Solicitation_Perimeter_Security_Fence.pdf

This project consists of the construction of a Perimeter Security Fence (chain link) and Gates surrounding 94th Brigade, 15th Brigade and Camp Arif jan, Kuw ait. The contractor shall provide all management, administration, quality control, labor, transportation, equipment, materials, vehicles, heavy equipment, supplies and other items as necessary to perform the services contained in the Scope of Work.

Magnitude of Projects: Betw een $5,000,000 and $10,000,000. NOTE: (a) The Government reserves the right to incorporate the proposal into the contract and distribute the proposal as deemed necessary. Any deviations from the proposal must be approved by the Contracting Officer; (b) The contractor is required to provide all documentation requested in this solicitation to include Defense Base Act (DBA) Insurance after contract aw ard and prior to Notice to Proceed (NTP); (c) Performance and Payment Bonds (10%) are required in accordance w ith clause 52.228-15.

DIANE E DELATHOUDER 540 665 6558

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

10-Jan-2018

(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 ________446 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 __________2 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specified in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________09 Feb 2018 (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 X is, 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 _______120 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

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS-CETAM-CT

MIDDLE EAST DISTRICT, CETAM-CT

PO BOX 2250

WINCHESTER VA 22604-1450

W912ER

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

04:00 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:

W912ER-17-R-0021 82

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

W912ER-17-R-0021

Section 00 11 00 - Standard Form (SF) 1442 and CLIN Schedule

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0001 1 Job

Mobilization and Demobilization

FFP

Mobilization and Demobilization in accordance with the contract documents.

FOB: Destination

NET AMT

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0002 1 Job

Construct Fence Alignment A

FFP

Construct Fence Alignment A in accordance with the contract documents.

FOB: Destination

NET AMT

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0003 1 Job Install Barbed Tape Along Alignment A

FFP

Install Barbed Tape Along Alignment A in accordance with the contract documents.

0004 1 Job Construct Fence Alignment B

FFP

Construct Fence Alignment B in accordance with the contract documents.

0005 1 Job Install Barbed Tape Along Alignment B

FFP

Install Barbed Tape Along Alignment B in accordance with the contract

0006 1 Job Construct Fence Alignment C

FFP

Construct Fence Alignment C in accordance with the contract documents.

0007 1 Job Install Barbed Tape Along Alignment C

FFP

Install Barbed Tape Along Alignment C in accordance with the contract

0008 1 Job Construct Fence Alignment D

FFP

Construct Fence Alignment D in accordance with the contract documents.

0009 1 Job Install Barbed Tape Along Alignment D

FFP

Install Barbed Tape Along Alignment D in accordance with the contract

0010 1 Job OPTION Option 1- Perform EarthWork/Move Berms

FFP

Option 1- Perform EarthWork/Move Berms in accordance with the contract documnets.

0011 1 Job OPTION Option 2 - Install Gate(s) Along Fence

FFP

Option 2 - Install Gate(s) Along Fence Alignments in accordance with the contract

Section 00 21 00 - Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Offerors

PROPOSAL CHECKLIST

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

A. GENERAL INFORMATION

This solicitation is for a Firm-Fixed-Price contract for construction services in Kuwait using a single step design-bid-build procurement process. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Transatlantic Middle East District (TAM), has a requirement from the Kuwaiti Armed Forces to construct a perimeter security fence and gates surrounding 94th Brigade, 15th Brigade and Camp Arifjan, Kuwait. The project will be constructed in accordance with current building codes, safety, and security standards.

Magnitude of Construction: The estimated cost of this construction project is between $5,000,000 and $10,000,000.

The Primary North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code is 238990 (All Other Specialty Trade Contractors) with a small business size of $15 million.

System for Award Management (SAM). Contractors (including Joint Venture entities) shall be registered in SAM and determined to be responsible prior to Award. For more information, see the SAM website at https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/. Please ensure that NAICS code 238990 – All Other Specialty Trade Contractors is listed in your SAM registration.

B. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, CONTENT, AND FORMAT

The Government will not reimburse any costs incurred or associated with preparation and submission of any responses to this solicitation. Oral explanations or instructions to offerors are not binding. Any information given to an offeror which impacts the solicitation will be given in the form of a written amendment to the solicitation.

Any and all amendments to the solicitation will be issued electronically at the Federal Business Opportunities website (www.fbo.gov). It is an offeror’s responsibility to continuously check for any amendments to this solicitation and acknowledge any and all amendments in its proposal submission.

Offerors shall not modify the terms and conditions of the solicitation in either the technical or price proposal or add conditions or qualifications to their offers. Should an offeror include terms and conditions that conflict with the terms and conditions of the solicitation, the offeror may be determined to be ineligible for award. Any questions related to specific terms and conditions contained within the solicitation shall be raised by the offeror and resolved prior to the closing date for receipt of proposals.

References to “confidential” projects cannot be submitted to demonstrate capability unless all of the information required for evaluation as specified herein can be provided to the Government as part of an offeror’s technical proposal. Offerors that include information in their proposals that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes, shall clearly mark their proposals in accordance with the instructions at FAR clause 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors-Competitive Acquisition, paragraph (e), Restriction on Disclosure and Use of Data.

Use of the words “will”, “shall”, or “must” indicates a mandatory requirement for which failure to comply, at the time and date for submission of proposals, shall result in an offeror’s proposal being disqualified, unless the Government determined to conduct discussions in accordance with FAR 15.306, thereby providing a means by which appropriate corrections by the offeror(s) involved can be made. Failure to comply with non-pricing or pricing requirements that are annotated with the words “should” or “may” can result in a lowering of an offeror’s non-pricing ratings, and may have a significant effect upon an offeror being selected for the contract award. Time periods, if stated as a number of days, are calendar days unless otherwise specified.

1. PROPOSAL CONTENT

Offerors are required to submit proposals with at least the minimum content specified herein. A proposal without the minimum content may result in a determination that the proposal is unacceptable. The Government will not make assumptions concerning intent, capabilities, or experiences. Clear identification of proposal details shall be the sole responsibility of an offeror.

All information intended to be evaluated as part of the technical proposal shall be submitted within the technical proposal. Do not include references to material or information not found within the technical proposal. Referencing information not found within the qualification proposal could lead to an offeror’s proposal being determined unacceptable if materially incomplete in any aspect.

a. COVER PAGE: A cover page shall appear at the beginning of each volume and, at a minimum, shall consist of the following information:

i. Solicitation number

ii. Offeror’s name, physical mailing addresses, telephone number, and email address of the official having the authority to bind the offeror contractually.

iii. Offeror’s DUNS Number, CAGE Code, and Tax Identification Number (TIN)

b. TABLE OF CONTENTS: A table of contents shall be placed in each volume and shall identify major areas by title, page numbers, and volume location.

c. VOLUME I TECHNICAL PROPOSAL: The information required within an offeror’s technical proposal is described under Basis of Award. Do not submit pricing information with the technical proposal.

i. Factor 1: Technical Approach

ii. Factor 2: Past Performance

iii. Factor 3: Preliminary Schedule

iv. Factor 4: Financial Surety

v. Subcontractor Letters of Commitment, where applicable.

vi. Completed Representation and Certifications (Section 00 45 00).

vii. Completed Corporate Certificate/Authority to Bind Partnership (Attachment A)

__If the offeror is a corporation, completed Corporate Certificate; OR

__If the offeror is a partnership, completed Authority to Bind Partnership and a copy of the Partnership

Agreement; OR

__If the offeror is a joint venture (JV), completed Corporate Certificate for each member of the joint venture and a copy of the Joint Venture Agreement.

__Proof of ability to obtain bonds, Irrevocable Letter of Commitment (ILC) or other surety in accordance with FAR Part 28.

d. VOLUME II PRICE PROPOSAL: The information required within an offeror’s price proposal is described under the price evaluation, Factor 5, Price. Within an offeror’s price proposal, the following shall also be submitted:

i. Signed Solicitation, Offer, and Award (SF 1442) with blocks 14-20c completed, including acknowledgment of all amendments.

ii. Completed SF 1442, Section 00 11 00, CLIN Schedule.

iii. Completed Supplemental (Attachment F) Price Breakdown and Cost breakdown sheet in an Excel format.

Ensure figures and totals match Section 00 11 00, CLIN Schedule.

iv. Bid Guarantee in accordance with FAR Clause 52.228-1

Offerors shall verify that the information for all forms submitted is current, correct, and complete, including names of points of contact, email addresses, and telephone numbers.

The Government will not evaluate any material that exceeds the page limits specified within each evaluation factor. Elaborately prepared proposals are not required, and any material in excess of what is requested, such as corporate marketing information, will not be considered.

Failing to submit or completely fill out the solicitation attachments found at Appendix D may result in a determination that the proposal is unacceptable. Therefore, offerors are urged to follow instructions and raise questions through inquiries if instructions are not understood.

2. PROPOSAL FORMAT

a. Proposals must be typed and submitted in English. Proposals submitted in a language other than English are unacceptable. Letters of Commitment, partnership agreements or joint venture agreements, if not written in English, must be accompanied by an English translated copy with a signed statement, in English, by an authorized representative who can bind the entity of each JV partner that the English translation is true and correct.

b. A JV is defined as follows: a legal business entity formed between two or more companies (parties) to undertake the performance activities of a contract together. This does not include other arrangements such as “teaming agreements” or “strategic alliance”, which are not recognized as bona fide joint ventures for the purposes of this solicitation.

c. Offerors proposing as joint ventures shall provide evidence that the JV as a legal entity has been duly formed. JV’s shall include a copy of the legal JV agreement signed by an authorized officer from each of the firms comprising the JV with the chief executive of each entity identified. The Government will not evaluate the capability of any contractors that are not included in the JV agreement.

d. If submitting a proposal as a JV, the experience, and past performance of each of the JV partners can be submitted for the JV entity. The experience for each JV partner will be considered the experience of the JV entity. Page and project form limits apply to the JV as a whole.

e. An offeror’s proposal must include an (1) original and two (2) copies of both volumes along with one (1) CD which must contain all files in an Adobe portable document format (PDF). The original and each copy must be individually bound, typically in a standard three ring binder or similar book with tabs or separators dividing each of the sections noted above.

f. An offeror’s technical proposal (including representation and certification information) and price proposal must be submitted as two separate volumes (PDF files) as identified in the Proposal Content. Page limits, if stipulated must be adhered to. The Government will not evaluate any material that exceeds the page limits specified herein. Proposals shall be sized to print on 8 1/2” x 11” paper (11” X 17” for drawings).

Margins shall be no smaller than a half inch (1/2”), font face shall be Times New Roman or Arial, and font size shall be no smaller than 10 point font. Page is defined as a single sheet of paper with text on both sides. Pages furnished for organizational purposes only, such as a cover page or a table of contents, are not included in the page limitation. Corporate certificates, JV agreements, partnership agreements and letters of commitment are also not included in the page limitations.

Offerors shall place the following notification on the bottom of each page of their proposal: Source Selection Information - See FAR 2.101 and 3.104. Do not disclose any source selection information to any unauthorized person.”

g. All information must be confined to the appropriate volume. In order to reduce proposal size, the offeror must confine the proposal to required information sufficient to provide an adequate basis for evaluation. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details, in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of the proposal. Each volume of the proposal must contain a table of contents, summary section with a brief abstract of the volume, and the narrative discussion. Proprietary information must be clearly marked.

h. All information must be confined to the appropriate volume. In order to reduce proposal size, the offeror must confine the proposal to required information sufficient to provide an adequate basis for evaluation. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details, in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of the proposal. Each volume of the proposal must contain a table of contents, summary section with a brief abstract of the volume, and the narrative discussion. Proprietary information must be clearly marked.

C. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

Electronic proposals (facsimile, email etc.) are not permitted unless otherwise requested by the Contracting Officer.

In the event that electronic proposals are requested, it is an offeror’s responsibility to ensure its proposal is received by the Government emailing system by the date and time of the proposal deadline, e.g., undeliverable messages due to an offeror’s proposal size is not the responsibility of the Government.

Proposals are due to the following addresses no later than the specified date and time in Block 13 of the SF1442 and may be delivered via U.S. Mail, Commercial Carrier (FedEx, UPS, etc.) or deliver by hand:

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

or

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

MIDDLE EAST DISTRICT - CETAM-CT-EA MIDDLE EAST DISTRICT - CETAM-CT-EA

ATTN: DIANE DELATHOUDER/W912ER-17-

R-0021

ATTN: DIANE DELATHOUDER/W912ER-17-R-

201 PRINCE FREDERICK DRIVE 340 N. PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD, UNIT 2250

WINCHESTER, VA 22602 WINCHESTER, VA 22604

Your proposal is due no later than 09 February 2018, 4:00PM EST, Winchester, VA to the above address.

Late Proposals: Any proposal, modification, or revision received by the Government after the exact time specified for receipt of offers is “late” and will not be considered unless it is received before award is made, the Contracting Officer determines that accepting the late offer would not unduly delay the acquisition, and –

1) if it was transmitted through an electronic commerce method authorized by the solicitation, and it was received at the initial point of entry to the Government infrastructure not later than 4:00 p.m. one working day prior to the date specified for receipt of proposals; or

2) there is acceptable evidence to establish that it was received at the Government installation designated for receipt of offers and was under the Government's control prior to the time set for receipt of offers; or

3) it is the only proposal received. However, a late modification of an otherwise successful proposal that makes its terms more favorable to the Government will be considered at any time it is received and may be accepted.

D. SOLICITATION INQUIRIES

1. All inquiries regarding this solicitation are to be submitted via Bidder Inquiry. Telephone and email inquiries will not be accepted. Bidder Inquiry is a web-based program that allows bidders to post questions regarding the solicitation and view all questions by other bidders and responses by USACE. Bidder Inquiry can be accessed through ProjNet at https://www.projnet.org/projnet/.

a. Offerors shall only submit one question per inquiry. All inquiries containing multiple questions will be rejected.

b. Offerors will receive an acknowledgement of their question(s) via email, followed by an answer to their question(s) after it has been processed by our technical team. Offerors may view all bidder inquiries through ProjNet.

c. Inquiries must be submitted at least seven (7) calendar days prior to the proposal due date. Offerors will not be able to submit inquiries after this date as the ProjNet system must be shut down.

2. To submit and review bid inquiries, prospective offerors will need to use the Bidder Inquiry Key presented below and follow the instructions listed below the key for access.

The Bidder Inquiry Key is: C342NR-V2R4Y4

3. Specific Instructions for ProjNet Bid Inquiry Access:

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

b. Identify the Agency as USACE.

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

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

e. Click Continue. A page will then open saying that a user account was not found and will ask you to create one using the provided form.

f. 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.

g. Click Add User. Once this is completed, you are now registered within ProjNet and are currently logged into the system.

4. Submit questions or review questions and answers. A bidder who submits a question will receive an automated email notification that their question has been received. When an answer is posted to a question, the question and answer is then available for all other bidders to review.

5. For specific step-by-step for POSTING YOUR INQUIRIES, see the Reference link on the Contract Viewer.

6. For questions about the ProjNet-®, please contact the Call Center help desk toll free at 1-800-428-HELP, which operates from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM (Eastern US time zone). ProjNet-® questions can also be emailed to the helpdesk at staff@rcesupport.com.

7. Pre-proposal Conference/Site Visit. A pre-proposal conference or site visit may be conducted during request for proposal period. The proposed date for the site visit will be conducted two weeks after the project has been advertised. Refer to Site Visit Clause 52.236-27.

E. BASIS OF AWARD

1. Subject to the provisions contained herein, the Government will evaluate technical or non-price proposals to determine offerors who are responsible in accordance with FAR Subpart 9.1; who are responsive to the solicitation requirements; and whose proposal represents the best value to the Government using the Trade-Off process described in FAR Subpart 15.101-1. The Trade-off (Best Value) process will be used to determine which proposal offers the greatest value to the Government based on a price/technical trade-off. The resulting contract award will be a firm-fixed priced contract to the successful offeror.

2. The technical evaluation team, using reasoned judgment, shall evaluate qualification proposals by identifying significant strengths, strengths, significant weaknesses, weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in each offeror’s proposal and assigning a combined technical/risk rating.

Definitions

Significant Strength is an aspect of an offeror's 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.

Strength is an aspect of an offeror's 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 Weakness is a flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Weakness is a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Uncertainty is any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal for which the intent of the offer 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).

Deficiency is 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.

A risk as it pertains to source selection is the potential for unsuccessful contract performance. The consideration of risk assesses the degree to which an offeror’s proposed approach to achieving the technical factor or subfactor may involve risk of disruption of schedule, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

Completeness: To be complete, the offeror must provide all data that is requested and necessary to evaluate the price. The Government will assess the extent to which the proposed prices comply with the content and format requirements set forth in this solicitation.

Reasonableness: The offeror’s proposal is evaluated through price analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.305(a)(1). For price to be reasonable, it must represent a price that provides best value to the Government when consideration is given to prices in the market (market conditions may be evidenced by other competitive proposals), technical, and functional capabilities of the offeror. The offeror's price will be evaluated to determine if any are unreasonably high in relation to the anticipated work under the contract, as well as with current industry standards.

Unbalanced Pricing: In accordance with FAR 15.404-1(g) unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more line items is significantly over or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. All offers with separately priced line items or subline items shall be analyzed to determine if the prices are unbalanced. An offer may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

3. There may be contained within the evaluation factors certain mandatory or minimum requirements to be met for evaluation. There are also contained within the described factors certain documents for submission. Failure to satisfy any mandatory or minimum requirement may result in a determination that a proposal is unacceptable.

4. The Government intends to select one offeror for an award without discussions, but reserves the right to hold discussions if the Government determines that to do so would be in its best interest. Therefore, an offeror’s proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a technical and pricing standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if it is determined by the Contracting Officer to be necessary.

F. EVALUATION FACTORS

All of the submission items to be evaluated shall pertain to the offeror, whether a single contractor entity, partnership, or a joint venture. As a minimum, twenty percent (20%) of work associated with this project is required to be performed by the contract awardee.

Subcontractors: The Government recognizes that completion of a project is often a team effort. An offeror that intends to utilize a major subcontractor shall submit a firm, unequivocal letter of commitment signed by each major subcontractor. A major subcontractor is defined as a subcontractor who performs twenty percent (20%) or more of the total on-site management and construction efforts or those performing 20% or more of the total dollar value of the project.

Joint Ventures: A JV is defined as a legal business entity formed between two or more companies to undertake the performance activities of a contract together.

An offeror proposing as a JV shall provide evidence that the JV as a legal entity has been duly formed. JV’s shall include a copy of the legal JV agreement signed by an authorized representative who can bind the entity of each JV partner, with the chief executive of each entity identified. A prospective offeror that submits a proposal as a JV may not change their JV firms, if selected for award.

EVALUATION FACTORS

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL APPROACH

FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

FACTOR 3: PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE

FACTOR 4: FINANCIAL SURETY

FACTOR 5: PRICE

Relative importance of the evaluation factors: For evaluation purposes, Technical Approach (Factor 1) and Past Performance (Factor 2) are approximately equal in weight and are more important than Preliminary Schedule (Factor 3). When Factor 1, Factor 2, and Factor 3 are combined, they are given significantly more weight than Factor 5 (Price) in the evaluation process for this acquisition.

Factor 4, Financial Surety, shall be rated on a “Pass” or “Fail” basis. Offerors who receive a “Fail” rating will be eliminated from consideration for award.

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL APPROACH

Factor 1, Technical Approach, consists of two elements: Management Approach and Prior Experience. The two elements are equal in importance to each other. Factor 1 will be evaluated in its entirety resulting in an assignment of a single technical approach rating.

Under Factor 1, an offeror shall provide a narrative, not to exceed twenty (20) pages (double sided) and may assign a total of twenty pages as they see necessary in describing management approach and experience on prior projects which will enable the offeror to successfully perform the requirements of the solicitation.

Proposal Submission Requirements:

Management Approach

An offeror shall provide a detailed narrative that demonstrates the offeror’s understanding of the overall scope of work for the project and describes the offeror’s approach to completing the work. An offeror’s narrative should identify all major scope components of the project, including critical components. The narrative should include a discussion of an offeror’s planned technical approach that addresses shipping and logistics (air, land, and sea), phasing, local labor and subcontractor markets, local laws, anticipated challenges to the project, and the requirements associated with constructing a perimeter security fence and inclusion of multiple gate locations.

The narrative shall also address the following:

a. Kuwait Business License: An offeror shall include, with its narrative, proof of current Kuwait business licensure in the offeror’s name, or alternatively, the offeror’s supported plan to obtain a Kuwait business license.

b. Base Access: An offeror shall explain how it will comply with Camp Arifjan’s security requirements. The narrative shall also describe the offeror’s plan to control access to the work site and for obtaining base access for its personnel, subcontractors, and its construction materials and equipment.

c. Organization: An offeror shall describe the process it plans to use to manage the project. The offeror shall discuss its proposed project organization, defining the roles, responsibilities, and authority to be delegated to its team. This includes the identification and description of who will perform the major or critical aspects of construction. The offeror shall include an organizational chart along with an accompanying narrative, which shows the relationship and how work flows through the organization between the offeror’s home office, field office, major subcontractor(s), QC personnel, safety personnel, and USACE. If applicable, the offeror shall clearly state the roles of any JV partners and major subcontractors in its discussion.

Offerors shall include a firm, unequivocal letter of commitment signed by each of its major subcontractor(s) in its proposal submission.

The management approach portion of an offeror’s proposal will be limited to fifteen (15) pages (double sided) in length, not including organizational chart(s) or letters of commitment. Any pages beyond fifteen will not be evaluated and will be ignored.

Prior Experience

Although an offeror may highlight any experience it has gained, to include experience with fence construction, an offeror’s narrative, not to exceed five (5) pages, shall pertain to the offeror’s prior experience on projects dealing with construction challenges within the last five (5) years, and how these experiences will positively impact its performance handling a design-bid-build project in Kuwait. As part of its narrative, an offeror should address process improvements or innovative techniques it created or established to address construction challenges.

For purposes of this portion of the evaluation, the focus is on the Offeror’s prior experience in dealing with construction challenges, not on those project metrics required to conduct a past performance relevancy evaluation. A separate project relevancy analysis will be completed under the past performance factor.

At a minimum, an offeror should address its experience in the following:

a. Hiring qualified laborers and maintaining a qualified workforce.

b. Procurement of long lead items.

c. Obtaining access to work locations, such as base access.

If an offeror is a JV, the offeror may discuss experience on projects performed by the JV and projects performed by any JV partner. In its evaluation, the Government is focused on the offeror’s prior experience. If an offeror discusses experience of its proposed major subcontractor(s), a firm, unequivocal letter of commitment signed by the subcontractor(s) must be included in the offeror’s proposal. If this requisite letter of commitment is not submitted, the prior experience of the major subcontractor(s) will not be considered.

Evaluation Procedures, Adjectival Ratings and Descriptions:

An offeror’s technical approach will be evaluated in its entirety to determine the offeror’s understanding of the requirements and its capability to execute the requirements of the solicitation. The Government will also evaluate the extent of the offeror’s consideration of the inherent challenges that are specific to this project scope and location.

In evaluating an offeror’s technical approach, the Government will evaluate each segment as follows:

Management Approach: The Government will evaluate proposals to determine the completeness and feasibility of an offeror’s management approach and its understanding of the overall scope of work and anticipated challenges.

The Government will evaluate an offeror’s management approach based on the following aspects:

a. Kuwait Business License: The Government will evaluate the extent of an offeror’s understanding of the process, procedures, and requirements to obtain a business license to work in the Kuwait.

b. Base Access: The Government will evaluate the extent of an offeror’s understanding of the security requirements at Camp Arifjan. The Government will evaluate an offeror’s plan to control access to the work site and for obtaining base access for completeness, reasonableness, and feasibility of the plan.

c. Organization: The Government will evaluate an offeror’s plan to manage the project. The Government will assess an offeror’s proposed project organization for well-defined roles, responsibilities, and authority delegated to its team. The Government will evaluate an offeror’s organizational chart and narrative to determine the effectiveness of the relationships and work flow between the offeror’s home office, field office, major subcontractor(s), QC personnel, safety personnel, USACE, and any JV partners if applicable.

Prior Experience: The Government will evaluate an offeror’s prior experience on projects dealing with fence construction and construction challenges to determine how these experiences will enable the offeror to successfully perform the requirements of the solicitation.

The Government will evaluate an offeror’s prior experience on projects dealing construction and give a greater weight to those projects dealing with fence construction to determine how these experiences will enable the offeror to successfully perform the requirements of the solicitation.

Additional Greater Weight Considerations:

a. Greater weight will be given to offerors who possess a current Kuwait business license.

b. Greater weight will be given to offerors who provide evidence of having obtained a security clearance and gate passes to work on a Kuwait military base for previous or current projects.

c. Greater weight will be given to offerors who effectively demonstrate they will self-perform more than fifty percent (50%) of the work.

A single technical rating will be assigned to the technical approach of an offeror’s proposal. The ratings include consideration of risks in conjunction with a proposal’s significant strengths, strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies. The Factor 1 evaluation will utilize the combined technical /risk ratings and the risk descriptions as follows:

Table 1. Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method

Color Rating Adjectival Rating Description

Blue

Outstanding

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

Purple

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.

Green

Acceptable

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

Yellow

Marginal

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

Red

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.

FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

The Factor 2 Past Performance evaluation includes an assessment of an offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements and results in an assignment of a single past performance confidence assessment rating based on an offeror’s overall record of recency, relevancy, and quality of performance.

For the purposes of this evaluation:

A “recently completed” project is defined as a project which (1) has been completed within the last five years of the RFP issuance date, or (2) is currently under construction and is at least 80% complete as of the RFP issuance date.

A “relevant” project is defined as a recently completed project, with a similar scope and cost magnitude as the project that is the subject of this solicitation.

“Similar scope” is defined as the construction of security fences and installation of gates.

“Similar cost magnitude” is defined as a project with a total value of at least $5 million.

An offeror shall submit recently completed, relevant project experience using the Experience Overview Sheet (Attachment B), Construction Experience Form (Attachment C) and Relevancy Matrix (Attachment D). The offeror should include a project description on the Construction Experience Form that is detailed enough to permit an evaluation of project relevancy, recency, and quality and should describe project scope and magnitude. The offeror should also provide the name of an English-speaking reference and current contact information on the Construction Experience Form (Attachment C).

An offeror should provide references who have first-hand knowledge of the offeror’s past performance for the applicable project submitted and may be asked to comment on specific aspects of the offeror’s performance, including: quality of construction, timeliness, management of the work, subcontractor management including timely payment to subcontractors or suppliers, safety, relations between owner and contractor, level of support for such elements as as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, correcting design or construction errors, and warranty work. References should be the contracting agency or entity that administers the contract such as the construction agent, owner, or Government representative. The offeror’s references should be independent and willing and available to answer questions. The offeror should also ensure that each reference is notified that he/she may be contacted for the purposes of the evaluation. The Government may contact and interview references provided, and additionally reserves the right to interview other individuals acting for the reference provided, if the reference is not available.

When submitting past performance information for consideration, the offeror is limited to at least two but no more than five projects that have been performed by the offeror. Additional projects submitted that exceed these limits will not be considered for evaluation.

If an offeror is a JV, the offeror may submit projects for evaluation performed by the JV and projects performed by any JV partner as the past performance of the offeror. The Government will consider past performance information submitted for one JV partner as the past performance information for the JV-offeror, if: (a) for each project submitted for past performance consideration, the offeror’s proposal describes the role of the JV partner for that specific project; and (b) the offeror’s proposal clearly identifies how the role of the JV partner on the submitted project is relevant to the role the partner will be performing on the solicitation project. The Government will not consider for evaluation under this factor the past performance of any subcontractors.

An offeror is responsible for obtaining a client-completed Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) (Attachment E) for each project submitted. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client before the proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with its proposal the first page of the PPQ (including blocks 5 and 6), which will provide the contract and client information necessary to conduct an assessment.

An offeror should follow up with clients to ensure that PPQ submissions are in accordance with the solicitation requirements and the proposal closing date. If the client requests, completed PPQ’s may be submitted directly to the Government’s point-of-contact, Ms. Diane deLathouder at Diane.E.deLathouder@usace.army.mil prior to the proposal closing date. Offerors may submit PPQ’s for submitted projects which were previously filled out by clients and used in previous proposal submissions. However, offerors shall not incorporate these PPQ’s by reference into their proposals.

In addition to the PPQ’s, the offeror is permitted to submit DD Form 2626 (Performance Evaluation (Construction) and/or Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR) for projects submitted. Past performance information such as awards, certificates, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition shall not be submitted as this information will not be evaluated. The offeror should provide details for any past performance problems encountered and the corrective actions taken for projects submitted in the appropriate space provided on the Construction Experience Form (Attachment C).

FALISIFIED PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION MAY BE GROUNDS FOR DISQUALIFICATION OF

AN OFFEROR’S PROPOSAL, REFERRAL OF THE OFFEROR FOR DEBARMENT, AND REFERRAL OF

THE OFFEROR TO THE APPROPRIATE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIVE ENTITY.

The Government reserves the right to contact and interview references and clients submitted by an offeror, or by any other means available in order to verify past performance information. The Government reserves the right to authenticate any past performance information submitted by the offeror by reviewing relevant Government databases, other DoD or Government appraisal systems, or other sources. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in an offeror’s proposal; inquiries of owner representative(s); Federal

Awardees Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS); Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS); Government field representatives; and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the offeror.

Evaluation Procedures, Adjectival Ratings and Descriptions:

There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation (recency, relevancy, and quality) which results in a single performance confidence assessment of an offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements.

a. Recency: The first is to evaluate the recency of an offeror’s past performance. A “recently completed” project is defined as a project which (1) has been completed within the last five years, as of the date of the RFP issued, or (2) is currently under construction and is at least 80% complete as of the date the RFP is issued.

b. Relevance: The second aspect of the Past Performance evaluation is to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by an offeror is to the solicitation’s effort. A “relevant” project is defined as a recently completed project, with a similar scope and cost magnitude as the project that is the subject of this solicitation.

“Similar scope” is defined is defined as the construction of security fences and installation of gates.

“Similar cost magnitude” is defined as a project with a total value of at least $5 million.

Within the relevancy aspect, an offeror’s past performance is evaluated to determine how relevant the offeror’s demonstrated record of past performance is to the efforts required in the solicitation. The Government’s assessment under the Relevancy Assessment of past performance is a significant contributor to the final past performance rating; however, it is not a formal rating in and of itself. The following criteria will be used to establish the overall level of relevancy of an offeror’s past performance.

Table 2. Past Performance Relevancy Rating Method Adjectival Rating Description

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.

c. Quality: The third aspect of the past performance evaluation is to establish the overall quality of an offeror’s past performance. The past performance evaluation performed in support of this solicitation does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of an offeror’s performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well an offeror performed those past contracts. The Government will review all past performance information collected and determine the quality of the offeror’s performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information and incorporate these into the performance confidence assessment.

The rating for this factor will be expressed as a degree of confidence in the offeror’s ability to successfully accomplish the work required in the solicitation. The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor performance.

The Government places a higher value on past performance for which documented successful outcomes are both available and supported by outside source confirmation (for example, telephone interviews with references and clients, CPARS or other agency performance databases, or personal knowledge of Government employees that…