W912GB22R0031_0003 Modification Summary of Changes.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

Update site location and add sew er manhole location map. Due date has been extended to 9 February 2023, 1000 hrs Berlin time.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 19

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 27-Dec-2022

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 W912GB22R0031

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

23-Sep-2022

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 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

27-Dec-2022

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:

W912GB22R0031

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 10 00 – Price Schedule Section 00 21 16 – Instructions to Offerors Section 00 22 16 – Evaluation Factors for Award Section 00 45 00 – Representations and Certifications Section 00 70 00 – Conditions of the Contract Section 00 72 00 – Contract Clauses Section 00 73 00 – Supplementary Conditions

ATTACHMENTS (Incorporated herein by reference)

ATTACHMENT 1 – Project Location Map ATTACHMENT 2 – Concept Site Plan ATTACHMENT 3 – Architectural Drawings ATTACHMENT 4 – Structural calculations Guideline ATTACHMENT 5 – Dedication Plaque

ATTACHMENT 6 – SPECIFICATIONS BINDER

ATTACHMENT 7 – Statement of Work (SOW) ATTACHMENT 8 – Bank Letter of Assurance Sample ATTACHMENT 9 – Bank Letter of Guarantee Sample ATTACHMENT 10 – Commitment Letters ATTACHMENT 11 – Past Performance Questionnaire ATTACHMENT 12 - Experience Information Sheet ATTACHMENT 13 - VAT Information ATTACHMENT 14 - Pay Terms Bid Schedule-Price Schedule ATTACHMENT 15 - Site Visit Attendee Worksheet ATTACHMENT 16 - Municipal Sewer Manhole Location Map

SECTION 00 10 00 - SOLICITATION

The required response date/time has changed from 09-Jan-2023 10:00 AM to 09-Feb-2023 10:00 AM.

SECTION 00 21 16 - INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS

INSTRUCTION TO OFFERORS

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

1. Introduction. The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Europe District (NAU) intends to select one contractor to design and construct the project described in the Scope of Work (SOW). 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. Copies of the solicitation are available by INTERNET ACCESS ONLY. All solicitation documents will made available for viewing under Contracting Opportunities within the Beta SAM website (https://beta.sam.gov). All amendments will be made available for viewing within Beta SAM. It shall be the Offeror’s responsibility to check the website for any amendments. 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.

2. Evaluation Approach. The evaluation procedures are in accordance with Federal

Acquisition Regulation Part 13.106-2(b)(3) – Price and Other Factors. Award will be made to an Offeror proposing the combination most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the proposals received, including the evaluation factors described herein. The Contracting Officer will award a firm fixed price contract to the responsible offeror that conforms to the solicitation, is determined to have proposed a fair and reasonable price and whose offer presents the best overall value to the Government, all factors considered. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers.

3 SPECIAL NOTICE: SAM Registration: In order to do business with the US

Government as a contractor, a company must be registered with the System for Award Management (SAM, www.sam.gov). In order to register on SAM, a company must obtain a NCAGE code. You can apply for an NCAGE code and a simultaneously, but both must be obtained in order to register on SAM. Specific instructions how to obtain a NCAGE code, and a SAM Registration are as follows:

a. NCAGE Code. An NCAGE code is a five-character ID number used by the US Government to identify international companies. All non-US firms must obtain an NCAGE code. How does your company obtain an NCAGE Code? If you are a vendor located outside the United States, one can be obtained at no cost by visiting https://eportal.nspa.nato.int/AC135Public/CageTool/home. Further information about NCAGE codes is available at:

https://eportal.nspa.nato.int/AC135Public/Docs/US%20Instructions%20for%20N SPA%20NCAGE.pdf. Generally it takes approximately 24-48 hours to obtain an NCAGE code.

b. SAM Registration. The System for Award Management (SAM) is a registration database required for all US Federal Government Contracts and where you will find contract opportunities all over the world. You can register on SAM at: https://www.sam.gov/SAM/pages/public/loginFAQ.jsf.

