RFP# 202603055_Popham Q
14 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Popham Peninsula Climate Resilience Planning
- Solicitation number
- RFP - 01A - 202603055
- Issued by
- Piscataquis County, Maine
About this file
This is a Bidders' Conference Questions and Answers document for Request for Proposals #202603055, issued by the State of Maine Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry, Bureau of Parks and Lands in collaboration with the Maine Geological Survey, Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, Maine Department of Transportation, Maine Department of Environmental Protection, and the Town of Phippsburg. The RFP seeks professional coastal planning and stakeholder consultation services to develop a comprehensive climate resilience plan for the Popham Peninsula, addressing vulnerabilities including erosion, sea level rise, and storm surges affecting Popham Beach State Park, Fort Popham State Historic Site, Route 209, and surrounding coastal areas. The scope encompasses nine key tasks including project initiation and stakeholder engagement, coastal vulnerability assessment, recreational and ecological inventory, public outreach through up to three workshops, resilience strategy identification, model ordinance language development, and final plan preparation. The mandatory Bidders' Conference was held June 4, 2026, from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. at Popham Beach State Park, with written questions due by June 8, 2026, at 4:00 p.m. and proposals due June 30, 2026, at 4:00 p.m. via the Vendor Self Service system. The initial contract period runs from August 1, 2026, through June 30, 2027, with an optional renewal from July 1, 2027, through June 30, 2028, contingent on funding availability and performance, with an anticipated total project timeline of 12 to 18 months.
The State has not disclosed a pre-determined budget or not-to-exceed amount, requiring bidders to propose realistic costs covering all tasks for the full contract period including hourly rates for all personnel. Evaluation will be conducted on a 100-point scale with 35 points for Organization Qualifications and Experience, 40 points for Proposed Services, and 25 points for Cost Proposal, with lowest cost receiving maximum points. No set-aside designations or restrictions limiting participation to particular organization types apply, indicating open competition. Bidders must submit detailed budget breakdowns, financial statements for the past three years, certificates of insurance, organizational charts with brief bios, and relevant licensure documentation. The project is partially funded through a National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) grant under the "Resilient Maine: Local Adaptation and Resilience Actions at a Coastwide Scale" initiative, building on prior assessments from previous adaptation planning efforts. The State anticipates making one award, with the successful bidder executing a State of Maine Service Contract with payment on a net 30 basis upon receipt of accurate invoices. All proposals will be publicly available following award notification in accordance with Maine's Freedom of Access Act.
Text of this file
Sheet1
| Question | Answer |
| What is the Bureau’s preferred philosophy - human intervention vs mechanical protection vs let nature take its course. | All options should be considered, noting financial, regulatory, logistical, and other pros and cons. |
| What is the historical elevation data? | Modeling/GIS data is available via Maine Geologic Survey. Our interest is both historical and future. |
| What is the visitor capacity at high tide and how are visitors notified? | Historically Popham Beach State Park has seen 200,000 visitors/year. Numbers have recently been reduced by limiting visitation at high tide. |
| Is there a preference for hardened structure vs. 'living shorelines'? | See question on line 3 above. |
| What are the expected priorities? | Consider ecological, recreational, operational, financial, historical elements, among others. |
| Is there existing information on ecological features? | Yes, from Maine Natural Areas Program (MNAP) and Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW). Updating these features could be useful but not necessarily the highest priority. |
| Is feedback expected from other stakeholders? | Yes - including groups associated with Morse Mt.; the Town of Phippsburg, state agencies, land trusts, and others. |
| What is the geographic extent of the project? | The focus is on the state's assets at Popham Beach and Fort Popham, but nearby lands should be included in the analysis. |
| Is beach scraping contemplated? | No option has been eliminated from consideration |
| Does BPL hope to increase public use? | No |
| Will this be a pilot project for beach resilience or for development of model beach ordinances | Yes, we intend outcomes of this project to be applicable to other similar geographies. |
| What is the scope of the contract? | We envision three phases in the eventual work at Popham: (1) planning/community engagement, (2) architecture/engineering, (3) construction. The current RFP applies to phase 1. |
| Will the 2016 report be updated? | Updating the 2016 report is not a required outcome of this project. |
| Can a site plan of the developed park infrastructure be provided? | Yes, a concept plan has been shared as part of RFP. |
| Are there monitoring wells to detect saltwater intrusion? | Yes, though we are not aware of recent monitoring data from these wells. |
| Who will provide stakeholder coordination? | The consultant, with input from Maine Bureau of Parks and Lands |
| Are there other state agency partners? | MDIFW, Maine Department of Transportation (MDOT), ME Geologic Survey (within DACF), Maine Department of Environmental Protection |
| Are there protected species or ecosystems? | Yes, consult MDIFW and MNAP for data. |
| Could a sample contract be provided for review? | The standard Service Contract (SC) template can be downloaded from the Office of State Procurement Service’s website: https://www.maine.gov/dafs/bbm/procurementservices/forms/ |
| Part IV, Section II.5, Financial Viability: these requirements have been removed in the past on the State's RFPs; are they required here? If so, do they count toward the page/file size limit? (page 16) | These items are required and count toward the overall page/size limit. |
| Part IV, Section II.3 (page 16) : Would you prefer just the org chart? Small bio resumes? Full page resumes? Thanks, | Org chart and brief bios; full resumes are not required. |
| Within the deliverables in the Scope of Work, #8 Final Report and Presentation: How important will evaluators consider transferable planning/governance frameworks and broader applicability to other Maine coastal communities? | These factors will be weighed as part of the overall scoring process. |
| Within the Scope of Work, #8 Final Report and Presentation: Is DACF interested in projects that include public-facing storytelling, communications, or documentation components intended to share lessons learned/replicate the process more broadly? | Yes |
| Part V, Section B. Scoring Weights and Process: Can more detail be provided on how the Proposed Services section (40 points) will be scored? | No |
| Does the Route 209 adaptation planning component (referenced in Appendix G as a distinct deliverable) fall within the scope of this RFP, or is it a separate procurement? | MDOT is the lead agency on design for Route 209. However, applicants should consult with MDOT to understand the agency's process, timeframe, and intent. |
| Can drones be used as part of the assessment and data collection under this RFP? | Drone use has not been approved by NOAA's Environmental Compliance review, so if drones are going to be used, that process would need to be revisited. |
| What data layers, especially existing BPL facility condition assessments, as-built drawings, and infrastructure data for the two bathhouses, parking lot, and Fort Popham structures, and prior reports will be provided (Section 2)? | See line 16 above. |
| Part V.B.3 (Page 18) : Is DACF able to share the anticipated project budget? | There is no 'anticipated project budget.' |
| Part V.A.1 (page 18) : Is DACF able to share who is on the project steering committee / evaluation team? | We anticipate the team will consist of representatives from the Bureau of Parks and Lands, ME Geologic Survey, Bureau of Resource Information and Land Use Planning, and Governor's Office of Planning, Innovation, and the Future. |
| Part II.4 (Page 9) : How many stakeholder meetings are anticipated beyond the initial stakeholder meeting and three public workshops? | That answer can be proposed by the consultant. |
| Part II.8 (Page 11) : Is DACF seeking a document that is primarily technical in nature for planning? Or a highly graphic, public-facing resilience plan, suitable for broad distribution? | We hope the final report blends both technical and public-facing components. |
| Part II.6 (Page 10) : Should the model ordinance deliverable consist of planning recommendations, conceptual ordinance frameworks, or fully drafted ordinance language suitable for adoption? | That answer can be proposed by the consultant. |
| Page 8 of the RFP mentions that this project is a component (Task 2.4b, in part) of the State of Maine's multi-agency grant from NOAA. To assist in developing a realistic cost proposal, can the State provide an estimated budget or a "not-to-exceed" amount? | There is no pre-determined budget. |
| Appendix C provides space for three project examples to be included. Could this form be expanded to include more than three project examples? | Yes. |
| Can a map of the "Popham Peninsula" study area be provided? What part of Rt 209 is included in the study area? Does it include the crossing at the intersection of Popham Rd and St. John Dr.? | A concept drawing has been added to the RFP. See lines 10 and 16 above. |
| Has this project already gone through Environmental Compliance review with NOAA? What type of work is allowable based on the EC review? For example, could additional drone work be conducted? | This project was not initially subject to Environmental Compliance review. See line 28 regarding drone use. |
| Is there existing groundwater aquifer monitoring data that has been collected by BPL and if so, what type of data have they been collecting? | See line 17 above. |
| Will Maine Geological Survey be involved in this project? | Yes |
| For task 4, can you define what you mean but engaging the "public"? Is it just the stakeholders listed under "Tasks", or does the "public" also include the broader local community, statewide or regional public audiences? | That answer can be proposed by the consultant. |
| Can you confirm that the cost proposal should include the estimated budget to complete all tasks outlined in Part II, even though these tasks may occur during both performance periods? | Yes |
| To assist in developing a realistic cost proposal, can the State provide an estimated budget or a "not-to-exceed" amount for this contract? | See lines 30 and 35. |
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| RFP# 202603055 Amendment 1_Popham 06.16.26.docx | DOCX document | |
| RFP# 202603055 - Popham Peninsula Climate Resilience Planning _Final.docx | DOCX document |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .