REQUEST FOR PROPOSALSSouth Platte Decision Support System Alluvial Groundwater Model Updates

For the Colorado Water Conservation BoardRFP# PDA-1330

1.0 OVERVIEW

1.1 Issuing OfficeThis Request for Proposals (RFP) is issued by the State of Colorado, Department of Natural Resources, on behalf of the Colorado Water conservation Board. All contact regarding this solicitation is to be directed to:

Allan SmithDepartment of Natural Resources Purchasing Office1313 Sherman #423Denver, CO 80203(303) 866-3292 x8631Fax: (303) 866-5575Email: allan.smtih@state.co.us

1.2 PurposeThe purpose of this RFP is to obtain competitive bid proposals from qualified firms or teams, to complete South Platte River Basin alluvial groundwater water modeling update. The South Platte Decision Support System (SPDSS) includes an alluvial groundwater planning model for the South Platte River basin. The model, as outlined in the modeling documentation and various task memoranda, was developed using MODFLOW, the USGS finite–difference groundwater flow model. The study period for the current model is 1950-2006. The purpose of the project behind this RFP is to extend the study period to 2011, or to the most current year data is available and verify that the updated model runs appropriately. This project will also include updating all the relevant processes that are needed to update model inputs for the extended time period. There is also the potential for modeling scenarios to be performed once the updated model is completed.

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 BIDS 12/31/2013Informational Vendor Meeting 1/16/2014 10:00 AM Inquiry deadline for written questions 1/20/2014 NoonAnswers posted on Colorado BIDS 1/22/2014Submission deadline 2/4/2014 4:00 p.m.Evaluation of Proposals 2/5/2014 to 2/10/2014Project Award (estimate) 2/10/2014 approximateProject start date 3/3/2014

1

A mandatory pre-bid meeting will be held on, Tuesday January 16, at 10:00 AM The CWCB Project Manager or his representative, and the DNR Purchasing Agent will meet with prospective bidders at 1580 Logan Street, Denver, CO 80203. The meeting will be in the second floor conference room.

1.4 SubmissionAll 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 4 copies of the consultant’s complete proposal (for a total of five [5] copies) and include all submittal information outlined in section 5.0 Submittal. It is the responsibility of the proposer to ensure that the 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-1422 and shall show such information on the outside of the proposal packet. Proposals will not be accepted by facsimile transmittal.

Proposers are advised that DNR desires 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 loose-leaf binders.

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

1.5 InquiriesProspective 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 SmithDepartment of Natural Resources(See 1.1 for contact information)

All envelopes containing questions must be clearly marked "Inquiry for RFP PDA-1422 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 BIDS System”, see 1.8, below. The amendment will respond to all questions submitted regarding the RFP.

1.6 Amendments to Request for ProposalsIn the event it should be necessary to revise any portion of this Request for Proposals, an amendment will be posted on the Colorado BIDS website (see 1.7 below).

1.7 Colorado BIDS Website

2

This solicitation is published using the Colorado BIDS System. Solicitation documents and information (including any amendments or modifications) will be updated with revisions on this site. Go to the “State Purchasing Office link at www.bidscolorado.com and selecting “Solicitations”.

1.8 Evaluation Process and AwardProposals will be evaluated and award made as outlined in section 6.0, Evaluation and Award. Award or awards will be based upon each firm or teams proposals in the following areas:

1. Understanding of Colorado water rights and water use in the specific model basin.2. Experience developing and applying basin-wide groundwater planning models.3. Experience and understanding of the CDSS database, DMIs, StateCU and MODFLOW.4. Experience and understanding of the basin of interest5. Coordination experience with other agencies or companies6. Specific experience of proposed key staff members.7. Staff availability to perform the work in a timely fashion.

1.9 Attachments

The following attachments are included as part of the Request for Proposal: RFP Form, one page, page 25. Model Contract and Colorado Special Provisions

2.0 CONTRACT INFORMATION

2.1 Colorado Contract

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.

Single Contract. DNR will enter into a single contract. Any partnerships between firm or teams specializing must be managed in a Prime Contractor / Subcontractor approach. All references to “proposer” 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 will be required to assume responsibility for all goods and services offered in its proposal, and DNR will consider the selected contractor 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.

3

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 or the issuance of a State Purchase Order. Contractor agrees to proceed with due diligence, completing all specified work by June 30, 2016. (Date approximate)

2.3 Measurement and Payment

Measurement and payment for the project will be based on specific tasks and items outlined in the formal contract. 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.

4

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 coverages 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 Insert Dept or IHE Acronym, 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

5

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 Measures and Standards

(a) Performance measures and standards

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

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

c. Any draft report or draft technical memorandum will be submitted to CWCB for comments prior to final report and contract completion.

(b) An accountability section

a. 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

6. Comments and Issues

b. All deliverables and support data will be made available to State

i. Modeling datasets, command files and documentation.

(c) Monitoring requirements

a. Monthly progress reports

6

(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

7

3.0 COLORADO’S DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS BACKGROUND

SPDSS is part of Colorado’s Decision Support Systems (CDSS), which includes decision support systems that have previously been developed for the Colorado River basins and the Rio Grande basin. These decision support systems are data-centered systems that integrate analysis tools, relational databases, and models to help water users and water managers make decisions.

HydroBase is the relational database that stores water-related information used in the groundwater modeling effort. Model input files are created using Data Management Interface (DMI) “command files” that extract data from HydroBase, supplement missing information with data from outside sources, and fill data to create complete data sets. The use of command files allows for new data to more easily be incorporated into future model updates and assures consistency between the separate basin models. The DMIs that are required to develop input files for the alluvial groundwater model are TSTool, StateDGI and StatePP. TSTool is generally used to create time-series input files, such as historical streamflow records. StateDGI is used to process spatial data such as matching irrigated parcels to model cells. StatePP was developed to pre-process relational and spatial data (including consumptive use results from StateCU). StatePP produces the MODFLOW input for the recharge, well, evapotranspiration, and drain packages. StateCU is the CDSS consumptive use tool and is utilized to estimate crop consumptive use and well pumping. Documentation for the DMIs and StateCU can be found at the CDSS website (cdss.state.co.us). How those specific tools were used in the SPDSS effort can also be found in various task memoranda also located at the CDSS website.

