Amendment 2 Q&As.pdf

RFP No. 72049219R00017 Amendment No. 2 Q&As

Technical Questions:

1. Section F.8 on pages 20-21 of the RFP – would USAID please consider providing incremental payment of fee for achievement of the deliverable/target listed in the table, “At least 200,000 new household electricity connections,” particularly given the challenges of working in PNG and the progressively more challenging feat of achieving additionality as connections increase? For, example, would it be possible to split this deliverable into multiple deliverables scheduled at intervals over the life of the project or to pay partial fee for partial achievement, to be recognized during the course of the project as the interim targets are achieved? Additionally, would USAID consider allowing contractors to receive a part of its fee as a base fee tied to regular reporting activities/monthly operational costs in addition to the fee tied to performance milestones?

USAID: No. Fee will be allocated and disbursed in accordance with Section F.8.

2. With regard to Section F.8, we appreciate USAID’s clear description of the expected results for the PEP Activity. However, the RFP’s current fee payment mechanism may remove the flexibility that USAID and the contractor need to reprogram activities and effort to be responsive to stakeholder needs, capitalize on windows of opportunities, and achieve greater results. Because the PEP Activity is a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee type contract that is structured to incentivize the contractor to meet certain targets while maintaining flexibility to adapt implementation to achieve these results, we request that USAID remove the deliverable, “At least 200,000 new household electricity connections” from F.8 and allow the contractor to adjust the fee payment schedule with each annual work plan. Because USAID uses annual work plans to manage a contractor’s progress toward completing a contract, this flexibility allows the contractor to readjust and reallocate effort and resources to achieve the most results attainable within the total estimated cost. Any unpaid fee due to the contractor’s not achieving a certain result beyond its manageable control, such as the changing needs of local counterparts, may be reallocated among other or new deliverables in the work plan for the upcoming year. Should USAID wish to tie fee to results as described in F.8, a Cost-Plus-Award-Fee type contract would be more appropriate and likely to provide better value to USAID.

USAID: No. Please see response to question 1.

3. Section F.8, on page 21 of the RFP differentiates between the different types/levels of electricity connections for households, based on the World Bank Multi-Tier framework. -can USAID provide additional information regarding the categorization of connections and whether all levels of connections count equally toward the total connections target of 200,000? For example, if two households are currently at Tier 0, with no electricity, and one improves under PEP to Tier 1 (4 hours of light and phone charging) and one improves under PEP to Tier 5 (23 hours of electricity minimum of 3 hours at night, 3x disruptions per week or >2 hours total disruption), (a) are both improvements in connection weighted equally for the purposes of the deliverable? (b) Does USAID intend to allow improvements within the framework to be counted as connections? (c) For example, could the program count a household with improved service delivery moving form Tier 2 to Tier 4 as a connection?

USAID: Answers to (a) No information is available at this time. This will be determined during consultations with the government of PNG. (b) No. Improvements within the framework will not count directly under the 200,000 but this can be attributed to Objective 1, PPL operational efficiency. (c) Same answer as (b).

4. Section F.8, on page 21, is USAID able to provide an established view as to what should constitute the requisite minimum standard for a household connection to be counted against the objective of adding 200,000 new connections?

USAID: USAID encourages offerors to propose recommended approaches to reach 200,000 new household connections.

5. Section F.8, pages 20-21 Table 1: Fixed Fee and the Required Deliverables

The table for fixed fee only lists two categories: 1) achieving at least 200,000 new household electricity connections and 2) PWS deliverables for Components 1-4. In a country such as PNG where USAID has not operated extensively in the past, it is very likely that situations will evolve and priorities will change over the life of the contract. However, the contractors would be incentivized to complete the originally designated deliverables, as that is their only opportunity to earn fee. Would USAID consider adding regular fee payments tied to quarterly/annual reports of no more than 5% per year? This will provide regular fee payments to contractors, while still tying most fee to the proposed deliverables.

USAID: No, quarterly/annual reports are required mandatory reporting. The purpose of tying fixed fee to connection is to incentivize performance.

6. Section F.8, page 21 Table 1: Fixed Fee and the Required Deliverables

Twenty-five percent (25%) of the fixed fee is tied to achieving at least 200,000 new household electricity connections. As written, the contractor would receive no fee for 199,999 connections, but 25% of the fee for the next connection. Would USAID consider breaking this payment up into 5% tranches for each new group of 40,000 connections, or some other division?

USAID: No. Please see response to question 1.

7. Section F.9 Key Personnel on page 21 of the RFP – could USAID please confirm that it will accept offers that include fewer than five key personnel?

USAID: Yes. USAID will accept offers that include fewer than five key personnel. Chief of Party is a required key personnel position. Offerors must decide the appropriate level of additional key personnel.

8. Please confirm that the minimum qualifications to be met by the Chief of Party and other proposed Key Personnel are left up to the discretion of the Offeror.

USAID: USAID will not define minimum qualifications. Offerors must identify and propose qualifications that align with their technical approach.

9. In Section M.2 (p. 84), the evaluation criteria for the Management Plan includes

“the…appropriateness of the proposed staffing, *particularly the proposed key positions* to ensure successful implementation of the proposed PWS” (emphasis added). Further, Section L.6.b (p. 78) directs the Offeror to identify key positions, their professional qualification, and experience.

a. Please confirm that in this section Offerors should propose key positions and specify the professional qualifications and experience required for each.

USAID: Section L.6(b) Part 2: Management Plan states “Offerors must describe how they plan to set up their (i) organizational structure that identifies key positions and the appropriateness of their professional qualification and experience.”

b. In addition, please confirm that Offerors should include brief biographies for proposed key personnel candidates.

USAID: No, this is not required.

10. Can USAID confirm that the required Organizational Chart and Rapid Mobilization Plan, referenced on page 78 of the RFP as supporting the Management Plan, can both be included as part of the Technical Proposal Annexes?

USAID: No. The Organizational Chart is included in the 10-page limitation. The Rapid Mobilization Plan is an annex to the management plan and is not part of the page limitation requirement.

11. Can USAID specify the number of days the Rapid Mobilization Plan should cover (e.g. 90 days, 120 days, or 180 days)?

USAID: The Rapid Mobilization Plan should be set for 90 days.

12. Can USAID please confirm what “pause and reflect” means (p. 78 of the RFP) within the context of the Rapid Mobilization Plan?

USAID: Please follow this link on “pause and reflect:”

https://usaidlearninglab.org/library/facilitating-pause-reflect

13. In Section C, USAID highlights “ways to catalyze private investments” as the focus of Objective

4, but the SOO only provides a sub-objective for “commercial financing.” Is Sub-Objective 4.1 for financing to be considered more broadly, or should it be specific to commercial financing?

https://usaidlearninglab.org/library/facilitating-pause-reflect

USAID: Yes, Objective 4 should consider other financing opportunities. Section J is revised accordingly.

14. Section C.IV Sustainability (p. 10) reads: “the Contractor must highlight the principles behind strengthening energy security and expanding access across the Indo-Pacific region by engaging with local organizations either through subcontracts or grants…” Please confirm that the Grants Under Contract clause will be added to the resultant contract.

USAID: No. The word “grants” is deleted. Please see the revised RFP.

15. As referenced in Sub-Objective 2.3 (Attachment J-4): Can USAID clarify/define “energy system?” Which types of system does this include? Does this refer to mini-grids only?

USAID: Energy system indicated under Sub-Objective 2.3 refers to mini or micro grids.

16. To achieve the objectives of the “10 viable energy systems,” can USAID clarify if the Contractor will be able to purchase equipment (e.g. Energy hardware, solar panels, battery storage) directly or under a grant/subcontracting mechanism?

USAID: Yes. A contractor could purchase equipment.

17. To achieve the objectives of the “10 viable energy systems,” can USAID clarify if construction will be allowed as part of this procurement opportunity?

USAID: Construction is not contemplated as part of this activity at this time.

18. Does USAID have a “pre-agreed size” determined under sub-Objective 2.3 or is the offeror expected to propose the “size”?

USAID: No. Offerors must propose the size.

19. Objective 4 – Does “catalyze private investment for energy projects” include brownfield projects-where private investment can be used to refurbish aging/out of action plants in exchange for equity ownership?

USAID: Yes.

20. If PEP collaborates with other donors who are concurrently aiming to increase connections, through this collaboration can PEP benefit from these connections towards the 200,000 new connection target?

USAID: Yes. However, USAID’s role should be clearly identified, substantiated and approved by

USAID.

21. On page 78, it states that “The Offerors must propose possible viable sites for implementation of Objective 2”. How many possible sites is USAID looking for at this stage?

USAID: USAID leaves the number of sites open for Offerors to propose.

22. Can PEP offer sites that are under plan by other donors but would benefit from PEP collaboration?

23. On page 8, USAID states that the Contractor will facilitate reaching a target of at least 200,000 new household electricity connections.” Do commercial (industrial, business, etc.) connections count toward this target?

USAID: No. Commercial connections will not count directly under the 200,000 but this can be attributed to Objective 1, PPL operational efficiency.

24. On page 9, under bullet “Advanced coordination with other donors,” USAID mentions

“participation in future Trilateral coordination platforms and the planned PEP Governance Committee.”

a. Would the Contractor participate?

USAID: Yes. However, USAID reserves the right to decide who will participate in the

Trilateral coordination platforms and PEP Governance Committee.

b. Alternatively, is this level of participation intended for USAID only?

USAID: Please see response to question 24 a. above.

25. On page 9, under bullet “Procurement of smart technologies” USAID notes “Prior to proposing the procurement of these technologies, the activity must leverage private sector resources that are willing to partner with USAID to implement these technologies.” Does this mean that the Contractor will only be able to introduce smart technologies that have been provided (funded) entirely by a private sector partner? Would it be possible to amend the section to read instead “Prior to proposing the procurement of these technologies, the activity must explore the possibility of leveraging private sector resources that are willing to partner with USAID to implement these technologies. If no private sector resources can be leveraged successfully, the Contractor will, with USAID approval, be authorized to procure proposed technologies directly.

USAID: Yes. Please see the revised RFP for the changes.

26. On pages 9 and 10, under bullet “Private sector engagement” USAID notes “The activity must clearly identify the role of the private sector in each of the Tasks and qualify the private sector’s resources that will contribute to achieving the goals of the PEP.” Can USAID clarify if the applicant is required to “clearly identify” and “qualify the private sector’s resources” at the proposal stage or if Offerors can demonstrate an illustrative role and illustrative resources from the private sector?

USAID: USAID leaves it to the Offeror to propose the role of their proposed private sector partners as well as the illustrative resources that the proposed private sector may provide.

27. On page 78 Objective 2 Adherence to criteria for site selection: Can USAID clarify/quantify what is considered “low service coverage” and “projected high electricity demand”?

RESPONSE: Please refer to PNG’s National Energy Rollout Plan (NEROP).

28. In Section L.6(b) Part 1, Objective 2 (p. 77), the criteria for site selection enumerated for Objective 2 includes item (c), “Implementing or has plans of implementing programs related to electricity distribution/retail.” Would USAID please clarify?

USAID: Objective 2(c) reference to “Implementing or has plans of implementing programs related to electricity distribution/retail” is an error and is deleted. Please see the revised RFP for the changes.

29. In Part 3: “Institutional Experience and Capability” can we include the experience and capabilities of our full consortium, as appropriate, or only those of the prime and major subcontractor/s combined?

USAID: USAID leaves it to the Offeror to decide.

30. For Attachment J.4, would USAID please provide its definition of “systems” in the context of Sub-Objective 2.3?

USAID: Please see response to question 15.

31. RFP Section C, Table 1 indicates that 90,000 consumers connected to the grid have no PPL account. Are those consumers considered to be “illegal” and part of the commercial losses or are they supplied by another utility?

USAID: Please refer to the World Bank Report on Papua New Guinea Energy sector dated March

2017 as referenced in the RFP.

32. If the PEP loss reduction program includes activities to normalize connections for existing PPL connections without a PPL account, would those normalized customers could towards the target of 200,000 new connections?

USAID: Please see response to question 3.

33. Please confirm that new consumers through off grid or mini-grid solutions would be considered within the target level of 200,000 new consumers (in that case those consumers would not be PPL’s consumers)?

34. Section F.8 makes a reference to the Multi-Tier Framework (asterisk in the deliverables table row describing the 200,000 new connections) but does not state which tier is required to count a new connection toward the 200,000 target. Tier 2? Tier 3?

USAID: The tier to count a new connection toward the 200,000 target will depend on the technical approach of the offeror and discussions with host country counterparts.

35. Is USAID following the World Bank Multi-Tier Framework on page 21 to define household connection to count toward PEP’s 200,000 new household electricity connections?

USAID: Yes, USAID will consider this framework among others.

36. Attachment J.4 (p. 90) states that “The overall objective of this activity is to facilitate reaching a target of at least 200,000 new household electricity connections”

Power Africa allows counting of solar lanterns for a certain number of connections. Will the contractor be allowed to count lanterns as connections for PEP?

USAID: No.

37. Attachment J.4 (p. 90) states that “Sub-Objective 1.5: Electricity connections through various modalities increased within PPL’s exclusive service areas.”

Will connections to commercial/industrial customers and public establishments be counted?

USAID: Please see response to question 23.

38. Attachment J.4 (p. 90) states that “Objective 2: Develop Viable Off-Grid Electrification Models.

Improved viable off-grid electrification investments to provide electricity to provincial centers, island communities and other remote populations.”

Grids for many provincial centers are operated by PPL, so it is unclear if activities in these areas will fall under Objective 2. Could USAID clarify the definition of off-grid for this context?

USAID: Off-grid systems are those that are not connected to the main grid. It is recognized that PPL also works on some off-grid areas. In this case, these areas would fall under Objective 1 and contribute toward the 200,000 connections.

Administrative Questions:

39. What is the expected start date of the PNG Electrification Partnership Activity?

USAID: The expected start date of the PEP Activity is on or about July 2020.

40. Section B.4 Price Schedule on page 2 of the RFP – could USAID please considering adding a CLIN 0005 for management and cross-cutting activities that may be directly attributable to only one of the other CLINs?

USAID: No. USAID will not modify the CLIN structure.

41. Section B.4 Price Schedule on page 2 of the RFP – With a CPFF completion type contract, especially in this case where offerors are developing a Performance Work Statement with proposed objectives, deliverables, and results, both USAID and the contractor benefit when the contractor can move resources around to address different issues as opportunities arise or the situation on the ground changes. Having to operate within CLINs, especially when there are so many cross-cutting and interconnected activities, will lead to reduced efficiencies in implementation. Unless the Contract Line Item format is expressly tied to appropriations, will USAID consider the options below to enable streamlined implementation of the Activity?

● Remove the CLIN format; or

● Allow the contractor the flexibility to move funds between CLINs up to ten (10) percent of cost without prior approval from the CO.

USAID: No. Please see response to question 40.

42. Section G.3 (p. 23) states that “The Administrative Contracting Office is: Regional Office of Acquisition and Assistance, USAID/Philippines”

Section G.4 (p. 23) Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR)

a. Could USAID elaborate on what role USAID/Philippines will play in technical management/direction of PEP vis-à-vis a USAID representative in PNG (who is being recruited)?

USAID: USAID/Philippines Regional Office of Acquisition and Assistance will administer the prospective contract.

b. Will USAID’s COR for the PEP Activity be based in PNG or in the Philippines?

USAID: The location of USAID’s CORwill be determined before the contract is awarded.

43. Section I.1 (p. 39) FAR 52.215-11 and FAR 52.215-13

Because the solicitation does not include a request for certificate of certified cost and in accordance with FAR Part 15.403-(b)(1) there is adequate competition to determine cost/price reasonableness, we respectfully request that USAID remove FAR clauses 52.215-11 and 52.215- 13 price reduction for defective certified cost or pricing data.

USAID: USAID will retain FAR clauses 52.215-11 and 52.215-13 in the RFP.

44. Section L.5(b)(4) on page 75 of the RFP – can USAID please confirm that the full Cost Volume can be submitted in Adobe Acrobat (PDF) in addition to submitting the budget in Microsoft Excel and the narrative in Microsoft Word? This would be especially necessary for certain required documents like the indirect cost information and Section K.

USAID: Yes. Please see the revised RFP.

45. Section L.5 (p. 75) states that “For Cost Proposal, acceptable file formats are Microsoft Office Applications.”

Given that many documents in the Cost Proposal are signed or are otherwise created in PDF, and the Technical Proposal may be presented in PDF, will USAID please allow the Cost Proposal narrative to be presented in PDF, with the budget in MS Excel?

USAID: Yes. Please see the revised RFP.

46. The definition of “major subcontractor” provided in the RFP (Section L.6 Part 4(1) on page 78 of the RFP) is unclear. Can USAID provide more clarity or restate for a better understanding.

Specifically, can USAID please confirm that a major subcontractor is either one whose proposed total cost exceeds 25% of the offeror’s cost of proposed labor or is a major subcontractor one whose total proposed level of effort exceeds 25% of the proposed level of effort?

USAID: “Major Subcontractor(s)” are those subcontractors whose costs exceed 25% of the Offeror’s total proposed cost or who are otherwise defined by the prime to be essential to successful project implementation. All primes must identify “major subcontractors” in the cover letter of their proposals. Please see the revised RFP for this change.

47. Section L.6 Part 4(1) defines major subcontractor as “one whose proposed cost exceeds 25% of the Offeror’s total proposed level of effort.” Considering that cost and level of effort (LOE) are not equivalent, please confirm this sentence, should read “one whose proposed LOE exceeds 25% of the Offeror’s total proposed LOE.”

USAID: Please see response to question 46.

48. Section L.6.b (p. 76) states that “Performance Work Statement: (20 pages)”

Would USAID consider providing offerors 25 pages for the PWS to address all of the objectives, sub-objectives, and the 10 key considerations/constraints in sufficient detail?

USAID. No.

49. Section L.6, Part 2 (p. 78) states that “identifies key positions and the appropriateness of their professional qualification and experience”

So that offerors have adequate space to thoroughly describe the professional qualifications and experience of key personnel, may we include key personnel resumes in an annex that does not count against the 10-page limit for the Management Plan?

USAID: No. This is not required at this time.

50. Section L.6, Part 4 (pages 78-79) states that “List in an annex to the technical proposal up to five

(5) of the most recent (active or ended no more than 3 years ago) and relevant contracts/ agreements for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal for the Offeror and up to three

(3) for each major subcontractor using the template provided in Attachment J.2…For all contracts listed above that are not in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), provide…”

Attachment J.2 states that “The form is not required if the below information is available in the Government past performance systems.”

Could USAID confirm that offerors are not required to complete the Past Performance Information form for projects that are in the CPARS?

USAID: USAID requires offerors to complete the Past Performance Information form even for projects that exist in CPARS. Please see revised RFP for this change.

51. Section L.6, Part 4.1.b (p. 79) states that “For all contracts listed above that are not in the

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), provide…a description of the performance to include..(4) Skills/expertise required”

Reference: Attachment J.2 Past Performance Information (PPI)

The past performance instructions on page 79 require the offeror to include Skills/expertise required as part of the description of performance for projects not in the CPARS. However, the PPI form in Attachment J.2 does not include a field for this information. Would USAID delete the requirement to include Skills/expertise required from page 79?

USAID: No. USAID requires offerors to include Skills/expertise in the PPI form. Please Attachment J.2 Past Performance Information (PPI) form.

52. Section L.7.2.i (p. 79) states that “The cost elements must roll into Contract Line Item Numbers

(CLINs) to be included in Section B.4 of the contract.”

Attachment J.3, Budget Template, Summary tab states that “Note: The cost elements should roll into Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) to be included in Section B.4 of the contract.”

a. How does USAID want offerors to roll cost elements into the CLINs? Will there be multiple detailed budgets presented for the prime and possibly the subcontractors, or will offerors estimate the spend between the CLINs at the summary level?

USAID: Each CLIN must have a detailed budget for both prime and subcontractor(s).

b. Also, there is no administrative CLIN for project operations like rent, security, COP/DCOP, etc. Are these costs to be apportioned across CLINs?

53. Section L.7.2(v)(a) (p. 80) requests Indirect Cost Information for “proposed subcontractors.”

However, this section also requests this information for “each major subcontractor.” Would USAID confirm that Indirect Cost Information is required only for major subcontractors?

USAID: Yes.

In Part 3: “Institutional Experience and Capability” can we include the experience and capabilities of our full consortium, as appropriate, or only those of the prime and major subcontractor/s combined?

USAID: Please see response to question 29.

