Amendment No. 3 to 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 13

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 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa Airbase Area

RFP No. 72044021R00002 one

The purpose of this amendment is to:

1. Extend the proposal submission due date from “September 9, 2021” to “September 30, 2021” at 1600 Hanoi time;

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

3. Provide link to Attachments: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1xU4qxxFF69mTxYHR7t866SHcLi-uNiEl

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

Suzanne H. Johnson

August 27, 2021 https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1xU4qxxFF69mTxYHR7t866SHcLi-uNiEl

Amendment No. 3 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. There are many complex issues with this proposed program that require extensive time to work through to provide a fair price for the works. As such would USAID consider extending the due date for responses to October 1, 2021?

USAID RESPONSE: The closing date for this RFP is changed to Thursday September 30, 2021. The RFP is revised to reflect this.

2. With the ongoing Covid-19 quarantines in Vietnam, it has been taking longer to obtain bids and quotations from

Vietnamese suppliers. Would USAID consider another 2 to 3 week extension to the bid due date to allow for continued price refinement with local suppliers?

USAID RESPONSE: Please see response to Question No. 1.

3. Section C.5.1.3.9 - What size connection is anticipated for the 400 m3/day water line?

USAID RESPONSE: This information is not available at this time. USAID anticipates that this information will be available at the CLIN 1 NTP.

4. In Section C.5.2.4.2, it is noted that the A&E contractor will collect samples of treated material from the TMSA, rather than collecting samples before the material is removed from the treatment structure (e.g., as split samples). It is understood that the intent of the requirement is to put the decision making for this performance-based work on the Contractor. However, this requirement will likely increase costs and may result in other undesirable outcomes for USAID. Because the TMSA samples will not be the same as those collected from the pile, there is a risk that the results will be different (especially if the A&E contractor’s sampling methodology is different/includes less compositing, etc.). The uncertainty when different results are obtained from the same material could result in schedule delays and, in the worst case, require that additional treatment be performed. Although the chance of this is low, the effect would be very significant, as this would require substantial effort to reload the treatment cells and re-treat the material, resulting in substantial schedule delays and significant additional costs for both the Contractor and USAID. If this requirement remains, it will likely lead bidders to include contingency pricing in their bids and thus increase costs for USAID. However, we do not believe that this requirement will provide USAID with any additional value, especially given that USAID will already have the ability to approve and oversee the Contractor’s post-treatment sampling plan and to collect split samples and/or additional samples from the treatment cell prior to cooling and transport of the soils to the TMSA. This could be prevented by having the A&E contractor collect split samples at the same time as the Treatment Contractor. This is typically done without issue for thermal remediation projects in the United States with similar concentration-based performance requirements, and was successfully done in Danang, where GVN collected spit samples of post-treatment material from the pile. Split samples with GVN appear to still be acceptable for wastes per the Project Material Disposition Approach, but if this is not acceptable, it would be helpful to bidders if USAID could explain their rationale here – perhaps other solutions are available to address their concerns, that would not involve the substantial cost and schedule risk of cooling and moving treated soil out of the treatment cell to the TMSA before USAID and the A&E Contractor collect their confirmatory soil samples.

USAID RESPONSE: As the TCH can be configured in different ways which are not only limited to the pile structures, different TCH configurations will enable different confirmatory sampling approaches. As indicated in the RFP, the Contractor must determine the treatment threshold to be accomplished prior to transporting material from the treatment structure(s) to the TMSA. The Contractor must ensure a confirmatory sampling approach in line with the SAP/QCPP, allowing the means for the A&E Contractor to independently collect confirmatory samples of treated material EITHER from the treatment structure OR from the TMSA. During the design process, USAID, GVN, and A&E Contractor can reach agreement with the Contractor on the confirmatory sampling approach. Upon notice by the Treatment Phase 1 Contractor that the treatment threshold has been met, the A&E Contractor will collect samples to provide USAID an independent quality control check. Sub-paragraph C. 5.2.4.2 Material Storage Area Operations of the RFP is revised to reflect this.

5. F-5, I-6, Bid Form. Bonding. Securing a commitment for bonding this project continues to be a difficult issue. Sureties are resistant to provide bonding given several traits about this project: 1) environmental remediation work, 2) outside the US, and 3) long 4-to-5-year bond duration. Bonding will add significant cost to the project, likely more than $1Million, but in our opinion, provides little value. Alternative guarantee and performance inducement provisions could provide USAID with the same results at little or no additional cost. Though it was asked previously in Round 1 questions, we ask again if USAID would consider removing the bonding requirement for this project? Alternatively, if bonding is required, if USAID would consider releasing a portion of the open bond commitment as major features of CLIN 2 work are completed (e.g., construction complete, treatment batch 1, treatment batch 2, final demobilization).

Amendment No. 3 to RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa Airbase Area

Reducing the open bond commitment over time as major work elements are completed may make this project more palatable to sureties; it would also reduce the cost to both the Contractor and USAID.

USAID RESPONSE: Thank you for the suggestion. However, we will keep the bonding requirements as is.

6. Section I.1. references FAR 52.215-10 and 52.215-12. These clauses suggest that certified cost or pricing data will be required for the base award. It is our understanding that certified cost or pricing data is not required if the contract is a fixed price, competitively awarded contract. Will USAID consider removing these FAR references to certified cost or pricing data, or explain the intent of their inclusion in this RFP?

USAID RESPONSE: While we are not requiring certified cost and pricing data for this contract action, we reserve the right to obtain one during the contract implementation when the circumstances are warranted.

7. Section I.1. references FAR 52.222-33, Notification of Requirement for Project Labor Agreement. Can USAID please clarify the intent of this clause? Is this clause applicable to contracts outside of the US? With what groups or agencies are Contractors required to negotiate a Project Labor Agreement? Have other contracts at the Bien Hoa Airbase site negotiated such Project Labor Agreements that could be used as a model or reference for a Project Labor Agreement under this contract? If so, can USAID provide contact information for the parties to any such agreements?

USAID RESPONSE: Thank you. USAID does not have/require a project labor agreement. This clause is removed in the RFP Revision No. 2 which is attached to this RFP Amendment No. 3.

8. Section I.2., references AIDAR 752.7007, Personnel Compensation, requiring government approval for the payment of certain overseas recruitment incentives. It is our understanding that this clause should only apply to cost-reimbursement contracts. Would USAID consider removing this clause from the contract?

USAID RESPONSE: Thank you. This clause is removed in the RFP Revision No. 2.

9. Attachment J.7: Contractor Past Performance Information, Part II, is typically used by USAID themselves to contact the client in order do their own due diligence on a contractor’s project performance. Please confirm that in this proposal USAID wants the submitting contractor to self-assess their performance on each project and thus fill in the data listed under Part II.

USAID RESPONSE: The Offorers are to submit past performance information following the instruction in L.6.4 and evaluation factor M.2.4. For any past performance records that are not in CPARS, the Offerors may self-assess their performance. Please keep in mind that the relevant past performance information provided must be factual, describing the occurrences during the Activity implementation under each specified area for USAID to re-assess and evaluate Offerors’ past performance. USAID reserves the rights to use performance information obtained from other than the sources identified by the Offeror/major subcontractor to complete this evaluation.

10. Section K.9 references FAR 52.230-1 Cost Accounting Standards and Certifications. It is our understanding that this contract would qualify for exemption from CAS under 48 CFR § 9903.201-1 - CAS applicability, which provides for an exception under paragraph (15) “Firm-fixed-price contracts or subcontracts awarded on the basis of adequate price competition without submission of certified cost or pricing data.” While we have a robust project cost accounting and project controls system, compliance with CAS standards would impose a significant accounting burden on our firm at additional cost to USAID, as this would be the only project that would require our firm to certify compliance with CAS.

Will USAID consider removing the references to CAS and CAS certification from this contract?

USAID RESPONSE: No. It is a contractual requirement for Offerors to complete.

11. L.7. Past Performance Information. The bullets under item (1)(a) ask the contractor to describe recent and relevant contract experience that meets all of the three criteria including:

● Cost at and above $5,000,000;

● Period of performance falling within the past five years; and

● Involving (1) remediation and cleanup of contaminated buildings, mine sites, soil, or ground water; and (2) integrated mine reclamation activities, including demolition, soil remediation, wastewater treatment, hazardous material removal, contouring land, and revegetation. (Emphasis added).

Can USAID clarify the relevance of including contaminated building and mine reclamation activities to this project?

Will USAID consider removing requirements for experience with remediation of contaminated buildings and mine reclamation from the required list of past project experience?

Amendment No. 3 to RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa Airbase Area

USAID RESPONSE: L.6.4. Past Performance Information, the third bullet under item (1)(a) will be replaced with the following:

● Involving (1) remediation and cleanup of soil, or groundwater; and (2) integrated environmental reclamation activities, including demolition, soil remediation, wastewater treatment, hazardous material removal, contouring land, and revegetation.

12. The RFP references the Site-wide EMMP and the EIA as guidance documents for monitoring requirements, but it is unclear exactly which of the monitoring activities and locations identified in the EIA and EMMP that the Treatment Phase 1 Contractor will be responsible for conducting. We noted the following statement in Section 5.1 of the Site-wide EMMP: "These tables note several deviations from the monitoring called for in the GVN EIA. In some cases, USAID is proposing more frequent monitoring than called for in the EIA...however, USAID is also proposing not to monitor several water parameters mentioned in the EIA because such parameters cannot be plausibly linked to proposed Project activities" and also noted that many parameter tables in the SWEMMP have notes below them stating that various EIA parameters are not included as they are "not parameters of concern with respect to...Project activities." Can USAID please clarify which of the monitoring and sampling activities as listed in Section 5.2 of the EIA and in the attached table, that the Treatment Phase 1 contractor will be responsible for conducting? For example, there are 22 ambient air monitoring locations identified in the EIA while there are only 4 identified in the Site-wide EMMP. And there are 24 surface water, wastewater and groundwater monitoring locations identified in the EIA while the Site-wide EMMP only requires 4 sampling locations. Which of these locations, if any, is the Treatment 1 Contractor responsible for monitoring? In the event of conflicts between parameters or monitoring frequency between the EIA and Site-wide EMMP, which document governs?

USAID RESPONSE: During the Masterplan development/review process, USAID had consulted with GVN on the Site-wide EMMP (SWEMMP) and GVN had no concerns on the minimum standard requirements (monitoring parameters, frequencies, methods and locations) for different sub-activities including Preparation and Construction, Remediation Operation and Environmental Restoration specified in the Tables IA and IB of the SWEMMP. Note also that the SWEMMP was prepared after thorough review and evaluation of the EIA and in close consultation with the GVN. The Treatment - Phase I Activity-Level EMMP must be prepared in compliance with the SWEMMP, not the EIA.

The RFP will be revised to reflect this. The Treatment - Phase I Activity-Level EMMP must identify activities within the treatment activity-wide area as shown on Figure 4 of the RFP that pose potential impacts and describe the mitigation and monitoring elements to minimize the potential environmental impacts during construction, operation and until site restoration completion. The Treatment - Phase I Activity-Level EMMP once approved by USAID and concurred by GVN will govern all the Treatment - Phase I environmental monitoring and mitigation measures/protocols.

13. Who is responsible for installing and developing the groundwater monitoring wells for the project?

a. If the Treatment Phase 1 Contractor will be responsible for installing and sampling groundwater monitoring wells, can USAID please clarify whether the EIA or Site-wide EMMP requirements are to be followed and what the total depths for the new wells need to be?

USAID RESPONSE: Yes, the Treatment - Phase 1 Contractor is responsible for the installation and monitoring of ground wells for the TCH plant and the TMSA. The required minimum depth of GW wells is 20 meters in conformation to the GVN standard TCVN 261:2001: Solid Waste Landfills. The Treatment - Phase 1 Contactor must install three GW wells downstream of the TCH plant and the TMSA. See clarification in Section C.5.1.3.3 of the RFP. A groundwater monitoring well detail drawing (100-009) is included in the Compendium. This drawing will be modified to include the 20-meter minimum depth requirement of the regulation listed above. Additionally, TCVN 261:2001: Solid Waste Landfills will be added as a reference standard to Section 33 51 39 - Monitoring Wells. The Compendium will be modified and shared with this RFP Amendment.

14. Can USAID please clarify which chlorophenol compounds are to be included in the chlorophenol analyses referenced in the EIA and Site-wide EMMP?

USAID RESPONSE: The SWEMMP, not the EIA, specifies minimum standard requirements for the Treatment - Phase I Activity Level EMMP. Only 2-chlorophenol analyzed by Method TO-4 is required to be monitored per the SWEMMP, Please see also USAID response to Question No. 12.

15. Section 5.2.4 in the EIA refers to monitoring surface water, groundwater, and ambient air monitoring, during environmental restoration (i.e., after completion thermal treatment operations). Can USAID clarify the frequency and duration of the Treatment Phase 1 Contractor’s responsibilities for surface water, groundwater, and ambient air monitoring after thermal treatment operations end?

Amendment No. 3 to RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa Airbase Area

USAID RESPONSE: The SWEMMP, not the EIA, specifies minimum standard requirements for the Treatment - Phase I Activity Level EMMP. Please see Tables IA and IB of the SWEMMP for the requirements on air and water quality mitigation and monitoring for the Environmental Restoration. The RFP will be revised to clarify that the Treatment Phase I Activity - Level EMMP must identify activities that pose potential impacts and describe the mitigation and monitoring elements to minimize the potential environmental impacts during construction, operation “and until site restoration completion,” (Section C. 5.1.2). Please see also USAID responses to Questions 12-15.

16. Section 5.3.2.2 in the EIA states that perimeter ambient air samples for dioxin during thermal operations be “regularly implemented, continuously.” Table 1.B.2 in the Site-wide EMMP appears to indicate monthly ambient air monitoring.

Can USAID clarify the required frequency of ambient air sampling frequency during thermal treatment operations?

USAID RESPONSE: The SWEMMP, not the EIA, specifies minimum standard requirements for the Treatment - Phase I Activity Level EMMP. Table I.B.2 covers non-treatment air quality monitoring, specifying continuous monitoring for total dust, weekly for PM10, monthly for dioxin and every two month for benzene. During the operation phase, the Treatment - Phase I Activity-Level EMMP must ensure minimum treatment air emission mitigation and monitoring requirements specified in Table I.B.3, I.B.4 and I.B.5. See also response to Questions Nos. 12 to 15.

17. The water content varies substantially between the soil and sediments to be treated, which affects the thermal properties and heat capacity of the treated materials. Table 2-2 in the Master Plan indicates that the majority of the material is soil vs. sediment. For the treatment phase of the project, can USAID clarify what fraction of the total volume should be assumed to be soil and what fraction should be assumed to be sediment?

USAID RESPONSE: The Civil Works – Phase 1 Contractor is anticipated to place 50,000 cubic meters of material in the PTSA for the first treatment cycle. Of this 50,000 cubic meters, approximately 2.2% (1,100 cubic meters) is estimated to be sediment. The Civil Works – Phase 1 Contractor is anticipated to place an additional 61,170 cubic meters of material prior to the second treatment cycle. Of this 61,170 cubic meters, all material is anticipated to be soil. The actual percentages of soil and sediment may vary, these estimates are intended to provide a summary of information available at this time.

18. Will the soils and sediment be separated or segregated in the PTSA, so that the Treatment Contractor can control placement or mixing of sediment materials in the TCH treatment cell?

USAID RESPONSE: Soils and sediment will not be separated or segregated in the PTSA. The A&E Contractor and the Civil Works – Phase 1 Contractor will note and provide the general location of sediment within the PTSA to the Treatment – Phase 1 Contractor. Please see also the USAID response to Question No. 17.

19. Would like to state that the presentation and conference held on August 11 was well done. The Contractors appreciate the time and effort that USAID put into making this success conference.

USAID RESPONSE: Thank you for your participation and interest in this Activity.

20. Will USAID consider a cost reimbursable contract? There is high risk for the Contractor under firm fixed price contract type, which definitely drives the price of the contract.

USAID RESPONSE: All Offerors should propose based on a fixed price in accordance with the terms of the solicitation.

21. Will USAID accept a bond on US paper?

USAID RESPONSE: Yes, US bonds are acceptable.

22. Is the bond a 5-year term bond or an annually billed obligation?

USAID RESPONSE: As indicated in the RFP (as amended), 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. Please also see response to Question No. 5.

Amendment No. 3 to RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa Airbase Area

23. The contractor is required to use USAID DBA insurance carrier; how does it work and how does the contractor bill the cost to the contract?

USAID RESPONSE: Offerors are to ensure that all costs necessary to implement the Activity, in this case DBA insurance are/may be included in the proposed price as appropriated.

24. H.22 USAID Ownership and Use of Documents - (s) Supplemental Documents – The Contracting Officer shall furnish from time to time such detailed drawings and other information as is considered necessary, in the opinion of the Contracting Officer, to interpret, clarify, supplement, or correct inconsistencies, errors or omissions in the Contract documents, or to describe minor changes in the work not involving an increase in the contract price or extension of the contract time. The Contractor shall comply with the requirements of the supplemental documents, and unless objection is made by the Contractor within 20 days, their issuance shall not provide for any claim for increase in the Contract price or an extension of the contract time. Can the Contractor have up to 45 days instead of 20 days to make objections?

USAID RESPONSE: No. We will keep the period for making objections by the Contractor to “within 20 days.”

25. Will USAID consider an additional three months extension of the RFP?

USAID RESPONSE: Please refer to answer to response to Question No. 1.

26. Does the Contractor project manager have to reside in Vietnam full time during the 5-year performance of the contract? Or can an alternate project manager from one of the Contractor’s subcontract perform this full-time duty?

USAID RESPONSE: Yes, the Project Manager must reside in Vietnam full time AND “must have the ability to speak for and bind the Contractor.” This is not something that can be delegated to subcontractor personnel.

27. Can documents, such as reports, drawings, presentation materials, be in Contractor format?

USAID RESPONSE: All deliverables required under the Contract must be in USAID’s directed format and in consultation with the COR and the Mission’s Development and Outreach team as laid out in Attachment J.12 and Section D – Packaging and Marking of the RFP. Particularly, Section D includes the following: “The Contractor will not mark its corporate identities or logos on USAID-funded program materials and communications, unless approved in advance by the Contracting Officer.”

28. Are all of the equipment purchased under this contract owned by the US Government? It is not clear that during the demobilization stage which equipment will be removed. In respect to this removed equipment, who owns this? And if this is US Government equipment and it is demobilized, where is this stored?

USAID RESPONSE: All equipment and materials acquired for the performance of this contract belongs to the Contractor upon accomplishing its purposes, except for the thermal oxidizer as indicated C.5.1.3.6 Treatment System Design and C.5.2.4.7 Operations Demobilization (as amended).

Ownership of the thermal oxidizer will be transferred to USAID at the end of the Contractor’s period of performance.

The Contractor is to follow Decontamination and Demobilization Plan, sub-paragraphs C.5.2.4.4 Construction Demobilization and C.5.2.4.7 Operations Demobilization in decontamination, demolition, removal, and disposal of all other components provided by the Treatment – Phase 1 Contractor. See clarifications in RFP Section C.5.2.4.7 Operations Demobilization.

29. Although this program is Phase 1, what is the probability that the additional phases planned will be funded and awarded?

USAID RESPONSE: Additional phase(s) are under consideration and subject to funds availability.

30. What would USAID do if all sound and responsible proposals exceeds the 80 million dollars limit?

USAID RESPONSE: The Offeror’s initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoints, taking into consideration overall Contract requirements.

Amendment No. 3 to RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa Airbase Area

31. Given the costs incurred in the Danang IPTD treatment far exceeded the $50-80 million range for a smaller volume of contaminated soil without proper monitoring of dioxins/furans in wastewater discharges and air emissions, what probabilistic certainty would the range of $50 - 80 million provide to adequately protection for public health and the environment in Bien Hoa?

USAID RESPONSE: Based on prior experience and historical data, USAID has placed the range of $50 - $80 million to accomplish all work with appropriate environmental and human health protection measures/protocols as required in the RFP. Please also see USAID responses to Question Nos. 30, 40, and 41.

32. It is believed that for the Danang remediation, USAID covered the costs for electricity and GAC for off-site treatment and disposal in a European country. Does the Agency plan to cover these costs again for Phase 1 treatment in Bien Hoa?

USAID RESPONSE: No, the Contractor will bear the costs for electricity and GAC disposition.

33. Contaminants other than dioxins were mentioned in an inconsistent and non-specific way through-out the RFP which may lead to offerors understanding the requirements for sampling and analysis differently. Can USAID be specific and categorically clear on what contaminants must be analyzed and at what points of the treatment process?

USAID RESPONSE: “Contaminants” are mentioned in the Decontamination and Demobilization Plan requirements.

COCs (Contaminants of Concerns) are mentioned in the Activity-Level EMMP. The Contractor must (i) identify contaminants that are potentially present in discharges/wastes generated by the Treatment - Phase I activities, (ii) include the identified contaminants to the Activity-Level EMMP, and (iii) ensure all discharges/wastes to be handled in compliance with the approved Activity-Level Waste Management Plan and EMMP.

34. It is understood that the Geographic Code 937 applies to offerors or Contractor contractors. Does this apply to a US company that will use subcontractors outside of the United States? Or can a US company that qualifies under Code 937 use foreign subcontractors without any issue?

USAID RESPONSE: The authorized geographic code 937 will apply to subcontractor procurements. Please also refer to 2 CFR 228 RULES FOR PROCUREMENT OF COMMODITIES AND SERVICES FINANCED BY USAID.

35. The proposed technology treatment train is comprised of demonstrated technologies with the result that our efficient and green process design will generate treated soils that are more friendly for beneficial use and more environmentally sustainable. Does USAID prefer greener and more sustainable solution over other solutions if all other parameters are comparable?

USAID RESPONSE: As stated in Subsection L.6.1 TECHNICAL UNDERSTANDING AND APPROACH, the Offeror’s Design Concept must describe how key features address the Project treatment technology criteria referenced in the Annex 8 – Technical Memorandum “Technology Evaluation and Recommended Treatment Methods” of the Masterplan, that includes relevant green-approach criteria, i.e. 4.A. Minimization of consumption of resources and 6.A.

Minimization of byproducts.

As stated in Section M (as amended), the technical proposal will be evaluated with the four criteria: Technical Understanding and Approach, Technical Qualifications, Management and Staffing Plan, and Past Performance Information in descending order of importance.

36. Will USAID require the successful offeror to implement a comprehensive performance test program to establish acceptable operational parameters to ensure compliance with wastewater and air emission regulatory requirements as a condition for obtaining a Permit-To-Operate prior to beginning full-scale operations? Please specify the CPT program requirements, including sampling regiment and scheduling timeframe.

USAID RESPONSE: As stated in the RFP, the Offerors must describe the technical approach and solution for realizing the design concept both in the construction and operation stages, i.e. means and methods to implement the proposed Design Concept. The Contractor must ensure their design, construction and operation to meet the contract requirements and standards. It is up to the Offerors to include a comprehensive performance test (CPT) as a part of their technical approach and solution. Also refer to Section 01 31 13 - PROJECT COORDINATION of the Compendium for more information on licenses and permits.

Amendment No. 3 to RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa Airbase Area

37. Please qualify and quantify the requirements for continuous fugitive emission monitoring stations for the project.

USAID RESPONSE: The numbers of air stations and locations and accompanied equipment will depend on the design by the Treatment – Phase I Contractor and will need to be described in the Treatment Activity-Level EMMP for approval by USAID. In addition, appropriate air quality monitoring equipment must be considered in the EMMP and HASP as necessary to monitor fugitive emissions during the handling of pre-treated and post-treated soil and sediment.

