Questions_and_answers.xlsx

XLSX spreadsheet 28 KB Posted Aug 10, 2017

Attached to: CISCO SMART net services
Solicitation number: DJF172500PR0008815
Issued by: Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation Headquarters Division

About this file

From the source

Q&A

View the file

Other files

File	Type	Posted
FBI_DOJ_RFP_Price_Template_Final_Rev1.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Aug 11, 2017
20170721_FBI_DOJ_Cisco_IDIQ_JA_17-8815_FBO.docx	DOCX document	Aug 10, 2017
20170803_Cisco_IDIQ_RFP_Rev2.pdf	PDF	Aug 10, 2017
SF1449_FBI_17-8815.pdf	PDF	Aug 10, 2017
20170803_Cisco_IDIQ_RFP_REV_1.pdf	PDF	Aug 7, 2017
Definitions.docx	DOCX document	Aug 4, 2017
FBI_Cisco_Hardware_Shipped_as_of_31May2017.xlsb	XLSB spreadsheet	Aug 4, 2017
Security_Requirements.docx	DOCX document	Aug 4, 2017
Cisco_Service_Description_-_Data_Center_Optimization_Services.pdf	PDF	Aug 4, 2017
Cisco_Service_Description_-_Cisco_Focused_Technical_Support_Services.pdf	PDF	Aug 4, 2017
FBI_DOJ_RFP_Price_Template_Final.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Aug 4, 2017
Cisco_Service_Description_-_Cisco_Software_Support_Service.pdf	PDF	Aug 4, 2017
20170803_Cisco_IDIQ_RFP_FINAL.pdf	PDF	Aug 4, 2017
SF1449_FBI_17-8815.pdf	PDF	Aug 4, 2017
Cisco_Service_Description_-_Cisco_Security_Optimization_Service.pdf	PDF	Aug 4, 2017
Cisco_Classified_Network_Support.pdf	PDF	Aug 4, 2017
Cisco_Service_Description_-_Network_Optimization_Service.pdf	PDF	Aug 4, 2017
ARQ_FBI_17-8815.docx	DOCX document	Aug 4, 2017
FBI_Cisco_Software_Purchased_as_of_31May2017.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Aug 4, 2017

Show all 19

On GovTribe

Work with this file

Download the original file
Contacts named in this file
Similar government files
Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

Sheet1

Industry Questions	Government Response	RFP updated?
Could the contracting office please confirm the NAICS code/s associated with this RFP?	This is the correct code	No
Does the FBI have a standard past performance template to be filled to illustrate prior experience?
Should Section 14.9 be changed to remove the reference to the NASA SEWP V contract?	This will be corrected	Yes
Should Section 14.9 be changed to remove the last sentence regarding Open Market Services since it is in conflict with Section 19.4?
Cisco defines SWSS as Software Support Services which is the equivalent of SMARTnet maintenance for software license subscriptions. SWSS does not equate to, nor does it provide actual software licensing. The Government makes several references throughout the RFQ to SWSS “subscription licenses”. Please clarify the Government’s intent is to purchase SWSS software maintenance vs. software licensing. If the intent is to procure only SWSS maintenance, please remove all references to SWSS “subscription license”.

On Page 10 for FBI and on Page 11 for DOJ, the Government states that NOS Transaction Services will be priced “based on the negotiated FFP BID Hours”. Cisco is a Commercial entity and does not provide hourly labor rates. Please advise as we are unable to complete the pricing table with these fields.

