MODIFICATION
B -- BAA-Environmental Protocols and Monitoring-Renewable Energy and Stewardship
- Notice Date
- 2/1/2010
- Notice Type
- Modification/Amendment
- NAICS
- 541990
— All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
- Contracting Office
- MMS Procurement Branch, HQ381 Elden Street, MS 2102HerndonVA20170-4817US
- ZIP Code
- 00000
- Solicitation Number
- M10PS00152
- Response Due
- 2/22/2010
- Archive Date
- 3/24/2010
- Point of Contact
- Algarin, Lisa A 703-787-1120, algarinl@mms.gov
- E-Mail Address
-
Algarin, Lisa A
(algarinl@mms.gov)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- The purpose of this amendment to Study Opportunity Title: Developing Environmental Protocols and Monitoring to Support Ocean Renewable Energy and Stewardship is to provide changes and clarifications to the original BAA announcement, based on questions received from potential Offerors by the required response date of 20 January 2010. This amendment is organized based on the original BAA structure. All items are clarifications, except where specifically noted. There are no further amendments anticipated at this time, the scope remains the same, and the response date for submission of proposals remains unchanged at 3:00 p.m. EST, 22 February 2010. AMENDMENT OF BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT (BAA)MINERALS MANAGEMENT SERVICE (MMS) Study Opportunity Title: Developing Environmental Protocols and Monitoring to Support Ocean Renewable Energy and Stewardship Study Opportunity Number: M10PS00152, Amendment 1 I. TOPICS Topic 1: Characterization & Potential Impacts of Noise Producing Construction & Operation Activities on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) For Topic 1, the anticipated award amounts will cover all three phases of development - before, during and after construction. The proposal should describe the Offeror's approach to the objectives as stated in the BAA for all four of the listed areas. No specific GPS coordinates describing the areas are available at the present time. Two of the four areas will be chosen for implementation at a later time using the status of facility planning as one criterion for the decision. Given the differences in the four areas, it is expected that budgets for each area may vary. Individual budgets for each of the areas must be included in the proposal. Within the timeframe of the BAA, we anticipate that only test facilities will be constructed, not arrays producing energy for commercial use. The proposal would accomplish the characterization and estimate the potential impacts at test facilities. No timeline for construction or operation phases is available at this time. Topic 3: Physical Oceanography Field Study to Assess Potential Environmental Impacts of Prospective Marine and Hydrokinetic Energy-Generating Devices The intent is to focus the effort on a smaller portion of the coastline rather than attempting to include the entire length in a single effort. Regions are based on biophysical characteristics rather than administrative boundaries. Proposals should address sites on the Atlantic and/or Pacific seaboards. The Gulf of Mexico is excluded. The particular site addressed should encompass Federal waters at least in part. Since the assessment of impact of OCS operations conducted by MMS extends to state waters, the study site does not have to be wholly within Federal waters. However, the deployment sites at the Federal waters are strongly encouraged. Topic 3 is focused on hydrokinetic energy generation specifically (i.e. using the motion of water to generate energy contained in ocean currents or ocean waves). However, a proposal that included wind facilities would not be excluded from consideration. Because, wind is one of the major driving forces of the physical processes at hydrokinetic energy sites, the measurement of wind is included in this Topic to assess the potential impacts. While a proposal that included wind would still be considered, a proposal that addressed wind alone would not. The term analytical solution refers to the solution that will resolve the changes to flow systems (or physical processes) in the ocean environment after the installation of hydrokinetic energy generation devices. The information derived from this effort will feed the development of an analytical solution in a future effort. The inclusion of a modeling study to address requirements in Topic 3 would not result in the exclusion of the proposal from consideration. Topic 4: Evaluation of Environmental Monitoring Technologies for Offshore Renewable Energy Proposals under Topic 4 may address technologies expected both in Federal and State waters. All hydrokinetic and wind technologies implemented in marine waters may be included in proposals on this topic. Proposals may include assessments focused on any or all marine and hydrokinetic and offshore wind environmental information needs. Proposals should evaluate the technologies used to conduct environmental monitoring, not the energy-producing technologies or equipment themselves. The evaluation should assess existing environmental technologies to evaluate whether they are sufficiently robust for an adequate assessment of the environments where marine hydrokinetic and offshore wind energy development is likely to occur. The evaluation may assess existing environmental technologies, adaptations of existing systems and equipment, newly conceived technologies, and/or existing technologies not currently commercialized or not currently being applied to offshore renewable energy. Proposals may include, as deemed appropriate by the Offeror, such elements as a discussion of system integration with motion sensing and software correction, an industry assessment, or offshore testing, however these are not requirements for this topic. Proposals may address as many areas of environmental monitoring (e.g. physical, biological, geological) as deemed appropriate. Topic 5: Sub-Seabed Geologic Carbon Dioxide Sequestration Best Management Practices Topic 5 describes a research study effort. The primary users of the deliverables from proposals addressing Topic 5 will be within the US Government. Because products will be available to the public, developers may use the results as well. Topic 6: Renewable Energy Visual Evaluations Details regarding the number and location of end users, deployment, servers and licensing will depend on the proposed approach. The following is a change to the original requirements for Topic 6. The following paragraph replaces the second full paragraph in Topic 6.The objective of proposals under this topic is to provide the tools necessary to assess the potential visual impacts associated with offshore renewable energy technologies including wave, wind, and ocean current projects. The result shall build an interactive