Clarifications of the issues raised during Pre-bid ... - Rsrdc.com

Clarifications of the issues raised during Pre-bid Meeting in the Corporateoffice of RSRDC, Jaipur for1. Development of Jaipur Nagaur Highway2. Development of Sawaimadhopur-Mathura road (state Boarder) HighwayThe following representatives of the consulting firms attended the Pre-bid meeting:No. Name of firm Name of Contact No. Tel./Fax E-mailParticipant1 2 3 4 5 61 M/s Sharikon Sh. K.C.Sharma 9829065408Consultants2 M/s LASA &MCPL M/s LASA& MCPL1.Sh.P.C.Bhargava2.Sh.Deepesh9314529503,093005664813 M/s Tetra TechIndia Ltd.,4 CES India Pvt.Ltd.,5 SMEC IndiaPvt.Ltd.,6 Voyants Solutions(P) Ltd.,7 BLG ConstructionBLG Constructionservices8 PDCOR Ltd., 1.RajeeshPorwal 2. SushilMaheshwariKumawatSh. Nitin 9314624195 011-Jhanwar45007599Deepk Gupta 9414055628Sh.SamitSaproo9818554207 0124-4380043Nitai choudhary 9810615094 0124-40190511.Sh.Paresh Kr. 9784003567, 0291-Gupta9784003582 27016222.Sh. ManeeshMangal09352077575,94140470120141-2747045Jhanwar.nitin@gmail.comnitai@yoyants.inpareshkr@rediff.comm_mangal@rediff.comRajneesh.porwal@gmail.com1

Details of Pre-bid Meeting held on dt.25.03.2009 in the Corporate office ofRSRDC,Jaipur forQuarryClarifications1 2 3A. LEA Associates South Asia Pvt.Ltd.1. Please clarity whether the same consultant would beawarded more than one package (project corridor)from the three mentioned above.YES2. Cls.5.1 page 36 – For attending the pre-proposalmeeting, purchase of RFP document is writtenmandatory but cls.1.4,page-2 states that the applicantswho have downloaded the RFP document from theofficial website of the Authority need not to deposit theaforesaid fee. Please clarify:3. Cls.3.1.4(ii) page 31 – May please clarified further forthe definition of any project and type of consultancyservices discharged to fulfill the eligibility criteria. Doesit mean any project pertaining to railway, building,power plant, roads and highways, structures etc. Doesit include Design Consultancy only or Supervisionconsultancy also?.4. It is our experience that lot of time, energy and moneyis required for the preparation of the ‘Land PlanSchedules and Utility relocation (Report KD3)’ andalso on ‘Environmental and Social Impact AssessmentReport (Report KD5). We propose to change thepayment term of the two to 15% each respectively andreduce the payment of DFR (Report KD6) andFFR(Report KD7) to 20% and 15% respectively.5. It is also requested to release the payment as per thepayment schedule against the invoice submitted. Incase of any delay in payment by MoSRTH&H 75% ofthe claimed amount may please be released as anadvance payment so that the consultant must not facethe cash flow problem.6. It may please be clarified whether getting the threeclearances from viz. Forest, MoEF and State pollutioncontrol board is the responsibility of the consultant orthe scope is limited to only preparation of the reportand filing of the case to the respective departments.7. Cls.3.3.6(d) page 53- Indicative quantities of depth ofboring in soft soil and rock may please be provided todevelop a uniform and rational financial proposal bythe consultants as bridges to be proposed for reconstructionalso require sub soil investigation andwhich cannot be assessed in reconnaissance survey,whether ROB locations are also included?8. Please indicate is it required to take trial bore hole ortest pit at river bridge locations? This shall be done atall minor and major and minor bridge locations or onlyat major bridges?No fee is required, if downloaded fromwebsite.(i)(ii)This pertains to Designconsultancy only.Any construction project of therequired value will beconsider under cls 3.1.4 (ii)The payment schedule remainunchanged except time scheduleunder cl 6.2,may refer corrigendum onweb sitePayment shall be released as perprovisions of agreement.Consultant shall only assist andsupport for getting clearancewherever required.Relevant codes and good engineeringpractices be adopted for technicalspecifications.Relevant codes and goodengineering practices be adopted fortechnical specifications.9. Cls.3.5, page-54- Normally ROBs are to be provided at Consultant shall only assist and2

all level crossings falling along the alignment.Indicative GADs are to be prepared in consultationwith railway authorities. Does it mean that consultant isto get the GADs approved from Railway Deptt.,10. Cls6.3(b)(i),page 108 – Rather withholding thepayment of the next stage, it is requested to release75% of the payment to avoid any cash flow problem tothe consultant.11. Cls7.2.2.,page 109 – LD clause is too stringent. It isproposed to convert the penalty to 1% per week or partthereof subject to the maximum ceiling limit to 5%.12. Cls.3.3.2, page 50,51,52,53 – the cls.3.3.2(g) &Cls.3.3.2(j) are contradictory. For submitting thehorizontal & vertical profile & as per cls.3.3.2(g),(h)&(i); cls3.3.2(j) is not applicable.13. Cls.3.3.2(j) page 51 – Taking a cross section at 1Kmdistance may not result in adequate data forcalculation of Profile Correction and earth workquantities. Please confirm the interval for crosssection.14. Section-3,page 30 – Criteria for evaluation is notrational but mathematical. Good consultants are likelynot to get the projects with their qualified team. Firmshowing good numbers of projects (true or false) in theCVs may win the Project. Requested to evaluate theproposals in the same manner as NHAI does.15. Cls.3.2.1,page 45 – Traffic volume surveys to beconducted at Toll Plaza locations and every 20kmalong the corridor. These have to be conducted twicein four month. Please indicate the interval to beadopted for toll plaza. Can the scope for traffic countsbe reduced considering the traffic homogeneity alongthe corridors?16. Cls 3.2, page 45- Scope for Traffic surveys does notindicate to conduct of OD surveys. Please confirm.17. Cls.3.2.3(a) page 46 – Traffic projections shall bebased past trends and growth in influence area or at aconstant growth rate. Please clarify, is it required toany analysis or to adopt 5% growth rate for trafficgrowth.18. Cls.3.2.1 – page 47 – It is proposed that intersectionvolume counts to be conducted for 4hrs peak in themorning and evening.19. Cls.3.2.1. page 48 – Please indicate the duration forconducting of axle load.20 TOR indicates at identifying sections of project corridordeficient horizontal and vertical geometry. It alsoindicates at identifying sections with inadequate SSD.Does authority have any idea or drawings pertaining tothese? It would be very difficult identify these sectionswith naked eye. Are these locations to be identifiedbased on topographical surveys.support for getting clearance fromrespective department.Payment shall be released as perrelevant provision given in documentonlyShall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document onlyThe requirements are minimum andrequired no. of tests are to be carriedout as per standard codal provisionsand good engineering practices.The requirements are minimum andrequired no. of tests are to becarried out as per standard codalprovisions and good engineeringpractices.Criteria for evaluation shall prevail asper relevant provisions given indocument only.No relaxation in traffic surveys isacceptable and location toll Plazashall be decided in consultation withclient as per toll policy.Consultant may carry out morerequired study necessary for theproject.Traffic growth may be taken is as 5%as per relevant clause of thedocumentConfirmed.Please refer Clause 3.2.6.The necessary survey is to beconducted to ascertain the proposedimprovement.21. TOR indicates at provision of at least intermediate The engineering judgment is expected3

sight distance along the corridor. This will definitelyenhance the safety, but may require long verticalcurves which may results in regarding the existingprofile to a great extent. This may result in reducingthe project viability. Pease confirm is it really requiredto provide ISD throughout?22. TOR does not indicate conduct of material surveys foridentification of material sources. Please confirm.to keep the balance in proposedimprovement and financial viability inconsultation with client.All necessary survey and investigationare to be cared out to work out theproject cost and to ascertain financialviability.Please refer clause 3.423. Please indicate whether the scope includes Bypassstudy at urban area or not.24. TOR indicates at conduct of a preliminary financial The necessary survey is to beviability at inception stage of the project its self ( within conducted to ascertain the financial4 weeks). Is it required to do any field investigations or viability. May refer Clause 4A &not for this assessment? Please confirmClause 4I.25. Four weeks appears to be very short time for Shall be dealt as per relevantassessing the construction cost and traffic levels along provision given in document onlythe corridors and undertake financial viability. It maybe considered to give at least two months time for thesame or indicate guidelines for carrying out thisactivity. Please clarity26. It is also mentioned that if project is not viable, Shall be dealt as per relevantconsultants are eligible for 10% of the fee. If the above provision given in document onlysuggestion of 2 months is agreed, consultants shall bepaid at least for the field investigation. Hence, thispercentage may be increased to 40% at least first twomonths of input. Please Consider.27 Preparation of land plan schedules and utility Shall be dealt as per relevantrelocation costs would depend on the availability of provision given in document onlyother governmental staff. Please indicate whetherscope of consultants ends at submission of land planschedules and utility relocation plans or it includesundertaking joint measurements and obtainingestimates?28. It would be very difficult get Land Schedules/utility Shall be dealt as per relevantthings done within a period of 3 months. Hence the provision given in document onlysame may be at least increased to 12 months. Pleaseconsider.29. It is mentioned in the TOR that there will be a Shall be dealt as per relevantdeduction of 10% in consultancy fee at feasibility stage provision given in document only.in case the capital cost increases by 10% when Time schedule has been revised. Maycompared with IR. It is a very stringent clause in view refer rsrdc.comof the time given at IR state (4 weeks only), Pleaseconsider either increasing the time at IR stage ofremoving this clause of reduction in consultancy fee.B. Kailash Chandra Sharma – sharikocosultants@yahoo.co.in1 1. All projects page-30, cl.3.1.3 : Quality of eligible Shall be dealt as per relevantassignments be categorized.provision given in document onl2 2. – do- Quality of Shall be dealt as per relevantsubmission for methodology & work plan. –do- provision given in document only3 3. All projects page-55, cl.3.11 : Social impact Shall be dealt as per relevantspecialist shall be required for about 30 days. provision given in document only4 4. Jaipur-Nagur, pg.67, c:6.2 : The Shall be dealt as per relevant4

length is 253 km & 18 weeks has been consideredgood for 125km. The period of assignment should be36 weeks or if it is required to be done in 18 weeks,two teams shall be required.5 5. All projects: -do- periodto be proportionate to length.6 6. All projects: about 15days time shall be spent in elections & it should beexcluded.CShovan Bera archtechconsultants@rediffmail.com1 Jaipur(NH-11) to Nagaur (NH 65&89) via Jobner: para1.8 – clarifications/queries are forwarded for review:para 2.1.4 pg.6: It is seen that a social expert has notbeen included in the list where as scope of services atpara 3.1.( pg.44) & para 3.11 – (pg.55) indicaterequirement of Social Impact Assessment in thefeasibility report. (ii) it has been reported by ourproject coordinator at Jaipur that if the Project is foundto be financially not viable on DBFOT basis, than theconsultancy fees of the consultant would be restrictedto 10% of fees. – It may be appreciated that by thetime financial viability is assessed expenditure of theorder of 70% to 80% would have been incurred by theconsultant – therefore a fee of 10% would be grosslyinadequate.(iii) It is given tounderstand that the evaluation of key personnel wouldbe done with reference to a bench mark arrived at aftercomparative assessment – this procedure is generallynot adopted for evaluation by other agencies whereevaluation is done individually. – request considerprocedure.D1 2.2.2 (D) : Length of professional experience &experience on eligible assignment. : Kindly clear “Length of professional experience” does it mean No. ofyears after graduation in the respective disciplines.provision given in document onlyTime schedule has been revised. Mayrefer RSRDC.comShall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document onlyTime schedule has been revised. Mayrefer RSRDC.comThe election process will not affect thework, hence not accepted. Timeschedule has been revised. May referRSRDC.comShall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document onlyRajeev Goel, Rajeev.goel@tetratechindia.com representing TetratechindiaProfessional experience will beconsidered in actual experience asrelevant field.2 2.2.2(D): then experience on eligible assignments forenvironmental expert says “worked as a sole expert fortwo eligible assignments.” -Kindly clarifythe stature of the client for the sole expert e.g. Owner,Consultant, Contractor, Sub-contractor or local villagebodies”.3 3.1.1 & 3.1.3 – In the first stage, the TechnicalProposal will be evaluated on the basis of Applicantsexperience, its understanding of TOR. Proposedmethodology & work plan & the experience of keypersonnel. -Evaluation is also based onunderstanding of the TOR, but no marks have beenallocated under this parameter (3.1.3)4 3.1.3,3(a&b) – the criteria gives a understanding that agraduate of total ten years relevant experience shouldHe must be associated with theeligible assignment in relevant field.Shall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document onlyMay refer clause 3.1.45

have been the team leader for two eligibleassignments [ as per 2.2.2(D)]. – But at 3.1.3(a) it doesnot specify the No., of minimum eligible assignments.What will be the marks for fulfilling the requirement ofminimum two eligible assignments?5 Eligible Assignments: Cl: 3.1.4(i) & (ii) – Please clarifythat:1. The percentage above construction cost to arrive atthe Capital Cost. &2. Does the eligibility criteria mean feasibility studies &construction supervision of Highway projects.6 3.2.1 – S.No.1.0 – “ Classified Traffic volume……….