Will the Government consider allowing 90 days notification in changes to Advanced Services requirements? 30 days is not sufficient notice to ensure continuity of service and resource planning.
Proposals must be valid for 150 days, yet Cisco’s pricing is valid for 60 days as per their standard quoting policy. Will the government adjust the timeline to align with Cisco’s policy?
Section 14.9 Subcontracting: States proposed small business plans as long as they are mapped to the Prime Offeror’s NASA SEWP V contract. Since his RFP is full and open solicitation, can the government please remove the reference to the NASA SEWP V contract?	This will be corrected	Yes
Section 19.4 Proposal Volume Instructions: Volume A- The government is requesting the attached complete KMPL list that has PII information. Can the government please provide a secure way we can submit the KMPL wo keep the PII more secure?	Email to Hlwilliams2@fbi.gov (please provide password email also)
Will the government allow for use of Cisco’s Safeguarding requirement and the DD254 read specifically that the Safeguarding will be conducted by Cisco as long as the contractor has a Top Secret Facility clearance? We request this consideration since Cisco will be performing all the services and the contractor will not be receiving the classified information to safeguard
Will the evaluation criteria allow credit for a value add tool that tracks inventory under contract with a quarterly line item price? This tool would allow the FBI, DOJ, to update inventory through the online submission of RMAs and/or devices removed from service to validate quarterly true-ups or true-downs.
Will the evaluation criteria allow credit for a value add tool that projects lifecycle replacement products up to 5 years in advance based on Cisco “Last day of support”?
Section 1 Item number 1 states that Cisco network hardware is included in this competition, however this section indicates “planned competitive procurements for future network hardware”. Will the government please clarify whether network hardware is included in this competition? If not, will it please remove item number 1?
Section 4.1 The government states that the DOJ reserves the right to negotiate directly with the manufacturer to obtain additional discounts as they relate to SWSS Subscription Licenses. Will the government please clarify whether this extends only to manufacturers other than Cisco?
14.9 The Scope section states that this is a Full and Open Competition without a reference to NASA SEWP V Contract; however, this section indicates, “Offerors are allowed to propose subcontractors as long as the services provided by subcontractors are mapped to the Prime Offeror’s NASA SEWP V contract”. Will the government please clarify if the Prime can avail from a SEWP contract or otherwise, the reason for the subcontractors to be mapped to the Primer Offeror’s NASA SEWP V Contract if this is a Full and Open Competition?	This will be corrected	Yes
Section 19.1 The government states that a “large number or significant ADEs not providing benefit to the Government may result in rejection of the Offeror as unacceptable”. Will the government please clarify what constitutes a “large number or significant ADEs…”? Additionally, as this IDIQ is for a brand name specific program, contractors are often at the mercy of the manufacturer and their terms. Will the government please consider this factor when determining a large number or significant ADEs?
Section 20 Is a contractor’s commercial subcontracting plan an appropriate response to the subcontract plan requirement?
Section 20 Is it the intention of the government to consider price discounts at a CLIN level or will the government only evaluate the offer based on the Total Evaluated Price (Cell H116)? Will the government provide context around how it intends to determine a Total Evaluated Price or CLIN’s reasonability?
Section 4.1 Will the government allow for contractor-badged engineers to perform Cisco Advanced Services so long as they meet the technical and security requirements?
Section 4.1 Will the government please provide clarification around the estimated time to be spent at each location covered by this contract? This will be essential in building out appropriate discounts.
Section 4.1 Will the government please provide an estimated total user count that this program will cover within the FBI and DOJ, respectively?
In order to provide a complete analysis of Cisco pricing and confirm that we are providing the Government with our most competitive offer, we would like to request that the Government extend the due date for Federal Bureau of Investigation/ Department of Justice CISCO Network Services RFP No. 17-8815 until Friday August 25, 2017	No
Section 19.4 Upon review, we believe these provisions are not appropriate here and request that the government please delete them from the RFP. FAR 19.702(b)(2) states that a small business subcontracting plan is required only where the solicitation “has subcontracting possibilities” for small businesses. See also FAR 19.708(b)(1). Among the factors to be considered in determining whether “subcontracting possibilities” exist is “[w]hether there are likely to be product prequalification requirements.” FAR 19.705-2(b)(2). The subject RFP requires the resale of specified Cisco maintenance and licenses and engineering support by Cisco-badged engineers. These are tantamount to prequalification requirements. Thus, there are no subcontracting possibilities for small businesses. To the extent the RFP contemplates submission of only a “commercial” subcontract plan, it is still inappropriate. Nothing in the FAR allows an agency to request a commercial subcontracting plan where, as here, the requirements of FAR 19.702(b)(2) are not met.
Section 19.4 If, notwithstanding the foregoing, the government still requires submission of a subcontracting plan, we request that submission and evaluation of the plan be required prior to award, not with initial offers. Where a small business subcontracting plan is required, FAR 19.705-2(d) permits the agency to require submission of the plan with initial offers “or at any other time prior to award.” For offerors that have not already negotiated a commercial subcontracting plan with a government agency, submission prior to award will give the government and the offeror more time to negotiate a suitable plan.
Section 19.4 Please clarify what is meant by the phrase “if applicable” in sections 19.4 (page 46) and 20.D (page 50).
Section 20 Please clarify what is meant by this sentence in section 20.D (page 50) of the RFP: “In response to this factor, the Offeror shall provide the descriptions for each uniquely numbered criterion.”
Section 14.9 states: "Offerors are allowed to propose subcontractors as long as the services provided by subcontractors are mapped to the Prime Offeror’s NASA SEWP V contract. Open-market services are not being solicited under this RFP." This clause seems to be included in error - please clarify or remove.	This will be corrected	Yes
The government states "For each item removed, the FBI will be entitled to a cost Credit in the forward quarter equal to the removed item’s Commercial List Price less the reseller’s discount". This statement is misleading and makes it sound like the price of the hardware will be credited, rather than the Smart Net maintenance. Please confirm this should state "For each item removed, the FBI will be entitled to a cost Credit in the forward quarter equal to the removed item’s Commercial List Price for Smart Net maintenance less the reseller’s discount", and revise accordingly.
Section 20.A (page 49) evaluation states: "This Factor is used to evaluate the proposed solution, approach, and planned schedule for accomplishing all effort required in fulfillment of the RFP," and on how the Offeror demonstrates it can deliver the requirement in RFP Section 4.1. However, Section 19.4 (page 44) states: "Each Offeror shall clearly address each of the specific requirements and terms and conditions in 4.1.A – 4.1.F. The Government does NOT require verbatim re-statements of those requirements, and each Offeror may succinctly re-state the headings of each requirement and term and condition and acknowledge the Offeror’s ability to meet the requirements and terms and conditions, so as to ensure ALL elements are addressed." Please clarify the Government's required response for Section 4.1, as there is a conflict between the RFP instructions and evaluation. In other words, does the Government require only succinct acknowledgement of each requirement and term and condition, as stated in Section 19.4? If yes, what level of acknowledgement is required (please provide example)? Or, does the Government require a detailed narrative approach/solution/schedule as stated in Section 20.A? Please clarify.
Is Cisco, as required/specified by the Government, required to complete the Key Personnel Management Listing (KMPL FBI 17-8815) and Acquisition Risk Questionnaire (ARQ FBI 17-8815) for inclusion in the Offeror's proposal?	Email to Hlwilliams2@fbi.gov (please provide password email also)
Attachment KMPL Due to the sensitive personal information required in the Key Personnel Management Listing attachment ("KMPL FBI 17-8815”), i.,e, Social Security Numbers, is it acceptable to submit this attachment separately from the proposal submission and directly to the FBI CO at hlwilliams2@fbi.gov by the specified proposal due date/time?	Email to Hlwilliams2@fbi.gov (please provide password email also)
Section 19.4, page 44, states: "The Offeror shall include the following attachments:" and lists attachments a.- f. Please confirm it is acceptable to submit all attachments referenced in items a. - f. as separate files (only item d., Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI), instructs the offeror to submit the attachment in a separate file).
Section 19.4 Please confirm that an Offeror with no known or perceived issues that could potentially represent an OCI if awarded this contract is not required to submit OCI documentation/OCI Mitigation Plan with its proposal.
Section 19.4 instructs the offer to submit a Volume A Technical Proposal document "not longer than twenty (20) pages." Please confirm that the cover/title page, table of contents/figures, and transmittal letter are excluded from the 20-page limit.
Please confirm that the Government-provided SF1449 is the correct version and should be completed and returned as it was issued. Blocks 3, 6, 8 and 14 appear to be out of date/inaccurate.	Will correct and resend
Please clarify the correct solicitation number for this procurement. The SF1449 shows FBI #17-8815 and the RFP shows 17-8815; however, the solicitation number on the online FedBizOps (FBO) announcement is DJF172500PR0008815 (note: DJF172500PR0008815 is the requisition number on the SF1449.).	The SF1449 relects the name on the RFP, the Solicitation on FBO doesn't have to have the same name	No
