B.08.03_Pre-proposal_conference_slides_FINAL_Am-0001.pdf

US Army Corps of Engineers

BUILDING STRONG®

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Europe District

Pre-Proposal Conference:

FY19 SCIF MATOC

(Germany, Belgium, Poland, Romania, and Estonia)

Solicitation No. W912GB19R0027

02 July 2019

BUILDING STRONG®FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FY19 SCIF MATOC

Pre-Proposal Conference

Welcome!

Please sign in Turn off cell phones Questions are encouraged throughout the presentation. However, all questions must ultimately be submitted in writing to Candace Lotomau and LTC Christian Solinsky via ProjNet and will be answered via an official amendment to the solicitation that will be available to all Offerors.

No pictures, video, or any recording is allowed.

Agenda

1. Opening Remarks

• LTC Christian Solinsky, Contracting Officer

2. Key Contracting Items

• Daniel Carnley, Contract Specialist

3. Solicitation Instructions and Evaluation Approach

• Candace Lotomau, Contract Specialist

4. SCIF Seed Project/Upcoming SCIF Projects

• Andrew Duffe, Project Manager

5. Legal Matters

• H. Jay Aldridge, Assistant Counsel

OPENING REMARKS

LTC Christian Solinsky Contracting Officer

KEY CONTRACTING ITEMS

Daniel Carnley Contract Specialist

Disclaimers Information Provided During Pre-proposal Conference

• Any remarks or explanations provided during this Pre-proposal Conference are for general information and will not change the terms and conditions of the solicitation.

• Any changes resulting from the conference or responses to questions received will be done in writing by the issuance of an amendment.

Contracting Officer Authority Only a warranted Contracting Officer (either a Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO), or an Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO), acting within their delegated limits, has the authority to issue modifications or otherwise change the terms and conditions of a contract. If an individual other than the Contracting Officer attempts to make changes to the terms and conditions of a contract you shall not proceed with the change and shall immediately notify the Contracting Officer.

CORs cannot change the contract in terms of time or money.

CORs can only enforce what is written in the contract.

This presentation was prepared using the FY19 SCIF Construction MATOC Solicitation.

It is the PROPOSERS RESPONSIBILITY to comply with the details of the solicitation and any amendments.

U.S. 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

USACE Acquisition Instructions https://www.usace.army.mil/Business-With-Us/Contracting/Resources/

Federal Business Opportunities

Announcement of Opportunities: The synopsis, solicitation and all subsequent amendments are posted through the Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) website below. It is the Offeror’s sole responsibility to obtain the solicitation and any subsequent amendments through this website.

FedBizOpps Website http://www.fbo.gov

User guides are located under the “Getting Started” tab

Slide 8

Federal Business Opportunities

Type Solicitation or Name/ Number here and then press Search

BUILDING STRONG®

Click here

BUILDING STRONG®11

Click on the links to access the files

System for Award Management

Mandatory Registration in SAM: The Federal Government mandates that a contractor be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) database prior to the award of a Federal contract. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clause 52.204-7 states that in order to do business with the Government, the contractor must be registered in the SAM database. Firms interested in doing business with the Federal Government should now visit the “System for Award Management (SAM)” website, which consolidates Federal procurement systems such as CCR and ORCA. The JV must be registered prior to award with a unique Duns and Bradstreet Number and CAGE Code. You can not use one of the JV partner’s registration.

https://www.sam.gov/

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

DUNS Number

Obtain a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number:

If you do not have a DUNS number, contact Dun and Bradstreet to obtain one.

http://www.dnb.com

CAGE Code

Obtain a Contractor and Government Entity Code (CAGE):

The CAGE code is a required piece of data for registering in the System for Award Management (SAM). If you are a vendor located in the United States and do not have a CAGE code, a CAGE code will be assigned to you when you register in the SAM database for the first time.

CAGE Websites

The CAGE welcome information page is at:

http://www.dlis.dla.mil/CAGE/cage_welcome.aspx

Who do I Contact?

Candace C. Lotomau (Contract Specialist) Telephone: +49 611 9744 2819

Candace.C.Lotomau@usace.army.mil

LTC Christian Solinsky (Contracting Officer) Telephone: +49 611 9744 2281

Christian.Solinsky@usace.army.mil

SOLICITATION INFORMATION

Candace Lotomau Contract Specialist

Requests for Information Reminder: anything discussed at this pre-proposal conference is UNOFFICIAL.

The solicitation advertised (including amendments) should be the documents used to submit your proposal.

Questions may be asked at this conference, but again are UNOFFICIAL unless submitted in writing via ProjNet at www.ProjNet.org/ProjNet

Bidder Inquiry Key is 4M77E7-2P972R

Where the Government determines that RFIs regarding a material aspect of the solicitation document requires correction, the response will be in the form of an amendment. If the Government finds that the solicitation does not require any correction, the response will normally be that the information being requested can be found within the solicitation using reasonable interpretation.

