MODIFICATION
R -- Definitional Mission to Evaluate Waste to Energy and Renewable Energy Projects in Europe Region
- Notice Date
- 1/16/2004
- Notice Type
- Modification
- 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
- USTDA-04-Q-039
- Response Due
- 2/9/2004
- Archive Date
- 2/24/2004
- Point of Contact
- Forestine Winters, Contract Specialist, Phone 703-875-4357, Fax 703-875-4009, - Della Glenn, Contracts Officer, Phone 703-875-4357, Fax 703-875-4009,
- E-Mail Address
-
contract@tda.gov, contract@tda.gov
- Small Business Set-Aside
- Total Small Business
- Description
- STATEMENT OF WORK ?Definitional Mission? for Advisory and Assistance Services by Non-Governmental Sources for Europe Region? Project Title: Europe Region: Waste to Energy and Renewable Energy Definitional Mission 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. 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 study 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 (COTR) 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 sponsor(s), 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 project(s). 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 project, 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. Embassy in the host country of the Contractor?s proposed travel itinerary prior to departure and request that the Commercial Section of the Embassy provide the Contractor with names and addresses of appropriate host country officials with whom to meet. 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. Embassy upon arrival and prior to departure for briefing and debriefing meetings. While the Embassy may be able to assist the Contractor in arranging some initial meetings with host country officials, the Contractor is responsible for arranging the 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 project(s) is 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 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 project. 2.6 USTDA Report Objectives If the Contractor recommends that USTDA fund the study (ies) 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 a feasibility study of the proposed project(s); 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, as cited in Sections 3.1 through 3.15. 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 project, 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 project 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 project 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 sponsor(s) business/government operations or authority and an assessment of the project sponsor?s 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 project 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 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 sponsor, 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 project may have on the environment and ensure that the terms of reference for the feasibility study 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 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 project 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 the feasibility study. 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 study prepared in accordance with the Feasibility Study Budget Format and Budgeted Labor Requirements, which can be found at Attachment 3. Section J.3. 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 project meets USTDA?s basic funding criteria; 3.14.2 the appropriate TOR for the proposed study; and 3.14.3 the appropriate budget for the proposed study. 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 C.3.1 through C.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 As Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia move closer to full European Union membership, several EU policies and directives make the move to waste-to-energy and renewable energy an imperative. Pollution control mandates, renewable energy requirements and reductions in landfilling all create policy requirements to promote waste-to-energy and renewable energy. This policy goal has caused many of the countries to implement mandatory purchase prices for energy formed from renewable sources (waste-to-energy is considered renewable). These mandatory purchase prices and other policies can make waste-to-energy and renewable energy projects economically viable. The Waste-to-Energy and Renewable Energy Conference that USTDA hosted in Prague in December 2002 took the opportunity to capitalize on these trends. More than 20 projects in this sector from North Central Europe countries were highlighted and presented at the conference. Many of these projects had previously obtained USTDA feasibility study financing. USTDA has funded feasibility studies on the following waste to energy and renewable energy projects within the last two years in Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia: ? Chelm Waste-to Energy Project ? This project would build a power plant fueled by municipal waste for the generation of electric power and hot water in Chelm, Poland ? Suwalki Wind Power Project ? This project is a technical and economic assessment of a wind project in Suwalki, Poland. ? 