Questions_Answers_19PM072Q0012.pdf

MOBILE & DATA SERVICES FOR U.S. EMBASSY PANAMA

RFQ# 19PM00726Q0012

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS #1

1. Question: U.S.-Based Prime Integrator. Would the Department permit a U.S.-based telecommunications, technology, or managed-services company to serve as the prime contractor and single point of accountability while obtaining underlying regulated mobile services from one or more telecommunications carriers properly licensed to operate in Panama?

Answer: Please refer to DOSAR Clause 652.242-73 Authorization and

Performance (AUG 1999).

2. Question: Integrated Service Model. Would the Department consider a solution in which the U.S.-based prime assumes end-to-end responsibility for program management, telecommunications integration, carrier coordination, service levels, cybersecurity, C-SCRM, billing, reporting, incident management, escalation, disaster recovery, and continuity of operations?

Answer: The government will evaluate all compliant proposals that meet solicitation requirements stated in the Request for Quote documentation in accordance with the stated evaluation criteria.

3. Question: Single Contractual Umbrella. Would the Department consider it advantageous for the Embassy to obtain all required telecommunications and related managed services through a single accountable prime contractor rather than independently managing multiple underlying service providers?

Answer: With exception to response to question 25, the same responses to questions

no. 1&2.

4. Question: Telecommunications Consolidator. Would the Government accept a

U.S.-based telecommunications consolidator capable of coordinating multiple carriers and communications technologies while providing the Embassy with one contract, one program-management structure, one service-management framework, and one escalation mechanism?

5. Question: Multiple Licensed Carriers. May the prime contractor establish arrangements with more than one licensed Panamanian telecommunications carrier to improve coverage, availability, redundancy, and continuity of operations?

6. Question: Single-Carrier Dependency. Given the mission-critical nature of

Embassy communications, has the Government evaluated the operational risk of relying upon a single local mobile-network operator for voice, data, messaging, roaming, restoration, and emergency communications?

Answer: The Government's internal operational risk assessments fall outside the scope of this solicitation. The solicitation remains unchanged.

7. Question: Multi-Carrier Resiliency. Would the Government consider favorably an architecture that enables critical communications to utilize multiple qualified networks when the primary carrier experiences an outage, congestion event, cyber incident, infrastructure failure, natural disaster, or regional degradation?

Answer: Same response as question no. 2.

8. Question: Independent Communications Paths. Would the Department permit the prime contractor to incorporate additional commercially available communications technologies and service providers that are operationally independent of the primary cellular network where doing so strengthens survivability and continuity of operations?

9. Question: Additional Qualified Subcontractors. May an offeror incorporate qualified telecommunications, infrastructure, managed-service, network, cybersecurity, or emergency-communications subcontractors when those providers materially improve resilience, geographic coverage, security, restoration capability, or network diversity?

Answer: With exceptions to response to question 25, the same response as question

no. 2.

10. Question: Common Points of Failure. Would the Department consider requiring offerors to identify whether proposed primary and backup communications paths share towers, fiber, backhaul, network cores, data centers, commercial power, facilities, or other common points of failure?

Answer: No, the Department does not consider it mandatory for offerors to identify common points of failure. However, offerors need to provide evidence that they maintain disaster recovery and network redundancy plan in the event of an emergency or major service disruption. Refer to Section 3 – Page 40 – line # 10.

11. Question: Communications Resiliency Plan. Would the Government consider requiring offerors to provide a Communications Resiliency and Continuity of

Operations Plan identifying primary, secondary, and emergency communications paths and procedures?

Answer: No. See response to question 10.

12. Question: Continuity During Major Events. Should proposed solutions specifically address continuity of Embassy communications during natural disasters, prolonged power failures, fiber cuts, network-core failures, major cyber incidents, civil emergencies, or periods of extraordinary network congestion?

Answer: Offerors do not need to address each scenario individually. Offerors must provide evidence of their disaster recovery and network redundancy plan (Section

3, Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Paragraph A.3, Item 10). The Government will evaluate that evidence under the "Network Resiliency & Continuity" subfactor of the Technical Factor (Section 4). After award, the Contractor must meet the survivability and recovery requirements in Section 1, Paragraph 13. These include providing a high-level overview of its recovery and continuity capabilities upon

Government request and identifying emergency escalation procedures and points of contact for major outages.

13. Question: Embassy Compound Resilience. May offerors propose alternate communications paths and complementary technologies designed to maintain communications within the Embassy compound if normal terrestrial cellular connectivity becomes unavailable or materially degraded?

Answer: Not necessary, alternate communications paths within the embassy compound are not necessary due to other technologies already implemented.

14. Question: Geographic Resilience. May offerors propose multiple carriers or complementary communications capabilities to improve service availability in locations where the primary terrestrial carrier has limited coverage or experiences an extended outage?

Answer: Offerors may propose complementary communications capabilities to improve service availability in locations where the primary terrestrial carrier has limited coverage or experiences an extended outage.

15. Question: Mission-Critical Personnel. Does the Department anticipate identifying certain personnel, offices, operational teams, or devices requiring enhanced communications redundancy or continuity capabilities?

Answer: No, the Embassy does not anticipate identifying certain personnel requiring enhanced communications redundancy.

16. Question: U.S.-Based Program Management. Would the Department consider the availability of U.S.-based program management, contract administration, network-service management, cybersecurity oversight, and executive escalation capabilities when evaluating the overall technical solution?

Answer: With exception to response to question 25, the same response as question

17. Question: Independent Incident Management. Would the Government consider it beneficial for an independent prime integrator to coordinate carrier escalation and restoration activities when the underlying network operator itself is experiencing a service failure?

Answer: The Government does not consider an additional coordination layer beneficial. During a network failure, an intermediary may delay escalation and restoration. This response does not prevent any offeror from submitting an offer.

The prime Contractor remains fully responsible for escalation and service restoration, whether or not it subcontracts any work. This includes the requirements in Section 1, Paragraph 13 and the one (1) hour response time for critical service issues in the Performance Work Statement. Offerors that propose subcontracted network services should describe how their escalation procedures will give the

Government timely and direct access to restoration resources. The solicitation remains unchanged.

18. Question: Carrier Substitution. If an underlying telecommunications carrier becomes unable to meet the Government's security, coverage, performance, resilience, or service-level requirements, may the prime contractor transition affected services to another qualified provider while maintaining continuity of the prime contract?

19. Question: Centralized Carrier Management. May the prime contractor centrally manage provisioning, SIM/eSIM administration, service activation and deactivation, roaming, usage, carrier performance, incident escalation, inventory, and telecommunications expense management?

20. Question: Consolidated Billing and Reporting. Would the Department accept consolidated invoicing and reporting from the prime contractor, provided that all required line-level pricing, usage, call-detail, and other information remains available to the Government?

21. Question: C-SCRM Oversight. Because this solicitation expressly requires completion of Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management documentation, will the Government consider the prime contractor's ability to oversee C-SCRM across all telecommunications carriers, technologies, equipment providers, software providers, and subcontractors supporting the solution?

22. Question: Telecommunications Data. Should offerors identify where

Government account information, usage records, call-detail information, billing records, provisioning information, and support data will be stored, processed, administered, and accessed?

Answer: This is not necessary, based on the requirements of the contract.

23. Question: Privileged Administrative Access. Should offerors describe the controls governing personnel who have privileged or administrative access to

Government telecommunications accounts, SIM/eSIM provisioning, billing systems, network-management platforms, and support environments?

Answer: This is not necessary, based on the requirements of the contract.

24. Question: U.S.-Based Incident Reporting. Would centralized incident, outage, cyber-event, service-degradation, and restoration reporting through the U.S.-based prime contractor be considered an advantageous feature of the proposed solution?

25. Question: Temporary Services Subcontracting Provision. The solicitation states in connection with temporary additional services that "this work shall not be subcontracted." Would the Department clarify whether this restriction applies only to responsibility for managing and fulfilling the temporary-service requirement or whether it also prohibits a prime contractor from obtaining the underlying regulated network service from a telecommunications carrier licensed in Panama?

Answer: This restriction only applies to the temporary services subcontracting provision.

26. Question: Licensed Local Carrier Model. If a U.S.-based prime contractor does not itself possess a Panamanian mobile-spectrum concession, may it satisfy the underlying wireless requirement through properly licensed Panamanian telecommunications providers while remaining fully responsible to the Department for contract performance?

Answer: Same responses to questions no. 1&2.

27. Question: Panama Licensing. Where regulated carrier services are performed by licensed telecommunications subcontractors, may the applicable Panamanian telecommunications licenses and regulatory authorizations be held by those underlying carriers, with the prime responsible for ensuring continued subcontractor compliance?

28. Question: Resilience and Subcontracting. Would the Department clarify that the solicitation's subcontracting provisions do not prevent an offeror from integrating multiple qualified telecommunications and continuity providers where doing so increases resilience and eliminates single points of failure?