3.1 SPDSS Alluvial Modeling Overview

The data-centered approach to groundwater modeling defines processes and tools that facilitate a linkage between data sources, such as HydroBase and State GIS coverages, and a numerical groundwater model. This approach facilitates updating of numerical models when changes to underlying data sets occur, model simulation periods change, or additional processes need to be incorporated. This capability requires use of model support tools that allow definition of conceptual model elements independent of the numerical model.

Task Memorandum 50.1, available online at the CDSS website, describes the data-centered approach applied to the alluvial groundwater modeling effort. Figure 1 in the memorandum shows the flow process that will be used in updating the alluvial groundwater model. The use of HydroBase, TSTool, StateDGI and StatePP and other processes (Appendix J, SPDSS Alluvial Groundwater Model Report) will be used in this update. Results from StateCU for the extended period will be made available for this project. The attached figure is a flow chart that further illustrates the alluvial groundwater input development process.

Objectives:

The objectives of this Request for Proposal are to:The objectives of this Request for Proposal are to:

1. Extend the historical time series data sets needed for the SPDSS alluvial groundwater model through 2011 or to the most current year data is available.

2. Run the updated StateDGI with appropriate input files using the CDSS Tool Box.3. Rerun StatePP and all other appropriate spreadsheets or pre-processors (precipitation, lateral

boundary, USGS Grid 2 Grid and SFR generator) to create new MODFLOW input files.4. Take information and data generated from objectives 1-3 and rerun the SPDSS alluvial

groundwater model and test that the 1950-2006 results are the same as under the original dataset. Compare 1950-2006 calibration statistics with the extended period statistics.

5. Do limited recalibration, if necessary, with the extended dataset.6. Perform modeling scenarios, as requested by the State management team.

8

7. Produce an updated modeling report.8. Provide all files used in the modeling process in an organized format. Documentation of the file

compilation process along with a process flow diagram will also be provided

4.0 SCOPE OF WORK

4.1 TASK 1 Extension of Historical Time Series Data

Background:

During initial development of the SPDSS alluvial groundwater model, numerous files were created relating to historical climate, streamflow and diversion records for the period 1950-2006. Since that time HydroBase has been updated every year with the most current data, and an irrigated crop type and acreage update has been completed for 2010. All time series data sets need to be updated to include the most recent data. Note that this task does not include those time series data sets that are created as a result of StateCU (e.g., agricultural recharge and pumping). Colorado’s Decision Support Systems use a data-centered approach in the development of model input files. This approach allows input files to be more easily and automatically extended and updated to include new information, e.g., to include more years of streamflow and diversion records, or to include new water rights or new operations.

Objective:

Extend through 2011 (or to the most current year data is available) all relevant time series input files needed for the model using the CDSS data-centered approach.

Approach:

TASK 1 Extend required time series data

Extend all relevant time series data sets through 2011 (or most current year data is available). This will be accomplished using the same methodologies developed for the original model. Note that some data sets may have values that do not vary temporally, but they still need to be extended. Data sets that need to be extended include:

Alluvial underflow into model Stream inflows and diversions needed for the SFR2 package Precipitation M&I pumping Recharge pumping Augmentation pumping Augmentation recharge Bedrock fluxes Lateral boundary inflow fluxes Reservoir seepage

Calibration target data sets that also need to be extended include:9

Observation water level data Stream gain/loss estimates Streamflow at relevant gages within the model

It is believed that all processing tools and data sets are functional and available, however vendor should anticipates some unforeseen challenges in updating the files. All files and modified DMI command files will be submitted to the CWCB as part of the deliverable.

4.2 TASK 2 – UPDATE CDSS TOOL BOX

Background:

The State of Colorado’s CDSS Tool Box is a set of GIS Data Management Interfaces that utilizes ArcMap capabilities to process spatial data for use in consumptive use, groundwater and surface water modeling analyses. The CDSS Tool Box was developed to provide a consistent, automatic and reproducible method for developing input files required for the CDSS consumptive use model (StateCU), water resource planning model (StateMod), and the preprocessor to MODFLOW (StatePP). The main CDSS Tool Box consists of five toolsets: Aggregate, Climate Weights, Soil Parameters, Well to Parcel Matching and State Data-Centered Groundwater Interface (StateDGI). The Aggregate, Climate Weights, and Soil Parameters toolsets are primarily used in creating input files for StateCU and StateMod, whereas the Well to Parcel Matching and StateDGI toolsets are used to create input files to StatePP and ultimately MODFLOW.

The StateDGI toolset was developed to compute the spatial components of groundwater GIS layers in relation to a defined MODFLOW cell system. StateDGI is used in conjunction with an Access relational database to store and process data for use by the groundwater preprocessor, StatePP. This spatial information, used in conjunction with StateCU output files, is used as input to StatePP to develop and run a groundwater simulation model. The user must run StateDGI from ArcMap and later Access to determine cell-by-cell values for input to the StatePP model.

Objective:

Update the CDSS Tool Box to the ESRI ArcGIS 10.1 standard, including making modifications or enhancements needed to StateDGI to produce the needed StatePP input files.

TASK 2 Update CDSS Tool Box

The StateDGI toolset allows users to perform numerous spatial tasks easily, including distributing well capacity by aquifer layers, locating wells and parcels by the model cell they fall into, and computing the fractional length and areas in each model cell of various GIS layers. Due to the GIS and Access format of the files used by StateDGI, the user is not able to create an input data set from scratch using the toolset. Instead, new input data sets should be created by developing new GIS layers using ArcMap

Update the entire StateDGI toolset to incorporate the following: Update entire CDSS Toolbox to ArcGIS 10.1.  Tools can be written to use up to ArcView

level functionality.   Include the ability to read both geodatabases and shapefiles. Update the CDSS Toolbox to run on both geodatabase feature class and shapefile input.  It is

believed that 'ObjectID', a default geodatabase field, is being used as an iterator within the 10

Access Database Shell.  This will have to be modified to accommodate the use of geodatabase feature classes.

Review the entire code in the CDSS Toolbox for redundant code, consistent input data schema requirements and overall logic of geoprocessing functions.

Review the queries run within the Access Database Shell for correct logic and consistent schema requirements that match the schema requirements of the CDSS Toolbox; correct where necessary.

Add appropriate processing messages describing what the tool is doing during processing. Revise queries calling the 'cov' fields in the irrigated lands input data to also operate without

this field by pro rating them evenly between the surface water structures assigned to the parcel.

Within the StateDGI Access data shell, the queries that build the State PP input files will be evaluated and modified if necessary. 

Evaluate Climate Weights Toolset scripts to insure they perform as required.  Ensure scripts that create climate station grids are operating correctly.  Evaluate the Well to Parcel Matching tool to ensure that it is processing the data correctly,

such as assign well class. Ensure that StateDGI is reading the appropriate data fields and uses the current DSS data

schema.  For example, in well data, the fields ‘PERMDATE’ and ‘APPRDATE’ must have underscores in the data like this ‘PERM_DATE and ‘APPR_DATE’ in order for the well data export from StateDGI to work.

All code changes will be documented and presented in an updated CDSS Tool Box User Manual, made available to the State. A functional CDSS Tool Box will be installed on designated CWCB and DWR computers.

4.3 TASK 3-DEVELOPMENT OF MODFLOW INPUT FILES

Background:

Task Memorandum 50.1 and Appendix J to the Final Report, available online at the CDSS website, describe the data-centered approach applied to the alluvial groundwater modeling effort. Figures in both show the flow process that will be used in updating the alluvial groundwater model. HydroBase, TSTool, StateDGI and StatePP and other processes (Appendix J, SPDSS Alluvial Groundwater Model Report) will be used in performing the update.

With the development of MODFLOW-CDSS by the USGS, another option has become available for developing the MODFLOW input files for the SPDSS alluvial model. By employing the stress partitioning incorporated in MODFLOW-CDSS, multiple stress packages can be created for the same type of stress, e.g., multiple well packages can exist in the same model. This would be very useful in the SPDSS model as there are currently several stress packages in the model that each include numerous components; e.g., the well package includes agricultural and M&I pumping, lateral boundary inflows, and Denver Basin bedrock fluxes. If these components were separated into unique well packages, it would facilitate activities such as checking input, analyzing output, and making changes to the model. As part of this project, the State would like the contractor to investigate adapting the current MODFLOW input files for the SPDSS model to MODFLOW-CDSS, with separate stress packages as appropriate.

Approach:

The MODFLOW input files from the original SPDSS model will be updated for the model period of 1950 through 2011 or to the most current year data is available, utilizing the original approach with

11

MODFLOW-2000. An alternate option for updating the input files will also be investigated, utilizing MODFLOW-CDSS, which is based on MODFLOW-2005 (Harbaugh, 2005) and includes modifications to fulfill needs identified by the Colorado Water Conservation Board. The modifications include a new Partition Stress Boundaries capability and an option to allow execution to continue when the selected solver fails to converge. The State will decide which approach to use, based on estimated costs and schedule for the alternate option as compared to the original approach. The Contractor’s proposal should assume that the original approach is being used for proposal cost, schedule and approach.

Task 3.1-Investigate Adapting Input Files to MODFLOW-CDSS

Investigate adapting the original SPDSS model and input files to MODFLOW-CDSS. This will include utilizing the stress-partitioning capability where appropriate, converting other input files to MODFLOW-2005 if necessary, and making code changes to MODFLOW-CDSS to incorporate the solution used in the original model to prevent drying of cells during simulation (Doherty, 2001). Estimate a cost and schedule for performing the conversion, and make a recommendation to the State. The State will decide whether to proceed with MODFLOW-CDSS or stay with the original approach with MODFLOW-2000.

Task 3.2-Develop MODFLOW Input Files

Based on the methodologies used in the original model in MODFLOW-2000, all input files will be updated as necessary for the extended study period. This will include running StateDGI and StatePP and other preprocessors where appropriate. Data sets created in Task 1 will be incorporated where appropriate.

StatePP was developed to pre-process flow and spatial data for MODFLOW, the groundwater flow model. StatePP produces the MODFLOW input files for recharge, well pumping, and evapotranspiration and drains. StatePP input files are primarily derived from StateDGI; however, several files are manually or StateCU produced. The attached memorandum titled “Transmittal of Final StatePP Input Files, updated 10/29/08 to include additional information on diversions to recharge sites” gives general information on the approach.

StateCU Derived Input Files: The StateCU analysis estimates the parameters, used in the ground water model, by StateCU structure ID. Information from the StateCU analysis (completed under HB-1278) will be distributed to ground water model cells in StatePP, based on the StatePP inputs.

SP2013.dwb – Will provide canal loss, non-consumed applied irrigation water, and pumping estimates by StateCU structure ID. Structures included in this detailed water budget output have irrigated acreage, plus acreage that contributes to lateral inflow. Irrigation water requirements and acreage for crops that have the potential to be subirrigated are also included in SP2013.dwb. SubIrrigated Crop 1 in the analysis refers to Grass_Pasture (termed irrigated meadow in StatePP) and SubIrrigated Crop 2 in the analysis refers to Alfalfa.

SP2013.ddh – Will provide river headgate diversions by StateCU structure ID for all diversions modeled in the consumptive use and surface water modeling efforts.

StateDGI Derived Input Files: StateDGI is used to create several of the input files for StatePP. The following seven sets of files, listed with a general description, will be created and transmitted with the task memorandum. The first file in the set, (SP2013_xxxx, where xxxx is the year associated with the irrigated acreage snapshot) includes information for the entire model grid (both active and inactive cells) within the South Platte Basin. The second file in the set (SP2013_xxxx_Active, where xxx is the year

12

associated with the irrigated acreage snapshot) includes information for the active model cells only. These seven sets of files will be created for each of the six SPDSS irrigated acreage snapshots (1956, 1976, 1987, 2001, 2005 and 2010).

.

SP2013_xxxx.irr; SP2013_xxxx_Active.irr – Will provide the total irrigated acreage, by StateCU structure ID, contained in each associated model grid cell.

SP2013_xxxx.alf; SP2013_xxxx_Active.alf – Will provide the irrigated alfalfa acreage, by StateCU structure ID, contained in each associated model grid cell.

SP2013_xxxx.med; SP2013_xxxx_Active.med – Will provide the irrigated grass pasture (meadow) acreage, by StateCU structure ID, contained in each associated model grid cell.

SP2013_xxxx.wel; SP2013_xxxx_Active.wel – Will contain information for each well assigned to irrigated acreage including:

Assigned StateCU structure ID, unique well WDID, permit, or receipt number, irrigated acreage served by well in each associated model grid cell, area weighted well yield in the each associated grid cell, model layer where well pumping occurs, and year well was permitted/adjudicated.

SP2013_xxxx.can; SP2013_xxxx_Active.can – Will provide the canal length, by StateCU structure ID, in each associated model grid cell.

SP2013_2001.pcp; SP2013_2001_Active.pcp – Will provide the area, by land use category, in each associated model grid cell. Note that there is only one land use coverage for the South Platte and it represents the year 2001.

SP2013_2001.etz; SP2013_2001_Active.etz – Will provide the phreatophyte acreage in each associated model grid cell. Note that there is only one land use coverage for the South Platte, which includes native vegetation categories reported in the *.etz file, and it represents the year 2001.

Additionally, the CDSS Tool Box Climate Weights tool will be used to recreate the following StatePP input file, to be transmitted with the task memorandum:

GWModel_ppt_wts.csv – Will provide the climate station weights for each model cell for use in estimating precipitation recharge.

SPDSS Groundwater Geodatabase: This groundwater geodatabase houses the model grid, elevations, alluvial underflow, the stream network and municipal/industrial pumping information that is used in StatePP, lateral boundary processor and the SFR GIS processor.

4.4 TASK 4 – RUN EXTENDED ALLUVIAL GROUNDWATER MODEL

Background:

13

With all of the input files generated with the data extended, the SPDSS alluvial groundwater model will be rerun for the 1950-2011 (or to the most current year data is available) simulation period. The groundwater modeling software GMS will be utilized in working with the MODFLOW input, run execution and output as much as practicable.

Objectives:

Ensure that the extended dataset results in similar output results for the simulation period 1950-2006 as under the original SPDSS groundwater modeling effort. Ensure that the extended period (2007-2011 or to the most current year data is available) is calibrated to the same standards as in the original model calibration. (See SPDSS Task Memorandum 48 for details on the initial calibration standards.)

Task 4.1 Model Simulation, 1950-2006

Take the extended dataset and rerun the alluvial groundwater model for the period 1950-2006, to ensure it replicates the previous SPDSS results.

Task 4.2 Model Simulation, 1950-2011(or to the most current year data is available)

Rerun the extended alluvial model for the entire simulation period, 1950-2011(or to the most current year data is available).  Provide calibration statistics for the original (1950-2006) and extended (2007-2011) time periods.  Compare the calibration statistics between the original and extended time periods and recommend whether or not recalibration is needed.  Upon agreement and approval by the State, conduct up to 80 hours of recalibration work.  For the purpose of this request it should be assumed that up to 80 hours of recalibration work will be needed.

Task 4.3 Model Update Report

Provide a summary report documenting the model input and results.

Task 4.4 File Organization

Provide all files used or created as part of the update process to CWCB as part of the deliverables. These files include both data and executable files. Provide documentation of the file compilation process, along with a process flow diagram. All files will be organized to allow CWCB and DWR staff to easily follow the update process.

4.5 TASK 5 – PERFORM MODELING SCENARIOS

Background:

During the project, the need may arise for various simulations using the SPDSS alluvial groundwater model. These simulations, on approval by the State representatives, will be performed on a task-order basis. Estimates for cost and schedule will be presented to the State, which will decide how to proceed.

Objectives:

Perform model simulations as needed and analyze results and provide written reporting. Model simulations may include scenarios such as varying agricultural pumping or augmentation recharge on a regional basis and analyzing the resulting changes in groundwater levels, streamflow, etc.

Task 5.1 Model Simulations

14

Revise model input files as needed, utilizing the data-centered process as much as practicable. Run the simulation, and analyze the results to evaluate the response of the model.

Task 5.2 Reporting

Prepare a memorandum describing the model simulation, changes to inputs, and results.

4.6 TASK 6 - PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND MEETINGS

Objectives:

Provide a forum for technical, schedule and budget issue discussions with State representatives.

Approach:

Task 6.1 Progress ReportsInvoices (6 expected) will be prepared that include billing by person, rate, hours, and charge. Invoices will include monthly progress reports that show: 1) a task summary that presents the budget, costs to date, percent spent, and percent complete; 2) work activity description that describes the work accomplished that month and estimated percent complete for each subtask presented in the budget; and 3) a summary of concerns on technical issues, budget or schedule.

Task 6.2 State and Coordination Meetings Prepare for and attend 12 monthly half-day progress meetings with State representatives to discuss progress, results, issues and recommendations. Meet with Modeling Technical Manager 6 times to discuss coordination and modeling issues.

15

5.0 SUBMITTAL

5.1 Proposal FormatThis 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 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 disk. 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.

5.2 Response ScopeIn order to be responsive to this RFP, the proposer must fully address each item of this section 5.3 through 5.7. The proposer must start with the first item and consecutively continue through completion of all items. The procedure for response is as follows:

Identify the item by the paragraph representation which references it, i.e. /g/ 6.4.1, 6.5.2, etc. Fully address the subject item. The description may be in narrative or outline format. Be as

concise as you can while discussing the items fully. The response must address the Scope of Work as presented in this RFP. Reference and attach any supporting documents that help describe or contribute to an item.

