LTO_ESA_NEPA_PWS_bn_(2).pdf

Attachment 0001

Performance Work Statement

Long-Term Operation of the Central Valley Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP)

(Base Contract Plus 3 Optional Tasks)

January 2018

1.0 Background

Reclamation constructed the CVP in order to provide 1) Flood control and navigation; 2) a water source to agricultural and M&I demands throughout California; and 3) hydropower generation. State and Federal regulations to protect water quality within the delta and prevent extinction of threatened and endangered species including, but not limited to, water right permit conditions and Endangered Species Act (ESA) requirements significantly impair the ability of the CVP and SWP to provide water supply and market hydropower. Populations of threatened and endangered species continue to decline. This project will evaluate alternatives to restore, at least in part, water supply and hydropower marketability within California while accommodating other operational considerations considering the other limitations within the system.

The CVP and SWP address three major water supply issues of California’s hydrology: 1) more water in the north than the south, so CVP and SWP move water south; 2) highly variable hydrology between wet years and dry years, so the CVP and SWP store water from year to year;

and 3) highly variable hydrology within a year, so the CVP and SWP store winter/spring snowmelt runoff to supply summer irrigation needs. These are addressed by storage upstream of the Delta, conveyance through the Delta, and storage for exports south of the Delta. Currently, the CVP has limited storage south of the Delta, increasing restrictions on conveyance through the

Delta, and increasing requirements on the management of storage upstream of the Delta.

The CVP and SWP are currently operated in accordance with the 2008 U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service Biological Opinion (2008 USFWS BO) (https://www.fws.gov/sfbaydelta/CVP-

SWP/index.htm) and the 2009 National Marine Fisheries Service Biological Opinion (2009

NMFS BO)

http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/central_valley/water_operations/ocap.html), both of which concluded that the coordinated long-term operation of the CVP and SWP, as proposed in

Reclamation’s 2008 Biological Assessment (BA), was likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species and designated critical habitat. Both BOs included Reasonable and

Prudent Alternatives (RPAs) designed to allow the CVP and SWP to continue operating without causing jeopardy or adverse modification to designated critical habitat. Reclamation accepted and then implemented the USFWS and NMFS RPAs.

Reclamation completed the court-ordered National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process on the Coordinated Long-term Operation of the CVP and SWP (LTO) with issuance of a Record of Decision (ROD) on January 11, 2016.

Updates to the Coordinated Long-Term Operation of the CVP and SWP https://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_project_details.php?Project_ID=21883)

On August 2, 2016, Reclamation requested reinitiation of Endangered Species Act (ESA)

Section 7 consultation with USFWS and NMFS on the LTO. Several factors resulted in

Reclamation requesting reinitiation of consultation under the ESA, including the apparent decline in the status of several listed species, new information related to recent multiple years of drought, and the evolution of best available science. This consultation is expected to update the system-wide operating criteria for the LTO consistent with Section 7 requirements, to investigate the potential of including new conservation measures for listed species, and to review the existing RPA actions included in the 2008 USFWS BO and 2009 NMFS BO to determine their continued substance and efficacy in meeting the requirements of Section 7 of the ESA.

Prior to the 2008 USFWS BO and the 2009 NMFS BO being upheld by the U.S. Court of

Appeals, Reclamation and the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) were developing concepts for modifications to RPA actions to avoid jeopardy of listed species and improve their feasibility and sustainability over the long term. Although, due to the District

Court schedule, these concepts were not sufficiently developed to allow inclusion in the NEPA process on the LTO completed on January 11, 2016, Reclamation and DWR have concluded that it may be beneficial to explore opportunities to improve efficiencies related to implementation of the RPA actions. If warranted, the revised RPA actions could potentially be included as conservation measures in the Proposed Action for ESA Section 7 consultation and evaluation under NEPA.

On December 29, 2017, Reclamation issued a Notice of Intent

(https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/current#reclamation-bureau) to prepare a programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for analyzing potential modifications to the continued long-term operation of the federal Central Valley Project (CVP), for its authorized purposes, in a coordinated manner with the State Water Project (SWP), for its authorized purposes. Reclamation proposes to evaluate alternatives that maximize water deliveries and optimize marketable power generation consistent with applicable laws, contractual obligations, and agreements; and to augment operational flexibility by addressing the status of listed species.

2.0 Scope of Work

Reclamation anticipates a three-track process with all tracks initiated simultaneously, proceeding in parallel, but concluding at different dates. All three processes will occur concurrently, and alternatives development for each will inform the other two. This contract will provide technical assistance for the first process, and complete the environmental compliance and Endangered

Species Act Biological Assessments for the second two processes.

Throughout all tracks, objectives include:

1. “Fresh Look Concept”: Analyze revising operation of the CVP and SWP, including appurtenant facilities, hatcheries, and inclusion of possible restoration, to account for new science and recent information.

2. Biological objectives: Meet biological objectives through consideration of operations in conjunction with habitat restoration and construction, instead of focusing solely on operational objectives.

3. Best available science: Use best available science and set appropriate biological objectives to attain water use and species conservation goals.

4. Science-based adaptive management: Include a robust adaptive management for adjustments over time based on new science.

