Attachment__13_Question_and_Answer_Response_26_Feb_15.pdf

SOLICITATION FA2521-14-R-0018 – ATTACHMENT 13

Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineer Requirements (SABER)

QUESTIONS & ANSWER RESPONSE

26 Feb 2015

Question 1: “The referenced section states: “All text, including table and figure identifiers, shall be indexed and

100% searchable text. All text shall be displayed as a font and not displayed as a bitmap in any proposal volume or appendix to facilitate the ability to copy and paste to another document..” We would like to include in Volume III some snapshots (exhibits) of client commendation letters and CCASS evaluations that we do not have the native files for. We have PDF versions of these documents, which we can convert into JPG images, but neither format would be word-searchable. We cannot convert the text in these documents to a font without completely re-creating them, which would diminish the integrity of the material being presented. Please clarify that it would be acceptable if the figure identifier (e.g., “Exhibit 1-1, Customer Letter of Appreciation for FA1111-11-D-1111”) is searchable, although the words in the exhibit itself are not.”

Answer 1: Applicable to Vol III exhibits only - It is acceptable if the figure identifier is searchable although words in the exhibit itself are not searchable (i.e. pdf copies of CCASS evaluations/customer appreciation/reference letters)

Question 2: The referenced section states: “All text, including table and figure identifiers, shall be indexed and 100% searchable text. All text shall be displayed as a font and not displayed as a bitmap in any proposal volume or appendix to facilitate the ability to copy and paste to another document..” There are several pages in an offeror’s response that require signatures (i.e., the SF1442, Amendments, and cover letter). For the electronic copies, would 45 CONS make an exception for the “100% searchable text” requirement for these pages, which will likely be scanned copies?

Answer 2: All paper copies shall have wet signatures. Electronic copies will not be required wet or digital signature therefore 45CONS will not make an exception for 100% searchable text requirement.

Question 3: “The referenced section requires offerors to provide a PDF version of Volume I and a PDF version of

Volume III. In some cases, an electronic signature (an Adobe e-signature) is used to approve documents when it is not feasible to obtain a wet signature. When this approach is used, the Adobe document is protected and cannot be integrated into another PDF file. For example, if an RFP Amendment is signed using an Adobe e-signature, that

Amendment cannot be then inserted into a combined PDF file for all of Volume I. Additionally, it will not be possible to set the all of the security options/setting for that e-signed PDF file to “allowed” as required by this paragraph. For the electronic copies of Volume I, would 45 CONS please consider making an exception to the requirement for a combined PDF version of Volume I which has security settings for all pages set to “allowed”? If pages of an offeror’s response include an e-signature, PDF files for those pages could be included as separate files on the CD.”

Answer 3: All paper copies will have wet signatures. Electronic copies will not be required wet or digital signature therefore 45CONS will not make an exception for 100% searchable text requirement.

Question 4: “Will the Government allow teaming agreements in lieu of Joint Ventures? If so, will the past performance of the non 8(a) team member be considered for evaluation? Included is a copy of two forms

(Subcontractor Consent sample form and Client Authorization Letter) that have been used on another Air

Force solicitation for your review and to request these be acceptable forms to be used if teaming agreements and/or major subcontractors can be used to utilize past performance.

I have included Subpart 9.6 - Contractor Team Arrangements from the FAR.

Subpart 9.6-Contractor Team Arrangements 9.601 Definition.

"Contractor team arrangement," as used in this subpart, means an arrangement in which-

(1) Two or more companies form a partnership or joint venture to act as a potential prime contractor; or

(2) A potential prime contractor agrees with one or more other companies to have them act as its subcontractors under a specified Government contract or acquisition program.

9.602 General.

(a) Contractor team arrangements may be desirable from both a Government and industry standpoint in order to enable the companies involved to-

(1) Complement each other's unique capabilities; and

(2) Offer the Government the best combination of performance, cost, and delivery for the system or product being acquired.

(b) Contractor team arrangements may be particularly appropriate in complex research and development acquisitions, but may be used in other appropriate acquisitions, including production.

(c) The companies involved normally form a contractor team arrangement before submitting an offer. However, they may enter into an arrangement later in the acquisition process, including after contract award.

9.603 Policy.

The Government will recognize the integrity and validity of contractor team arrangements; provided, the arrangements are identified and company relationships are fully disclosed in an offer or, for arrangements entered into after submission of an offer, before the arrangement becomes effective. The Government will not normally require or encourage the dissolution of contractor team arrangements.

9.604 Limitations.

Nothing in this subpart authorizes contractor team arrangements in violation of antitrust statutes or limits the

Government's rights to-

(a) Require consent to subcontracts (see Subpart 44.2);

(b) Determine, on the basis of the stated contractor team arrangement, the responsibility of the prime contractor (see

Subpart 9.1);

(c) Provide to the prime contractor data rights owned or controlled by the Government;

(d) Pursue its policies on competitive contracting, subcontracting, and component breakout after initial production or at any other time; and

(e) Hold the prime contractor fully responsible for contract performance, regardless of any team arrangement between the prime contractor and its subcontractors.”

Answer 4: The prime who is 8(a) may team with a non 8(a) as long as the prime meets the Limitations of subcontracting rule. A joint venture and a mentor protégé agreement must be approved by SBA, AF, or DoD. An approved 8(a) agreement can prime with a non 8(a) as long as the limitation of subcontracting rule is met. The solicitation states 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. If this is a teaming agreement with the past performance from the subcontractor (other than 8(a)), the subcontractor's past performance will not be considered as highly as the principle offeror.

Question 5: “Section L-3 paragraph d states “that all proposals should be delivered to the Points of Contacts listed above” (i.e. in paragraph b). The Points of Contacts listed in paragraph b have different addresses. Please confirm what address the proposal should be sent to. Also please confirm that the address provided is also an address that can be used for proposals being delivered via FEDEX.”

Answer 5: Proposals shall be sent to the address listed for the CONTRACT SPECIALIST. This address can be used for proposals being delivered via FEDEX.

Question 6: The response to question #1 states that Bid Guarantee to be included in Volume 1 of the proposal.

Shouldn’t it be letter from the surety? If there is a bid bond/guarantee required, how much should be bonds be for?

Answer 6: It should be a fully executed Bid Bond. FAR 52.228-1, incorporated in full text under Section L, states the bid bond amount.