B.08.02 - W912GB22R0028 (Greece).pdf

Design-Build Construction of Facility Infrastructure located at Stefanovikeio, Greece.

The estimated magnitude of construction is bew tw een $250,000.00 to $500,000.00.

This acquisition is being solicited full and open.

The NAICS Code for this procurement is 236220.

Central Contractor Registration and ORCA are now available on the System for Aw ard Management (SAM), available at w w w .sam.gov.

Offerors must comply w ith the requirements of 52.204-7, 52.204-8, 52.232-33, and any other CCR/ORCA requirements in this solicitation through SAM.

PLEASE NOTE: SAM is completely free of charge for both registrantsand users.

BJORN HALE

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS

NEGOTIATED

18-Aug-2022

(RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

B. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

See Item 7

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID

3. DATE ISSUED

9. FOR INFORMATION A. NAME

SOLICITATION

NSN 7540-01-155-3212 1442-101 STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 4-85)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(e)

11. The Contractor shall begin performance w ithin _______10 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________690 calendar days after receiving aw ard, X notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________52.211-10

12 A. THE CONTRACTOR MUST FURNISH ANY REQUIRED PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS?

(If "YES," indicate within how many calendar days after award in Item 12B.)

X YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________ copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________20 Sep 2022 (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers must be publicly opened at that time.

shall be marked to show the offeror's name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time offers are due.

B. An offer guarantee is, X is not required.

C. All offers are subject to the (1) w ork requirements, and (2) other provisions and clauses incorporated in the solicitation in full text or by reference.

D. Offers providing less than _______90 calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due w ill not be considered and w ill be rejected.

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NO.

IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by offeror.

4. CONTRACT NO.

7. ISSUED BY CODE

CONTRACTING DIVISION

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

KONRAD ADENAUER RING 39

D-65187 WIESBADEN GERMANY

WIESBADEN 65187

W912GB

PAGE OF PAGES

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

02:00 PM (hour) Sealed envelopes containing offers

5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NO. 6. PROJECT NO.

8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If Other Than Item 7)

FAX:TEL: TEL: FAX:

W912GB22R0028 1 OF 49

20B. SIGNATURE

(REV. 4-85)STANDARD FORM 1442 BACK

TO SIGN

NSN 7540-01-155-3212

SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD (Continued) (Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

CODE FACILITY CODE

17. The offeror agrees to perform the w ork required at the prices specif ied below in strict accordance w ith the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in w riting w ithin ________ calendar days after the date offers are due.

the minimum requirements stated in Item 13D. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13D.)

AMOUNTS SEE SCHEDULE OF PRICES

18. The offeror agrees to furnish any required performance and payment bonds.

19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the solicitation -- give number and date of each)

AMENDMENT NO.

DATE

20A. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN

OFFER (Type or print)

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

22. AMOUNT 23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

CODE

(Insert any number equal to or greater than

20C. OFFER DATE

25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) 41 U.S.C. 253(c)

CODE27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY:26. ADMINISTERED BY

(Include ZIP Code)14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR 15. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code)

See Item 14

(Include only if different than Item 14)16. REMITTANCE ADDRESS

30B. SIGNATURE

29. AWARD (Contractor is not required to sign this document.)

document and return _______ copies to issuing office.) Contractor agrees Your of f er on this solicitation, is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award con-to f urnish and deliv er all items or perf orm all work, requisitions identif ied summates the contract, which consists of (a) the Gov ernment solicitation and on this f orm and any continuation sheets f or the consideration stated in this y our of f er, and (b) this contract award. No f urther contractual document is contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be necessary .

gov erned by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certif ications, and specif ications or incorporated by ref er-ence in or attached to this contract.

30A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED 31A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

30C. DATE

(Type or print)

TEL: EMAIL:

31B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 31C. AWARD DATE

BY

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

(Contractor is required to sign this28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT

(M ust be fully completed by offeror)OFFER

W912GB22R0028

Section 00 10 00 - Solicitation

SF1442 BLOCK 10 CONTINUATION

Technical inquiries and questions relating to the proposal procedures or bonds are to be submitted via Bidder Inquiry in PROJNET at http://projnet.org/projnet. Please see Section 00 21 00, PROJNET for further instructions.

Please see FAR 52.236-27 Alt. I for site visit information.

The term bud and proposal are used interchangeably in industry and may be used interchangeably throughout this solicitation.

