Amendment_1_to_SOL-111-17-000003.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

6. ISSUED BY

USAID Armenia

1 American Avenue

Yerevan 0082

CODE

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

10/23/2017

ARMENIA

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, Stale and ZIPCode)

CODE FACILITY CODE

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6)

Not Applicable

(x)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

SOL-111-17-000003

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

09/14/2017

PAGE OF PAGES

1 129

5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

CODE N/A

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended. Xis 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 solicitationand amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOURACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAYRESULT 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.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA(Ifrequired)

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS. IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM14 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 required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

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

The purpose of this amendment to the solicitation is to provide clarifications and additional information as included in the attached documents (ATTACHMENTS A, B, C) and post the Revised Solicitation Document SOL-111-17-000003 (ATTACHMENT D):

ATTACHMENT A - QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

ATTACHMENT B - BUDGET TEMPLATE

ATTACHMENT C - LOCAL COMPENSATION PLAN

ATTACHMENT D - REVISED SOL-111-17-000003

All other terms and conditions of the solicitation document remain unchanged.

End of Amendment 0001

Except as provided herein,alltermsand conditions of the document referenced in Item 9 Aor 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and infull forceand effect.

15A. NAMEAND TITLEOF SIGNER (Type orprint)

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signatureof person authorizedto sign)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

15C. DATE SIGNED

16A.NAME ANDTITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Typeorprint)

Justin Gunnoe

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

1/ S"

16C. DATE SIGNED

STANDARD FORM30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

ATTACHMENT A - QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

RFP # No. SOL-111-17-000003 “Market Liberalization & Electricity Trade Program (MLET)”

# Question USAID Response

1. RFP Reference: B.2

Page Number: B-1 Relevant RFP Language: “This is a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) Completion type contract.”

RFP Reference: I.1 Page Number: I-3 Relevant RFP Language: Clause Number 752.216-70 Question: Could USAID remove Clause Number 752.216-70 AWARD FEE (MAY 1997) since Section B.2 indicates that award fee is not applicable to this contract?

Removed.

2. RFP Reference: C.4 – Subtask 1.2 first paragraph Page Number: C-6 Relevant RFP Language: “Strengthen the capacity of the PSRC, Transmission Operator, Settlement Centers, and other energy entities to be able to support the implementation of a new legal-regulatory framework.”

Question: This language duplicates the last bullet under Subtask 1.1. Could USAID confirm that this sentence should be deleted from Subtask 1.2?

There is no duplication. Under Subtask 1.1. USAID expects that the Offeror will strengthen the capacity of the PSRC, Transmission Operator, Settlement Centers, and other energy entities to be able to support development of a new legal-regulatory framework, while under Subtask 2.1 we expect that the Offeror will strengthen the capacity of the PSRC, Transmission Operator, Settlement Centers, and other energy entities to support the implementation of a new legal-regulatory framework, because enforcement of the laws and regulations is an ongoing issue in Armenia.

3. RFP Reference: C.4 – Subtask 1.3, second bullet Page Number: C-6 Relevant RFP Language: “Provide assistance in the development and usage of market software” RFP Reference: F.6 – A. Deliverable Table, #12 Page Number: F-2 Relevant RFP Language: “Market software developed and used by market operator and market players” Question a: The detailed work requirement for Subtask 1.3 in Section C.4 indicates that the contractor should provide assistance in the development of the market software.

However, Deliverable #12 in Section F.6.A Deliverable Table says that the contractor is responsible for developing market software to be used by the market operator and market players, which would use up a significant percentage of the total estimated value of MLET ($7 million - $8 million). Can USAID confirm that the contractor should only provide assistance to Armenian counterparts to develop a tender to procure such

a. The contractor should develop the market software in cooperation with the market operator either by procuring off the shelf software and adopting it for the Armenian market or by designing it.

b. The contractor is responsible for developing the new market software within the scope of the MLET.

software?

Question b: If yes, would USAID amend Deliverable #12 to reflect that the contractor is not responsible for developing the new market software within the scope of the MLET Program?

4. RFP Reference: F.2 Page Number: F-1 Relevant RFP Language: “Period of Performance” Question: To enable offerors to present the most accurate cost possible, could USAID provide the anticipated start date?

USAID anticipates the start date of activities to be approximately early March 2018.

5. RFP Reference: F.6.D Page Number: F-7 Relevant RFP Language: “The M&E Plan is subject to final approval by USAID and is separate from the regular financial and other reports required by the standard Cooperative Agreement provisions.”

Question: Given that Armenia MLET is a contract, not a cooperative agreement, we would respectfully request that this sentence be deleted from the RFP.

The final M&E plan should be prepared by the Offeror and approved by USAID.

Please revise the referenced sentence as follows:

“The M&E Plan is subject to final approval by USAID and is separate from the regular financial and other reports.”

6. Question: We respectfully request that USAID incorporate FAR 52.244-2, Alternate I (June 2007) in sections H and I to accommodate offerors who have a Federally Approved Purchasing System.

Included.

7 RFP Reference: H.37 Page Number: H-19 Relevant RFP Language: “All reports generated and data collected during this project shall be considered confidential and shall not be reproduced, disseminated or discussed in open forum, other than for the purposes of completing the tasks described in this document, without the express written approval of a duly authorized representative of USAID. All findings, conclusions and recommendations shall be considered confidential and proprietary.”

Question: We respectfully request that USAID please clarify who are the duly authorized representatives for the solicitation and the subsequent contract.

The Contracting Officer is the duly authorized representative of

USAID.

8 RFP Reference: I.5 Page Number: I-5 Relevant RFP Language: “52.219-9 SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN

(JAN 2017)”

Question: Because the place of performance for this contract will be in the Republic of Armenia, and significant direct charges are likely to be incurred outside the United States, would the Contracting Officer agree to waive the requirement of a Small Business Subcontracting Plan?

Small Business Subcontracting Plan is a requirement and will not be waived.

Add the following item under Section L.7 INSTRUCTIONS FOR

PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF THE

COST/BUSINESS PROPOSAL on page L-10

g) Part 9 – Small Business Subcontracting Plan Offerors must submit a small business subcontracting plan in accordance to FAR 52.219-9.

9 RFP Reference: L.6 Page Number: L-3

Both, technical and cost proposals should be typed and submitted on standard 8 1/2" x 11" paper.

Relevant RFP Language: “Technical proposal is limited to 30 pages and be written in English and typed on standard 8 1/2" x 11" paper” RFP Reference: L.7 Page Number: L-6 Relevant RFP Language: “Cost/Business proposals must be written in English on A4-size, 216 mm by 297 mm paper” Question: May offerors submit the Technical proposal on A4-size paper so that the format of the entire proposal is consistent?

10 RFP Reference: L.6 Page Number: L-3 Relevant RFP Language: “Technical proposal is limited to 30 pages and be written in English and typed on standard 8 1/2" x 11" paper, one inch margins (top and bottom, left and right), single spaced, one-sided, Times New Roman point 12 font size (can be 10-point font in charts, graphs and tables) with each page numbered consecutively…” Question: For ease of numbering pages consecutively, may offerors reorder annexes so that annexes that count against the 30-page limit come first and all annexes that do not count against the 30-page limit come at the end of the proposal?

Please comply with the Required Order of the Technical Proposal as listed in L.6. This order will guide USAID’s RFP compliance checklist once proposals are received. Please note that all annexes of the technical proposal listed under # 7. Required Annexes – are not subject to 30 page limitation.

11 RFP Reference: L.6 Page Number: L-4 Relevant RFP Language: “Required Order of the Technical Proposal…” Question: To improve readability of the proposal, may offerors also include a list of acronyms that does not count against the page limitation?

Yes, offerors can include a list of acronyms which will not be counted against the page limitation.

12 RFP Reference: L.6 Page Number: L-4 Relevant RFP Language: “Required Annexes –subject to page limitation…d) Project List and Past Performance References” RFP Reference: L.6.3 Page Number: L-6 Relevant RFP Language: “Offerors must describe and demonstrate their organizational experience to develop, manage, and implement projects of similar scope, size, scale, duration, nature and complexity. In support of the related experience, Offerors must also complete the Past Performance Information Sheet available as an Attachment #5 and include the sheet in the Cost Proposal (L.7(d) Part 4 – Past Performance)” Question a: The outline for the Technical Proposal requires an annex for past performance, however Section L.6.3 does not include detailed instructions for what information offerors should include in that annex. Because past performance information is required to be submitted as part of the Cost Proposal, would USAID consider deleting “d) Project List and Past Performance References” from the list of required annexes on page L-4?

Question b: If Annex D remains, will completing and including Attachment #5: Past

a. Offerors should submit a narrative description of past performance information as part of technical proposal.

Annex d. Project List and Past Performance References of the technical proposal should contain short forms of cited projects and will not be counted against the 30 page limitation.

b. The past performance matrix should be submitted as part of the cost proposal.

c. Yes.

d. Yes, short forms will not be counted against the 30 page limitation.

Performance Matrix be sufficient to satisfy the requirement?

Question c: If not, are offerors required to submit past performance short forms for cited projects?

Question d: If short forms are required, would they be exempt from the 30-page limitation, since each completed short form takes at least 2 pages?

13 RFP Reference: L.6 Page Number: L-4 Relevant RFP Language: “Required Annexes –subject to page limitation…f) Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan” RFP Reference: L.7.d Page Number: L-10 Relevant RFP Language: “Offerors who are determined to be in the competitive range, or the apparent successful Offeror should no competitive range be established, shall submit a branding and marking plan which complies with Section D.1. Offerors do not need to submit a branding and marking plan with their initial proposals.”

Question: Are we correct that a Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan is not required to be included in the Technical Proposal at this time?

The Branding and Marking Plan will be requested only from the successful offeror when negotiating the award of the contract.

Revise item f) Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan on page L-4 under No. 7. Required Annexes; L.6 INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL to add “only required from successful Offeror.”

14 RFP Reference: L.6.2.a Page Number: L-4 Relevant RFP Language: “Offerors must also propose a start-up plan that will smoothly and efficiently guide mobilization of the Offeror’s team and serve as a blueprint for the initial months of operation.”

Question: Section L requires offerors to present a start-up plan in the Management Approach section. However, Section M does not indicate that USAID will evaluate the start-up plan. Can USAID confirm that offerors are not required to propose a start-up plan?

Startup plan will be evaluated as part of Management Approach under B. Management Plan and Personnel.

Amend the Management Approach sub-criteria of B. Management Plan and Personnel on page M-3 under Section M to include “startup plan” among other things for evaluating the management approach.

15 RFP Reference: L.6.2.a Page Number: L-4 Relevant RFP Language: “Management Approach…Offerors must explain the role of the home office in the implementation of the project. Also, offerors must describe support capabilities of the home office, including experience in commodity procurement, training, and subcontracting and post-award administration.”

RFP Reference: L.6.2.c Page Number: L-5 Relevant RFP Language: “Staffing Plan …The Offeror must describe the roles and responsibilities of Home Office management staff, Field Office staff, their assigned management and decision-making authorities” RFP Reference: M.2.B Page Number: M-3

The role and responsibilities of the Home office staff will be evaluated under Staffing Plan sub-criteria of the Management Plan and Personnel.

Offerors should submit the role and responsibilities of the Home office staff only under the Staffing plan. The following paragraph from a) Management Approach of L.6 INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL on page L-4 will be deleted.

“Offerors must explain the role of the home office in the implementation of the project. Also, offerors must describe support capabilities of the home office, including experience in commodity procurement, training, and subcontracting and post-award administration.”

Relevant RFP Language: “Staffing Plan…roles and responsibilities of home office staff” Question: Section L requires offerors to describe the roles and responsibilities of home office staff under both the Management Approach and Staffing Plan sections. However, Section M indicates that home office roles and responsibilities will be evaluated under the Staffing Plan only. Can USAID confirm that offerors are not required to describe home office roles and responsibilities in the Management Approach section?

16 RFP Reference: L.6.2.b Page Number: L-5 Relevant RFP Language: "Qualifications and Experience of Personnel…Offerors must also include in the proposal résumés for all professional personnel (as an Annex).

Resumes for key personnel may not exceed two pages in length and two pages for all other professional personnel."

RFP Reference: L.6.2.c Page Number: L-5 Relevant RFP Language: “Staffing Plan…Offerors are not required to name Armenian long-term staff, other than key personnel, or provide CVs thereto,” Question a: Could USAID confirm that CVs are required only for the key personnel?

Question b: If CVs are not limited to the key personnel only, then are we correct that “all professional staff” does not include finance, administration, and operations staff, and therefore resumes are not required for these individuals?

a. CVs should be submitted for all identified key and non-key technical personnel.

b. CVs of administrative personnel including finance, administration, and operations staff are not required.

Bio data forms should be submitted for all identified key, non-key and administrative personnel as part of cost proposal to allow analysis of cost reasonableness.

17 RFP Reference: L.6.2.c Page Number: L-5 Relevant RFP Language: “Letters of commitment are discouraged for proposed local professional staff, excluding the COP and DCOP.”

Question: A DCOP is not mentioned in Section C.5: Key Personnel or anywhere else in the RFP. Can USAID confirm that there is no DCOP position for MLET?

DCOP position is not included among the anticipated key personnel positions for the activity. However, offerors are free to propose additional key personnel positions including DCOP, if found necessary for the successful implementation of the project.

Add the following paragraph at the end of Section C.5 KEY PERSONNEL on page C-8.

“Offerors are free to propose additional key personnel positions including DCOP, if found necessary for the successful implementation of the project.”

Add “if applicable” at the end of the 3rd paragraph of item C.

Staffing Plan, on page L-5

18 RFP Reference: L.6.2.c Page Number: L-5 Relevant RFP Language: “Staffing Plan …the relationship the Offeror will have to any subcontractors/sub-Awardees. If Offerors intend to develop institutional partnerships or teaming arrangements or engage subcontractors in the implementation and performance of the contract, the proposal must identify and describe the roles and responsibilities of such local, regional, and/or international organizations. The Offeror must include letters of commitment from all such proposed partners and team members. Exclusive

Teaming arrangement will be evaluated as part of Management Approach.

Remove the following paragraph from item c. Staffing plan on page L-5 under 2. Management Plan and Personnel and incorporate into item a. Management Approach under 2. Management Plan and Personnel of Section L.6 on page L-4 of Section L.6

INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARATION OF TECHNICAL

PROPOSAL

relationships with local partners are discouraged. Offerors shall describe in detail how they will work with and engage these organizations. The proposal must specify the nature of organizational linkages between the prime contractor and any subcontractor, joint venture, or consortium entities. This includes relationships between each other, lines of authority and accountability, and plans for utilizing and sharing resources. The proposal must include an organizational chart or exhibit that illustrates the roles of the organizations in program implementation.”

RFP Reference: M.2.A Page Number: M-3 Relevant RFP Language: “Management Approach…teaming arrangements, including proposed use of local and international counterpart and partner organizations” Question: Section L requires offerors to describe teaming arrangement under the Staffing Plan section, whereas Section M indicates that teaming arrangements will be evaluated under the Management Approach. Can USAID confirm that offerors should describe teaming arrangements in the Management Approach section, and not in the Staffing Plan section?

“If Offerors intend to develop institutional partnerships or teaming arrangements or engage subcontractors in the implementation and performance of the contract, the proposal must identify and describe the roles and responsibilities of such local, regional, and/or international organizations. The Offeror must include letters of commitment from all such proposed partners and team members.

Exclusive relationships with local partners are discouraged. Offerors shall describe in detail how they will work with and engage these organizations. The proposal must specify the nature of organizational linkages between the prime contractor and any subcontractor, joint venture, or consortium entities. This includes relationships between each other, lines of authority and accountability, and plans for utilizing and sharing resources. The proposal must include an organizational chart or exhibit that illustrates the roles of the organizations in program implementation.

(This chart will not count against page limitations).”

19 RFP Reference: L.6.2.c Page Number: L-5 Relevant RFP Language: “Staffing Plan…The Offeror must include letters of commitment from all such proposed partners and team members.”

Question: Similar to the letters of commitment from key personnel, may offerors include letters of commitment from partners in an annex that does not count against the page limitation?

Yes.

20 RFP Reference: M.2.A Page Number: M-2 Relevant RFP Language: “and associated work plan for the first year” Question a: Section M requires offerors to present a first year work plan as part of the Technical Approach. However, Section L does not provide instructions for inclusion of a work plan. Can you USAID confirm that offerors are not required to include a first year work plan as part of the proposal?

Question b: If offerors are required to include a first year work plan, may we create a new annex that does not count against the 30-page limit?

a. The Offerors are requested to provide a draft first year work plan as part of technical approach.

b. The plan can be provided as an annex to the technical proposal not to be counted against the page limitation.

Add the following under item 1. Technical Approach of Section L.6

INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARATION OF TECHNICAL

PROPOSAL on page L-4:

“Additionally, the offeror must present the work plan for the first year; time schedule and deliverables for the overall project and individual tasks; plans to identify and address emerging risks that cannot be foreseen at program inception; and the draft M&E plan.”

21 RFP Reference: M.2.B Page Number: M-3 Relevant RFP Language: “clarity and effectiveness of offeror’s monitoring and evaluation plan”

c. The Offerors are requested to provide a draft M&E plan as part of technical approach.

d. The plan can be provided as an annex to the technical proposal and will not to be counted against the page limitation.

Question a: A monitoring and evaluation plan is not mentioned in Section L of the RFP.

Could USAID clarify whether or not offerors are required to include a monitoring and evaluation plan in our proposal?

Question b: If a monitoring and evaluation plan is required, may offerors place it in an annex that does not count against the 30-page limitation?

Please see the response to question #20 above.

22 RFP Reference: Attachment 6 Question: USAID has provided a CLIN based budget template. Could USAID add a CLIN 5 for cross-cutting Other Direct Cost expenses – such as office costs, materials, and vehicles – that cannot be allocated to a specific programmatic output?

Other Direct Costs should be included in Total Direct Costs line item for the prime. Subcontractor other direct costs should be included under Subcontracts line item.

Please see the attached revised budget template (Attachment B).

23 Page C-6: Can you clarify the following?: " ...provide...capacity building for new nuclear SMR and/or renewable technologies"

USAID expects that the Offeror will provide capacity building to relevant institutions, including Armenian Nuclear Regulator, in the event that the Government of Armenia (GOAM) decides to develop a new nuclear SMR. The GOAM decision to begin studies on SMR is anticipated in 2019.

Also, USAID anticipated the contractor to provide capacity building for development of renewable energy, including solar and wind.

However, in case the SMR will be endorsed by GOAM, it is anticipated that limited support will be provided for capacity building on renewables.

24 Is there a Local Compensation Plan and if so can we have access to it? See Attachment C.

25 Since provision 52.204-7 is included:

a) If the offeror is registered on SAM does the offeror meet the Section K proposal requirements by checking off Section K.2 (b) (2) (i) Paragraph (d) applies and submitting page K-1 and pages K-14 and K-15 the signature page?

b) Is the offeror the only one required to submit a Section K or the Subs have to submit as well?

The Prime Offeror as well as the proposed subcontractors should complete and submit the Section K.

26 The RFP references “PRSC’s concept paper” on page C2. Is this the same as Engility’s USAID report New_Market_Designs_for_the_Power_Sector_in_Armenia,_September,2016” which was included as an attachment to the RFP? If not, could USAID provide the corresponding concept paper or indicate to Offerors how it can be obtained?

Yes, it is the same.

27 Can we add a listing of acronyms and not be included in the page count? Please see response to question #11 above.

28 The Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan is listed as a required annex to the

Technical Proposal. However, the instructions for the cost proposal contradict this instruction (“Offerors who are determined to be in the competitive range, or the apparent successful Offeror should no competitive range be established, shall submit a branding and marking plan which complies with Section D.1. Offerors do not need to submit a branding and marking plan with their initial proposals.”). If they are required, could these be excluded from the tech proposal’s page limit?

Please see the answer to question #13 above.

29 Reference page c-3, why are tariffs different for Hrazdan 5, and what is it’s fuel type? Offerors are encouraged to research the subject on their own. Also, the Gap Analysis is included in the Recommended Reading List of Electricity Sector Analysis to Guide the offeror (ATTACHMENT 7) and is provided as an Annex to the Solicitation document (7.6 Gap Analysis with List of Market Challenges and Legal Barriers, EC- LEDS, June 2016) and can serve a source of information on the subject.

30 Reference page c-3, is new energy infrastructure under construction? There is no new infrastructure under construction related to interconnection with Georgia.

31 Reference c-3, in regards to the Gap Analysis, have any parts been implemented? Yes. See action plan provided as an annex 7.1 to the solicitation document with dates on certain activities.

32 Reference page c-6, is there common market software already in place for Georgia? Offerors are encouraged to research the subject on their own.

33 Reference page c-6, Task 2, last two words - to Times -, please clarify what is meant? MARKAL is a numerical model used to carry out economic analysis of different energy related systems at the country level to represent its evolution over period of time. TIMES have been developed under the auspice of the International Energy Agency’s Energy Technology Systems Analysis Programme (IEA-ETSAP) as the evolutionary successor to MARKAL.

USAID expects that Armenia will transition from MARKAL to

TIMES.

34 Reference page c-7, Key Personnel, on first look, the budget for this project does not appear to support full time international consultants for the full five years. May we have variations such as initial international then transition to local, or have internationals not spend the entire five year period, or schedule the position being filled by periodic short termers?

Yes, Offerors are free to propose their best staffing plan for the implementation of the activity.

35 Who pays for market operation software? The software development will be funded within the MLET program.

36 Are the specifications for the SMR to be provided by the contractor? The Contractor may provide support for the development of the specifications in the event a request is received from GOAM.

37 Reference page F-3, the table shows a number of dates - but some items are listed as TBD, but they also have a date of, e.g., 2021. Please clarify?

Exact months are TBD within the indicated year.

38 Reference page l-5, it discusses a DCOP, is this a separate key person, or do we designate one of the other key persons to have an additional role of DCOP?

See response to question # 17 above.

39 Page L-4, Section L.6.2a) – What is “SR” Program activities? Delete SR.

40 Page F-8, Section F.8 – In the Illustrative Indicators table, the second indicator is for a functional Wholesale Market, with a target of “at least 5.” Can USAID explain what this target references?

Following is the list of minimum required 5 target indicators:

1. capacity market

2. month-ahead market

3. day-ahead market

4. balancing market

5. ancillary services 41 Page H-5, Section H.8 – This section states that reports may be required in Romanian, which is clearly a typo. Can USAID amend the solicitation to either remove this sentence or clarify whether reports are needed in Armenian?

Delete “Romanian” and insert “Armenian.”

42 Page I-5, Section I.5 – This section contains several pages of instructions for a Small Business Subcontracting Plan, but there is no requirement in Section L to provide one.

Since this program will be conducted almost entirely outside of the United States, will a subcontracting plan be required?

See response to question # 8 above.

43 Page J-1, Attachment 6 –Questions about the provided budget template:

1. The budget template has two different sets of CLINs, one on the summary page (Direct Costs, Indirect Costs, and Fixed Fee), and one on the Detailed Budget (Tasks 1, 2, 3 and Fixed Fee). These both differ from Section B.4, which had line items for Direct Costs, Subcontracts, Indirect Costs, and Fixed Fee. Can USAID please clarify what CLINs we need to track the budget against?

2. On the Detailed Budget tab, the CLINs for Task 1-3 all have fixed fee included in their totals. Is the separate fixed fee CLIN needed?

3. The Subcontractor tab contains no units or unit rates to show calculations. It is also set up in a completely different format and grouping from the prime contractor’s Detailed Budget. Can Offerors use a format that is closer in appearance to the prime contractor’s template for the subcontractors?

Please see the attached revised budget template (Attachment B).

44 Page L-3, Sections L.5, L.6 and L.7 – Section L.5 states that attachments must be submitted in MS Word, Adobe PDF, or MS Excel (emphasis added) and in bold type in the next paragraph notes that USAID would prefer one attachment per volume. Sections L.6 and L.7, however, state that the proposals must be submitted in MS Word and Adobe PDF (as well as an Excel budget for the cost proposal). Given the strong preference for one file per volume, can USAID confirm that Sections L.6 and L.7 should be revised to state that the Technical Proposal and the Cost Proposal Narrative should be submitted in MS Word or Adobe PDF?

The technical proposal should be submitted in MS Word or Adobe PDF format.

The cost proposal narrative should be submitted in MS Word or Adobe PDF format. The budget tables should be submitted in Adobe PDF as well as MS Excel format with unlocked cells to allow cost analysis.

45 Pages L-6 – L-10, Section L.7 – The majority of the cost proposal instructions seems to be very similar to the recent energy RFP from USAID Ukraine, which had several non-standard elements to it. The use of it in this RFP has created a few errors and caused inconsistencies with Section L.6 and Section M, namely:

1. Page L-10, Section L.7 – both Part 5 and Part 8 reference “Ukraine’s ability to receive the best services.” Can USAID confirm that this is a typo, and should be Armenia?

2. The Cost Proposal is required in A4 format, but the Technical Proposal is required in Letter format. Can USAID confirm if letter-sized paper is acceptable for the Cost

1. Delete “Ukraine” and insert “Armenia” in lieu thereof.

2. Both, technical and cost proposals should be typed and submitted on standard 8 1/2" x 11" paper.

3. Please see the answer to question #12 above.

4. Please see the answer to question #13 above.

Proposal as well, as that is the native format used by most USAID offerors for programs of this type?

3. Page L-4, Section L.6 – “Project List and Past Performance References” are a required Annex and count against the Technical Proposal 30-page limit, but the Past Performance instructions for the Technical Proposal (page L-6) state that the information should be presented in the Cost Proposal. The instructions for the Cost Proposal are only for projects of a specific size and scope that are not already in CPARS, which will be a limited number, as well as our use of small businesses historically. No contracts in CPARs are to be presented. An additional problem is, according to Section M, the Technical Evaluation team will be reviewing the past performance of the Offerors, and this team is not permitted to review the cost proposal. Can USAID please clarify where the past performance material should reside and who will be evaluating it, and amend the solicitation to that effect? If the material remains in the technical proposal, can USAID exclude Annex D from the 30-page limit?

4. Page L-4, Section L.6 – Under the Required Annexes, bullet f) calls for a Branding Implementation Plan and a Marking Plan to be included and would count against the 30-page limit. However, in Section L.7 on Page L-10, it is stated in bold text that Offerors do not need to submit these plans with their initial proposal. Can USAID please clarify, and also please consider removing this from the page limitation if it remains in the technical proposal volume, as it is not an evaluated section?

46 Page L-6. Section L.6 – Can USAID confirm the section on past performance in the body of the proposal is more similar to “corporate qualifications,” while the past performance annex is to list specific projects. Could USAID specify what it wants for the annex and how it might differ from the past performance materials to be submitted for the cost proposal, if we are to present the materials in both volumes?

Please see response to question #12 above.

47 Page L-4, Section L.6 – May offerors include an acronyms list after the Table of Contents that is excluded from the page limit?

Please see response to question #11 above.

48 Page L-5, Section L.6 – The top paragraph requests that offerors provide “a description of the location” and “on the job relationships between each” for the proposed candidates.

Could USAID clarify what it means by these?

Description of the location is for the proposed location (field office, home office, etc.) of the key personnel.

“On the job relationship” refers to the description of vertical and horizontal management relations within the proposed structure.

49 Page L-5, Section L.6 states that offerors are to provide letters of commitment from institutional partners and subcontractors. Could USAID define “institutional partners?”

And are these letters to be part of the management approach or an annex? We note that page L-10 of the RFP also requires these letters in the cost proposal.

Institutional partnership is a general term used for consortiums, joint ventures or other type of partnerships.

Letters of commitment for Institutional Partnerships should be submitted only as part of the cost proposal as described in (c) Part 5

– Letters of Commitment (Subcontractors) under Section L.7.

50 Page L-9, Section L.7 states that offerors are to use Attachment 5 for past performance projects without CPARs. We have four questions in this regard.

1. May we reformat Attachment 5 slightly as long as we include the same information?

2. What do we do about projects with CPARs (the instructions in paragraphs 1. and 2.

both address projects “not listed in CPARS”)?

3. Are there any restrictions on past performance (e.g., number of projects submitted)?

4. Some of the items listed in Paragraph 2 (e.g., point of contacts) are not listed in

Attachment 5. How do we address this?

1. Attachment 5 for Past Performance Matrix is a required format.

2. All projects including ones with CPARS should be listed in the

Past Performance Matrix.

3. There is no limit on the number of projects.

4. The contact information is the last column of Attachment 5.

51 Page L-4, Section L.6 – Would USAID please consider imposing the 30-page limit on the main body of the proposal, then perhaps separate limits (if any) on the annexes?

Please note that there are no page limitations imposed on annexes listed in #7 Required Annexes on page L-4.

52 Section C.3, pg. C-2 states that, “the contractor will support the implementation of Armenia’s Energy Strategy and Action Plan for Market Liberalization and Promotion of Cross Border Trade, as well as Regulatory Road Map, and PSRC’s concept paper.” The PSRC concept paper was not provided as an attachment to SOL-111-17-000003. Can USAID please provide this document?

The PSRC concept is included in the Recommended Reading List of Electricity Sector Analysis to Guide the offeror (ATTACHMENT 7) and is provided as an Annex to the Solicitation document (7.1 New Market Designs for the Power Sector in Armenia, September, 2016)

53 Section L.6, pg. L-3 of the RFP stipulates that the Technical Proposal be submitted on standard 8 ½” x 11” paper, while Section L.7, pg. L-6 requires that Cost/Business Proposal be submitted on A4-size paper. Could USAID kindly confirm that the Cost/Business Proposal may also be submitted on standard 8 ½” x 11” paper with larger tables on standard 11” x 17” paper?

Please see response to question #9 above.

54 Section L.6, pg. L-3 mentions formats for submission of the Technical Proposal. Can USAID please confirm that to ensure secure transmission of all proposal content the Technical Proposal can be submitted in Adobe PDF?

USAID requests that Technical proposals are submitted in both Microsoft Word and Adobe PDF format.

55 Section L.7, pg. L-8 lists Past Performance as part of the Cost/Business Proposal. Per instructions in L.7(d) and L.6(3), offerors must submit a Past Performance Information Sheet in the cost volume. According to the “Required Order of the Technical Proposal” on page L-4, “Past Performance” is included as a section of the technical volume, and there is a “Project List and Past Performance References” listed as a required annex, subject to page limitation. Could USAID please confirm that because the Past Performance Information Sheet will be included in the cost volume, and because past performance is included in the narrative, that Annex D. Project List and Past Performance References is not required?

Please see response to question #12 above.

56 Section L.7, pg. L-10 lists the Branding and Marking Plan as part of the Cost/Business Proposal, and only required during competitive range. However, Section L.6, pg. L-4 lists the Branding Implementation and Marking Plan required as Annex F to the Technical Proposal. Could USAID please confirm that the Branding Implementation and Marking Plan will only be required in the cost proposal during the competitive range period?

Please see response to question #13 above.

57 Can USAID confirm that Annexes A, D, E, F are not subject to the 30 page limitation? All annexes of the technical proposal listed under # 7. Required Annexes are not subject to 30 page limitation.

58 Section C sets forth work requirements as three closely interwoven tasks. Section L-7 does not instruct offerors to propose contract cost ceilings by task. However, in Attachment 5, Budget Template, USAID has asked offerors to provide cost estimates for contract line items for each task, and these are labeled CLIN 001, CLIN 002, CLIN 003.

Could USAID please remove the requirement to disaggregate program costs by task in the detailed budget (Budget Template, Cost Elements by Task)? This would facilitate the sharing of resources across tasks, and hold offerors to the three CLINs on the Summary Budget (direct costs, indirect costs, fee; also labeled CLIN 001, CLIN 002, CLIN 003).

Please see the attached revised budget template (Attachment B).

59 Would USAID allow us to submit an acronyms list that does not count toward the page limit?

See answer to question #11 above.

60 Section L-.6, pg. L.4 requires Letters of Commitment for Key Personnel as Annex C in the technical volume. However, Section L.7 (f) Part 8, pg. L-10 mentions letters of commitment as part of the cost volume. Would USDAID please confirm that letters of commitment for key personnel are only required as annex in the technical volume?

Letters of commitment should be submitted only as an annex to the technical proposal.

Delete the requirement for letters of commitment from Section L.7

(f) Part 8 on page L-10.

61 I am writing to kindly ask you to let us know whether our potential partner, which is a non-trade, non-for profit organization, founded by the Republic of Armenia, can apply with us as a sub-contractor. We would like to know whether the fact that it is an NGO founded by the Republic of Armenia may possibly create a conflict of interest.

NGOs can apply as a subcontractor. An organizational conflict of interest (OCI) may occur in the event that the proposed subcontractor organization founded by the Republic of Armenia is also a beneficiary of the project.

62 Section C.4, Page C-6 Under Subtask 1.3 and Task 2, the RFP references the requirement for the offeror to “provide assistance in the development and usage of market software” and “support the transition from Markal software to Times.” Please provide additional detail on the scope and scale of assistance USAID envisions. Does USAID anticipate contract funds being used for direct procurement of software licenses? If so, would USAID consider providing a plug figure to facilitate budgeting?

There is no plug figure for this requirement.

Also, please see answers to question #3 and #33 above.

63 Section C.5, Page C-7 & C-8 In Section C.5.A of the RFP lists, four key personnel positions required for the MLET program including “Energy Regulatory Specialist” and “Electricity Market Design Specialist” position. In the following paragraphs under Section C.5.B, RFP provides minimum qualification requirements for these four positions. However, the titles of the two positions does not match with those in section C.5.A. , these two are “Senior Energy Regulatory Specialist” and “Senior Electricity Market Design Specialist”. Given the above, please clarify/confirm the titles of the Key Personnel/positions required under the RFP and their respective minimum qualifications

The four key personnel positions are as follows:

• Chief of Party position

• Power Systems Adviser

• Senior Energy Regulatory Specialist

• Senior Electricity Market Design Specialist

The minimum qualification of the above listed positions are included in the RFP Section C.5 KEY PERSONNEL.

Revise the Section C.5.A on page C-7 to replace “Energy Regulatory Specialist” and “Electricity Market Design Specialist” positions with “Senior Energy Regulatory Specialist” and “Senior Electricity Market Design Specialist” positions respectively.

64 Section F.6, Page F-4 & F-6 The table of Other Deliverables and Performance Schedule indicates that the Final Report is due 60 calendar days after the end date of the contract, however, #6 on Page F-6 indicates that the Final Report is die Thirty (30) days after the end of the Contract. Can USAID please clarify when the Final Report is due?

The final report is due 30 days after the end date of the contract.

Delete “60 calendar days” and insert “30 calendar days” in lieu thereof in the table for Other Deliverables under Section F.6 on page F-4.

65 Section L.6, Page L-4 RFP under Section L.6 (page L-4) , Required Annexes list Letter of Commitment for Key Personnel as one of the item. However on Page L-5, section L.6.2.b (or c) – Staffing Plan, RFP states “Letters of Commitment are discouraged for proposed local professional staff, excluding COP and DCOP”. Please clarify that Letter of Commitment for proposed local professionals are not required /or discouraged for all positions including Key positions (except COP and DCOP position).

Letters of Commitment are discouraged and not required for all proposed local professional staff, excluding COP and DCOP, in case the proposed candidates for COP and DCOP positions are local professionals.

66 Section L.6.2.a, Page L-4 Under the “a) Management Approach,” the RFP states “This section must describe the management structure for the implementation of proposed SR program activities and explain how it will implement activities proposed.” Can USAID clarify what the “SR program” is as there is no reference to it in the RFP?

See answer to question #39 above.

67 Section L.6, Page L-4 & L-5 Under Section L.6, the RFP states, “Resumes should not exceed 2 pages for each individual” and “Offerors must also include in the proposal résumés for all professional personnel (as an Annex). Resumes for key personnel may not exceed two pages in length and two pages for all other professional personnel.” Can USAID consider only providing Resumes for the four key personnel and providing a short bio for all other professional personnel in a staffing matrix in the Annex?

CVs should be submitted for all identified key and non-key technical personnel.

CVs of administrative personnel including finance, administration, and operations staff are not required.

Bio data forms should be submitted for all identified key, non-key and administrative personnel as part of cost proposal to allow analysis of cost reasonableness.

68 Section L.7, Page L- 10 Under section “(f) Part 8,” the RFP states, “USAID discourages the use of exclusive agreements as this limits USAID’s and Ukraine’s ability to receive the best services.” Can USAID clarify if they meant Ukraine or Armenia?

Please see response #45 above.

69 Not Applicable Can USAID provide a Local Compensation Plan (LCP) for USAID Armenia?

Please see response to #24 above.

70 Not Applicable Can USAID provide an exchange rate for USD/AMD for the purpose of proposal evaluation?

Costs should be calculated and Cost Proposals should be submitted in USD.

71 Question : Under Section M.2.B., the RFP includes in the evaluation criteria “…[t]he extent to which the program management approach and structure will support the technical approach to achieve results, including … clarity and effectiveness of offeror’s monitoring and evaluation plan … match the requirements included in the solicitation.”

Under Section F.6.A, the RFP states that the deliverables “Monitoring and Evaluation Program, inclusive of Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP)” is due 60 calendar days after contract award.” There is no mention in Section L. Proposal Instructions to include a M&E plan or PMP. Can USAID clarify if a draft M&E or PMP is required in the technical proposal and, if so, provide instructions for how it should be included: in the body of the proposal, as an attachment, page limitations, etc.?

Please see response to #21 above.

CONTRACT LINE ITEM YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 TOTAL

001 - Total Direct Costs

002 - Subcontracts

002 - Total Indirect Costs

003 - Fixed Fee

TOTAL COST PLUS FIXED FEE

SUMMARY BUDGET

ATTACHMENT B - BUDGET TEMPLATE

COST ELEMENTS

A. Salaries and Wages Daily Rate LOE/Units Cost Daily Rate LOE/Units Cost Daily Rate LOE/Units Cost Daily Rate LOE/Units Cost Daily Rate LOE/Units Cost LOE/Units Cost

1. Long-Term Technical Assistance (LTTA) Days Days Days Days Days Days LTTA EXPATRIATE/TCNs

Subtotal LTTA Expatriate/TCNs

LTTA LOCAL STAFF

Subtotal LTTA CCNs

TOTAL Long-Term Technical Assistance

2. Short-Term Technical Assistance (STTA) STTA EXPATRIATE/TCNs

Subtotal STTA - Expatriates/TCNs

STTA LOCAL

Subtotal STTA LOCAL

TOTAL Short-Term Technical Assistance

3. Cooperating Country Nationals (CCN) Administrative Staff

TOTAL CCN Administrative Staff

4. Home Office Support

TOTAL Home Office Support

Total Salaries and Wages B. Fringe Benefits

Rate Units Cost Rate Units Cost Rate Units Cost Rate Units Cost Rate Units Cost Units Cost

Total Fringe Benefits C. Travel, Transportation & PerDiem

Rate Units Cost Rate Units Cost Rate Units Cost Rate Units Cost Rate Units Cost Units Cost International Travel Local Travel Per Diem

Total Travel, Transportation & Per Diem D. Allowances

Rate Units Cost Rate Units Cost Rate Units Cost Rate Units Cost Rate Units Cost Units Cost

Total Allowances E. Other Direct Costs (ODCs)

Rate Units Cost Rate Units Cost Rate Units Cost Rate Units Cost Rate Units Cost Units Cost

Total ODCs

CLIN 001 TOTAL DIRECT COSTS

Rate Units Cost Rate Units Cost Rate Units Cost Rate Units Cost Rate Units Cost Units Cost

CLIN 002 Total Subcontracts

Rate Base Cost Rate Base Cost Rate Base Cost Rate Base Cost Rate Base Cost Base Cost

CLIN 003 Total Indirect Costs

Rate Base Cost Rate Base Cost Rate Base Cost Rate Base Cost Rate Base Cost Base Cost

CLIN 004 Total Fixed Fee

TOTAL COST PLUS FIXED FEE

PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

CLIN 004 Fixed Fee

CLIN 003 Indirect Costs

CLIN 001 Total Direct Costs

CLIN002 Subcontracts

BUDGET TEMPLATE BY CLIN - Include ONLY those cost line items that are consistent with your technical approach

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4

TOTAL

Year 5

ITEMS Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 TOTAL EXPLANATION

*LABOR

Direct Long-Term Labor (Expatriate)…