Consultant opportunities with the EBRD

Transcription

1 Consultant opportunities with the EBRD Thursday 17th March, 2011 NL EVD Internationaal Afternoon Workshop Instructions and Material Steps for Completing the Case Studies Part 1: Analysis of an Expression of Interest (tot 75mins) 1. Following a brief introduction, the group of participants will be divided into subgroups of 4-6 people. Time allowed: 10 minutes. 2. In the first exercise, each person in each subgroup will be asked to review only the Procurement Notice (Annex I) and the Expression of Interest from FakeConsult (Annex II), which is a contrived expression of interest in response to the advertisement. 3. Each subgroup will be given time to review the Expression of Interest letter from FakeConsult in order to give it the best possible chance of being selected by the EBRD for the short list. Editing could include additions, deletions, modifications etc. Time allowed: 30 minutes 4. The subgroups will than be asked to present their views, comments and highlight errors/inconsistencies as if they were evaluators in the EBRD. Time allowed: 35 minutes Part 2: Analysis of a response to a Request for Proposal (tot 75mins) 5. The subgroups will be asked to read the Request for Proposal package (Annex III); subgroups are also presented with an extract from the Technical Proposal of Spancom - a shortlisted company - comprising an Activity, Staffing and Output Schedule (Annex IV); this is the core of a Technical Proposal. Timing: A total of 40 minutes is allowed for document revision and subgroup discussion. 6. Each subgroup will than be asked to present its views and comments on the Technical Proposal extract to the whole group with a view of highlighting weaknesses, strengths, errors and inconsistencies. Time allowed: 35 minutes. Attached Material: o Annex I: Procurement Notice o Annex II: Expression of Interest from FakeConsult o Annex III: Request for Proposal package o Annex IV: extract from Technical Proposal of Spancom (F)

2 Annex I Procurement Notice Georgia Regional Roads Regional Roads Project - Pre-Feasibility Study Georgia Transport Early Transition Countries Fund Assignment Description The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (the "EBRD" or the "Bank"), in cooperation with MCG ("Millennium Challenge Georgia"), intends to assist the Government of Georgia to improve the road corridor linking Tbilisi with the Samtskhe-Javakheti Region. To this end, the main objectives of the assignment are to: Establish the reasonable scope of a project to rehabilitate approximately 90kms of the road from Borjomi, through Akhaltsikhe to Goderdzi (mountain pass) on the extension towards Batumi, Assess establish the economic and engineering feasibility of this project with emphasis on identifying the nature and extent of potential physical problems, Prepare draft Terms of Reference for subsequent stages of the required consultancy work. To achieve these objectives, the scope of work for the assignment is expected to include, but not be limited to: Preparing a Road Inventory of the Borjomi - Akhaltsikhe Goderdzi Road Undertaking a Road Condition Survey and a Geo-hazard Survey Recommending appropriate Design Standards Estimating Preliminary Costs Proposing a suitable Rehabilitation Programme Undertaking an Outline Economic Evaluation Preparing draft Terms of Reference for Feasibility Study. Assignment Duration: It is envisaged that the assignment duration will be 6 months with the start date of 30 June 2011 Maximum Budget Available for the Assignment: EUR 200,000.00; exclusive of VAT The consultant must determine whether any VAT would be chargeable on the services and the basis for that determination, without taking into consideration the Bank's special status as an IFI and state this to the Bank in their response to the Invitation for Expressions of Interest. To the extent that a consultant incurs input VAT on goods and services purchased in connection with the provision of services (e.g. VAT on airline ticket) which is not otherwise recoverable by the consultant from the local tax authority, the gross cost to the consultant of such expenses shall be treated as a reimbursable expense. Eligibility There are no eligibility restrictions, however consultant selection and contracting will be subject to availability of funding. Consultant Profile Corporate services are required. Firms expressing their interest should have wide experience in the road sector. The Consultant's team must encompass considerable experience and expertise in Highway Engineering & Planning, Engineering Geomorphology and Geotechnical Engineering and should be familiar with the design and construction of roads in mountainous terrain similar to that in Georgia. The firms should have a strong focus on road engineering and previous experience of working in Former Soviet Union countries is essential. Specific experience of working in Georgia

