140R2020Q0114 Combined Synopsis-Solicitation V3.pdf

COMBINED SYNOPSIS/SOLICITATION

140R2020Q0114

Seepage Management Support

Contracting Office:

Bureau of Reclamation Interior Region 10 · California-Great Basin

Acquisitions and Services Division Supply and Services Branch

Sacramento CA 95825

This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in Subpart 12.6, as supplemented with FAR parts 13.5 and additional information included in this notice.

The Bureau of Reclamation intends to award a Firm-Fixed Price and Time and Materials Purchase Order for services represented in the Performance Work Statement. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation; quotes are being requested and a written solicitation will not be issued. The solicitation document and incorporated provisions and clauses are those in effect through Federal Acquisition Circular 2020-09, as of October 26, 2020.

This requirement is being solicited as a Small Business set-aside and will be awarded on a Best Value basis in accordance with Part FAR 13.5

GENERAL INFORMATION

RFQ Number: 140R2020Q0114

Request for Quotation (RFQ) Request for Proposal

(RFP) Invitation for Bid

(IFB)

North American Industry Classification Code

(NAICS):

541620 Size Standard: $16.5M

Competition: 100% SMALL BUSINESS SET-ASIDE

QUOTES DUE: November 27, 2020 at 17:00 PM Eastern Time

EMAIL TO: dseggay@usbr.gov

Business Information:

Business Name: _______________________________

DUNS Number/Cage Code: ______________________

Tax ID Number: _______________________________

Business Size (select one): Large Small mailto:dseggay@usbr.gov

CLIN

NO.

Description

Qty Unit of Issue

Unit Price Total Price

00000

Contractor shall provide all management, personnel, supervision, labor, materials, transportation, and other items necessary to perform seepage management support for the San Joaquin River Restoration Program (SJRRP) services in accordance with the Performance Work Statement

(PWS).

00010 Base Year: Subtask I – Plan and Project Handbook (Time-and-Materials).

Ceiling amount: $120,000.00

00020

Base Year: Subtask II – Baseline Monitoring (Firm Fixed Price)

Mo

00030 Base Year: Subtask III- Site Evaluation (Time-and-Materials).

Ceiling amount: $415,000.00

00040 Base Year: Subtask IV- Seepage Losses (Time-and-Materials).

Ceiling amount: $50,000.00

00050 Base Year: Subtask V- Project Analysis, Design, Environmental Compliance and Permitting (Time-and-Materials).

Ceiling amount: $355,000.00

00060

Base Year: Subtask VI. Outreach - Seepage and Conveyance Technical Feedback Meetings (Firm-Fixed Price)

00070 Option Year 1: Subtask I – Plan and Project Handbook (Time-and-Materials)..

Ceiling amount: $120,000.00

00080

Option Year 1: Subtask II – Baseline Monitoring (Firm Fixed Price)

00090 Option Year 1: Subtask III- Site Evaluation (Time-and-Materials).

Ceiling amount: $415,000.00

00100 Option Year 1: Subtask IV- Seepage Losses (Time-and-Materials).

Ceiling amount: $50,000.00

00110 Option Year 1: Subtask V- Project Analysis, Design, Environmental Compliance and

00120

Option Year 1: Subtask VI. Outreach - Seepage and Conveyance Technical Feedback Meetings (Firm-Fixed Price)

00130 Option Year 2: Subtask I – Plan and Project Handbook (Time-and-Materials).

Ceiling amount: $120,000.00

00140 Option Year 2: Subtask II – Baseline Monitoring (Firm Fixed Price)

QUOTE/PRICING SCHEDULE

00150 Option Year 2: Subtask III- Site Evaluation (Time-and-Materials).

Ceiling amount: $415,000.00

00160 Option Year 2: Subtask IV- Seepage Losses (Time-and-Materials).

Ceiling amount: $50,000.00

00170 Option Year 2: Subtask V- Project Analysis, Design, Environmental Compliance and

00180

Option Year 2: Subtask VI. Outreach - Seepage and Conveyance Technical Feedback Meetings (Firm-Fixed Price)

TOTAL PRICE PROPOSED

Notes:

1. Refer to Attachment 1

2. CLINs/Tasks that are Time-and-Materials have ceiling amounts set for each year.

3. CLINs/Tasks that are Time-and-Materials shall include price breakouts that include the following:

1) Labor Categories

2) Number of hours for each labor category

3) Fully burdened labor rates for each labor category

4) Subotal price for each labor category.

Performance Work Statement Seepage Management Support

9/28/2020

1.0 Background

The San Joaquin River Restoration Program (SJRRP or Program) implements a comprehensive long-term effort to restore flows and a self-sustaining Chinook salmon fishery while reducing or avoiding adverse impacts to water supply. This work statement supports seepage management activities which include monitoring, project design, and analysis of changes to shallow groundwater tables and the related effects to Restoration Flows, agriculture, and levee stability for lands adjacent to the SJRRP area, including 150 miles of the San Joaquin River and a portion of flood bypass projects. Components of the work include, but are not limited to:

• Updating a Seepage Monitoring and Management Plan to guide the release of flows and identifying locations of projects to address material adverse impacts from seepage;

• Data collection to identify risks and understand the relationships between SJRRP flows and material adverse impacts;

• Analysis of seepage losses and gains to inform material adverse impacts and Unexpected Seepage Losses as defined in the San Joaquin River Settlement;

• Support for responding to landowner concerns regarding seepage during Program flow releases and analysis to support making changes to flow releases in response to seepage concerns;

• Revisions to a handbook to provide guidelines on implementing projects to mitigate material adverse seepage impacts;

• Analysis, design, environmental compliance, and permitting to implement seepage mitigation projects; and

• Stakeholder outreach to work with landowners and the public on seepage concerns in a transparent process.

