W912QR24R0014-0004.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

a. The evaluation Criteria is heteby revised to clarify the proposal page limits.

b. All Amendments must be acknoledged.

c. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 2

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

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 W912QR24R0014

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

20-Feb-2024

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

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

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

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

Solicitation W912QR24R0014 for the Camp Arifjan Microgrid is hereby amended as follows:

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

18-Apr-2024

CODE

U. S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, LOUISVILLE

600 DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. PLACE

ROOM 821

LOUISVILLE KY 40202-2239

W912QR 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912QR24R0014-0004

Submittal Requirements and Evaluation Criteria

1. Overview.

1.1 The intent of this solicitation is to select one contractor for the construction of a new Microgrid for Camp Arifjan, Kuwait.

The basis of award is the Best Value Trade-Off Process. The Contracting Officer will award a firm fixed price contract to the responsible offeror whom the Source Selection Authority (SSA) determines conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable, and offers 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.

1.2 The proposed project is a Design-Bid-Build new construction of a microgrid for the installation of Camp Arifjan, Kuwait.

The project will install a grid tie from Zone 4 Power Plant (PP) with an underground feeder electric cable conductor feed from Zone 4 Power Plant to TIP-C then continuing to Main Communications Facility (MCF) Signal Compound to power critical facilities. Install rooftop mount solar photovoltaic (PV) array, and 1.0 MW/2.0 MWH battery energy storage system (BESS). Install Automatic Transfer Switches (ATS) and Microgrid controls. Install electric meters at facilities and PV systems. Upgrade zone 4 power plant generator controls with microgrid controls to incorporate solar PV and battery storage with BESS controller. This project will also make provisions for a new 10 MW dedicated feeder line from Z4PP to the new Host Nation zone 4 substation and install a 11kV distribution line from Z4PP to TIP-C compound and continue to the MCF signal compound. Install new dual feed substations at both TIP-C and MCF Signal Compound, 11kV to 415/230V transformers, breakers, and switchgear.

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 past performance and technical approach necessary for successful completion of the project. Requirements stated in this Request for Proposal (RFP) are minimums.

2.2 Offerors shall submit their proposals to the US Army Corps of Engineers through the Procurement Integrated Enterprise

Environment (PIEE) - https://piee.eb.mil/. Proposals are not to be submitted any later than the time and date specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442.

2.3 Offerors are required to submit a proposal made up of Past Performance, Management Approach, and Price and Pro Forma.

All proposal materials shall be submitted with a table of contents. The sections should parallel the submission requirements identified below. Volumes I and II shall be submitted electronically. Failure to place the required submission information under the appropriate tab (factor) may result in a lower rating if the evaluators cannot readily find the appropriate information.

*NOTE: Provide the complete Volume I proposal submittal including text, renderings, drawings, photographs, etc. in electronic format. Provide the complete Volume II proposal submittal electronically with the final price breakout schedule.

Volume I – Factor I: Past Performance is limited to submission of information for three (3) past performance projects.

Information submitted which exceeds this limit will not be evaluated. Information should be submitted with a minimum font size of 11 and a minimum margin size of one-half inch on all sides.

Volume I – Factor II: Management Approach will have a limit of 10 pages using a minimum font size of 11 and a minimum margin size of one-half inch on all sides. Format restrictions will be strictly adhered to and enforced. Information submitted which exceeds the specified limit will not be evaluated.

2.4 Volume I – Past Performance and Management Approach, shall be submitted electronically and include the following information:

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

2.5 Volume II – Price and Proforma Information, shall be submitted electronically and shall include the following information:

Volume II – Tab A: Standard Form 1442 and Price Breakout Schedule Volume II – Tab B: Joint Venture Agreements

Volume II – Tab C: Evidence of Ability to Obtain Bonding and Proof of Financial Ability Volume II – Tab D: Pre-Award Information Volume II – Tab E: Joint Contingency Contracting System (JCCS) Registration Volume II – Tab F: Kuwait Commercial Registration Certificate (Business License)

3. Proposal Evaluation Process

3.1 A Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) comprised of representatives of the Corps of Engineers, User/Customer, and other required personnel will evaluate the proposals. Offerors are advised that the technical evaluation and rating of proposals will be conducted in strict confidence. Technical proposals will be reviewed and rated without knowledge of the price offered. 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 Tradeoff Process.

