20210723 Amendment No.1_RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa Airbase Area.pdf

5. PROJECT NO.

CODE

7. ADMINISTERED BY

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

CODE

6. ISSUED BY

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

9B. DATED

PAGE OF PAGES

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED

BPA NO. 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

FACILITY CODE CODE

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers

E. IMPORTANT:

X is extended,

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning __________ copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment of each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR AC- KNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

(REV. 10-83)

is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office. is not, A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

15C. DATE SIGNED

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER

BY /s/

Contractor X one

16C. DATE SIGNED

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

STANDARD FORM 30 STANDARD FORM 30

(Type or print) (Type or print)

(Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

(No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)

(If other than Item 6)

(Specify type of modification and authority)

(such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.)

(If applicable)

(SEE ITEM 11)

(SEE ITEM 13)

(X)

(X)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

1 11

See Block 16 C USAID/Vietnam Office of Acquisition and Assistance (OAA) 15/F Tung Shing Building, 2 Ngo Quyen Hanoi, Vietnam

To all Offerors RFP No. 72044021R00002 one

RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa Airbase Area

The purpose of this amendment is to:

1. Extend the proposal submission due date from “August 19, 2021” to “September 9, 2021” at 1600 Hanoi time;

2. Incorporate responses received and answers thereto as an integral part of the RFP. See also the Revised No. 1 of RFP as attached; and,

3. Inform the virtual conference participants (registered closed on July 20,2021) that conference details will be shared with the registered participants before the conference date which is currently planned for on August 11, 2021.

Except as so stated, all other terms and conditions in the original RFP remain the same.

Suzanne H. Johnson

July 23, 2021

Amendment No. 1 to RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa Airbase Area

Questions Received Pertaining to RFP No. 72044021R00002 and Corresponding USAID Answers:

1. The RFP states that Thermal Conductive Heating is the remediation approach.

1.1. Is this the only acceptable approach?

USAID RESPONSE: Yes. Thermal Conductive Heating is the only acceptable technology. Please refer to Subsection 4.3.2.2 of the Project Masterplan https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00XF4J.pdf for more information on the Thermal Conductive Heating.

1.2. Would other thermal approaches be considered?

USAID RESPONSE: No.

1.3. Would a non-conforming proposal (specifically in relation to the specific treatment approach) be accepted and evaluated?

2. There is a tremendous amount of information to assimilate in the RFP and attached documents while also developing design details, scoping documents, and soliciting bids from subcontractors and suppliers. Will USAID consider granting an extension of four (4) weeks to the proposal due date, to September 15, 2021.

USAID RESPONSE: Please see the amendment cover page for the amended proposal submission due date.

3. C-5.1: With reference to this text, “In addition to design, additional tasks include workshops, meetings, presentations, and approvals of interim deliverables.” Can USAID please clarify whether the Treatment Contractor is responsible for providing facilities for meetings, or if meeting facilities will be provided by others. If meeting facilities are to be provided by the Treatment Contractor, please indicate relevant information for the meeting (expected number of attendees, duration of meeting, meal required, etc.).

USAID RESPONSE: The A&E Contractor is responsible for providing facilities for workshops and meetings.

The Treatment Phase I Contractor must support this effort with information and materials as needed. The RFP is revised to clarify this. Also please refer to Subsection 5.1.4.4 Review and Approval for the responsibilities of the Treatment Phase I Contractor for the design review/approval workshops/meetings.

4. C-5.1: With reference to this text, “The degree of detail conveyed by the task description and technical drawings in the design must be adequate to ensure USAID Contracting Officer Representative (COR) and GVN approval to implement the treatment, and achieve the treatment threshold of 100 ppt.,” Could USAID please be more specific regarding the level of definition required for drawings, in terms of a level of design development (e.g., 30%, 60%, 90%)?

USAID RESPONSE: Please see Section C.5.1.4 for description of design submittals, review, and approval, including required specific elements for the drawings at the 30%, 60% and 90% levels of completeness.

5. C-5.1: This section states that “The Contractor is responsible for all labor, materials, equipment, supervision, adequate security protocols, permits, approvals, and incidentals necessary to perform the work.”

5.1. As a foreign contractor, we will have minimal ability to ensure timely review and approval of design submittals and permits by the various GVN agencies. This presents a significant potential schedule and cost risk for the Contractor.

5.2. How should this be approached/bid to account for the schedule and cost risk associated with obtaining GVN approvals and permits?

5.3. Will significant schedule delays changes associated with obtaining GVN approvals and permits be acceptable as a change order?

