The Ministry of Transport

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

FOR

Harmful vehicle emissions research and modelling

Request for Proposal for Harmful vehicle emissions research and modelling

Table of contents

SECTION A: OVERVIEW

1.Introduction

2.Description of Requirements

2.1Overview

2.2Background

2.3Purpose of research

2.4Scope of services

2.5Deliverables

2.6Additional support

3.Timetable

4.Communication

4.1Communication with respondents

4.2RFP questions

4.3Additional information and clarification

5.Submission of Responses

5.1RFP responses

5.2Late tenders

5.3Joint proposals

5.4Proposal validity

5.5Pricing and GST

5.6Alternative proposals

6.RFP conditions

6.1Rights reserved by the Ministry

6.2Canvassing

6.3The Ministry liability for your information disclosed

6.4Subject to contract

6.5RFP responses complete and accurate

6.6Shortlisting and negotiations

6.7Confidentiality

6.8Copyright

6.9Probity of tender procedures

6.10RFP costs

6.11Advertising

6.12Governing law

6.13Conflict of interest

6.14Acceptance of gifts

7.RFP evaluation

7.1Evaluation criteria

SECTION C: INFORMATION REQUIRED FROM RESPONDENTS

8.Instructions

9.Contact details and company information

10.Relevant experience

11.Business relationship

12.Financial details

13.Insurance details

14.Environmental performance

15.Pricing

16.Proposed form of contract

17.Assumptions

Form of response

Conflict of Interest Declaration

Declaration

SECTION A: OVERVIEW

1.Introduction

The Government’s overall vision for transport is that New Zealand will have an affordable, integrated, safe, responsive and sustainable transport system.

As the Government's principal transport policy adviser, the Ministry both leads and generates policy within the framework of the government’s vision for transport.

The purpose of this Request for Proposal (“RFP”) is to invite external companies to submit their proposals to the Ministry of Transport(the Ministry) for the provision of a research report, together with information on their skills, services and experience in providing such services/products.

Following the evaluation of the RFP responses, the Ministry may:

  • Enter into negotiations with preferred supplier(s); and/or
  • Conclude the process without awarding any contracts.

This RFP consists of the following:

  • Section A – Overview: Provides background information, instructions and conditions for responding to this RFP;
  • Section B – RFP Process: Sets out the conditions and requirements of this RFP process, together with the evaluation process and criteria;
  • Section C – Information Required from Respondents: Sets out the information required to be in your RFP response; and

2.Description of Requirements

2.1Overview

This section describes the services under consideration. All respondents will detail how they propose to provide the services outlined here, total cost, and the expected timeframe.

2.2Background

The 2012 Health and Air Pollution in New Zealand Study (HAPINZ)[1] estimates that that in 2006 (the base year for the report), emissions from vehicles caused around 256 premature deaths and posed a social cost of $934 million for health effects. Emissions from diesel vehicles were the main contributor to this.

New Zealand already has an agreed timetable set out in the 2007 Vehicle Exhaust Emissions Rule to require the most recent emissions standards for new and used vehicles entering the fleet. It has also implemented fuel standards for zero sulphur diesel (although it has not implemented zero sulphur petrol) that enable modern emissions control devices to function properly and which reduce particulate emissions from all vehicles. These policies have lead to measurable reductions in vehicle exhaust emissions, both on a per-vehicle basis and in absolute terms, as measured by air-quality monitoring devices. However, in some parts of New Zealand and most importantly in Auckland, harmful exhaust emissions remain significant. If further reductions in emissions are to be made from the vehicle fleet, they must be made from vehicles already in-service.

In the past decade, particularly in Europe, but also in other jurisdictions, there have been a wide range of policies implemented to reduce emissions in specific cities or even specific parts of cities. The most obvious of these policies are low emissions zones, which restrict access to more polluting vehicles and mandatory retrofit of emission reduction devices.

Anotheroption to reduce emissions from in-service vehicles that is used in many (although by no means all) jurisdictions is to carry out emissions tests on vehicles. Those that are found to be high emitting are then required to be repaired. New Zealand considered the introduction of so called ‘simple’ emissions tests in the mid-2000s, but did not proceed as the costs were found to out weigh the likely benefits. It was also found that the simple tests were very poor at identifying vehicles that were high emitting on the road. Recent advancements in testing procedures may warrant another look as in-service emissions testing.

2.3Purpose of research

The Ministry of Transport (the Ministry) is establishing a programme of workto co-ordinate initiatives designed to improve the quality of New Zealand’s vehicle fleet.

One area of focus is the potential to improve air quality outcomes.

Specifically, the Ministry would like to commission research to identify if there are cost effective policies to reduce vehicle emissions(especially fine particulates and oxides of nitrogen (NOx)) in the Auckland Region. In light of the finding in the HAPINZ study that diesel emissions are a specific problem the research is to focus on emissions from diesel vehicles. Where relevant any research may consider emissions from petrol vehicles and other pollutants, but this is not considered a priority. In addition, the research may also consider air pollution from non-tail pipe sources (eg tyres, brakes, etc) where this is relevant.

The project would involve the consultants identifying a range of options that have been successful in reducing air pollution from vehicles in designated areas and then assessing their likely costs and benefits in a New Zealand context, specifically in Auckland.

Where the information is readily available and relevant, the research should identify the arrangements used to introduce the requirements in the designated area, how the controls are applied and enforced in practice, and how the controls deal with vehicles from outside the designated region. The research should identify any legal similarities or differences that might assist with or prevent adoption of the policy options in New Zealand.

Although the study may include options for emissions testing, the research is expected to cover a wide range of possible policy options, including low emissions zones, low emission fuels, and retrofits of emissions reductions technologies. It is expected that an initial report would identify a broad range of emissions reductions options. An agreed number of these would then be subject to more detailed investigation.

Once the options have been agreed on, the next step of the research task would involve modelling both the likely costs and benefits of the options.

When considering options, the research must explicitly consider the diverse origins of New Zealand’s vehicles fleet. It should discuss any issues that would arise from implementing any policy on a diverse population of vehicles, given that roughly half of the vehicles in New Zealand are built to Japanese domestic exhaust emissions standards, 30% are built to European exhaust emissions standards and 20% are built to either unknown or no emissions standards.

It is not expected that the proposal would require any physical testing of vehicles.

2.4Scope of services

It is proposed that a piece of research be conducted on in-service emissions policies. This would include:

-Determining a range of options for reducing emissions from vehicles in a defined geographical area. This could includetechnologies that are currently available, or are expected to be available in the near future (< 5 years).

-A discussion on the legal approaches taken to implement and enforce the policy options in other jurisdictions.

-Selection of an agreed set of these options for further, more detailed analysis.

-An estimate of the likely costs of implementing the identified policy options, including any upfront and on-going costs for the agreed options for both the agency that would implement the option and for the owners of any vehicles affected.

-An estimate of the likely benefits of the agreed options, in terms of reduced emissions from in-service vehicles, that could be expected from different options. It is expected that this would be shown by the combination of an emissions and a health effects model. Unless otherwise agreed, all results from modelling should be directly comparable with the approach and findings of the 2012 HAPINZ study.

The successful candidate for this piece of research would ideally have proven research skills, an ability to carry out an economic assessment of the financial costs and benefits, and a background in modelling in the transport sector, including modelling of air quality and health effects. The successful candidate would be expected to have access to a range academic, scientific and technical literature and be able to seek advice from relevant international experts on the subject.

The successful candidate would be expected to provide periodic updates to the Ministry, but could be located anywhere. A desk at the Ministry’s office in Wellington can be provided if required.

2.5Deliverables

The key deliverables for this piece of research will include:

  • A literature search that identifies an agreed list of policy options that will be assessed
  • An agreed framework for assessing the costs and benefits of the proposals, including identification of the models that will be used to carry out the assessments
  • a draft report – for review at various stages and final draft for peer review by the project team
  • a final report
  • a presentation of the research findings to Ministry staff

We have provisionally estimated that the work could take around four months and we have budgeted $70,000.

2.6Additional support

The Auckland Council, Auckland Transport and the NZ Transport Agency have indicated they will provide in-kind support for this project. This will include their assistance to access Auckland-specific information held by the Council and the Agency. It is expected their representatives would be part of the project team and assist in identifying the set of options that would be subject to the in-depth research and would provide peer review of the final report.

SECTION B: THE RFP PROCESS

3.Timetable

The anticipated timetable for this RFP process is as follows:

Activity / Date
Release RFP / 20 June 2014
RFP questions close (Refer Section 4.2) / 11 July 2014
RFP closes / 18 July 2014
RFP evaluation / 25 July 2014
Presentations/interviews if required / Week starting 28 July 2014
Respondents notified of outcome / 1 August 2014
Contract negotiations / Week starting 1 August 2014
Contract commencement / 7 August 2014

Respondents are to note that this timetable is indicative only, and may be subject to change at the sole discretion of the Ministry. All respondents will be notified of any changes to the timetable by the Authorised Representative.

4.Communication

4.1Communication with respondents

No communication will be entered into with any of the respondents, except in the following circumstances:

  • Clarification of the RFP document by respondents (only prior to the prescribed closing date);
  • the Ministry seeking clarification of submitted proposals;
  • Informing respondents of the outcome of the RFP process.

All communication/correspondence between any respondent and the Ministry will be conducted in writing through the Authorised Representative:

The Ministry’s Authorised Representative is:

Marian Willberg
Ministry of Transport
PO Box 3175
Wellington

The Ministry will not be bound by any statement, written or verbal made by any person other than theAuthorised Representative stated in this section. The Authorised Representative is the only person authorised to make representations or explanations on behalf of the Ministry regarding this RFP document.

4.2RFP questions

All questions are to be submitted in writing to the Authorised Representative as stated in Section 4.1 of this RFP document. Respondents may submit written questions to clarify issues relating to the RFP up to 4.00pm 11 July 2014. Questions and answers which the Ministry deems are important to the RFP will be published to all respondents. Any questions received after this time/date may not be responded to.

4.3Additional information and clarification

Responses to respondent requests for clarification that relate solely to one respondent will be provided to the respondent requesting the clarification. All other clarifications issued by the Ministry will be provided to all respondents by way of a Notice to Respondents (“NTR”). All notices issued will become part of this RFP.

5.Submission of Responses

5.1RFP responses

The RFP will close at 4pm on 18 July 2014

The place of closing is:

The Ministry of Transport

Level 6, 89 The Terrace

Wellington

Attention: Marian Willberg

You may instead email your response to: .

Responses must be submitted in the format at Section C, and must be clear, legible and provide all information requested in this RFP document.

Responses must (if posted):

  • Be received on or prior to the time and date stipulated as the closing date;
  • Be placed in a sealed envelope clearly marked “Request for Proposal for Harmful emissions research and modelling and “Commercial in Confidence”;
  • Be addressed to the place of closing, marked for the attention of the contact name; and
  • Comprise one original copies and one unbound copy.

Any response received by the Ministry that does not conform to all or any of the above conditions may be rejected during evaluation at the sole discretion of the Ministry.

Any request for an extension of the closing date is likely to be declined.

You may attach any supporting material that you wish to your proposal. Please make sure that it is clearly labelled, and summarise any attachments in a covering letter.

5.2Late tenders

The Ministry reserves the right to receive and consider a late RFP submission; however, as a general rule, any response received at the place of closing after the closing time, for whatever reason, may not be considered.

