Reissued RFP Toledo Mill Site.pdf

RFP - Exhibit A: Scope of Work

Technical Scope of Work for the:

Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) and Corrective Action Plan

(CAP) for the Upper Mill Property in Toledo, Oregon

Issued by: The Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians (CTSI)

Project Summary

The Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians (CTSI) seeks proposals from qualified environmental professionals (QEPs) to assess contamination, develop remediation strategies, estimate remediation costs, and ensure compliance with all relevant federal, state, local, and tribal environmental regulations for the Upper Mill Property in Toledo, Oregon. This EPA-funded brown field project includes assessing contamination, developing cleanup strategies (including estimating costs), and engaging the community to ensure compliance with federal, state, local, and tribal standards. Key deliverables include a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP), Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP), Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS), and a

Corrective Action Plan (CAP). The Corrective Action Plan (CAP) will outline site-specific remediation methods, estimated costs, and regulatory compliance steps, ensuring full alignment with ODEQ and EPA standards. These plans must guide field sampling, ensure data quality, and outline the remedial strategies to address contamination. Proposals must meet the submission requirements outlined in this document.

1. Introduction and Property Location

The Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians invites proposals from qualified environmental consulting firms to develop and execute an environmental assessment and cleanup plan at our

Upper Mill Property in Toledo, Oregon. This project, funded by the EPA Brownfields Program, aims to address environmental concerns, foster regulatory compliance, and promote community revitalization.

Property Location

The entire Toledo Mill Site, located around 2009 Sturdevant Rd, Toledo, Oregon 97391, includes six Lincoln County tax lots. It is divided into distinct areas:

1. Upper Mill Site: Previously used for warehousing and equipment storage, with an RCRA-designated wood waste landfill (closed). It is the upslope portions of Lincoln County, Oregon

Map Taxlots 11-10-21-00-00800-00 and 11-10-20-00-01100-00.

Lower Mill Site: Former lumber manufacturing area and primary contamination site

The reference document for beginning this assessment is a Phase I ESA report prepared by

Farallon Consulting, and will be provided to firms at the mandatory job walk. The executive summary of this report, showing Recognized Environmental Concerns (RECs), appears in this

RFP as an Appendix. The entire Phase I ESA report for the Upper Mill Site will be provided to contractors who attend the mandatory job walk on the site.

2. Project Background and Objectives

EPA Funding Guidelines and Compliance

This project is funded by the EPA Brownfields Program, which will include the following:

• All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI):

o Activities must conform to EPA’s Standards for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), ensuring compliance with CERCLA requirements.

o Key references include ASTM E1527-21 (Phase I ESA) and ASTM E1903-19 (Phase II ESA).

• Eligible Activities:

o Soil, groundwater, and surface water sampling and analysis.

o Development of Sampling and Analysis Plans (SAP) and Quality Assurance Project Plans (QAPP).

o Cleanup planning, including an Analysis of Brownfields Cleanup Alternatives

(ABCA) and Corrective Action Plan (CAP). This project includes a Remedial

Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) to characterize contamination levels and evaluate remedial alternatives. The RI/FS will provide a basis for selecting an appropriate cleanup strategy, ensuring alignment with EPA Brownfields

Program guidelines and ODEQ’s Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP).

• Community Engagement:

o Inclusive stakeholder engagement, adhering to EPA environmental justice principles.

• Regulatory Reporting:

o Support STBC/CTSI in fulfilling EPA reporting requirements, including preparing quarterly ACRES reports with site-specific sampling results, compliance status, and funding utilization updates. Additionally, the QEP must ensure all deliverables meet ODEQ requirements, including specific data formats and regulatory compliance.

Objectives

The project aims to evaluate and address recognized environmental conditions (RECs) and potential contamination by conducting comprehensive soil, groundwater, and surface water sampling. These assessments will form the foundation for subsequent cleanup strategy development.

2.1 Mandatory Job Walk

• A mandatory job site walk at the Upper Mill Property will ensure all bidders fully understand the site conditions and project requirements.

• Attendance is required for proposal submission.

• The Phase I ESA report will be provided only to those who attend the mandatory job walk.

• To confirm attendance, bidders must RSVP to AnnL@STDCorp.net, CharlesG@ctsi.nsn.us

AngelaS@ctsi.nsn.us.The job walk will include:

o A guided tour of the site, including identified areas of concern.

o A discussion of known Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) from the Phase I ESA.

o A Q&A session with representatives from STBC, CTSI, and regulatory agencies.

3. Scope of Work

3.1 Key Deliverables

• QAPP (Quality Assurance Project Plan): The QEP must develop and submit a QAPP for approval by STBC, CTSI, ODEQ, and EPA, ensuring it meets all requirements for environmental sampling, data validation, and reporting.

• HASP (Health & Safety Plan): The QEP must develop and implement a Health and

Safety Plan (HASP) to ensure safe working conditions during all field and cleanup activities.

• SAP (Sampling and Analysis Plan): QEP must develop an SAP that specifies contaminant thresholds, sampling locations, analytical methods, and QA/QC protocols in accordance with EPA’s Brownfields guidance, primarily focused on high-priority contamination areas in the Phase I ESA (see Appendix).

• ABCA (Analysis of Brownfields Cleanup Alternatives): The QEP must develop and submit a draft and final version for review and approval.

• Remedial Investigation (RI) Report, summarizing findings and contamination extent.

• Feasibility Study (FS) Report, analyzing remedial alternatives.

• CAP (Corrective Action Plan): The QEP must develop and submit a comprehensive plan that aligns with STBC, CTSI, ODEQ, and EPA standards. The Corrective Action

Plan (CAP) will outline site-specific remediation methods, estimated costs, and regulatory compliance steps, ensuring full alignment with ODEQ and EPA standards.

• Stakeholder Engagement Summary, documenting meetings and regulatory discussions.

• Community Engagement Materials:

The QEP must conduct at least one public meeting and document all outreach efforts.

This report must be submitted and approved before finalizing the CAP. Failure to provide complete documentation will result in the rejection of the deliverable. Required documentation includes:

mailto:AnnL@STDC.us mailto:CharlesG@ctsi.nsn.us mailto:AngelaS@ctsi.nsn.us

1. Copies of public meeting announcements and distribution lists

2. Stakeholder email invitations and responses

3. Attendance logs with participant names and affiliations

4. Transcripts or summaries of all public concerns raised

5. A final summary report explaining how community concerns were addressed in the CAP.

The QEP must conduct at least one in-person public meeting and document all outreach efforts. Any additional meetings may be conducted virtually, but at least one must be held on-site, with a QEP representative physically present to answer questions and engage with the community.

3.2 Tasks

• Prepare a QAPP for Regulatory Approval: The QEP is responsible for preparing a

Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) and a Health and Safety Plan (HASP) for approval by STBC, CTSI, ODEQ, and EPA. The QAPP must outline objectives, roles, sampling methods, and data validation procedures, ensuring all environmental sampling and reporting requirements are met. QEP must obtain formal written approval from

STBC, CTSI, ODEQ, and EPA for the QAPP, SAP, HASP, and Task 2 Work Plan before initiating any fieldwork or sampling activities. No exceptions will be granted. The consultant must submit all draft deliverables for review and incorporate all feedback before approval is granted. To prevent unauthorized use or circulation, all draft deliverables must be labeled “DRAFT – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION” on each page.

• HASP (Health & Safety Plan): The QEP must prepare a site-specific Health & Safety

Plan (HASP) compliant with OSHA 29 CFR 1910.120. The HASP must outline hazard assessments, safety protocols, and emergency procedures and be submitted for approval before any fieldwork begins.

• Conduct Site Reconnaissance: The QEP must refine sampling locations and conduct a thorough inspection with STBC, CTSI, ODEQ, and EPA personnel.

• Develop a Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP): The QEP must create a detailed SAP focusing on high-priority areas, as identified in the Phase I ESA, including unknown fill materials, equipment maintenance areas, and potential petroleum and chemical contamination sites. The QEP must develop an SAP that specifies contaminant thresholds, sampling locations, analytical methods, and QA/QC protocols in accordance with EPA’s Brownfields guidance.

• Draft ABCA and CAP: The QEP must prepare a draft Analysis of Brownfields Cleanup

Alternatives (ABCA) evaluating cleanup alternatives and costs. The QEP must develop a

Corrective Action Plan (CAP) for STBC, CTSI, ODEQ, and EPA review and approval, ensuring alignment with state-level considerations. The QEP must write the Corrective

Action Plan (CAP), outlining site-specific remediation methods, estimated costs, and regulatory compliance steps, ensuring full alignment with ODEQ and EPA standards.

• Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS) The QEP must prepare an RI/FS essential to the environmental assessment process, ensuring a thorough understanding of contamination at the Upper Mill Site. The investigation will define the nature and extent of contamination, assess potential exposure pathways, and develop cleanup alternatives that align with the EPA Brownfields Program and Oregon Department of Environmental

Quality’s (ODEQ) Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP). The RI/FS will support selecting the most effective remedial approach, forming the foundation for the Corrective Action

Plan (CAP).

o The Remedial Investigation (RI) will involve comprehensive soil, groundwater, and surface water sampling to address any data gaps from previous assessments.

It will also include contaminant fate and transport modeling to evaluate the potential for off-site migration and geotechnical and hydrological studies to inform cleanup feasibility. The investigation will result in developing a

Conceptual Site Model (CSM), which will illustrate contamination sources, transport mechanisms, and potential receptors. Additionally, the RI will include human health and ecological risk assessments based on EPA and ODEQ standards, ensuring that scientifically validated data drive all remediation decisions.

o Following the RI, the Feasibility Study (FS) will evaluate potential remediation strategies, considering cost, effectiveness, feasibility, and long-term liability. The FS will analyze various remedial approaches, including excavation, in-situ and ex-situ treatment technologies, monitored natural attenuation, and institutional or engineering controls. Each alternative will be assessed through a comparative analysis, ensuring that the most practical and cost-effective solution is selected for inclusion in the CAP. The QEP will provide detailed cost estimates for each alternative, including capital and long-term operational expenses, to ensure the chosen approach meets budgetary and regulatory expectations.

o The QEP will prepare both the Remedial Investigation Report and the

Feasibility Study Report, summarizing findings and outlining recommended remedial actions. To ensure regulatory compliance, the QEP will coordinate closely with ODEQ’s Voluntary Cleanup Program and engage with EPA representatives to align the RI/FS with Risk-Based Corrective Action (RBCA) guidelines. Stakeholder engagement will be a crucial aspect of the process, and the QEP must facilitate meetings with STBC, CTSI, ODEQ, and EPA to review findings and discuss remediation options. Schedule and conduct a public meeting. The QEP must conduct at least one public meeting and document all outreach efforts.

3.2 Regulatory Coordination

• The QEP must responsibly and proactively ensure compliance with EPA, ODEQ, and tribal regulations throughout the project. This includes submitting reports, coordinating with regulators, and updating all stakeholders as the project progresses. The QEP must engage with EPA, ODEQ, and tribal representatives regularly to ensure that all regulatory requirements are met at each project stage.

• The QEP must incorporate Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) into habitat restoration plans.

• The QEP must enroll the site into the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality’s

(ODEQ) Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) to facilitate regulatory oversight, ensure compliance with state cleanup standards, and align remediation efforts with ODEQ-approved methodologies.

• Work Plan Submission: The QEP must prepare and submit the Work Plan to ODEQ and

EPA for formal approval before commencing fieldwork or sampling activities. No activities are permitted to proceed without the written approval of the Work Plan from both ODEQ and EPA. Any proposed changes to the work plan must be reviewed and approved by STBC, CTSI, and the relevant regulatory bodies.

• Final Assessment and Risk Characterization Compliance: The QEP must ensure that the

Final Assessment Report and risk assessments align with ODEQ and EPA risk-based remediation criteria. All human health and ecological risk evaluations must be conducted using EPA-approved methodologies, and findings must be documented to support ODEQ and EPA decision-making for corrective actions and site closure considerations.

3.3 Community Engagement

The QEP must develop community engagement strategies, including accessible communication materials and conducting public meetings to present findings and gather feedback. The community engagement process will adhere to EPA environmental justice principles, ensuring inclusive participation, especially from underrepresented groups.

Public meeting summaries and feedback records will be documented and integrated into the project planning process to ensure community concerns are addressed effectively.

QEP will schedule and conduct a public meeting.

3.4 ESA & NHPA Clearances

Before initiating fieldwork, the QEP must obtain all necessary Endangered Species Act

(ESA) and National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) clearances. The consultant must demonstrate that planned environmental and investigative activities will not adversely affect sensitive species, habitats, or cultural resources. All clearances must be secured before proceeding with any site activities.

3.5 Reporting:

• Final Performance Report: The Final Performance Report must include:

1. Summary of all completed tasks, including sampling, cleanup planning, and public engagement.

2. Site assessment data with laboratory-certified results.

3. Maps of contamination extent before and after investigation.

4. Regulatory approvals obtained, including EPA and ODEQ compliance letters.

5. Analysis of Brownfields Cleanup Alternatives (ABCA) and cost breakdowns.

6. Final Corrective Action Plan (CAP) with approved cleanup strategies.

7. Human health and ecological risk assessments using EPA/ODEQ standards.

8. Post-remediation site conditions, with final risk characterization.

9. Lessons learned and recommendations for future monitoring.

The Final Performance Report must be submitted within 90 days of project completion.

No final payment will be issued until STBC, CTSI, ODEQ, and EPA approve this report.

All electronic deliverables must be submitted in accessible, non-proprietary formats (e.g., Microsoft Word, Excel, or PDF for reports; CSV for data; GIS shapefiles for mapping).

Quarterly Reports and ACRES: QEP must submit a quarterly progress report no later than 10 business days after the end of each quarter. The report must include: (1) a summary of completed tasks, (2) a description of encountered challenges and how they were addressed, (3) updated environmental sampling results, (4) an itemized budget report showing funds expended and remaining, and (5) an updated project timeline.

Reports must be formatted for direct submission into the EPA ACRES system.

3.6 Project Management

• Timeline: Propose a realistic estimated schedule with key milestones, including regulatory reviews, public engagement phases, and deliverable deadlines, to ensure project alignment with EPA expectations.

• Budget: Provide a detailed cost breakdown using the provided template in Exhibit B (Bid

Form).

4. Fixed-Price Work Units, Payment Terms, and Legal Provisions

The project must be completed in fixed-price work units, with a pause for review, approval, and payment after each unit. QEP must receive written confirmation from

STBC before proceeding to the next phase. No work will be reimbursed if performed out of sequence or without prior authorization.

Payment and Approval Timing: Payment for each work unit will be contingent upon written approval from STBC, CTSI, ODEQ, and EPA, confirming that all deliverables fully meet the agreed-upon scope, regulatory standards, and formatting requirements. If a deliverable does not meet these requirements, the consultant must revise and resubmit at no additional cost, and no additional payments will be authorized until full compliance is met. The QEP must meet all required standards, deadlines, and EPA-specific formatting to obtain approval. The QEP must not proceed to the next work unit without written authorization from the CTSI Director of Natural Resources.

Work Unit Structure:

The project will be completed in fixed-price work units. STBC and the EPA must review and approve each work unit before payment. No work unit will proceed to the next phase without written authorization from the Director of Natural Resources at CTSI. The following work units are mandatory. The QEP may propose minor modifications only if they justify writing. No modifications—including scope reductions, changes in deliverables, or timeline adjustments—will be permitted without formal written approval from STBC, CTSI, and EPA. Requests to remove, merge, or defer deliverables will not be accepted.

• Unit 1: Initiation & Reconnaissance – Kick-off meeting summary, site reconnaissance report.

• Unit 2: Draft Environmental Site Assessment (ESA), National Historic Preservation

Act (NHPA) clearance, Health & Safety Plan (HASP), Quality Assurance Project

Plan (QAPP), and Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP).

• Unit 3: Field Sampling – Sampling results report.

• Unit 4: Data Analysis & ABCA Development – Draft ABCA.

• Unit 5: RI/RS – QEP must complete the RI Report, the FS Report, regulatory engagement, and a stakeholder meeting to discuss cleanup alternatives. The findings from the RI/FS will directly inform the CAP, ensuring that all proposed remediation strategies are based on a comprehensive and well-documented site assessment.

• Unit 6: Draft CAP – Corrective Action Plan.

• Unit 7: Community Engagement & Reporting – Public meeting materials and EPA progress report.

