Amend 02 Baltics Slide Deck.pdf

EVENT FOR INDUSTRY: WORKING

WITH THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF

ENGINEERS

Presented by:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Europe District 10 February 2020

Radisson Blu Latvija Conference & Spa Hotel Riga, Latvia

USACE TEAM INTRODUCTIONS

Ms. Allison Blount Program Manager, Base Contracts

Ms. Jennifer Aldridge Strategic Engagement Coordinator

Ms. Leslie Reed Assistant Counsel

LTC Christian Solinsky Contracting Officer

Mr. Mike Steagall Project Engineer, Latvia/Lithuania

Mr. Chris Bailey Project Engineer, Estonia

Ms. Sarah Woody Program Management Specialist

AGENDA

Registration – 1 hour Welcome / Introductory Remarks About U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Doing Business with the USACE: Part 1 Systems and Registrations

Doing Business with the USACE: Part 2 Source Selection, Procurement Tools & Project Delivery Methods

Doing Business with the USACE: Part 3 + Q&A Understanding the Solicitation and Proposal Preparation

Break – 30 minutes Pre-Proposal Conference: Part 1 U.S. Procurement Law & Overseas Contracting

Lunch Break (own attendees’ own) – 90+minutes USACE Specific Requirements & Program in Baltic Countries Pre-Proposal Conference: Part 1 Latvia/Lithuania & Estonia MATOC Requests for Proposal

Break – 30 minutes Q&A Session / Closing Remarks

Information Provided During Industry Day

Any remarks or explanations provided during this presentation today are for general information and will not change the terms and conditions of any resultant solicitation or subsequent contract.

DISCLAIMER

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

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

USACE is globally engaged and regionally aligned

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

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

Europe District AOR (1 of 2) – MILCON Workload

BEL Belgium BGR Bulgaria CZE Czech Republic DNK Denmark EST Estonia DEU Germany HUN Hungary ITA Italy LVA Latvia LTU Lithuania LUX Luxembourg NLD Netherlands NOR Norway POL Poland ROU Romania SVN Slovakia TUR Turkey

Europe District MILCON projects (past, present, and future) are located in 16 countries throughout the EUCOM AOR:

Europe District AOR (2 of 2) – Non-MILCON Workload

ALB Albania ARM Armenia AZE Azerbaijan GEO Georgia HVR Croatia ISR Israel XKX Kosovo MKD North Macedonia SRB Serbia UKR Ukraine

EUCOM Non-MILCON Workload (not already included in MILCON)

AFRICOM

Non-MILCON

Workload BEN Benin BFA Burkina Fasso CMR Cameroon TCD Chad DJI Djibuti

GAB Gabon GHA Ghana KEN Kenya LSO Lesotho MWI Malawi MOZ Mozambique NER Niger NGA Nigeria STP Sao Tome SEN Senegal SLE Sierra Leone ZAF South Africa SWZ Swaziland TGO Togo TUN Tuniaia

Central Area Office – Sembach, Germany Ramstein AFB RO

Spangdahlem AFB PO Kaiserslautern RO

Germersheim PO Baumholder RO

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

Hessen Area Office –Wiesbaden, Germany Wiesbaden RO

CIC PO

Grafenwoehr RO

Ansbach PO Hohenfels PO Garmish PO

Stuttgart RO

District HQ – Wiesbaden Special Projects RO

(AFRICOM/EUCOM)

ROBMC (Hospital) Area Office*

Poland MD Area Office (Redzikowo, Poland)

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

Israel Area Office North RO

Haifa PO Central RO South RO

RO: Resident Office PO: Project Office *Planned Office

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

Tallinn PO – Tallinn, Estonia

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

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

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

EUROPE DISTRICT OFFICES

DOING BUSINESS WITH THE

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF

ENGINEERS PART 1

• General Information: Registrations & ID Numbers

• DUNS Number

• Cage Code

• SAM Registration

OVERVIEW

REGISTRATIONS & IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS

System Description Website General Timeline

DUNS Dun & Bradstreet Number (DUNS):

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

CAGE /

NCAGE

Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code

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

7-11 business days

SAM System for Award Management (SAM) is a registration database required for all US Federal Government Contracts and where you will find opportunities.

https://www.sam.beta.

gov/

2 weeks to go active

What is a DUNS Number? It’s a unique nine-digit identification number for each physical location of your business.

How does my firm obtain a DUNS number? Go to http://www.dnb.com to obtain a DUNS number at no cost.

https://www.dnb.com/duns-number/get-a-duns.html

DUNS NUMBER

The CAGE or NCAGE code is a required piece of data for registering in the System for Award Management (SAM).

• What is a CAGE Code? The Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code is a unique identifier assigned to suppliers to various government or defense agencies, as well as to government agencies themselves and also various organizations.

