Local Telecommunications Services - QA Addendum_Rev4.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 27 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Local Telecommunications Services (LTS II)
- Solicitation number
- FA8604-26-Q-B003
About this file
This is a Questions and Answers (Q&A) Addendum addressing 48 inquiries from offerors regarding solicitation FA8604-26-Q-B003, a 100% small business set-aside Request for Quote (RFQ) for Local Telecommunications Services at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. The government responses clarify technical requirements, operational parameters, and contractual expectations for delivering voice interconnection services using an IP-based transport solution with T1/PRI handoff at designated demarcation points in Buildings 10262 and 20015.
Key technical clarifications include: demarc preference as DSX for PRI circuits; vendor responsibility for arranging last-mile connectivity through existing carriers (Lumen, AT&T, Alta Fiber); porting of 53,000 DID numbers currently held by incumbent Lumen, with phased porting permitted through the November 12, 2026 cutover deadline; provision of 21 operational PRI circuits at each site plus 20 overflow/failover PRIs; and deployment of a commercial hosted voice solution with tunnelized encryption terminating as T1/PRI at government demarcation points with no connection to government IP networks. Contractor responsibilities end at demarcation; all internal PBX systems and on-base operations remain government-managed. Personnel accessing Wright-Patterson AFB must be U.S. citizens with Real-ID; installation crews receive temporary 30-day passes, while contractor personnel obtain badges valid for three years following contract award. Maintenance windows are scheduled for Tuesday/Thursday 1800-0000 hours with required configuration control approval. The quote submission deadline was extended to 3:00 PM EDT on July 15, 2026, and the government committed to expediting the 15 working-day plan review timeline to accommodate long-lead procurement activities authorized to begin Day 1 of award, including carrier circuit provisioning and LNP order submission prior to formal Installation Plan acceptance.
View the file
Other files
Show all 12
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Question Number | Question | Document, if applicable | Citation, if applicable | Government Response |
| 1 | What are the demarc expectations? | Attachment 1 - PWS | Demarc of PRI circuits would be preferred as DSX. | |
| 2 | Would it be possible to validate base access / contractor requirements? | General | Base access requirements, Real-ID, or Valid US Passport, US Citizenship, and no barring status of background check. Passes to be arranged through one of the contacts. |
CO Facility hours of operation 0700-1600 M-F. After-hours access to be coord through OPS Center.
| 3 | Could you please confirm if there is a minimum CMMC requirement for this RFP? And if so, is CMMC Level 1 (self-certified) sufficient? | ||
| General | |||
| 4 | Do active or ongoing contracts qualify as acceptable past performance submissions, or are references limited strictly to fully completed contracts? | Section L | |
| 5 | Does past performance performed by a subcontractor or teaming partner count toward the pass/fail evaluation, or must the past performance be held by the prime offeror? | Section M | Relevant subcontractor experience can be submitted as evidence for past performance and will count toward the pass / fail evaluation. |
| 6 | Who is currently responsible for providing the physical last mile connectivity to each demarcation point on the installation — is this the Government, the incumbent contractor, or a third-party carrier? | Attachment 1 - PWS | Last mile will need to be arranged by the vendor, either through vendor owned facilities, or utilizing existing vendor capabilites. |
| 7 | Will the awardee be required to lease last mile facilities to each demarcation point, and if so, are there preferred or mandatory carriers identified? | General | Current vendors with POP within the spaces, all vendors have IP solutions in-place as well as dark fiber presence, availability/lease should incorporated into proposals. |
Site A: LUMEN, AT&T, Alta Fiber Site B: LUMEN, AT&T
| 8 | What is the porting source for the DID number ranges associated with this requirement? Specifically, are the DIDs currently held by the Government, the incumbent contractor, or a commercial carrier — and will they be ported to the awardee upon contract award? | General | DID are currently assigned to incumbent (LUMEN) as carrier of record. The government leases the numbers from Lumen, the awardee will need to arrange porting and assume carrier of record. | |
| 9 | Will the Government issue a LOA exempting Offeror from Taxes, Fees and Surcharges (TFS)? | Solicitation | DFARS | |
| 10 | What authority will be provided for the awarded contractor to remove any circuits, equipment, or cables? Is the Government open to Professional Services Engagement to remove any equipment or cabling? Can the Government confirm who owns the Equipment? | Attachment 1 - PWS | PWS 2.2. - Decommission Plan | Existing equipment providing service is owned by LUMEN, which would preclued government autority to remove. Transition from incumbent provider will be coordinated between the awardee and government. |
| 11 | Will the government provide an existing floor or building drawing for the two demarcation buildings required to receive diverse circuits and associated equipment | Attachment 1 - PWS | PWS 2.2. - Installation Plan | |
| 12 | Regarding Circuit Termination, is it expected that the vendor will perform all extensions from |
the commercial circuit handoff to the location of vendor equipment? Or will the Comm Squad or other contractor do that under a work order from the customer? Attachment 1 - PWS PWS 2.3.
Demarcation and
| Physical Termination | Vendor to provide extension from commercial hand-off to intalled equipment. | |||
| 13 | Regarding Physical Protection, is it expected that the small business awardee provide new OSP cable? | Attachment 1 - PWS | PWS 2.3. |
Demarcation and Physical Termination Vendors can submit proposals for new OSP for consideration, but options exist using existing carriers.
Current vendors with POP within the spaces, all vendors have IP solutions in-place as well as dark fiber presence, availability/lease should incorporated into proposals.
Site A: LUMEN, AT&T, Alta Fiber Site B: LUMEN, AT&T
| 14 | We assume if TSP is ordered, there is no other service on this contract to prioritize against, and any TSP assignment for the providing carrier for an outage would be prioritized with the carriers priority list to include other competing TSP services. | |||
| Q. Based on assumptions above, will the Government expand on base Restoration Priority List and how that applies to providing two diverse circuits which apparently will have TSP approved codes? | Attachment 1 - PWS | PWS 4.0 - 4.1. | ||
| 15 | Does the Government want the Project Manager to be dedicated (full time) or designated (shared) for the period of performance? | Attachment 1 - PWS | PWS 5.1. |
Contract Management 16 If dedicated Project Manager, will there be a CLIN for that labor? Attachment 1 - PWS PWS 5.1.
Contract Management 17 Please confirm whether the customer expects the assigned Project Manager to serve as the single point of contact throughout implementation, lead weekly or bi-weekly status meetings and reporting, deliver the implementation and cutover plans with supporting schedules, and provide access to the service portal, available training resources, and the post-implementation operations plan for trouble resolution and service request management? Attachment 1 - PWS PWS 5.1.
Contract Management
| 18 | Is it expected that vendor will provide employee list for those that need occasional access to maintain and service the services provided or is there an expectation that there will be onsite personnel? | Attachment 1 - PWS | PWS 5.3. | |
| Security Requirements | Vendor to provide list of persons needing periodic access, not dedicated on-site. | |||
| 19 | Please clarify the prior contract requirement. |
Section L states: A. Provide evidence of no more than three (3) prior contracts, each with a total value greater than $50,000, completed within the past five years.
Section M states: A. Prior Contract greater than $50,000 in total value demonstrating one (1) year of recent experience, within the past five years of the RFQ release date Q. Will the Government confirm if the project must be completed within the past five years, or is an ongoing contract with at least one year of recent experience acceptable? Section L & Section M L.4.A
| Factor 2, 4.2.A | Provide evidence of no less than one (1), but no more than three (3) prior contracts, each with a total value greater than $50,000, completed within the past five years that demonstrates one (1) year of recent experience. This experience can be peformance of greater than one (1) year on a currently ongoing contract. | ||||
| 20 | Does the Government require an ATO for any contractor-provided platform, portal, operational support system, or cloud/service management component supporting this contract? If yes, please identify the required authorization framework, impact level, required artifacts, and timing. | Attachment 1 - PWS | General | ||
| 21 | Please identify whether the contractor will process, store, or transmit CUI/CDI under this contract and identify the expected CUI categories and artifacts in scope. | Attachment 1 - PWS | General | ||
| 22 | Please confirm whether FedRAMP authorization is required for any cloud-based capability supporting this effort, including portals, dashboards, provisioning systems, or orchestration tools. | Attachment 1 - PWS | General | ||
| 23 | Please confirm whether U.S.-only data residency, U.S.-only support personnel, or U.S.-person-only access is required for any systems, data, or support activities. | Attachment 1 - PWS | General | ||
| 24 | Please confirm whether a commercial hosted voice solution is acceptable when all IP voice traffic is transported over a private vendor-managed VPN and services are handed off as T1/PRI at Government demarcation points. | Attachment 1 - PWS | General | Vendor provided solution can be hosted on commercial voice systems, with expectation of tunnelized encryption betweeen the service provider networks, and the equipment supporting T1/PRI handoff. | |
| 25 | Please confirm whether the Government expects the contractor to support any Risk Management Framework (RMF) activities, including eMASS entries, control implementation statements, Security Assessment Plan (SAP), Security Assessment Report (SAR), Plan of Action and Milestones (POA&M), or continuous monitoring artifacts. | Attachment 1 - PWS | General | ||
| 26 | Please confirm that the contractor’s responsibility ends at the Government-designated T1/PRI demarcation points, and that Government-owned PBX systems, internal switching, internal ALI database management, and on-base PSAP operations remain Government responsibilities. | Attachment 1 - PWS | General | Transfer of responible AOR will terminate at the demarcation point. All internal systems to be maintained by government personel. Vendor resonsibiity for solutions deployed to support capability up to the hand-off. | |
| 27 | Please confirm that the contractor is not required to use Government-owned data networks or Government-owned systems to deliver the managed voice service. | Attachment 1 - PWS | General | No access will be provided to government controlled networks/equipment. | |
| 28 | Please confirm whether any contractor equipment installed at the demarcation locations will require connection to Government IP networks, or whether all contractor connectivity will remain within contractor-provided transport and service infrastructure. | Attachment 1 - PWS | General | No direct connection to Government IP Networks, requesting termination as PRI to meet security requirements. | |
| 29 | Please confirm whether the Government requires vulnerability scanning, cybersecurity testing, configuration validation, or security inspection of contractor-provided equipment before installation or service activation. | Attachment 1 - PWS | General | ||
| 30 | Please confirm the minimum personnel screening, investigation, or clearance requirements for contractor personnel requiring physical access to Wright-Patterson AFB facilities. | Attachment 1 - PWS | General | Physical access to the installation will require US Citizen with Real-ID. All personel subject to basic screening using OH-LEADS, for any precluded history. |
Name, Driver License Number, for pre-screening, SSN may be requested at the ECP.
31 Please confirm whether contractor personnel supporting this effort require Common Access Cards (CAC), Public Trust investigations, National Agency Check with Inquiries (NACI), Tier 1 investigations, or any other suitability determination. Attachment 1 - PWS General Install crew can be given up to 30 day pass at a time. A contractor badge can be obtained once contract is signed and NOC leter is submitted with required contractor names. Badge is good for up to three years and must be surrendered if employee is removed from the contract. Physical access to the installation will require US Citizen with Real-ID. All personel subject to basic screening using OH-LEADS, for any precluded history.
Name, Driver License Number, for pre-screening, SSN may be requested at the ECP.
| 32 | Please confirm whether any work under this contract is classified or requires a DD Form 254. | Attachment 1 - PWS | General | No classified work being performed, |
| 33 | If no classified work is required, please confirm that a facility clearance and cleared personnel are not required for contract performance. | Attachment 1 - PWS | General | No classified work being performed, |
| 34 | Please clarify whether remote support personnel who do not require physical base access are subject to the same personnel screening requirements as on-site personnel. | Attachment 1 - PWS | General | |
| 35 | Please confirm the process and lead time for obtaining base access credentials, vehicle passes, escorts, keys, and access to demarcation facilities. | Attachment 1 - PWS | General | |
| 36 | Appendix 10 Section 10.8 identifies 42 existing ISDN PRI circuits currently served by the incumbent provider. Section 10.9 identifies 42 T1/PRI circuits to be provided by the incoming contractor. Please confirm whether these represent the same 42 circuits — with the Section 10.8 circuits to be decommissioned upon cutover and replaced by the Section 10.9 circuits — or whether they represent two separate and distinct sets of circuits. | Appendix 10 | Sections 10.8 and 10.9 | 21 PRI installed at each site. 20 PRI intended for overflow and/or failover, with a single PRI dedicated to the special service identified numbers at each site. This support a max of 42 total, with each site providing geographic failover, should one site incurr an outage we would operate at a limited scope of the remaining site 21 PRI, not full capacity. The transport chanel is for a outside the fence fire alarm monitoring. This does not connect to the PBX. |
The connection must remain operational through a vendor provided solution.
Similar to dry contact type service, previously LUMEN leased pairs from AT&T, but developed a cellular backhaul solution to replace the functionality.
37 The solicitation requires porting of 53,000 DID numbers across six NPA-NXX blocks from the incumbent provider. (a) Please clarify whether the November 12, 2026 cutover deadline requires complete porting of all 53,000 DID numbers or activation of carrier circuits and IP voice services at both demarcation points, with DID porting completing in staged phases thereafter consistent with FCC-mandated LNP timelines. Attachment 1 - PWS PWS 2.2 Site has a pool of 53K numbers with exception of the list of Special Service numbers called out, all numbers to be dynamically routed between the 40 common service PRIs. The roll-over should alternate between sites.
Request alternate routing scheme for the special service numbers, with first choice the two standalone PRI, with one appearance at each site.
| 38 | If phased porting is acceptable, please confirm whether a staged approach is permissible whereby high-priority DID blocks are ported first with remaining NXX blocks completing over a defined post-cutover window. | Attachment 1 - PWS | PWS 2.2 | Phased porting can be utilized, noting all actions to be completed by the hard cotover date of 12 Nov |
| 39 | Please confirm whether the contractor may initiate LNP porting orders on Day 1 of contract award in parallel with and prior to Government acceptance of the Installation Plan. | Attachment 1 - PWS | PWS 2.2 | Porting actions can begin, noting that finalization not to occur until equipment and/or service has been established to prevent loss of capabilities to the installation. |
| 40 | Are there designated maintenance windows or restricted periods during which cutover, testing, and migration activities may or may not be performed? Specifically: (a) are there mission-critical periods during which no service interruption is permissible regardless of advance notice; (b) are there preferred low-traffic windows during which the Government would prefer cutover activities to be scheduled; and (c) are there any scheduled WPAFB exercises, inspections, or operational events between award and December 31, 2026 that the incoming contractor should account for in cutover scheduling? | Attachment 1 - PWS | PWS 2.2 | Normal weekly reoccuring maintenace windows are Tuesday/Thursdays 1800-0000. All work will still need to be advertised and approved for situational awareness even within those windows, via our Configuration Control process. |
| 41 | To support trunk capacity planning and traffic analysis deliverables required under PWS 4.3, can the Government provide current call volume data for WPAFB including average monthly minutes of use, busy hour call attempts, average call duration, inbound/outbound traffic split, and utilization data associated with the existing 42 PRI environment? If this data is not available from the Government, may offerors request call detail records directly from the incumbent provider under applicable FCC provisions? Would also appreciate if further split can be provided Domestic /LD ( including Alaska /Puerto Rico ) and any international destinations | Attachment 1 - PWS | PWS 3.4, 4.3 | |