Section 20.C (page 50) states: This volume shall contain three (3) past performance of recent contracts…" Section 19.4.e, page 46, lists past performance as an attachment to Volume A, Technical Proposal. Please clarify that past performance should be submitted as an attachment to Volume A, Technical Proposal, and not as a separate volume.
Is it acceptable to submit the Volume A, Technical Proposal, response and any attachments in Adobe PDF format?	Word format	Yes
Section 12.1 states: "Submission of these documents should include identification of the Quotation number RFQ0018228…" Please clarify the reference to Quotation number RFQ0018288.
Section 13.4 Reference an IDIQ Account Manager, however, the last sentences mentions a “PM” – is this a mistake or an additional role required?
Section 12.3 In regards to the financial reporting obligation, the second paragraph states, “This notification shall be provided to the CO for the period ending March 31. The due date for providing this notification is March 5”. Please confirm the correct due date for providing the notification as it is currently due before the period ends.	This is notification for Accruals only and this is the time they are due	No
Will the government please provide an updated SF 1449 as the one provided shows an award/effective date of 07/21/2017 and an issue date of 6/26/2017?	Will correct and resend	No
Section 14.9 Will the government please provide clarification in regards to the source of the RFP in regards to section 14.9 - “Offerors are allowed to propose subcontractors as long as the services provided by subcontractors are mapped to the Prime Offeror’s NASA SEWP V contract. Open-market services are not being solicited under this RFP”.	This will be corrected	Yes
Section 2.0, 19.4 and 20 In regards to a Top SECRET facility clearance with a SECRET safeguarding capability… Would you please clarify the type of data or information that requires secret safeguarding?
Section 2.0, 19.4 and 20 In regards to a Top SECRET facility clearance with a SECRET safeguarding capability… Is it secret safeguarding of physical data or digital data?
Section 2.0, 19.4 and 20 In regards to a Top SECRET facility clearance with a SECRET safeguarding capability… Is there any electronic transmission of classified data required?
Section 2.0, 19.4 and 20 In regards to a Top SECRET facility clearance with a SECRET safeguarding capability… Would you please issue a Solicitation DD254 to us so that we can upgrade our current TS Facility Clearance to include Secret Safeguarding capability and have DSS certify it? If not, will you allow for a grace period after award to allow time for DSS to certify the capability? DSS requires a solicitation DD254 in order to certify the capability.
Section 4.1 Cisco cannot agree to provide support on incidental Cisco equipment purchased by the FBI on or before 31, May 2017 and not included on the excel file and yet to have reached the end of support at no charge to the government. Can you please provide a list of the devices requiring support so Cisco and provide pricing accordingly?
Section 19.4 The government is assuming a 15% reduction in inventory year over year (per cells D63: G63) in the DOJ RFP Price Template. Can you confirm if these numbers are subject to change?
Section 19.4 Proposal Volume Instructions, Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI). Limit 10 pages. Statement: Bidder has a current OCI Mitigation Plan filed with the FBI that does not have page constraints; therefore, it exceeds the requested page limit. Question: Will the FBI waive the page limit for the OCI plan to accept our OCI plan?
Section 19.4 Proposal Volume Instructions, Subcontract Plan. Limit 10 pages. Statement: Bidder has an approved commercial plan which complies with the requirements of FAR 19.704(d). The FAR does not have page constraints; therefore, our approved plan exceeds the requested page limit. Question: Will the FBI waive the page limit for the subcontract plan if it has already been approved and signed by a government entity?
This Offeror requests that the Government re-issue the SF1449 to reflect the correct date.	This will be corrected	No
Section 1 Do the items that the Government seeks to procure through this solicitation (i.e., “(1) Smart Net maintenance, (2) Advanced Services engineering support, and (3) SWSS term licenses on the current installed base of Cisco hardware and certain software licenses”) provide additional features or functionality to the to the current installed base of Cisco hardware and software? If so, has the Government made a formal determination, or issued a J&A, to support the use of Cisco products to support this added functionality? Can the Government provide this J&A to Offerors or identify where the determination or J&A is posted? Has the Government investigated whether other vendors can provide this added functionality at a better value to the Government?
The Government states that it requires Smart Net maintenance, Advance Services engineering support, and SWSS term licenses on the current installed base “[a]s a result of the planned competitive procurements of future network hardware.” What is the causal link between the planned competitive procurements and the current need for the items being procured through this solicitation? Why and how do the future planned competitive procurements create a current requirement for (1) Smart Net maintenance, (2) Advanced Services engineering support, and (3) SWSS term licenses on the current installed base of Cisco hardware and certain software licenses? Has the Government already decided that the “planned competitive procurements of future network hardware” will be limited to Cisco hardware? If so, has a formal determination or J&A been issued supporting this determination? Will the Government provide a copy of any such determination or J&A or indicate where it is posted?
