20100402_AMEND0004_MSC_NGW__RFP_QA.pdf

HC1013-09-R-2004 MSC NGW RFP

QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES

02-April-2010

QUESTION # 65

Attachment A, Sec 5(a(ii) – Please clarify whether the bandwidth requirements (i.e. CIR of 64 kbps and BIR of 256 kbps downlink/128 kbps uplink) are in terms of IP Data Rate or Information Rate. Information Rate calculation includes the IP payload overhead plus the TRANSEC and SATCOM encapsulation overheads.

REVISED ANSWER # 65

The bandwidth requirements are in terms of IP Data Rate (including IP payload overhead) and not in terms of information rate given the above information rate definition.

QUESTION # 200

Section Number: L.

Requirement: 1.1.

Question: Is the program/budget funding reflected in DLCC dollars (i.e., reflects discount factors from Section M 002, D-7) or in nominal dollars (i.e., sum total of real year amounts)?

ANSWER # 200

The program/budget funding is in current year/nominal dollars.

QUESTION # 201

Section Number: L.

Requirement: 1.1.

Question: Do the stated amounts include funding for existing BEST services and NGW services?

ANSWER # 201

The budget in Attachment O, Section L, 1.1 is provided for reference only.

QUESTION # 202

Section Number: B,M.

Requirement: CLIN 0001-0032.

Question: For pricing Sub-CLINs, the “Unit” column reflects 3 mo or 12 mo of service. The amount under “Unit Price” columns is required to be MRC or NRC. “Total Price” column multiplies “Quantity” by the “Unit Prices” which are MRC. It does not take into consideration the 3 mo and 12 mo periods specified under “Unit” column. Can the Government please clarify how the number of months should be factored into the calculation?

Recommendation: Revise CLIN structure to accommodate.

ANSWER # 202

See Question #34. The following statement has been added to Schedule B: “Unit MRC equals the price for 1 month;

TOTAL MRC equals the price for UNIT times the UNIT PRICE MRC”. For example, if the 3-month price for a Bandwidth Price of 64kbps (CLIN0002AA) is $30, in the Price Schedule UNIT PRICE MRC will be $10 MRC and the TOTAL PRICE would be $30. The Government commitment upon use of that CLIN would be for the Committed Bandwidth Increment ordered, i.e., 3 months.

QUESTION # 203

Section Number: B,M.

Requirement: CLINs & Pricing Table.

Question: Are prices for the relevant contract year based on the date of order or date of service? For example, a 12 month service is ordered starting month 11 of Base Year 1, will it be billed as (a) first 2 months at Base Year 1 prices and remaining 10 months at Base Year 2 prices or (b) 12 months at Base year 1 prices. Please clarify?

ANSWER # 203

It is based on the date of order. For example, 12 month CLIN activated on month 11 of Base Year 1, all 12 months will be billed at the Base Year 1 price and not the Base Year 2 price.

QUESTION # 204

Section Number: B,M.

Requirement: Govt Example CONUS_BY1.

Question: Government has included CONUS_BY1 as an example with the pricing spreadsheet. In order to facilitate accurate completion of the pricing spreadsheet, can the Government please provide a completed sample spreadsheet with evaluation quantity factors, Band, spreadsheet formulas to reflect DLCC by each sub-CLIN, CLIN and Totals that will be evaluated?

ANSWER # 204

Please see revised Section B.

QUESTION # 205

Section Number: SOO 6.1.

Requirement: Information Assurance.

Question: Can the Government please explain the DIACAP and IA boundary or boundaries, and MAC level and sensitivity for each?

ANSWER # 205

Please see SOO, Section 6.1.G. The IA requirements that are applicable to commercially operated LES are: DFARS clauses 252.239-7000 (IA protection), 252-239-7001 (Contractor performance of IA protection), National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual NISPOM), and DODI. 8510.01. For further guidance, please see Section J, Attachment F, Section 2.1.2. All documents, except the NGW DIACAP Implementation Plan, are publicly available. The NGW DIACAP Implementation Plan will be developed post-award.

QUESTION # 206

Reserved.

ANSWER # 206: Reserved.

QUESTION # 207

Reserved.

ANSWER # 207: Reserved.

QUESTION # 208

Is it acceptable to the Government if we offer optional CLINS in the relevant categories?

ANSWER # 208

No

QUESTION # 209

Section: Pricing Schedule.

Requirement: Shipboard Installation.

Question: There is no installation pricing CLIN identified for Diego Garcia. Will ship installations occur at this location?

ANSWER # 209

Please see revised Section B. Subclins added for Diego Garcia ship installations.