• How does your company obtain a CAGE Code? If you are a vendor located inside the United States, one can be obtained by visiting: https://cage.dla.mil/

• What is an NCAGE Code? The NATO Codification System (NCS) was established in 1954. In order to differentiate between the U.S. and NATO systems, CAGE was referred to as NATO COMMERCIAL and GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY CODE (NCAGE) in the NCS community.

• How does your company obtain an NCAGE Code? If you are a vendor located outside the United States, one can be obtained by visiting https://eportal.nspa.nato.int/AC135Public/default.aspx

CAGE AND NCAGE CODE

LATVIA

Ms. Agnese ADMIDINA +371 6733 5168 +371 6722 9150 agnese.admidina@mod.gov.lv

Mr. Aivars SKULTANS +371 6733 5158 +371 6722 9150 aivars.skultans@vamoic.gov.lv

NCAGE MATTERS POINT OF CONTACT

LITHUANIA

Cpt. Vytautas GYLYS +370 (5) 2785 250 +370 (5) 2103 793 ncblt@mil.lt

Aristida MARGERIENE +370 (5) 2785 252 +370 (5) 2103 793 aristida.margeriene@mil.lt

ESTONIA

Mrs. Piret LILLE +372 717 4140 +372 601 1120 piret.lille@mil.ee

… moved…

IMPORTANT CHANGES!

Contract Opportunities is a government-wide list of notices of proposed contract actions expected to exceed $25,000. Notices include solicitations, pre-solicitations, sole source justifications, awards and other notices related to the acquisition of supplies and services.

• Sources Sought: Used as a market research by contracting officers.

• Pre-Solicitation Notice: Makes vendors aware that a solicitation may follow. Vendors may add themselves to the Interested Vendors List, if the posting agency has enabled this feature.

• Solicitation (Combined Synopsis/Solicitation): These opportunities include specifications for the product or service requested and a due date for the proposal. The notice will specify bidding procedures in the details of the solicitation.

• Award Notice: When a federal agency awards a contract, they may choose to upload a notice of the award to allow the interested vendors to view the vendor receiving the awarded contract, and amount agreed upon.

• Special Notice: Most opportunities classified this way are open for bids from eligible vendors (For Examples: MATOCs).. Also used for announcing Industry Days.

OPPORTUNITIES

THE

BASICS

CHANGES IN FEATURES AND FUNCTIONALITY (1 OF 2)

CHANGES IN FEATURES AND FUNCTIONALITY (2 OF 2)

DoD Procure‐to‐Pay (P2P) beta.SAM.gov | For People Who Make, Receive, and Manage FederalAwards

HOW TOSEARCH

● Search through each award domain separately or across all domains at once with a single search tool

● Easy to understand display

● More consistent results with award data filtering options

● Sort search results by title or date modified

● Search by keyword or ID (ex: DUNS, contract number)

● Find comprehensive data about an entity with a single search

DoD Procure‐to‐Pay (P2P) beta.SAM.gov | For People Who Make, Receive, andManage Federal Awards beta.SAM.gov | For People Who Make, Receive, andManage Federal Awards 18

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

NEED ASSISTANCE?

ENGINEERS PART 2

• Source Selection Process Overview

• Source Selection Approaches

• Source Selection Teams & Responsibilities

• Contract Vehicles

• Project Delivery Methods

DOING BUSINESS WITH THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

PART 2: OVERVIEW

Develop Requirement & Conduct Market Research Develop Acquisition Strategy/Plan Government Issues Solicitation (via beta.sam)

Pre-proposal conferences/Site Visits will be held for large or complex procurements

Offerors submit questions and Government may amend solicitation Contractors submit Proposals Government Evaluates Proposals Award on Initial Offers (Decision Point) Establish Competitive Range Conduct “meaningful” Discussions Request & Receive Final Proposal Revisions Evaluate Final Proposals & Make Source Selection Decision Contract Award Debriefings

SOURCE SELECTION PROCESS OVERVIEW

SOURCE SELECTION PROCESS OVERVIEW

Proposal Material Received

Individual Evaluations Caucus SSA

Briefing Award Decision

Discussions*Final Proposal Revisions

Contract Award

Debriefings

*If Required

Solicitation Issued

Single Phase Evaluation

Comments Strengths Weaknesses Merit & Confidence

Ratings

Consensus Strengths Weaknesses Merit & Confidence

Ratings

Two COMMON Approaches

• Lowest price technically acceptable (FAR 15.101-2 ) Best value is expected to result from selection of a technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price

• Trade-off Process (FAR 15.101-1) In the best interest of the Government to consider award to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated offeror All evaluation factors and significant subfactors that will affect contract award and their relative importance shall be clearly stated Possible Trade-offs: Technical, Past Performance, and Price/Cost

SOURCE SELECTION APPROACHES

CONTRACT VEHICLES

AND

PROJECT DELIVERY METHODS

Construction - Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC)

• Multiple Indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contracts under a single “pool”

• Types of Work:

Design-Build (DB) and Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Project Task Orders

