B.08 CONFORMED_AM01_22r0005 GEORGIA,ARMENIA MATOC_2022.01.19.pdf

DESIGN-BID (DB) AND DESIGN-BID-BUILD (DBB) INDEFINITE DELIVERY / INDEFINITE QUANTITY (IDIQ) MULITPLE AWARD TASK ORDER CONTRACT (MATOC) IN SUPPORT OF DEFENSE OPERATIONS IN Georgia AND Armenia.

THIS ACQUISITION IS BEING SOLICITED INVITING FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION.

THE CONTRACT VALUE IS NOT-TO-EXCEED: $25,000,000.00 for Georgia / $20,000,000.00 for Armenia

THE NAICS CODE FOR THIS PROCUREMENT IS 236220.

SHANNON L DAVIE

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS

NEGOTIATED

21-Dec-2021

(RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

B. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

See Item 7

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID

3. DATE ISSUED

9. FOR INFORMATION A. NAME

SOLICITATION

NSN 7540-01-155-3212 1442-101 STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 4-85)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(e)

11. The Contractor shall begin performance w ithin _______10 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________1825 calendar days after receiving aw ard, notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________FAR 52.211-10

12 A. THE CONTRACTOR MUST FURNISH ANY REQUIRED PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS?

(If "YES," indicate within how many calendar days after award in Item 12B.)

X YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________1 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specified in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________01 Feb 2022 (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers must be publicly opened at that time.

shall be marked to show the offeror's name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time offers are due.

B. An offer guarantee X is, is not required.

C. All offers are subject to the (1) w ork requirements, and (2) other provisions and clauses incorporated in the solicitation in full text or by reference.

D. Offers providing less than _______240 calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due w ill not be considered and w ill be rejected.

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NO.

IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by offeror.

4. CONTRACT NO.

7. ISSUED BY CODE

CONTRACTING DIVISION

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

KONRAD ADENAUER RING 39

D-65187 WIESBADEN GERMANY

WIESBADEN 65187

W912GB

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

10:00 AM (hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NO. 6. PROJECT NO.

8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If Other Than Item 7)

FAX:TEL: TEL: FAX:

W912GB22R0005 55

20B. SIGNATURE

(REV. 4-85)STANDARD FORM 1442 BACK

TO SIGN

NSN 7540-01-155-3212

SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD (Continued) (Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

CODE FACILITY CODE

17. The offeror agrees to perform the w ork required at the prices specif ied below in strict accordance w ith the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in w riting w ithin ________ calendar days after the date offers are due.

the minimum requirements stated in Item 13D. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13D.)

AMOUNTS SEE SCHEDULE OF PRICES

18. The offeror agrees to furnish any required performance and payment bonds.

19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the solicitation -- give number and date of each)

AMENDMENT NO.

DATE

20A. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN

OFFER (Type or print)

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

22. AMOUNT 23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

CODE

(Insert any number equal to or greater than

20C. OFFER DATE

25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) 41 U.S.C. 253(c)

CODE27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY:26. ADMINISTERED BY

(Include ZIP Code)14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR 15. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code)

See Item 14

(Include only if different than Item 14)16. REMITTANCE ADDRESS

30B. SIGNATURE

29. AWARD (Contractor is not required to sign this document.)

document and return _______ copies to issuing office.) Contractor agrees Your of f er on this solicitation, is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award con-to f urnish and deliv er all items or perf orm all work, requisitions identif ied summates the contract, which consists of (a) the Gov ernment solicitation and on this f orm and any continuation sheets f or the consideration stated in this y our of f er, and (b) this contract award. No f urther contractual document is contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be necessary .

gov erned by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certif ications, and specif ications or incorporated by ref er-ence in or attached to this contract.

30A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED 31A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

30C. DATE

(Type or print)

TEL: EMAIL:

31B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 31C. AWARD DATE

BY

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

(Contractor is required to sign this28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT

(M ust be fully completed by offeror)OFFER

W912GB22R0005

Section 00 00 00 - Procurement and Contracting Requirements

POINTS OF CONTACT:

CONTRACT SPECIALIST: Shannon Davie +49 0611 9744 2989/ shannon.l.davie@usace.army.mil CONTRACTING OFFICER: David Decker +49 0611 9744 2934 / david.w.decker@usace.army.mil

REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION:

Requests for Information shall be submitted via ProjNet no later than 10 calendar days before the proposal due date. See Section 00 21 00 – Instructions for further details.

Section 00 01 10 - Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 00 00 00 Procurement and Contracting Requirements SECTION 00 01 10 Table of Contents SECTION 00 10 00 Solicitation Contract Line-Item Number (CLIN) Schedule SECTION 00 21 00 Instructions to Offerors SECTION 00 22 16 Supplementary Instructions – Phase ONE of TWO SECTION 00 22 18 Supplementary Instructions – Phase TWO of TWO 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 Administrative Requirements

ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENT 1 Specifications Binder ATTACHMENT 2 Project overview sheet ATTACHMENT 3 Project Info Sheet ATTACHMENT 4 Past Performance Questionnaire ATTACHMENT 5 Letter of Commitment ATTACHMENT 6 Bank Letter Of Assurance ATTACHMENT 7 Bank Letter Of Guaranty ATTACHMENT 8 Projnet instructions ATTACHMENT 9 Bonds and Other Protections ATTACHMENT 10 Georgia VAT Instructions ATTACHMENT 11 Armenia VAT Letter Sample (attached) ATTACHMENT 12 Georgia Price Schedule - **** ONLY FOR PHASE II**** ATTACHMENT 13 Armenia Price Schedule - **** ONLY FOR PHASE II****

Section 00 10 00 - Solicitation

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES MAX

QUANTITY

UNIT UNIT PRICE MAX AMOUNT

0001 1 Job

REPUBLIC OF GEORGIA MATOC BASE PERIOD

FFP

Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) to provide real property repair and maintenance, environmental work, and construction services for the Republic of Georgia.

The minimum guarantee for the entire contract (Base period and all options) is $2,000.00.

BASE PERIOD: 5 years from award.

The entire contract (Base period plus 6 month option) shall not exceed $25,000,000.00.

FOB: Destination

MAX

NET AMT

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES MAX

QUANTITY

UNIT UNIT PRICE MAX AMOUNT

0002 1 Job REPUBLIC OF Armenia MATOC BASE PERIOD

FFP

Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) to provide real property repair and maintenance, environmental work, and construction services for the Republic of Armenia.

The minimum guarantee for the entire contract (Base period and all options) is $2,000.00.

BASE PERIOD: 5 years from award.

The entire contract (Base period plus 6 month option) shall not exceed $20,000,000.00.

MAX

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0003 1 Job OPTION Option FAR Clause 52.217-8

FFP

Option for FAR Clause 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services for six months

DELIVERY INFORMATION

CLIN DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

0001 5 yrs. ADC 1 U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, EUROPE

CENAU-CT

KONRAD-ADENAUER RING 39

WIESBADEN 65187

(+49)611-9744-2600

WK4SF6

0002 5 yrs. ADC 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

WK4SF6

0003 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Section 00 21 00 - Instructions

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

52.215-1 Instructions to Offerors--Competitive Acquisition JAN 2017 52.216-27 Single or Multiple Awards OCT 1995

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT (APR 1984)

The Government contemplates award of a Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) contract resulting from this solicitation.

(End of provision)

52.236-28 PREPARATION OF PROPOSALS--CONSTRUCTION (OCT 1997)

(a) Proposals must be (1) submitted on the forms furnished by the Government or on copies of those forms, and (2) manually signed. The person signing a proposal must initial each erasure or change appearing on any proposal form.

(b) The proposal form may require offerors to submit proposed prices for one or more items on various bases, including--

(1) Lump sum price;

(2) Alternate prices;

(3) Units of construction; or

(4) Any combination of paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(3) of this provision.

(c) If the solicitation requires submission of a proposal on all items, failure to do so may result in the proposal being rejected without further consideration. If a proposal on all items is not required, offerors should insert the words “no proposal” in the space provided for any item on which no price is submitted.

(d) Alternate proposals will not be considered unless this solicitation authorizes their submission.