3.2 The evaluation process essentially consists of four parts: proposal compliance review and responsibility determination, technical evaluation, price evaluation, and price/technical trade-off analysis.

3.2.1 Proposal Compliance Review: This is an initial review to ensure that all required forms and certifications are complete and that both a technical and price proposal were received. 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.

3.2.2 Technical Evaluation: The SSEB will evaluate and rate the proposals against the RFP requirements. Factors will be rated using an adjectival-based system. Past Performance will be rated based on recency/ relevancy (see Past Performance Relevancy Ratings in section 4.5) and Confidence is performance (see Performance Confidence Assessments in section 4.5).

Management approach will be rated based on Technical Assessment (see Technical Assessment Rating in section 4.5).

3.2.3 Price Evaluation: The SSEB and Contracting Officer/SSA will evaluate price proposals independent of the technical evaluation. The SSEB will not have access to price information until completion of the technical evaluation.

3.2.4 Technical Trade-off Analysis: After all above evaluations are complete, the Contracting Officer/SSA will compare the relative advantages and disadvantages of technical proposals and compare prices. The Source Selection Authority (SSA) will then consider all factors to select the proposal offering the best value to the Government.

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. All evaluation factors, other than cost or price, when combined are considered equal to cost or price. Offerors are reminded to include their best technical and price terms in their initial offer and not to automatically assume that they will have an opportunity to participate in discussions or be asked to submit a revised offer. The Government may make award of a conforming proposal without discussions, if deemed to be within the best interest 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 - Price and Pro Forma Information

Tab A: Standard Form 1442 and Price Breakout Schedule Not Rated Tab B: Joint Venture Agreements Not Rated Tab C: Evidence of Ability to Obtain Bonding and Proof Not Rated of Financial Ability Tab D: Pre-Award Information Not Rated Tab E: Joint Contingency Contracting System (JCCS) Not Rated

Registration Tab F: Kuwait Commercial Registration Certificate (Business License) Not Rated

4.5 Ratings

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

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Rating Description Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

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

Somewhat Relevant

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

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

Performance Confidence Assessments

Rating Description Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

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

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available, or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

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

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

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 offerors’ 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 offerors’ 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.

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).

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

Risk. as it pertains to source selection, is the potential for unsuccessful contract performance. The consideration of risk assesses the degree to which an offeror’s proposed approach to achieving the technical factor may involve risk of disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method

Adjectival Rating

Description

Outstanding Proposal demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength or significant 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.

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

5.0 Volume I – Factor I: Past Performance

5.1 Submission Requirements:

5.1.1 Provide descriptions of up to three (3) projects completed by the Prime Contractor within the last five (5) years (from the solicitation issue date) that are similar to this project in size and scope. Projects completed more than five (5) years before the solicitation issue date may be considered for evaluation purposes but may lessen the overall relevancy rating for that project. Projects must be complete and operational to be considered relevant. An Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract may be submitted only if a single task order could be considered similar to this project. Task orders may not be combined in order for the project to be considered similar. NOTE: Renovation projects will NOT be considered similar in size or scope to the solicited requirement.

5.1.2 Projects considered similar in size shall include construction of a microgrid demonstrating the following size elements. Sizes greater than those identified below will be considered similar in size:

- Installation & construction of 0.5MW/1.0MWH Battery Energy Storage System (BESS)

- Installation of 9 kV distribution line

- Install of 415/230V transformers

- Reciprocating internal combustion engine (RICE) and Gas Turbine generators

5.1.3 Projects considered similar in scope shall include construction of a microgrid demonstrating the following scope elements:

- Underground electrical conductor feeds

- Photovoltaic (PV) array installation

- Information and Communication Systems

- Commissioning of Microgrid systems

- Environmental Compliance

- Cybersecurity

5.1.4 The prime contractor must have self-performed at least 15 percent of the direct contract labor (including testing and layout personnel), exclusive of other general conditions or field overhead personnel, material, equipment, or subcontractors to be considered similar.

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

a) Previous work on projects in Kuwait.

b) Previous work with USACE/NAVFAC.

c) Previous work on a military installation.

5.1.6 The following information shall be provided for each project:

a) Project Title, Location, and Contract Number/Unique Identifier

b) Current percentage of construction complete and the date it was or will be complete

a. For projects that are not yet complete, provide description of work remaining to be completed.

c) Scope of the project, to include purpose/use of facility

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

e) Type and percentage of work that was self-performed

f) Two references for the project, with emails and telephone numbers

5.1.7 For this factor, also include any ratings, letters, awards, etc. that support past performance on these projects. Any of this information that is submitted shall clearly identify to which of the submitted projects it pertains. A sample Past Performance Questionnaire is attached for your convenience. If used, the Past Performance Questionnaire must be submitted by the offeror with the proposal submission and not sent directly to the agency from the reference. For each project, the offeror may provide information on problems encountered on the identified contracts and the offeror’s respective corrective action.

NOTE: For purposes of evaluating past performance, the Prime Contractor is defined as the contractor identified in Block 14 of the Standard Form 1442. Projects performed by contractors other than the offeror, including, but not limited to, teaming partners, subcontractors, sister or parent companies, and affiliates will not be evaluated for past performance, unless those other contractors are part of a joint venture offeror as demonstrated by a signed joint venture agreement. If more than one contractor is listed in Block 14, then a signed joint venture must be submitted with the proposal and the joint venture shall be registered as such in the System for Award Management (SAM). However, each party of the Joint Venture (JV) must submit their own Unique Entity Identifier Number (formerly known as DUNS) with the JV proposal. Projects performed by other contractors than the offeror, such as teaming partners or subcontractors, will not be evaluated for past performance, unless those other contractors are part of a JV offeror as demonstrated by a signed JV agreement. If the offeror represents the combining of two or more companies as a JV for the purpose of this RFP, each company in the JV may submit project examples, but the total submitted by the JV will not exceed three (3).

6.0 Volume I – Factor II: Management Approach

The Management Approach factor is comprised of two (2) elements which are the Management Approach Narrative and Schedule Narrative. Please note there will only be a single rating for the factor based upon the evaluation of both elements in accordance with the criteria in section 6.2.

6.1 Submission Requirements:

6.1.2 Management Approach Narrative: Provide a narrative for the project that describes how your labor, resources, designers, subcontractors, and material suppliers will be managed, supervised, coordinated, and used to ensure successful completion of the project. The Management Approach shall include the following information:

Discuss the key members of your project delivery team, including your quality control manager and team, major subcontractors, and how they’ll work together to streamline construction and deliver a successful project. Staffing of the field office – explain who will be located at the field office, the proposed location of the office, and the planned timeframe to establish the office.

Identify the personnel who will be located on-site during the construction. There shall be at least 1 person, fluent in the English language, available at the field office during all working hours and available via cell phone 24 hours, 7 days per week for emergency circumstances.

Identify significant areas of risk or resource constraints and provide your plan for mitigating these risk/constraints during contract performance.

Discuss the key subcontractors you will utilize to accomplish this work and how they will be managed.

Plan for completing work on a U.S. Base in Kuwait with emphasis on offeror’s understanding and ability to meet visa and work permitting requirements/process. The plan must demonstrate an understanding of host nation visa and work permit requirements and explain in detail how the offeror intends to fulfill these requirements. Plan must include a discussion on how you will mitigate any delays in meeting host nation requirements and subsequent delays in contract performance.

Plan for obtaining access to the site (registration of workers) and controlling access to the site during construction.

Ability to comply with security and host nation requirements

6.1.3 Schedule Narrative: Based on the project budget and scope, provide a schedule narrative describing the construction sequence/process for successful completion of the project (Construction, Commissioning, and

Close-Out) within the duration shown in FAR 52.211-10. At a minimum, the Schedule Narrative shall address the timing and process(es) necessary to complete the key activities indicated below:

Long Lead Items (3 months or greater)- Submittals, Procurement and Delivery Pre-Construction Submittals and Government Review Workforce mobilization activities Coordination of new construction to maintain ongoing operations Identification and procurement of Permits Commissioning Activities and Critical Submittals Project Closeout and achievement of substantial completion.

6.2 Evaluation Criteria:

The SSEB will be using the Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method table in section 4.5 to evaluate the Management Approach. The management Approach narrative will be evaluated based on the level of understanding of the work and the involvement the contractor will have in the management, oversight, control, and coordination of the work performed during construction of the project. Narratives that demonstrate a thorough understanding of the project requirements and provide a thorough approach for successfully managing the solicited project and/or mitigating project specific risk items may be rated more favorably by the SSEB.

The schedule narrative will be evaluated based on the understanding of events identified in paragraph 6.1.3 above and the offeror’s capability to complete the schedule within the contract duration. Narratives that demonstrate a thorough understanding of the schedule impacts of the key activities and provide a thorough approach for successfully completing the solicited project within the contract duration may be rated more favorably by the SSEB.

NOTE: The SSEB will evaluate the offeror’s schedule using calendar days, not dates.

7.0 Volume II - Price and Proforma Information

7.1 Tab A - Standard Form 1442 and Proposal Price Breakout Schedule.

7.1.1 Submission Requirements:

The offeror shall complete and submit Standard Form 1442 and the Proposal Price Breakout Schedule.

Both of these forms are included in this solicitation.

The Offeror must also provide the following information:

i. An explanation of what activities make up the Offeror’s Mobilization and Demobilization costs.

ii. The Offeror’s estimated cost of Defense Base Act (DBA) insurance for this project.

7.1.2 Evaluation Criteria:

The price will be evaluated on base proposal plus all options. The price will be evaluated by the Contracting Officer/SSA for fair and reasonableness through the use of a price analysis. Price will also be checked for unbalancing of line items. Offerors are cautioned to distribute costs appropriately.

7.2 Tab B – Joint Venture and Mentor-Protégé Agreements

7.2.1 Submission Requirements:

If more than one contractor is listed in Block 14, or the offeror listed in Block 14 is a joint venture (JV), the offeror shall be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) as a legal entity separate from the individual joint venture members. However, each member of the JV must submit its own Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) with the proposal. A copy of the offeror's signed joint venture agreement shall be submitted with the proposal.

In addition to the joint venture agreement, small business offerors submitting a proposal as a Mentor- Protégé JV under the SBA Mentor-Protégé program (MPP) shall submit a copy of their SBA-approved Mentor-Protégé agreement.

7.2.2 Evaluation Criteria:

This information will be used for the purpose of completing the Pre-Award Survey and will not be rated.

Small business joint venture agreements must comply with the relevant regulations in Title 13 of the Code of Federal Regulations in order for an offeror to be eligible for any small business set-aside acquisitions and/or small business-related price preference.

7.3 Tab C – Evidence of Ability to Obtain Bonding and Proof of Financial Ability

7.3.1 Submission Requirements:

A. Financial Capability. Submit Proof of Financial Ability (Most recent financial statement covering assets and liabilities). Include the name, address and telephone number of the offeror’s banking institution. If the offeror is a joint venture, submit this information for each joint venture member.

B. Bonding Capability. Submit information showing the offeror's ability to be bonded for this project.

Include the name, address and telephone number of the offeror’s bonding company.

Bonding capability shall be submitted electronically per ELECTRONIC PROPOSAL SUBMISSION and addressed to:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Louisville District Attn: William B. Gevedon 600 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Place Louisville Ky, 40202

7.3.2 Evaluation Criteria:

Offerors are required to submit proof of their ability to obtain the required financial assurance instrument as outlined in "Performance Surety Form" which is included in this solicitation. Acceptable surety for performance and payment bonds in may come in the form of commercial surety bonds, irrevocable letters of credit, or other acceptable surety under FAR 52.228-15, which is included in this solicitation. In accordance with DFARS 232-072 Financial Responsibility of Contractors; the contracting officer will use the policies and procedures therein to determine the financial capability of all offerors. The surety or bank shall attest to the offeror’s ability to obtain bonding or satisfactory Irrevocable Letters of Credit (ILCs) in the amount of 20% of the total proposed contract price for each bond for the duration of the contract performance period. Performance and payment bonds must be supported by acceptable security as defined in FAR 28.201. A letter of commitment from an acceptable surety as defined in FAR Subpart 28.2 will provide acceptable proof of the offeror’s ability to obtain the required coverage. Only a (U.S.) federally insured financial institution may confirm the offeror’s ability to obtain an ILC.

Offerors must submit proof of their ability to obtain the required surety to receive an “Acceptable” rating.

The guidance below should assist the offeror in determining what it must submit as proof:

The evidence of ability to obtain adequate surety must come from an entity that would be acceptable as the surety during contract performance. Accordingly, a letter from a bank that is not (U.S.) federally insured would not be adequate proof of ability to obtain surety without an accompanying letter from a federally insured financial institution that would confirm an ILC issued by the bank that is not federally insured.

Similarly, a letter from a commercial surety bond broker would not be acceptable; a letter from a U.S.

Treasury‐listed bonding company is required to prove ability to obtain commercial surety bonds.

With respect to individual sureties, offerors should be mindful of the requirement to prove, and not merely allege their ability to provide the required surety. For example, in order to prove ability to obtain surety through an individual surety’s pledge of assets, an offeror would have to provide both proof of sufficient assets and a letter from an authorized representative of the individual surety stating the availability of the assets as security for the performance and payment bonds under the contract resulting from the solicitation and its/his/her intent to pledge the assets as such, along with evidence of the authorization of any individual signing such a letter in a representative capacity.

Similarly, to prove ability to meet the surety requirements with certified checks or money orders, the contractor would have to provide both proof of a sufficient bank balance and a letter from an authorized representative of the entity in whose name the balance is deposited, stating both the availability of the funds as security for the performance and payment bonds under the contract resulting from the solicitation and the accountholder’s intent to use the funds to provide a certified check or money order, along with evidence of the authorization of the individual signing the letter to bind the accountholder.

Ultimately, the performance and payment bonds or ILCs must secure the performance and payment obligations of the contractor under the contract resulting from the solicitation. As long as this is the case, who funds the performance and payment sureties (for example, whether it is a joint venture offeror itself or only one of the coventurers in a joint venture offeror) is, generally, not a matter of concern to the Government.

Note that the Government has not determined it to be impracticable to obtain surety, or to provide performance and payment bonds from U.S. Treasury-listed bonding companies for the contract that will result from the solicitation. Offerors should not expect the surety requirements of the contract to be waived or reduced or commercial surety bonds issued by non-U.S. Treasury-listed companies to be accepted. Note also that a bank letter of guaranty or other bank guaranty (that is not an ILC conforming to the requirements of FAR 52.228-14) will not be an acceptable form of surety for the contract. These same requirements that will apply to the sureties required for the contract will apply in the evaluation of this factor.

Offerors that have any doubt as to whether or not their contemplated submissions will meet the requirements of this factor should use the vendor inquiry process to obtain clarification.

7.4 Tab D - Pre-Award Information

7.4.1 Submission Requirements:

A. The offeror shall submit one completed copy of the included Representations and Certifications.

B. The offeror shall submit the following information:

a) Number of years the firm has been in business

b) Name, address and telephone numbers of two credit/trade references

c) A list of present commitments, including the dollar value

7.4.2 Evaluation Criteria:

This information will be used for the purpose of completing the Pre-Award Survey and will not be rated.

7.5 Tab E – Joint Contingency Contracting System (JCCS) Registration Requirements

REGISTRATION / SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: Failure to have an active and completed registration in any one of the following databases at the time of Bid may deem the offeror “nonresponsible” in accordance with FAR Part 9 and ineligible for award. Information contained within an offeror’s registration must be current and valid. The responsibility of maintaining current information contained in an offeror’s registration rests solely on the offeror.

a. System for Award Management (SAM): https://sam.gov Unless an exemption applies, Government contractors must be registered in the SAM and complete required representations and certifications annually. FAR 52.204-7 requires offerors to be registered in SAM at the time of bid and to continue to be registered until time of award, during performance, and through final payment.

b. Offeror must be registered in Joint Contingency Contracting System (JCCS): https://www.jccs.gov/ If an offeror is a joint venture (JV), the JV entity must have a valid registration representing the JV as one business/firm/entity. This is applicable to SAM and JCCS. The JV and all businesses/firms/entities that are a member of the JV must have separate SAM and JCCS registrations. The Government will not accept separate registrations and licenses for each separate entity representing the JV in lieu of the JV itself being registered.

7.6 Tab F: Kuwait Commercial Registration Certificate (Business License)

An offeror must provide a copy of a current Kuwait Commercial Registration Certificate (business license) in the offeror’s name in English or translated into English. In the alternative, if the offeror’s licensure or authorization to perform construction in Kuwait, permitting it to perform the work required by this solicitation, is in some form other than a Commercial Registration Certificate, the offeror must provide documentary proof of each and every element of such licensure or authorization and a full explanation as to how its licensure or authorization, currently in effect, complies with the laws of Kuwait. The requirement of the previous sentence applies to any form of licensure or authorization other than a Commercial Registration Certificate in the name of the prime offeror itself (the same legal entity), including the commercial registration of one or more co-venturers in an offeror that is a joint venture if that is sufficient for performance of the resulting contract under the laws of Kuwait. Any licenses or certifications must be current at the time of proposal submission, and current throughout the Period of Performance of the contract.

W912QR24R0014

(End of Summary of Changes)