Section 2.0 The Offeror assumes that any DOJ component under the IDIQ will be bound by the same Terms and Conditions as the IDIQ and will place no additional requirements, terms and conditions on any order under this contract. Can the FBI confirm?
Section 2.0 This Offeror assumes that the FBI will continue to provide Clearance Sponsorship for these individuals. Will the Government provide invitation to CJIS Industry Day and other related Government Industry conferences or meetings? The Offeror assumes these Individuals will be provided badges and appropriate FBI credentials for entering FBI facilities and monitoring as necessary Cisco personnel for Contract compliance.
Section 2.0 The FBI’s description of this procurement is inconsistent. While the FBI suggests the procurement is a “Full and Open Competition using FAR Part 12 – Acquisition of Commercial Items,” in other references throughout the Solicitation, the FBI refers to the procurement as a “Brand-Name” competition. See RFP at Sections 1.0 Background DOJ/FBI; 3.0 Contract Type; and 19.4 Proposal Volume Instructions. We have multiple questions regarding whether this procurement is using other than full and open competition, brand-name only procedures. Please explain whether this procurement is a full and open competition or other than full and open competition using brand-name description. To the extent the FBI is using less than full and open competition procedures – i.e., brand-name descriptions, we have not been able to locate a Justification and Approval (J&A) or Limited Sources Justification (LSL) authorizing the use of less than full and open competition procedures. Please provide a copy of the J&A or LSJ to potential offerors. We understand the FBI’s intention to acquire brand-name Cisco equipment, but do not see any authority in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.203-1(c), Application for brand-name description,” for the acquisition of the “services” portion of this procurement on a brand-name basis. Please identify the authority upon which the FBI is relying for the acquisition of services on a brand-name basis.
Similar to the prior question, please explain whether the FBI contends the services portion of this procurement are only available from the original source, here Cisco, or are being acquired in a follow-on contract for the continued development or production of a major system or highly specialized equipment , including major components thereof, when it is likely that award to any other source would result in substantial duplication of cost to the Government that is not expected to be recovered through competition, or unacceptable delays in fulfilling the FBI’s requirements. Will the FBI consider changing the “services” portion of the Solicitation to use a “brand-name or equal” description? And, if so, will the FBI delete all references in the Solicitation to “Cisco” maintenance services – e.g., Cisco “Smart Net” maintenance, Cisco “Advanced Services” engineering support, and Cisco “Software Support Services” (2.0 Scope at P 2) and/or otherwise making all references in the Solicitation to services to “or equal” services?
Government requires offeror to be a Cisco Gold Level reseller, Cisco’s Gold certification process allows for multiple ways to achieve this status. The offer can select the focus areas that best fit their business models. Does the government have core areas that lead to Cisco Gold Certification that the offer must have to meet this requirement?
Further, there are 148 Gold Partners for Cisco in the United States – many have never administered an Enterprise Services contract. There are many Non-Gold Partners that have administered an Enterprise Services contract. What is the justification for requiring a Gold Partner certification?
If an offeror is a joint venture, please confirm that it is sufficient for a joint venture member, as opposed to the joint venture, to be a Cisco Gold Partner in order for the joint venture to be eligible for award.
To the extent the FBI requires a joint venture offeror to be a Cisco Gold Partner to be eligible for award, please explain how a small business joint venture can compete for award when potential offerors have been given 8 business days to form a joint venture, apply for and be approved as a Cisco Gold Partner.
If offeror is a small business joint venture, is it sufficient for one member of the joint venture, as opposed to the joint venture, to hold a valid TOP SECRET facility clearance by the date of contract award, with SECRET safeguarding capability as authorized by a US Government agency for the joint venture to be eligible for award?
To the extent the FBI requires a small business joint venture offeror to hold the above facility clearance, please explain how a potential small business joint venture offeror can obtain the above facility clearance by the date of award given that the FBI has provided a total of 8 business days from the release of the RFP to submission of offers and where the RFP indicates the FBI intends to make award on or before September 27, 2017 when the NASA SEWP Delivery Order with Options expires? Will the FBI consider extending the date by which a small business joint venture offeror needs to hold the above facility clearance? Is it sufficient to be eligible for award that a small business joint venture offeror has applied for the above facility clearance as of the date for submission of offers?
