SFD-1902 amendment 1.docx

STEVE SISOLAK

Governor

STATE OF NEVADA

BRADLEY CROWELL

Director

TIM WILSON, P.E.

Acting State Engineer

DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES

DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES

901 South Stewart Street, Suite 2002 Carson City, Nevada 89701-5250

(775) 684-2800 • Fax (775) 684-2811 http://water.nv.gov

SUBJECT: Amendment No.1 to Request for Proposal No. SFD-1902 DATE OF AMENDMENT: March 22, 2019 DATE AND TIME OF OPENING: April 15, 2019 @ 4:30 pm AGENCY CONTACT: Katie Bradley, Management Analyst III

The following shall be Amendment No. 1 as part of RFP No. SFD-1902 for Inundation Maps for the South Fork Dam. If a vendor has already returned a proposal and any of the information provided below changes that proposal, please submit the changes along with this amendment. You need not re-submit an entire proposal prior to the opening date and time.

1. Does the attached RFP completely replace the original RFP? – Yes.

1. Are the Reference Questionnaires required? If so do we use the form from the initial RFP? – Yes the Reference Questionnaires are still required. You can use the form from the initial RFP but that format is not required. The Reference Questionnaire is attached to this document for use if needed.

1. What are the submittal requirements for number of copies to be submitted and do you want an electronic copy on a thumb drive? – One hardcopy and one electronic copy sent via mail or submitted in person.

1. Do the team resumes need to be in any specific format? – No.

1. Is there a page limitation for the proposal other than one page for the cover letter? – No.

1. Will an EAP be produced or is this an update to an existing EAP? – This will be an update to an existing inundation map. The EAP is being updated by the division.

1. What information will be provided by NDWR for the modeling? Is there an expectation that new data will be required? – The information regarding the dam will be given to the successful contractor. We also have the existing model that was prepared in 2012 in Flo2D. Our office doesn’t have this program, so we are unsure if all the data is there in order to recreate the existing inundation map. We will also provide the report that accompanied the inundation map to the successful contractor. If there are specific items that you are looking for, please provide a detailed list.

1. What are your general submission requirements? Can we assume they are the same as the originally released RFP since they are not listed in this new RFP? – The general submission requirements are as stated in section 4.

1. What topographic data does the State of Nevada Division of Water Resources currently have available of this area? - We are currently working to see if any other state agencies have any updated information beyond what is published on the USGS site. We will work with the selected contractor on obtaining any additional information that may be needed to generate an acceptable inundation map.

1. Scope of Services (Page 12 of 15): The conditions to be modelled include “Failure During Probable Maximum Flood Event.” Has the Probable Maximum Flood been determined, or does the study require a hydrologic analysis to determine the PMF? - A design letter for the reservoir, dated February 8, 1984, from Chilton Engineering establishes a PMF maximum inflow of 57,000 cfs and a corresponding 1/2 PMF peak inflow of 28,500 cfs. The local PMF storm event is more representative of the type of storm typically found in this area. The calculated local PMF peak inflow rate (63,600 cfs) validates the published design information (peak flow = 57,000 cfs); therefore, the published design hydrographs for the PMF were used in the inundation simulations.

1. Is there existing topographic data of the area around the reservoir and downstream of the reservoir? If so, is this data of suitable quality to develop the hydraulic model, or will the contractor need to collect topographic data? - Limited existing topographic data is available. Discussions with the selected contractor will be held to determine if any additional data is required to provide the inundation map. We can provide the selected contractor the previous model and data used to generate this model.

1. Is there existing bathymetric data of the lake or a stage-versus-volume rating curve suitable for the analysis, or will the contractor need to collect bathymetric data for purposes of this project? - The state does have a stage storage curve that is suitable for analysis.

1. Will the dam/outlet works design (as-built) drawings and any available hydrologic/hydraulic studies be made available to the selected contractor? - If this is required by the selected contractor, our office will provide as much information as possible. All asbuilts and previous studies will be given to the selected contractor to aid in their analysis.

1. What existing reports, analyses, and data (e.g. hydrology, reservoir stage/storage/discharge, terrain) will be available to facilitate completion of the inundation analysis and mapping? - Our office will provide as much information as possible. All asbuilts and previous studies will be given to the selected contractor to aid in their analysis. The office does have limited terrain data downstream of the dam.

1. Will NDWR be providing the consultant with known and approved upstream hydrology modelling results to input into the dam breach model? - Yes, Division will provide upstream hydrology and previous inundation studies.

1. Will NDWR provide the consultant with original dam design plans, as-builts, any other studies, pertinent hydrology studies and manuals? - Yes, Division will provide any information available that will help with the generation of an updated inundation map

1. Is there an existing EAP and Inundation Map, or is this project starting from scratch? - The division is currently updating the EAP in house. The existing inundation map and model will be shared with the selected consultant.

a. If this information is existing, is it available to consultants? - Yes

1. Will NDWR provide the chosen consultant with known critical structural and property information already recorded with NDWR? - Yes, the division will work with the consultant to provide any necessary information required for the inundation map.

1. Will NDWR have aerial topography and/or ortho photos available? - The division is working with other state agencies to determine what information is available. If additional survey information is required, these discussions will occur with the selected contractor.

1. Should bidders include budget for obtaining topography data files, or will those be provided by NDWR? Files needed would include as-built topography of the dam, spillway, and fuse plug, and downstream topography.- Each vendor should supply a proposal on the information required to produce the inundation maps requested. DWR will work with the selected vendor to determine the cost of the project and any additional information required. If the selected vendor determines that survey downstream needs to be conducted, DWR will work with the selected vendor to determine if the cost is justified for the project. DWR will provide as much information as possible so the vendor can produce an accurate inundation map.

1. Will bidders receive a map showing the surrounding habitable structure and/or a list of critical facilities and “lifelines” that NDWR is worried may be impacted by flooding, or should bidders include budget for a site visit to evaluate potential critical facilities and habitats? - DWR can work with the selected vendor on the downstream critical facilities and infrastructure. Initial review of the downstream hazards include some private ranches, homes, I-80, the Carlin tunnels, Carlin and potentially Beowawe. There could be additional infrastructure or facilities that may be impacted after the maps are generated. If the bidder determines that a site visit would be required, then this requirement should be explained in the proposal. The cost will be discussed and negotiated after the vendor is selected.

1. Will this be and update to previously prepared inundation maps? If so, will data used for mapping effort be available to successful bidder? - This will be an update to a previously developed inundation map. The data will be shared with the selected contractor.

1. Will the FEMA flood map HEC-RAS data files for Zone A flood plain developed in 2013 (or most recent) for the area affected along the Humboldt River be available to the successful bidder? - To our knowledge, we do not have the HEC-RAS information for the most updated FEMA floodplain map. There is some lidar information available on the USGS website that can be used. If this information would be useful to the selected contractor, we will work with FEMA to obtain this information, if possible.

State of Nevada

Steve Sisolak

Department of Conservation and Natural Resources

Governor

Division of Water Resources

Time Wilson

Acting State Engineer

901 S. Stewart St., Ste. 2002 Carson City, NV 89701

BUSINESS REFERENCE’S RESPONSE TO REFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP)

PART A – TO BE COMPLETED BY PROPOSING VENDOR:

Company Name Submitting Proposal:

Reference is requested for vendor as identified above; or

Company Name acting as subcontractor for vendor identified above

PART B – BUSINESS REFERENCE INSTRUCTIONS

Please reference the RFP number in the subject line of the email.

CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION WHEN COMPLETED (Please print)

Company Providing Reference:

Contact Name:

Title:

Contact Telephone Number:

Contact Email Address:

RATING SCALE:

Where a rating is requested and using the Rating Scale provided below, rate the following questions by noting the appropriate number for each item. Please provide any additional comments you feel would be helpful to the State regarding this contractor.

PART C – QUESTIONS:

1. In what capacity have you worked with this vendor in the past?

Comments:

Comments:

Comments:

Comments:

Comments:

7.

Rate how well the agreed upon, planned schedule was consistently met and deliverables provided on time. (This pertains to delays under the control of the vendor.)

RATING:

Comments:

Comments:

Comments:

Comments:

Comments:

Comments:

Comments:

14. With which aspect(s) of this vendor’s services are you most satisfied?

Comments:

15. With which aspect(s) of this vendor’s services are you least satisfied?

Comments:

16. Would you recommend this vendor to your organization again?

Comments:

PART D – GENERAL INFORMATION:

1. During what time period did the vendor provide these services for your organization?

Month/Year:

image2.wmf oleObject1.bin image1.png