MODIFICATION
A -- MODELING OF THE OXIDATION OF MERCURY IN A PILOT-SCALE COMBUSTER
- Notice Date
- 7/18/2006
- Notice Type
- Modification
- Contracting Office
- Environmental Protection Agency, Acquisition Management Branch, 26 W Martin Luther King, Cincinnati, OH 45268
- ZIP Code
- 45268
- Solicitation Number
- RFQ-OH-06-00172
- Response Due
- 7/24/2006
- Archive Date
- 8/24/2006
- Description
- NAICS Code: 541710 Amendment #1 Technical Questions and Answers 1. Section 2 of Approach refers to the "Contractor's existing kinetic model". Is that model available for review prior to submission of a quote? Answer: There are several companies that have already done extensive work looking into the mechanisms of mercury oxidation. These companies have either prepared their own models or modified other company's models. These models have been discussed in scientific literature as well as at technical conferences. It is assumed that any contractor interested in this requirement would have its own kinetic model, or be able to purchase and modify an existing kinetic model. 2. This requirement implies that this is a continuation of a previous effort. Is this correct? Answer: There have been several manuscripts in the scientific literature on modelling the oxidation of mercury in coal flue gas. The EPA would like to apply one of these models to data that is being collected on a pilot scale combustor. This is not a continuation of a previous effort, but rather applying an existing model to our results. 3. Task 3 and Task 4 state that "at least one" paper/manuscript will be produced. If you anticipate more than one, what number should be used in the quote? Answer: Please identify in your quote, only one paper/manuscript being produced. 4. Task 4 states that the contractor may be responsible for presenting a paper at a conference. Should this cost be included in the quote or will it be handled as a "Change" if it is required? If it is to be included, what destination should be used? If a location has not been determined, shouldn't all offerors be instructed to use the same destination in order to have comparable quotes? Answer: The cost of travelling to a technical conference and presenting a paper at that conference shall be included in the quote. The conference at which this information shall be presented at has not been determined. Two potential technical conferences have been specified in the Statement of Work as acceptable, one is the Air and Waste Management's annual conference and the other is the EPRI/AWMA/EPA Mega-Symposium. It will be a domestic conference in which travel costs are fairly similar for large cities in the United States. Modeling of the Oxidation of Mercury in a Pilot-Scale Combustor This is a request for quote (RFQ) for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in FAR Subpart 12.6, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. The identifying RFQ number is RFQ-OH-06-00172. The RFQ and incorporated provisions/clauses are those in effect through Federal Acquisition Circular 05-09. This requirement is 100% set-aside for small businesses. A firm fixed price purchase order is anticipated to result from the award of this RFQ. The NAICS code is 541710, and the size standard is 500 employees. STATEMENT OF WORK Period of Performance: 12 Months from the date of award Estimated Level of Effort: The level of effort for this project is estimated to be 250 hours. Goal The goal of the proposed project is to perform and validate a definitive kinetic study of mercury oxidation mechanisms that characterizes the impact of flue gas temperature gradients and heterogeneous reaction mechanisms on the extent of high temperature mercury oxidation. The proposed work would further EPA's mission as follows: "The work would serve to explain the variability in mercury emissions often observed and documented under EPA's Information Collection Request and will provide a foundation for the extension of studies now being conducted to reduce mercury emissions from coal-fired boilers. "The work would validate an established kinetic model for mercury speciation, which would be a valuable national resource as utility and industrial coal-fired boilers implement technology to meet mercury regulations through a wide range of national coal supply. The emphasis on gas quenching rates and supplemental unburned carbon will fill an important gap in the current understanding of mercury oxidation mechanisms. "Results would be published in a peer reviewed journal and at technical conferences to add to the national knowledge base on mercury and to disseminate the results to a wide audience. Approach 1. Areas of interest and parameters to be modeled include the following model runs: "Flue gas economizer inlet and outlet temperature variation. "Flue gas temperature gradient (within economizer) variation. "Coal type variation (subbituminous and bituminous). "Coal chlorine and mercury content variation. "Fly ash carbon level variation. 2. Model simulations will be performed using Contractor's existing kinetic model for mercury speciation. "Obtain parametric predictions for oxidized mercury entering and leaving all units in the gas cleaning system based on: variation in flue gas temperature entering and exiting heat exchanger. FLue gas quenching rate variation. Fly ash unburned carbon level variation. Coal rank and chlorine content variation. "Model simulations will be used to generate kinetic curves, as follows: Extent of mercury oxidation vs. flue gas quench rate Extent of mercury oxidation vs. economizer inlet temperature Extent of mercury oxidation vs. economizer outlet temperature Extent of mercury oxidation vs. unburned carbon level Extent of mercury oxidation vs. coal rank/chlorine content 3. Data reduction, reporting and publication of results Task 1: Modeling Scope Definition EPA Laboratory Responsibilities: 1. Laboratory personnel will provide data from experimental work on the Multi-Pollutant Control Research Facility (MPCRF) to set up the kinetic model. The data shall consist of: flue gas flow rates and temperatures firing rates for the MPCRF combustor typical coal analyses for subituminous and bituminous coals to be tested flue gas compositions for each coal (O2, CO, NOx, CO2, SO2). system configuration and unit specifications sufficient to estimate inlet and outlet temperatures and residence times for each gas cleaning unit. Contractor Tasks: 1. The Contractor shall lay out the kinetic modeling framework. 2. The Contractor shall estimate flue gas temperature histories and residence times for subituminous and bituminous coal base cases. 3. The Contractor shall refine the parametric modeling runs to be performed. The kinetic simulations will be combinations of the following parameters, plus any other items identified during Task 1. Parametric Variable Conditions to be tested Coal Type Subituminous, bituminous Flue gas quench rate, F/s Max. possible, 2000 F/s, 1000 F/s Flue gas inlet temperature, F 1350, 1250, 1150 Coal Cl, ppm (by weight, daf basis) As found in coal LOI, wt. % Baseline, +1%, +3% CO spike, ppm 25, 100 Task 2: Kinetic Simulations of NRMRL Combustor EPA Laboratory Responsibilities: 1. The Laboratory will fire the combustor according to the test matrix defined in Task 1. 2. An EPA technician or on-site contractor will operate the combustor and sampling equipment. 3. Set-up and demonstration of temperature control and flue gas monitoring may require at least one week of firing prior to data collection. 4. NRMRL will provide analyses for each coal to be tested: Proximate analysis Ultimate analysis Higher heating value Coal Hg and Cl content 5. NRMRL will sample the flue gas for each test run: O2, CO, NOx, CO2, SO2 Fly ash unburned carbon Mercury speciation (elemental, oxidized, particulate) at air preheater outlet/PCD inlet and at PCD outlet/stack. Contractor Tasks: 1. The Contractor shall specify all data needed for kinetic modeling. 2. The Contractor shall assist in defining additional runs needed for kinetic model validation. 3. The Contractor shall perform kinetics simulations of mercury speciation for subituminous and bituminous coals for each completed test in the simulation matrix laid out in Task 1. Task 3: Data Analysis and Presentation of Results EPA Laboratory Responsibilities: 1. NRMRL will provide Contractor with the data collected under Task 2. 2. NRMRL will co-author papers for presentation at appropriate industry conferences such as the MEGA symposium and Air Quality Conference. EPA personnel will present the papers where budgets and work schedules permit. Contractor Subtasks: 1. The Contractor shall specify any additional kinetic modeling runs needed for comparison to the MPCRF combustor data set and for validation of the mercury oxidation mechanisms modeled. 2. The Contractor shall co-author at least one paper for publication at appropriate industry conferences such as the MEGA symposium or Air Quality Conference. Task 4: Presentation of Test Results for Conference Paper The contractor shall prepare at least one manuscript for submission to the Mega Symposium or the Air and Waste Management Annual Conference. This shall include reducing the data and submitting the manuscript to the conference. EPA personnel will present the paper(s) where budgets and work schedules permit. In the event EPA personnel are not able to attend the conference, the contractor shall be responsible for presentation of the results at the conference. Task 5: Preparation of Peer Reviewed Journal Article The contractor shall prepare at least one manuscript on the work performed in this study for submission to a peer reviewed journal. This includes preparing the manuscript in accordance with the style used by the selected journal. The journal article shall be cleared for publication by the EPA's technical review system prior to publication. QA Requirements for Modeling Work All modeling work must comply with NRMRL's QA requirements. This includes submitting a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) before any modeling work is started. NRMRL's QA requirements are provided in Attachment 1 to the Statement of Work. Deliverable Schedule Identify specific deliverables and the timeline for delivery. This includes the number of months after receipt of the purchase order (PO) to complete each task as delineated below: Tasks: Time: Task 1 1 Month after receiving Purchase Order (PO) Task 2 3 Months after receiving PO Task 3 6 Months after receiving PO Task 4 10 Months after receiving PO Task 5 12 Months after receiving PO The following clauses apply to this request for quote: FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors-Commercial Items; FAR 52.212-2 Evaluation-Commercial Items, and the specific evaluation criteria is as follows: (1) Technical approach in meeting the requirments of the Statement of Work and (2) Technical approach shall be evaluated on a pass or fail basis (with the lowest price technically acceptable receiving award). Offers shall provide descriptive technical literature and other documentation as necessary, in sufficient detail to demonstrate that the their quote meets the requirements in the Statement of Work specified above; FAR 52.212-3, Offeror Representations & Certifications-Commercial Items, shall be completed by offeror and submitted with quote, unless the offeror's registered with CCR; FAR 52.212-4, Contract terms & Conditions-Commercial Items; The following FAR clauses in paragraph (b) of FAR clause 52.212-5, Contract Terms & Conditions Required to Implement Statutes or Executive Orders-Commercial Items will apply, 52.222-3, 52.222-19, 52.222-21, 52.222-26, 52.222-35, 52.222-36, 52.222-37, 52.225-13. FAR 52-225-1, FAR 52.232-33, Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer-Central Contractor Registration; all clauses can be found at: http://farsite.hill.af.mil/VFFARA.HTM. In addition, the following US EPA EPAAR clause is applicable to this RFQ: EPAAR 1552.233-70, Notice of Filing Requirements for Agency Protests, and 1552.211-79, Compliance with EPA Policies for Information Resource Management. These EPAAR clauses are available at http://www.epa.gov/oam/ptod/epaar.pdf. The government anticipates award using simplified acquisition procedures of an order resulting from this solicitation to the responsive/responsible offeror whose quote conforms to the solicitation and is most price advantageous to the government. Offers shall submit 1 copy of their quotation that references RFQ-OH-06-00172, no later than July 24, 2006 at 3:00 PM (EST) to Scott A. Fogle, at fogle.scott@epa.gov or via fax at 513 487-2107. Questions or comments may also be directed to Scott A. Fogle, at 513 487-2049, or at fogle.scott@epa.gov.
- Record
- SN01091990-W 20060720/060718221352 (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 |