Amendment 0004.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Ammendment 04- W912GB20R0007 Germany West JOC

The purpose of this Ammendment is to:

a) Extend the Proposal due date to 4 June 2020 at 10:00AM CET.

b) Update the Contract Specialist to MSG Betsy Weintraub throughout the Solicitation.

c) Update Attachment 2B- Experience Info Sheet.

d) All RFIs have been closed in ProjNet.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 21

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 29-May-2020

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

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W912GB20R0007

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

21-Apr-2020

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

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

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

29-May-2020

CODE

CONTRACTING DIVISION

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

KONRAD ADENAUER RING 39

D-65187 WIESBADEN GERMANY

WIESBADEN 65187

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

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912GB20R0007

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 00 00 - PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS

The following have been modified:

SOLICITATION INFORMATION

POINTS OF CONTACT:

• CONTRACT SPECIALIST: MSG Betsy Weintraub betsy.weintraub@usace.army.mil

• CONTRACTING OFFICER: Tony Reed tony.e.reed@usacce.army.mil

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS:

Submission shall be via DoD SAFE Site (https://safe.apps.mil). As an alternative both the Contract Specialist, Betsy Weintraub, betsy.weintraub@usace.army.mil and the Contracting Officer, Tony Reed, tony.e.reed@usace.army.mil., can receive proposals via email. However prior coordination must be made with the contracting officer prior to the due date to use the alternate method of submission. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to ensure receipt.

SECTION 00 01 10 - TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 00 00 00 Procurement and Contract Requirements SECTION 00 01 10 Table of Contents SECTION 00 10 00 Solicitation Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) Schedule SECTION 00 21 00 Instructions - Submission Requirements SECTION 00 22 00 Supplementary Instructions - Evaluation Criteria SECTION 00 43 00 Bid Bond Form SECTION 00 45 00 Representations and Certifications - Clauses SECTION 00 70 00 Conditions of the Contract – Contract Clauses SECTION 00 72 00 General Conditions - Special Contract Requirements SECTION 01 11 00 Summary of Work

SOLICITATION ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENT 1– Specification Binder Division 00 – Procurement and Contracting Requirements

• 00 74 01 Special Conditions (NAU) 10/19

• 00 74 02 Time Extensions for Unusually Severe Weather (NAU) 10/19

• 00 74 10 Supplemental Conditions for Projects in Germany (NAU) 10/19 mailto:betsy.weintraub@usace.army.mil mailto:tony.e.reed@usacce.army.mil mailto:betsy.weintraub@usace.army.mil mailto:tony.e.reed@usace.army.mil

Division 01 – General Requirements

• 01 30 01 General Requirements (NAU) 02/20

• 01 32 01 Project Schedule (NAU) 10/19

• 01 32 16 Small Project Progress Schedules (NAU) 10/19

• 01 33 00 Submittal Procedures (NAU) 10/19

• 01 35 26 Safety Requirements (NAU) 10/19

• 01 45 00 Quality Control (NAU) 10/19

• 01 45 01 Resident Management System Contractor Mode (RMS CM) (NAU) 10/19

• 01 45 06 Job Order Contract (JOC) Site Personnel Requirements (NAU) 10/19

• 01 78 00 Closeout Submittals (NAU) 10/19

• 01 78 23 Operation and Maintenance Data (NAU) 10/19

ATTACHMENT 2A - Experience Overview Sheet ATTACHMENT 2B – Revised Experience Information Sheet (Ammendment 04) ATTACHMENT 3 - USACE Past Performance Questionnaire ATTACHMENT 4 – Revised Electronic Pricing Schedule EXCEL Format ATTACHMENT 5 – Bank Letter of Assurance Sample ATTACHMENT 6 – Bank Letter of Guarantee Sample ATTACHMENT 7 – Letter of Commitment Sample ATTACHMENT 8 - UPB Germany_Italy_Europe (2016) ATTACHMENT 9 – DIN Conversion to European Standard ATTACHMENT 10 – Construct Project Signs

• EP 310-1-6a Construction Signs (English), 06/06

• EP 310-1-6a Construction Signs (German), 06/06

SECTION 00 10 00 - SOLICITATION

The required response date/time has changed from 01-Jun-2020 10:00 AM to 04-Jun-2020 10:00 AM.