Please note, page numbering in this document may not be accurate.

http://projnet.org/projnet

PRICE BREAKOUT SCHEDULE

Offerors shall provide pricing for all items.

The following items include providing all labor, materials, equipment, and services necessary to complete the design and construction of the work identified in the attached Plans, Specifications, Statement of Work (SOW) and Soliciation. It also includes preparation of all documents, submittals, and schedules; inspections; and compliance with all technical, quality control, administrative, and safety requirements. All work shall be performed in accordance with these documents. Refer to Specification Section 01 22 00 Price and Payment Procedures for additional description of the work associated with each of the items.

Period of Performance: Refer to clause COMMENCEMENT PROSECUTION AND EXECUTION OF WORK (52.211-10) in the Solicitation for the period of performance for all items.

Liquidated Damages: Refer to clause LIQUIDATED DAMAGES-CONSTRUCTION (52.211-12) in the Solicitation for the liquidated damages for all items.

Item No. Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Amount

0001 Design of US Distribution Network 1 Job €_______ €_______ 0002 Construction of US Distribution Network 1 Job €_______ €_______

Total of Base Items 0001 thru 0002 €_______________

EXTENSIONS: All extensions of the unit prices shown will be subject to verification by the Government. In case of variation between the unit price and the extension, the unit price will be the offer.

Section 00 21 00 - Instructions

PROJNET INSTRUCTIONS

OFFEROR'S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

Technical inquiries and questions relating to proposal procedures or bonds are to be submitted via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at http://www.ProjNet.org/ProjNet. As noted below, offerors shall not submit their proposals via ProjNet.

Offerors shall submit their proposals in accordance with the provisions stated in the solicitation.

To submit and review bid inquiry items, bidders will need to be a current registered user or self-register into system.

The Solicitation Number is: W912GB22R0028

The Bidder Inquiry Key is: YDBZ84-VK956S

Specific Instructions for ProjNet Bid Inquiry Access:

1. From the ProjNet home page linked above, click on Quick Add on the upper right side of the screen.

2. Identify the Agency. This should be marked as USACE.

3. Key. Enter the Bidder Inquiry Key listed above.

4. Email. Enter the email address you would like to use for communication.

5. Select Continue. A page will then open stating a user account was not found and will ask you to create one using the provided form.

6. Enter your First Name, Last Name, Company, City, State, Phone, Email, Secret Question, Secret Answer, and Time Zone. Make sure to remember your Secret Question and Answer as they will be used from this point on to access the ProjNet system.

7. Select Add User. Once this is completed you are now registered within ProjNet and are currently logged into the system.

Specific Instructions for Future ProjNet Bid Inquiry Access:

1. For future access to ProjNet, you will not be emailed any type of password. You will utilize your Secret Question and Secret Answer to log in.

2. From the ProjNet home page linked above, click on Quick Add on the upper right side of the screen.

3. Identify the Agency. This should be marked as USACE.

4. Key. Enter the Bidder Inquiry Key listed above.

5. Email. Enter the email address you used to register previously in ProjNet.

6. Select Continue. A page will then open asking you to enter the answer to your Secret Question.

7. Enter your Secret Answer and click Login. Once this is completed you are now logged into the system.

From this page you may view all bidder inquiries or add an inquiry.

Bidders will receive an acknowledgement of their question via email, followed by an answer to their question after it has been processed by our technical team.

Offerors are requested to review the specification in its entirety and to review the Bidder Inquiry System for answers to questions prior to submission of a new inquiry.

The call center operates weekdays from 8AM to 5PM U.S. Central Time Zone (Chicago). The telephone number for the Call Center is 800-428-HELP.

Information concerning the status of the evaluation and/or award will NOT be available after receipt of bids/proposals.

http://www.projnet.org/projnet

NOTES:

1. Offerors shall not submit their proposals via ProjNet, but in accordance with the provisions stated in the solicitation. Any questions regarding acceptable means of submitting offers shall be made directly to the Contract Specialist identified in the solicitation.

2. Government responses to technical inquiries and questions relating to proposal procedures or bonds that are submitted to ProjNet in accordance with the procedures above are not binding on the Government unless an amendment is issued on Standard Form 30. In the case of any conflicts, the solicitation governs. Any changes or revisions to the solicitation will be made by formal amendment. Government responses will be limited to: (a) Notice that an amendment will be issued; (b) Reference to an existing requirement contained in the solicitation; or (c) Notice that a response is not necessary.