For help with SAM registration, see the SAM Quick Start guide at:

https://www.sam.gov/SAM/transcript/Quick_Guide_for_International_Entity_Re gistration.pdf. For additional help at no cost, contact the Federal Service Desk at www.fsd.gov or by telephone at +1-866-606-8220 (toll free) or +1- 334-206-7828 (internationally). Generally it takes approximately two weeks to for SAM to activate a registration, from the date it receives a completed registration. Please take notice that SAM has an entity registration requirement that firms submit an "original, signed notarized letter before the registration will be activated." Instructions for international entities (not located in the U.S. or its outlying areas) can be found at:

https://www.fsd.gov/fsd-gov/answer.do?sysparm_kbid=dbf8053adb119344d71272131f961946&sysparm_ search=KB0013221.

4 Pre-Proposal Site Visit. The Government will hold a pre-proposal site visit.

Offerors are strongly encouraged to attend the site visit. Details are as follows:

a. Location: See Project Location Map, provided as a solicitation attachment.

b. Time/Date: 9 November 2022, 12:00PM (SAST)

c. Registration Instructions: Offerors must pre-register their attendees no later than 2 November 2022. To Pre-Register, complete the site visit attendee information sheet (solicitation attachment) submit via email to eliud.temblador@usace.army.mil. Offerors MUST pre-register in order to attend the site visit. IMPORTANT: Any individuals planning to attend must register in advance with their full name, organization name, job title, and passport information or they will not be permitted access to the sites—please use the attendee information sheet attached to the RFP. Also, space may be limited and as a result the number of attendees per company may be limited.

d. On Site Point of Contact. For logistics concerns and questions accessing the site, Offerors are encouraged to contact Mr. Mark Dold (doldMR@state.gov)

e. Project Questions. Unfortunately, the US Government cannot answer project questions on site. All project questions should be submitted via ProjNet (see instructions below). Any answers given at the site visit are strictly unofficial.

f. COVID19 Measures and International Travel Restrictions. Due to the recent rise of COVID-19 cases, many Governments have implemented various important protocols to help spread infection. Offerors are advised to familiarize themselves with the measures that may impact the work under this contract, including possibly international travel restrictions.

5 Inquiries. Offerors with technical inquiries shall submit their inquiries in writing via “Bidder Inquiry” in ProjNet at www.projnet.org\projnet. The bidder inquiry key is 89DKJ9-JN38EV. 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 ten calendar days prior to the stated deadline for offers. All Offerors are encouraged to register on ProjNet for alerts so as to stay abreast of Q&A’s that are posted in reference to this solicitation. Only self-registered users on ProjNet can submit & 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.

6 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 shall be via email to both the Contract Specialist, Major Matt Bookout, at thomas.m.bookout@usace.army.mil and the Contracting Officer, Master Sergeant Aaron Kopecky, at aaron.j.kopecky@usace.army.mil. As an alternative, Offerors may utilize the DoD SAFE Site (https://safe.apps.mil). It is the responsibility of 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. If utilizing the DoD SAFE site, the file size limitation is 8GB.

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) “IAF-23-0001 RESPONSE Firmname Volume I.pdf”

(2) “IAF-23-0001 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. Submission & Deadline. Interested parties shall submit responses no later than the date specified on solicitation document. The time & date of proposal receipt will be the delivery time & date recorded of email receipt on the Government’s server. Do not assume that electronic submission will occur instantaneously. Offerors should time their email submission with prudence by not waiting until the last few minutes—this will allow for unexpected delays in the transmittal process and troubleshooting.

Offerors are encouraged to keep a copy of the delivery and/or read confirmation for their record but should also request confirmation.

Submissions after the deadline may be emailed to the Contract Specialist, Major Matt Bookout, at thomas.m.bookout@usace.army.mil and the Contracting Officer, Master Sergeant Aaron Kopecky, at aaron.j.kopecky@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. The Government will endeavor to honor the restrictions against release requested by Offerors, to the extent permitted under United States law and regulations.

7. Submission Requirements, Volume I, Non-Price Proposal: Volume I should include a section for each Non-Price factor. Volume I should be organized as follows:

a. Executive Summary. Include a one page cover letter, and any applicable executed Joint Venture (JV) agreements or other evidence of formal teaming agreements.

i. 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.

(h) A statement that the JV partners are jointly and severally liable under the contract.

(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) If one of the JV parties possesses relevant experience and/or past performance, the experience and/or past performance of that firm will be considered as the experience and/or past performance of the JV.

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

ii. Other formal teaming agreements shall include the following:

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

b. Factor 1, Technical Approach. The Government requires that the Offeror provide the following:

i. Offerors should submit their proposed technical approach to accomplish design and construction tasks covered in the SOW included in this solicitation. Offerors should limit their technical approach to twenty pages (A4 or letter size) using at a minimum a 10 pitch font and should describe the following:

(1) Manpower required to design and construct the project

(include the make-up of teams by trade).

(2) Any specialized tools and equipment, required to construct the project.

(3) How the Offeror will ensure cost effective purchase of building materials

(4) A plan that includes discussion of how the Offeror plans to track and financially plan for Value Added Tax (VAT) reimbursements or exemptions applicable to work in the Host Nation.

(5) The Offeror’s safety processes.

(6) The Offeror’s quality control processes.

(7) Knowledge of requirements and constraints applicable to work in the Host Nation and regionally near the project location.

(8) Subcontracting Plan that specifies which technical aspects the Offeror plans to self–perfrorm as the prime contractor and which tasks the subcontractor(s) will perform, and explains how the Offeror will use proposed personnel and sub-contractor resources to assure the delivery of quality workmanship in accordance with the

SOW.

c. Factor 2, Schedule. Offerors should include a schedule and an accompanying narrative with the minimum components listed below, and using the assumptions specified herein.

i. Schedule Narrative. The schedule narrative should not exceed eight pages (A4 or letter size), using at a minimum a 10 pitch font and should accomplish the following:

(1) Define what primary assumptions used in the Offeror’s schedule.

(2) Discuss skilled and unskilled labor requirements the

Offeror anticipates for critical schedule elements.

(3) Identify how the Offeror will manage submittals in advance (e.g. 30, 60, and 90 days out), and discuss what potential issues it anticipates and how it will proactively resolve them.

(4) Discuss how the Offeror will manage subcontractors from a schedule perspective.

ii. Schedule. The schedule submission may be submitted MS

Excel, MS Word, or Adobe pdf file format and should be specifically-tailored to the project contemplated by this solicitation. If prepared in Primavera "xer", the Offeror may submit a Primavera file also, The schedule should include the activities listed below:

(1) Contract Award

(2) BLG, Insurance Submission and other pre-construction approvals

(3) Notice to Proceed (NTP)

(4) Submission of each design submittal required in the

SOW.

(5) Design submittal review periods as specified in the SOW

(6) Preconstruction submittals

(7) Site Mobilization

(8) Construction activities across various construction trades

(9) Initial and Final Inspections

(10) Closeout documents

(11) Construction completion

(12) Warranty

iii. Schedule Assumptions. For the purposes of evaluation under this factor, the Offeror should utilize the following assumptions:

plan for a 365 calendar day construction duration, Offeror should use the dates of 30 September 2022 for award and 20 October 2022 for issuance of the NTP, and should prepare the schedule assuming that all base line items and options will be awarded on that date.

d. Factor 3, Past Performance. No submission is required, but Offerors are encouraged to submit a narrative explaining any past performance that is relevant to the project contemplated by this solicitation and demonstrates they will be successful if awarded the contract. The Government will evaluate Past Performance by reviewing, at a minimum, the Offeror’s proposal, the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), and System for Award Management (SAM). The Government evaluation will be subjective, and will use independent judgment in determining relevancy of an Offeror’s past performance and confidence pertaining to the perceived likelihood of its future success. Offerors may also provide a completed past performance questionnaire for completed projects, which is provided as an RFP attachment.

8. Volume II, Price Proposal and Administrative Matters: Volume II should include the following:

a. Cover Letter. Offerors should submit a cover letter including the following language:

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. A completed Standard Form (SF) 1442, using a printed copy of the SF 1442 included in this solicitation for the contract. As applicable, Offerors should also submit a completed SF 30 for each solicitation amendment, acknowledging the amendments.

c. Completed Price Schedule. Offerors should submit a completed Section 00010, Proposal Price Breakout Schedule, including proposed prices for all items. The Price Schedule is included in Section 00010 of this solicitation.

d. Bank Letter of Assurance (BLA) or other securities. Unless an Offeror provides a bid bond, a BLA in the amount of 10% of the proposed price shall be provided.

See format provided as RFP attachment. The BLA is evidence showing the Offeror's ability to be bonded or obtain a 10% Bank Letter of Guarantee (BLG) for this project. Include the name, address and telephone number of the firm's bonding company or bank. As an alternative, other bonds and financial protections may be accepted, see the following:

i. A 100% performance and payment bond, as specified by

52.228-15, Performance and Payment Bonds – Construction. The contracting officer will only accept performance and payment bonds from corporate sureties that appear on the list contained in the Department of Treasury Circular 570, “Companies Holding Certificates of Authority as Acceptable Sureties on Federal Bonds and Acceptable Reinsuring Companies,” or bonds supported by coinsurance or reinsurance agreements from such listed sureties and conforming to the Department of the Treasury regulations in 31 CFR 223.10 and 223.11, as elaborated in FAR Part 28. The contracting officer requires any reinsurance agreements to be executed and submitted with the bonds before making a final determination on the bonds.

ii. An Irrevocable Letter of Credit that complies with the requirements of clause 52.228-14 – “Irrevocable Letter of Credit” and is equal to 10% of the proposed price. An ILC must secure both performance and payment under the contract and substantively conform to the model provided in clause 52.228-14. It must be issued or confirmed by a federally insured financial institutions rated investment grade. As per 52.228-14(d), the offeror must provide the contracting officer a credit rating from a recognized commercial rating service that indicates the financial institution has the required rating(s) as of the date of issuance of the ILC.

iii. Certified or cashier’s checks, bank drafts, money orders, or currency equal to 10% of the proposed price. The checks, drafts, or money orders shall be in the same currency as the currency specified for the award of the contract. The checks, drafts, or money orders shall be drawn to the order of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Europe District Finance and Accounting Officer.

iv. United States bonds or notes equal to 10% of the proposed price. The bond or note must be accompanied by a duly executed power of attorney and agreement authorizing the collection or sale of such United States bonds or notes in the event of default of the principal on the bond. The contracting officer may –

a) Turn securities over to the finance or other authorized agency official; or

b) Deposit them with the Treasurer of the United

States, a Federal Reserve Bank (or branch with requisite facilities), or other depository designated for that purpose by the Secretary of the Treasury, under procedures prescribed by the agency concerned and Treasury Department Circular No. 154.

v. SAM Registration, Representations & Certifications.

Offerors should submit the following:

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

b) 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”.

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

vi. Financial Information Offerors should submit financial information to demonstrate they have adequate financial resources to perform the contract, or the ability to obtain them. For example, past three years financial statements, annual reports, Dunn & Bradstreet Ratings, and/or bank name, number and POC, etc.

DBA Insurance: DBA coverage is required for work performed on this project by all contractors and subcontractors. You will be required to provide the insurance certificate no later than 14 calendar days after award.

The DBA Defense Base Act (DBA) insurance is commercially available from carriers and self-insured employers authorized by the Department of Labor (DOL). The DOL table of authorized carriers and self-insured employers is available at http://www.dol.gov/owcp/dlhwc/lscarrier.htm Negotiations/Discusions. The Contracting Officer intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without negotiations or discusions. Therefore, Offerors should include their best price terms in their initial offer and not assume they will have an opportunity to participate in negotiations and/or be asked to submit a revised proposal. However, the Contracting Officer may determine it necessary after evaluating initial proposals to engage in negotiations and/or other bilateral communications with one or more Offerors.

The Contracting Officer will notify all Offerors when an award is made. If negotiations are conducted, the Contracting Officer may negotiate orally, in writing, etc. The method for negotiations will be at the discretion of the Contracting Officer. The Contracting Officer will provide additional instructions with the notification that negotiations are necessary.

Negotiations. The Contracting Officer intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without negotiations. Therefore, Offerors should include their best price terms in their initial offer and not assume they will have an opportunity to participate in negotiations and/or be asked to submit a revised proposal. However, the Contracting Officer may determine it necessary after evaluating initial proposals to engage in negotiations and/or other bilateral communications with one or more Offerors. The Contracting Officer will notify all Offerors when an award is made. If negotiations are conducted, the Contracting Officer may negotiate orally, in writing, etc. The method for negotiations will be at the discretion of the Contracting Officer. The Contracting Officer will provide additional instructions with the notification that negotiations are necessary.

SECTION 00 22 16 - SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

EVALUATIONS OF OFFERORS

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

The Government will utilize the Tradeoff Source Selection Process in accordance with FAR 15.101-1 to determine best value. This process permits tradeoffs among price and non-price factors, and the Government considers it to be in its best interest to allow award to other than the lowest priced Offeror or other than the highest technically rated Offeror. The award will be made to the Offeror proposing the combination most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the proposals received, including the evaluation factors described in paragraph B of this section. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” on factors 1 & 2 and no less than Neutral on Past Performance (factor 3) must be achieved for all non-price factors. Offerors will be cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest price offered.

B. FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

All proposals will be evaluated on the factors listed below. Offerors are required to provide data addressing all stated factors in a clear and understandable format. 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 is set forth in the “Evaluation Approach,” paragraph of this section. Evaluators will ensure Offeror’s complied with all submission requirements set forth in the “Proposal Submission,” paragraph of the RFP Section 00 21 00.

The non-price factors are as follows:

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. The non-price factors for this solicitation are listed below:

Factor 1: Technical Approach Factor 2: Schedule Factor 3: Past Performance

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

Factor 4: Price

3. RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF THE EVALUATION FACTORS. Of the non-price factors, Past

Performance is the most important. All non-price factors, when combined are approximately equal in importance to price.

C. EVALUATION APPROACH

1. Factor 1: Technical Approach. The Government will evaluate the proposed technical approach to accomplish the SOW included in this solicitation, to assess the Offeror’s perceived ability to implement all requirements of the SOW. Additional consideration may be afforded to an Offeror whose proposed approach:

(i) Demonstrates a reasonable process and rationale for the number and capability of staff to perform the tasks in a cost effective manner

(ii) Explains how the Offeror will use proposed personnel and sub-contractor resources to assure the delivery of quality projects in accordance with contract provisions as well as the ability and familiarity with conducting business and finances in the Host Nation and regionally near the project location.

(iii) Provides an adequate plan for each of the items specified under RFP Section 00 21 00 for this factor.

(iv) Demonstrates innovative approaches to maximize personnel efficiency or provide cost savings through reduced materials, travel, and labor.

2. Factor 2: Schedule. The Government will evaluate the proposed schedule to assess the Offeror’s apparent understanding of the project scope and schedule restrictions that must be considered (e.g., long lead items, site access, manpower availability, critical milestones, etc.). The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s apparent understanding of the interrelated nature of activities in the proposed schedule, the Offeror's overall apparent capability to schedule the complete project within the proposed contract duration, and the realism of the schedule.

The Government may use independent judgment concerning typical construction durations, as well as the Offeror’s proposed schedule logic and constraints. Additional consideration may be afforded to an Offeror whose proposed schedule:

(i) Identifies critical milestones throughout, the anticipated overall critical path, and any parallel activities.

(ii) Identifies schedule constraints as they relate to the site access for workers and delivery of materials, long lead items, the Government’s periods for review and approval of submittals, anticipated delays throughout, etc. (including restrictions associated with local holidays and United States holidays)

(iii) Shows a thorough list of activities, during the design, construction, and closeout phases of the project.

(iv) Distinguishes between prime and subcontractor activities if applicable.

3. Factor 3: Past Performance. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s past performance records on other recent and relevant contracts to assess what level of expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the effort required by this RFP. The Government reserves the right to check any and all cited references to verify supplied information by utilizing any and all sources of past performance information that the Government has at its disposal, to include sources not provided by Offeror.

