36C10A-19-R-0008-008.pdf

QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES

1. Para 5.2.3.1 and 5.2.3.2 are very hard to discern numbers of various parts needed, i.e., I get the 226 VSATs and corresponding modems. I see 180 multifunction printers (stated, so OK), but the numbers for phones in the first para says 4 analog and 4 SIP, which would be 904 of each; however, next para says 4 and 2. That is OK, but not sure what goes with whom in this. Also states 2 WAPs, and one Tele video, so leads one to believe you want 552 WAP units, and 220 tele video units.

Response: Section 5.2.3.1 only discusses Vehicle Mounted Units, Man Portable Units and Fixed Terminals. Section 5.2.3.2 discusses only First Responder Units.

There are some requirement differences between the two types of units. For example, there is no requirement in section 5.2.3.2 for video conferencing hardware or for a multifunction device.

Paragraph 5.2.3.1 of the Performance Work Statement (PWS) will be changed as follows: The “180 quantity” and the work “fax” will be removed from part M. Part N will be modified to read “1 Ruggedized storage container similar to one described in sections 5.2.3.3 case for each Multifunction Device.” The line “Each MPU shall also include ruggedized hard sided shipping container” will been removed as it was deemed redundant to part N “

No changes were deemed necessary for Section 5.2.3.2.

2. Could you amend the solicitation upon final draft for a different NAICS code? The reasons are as follows:

• The size standard of $32.5M is too small for a deal of this size. Based on the Gov’t wanting to run this as a service, there will be tens of millions of dollars over a long period of time.

• Only a few SDVOSBs would qualify to finance this opportunity as a prime…….and it would immediately impact their status at that $32.5M threshold.

• This is a complicated procurement with multiple OEMs with sophisticated and complicated deployment and service.

• With NAICS code; 517911, General SDVOSB resellers can perform on this contract and accomplish the government desire to upgrade the VSAT system with multiple OEMS and satellite providers. This contract is obviously not solely about more bandwidth. I have attached NAICS code table below for your reference.

Response: VA takes all requests of this nature seriously. However, based on the definitions found in the NAICS Code Manual, the most appropriate NAICS for this procurement is 517410. See excerpt below from the manual.

517911 Telecommunications Resellers

This U.S. industry comprises establishments engaged in purchasing access and network capacity from owners and operators of telecommunications networks and reselling wired and wireless telecommunications services (except satellite) to businesses and households. Establishments in this industry resell telecommunications; they do not operate transmission facilities and infrastructure. Mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs) are included in this industry.

Cross-References. Establishments primarily engaged in--

• Operating and maintaining wired telecommunications networks--are classified in U.S. Industry 517311, Wired Telecommunications Carriers;

• Operating and maintaining wireless telecommunications networks--are classified in U.S. Industry 517312, Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite); and

• Reselling satellite telecommunications services--are classified in Industry 517410, Satellite Telecommunications.

3. To encourage competition, and ensure Best Value to the Government, would the Government consider changing the Set-Aside from SDVOSB to Full and Open?

Response: No. VA has made the determination that there are at least two SDVOSBs capable of meeting this requirement.

The VA has no discretion in this regard. As prescribed in 38 U.S.C. 8127(d), the VA rule of two mandates that the contracting officer “shall award contracts on the basis of competition restricted to small business concerns owned and controlled by veterans if the contracting officer has a reasonable expectation that two or more small business concerns owned and controlled by veterans will submit offers and that the award can be made at a fair and reasonable price that offers best value to the United States.”

4. Development of a Compliant, Compelling, and Quality proposal for a Program of this size requires a minimum of 45 days from release of the Final RFP. As the Draft was released on July 26 and the Final RFP is anticipated on August 2, would the Government consider a submittal date of September 16th?

Response: The solicitation will close on August 23, 2019.

5. Reference Section 5.2.1 Space Segment Bandwidth Requirement & B.4 Table of Deliverables of the PWS. To ensure the offered bandwidth and satellite or satellites are available for the duration of the Base Year and all Option Years, will the Government require the “Proof of satellite coverage statement” as part of the proposal submission?

Response: No, the Government recognizes that satellite bandwidth agreements/negotiations are dynamic and will not require the Offerer to require proof of dedicated bandwidth or interconnection agreements before contract award.

6. Reference Section 5.2.2. Hub Equipment of the PWS. Request the Government please clarify the requirement to provide Qty (1) hub at each teleport. The statement in section 5.2.2. (I) is vague and could be interpreted to require Qty (2) hubs at each teleport.

Response: As described in the PWS there is a requirement for two hub locations.

That means at least two hubs. Part (I) requires that each of those two hubs be internally fault tolerant with redundant components, namely: dual processors;

power supplies; and line cards. An alternate method could be supplying two hubs at each location but that would probably result in a more complex system.

7. Reference 5.2.3.1 VEHICLE MOUNTED UNITs (VMUs), MAN PORTABLE UNITs (MPUs), and FIXED TERMINALS of the PWS. Request the Government please clarify the requirement to submit link budgets with contractor proposals in order to confirm the required performance throughputs can achieved.

Response: The Government does not require the Offeror to submit link budgets.

The Government is well aware of the bandwidth requirements for the transponder and how much throughput each type of unit must be capable of. This does not mean that each unit will be allocated that much bandwidth on a daily basis. The Government will expect an initial link budget from the Offeror and as stated in Section 5.2, Para 7, this may be adjusted to reflect operational needs. The Government will test each type of unit to ensure that it meets the throughput requirement upon delivery. While the Government is evaluating the proposals each piece of equipment making up the VSAT units will be examined with an eye toward performance and reliability.

8. Does item H “Provide Terminal to Terminal connectivity for voice and video calling” indicate that voice and video must be possible between remotes as a single hop? Or does it indicate that the hub will allow remote to remote communication, but a double-hop is required?

Response: This means that the phones and video units from one VSAT must be able to call the phones and video units on another VSAT unit. As long as it works reliably and with little to no jitter and/or pixelation we don't care about the number of hops.

9. Are toll-free numbers also required for VMU's, MPU's, and fixed terminals?

Response: Yes, the PWS has been edited to require toll free numbers.

10. Is it expected that the existing toll-free numbers will be transferred/ported to the new contractor, or will new numbers be needed?

Response: This requirement will be up to the offeror to decide.

11. Does the VA have to ability to extend the existing contract for 30/60/90 days with the incumbent (and sub-contractors) if needed?

Response: No, the existing contract has no available options.

12. Terminal types and counts are different in the PWS and attachments. Can the VA clarify?

Response: The PWS has been corrected to reflect the correct number of terminal units.

13. Remotes MVC-VSAT78, MVC-VSAT82, and MVAT83 do not have a state listed.

Will the VA provide the state where these are located?

Response: MVC-VSAT78, is located in Evanston, IL, MVC-VSAT82 is located in Henderson, NV, and MVC-VSAT83 is located in Columbus, OH. Corrections have been made to attachments A and B.

14. For final equipment acceptance, does the VA want each terminal tested upon delivery?

Response: Yes.

15. "The contractor shall provide, at a minimum, a dedicated, non-pre-emptible 36 MHz Ku Band transponder for use by the Enterprise SatCom infrastructure throughout the period of performance of this contract. The 36 MHz may be provided by one or more satellites.

Question: How can the bandwidth be provided on one or more satellites if the Government requirement is for a dedicated, non-pre-emptible 36 MHz Ku Band transponder? Is the Government suggesting a vendor propose using more than one dedicated 36 MHz Ku transponder in their managed service offering? How can a vendor be meeting the dedicated transponder requirement without including an additional 36 MHz transponder in their solution? If you are asking for a two-satellite solution, are you asking for two separate dedicated 36 MHz transponders, one for each satellite? Please advise."

Response: The Government requires a total of 36Mhz that is dedicated and non-pre-emptible. This may be split between more than one satellites.

16. The Government anticipates releasing the final RFP one week after release of the DRFP, on or about August 2nd, 2019, with a proposal due date of August 23rd, 2019 (20 calendar day turnaround).

Question: Given the detailed information regarding the locations of the VSAT terminals, age of each terminal variant, and other key transition information was only provided in the DRFP release, will the Government extend the due date for proposals by at least two weeks so the proper level of analysis and transition plan development can take place for inclusion into a vendor’s proposal? Providing only 20 calendar days to respond is just not adequate for this level of technical and programmatic analysis, let alone development of an overall, all-inclusive managed services pricing approach.