| 42 | CLINs 0003, 1003, 2003, 3003, 4003, 5003 and CLINs 0004, 1004, 2004, 3004, 4004, 5004 are designated as Not Separately Priced. Please confirm whether offerors should enter a zero-dollar value or leave the corresponding cells blank in Attachment 3, and confirm that these CLINs will not factor into the Total Evaluated Price calculation. | Section L | Para 3.5 | The offereor may enter a zero-dollar value, NSP or leave cells blank for any CLINs designated as Not Separately Priced. The Government will not factor these CLINs into the Total Evaluated Price calculation. |
| 43 | PWS Section 3.4 specifies flat-rate domestic calling with no per-minute charges. PWS Section 3.2 lists standard service features but does not explicitly address international calling. Please clarify whether international calling capability is required under this contract and, if so, whether it is expected on a flat-rate or per-minute rated basis. | Attachment 1 - PWS | PWS 3.2, 3.4 | International calling capability is requested, due to the variable rate per region per-minute is expected for international calling. Expectation of no per minute charge only applies to domestic calls. |
| 44 | Will the Government permit the incoming contractor to reuse existing carrier conduits, cable pathways, entrance facilities, and telecommunications spaces currently utilized by the incumbent provider to reach the demarcation points at Building 10262 and Building 20015? If reuse is permitted, will the Government facilitate coordination between the incoming contractor and the incumbent to enable an orderly transition of these facilities? | Attachment 1 - PWS | PWS 2.1, 2.3 | OSP will need to determine availability conduits and pathways |
| 45 | Given the November 12, 2026 cutover deadline and the plan review timeline in PWS 2.2 — which requires plan submission within 15 calendar days of award, 15 working days for Government review, and 10 working days for final plan delivery — please confirm: (a) whether the Government will commit to the 15 working day review timeline and whether flexibility exists to expedite if necessary to protect the cutover date; and (b) whether the contractor is authorized to initiate long-lead activities — specifically carrier circuit provisioning, LNP order submission, and gateway hardware procurement — on Day 1 of contract award prior to Government acceptance of the Installation Plan. | Attachment 1 - PWS | PWS 2.2 | Government has interest in expiditing review, to meet long-lead requirements. |
| 46 | PWS 2.2 states that no on-site installation may commence prior to Government acceptance of the Installation Plan. May the incoming contractor commence cable installation activities within existing Government telecommunications spaces and conduit systems at Buildings 10262 and 20015 prior to plan acceptance, provided such work does not disrupt existing incumbent services? If not, please confirm what site preparation activities the contractor may undertake between contract award and Government plan acceptance. | Attachment 1 - PWS | PWS 2.1, 2.2 | |
| 47 | We request an extension to the quote due date by two weeks from the release of questions & answers to provide sufficient time for offerors to provide a complete, compelling, and compliant offer. | Appendix 10 | General | Extension will be granted until 3:00PM EDT on 15 July 2026. |
| 48 | How many offsite DIDs exist that will require e911? | Appendix 10 | Appendix 10,10.14 e911 | Currently off-site e911 capabilites may be required for <200 DID. |
| 49 | The section requires the offeror to provide a "detailed process for disconnecting and removing all equipment and circuits from the incumbent provider (CenturyLink Communications – DBA LUMEN) upon successful cutover." Incumbent contractors are normally required to submit a "Transition Out Plan" to the Government that provides these details as well as assurances of cooperation with the awardee to minimize disruption to services. The awardee will not have the authority or knowledge to decommission any existing Lumen equipment or cabling. Recommend that the requirement be removed or changed to require the coordination between the awardee and the incumbent in the development of a timeline for the cutover. | Attachment 1 - PWS | PWS 2.2 Decommissioning Plan | Request assistance with gaining requirements to disconnect LUMEN services impacted by this task, LNP, e911 etc will need action from the awardee, as those capabilites are in-scope of this solicitation. |
