ATTACHMENT L1 SOLICITATION QUESTIONS_Government Response.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 30 KB Posted
- Attached to
- DISA VISP
- Solicitation number
- HC101321R0011
- Issued by
-
Defense Information Systems Agency
About this file
This summary is based on a review of the federal contract opportunity and related documents provided by DISA for the Voice over IP Services Procurement (VISP).
The documents include a solicitation for proposals for the VISP, which will provide commercial voice services to DoD sites globally. Proposals are due by specific dates in July 2021 for each of the four regions: Northcom-Southcom, Hawaii, Eucom-Centcom-Afrcom, and Indopacom. The solicitation seeks proposals to provide SIP trunking, DIDs, emergency services, network transport, and a customer web portal for oversight and management. Pricing is required for mandatory sites listed in the attachments, and optional for other sites. The contract will have a one year base period and four one-year options. DISA intends to award up to one contract per region.
The attachments include sensitive site location lists, regional DID coverage requirements, and pricing templates requiring unit prices for voice services, circuits, usage rates, and management fees. Questions are due by May 2021 and will be answered with amendments. The documents focus on the voice, network, and management services required along with relevant contract details.
View the file
Other files
Show all 33
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Q&A
| RFP Page | RFP Section/ Paragraph | CLIN/ Clause/Appendix/Attachment/Other | Questions/Comments/Recommendations | Government Response |
| 198 | L | General | Will Session Border Controllers (SBCs) and managed services for those SBCs be required as part of the services or is the government requesting just the SIP trunk services without SBCs? | The Government already has procured and installed operational Session Border Controllers (SBCs) within the Government-controlled network enclaves, and will not require the vendor to provide or operate any equipment that will reside within the Government's demarcation boundary as part of this acquisition. The Government will supply an IP address and port to the vendor on which to terminate any provisioned SIP trunks, and the contractor will only need to provision the SIP trunk (and associated supporting infrastructure) accordingly. |
| 198 | L | General | When TNs are assigned to a local phone, example in Japan, is a local Japanese telephone number used on the phone or is a NPA-NXX number reserved from the US assigned to the telephone? | When the contractor is requested to provide telephone numbers sourced from a particular country/region (as specified in PWS Appendices B and C) as part of this RFP, the contractor is required to provide a local phone number sourced from that region. While the Government does have situations today where non-local numbers are used (a.k.a "long locals"), the intent of this RFP is to obtain local numbers for the required regions identified within the RFP appendices. |
| 198 | L | General | Will the Government please consider a 30-day extension to ensure the solution supports answers to these questions? | The Government will utilize the following schedule, all proposals are due at 10am Central Time. July 7, 2021: NORTHCOM/SOUTHCOM |
July 13, 2021: Hawaii July 21, 2021: EUCOM/CENTCOM/AFRICOM July 27, 2021: INDOPACOM
| 182 | 6.18 | Deliverable | Will the Government provide an amended site list that indicates priority for transition of sites? | All of the sites listed in PWS Appendix B are currently receiving services today. No priority ordering of the sites can be guaranteed at this time. The Government will determine the priority post contract award by submitting Service Orders (SOs) to the contractor generated from DISA Storefront, but will work with the contractor during regular program status meetings to advise as to which "batch" of sites are being submitted for ordering. Certain mission partners may also delay transition slightly as they re-evaluate their costs/fees under the new contract before a final order is submitted, which could affect the ordering of services requested as well. |
| 198 | L | L1 | In the event that answers to questions and any resulting RFP amendments are not issued by 17 June 2021, will the Government consider extending the due date for proposal submission? | The Government has extended the proposal due date. All proposals are due at 10am Central Time. July 7, 2021: NORTHCOM/SOUTHCOM |
July 13, 2021: Hawaii July 21, 2021: EUCOM/CENTCOM/AFRICOM July 27, 2021: INDOPACOM 197 L General Will the Government please clarify if each regional response is due on 17 June 2021; or will there be different due dates per four (4) region? The Government will utilize the following schedule, all proposals are due at 10am Central Time. July 7, 2021: NORTHCOM/SOUTHCOM July 13, 2021: Hawaii
| 198 | L2.0.1 | The instructions in L2.0.1 note that "The offer should address all requirements as stated in the PWS…" Are offerors to address each and every PWS section in their Volume II Technical/Management responses, or only the PWS sections cited in L4.2.2 and M2.2? | Section L2.0.1 is updated to state "If awarded, a contractor is obligated to meet every aspect of the PWS and all associated attachments for the regions for which they wish to be considered for award." | |
| 204 | L5.1 | L3 | The instructions indicate that offerors are to submit their past performance references on the form provided in Attachment L3. Attachment L3 seems to be intended for use as a questionnaire for Government customer personnel. Will the Government please provide further instruction on its intention with this form (e.g., that offerors are to complete only sections I and II and are to limit their response in those sections to 4 pages per reference)? | Per RFP Section L5.1, Offerors are advised that the Government will use data provided by each offeror in this volume and may use data obtained from other sources in the evaluation of past performance. Attachment L3 is intended for use as a questionnaire for Government customer personnel and per the form, is to be sent to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist listed. |
| 204 | L5.1 | L3 | After proposal submission, will the Government be sending offerors' Volume III Past Performance references to the customer contact listed in each reference? Or, are offerors to provide a copy directly to those customer contacts before the proposal due date? | The offerors should provide a copy directly to those customer contacts who will submit the form by the proposal due date to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist listed. |
| 183 | PWS 6.18.1 | PWS 6.18.1 requires offerors to submit a Draft ALTP with the proposal, but this is not mentioned in the instructions in L4.2.2 or the evaluation criteria in M2.2. Will the Government please provide further instructions as to how the Draft ALTP should be incorporated into the proposal and what level of detail it should contain? | The solicitation has been updated to include the draft ALTP as an evaluation factor, see M2.2. The ALTP only needs to be detailed enough to show a feasible and realistic approach for migrating the full set of existing sites receiving services identified in PWS Appendices A and B over to the new contract awarded under this RFP. | |
| 177 | PWS 6.14.4 | PWS 6.14.4 requires that, "As part of the response to this PWS, the contractor shall provide written evidence of an established and comprehensive Cybersecurity program which addresses all of the functional categories identified in Table 6.14.4 of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity version 1.1 posted at this reference https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/CSWP/NIST.CSWP.04162018.pdf" Table 1 in the document at the referenced URL and Table 6.14.4 in the PWS contain 23 different categories for which a response is being requested. Should this information be provided within the Subfactor 2 response of the Volume II Technical/Management Approach? If so, will the Government please update RFP sections L4.2.2 and M2.2 (b) to reflect the requirement? | PWS 6.14.4 has been updated to require program within 10 days of award. | |
| 198 | L | Will the Government please allow offerors a reasonable amount of time between the issuance of the initial Q&A and the time that the proposal is due, so that offerors may adjust their responses accordingly? | Yes, there will be a reasonable amount of time between the issuance of the initial Q&A Government responses and the proposal due date. | |
| 200 | L2.2 | If an offeror intends to bid all regions, should a separate proposal be provided for each region, with each of those proposals containing Volumes I-V? | The summary should address which regions for which the offeror seeks to be considered for award. A separate Cost/Price Volume shall be submitted for each of the four (4) defined regions for which the offeror seeks consideration for award.. | |