5.4. Is USAID requesting that the Contractor include risk or contingency pricing to cover this? Would USAID consider a modification to the SOW language such that the Treatment Contractor prepares the necessary design submittals, permit application forms and supporting documentation and provides them to USAID and the A&E Contractor to obtain the permits and approvals from GVN agencies?

https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00XF4J.pdf

Amendment No. 1 to RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa

USAID RESPONSE:

5.1 The Contractor is responsible for approval of design submittals and permits necessary to perform the work. Please refer to Subsection C.5.1.4.4 for more information on Design Review and Approval. The Contractor may have a subcontractor to assist in obtaining GVN designs/permits approval.

5.2 The Contractor must account for the review periods listed in the RFP when they price applicable line items in the price proposal form.

5.3 The Contractor must do their best to meet the allotted approval timeline to avoid impacts to the Activity schedule. In the case where the delay is outside of the Contractor’s control and with solid justification and proof to USAID, USAID may consider all the facts presented and may accept the delay as a change order.

5.4. No. However, the Offerors will factor in necessary and realistic costs to successfully perform the required work based on their own market research and pricing strategy that results in the most complete and competitive pricing. Please also see responses to the questions 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3.

6. C-5.1.1.1: In reference to this text, “The Contractor must identify any changes or updates to these ARARs during the design stage and ensure that all changed or updated requirements are included/met in the proposed design.” It indicates that the Contractor is responsible for amending the design to incorporate ARARs that will not have been determined at the time of bid. This undefined scope and performance language increases the risk to the Contractor. How should this be approached / bid? Will USAID be willing to push back to GVN ARARs that are defined after the risk? Will significant changes be acceptable as a change order? Is USAID requesting that the Contractor include risk or contingency pricing to cover this?

USAID RESPONSE: The Contractor must identify any changes or updates needed to the ARARs based on the Contractor’s treatment methods and must ensure that all changed or updated requirements are included in/met the proposed design. These updates to ARARs must accompany the 30% design submittal. Based on the proposed ARARs updates, USAID will consult with GVN on what updates/changes to ARARs accompanying 30% design will be and/or not be applied to the Treatment – Phase 1 activities.

The Offerors are reminded of proposing complete and competitive pricing. Any changes necessary to meet the overall Contract Objectives discovered during the contract implementation may be reviewed and approved as part of change orders or claims subject to USAID’s approval and availability of funds.

7. C-5.1.1.1: This mass balance plan “must be sufficient to characterize the fate of treated dioxin throughout treatment operations.” As we understand, although all mass streams around the pile were sampled and quantified, the mass balance could not be closed definitively because the degradation byproducts of the dioxin are too similar to (or the same as) other herbicides that are present in the soils initially and which are also undergoing thermal degradation (as evidenced in the KEMRON report). Please confirm that such an outcome would be acceptable.

USAID RESPONSE: This question appears to be in reference to the Mass Balance Plan of Subsection C.5.1.2 Planning Documents. As necessary to confirm the occurrence of co-contaminants (e.g., other herbicides), the Contractor must include necessary analyses in the evaluation of pre-treated soil/sediment. Mass balance calculations must be performed in accordance with an approved Mass Balance Plan which includes clearly stated assumptions and uncertainties.

8. C-5.1, C-5.1.3.3: With reference to this text in Section C.5.1, “The Contractor is responsible for all labor, materials, equipment, supervision, adequate security protocols, …” and this text in Section C.5.1.3.3 describing site preparation activities including, “…site fencing, guard shacks, and other security improvements…” Will USAID please clarify the Treatment Contractor’s responsibilities regarding site security?

What additional security measures are anticipated to be required, besides the site fencing? Will GVN provide security guards for the treatment site, or is the Treatment Contractor responsible for providing security guards?

If the Treatment Contractor must provide security guards, will USAID please indicate whether guards are only required for nights and weekends, or if the guard shacks must be staffed 24/7?

USAID RESPONSE: The Civil Works – Phase 1 Contractor will construct the site fencing and guard shacks and the A&E Contractor is responsible for providing security staff through an agreement with the Airbase Command (Regiment 935). The RFP is revised to reflect this.

Amendment No. 1 to RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa

9. C-5.1.3.3: With reference to this text in Section C.5.1.3.3 describing site preparation activities including, “…electrical, water supply, internet, phone, and sanitary facilities…” Will USAID please provide any available information on the location of the nearest available internet and phone service connection points to the thermal treatment site?

USAID RESPONSE: Internet and phone service to the Airbase can be provided by various providers.

Information on these providers can be found at https://mic.gov.vn/Pages/TinTuc/tinchitiet.aspx?tintucid=100241.

10. C-5.1.3.3: This section states “Another USAID contractor is responsible for roadwork and drainage rehabilitation, replacement, and maintenance to, from, and around the site.” Attachment J.6, “Preliminary Drainage Plan,” appears to indicate that the Civil Works Contractor is responsible for constructing the perimeter drainage system improvement. Will USAID please clarify whether the Treatment Contractor or Civil Works Contractor is responsible for constructing and maintaining the site drainage features shown in RFP Figure 5 Perimeter Treatment Site Drainage System.

USAID RESPONSE: The Civil Works – Phase 1 Contractor is responsible for construction and maintenance of the site drainage features shown in Figure 5 in the RFP.

11. C-5.1.3.4: This section states that, “…excavated soil is dewatered to a moisture content of not more than 20 percent, by mass, and excavated sediment to less than 43 percent, by mass…,” while Table 2 in the RFP indicates moisture content ranges from 4 to 21 %. The Thermal Study report (Attachment J.5) indicates soil moisture contents between 23 and 33% by mass (Table 1, page 4). The initial soil saturation governs the energy usage and duration of the thermal treatment, and as such is an important design input parameter connected to both schedule and cost. Based on the provided soil properties, information a moisture content of above 20% corresponds to the soil being fully saturated, therefore the 43% moisture content by weight does not appear to be possible. Can USAID confirm whether each of the provided moisture contents are presented on a wet-weight or dry-weight basis? Can USAID provide direction on which of the moisture content values should be used for design and pricing basis?

USAID RESPONSE: The provided moisture contents are presented on a dry-weight basis. The RFP is revised to reflect this. As stated in the RFP, the Civil Works - Phase I Contractor (not the Treatment – Phase I Contractor) will ensure that excavated soil is dewatered to a moisture content of not more than 20 percent, by mass, and excavated sediment to less 43 percent, by mass, prior to material loading of the PTSA by the Civil Works – Phase I Contractor.

Also note that moisture contents (e.g., as reported in the EA) were evaluated using ASTM Method D2216 which is based on dry-weight basis (e.g., weight of water evaporated divided by remaining dry-weight of soil).

12. C-5.1.3.10: Please clarify whether a natural gas supply connection is available to service the thermal treatment system, and if so, where the nearest such connection is located. If natural gas is not available in close proximity to the site, can USAID advise whether there are any restrictions on bulk storage of propane or diesel fuel at the airbase, especially any storage volume limitations?

USAID RESPONSE: A natural gas supply connection for the TCH treatment plant is not currently available at the Airbase and will not be provided by GVN. Any proposed fuel/energy storage must be included in the design for USAID and GVN approval, including Bien Hoa Airbase Command (Regiment 935) approval. Storage sizing and configuration must be permitted by the local fire prevention authority and meet the applicable GVN regulations.

13. Figure 4: Can the Treatment Contractor propose modifications to the preliminary positions of the Pre-treatment and Post-treatment stockpiles and other site features to better accommodate proposed thermal treatment hardware and trucking routes? Who will be responsible for removing the equipment in the area marked “Haemer’s Site” in Figure 4? If this will be the Treatment Contractor’s responsibility, please provide a summary of the items requiring removal (description, size, weight), what specific decontamination the equipment requires, and where these items may be disposed.

USAID RESPONSE: The Contractor cannot modify the locations of the Pre-Treatment Storage Area (PTSA) and Treated Material Storage Area as shown in Figure 4 because their locations affect the perimeter treatment https://mic.gov.vn/Pages/TinTuc/tinchitiet.aspx?tintucid=100241

Amendment No. 1 to RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa site drainage system designed by the A&E Contractor and constructed by the Civil Works - Phase 1 Contractor. The locations of the other facilities are just preliminary, and the Contractor must design a detailed site layout of the work, identifying locations for all components of the treatment work area.

Figure 4 shows the location of the Haemers pilot plant to make Offerors aware that there is an existing facility on-site. It is anticipated that the Haemers plant will remain on-site during treatment activities. The site is approximately 1,500 m2. If required, Haemers may access this area for their work. USAID will reach an agreement with GVN that any ongoing access by Haemers will not unreasonably impact the Contractor.

14. C-5.1.3.4, Table 1: Can USAID confirm that the provided 111,170 m3 “bank” volume of soil requiring treatment is the in-situ volume? Assuming that is the case, the volume of the stockpiled soil requiring treatment will then be substantially higher. Can USAID provide any historic information on the typical swell or volume expansion of site soils once excavated and stockpiled?

USAID RESPONSE: USAID confirms that the 111,170 m3 “bank” volume is the in-situ original excavated volume that will be measured using site-surveyed pre- and post-excavation grades. AASHTO provides typical shrink and swell factors for estimating purposes, https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/pddm/dpg/earthwork-design. Other activities on-base have used a factor of 1.3.

15. C-5.1.3.6: With reference to this text, “At the end of the Treatment - Phase I Contract, the Contractor must work with the supplier of the thermal oxidizer to perform the required maintenance and provide warranty for a minimum of 10 years of operation beyond the period of performance.” Most typical equipment warranties are only one to two years. At the end of the Treatment 1 contract, the thermal oxidizer will have been in operation for approximately 3 years. It is very unlikely that any manufacturer would be willing to extend a traditional parts and labor “warranty” for an additional 10 years. Would it be acceptable to supply USAID with a continuing service contract from the manufacturer to support the future operation of the thermal oxidizer?

USAID RESPONSE: A continuing service contract from the manufacturer to support the future operation of the thermal oxidizer is acceptable as one possible solution. The Offeror may propose the best approach to address this requirement for USAID’s review and consideration during the contract implementation.

16. C-5.1.3.9: This section states that GVN will provide a 400 cubic meter per day water supply for the project.

Can USAID please provide anticipated water pressure and water quality data (particularly pH, hardness, and alkalinity) for this water source?

USAID RESPONSE: GVN will provide a 400 cubic meter per day piped water source for the TCH treatment plant. The Contractor must be responsible for connecting to this water source. The GVN-provided water source and the information on water pressure and quality data is not currently available. The A&E Contractor will measure water pressure and water quality following GVN provision of the source and provide the results to the Contractor at the CLIN 1 NTP. The RFP is revised to reflect this.

17. C-5.1.4.4, C-5.2: Please clarify the requirements around the GVN and USAID approval process and requirements for start of construction. intext in Section C.5.1.4.4 states that, “The final (100%) design will become final upon approval by the COR. All final design documents must be approved by the COR prior to construction. Note that COR approval will be contingent on GVN review and acceptance of 100% design.”

While Section C.5.2 states. “USAID will issue a separate CLIN 2 NTP that is contingent on completion of CLIN 1 Design, including 90% design approval from GVN. Following CLIN 2 NTP, the Contractor must construct the treatment plant, associated systems...” For budget and scheduling purposes, can USAID please clarify when the Treatment Contractor will be authorized to begin procurement of materials needed for system construction, and when the Treatment Contractor will be authorized to mobilize to the site and begin construction – after approval of the 90% Design or after approval of the 100% Design?

USAID RESPONSE: The Contractor will be authorized to begin procurement of materials needed for system construction following the CLIN 2 NTP. The CLIN 2 NTP will be issued after completion of CLIN 1 Design, including 100% design approval from GVN. The RFP is revised to reflect this. USAID may consider authorizing the Contractor to mobilize to the site to facilitate CLIN 2 preparation before 100% design approval.

Amendment No. 1 to RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa

18. C-5.1.4.1: Please explain what existing topographical survey and existing site utility information will be provided to the Contractor. Will USAID please provide an AutoCAD compatible CAD drawing of the treatment site and the immediate surrounding area, including elevation contours (if available).

USAID RESPONSE: As indicated in C.5.1.3.3, topographic survey will be conducted by the A&E Contractor and provided to the Contractor prior to the Notice to Proceed (NTP) for CLIN 1. There is existing MONRE survey data that is provided in Figure 7-25 of the Project Masterplan. CAD files will not be provided to Offerors but will be provided to the Contractor at CLIN1 NTP. Please also see responses to Question Nos. 22 and 41.

19. C-5.1.4.4: The scope indicates that there will be meetings and workshops. Noting challenges to hold meetings during the pandemic, that likely will be a sustained challenge, please clarify if workshops and meetings cannot be held in person, how the design will proceed, and what the Contractor should assume for estimating costs for this effort.

USAID RESPONSE: If necessary, virtual meetings and workshops will be proposed. Please also see the response to Question No 3.

20. C-5.1.4.4: Regarding the specified GVN review durations, if GVN review periods stretch beyond the durations noted, what assistance will USAID provide for resolving comments in a reasonable timeline? Given the inclusion of liquidated damages, and the limited control the Contractor will have in securing GVN approvals, will USAID provide a degree of schedule relief if GVN reviews take longer than forecasted.

USAID RESPONSE: Please refer to Subsection 5.1.4.4 Review and Approval for USAID and A&E Contractor role in leading interaction with GVN on design approval. If the GVN review prolongs and is outside of the Contractor’s control, the Contractor must revise the Baseline Schedule to reflect this and submit to USAID for approval.

