Q_A_12_10_2022_0009.pdf

Document (RFP, Attachment, etc.) Section (B, C, D, E, etc.) Clause/Paragraph Title Line NumbComment/Recommendation/Question FINAL ANSWER/COMMENT Does the solicitation allow an offer comprised of all Commercial Items, including hourly commercial services?

Yes

If yes, please confirm that Commercial Items, including hourly commercial services are not subject to the solicitation’s cost breakdown requirements and should be, as customary, substantiated by other means such as a price analysis to demonstrate price reasonableness.

Price reasonableness will be determined by labor hour by labor categories. Sample task orders will be evaluated on level of effort and commercially available items required in the government SOW.

DRAFT_RFQ_140G0122R0010_Clauses Section L Factor D: Cost/Price Proposal 4010-4032

In light of the Government’s desire for a commercial, or partial commercial solution, would the government please confirm that Commercial Items are not subject to the solicitation’s cost breakdown requirements and should be, as customary, substantiated by other means such as a price analysis to demonstrate price reasonableness?

Price reasonableness will be determined by labor hour by labor categories. Sample task orders will be evaluated on level of effort and commercially available items required in the government SOW.

DRAFT_RFQ_140G0122R0010_Clauses Section L, Sub Factor C-1 3868

The DRFQ states, "The Offeror shall submit a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) relevant projects that best demonstrate your experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP for IaaS and/or PaaS." Please clarify that each Cloud Experience reference must cover IaaS and/or PaaS and is similar in scope to both the SOO and the RFP for Iaas and/or PaaS?

U.S. Government expects that the contracting team will select relevant prior experience examples. Those prior experience examples may be the same or different for the submitted past performance examples from past contract work.

This line was corrected from the DRFQ to state: "The Offeror shall submit a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) relevant projects that best demonstrate your experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the SOO for IaaS and/or PaaS."

Section L Corporate Experience 3901-

Section B states the entire contract minimum and maximum. The minimum is a guarantee that the Government intends on issuing over multiple task orders.

The Government intends on issuing task orders worth a minimum of $10 Mil and not to exceed $1B.

These minimum and maximum values for this contract are separate from Corporate Experience. Bidding vendors should provide their corporate experience for contracts equal to or exceeding $5M for efforts similar in scope to the requirements of this RFP.

Factor B Contract Minimum and Maximum Amounts 29

DRAFT_RFQ_140G0122R0010_Clauses Section L, Factor B Proposal Format and Submission Instructions (Modified)

3478-

In Section L, Lines 3478 and 3479, the Government states “Cross-referencing within a proposal volume across Factors or Sub-Factors is not permitted.” To aid the evaluation process, will the Government allow for cross referencing?

No.

DRAFT_RFQ_140G0122R0010_Clauses Section L

Sub Factor A-4.1 Day One Task Order #1:

CHS II Transition, Sub Factor A-4.2 Sample Task Order #2: National Water Information System, Sub Factor A-4.3 Sample Task Order #3: Data Lake

4289-4308

We had difficulty crosswalking all Section M evaluation factors for Task Orders #1 - #3 against items required in the Section L instructions (and vice versa). Will the Government consider revising Section L and M clauses related to Task Order responses to more clearly show how required response elements will be evaluated?

No. This was previously answered and published in Amendment 4 on October 14, 2022.

Q_A_10_14_2022_0004 A-4.2 Requirements and Capabilities Page 17, third to last row

Can the government provide more information on what components and size of the WQP system are in cloud and what components are on-premise?

This is addressed in the updated sample task order.

In Section L, for Corporate Experience, Lines 3901 and 3902 state “Relevant for the prime contractor is defined as a contract equal to or exceeding $5,000,000 for efforts similar in scope to the requirements of this RFP a contract equal to or exceeding $5,000,000.” However, in Section B, Line 29 states “Minimum of $10 Million.” If the minimum value for work to be performed under this contract, is $10 million, will the Government adjust the value related to Corporate Experience to be the same?

DRAFT_RFQ_140G0122R0010_Clauses Section L Factor D: Cost/Price Proposal 4010-4032

DRAFT_RFQ_140G0122R0010_Clauses

Q_A_10_14_2022_0004 A-4.3 A-4.3 Sample Task Order #3: Data Lake Page 17, last row

Can the government provide more information on the footprint of Data Hub or components already in CHS II cloud?

This is addressed in the updated sample task order.

Request that the Government allows NAICS code 541519, with the size standard in number of employees vs the stated 518120, which has a review size standard of $35M.

NAICS Code 518120 is the most appropriate and approved code. This was previously answered and published in Amendment 4 on October 14, 2022.

When reviewing the requirements, we noted that there is no pricing for Cloud consumption, just labor. Is it your intention for CHSIII to be a Cloud resale or does DOI intend to consume Cloud services under FCHS or another vehicle?

It is the intention of the Government for CHS III to be a Cloud resale.

The two contracts--FCHS II and CHS III--are two separate, unrelated contracts. The two contracts represent different business models. The DOI FCHS II contract will be available for use by DOI customers as well as by other external Federal customers. The CHS III contract will only be available for use by internal DOI customers. The DOI FCHS II contract will be a multiple award contract where DOI CHS III is single award and seeking multiple industry partners to provide a variety of cloud service offerings to include professional services. USGS has developed an Enterprise Architecture with it current Cloud (CHSII) contract offering. USGS seeks to expand upon that business model and EA environment for the CHSIII award.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ SECTION L - Instructions, Conditions, VOLUME I: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL FORMAT 3216-3217 Given the number of requirements to address, and in order to provide sufficient detail on our approach, will the Government consider an increase in page count for Subfactor B-1 Project Management from 10 to 15 pages?

Sub Factor B-1: Project Management will be changed from 10 to 15 pages.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ L, Factor C-1 & C-2 Past Performance 3629-3630

If the Government continues to require three contracts from the prime and from each significant subcontractor, including each reference cited in Factor C-1, does the Government intend to receive up to 10 pages from the prime and an additional 10 pages for each significant subcontractor?

No. This was previously answered and published in Amendment 4 on October 14, 2022.

DRAFT_RFQ_140G0122R0010_Clauses Section L Factor D: Cost/Price Proposal 4010-

In light of the Government’s desire for a commercial, or partial commercial solution, would the government please confirm that Commercial Items are not subject to the solicitation’s cost breakdown requirements and should be, as customary, substantiated by other means such as a price analysis to demonstrate price reasonableness?

The Government is interested in the cost breakdown of CSP cloud services, but does not have an interest in evaluating other SaaS commercial items, such as software licenses, which would be evaluated on a task order basis once the contract is awarded.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ D D-6 372-3731

Often commercial subcontractors, as defined in FAR 2.101, refuse to divulge cost information to any entity (Prime or Government) as they are generally exempt from this type of requirement. It is possible many commercial subcontractors (including CSPs such as AWS, MS, and Google) will elect to no bid if they are required to divulge cost information.

To leverage best in class commercial offerings and solutions, the offeror kindly requests that this requirement is removed for any non-CAS covered subcontractors.

This was previously answered and published in Amendment 4 on October 14, 2022. The solicitation has been changed removing language for submission in a sealed envelope. If a subcontractor does not wish to divulge proprietary cost information to the prime contractor, the subcontractor may submit their information directly to the Contracting Officer at gs_chs@usgs.gov.

To further reiterate, ALL proposals shall be submitted electronically only. No paper proposals (in whole or part) will be accepted.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ D D-10

3772-

"Offeror shall provide a price proposal which shall reflect discounted open market firm-fixed pricing for all labor categories that may perform services under the master IDIQ SOO and firm fixed price and cost breakdown for Sample Task Order 1, Sample Task Order 2, and Sample Task Order 3."

1) Since this is a single award IDIQ, to ensure equity for all potential users of the IDIQ, we recommend that the rates bid at the IDIQ level represent the best value to the government without a need for discounting.

Discounting at the task order level could lead to discrepancy in pricing across the USGS and DOI.

"Discounted" is being removed. Offeror shall provide a price proposal which provides open market firm-fixed pricing for all labor categories that may perform services under the master IDIQ SOO.

Attachment D - Sample Task Order Transition - Final

A-4.1 Sample Transition Task Order: CHS II Transition

The task order is listed as labor hours, however it appears that there will be ODCs required as well. Will the government confirm that this TO should actually be a T&M type TO?

This will be updated to a T&M type TO, which should include labor hours, infrastructure/CSP platform costs, and any other anticipated costs, (e.g., software license renewals).

Attachment E - Sample Task Order

NWIS_WQP - FINAL

A-4.2

Sample Task Order #2: Services supporting a Multi-agency Water Quality Portal (WQP) for National Water Information System

(NWIS)

The task order is listed as labor hours, however it appears that there will be ODCs required as well. Will the government confirm that this TO should actually be a T&M type TO?

This is a labor hours TO. There will not be any additional ODCs for this TO.

Attachment F - Sample Task Order Data Lake - FINAL

A-4.3 Sample Task Order #3: Data Lake The task order is listed as firm fixed price, however it is also listed as labor hours in the 140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ, line 3446 as labor hours. Will the government clarify which type of contract TO3 is?

Task Order 3 is firm fixed price and has been updated. In addition, Firm Fixed Price task orders shall have a price breakdown so that the Government can see how the FFP was derived.

Are you able to please provide us with a list of the servers being used for this program and the RAM associated with them? This information is vital in helping us provide the most accurate pricing information to our CSPs and Integrators for them to submit with their proposals.

This is a snapshot in time. Across all CHS, we have over 1000 virtual servers with over 700 virtual servers running at any given time. A spreadsheet will be uploaded to the Reading Room.

140G0122R0010 Final RFQ FACTOR D: COST/PRICE PROPOSAL (D-7)(D-8(D9) 3736-3761

…"Proposal shall include a complete price break-down and narrative, as detailed in paragraph D-5, and provide hours by Task Order WBS, by contractor, by labor category, by month.".

Will the government provide a Task Order pricing template for the Offerors to complete in order to provide total price detail in a consistent formate to the government? Specifically, (1) Given that the Task Orders are Labor Hour (LH), how should the Offeror propose ODCs, such as AWS hosting costs in the Labor Hour Pricing Models? Should the Task Order be Time and Material (T&M) without ODCs not be priced at this time? (2) Will the government provide a Task Order Pricing Template for the Offerors to complete in order to provide Total Price detail in consistent format to facilitate ease of proposal evaluation?

No specific pricing template is being provided for task orders. It is the offerors determination on developing their own pricing detail.

The only template provided is at the main IDIQ to provide a list of labor categories and the firm fixed price rate.

Attachment D p.4, Souce/End Point Devices Are there any estimates or measurements for egress? Egress may fall into various categories including but not limited to regular egress, interconnect egresss, VPN egress, inter-regional egress, etc.

This is a growing, dynamic program and the U.S.

Government is interested in the negotiated rates for the future. Any estimate provided is simply a snapshot in time, not necessarily reflective of the future measurements for egress. On average this can be 337 TB/month over the past year.

Attachment D p.4, Souce/End Point Devices Attachment D lists 802 EBS volumes - but does not provide a break down of what storage class those EBS volumes use which is a significant determinant of price.

This information has been added to Sample Task Order 1.

Attachment D p.4, Souce/End Point Devices There are 802 EBS volumes but there are no metrics on snapshots or where they're stored

A spreadsheet will be uploaded to the Reading Room.

Attachment D p.5, Souce/End Point Devices There are 12 redshift clusters - but no sizing or performance guidances (IE how much data do these clusters hold?)

This information has been added to Sample Task Order 1.

Attachments E, F N / A

Attachments E and F heavily reference Shared Services from the Day 1 Task Order - but the Day 1 Task order only references a copy of the service Catalog. Are shared services accounted for in the existing technical requirements or is more information needed?

“Shared services” refers to those defined in the Transition Task Order, as well as those that have been provided in the Industry Day slides and published in the Reading Room.

Attachments D, F N / A Sample Task Orders D and F do not list list availability requirements (99, 99.9, 99.99) - what are the availability requirements for each of these task orders?

Vendors should refer to the Service Level Agreement (SLA) Requirements, provided in Task Order D. The requirements are variable, depending upon the application. Prime integrator should offer what the CSP platforms advertise commercially.

Attachment F p.2 / Priority 3- Trusted Digital Repositories

L1 Trusted Digital Repositories require an inventory of all physical media utiilized including hard disks. Object storage backends in the cloud are enormous in scale and constantly changing - the inventorying of hard drives is opaque to service consumers. Is secure Object Storage in the Cloud sufficient for TDRs?

Yes

Attachment F p.3 / Dremio Is Dremio operated on-prem or in the cloud? Currently in the cloud

Final RFQ SECTION F - Deliveries or Performance Please provide clarification on option years.

The CHS III contract will be a 5-year base, and three 2-year option periods.

Final RFQ Please provide clarification on where to insert CSP pricing in the response.

This should be included with your price proposal, per any contract teaming agreement.

RFP Section C 4.0 Scope 199-202

Please provide clarification whether the government is requesting all of the Cloud Services to be contained within the CSPs GovCloud offerings at contract award, to allow for all workloads up to FedRAMP High in the future and approximate timeframe for the High Requirement.

We are currently FedRAMP Moderate, but considering the length and scope of the CHS III contract, there may be a future need for FedRAMP High requirements.

Questions and Answers dated 10/14/2022 Page 10 of 44 Last three Q & As on the page.

The government answered many of the questions with respect to the topic of FedRAMP, with the following response. "We are currently FedRAMP Moderate, but considering the length and scope of the CHS III contract, there may be a future need for FedRAMP High requirements." Would you consider mandating the CSP deploy DOI workloads in a Government-specific cloud environment vs a commercial environment? This would allow easier migration between environments, as well as eliminating egress charges for transferring data between those environments.

Contract teams should propose the best flexibility and elasticity to the Government. The Government works with external collaborators, such as academia.

General Question Does DOI have a preference as to whether the cloud-management tools are run in an on-premises environment or in the cloud itself, and can manage both on-premisies and cross cloud environments.

USGS is currently using cloud-management tools in the cloud, but the Government is open to other innovative, commercial solutions.

General Question Since DOI has deployed a suite of datacenter management tools today, will you clarify that your preference is to use those same tools to manage your cloud environments?

Generally, no. Any deviation will be defined in a future task order specific requirement.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ General N/A N/A Is this solicitation document a Request for Quote (RFQ) or Request for Proposal (RFP)?

Request for Proposal (RFP)

Attachment D, CHS II Transition Requirements "The Contractor shall provide the current list of cloud services and capabilities …"

Will the Government please clarify the period of performance for Task Order 1?

The U.S. Government anticipates the transition should range between 4 and 12 months, depending upon the proposed CSP(s).

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section L Section L Table GS2150 3495-

Ref: Section L GS2150: Will the Government please consider increasing the page count for Sub Factor B-1: Project Management from 10 pages to 20 pages to allow sufficient space for offerors to address the requirements?

Could the Government also consider modifying Section L table GS2150 to indicate this would be in addition to the maximum of 5 pages of detailed position descriptions that may be included in an attachment and not applied to the page limitation (ref: lines 3495-3496)?

Sub Factor B-1: Project Management will be changed from 10 to 15 pages.

GS2150 table has been changed to reflect 15 pages.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section M Evaluation Factors/Basis for Award 3860 -

The solicitation states, "When making the best value determination, only those Offerors who receive a rating of “High Confidence or Some Confidence” for Factors A and B will be considered. The Government will assess its level of confidence that the offering contractor will successfully perform all requirements in regard to Factors A and B." Will the Government please define the rating scale for Factors A and B by specifying all the possible ratings and their definitions?

No.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section M Sub Factor A-1 Technical Approach 3887 -

The solicitation states, "The Government shall evaluate the contractor proposal on Technical Management Practices by using the following factors: . . ."

Will the Governmnt please clarify whether this evaluation factor is for Sub Factor A-1 (Technical Approach) or Factor B (Management Approach)? This is unclear as written, (i.e., "Technical Management Practices" includes both Technical and Management).

This evaluation factor is for Sub Factor A-1, Technical Approach.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR A: TECHNICAL APPROACH Sub Factor A-1 Technical Approach 3890-

The solicitation states, "Proposals shall be evaluated on an approach to managing work across task orders, ensuring overall contract performance through integrated and/or common processes, procedures, and communication across task orders."

Per the answer to question 270 for the Draft solicitation, should this evaluation criterion be included for Factor B: Management Approach vs.

Factor A: Technical Approach?

Yes, this will be modified in an amendment and should be included for Factor B: Management Approach.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section L Sub Factor A-5 Section 508 Standards 3448 -

The solicitation states "Provide an Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) for each commercially available Information and Communication Technology (ICT) item offered through this contract. Create the ACR using the Voluntary Product Accessibility Template Version 2.1 or later, located at https://www.itic.org/policy/accessibility/vpat..."

Given that the Government is requesting only "labor" for this proposal submission/ contract, would the Government please confirm that they are only looking for offerors to provide the process for developing ACRs for Section 508 Standards? If the Government wants Offerors to include ACRs, could you clarify for which ICTs and, also, if these can be provided outside the 5-page page count.

The Government confirms that Offerors should provide their process for developing ACRs for Section 508 Standards. This section of the proposal submission is outside the 5-page page count.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section L; Section M Subfactor B-1 Project Management - Management Processes

3539 -

Section L, Sub Factor B-1 Project Management, Management Processes requires offferors to address communication management. Section M, Sub Factor B-1 Project Management, Management Processes does not include communication management. Will the Government please clarify whether communication management will be evaluated in Sub Factor B-1 and, if so, how?

This will be modified in an amendment.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section L Subfactor B-1 Project Management - Management Processes

3488 -

The solicitation states, "Provide information that demonstrates the Offeror’s ability to plan for the proper staffing based on the technical approach proposed phasing required by the contract and show technical and management leads across all task orders and scope of work." Per the answer to question 258 from the Draft solicitation Q&A, we recommend the Government remove "proposed phasing."

Yes, this will be modified in an amendment.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section M Subfactor B-1 Project Management 4025 -

The solicitation states, "The Offeror shall be evaluated on the proposed organization and the management processes that will be used for performance of the contract. Summarize the Project Management Plan. At a minimum, the Offeror shall include the following management methods: .

Will the Government please clarify the evalution criteria for Sub Factor B-1 Project Management? The RFQ appears to contain instructions rather than evaluation criteria and the instructions differ from the instructions for Subfactor B-1 in Section L.

Yes, this will be modified in an amendment.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section L; Section M

GS2150 Proposal Format and Submission Instructions (Modified) August 2001;

Subfactor B-2 Key Personnel; Subfactor B-2 Key Personnel

Technical Proposal Format table;

3565 - 3570;

4099-

The Volume I: Technical Proposal Format table on page 88 indicates a, 20-page total limit on how these key positions interact to form an effective management team."

Sub Factor B-2 Key Personnel in Section L states, "The Offeror shall provide the name and resume for the individuals proposed to fill the aforementioned key positions. Attach a signed statement of availability for the project, which is included in the 20-page limit. Offerors shall describe and provide a statement of continued availability of individuals proposed, which shall be included prior to submission of any revised final offer."

Sub Factor B-2 Key Personnel in Section M states, "The Offeror shall be evaluated on how these positions interact to form an effective management team (limited to five (5) pages)."

Will the Government please clarify:

- Whether key personnel resumes are included in the 20-page limit

- Whether signed statements of availability are included in the 20-page limit

- Whether offers can submit a single statement of availability with signatures from all the key personnel

- The page limit for describing how the key positions interact to form an effective management team

Key personnel resumes are included in the 20-page limit.

Signed statements of availability are not included in the 20-page limit. The contracting team can determine their preferred approach.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR B: MANAGEMENT APPROAC

Sub Factor B-3 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

3571- 4110-

The solicitation states, “The Offeror shall be evaluated on a QASP that describes its systematic quality assurance methods used by the Offeror to evaluate and validate that the Offeror’s quality control efforts are timely, effective, and are delivering the performance for the stated contract. The Offeror shall be evaluated on specific details of how the Offeror will survey, observe, test, sample, evaluate, and document performance results to determine if performance requirements are being met.”

