RFP-PDAA-2016-2 CO-NM Extreme Precipitation Study-Final-2.pdf

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

CO-NM Regional Extreme Precipitation Study For the Colorado Water Conservation Board, the Colorado Division of Water Resources and the New Mexico Office of the State Engineer

RFP-PDAA-2016-2

1.0 OVERVIEW

1.1 Issuing Office

This Request for Proposals (RFP) is issued by the State of Colorado, Department of Natural Resources, on behalf of the Colorado Water Conservation Board (agency) and the Colorado Division of Water Resources. All contact regarding this solicitation is to be directed to:

Allan Smith Department of Natural Resources Purchasing Office 1313 Sherman #423 Denver, CO 80203

(303) 866-3292 x8631 Email: allan.smith@state.co.us

1.2 Purpose

The purpose of this RFP is a peer reviewed project to use existing methodologies and science to create updated tools and procedures for estimating regional extreme precipitation depth, area, and duration relationships and regional precipitation frequency estimates for the regional area including Colorado and New Mexico. The project also desires to develop an accepted standard of practice for these studies to be used as a national model. Finally, the project will evaluate the uncertainty of the various components, and create a list of additional future research projects to reduce the uncertainty of the chosen methods.

1.2.1. Deterministic Regional Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) Estimation Will involve new PMP estimates across CO and NM using the current state-of-the-practice HMR-style deterministic PMP processes as currently being utilized by the meteorological consultant community. The latest extreme storm data, climate data, and analysis tools will be utilized in a gridded-GIS-based platform. We anticipate opportunities to advance the methods, especially for estimation of PMP at high elevations and over mountainous terrain. See Page 12 section 4.2 for detailed information.

1.2.2. Regional Precipitation-Frequency Analysis: Will include an extreme precipitation-frequency analysis. Extreme Precipitation-Frequency curves for Average Annual Recurrence Intervals greater than or equal to 100 years will be developed for CO and NM in a gridded GIS-based product using statistical methods similar to those used in NOAA Atlas 14. Consideration will be given to expanding the precipitation data sets beyond the stations used in Atlas 14, in order to capture extreme events, and the issue of rain-only precipitation frequency curves for high elevations will be addressed. Precipitation Frequency curves will be extended far enough to inform the results of Task 1. See pages 13 section 4.3 for detailed information mailto:allan.smith@state.co.us

1.2.3. HRRR Model Analysis: TASK 3 shown for information purposes only. This task will be sole-sourced to NOAA/ESRL/PSD HRRR Model team. See page 14 Section 4.4 for additional information

1.2.4. Project Management: The scope of services needed to assist project sponsors in management of the project includes the following tasks:

a. Meeting scheduling

b. Meeting arrangements

c. Meeting agenda development.

d. Meeting facilitation as necessary to keep project team on task, one time and on budget.

e. Meeting minute preparation and distribution.

f. Generate Action Item task lists for each task by consultant, review board member or project sponsor.

g. Management of Action Item tasks as necessary to ensure team member accountability

See page 15, section 4.5 for detailed scope information.

1.2.5.

This RFP provides prospective proposers with sufficient information to enable them to prepare and submit proposals for consideration by the Department of Natural Resources to satisfy the needs as outlined in the Scope of Work.

1.3 Schedule of Activities:

Activity Date Time

RFP posted on the Colorado VSS December 10, 2015 Informational Pre-proposal Meeting December 22 , 2015 11:00 a.m.

Inquiry deadline for written questions December 30, 2015 Noon Answers posted on Colorado VSS January 6, 2015 Before 4:00 p.m.

Submission deadline January 19, 2016 4:00 p.m.

Evaluation of Proposals January 20-26, 2016 Interviews (if required) January 27, 2016 TBA Project Award February1, 2016 (estimate) Approximate Start Date March 15, 2016

1.4 Pre-Proposal Meeting

An informational pre-proposal meeting will be held on Tuesday, December 22, 2015, 11:00 am at 1313 Sherman St, Denver, CO 80203, Room 318 to answer the questions of interested parties and to clarify the expectations of this Scope of Work.

1.5 Submission

All proposals must be received by the Purchasing Office, Department of Natural Resources, Purchasing, 1313 Sherman #423, Denver, CO 80203 no later than the date and time shown in the Schedule of Activities, Deadline for receipt of proposals. Each submittal shall consist of one original (identified as such) and 5 copies of the consultant’s complete proposal (for a total of six [6] copies), one electronic copy on either a CD, flash drive, or other similar storage device and include all submittal information outlined in section 5.0 Submittal. The proposer is responsible for ensuring that its proposal is received in the Procurement Office, prior to the deadline.

Consultants mailing proposals should allow ample mail delivery time to ensure timely receipt of their proposals. Proposals received after the above date and time will not be considered!

Proposals must be sealed and clearly identified as a proposal for the DNR RFP- PDA-2016-2 and shall show such information on the outside of the proposal packet. Proposals will not be accepted by facsimile transmittal.

DNR advises proposers of its desire that proposals prepared in response to this RFP be submitted on recycled paper, if at all possible, and that all copies be printed on both sides of paper. While the appearance of proposals is important, and professionalism in proposal presentation should not be neglected, the use of non-recyclable or non-recycled glossy material is discouraged. In addition, it is requested that proposals be in flat bound form to facilitate filing. Please do not submit proposals in three ring binders.

A responsive proposal must include the items outlined in section 5.0 Submittal.

1.6 Inquiries

Prospective proposers may make written inquiries concerning the RFP to obtain clarification of requirements. No inquiries will be accepted after the date and time specified in the Schedule of Activities, Prospective Proposer’s Inquiry Deadline. Questions must be submitted in writing on the proposer’s letterhead to: Allan Smith Department of Natural Resources (See 1.1 for Contact Information)

All envelopes containing questions must be clearly marked "Inquiry for RFP-PDAA-2016-2” to facilitate handling and distribution. Inquiries sent by fax WILL NOT be accepted. The preferred method for submitting inquiries is via email as an attachment that can be opened by Microsoft Word 2007. An amendment will be posted on the “Colorado VSS System”, see 1.8, below. The amendment will respond to all questions submitted regarding the RFP.

1.7 Amendments to Request for Proposals

In the event it should be necessary to revise any portion of this Request for Proposals, an amendment will be posted on the Colorado VSS website (see 1.8 below). This will be the only form of notification and the proposer is responsible for actively checking for updates on the BIDS website. Courtesy emails may also be sent out by the issuing office at their own discretion.

1.8 Colorado VSS Website

This solicitation is published using the Colorado VSS System. Solicitation documents and information (including any amendments or modifications) will be updated with revisions on this site: www.colorado.gov/vss

1.9 Evaluation Process and Award

Proposals will be evaluated and awards made as outlined in section 6.0, Evaluation and Award.

Award or awards will be based upon each consultant’s proposal in the following areas:

• Qualifications

• Project Approach

• References http://www.colorado.gov/vss

• Management Summary

• Project Experience

• Organization

• Quality Control/Quality Assurance

• Schedule

• Price

1.10 Attachments

The following attachments are included as part of the Request for Proposal:

• RFP Form (PG 31)

• Model Personal Services Contract

2.0 CONTRACT INFORMATION

2.1 Colorado Contract or Purchase Order

The successful proposer(s), hereafter called Contractor, will be required to enter into a formal contract with the State. The contract will incorporate this RFP, published addenda and the response of the successful bidder, and will include all contract terms and the Colorado Special Provisions.

**NOTE: Prospective contractors can submit proposals on one or more of the components described in Section 1.2 of this document. If more than one component is being bid upon, each component should have its own section describing the requirements listed above, including cost estimates for each component.

Project Contracts: DNR will enter into a single contract or contracts with each selected contractor or team of contractors for the components of work described in section 1.2. For each bid, any partnerships between contractors specializing must be managed through a Prime Contractor / Subcontractor approach. All references to “proposer” or “consultant” or “contractor” or “offeror” throughout this RFP document shall be interpreted to mean the prime responding vendor, except where specifically noted otherwise. Any/all forms signed and submitted by this so defined prime shall be interpreted as acknowledgement of terms and conditions and assumed responsibilities on behalf of all partnered entities (if applicable). The selected contractor(s) will be required to assume responsibility for all goods and services offered in its proposal, and DNR will consider the selected contractor(s) to be the sole point of contact with regard to all contractual matters and responsibilities. The selected contractor must gain prior written approval from DNR for any changes to subcontractors, subsequent to proposal submission.

2.2 Project Duration

Time is of the essence in the performance of the contract, and work shall begin under the Contract as soon as possible after contract execution. Contractor agrees to proceed with due diligence, completing all specified work by March 15, 2018.

2.3 Measurement and Payment

Measurement and payment for the project will be based on specific tasks and items outlined in the formal contract and subsequent task orders. Payment shall be made based on the percentage of completed tasks, as invoiced and approved by the project manager.

2.4 Insurance Requirements

A. The contractor shall obtain, and maintain at all times during the term of this contract, insurance in the following kinds and amounts:

1) Workers’ Compensation Insurance as required by state statute, and Employer’s Liability Insurance covering all of contractor’s employees acting within the course and scope of their employment.

2) Commercial General Liability Insurance written on ISO occurrence form CG 00 01 10/93 or equivalent, covering premises operations, fire damage, independent contractors, products and completed operations, blanket contractual liability, personal injury, and advertising liability with minimum limits as follows:

a. $1,000,000 each occurrence;

b. $1,000,000 general aggregate;

c. $1,000,000 products and completed operations aggregate; and

d. $50,000 any one fire.

If any aggregate limit is reduced below $1,000,000 because of claims made or paid, the contractor shall immediately obtain additional insurance to restore the full aggregate limit and furnish to the State a certificate or other document satisfactory to the State showing compliance with this provision.

3) Automobile Liability Insurance covering any auto (including owned, hired and non-owned autos) with a minimum limit as follows: $1,000,000 each accident combined single limit.