5. Transparency: Establish an expanded outreach process, and include a broad range of interested parties.

Track 1 - A modification to restrictions on Delta exports where updates could be evaluated and a decision reached within a year. Prior work and/or limited controversy would support the schedule. Example modifications could include: fish presence based Old and Middle River requirements during excess conditions, and a lower San Joaquin River Flow to combined CVP

SWP exports (I:E) during normal wet and wet years. This track would complete the National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in a short amount of time, and be focused on obtaining some changes to water operations to improve water supply.

Track 2 - Revisions to the Coordinated Long-term Operation of the CVP and SWP and Related

Facilities - A programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that analyzes maximizing water deliveries and power marketability through: new storage facilities, conveyance, modifications to existing facilities, changes to regulations, and/or addressing other stressors.

Track 3 - Reinitiation of Consultation (ROC) on the Coordinated Long-term Operation (LTO) of the CVP and SWP - One or more additional project-specific NEPA and ESA efforts tiered off

Revisions to the LTO (Track 2), above. The project-specific NEPA and ESA would support re-operation of the CVP and SWP and complete the reinitiation of consultation. Additional project-specific NEPA and ESA efforts could include new or modified infrastructure, habitat restoration, other stressors, and/or regulatory changes, as necessary and timely.

It is anticipated that the consultation under the ROC on LTO will encompass the entire CVP and

SWP service areas and facilities, including the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta) and its upstream watersheds. This consultation will incorporate new Delta conveyance facilities, operations, and conservation measures associated with implementation of the California Water

Fix (CWF) when finalized. Under the CWF, DWR is proposing to construct and operate new water conveyance facilities in the Delta including three intakes, two tunnels, associated facilities, and a permanent head of Old River gate; operate existing SWP Delta facilities in coordination with the new facilities; maintain the newly-constructed and existing facilities; implement and uphold new and existing conservation measures; and implement and assist in an ongoing monitoring and adaptive management program. Reclamation proposes to coordinate CVP operations with DWR using the new and existing facilities and is the lead agency for the ESA

Section 7 consultation for the CWF.

The scope of the project includes possible revisions to overall operation of the CVP and SWP, including operations and facilities within the Sacramento River, Feather River, Trinity River, American River, and San Joaquin River watersheds. Work efforts will focus on development of alternatives related to adaptive management and biological metrics, with an emphasis on working collaboratively with USFWS, NMFS, DWR, the California Department of Fish and

Wildlife (CDFW), water users, and environmental and fishery non-governmental organizations

(NGOs). Several independent peer reviews will occur at multiple steps during the technical analyses and recommendations will be included in the Contract deliverables for Track 3.

(Additional details regarding the scope of the work effort are provided in 9.0 Tasks below.) It is anticipated that the deliverables prepared under this Contract will rely heavily on the NEPA and

ESA environmental compliance documents prepared and issued during 2013 through 2017 for the LTO and CWF.

Track 1 objectives include:

1. Support modified water operations to improve water supply through completion of NEPA and Reclamation’s ESA compliance materials within 1 year.

Facilities objectives include:

1. Identify to what extent may the integration of new storage into water operations might support maximizing water supplies.

a. North of the Delta

b. South of the Delta

2. Identify to what extent might improvements to conveyance support maximizing water supplies.

a. Facilities

b. Regulatory

3. Assess the sharing of water supplies and regulatory requirements with the CVP and between the CVP and the SWP.

4. Identify to what extent non-flow measures can meet species needs and reduce impacts to water supply.

a. Infrastructure

b. Habitat Restoration

5. Identify measures that might improve the marketability of CVP water and/or power.

Revisions (Track 2) to the Coordinated Long-term Operation of the CVP and SWP and Related

Facilities would identify each type of measure (SOD Storage, upstream of Delta storage, conveyance, and non-flow measures) in isolation and inform the point of diminishing returns and then the measures in combination, example provided in Figure 1 below. In Track 2, Reclamation will complete a Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) within 18 months of issuing a

Notice of Intent (NOI). This Project Track will conclude upon signing a Record of Decision

(ROD). Overall, Revisions to the Coordinated Long-term Operation of the CVP and SWP and

Related Facilities should provide a basin wide evaluation (both north and south of Delta) to identify where to focus efforts and how to combine the various options on the planning horizon to best meet water supply n

Figure 1: Draft Track 2 approach

Track 3 - ROC on LTO objectives include:

1. Implementing project specific actions that would tier from Track 2, including potential reoperation of the CVP and SWP.

2.0 Scope

Purpose and Scope: The need is to develop environmental compliance documentation on the updates to the LTO in accordance with Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA, the National Environmental

Policy Act (NEPA) as amended, the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations for

Implementing the Procedural Provisions of NEPA (40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part

1500-1508), the Department of Interior’s (DOI) regulations for implementing NEPA (43 CFR

Part 46), and the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) NEPA Handbook (latest version available - dated February 2012), and Secretarial Order 3355 (Streamlining National

Environmental Policy Reviews and Implementation of Executive Order 13807).. Additionally, the BAs will include appropriate information on Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) that will result in conclusion of consultation with NMFS under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and

Management Act (MSA). This contract will provide technical assistance for Track 1, and complete the ESA, NEPA, and MSA consultations for Revisions (Track 2) to the Coordinated

Long-term Operation of the CVP and SWP and Related Facilities and the ROC (Track 3) on

LTO. As stated above, all three processes will inform each other and be intricately linked.

