W912GB-14-R-0030_FY15_Israel_MATOC_Solicitation_2Sep14.pdf

W2SDXXXXXXXXXX

Project: FY15 Israel Multiple Aw ard Task Order Contract (MATOC)

Phase I - Volume I Technical proposals are due by 31 October 2014 at 1500 Central European Time.

The Pre Proposal Training/Discussion date and location are yet to be determined. A Seed Project w ill be added to this solicitation through a future amendment. Proposals for the Seed Project shall be required w ith Phase II of the Solicitation. Phase II submission date is to be determined.

Submit questions regarding this solicitation via email to the follow ing Point of Contact:

Glenn Adams, Contract Specialist Email: glenn.adams @usace.army.mil Phone: +49 (0)611 9744 2723 or +49 (0)162 253 4187

GLENN ADAMS +49 (0)611 9744 2723

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

02-Sep-2014

(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

X

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 _______ calendar days and complete it w ithin ________ calendar days after receiving aw ard, notice to proceed. This performance period is mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________FAR 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 __________0 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________26 Sep 2014 (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 _______180 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

1 OF

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:

W912GB-14-R-0030 163

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

W912GB-14-R-0030

Section 00010 - Solicitation Contract Form

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES MAX

QUANTITY

UNIT UNIT PRICE MAX AMOUNT

0001 49,900,000 Job FY15 Israel MATOC Base Year

FFP

This contract will provide repair, maintenance and construction services in Israel, primarily for the Israeli Ministry of Defense, but may be used for other customers with requirements in Israel. The Contractor shall provide and is responsible for all labor, material, equipment, transportation and all support costs required to perform the work. The Defense Base Act (DBA) Insurance requirment shall be calculated and obtained per individual task order prior to the commencement of work. Please refer to Section 013000 - Summary of Work and all applicable attachments.

FOB: Destination

PURCHASE REQUEST NUMBER: W2SDXXXXXXXXXX

MAX

NET AMT

UNIT UNIT PRICE MAX AMOUNT

0002 49,900,000 Job OPTION FY15 Israel MATOC Option Year 1

FFP

This contract will provide repair, maintenance and construction services in Israel, primarily for the Israeli Ministry of Defense, but may be used for other customers with requirements in Israel. The Contractor shall provide and is responsible for all labor, material, equipment, transportation and all support costs required to perform the work. The Defense Base Act (DBA) Insurance requirment shall be calculated and obtained per individual task order prior to the commencement of work. Please refer to Section 013000 - Summary of Work and all applicable attachments.

UNIT UNIT PRICE MAX AMOUNT

0003 49,900,000 Job OPTION FY15 Israel MATOC Option Year 2

FFP

This contract will provide repair, maintenance and construction services in Israel, primarily for the Israeli Ministry of Defense, but may be used for other customers with requirements in Israel. The Contractor shall provide and is responsible for all labor, material, equipment, transportation and all support costs required to perform the work. The Defense Base Act (DBA) Insurance requirment shall be calculated and obtained per individual task order prior to the commencement of work. Please refer to Section 013000 - Summary of Work and all applicable

UNIT UNIT PRICE MAX AMOUNT

0004 49,900,000 Job OPTION FY15 Israel MATOC Option Year 3

FFP

This contract will provide repair, maintenance and construction services in Israel, primarily for the Israeli Ministry of Defense, but may be used for other customers with requirements in Israel. The Contractor shall provide and is responsible for all labor, material, equipment, transportation and all support costs required to perform the work. The Defense Base Act (DBA) Insurance requirment shall be calculated and obtained per individual task order prior to the commencement of work. Please refer to Section 013000 - Summary of Work and all applicable

UNIT UNIT PRICE MAX AMOUNT

0005 49,900,000 Job OPTION FY15 Israel MATOC Option Year 4

FFP

This contract will provide repair, maintenance and construction services in Israel, primarily for the Israeli Ministry of Defense, but may be used for other customers with requirements in Israel. The Contractor shall provide and is responsible for all labor, material, equipment, transportation and all support costs required to perform the work. The Defense Base Act (DBA) Insurance requirment shall be calculated and obtained per individual task order prior to the commencement of work. Please refer to Section 013000 - Summary of Work and all applicable

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

(All Information Presented in this TOC is Incorporated into this Solicitation)

SECTION 00010 – Solicitation/Contract Form (SF 1442) SECTION 00100 – Schedule/Instructions to Offerors SECTION 00600 – Representations & Certifications SECTION 00700 – Contract Clauses SECTION 00800 – Special Contract Requirements

Special Requirements (SRs) – Sample Only

SR-0 Description of Work SR-1 Tax Clause: Taxes Imposed by the Government of Israel SR-2 Existing Structure and Installations SR-3 Base Security Requirements

USACE Specifications

00 73 15 General Conditions, April 2010 00 73 15.01 Government Field Office, June 2011 00 73 15.15 Time Extensions for Unusually Severe Weather, January 2009 00 73 16.01 Special Conditions for Projects in Israel, January 2013 01 00 15 Design After Award, December 2011 01 32 01.00 10 Project Schedule, May 2008 01 33 00 Submittal Procedure, July 2009 01 35 26 Safety and Occupational Health Requirements, November 2012 01 45 01 USACE Quality Control, March 2012

01 45 01.01 Additional Quality Control Personnel, 2010 01 451 Contractor Quality Control (Design-Build) 2007 01 45 01.10 USACE Quality Control Systems, April 2008 01 78 00 Completion Procedures, February 2010 01 78 23 Operation and Maintenance Data, March 2009 02 41 00 Demolition and Deconstruction, March 2011 EP 310-1-6a Construction Signs, Nov 2008

Department of the Army, Manual No. EM 385-1-1, September 2008. Safety, Safety and Health Requirements, http://140.194.76.129/publications/eng-manuals/em385-1-1/2008_Dari/toc.htm

Host Nation Technical Requirements (HNTRs)

01 -HNTR for Earthworks, 1993 02 - HNTR for Concrete Cast in-Situ Works, 1998 03 - HNTR for Precast Concrete Products, 1990 04 - HNTR for Construction Works, 1995 05 - HNTR for Waterproofing Works, 2004 06 - HNTR for Joinery and Steel Works, 2004 07 - HNTR for Sanitary Installations, 1990 08 - HNTR for Electrical Installations, 2001 09 - HNTR for Plaster Works, 2005 10 - HNTR for Flooring and Covering Works, 2001 11 - HNTR for Painting Works and Methods of Measurements, 2005 12 - HNTR for Aluminum Metal Works, 1990 13 – HNTR for Methods of Measurement for Prestressed Concrete Works, 2006 14 - HNTR for Stone Works, 1991 15 - HNTR for Air-Conditioning Installations 1997 16 – HNTR for Heating and Steam Installation 1992 17 - HNTR for Elevators, 2002 18 – HNTR for Communications Infrastructure, 2005 19 - HNTR for Steel Structures Works, 2000 21 - HNTR for Precast Concrete Constructions, 1995 22 - HNTR for Prefabricated Elements in Building, 1995 23 - HNTR for Piles Bored and Cast In Site and Take-off Procedures, 2000 34 - HNTR for Fire Detection and Fire Extinguishing Systems, 1995 36 - HNTR for Compressed Air Installations, 1998 40 - HNTR for Site Development, 1993 41 - HNTR for Gardening and Irrigation Works, 1993 43 – HNTR for Outdoor Lighting, 1982 50 - HNTR for Concrete Pavements, 1993 51 - HNTR for Paving Runways, Roads and Aprons, 1998 57 - HNTR for Water Lines, Sewage and Channeling, 1990 66 – HNTR for Protective Locksmithing, 2012 67 - HNTR for Antenna Mast Installation, 1984

Attachments

Attachment (1) - Experience Overview Sheet Attachment (2) - Experience Information Sheet Attachment (3) - USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (Section A and B) Attachment (4) - Sample Letter of Commitment Attachment (5) - Sample OSP Worksheet and Directions Attachment (6) - SF LLL Disclosure of Lobbying Activities http://140.194.76.129/publications/eng-manuals/em385-1-1/2008_Dari/toc.htm

Attachment (7) – Prime Contractor Certification - Key Personne& Performance Attachment (8) - Price Schedule Attachment (9) – USACE Specifications Attachment (10) – Host Nation Technical Specifications (HNTRs) Attachment (11) – Sample Special Contract Requirements (SRs)

FMS REQUIREMENT

This contract is an “FMS Requirement” for the Israeli Ministry of Defense.

BASIC PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

BASIC PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

A. BASIS FOR AWARD (Section 00100)

When the word ‘Offeror’ is encountered throughout Section 00100, it is intended to mean a company seeking to do business with the Government that submits a proposal in response to this solicitation. When the word “Government” is encountered throughout this Section 00100, it is intended to mean U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Best Value source selection procedures will be used with the intent to award to the responsible Offerors whose proposals, conforming to the request for proposal (RFP), are determined to be technically acceptable and offers the best value to the Government using the trade-off method.

The award will be made based on the best overall proposals that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the five (5) evaluation factors: Experience, Past Performance, Management Approach, Design Capability Plan, and Price. Experience is slightly more important than Past Performance. Past Performance is slightly more important than Management Approach. Management Approach is slightly more important than Design Capability Plan, and when combined the four technical factors are significantly more important than price.

Technical Factors 1- Experience, 2 - Past Performance and 3 - Management Approach will be evaluated in Phase I – Technical and the evaluation results of these factors will be carried over to Phase II – Technical and be included with the results of the evaluation of Technical Factor 4 – Design Capability.

To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for each of the non-priced factors.

Offerors will be cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest price offered.

NOTE: ALL NON-PRICED FACTORS COMBINED ARE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE IMPORTANT THAN

PRICE AS AN INDIVIDUAL FACTOR. The Government reserves the right to award to other than the lowest proposed price; however, the degree of importance of price related elements as a factor will become greater as the technical proposals approach equality. The greater the equality of technical proposals, the more important price shall become in selecting the Best Value to the Government.

The awarded Contract will incorporate the successful Offeror’s proposal to the extent it offers betterments and does not conflict with the Request for Proposal.

B. FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal: Award will be made to the Offeror proposing the combination most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors described below.

Evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal shall address each factor as it applies to the solicitation requirements. A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation is set forth in the “Evaluation Approach”, Paragraph C of this section. During evaluations of each proposal, the Government will assign each factor an adjectival rating and write a narrative evaluation reflecting the identified findings.

Factor 1: Experience: Each Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated to determine depth and relevance of their experience.

Factor 2: Past Performance: Each Offeror’s past performance will be reviewed to determine relevancy and confidence assessment.

Factor 3: Management Approach: The Offeror’s management approach will be evaluated for the reasonableness, risk, and the logic which illustrates a basic understanding of managing of contract of this nature.

Factor 4: Design Capability: The Offeror shall submit their plan for obtaining Designer(s) of Record appropriate for the anticipated work that may be ordered under this contract. At a minimum the plan shall include the following:

1. Criteria for selection of the Designer(s) of Record

2. Certification requirement(s)

Factor 5: Price: The resulting award will be a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC). Price reasonableness will be utilized in the evaluation of the Firm-Fixed Price effort.

C. EVALUATION APPROACH

All proposals shall be subject to evaluation by the Source Selection Team (SST) to include any and all information submitted by the Offeror, regardless of whether it was specifically asked for herein.

1. The overarching evaluation approach for all factors is as follows:

a. Adequacy of Response. The proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the Offeror’s methods and approach have adequately and completely considered, defined, and satisfied the requirements specified in the RFP. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement has been addressed in the proposal in accordance with the proposal submission section of the RFP.

b. Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the Offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule.

2. FACTOR 1- EXPERIENCE

1. The Proposal shall contain no more than seven (7) projects performed within six (6) years of the solicitation issue date or currently being performed (at least 50% complete) that show experience constructing facilities of a similar dollar value, physical size, complexity and function, utilizing techniques relevant to those required by this solicitation. Of the seven (7) projects submitted, at least two projects should be for the prime contractor of which one of the projects submitted by the prime must be in the United States. In the case of a joint venture, at least one project for each joint venture partner must be submitted. The Offeror will be evaluated on the depth and relevance of their experience as submitted in the proposal in accordance with the following items which are approximately equal to each other in importance:

• Projects which involve construction of base facilities.

• Projects which involve renovations of base facilities.

• Projects which involve airfield runway works (new/replacement paving)

• Projects built in an active environment and phased construction.

• Projects which involve design-build.

• Projects with a cost between $1,000,000 and $15,000,000.

• Projects that demonstrate experience working in Israel.

• Two (2) projects demonstrating the Prime Contractor’s experience working in the United States

• Projects the are completed (as opposed to in-progress or on-going) within the last six (6) years. Projects older than six (6) years will be evaluated but may be considered less relevant

2. For the purposes of this solicitation, a `project' is defined as a discrete, severable scope of work or set of activities with a measurable performance period and monetary value. There may be several projects within a single contract.

An example is: a single contract that includes projects with distinct sets of facilities at different locations and each project is identified as a separate contract line item.

3. Projects demonstrating that the Offeror’s team members have previously worked together are considered more relevant, especially where the roles were similar to those that are proposed for this work. Projects that are closer to the completion date (either recently completed or nearing completion) are considered more relevant than those that are further from the completion date. Projects for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and to a slightly lesser extent other U.S. Government agencies, are considered more relevant.

4. Demonstrated expereinece in the categories listed above for multiple projects versus demonstrated experience in the categories listed above on one project will be considered more relevant.

5. For Projects that are not considered fully relevant, the government will evaluate which projects demonstrate various aspects of relevancy. Offerors are encouraged to submit a combination of projects demonstrating experience with as many relevant aspects as possible. Offerors are cautioned that if they submit no recent experience, this may negatively affect the evaluation of the depth of experience.

6. If more than seven (7) projects are submitted, only the first seven will be evaluated. If less than seven (7) projects are submitted, the proposal will be evaluated; however, the proposal might not receive the highest rating available.

If less than two (2) projects for the prime are submitted, the proposal will be evaluated; however, the proposal might not receive the highest rating available. An Offeror will not receive credit under this factor for the relevant experience of an individual or for key personnel experience proposed for this project. An Offeror should not submit basic indefinite quantity contracts and multiple award construction contracts as projects, however, individual task orders under those contracts may be submitted as projects.

The adjectival ratings from FACTOR 1: EXPERIENCE are listed and defined below:

TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Color Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

3. FACTOR 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE

There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation. The first aspect is to evaluate the Offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant project work is, as described in Factor 1 Experience, for recent projects. The second aspect is to evaluate the Offeror’s performance to determine a confidence assessment of the Offeror’s performance. With respect to relevancy, more relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future performance and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance.

Past Performance will be evaluated for projects performed within six (6) years of the solicitation issue date or currently being performed (at least 50% complete). If an offeror submits a project for experience that is more than six (6) years old, it may be considered for past performance but may less relevant than past performance in the past six years.

The Offeror's past performance will be evaluated based on performance on projects submitted under Factor 1 Experience, to include the past performance of any Subcontractors or Joint Venture partners whose projects the Offeror may have submitted, as well as any other Past Performance information obtained by the Government through other available sources. An Offeror may not establish past performance based on individual or key personnel performance, apart from the Offeror’s entity that is proposing. Past performance will be evaluated in accordance with the following criteria:

a. Quality: The degree to which the Offeror has complied with the contract requirements ; met quality standards;

was timely in regard to problem resolution without extensive customer guidance; and the shown effectiveness of his prior quality control program.

b. Schedule/Timeliness of Performance: Whether the Offeror met contract completion dates including significant milestones and where schedules were exceeded, whether the Offeror identified valid justifications for the delays or if liquidated damages were assessed due to late delivery by the Offeror.

c. Customer Satisfaction: The degree to which end-users were satisfied with the project; whether the Offeror was reasonable and cooperative in regard to resolving disagreements; whether the Offeror was responsive and businesslike with concern for the customer, and whether the Offeror achieved customer satisfaction.

Purple Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is unawardable.

d. Management Personnel/Labor: Whether the Offeror used effective business practices for on-site management for subcontractors, suppliers, materials, and labor force. Whether and the extent to which the Offeror displayed an ability to hire and retain a qualified workforce; controlled government/ owner property when applicable; provided a workforce with the required expertise; successfully managed multiple projects simultaneously and multiple disciplines of construction; easily assimilated and incorporated changes in requirements and priorities in response to the owner; and provided an effective overall management and control of projects and programs.

e. Cost/Financial Management: Whether the Offeror met the contract requirements by completing the project at the agreed to price and where not, the extent to which the Offeror was responsible for cost increases; whether the Offeror provided alternative methods that benefited the client; whether the Offeror submitted invoices timely with sufficient documentation to substantiate requested payment and avoided significant unexplained variances from the original price..

f. Safety/Security: The Offeror’s prior record for maintaining an environment of safety, adherence to a safety plan, and compliance with safety requirements, including following safety regulations, housekeeping, and correcting noted deficiencies, as well as the Offeror’s prior compliance with all security requirements and personnel security requirements when applicable.

g. General: The ability to respond to emergency situations; ability to effectively communicate; compliance with contract terms and conditions. This includes if prior customers would prefer to do business with the Offeror again, if given the choice.

1. Offerors are reminded that the Government reserves the right to obtain past performance information from any source available and has the right to contact customers other than those listed by the Offeror to evaluate past performance.

2. The Government reserves the right to verify statements the Offeror makes regarding its past performance to determine whether they are substantiated.

3. The Government will consider past performance information in evaluating overall risk associated with a particular Offeror. When evaluating these criteria, the following will be taken into consideration for evaluation purposes:

a. The relevance of the past performance;

b. How recently the project submitted was performed;

c. Trends in the Offeror’s performance;

d. Evaluations, letters of appreciation, and commendations from customers; and

e. Positive and/or negative comments that impact evaluation of Offeror’s past performance.

4. Unavailability of Past Performance Information: IAW FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv), in the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available; the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

The adjectival ratings for FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE are listed and defined below:

(i) RELEVANCY: The first aspect of the past performance evaluation is to assess the Offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the Offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. Relevancy is not separately rated, however, the following criteria will be used to establish what is relevant which shall include similarity of service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and degree of subcontract/teaming.

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.

(ii) PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT: The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts. The past performance evaluation gathers information from customers on how well the Offeror performed those past contracts. In conducting the performance confidence assessment, each Offeror shall be assigned one of the ratings identified below:

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 be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Unknown Confidence (Neutral) 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.

iii. Offerors (a) for whom compliance with FAR 52.219-8 has been established; and/or (b) for whom no negative information has been reported; or (c) certifying no past performance history of contracts containing FAR 52.219-8 will be rated as “complying with FAR 52.219-8.” Such a rating shall have neither positive nor negative impact on the Offeror’s overall Past Performance evaluation. Offerors for whom negative information has been reported shall have such negative information, along with any explanations or comments responding to such negative information supplied by the Offeror, evaluated in accordance with the evaluation criteria for Past Performance. Such evaluation shall be substantiated and factored into the Offeror’s overall Past Performance evaluation.

4. FACTOR 3 - MANAGEMENT APPROACH

The Offeror’s management approach will be evaluated for the reasonableness, risk, and the logic which illustrates a basic understanding of managing the contract for the following:

1. Clearly delineated lines of authority on the organizational chart (graph) organized in a precise and logical manner including the relationship between the headquarters’ office and the site office, including all involved with the management of the contract including subcontractors and joint venture partners.

2. The graph and the narrative description clearly display the planned organization structure to include clearly identifying prime contractor versus subcontractor positions and where those position our located, identifying the Project Manager by name, and identifying the logical distribution of key personnel. The Project Manager meets the minimum qualifications as required in the Summary of Work (see Section 013000, paragraph 1.10.1).

3. Comprehensive descriptions of duties, roles, major responsibilities, and authorities for key personnel, including roles of authorities for subcontractors and joint ventures presented as a logical approach to perform the work throughout the contract, including which roles and personnel are identified to communicate with the Government.

Note: The positions of project manager, site superintendant, CQC system manager and safety and health manager must be filled by full time employees of the prime contractor, directly hired by the prime contractor. The cannot be employees or officials of a subcontractor and cannot also serve or be “dual hatted” as subcontractor employees or officials. The prime contractor may have additional positions filled by its employees but the four positions listed herein are the minimum acceptable.

4. A precise explanation illustrating an understanding of the contract requirements by describing management for performance of a task order including start-up / mobilization and additional and/or unique management advantages provided to the Government.

5. A reasonable approach to distribution of key personnel required to manage an annual workload of $45,000,000 for multiple task orders awarded simultaneously at different locations between $1,000,000 to $10,000,000.

6. The ability to obtain and maintain a Facility Clearance and to manage a project requiring such clearance in Israel.

The adjectival ratings for FACTOR 3: MANAGEMENT APPROACH are listed and defined below:

TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Color Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and

Purple Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and

5. FACTOR 4 - DESIGN CAPABILITY PLAN

Design Capability, the Offeror shall submit their plan for obtaining Designer(s) of Record appropriate for the anticipated work that may be ordered under this contract . At a minimum the plan shall include the following:

1. Criteria for selection of the Designer(s) of Record

2. Certification requirement(s)

The adjectival ratings for FACTOR 4: DESIGN CAPABILITY PLAN are listed and defined below.

6. FACTOR 5 - PRICE

adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one

TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Color Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and

Purple Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one

1. Price will not be scored, but will be evaluated in accordance with this section. In order to be considered acceptable, offers must contain prices for all of the contract line items (CLINs) for the base items and any options.

Failure to submit a Price Schedule and failure to complete all CLINs may result in the Offeror’s proposal package being rejected by the Government after initial evaluation without further consideration. The Offeror's price proposal will be evaluated to determine reasonableness, completeness, and affordability in order to assess the Offeror’s understanding of the scope of work for the project (the Government’s assessment of the Offeror’s ability to perform the work at the proposed price), i.e. whether the price is reasonable for the work to be performed, whether the price reflects the Offeror’s understanding of the requirements, and whether the price is consistent with the technical proposal. Price will be evaluated based on the total sum of the base price CLIN and all option CLINs.

a. Completeness – To be complete, the Offeror must provide all data that is requested and necessary to evaluate the prices, including completing all CLINs on the Price Schedule. The Government will assess the extent to which the proposed prices comply with the content and format requirements set forth in this solicitation.

b. Reasonableness – The Offeror's proposal will be evaluated through price analysis techniques as described in FAR Part 15. 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), and the technical and functional capabilities of the Offeror.

The Offeror’s price shall include and incorporate all costs associated with currency fluctuation and inflation. The Offeror’s price shall include and incorporate all costs associated with performance of the project, including labor, materials, securing and storage of materials, and equipment.

The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject any and all offers.

2. Price Evaluations

Price is evaluated as the Total Bottom Line Sum, which includes the base year and the four (4) option periods.

Price and Line Items are also individually reviewed to ensure reasonableness and balance. Price will be evaluated independently from the technical submission and in accordance with FAR Clause 52.217-5 Evaluation of Options (Jul 1990)

3. Line Item Weight

The Line Item Weight is used as part of the evaluation of Price Proposals. The Line Item Weight is the product of the Coefficient multiplied by the Weight Factor.

Formula:

Coefficient x Weight Factor = Line item Weight Numerical Example:

(1.45 x 3) = 4.35 Line Item Weight (This is only an Example and is not intended for a suggested bidding coefficient)

4. Determination of Bottom Line Sum

The Bottom Line Sum is used for evaluation of Price. The Bottom Line Sum is the sum of all Line Item Weights located in Column six. The Total Bottom Line Sum includes the base year and the four (4) option periods.

5. Complete Price Proposals

In order to be considered acceptable, proposals must be complete for all line items on Section 00101 Price Schedule.

Failure to complete all information on Section 00101 Price Schedule may result in the Offeror's proposal package being rejected by the Government after initial evaluation without further consideration.

If, during the course of the price analysis, the Contracting Officer has reason to question the reasonableness of a Price proposal, or has reason to believe there is unbalancing in the Price proposal, the Contracting Officer may conduct such additional analysis as it requires in order to complete a through price analysis. Because the evaluation of the Price proposal will represent a portion of the total evaluation, it is possible that an Offeror might not be selected because of an unbalanced or an unreasonable Price proposal.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

1. This contract is firm-fixed-price, payable entirely in United States of America Dollars. No additional sums will be payable due to any escalation in the cost of materials, equipment or labor. The Contractor’s failure to properly estimate or accurately predict the cost and/or difficulty in achieving the results required by this contract is not reimbursable. The contract price will not be adjusted on account of fluctuations in the currency exchange rates. No Bill of Quantities will be provided by the Government or will be utilized during this Contract. Changes in the contract price and/or time to complete will be made only due to changes made by the Government in the work to be performed/due to delays caused by the Government as determined and approved in accordance with FAR clauses 52.243-4 Changes, and FAR 52.211-13 Time Extensions, and as approved by the Contracting Officer. Advance payments are not authorized and the contractor will be paid only for work as the work is accomplished in defined intervals as the work proceeds, in accordance with FAR clause 52.232-5 Payments under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts.

2. Responsibility: In accordance with FAR Subpart 9.1, the Contracting Officer will perform an affirmative responsibility determination to ensure that the Offeror has the adequate resources to perform the work.

D. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION (Section 00100)

The source selection process will use a two-step phase selection approach as authorized under 10 U.S.C. 2305a. The first phase of the selection process will determine if the contractor meets the minimum qualifications outlined in the solicitation. If a contractor’s proposal is considered among the highly qualified in Phase I, they will be required to submit additional information for Phase II for evaluation.

1. Introduction. The Offeror’s proposal shall be submitted in hard copy, with accompanying digital copies, as set forth below. Phase 1, Volume 1: Technical Proposal (Factors 1, 2, and 3) and Phase 2, Volume 1: Technical Factor 4 and Phase 2, Volume II: Price Proposal / Administrative Submission shall be received at the following address by the date and time indicated on the Solicitation Standard Form 1442. No. facsimiles are permitted:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers – Europe District Contracting Division (CENAU-CT) Attn: Glenn Adams, Contract Specialist 7th Floor, Room 709A Konrad-Adenauer Ring 39 D-65187 Wiesbaden Germany

Email: glenn.adams@usace.army.mil Telephone Confirmation: +49(0)611-9744-2723

Files shall not contain classified data. The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited.

Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the Technical requirements or the PWS with a statement of intent to perform does not reflect an understanding of the requirement or capability to perform. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

mailto:glenn.adams@usace.army.mil

2. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

The Government will not make assumptions concerning intent, capabilities, or experiences. Clear identification of proposal details shall be the sole responsibility of the Offeror. The proposal shall meet the following basic requirements.

a. The Proposal shall be typed and submitted in English and easy to read.

b. Proposal shall be organized, concise, and submitted in two volumes. Volumes shall be clearly identified and tabbed. Each factor shall be described in a separate tabbed section.

c. Each volume shall be contained within a separate binder.

d. Each volume shall be identified by the solicitation number, volume number, and name, address, and telephone number of the prime Offeror on the cover.

e. Each volume shall contain a Table of Contents and include at the bottom left side of each page the volume and page number.

f. Volume I: Offerors shall verify that the information for all forms submitted is current, correct and complete including names of the points-of-contact, email address, and telephone number.

g. Volume II: The Price Schedule shall be completed in full, including all options, if any.

h. Volume II: Offerors shall submit a signed Offer Standard Form 1442 for this solicitation including verification of all amendments received.

i. Initial proposals should be submitted based on the most favorable terms the Offeror can submit to the Government from a technical and price position. You are referred to the section entitled: Basis for Award

j. Offerors shall submit a CD copy of each Volume, including the Electronic Price Schedule.

k. Proposals shall completely and adequately address the requirements of this solicitation. Offerors are reminded that elaborate corporate marketing information, formatting, special reproduction techniques, etc., are not necessary.

l. Contractors are cautioned against submitting conditional proposals. All questions and concerns shall be addressed to the Contracting Officer prior to the closing date of the solicitation, providing adequate time for the Contracting Officer to answer the concerns.

m. Failing to submit attachments or failing to complete the proposal properly, may result in rejection of the offer without further evaluation. Therefore, Offerors are urged to follow instructions and speak with the Contracting Officer if instructions are not understood.

Note: Proposal Expenses and Pre-Contract Costs: The Request for Proposal (RFP) solicitation does not commit the Government to pay any costs incurred in the preparation and submission of a proposal or for any other costs incurred by any firm submitting a proposal in response to this solicitation.

n. Proposals shall be submitted in the following format:

PROPOSAL PACKAGE ORIGINAL COPIES CD

PHASE I

VOLUME I – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL 1 4 1

FACTOR 1 – Experience FACTOR 2 – Past Performance

FACTOR 3 – Management Approach

This volume shall also include the following:

Letters of Commitments for Committed Subcontractors Joint Venture Agreement (if applicable)

PHASE 2

VOLUME I – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL 1 4 1

FACTOR 4 – Design Capability

VOLUME II – PRICE PROPOSAL

1 4 1

FACTOR 5 – Price

This volume shall include the information as detailed in paragraph “PROPOSAL

FORMAT FOR VOLUME II.”

Committed Subcontractors.

If an Offeror wishes to be credited with the experience, expertise and/or past performance of a committed subcontractor (i.e., a firm that is not the prime contractor) a letter of commitment signed by the committed subcontractor and the prime contractor shall be submitted. The commitment letter shall be submitted even if the firm is in some way related to the prime contractor (for example, the committed subcontractor is subsidiary of the prime contractor, or a subsidiary of a firm to which the prime contractor is also a subsidiary). If a letter of commitment is not submitted, the experience will not be considered. The Offeror shall include their letter of commitment as part of Volume I.

Joint Ventures.

The Contracts will be awarded only to U.S. Firms and paid only in U.S. ($) dollars pursuant to 22 U.S.C. §2791(c).

If a single Offeror does not have in-house design and construction capabilities, the offeror shall either have a joint venture agreement with a U.S. firm or a committed subcontractor with a Letter of Commitment.

An Offeror that is part of a Joint Venture must submit a legally binding joint venture agreement. The Government will not evaluate the capability of any Offerors that are not included in the Joint Venture agreement. Joint Ventures must include a copy of the legal joint venture agreement signed by an authorized officer from each of the firms comprising the Joint Venture with the chief executive of each entity identified and must be translated into English, if the original agreement is in a language other than English.

If submitting a proposal as a joint venture, the experience, past performance, and management approach of each of the joint venture partners can be submitted for the joint venture entity. The experience for each joint venture partner will be considered the experience of the joint venture entity. Joint ventures shall submit the following additional documentation regarding their business entities:

a. A copy of their joint venture agreement in English.

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

1) The relationship of the joint venture parties in terms of business ownership, capital contribution, and profit distribution or loss sharing. The joint venture agreement must show that joint venture members are jointly and severally liable for any obligations under the contract.

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

3) The structure of the joint venture and decision-ranking responsibilities of the joint venture parties in terms of who will control the manner and method of performance of the work.

4) The bonding responsibilities of the joint venture parties.

5) Identification of the key personnel having authority to legally bind the joint venture to subcontracts and state who will provide or contract for the labor and materials for the joint venture.

6) Identification of party maintaining the joint venture 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 joint venture.

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

8) Identification of party having overall control of the joint venture.

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

If one of the joint venture parties possesses relevant experience and/or past performance, the experience and/or past performance of that firm will be considered as the experience and/or past performance of the joint venture.

A complete and legally binding document with all the information required under this section titled “Joint Ventures” shall be included.

*** The auhorized member of the Joint Venture shall sign the SF 1442 and the Joint Venture be named on the Bid Bond and subsequent Performance and Payment Bonds. Make sure to include the SF 1442 and the Bid Bond as part of Volume II.

3. PROPOSAL FILES

a. Format. The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled.