(02). 95332422Q00800001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended.

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:

(a)By completing items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on 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 ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE

DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment your 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.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

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

CHECK ONE 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.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

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.

15C. DATE SIGNED

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

95332422Q00800001

Summary of Changes

Introduction:

There are two (2) parts to amendment 0001:

(1). the 1st part provides sixty (60) Questions received & Answers (Q&A);

(2). the 2nd part itemizes eight (8) changes made to the Solicitation.

Part 1:

Q1. Can the Government extend the Request for Quote (RFQ) due date?

A1. Yes; See paragraph (1). under Part 2 below.

Q2. Base task Period of Performance (PoP); Is this PoP for the base task six (6) months?

A2. All tasks per Section C.4 of the Statement of Work (SoW), are to be completed in accordance with the deliverable schedule and an one (1) year PoP.

Q3. Period of Performance for Options; Is the period of performance for options three (3) months?

A3. See A2 above.

Q4. Can the twenty five (25) page limitation for the Volume I: Factor 1, Technical Capability Quote, be increased to account for the Optional Assessments?

A4. Yes; See paragraph (2). under Part 2 below.

Q5. Will the technical approach for the options be described in separate and stand-alone documents? Will you request a definite number of pages for each option?

A5. The page limitation for the entire technical approach is thirty (30) pages; quoters can choose how to allocate these pages between the Base Period Scope of Work and the Optional Assessments Scope of work.

Q6. Will you provide the contract value for the base task (ceiling) and the contract value for task options?

A6. This acquisition this is not an Indefinite Delivery Contract type vehicle; thus: no contract ceiling estimates apply; The Government's requirements are specified in the RFQ; the Government unilaterally sets & establishes the level of effort labors hours at a revised expected burn rate of: 24,772 hours for the life of the contract (including optional tasks); quoter(s) will reference the representative sample labor categories in Section H of the RFQ; and choose their own labor categories and labor hours allocation mix relative to each entity's unique technical approach in satisfying contract requirements. Vendor(s) must meet the commercial service performance & other contract deliverable requirements on a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) basis. Payment(s) will be made and are incentivized according to the deliverable schedule for specific, discrete and meaningful deliverables. Thus: the approximate value of the contract effort, as specified in the RFQ, is; inclusive and the summation of the quoter(s) direct, indirect and other direct costs whereby the vendor(s) assumes all cost/price risk in a FFP, performance based services environment; In addition: See paragraph (3). under Part 2 below.

Q7. Are subcontractors allowed to bid with multiple prime bidders/consortia on a non-exclusive basis?

A7. Yes; there are no such prohibitions specified in the RFQ.

Q8. Appendix D includes photographs and background information on the Goma hydroelectric plant. Could a full set of engineering drawings of the plant also be made available?

A8. The full set of engineering drawings will be made available to the contract awardee.

Q9. Appendix D includes data and some selected annotated engineering drawings for Bumbuna 1. Could a full set of engineering drawings also be made available?

A9. See A8. Above.

Q10. Does the SoW take into consideration the effect that upgrading Bumbuna 1 will have on water availability for Bumbuna 2 operation when it comes on stream?

A10. There is not enough water to operate Bumbuna existing, Bumbuna I upgrade and Bumbuna II extension at maximum power all year. However, it was agreed with the Government of Sierra Leone that the water volume currently available for operating Bumbuna I would not be curtailed after commissioning of a future Bumbuna II project. If and when the Bumbuna II extension is eventually built, the production from Bumbuna I upgrade is expected to decrease. The production estimates before and after commissioning of Bumbuna II are included in the scope for this feasibility study.

Q11. The SoW suggests that the environmental team will be assisted by the Bumbuna Watershed Management Authority on environmental, social and climate change issues. What is the capacity of this Authority and how operationally effective is it to provide this assistance?

A11. The Bumbuna Watershed Management Authority (BWMA) is responsible for the water management within the Bumbuna catchment. They have technical leads including a Social safeguards specialist, Agroforestry development specialist, Water quality, fisheries, and hydrology specialist, Emergency action unit coordinator, and Community liaisons officers for the management of environmental and social issues. The SoW states that environmental, social and climate assessments related to hydropower should be done in coordination with the Bumbuna Watershed Management Authority, not that the Consultant will be assisted by the BWMA. BWMA could then provide support in planning field activities and stakeholder consultation activities and could share their knowledges and available data with the Consultant team. Proposed Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) should be made in coordination with the BWMA in order to consider their internal structure and existing E&S management.

Q12. We assume that an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) license will not be required from Environmental Protection Agency Sierra Leone (EPA-SL). If it is, then the processes will be more elaborate than outlined in the SOW.

A12. Proposed environmental and social studies should be undertaken in compliance with national requirements and Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) Environmental Guidelines. It is not anticipated that the EIA licenses will be acquired inside the Feasibility study timeframe. However, the mandate includes the preparation of the detailed terms of reference for full Environmental and Social Impact Assessments that should allow obtaining the associated EIA licenses subsequently.

Q13. Will geotechnical analysis be required for the load dispatch centers? Have the locations of the load dispatch centers been determined? What is the scope of the site development activities and feasibility studies for the load dispatch centers?

A13. The location of the main and backup dispatch centers must be proposed by the Contractor based on criteria defined in the paragraph C.4.E.1 II Prefeasibility Study and other industry practice criteria such as separate locations to avoid common mode of failure. There is no geotechnical survey required but Contractor must assess the specifics of the proposed sites for construction of buildings to house both Dispatch Centers. Refer to C.4.E.1 II Prefeasibility Study "Dispatch Centers Buildings" for a description of the scope of the site development activities and feasibility studies for the load dispatch centers.

Q14. Concerning the environmental analysis, which components of a typical Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) are required in the "preliminary ESIA" required for the following aspects of the project: Goma hydro, Bumbuna hydro, transmission corridor analysis, solar energy analysis, load dispatch centers?

A14. The section C.4.A.2 details the objectives and content of the preliminary ESIA applicable with proposed projects. Point 6 identifies what a Preliminary ESIA shall include:

1. Executive summary.

2. Preliminary policy, legal, and institutional framework.

3. Project description.

4. Analysis of alternatives.

5. Preliminary baseline data on the environmental and social profile of the project areas.

6. Preliminary identification of socio-economic and environmental risks and impacts.

7. Proposed Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF).

This content is aligned with typical ESIA chapters. A summary of stakeholder consultations and associated results and findings should also be included.

Q15. Does MCC expect a validation of the existing network model against gathered system data? This includes both power flow, short circuit and dynamic stability models.

A15. Yes, MCC expects the Contractor to validate the existing network models for load flow, short circuit and dynamic stability against available data.

Q16. The SoW includes the assessment of contributions from neighboring networks, such as the Cote d'Ivoire- Liberia-Sierra Leone-Guinea (CLSG) line. Will MCC coordinate acquisition of current neighboring system models and can MCC confirm the software currently being used by neighboring systems?

A16. MCC/ Sierra Leone Compact Development Unit (SLCDU) will coordinate with the neighboring networks (CLSG). Authorities to obtain an equivalent network model that the Contractor will be using for purpose of the Sierra Leone (SL) network simulations.

Q17. Does the Government of Sierra Leone (GoSL) have established system planning procedures or general tariff language associated with interconnection of new generating facilities they can share? For the solar project pipeline contained in Table 4, will those projects be evaluated per a defined process or is the definition of that process part of the SoW?

A17. Yes, the Government of Sierra Leone, through the national regulator, Sierra Leone Electricity and Water Regulatory Commission (EWRC) and an ad-hoc Grid Code committee has developed a national grid code under review by the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) electricity regulator, which lays out the procedures to interconnect and access the national grid. Furthermore, the ECOWAS regional electricity regulator has established a methodology for transmission pricing approved by the 15 ECOWAS Member States. For the solar pipeline from Table 4, the Ministry of Energy has established processes to assess solicited and unsolicited proposals from private sector investors, particularly from Independent Power Producers (IPP) (see the Ministry of Energy website). Assessing the solar project opportunities for this procurement will follow the process described in C.4.C.5.

Q18. For the solar and storage analysis, are GoSL and SLCDU able to facilitate introductions to the project developers for purposes of enabling the consultant to assess the status of these proposed projects?

A18. Yes, with GoSL and SLCDU input, MCC can facilitate introductions to active regional project developers in solar and storage.

Q19. For optional task C.4.C.6, the assessment of additional hydro potential, please confirm approximately how many sites from among the 31 proposed hydroelectric facilities in Table 5 should be included in the "visit of representative sites for construction of the power stations" for confirming local conditions? Additionally, please confirm whether any topographical, geotechnical, or hydrological assessment is required in conjunction with these site visits?

A19. The existing plants that are listed and sites for Bumbuna II project don't need to be assessed. There are various potential sites that are located on the same river for which the visits may be combined to characterize the representative sites, especially for those with highest development potential. The assessment is limited to the tasks described in C.4.C.6 and with consideration of the applicable requirements of C.4.A.

Q20. RFQ L.2.2. Could MCC please clarify if the 25 page limit is for the entire Volume I, or does it only refer to Subfactor 1 only?

A20. See A4. above; the new page limit applies only to subfactor 1; the resumes under subfactor 2 have a page limit of four (4) pages each and there is no page limit for the Personnel Matrix.

Q21. May quoters include an acronym list and table of contents in their proposal?

A22. Yes; each volume should have these, which will not count towards any page limitations.

Q22. RFQ H.1 Personnel. For the Trafficking in Persons (TIP) Risk Assessment Expert, the RFQ states that the candidate should have a minimum of "57 years" of experience. Could MCC please clarify if 57 is the correct number of years for this qualification, or if it intended another number?

A22. See paragraph (4). In Part 2 below.

Q23. Standard Form (SF) 1449. Given what is provided in box 27a of the SF 1449, it is unclear to us whether MCC intends to incorporate FAR 52.212-1, 52.212-4, 52.212-3, and 52.212-5 in this solicitation. Could MCC please clarify?

A23. See paragraph (5). In Part 2 below.

Q24. Could MCC please clarify whether it intends to issue a separate Gender Equity and Social Inclusion (GESI)/Just Transition program that is separate from this procurement? If so, when is the expected timing of this separate consultancy and how does MCC envision it working together with the power sector feasibility studies team?

A24. MCC is not planning to issue a separate procurement specifically addressing the Gender Equity and Social Inclusion / Just Transition aspects of the Sierra Leone Compact. It is intended for the Contractor to incorporate a climate change mitigation, (just) transition and resiliency assessment (or Climate Change Assessment) throughout the projects detailed in the following sections (C.4.B through D as well as any relevant Options selected). For example, a component outlined as part of this work include preliminary assessments of the Environmental and Social Impacts of GHG Emissions to include alignment with country climate change goals and a just transition toward low‐carbon development e.g. protecting health, jobs, workers' rights, gender aspects, biodiversity, and shifting to sustainable and equitable economic development. As outlined section C4.A6, Climate Change Assessments are integrated within the feasibility scopes.

Q25. Does MCC envision that the Optional Assessments be just engineering assessments, or will they also incorporate the following tasks that are required in the Base Assessments, namely: Engineering and Implementation assessments for infrastructure; Environmental and Social impact assessments; Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF); Trafficking in Persons (TIP) Risk assessment; Social and gender inclusion assessment;

Climate Change Mitigation, Transition and Resiliency Assessment; and Economic and financial assessments and monitoring and evaluation.

A25. With reference to the optional additional hydro potential assessment, please refer to A19. above. With reference to other options such as upgrade of Bumbuna 1, solar and grid storage potential, and selection of power for agribusinesses, see descriptions at paragraph C.4.C.3, C.4.C.5 and C.4.F that identifies tasks that are not limited to a pure engineering assessment.

Q26. Section L.2.3, page 49 of 53, states that past performance from either prime or subcontractor is acceptable, which we welcome. Would MCC confirm that there is no threshold amount of work to be performed by the subcontractor for their past performance to be used in this proposal?

A26. Government confirms; there are no such limitations prescribed in the RFQ.

Q27. On page 5 of 53, MCC indicates that the kick-off meeting is a deliverable with a payment of 10%. Can MCC confirm if the method of validation for payment is the Contractor's presence (virtual or in-person) at the kick-off meeting or is something else also expected?

A27. Nothing more is expected other than attendance.

Q28. Section F.2 Period of Performance, page 7 of 53, states that the 12 months covers optional tasks. Can we reasonably assume that the base period therefore is seven months, and the options maybe exercised after the base period work is completed?

A28. The Optional tasks may be exercised by Contracting Officer Directive, at any time during the PoP that allows reasonable time for completion, including immediately upon contract award or later in the twelve month contract period.

Q29. Section H.1 Personnel, page 12 of 53, states the Project Manager/Sector Tech Specialist is the only Key Person (as required under 48 CFR § 2052.215-70). However, Section M.2.1 (2)Subfactor 2 Staffing & Personnel Requirements states that "MCC will evaluate the nature, degree and extent to which Quoter's Resumes and Matrix, meets and or exceeds the knowledge, skills, abilities and other qualifications as specified in Section C…."

Would MCC clarify whether only the Key Person will be evaluated or will the entire list of other positions listed in H.1 be evaluated? If all listed experts are evaluated, would MCC advise how will the ten experts listed under the "Other Power Sector Engineers" category be evaluated whose KSAs are not mentioned in the RFP document.