Additional consideration will be afforded to an Offeror whose record of Past Performance demonstrates a history of successfully completing projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity, and that are located within the country and/or region where the project is located (especially near the project location). Conversely, projects dissimilar in size, scope, and complexity and that are not located within the Host Nation will be considered less relevant.

4. Non-Price Evaluation Ratings. Evaluators will apply the adjectival rating for the definition that most closely matches the evaluation.

(i) Factor 1 and 2 – Technical Approach and Schedule: The adjectival rating for Technical Approach and Schedule are listed and defined below:

NON-PRICE FACTOR COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Color Rating Description

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

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

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

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

Red Un-acceptable

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

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

NON-PRICE FACTOR TECHNICAL RISK RATING

Adjectival

Rating Description

Low

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

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

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

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

(ii) Factor 3 – Past Performance: The adjectival ratings for Past Performance are listed and defined below:

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

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings:

Rating Definition

Very Relevant

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

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

Somewhat Relevant

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

Not Relevant

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

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

Performance Confidence Assessments:

Rating Definition

Substantial Confidence

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

Satisfactory Confidence

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

Neutral Confidence

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

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

Limited Confidence

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

No Confidence

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

5. Factor 4: Price. Price will be considered in making the Government’s determination of which proposal received in response to this RFP presents the best value. The Government will perform price analysis on all proposals received in accordance with FAR Subpart 15.4 to determine completeness, balanced pricing, reasonableness Offerors are required to price for all items for the base and all options. Failure to submit a price and failure to complete all CLINs in Section 00 10 00 of the Solicitation may result in the Offeror’s proposal package being rejected by the Government after initial evaluation without further consideration. From a price perspective, an offer’s overall value will be assigned as being the sum of all the CLINs added together (all base and option CLINs).

Analysis will be performed by one or more of the following techniques to ensure a fair and reasonable price:

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

(ii) Comparison of proposed prices with the independent Government estimate.

(iii) Comparison of proposed prices with available historical information.

The Government intends to evaluate all options and has included the provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in the Solicitation. In accordance with FAR 52.217-5, evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). Prices proposed will be analyzed to determine if the prices are unbalanced. If the price analysis indicates that an offer is unbalanced the contracting officer shall consider the risks to the Government associated with the unbalanced pricing. An offer will be rejected if the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

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

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

15.001.

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

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

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

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).

7. 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. For a teaming arrangement to be recognized for purposes of source selection evaluation and the application of non-price factors, there must be full disclosure of the teaming arrangement and company relationships in the team's proposal. The proposal must include a narrative that explains the major or critical aspects of the work to be performed by each team member (to include identification of team members, a full delineation of roles and responsibilities of team members, and the duration of the agreement, etc.).

The proposal must also include an agreement that has been or will be executed prior to award 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.

(i) JVs (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 surrounding requirements related to the JV agreement are provided in the INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS section.

(ii) Affiliates. In the case of an Offeror’s affiliates, experience and/or past performance of an Offeror’s

“affiliate,” as that term is defined in FAR 2.101 will be evaluated (as described within this section) if the Offeror demonstrates 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 team members outside of the Prime Offeror will not be considered.

(iii) Other Teaming Arrangements. In the case of prime-sub teams (e.g. if an Offeror proposes to utilize a

“key subcontractor”), the agreement must 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. However, consistent with FAR 9.104-4, the Government may consider the responsibility of subcontractor 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. Finally, any resulting subcontract(s) may not deviate from the substantive provisions of the teaming agreement. The failure of the Offeror to perform with one or more subcontractors on a recognized team may be grounds for termination for default. There can be no substitution of subcontractor team members except that, in the case of a prime-sub team arrangement, the Government may (in its sole discretion and without any obligation whatsoever), at the request of the prime, permit the substitution of a subcontractor with equivalent or greater capability for a subcontractor on the identified team. Note: Only a Contracting Officer can approve such a change after contract award.

** END OF SOLICITATION PROVISIONS **

(End of Summary of Changes)