SECTION 00 21 00 - INSTRUCTIONS

Section 00 21 00 Instructions to Offerors

When the word “Offeror” is encountered, it is intended to mean a company seeking to do business with the Government that submits a proposal in response to this solicitation. When the word “Government” is encountered, it is intended to mean USACE NAU. “Request For Proposal”, “RFP” and “Solicitation” are used synonymously throughout.

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

A. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

1. Introduction. To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, Offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors. The Offeror shall submit in the proposal all requested information specified in this section of the Request for Proposal (RFP) solicitation at or before the exact time specified. There will be no public opening of the proposals received as a result of this solicitation. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. Copies of the solicitation are available by INTERNET ACCESS ONLY. All solicitation documents will made available for viewing under Contracting Opportunities within the Beta SAM website https://beta.sam.gov. All amendments will be made available for viewing within Beta SAM. It shall be the Offeror’s responsibility to check the website for any amendments.

2. Inquiries. Offerors with technical inquiries shall submit their inquiries via “Bidder

Inquiry” in ProjNet at www.projnet.org\projnet.

To submit and review bid inquiry items, bidders will need to be a current registered user or self-register into system. To self-register go to web page, click BID tab select Bidder Inquiry, select agency USACE, enter Key for this solicitation listed below, and your e-mail address, click login. Fill in all required information and click create user. Verify that information on next screen is correct and click to continue. From this page you may view all bidder inquiries or add inquiry. Only one question will be allowed per inquiry. If multiple questions are included in a single inquiry, only the first question will be answered. All others will remain unanswered until entered in as single inquiries. Bidders will receive an acknowledgement of their question via email, followed by an answer to their question after it has been processed by our technical team.

The solicitation number is: W912GB20R0007 The bidder inquiry Key is: ID33HX-SR8SWR

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. If the System is not closed in a timely manner, an inquiry posted within seven calendar days of the receipt of proposals will still be regarded as untimely and will not afforded a substantive response.

The Government reserves the right to decline addressing certain questions.

Offerors are requested to review the specification in its entirety, review the Bidder Inquiry System for answers to questions prior to submission of a new inquiry.

The bidder call center operates weekdays from 8am to 5pm U.S. Central Time Zone (Chicago). The telephone number for the Call Center is 800-428-HELP.

https://beta.sam.gov/ http://www.projnet.org/projnet

It is the Offeror’s responsibility to monitor for inquiries and responses.

3. General Proposal Submission Requirements.

a. Electronic Proposals. In an effort to reduce paperwork and costs, ALL

RESPONSES TO THIS ANNOUNCEMENT SHALL BE SUBMITTED

ELECTRONICALLY. Hand carried delivery or USPS/UPS/Fedex delivery of hard copies and/or CD-ROMs are not authorized. Facsimile submission is not authorized.

Submission shall be via DoD SAFE Site (https://safe.apps.mil). As an alternative both the Contract Specialist, MSG Betsy Weintraub, betsy.weintraub@usace.army.mil and the Contracting Officer, Tony Reed, tony.e.reed@usace.army.mil., can receive proposals via email. However prior coordination must be made with the contracting officer prior to the due date to use the alternate method of submission. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to ensure receipt.

b. File Size Limitations. Offerors are advised that the size limitation for email submission is 10MB due to server restrictions. If needed, Offerors are advised to break the files down into smaller sections and deliver in separate emails. In such cases, please divide the sections as logically as possible and be sure to clearly name the files as specified below. If utilizing the DoD SAFE site the file size limitation is 8GB.

Offerors must request a code within 10 days before the solicitation closes from the Contract Specialist if utilize the DoD SAFE site.

c. File Names. To ensure your submission is received and processed appropriately, it is important that interested parties CAREFULLY ensure their electronic files adhere to the following naming convention: 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) “W912GB20R0007 RESPONSE Firmname Volume I.pdf”

(2) “W912GB20R0007 RESPONSE Firmname Volume I Part 1.pdf”

(3) “W912GB20R0007 RESPONSE Firmname Volume I Part 2.pdf”

(4) “W912GB20R0007 RESPONSE Firmname Volume I diagrams, figures.pdf”

(5) “W912GB20R0007 RESPONSE Firmname Volume II.pdf”

d. 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. Information pertaining to more than one evaluation factor should be repeated in the each section for each factor. Electronic files shall be Microsoft Windows compatible. Files shall be submitted in their native format mailto:shelia.a.welsh2@usace.army.mil mailto:tony.e.reed@usace.army.mil

(i.e. doc, xls, ppt, etc.), or if in pdf format, shall be in searchable text. If the electronic files are of a size at which they must be compressed (zipped), they shall be compressed into one zipped folder.

e. 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 of email receipt on the Government’s server. Do not assume that electronic submission will occur instantaneously. Offerors should time their email submission with prudence by not waiting until the last few minutes—this will allow for unexpected delays in the transmittal process and troubleshooting. Offerors are encouraged to keep a copy of the delivery and/or read confirmation for their record but shall also request confirmation. Submission after the deadline may be emailed to Contract Specialist, MSG Betsy Weintraub, betsy.weintraub@usace.army.mil but be advised they will be considered late and as such will be processed in accordance with FAR 15.208.

f. 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 OfferorsCompetitive Acquisition (Jan 2017),” subparagraph (e) which is found in Selection 00 21 00 of the solicitation. The Government will endeavor to honor the restrictions against release requested by Offerors, to the extent permitted under United States law and regulations.

g. SPECIAL NOTICE: System for Award Management. Please take notice that the System for Award Management (SAM, www.sam.gov) has a new entity registration requirement that firms submit an "original, signed notarized letter identifying the authorized Entity Administrator for the entity associated with the Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number before the registration will be activated." This applies to all new entity registrations and all entity registration renewals, effective 29 April 2018. Further information behind this new requirement is posted to the General Services Administration's (GSA) announcement page at https://www.gsa.gov/samupdate.

Please also refer to Federal Service Desk's (FSD) instructions on how to comply with this new requirement. NOTE: the instructions are different for domestic (U.S. based) and international (not U.S. based) firms. Offerors are reminded that this solicitation includes the provision FAR 52.204-7 SAM or FAR 52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors--Commercial Items, and the resulting award will include the clause FAR 52.204-13 SAM Maintenance or 52.212-4 Contract Terms and Conditions--Commercial Items. These 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. 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.

Instructions for domestic entities (located in the U.S. or its outlying areas):

mailto:shelia.a.welsh2@usace.army.mil http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/15.htm#P179_28709 http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/52_215.htm#P2_52 http://www.sam.gov/ https://www.gsa.gov/samupdate https://fsd.gov/fsd-gov/answer.do?sysparm_kbid=d2e67885db0d5f00b3257d321f96194b&sysparm _search=kb0013183. Instructions for international entities (not located in the U.S.

or its outlying areas): https://www.fsd.gov/fsd-gov/answer.do?sysparm_kbid=dbf8053adb119344d71272131f961946&sysparm _search=KB0013221

4. Proposal Format, Volume I, Non-Price Proposal: Volume I shall include an

Executive Summary section for and a section for each Non-Price factor. Volume I shall be organized as follows:

a. Section A - Executive Summary. Include a one page cover letter and any applicable executed joint venture agreements or other evidence of formal teaming agreements.

i. For purposes of evaluating past performance, the Offeror/Prime

Contractor is the contractor identified in Block 14 of the Standard Form 1442. If more than one contractor is listed in Block 14, then a signed Joint Venture (JV) agreement must be submitted with the proposal and the JV shall be registered as such in the System for Award Management (SAM). However, each party of the JV must submit their own DUNS number with the JV proposal. JV agreements shall include the following:

(1) A copy of their JV agreement in English, signed by all parties of the JV.

(2) A detailed statement outlining the following in terms of percentages, where appropriate:

(a) The relationship of the joint venture parties in terms of business ownership, capital contribution, and profit distribution or loss sharing.

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

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

https://fsd.gov/fsd-gov/answer.do?sysparm_kbid=d2e67885db0d5f00b3257d321f96194b&sysparm_search=kb0013183 https://fsd.gov/fsd-gov/answer.do?sysparm_kbid=d2e67885db0d5f00b3257d321f96194b&sysparm_search=kb0013183 https://fsd.gov/fsd-gov/answer.do?sysparm_kbid=d2e67885db0d5f00b3257d321f96194b&sysparm_search=kb0013183 https://www.fsd.gov/fsd-gov/answer.do?sysparm_kbid=dbf8053adb119344d71272131f961946&sysparm_search=KB0013221 https://www.fsd.gov/fsd-gov/answer.do?sysparm_kbid=dbf8053adb119344d71272131f961946&sysparm_search=KB0013221 https://www.fsd.gov/fsd-gov/answer.do?sysparm_kbid=dbf8053adb119344d71272131f961946&sysparm_search=KB0013221

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

(e) Identification of party maintaining the joint venture bank accounts for the payment of all expenses and the deposits of all receipts, keep the books and records, and pay applicable taxes for the joint venture.

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

(g) Identification of party having overall control of the joint venture.

(h) A statement in the agreement that each member of the Joint Venture will be jointly and severally liable for any obligations under the contract if awarded to the Joint Venture.

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

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

ii. Other formal teaming agreements shall include the following:

(1) A copy of their teaming agreement in English, signed by all parties of the team.

b. Section B - Factor 1, Management and Technical Approach. This section in the proposal shall include a narrative describing the Offeror’s proposed management and technical approach for successful execution of this Job Order Contract and the Offeror shall submit a graphical description (an organization chart) of its planned organization structure for successful execution of the contract. Offeror must demonstrate an understanding of the specific requirements associated with the construction and administrative responsibilities associated with projects for the US Government as spelled out in the documents and demonstrate their ability to accomplish those requirements. The information shall provide charts, tables, sketches and maps as needed to make the work approach understandable. There is a limit of twenty (20) single spaced typed pages (A4 or letter size), front and back equal two (2) pages. If more than 20 pages are submitted, only the first 20 pages will be reviewed and evaluated. The organization chart, resumes, and commitment letters are not considered part of the page count. The Management and Technical Approach shall demonstrate the following:

1. An organization chart (graph) that clearly identifies:

a) Lines of authority and communication for the execution of the contract, to include the on-site person that communicates with the U.S. Government, and any other personnel authorized to communicate directly with the U.S. Government.

b) Lines of authority of the Offeror’s Project Manager, Site Superintendent, Contractor Quality Control (CQC) System Manager, Site Safety & Health Officer (SSHO). All positions shall be identified on the organization chart by title, organization, and physical location.

c) All JV Partners and Key Subcontractors, when applicable.

d) All offices involved in this contract from the Offeror’s Headquarters to the Offeror’s site office(s), and how they are related.

2. A narrative description of the organization structure including roles, major responsibilities, and authorities of all Team Arrangement parties, and key personnel (Project Manager, Site Superintendent, CQC System Manager, and Site Safety & Health Officer) shall be described.

3. A narrative description of the Offeror’s plan for management of five (5) simultaneous task orders for JOC (Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization) SRM work at various locations, including mobilization to the site; how to staff multiple field offices with key personnel currently employed by Team Members, and letters of commitments from additional personnel required to meet the minimum standards of the contract; and in general, a description of work that will be done by the prime and that to be accomplished by subcontractors or other Team Members. This narrative description shall include the Offeror’s planned approach to the following:

a) quality control

b) staffing (both management and labor to perform a typical construction project)

c) obtaining, retaining, coordinating, and managing subcontractors.

See more detail regarding Factor 1 under the EVALUATION APPROACH section below.

c. Section C - Factor 2, Past Performance. For Factor 2, Offerors shall provide a completed performance record for up to five (5) projects, but no less than two, completed within the last six (6) years (from the proposal due date) or currently being performed (at least 50% complete from the date of this solicitation), which are fundamentally for building renovations, repairs to roofs; repair/replacement of major building systems such as electrical, mechanical, HVAC; Civil work including concrete/asphalt roads and pavements, earthwork, or drainage structures; or environmental work such as hazardous material abatement and disposal. If more than five projects are submitted, only the first five projects will be evaluated. If the Offeror submits indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) task orders for experience, each task order will count as one project. Offerors proposal for this factor shall include the following:

1. A completed Experience Overview Sheet (RFP Attachment 2A)

2. A completed Experience Information Sheet for each project submitted (RFP Attachment 2B). Offerors must specifically cite the work they were responsible for under each project (e.g., if the Offeror was a JV on a prior project but not submitting as a JV for this project or if the Offeror utilized subcontractors to perform work on prior projects, the Offeror must provide what the Offeror performed only). Additionally, Offerors are cautioned to provide enough detail for an assessment to be documented.