3 and the Caucasus region is desirable, as staff with good Georgian or Russian language skills. It is expected that most of the consultancy work will be carried out in Georgia. Associations with local firms of specialists and/or the inclusion in the Consultant's team of local technical experts who are familiar with the conditions and standards will be encouraged. Submission Requirements Interested consultants are hereby invited to submit expressions of interest. In order to determine the qualifications and competence of consulting firms seeking to be shortlisted, the information submitted should include the following: company profile, organisation and staffing; details of experience or similar assignments undertaken in the previous five years, including their locations; CVs of staff who could be available to work on the assignment. The above information should not exceed 15 pages, including CVs. If the consultant wishes, additional information (eg, brochures, full CVs, etc) may also be annexed, but this should be clearly identified as supplementary to the main submission. Expressions of Interest should be submitted, in English, electronically through eselection no later than the closing date. EBRD Contact: Mr Andrea Baldan European Bank for Reconstruction and Development One Exchange Square London EC2A 2JN Tel: , Fax: baldana@ebrd.com Note Following this invitation for Expression of Interest, a shortlist of qualified consultants will be formally invited to submit proposals. Shortlisting and selection will be subject to the availability of funding. 16 March 2011

4 Annex II FakeConsult EOI FakeCosult Expression of Interest Introduction In response to the procurement notice put forward by the EBRD for the Pre-feasibility Study of the Georgia Regional Roads Project. FakeConsult herewith formally expresses its interest to undertake the consultancy services required. Company Profile FakeConsult is a young consultancy individual firm focusing on consulting services related to the field of infrastructure development and geotechnical/geological conditions. FakeConsult s main consultant and funder, Dr. Jan Schmidt, is an internationally experienced engineering geologist and engineering geomorphologist who has worked in a number of mountainous countries on various infrastructure development projects. In particular road feasibility and road alignment studies have been his main domain of professional focus in recent years, particularly in the Himalayas. The extensive experience gained in mountainous settings by FakeConsult are clearly in line with the expressed field of expertise described in the procurement notice: Preparation of a road inventory A road condition survey compilation Appropriate design standard recommendation Cost estimates Geological, geo-hazard and geo-engineering assessments FakeConsult therefore feels comfortable to submit an EoI in response to the procurement notice and is confident to be able to put forward a knowledgeable and experienced staffing. Organisation and Staffing FakeConsult adopts a flexible staffing approach in dependence of the various consultancies in which it operates. In general the company can fall back upon a network of independent specialists, all having gained a track record of experience in infrastructure development studies in mountainous terrain. These specialists all have a specific field of excellence varying from road design, engineering geology, tunneling to hazard mapping. The various specialists in our network are connected to well known engineering geological research institutions (Spancon and Freshtex in France and many others abroad). It is envisaged to engage with local engineering staff in Georgia to make use of their local technical and logistical expertise. Previous experience FakeConsult has been involved the last years with a number of road alignment and road feasibility studies in the Himalayas, mainly Bhutan. These studies all were located in challenging mountainous conditions with an array of natural hazards and constraints related to the complex geological and geotechnical conditions in which the specific roads and/or road alignments were projected. In the projects undertaken close collaboration existed with local governmental Road Authorities during the whole project phase to ensure a positive embedding of the study results in the local organizations. Examples of recent road studies are: Example 1 The road was assessed in light of the local geological and geotechnical conditions and natural hazards present. In light of the complexity of the natural conditions a negative judgement was submitted to the Department of Roads considering the high construction and post-construction maintenance costs.

5 Example 2 The proposed Highway is a road corridor of more than 80 km connecting the district capital of with a remote town in south-west Bhutan. As access to the town can only be achieved via Indian soil a new road alignment has been proposed by the Department of Roads. A field reconnaissance was carries out to assess the feasibility of this proposal form a geological and geotechnical perspective. Alternatives were included to circumnavigate the most obvious problem spots along the complex alignment section. At present the road is under construction in accordance with the submitted advice, including new alternative sections. Example 3 The National Highway linking Central-Bhutan is planned to be upgraded in the coming years in order to serve a large-scale hydropower project planned to be started soon. To reduce the present distance a bye-pass has been proposed that will shorten the present highway by about 50km. The chosen alignment however was found to be geologically and geotechnically very challenging. The design of the proposed Highway therefore should be adapted considerably to safeguard a safe and sustainable usage of the bye-pass in the years to come. Provisional Bid FakeConsult is able to put forward a provisional bid for the Georgia Regional Roads Project - Pre-Feasibility Study for EUR 135,000, exclusive of VAT. A specific budget can only be submitted if a better judgment can be made of total work load and assessment of additional expert input, including local staff. CV of the main consultant Dr. Jan Schmidt is attached. Upon shortlisting additional CV s will submitted of experts in the field of road engineering and engineering geology. CURRICULUM VITAE of Jan Cornelius Schmidt ( )

