MODIFICATION
B -- B: Southern African Development Community (SADC) CNS/ATM Transition Plan
- Notice Date
- 2/11/2005
- Notice Type
- Modification
- NAICS
- 541690
— Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services
- Contracting Office
- United States Trade and Development Agency, USTDA, USTDA, 1000 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1600, C/O US TDA 1000 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1600, Arlington, VA, 22209-3901
- ZIP Code
- 22209-3901
- Solicitation Number
- Reference-Number-0210023B
- Response Due
- 3/9/2005
- Archive Date
- 3/24/2005
- Description
- Reference is made to the January 21, 2005, FedBizOpps posting, Reference Number 0210023B, inviting submission of qualifications and proposal data (collectively referred to as the "Proposal") from interested U.S. firms which are qualified on the basis of experience and capability to develop a feasibility study for conducting a Communication, Navigation, Surveillance/Air Traffic Management (CNS/ATM) Lower Airspace Feasibility Study and Implementation Plan for SADC. This is to notify interested U.S. firms that the U.S. Trade and Development Agency (USTDA) and the Southern African Development Community (SADC), the project sponsor or Grantee for the project, received a written request for clarification of the Request for Proposals (RFP) for the SADC CNS/ATM Transition Plan project by a U.S. company. We are herewith providing a public response to that request, providing the same information to all potential bidders on this project. The questions posed by the U.S. company are written in bold letter type. USTDA's and SADC's joint responses are written below each corresponding question. Question 1: The RFP Introduction (page 4?3rd paragraph?second sentence) states that "the project was to be performed by a U.S. company on a sole-sourced basis, as requested by SADC." Please identify that company. Will this company be competing for the Feasibility Study? Answer: The company is Innovative Solutions International, Inc. The Grantee has indicated they would like this study to be competed. We have no knowledge of whether Innovative Solutions International, Inc. will compete for this Study, however the competition is open to all bidders. Question 2: There are four versions of the TOR in the RFP: 1) on page 5 of the Introduction; 2) one beginning on the first page of Annex 1; 3) in Annex 1 to Amendment 1 to the Grant Agreement; and 4) in Annex 5. The TORs are similar?not identical; which one governs in the event of conflict? I believe that the TOR in Annex 5 will govern as the last sentence of 1.2 Objective on page 5 of the RFP Introduction states, "The TOR for this Feasibility Study is attached as Annex 5." Is this belief correct? Answer: The Terms of Reference (TOR) that govern this project are included in Amendment No. 1 to the Grant Agreement, included in Annex 4 of the RFP; and in Annex 5 of the RFP. These TOR are identical. Companies need to carefully study the Grant Agreement and the Amendment No. 1 to the Grant Agreement in Annex 4 of the RFP. The Amendment No. 1 to the Grant Agreement amends the Grant Agreement in several important ways. Some of the key changes the amendment makes include, among others: (a) replacing the TOR in the Grant Agreement entirely; (b) increasing the amount of grant funding from the original $600,000 to $808,359; (c) dividing the Study into two phases and providing for a U.S. company cost share as part of funding the overall cost of the Study; (d) changing the seat of the Grantee from SADC's Southern African Transportation and Communications Commission to SADC's Civil Aviation Committee; (e) making the grant competitive to all U.S. companies; (f) making USTDA funds for the grant pursuant to prohibitions of U.S. legislation from the fiscal year 2002 and fiscal year 2004; (g) adding a U.S. company cost share that will be used for those countries where USTDA grant funds are prohibited, as outlined in point (f); and changing the Study completion date. Companies should carefully note which countries the U.S. company cost share (US$8,061) is required for as they prepare their proposals. USTDA grant funds may not be used for countries included in the official SADC region where U.S. Government foreign assistance is prohibited, as outlined in section 512 of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, Fiscal Year 2002; section 512 of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2004; section 620(q) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended; or Executive Order 13288. Please note that this clarification is intended only to give an overview of what Amendment No. 1 to the Grant Agreement entails. It is by no means a replacement of that document. Companies should refer to the Grant Agreement and Amendment No. 1 to the Grant Agreement in Annex 4 of the RFP for the requirements of this grant. Question 3: In the TOR provided as Annex 5, Task 2 is to "collect and evaluate existing studies, surveys and policies pertaining to CNS/ATM, lower and upper airspace systems." In contrast, the first paragraph of the introduction defines the Feasibility Study as for "?Lower Airspace Feasibility Study and Implementation Plan." Is the scope of the Feasibility Study to include upper airspace as well as lower airspace or is the requirement simply to be compatible and consistent with existing upper airspace plans? And are the existing studies, etc. to be collected and evaluated available from SADC or will the project require obtaining such documents from their original sources such as Sofreavia, the French company that performed the previous study? Answer: The Terms of Reference (TOR) govern this project, so companies must follow them carefully. However, to answer the question, the second paragraph of the "Introduction" section in the TOR states: "The SADC Civil Aviation Committee and the Upper Airspace Control Center (UACC) Steering Committee seek the development of a Study to determine the viability of the lower airspace in terms of the Upper Air Space Control Center (UACC)." In answer to the second part of the question, SADC wishes to advise that it may make available copies of those studies that were executed at a regional level and commissioned by SADC on the clear understanding that the proposed Study will not replicate but build on the earlier work in accordance with the agreed TOR. They would also like to make it clear that the other data collection activities required of the Contractor as outlined in Task 2 of the TOR remain relevant and critical to the successful execution of the Study.
- Record
- SN00750270-W 20050213/050211212521 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps.gov Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |