Attachment__11_Question_and_Answer_Response_6_Feb_15.pdf

SOLICITATION FA2521-14-R-0018 – ATTACHMENT 11

Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineer Requirements (SABER)

QUESTIONS & ANSWER RESPONSE

6 Feb 2015

Question 1: Competition is limited to 8(a) firms serviced by region IV limited to the state of Florida only and other

8(a) firms with a bona fide place of business in the competitive area. Our firm has a construction office at Cape

Canavernal. Does this office qualify as a bona fide place of business and does it permit our firm to propose on FA2521-

14-R-0018 SABER?

Answer 1: Unless the firm has a Bona Fide Office approved by the SBA's North or South Florida District Office they would be in eligible. Therefore, the firm must provide you with an approved Bona Fide Office letter from

SBA's North or South Florida District Office.

Question 2: Section L-2 instructions for Volume III – Past Performance, paragraph a, states that “PAST

PERFORMANCE WILL BE EVALUATED ON THE PRMARY OFFEROR ONLY.” However, Section M (last sentence of paragraph f in the Factor 2, Volume III – Past Performance subsection) states that “In addition, past performance regarding predecessor companies or key personnel (i.e. Onsite Program Manager) who have relevant experience, that will perform major critical aspects of the requirements WILL NOT be considered as highly as past performance information on the principle offeror.” We are concerned that 8(a) firms who have sister or predecessor companies (firms that were managed by the same people who are managing the primary offeror, using the same processes and procedures) that performed similar contracts recently will not be able to have all of their relevant past performance taken into consideration. Considering that the government may benefit from experience that a SABER contractor has gained on contracts executed by sister companies or predecessor companies within their organization, would 45CONS consider revising the RFP to indicate that Past Performance contracts performed by predecessor or sister companies might be rated equally to those performed by the principal Offeror if a connection can be established through an organizational roadmap? The language below, used in recent USAF RFPs, could be used to implement this change to the solicitation’s instructions for Volume III. Organization Structure Change History— Organizational

Structure Change History. Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant present or past efforts or between conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this acquisition. To facilitate this relevancy determination, include in this proposal volume a "roadmap" describing all such changes in the organization of your company. As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevance of any efforts you identify for past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment.

Since the Government intends to consider present and past performance information provided by other sources as well as that provided by the offeror(s), your "roadmap" should be both specifically applicable to the efforts you identify and general enough to apply to efforts on which the Government receives information from other sources.

Answer 2: “PAST PERFORMANCE WILL BE EVALUATED ON THE PRIMARY OFFEROR ONLY.” has been removed from Section L. Section M remains unchanged.