JOC_PPC_Slides_FINAL__FBO.pdf

PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE

SOLICITATION #: W912GB19R0026

POLAND JOB ORDER CONTRACT (JOC)

Presented by:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Europe District

05 March 2019 Sheraton Hotel Poznán, Poland

USACE TEAM INTRODUCTIONS

AGENDA

Registration / Check-in 0900 Welcome / Introductory Remarks

Allie Blount 0935-0940

About The USACE / NAU Jen Aldridge / David Manka

0940-0945

Job Order Contracting (JOC) John McCormick

0945-1005

Procurement Matters: Timeline, Systems, Solicitation, Proposal Format & Submission, Evaluation Criteria, Debriefings, etc.

Allie Blount

1005-1045

Break – 20 Minutes 1045-1105 U.S. Procurement Law and Overseas Contracting

Leslie Reed 1105-1135

Closing Remarks 1135-1200

Information Provided for this Pre-Proposal Conference

Any content of this presentation, remarks or explanations provided are for general information and do not change the terms and conditions of the solicitation.

DISCLAIMER

THE UNITED STATES ARMY

CORPS OF ENGINEERS &

THE EUROPE DISTRICT

JENNIFER ALDRIDGE / DAVID MANKA

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Mission: USACE provides vital engineering solutions, in collaboration with our partners, to secure our Nation, energize the economy, and reduce risks of disasters.

USACE is globally engaged and regionally aligned

NAU Commander: Colonel John K. Baker, P.E.

Headquartered in Wiesbaden, Germany Six broad portfolios: Enduring Base Support, Forward Basing and Posture, Medical Facilities, School Facilities, Defense Security Cooperation, and Missile Defense.

Central Area Office – Sembach, Germany Ramstein AFB RO

Spangdahlem AFB PO Kaiserslautern RO

Germersheim PO Baumholder RO

BENELUX RO - Mons, Belgium Brunssum PO Netherlands Brussels PO - Brussels

Hessen Area Office –Wiesbaden, Germany Wiesbaden RO

CIC PO

Grafenwoehr RO

Ansbach PO Hohenfels PO Garmish PO

Stuttgart RO

District HQ – Wiesbaden Special Projects RO

(AFRICOM/EUCOM)

ROBMC (Hospital) Area Office*

Poland MD Area Office (Redzikowo, Poland)

•500+ Employees •25% Local Nationals •More than 30 field offices in 14 countries

Israel Area Office North RO

Haifa PO Central RO South RO

RO: Resident Office PO: Project Office *Planned Office

Northern Europe Area Office (Poznan, Poland) Powidz RO – Powidz, Poland Lask PO – Lask, Poland Riga RO – Riga, Latvia

Tallinn PO – Tallinn, Estonia

Southern Europe Area Office (MK, Romania) Romania RO – Mihail Kogalnicheanu (MK)

Campia Turzii PO – Romania* Romania MD PO – Deveselu, Romania NSTA PO – Bulgaria

Mediterranean RO – Vicenza, Italy Aviano PO Livorno PO TUSEG – Incirlik AB, Turkey Caucasus PO – Tbilisi, Georgia

EUROPE DISTRICT OFFICES

JOB ORDER CONTRACTING

(JOC)

MR. JOHN MCCORMICK

JOC PROGRAM MANAGER

• Occasionally referred to as a Single Award Task Order Contract

(SATOC)

• One Indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity Contract Award

• Types of Work:

Sustainment, Restoration and Modernization (SRM) type of projects

• Task orders priced using a unit price book (UPB)

• Step 1 – Select JOC contractor

• Step 2 – Individual task orders negotiated with single JOC contractor

JOB ORDER CONTRACT OVERVIEW

• TASK ORDER LIMITATIONS:

The Minimum Task Order $2,000 and the Maximum

Task Order is limited to $2,500,000. However, smaller and larger dollar value projects may be considered at the discretion of the Contracting Officer.

• PROJECT LOCATIONS:

Locations include but are not limited to Drawsko

Pomorskie Training Area (DPTA), Zagan-Swietoszow Training Area, Swietoszow Military Complex, Boleslawiec Military Complex, Zagan Military Complex, Skwierzyna Military Base, the 33rd Transport Air Base in Powidz, and Bukowska Base in Poznan.

POLAND JOB ORDER CONTRACT

Ref: RFP Section 01 11 00 Summary of Work

• Unit Price Book (UPB): The UPB titled “2016 Germany UPB Update – Euro Based” is to be used in the pricing and execution of work under this contract.

• Non Pre-Priced (NPP): Items of work not covered by the UPB that are within the Scope of the Contract are considered NPP. NPP items shall be negotiated quantities based on actual quotes that are incorporated into Task Orders.

• COEFFICIENT: Contractor proposed, numerical factor that represents contractor costs direct and indirect not considered to be included in the UPB.

PRICING

UNIT PRICE BOOK (UPB)

• A compilation of real property repair, maintenance, minor construction related tasks, etc.

• Integral part of contract.

• Thousands of items.

• Sections by trade.

• Each item has item number, description, unit of measure and price

• All UPB prices and their respective coefficients are established at the award of contract.

SAMPLE TASK ORDER

The Sample Task Order illustrated below is intended to be used as an EXAMPLE ONLY, prices and coefficients are not actual prices.

SAMPLE TASK ORDER

PARKING APRON DEMOLITION & REPAIR (Sample) Book Line Item

Description Unit Unit Quantity

Unit Total Measure Price

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) X.X.X Break up and remove road surface and cutting M3 7.8 $ 230.00 $ 1,794.00

X.X.X Base Course w/compacting M3 6 $ 150.00 $ 900.00 X.X.X Welded wire KG 15 $2.30 $ 34.50 X.X.X Exposed Aggregate 6cm thick slab, gravel concrete (furnish & install) M3 1.8 $ 47.90 $ 86.22

Total Direct Cost $ 2,814.72 Coefficient * 1.45 Total Price Of Normal Hour Work $ 4,081.34

* Contractor awarded coefficient 1.45 for normal working hours.

NPP Item Description Unit Measure

Unit Quantity

Unit Price Total

Reflective Tape LS 1 $ 150.00 $ 150.00 Bidding Schedule Line Item Coefficient * 1.50 Total Price of NPP $ 225.00

Task Order Normal Work Hours $ 4,081.34

NPP $ 225.00

Total Price of Task Order $4,306.34

The Sample Task Order illustrated below is intended to be used as an EXAMPLE ONLY, prices and coefficients are not actual prices.

1. Project Identification

2. Joint Site Visit & Joint Scoping

3. Solicitation Issued

4. Contractor Prepares Cost

Estimate/Proposal via the UPB

5. USACE Reviews Proposal

6. Negotiate (as necessary)

7. Finalize Pricing (as necessary)

8. Contracting Officer issued Task Order

(DD 1155)

9. Project Execution (Construction)

10. Task Order Close-out

JOC PROCESS OVERVIEW

PROCUREMENT MATTERS

MS. ALLISON M. BLOUNT

CONTRACTING OFFICER

• Procurement Timeline

• Registrations & ID Numbers

• Federal Business Opportunities

• Pre-Proposal Inquiries & ProjNet

• Instructions

• Proposal Format

• Evaluation Criteria

• Source Selection Approach

• Debriefings

OVERVIEW

• Request for Proposal Issued – 14 FEB 2019

• Amendment 0001 – 20 FEB 2019

– PPC information, correct paragraph B.3 in Section 00 22 00, and provide Site Info

• Amendment 0002 – 28 FEB 2019

– PPC Info, revisions to Sections 00 21 00 & 00 22 00

• Amendment 0003 – 01 MAR 2019

– Revisions to Section 00 22 00 (relative importance of factors, Factor 1 more consideration, and pricing evaluation).

