19GE5026Q0037-0001-QAs22.pdf

September 18, 2026

SUBJECT: Solicitation Number 19GE5026Q0037 dated September 01, 2026 Replace Outdated Fire Alarm System – U.S. Embassy Berlin, Curtius Annex on behalf of the Facility Management Office.

To Potential Offerors:

The US Government has received the following questions to solicitation 19GE5026Q0037 and is providing the following answers:

Note: The questions are marked with (Q), and the answers are marked with (A).

I. Delivery Structure

Q-01. (Ref: L.1.2(1); M.3.1(2)-(3)) Does a foreign-incorporated company with a registered German branch (commercial registration, permanent address, telephone listing, German VAT) satisfy the establishment and authorization requirements, with the offer submitted in the parent's name?

A-01. The Management Plan must include "evidence of operating an established business in Germany, including a permanent address and telephone listing." Additionally, the Mandatory Minimum Requirements require local VAT registration (if applicable) and proof of authorization to perform in the country of performance.

The solicitation does not explicitly address a parent/branch structure. Provided these evidentiary requirements are met and the offer clearly identifies the contracting entity, a parent/branch structure is not inherently precluded. However, final responsibility determination rests with the Contracting Officer under FAR 9.1. Offerors should clearly identify the contracting party's full legal name and organizational structure in the offer.

In addition to the above, the following certifications are mandatory:

• The bidder shall be a company certified by the BHE Bundesverband Sicherheitstechnik e.V.

Regional Procurement Support Office Giessener Strasse 30

60435 Frankfurt am Main Germany

E-mail: WalkerAK@state.gov

• The bidder shall be recognized as an approved installation company for intrusion alarm and fire detection systems by the relevant professional association.

• The bidder shall hold a valid certificate issued by VdS Schadenverhütung GmbH confirming its approval as an installation company for intrusion alarm and fire detection systems.

Q-02. (Ref: M.3.1(1)) Where a foreign parent performs through its German branch, which entity's UEI and SAM registration is evaluated, and must the SF-1449, SAM registration, and price offer all name the parent?

A-02. The solicitation requires that the "Offeror must provide UEI and active SAM registration".

The UEI, SAM registration, SF-1449, and price offer must all consistently name the same legal entity — the entity that will be the actual contracting party and signatory. If the parent will be the contracting party, all documents should name the parent.

Q-03. (Ref: Attachment 1 qualification criteria; H.1(c)) May the BHE certification, approved-installer recognition, and VdS certificate be held by the specialist subcontractor performing the installation, with certificates submitted with the offer, rather than by the offeror?

A-03. Attachment 1's SOW indicates that "Der Anbieter" (the bidder/offeror) must hold BHE certification and VdS approval, suggesting the offeror itself must hold these credentials.

Separately, H.1(c) requires that "all subcontractors performing fire alarm system installation, wiring, or certification work shall hold current, valid licenses and certifications as required by the SOW". While these provisions do not clearly permit substituting a subcontractor's certification, if the subcontractor can provide the certificates, we consider it acceptable.

Q-04. (Ref: H.1(a)-(b); DOSAR 652.242-73(b)) Is a teaming agreement at proposal stage plus a subcontract at award acceptable instead of a joint venture, must it be submitted in Volume 2, and must the partner hold its own UEI and SAM registration?

A-04. Section H.1 permits subcontracting specialty trade work with prior written Contracting Officer consent. DOSAR 652.242-73(b) contemplates that "if the party actually performing the work will be a subcontractor or joint venture partner, then such subcontractor or joint venture partner agrees to the requirements of paragraph (a)," indicating that a subcontract arrangement (not only a joint venture) is acceptable.

A teaming agreement with a subsequent subcontract would generally satisfy this requirement, and supporting evidence should be included in Volume 2 (Management Plan) per L.1.2(1).

As a subcontractor, the partner would generally not need its own UEI/SAM registration unless it will be paid directly by the Government, which is not contemplated under this structure. Note, however, that this differs if the parties instead choose to form a joint venture rather than a prime/subcontractor arrangement: a joint venture entity is itself required to have its own active

SAM registration, regardless of whether it is paid directly by the Government. Offerors should confirm early which structure — teaming/subcontract or joint venture — they intend to use, as the registration requirements differ accordingly.

Q-05. (Ref: L.1.2(3); M.3.2(C)) May the offeror submit projects performed by the same corporate entity through a branch in another country, and will such experience be credited as the offeror's own where it was not performed in the country of performance?

A-05. Yes. The solicitation explicitly states: "If the offeror has not performed comparable services in the host country, then the offeror shall provide its international experience".

Corporate Experience evaluation under M.3.2(C) is based on "types of work and volume of work previously or currently being performed by the contractor". Experience performed by the same corporate legal entity through a branch elsewhere is creditable as the offeror's own experience.

II. Solicitation Documents

Q-06. (Ref: B.4; C.2; Section J; L.1.1(7)) Please confirm the priced offer is to be submitted on the issued file 26Q0037_Attach02_Price.

A-06. Confirmed. Per Section J's List of Attachments, "Attachment 2: Pricing" is the designated pricing document. References to "Attachment 3" for pricing in B.4 and L.1.1(7) should read “Attachment 2”.

Q-07. (Ref: I.3.4 para 5; K.4; Attachment 6 para 5) The FAR 52.222-56 threshold is $700,000 at I.3.4 and K.4 but $500,000 at Attachment 6 para 5. Which governs, and is the CTIP compliance plan required regardless of contract value?

A-07. This is a genuine inconsistency between documents. Section I.3.4 states the threshold as "$700,000 or more," as does K.4 ("exceeds $700,000"), while Attachment 6 para 5 states "$500,000 or more." The combined synopsis/solicitation document (Sections I and K) governs over the attachment. The $700,000 threshold applies for purposes of the formal FAR 52.222-56 certification requirement.

However, CTIP compliance obligations apply only where the Contractor will employ Third Country Nationals (TCNs) in performance of this contract, per DOSAR 652.222-800. If no TCNs will be employed, neither the FAR 52.222-56 certification nor the CTIP Compliance Plan is triggered, regardless of contract value. If TCNs will be employed, the CTIP Compliance Plan must be submitted with every offer as part of Volume 2, evaluated on a Pass/Fail basis, per L.1.2(4) and M.3.2(D).

Q-08. (Ref: FAR 52.222-56; Attachment 6) Please confirm the required form and content of the CTIP certification, and whether a signed certificate must be submitted with the offer or only annually after award.

A-08. Per DOSAR 652.222-800, the CTIP certification and Compliance Plan requirements apply only if the Contractor will employ Third Country Nationals (TCNs) in performance of this contract. Offerors that will not employ TCNs are not subject to these requirements.

Where TCNs will be employed: per K.4, "The apparent successful Offeror must submit, prior to award, a certification" — this formal FAR 52.222-56 certification is required only from the apparent successful offeror, before award (not necessarily with the initial offer). Separately, the CTIP Compliance Plan must be included with the initial offer as part of Volume 2 – Technical, if TCN employment is contemplated. Attachment 6 also references annual re-certification after award for contracts involving TCN labor.

III. Schedule, Access and Performance

Q-09. (Ref: B.5, F.1; SF-1449 line items 001, 002) B.5 and F.1 state 150 calendar days from Notice to Proceed, while the SF-1449 line items show 01 October 2026 to 30 April 2027 (212 days). Which governs, and what is the anticipated NTP date?.

A-09. B.5 governs: “The period of performance for this contract shall be 150 calendar days from the date of Notice to Proceed (NTP), unless otherwise extended in accordance with the terms of this contract.” The CLIN 001 is the desired timeframe for the 150 calendar days performance period. The NTP should follow soon after contract award.

Q-10. (Ref: Attachment 1 pos 4.3; F.1 Phase 4) Please define the required coverage and acceptance criteria for the temporary system.

A-10. The SOW references only that the Contractor shall "establish a temporary system as needed" during removal of the old system, and BOQ item 4.3 references "Aufbau Provisorium" (setup of temporary system). Specific coverage requirements and acceptance criteria for the temporary system are not further defined in the current solicitation package.

Regardless of the specific coverage requirements, the Contractor must ensure that a life-safety alerting mechanism remains in place to notify all building occupants of an emergency throughout the fire alarm system's reconstruction. This requirement should be addressed during the Planning and Design phase (Phase 1) of the SOW, prior to the start of construction, to ensure continuous life-safety coverage is maintained during the transition period.

IV. Technical Scope

Q-11. (Ref: Attachment 1, existing controls; F.1 Phase 4) Please provide the schedule of retained interfaces (SHEV, door hold-open devices, lifts, HVAC shutdown, access control), the existing control matrix and cause-and-effect, and confirm trade responsibility for the controlled equipment.

A-11. Given this limited scope, no control matrix or cause-and-effect documentation exists for lifts, HVAC shutdown, or door hold-open devices, as these systems are not connected. Trade responsibility for the smoke exhaust window interface will rest with the Contractor providing the fire alarm system installation; coordination with the mechanical trade responsible for the windows themselves will be required to confirm the interface point and cause-and-effect sequence.

Q-12. (Ref: Attachment 1; bill of quantities Section 2) Is Hekatron equipment mandatory or will an equivalent VdS-approved manufacturer be accepted, and what evidence of equivalence must accompany the offer?

A-12. Hekatron is identified in the SOW as the "preferred" manufacturer ("vorzugsweise zu wählen"), reflecting the fact that the existing system is also Hekatron-manufactured, which allows for a more streamlined and structured replacement. However, Hekatron is not mandatory.

Offerors proposing an equivalent, VdS-approved alternative will be considered, provided the offer includes:

• Documentation of full compatibility with the existing system components that will remain in place;

• Evidence of compliance with DIN VDE 0833-2 and DIN 14675; and

• Demonstrated functional equivalence to the specified Hekatron equipment.

Final determination of acceptability for any proposed "or equal" alternative rests with the Contracting Officer, based on the COR's technical recommendation.

Q-13. (Ref: Attachment 1, cable network; pos 3.5-3.9) Please confirm the required functional integrity class (E30 or E90) and whether existing penetrations and fire stopping may be reused or must be renewed by the contractor.

A-13. The required functional integrity class for the specified cable runs is E30, consistent with the ring-line functional integrity requirements discussed in the SOW narrative.

Existing penetrations and fire stopping may not be reused. The Contractor shall renew all cable runs, penetrations, and fire stopping associated with this scope to meet E30 requirements, ensuring full compliance and certification of the new installation.

Q-14. (Ref: Attachment 1 pos 5.1) Please confirm whether appointing and paying the Prüfsachverständiger is the contractor's responsibility or the Government's, and who bears any re-inspection costs.

A-14. The Government is responsible for appointing and paying the Prüfsachverständiger (independent expert inspector). The Contractor's price shall include the cost of accompanying the Prüfsachverständiger during inspections, including any required re-inspections, but the Contractor is not responsible for the inspector's fees.

If a re-inspection is necessitated by Contractor non-compliance or deficient work, the Government reserves the right to recover any associated re-inspection costs from the Contractor.

V. Commercial, Tax and Payment

Q-15. (Ref: FAR 52.229-11; L.1.1(9)) As the services are performed in Germany, a WTO GPA party, please confirm a foreign offeror may claim full exemption from the section 5000C tax under Part III of Form W-14.

A-15. Section 52.229-11(c) permits exemption claims based on an international procurement agreement (Part III of Form W-14) where goods/services are produced/performed in a country that is party to such an agreement. As Germany is a WTO Government Procurement Agreement party and performance occurs in Germany, a Part III exemption claim would generally be appropriate for self-certification on Form W-14, subject to IRS audit. Final tax determinations are adjudicated by the IRS, not the Department of State.

Q-16. (Ref: FAR 52.229-11; K.2) Where the offer is submitted in the name of the German-registered branch, holding a German commercial registration and VAT number, is Form W-14 still required and does the section 5000C exemption still apply?

A-16. Yes, Form W-14 is still required regardless of local German commercial registration, provided the contracting entity is a "foreign person" under the definition at 26 U.S.C.

7701(a)(30). The Part III exemption basis (performance in a WTO GPA country) would still apply, independent of local registration status.

Q-17. (Ref: G.3; CLIN 002) Will the Embassy issue a VAT exemption certificate, should line item 002 still be priced at 19 percent, and how is VAT treated in the price evaluation under Section M?

A-17. As the work will be performed on German soil, the standard 19% VAT applies. The U.S.

Embassy is reimbursed VAT paid directly from the German government. CLIN 002 should therefore remain priced with 19% VAT included.

For purposes of price evaluation under Section M, VAT is treated as neutral and will not factor into the evaluation of offered prices, since it applies equally across all offerors.

Q-18. (Ref: F.6) Please confirm the basis for monthly payments under a firm fixed price order (progress, milestone, or delivery-based), and that Form W-14 is submitted once with the offer rather than monthly.

A-18. Monthly payments under this firm fixed price order will be delivery-based, tied to the Contractor's completion and delivery of specified milestones or deliverables during that billing period, rather than percentage-of-progress or fixed periodic installments.

Q-19. (Ref: Attachment 1 warranty clause; FAR 52.212-4(o)) Which governs, and what warranty period applies to the installed system?

A-19. Attachment 1 specifies that warranty is governed by the German Civil Code (BGB) and its statutory periods, while FAR 52.212-4(o) provides a general merchantability/fitness-for-purpose warranty without specifying a fixed duration. Since FAR 52.212-4(o) does not itself specify a period, Attachment 1's reference to BGB statutory periods effectively supplies the applicable warranty duration; the two provisions are not in direct conflict.

Q-20. (Ref: Attachment 1; F.6) Are the two annual inspection and maintenance visits within the contractor's scope and to be priced in this offer, or borne by the Government?

A-20. No explicit bill of quantities line item for "two annual inspection and maintenance visits" was identified in the pricing schedule provided with this solicitation. F.6 references only a "Preventive Maintenance Schedules" document, deliverable "upon request," rather than a requirement for physical maintenance visits.

Accordingly, the two annual inspection and maintenance visits are not within the scope of this offer and should not be priced under this contract. Preventive maintenance, including any associated site visits, will be addressed under a separate, future contract and is not the Government's expectation under the current solicitation.

Q-21. (Ref: FAR 52.225-17) Please confirm offers are to be priced in euro, and state the exchange rate source and date the Government will apply if offers are received in more than one currency.

A-21. FAR 52.225-17, Evaluation of Foreign Currency Offers, is incorporated by reference.

Offerors are not restricted to pricing their offer in euro; offers may be submitted in the offeror's currency of choice.

For evaluation purposes, the Government will convert any offer submitted in a currency other than U.S. dollars into U.S. dollars using the exchange rate published by the U.S. Treasury Reporting Rates of Exchange as of the solicitation closing date September 21, 2026. This converted amount will be used solely for evaluation purposes and does not affect the currency in which the awarded contract will ultimately be priced and paid.

Q-22. (Ref: L.1.2) Are there page limits or formatting requirements for Volume 2, may certificates, resumes, and reference lists be appended outside any limit, and are German-language certificates with English summaries acceptable?

A-22. No specific page limits or formatting requirements for Volume 2 are stated in the solicitation beyond the content requirements listed in L.1.2(1)-(4). Note that Section L.1 requires offers to be submitted "in the English Language"; German-language certificates should be accompanied by an English summary or translation to ensure they can be fully evaluated.

- end of document -