Solicitation_W912GB-16-R-0030_Project_13580.pdf

Project 13580, Israel

1. A Pre-Proposal Briefing will be held on 03 May 2016 at 0930 local time at the Hilton Tel Aviv (Ha-Yarkon St. 205, Tel Aviv-Yafo, 6340506, Israel). A Pre-Bid Site Visit has been scheduled for 04 May 2016 at 0930 local time. Offerors shall meet in the parking lot of IKEA Rishon Le Zion. Offerors must pre-register for both scheduled events. Offerors shall provide the following information no later than 28 April 2016 for all attendees to Itzik Ruimy at itzik.ruimy.ln@usace.army.mil and cc: oksana.strekha@usace.army.mil. The Subject of the E-mail should say “Site 13580 Site Visit”

a) Full name of attendee

b) Name of company the attendee is affiliated with

c) A copy of US Passport for American citizens or Todot Zehut if attendee is from Israel

2. Construction Magnitude is between $10,000,000 to $25,000,000

3. NAICS Code is 236220, Commercial and Institutional Building Construction

4. Proposals are due on 23-May-2016 by 15:00 hours Central European Summer Time (CEST). Proposals shall be received at: U.S Army Corps of Engineers-Europe District, Contracting Division, Attn: Oksana Strekha, 7th Floor, Room 709A, Konrad-Adenauer Ring 39, D-65187 Wiesbaden, Germany

5. Payment and Performance Bonds must be furnished within 10 calendar days after award

OKSANA STREKHA

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

22-Apr-2016

(RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

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

See Item 7

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID

3. DATE ISSUED

9. FOR INFORMATION A. NAME

SOLICITATION

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

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(e)

11. The Contractor shall begin performance within _______10 calendar days and complete it within ________548 calendar days after receiving award, X notice to proceed. This performance period is mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________

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 __________ 6 copies to perform the work required are due at the place specified in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________23 May 2016 (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) work requirements, and (2) other provisions and clauses incorporated in the solicitation in full text or by reference.

D. Offers providing less than _______120 calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due will not be considered and will 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

03:00 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-16-R-0030 207

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-16-R-0030

Section 00 01 10 - TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

(All Information Presented in this Table of Contents is Incorporated into this Solicitation)

SECTION TITLE

Section 00 10 00 Solicitation, Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) Schedule

Section 00 20 00 Instructions for Procurement

Section 00 21 00 Instructions

Section 00 45 00 Representations and Certifications

Section 00 70 00 Conditions of the Contract

Section 00 71 00 Definitions

Section 00 72 00 General Conditions

Section 00 73 00 Supplementary Conditions

Department of the Army, Safety and Health Requirements Manual No. EM 385-1-1, November 2014.

(Available online at:

http://www.publications.usace.army.mil/Portals/76/Publications/EngineerManuals/EM_385-1-1.pdf OR http://www.usace.army.mil/SafetyandOccupationalHealth.aspx)

Specifications

00 73 15 General Conditions, May 2015 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 32 01.00 10 Project Schedule, May 2008 01 33 00 Submittal Procedure, July 2009 01 35 26 Safety and Occupational Health Requirements, May 2015 01 45 01 USACE Quality Control, March 2012 01 45 01.01 Additional Quality Control Personnel, May 2010 01 45 01.10 USACE Quality Control System (QCS), April 2008

01 78 00 Completion Procedures, February 2010 01 78 23 Operation and Maintenance Data, March 2009 02 41 00 Demolition and Deconstruction, May 2010 EP 310-1-6a Construction Signs, June 2006

Host Nation Technical Requirements

HNTR 01 - General Specifications for Earthworks, 1993 HNTR 02 - General Specifications Cast in-Situ Concrete Works, 1998 HNTR 03 - General Specifications for Precast Concrete Products, 1990 HNTR 04 - General Specifications for Masonry Works, 1995 HNTR 05 - General Specifications for Waterproofing Works, 2004 HNTR 06 - General Specifications for Joinery and Steel Works, 2004 HNTR 07 - General Specifications for Sanitary Installations, 1990 HNTR 08 - General Specifications for Electrical Installations and Take-off Procedures, 2001 HNTR 09 - General Specifications for Plastering Works, 2005 HNTR 10 - General Specifications for Flooring and Covering Works, 2001 HNTR 11 - General Specifications for Painting Works, 2005 HNTR 12 - General Specifications for Aluminum Works, 1990 HNTR 13 - General Specifications for Prestressed Concrete Works, 2006 HNTR 14 - General Specifications for Stone Works, 1991 HNTR 15 - General Specifications for Air-Conditioning Installations, 1997 HNTR 16 - General Specifications for Heating and Steam Installation, 1992 HNTR 17 - General Specifications for Elevators, 2002 HNTR 18 - General Specifications for Communications Infrastructure, 2005 HNTR 19 - General Specifications for Steel Structures Works, 2000 HNTR 21 - General Specifications for Precast Concrete Constructions, 1995 HNTR 22 - General Specifications for Pre-Fabricated Elements in Building, 1995 HNTR 23 - General Specifications for Piles Bored and Cast In-Site, 2000 HNTR 34 - General Specifications for Fire Detection and Fire Extinguishing Systems, 1995 HNTR 36 - General Specifications for Compressed Air Installations, 1988 HNTR 40 - General Specifications for Site Development, 1993 HNTR 41 - General Specifications for Gardening and Irrigation Works, 1993 HNTR 43 - General Specifications for Outdoor Lighting, 1982 HNTR 50 - General Specifications for Concrete Pavements,1993 HNTR 51 - General Specifications for Paving Runways, Roads and Aprons, 1998 HNTR 57 - General Specifications for Water Lines, Sewage and Channeling, 1990 HNTR 66 - General Specifications for Protective Locksmithing, 2008 HNTR 67 - General Specifications for Antenna Mast Installation, 1984

Drawings

Attachment (17a1) - A Architectural Attachment (17a2) - A Architectural Attachment (17b) - C Civil Attachment (17c) - S Structural Attachment (17d) - E Electrical

Attachment (17e) - F Fuel Attachment (17f) - CP Cathodic Protection Attachment (17g) - M Mechanical Attachment (17h) - P Plumbing

Attachments

Attachment (1) - Experience Overview Sheet Attachment (2) - Experience Information Sheet Attachment (3) - USACE Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment (4) - Resume Attachment (5) - Letter of Commitment Attachment (6) - Contractor Key Personnel Performance Certification Attachment (7) - OSP Worksheet and Directions Attachment (8) - Change Order Markup Rates Attachment (9) - Disclosure of Lobbying Activities Attachment (10) - Price Schedule Attachment (11) - Special Contract Requirements (SRs 0 through 03) Attachment (12) - Special Specifications Attachment (13) - Soil Report Attachment (14) - USACE General Specifications Attachment (15) - Host Nation Technical Requirements Attachment (16) - Drawings List Attachment (17) - Drawings

Section 00 10 00 - SOLICITATION, CONTRACT LINE ITEM NUMBER (CLIN) SCHEDULE

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0001 1 Job Construction of Operational Facility

FFP

Construction including all required utilities and infrastructure as described in the solicitation documents for the following: ten (10) aircraft hangars (Hangars #1-5 and #7-11), two (2) aircraft support buildings: one staff and one technical building (Support Buildings 300 and 400), three (3) equipment sheds (Equipment Sheds 610, 631, and 632), and a maintenance station (Maintenance Station 800).

Upgrades and new construction of existing roadways and parking lots are also included. Period of Performance for this CLIN is in accordance with attached Price Schedule.

FOB: Destination

NET AMT

0002 1 Job OPTION Option 1-Construction of Western Runway

FFP

Construction to extend the existing western runway and construction of a new western taxiway (apron) connecting from western runway to the facilities as described in the solicitation documents. Period of Performance for this CLIN is in accordance with attached Price Schedule.

0003 1 Job OPTION Option 2-Construction of Eastern Taxiway

FFP

Construction of a new eastern taxiway (apron) connecting from western runway to existing eastern runwayas described in the solicitation documents. Period of Performance for this CLIN is in accordance with attached Price Schedule.

0004 1 Job OPTION Option 3-Construction of Fuel Station700

FFP

Construction of a new fuel station including all required utilities and infrastructure as described in the solicitation documents. Period of Performance for this CLIN is in accordance with attached Price Schedule.

0005 1 Job OPTION Option 4-Construction of Storage Bldg500

FFP

Construction of a new storage building including all required utilities and infrastructure as described in the solicitation documents. Period of Performance for this CLIN is in accordance with attached Price Schedule.

0006 1 Job OPTION Option 5-Construction of Addn Hangars

FFP

Construction of two additional hangars (Hangars #6 and #12) including all required utilities and infrastructure as described in the solicitation documents.

Period of Performance for this CLIN is in accordance with attached Price Schedule.

0007 1 Job OPTION Option 6-Installation of Hangar Gates

FFP

Installation of twelve (12) aircraft hangar gates including all required utilities and infrastructure as described in the solicitation documents. Period of Performance for this CLIN is in accordance with attached Price Schedule.

Section 00 20 00 - INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROCUREMENT

FMS REQUIREMENT

FMS REQUIREMENT

This contract is administered under Foreign Military Sales (FMS) and United States (U.S.) procurement laws and regulation “FMS Requirement” for the Israeli Ministry of Defense. The contract will be awarded and paid in U.S. Dollars. This procurement will be restricted to U.S. firms only, in accordance with 41 U.S.C. 421, 48 C.F.R. Chapter 1, Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.302-4 - International Agreement, and Defense FAR Supplement (DFARS) Part 225 - Foreign Acquisition. Contractors participating in this solicitation must be U.S. firms. Any Joint-Venture must be with another U.S. firm.

Offerors are advised that members/employees on the Israeli Ministry of Defense and the Israeli Armed Forces may serve as technical advisors and price analysts in the source selection process. These individuals will be authorized access to the proposal data and participate in discussions if required.

In accomplishing their duties related to the source selection process, the aforementioned may require access to proprietary information contained in the offerors' proposals. If the Offeror wishes to restrict any portion of their proposal which they consider proprietary from the aforementioned, the Offeror must issue a formal letter explaining the portions which should not be released to the Contracting Officer along with their proposal.

Section 00 21 00 - INSTRUCTIONS

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

SOLICITATION PROVISIONS

A. BASIS FOR AWARD (Section 00 21 00)

When the word ‘Offeror’ is encountered throughout Section 00 21 00, it is intended to mean a company seeking to do business with the Government and said company submits a proposal in response to this solicitation. When the word “Government” is encountered throughout this Section 00 21 00, it is intended to mean U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Subject to the provisions contained herein, award will be made to one (1) Offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the FAR, conforms to the solicitation requirements, and whose proposal is determined to be technically acceptable and offers the Best-Value to the Government. This source selection approach, called Best-Value Tradeoff, includes an evaluation of all factors: experience, past performance, management plan, and price. The Government reserves the right to award to other than the lowest proposed price Offeror; however, the degree of importance of price as a factor will become greater as the non-price factors of proposals approach equality. The greater the equality of non-price factors of proposals, the more important price shall become in selecting the best-value to the Government. Unreasonably high or low proposed prices may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from the competitive range based upon an assessment that the Offeror does not understand the requirement or the Offeror has made an unreasonable proposal.

Relative Importance of Factors: The proposals will be evaluated based on the four (4) evaluation factors: Non-price Factor One (1) Experience, Factor Two (2) Past Performance, and Factor Three (3) Management Plan, and Price Factor Four (4) Price.

All non-price factors are of equal importance and when combined are significantly more important than price.

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 its experience.

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

Factor 3: Management Plan: The Offeror’s management plan will be evaluated for the reasonableness, risk, and logic associated with the overall organization structure and how it is staffed to execute the entire scope of work in accordance with the project schedule.

Factor 4: Price: The resulting award will be a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) Contract. 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.

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.

FACTOR 1- EXPERIENCE

1. The Proposal shall contain no more than five (5) projects performed within five (5) 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 five (5) projects submitted, at least two projects should be for the prime contractor and in the case of a joint venture, at least one project for each joint venture partner. The Offeror will be evaluated on the depth and relevance of their experience as submitted in the proposal in accordance with the following criteria:

• Projects which involve construction of large-scale aircraft operation and maintenance facilities including hangars, support buildings, and fuel stations.

• Projects with substantial concrete and steel works.

• Projects with significant road and runway works.

• Projects similar in magnitude ($10,000,000 to $25,000,000) and complexity and of a similar duration as the work required under this solicitation.

• Projects that demonstrate experience working in Israel.

• Projects demonstrating that the offeror’s team members (including Key

Personnel, subcontractors, commissioning specialist and/or Joint Venture partners) 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 completed (as opposed to in-progress or on-going).

• Projects performed within the last five (5) years. Projects older than five (5) years will be evaluated but may be considered less relevant.

• One (1) project completed within the last 5 years of the solicitation date or currently being performed (at least 50% complete) demonstrating the Prime Contractor’s experience working in the United States of a similar magnitude, scope, complexity and schedule to the work required under this solicitation.

2. 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 for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and to a slightly lesser extent other U.S. Government agencies, are considered more relevant.

3. Projects demonstrating experience in multiple categories listed above will be considered more relevant than projects demonstrating one category.

4. 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.

5. If more than five (5) projects are submitted, only the first 5 (five) will be evaluated. If less than five (5) 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.

6. 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 base 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:

FACTOR 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE

1. There are two (2) 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 projects performed within five

(5) years of the solicitation issue date or currently being performed (at least 50%

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.

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.

complete). 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.

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, as well as any other Past Performance information obtained and deemed appropriate. 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 its 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 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.

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

4. In evaluating relevancy and determining a confidence assessment of past performance, the following shall also be taken into consideration:

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 of Offeror’s past performance.

5. 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.

6. 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. 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.

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 PLAN

The Offeror’s management plan will be evaluated for its reasonableness, risk, and the logic associated with the overall organization structure and how it is organized, structured, and staffed to execute the entire scope of work. The management plan which includes the organizational structure and staffing and execution plan will be rated as one factor. The Government will consider the organization and clarity of the management plan and whether the management plan:

1. Clearly delineated lines of authority on the organizational chart in a precise and logical manner including the relationship between the site office and USACE, including all involved with the management of the contract, for example, 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 positions are located.

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. Key personnel positions must be filled by full time employees of the prime contractor, directly hired by the prime contractor. They cannot be employees or officials of a subcontractor and cannot also serve or be 'dual hatted' as subcontractor employees or officials. If proposed Key Personnel are currently employed by someone other than the Prime Contractor, a signed letter of commitment must be signed by both parties and submitted with the proposal.

Resumes of Key Personnel: The Offeror’s Key Personnel will be evaluated based on the information provided in the resumes. Resumes shall follow the format provided in Attachment 4. The minimum qualifications for the Key Personnel are listed below, and if the Key Personnel resumes submitted do not demonstrate these qualifications then the Key Personnel will not be considered to meet the minimum requirements for this Factor, and will receive an unacceptable rating in this Factor. In evaluating proposed key personnel the government may consider any relevant information known to it concerning the proposed personnel, including performance on previous government contracts.

a. Minimum experience for the Key Personnel shall include experience with at least one (1) similar project in the role for which they are proposed.

Minimum experience and education requirements must be in accordance with USACE Specifications and the following:

The Project Manager, Quality Control Manager, Safety Manager and Health Manager each must have five (5) years of construction experience similar in size and complexity to that required in this solicitation.

The Site Superintendent must have ten (10) years of construction experience similar in size and complexity to that required in this solicitation.

Additional QC Personnel (civil, electrical, mechanical, and structural) must have two (2) years of construction experience similar in size and complexity to that required in this solicitation.

Experience must be on a project of the same type and nature as the work identified in the project scope of work, and be on a contract with the government of the United States of America, either with the US Army Corps of Engineers or Department of Defense agencies.

4. A precise explanation illustrating an understanding of the contract requirements by describing management for performance of the contract including mobilization, summary of quality control plan, staffing of the field offices, plan to supply labor including manpower loading, 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.

5. A project schedule and resource leveling plan that accounts for all contract requirements. The schedule will be evaluated for understanding of the project scope, risks, and restrictions which must be considered (e.g., long lead supply and materials, identification of critical path items, logicalness of proposed phasing, etc.). The resource leveling plan will be evaluated for its ability to demonstrate how the project scope will be accomplished within budget and on schedule. Further, the Offeror’ schedule must specifically demonstrate the Offeror’s ability to satisfy the milestones specified in the price schedule and specification sections. In addition, the Government may use independent judgment concerning logic, constraints and typical construction durations.

The length of the schedule must be equal to the contract duration. The Government will evaluate the schedule to assess conformance with the solicitation requirements, the strength of understanding of the project scope, and restrictions which must be considered in the schedule (e.g., long lead items, base access, manpower availability, critical milestones, logicalness of proposed phasing, etc.). The Government will evaluate the strength of understanding of events associated with the Offeror's capability to schedule the complete project within the proposed contract duration and the realism of the schedule.

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

FACTOR 4: PRICE

Basis of Evaluation

The Government will evaluate price based on the total evaluated price. Total evaluated price consists of the price of all Contract Line Items (CLINs) base and all options in the Price Schedule, Off-Shore Procurement (OSP) Worksheet, the supporting pricing narrative and the Markup Rates.

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.

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.

(a) For evaluation purposes, the total evaluated price will include the following:

(1) Evaluation of the price proposal will determine the reasonableness of the offeror’s proposal.

(2) Evaluation will determine the offeror’s comprehension of the requirements of the RFP as well as to assess the degree to which the proposed price accurately reflects proposed performance.

(b) In accordance with FAR 15.404-1, Proposal Analysis Techniques, analysis will be performed by one or more of the following techniques to ensure a fair and reasonable price:

(1) Comparison of total proposed price(s) received in response to the solicitation;

(2) Comparison of proposed price received in response to the solicitation to the Independent Government Estimate;

(3) Comparison of proposed price received in response to the solicitation with available historical information;

(4) Comparison of proposed price received in response to the solicitation with market research;

(5) Analysis of congruence between technical and price proposals to determine the reasonableness of the proposed prices as well as potential performance risk.

The contract will be a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contract. 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, performance risk 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 all CLINs. Should the Government determine proposed prices are unreasonably low (an indication of “buy-in”), this will be considered a performance risk.

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 and completing the Offshore Procurement (OSP) worksheet. 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 proposed prices will be evaluated to determine if any are unreasonably high or low in relation to the anticipated work under the contract as well as with current industry standards. 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 Offeror shall also declare their method for determining their Field Office Overhead (FOOH) rate in accordance with the FAR. As the evaluation of the price proposal will represent a portion of the total evaluation, it is possible that an Offeror might not be selected for award because of unreasonable, unbalanced, incomplete, inaccurate, noncurrent price proposal information and/or project pricing data.

Failure to submit complete the Pricing Schedule and failure to complete all Contract Line Items may result in the Offeror’s proposal package being rejected by the Government after initial evaluation without further consideration.

The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject any and all offers. However, offers found to be unreasonably high or low, may be considered unacceptable and rejected on that basis.

FFP Requirements

1) The RFP requires firm-fixed-prices contract line items. A price reasonableness approach will be utilized by the Government to determine that the proposed prices offered are fair and reasonable and that a “buy-in” or unbalanced pricing between CLINs or Option Periods is not occurring. In evaluating price reasonableness, other than cost and pricing data, shall be utilized.

2) The Government will examine price proposals for artificially low unit prices.

Offers found to be unreasonably high, unreasonably low (an indication of “buy –in”), or unbalanced, may be considered unacceptable and may be rejected on that basis.

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 00 21 00)

1. INTRODUCTION

The Offeror’s proposal shall be submitted in hard copy, with accompanying digital copies, as set forth below. Volume 1: Technical Proposal and 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 or emails of Volume I or Volume II are permitted:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers – Europe District Contracting Division (CENAU-CT) Attn: Oksana Strekha, Contracting Specialist 7th Floor, Room A-704 Konrad-Adenauer Ring 39 D-65187 Wiesbaden Germany

Email: oksana.strekha@usace.army.mil Telephone Confirmation: +49(0)611-9744-2626

The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited.

Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the Technical requirements or the RFP 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.

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. Offerors shall submit a CD copy of each Volume, including the Electronic Price Schedule. Text and graphics portfolios of the electronic copies shall be in a format readable by Microsoft Word or Adobe, Data submitted in a spreadsheet format shall be readable by MS Excel. In the case of conflict between the paper copy and the electronic copy of the proposal submitted, the paper copy shall take precedence.

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 and OSP Worksheet shall be completed in full, including all options.

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 and OSP Worksheet.

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. If the offeror wishes to restrict the disclosure or use of its proposal, use the legend permitted by FAR 52.215-1(e). Individual subcontractor/vendor proprietary information may be submitted via separate binders/CDs. The information contained in these binders/CDs must be referenced (by binder title, page and section number as appropriate) within the main proposal where the information would have been included if it were not subcontractor/vendor proprietary. The information in these separate binders/CDs is subject to all other requirements of the RFP and must be well-marked to clearly indicate any special handling instructions.

n. 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…