52.252-1 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (FEB 1998)

This solicitation incorporates one or more solicitation provisions by reference, with the same force and effect as if they were given in full text. Upon request, the Contracting Officer will make their full text available. The offeror is cautioned that the listed provisions may include blocks that must be completed by the offeror and submitted with its quotation or offer. In lieu of submitting the full text of those provisions, the offeror may identify the provision by paragraph identifier and provide the appropriate information with its quotation or offer. Also, the full text of a solicitation provision may be accessed electronically at this/these address(es):

https://www.acquisition.gov/browse/index/far http://farsite.hill.af.mil

52.252-5 AUTHORIZED DEVIATIONS IN PROVISIONS (NOV 2020)

(a) The use in this solicitation of any Federal Acquisition Regulation (48 CFR Chapter 1) provision with an authorized deviation is indicated by the addition of "(DEVIATION)" after the date of the provision.

(b) The use in this solicitation of any Department of Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation (48 CFR Chapter 2) provision with an authorized deviation is indicated by the addition of "(DEVIATION)" after the name of the regulation.

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

A. INTRODUCTION

1.1. The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Europe District (NAU) intends to award two, separate Firm-Fixed Price MATOCs – one for Georgia and one for Armenia - with a total capacity of $25M for DB or DBB construction activities in Georgia; and a total capacity of $20M for DB or DBB construction activities in Armenia and will include a target of seven (7) contractors in each of the Georgia and Armenia MATOC pools.

NOTE: When the word “Offeror” is encountered in the RFP, 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.

1.2. All task orders under these MATOCs shall not exceed the total shared capacity of

$25,000,000.00 for the Georgia MATOC pool and the total shared capacity of $20,000,000.00 for the Armenia MATOC pool. Each awardee under each MATOC will be given fair opportunity for each order under the applicable MATOC in accordance with FAR 16.505(b)(1). The Government may exceed the stated minimum/maximum task order limitation upon mutual agreement of all parties (see FAR 52.216- 19 in the

RFP).

1.3. For the purposes of this Solicitation, the Government will utilize the Two-Phase Design-

Build Selection Procedures in accordance with FAR 36.303.

For the purposes of this Solicitation, the Government will utilize the Best Value Tradeoff Process for Source Selection in accordance with FAR 15.101-1 to determine best value. The Government will evaluate both technical capability and price. The Government intends to award a target of seven (7) Firm-Fixed Price IDIQ contracts under the Georgia MATOC and seven (7) Firm-Fixed Price IDIQ contracts under the Armenia MATOC. See Sections 00 22 16 and 00 22 18 for further details on the Government’s evaluation approach.

B. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE

The Pre-Proposal Conference will be held virtually via WebEx by CISCO on 20 January from 1200 to 1400 Central European Standard Time (CEST). More ways to join:

Join from the meeting link https://cenau.webex.com/cenau/j.php?MTID=me64585865f432a4a9997b168299cd434

Join by meeting number Meeting number (access code): 2762 033 4060 Meeting password: AVqivNAS487

Tap to join from a mobile device (attendees only) +49-61-967-819-735,,27620334060## Germany +1-415-527-5035,,27620334060## US Toll

Join by phone +49-61-967-819-735 Germany +1-415-527-5035 US Toll

Global call-in numbers Join from a video system or application Dial 27620334060@cenau.webex.comYou can also dial 207.182.190.20 and enter your meeting number.

C. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

1. Introduction. To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, Offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are required to meet all Solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors.

The Offeror shall submit in the proposal all requested information specified in this section of the Request for Proposal (RFP) 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 be made available for viewing at the SAM website (http://www.sam.gov). All amendments will be made available for viewing at the SAM website. It shall be the Offeror’s responsibility to check the website for any amendments.

2. Inquiries. Offerors with technical inquiries and any other questions shall submit their inquiries via Bidder

Inquiry in ProjNet at http://www.projnet.org/projnet.

The Georgia bidder inquiry key is: 5EDPHN-RSBJFT The Armenia bidder inquiry key is: K7CX3K-7T9832

Offerors are requested to review the specifications binder (RFP Attachment) in its entirety and review the Bidder Inquiry System for answers to questions prior to submission of a new inquiry. The Government reserves the right to decline addressing certain questions. Further, no questions, unless in the Government’s interest, will be answered any later than 10 business days prior to the stated deadline for offers. All Offerors are encouraged to register on ProjNet for alerts to stay abreast of Q&A’s that are posted in reference to this Solicitation. Only self-registered users on ProjNet can submit and review inquiries. To self-register, go to the webpage, click BID tab, select Bidder

Inquiry, select agency USACE, enter the key for this Solicitation listed above, and your email address. After initial login, enter all the required information to create your user ID. Verify the information on the next screen and from there you may submit and view inquiries. Those submitting inquiries will receive a system generated email notification when their inquiry has been processed and answered. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to monitor for inquiries and responses.

3. General Proposal Submission Requirements.

a. Electronic Proposals. In an effort to reduce paperwork and costs, ALL RESPONSES TO THIS ANNOUNCEMENT SHALL BE SUBMITTED ELECTRONICALLY. Hand carried delivery or USPS/UPS/Fedex delivery of hard copies and/or CD-ROMs are not authorized. Facsimile submission is not authorized. Electronic submissions of proposals shall be sent via DOD SAFE at https://safe.apps.mil/ (to Contract Specialist, Mr. Shannon Davie, at shannon.l.davie@usace.army.mil and the Contracting Officer, David Decker, at david.w.decker@usace.army.mil). It is the responsibility of the Offeror to ensure receipt.

b. File Size Limitations. Offerors are advised that the file sizes limits of DOD SAFE are 8 GBs total.

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 your firm’s name followed by, the Solicitation number, followed by the word “RESPONSE,”, and finally a brief file description. EXAMPLES:

1) “Firmname W912GB22R0005 RESPONSE Georgia Volume I.pdf”

2) “Firmname W912GB22R0005 RESPONSE Georgia Volume I Part 1.pdf”

3) “Firmname W912GB22R0005 RESPONSE Georgia Volume I Part 2.pdf”

4) “Firmname W912GB22R0005 RESPONSE Georgia Volume II.pdf”

1) “Firmname W912GB22R0005 RESPONSE Armenia Volume I.pdf”

2) “Firmname W912GB22R0005 RESPONSE Armenia Volume I Part 1.pdf”

3) “Firmname W912GB22R0005 RESPONSE Armenia Volume I Part 2.pdf”

4) “Firmname W912GB22R0005 RESPONSE Armenia 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-(A4 is acceptable) -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. Proposals shall completely and adequately address the requirements of this Solicitation. Offerors are reminded that elaborate corporate marketing information, formatting, special reproduction techniques, etc., are not necessary. Failing to submit attachments or failing to complete the proposal properly may result in rejection of the offer without further evaluation. Information pertaining to more than one evaluation factor should be repeated in 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. Submission & Deadline. Interested parties shall submit responses no later than the date specified on the solicitation document. The time & date of proposal receipt will be the delivery time & date recorded in DOD SAFE. Do not assume that electronic submission will occur instantaneously.

Offerors should time their submission with prudence by not waiting until the last day—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. Submissions after the deadline may be emailed to Shannon Davie, Contract Specialist at shannon.l.davie@usace.army.mil. Be advised they will be considered late and as such will be processed in accordance with FAR 15.208. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to ensure receipt.

f. Any information, presented in a proposal that the Offeror wants safeguarded from disclosure to other parties must be identified and labeled in accordance with the requirements of Provision “FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to OfferorsCompetitive Acquisition (Jan 2017),” subparagraph (e). The Government will endeavor to honor the restrictions against release requested by Offerors, to the extent permitted under United States law and regulations.

SPECIAL NOTICE: System for Award Management. Please take notice that the System for Award Management (SAM, www.sam.gov) requires 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 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_search=kb0013183. Instructions for international entities (not located in the U.S. or its outlying areas): https://www.fsd.gov/fsd-gov/answer.do?sysparm_kbid=dbf8053adb119344d71272131f961946&sysparm_search=KB0013221

Section 00 22 16 - Supplementary Instructions to Proposers

PROCEDURES FOR SUBMITTAL AND EVALUATION OF OFFERS FOR PHASE I

1. Overview

1.1. The intent of this solicitation is to select a target of seven (7) contractors for two, separate Multiple Award Task Order Contracts (MATOCs) for Design-Build and Design-Bid-Build construction services in Georgia and Armenia. The Solicitation will result in two, separate Firm-Fixed Price IDIQ MATOCs – one for Georgia and one for Armenia - with a total capacity of $25M for DB or DBB construction activities in Georgia; and a total capacity of $20M for DB or DBB construction activities in Armenia and will include a target of seven (7) contractors in each of the Georgia and Armenia MATOC pools. These two, separate MATOC pools in each Georgia and Armenia will include a five-year base period + the potential for a six-month Option under FAR 52.217-8.

1.1. This is a two-phase procurement, and the basis of award is the best value trade-off process. The potential

Offerors are invited to submit the information described in this Section 00 22 16, Procedures for Submittal and Evaluation of Offers for Phase I, for review and evaluation by the Government. Following completion of the evaluation of Phase I, up to a target of seven (7) most highly qualified Offerors each will be selected for Georgia and Armenia to participate in Phase II. The selected Offerors for Phase II will be invited to submit the information described in Section 00 22 18, Procedures for Submittal and Evaluation of Offers for Phase II, for review and evaluation by the Government. Price will be evaluated in Phase II through use of a maximum allowable binding contract rates. Following completion of the Phase II evaluation, the Contracting Officer will award to a target of seven (7) contractors each for both Georgia and Armenia, to the responsible Offerors whom the Source Selection Authority determines conforms to the solicitation, are fair and reasonable, and offer the best overall value to the Government, all factors considered. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offers or to reject all offers.

The selected Offerors for each MATOC pool will receive a minimum guarantee amount of $2,000.00 via the award of an initial task order at the time of the applicable MATOC award. This minimum guarantee is over the full term of the contract. Upon award of a subsequent task order which exceeds the minimum guarantee, the minimum guarantee will be de-obligated via unilateral modification. No legal liability on the part of the Government shall arise until funds are made available to the Contracting Officer and a task order or contract is awarded by the Contracting Officer. Any Offeror proposing on this solicitation does so at its own cost and with the full knowledge that a task order might not result from this Solicitation.

2. Submittal of offers.

2.1. Offerors submitting proposals for this project should limit submissions to data essential for evaluation of proposals so that a minimum of time and monies will have been expended in preparing information required herein. However, to be effectively and equitably evaluated, the proposals must include information sufficiently detailed to clearly describe the Offeror's capability for successfully completing the solicited action. Requirements stated in this Request for Proposal (RFP) are minimums. Proposals should follow in the order of sequence set forth in the RFP. Information provided out of sequence, or in the wrong section of the proposal, may not be evaluated and may result in the Offerors disqualification from award.

Offerors are cautioned to put forth their best efforts, and to furnish all information clearly to allow the Government to determine their performance capability. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but rather should demonstrate convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet the RFP requirements.

2.2. Offerors shall submit their proposals to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers electronically through the DoD

SAFE website (https://safe.apps.mil/about.php). Please see the complete electronic proposal submission instructions within the solicitation (Section 00 21 00 – Instructions).

2.3. For Phase I, Offerors are required to submit a proposal consisting of the information identified in paragraphs 2.4, 2.5, and 2.6 below. All proposal materials shall be submitted with a table of contents and clear divide between each section. The sections should parallel the submission requirements identified herein.

2.4. Volume I for Phase I shall include the following information:

Volume I: Factor I – Past Performance Volume I: Factor II – Management Approach

2.5. Volume II for Phase I shall be submitted in a separate electronic document and include the following information:

Volume II: Tab A – Standard Form 1442 Volume II: Tab B – Joint Venture Agreement (if applicable) Volume II: Tab C – Commitment Letters (if applicable) Volume II: Tab D – Evidence of Ability to Obtain Financial Protections and Proof of Financial

Ability (Bank Letter of Assurance (BLA) or Bid Bond)

2.6. IMPORTANT: Proposal shall clearly state which MATOC the Offeror is proposing, either Georgia and/or

Armenia. If the Offeror is proposing for both Georgia and Armenia, two separate proposals shall be submitted, one for the Georgia MATOC and separate one for the Armenia MATOC

NOTE: Phase I does NOT involve pricing submission.

