Flight Information Management System (FIMS): Request for Proposal

The RFP has concluded

• In-field trials of FIMS prototypes provide valuable insights to support growing UAS operations

  In-field trials of FIMS prototypes provide valuable insights to support growing UAS operations. Airservices continues its partnerships with the selected developers who are each prototyping a FIMS with in-fields trials between 24 October to 11 November 2022. In-field trials are an important element, providing valuable information to both developers and Airservices on the real-world capabilities in the UTM ecosystem that will support thriving UAS operations in Australia.

• RFP Submission Period Closed

  Thanks to all those companies who have made submissions to the FIMS Prototype RFP. We're impressed with the response and for the next few weeks will be turning our efforts to evaluation. We will advise on outcomes as soon as we have settled the selections.

  In the meantime, we may reach out to some of you with questions regarding your submission.

  Thanks again!

  The IAP team.

• RFP Addenda 7

  The following questions and answers are provided for this RFP:

  
  

  ID	Question	Answer
  1.	The draft agreement has a placeholder for inputting ABN. Is ABN necessary for responding to this RFP? Can international companies who do not have an ABN participate in this RFP?	Airservices encourages companies to seek their own tax advice and/or look at the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) website. A useful place to start would be the following link: https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/International-tax-for-business/Foreign-residents-doing-business-in-Australia/ If the company is not required to have an Australian Business Number (ABN) they will be required to complete a Statement by a Supplier form (https://www.ato.gov.au/Forms/Statement-by-a-supplier-not-quoting-an-ABN/).
  2.	Annexure D -Detailed Proposal: System Requirements Specification: Does Airservices require a detailed response for the Developer's understanding of each system requirement specification or will a simple "Comply" suffice.	Providers should provide a detailed proposal, including any supplementary information to support their compliance with the System Requirements, noting that Airservices intends to select Preferred Providers, against the RFP evaluation criteria, based on their written proposals in the first instance. Any compliance variances to the System Requirements can be justified through Annexure E.

  
  

  Note: The Enquiry Deadline for clarifications has now closed.

  
  

• RFP Addenda 6

  Please see the following questions and answers comprising Addenda 6.

  ID	Question	Answer
  1.	Schedule 1 – Statement of Requirements Section 5.2 – In-Field Trial Part (f) – Trial Site Question 1 – Is Air Services Australia responsible for selecting the trial site?	Airservices is responsible for selecting the trial site. This will be determined in conjunction with our Test & Evaluation (T&E) provider in the coming months.
  2.	Question 2 – Is the equipment listed in the table in this section provided by Air Services Australia?	Yes. Airservices will provide all equipment listed in the table in section 5.2.
  3.	Part (g) – Traffic Density Question 3 – Will Air Services Australia provide the UAS operations including the 100 UAV’s if required, along with the pilots, support staff and operating expenses to conduct this testing?	No. Airservices will provide a small fleet of UAS in conjunction with the T&E provider (~5 UAV). The remainder UAV to exercise in-field testing at a dense traffic level are expected to be simulated by the UTM developer. Correctly implemented, whether a UAV is simulated and actual should be invisible to the FIMS.
  4.	Requirement: RM09 What noise propagation model should be attributed to a custom drone?	The noise propagation model applied to all UAV should be a free field acoustic propagation model using the UAV acoustic parameters (which will vary per UAV model) to calculate the A-weighted sound level (dBA) at ground level. For the purpose of the FIMS Prototype, a custom drone should still be assigned acoustic parameters to use in the propagation model.
  5.	Requirement: SU16 Could Airservices clarify the scope of “…any off-nominal conditions that cannot be contained/managed by the USS.”. The requirement is slightly ambiguous.	The intent of this requirement is that the Airspace Administrator should only be notified of off-nominal conditions where the outcome of that condition cannot be wholly managed by the applicable USS. An off-nominal situation such as a non-conforming UAV has potential to be wholly managed by the applicable USS. Airservices is open to proposals to meet this requirement. There are many conditions/scenarios that are yet to be explored.
  6.	If our company intends to become a USS when the UTM ecosystem is formally established in Australia, do we need to go this or any future RFP?	The formal establishment of a complete UTM ecosystem (FIMS, USS, SDSP, etc) is not specifically the subject of the FIMS Prototype RFP. While our efforts will inform that ecosystem, there is no requirement for potential future USS to respond to the FIMS Prototype RFP. Instead, broader ‘whole of Australian government’ activities are expected to more formally establish requirements for USS and corresponding integration into the UTM ecosystem.
  7.	Is Airservices negotiable on the co-funding percentage (50% of total cost) and/or the commercialisation arrangements of Foreground IP (section 6.2.c of the draft agreement).	Airservices will not fund more than 50% of the project cost. It is Airservices expectation that the Agreement is in a form that is commercially reasonable and able to be signed by Developers without amendment. Airservices will not consider material departures from the content of clause 6.2.c of the draft agreement. Minor changes may be considered.

• RFP Addenda 5

  The following corrections are provided for this RFP:

  ID	Change
  	RFP Closing Time: 2359h local time in the ACT on 23 June 2021 (Changed on the front page & Section 1. RFP Details - see document library for v1.2 of the RFP)
  	Enquiry Deadline: 2359h local time in the ACT on 16 June 2021 (Changed Section 1. RFP Details- see document library for v1.2 of the RFP)

  The following question and answers are provided for this RFP:

  ID	Question	Answer
  1.	Section 2.6, SI04 What types of NOTAMs does AsA expect to be decoded into digital NOTAM format? There are a large number of NOTAMs that include temporal spacial data that apply to the SFC to 400ft and above airspace.	For the purpose of the prototype, Airservices is not applying filtering on NOTAMs other than those that do not impact operations below 400ft (i.e. filter all NOTAMs with a lower limit above 400ft). Learnings from the Prototype activity and other internal analysis activities will result in a suitable filtering model.
  2.	Requirements TS02 and SI01 reference the FIB, and the Reference section itself states [7] ICD/FIB/SOAP/001, FIB SOAP Interface Control Document. Please would Airservices provide this ICD so that we can confirm compliance to those requirements. Can a sample dataset supplied?	Airservices are unable to provide the FIB ICD at this point in time. We will provide the ICD to the successful applicants on contract signature. Please see the sample request/response from the FIB data feed in the document library to the right.

• RFP Addenda 4

  Please see Version 1.2 of the FIMS Prototype System Requirements Specification in the document library to the right with clarified requirements for the Noise Management Service. The “Change Summary” summarises the changes.

• RFP Addenda 3

  The following clarifications are provided for this RFP:

  
  

  ID	Change
  1.	We have released our industry briefing video. We encourage all potential respondents to watch the video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiOloZ8fHzw
  2.	See attached list of questions and answers specific to the FIMS Prototype System Requirements Specification.
  3.	Question I guess the key aspect of my question was not asking the AsA to provide standards, of course we can do that. It’s the issue with WK63418, which seems key to the RFP but as confirmed by AsA’s Manager, is not available to anyone, so it’s impossible to reference irrespective of how the requirement is classified. Answer Access to WK63418 draft standards is something that individual respondents are responsible for sourcing, should they wish to address those specific desirable requirements.
  4.	Question In section 6.2 Foreground IP (a) there is a reference to clause 6.4, feedback and suggestions. Is this reference correct? Could you elaborate how the clause 6.2 is subject to feedback and suggestions clause? Answer Clause 6.4 is to ensure that Airservices is not prevented from using any information discussed in working groups, meetings, or general discussion that is not identified as Foreground IP by the Developer. This kind of information is considered to be distinct from clause 6.2 given the nature of collaborative working groups, meetings, or general discussion.
  5.	Question Will Airservices interpret a "does not comply" and/or "partial compliance" in response to Annex E as a Partial or Alternative Proposal as defined by Item 9 and Item 10 respectively. Answer For clarity, the following explanations are provided: A Partial Proposal is one that proposes to deliver only part of the solution requested in Schedule One (Statement of Requirements), for example delivery of only a specific component of the protype. Airservices requires proposals to provide a complete solution and as such will not be accepting partial proposals (Item 9). Annexure E (Compliance Statement) requires tenderers to indicate compliance, partial compliance or noncompliance with a) the draft agreement and b) the System Requirement Specifications (Schedule 4). Whilst Airservices prefers compliance with all clauses of the agreement and the System Requirement Specifications, partial compliance or noncompliance with these requirements will form the basis of matters for negotiation with the preferred tenderer/s and will not lead to a tenderer being deemed to have submitted a partial proposal. An alternative proposal (item 10 and Section 5.8) is one that does not comply with the requirements and proposes an alternative means to that outlined in the Statement of Requirement, of delivering the solution required by Airservices. An alternative proposal cannot be submitted unless a compliant proposal is also submitted. Therefore Airservices could not deem a proposal to be an alternative proposal based on responses to Annexure E. Airservices will not accept alternate proposals.

  
  

• FIMS Prototype RFP Industry Briefing

  Today we release the FIMS Prototype RFP Industry Briefing! We encourage all potential respondents to view this video for more context regarding your submission.

