SPECIAL NOTICE
C -- Geothermal Study
- Notice Date
- 4/18/2006
- Notice Type
- Special Notice
- NAICS
- 541330
— Engineering Services
- Contracting Office
- Department of the Air Force, Air Combat Command, 366 CONS, 366 Gunfighter Ave Ste 498, Mountain Home AFB, ID, 83648-5296
- ZIP Code
- 83648-5296
- Solicitation Number
- Reference-Number-F3F3CE6089A100
- Response Due
- 6/8/2006
- Archive Date
- 6/23/2006
- Small Business Set-Aside
- Total Small Business
- Description
- STATEMENT OF WORK (SOW) For Geothermal Study at Mountain Home AFB 23 Mar 2006 This SOW is for a Geothermal study at Mountain Home AFB, ID. SECTION I. SCOPE OF WORK 1. Perform Geothermal study of the Mountain Home AFB site and within 25 miles in all directions to determine potential for geothermal development. The potential for geothermal deposits for high temperature suitable for power generation and lower temperature for space heating and industrial applications will be evaluated. Analysis will include but not be limited to satellite color/infrared satellite imagery. Analysis will be performed by a firm with experience in analyzing geothermal potential. SECTION II. DELIVERABLES 1. The following items will be delivered to the Government: a. Copy of annotated satellite imagery. b. Report containing satellite imagery annotation; discussion of annotation findings; presentation and discussion of thermal leakage data pertinent to the study; presentation and discussion of deep drilling data for the region of interest; subsurface interpretations consistent with the data in hand; and the identification of land areas with potential geothermal resources, if any are identifiable. Alternative subsurface interpretations compatible with the geothermal and structural evidence in hand will be prepared. If land with a potential for high temperature geothermal development is identifiable, evaluation of the risks if development is undertaken at such locations; and the presentation of suggestions as to follow-on studies that might be employed so as to reduce future development risks will be included. Discussion will be included regarding the potential presence of industrial grade low temperature geothermal resources in addition to the high temperature resources being sought. Any land suitable for further study and/or development will be identified. c. A briefing/seminar followed by a question and answer session will be held for one day at Mountain Home AFB. SECTION III. POINTS OF CONTACT 1. Project direction will be taken for the Contracting Officer (CO) only. EVALUATION FACTORS PAST PERFORMANCE: As part of the evaluation process, the Government will assess each offeror?s past performance. The offeror shall present factual material dealing with contracts held with other Government agencies or with private sector businesses on which the same or similar services were provided. Information requested includes successful execution of contracts, and in problem areas, the steps taken to resolve or correct. Offerors are cautioned that the Government will use information provided by the offerors and information obtained from other sources in the development of the performance confidence assessments. (a) Content. 1) Offerors shall submit a consecutive list of all past and present performance for the last three years. Offerors shall submit the list no later than 8 May 06, to Christina L. Lene, 366 Contracting Squadron/LGCA, 366 Gunfighter Ave Suite 498, Mountain Home AFB ID 83648, or FAX (208)828-4031. For all listed contracts, provide the following information: a. Contracting agency b. Contract number c. Brief description of contract effort (service) d. Period of performance e. Contract value at time of award f. Current value, including all changes and exercised options g. Contracting Officer?s name, address, and telephone number 2) Required information is limited to two pages per contract. Company name shall be indicated on the upper right hand corner of each page. 3) Information should be submitted on all contracts performed within the past three years and shall include information on corporate experience and past performance which clearly demonstrates that the offeror is capable of conforming to contractual requirements. Address how well the work was performed on other contracts, perception of customer satisfaction, interface and working relationship with key government personnel, whether there were cure notices, show cause letters or termination actions, whether Contract Discrepancy Reports (CDRs) were issued, total number of CDRs if applicable, and final amount of deductions. Discuss whether quality services were provided at original bid prices. Describe any awards or special recognition for high-quality service. 4) Provide general information concerning any Government audits that may have been issued during the past five years, to include the name of the audit agency, address, auditor, telephone number, and recommendation of audit. 5) Offerors with no past experience in providing services similar to environmental assessment consulting services shall state so. 6) Offerors lacking recent and relevant present/past performance experience similar to environmental assessment consulting services shall may submit information regarding key personnel who have recent and relevant experience. In this case, offerors shall provide the following information, as a minimum, to allow government evaluators to conduct a present/past performance evaluation on those key personnel cited by the offeror. a. Name of Key Personnel Complete Address Telephone Number Brief synopsis of relevant experience (a resume may be submitted) b. Provide 5 references for each key personnel to be utilized and include the following for each reference: Complete Address Point of Contact Telephone Number Contract Number Contract Type Project Title Contract Period of Performance Brief Description of Work NOTE: ?Relevant past performance? is defined as Environmental consulting services the same or similar to those in the Statement of Work contained in this solicitation. RELEVANCY DEFINITIONS VERY RELEVANT Past/present performance effort involved essentially the same magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. RELEVANT Past/present performance effort involved much of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. SOMEWHAT RELEVANT Past/present performance effort involved some of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. NOT RELEVANT Past/present performance effort did not involve any of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation required. ADDENDUM TO FAR PROVISION 52.212-2, EVALUATION -- COMMERCIAL ITEMS (INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE ON STANDARD FORM 1449) (a) BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD: The basis for award will be an integrated assessment based on tradeoff between past performance and price. The Government will award the contract to the offeror who represents the best value to the Government in terms of past performance and price, as outlined below. The government reserves the right to award the contract to other than the lowest priced offeror. In a performance price tradeoff, the Contracting Officer will only clarify the offerors? information; no discussions are contemplated in accordance with FAR 15.306. Offerors may be given the opportunity to clarify relevance or adverse past performance to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond. Clarifications are limited exchanges between the Government and offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated. (1) PAST PERFORMANCE: Past performance confidence assessment shall be accomplished for all offerors, and each offeror shall be assigned one of the following ratings: RATING DEFINITION High Confidence Based on the offeror?s performance record, essentially no doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Significant Confidence Based on the offeror?s performance record, little doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror?s performance record, some doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Unknown Confidence No performance record identifiable (see FAR 15.305(a)(2) (iii) and (iv)). Little Confidence Based on the offeror?s performance record, substantial doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Changes to the offeror?s existing processes may be necessary in order to achieve contract requirements. No Confidence Based on the offeror?s performance record, extreme doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. a. A number of past performance references provided by offerors will be selected and investigated. Any derogatory past performance information obtained will be presented to the affected offeror and that offeror will have an opportunity to respond with any mitigating facts. The final determination of past performance ratings shall rest with the contracting officer. b. An offeror with limited or no recent or relevant past performance will receive a rating of Neutral/Unknown Confidence, and will not be rated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. c. Past performance shall be evaluated on the basis of the following sub factors of equal importance: 1) Quality of Work 2) Timely Performance 3) Management Effectiveness 4) Cultural and Environmental Work Performance (2) PRICE: a. Completeness: The proposal covers all requirements of the performance work statement, includes all pricing information required by the solicitation, and the Price Schedule is completed as required. b. Reasonableness: Prices are reasonable in comparison to estimates, prior prices paid, other offers received and can be supported by suitable estimating techniques. c. Realism: The government may determine that a proposal is unacceptable if the prices proposed are materially unbalanced between the line items or subline items. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly overstated or understated, as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. For example, if unique and innovative approaches are the basis for an unbalanced/inconsistently priced proposal, the nature of these approaches and their impact on price must be completely documented. The burden of proof of realism rests solely with the offeror. A proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the government. (3) PAST PERFORMANCE SHALL BE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE IMPORTANT THAN PRICE. (b) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer?s specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.
- Place of Performance
- Address: Mountain Home AFB, Idaho
- Zip Code: 83648
- Country: United States
- Zip Code: 83648
- Record
- SN01030066-W 20060420/060418220642 (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 |