MODIFICATION
R -- DEFINITIONAL MISSION FOR ADVISORY AND ASSISTANCE SERVICES BY NON-GOVERNMENTAL SOURCES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS IN THE STATE OF SAO PAULO, BRAZIL
- Notice Date
- 5/7/2004
- Notice Type
- Modification
- NAICS
- 541990
— All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
- Contracting Office
- United States Trade and Development Agency, TDA Contracts Office, USTDA, 1000 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1600, Arlington, VA, 22209-3901
- ZIP Code
- 22209-3901
- Solicitation Number
- USTDA04-Q-5-176
- Response Due
- 5/21/2004
- Archive Date
- 6/5/2004
- Point of Contact
- Forestine Winters, Contract Specialist, Phone 703-875-4357, Fax 703-875-4009,
- E-Mail Address
-
contract@tda.gov
- Small Business Set-Aside
- Total Small Business
- Description
- SCOPE OF WORK ?DEFINITIONAL MISSION? FOR ADVISORY AND ASSISTANCE SERVICES BY NON-GOVERNMENTAL SOURCES FOR BRAZIL PROJECT TITLE: BRAZIL: DEFINITIONAL MISSION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS IN THE STATE OF SAO PAULO 1 SCOPE OF WORK The U.S. Trade and Development Agency (?USTDA?) requires services under this non-personal services Contract to support or improve its decision-making relative to the funding of projects and activities in developing and middle income countries. USTDA has received requests for feasibility study/technical assistance funding for several water and wastewater projects from Companhia de Saneamento Basico do Estado de S?o Paulo (?SABESP?), the state sanitation company in the State of S?o Paulo, and a request for technical assistance to develop a toxic chemicals reduction program from the Companhia de Tecnologia de Saneamento Ambiental (?CETESB?), the environmental protection agency for the State of S?o Paulo. The Contractor shall provide a report to USTDA, which will: 1.2 assess and justify whether or not USTDA should provide funding for the proposed feasibility studies/technical assistance or other activities; 1.3 assess any alternative study or activities which the Contractor sees as viable options for USTDA consideration; and 1.4 provide supporting analysis and recommendations on the above information in a final report that analyzes all the relevant issues. 2 DELIVERY & PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS 2.1 KICK-OFF MEETING WITH THE USTDA PROGRAM OFFICE Upon award, the Contractor shall contact USTDA?s Contracting Officer?s Technical Representative to schedule a meeting to discuss details of the Contract assignment. Unless otherwise advised by the COTR, this meeting will be held at USTDA?s office in Arlington, Virginia. The COTR shall provide the Contractor with names and addresses of the project sponsors, other pertinent entities to contact in the United States and overseas, and any other relevant details that may impact upon the design and/or evaluation of the proposed projects. 2.2 PRE-VISIT REPORT Prior to departure to the host country, the Contractor shall provide the COTR a pre-visit written report of 3-5 pages containing the proposed schedule or itinerary, preliminary strategies or findings on project viability, financing options, U.S. company interest in the projects, a list of contacts to be made during the visit and a pre-visit checklist of issues, information and questions to be utilized during the visit. 2.3 USTDA RESPONSIBILITY USTDA will advise the U.S. Commercial Service in the host country of the Contractor?s proposed travel itinerary prior to departure and request that the Commercial Section of the U.S. Consulate in S?o Paulo meet with the Contractor for briefing and debriefing meetings. 2.4 CONTRACTOR?S HOST COUNTRY TRAVEL The Contractor shall travel to the host country to meet with relevant project officials and with the U.S. Embassy. The Contractor shall contact the Commercial Section at the U.S. Consulate upon arrival and prior to departure for briefing and debriefing meetings. The Contractor is responsible for arranging all meetings as well as logistics for the visit, i.e., hotel accommodations, transportation, and interpretation services. In some cases, the Contractor may need to Contract with a local entity to assist with these logistics. Local entities may not provide the technical work of substance for the creation of the DM report. 2.5 CONTRACTOR MEANINGFUL DISCUSSIONS The Contractor shall hold meaningful discussions with appropriate contacts to determine and gauge the interest of potential project financiers and potential U.S. suppliers and assess whether the proposed projects are economically, financially, and technically viable. The Contractor shall analyze the potential procurement of U.S. goods and services for project implementation by categories and dollar values. The analysis shall include for each project an assessment of the project risks and its financial viability, the priority of the project and political/social/organizational support it has, potential sources of financing, and the capability and experience of the project sponsor. The analysis shall also include an assessment of the social and economic development impacts of the proposed projects. 2.6 USTDA REPORT OBJECTIVES If the Contractor recommends that USTDA fund the study/technical assistance in a phased approach, and/or if any outstanding issues should be resolved or conditions met before funding is approved, those phases, issues and/or conditions should be clearly explained in the recommendation. 2.6.2 The Contractor shall provide a final report to the USTDA, which will: 2.6.2.1 assess and justify whether or not USTDA should provide funding for feasibility studies/technical assistance for the proposed projects; 2.6.2.2 assess any alternative or other activities which the Contractor sees as viable options for USTDA consideration; and 2.6.2.3 provide recommendations on the above information in a final report that analyzes all relevant issues 2.6.3 Contractor recommendations shall be based upon USTDA funding criteria, which are that the project must: 2.6.3.1 be likely to receive implementation financing, and in addition, have a procurement process that provides ?equal access? to U.S. firms; 2.6.3.2 represent an opportunity for sales of U.S. goods and services that is many times greater than the initial investment of USTDA assistance; 2.6.3.3 be a development priority of the project sponsor and country where the project is located and have the endorsement of the U.S. Embassy in that nation; and 2.6.3.4 involve U.S. companies that are facing strong competition from foreign companies receiving subsidies and other support from their governments. 3 DEFINITIONAL MISSION FINAL REPORT 3.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (1-2 PAGES) The Contractor shall submit an executive summary of the report?s findings and recommendations. 3.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION (3-5 PAGES) The Contractor shall submit a description and history of the projects, including, among other things, host country and/or other project sponsors, sector, project location, source of raw materials, infrastructure requirements, proposed technological approach, legal and regulatory framework (licenses, permits, etc.), implementation schedule, economic fundamentals (estimated capital cost, operating costs, expected revenues, etc), and any other key variables or issues that the Contractor deems critical as part of a thorough activity/project evaluation. 3.3 DEVELOPMENTAL IMPACT (2-3 PAGES) The Contractor shall submit an assessment of the development impact of the projects on the host country. In this section, the Contractor shall discuss two aspects of ?developmental impact?. 3.3.1 Primary Developmental Benefits - The Contractor will discuss the most important benefits that the projects will provide to the host country. Items of interest to USTDA include, but are not restricted, to the following: number of new jobs created by the project; technology transfers; and new service etc. 3.3.2 Alternatives ? Are there competing ways to achieve host country objectives? At the Definitional Mission stage, it will not be possible to address these questions definitively, but the Contractor, at a minimum, is expected to define and comment on the broad alternatives available to the host country project sponsor. 3.4 PROJECT SPONSOR?S COMMITMENT (1-2 PAGES) The Contractor shall submit a description of the host country project sponsors business/government operations or authority and an assessment of the project sponsors? ability to implement the project. 3.5 IMPLEMENTATION FINANCING (2-4 PAGES) The Contractor shall submit a review of the financing options for project implementation, including an assessment of the overall cost estimate of the projects and, for projects involving potential U.S. equity investment, the project?s proposed debt-equity structure to ensure that it corresponds to the requirements of the prospective lenders (this aspect is critical to USTDA?s decision making). As part of this review, the Contractor is required to contact officials from the potential financing institutions, including, where appropriate, multilateral lending institutions, Ex-Im Bank, OPIC, and private/commercial sources, to assure that the project sponsors have adequately explored their financing options. The Contractor shall provide names and phone numbers of contacts at the potential lending institutions and summarize their comments. The Contractor must determine the most likely source(s) of implementation financing and ensure that the terms of reference for any proposed feasibility study/technical assistance fulfill the requirements of the most likely source(s). 3.6 U.S. EXPORT POTENTIAL (1-2 PAGES) The Contractor shall submit a best estimate of potential procurement of U.S. goods and services for project implementation. This estimate should be supported by a breakdown by category and dollar value of goods and services likely to be imported for the project and an illustrative list of potential U.S. suppliers of the goods and services for those goods and services listed as likely U.S. exports. A report of discussions with a reasonable number of U.S. companies that could be exporters, and their level of interest in the project, should also be included. 3.7 FOREIGN COMPETITION (1-2 PAGES) The Contractor shall discuss the foreign competition for goods and services likely to be procured for project implementation by category, including a discussion of U.S. industry competitiveness in each category, taking into account geographic factors, local industry capabilities, technology and licensee issues, past procurement tendencies of the project sponsors, and how the procurement is likely to be conducted. 3.8 IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT (1-2 PAGES) The Contractor shall submit a statement regarding the likely consequences the proposed projects may have on the environment and ensure that the terms of reference for the feasibility study/technical assistance include, at a minimum, a preliminary review of the project?s impact on the environment, with reference to local environmental requirements and those areas requiring evaluation by the potential lending agencies. The feasibility study/technical assistance should identify potential negative impacts and discuss the extent to which they can be minimized. 3.9 IMPACT ON U.S. LABOR (1-2 PAGES) The Contractor shall submit an assessment of the impact of the projects on U.S. labor. 3.10 QUALIFICATIONS (1-2 PAGES) The Contractor shall submit the feasibility team qualifications required to conduct the study and the evaluation criteria to be used by the Project Sponsor in cases of completed studies. 3.11 JUSTIFICATION (1-2 PAGES) The Contractor shall provide an explanation of why USTDA?s grant funding is needed. 3.12 TERMS OF REFERENCE (1-5 PAGES) The Contractor shall provide Terms of Reference (TOR) for each feasibility study/technical assistance activity recommended for funding. The TOR which must be endorsed by the Project Sponsor, shall include, at a minimum, the following: 3.12.1 Purpose and objective of the study and; a technical analysis of the project; 3.12.2 An economic analysis of the project (This section will usually include attention to competing alternative methods of achieving the same or similar host country objectives); 3.12.3 A financial analysis of the project; 3.12.4 An appropriate environmental analysis of the project; 3.12.5 A review of regulatory issues related to the project; 3.12.6 A summary of key host country economic development benefits expected from projects (e.g., job creation, new technologies introduced, productivity enhancements, new production/transport/communications capacities that will result from the project). 3.12.7 A list of proposed equipment and services for project implementation, including a list of potential U.S. sources of supply (company names and contact information); 3.12.8 An implementation plan (anticipated next steps necessary to implement the project); and 3.12.9 A Final Report that summarizes the findings of the study and/or other appropriate deliverables. The TOR must be designed to meet the requirements of the most likely source(s) of implementation financing. The requirements of some of the potential financing sources may be found at the following web sites: www.opic.govfinance/home.htm www.exim.gov/tools/index.html www.ifc.org/proserv/ www.adb.org/privatesector/finance/default.asp www.ebrd.com/apply/index.html www.iadb.org/iic/english/pdf.htm www.afdb.org/opportunities/business_general_proc_notices_country.htm 3.13 FEASIBILITY STUDY BUDGET (2-3 PAGES) The Contractor shall provide a budget a detailed budget and task breakdown for the feasibility studies/technical assistance prepared in accordance with the Feasibility Study Budget Format and Budgeted Labor Requirements, which can be found at www.tda.gov. The budget should be supported with sufficient detail to enable USTDA staff or others reviewing the material to understand completely, not only the budgeted amounts, but also the methodology that justifies the budget amounts. The budget should include: 1. Labor, budgeted by position title and task for each of the positions on the feasibility study team. Positions should be identifiable, with descriptions of the positions and proposed team members included in the proposal. Person-Days should reflect the proposed number of days of work effort proposed for each position for each task. The unit cost should be the actual loaded daily rate for each position. The proposed budget may not include fee or profit. 2. Itemization should be prepared for per diem, transportation, communications, subcontracts, translation of Final Report, and other direct costs. Per Diem must be based on U.S. Government rates, which are available on the State Department web site (http://www.state.gov/www/perdiems/index.html). The budget should support the feasibility study terms of reference. 3.14 RECOMMENDATIONS (1-2 PAGES) The Contractor shall provide recommendations as to: 3.14.1 whether or not the projects meet USTDA?s basic funding criteria; 3.14.2 the appropriate TORs for the proposed studies/technical assistance; and 3.14.3 the appropriate budgets for the proposed studies. 3.15 CONTACTS The Contractor shall submit a list of individuals contacted during the DM, with their addresses, phone and fax numbers, and e-mail addresses. 4 CONTRACTOR INTERIM STATUS REPORTING AND DELIVERABLES The Contractor shall provide verbal updates to the COTR when necessary. The deliverables may also take the form of information, advice, opinions, alternatives, analyses, evaluations, recommendations, interim and final reports, or other oral or written work products needed for successful performance. 5 CONTRACTOR -- DEFINITIONAL MISSION REPORTS The Contractor shall prepare a report to USTDA that addresses all the issues in the Definitional Mission requirements as outlined in Section 3.1 through 3.15. Since this report will be available for public distribution, any sensitive or business proprietary information shall be included in a separate confidential attachment to the report. 5.1 REPORT DRAFT -- COTR APPROVAL The Contractor shall provide the report in draft form to USTDA for COTR review within ten (10) working days after completion of the overseas visit. The report should be clearly marked ?Draft? on the cover. 5.2 REVISED REPORT DRAFT ? COTR APPROVAL Within five (5) working days after receiving the COTR?s comments on the draft report, the Contractor shall submit a revised copy for COTR review. The Contractor shall revise the report as necessary until securing final COTR approval. 5.3 FINAL REPORT ? COTR APPROVAL The final report shall incorporate all mutually agreed upon material and revisions. The report shall include any supporting documentation. It shall be grammatically and factually correct in all respects, internally consistent, and all statements and tables shall be clear and easily understood by a competent reader, and contain no typographical errors. Upon notification from the COTR that the report is considered acceptable, the Contractor shall submit twenty (20) copies, and one (1) unbound original to USTDA. All reports must be paginated and submitted in Microsoft Word on a 3.5-inch disk or on a CD-Rom. The Contractor shall also submit the report to the COTR as an e-mail attachment, and also in Microsoft Word format. 6. PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS AND PROFILE The Companhia de Saneamento Basico do Estado de S?o Paulo (?SABESP?) is the utility in charge of the planning, implementation and operation of potable water and basic sanitation facilities in 366 municipalities in the State of Sao Paulo. SABESP provides service to 25 million people. Its operations vary in size ranging from the Sao Paulo metropolitan area with 18 million inhabitants to medium and large cities ranging from 100,000 to 1 million inhabitants to small towns with less than 100,000 inhabitants. SABESP has identified several areas in which it requires technical assistance. 1) Effective potable water treatment systems. SABESP is seeking to establish a more effective water treatment process. Population growth has placed a number of stresses on the the Upper Tiete River, which is the source of water for 2.5 million people in the greater S?o Paulo area, and the Lower Cotia River, which supplies another 300,000. SABESP is trying to develop new treatment processes for these sources of potable water. 2) Distribution Management: SABESP is seeking TA to improve the performance of water distribution operations. In the S?o Paulo metropolitan area there are 25,000 km of distribution mains and 20,000 km of service connections. SABESP conducts approximately 20,000 repairs per month to its water distribution network. To improve the quality of its services, SABESP is seeking state-of-the-art tools to improve the operational management of its distribution network, its maintenance system, and existing control mechanisms. 3) Wastewater Tertiary Treatment: SABESP is seeking technical assistance to comply with more stringent environmental norms for wastewater effluent. SABESP operates several wastewater treatment processes, of which 40 are conventional activated secondary sludge and approximately 230 are stabilization ponds. In some cases, there is a need for tertiary treatment to remove nitrogen and phosphorus from the effluent in order to comply with new state and federal norms. Many of the stabilization pond treatment systems will also require further treatment to remove algae, reduce the fecal coliform level and improve the oxygen levels. 4) Industrial Re-use of Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluents: SABESP operates 5 large wastewater treatment plants in the S?o Paulo metropolitan area and 2 wastewater treatment plants in the interior of the state with a total of 16 cubic meters per second of effluent that could potentially be re-used by industry. USTDA has worked with SABESP in the past. USTDA provided a $250,000 grant to SABESP (USTDA Activity Number 1996-561A) for technical assistance on the S?o Paulo Wastwater Treatment Plan. The DM consultant will be tasked with pursuing additional details from SABESP on the results of this previous technical assistance as part of the evaluation of the new request for funding. The Companhia de Tecnologia de Saneamento Ambiental (CETESB) is the environmental protection agency for the State of S?o Paulo. USTDA has also worked with CETESB, most recently in 2000 to partially fund technical assistance (USTDA Activity Number 2000-50016B). CETESB has used the results of the original technical assistance to define the procedures and schedule for the environmental licensing of the approximately 7,000 service stations and fuel retailers located in the state of S?o Paulo. CETESB has requested technical assistance to develop a new program to reduce toxic industrial products in the state. The State of S?o Paulo generates 54% of Brazil?s gross national product (GNP) and is home to more than 120,000 industries. S?o Paulo represents about 71% of Brazil?s pharmaceutical production, 64.5% of plastic production, and 59% of chemical production. In December 2002, the State of S?o Paulo changed its permitting legislation, which provided CETESB with new tools to more effectively guarantee environmental quality in the state. Specifically, CETESB is seeking to develop a plan for the reduction of toxic chemicals. CETESB is studying the possibility of implementing a program similar to the USEPA?s Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) and similar state-level programs in the United States. The proposed scope of the technical assistance would identify the main toxic chemicals used in the top 10 industrial sectors in the state; quantify the use of these chemicals; prioritize the chemicals to be targeted by the program (e.g. based on quantity used, level of toxicity, potential pollution); research ways to create economic incentives for industries to reduce the use of toxic chemicals; and assist CETESB with the design of a program to reduce the use of toxic chemicals. The implementation of a state-wide toxic chemical reduction program by CETESB is expected to drive industries to change some industrial processes in order to reduce the use of toxic chemicals.
- Place of Performance
- Address: 1000 Wilson Blvd. - Suite 1600, Arlington, VA
- Zip Code: 22209
- Country: USA
- Zip Code: 22209
- Record
- SN00582189-W 20040509/040507212613 (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 |