QandA_as_of_6-12-18.docx
DOCX document 22 KB Posted
- Attached to
- HEMP Protected Fiber Optic Cable System Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- HC101318R0016
- Issued by
- Defense Information Systems Agency
About this file
Q&A as of 12 Jun 2018.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 19
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
RFQ Questions & Answers
| Reference |
| Questions |
| Government Response |
CLINS/Technical
| CLINS 1-4 state “Unprotected East and West (E & W) required, per site, per OC-48, will include 4-ports.” Is the OC-48 a line/NNI port and are the 4-ports sub-rate client/UNI (OC3/12) ports to be mapped into the line or NNI port? |
| Requirement is for Two OC-48’s on each path. The fiber is required to meet HEMP protection. |
CLINS/Technical
| CLINs mention East and West (as in SONET). Those terms typically reflect some sort of protection switching back to the UPSR era. Does the system have or require Linear 1+1 or some type of ring protection? |
| The fiber has to be HEMP protected by the contractor. The circuit protection/switching is performed by the Government equipment. |
CLINS/Technical
| CLINS 5-8 state - Turn up and support two wavelengths which will support two full duplex OC-48's between x and y. Are the two aforementioned wavelengths in addition to the OC-48s detailed in CLINS 1-4? |
| True. |
General
| What is the maximum bandwidth/ service rate requirement per link between locations? |
| Two OC-48’s worth. |
CLINS/Technical
| The CLINS reflect the desire for two OC-48 lambdas or wavelengths. In event the existing system and equipment becomes unsupportable during the period of performance, is it acceptable to provide two OC-48s of capacity over a 10G lambda or wavelength? In other words, are OC-192/10G/OTU-4 waves an acceptable equivalent provided the solution can hand off a OC-48 client? |
| Yes. |
CLINS/Technical
| CLINS 5-8 state - Turn up and support two wavelengths which will support two full duplex OC-48's between x and y. Assuming an upgrade will be required during the POP, will two OC-48s of capacity over a 10G lambda or wavelength be acceptable or would two 10G lambda/wavelengths be required to provide the two full duplex OC-48's between x and y? |
| Two OC-48s of capacity. |
CLINS/Technical
| All CLINS – refer to OC-48 lambdas or wavelengths. Are newer technologies such as OTN, Carrier Ethernet or Circuit Emulation acceptable? |
| Optical is required. |
CLINS/Technical
| CLINs 1-4, and associated out-year CLINs, do not appear to be consistent with the provided PWS. The PWS calls for 3 links whereas these non-optional CLINs call for four (4) links. Which requirement is correct? |
| Add room 3101 to PWS 6.7. Also reference PWS 6.1.2. CLIN 0004 is for the second node (node 2) at CMAFS. |
CLINS/Technical
| CLINs 1-4, and associated out-year CLINs, do not appear to be consistent with the provided PWS. The PWS. Para 5 (Scope), states “This PWS is for 2 OC-48 lambda services at each location constituting a system with a working and protected path in opposite directions” whereas solicitation pages 3 of 91 & 4 of 91, CLINs 1-4 (not optional), state a requirement of “Unprotected East and West (E & W) required, per site, per OC-48.” Can this apparent conflict be clarified? Are the OC-48s to be provided as Unprotected OC-48s as the CLIN suggests or are they to be configured as Working and Protected path OC-48s as per the PWS? Which is the correct requirement? |
| These must be configured in a Working and Protect configuration. See question 1. |
PWS, CLIN, Technical
| PWS requirement description on page 5 (scope) calls for “The Contractor shall provide network/system/service and equipment terminating at the 3 bases, that have the capability of supporting Wave Division Multiplexing (WDM); and have the ability to provide the initial two lambda services with working and protected paths in opposite directions and at least two additional capacity of OC-48 wavelengths terminating at each location with no electronic breakouts outside of the terminating HEMP facilities at the 3 bases. Does PWS statement - “provide the initial two lambda services with working and protected paths in opposite directions” refer to CLINs 1-4, and associated out-year CLINs, and does the PWS statement - “at least two additional capacity of OC-48 wavelengths terminating at each location with no electronic breakouts outside of the terminating HEMP facilities at the 3 bases” meant to refer to CLINs 5-8, and associated out-year CLINs, or is there to be a different understanding of what parts of the PWS refer to the non-optional CLIN requirement and optional CLIN requirement? |
| The initial requirement to provide service refers to CLINS 1-4 and out-years and the two additional capacity refers to CLINS 5-8 and out-years. |
CLIN/Technical
| Are Optional CLINs 5-8, and associated out-year CLINs, intended for the contractor to identify cost to provide a second wavelength between each site pair to bring the total of OC48 wavelengths to four (4) at each node consisting of two (2) OC48 wavelengths as working and protected to the east and two (2) OC-48 wavelengths as working and protected to the west? Or are they to be understood differently? |
| True. |
CLIN/Technical
| Price Template for “optional CLINs” stipulates for them to be “priced per wavelength of service”. Is the Government’s intent to exercise these “optional CLINs” in addition to, exercise non-optional CLINs 1-4, and the out-years, in the event the Government chooses to acquire the two wavelengths configured for two full duplex OC-48 services? If not, shouldn’t the contractor enter in these optional CLINs the cost for two wavelengths vice price per wavelength of service? |
| The verbiage for “priced per wavelength of service” will be removed from the price template. |
Solicitation
| Subfactor 1 states “the contractor must propose a plan that demonstrates the ability to meet the immediate requirement of providing service for the three existing nodes and HEMP protected OC-48 service from day one of the contract.” However, the CLINs provided in the price template and also the solicitation CLINs starting on pages 3 of 91 calls for four (4) nodes and at no place can a configuration or corresponding CLINs be found in the solicitation that identifies the specific three (3) nodes and corresponding three (3) links so they can be addressed and proposed. Will the Government please clarify the requirement? |
| There are 3 existing nodes (one at each base). The existing nodes need to be in service from day 1 of the POP. The 4th node will also be at CMAFS (a second node for this location). See PWS 6.1.2, 6.24. This fourth node will need to be installed within One year after Award. |
PWS, DD254
| Security Classification: The PWS states Unclassified and the solicitation DD-254 states Secret. It is assumed the solicitation DD-254 overrules the PWS. Would that be correct? |
| The PWS will be updated to reflect "secret" clearance is required. |
PWS
| PWS paragraph 13.23 states “The system is comprised of 2 OC-48 wavelengths.” Will the Government provide a diagram of this service requirement? |
| Diagram provided. |
Pricing Template
| The Pricing Template does not provide a place for the contractor to submit Non-Recurring Costs (NRCs). Is it the Governments intent to prohibit NRC’s on this contract for project NRC expenses (ex., construction at CMAS and procurement and install of any necessary node equipment during the 10-year POP) and for those to instead be provided as part of the MRC prices submitted? |
| The government intends to pay a monthly cost (MRC) for the requirements of the PWS. The contractor is to propose all cost as MRC. |
Pricing Template
| Both the Pricing template and solicitation pages starting at 3 of 91 indicate places to provide cost. Does the Government intend for the contractor to enter their price in both documents or only the pricing template excel document? If the Government intends for the contractor to enter a price in solicitation pages starting with 3 of 91 how does the Government want the contractor to enter their price in that document? |
| Prices should be entered into the pricing template. |
General
| In event the existing service becomes end of life or unsupportable during the required 10-year POP, will the Government accept in this proposal an offer that includes upgrade to the existing system? If so, should that cost be proposed in the appropriate out year CLINs that correspond to the required upgrade date and would the Government accept different CLIN pricing for those years or must the contractor structure their CLIN prices to be uniform across all 10-years? Additionally, does the Government have space available in existing racks or space for an additional rack at each Government node site and will the Government provide the power and environmental support? |
| The contractor shall select equipment that will be maintainable for the life of the contract or replace EOL/EOS equipment as needed. Government will provide rack space, power and environmental support. |
Solicitation
| In regard to compliance with the LOS restrictions of 52.219-14. Would treatment of the telecommunication infrastructure as an ODC remove that cost element from the LOS restriction cost basis and calculation in determining compliance with 52.219-14? As you are likely aware, telecom infrastructure is largely owned and operated by large business (CenturyLink/Level3, ATT, Verizon, Etc.). It is not practical for small businesses to own telecom infrastructure due to the cost burden of owning and operating such telecom infrastructure. Therefore, a small business will have to acquire that cost element from a large business. If the cost of providing this telecom infrastructure were subject to the cost basis of LOS restrictions a small business would be unable to comply. If the required telecommunications infrastructure were provided as an ODC would it be excluded from the LOS basis and calculation? If so, the resulting requirement for LOS compliance would be “(1) Services (except construction) - At least 50 percent of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel shall be expended for employees of the concern” and similar situated small business concerns. Would this be correct? |
| As this contract is for services, the LOS clause requires an offeror to agree that at least 50 percent of its personnel costs under the contract will be based upon work of its own employees. 48 C.F.R. § 52.219-14. The treatment of infrastructure should not impact this calculation. |
General Given this solicitation is a small business set aside, and small businesses do not possess the resources or proposal staff of a large business, we request a three (3) week extension to the proposal submission date. Due to numerous areas in the solicitation material requiring clarification or possible revision, we respectfully request a three (3) week extension be applied from date of a revised proposal or the date when all questions have posted.
The proposal due date will be extended until July 11, 2018
File details come from the government source that posted it.