GIS tool into which the necessary data can be plugged to evaluate sites of choice. Proposals should define data layers and formats required as inputs to the tool. Offerors should evaluate existing tools for their applicability to this effort. The requirement is that the technological approach to the tool that is proposed should be comparable to the functionality provided by ArcView 9.2. Alternatives to the ArcView software package will be considered but they must be compatible with existing MMS systems or be derived from software that is commercially available off the shelf. A plan to ensure that the tool remains useful and accessible for the foreseeable future must be included in any proposal. User selectable/specified parameters include: The number of structures in a hypothetical facility or array, The full height of structures (including maximum rotor height for wind turbines), The distance between structures in the facility or array, Various configurations of structures within the array, The location of the onshore viewpoint, The height of the onshore viewpoint, and Other potential Offeror-defined viewshed elements. Topic 7: Renewable Energy Capacity Inventory in Coastal Alaska The BAA seeks information relevant to development prospects for renewable energy sources on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) of Alaska. This could include any and/or all renewable energy generation technologies that might be deployed in the marine environment of the OCS. Proposals addressing renewable energy sources in State waters in addition to OCS waters will be considered. Topic 8: Ocean Renewable Energy Siting in the Context of Coastal and Marine Spatial Planning Generation of new oceanographic, ecological and human information is not expected as part of proposals addressing Topic 8. Existing data should be used and collection and integration efforts could be included in the proposal. A specific, active application for an ocean renewable energy project is not required for proposals addressing Topic 8. Proposals offering an integrated evaluation approach that can be used under Federal, State or regional siting programs for future ocean renewable energy project proposals will be considered. Details regarding end users, deployment, servers and licensing will depend on the proposed approach. II. AWARD INFORMATION The following is an addition to the original requirement under item (b) of this section: The Government anticipates award of multiple year (options) and/or multi-year, cost reimbursable and/or firm fixed price contracts resulting from this BAA. These are clarifications.The total funding available for all awards under this BAA is approximately $6.5 M. The anticipated total award amount (for all years of the effort) for individual proposals addressing a single topic is given within each topic. For example, the same amount is available regardless of whether the effort is proposed for one year or for five years. All funding for the project will be provided either in full at the outset or incrementally over the first three to five years. Proposals outside the anticipated award amounts for the individual topics and proposals addressing more than one topic will be considered. There is no inherent advantage or disadvantage to addressing multiple topics in a single proposal. Multi-topic proposals must address all aspects of each topic included. Estimated funding ranges for multi-topic proposals may be combined. For example, if topics 1 and 2 were addressed in a single proposal, the award could be expected to range between $600,000 and $1,000,000. The number of awards for a given topic cannot be predicted in advance. III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION Any organization except Federal laboratories as defined in the BAA may be the lead on a proposal. Team efforts are required for all bids. Members of the team must come from at least two of the three sectors listed in the BAA. There is no limit on the number of organizations comprising the team. A proposal from a consortium of groups would meet the requirements for consideration. System integrators are the government personnel who will be included as needed to incorporate and make available the deliverables on government information systems. Other contractors would consist of organizations retained by the Agencies funding the proposal that are engaged in similar activities or involved in information systems support. The selection of other entities with whom data, software and other information will be shared will depend on the content of the particular proposal. Note that the default policy in NOPP is the full, open and immediate disclosure of all data and products taken under NOPP sponsorship. Waivers and exceptions to this policy should be requested in the proposal and may be granted by the cognizant Program Officer. IV. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INFORMATION The following is an addition to the original requirement under the bulleted information in the section titled Full Proposal Format Volume 1 Technical and Volume 2 Cost Proposal. Offerors wishing to respond to more than one topic as part of a coordinated effort should submit a single proposal addressing all topics. In Volume 1, an additional 7 pages will be allowed for each additional topic, e.g. one topic = 15 pages, 2 topics = 22 pages, 3 topics = 29 pages, etc. The relevant topic(s) should be identified for each task. Volume 2 of the proposal must correlate with the tasks as proposed in Volume 1. The budget and schedule should be broken down by topic and year. The following is change to the original requirement under the bulleted information in the section titled Full Proposal Format Volume 1 Technical and Volume 2 Cost Proposal. List of References: Provide source of each reference cited in the proposal. No specific format required. (This item is NOT included in page count.) These are clarifications.A particular agency does not need to be identified in a proposal because it will be reviewed by any and all interested NOPP partner agencies. Partial awards of single and multiple topic proposals may be considered. Offerors may focus their proposals in whatever manner is deemed appropriate. Proposals may include any approach to the topic deemed to be the best way to address the requirements. If there is a cost associated with the use of UNOLS vessels, it needs to be clearly specified in the cost volume of the proposal and included in the total cost of the offerors approach. In addition, a copy of the ship request form must also be included with the proposal.
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/DOI/MMS/PO/M10PS00152/listing.html)
- Record
- SN02054410-W 20100203/100201234825-095e46d9a24e891147c9346efeb4c548 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |