ESP_Pre-Bid_Meeting_Presentation_OAPA_2015-07-14.pptx

USAID Afghanistan

Engineering Support Program (ESP)

Pre-Bid Meeting

July 14, 2015

Introduction UAID Afghanistan has a $1 billion infrastructure portfolio that encompasses energy, water, natural resources, transportation and building projects.

This presentation is intended to provide bidders with examples of the type of work they can expect.

This presentation is not intended to limit the scope of work to the examples provided.

Bidders should refer to Statement of Work, C.4 for Detailed Work Requirements Bidders should refer to Statement of Work C.9 for the Project Management/Job Order process

Infrastructure Overview Energy Sector Power Transmission and Connectivity (PTEC) Northern Electric Power Supply (NEPS) Southern Electric Power Supply (SEPS) Salang Tunnel Substation Clean Energy Program Kajaki Dam Turbine 2 Installation and Commissioning Transport Sector Gardez-Khost Road Phase 4 Salang Passage Routine Maintenance-Emergency (O&M) Water Sector Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Program Natural Resources Mining and Extractives (MIDAS) Shebergan Gas Development Program (SGDP)

Afghanistan Energy Map

Examples of Engineering Services

Electrical Substation Design Services Site Selection Civil location drawings Geotechnical investigation Site Surveys Substation Conceptual Design Conceptual design and demolition drawings Grading plans Single line diagrams General arrangement plans Substation elevations Substation Pricing Schedules

Extreme poverty: While tremendous progress has been made, Afghanistan remains extremely poor.

Total U.S. civilian assistance to Afghanistan, which has averaged $2 billion per year over the past decade, was already cut in half in FY14 to $1.1 billion per year. This cut will result in less funding for sub-national government, economic growth, and programs for youth engagement.

If continued, it will result in less money for the Afghanistan Reconstruction Trust Fund (ARTF), which funds the salaries and recurrent costs of the government.

Reducing state fragility: In 2013, Afghanistan crossed the threshold from “extreme fragility,” the worst category, to the second worst category of “high fragility.” However, a rapid reduction in assistance is likely to reverse this progress.

From the 2012 baseline of $4.3 billion in overall international civilian assistance given to Afghanistan, a moderate reduction to $2.7 billion in assistance in 2017 (7% per year), and $2 billion in 2022 (5% per year), coupled with modest gains in governance and preservation of investments in human and institutional development, places the probability of Afghanistan falling back into “extreme fragility” at 38% in 2017 and 30% in 2022.

If, however, assistance is reduced to $2 billion in 2017 (11% per year) and $1.2 billion in 2022 (8% per year), then the risk of extreme fragility increases to 73% in 2017 and 74% in 2022. In other words, a roughly 40% cut in assistance over the next 5-10 years increases Afghanistan’s probability of “extreme fragility” by almost 35% compared to a gradual reduction.

Addressing the fiscal gap: According to World Bank figures, Afghanistan’s domestic revenue has increased an average of 24 percent per year from 2004 through 2011, but has been stagnant since then growing only 4% between 2011 and 2013. Afghanistan spends roughly half its $5 billion 2013 budget on security costs and half on civilian needs.

75% of its security budget was paid by donor funds, whereas 55% of its civilian expenses are donor funded.

Meanwhile, Afghanistan’s population and its expenses are increasing and its security threats are remaining constant, meaning that it will not be able to pay the bills needed for meeting the basic development needs of an ‘average’ poor country for many years. In 2013, for example, donor grants provided more than half of Afghanistan’s $5.4 billion budget.

In 2018 the World Bank projects that Afghanistan will have total civilian development and security costs that are $7 billion more than its domestic revenue, meaning that donor financing must make up the difference or expenses will have to be cut, which could well impact security, the economy, or some of each.

Examples of Monitoring Services Quality Assurance Verification Material Test Evaluation Equipment Submittal Review Change Proposal Review Payment Request Review Substantial Completion Inspection Final Inspection –Deficiency Correction Review

Procurement Phase Services Request For Proposal (RFP) Package Preparation Pre-bid Meeting Coordination Response to Bidder Questions Evaluation of Bids Recommendations for Award Preparation of Contract

Construction Project Management Owner’s Representative Services Project Planning Conceptual Budget Estimating Value Engineering and Alternatives Analysis Design Phase Constructability Analysis Contractor Baseline Schedule Evaluation Change Order Analysis Progress Payment Evaluation Project Cost Control Reporting

Pre-fabrication Inspection - Towers

Structural Inspections

Testing Galvanizing on Tower Supports

Material Test Evaluation

Quality Assurance - Field Verification

FY 2015 653(a)

Material Field Testing

Kajaki Hydroelectric Turbines

Lab testing

Electrical Inspections image3.jpeg image4.emf image5.jpeg image6.png image7.jpeg image8.jpeg image9.jpeg image10.jpg image11.jpg image12.jpeg image13.emf image1.png