[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 81 (Thursday, April 28, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page ]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-10154]
[Federal Register: April 28, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Morgantown Energy Technology Center, Research Opportunity
Announcement, Applied Research and Development
AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Morgantown Energy Technology
Center.
ACTION: Notice of a Research Opportunity Announcement (ROA).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The objective of this program is to support the U.S.
Department of Energy's (DOE's) Office of Technology Development's
applied research efforts for the development of technologies having
potential applications in the Environmental Restoration and Waste
Management (EM) program. This is the second ROA to be issued in support
of that program. Technologies which: Do not duplicate existing work;
complement or enhance existing or planned work; and best serve the
needs of the EM program are desired. A proposed technology may be a
device, process, material or method that improves DOE's capabilities in
the following areas: in situ remediation of contaminated sites;
characterization, sensors and monitoring; low-level mixed waste
processing; efficient separations technology for radioactive wastes;
robotics; materials disposition technologies; improved engineered
barriers for waste storage and disposal; and improved waste forms.
For the purpose of this program, ``applied research'' is the
systematic application of knowledge toward the production of useful
devices, materials or methods, including design, development, and
improvement of prototypes and processes to meet specific requirements.
Proposals for basic research are not desired under this ROA.
It is not the purpose of this solicitation to support, and no
proposal will be selected to conduct, support service activities,
conference or training activities, or for work who's primary purpose is
the demonstration of existing technologies.
DATES: Proposals may be submitted at any time after the issuance date
of this ROA up to and including one year after the issue date. The
issue date is the date on which this notice appears in the Federal
Register. Proposals must state an acceptance period of at least 180
days.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
1. Additional information concerning DOE's requirement is available
as an information package. The package will be made available on a
3.5'' disc in WordperfectTM, version 5.2. The information package
includes a more complete description of the research areas identified
in the areas of research section and guidelines for preparing various
section of the proposal as well as other information and forms. The
information package will be updated periodically.
2. Requests for the information package and other information
concerning the ROA can be obtained by telephoning (304) 291-4634.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. Identification number, authority for issuance, and title:
a. DE-RO21-94MC31305.
b. The use of broad agency announcements is authorized by the
Competition in Contracting Act of 1984 (CICA) (41 U.S.C. 259(b)(2)) and
the Federal Acquisition Regulation at part 6.102(d)(2) as supplemented
by the Department of Energy Acquisition Regulation.
c. Title of Research Opportunity Announcement: Applied Research and
Development of Technologies For Environmental Restoration and Waste
Management II.
d. Areas of Research in Which Contracts May be Awarded:
1. In situ remediation. There is a need for innovative and improved
in situ remediation methods for the cleanup of contaminated soils and
groundwater. In situ treatment refers to treatment of contaminated
material with minimal, or no, excavation, as well as any enhancement of
contaminant removal from the subsurface. In situ remediation includes
on-site treatment of groundwater and soils. In situ containment refers
to technologies which retard or eliminate contaminant migration to the
surrounding environment. The EM program has focused on three areas in
which to develop in situ remediation technologies. They are: (1) In
situ containment, (2) in situ biological treatment and (3) physical/
chemical in situ treatment.
2. Characterization, sensors and monitoring. Technologies for
characterization and monitoring are required for site clean-up and
waste processing applications. There is a need for greater use of
field-deployable methods and devices including real-time monitoring of
process streams to reduce dependency on laboratory analyses which are
costly and time consuming. In addition, techniques, including
information management systems, are required that can better elucidate
the physical, hydrogeological and chemical properties of the subsurface
while minimizing or optimizing the use of boreholes. Finally, improved
sensors are needed to better measure contaminants in varied, hazardous
environments.
3. Low-level mixed waste processing. DOE has identified the need
for the development of new technologies for reducing current mixed
(hazardous with a radioactive component) waste inventories. Low-level
mixed waste is categorized into the following generic descriptions:
Aqueous liquid wastes, organic liquid wastes containing organic
chemicals, wet solid wastes, and dry solid wastes.
Six treatment technology areas, ranging from front-end waste
handling through the generation of a final waste form, are identified
for focusing applied research and development efforts. The treatment
technology areas are: (1) Front-end waste handling and feed
preparation, (2) non-thermal waste treatment, including
decontamination, recycling and separation of suspended and dissolved
materials, (3) mercury control, (4) waste destruction and
stabilization, (5) secondary destruction and off-gas treatment and (6)
final waste forms. Processing low-level mixed wastes will emphasize,
where appropriate, use of methods to treat and/or separate the
hazardous component to simplify the handling and disposal of materials
in subsequent steps.