38. Will USAID consider a technology technically unacceptable should the post-treatment soil be rendered unacceptable (i.e., minerally oxidized to ash) for geotechnical backfill compaction requirements for re-use on site?

USAID RESPONSE: One of the objectives of the Treatment - Phase 1 Contract is to ensure that treated soil and sediment can be used by USAID as a beneficial fill on the Airbase. Some augmentation of the treated material may be needed prior to use as backfill depending on the characteristics of the Treatment - Phase 1 Contractor’s process. The Offerors’ proposal must indicate the anticipated quality of treated material and ability to meet the fill requirements specified in the Compendium. Section L.6.1 of the RFP is revised to include this.

39. We plan to use Vietnamese subcontractor that is a holder of a hazardous waste disposal license issued by GVN.

Only the subcontractor will be handling contaminated soil/sediment prior to the TCH process. Please confirm our understanding of Slide 8 of USAID’s presentation that if the other team members that are not handling the contaminated soil/sediment will not need to also apply for a similar hazardous waste disposal license

USAID RESPONSE: The Hazardous Waste Disposal License requirement applies only to the entity that (either Prime Contractor or Subcontractor) handles contaminated material. USAID confirms that the other Contractor/Subcontractors that will not handle the contaminated soil/sediment will not need to apply for Hazardous Waste Disposal License. The Contractor must make the determination on whether the material is contaminated or not (i.e., is treatment complete).

Please refer to section L.6 INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARATION OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL that the Hazardous Waste Disposal License (either by Contractor or Subcontractor) must be presented at the time of proposal submission.

40. Will USAID conduct a full technical evaluation of each offeror’s proposal regardless of whether the price is above the $80M upper threshold indicated in the RFP?

USAID RESPONSE: Please refer to the response to Question No. 30.

41. Although mentioned in the RFP and during the presentation that technical has more importance than price. However, if the price is greater than $80M, will the government evaluate the technical portion or will the proposal be immediately considered non-responsive and no further evaluation will occur?

USAID RESPONSE: USAID will conduct proposals evaluation in accordance with Section M of the RFP. Please also refer to the response to Question No. 30.

42. For the organigram/organization chart/management structure requirement for one of the annexes, is there an example or template that could be supplied so that our proposal meets what is required by USAID?

USAID RESPONSE: There is no template. Offerors may submit the required information with their own format within the page limit.

43. For the staffing matrix, is there an example or template that could be supplied so that our proposal meets what is required by USAID?

USAID RESPONSE: There is no template. Offerors may submit the required information with their own format within the page limit.

44. Does the Contractor need to have the Hazardous Waste Disposal License if one of the Contractor’s subcontractors has the License? It is planned that the subcontractor that has the license will do all of the contaminated soil and material handling and that the Contractor will only oversee (but not actually touch) the material.

Amendment No. 3 to RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa Airbase Area

USAID RESPONSE: See response to Question No. 39. It is fine that the Prime Contractor oversees the contaminated material handling performed by the subcontractor with appropriate Hazardous Waste Disposal License to ensure compliance with the approved Activity-Level Waste Management and EMMP.

45. Does the Contractor need to have the Construction Operation Capability Certificate? One of the subcontractors to the Contractor will have this certification – is this sufficient?

USAID RESPONSE: The Vietnamese Prime Contractor must have the Construction Operation Capability Certificate (Article 1, Sub-article 32 of Decree 100/2018/ND-CP). See also USAID response to Question No. 46 below for Foreign Prime Contractor. Section C.5.1.1.3 is revised to include Decree 100/2018/ND-CP.

46. Does the Contractor need to have the Construction Operations License for Foreign Contractors if one of the subcontractors to the Contractor will only be performing construction operations?

USAID RESPONSE: The Foreign Prime Contractor must have the Construction Operations License for Foreign Contractors (Article 70 of Decree 59/2015/ND-CP and Article 1, Sub-article 38 of Decree 100/2018/ND-CP). Section C.5.1.1.3 is revised to include Decree 100/2018/ND-CP and Decree 59/2015/ND-CP.

47. Is it possible to transfer the construction civil works scope from the treatment contractor to other site contractors to reduce the treatment contractor overall price? That is, if the treatment contractor only focuses on design, equipment and operation of the treatment equipment and other site contractors perform the civil works (e.g., the TMSA), this will reduce the overall price of the program.

USAID RESPONSE: No. The scope will remain as issued in the RFP and as amended.

48. The concern about a FFP type of contract is that the FFP must carry costs associated with risk. This risk can range from shipping issues, site issues, utility reliability and other issues that might have nothing to do with the Contractor’s performance. It might be helpful if USAID were to consider allowing the Contractor to define what items their FFP price covers and what items their FFP does not cover. With that, the cost of carrying the risks will drop (e.g., what risk the contractor won’t cover) thus lowering the price of the program.

USAID RESPONSE: Please also refer to the response to Question No. 20.

49. Does the site, equipment or operation at the Haemers’s site affect anything that the Contractor is responsible for Phase 1?

USAID RESPONSE: The footprint of the Haemers’s site is identified on Slide 21, and the Contractor is not responsible for that footprint unless it is formally handed over to the Contractor (i.e., after MND has accepted the demobilized site back from Haemers).

50. In respect to the P&ID required, P&IDs can be multiple pages long. Is USAID requesting detail P&IDs or are summary P&IDs acceptable to assist with meeting the page limitation of the proposal?

USAID RESPONSE: A more generalized (i.e., summary) P&ID is acceptable for the proposal so long as adequate detail is presented to understand the Treatment – Phase I Contractor’s overall treatment process, treatment capacity, and vapor and wastewater treatment approach and capacity. More detailed P&IDs will be required during the design phase of the project.

51. To assist with reducing the costs associated with risk, would there be any reconsideration of either accepting a T&M, CPFF or FP-LOE type of contract? This will allow the Contractor to not carry high risk costs but instead focus on exactly what is need to be priced to perform the scope of work.

USAID RESPONSE: No. Please also refer to the response to Question No. 20.

52. Due to the questions brought up in the presentation and the questions that are expected to be asked to USAID by the Contractor contractors, is it possible to extend the due date of the proposal to Sept 30?

USAID RESPONSE: See response to Question No. 1.

Amendment No. 3 to RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa Airbase Area

53. In the price form attached with the RFP, the term “Total Day Works” is mentioned with its own specific line. What is this? Since this price is added to the total price of the Contractor, do bonds have include this total price or just the price without the “Total Day Works”?

USAID RESPONSE: “Total Day Works” is a means by which a Contractor is paid for work specifically authorized by the Contracting Officer. Bonds need not account for the “Total Day Works.”

54. Will the electrical usage costs be borne by the Contractor? If yes, what is the rate that the Contractor should use in the pricing proposal?

USAID RESPONSE: Yes, electrical costs will be borne by the Contractor. Rates can be found here:

https://www.evn.com.vn/c3/evn-va-khach-hang/Bieu-gia-ban-le-dien-9-79.aspx.

55. What is the reliability of the electrical grid? Should diesel generators be supplied to supplant any electrical loss?

USAID RESPONSE: Power outages are uncommon; however, there is no guarantee that power will be continuous.

The offerors must determine the need for generators to support their treatment system.

56. There will be four electrical transforms at the site each with a supply of 3200 kvA. This implies a total of 12,800 kvA for the site, correct? What is the power quality of the electrical supply? Any power correction equipment required?

Any requirements on harmonic feedback?

USAID RESPONSE: The total apparent capacity of the four transformers together is 12,800 kvA. As the RFP clearly states the Contractor’s designs must include details on Contractor-implemented connection to these transformers.

Please see also USAID response to Question 55 above for the quality of electrical supply.

57. Will the water usage costs be borne by the Contractor? If yes, what is the rate that the Contractor should use in the pricing proposal?

USAID RESPONSE: Yes, water usage costs will be borne by the Contractor. Rates can be found here:

https://dowaco.vn/ho-tro-khach-hang/#gia-nuoc.

58. For the 400 cubic meter per day pipe water, is the water considered “hard” or “soft”? What is the mineral content?

What is the pH of the water? Are there any contaminants that should be of concern? Is the water considered potable? What is the water pressure? Is the water supply reliable?

USAID RESPONSE: See response to Question No. 16 of Amendment No. 1 to the RFP. Please also refer to the Dong Nai Water Supply Company’s water testing information below for general information: https://dowaco.vn/ket-qua-chat-luong-nuoc-thang-08-2021/.

59. For fuel type, what is the preferred fuel type in Vietnam? Diesel or Kerosene? What would the GVN and USAID prefer to be used at the site?

USAID RESPONSE: Both Diesel and Kerosene are available in Vietnam and accepted by GVN and USAID. As clearly stated in the C.5.1.3.10 SUPPLEMENTAL FUEL, the Contractor must provide calculation and justification of supplemental fuel source requirements for equipment such as the thermal oxidizer, if needed.

60. It is critical that the Contractor pricing plan maintains a stable cash flow. Is it acceptable that the Contractor identifies a milestone payment plan for the project that includes actual work accomplished with payments in the proposal?

USAID RESPONSE: Schedule of Values (SOVs) serves as a basis for progress payments.The Contractor may submit vouchers on a monthly basis in accordance with FAR 52.232-5 Payments under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts, FAR 52.232-40 Providing Accelerated Payments to Small Business Subcontractors, and G.1 AIDAR

752.7003 DOCUMENTATION FOR PAYMENT (NOV 1998).

61. On page 27, F.7 (b) it is mentioned that the entire work be ready for use not later than 1826 days. Please define what

“ready for use” means.