&one station every 20km of project highway. -The exact location will be decided based onhomogeneous sections in terms of land use which willbe determined at the time of inception report. Thisincludes refining all the engineering & traffic surveys inthe inception report.7 3.2.3 (B) : The consultant shall also provide sensitivityanalysis due to change in assumption of trafficprojection: -Sensitivity analysisshall be provided as parameters given in HDM IV-AWorld Bank recognized economic analysis software. –Please clarify if marks will be deducted if the sensitivityanalysis is not proposed to be done by HDM-Iv?8 3.3.2(A) divide the project highway as per terrainclassification:The project highway isdivided primarily on homogeneous sections for subgrade& soil properties as pavement design will bebased on that.9 3.3.2(D) Identify stretches which require raising. -Raising of embankment will be decided on a decisionbased on streamlining the flooding water in thedrainage works & the adjacent land use andcomparative cost evaluation.10 3.3.2 (e)-(i) identify stretches which do not meet thecriteria for ruling design speed. -Kindly specify the Design Parameter of the rulingdesign speed in Km/Hrs.11 Key Personnel Deployment - Kindly clarify if afirm bids for all the projects, the team of key Personnelcan be same or the min set possible.12 Annexure 4.0 ; Deliverables A: last line “ the consultantshall be entitled to a payment of 10% of the agreementalues upon such termination : - Please revise thepayment for inception Report submission &acceptance to 25% of the consultancy feesirrespective of the viability of the project.13 Cl.3.1.4(ii) second eligible criteria does not have theword construction & supervision. It only hasconstruction. Does this mean that a constructing firm isalso eligible.1. Actual construction cost2. Design/feasibility study consultancyonly.YESShall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document onlyShall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document onlyShall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document onlyAs per relevant provision of IRCcodes applicable for state Highwayand manual of specification &standards published by PlanningCommission GoI.Separate team for each projectShall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document onlyDesign/feasibility study consultancyonly.6

14 The date of LOA & sale of bid document for contractor(RFQ) has only about three to four weeks. What arethe deliverables from Technical Feasibility Consultantat this stage?15. The additional qyarries of 25.03.09 will be uploadedwhen.The deliverable along with timeschedule is as per clause 6.2 asmodified. May refer rsrdc.com30.03.2009E. D.Vimlesh mahle.Pg.No.31 in 3.1.4. Para. Eligibility Assignment: (a) Either or any, (b) YesDetails of Point No. (i) &(ii) both they essential or anyone is required. And can we do this project withconsortium bases.(i) Twolaning of a national or state highway(ii) Any project involving construction.F. Voyant solution Pvt. Ltd. info@voyants.in1 As per the team for these project, kindly allow us touse same persons for the positions of FinancialAnalyst & Environmental Expert across differentpackages.2 At page 101, clause 3.5.2 (b) of the RFP documentconsultant has to take Third Party Liability insurancewith a minimum coverage of Rs. 5 crore. This amountseems to be on the very higher side, since thepremium would have to be paid by consultant inMoSRTH this amount is taken as Rs 1 crore. Kindlyconsider.3 At page no. 67 as per clause 6.2, 10% of the paymentwill be released after 52 nd week, completion of servicesincluding assistance during bid process. We requestyou to take the bank guarantee of the equivalentamount for the said period and release the payment tothe consultant.4 At page no 31 & 32 of RFP document, to claim theproject as eligible assignments the applicant musthave received professional fee of Rs. 25 lakh for roadproject and 50 lakh for the project from private sector.We request instead of asking for the exact amount,receipt of 50% of the professional fee should beconsidered. This practice is being followed byMoSRTHG. LT- RAMBOLL1 Clause 2.1.4 of “Instructions to Applicants” requirescertain minimum number of days for each Keypersonnel to be spent at site. The purpose of this is notclear. This may impede the timely completion of theproject. Personnel will be at site if and when required.It cannot be made mandatory.2 Clause 2.2.2 D of “ Instructions to ApplicantsThis requires experience of all key Personnel in two “Eligible Assignments” the same is repeated in Clause3.1.3. This term is defined in clause 3.1.4 and pertainsto only projects of two laning with paved shoulder. Thisis highly restrictive in respect of Bridge Engineers (whowould have worked on flyovers. ROBs etc.) Traffic cumShall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document onlyShall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document onlyShall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document onlyShall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document onlyNo. of days as prescribed have beenworked out for better appreciation ofwork to be done/being done by theconsultants team. It has beengenerally accepted by intendingBidders will be adhered to.All key persons should haveexperience on eligible assignment asdefined in cl.3.1.47

Safety Engineers, Surveyors, financial Analyst andEnvironment Expert. It may however, be noted thatclause 7 of ToR does not refer to any “ EligibleAssignments” Since this qualification forms the majorcomponent of Technical Evaluation and the weightagefor Technical Evaluation is 70% in the overallassessment, this stipulation should be worded verycarefully to avoid any ambiguity.3 Clause 2.16.3 requires Memorandum and Articles ofAssociation as also copies of Audited Balance Sheetfor preceding 3 year should be included, However,Clause 2.16.6 states that “ No separate documents likeprinted annual statements ; company brochures etc.will be entertained” Please clarify.4 Clause 2.21.3 lists items which will render theApplication Non Responsive. The last “item” states it isnot non-responsive in terms here of” Please clarify.5 Clause 8.1 of “Draft Agreement” states that the partiesundertake to act in good faith…. To ensure therealization of objectives of the agreement. With such apremise, it is very unreasonable to propose a very stiffpenalty for substitution of Key Personnel as stated inclause 2.25.2 of “Instructions to Applicant”. During theshort period of the Assignment (only 18 weeks),theconsultant will not replace the expert unless it isabsolutely essential due to reasons such as death,illness, resignation etc. It is requested that thisprovision be removed.6 Clause 3.15.1 of “Terms of Reference”: States thatdetailed financial analysis is not required. What isrequired is a preliminary assessment of financialviability. Clause 3.14 states that indicative BOQ andrough cost estimates are to be prepared. All these arevery vague. Very clear levels of accuracy requiredshould be stated. Otherwise different applicants mayassume different meanings for these requirements,which will reflex in prices quoted.O&M costs are to be taken as per norms of Authority.What are they.Traffic growth rate is stipulated as 5% per annum. Thisitself will impose roughness in estimating the IRR.7 Clause 4A of TOR expects that based on “realistic”:assumptions, a preliminary financial analysis is to beprepared even at the Inception Report Stage. Thisreport is to be prepared in just 2 weeks. In clause 4 I ,when at the end of the project a “preliminary” financialevaluation is made, if the viability gap fundingproposed in inception Report exceeds 10% theconsultant will be penalized. This is grossly unfairsince even at the final stage, what is mandated is onlya preliminary financial evaluation. What accuracy canthen be expected at Inception Report Stage preparedwithin 2 weeks? This kind of provision will lead tocooking up of the results of the Report and rendering itAs per clause 2.16.6 only photocopies or relevant pages of the printeddocuments are only provided.It implies that the proposal should beresponsive in terms of cl.2.21.3(a to g)The continuation of the key person isdesirable and for exception the clause2.25.2 is applicable.The work is to be carried out as perscope of services at cl.3.1. of TORconfirming to standard specificationsof IRC and prevailing market rates.O&M cost are to be worked out asper standards of IRC, as perrguidelines in MCA for O&M issued byplanning commission.The preliminary & final projections atthe inception & final stage should bereasonably accurate to within 10% asper TOR..8

useless. When the Authority has stipulated growth rateof 5% for traffic, how can the Consultant made“inaccurate projection leading to higher costs” (see lastline of Clause 4 I).8 Clause 3.15.3 stipulates that a minimum IRR of 12 isto be aimed at by suitably adjusting the capital costand does not talk about any Viability Gap Funding toachieve this. However, Clause 4 A provides forViability Gap Funding upto 20% of the capital cost toachieve 12% IRR. This contradiction should beresolved.9 Agreement Para C: Request add between “Consultant”and “awarded” the words “after due evaluation of thecredentials presented by the consultant and the pricequoted”.10 Clause 2.9.1(g) of the agreement: This is a veryarbitrary power and the compensation for such aneventuality specified in 2.9.5.(iii) is grossly inadequate.The authority should pay 50% of the differencebetween the quoted price for the Assignment and theamounts for which invoices have been raised for theworks completed when the decision for arbitrarilyterminating the Assignment is communicated to theconsultant.11 Clause 3.3.6 Geotechnical Surveys: Test pits have tobe carried out at river bed and locations of new bridgeconstruction and other proposed structures. Wepresume that the required geotechnical data forexisting structures available with the ministry will beprovided. Please clarify.12 Clause 2.20 Bid Security: Whether Bid Security can besubmitted as Bank Guarantee.13 Clause 6.2 Time and payment Schedule: The paymentupon submission of inception report to an extend of10% may be considered since lot of surveys have tobe conducted.14 Clause 3 Scope of services Topographic Surveys :The project stretch is 253 km long with heavy trafficand the time provided for carrying out surveys are only40n days which not sufficient.15 Clause 6.2 Time Schedule for deliverables: Timeprovided for preparation of final feasibility report is 18weeks which is too short. This may be reconsidered.16 Clause 4C Land Acquisition Plan : The preparation ofland acquisition plan will also take lot of time since inmany sections both sides of the project stretch ishaving heavily built up structures such as commercial,residential buildings, temples, mosques, educationalinstitutions, government offices etc. We presume thatexisting ROW details will be provided by the ministry.HConsulting Engineering Services (India) Pvt Ltd.The limiting of viability gap fundinghas been increased to 40% andcorrigendum in this regard is attachedherewith.( as well RSRDC web site.)The present terminology of the clauseis adequate.The compensation as provided incl.2.9.5 is in order.All required data regarding theexisting structures to be obtained byconsultant.No, only Demand Draft will beacceptable.The payment schedule remainsunchanged.As specified in clause 8 of TOR, thesurveyor is a key person is to spentminimum 40 days at site, the actualduration may be more than this as perrequirement.Clause 6.2 and annexure 6 of clause6.3 is modified and corrigendum inthis regard has been issued extendingthe time schedule of variousdeliverables stretched up to 22 weeks.Details are to be collected by theconsultant, however all possible helpshall; be extended to faceilitate theconsultant.9

1 The TOR indicates only professional staff required forthe assignment without assigning man-month of eachKey Professional staff, Sub Professional Staff andsupport staff. Please indicate man-month of each keyprofessional staff, sub professional staff and supportstaff.2 Please clarify whether the same team can beproposed for all the five proposals.3 Please provide Project map showing different projectstretches to enable us make site visit and prepare siteappreciation report.4 As per payment terms (refer TOR clause 6.2,page 67),payment to the consultant will be made from 8 th weeki.e. on submission of report on Alignment and firsttraffic survey. Normally on submission of InceptionReport, a payment is made to the consultant.Shall be dealt as per document..Shall be dealt as per document.Provided.Shall be dealt as per document.Please clarify.5 As per payment terms (refer ToR, clause 6.2, page67), the submission of Inception Report has beenmentioned as, at the end of 2 nd week, whereas inclause 4A (page 59 of ToR) it is stated at the end of4 th week from commencement.Kindly clarify which time period to follow.6 As per ToR, clause 6.2, page 59 “Within a period offour weeks of submission of the Inception Report, theConsultant shall submit a Supplementary InceptionReport where it must clearly spell out the broadstrategy for structuring the prioject in a manner thatwould restrict the likely viability gap fundingto…………” . The would require certain data like basetraffic, Capital cost and O&M cost to be estimated. Atime period of four weeks is inadequate for suchviability analysis. This may be raised to weeks.Kindly consider.7 Para 3.2.1 of ToR, page 45- Classified Traffic volumecount should be done for each proposed too plazalocation and one station for every 20 KM of projecthighway traffic volume counts are generally conductedat each homogenous section, which can be more orless than 20 KM, so in our opinon, the number of trafficcount locations may be decided accordingly instead offixed interval of 20 KM, in addition to proposed TollPlaza locations.This aspect may be reconsidered.8 IN addition to the facilities to be provided by the clientas per ToR, the client should also provide the followinginformation.Existing ROW (Right of way) data/map of the projectroadlMay go through clause 4A of TORwhich states that “ within a period offour weeks of submission of InceptionReport”..Clause 6.2 modified may visitrsrdc.com.The location of traffic count station isto be decided in consultation withauthority as per clause 3.2 of TOR.Map of the projects already providedand the details are to be collected byconsultant. Authority will help if need.10

List of exiting underground utilities along the projecthightwayVillage revenue maps through which the project roadtraverses.9 Terms of Reference , Clause 6, page 67- Time andpayment schedule, sub clause 6.1 state “ The toatalduration for preparation of the Feasibility end of 52weeks or two month after the signing of agreement”. Aprovision of two man- days for each of the keypersonnel had been provided for such intermittentservices as per financial format appendix II itemC on page 160 of the ToR. This provision appears tobe too short and needs to be reconsidered. In ouropinion, the time period for such intrermitted servicesfrom each key personnel may be kept adequately (sayten man-days each) with afoof noting”to be paid onactual man- day input”, so that, such expenditureremains within the “ ceiling amount” of the contract.These aspects may please be reviewed andconsidered.10 As per clause 4 (H) page 62 of ToR, Consultant has toprepare schedules A,B,C,D and H of concessionagreement. We pressure that all other schedules willbe prepared solely by the department/client.Shall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document onlyAll the required details along withschedules are to be prepared byconsultant.Kindly confirm.11 As per clause 5 (c) of ToR, page-63 cross sectionshould be prepared for entire Project highway. Weprrsume that only typical cross section as proposedstretchwise will serve the purpose.Kindly confirm.12 It is expected that MOEF clearance has already beentaken into consideration.The necessary number of x-sectionsis to be prepared as per standardcodal provisions and goodengineering practices to ascertainrealistic project cost.All the necessary clearances are to beobtained and consultant shall allnecessary provide details and supportfor obtaining clearance.Proposal due date (PDD) alreadyamended may visit www.rsrdc.com13 We request the submission date to be extended to 21days after receiving replies of the pre-bid queries.I. Mukesh Associates1. In the Terms of Reference Page No.58 under Shall be dealt as per relevantInception report it is given that, A Supplementary provision given in document only,Inception Report Where it must clearly spell out the however Viability Funding Gap levelbroad strategy for structuring the project in a manner has been enhanced from 20% to 40%.that would restrict the likely viability gap funding to a Please visit rsrdc.com forlevel not exceeding 20%. Of the capital cost of the corrigendum.project assuming an IRR of 12%. In the event that aviable project does not seem feasible, the Consultantshall not proceed with the Consultancy and the sameshall stand terminated. The Consultant shall beentitled to a payment of 10% of the Agreement Valueupon such termination. In order to assess the reliableviability of the project at this stage, consultant has tocarryout traffic survey, topographic survey, preliminary11

improvement plan (including the bypass, structuresetc) and preliminary cost estimate. The above requiresubstantial input towards arriving the cost, revenuestreams and complete 40 to 50 percentage of totalfeasibility study. Whereas, it is mentioned that only10% of the agreement value will be paid in case theproject is not feasible. We request you to kindly revisethe percentage of payment to 40% upon termination inthe event the project seems not feasible.2 In The Terms of Reference item No. 6.2- Time andPayment schedule, Page No.67 it is given that, 15%payment will be made on submission of alignment planand first traffic survey report. This stage of reportdemand 30% of the work requirement for totalfeasibility study. Hence the payment for the first stageof payment shall be revised at least 25% of agreementvalue.3 The second stage of payment will be made onsubmission of Land Plan schedule and Utilityrelocation plan report (KD3).Preparation of land planschedule and preparation of utility shifting plan withcost of shifting utilities involve various agencies.According to the past experience in the NHAI project,the shifting of utilities and land plan schedule consumeconsiderable amount of time and some time evenbeyond the duration of project. The time required forpreparing the LPS and utility shifting depend onresponse time from the concerned agencies. Hence,we request you to kindly move the second stage ofpayment to sixth stage or consider making paymentsfor 3 rd , 4 th and 5 th stage in case the report on LPS andutility shifting is delayed due to longer response timefrom the agencies.4 In the Terms of References item No. 4 – C ( c ), PageNo. 60 it is given that, Land Plan Schedules shall beprovided separately for Two - landing and Four –landing respectively. Please clarify, whether the LPSfor two landing of entire project highway and fourlanding of entire project highway should be providedseparately. Other wise the LPS for two laning stretchand four laning stretch in the project highway to besubmitted separately. Please clarify.5 Please clarify, the type of arrangement made foracquisition of land for the project. As in case of NHAIprojects, competent authority from the revenuedepartment would be appointed to process the landacquisition required for the project. Please clarify,whether any such arrangement is envisaged forappointment of competent authority for field verificationand approval of land acquisition for the project.6 From the TOR we understand that design of alignmentof project road involve detailed design of the projectroad including the vertical and horizontal alignmentand intersection design. Since, it is a feasibility studyShall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document onlyShall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document onlyThe LPS for two laning stretch andfour laning stretch in the projecthighway to be submitted separately.As per rules of GOR.Shall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document only12

