Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Procurement Operations Branch, MS2500, 381 Elden Street, Herndon, Virginia 20170-4817

B -- ESTIMATION OF OCS OIL SPILL RISK FROM ALASKA NORTH SLOPE, TRANS-ALASKA PIPELINE, AND ARTIC CANADA SPILL DATA SETS. SOL RFQ-16128 DUE 071299 POC Wallace Adcox, Contracting Officer, (703) 787-1362 E-MAIL: Contracting Officer's E-mail, wallace.adcox@mms.gov. This is a request for quotation under FAR part 13. No separate RFQ will be issued. All information is contained in this CBD announcement. This requirement is 100% set-aside for small business. The Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service (MMS), intends to competitively award a contract to conduct a study entitled "Estimation of OCS Oil Spill Risk from the Alaska North Slope, Trans-Alaska Pipeline, and Arctic Canada Spill Data Sets". This study will provide oil spill risk occurrence estimator(s) for OCS Beaufort Sea exploration and development, based data on oil industry spills of crude and diesel. The study will inventory oil industry spills of > 100 bbl, including verification of data for the subset of spills of > 500 bbl for Alaska North Slope, Trans-Alaska Pipeline (TAP), and Arctic Canada areas. The study will evaluate the reliability of the data sets, and estimate draft spill rate(s), along with evaluation of appropriateness and statistical robustness of the spill rate(s). ESTIMATED LEVEL OF EFFORT: The government estimates a period of performance for this contract of four (4) months and a price of $50,000 to $100,000. BACKGROUND: In Alaska environmental assessments and environmental impact statements, the MMS uses national OCS statistics to estimate the likelihood of large spills (>1,000 bbl) occurring. The frequency of large spills per unit volume of oil produced on or transported from the OCS follows a Poisson distribution: indicating that individual spills can be treated as rare and random events, independent of spill cause. The spill rate (number of spills per volume of oil) is statistically adjusted to correct for historical trends in spillage. Both the statistical methodology and results are generally accepted and are published in the peer-reviewed literature [see Task 5 citations]. The mean number of large spills and, using the Poisson distribution, the probability of one or more and the most likely number of such spills are calculated from the historical spill record and estimated amount of oil produced and/or transported. The historical record for OCS platform and pipeline spills used to calculate the national OCS oil spill rates is mostly from the Gulf of Mexico. This spill record does not include pipeline spills inshore of the OCS, in State waters or on land. The MMS Alaska OCS Region intends to calculate spill frequency based on the Alaska North Slope and the Canadian Arctic rather than the Gulf of Mexico experience, and to include all major pipeline spills, both onshore and offshore, in environmental impact assessment. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: Obtain and collate all available data on oil industry spills for Alaska North Slope, Trans-Alaska Pipeline (TAP), and Arctic Canada areas; Review the reliability and completeness of these data; Obtain and collate data on crude production, and crude and diesel pipeline mileage and throughput by year for Alaska North Slope, TAP, and Arctic Canada areas; Evaluate the appropriateness and statistical robustness of these data for estimating onshore and offshore oil spill risk from Beaufort Sea oil development; and, Estimate draft onshore and offshore spill rate(s) using the optimum data set(s). SCOPE OF WORK: TASK 1. POST-AWARD TELECONFERENCE WITH MMS. Within two weeks of contract award, hold a post-award teleconference with the Alaska OCS Region and Herndon MMS staff to insure a clear understanding by all of study objectives, concerns, and timelines. The Offeror shall: Provide draft agenda to participants prior to the meeting, Provide Meeting Summary to participants within one week of meeting, List any changes needed to planned work as a result of the meeting. TASK 2. OBTAIN AND COLLATE DATA ON OIL INDUSTRY SPILLS OF > 100 bbl FOR ALASKA NORTH SLOPE, TRANS-ALASKA PIPELINE (TAP), AND ARCTIC CANADA AREAS: Include spills > 100 bbl of diesel and crude related to oil and gas exploration, construction development, production, transport, and storage on facilities. Identify sources for spill data from the following study areas and obtain these data: U.S. Beaufort Sea, Canadian Beaufort Sea, Onshore Alaska North Slope to the east of the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPRA), TAP, not including the Valdez Terminal, Onshore McKenzie River delta area, NPRA, Norman Wells, Canadian High Arctic Islands. Obtain relevant supporting data, if available (e.g.; facility type, date, company, spill name, oil type, location descriptor, latitude and longitude, cause of spill, spill volume, how spill volume was obtained, whether on water or land, spiller). Identify any intentional spills (sabotage or otherwise). Compare different data sets for the same area to enhance comprehensiveness of the data. Some sources for Alaska data include: ADEC 1995-1998 Alaska North Slope Crude and Refined Oil Spills Database*, ADEC Southern District (south of Tok) oil spill files, ADEC Northern District (Tok north) oil spill files, Joint Pipeline Office Database of TAP Spills from 1970-1994*, Alyeska Pipeline Company, Crude Oil Spill Data >1,000 bbl 1977-1980*, Crude Oil SpillData 1989-April 1999*, ADEC Contaminated Sites Database, Oil Spill Intelligence Report*, MMS can provide the data sets marked with an asterisk and can provide contacts and phone numbers for the other data sets on this list. Provide the collated Oil Spill Data Set to MMS in Microsoft Office 97 Access. The data should be sortable by the individual study areas (e.g.; U.S. Beaufort Sea, etc). Maximize interconvertability between this Access database and the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) 1995-1998 spill data set in Excel. TASK 3. REVIEW THE RELIABILITY AND COMPLETENESS OF THE DATA: Provide reporting criteria that were in effect for reporting older and new data in the data examined in Task 2. Data sets having a legal requirement for spill reporting, where the company is subject to legal penalties if they fail to report the spill, may be more reliable. Validate these data with the authority to which the companies are required to report. The Offeror shall describe the overall comprehensiveness and completeness of the compiled Task 2 data set. Evaluate the reliability of the reported spill volumes for the subset of spills >500 bbl, based on how the volume was determined and supporting documentation. TASK 4. OBTAIN AND COLLATE CRUDE PRODUCTION, PIPELINE THROUGHPUT, AND PIPELINE MILEAGE DATA BY YEAR FOR ALASKA NORTH SLOPE, TRANS-ALASKA PIPELINE, AND ARCTIC CANADA AREAS. Obtain and collate any crude production and piped crude and diesel volumes by year for each Task 2 Study area. Small volumes of crude have been tankard from the Canadian Beaufort and the Canadian High Arctic Islands; these transport volumes should be also be included, but clearly be separable from piped volumes. Also collate operational pipeline mileage in place each year for each Task 2 study area. Collate and provide the data to MMS in Microsoft Office 97 Access. TASK 5. EVALUATE THE APPROPRIATENESS AND STATISTICAL ROBUSTNESS OF THESE DATA FOR ESTIMATING ONSHORE AND OFFSHORE OIL SPILL RISK FROM BEAUFORT SEA OIL DEVELOPMENT. Estimate draft onshore and offshore spill rate(s) using the optimum data set(s). Based on the information collected in Tasks 2-4, Determine optimum data sets and estimate draft onshore and offshore spill rate(s). First, examine the appropriateness of using these data to evaluate oil spill risk from Beaufort Sea OCS development. Part of this evaluation shall be in the context of prior MMS use and statistical evaluation of spill rates for OCS use. The Offeror is referred to the following citations for this context: Anderson, C. M. and LaBelle, R. P. 1994. Comparative Occurrence Rates for Offshore Oil Spills. Spill Science and Technology Bulletin 1(2):131-141. Anderson, C. M. and LaBelle, R. P. 1990. Estimated Occurrence Rates for Analysis of Accidental Oil Spills on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf. Oil and Chemical Pollution 6(21):21-35. Lanfear, K. J. and Amstutz, D. E. 1983. A Reexamination of Occurrence Rates for Accidental Oil Spills on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf. In Proceedings 1983 Oil Spill Conference (Prevention, Behavior, Control, Cleanup). Held February 28-March 3, 1983, San Antonio, TX. Washington, DC: USCG, API, EPA, pp. 355-365. Nakassis, A. 1982. Has Offshore Oil Production Become Safer? Menlo Park, CA: USDOI, USGS. Open-File Report 82-232. 26 pp. Second, consider the statistical robustness and validity of potential estimators, including: Effect of one more spill on the estimators, Data set size for spills > 100 bbl, > 500 bbl, or > 1000 bbl, Rationale for including/excluding intentional spills (sabotage or otherwise), Effect of incomplete pipeline life cycle in data set, Correlation of pipeline mileage and/or oil volume with spillage, Differences in the size of onshore and offshore data subsets, Magnitude of the record (number of spills, oil volume) used to calculate estimators versus that for Anderson and LaBelle (1994) Postulated differences (or lack thereof) in onshore and /offshore oil spill risk factors. Third, calculate appropriate draft spill rate(s). The calculation should include correction for time trends in spill rates [see Anderson and LaBelle 1994], if statistically appropriate. TASK 6. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT: A. Program Management Plan: Operate under the program-management plan described in the proposal. A data management plan shall be incorporated in the program management plan. B. Interim Progress Report: Submit interim progress (letter) report to the Contracting Officer's Technical Representative (COTR). The progress reports shall include: A brief summary of all preceding work and overall progress made against the schedule, A brief summary of significant technical, schedule, or cost problems encountered, including an assessment of their probable effects on meeting contract provisions, A brief summary of any resolutions agreed to between Contractor and MMS regarding these problems, A list of all significant meetings held or other contacts made in connection with the contract, including a brief summary of the participants and subject, date, location, and outcome of each such contact or meeting. TASK 7. FINAL REPORT AND TECHNICAL SUMMARY: A. SYNTHESIS and INTERPRETATION: Perform synthesis and interpretation necessary to accomplish Tasks 2 through 5. B. DRAFT FINAL REPORT and DRAFT TECHNICAL SUMMARY: Complete and submit draft final report and Technical Summary to MMS for scientific and editorial review. The report should summarize results of Tasks 2 and 4 and provide more detailed discussion of Tasks 3 and 5. The report should cite the Oil Spill and Supporting Data Sets (Tasks 2 and 4) as separate appendices available from MMS. The Technical Summary should cover all technical Tasks. A copy of the standard MMS formatting requirements for technical summaries and cover/title page specifications for the report will be provided by MMS after contract award. A digital copy of the draft Oil Spill and Supporting Data Sets should be provided to MMS with the draft Final Report. C. REVISED, FINAL REPORT and TECHNICAL SUMMARY: Revise the final report and Technical Summary and complete as per reviewcomments. Provide the rationale in a letter accompanying the final report for any review comments not accommodated. Copies of the report, a high-quality master copy, and a PC-compatible digital copy shall be provided to MMS. Text and tables of the digital copy of the report should in Microsoft Office 97 Word or newer. Bibliographic citations for the final report shall be provided to MMS also in ProCite 4 or newer (or as a file directly importable into ProCite). A digital copy of the Final Oil Spill and Supporting Data Sets should be provided to MMS with the Final Report. A final Technical Summary, revised from the draft as per review comments and a PC-compatible digital copy in Microsoft Office 97 Word or newer, shall be provided to MMS. Interested firms may request a copy of the deliverables schedule by emailing to POC. The schedule will be released electronically. HOW TO RESPOND: In order to compete for this contract, a firm must demonstrate that they are qualified to perform the work by providing, by 4:00P.M., July 12, 1999, a Capabilities Statement and Technical and Business Proposal less than 25 pages in length. The Capability Statement must describe accurately: (1) your key personnel (those who would have primary responsibility for performing and/or managing the study) with their qualifications and specific experience; and (2) your organizations experience with this type of work and a description of your facilities. You must provide information that your organization and personnel on this project have the experience and expertise to successfully perform the work. You must provide information on which task(s) each key personnel will perform and the rationale for that assignment. (3) Past Performance: Submit period of performance, dollar amount, client name and telephone number., for previous work of this nature that your personnel or organization is currently performing or has completed within the last two years. References will be checked. Your Capabilities Statement will be evaluated based on (1) the currency, quality and dept of experience of individual personnel in working on similar projects. "Similar Project" is meant to convey similarity in topic, methodologies, dollar value, duration and complexity; (2) quality and depth of education; experience on other projects which may not be similar enough to include in response to (1), but may be relevant; and publication history; (3) organization's history of successful completion of projects; history of producing high quality reports and other deliverables; history of staying on schedule and within budget. People's skills and experience will be evaluated in light of the tasks they will be performing. Total length of capability Statement, Technical and Business Proposal must not exceed 25 pages. Firms shall submit their Capabilities Statement and Technical and Business Proposal in original and two (2) copies to Wallace Adcox, Contracting Officer, Minerals Mangement Service, 381 Elden Street, MS-2500, Herndon, VA 20170-4817. Three (3) additional copies shall be sent to Richard Prentki, PH.D., Minerals Mangement Service, Alaska OCS Region, 949 E. 36 Street, Anchorage, AK 99508. Each Firm must also provide a brief Technical Business proposal consisting of a short written technical proposal describing the work that will be performed, brief project plan and cost/business proposal. The government will evaluate each written Technical proposal to determine the most effective firm, including schedule, coordination, and methodology to complete the work. The evaluation criteria are equal in value and a best value analysis will determine which firm will receive the award. Price to perform the basic work will be evaluated along with other factors. The government may not conduct negotiations so submit your best offer. The government may request an oral presentation of the most qualified firm to ensure agreement with the project scope. Questions should be faxed or E-mailed as soon as possible to: Fax (703) 787-1087 or E-mail to Wallace.Adcox@mms.gov. Please include your full name,the RFQ number (16128) and title, your organization, complete address, and phone and fax numbers. TELEPHONIC QUESTIONS OR REQUESTS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) Regulatory Change Notice: The Federal Acquisition Regulation authorizes the use of price and evaluation credits in industries where SDB prime contractors and subcontractors have been underutilized. We ask that you inform your SDB subcontractors that they should contact SBA's Office of Certification and Eligibility at 800-558-0884 to obtain an application, or to log on to SBA/s Website (www.sba.gov.sdb). If you are an SDB prime contractor who is not SBA-certified, we also ask that you apply for certification. Effective October 1, 1998, certified SDB prime contractors were eligible for a price credit when bidding on Federal prime contracts. Effective January 1, 1999, prime contractors who subcontract with SBA-certified or self-certified SDBs are eligible for evaluation credits. Please note that prime contractors may continue to rely on self-certification of their SDB subcontractors through June 30, 1999. For solicitations issued on or after July 1, 1999, prime contractors must use SDB-certified SDB subcontractors in order to be eligible for evaluation credits. (See Numbered Note 1) Posted 06/25/99 (W-SN347472). (0176)

Loren Data Corp. http://www.ld.com (SYN# 0025 19990629\B-0005.SOL)