6 Annex III - Request for Proposal package RFP 1 - Datasheet The information in this Data Sheet is specific to this Request for Proposals (RFP) and complements the Standard Instructions to Consultants -- RFP 2 1. The Assignment Title of Project: Georgia Regional Roads Project - Pre-Feasibility Study Title of Assignment: Georgia Regional Roads Project - Pre-Feasibility Study TCS ID: Proc Ref: Budget (exclusive of VAT) The total maximum budget available for this contract is 200, EUR; the Assignment may be extended by EBRD subject to Consultant s performance and project needs. The consultant must determine whether any VAT would be chargeable on the services and the basis for that determination, without taking into consideration the Bank's special status as an IFI and state this to the Bank in their response to the Invitation for Expressions of Interest. To the extent that a consultant incurs input VAT on goods and services purchased in connection with the provision of services (e.g. VAT on airline ticket) which is not otherwise recoverable by the consultant from the local tax authority, the gross cost to the consultant of such expenses shall be treated as a reimbursable expense. 3. Source of Funds and Eligibility It is anticipated that the contract will be financed through the EBRD's Early Transition Countries Fund. There are no eligibility restrictions, however consultant selection and contracting will be subject to availability of funding. 4. Timetable for engagement of consultant Issue Request for Proposal: 01 May 2011 Request for Clarifications Deadline: 21 May 2011 Receipt of proposals: 01 June :00 PM Commencement of consultancy services: 30 June 2011 Expected Duration of the Assignment: 6 months 5. The Executing Agency is: The EBRD All communication with the Executing Agency regarding this assignment should be addressed to: Mr Andrea Baldan European Bank for Reconstruction and Development One Exchange Square London EC2A 2JN Tel: , Fax: baldana@ebrd.com

7 6. Shortlisted Consultants Further to the invitation for Expressions of Interest published on 11 March 2011, the following consultants have been shortlisted and invited to submit proposals for this assignment: Lead Firm / Nationality Spancom / FRANCE Namunabase / UK Silvercan / GERMANY Linezap / ITALY Freshtex / FRANCE Associated Firms / Nationality Dinglax / GEORGIA Freshfind / GEORGIA 7. Site Visit No site visit is envisaged 8. Language of proposals The proposal language must be prepared in the English language. All supporting documents in another language must be translated into the language of the proposal. If there is a discrepancy between a document and its translation, the translation will rule. 9. Validity period of proposals Consultants shall keep their proposals valid for a period of 90 days following the deadline for submission of proposals. 9. Currency of proposal Financial proposals must be stated in the following currency: EUR 10. Submission of proposals One electronic copy shall be uploaded in eselection AND One original of the complete proposal shall be submitted to the following address: Mr Andrea Baldan European Bank for Reconstruction and Development One Exchange Square London, EC2A 2JN 11. Deadline for receipt of proposals The deadline for receipt of proposals shall be 01 June :00 PM 12. Interview of key experts No interviews are envisaged. 13. Financial Proposals Financial Proposals will be evaluated based on total proposal price. 14. Other instructions or amendments to the standard documents For Evaluation Criteria and Methodology please see RFP 4.

