the city of new york department of information technology and
TRANSCRIPT
THE CITY OF NEW YORK
DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR
FRANCHISES AUTHORIZING CONSTRUCTION AND PROVISION OF LATERAL DUCTS AND RELATED FACILITIES TO HOUSE TELECOMMUNICATIONS
FIBER LINKS TRANSMITTING LOCAL HIGH-CAPACITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES BETWEEN MAINLINE SYSTEMS AND
BUILDING ENTRANCES
IMPORTANT: IT IS UNLAWFUL TO ENGAGE IN ACTIVITY THAT UNDERMINES OR THWARTS THE FAIR AWARD OF THE CONTRACT RELATED TO THIS RFP. THE NEW YORK CITY COMPTROLLER IS CHARGED WITH THE AUDIT OF CONTRACTS IN NEW YORK CITY. IF YOU BELIEVE THAT THERE HAS BEEN UNFAIRNESS, FAVORITISM OR IMPROPRIETY IN CONNECTION WITH THIS PROPOSAL PROCESS, PLEASE CONTACT THE COMPTROLLER, OFFICE OF CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION, ONE CENTRE STREET, ROOM 835, NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10007, TELEPHONE NUMBER (212) 669-3000.
AUTHORIZED AGENCY CONTACTS: AGOSTINO CANGEMI, GENERAL COUNSEL (718) 403-8076 [email protected] DEBRA SAMUELSON, DEPUTY GENERAL COUNSEL (718) 403-8505 [email protected] Facsimile (718) 403-8130 11 METROTECH CENTER, 3RD FLOOR BROOKLYN, New York, 11201
2
RELEASE DATE: December 13, 2002
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 BACKGROUND 1.2 RFP TIMETABLE 1.3 GENERAL INFORMATION 1.3.1 STATUS OF INFORMATION 1.3.2 APPLICANT INQUIRIES 1.3.3 COMMUNICATION WITH DoITT 1.3.4 ADDENDA 1.3.5 MODIFIED PROPOSALS; LATE PROPOSALS AND
MODIFICATIONS 1.3.6 COSTS INCURRED BY APPLICANTS 1.3.7 ORAL PRESENTATIONS AND INTERVIEWS 1.3.8 NEGOTIATIONS 1.3.9 APPLICANT ACCEPTANCE OF FRANCHISE PROVISIONS 1.3.10 FRANCHISE AWARD 1.3.11 RFP POSTPONEMENT OR CANCELLATION 1.3.12 CONFIDENTIAL OR PROPRIETARY INFORMATION 1.4 PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCEDURES 1.4.1 EVALUATION COMMITTEE 1.4.2 PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA 1.4.3 PROPOSAL PACKAGE 1.4.4 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS 2.0 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS 3.0 RESERVATION OF RIGHTS
4
TABLE OF EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT A: THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK RESOLUTION NO. 225-A EXHIBIT B: INVESTIGATION CLAUSE, MACBRIDE PRINCIPLES, AND
AFFIRMATION EXHIBIT C: PROPOSAL SUBMISSION FORM EXHIBIT D: E-MAIL AUTHORIZATION FORM
5
1.0 INTRODUCTION The City is seeking proposals for franchises authorizing the installation,
maintenance and operation of ducts (also sometimes known as conduits) that
would provide housing for fiber optic or similar telecommunications lines
connecting so-called “mainline” or “backbone” telecommunications systems,
running down main streets, with the individual buildings where customers for
telecommunications services are located.
Over the past ten years or so, the City of New York (“the City”) has granted more
than a dozen franchises permitting a wide variety of telecommunications
companies to use City streets to run fiber optic and other telecommunications
lines. The result of this effort is that in many areas of the City, especially central
business districts, there is a robust availability of fiber capacity from a number of
different telecommunications providers. Such robust availability of fiber capacity
is a key prerequisite to continuing and expanding the City’s status as the world’s
greatest center of commerce, culture and communications. The events of
September 11, 2001 have made it even more evident that a powerful and
capacious telecommunications infrastructure is central to the City’s continuing
vitality.
Although existing franchising policy is successfully enabling the construction of
state-of-the-art fiber optic telecommunications lines in the City, the City’s
Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications (“DoITT” or the
6
“Agency”) has become aware of an increasing need to facilitate the ability of
telecommunications providers to connect these lines to the buildings where their
customers are located, and to do so in a manner that minimizes the impact on
traffic, pedestrians and the neighborhoods where the relevant lines and buildings
are located.
Generally, fiber optic telecommunications systems in the City’s streets can be
divided into two sections1: (1) the “mainline”, “backbone” or “trunk” section, which
consists of the thickest cables with the highest number of fiber strands, usually
running down a neighborhood’s main streets (in Manhattan, for example, such
mainline or backbone fiber cable generally runs under avenues and two-way
streets); and (2) the “lateral” section, which generally consists of somewhat
narrower cables, branching off of the backbone system and linking the backbone
system down subsidiary streets to individual buildings. For many years, the City
has maintained a system in Manhattan and part of the Bronx in which
telecommunications ducts and conduits—the pipes that house the optical fiber
cable—are constructed and maintained by a central provider responsible for
providing common duct space for the cables of multiple telecommunications
companies. A company known as Empire City Subway is the primary provider of
common ducts in Manhattan and the Bronx, although Con Edison recently
agreed to be an additional provider of common telecommunications ducts in the
1 All references to fiber, optical fiber, etc., throughout this RFP are intended to refer to and include any other land-based medium, such as copper wire or coaxial cable, that can also be used for telecommunications transmission, and such references should be read to be thus inclusive.
7
City. Under this common duct approach, telecommunications companies share a
common duct system provided by Empire City or Con Ed, instead of building
individual duct systems. Such sharing both reduces costs for the
telecommunications companies involved and reduces the need for repetitive
street construction projects that damage street surfaces, interfere with traffic and
adversely affect neighborhood life. The Empire City common duct approach has
proven relatively effective with respect to backbone systems and has contributed
to the rapid expansion of backbone fiber capacity in the City. However, the
Empire City common duct approach has thus far not proven as effective with
respect to the lateral sections of telecommunications systems. Substantial
portions of the duct that houses lateral sections of new fiber systems are being
built separately and individually by each telecommunications provider – a method
that, compared with the common duct system, is both more expensive for each
provider and more burdensome on communities, streets and traffic. One result
of the limited use of common duct for lateral fiber has been that the powerful new
backbone fiber systems built in recent years are not being as fully utilized as they
might be if they could be more efficiently connected to the buildings where
telecommunications service customers are located.2 In addition, repeated
installations of non-common duct in City streets adds substantial street
maintenance costs for the City and shortens the effective life of street surfaces
2 The problem of efficiently connecting backbone fiber to building locations is an issue not just in the City but also in many other areas of the country, where it is sometimes referred to as the “last mile” issue, because it involves connecting cable that has run tens, hundreds or thousands of miles across the “last mile” to the customer. In New York City, the issue generally involves far less than a mile, indeed frequently involves less than 150 feet.
8
and infrastructure. It is the goal of this RFP to seek one or more entities to build,
administer and maintain common ducts for lateral fiber optic lines in the City, thus
facilitating the expansion of the City’s telecommunications infrastructure while
reducing the number of entities who need to perform duct construction in City
streets and thus mitigating the deleterious effects of duct construction on
neighborhoods, streets and traffic.
It is anticipated that the determination of the scope and location of the ducts to be
built under any franchise granted hereunder will be primarily, though not
necessarily exclusively, market-driven and, thus, will be in the franchisee’s
discretion. Thus the primarily goal of this RFP is to enable one or more qualified
franchisees to respond to or anticipate demand for common duct space where it
is arising or is likely to arise, and to charge users for such duct space at market
rates, in a manner that would permit the franchise operation to be economically
self-sustaining, that is, without any subsidy from the City. However, DoITT also
recognizes that certain public benefits may arise from the construction of
common duct space even in locations where short-term market considerations
may not immediately drive such construction (such public benefits might include
the creation of infrastructure that could encourage long-term economic
development, and the long term protection of streets from future repetitive
construction demands). Therefore, DoITT is encouraging proposers to offer
some level of binding commitment to build common ducts in at least some
locations, even without definitive market support for such construction, and
9
proposers should be specific about what portions of their construction proposal
would fall into this guaranteed construction category.
On a related note, DoITT also recognizes that, under ordinary conditions, it will
be in the economic interest of the franchisee or franchisees building and
managing common duct as contemplated herein to maximize the number of
potential tenant-occupants (presumably provided that they are responsible and
financially sound), thus maximizing revenue, and not to prohibit or effectively
prohibit any potential occupants from using the ducts. However, it is conceivable
that under some circumstances, a franchisee, particularly if such franchisee is
itself a telecommunications service provider (or is related to such a provider),
may have an incentive, external to the economics of the duct system operation
itself, to fail to make duct space available to others in a neutral manner. Because
such a failure would be inconsistent with DoITT’s purposes in issuing this RFP,
proposers should be aware that any eventual franchise contract or contracts
granted in connection with this RFP will include provisions assuring that if the
franchisee is or becomes a telecommunications provider (or is or becomes
related to such a provider), that the franchisee would be or become obligated to
meet certain obligations to offer space in common ducts on a neutral basis.
Nothing in this RFP or in any franchise contracts granted pursuant hereto is or
shall be intended or construed to limit the obligations of Empire City Subway
Company or Con Edison.
10
1.1 BACKGROUND Pursuant to Section 363 of the Charter of The City of New York, the
Commissioner of DoITT has made the initial determination of the need for
franchises in connection with the provision of local, high-capacity
telecommunications services.
Pursuant to Section 363 of the Charter of The City of New York, the Mayor
submitted to the Council of The City of New York (“the Council”) a proposed
authorizing resolution for such franchises.
On November 20, 2002, the Council, after making several modifications thereto,
adopted said authorizing resolution (Resolution No. 225-A, attached hereto as
“Exhibit A”, referred to hereinafter as the “Resolution”) and thereby authorized
DoITT to grant non-exclusive franchises for the installation of facilities and
equipment on, over and under the inalienable property of the City to be used in
providing local, high-capacity telecommunications services.
The Council determined that the granting of such franchises will promote the
public interest, enhance the health, welfare and safety of the public and stimulate
commerce by assuring the widespread availability of reliable high-capacity
telecommunications services.
11
Charter Section 1072 grants DoITT the power to, among other things, develop
and issue requests for proposals or other solicitations of proposals for
telecommunications-related franchises.
Pursuant to said Charter Section 1072 and Authorizing Resolution 225-A, DoITT
hereby issues this Request for Proposals (“RFP”) to award non-exclusive
franchises for the installation of equipment, specifically ducts and conduits, in the
inalienable property of the City associated with the provision of local, high-
capacity telecommunications services.
For the purposes of this RFP, “inalienable property of the City” shall mean the
property designated as inalienable in Section 383 of the Charter of The City of
New York.
For the purposes of this RFP, “local, high-capacity telecommunications services”
shall have the meaning set forth therefore in the Resolution.
In the view of DoITT, the installation of common lateral ducts, as contemplated in
this RFP, associated with high-capacity telecommunications services will provide
for the development of innovative technologies, promote competition in the City’s
telecommunications marketplace, expand route diversity in telecommunications
services to improve the continuity of such services in the event of localized or
12
City-wide disasters, and reduce the adverse impact of construction in City
streets.