5) The State of Colorado shall be named as additional insured on the Commercial General

Liability and Automobile Liability Insurance policies (leases and construction contracts will require the additional insured coverage for completed operations on endorsements CG 2010 11/85, CG 2037, or equivalent). Coverage required of the contract will be primary over any insurance or self-insurance program carried by the State of Colorado.

6) The above insurance policies shall include provisions preventing cancellation or non-renewal without at least 30 days prior notice to Contractor and Contractor shall forward such notice to the State within seven days of Contractor’s receipt of such notice.

7) The contractor will require all insurance policies in any way related to the contract and secured and maintained by the contractor to include clauses stating that each carrier will waive all rights of recovery, under subrogation or otherwise, against the State of Colorado, its agencies, institutions, organizations, officers, agents, employees and volunteers.

8) All policies evidencing the insurance coverage’s required hereunder shall be issued by insurance companies satisfactory to the State.

2.5 Contractor Evaluation

If the maximum amount payable to Contractor under this Contract is $100,000 or greater, either on the Effective Date or at anytime thereafter, this section applies.

Contractor agrees to be governed, and to abide, by the provisions of CRS §24-102-205, §24-102- 206, §24-103-601, §24-103.5-101 and §24-105-102 concerning the monitoring of vendor performance on state contracts and inclusion of contract performance information in a statewide contract management system.

Contractor’s performance shall be subject to Evaluation and Review in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Contract, State law, including CRS §24-103.5-101, and State Fiscal Rules, Policies and Guidance. Evaluation and Review of Contractor’s performance shall be part of the normal contract administration process and Contractor’s performance will be systematically recorded in the statewide Contract Management System. Areas of Evaluation and Review shall include, but shall not be limited to quality, cost and timeliness. Collection of information relevant to the performance of Contractor’s obligations under this Contract shall be determined by the specific requirements of such obligations and shall include factors tailored to match the requirements of Contractor’s obligations. Such performance information shall be entered into the statewide Contract Management System at intervals established herein and a final Evaluation, Review and Rating shall be rendered within 30 days of the end of the Contract term. Contractor shall be notified following each performance Evaluation and Review, and shall address or correct any identified problem in a timely manner and maintain work progress.

Should the final performance Evaluation and Review determine that Contractor demonstrated a gross failure to meet the performance measures established hereunder, the Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Personnel and Administration (Executive Director), upon request by the Colorado Water Conservation Board, and showing of good cause, may debar Contractor and prohibit Contractor from bidding on future contracts. Contractor may contest the final Evaluation, Review and Rating by: (a) filing rebuttal statements, which may result in either removal or correction of the evaluation (CRS §24-105-102(6)), or (b) under CRS §24-105- 102(6), exercising the debarment protest and appeal rights provided in CRS §§24-109-106, 107, 201 or 202, which may result in the reversal of the debarment and reinstatement of Contractor, by the Executive Director, upon showing of good cause.

2.6 Model Contract Terms and Colorado Special Provisions

The awarded vendor will enter into a contract with the State of Colorado that will include the Colorado Special Provisions and the terms shown in the model contract.

2.7 The undersigned is subject to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title ii OF THE Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, and offers all persons the opportunity to participate in programs or activities regardless of race, color, national origin, age, sex, or disability. Further, it is agreed that no individual will be turned away from or otherwise denied access to or benefit from any program or activity that is directly associated with a program of the recipient on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, sex (in education activities) or disability.

2.8 Performance Monitoring

Performance monitoring for the contract shall include the following:

(a) Performance measures and standards

a. Task memorandums will be provided to CWCB by vendor to insure that each subtask is being completed properly, prior to the final deliverable.

b. Monthly progress meetings where vendor will update CWCB on any issues or concerns related to completing the contract. This will insure that unexpected challenges can be quickly addressed.

c. Draft report submitted to CWCB for comments prior to final report and contract completion.

d. All draft deliverables and support data will be made available to State for review throughout the duration of the study..

(b) An accountability section

a. Weekly status meetings where vendor will report status of tasks and deliverables.

b. Monthly invoicing will include the following:

i. Budget status by subtask broken down by:

1. Current costs

2. Cumulative costs

3. Percent spent

4. Estimated percent completed

5. Remaining budget

(c) Monitoring requirements

a. Monthly progress reports

b. Meeting minutes

(d) Methods and mechanisms to resolve noncompliance

a. Replace project personnel from either the vendor or CWCB

b. Require additional monitoring if information is not adequate for the CWCB

3.0 COLORADO-NEW MEXICO REGIONAL EXTREME PRECIPITATION STUDY

3.1 Background

Since the 1970s, rainfall for use in spillway design at high and significant hazard dams has been estimated in the CO/NM region using Hydrometeorological Reports (HMR’s) provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Those reports and the methods utilized were developed in conjunction with the US Army Corps of Engineers and the US Bureau of Reclamation. Colorado and New Mexico have each used HMRs 49, 51/52 and 55A since their releases in 1970’s and 1980’s.

