B.08.03 W912GB20R0017-0001 (AMDT 0001).pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

W912GB20R0017 FY20 ATFP JOC

The purpose of this Ammendment is to:

a) Update Section 002100 Section D- Bank Letter of Assurance

b) Delete Clause 52.000-4059 Letter of Assurance (RFP)

c) Update Section 01 11 00 Summary of Work

d) Update Attachment A2A- Experience Overview Sheet

e) Update Attachment 8- UPB

f) Provide Pre-Proposal Conference Slides

g) Update Section 00 22 00 Supplementary Instructions- Evaluation Criteria to specify correct font size

h) Update Attachment 4- FY20 ATFP Pricing Schedule

All changes are marked in red w ithin the SF30. See attachments and continuation pages for further details.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 38

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 12-Mar-2020

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

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W912GB20R0017

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

25-Feb-2020

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

12-Mar-2020

CODE

CONTRACTING DIVISION

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

KONRAD ADENAUER RING 39

D-65187 WIESBADEN GERMANY

WIESBADEN 65187

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

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912GB20R0017

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 01 10 - TABLE OF CONTENTS

The following have been modified:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 00 00 00 Procurement and Contract Requirements SECTION 00 10 00 Solicitation Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) Schedule SECTION 00 21 00 Instructions - Submission Requirements SECTION 00 22 00 Supplementary Instructions - Evaluation Criteria SECTION 00 45 00 Representations and Certifications - Clauses SECTION 00 70 00 Conditions of the Contract – Contract Clauses SECTION 01 11 00 Summary of Work SECTION 01 30 00 Contract Requirements

SOLICITATION ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENT 1 – Specifications Binder ATTACHMENT 2A - Experience Overview Sheet ATTACHMENT 2B - Experience Information Sheet Updated via Amendment 01 ATTACHMENT 3 - Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaire ATTACHMENT 4 - Price Schedule Updated via Amendment 01 ATTACHMENT 5 - Bank Letter Of Assurance Template ATTACHMENT 6 - Bank Letter Of Guaranty Template ATTACHMENT 7 - Sample Commitment Letter ATTACHMENT 8 - ATFP Unit Price Book (UPB) Updated via Amendment 01 ATTACHMENT 9 – ATFP Technical Exhibits ATTACHMENT 10 – EURO JOC Unit Price Book (UPB) ATTACHMENT 11 - DIN EU Standard ATTACHMENT 12 CENAU ATFP Guideline

SECTION 00 10 00 - SOLICITATION

CLIN 1001

The CLIN extended description has changed from:

Firm Fixed Price Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Single Award Task Order (SATOC) for Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Poland, Romania, and Bulgaria.OPTION ONE: 12 months from expiration of Base year (if exercised). The entire contract shall not exceed $49,950,000.

To:

Firm Fixed Price Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Single Award Task Order (SATOC) for Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Poland, Romania, and Bulgaria.OPTION ONE: 12 months from expiration of Base year . The entire contract shall not exceed $49,950,000.

SECTION 00 21 00 - INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION 00 21 00 INSTRUCTIONS

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

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

A. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

1. Introduction. The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Europe District (CENAU) has a continuing requirement to support sustainment, restoration and modernization(SRM) projects that specifically pertain to Anti-Terrorism, Force Protection (ATFP) measures and Access Control Points (ACP) at U.S facilities in Germany, Belgium, Bulgaria, the Netherlands, Poland, and Romania. This contract will specifically exclude any Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) work to install, repair, upgrade or otherwise service components within or associated with SCIFs, but will otherwise cover all appropriate JOC work pertaining to ATFP/ACP in accordance with AFARS 5117.90 and the Army Job Order Contracting Guide dated January 2003. The

FY20 JOC will have a combined ceiling amount of Not to Exceed (NTE) $49,950,000.00.

To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, Offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are required to meet all Solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors. The Offeror shall submit in the proposal all requested information specified in this section of the Request for Proposal (RFP) at or before the exact time specified. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an Offeror being ineligible for award. Copies of the RFP are available by INTERNET ACCESS ONLY. All RFP documents will made available for viewing at the Beta SAM website (http://www.beta.sam.gov). All amendments will be made available for viewing in Beta SAM. It shall be the Offeror’s responsibility to check the website for any amendments.

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

The solicitation number is: W912GB20R0017 The bidder inquiry Key is: PRWBV9-9V5PE3

The Bidder Inquiry System will be closed to new inquiries ten (10) calendar days prior to proposal submission in order to ensure adequate time is allotted to form an appropriate response and amend the solicitation, if necessary. If the System is not closed in a timely manner, an inquiry posted within seven calendar days of the receipt of proposals will still be regarded as untimely and may not afforded a substantive response. The Government reserves the right to decline addressing certain questions.

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

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

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

2. General Proposal Submission Requirements.

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

RESPONSES TO THIS ANNOUNCEMENT SHALL BE SUBMITTED

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

Email submission shall be via email 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. It is the responsibility if the Offeror to ensure receipt.

b. File Size Limitations. Offerors are advised that the file size limitation is

10MB due to email server restrictions. If needed, Offerors are advised to break the files down into smaller sections and deliver in separate emails. In such cases, please divide the sections as logically as possible and be sure to clearly name the files as specified below.

c. File Names. To ensure your submission is received and processed appropriately, it is important that interested parties CAREFULLY ensure their electronic files adhere to the following naming convention: Each filename shall begin with the solicitation number, followed by the word “RESPONSE”, followed by your firm’s name, and finally a brief file description. EXAMPLES:

(1) “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, figures.pdf”

(5) “W912GB20R0017 RESPONSE Firmname Volume II.pdf”

d. File Organization, Formatting, and other instructions. Although hard copies are not accepted, each file shall be clearly indexed, and logically assembled. Font size shall be 10 or larger. Pages shall be letter sized--larger page sizes (such as 11x17 foldouts, etc.) will be counted as two pages. Offerors shall prepare proposals in the English language. Proposals shall be in a narrative format, organized and titled so that each section of the proposal follows the order and format of the factors. Information presented should be organized so as to pertain to only the evaluation factor in the section that the information is presented. Information pertaining to more than one evaluation factor should be repeated in the each section for each factor. Electronic files shall be Microsoft Windows compatible. Files shall be submitted in their native format (i.e., doc, xls, ppt, etc.), or if in pdf format, shall be in searchable text. If the electronic files are of a size at which they must be compressed (zipped), they shall be compressed into one zipped folder.

e. Upload Completion & Deadline. Interested parties shall submit responses no later than the date specified on solicitation document. The time & date of proposal receipt will be the delivery time and date recorded of e-mail receipt on the Government’s server. Do not assume that electronic submission will occur instantaneously. Offerors should time their upload effort with prudence by not waiting until the last few minutes—this will allow for unexpected delays in the transmittal process and troubleshooting. Offerors are encouraged to keep a copy of the delivery and/or read confirmation for their record but shall also request confirmation. Offerors are encouraged to keep a copy of the upload confirmation for their record. Submissions after the deadline may be emailed to MSG Betsy Weintraub, Contract Specialist, at (betsy.weintraub@usace.army.mil), but be advised they will be considered late and as such will be processed in accordance with

FAR 15.208.

f. Any information, presented in a proposal that the Offeror wants safeguarded from disclosure to other parties must be identified and labeled in accordance with the requirements of Provision “FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to OfferorsCompetitive Acquisition (Jan 2004),” subparagraph (e). The Government will endeavor to honor the restrictions against release requested by Offerors, to the extent permitted under United States law and regulations.

g. SPECIAL NOTICE: System for Award Management. Please take notice that the System for Award Management (SAM, www.sam.gov) has a new entity registration requirement that firms submit an "original, signed notarized letter identifying the authorized Entity Administrator for the entity associated with the Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number before the registration will be activated." This applies to all new entity registrations and all entity registration renewals, effective 29 April 2018. Further information behind this new requirement is posted to the General Services Administration's (GSA) announcement page at https://www.gsa.gov/samupdate. Please also refer to Federal Service Desk's (FSD) instructions on how to comply with this new requirement. NOTE: the instructions are different for domestic (U.S. based) and international (not U.S. based) firms. Offerors are reminded that this solicitation includes the provision FAR 52.204-7 SAM or FAR 52.212- 1 Instructions to Offerors--Commercial Items, and the resulting award will include the clause FAR 52.204-13 SAM Maintenance or 52.212-4 Contract Terms and Conditions-- Commercial Items. These provisions/clauses require all contractors to register and maintain an active SAM entity registration in order to be eligible for contract awards, as prescribed by the regulation at FAR Subpart 4.11. In order to eligible for the contract award resulting from this solicitation, Offerors are advised to take immediate action to ensure your SAM entity registration is current and/or will be current at the time of proposal receipt by this contracting office. Instructions for domestic entities (located in the U.S. or its outlying areas): https://fsd.gov/fsd-gov/answer.do?sysparm_kbid=d2e67885db0d5f00b3257d321f96194b&sysparm_searc h=kb0013183. Instructions for international entities (not located in the U.S. or its outlying areas): https://www.fsd.gov/fsd-gov/answer.do?sysparm_kbid=dbf8053adb119344d71272131f961946&sysparm_searc h=KB0013221

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

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

a. Section A - Executive Summary. Include a one (1) page cover letter and any applicable fully-executed joint venture (JV) agreements or other evidence of fully executed teaming agreements.

i. The cover letter shall be in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(c)(2), including:

(1) The Solicitation number.

(2) The Offeror’s name, address, and phone/email contact information.

(3) 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.

(4) 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.

(5) 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.

ii. JV agreements shall include the following:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(g) Identification of party having overall control of the JV.

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

(4) A statement in the agreement that each member of the JV will be jointly and severally liable for any obligations under the contract.

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

(6) A copy of any other formal their teaming arrangement (see Section 00 22 00 (C)(2)) shall be submitted in English, and shall be signed by all parties of the team.

b. Section B - Factor 1, Experience/ Past Performance

Offerors shall submit two attachments, Attachment 1 Experience Information Sheet, and completed CPARS records and/or completed Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaire (PPQ) Forms for each project submitted for experience evaluation under Factor 1. The Experience Information Sheet shall not exceed 4 pages per project. Only the first 4 pages will be read. The Experience Information Sheet and the PPQ Form are provided as an RFP attachments.

See full requirements for this Factor under the EVALUATION APPROACH section below.

c. Section C - Factor 2, Management Approach.

This section shall include an organizational chart and a narrative describing the Offeror’s proposed management approach. Proposal information for this Factor will be limited to 10 pages (not to include charts). See full requirements for this Factor under the EVALUATION APPROACH section below.

4. Proposal Format, Volume II, Price Proposal and Administrative Matters: Volume II shall include the following:

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

i. The solicitation number.

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

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

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

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

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

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

d. Section D i. BLA: A Bank Letter of Assurance (BLA) issued by a Bank, Insurance Company, or other valid financial institution deemed acceptable to the Contracting Officer for the value of €4,950,000.00, containing the terms and conditions set forth in the RFP Attachment 5. Please note that these terms and conditions shall not be changed, or supplemented with other terms. Also note that the BLA requires the bank to provide a Bank Letter of Guaranty (BLG) with the same terms and conditions of RFP Attachment 6.

ii. BLG: Within TEN (10) calendar days after the date of Contract award, the Contractor shall furnish the Contracting Officer a BLG issued by a Bank, Insurance Company, or other valid financial institution deemed acceptable to the Contracting Officer for the performance of the work in the amount of €4,950,500 , conforming to RFP Attachment 6. Failure to furnish the BLG may be deemed a breach of contract. The BLG will be dated as of the Contract award or as soon thereafter as possible. The BLG shall state that it will continue in effect without change in amount or terms until the work has been finally inspected and accepted by the Government, and that thereafter it will continue in effect until expiration of any applicable warranty periods or extensions thereof in an amount equal to five percent (5%) of the task order price. TheBLG shall also state that the bank agrees and consents that the contract may be modified by change order or supplemental agreement without affecting the validity of the BLG. The Contracting Officer may require and the Contractor shall furnish the Contracting Officer an increase in the amount of the BLG because of increases to the contract value. The authorization to issue "Notice to Proceed" will not be effected until after approval and acceptance by the Contracting Officer of the BLG. The BLG shall be interpreted in accordance with U.S. law and is subject to the Choice of Law and Immunity for Legal Process clauses in the Contract and no terms may be changed or added to those on RFP Attachment 6.

FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BID BOND OR LETTER OF ASSURANCE AS

PRESCRIBED ABOVE WILL DETERMINE YOUR PROPOSAL TO BE

INCOMPLETE AND NOT EVALUATED. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A PAYMENT

AND PERFORMANCE BOND OR A BLG AS PRESCRIBED ABOVE MAY BE

GROUNDS FOR TERMINATION FOR DEFAULT.

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

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

ii. A copy of their current “Entity Registration” in the System for Award

Management (SAM) as recorded at www.sam.gov, showing the following sections: “core data, “assertions”, and “POCs”.

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

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

B. DISCUSSIONS

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

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

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

PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE

1. A Pre-Proposal Conference will be held on 4 March 2020 from 09:00-12:00 at the following location:

Fraport Conference Center Frankfurt Airport Center 1, Frankfurt Airport, D-60547 Frankfurt/Main

Conference check-in will being at 08:30 local time and presentations will begin at 09:00.

Due to limited space, attendees are limited to no more than two(2) people per contractor/company.

To Pre-register, please send the following information to betsy.weintraub@usace.army.mil no later than 2 March 2020 at 13:00 local time.

Full Name Company Position E-mail and Phone number (including country code) Reason for attending (prime contractor, subcontractor, etc)

SECTION 00 22 00 - SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS

EVALUATION FACTORS

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

The Government will utilize the Best Value Tradeoff Process for Source Selection in accordance with FAR 15.101-1 to determine best value. This process permits tradeoffs among cost or price and non-cost factors. Award will be made to the Offeror proposing the combination most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the proposals received, including the evaluation factors described in paragraph B of this section. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for all non-price factors. The Government considers it to be in its best interest to allow award to other than the lowest priced Offeror or other than the highest technically rated Offeror. The perceived benefits of the higher priced proposal shall merit the additional cost, and the rationale for tradeoffs must be documented in the file in accordance with FAR 15.406.

B. FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The Government Source Selection Team (SST) will evaluate proposals according to the factors listed below. Offerors are required to provide data addressing all stated factors in a clear and understandable format. If an Offeror does not have data relating to a specific factor, it shall be clearly stated in the proposal. Proposals that do not clearly address all factors may be considered unacceptable and may not receive further consideration. A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation for each factor is set forth under the EVALUATION APPROACH paragraph below.

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

Factor 1 –Experience / Past Performance Factor 2 – Management Approach

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

Factor 3 – Unit Price Books (UPBs) Coefficients

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

C. EVALUATION APPROACH

All proposals shall be evaluated by the Source Selection Team (SST).

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

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

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

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

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

Deficiency. A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. See FAR 15.001.

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

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

(FAPIIS).

2. TEAM ARRANGEMENTS. As described in FAR Subpart 9.6, it is the Government’s policy to recognize the integrity and validity of contractor team arrangements. The Offeror may be credited with the experience, expertise and/or past performance of a JV member, a team member, a subcontractor, or an affiliate (collectively referred to in this RFP as “Team Members” if that experience/past performance relates to the services described for that party in the team arrangement agreement or the letter of commitment. Consistent with FAR 9.104-4, the Government also may consider the responsibility of such entities or persons when it may adversely affect the prospective prime contractor’s responsibility or when it is in the Government’s interest to do so. In the event that the Offeror is awarded the resultant contract, there can be no substitution of any proposed team member, subcontractor, or key personnel identified in a teaming agreement or letter of commitment without prior written approval of the contracting officer. Approval or disapproval of a substitute entity or person is a matter within the sole discretion of the contracting officer, who will consider factors such as whether the proposed substitute appears to be equally qualified and whether the substitution is the best interests of the Government and project execution. In approving a substitution, the contracting officer may impose such conditions on the substitution as he/she deems appropriate in the exercise of his/her sole discretion.

Further details on requirements related to Team Arrangements are provided in the section 00 21 00.

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

b. Joint Ventures (JV). If the Offeror is a JV, the Offeror must provide evidence of a legally binding JV agreement, which creates legal responsibility on the part of all contractors in the JV. Further details on the requirements for a JV agreement are provided in section 00 21 00. Offerors shall provide a copy of the Joint Venture Agreement if the Offeror wishes to be credited with the experience of the Joint Venture Partners. This shall be provided as part of the proposal in Factor 1 Past Performance.

Clearly address the experience of each of the Joint Venture Partners and the relationship on any ongoing or previous projects.

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

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

This commitment, nature of each entity’s relationship and meaningful participation shall be described in a document signed by authorized representatives of both the Offeror and its affiliate. If a teaming agreement or commitment is not provided, the experience and/or past performance of any affiliate or team members outside of the Prime Offeror will not be considered.

3. NON PRICE FACTORS:

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

a. Factor 1: Experience/Past Performance will be evaluated as one factor. For Factor 1, Offerors should submit a maximum of five projects, but no less than two, that were completed within the last six (6) years or currently being performed (at least 50% complete from the date of this solicitation), and that best represent the Offeror’s work experience required on this solicitation. The Experience Information Sheet shall not exceed 4 pages per project. Only the first 4 pages will be read. If more than five projects are submitted, only the first five projects will be evaluated. If the Offeror submits indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) task orders for experience, each task order will count as one project. If the offeror is proposing with a Team Member, projects involving the same team will be given the most credit. 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. Regardless of the number of Team Arrangements, no more than five (5) Attachment 2, Project Experience Forms and Attachment 3 PPQs may be submitted for Factor 1. Submissions above five (5) projects will not be evaluated. Only the first five (5), as listed in the proposal, will be evaluated.

1. For Factor 1 experience, the Government will evaluate each Offeror’s demonstrated record of performance on recent and relevant projects that involve a similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities as this solicitation. Then, the Government will evaluate the Offeror’s quality of performance to determine a confidence assessment rating. Projects that are considered to be more relevant will have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment rating.

a. Recency. Projects submitted should be 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 this solicitation. Projects submitted that are beyond six years may be considered, but may be considered less relevant.

b. Relevancy. Firm-fixed-priced contracts that demonstrated the relevant characteristics below will be considered more relevant than cost reimbursement and time and materials type contracts. Projects submitted that do not have the qualities considered most relevant will be considered, but the offeror may receive a lower rating for this factor.

Table 1: Experience/Past Performance Relevancy Rating Adjectival Rating Description

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

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

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation

Most relevant projects are those that have the following qualities:

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.

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

Projects performed for the U.S. Government.

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

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

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

Projects demonstrating experience working with proposed Team

Arrangement parties.

NOTE: Offerors are cautioned that the SST may assess weaknesses against experience examples that demonstrate a significant lack of experience in one or more of the criteria listed above, that are not verifiable, and/or where the Offeror or their proposed subcontractor were subcontractors and their role in the project was minor in comparison to the whole project.

b. For Factor 1 past performance, Offerors shall provide a completed Attachment 2, PPQ for each project submitted. The completed PPQs shall not exceed 4 pages per contract. Pages exceeding the maximum will not be read. The PPQs shall be filled out by project owners / clients who have first-hand knowledge and information on the Offeror’s past performance in connection with the projects submitted in response to this solicitation. The project owners / clients shall not be affiliated with the Offeror in any manner. The Offeror must identify English speaking clients, but if not possible, must identify the language that the clients speak and should ensure that the points of contact are aware they may be contacted to verify information. Please ensure correct client telephone number(s) and email address(es) are provided. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of PPQs. If the client requests, PPQs may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, MSG Betsy Weintraub, via email at betsy.weintraub@usace.army.mil prior to proposal due date. Offerors may provide a completed Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation in lieu of Attachment 3. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror shall complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s).

Offerors may 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 SST will evaluate Offerors’ past performance 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 the experience portion of Factor 1, but 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 Team Members.

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 evaluating 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.

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 15.305(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 source selection or any competitive range determination 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.

Once evaluation of all of the above information is completed, each offeror shall be assigned one of the ratings identified below for Factor 1 Experience/Past Performance:

Table 2: Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Adjectival Rating Description

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.

b. Factor 2: Management Approach. This section shall include a narrative describing the Offeror’s proposed management approach for successful execution of this Job Order Contract.

The Offeror shall submit a graphical description (an organization chart) of its planned organization structure for successful execution of the contract. There is a limit of ten

(10) single spaced typed pages (A4 or letter size), using 10 point or larger font, front and back equal two (2) pages. If more than 10 pages are submitted, only the first 10 pages will be reviewed and evaluated. The organization chart, resumes, and commitment letters are not considered part of the 10 pages. The Management Approach shall include the following:

An organization chart (graph) that shows:

a) lines of authority and communication for the execution of the contract;

b) clearly shows the lines of authority of the Offeror’s Project Manager, Site Superintendent, Contractor Quality Control (CQC) System Manager, Site Safety & Health Officer (SSHO);

c) the organization chart shall also include all JV Partners and Key Subcontractors, when applicable; and

d) the chart shall identify all offices involved in this contract from the Offeror’s Headquarters to the Offeror’s site office(s), and how they are related; all positions shall be identified on the organization chart by title, organization, and physical location. The Project Manager, or the on-site person that communicates with the U.S. Government if the PM is not on-site, and any other personnel authorized to communicate directly with the U.S. Government shall be clearly identified.

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

The Offeror’s plan for management of five (5) simultaneous task orders for ATFP requirements at various locations, including mobilization to the site; how to staff multiple field offices with key personnel currently employed by Team Members, and letters of commitments from additional personnel required to meet the minimum standards of the contract; and in general, work that will be done by the prime and that to be accomplished by subcontractors or other Team Members.

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:

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

ii. The extent to which the proposal describes a reasonable and logical plan for the performance of multiple projects in various geographical locations under this contract (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 plans.

For this factor, Offerors will be assigned a combined technical/risk rating from the following table, based on the evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal in accordance with the requirements of the solicitation:

NON-PRICE FACTOR COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Color Rating Description

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

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

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

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

Red Un-acceptable

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

Risk levels…