250 MW Slupsk Offshore Wind Project ? This project would involve more than 100 turbines off of the Baltic coast of Poland. ? Druid Biomass-to-Energy Project ? Druid intends to use its waste biomass to fuel new cogeneration units near Plzen, Czech Republic to generate heat and electricity for its operations. ? Plzenska Teplarenska Waste-to-Energy Project ? This project in Plzen, Czech Republic would involve the construction of a district heating plant powered by municipal waste. ? PDI Plasma Gasification Project ? The Czech grantee would utilize a state-of-the-art plasma gasification vitrification system to turn municipal waste and other waste into electricity. ? KH Tebis Co-generation Biomass to Energy Project ? This project would involve using biomass waste to power a cogeneration heat and power plant in Kutna Hora, Czech Republic. ? Slovnaft Incinerator Upgrade Project ? This project involves the selection of the most modern waste-to-energy technology and equipment to upgrade and/or replace three incinerator units in Slovakia. The DM consultant will visit most of the above-mentioned projects along with Mr. Greenip. The purpose of this effort would be both to determine the current status of each of the projects and to consider ways to move the projects toward implementation. This will allow for better analysis of the projects? actual or potential (depending on the stage of the project) U.S. exports and development impact. The DM consultant will be able to analyze the projects individually and the strategy as a whole to help USTDA determine future strategy in the waste-to-energy and renewable energy sector. Although Mr. Greenip will not travel to Hungary, the DM consultant should also review projects in Hungary that USTDA has funded, including: ? Greenergy Wind Park Project ? Greenergy Kft. proposes to build a wind park of 80 to 100MW of installed capacity in various sites in Hungary. ? Ajka Solid Waste Eco-Processing Feasibility Study ? This project would involve a high solids anaerobic digestion plant in Ajka, Hungary. ? Tapioszele Disposed Rubber Recycling Project ? The municipality of Tapioszele examined the establishment of a joint-venture disposed rubber recycling facility using cutting-edge, environmentally neutral pyrolysis technology. ? Druid Biomass-to-Energy Project ? Druid intends to use its waste biomass to fuel new cogeneration units near Plzen, Czech Republic to generate heat and electricity for its operations. The DM consultant will also review waste-to-energy and renewable energy projects in the three countries and in Hungary. In large part due to the success of the conference, USTDA has received a number of proposals for USTDA funding of feasibility studies in the waste-to-energy and renewable energy sector. The following projects will be reviewed: ? Petrochema Waste to Energy Project: This project would involve construction of a regional incineration plant in eastern Slovakia that would replace two out-of-date incineration plants owned by Petrochema a.s., a large Slovak chemical company. The current plants do not meet emission standards set to take effect in the near future. This project is expected to be funded by structural EU funds, internal sources and the attraction of a strategic investor. ? KV Venti Wind Energy Project: KV Venti Ltd., a private Czech developer of wind projects, is planning to initially install approximately six wind turbines near either Most or Nachod in the Czech Republic. Both of the locations are in mountainous areas that have good wind potential. ? Powiat Nowy Tomysl wind energy project: a wind power facility is currently being developed west of the city of Poznan, with an expected installed capacity of 100.5 MW. Total project costs are estimated at $105 million, with the majority of costs consisting of payment for turbines. ? MOL Biofuels Project: This project would involve the production of biofuels (gasoil, biodiesel, etc.) in order to meet an EU mandate of 2% biofuels production by 2005. MOL as one of the largest refiners in Central Europe must comply with Hungarian implementation of this mandate. MOL has access to capital markets and is a profitable firm, so this project could be financed from internal sources or through balance sheet debt financing. ? MOL Geothermal Power Project: This project would involve the construction of a 2-5 Megawatt geothermal power plant, which would produce electricity. Existing hydrocarbon wells would be explored and developed. The total project cost is estimated at $14 million in the case of a 5-megawatt plant. ? BKZ Somogy County WTE project: BKZ, a Hungarian developer of waste-to-energy would construct a waste-to-energy facility in Somogy County, Hungary. ? BKZ Duna Refinery CHP: This project would involve the construction of a combined heat and power plant on the premises of MOL?s Duna Refinery. ? Municipal solid waste gasifier in Szegd County: BKZ would develop a municipal solid waste gasifier in conjunction with municipal authorities in Szegd County, Hungary.
- Place of Performance
- Address: USTDA office, Arlington, VA, other U. S. locations and designated host countries
- Record
- SN00505690-W 20040118/040116212642 (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 |