Brainstorming, alternatives development, and modeling for each will inform and be used for the other two.

The geographic scope of the work is throughout the State of California. Between 75-80 percent of the work will be completed in the Sacramento area.

4.0 Type of Contract

The government will award a hybrid Firm Fixed Price (FFP) and Time and Materials (T&M)

Contract.

5.0 Period of Performance

The period of performance shall be five (5) years from the date of contract award.

5.1 Place of Performance

The work to be performed under this contract will be performed at the Contractor’s facility and other places appropriate for meetings and public outreach.

6.0 Deliverables

The Contractor shall develop an initial project and deliverables schedule that completes the ESA

Section 7, MSA, and NEPA compliance on the updates to the LTO in accordance with Table 6.1.

The schedule is subject to change based on unforeseen conditions and changes in agency direction, with changes to deliverables coordinated through the Contracting Officer.

Contractor and contractor personnel will sign a non-disclosure agreement with conditions related to access and handling of classified information at the time of award of the contract.

Under this contract, the following documents are required to be submitted as an attachment to the

IPP invoice:

The Contractor shall also submit an electronic copy of the IPP invoice to the Contracting

Officer at doinvoices@usbr.gov once the invoice has been submitted to IPP. Failure to email the invoice may cause significant delay or possible rejection of your payment request.

The Contractor must use the IPP website to register access and use IPP for submitting requests for payment. The Contractor Government Business Point of Contact (as listed in SAM) will receive enrollment instructions via email from the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston (FRBB) within 3-5 business days of the contract award date. Contractor assistance with enrollment can be obtained by contacting the IPP Production Helpdesk via email ippgroup@bos.frb.org or phone (866) 973-3131.

If the Contractor is unable to comply with the requirement to use IPP for submitting invoices for payment, the Contractor must submit a waiver request in writing to the Contracting Officer with its proposal or quotation.

All electronic deliverables to be posted externally will be compliant with Section 508

Amendment to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (https://section508.gov/content/learn/laws-and-policies).

mailto:doinvoices@usbr.gov https://section508.gov/content/learn/laws-and-policies https://section508.gov/content/learn/laws-and-policies

All electronic deliverables to be posted and all materials made available to the general public will meet Reclamation’s Visual Identity Standards (https://www.usbr.gov/vip/IV-p-reports.html).

All data will be delivered in a format that is discoverable and useable by end users inside and outside the government, and consistent with Memorandum M-13-13 Open Data Policy –

Managing Information as an Asset (https://project-open-data.cio.gov/policy-memo/).

All draft electronic deliverables will be developed and submitted using Microsoft (MS) Office programs such as Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Project, etc., as applicable, or for modeling files, in raw (native) model data formats, and all final deliverables will be in applicable MS Office programs and PDF formats. Modeling results will be shared in raw model formats, as well as all pre- and post-processing tools and spreadsheets.

Table 6.1 Schedule of Major Deliverables (see Tasks for more detail)

Deliverable Description Due Date

Track 1

Modeling Appendices Due June 2018

Track 2 - Revisions to the Coordinated Long-term Operation of the CVP and SWP and

Related Facilities

Alternatives Technical Memorandum Due June 2018

Public Draft Environmental Impact Statement December 2018

Final Environmental Impact Statement June 2019

Biological Assessment June 2019

Track 3 - ROC on LTO

Initial Options Technical Memorandum September 2018

Public Draft NEPA Document July 2019

Biological Assessment September 2019

Final NEPA Document January 2020

6.0 Government-Furnished Property

No Government-Furnished Property will be provided for this contract. Government will not furnish any property, services, utilities, etc.

https://project-open-data.cio.gov/policy-memo/

7.0 Objectives

Complete a BA for both Tracks 2 and 3 of the updates to the LTO

Complete all NEPA documentation associated with the above Purpose and Scope –

NEPA for both Tracks 2 and 3

Provide assistance with analytical tools for Tracks 2 and 3

Conduct preliminary modeling analyses and assessments for development of an initial

Proposed Action for Tracks 1, 2 and 3

Provide biological and operational modeling for Tracks 1, 2, and 3

Prepare for and participate in agency and stakeholder coordination meetings associated with ESA/MSA consultation and NEPA activities described in the above

Purpose and Scope for Tracks 1, 2, and 3

Assist in formal consultation coordination for Tracks 2 and 3

Compile administrative records for ESA, MSA, and NEPA processes for Tracks 2 and

8.0 Tasks

Description of Work:

As stated above, the objectives are to develop environmental compliance documentation in accordance with the ESA, MSA, and NEPA for the LTO. Documentation shall include BAs, EISs, and RODs. In addition, the NEPA documentation shall address compliance with the

National Historic Preservation Act, and other requirements and supporting documentation.

The ESA and NEPA environmental documentation shall include an analysis of potential impacts associated with the LTO. The project area will include the CVP and SWP service areas and facilities, including new Delta conveyance facilities and operations, potential actions outside of the Delta to address issues such as climate change and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers flood control rule curve updates, and potential cumulative effects.

For Track 2, it is currently anticipated that new alternatives and Proposed Action developed for

NEPA and ESA Section 7 consultation may include the following components:

New North of Delta storage

New South of Delta storage

California Water Fix

Changes to Delta regulations (i.e. OMR, San Joaquin I:E, etc.)

Pump storage for power generation

Changes to Reclamation’s cost allocation to reduce CVP power costs

Changes to ability to pay calculations

Changes to power marketing plans in coordination with the Western Area Power

Administration to make CVP power more marketable

Additional reservoirs and conveyances not currently connected to the CVP or SWP

Changes to the Central Valley Project Improvement Act

Changes to the Coordinated Operations Agreement

For Track 3, it is currently anticipated that a new Proposed Action developed for ESA Section 7 consultation and evaluation under NEPA for Track 3 may include the following components:

Friant Dam operations, including San Joaquin River Restoration flows

Trinity River operations, including the Trinity River Restoration Program and long-term plan for Klamath River fall augmentation flows

Clear Creek channel maintenance flows

Delta Smelt Resiliency Strategy implementation

Shasta Reservoir storage and temperature management adjustments

Changes to Old and Middle River (OMR) actions, the Inflow to Export ratio, Fall

X2 actions, and refinement of an OMR index

New Melones Revised Plan of Operation

Coordinated Operations Agreement (COA) negotiations (as appropriate)

Folsom Dam/Lower American River operational changes, including the Water

Control Manual Update and the revised Flow Management Standard (if available)

State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Water Quality Control Plan updates

Habitat restoration, including predation control and management

Hatchery operations and management, including the Delta Smelt Conservation

Hatchery

The BA and EIS will address coordinated operation of the CVP and SWP, DWR and provide needed cooperation and expertise through Reclamation to the Contractor.

This PWS includes activities associated with:

Preparation of preliminary modeling analyses and assessments, including assessments of existing RPA actions, for development of an initial Proposed Action, Preparation of environmental compliance documents and associated public outreach and technical meeting materials, Surface and groundwater modeling, Operational modeling, Biological modeling, Economics modeling, Agency and stakeholder meetings, and

Technical issue support.

The following tasks are presented in groupings associated with a Base Contract through three (3)

Optional Tasks. The Base Contract includes public outreach and initial alternatives development for Tracks 2 and 3, as well as some modeling for Track 1. The Base Contract also includes project management and administrative record tasks during the preliminary efforts, as well as preparing materials for and participation in agency/stakeholder meetings.

Optional Task 1 completes the NEPA and ESA processes for (Track 2) Revisions to the

Coordinated Long-term Operation of the CVP and SWP and Related Facilities. This includes preparation of an Admin and Public Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Final Environmental

Impact Statement, and Biological Assessment. This includes final alternatives development and screening, preparation of affected environment sections, and identification of NEPA analytical tools. Optional Task 1 also includes ESA/MSA-related tasks, including identification of analytical tools, conducting biological and operational modeling, and drafting and finalizing the

Biological Assessment. Also included is associated project management and administrative record efforts, and agency/stakeholder meeting coordination.

Optional Task 2 addresses the NEPA alternatives development and modeling for the ROC (Task

3) on LTO. This includes analytical tools decisions and post-processing tool development as necessary, biological and operational modeling of alternatives, initial and final screening of alternatives, and preparation of two Administrative Draft Environmental Impact Statements and the Public Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Also included is associated project management and administrative record efforts, and agency/stakeholder meeting coordination including public hearings on the Public Draft EIS.

Optional Task 3 includes the Final EIS for ROC (Task 3) on LTO, Record of Decision for ROC on LTO, and the ESA process for ROC on LTO. This includes responses to public comments from the public hearings, drafting an Administrative Draft Final EIS, completing the Final EIS, and doing draft and final Records of Decision documents. Also included is conducting biological analysis for preparation of the Biological Assessment, drafting two Administrative Draft

Biological Assessments, and support for the formal consultation process with USFWS and

NMFS after submittal of the Biological Assessment. Also included is associated project management and administrative record efforts, and agency/stakeholder meeting coordination.

BASE CONTRACT

Task 1 – Public Involvement

Subtask 1.1 – Quarterly Meetings, Public Hearings, and Scoping (Firm Fixed Price)

The contractor will assist with room reservations and payments, audio and visual equipment, presentations, agendas, handouts, posters, court reporters and court reporter transcripts (as indicated below), translators (as indicated below), newspaper ads (as indicated below), meeting notes, coordinating meeting logistics, and planning as necessary for the following meetings for each track. These meetings are anticipated to be the quarterly meetings required under the WIIN

Act Section 4004(c). Dates are subject to change but this number of meetings may be assumed.

The following meetings, at a minimum, are planned as part of the Base Contract:

Facilities:

- June 2018: Workshop on alternatives

- October 2018: Workshop for input on sections of the Draft NEPA document

- December 2018: Public Hearings (3) on Draft EIS (court reporters, translators, and newspaper ads needed)

- March 2019: Workshop on interested party comments on the Draft EIS

Track 3 - ROC on LTO:

- May 2018: Analytical Tools Workshop / Fair

- June 2018: Integration Workshop #1

- July 2018: Sacramento/Trinity/Clear Creek Workshop #2 and Delta Workshop #2

- July 2018: Integration Workshop #2

- August 2018: Integration Workshop #3

- December 2018: Workshop on Alternatives

- January 2019: Scoping Meetings (6) for Track 3 (court reporters, translators, and newspaper ads needed)

- February 2019: Workshop on Analysis

- May 2019: Workshop for input on sections of the Draft NEPA document

- August 2019: Public Hearings (6) on Public Draft EIS (court reporters, translators, and newspaper ads needed)

- November 2019: Workshop on interested party comments on the Draft EIS

- February 2020: Workshops on next steps

Public hearings and scoping meetings will be spread throughout the state, with several in

Northern California, several in Southern California and several around Sacramento or the Delta.

The Contractor shall document scoping comments received during the public scoping meetings anticipated for the ROC on LTO in January 2019 and prepare and submit to Reclamation a

Scoping Report, compiling all of the comments received. The Scoping Report shall include a summary matrix of the issues raised in the comments received on the NOI and during the scoping meetings.

Subtask 1.1 Deliverables: (All final electronic versions will be 508 compliant for placement on a website)

1) Meeting Notes – electronic copy – due 5 days after the meeting

2) Meeting Materials – drafts as electronic copy, finals as electronic copy and poster boards, 10-page hard copy handouts (up to 500), etc. – drafts due 5 days before the meeting, finals due 2 days before the meeting

3) Draft and Final Public Scoping Report - one (1) hard copy, electronic copy – draft due 2 weeks after the scoping period ends, final due 4 weeks after the scoping period ends

Subtask 1.2 - Stakeholder Coordination (T&M Task)

The Contractor shall support Reclamation as necessary to coordinate with project stakeholders, USFWS, NMFS, NEPA cooperating agencies, Designated Non-Federal Representatives

(DNFRs), and all other interested parties for the NEPA and ESA/MSA consultation processes.

At the beginning of the project, the Contractor shall prepare for and attend an anticipated eight meetings with interested parties to discuss technical issues associated with ESA/MSA and NEPA review. The Contractor shall provide technical materials and complete meeting summaries related to technical issues discussed at all meetings. In addition, the Contractor shall provide

Reclamation with a list of potential NEPA cooperating agencies, including why those agencies have jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to this project’s impacts or alternatives.

Once this list has been finalized with Reclamation’s input, the Contractor shall draft a letter inviting potential cooperating agencies to participate in the development and/or review of the

EIS. The Contractor shall also develop and manage a list of DNFRs, tracking Reclamation invitations and responses by potential DNFRs. Throughout EIS development, the Contractor shall coordinate with Reclamation to ensure that the cooperating agencies, DNFRs, and other stakeholder’s input is considered and addressed, as appropriate, through soliciting comments on draft documents and the use of draft press releases, e-mail messages, postcards or other information gathering techniques. It is anticipated that a value planning process, or a similar type process, will be included as part of the stakeholder engagement process.

Subtask 1.2 Deliverables: (All final electronic versions will be 508 compliant for placement on a

1) Meeting Notes – electronic copy – due 5 days after the meeting

2) Meeting Materials – drafts as electronic copy, finals as electronic copy and poster boards, 10-page hard copy handouts (up to 500), etc. – drafts due 5 days before the meeting, finals due 2 days before the meeting

Task 2: Initial Options Development and Modeling (Time and Materials Task)

The Contractor shall conduct, as appropriate and with the approval of the Government, operational and biological modeling activities necessary to evaluate the effects associated with a range of initial options for all 3 tracks. Modeling activities shall use existing hydrologic, hydrodynamic, and water quality and biological tools, which may include CalSimII (and/or

CalSimIII if available and appropriate), DSM2, HEC-5Q, and SacPas. This initial modeling is not to evaluate impacts of alternatives robustly for the purposes of the EIS, but rather to do initial options development and create rough estimates of benefits and impacts for the purposes of refining options into alternatives. The Contractor shall prepare a Technical Memorandum describing the operational and biological modeling conducted. The contractor may assume up to

20 CalSim model runs and 20 other model runs for the purposes of forming a quote.

Task 2: Deliverables: (All final electronic versions will be 508 compliant for placement on a

1) Initial Options Technical Memorandum – draft, electronic copy; final, electronic copy and up to 20 hard copies – draft due 1 month after Reclamation gives the contractor the last initial options run, final due 2 weeks after Reclamation’s comments are provided

2) All raw data and model files for all runs completed, including input, output, grid, executable, DSS, text, etc. – electronic copy on external hard drive, USB, or DVD – due

1 month after Reclamation gives the contractor the last initial options run

3) MS word document on the external hard drive, USB, or DVD with the raw data and model files explaining the organization of the files and the differences between all of the runs completed, including naming conventions– due 1 month after Reclamation gives the contractor the last initial options run

Task 3: Administrative Record (FFP Task)

Under this task, the Contractor with Reclamation coordination shall identify, acquire, and organize the administrative record (AR) documenting the decision-making process and the basis for the agencies' decision during completion of tasks under the Base Contract. The AR shall consist of all documents and materials directly or indirectly considered by Reclamation decision-makers. The Contractor shall also identify, acquire, and organize Privilege files, which meet one of six categories: 1) attorney-client, 2) National Historic Preservation Act, 3) Archeological

Resources Protection Act, 4) critical energy infrastructure, 5) proprietary/commercial information, and/or 6) deliberative processes.

The Contractor shall compile all documents and materials identified by Reclamation primarily through discussions with Reclamation personnel and consultant and sub-consultant staff.

Documents and materials to be included in the AR and Privilege Log (PL) consist of final meeting notes, technical memorandums, presentation materials, reports, letters, memorandums, electronic mail, faxes, etc. The Contractor shall methodically search the Contractor’s files and the files of sub-contractors to determine the types and extent of materials in their possession. If requested, the Contractor shall assist Reclamation in searching Reclamation records.

The Contractor shall develop an AR organization outline for Reclamation’s approval. Following

Reclamation’s approval, the Contractor shall provide a Technical Memorandum as to how the

AR will be prepared and organized, including the AR Index and PL Index spreadsheets. The AR

Index shall identify all documents and materials by date, document number, Bates number, category, type, subject, file name, pages, author, and recipient (if applicable), and include a link to the file location on the hard drive and/or CD/DVD. The PL Index shall identify all documents and materials by PL document number, category, type, subject, file name, pages, date and author.

Once approved, the Contractor shall organize and prepare the AR, PL, AR Index, and PL Index and deliver it to Reclamation following completion of the tasks under the Base Contract.

Approximately two (2) meetings with Reclamation will be needed to perform this task.

Task 3 Deliverables:

1) AR Outline – one (1) hard copy and electronic copy – due 1 month after contract award

2) AR and PL TM – one (1) hard copy and electronic copy – due 2 months after contract award

3) Complete AR to Date - electronic copy in pdf (hard drive, CD or DVD) – due at closeout of the contract

Task 4: Project Management (Firm Fixed Price Task)

Subtask 4.1: Project Management Plan and Schedule (FFP Task)

The Contractor shall develop a Project Management Plan (PMP), risk assessment process, quality assessment/quality control plan, work sequence diagram and schedule for completing all tasks for ESA Section 7 and NEPA compliance. The project schedule shall address each task and subtask and include start/finish dates, total duration in days, and key milestone dates. The PMP shall also include names, titles, telephone numbers, email addresses of key individuals working on the project and include a project organization chart and project responsibilities matrix. The

Contractor shall develop the PMP with input from Reclamation. A Draft PMP shall be submitted to Reclamation for review, comment, and approval. The Contractor shall incorporate comments on the Draft PMP into a Final PMP.

During development of the PMP, the Contractor shall review Reclamation’s internal PMP and identify any needed revisions to ensure compliance with Reclamation’s PMP policy.

The Final PMP will be considered as a living document in which the Contractor will be expected to periodically update over the full performance period of this Task Order. It is believed that changes to the Final PMP will be primarily focused on updating the schedules and work sequence diagrams.

Subtask 4.2: Project Controls and Meetings (FFP Task)

The Contractor shall manage the project scope, budget, and schedule. This subtask addresses general project management efforts, including, but not limited to:

Invoicing and monthly progress reports, Oversight of day to-day project activities and preparation of deliverables, Correspondence with Reclamation and associated stakeholders, Consultant project team management, Document control (library), 508 compliance (ensuring all electronically posted documents are compliant with

Section 508 Amendment to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and in accordance to

Reclamation Standards), and

Reclamation Visual Identity standards (ensure all electronically posted and final documents meet Reclamation’s Visual Identity standards).

The Contractor shall meet with Reclamation and associated stakeholders, as needed, on a monthly basis through the duration of the project to report on project progress and review task milestones. The Contractor shall facilitate these meetings, provide meeting agendas, develop presentation materials describing project progress, and prepare meeting summary notes. The

Contractor shall assume weekly conference calls with Reclamation between meetings.

Task 4 Deliverables:

Draft and Final PMP/schedule -- electronic copy – draft due 2 weeks after contract award, final due 2 weeks after Reclamation’s comments are provided

Monthly invoices/progress reports - one (1) hard copy to Reclamation’s Contracting

Officer, electronic copy to Reclamation's COR – due monthly

Meeting agendas materials, meeting notes – electronic copies – meeting materials due in draft 5 days before a meeting, finals due 2 days before the meeting, meeting notes due 5 days after the meeting

OPTIONAL TASK 1

Optional Task 1 completes the NEPA and ESA processes for Track 2. This includes preparation of an Admin and Public Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Final Environmental Impact

Statement, and Biological Assessment. This includes final alternatives development and screening, preparation of affected environment sections, and identification of NEPA analytical tools. Optional Task 1 also includes ESA/MSA-related tasks, including identification of analytical tools, conducting biological and operational modeling, and drafting and finalizing the

Biological Assessment. Also included is associated project management and administrative record efforts, and agency/stakeholder meeting coordination.

