To dispel rumors, I have attached the Scope of Work as a .pdf document. Here is a quoted relevant portion:

(emphasis added)

Mr. Penn was merely paraphrasing an OFFICIAL DOCUMENT FROM THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, yet people, who evidently do not know how to use Google and spend the 2.5 minutes it took me to find the same document, chose to pillory him (and me) without checking their facts.
How does that slice and dice?

The contract document relies heavily on the original B&M drawings. Is there a lot of confidence that the current boiler actually matches those drawings? There have been cases described on RYPN where locomotives did not match their construction drawings.

Correct me if I'm wrong here but wasn't the firebox rebuilt third party? If so, why aren't they being held responsible to fix what should have been done right?

Thanks for clarifying the situation by posting this attachment.



More importantly, "Can it core a apple?"

My effort to be circumspect seems to have ignited a couple of regular posters. Hopefully they will read and understand the pdf document Mr. Wilkens linked to will put an end to that effort to shoot the messenger.

Mr. Wilkins did what should have been done in the first place. All that needed to be presented was the document stating exactly the scope of the work is to be. Without that evidence, we had people planning tree houses on imagined limbs constructed of speculative branches.

That wasn't so hard. "So easy, even Grandma can do it!"

I'll second that. But I'd like to add this; if we don't know what document to look for, how can we find it? Google is great, but it isn't the end-all method of answering every question.

Are we to start footnoting every RYPN post now?

I thought it was odd that this document has no date on it, no deadline for contract submissions..actually no dates whatsoever. It could have been written yesterday or 5 years ago for all I know.

Because it's part of a packet of documents. There are other documents that include the bidding standards, etc.

Original bid packet was posted 8/3/15. It was modified on 8/10/15.

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=6789560464dc77d2b549752d986a56de&tab=core&_cview=1


https://www.fedconnect.net/FedConnect/PublicPages/PublicSearch/Public_Opportunities.aspx

Congratulations to Bruce Mowbray and the other professional preservation specialists at the shops in Scranton. The recently released bid package is no doubt a result of his and his colleagues’ hard work and perseverance throughout the leadership transition that has occurred in Scranton since Superintendent Kip Hagen passed away in 2013. It is only through Mr. Mowbray's determination and dedication that the technical mistakes in this project have received the attention they deserve and will now be corrected so that the completed restoration will be safe and require a minimum of maintenance.

Now that control of the technical management of the shop work has been removed from the LWVRHS and placed in the hands of Mr. Mowbray and his colleagues, future restoration work on 3713 can proceed in a more orderly fashion.

Three interesting dates in the document are:

12. Date of delivery: 31 January 2016.

17. (b) Offers are due on or before 2:00 P.M. EST, 1 September, 2015

17. (f) Site Visit: Monday, 17 August 2015 at 10:00 AM EST.

Yes, as you might have seen in the PM I sent you, the Park leadership is 100% behind this project and the shop team has been instrumental in moving it forward while finishing their high-quality work on #26. Together with fundraising success this year, things are rolling. I have no doubt that the partnership will succeed in a first-class restoration.

Rob

"robertjohndavis" - Thank you for making me aware of the lack of clarity in my last post. I have edited it accordingly.

Thanks for the clarification David, appreciate it.

Ok, now that all that trivial stuff has been discussed...

What style lettering will be done on the tender?

(runs and hides)