Documents
Resources
Learning Center
Upload
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out

Request for Quote

VIEWS: 3 PAGES: 7

									                                      Statement of Work

                                Clean Air Technology Project

PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE: Date of Award through December 30, 2011

PROJECT OFFICER: Vanessa Bowie
                 Office of the Chief Financial Officer/Center for Environmental Finance
                 bowie.vanessa@epa.gov
                 202-564-5186

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Later this year, EPA will promulgate a regulation (Maximum
Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standard to limit emissions of hazardous air pollutants
from industrial boilers which burn oil, coal, biomass, refinery gas or other gas to produce
steam. Boilers are used at industrial facilities such as refineries, chemical and manufacturing
plants and paper mills to produce heat at commercial and institutional facilities such as
shopping malls and universities.

Most facilities will comply with this regulation by installing pollution control equipment on their
facilities. Environmentally, it would be preferable if, instead of retrofitting existing boilers with
pollution controls, plant owners were to replace the old boilers with a next generation
technology that is more efficient, lower emitting and reduces green house gas emissions as well
as the hazardous air pollutants that the regulation addresses. Because this cannot be required
in the regulation, the Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) submitted a charge requesting
assistance from the Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB) to assist it in developing
creative financing ideas that create incentives for plants to consider newer, cleaner
technologies rather than only considering retrofitting existing boilers with pollution controls.

The Office of the Chief Financial Officer’s Center for Environmental Finance (CEF) manages the
Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB). EFAB is an EPA advisory committee under the
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that provides advice and recommendations to the
Administrator and program offices on paying for the growing costs of environmental protection
and how to increase investment in environmental infrastructure through the leveraging of
public and private resources.

The OCFO requires support for performing research and writing relative to the request above.

ASSIGNMENT:

Task 1 – Kickoff Meeting


                                                  1
The contractor shall meet by phone with the EFAB Work Group Chair, selected members, and
CEF staff to gain an understanding of the background and purpose of the project and to allow
the work group members and CEF staff to respond to questions by the contractor regarding
expectations.

Deliverable: The contractor shall prepare minutes of the discussion.

Due Date: Within one week of contract award

Task 2 – Abstracts on Relevant Research

The contractor shall review existing materials prepared by the EPA, DOE, and others in order to
assist the Work Group with understanding of the breadth of information available regarding: (1)
the relative regulations to be promulgated and regulations that already exist, (2) the economic
benefits to boiler owners of newer technologies, and (3) what currently happens with boilers
and the choices most often made when boilers are replaced and how they are financed. The
contractor shall research the availability of similar reports and determine their relevance to the
Work Group. Copies of such research shall be posted on a website available to the Work Group
or links to such research shall be provided.

Deliverable: The contractor shall write abstracts of the most relevant research for use by the
Work Group. No more than ten abstracts shall be provided, although research reports of
similar work may be grouped into a single abstract. The abstracts shall be organized according
to: (1) creative financing that is currently being used in other contexts that could be applied, (2)
incentives that are not currently being used but could be under existing law, and (3) ideas for
new federal or state legislation that could provide new incentives for this purpose.

Due Date: Within two weeks of completion of Task 1

Task 3 – Additional Research for Abstracts

The contractor shall determine if there are other, additional publications the Work Group
should review (e.g., previous EFAB reports that may be relevant). If so, after consultation with
the Project Officer, the Work Group Chair and selected members, the contractor shall obtain
the materials and incorporate the research into the abstracts described in Task 2.

Deliverable: Information from this task shall be incorporated into the deliverable for Task 2.

Due Date: Within one week of completion of Task 2

Task 4 – Draft Outline of Recommendations




                                                 2
After the Work Group has reviewed the abstracts, the contractor, with technical direction from
the Project Officer and Work Group Chair, shall develop a detailed, draft outline of a paper
containing recommendations to EPA regarding the deliverables of Tasks 2 and 3, above.

Deliverable: A detailed outline of approximately five pages shall be provided to the Project
Officer. The outline shall include, at a minimum: (1) a synopsis of the work performed to arrive
at recommendations; (2) a summary of relevant questions and issues which arose during
research and review; and (3) a list of recommendations with discussion on how each idea would
potentially be implemented, the industries impacted, potential cost to the boiler owners and
potential cost to the EPA. The recommendations should be categorized in terms of: (1) creative
financing that is currently being used but on a limited basis, (2) creative financing and
incentives that are not being used in this context and that are possible under existing law, and
(3) creative financing and incentives that would require new federal or state legislation that
could provide new incentives for this purpose.

Due Date: Within one week of completion of Task 3

Task 5 – Draft Report

Using a final, detailed outline approved by the Work Group and endorsed by the Project Officer,
the contractor shall write a first draft of the report. The contractor may also prepare a
presentation summarizing the recommendations and relevant issues for discussion.

Deliverable: The contractor shall write a draft report incorporating the items detailed in the
outline developed in Task 4 for review by the Work Group for comments and suggestions. The
draft report shall be written to a non-technical audience. For ease of review by the Work
Group, the draft report shall include references to the sources of all significant information.

Due Date: Within two weeks of completion of Task 4

Task 6 –Revisions to Initial Draft Report

Using a draft report and the comments approved by the Work Group and endorsed by the
Project Officer, the contractor shall use EPA comments to refine the report as required.

Deliverable: The contractor shall refine the report and prepare a second draft report
incorporating the items detailed in the outline developed in Task 4, including any amendments
recommended by the Work Group and endorsed by the Project Officer. The second draft
report shall be written to a non-technical audience, including references to the sources of all
significant information.

Due Date: Within one week of receipt of comments from the Project Officer and Work Group
Chair


                                               3
Task 7 – Final Report

After the Work Group has had an opportunity to review the second draft report, the contractor
shall use EPA comments to refine the paper as required.

Deliverable: The contractor shall provide a revised draft of the report prepared in Task 6,
incorporating the comments provided by the Project Officer.

Due Date: Within one week of receipt of comments on the draft report from the Project
Officer and Work Group Chair

SUMMARY OF DELIVERABLES:

                        Description                                       Due Date

Task 1: Prepare minutes of the discussion                    Within one week of contract award

Task 2: Write abstracts of the most relevant research for    Within two weeks of completion of
use by the Work Group                                        Task 1

Task 3: Determine if there are other, additional             Within one week of completion of
publications the Work Group should review                    Task 2

Task 4: A detailed outline of approximately five pages       Within one week of completion of
                                                             Task 3

Task 5: Draft report incorporating the items detailed in     Within two weeks of completion of
the outline developed in Task 4                              Task 4

Task 6: Refine the report and prepare a second draft         Within one week of receipt of
report incorporating the items detailed in the outline       comments from the Project Officer
developed in Task 4                                          and Work Group Chair

Task 7: Revise draft of the report prepared in Task 6,       Within one week of receipt of
incorporating the comments provided by the Project           comments on the draft report from
Officer                                                      the Project Officer and Work Group
                                                             Chair



EVALUATION CRITERIA:




                                                   4
Following are the Evaluation Factors listed in descending order of importance. Each of the
below-listed factors shall be addressed in the offerors technical response. This is a best-value
procurement. The Government may or may not award to the low price quotation. For this
requirement, all evaluation factors other than price, when combined, are significantly more
important than price.

       1) Past Performance

       Past performance focuses on how well the offeror has performed prior similar
       requirements. The offeror shall include performance scenarios similar in scope,
       magnitude and complexity to the requirements set forth.

       2) Relevant Experience

       Relevant experience focuses on the expertise relevant to researching materials and
       writing abstracts. The offeror shall demonstrate recent and relevant experience that
       clearly reflects their ability to: (1) research material on this subject matter, (2) write
       abstracts, (3) write reports, and (4) deliver written work in a timely and efficient manner
       according to the government’s schedule.

       3) Technical Expertise and Approach

       Offerors shall describe their approach to researching materials and writing abstracts.
       The offeror shall also:

              Describe their approach and manner to writing reports;
              Describe creative but practical approaches for producing written and visual
               materials for research;
              Demonstrate their knowledge and understanding of this Statement of Work,
               partnership and other non-EPA partnership environmental programs, business-
               government partnership programs, public health or other social marketing
               programs or campaigns, and/or public sector coalition building.

       4) Management Approach

       The Offeror’s management approach will be evaluated based on the following criteria:
       (1) offeror’s demonstrated ability to manage and coordinate multiple tasks and continue
       to meet schedule and resource constraints, (2) offeror’s ability to provide the
       appropriate subject matter expertise and experienced resources in the areas described
       in the SOW and its flexibility to address varying levels of effort throughout the contract
       period of performance, and (3) the methods to promptly inform the EPA Contracting

                                                5
       Officer Representative (COR) of circumstances which impact production schedules or
       any other issues which will affect timeliness and quality of services.

       5) Key Personnel & Qualifications

       The individual selected for the project should have an undergraduate degree in
       environmental science or a related field with knowledge of environmental issues
       (particularly air issues), or business or a related field with knowledge of financing
       programs. Strong communication and writing skills are essential. A writing sample may
       be required as part of the selection process.

       6) Cost

       The offeror shall submit a fixed price quote. Consideration will be given to the offeror
       who provides the best value to the government.

QUOTE SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS:

Offerors shall submit a detailed project plan not to exceed 5 pages (this limit applies to the
technical portion of the resume only and excludes resumes, attachments, past performance
references and pricing related information). The submitted project plan shall describe the
Offeror's ability to satisfy the Government's requirement as set forth in the Statement of Work,
including the labor classifications/technical expertise to accomplish each section of the
Statement of Work.

Additionally, each offeror shall identify up to 3 contracts, which have recently been performed
(within the last 3 years), or are currently being performing, which are similar in scope for
services of this magnitude and complexity. The offeror shall provide the following information
with respect to each of these contracts:

(1) Contract number, contract type and dollar value;

(2) Date of contract award and period of performance;

(3) Name, address and telephone number of all applicable contract points of contact;

(4) Brief description of contract work, scope, and responsibilities.

In addition to considering past performance information provided in the offeror’s submission,
past performance evaluations may also be based on the offeror’s supplied references,
information obtained through federal performance tracking databases, and other information
obtained by the Government from other sources.

Offerors shall submit a firm, fixed-price quote, including indirect costs, other direct costs
(ODCs), travel and any other applicable charges, providing a ceiling price for this requirement.



                                                 6
Each offeror shall submit (1) one electronic copy to Ben Shih, Contract Specialist, at
shih.benjamin@epa.gov and to the Project Officer, Vanessa Bowie, at bowie.vanessa@epa.gov.
Due date for receipt of responses to this RFQ will be 3:30 pm, Eastern Time, on April 14, 2011.

Prospective sources are reminded that an award can only be made to a Contractor who is
registered in the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) database (http://www.ccr.gov).




                                               7

								
To top