RFP_Q A_20160909.pdf

Question 1: Reference Solicitation Page 418, Section L, Paragraph 2.2.7 Proposal Submission

All proposals shall contain all appropriate markings including those prescribed in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on Disclosure and Use of Data, and FAR 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and Source Selection Information, and be encrypted.

How does the Government want us to encrypt our proposal submission.

Answer 1: The offeror and the Government contact will need to exchange digitally signed emails and save each other as contacts. This should allow encrypted emails to be sent.

Question 2: Reference Solicitation Page 418, Section L, Paragraph 2.2.7 Proposal Submission

Section L.2.2.7 states that if files are compressed, the necessary decompression program must be included.

What is the maximum file size allowable in a single e-mail?

Answer 2: The total size of each email (including all attachments) shall not exceed 20MB. Email attachments shall not be submitted in a .zip file format. The solicitation, Section L 2.2.7 has been updated accordingly.

Question 3: Reference Solicitation Page 417, Section L, Paragraph 2.2.5 Indexing

Each volume shall contain a more detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections.

Will the Government define digital Tab Indexing?

Answer 3: The reference to tab indexing has been removed from Section L.

Question 4: Reference PWS Page 5, Section C, Paragraph 6.2.1.7 and CLINs

Certain CLINs list power as a requirement for shelters, such as CLIN 001AF. Given the unknown locations of future MWR ICPs, it places undue risk on the contractor to determine fuel prices and delivery costs to unspecified locations during the potential period of performance over seven and a half years.

Likewise, supporting a generator to meet 99.5% availability without permanent space allocated for support contractors in the areas of operation required is unrealistic given the need to continually refuel onsite generators.

Will the Government consider including fuel and generator maintenance support as GFE or unpriced for this solicitation and be priced on future task orders when locations can be determined?

Answer 4: If the power source requires re-fueling, the contractor shall ensure the fuel is standard low-octane or diesel fuel commonly available and the Government will assume responsibility for re-fueling;

however, the contractor shall otherwise remain responsible for maintenance of the power source. PWS

6.2.1.7 has been revised accordingly.

Question 5: Reference PWS Page 10, Section C, Paragraph 6.3.3

The PWS requires that the offeror provide telephone service from any Internet Café to any OCONUS US Installation for a cost not exceeding $0.04/minute. Additionally, the PWS states that pricing to “the rest of the world” will be at competitive global rates. These two requirements seem to contradict each other.

Providing what potentially amounts to international long distance to every country in the world is unrealistic at $0.04/minutes.

For evaluation purposes, will the Government consider removing or revising the requirement to call any potential OCONUS US Installation at $0.04/minutes or less as it is unachievable in today’s market.

Answer 5: No.

Question 6: Reference PWS Page 10, Section C, Paragraph 6.3.4

The Government requires that the offeror ensure that international services are provided as scheduled with the full approvals necessary for each affected host nation. As each satellite based Internet Café CLIN requires the inclusion of these costs, the offeror must assume the most expense option to reduce its financial risk. This additional financial risk may result in an artificially higher cost to cover the offeror’s risk.

In order to lower the Government’s costs, will the Government consider including host nation approvals and frequency clearances as unpriced CLIN for the IDIQ and priced only locations can be determined.

Answer 6: No.

Question 7: Reference Section L, Paragraph 2.2.2.1 (Page size and format)

Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the text size shall be no less than 11-point Arial, Times New Roman, or Courier New font for all text.

Will the Government confirm that this instruction includes all of the font styles in the specified family, e.g., italic, bold, etc.

Answer 7: Yes, this applies to all font styles.

Question 8: Reference Section B, Paragraph B.1,b. “b. The MWR Global Internet Café services will be awarded as an Indefinite-Delivery Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) contract. All task orders awarded against the ID/IQ contract will be Firm Fixed Price (FFP) type task orders in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 16.5 – Indefinite-Delivery Contracts, with the exception of travel and shipping. As the Government executes the Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) for these services, the contractor will be required to provide a cost build-up, quote, and/or invoice to support their charges prior to submitting an invoice to the Government.”

Requiring a fixed price for satellite bandwidth for a period of performance of seven and a half years, places undue risk on the contractor. Satellite bandwidth costs fluctuate greatly over time and there is no feasible, or realistic way for any offeror, even the satellite owner, to accurately estimate costs for a period of seven and a half years.

8a: What cost basis will the Government use to determine cost reasonableness for satellite bandwidth when there are significant factors that would prevent the Government from determining realistic estimates of the probable costs of performance?

8b: How is the offeror required to submit cost build-ups, quotes, and/or invoices for Firm Fixed Price CLINs when executing. Does this indicate that the Government will allow price changes to CLINs if the offeror’s costs have significantly increased outside of its control – even having submitted a Firm Fixed Price?

8c: Are the prices that the offeror proposes for each CLIN to be used, without economic price adjustment, throughout the entire period of performance without consideration of market fluctuations?

8d: If the Government will not allow adjustments to CLIN pricing, such as CP/FFP, will the Government consider reducing the period of performance for pricing to three years, with a six month extension?

Answer 8:

8a: In accordance with Section L 5.1.1 Price Reasonableness and Completeness, “[r]easonableness will be determined using one or more of the techniques within FAR 15.404.”