5.3Joint proposals

5.3.1Joint proposals, whereby an organisation invited to submit a proposal elects to form an alliance with another organisation with the purpose of improving capability to offer the services specified in this RFP, are permitted, provided that full disclosure is given of the alliance, and the manner in which the delivery of the specified services/product will be apportioned and administered.

5.3.2In such a submission, the proponents are jointly and severally liable.

5.3.3One of the joint proponents must be identified as the contact point for all communications with the Ministry relating to the proposal.

5.4Proposal validity

Every proposal will be a continuing offer and irrevocable until October 17, or such later date as the Ministry may agree.

5.5Pricing and GST

Any rates or prices quoted should be exclusive of GST and in New Zealand dollars.

5.6Alternative proposals

It is the Ministry’s preference to contract on the basis set out in this RFP. However, the Ministry may consider alternative proposals. Any alternative proposal should clearly identify the commercial advantage and ‘value added’ offered.

6.RFP conditions

6.1Rights reserved by the Ministry

6.1.1The Ministry reserves the right to:

  • Reject all or any RFP response and not award and not accept the lowest-priced response;
  • Call and/or re-advertise for RFP responses or revisit any prior ROI process;
  • Waive any irregularities or informalities in the RFP process;
  • Amend the closing date, the acceptance date, or any other date in the RFP document;
  • Amend this RFP and any associated documents by the issuance of a written amendment notice;
  • Seek clarification of any RFP response;
  • Suspend or cancel (in whole or in part) this RFP process;
  • Consider or reject any alternative RFP response;
  • Deal separately with any of the divisible elements of any RFP response, unless the relevant RFP response specifically states that those elements must be taken collectively;
  • Enter into discussions and/or negotiations with any respondent at any time, and upon any terms and conditions, before or after acceptance of an RFP response;
  • Conduct a financial check on any respondent submitting a tender response;
  • Obtain similar goods/services from any third party and not deal exclusively with any respondent under this RFP process; and
  • Meet with any respondent before and/or after the RFP closes and prior to the award of any contract.
  1. The Ministry will not be bound to give any reasons for decisions made as a result of this RFP or as an outcome of the RFP evaluations.
  2. It is the Ministry’s preference that one contract be awarded for the services/product. However, the Ministry may, in its sole discretion, decide to divide the services and award different contracts for different services The terms of this RFP does not guarantee the successful respondent any volume, value, or the placement of any orders.

6.2Canvassing

In respect of this RFP, respondents will not canvass any Ministry employees, contractors, consultants, board member or anyone who has a direct working relationship with the Ministry, other than the Authorised Representative stated in Section 4.1. Any respondent found to be canvassing or have canvassed any Ministry employee, contractor, consultant, board member or anyone who has a direct working relationship with the Ministry, other than the Authorised Representative, regarding this RFP may be excluded from further consideration.

6.3The Ministry liability for your information disclosed

6.3.1While the Ministryendeavours to supply correct information, it disclaims, to the extent allowed by law, any liability (in contract and in tort, including negligence) to any respondent or other person if they rely on any information provided by the Ministry in relation to this RFP.

6.3.2Those submitting RFP responses will be deemed to have:

  • Examined this RFP and all documents referenced (if any);
  • Considered all the risks, contingencies and other circumstances that may have an effect on their RFP response; and
  • Satisfied themselves as to the correctness and sufficiency of their RFP response, including the pricing structure offered.

6.4Subject to contract

All parties submitting an RFP response agree that:

  • A contract is only formed between the Ministry and the successful respondent when the Ministry executes such a contract covering the relevant services.
  • This RFP and any provision contained in it does not give rise to a separate contract between the Ministry and that party; and
  • Nothing in this RFP, or in the relationship of the Ministry and that party, imposes any duty of care on the Crown or the Ministry, and any such duty of care is expressly excluded.

6.5RFP responses complete and accurate