TIMELINE

• Pre-Proposal Conference – 05 MAR 2019

• Pre-Proposal Inquiries Due – 21 MAR 2019 *7 calendar days prior to PDD

• Proposals Due Date (PDD) – 28 MAR 2019

• Anticipated Award – Late MAY or early JUNE 2019

REGISTRATIONS & IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS

System Description Website General Timeline

DUNS Dun & Bradstreet Number (DUNS):

Unique nine-digit identification number for each physical location of your business http://www.dnb.com 24-48 hours

CAGE /

NCAGE

Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code

NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code http://www.dlis.dla.mil/ cage_welcome.asp https://eportal.nspa.na to.int/AC135Public/def ault.aspx

7-11 business days

SAM System for Award Management (SAM) is a registration database required for all US Federal Government Contracts https://www.sam.gov/ 2 weeks to go active

FBO Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) a web-based portal which allows vendors to review U.S. Procurement Opportunities and submit proposals https://www.fbo.gov/ Immediate http://www.dnb.com/ http://www.dlis.dla.mil/cage_welcome.asp https://eportal.nspa.nato.int/AC135Public/default.aspx https://www.sam.gov/ https://www.fbo.gov/

• Provisions/clauses require all contractors to register and maintain an active SAM entity registration in order to be eligible for contract awards, as prescribed by the regulation at FAR Subpart 4.11.

Solicitations Provision: FAR 52.204-7 SAM or FAR 52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors--Commercial Items Contract Clause: FAR 52.204-13 SAM Maintenance or 52.212-4 Contract Terms and Conditions--

Commercial Items.

• Contractors are required to update SAM registration ANNUALLY.

• In order to eligible for the contract award resulting from this solicitation, Offerors are advised to take immediate action to ensure your SAM entity registration is current and/or will be current at the time of proposal receipt by this contracting office.

SYSTEM FOR AWARD MANAGEMENT

Ref: RFP Section 00 21 00 - Instructions

• U.S. Federal Government mandates contractor registration in the System for Award Management (SAM) prior to the award of a Federal contract.

• How does your company register in SAM? Go to: https://www.sam.gov/

• The website contains a video overview briefing and user guides for assistance.

• For Help with SAM or FBO, Contact the Federal Service Desk: www.fsd.gov Live Chat or Web form or via Phone U.S. Calls: 866-606-8220 International Calls: 334-206-7828 Hours of Operation: Monday - Friday 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. ET

SYSTEM FOR AWARD MANAGEMENT

Ref: RFP Section 00 21 00 - Instructions https://www.sam.gov/ http://www.fsd.gov/

Mrs. Dorota MIRECKA

Phone: +48 261 877 858 / 898 Fax: +48 261 877 888 E-mail: ncbpl@ron.mil.pl

POLAND POINT OF CONTACT

mailto:ncbpl@ron.mil.pl

• All Requests for Proposal (RFP) documents and amendments are available for viewing at the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) website http://www.fbo.gov

• It is the Offeror’s responsibility to check the website for any amendments.

• The FBO vendor user guide has information & instructions on how to utilize FBO, accessible via the following web URL:

https://www.fbo.gov/downloads/FBO_Vendor_Guide.pdf

SOLICITATIONS & AMENDMENTS

Ref: RFP Section 00 21 00 - Instructions http://www.fbo.gov/ https://www.fbo.gov/downloads/FBO_Vendor_Guide.pdf

• Pay special attention to stated proposal deadlines. Late proposals in nearly all cases will not be considered.

• The Bids/Responses feature is enabled by the Buyer (USACE) for this solicitation. Offerors shall submit an electronic response through document upload.

• Vendors must login to be able to submit/review electronic responses.

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

FBO REGISTRATION

Enter DUNS

Offerors with technical inquiries shall submit their inquiries via “Bidder Inquiry” in ProjNet at www.projnet.org\projnet.

Bidder Inquiry Key: 67F9TC- D44W95

The Bidder Inquiry System will be closed to new inquiries seven (7) calendar days prior to proposal submission in order to ensure adequate time is allotted to form an appropriate response and amend the solicitation, if necessary.

PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRIES VIA PROJNET

http://www.projnet.org/projnet

• TASK ORDERs

– Minimum Task Order $2,000

– Maximum Task Order is limited to $2,500,000.

However, smaller and larger dollar value projects may be considered at the discretion of the Contracting Officer

• Not To Exceed (NTE) $49.5M Total over Five Years

• Base Ordering Period: One Year

• Four Additional One-Year Ordering Periods

W912GB19R0026

See Section 00 21 00

• File Size Limitations. Offerors are advised to follow the FBO instructions for uploading files larger than 10MB (java upload).