3. The ability to enter technical inquiries and questions relating to proposal procedures or bonds will be disabled five (5) days prior to the closing date stated in the solicitation. No Government responses will be entered into the ProjNet system within two (2) days prior to the closing date stated in the solicitation.

ELECTRONIC PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

Proposals: ALL SUBMISSIONS TO THIS PROPOSAL ANNOUNCEMENT SHALL BE SUBMITTED ELECTRONICALLY THROUGH DOD SAFE. No paper copies, CD-ROMs or facsimile submissions will be accepted. Electronic Proposal Submission is required through the Army’s Electronic File Sharing Service, DOD SAFE (https://safe.apps.mil). The DOD SAFE Application is used to send large files to individuals that would normally be too large to send via email. There are no user accounts for SAFE. Authentication is handled via email.

Anyone has access to DOD SAFE, and the application is available for use by anyone. The SAFE “Getting Started Guide” has information on how to utilize the system (https://safe.apps.mil/about.php). Instructions for uploading are as follows:

1. Send an email to the Contract Specialist to receive the link to drop off your proposal. This will need to be completed five (5) business days prior to proposal due date.

a. Bjorn Hale, Contracting Specialist at bjorn.t.hale2@usace.army.mil

2. You will receive an email with the link to submit your drop-off. The link will be provided no later than two

(2) business days prior to the proposal due date.

3. Short Note to the Recipients: Click the Add Files or Drag and Drop your files. For file description, enter

W912QR22R0028-FIRMNAME.

4. Click Upload button to send documents.

5. Guest users will need to check their email to verify their email address before the recipients will be notified. (Government-issued Common Access Cards (CACs) are not required).

File Size Limitations: Offerors are advised to follow the DOD SAFE instructions for uploading files. DOD SAFE supports delivery up to 8GB. If needed, Offerors are advised to break the files down into smaller sections in order to upload it to the system. In such cases, please divide the sections as logically as possible and be sure to clearly name the files as specified below.

File Naming Convention: To ensure your submission is received and processed appropriately, it is important that interested parties CAREFULLY ensure their electronic files adhere to the following naming convention:

1. W912QR22R0028-FIRMNAME-VOLUME

2. W912QR22R0028-FIRMNAME-VOLUME II

Each file name shall begin with the solicitation number followed by the firm’s name and a brief file description.

Please see examples above.

File Organization: Although hard copies are not accepted, each file shall be clearly indexed, and logically assembled. Font size shall be 11 or larger. Pages shall be letter sized (larger page sizes (such as 11x17 fold-outs, etc.) will be counted as two pages. Proposals shall be in a narrative format, organized and titled so that each section of the proposal follows the order and format of the factors. Information presented should be organized so as to pertain to only the evaluation factor in the section that the information is presented. Information pertaining to more than one evaluation factor should be repeated in the each section for each factor.

Upload Completion & Deadline: Interested parties shall submit responses no later than the date specified on the solicitation document. The time & date of proposal receipt will be the upload completion / delivery time & date recorded within DOD SAFE site. Do not assume that electronic submission will occur instantaneously. Large files (e.g. 10MB or more) will take some time to upload. Offerors should time their upload effort with prudence by not waiting until the last few minutes—this will allow for unexpected delays in the transmittal process. Offerors are encouraged to keep a copy of the upload confirmation for their record. Submissions after the deadline will be considered late and will be processed in accordance with FAR 15.208.

Electronic Files: Files shall be in their native format (i.e. doc, xls, ppt, etc.), or if in pdf format, shall be in searchable text. Text and graphics portfolios of the electronic copies shall be in a format readable by Microsoft Office or Adobe applications. Data submitted in a spreadsheet format shall be readable by MS Excel (all cells and formulas should be unlocked).

Any information, presented in a proposal that the Offeror wants safeguarded from disclosure to other parties must be identified and labeled in accordance with the requirements of Provision “FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors – Competitive Acquisition (Jan 2017),” subparagraph (e). The Government will endeavor to honor the restrictions against release requested by Offerors, to the extent permitted under United States law and regulations.

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

52.204-7 System for Award Management OCT 2018 52.204-16 Commercial and Government Entity Code Reporting AUG 2020 52.204-18 Commercial and Government Entity Code Maintenance AUG 2020 52.215-1 Instructions to Offerors--Competitive Acquisition NOV 2021 52.222-56 Certification Regarding Trafficking in Persons Compliance

Plan.

OCT 2020

52.232-13 Notice Of Progress Payments APR 1984 252.204-7019 Notice of NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Requirements MAR 2022 252.215-7008 Only One Offer JUL 2019

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT (APR 1984)

The Government contemplates award of a FIRM FIXED PRICE contract resulting from this solicitation.

(End of provision)

52.233-2 SERVICE OF PROTEST (SEP 2006)

(a) Protests, as defined in section 33.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, that are filed directly with an agency, and copies of any protests that are filed with the Government Accountability Office (GAO), shall be served on the Contracting Officer (addressed as follows) by obtaining written and dated acknowledgment of receipt from:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ATTN: Christopher Brackett Contracting Division (CENAU-CT) Konrad Adenauer Ring 39 65187 Wiesbaden, Germany

(b) The copy of any protest shall be received in the office designated above within one day of filing a protest with the GAO.

52.236-27 SITE VISIT (CONSTRUCTION) (FEB 1995) – ALTERNATE I (FEB 1995)

(a) The clauses at 52.236-2, Differing Site Conditions, and 52.236-3, Site Investigations and Conditions Affecting the Work, will be included in any contract awarded as a result of this solicitation. Accordingly, offerors or quoters are urged and expected to inspect the site where the work will be performed.

(b) An organized site visit has been scheduled for--

Thursday, 08 September 2022 at 1000 HRS local time.

(c) Participants will meet at--

All site visit attendees will wait at the main gate parking lot until security forces arrive to escort the entire group to each facility. The site visit will begin promptly at 1000 HRS and everyone will depart exactly at 1005 HRS. Security forces will not wait for lait contractors.

Please reference the project map attacment for the project location.

Included with this solicitation is an attachment (ASTGR Access Request). All interested contractors who are planning on attending the site visit, shall fill out and return the attached document by no later than Tuesday, 23 August 2022 at 1000 HRS Central European Summer Time to Bjorn Hale at bjorn.hale@usace.army.mil.

52.252-1 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (FEB 1998)

This solicitation incorporates one or more solicitation provisions by reference, with the same force and effect as if they were given in full text. Upon request, the Contracting Officer will make their full text available. The offeror is cautioned that the listed provisions may include blocks that must be completed by the offeror and submitted with its quotation or offer. In lieu of submitting the full text of those provisions, the offeror may identify the provision by paragraph identifier and provide the appropriate information with its quotation or offer. Also, the full text of a solicitation provision may be accessed electronically at this/these address(es):

https://www.acquisition.gov/browse/index/far http://farsite.hill.af.mil/

52.252-5 AUTHORIZED DEVIATIONS IN PROVISIONS (NOV 2020)

(a) The use in this solicitation of any Federal Acquisition Regulation (48 CFR Chapter 1) provision with an authorized deviation is indicated by the addition of"(DEVIATION)" after the date of the provision.

(b) The use in this solicitation of any Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (48 CFR Chapter 2) provision with an authorized deviation is indicated by the addition of "(DEVIATION)" after the name of the regulation.

https://www.acquisition.gov/browse/index/far http://farsite.hill.af.mil/

Section 00 22 00 - Supplementary Instructions

SUBMISSION & EVALUATION INFO

SECTION 00112 - PROCEDURES FOR SUBMITTAL OF OFFERS AND PROPOSAL EVALUATION

CRITERIA

1. Overview.

1.1. The intent of this solicitation is to select one contractor for a design-build project for the construction of facility infrastructure in Stefanovikeio, Greece. The project consists of the installation of a new fiber optic communications network between various buildings on the installation (Please reference the statement of work for more details). The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein, and award a firm fixed price contract to the responsible offeror, whose proposal conforms with all the terms and conditions of the solicitation and whose proposal is determined to represent the overall best value to the Government, all factors considered.

1.2. The basis of award is the Tradeoff Process. Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the factors below, listed in relative order of importance: past performance will be more important than management approach. All evaluation factors, other than cost or price, when combined are considered approximately equal to cost or price. The Contracting Officer will award a firm fixed price contract to the responsible offeror whom the Source Selection Authority determines conforms to the solicitation, whose price is fair and reasonable, and who offers the best overall value to the Government, all factors considered. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers.

2. Submittal of offers.

2.1. Offerors submitting proposals for this project should limit submissions to data essential for evaluation of proposals so that a minimum of time and monies will have been expended in preparing information required herein. However, in order to be effectively and equitably evaluated, the proposals must include information sufficiently detailed to clearly describe the offeror's capability for successfully completing the solicited action. Requirements stated in this Request for Proposal (RFP) are minimums. Proposals should follow in the order of sequence set forth in the RFP. Information provided out of sequence, or in the wrong section of the proposal, may not be evaluated and may result in the Offerors disqualification from award. Offerors are cautioned to put forth their best efforts, and to furnish all information clearly to allow the Government to determine their performance capability. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but rather should demonstrate convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet the RFP requirements.

2.2. Offerors shall submit their proposals to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers electronically through the DoD

SAFE website (https://safe.apps.mil/about.php). Please see the complete electronic proposal submission instructions within the solicitation (Section 00 21 00 – Instructions).

2.3. Offerors are required to submit a proposal consisting of the information identified in paragraphs 2.4 and

2.5 below. All proposal materials shall be submitted with a table of contents and clear divide between each section. The sections should parallel the submission requirements identified herein.

2.4. Volume I shall include the following information:

Volume I: Factor I – Past Performance Volume I: Factor II – Management Approach https://safe.apps.mil/about.php

2.5. Volume II shall be submitted in a separate electronic document and include the following information:

Volume II: Tab A – Standard Form 1442 Volume II: Tab B – Joint Venture Agreement (if applicable) Volume II: Tab C – Bank Letter of Assurance (BLA), Bank Letter of Guaranty (BLG), Bonds, Insurance and other Sureties, and Financial Information Volume II: Tab D – Pre-Award Information

3. Proposal Evaluation Process.

3.1. A Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) comprised of representatives of the Corps of Engineers personnel will evaluate the proposals. Offerors are advised that the technical evaluation and rating of proposals will be conducted in strict confidence. Technical proposals will be reviewed and rated without knowledge of the price offered. The number and identities of offerors are not revealed to anyone who is not involved in the evaluation and award process or to other offerors. Proposals will be evaluated based on the factors described herein, and the basis of award is the Tradeoff Process.

3.2. The evaluation process essentially consists of four parts: proposal compliance review and responsibility determination, technical evaluation, price evaluation, and cost/technical trade-off analysis.

Proposal Compliance Review: This is an initial review to ensure that all required forms and certifications are complete and that both a technical and price proposal were received.

Technical Evaluation: The SSEB will evaluate and rate the proposals against the RFP requirements.

The management approach will be rated using an adjectival-based system. Past performance will be rated based on recency/relevancy and confidence.

Price Evaluation: The SSEB and Contracting Officer/SSA will evaluate price proposals independent of the technical evaluation. The SSEB will not have access to price information until completion of the technical evaluation.

Cost/Technical Trade-off Analysis: After all above evaluations are complete, the Contracting

Officer/SSA will compare the relative advantages and disadvantages of technical proposals and compare prices. The Source Selection Authority (SSA) will then consider all factors to select the proposal offering the best value to the Government.

4. Proposal Information and Related Evaluation Factors.

4.1. Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the factors below, listed in relative order of importance:

past performance will be more important than management approach. All evaluation factors, other than cost or price, when combined are considered approximately equal to cost or price. Offerors are reminded to include their best technical and price terms in their initial offer and not to automatically assume that they will have an opportunity to participate in discussions or be asked to submit a revised offer. The Government may make award of a conforming proposal without discussions, if deemed to be within the best interest of the Government.

4.2. Volume I – Factor I – Past Performance 1st

4.3. Volume I- Factor II – Management Approach 2nd

4.4. Volume II - Price and Pro Forma Information

Tab A Standard Form 1442 and Price Breakout Schedule Not Rated

Tab B Joint Venture Agreements Not Rated

Tab C Bank Letter of Assurance (BLA), Bank Letter of Guaranty Not Rated

(BLG), Bonds, Insurance and other Sureties, and Financial Information

Tab D Pre-Award Information Not Rated

4.5. Ratings

Evaluators will apply the adjectival rating for the definition that most closely matches the evaluation.

Table 1

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Rating Definition

Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Table 2

Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Definition

Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Limited Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence

No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

NOTE: During the best value trade-off process, Offerors whose proposals receive a satisfactory confidence or substantial confidence rating for this factor may be considered more favorably than an Offeror with a neutral confidence rating.

Table 3 Technical Assessment Ratings

Adjectival Rating Definition

Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Acceptable

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

Table 4

Technical Risk Descriptions Adjectival Rating Definition

Low

Proposal may contain weakness(es) which have little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance.

Normal contractor efforts and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Moderate

Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which may potentially cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties.

High

Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which is likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Is unlikely to overcome any difficulties, even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.

Unacceptable Proposal contains a material failure or a combination of significant weaknesses that increases the risk of unsuccessful performance to an unacceptable level.

4.6. Definitions

Deficiency. A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. See FAR 15.001.

Strength. An aspect of an offerors’ proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Significant Strength. An aspect of an offerors’ proposal that has appreciable merit or appreciably exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be appreciably advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See

FAR 15.001.

Significant Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

Uncertainty. Any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal for which the intent of the offeror is unclear (e.g., more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating that there may have been an error, omission or mistake).

Clarification. Limited exchanges between the Government and offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated. See FAR 15.306(a)(1).

Adverse Past Performance. Past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating from sources where the information is from other than formal rating systems such as “PPIRS” or

“FAPIIS.”

Betterment. Any component, feature, or system that exceeds the minimum requirements stated in the

Request for Proposal and is included in the proposed price.

5. Volume I – Factor I – Past Performance

5.1. Submission Requirements:

Provide descriptions a maximum of three (3) substantially complete or completed by the Offeror or by one of its team members (with who the Offeror has a commitment letter as discussed below. In the case of an Offeror that is a joint venture (JV), the contract must have been awarded to at least one member of the JV as the prime contractor or to a team member, with a commitment letter, as the prime contractor. In the case of any proposal that relies on a teaming arrangement for the projects submitted, the contract must have been awarded to that team member as the prime. Past performance of affiliates will only be considered if the work performed by the affiliate is relevant to this solicitation and if there is a commitment letter from the affiliate that they will perform similar work for this project. The scope of the affiliate’s involvement must be clearly laid out .

The Offeror, a JV member, or any team member for which projects are submitted must have performed as the prime contractor on the project and the project must have been completed within the last five (5) years or must be substantially complete (from the solicitation issue date). Projects completed more than five (5) years before the solicitation issue date may be submitted, however, they will be considered less relevant. Projects are considered substantially complete at 75% completion, if enough work has been performed such that it demonstrates the ability to successfully complete all phases of the project. An indefinite delivery indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract may be submitted only if a single task order is considered similar in scope. Task orders may not be combined for them to be considered similar.

For a project to be considered relevant, it must be similar in size and scope to the type of project being solicited.

Projects considered similar in size should be a minimum of €250,000.00.

Projects considered similar in scope to this project should include the following:

• Projects that include new utilities infrastructure; for example, installing new fiber optic cable, providing new ducts, and providing connections to facilities.

• Projects that demonstrate working in the European Union.

• Projects that demonstrate successful completion of the design build project delivery method.

NOTE: Design bid build may be submitted; however, they may be considered less relevant than design build projects.

The prime contractor on the project must have self-performed at least 15% of the cost of the contract, not including the cost of materials, with its own employees to be considered similar.

Additional consideration may be given for projects that contain the following features:

• Demonstrated experience in successfully completing design build projects in Greece.

• Demonstrated experience in successfully completing design build projects for the Greek

Government on host nation military installations.

• Demonstrated successful completion of design build projects for the United States Government on U.S. military installations.

The following information shall be provided for each project:

• Project title, location, and contract number/unique identifier

• Current percentage of construction complete and the date it was or will be complete. For projects that are not 75% complete, provide description of work remaining to be completed.

• Scope of the project, to include purpose/use of facility.

• Size of the project, differentiate square footage of new construction versus renovation if project includes both.

• Type and percentage of work that was self-performed.

• Whether the project involved new construction, renovation, or both. Clearly delineate square footage for construction and renovation.

• Whether the project was completed for the United States Department of Defense.

For this factor, also include any information that supports past performance on these projects. Any of this information that is submitted shall clearly identify the submitted project(s) to which it pertains. A sample past performance questionnaire is attached. If used, the past performance questionnaire must be submitted by the Offeror with the proposal submission and not sent directly to the agency by the reference. For each project, the Offeror may provide information on problems encountered on the identified contracts and the Offeror’s respective corrective action.

For each project under factor I, offerors shall include a completed Contractor’s Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) record or a completed Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaire Form (PPQ) if available. If available, a completed record from the CPARS will be accepted for evaluation for this factor. An interim completed CPARS rating will be considered if a final record is not available. If a completed CPARS record is not available at all, Offerors shall complete and provide a PPQ Form, provided as an RFP attachment.

PPQ Instructions: The offeror shall complete Blocks 1-4 of the provided PPQ and have the Contracting Activity and the Technical Representative responsible for the past/current contract complete the remainder of the PPQ. Offeror shall ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs should be submitted with the proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires.

Team Arrangements: As described in FAR Subpart 9.6, it is the Government’s policy to recognize the integrity and validity of contractor team arrangements. Please refer to section 7.2 with respect to submission requirements for a teaming arrangement to be recognized for purposes of source selection evaluation and the application of non-price factors.

In the case of prime-sub teams, work with affiliates or other teaming partners, offerors are reminded that the offeror is the prime contractor and remains fully responsible for contract performance, regardless of any team arrangement between the prime contractor and third parties. Consistent with FAR 9.104-4, the Government may consider the responsibility of key subcontractors, affiliates, or other team members when it may adversely affect the prospective prime contractor’s responsibility or when it is in the Government’s interest to do so. Any subcontract(s) or other teaming agreements may not deviate from the substantive provisions of the required commitment letters (RFP Attachment 4).

The failure of the offeror to perform with one or more committed subcontractors, team members or affiliates may be grounds for termination for default. There can be no substitution of committed subcontractors, team members or affiliates except that, the Government may (in its sole discretion and without any obligation whatsoever), at the request of the prime, permit the substitution of a firm with equivalent or greater capability a firm that was proposed with a Commitment Letter in the proposal.

Note: Only a Contracting Officer can approve such a change after contract award.

5.2. Evaluation Criteria:

The SSEB will evaluate the relevancy of recent past performance identified in the proposal in response to paragraph 5.1 above. By using the criteria identified above, the SSEB will determine how relevant each past project is when compared to the scope, size, and magnitude of effort and complexities of the solicited projects scope of work. A relevancy assessment will be made on each submitted project using the past performance relevancy ratings table above.

The SSEB will next review how well the Offeror performed on those projects. The Government reserves the right to check any or all citied references to verify supplied information and to assess owner satisfaction. The Government also reserves the right to not contract the provided references. In addition to the information submitted by the Offeror, the Government reserves the right to review any other sources of relevant information for evaluating past performance, including projects other than those submitted by the Offeror. The Government will, at a minimum, review past performance information retrieved through the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/Unique Entity Identifier numbers. Other sources may, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved from inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror.

The SSEB will review all past performance information collected for the offeror. The SSEB will determine the quality of the offeror’s performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information and incorporate this information into the performance confidence assessment. The SSEB will assign a final, overall performance confidence rating, using the ratings in the performance confidence assessment table above, based on the SSEB’s assessment of (1) the degree of the Offeror’s recent, relevant past performance, and (2) how well the Offeror performed that on those relevant projects.

6. Volume I – Factor II – Technical Approach

6.1. Submission Requirements:

Provide a narrative that describes the offeror’s technical approach for executing the design build contract per the detailed requirements herein. Clearly and concisely describe the offeror’s design build team, and how members of the team, including sub-contractors (if applicable), will work collaboratively to ensure timely, quality completion of the project. The technical approach shall include the following:

o The narrative shall address the Offeror’s criteria for the selection of the designer of record (architect engineer) and their qualifications to design projects in Greece.

o The narrative shall address the Offeror’s knowledge of requirements and constraints applicable to design and construction in Greece and regionally near the project location, to include the Offeror’s knowledge of:

Registration requirements to perform construction in Greece Obtaining base access in Greece Local permitting requirements for underground utilities work and construction of this project.

Ability to coordinate independently with the host nation o Manpower required to construct the project (include the make-up of teams by trade), and a sub-contracting plan that specifies which technical aspects the Offeror plans to self-perform as the prime contractor and which tasks the sub-contractor(s) will perform. Offeror’s plan to retain and manage sub-contractors and their plan to obtain host nation materials and supplies.

o The Offeror’s safety and quality control processes.

o The three (3) main areas of risk identified by the Offeror, along with the plan to mitigate the risks.

NOTE: There is a page limit of fifteen (15), 8.5” x 11” pages, using a minimum font size of 11 and a minimum margin of one-half inch on all sides, for the Management Approach factor. If the page limit is exceeded, only the first fifteen (15) pages will be read and evaluated.

6.2. Evaluation Criteria:

The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses, and any deficiencies in the proposal. The

Government will evaluate the offeror’s understanding of the design build process. Offerors are encouraged to tailor their proposal to demonstrate their approach for successfully completing the solicited design build project, as well as how they will manage the overall project.

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s understanding of the design process and the roles of the designers of record and construction firm. The evaluation will be based on how well the offeror demonstrates their organizational (i.e., the structure and staffing) ability to execute design build projects, to include the integration of the design and construction firms during design and construction.

Proposals demonstrating that construction personnel will be actively involved in the design process may be viewed more favorably by the SSEB. The Government will evaluate the role of the designer in maintaining design integrity throughout the process, including its key roles during construction.

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s capabilities and understanding of the contractually required quality control processes for both design and construction, as well as the strength of the offeror’s proposed approach to control and track revisions to the design. The Government places value upon continued participation by the designers of record during the construction quality control process.

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s understanding and capabilities to perform design build construction projects in Greece, to include coordination with host nation authorities. The Government will evaluate if the offeror demonstrated thorough understanding of the certification and registration requirements for companies in Greece and the ability to meet the requirements, along with the demonstrated ability to communicate in English.

7. Volume 2 - Price and Proforma Information

7.1. Tab A - Standard Form 1442 and Proposal Price Breakout Schedule.

Submission Requirements:

The offeror shall complete and submit Standard Form 1442 and Section 00010, Proposal Price Breakout Schedule. Both of these forms are included in Section 00010 of this solicitation.

Evaluation:

The price will be evaluated on base proposal plus all options. The price will be evaluated by the SSEB and Contracting Officer/SSA for fair and reasonableness through the use of a price analysis.

Price will also be checked for unbalancing of line items. Offerors are cautioned to distribute costs appropriately.

7.2. Tab B – Joint Venture

If the Offeror listed in Block 14 is a joint venture (JV), then a signed JV agreement must be submitted with the proposal and the Offeror shall be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) as a legal entity separate from the individual joint venture members . However, each member of the JV must submit its own Unique Entity Identifier (formally DUNS number) with the proposal.

Projects performed by contractors than the Offeror, such as teaming partners, affiliates or subcontractors, may be evaluated for past performance; however, Commitment Letters must be provided as discussed below:

JV agreements shall include the following:

1. A copy of their JV agreement in English, signed by all parties of the JV.

2. A detailed statement outlining the following in terms of percentages, where appropriate.

a. The relationship of the JV parties in terms of business ownership, capital contribution, and profit distribution or loss sharing.

b. The management approach of the JV in terms of who will conduct, direct, supervise and control the project and have custody and control of the assets of the JV and perform the duties necessary to complete the work.

c. The structure of the JV and decision-ranking responsibilities of the JV parties in terms of who will control the manner and method of performance of the work.

d. Identification of the key personnel having authority to legally bind the JV to subcontracts and state who will provide or contract for the labor and materials for the

JV.

e. Identification of party maintaining the JV bank accounts for the payment of all expenses and the deposits of all receipts, keep the books and records, and pay applicable taxes for the JV.

f. Identification of party furnishing the facilities, such as office supplies and telephone service.

g. Identification of party having overall control of the JV.

3. Other sections of the proposal shall identify, where appropriate, whether key personnel are employees of the individual JV parties and identify the party or hired as employees of the JV.

4. A statement in the agreement that each member of the JV will be jointly and severally liable for any obligations under the contract.

Teaming Arrangements: If an offeror wishes to be credited with the past performance of a firm other than the offeror such as a subcontractor, team member, or affiliate (defined in FAR 2.101), a Letter of Commitment signed by authorized representatives of the offeror and by authorized representatives of the non-offeror firm must be submitted with the proposal. A sample for such Commitment Letters is provided as an attachment (Attachment 4). The signatures and substantive terms of these sample commitments are required for consideration of any teaming arrangement for evaluation purposes.

Compliance Review:

This information will be used for the purpose of completing a compliance review.

7.3. Tab C – Bank Letter of Assurance (BLA), Bank Letter of Guaranty (BLG), Bonds, Insurance and other

Sureties, and Financial Information

40 U.S.C. Chapter 31, Sub-Chapter III, Bonds (formerly known as the Miller Act) and FAR 28.102 require a 100% performance and payment bonds issued by an acceptable corporate surety for any construction contact exceeding $150,000. This requirement may be waived, however, by the Contracting Officer for work performed in foreign countries if it is found that it is impracticable for the contractor to furnish such bond.

This contract will be performed in a country outside the United States, and the Contracting Officer has found that it is impracticable for many otherwise eligible firms to…