140L5725Q0003_-_Attachment_004_-_DRAFT_StreamStructure(BDA-PALS)_EvaluationCriteria_3.pdf

Source Selection Evaluation Criteria

Best Value Trade-Off

The Upper Bear River Beaver Dam Analogues (BDA) and Post Assisted Log Structures (PALS) Project should be evaluated on a “trade-off” basis.

1. Key Personnel The contractor must provide the name(s) of any individual(s) proposed to be responsible for planning, supervising, and overseeing the project. For each such individual, information must be included with the bid to demonstrate that the individual has achieved all the following:

a. Formal education that gives the individual competency to carry out the scope of work.

This may be obtained in either of the following ways:

i. Formal education resulting in a graduate degree in hydrology or similar discipline (e.g., geomorphology, ecology, environmental management), or

ii. Formal education resulting in a bachelor's degree in hydrology or similar discipline (e.g., ecology, geomorphology, environmental management) plus at least 24 months of professional experience including similar duties as proposed in this contract.

b. Competency in the theory and methods of low-tech, process-based restoration design and construction. This includes understanding stream evolution, the dominant processes and attributes associated with each state in the stream evolution sequence, and how to account for those factors in structure, complex, and project-scale decisions.

c. Experience applying the Principles of Riverscape Health and Restoration to the design and implementation of projects that have achieved objectives at the structure, complex, and project scales.

d. Ability to plan, equip, organize, and supervise activity of the type and scope proposed.

2. Technical Approach The contractor’s technical approach to implementing low-tech restoration must follow the standards of practice described in the Low-Tech Process Based Restoration of Riverscapes Design Manual (see Reference) when making decisions on the number, type, size, location, and spatial arrangement of structures that best evokes the biophysical responses needed to achieve structure, complex, and project scale objectives. This includes adhering to the Ten guiding principles, which are broken into: (a) riverscape principals and (b) restoration principals.

a) Riverscapes Principles – would inform planning and design through an understanding of what constitutes healthy, functioning riverscapes and therefore what are appropriate targets and analogues to aim for. They include:

i. Streams need space. Healthy streams are dynamic, regularly shifting position within their valley bottom, reworking and interacting with their floodplain.

Allowing streams to adjust within their valley bottom is essential for maintaining functioning riverscapes.

DRAFT COPY

ii. Structure forces complexity and builds resilience. Structural elements, such as beaver dams and large woody debris, force changes in flow patterns that produce physically diverse habitats. Physically diverse habitats are more resilient to disturbances than simplified, homogeneous habitats.

iii. The importance of structure varies. The relative importance and abundance of structural elements varies based on reach type, valley setting, flow regime and watershed context. Recognizing what type of stream you are dealing with (i.e., what other streams it is similar to) helps develop realistic expectations about what that stream should or could look (form) and behave (process) like.

iv. Inefficient conveyance of water is often healthy. Hydrologic inefficiency is the hallmark of a healthy system. More diverse residence times for water can attenuate potentially damaging floods, fill up valley bottom sponges, and slowly release that water later elevating baseflow and producing critical ecosystem services.

b) Restoration Principles – Restoration Principles relate to our specific restoration actions and give us clues as to how to develop designs to promote processes that lead to recovery and resilience. These principles are rooted in the notion that we are not designing and building the solution, but rather we are simply initiating and promoting natural processes with structural additions as efficiently as possible to maximize the miles of riverscape we can improve. The low-tech Restoration Principles elaborated below help place our restoration actions in the right context to maximize our effectiveness in promoting better riverscape health.

v. It’s okay to be messy. When structure is added back to streams, it is meant to mimic and promote the processes of wood accumulation and beaver dam activity. Structures are fed to the system like a meal and should resemble natural structures (log jams, beaver dams, fallen trees) in naturally ‘messy’ systems. Structures do not have to be perfectly built to yield desirable outcomes. Focus less on the form and more on the processes the structures will promote.

vi. There is strength in numbers. A large number of smaller structures working in concert with each other can achieve much more than a few isolated, over-built, highly secured structures. Using a lot of smaller structures provides redundancy and reduces the importance of any one structure. It generally takes many structures, designed in a complex, to promote the processes of wood accumulation and beaver dam activity that lead to the desired outcomes.

vii. Use natural building materials. Natural materials should be used because structures are simply intended to initiate process recovery and go away over time. Locally sourced materials are preferable because they simplify logistics and keep costs down.

viii. Let the system do the work. Giving the riverscape and/or beaver the tools (structure) to promote natural processes to heal itself with stream power and ecosystem engineering, as opposed to diesel power, promotes efficiency that allows restoration to scale to the scope of degradation.

ix. Defer decision making to the system. Wherever possible, let the system make critical design decisions by simply providing the tools and space it needs to adjust. Deferring decision making to the system downplays the significance of uncertainty due to limited knowledge. For example, choosing a floodplain elevation to grade to based on limited hydrology information can be a complex and uncertain endeavor, but deferring to the hydrology of that system to build its own floodplain grade reduces the importance of uncertainty due to limited knowledge.

x. Self-sustaining systems are the solution. Low-tech restoration actions in and of themselves are not the solution. Rather they are just intended to initiate processes and nudge the system towards the ultimate goal of building a resilient, self-sustaining riverscape.

3. Schedule Depending on the year, the time frame between the flow in the creek being low enough to work in the channel to freeze up can be a short timeframe. The contractor should demonstrate in their schedule that they have the capability (number of people on the crew and time available) to complete the project by Oct 31, 2025.

In addition to the mandatory requirements of Past Performance and Price, the non-price evaluation factors listed above (1-3) when combined are significantly more important than the price. The evaluation criteria are listed in order of importance and should be weighted accordingly. For example, criteria number 1 is the most important and should be weighted the highest.

Reference

Wheaton J.M., Bennett S.N., Bouwes, N., Maestas J.D., and Shahverdian S.M. (Editors) 2019. Low-Tech Process-Based Restoration of Riverscapes: Design Manual. Version 1.0. Utah State University Restoration Consortium. Logan, UT. Available at: http://lowtechpbr.restoration.usu.edu/manual http://lowtechpbr.restoration.usu.edu/manual