29. Question: Small-Business Market Research. The solicitation currently identifies no set-aside. Would the Department consider conducting additional market research to determine whether qualified U.S. small businesses can serve as prime telecommunications integrators for this requirement?

Answer: The Department will evaluate all offers received including those from U.S.

Small Businesses; however, based on DOSAR 619.000(b), the Government represented by US Embassy Panama City has not voluntarily restricted this procurement to Small Business Programs.

30. Question: 8(a) Acquisition. Would the Department consider an SBA 8(a) competitive set-aside if market research demonstrates that qualified 8(a) companies can provide end-to-end prime-contract responsibility using appropriately licensed telecommunications providers and other qualified teammates?

Answer: No, please refer to response to question 29.

31. Question: SBA and Small-Business Coordination. Would the Department consider coordinating with the Department of State's small-business office and the

U.S. Small Business Administration regarding the feasibility of an 8(a) acquisition strategy for this requirement?

Answer: No, please refer to response to question 29.

32. Question: Meaningful 8(a) Role. Would the Department consider an acquisition structure under which an 8(a) prime performs meaningful telecommunications integration, program management, C-SCRM, cybersecurity oversight, carrier management, SLA management, reporting, incident management, billing management, and continuity-of-operations functions while regulated telecommunications services are supplied by appropriately licensed carriers?

Answer: Same responses to questions no. 1,2&29.

33. Question: Limitations on Subcontracting. If this requirement were competed as an 8(a) or other small-business set-aside, how would the Department apply applicable limitations on subcontracting where portions of the requirement necessarily involve telecommunications services obtained from licensed

Panamanian carriers?

Answer: Same responses to questions no. 1,2&29.

34. Question: Treatment of Carrier Costs. For any applicable limitation-on-subcontracting calculation, how would the Department treat underlying carrier charges such as network access, airtime, roaming, spectrum-based services, and regulated telecommunications services?

Answer: All costs shall be accounted for on the pricing table contained in the solicitation, Section 1.

35. Question: CLIN Structure. Would the Department consider structuring CLINs to separately identify underlying carrier services and the prime contractor's program-management, integration, cybersecurity, C-SCRM, reporting, resilience, and managed-service responsibilities if doing so facilitates meaningful U.S. small-business participation?

Answer: No.

36. Question: U.S. Government Past Performance. Will the Department consider experience managing U.S. Government telecommunications programs, multi-carrier environments, international telecommunications, cybersecurity, and mission-critical managed services when evaluating a U.S.-based integrator?

Answer: Yes, the Government will use past performance information primarily to assess an offeror’s capability to meet the solicitation performance requirements, including the relevance and successful performance of the offeror’s work experience. The Government may also use this data to evaluate the credibility of the offeror’s quotation. Refer to Section 3 – A.3.4. 5th bullet point.

37. Question: Technology Refresh. Under the solicitation's technology-refresh provisions, may the prime introduce additional carriers, communications technologies, infrastructure, or service providers during performance when they improve resilience, security, coverage, capacity, or service quality?

Answer: The contractor may propose for the Government’s technological refreshment substitution or addition for any products provided or services that may become available as a result of technological improvements. Refer to the

Performance Work Statement in Section 1.9 Technology Refreshment.

38. Question: Resiliency as an Evaluation Consideration. Given the mission-critical nature of the requirement, will the Department consider communications resilience, infrastructure diversity, continuity of operations, recovery capability, and elimination of single points of failure when conducting its stated best-value trade-off evaluation?

Answer: The Department will consider communications resilience, infrastructure diversity, continuity of operations, recovery capability, and elimination of single points of failure when conducting its stated best-value trade-off evaluation.

39. Question: Best-Value Trade-Off. May the Government recognize the additional mission value associated with redundant communications paths, multiple providers, independent backup capabilities, centralized program management, and enhanced cybersecurity oversight even where those capabilities are not necessarily represented by the lowest-priced technical approach?

Answer: Additional value capabilities with redundant communications paths, multiple providers, independent backup capabilities, centralized program management, and enhanced cybersecurity oversight will be considered and evaluated.

40. Question: Integrated Resilient Telecommunications Architecture. Given the solicitation's requirements for domestic and international communications, roaming, cybersecurity supply-chain risk management, reliability, customer support, disaster recovery, and survivability, would the Department consider a solution in which a U.S.-based prime telecommunications integrator, including a qualified SBA-certified 8(a) company, provides end-to-end accountability while integrating appropriately licensed Panamanian carriers and additional qualified communications providers into a resilient, multi-path telecommunications environment? If so, would the Department consider clarifying the solicitation's subcontracting, licensing, and small-business provisions to expressly permit such an acquisition and delivery model?