The deadline to submit RFIs is 10 July 2019.

Solicitation Overview Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ), Multiple Award Task Order (MATOC)

Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Contract, payable in U.S. Dollars ($) Awarded to more than one firm (Multiple Award) Awarded MATOC Contractors compete for Task Orders

Design-Build (DB) and Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Projects Level of design is anywhere from 0%–100%.

Two-phase (Best-Value) Selection Process

Phase I Proposals will be evaluated by a Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB).

Only the Offerors selected to move from Phase I to Phase II will be requested to submit proposals for Phase II.

Phase II Proposals will be evaluated by the SSEB.

Award by the Government is anticipated by FY19 4th Quarter.

What is the Best Value Determination?

Award will be made to the offeror whose total evaluated price and technical proposal provides the best value to the Government.

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

Slide 19

Contract Award

Award will be made to at least two (2) Offerors.

Contractor Qualification: contractor determined to be responsible in accordance with FAR 9.104 Proposal Conforms to Solicitation Requirements

The awarded contract will incorporate the successful Offeror’s proposal to the extent it offers betterments and does not conflict with the solicitation requirements.

Proposal Represents Best Value to Government

Slide 20

Task Orders

Contract clauses in the base contract are applicable to each Task Order.

Performance and Payment Bonds are required for each Task Order award.

Slide 21

On-Ramp/Off-Ramp

Additionally, this procurement will utilize “On-Ramp, Off-Ramp” procedures, which are outlined in Section 00 70 00 Conditions of the Contract. The Government reserves the right to re-open competition at any time during the term of the contract, to either remove or add awardees after a thorough review process, if it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government.

All contract holders will be afforded the opportunity to propose on each task order, should they so choose. Awardees are not required to propose on all task orders, but must notify if not proposing. However, if zero (0) proposals are received in a given year, Contractors may be at risk of being removed or “off-ramped” from the MATOC.

Slide 22

The geographical area covered by this contract will include work in Germany, Belgium, Poland, Romania, or Estonia.

Period of Performance: Base Period of three years

Slide 23

Maximum Contract Value

• Shared capacity of $49,900,000 for the life of the contract

Minimum Guarantee

• $3,000 for the life of the contract

Slide 24

Bonding Requirements

Bid Guarantee/Bond - The Offeror shall submit an original Bid Guarantee (Bid Bond) at the time of the price proposal submittal (Phase II Volume II) electronic copy with proposal and hardcopy via mail/courier).

Using Standard Form 24 (SF24) In the amount of $3,000,000.00

Performance & Payment Bonds - 100% Performance & Payment Bonds are required to be submitted after award and prior to notice to proceed (NTP) for EACH Task Order award.

Bond requirements are covered under FAR Clause 52.228-15

Evaluation Factors for Award Factor 1 – Past Performance of Construction Projects Factor 2 – Management Approach Factor 3 – Architect-Engineering Team Factor 4 – Seed Project Narrative Factor 5 – Seed Project Price/Price Schedule Past Performance of Construction Projects contains a pass/fail element. The

Offerors must submit at least three (3) of the five (5) projects in which they performed as the prime (i.e. the offeror) and two (2) of the five (5) projects being SCIF work in accordance with ICD/ICS 705. In case of a Joint Venture, the work must have been performed by at least one of the JV partners.

Offerors who do not meet that minimum requirement are not eligible for award.

A relative weight within each of the five (5) evaluation factors is as follows:

In Phase I, Factors 1, 2, and 3 are in descending order of importance.

In Phase II, the order of importance is Factor 4, 1, 2, 3, and 5.

When combined, the four (4) non-price factors when combined are approximately equal to price.

Proposal Format Basic Proposal Submission Requirements:

Typed In English Organized Price proposal MUST be in a separate file for Phase II:

Volume I - Technical Proposal Volume II - Price Proposal

What Do I need To Submit?

Submission Requirements under Section 00 21 16 - Instructions to Proposers of the solicitation outlines the content and format for your proposal.

Review this section carefully! Failure to submit all required documentation may result in rejection of your proposal.

Failing to submit attachments or failing to properly complete the requested information, may result in rejection of the offer without further evaluation. Therefore, Offerors are urged to follow instructions and submit Requests for Information (RFI) via ProjNet if the instructions are not understood.

What do I need to Submit?

Phase I: Three Non-cost Technical Factors

Factor 1 – Past Performance of Construction Projects

• Attachment 1 – Contractor Past Experience Overview Sheet

• Attachment 2 – Contractor Past Experience Information Sheet

• Attachment 3 – Past Performance Questionnaires OR formal evaluations

(CPARS)

• Performance Recognition Documents (if applicable)

Factor 2 – Management Approach

• Narrative

• Organization Chart

Factor 3 – Architect-Engineering Team

• Attachment 4 – Architect-Engineer Experience

Attachment 5 – Letters of Commitment (if applicable) Joint Venture Agreement (if applicable) Signed SF 1442 including acknowledgement of amendments.

