ITB S-62900-00015515 - Thompson Creek and Yellowjacket - Questions and Answers.pdf
PDF 240 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- S-62900-00015515
- Issued by
- Jackson County, Oregon
About this file
This document is a Questions and Answers addendum for ITB S-62900-00015515, a heritage survey project administered by the State of Oregon Department of Forestry in collaboration with the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. The project requires contractors to conduct comprehensive cultural resource surveys across approximately 2,755 acres in the Thompson Creek and Yellowjacket fuels reduction project areas, with survey intensities varying by probability zones: 10% coverage in low probability areas, 50% in medium probability areas, and 100% surface inspection in high probability areas. Contractors must perform random shovel testing in high-probability areas at a rate of one test per 20 acres and update documentation for 27 previously recorded heritage sites using both RRSNF and Oregon Site forms. The contract includes a pre-work meeting in Medford, three phone meetings, and one in-person location meeting, with a draft report due September 1, 2026, and a final report due November 25, 2026. All survey work must be conducted on public lands only, and contractors should assume responsibility for coordinating access through private roads when necessary by contacting landowners directly. The Forest Service will provide Forest Service keys during business hours for accessing gated roads in the project area.
The Q&A clarification addresses critical survey protocols and permitting requirements. An ARPA permit or Organic Act permit is required prior to fieldwork, with ARPA permit being the preferred option. Contractors should plan travel to Medford for records review, with digital records provided when possible, and must budget for subsurface testing protocols that apply uniformly to both previously recorded and newly identified sites to maintain consistent documentation standards. No artifact collection will occur unless an ARPA permit is issued. Contractors must provide their own flagging tape and datum tags, flag all resources (with exceptions possible for linear resources not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places), and submit both hard copy and digital versions of final deliverables. The contract requires compliance with Secretary of Interior Standards for archaeology and professional qualification standards equivalent to GS-193, with resumes and certifications sufficient to demonstrate key staff qualifications without requiring project examples or page limits.
View the file
Other files
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
ITB S-62900-00015515 – Heritage Surveys – Thompson Creek and Yellowjacket
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS – JANUARY 5, 2026
1. Question:
Exhibit A (Statement of Work):
Will access roads through private parcels be open for accessing more remote or limited-access areas?
Answer: The are very few gates in the project area that would limit access. Of the few gates, the contractor may check out a Forest Service key to open the lock and access the road. The key is available during business hours at the Forest Service office in Ruch.
2. Question:
(SIMILAR QUESTION) Exhibit A (Statement of Work):
Upon researching the APE and survey areas, several of the survey areas are adjacent to private property. In the instance that access requires use of private roads, will the Forest Service negotiate and gain permission to access and utilize these private roads?
(Examples: Yellowjacket survey area in Township 40 South, Range 03 West, Section 35 and Township 41 South, Range 02 West, Section 06)
Answer: The Forest Service will not be asking permission from private landowners for access. All units can be access by driving or walking. The contractor may reach out to landowners for access.
3. Question:
Exhibit A (Statement of Work), page 18, 2.Locations
Is all land to be surveyed public land?
Answer: Yes.
4. Question:
Exhibit A (Statement of Work), pages 19-20, 3. Tasks, Task 2: Progress Review Meetings:
Is there an expectation for meetings beyond the one pre-work meeting (Medford), 3 phone meetings, and one location meeting (Medford)? If so, are they anticipated to be digital/remote or in person? If in person, where are they assumed to be held?
Answer: No. All other meetings can be by phone or remote. The Medford location meeting will occur at the Medford BLM (Interagency) office.
5. Question:
Exhibit A (Statement of Work), page 20, 3. Tasks, Task 3: Review and Update Previously Recorded Sites:
Can bidders receive a list of previously recorded sites prior to bid submission?
Answer: Yes. They should also do an independent records search at SHPO capture any data not curated on forest.
6. Question:
Exhibit A (Statement of Work), page 20, 3. Tasks, Task 3: Review and Update Previously Recorded Sites:
The SOW states “All cultural resources identified within the APE as a result of the inventory, including previously recorded sites shall be documented according to professional standards and conform to Oregon State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) standards and RRSNF standards” (page 20) followed by a requirement for the contractor to use RRSNF site record forms (page 22).