• Step 1 – Select MATOC contractors (open competition)

• Step 2 – Individual task orders competed among MATOC contractors

Construction - Job Order Contract (JOC)

• Also known as a Single Award Task Order Contract (SATOC)

• One Indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity Contract Award

• Types of Work:

Sustainment, Restoration and Modernization (SRM) type of projects

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

• Step 1 – Select JOC contractor

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

CONTRACT VEHICLES OVERVIEW

Environmental Services – Remediation MATOC

• Multiple Indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contracts under a single “pool”

• Step 1 – Select MATOC contractors (open competition)

• Step 2 – Individual task orders competed among MATOC contractors

Architect and Engineering (A-E) Services – Indefinite Delivery Contracts (IDC)

• Various SATOCs

• All solicitations are based on most highly qualified

• Types of Work:

Design Non-design work

• Step 1 – Select A-E SATOC contractor(s)

• Step 2 – Individual task orders negotiated with single A-E contractor(s)

CONTRACT VEHICLES OVERVIEW

PROJECT DELIVERY METHODS

Design-Bid-Build

Design-Build

ENGINEERS PART 3

• Understanding the Solicitation

• Preparing your Proposal

• Exchanges with Offerors & Debriefings

• USACE/U.S. Government Specific Requirements

DOING BUSINESS WITH THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

PART 3: OVERVIEW

• The typical Request for Proposal (RFP) is a significantly long document that reads like a legal text, and has very specific requirements. Make sure you thoroughly read and understand the proposal submission requirements and process.

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

• Understanding each section prior to preparing your first RFP response will certainly save you time.

UNDERSTANDING THE SOLICITATION PACKAGE

UNDERSTANDING THE SOLICITATION PACKAGE

Section 00 01 10 Table of Contents Section 00 01 15 List of Drawing Sheets Section 00 10 00 Solicitation, Contract Line Items (CLINs) Section 00 21 16 Instructions to Proposers Section 00 22 16 Supplementary Instructions to Proposers Section 00 45 00 Representations and Certifications Section 00 70 00 Conditions of Contract Section 00 72 00 General Conditions Section 01 00 00 General Requirements Section 00 73 00 Supplementary Conditions Section 00 74 00 Special Conditions Section 01 00 00 General Requirements Sections 02 00 00 – 49 99 99 Technical Sections

Solicitation and Contract Standard Forms (SFs)

• Standard Form 33, Solicitation, Offer and Award

• Standard Form 1449, Solicitation / Contract / Order for Commercial Items

• Standard Form 1442, Solicitation / Contract

• Standard Form 18, Request for Quotation

• Standard Form 26, Award / Contract

Request for Proposal (RFP): This is a negotiated contract where further discussion may take place after the proposal is submitted. The offeror may have the opportunity to change pricing or technical requirements. A SF 33 or SF 1442 must be signed and submitted. Once the government agency signs the appropriate form, the contract becomes binding. (Offer & Acceptance)

INFORMATION TO OFFERORS - SECTION 00 10 00

MAGNITUDES of CONSTRUCTION

The magnitudes are provided in FAR 36.204 and DFARS 236.204

Typical Language in the Solicitations:

Per FAR 36.204, the estimated price range of this contract (base and all options) is between $1,000,000 and $5,000,000.

INFORMATION TO OFFERORS - SECTION 00 10 00

$500,000 - $1,000,000 $1,000,000 - $5,000,000 $5,000,000 - $10,000,000 $10,000,000 - $25,000,000 $25,000,000 - $100,000,000 $100,000,000 - $250,000,000

Contract line items (CLINS) Price/Costs:

CONTRACT LINE ITEMS – SECTION 00 10 00

Item Number Supplies/Services Quantity Unit Unit Price Amount 0001 Construction of

Warehouse 1 Job $5,000.00 $5,000.00

Item Number Supplies/Services Quantity Unit Unit Price Amount 0001 Design and

Construction of Warehouse

0001AA Design of Warehouse 1 Job $1,000.00 $1,000.00

0001AB Construction of Warehouse

1 Job $1,000.00 $1,000.00

Fill in the highlighted sections

Info Only

Should include all item 0001 costs

PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS - SECTION 00 21 16

This section provides instructions for preparing your proposal including:

PROPOSAL ORGANIZATION: Volume I – Technical Proposal Volume 2 – Price Proposal

FORMAT: Details regarding PDF readable format, font, and/or page limitation DEADLINES for submitting questions regarding the RFP and proposal due date PROPOSAL DELIVERY METHOD: For example, FBO, Email or hard copy submission, address, number of originals and copies, etc.)

NOTICES, CONDITIONS OR OTHER INSTRUCTIONS

EVALUATION CRITERIA - SECTION 00 22 16

This section will typically include:

Basis for Award:

Best Value determination Technical Factors level of importance

Evaluation Factors & Approach: Outlines how the agency will assess and evaluate the proposals.