| 50 | Offerors are asked to provide a flat-rate with no additional per-minute or long distance charges. In order for offerors to accurately price the requirements, will the Government provide historical usage rates for domestic local and long distance calling minutes? | Attachment 1 - PWS | PWS 3.4 Billing and Calling Rating | |
| 51 | The table provided shows a different number of PRIs at each location than the 21 at each requested. Can the Government confirm that the request is for 21 PRIs at each of the demarc locations? | Appendix 10 | Appendix 10, 10.8 | Currently there are a total of 42 PRI at the site. 40 Common user, 2 for dedicated emergency/operation center usage. In the current configuration there are more PRI located at the 10262 primary site. With the goal of balancing capabilites between the sites as an outcome of this effort, the govenment will complete actions required to have 20 common user PRI, and 1 dedicated OPS PRI at each site as we transition to the new contract. |
| 52 | The Government currently has an Avaya Aura, this platform has the ability to take SIP trunks directly without the need for the PRI handoff. Has the Government considered acquiring the required licensing from Avaya to enable this? This solution would likely be cheaper overall and be simpler to implement with less points of failure. This would also be more future-proof as the production and availability of replacement PRI cards becomes scarce as the products become obsolete. | General | General | Although the SIP connection would be standard within industry, for ease of implementation/capabilites. DOW requirements prohibit interfacing with Internet Telecommunications Service Providers using IP services, as this introduces a potential security issue. To implement these capabilies we need to break the connection with PRI gateways, to mitigate the risk. |
| 53 | Instructions to Offerors, Section 4, Volume 2: Relevant Performance History states "The offeror shall provide an executed contract(s) as evidence [...] This contract should be submitted as an attachment to the Technical volume." Please confirm whether executed contracts should be provided in Volume 2 Relevant Performance History or Volume 3 Technical. | Section L | Instructions to Offerors 4 | The executed contract information should be submitted as an attachment to Volume 2, Relevant Performance History. |
| 54 | Instructions to Offerors, Section 4, Volume 2: Relevant Performance History states "The offeror shall provide an executed contract(s) as evidence." What portions of the executed contracts need to be submitted? Just the portions that include "contract number, original total contract value, period of performance, type of contract, program title, final total contract value, customer, and CO information." or does the Government want the entire contract? | Section L | Instructions to Offerors 4 | The offeror shall provide the contract number, original total contract value, period of performance, type of contract, program title, final total contract value, customer, and CO information. The contractor shall redact / omit any classified or sensitive information. |
| 55 | Please clarify if the government is asking for diverse install points or carrier diversity. | Appendix 10 | Appendix 10, 10.17 | Diversity requested to prevent single point of failure for teleco services to the installation. Specifically requesting presence diversity to the two physical sites. |
| 56 | 21 PRIs are allocated for each of the sites, Area A and Area B. For failover and overflow, is the government intending for all PRIs, 42 in total, to operate from one individual site, as in a fully protected service scenario? If not, please clarify the level of failover protection required. | Appendix 10 | Appendix 10, 10.9.1 Distribution of Physical Services between Sites | No expectation that all 42 to operate from a single site, the goal is for physical site diversity with acceptance of risk for reduced capacity in event of a network outage impacting a single site. |
| 57 | To confirm, is the Government requiring the contractor to provide dedicated PRIs solely for the 900 numbers in the list? Will these 900 numbers be routed dynamically, between sites and PRIs? | Appendix 10 | Appendix 10, 10.9.3 Special Service Routing | The installation has 53,000 DID covered in the scope of this effort. All of these numbers will require routing from the vendor solution to the base phone system using dedicated PRI. |
| 58 | The requirement states that the “transport channel must remain active and in place” – Please clarify. |
Is this transport channel part of the solicited solution or will the transport channel remain in place from the previous provider?