8b: These will be cost-reimbursable CLINs. The contractor shall submit an estimate for the cost of the shipping and shall not coordinate or ship without Government approval and acceptance. The Government will reject shipping charges that are invoiced without prior authorization. The contractor shall invoice shipping as a pass-through charge. For purposes of evaluation, the Government has provided a plug number for these CLINs. These plug numbers will serve as a Not to Exceed amount when the CLIN is exercised .

8c: The Government requests Firm Fixed Pricing for all CLINs identified in Section B Pricing Schedule spreadsheet, with the exception of the Not to Exceed plug numbers.

8d: No.

Question 9: Reference Solicitation Page 293, Section B, Paragraph B.1.b: “As the Government executes the Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) for these services, the contractor will be required to provide a cost build-up, quote, and/or invoice to support their charges prior to submitting an invoice to the Government.”

This is not in line with a FFP contract post award, nor does it agree with the language in B.2 and 5.1.2 which states, “Pricing will be incorporated into Schedule B and related B-Tables upon contract award and used for all orders placed post-contract award.”

Does the Govt. not intend to pay the offeror/contractor based on the FFP CLIN structure proposed? Will the Govt. please remove the last sentence from B.1.b?

Answer 9: These will be cost-reimbursable CLINs. The contractor shall submit an estimate for the cost of the shipping and shall not coordinate or ship without Government approval and acceptance. The Government will reject shipping charges that are invoiced without prior authorization. The contractor shall invoice shipping as a pass-through charge. For purposes of evaluation, the Government has provided a plug number for these CLINs. These plug numbers will serve as a Not to Exceed amount when the CLIN is exercised .

Question 10: Reference Solicitation Page 294, Section C, Clause 52.215-3 REQUEST FOR

INFORMATION OR SOLICITATION FOR PLANNING PURPOSES (OCT 1997):

52.215-3, as it is clearly applicable to a RFI, and not this RFP Will the Government please remove 52.215-3 in its entirety?

Answer 10: This clause has been removed.

Question 11: Reference Solicitation Page 419, Section L, 5.1.3 Pricing Information Requirements

It is unclear in 5.1.3 whether or not the Government is requiring data other than certified cost or pricing data with the offeror’s proposal submission.

Will the Government please clarify its pricing and documentation requirement(s)?

Answer 11: In accordance with Section L, 5.1.3, “If, after receipt of proposals, the Contracting Officer determines the required conditions of adequate competition do not exist, that there is insufficient information available to determine price reasonableness, and none of the exceptions in FAR 15.403-1 apply, the offeror may be required to certify its submitted cost or pricing. In accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b) and 15.403-3(a), data other than certified cost or pricing data may be required to support price reasonableness. Information shall be provided in accordance with FAR 15.403-5.” The Government will inform offerors after receipt of proposals if this will be required; however, the Government anticipates adequate price competition.

Question 12: Reference Solicitation Page 420, Section L, 5.1.4 Price Proposal

Pricing validity dates from satellite bandwidth providers typically expire within 30 days. It is unreasonable and unrealistic to impose a 180 day (and possibly longer) validity period on the offeror for a FFP contract, where the offeror cannot obtain the same validity period from its satellite bandwidth providers.

12a: Will the Government consider a hybrid contract type, to award the satellite bandwidth CLINs as

CPFF?

12b: If not, how will the Govt. protect the offeror from increased satellite bandwidth costs in a FFP contract?

Answer 12:

a. No.

b. IAW 16.202-1, “[a] firm-fixed-price contract provides for a price that is not subject to any adjustment on the basis of the contractor’s cost experience in performing the contract. This contract type places upon the contractor maximum risk and full responsibility for all costs and resulting profit or loss. It provides maximum incentive for the contractor to control costs and perform effectively and imposes a minimum administrative burden upon the contracting parties.”

Question 13: Reference Solicitation Page 421, Section L, 8.1 Proposal Evaluation & 8.3 Non- Government Source Selection

The Government identifies FCI, TriSept Corporation, and CACI in 8.1 and 8.3, as companies having access to submitted proposals.

What type of non-disclosure protections are afforded offerors with regard to offeror’s proprietary data?

Answer 13: All government and non-government personnel that will have access to offerors’ proprietary information sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement prior to the source selection. All signed Non-Disclosure Agreements are collected and stored by the Contracting Officer.

Question 14: Reference Solicitation Page 421, Section L, 7.0 Required Submittals (f) Subcontracting Plan

Assuming that 100% of the MWR ICP cafes will be located OCONUS, FAR Part 19.702(b)(3) states subcontracting plans are not required for contracts or contract modifications that will be performed entirely outside of the United States and its outlying areas.

Will the Government please remove the requirement for a Subcontracting Plan?

Answer 14: A Subcontracting Plan will be required unless the offeror proposes to perform all work overseas, IAW FAR 19.702(b)(3).

Question 15: Reference Solicitation Page 10, Section B, CLIN 0003/4

Government states "IC Service Initialization, Satellite FFP Internet Café Service Initialization, Satellite Option." and "IC Service Initialization, Local ISP FFP Internet Café Service Initialization, Local ISP Option.". Since PWS does not refernce such activity, can Government please describe the intenended purpose for CLIN's x003/4?

Answer 15: CLINs X003 and X004 are intended to capture any additional non-recurring charges associated with service start-up for the internet cafes that are not covered by CLINs X001 and X002.