Starting in 2006, CO and NM each endeavored to develop and utilize “statewide” extreme precipitation estimation tools to apply site specific probable maximum precipitation methods (SSPMP) as a means to update the methods utilized in the HMR’s. These tools were configured within a modern GIS framework to provide engineers and owners with efficient and economical access to those techniques. For a variety of reasons, those attempts proved unsuccessful for both CO and NM, but the need remains.

In July 2008, the Extreme Storm Event Working Group (ESEWG) was chartered by the federal Advisory Committee on Water Information, Subcommittee on Hydrology. Their purpose is to coordinate studies and improve methods used to develop extreme precipitation estimates including PMP and to develop a detailed scope of work and funding requirements to update the NOAA HMRs. Through their work they identified the need for updating the HMR’s to include extreme storms that had occurred since their publication, and to modernize methods of analysis.

In December 2011, a report titled “Review of Probable Maximum Precipitation Procedures and Databases Used to Develop Hydrometeorological Reports” was written by the US Bureau of Reclamation for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research.

The report concluded that much research had been conducted on this topic but that little had yet to be assimilated into “operational estimates of PMP”, i.e., none had yet been put to use.

Recommended research topics for future updating and use included; numerical modeling, estimation of uncertainty, finer spatial discretization, incorporation of local climate effects, use of climate variability/change information, and probabilistic estimates.

Over the years, site specific Probable Maximum Precipitation (SSPMP) studies have been conducted around the country as a substitute for the HMR estimates. To date there are no national standards of practice for such studies and some studies with conflicting or contradictory results have been contentious. The dam safety programs in four states, Nebraska, Ohio, Arizona, and Wyoming have employed private sector meteorological consultants to update the HMR procedures in their states using the so-called “Statewide PMP” processes developed by those consultants. These studies could be considered standardized due to the fact that the same consultant has performed each study and each have had three- member “Peer Review Panels” as dictated by the FERC. However, no Federal or dam safety sanctioned standards of practice, guidelines or recommended procedures have been developed through the course of these studies, thereby leaving the States that develop them vulnerable. Meanwhile, at least two additional states (Texas and Virginia) are moving ahead with their own Statewide PMP studies.

Through our participation in the ESEWG, which includes NOAA representation, it is our understanding that NOAA has no current plans to update the HMR products, documents, or processes. Other Federal extreme precipitation estimation efforts are disparate: research within NOAA is on-going in regard to extreme climate forecasting using physical-based numerical models, and the USACE and USBR continue to work with probabilistic methods for flood hazard risk assessments.

The ESEWG conducted a survey of state dam safety programs PMP needs in the spring of 2014.

A significant response to surveys included an urgent need for updating HMR-like estimates of PMP. The HMRs are increasingly viewed as out-dated and their use in dam safety regulation is becoming increasingly difficult to defend to dam owners and to elected officials. Yet in some states, statutes require the use of NOAA HMR PMP as the defacto standard. The lack of current NOAA PMP estimates along with the lack of Federal or industry-sanctioned alternatives leaves these states in limbo.

4.0 SCOPE OF WORK

4.1 Work Tasks Overview

Like other states, Colorado and New Mexico have identified and set as a priority, the need to update extreme precipitation estimates for use in the evaluation of spillway adequacy in their states, using modern meteorological methods and advancing those methods where possible. Due to the similarities in geography, meteorology and PMP experience between the two states, a cooperative, regional study has been proposed. As part of the research conducted to develop the framework for this study, we have observed that there is a very small PMP community remaining after the development of the HMRs, and little research and few scientific advances are occurring.

Of particular concern to us in CO and NM is that there seem to be few answers to the questions about the physical limits on high elevation rainfall -- questions that were raised as far back as the 1980s. This reality has lead CO/NM to begin planning for an ensemble approach to updating extreme precipitation estimates and the methods to do so. Our plan includes combining three individual tasks, conducted concurrently and in collaboration with each other.

Task 1 will involve new PMP estimates across CO and NM using the current state-of-the-practice HMR-style deterministic PMP processes as currently being utilized by the meteorological consultant community. The latest extreme storm data, climate data, and analysis tools will be utilized in a gridded-GIS-based platform. We anticipate opportunities to advance the methods, especially for estimation of PMP at high elevations and over mountainous terrain.

Task 2 will include an extreme precipitation-frequency analysis. Extreme Precipitation- Frequency curves for Average Annual Recurrence Intervals greater than or equal to 100 years will be developed for CO and NM in a gridded GIS-based product using statistical methods similar to those used in NOAA Atlas 14. Consideration will be given to expanding the precipitation data sets beyond the stations used in Atlas 14, in order to capture extreme events, and the issue of rain-only precipitation frequency curves for high elevations will be addressed.

Consideration will also be given to using storm based statistics (e.g. stochastic storm transposition) in order to make or support extreme precipitation frequency estimates that are scientifically defensible and meet the project goals. Precipitation Frequency curves will be extended far enough to inform the results of Task 1.

Task 3 will be a research study of the potential uses of the state-of-the-practice gridded numerical weather forecasting model (NOAA – HRRR model) to inform the above two tasks and possibly to advance Extreme Precipitation science and practice. Task 3 will attempt to show whether storm-based deterministic PMP estimates are consistent with bounds on physical meteorological processes, particularly at high elevations.

Selected meteorological consultants and researchers will conduct the three tasks in open coordination and collaboration in an attempt to maximize the opportunities for transfer of applicable data, knowledge and methods among them. The primary end product of this analysis for the Colorado and New Mexico dam safety programs will be an update of extreme precipitation estimates (including PMP) based on defensible and modern meteorological science for evaluating spillway adequacy. The project deliverables envisioned are tools to estimate how much rain could fall within a given basin based on deterministic storm-based PMP methods; to provide a probability framework for extreme precipitation rainfall estimates; and to know if such rainfall is physically realistic as represented by numerical modeling.

Project Review Board As described above, as outside consultants and state dam safety programs work to update and modernize the methods of predicting PMP rainfall for spillway adequacy studies, peer review boards are a typical part of the process. Although the boards are helpful in providing confidence to the participants in the results of their individual studies, we are not aware that participation by various Federal agencies has resulted in official Federal or industry-wide acceptance of the products or methods. It is the opinion of the CO/NM regional study planning team that this situation can and should be corrected in order to provide certainty to the sponsors of these studies and to the greater benefit of future studies nationwide.

Our study will engage those agencies who were originally responsible for the HMR procedures and guidance documents. We have assembled a Project Review Board (Board) that includes representatives of NOAA Physical Science Division, NOAA Hydrometeorology Design Studies Center, the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the US Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). In addition, the State climatologists from each state have verbally agreed to be on the Board. It is significant that the current Colorado State climatologist has been involved in the study of extreme precipitation in Colorado for nearly 30 years. Finally, we have requested Board participation from a representative of the ASCE Task Committee on Use of Atmospheric Numerical Models for Estimating Probable Maximum Precipitation.

In addition to the Project Review Board, we have also met with potentially impacted dam owners in Colorado and secured their interest in this project. The results of this project will be used in new Rules for addressing spillway adequacy and design of spillways. Part of our Rule revision process involves public comment. To avoid the acrimony that was created by the HMR 55 based Rule roll out in 1988 and the confusion that has followed even into the 2007 Rules, involving potentially impacted dam owners at this early stage has obvious benefit.

We envision the Board, private and NOAA contractors and representatives of CO and NM dam safety working together through quarterly, multi-day, workshops to establish consensus on all aspects of the project from goals to final outcomes. The original HMR reports filled a need and created the guidelines for federal and states programs with respect to PMP analysis and use. The project contractors, Board members and participants will re-write a similar set of guidelines using current state-of-the-practice and state-of-knowledge means consistent with World Meteorological Organization guidance and methods as described above in Task 1-3. The project has a schedule of two years for completion.

The States of Colorado and New Mexico regulate dams with the following elevation and basin size characteristics:

Dam Crest Elevation Range

(ft msl)

Number of Colorado High &

Significant Hazard Dams 10,000 and above 81

7500-10,000 226 5000-7500 334 3500-5000 83

Basin Size Range (sq miles)

Number of Colorado

H&S Hazard Dams

Number of New Mexico H&S

Hazard Dams

1000-5000 10 3 500-1000 8 0 100-500 33 8 10-100 138 57

1-10 281 80 0-1 254 64

724 212

Project Purpose/Goals: There are three main project goals to be accomplished by the team:

1) To create updated, broadly accepted tools and procedures for estimating extreme precipitation depth, area, and duration relationships and precipitation frequency estimates for individual basins within the regional area that includes Colorado and New Mexico. The tools and processes developed will be utilized by the States of Colorado and New Mexico as part of their Rules for determining spillway adequacy for dams in their states.

2) The project also desires to develop a draft standard of practice guidance document for these studies suitable for use in development of a national model.

3) Through the course of the project the uncertainty of the various components, elements and variables utilized will be evaluated. In some cases the project constraints of schedule and budget will not allow those uncertainties to be minimized but their use will still be desirable. A list will be created of those components, elements and variables that could benefit from further research or study to reduce or quantify their uncertainty to the advantage of the quality and longevity of the processes developed.

Project Review Board:

As previously discussed, this study will be overseen and advised by a review board consisting of representatives of federal agency experts in meteorology, hydrometeorology, probabilistic risk analysis, dynamic weather modeling, dam regulation, state climatology, and application of hydrometeorology for dam design. Additionally, the project workshops will be observed by dam owners who will ultimately be regulated to the standards develop. Current project review board membership includes representatives from the following organizations:

o NOAA/ESRL/PSD – Boulder o NOAA/NWC/HDSC – Silver Springs o USBR - Denver o USACE - RMC Denver, Omaha o FERC - Washington, DC & Chicago o FEMA - TBD

Interested Colorado dam owners who have indicated they will observe the process and provide comments as appropriate include:

o Denver Water o Northern Water o Xcel Energy o Colorado Springs Utilities o Aurora Water o Colorado River District o Colorado Parks & Wildlife

The New Mexico Watershed and Dam Owners Coalition (NMWDOC) represents a number of flood control agencies and soil and water conservation district who own and operate dams in New Mexico. The NMWDOC has adopted a resolution of support for the project and has committed funding to the effort. Interested owners have also expressed a desire to observe and advise the process.

