ATFP JOC PPC Slides 2020.03.04 FINAL (AMDT 0001).pdf

PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE

SOLICITATION #: W912GB20R0017

FY20 ANTITERRORISM FORCE PROTECTION

JOB ORDER CONTRACT (JOC)

Presented by:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Europe District

04 March 2020 Frankfurt, Germany

USACE TEAM INTRODUCTIONS

AGENDA

Registration / Check-in 0830 Welcome / Introductory Remarks

Chris Brackett 0900-0905

About USACE / NAU Jennifer Aldridge

0905-0915

ATFP Job Order Contracting (JOC) Emily Rivera

0915-0945

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

MSG Betsy Weintraub / Chris Brackett

0945-1045

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

Leslie Reed 1105-1135

Questions / Closing Remarks 1135-1200

Information Provided for this Pre-Proposal Conference

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

DISCLAIMER

THE UNITED STATES ARMY

CORPS OF ENGINEERS &

THE EUROPE DISTRICT

JENNIFER ALDRIDGE

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 PO

District HQ – Wiesbaden Special Projects RO

(AFRICOM/EUCOM)

ROBMC (Hospital) Area Office*

Poland MD Area Office (Redzikowo, Poland)

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

Israel Area Office North RO

Haifa PO Central RO South RO

RO: Resident Office PO: Project Office *Planned Office

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

Tallinn PO – Tallinn, Estonia

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

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

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

EUROPE DISTRICT OFFICES

ATFP JOB ORDER

CONTRACTING (JOC)

EMILY RIVERA, P.E.

• One Indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity Contract Award

• Types of Work:

Sustainment, Restoration and Modernization (SRM) type of projects

• Task orders priced using unit price books (UPBs)

• Step 1 – Select one JOC contractor

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

JOB ORDER CONTRACT OVERVIEW

• TASK ORDER LIMITATIONS:

The Minimum Task Order $10,000 and the

Maximum Task Order is limited to $5,000,000. However, smaller and larger dollar value projects may be considered at the discretion of the Contracting Officer.

• PROJECT LOCATIONS:

The geographical area covered by this contract includes work in Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, the Netherlands, Poland and Romania.

ATFP JOB ORDER CONTRACT

Ref: RFP Section 01 11 00 Summary of Work

• Unit Price Books (UPBs): Two UPBs are to be used in the pricing and execution of work under this contract:

• “2019 Antiterrorism Force Protection UPB- Euro Based”

• “2016 Germany UPB Update – Euro Based”

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

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

PRICING

Ref: RFP Section 01 11 00 Summary of Work

Evaluation Weighting:

ATFP Pre-Priced Coefficient = 60% EURO JOC Pre-Priced Coefficient= 30% Non Pre-Priced Coefficient = 10%

Germany = 40% Belgium = 20% Netherlands = 10% Poland = 20% Romania = 5% Bulgaria = 5%

PRICE SCHEDULE

0.9 0.6 0.5

21.6 7.2 2.0

ATFP UNIT PRICE BOOK (UPB)

• A compilation of ATFP items encompassing the installation of physical force protection measures.

• Prices represented as 2019.

• ~ 500 items.

• U.S. Cleared Labor Rates

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

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

Main ATFP Items:

• Windows

• Guard Booths

• Security Systems

• Security Lighting

• Vehicle Barrier Systems

• Fencing and Gates

EURO-JOC UNIT PRICE BOOK (UPB)

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

• Supplements ATFP Pricebook.

• Thousands of items.

• Sections by trade.

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

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

SAMPLE TASK ORDER

Perimeter Lighting Project

SAMPLE TASK ORDER

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

100 02 01 Trenching € 23,092.20 100 05 01 Cabling € 38,725.50 127 32 05 Street Lighting € 142,284.20

€ 204,101.90

1. Project Identification

2. Joint Site Visit & Joint Scoping

3. Solicitation Issued

4. Contractor Prepares Cost

Estimate/Proposal via the UPB

5. USACE Reviews Proposal

6. Negotiate (as necessary)

7. Finalize Pricing (as necessary)

8. Contracting Officer issued Task Order

(DD 1155)

9. Project Execution (Construction)

10. Task Order Close-out

JOC PROCESS OVERVIEW

PROCUREMENT MATTERS

MSG BETSY WEINTRAUB / CHRIS BRACKETT

CONTRACTING SPECIALIST / CONTRACTING OFFICER

• Procurement Timeline

• Registrations & ID Numbers

• Federal Business Opportunities

• Pre-Proposal Inquiries & ProjNet

• Instructions

• Proposal Format

• Evaluation Criteria

• Source Selection Approach

• Debriefings

OVERVIEW

• Request for Proposal Issued – 25 FEB 2020

• Amendments – none yet

TIMELINE

• Pre-Proposal Conference – 4 MAR 2020

• Pre-Proposal Inquiries Due – 17 MAR 2020

• Subject to change (10 calendar days prior to PDD)

• Proposals Due Date (PDD) – 26 MAR 2020 @ 02:00 PM CET

• Anticipated Award – Mid May to Early June 2020

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

What do you need to register for a DUNS number?

Legal name Headquarters name and address of your business Doing Business As (DBA) or other name by which your business is commonly recognized Physical address: city, state, country and ZIP code Mailing Address (if different from physical) Telephone Number Contact Name and Title Number of employees at your physical location

DUNS NUMBER

• 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.

• 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.

Note: When a business/organization is assigned a CAGE/NCAGE, they are in fact the same code.

CAGE AND NCAGE CODE

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

• 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/

• 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

(Click on the CAGE/NCAGE Code Request Tab)

CAGE AND NCAGE CODE

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

Solicitations Provision: FAR 52.204-7 SAM Contract Clause: FAR 52.204-13 SAM Maintenance

• Contractors are required to update SAM registration ANNUALLY.

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

SYSTEM FOR AWARD MANAGEMENT

Ref: RFP Section 00 21 00 - Instructions

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

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

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

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

SYSTEM FOR AWARD MANAGEMENT

Ref: RFP Section 00 21 00 - Instructions

… has moved to…

IMPORTANT CHANGES!

• For Help with registration, Contact the Federal Service Desk: www.fsd.gov Live Chat or Web form or via Phone International Calls: 001-334-206-7828, U.S. Calls: 866-606-8220 Hours of Operation: Monday - Friday 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. ET

NEED ASSISTANCE?

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

Bidder Inquiry Key:

PRWBV9-9V5PE3

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

– Minimum Task Order $10,000

– Maximum Task Order is limited to $5,000,000.

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

• Total maximum ordering value $49,950,000 over (5) Five Years

– Base Ordering Period: Two (2) Year

– Three Additional One-Year Option Ordering Periods

W912GB20R0017 – FY20 ATFP SATOC

• 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) “W912GB20R0017 RESPONSE Firmname Volume I.pdf”

(2) “W912GB20R0017 RESPONSE Firmname Volume I Part 1.pdf”

(3) “W912GB20R0017 RESPONSE Firmname Volume I Part 2.pdf”

(4) “W912GB20R0017 RESPONSE Firmname Volume I diagrams.pdf”

(5) “W912GB20R0017 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)

• 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 delivery time & date recorded of 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) that were completed within the last six (6) years or currently being performed (at least 50% complete from date of RFP), as well as 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 10 pages (not including organization chart, resumes, and commitment letters).

PROPOSAL FORMAT – VOLUME I

VOLUME II, PRICE & ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

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

i. The solicitation number.

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

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

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

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

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

PROPOSAL FORMAT – VOLUME II

VOLUME II, PRICE & ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS (Continued)

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

4. Section D – Bank Letter of Assurance or Bid Bond in the amount of €4,950,000. See format provided as RFP attachment.

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

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

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

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

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

PROPOSAL FORMAT – 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 – Experience/ Past Performance Factor 2 – Management Approach

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

Relative Importance of the Evaluation Factors. In accordance with FAR 15.304(e), non-price factor, Factor 1- Experience/Past Performance is more important than Factor 2- Management Approach; and all non-price factors (Factors 1 and 2), when combined, are approximately equal in importance to price (Factor 3).

SOURCE SELECTION APPROACH

Ref: RFP Section 00 22 00 - Evaluation

KEY DEFINITIONS

STRENGTH:

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

WEAKNESS:

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

SIGNIFICANT WEAKNESS:

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

DEFICIENCY:

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

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

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

b) The contract was completed within six years of the solicitation issue date or currently being performed (at least 50% complete) that are for similar work as that required in the solicitation.

c) The contract is fundamentally for one or all of the following types of construction work:

Antiterrorism-Force Protection work including Installation of access gates and gatehouses and/or guard shelters; Installation of vehicle barriers and/or physical barriers; Installation of electronic security systems and generators; Construction of blast and splinter protection;

Construction of roadways and walkways; Installation of fencing and/or gates; Installation of area or street lighting.

d) Projects with a construction cost of $10,000.00 to $5,000,000.00.

RECENT AND RELEVANT CONTRACTS

e) Projects performed for the U.S. Government

f) Projects that demonstrate experience working in Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, and Romania.

g) Projects that demonstrate experience managing multiple projects concurrently, and involving multiple trades.

h) Projects demonstrating experience working with proposed Team Arrangement parties.

RECENT AND RELEVANT CONTRACTS (CONT)

The Source Selection Team will evaluate Offerors under this factor to determine the depth and breadth of the Offeror’s experience that demonstrates the ability to accomplish the work specified under this solicitation. Offerors must submit no more than five projects meeting the recency and relevancy definition.

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

For Offerors submitting as a Teaming Arrangement, each firm/contractor in the Teaming Arrangement, whether JV or prime/key sub, shall submit a minimum of one

(1) project. If more than five projects are submitted by an Offeror, the Government will only review the first five (5) projects. The projects will be reviewed in the order in which they are received in Offeror’s submitted proposal.

FACTOR 1: EXPERIENCE/ PAST PERFORMANCE

(1 OF 2)

• 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

• The Government may verify information provided by the Offeror with any source available and has the right to contact points of contact other than those listed by the Offeror. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, JV, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the Offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPTWOS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror. In rating past performance, the Government may consider available past performance information on predecessor companies, or employment histories of key personnel, or committed subcontractors performing key elements of the project. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

FACTOR 1: EXPERIENCE/ PAST PERFORMANCE

(2 OF 2)

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

i. Projects that demonstrate Antiterrorism-Force Protection work including Installation of access gates and gatehouses and/or guard shelters; Installation of vehicle barriers and/or physical barriers; Installation of electronic security systems and generators; Construction of blast and splinter protection; Construction of roadways and walkways; Installation of fencing and/or gates; Installation of area or street lighting.

ii. Projects with a construction cost of $10,000 - $5,000,000

iii. Projects performed for the U.S. Government.

iv. Projects completed within the last six years of the solicitation issue date or are currently being performed (at least 50% complete) will be considered recent. Projects older than six years will be evaluated but may be considered less relevant

v. Projects that demonstrate experience working in Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, and Romania.

vi. Projects that demonstrate experience managing multiple projects

vii. concurrently, and involving multiple trades.

viii. Projects demonstrating experience working with proposed Team

ix. Arrangement parties.

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: PAST PERFORMANCE (1 OF 2)

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

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

• In rating past performance, the Government may consider available past performance information on predecessor companies, or employment histories of key personnel, or committed subcontractors performing key elements of the project. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

FACTOR 1: PAST PERFORMANCE (2 OF 3)

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

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

FACTOR 1 PAST PERFORMANCE (3 OF 3)

Performance Confidence Assessments:

Rating Definition

Substantial Confidence

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

Satisfactory Confidence

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

Neutral Confidence

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

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

Limited Confidence

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

No Confidence

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

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

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

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

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

• The extent to which the proposal describes a reasonable and logical plan for the performance of multiple projects in various geographical locations (Belgium,Bulgaria,Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, and Romania)that illustrates a detailed understanding of multiple task order requirements, proposes personnel that meet the specification requirements, and provides subcontracting and staffing plan.

FACTOR 2: MANAGEMENT APPROACH

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

NON-PRICE FACTOR TECHNICAL RISK RATING

Adjectival

Rating Description

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

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

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

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

RISK LEVELS

FACTOR 2 RATING

NON-PRICE FACTOR COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

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

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

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

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

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

Proposal is unawardable.

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

COEFFICIENTS

• Offerors are required to price for all items for the base and all option ordering periods. See the RFP Section 01 11 00 for a definition of UPB Coefficients and sample Task Order Proposal (RFP attachment). From a price perspective, an offer’s overall value will be assigned as being the sum of all the CLINs added together. Analysis will be performed by one or more of the following techniques to ensure a fair and reasonable price:

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

ii. Comparison of proposed prices with the independent Government estimate

iii. Comparison of proposed prices with available historical information.

FACTOR 3: PRICE (1 OF 2)

• The Government intends to evaluate all options and has included the provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in the Solicitation. Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

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

FACTOR 3: PRICE (2 OF 2)

PRICE FACTOR: COEFFICIENTS

• Offerors are required to complete the PROPOSED COEFFICIENT for all items.

• Each geographic area has three coefficients: ATFP Pre-priced Coefficient (Regular hours),EURO JOC

Pre-priced Coefficient (Regular hours), and Non-pre-priced coefficient.

• Each PROPOSED COEFFICIENT will be contractually binding.

• The PROPOSED WEIGHTED VALUE columns are for evaluation purposes only.

• An offer’s overall value for the price factor will be assigned as being the sum of the

TOTAL PROPOSED WEIGHTED VALUE column)

FY20 ATFP JOC

Contract line Item Number (CLIN) 0001 1001 2001 3001 4001 TOTAL

Year Base Year Base Year 2 1 2 3

Georgraphic Locations**

Proposed Coefficient *

Proposed Weighted Value**

Evaluation Purposes Only

Proposed Coefficient *

Proposed Weighted Value**

Evaluation Purposes Only

Proposed Coefficient *

Proposed Weighted Value**

Evaluation Purposes Only

Proposed Coefficient *

Proposed Weighted Value**

Evaluation Purposes Only

Proposed Coefficient *

Proposed Weighted Value**

Evaluation Purposes Only

Total Proposed Weighted Value*** Evaluation

Purposes Only Germany ATFP UPB Pre‐Priced Coefficient

EURO‐JOC UPB Pre‐Priced Coefficient Non Pre‐Priced Coefficient

Belgium ATFP UPB Pre‐Priced Coefficient EURO‐JOC UPB Pre‐Priced Coefficient Non Pre‐Priced Coefficient

Netherlands ATFP UPB Pre‐Priced Coefficient EURO‐JOC UPB Pre‐Priced Coefficient Non Pre‐Priced Coefficient

Poland ATFP UPB Pre‐Priced Coefficient EURO‐JOC UPB Pre‐Priced Coefficient Non Pre‐Priced Coefficient

Romaina ATFP UPB Pre‐Priced Coefficient EURO‐JOC UPB Pre‐Priced Coefficient Non Pre‐Priced Coefficient

Bulgaria ATFP UPB Pre‐Priced Coefficient EURO‐JOC UPB Pre‐Priced Coefficient Non Pre‐Priced Coefficient

TOTAL 0.00 TOTAL 0.00 TOTAL 0.00 TOTAL 0.00 TOTAL 0.00 0.00

Bid Schedule Instructions:

* Offerors are required to complete the PROPOSED COEFFICIENTS for all items (all coefficients for all areas for base and all option ordering periods). The Proposed Coefficient will be contractually binding.

** Weighting is as follows: ATFP Pre‐Priced Coefficient = 60%, EURO JOC Pre‐Priced Coefficient= 30%, Non Pre‐Priced Coefficient = 10%. Weighting is for evaluation purposes only.