54. Section L.7.2(v)(b) (p. 80) states that “If the Offeror or major subcontractor does not have a cognizant Government Audit Agency, the proposal must include:

● Audited balance sheets and profit and loss statements for the last two complete years, and the current year-to-date statements (or such lesser period of time if the Offeror is a newly-formed organization). The profit and loss statements must include details of the total cost of goods and services sold, including a listing of the various indirect administrative costs, and be supplemented by information on the prime contractor’s customary indirect cost allocation method, together with supporting computations of the basis for the indirect cost rate(s) proposed; and

● The most recent two fiscal year pool and base costs compositions along with derived rates, the bases of allocation of these rates and an independent certified audit by a certified accounting firm of these rates.

Reference: Attachment J.3, Budget Template, Detail Subcontractor tab states the “Type of Subcontract”

Questions:

a. If a major subcontractor does not intend to propose an indirect cost rate, rather it will be budget shared costs (i.e. facilities, utilities) as other direct costs, does the major subcontractor need to provide the audited balance sheets and two most recent fiscal year pool and base costs compositions along with derived rates?

USAID: Indirect Cost Information required under Section L.7.2(v)(b) is not required if the proposed budget from the major subcontractor does not include an indirect cost rate.

b. Most subcontractors in the country and region are not set up to track costs in the way required for CPFF contracts but have extensive experience selling their services commercially in a fixed price or time-and-materials basis. The budget template alludes to other than CPFF contract types being allowed on line 6 of the Subcontractor tab, but the cost proposal instructions are silent on the matter. Can USAID confirm that if a subcontractor presents a firm fixed price deliverable-based budget or a time and material budget, the subcontractor does not need to provide the audited balance sheets and two most recent fiscal year pool and base costs compositions along with derived rates?

USAID: Yes. Section L.7.2(v)(b) requirements are not required for firm fixed price and time and materials contracts.

55. Attachment J.3, Budget Template, Summary tab

The summary tab has two consecutive lines after the “Fixed Fee” line for Total Estimated Cost

Plus Fixed Fee, but no line above “Fixed Fee” for Total Estimated Costs (e.g. without fee). May offerors move one of the repeated lines up and change to just Total Estimated Costs?

USAID: Please see the revised Attachment J.3, Budget Template.

56. Attachment J.3, Budget Template, Detail Prime tab

The Prime budget template states on line 6 “Type of Subcontract,” similar to the subcontractor template. Please confirm if this should be changed to “Type of Contract” or deleted.

57. Attachment J.3, Budget Template, Detail Prime tab

In the Fringe Benefits section, the parenthetical statement states to “include allowances.” Our fringe benefit rates are determined by our NICRA with the U.S. Government or local labor laws in beneficiary countries, while allowances are a direct billable cost with different indirect costs applied to them. In the subcontractor template, allowances are a separate cost category from fringe benefits. Will USAID allow prime offerors to create a separate category for allowances to be consistent with our NICRA?

58. Attachment J.3, Budget Template, Detail Prime and Detail Subcontractor tabs

The mandatory template is missing a few elements that are commonly found on CPFF budget templates, such as:

● A line identifying the prime or sub organization name

● Offer version (e.g. original or revised submission)

● Sections for Equipment and Supplies

● Subtotal lines for Travel and ODCs (in prime template)

● Travel and ODC sections missing in sub template completely

May offerors add categories to the template, or use their own template which addresses all of the necessary categories?

59. Section L.7.2 Proposed Cost/Price, (v) Indirect Cost Information (e.g. Overhead, G&A, Material & Handling), paragraph (a) and (b), we have the following questions:

a. Please define major subcontractor;

USAID: Please see response to question 46.

b. Please confirm that document requirements of Section L.7.2 paragraph (v) do not apply to subcontractors that do not meet the definition of a major subcontractor;

USAID: Requirements under Section L.7.2(v) do not apply to subcontractors that do not meet the definition of a “major subcontractor.”

c. Would USAID allow the prime contractor to use of time & materials or fixed price subcontracts?

60. Section L.7.3 (p. 81) states that the Offeror and each proposed subcontractor must complete

Section K. The Section K included in the RFP does not provide a place to sign. Would USAID please provide an amended Section K with signature blocks?

USAID: Please see the revised RFP which includes the signature page.