A29. Government confirms, there is no reference to "48 CFR § 2052.215-70" on page 12 or elsewhere of the RFQ. All quoted Personnel (which includes both Key and Non-Key) by the vendor(s), will be evaluated. The Other Power Sector Engineers will be evaluated based on the extent to which those individuals' resumes meet or exceed the knowledge, skills, and experience specified in Section C. During a contract's PoP, any changes in the Key Personnel that are proposed would require a formal contract modification. Therefore, this RFQ limits the Key Personnel to the Project Manager/Sector Tech Specialist and identifies the other specialists as non-key personnel.

Q30. SoW, Page 40, refers to "transmission line simulation studies." Can MCC clarify which software (e.g., DIgSILENT, PSSE, etc.) has been used by Sierra Leone and/or the CLSG line (West African Power Pool) to undertake the transmission line simulation studies?

A30. MCC has requested this data from the SLCDU and will advise bidders as soon as possible. Recent studies on the Sierra Leone network model have used ETAP, but the Government of Sierra Leone does not have licensed access to this model.

Q31. Statement of Work (SoW), Section C.3.A, page 7 of the last paragraph states, "the Consultant is expected to collaborate as needed with other MCC consultants supporting Compact development to ensure the timely sharing of key data and assumptions." Can MCC provide additional guidance on what form this collaboration is to take? Since this solicitation is a Firm Fixed Price contract, the level of effort to collaborate is difficult to estimate without additional information, such as how many workshops with other firms, where will these workshops be held (in person or virtual), how many staff per workshop, how long are each workshop to last, etc. If the chosen firms for the various other tasks are spread across the globe, the suggested collaboration will be costly and difficult to manage.

A31. Section C.6, Deliverables, notes the collaboration workshops as specific deliverables. See excerpts from the

C.6 Deliverables Table noted below; there are two workshops with the Policy and Institutional Reform (PIR) contractor intended to inform and clarify the approach to the economic and financial analysis of the proposed projects, as well as the key assumptions used in the analysis so that the outputs of such activities can be integrated into the sector model under development by the PIR contractor. A third workshop is for coordination with the Productive Use contractor, who will provide a shortlist of potential productive use sites for grid access to be analyzed as described in the Optional task C.4.F.

Hybrid attendance (some individuals in-person in Freetown combined with others attending remotely) is expected. It is the Consultant's discretion to propose the appropriate staff for the workshops in line with their approach, methodology, and staffing strategy. At a minimum, representatives from the relevant Contractor firms, MCC, and SLCDU should be in attendance. In addition, the Consultant should be prepared to collaborate with the PIR and Productive Use contractors on a continuous and ad-hoc basis to ensure the quality and timely outputs of each SOW.

Coordination workshop with Policy and

Institutional Reform (PIR)

Contractor

No later than 4 weeks after award.

-- Online meeting to discuss preliminary economic/financial assumptions for both assessments

Coordination workshop with Productive Use of

Electricity (PUE)

Contractor

No later than 8 weeks after award.

-- Workshop in Freetown to review preliminary findings

(1 day duration).

2nd Coordination workshop with Policy and

Institutional Reform (PIR)

Contractor

No later than

20 weeks after award or in accordance with the workplan.

-- Workshop in Freetown to discuss assumptions and outputs from this study as inputs to the scenario modelling (1 day duration)

Q32. SoW, Page 10, paragraph 5 states that the Contractor shall collect existing topographical maps, LIDAR, aerial survey, and soil conditions. Can MCC confirm that these reports exist and will be made available to the selected Contractor upon award so that the cost of conducting these specialized surveys and studies do not need to be included in the price proposal? We request an inventory of such reports so as to allow us to provide the most realistic price proposal.

A32. Contractor shall conduct the specialized surveys and studies as mentioned under paragraph 5 of C.4.A.1 and any other that are required under the corresponding specific paragraphs such as C.4.B.4.

Q33. Can MCC confirm what is to be done for the 31 hydroplants that are listed, for which no feasibility is needed? Also, can MCC clarify the meaning of "exploratory" in the following excerpt from the SoW, page 55:

"The purpose of this exercise is exploratory for use by the Ministry of Energy and others and not intended for MCC to commit to the development and the construction of any hydro plant unless instructed otherwise by MCC during the course of the study".

A33. With reference to description of C.4.C.6 as 'exploratory,' the purpose of this hydro potential assessment is to provide baseline information for the Ministry of Energy on the hydropower resource potential of Sierra Leone.