8 1. General RFP 2 (extract from) Standard Instructions to Consultants Introduction 1.1 The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development ( EBRD or the Bank ) intends to select a consultant from among the shortlisted consultants set out in Data Sheet - RFP 1 (para 6) ( Consultant(s)''), in accordance with the procedures specified in the Request for Proposals ( RFP ) package. 1.2 Throughout this RFP 2, the term Consultant(s) is used to refer to the lead firm ( Lead Firm ) and (if any) its associated firm(s) as listed in Data Sheet - RFP 1 (para 6). The Bank shall only correspond with the authorised representative of the Lead Firm of a Consultant. 1.3 Consultants should note that: (a) subject to paragraphs 1.5 to 1.7, below, only Consultants that have been short listed and invited to submit proposals are eligible to participate in this RFP; (b) the costs involved in preparing the proposal and negotiating the contract, including any travel expenses incurred during site visits or attendance at interviews, are not directly reimbursable as a cost of the assignment; and (c) the Bank is not bound to accept any of the proposals submitted. Source of Funds 1.4 The funding source and eligibility requirements for the assignment & Eligibility are set out in the Data Sheet - RFP 1 (para 3). Consortia Subcontractors and Association 1.5 If a Consultant considers that it does not have all the required expertise for the assignment, it may obtain a full range of expertise by associating with individual consultant(s) and/or consultant firms and entities, in a consortium or through subcontracting or association, as appropriate. The Consultant will not request the Bank to recommend experts or firms with which the Consultant can sub-contract or enter into consortium arrangements. 1.6 The Consultant may not, without the prior approval of the Bank, associate with other Consultant(s). Requests for approval of such associations must be received by the Bank no later than fourteen (14) days after the date of issue of the RFP. 1.7 Subject to any restrictions or provisions to the contrary in Data Sheet - RFP 1 (para 3), the Consultants are encouraged to involve the participation of local consultants where appropriate and possible, by entering into associations or subcontracting with consultants from the country or region of the assignment. 1.8 Consultants proposing to enter into associations or subcontracts will, nevertheless, be expected to perform the major part of the assignment and to retain full responsibility for the execution of the entire assignment. The Bank will only enter into a contract with the Lead Firm as defined in Data Sheet - RFP 1 (para 6). The contractual relationships between the Consultant and any of its consortium members or subcontractors are the Consultant s sole responsibility. The Bank will not enter into correspondence with subcontractors or the Consultant s consortium members. ( )

9 3. Preparation of Proposals ( ) Technical Proposal ( ) 3.7 The Technical Proposal shall provide the following information, using the Standard Proposal Forms - RFP 3, completed in the manner and detail indicated therein, wherever specified: (a) a brief outline of the Consultant's organisation; (b) an outline of the Consultant's recent experience in assignments of a similar nature (Standard Proposal Form - RFP 3.2); (c) any comments or suggestions on the TOR (RFP 5) or other aspects of the RFP; (d) a description of the methodology and work plan for performing the assignment (Standard Proposal Form - RFP 3.5); (e) the list of the proposed experts by speciality, the tasks that would be assigned to each expert, timing and estimates of the total input of the experts. (Standard Proposal Form - RFP 3.3); (f) up-to-date hard copy CVs of the proposed experts, recently signed by the expert (scanned copies of which are acceptable) and the authorised representative of the Consultant submitting the Proposal (Standard Proposal Form - RFP 3.4) and electronically submitted versions; (g) estimates of the total number of experts needed to carry out the assignment, supported by a bar chart diagram showing the time provided for each experts team member (Standard Proposal Form - RFP 3.5); and (h) any additional information requested in the Data Sheet - RFP 1. (i) the page limit for Proposals as set out in the Data Sheet - RFP 1 must be adhered to. Consultants must not send additional information such as company brochures. 3.8 The Technical Proposal must not include any financial information. 3.9 Consultants should ensure that the information submitted in their Technical Proposal is correct and internally consistent. This information should be verifiable by reference to factual data in the possession of or available to the Consultant, or by reference to third parties The Bank may request verification of any information submitted by a Consultant A Technical Proposal may be rejected if the Consultant: (a) submits incorrect or misleading information; or (b) fails to provide information which is essential to evaluate the Proposal; or

10 (c) fails to provide clarification or acceptable verification of the information supplied, in response to a request from the Bank for such clarification or verification; or (d) includes financial information (see para 3.8 above); or (e) fails to provide an electronic version of the Proposal through eselection; or (f) submits inconsistent electronic and hard copy versions of the Proposal; or (g) misses any of the deadlines for submission which are set out in Data Sheet - RFP 1 (para 11).

