Morgantown Energy Technology Center, Research Opportunity Announcement, Applied Research and Development

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