41. Question: For the covered-telecommunications usage threshold in Section 4, how should offerors calculate the “percentage of use” — across the operator's entire national network, or limited to the components that actually route or process the

Embassy's user data traffic?

Answer: The Offeror must attest the percentage of use of covered

Telecommunications equipment/services or critical technology as a substantial or essential component of any system, across the operator’s entire national network.

42. Question: Will the exceptions under FAR 52.240-91(b)(3) - for backhaul, roaming, interconnection, and equipment that cannot route or provide visibility into user data

— be taken into account when determining percentage of use and eligibility?

Answer: No, the Embassy will not take this into account.

43. Question: For an offeror attesting to covered-technology use below 50%, is a robust Reduction/Mitigation/Elimination Plan sufficient to retain eligibility and be evaluated on the remaining technical factors?

Answer: The Embassy will evaluate the offerors submitted Reduction, Mitigation, or Elimination Plan describing how it will reduce, mitigate, or eliminate reliance on covered technology over the life of the contract to retain eligibility and be evaluated on the remaining technical factors.

44. Question: When does the current provider's contract end, and by what date is the new service expected to be fully operational? Is a transition/overlap period permitted where both operators coexist, or is a clean cutover expected at award?

This date is required to design the no-disruption migration plan.

Answer: The current contract ends on December 3, 2026. The new contract needs to start no later than December 4, 2026. If the new contract can start before these days, overlap may be considered to transition to a new provider.

45. Question: The “Exhibit 1 – Data Consumption Statistics” appears as a deleted attachment. Could the Embassy re-issue it or provide historical per-line data consumption, needed to accurately price the unlimited plan with unrestricted hotspot?

Answer: The exhibit was shared with all the pre-proposal meeting participants and can be shared directly upon request.

46. Question: What constitutes acceptable "proof of SAM registration" to submit with the offer: a screenshot of the active status on SAM.gov, the record showing the

UEI/CAGE, or another specific format?

Answer: Yes, a screenshot of the active status on SAM.gov and the record showing the UEI/CAGE are valid methods.

47. Question: What contractor/offer code should the offeror enter on the SF-1449 and throughout the proposal, and in what format does the Embassy expect it?

Answer: Offerors don’t need to fill the ‘Code’ block of 17a. of the SF-1449 form and the proposal.

For the SF-1449 offerors shall complete blocks 17, 24 & 30 at a minimum. Block

24 should list the total value for base year and option years.

Offerors need to fill the 17a. of the SF-1449 form with the name of their company, address and telephone number and UEI code.

It is important to make sure the submission is made in specific size and format; in

MS-Word 2007/2010 or MS-Excel 2007/2010 or Adobe Acrobat (pdf) file format.

The file size must not exceed 30MB.

48. Question: Regarding the 470 voice-and-data lines: (a) should all be quoted under a single plan? (b) what is the current device split between Android and iPhone? (c) are there required device models or specifications?

Answer: (a) The estimated 470 voice and data lines shall be quoted under a single

Unlimited Plan (including Voice & Data) as listed in the Pricing schedule.

(b) device split is irrelevant, primary device is currently iPhone, (c) and all devices are procured by the government separately to contract.

49. Question: Regarding the 40 basic-plan lines: (a) are they quoted with no monthly fee, usage-only? (b) is there a required Android tier or model for these devices?

Answer: (a) The estimated 40 basic plan lines shall be quoted with no monthly fee;

rather you should quote the price per minute among the different SubCLINs,

(b) No

50. Question: The temporary-services description states they may follow either the basic or unlimited plan as needed, but the pricing schedule only allows a single value. How should the price for temporary services be quoted to reflect both plans?

Answer: For the Temporary Additional Services of the pricing charts, it should be the price of the monthly rental of smartphones devices only.

The plan acquired for these devices will be either basic or unlimited and priced according to the CLIN 0001 and 0002 prices quoted.

51. Question: Could the Embassy indicate an average number of temporary-service requests per year, to size the offer accurately?

Answer: In the event that the Embassy would request temporary services the number would be approximately 10. However, the frequency of requests could be years in between.

52. Question: The solicitation mentions "insurance" in the scope and again under item

A of Section 3. Do both refer to the same insurance? Does it mean device insurance or another coverage (e.g., workers compensation / war-hazard)?

