The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
Sheet1 Note: The answers provided below are for informational purposes, to assist potential Offerors in preparing proposals, and such answers do not themselves constitute a part of any future Request for Proposal (RFP). To the extent that any answers provided below conflict in any way with the future RFP and any Amendments, the final RFP takes precedence.
| | Solicitation: 36C10A24R0004 - Questions and Answers | |
| Question # | Section | Question | Response |
| 1. | General Question | What is the existing contract/incumbent contract award ID number for this contract? | Space Exploration Technologies Corp. SpaceX |
Contract Number: 36C10A22P0027
| 2. | General Question | Who is the incumbent contractor for this posting? | Please refer to answer to number 1 above. |
| 3. | General Question | Is this a follow-on/recompete to an existing contract? | Please refer to answer to number 1 above. |
| 4. | General Question | We respectfully request an extension to the response due date of at least 30 days from the date the responses to questions are received by the offeror. This ensures a complete response which considers items that have been left out, as well as responses to questions. | The RFP will be extended to 21 June 2024. |
| 5. | General Question | Can the government please provide Attachment A – as referenced in Section D, PWS 4.2 (Place of Performance)? | Attachment A was incorporated in para 5.2.1, reference will be removed from solicitation. |
| 6. | General Question | Can the government please clarify the section numbering in Section D, PWS 5.0? This numbering does not appear to be sequential. | The solicitation table of contents will be renumbered to reflect the correct page numbers in the contents of the solicitation. The correction will be included in the amended solicitation. |
| 7. | General Question | Can the government provide the page number in the RFP for Section D, PWS 5.2.1.1? Section D PWS 5.2.1.1, referenced in E1(I)c (Volume I – Technical item ‘c’), does not appear to be included in the 21 May 2024 release of the RFP. | Section E regarding Volume I-Technical will be updated to correct references. |
| 8. | General Question | In reference to Section E1(II) – Can the government please define “case study?” | The “Case Study” verbiage has been removed from the solicitation and will be reflected in the solicitation amendment. Please see solicitation amendment for update to Section E, Volume I. |
| 9. | General Question | Can the government confirm if there will be additional on-ramps where offerors will be | |
allowed to respond to this solicitation for this IDIQ? If so, can the government please clarify
| when those additional on-ramps will occur? | No additional on-ramps are planned. | | | |
| 10. | General Question | Can the government confirm the primary use cases for the services delivered within this solicitation? Some examples may be sending medical imaging, staff communication (email and voice), telehealth, or distance training provided by video streaming. | The VA intends to use the services for any VA applications which may vary from site to site. |
| 11. | General Question | We would like to know if this is a brand new contract OR if there is (was) an incumbent performing these services. | Please refer to answer to number 1 above. |
| 12. | General Question | If not brand new, could you please provide the current / previous contract number? | Please refer to answer to number 1 above. |
| 13. | RFP page 1 | Due Date 6-14-2024 1300 CST - as VA requesting SLA-based services With regards to Starlink & Starshield (Best Effort commerical services) request additional 2wks for Vendor to provide updated inputs. | |
| Rationale: Starlink, Starshield Best Effort service w/o guaranteed MIRs/CIRs. Contractor requires additional time to discuss SLAs w/SpaceX. | Please refer to answer to number 4. | | |
| 14. | RFP - Section B page 4 | initial CLIN table 0001-4018 - can VA provide total qty? |
| Rationale: please provide additional insite into make up of CLIN sheet. Attachment 1 does not nomenclate quanties for terminals and stops short of the indicated 18 annual CLINs in RFP document. | Please reference B.1 Schedule of Supplies and Services which states "The Government will place orders based on prices identified in Attachment 1 – Price Evaluation-Low Earth Orbit Satellite Equipment and Services, Schedule B Pricing….". Known locations and quantities are listed at paragraph 5.2.1of the PWS. The VA may isue task orders for services at any VA facility as stated in paragraph 4.2 of the PWS utilizing B.3 Ordering Procedures. | | |
| 15. | RFP - FARs page 4 - | procedures for selecting contractors for task order awards under LEO Satellite Services are governed by FAR 16.505 - how many contracts will VA initally award IDIQ? |
| Rationale: RFP mentions up to 3 - one being SB. Currently no SBs are authorized as resellers of Starshield and Starlink to the US Government - will the VA rule of twos apply for this contract? | Please reference E.10 FAR 52.212-2 Evaluation Commercial Products and Services Paragraph A, which states "Award will be made to up to three (3) awardees, with one award reserved for a small business." | | |
| 16. | page 9 | Firm Fixed Price. All task orders awarded as a result of RFQs listed under this contract will be Firm Fixed Price based on previously established prices contained in the ID/IQ contract" |
| Rationale: Contractor assumes pricing only to include service and hardware support. Travel, shipping, one time costs will be nomenclated in individual TOs (rationale - contractor cannot provide a FFP for multiple travel to multiple sites over a 5 year IDIQ period at the IDIQ level). | The VA requires FOB destination pricing that includes one-time costs. Please see paragraph 5.3.4 Equipment Shipment of the PWS. | | |