Is this a channelized 64Kbps (DS0) circuit or can the government utilize a standard ethernet transport to transport calls?
Will this site be serviced from the Governments PBX system/infrastructure located in Area B?
| Will the government accept a separate single POTS line for this location as an alternate solution? | Appendix 10 | Appendix 10, 10.11 Transport Channels | Continued operation of the transport channel through the transition period, as included in the scope of this effort. The service utilizing this is a fire alarm for out-side the wire facility owned by the USG, not POTS service. Has no connection to the phone system. End equipment is Digitize 3505 fire monitoring system. Incumbent provider relocated service from leased cable pair to cellular backed contact closure monitoring. | |
| 59 | Can the government please provide information on the equipment (e.g., PBX) that will be connected to each of the groups of T1s identified in the RFP? | General | Single PBX, Model Avaya Aura Rel 10.2, T1 to terminate to Avaya Brand G450 Gateways on MM710 cards. | |
| 60 | Is there rack space at all locations? | General | We will provide floor space for vendor installed rack. Power requirements to be identified by the vendor (NEMA5-20, Twist Lock L5-xx or L6-xx) once identified government will site prep power requirement prior to installation. | |
| 61 | Can the Government please identify where the T1s need to be terminated (e.g., at an MDF?, length of cables?) | General | T1 Terminated to RJ-45 Patch Panel, within the same rack as the equipment. Distance to equipment from patch panel Site A 40 ft, Site B 30 ft | |
| 62 | Subcontractor Experience - Section L, Paragraph 4A allows up to three (3) prior contracts as evidence. Can one or more of those contracts be from a proposed subcontractor rather than the prime offeror? | Section L | Yes, relevant subcontractor experience can be submitted as evidence. | |
| 63 | If the prime offeror previously performed relevant work as a subcontractor (i.e., held no direct contract with the end customer), can that experience be cited as qualifying evidence? If yes, what documentation would be required? | Section L | Yes, the prime offeror can submit relevant experience as evidence of work peformed as a subcontractor. As evidence, the offeror shall provide an executed contract(s) in which they or their prospective subcontractor served as the prime or a subcontractor. The offeror shall provide the contract number, original total contract value, period of performance, type of contract, program title, final total contract value, customer, and CO information. The contractor shall redact/omit any classified or sensitive information. This contract information should be submitted as an attachment to Volume 2, Relevant Performance History. | |
| 64 | 6. Acceptable Evidence in Place of Executed Contracts: Section L, Paragraph 4 requires "an executed contract(s) as evidence." Will the government accept any of the following? |
· CPARS evaluations?