11 RFP 4 - Evaluation Criteria and Methodology The following criteria and weighting shall be used for the evaluation of technical proposals. Criteria Weight Min. Acceptable Threshold 1. Specific experience and capability of the consultant firm(s) 10 - related to the assignment: * experience in similar assignments 34% * experience in similar locations 33% * structure, organisation, capacity of firm 33% 2. Adequacy of the proposed work plan and methodology in responding to the TOR: * understanding of assignment 34% * approach and methodology 33% * work plan and team assignment 33% 3. Qualification and competence of the key personal for the assignment: * Team leader & Highway engineer 55% * Geotechnical expert 20% * Transport economist 10% * Environmental expert 5% * Local expert(s) 10% Each of the key personnel listed above will be evaluated based on the sub-criteria listed below. * qualifications 15% * specific experience and expertise related to their task 60% * experience in the region 25% 4. Other factors: Local Participation, local presence, back-up 5 - capacity, quality assurance, training/transfer of know how. * Local participation and presence 100% Total Proposals earning less than the minimum score with regards to both the minimum acceptable threshold and the total (% of maximum score) specified above shall be rejected from further consideration. In combining the Technical and Financial evaluation, the following methodology shall be applied: The evaluated financial proposal (adjusted and corrected in accordance with the RFP) will be converted to a final score (points) in the following manner: FSa = LP % EPa x 100 where: a = the proposal being evaluated FSa = evaluated financial score for proposal a LP = the lowest evaluated financial proposal EPa = the evaluated financial proposal for proposal a In combining the Financial Score with the Technical Score, the Financial Score shall be given a weight of 20%. The technical score and the financial score shall be combined in the following manner: CSa = TSa [(100-W) % 100] + FSa (W % 100) where: a = the proposal being evaluated CSa = combined evaluated score of proposal a TSa = technical score for proposal a (where TS max = 100) FSa = financial score for proposal a (where FS max = 100) W = the weight given to the financial score

12 RFP5 -Terms of Reference 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 General The road infrastructure of Georgia is generally sub-standard. Most of the terrain is mountainous, with all the associated geo-hazards such as seismicity, soil instability, landslides and erosion. In 1995, the road network was severely deteriorated. Since then, improvements to major roads have gradually been made and a Pavement Management System (PMS) has been established. The most important transport corridor in the country is the east-west route from the Black Sea coast (the ports of Poti and Batumi) via Tbilisi to Red Bridge on the border with Azerbaijan and thence eastwards to Central Asia. A significant volume of traffic from/to Turkey also follows this route, entering Georgia near Batumi. Recently, attention has been given to implementing projects for rehabilitation of the road networks in the areas to the south-west of Tbilisi, the Samtskhe-Javakheti Region. In addition to improving the regional links with Tbilisi, these projects will facilitate the international connections across the southern border with both Armenia and Turkey. Further west, another connection with Turkey is provided by secondary road S8 which runs from Khashuri (on the main Poti-Tbilisi road) via Borjomi to Vale, near the border. A World Bank financed project will rehabilitate the section from Khashuri to Borjomi. Rehabilitation/upgrading of the S1 westerly extension from Akhaltsikhe would provide a significantly shorter route between Batumi and Tbilisi than the northern route at present in use via Poti. 1.2 The Project The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) is considering financing the rehabilitation of about 90km of the road from Borjomi, through Akhaltsikhe to Goderdzi on the extension towards Batumi. The Bank therefore wishes to engage a Consultant to conduct a Pre-Feasibility Study to examine the technical feasibility of such a project and to provide data for a subsequent Feasibility Study and Detailed Design. 1.3 Data Sources Some data for the project road is held in the PMS and will be made available for the study. The Consultant is also particularly referred to the following report carried out for the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) available upon request: - Assistance in Assessing the Samtskhe-Javakheti Road Project, Georgia - (Draft Final Report, April 2011) 2. OBJECTIVES The objectives of the present study are as follows. (i) To establish the reasonable scope of a rehabilitation project, (ii) To establish the nature and extent of potential physical problems, (iii) To prepare draft Terms of Reference for subsequent stages of the required consultancy work SCOPE OF WORK 3.1 Road Inventory The Consultant should prepare an inventory of the project road giving lengths and salient characteristics of homogenous sections. All existing structures (eg bridges, culverts, retaining walls) should be located and described. 1 To ensure impartiality the selected Consultant will be excluded from participation in the subsequent stages of consultancy work.