In 1988, a coalition of environmental groups led by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) filed a lawsuit challenging the renewal of the long-term water service contracts between the United States and the Central Valley Project Friant Division Contractors. After more than 18 years of litigation (Natural Resources Defense Council, et al., v. Kirk Rodgers, et al.), the NRDC, Friant Water Users Authority (FWUA), and the Departments of the Interior and Commerce (Settling Parties) reached agreement on the terms and conditions of the San Joaquin River Settlement (Settlement). The court approved the Settlement on October 23, 2006. The San Joaquin River Restoration Settlement Act, Title X, Subtitle A of the Omnibus Lands Bill, Public Law 111-11, (Legislation) authorized implementation of the Settlement on March 30, 2009.

The Bureau of Reclamation’s (Reclamation) SJRRP Office coordinates implementation of the Settlement. The Federal Settling Parties entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the State of California, by and through the California Natural Resources Agency regarding the State’s role in the implementation of the Settlement. The “Implementing Agencies” responsible for the management of the SJRRP include the United States Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), the Department of Water Resources (DWR), and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). A Program Management Team (PMT) with representatives from the five Implementing Agencies provides direction to four workgroups that facilitate and coordinate the technical activities: Water Management, Fish Management, Engineering and Design, and Environmental Compliance and Permitting. The workgroups include staff from each of the five Implementing Agencies to address technical issues related to the SJRRP implementation and review technical deliverables. The Seepage and Channel Capacity Subgroup also includes the United States Geological Survey for technical support and guidance. A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) with representatives from the Settling Parties and overseen by an independent Restoration Administrator (RA) makes specific recommendations on implementation as described in the Settlement. Public Technical Feedback meetings provide outreach to stakeholders including landowners, water users, and the public.

The Settlement and Legislation call for releases of additional water from Friant Dam, a combination of channel and structural improvements along the San Joaquin River between Friant Dam and the confluence of the Merced River, the reintroduction of spring and/or fall-run Chinook salmon, and water supply projects for Friant Division long-term contractors. The Restoration Flows are comprised of water associated with specific Reclamation water rights granted by the California State Water Resources Control Board. These flows fall under the jurisdiction of Section 1707 of California Water Code and are dedicated to beneficial instream use in the San Joaquin River.

Both the Legislation and the Water Rights Orders include requirements for seepage management. The public website for the SJRRP, www.restoresjr.net, describes the origin of the SJRRP, organizational structure, and participants. The Restoration Goal of the Settlement requires the conveyance of flows through the San Joaquin River from Friant Dam to the Merced River confluence.

Channel capacity, including impacts from high groundwater tables, will limit the ability to convey flows until the development and implementation of projects to relieve constraints. The Settlement identified some projects, but some of the constraints will remain unknown until flows reach high enough rates to identify additional problem areas. To support conveyance of flows, the SJRRP will reduce or avoid adverse seepage impacts through recommendations to limit, reduce or divert Restoration Flows in real-time and the development of projects to improve conveyance.

Historically, rain and snowmelt in the mountains surrounding the San Joaquin Valley percolated into groundwater aquifers and augmented surface flows in Reaches 3, 4, and 5 of the San Joaquin River, see Figure 1. Agricultural development over the past century and the construction of the flood project changed the surface and groundwater interactions. Currently, the San Joaquin River generally loses surface flow to pumping centers in the unconfined aquifer zone along the north-east side of the river. Agricultural encroachment into the historical floodplain resulted in farmed lands immediately adjacent to the river channel. Poor drainage and the return of year-round flows under the Settlement in the river channel and flood bypasses raise concerns that shallow groundwater tables will adversely impact agricultural production in lands adjacent to the river.

http://www.restoresjr.net/

Figure 1. Seepage Management Study Area

A number of studies and documents provide information leading up to, through, and following the Settlement. The SJRRP website provides information on prior work including:

• The Background Report, McBain and Trush 2002

• The Program Record of Decision (ROD) and Environmental Impact Statement/Report (PEIS/R)

• Site Specific Studies

• Annual Technical Reports

• Expert testimony by Deborah Hathaway of S.S. Papadopulous and Associates.