USAID RESPONSE: The Contractor must obtain a notice per sub-paragraph C.5.2.4.8 Final Acceptance and complete all deliverables specified in paragraph F.5 DELIVERABLES AND DELIVERABLES SCHEDULE and well as preparing for demobilization within this indicated duration.

https://www.evn.com.vn/c3/evn-va-khach-hang/Bieu-gia-ban-le-dien-9-79.aspx https://dowaco.vn/ho-tro-khach-hang/#gia-nuoc https://dowaco.vn/ket-qua-chat-luong-nuoc-thang-08-2021/ https://dowaco.vn/ket-qua-chat-luong-nuoc-thang-08-2021/

Amendment No. 3 to RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa Airbase Area

62. For CLIN 1, are daily construction and CQC reports required as defined by Item 30 of the deliverables (Section F.5)?

USAID RESPONSE: No daily reporting is required during CLIN 1. Daily reporting is required for CLIN 2 during construction and operations. See clarifications in the RFP Section C.5.1.2.

63. For the “Buy American” clause, if equipment is purchased in the US but fabricated and built outside of the US, does this violate the clause?

USAID RESPONSE: §22 CFR 228 describes the source and nationality requirements for the procurement of commodities and services under the authorized geographic code 937.

64. How much detailed is required for the schedule that will be included in the proposal?

USAID RESPONSE: The Treatment – Phase I Contractor’s schedule, as included in the proposal, must include sufficient detail to demonstrate a thorough understanding of the steps that will be required to ultimately meet the treatment goals and timeline as identified in the RFP. The schedule must reflect the potential contractor’s careful consideration of the steps required and as such should be reasonably detailed to convey a comprehensive plan for meeting overall project objectives.

65. Is the technical proposal submitted separately from the cost proposal?

USAID RESPONSE: Yes. See Instructions in Section L of the RFP for proposal submission.

66. The presentation indicated that the asphalt thickness is 8 cm (3.15 inches). Can it be assumed that this thickness is consistent or should we consider that there might be areas with less thickness?

USAID RESPONSE: The surface thickness may vary, consider that some areas may be less thick.

67. Please be more specific in the RFP that all offerors are required to operate the Thermal Oxidizer (TO) and all proposed wastewater treatment technologies throughout the entire project to ensure air emission and wastewater quality standards are achieved continuously to protect the surrounding human health and the environment.

USAID RESPONSE: As clearly indicated in the C.5.1.3.6 Treatment System Design, the vapor treatment system must include use of a thermal oxidizer as a primary element. The vapor and wastewater treatment systems design must ensure that all discharges will meet the approved Activity-Level EMMP requirements prior to being discharged into the environment.

68. Section C.5.2.4.2 indicates that one of USAID’s civil contractors will transport contaminated soil to the PTSA and transport treated soil from the TMSA to another area on the base for reuse as backfill materials. The access road of approximately 1.8Km in length on Figure 4 of the RFP is labeled as to and from the PTSA and TMSA. Is an offeror expected to include construction of the road into its cost estimate?

USAID RESPONSE: The 1.8 km access road discussed in the site walk and additional information table from Amendment 2 will be maintained with some portions rehabilitated and reconstructed by the Civil Works – Phase 1 Contractor. The roadway around the treatment area on the west, north, and east sides will be built by the Civil Works

– Phase 1 Contractor. This includes access to the PTSA and TMSA on the east side of these facilities and up to the southern access gate on the west side of the treatment area. The Treatment – Phase 1 Contractor is responsible for surface improvements within Treatment – Phase 1 work area as required from the south access point, between treatment and support facilities, and from/to the treatment facility to/from the PTSA and the TMSA (for unloading the PTSA and loading the TMSA).

69. C.5.1.3.9 – “USAID anticipates that the Contractor-designed treatment plant construction and operation will require both water and power inputs to accomplish activity objectives. GVN is planning to install a 400 cubic meter per day piped water source and four transformers with capacity of 3200 kvA-22/0.4 kV per each in the area identified as “Substation and Water Supply” in the preliminary site layout for use by the Contractor.” The power inputs are designed on a thermal desorption plant using electrical resistances, which is different from a plant using liquid or gas fuels.

Q1: In the event that the final design, as approved by USAID and GVN does not require said electrical output (for example if liquid or gas fuels are used for heating elements), will USAID proceed with the described upgrades anyway?

Amendment No. 3 to RFP No. 72044021R00002 for USAID Treatment – Phase 1 for Dioxin Remediation at Bien Hoa Airbase Area

USAID RESPONSE: The approved Contractor’s final design must confirm the electrical output requirement.