Scope of Work: For contracting purposes the scope of the project will be broken into the tasks described below. Tasks may be added and/or deleted during discussion with the selected contractor(s) as the projects schedules of values are developed. The project will be phased as described below.

4.2 Task 1 - Deterministic Regional Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) Estimation (Budget for Phase A - $500,000, Phase B - $150,000)

1. Review of the rainfall analysis published in HMRs 49, 51, 52, and 55a. A critical evaluation of the storms selected for analysis in the development of published rainfall estimates, and of the procedures used to conduct storm transposition and maximization must be provided.

2. Expansion of the existing extreme storms database. Significant rainfall events which have occurred after the analyses documented in the relevant HMRs were published should be identified and analyzed, particularly with respect to meteorologic and orographic factors.

3. Select the list of storms to be used to develop the gridded regional analysis product. This study is not intended to document and analyze all extreme storms. Average Exceedance Probability (AEP) criteria will be established to limit storm analysis to extreme storms that drive PMP maxima when transposed to all regions within the study.

4. Analyze & separate historic storms by storm type (e.g. local convective, remnant tropical storm, etc.)

5. Study all previous work regarding definition of “Sub-regions”, or regions of homogenous meteorological characteristics within the heterogeneous super region of the study. Use previous studies, additional and/or new statistical analysis and the results of analysis of dynamical modeling (HRRR Model) to create scientifically defensible sub-regions for the study.

6. Perform In-place maximization of controlling storms: Use updated dew point climatology and modern methods to determine relevant reference and maximum dew point values (e.g. use HYSPLIT to determine moisture trajectories)

7. Perform Storm transposition analyses for controlling storms applicable to all sub-regions.

Justify storm transposition limits with input from Dynamic Modeling component of the Project.

8. Fully explain, justify and document:

o the techniques utilized to separate and transpose convergence precipitation from orographically influenced precipitation in sub-regions of the study with terrain effects.

o elevation adjustments applied during maximization and transposition o Spatial & temporal Envelopment procedures to address sample variation

9. Develop areal reduction factors

10. Develop appropriate spatial patterns for drainage basin of interest

11. Develop appropriate enveloped temporal distributions suitable for use in all basins for both local and general storms within the region or sub-region..

12. Develop GIS-based tool to allow determination of PMP for all basin sizes and at all dam crest elevations within the Colorado and New Mexico Region.

13. Through the course of this study, every attempt must be made to develop consistency between the results of this study and the results of those previous studies conducted in states or regions adjacent to the Colorado-New Mexico Region.

14. Provide Quality Control procedure to ensure data and analyses are accurate and defensible. Methodology will be consistent with the World Meteorological Organization PMP development strategies or will be supported by technical documentation provided for review by the Project Review Board.

15. Provide internal consistency checks on estimates at each step of analysis (e.g. use of within vs. among storm estimates)

16. Provide reasonableness checks of final PMP estimates:

o Compare PMP estimates to HMR 55A & HMR 49 estimates (map +/- difference) o Compare PMP estimates to NOAA Atlas 14 or other frequency estimates (map difference) o Show historic extreme storms as % of PMP

4.3 Task 2 - Regional Extreme Precipitation-Frequency Estimation

(Budget for Phase A - $400,000, Phase B - $120,000)

1. Conduct comprehensive research on all previous Precipitation-Frequency analyses for individual basins (dams) conducted by others within the Colorado-New Mexico region.

Sources may include USBR, USACE or other federal or private dam owner studies.

2. Analyze & separate historic storms by storm type (e.g. local convective, remnant tropic storm, etc.)

3. Use available scientifically and statistically defensible methods for regional frequency analysis, including but not limited to extrapolation of NOAA Atlas 14 frequency curves, to develop extreme precipitation frequency estimates for AEP from 1E-3 to 1E-9, inclusive

4. Evaluate whether rainfall data needs to be expanded beyond co-op station data used in NOAA Atlas 14 in order to accurately represent spatial variation over mountainous terrain and to represent extreme, rare historic events (e.g. bucket surveys).

5. Develop areal reduction factors

6. Evaluate and utilize as necessary, storm-based statistics (e.g. stochastic storm transposition) in order to make or support scientifically defensible estimates of very low annual exceedance probability rainfall, which are necessary to meet the project goals.

7. Address need to separate non-liquid precipitation in order to make rain-only precipitation frequency estimates

8. Provide estimates of statistical uncertainty

9. The results of the Precipitation-Frequency analysis will be used to inform the results of the deterministic rainfall analysis results (ex. other PMP studies have used precipitation frequency estimates to develop orographic intensification or orographic transposition factors)

10. Develop temporal distributions applicable to extreme precipitation estimates

11. Provide Quality Control procedure to ensure data and analyses are accurate and defensible

12. Provide internal consistency checks on estimates at each step of analysis (e.g. use of within vs. among storm estimates)

13. Develop GIS tool to allow Precipitation Frequency estimates to be determined for all basin sizes at all locations in CO & NM

14. Provide comparison products for Precipitation Frequency Estimates:

a. Map PMP estimates in terms of AEP to show statewide variation

b. Compare precipitation frequency estimates to NOAA Atlas 14 (map & explain differences)

4.4 Task 3 - Dynamical Rainfall Forecast Modeling - FOR INFORMATION ONLY (consultants do not bid on this task, this will be sole-sourced to NOAA/ESRL/PSD HRRR model team personnel) (Budget for Phase A - $200,000, Phase B - $60,000)

The tasks described below are proposed to occur in two steps. Step 1 (Task 1 below) would occur first and is designed to assess the feasibility of using dynamic modeling to address PMP.

Perform a feasibility study to test and evaluate the potential benefits of adopting a high-resolution dynamical modeling-based framework for evaluating PMP by using the High Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) numerical weather forecasting model from NOAA/ESRL.

The results of this work will be presented to a multi-agency science review panel to assess the feasibility of adapting such a novel framework within the existing agency infrastructures.

1. Obtain archived gridded precipitation forecast data from the HRRR model over the regional study area (CO and NM). This data is generated using 3-km gridspacing at 1-hour forecast intervals. Forecast cycles are run out to 15 hours and are generated every hour. Develop gridded 1-h, 6-h, 12-h precipitation maxima fields using all available HRRR model data over a ~3.5-year period. The maximum precipitation generated at each gridpoint at any time in this dataset will then be analyzed to inform the following scientific questions:

i. Are there spatial and temporal precipitation patterns that could be used to inform the possible development of “sub-regions” with similar extreme precipitation characteristics,

ii. Do elevation-dependent precipitation thresholds exist?

iii. How do results from the temporally-short but spatially-high resolution

HRRR analysis compare with and augment the results of previous observations-based studies of Colorado extreme climatology (Mahoney,

et. al. 2015)? What additional detail is offered to further define seasonality characteristics and implications on the region of study?

iv. How do the results of this short-term feasibility study compare with longer historical records (e.g., the 1/8-degree Climatology Calibrated Precipitation Analysis; Luo et al. 2014)? Which extreme precipitation characteristics can be extrapolated to longer records, and which will require additional changes within the dynamical modeling framework?

v. How feasible is it for dynamically-based modeling framework to address PMP as stakeholders presently require the information, and can such methodologies have applicability to regions outside NM and CO?

Step 2 (Task 2 below) describes research that builds on the Step 1 feasibility study to address climate change and precipitation-elevation relationships.

2. Apply PSD expertise and tools toward exploring modeled extreme precipitation responses to varying model inputs (e.g. climate signals, terrain characteristics, environmental perturbations) using a dynamical modeling framework (WRF in general and possibly HRRR)

1. Address additional physical process-focused science questions such as:

i. How do large-scale climate perturbations affect the upper-bounds of precipitation potential?

ii. To what extent does terrain elevation limit heavy precipitation?

iii. To what extent can storm precipitation patterns be applied to other regions with differing extreme precipitation climatologies?

4.5 Task 4 – Project Management

(Budget for Phase A - $100,000, Phase B - $20,000)

1. The scope of services needed to assist project sponsors in management of the project includes the following tasks:

a. Meeting scheduling

b. Meeting arrangements

c. Meeting agenda development.

d. Meeting facilitation as necessary to keep project team on task, one time and on budget.

e. Meeting minute preparation and distribution.

f. Generate Action Item task lists for each task by consultant, review board member or project sponsor.

g. Management of Action Item tasks as necessary to ensure team member accountability

2. Project management consultant will utilize Earned Value Project/Performance

Management or other acceptable tools to control cost, scope and schedule.

3. Project manager will accumulate all meeting minutes, notes, results of the various tasks and develop a final report format to document all project work. A final report in the format developed will be provided by the Project Manager based in part on products and review comments provided by members of the team.

4. Project manager will develop a draft standard of practice document for these studies suitable for review and for potential use in development of a national model.

5. Through the course of the project the uncertainty of the various components, elements or variables utilized will be evaluated. In some cases the project constraints of schedule and budget will not allow those uncertainties to be minimized but their use will still be desirable. The project manager will maintain the list created of those components, elements or variables that could benefit from further research or study to reduce or quantify their uncertainty to the advantage of the quality of the process. The list will be documented in a report suitable for use by the scientific and engineering communities.

Other Project Scope Considerations:

1. The above components of the study will be assimilated into an operational model or process whereby PMP/Precipitation Frequency estimates can be made, and adjusted as determined appropriate to a defined criteria (Rules) to determine rainfall depths for use in rainfall-runoff modeling for spillway analysis within the region.

2. Consultants must address ownership & long-term maintenance and updating requirements of all data and any applications/add-ons developed to achieve the goals described.

3. Consultants must provide GIS tools and databases that are downloadable and capable of running on local platforms by users.

Scope of Work - Study Workshops:

1. The goals of the study will be advanced, assessed and ultimately achieved through a kick-off workshop followed by regular quarterly workshops. All workshops will consist of two-day meetings attended by consultants contracted for all tasks, project review board members, dam owner representatives, CO and NM dam safety representatives (Project sponsors), CWCB personnel and others as interested or invited. The workshops will be scheduled, arranged, coordinated and facilitated by the consultant hired to fulfill the project management scope.

2. All task Consultants should plan and budget for 10 workshops over the course of the 24 month project schedule. Costs associated with travel, lodging and per diem necessary to be prepared to participate from 8:00 am until 5:00 for two days in a row should be included, including but not limited to necessary travel before and after the work days to allow for full participation.

3. Workshop locations will alternate between Denver, CO and Albuquerque, NM, at locations to be determined in each city.

Project Phasing:

For the purposes of the timing of available project funding, this regional project will be divided into phases representing work done separately on the regions of the states of Colorado and New Mexico.

1. Phase A – All work and costs of work shall be shown for the geographic region of the State of Colorado.

2. Phase B – All work and costs of work shall be shown for the geographic region of the State of New Mexico

3. Phase A will be contracted for initially. Work associated with Phase B will be dependent on funding from the State of New Mexico. It is currently anticipated that New Mexico funding will become available on or about July 1, 2016, at which time execution of the Phase B work will be accomplished.

4. Phase A work will be started as soon as contracting between contractors and the State of Colorado can be accomplished. It is anticipated that Phase A and Phase B will be conducted simultaneously, upon execution of the Phase B contracts.

Deliverables:

1. Provide a GIS-based tool to allow determination of PMP and Precipitation Frequency Estimates for all basin sizes and at all dam crest elevations within the Colorado and New Mexico Region.

2. The GIS-based tool(s) should provide gridded PMP/PF estimates at a maximum grid size of 90 arc-seconds or approximately 2.5 kilometers for a specific basin area size. Extreme Precipitation estimates should be calculated for Local Storms at 1-,2-,4-,5-,6-,12- and 24-hour durations and for General Storms at 1-,6-,12-,24-, 48- and 72-hour durations. The tool should apply all adjustment factors and spatial patterns needed to provide a gridded map of the Extreme Precipitation estimate for a specific basin of interest. The tool should also provide a temporal storm distribution for each Extreme Precipitation (EP) estimate (Local PMP, General PMP, Precip Frequency, etc.) The tool should produce a brief summary report for each basin analysis provided the EP estimate map, a summary table showing EP estimate for each duration and providing the controlling storm (for PMP), and confidence limits on the EP estimates.

3. Precipitation-Frequency output should include both tabular PF estimates and graphical Depth-Duration-Frequency curves similar to NOAA Atlas #14.

4. A summary report shall be provided to document all steps in the EP estimation process, all data used in the study, QC processes, sensitivity analyses, reasonableness comparisons to HMR 49, 55A, NOAA Atlas 14 estimates, and Review Board comments and responses throughout the study.

5. Statewide Extreme Precipitation Study Guidance document to document general steps, data, and steps used to serve as a draft guidance document for other Federal and State agencies

6. Develop a draft standard of practice guidance document for this study suitable for use in development of a national model.

7. Task 3 deliverables include a report including but not limited to the following: Purpose and Scope, History of HRRR model, Discussion of aspects of the analysis as described in the steps and tasks shown, conclusions drawn from the analysis, and recommendations for future analysis to support the project activities and science goals.

8. Create a “Topics for Further Research” list of those components, elements and variables that could benefit from further research or study to reduce or quantify their uncertainty to the advantage of the quality and longevity of the processes developed.

Submittals: Thirty percent, 60%, and 90% draft reports shall be submitted by Task 1, 2 and 3 consultants for review and comment. Review Board member comments shall be addressed by the Consultant with satisfactory written responses and appropriate changes to the report. The Task 4 Consultant shall work directly with the other Task Consultants on the development of a comprehensive final project report. After all review comments have been resolved, ten (10) hard copies and an electronic copy of the Final report shall be submitted to the project sponsors for distribution and use.

Review Board Responsibility:

Project Review Board members will provide review written comments to 30%, 60% and 90% reports within 20 working days of receipt.

5.0 SUBMITTAL

5.1 Proposal Format

This section describes the information that must be furnished by the proposer and the prescribed format in which it must be presented. The Department of Natural Resources Requests that proposals are submitted that:

• Include recycled paper as much as possible.

• Are printed, double sided, on 8 ½ by 11” paper.

• Are bound to facilitate filing; three-ring binders and bulky submittals are not permitted

• Submit One (1) original and (5) copies of your proposal, along with an electronic copy of your proposal in Word 2003 or 2007 or as a PDF on a, CD, flash drive, or other similar storage device

• Proposals must be delivered “sealed” with RFP Number, and Opening Date and Time on outside of envelope. Be advised that telegraphic or electronic offers cannot be accepted.

• The format of the actual proposal shall be as follows:

a) Cover Letter – 2 pages max.

b) Project approach based on Scope of Work – 8 pages max.

c) Project Cost – 1 page max.

d) Project Schedule– 2 pages max.

e) Project Team, including organization chart - 4 pages max.

f) Resumes &…