• The 1999 Pilot Project

• The 2010 Interim Flow EA/IS

• The 2011 Interim Flow Supplemental EA

• Flow Monitoring Status Pages

• Monitoring Well Atlases

• Seepage Management Plan and Amendments

• Seepage Project Handbook

• Seepage Management Actions EA/FONSI

The body of existing literature provides the technical basis and the history for the development of the SJRRP and the context for integrating the different projects and workgroups with long-term strategies.

https://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/includes/documentShow.php?Doc_ID=29204

2.0 Scope

Under full Restoration Flows, the Settlement calls for a short duration pulse of up to 8000 cfs through Reaches 1 and 2A and the conveyance capacity for flows of up to 4500 cfs in Reaches 2B through 5 of the San Joaquin River. To reduce or avoid material adverse seepage impacts and allow for the passage of Restoration Flows, the SJRRP created a Seepage Management Plan (SMP). As a living document, the SMP provides a framework to disclose the overall approach, guide actions, and facilitate stakeholder feedback. The latest public version currently resides at:

http://www.restoresjr.net/restoration-flows/seepage-projects/.

Multiple agencies participate in the development of the SMP with primary authorship by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) under the direction of Reclamation.

Sections include:

• Seepage Effects: description of potential impacts including water-logging, soil salinity, and geotechnical stability of levees.

• Locations of Known Risks: areas identified as at risk for seepage effects through landowner identified parcels, historical groundwater levels, elevation data, the Central Valley Hydrologic Model (CVHM), aerial imagery, and the current monitoring program.

• Operations Plan: procedures for assessing flow rates and responding to real- time concerns identified by monitoring and landowner feedback through making changes in flow releases.

• Monitoring Program: a series of telemetry, logged, and manually measured monitoring well transects and staff gages spaced roughly 8-10 miles apart with additional wells at locations identified by the SJRRP and landowners. Additional monitoring data includes soil moisture content, soil salinity, water quality, and hydraulic conductivity measurements on a site-specific basis to assess agricultural effects.

• Thresholds and Triggers: events that result in increased scrutiny and provide operational criteria to restrict the magnitude, timing, or duration of flows. Events include: depth to water table, river stage, and phone calls from local landowners. An event typically results in a site visit to assess conditions and make a recommendation on how to proceed.

• Responses: real-time actions Reclamation can take to reduce or avoid adverse impacts including limit flows at Friant, restrict ramping rates and duration reduce releases, exchange flows at Mendota Pool, deliver flows to Arroyo Canal near Sack Dam, or divert flows into the Chowchilla Bypass at the Chowchilla Bifurcation Structure.

• Projects: a description of potential long-term measures to relieve channel capacity constraints in the future.

Projects may include easements, berms, slurry walls, drains, or other non-structural and constructed measures.

Conceptual Frameworks The SMP makes use of several conceptual models to identify and describe the relationships between relevant factors of seepage. Further development of the SMP may need to refine, update, or replace existing conceptual models.

The Flow Bench Evaluations on the Flow Conditions page under Flow Scheduling on the public website show the predictions of groundwater levels at a given flow rate and the process to determine allowable flow releases. Figure 2 shows the methods for predicting the effects of a change in release at Friant Dam from the perspective of increasing flows

The conceptual model illustrates the use of hydraulic rating curves to predict water surface elevations in the river channel and the resulting rise in monitoring wells. The conceptual model intentionally simplifies the representation of physical processes to predict a maximum amount of rise and neglects groundwater gradients.

http://www.restoresjr.net/restoration-flows/seepage-projects/

Groundwater monitoring thresholds are based on either historical groundwater levels, or crop root zones and soil capillary rise. The illustration and definition of the threshold provides a means for stakeholders to assist in constructing scientifically based criteria.

Figure 3 shows some of the components investigated in a site evaluation in preparation for developing a project to relieve seepage constraints on channel capacity.

Figure 3. Site Evaluation Conceptual Model

The groundwater gradient at different river flow levels allows the determination of the extent of influence of the San Joaquin River on groundwater levels as well as the inclusion of other potential groundwater influences. This provides an understanding of seepage impacts, whether they are impacts to crops or infrastructure, rather than simply a model based around understanding groundwater levels. Based on the conceptual model, factors to

Rating Curve

Well

Channel

Monitoring Threshold

Flow

Figure 2. Conceptual Model for Operations

St ag e consider for seepage projects include:

• Sources of Groundwater Recharge o Rainfall o Irrigation o Canal Seepage o Flood Flow Seepage o SJRRP Seepage

• Sources of Soil Salinity o Irrigation Water o Fertilizer o Natural Soil Minerals o Shallow Groundwater Rise

• Additional Factors o Weather Patterns

Stakeholders identified slope of the ground surface as another factor. Further development may require defining additional conceptual models and communicating with agencies and stakeholders different ways of addressing seepage needs. The SJRRP may use different conceptual models in different locations depending on site conditions, data availability, and stakeholder concerns.

Outreach The SJRRP started a public Seepage and Conveyance Technical Feedback meeting to facilitate the exchange of information with third parties and receive comments on ongoing studies. These meetings occur approximately once per year in or around Los Banos, CA. Stakeholders present at these meetings may include the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority (SJRECWA) and member agencies, and the San Joaquin River Resources Management Coalition (RMC), a local landowner group. In addition to seepage issues, they will include other conveyance topics such as levee capacity, which will involve the California Department of Water Resources (DWR).

Outreach may also include but is not limited to other public meetings such as the Program Science Meeting.

Approval Process This scope anticipates frequent interaction with agency staff in order to identify the appropriate means of accomplishing objectives while meeting a compressed timeline for implementation. Tasks will include technical analysis and design, synthesis of materials into reports, and development of presentations to agencies, stakeholders, and the public. This work statement will require the Contractor to develop written and visual presentation materials in consultation with the Implementing Agencies as described by the tasks. All materials shall go through a comprehensive review by the Contractor prior to delivery to Reclamation. This comprehensive review shall include a quality assurance and quality control process, grammar and readability, general editing, and formatting. Source data, including presentations, supporting materials, models, datasets, GIS layers, and processing shall be made available to agencies for review at each step.

Reports and Technical Memoranda shall include review by Reclamation and the Seepage Management Subgroup, the PMT and the respective Implementing Agency’s policy and legal team, as determined by each Implementing Agency.

Reclamation, at its discretion, may include comments from parties beyond the Implementing Agencies in the review process such as the Restoration Administrator, Technical Advisory Committee, NRDC, FWUA (now FWA), SJRECWA, or the RMC.

All deliverables except meeting materials and unless otherwise noted shall be submitted as First Administrative Draft, Second Administrative Draft, Public Draft, and Final Draft. Table 1 shows review timeframes for documents.

The Contractor shall account for review and the time necessary to incorporate comments into schedules.

Table 1. Review Timeframes

Draft Version Approval Level Minimum Review Time

First Administrative Consultant First Attempt, Subgroup Review 1 Week

Second Administrative

Subgroup Comments Addressed, PMT Review 1 Week

Public PMT Comments Addressed, Public/Stakeholder Review

2 Weeks

Final Public/Stakeholder Comments Addressed Deadline

Meeting materials including agendas, handouts, presentations, draft notes, and final notes shall include reviews by the Work Groups, and the PMT if identified as necessary by the Seepage Management Subgroup Lead before releasing them to the public. Meeting materials shall be provided on the following schedule shown in Table 2.

For each meeting, the Contractor shall provide meeting notes that summarize action items and decision points. Draft meeting notes shall be delivered within three (3) days of the meeting. Final notes, incorporating comments and suggested changes, shall be provided within two (2) days of receipt of all comments.

Table 2. Meeting Materials Timeframes

Deliverable Timeframe

Agenda At least 5 Days Prior to Meeting Handouts At least 2 Days Prior to Meeting Presentations At least 2 Days Prior to Meeting Draft Notes Within 3 Days After Meeting Final Notes Within 2 Days After Review

Additionally, document development may require policy decisions by the Implementing Agencies with briefing papers or outlines to support making intermediate decisions and collaboration with agency staff. Miscellaneous materials shall include review by the Work Groups and PMT as identified as necessary by the Seepage Management Subgroup.

To the extent possible, all comments from Reclamation and the Implementing Agencies are to be satisfactorily addressed at each submittal stage. In cases where comments from Reclamation or an Implementing Agency cannot be incorporated for any reason, the Contractor shall contact Reclamation’s Project Manager for resolution. To the extent possible, all comments from non-agency parties are to be satisfactorily addressed prior to finalizing documents. In cases where comments cannot be incorporated, the Contractor shall contact Reclamation’s Project Manager for resolution. Documents submitted for review shall include a method for tracking comments and describe how the comments were incorporated.

Each task describes the specific deliverable requirements. Materials will vary in length and shall include, but are not limited to, graphics needed to depict the study area and features or aspects of any of the alternatives discussed.

Information to be provided to the Contractor by Reclamation for inclusion in any of the deliverables will be provided in draft form at least two weeks prior to the due date of that deliverable. Deliverables shall be provided in both Adobe Acrobat (.pdf) and MS Word, MS PowerPoint, MS Project, MS Excel, or .jpeg format, unless otherwise agreed upon by Reclamation. The number of required hardcopies for each deliverable is specified in each task. The Contractor shall provide the supporting information used in the development electronically including raw data, model input, model files, model output files, executables, analytical calculations, CAD drawings, and GIS layers used to develop results and maps.

Reclamation shall own the rights to any models, calculations, GIS data, CAD drawings, or other items produced under this contract.

Meeting Locations The Contractor shall assume 50% of agency meetings will be conducted in Sacramento and 50% conducted in Fresno, Los Banos, Firebaugh, or Turlock, CA. Public meetings will likely be conducted in Los Banos or Firebaugh, CA.

Contractor shall assume in-person attendance by at least one representative capable of addressing technical concerns.

Tasks The Contractor shall provide general project management/administration activities in support of this contract including but not limited to the following:

• Developing a master schedule of all document, analysis, design, environmental compliance, and permitting tasks. A separate schedule for the landowner will be required for design and compliance activities on each seepage project.

• Coordination of daily Contract activities by the Contractor’s staff and consultant team, document review, and quality assurance/quality control of work prepared for this Contract.

• Scheduling, planning, and conducting meetings and presentations.

• Preparation and reproduction of meeting notes, handouts, and deliverables.

• Coordination and communication with the Implementing Agencies.

• Management and maintenance of an electronic document library with hard copies to be provided upon request.

• Preparation of Monthly Progress Report outlining activities of the previous month by sub-task, activities anticipated for the current month by sub-task, an updated master schedule, issues or topics of concern, estimated expenses projected out by month for two (2) months out, a monthly invoice, and quarterly accruals. The master schedule shall be delivered to Reclamation in an MS Project format or other as approved.