• File Name. Each filename shall begin with the solicitation number, followed by the word “RESPONSE”, followed by your firm’s name, and finally a brief file description. EXAMPLES:

(1) “W912GB19R0026 RESPONSE Firmname Volume I.pdf”

(2) “W912GB19R0026 RESPONSE Firmname Volume I Part 1.pdf”

(3) “W912GB19R0026 RESPONSE Firmname Volume I Part 2.pdf”

(4) “W912GB19R0026 RESPONSE Firmname Volume I diagrams.pdf”

(5) “W912GB19R0026 RESPONSE Firmname Volume II.pdf”

GENERAL SUBMISSION INFORMATION

• File Organization, Formatting, and other instructions.

Although hard copies are not accepted, each file shall be clearly indexed, and logically assembled. Font size shall be 10 or larger. Pages shall be letter sized--larger page sizes (such as 11x17 foldouts, etc.) will be counted as two pages.

Offerors shall prepare proposals in the English language.

Proposals shall be in a narrative format, organized and titled so that each section of the proposal follows the order and format of the factors.

Information presented should be organized so as to pertain to only the evaluation factor in the section that the information is presented.

Files shall be submitted in their native format (i.e. doc, xls, ppt, etc.), or if in pdf format, shall be in searchable text.

GENERAL SUBMISSION INFORMATION (CONT)

• Upload Completion & Deadline.

Interested parties shall submit responses no later than the date specified on solicitation document.

The time & date of proposal receipt will be the upload completion / delivery time

& date recorded within FBO.

Do not assume that electronic submission will occur instantaneously. Large files

(e.g. 10MB or more) will take some time to upload. Offerors should time their upload effort with prudence by not waiting until the last few minutes—this will allow for unexpected delays in the transmittal process and troubleshooting.

• Any information, presented in a proposal that the Offeror wants safeguarded from disclosure to other parties must be identified and labeled in accordance with the requirements of Provision “FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors Competitive Acquisition (Jan 2004),” subparagraph (e).

GENERAL SUBMISSION INFORMATION (CONT)

VOLUME I, NON-PRICE

Section A - Executive Summary. Include a one page cover letter and any applicable fully-executed joint venture agreements.

Section B - Factor 1, Experience. Include a completed Experience Information Sheet for each project.

Section C - Factor 2, Past Performance. Include completed CPARS records and/or completed Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaire Forms for each project submitted under Factor 1.

Section D - Factor 3, Management Approach. This section shall include a narrative describing the Offeror’s proposed management approach. Limited to 20 pages.

PROPOSAL FORMAT – VOLUME I

VOLUME II, PRICE & ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

1. Section A – Cover Letter. Offerors shall submit a cover letter in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(c)(2), including:

i. The solicitation number.

ii. The Offeror’s name, address, and phone/email contact information.

iii. A statement specifying the extent of agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation and agreement to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered.

iv. Names, titles, and telephone / email contact information of persons authorized to negotiate on the offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation.

v. Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent’s authority.

2. Section B – Completed Solicitation Form (and amendments). Offerors shall submit a completed Standard Form (SF) 1442 using a printed copy of the SF 1442 included in this solicitation. If applicable, Offerors shall also submit a completed SF 30 for each solicitation amendment, acknowledging all the amendments.

PROPOSAL FORMAT – VOLUME II

VOLUME II, PRICE & ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS (Continued)

3. Section C – Completed Price Schedule. Offerors shall submit a completed price schedule, including proposed prices for all items for the base and all option years (schedule provided as RFP attachment).

4. Section D – Bank Letter of Assurance or Bid Bond in the amount of €4,800,000 ($5,000,000). See format provided as RFP attachment.

5. Section E – SAM Registration, Representations & Certifications. Offerors shall submit the following:

i. A completed clause FAR 52.204-8(d).

ii. A copy of their current “Entity Registration” in the System for Award Management (SAM) as recorded at www.sam.gov, showing the following sections: “core data, “assertions”, and “POCs”.

iii. A copy of their current “FAR & DFARS Report” that demonstrates all their completed representations and certifications as recorded at www.sam.gov.