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

Only the first 4 pages will be read.

3. A completed performance record for each project (CPARS record or PPQ completed by the client POC). If available, the completed record should be from the Contractor’s Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). An interim completed CPARS rating will be considered if a final record is not available. If a completed CPARS record is not available at all, Offerors shall complete and provide a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) according to the instructions below. A blank PPQ form is provided as Solicitation Attachment 3. Offerors may also include performance recognition documents received for the Factor 2 projects such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition. If an Offeror has any Cure Notices or Show Cause Letters for each submitted project, the Offeror shall provide them with 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.

4. 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.

PPQ Instructions: If a CPARS record is unavailable, the offeror shall complete Blocks 1-4 of the provided PPQ and shall have the Contracting Activity and the Technical Representative responsible for the past/current contract complete the remainder of the PPQ. That client point of contact (POC) shall clearly indicate their title and role on the subject project. Offerors shall ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the POC. If the POC does not speak English, the Offeror shall identify the language that the POC speaks and should ensure that the POCs are aware they may be contacted to verify information. Offerors should follow-up with POCs to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the POC requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact via email no later than the closing date of this RFP. Completed PPQs shall be submitted with the proposal, and shall not exceed four (4) pages each. Pages exceeding the maximum will not be read. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror shall complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s).

NOTE: If relevant projects involving the same team are unavailable, each firm/contractor in the Teaming Arrangement, whether JV or prime/key sub, shall submit a minimum of one (1) project for each Team Member. Regardless of the number of Team Arrangements, no more than five projects may be submitted for Factor 2.

5. Proposal Format, Volume II, Price Proposal and Administrative Matters: Volume

II shall include the following:

a. 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.

b. 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.

c. 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 solicitation attachment).

d. Section D – Bank Letter of Assurance or Bid Bond in the amount of €4.5M.

See terms and format provided as solicitation Attachment 5. THE PROPOSAL MAY BE

DEEMED INCOMPLETE AND MAY NOT BE EVALUATED FOR FAILURE TO

PROVIDE A BANK LETTER OF ASSURANCE OR BID BOND AS PRESCRIBED IN

Section 01 00 00 – Summary of Work.

e. 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.

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

g. Section G – Defense Base Act Insurance (DBA). The contractor shall certify in the proposal whether DBA insurance is required. (See SECTION 01 11 00 Summary of Work).

B. DISCUSSIONS

1. General Information: The Government does not intend to hold discussions.

However, in accordance with FAR 15.306(d), discussion sessions with each Offeror may be held. Should discussions take place, all Offerors in the competitive range will be allowed to submit Final Proposal Revisions.

Discussion Scheduling: If discussions are conducted, the Contracting Officer may conduct discussions orally, in writing, etc. The method for discussions will be at the discretion of the Contracting Officer. The Contracting Officer will provide additional instructions with the notification of discussions.

SECTION 00 22 00 - SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS

Section 00 22 00 Evaluation Factors

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

The Government will utilize the Best Value Tradeoff Process for Source Selection in accordance with FAR 15.101-1 to determine best value. This process permits tradeoffs among cost or price and non-cost factors, and the Government considers it to be in its best interest to allow award to other than the lowest priced Offeror or other than the highest technically rated Offeror. The award will be made to the Offeror proposing the combination most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the proposals received, including the evaluation factors described in paragraph B of this section. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” or "Neutral Confidence" must be achieved for all non-price factors.

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

B. FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The SSEB will evaluate proposals according to the factors listed below. Offerors are required to provide data addressing all stated factors in a clear and understandable format. If an Offeror does not have data relating to a specific factor, it shall be clearly stated in the proposal. Proposals that do not clearly address all factors may be considered unacceptable and may not receive further consideration. A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation for each factor is set forth under the EVALUATION APPROACH paragraph below. Evaluators will ensure Offeror’s complied with all submission requirements set forth in the “Proposal Submission,” paragraph of the solicitation Section 00 21 00.

1. Non-Price Factors: The purpose of the non-price factors is to assess whether the Offeror’s proposal will satisfy the Government’s minimum requirements. A proposal receiving an unacceptable rating on one or more non-price factors will result in an overall unacceptable rating and be ineligible for award.

Factor 1 – Management and Technical Approach Factor 2 –Past Performance

2. Price Factor: The purpose of the price factor is to ensure a fair and reasonable price. The price factor will be evaluated differently than the non-price factors, and is subject to Contract Pricing policies as set forth in FAR Subpart 15.4.

Factor 3 – Price - Unit Price Book (UPB) Coefficients

3. Relative Importance of the Evaluation Factors. In accordance with FAR 15.304(e), Factor 2 (Past Performance) is more important than Factor 1 (Management Approach).

All non-price factors (Factors 1-2), when combined, are approximately equal in importance to price (Factor 3).

C. EVALUATION APPROACH

All proposals shall be evaluated by the SSEB.

1. DEFINITIONS. The following definitions are provided to assist evaluators in the evaluation process:

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.

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

Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

Significant Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

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. See FAR 15.001.

Uncertainty. Any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal for which the intent of the offeror is unclear (e.g., more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating that there may have been an error, omission or mistake).

http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/15.htm#P4_308

Clarification. Limited exchanges between the Government and Offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated. See FAR 15.306.

Adverse Past Performance. Past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating from sources where the information is from other than formal rating systems such as “Past Performance Information Retrieval System” (PPIRS) or “Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System.”

(FAPIIS).

2. TEAM ARRANGEMENTS. As described in FAR Subpart 9.6, it is the Government’s policy to recognize the integrity and validity of contractor team arrangements. The Offeror may be credited with the experience, expertise and/or past performance of a JV member, a team member, a subcontractor, or an affiliate (collectively referred to in this RFP as “Team Members”) if relates to the services described for that party in the team arrangement agreement or the letter of commitment.

Consistent with FAR 9.104-4, the Government also may consider the responsibility of such entities or persons when it may adversely affect the prospective prime contractor’s responsibility or when it is in the Government’s interest to do so. In the event that the Offeror is awarded the resultant contract, there can be no substitution of any proposed team member, subcontractor, or key personnel identified in a teaming agreement or letter of commitment without prior written approval of the contracting officer. Approval or disapproval of a substitute entity or person is a matter within the sole discretion of the contracting officer, who will consider factors such as whether the proposed substitute appears to be equally qualified and whether the substitution is the best interests of the Government and project execution. In approving a substitution, the contracting officer may impose such conditions on the substitution as he/she deems appropriate in the exercise of his/her sole discretion. Further information about Teaming Arrangement requirements is provided in section 00 21 00 (A)(4)(a).

a. Teaming Agreements. For a teaming arrangement to be recognized for purposes of source selection evaluation and the application of non-price factors, there must be full disclosure of the teaming arrangement and company relationships in the team's proposal. The proposal must include a narrative that explains the major or critical aspects of the work to be performed by each team member (to include identification of team members, a full delineation of roles and responsibilities of team members, and the duration of the agreement, etc.). The proposal must also include a fully executed agreement between/among all team members. The proposal and agreement must be consistent; substantive inconsistencies between the proposal and agreement may be construed against the Offeror. The timely submission of the executed teaming agreement prior to award shall be a precondition to a finding of responsibility. Further details on the requirements of teaming agreements are provided in section 00 21 00(A)(4)(a).

b. Joint Ventures (JV). If the Offeror is a JV, the Offeror must provide evidence of a legally binding JV agreement, which creates legal responsibility on the part of all http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/15.htm#P290_46318 http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/15.htm#P290_46318 http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/09.htm#P707_126651 contractors in the JV. For the JV arrangement to be recognized for purposes of source selection evaluation and the application of non-price factors, the proposal must clearly address the experience of each JV member and the relationship of the members on any ongoing or previous projects. Further details surrounding requirements related to the JV agreement are provided in Section 00 21 00, INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS.

c. Key Subcontractor Commitment Letters. For a prime-subcontractor arrangement to be recognized for purposes of source selection evaluation and the application of non-price factors, the proposal must have a commitment letter signed by both the prime and the subcontractor that includes the substantive portions of the sample provided in Attachment 7. The agreement must also reflect that the prime contractor is vested with control and responsibility for the daily management of the work, and that it remains responsible for contract performance, including those items allocated to a subcontractor on the team. Offerors are reminded that the prime contractor remains fully responsible for contract performance, regardless of any team arrangement between the prime contractor and its subcontractors. For a prime-subcontractor arrangement to be recognized for purposes of source selection evaluation and the application of non-price factors, the proposal must have a commitment letter signed by both the prime and the subcontractor that includes the substantive portions of the sample provided in Attachment 7.

d. Affiliates. The term “affiliate” is defined in FAR 2.101. For an affiliate’s relevant experience and past performance to be recognized for purposes of source selection evaluation and the application of non-price factors, the proposal must demonstrate a firm commitment that the affiliate will participate meaningfully (e.g., roles, responsibilities, etc.) in the performance of the contract resulting from this solicitation.

This commitment, nature of each entity’s relationship and meaningful participation shall be described in a document signed by authorized representatives of both the Offeror and its affiliate.

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

3. ADJECTIVAL RATINGS. Evaluators will apply the adjectival rating for the definition that most closely matches the evaluation

Factor 1 –: The adjectival rating for Management Approach and Technical Approach are listed and defined below:

NON-PRICE FACTOR COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

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

Purple Good Proposal 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 has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Un-acceptable 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.

Unaccept able

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

Factor 2: The adjectival ratings for Past Performance are listed and defined below:

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

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings:

Rating Definition Very Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of

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

Performance Confidence Assessments:

Rating Definition Substantial Confidence

Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence

Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

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.

4. Non Price Factors: Data provided in response to the non-price factors described below shall be included in Volume I, “Non-Price Proposal.”

a) Factor 1, Management and Technical Approach. Evaluators will determine whether the Offeror’s management and approach as specified in Section 00 21 00 is logical, feasible, and demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of the complexity of managing the contract. In performing the evaluation, the Government will evaluate the following:

i. 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.

ii. The extent to which the proposal describes a reasonable and logical plan for the performance of multiple projects within the geographic scope of this contract that illustrates a detailed understanding of multiple task order requirements, proposes personnel that meet the specification requirements, and provides subcontracting and staffing plans.

b) Factor 2, Past Performance. For this Factor, the SSEB will evaluate the relevancy and quality of the Offeror’s past performance and will assess a confidence level on how likely the Offeror will be successful on the work under this Solicitation. The relevancy and likelihood of success will be evaluated based on the Offeror's performance on projects submitted for evaluation by the Offeror as well as other projects not submitted by the Offeror, to include the past performance information from other sources available to the SSEB, and past performance of any Subcontractors or JV partners specified in the Offeror’s proposal. This assessment will be based on consideration of all relevant facts and circumstances, including any trends in past performance. The Offeror's past performance will be evaluated based on performance on projects submitted under the experience portion of Factor 2, but the Government reserves the right to review all recent past performance records available to make a confidence determination to include other projects not submitted by the Offeror. The Government also reserves the right to review past performance of any Team Members.

(1) Past Performance Relevancy. The SSEB may consider projects more relevant if they consist of the following (listed in no particular order). Projects completed more than six (6) years before the proposal due date and/or not meeting these criteria may be considered for evaluation purposes but may lessen the Offeror’s overall relevancy rating:

(1) Projects that demonstrate experience working in all three countries: Germany, Belgium, and Netherlands.

(2) Projects that demonstrate experience working on US Army Garrisons.

(3) Projects involving multiple trades.

(4) Projects demonstrating experience working with proposed Key

Subcontractors and/or the proposed JV Partners

(5) Projects with a cost of €50,000 to €5,000,000.

Offerors are cautioned that the SSEB may assess weaknesses against experience examples that demonstrate a significant lack of experience in one or more of the criteria listed above, 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. Furthermore, completed PPQs, especially those with a supporting narrative that explains the basis for the ratings, may be considered more favorably than those that are not completed by the client or those that lack any rationale for the ratings provided. Finally, if the Offeror is proposing with a Team Member, projects involving the same team will be given the most consideration.