These requirements are typically associated with a Contractor Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan, since a QASP defines the government’s surveillance criteria and methods. Is the Government expecting a draft (USGS) QASP (structured similarly to Attachment J) or a Contractor QA/QC Plan?

For transparency, the U.S. Government has provided a QASP (see Attachment J) as a sample of how the awardee will evaluated upon commencement of work. The Offeror shall submit a QASP of their own (which may be called a QA/QC Plan), on which they will be evaluated.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section M Sub Factor B-3 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

4112 -

The evaluation criteria appear to be nearly identical to Subfactor B-3 instructions in Section L. Will the Government please clarify the difference between the two?

Section M has been updated accordingly.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section L Sub Factor C-2 Past Performance / (a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

3599- 3602;

3637- 3639;

3678-

How many projects does the Government want to evaluate? Based on the instructions on lines 3599-3602, lines 3637-3639, and lines 3678-3682, vendors are being asked to submit twelve or more relevant projects.

However, in Section M (page 109, lines 4170-4171), the solicitation states:

"Any projects submitted in excess of the five (5) for Experience will not be considered." Could the Government please clarify the total number of projects to be evaluated?

U.S. Government did not ask for submissions of twelve or more relevant projects, but rather specified that projects needed to be a minimum of twelve months in duration.

The Government will review no more than five projects for this section.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section L Sub Factor C-1 Cloud Experience 3604-

As written, the government is limiting experience projects to just those that are completed. Would the government consider changing this requirement to "Projects submitted for the Offeror shall be completed or active within the past five (5) years of the date of issuance of this RFP"?

Yes, this will be modified in an amendment. Projects submitted for the Offeror shall be completed or active (minimum 25% completed) within the past five (5) years of the date of issuance of this RFQ.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section L Sub Factor C-1 Cloud Experience 3626 -

According to the solicitation: "The Government shall assess the breadth, depth, relevance, and currency of the Offeror’s experience based on data provided in Corporate Experience."

Can the Government confirm the clause "in Corporate Experience" in this instruction means that offerors will address this information in Attachment A?

Information technology is experience related to cloud projects, not corporate experience, and should be used for Attachment A.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section L Sub Factor C-1 Cloud Experience 3642

Per the solicitation: "Corporate experience information is limited to a maximum of two pages per contract."

Could the Government confirm the two pages of Attachment A satisfies this requirement for "corporate experience information?" Or is this instruction asking for two additional pages of corporate experience information beyond the two pages of Attachment A? Please clarify.

Information technology is experience related to cloud projects, not corporate experience, and should be used for Attachment A.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section L Sub Factor C-2 Past Performance / (a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

3650 -

Based on our experience, we recommend that the solicitation be changed to instruct all PPQs to be forwarded directly to USGS by the offer's evaluators.

This will be modified for clarification in an amendment.

PPQs should be sent directly to USGS by the Offeror's evaluators.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section L Sub Factor C-2 Past Performance / (a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

3663 -

The solicitation states: "Offerors shall provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken. Offerors shall address any adverse past performance issues"

In which sub-factor does this content belong? We would have assumed this requirement is addressed within Attachment A (which is requested in sub-factor C-1), but this instruction is for sub-factor C-2.

Attachment A is referencing experience information under sub-factor C-1. Sub-factor C-2 is for past performance. Experience represents the support services the Offeror has provided; past performance is how well an Offeror has conducted work.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section L Sub Factor C-2 Past Performance / (a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

3678 -

The paragraph which starts on line 3678 appears to be inconsistent with the previous instructions in the solicitation. Would the government consider removing or clarifying this paragraph?

Past performance and prior experience are separate sub factors and it is the determination of the offeror to provide what they submit for both criteria.

Attachment A is referencing experience information under sub-factor C-1. Sub-factor C-2 is for past performance. Experience represents the support services the Offeror has provided; past performance is how well an Offeror has conducted work.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section L Sub Factor C-2 Past Performance / (a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

3678 -

Per the solicitation: "In addition to the information requested above, Offerors (prime and subcontractors) shall provide past performance information for three contracts for which the Offeror was the prime Contractor or subcontractor that have been delivered in the past five years from the proposal submission due date and that completed a minimum of twelve (12) months or is/will be the prime contractor or subcontractor that are currently in the development or implementation phase."

Can the government clarify whether you're asking for another three project references beyond the three to five asked for in lines 3599-3602 (resulting in eight or more references to be evaluated)? If so, is the offeror to complete an Attachment A for these additional three along with a CPAR or PPQ for these additional three? Do these additional three count against volume page limits?

Past performance and prior experience are separate sub factors and it is the determination of the Offeror to provide what they submit for both criteria.

Attachment A is referencing experience information under sub-factor C-1. Sub-factor C-2 is for past performance. Experience represents the support services the Offeror has provided; past performance is how well an Offeror has conducted work.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section L Sub Factor C-2 Past Performance / (a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

3688 -

Rather than providing all relevant contracts within the last five years (which could result in an unreasonably large number of references), could the Government please clarify that this instruction only applies to the Attachment A references cited in Subfactor C-1?

The paragraph states three contracts that have been delivered within the last five years.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section M Factor C: Past Performance and Cloud Experience, Corporate Experience

4147, 4173 -

The solicitation states, "The Offeror shall be evaluated on corporate experience on an adjectival rating system." It also states, "Offerors who submit relevant projects that demonstrate experience self-performing relevant features of work may receive a higher rating than those who do not demonstrate self-performance." Will the Government please provide the possible adjectival ratings and their definitions?

No.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section M Sub Factor C-1 Cloud Experience 4147 What is the range/scale of the adjectival rating system? This information will not be shared.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section M Sub Factor C-1 Cloud Experience 4164 -

How will the government determine relevancy? Lines 3601 - 3602 define "relevancy" as: "a relevant project is further defined as a project similar in size, scope, and complexity to the SOO." Later, on Lines 4139 - 4142 "relevancy" is defined as: "projects that are similar in size, scope, complexity, and difficulty to the RFP for IaaS and/or PaaS." Will the government please provide a single definition of relevancy?

This will be modified to remove "difficulty."

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section M Sub Factor C-1 Cloud Experience 4173 -

Would the government please confirm that "self-performing" work is that which was performed by the Offeror as a Prime?

The U.S. Government is interested in experience as it relates to any contract team arrangement that the Offeror may have.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section M Sub Factor C-2 Past Performance

4181 - 4183 & 4195 -

There is no "Factor H" in the solicitation. Please clarify these two references.

This should be Factor C and will be modified.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ and Attachment L

Section M Factor D: Cost/Price Proposal 4247-

Are bidders allowed to modify Attachment L to account for how individual Offerors may load burdens onto direct cost?

Attachment L is being revised so that offerors are to only provide fully burned rates.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ and Attachment L

Section M Factor D: Cost/Price Proposal 4258-

Attachment L does not provide a template for providing a price proposal for the individual Task Orders. Are bidders allowed to submit an Excel price proposal in the format of their choosing for these Task Orders?

Attachment L is for the main contract, not specific task orders. Offerors may submit Excel price proposals for the task orders in the format of their choosing.

Attachment C - Small Business Participation Commitment Document

Section M Sub Factor E-1 Small Business Participation Commitment Document

4288 and

Prescribed small business percentages are clear, but specific dollar amounts will be dicated by task orders that are issued on the contract over the 11 years of performance. Will the Government provide a plug number, such as the contract minimum of $10 million, to use for demonstrative purposes to illustrate how much Small Business subcontracting will occur?

The contract minimum represents the minimum guaranteed amount for the selected vendor. The single integrator vendor is expected to manage the contract, including subcontractors, toward the small business percentage goal.

General N/A N/A N/A

The RFQ refers to "Cloud Support Services Provider", "Cloud Hosting Provider", "Cloud Service Contractors", "Cloud Hosting solutions Contractors", "CHS Provider", "Reseller", and "DOI-wide CSP". Will USGS consider providing definitions so offerors can better understand which requirements apply to specific players participating in the SOO?

These terms are not defined in the NIST Glossary at (https://csrc.nist.gov/glossary?index=C).

All references to "cloud broker," "cloud provider," etc., are according to the NIST (https://csrc.nist.gov/glossary?index=C). "Cloud Hosting Solutions Contractor," "Cloud Hosting Provider", "Cloud Service Contractors," "CHS Provider," "Reseller," and "DOI-wide CSP" are the same as "cloud provider" as defined by

NIST.

Attachment D A-4.1, Requirements and Capabilities

4.a N/A How does the Government intend to contract for IaaS and PaaS as stand-alone services? Will the Government procure IaaS and PaaS services on a passthrough basis (like a resale distribution)?

The U.S. Government expects that IaaS and PaaS will be procured through a resale distribution, but Offerors may provide other recommendations for flexibility as cloud offerings evolve in the future.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Section C 61

Does the Government prefer we refer to this opportunity as "Cloud Hosting Solutions (CHS) III," or "Cloud Hosting Services (CHS) III"? Please confirm that we should refer to this opportunity as "Cloud Hosting Solutions (CHS)

III."

It is Cloud Hosting Solutions (CHS) III.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR C Sub Factor C-2 Past Performance 3678 - 368

The Government states that "In addition to the information requested above, Offerors (prime and subcontractors) shall provide past performance information for three contracts for which the Offeror was the prime Contractor or subcontractor…"

Does the Government intend that a team of contractors will provide three to five past performance references from the Prime and each Subcontractor? That is, if a team is composed of the Prime and 3 subcontractors, does the Government intend the team to submit between 12 and 20 references or a combined total of 5?

The Offeror should submit a combined total of three to five references to represent its contract team.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ

Attachment F - Sample Task Order Data Lake - FINAL

FACTOR A

Attachment F

A-4.3 Sample Task Order #3: Data Lake 3446

For Sample Task Order #3: Data Lake, Line 3446 states "This task order is labor hours." Attachment F: Sample Task Order Data Lake FINAL states "This task order is firm fixed price." Can the Government clarify if Task Order #3: Data Lake is labor hour or firm fixed price?

Sample Task Order #3: Data Lake is firm fixed price.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR A

A-4.1 Sample Task Order #1: CHS II Transition

The description of Sample Task Order #1: CHS II Transition states that "The response to this Task Order is expected to be issued at time of contract award." Please confirm that this Task Order will be awarded along with the overall IDIQ.

Sample Task Order #1: CHS II Transition is for evaluation purposes. A transition task order is expected to be issued after the IDIQ contract is awarded.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ

Attachment D - Sample Task Order Transition - FINAL

FACTOR A

A-4.1 Sample Task Order #1: CHS II Transition

Sample Task Order #1: CHS II Transition has been specified as "Labor Hour."

It was noted at the IDIQ level that ODCs / cloud spend would be denoted at the task order level. Is it the Government's intent to have Offerors price in cloud ODCs based on the list of Source/End Point devices provided on pages 4-6 of Task Order #1?

Yes.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR D TO#1, TO#2, and TO#3 Does the Government require a not to exceed ODC CLIN on each of the task orders?

No, not for the three sample task orders.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR D TO#1, TO#2, and TO#3 Does the Government require a not to exceed travel CLIN on each of the task orders?

At this time, for the three sample task orders, there are no anticipated travel requirements.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ

Attachment D - Sample Task Order Transition - FINAL

FACTOR A

A-4.1 Sample Task Order #1: CHS II Transition

Does the Task Order #1: Transition scope require transfer of any existing AWS accounts under CHS II?

Yes.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR D Cost/Price Proposal

3738- 3740, 3738- 3740, 3756-

Can the Government provide price proposal templates (3) for each sample task order to include CLIN structure (FFP deliverable schedule for FFP task orders, T&M labor breakdown for T&M task orders, ODCs, Travel NTE, etc).

Offerors may submit Excel price proposals for the task orders in the format of their choosing.

Attachment C -Small Business Participation Commitment Document

Sub Factor E-2 Small Business Subcontracting Plan; B.

Quantitative Participation of Small Businesses

Proposed Total Contract Value 4331

The Government has specified that "Plans shall reflect a small business subcontracting requirement of at least 20% of the total contract value."

Can you confirm that we should use the ceiling value for the Total Contract Value?

The ceiling value may be used as an assumption value.

The single integrator vendor is expected to manage the contract, including subcontractors, toward the small business percentage goal.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR A Sub Factor A-1 Technical Approach 3890-3892

Sub-Factor A-1 evaluation criteria includes: " Proposals shall be evaluated on an approach to managing work across task orders, ensuring overall contract performance through integrated and/or common processes, procedures, and communication across task orders." This criterion seems to map to the Communication Management instructions (3539-3541) under Sub Factor B-1: "The Offeror shall describe the approach to managing work across task orders, ensuring overall contract performance through integrated and/or common processes, procedures, and communication across task orders."

Would the Government consider including this criterion in Sub Factor B-1 instead of Factor A-1?

This will be modified in an amendment.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ

FACTOR A

FACTOR B

For Factors A & B, can the government clarify what "high confidence," "some confidence," "low confidence," and "neutral confidence" mean?

There's no reference for these measures in Section M.

This information will not be shared with Offerors.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR D For Factor D, how will the Government calculate the total evaluated price?

Price reasonableness will be determined by labor hour by labor categories. Sample task orders will be evaluated on level of effort and commercial available items required in the government SOW.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR D

Is the total evaluated price calculated by adding the proposed prices for the 3 task orders?

No.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR C

Sub Factor C-2 Past Performance

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

3648 - 364

Instructions for Sub Factor C-2 state that Offerors must submit a CPAR evaluation or a past performance questionnaire. Since there is no page limit for questionnaires, would the Government confirm that there is also no page limit for CPAR evaluations?

Yes, there is no page limit.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR A Sub Factor A-1 Technical Approach 3906-3908

Sub-Factor A-1 evaluation criteria include "Proposals shall be evaluated on the approach of the assignment of staff to work to ensure the proper skills are present and available. The evaluation will consider the approach to completing a Basis of Estimate." Should this criterion be included in Factor B: Management Approach instead of Factor A?

This evaluation criterion should reference the technical skills of the contractor staff, which is in line with Sub Factor A-1. Factor B: Management Approach references overall management processes and team communication.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR A Sub Factor A-1 Technical Approach 3910-3911

Sub-Factor A-1 evaluation criteria include " Proposals shall be evaluated on knowledge and understanding of risk management and document how risk management will be implemented across projects throughout the extent of the contract." Should this criterion be included in Factor B: Management Approach instead of Factor A?

This evaluation criterion should reference risk management of the technical approach, which is in line with Sub Factor A-1. Factor B: Management Approach references overall management processes and team communication.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR A Sub Factor A-1 Technical Approach 3913-3916

Sub-Factor A-1 evaluation criteria include "Proposals shall be evaluated on the effectiveness of the proposed communication mechanisms in providing timely, accurate, and relevant information to the USGS regarding task activities and the overall contract performance. The proposal will be evaluated on the contractor’s approach to compare previously communicated work plans to actual performance." Should this criterion be included in Factor B: Management Approach instead of Factor A?

This evaluation criterion should reference communication mechanisms of the technical approach, which is in line with Sub Factor A-1. Factor B: Management Approach references overall management processes and team communication.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR A Sub Factor A-4 4001 and 4 Sample Task Orders #2 and #3 are "expected to be a sample task order."

Please confirm that Task Orders #2 and #3 are sample task orders and will not be awarded at time of ID/IQ award.

Confirmed.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR C

Factor C: Cloud Experience and Past Performance

3680, 4209

The instructions for Sub Factor C-2 limit past performance to contracts delivered in the past five years (3680). However, the evaluation criteria for Sub Factor C-2 limit past performance to contracts delivered in the past three years (4209). There are similar discrepancies (3 yrs vs 5yrs) between the draft RFQ Q&A answers and the final RFQ for Sub Factors C-1 and C-2.

Can the Government confirm that Offerors may submit contracts delivered within the past five years for both Sub Factor C-1 and Sub Factor C-2?

Yes.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ

Factor A-4.1 Factor A-4.2 Factor A-4.3

A-4.1 Sample Task Order #1 A-4.2 Sample Task Order #2 A-4.3 Sample Task Order #3

3398- 3418- 3440-

Proposal instructions for TO#1, TO#2, and TO#3 state "It is requested that a schedule primarily focused on major milestones and key deliverables be provided in soft copy using Microsoft Project (exported to PDF)."

Please confirm that Offerors are allowed to submit the required Microsoft Project PDF schedules for TO#1, TO#2, and TO#3 as attachments to the technical volume and are excluded from page count.

Confirmed.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR D Cost/Price Proposal 3772-3774

This paragraph states - "Offeror shall provide a price proposal which shall reflect discounted open market firm-fixed pricing for all labor categories that may perform services under the master IDIQ SOO and firm fixed price and cost breakdown for Sample Task Order 1, Sample Task Order 2, and Sample Task Order 3." However, Sample Task Orders 1 and 2 are Labor Hour contract type. Please clarify this statement.

This paragraph has been updated to read "Offer shall provide a price proposal which provides fixed priced labor rates for all labor categories that may perform services under the master IDIQ SOO. "

Sample task order price proposals submission information is set forth in D-7, D-8 and D-9.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ

FACTOR D (D-6) and/or FACTOR E (E-2)

VOLUME II: Business Management Proposal Format

3216-3217

Should the Small Business Subcontracting Plan reside in Factor D (D-6:

Subcontractor – Supporting Cost Proposal, including Pricing Modal, and Small Business Subcontracting Plan (if applicable)) or Factor E (E-2: Small Business Subcontracting Plan)?

Small Business Subcontracting Plan shall be submitted under Factor E (E-2). D-6 will be modified to remove Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Attachment Number H SECTION J - List of Documents, Exhibits and Other Attachments

Will the Government please confirm that Attachment H has been provided as a model and offerors may provide a small business subcontracting plan that contains the same information in Attachment H in a different format as part of our proposal submission?

No. Offerors should complete Attachment H. The DOI Form provided under Attachment H is utilized so that all vendors are evaluated on the same scale.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ Attachment L Hourly Rates Would the Government consider including unburdened rates, Overhead, G&A, Profit and Burdened rates detail only for the Base Year with an escalation % for the subsequent years?

Attachment L has been modified for offerors to provide only fully burdened hourly rates per year. It is up to the offeror to escalate their fully burndened hour rates per year.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR D: COST/PRICE PROPOSAL D-10 3772-3774

The Government states: "Offeror shall provide a price proposal which shall reflect discounted open market firm-fixed pricing for all labor categories that may perform services under the master IDIQ SOO..."

The provided price proposal Attachment L template expects a new rate build-up (i.e., not from a GWAC contract such as GSA MAS). Can the Government clarify how you expect to see a discount on a rate build-up?

"Discounted" is being removed. Offerors shall provide a price proposal which provides open market firm-fixed pricing for all labor categories that may perform services under the master IDIQ SOO.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR D Attachment L Can the Government update Attachment L to include fringe costs?

Attachment L will be modified so that only the burdened rate is to be provided.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR D Attachment L Can the Government update Attachment L to include facility costs?

Facilitiy costs are for cost type contracts. This is not a cost type contract. It is a commercial contract.

140G0122R0010 FINAL RFQ FACTOR A Sub Factor A-5 Section 508 Standards 3450 - 345

Offerors are required to submit an Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR), using the Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT), for each commercially available Information and Communication Technology (ICT) item offered through this contract. Since the VPAT is a lengthy document and Offerors may have to submit multiple VPATs, would the Government consider excluding VPATs from the page limit for Sub Factor A-5?

Yes, the VPAT will be excluded from the page limit for Sub Factor A-5.

RFP

Section B - Supplies or Services/Pricing

Other Direct Costs (ODCs), 41-46 Is the contractor allowed to add M&S/G&A to ODCs in accordance with our accounting procedures?

yes

Attachment D - Sample TO Transition What is the government's plan for transitioning all support elements for the existing work to the new contract, to include…