• Unit 8: QEP must prepare a Final Performance Report detailing all deliverables and the overall site investigation findings. This report must include comprehensive human health and ecological risk assessments in alignment with DEQ and EPA guidelines

Legal Provisions:

The QEP agrees to complete the project as outlined in this agreement, with payment for each work unit being contingent upon formal approval by both the Siletz Tribal Business

Corporation (STBC) and the EPA of the associated deliverables. Payment for each work unit is contingent upon reimbursement from the EPA. If EPA reimbursement is delayed or denied, no payment will be made for that work unit, and the QEP waives the right to claim unpaid compensation from CTSI or STBC. The QEP agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Siletz Tribal Business Corporation and its affiliates from any claims arising from EPA non-payment, including but not limited to legal fees or financial loss. The QEP also waives any right to impose liens for non-payment in the event of EPA’s denial of payment. This agreement shall be binding upon both parties and their successors. If any provision of this agreement is invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will continue in full force and effect.

Insurance Requirements and Risk Mitigation:

Additionally, to protect all parties involved, the selected QEP must provide proof of insurance coverage before beginning work. Required policies include general liability insurance with a minimum coverage of $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate, as well as professional liability insurance with a minimum coverage of

$1,000,000 per claim. With a minimum coverage of $2,000,000 per occurrence, pollution liability insurance must also be maintained to cover environmental liabilities associated with site investigations and remedial planning. Workers’ compensation insurance must be carried by Oregon state law, ensuring coverage for workplace injuries or medical expenses. In addition, automobile liability insurance with a minimum coverage of

$1,000,000 per accident is required for any company-owned, leased, or rented vehicles used for project-related activities. Insurance certificates must be provided before contract execution. Failure to maintain required coverage will result in contract termination.

To further mitigate risk, the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians (CTSI) must be listed as additional insureds on all policies. The QEP must provide insurance certificates before the contract is executed, and failure to maintain the required coverage will result in contract termination. These requirements ensure financial protection for all stakeholders and help safeguard the successful completion of the project.

5. Proposal Requirements

Proposals must be submitted under the following requirements. We expect your proposal to reflect the clarity and transparency you will bring to your work with us. Your proposal should resemble the final report you will provide, as it demonstrates your ability to communicate effectively. We appreciate straightforward, no-nonsense explanations—clear, simple, and transparent. We respect proposals that illustrate this approach, as we value clear communication and simplicity. Our team is experienced in environmental remediation and thoughtful, and we prefer to understand things quickly, so please don’t overcomplicate things or hide details behind jargon.

Proposals must not exceed 10 pages, excluding exhibits such as resumes, certifications, references, and supporting documentation. Proposals exceeding this page limit will be disqualified without review. The proposal must include the following:

1. Organizational Profile: A brief history and qualifications of your firm and any sub-consultants involved.

2. Key Personnel: The resumes and roles of project team members, including the Project

Manager, should highlight relevant experience. This is to include the qualifications of all subcontractors. The QEP must not assign, delegate, or subcontract any portion of the work to another firm or individual without prior written approval from STBC. All proposed subcontractors must be disclosed in the proposal, including their qualifications and roles. STBC reserves the right to reject any subcontractor.

3. Experience: Demonstrated expertise in managing and completing similar EPA-funded environmental cleanup projects (they don’t have to be Brownfields), with examples of meeting deadlines, budgets, and regulatory requirements. The proposal must confirm that the firm understands all federal, state, and tribal environmental requirements, including but not limited to EPA, ODEQ, and CTSI standards.

4. Technical Approach: A detailed methodology for completing the outlined tasks, focusing on how you’ll meet the project’s goals and overcome potential challenges.

5. Explain Your Work Flow: Explain how your firm will sequence work to comply with regulatory approvals and project deadlines.

6. Public Communication Plan: A clear strategy for engaging with the community and ensuring their input is effectively integrated into the project.

7. Timeline and Budget: A comprehensive, realistic schedule with key milestones and a detailed cost breakdown that aligns with the project’s objectives.

8. Regulatory Compliance: Evidence that you understand and will adhere to EPA and tribal standards, with specific details on how your approach meets regulatory requirements.

9. Insurance Documentation: Proof of required insurance coverage.

10. References: Provide contact information for three to five relevant project examples demonstrating your ability to complete projects of a similar scale and complexity.