The Contractor’s Project Manager and/or Project Coordinator shall be available to participate in bi-weekly contract status and coordination calls to review progress and plan for upcoming activities with the Reclamation Project Manager and other Implementing Agency staff as appropriate.

The Contractor’s Project Manager and/or Project Coordinator shall attend periodic meetings, on an as needed basis, to review progress and plan for upcoming activities with the Reclamation Project Manager and other Reclamation staff, the SJRRP Program Manager, the Implementing Agencies, the Settling Parties, and Exchange Contractors as appropriate. These progress meetings may also be scheduled as needed to report on contract/Project issues and concerns, and other matters related to the administration and execution of this contract. For briefing purposes, the Contractor shall prepare presentation materials describing Project progress typically in the format of 1-2 page fact sheets at critical milestones. Assume one (1) meeting per month, with a total of twelve (12) meetings per year. These

Subgroup meetings to coordinate with agency staff and others will occur in addition to the Technical Feedback meetings.

Task 1. Seepage Management Year 1

Contractor will assist Reclamation and the SJRRP in implementation of seepage management from December 1, 2020 to November 30, 2021. The schedule for deliverables integrates with other SJRRP activities including flow and reporting requirements. In addition to general activities, six subtasks below describe known components for seepage management.

The Contractor shall identify quality assurance and quality control plans for monitoring and proposed products to address seepage management goals. The Contractor shall have experience working in the San Joaquin Valley conducting crop, groundwater, seepage, and soil salinity monitoring, testing and installation including groundwater, hydrology, soil science, agricultural engineering, agricultural economics, and drainage engineering.

Contractor shall be familiar with all existing documents, pertinent legislation, and familiar with MODFLOW, CVHM and groundwater analysis techniques. Experience working collaboratively with agency staff, stakeholders, Settling Parties, and landowners is required.

Contractor is expected to carry identification and permission documents when on private property and explain the visit with utmost politeness to landowners. Field staff will read and carry Temporary Entry Permits and monitoring well agreements in the field and abide by all terms and conditions within these documents. Contractor staff will conduct all work between the hours of 8 am and 6 pm unless otherwise coordinated, drive less than 20 miles per hour on dirt roads to avoid dust, and park in turnout areas not blocking roads. Equipment fuel, oil, breakdown and maintenance is the responsibility of equipment owner and shall be included in the submitted hourly rate.

Source data, including datasets, GIS layers, spreadsheets, fieldnotes, and processing shall be made available to agencies for review and approval and for turnkey delivery to stakeholders at each step.

Subtask I. Seepage Management Plan and Project Handbook (Time-and-Materials) The Seepage Management Plan identifies thresholds that constrain Restoration Flow releases. Existing constraints on releases will require projects to increase the level of non- damaging flow releases. Projects may include structural, non-structural, or a combination of measures such as easements, fee title acquisition, tile drains, and slurry walls. This task updates the Seepage Management Plan and the Seepage Project Handbook to assist Reclamation and landowners in understanding and developing the most appropriate projects for different types of site conditions and includes data collection, environmental compliance requirements, and timelines. This task includes all modeling and analysis necessary to update the plan and handbook, as well as coordination with agencies and stakeholders, technical writing, editing and graphic design. The handbook shall include example construction specifications. The handbook shall include template environmental documents for clearing potential seepage projects including general biological and cultural resources characteristics of the study area. Review times required will be doubled for the Seepage Management Plan and Seepage Project Handbook.

The Contractor shall demonstrate experience with drainage and river engineering as well as environmental compliance and permitting for State and Federal Projects (CEQA and NEPA). Contractor roles at minimum will include coordinating input from agencies, technical editing, graphics, etc. Additional roles include formulating approaches to manage and mitigate for seepage, background research, mapping, data management, and analysis of technical information. The high level of stakeholder scrutiny and agency commitments to seepage management will increase the amount of time for document review. The Contractor shall assume double the standard review times for the Seepage Management Plan.

The Contractor shall demonstrate an understanding of Settlement objectives, third party concerns and the ability to apply sound science based in the physical processes and factors that drive groundwater, soil science, and agricultural engineering to formulate short-term solutions as well as long-term strategies.

Deliverable: Seepage Management Plan and Seepage Project Handbook

Due Date: End of Year 1, and each subsequent Option Year

Format: For each draft, hard copies as requested and emailed in Microsoft Word and PDF, GIS layers and monitoring data in Excel; all model files shall be prepared in native format for turnkey delivery to stakeholders.

Assume two (2) appendices of the SMP of moderate complexity to be updated each year.

Subtask II. Baseline Monitoring (Firm-Fixed Price) Baseline monitoring includes the information necessary to understand physical processes governing seepage and provide data to support real-time flow adjustments. The SMP will describe the necessary data collection and monitoring. The Contractor shall conduct the monitoring to support the SMP strategies and inform real time decisions in coordination with Reclamation and the other Implementing Agencies. Monitoring shall include the Contractor’s purchase and installation of any new monitoring equipment and regular field visits to collect data on new and existing installations. Assume five (5) new well installations per year. Dataloggers are already installed in most locations where they can be; assume 30 additional loggers needed throughout the network in Year 1, 15 replacement loggers in Year 2, and 15 replacement loggers in Year 3. Monitoring shall also include any abandonment or retiring of wells in the monitoring network when they are no longer needed; assume five (5) per year. Equipment for long term installation such as well casings and dataloggers shall be purchased by the Contractor with ownership of said equipment residing with the government. Other equipment for temporary use such as drill rigs, trucks, electronic sounders, etc. shall be purchased by the Contractor and owned by the Contractor.

