C06__Amendment_0001_-_Questions_and_Answers_0001.pdf

RFQ 140R2023Q0112

Questions and Answers

Question 1: Is the TROA Planning Enabled Operations Model completed, and will this be available at the time of the award, or is this model still under development? If it is still under development, will the contractor be involved in, or responsible for, combining the two RiverWare models?

Answer: The TROA Planning Enabled Operations Model is under development and should be complete November 2023. As such, it should be available soon after the time of the award. The Contractor will not be involved in, or responsible for, combining the two RiverWare models.

Question 2: Will the contractor be required to facilitate workshops to present the model to stakeholders and answer questions in a public forum?

Answer: The contractor will not be required to facilitate any workshops. We expect the Contractor to develop a presentation (~1-2 hrs.) that could be presented to stakeholders, ex.

OCAP stakeholders and TROA parties. Depending on the Contractors’ performance and situation Reclamation may present information on the project and model or may ask the Contractor to present this information. See revised performance work statement section 3.4.3.

Question 3: Will the contractor be responsible for preparing graphics and other presentation material to present the model to stakeholders?

Answer: See answer to Question 2. The contractor will be responsible for preparing graphics and other presentation material that summarize the updated method to measure TCL. The decision on whether the Contractor or Reclamation present those materials will be decided at a later date.

Question 4: On page 8 of the solicitation document, it says that the “accuracy, precision, and flexibility” is lacking with the extant statistical method. Could the USBR explain in what way the precision is lacking?

Answer: The primary concerns with the existing method relate to accuracy and flexibility. The term precision can be disregarded in this instance. See attached revised performance work statement section 1.2.2.

Question 5: Page 8 of the solicitation document says that the method should “take advantage of data from a new gage,” but any relevant model will be able to take advantage of parameters measured at any number of gauge locations in the system. Please clarify this requirement.

Answer: The Contractor is expected to take advantage of data from the new gage downstream of Derby Dam Fish Screen to extend the geographic extent over which losses are estimated, i.e., the current method estimates losses from the Truckee Canal at Wadsworth to Hazen, but the updated method should estimate losses from the new gage downstream of the Derby Dam Fish Screen to Lahontan Reservoir (See answer to Question 14 as well).

Question 6: The description in the Quote/Pricing Schedule (page 5 of the RFQ) mentions that the contractor will provide all tools, material, and equipment. Can the USBR confirm that, since this is mainly a modeling exercise, no material or field/laboratory equipment will be required?

Answer: This is boilerplate language inserted into all performance-based service requirements. It will be up to the individual contractor and their industry expertise to determine what tools, material, and equipment are required, if any, to meet the requirements of the performance work statement.

Question 7: On page 13 of the RFQ, Section 3.4.2 (2), can the USBR clarify what is meant by “extreme conditions” in the context of the work to be performed?

Answer: Extreme conditions in this context means droughts and floods, extreme high and low canal flows, as well as extreme heat waves. This includes canal flows that extend beyond the historical range of flows and/or do not follow historical patterns of timing. We recognize that this requirement and conditions overlap with those related to the requirement that the developed method should contain flexibility to accommodate climatic changes (See answer to Question 8 as well).

Question 8: On page 13 of the RFQ, Section 3.4.3 (1), please provide additional clarification on what estimating TCL in “future conditions” in the model would include.

Answer: Future conditions include different hydraulic conditions including timing and magnitude of flows through the Truckee Canal that differ from historical diversion patterns.

Future conditions also include any changes to temperature or precipitation due to climate change or other factors. Future conditions also include future changes in the Truckee Canal’s physical structure.

Question 9: Page 13 of the solicitation document says: “up to one site visit.” Would the USBR be open to the possibility of multiple site visits to take field measurements?

Answer: The performance work statement does not require field measurements or new data collection, but it is also not prohibited. Reclamation is open to the possibility of site visits to take field measurements (See answer to Question 10 as well).

Question 10: Based on our experience, we would like to propose some ideas to improve seepage loss estimations and other canal losses using physically based field methods, including control structure calibrations, as well as hydraulic modeling. Would the USBR approve of the inclusion of such ideas in our proposal?

Answer: Yes, Reclamation is open to this possibility and including these types of field methods as an option for consideration.

Question 11: At what physical locations are the lateral and stage (water level) data measured in the data sets that will be provided to the Contractor after award?