Adjectival Ratings/Descriptions: Focuses on strengths and weaknesses of the proposal compared to the requirements in the SOW.

The Statement of Work (SOW) describes what the government agency wants you to do or supply.

Proposal Tips:

When responding to the SOW, don’t be afraid to be redundant and don’t assume the proposed agency already knows the SOW.

Demonstrate an approach to delivering on the listed SOW and illustrate your firm’s capabilities to the agency.

STATEMENT OF WORK - SECTION 01 00 00

In addition to the general FAR Clauses, this section will also include local clauses including:

CONTRACT CLAUSES/GENERAL PROVISIONS - SECTIONS 00 70 00 & 00 72 00

52.000-4059 LETTER OF ASSURANCE

52.000-4062 BANK LETTER OF GUARANTY

52.000-4103 DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES

52.000-4133 WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE (DEFENSE BASE ACT) – COUNTRIES WITH

WAIVERS

52.000-4092 INSTALLATION CLEARANCE / ACCESS REQUIREMENTS

STR 52.000-4004 IMMUNITY FROM LEGAL PROCESS

STR 52.000-4008 DESIGNATED COUNTRY CITIZENS ON USAREUR ACCESS-CONTROLLED

INSTALLATIONS

STR 52.000-4023 UNAUTHORIZED SERVICE

STR 52.000-4024 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GOVERNMENT, CONTRACTOR, AND CONTRACTOR

PERSONNEL

STR 52.000-4038 ENGLISH SPEAKING REPRESENTATIVE

STR 52.000-4043 CORRESPONDENCE IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE

STR 52.000-4074 TAX RELIEF

This section typically includes:

Terms for Inspection and Acceptance Deliveries or Performance

• Defines the terms of the contract and states any options to extend the term of the contract

• Lists the Delivery Dates for each CLIN of the contract Contract Administrative Data

• Invoice data Special Contract Requirements

• Security requirements and base access (if applicable

SUPPLEMENTARY CONDITIONS - SECTION 00 73 00

• REMEMBER that each Solicitation is different.

• Follow each solicitation instructions EXACTLY. The solicitations will instruct you on what should be submitted, where and when. It is very important to follow those instructions in order to be competitive.

• Offerors are advised to provide their BEST PROPOSAL in the first submission.

PROPOSAL TIPS

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

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

the evaluation process;

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

what was successful in your proposal;

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

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

DEBRIEFINGS

BREAK

U.S. PROCUREMENT LAW &

OVERSEAS CONTRACTING

MS. LESLIE REED

OFFICE OF COUNSEL

• US Procurement Regulations and Important Clauses

• Prime Contractor Project Management

• US Contracting Officers

• Joint Ventures, Teaming Agreements, Key Subcontractors, Affiliates

• Defense Base Act Insurance & Taxes and VAT

• Bonding Requirements

• Questions

OVERVIEW

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

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

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

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

U.S. PROCUREMENT LAW AND REGULATIONS

DFARS 252.233-7001

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

CHOICE OF LAW (OVERSEAS)

DISPUTES AND CLAIMS REGULATIONS

41 United States Code (U.S.C.) Chapt. 71 -Contract Disputes

FAR Subpart 33.2, Disputes and Appeals

FAR 52.233-1, Disputes

CLAUSE 52.000-4004

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

IMMUNITY FROM LEGAL PROCESS

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

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

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

• The Government will always hold the prime responsible.

COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL LABOR LAWS

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

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

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

PRIME CONTRACTOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT

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

– Adequately manning and staffing the project.

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

– The U.S. Government will not compensate you if labor turns out to be more expensive than you expected. This is true even if the reason for the added expense is a change in the host nation (HN) laws/regulations that increases your labor cost.

– The U.S. Government cannot influence the HN regarding visas or work permits and may not provide any assistance.

PRIME CONTRACTOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT (CONT.)

• What if the Prime has a lot of experience, but NO or little experience working in the Host Nation?

• What if the Prime is a host nation company with a lot of experience, but none or very little experience with the U.S.

GOVERNMENT or the U.S. Department of Defense?

PRIME CONTRACTOR EXPERIENCE

• To be more competitive in terms of experience, applicants often enter into Joint Ventures, Teaming Agreements, propose Key Subcontractors who have experience, hire Key Personnel with experience or rely on the experience of an Affiliate company, such as a Parent Company or a “Sister” company

• This will be discussed in more detail at the preproposal conference later today and at future preproposal conferences for individual procurements.

PRIME CONTRACTOR EXPERIENCE, CONT.

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

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

– Shall identify the chief executive of each entity identified

– Shall be translated into English

– Shall include a detailed statement outlining, in terms of percentages, which JV member is responsible for what aspects of the project, the relationship of the JV in terms of ownership/capital contribution, profit/loss sharing; and which party has overall control, etc.

– Note: The Contract will provide that JV members are jointly and severally liable for any obligations under the contract. The JV Agreement should also state this.

JOINT VENTURES See Request for Proposal (RFP) for exact Instructions

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

-The proposal must explain the major or critical aspects of the work to be performed by each team member (to include identification of team members, a full description of roles and responsibilities of team members, and the duration of the agreement). The “credit” given will depend on the proposed participation of the teaming partner.

TEAMING AGREEMENTS

• During Source Selection, prime contractors can receive credit for the experience, past performance and capabilities of a subcontractor provided the proposal includes a letter of commitment that describes the type of services the subcontractor will perform and that it is signed by authorized representatives of both the prime and subcontractor.

KEY SUBCONTRACTORS

• During Source Selection, prime contractors can receive credit for the experience, of an “Affiliate.” The term “Affiliate” is defined in the U.S. regulations, but typically it refers to a parent corporation or a “sister” company (both subsidiaries of the same parent corporation.)

• If the prime wants to rely on the experience of an Affiliate, its proposal must demonstrate a firm commitment that the Affiliate will participate meaningfully in terms of roles and responsibilities in the performance of the contract. This commitment and the nature of each entity’s relationship and meaningful participation shall be described in a document signed by authorized representatives of both the prime and its Affiliate.

AFFILIATES

• Since the U.S. Government will rely on the past experience of JV members, teaming partners, key subcontractors, key personnel and Affiliates in deciding which proposal offers the best value, the inability or failure to use those same entities or personnel in the manner proposed could result in a termination of the contract.

• In general, substitutions are not guaranteed. The Contracting Officer must determine if the substituted entity or person is comparable to the entity or person proposed in terms of experience and capabilities. If they are not, the Contracting Officer has the discretion to decline the proposed substitution.

WHAT IF A SUBSTITUTION IS NEEDED?

• The DBA covers persons employed at US defense bases overseas.

The DBA is designed to provide medical treatment and compensation to employees of defense contractors injured in the scope and course of their work for the U.S. Government. The DBA is administered by the United States Department of Labor (DOL).

• Latvia and Lithuania have waivers from the DBA Insurance requirements with respect to workers covered by their respective nations’ workers’ compensation for on-the-job injuries laws.

• That RFP will have a clause 52.000-4133 WORKERS

COMPENSATION INSURANCE (DEFENSE BASE ACT) –

COUNTRIES WITH WAIVERS (SEPTEMBER 2017) – with a link where you can click to get a copy of the terms of the country waiver

DEFENSE BASE ACT (DBA) INSURANCE

DBA CONT.:

• The DBA waiver does NOT apply to work in Estonia or to

US citizens, lawful residents of the US, or employees hired in the US. For such employees, the RFP with have a separate FAR Clause 52.228-3 Worker's Compensation Insurance (Defense Base Act) JUL 2014.

• In those instances, DBA Insurance coverage is required for work performed by all contractors and subcontractors on DoD Contracts. No other insurance can serve as a substitute. DOL website has a list of authorized insurance carriers.

• Proof of DBA must be provided after award (see RFP).

TAX EXEMPTIONS

United States contractors in Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia when working solely for the purpose of supporting the U.S. Government shall not be subject to any form of income or profits tax by the governments of those countries.

Importation of articles by any contractors acting on behalf of the U.S. shall be free of any import duties or taxes.

• Articles and services acquired by contractors acting on behalf of the U.S. should not be subject to direct or indirect taxation, to include value added taxes, excise taxes, sales taxes or similar taxes.

• The RFPs have (or will) outline the specific VAT procedures for each country.

VALUE ADDED TAX (VAT)

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

• If specifically allowed in the RFP, a Bank Letter of Assurance (BLA) and after award a Bank Letter of Guarantee (BLG) may be submitted instead of bond. (typically 10% - 25% of contract or task order award)

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

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

BONDING REQUIREMENTS

LUNCH BREAK

USACE/U.S. GOVERNMENT

SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS

1. Construction Quality Management Course

2. Safety

3. CPM Schedule & Payments

4. Resident Management System (RMS)

Course developed in partnership with Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC) and the Associated General Contractors

(AGC)

Details:

• Instructs Contractor Superintendents, Quality Control (QC) Staff, and

Foreman in construction quality control and how it relates to Owner quality assurance (QA)

• Describes the QC/QA system successfully used by USACE

• Required prior to commencement of construction. [Refer to §01 45 00]

USACE CONSTRUCTION QUALITY MANAGEMENT (CQM) COURSE

Location: Wiesbaden, Germany Registration:

https://www.nau.usace.army.mil/Business-With-Us/CQM/ Upcoming Courses:

23-24 April 2020 (Full); 30-31 July 2020; 22-23 October 2020 Class space is limited to the first 35 students.

Registration deadline is two (2) weeks prior to start date.

There is no fee for course attendance. For other questions regarding registration or course information please email CENAU- EC-CQM@usace.army.mil.

CONSTRUCTION QUALITY MANAGEMENT COURSE (CONT.)