| · Contract award documents (e.g., SF-1449) in lieu of the full contract? | Section L | Yes, CPARs and SF1449s can be submitted. Clarification has been provided the answer for question 63 above regarding the information required as evidence. | ||
| 65 | Please clarify which are acceptable and whether they can fully substitute for or must supplement the executed contract. | Section L | Clarification has been provided above regarding the information required as evidence. | |
| 66 | 7. Volume Reference Discrepancies: Section L contains multiple references that appear inconsistent with Table 1's volume structure. | Section L | These discrepancies in Section L have been addressed in Question 73 and 74 below. These will be corrected with a red-lined version of Section L. | |
| 67 | Section L, Paragraph 1.3, instructs offerors to include the 120-day offer validity statement in Volume 2, while Table 1 identifies Volume 2 as the Relevant Performance History Volume and Volume 1 as the Price Volume. In which volume should the 120-day validity statement be included? | Section L | The 120 day validity statement applies to Volume 1, Price Volume. | |
| 68 | Section L further states, "For Volume 2, the offeror shall ensure the Microsoft Excel files are NOT 'read-only,' so that the Government can verify the offeror's calculations." Since Microsoft Excel pricing files and pricing calculations appear to correspond to the price volume, please confirm whether these instructions were intended to reference Volume 1 (Price) rather than Volume 2 (Relevant Performance History). | Section L | The read-only request applies to Volume 1, Price Volume. | |
| 69 | During the walk through we saw equipment installed to support Circuit ID 08/LDGS/000087/TW (GSA Fleet). This equipment included a metal cabinet, with an in_hand LR805 cellular gateway router connected to an in_hand IG502 gateway router connected to a ZLAN Remote I/O controller. Can you confirm if the ZLAN Remote I/O controllers are owned by the government and can be re-used for the new solution? Understanding that the cabinet, and both gateway routers are owned and operated by the current provider LUMEN we need clarification if LUMEN also provides the ZLAN Remote I/O controllers. | General | All equipment and backhaul are owned and operated by the incumbent provider (LUMEN). The Government Demarcation is the 66 block mounted on the exterior of the cabinet. | |
| 70 | During the walk through we saw equipment installed to support Circuit ID 08/LDGS/000087/TW (GSA Fleet). Is this solution of an in_hand LR805 cellular gateway router connected to an in_hand IG502 gateway router connected to a ZLAN Remote I/O controller part of a larger SCADA with SD-WAN deployment? | General | All equipment and backhaul are owned and operated by the incumbent providor (LUMEN). The Government Demarcation is the 66 block mounted on the exterior of the cabinet. | |
| 71 | Where are the external access manholes located? | General | ||
| 72 | There were multiple questions embedded on the question and Government Response to Question 58 did not specifically answer all of the original questions or concerns. The requirement states that the “transport channel must remain active and in place” Is this transport channel part of the solicited solution or will the transport channel remain in place from the previous provider? | |||
| Appendix 10, | ||||
| Local Telecommunications Services - QA Addendum_Rev3 | Appendix 10, 10.11 Transport Channels; Question 58 | The trasport circuit is part of the solicitiation, and the government is requesting transfer of the circuit in a minimally disruptive fashion. The existing path will be disconnected from the incument providor once a solution is fully operational. To be completed NLT the hard cutover date of 12 Nov. | ||
| 73 | The requirement states that the “transport channel must remain active and in place” Is this a channelized 64Kbps (DS0) circuit or can the government utilize a standard ethernet transport to transport calls? | Appendix 10, | ||
| Local Telecommunications Services - QA Addendum_Rev5 | Appendix 10, 10.11 Transport Channels; Question 60 | This is not a traditional DS0, and is not used to transport calls. The equipment at the end is Digitize 3505, Fire Alarm monitoring system, connected to a building panel (Simplex?) located outside the fenceline. Due to the facility being mostly unoccupied, and being a government owned building this provides fire detection capabilites. | ||
| 74 | The requirement states that the “transport channel must remain active and in place” Will this site be serviced from the Governments PBX system/infrastructure located in Area B? | Appendix 10, | ||
| Local Telecommunications Services - QA Addendum_Rev6 | Appendix 10, 10.11 Transport Channels; Question 61 | Not connected to any PBX. | ||
| 75 | The requirement states that the “transport channel must remain active and in place” Will the government accept a separate single POTS line for this location as an alternate solution? | Appendix 10, | ||
| Local Telecommunications Services - QA Addendum_Rev7 | Appendix 10, 10.11 Transport Channels; Question 62 | Previous iteration of this circuit was via leased cable pairs from AT&T, the cable in question has deteriorated, with no plans for refirbishment. LUMEN developed/deployed a solution to monitor for the three states (Normal, Trouble, Alarm) provided by the building panel, and transmit each condition back to the 20015 location, for interconnection to the Digitize system using cellular backhaul. |
Any solution that can provide these required capabilities would be acceptable.
This is not a traditional POTS capability, more in-line with dry contact alerting type of solution.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .