Pre-proposal minutes-DeCA.doc

MINUTES FROM THE DECA BROADBAND/VSAT

PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE

7 MAY 2008

A pre-proposal conference for the DeCA Broadband/VSAT acquistion, solicitation number HC1013-08-R-2004 was held at DeCA HQ, Ft. Lee, VA on 7 May 2008 at 9am.

Mrs. Brenda Leonard, Contracting Officer from DITCO-Scott, began the meeting by introducing herself and welcoming everyone in attendance..

She then stated the purpose of this conference is to provide a brief overview of the acquisition and that all minutes from this meeting, to include questions and answers, vendor sign in list and any changes that are made will be posted to the FedBizOpps website and the DITCO Opportunities website within a few days.

Mrs. Leonard then asked the government employees introduce themselves. In attendance for the government were:

Ron Warfield, Program Manager

Tom Donnelly Scott Shultz

Yolanda Bowden

Duane Woodfin

Corinina Russell

James Driver

Mrs. Leonard covered the ground rules of the meeting. She informed the contractors that:

--This conference will be informal and held as an open forum.

--Our intent is to clarify, not to change, the solicitation

--Questions may be asked at any time (they may not be all answered here, but you will get an answer)

-- There is only time for one more amendment prior to proposals being due and we will not be granting any more extensions so this is the time to ask.

--She stressed that anything said or done here today does not change the RFP unless an amendment is done. That will be the only official document for proposal preparation.

A question was asked regarding a cutoff for submitting questions and Mrs. Leonard replied that questions should be submitted by COB Monday so that vendors have time to prepare their proposals.

Mrs. Leonard then covered the key areas of the solicitation but reminded vendors that it is your responsibility to ensure you read and fully understand the solicitation.

-The RFP number is HC1013-08-R-2004 and was posted on FBO on 27 Mar 08

-Proposals are due at DITCO-Scott, the address is listed on page 22 of 41, on 20 May 2008 by 2pm. NOTE: THIS DATE HAS BEEN EXTENDED TO 28 May 08, 2pm.

-This is an 8(a) set aside. You must be registered with the SBA in the NAICS code 517410

-Proposal format change, not listed in the RFP but will be--SANITIZE, Part III, technical proposal. Do not list your company name on each page of the section.

-Proposals must be submitted in the manner listed in the RFP, government will not accept email/fax copies.

-The resulting contract will be for a base year and 3 option years

-Award will be an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity contract. Minimum guarantee is the first pilot site.

-Task orders will be issued per site as we bring them on line.

-Past Performance Surveys can still be sent in, up until proposals are due. Past Performance will only be evaluated on the prime contractor, which is the 8(a) company

-This will be a best value source selection, Technical and Past performance are approximately equal, and when combined are slightly more important than price.

-Section B-pricing pages information:

This will be a Firm fixed price contract

Place a numerical figure everywhere there is a dollar sign

It is a business decision on how you do your pricing

Mr. Ron Warfield then reviewed the Performance Work Statement. During this time, the following issues were raised.

- PCI certification. Question: For an appropriate certification and accreditation for PCI, it requires system to be in place to be inspected and audited, so my question is, is PCI certification, while it is a vendor’s responsibility to accomplish for what they are delivering, can that happen as the network is being built, or at certain junctures, and how much time will be provided to the vendor to accomplish that task?

Answer: After discussion, the PWS was updated to reflect PCI certification is required within 30 days of installation acceptance.

- Question: Do you want the VSAT only to be PCI certified?

Answer: The total solution is to be PCI certified.

- Question: If something outside the scope of work affects PCI certification efforts, will the scope of work be expanded to resolve those issues.

Answer: Anything outside the scope of the contract is DeCA’s responsibility. DeCA will resolve those issues/items so the vendor certification efforts can continue.

- Question: Does the PCI requirement apply to the broadband, VSAT and multicast?

Answer: The PCI requirement applies to the broadband and VSAT components. We do not believe the PCI standard specifically addresses multicast.

- Question: Are the vendors responsible for securing the multicast component with PCI standards.

Answer: No, that is not our requirement or intention.

-Question: The PWS said legacy bad check files might be considered for multicast distribution. Will DeCA require PCI certification for multicast to support this?

Answer: No. The requirements for the legacy point of sales system are being dropped as it will be retired within the next few months.

-Question: Will the vendor be responsible for encrypting the multicast traffic and not the VPN tunnel traffic?

Answer: Yes, this is correct.

-Question: Will the vendor be responsible for firewalling the Internet access?

Answer: The vendor is responsible for providing the transport service only; protection of the enclave/store/remote sites is DeCA’s responsibility.

-Question: For the remote sites, there are specific PCI terms for Internet access that conflict with the PCI standards. Will DeCA take care of those issues?

Answer: If the commercial Internet access requirement for the remote sites goes against, conflicts with or adversely affects the PCI certification requirements, DeCA will not activate or use the commercial Internet access requirement.

-Question: Are all of the existing sites and enclave PCI certified now?

Answer: No, DeCA’s enterprise is not PCI certified. This issue is being worked through DeCA’s Senior Information Assurance Officer under the CIO’s office.

-Question: AES has multiple levels of encryption; what level of encryption is required?

Answer: We require AES with a 256 bit encryption key.

-Question: Where does the multicast data come from; i.e., does it come from DeCA HQ at Ft Lee?

Answer: Yes, virtually all of the multicast data will come from DeCA HQ at Ft. Lee. A VPN tunnel or SSH session might possibly be used to push the data in a secure manner to the vendor teleport. The segment of the path from the vendor teleport to the remote VSAT location would protect the multicast transmission data using the vendor’s solution.

-Question: Is the multicast server or multicast data push coming from DeCA HQ at Ft Lee?

Answer: It comes from whatever the vendor proposes.

-Question: In what form will the multicast data come? On CD, or anything the vendor wants to specify?

Answer: The vendor needs to specify what their solution entails. One option is to push it to the vendor via some secure some SSH tunnel or something similar.

-Question: Would the multicast data push be firewalled to protect DeCA’s enclave because the vendor’s teleport is on the outside of DeCA’s enclave?

Answer: Yes. The data would traverse from DeCA’s network through its firewall to the vendor.

-Question: Are there facilities here at DeCA HQ for a multicast server?

Answer: Yes, so long as the server does not exceed 10 amps. A typical Microsoft server type device can be handled with no problems. A server/appliance should be rack mountable in a 19” equipment rack with a minimum of three 10/100/1000baseT interfaces. Ref revised PWS 2.1.2.

-Question: Does the multicast transmission have to be real time; i.e., sent as soon as it is received? Can it be handled at some later time? For example, if the data were provided Friday afternoon, the vendor could have the data delivered by Monday morning.

Answer: Real time transmission is not a requirement. The vendor’s solution needs to be able to handle the transmission. The transmission can be sent at a later time. The example is acceptable.

-Question: Is the transmission only once a week?

Answer: Yes. DeCA has never had a multicast capability before. As the user community becomes aware of the potential, the demand could increase. At some point in the future, there may be a need to adjust the frequency and duration of the transmissions.

-Question: With regards to the remote store GFE XP machine with the folder to store the multicast file. The PC will not be behind a firewall nor on the enclave network. The vendor multicast will deliver the file to the PC folder and DeCA will move the data to its protected enclave. Is this the same machine the vendor is going to provide on-call Internet service on?

Answer: Our Senior Information Assurance Officer will work with us to develop an appropriate strategy and security configuration based on the store routers being configured as perimeter routers. The reference to on-call Internet service is not understood in this context

-Question: Once a week a data broadcast of some type will be made. The data will be delivered to the vendor for transmission. Since this is only once a week, do you want a virtual connection or a hardwired connection? How do you want to deliver the information?

Answer: We are expecting some type of path between the vendor teleport and DeCA, so a path will be in existence. If it is feasible, we would want to use this connection to push the multicast data to the vendor teleport.

-Question: The connection for passing the multicast traffic could be frame relay, hard wired ?

Answer: Yes, PWS 2.1.6 indicates the links should be dedicated terrestrial private IP gateways. Based on the size of the connection, we recognize there may be contention/congestion issues; these should be addressed in the vendor’s proposal.