Question 16: Reference Solicitation Page 360, Section I, Paragraph 1

The government has included two DFARS clauses applying the Buy American Act to this RFP, DFAR 252.225-7001 and 252.225-7002. Can the government confirm that it intends to apply Buy American to this procurement for services outside of the United States? If so, does the Government intend to apply a price increase to subcontractors not from qualifying countries listed in 252.225-7002? If there is a price increase applied is the amount of increase 50% and is that increase applied to the Prime's entire bid price or that portion of the bid attributed to a non-qualifying country subcontractor? If an item is a commercial item and thus excluded from BAA how should an offeror identify this in their offer?

Answer 16: These clauses have been removed.

Question 17: Reference Solicitation Page 367, Section I, 52.222-17 Paragraph 2.(i)

FAR 52.222-17 has been included in this request for proposal. Can the Government provide the number of service employees currently performing under the incumbent contract/contracts? Can the Government also provide the location and specific work effort they are performing or the labor category, description, level for each service employee? Additionally, if the Government knows which service employees are scheduled to be terminated as a result of any award to a non-incumbent can they provide information for each of those positions?

Answer 17: This clause does not apply and has been removed from the Solicitation.

Question 18: Reference Solicitation Page 375, Section G, 52-239-000 Paragraph (a)

Bullet "(a)" states the credits for the different outage durations. Can the Government clarfy wether or not this measured outages are at the network-level or site-level? Furthermore, how do these outage levels corrolate to therequired 99.5% availability stated in Section 6.3.16 of the PWS? Does the Government expect a 1/4 Day credit for a 4 hour outage during a given month if that ends us to be the only outage experienced that month? If so, then even if the bidder is Complient with the 99.5% availability, they would still have to pay a penalty.

Please clarify the outage measurement level (network VS site) and it's relationship to the required credit levels.

Answer 18: The availability requirement is applicable to each Café user’s ability to access and use the service at the required service levels. The 99.5% availability requirement allows for up to 3.6 hours of downtime per month; therefore, the provisions of 52.239-9000 apply for outages in excess of the minimum availability requirement, or 3.6 cumulative hours per month.

Question 19: Reference Solicitation Page 417, Section L, 2.2.2.1, Paragraph 1 & Solicitation Page 418, Section L, 2.2.7, Paragraph 3

This paragraph states that the document can be submitted in MSWord 2007 or PDF form; however, under Section 2.2.7, Para #3 it states that the electronic copies of the proposal shall be submitted in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Office Word 2007, MS Office Excel 2007, MS Office Project 2007, and MS Office PowerPoint 2007, as applicable. Therefore, is PDF acceptable for the electronic submital?

Answer 19: PDF is acceptable for submission of the Technical Proposal. The solicitation, Section L

2.2.7 has been updated accordingly. The Price Proposal should be submitted in MS Office Excel, as provided in Section B.

Question 20: Reference Solicitation Page 417, Section L, Paragraph 2.2.2.2

Are hard copies required? Paragraphic states that large tables, charts, graphics and figures can be printed on 11x17 inch paper and count as a single sheet, but these foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume.

Answer 20: No, electronic submission is preferred.

Question 21: Reference Solicitation Page 418, Section L, Paragraph 2.2.7

Governement states "All proposals are due Monday, September 26, 2016, at 8:00 AM (CDT)".

Considering the complexcity of the requirements and the facts that Local ISP circuit prequalifications take 3 weeks after receipt of the complete mailing address of aspecific Internet Café location and PWS does not provide such addresses, can teh Government offer a 3 weeks extension? Our goal is to offer the most qualified Local ISP option and pricing.

Please provide a 3 week extension.

Answer 21: An extension will not be granted at this time.

Question 22: Reference Solicitation Page 419, Section L, Paragraph 4.2.2(5)

Government states "Technical/Management Factor a. Subfactor1: Internet Cafés and b. Subfactor 2: End-to-End Managed Services…" which map into Tasks 2 & 3 of the PWS. Where should the bidders address requirements stated for Task 1 & and Subtask 4.2-4.5 of the PWS? More specifically, where should the bidders address requirements listed in Sections 6.1 & 6.4.2 - 6.4.5 of the PWS?

Can Government clarify the Volume II organization and add bullets "c." and "d." for addressing Tsk 1 and Subtasks 4.2 - 4.5?

Answer 22: Solicitation, Section L 4.2.2 has been updated accordingly. The contractor should submit all documentation that demonstrates an ability to meet all requirements in the PWS.

Question 23: Reference Solicitation Page 421, Section L, Paragraph 7.0(e)

Section 7 e identifies the OCCI Plan as a required submittal however the instructions in Section 2.1.6 identify an OCCI plan as only required if an offeror "believes that an actual or perceived OCCI does exist on this procurement." Can the Government confirm that an OCCI Plan is only required if you have an actual or perceived OCCI?

Delete OCCI Plan from requirements or idenitfy this as an "or" statement and include the confirming statement of no OCCI.

Answer 23: Section L 2.1.6 states, “If the offeror believes that no OCCI exists, the OCCI response shall set forth sufficient details to support such a position.” This is still considered by the Government to be an OCCI plan for the purposes of Section L 7.0(e).

Question 24: Reference Solicitation Page 421, Section L, Paragraph 7.0(f)

Section 7 (f) is the only section to reference a subcontracting plan. Can the Government confirm that a subcontracting plan is required? If so, can the Government include the requirements of the subcontracting plan for offerors to meet and respond to in their subcontracting plans?

Delete requirement or include details of what is required within the plan.

Answer 24: Yes, a Subcontracting Plan will be required unless the offeror proposes to perform all work overseas, IAW FAR 19.702(b)(3). Subcontracting criteria will be IAW FAR 19.7.

Question 25: Reference Solicitation Page 295/313, Section E/D, Paragraph 1

Page 294 includes a Section C -Descriptions and Specifications and Page 295 includes a Section E - Inspection and Acceptance but there is no Section D in between. Can the Government confirm there is not section D and/or provide if there is?

Answer 25: The solicitation does not include a Section D.

Question 26: Reference PWS Page 2, Section C, Paragraph 6.1.2.1

Government states "the contractor shall submit a transition plan for transitioning all current cafés from existing service the new service." If the old cafe is to continue operations until the new cafe is operational, how does the government suggest resolution when a site only has one location suitable for cafe installation?

Answer 26: It is the Government’s intent to continue services through transition; however, the Government understands this may not be possible in all cases. If the Government introduces a limitation as described above the vendor will not be held accountable.

Question 27: Reference PWS Page 3, Section C, Paragraph 6.1.2.2

Government states, "Contractor shall hold a Transition Kickoff meeting with the government and necessary stakeholders within 30 days following the award of any task order(s) requiring the transition of existing Internet Cafe infrastructure to this new contract." Is the government directing that during the site survey the awardee evaluate the current cafe equipment for reutilization?

Answer 27: No. The Government does not intend to allow the re-use of any existing café equipment.

Question 28: Reference PWS Page 4, Section C, Paragraph 6.2.1.2

Government states "Cafés that provide only wireless services shall initially include one WAP for a small Café and three WAPs for a large Café. The Government will order additional WAPs as needed for coverage of larger areas that cannot be covered by the range of the initially provided WAPs.". Should all WAPS be rated for outdoor use, or just a subset?

Answer 28: To cover the wide range of possible scenarios and to allow for firm-fixed pricing, all WAPs should be rated for outdoor use.

Question 29: Reference PWS Page 4, Section C, Paragraph 6.2.1.2

The government states "one access point (WAP) to support up to 20 additional users within the perimeter of the café structure." What does the government consider the perimeter? We will need a definition, because the requirements on the ground may be different.

Answer 29: The perimeter is within 10 meters of the center of the room or structure housing the Café computers and phones.

Question 30: Reference PWS Page 5, Section C, Paragraph 6.2.1.7

Government states "In those cases as specified in individual task orders, the contractor shall be required to provide/establish shelter, power, and furnishings for the Internet Café.". Will the contractor have the support of that base's Public Works Division (PWD)?

Answer 30: Given the uncertainty of the conditions for future Task Orders, the Government cannot confirm PWD support; however, it is expected that PWD will support when and where available in accordance with local camp/post/base policies.

Question 31: Reference PWS Page 5, Section C, Paragraph 6.2.2.1

Government states "As necessary, the Government will order installation and de-installation of the Internet Café will be required upon completion of services. ..... De-installation includes removing all components provided in the installation of the internet café." Will the awardee be responsible for de-installation of the existing/old Cafés?

Answer 31: No. The Government will be responsible for removal of existing café equipment.

Question 32: Reference PWS Page 8, Section C, Paragraph 6.3.1.2

Government states "Telephone Service Min. CIR per telephone (kbps) 17 Symmetrical full-duplex". The 17kbps minimum CIR for voice suggests the desire for a voice codec other than G.729 which operates at 8kbkps . G.729 is widely considered to deliver near toll quality voice using minimal bandwidth. Does the 17kbps minimum CIR figure restrict the use of G.729 and other codecs that operate at 16kbps or less?

Specify a voice codec or a desired MOS score.

Answer 32: The Government does not intend to specify a CODEC or MOS. Regardless of CODEC or MOS, the contractor shall ensure 17kbps is available to support telephony.

Question 33: Reference PWS Page 8, Section C, Paragraph 6.3.1.2

Government states "MWR Internet Cafés shall be capable of supporting simultaneous telephony and typical Internet applications (e.g. web browsing, email, chat, video chat services such as Skype, instant messaging, collaboration, streaming video,…". Can Government provide a historical telephoney call volume for each of the Cafés?

Answer 33: The Government does not have this historical information.

Question 34: Reference PWS Page 9, Section C, Paragraph 6.3.1.6

Government states "Overall availability of each Café’s set of services shall be at least 99.5% (calculated over the operating hours of the Café during any 30-day period)." Does the 99.5% refer to the network availability or the Café operability? If latter, then what happens if 1 or 2 of the computers at the Café are inoperable for say 5 hours due to failure while the other comnputers are fully functional? Would that Café then be deemed unavailable?

Please clarify applicability of the 99.5% target.

Answer 34: The availability requirement is applicable to each Café user’s ability to access and use the service at the required service levels. The 99.5% availability requirement allows for up to 3.6 hours of downtime per month; therefore, the provisions of 52.239-9000 apply for outages in excess of the minimum availability requirement, or 3.6 cumulative hours per month.

Question 35: Reference PWS Page 9, Section C, Paragraph 6.3.1.7

Government states "The contractor shall operate transponder bandwidth in accordance with contractor submitted and satellite operator approved Transmission Plan provided within 5 days of award and at least

24 hours prior to the start of service.". This period contrdicts with the 30-60 days of transition or implemnetation window after award (individual TO or the Solicitation itself.

Can Government please clarify thedelivery window requirement?

Answer 35: This is applicable to the Task Order award.

Question 36: Reference PWS Page 9, Section C, Paragraph 6.3.1.3

Based on Table 4, network shall support 20, 30, and 60 Wireless usres depenhding on the Café size. Is the bidder to limit the number of concurrent wireless users to match those drived from Table 4? If not, then would Government accept lower CIR's/wireless user?

Answer 36: The contractor may limit the number of concurrent users through Quality of Service settings;

the CIR per user shall not be lower than the PWS requirements.

Question 37: Reference PWS Page 10, Section C, Paragraph 6.3.5

Government states "The contractor shall provide the option for use of local ISP connectivity in lieu of the Space Segment when local ISP is available and when the local ISP option meets all other applicable terms of the contract...". In order to verify access and pricing to each of the Cafés listed in Table 5, bidders would need to know the exact street address. This information is required to qualify local loop access, much like for any terretrsiral links in CONUS. Without this information, no FFP can be provided for CLIN's X002.

Please include complete location street address VS Lat/Long.

Answer 37: Street address information is not available, Lat/Long is provided.

Question 38: General

Is there a list of approved contractors interested in opportunity HC1013-16-R-0007 or any means to contact approved prime vendors for this requirement to offer cost-effective fiber optic solutions and support (partner/subcontractor) for the upcoming requirement noted in HC1013-16-R-0007?

Answer 38: A list of interested contractors will not be provided.

Question 39: General

Can offerers compete/submit for only certain regions of the requirement or must the submittal be for all sites? e.g. submit proposal for the CENTCOM AOR.

Answer 39: The proposal must cover all regions.

Question 40: General

Since [the STRATCOM EMI/RFI Checklist] was not included as a part of the package release attached to the RFP, can you confirm if the attached is a current copy?

Answer 40: A current version has been provided as Attachment 2.

Question 41: General

Any possibility of getting the PWS in MS Word format? I’ve got the draft version in MSW, but would like to get the final PWS in MSW if possible.

Answer 41: A MS Word version will not be provided.

Question 42: Reference Solicitation Page 417, Section L, Paragraph 2.2.2.2

Would the Government consider allowing 10 pt. font for tables, graphics, figures, and Excel spreadsheets?

Answer 42: No

Question 43: Reference Solicitation Page 417, Section L, Paragraph 2.2.2.2

Would the Government consider allowing Ariel Narrow font for tables, graphics, figures, and Excel spreadsheets?

Answer 43: No

Question 44: Reference PWS Page 7, Section C, Paragraph 6.3.1

Table 1 lists existing café types by country and Table 4 lists CIR requirements per café type. Based on these values, the required sum of all existing café Mbps is 89.448 Mbps. Please confirm that the minimum acceptable CIR for existing café’s is 89.448 Mbps.

Answer 44: The requirements of this solicitation are modified from the requirements of the existing cafés and should not be compared. Additionally, all information regarding existing cafés has been provided in the PWS to the maximum extent possible; however, it is subject to change. Café requirements will be specified at the Task Order level.

Question 45: Reference Solicitation Page 420, Section L. Paragraph 6.1

Does the Government only requires the entire solicitation to be completed/signed, or only the SF 1449 form?

Answer 45: The entire solicitation must be completed and signed.

Question 46: Reference Solicitation Page 418, Section L, Paragraph 2.2.7

What is the maximum file size for email submission to the Government?

Answer 46: The total size of each email (including all attachments) shall not exceed 20MB. The solicitation, Section L 2.2.7 has been updated accordingly.

Question 47: Reference PWS Page 11, Section C, Paragraph 6.4.1.2

Will the Government confirm that the only satellites not allowed for use based on NDAA prohibitions are satellites owned by companies based in China, North Korea, Syria, Iran, and Sudan.

Answer 47: Based on the NDAA prohibitions contained in PWS section 6.4.1.2, these are the only applicable countries.

Question 48: Reference PWS Page 11, Section C, Paragraph 6.4.1.2

NDAA FY 2016 sections 1245 and 1246 prohibits military-to-military cooperation between the US and Russia. While pricing afforded by Russian satellite operators are far below current market rates, we believe that NDAA prohibition would restrict contractors from proposing satellite services on Gazprom and Russian Satellite Communications Company as they are entities of the Russian defense industry.

Likewise, we believe this would also prohibit routing satellite services through Russian teleports and routing terrestrial services through Russia territory.

Has DITCO obtained a waiver of this prohibition by the Secretary of Defense so that contractors can offer lowest price technically acceptable solutions that utilize Russian satellite operators and teleport gateways?

Answer 48: This question assumes a specific interpretation of the FY 2016 NDAA that the organization has no authority to independently make. However, in response to the question, DITCO has not obtained any waivers at this time.

Question 49: Reference Solicitation Page 420, Section L, Paragraph 5.2 Volume Organization, and Section B, Pricing Schedule workbook

Section 5.2 states, “Excel spreadsheets may be submitted on paper up to 11 x 17 inches using 11-point Ariel, Times New Roman, or Courier New font.”

Section B Pricing Schedule excel workbook provided with the RFP uses 10-point Arial font.

Question: Will the Government amend section L, 5.2 to state that 10-point font is acceptable for excel spreadsheets?

Answer 49: No. The font size in Section B has been updated.

Question 50: General

The Government has provided CLIN quantities for evaluation purposes only. By assigning quantities to all CLINs, the Government is arbitrarily increasing the total contract value and opening up opportunities for Offerors to manipulate their total evaluated price by providing unrealistic pricing for CLINs they do not anticipate the Government ordering. Since this is an LPTA evaluation, no value should be assigned to items not being ordered at contract award. Will the Government change CLIN quantities to zero quantity for those CLINs that are not anticipated to be ordered at contract award?