Task 5: Optional Task 1 - Stakeholder Coordination (Track 2)

Subtask 5.1 – Interested Party Coordination (Time and Materials Task)

The Contractor shall continue to support Reclamation as necessary to coordinate with project stakeholders, USFWS, NMFS, NEPA cooperating agencies, and DNFRs for the ESA/MSA consultation process. The Contractor shall prepare for and attend meetings, provide technical materials, and complete technical meeting summaries for all meetings. Throughout EIS development, the Contractor shall coordinate with Reclamation to ensure that the cooperating agencies, DNFRs, and other stakeholder’s input is considered and addressed, as appropriate.

Subtask 5.2: Agency and NEPA/CSAMP Coordination (T&M Task)

The Contractor shall schedule and participate in separate biweekly interagency technical meetings in consultation with Reclamation, USFWS, NMFS, and DWR as needed throughout development of the BA. These interagency technical meetings are intended to provide coordination among the Federal and state agencies involved in the ESA Section 7 consultation process and to strive for the effective and efficient completion of the BA. The Contractor shall provide meeting summaries to Reclamation within five (5) calendar days following each meeting. After review by Reclamation, the meeting summaries shall be distributed to the meeting participants to memorialize any decisions made and document action items committed to during the interagency technical meetings.

The Contractor shall also participate in up to 10 meetings and workshops associated with the

NEPA process. The Government shall determine the date, time and location of the meetings and the Contractor shall attend the meetings. The Contractor shall provide discussion summaries to

Reclamation within five (5) calendar days following each meeting describing how the information presented during the meeting affects the Section 7 consultation process, and more specifically, the compliance documentation. In addition, when directed by the Government, the

Contractor shall ensure that the NEPA and ESA processes are closely coordinated and inform each other. Consequential information stemming from this coordination should be documented via emails or memoranda, as appropriate.

The Contractor shall participate in the CSAMP process, as needed, or be aware of the information generated by the CSAMP. As directed by the Government, the Contractor shall assist in development of up to ten (10) technical memoranda or analyses associated with

Reclamation’s participation in and coordination with CSAMP. In addition, the Contractor shall provide discussion summaries to Reclamation within five (5) calendar days following each

CSAMP meeting the Contractor attends describing how the information presented during the meeting affects the ESA Section 7 consultation process, and more specifically, the compliance documentation. If the Contractor does not attend the meeting, the Contractor shall review the meeting minutes to provide the discussion summaries. The Contractor shall incorporate approved information stemming from the CSAMP into the BA.

Subtask 5.3 Optional Task 1 - Draft EIS Public Workshops

The Contractor shall assist Reclamation in preparing up to four (4) public workshops following the release of the Draft EIS; one (1) or two (2) in or near Sacramento and/or the Delta, one (1) in northern California, and one (1) in the Central Valley. The Contractor shall coordinate pre-meeting planning activities with Reclamation and Reclamation’s facilitator by assisting with defining meeting objectives and format; determining locations; preparing notifications, press releases, e-mails, handouts, comment cards, poster boards, presentations, and other presentation and information gathering materials; assisting presenters with presentation materials;

coordinating meeting logistics; attending workshops; tracking comments; documenting workshops; and preparing workshop technical summaries. The Contractor shall submit draft documents and materials and work with Reclamation and Reclamation’s facilitator to finalize activities and materials. Court reporters, transcripts, and translators, as needed, will be provided under separate contract by Reclamation’s facilitator and are not included under this task.

Task 5 Optional Task 1 Deliverables:

1) Draft and Final Interested Party Meeting Materials and Technical Summaries – drafts as electronic versions, finals as hard copy 10-page handouts (up to 500 copies), etc.

2) Biweekly technical meeting summaries - electronic copy

3) Up to ten (10) discussion summaries describing how the information presented during

NEPA meetings affects the ESA Section 7 consultation and associated compliance documentation - electronic copy

4) Documentation of consequential information stemming from NEPA/ESA coordination -electronic copy

5) Up to ten (10) technical memoranda or analyses associated with CSAMP

6) Up to ten (10) discussion summaries describing how the information presented during a

CSAMP meeting affects the ESA Section 7 consultation and NEPA processes

7) Draft and Final Stakeholder Meeting Materials and Technical Summaries – drafts as

8) Draft and Final Public Workshop/Meeting Materials - drafts as electronic versions, finals as poster boards, 10-page hard copy handouts (up to 500), etc.

9) Draft and Final Public Workshop Summary TMs - One (1) hard copy, electronic copy

Task 6: Revisions to the LTO – NEPA (Track 2)

The Contractor shall prepare a Draft and Final EIS for public review and comment in accordance with NEPA, as amended, the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations for

Implementing the Procedural Provisions of NEPA (40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part

1500-1508), the Department of Interior’s (DOI) regulations for implementing NEPA (43 CFR

Part 46), the Reclamation NEPA Handbook (latest version available - dated February 2012), and Secretarial Order 3355 (Streamlining National Environmental Policy Reviews and

Implementation of Executive Order 13807). The Draft EIS shall include, but not be limited to, an affected environment, effects analyses, and cumulative effects analyses for the resources in the physical, biological, and socioeconomic environment listed above in Subtask 9.3.3 (at a minimum).