Response: The closing remains August 23, 2019.

17. The Base Year period of performance is 12 months, beginning the date of the award.

Question: The way the periods of performance are currently structured injects significant risk into providing the VA with a managed service that includes all the new terminal variants that will be procured, bundled into the pricing for the base year CLIN instead of being spread out over multiple years. By only guaranteeing one year, offerors are at risk of possible cancellation of the contract. If the Government makes the Base Period at least three years with 7 option year periods, this at least guarantees that the VA has the funding to cover the new terminal costs, and those costs can be spread throughout the first three years vs. lumped into the first year. Can the Government change the Base Period to at least three years vs the current single year period?

Response: No, in accordance with FAR 37.106, contracts for services funded by annual appropriations cannot exceed one year.

18. Government equipment shall be located within a locked enclosure accessible by only authorized personnel.

Question: Is a locked cabinet sufficient, or does the VA require the hub equipment to be locked inside of a cage?

Response: A locked enclosure is required. Anything beyond the locked enclosure is at the discretion of the offeror.

19. Each of the two hubs must be fully redundant.

Question: Does the VA require a completely redundant Hub?

Response: Each of the two HUBs must be fully redundant as outlined in the PWS section 5.2.2 I. To clarify we require dual processors, dual power or better, dual fans, dual cards or better.

20. Do the MPUs require 4 SIP phones, 4 Analog phones, and 1 video conferencing unit?

Response: In accordance with PWS section 5.5.3.1. Yes, plus one copier/printer.

21. Please confirm the 50 transit hard cases are total quantity needed for the program, to support MPUs. Please also confirm this requirement is different that the 40 cases mentioned in section 5.2.3.3.

Response: In accordance with PWS section 5.2.3.1 part N will be changed to reflect one each for each unit in section 5.2.3.1. This is separate from the 40 cases in section 5.2.3.3.

22. Will the VA permit the contractor to use utilized timing groups in the hub chassis for other customers, assuming that cards/protocol processors/network equipment will be dedicated to the VA?

Response: No. All hub equipment will be dedicated to VA use.

23. The scope states that the contractor will provide a managed service. It is also stated the no used equipment will be permitted. Will the VA allow used equipment (such as a hub chassis) to provide the managed service?

Response: No, all contractor equipment provided must be new.

24. We understand from the RFP that only a SF1449 is required to be submitted for Volume 4. Does the VA require any additional documentation for this volume (volume 4) aside from SF1449 and amendment acknowledgements? The paragraph also talks about certifications and original signatures, what other documents are required besides the SF1449?

Response: Section E1 of the RFP states, Volume IV shall contain the SF1449 and any proposed terms and conditions and/or assumptions upon which the proposal is predicated.

25. The description for CLIN 3009 states, “Contractor should provide up to 10 additional VMU VSAT terminals …”. All other CLINs for Additional VMU terminals are for 8 VMUs. Will the Government confirm the number of terminals required for CLIN 3009?

Response: CLIN 3009 has been corrected to reflect a quantity of 8.

26. Section 4.1 identifies this managed service has a maximum potential length of 10 years; 1 12 mo base and 9 12 mo options. However, Section 3.0 bullet M, offerors are to price lifecycle refreshes. There is no CLIN in section B.1 to account for lifecycle refreshes. In order to ensure fair competition, and because there is no CLIN to account for lifecycle refreshes, will the Government confirm that Offerors are not to bid lifecycle refreshes at this time, or provide a plug number to all Offerors for evaluation purposes?

Response: This is a managed service contract meaning that the Government will not take possession of any of the equipment. It will be up to the contractor to maintain the equipment and if necessary replace any end of life item in order to maintain the performance standards identified in the PWS. Therefore, any life cycle refreshes required over the 10-year period shall be included in the monthly price for managed services.

27. Section 3.0, Scope, states that the offeror is to replace the existing SATCOM equipment and provide a managed (implied SATCOM) service. However, 5.2.3.1 and

5.2.3.2 have requirements for providing a Router and WiFi Access Points. Would the VA please confirm that offerors are to price AND manage the remote router and WiFi infrastructure as part of the managed service?