Beyond the Goma and Bumbuna I Upgrade projects detailed in C.4.C.1 and C.4.C.2, MCC is not considering additional hydropower projects for development under the Compact at this time. Please refer to A19 above for additional information on the study requirements.

Q34. For the avoidance of doubt and uncertainty, would MCC summarize in a table list of project for which feasibility studies are to be undertaken – T&D Upgrade (rehab/upgrade vs. new build of T&D network of different voltage levels, lengths, substations), Low Carbon Investment (size and scope of renewable plants – hydro and PV), and Access (criteria for choosing villages for grid extension of connections)? This would help the Contractor to price the proposal in the most realistic way. For example it is difficult to price the statement on Page 62 which states that "The Contractor shall perform investigations to determine which villages and towns will be selected for cost-effective distribution expansion and identify optimal connection designs and beneficiaries." How should the Contractor interpret the meaning of "investigations", i.e., how deep and wide, as different contractors will interpret this differently, leading to unequal LOE assumptions.

A34.

Project Component Study Requirements Comment

Expansion of the

National

Transmission

Network

Southern

Transmission

Corridor and sub-transmission

(C.4.B.1)

Preliminary

Assessment

(C.4.B.4)

Pre-Feasibility Study

(C.4.B.4); and

Detailed Feasibility study (C.4.A.1 to

C.4.A.7)

- Base study

- New build

- Transmission specifications in

Table 1 (kV, SS, km)

-Subtransmission specifications in

Table 2

Plus a 66kv x 74 km line from Kailahun to

Koindu through

Buedu

Northern Corridor sub-transmission

(C.4.B.2)

Preliminary

Assessment

(C.4.B.4)

Pre-Feasibility Study

(C.4.B.4); and

Detailed Feasibility study (C.4.A.1 to

C.4.A.7)

- Base study

- New build

-Subtransmission specifications in

Table 3

Upgrade of the Preliminary - Base study

161kV Freetown-

Bumbuna line

(C.4.B.3)

Assessment

(C.4.B.4)

Pre-Feasibility Study

(C.4.B.4); and

Detailed Feasibility study (C.4.A.1 to

C.4.A.7)

- Rehabilitation

- No technical specifications prescribed, seeking recommendations

Lower Cost and

Lower Carbon

Generation

Rehabilitation and

Upgrade of Goma

Hydropower Plant

(C.4.C.1)

Preliminary

Assessment

(C.4.C.3)

Pre-Feasibility Study

(C.4.C.3); and

Detailed Feasibility study (C.4.A.1 to

C.4.A.7)

- Base study

-Currently ~3MW, considering upgrade to 6MW. Further technical detail in

C.4.C.1 and

Appendix D

Rehabilitation and

Upgrade of Bumbuna

1 Hydropower Plant

(C.4.C.2)

Preliminary

Assessment

(C.4.C.3)

Pre-Feasibility Study

(C.4.C.3); and

Detailed Feasibility study (C.4.A.1 to

C.4.A.7)

- Optional Study

- Currently 50MW, considering upgrade to 100MW. Further technical detail in

C.4.C.2 and

Appendix D

Assessment of Grid-connected Solar and

Storage Potential

(C.4.C.4)

Preliminary

Assessment

(C.4.C.5)

Pre-Feasibility Study

(C.4.C.5); and

Detailed Feasibility study not required

-Optional study

- No specific project or MW selected.

Contractor should identify potential attractive projects

Assessment of additional

Hydropower Potential

(C.4.C.6)

Preliminary

Assessment

(C.4.C.6)

Pre-feasibility study

(C.4.C.6)

Detailed feasibility study not required

-Optional study

- No specific projects selected. Contractor should collect best available data

Increasing Access to

Affordable and

Reliable Electricity

Rehabilitation and

Upgrade of the

Distribution Network

(C.4.D.2)

Preliminary

Assessment

(C.4.D.5)

Pre-Feasibility Study

(C.4.D.5); and

Detailed Feasibility study (C.4.A.1 to

C.4.A.7)

-Base study

-'Investigations' to be performed are detailed in C.4.D.5

Expansion of the distribution network to unserved areas

(C.4.D.3)

Preliminary

Assessment

(C.4.D.5)

Pre-Feasibility Study

(C.4.D.5); and

Detailed Feasibility study (C.4.A.1 to

C.4.A.7)

-Base study

-Criteria for selection is detailed in C.4.D.3

-'Investigations' to be performed are detailed in C.4.D.5

Access to Last Mile

Connections

(C.4.D.4)

Preliminary

Assessment

(C.4.D.5)