11. Indian Preference: Proof of Indian preference, if applicable. Indian preference is provided in accordance with the methods in the Siletz Tribal Code § 2.001, Tribal

Plan of Operations § 2.024, and 24 CFR 1000.52. Indian preference only applies to a qualified entity documenting 51% or more ownership of a business entity by an enrolled Native American/Tribe.

6. Evaluation Criteria

Proposals will be evaluated using a transparent scoring system to ensure fairness and clarity. The following weighted criteria will guide the evaluation process:

• Timeline and Cost Feasibility (50%): Evaluators will examine the realism and detail of the proposed schedule and budget. Proposals that clearly outline achievable milestones, align with EPA timelines, and include contingency plans will be favored.

• Uniquely Qualified to Assess and Remediate (5%): Evaluators will assess the QEP's proven experience handling all elements of cleanup, including planning, sampling, remedial action planning, and cleaning up contamination itself. For example, proposals that detail specific approaches that show an ability to manage the entire process will score higher.

• Project Understanding and Approach (5%): Evaluators will assess the proposal’s depth of understanding regarding project goals, site conditions, and methodologies. For example, proposals that detail specific approaches to addressing Recognized

Environmental Conditions (RECs) or aligning with CTSI’s environmental goals will score higher.

• Qualifications and Experience (5%): The experience and qualifications of key personnel, particularly in projects of similar scale funded by EPA or ODEQ, will be evaluated. Proposals that include certifications, detailed resumes, and examples of successful projects will score higher.

• Community Engagement Strategy (10%): Proposals will be evaluated on the inclusivity and effectiveness of their community engagement plans. For instance, those incorporating strategies for engaging underrepresented groups or including accessible public meeting formats will score higher.

• Compliance with EPA Guidelines and Tribal Priorities (10%): Scoring will reflect how well the proposal demonstrates an understanding of and commitment to federal, state, and tribal environmental standards. Proposals that explicitly address EPA and

ODEQ requirements, such as QAPP or SAP, and incorporate Traditional Ecological

Knowledge (TEK) will receive higher scores.

• Indian Preference (15%): In evaluating the relative merit of each proposal and ultimately awarding the contract, CTSI will give an Indian preference according to the Siletz Tribal Code § 2.001, Tribal Plan of Operations § 2.024, and 25 CFR

1000.52. Indian preference is evaluated—and scoring under this criterion is awarded—based upon the degree to which your firm is an Indian organization or an

Indian-owned economic enterprise.

Each criterion will be scored on a scale from 1 to 5, with one being "Does not meet expectations" and five being "Exceeds expectations." Weighted totals will be calculated to determine the final score for each proposal.

7. Submission Information: The project is jointly managed by the Siletz Tribal Business

Corporation (STBC) with input from an executive committee from the Confederated Tribes of

Siletz Indians (CTSI).

Please ensure all submissions include the following:

• Format:

o PDF submissions only.

Send via email to

• AnnL@STDCorp.net, CharlesG@ctsi.nsn.us o AngelaS@ctsi.nsn.us.

• Required Documents:

o Proposal document.

o Certifications (as applicable).

o Resumes of key personnel.

o References (minimum of three relevant projects).

o Proof of insurance.

o Itemized budget.

Submission Instructions:

• Format: PDF submission only.

Email: Send proposals to

• AnnL@STDCorp.net, CharlesG@ctsi.nsn.us

• AngelaS@ctsi.nsn.us.

• Subject Line: “Proposal for Environmental Assessment – Upper Mill Property”

8. Project Timeline & Deadlines

The following schedule outlines important dates and deadlines for this Request for Proposal

(RFP). Failure to meet required deadlines, including attending the mandatory job site walk, will result in disqualification.

Event Date

RFP Issued May 23, 2025

RSVP Deadline (Mandatory) June 6, 2025 (5:00 pm Pacific Time)

Mandatory Site Walk (Mandatory) June 12, 2025 (10:30 am to 1:30 pm)

Questions Due June 16, 2025

Full Proposal Due June 20, 2025

Proposal Evaluation Complete June 27, 2025

Award Notification June 30, 2025

Project Kickoff Meeting July 10, 2025 mailto:AnnL@STDC.us mailto:CharlesG@ctsi.nsn.us mailto:AngelaS@ctsi.nsn.us mailto:AnnL@STDC.us mailto:CharlesG@ctsi.nsn.us mailto:AngelaS@ctsi.nsn.us