3. Proposal Evaluation Process.

3.1. A Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) comprised of representatives of the Corps of Engineerswill evaluate the proposals. Offerors are advised that the technical evaluation and rating of proposals will be conducted in strict confidence. The number and identities of Offerors are not revealed to anyone who is not involved in the evaluation and award process or to other Offerors. Proposals will be evaluated based on the factors described herein, and the basis of award is the best value trade-off process, as stated above.

3.2. The evaluation process for Phase I essentially consists of two parts: proposal compliance review and responsibility determination, and technical evaluation.

Proposal Compliance and Responsibility Review: This is an initial review to ensure that all required forms and certifications are complete, and that the Offeror is financially capable of sustaining performance under the contract and is able to obtain the required level of performance and payment bonds from an acceptable surety

Technical Evaluation: The SSEB will evaluate and rate the Phase I, Volume I proposals against the

RFP requirements. Factor I – Past Performance will be rated using Tables 1 and 2 below. The rating will be based on overall confidence in performance (Table 2, below), with the final confidence assessment rating based on the extent of recent, relevant experience (Table 1, below) and the quality of the Offeror’s performance. Factor II – Management Approach will be rated using Tables 3 and 4 below. The SSEB will assign an adjectival descriptor to the technical factors. The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, significant strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining the technical ratings.

Combined technical/risk evaluations shall utilize the combined technical/risk ratings (see Table 3) and risk descriptions (see Table 4) below in section 4.5.

4. Proposal Information and Related Evaluation Factors.

4.1. Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the factors below, listed in relative order of importance:

Past Performance will be more important than Management Approach. The initial offer and subsequent Government evaluation will be the basis for the Source Selection Authority’s selection of up to the ten

(10) most highly qualified offers for each MATOC pool to continue to Phase II of the procurement.

Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details in their Phase I proposals, in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of Phase I proposals. Offerors should not assume that they will have an opportunity to clarify or correct anything in their proposal after submitting it in response to Phase I. The Government may evaluate Phase I proposals as submitted, without further exchanges. However, the Government reserves the right to talk with, or otherwise contact, offerors during Phase I and to request additional information or Phase I proposal revisions, if determined to be necessary and in the best interests of the Government

4.2. Volume I: Factor I – Past Performance 1st

4.3. Volume I: Factor II – Management Approach 2nd

4.4. Volume II: Administrative Matters

Tab A Standard Form 1442

Tab B Joint Venture Agreements Tab C Commitment Letter

Tab D Evidence of Ability to Obtain Financial Protections and

Proof of Financial Ability

4.5. Ratings

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

Table 1 Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating Definition

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

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

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

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

Table 2 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. Proposal is unawardable.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Proposal is unawardable.

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

Table 3 Technical / Risk Assessment Ratings

Adjectival Rating Definition

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

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.

Acceptable

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

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

Proposal is unawardable.

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.

Table 4 Technical Risk Descriptions

Adjectival Rating Definition

Low

Proposal may contain weakness(es) which have little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance.

Normal contractor efforts 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.

4.6. Definitions

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.

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.

Clarification. Limited exchanges between the Government and offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated. See FAR 15.306(a)(1).

Adverse Past Performance. Past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation.

5. Volume I: Factor I – Past Performance

5.1. Submission Requirements

Provide a minimum of two (2), and a maximum of five (5) projects that are completed or substantially complete by the Offeror (or by a JV member or other team member with a signed Commitment Letter) within the last 5 years (from the solicitation issue date) which are similar in size and scopeto task orders that will be issued under the applicable contract. Projects completed more than five (5) years before the solicitation issue date may be considered less relevant. Projects are considered substantially complete at 95% completion, if enough work has been performed such that it demonstrates the ability to successfully complete all phases of the project. An indefinite delivery indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract may be submitted only if a single task order could be considered similar in scope. Task orders may not be combined for them to be considered similar.

Projects considered similar in size will have a contract value between $200,000 and $1,000,000 but may be as high as $7,000,000.

Projects considered similar in scope to this project shall be Design-Build (DB) construction of new facilities, renovations of existing structures, and real property repair.

NOTE: Design/Bid/Build projects may be submitted; however, they may be considered less relevant than Design/Build projects.

Projects must demonstrate that the Offeror (or if applicable the JV member or other team member with a Commitment Letter) has self-performed at least 15% of the cost of that contract, not including the cost of materials, using its own employees to be considered similar

Additional consideration may be given for projects that contain the following features:

Demonstrated experience in successfully completing DB/DBB projects in the country being proposed (either Georgia and/or Armenia, as applicable).

Demonstrated experience with key subcontractors, team members, and JV partners in successfully completing Design Build projects for the United States Government.

NOTE: Offerors whose proposals have more projects meeting or exceeding all criteria requirements for this Factor may receive more consideration than an Offeror who submits fewer projects meeting or exceeding all criteria. Offerors also are cautioned that the SST may assess weaknesses against experience examples that do not demonstrate one or more of the criteria listed above, that are not verifiable, and/or where the performance of the Offeror or subcontractor, team member or affiliate on which they rely was minor in comparison to the whole project.

The following information shall be provided for each project:

Project title, location, and contract number/unique identifier.

Current percentage of construction complete and the date it was or will be complete. For projects that are not 95% complete, provide description of work remaining to be completed.

Scope of the project, to include purpose/use of facility.

Size of the project, differentiate square footage of new construction versus renovation if project includes both.

Type and percentage of work that was self-performed.

Whether the project involved new construction, renovation, or both. Clearly delineate square footage for construction and renovation.

Whether the project was completed for the United States Government.

For this Factor, also include any information that supports past performance on these projects. Any of this information that is submitted shall clearly identify the submitted project[s] to which it pertains. A sample Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) is attached. If used, the Past Performance Questionnaire must be submitted by the Offeror with the proposal submission and not sent directly to the agency by the reference. For each project, the Offeror may provide information on problems encountered on the identified contracts and the Offeror’s respective corrective action.

For each project under Factor I, Offerors shall include a completed Contractor’s Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) record or a completed Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaire (PPQ) Form. If available, a completed record from the CPARS will be accepted for evaluation for this Factor. An interim completed CPARS rating will be considered if a final record is not available. If a completed CPARS record is not available at all, Offerors shall complete and provide a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) Form, provided as an RFP attachment.

PPQ Instructions: The Offeror shall complete Blocks 1-4 of the provided PPQ and have the Contracting Activity and the Technical Representative responsible for the past/current contract complete the remainder of the PPQ. Offeror shall ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs should be submitted with the proposal.

If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires.

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. Please refer to Section 00 21 00 Instructions - Submission Requirements with respect to submission requirements for a teaming arrangement to be recognized for purposes of source selection evaluation and the application of non-price factors.

In the case of Prime-Sub teams, work with affiliates or other teaming partners, Offerors are reminded that the Offeror is the Prime Contractor and remains fully responsible for contract performance, regardless of any team arrangement between the Prime Contractor and third parties. Consistent with FAR 9.104-4, the Government may consider the responsibility of key subcontractors, affiliates or other team members when it may adversely affect the prospective Prime Contractor’s responsibility or when it is in the Government’s interest to do so. Any subcontract(s) or other teaming agreements may not deviate from the substantive provisions of the required Commitment Letters (RFP TAB 5).

The failure of the Offeror to perform with one or more committed subcontractors, team members or affiliates may be grounds for Termination for Default. There can be no substitution of committed subcontractors, team members or affiliates except that, the Government may (in its sole discretion and without any obligation whatsoever), at the request of the Prime Contractor, permit the substitution of a firm with equivalent or greater capability a firm that was proposed with a Commitment Letter in the proposal. Note: Only a Contracting Officer can approve such a change after contract award.

5.2. Evaluation Criteria

The SSEB will evaluate the relevancy of recent past performance identified in the proposal in response to paragraph 5.1 above. By using the criteria identified above, the SSEB will determine how relevant each past project is when compared to the scope, size, and magnitude of effort and complexities of the solicited MATOCs scope of work. A relevancy assessment will be made on each submitted project using the Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Table above.

The SSEB will next review how well the Offeror performed on those projects. The Government reserves the right to check any or all citied references to verify supplied information and to assess owner satisfaction. The Government also reserves the right to not contract the provided references. In addition to the information submitted by the Offeror, the Government reserves the right to review any other sources of relevant information for evaluating past performance, including projects other than those submitted by the Offeror. The Government will, at a minimum, review past performance information retrieved through the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/Unique Entity Identifier numbers. Other sources may, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved from inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror.

The SSEB will review all past performance information collected for the Offeror. The SSEB will determine the quality of the Offeror’s performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information and incorporate this information into the Performance Confidence Assessment. The SSEB will assign a final, overall Performance Confidence rating, using the ratings in the Performance Confidence Assessment Table above, based on the SSEB’s assessment of (1) the degree of the Offeror’s recent, relevant experience, and (2) how well the Offeror performed that experience.

6. Volume I: Factor II – Management Approach

6.1. Submission Requirements

Provide an organizational chart and narrative description of the Offeror’s overall structure and management of the project team from the Offeror’s Headquarters to the Offeror’s site office(s). The chart and narrative shall include the following:

o Identify all offices involved in this contract o Identify all positions by title, organization, and physical location, including subcontractors and consultants o Include lines of reporting and technical areas of responsibility under the contract o Clearly show the lines of authority of the Offeror’s Project Manager, Quality Control and Safety

Organization, including all JV Partners and subcontractors, when applicable

Provide a narrative that describes the Offeror’s management approach and intended corporate management approach for executing the design build contract per the detailed requirements herein.

Clearly and concisely describe the offeror’s DBB/DB team, and how members of the team, including sub-contractors (if applicable), will work collaboratively to ensure timely, quality completion of future task orders. The Management Approach shall include the following:

o The narrative shall discuss the Offeror’s plan and capability to manage multiple task orders concurrently.

o The narrative shall discuss the Offeror’s knowledge of requirements and constraints applicable to construction projects in Georgia and/or Armenia, (as applicable), to include permits and authorizations for construction work within the Host Nation and the ability to communicate in English.

o The narrative shall discuss the Offeror’s criteria for the selection of a Designer of Record (DOR) (to include licensing and registration requirements in the host nation for the DOR) for future task order awards for the solicited MATOCs.

o The narrative shall discuss the Offeror’s plan to obtain, retain, coordinate, and manage sub-contractors in Georgia and/or Armenia, as applicable (as applicable).

The Management Approach narrative shall address the information described in the paragraphs below.

Roles and Responsibilities: Describe the roles and responsibilities of the Offeror’s DBB/DB team and how their resources will be utilized to deliver future Design-Build task order awards. Describe the proposed management structure for the DBB/DB team (i.e., key members), explaining how the design and construction process will be managed throughout the entirety of future task order life cycles (e.g., Design, Construction, Close-out).

Communication Plan: Describe interactions and communications both within the DBB/DB team and with the Corps of Engineers throughout the entirety of the base MATOC life cycle, as well as that of any future task order awards.

Quality Control: Describe the DBB/DB team’s quality control approach, corporate systems, and capabilities to maintain quality control of the design and construction.

o Provide specific information on how you will manage and track changes/revisions both during the design phase and construction phase of a given task order.

NOTE: There is a page limit of twenty-five (25), 8.5” x 11” pages, using a minimum font size of 10 and a minimum margin of one-half inch on all sides, for the Management Approach factor. If the page limit is exceeded, only the first twenty-five (25) pages will be read and evaluated. Any information that exceeds these page limits will not be evaluated. The Organization Chart is excluded from the page limit.

6.2. Evaluation Criteria

The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses, and any deficiencies in the proposal. The

Government will evaluate the Offeror’s understanding of the USACE Design/Build process and how well it has demonstrated its ability to successfully execute DBB/DB projects. Offerors are encouraged to tailor their proposal to demonstrate their approach for successfully completing a Design-Build task order, as well as how they will manage the overall MATOC.

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s understanding of the design process and the roles of the designers of record, construction firm, and the Government reviewers. The evaluation will be based on how well the Offeror demonstrates their organizational (i.e., the structure and staffing) ability to execute design-build projects, to…