21. C-5.1.4.4: Will USAID consider reducing the time required for GVN review of the 60% design and 90% Design

(90 days and 60 days respectively, per C.5.1.4.4.) Would it be possible to reduce these GVN review periods to 60 days for the 60% Design and 30 days for the 90% design? What is the anticipated award date for the project? The anticipated project start date and duration of the design review and approval period will be critical to understand, as they each have potential impact on project timing and work sequence with regard to the wet and dry seasons indicated in C.5.1.3.2.

USAID RESPONSE: The time allotted for GVN review of 60% and 100% designs is based on consultation between the GVN and USAID and is simply meant to provide an estimated approval timeline for the Offerors' planning and budgeting purposes, and therefore, will not be modified. The targeted CLIN 1 NTP date of this Contract is anticipated to be o/a March 2022.

22. C-5.1.5: Can USAID provide geotechnical property information for the existing soils in the thermal treatment work area (e.g., grain size gradation, Atterberg limits, water content, bulk density, bearing capacity, groundwater elevation) to serve as a basis for design of structures associated with the thermal treatment work?

USAID RESPONSE: The site will be surveyed by the A&E Contractor following UXO clearance and provided to the Contractor prior to the NTP, as stated in the RFP. The Treatment – Phase 1 Contractor will be required to perform any additional topographical or geotechnical survey required to perform their design as stated in the RFP. Please also see the response to Question No. 18 and 41.

23. Figure 6 appears to be corrupted. Can a revised version be provided?

USAID RESPONSE: Yes, Figure 6 is re-shared with this amendment.

24. C-5.2.4.3: Please clarify the storage treatment requirements for the TMSA. The text indicates “Another USAID contractor will transport the treated material from the TMSA to the determined reuse site prior to completion/cooling of the following batch.” This implies that the maximum that would need to be stored would be one “batch” worth of volume (although the size of the “batch” does not appear to be specified). However, Amendment No. 1 to RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa the following paragraph indicates that not all soils may be removed, and that the TMSA should be designed for a 5-yr storage life.

USAID RESPONSE: As indicated in C.5.1.3.5, the TMSA must be designed to accommodate all soil and sediment following treatment. The minimum storage capacity of the TMSA is 79,300 cubic meters. This assumes that the treated volume resulting from bank volume #2 in Table 1 may need to be stored as well as some excess based on timing of removal for reuse by another USAID contractor. The actual capacity will be determined based on the Treatment - Phase I Contractor’s design. As indicated in C.5.2.4.3, the Treatment – Phase 1 Contractor is responsible for providing a TMSA capable of storing any remaining materials for a 5-year period beyond the contract period of performance. Offerors must indicate the assumptions made for the TMSA Design Concept submitted as part of L.6.1 Technical Understanding and Approach, including estimated volume and reuse availability timelines for treated materials. Actual volumes and timelines will be finalized during the design process. The RFP is revised to reflect this.

25. C-5.2.4.5: Can USAID please provide names and locations of any disposal facilities in Vietnam authorized to accept dioxin impacted waste streams including soil, non-aqueous phase liquid, adsorbent media, and other miscellaneous contaminated solid materials (e.g., impacted PPE, filter bags or cartridges, etc.)?

USAID RESPONSE: Please see listing from Vietnamese Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment:

https://dichvucong.monre.gov.vn/Pages/PublicInfo/CongKhaiKetQua.aspx

See listing from Dong Nai Department of Natural Resources and Environment:

https://stnmt.dongnai.gov.vn/Pages/Thong-Tin-Can-Biet/pDonviHNQLCTNH.aspx.

26. C-5.2.4.5: Can USAID please provide a list of contractors possessing the Hazardous Waste Disposal License issued by the Vietnam Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MONRE) referenced in this Section.

USAID RESPONSE: Please see the response to Question No. 25 above.

27. C-5.2.5.2: This section states that the Contractor is responsible for attending monthly meetings with USAID and GVN in Hanoi or at the site. For budgeting purposes, can USAID clarify what fraction of the meetings, or at what frequency, will meetings be held in Hanoi?

USAID RESPONSE: The Contractor must attend monthly meetings in person anticipated to be at the project site. If the monthly meetings happen elsewhere, the Contractor must attend virtually. USAID will notify the Contractor’s participation prior to the meeting.

28. H.20: Will USAID please specify the minimum insurance limits for the various types of required coverage specified in this section.