Slide 29

What do I need to Submit?

Only the Offerors selected to move from Phase I to Phase II will be requested to submit proposals for Phase II.

Phase II: Two (2) Volumes Required:

• Volume I – Technical Proposal Factor 4 – Seed Project Technical Approach Narrative Letters of Commitment (if applicable)

• Volume II – Price / Administrative Proposal Factor 5 – Seed Project Price/Price Schedule

Attachment B – Pricing Schedule No. 1 (MATOC) Attachment C – Price Schedule No. 2 (Seed Project)

Bid Bond SF24 (electronic copy – hardcopy to be mailed) Signed SF 1442 including acknowledgement of amendments.

Slide 30

Standard Form 1442 (page 2)

Factor 1: Past Performance of Construction Projects Submission Requirements

Attachment 1 – Contractor Past Experience Overview Sheet

Offerors shall complete an Experience Overview Sheet, Attachment 1, with a total submission not-to-exceed (NTE) five (5) projects, which are completed within the last 6 years or currently being performed (at least 50% complete), that best represent the Offeror’s past experience required on this solicitation.

If more than five projects are submitted, only the first five projects will be evaluated.

Pass/Fail Element:

► The Prime contractor must have performed at least three (3) of the five (5) projects submitted for Factor 1, AND

► Two (2) of the five (5) projects submitted must be SCIF Construction.

► In the case of a Joint Venture, the work must have been performed by at least one of the JV partners.

Offerors who do not meet these minimum standard are NOT eligible for award.

Factor 1: Past Performance of Construction Projects Submission Requirements

Attachment 1 – Contractor Past Experience Overview Sheet Projects provided should demonstrate experience in managing multiple projects performed simultaneously and should demonstrate past experience in the following:

a. Completed within the last six (6) years from the date of the solicitation or at least 50% complete by the date of this solicitation;

b. Performed Outside the Continental United States (OCONUS) (projects performed within the European Union will be considered more relevant, while projects performed in Germany, Belgium, Poland, Romania, or Estonia will be considered most relevant);

c. Design-Build construction projects;

d. New construction or renovations of buildings that demonstrate experience with

Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities (SCIFs) in compliance with ICD/ICS 705 standards;

e. Replacement to include major building systems (electrical, mechanical, structural, etc.) repaired or replaced.

SCIF renovation/construction performed in accordance with ICD 705 in Germany, Belgium, Poland, Romania, or Estonia will be considered more relevant.

Attachment 1

Attachment 2 – Contractor Past Experience Information Sheet

Offerors shall provide a Contractor Past Experience Information Sheet (Attachment 2) for each project listed on the Contractor Past Experience Overview Sheet (Attachment 1). The Past Experience Information Sheets must be filled out completely.

You are encouraged to provide additional descriptive, narrative information and pictures on projects (not only project lists or titles) in addition to the Contractor Past Experience Information Sheet, but any additional information must pertain specifically to these five (5) projects

Factor 1: Past Performance of Construction Submission Requirements

Past Experience Information Sheet (Attachment 2)

Past Performance Questionnaire – Attachment 3

Offerors shall provide a completed performance record for the same projects submitted for consideration. If available, a final completed record from the Contractor’s Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) will be accepted for evaluation under this factor.

Clients are highly encouraged to submit questionnaires direct to the offeror and included in the proposal. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact via e-mail prior to the proposal closing date.

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 Blocks 1-4 and submit with the proposal.

Factor 1: Past Performance of Construction

USACE Past Performance Questionnaire- Attachment 3

(SECTION A):

Blocks 5-8 to be completed by Client.

Past Performance Questionnaire – Attachment 3 (cont.)

Offerors shall ensure contract information for clients is current and accurate so the Government may verify information received. The POCs provided cannot be affiliated with the Offeror in any manner. The POCs must be aware they may be contacted and should be willing and able to answer questions on the projects. The POCs will be allowed to answer questions in writing, if preferred.

Factor 1: Contractor Past Performance of Construction Submission Requirements

USACE Past Performance Questionnaire

(SECTION B):

To be completed by Client

1. QUALITY:

a) Quality of technical data/report preparation efforts E VG S M U N

b) Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical performance E VG S M U N

c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance E VG S M U N

d) Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements (without adverse effect on performance) E VG S M U N

2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:

a) Compliance with contract delivery/completion schedules including any significant intermediate milestones. (If liquidated damages were assessed or the schedule was not met, please address below)

E VG S M U N

b) Rate the contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks identified in the contract E VG S M U N

3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

a) To what extent were the end users satisfied with the project? E VG S M U N

b) Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes; responsiveness to administrative reports, businesslike and communication)