QUESTION # 210

Requirement: Shipboard Installation.

Question: There is no installation pricing CLIN identified for Hawaii. Will ship installations occur at this location?

ANSWER # 210

Please see revised Section B. Subclins added for Hawaii ship installations.

QUESTION # 211

Requirement: Shipboard Installation.

Question: In the Government’s response to Question 114 it was stated that tax and customs duties need to be included for CLINs 0035-0063. However, for which country does the Contractor determine these fees for if the installation is within a broadly defined region (i.e. “Middle East”)?

ANSWER # 211

Please see revised Section B. CLIN 0081 has been provided to reimburse costs associated with custom duties and taxes with proper support documentation.

QUESTION # 212

Section: Pricing Schedule.

Requirement: Travel.

Question: In the Government’s response to question 115 it was stated that travel related costs should be included in the pricing. If the installation site is identified in a broadly defined region (i.e. “Middle East”), how should the Contractor estimate travel and travel related costs?

ANSWER # 212

CLINs include all installation costs by region including travel costs.

QUESTION # 213

Requirement: Travel.

Question: If travel is to be included in the installation costs, what will “CLIN 0075 Travel” be used for?

ANSWER # 213:

CLIN is for Government Directed Travel (i.e. technical support services other than normal installation support.)

QUESTION # 214

Requirement: Shipboard Installation.

Question: In the installation CLINs there is a reference to “with crane provided.” Can the Government provide clarification as to whether the Government is providing the crane or does the Government expect the Contractor to provide the crane? If the crane is provided by the Government, does this also include a crane operator?

ANSWER # 214:

The Government will provide crane services in Government yards/facilities. Government-provided cranes will be accompanied by supporting services.

QUESTION # 215

Section: Pricing Schedule.

Requirement: Evaluation Quantities.

Question: With regards to the bandwidth quantities and the evaluations quantities, is the buildup below and accurate representation for figuring out the contractors DLCC?

a) CLIN 0001 – Qty 10, MRC 1000, Total MRC 10,000, Evaluation Quantity year one 14, Total Evaluation price for CLIN

0001 Year 1 is 140,000.

i) Total MRC = (10x1000)= 10,000 Total Evaluation Quantity = (10,000 x 14 ) = 140,000 (assume no NRC for example).

ANSWER # 215

The DLCC calculation will use the evaluation quantities only. See revised Section B Price Schedule which includes DLCC calculation.

QUESTION # 216

Section: Question/Answer numbers 118, 168, and 197.

Requirement: Information Assurance.

Question: Does the Government intend to mandate TEMPEST (DFARS clause 252.239-7000) requirements, as COTS equipment is normally tested to the NACSIM requirements?

ANSWER # 216:

No. The Government does not intend to mandate TEMPEST requirements.

QUESTION # 217

Section: SOO 6.1, IA.

Requirement: The contractor shall provide transmission security (TRANSEC) over the satellite infrastructure links as specified by DoD Directive (DoDD) 8581.1, IA Policy for Space Systems Used by DoD (i.e., Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) 140-2 Level 2 Advanced Encryption Standard (AES)-2). Anti-jam TRANSEC capability is not required.

Question: Is the FIPS 140-2 Level 2 certification required for the shipboard satellite modems?

Recommendation: Recommend that the requirement be changed to FIPS 140-2 Level 1 certification for the shipboard satellite modems.

ANSWER # 217

See answer to question 139 in Q&A located in Amendment 4.

QUESTION # 218

Section: SOO 6.1, IA.

Requirement: Information Assurance – MAC II Control (DoDI 8500.2: CODP-2).

Question: Does the Government require backup LES infrastructure for the resumption of mission essential functions within 24 hours of activation in the wake of a catastrophic facility loss?

ANSWER # 218:

Government declines to provide an answer.

QUESTION # 219

Section: Question/Answer number 82.

Requirement: Lab Configuration.

Question: Does the Government require that the same shipboard hardware configuration be provided at the Lab sites?

ANSWER # 219

Yes, the lab equipment shall include each terminal architecture provided in the solution. Please see Section B, CLINs 0083 and 0084 have been added to the Non-Bandwidth_BY1 Price Schedule to consolidate Lab Requirements for the Ship-Board and MSOC Vans.

QUESTION # 220

Section: L: 4.2.2 Section 1: Technical Solution/Management Approach “The tasking statements in the PWS and Schedule sections shall use a common numbering system. The PWS shall include separate sections for all tasks associated with Low-Rate Initial Production (LRIP), installation, and sustainment tasks in order to clearly differentiate the tasks to be performed during each phase of the contract. . . . The offeror shall follow the PWS template provided in Section J, Attachment H. Offerors who do not follow the template will be negatively scored.”