61. Please confirm that Section K.10 FAR 52.222-25 Affirmative Action Compliance (Apr 1984) does not apply to non-U.S. and local subcontractors since the work to be performed under the PNG PEP will be performed outside the United States by employees who were not recruited within the United States.

USAID: No. USAID intends to keep FAR 52.222-25 Affirmative Action Compliance (Apr 1984) in the solicitation.

62. Please confirm that Section K.11 FAR 52.230-1 Cost Accounting Standards Notices and

Certification (Oct 2015) does not apply to foreign entities/concerns.

USAID: Offerors are encouraged to read FAR 52.230-1 Cost Accounting Standards Notices and Certification (Oct 2015) and provide the necessary information as required.

63. Please confirm that Section K.12 FAR 52.230-7 Proposal Disclosure-Cost Accounting Practice

Changes (Apr 2005) does not apply to foreign entities/concerns.

USAID: Offerors are encouraged to read FAR 52.230-7 Proposal Disclosure-Cost Accounting Practice Changes (Apr 2005) and provide the necessary information as required.

64. Attachment J.3 – Budget Template – Can USAID please confirm that the Detail Prime worksheet should include the same detail as the Detail Subcontractor? For example, should the Detail Prime include the labor split between Direct Long Term Labor, Direct Short Term Labor, Local Staff, and Home Office, with a subtotal for each line?

65. The mandatory budget template Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) differ from the CLIN table on section B.4 Price Schedule of the RFP. Which of these two budget formats should Offerors use to present their budget/cost proposal?

USAID: Both formats should be presented in the budget/cost proposal. Please see the revised Attachment J.3, Budget Template.

66. On the budget template’s subcontractor tab, Direct Long Term Labor and Direct Short Term

Labor are categories as well as Local Staff. Please clarify the difference between Direct Long Term Labor and Local Staff.

USAID: Direct Long Term Labor is either the Long-Term Technical Assistance (LTTA)- Expatriates or LTTA Local Staff. Direct Short-Term is either Consultants or Short-Term Technical Assistance (STTA).

67. On the budget template, Allowances is included in the Fringe category on the “Detail Prime” tab but it is included as its own category on the “Detail Subcontractor” tab. Please clarify if Allowances should be its own category.

68. On the budget template, please clarify if equipment and supplies be included within ODCs or if they should be a separate category.

69. On the budget template’s Summary tab requests a “by line item explanation.” Please confirm this refers to the budget narrative.

70. Please confirm that there can be categories for Travel and ODCs in the subcontractor tab of the budget template.

71. The Branding and Marking Plan appears in the Table of Contents for the Cost Volume, but the language also specifies that “the successful offeror” must submit a Branding and Marking Plan which complies with Section D of the RFP. Can USAID advise whether offerors should submit a preliminary Branding and Marking Plan with our initial cost proposal submission, or should we wait for USAID to select the preferred offeror and then submit a plan if requested to do so?

USAID: Please see Section L.7.7 Branding and Marking Plan of the RFP.

72. The RFP states on page 76 that tables, graphics, charts, and graphs are not included in the page limitations for the Technical Proposal. Can USAID confirm that any tables and graphs provided in the technical proposal should appear on separate pages without page numbers so they don’t count towards the overall 35 page limit for the Technical Proposal?

USAID: Tables, graphics, charts, graphs, etc. are included in the page limitation as described in Section L.6(a) Instructions for the Preparation of Technical Proposal. Tables, graphics, charts, graphs, if any contained under “Not included in the page limitation are the following:” is therefore deleted. Please see the revised RFP.

73. Will USAID consider changing the geographic code from 937 to 935 given that PNG has a long and deep tradition of cooperation with Australia and New Zealand on energy issues and many standards and norms in the energy sector are predicated on Australian expertise and systems.

USAID: No.

74. The RFP in Section I.1 includes FAR Clause 52.229-8 Taxes – Foreign Cost Reimbursement

Contracts. Please confirm if the resultant contract will be exempted from local taxes and duties (for U.S. and local teaming partners and their personnel).

USAID: USAID will provide more information/guidance to the successful Offeror.