** Weighting for geographical locations is as follows: Germany = 40%, Belgium = 20%, Netherlands = 10%, Poland = 20%, Romania = 5%, Bulgaria = 5%. Weighting is for evaluation purposes only.

** The PROPOSED WEIGHTED VALUE and TOTAL PROPOSED WEIGHTED VALUE columns are for price evaluation purposes only and will NOT be contractually binding.

*** An offer’s overall value for the price factor will be assigned as being the sum of all the PROPOSAL VALUES added together (i.e. the sum of the TOTAL PROPOSED WEIGHTED VALUE column).

What is a Debriefing?

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

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

the evaluation process;

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

what was successful in your proposal;

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

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

DEBRIEFINGS

FINAL COMMENTS / REMINDERS

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

Bidder Inquiry Key:PRWBV9-9V5PE3

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

• Proposals shall be via emailed to both the Contract Specialist, MSG Betsy Weintraub, at betsy.weintraub@usace.army.mil and the Contracting Officer, Mr. Christopher Brackett, at christopher.brackett@usace.army.mil .

MSG Betsy Weintraub Contract Specialist Phone: +49 611 9744 2195 Email: betsy.weintraub@usace.army.mil

Christopher Brackett Contracting Officer Phone: +49 611 9744 2931 Email: christopher.brackett@usace.army.mil

POINTS OF CONTACT

Reference Section 00 00 00 - Procurement and Contracting Requirements

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

Slide 67

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 nations (HNs) laws/regulations that increases your labor cost.

– The U.S. Government cannot influence the HNs 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(s)?

• 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.

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. As with any teaming arrangement, the “credit” given will depend on the proposed participation of the teaming party – in this case, the scope and type of work the subcontractor will perform under this contract.

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.

• 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 and the contract could be terminated for default.

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).

• Some of the countries covered by this contract have waivers from the DBA insurance requirements with respect to workers covered by the host nation’s workers’ compensation for on-the-job injuries laws.

Those countries are: BELGIUM, GERMANY, NETHERLANDS &

ROMANIA

DEFENSE BASE ACT (DBA) INSURANCE

• The RFP Summary of Work (SOW) will be amended to address this requirement, and for the countries that have waivers, it will provide a link to the terms of the host nation’s country waiver:

https://www.dol.gov/owcp/dlhwc/dbawaivers/dbawaivers.htm.

• The DBA waiver does NOT apply to US citizens, lawful residents of the US, or employees hired in the US. For those employees, and for work in the countries that do not have a waiver (Bulgaria & Poland), the contractor is governed by the requirements of the Contract’s FAR Clause 52.228-3 Worker's Compensation Insurance (Defense Base Act) JUL 2014.

DEFENSE BASE ACT (DBA) INSURANCE

DBA (CONTINUED):

• So, for all contractors (including subs) DBA insurance is required for the US employee categories. DBA insurance also is required (by Prime and subs) for all work performed in Bulgaria or Poland. No other insurance can serve as a substitute. The SOW amendment will have a link to the DOL website with a list of authorized insurance carriers.

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

DBA (CONTINUED):

- Proof of any required DBA insurance must be provided within 10 days of a task order after award.

- Defense Base Act Insurance is not included in the contractor’s coefficients. DBA Insurance shall be proposed as a Non-Pre-Priced (NPP) Item on a task order basis.

TAX EXEMPTIONS

• United States contractors 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 host nation governments.

• 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.

• Please note that Germany, Poland & Romania have country specific guidance in the specs for VAT procedures in those countries.

• Contractors will not be reimbursed by the US Government for taxes paid to host nations.

VALUE ADDED TAX (VAT)

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

• It is often difficult for contractors to obtain these bonds from the US Treasury list of approved sureties. Accordingly, for USACE work in Europe, a Bank Letter of Assurance (BLA) and after award, a Bank Letter of Guarantee (BLG) may be submitted instead of bond. The BLA/BLG will be for €4,950,000 (10%)

• 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

QUESTIONS?

THANK YOU!