QUESTION(2).doc

QUESTION:

1. The SOW suggest that 'all features discussed with the Scope of Work' are to be recorded in a PGDB format. We can only assume that the information listed that is to be provided the Contractor is limited to the Master Plans, OMP's and Water Control Manual. Are we to assume that the intent of the Solicitation is for the contractor to build a PGDB for all 'corps owned lands' on the three projects that includes: 1) topography, 2)slope analysis, 3)vegetation, 4)soils, 5)sensitive/eroded shoreline areas, 6)minerals, 7)facilities, 8)utilities, 9)visitation, 10)demographics, 11)resource carrying capacity, 12) historic/cultural/archeological resources, 13)noxious weed areas 14)flood/water management, 15) master plan data and, 16) and all other 'Factors Influencing Resource Management and Development' as noted in item #2 Appendix A of the SOW?

ANSWER:

Yes. The Contractor will provide a complete new PGDB within the extents of a sample PGDB provided by the government, for each of the three projects.

QUESTION:

2. What level of accuracy is expected for spatial data?

a. aerial photo interpretation

b. un-surveyed GPS

c. surveyed GPS

ANSWER:

Level of accuracy “resides in the mind of those who are requesting the data collection effort and will be using the data.”

QUESTION:

3. What information is available on each of the projects with respect to areas of shoreline erosion?

ANSWERS:

Currently, very little information is available concerning areas of shoreline erosion at each of the projects. One thing that can be provided is information from both John H. Kerr's and W. Kerr Scott's shoreline management programs. Specifically, John H. Kerr has 23,100 feet of erosion control under their shoreline system. This figure does not include areas of erosion around Corps facilities and lease areas. W. Kerr Scott has some limited information on erosion in their draft shoreline management plan which can be viewed on the project web site. http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/wkscott/index.htm Falls Lake has not had any surveys to identify areas of shoreline erosion.

QUESTION:

4. Is there a Resource Carrying Capacity Model (or format) that the COE accepts and would like to see used on these projects?

ANSWER:

Reference the following documents:

Urban Research and Development Corporation. (1980). "Recreation carrying capacity handbook methods and techniques for planning, design, and management," Instruction Report R-80-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS., NTIS No. AD A096 446.

Department of the Army Technical Manual TM 5-803-12, Planning of Outdoor Recreation Areas, 2004.

A copy will be provided after the contract is awarded.

QUESTION:

5. Should our proposal include a detailed breakdown of cost by line item or simply in the Summary Form provided?

ANSWER:

Both. As discussed in “2.c. Part 3 – Price”, the cost proposal shall include a detailed listing of all direct and indirect costs, AND be presented in the format of the Contract Line Item Numbers chart.