4. Efficient separations technology for radioactive wastes.
Separations technologies are required to process a wide spectrum of
highly radioactive defense wastes. These wastes may include high-level
wastes, low-level wastes, transuranic wastes, and mixed wastes in all
three categories. Highly radioactive defense wastes are anticipated to
be processed into waste forms suitable for disposal in deep geologic
repositories. Innovative applications of appropriate separation
technologies will substantially decrease the volume of waste to be
disposed of in repositories resulting in significant cost savings.
5. Robotics. Five areas have been identified within the EM program
for development and application of advanced robotics and automation
technologies. These are: (1) The characterization and remediation of
waste storage tanks, (2) the characterization and remediation of buried
waste sites, (3) the automation of contaminant analysis, (4) the
decontamination and decommissioning of inactive nuclear facilities, and
(5) operations for waste handling. Advancements in the development of
robotics and automation technologies are needed in the areas of
mechanical, control, and sensor systems.
6. Material disposition technology. Decontamination and
decommissioning of surplus DOE facilities will result in the need to
dispose of concrete, metals, sludges, contaminated soil, chemicals, and
hazardous and mixed wastes. The implementation of recycling and reuse
technologies is desired due to the great volumes and potential value of
the material that is present at these facilities. Volume reduction
technologies are also needed to minimize the costs associated with
storage and disposal.
7. Improved engineered barriers for waste and disposal. There is a
need for improved engineered barriers, i.e, any man-made structures,
devices or practices that enhance the performance of a waste storage or
disposal facility. Engineered barriers are required to contain wastes
which might otherwise release contaminants along air, surface water
and/or groundwater pathways. Technology is needed for the design,
construction and performance assessment of improved engineered barriers
relative to low-level radioactive waste disposal and the interim
storage of high-level radioactive wastes.
8. Improved waste forms. Technologies producing improved waste
forms for hazardous, radioactive and mixed wastes are desired. Waste
forms must meet certain performance requirements, including durability
and resistance to leaching. Waste types for which improved waste forms
are desired are: low-level mixed wastes, incinerator ash and various
special radioactive wastes including spent nuclear fuels, calcine
waste, cesium and strontium halides, and transuranic waste. In
addition, DOE is seeking performance assessment methodologies to
rapidly and reliably determine the leachability and durability of waste
forms.
Submission, Withdrawal, and Unsuccessful Proposals
1. Proposals are to be submitted to the following address: U.S.
Department of Energy, Morgantown Energy Technology Center, Attn: Thomas
L. Martin, M.S. I07, 3610 Collins Ferry Road, Morgantown, WV 26505.
2. Proposals may be withdrawn by the offeror at any time prior to
award of a contract by written notice to the individual identified in
item 1 above.
3. Unsuccessful proposals will be retained by the receiving office
and will not be returned to unsuccessful offerors. Unsuccessful
offerors will be given an opportunity for a debriefing which will
describe the evaluation process and discuss the major strengths and
weaknesses found in their proposal. Proposals received subsequent to
the close of the submission deadline may be considered and evaluated
under a succeeding ROA if one is issued by METC, provided that the
offeror so affirms, in writing, and provides METC, as part of its
affirmation, any needed updated information relating to its proposal
and the proposed research is consistent with the objectives of the
succeeding ROA.
Funding Availability
The amount of money which is available for initial funding of
awards during FY 1995 is approximately $6,000,000.
Evaluation Factors and Proposal Preparation Instructions
1. Technical Evaluation Factors: The following factors will be used
for the evaluation of proposals submitted under this solicitation: a.
Technical Approach and Understanding: Proposals will be evaluated
considering the offeror's understanding of the need(s) or problem(s)
the technology will address and the soundness and likelihood of success
of the proposed research effort in meeting the research objective(s).
b. Merit of the Technology: Proposals will be evaluated considering
the offeror's discussion of the technology's merit in terms of
anticipated performance improvements and cost savings compared to
existing technology.
c. Personnel Qualifications, Project Organization and Experience:
Proposals will be evaluated considering the offeror's technical and
managerial experience, qualifications, and the availability of
personnel who are proposed to work on the project; project organization
and management structure; and prior experience in managing projects
similar in type, technology, size and complexity.
d. Facilities and Equipment: Proposals will be evaluated
considering the quality, availability, and appropriateness of the
offeror's proposed facilities and equipment.
2. Relative Importance of the Evaluation Criteria: The Technical
Proposal Evaluation Criteria, as listed above, are in descending order
of importance. Criteria a and b are of equal importance. Criterion c is
twice as important as criterion d. Criteria a and b are each more than
three times as important as criterion d.
3. Cost Evaluation: Proposed cost will be evaluated for
reasonableness, appropriateness, and probable cost to the Government.
