ADDENDUM 1 

Request for Proposal for Engineering and Technical Due Diligence Services 

GO Ready Site Development Program 

RFP Issued: October 5, 2026 

Addendum 1 Issued: October 16, 2026 

Proposal Submittal Deadline: October 30, 2026, 4:00 P.M. CT 

Issued by: Greater Omaha Chamber 

In order to assist potential responders to the Request for Proposal, the Greater Omaha Chamber is issuing this addendum to clarify questions that have been submitted. 

Question 1: Can you provide additional information about the eight potential sites that will be part of the process, and are boundaries available? 

Response: The sites are not completely finalized; however, to the best of our knowledge at this time, the following sites are identified for study. Boundaries will be provided at project initiation. Sites are subject to change as per Section 1.1 in the Request for Proposal. #	County	Site Description	Approx. Acres	Shape
1	Cass	Mynard Lane site (industrial), southwest of Plattsmouth	228	Irregular
2	Dodge	Fremont Inland Port Authority site. 261 acres owned; 456 acres under option. The Master Development plan is already completed — only site due diligence needs to be conducted; no site engineering required.	717	Irregular
3	Douglas	Industrial site	200 (est.)	Rectangular
4	Douglas	Urban core site, 1–2 blocks; expected to be vacant or used for parking, with no existing buildings. Proposed end use: office development. The Target Industry Parameters included with the RFP Attachment A do not apply to this potential site.	1–2 blocks	Square
5	Sarpy	Industrial site	Up to 200	Rectangular
6	Pottawattamie	Rural industrial site	40–100	Somewhat irregular
7	Washington	Industrial site	Up to 400	Mainly rectangular
8	TBD	Site #8 — still to be determined; industrial site	200 (est.)	Rectangular

Question 2: Does the $564,000 budget include the potential one or two NEPA Environmental Assessments? Will EDA handle tribal consultation directly, with the consultant providing supporting documentation? 

Response: At this point in time, there is the potential for just one NEPA assessment, targeted for the Fremont Inland Port Authority site. Whether the NEPA is executed for the site depends on budget capacity. Fremont anticipates applying for federal grants for the development of rail and roadways, so if the NEPA can be furthered or completed, that would be a positive. This narrows the statement in the original Request for Development, Section 3.1 from a potential 1-2 sites to just 1 site. Respondents should price the potential NEPA as a cost per task as described in Section 4.1. Tribal consultation will follow NEPA guidelines. The EDA will not be involved in the NEPA component. 

Question 3: What level of geotechnical exploration is expected (i.e., borings or desktop study)? 

Response: Soil test borings are the preferred methodology, dependent upon the outcome of the NHPA Section 106 analysis (see Section 3.2 of the Request for Proposal). The number of soil borings can be managed to limit costs, as the aim is to provide general soil conditions and load-bearing capacities. Respondents should propose suggested soil boring quantities and/or alternate methodologies. If the Section 106 review shows potential adverse effects, a desktop study will be the methodology. 

Question 4: Are archeological field investigations included in the base scope or treated as additional services? 

Response: Any archeological field investigations that may be required as part of the NHPA Section 106 review are to be included in the base scope. In the cost proposal section of the response, the respondent may break out these costs separately. 

Question 5: What level of conceptual grading, infrastructure design, and utility analysis is expected? 

Response: Generally, the expectations are: 

• Grading: Basic rough grading plan to create a developable pad. 

• Infrastructure design: A pathway to bring utilities to the site from existing services, estimated cost, and estimated length of time to complete the improvements. Local EDC personnel will assist with coordination with local utilities. 

• Utility analysis: A general estimate of potential capacity available at the site with either existing infrastructure in place or potential capacity if extended, if available. Local EDC personnel will assist with coordination with local utilities. 

Question 6: Can the selected consultant compete for subsequent design and construction-phase services? 

Response: The selected consultant is open to compete for any subsequent design and construction services. Future opportunities, if any, are not known at this time. Selection for this project does not guarantee or give any advantage for future procurement opportunities. The selected consultant will have the opportunity to have their company name, logo, and contact information included with the marketing/due diligence package which are presented to prospective companies considering the sites. 

Question 7: Can previously completed GO Ready studies and deliverables be provided as examples or templates? 

Response: There is a general Marketing Flyer template that has been used for the locally EDC-controlled sites. Examples of those templates can be found at: selectgreateromaha.com/economic-development/site-selection/go-ready. This is not a required template. 

Existing due diligence materials vary depending on the completing firm. We would prefer to have a more consistent due diligence package across our certified sites. The submitting firm should include examples of publicly facing materials it has provided for similar projects. The GOEDP and the selected firm will jointly agree on the final design and look of the marketing packet and executive summary that fits within the provided budget. 

Question 8: How will the qualifications and cost proposals be evaluated? 

Response: As shown by the scoring weights in Section 5 of the Request for Proposal, the evaluation of responses is heavily weighted toward the qualifications of the submitting firm. Experience and deliverables on similar projects make up 50 percent of the scoring matrix, and the experience of personnel and the proposed methodology for completion make up another 30 percent. The proposed pricing structure makes up only 10 percent of the scoring; however, the importance here is how will the respondent manage the process and costs so that the proposed end result of eight certified GO Ready sites can be achieved. Once the preferred firm is selected and notice to proceed is given, we will coordinate with the firm to develop a specific budget and due diligence plan for each site that fits within the total budget.