6. Section F - Financial Information (e.g. past three years financial statements, annual reports, Dun & Bradstreet Ratings, and or number, bank name, and POC, etc).

PROPOSAL FORMAT (CONT)

Trade-off Process (FAR 15.101-1) In the best interest of the Government to consider award to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated offeror. Factors include:

Factor 1 – Corporate Relevant Specialized Experience Factor 2 – Past Performance Factor 3 – Management Approach Factor 4 – Price, Unit Price Book (UPB) Coefficients

Relative Importance of the Evaluation Factors. In accordance with FAR 15.304(e), the non-priced factors, when combined, are approximately equal in importance to price.

In addition, of the non-price factors, Factor 1 Experience is more important than Factors 2 Past Performance and 3 Management Approach, which are of equal importance to one another.

SOURCE SELECTION APPROACH

Ref: RFP Section 00 22 00 - Evaluation

KEY DEFINITIONS

STRENGTH:

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

WEAKNESS:

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

SIGNIFICANT WEAKNESS:

• A flaw that substantially increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

DEFICIENCY:

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

For Factor 1 evaluation purposes, the definition of a recent and relevant contract must meet the following conditions:

a. The contract was awarded to the Offeror as the prime contractor. In the case of an Offeror that is a JV, the contract must have been awarded to either member of the JV as the prime contractor. In the case of an Offeror that is a prime-sub team (see previous paragraph on teaming arrangements), the contract must have been awarded to the prime or the key sub-contractor.

b. The contract was completed no earlier than five calendar years before the closing date of the RFP or has been ongoing for at least one year before the closing date of this RFP.

c. The contract is fundamentally for building renovations that include floors, doors, walls, windows, external facades, repairs to roofs; repair/replacement of major building systems such as electrical, mechanical, HVAC; Civil work, that includes concrete/asphalt roads and pavements, earthwork, and drainage structures; and environmental work, such as hazardous material abatement and disposal.

d. Projects with a minimum cost of €50,000.

RECENT AND RELEVANT CONTRACTS

The SST will evaluate Offerors under this factor to determine the depth and breadth of the Offeror’s experience that demonstrates the ability to accomplish the work specified under this solicitation. Offerors must submit no more than five projects meeting the criteria in Paragraph C.3.Recent and Relevant Contracts.

The Experience Information Sheet shall not exceed 4 pages per contract.

For Offerors submitting as a Teaming Arrangement, each firm/contractor in the Teaming Arrangement, whether JV or prime/key sub, shall submit a minimum of one (1) project. If more than five projects are submitted by an Offeror, the Government will only review the first five (5) projects. The projects will be reviewed in the order in which they are received in Offeror’s submitted proposal.

FACTOR 1: CORPORATE EXPERIENCE

For the purposes of evaluation under this factor, more consideration will be given to an Offeror that demonstrates greater depth and breadth of experience that involve the following (listed is in no order of importance).

i. Projects that demonstrate experience working in Poland.

ii. Projects that demonstrate experience working in European Union countries.

iii. Projects that demonstrate experience working with the United States

Government.

iv. Projects demonstrating experience with multiple projects in multiple trades.

v. Projects demonstrating experience working with proposed Key

Subcontractors and/or the proposed JV Partners.

NOTE: Offerors are cautioned that the SST may assess weaknesses against experience examples that are not verifiable, and/or where the Offeror or their proposed subcontractor were subcontractors and their role in the project was minor in comparison to the whole project.

FACTOR 1: CORPORATE EXPERIENCE (CONT)

FACTORS 1 & 3 RATING

NON-PRICE FACTOR COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Color Rating Description Blue Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

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

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

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

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

Proposal is unawardable.

Risk levels as described in the adjectival ratings in the combined technical/risk rating table will be assessed according to the following guidelines:

NON-PRICE FACTOR TECHNICAL RISK RATING

Adjectival Rating Description

Low

Proposal may contain weakness(es) which have little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

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

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

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

RISK LEVELS

• The SST will evaluate Offerors under this factor to determine how likely Offerors will be successful on the work under this solicitation.

• The Offeror's past performance will be evaluated based on performance on projects submitted under Factor 1 Experience, as well as other projects not submitted by the Offeror, to include the past performance of any Subcontractors or JV partners the Offeror may have submitted.

• The Government’s past performance evaluation will include an assessment of past performance on any and all relevant past performance. NOTE: The evaluation for this factor uses a much broader definition of what is relevant as compared to Factor 1 Experience.

This assessment will be based on consideration of all relevant facts and circumstances, including any trends in past performance.

• Key focus areas will include the following (see PPQ): Quality, Schedule/Timeliness of Performance, Customer Satisfaction, Management/Personnel/Labor, Cost/Financial Management, AND Safety/Security

FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

• Also include performance recognition documents received for the Factor 1 projects such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition. Offerors shall provide a copy of any Cure Notices or Show Cause Letters received by the Offeror for each submitted project and a description of any corrective action implemented by the Offeror. The Offerors shall indicate if any of the contracts listed were terminated and the type and reasons for the termination.

• The Government may verify information provided by the Offeror with any source available and has the right to contact points of contact other than those listed by the Offeror.

• In rating past performance, the Government may consider available past performance information on predecessor companies, or employment histories of key personnel, or committed subcontractors performing key elements of the project. 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 2: PAST PERFORMANCE (CONT)

• Past Performance Relevancy Rating. The first aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the Offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. Relevancy is not separately rated, however. Common aspects of relevancy include similarity of service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and degree of subcontract/teaming.

• Performance Confidence Assessment. The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts. In conducting the confidence assessment, each Offeror shall be assigned one of the ratings identified on NEXT SLIDE.

FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE (CONT)

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.

Neutral Confidence

No recent/relevant performance record is available or the Offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

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.

Note: In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.304(a)(2)(iv)). If an Offeror has no relevant past performance history, the Offeror must affirmatively state that it possesses no relevant directly related or similar past performance.

Evaluators will determine whether the Offeror’s management approach is logical, feasible, and demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of the complexity of managing the contract. The information shall provide charts, tables, sketches and maps as needed to make the work approach understandable.

In performing the evaluation, the Government will evaluate the following:

• Whether the proposal clearly delineates lines of authority, and communication with the

Government, on the organizational chart organized in a precise and logical manner, including all offices involved with the management of the contract, including Key Subcontractors and JV partners.

• The extent to which the proposal describes a reasonable and logical plan for the performance of five (5) simultaneous task orders that illustrates a detailed understanding of multiple task order requirements, proposes personnel that meet the specification requirements, and provides subcontracting and staffing plan.

See previous slide 37 for combined technical/risk rating.

FACTOR 3: MANAGEMENT APPROACH

Price will not be rated, but will be considered in establishing the competitive range prior to discussions (if held) and in making the final determination of best value. The Government will perform price analysis on all proposals received in accordance with FAR 15.404-1 to determine completeness, balanced pricing, reasonableness, and understanding of the work.

COEFFICIENTS

• See the RFP Section 01 11 00 for a definition of UPB Coefficients.

• Offerors are required to price for all items for the base and all option ordering periods.

• Prices proposed will be analyzed to determine if the prices are unbalanced. If the price analysis indicates that an offer is unbalanced the contracting officer shall consider the risks to the Government associated with the unbalanced pricing. An offer will be rejected if the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government. From a price perspective, an offer’s overall value will be assigned as being the sum of all the CLINs added together.

FACTOR 4: PRICE

The Government intends to evaluate all options and has included the provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in the Solicitation. In accordance with FAR 52.217-5, evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). Analysis will be performed by one or more of the following techniques to ensure a fair and reasonable price:

(i) Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the Solicitation.

(ii) Comparison of proposed prices with the independent Government cost estimate.

(iii) Comparison of proposed prices with available historical information.

FACTOR 4: PRICE (CONT)

FY19 Poland JOC Contract line Item Number (CLIN) 0001 1001 2001 3001 4001

Area 1 - Poznan Base Year Option Year 1 Option Year 2 Option Year 3 Option Year 4 Pre-Priced Coefficient (Regular Hours) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pre-Priced Coefficient (Other than Regular Hours) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Non Pre-Priced Coefficient 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Area 2 - Drawsko Pomorskie Base Year Option Year 1 Option Year 2 Option Year 3 Option Year 4 Pre-Priced Coefficient (Regular Hours) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pre-Priced Coefficient (Other than Regular Hours) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Non Pre-Priced Coefficient 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Area 3 - All Other Locations Base Year Option Year 1 Option Year 2 Option Year 3 Option Year 4 Pre-Priced Coefficient (Regular Hours) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pre-Priced Coefficient (Other than Regular Hours) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Non Pre-Priced Coefficient 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

PRICE FACTOR: COEFFICIENTS

• Offerors are required to price for all items for the base and all option ordering periods.

• An offer’s overall value will be assigned as being the sum of all the CLINs added together.

Ref: RFP Attachment 4

What is a Debriefing?

A Debriefing under FAR Part 15 is an opportunity for an offeror to better understand the basis for an agency’s selection decision.

Debriefings give you a chance to hear from the agency regarding:

the evaluation process;

how your proposal was evaluated in relation to the evaluation criteria;

what was successful in your proposal;

what was lacking in need of improvement in your proposal; and reasonable responses to relevant questions about whether the source selection procedures were followed.

Offeror must submit a debriefing request to USACE within 3 calendar days after notification of exclusion from the competitive range or contract award.

DEBRIEFINGS

FINAL COMMENTS / REMINDERS

• Offerors with technical inquiries shall submit their inquiries via “Bidder Inquiry” in ProjNet at www.projnet.org\projnet.

Bidder Inquiry Key: 67F9TC-D44W95

• You may be disqualified for submitting a proposal that does not meet all of the requirements.

• Proposals must be submitted using Bids/Responses feature on FBO http://www.projnet.org/projnet

SFC(P) Betsy Weintraub Contract Specialist Email: betsy.weintraub@usace.army.mil

Allison M. Blount Contracting Officer Email: allison.m.blount@usace.army.mil

POINTS OF CONTACT

mailto:betsy.weintraub@usace.army.mil mailto:allison.m.blount@usace.army.mil

U.S. PROCUREMENT LAW &

OVERSEAS CONTRACTING

MS. LESLIE REED

ASSISTANT COUNSEL

• US Procurement Regulations and Important Clauses

• Joint Ventures

• Bonding Requirements

• Compliance with Local Labor Laws and Defense Base Act Insurance

• Prime Contractor Project Management

• Miscellaneous Points

OVERVIEW

Contracts are awarded and executed under United States Procurement laws and regulations.

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) http://farsite.hill.af.mil/vffara.htm

Defense FAR Supplement (DFARS) http://farsite.hill.af.mil/vfdfara.htm

Army FAR Supplement (AFARS) http://farsite.hill.af.mil/vfafara.htm

U.S. PROCUREMENT LAW AND REGULATIONS

DFARS 252.233-7001

This contract shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the substantive laws of the United States of America. By the execution of this contract, the Contractor expressly agrees to waive any rights to invoke the jurisdiction of local national courts where this contract is performed and agrees to accept the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals and the United States Court of Federal Claims for the hearing and determination of any and all disputes that may arise under the Disputes clause of this contract.

CHOICE OF LAW (OVERSEAS)

USEUCOM CLAUSE 52.000-4004

The contractor agrees to indemnify and save harmless the United States Government against all claims and suits of whatsoever nature arising under or incidental to the performance of this contract by any subcontractor against the United States Government. The Contractor further agrees to waive his rights to bring suit or other legal action against the United States Government, except as provided in the Disputes clause of this contract and in the United States Federal Statutes.

IMMUNITY FROM LEGAL PROCESS

• The U.S. Government is very concerned that laborers on our projects receive working conditions and wages in accordance with Host Nation laws and regulations

• “Compliance With Local Labor Laws”, provides that contractors must comply with all host nation labor laws and regulations including laws and regulations relating to hours of work and compensation.

• Be aware that this applies to subcontractors as well as the prime contractor – the prime contractor is responsible for ensuring that all workers on the project are properly paid, regardless of whether the workers are employed directly by the prime contractor, principal subcontractor or subcontractors at any tier.

• The Government will always hold the prime responsible.

COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL LABOR LAWS

• DBA Insurance coverage is required for work performed under U.S.

contracts in Poland by all contractors and subcontractors. No other insurance can serve as a substitute.

• Defense Base Act (DBA) insurance is commercially available from carriers and self-insured employers authorized by the Department of Labor (DOL). The DOL table of authorized carriers and self-insured employers is available at http://www.dol.gov/owcp/dlhwc/lscarrier.htm

• Refer to FAR Clause 52.228-3 Workers’ Compensation Insurance (Defense Base Act) (July 2014) and 52.000-4133 Workers Compensation Insurance (Defense Base Act) – Countries with Waivers (March 2017) for more DBA Insurance information and how to obtain DBA Insurance

DEFENSE BASE ACT (DBA) INSURANCE

http://www.dol.gov/owcp/dlhwc/lscarrier.htm

• Typically US government requires 100% Performance and Payment bonds issued by approved US surety companies (See FAR 52.228-15)

If specifically allowed in the RFP (which it is here), a Bank Letter of Assurance (BLA) and after award a Bank Letter of Guarantee (BLG) must be submitted.

• The Government must be able to draw on the BLGs upon request without the need to take any legal action or obtain the consent of the contractor or any other proof or action.

Note: If a Joint Venture (JV), the Bank Letter of Assurance must cover the JV, not just one member of the JV.

BONDING REQUIREMENTS

If submitting a proposal as a joint venture (JV), the experience and past performance for each joint venture partner will be considered for the joint venture entity. JVs shall submit the following:

– A legally binding joint venture agreement signed by an authorized officer from each of the firms comprising the JV.

– Shall identify the chief executive of each entity identified

– Shall be translated into English

– Shall include a detailed statement outlining, in terms of percentages, the relationship of the JV in terms of ownership, capital contribution, profit distro/loss sharing; bonding responsibilities; party having overall control, etc.

Note: The JV agreement must show that joint venture members are jointly and severally liable for any obligations under the contract.

JOINT VENTURES

See RFP Section 00 21 00 for exact Instructions

- During Source Selection, prime contractors can receive credit for the experience, past performance and capabilities of a teaming partner provided the proposal includes an agreement with full disclosure of the teaming arrangement and company relationships, which must be signed by authorized representatives of all team members.

- The proposal must explain the major or critical aspects of the work to be performed by each team member (to include identification of team members, a full description of roles and responsibilities of team members, and the duration of the agreement).

TEAMING AGREEMENTS

• The U.S. Government contracts are with the prime contractors.

• USACE expects the prime contractor to actively manage the project and ensure the work meets contract requirements and the U.S. Government will hold the prime contractors responsible for contract execution.

• When issues arise, the U.S. Government deals with primes, not subcontractors.

PRIME CONTRACTOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The Provision “Compliance With Host Country Rules and Customs” provides that the contractor is responsible for:

– Adequately manning and staffing the project.

– Obtaining any necessary visas, permits, clearances for workers.

– The contractor assumes the risk and cost of obtaining the necessary labor to execute the project.

– The U.S. Government will not compensate you if labor turns out to be more expensive than you expected.

– This is true even if the reason for the added expense is a change in HN laws and regulations that increases your labor cost.

– The U.S. Government may not have any influence over the HN in regards visas or work permits and may not provide any assistance.

PRIME CONTRACTOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT (CONT.)

• During Source Selection, prime contractors can receive credit for the experience, past performance and capabilities of a subcontractor provided the proposal includes a letter of commitment signed by authorized representatives of both the prime and subcontractor. These commitments should be used only for those key subcontractors that you anticipate using on all task orders because you will be expected to use the committed subcontractors for the work you perform.

• Similarly, when a proposal specifies prime personnel by name you are expected to use those personnel for the work performed.

• Substitutes of key personnel or key contractors after award are allowed only with Contracting Officer approval.

PRIME CONTRACTOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT (CONT.)

Information Provided for this Pre-Proposal Conference

Any content of this presentation, remarks or explanations provided are for general information and do not change the terms and conditions of the solicitation.

REMINDER DISCLAIMER

CLOSING COMMENTS