  We look forward to hearing from you!

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiOloZ8fHzw

• RFP Addenda 2

  The following corrections are provided for this RFP:

  
  

  ID	Change
  1	RFP Closing Time: 2359h local time in the ACT on 9 June 2021 (Changed on the front page & Section 1. RFP Details)
  2	Enquiry Deadline: 2359h local time in the ACT on 2 June 2021 (Changed Section 1. RFP Details)
  3	Page 32, Section 2 – Requirements, Paragraph (a) Figure 2 – FIMS Prototype Development & Down-Selection Approach, update to dates in the timeline of the diagram.
  Question and Answers submitted through Engage & iap@airservicesaustralia.com
  4.	Answer posted May 5 2021 Question 1: Page 40 of schedule 4 (FIMS prototype System Requirements) dated 27 April 2021. Please advise how to get access to the UTM spec docs 001 - 006 shown in Section 4 "References". Thanks Answer: Airservices have described the requirement that each of these specs apply to throughout the System Requirements, however, we intend to only provide the detailed specifications to the selected participants in the FIMS Prototype pilot. Respondents should use the System Requirements to determine expected efforts for integration/development.
  5.	Answer posted May 10 2021 Question 2: The SRS page 50 B.3 Off-nominal Operations discusses the identification of non-conforming operations. The architecture (Figure 2 Page 8) illustrated in the SRS document makes the USS responsible for deconfliction and dynamic reroute. If a non-conformance is triggered and the contingency state is declared, and the USS notifies the FIMS of a revised intent volume, is it the expectation that FIMS will re-flow current strategic deconfliction approvals and re-issue or will corrective and containing action be limited to the primary and secondary actors and the specific vehicle? We believe this is a relevant issue, particularly in projected, high-density environments. Answer: The SRS establishes a series of relatively high-level system functions and outcomes. Airservices is open to respondent proposals for low-level system design/functionality. However, evaluation of submissions with respect to technical requirements will only consider proposed compliance and feasibility against those described in the SRS.
  6.	Answer posted May 10 2021 Question 3: Notwithstanding the answer to the consolidated list of questions from the RFI phase (Page13) regarding ASTM WK63418, the SRS Document CM03, XM02, DSS02 and USS SD01 all use the term "shall comply" regarding compliance with WK63418. As the SRS refers, this standard is in Draft form and not available to anyone other than members of the working group. The Manager, Technical Committee Operations, ASTM, confirmed this policy as an immutable position overnight. Given that the SRS requirements seem to indicate, using the word "shall", mandatory compliance with a draft standard, can ASA provide a copy of this draft to potential respondents as it seems apparent that the writers know of its contents? Answer: In all references to ASTM standards in the SRS document, each requirement has been listed as 'Classification 2' or 'desirable'. Airservices will not be providing access to industry standards, it is up to the respondent to organise access to any standards documentation required for their submission.
  7.	Answer posted May 10 2021 Question 4: Is AsA seeking only UTM developers, or will bids from data and system integrators with demonstrable capability in the FIMS component be eligible? Answer: Airservices will accept submissions from any organisation and the merits of that submission will be determined against the evaluation criteria stated in the RFP under Schedule 5.
  8	Request received from industry for two-week extension via iap@airservicesaustralia.com. Extension applied and new closing time as per ID 1 of this addenda.

  
  

  Please note changes to ID's 1 to 3 have been captured in the updated RFP document found in the Document Library to the right (dated 110521).

• RFP Addenda 1

  An addenda to the RFP on AusTender has been released capturing the following changes.

  ID	Change
  1.	Figure 3 of UTM-REQ-01, FIMS (Prototype) System Requirements Specification, Version 1.0 of 27 Apr 2021 (RFP Schedule 4) was noted to be cropped incorrectly. Version 1.1 of UTM-REQ-01 corrects Figure 3.
  2.	Paragraph (f) of the Agreement Overview of Schedule 2 of the RFP, FIMS Prototype Pilot Agreement, did not include a date for comments on the draft agreement. An updated version of the schedule corrects this.
  3.	Paragraph (f) of the Agreement Overview of Schedule 2 of the RFP, FIMS Prototype Pilot Agreement, indicated that Developers should sign the draft agreement as part of their submission. This has been corrected to request that developers simply indicated whether they have not comment with the terms and conditions.
  4.	Page 13 of Schedule 2 of the RFP, FIMS Prototype Pilot Agreement, indicated the RFP was released in February 2021. This has been corrected.

  
  

  Version 1.1 of UTM-REQ-01 and Schedule 2 of the RFP can be found in the document library to the right.