Alternatively, where one member of a small business joint venture holds the above facility clearance, to be eligible for award, would it be sufficient for the joint venture to be structured in a way that the joint venture member not holding a facility clearance could perform all work not requiring a facility clearance and would be precluded from performing work requiring a facility clearance and otherwise not have access to classified information?
Given the extremely short time allotted for submission fore proposals, can an offeror be considered for award if it possesses an interim Top Secret facility clearance for award and is in the process of obtaining a final Top Secret FCL?
Has the Government created a formal J&A or some other document to justify this brand name procurement? If so, can the Government provide the J&A to Offerors or identify where the J&A or other justification is posted? If the Government has not created a formal J&A or justification for the brand name only procurement, upon what authority is the Government relying to proceed on a brand name basis?
Section 3.1 and 4.2 Please explain what the FBI means by “badged.” Are engineers performing work at FBI facilities required to wear actual badges identifying them as Cisco engineers? If not, how should an offeror demonstrate and how will the FBI confirm that engineers are Cisco badged?
Section 3.2 Government states that OFFERORS must have a valid, posted and verifiable CISCO Gold Membership. Will the Government define what it means by “Membership”?
If the offeror is a joint venture, must all co-venturers be Cisco Certified as a Gold Partner?
The Government states in 3.1 above that the CLINS in this RFP are Firm Fixed Price. Will the Government define what it means by “rates”? How do these “rates” comply with Firm Fixed Price?
Will the Government define what it means by “discount”? How do these “discounts” comply with “rates” and Firm Fixed Price? Is the Government looking for a “rate”, a “discount” or a “Firm Fixed Price”?
The ceiling amount for the overall effort is expected not to exceed $250,000,000.00 for DOJ Component usage, including FBI. And There is no price limit for an individual Task Order/Delivery against this effort. Question:: The Offeror is unclear what the Government means by “expected not to exceed $250,000,000.00. How does that apply to “(c) There is no price limit”? Will the Government clarify if there is in fact a dollar ceiling or a price ceiling for the contract?
For CLIN A, the Government defines SmartNet Maintenance, which appears to be different from SmartNet’s Total Care, and which appears to be different from CLIN B Product Maintenance. Is it the Government’s intent for the Offeror to provide SmartNet Total Care including phone-home capabilities, Smart Collectors, etc.? What components of Cisco SmartNet Total Care are/are not applicable? Is “CLIN B Product Maintenance” in fact Cisco SmartNet Total Care or is it materially different from CLIN A?
The FBI asserts that Cisco and the FBI agree that “incidental equipment purchased by the FBI…will be covered at no additional cost”. The Offeror is not aware of any such agreement with Cisco. Will the Government provide a copy of such agreement including any Terms and Conditions required? The Offeror assumes the Government will indemnify the Offeror from any nonconformance or any nonperformance by Cisco or any disputes arising as a result of this agreement?
The Government qualifies its assertion about the Cisco agreement with the term “incidental”. Will the Government define the term “incidental”? And, is this term contained in its agreement with Cisco?
The Offeror assumes that the Government and Cisco are responsible for ensuring that equipment found that isn’t on the spreadsheet, Excel pricing file “FBI Cisco Hardware Shipped as of 31May2017”, is registered for Smart Net coverage. Is this correct?
What is the process for tracking these items and providing the proper documentation outlined in this RFP?
Section 4.1.A.2 Can the Government provide its agreement with Cisco stating that Cisco will provide the Equipment List? This Offeror assumes that the Government will not enforce contract terms should Cisco fail to provide the list, provide an erroneous list, or fail to live up to its “agreement” with the Government. Correct?
The Government states that the List will be provided after September 29, 2017 to be considered for award via this IDIQ. How soon after September 29, 2017. Is there a deadline in the “agreement” between the Government and Cisco? And can that deadline and agreement be provided?
What does the Government mean by “to be considered for award via this IDIQ”? Is there equipment on the list that the Government may exclude from future Purchase Orders?
SmartNet Services are provided by Cisco personnel, RMAs are provided by Cisco personnel directly, all parts provided are provided by Cisco directly. Is the Government expecting that Offerors examine all spare parts and RMA materials provided by Cisco or is the Government’s prohibition against refurbished, third party or gray market equipment covered in its “agreement” with Cisco? How does the Government envision a Contractor enforcing this provision? The Offeror assumes it will be indemnified from liabilities arising from maintenance, services or parts provided directly by Cisco under its SmartNet program.
And, does this apply to both FBI and DOJ?