SITE SAFETY AND HEALTH

Engineer Manual (EM) 385-1-1 USACE Safety & Health Requirements Manual:

http://www.publications.usace.army.mil/USACE- Publications/Engineer-Manuals/

USACE Specifications:

• 01 35 26 Safety and Health Occupational Requirements

• 01 45 01 USACE Quality Control

• 01 45 01.01 Additional Quality Control Personnel

PROJECT SCHEDULE (SECTION 01 32 01 )

The schedule is the basis for determining contract earnings during each update period and therefore the amount of each progress payment.

Activity cost loading must be reasonable and without front-end loading. Provide additional documentation to demonstrate reasonableness if requested by the Contracting Officer.

PAYMENTS

FAR 52.232-5 Payments under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts Monthly Invoices An itemization of the amounts requested, related to the various elements of work required by the contract covered by the payment requested.

A listing of the amount included for work performed by each subcontractor under the contract.

A listing of the total amount of each subcontract under the contract.

A listing of the amounts previously paid to each such subcontractor under the contract.

Additional supporting data in a form and detail required by the Contracting Officer.

RESIDENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (RMS)

• Comprehensive contract administration software used for ALL construction contracts.

• E.g. Submittals, schedules, pay estimates, contract modifications

CPM SCHEDULE, PROGRESS PAYMENTS AND RMS

The Resident Management System (RMS) is the contract administration programs designed by Resident Engineers. The systems provide an efficient method to plan, schedule, and control all aspects of construction.

Support and tutorials:

RMS Support Center YouTube Channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_ID-JmaZgePmlrb2zdUOqg

RMS 3 Contractor Mode User Manual:

https://rms.usace.army.mil/datafiles/rmsdocwebsite/files/RMS3CM.pdf

Download RMS 3.0 Contractor Launcher:

https://rms.usace.army.mil/datafiles/rmsdocwebsite/files/RMSLauncherSetupKtr25.exe

Installing RMS 3.0 Contractor Mode https://rms.usace.army.mil/datafiles/rmsdocwebsite/files/Installing%20RMS%203.pdf

RESIDENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (RMS)

USACE PROGRAM

UPCOMING OPPORTUNITIES (1 OF 4)

Multiple Award Task Order Contract

(MATOC)

• Area: Estonia

• Capacity (shared): $49.9M

• Ordering Period: 5 years

• Task Order Range: $200K to $15M

• Design-Build & Design-Bid-Build Projects

• Typical Projects: building renovations, range improvements, new construction of facilities, roof replacements, fire alarm system repair, utilities repair, new hardstand construction or upgrades, airfield improvements and upgrades, etc.

Potential Projects:

• FY20 (IEU-20-0010) Rummu Kingergarten

Renovation, Amari, Estonia, $250K-$500K

• FY20 (IEU-20-0024) Renovate Kindergarten, Maardu, Estonia, $250K-$500K.

• FY21 Amari AB (CDDAR equipment storage facility), Amari, Estonia, $500K-$1M

• FY?? EDI Vertical Construction, Amari, $5M -

$10M

• FY?? EDI Vertical Construction, Amari $5M-

$10M

UPCOMING OPPORTUNITIES (2 OF 4)

Multiple Award Task Order Contract

(MATOC)

• Area: Latvia & Lithuania

• Capacity (shared): $49.9M

• Ordering Period: 5 years

• Task Order Range: $200K to $15M

• Design-Build & Design-Bid-Build

Projects

• Typical Projects: building renovations, range improvements, new construction of facilities, roof replacements, fire alarm system repair, utilities repair, new hardstand construction or upgrades, airfield improvements and upgrades, etc.

Potential Projects:

• FY20 Infrastructure Emergency Medical Vehicles & Staff

Renovation, Daugavpils, Riga, Latvia, $250K-$500K

• FY20 Regional Mgmt & Dispatch Center Riga, Latvia, $250K-

$500K

• FY21 Renovation of Luznava Kindergarten, Luznava, Latvia, $250K-$500K

• FY21 Renovation of Dagda Secondary School, Dagda, Latvia, $250K-$500K

• FY?? EDI Vertical Construction, Riga, Latvia, $5M - $10M

• FY?? EDI Vertical Construction, Riga, Riga, Latvia $5M- $10M

• FY20 Fire Station Renovation Panevezys, Lithuania

• FY21 Renovate Kalvarija Fire Brigade Station, Kalvarija, Lithuania, $250K-$500K

• FY?? EDI Vertical Construction, Kaunas, Lithuania, $5M - $10M

• FY EDI Vertical Construction, Kaunas, Lithuania, $5M- $10M

UPCOMING OPPORTUNITIES (3 OF 4)

Architect-Engineering (A-E) Services Indefinite Delivery Contract (IDC)

• Coverage: Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia

• Capacity (Shared): $49.5M, minimum of 3 awards

• Ordering Period: 5 Years

• Planned Solicitation Date: TBD 2020

• Typical Work includes Multi-disciplined A-E services, specifically:

– Design of military facilities in the stated countries. The design requirements shall need to consider both U.S. design codes and host nation specific design codes and standards, as well as NATO requirements.

– Develop RFP packages for DB & DBB projects

– Prepare design criteria, A-E designs, specifications, design related analyses and studies, and cost estimates.

– Environmental documentation including permits, special studies, as required by host nation laws and regulations.

– Other studies (planning, feasibility, geotechnical, etc), planning & design charrettes, CAD/GIS Mapping, construction inspection services, etc.

UPCOMING OPPORTUNITIES (4 OF 4)

For Fiscal Year 2020 Business Opportunities with the Europe District, visit:

https://www.nau.usace.army.mil/Business-With-Us/Contracting/

QUESTIONS

PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE

W912GB20R0016 ESTONIA MATOC

W912GB20R0005 LATVIA & LITHUANIA MATOC

Presented by:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Europe District 10 February 2020

Radisson Blu Latvija Conference & Spa Hotel Riga, Latvia

Shoot House - Skopje, North Macedonia

Offerors shall submit inquiries via “Bidder Inquiry” in ProjNet at www.projnet.org\projnet. See the solicitation for ProjNet registration instructions.

Bidder Inquiry Key:

4IYRJG-NS38X6

M3WJTH-JN6IN5

Bidder Inquiries will be closed to new inquiries TEN calendar days before the proposal due date in order to appropriately respond and amend the solicitation, if necessary.

PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRIES VIA PROJNET

Ref: RFP Section 00 21 00 - Instructions

Select USACE

Enter Email

• TASK ORDERs Latvia/Lithuania:

– Minimum Task Order $200,000.00

– Maximum Task Order is limited to $15,000,000 However, smaller and larger dollar value projects may be considered at the discretion of the Contracting Officer

W912GB20R0015 FY20 LATVIA/LITHUANIA MATOC

• TASK ORDERs Estonia:

– Minimum Task Order $200,000.00

– Maximum Task Order is limited to $15,000,000.

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

W912GB20R0016 FY20 ESTONIA MATOC

• Total maximum ordering value $49,950,000 over five

(5) Years

– Base Ordering Period: Two (2) Years

– Option Periods – Three (3) One-Year Option periods

An additional 6 month ordering period will be utilized if FAR Clause 52.217-8 (Option to Extend Services) is exercised

W912GB20R0015 FY20 LATVIA/LITHUANIA MATOC

• Total maximum ordering value $49,950,000 over five

(5) Years

– Base Ordering Period: Three (3) Years

– Option Periods – Two (2) One-Year Option periods

An additional 6 month ordering period will be utilized if FAR Clause 52.217-8 (Option to Extend Services) is exercised

W912GB20R0016 FY20 ESTONIA MATOC

• File Size Limitations. Offerors are advised that the file size limitation is 10MB due to email server restrictions.

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

(1) “W912GB20R00xx RESPONSE Firmname Volume I.pdf”

(2) “W912GB20R00xx RESPONSE Firmname Volume I Part 1.pdf”

(3) “W912GB20R00xx RESPONSE Firmname Volume I Part 2.pdf”

(4) “W912GB20R00xx RESPONSE Firmname Volume I diagrams.pdf”

(5) “W912GB20R00xx RESPONSE Firmname Volume II.pdf”

GENERAL SUBMISSION INFORMATION

Reference Section 00 21 00 Instructions

File Organization, Formatting, and other instructions.

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

Offerors shall prepare proposals in the English language.

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

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

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

GENERAL SUBMISSION INFORMATION (CONT)

Submission & Deadline.

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

The time and date of proposal receipt will be the delivery time & date recorded of the email receipt on the Government’s server.

Do not assume that electronic e-mail submission will occur instantaneously. 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.

GENERAL SUBMISSION INFORMATION (CONT)

VOLUME I, NON-PRICE

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

Section B - Factor 1, Experience / Past Performance. Offerors will submit no more than five (5) projects and a minimum of two (2) meeting the recency and relevancy definitions. Additionally, include completed CPARS records and/or completed Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaire Forms for each project submitted under Factor 1.

Section C - Factor 2, Management Approach. This section shall include a narrative describing the Offeror’s proposed management approach. Limited to 20 pages.

PROPOSAL FORMAT – VOLUME I (PHASE I)

VOLUME II, ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

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

i. The solicitation number.

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

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

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

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

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

PROPOSAL FORMAT – VOLUME II (PHASE I)

VOLUME II, PRICE & ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS (Continued)

3. Section C – 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.

4. Section D - Financial Information: Offerors shall submit financial information to demonstrate they have adequate financial resources to perform the contract, or the ability to obtain them. For example, past three years financial statements, annual reports, Dun & Bradstreet Ratings, and/or bank name, number and POC, etc.