The Contractor shall perform data collection anticipated to identify seepage and manage flows. Minimum anticipated monitoring equipment and tests would include:

• Groundwater elevations using hand auger of drive-point groundwater monitoring wells including a datalogger collecting information at least hourly on groundwater level, temperature, and Electrical Conductivity;

• Groundwater elevations in field using hand augers and potential installation of temporary wellpoints.

Assume five (5) field sites monitored per year;

• Soil characteristics such as hydraulic conductivity, and moisture using equipment such as hand-auger samples and an EM38 meter or equivalent tools. Assume such characterization of soils at one (1) site per year;

• Ground surveys of all measurement sites to identify topography of the surrounding lands and cross section profile;

• Staff gage installation and pressure transducers with loggers for monitoring river stage and water temperatures; and

• Abandonment or retirement of wells when no longer needed in the monitoring network. Assume five (5) per year.

The Contractor shall conduct field data collection needs. Minimum anticipated field data collection would include:

• At least quarterly staff gage readings of river water surfaces adjacent to all transects in Reaches 1 through 5 and the bypasses (assume approximately 20). At least once a year these readings will include a flow measurement;

• Monthly groundwater level measurements in approximately 120 wells in Reaches 1 through 5 including bypasses, and quarterly measurements in the remainder of the well network; and

• At least quarterly downloads of logged data.

All measurements will require a location reported in NAD-83. Field samples may use handheld GPS equipment.

Ground topography and wells will require survey grade coordinates including elevation in NAVD 88. Wells shall include top of casing and ground surface elevation information. Deliverables shall be reviewed to ensure accuracy as well as that all appropriate groundwater, flow hydrology, agricultural, etc. information is included. Table 3 details example minimum monitoring requirements. Land access will require coordination with the SJRRP Office.

The Contractor shall develop required environmental compliance and permitting documents in coordination with the SJRRP office. The Contractor will complete National Environmental Policy Act compliance for all monitoring activities with guidance from Reclamation, including Categorical Exclusions or Environmental Assessments. The Contractor will also develop information for all required permits, including possible Streambed Alteration Agreements, Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act permits, Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, Essential Fish Habitat, and any other required permits.

The Contractor shall provide monitoring information as part of a database. The Contractor will be required to keep the database up to date, including all monitoring metadata.

Deliverable and Due Date: Database updates and Groundwater Metadata, quarterly each year.

Format: Microsoft Access database, Electronic GIS and MS Excel Files, Microsoft Word, and Adobe PD

Table 3. Example Monitoring Plan and Data Collection Schedule:

Monitoring Type Minimum Deliverable Final Outcome Due Date

Hourly Data (Assume 200 wells downloaded quarterly)

Dataloggers will be installed in wells, downloaded quarterly, quality assurance quality controlled, and sent over in a spreadsheet or Access database or SQL database with columns for Well ID, Date / Time, EC, temperature, and depth below top of casing or depth below ground surface if the well has been surveyed.

1st and Final Drafts quarterly

Groundwater and river staff gage measurements (Assume 120 wells monthly and 20 staff gages quarterly)

- Excel spreadsheet of well ID, date, depth from top of casing, depth to water and elevation

- Plots and summary text of groundwater levels

- Photos of installation, any adjacent farming activity or installation issues, staff gage reading or estimate of river flow and any diversions, notes of issues or items of interest

1 week after measurements, only final drafts after agency approval of first submittal

Note that Reclamation is open to alternative methods of achieving baseline monitoring objectives described above.

Alternative approaches to the current monitoring network should be described and outlined in a supplemental cost estimate for consideration.

SUBTASK III. SITE EVALUATION (TIME-AND-MATERIALS)

The Contractor will perform site evaluations to analyze the factors influencing potential material adverse impacts from groundwater seepage and identify the relative significance of Interim and Restoration Flows. A landowner claim of impacts or identification of a site under the SMP may initiate a site evaluation. Sites to be evaluated may be landowner specific or on a regional scale. The evaluation shall make use of the conceptual models developed in the SMP and the guidance provided by the Seepage Project Handbook. The evaluation may include additional data collection and coordination with landowners.

The Contractor shall first prepare a data collection map including proposed data collection, existing SJRRP datasets, local information and data, and propose to Reclamation any analytical tools the Contractor plans to use. Reclamation will share the data collection map with landowners to solicit feedback. All site visits where landowner or a landowner representative is present will require a short memo including attendees, data collected, and discussion had. The Contractor shall also develop a Site Evaluation Technical Memorandum. The Site Evaluation TM shall present results and conclusions from monitoring and analysis, determine the site-specific conditions and causes of any damage or concerns, include a table showing the anticipated crop impacts for different river flow levels, evaluate potential projects with respect to the Seepage Project Handbook, and conclude with a recommendation to either undertake a project or recommend thresholds for the site. If the Site Evaluation recommends a project, the report should also conduct initial screening to develop a list of initial alternatives. The initial alternatives will be evaluated to the preliminary design level as described in the Seepage Project Handbook. The preliminary design information may be published in a separate Preliminary Design Report.

If a site is identified for a project and the landowner has indicated an interest in a realty action, the Contractor will also assist in evaluating the boundary of potential seepage impacts given a maximum channel capacity and flow of 4500 cfs. Sites to be evaluated may be landowner specific or on a regional scale. This boundary evaluation will consider existing data such as landowner identified parcels, historical groundwater levels, elevation data, the Central Valley Hydrologic Model (CVHM), aerial imagery, and the current monitoring program. The determined boundary evaluation will inform potential seepage easement areas or areas for fee title acquisition and should be submitted as a Potential Seepage Boundary Evaluation report with a First Administrative and Second Administrative Draft until finalized.

Monitoring requirements shall include, at a minimum, hydraulic conductivity tests in addition to those described in Subtask ii. – Baseline Monitoring, with the same monitoring result deliverables, if the site is affected by groundwater and salinity issues. Results shall be delivered with a metadata spreadsheet including at least test location ID, Reach, Bank, test date, consultant, staff name, coordinates, total depth, depth interval, test results and notes. Drill logs for first boring of a hydraulic conductivity test shall be included with USCS and USDA soil classification, logged into Excel. A GIS layer with metadata shall be submitted. In addition, Contractor shall deliver photos of water quality and hydraulic conductivity testing, any adjacent farming activity or installation issues, staff gage reading or estimate of river flow and any diversions, notes of issues or items of interest. Hydraulic Conductivity Testing using piezometer or auger-hole tests shall be performed in accordance with Reclamation’s Drainage Manual except using dataloggers.

Site Evaluations will be shared with landowners and presented to landowners.

Contractor shall provide staff with expertise in agronomy, soil science, groundwater hydrology, and hydraulics to attend meetings with landowners to share results. Potential Seepage Boundary Evaluation reports will be reviewed and approved by Reclamation staff and provided to Reclamation Survey staff to initiate the land appraisal process.

Story, Regina L Verify this language is acceptable with Dean.

Deliverable: Site Evaluation Technical Memorandum and/or Potential Seepage Boundary Evaluation

Schedule: Methods within 4 weeks of a site visit, Completed TM within 4 months of a site visit. Completed Potential Seepage Boundary Evaluation within 2 months of project identification.

Format: For each draft, hard copies as requested and emailed in Microsoft Excel, Word, or other as appropriate, and PDF. GIS Layers, Monitoring data in Excel, Model Files

Table 4. Example Site Evaluation Outline and Data Collection

I. Introduction: description of the site and relevant features II. Methods: proposed approach for evaluation

III. Results: data collection and numerical analysis IV. Discussion: applicability and limitations of the evaluation V. Initial Screening: results of screens for infeasible project types VI. Conclusions and Recommendations: process for moving forward including a project and/or revised threshold pending completion of a project VII. Field Visit Documentation Appendix: attendees, data collected, and discussion items for each trip to the site VIII. Data Appendix – measurements including:

1. Groundwater Levels

2. Surface Water

3. Water Quality

4. Soil Hydraulic Conductivity

5. Soil Chemistry

IX. Numerical Analysis Appendix: computations and results

The Contractor shall assume the identification of four (4) site evaluations and four (4) seepage boundary evaluations per year.

Subtask IV. Seepage Losses (Time-and-Materials) The Settlement indicates that the Settling Parties shall work together to identify any increased losses beyond those assumed in Exhibit B, termed “Unexpected Seepage Losses.” The parties shall also identify steps to address any such increases in seepage losses. To fulfill this obligation of the Settlement, the Contractor shall assist in the monitoring and analysis of seepage losses to inform material adverse impacts and Unexpected Seepage Losses. This may include, but is not limited to, determining a conceptual framework to represent losses, improved monitoring to identify losses in each reach of the Restoration Area, analysis of gauge data to quantify losses, and recommendations to reduce and/or make up for Unexpected Seepage Losses. As part of identifying and addressing any such increases in seepage losses, the Contractor may also participate in engagement on the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), including coordination with Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs).

Deliverable: Flow Loss Analysis

Due Date: End of Year 1, and each subsequent Option Year

Format: Microsoft Word, Adobe PDF, Electronic GIS, and MS Excel Files

Assume one (1) new appendix to the SMP regarding losses is drafted in Year 1, published in Year 2, and ongoing updates completed in Year 3.

Subtask V. Project Analysis, Design, Environmental Compliance and Permitting (Time-and-Materials) Contractor shall develop projects to reduce or avoid adverse seepage impacts while passing Restoration Flows.

This includes building upon site evaluations with additional data collection, analysis, design, environmental compliance, and permitting. Contractor shall participate in any Appraisal level studies, develop preliminary level designs for the range of options identified in the site evaluation, and complete 60% design for the preferred alternative including conceptual layouts, quantities and costs. All site visits where landowner or landowner representative is present will require a short memo including attendees, data collected, and discussion as described in Subtask iii – Site Evaluation.

Contractor shall perform all required environmental compliance and permitting tasks for the preferred alternative, including Environmental Assessments, Environmental Impact Statements, Biological Assessments, Section 10, Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act, Essential Fish Habitat, Streambed Alteration Agreements, and potentially CEQA and CESA compliance in addition.

Contractor shall have a groundwater hydrologist with salinity and agronomy experience recognized as an expert in the industry available to work when needed and prioritizing this contract above other projects. Working through contentious issues with stakeholders and agencies will be required. The agronomy and groundwater expert(s) shall attend site visits with landowners and present at Seepage and Conveyance Technical Feedback Group meetings.

Deliverable: Project Report

Due: 6 months after site identification

Format: For each draft, hard copies as requested and emailed in Microsoft Excel, Word, or other as appropriate, and PDF. GIS Layers, Monitoring data in Excel, Model Files

Table 5. Example Project Report

I. Introduction II. Methods III. Results IV. Discussion V. Conclusion and Recommendation VI. Field Visit Documentation Appendix VII. Data Appendix VIII. Analysis Appendix IX. Environmental Compliance (EA/IS or EIS/EIR) X. 60% Design for Preferred Alternative XI. Permit Applications

Assume identification, development, and completion of three (3) project reports per year.

Subtask VI. Outreach - Seepage and Conveyance Technical Feedback Meetings (Firm-Fixed Price) Started in December of 2010, the SJRRP holds public meetings on seepage and conveyance to update stakeholders and create opportunities for feedback approximately once a year. The SJRRP public website shows materials from past meetings at: http://www.restoresjr.net/get-involved/involvement-opportunities/technical-feedback-meetings/.

Technical Feedback meetings typically consist of a 2-3 hour presentation describing technical developments and status updates with ample time for stakeholder feedback and comments. Typical locations will consist of areas near Los Banos and Firebaugh, CA. This coordination task requires the Contractor’s assistance in planning the outreach, scheduling the meeting with Agencies and stakeholders, creating the agenda, assisting in development of the presentation, setting up the room, facilitating the meeting, taking notes, soliciting comments, and other http://www.restoresjr.net/group_activities/index.html http://www.restoresjr.net/group_activities/index.html duties associated with outreach.

Additional outreach to Reclamation and agency staff, stakeholders, and third parties occurs on an irregular basis.

The Contractor’s Project Manager and/or Project Coordinator, and the design team lead will be expected to attend monthly agency Seepage Subgroup meetings and other coordination meetings with agencies and stakeholders.

The Contractor may be asked to report on progress or present findings.

The Contractor shall expect to present materials to water districts and the public, understand needs, and solicit feedback from technical groups. The Contractor’s Project Manager shall attend the Seepage and Conveyance Technical Feedback meetings and be prepared to present progress and plan for upcoming activities.

Minimum Deliverable Final Outcome Due Date

Agenda At least 5 Days Prior to Meeting Handouts At least 2 Days Prior to Meeting Presentations At least 2 Days Prior to Meeting Draft Notes Within 3 Days After Meeting

Format: PowerPoint for Presentations, Microsoft Word for Agendas and Notes, Microsoft Word and pdf for handouts. All items emailed

The Contractor shall demonstrate experience in complex and controversial public projects with high degrees of transparency and political sensitivity toward competing demands. Implementing agencies must balance conflicting goals of resource management, policies, and legal requirements.

Assume two (2) public feedback meeting per year over the period of performance. The Contractor may be requested to assist with developing presentation materials and coordination. Up to two (2) meetings per year can be assumed in Sacramento, CA to develop materials, coordinate technical efforts, and develop strategies. Outreach may also include and should account for the Program Science Meeting to be held in Year 2.

Task 2. Option – Seepage Management for Year 2 This task provides the same support as Seepage Management Year 1 but for Year 2 (December 1, 2021 – November 30, 2022).

Task 3. Option – Seepage Management for Year 3 This task provides the same support as Seepage Management Year 1 but for Year 3 (December 1, 2022 – November 30, 2023).

3.0 Type of Contract

The government will award a combination of Firm-Fixed Price and Time-and-Materials contract, as indicated by each subtask description.

4.0 Period of Performance

The period of performance for this contract including option years is from approximately December 1, 2020 through November 30, 2023.

Base Year December 1, 2020 – November 30, 2021 Option Year I December 1, 2021 – November 30, 2022 Option Year II December 1, 2023 – November 30, 2023

5.0 Administrative Information

5.1 Recognized Holidays

New Year’s Day Independence Day Thanksgiving Day Martin Luther King Jr.’s Birthday Labor Day Christmas Day President’s Day Columbus Day Memorial Day Veteran’s Day

5.2 Hours of Operations

The contractor may work during normal business hours.

5.3 Place of Performance

Government facilities will not be used for this contract, except for invitational progress and planning meetings. The work to be done under this contract will be performed primarily at the Contractor’s facilities, except for fieldwork within the Restoration Area and scheduled meetings.

5.4 Security

No security requirements are necessary. For any meetings within government facilities, guests may be required to pass through security screening before entry.

6.0 Delivery

Table 6 summarizes the…