W912GB-16-R-0001-0003.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

ROBMCR Electrical Substations

A. The purpose of this amendment is to revise and clarify the Submission Requirements and Evaluation Criteria.

B. Proposals shall be submitted by 6 May 2016 at 16:00 hours Central European Summer Time. Proposals may be submitted electronically, please see the revised Submission Requirements for electronic submission instructions.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 20

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W912GB-16-R-0001

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

05-Feb-2016

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer X is extended, is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

CODE

CONTRACTING DIVISION

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

KONRAD ADENAUER RING 39

D-65187 WIESBADEN GERMANY

WIESBADEN 65187

W912GB 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

21-Apr-2016

W912GB-16-R-0001

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SECTION 00 00 00 - PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING REQUIRMENTS

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 00 00 - PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING REQUIRMENTS

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0004

AMENDMENT 0003

CHANGES ASSOCIATED WITH AMENDMENT 0004 ARE

REFLECTED IN BOLD RED TYPE.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

QUESTION ANSWER

1 Section 3.3.3.2 of the RFP describes one of the transformers in the water protection area. It lists “bio oil” as the preferred isolation liquid of this transformer.

There are several different ways of replacing the environmentally unfriendly mineral oil in transformers:

1. Bio oil, based on cooking oil, with special chemicals added that reduce vaporization, boost the oil’s heat transfer abilities etc.

2. Synthetic oil that can also be used in water protection areas and is biologically degradable.

Bio oil is the more expensive option and is fairly new to the market. Synthetic oil is less expensive and has been used in transformers for over 30 years, among others in transformers in water protection areas in Germany, in Denmark and in Sweden.

Would you please clarify whether bio oil is required or if comparable synthetic oil may be offered too?

As long as Oil conforms to VDE 0389-2, then it is allowed.

2 According to the RFP, the contractor shall offer copper cables for the connection between the Landstuhl Substation and the demarcation building South. If aluminum cables may be offered too, this could save the US Army a large amount of money.

Cables made of aluminum are technically equivalent to

The use of copper cables has been coordinated with the Pfalzwerke and the German Government Construction Agent the LBB. USACE is aware of the cost savings potential, but in order to the ones made of copper. The main differences are diameter and weight: for the same current-carrying capacity, a copper cable’s diameter is about a quarter smaller than the one of an aluminum cable, while copper cables are about twice as heavy as aluminum cables.

achieve the electrical synergy between all construction components we will maintain the use of copper as per the

RFP.

SECTION 00 21 00 - INSTRUCTIONS

The following have been modified:

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

In Phase 1 of the Two-Phase design-build selection procedures, interested firms or joint venture entities (referred to as “Offerors”) submit certain specified performance capability proposals, demonstrating their capability to successfully execute the design-build construction contract resulting from this solicitation. The Government will evaluate the performance capability of proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein and will short-list no more than five

(5) of the Phase 1 Offerors to compete for the design-build contract in Phase 2.

In Phase 2, the short-listed Offerors will submit proposals in accordance with the solicitation.

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

Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the technical requirements or the SOW 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.

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.

1. BASIC PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Phase 1 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 Government may reject incomplete proposals after initial evaluation without further consideration. The Phase I proposal shall meet the following basic requirements:

a. The proposal shall be submitted in ENGLISH, typed, and easy to read.

b. The proposal shall be organized and concise. Each factor shall be described in a separate tabbed section.

c. The proposal shall be identified by the solicitation number, name, address, and telephone number of the prime Offeror on the cover.

d. The proposal shall contain a table of contents and include at the bottom left side of each page the page number.

e. Offerors shall verify that the information for all forms submitted is current, correct, and complete including name(s) of the point(s) of contact (POCs), email address(es), and telephone number(s).

f. Offerors shall submit a CD copy of the proposal.

g. 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.

h. Contractors are cautioned against submitting conditional proposals.

i. 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.

j. Name, Address, DUNS, CAGE, and TAX Identification Number of the Contractor submitting the proposal.

2. BASIC PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Phase 2 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 submitted in ENGLISH, typed, and easy to read.

b. The proposal shall be organized, concise, and submitted in two (2) 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 name(s) of the point(s) of contact (POCs), email address(es), and telephone number(s).

g. Volume II: Section 00 10 00 Pricing Schedule shall be completed in full, including all option period, and the Non-Pre-Priced coefficient.

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

i. Offerors shall submit a CD including an electronic copy of the Pricing Schedule.

Each volume on the CD should be a separate file.

j. 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.

k. Contractors are cautioned against submitting conditional proposals.

l. 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.

3. Joint Ventures

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 and past performance of each of the joint venture partners can be submitted for the joint venture entity. The experience/past performance for each joint venture partner will be considered the experience/past performance 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.

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

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.

4. Key Subcontractors.

If an Offeror wishes to be credited with the experience and/or past performance of a key subcontractor (i.e., a firm that is not the prime contractor part of the Joint Venture) a letter of commitment signed by the Key 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 or to a Joint Venture Partner (for example, the Key Subcontractor is subsidiary of a Joint Venture Partner, or a subsidiary of a firm to which the Joint Venture partner is also a subsidiary). If a letter of commitment is not submitted, the experience and past performance will not be considered. Include this information as part of Phase 1.

5. PROPOSAL FORMAT AND DELIVERY LOCATION

Proposals shall be submitted in the following format:

Proposal Package Original Copies Electronic Phase 1 1 5 1 Factor One (1) – Experience Factor Two (2) – Past Performance Factor Three (3) – Management Approach Phase 2 Volume I – Technical Proposal 1 5 1** Factor Four (4) – Design Coordination

Volume II – Price / Administrative Proposal 0 0 1**

Factor Five (5) – Price Section 00 10 00 Pricing Schedule Electronic Pricing Schedule

**Electronic copies of Phase 2, Volumes I and II, may be submitted on a single CD but Volumes I and II must be separate files on the CD.

Volume I, Technical Proposal, and Volume II, Price / Administrative Proposal, submissions shall be received at the following address by the date and time indicated on the SF 1442, or as amended. No facsimiles submissions of Phase1 or Phase 2, with the exception of Attachment Three (3), Past Performance Questionnaires, are permitted:

Hard Copies

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Europe District Contracting Division (CENAU-CT) Attn: Erica Taylor 7th Floor, Room A717 Konrad-Adenauer Ring 39 65187 Wiesbaden Germany

Proposal Receipt Confirmation Points of Contact:

E-mail:erica.j.taylor@usace.army.mil Telephone: +49(0)611-9744-2106

E-mail: rachael.raposa@usace.army.mil Telephone: +49(0)611-9744-2600

ELECTRONIC SUBMISSIONS OF PROPOSALS ARE ALLOWED, PLEASE SUBMIT

PROPOSALS USING THE FOLLOWING DIRECTIONS:

Proposals shall be submitted utilizing the AMRDEC SAFE Application, https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe The AMRDEC SAFE Application is used to send large files to individuals that would normally be too large to send via email. There are no user accounts for SAFE- authentication is handled via email. Everyone has access to SAFE, and the application is available for use by anyone.

a. The AMRDEC SAFE application can be accessed via https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe.

b. There are two options to proceed from the SAFE homepage:

I. Proceed as CAC User - Select this option if you have a valid US DoD-issued Common Access Card (CAC).

II. Proceed as Guest - Select this option if you do not have a CAC.

c. After selecting one of the options above, the page will be redirected to the package upload form. Fill in all the required input fields:

I. Your Name - Your name;

II. Your Email address - Your email address;

III. Confirm Your Email Address - Re-enter your email address;

IV. Description of File(s) - Enter W912GB15R0031-COMPANY NAME:

mailto:erica.j.taylor@usace.army.mil mailto:rachael.raposa@usace.army.mil https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe

V. File(s) - Click the "Browse" button to select your file(s). You may add up to 25 files per package, so long as the total file size does not exceed 2GB;

VI. Deletion Date - Select the Maximum date for the package to be deleted from SAFE. The maximum (which is also the default) is two weeks (14 days) from today;

VII. Provide an email address to give access to – Enter----

CENAU.PROPOSAL@USACE.ARMY.MIL

d. Grant access to these people - This is the list of people you have granted access to the package. To remove a recipient, highlight their name and click the "Remove" button;

e. Caveats - Default is "None";

f. Encrypt email message when possible - Attempt to encrypt the package's notification email to each recipient;

g. Notify me when files are downloaded - You (the sender) will receive a notification via email when a recipient downloads the package;

h. Require CAC for pickup - Require the recipient to be logged in with a valid US DoD-issued CAC to download the file(s). Recipients without a CAC will not be able to download the package.

6. PROPOSAL FORMAT PHASE 1

FACTOR 1 – EXPERIENCE

Submission Requirements:

For Factor 1 – Experience, Offerors shall submit two (2) attachments, Attachment 1: Experience Overview Sheet and Attachment 2: Experience Information Sheet, detailing previous work experience projects meeting the requirements of this solicitation.

1. Information for completing Attachment 1 and Attachment 2:

a. Offerors shall complete an Experience Overview Sheet, Attachment One (1), with a total listing of five (5) projects, performed within the last six (6) years or currently being performed (at least 75% complete), that best represent the Offeror’s work experience required on this solicitation. If more than five (5) projects are submitted, only the first five

(5) projects will be evaluated. If the Offeror submits IDIQ task orders for experience, each task order will count as one project.

b. Offerors shall provide an Experience Information Sheet, Attachment Two (2), for each project listed on Experience Overview Sheet, Attachment One (1). All Experience Overview and Information Sheets must be filled out completely. The information provided on the Experience Information Sheets will be used to evaluate the relevancy and depth of each Offeror’s experience. Offerors are responsible for providing project descriptions in sufficient detail to permit evaluation of project relevancy. If the Offeror submits Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) task orders for experience, each task order will count as one project. Offerors are to provide relevant project examples.

c. An English speaking point of contact must be provided for each project submitted.

Please include the name, email, phone number(s) and fax number(s) for each point of contact. The Government may contact point(s) of contact to verify project information on mailto:CENAU.PROPOSAL@USACE.ARMY.MIL the Experience Information Sheets.

2. Most relevant projects (elements) are those demonstrate experience such as:

a. Projects that demonstrate Design Build experience working in Germany.

b. Projects that demonstrate experience designing, constructing and/or managing a project that involves significant electrical work. Similar efforts may include: electrical substations, transformers, Network Electrical Distributions with connections to electrical Utility providers.

c. If Key subcontractor or JV experience is submitted for evaluation purposes, project examples that demonstrate experience working with those Key Subcontractors and/or JV Partners are considered more relevant.

d. Projects with a cost between €1,000,000 to €10,000,000.

3. If a prime and sub have performed an otherwise relevant project together in the past, such a project may be considered more relevant than a project performed by only the subcontractor.

4. Signed Letters of Commitment from any key subcontractors (does not include directed subcontractor) for which experience or past performance information is being submitted for evaluation.

FACTOR 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE

Submission Requirements:

For each project submitted in Factor 1 Experience, use one (1) of the following formats to demonstrate past performance:

• Offerors may submit Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluations.

OR

• If no CPARS evaluation exists, the Offeror may submit a PPQ. PPQs --Solicitation

Attachment 3, NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire, in Section J of the solicitation--- is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client.

Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs should be submitted with your proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government via e-mail at cenau.proposal@usace.army.mil, prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

mailto:cenau.proposal@usace.army.mil

When emailing PPQs to cenau.proposal@usace.army.mil please include the solicitation number (W912GB-16-R-0001) and “PPQ” in the subject line. Example: Subject: W912GB-16-R-0001, PPQ for Contractor Name

Offerors may also include performance recognition documents received within the last six (6) years, such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition.

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. 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, JV, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror's proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

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.

FACTOR 3-MANAGEMENT APPROACH

Submission Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit a Management Plan for successful execution of this project. The narrative shall clearly demonstrate the Offeror understands the technical scope of this project.

The narrative shall describe, in detail, how the project team will accomplish the project and how the prime contractor will manage the various subcontractors, material acquisition and requirements for compliance with the RFP. The areas of emphasis relating to this factor are;

Organization Structure and Staffing; Project Execution and Management; Quality Control and Processes; and Project Security Processes (these are NOT individually rated subfactors). At a minimum, the plan must include the following:

1. Organization Structure and Staffing: The Offeror must clearly describe its organization structure and provide an Organization Chart. The description must identify all offices involved in this project from the Offeror’s Headquarters through to the Offeror’s site office, and how they are related. The Offeror must show the lines of authority and communication for the execution of the contract including the communication and authority lines for the Offeror’s Project Manager, Quality Control and Safety Organization, Electrical Engineer. All Joint Venture partners and major Subcontractors shall be addressed in this description. The description shall identify whether functions/positions will be filled by prime or by subcontractors.

The proposal shall clearly explain the proposed staffing and how the parties will communicate between each other and with the US Government.

2. Project Execution: The Offeror shall describe its plan for execution of the project. This includes the following elements at a minimum:

a. Project start up and mobilization – identify the activities that will take place immediately mailto:cenau.proposal@usace.army.mil after contract award.

b. Initial construction submittals – the Offeror should convincingly demonstrate that it will be able to submit the required Safety and Quality Control Plans in compliance with all the requirements of Specification Sections 01 35 26.00 00, “Safety and Occupational Health Requirements” and Sec 01 45 01.00 00, “USACE Quality Control” including all subparts, respectively.

c. Plan to obtain, retain, coordinate, and manage subcontractors – the Offeror must identify the significant aspects of the work which are to be self-performed and those that will be subcontracted. The Offeror must identify all key subcontractors by name. The Offeror must identify the nature and overall percent of work that will be performed by the Prime Contractor and all key sub-contractors).

d. Plan for initially obtaining access to the site (registration of workers) and controlling access to the site during construction.

e. Plan for how communications will be held with the U.S. Government. All communications shall be in the English language.

f. Plan and commitment to successfully meet contract obligations in the event issues between the Prime contractor and directed subcontractor arise to include disputes over change orders, Request for Equitable Adjustments, Claims during performance. Plan should also include the Prime contractor’s ability to communication, supervise and interact with the directed subcontractor to successfully complete the project.

3. Quality Control and Processes: The Offeror shall describe its Quality Control plan and processes for the project. The following minimum areas should be addressed in the plan:

a. Construction Quality Control

b. Safety Plan

c. Shop drawing and Request for Information (RFI) process

d. Risk identification and management program

e. Clear assignments of responsibility by key staff members

f. Identify the start-up activities after Notice to Proceed is issued

There is a limit of thirty (30) single spaced typed pages (A4 or letter size), using at a minimum a 12 pitch font, front and back equal two pages. If more than 30 pages are submitted, only the first 30 pages will be reviewed and evaluated. Offerors are encouraged to become familiar with personnel requirements located in specification Sections 01 45 01 USACE Quality Control; 01 35 26 Health and Occupational Safety Requirements; and 00 73 15 General Requirements

4. If a Key Subcontractor’s (not the directed subcontractor) is submitted for evaluation purposes, explain in the Management Approach submittal section the percentage of work the subcontractor will perform under this solicitation, how work will be managed between the prime and Key Subcontractor, and address any prior experience with the Key Subcontractors.

5. Directed Subcontractor – Offerors must submit a letter from Pfalzwerke which states they intend to work directly with you and will submit to you a price proposal for inclusion in your price proposal (Phase II).

7. PROPOSAL FORMAT FOR PHASE II, VOLUME I

FACTOR FOUR (4) – DESIGN COORDINATION

Submission Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit a design management plan that demonstrates how they intend to plan and coordinate with the directed design subcontractor (Pfalzwerke).

8. PROPOSAL FORMAT FOR PHASE II, VOLUME II

FACTOR FIVE (5) – PRICE

Submission Requirements:

This volume shall consist of all information required to support proposed prices. Certified cost and pricing data are not currently required; however, the Government reserves the right to request such data prior to award. The information submitted in this volume shall comply with FAR 15 and the requirements set forth below. There are no page limitations for this volume.

1. Offerors shall submit completed Attachment 4: Price Schedule containing prices and must propose on all CLINs, to include option CLINs, if applicable.

2. Completed Blocks 14 through 20 of the Offer, Standard Form (SF) 1442, duly executed with an original signature by an authorized official to bind the company. If submitting as a joint venture, an authorized official from each of the firms comprising the joint venture shall sign the SF 1442.

3. Representations and Certifications fully completed.

4. The name, addresses, telephone number(s), facsimile number(s), and e-mail address

(es) of the point(s) of contact with the authority to legally bind the Offeror.

5. The name, address, DUNS, CAGE, and Tax Identification Number (TIN) of the Offeror submitting the proposal.

Note: Offerors must be registered in System for Award Management (SAM) system prior to receiving an award. If submitting as a joint venture, the joint venture entity must be registered in SAM prior to receiving an award.

b. Failure to submit Section 00 10 00 and/or failure to complete all Line Items on Section 00 10 00, may result in the Offeror’s proposal package being rejected by the

Government after initial evaluation without further consideration.

This contract is firm-fixed-price, payable entirely in Euros. 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. 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 Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clauses. 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 (a) adequate financial resources to perform; (b) the ability to comply with the required performance schedule; (c) a satisfactory performance record; (d) a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics; (e) the necessary equipment and facilities to perform or the ability to obtain them; (f) be otherwise qualified and eligible to receive award.

LIMITED RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATION INFORMATION SUBMISSION:

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements

(1) Firms will submit a Bank Letter of Assurance demonstrating that their bank will provide a Bank Letter of Guarantee (BLG) for 20% of the project value, or, letter from a Surety demonstrating that the firm has bonding capacity of 100% of the price proposal, or a Bid Bond that satisfies the solicitation requirements.

(2) Firms are requested to notify their surety that representatives from USACE-NAU will be contacting them for reference information.

Additionally, the Government may use other sources of information to determine a firm’s responsibility including but not limited to Dun & Bradstreet reports and State databases.

SECTION 00 22 00 - SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION CRITERIA

EVALUATION CRITERIA

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

When the word ‘Offeror’ is stated in the solicitation, 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 stated in the solicitation, it is intended to mean U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

A Two-Phase Best Value Tradeoff source selection approach, as authorized under 10 U.S.C. 2305a, will be used. This process allows for a tradeoff between non-price factors and price and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal or other than the highest technically rated proposal to achieve a best-value contract award. Various rating approaches are used to evaluate proposals when using the tradeoff process.

Since this solicitation is Two-Phase, the most highly qualified evaluation on the ratings of each Phase 1 proposal against all Phase 1 evaluation criteria (FAR 15.306(c)) may be established in order to compete in Phase 2. An amendment to the original solicitation will be issued to initiate the Phase 2 portion of the solicitation.

The Government may proceed to the Phase2 competition without conducting discussions pertaining to the Phase 1 Technical Proposals. The Government may accept a Phase 2 offer and make award without conducting discussions with any of the Phase 2 offerors, if the Government can determine that one of the offerors has submitted an acceptable proposal that clearly represents the best value to the Government (see the analysis tradeoff procedures described below).

Subject to the provisions contained herein, the award will be made based on the best overall (Best Value/Tradeoff) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the four (4) evaluation factors; award will be made to the best value Offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements, and judged by an overall assessment of the evaluation criteria and other considerations specified in this solicitation, represents the Best Value to the Government. This source selection approach, called Best-Value Tradeoff, includes an evaluation of all factors: experience, past performance, management approach, design coordination and price.

The letter of commitment for the Directed Subcontractor, Pfalzwerke is a pass/fail requirement.

The proposals from Offerors who provide the required letter will then be evaluated in the following manner: 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 Coordination; and when combined, the four non price factors are equal to Price.

The Government reserves the right to award to other than the lowest proposed price. The greater the equality of technical proposals, the more important price shall become in selecting the Best Value to the Government.

Evaluation Factors. IAW FAR 15.304, the following factors will be considered in evaluating the proposals:

PHASE 1

1. Evaluation Factors:

The following factors will be considered in evaluating the Phase 1 proposals:

a. Factor One (1) – Experience

b. Factor Two (2) – Past Performance

c. Factor Three (3) – Management Approach

The SSA will use the evaluation results from the Phase1 proposal submittals and do his/her own integrated evaluation of the proposals. Offerors evaluated as most qualified will be notified by the Contracting Officer to submit the Phase 2 Proposal Requirements.

PHASE 2

2. Evaluation Factors:

The following factors will be considered in evaluating the Phase 2 proposals:

a. Factor Four (4) – Design Coordination

b. Factor Five (5) – Price

B. EVALUATION CRITERIA

The following is the Technical Rating Scale for:

a. Factor 1 – Experience

b. Factor 3 – Management Approach

c. Factor 4 – Design Coordination

Technical Ratings

ADJECTIVE DEFINITION

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.

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.

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.

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.

UNACCEPTABLE

Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is un-awardable.

FACTOR ONE (1)- EXPERIENCE

Evaluation Criteria:

The Experience factor will be rated as one factor. The offeror’s proposal will be evaluated on the relevance and depth of the projects and variety of construction experience demonstrated by the projects submitted. Depth is defined as the number of relevant similar projects. Within the Experience Factor there are no Sub-factors. Individual elements evaluated in Experience are all equal to each other.

If the offeror is proposing as a Joint Venture or with major subcontractors, relevant projects involving the same team will be given the most credit. Regardless of the number of Joint Venture partners, no more than five (5) Attachment 2, Project Experience Forms may be submitted for this factor. Submissions above five (5) projects on the Experience Overview Sheet and/or the Project Experience Forms will not be evaluated.

Most relevant projects (elements) are those that demonstrate experience:

o Projects that demonstrate Design Build experience working in Germany.

o Projects that demonstrate experience designing, constructing and/or managing a project that involves significant electrical work. Similar efforts may include: electrical substations, transformers, Network Electrical Distributions with connections to electrical Utility providers.

o If Key subcontractor (not directed subcontractor) or JV experience is submitted for evaluation purposes, project examples that demonstrate experience working with those Key Subcontractors and/or JV Partners are considered more relevant.

o Projects with a cost between €1,000,000 to €10,000,000.

Projects that demonstrate experience in all the required categories listed in PROPOSAL FORMAT FOR FACTOR 1 – EXPERIENCE, Submission Requirements are considered most relevant. Projects that demonstrate experience in multiple categories are considered more relevant.

FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

1. 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 completed in the last 6 years or currently ongoing (at least 75% complete) only.

2. 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. Proposals will be evaluated based on the information provided and any other Past Performance information obtained by the Government. 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.

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 projects and 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.

1. In evaluating relevancy and determining a confidence assessment of past performance, shall also be evaluated in accordance with the following criteria:

a. The relevance of the past performance;

b. How recent the project submitted was performed;

c. Trends in the Offeror’s performance;

d. Evaluations, letters / certificates of appreciation, commendations, and awards from clients;

and

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

2. Letters, Certificates, Commendations, and Awards: Additional consideration may be provided for letters of appreciation and commendations provided as part of an Offeror’s proposal, especially for projects submitted in response to Factor One (1), Experience.

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

4. Unavailability of Past Performance Information: In accordance with 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.

5. Additional Past Performance Evaluation Information:

a. Negative comments received from data gathered by the Government will not necessarily result in an adverse rating. However, negative comments from relevant past performance sources may negatively impact the evaluation of an Offeror’s past performance.

b. The Offeror shall ensure that the identified references and points of contact speak English, if possible, and are aware they may be contacted for information. Offerors are reminded that the Government reserves the right to obtain past performance information from any source available. The Government may also consider other past performance information in evaluating overall risk associated with a particular Offeror.

c. At no time during the evaluation process, in the debriefing, or after award, will the names of the individuals providing reference information about an Offeror's past performance be revealed to the Offeror or to any other party.

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

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.

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.

FACTOR 3: MANAGEMENT APPROACH

The Management Plan will be evaluated as one (1) factor. Within the Management Plan Factor there are no Sub-factors.

The Offeror’s Management Plan (including the Organization Structure and Staffing; Project Execution and Management; Key Personnel and Quality Control and Processes) will be evaluated for completeness, reasonableness, risk, and logic. The Government will evaluate whether the plan includes all the elements described in this solicitation. The management plan will be rated as one (1) factor.

The Government will evaluate whether the management plan:

• Demonstrates clearly delineated lines of authority on the organizational chart (graph) structured 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 such as subcontractors and joint venture partners.

• Identifies whether positions will be filled by prime or subcontractor and where they will be located.

• Clearly displays the planned organization structure on the graph and the narrative description.

• Provides comprehensive descriptions of duties, roles, major responsibilities, and authorities for

PM, Quality Control (QC) Manager, Safety Manager, and senior Electrical Engineer, 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.

• Provides a precise explanation illustrating an understanding of the contract requirements by describing management for performance of the contract including start-up / mobilization, summary of quality control plan, staffing of the field offices, summary to supply labor, summary to acquire materials, plan to obtain, retain, coordinate and manage subcontractors, summary for compliance with security requirements and additional and/or unique management advantages provided to the Government.

• Includes a Project Execution that describes a viable strategy to execute the project while achieving the desired quality as described in the solicitation.

• Provides a Quality Control Plan with descriptions of its procedures, controls, and people used within the Contractor’s organization that satisfied the requirements of this solicitation.

Pass/Fail – Directed Subcontract – Offerors must submit a letter from Pfalzwerke which states they intend to work directly with you and will submit to you a price proposal for inclusion in your price proposal (Phase II). Offerors who fail to provide this letter will be ineligible for award.

PHASE II

FACTOR FOUR (4) – DESIGN COORDINATION

Evaluation Criteria:

The Government will evaluate the plan for reasonableness and feasibility.

FACTOR 5 – PRICE

Evaluation Criteria:

The Government…