Subtask 6.1 - Purpose and Need and Background (FFP Task)

The Contractor shall provide a project background for Track 2 that concisely and clearly explains the CVP and SWP purposes and the consultation history. The background should also explain the connection of the operation of the CVP/SWP in association with implementation of the

CWF. Background information should include Reclamation’s authorization for implementing the action, the study area, study period, list of approvals, and the EIS organization.

The Contractor shall develop a brief Purpose and Need (P&N) Statement for the Proposed

Action that provides information not stated in the rest of the EIS. The P&N Statement should describe the need as the broader underlying social need to which the agency is responding. The specific objectives of the Proposed Action shall also be described in the P&N Statement. The

P&N Statement should serve as a screening criterion for determining which alternatives are reasonable and prudent. The Contractor shall provide the draft P&N Statements to Reclamation for review, and shall include the revised statements in the Project Description TM.

Subtask 6.2 – No Action Alternative Description (FFP Task)

The Contractor shall describe the No Action Alternative. The No Action should be based on the operations moving forward into the future without the Proposed Action. Prior to completion of this task, the Contractor shall ensure that adequate preliminary Affected Environment/Baseline information has been collected and developed to support preparation of a complete No Action

Alternative description. The No Action Alternative should describe the future conditions without the project at the year 2070, which may include scenarios with and without implementation of the CWF and multiple climate change scenarios. The Contractor shall describe how the No

Action Alternative is different from conditions that existed at the point in time when the NOI was published. If differences exist, the EIS shall include comparisons of the alternatives to both the existing conditions and the No Action Alternative. The Contractor shall coordinate closely with Reclamation to develop the No Action Alternative.

Subtask 6.3 – Alternatives Development (T&M Task)

The Contractor shall develop a list of components for potential inclusion in a preliminary range of alternatives for Reclamation’s consideration. The preliminary range of alternatives shall consider comments from public scoping, Reclamation, USFWS, NMFS, DWR, SWRCB, stakeholders, and previously developed documents associated with operation of the CVP and

SWP. The Contractor shall develop and implement screening criteria and a process to analyze potential actions for inclusion in a range of alternatives that could proceed into the detailed impact assessment. The screening criteria shall include, but are not limited to, factors such as meeting the P&N, engineering and economic feasibility, environmental effects, effectiveness, and socioeconomic effects. The Contractor shall apply the screening process to narrow the range of alternatives and identify the alternatives that best meet the screening criteria. The alternatives remaining after this screening process shall be carried forward for evaluation in the EIS. The

Contractor shall assume that up to six (6) alternatives, with potential for a maximum of up to two

(2) sub-alternatives each, will be carried forward for detailed analysis in the EIS, including the

No Action Alternative.

Task 6.4 - Project Description (FFP Task)

The Project Description will be consistent with the Proposed Action for ESA Section 7 consultation on the Revisions to the Coordinated Long-term Operation of the CVP and SWP and

Related Facilities. The Contractor shall describe in detail the action alternatives carried forward from the Alternatives Screening Task, including the No Action Alternative. An Administrative

Draft Project Description TM shall be submitted to Reclamation for review, comment and approval. Changes and adjustments shall be made to the Administrative Draft Project

Description based on comments from Reclamation and associated stakeholders (such as DWR, USFWS, NMFS, and NEPA cooperating agencies). The Contractor shall prepare and submit a

Final Administrative Draft Project Description TM incorporating appropriate comments from

Reclamation and associated stakeholders. The deliverable from this task will be used as the Draft

Project Description and Alternatives section for inclusion in the Administrative Draft EIS.

Task 6.5 Draft EIS Sections (FFP Task)

The Contractor shall prepare a Draft EIS, including identification of the analytical tools to be used in the NEPA analyses and a description of the affected environment for the following resources (at a minimum):

Surface water resources and water supplies

Surface water quality

Groundwater resources and groundwater quality

Energy

Fish and aquatic resources

Terrestrial biological resources

Geology and soils resources

Agricultural resources

Land use

Visual resources

Recreation resources

Air quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Cultural resources

Hazards, hazardous materials, and public health

Noise

Transportation and traffic

Socioeconomics, including agricultural economics

Indian trust assets

Environmental justice

Other NEPA required sections related to growth inducement, long-term commitment of resources, etc.

The Contractor shall describe the affected environment for the environmental resources to be evaluated, as listed above. The level of detail shall be consistent with the level of detail needed to analyze the environmental effects of implementing the various alternatives on the physical, biological, and socioeconomic resources. Data shall be compiled and presented in technical appendices, as needed, and summarized in the body of the EIS. The technical appendices and summaries shall include sufficient detail to be directly used for alternative analyses.

Task 6.6 Optional Task 1 - Analytical Tools for NEPA Analyses (Firm Fixed Price Task)

Under this subtask, the Contractor shall develop a preliminary list of analytical tools and recommend appropriate tools to be used in the comparative analyses required under NEPA to evaluate impacts to the physical, biological, and socioeconomic environment.