Pre-Feasibility Study

(C.4.D.5); and

Detailed Feasibility study (C.4.A.1 to

-Base study

-'Investigations' to be performed are detailed in C.4.D.5

C.4.A.7)

National Dispatch

Center (C.4.E)

C.4.E.2.II details requirements for preliminary assessment, pre-feasibility study, and detailed feasibility study

- Base Study

Identification of

Power Supply

Solutions for

Agribusiness

Opportunities (C.4.F)

Preliminary assessment and pre-feasibility study requirements noted in C.4.F.1

Feasibility study requirements described in C.4.F.1 and C.4.A.1 through

C.4.A.7

-Optional Study

Q35. Throughout the SoW, statements like "The Contractor shall perform, but is not limited to…", is mentioned.

We believe this may lead to uneven pricing assumptions (some maybe over-estimated, while others may be underestimated), particularly in a Firm Fixed Price scenario. To level the playing field, we request MCC to add tasks that are required to be performed by the Contractor or rephrase the instruction to lower the risk to the Contractor.

A35.The question quotes a phrase from C.4.E concerning software requirements for the National Dispatch Center's SCADA. MCC recommends that quoters clearly document their pricing assumptions and the impact(s) those assumptions had on the price quote.

Q36. Section B – Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs, page 4. Can MCC clarify what the "LT" under Unit is referring to in the table?

A36. "LT" refers to the Unit of Issue, which means: Lot. A lot is defined as: a collection of associated or miscellaneous articles / services, sold and procured as one unit. In this case: the total Lot of Services for the entire contract effort over the twelve (12) months, will be all priced as one (1) Lot and then paid out against / drawn down against, the aforementioned payment milestones, under the one (1) Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) 0001.

Q37. Section B – Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs, page 4. Can MCC clarify what information should be provided for the Unit Cost and Extended Price cells?

A37. In CLIN 0001 in Section B of the RFQ, Page 4, the Quantity is: one (1) Lot and the Unit Price is:

=SUM(D6:D11)+SUM(D13:D16), which also equals the CLIN 0001 Total Price in cell #: D17 of the revised price quote template; See Paragraph (6). under Part 2 below.

Q38. Section B.5 PAYMENT AND DELIVERABLE SCHEDULE, page 5 states: Overall, the Government estimates approximately 21,692 total labor hours will be utilized during the contract's Period of Performance (PoP). In addition, the Government estimates extensive travel will be needed, with several travel trips / travel missions needed in support of each contract PoP. Can MCC clarify if multiple contracts are expected given the mention of "each contract PoP"?

A38. See A2, A3, A6 & A36. above; there is only one (1) overall contract PoP, which is twelve (12) months; only one (1) contract will be issued; See paragraph (7). In Part 2 below.

Q39. Regarding Section B.5 and Section F.6, would MCC provide an estimated number and duration of trips so price proposals from Quoters are comparable?

A39. Bidders should expect to spend significant time in-country. Since this is a fixed price contract MCC encourages bidders to determine their own approach and level of effort needed to fulfil the contract requirements.

At a minimum, at least five workshops identified in the deliverables table of C.6 will require attendance in country.

Q40. Alternatively, as regards to Section B.5, would MCC consider splitting the contract into FFP and reimbursable portion, so that any MCC initiated or instructed trips are charged on a reimbursable basis, while the FFP portion covers the Contractor's own assumptions about the number and duration of trips they need to complete the assignment?

A40. The Government confirms the requirements, as specified in the RFQ.

Q41. Section L.2.4 Volume III Factor 3 Price / Business Quote, page 49 states: In Excel format, with open formulas for CLINs in Section B, but CLINs are not mentioned in Section B of the RFP. Can MCC clarify what the CLINs are if any and which Table(s) in Section B should show the CLINs?

A41. There is only one (1) CLIN; See paragraph (8). In Part 2 below.

Q42. In addition to technical, MCC will be using price as an evaluation factor. Will the total price of base and options be used in this evaluation or just the base?

A42. See paragraph # M.2.3 Volume III Factor 3 Price / Business Quote. The Base and Options prices will be considered as evaluation factors.

Q43. Can MCC confirm if the optional tasks are in addition to the 21,692 total labor hours estimated? If so, can MCC provide the Independent Government Cost Estimate (in labor hours) for each optional task?

A43. See A6 above.

Q44. Section F.1 Place of Performance, page 7 of 53 states that the Contractor is required to perform services wherever and whenever MCC needs them to. Given this is a Firm Fixed Price contract, can MCC provide guidance on the number and duration of these trips so that price proposals have the same numeraire, and can be compared on a consistent and fair basis?