USAID RESPONSE: The Offerors must conduct market research to price out the required insurance premium that is deemed best competitive and appropriate to the proposed technical design and approach, factoring in requirements in paragraph H.20 and the Offerors’ approach to meet the RFP’s requirements.

29. F-5, I-6, Bid Form: In reference to the 100% payment and performance bonds, if only CLIN 1 is awarded initially, will the Contractor be required to post the bond for the entire amount of the contract (CLIN 1 + CLIN 2), or only for the awarded and authorized value of CLIN 1? Likewise, we anticipate that CLIN 2 would be funded incrementally based on annual funding needs. If that is the case, will the Contractor be required to post the bond for the full amount of CLIN 2 upon NTP with CLIN 2, or only be required to post a bond for the portion of CLIN 2 that is authorized at that time?

USAID RESPONSE: In reference to the 100% payment and performance bonds, the Contractor will be required to post the bonds only for the awarded and authorized value of CLIN 1. Upon Notice to Proceed (NTP) with CLIN 2 the contractor will be required to post the bonds for the full amount of CLIN 2 no later than five days upon CLIN 2 NTP. The RFP is revised to reflect this.

30. F-10: Delays outside of the Contractor’s control, including delays in receiving GVN approvals, shutdowns or delayed material deliveries related to Covid-19, or other such issues could impact the Contractor’s ability to https://dichvucong.monre.gov.vn/Pages/PublicInfo/CongKhaiKetQua.aspx https://stnmt.dongnai.gov.vn/Pages/Thong-Tin-Can-Biet/pDonviHNQLCTNH.aspx

Amendment No. 1 to RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa meet the project timeline. Will USAID consider such conditions as grounds for a change order, and excluded from Liquidated Damages? Will USAID consider removing (or reducing) the liquidated damages?

USAID RESPONSE: The Contractor must identify, assess, and have a plan to mitigate risks that may affect the project baseline schedule. USAID will evaluate delays on a case-by-case basis and decide if the evaluated delays will be considered as grounds for a change order and/or excluded from Liquidated Damages. USAID will keep the current liquidated damages. Please also refer to responses to Question Nos. 5 and 6.

31. I-6, Bid Form: Would USAID consider ridering down the open bond amount as major work tasks are completed? For example, once CLIN 2.1 construction work tasks are completed and the CLIN 2.2 operation tasks are started, would the Government consider ridering down the amount of the open bond to remove the CLIN 2.1 tasks, and only hold open the bond value for the remaining CLIN 2.2 tasks? Such an approach would substantially reduce the Contractor’s open bond exposure at any one time, which would both reduce cost and make it easier to secure the bond.

32. I-6: Would USAID consider holding a portion of the Contractor monthly payment requests as retainage in lieu of a bond?

33. J.2: Compendium Health and Safety Specification 01 35 29, Section 2.02.A.2.f. calls for respiratory protection consisting of “full- or half-face respirators with appropriate cartridges or disposable dust masks worn with full-face shield where required.” Likewise, the Site-Wide HASP, specifically Paragraph 9.8.1 and Appendix D Site Characterization AHA for potential exposure to dioxin-contaminated soil also require “Full-face respirator with appropriate cartridges OR half-face respirator with appropriate cartridges worn under a full-face shield.” We are aware that in Danang, a number of activities were performed in Level B personal protective equipment, including the use of supplied air respirators and SCBAs. How should this be bid? Will full-face respirators be considered adequate and appropriate protection for tasks involving contact with potential dioxin-impacted media? Or should the Contractor assume that Level B PPE/supplied air respirators will be required for tasks that may involve exposure to dioxin-impacted media? Is USAID expecting that the Contractor to include pricing for provision of supplied air respirators and SCBA equipment in their base price, or will a future upgrade to Level B/supplied air respirators be eligible for treatment as a change order, if deemed necessary for personnel safety?

USAID RESPONSE: The Site-Wide HASP establishes the required minimum levels of PPE through activity hazard analysis (AHA) in paragraph 4.1. The Contractor is required to submit AHAs for each project area per Compendium Section 01 35 29 paragraph 1.04.C.1.c and 1.07.C. It is the responsibility of the Contractor to determine the appropriate level of PPE required for each activity and project area.