Reference to technical literature can be given in support, but no in place of, a written answer. Assemble your completed work into a package that can be readily reviewed. A table of contents is preferred The completed and signed RFP Submittal Cover Sheet MUST accompany proposals submitted. In order for proposals to be eligible for consideration, the proposing firm or team or individual

must be registered on the Colorado BIDS system at the time of the proposal submission deadline. See section 1.7 for more information.

5.3 Minimum QualificationsThe following qualifications must be met by the prospective proposer in order for the bid to be considered. Please include a short narrative indicative of how your firm or teams meets these qualifications.

5.3.1 Must possess working knowledge of MODFLO 2000.5.3.2 Must possess a working understanding of Colorado water use, water management and

administration practices within the South Platte.5.3.3 Must possess a good understanding of the CDSS tools and how they are used in this effort.

5.4 Project ExperienceDetail your firm or teams past successful experience working on similar projects in the following areas:

5.4.1 Ground water allocation modeling, (practical and theoretical).5.4.2 Ground water modeling experience in Colorado.5.4.3 Water use, management and administration experience within Colorado. 5.4.4 Experience with using the CDSS tools.

16

5.4.5 Each proposal must give the names, addresses and phone numbers of three (3) individuals from current and past clients who have procured similar services to act as references. The individuals identified must at least hold a position of project management or other contract authority

5.5 Management Plan

5.5.1 Present an organizational chart listing team members and their responsibilities. Include each team member’s level of involvement, roles and responsibilities of all key members.

5.5.3 Specify your firm or teams cost and quality control methods to assure the project remains on time, on target, and within budget.

5.5.2 Submit resumes for each member of your team, highlighting relevant experience on similar projects.

5.6 Project approach

5.6.1 Submit a narrative explaining your understanding of the need for this effort. 5.6.2 List and give a short explanation for each step or process in implementing the various tasks, and

how each task interacts with each other.

5.7 Writing SampleEach written proposal will be evaluated for technical writing skills of the proposer.

5.8 Price Submit a time and materials cost for each task listed in the scope of work and a total price for the project.

6.0 EVALUATION AND AWARD

6.1 Introduction:This section outlines the evaluation process and criteria to be used by the Evaluation committee in the selection of the best proposal in response to this RFP.

6.2 Evaluation Process and AwardThe Evaluation Committee shall review and score each of the proposals based on the criteria listed below. All proposals will receive fair and equal treatment. Based upon the ranking of the proposals after the initial review, the highest-ranked proposers may be asked to make an oral presentation of their proposals. A combined score based on the written proposal and oral presentation shall serve to determine the top-ranked proposal, however, the presentations will receive a separate evaluation score based on the criteria below. The state reserves the right to check references at any stage of the evaluation. However, at a minimum, prior to award, the State will check references for the top-ranked vendor.

17

Offerors should not assume that they will have an opportunity for oral presentations or revisions of proposals, so they should submit their most favorable proposals as their initial proposal. If award is not made on receipt of initial proposals, offerors in the competitive range (those most responsive to the requirements and reasonably susceptible of being selected for award) will be provided an opportunity to make an oral presentation. The competitive range determination will be based on the written proposals, so offerors are cautioned to insure that their proposals adequately convey the soundness of their approach and understanding of the requirements.

The proposal that results in the best value to the State of Colorado shall be recommended by the Evaluation Committee to management for contract award.

While a numerical evaluation method may be used as an aid to evaluation, the selection ultimately is a business judgment that will reflect an integrated assessment of the relative merits of proposals and presentations, (if applicable) using the factors identified below. The State reserves the right to reject any (or all) proposals that pose, in the judgment of the State, unacceptable risks of unsuccessful or untimely performance, unacceptable State resources requirements, or costs exceeding the budget constraints.

6.3 Minimum QualificationsThe following minimum qualifications will be evaluated:

6.3.1 The proposer’s knowledge of MODFLO 2000 will be evaluated based on the amount of knowledge demonstrated in the submittal.

6.3.2 The proposer’s working understanding of Colorado water use, water management and administration practices within the South Platte will be rated based on the amount and depth of knowledge demonstrated in the submittal.

6.3.3 The proposers understanding of CDSS tools and how they are used will be rated based on the explanations of their uses and the depth of experience using it them as demonstrated in the submittal.

Those firm or teams meeting the minimum qualifications will be scored on the following criteria:

6.4 Project Experience

6.4.1 Ground water allocation modeling, (practical and theoretical), will be evaluated based on the amount of experience shown and it’s similarity to this project.

6.4.2 Ground modeling experience in Colorado, will be evaluated on the amount of Past experience the proposer has working on Colorado projects.

6.4.3 Water use, management and administration experience within Colorado, will be evaluated on the amount of past experience the proposer has working on Colorado projects.

6.4.4 Experience with using the CDSS tools will be evaluated based on the amount of experience the proposer has working with the product.

6.4.5 References will be scored based on the feedback from references. References may be used to only verify past projects and may or may not be called.

6.5 Management Plan

6.5.1 The organizational chart will be evaluated, on its level of defined responsibilities and clarity of each member’s involvement.

6.5.2 The cost and quality control methods will be evaluated based on the precision of the method and the rationalization of how it will succeed.

18

6.5.3 Resumes will be evaluated on the amount and similarity of each members experience to the scope of work.

6.6 Project Approach

6.6.1 The narrative will be evaluated on the depth of the proposers understanding of the need for this effort.

6.6.2 The steps and processes will be evaluated based on the order and interaction between each step/process, and the likely hood that the steps/processes will yield a successful finished product.

6.7 Writing Sample

Each written proposal will be evaluated for technical writing skills of the proposer.

6.8 Price

Price will be evaluated on the best overall value to the State.

SECTION 7.0 ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION

7.1 Proposal Submission All proposals must be received by the Department of Natural Resources, Executive Directors Office, Purchasing Office, no later than the date and time shown in the Schedule of Activities, Proposal Submission Deadline. Each proposal package shall consist of the items outlined in Section 4 – Submittal of this RFP.

A complete proposal package including all elements of the proposer’s response as delineated above MUST be submitted and received by the stated deadline.