Since the FBI will present both to Reseller and to Cisco the list of line items that the FBI is removing from SmartNet maintenance, the Offeror assumes that Cisco has agreed to remove the items and provide a credit. Is that correct? Can the Government provide a copy of its agreement with Cisco?
And, does this apply to both FBI and DOJ?
The Government discusses a Cost Credit based on the “Reseller’s Discount”. Since this is a Firm Fixed Price contract, what “discount” is the Government referring to?
Section 4.1.A.i.v … the reseller’s discount is subject to negotiation based on the legacy terms of the Smart Net maintenance being consolidated from other reseller contracts. Does this apply to both FBI and DOJ?
What “discount” is the Government referring to under this Firm Fixed Price contract? And, does this apply to both FBI and DOJ?
Cisco from time to time raises list prices which subsequently affects SmartNet prices. Has the Government reached an agreement with Cisco that the prices listed in its spreadsheet will remain in effect? Will the Government provide a copy of such agreement? And, does this apply to both FBI and DOJ?
The FBI will be entitled to a CNS Credit in the forward quarter equal to the Commercial List Price for CNS less the reseller’s discount. What discount is the FBI referring to? And, does this apply to both FBI and DOJ?
Cisco’s NOS Transaction Services are not offered or available on an hourly basis. Normally they are sold as an engagement for a FFP based on the Statement of Work. Given that Cisco does not offer NOS on an hourly basis but rather as a project quote, and given that the Government has insisted on only direct Cisco services, how would the government like for contractors to respond to this requirement? And, does this apply to both FBI and DOJ?
Individual Rest of DOJ Components other than the FBI may require any of the above Advanced Services on schedules to be determined, and requires reseller discounts commensurate with the FBI, taking into account that the FBI requires cleared personnel and Rest of DOJ does not. What discount is the Government referring to?
Section 4.1 D The Offeror is confused by the Government’s use of multiple pricing schemes in this sentence: Cisco does not provide NOS services at an hourly rate, and the Government has insisted on Cisco services. Can the Government please define “FFP Bid Hours”? Can the Government please define “NOS Transaction Services Discounted Hourly Rate”? What discount is the Government referring to?
Section 4.1 E2 Can the Government provide its agreement with Cisco stating that Cisco will provide the Software List. This Offeror assumes that the Government will not enforce contract terms should Cisco fail to provide the list, provide an erroneous list, or fail to live up to its “agreement” with the Government. Correct?
The Government states that the List will be provided after September 29, 2017 to be considered for award via this IDIQ. How soon after September 29, 2017. Is there a deadline in the “agreement” between the Government and Cisco? And can that deadline and agreement be provided?
What does the Government mean by “to be considered for award via this IDIQ”? Is there software on the list that the Government may exclude from future Purchase Orders?
The DOJ reserves the right to negotiate directly with the manufacturer to obtain additional discounts. Does the above statement apply only to SWSS Subscription Licenses or to all services identified in Section 4.1? Regardless of the scope of DOJ’s statement above, how will the awardee’s financial arrangement with Cisco be impacted by such negotiations? Will DOJ allow the awardee to participate in such negotiations and/or otherwise disclose to the awardee the end result of such negotiations?
Can the Government provide its justification or its requirement for Cisco badged engineers? The Government has asked for Cisco Gold partners for this procurement; Gold Partner engineers are trained, certified and tested to the same level as Cisco engineers. Moreover, many “Cisco-badged” engineers currently performing in the customer’s environment are not Cisco employees. What is the requirement that the Government is trying to fulfill with this language?
Can the Government change this requirement to Cisco-accredited and certified/ appropriately Government-cleared personnel?
Please define precisely what is meant by the term “Cisco-badged engineers.”
Section 5.0 The Offeror acknowledges the Government’s provision of a working environment on premises and assumes this is available to all Contractor-provided personnel. Correct?
Section 6.0 FBI Advanced Services Quarterly Business Review is not discussed in Section 4.1C.
Section 12.1 Given the role of Cisco in this procurement, is Cisco considered a subcontractor within the meaning of this paragraph?
Will the Government please provide a list of all potential city/state locations where all work could potentially occur?
Section 12.4 Given that the Government has written the requirements directly for Cisco-badged personnel under their standard SmartNet and other agreements, the Offeror asks that this requirement be deleted.
Section 14.9 Can the Government please clarify its reference to the NASA SEWP V contract?	This will be corrected	Yes
Section 16.1 The Government has included FAR 52.224-5. Given this is a services only acquisition, can the Government remove its inclusion of this reference?
The Government has included 52.227-14 Rights in Data – General, Cisco generally provides only limited rights to technical data. Can the Government please revise to match Cisco’s license agreements which provide limited rights in technical data?
The Government has included FAR 52.212-4. Paragraph (h) requires the awardee to indemnify the Government against infringement of intellectual property. Given this is a services only acquisition, can the Government remove its inclusion of this Given this is a services only acquisition, can the Government remove its inclusion of this indemnification requirement?
Will the Government remove the warranty provision of 52.212-4(o)?
Section 18.0 Will the Government please explain the reference to the “BOA.”?
Section 18.1 Given this is a Services only acquisition, can the Government remove this requirement?
Section 18.6 The Government has asked Offerors to provide certifications and representations under FAR 52.219-1 but has not provided for corresponding certifications under FAR 52.219-2 through 52.219-8. Can the Government clarify that these clauses apply as well?
Section 18.15 Given this is a Services only acquisition, can the Government remove this requirement?
Section 19.1 Government states that the Offeror is to refer to “Section 19.2” for instructions on completing Attachment “FBI DOJ RFP Price Template Final”. Said section does not contain any instructions pertinent to the subject Excel Template. Will the Government clarify their instructions for the completion of Attachment “FBI DOJ RFP Price Template Final”?
Section 19.1 Please define the terms “large number” and “significant.” For example, is a “large number” greater or less than 10 ADEs?
In your attached Excel spreadsheet, you’ve identified legacy equipment that needs to be covered under this contract vehicle. This spreadsheet contains items like Product ID, Product Nomenclature, Product Part Number, and Serial Number. Cisco also identifies its products with the Unique Device Identifier (UDI). Will the Government require this capability moving forward?
This question references CLINS E and F. Will the Government clarify its understanding of the differences between Cisco’s support requirements related to SmartNet for perpetual licenses and subscription licenses?
Assuming the answer to the above question, would 508 Compliance be necessary?
Section 19.4 The Government requires confirmation of both Cisco Gold Certification and Facility Clearances at the Top Secret Level. Is it the Government’s intent to require the Offeror to use two pages of its Technical Response to confirm these pass or fail requirements? Or would the Government allow the Offeror to acknowledge these requirements in the Technical Response and then have them as attachments without impact on page count?
Due to the sensitive nature of information contained in “KMPL FBI 17-8815” has the Government taken into consideration how to securely deliver this information with this response?	Email to Hlwilliams2@fbi.gov (please provide password email also)
Section 2.0 and 20.0 Would the Gov’t please confirm the offeror must have an active “safeguarding” program by the contract award date? According to our DSS Representative, he stated this validation without an active DD254 is actually discriminatory and goes against the NISPOM guidelines. It is one thing to require an active Top Secret facility clearance, something else to include the requirement for an active Safeguarding program without an issuance of a DD254.
As the DOJ and FBI fully knows and understands the intricates of maintaining an accredited Security Program, clearance or safeguarding is only given with a documented DD254 need. Will the Gov’t accept an offeror who has an active Top-Secret clearance in Phase 1 evaluation whom also has the necessary Safeguarding infrastructure in place but does not currently have an active safeguarding program?
Would the Gov’t please describe what types of documents it foresees being exchanged between it and the awarded contractor that would require Safeguarding capabilities within a contractor’s facilities and not at the Gov’t site?			We recommend the Gov’t consider allowing Offerors whom have an active Top Secret facility clearance program to be allowed 90 days post contract award to stand up its Safeguarding program. As stated in question 2 above, without an active DD254 DSS will not approve or authorize a company to maintain an active Safeguarding program. This factor will mitigate/eliminate potentially highly qualified Cisco Gold Certified companies to bid this opportunity.
Section 4.1.A.2 & 4.1.B.2 It is assumed the DOJ/FBI expects a credit for the remainder of the current option year, with the credit calculated starting at the beginning of the following “quarter”. For example, if an item is identified at the 3 month point the government would want a credit for the remaining 9 months of the option year and not just the following 3 months; is this assumption correct?
Section 14.9 This appears to be a “left over” from when the original Draft was posted on SEWP and since this is an Open Market solicitation we assume that Open Market services will be acceptable.	This will be corrected	Yes
The KMPL requires the Offeror to provide/disclose Personally Identifiable Information (PII), which is also considered Sensitive Personal Information (SPI) specifically the Social Security Numbers (SSN’s), including Date of Birth (DoB) and Place of Birth (PoB) for key organizational personnel. This information is PII governed and sensitive. Can SSN’s, DoB and PoB be provided post award for review rather than all Source Selection personnel? What or who is going to safe guard this information?	Email to Hlwilliams2@fbi.gov (please provide password email also)	Yes

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated Nov 14, 2017.