Answer: Yes, both refer to workers compensation insurance (FAR 52.228-4 -

Workers' compensation and War–Hazard Insurance Overseas). Based on FAR

52.228-4, if this clause is cited or incorporated in the solicitation, it would point toward the latter — insurance covering the contractor's personnel working in as part of the contract, if required to work on the Embassy compound, not insurance for the mobile devices themselves.

53. Question: Section 3, item 5 requests evidence of personnel, equipment, and financial resources. What specific documents does the Embassy consider acceptable for each category — particularly for financial capability (e.g., financial statements, a bank letter, a line of credit, a credit rating, or an offeror’s statement)?

Answer: For financial capability (resources), offerors may submit financial documents such as: audited financial statements, a bank letter/line of credit confirmation, a credit rating report or an offeror's self-certification/statement.

54. Question: Regarding past-performance references, how many reference letters or client references are required at minimum?

Answer: There is not a minimum number of client references letters. Offerors may submit only relevant references letters of similar past experience.

55. Question: What is the Embassy's expectation regarding the device refresh/replacement cycle during the contract, and on what timeline?

Answer: This solicitation does not include the purchase of devices, so the Embassy has no expectation or defined timeline for a device refresh/replacement cycle during the contract period.

However, regarding the Temporary Additional Services - Monthly rental of smartphones devices, the contractor may propose available devices.

56. Question: Could you please confirm the number of buildings included within the

Embassy compound? Would it be possible to arrange site access for a coverage assessment visit?

Answer: A site visit can be arranged with the awardee after award.

57. Question: Could you please provide the location of the Ambassador's residence in

La Cresta? Is the residence a standalone house? If it is in an apartment building, could you please indicate the building name and floor number?

Answer: Please refer to A.3.14 in Section 3.

58. ATTACHMENT 2 - CYBERSECURITY SUPPLY CHAIN RISK

MANAGEMENT (C- SCRM), SOFTWARE PRODUCER ATTESTATION

FORM. Complete the attached C-SCRM Software Producer Attestation worksheet

(If the offeror is providing any software). Instructions on how to fill both forms can be found on the excel document. Question: If we are not offering any software, do we still need to complete the cybersecurity section?

Answer: If the vendor is not offering any software, then only the completed C-

SCRM Questionnaire (Attachment 1) is required. In lieu of a completed C-SCRM

Questionnaire, the vendor may submit a third party authorizing official conducted assessment, such as ISO 27001, ISO 9000, System and Organizational Controls

(SOC) II, or FedRAMP authorization.

59. Question: In this regard, we would appreciate your confirmation as to whether, considering the nature of the services subject to this tender and the fact that they will be provided 100% from Panama:

• The services qualify for the full exemption from the 2% tax under Section

5000C.

• It is appropriate to submit Form W-14 claiming the full exemption.

• Consequently, no 2% withholding would apply to payments made under the contract.

Answer:

The James Zadroga Act applies to all foreign vendors. However, Section 5000C exempts vendors from countries that have an international agreement with the

United States. Panama currently has such an agreement. Below are responses to each question:

• Full exemption under Section 5000C: Yes. Panama has an international agreement with the United States, so services provided 100% from Panama qualify for the full exemption from the 2% tax under Section 5000C.

• Submitting Form W-14: Yes. To claim the full exemption, offerors must submit a completed IRS Form W-14, available at www.irs.gov/w14. This ensures compliance with FAR 52.229-11.

http://www.irs.gov/w14

• No 2% withholding: Correct. If the offeror submits a completed and valid IRS

Form W-14 claiming the full exemption, the 2% withholding will not apply to payments made under the contract. If the offeror doesn't submit the form, or submits it incomplete, the 2% withholding will apply.

See "Mobile Invitation Cover Letter," page 1, Item #5.

60. Question: Would a U.S. vendor be permitted to submit an offer as the prime contractor and fulfill the telecommunications portion of the contract through an authorized mobile-service provider in Panama?

61. Question: Additionally, would the prime contractor be required to hold its own

Panamanian telecommunications license, or would an agreement or subcontract with a properly licensed local provider satisfy this requirement?

62. Question: Please also advise whether any additional registration, authorization, local business license, or documentation is required for a U.S.-registered company whose owner is a legal resident of Panama and has business operations there.

63. Question: Is this a brand-new contract or if there is (was) an incumbent performing these services. If not brand new, could you please provide the current / previous contract number?

Answer: This is not a brand-new requirement — an incumbent contractor currently performs these services under contract number 19PM0724D0002.