It is the sole responsibility of the proposer to ensure that its complete proposal package is received in the Contract and procurement Office prior to the deadline. Proposers mailing their documents should allow ample mail delivery time to ensure timely receipt of their proposals. PROPOSALS RECEIVED AFTER THE DATE AND TIME STATED IN THE SCHEDULE OF ACTIVITIES WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED.

Proposals must be clearly identified as a proposal in response this request for proposals, identified by the RFP number, and must show such information on the OUTSIDE of the proposal packet(s). Proposals will not be accepted by facsimile transmittal. All materials submitted shall become the property of DNR and will not be returned unless the RFP solicitation is cancelled prior to the submittal due date, in which case such proposals will be returned unopened, or opened only for identification purposes.

Proposers are advised of DNR’s desire that proposals prepared in response to this RFP be submitted on recycled paper, 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 materials is discouraged. In addition, it is requested that proposals be in flat bound form to facilitate filing.

19

7.2 Amendments to RFP

In the event it should be necessary to revise any portion of this RFP, addenda such as response to written inquiries received by the stated deadline, will be published on the State BIDS System at the Internet site, www.bidscolorado.com. Proposer MUST acknowledge any/all amendments to this RFP in the cover letter to its proposal AND the signature page attached to such addendum(s) must be acknowledged with signature by a person authorized to bind the proposer, and included as part of the response proposal. It is the proposer’s sole responsibility to monitor and access the State BIDS System for any amendments and to acknowledge and/or comply with all such published addenda as specifically instructed. Failure to acknowledge all amendments as instructed in each/all such addenda may cause rejection of the entire proposal as non-responsive.

7.3 Proposer/Vendor Registration

Proposer registration (Colorado BIDS Registration) MUST be current and activated at the time and date of the Submission Deadline, specific to this RFP (Line 4 in Schedule of Activities), and as noted on the Colorado BIDS webpage. Proposer registration status is based on the Proposers’ Federal Employer Tax ID Number (FEIN), as provided by the Proposer, on the Request for Proposal (RFP) Submittal Cover Sheet - page 1 of this document. Only Proposers registered by the submission deadline for this RFP will be considered.

7.4 Parent Company If a proposer is owned or controlled by a parent company, the name, main office address and parent company’s tax identification number (FEIN) must be provided in the proposal document. Regardless of whether or not a Proposer is owned or controlled by a parent company, the responding Proposer’s FEIN, as provided on the RFP Submittal Cover Sheet, shall be the number used to determine registration status.

7.5 Response Material Ownership All material submitted regarding this RFP becomes the property of the State of Colorado. The State of Colorado has the right to retain the original proposal and other RFP response materials for its files. As such, the State of Colorado may retain or dispose of all copies as is lawfully deemed appropriate. The State of Colorado has the right to use any or all information/material presented in reply to the RFP, subject to limitations outlined in the clause, Proprietary/Confidential Information. Proposer expressly agrees that the State may use the materials for all lawful State purposes, including the right to reproduce copies of the material submitted for purposes of evaluation, and to make the information available to the public in accordance with the provisions of the Public Records Act. Proposals may be reviewed by any person after the “Notice of Intent to Make an Award” letter has been issued, and announcement made on the State of Colorado BIDS system, subject to the terms of Section 24-72-201 et. seq., CRS, as amended, Public (Open) Records.

7.6 Proprietary Information All material submitted in response to this RFP will become public record and will become subject to inspection following final proposer selection. Any material requested for treatment as proprietary or confidential must be clearly identified and easily separable from the rest of the proposal. Such requests must include justification for each request. It is not acceptable to label the entirety of the proposal as proprietary or confidential.

7.7 Request for Confidential/Proprietary Classification The State neither requests nor encourages the submission of confidential/proprietary information in response to this RFP. Information submitted will be open for public inspection upon completion of the RFP process and award of contract. Should a proposer want the State to treat certain information as confidential/proprietary, the proposer shall submit a written request, as part of its RFP package, to the DNR Contract and Procurement Manager, provided that the submission is in STRICT accordance with the procedures listed below. Adherence to these procedures remains the SOLE RESPONSIBILITY of the

20

proposer. The written request for confidentiality/proprietary classification will be reviewed and either approved or denied by the DNR Contract and Procurement Manager. If denied, the proposer will have the opportunity to withdraw its entire proposal, or to remove the proprietary restrictions. NEITHER COST NOR PRICING INFORMATION NOR A TOTAL PROPOSAL WILL BE CONSIDERED PROPRIETARY.

PROCEDURES FOR SUBMISSION OF CONFIDENTIAL/PROPRIETARY INFORMATION

A. Written request for confidentiality/proprietary classification shall be submitted, by the offeror, with the proposal documents.

B. The written request will be enclosed in an envelope marked “REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIALITY/PROPRIETARY CLASSIFICATION,” and attached to the cover of the ORIGINAL copy of the offeror’s proposal that contains the DNR invitation for proposal page with the offeror’s ORIGINAL autographic signature.

C. The written request must state SPECIFICALLY, AND IDENTIFY BY PAGE NUMBER, what elements of the proposal are to remain confidential. The request must also IDENTIFY THE BASIS for the claim of confidentiality/proprietary classification, OTHER than a recitation of a SPECIFIC State or Federal statute.

D. Confidential/propriety information MUST be readily IDENTIFIED, MARKED and SEPARATED/PACKAGED from the rest of the proposal. Co-mingling of confidential/propriety information and other information is NOT acceptable.

E. The DNR Contract and Procurement Manager will make a written determination as to theapparent validity of any request for confidentiality/proprietary classification. This written determination will be sent to the offeror.

F. Proposals not following this procedure may be declared non-responsive by the DNR Contract and Procurement Manager and given no further consideration.

7.8 Rejection of Proposals

Pursuant to Procurement Rule 24-103-301, the State of Colorado reserves the right to reject any or all proposals received in response to this RFP, or to cancel this RFP if it is in the best interest of the State to do so. Failure to furnish all information, or to follow the proposal format set forth in this RFP, may act to disqualify the proposal. It is the sole responsibility of the proposer to ensure ALL required signature forms and the requisite number of document copies are included in its submittal package.