Response: Yes, the Contractor must manage the remote router and Wi-Fi infrastructure as part of the managed service.

28. Does the VA require two physical Wireless Access Points OR the capability to operate multiple SSIDs with logical separation between VA and NON-VA users?

Response: Yes, the VA requires two separate Wireless Access Points. The two services may be in geographically separate locations, hence the requirement for two.

29. Would the Wireless Access Points integrate into existing VA wireless controller infrastructure? If so, would the VA please provide details of the existing GFE wireless controller infrastructure?

Response: No, the Wireless Access Points are to be stand alone units. The latency incurred by satellite communications rules out a controller based design.

30. The Ku-Band FRU man-portable terminals shall [Be] able to be connected to an external Ethernet switch via RJ45 copper Ethernet connection. Would the Government please confirm that offeror does not need to price nor manage referenced external (GFE) switch?

Response: The Government confirms that any external network device or other network connected to the VSAT unit will not be configured or managed by the Contractor.

31. The Ku-Band FRU man-portable terminals shall [Be] able to be connected to an external Ethernet switch via RJ45 copper Ethernet connection. Would the Government please confirm that GFE external switch can be utilized for offeror’s SIP and Wireless

AP?

Response: The VA requires the option of connecting the offerors VSAT to a GFE switch or network if needed. The GFE would not be part of the VSAT or part of the offerors solution.

32. The Ku-Band FRU man-portable terminals shall [Be] able to be connected to an external Ethernet switch via RJ45 copper Ethernet connection. Would the Government please confirm that GFE external switch is POE+ capable to power offeror’s SIP and Wireless AP?

Response: The switch required to power the SIP phones provided with the FRU is the offerors responsibility. Should the VA connect the FRU to a GFE switch or network any required POE would be the VAs responsibility and not in scope of the PWS.

33. PWS 5.4.3 explains that FRUs consist of 2 Cisco routers, one for private side (VA) services and the other for public side. Is the offeror to price and manage 2 Cisco routers for FRUs?

Response: Section 5.4.3 has been changed to clarify that for all VSAT units, except for the current FRUs, 2 routers are required. We have removed the Cisco brand name as well. The VA's intent is to separate internal VA traffic from external traffic. The only acceptable common components between the internal VA network and the external network is the satellite modem and the hub at the ground station and even then the traffic must be kept logically separate.

34. The description for CLIN 0001 states, “Contractor shall provide all of the equipment, services, and maintenance, as required by paragraphs 5.1 through 5.7 of the PWS” PWS Section 5.2.3 states, “The Contractor shall replace the existing Enterprise SatCom network hardware and software” CLIN 0001 does not allow for a non-recurring charge for the equipment to be charged. Where are Offeror’s to propose the non-recurring charge to replace the existing network hardware and software?

Response: This is a managed service contract. All costs incurred shall be included in the monthly price.

35. The description for CLIN 0002 states, “As required by 5.2.2.4 of the PWS.” There is no PW section 5.2.2.4.” Will the Government update the reference to 5.2.3.3?

Response: The RFP has been corrected to reference 5.2.3.3.

36. Would the VA clarify what analog interface offerors need to supply, for example, FXS, FXO, etc.

Response: The Government wants the ability to take any home type analog telephone and plug it into the VSAT. We expect dial tone.

37. Would the VA provide guidance as to what will be transported by the analog interfaces, fax or voice?

Response: Voice only, FAX is not a requirement.

38. PWS specifies several deliverables, some of which are post award deliverables provided during the course of the contract, and some of which VA may require as part of an offeror’s submission package. Will the VA identify which PWS deliverables are required to be included in the offeror’s submission package?

Response: The deliverables are due in accordance Section B.4 Table of Deliverables of the Request for Proposal. All of the deliverables are required after contract award.

39. Some deliverables require considerable page count, and to accommodate this, will the VA allow offeror’s to submit a deliverable package as an attachment to Volume I that does not count against page limitations?

Response: See response to question 38 above.

40. PWS states “The Government reserves the right to reject a satellite based on estimated service life and security concerns.” Can the VA elaborate on potential security concerns? Is this related to states of concern / states of ownership, or other?

Response: The VA will not accept the usage of Chinese or Russian built or operated satellites. The VA will not accept the usage of a satellite that is past its projected life expectancy and with less than 15% station keeping propellent available. Should a satellite be past its expected life expectancy and still have transponder redundancy and have more than 15% of station keeping propellent it would still be acceptable. The PWS has been updated to reflect this change.

41. PWS states “The Government reserves the right to reject a satellite based on estimated service life and security concerns.” Will the Government conduct a bidder exchange / evaluation period, where they will notify bidders of any concern with estimated service life and security concerns, so that they may be addressed by providing additional detail or proposing alternate solution?

Response: See response to question 40 above. The Government may award without discussions. Therefore, Offerors should provide their best proposal. However, if discussions are required, offerors may have an opportunity to address weaknesses and deficiencies in their proposal.

42. The description for CLINs x007 states “1000MB UPGRADE TERRESTRIAL LINK” All other references in the RFP and PWS are to a 100 MB upgrade. Will the Government update the CLIN descriptions to say “100MB UPGRADE TERRESTRIAL

LINK”??

Response: The RFP has been corrected.

43. PWS 5.3 states: Phase-One Operations shall consist of concurrent operations to transition the new Enterprise SATCOM system along with the existing SATCOM system (terminals and satellites). The new Contractor shall be responsible for operating and maintaining the existing SATCOM system. Will the Government provide complete access to the existing network resources at no cost to the new contractor?

Response: The Government would grant the same access to the same resources for no cost.

44. These statements seem to be in conflict. PWS 5.2.3 states "The two-day on-site training (5.6.1) is priced separately and should not be included in the price of the VSAT terminal" Solicitation descriptions for applicable x009 and x010 for new terminals states " Contractor shall provide up to 8 additional VMU VSAT terminals in accordance with paragraph 5.8.3 of the PWS. The price shall include initial training" Can the VA clarify, is the two-day on-site training priced separately, or should we include training with new terminals?

Response: Initial training shall be included with all new terminals and should be included in the managed services monthly price. The PWS has been changed to reflect this as well as remove the reference to 5.6.1. Also, refresher training in accordance with 5.7.2 is separately priced in the schedule.

45. When will the contractor be required to be verified and listed in the Vendor Information Pages? This is a time intensive process, so requiring VIP listing prior to contract award may eliminate some bidders. Would the VA consider requiring VIP listing at time of contract award rather than proposal submission?

Response: In accordance with Vets First Contracting Program (Public Law 109- 461), VIP verification is required at time of proposal submission and award.

46. When will the contractor be required to be verified and listed in the Vendor Information Pages? This is a time intensive process, so requiring VIP listing prior to contract award may eliminate some bidders. Would the VA consider requiring VIP listing at time of contract award rather than proposal submission?

Response: See response to question 45 above.

47. In evaluating the requirements, there are significant portions of service and products that are only available from large businesses (bandwidth, equipment, terrestrial connection). These components will likely reach or even exceed 50% of the contract value. How will the VA account for this imbalance in asking the awardee to meet small business workshare requirements? Would the VA consider excluding those portions from the small business requirement?

Response: FAR 52.219-14(c) states:

By submission of an offer and execution of a contract, the Offeror/Contractor agrees that in performance of the contract in the case of a contract for-

(1) Services (except construction). At least 50 percent of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel shall be expended for employees of the concern.

(2) Supplies (other than procurement from a nonmanufacturer of such supplies).

The concern shall perform work for at least 50 percent of the cost of manufacturing the supplies, not including the cost of materials.

(3) General construction. The concern will perform at least 15 percent of the cost of the contract, not including the cost of materials, with its own employees.

(4) Construction by special trade contractors. The concern will perform at least 25 percent of the cost of the contract, not including the cost of materials, with its own employees.

This requirement is a managed service. Only paragraph (1) applies.

Further, SBA has determined that the nonmanufacturer rule is not applicable to service NAICS codes. NAICS code 517410 Satellite Telecommunications as 517410 is unambiguously a service NAICS code.

“This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in providing telecommunications services to other establishments in the telecommunications and broadcasting industries by forwarding and receiving communications signals via a system of satellites or reselling satellite telecommunications.” (emphasis added)

SBA regulation 13 CFR section 121.046, paragraphs (b)(3) and (4) state:

“(3) The nonmanufacturer rule applies only to procurements that have been assigned a manufacturing or supply NAICS code, or the Information Technology Value Added Resellers (ITVAR) exception to NAICS code 541519. The nonmanufacturer rule does not apply to contracts that have been assigned a service (except for the ITVAR exception to NAICS code 541519), construction, or specialty trade construction NAICS code.

(4) The nonmanufacturer rule applies only to the supply component of a requirement classified as a manufacturing, supply, or ITVAR contract. If a requirement is classified as a service contract, but also has a supply component, the nonmanufacturer rule does not apply to the supply component of the requirement. The rental of an item(s) is a service and should be treated as such in the application of the nonmanufacturer rule and the limitation on subcontracting.” (emphasis added)

GAO and COFC have generally afforded considerable deference to SBA’s guidance on matters of classification and the nonmanufacturer rule. (see generally C&G Excavating, Inc. v. US, 32 Fed.Cl. 231 (1994); Adams Industrial Services, Inc. B-280186 (1998)).

Accordingly, the nonmanufacturer rule is not applicable to this procurement.

48. Volume II, Past Performance, requires the offeror to submit up to 5 relevant past performance citations in performance at any point during the last 3 years. Wil the govt consider extending this requirement to 5 years in order to allow companies to provide a full range of relevant service?

Response: No, the requirement is for past performance during the last 3 years.

49. Can the offeror submit a Transition Plan as an Appendix to the Technical Approach and not counted in page count?

Response: A formal transition plan is not required as part of the proposal. However, as part of the technical approach the Offerors must address overall phase-in transition approach, timeline, and strategy and its understanding of and ability to meet phase-in requirements and accomplish a non-disruptive, low risk phase-In transition as stated in Section 5.1.6.1 of the PWS. Therefore, the final RFP will expand the page count for Volume I to 30 pages.

50. Is it the Government's intention to allow a transition period wherein the network will be off-line for a scheduled 'maintenance period' to facilitate the replacement of all equipment, or is it the Government's intention to have both networks operated simultaneously as legacy equipment is removed and the new network architecture implemented?

Response: The Government will allow a transition period where both networks are online until the old hardware has been replaced or migrated to the new network. An offline network is not acceptable. Refer to paragraph 5.3 of the PWS.

51. These two references appear to be contradictory as written. The requirement for "encryption of all control (data and management)" necessitates a TRANSEC compliant solution. In response to industry questions of the TRANSEC requirement in earlier versions of the PWS it was removed by the Government. Is it the Government's intention to reinstitute TRANSEC requirements?

Response: The PWS has been edited to reflect that all encryption shall be NIST certified FIPS 140-2 level 2 or better. The Government does not require TRANSEC.

52. Given that the award timeframe is unknown, please provide the required length of duration for Phase One completion in terms of days or months.

Response: The VA anticipates Phase One to be completed in 60 days.

53. Are offerors to assume that the place of performance for delivery, installation, and training for each system is in the City, State location in Column C of the attachment entitled 36C10A-19-R-0008-002?

Response: Yes.

54. For systems located in the same city, should offerors plan a consolidated training for that location, or does each VSAT system need its own 2-day training regardless of how many other terminals are in the same city? Travel and labor costs can be minimized if training sessions can be consolidated.

Response: The VA will make an effort to consolidate training; however, this cannot be guaranteed. The more lead time provided, the more likely, the training can be consolidated.

55. Reference PWS 5.1.1, the Contractor Project Management Plan. Please confirm this is due after award and not with proposals.

Response: Correct, the Contractor Project Management Plan is not due with the proposal.

56. Each of letters A-L and O-V seem to be requirements PER terminal. Items listed under M and N seem to be an aggregate requirement - i.e. we assume the government does not want 180 multifunction devices per terminal. Please clarify this in the PWS.

Response: This section of the PWS has been edited to better reflect the requirements PER terminal. The 180 will be removed. Items M and N have changed.