A44. See A39 for clarification on minimum requirements for travel to Sierra Leone. No travel to MCC Headquarters in Washington DC is expected.

Q45. Section M 2.3 says "The Government will evaluate Quotes for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement." However, the tables at the beginning of Section B and in B.5 do not have a space for options pricing. Can MCC clarify if work for the optional tasks should be included in the total price for the tables at the beginning of Section B and in B.5?

A45. See Paragraph (6). under Part 2 below.

Q46. Section L of the RFP did not require pricing options. Can MCC clarify if pricing for the options is to be provided at a later stage?

A46. See A45. above.

Q47. The SoW's Section C.3.A, page 6 states that the "Contractor is required to price the Base Study and each option separately." Can MCC confirm what information, if any, needs to be provided for pricing the options?

A47. See A45.

Q48. Man days requirement for individual experts are not mentioned, this would help us estimate the financial proposal more accurately.

A48. See A6 above. MCC expects bidders to develop their own staffing strategies to fulfil the contract requirements identified in the SoW.

Q49. The expert's location of work is not mentioned clearly whether all of them need to be onsite always, or if there would be a hybrid mode, combining both On Site and Off site.5 A49. Hybrid working is anticipated. Substantial in-country work will be required, see A39 and A44.

Q50. Pre-Qualification of Bidder: L.2.3 Volume II - Past Performance Quote: (6 pages) - Three Examples of the Past Performance need to be provided. What would be the criteria for this pre-qualification and what do you mean by examples? Could you please share a sample copy of such a document to help us to prepare it properly?

A50. The criterion for Past Performance is Stipulated in the RFQ, see paragraph: L.2.3; Past Performance on a prior or current contract would constitute the quoter(s) past performance either as a Prime of Sub-Contractor, in which the SoW on the example provided (Contract Number), is similar in size, scope, and complexity to this RFQ and was: preferably within the past seven (7) years as of the date of this solicitation; at a minimum: Table L.2.3.1, must be provided for each example.

Q51. Quote evaluation criteria FAR 52.217-8, is not clear, needs further clarification and explanation.

A51. FAR Clause Citation # 52.217-8, provides statutory authority to extend services after contract award; it is in full text on page thirty (30) of the RFQ; should the parties utilize this authority to extend services after contract award, it will be done so via contract modification; See: A45 above; See: https://www.acquisition.gov/far/part-

52#FAR_52_217_8

Q52. Is it mandatory to have SAMS and DUNS number to bid for this opportunity?

A52. A valid & active SAM Registration is a specified RFQ Requirement; however: a DUNS # is not mandatory and is either not being utilized by SAM and or is currently being transitioned over to the Unique Entity ID #. See FAR Subpart 4.11 for SAM requirements.

Q53. Is there any specific requirement to have a local firm from Sierra Leone?

A53. There is no contractual requirement to partner with a local firm in Sierra Leone, however substantial in-country presence is expected and local partnering may be one approach to properly fulfil the tasks detailed in the SoW.

Q54. Would you be able to provide us with the status of current Power sector development projects in the country and the plans for the future projects?

A54. Appendices B, C, D, and H all provide best available baseline data for current status of the Sierra Leone electricity sector.

Q55. We would be keen to participate in any pre-bid meeting MCC is planning for this.

A55. There are no pre-quote meetings/conferences planned for this acquisition.

https://www.acquisition.gov/far/part-52" \l "FAR_52_217_8 https://www.acquisition.gov/far/part-52" \l "FAR_52_217_8

Q56. The Scope of work (SOW) mentions nine appendices in its Table of Content. Could you share these?

A56. Sierra Leone appendices to the SoW, were uploaded to SAM, on 05 July, 2022.

Q57. We would like MCC to confirm the list of tasks/projects that should be included in the price proposal. For example, Section "C.4 Tasks to be performed" of the SOW presents some "Base Period" projects, then "Optional Assessments" including Bumbuna I Hydroelectric Plant as optional. Most of the optional assessments are mentioned as "optional" later in the text. However, at section "C.4.C.2 – Upgrade of Bumbuna I Plant capacity", the project is not presented as optional.

A57. The Bumbuna I Upgrade is an Optional task. See A34 above.

Q58. SoW. C.4.A.1 Engineering assessment, point 5. Geotechnical Assessment. Does MCC expect the contractor to perform boreholes and field geotechnical assessments for each project that should be included in our price proposal?

A58. With reference to C.4.A.1 paragraph 5, there is no requirement to perform boreholes and soil sampling analysis.

Q59. Section C.4.B of the Scope of Work mentions a previous IRP developed by the MCC funded THP to establish the least cost generation pathway. Is it possible to work with the previous modeling team to update the IRP model, such that development of an entirely new IRP avoided? If not, is MCC anticipating that an entirely new IRP would be an appropriate level of analysis to evaluate the economics of expanding the transmission network and upgrading of the Goma Hydro Plant (and possible some of the optional tasks)?

A59. MCC has issued a separate RFQ Notice 95332422Q0074 Electricity Sector Reform and Institutional Capacity Building Roadmap for Sierra Leone. This Policy and Institutional Reform Consultant will develop a Power Sector Financial Sustainability Model v2 and User Manual, an update to the network model developed during MCC's Threshold Program. Close coordination between the PIR and Feasibility Study Consultants is expected, and the PIR Consultant is tasked to work with sector stakeholders and the Feasibility Studies Consultants to develop and model various scenarios of the Sierra Leone electricity sector to properly evaluate the projects under consideration.

Q60. We are aware that MCC has staff who are very experienced in the development of cost-benefit analyses (CBAs). Is it appropriate to assume that MCC staff would primarily develop the CBA model, with input from the winning bidder that would be generated, for example, from the IRP modeling and transmission studies?

A60. Yes, MCC will develop the cost-benefit analysis for assessing projects, requiring inputs from the Feasibility Study Consultants obtained from this RFQ, the Sector model developed by the Policy and Institutional Reform Consultants, and inputs from the Willingness-to-Pay study for Sierra Leone, a third active procurement related to MCC compact development.

Part 2:

(1). Block 8 of the SF1449, on the RFQ Cover Page, offer due date has changed from: from: 08/01/2022, to:

08/10/2022; offer submission time remains the same and does not change at: noon, midday 12:00 PM EST.

(2). Paragraph # L.2.2 is changed from the two (2) references to: twenty-five (25) pages, to the new reference page limitation of: thirty (30) pages.

(3). Section B.5 and Table 1 of the RFQ has been revised: the total estimated level of effort labor hours over the one (1) year contract, is increased: by: 3,080 hours, from: 21,692 hours, to: 24,772 hours.

(4). Page 13 of the RFQ, Section H, the Qualifications paragraph for the TIP Risk Assessment Expert, is modified to reflect the range of: 5 years – 7 years.

(5). Block 27a of the RFQ SF1449 Cover Page, is: hereby marked off and checked, as applicable; Box 27b will be marked off and checked, as applicable, on the award document SF1449 Cover Page.

(6). Table 1. Price Quote Template changes from:

Deliverable Paymen t Amount

Kick-off meeting 10%

Inception Report and Workplan 10%

Preliminary Assessment Report 10% $

Pre-Feasibility Report * 20% $

Draft Feasibility Report ** 30% $

Final Feasibility Report ** 20% $

Table 1. Price Quote Template changes to:

Deliverable Payment Amount

Kick-off meeting 10% $

Inception Report and Workplan 10%

Preliminary Assessment Report 10% $

Pre-Feasibility Report * 20% $

Draft Feasibility Report ** 30%

Final Feasibility Report ** 20%

Optional Tasks:

Rehabilitation and Upgrade of Bumbuna 1 Hydropower Plant - Preliminary Assessment, Pre-Feasibility, and Final Feasibility Report

Assessment of Grid-connected Solar and Storage Potential -- Preliminary assessment, Pre-Feasibility, and Final Feasibility Report

Assessment of additional Hydropower Potential -- Preliminary assessment, Pre-Feasibility, and Final Feasibility Report

Identification of Power Supply Solutions for Agribusiness Opportunities -- Preliminary assessment, Pre-Feasibility, and Final Feasibility Report

CLIN 0001 TOTAL PRICE $

(7). Section B.5. Table 1 narrative changes, from: "each contract PoP" to: "the overall twelve (12) month contract effort".

(8). Paragraph # L.2.4 Volume III Factor 3 Price / Business Quote, Paragraph (1). Budget Summary: is revised to remove "CLINs in Section B" and replaces with: "Cells D6 through D1; Cells D13 through D16; and: Cell D17 of the revised sierra leone price quote template".

(1). the 1st part provides sixty (60) Questions received & Answers (Q&A);

(2). the 2nd part itemizes eight (8) changes made to the Solicitation.

Millennium Challenge Corporation, Contracts and Grants Management Division, 1099 Fourteenth St NW, Suite 700 Washington, DC, 20005-3550, US