SOW - CP-AES Systems at Selected FAA AK Sites rev4.pdf

25-Aug-21 SOW - CP-AES Systems at Selected FAA AK Sites rev4

STATEMENT OF WORK

FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR COMMERCIAL POWER OR ALTERNATIVE ENERGY

SYSTEMS TO REPLACE FAA PRIME POWER GENERATION FACILITIES ON SELECT

REMOTE FAA SITES IN ALASKA

Job Description:

FAA Power Services Group (PSG) Electrical Line Distribution (ELD) Program desires a feasibility study of commercial power (ideal) or alternative energy systems (AES: solar, wind, etc) (secondary choice) to replace (ideal) or supplement (secondary) existing FAA prime power (PX) generating capacity at five remote sites.

These sites support radio/beacon and/or navigation facilities for commercial airlines and the military. The study shall provide details and recommendations to allow the department to decide on the feasibility and technical/cost requirements of installing commercial power or alternative energy systems in lieu of running prime power generators 24/7/365. For alternative energy solutions (if commercial power connection to grid is not feasible), all alternative technology options are on the table.

This is a simple desktop site study/recommendation only; complete design and installation will be a separate future procurement contingent on an FAA decision to proceed past the initial study stage.

The FAA’s motivation for looking into providing commercial power or alternative energy power (CP/AES) to these sites is that the provisioning, supporting, and maintaining of the existing prime power generation is expensive, inconvenient, and fuel and labor intensive. There are costs to replace and maintain engines, and the burn rates of fuel and cost to deliver it are substantial. In addition, there are environmental concerns with the existing large fuel storage tanks supporting the existing PX generators. Although complete replacement of the PXs--backed up by standby generators--through conversion of the existing systems to commercial power or 100% alternative energy are the preferred solution, any significant but cost-effective reduction of reliance on the existing PX generators will be considered.

Awardee shall conduct a cost/benefit analysis among the analyzed alternatives for each of the five sites, then recommend a preferred solution. In both its considered and recommended solutions, awardee should consider the main theme of this effort: to state (or claim otherwise) that the solution will provide (in general terms, as an informed appraisal) a good return on investment to the FAA. Further, and most importantly, after reading the studies, PSG managers should be able to succinctly gage if a solution will be feasible and cost effective. If a considered or preferred solution is judged not feasible and cost effective, this should be clearly stated in the reports.

Basic Data: Below are five sites for which feasibility studies for CP or AES are desired. Study results (reports) shall be returned at not less than two-week intervals apart and in the order of importance of the site in terms of load, thus: Middleton Island (MDO), Level Island (LVD), Sister’s Island (SSR), Moses Point (MOS), Yakataga

(CYT):

Location Row Labels

PX = Prime Power (Engine Generator) - Alternating EGs operating 24x7, 365 days/yr* Typical EG Loading LATITUDE_DEG LONGITUDE_DEG

Middleton Is AK MDO PX Three each 250 kW kW diesel generators 50% Loaded, 24x7/365 59.43769 -146.32747 Yakataga AK CYT PX Two each 25 kW diesel generators 50% Loaded, 24x7/365 60.08201 -142.49349 Level Island AK LVD PX Two 75 kW generators 50% Loaded, 24x7/365 56.46806 -133.08139 Moses Point AK MOS PX Two 30 kW Kohler Diesel Generators 50% Loaded, 24x7/365 64.69655 -162.07129 Sisters Is AK SSR PX Two each 50 kW diesel generators 50% Loaded, 24x7/365 64.69655 -162.07129

Period of Performance:

Seven months from date of award.

Tasks:

The awardee shall provide technical support to the tasks identified below and support and/or complete any deliverables identified herein. Tasks include:

Preliminary:

1. Initial “meeting of the minds” with FAA and possibly other government representatives to carefully characterize FAA interests, concerns, and constraints.

2. Establishment of an organizational and study project structure.

Contractor Responsibilities and Deliverables

1. Identification and preliminary confirmation of suitable study project stakeholder team members and alternates, if appropriate.

2. Satellite and terrain assessment to ascertain the ability to employ alternative energy sources

(solar/wind/other).

3. Integration of any commercial power solution (ideal) or AES (secondary choice) with the existing FAA power infrastructure.

4. Development of project alternatives and conceptual designs for each (no detailed technical analysis required for this procurement).

5. An assessment of necessary environmental, regulatory, and permitting requirements.

6. Rough order of magnitude cost estimates for the design/construction timelines for the CP or AES solution considered for each particular location.

7. SUBMITTAL. Within 2 weeks of notice to proceed, awardee shall provide a list of desired data from the

FAA for execution of the studies. Within one month from receipt of awardee’s list, FAA shall provide the requested data.

8. SUBMITTAL. Awardee shall provide precise GPS location data and height to highest point of the blade of any wind turbines proposed as part of a solution.

9. DELIVERABLE. Within 4 months after FAA provides the requested data, as phased deliveries and with MDO first, awardee shall provide a Draft Report for each site for FAA review. The draft report(s) shall include a technical/supply-support-cost/execution/economic return on investment (ROI) of each considered and recommended alternative. The Draft Report(s) shall also clearly state whether a commercial power or an alternative solution is considered feasible or not. FAA shall provide comments on the awardee’s Draft Report(s) within 30 calendar days.

10. DELIVERABLE. Within 2 weeks of receipt of FAA comments, awardee shall provide a Final Report that incorporates requested corrections and clarifications to the Draft Report.

11. Included in the reports should be any other salient information deemed important by the bidder but not covered herein.

Proposal Cost and Timeline:

Within four months after an FAA responds to awardee’s request for data, a Draft Assessment Report for each FAA site shall be submitted in accordance with No. 8 above, followed by a Final Report for each site two weeks from receipt of FAA recommended edits to Draft Report in accordance with No. 9 above.

FAA Responsibilities:

The FAA shall provide the following:

1. Participate in a preassessment meeting of the minds.

2. Assign a single point of contact and alternate if appropriate.

3. Provide site data regarding electrical use and load information, etc, as deemed relevant by FAA for the purposes of this study.

4. Review and comment on Draft Report(s) in a timely manner to facilitate Final Report(s).

5. Agreement to protect any proprietary, confidential, or critical energy infrastructure information provided and marked as such by the Awardee in its submissions.

6. Any other information deemed necessary by the FAA and awardee to perform this study.

Work Location: See Basic Data section above for a tabulation of the study sites. Satellite photos, available site and equipment photographs, and other data may be available from the FAA for use in the study. Site visit(s) are not part of this procurement.