In the event DNR elects to NOT award any proposer, or the RFP solicitation is cancelled, all received proposals must be retained as confidential and will not be subject to public inspection. The purpose for this condition is to prevent any future potential offeror’s an opportunity to review other offeror’s’ proposals and thereby gain any unfair advantage in submitting future proposals.

Any cancellations occurring before the submittal due date will result in received proposals being returned unopened to the appropriate proposer accompanied by a notice of cancellation letter.

7.9 Incurring Costs

The State of Colorado is not liable for any cost incurred by proposers prior to issuance of a legally executed contract or procurement document. No property interest of any nature shall occur until a contract is awarded and signed by all concerned parties. No reimbursement of travel and other preparatory costs will be considered for those proposers recommended for interview, demonstrations or other subsequent travel prior to award.

7.10 Vendor Past Performance

21

Each offeror’s past performance will be reviewed as part of the State’s overall evaluation of best value. This evaluation will take into account past performance information submitted as a part of each offeror’s proposal, including but not limited to, information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, and subcontractors performing major or critical aspects of the service(s) if such information is relevant.   Offerors without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available will receive a neutral past performance rating.   The State will consider past or current State contracts for efforts similar to the State requirements for this contract. The State will consider information provided regarding problems encountered on the identified contracts and any associated corrective actions.   7.11 Evaluation Criteria

An evaluation will be made by an appointed, impartial evaluation committee tasked with determining the merit of proposals received in accordance with the evaluation criteria defined herein. The recommendations of this group will be forwarded to the DNR Contract and Procurement Manager for approval.

Failure of the proposer to provide in its proposal any information requested in this RFP may result in disqualification of the proposal and shall be the sole responsibility of the proposing firm.

During the evaluation process, discussions may be conducted with responding proposer(s) determined reasonably likely of being selected for award. It will be at the sole recommendation of the evaluation committee as to whether discussions for clarification are needed and thereby requested.

The sole objective of the evaluation committee will be to recommend the proposer whose proposal is determined most responsive to the State’s needs and most advantageous to the State of Colorado taking into consideration the price and all evaluation factors set forth herein and as defined in Section 24-103-203(7) CRS.

Specific evaluation criteria are outlined in Section 5 of this RFP, entitled Scoring and Evaluation Criteria.

7.12 Proposal Content/Acceptance of RFP Terms A submission in response to the RFP acknowledges acceptance by the proposer of all unaltered terms and conditions, as set forth herein. Any proposed exception taken to the State’s Terms and Conditions must be clearly and thoroughly identified and supported and acceptable alternatives must be proposed. Failure to do so shall be deemed a waiver of any rights to subsequently raise exception and/or request modification, except as outlined or specified in this RFP. Submission of exceptions does not guarantee their acceptance, however, and such submittal will be taken into consideration during proposal review and scoring by the evaluation team.

7.13 Conflict of Interest By submission of a response proposal, the proposer agrees that, at the time of contracting, the proposer has no interest, direct or indirect, that would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the required services. The proposer shall further covenant that, in the performance of the contract, they shall not employ any person having any such known interest.

7.14 Proposal Prices

Estimated proposal prices are not permitted unless specifically requested. Proposers are urged to submit prices reflective of as accurate and reasonable predictions of costs as possible. Proposers are alerted that although DNR reserves the right to request a Best and Final Offer, any revisions, including costs, will be closely evaluated by the evaluation committee, towards insuring the elimination of any perceived

22

inequities and unacceptable conditions.

7.15 Selection of Proposal All proposers will be notified in writing regarding the results of the RFP evaluation. Upon review and approval of the evaluation committee’s recommendation for award, the DNR Contract and Procurement Office will issue a “Notice of Intent to Make an Award” letter to the apparent successful proposer. Such letter, by itself, does not grant any property interest or right of any nature in the RFP work/services or to contract for the performance of such work/services. Contract terms that are consistent with the RFP and that are acceptable to the State must first be discussed, followed by contract completion and signature by all parties and the State Controller. Only upon final signature by the State Controller does the successful proposer have any interest or rights in the RFP work/services. Therefore, the apparent successful proposer receiving a “Notice of Intent to Make an Award” letter shall not rely on that letter to make commitments to third parties, and the apparent successful proposer shall not take any actions(s) to prepare for, or start the performance of, the RFP work/services until a contract is fully executed. Further, every effort will be made to have a completed and fully signed agreement on or before the date indicated in the Schedule of Activities (Line 10) unless extended by DNR during the RFP process. If through no fault of the State the parties are unable to agree on contract terms, DNR may elect to cancel the “Notice of Intent to Make an Award” letter and make the award to the next most successful/highest ranked proposer.

7.16 Intent to Award After proposer selection, award will be posted on the Colorado BIDS System. Following posting of the award, all interested parties may review the RFP files, including response proposals, by making an appointment with:

Department of Natural Resources, Purchasing Office

ATTN: Allan Smith1313 Sherman Street, Room 423

Denver, CO 80203Phone: (303) 866-3292 Ext. 8631

Email: allan.smith@state.co.us

7.17 Award of Contract Final award will be made to the proposer whose proposal best meets the evaluation criteria set forth in this RFP and is determined by the evaluation committee to be the most responsive to the State’s needs and most advantageous to the State of Colorado, taking into consideration the price and other factors set forth herein, subject to discussion and execution of an acceptable contract as described above. It is DNR’s intent to make a selection within 60 to 80 days of proposal submission deadline; however, as the evaluation process is dependent upon the length and number of the proposals received, and evaluation committee members’ schedules, the schedule of activities post the proposal submission deadline (i.e., interviews, demonstrations) is strictly estimated, requiring all Price proposals remain firm and valid for award for at least 180 days following proposal submittal deadline. Price proposals must contain specific language agreeing to the validity of the pricing for 180 days.

7.18 Protested Solicitations and Awards Any actual or prospective proposer who is aggrieved in connection with the solicitation or award of a contract may protest to the DNR Contract and Procurement Director. The protest shall be submitted in writing within seven (7) working days after notification of intent to award as defined as when such aggrieved person knows, or should have known, of the facts giving rise thereto. Ref. Section 24-109, 101 et seq., CRS, as amended; Section 24-109, 201 et. Seq., CRS as amended; Section R-24-109-101 through R-24-109-206, Colorado Procurement Rules. Protests received after the seven-working-day period shall

23

not be considered. The written protest shall include, as a minimum, the following:

A. The name and address of the protestor; B. Appropriate identification of the procurement by bid, RFP, or award number; C. A statement of the reasons for the protest; and D. Any available exhibits, evidence, or documents substantiating the protest.

7.19 News Releases Proposers shall not issue any news releases pertaining to this RFP prior to execution of a contract. At any time after execution, only news release approved by the DNR Program Manager shall be made.

7.20 Certification of Independent Price Determination A. By submission of its proposal, the proposer certifies and, in the case of a joint proposal, each party

thereto certifies as to its own organization, that in connection with this procurement: 1) The prices in the proposal were arrived at independently, without consultation,

communication, or agreement, for the purpose of restricting competition, as to any matter relating to such prices with any other proposer or with any other competitor;

2) Unless otherwise required by law, the prices which have been quoted in this proposal have not been knowingly disclosed by the proposer and will not knowingly be disclosed by the proposer prior to award either directly or indirectly, to any other proposer or to any other competitor; and

3) No attempt has been made by the proposer to induce any other person or firm to submit, or not to submit, a proposal for the purpose of restricting competition.

B. Each person signing the Cover Page of this RFP – certifies that: 1) He/she is the person within the proposer’s organization responsible for that organization’s

decision as to the prices being offered in the proposal and that he/she has not participated, and will not participate, in any action contrary to A (1) through (3) above; OR

2) He/she is not the person within the proposer’s organization responsible for the decision as to the prices being offered in the proposal but that he/she has been authorized in writing to act as agent for the persons responsible for such decision, by certifying that such persons have not participated, and will not participate, in any action contrary to A (1) through (3) above, and as their agent does hereby so certify; and he/she has not participated, and will not participate, in any action contrary to A (1) through (3) above.

C. A proposal will not be considered for award where A (1) and (3) and B above have been deleted or modified. Where A (2) has been deleted or modified, the proposal will not be considered for award unless the proposer furnishes with the proposal a signed statement which sets forth in detail the circumstances of the disclosure and the DNR Contract and Procurement Manager, or designee, determines that such disclosure was not made for the purpose of restricting competition.

7.21 Taxes The State of Colorado, as purchaser, is exempt from all Federal taxes under Chapter 32 of the Internal Revenue Code (Registration No. 84-730123K) and from all State and Local Government Use Taxes (Ref. Colorado Revised Statutes Chapter 39-26.114[a]). Seller/proposer is hereby notified that when materials are purchased in certain political subdivisions, the seller/proposer may be required to pay sales tax even though the ultimate product or service is provided to the State of Colorado. This sales tax will not be reimbursed by the State.

7.22 Contract Products - Ownership Rights All products produced in response to the contract or agreement resulting from this RFP will be the sole property of the State of Colorado. Any exceptions must be outlined in detail. Exceptions may serve as cause for rejection of proposal. Such products shall include original materials, including any reports,

24

studies, data, designs, drawings, maps, meeting minutes, specifications, data spreadsheets, notes, documents, electronically or magnetically recorded material and related intellectual property developed or created by the successful proposer pursuant to the services sought by this RFP, and subsequently provided and integrated by contract between DNR and the successful proposer, shall become the sole property of the State. The purchase of licenses for use of a proposer’s software shall not be interpreted to mean purchase of the actual application or software. Ownership of the specific application and software selected under this RFP shall remain with the selected proposer. The successful proposer will not be allowed use of any materials furnished by, or produced for, DNR for any purpose other than towards the completion of the works described herein, without permission from DNR.

7.23 Assignment and Delegation

Except for assignment of antitrust claims, neither party to any resulting contract stemming from this RFP may assign or delegate any portion of such contract without the prior written consent of the other party.

7.24 Choice of Law

The laws of the State of Colorado shall govern in connection with the formation, performance, and the legal enforcement of any resulting contract. Further, Title 24, CRS as amended, Article 101 through 112, and Rules adopted to implement the statutes, govern this procurement.

7.25 Legislative ChangesThe State of Colorado reserves the right to amend the contract in response to legislative changes, which affect this project.

7.26 AuditThe States reserves the right to require that the successful proposer has a process audit conducted of its program at least once every three (3) years. If the successful proposer has not had such an audit prior to awarding of this contract, and the State requires one, then an audit must begin within six (6) months of the award of this contract. The State reserves the right to approve the selected firm. A complete copy of the audit must be provided to the Department of Personnel and Administration within five (5) working days of its completion. The Department of Personnel and Administration will negotiate directly with the contractor regarding any exceptions or findings from the audit.

8.27 Disadvantaged Business Opportunities The State encourages its agencies to utilize minority-owned and women-owned businesses to the greatest extent possible without sacrificing adequate competition. Proposers are reminded of the illegality of discrimination, and the provisions of Procurement Code Section 24-111-102. While there is not a specific requirement for DBE participation for this solicitation, the State does encourage the submission of responses that include minority-owned and/or women-owned businesses.

25

COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCESREQUEST FOR PROPOSALRFP NO: PDA-1422South Platte Decision Support System

Return all proposals to:Colo Dept of Natural Resources Purchasing Agent:Purchasing Office Allan Smith1313 Sherman Street, #423 (303) 866-3292 X8631Denver, CO 80203 Fax: (303) 866-5575

Email: allan.smith@state.co.us

Vendor Name:

Vendor Address:

City, State, Zip:

Vendor Phone:

Signature:

Name (Print):

Title:

Date:

F.E.I.N/SSN:

EMAIL:

Contact and contact numbers/email (if different than above):

RETURN THIS SHEET WITH YOUR PROPOSAL

26