Will the final deliverables include RRSNF site forms and Oregon Site forms or only the RRSNF site forms?
Answer: Both forms will need to be completed.
7. Question:
Exhibit A (Statement of Work), page 21, 3. Tasks, Task 4: Heritage Survey and Report, Pre-Field Work #1:
It is unclear if an ARPA permit will need to be obtained prior to work. From p. 21: "Prior to field work an Archeological Resource Protection Act (ARPA) or Organic Act permit must be obtained.”
ALSO on p.21: "The permit will be for shovel tests in high and medium probability areas under the Organic Act or the Antiquities Act. An ARPA permit will not be required if surveys and shovel testing are only for determination of the presence or absence of cultural resources. No artifacts are to be collected unless an ARPA permit is issued." Is an ARPA or Organic Act permit required for survey? Or should applying for an ARPA permit be included as a contingency task?
Answer: Yes, an ARPA permit or Organic Act permit will need to be attained. ARPA permit is preferred.
8. Question:
(SIMILAR QUESTION) Exhibit A (Statement of Work), page 22, 3. Tasks, Task 4: Heritage Survey and Report, Survey Protocols #2:
On page 21, it states “an Archaeological Resource Protection Act (ARPA) or Organic Act permit must be obtained; the Contractor must obtain a permit from the RRSNF Special Uses Program…An ARPA permit will not be required if surveys and shovel testing are only determination of the presence or absence of cultural resources.” Later in the same paragraph it states “No artifacts are to be collected unless an ARPA permit is issued”.
Please provide clarification, as the statements about whether an ARPA permit is required are contradictory.
Answer: Yes, an ARPA permit OR Organic Act permit will need to be attained. ARPA permit is preferred.
9. Question:
Exhibit A (Statement of Work), pages 21-22, 3. Tasks, Task 4: Heritage Survey and Report, Pre- Field Work:
Will Contractor be expected to coordinate with Tribes regarding fieldwork dates, etc.?
Answer: No.
10. Question:
Exhibit A (Statement of Work), page 22, 3. Tasks, Task 4: Heritage Survey and Report, Pre-Field Work #4:
Should Contractors assume travel to archives for background research in addition to the RRSNF headquarters in Medford?
Answer: Plan to travel to Medford to review records. Digital records will be sent to the contractor if possible.
11. Question:
Exhibit A (Statement of Work), page 22, 3. Tasks, Task 4: Heritage Survey and Report, Survey Protocols #3:
Will resources need to be recorded/reported on OR SHPO forms as well as USFS/RRSNF forms, or just the RRSNF forms?
Answer:
RRSNF forms will be used, except in cases where SHPO requires their version of the inventory form.
12. Question:
Exhibit A (Statement of Work), page 22, 3. Tasks, Task 4: Heritage Survey and Report, Survey Protocols #2:
The SOW describes several parameters for subsurface testing for known resources, including “if cultural materials are encountered through shovel probes during high probability survey sampling, further STPs will be used to determine site boundaries. For known historic properties or isolates, at minimum two shovel test probes will be excavated to determine the possibility of subsurface cultural deposits”.
Will STPs be conducted at temporally historic sites or isolates and precontact sites and isolates?
Answer: Yes, STPs will be carried out to define the boundaries of all site types. At many historic sites, the subsurface remains do not have the same horizontal extent as surface artifacts. Therefore subsurface testing is required to document the horizontal extent of subsurface deposits associated with a historic site.
13. Question:
Protocols #2:
The SOW describes several parameters for subsurface testing for known resources, including “if cultural materials are encountered through shovel probes during high probability survey sampling, further STPs will be used to determine site boundaries. For known historic properties or isolates, at minimum two shovel test probes will be excavated to determine the possibility of subsurface cultural deposits”.
Will newly identified sites from pedestrian survey be required to have STPs conducted for both subsurface presence as well as boundary delineation?
Answer: Yes, see answer above.
14. Question:
Exhibit A (Statement of Work), page 22, 3. Tasks, Task 4: Heritage Survey and Report, Survey Protocols #2:
The SOW describes several parameters for subsurface testing for known resources, including “if cultural materials are encountered through shovel probes during high probability survey sampling, further STPs will be used to determine site boundaries. For known historic properties or isolates, at minimum two shovel test probes will be excavated to determine the possibility of subsurface cultural deposits”.
Based on the verbiage listed above, it appears that known resources (including previous and newly identified sites) will have a minimum of two STPs for subsurface presence testing, followed by site boundary delineation testing if an STP is positive. Is this the preferred protocol?
Answer: If the horizontal extent of a previously recorded site has not previously been defined by shovel testing, it should be done so in the same manner as a newly recorded site. That way all sites, old and new are recorded to the same standard.
15. Question:
Protocols #2:
The SOW describes several parameters for subsurface testing for known resources, including “if cultural materials are encountered through shovel probes during high probability survey sampling, further STPs will be used to determine site boundaries. For known historic properties or isolates, at minimum two shovel test probes will be excavated to determine the possibility of subsurface cultural deposits”.
Pinnacle’s standards for subsurface site boundary delineation includes double negation in four cardinal directions (a minimum of 8 STPs per site). Clarification of the STP protocol for known resources will help aid in budgeting the total number of STPs required for known and new resources.
Answer: Same as answer above.
16. Question:
Protocols #4-6:
Is there a specific number of new sites/isolates Contractors should assume?
Answer: Expectations for the number of new sites should be drawn from the background research you do in advance of survey.
17. Question:
Exhibit A (Statement of Work), page 22, 3. Tasks, Task 4: Heritage Survey and Report, Survey Protocols:
If an ARPA permit is required and artifacts will be collected, is OMNCH the assumed repository?
Answer: The SOW specs indicate no collecting will be done. An ARPA permit is required.
18. Question:
Protocols:
To assist with budgeting, does ODF or the USFS have a specific sampling strategy that they would like followed for survey of the low-probability areas?
Answer:
The sampling strategy for all probability levels is defined in the SOW.
19. Question:
Protocols #5:
The SOW states “Sites will be recorded by the Contractor using a GPS unit. The Contractor will tie flagging securely to trees with seven to ten (7-10m) meter spacing between flags.” (Page 22)
Will flagging tape be required for isolates as well? Additionally, will linear resources be required to have flagging tape? For example, a look into OARRA identifies a previously recorded ditch that extends for over a mile, would this resource need to be flagged?
Answer: Assume you will flag all resources and ask about potential exceptions. For the mile long ditch, it probably doesn’t need to be flagged unless its NRHP eligible.
20. Question:
Protocols #5:
The SOW states “Sites will be recorded by the Contractor using a GPS unit. The Contractor will tie flagging securely to trees with seven to ten (7-10m) meter spacing between flags.” (Page 22)
Will the Forest supply flagging tape and datum tags if required?
Answer: No, these will be provided by the contractor.
21. Question:
Exhibit A (Statement of Work), page 23, 3. Tasks, Task 4: Heritage Survey and Report, Post-field Work #4:
The SOW requests two printed color, hard copies of the report (page 23), is this still preferred or would a thumb drive be an acceptable replacement?
Answer: Hard copies and digital copies are required.
22. Question:
Exhibit A (Statement of Work), pages 24-25, 3. Tasks, Task 5: Final Report(s) and Presentation, #3:
On page 25, a table states that the draft survey report is due September 1, 2026, followed by comments from the review staff due October 15, 2026, with the final report due by November 25, 2026. Below the table it states, “Upon submission of draft deliverables, the RRSNF and Agency will have 10 days to inspect and provide comments to the Contractor for finalization. The Contractor will then have 10 days to make changes and submit the revised deliverable.” The 10 day requirement and the due dates do not align, which timeline is the appropriate timeline for this project?
Answer: The longer time period will be allowed to give all parties adequate time to meet deadlines.
23. Question:
ITB Document, page 5, Section 1.3:
Are there page limits that apply to the documentation of Key Staff qualifications?
Answer: No.
24. Question:
ITB Document, page 5, Section 1.3:
Will resumes and any applicable certifications suffice as documentation to meet the minimum Key Persons requirement or are project examples also desired?
Answer: Resumes and certificates will suffice.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .