W9128F21Q0059_Question and Answers_Cultural Surveys.pdf

Questions and Answers 20210712

Will the COR provide copies of previous site forms and associated reports?

The COR will provide electronic copies of shapefiles after award per the Description of Service; previous site forms and reports on file will be provided upon request; however, the contractor may be required to do some investigation to develop successful workplans and strategies.

Is there potential that the USACE could provide site forms, maps, aerials, pictures, or Google Earth images of sites? This would allow for better planning when it comes to geophysical testing

USACE will provide site forms to contractor who receives the award but cannot provide site locational data on a public website like sam.gov

“Contractor shall seek permission from private landowners to cross their lands, if needed.” This can be a very large problem as in the past we have had LO’s refuse to allow us to cross. In cases of LO refusal to cross or access what are we to do? It seems the USACE should do the asking and getting permission in writing.

USACE is not directing specific access routes or methods. It is the contractor’s responsibility to avoid trespassing within their route planning process. In cases of LO refusal of access, contractor should consider alternate access methods including boat/water access.

How are we to get material from USACE, and them from us? What if USACE refuse or we cannot reach them? Will there be a specified contact in addition to the COR for USACE?

The COR will provide and receive electronic material through DOD SAFE or email.

Government will provide all necessary information all other information contract shall be responsible for obtaining. The KO, Contracting Specialist, PM, and Project Archeologists provide adequate access to the government if the COR is not available or responsive.

Where will the Kick-Off meeting occur? Will the kick-off meeting be in person or remote?

The Kick-Off meeting will be remote, organized by contractor using a format compatible with

USACE.

How large a file can USACE accept for electronic submissions? Is there an FTP site and will we get access? Can an FTP site be established for this project?

DOD Safe accepts files up to 8 GB in size. DOD Safe is the DOD’s authorized file transfer system.

USACE will not establish an FTP. USACE may accept files through a contractor established secure SharePoint or FTP at the contractor’s expense.

Will the USACE clear vegetation at sites prior to Geophysical testing?

Contractor will be responsible for successful data collection, include site prep/vegetation removal.

Who will be the USACE project archaeologist? USACE project archaeologists are those archaeologists with responsibility for each individual lake office and they will vary by Project/lake.

Will the USACE Project Archaeologist and COR be two persons or a single person?

The COR is an archaeologist. Project Archaeologists will be identified for each Project/Lake.

What does USACE hope to accomplish with this contract?

USACE is seeking to better understand the resources it manages in accordance with Section 110(a) of the National Historic Preservation Act.

Specifically, USACE is seeking to understand the data potential of these sites and the distribution of contributing elements within each site to facilitate future preservation planning.

Photographs need to have a bar scale: 1. is USACE specifying the scale), 2. does USACE want photos imprinted with the direction of view, the UTM’s, and the Lat and Long on the Photo or just a photo with a scale?

USACE recommends all photos be associated with a direction of view and UTM coordinates, this may be within the photo caption or as a table in an appendix. USACE leaves specifics of the scale bar to the professional judgement of the contractor.

Is a separate standalone work plan required for each site or can the work plan for each site be included in the overall work plan?

A consolidated work plan would be acceptable provided it addresses the site-specific details of all planned work.

Is a separate standalone testing strategy required for each site or can it be part of the work plan for each site?

The testing strategy may be included in the workplan.

Can the Testing Strategy Summary be a single document with individual site sections or are individual standalone site strategies required?

Testing Strategy Summaries may be consolidated into a single document provided that the site-specific details are present.

To what level will stone rings at 24VL0025 (or other locations) be accomplished. General or by Stone. Define detailed mapping. The SOW states use “Montana Stone Ring attribute form”.

However, in Montana there are two levels of ring recordation. Which level should be used in Montana? Are we to apply Montana Standards to South Dakota or are there additional Ring Recordation Standards in South Dakota we are to use/?

For 24VL0025, this is the contractor’s choice of which attribute form is most appropriate and is left up to the Contractor. The generic data form is acceptable to USACE. Individual stones associated with rings must be mapped at point resolution. Requirements in the PWS for stone ring recordation are specific to this site as they derive from management recommendations of this site. Rock rings identified elsewhere are to be recorded in accordance with general professional practice.

For 24GF0373 how far is the wagon trail to be traced?

Only within the established site boundary.

“The depth of excavation units must meet and/or exceed beyond the cultural component(s)

For eligibility site testing, it is essential that the test excavation extends throughout the cultural identified in the literature review,” what does this mean?

strata. Test unit target depth should be based on known depths of bottom of cultural strata identified within existing documents. Where not documented, test units are expected to reach sterile strata below the cultural horizons.

In what projection does USACE want the data, we understand NAD83 Zone 13 but what projection?

Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) is the typical projection expected by USACE. Zone 13 is specific to the Fort Peck work; the remaining project areas are within Zone 14. NAD 1983 is the required datum.

Define the meaning of “all pertinent historical and archeological background literature for the project area”. We think this should be up to us to define what is pertinent. This statement is an extremely broad requirement!

Background literature depth is at the discretion of the Contractor’s PI but must meet the reasonable and good faith standard and provide sufficient background to allow meaningful evaluation within the appropriate historic context; i.e., a review of existing site and GLO records would not be sufficient. Specifics of background research plan may be detailed within the Work Plan to ensure agreement on adequacy.

The SOW states “the curation, cataloguing, and storage of approved artifacts is the responsibility of the USACE”. However, in the event that material or samples are collected is there a specific form to identify the material that is required or can we develop our own?

The contractor may develop their own form;

however, The USACE does not ordinarily allow collection of artifacts from cultural resource sites and any collection will need to be coordinated well in advance.

Please provide examples of a format for the weekly progress reports as SOW indicates?

Format of the weekly progress report is at the discretion of the Contractor and may be as simple as an email briefing what work occurred in the previous week and the plans for the coming week.

There are two Base Efforts, the NR Work and the Geophysical Work. The same questions are posed in both. For both are two reports etc. required or can a single report addressing both requirements be allowed? If Option One and Two are awarded this same question is asked.

The required division of the reports is by state.

Fort Peck, MT’s NR work must be reported separately from the geophysical testing occurring in South Dakota. If the base and options are awarded at the same time, all South Dakota work may be combined into a single report.

Under Method of Payment are Base NR and Geophysical separately payable or a combined payment as to the percentiles indicated? In other words, is payment for NR work separate from Geophysical or are they one? It appears that the two aspects are to be invoiced separately and treated as two separate projects and work efforts?

National Register Testing at Fort Peck and Geophysical Testing in South Dakota will be addressed as separate CLINS within the same project and should be invoiced as such. Refer to Method of Payment within the PWS.

Under the Base NR project aspect what happens if we recommend the sites as Not Eligible? Does that decrease the contract by 10%?

A recommendation of Not Eligible should be discussed with the COR; if USACE is prepared to accept the recommendation then no nomination form is needed, and the contract will not be decreased by 10%. If USACE does not accept the argument for non-eligibility a form may still be required.

Do all project personnel need to complete the Security Requirements? If so, will time be allowed to complete the requirements be folded into the project schedule?

It is the contractor’s responsibility to pre-screen Candidates using the E-verify Program and meet security requirements. All on-site personnel must comply with local security policies and procedures; however, no onerous security measures are presently in place for the publicly accessible areas where work is required.

We would like a copy of the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan.

See PWS Technical Exhibits 1–4. The QASP notwithstanding, the contractor is responsible for the quality of all deliverables.

Pricing asks for geomorphologists; however, geophysicist generally do the remote sensing work described in the RFP. We’d like clarification.

Geophysicist has been added to Project Pricing.

Bidders can add Labor Classification at their discretion.

Are any of the sites inundated by lake levels or partially inundated?

No.

Can USACE clarify temporal affiliation of each site? Historic or prehistoric?

All sites except 24GF0373 are prehistoric sites.

Gradiometer survey plus additional coverage with other instruments is called for. In most cases this will be appropriate, but gradiometer might be ineffective on some sites. It is probably most cost-effective to limit coverage with additional instruments to sampling or targeted survey of limited areas. Expectations for this are ambiguous in the RFP.

USACE prefers gradiometer and soil resistivity;

where gradiometer is feasible it should be conducted with one additional method. Where ineffective Contractor should provide two appropriate forms of geophysical testing.

Geophysical survey methods can vary by orders of magnitude based on type, terrain, and vegetation considerations; a better understanding of each site is necessary to provide accurate estimates.

Site numbers have been provided within the PWS allow prospective contractors to gather such site-specific data as they believe necessary to better understand each site.

It calls for gradiometer survey plus additional coverage with other instruments. In most cases this will be appropriate, but gradiometer might be ineffective on some sites. It is probably most cost-effective to limit coverage with additional instruments to sampling or targeted survey of limited areas. Expectations for this are ambiguous in the RFP.

Solicitation W9128F21Q0059 Section 2 B - Geophysical testing will include both gradiometer and soil resistivity methods; additional methods that are best suited to identifying archeological features in varying sediment types in the project area may be proposed by the contractor.

Additional methods are the discretion of the offeror.

If this a new requirement, or is there a current or previous contractor who has performed similar services? If available, can you please send along the incumbent contract and task order number?

Previously purchase orders for similar work have been provided by Collier Geophysics LLC (W9128F19P0117), North Wind Resource Consulting LLC (W9128F17P0002), and Ethnoscience Inc (W9128F17P0165).