Franchises granted pursuant to this RFP will be non-exclusive and it should be
noted that multiple franchise awards may be made by the agency if DoITT
determines that multiple awards may contribute to the strength of the City’s
telecommunications marketplace and infrastructure and/or otherwise serve the
City’s interests, while also being consistent with the City’s needs to manage the
public rights-of-way appropriately. Because this RFP involves street construction
management matters, DoITT reserves the right to limit the number of awards
granted under this RFP (if DoITT so determines that such limitation is
appropriate, it will select the most qualified proposers). It should be further noted
that, pursuant to the authorizing resolution, DoITT reserves the right to issue (in
cooperation with the City’s Department of Transportation) additional RFPs in the
future for the services contemplated by this RFP.
1.2 RFP TIMETABLE
Release date of this RFP will be: December 13, 2002
All proposals must be received by: January 21, 2003
Such January 21, 2003 date is referred to hereinafter as the “Proposal Due
Date”. Proposals must be delivered by 3:00 PM on the Proposal Due Date to
Agostino Cangemi, Department of Information Technology and
Telecommunications, 11 Metrotech Center, 3rd Floor, Brooklyn, New York 11201.
13
NOTE: AFTER THE IDENTIFICATION OF ANY PROPOSAL THAT (1) MEETS
THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS RFP, AND (2) SUFFICIENTLY INDICATES
(PURSUANT TO THE EVALUATION PROCEDURES DESCRIBED IN SECTION
1.4 HEREOF) THAT ENTERING INTO NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE
PROPOSER IS LIKELY TO RESULT IN THE GRANT OF A FRANCHISE THAT
WILL BE ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE CITY, DOITT EXPECTS TO ENTER INTO
CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH EACH SUCH PROPOSER. IF
AGREEMENT IS REACHED BETWEEN DOITT AND ONE OR MORE SUCH
PROPOSERS AS TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF A FRANCHISE
CONTRACT, CONSISTENT WITH THE AUTHORIZING RESOLUTION, EACH
PROPOSED FRANCHISE CONTRACT WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE
FRANCHISE AND CONCESSION REVIEW COMMITTEE (“FCRC”) FOR ITS
APPROVAL CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 373 OF
THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK. ADDITIONALLY, ALL
PROPOSED FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS SHALL BE SUBJECT TO
APPROVAL BY THE MAYOR PURSUANT TO SECTION 372 OF THE
CHARTER AND REGISTRATION BY THE COMPTROLLER PURSUANT TO
SECTION 375 OF THE CHARTER. NO FRANCHISES SHALL BE DEEMED
GRANTED UNLESS AND UNTIL THE APPROVALS AND REGISTRATION SET
FORTH IN THIS PARAGRAPH HAVE BEEN GRANTED AND COMPLETED.
14
1.3 GENERAL INFORMATION
1.3.1 Status of Information
DoITT shall not be bound by any oral or written information released prior to the
issuance of this RFP.
DoITT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO CANCEL OR AMEND THIS RFP AT ANY
TIME.
APPLICATIONS SHOULD NOT RELY ON ANY REPRESENTATIONS,
STATEMENTS OR EXPLANATIONS OTHER THAN THOSE MADE IN THIS
RFP OR IN A FORMAL ADDENDUM TO THIS RFP.
1.3.2 Applicant Inquiries
All inquiries regarding this solicitation must be in writing, by mail or fax,
addressed to the Agency Contact Persons designated on the cover sheet of this
RFP, or their successors.
1.3.3 Communication with DoITT
Applicants are advised that from the day their proposal has been submitted, until
the Agency has decided to grant or deny an award (the “Evaluation Period”), all
contact with agency personnel related to this RFP must be written, by mail or fax,
and is limited to the Agency Contact Persons designated on the cover sheet of
this RFP, or their successors, and persons designated by the Agency Contact
Persons.
15
1.3.4 Addenda
DoITT will issue responses to inquiries and any other corrections or amendments
it deems necessary in written addenda.
APPLICANTS SHOULD NOT RELY ON ANY REPRESENTATIONS,
STATEMENTS OR EXPLANATIONS OTHER THAN THOSE MADE IN THIS
RFP OR IN A FORMAL ADDENDUM.
1.3.5 Modified Proposals; Late Proposals and Modifications
(a) Modified Proposals Applicants may submit modified proposals to replace
all or any portion of a previously submitted proposal up until the Proposal Due
Date. The Evaluation Committee (See Section 1.4.1 hereof) will only consider
the latest version of the proposal.
(b) Late Proposals and Modifications Proposals or modifications received
after the Proposal Due Date shall be deemed late and shall not be considered.
1.3.6 Costs Incurred by Applicants
DoITT shall not be liable for any costs incurred by applicants in the preparation of
proposals or for any work performed in connection therewith.
16
1.3.7 Oral Presentation and Interviews
DoITT may require applicants to give oral or visual presentations in support of
their proposals, or to exhibit or otherwise demonstrate the information contained
therein.
1.3.8 Negotiations
DoITT expects to enter into franchise contract negotiations with proposers whose
proposals (1) meet the requirements of this RFP, and (2) sufficiently indicate
(pursuant to the evaluation procedure described in Section 1.4 hereof) that
entering into such negotiations is likely to result in the grant of a franchise that
will be advantageous to the City.
DoITT may in its sole discretion negotiate with one or more proposers.
No applicant shall have any rights against DoITT or the City of New York arising
from such negotiations or from DoITT’s failure to negotiate.
1.3.9 Applicant Acceptance of Franchise Provisions
By submitting a proposal in response to this RFP, an applicant indicates to DoITT
that it understands and accepts, at a minimum, that the terms and conditions set
forth in Resolution No. 225-A attached hereto, will be a required part of any
franchise granted pursuant hereto. Applicants acknowledge that any such
17
franchise contract will be subject to, among other things, completion and
submission of questionnaires in connection with the City’s Vendor Information
Exchange System (“VENDEX”) and review of the information contained therein
by the Department of Investigation. In addition, any franchise or franchises
granted pursuant to this RFP will include, standard provisions regarding (1)
protection, alteration or relocation of installed facilities in the event such facilities
interfere with public works or public improvements or in the event of changes in
street grades or lines, (2) obligations of a franchisee upon termination of the
franchise, and (3) rights of the City to move or remove franchise facilities in the
event of an emergency or other stated circumstance.
1.3.10 Franchise Award
The franchise(s) resulting from this RFP will be awarded to the qualified
applicant(s) whose proposal(s) DoITT believes will be advantageous to the City.
1.3.11 RFP Postponement or Cancellation
DoITT reserves the right to postpone or cancel this RFP and to reject any or all
proposals at any time.
1.3.12 Confidential or Proprietary Information
It is not expected that information supplied by an applicant in its proposal will be
confidential. In the event an applicant believes that specific information it must
submit to respond fully and completely to this RFP should be treated
18
confidentially by the City, it should so advise DoITT in writing in the proposal.
DoITT will attempt to treat as confidential proprietary information of any applicant,
consistent with legal requirements. Any allegedly proprietary information
contained in a proposal must be clearly designated as such, and should be
separately bound and labeled with the words “Proprietary Information”.
Appropriate reference to this separately bound information must be made in the
body of the proposal. MARKING THE ENTIRE PROPOSAL AS PROPRIETARY
WILL RESULT IN THE PROPOSAL BEING RETURNED TO THE APPLICANT
UNREAD.
Applicants should be aware, however, that DoITT may be required, pursuant to
the New York State Freedom of Information Law (“FOIL”) (New York Public
Officer Law Section 87 et seq.), to disclose a written proposal or portion thereof
submitted in connection with this RFP. In the event that such disclosure is
required by a third party, DoITT will provide notice to the applicant as far in
advance as practicable of any deadline for responding and shall consult with the
applicant to evaluate the extent to which such information may be withheld from
disclosure under the provisions of FOIL. Consistent with the requirements of
FOIL, the final determination whether such information may be withheld from
disclosure shall be made by DoITT. In the event that DoITT determines that
information may not be withheld, DoITT will attempt to provide the applicant with
timely notice of intent to disclose in order that the applicant may invoke any rights
or remedies to prevent disclosure to which it believes it may be entitled under the
19
law. The applicant expressly acknowledges and agrees that neither DoITT nor
the City of New York will have any obligation to the applicant in the event of
disclosure of materials designated by applicant as “Proprietary Information”.
1.4 PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCEDURES
1.4.1 Evaluation Committee
Proposals shall be reviewed by an Evaluation Committee consisting of not
fewer than four (4) persons (at least two of which will be representatives of the
City’s Department of Transportation) with knowledge, expertise and experience
sufficient to make a fair and reasonable evaluation of the proposals.
Rating sheets or other written evaluation forms shall be used to evaluate
proposals and shall be signed and dated by all members of the Evaluation
Committee. Initial ratings may be amended, and the amended ratings shall be
recorded on amended rating sheets. Copies of all initial and amended rating
sheets or evaluation forms shall be maintained as part of DoITT's files.
1.4.2 Proposal Evaluation Criteria
The criteria to be used by the Evaluation Committee in evaluating proposals shall
be:
(a) the adequacy of the proposed compensation to be paid to the City, including
the wiring and provision of telecommunications services (including through
the provision of ducts capable of housing telecommunications service
20
facilities) pursuant to the franchise to public schools and to other buildings
owned, leased or occupied by the City;
(b) the financial, legal, technical and managerial experience and capabilities of
the applicant(s);
(c) the ability of the applicant(s) to maintain the property of the City in good
condition throughout the term of the franchise and the experience of the
applicant(s) in working with underground telecommunications conduit in City
streets;
(d) the efficiency of the public service to be provided;
(e) the extent to which the applicant(s) commit to provide services (including
through the provision of ducts capable of housing telecommunications service
facilities) pursuant to the franchise to areas of the City outside Manhattan and
under served areas of Manhattan;
(f) the scope of the area or areas in which the proposal(s) commit(s) to the
construction of common duct facilities;
21
(g) the degree to which the common duct facilities contemplated in the proposals
would accommodate the maximum number of users, including space for
potential future users who seek access after initial construction;
(h) the degree to which the proposed common duct facilities are likely to be used
by multiple providers (because, for example, the methodology proposed for
establishing rates for access to the ducts is likely to produce reasonable
rates); and
(i) the degree to which the proposer shows that its facilities will be compatible
with existing mainline telecommunications duct systems.
1.4.3 Proposal Package
At minimum the proposal must be comprised of:
(a) Technical Proposal – a narrative and/or other appropriate form of
presentation which: (i) describes the equipment and facilities which will utilize
the inalienable property of the City; (ii) describes the services to be provided by
such equipment and facilities; (iii) sets forth the method(s) of installation of such
facilities and equipment; (iv) sets forth where such facilities and equipment will be
installed and what portion, if any, of such equipment or facilities will be placed on
property other than the inalienable property of the City; (v) states that the
equipment and facilities which utilize the inalienable property of the City shall be
completely underground; (vi) describes the applicant’s plans for repair,
22
maintenance and/or removal of such facilities and equipment; (vii) describes the
applicant’s plans for maintaining the inalienable property of the City in good
condition during the term of the franchise; (viii) describes the applicant’s plans for
keeping the City informed of the status and use of the applicant’s system; and
(ix) describes the extent to which facilities and equipment installed will be
compatible with existing mainline telecommunications facilities in City streets.
[Note: Maps, drawings, illustrations, charts or other graphic descriptions may be
included in this portion of the proposal and, in fact, are encouraged.]
This technical section of the proposal should describe the level and scope of the
proposer’s commitment to meet DoITT’s goals as described in Section 1.0
above, including maximizing size and diversity of the geographic coverage of a
common lateral duct system and maximizing the number of initial and future
users the common duct system would accommodate.
(b) Legal and Managerial Proposal – (i) a narrative which indicates the extent
to which the applicant has secured any necessary authorizations, approvals,
licenses and/or permits required to provide the services sought to be provided
under the franchise and an acknowledgement that the applicant will not provide
such services unless and until such authorizations, approvals, licenses and/or
permits are obtained; and (ii) a narrative which describes the managerial
experience and capabilities of the applicant, including in particular experience
working with underground telecommunications conduit in City streets. Such
narrative may be in a format of the applicant’s choice and may include: business
23
references, a list of services provided by the applicant, an organization chart
identifying the names and titles of the persons whose responsibilities relate to the
proposed services and operations along with a summary of each person’s past
performance or qualifications regarding similar services or operations and any
other information the applicant deems relevant.
(c) Financial Proposal - a narrative which describes the applicant’s financial
ability to undertake the construction, operation, maintenance and removal of the
system sought to be installed pursuant to a franchise granted under this RFP.
Such narrative may include any financial information the applicant deems
relevant.
(d) Compensation Proposal - (i) a complete description of the applicant’s
proposed compensation to be paid to the City, including the wiring and provision
of telecommunications service (including through the provision of ducts to house
telecommunications service facilities) to public school and to other buildings
owned, leased or occupied by the City (such description may be in a format of
the applicant’s choice and shall include offers for the payment of fees or the
provision of facilities or services or both); and (ii) a description of how the
applicant proposes to set rates for use of the facilities by telecommunications
providers.
24
(e) Release Date of RFP and Acknowledgement of Addenda - a form, which
when completed and submitted with the proposal package, serves to confirm the
release date of the RFP to which the applicant is responding to and as the
applicant’s acknowledgement of the receipt of addenda to this RFP which may
have been issued prior to the submission of the proposal. (See Exhibit C).
1.4.4 Proposal Submission Requirements
Applicants are required to submit one (1) signed original and five (5) copies of
each proposal package. No proposals will be accepted by email or fax.
There is no page limitation for proposals, although conciseness is encouraged.
2.0 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS
During this period between the release date of this RFP and the end of the
Evaluation Period applicants are required to communicate, in writing (by mail or
fax), exclusively with the agency contact persons or their successors listed on the
cover sheet of this RFP, except as otherwise specifically directed by an agency
contact person.
In the event DoITT requires clarification of any portion of an applicant’s proposal,
it is possible that DoITT staff, other than the agency contact persons, may
contact an applicant with a request for information. Applicants are asked to
promptly answer such requests in writing. All clarifications of proposals must be
25
submitted in accordance with section 1.4.4. Under no circumstances will a
modification of the requirements of this RFP by DoITT be made formally other
than in an addendum. No applicant requests for information will be considered
formal unless made to an agency contact person. Applicants are referred to
Exhibit B which contains: (1) the “Investigation Clause” which will be included in
any franchise contract entered into by DoITT pursuant to this RFP; (2) the
“MacBride Principles” which will be included in any franchise contract entered
into by DoITT pursuant to this RFP; and (3) the “Affirmation” which will be
required to be signed by all applicants and which will be included in any franchise
contract entered into by DoITT pursuant to the RFP.
Applicants may if they wish request that any addenda from the Agency be sent
by e-mail, in lieu of mail, to an e-mail address specified by the applicant.
Applicants wishing to make such a request should complete and return Exhibit D
to DoITT as soon as possible.
2.1 RESERVATION OF RIGHTS
DoITT reserves the right to require the submission of additional information from
any applicant at any time during the Evaluation Period and before the effective
date of any franchise granted pursuant to this RFP.