13 3.2 Condition Survey Associated with the road inventory should be a condition survey of the road pavement and cross-section, together with the identified structures. It is expected that this survey should be largely visual, i.e., not requiring instrumented measurements. 3.3 Geo-hazard Survey The Consultant should also carry out a survey to identify existing or potential geo-hazards along the route. Each such hazard should be categorized (e.g., landslide/ rock-fall, unstable slope, mudslide, erosion, flood hazard, defective/inadequate drainage, salt hazard etc) and be assessed in the context of its probable implications for the road rehabilitation and the subsequent design life. The Consultant should adopt a simple rating system in order to rank hazards in association with their relative risks and consequences for the preservation of the road. Hazards with a low rating need only to be identified whereas those with high ratings should be examined more closely. 3.4 Design Standards Based on an appreciation of the hazard survey in conjunction with the road inventory, the Consultant shall review and recommend appropriate design standards to which the road should be rehabilitated. This review shall take into account the proposals in the MCC study and any other contemporary work on the subject. Consideration should be given to the possibilities of staged rehabilitation/upgrading. 3.5 Preliminary Costs The Consultant shall make preliminary estimates of the project costs of the rehabilitation based on his recommended design standards. These costs will be at the level of project definition and any crucial assumptions (eg availability of construction materials, allowances for contingencies, working periods etc) should be stated. 3.6 Rehabilitation Programme The Consultant shall propose a suitable programme for the rehabilitation, having regard to the work to be done and the practical working periods. 3.7 Environmental Impacts The consultant will carry out a preliminary environmental analysis of the proposed development designed to identify any significant environmental issues which will need to be addressed during the subsequent detailed design and implementation stages. This work will include: (i) a review any existing environmental studies relevant to the Project, (ii) determine the expected environmental status of the Project on the basis of the existing data (including the status of public consultation), (iii) identify significant environmental issues likely to be associated with the project and the possible mitigation measures available which can minimise any potential adverse impacts, and (iv) identify any likely environmental benefits of the project. 3.8 Economic Evaluation The Consultant shall estimate the main expected economic costs and benefits of the proposed rehabilitation programme and an outline economic evaluation of the project, sufficient to confirm its viability together with indicative rates of return. When presenting the results of the economic evaluation, the Consultant shall comment on the feasibility of the project, including the possible scope to increase the economic returns by adjusting the components of the project. 3.9 Terms of Reference for Subsequent Stages It is intended that subsequent project preparation will proceed by a 2-stage consultancy reference comprising (i) a Feasibility Study and (ii) the Design & Preparation of Tender Documents. The work content of these stages is presently expected to be as follows.

14 Feasibility Study Environmental Impact Assessment Environmental Monitoring and Management Plan Right of Way survey Topographical surveys Location/assessment of construction materials sources Traffic surveys/estimates Preliminary designs Feasibility level costs Economic assessment Design & Tender Documents Detailed Designs Tender Drawings Specification Contract Documents Bill of Quantities Engineer s Detailed Estimate The Consultant shall draft Terms of Reference for this work on the basis of the information provided by the Pre-feasibility Study. The Feasibility Study report should be in a form suitable for consideration by international financing agencies (in particular, the EBRD) and the Tender Documents should be suitable for tendering by international contractors in accordance with the EBRD s Procurement Policies & Rules. 4. DELIVERABLES One month after the commencement of work, the Consultant shall provide a concise Inception Report to the the EBRD summarising his initial findings and updating the work programme. Should the Consultant consider that any changes in the scheduled field work are necessary to achieve the objectives of the study, he shall give detailed proposals for such changes and thereafter follow the instructions of EBRD on the matter. A Draft Final Report should be submitted three months after the commencement of work. This report should summarise the Consultant s conclusions and comprise: (i) A detailed inventory of all available information on the road, gathered together, classified and summarised, (ii) Detailed presentation of the recommended scheme for rehabilitating the project road. The presentation should explain the reasoning leading to the scheme and the standards adopted, (iii) Preliminary cost estimates, qualified if necessary in respect of uncertainties, (iv) Draft Terms of Reference for subsequent consultancy stages. EBRD will respond to the Draft Final Report with their comments and requests, if necessary, for any additional clarification within one month of receipt of the report. The Consultant should present the Final Report taking account of all comments and clarifications, within one month of receipt of the comments. Reports should be presented in both English (3 copies of each) and also in soft format (Word, Excel, etc). 5. STAFFING The Consultant s staff for this reference must encompass considerable experience in Highway Engineering & Planning, Engineering Geomorphology and Geotechnical Engineering. It is important that they should be familiar with the design and construction of roads in mountainous terrain similar to that in Georgia. It is expected that most of the consultancy work will be carried out in Georgia. Associations with local firms of specialists and/or the inclusion in the Consultant s team of local technical experts who are familiar with the conditions and standards will be encouraged.