| 17. | RFP - PWS page 29 | Services encompassed in this requirement include Low Earth Orbit (LEO) Satellite Internet Services for both mobile and fixed sites throughout the VA enterprise that includes equipment and services for 11 existing StarLink, six (6) Hermtac mobile cases and one (1) Compact Rapid Deployable (CRD) mobile case |
| Rationale: is the contractor required to support hardware external to Starlink & Starshield terminals contained in the Hermtac & CRD kits? | Awardees are not required to support hardware external to Starlink and Starshield terminals contained in the Hermtac & CRD kits. | | |
| 18. | RFP - PWS - Scope page 32 | Provide continued maintenance and support for existing VA equipment. |
| Rationale: Please define existing equipment outside of Starlink and Starshield equipment. | All existing equipment are listed in 5.2.1 of the PWS. | | |
| 19. | RFP - PWS - Scope page 32 | Services shall include any special items, equipment, wiring or infrastructure to ensure the contractor's solution is compatible with the Government's current telecommunications infrastructure at the VA facilities |
| Rationale: please define the demarc. Starlink, Starshield are fully available, mature best effort communication transmission solution. Contractor recommends demarcation at modem port of terminal kits. | The Demarc is defined at Physical Handoff/RJ45 located in paragraph 5.2.1 of the PWS. | | |
| 20. | page 37 | Contractor shall provide the LEO Satellite Internet Services 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year |
| Rationale: Starlink & Starshield best effort commerical communications solution w/o quarenteed MIRs & CIRs. | Page 37 has been revised to align with paragraph 5.2.1 Availability of the PWS. | | |
| 21. | RFP - 5.2 LEO Services | Contractor shall ensure the existing equipment and services for 11 existing StarLink, 6 Hermtac mobile cases and 1 CRD mobile case are operational. |
| Rationale: Can VA provide make up of Hermtac & CRD - if not recommend Contractor only responsible for Starlink, Starshield hardware & services. | Contractor needs to maintain all existing hardware listed in 5.2.1 of the PWS. VA may elect to award some, all or none of these services to one or more awardees. | | |
| 22. | RFP - 5.2 LEO Services | Contractor shall ensure the existing equipment and services for 11 existing StarLink, 6 Hermtac mobile cases and 1 CRD mobile case are operational. |
| Rationale: Please provide type of Starlink terminals: Commercial HP or Flat to include router. | All existing Starlink equipment utilized by the VA are commercial High Performance. | | |
| 23. | RFP - 5.2 LEO Services page 38 | Contractor shall offer commercially available tiered data packages to include unlimited data at a fixed rate for both the fixed and mobile sites. The Contractor shall allow for flexibility between data packages at no additional cost to the Government. |
| Rationale: Please define no additional costs - does this imply no activation fees when upgrading monthly service? | The VA is requesting pooled data plans. | | |
| 24. | RFP - 5.3.2 Site Survey page 41 | Contractor shall perform an onsite survey as part of installation for fixed sites and mobile services at locations upon VA request. Site survey’s will at a minimum identify equipment, ancillary equipment, and specific installation needs. |
| Rationale: Contract assumes this price to be provided for specific TOs and not at IDIQ level. | Contractor should utilize this information to establish their pricing provided in Attachment 1 "Price Evaluation-Low Earth Orbit Satellite Equipment and Services" | | |
| 25. | RFP - 6.5 - SLA page 50 | SLAs in this document represent a minimum level of service acceptable to the government unless otherwise specified at the TO level. The VA recognizes that LEO Satellite Internet Services performance is likely to vary depending on location as well as the technical specification and capabilities of the deployed infrastructure. The Contractor shall provide the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) which shall govern the LEO Satellite Internet Services offered to the VA. |
| Rationale: Starlink and Starshield are best effort service offerings w/o guaranteed MIRs or CIRs. A range of MIR & CIR anticipated and expected, latency as well as link availability will be provided. | Please refer to answer to number 20. | | | |
| 26. | General Question | VA has designated this RFP as FFP, ID/IQ. However, the technical requirements and pricing CLINs are specific to one vendor (i.e., Starlink). Is the Government only considering Starlink’s LEO technology? If the VA is open to other LEO platforms, will the VA allow bidders to bid equipment and services that are not Starlink specific? | Please see paragraph 3.0 of the PWS "VA, OIT, CCS, CPMS requires contractor services to provide brand name or equal LEO satellite equipment…." |
| 27. | General Question | If other LEO products are provided rather than Starlink, some product/service line items on the Pricing Evaluation Excel file are Starlink specific and become inapplicable for a non-Starlink solution. Can those lines be left empty and replace with new and comparable line items? For example can a Mesh Wi-Fi Router for non-Starlink LEO platform be provided? Another item is Masonry Routing Kit which is specific to Starlink and not needed in other LEO platforms. | Please refer to number 8 in the "instructions to offerors" tab of Attachment 1 "Price Evaluation-Low Earth Orbit Satellite Equipment and Services" |
| 28. | General Question | In order to include the full features and capabilities of our LEO solution, can we add optional items in the Pricing Evaluation Excel file? | Please refer to answer to number 27. |
| 29. | General Question | Will the VA consider extending the deadline by 2 weeks to give bidders more time to put together a competitive proposal? | Please refer to answer to number 4. |