4. Proposal Preparation Instructions: a. Offerors who include in
their proposal data that they do not want disclosed to the public for
any purpose or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes
shall: 1. Mark the title page with the following legend: This proposal
or quotation includes data that shall not be disclosed outside of the
Government and shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed--in whole or
in part--for any purpose other than to evaluate this proposal or
quotation. If, however, a contract is awarded to this offeror or quoter
as a result of--or in connection with--the submission of this data, the
government shall have the right to duplicate, use, or disclose the data
to the extent provided in the resulting contract. This restriction does
not limit the Government's right to use information contained in this
data if it is obtained from another source without restriction. The
data subject to this restriction are contained in sheets (insert number
or other identification of sheets); and
2. Mark each sheet of data it wishes to restrict with the following
legend: ``Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject
to the restriction on the title page of this proposal or quotation.''
b. Each proposal will be submitted in the quantities specified
below to the address given in the summary section, above, designated as
the delivery point for proposals. Proposals are not to be submitted in
three-ring or similar binders. Each proposal will be comprised of three
separate volumes, numbered and submitted in the number of copies as
follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Volume Title Number of copies
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Volume I................ Offer and Other Document Original and 1.
Volume II............... Technical Proposal...... Original and 5.
Volume III.............. Cost Proposal........... Original and 3.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brief, but complete, proposals are desired. The Technical Proposal
shall be as brief as possible while addressing all of the technical
evaluation criteria and preparation instructions. The technical
proposal shall not exceed 50 pages in length including figures and
tables but excluding resumes of proposed personnel and the statement of
work. The statement of work shall not exceed 10 pages and is not
included in the technical proposal's 50 page limitation. There is no
limitation on the length of the other two volumes of the proposal.
The Volumes of the Proposal Must Contain the Following:
1. Volume I--Offeror Information: (Original and 1 Copy)
a. A publically releasable abstract: This section shall contain a
public abstract of not more than one page describing the proposed
project, the objective, methodology, sponsoring organization(s), the
schedule. Diagrams should not be included with the abstract. The
abstract may be released to the public by DOE in whole or in part at
any time. It is, therefore, required that it shall not contain
proprietary data or confidential business information.
b. Name and address of the offeror.
c. The ROA solicitation number: DE-RO21-94MC31305.
d. The date of submission of the proposal (Month, day, and year)
and the offer acceptance period (minimum of 180 days).
e. The names and addresses of any other Federal, State, or local
government entity who has in the past, or is currently, or expects in
the future, to provide funds for the same or similar research
activities of the offeror.
f. A proposal cover sheet, containing the information noted above,
signed by an individual authorized to contractually obligate the
offeror.
g. DOE Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of
Bidders/Offerors.
h. Certificate of Environmental Safety and Health.
2. Volume II--Technical Proposal: (Original and 5 Copies)
The offeror shall identify the specific area(s) of research the
proposed project addresses. These areas are defined in the section
titled, ``Areas of Research in Which Contracts May be Awarded''.
a. Technical Approach and Understanding
This section shall describe the offeror's technical approach to
accomplish the work.
The offeror shall provide a description of the technology, its
intended use(s), and the need(s) or problem(s) the technology will
address. The offeror shall provide a clear description of the project
objective(s) and deliverables (e.g. reports, device(s)).
The offeror shall provide a statement of work (SOW) which shall be
divided into logical tasks and subtasks necessary to accomplish the
project objective(s). The SOW shall include, where applicable, key go/
no-go decision points (it is understood that because of the nature of
the work proposed that some, though few, will not lend themselves to
go/no-go decision points) which will be used to evaluate project
success. These decision points may be identified as options in any
resulting contract. The offeror shall identify specific success
criteria which must be satisfied to demonstrate success for each key
go/no-go decision point.
Note: The statement of work will contain Task 1 which will
require the preparation of documentation and submission of
information necessary for DOE to comply with the National
Environmental Policy Act requirements if the project does not
qualify as a categorical exclusion. Offerors may receive the
Statement of Work format, which includes Task 1, from the individual
identified in Article 9, as part of the information package.
Where applicable the offer should provide a preliminary test plan
which shall include, but not be limited to, objectives of the test,
description of test equipment and experimental setup, test procedures,
test conditions, number of tests, duration of tests, data to be
collected, and criteria to determine success of a test. Also where
applicable, the offeror shall provide a preliminary process flow
diagram and material balance for the proposed technology.
The proposer shall provide a PERT (Program Evaluation and Review
Technique) chart or equivalent depicting the project schedule,
milestones, and interrelationship of the project tasks. The offeror
shall identify the critical path which identifies the sequential tasks
which, if not completed on time, will result in a delay in the overall
project schedule.
The offeror shall provide a table listing the estimated labor hours
and labor categories (e.g., management, engineering, scientific,
technician, analytical, clerical) required for each task. The offeror
shall include a table showing labor hours and labor categories for any
proposed subcontracting or consulting effort for each task, including
Task 1. The offeror shall discuss the rationale used to develop
estimates for labor hours, labor categories, subcontracting effort,
consulting effort, and travel. Cost information is not to be included
in the technical proposal volume.
The offeror shall describe the proposed travel. The purpose of the
trip, number of trips, the origin and destination, trip duration, and
the number of personnel shall be included in the explanation.
b. Merit of the Technology
The offeror shall describe the merit of the proposed technology in
terms of anticipated performance and/or cost savings over existing
technologies and how the technology is an improvement, where
applicable, in the following areas:
Reducing public and occupational health risks
Reducing environmental impacts
Improving clean-up and waste management/processing
operations
Cost reduction
Reducing the time required for remediation and or waste
management/processing
Minimizing generated or secondary wastes
Ability to meet regulatory requirements
Feasibility in implementing the technology
Breadth of application
c. Personnel Qualifications, Project Organization and Experience
The offeror shall describe relevant technical and managerial
experience, qualifications, and availability of the proposed project
personnel including subcontractors and consultants. Resumes of key
project personnel (e.g., project manager, principal investigator) shall
be included in an appendix to the proposal.
The offeror shall provide a description of the project organization
structure and the lines of authority, both technical and
administrative, and the relationship to the proposed research effort.
The offeror shall discuss any prior experience in managing project
that were similar in type, size, and complexity. The offeror shall
discuss experience in developing the proposed or similar technologies.
d. Facilities and Equipment
The offeror shall provide a discussion of the type, quality,
availability and appropriateness of the proposed facilities and
equipment, including a description of any facilities and/or non-
monetary resources requested to be furnished by the Government for use
by the offeror in performance of the proposed research.
The offeror shall discuss any special existing permits and licenses
for handling, treating, storing and disposing of hazardous and
radioactive waste at their facilities.
3. Volume III--Cost Proposal: (Original and 3 Copies)
a. A fully executed Standard Form (SF) 1411.
b. Supporting cost exhibits for the total project, by task, and
between go/no-go decision points to include labor hours, rates and
costs; equipment and supplies lists and costs; subcontracted costs in
the same level of detail; indirect costs and all other costs proposed.
The same level of detail shall be provided for shared costs, if
proposed.
DOE Obligation for Proposal Preparation
DOE is under no obligation to reimburse the offeror for any costs
associated with the preparation or submission of proposals; however,
bid and proposal preparation costs which are a portion of an
established indirect cost rate will be paid to successful offerors to
the extent that such costs have been reviewed and approved by the
appropriate auditing agency.
Funding of Proposals
DOE reserves the right to fund, in whole or in part (including any
options that may be negotiated), any, all, or none of the proposals
submitted.
Return of Unsuccessful Proposals
DOE is not required to, and will not, return to the offeror a
proposal which is not selected.
Proposal Review and Selection
1. Each proposal will be objectively reviewed on its own merit
against the evaluation criteria stated in the ROA. A two-step review
process will be employed. The initial evaluation will be performed to
determine if the proposal is responsive to this ROA. Proposals passing
the initial evaluation will be subject to a comprehensive evaluation
using scientific and/or peer reviewers, some of whom may be DOE
contractors. Offerors who object to review of their proposal by persons
other than Government employees shall so state in Volume I of their
proposal. Offerors are cautioned that DOE may be unable to give full
consideration to proposals which indicate that only Government
evaluation is authorized.
2. Proposals will be reviewed in groups which will be assembled as
often as practical considering the number of proposals received and the
availability of competent reviewers.
3. Selection of proposal(s) will be made in consideration of the
evaluation, the importance of the proposed research to DOE's overall
program objectives, and the availability of funds.
Proposal Evaluation and Award
DOE is not obligated to award a contract to an offeror merely
because the offeror's proposal was accepted by DOE for evaluation.
Set-aside Information, Standard Industrial Classification, and
Qualified Offerors
1. Set Aside Information: A minimum of twenty percent (20%) of the
number of awards made as a result of this solicitation are set aside
for small businesses.
2. Standard industrial classification: The standard industrial
classification (SIC) code for this acquisition is 8731. The small
business size standard is 500. The small business size standard for a
concern which submits an offer in its own name, other than on a
construction or service contract, but which proposes to furnish a
product which it did not itself manufacture, is 500 employees.
3. Qualified Offerors: Individuals, educational institutions, large
and small businesses, and all other organizations, with the exceptions
noted below, may submit proposals under this ROA.
Proposals are not solicited from and contracts will not be awarded
to any specific entity which operates a Government-owned or Government-
controlled research, development, special production, or testing
establishment, such as DOE's management and operating contractors
facilities, or Federally Funded Research and Development Centers
chartered by other agencies. For further information see DEAR 935.016-
2(b)(2).
Dated: April 20, 1994.
Thomas F. Bechtel,
Director, Morgantown Energy Technology Center.
[FR Doc. 94-10154 Filed 4-26-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P