15 Annex IV Extract from Technical Proposal of Spancom (F) ACTIVITY, STAFFING AND OUTPUT SCHEDULE *** Name Position Reports Due / Activities Months from the start of assignment (in the Form of a Bar Chart) No. of Months Dr Jan Schmidt Team Leader/Highway Engineer IR, DFR, FFR 3.00 Dominique Sparks Traffic Engineer/Transport Economist Traffic report, economic evaluation report 1.25 Jarred Frazier Environmental Specialist Envirionmental impact report 0.75 Adan Colon Geotechnical & Material Engineer Geotechnical & material report 0.75 Gail Carroll(*) (**) Deputy Team Leader Contribution IR, DFR & FFR 3.50 Isabel Yates Senior Highway Engineer Contribution IR, DFR & FFR, Inventory 2.00 Sophie Campbell Highway Engineer Contribution inventory and condition report 1.50 Gilberto Roth Structural Engineer Structure condition report 1.50 Melba Mcneil (*) Structural & Liaison Engineer Contribution structure condition report 3.00 Christine Hawkins Hydrological Engineer Hydrological and drainage report 1.50 Donnie Bowers Senior Geologist / Geo-Morphologist Geological & geo-hazard report 1.00 Hershel Susie Vincent Geologist Contribution geological & geo-hazard report 0.50 Prince Dixon Surveyor Hydrological and drainage report 1.50 Karla Carter (*) (**) Environmenalist Contribution environmental impact report 1.00 Lenora Clarke Ecologist Contribution environmental impact report 0.50 Supporting Staff Position Months from the start of assignment No. of Months Secretary / Translator (**) 4.00 Drivers (**) 3.00 Notes: IR - Inception Report, DFR - Draft Final Pre-Feasibility Report, FFR - Final Pre-Feasibility Report Full Time: Part Time: Reports Client's Review Report Inception Report Draft Final Pre-Feasibility Report Final Pre-feasibility Report Delivery (Months from the start of assignment) NOTES: * Available on demand ** Local Staff *** Due to the size of the file, the uploaded electronic version of this schedule differs from the hardcopy one; refer to the hardcopy for full details Technical Proposal presented by Spancom (F) in association with Freshtex (F) and Dinglax (Georgia)

16 Professional Staff Name of Staff * Jan Cornelius Schmidt Firm Spancom / FakeCons ult Area of Expertise Management and administration for transport rehabilitation and technical assistance projects, feasibility studies, design, procurement assistance, quality assurance Gail Carrol Dinglax Management and administration of complex civil engineering contracts, structural engineering Dominique Sparks Freshtex Transport planning, financing and policy, with particular emphasis on the appraisal of investments in road and maritime infrastructure Highway financing studies and studies of cost recovery based road user charging and taxation. Team leader in the formulation of study programs, in devising appropriate methodologies for the economic analysis of projects, in carrying out these analyses and in presenting the results to client governments and donor agencies Position Assigned Project Manager Assistant Project Manager local expert Transport Economist Input (months) Home: 2.5 Field: 0.5 Home: 2.5 Field: 0.5 Home: 1.0 Field: 0.25 Task Assigned Manage the provision of services, consultations, coordination with the EBRD Introduce team members into the tasks Liaison between the associates and local authorities Reporting Obtaining ROW information assist in co-operation with local authorities and organizations ownership research; checking of field survey results supervise data processing attend to meetings assist the Project Manager in reporting and contract administration Economic data collection Economic forecast scenarios Establishment of base year traffic Traffic forecast HDM-4 operation Economic evaluation of alternative alignments, rehabilitation options and/or maintenance strategies Recommendation on the economically most viable alternative Jarred Frazier Adan Colon Spancom Freshtex Professional experience in environmental planning and management in the frame of infrastructure development and environmental management projects. Environmental impact assessment, advise to environmental agencies and transfer of know-how, experience with local and governmental authorities and international organizations More than 25 years of preferential experience primarily on roads and airports projects, designs of foundations (bridges, structures), geo-technical and materials investigation and testing, pavement designs, materials specifications, supervision of construction (roads, bridges, structures), quarry and asphalt and concrete plant supervision. Environment al Specialist Senior Pavement/ Materials Engineer, Geotechnical Expert Home: 0.50 Field: 0.25 Home: 0 Field: 0.5 Conduct an Environmental Impact study comprising of the following activities Data collection; field visits Consultation with the relevant authorities Description of relevant legislative and regulatory provisions Identification of project related impacts Pavement condition survey Evaluation of pavement condition Pavement design and development of alternatives Identification and determining geo-hazards Evaluation of geotechnical investigations Technical Proposal presented by Spancom (F) in association with Freshtex (F) and Dinglax (Georgia)

17 Name of Staff* Isabel Yates Sophie Campbell Gilberto Roth Melba Mcneil Christie Hawkings Donnie Bowers Hershel Susie Vincent Prince Dixon Karla Carter Lenora Clarke Firm Area of Expertise Position Assigned Spancom Roads and Highways Engineering Senior Highway Engineer Freshtex Highway Engineering Highway Engineer Spancom Freshtex Freshtex Spancom Freshtex Spancom Dinglax Freshtex Expertise in structural design, especially in earthquake zones; experience in maintenance projects. Preparation of BOQ and tender documents, cost estimates, evaluations Expertise in structural design, management of field surveys and project management Hydrological studies and calculations, design of drainage structures and components, including irrigation systems flood protection studies Geotechnical investigations and laboratory testing, geoengineering research, geo-hazard identification, natural risk assessment and management Material and geological investigations, testing of rocks and deposits. Seismic and earthquake research Familiar and worked with different ELTA (electronic tachometers) and GPS systems; Computer data entry in GIS software Environmental surveys and analysis, audit, environmental impact assessment Environmental impact Assessment, determination and assessment of emission and pollutions, Structural Engineer Structural and Liaison Engineer Hydrological Expert Senior Geologist/G eo- Morphologist Input (months) Home: 1.5 Field: 1.0 Home: 0.5 Field: 1.0 Home: 0.5 Field: 1.0 Home: 2.0 Field: 0.0 Home: 0.5 Field: 1.0 Home: 0.5 Field: 0.5 Geologist Home: 0.25 Field: 0.0 Surveyor Home: 0.5 Field: 1.0 Environment alist local expert Home: 0.5 Field: 0.5 Ecologist Home: 0.25 Field: 0.25 Task Assigned Data collection and review Explanations of existing design standards Establishment of road alignment Data collection and review Inventory surveys Condition surveys Condition assessment Bridge inventory Bridge, culverts and other structural condition survey and bearing capacity assessment Definition of rehabilitation, reconstruction, construction measures Bridge inventory Bridge, culverts and other structural condition survey and bearing capacity assessment Liaison with local Authorities and Organisations Data collection and review Assessment of existing drainage condition Hydrological assessment Determination of preliminary drainage measures Cost estimates Geotechnical and geo-hazard surveys Assessment of soil condition Categorising of geo-hazards Risk assessment of geo-hazards Geotechnical and geo-hazard surveys Assessment of soil condition Material investigations Inventory surveys Data processing Data collection; field visits Consultation with the relevant authorities Identification of project related impacts Data collection; field visits Identification of project related impacts Assessment of emission and noise impacts Notes * To ensure continuity of inputs, Spancom will guarantee the availability of all its experts for the subsequent stages of the project including implementation ** All fees and expenses for this assignment capped at EURO 179, (excl VAT) as fully detailed in the Financial Proposal Technical Proposal presented by Spancom (F) in association with Freshtex (F) and Dinglax (Georgia)