E VG S M U N

c) To what extent was the contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of the customer? E VG S M U N

d) Overall customer satisfaction E VG S M U N

4. MANAGEMENT/ PERSONNEL/LABOR

a) Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors, suppliers, materials, and/or labor force? E VG S M U N

b) Ability to hire, apply, and retain a qualified workforce to this effort E VG S M U N

c) Government Property Control E VG S M U N

d) Knowledge/expertise demonstrated by contractor personnel E VG S M U N

e) Utilization of Small Business concerns E VG S M U N

f) Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines E VG S M U N

g) Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements and/or priority, including planning, execution and response to Government changes E VG S M U N

h) Effectiveness of overall management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the program) E VG S M U N

5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

a) Ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually agreed price(s)? E VG S M U N

b) Contractor proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the client E VG S M U N

Offerors are allowed an opportunity to provide information in regard to performance and problems encountered on projects. If no problems were encountered on projects, note by typing, “no problems”. If solution to problems were provided by the Offeror, then the Offeror shall provide information as to how these problems were resolved to the benefit of the customer.

The Offeror is encouraged to 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.

Offerors may provide a completed Department of Defense DD Form 2626 Final Construction Performance Evaluation or a completed Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation, in lieu of Attachment 3.

The Government may review other sources of information for evaluating past performance. 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 and the Government is under no obligation to check other sources.

Attachment 5 - Committed Subcontractors and/or Key Personnel If an Offeror wishes to be credited with the experience, expertise and/or past performance of a committed subcontractor and/or key personnel (i.e., a firm that is not the prime contractor or a person that is not currently hired by the prime contractor, respectively) a letter of commitment signed by BOTH the subcontractor and/or key personnel AND the prime contractor (or both parties of a Joint Venture) shall be submitted.

The commitment letter(s) shall be submitted even if the firm(s) is/are in some way related to the prime contractor (for example, the committed subcontractor is subsidiary of the prime contractor, or a parent or subsidiary of a firm to which the prime contractor is also a subsidiary).

If any letter of commitment is not submitted, that particular experience will not be considered. The Offeror shall include their letters of commitment as part of Phase I.

Teaming Arrangements:

Joint Ventures (JV): An Offeror that is part of a Joint Venture must submit evidence of a legally binding joint venture agreement.

Affiliates: If a teaming agreement or commitment is not provided, the experience and/or past performance of any team members outside of the Prime Offeror will not be considered.

If submitting a proposal as a joint venture, the experience, past performance, and management approach of each of the joint venture partners can be submitted for the joint venture entity. The experience for each joint venture partner will be considered the experience of the joint venture entity.

Evaluation Criteria: The Government will evaluate the depth and relevancy of the experience as submitted in the Offeror’s proposal. The Government will 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.

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

► The relevance of the past performance;

► how recently the project submitted was performed;

► trends in the Offeror’s performance;

► evaluations, letters of appreciation, and commendations from customers; and ► positive and/or negative comments that impact evaluation of Offeror’s past performance.

Construction Evaluation Approach

Factor 1: Contractor Past Performance of Construction Evaluation Approach

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 15.305(a)(2)(iv)).

Remember to follow solicitation instructions ‘exactly’ Past Experience Information Sheet – be detailed on what type of work was done, explain any challenges you overcame.

Details, details, details!

Check that your Past Experience Overview and Information

Sheets are filled out completely and accurately.

Ensure letter(s) of commitment follow the sample provided.

Questions on FACTOR 1?

Management Approach ► Organizational Chart ► Narrative ► Resumes (as applicable) ► JV Agreements (as applicable) ► Letters of Commitment for Key Personnel and Committed

SubContractors

30 page limitation (excluding organizational chart and resumes)

Factor 2: Management Approach

Information shall include the following:

► Lines of authority and communication for the execution of the contract ► Lines of authority of the Program Manager, Project Manager, Site

Superintendent, Quality Control Manager, Design Quality Control Manager, Safety Manager, and Security Manager

► Include all JV Partners and Key Subcontractors (when applicable) ► Identify all offices involved in this contract (from the Headquarters to the

Offeror’s site office(s), how they are related, positions identified by title, organization, and physical location.

► Clearly identify the Project Manager or the on-site person that communicates with the U.S. Government. (If the PM is not on-site, identify any other personnel authorized to communicate directly with the U.S. Government)

Factor 2: Organizational Chart/Graph

Organization Structure: Descriptions of duties, roles, major responsibilities, and authorities of all JV Partners, Key Subcontractors, and key personnel including a) Program Manager, b) Project Manager, c) Site Superintendent, d) Quality Control Manager, e) Design Quality Control Manager, f) Safety Manager, and g) Security Manager shall be described. The position titles used in the narrative must match those used in the organization chart.

Offeror’s plan for management and start-up of two (2) simultaneous task orders for general SCIF building construction, with no design-build, with a total value of $10M:

► Mobilization to the site ► Staffing multiple field offices with key personnel currently employed by the Prime and/or JV ► Letters of commitment from additional personnel required to meet the minimum standards of the contract ► Work that will be done by the Prime and to be accomplished by subcontractors.

► How the Offeror will support the geographic boundaries of the MATOC and why the team is uniquely qualified to undertake this contract, its approach to construction, and working with the customer during construction.