Answer: Stage data are here -

Question 12: Is gate opening for the check dams also available as a dataset?

Answer: No

Question 13: Are physical data for the canal such as cross sections, longitudinal bed slopes, gate dimensions, and gate and turnout locations available? Do each of the check dam locations have stage measurement?

Answer: That data is available in the HEC-RAS model listed in the References. Please notify the contracting officer if you would like a copy of any of the reference documents. Most of the check structures have a stage gage near them.

Question 14: The RFQ states that the new method “should take advantage of the data provided by a new gauge located downstream of the Derby Dam Fish Screen. These data will allow for

Structure NCommon Name Longitude Latitude TCM-10 TC1-Stage Gage -119.285 39.61317 TCM-11 TC2-Stage Gage (formerly TC-t11) -119.265 39.59515 TCM-12 Fernley Check Stage Gage -119.246 39.59153 TCM-13 Ricci Lane Stage Gage -119.236 39.58373 TCM-14 TC-t13 Stage Gage -119.218 39.57872 TCM-15 Anderson Check Stage Gage -119.199 39.58178 TCM-16 Clearwater Parkway Stage Gage -119.18 39.58062 TCM-17 TC9 Stage Gage -119.157 39.58014 TCM-18 Lucas Lane Stage Gage -119.133 39.57994 TCM-19 Allendale Check Stage Gage -119.128 39.58027 TCM-20 Steam Pad Seep Stage Gage -119.101 39.5674 TCM-21 Red Barn Seep Stage Gage -119.083 39.54718 TCM-22 TC12 Stage Gage -119.074 39.53922 TCM-23 Bango Check Stage Gage -119.045 39.50406 extending the geographic extent over which losses are estimated from the new gauge downstream of the Derby Dam Fish Screen to Lahontan Reservoir; the current method estimates losses from Truckee Canal at Wadsworth to Truckee Canal at Hazen USGS gauges.” We see that the addition of the gauge at the Derby Dam fish screen will allow for estimation of seepage upstream of Wadsworth. Will gauging be added downstream at the entrance to Lahontan Reservoir?

Answer: No, there will be no gage added downstream of Hazen. Ideally, though, the method would quantify losses along the whole canal from Derby Dam to Lahontan Reservoir. As such, the Contractor would need to identify a method to estimate losses in the canal from Hazen to Lahontan, without the benefit of a gage measuring canal inflow to Lahontan.

Question 15: Page 9 of the solicitation document mentions that the method must be “capable of functioning in the TROA RiverWare models.” Our understanding is that RiverWare allows various plug-ins (e.g. as used extensively in the USBR model of the Colorado River Basin), such that any mathematical or statistical/probabilistic model could be made to work with a base model in RiverWare. Is this correct?

Answer: That is correct, however given the extensive user base of the TROA models, the TROA Administrator would prefer to not have external models that need to execute with each run. The method should be internal to the model logic. Because seepage is partially dependent on stage, and how the Canal is checked up, incorporating near real time data, or patterns of stage oscillations from the 14 stage gages should be investigated.

Question 16: Page 12 of the solicitation document says: “Utilize only existing, easily accessible datasets”, but is it correct to assume that, with continuing monitoring, future datasets will also be available for application to TCL estimations?

Answer: This phrase was included to indicate that the proposed method should not require any new data collection efforts that burden Reclamation and should take advantage of existing data to the extent possible. However, it is expected that the Contractor will take advantage of additional data acquired over the course of the project within existing dataset, ex. flow data from existing gages measured during the project term.

Question 17: Page 12 of the solicitation document indicates the need for flexibility to accommodate climatic changes, but we believe that such flexibility should be inherent in any model within this context, so we would request clarification on this point.

Answer: Yes, we agree. See answers to questions 7 and 8. The model should be flexible enough to accommodate changes in diversion patterns, temperature, and precipitation due to climate change.

Question 18: Were the revised regression equations developed in reference #16 (Truckee Canal Losses Revised Regressions, 2014) implemented in the current RiverWare models?

Answer: The current RiverWare models use the regression equations listed in Reference 13.

Question 19: Is the existing method of estimating TCL currently being used in a backwards looking accounting mode?

Answer: The regressions are used in the forecasting mode of the Ops model, backwards looking accounting uses actual gage data to determine TCL. The study should improve both the forecasting and accounting methods.