preliminary alignment of the project road (to decide thelength of road) would be sufficient. Detailed design ofgeometry would be required only at the detailed designStage and the same shall be carried out by thedeveloper which will be proof checked by theindependent consultant. We suggest that the projectswhich are proposed to be developed under DBFOTpattern, feasibility study with preliminary alignmentdesign of the project with preliminary GAD forstructures would be sufficient for estimating for theproject cost.JN K BUIDLDCON PVT LIMITED1. I.-Two laning of a national or state highway having an Shall be dealt as per relevantestimated capital cost (excluding land) of at least provision given in document only.Rs.25 crore (Rs. Twenty five crore) in case of aproject in India, and US $ 12.5 million ( US $ twelvepoint five million) for project elsewhere;ORII- Any project involving construction and having anestimated capital cost (excluding land) of at least Rs.60 crore (Rs. Sixty crore) in case of a project in India,and US & 30 million (US $ thirty million ) for projectelsewhere.It may be clarified that while evaluating the bid 1 and 2shall be treated as equal2 Can the V eligible assignment be one from I and 4 Provided assignments covers asfrom IIindicated in cl.3.1.43 Financial capacity be Rs. 1.00 crores average of three The applicant shall have received ayears, it may also be clarified .minimum income Rs.………. perannum from professional fee duringeach of three years.KPDCOR Limited March31,20091A (D) Conditions of Eligibility for key personnel: Shall be dealt as per relevantFinancial Analystprovision given in document only.1B An Applicant may, if it consider necessary, propose Shall be dealt as per relevantsuitable Sub- Consultants in specific areas of provision given in document only.expertise. Credentials of such firms should besubmitted in Form-15 of Appendix-I, A Sub-Consultant,however, shall not be a substitute for any KeyPersonnel.2 The consultant shall assist the Authority and itsFinancial Consultant and the Legal Adviser byfurnishing clarifications as required for the financialappraisal and legal scrutiny of the Project Highway andBid Documents.Consultant shall assist the authority inbid process.3 Axle load spectrum surveys As per codal provision.4Bridge condition survey point No.(b)(iv)Shall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document only.5Proposal for Sections passing through urban areasThe surveys and investigation for the alignment andother features of the bypass are a part of thisconsultancy.Shall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document only.13

6 ROBs/RUBs- The Consultants shall prepare andsubmit indicative GADs of the proposed ROBs/RUBs.Including viaduct portion in the approaches based onpreliminary consultation with the railway authoritiesconcerned. (The GAD of ROBs/RUBs existing or underconstruction in the vicinity of the project highway couldalso be kept in view ).Since provision in the GAD’ need tobe included as per railwayrequirement.7 Social impact Assessment As per current prevailing policies ofCourt.8 Preliminary Designs9 Project Cost Shall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document only mayalso refer rsrdc.com.10 DeliverablesA. Inception ReportShall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document only.11 C.Land plan Schedules(c) Land plan Schedules shall be provided separatelyfor Two-laning and four-laning respectively.The LPS for two laning stretch andfour laning stretch in the projecthighway to be submitted separately.12 D. utility Relocation Plans All the required details as per goodengineering practice are required.13 Specific requirements for the Project highway (af) As per requirement of site.Provided a list of section /locations where tunnels maybe required. (Refer para 14.8 of Manual).14 Time and payment Schedule The total duration forpreparation of the Feasibility Report and Schedules toTime schedule has been modifiedfrom 18 to 22 months.( Available onthe Concession Agreement shall be 18 weeks, rsrdc.com).Regarding paymentexcluding the time taken by the Authority in conveyingits comments on the Draft Feasibility Report.schedule it shall be as relevantprovision given in document only.15 Mobilization Advance up to 10% of the total AgreementValue shall be paid on request against BankShall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document only.Guarantee of a scheduled Bank. This shall attract 10%simple interest per annum and shall be adjustedagainst the first four bills in four equal installments andthe accrued interest shall be recovered from the fifthbill.16 Consultancy Team Shall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document only.17 Attachment B to the TOR The Indicating List ofDrawings for Schedule H of the ConcessionAgreement18 Access to land property Help may be sought from authority..19 Liquidated Damages Shall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document only.20 Payment Schedule 2. All reports shall first besubmitted as draft reports for comments of theAuthority shall provide its comments no later thanthree weeks from the date of receiving a draft reportand in case no comments are provided within suchthree weeks, the Consultant shall finalise its report.Provided, however, that the Authority may take up tofour weeks in providing its comments on the DraftFeasibility Report.Shall be dealt as per relevantprovision given in document only.14