Section J, Attachment H, PWS Template, Section 7 – Tasks “(Provide a narrative of the tasks that make up the PWS. Number the tasks sequentially, e.g., Task 1 - NGW Initial Operational Capability (IOC), Task 2 - NGW Full Operational Capability (FOC), Task 3 - Post FOC Operations and Maintenance, Task 4 - Management, etc. Describe in clear terms, using active language, what work will be performed.

Structure the PWS around the purpose of the work to be performed, i.e., what is to be performed, rather than how to perform

it. Relate how the work meets the performance requirements specified in Section 6 of this document. Unfunded tasks are not allowed unless the requirement is subject to availability of funds (SAF) or is going to be incrementally funded).

“REMEMBER: Tasks, subtasks and deliverables presented here are examples. You must construct and present your own solution.”

1. What is the Schedule that the Section L requirement references?

2. Please clarify what the Government expects in terms of a common numbering system between the PWS and ‘Schedule’.

The instructions state that the PWS shall include separate sections for all tasks associated with LRIP, installation, and sustainment to differentiate clearly the tasks performed during each phase of the contract. The template states: “REMEMBER:

Tasks, subtasks and deliverables presented here are examples. You must construct and present your own solution.”

Shipboard installation tasks are relatively generic across ships, with differences occurring because of individual ship nuances of which we will not have knowledge until we board each ship, minimally each type of ship. Having to write to the LRIP installations and to that which will occur during the ‘installation’ phase is repetitive, which takes away from the depth with which we can address all tasks we will perform during the life of the program. Program Management (PM) and Information Assurance (IA) are tasks that will occur across all phases. Discussing PM and IA in each phase again adds repetitiveness in the PWS.

Are we constrained to make all of our tasks fit into the categories of LRIP, installation, and sustainment or are we allowed to construct and present our own PWS categories that we would present by task type, indicating in what phases tasks will occur, i.e.:

Task 1 – Program Management Task 2 – Systems Engineering Task 3 – Procurement Task 4 – Network Monitoring Task 5 – MSC NOC Installation Task 6 – RF Implementation Task 7 – Shipboard Installation Task 8 – MSOC Van Installation Task 9 – Training Task 10 – Information Assurance Task 11 – Operations and Maintenance (Sustainment)

ANSWER # 220

(1) The schedule refers to the WBS as specified in Appendix 4 Proposed Work Breakdown Structure.

(2) A numbering system that allows for a clear understanding of the relationship between the PWS and the WBS.

(3) As long as it is tied to the WBS and allows for a clear understanding of the relationship between the PWS and the

WBS.

QUESTION # 221

Section: Q&A Document.

Requirement: Questions 139, 169 and 170.

Question: Analyzing the Government’s responses to prospective Offerors’ questions, specifically the answer(s) to Questions 139, 169, 170, and after review of SOO section 6.1.a ambiguity remains regarding the TRANSEC encryption requirements.

Please confirm that the encryption requirement of SOO section 6.1.a applies only to encryption of the telemetry, tracking and control (TT&C) of the satellite.

ANSWER # 221

Yes.

QUESTION # 222

Section: Q&A Document.

Requirement: Question #139.

Question: Based on reviewing the Governments answers (specifically the response to Question 139), an exhaustive market research indicates that there is only one modem manufacturer currently selling a compliant COTS modem, effectively eliminating competition across industry modem manufactures, hub equipment suppliers and further limiting coverage and space systems by excluding L-Band operators with worldwide COTS services, for example. There are commercial alternatives in place today used by the DoD to satisfy IA requirements with respect to FIPS-140-2 and the Statement of Objectives, section 6.1.a.

Specifically, DoD users meet and maintain the FIPS 140-2 standards by deploying FIPS hardware and software at each end of a commercial network, and tunneling between the two. The generic approach is similar to the following: customer gateway router – FIPS certified contractor equipment/router – AES tunnel – satellite modem – satellite – hub modem – FIPS certified contractor device/router – (end AES tunnel) – customer NOC gateway router. This approach opens competition and allows for additional solutions, including worldwide COTS solutions, to satisfy the requirements of NGW.

Would such an approach be considered acceptable to the Government?

ANSWER # 222

Government declines to answer.

QUESTION # 223

Section: SOO 6.1.f.

Question: The government responded to several requests by contractors to define accreditation boundaries by pointing back to the section 6.1 of the SOO and section J attachment F. Neither Section 6.1 nor Section J-Attachment F addresses the specific accreditation boundaries for the NGW solicitation. Please confirm that the contractor is required to achieve and maintain all controls required by DoDI 8500.2 for MAC II public for contractor equipment used at the commercial LES; and other contractor equipment and applications meet the controls under MAC III public.

ANSWER # 223

Please see SOO, Section 6.1.c. All aspects of the contractors proposed network will need to be MAC II.

QUESTION # 224

Section: Q&A Document.

Requirement: Question #65.

Question: In the context of an IP/hub platform, CIR (committed information rate) and BIR (burstable information rate) the term "information rate" refers to the user data rate, whereas in the RF context, the term "information rate" refers to the data rate at the RF link "including all overhead related to hub signaling and space segment management”, resulting in less useable bandwidth to the Fleet and an inability to achieve the 64Kbps CIR and 256Kbps/128Kbps BIR user data requirements.

Please clarify that the "information rate" is related to the user data rate and not to the RF link data rate.

ANSWER # 224

The "information rate" is related to the user data rate and not to the RF link data rate. Please see revised answer to Question #65.

QUESTION # 225

Section: Q&A Document.

Requirement: Question #122.

Question: Will the Government include in the total evaluated price the cost for the areas outside the defined areas of concentration? If yes, please provide the 8 year evaluation bandwidth quantities for CIR, Surge and Burst which are required for coverage outside the concentration areas?

ANSWER # 225

Worldwide coverage should be reflected across the four regions listed in the CLINS. The offeror has some flexibility to define the exact point of demarcation between regions as long as no individual area of concentration is segmented across more than one region. The RFP asks for the offeror to provide a coverage map for the proposed solution. This coverage map and corresponding technical proposal description should clearly define what coverage is associated with which region.

QUESTION # 226

The PWS template contains the following:

Appendices: (Provide required appendix documents explained in Section L) We cannot find a reference in Section L for “required appendix documents.” Please clarify what documents are required in an Appendix to the PWS.

ANSWER # 226

Please see revised Section B.

QUESTION # 227

Section: B The most recent update to MSC NGW Statement of Objectives (SOO), Section 6.1, and paragraph g. requires that “the proposed LES infrastructure meets all administrative, operational, and physical security requirements in accordance with the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (NISPOM).” The purpose of the NISPOM is to prescribe “the requirements, restrictions, and other safeguards to prevent unauthorized disclosure of classified information. The Manual controls the authorized disclosure of classified information released by U.S. Government Executive Branch Departments and Agencies to their contractors.”

However, based on the SOO and DD 254, there is no requirement to store classified materials or information within the LES infrastructure. Please clarify the requirement to meet all the requirements of the NISPOM.

ANSWER # 227

There are no current requirements to store classified information, but does not preclude the need at a future time.

QUESTION # 228

Section: B The most recent update to MSC NGW Statement of Objectives (SOO), Section 6.1, paragraph f. requires that “…the NGW solution meets all administrative, operational, and physical security requirements in accordance with the NGW DIACAP Implementation Plan and the DoDI 8500.2. This includes, but is not limited to, ensuring that all personnel have the required security clearances (no higher than SECRET), authorization, need-to-know, have been indoctrinated, and are familiar with the internal security practices of all proposed NGW facilities.” Is it a requirement that all LES operating staff personnel, supporting the MSC NGW program, carry a SECRET clearance?

ANSWER # 228

Contractor staff should be cleared as appropriate to support MSC Operations in accordance with the DD254.

QUESTION # 229

The header for CLIN 72 changed from “Personnel Support Services” to “End to end DIACAP Certification & Accreditation.” Is it the Government’s intent that the labor categories under CLIN 72 can only be used for DIACAP activities?

ANSWER # 229

CLIN 0072 should be Personnel Support Services. This will be corrected in amendment 0004. The labor categories under CLIN 0072 are not restricted to DIACAP activities.

QUESTION # 230

CLIN 74 changed from “Integration (Start-up, IA Certificate/Accreditation, MAC Levels” to “End-to-end DIACAP Certification & Accreditation.” This language has removed the ability to capture project startup cost (i.e., LES Upgrades). Where are startup costs for the project to be captured?

ANSWER # 230

Please see revised Section B. All NRC costs associated with start up and commissioning shall be captured in CLIN 0082.

QUESTION # 231

CLIN 76AM CDRL 13 is for an Equipment Installation Financial Report. The CDRL identifies a Cost Summary Report. As this is a FFP contract how does this apply?

ANSWER # 231

Reporting said cost is a requirement of MSC to capture costs associated with capital equipment.

QUESTION # 232

Section J, Attachment D ship quantities do not match with Pricing Schedule ship quantities. Can the government please correct this discrepancy?

ANSWER # 232

Please see answer to question # 93

QUESTION # 233

In response to question 122, is the Government implying that the Contractor can add CLINs?

ANSWER # 233

No. The Government will not accept CLINs added by the Contractor. For further guidance, please see SOO, Section 5.a.4.

QUESTION # 234

Please clarify the government’s response to Question #64, 3-17-2010. The Government stated that “ the acceptable contention ratio is the ratio necessary to meet the Government's availability requirement. Please see SOO, Sections 6.2.h and 6.2.i.” However, if the Government purchases X MHz of surge bandwidth off the CLINs (e.g., 1024kbps off CLIN 0032AD) to support additional surge capacity for additional MSC vessels, then the government is for all practical purposes choosing its own oversubscription rate, yet the Service Level Agreements (SLA) in an offeror’s PWS is based on the offeror’s designed own oversubscription rate. Please clarify how would the government handle the discrepancy if it results in lack of performance due to that reason?

ANSWER # 234

Surge capcity will not be managed by the general MSC NGW regional service availibility and QoS SLA. Surge SLA to be negotiated if/when surge CLINs are excercised.

QUESTION # 235

Please clarify the government’s response to question # 142, 3-17-2010. The Government stated that “Contract personnel requiring access to the communications space and network requires a SECRET clearance as specified in the SOO.” From previous experience, contractor personnel working on MSC ships but not in the secure communications space have not been required to be U.S. citizens or hold a security clearance. Is it the intention of the Government that the requirement for personnel holding a SECRET clearance is limited to those personnel having access to the secure communication space (e.g., location where the BDE will be installed) and that contractor work outside of the secure communication space (e.g., installing the ADE and IFL cabling) may be performed by non-U.S. citizens without security clearances?

ANSWER # 235

Yes. Contractor work outside of the secure communication space may be performed by non-U.S. citizens without security clearances.

QUESTION # 236

QUESTION/RESPONSE# 65 – Request for clarification Question: Vizada believes that the MSC response to Question #65 contradicts what is shown in Attachment O, Section L, page 14, paragraph 2-11 (“OCD Checklist”). In this checklist, the Evaluation Methodology for the Item Description “Sustain the per-platform 64 kbps CIR” defines the acceptance criteria as “When it has been verified that the IP throughput rate for each link is always at least 64 kbps”. Vizada interprets this acceptance criteria to refer to the IP Data Rate and not the Information Rate, and therefore believes that this is inconsistent with the response provided to Question # 65.

Please clarify if the stated bandwidth requirements as presented in the SOO are in terms of IP Data Rate or Information Rate.

ANSWER # 236

Please see revised answer to Question #65.

QUESTION # 237

QUESTION/RESPONSE# 16, as revised on March 24 – Request for additional information Question: Please provide the full equipment list for cabling, rack hardware and components, including associated installation diagrams and drawings, to all parties. Unless all prospective bidders are provided with this information, the incumbent BEST contractor, with its full knowledge of these equipment lists and drawings, will be provided with an advantage over other bidders.

ANSWER # 237

Government declines to answer.

QUESTION # 238

QUESTION/RESPONSE # 183 – Request for reconsideration Question: The decision to have offerors provide a single bandwidth price per region that does not distinguish between technologies forces offerors to try and predict how each of the frequency bands might be used over the contract term. Since there are large variations in coverage, performance and cost between frequency bands, any solution that includes multiple frequencies will require the U.S. Government to incur an unnecessary cost, i.e., lower-cost capacity will only be available at a higher blended price when a single CLIN is required. Further, this CLIN structure potentially stifles an offeror from bidding a creative solution – to the disadvantage of the U.S. Government. Please reconsider restructuring CLINs to allow for pricing and ordering by frequency type.

ANSWER # 238

The Government will not restructure CLINs.

QUESTION # 239

Is full worldwide coverage a mandatory requirement of this solicitation or is the Government willing to accept a solution with gaps in coverage where no SATCOM will be available to the fleet?

ANSWER # 239

The SOO states that worldwide coverage is an objective rather than a constraint. MSC expects worldwide coverage, especially in areas emphasized in the SOO, but realizes that some deep water gaps may exist where cost-prohibitive. An offer will be graded on the extent of worldwide coverage as per evaluation criteria described in Section M.

QUESTION # 240

By making the statement "Worldwide coverage area with emphasis on the ship concentration areas", does the Government require complete coverage of the concentration areas, or is it acceptable to have gaps of coverage within the concentration areas?

ANSWER # 240

Minor gaps in areas of emphasis would still be considered compliant; however, the areas of emphasis are of particular importance and comprehensive worldwide coverage of these areas of emphasis weigh heavily in Section M.