From: David.Helms@noaa.gov David Helms
To: dlockett@wmo.int Lockett Dean
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 15:19:20 +0200
Subject: Re: Alaska Airlines Contract with ARINC

Hi Dean,

I suggest that I be the COTR for the data CLIN, and approve (monthly)
invoices on your behalf, in coordination with you, with funding from
WMO. If this works for WMO, I will check with ARINC to see if this is
acceptable. I really must move with this contract ASAP (in the next
week) since my contracting people start closing the books soon in
advance of the end of our fiscal year (September 31st).

Cheers,
Dave


On 7/19/2011 8:42 AM, Lockett Dean wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> Yes, I see. I'm sure both of your previous options are probably
> possible but, if the contract is between NWS and ARINC, I'm wondering
> how ARINC directly invoicing WMO can work? I'll try and find out -
> when do you need to know by?
>
> Dean.
>
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 2:35 PM, David Helms <David.Helms@noaa.gov
> <mailto:David.Helms@noaa.gov>> wrote:
>
> Hi Dean,
>
> I have to go through the contract process anyway, as my funding
> will be diverted if I don't find a place for it soon. Therefore, I
> don't see the need to negociate a contract with ARINC as well. I
> believe I can create a "contract line item" on my contract which
> WMO can direct fund, i.e., for the one year data cost for Alaska
> Airlines.
>
> Does this sound reasonable?
>
> Cheers,
> Dave
>
> Lockett Dean <dlockett@wmo.int <mailto:dlockett@wmo.int>> wrote:
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> Good to hear from you.
>
> No problem re the telecon - I think we got to a point of
> understanding in the meeting.
>
> Re:
>
> 1. Those are the correct dates.
>
> If WMO pays the per diem, i.e. WMO books the travel and it is
> not done by NOAA with reimbursement by invoicing WMO (as will
> be the case for you and Carl), then, yes, I believe that WMO
> pays PD for the travel days.
>
> 2. I think those criteria are spot on, Dave and certainly your
> advice on the representatives to have there would be what we
> would rely on. From the AMDAR meeting in Feb in De Bilt, there
> was a suggestion that Chile, Peru and Brazil were the likely
> candidates but, if you suggest Brazil, Argentina and Columbia
> are more likely candidates for successful AMDAR program
> development, then those are the ones we should target.
>
> 3. WMO directly funding (Panel TF) Element 2 would appear to
> be the most efficient way to put the contract with Alaska
> Airlines program in place - rather than transferring funds
> back to the USA...however, that will have to be approved by
> Frank and Miro but, clearly the US funds are available in the
> TF to cover that. Of course, me saying it and WMO being able
> to negotiate and cope with the contract is another matter
> entirely but, I'm willing to try and negotiate that hurdle.
> Bear in mind though, that it will be an arrangement that I
> think the Panel has not previously engaged in so it will be
> new ground.
>
> I have CC'd Frank and, if all goes to plan, I'll be meeting
> with him later in the week where obviously this and the
> workshop will be on the agenda. Should be able to let you know
> shortly after that if it can work.
>
> Thanks for your feedback and I'll get back to you shortly.
>
> Regards,
>
> Dean.
>
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:00 PM, David Helms
> <David.Helms@noaa.gov <mailto:David.Helms@noaa.gov>> wrote:
>
> Hi Dean,
>
> First, I apologize for missing today's conference call. I
> was back in the office from travel and did not see this
> meeting on my calendar.
>
>
> 1. Can you please confirm the following meeting dates?
>
> * AMDAR Panel #14 / ET-AIR #3 - November 2-4, 2011
> Quebec City, Canada
> * Mexico AMDAR Workshop - November 8-10, 2011 Mexico
> City, Mexico
>
> For the invited guests to the Mexican Workshop, do we
> assume a travel day "bookends" the meeting, e.g., November
> 7 and 11, including per diem expenses?
>
> 2. For the 3 observers, does WMO have in mind candidate
> NMS' in WMO IV (or RA III) which have the greatest
> potential for building an indigenous AMDAR Program?
> Suggested criteria for inviting the 3 observers, including:
> - Host country has a (potentially) strong aviation
> partnership with a national airline
> - Host country has a (potentially) strong AMDAR
> advocate who is technically competent and influential in
> the budget process
> - Host country is interested in modernizing their
> upper-air observing program, vice maintaining the status quo
> - Corporate relationships through ARINC or SITA with
> local aviation industry representatives can be leveraged
>
> My initial thought for candidate NMS include Brazil,
> Argentina, and Columbia. Others may be Panama, Costa
> Rica, and Chile. What is your perspective?
>
> 3. Regarding the proposed funding instructions, item A.
> Key Activities, b. Issues, ii. (Alaska Airlines) Contract
> Options:
>
> Our options for transferring funds for this contract are
> quickly dwindling. The remaining option is for the NWS to
> issue a contract to ARINC (sole source) for the setup
> (contract element 1) and data costs (contract element 2)
> for a one year period. NWS will fund the element 1,
> initial setup (now estimated at $34,000). and WMO to
> provide the resources for a one year data (August 2011
> through July 2012) access from 100 Alaska Airlines B737
> aircraft, element 2 ($28,224). WMO funds for the data
> (element 2) can go directly to ARINC and be put on the
> contract (which NWS initiates) or WMO can transfer funds
> to NWS and NWS can fund element 2.
>
> Please advise which option for funding the Alaska Airlines
> data collection (e.g. contract element 2) can be executed
> by WMO.
>
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Dave Helms