75. Section I.1 Notice Listing Contract Clauses Incorporated By Reference, FAR 52.219-8 Utilization of Small Business Concerns and 52.219-9 Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Jan 2017), in accordance with FAR 19.708(a)(2), it states that a small business subcontracting plan is not required if the contract will be performed outside the United States. Since the place of performance of this contract is PNG, should the requirement for a small business subcontracting plan be removed from this RFP?

USAID: No. Please see USAID Procurement Executive Bulletin No 2017-01.

76. Would USAID please clarify whether the rapid mobilization plan should appear in the

Management section as unnumbered/uncounted pages or as an annex in the technical proposal?

USAID: Please see response to question 10.

77. Section L.4(d) refers to validity of offer but does not provide a validity period. Please confirm the expected validity period.

USAID: The validity period is six (6) months from the date of submission of proposal.

78. Section L.5(b)(4) (p. 75) states, “For Cost Proposal, acceptable file formats are Microsoft Office

Applications.” So long that budgets are submitted in Microsoft Excel, may the remainder of the cost volume (i.e. Standard Form 33, Indirect Cost Information, Section K, etc.) be submitted in Adobe Acrobat (PDF)?

USAID: Please see response to question 45.

79. Attachment J.2 Past Performance Information states, “The form is not required if the below information is available in the Government past performance systems.” Would USAID confirm that the past performance forms should not include our USAID work that is readily available to the mission in the past performances system?

USAID: Please see response to question 50 and the revised Attachment J.2 Past Performance Information Sheet.

80. Would USAID kindly provide the offerors the FSN local compensation plan for Papua New

Guinea?

USAID: Please see Attachment J.5 FSN Local Compensation Plan for Papua New Guinea.

81. Section F.4 states that “No overtime or premium pay is authorized under this contract.” Does this limitation apply only to expatriates or all project staff? For local staff, contractors will have to comply with the host country labor laws that may require us to pay overtime to CCNs for work performed beyond the normal business hours on occasional circumstances.

USAID: This limitation applies to both expatriates and local project staff. Should the need arises, CO approval is required.

https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1868/peb2017-01.pdf

82. Section F.6 (p. 15) states that, “The COR and the Contractor will develop a standard format for submission of all deliverables during the collaborative workshop that will take place within the first 30 days after contract award.”

Section L.6, Part 2.ii (p. 78) states that, “The plan must include for a collaborative workshop for co-creation/co-development of the required deliverables.”

a. Will the collaborative workshop be held in PNG or the Philippines?

USAID: The place of performance is in PNG. All workshops must be held in PNG or as directed.

b. How many days will the collaborative workshop last?

USAID: The length of the collaborative workshop depends on the Offeror’s approach.

83. Section F.6.1 (last paragraph, p. 16) refers to an “initial list of commodities due with the technical proposal.” Please confirm that this list of commodities should be included in the cost proposal and not the technical proposal.

USAID: Including the quoted language was a mistake. It has been removed from the RFP. Please see the revised RFP. Any proposed list of commodities should be included in the cost proposal.

84. Section F.6.1 (p. 15) states that, “The annual work plan, at a minimum will include…The anticipated level of effort required from program technical staff and financial resources required to complete the tasks”

Does this mean the contractor will be required to present a budget per activity?

USAID: Yes. The Offeror is required to present their budget per activity and must be tracked accordingly.

85. On page 79 Section L.6 Part 4(4), the RFP states “4. Performance in using Small Business (SB)

Concerns (as defined in FAR 19.001)” –implying that Offerors should provide information on past experience teaming with small businesses.

a. Please clarify what information should be provided regarding utilization of SB Concerns.

USAID: Please see the revised RFP for this information.

b. Please confirm that this information should be included in an Annex that will not count against the page limitation for the Technical Proposal.

USAID: Please see Section L.6(b) Content and Organization of the Technical Proposal.

86. Section M.4 (Contracting with Small Business Concerns) reads “USAID encourages maximum participation of small businesses…Accordingly, every reasonable effort will be made to identify and make us of such organizations.” Please clarify whether Offerors proposing teaming arrangements with small business concerns on PEP will be evaluated more favorably.

USAID: Please see Section L.6 Part 4 of the revised RFP.

87. Can USAID clarify if Offerors may submit additional Annexes in addition to the Annexes outlined in the RFP?

USAID: No. Offerors must follow the instructions in Section L of the RFP. Information provided beyond the instructions in Section L will not be evaluated.