34. J.2: Regarding Section 1.08, Contractor Staff Organization, Qualifications and Responsibilities, we have questions about the language requirement for the Contractor Safety Officer (CSO), Section E. The position requires, in (13), “working knowledge of English and fluency in Vietnamese”, which does not precisely align with requirements in the main RFP (H.23) for language proficiency for all positions: “all Key Personnel must be proficient in English. Any additional contractor personnel and/or consultants shall have English and/or Vietnamese language proficiency as needed to perform technical services.” In addition, it will be challenging to find a local candidate (e.g., fluent in Vietnamese) who meets all of the stringent training and experience requirements for the position. So that this position may be open to the most technically qualified candidates, would USAID please consider modifying the language requirement as follows, to both match the RFP’s expectations for language capability presented in H.23 and to allow for the most technically-qualified candidates to be put forward in this position: “(13) Proficiency in English and basic/working knowledge of Vietnamese.”

USAID RESPONSE: A minimum of one of the following key personnel positions must be proficient in Vietnamese: Construction Manager, Construction Safety Officer, or Construction Quality Control Manager(s).

The Compendium will be updated and shared at a later time to reflect this. Paragraphs H.23 LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY and F.8 KEY PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS of the RFP is revised to reflect

Amendment No. 1 to RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa

35. J.5: A thermal study has been included – is this data representative of the soils to be treated at the site – or is it simply meant to prove that TCH is a viable treatment approach for this site? If it is representative, we have noted that the only VOC present in the soils at detectable concentration is Acetone and will need to account for its presence in the design of the treatment system.

USAID RESPONSE: Soil samples for the Kemron thermal treatment bench study were collected from one area of Bien Hoa Airbase (Decision Unit [DU] PI-02 – an area where a comparatively large volume of soil will require treatment) and so the occurrence of non-dioxin contaminants (i.e., VOCs, SVOCs, metals [arsenic], herbicides, PCBs) is specific to the discrete samples collected within that DU. Soil to be transported to the pre-treatment storage area (PTSA) for thermal treatment by the Treatment - Phase I Contractor will come from multiple areas around Bien Hoa Airbase. For design planning, it is necessary to review Appendix E in the May 2016 Environmental Assessment to understand the occurrence and concentration range of other contaminants in soils around the airbase. As was done during the bench study, soil from the PTSA will need to be sampled to document the presence of contaminants present prior to treatment.

36. L6.2: With reference to this text, “… the term “major subcontractor” includes only those identified subcontractor(s) budgeted in excess of 20% of the overall proposed budget as reflected in the Cost Proposal over the entirety of the performance period,” please clarify if USAID is willing to expand the definition of major subcontractor to allow the major subcontractor designation to be assigned to those who are performing 20% of the total budget and/or services critical to successful implementation, as is typical for many USAID procurements. This would involve amending the above-referenced text, and other places in the RFP where “major subcontractors” are referenced or defined, as follows: “…and any other subcontractor whom the offeror deems as critical to the execution of the scope of work.”

USAID RESPONSE: The major subcontractor as defined in the RFP is only for the purposes of proposal submission (i.e., for technical qualifications and past performance information) and evaluation of the identified/required areas. The Offerors/Contractor may subcontract in any other amounts or at any numbers that are deemed appropriate for the execution of the scope of work and with the most effective business arrangements.

37. Master Plan: We noted that Table 1.B.4 in the site-wide SAP/QAPP annex in the Master Plan, specifies vapor effluent stack monitoring for herbicides (2,4-D and 2,4,5-T, and chlorophenol). These are not typical parameters for the EPA TO-4 method listed, so this will be a customized analysis if it is indeed required. We would not expect these components to be present in large mass in-situ to start with, nor would we expect to volatilize these contaminants to a large degree as these compounds will readily degrade into chlorophenols which will primarily be treated in the liquid treatment system. We believe this may be specialized analysis that does not add much technical value to the project. Will USAID please advise how to address this issue?

Should the Contractor include pricing for customized TO-4 analysis to address these compounds? Or can the contractor confine the stack TO-4 analysis to analytes on the method’s standard analyte list?

USAID RESPONSE: EPA Method TO-10A is allowable for analysis of 2,4-D, 2,4,5-T, and chlorophenol in vapor effluent. The site-wide SAP/QAPP will be updated and shared at a later date to reflect this.

38. According to RFP, “Offerors must be eligible in accordance with the authorized geographic code for this procurement which is 937”. Please explain.

USAID RESPONSE: The authorized geographic code 937 indicated in the RFP is to describe who will be eligible to compete under this RFP. In accordance with USAID policy (ADS 310), Code 937 is defined as the United States, the recipient country, and developing countries other than advanced developing countries, but excluding any country that is a prohibited source.

The US or locally registered (Vietnam Enterprise in accordance with Clause 12 of Article 4 of the Vietnam Enterprise Law 59/2020/QH14) firms are eligible to submit proposals in response to the RFP.

39. We understand that if we choose to join, we work with the prospective prime offeror only. Do we need to work directly with USAID in any step or phase.

USAID RESPONSE: USAID only accepts proposals submitted by Prime Offerors. Prime Offerors under this RFP must be registered under the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 562910 -https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/310.pdf

Amendment No. 1 to RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa

Remediation Services with a business size of $22 million. In addition, Offerors must be eligible in accordance with the authorized geographic code for this procurement which is 937. Please also see response to Question No. 38.

40. Currently, we have registered for DUNS and NCAGE and an email address on https://sam.gov. Are these registrations enough if we would like to participate the bidding as sub-offeror?

USAID RESPONSE: Please see response to Question Nos. 38 and 39.

41. As referred in published document in RFP, we have not found any information about ground foundation (soil characteristics) of TCH or storages. We understand that information investigation is the responsibility of the offerors with approved plan. However, considering the Covid19 situation in South of Vietnam and Bien Hoa city, we cannot visit or arrange site inspection, the collection may be delayed until further notice. Could USAID support us with geological / soil characteristics information or show us the document for the reference?

USAID RESPONSE: Please see responses to Question Nos.18 and 22.

42. According to published documents of this package, GAC from TCH treatment will be transferred to France or

Switzerland for final treatment. Currently, Vietnam legal framework has not developed the detail instructions for treatment of dioxin-related wastes in cement kiln. We have contacted with MONRE for supplement of dioxin code and treatment procedures in hazardous waste management under Vietnamese laws, but this process is time consuming and may not be finished soon as we expected. As we have mentioned in official letter for RFI 72044021R00002, we can destruct dioxin waste efficiently and safely. Treatment of this waste in Vietnam will help reducing treatment cost significantly for both Governments Vietnam and US and the administration works on transborder movements and the disposal of POPs in international conventions (Stockholm, Basel etc..), especially as the quantity is five or six times higher than of Da Nang project. As indicated in the Bien Hoa EIA, the time to close this project will last for ten years with five batches from TCH system (incl. Phase 2). Could USAID consider the possibility to treat domestically this GAC in Vietnam instead of Europe so we can be a potential partner?

USAID RESPONSE: Dioxin-contaminated GAC from TCH treatment is most likely categorized as a hazardous waste in accordance with the site-wide Material Disposition Approach, Annex 8 to the Masterplan. The Prime Contractor must prepare a Waste Management Plan that specifies plans for storage, characterization, and disposal of dioxin-contaminated GAC from TCH treatment in conformance with the Contract standards and the site-wide Material Disposition Approach, Annex 8 to the Masterplan. This RFP does not preclude dioxin contaminated GAC disposal in Vietnam if the disposal complies with the Contract standards/requirements and Vietnamese laws and regulations on hazardous waste disposal.

43. During proposal preparation, new questions may be raised. Could we have any other chance to send newly arising question to USAID?

USAID RESPONSE: Currently, USAID anticipates one additional round of Q&As during the planned virtual conference tentatively held on August 11, 2021 (full details to be shared with the registered participants before the conference date) and followed by written questions due no later than August 13, 2021, at 1600 Hanoi time.

Another round of Q&As may be considered at USAID’s discretion.

44. There is no line item on the USAID bid form for waste disposal or site restoration. Can USAID provide guidance on where it would prefer the costs for those site close-out activities to be carried (e.g., in 2.10.01 – Site Preparation, or 2.20.06 – Treatment 2nd cycle)?

USAID RESPONSE: The waste disposal and site restoration must be included in the 2.00.01 Mobilization and Demobilization - Construction Stage and Operation Stage.

45. F.5, Page 25 - What is the difference between #2 (NTP) and Item 11 (CLIN 1 NTP). Are these not the same dates?

USAID RESPONSE: They both refer to CLIN 1 NTP. The RFP is revised to reflect this.

Amendment No. 1 to RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa

46. C.5.1.3.9 Electrical power – What frequency is the power that is defined to be supplied as?

USAID RESPONSE: 50 Hz.

47. Any chance of extending the contract due date past Aug 19?

USAID RESPONSE: Please see response to Question No. 2.

48. Could USAID please clarify how to submit Past Performance Information?

USAID RESPONSE: Offerors and their major subcontractor(s)(one whose proposed cost exceeds 20% of the Offeror’s total proposed cost/price) will use ATTACHMENT J.7 - PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION SHEET to provide required information as described in sub-paragraph L.6.4 PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION and submit them as annexes to the Technical Proposal. For Past Performance not in CPARS, Offerors must provide at least two contact information for each Past Performance Information Report provided.

[ END of AMENDMENT NO. 1]