PROPOSAL FORMAT – VOLUME II (CONT )

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

Non-Price Factors:

Factor 1 – Past Performance (PHASE I) Factor 2 – Management Approach (PHASE I) Factor 3 – Technical Approach – SEED or Sample Project (PHASE II)

Price Factor Factor 4 – Price – Binding labor rates for key personnel and common positions and common tasks (if feasible) with coefficients for specified regions and/or for specialized work and Relevant Seed or Sample Project. (PHASE II)

Relative Importance of the Evaluation Factors. Factor 1 is more important than Factor 2.

Factor 1 is approximately equal to Factor 3. All non-price factors (Factors 1-3), when combined, are approximately equal in importance to price (Factor 4).

SOURCE SELECTION APPROACH

Ref: RFP Section 00 22 00 - Evaluation

EVALUATION FACTORS

Ref: RFP Section 00 22 10 - Evaluation

SOLICITATION

PHASE I

Offerors must submit no more than five (5) projects and a minimum of two (2) meeting the following definition for recent and relevant projects. For Factor 1 evaluation purposes, the definition of a recent and relevant contract must meet the following conditions:

i. The project was awarded to the Offeror as the prime contractor. In the case of an Offeror that is a JV, the project must have been awarded to either member of the JV as the prime contractor. In the case of an Offeror that is a prime-sub team, the project must have been awarded to the prime or the key sub-contractor.

ii. The project was completed no earlier than six (6) calendar years before the closing date of the RFP or is at least 50% complete at the closing date of this RFP.

iii. At a minimum one (1) project is submitted for design-build and one (1) project is for design-bid-build construction work. Note: An offeror that does not demonstrate at least one (1) DB and one (1) DBB project will be considered overall not relevant for this factor and will receive no further consideration for award.

iv. Projects with a minimum cost of $500,000.

v. All experiences should be submitted from construction contracts and not Architecture-

Engineer contracts

RECENT AND RELEVANT CONTRACTS

Ref: RFP Section 00 22 10 - Evaluation

The SST will evaluate Offerors under this factor to determine the Offeror’s experience that demonstrates the ability to accomplish the work specified under this Solicitation.

The SST will first assess whether the projects submitted each meet the definition of recent and relevant project for Factor 1, as defined above.

Projects that do not address the minimum requirements below, will still be evaluated; but it may affect the Government's expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

FACTOR 1: EXPERIENCE / PAST PERFORMANCE

For the purposes of evaluation under this factor, more consideration will be given to an Offeror that demonstrates experience that involve the following:

i. Projects that demonstrate experience working in Estonia …Latvia or Lithuania.

ii. Projects that demonstrate experience working with the United States Government, more consideration will be given for experience working with the Department of Defense.

iii. Projects that demonstrate experience working with the European Union (EU).

iv. Projects demonstrating experience working in both new construction and major renovations of existing buildings.

v. Projects demonstrating experience working in both horizontal and vertical construction.

vi. Projects demonstrating experience with multiple projects concurrently involving multiple trades.

vii. Projects demonstrating experience working with proposed Key Subcontractors and/or the proposed JV Partners.

NOTE: Offerors are cautioned that the SST may assess weaknesses for an Offeror whose proposal demonstrates a significant lack of experience in the criteria listed above. Additionally, the SST may assess weaknesses against experience examples that are not verifiable, and/or where the Offeror or their proposed subcontractor were subcontractors and their role in the project was not clearly demonstrated or was minor in comparison to the whole project.

FACTOR 1: EXPERIENCE / PAST PERFORMANCE (CONT)

The SST will then evaluate Offerors under this factor to determine how likely it is that Offerors will be successful when performing task orders under the awarded contract. The Offeror's past performance will be evaluated based on performance on projects submitted under Factor 1.

Please note 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 Subcontractors or JV partners the Offeror may have submitted. Key focus areas will include the following (see PPQ Form):

• Quality

• Schedule/Timeliness of Performance

• Customer Satisfaction

• Management/Personnel/Labor

• Cost/Financial Management

• Safety/Security

FACTOR 1: EXPERIENCE / PAST PERFORMANCE

(CONFIDENCE)

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

During the best value tradeoff process, Offerors whose proposals receive a satisfactory confidence or substantial confidence rating for this factor may be considered more favorably than an Offeror with a neutral confidence rating.

For the Past Performance evaluation, the evaluation will include a relevancy rating and confidence assessment, as detailed below.

• Past Performance Relevancy Rating. The first aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the Offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection.

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

FACTOR 1: EXPERIENCE / PAST PERFORMANCE

(CONFIDENCE - CONT)

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings:

Rating Definition

Very Relevant

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

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

Somewhat Relevant

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

Not Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Performance Confidence Assessments:

Rating Definition

Substantial Confidence

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

Satisfactory Confidence

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

Neutral Confidence

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

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

Limited Confidence

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

No Confidence

Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the Offeror will be able to ‘successfully perform the required effort.

Note: In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past…