-Question: Would the multicast traffic be secondary to the other traffic using the links?

Answer: Yes. It is expected the multicast solution will seek to minimize impact to the non-multicast traffic and may possibly occur during off-hours. PWS 2.1.2 was revised to clarify this requirement

-Question: What time is off-hours; i.e., what time is every commissary closed?

Answer: DeCA has 3 theaters of operations, so DeCA would expect the multicast push would be staggered for the time zones in the 3 theaters of operations. DeCA would pick a time and ask the vendor to push the data to the remote sites by a specified time. Many DeCA stores are closed either on a Sunday or a Monday.

-Question: Does off-hours include or exclude the days commissaries are stocked during a week.

Answer: Based on input from DeCA Product Support, most stores have deliveries 4 or 5 days per week; only the most remote locations may have a single weekly delivery. It is doubtful whether commissary stock days will play any role in multicast transmission scheduling during off-hours. The revised PWS 2.1.2 tentatively defines 2200-0300 as the off-hour period; the PWS has additional details.

-Question: Will there be 3 different multicasts based on 3 theaters of operations?

Answer: This is an approach, but not required.

-Question: Is the requirement still for 15 Mbps multicast even if the multicast is split into 3 different transmissions?

Answer: Per PWS 2.1.2, the requirement is 15 Mbps to each site; it is not 5 Mbps to 3 theaters of operations.

-Question: Is the requirement for 1 multicast transmission per week, or is it 3 transmissions per week, one for each region?

Answer: Per the PWS, the requirement is for one multicast transmission to all of the remote locations once per week. If the vendor solution breaks the weekly transmission into 3 separate transmissions, one to each theater of operation, the requirement has been met. If the transmission is to all sites concurrently, the requirement is met. If the transmission is separate to each theater, the requirement is met.

-Question: What does DeCA send to the vendor, one transmission or three?

Answer: DeCA will send one transmission; the vendor solution will transmit the multicast based on whatever configuration they propose, either one to each theater, or one to all theaters. Only sites configured to receive a multicast transmission will receive it; consequently, DeCA expects a mechanism available from to configure which sites will receive a multicast so only the specified sites will receive the transmission. PWS 2.1.2 has been updated to reflect this requirement.

-Question: Is an acknowledgement from the site indicating receipt of the multicast broadcast required?

Answer: Yes, based on what we know of the technology.

-Question: Does there have to be a pre-configured secondary time?

Answer: Yes, there will need to be a delayed secondary schedule.

-Question: From a financial burden perspective, can you say exactly what you expect from the OCD testing of multicast? It is extremely expensive for some 8A firms to set up a multicast environment for testing a single file transmission for the OCD.

Answer: The requirement for multicast testing during the OCD has been removed. Multicast testing will be conducted in the Pilot Site phase.

-Question: Based on the table in 2.1.4 and the pricing table in Attachment 13, it appears the govt is expecting pricing based a different equipment set for a small, medium and large store. The dish and equipment set is not driven by store size, but by link budgets. A small store in Alaska may need a 3.8 meter dish set and a large BUC, but it is a small store. The pricing sheet is misleading. Factors in cost include the number of stores for the different equipment sets, not whether it is large, medium or small store. How does DeCA intend to resolve this issue?

Answer: Attachment 13 will be revised so the vendors price each store for VSAT non-recurring costs to include equipment, shipping, and installation costs. Cost will be evaluated on the total cost of the proposal.

-Question: With regards to PWS 2.1.11, after the last amendments, 4 theaters of operation were identified (CONUS, Europe, PAC Rim, Guam); are 4 leased systems required?

Answer: There are only 3 theaters of operation. Guam is included in the PAC Rim, but was broken out in Attachment 13 because VSAT service for Guam may be more expensive than other similar sized stores/CDCs. PWS 2.1.11 would require 3 deployable suites. The three theaters of operation are: CONUS, Europe, and PAC Rim.

-Question: It is financially burdensome for an 8A firm to purchase a suite and then only charge for it using the MRC when there is no guaranteed usage for the suite. Can anything be done to reduce this financial burden/risk for the vendors?

Answer: The requirement will be changed from “leased” to a purchase with a monthly recurring charge for maintenance and appropriate usage fees when the system is in use. Refer to the revised PWS and attachment 13 for details.

-Question: Would it be permissible to offer the deployable service in only one theater of operation? The cost of the service in CONUS would be more reasonable than a suite for the PAC Rim due to equipment size.

Answer: No. Please refer to PWS 2.1.11; the requirement is for 3 suites, one for CONUS, one for Europe, one for PAC Rim. The suite would be purchased when needed.

-Question: Ref PWS 2.1.5, does the 99.7% uptime requirement apply to the broadband connections?

Answer: Yes, the total integrated broadband/VSAT uptime requirement is 99.7%.

-Question: If either the broadband or the VSAT component of the solution running, is the solution up?

Answer: Yes.

-Question: If one of the components is up, then 4 hour response time is not required; is that correct?

Answer: The overall maintenance requirement is the next business day per PWS 2.5.4.1. There is a separate requirement for expedited service restoral in PWS 2.5.4.2. The expedited service restoral will be executed when directed by DeCA CORs, no matter what component is up or down.

-Question: Is the 99.7% uptime requirement the sum of the solution and not the requirement for the broadband and the VSAT separately?

Answer: It is the uptime requirement for the total solution. If one of the 2 pieces is operating, the service is in an impaired status; it is not down.

-Question: Are you implying that every site would have broadband and VSAT?

Answer: There is no implication; the PWS requires an integrated broadband and VSAT solution for all DeCA locations. Refer to PWS 1.0 and Attachment 12. The vendor is required to publish all locations they cannot provide the required service per RPF page 24 of 41, Element 4.4, Service Degradation and Non-Availability Report.

-Question: Ref RFP page 24 of 41, Element 4.4, Service Degradation and Non-Availability Report. May broadband or VSAT be placed in this Report.

Answer: Yes. Whenever a component of the broadband/VSAT solution is not available for a site, the site should be placed on this Report along with details as to why it was included on this Report. It should be noted that this Report covers more that just service non-availability.

-Question: Is there any way data can be presented that shows purchase of the deployable suite is more economical than leasing it?

Answer: DeCA is changing its requirement from a leased option to a purchase option. Refer to the revised PWS and Attachment 13 for details.

-Question: Will there be any issues with having a logical DEMARC or a physical DEMARC at the stores?

Answer: No

-Question: Regarding the fly away satellite suites for the theaters of operations. Assume a task order were issued, for instance, to set up a system someplace where there is no commissary right now and the system has to be moved ½ of the way across the Pacific. How do I recoup my shipping costs under a firm fixed price contract? Will the govt provide a military transport?

Answer: Military transport will not be provided. The requirement will be changed to the purchase of the fly-away suites instead of leased. Since the shipping cost will be different each time, a negotiated shipping cost CLIN will be established so shipping costs can be recovered.

-Question: Will there be a separate maintenance CLIN for the transportable units?

Answer: Yes, additional CLINS will be established since the requirement is changing from leased to purchase.

-Question: Regarding the Alaska and Hawaii locations being part of the PAC Rim, would they have VPN tunnels to the PAC Rim?

Answer: Yes. If OCONUS teleports were proposed for the PAC Rim and Europe, they would have a path terminating in those theaters of operation as indicated in the PWS; with their alternate path terminating in CONUS.

-Question: When are the specifications in PWS 2.1.6.2 supposed to be met?

Answer: This requirement must be met any time we choose to run it, 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, excluding DeCA traffic.

-Question: Are the IPGW requirements in 2.1.6.1 dedicated circuits, whether virtual or physical, between the vendor provided teleports and DeCA’s 6 network nodes?

Answer: Each teleport in a theater of operation should be dual homed. If there are 3 teleports, one for CONUS, Europe and the PAC Rim, there will be a total of 6 connections into DeCA’s protected enclave. If only one teleport is being proposed for global operations, there will only be 2 connections for it.

-Question: With regards to pricing in Attachment 13, CLINS 15-26, are you potentially looking for some type of physical connection to each of the listed locations from the teleports?

Answer: Yes.

-Question: With regards to the latency requirement, PWS 2.1.6.2, in order to meet the 90 millisecond latency requirement, you are implying the need for a dedicated circuit between Ft. Lee and the vendor solution broadband cloud. How do we size the circuit? Should it be sized to the maximum or minimum expected traffic load?

Answer: The circuits should be sized based on the estimated traffic load. The number of sites and typical traffic profiles have been provided. The vendors should price the terrestrial backhaul connectivity based on their technical analysis of the traffic load.

-Question: Should the backhaul circuit size be based on the maximum utilization of the ordered service, e.g., 500Kbps, assuming all stores will be connected? PWS 2.1.6.4 seems to require this.

Answer: That could be done, but it does not take into consideration the traffic analysis data provided in Attachment 7.

-Question: Some locations do not have broadband connections available. Are you expecting proposals to include possible tie-ins to surrounding paths that might make the service available? For instance, if service is not available on base, but is available off-base, would we want the service brought on base to a DeCA location.

Answer: If broadband service is available, we would like the service to be provided. If a broadband infrastructure does not exist, we do not expect an infrastructure to be built. Everyone should be aware that in most cases, access to on-base locations requires routing or connectivity through the base central office. Direct access is generally not permitted from an off-base service to an on-base location; it must pass through the base central office and use the base infrastructure.

-Question: Is the vendor really responsible for the DEMARC in the DeCA facility? The vendor prefers to have their DEMARC in the base central office so they are not responsible for the extended DEMARC.

Answer: PWS 2.1.8 will be reworded to clarify the vendor’s responsibility for extending the circuit across the base with DeCA assistance where needed.

-Question: Who bears the cost of extending the service across the base to the DeCA site?

Answer: In most cases, DeCA has an Installation Support Agreement (ISA) that defines the base support for DeCA commissaries and CDCs. DeCA pays an annual fee to the bases for their support. DeCA will pay for reasonable additional costs based on its past experience, for extending service across a base. These costs should be identified at site survey time.

-Question: With the use of a VPN tunnel over VSAT, is there any requirement or need for VSAT traffic acceleration?

Answer: Yes. RFP page 25, 26 of 41, Element 4.5 – Data Acceleration Report, will provide the vendor assessment of the benefit for data acceleration technology. Attachment 13 will be updated for provide for the pricing of the technology. This is a technical evaluation element.

-Question: Third party equipment is involved for data acceleration. Is it up to the vendor to propose a solution? Are there any restrictions on what is proposed?

Answer: Yes, the vendor should propose a solution and indicate how it would integrate into DeCA’s architecture to support their broadband/VSAT solution.

-Question: Data acceleration is not required for the VSAT solution so it won’t be included in the proposed solution; however it will be of a tremendous benefit. How is data acceleration to be priced?

Answer: Attachment 13 will be updated to include CLINS for data acceleration.

-Question: Will the installers have trouble getting on base? Can they be issued a single badge to get on all bases.

Answer: Every base controls their security environment. We will let the store know you are coming and provide a store POC to facilitate the process.

-Question: Where in the PWS can the vendor be reimbursed for the labor costs while waiting 18 days for gaining base approval to install the service?

Answer: It is the vendor’s responsibility to price their proposal to cover their costs and to schedule their workflow to maximize manpower utilization and effectiveness.

-Question: Ref 2.3.2, a concurrent site survey/install is not feasible because of the 18 days to gain the necessary approvals. How do you want this handled?

Answer: The PWS will be revised to allow a site survey visit with a preference for a concurrent survey/install where feasible. Survey costs can be included as part of the equipment/startup costs for each site in the revised Attachment 13.

-Question: Can work on the base and a DeCA facility be done without needed approvals from the base and other responsible groups/organizations?

Answer: Paragraph 2.3.6 was revised to include appropriate base approvals or other relevant approvals where required.

-Question: Can submission of the price volume be delayed and submitted at a later date after the site surveys are completed?

Answer: No as this would require paying the vendors to complete site surveys to build their price volume.

-Question: Does the SOFA agreement play any part in this installation?

Answer: We do not know; this will undoubtedly be determined at site survey time.

-Question: Does the contractor have any input as far as the installation schedule and regional constructability?

Answer: Yes, the contractor is free to build their schedule based on PWS 2.8.1 requirements.

-Question: With regards to the rollout schedule, is there any published list of potential site growth or site decreases for DeCA commissaries?

Answer: DeCA has an on-going construction program with around 6 stores per year being built. It takes 2-3 years to build a new store and they are usually built on a one for one replacement. We just added a new commissary at Fort Worth that used to be a joint exchange/commissary run by the exchange. This was the first new addition to the family of commissaries in quite a while. We believe a new commissary is slated for Richards-Gebauer MCB. DeCA does not make the decision as to whether a new commissary should be opened; those decisions are at the DoD and/or congressional level.

-Question: Regarding the rollout issue, there are some substantial one time cost issues relating to the NOC service. Since this is an IDIQ contract, there are no guarantees that service for multiple sites would be ordered; this would create an undue financial risk/burden on the vendor unless a guaranteed minimum number of stores within a short period of time were established. Is it possible to add one-time charges to Attachment 13 to cover startup costs for NOC services for each theater of operation?

Answer: Yes, Attachment 13 will be revised accordingly. The vendors must explain what this cost covers/includes.

-Question: CDCs are not identified as large, medium or small stores. What service should be provided to them?

Answer: We will amend attachment 12 to provide this information.

-Question: A lot of the CDCs seem to have the same physical address as the commissary. Should the CDCs be considered a part of the commissaries or not?

Answer: Contrary to what was stated in the meeting, many of the PAC Rim CDCs share a network with the commissary. We will identify those locations accordingly in the Attachment 12 revision.

-Question: For the pricing evaluation, should a quantity of one be assumed for the CLINS where TBD is indicated for evaluation purposes?

Answer: No. A total proposal cost is needed, CLINS 1-3 will be unit cost. Attachment 13 will be updated so service costs will be computed based on each site.

-Question: For the OCD, how will the dish be connected to the test bed?

Answer: A pull rope has been installed on the roof of the Sisisky wing, down through a ventilation shaft to the 1st floor Sisisky. This will be used to facilitate the installation of coax to support the OCD.

-Question: What should be done if there is no space or outlets available in a store/CDC equipment cabinet for the Broadband/VSAT equipment?

Answer: Per PWS 2.3.1.3, the store director may approve the recommendation of an alternate location; the DeCA HQ NOC will provide final approval. These issues should be resolved at site survey time.

-Question: How will testing be done for the production rollout? If the contractor turns over the service at 1400, when will the govt’s testing begin? Does it have to be scheduled?

Answer: Testing will be conducted in accordance with PWS 2.4 and Attachment 8B as specified therein. There will be phased approach to testing with applications being migrated over as test results support.

-Question: What type of connectivity should be provided for the backhauls from the vendor teleport to DeCA’s connection nodes?

Answer: The vendor should size the connectivity based on their analysis of the information provided. Possible circuit types include but are not limited to point to point, MPLS, or fractional DS3s.

-Question: Some of the information provided in Attachment 12 for locations only has building numbers with no street names. Is any more information available to further identify the site locations?

Answer: The web site www.commissaries.com may have additional information. We have made available the information we have. The web site sometimes lists the closest city. Store personnel were hired to sell groceries and may or may not be able to provide additional assistance.

-Question: What is the distance from the Sisisky roof location for the VSAT dish to the Sisisky 1st floor CARTS test bed area?

Answer: Approximately 230 feet.

-Question: What type of cable is already on-site for possible use at the contractor’s risk in connecting the rooftop dish to the IDU in the CARTS test bed area?

Answer: ComScope Dual RG6 5782 Quad Shield 3 GHz COAX Cable.

After the PWS review, the vendors were taken to three locations within DeCA HQ. They viewed the roof, the CARTS Test Bed, and the DeCA NOC area. The vendors were briefed that the tentative date for the OCD is 23-27 June and that the participation in the demonstration will be limited to those vendors still in the competitive range.

The meeting was then wrapped up. Mrs. Leonard thanked the vendors for coming to the conference and reminded them that questions must be submitted by COB 12 May 08 in order to be answered. She reiterated that nothing said at the conference constituted a change to the solicitation and that if any changes are made, they will be formally provided via a solicitation amendment. The meeting concluded at 1230.