Answer 50: No.

Question 51: Reference PWS Page 5, Section C, Paragraph 6.2.1.7

Will the Government provide confirmation that existing space exists at the 20 locations for an ICP Café shelter, generator if required, and sufficient space and stable ground for two 1.8 meter self-acquiring antennas, each with a clear and full view of the horizon?

Answer 51: The Government does not have site survey information at this time; however, currently single 1.2 meter dishes represent the largest deployed equipment at an MWR café.

Question 52: Reference PWS Page 17, Section C, Paragraph 12.1.1. Visit Authorization Letters

If a contractor has an FCL, would submitting the Visit Authorization Letter (VAL) to the COR through JPAS enough? Or permitted?

Answer 52: Determination would be made post-award on a case-by-case basis dependent on availability.

Question 53: Reference PWS Page 17, Section C, Paragrap 12.2. Communication and Data Protection Using External Certificate Authority (ECA) PKI

Often the government COR does not have the corresponding PKI from the contractor. How does the GCA plan to mitigate this issue if it does arise once content such as the deliverables are signed and encrypted to the COR but he/she is often unable to open the e-mail to access the information?

Answer 53: The contractor shall obtain PKI certificates and associated hardware through on of the approved ECA contractors.

Question 54: Reference PWS Page 16, Section C, Paragraph 11. Delivery Schedule

The bottom of the deliverable table references subparagraph 12.4. However, I could not locate the section referenced. Please confirm that this section does exist?

Answer 54: The correct reference is PWS 12.2.

Question 55: Reference PWS Page 8, Section C, Paragraph 6.3.1.3, Table 4

In this table, the Government specifies bandwidth requirements for each of the café types, exclusive of contractor overhead.

55a: Based on this information, should the offeror assume that all user data is incompressible and that satellite link budgets and terrestrial circuits must reflect the required throughput in Table 4?

55b: If not, are the Table 4 data rates provided without any data compression, or throughput measured from a local caching engine? For example, if the offeror proposes a compression product that compresses user traffic by 25% over the satellite, can the offeror propose a throughput of 75% of the required bandwidth?

Answer 55:

a. Yes.

b. N/A

Question 56: Reference PWS Pages 2 and 5, Section C, Paragraphs 6.1.2.1 and 6.2.1.5

Based on the RFP requirements, offerors are required to deliver a transition plan within 30 days of task order award, this includes installation of new café’s (See section 6.1.2.1). Additionally, the RFP is requiring offerors to have all CFE’s installed and operational within 60 days of receipt of order (see section 6.2.1.5). Is the 60 day interval supposed to start after the transition plan has been received and approved or is this concurrent with the transition plan review?

Recommend that the 60 day interval start after the transition plan has been approved by the government.

Answer 56: the Government understands that transitioning cafés may require additional time. Per the PWS, CFE shall be installed and activated within 60 days after receipt of order (to run concurrently with transition plan review) unless otherwise specified in the Task Order.

Question 57: Reference PWS Page 11, Section C, Paragraph 6.4.1.1. IA

Contained in the IA documentation that the Government sent to industry, included in the RFP; controls AT-1 and AT-2 are locked. Is this intentional and is it OK to leave these items unanswered?

Recommend that the government clarify if AT-1 and AT-2 were intentionally locked and provide a new spreadsheet if not.

Answer 57: The cells were not locked intentionally and are required to be completed. An updated CIAQ has been provided.

Question 58: Reference Solicitation Page 418, Section L, Paragraph 2.2.7 Proposal Submission

Given that the MWR ICP RFP is a complex end-to-end solution, will the Government consider offering an extension of two weeks for the proposal submission?

Recommend extending proposal due date two weeks to October 10, 2016.

Answer 58: An extension will not be granted at this time.

Question 59: Reference PWS Pages 4, 7, and 10, Section C, Paragraphs 6.1.3.4, 6.3, and 6.3.5

Under sections 6.1.3.4 and 6.2.4.5 the Government briefly describes the use of US Based Internet through a local ISP. This level of requirements is not sufficient to cover security vulnerabilities and telecommunications licensing and regulatory requirements. The vague requirement allows offerors to provide locally provided ISP through a proxy server that would not meet the requirements of local regulations, policy and security. Also, in Answer 55: of Draft RFP Q&A, the Government stated "The contractor shall ensure that the Internet Service is U.S.‐based; for example, Café users should access google.com (U.S.‐based) and not google.de (German‐based), regardless of transmission media." If the proposed transmission media is microwave to a bordering country, then subsequently interconnected with a proxy server in another country, and then virtually switched with a US Based internet domain, this would open up a great deal of vulnerabilities, security and regulatory issues.

Recommend that the government provide detailed requirements related to the use of local proxy servers, local communications methods (microwave, WI-Max or Fiber) that meet regulatory, security, and licensing as dictated by the ITU and local host country policy.

Answer 59: The Government intends service to be provided via satellite or pre-existing commercially available local ISP providers EG: cable. The Government is unaware of local ISP providers employing microwave transmissions as their standard offering. Furthermore, the Government expects all proposed solutions to be fully compliant with any and all regulatory, security, and licensing requirement as dictated by the ITU and local host country policy

Question 60: Reference Solicitation Page 417, Section L, Paragraph 2.2.2.2

Would the government accept no smaller than 8-pt. font for graphics and no smaller than 10-pt. font for tables? 11-pt. font is too large for graphics such as satellite contour maps (G/T and EIRP) and network diagrams. The large font covers important details. Tables in 10-pt. font or smaller stand out are more legible.

Answer 60: No

Question 61: Reference Solicitation Page 416 and 419, Section L, Paragraphs 2.2.1 and 4.2.2; PWS, Section C

Section L 2.2.1 Page Limitations and 4.2.2 Volume Organization 6) both list "Coverage Maps, Satellite availability reports, equipment specification sheets, link budgets etc." However, only Section C PWS

6.3.1.1. mentions coverage. The PWS does not mention the other documents. Section L 2.2.1 requests contractors include them as attachments. Section M lists coverage maps and link budget analysis under b.

Technical/Management Factor (ii) Subfactor 2 a.

Please reference all required documents in SEC C PWS under appropriate section as deliverables and indicate where to include them in contractor's submission in SEC L and SEC M.

Answer 61: Solicitation, Section L 4.2.2 has been udpated. The referenced documents are not deliverables; they are documents the contractor will submit with the technical proposal to demonstrate their ability to meet the capabilities and requirements specified in the PWS.

Question 62: Reference PWS, Section C; Solicitation Pages 418-419, Section L, Paragraphs 4.0, 4.1, 4.2, 4.2.1, 4.2.2; Solicitation Page 423-424, Section M, Paragraph M002 b. Technical/Management Factor

(i) Subfactor 1 - Internet Cafes and (ii) Subfactor 2 - End-to-End managed Services

There are four Subfactors in Section C PWS; however, Sections L and M both indicate only Subfactor 1:

Internet Cafes and Subfactor 2: End-to-End Managed Services are to be evaluated.

For example, SEC C PWS 6.1 Task 1 - Program Management and Subtasks 6.1.1, 6.1.2, and 6.1.3, are not addressed in SEC L Instructions 4.2.2 or SEC M002 b. Technical/Management Factor. The same is true for SEC C PWS 6.4 Task 4 - Contractor Global Network Requirements and its subtasks.

Where is the contractor to address all Section C PWS sections and subsections in Volume II Technical/Management in the allotted 40-page maximum page limit?

Please clarify how and where contractor is to address each SEC C PWS section and what will/will not be evaluated. For example, include in both Sections L and M the following instructions:

Technical/Management Factor

a. Subfactor 1: Internet Cafés (PWS 6.2)

b. Subfactor 2: End-to-End Managed Services (PWS 6.3)

c. Subfactor 3: Program Management (PWS 6.1)

d. Subfactor 4: Contractor Global Network Requirements (PWS 6.4)"

Answer 62: Solicitation, Section L 4.2.2 has been udpated accordingly. The contractor should submit all documentation that demonstrates an ability to meet all requirements in the PWS. Section M identifies only those factors and subfactors that will be evaluated.

Question 63: Reference PWS Page 5, Section C, Paragraph 6.2.2 - Subtask 2.2 - Internet Café Installation/Deinstallation; Attachment B - Pricing Template

Section 6.2.2 addresses requirements concerning the deinstallation of Internet Cafes. The pricing table does not indicate a CLIN for the inclusion of the price for Café Deinstallation. In which CLIN should the De-installation cost be priced?

Answer 63: The contractor may include this where they feel it is most appropriate.

Question 64: Reference PWS Page 2, Section C, Paragraph 6.1.1. Subtask 1.1 Program Management Plan; PWS Page 16, Section C, Paragraph 12. Security Requirements

Section 12, Security states all work associated with the Contract will be UNCLASSIFIED. PWS 6.1.1 requires a section of the Program Management Plan (PMP) ensuring staffing aligns appropriately with the necessary classification level of tasks on Contract. Since all work is unclassified, is this section of the PMP required?

Answer 64: Yes.

Question 65: Reference PWS Page 2, Section C, Paragraph 6.1.2.1

PWS 6.1.2.1 states that the Contractor shall submit a Transition Plan for transitioning all current cafes within the first 30 days of task order award. Does the government plan to award Transition task order simultaneously with Contract Award? If not, what is the estimated time between contract award and transition task order award?

Answer 65: This is unknown at this time.

Question 66: Reference PWS Page 9, Section C, Paragraph 6.3.1.7

PWS 6.3.1.7 requires the submission of the Transmission Plan within 5 days of award. Is the award mentioned above the Task Order award?

Answer 66: Yes. The PWS has been updated to reflect this clarification.

Question 67: Reference PWS Page 11, Section C, Paragraph 6.4.2.2

PWS 6.4.2.2 states "If individual task orders pertain to classified locations (as specified in the task order), the contractor shall provide fault reporting via secure email and or voice communications. Since all work under the contract is at an UNCLASSIFIED level, should this requirement be removed from the PWS?

Answer 67: No. The PWS further states, “If secure communications are not available, the contractor (and subcontractors) shall use a mutually agreed upon media and voice communications capability capable of protecting sensitive but unclassified data.”

Question 68: Reference Solicitation Section B, CLINs

Will the government please provide plug numbers for CLINS 3 and 59?

Answer 68: The Government assumes “59” was a typo and was meant to read “for CLINS 3 and 4?” An updated Pricing Schedule is provided with plug numbers included for CLINs X003 and X004.

Question 69: Reference Information Assurance

Since all CIAQ questions must be answered for applicable portions of the system, can the contractor assume that A&A is required solely for the satellite portion of the system?

Answer 69: A&A is required for all parts of the network(s) that support the solution. All network segments that support the solution must be accounted for in responses to the controls. Segments applicable are: Satellite Access Center, Satellites, and Contractor Enclave controlling/managing satellite communications resources.

Question 70: Reference Information Assurance

Can users access the system(s) without a CAC of PIV? (currently or in the future?)

Answer 70: Yes.

Question 71: Reference Section B Pricing Table, CLINs 0002 and 0005

CLIN 0002 of the pricing table calls for the Contractor to price 11 large wireless ISP ICPs and 4 large wired/wireless ISP ICPs while CLIN 0005 calls for the Contractor to price end-to end service for 12 large wireless ISP ICPs and 3 large wired/wireless ISP ICPs. Should these quantities match? If so, which CLIN should be changed?

Answer 71: The government does not see the discrepancy.

Question 72: Reference Solicitation Page 375, Section I, DARS 52.239‐9000

DARS 52.239‐9000 sets credits for service outages to be provided to the government. It does not, however, define what constitutes an outage. The RFP defines overall availability of each Café’s set of services as at least 99.5%. Are these the services defined as (1) voice, and (2) IP based data services (per paragraph 4, Objectives, in the PWS)? Is a café suffering an outage only if both services are out at the same time, or either one? What constitutes an outage for each service (i.e., complete loss of that service, or degradation to a specified level (please define the level))?

Answer 72: The availability requirement is applicable to each Café user’s ability to access and use the service at the required service levels. The 99.5% availability requirement allows for up to 3.6 hours of downtime per month; therefore, the provisions of 52.239-9000 apply for outages in excess of the minimum availability requirement, or 3.6 cumulative hours per month.

Question 73: Reference Start Date

Clin 1 states the start date as 02/19/2017, where as the CACQ form states the start date as 12/01/2016.

Which date is the correct 'start' date?

Answer 73: The correct start date is 02/19/2017. The CIAQ has been updated.

Question 74: Reference CIR

Will the government please define 'committed information rate' (CIR) as it relates to the MWR-ICP? Our perception of CIR is defined as the guaranteed minimum bandwidth allocated to a given application or site; CIR will be available to the application or site under all circumstances. Will the government please confirm?

Answer 74: Confirmed.

Question 75: Reference PWS Page 10, Section C, Paragraph 6.3.5 (Local ISP Option)

The actual addresses for the cafe s listed in CLIN 0004 and CLIN 0005 are required in order to get a price from a local ISP for connectivity to those cafes and for a bidder to provide a FFP price to the government.

Your current ICP provider has the addresses and is able to easily get local ISP quotes. In order to ensure fair competition, will the government please pass the addresses from your current provider to all bidders or provide plug numbers for CLIN 0004 and 0005?

Answer 75: Street addresses are not available. Lat/Long is provided. Plug numbers will not be provided.

Question 76: Reference Solicitation Section B, CLINs

For CLINs 0004AR, AT, AU, AV and CLINs 0005AR, AT, AU, AV, Ramadi and Fallujah are separate and distinct cities in Iraq. Will the government. please provide clarification on the locations of the cafe’s which bidders should provide a FFP price to for transition?

Answer 76: The Government cannot provide this information at this time.

Question 77: Reference Solicitation Page 418, Section L, Paragraph 2.2.7 – Proposal Submission

The RFP states: All proposals shall contain all appropriate markings including those prescribed in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on Disclosure and Use of Data, and FAR 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and Source Selection Information, and be encrypted. Will the government. please provide the specific type of encryption program/package that the government would like the offeror to use?

Answer 77: The offeror and the Government contact will need to exchange digitally signed emails and save each other as contacts. This should allow encrypted emails to be sent.

Question 78: Reference Solicitation Page 294, Section C, 52.215-3 Request for Information or Information for Planning Purposes (Oct 1997}

Since this is the final RFP should this clause be deleted?

Answer 78: This clause has been removed.

Question 79: Reference Solicitation Page 367, Section I, 52.222-17 NonDisplacement of Qualified Workers (May 2014)

Does section 52.222-17, "NonDisplacement of Qualified Workers", apply to this contract?

Answer 79: This clause does not apply and has been removed from the Solicitation.

Question 80: Reference Solicitation Page 360, Section I, 52.215-21 Alt lV Requirement for certified Cost Or Pricing Data.

Does section 52.215-21, "Alt lV Requirement for certified Cost Or Pricing Data", apply to this FFP contract?

Answer 80: Yes.

Question 81: Reference Solicitation Page 361, Section I, 252.239-7001: Information Assurance Contractor Training and Certification

The government included FAR Section 252.239-7001: Information Assurance Contractor Training and Certification by reference. This requires contractor personnel accessing DoD-funded information systems to have the proper and current information assurance certification to perform information assurance functions in accordance with DoD 8570.01-M. Can the government please confirm?

Answer 81: This question is a generalization of the exact wording of DFARS 252.239-7001. Please see the text of DFARS 252.239-7001 for the exact requirement.

Question 82: Reference Solicitation Page 360, Section I, 252.225-7001 Buy American And Balance Of Payments Program-- Basic

The government included FAR Section 252.225-7001 Buy American And Balance Of Payments Program-- Basic (Nov 2016) by reference. Can the government please clarify what line items this applies to?

Answer 82: This clause has been removed.

Question 83: Reference CIAQ - Attachment 1, Section J

The detailed CIAQ applies to…