No__1_-_CalSim_Climate_Analysis_Q_As_0001.pdf

CalSim Climate Analysis – Amendment 1 Questions and Answers

Section 3.1 Project Management, Meetings, and Coordination

The Contractor shall liaise with Reclamation technical staff on an as needed basis, within a week of requested update during the course of the task order to coordinate tasks, resources and activities, and review progress and schedule. Additional communications shall be required to exchange information for billing and invoicing as needed.

Q1: Will these meetings will be held in person or conducted online?

A1: Meetings will be held online. Travel is not expected to be part of this contract.

Section 3.2.1 CMIP6 GCM Access, Selection, and Preparation In section 3.2.1, it is mentioned that “Under this task, the Contractor shall assist Reclamation technical staff in creating an automated workflow to convert the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 6 (CMIP6) Localized Analog (LOCA) downscaled GCMs to model inputs. Climate inputs to be developed for two period changes.”

Q2: We understand that the Contractor should be providing automated scripts that ensure seamless download, processing, and ingestion of the Climate inputs in the format as required by the models (CalSim 3, HEC-5Q etc.).

Will the CMIP6 Climate Data be provided by the Reclamation technical staff? If not, what are the multiple sources from which the CMIP6 Climate Data shall be accessed or downloaded by the Contractor?

A2: Reclamation will be able to provide a limited set of scripts as a starting point, leveraging previous efforts.

Reclamation is currently working to publish CMIP6 LOCA2 data on the Green Data Oasis platform for public accessibility. The Contractor will be expected to download the data from the GDO website when available. If the contract begins prior to public data availability, Reclamation will provide a copy of the CMIP6 LOCA2 data in advance.

Q3: Is there a specific file format for the CMIP6 climate data?

A3: The files will be provided in either NetCDF or Zarr format.

Q4: In order to conduct the analysis to finalize the GCMs suitable for the region of interest, will the Contractor be provided with or given access to the Historical meteorological data?

A4: The Contractor shall make a recommendation from publicly available historical datasets for that which is most appropriate to the region be analyzed. Examples of potential datasets that may be appropriate include PRISM and Livneh.

Q5: The finalized GCM climate inputs will be developed for two period changes. Do the two period changes mean Mid Century and End Century?

A5: The analysis will be conducted for two windows centered on periods relevant to Reclamation decision making. This does not necessarily align with existing convention for mid and end of century analyses.

Q6: Should the Contractor carry out bias correction of the GCM Climate input or will the corrected input be provided by the Reclamation technical staff?

A6: Bias correction of the GCM information will not be required; however, other bias corrections such as in the hydrologic workflow may be required.

Section 3.2.2 Calculate temperature deviation between the historical CalSim period and predicted future conditions Calculate precipitation deviation between the historical CalSim period and predicted future conditions.

Q7: In order to calculate the temperature and precipitation deviation (Historical vs Predicted), the query is related to selection of the time period; whether it should be 30-year time period or Moving window of 30-year time period.

A7: The analysis will be limited to two, 30-year windows.

Under Section 3.2.2, bullet point 3, it is mentioned “Collect Variable Infiltration Capacity (VIC) models for each CalSim watershed basin”.

Q8: Does this mean that Calibrated VIC models are already available for each watershed basin and the Contractor is expected to work/ improve the VIC models in terms of model parameterization?

A8: VIC models exist for the domains that are available. The Contractor will be required to modify the domains as required for the analysis.

Section 3.2.3 Validation of workflow against previous climate change development

Q9: Does this mean comparing the outputs of WTMP and TDM model simulations for future climate with that of simulations corresponding to Historical period?

A9: Validation strategies can vary and will be planned by the contractor. Potential validation approaches include comparison previous climate development efforts or generation of historical synthetic data. TDM is not required as this is an estimated quantity that is an output of riverine temperatures, a subsequent analysis to the climate input development.

Section 3.3 Weather Generator Modelling Suite In section 3.3, it is mentioned that “The Contractor shall begin from the existing system, as developed by DWR, making modifications and improvements as appropriate.” While in Section 3.3.1, it is mentioned that “the Contractor shall assist Reclamation and DWR technical staff in producing and reviewing the Weather Generator”.

Q10: Does this mean that the Reclamation has already developed a Weather Generator and the Contractor is expected to improve upon the existing one rather than developing a Weather Generator from step 1?

A10: Reclamation has been working in partnership with CA DWR, who has developed the weather generator. The Contractor shall begin from this version of the tool, provided by Reclamation and CA DWR.

Q11: If the Weather Generator is already developed, what is the programming language that was used?

A11: The weather generator is already developed and is written in R. See website:

(https://github.com/nassernajibi/WGEN-v2.0)

Q12: Does the already developed Weather Generator have a Graphical User Interface?

A12: No, there is not a graphical user interface.

Q13: Is this Weather Generator both Windows and LINUX compatible?

A13: Yes, the weather generator is multi-platform. Any system that can execute R code in anticipated to be compatible.

Q14: Is there a web-based version of this Weather Generator? If no, is the contractor expected to develop the same?

A14: This is no web interface, and the Contractor does not need to create such.

Section 3.4 Understand Inflow to Reservoirs It is mentioned that “The analysis may require modifying VIC, comparing VIC output to that of another model, or creating a first principal analysis, as is appropriate.”

https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fnassernajibi%2FWGEN-v2.0&data=05%7C01%7Csheibeck%40usbr.gov%7C0de82291a79a479c11cc08dbe55c1117%7C0693b5ba4b184d7b9341f32f400a5494%7C0%7C0%7C638355955808521875%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=jLiJ5%2BsOHFWlVv6W17LI0SX3vNrn4A1lxi9REjU35Z0%3D&reserved=0

Q15: Should the Contractor validate the VIC results with observed data (to clarify the availability of the same) or with the output derived from another validated Hydrologic model?

A15: This is driven by the use case. If conducting a historical simulation, it would be most appropriate to compare to historical observations. If applying to a future condition, comparison to another model or first principles is likely to be more appropriate.

Q16: Is there another model available with the Reclamation for comparing VIC output or is the Contractor expected to choose the model and set it up for the same region?

A16: Reclamation has no preferred model for comparison. This may be independently setup, comparison to values in the literature, or otherwise analyzed, as appropriate.

Section 3.5 DMDU

Q17: In order to have a brief understanding of DMDU, can the Reclamation provide a few case studies or examples regarding the same?

A17: An example approach may be similar to the CO basin approach (https://www.colorado.edu/cadswes/research/colorado-river-basin-decision-making-under-deep-uncertainty) or that by RAND (https://www.rand.org/pubs/tools/TL320/tool.html).

General

Q18: Is the Contractor expected to develop a User Interface to enable the process of updating input, running the model, and viewing the result?

A18: New user interfaces are not required. Post processing and visualization will be done via scripting workflows.

Q19: If a User Interface has to be developed, should it be Windows-based, or LINUX based or both?

A19: New user interfaces are not required. Post processing and visualization will be done via scripting workflows.

Q20: Is there an expectation or requirement for a Web-based User Interface for the same process to be performed in the cloud?

A20: New user interfaces are not required. Post processing and visualization will be done via scripting workflows.

Q21: Price Schedule - CalSim Climate Analysis - Upon reviewing the provided Annexure outlining the price schedule, we have noted that the document references four specified resources. Considering the project scope outlined, we propose the inclusion of an IT Specialist. Could you kindly clarify whether we are confined to the specified resources listed, or if we have the flexibility to supplement the team based on our expertise? Additionally, are the allocated man hours definitive, or are they tentative? If tentative, may we quote based on our estimate?

Please confirm. Do we need to deploy these resources at the client's location, or can they work from their development center?

A21: Vendors are encouraged to add or modify the labor categories on the price schedule as well as the allocated labor hours for each task. Vendor’s will be required to explain any addition of labor categories (such as IT specialist) and significant changes in the hours proposed.

Q22: General - The work has significant scripting, data ingestion and transformation, and automation, we felt adding 2 software engineers (backend engineer and frontend engineer) will enhance the quality of delivery. Can they be please added in the BOM (Price Schedule).

A22: Yes, vendors may add labor categories as they see fit; however, vendors will be required to provide rationale for the inclusion of those labor categories.

https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.colorado.edu%2Fcadswes%2Fresearch%2Fcolorado-river-basin-decision-making-under-deep-uncertainty&data=05%7C01%7Csheibeck%40usbr.gov%7C0de82291a79a479c11cc08dbe55c1117%7C0693b5ba4b184d7b9341f32f400a5494%7C0%7C0%7C638355955808521875%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=rlIkCvUwAyc486xpbUW%2Bj74i5zm%2FxnNyeaCaPXGVh5s%3D&reserved=0 https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rand.org%2Fpubs%2Ftools%2FTL320%2Ftool.html&data=05%7C01%7Csheibeck%40usbr.gov%7C0de82291a79a479c11cc08dbe55c1117%7C0693b5ba4b184d7b9341f32f400a5494%7C0%7C0%7C638355955808521875%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=4%2F4a%2B4acgFAtSjW%2FvG7%2Bj3EY0QrfDCIyk3YuCzgCFEY%3D&reserved=0

Q23: Payment Schedule - Kindly provide clarification on the payment schedule for the project.

A23: This is expected to be a labor hour contract, which means work will be provided at agreed upon rates up to the contract ceiling amount ($2.5 million). On a project such as this, monthly invoicing by the vendor is generally preferred.