Accessibility Information

Users of assistive technologies such as screen readers should use the following link to activate Accessibility Mode before continuing: Learn more and Activate accessibility mode.

Request for Information UPF Construction Contracting Strategy

Solicitation Number: DE-11-RFI-UPFCCS
Agency: Department of Energy
Office: Federal Locations
Location: All DOE Federal Contracting Offices
  • Print
:
DE-11-RFI-UPFCCS
:
Special Notice
:
Added: Jan 20, 2011 10:30 am
PURPOSE OF THIS REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI):

This notice constitutes a Request for Information (RFI) as contemplated by FAR 10.002(b)(2)(iii) and (v).


INTRODUCTION:


NNSA is seeking information from industry regarding an acquisition strategy for managing the design/construction of the Uranium Processing Facility (UPF) at the Y-12 National Security Complex (Y-12). NNSA is contemplating whether the construction of UPF should be included in the scope of work: (1) under the consolidated management and operating (M&O) contract for Y-12 and the Pantex Plant, with an option for Savannah River Tritium Operations, or (2) under an Integration, Management, and Execution (IME) contract for construction at all NNSA sites.


The UPF is required to ensure the United States can maintain a safe, secure, and reliable arsenal over the long-term. Specifically, it will ensure the enterprise continues to have the capability to process enriched uranium to support the nuclear weapon program, nuclear non-proliferation objectives, and Naval Reactors. Currently, the existing M&O Contractor at Y-12 (Babcock & Wilcox Technical Services Y-12, LLC) is designing the UPF and will be submitting the UPF CD-2/3 package to the Y-12 Site Office for approval.


NNSA's vision is to move toward a fully integrated and interdependent enterprise that will enhance mission performance, reduce costs, strengthen partnerships and improve stakeholder confidence. The objectives of NNSA's acquisition strategy for management of construction at all sites, and specifically, UPF at Y-12, are to: (1) obtain the appropriate expertise, processes and systems in the management of all aspects of construction, including design development, procurement of materials and cost estimating; (2) improve construction management and reduce costs at all of NNSA's sites; and (3) allow NNSA's M&O contractors to provide greater focus on the nuclear security enterprise mission work while enabling project planning and execution efforts to be performed by design and construction experts.


Other relevant context may be found at: http://www.doeal.gov/MOContracts/ and http://www.doeal.gov/cm/Default.aspx.


SPECIFIC AREAS OF INTEREST:


More specifically, NNSA is seeking industry response to the following:


With regard to Option 1:


1. If responsibility for construction of UPF is contained within a consolidated M&O contract (option 1), how would this affect the view of industrial bidders for the M&O contract, and for the IME contract that would then not include construction responsibility for UPF?


With regard to Option 2:


2. If responsibility for construction of UPF were contained in the IME contract (option 2) and not in the consolidated M&O contract, how would this affect the view of industrial bidders for the M&O contract that would not include construction responsibility for UPF, and for the IME contract?


3. Under option 2, the M&O will continue as the Design Authority and is responsible for operating the new facility. In addition, the project execution may result in part of the building being in operation while part is still in construction. How does the management of these interface points between design, construction, and operations affect the view of the industrial community?


With regard to Option 1 or Option 2:


4. Would a competition for either the consolidated M&O contract or for an IME contract within the next 18 months be likely to have a negative effect on the on-going design effort for the UPF that will not be concluded prior to the end of FY12? If so, would one of the options listed above have a less negative effect than the other?


5. Do you foresee any Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI) or other conflicts with any of the options above? If so, how would you mitigate these conflicts?

SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS:


1. FAR 52.215-3 Request for Information or Solicitation for Planning Purposes (Oct 1997)


(a) The Government does not intend to award a contract on the basis of this solicitation or to otherwise pay for the information solicited except as an allowable cost under other contracts as provided in subsection 31.205-18, Bid and proposal costs, of the Federal Acquisition Regulation.


(b) Although "proposal" and "offeror" may be used in this Request for Information, your response will be treated as information only. It shall not be used as a proposal.


(c) This solicitation is issued for the purpose of: obtaining information to assist the National Nuclear Security Administration in developing a contracting strategy for the management of construction of UPF.


(End of Clause)


2. All proprietary material in the submission package shall be clearly identified and will be treated in the strictest confidence.


3. This RFI is issued solely for information and planning purposes and does not constitute a request for proposal. In accordance with FAR 15.201(e), responses to this notice are not offers and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract. Respondents are solely responsible for all expenses associated with responding to this RFI, and responses to this RFI will not be returned.


4. This is a Request for Information (RFI) and not a Request for Proposal (RFP). Therefore the Government makes no guarantees that a RFP for your capability will be issued at a later date.


5. Written responses to this RFI specifically addressing the items above (new and innovative approaches, experience, current capabilities), are limited to six pages, which may include a maximum of one page for an introduction of the company, and should be submitted to Kim Gallegos, Contracting Officer, via e-mail at SEB1@doeal.gov no later than 5:00 p.m. MST, February 22, 2011.

:
Various
Various locations, 20585
:
Kim Gallegos,
Contracting Officer
Phone: 505-845-5848
Fax: 505-284-7236
:
JUSTIN CROSBY,
CONTRACT SPECIALIST
Phone: 505-845-5265
Fax: 505-845-2686