Factor 2: Narrative

Compare and contrast the methods and approaches that would be used for Design-Build and Design-Bid-Build projects (including any differences resulting from incremental funding or fast tracked acquisitions)

Overall Quality Management Control System: The Offeror shall describe how they intend to manage quality throughout the contract and per task order. Discuss quality management methods proposed throughout the design and construction process.

Scheduling: The offeror must discuss its scheduling capabilities and procedures to be used for this contract and per task order. This should schedule updates, incorporating modifications into the schedule, and other steps to be taken to maintain the individual task order schedules.

ICD 705: The offeror must describe its familiarity and plan to comply with ICD/ICS 705 requirements in an OCONUS environment

Shall NOT exceed 30 pages

Factor 2: Narrative (cont.)

Factor 2: Management Approach Evaluation Approach

Evaluation Criteria: Proposals will be evaluated for reasonableness, risk, and logic, and the extent to which the proposal illustrates a basic understanding of managing the contract. In performing the evaluation, the Government will evaluate the following:

1. Whether the proposal clearly delineates lines of authority, and communication with the Government, on the organizational chart (graph) and is organized in a precise and logical manner, including all offices involved with the management of the contract, including Key Subcontractors and JV partners.

2. Whether the proposal contains comprehensive descriptions of duties, roles, major responsibilities, and authorities for key personnel.

3. The extent the proposal describes a reasonable and logical plan for performance of two (2) simultaneous SCIF task orders. The extent to which the narrative includes a description of how the Offeror will support the geographic boundaries of the MATOC and why the team is uniquely qualified to undertake this contract, its approach to construction, and working with the customer(s) during construction.

Factor 2: Management Approach Evaluation Approach

4. The extent the offeror describes, in detail, its methods and approach to Design Build and Design-Bid-Build projects.

5. The extent to which the proposal describes how they intend to manage quality throughout the contract and per task order.

6. The extent the offeror describes its scheduling capabilities.

7. The extent the offeror describes its familiarity and plan to comply with ICD/ICS 705 requirements in an OCONUS environment.

Questions on Factor 2?

Offerors may submit up to three (3) Architect-Engineer (AE) firms as team members and their relative past experience with DB projects performed Outside the Continental United States (OCONUS) with preference for SCIF projects performed in Germany, Belgium, Poland, Romania, or Estonia.

Demonstrate Offerors’ understanding of certification and registration requirements for companies and its ability to meet these requirements.

Projects should demonstrate the AE’s Designer of Record (DOR) experience.

Firms submitted under this factor shall include firms that the offeror intends to use throughout the life of the contract. If information about any AE team member is properly submitted, the expectation is that this AE will perform work. Before utilizing another AE, the Contracting Officer must consent.

Offerors shall submit a teaming agreement with the selected AE firm(s).

Factor 3: Architect-Engineering Team

Attachment 4 - Architect Engineer Experience Offerors may submit up to three (3) projects from each Architect-Engineer

(AE) firm presented (i.e. no more than 9 total).

For ongoing projects, 100% of the design and at least 50% of the major construction milestones must be completed at the time of proposal submission.

Relevant projects include:

► Completed within 6 years prior to date of the RFP ► Minimum value of $50K ► Performed Outside the Continental United States (OCONUS) ► More consideration given for SCIF projects in Germany, Belgium, Poland, Romania, or Estonia.

Offeror shall provide performance evaluations for each submitted project.

► Formal evaluations (CPARS, DD 2626) ► Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 3)

Offeror shall provide performance evaluations for submitted projects.

► Formal evaluations (CPARS, DD 2626) ► Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 3)

The Offeror shall also include in narrative form a plan demonstrating the Offeror’s understanding of certification and registration for design in Germany, Belgium, Poland, Romania, or Estonia, and its ability to meet these requirements.

Evaluation Criteria: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s plan for completeness, reasonableness, and logic and the degree to which the plan describes a viable strategy to execute design for an ordered project. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s plan in relation to their design capabilities described below as follows:

► DORs’ experience and performance on relevant construction projects (to include SCIFs).

► Plan demonstrating Offerors’ understanding of certification and registration requirements for design in Germany, Belgium, Poland, Romania, or Estonia, and ability to meet these requirements.

To achieve an “acceptable” rating, the Offeror will submit the information listed in the submission requirements for this Factor that demonstrates the DOR’s experience in relevant projects and ability to successfully meet all of the requirements related to designing a constructible project for this requirement.

Questions on Factor 3?

Evaluation Approach

BUILDING STRONG®57

Phase II:

Volume I: Factor 4 – Seed Project-Technical Approach

Narrative Volume II: Factor 5 – Seed Project Price/Price Schedule

DO NOT SUBMIT PHASE II, VOLUME I & II with Phase I submission.

Only Offerors selected to move from Phase I to Phase II will be requested to submit proposals for Phase II.

SCIF Seed Project/ Upcoming SCIF Projects

Andrew Duffe Project Manager

Slide 58

Project Title: AFRICOM Building 3314 - Commanders Conference Room SCIF Construction Magnitude: Between $1,000,000 and $5,000,000 Design-Bid-Build (D-B-B)

► Design 100% Complete Project will convert the AFRICOM Commanders Conference Room (~95 sqm) into a SCIF for classified meetings, briefings, and Video Teleconferences.

The Seed Project will be issued via Amendment to the RFP.

Seed Project Overview

BUILDING STRONG®60

BUILDING STRONG®61

Project Magnitude of Construction

Execution Method Project Description Remarks

AFRICOM Building 3309 ‐ SCIF Office

Between $1,000,000 and $5,000,000 D‐B‐B Project will upgrade an existing private office and associated Server Room. Design 100% Complete

AFRICOM Technical Rooms Remediation

(Phase I) (Phase II – next FY)

Between $1,000,000 and $5,000,000 D‐B‐B

Project provides upgraded HVAC, Power Panels, limited fire protection, and grounding with 29 Technical (Server) Rooms within 12 building on Kelley Barracks. 13 of the 29 Techical Rooms are within SCIF accredited areas.

Design 100% Complete

AFRICOM Building 3315 ‐ SCIF HVAC Repairs

Between $1,000,000 and $5,000,000 D‐B Design‐Build project replace the existing four chillers within the attic space of Building 3315 Project Scope of Work

Complete

Upcoming SCIF Projects

Factor 4: Seed Project – Technical Approach Narrative Submission Requirements

Seed Project RFP will be issued via Amendment to the solicitation.

Project Narrative:

► Technical Approach ► Sequence of Work ► Other Management Aspects to ensure on-time completion of the project ► Comprehensive start to finish discussion on significant features of the work ► Potential high-risk features of the work that may adversely impact the completion date and plan to mitigate these risks.

► Demonstrate a thorough and current knowledge of best practices in the design and construction.

► Address assumptions and techniques to be used in this project including those related to the various disciplines involved (e.g. architectural, structural, mechanical, environmental, etc.), and any special items to be accomplished (i.e. LEED, Life Safety, etc.)

► Address the ICD 705 requirements and plans for compliance with ICD/ICS 705

Narrative Submission Requirements

Key Personnel:

► Offeror must submit the names and qualifications of key Seed Project personnel to include at a minimum:

• Designer of Record Team (to include Architect, Structural Engineer, Civil Engineer, Mechanical Engineer, Electrical Engineer, Fire Protection Engineer, Design Manager, and Commissioning Manager),

• and the following full time on-site personnel:

Construction Project Manager, Safety Manager, Quality Control Manager, and Site Superintendent.

Narrative Submission Requirements

Key Personnel: (continued) ► Resumes of key project personnel identified above highlighting specific experience and qualifications on projects of a similar type, size, and technical issues.

• Personnel’s Title on this project

• Number of years with this firm and with other firms

• Number of years in this position or role

• Specialization

• Professional Registration (Type and State/Country Registration)

• Personnel’s specific experience and qualifications relevant to this project

• Titles of jobs on projects submitted as experience

Narrative Submission Requirements

Schedule:

► The Offeror shall provide a detailed schedule(s) showing how the work will be performed in order to meet the definition of substantial completion, the deliverables, and the maximum number of days described in the Scope of Work.

• For the purposes of evaluation under this factor, the Offeror should plan for a 365 calendar day construction period of performance, and show activities from contract Award to Notice to Proceed (NTP) and NTP to Building Occupancy Date (BOD). Offeror shall use the dates of 30 August 2019 for award and 21 September 2019 for NTP and should prepare the schedule assuming that all items will be awarded on that date.

► Submitted in the Primavera "xer" format and .pdf format.

► The schedule should show adequate detail, logic, and sequences to demonstrate Offeror can meet required completion date.

Narrative Submission Requirements

Schedule: (continued) ► At a minimum, the Offeror should show the following features in the schedule:

• Preliminary integrated schedule for site work, utilities and facility.

• Events associated with submittals and the proper handling of the review comments.

• O&M manual submission and required operator training.

• The anticipated critical path on the schedule.

• As-built submissions.

► Offerors are required to describe and discuss rationale, assumptions and thought process used in generating the schedule to support project delivery performance.

► Offeror should describe the process for Government design compliance reviews, design development performance period, Government submittal compliance reviews, market influence on skilled labor and resourcing and procurement of materials.

► Offerors are also requested to describe how they might reduce the overall review and acquisition times by aligning trades with cognizant disciplines and by offering specific details on the intended equipment and vendors at the design review stage.

Narrative Submission Requirements

Risk Management Plan:

► The Offeror shall submit a Risk Management Plan (RMP) that will show how the

Offeror is planning to mitigate uncertainties to include, but are not limited to, unknown site conditions, revised mission requirements, construction phasing, schedule risks and cost and time growth as a result of the above.

► The Offeror must demonstrate the capability and flexibility to plan and schedule the complete project to meet the proposed project completion date and clearly identify any constraints on the schedules presented (e.g., labor or material availability, weather, interfaces with the customer, etc.).

► Discuss how they plan to mitigate delays due to unforeseen conditions or events and recover time on the schedule in order to maintain the scheduled completion date.

► Identify the risks that exist in the critical or near-critical path (either inside or outside the Offerors control) which may impede project success in delivery, and what measures the Offeror will take to mitigate potential impacts of all identified risks.

Lessons learned from the projects submitted in Factor 1 are encouraged. Additionally, how those lessons will be applied to this project are also encouraged.

Narrative Submission Requirements

Change Management Process:

► The offeror shall submit a narrative discussing how they will handle and process changes and/or contract modifications.

• Discuss timelines, competitive proposals from subcontractors, and the submission of fair and reasonable pricing.

• Discuss paperwork submitted with proposals.

Narrative Evaluation Approach

Evaluation Criteria: To achieve an “acceptable” the Offeror will submit the information listed in submission requirements for this Factor that demonstrates a sound approach capable of meeting all requirements and objectives.

► PROJECT NARRATIVE: Project Narratives must provide a detailed, project-specific discussion of the significant features of the work described in this RFP and must address all of the elements identified in submission requirements for this Factor. DORs’ experience and performance on relevant construction projects (to include SCIFs). Extra consideration shall be given for quality materials that are utilized to maximize the operability and maintainability of the building to reduce maintenance.

► KEY PERSONNEL: The Offeror shall meet the requirements of this factor if the section addresses all of the elements identified in submission requirements for this Factor.

► SCHEDULE: The Offeror shall meet the requirements of this factor if the section addresses all of the elements identified in submission requirements for this Factor. The narrative must demonstrate a reasonable approach to the project and an understanding of the requirements of this project.

Narrative Evaluation Approach

Evaluation Criteria (continued):

► SCHEDULE:

• The Government will evaluate the schedule to assess the strength of understanding of the project scope, restrictions which must be considered in the schedule e.g., permitting, long lead items, etc.

• The Government will evaluate the strength of understanding of events associated with coordinating design submittals, reviews and incorporating review comments, the Offeror's capability to schedule the complete project within the proposed contract duration and the realism of the schedule.

• The Government will evaluate the design packaging plan for logic, reasonableness, how it facilitates meeting the proposed contract duration and how it facilitates the Government’s ability to timely perform its design reviews. The packaging plan should minimize risk to the Contractor and to the Government for tear-out and coordination for reviews.

• A schedule that offers advantage(s) to the Government over one that merely indicates an adequate understanding of the scope, restrictions, major deliverables and general understanding of the various events that can affect start and completion of construction may receive extra consideration.

Narrative Evaluation Approach

Evaluation Criteria: (continued) ► RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN: The Offeror shall meet the requirements of this factor if the section addresses all of the elements identified in submission requirements for this Factor. The narrative must demonstrate a reasonable approach to mitigate issues and an understanding of the requirements of this project.

► CHANGE MANAGEMENT PROCESS: The Offeror shall meet the requirements of this factor if the section addresses all of the elements identified in submission requirements for this Factor. The narrative must demonstrate a reasonable approach to the change management process and an understanding of the requirements of this project.

Factor 5: Seed Project Price/Price Schedule Submission Requirements

Seed Project Price Schedule will be issued via Amendment to the solicitation.

Offerors shall submit a completed Pricing Schedule as part of this Factor. Pricing shall not be provided in any other part of the proposal.

► Completing Pricing Schedule

• Offerors shall submit a completed Pricing Schedule as part of the Price

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

► Currency

• The Price Schedule is in U.S. Dollars.

How will the Price Factor be Evaluated?

Completeness ► All requested price related data provided including completing all CLINs *check your math* Evaluated in accordance with FAR 15,404-1

► Total evaluated price consists of the price of all CLINs base and 6-month option extension. Evaluation of any options shall not oblige the Government to exercise the option.

Reasonableness (Performance Risk) ► If the Government determines the prices are unreasonable ► Does the Offeror understand the requirements?

BUILDING STRONG®FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Slide 75

Ensure all Tabs are completed

How do I submit my proposal?

Methods – via ARL AMRDEC SAFE Application, https:// safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe/ https://safe.arl.army.mil/

Please see section 00 21 16 “Proposal Format” in the RFP for a full description

Proposals cannot be FAXED, E-MAILED or HAND DELIVERED.

Slide 76

Where do I Deliver my Bid Bonds?

Electronic copy submitted via ARL AMRDEC SAFE.

Hard copy sent to the following address:

US Army Corps of Engineers, Europe District Contracting Division, Box 7 Attn: Candace Lotomau Konrad-Adenauer Ring 39 65197 Wiesbaden, Germany or US Army Corps of Engineers, Europe District Contracting Division Attn: Candace Lotomau CMR 410 Box 7

APO, AE 09049

When are Proposals Due?

Proposals are due on or before

17 July 2019 1000 hours (CEST)

Central European Summer Time

If there is a change in the proposal due date, you will be notified by an amendment to the solicitation which you must acknowledge.

Slide 78

What If My Proposal Is Late?

Late proposals are handled in accordance with FAR 15.208.

Any proposal, modification, or revision, that is received at the designated

Government office after the exact time specified for receipt of proposals is “late” and will not be considered unless it is received before award is made, the contracting officer determines that accepting the late proposal would not unduly delay the acquisition; and—

(i) If it was transmitted through an electronic commerce method authorized by the solicitation, it was received at the initial point of entry to the Government infrastructure not later than 5:00 p.m. one working day prior to the date specified for receipt of proposals; or

(ii) There is acceptable evidence to establish that it was received at the Government installation designated for receipt of proposals and was under the Government’s control prior to the time set for receipt of proposals; or

(iii) It was the only proposal received.

Offerors can and should contact Candace Lotomau or LTC Solinsky to ensure their proposal was received on time.

What about Discussions?

The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions, if in the best interest of the

Government; however, we the Government does not intend to hold discussions.

Therefore, provide your best proposal in the first submission.

What is a Debriefing?

The offeror may request a preaward debriefing by submitting a written request for debriefing to the contracting officer within 3 days after receipt of the notice of exclusion from the competition.

Pre-Award – FAR 15.505

(1) The agency’s evaluation of significant elements in the offeror’s proposal;

(2) A summary of the rationale for eliminating the offeror from the competition; and

(3) Reasonable responses to relevant questions about whether source selection procedures contained in the solicitation, applicable regulations, and other applicable authorities were followed in the process of eliminating the offeror from the competition.

Post-Award – FAR 15.506 At the offeror’s request, this debriefing may be delayed until after award. If the debriefing is delayed until after award, it shall include all information normally provided in a postaward debriefing (see 15.506(d)).

If the offeror does not submit a timely request, the offeror need not be given either a preaward or a postaward debriefing. Offerors are entitled to no more than one debriefing for each proposal.

Questions?

10 min Break

Slide 82

LEGAL MATTERS

Jay Aldridge Deputy District Counsel

Slide 83

United States Law Contracts are awarded and executed under United States

Procurement laws and regulations

FAR Chapters

• FAR 35 Research and Development Contracting

• FAR 36 Construction & Architect-Engineering Contracts

• FAR 37 Service Contracting

• FAR 38 Federal Supply Schedule Contracting

• FAR 39 Acquisition of Information Technology

Slide 85

CHOICE OF LAW (OVERSEAS)

(JUN 1997)

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.

(End of clause)

Slide 86

52.000-4004 Immunity From Legal Process

(USEUCOM CLAUSE JUL 1966-E)

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.

Slide 87

Prime Contractor Project Management

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

We expect the prime 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, we deal with primes, not subcontractors.

The U.S. Government will enforce contract schedules and assessment of Liquidated

Damages if the schedule is not met.

Slide 88

U.S. Prime Contractor

Prime contractor must be a U.S. firm or a joint venture of two or more U.S. firms

Non U.S. firms may be subcontractors (subject to vetting and AO approval) but cannot be prime contractors nor members of a joint venture prime contractor

A joint venture of a U.S. firm and a non U.S. firm will not be considered for award

Language in a proposal that states or implies that a non-U.S.

firm is serving in a role as a prime or as a joint venture member with a prime will cause a proposal to not be considered

U.S. Prime Contractor The prime contractor must be a legitimate US construction contractor registered in and regularly doing business in the US.

The US prime CANNOT simply serve as a shell to pass a contract through to a foreign firm.

A U.S. prime contractor CANNOT ‘appoint’ or ‘designate’ a subcontractor to act as it’s ‘agent’ or on it’s behalf for execution of the contract.

The government deals with the prime contractor only.

The prime contractor is responsible for execution of the contract and cannot shift that responsibility to a subcontractor.

Joint Ventures

If submitting a proposal as a joint venture (JV), the experience and past performance of each JV partner will be considered

The proposal of a JV must include a signed copy of a legally binding JV agreement signed by an authorized official of each of the firms making up the JV.

The JV agreement submitted with the proposal must be the complete agreement – no unsubmitted annexes or sub agreements

Any other JV or consortium agreement is null and void with respect to the contract

The JV agreement must be in English

The JV agreement must include a detailed statement outlining the responsibilities, authorities and roles of each JV member

The JV agreement must specify that JV members are jointly and severally liable for any and all obligations under the contract

The bid and performance guaranties must cover the JV, not just one member of the JV

Related Entities

If you wish to receive credit for the experience, past performance or management capabilities of a related company or entity you must either include that company or entity as part of a joint venture or as a committed subcontractor

This is true even for a parent or subsidiary firm – if they are a separate legal entity they must be brought into the proposal as a JV…