| 202 | L2.3, L2.3.1 | Should offerors email a copy of their proposal(s) to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist, and also upload their proposal(s) to the DITCO portal? | No, per the instructions in section L2.3.1, to respond to this solicitation, the offeror should deliver an electronic proposal to https://www.ditco.disa.mil/vendors/ | |
| 206 | L7.1.2. | Section L7.1.2 references completed pricing information from Section B that should be included in Volume V (Contract Documentation). Please provide clarity for offerors, as page 201, Section L2.2.3 states, "All pricing information should be addressed ONLY in the Price Proposal Volumes...". | Section L7.1.2 has been changed to read - "All pricing information should be addressed ONLY in the Price Proposal Volumes, respective to the regions for which the offeror seeks to be considered for award" | |
| 102 | FAR 52.204-9, Personal Identity Verification of Contractor Personnel, applies only to contracts that require contractors to have routine (as opposed to intermittent) physical access to a federally controlled facility in accordance with FAR 4.1303. Since the awardee will only require intermittent access to a federally controlled facility, will the government please remove FAR 52.204-9 from the solicitation? | Removed from RFP on AMD 0003. | ||
| 102 | FAR 52.209-12, Certification Regarding Tax Matters, does not apply to DoD procurements in accordance with FAR 9.104-7(e). Since this is a DoD procurement, will the government please remove FAR 52.209-12 from the solicitation? | Removed from RFP on AMD 0003. | ||
| 103 | FAR 52.222-46, Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees, applies to only contracts that will require the contractor to provide professional services in accordance with FAR 22.1103. Since professional services are not within the scope of the solicitation, will the government please remove FAR 52.222-46 from the solicitation? | Removed from RFP on AMD 0003. | ||
| 103 | FAR 52.224-1, Privacy Act Notification, and FAR 52.224-2, Privacy Act, apply only to contracts that require the design, development, or operation of a system of records on individuals. Since the solicitation does not anticipate the contractor designing, developing, or operating a system of records on individuals, would the government please remove FAR 52.224-1 and FAR 52.224-2 from the solicitation? | Removed from RFP on AMD 0003. | ||
| 103 | FAR 52.246-25, Limitation of Liability – Services, applies only to contracts that are subject to the requirements of FAR Subpart 46.801 in accordance with FAR 46.805(a). FAR Subpart 46.801 does not apply to contracts for “information technology, including telecommunications….” See FAR 46.801. FAR 52.246-25 therefore does not apply to contracts for information technology, including telecommunications. Since the solicitation anticipates award of information technology/telecommunications contracts, would the government please remove FAR 52.246-25 from the solicitation? | Removed from RFP on AMD 0003. | ||
| 103 | FAR 52.248-1, Value Engineering, does not apply to contracts for commercial products that do not involve packaging specifications or other special requirements or specifications. Since the solicitation anticipates award of “commercially provided network solutions and services” (i.e., commercial products) that do not involve packaging specifications or other special requirements or specifications, would the government please remove FAR 52.248-1 from the solicitation? | Removed from RFP on AMD 0003. | ||
| 103 | DFARS 252.204-7004, DoD Antiterrorism Awareness Training for Contractors, applies only to contracts that require contractor personnel to have routine (as opposed to intermittent) physical access to federal facilities in accordance with DFARS 204.7203. Since the awardee will only require intermittent physical access to federal facilities, will the government please remove DFARS 252.204-7004 from the solicitation? | Removed from RFP on AMD 0003. | ||
| 132 | Through FAR 52.212-5, the solicitation incorporates by reference FAR 52.204-14, Service Contract Reporting Requirements. However, FAR 52.204-14 does not apply to indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contracts (IDIQ) or to DoD contracts in accordance with FAR 4.1705. Since the solicitation anticipates DoD awarding an IDIQ contract, will the government please remove FAR 52.204-14 from the solicitation? | Removed from RFP on AMD 0003. | ||
| 132 | Through FAR 52.212-5, the solicitation incorporates by reference FAR 52.204-15, Service Contract Reporting Requirements for Indefinite-Delivery Contracts. However, FAR 52.204-15 does not apply to DoD contracts in accordance with FAR 4.1705. Since the solicitation anticipates award of a DoD contract, will the government please remove FAR 52.204-15 from the solicitation? | Removed from RFP on AMD 0003. | ||
| 132 | Through FAR 52.212-5, the solicitation incorporates by reference FAR 52.219-3, Notice of HUBZone Set-Aside or Sole-Source Award. However, FAR 52.219-3 only applies to HUBZone set-aside or sole-source awards in accordance with FAR 19.1309. Since this procurement does not involve a HUBZone set-aside or sole-source award, will the government please remove FAR 52.219-3 from the solicitation? | Removed from RFP on AMD 0003. | ||
| 132 | Through FAR 52.212-5, the solicitation incorporates by reference FAR 52.219-33, Nonmanufacture Rule. However, FAR 52.219-33 applies only to small business set-asides in accordance with FAR 19.507(h). Since the solicitation does not anticipate award of a small business set-aside, will the government please remove FAR 52.219-33 from the solicitation? | Removed from RFP on AMD 0003. | ||
| 132 | Through FAR 52.212-5, the solicitation incorporates by reference FAR 52.223-11, Ozone-Depleting Substances and High Global Warming Potential Hydrofluorocarbons. However, FAR 52.223-11 applies only to contracts that anticipate the contractor providing the ozone-depleting equipment specified in FAR 23.804(a)(1), including, for example, refrigeration equipment and air conditioning equipment. Since the contractor will not be required to provide specified ozone-depleting equipment, will the government please remove FAR 52.223-11 from the solicitation? | Removed from RFP on AMD 0003. | ||
| 132 | Through FAR 52.212-5, the solicitation incorporates by reference FAR 52.223-21, Foams, which applies only to contracts for: (1) products that may contain high global warming potential hydrofluorocarbons or refrigerant blends containing hydrofluorocarbons as a foam blowing agent, such as building foam insulation or appliance foam insulation; or (2) construction. Since the awarded contract will not fall into either of the aforementioned categories, will the government please remove FAR 52.223-21 from the solicitation? | Removed from RFP on AMD 0003. | ||
| 132 | Through FAR 52.212-5, the solicitation incorporates by reference FAR 52.225-3, Buy American-Free Trade Agreements-Israeli Trade Act. However, FAR 52.225-3 does not apply to commercial item information technology procurements in accordance with FAR 25.1101(b)(1)(i)(B). Since this is a commercial item information technology procurement, will the government please remove FAR 52.225-3 from the solicitation? | Removed from RFP on AMD 0003. | ||
| 132 | Through FAR 52.212-5, the solicitation incorporates by reference FAR 52.232-34, Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer – Other than System for Award Management. However, FAR 52.232-34 does not apply to solicitations that include FAR 52.204-7 in accordance with FAR 32.1110(2)(i). Since the solicitation includes FAR 52.204-7, will the government please remove FAR 52.232-34? | Removed from RFP on AMD 0003. | ||
| 132 | Through FAR 52.212-5, the solicitation incorporates by reference FAR 52.232-36, Payment by Third Party. FAR 52.232-36 applies only to contracts where payment will be made by a charge to a government account with a third party such as a governmentwide commercial purchase card in accordance with FAR 32.1110(d). Unless the government anticipates that payment will be made by a charge to a government account with a third party (which would be unusual), would the government please remove FAR 52.232-36 from the solicitation? | Removed from RFP on AMD 0003. | ||
| 198 | Section L | Proposal Response Date/Time | Request the due date be extended by 60 days after the government answers all questions asked by vendors. The additional time is requested to provide a cost effective compliant response given the complexity of this RFP driven by the large volume of voice services and unique requirements (reporting, Web Portal and Cyber Security requirements among others). | The Government will utilize the following schedule, all proposals are due at 10am Central Time. July 7, 2021: NORTHCOM/SOUTHCOM |
July 13, 2021: Hawaii
| N/A | N/A | N/A | Request DISA consider using the GSA EIS contract for this procurement? Much of the language, product structure, CLIN structure and IT reporting requirements are very similar to the EIS contract. Making use of that contract could result in significant savings to the Government as industry has already invested significant resources developing and deploying these environments (Web Portals, billing systems, security environments). One Example is Attachment 4, Appendix D VISP Hawaii Pricing Template ROW 8 : DITCO CLIN column = x001: Service ID column = AA is similar to EIS CLINs which are used in EIS Billing, Portals systems. | The use of EIS would create an IDIQ task order within an IDIQ contract, which is prohibited. |
| Row 2 | Appendix Ds | Appendix Ds | Request the Government provide clarification about the purpose of the values in row 2 of ll the Appendix D spreadsheet tables (1.02%, .77%, .88%, .87%, .84%, .83%, .83%, .84%, .88%) | The purpose of the pre-established escalation rates was to provide all vendors with a consistent escalation percentage for each year to apply to all CLINs. This ensures consistent escalation amongst vendors and minimizes potential pricing errors from year to year. The pre-established escalation rates were derived from a Government Pricing and Purchasing Forecasting index for Telecommunications for the next 10 years. |
| 171 | PWS 6.7.2 | Table 6.7.5 Mandatory Features | Several of these features such as 3-way calling, blind transfer, attendant call routing, call forward and call hold appear to be PBX type features rather than SIP trunking features. Can you please clarify this? | The Session Controllers (DoD term for phone switch or IP PBX) receiving commercial services will reside within the Government-controlled network. However, the expectation is that the contractor will support implementation of these features in a manner when signaled over the provided SIP trunks, consistent with the SIP standards and requirements included in this RFP. DISA will work with the winning contractor to test and validate that any DoD-connected call session controllers can successfully signal the SIP primitives associated with the referenced calling features. |
| 171 | PWS 6.7.2 | Table 6.7.5 Mandatory Features | What is meant by Bandwidth QoS management? We support QoS on our SIP trunks, but we would like clarification on what the Government is requesting with "Bandwidth QoS management ". | In this context, "Bandwidth QoS Management" refers to the network's ability to process and allocate bandwidth during congestion periods for appropriately marked packets that have a particular DSCP value. A configurable quantity of bandwidth will be allocated to support the queues associated with a configured set of DSCP markings to ensure an acceptable level of services is maintained for certain DSCP-marked packets even during periods of congestion. |
| Appendix B / 165 | Attachment 2_Apendix B VISP Customer Site List / PWS Section 6.0 | All sites (524 in North-SouthCOM for example) in the attachment show as optional in column B of the spreadsheet. Are these locations supposed be optional? Would the government confirm if vendors are to price all of the optional sites? | All of the sites marked as optional in this RFP are marked in this manner because of the IDIQ nature of this RFP. While it is likely that the majority of sites listed in the RFP will be ordered through submission of a Service Order (SO) initiated from DISA Storefront, the Government cannot guarantee that services for a particular site will be ordered post-contract award. Because any of the referenced sites could receive an SO, it is required for vendors to fill out all of the required portions of the requested pricing tables in PWS Appendix D, which will be used during evaluation of the RFP costs associated with PWS Appendices A (MPLS VPN circuit sites) and B (currently serviced telephony / DID sites). The pricing supplied in Appendix D will be used when the Government submits orders for future services in DISA Storefront for any of the listed sites / regions covered under this RFP. | |
| N/A | N/A | N/A | Given the size and scope of this solicitation, would the Government consider extending the due date? | The Government will utilize the following schedule, all proposals are due at 10am Central Time. July 7, 2021: NORTHCOM/SOUTHCOM |
July 13, 2021: Hawaii
| 165 | 5. Scope | PWS | Are contractors required to bid on all four (4) regions? Or may we bid one of the four regions? | The Government intends to award up to one (1) firm-fixed price contract for each VISP Region for a maximum of four contracts; however, the Government reserves the right to award more than one region to a single offeror or to make no award(s) at all. Contractors are not required to submit a proposal on all regions. |
| 173 | 6.10.5 | PWS | Please define what is meant by "advanced" IP based emergency calling services. | Advanced IP based calling services in this context refers to the ability to support enhanced 911 or NG911 services where supported in a given region, which includes delivery of, at a minimum, a physical address to the ANI/ALI database. This service should allow public safety answer points (PSAPs), or similar functions in non-domestic US locations, to have the ability to retrieve location information associated with the 911 call in addition to receiving the phone call and source phone number or ELIN. |
| 174 | 6.11.9 Table | PWS | Would the inability to provide two-factor authentication on the portal at contract start date deem us technically not-compliant or is this something the Government would consider giving a post-award grace period during which we could implement it? | The PWS States: Provide a secure web portal for making updates to the ANI/ALI mappings utilizing Hypertext Transfer Protocol Secure (HTTPS) with username and password authentication at a minimum with a preference for two-factor authentication. The Government would consider a Plan of Action and Milestones (POAM) for meeting the two-factor authentication requirement and allow the vendor to migrate towards the two-factor authentication requirement in accordance with the negotiated POAM. |
| 9 | G4.11.1/2 | Appendix E | If billing exceeds the quoted price, will the contractor be able to bill for the taxes and fees in excess of that price? If taxes and fees are less than anticipated, will the contractor be required the bill at the lesser rate? | Taxes and fees must be included in the pricing supplied in Appendix pricing tables D. Billing cannot exceed the amounts quoted in Appendix D after contract award. |
| 170 | 6.7.2 | PWS | In locations where E911 does not qualify, will the customer provide their own 911 local service? | If a particular region's public safety answering points (PSAPs) or equivalent cannot support enhanced 911, then the Government will treat that as being the fault of the particular jurisdiction, municipality, county, region infrastructure receiving emergency calls and not the fault of the contractor awarded this RFP. The contractor must only supply E911 services for the locations where the jurisdiction's infrastructure can support it. |
| 183 | 6.1.8.1 ALTP | PWS | Would the Government be able to provide a list of requirements for the ALTP? | The ALTP only needs to be detailed enough to show a feasible and realistic approach for migrating the full set of existing sites receiving services identified in PWS Appendices A and B over to the new contract awarded under this RFP. |
| 185 | 6.19 NS/EP | PWS | Is the Government's intention to have the contractor request TSP assignments? And if so, how are we to determine which code/level should be assigned? | The Government will request TSP code assignments. Specifically, if an emergency occurs and a TSP requirement emerges to have a request for expedited services submitted, first DISA will contact the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency's TSP program office to obtain a code for use in the order following the instructions here (https://www.cisa.gov/telecommunications-service-priority-tsp). The received code will then be included in orders submitted through DISA Storefront and the contractor will receive the code as part of any Service Order (SO) received. From there, the contractor would be expected to process the order based on the DHS-assigned code and priority level relative to other orders. |
| 189 | 7.3.2 SLAs | PWS | Is there an acceptable alternative to AHCs or will an inability to support AHCs deem a contractor technically not-compliant? | Supporting AHCs is the minimum requirement. Per the PWS, "The contractor shall support the use of 28 character Agency Hierarchy Codes (AHCs) in accordance with Appendix E, Additional Billing Requirements, in order to distinguish between funding sources from multiple DoD entities." |
| 191 | 12 GFE | PWS | Normally we provide a NID, is there any additional premise-based equipment we will be required to provide? | Under this contract, the expectation is that the Government will provide all equipment required on the Government's side of the demarcation point. The contractor will not be required to procure or install any equipment within the Government network enclave boundary. |
| L6.2 | L | The line in the RFP: All pricing shall be quoted in U.S. Currency and carried to no more than two decimal places |
We have CLINs for usage that go out to 6 decimal points. If we have to round up to two decimal places this could result in really high rates for the usage. Can the RFP be amended to allow for six decimal places in the unit rates?
| The RFP has been updated (AMD04) and all APPENDIX Ds CLIN x038 have been updated to round to six decimal places. | ||||
| Pursuant to the directions provided under sections L6.1.2 and L6.2 can the Government please confirm that pricing is required for "Mandatory/Required Sites to be Priced" only and that pricing is permissible but not required for the "Optional Sites to be Priced" in the included Appendix D (Attachments 4-7)? Further, if the offerer is not required to provide pricing for all of the "Optional Sites to be Priced" can the Government please indicate how the offeror should indicate this given that the instructions under L6.1.1 indicate that leaving a cell blank or the use of "NSP", "N/A", and "N/C" (No charge) are not acceptable entries and the price proposal will be considered incomplete? | Offerors are required to put a price in for the Mandatory/Required sites. The instructions under L6.1.1 within the RFP has been updated. Pricing is permissible but not required for the "Optional Sites to be Priced". Therefore, a proposal will not be considered incomplete if cells are left blank or have "NSP", "N/A", or "N/C" for the "Optional Sites to be Priced" | |||
| Table 6.17.1, Line Item 2 requires a portal to allow customers to "Manage service-related features and settings." Will the Government please provide more detail as to exactly which service-related features and settings require management and how those features and settings are to be managed? | Please reference PWS 6.18, 6.20, 7.3 for additional detail. But beyond what is stated in the PWS, there is no other hard set feature list because the Government recognizes that for many commercial telephony vendors there is a diverse range of variations between offered telephone services and the associated ways to manage those services. However, some desirable features would include the ability to control blocking of calls from specific numbers in particularly as it relates to filtering spam/robo calls, the ability to integrate the ticketing information with DISA's helpdesk in an automated manner particularly as DISA is moving to ServiceNow for its trouble ticket management, the ability for customers to pull their billing information/usage data, and the ability to configure e-mail-based alerts for certain service events, ticket updates, outages. We also recognize that certain vendors will not expose specific control functionality in a customer-facing, Internet-accessible portal for security reasons. The overall objective is to allow the Government obtain access to the same set of commercially available service and management features that would be made available to any other customers commercially using that same vendor's portal / platform. | |||
| Does the CDR Report require the noted details for voice services only? | Correct, the CDR report must at a minimum provide details for voice-related services. | |||
| PWS 6.20.1 requires the ability to monitor service availability through a contractor-provided web portal. Which services require monitoring through the referenced portal? | Both the voice and network (MPLS VPN and Ethernet Access) services require monitoring through the portal, with specific reporting details pertaining to the SLA described in PWS 7 "Performance Metrics". The overall objective is to allow the Government to have high level visibility of the operational status of its SIP trunks and network connections to the contractor and validate that the service is meeting all required SLA parameters. | |||
| For SIP trunking and DID requirements in the Appendix D pricing templates, will the Government please provide the street address and building number for each requested site location? | Any available site information concerning the existing sites / locations either known to be currently receiving services or soon to receive services is provided in Appendices A and B however offeror must follow the instructions in the RFP to obtain this list of addressees in Appendices A and B because this list is deemed sensitive, CUI information, that is distribution limited. Please contact the RFP Points of Contact referenced on SAM.gov to obtain a copy. | |||
| 147 | 252.204-7012 | Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting (DEC 2019) | Request the Government confirm that IT systems required by this RFP, specifically network monitoring systems, Customer Web Portal and billing systems that are hosted or housed by the vendor (not an external cloud service provider) are only subject to NIST SP 800-171 and not FedRAMP. | FedRAMP is not applicable to a vendor's internally-hosted solution that is not located in a Cloud Service Provider. FedRAMP only applies "If the Contractor intends to use an external cloud service provider to store, process, or transmit any covered defense information in performance of this contract..." (RFP excerpt from section 252.204-7012) |
| 181 | 6.17 | PWS 6.17 Management and Network Operations | Does the Government require that the requested Web portal be dedicated to the DISA customer, or can it be utilized for multiple customers ? | The portal does not need to be exclusive to DISA but the DISA VISP-related information should only be accessible to this with an authorized need to know with appropriate role-based access controls. |
| 189 | 7.3.2 | PWS 7.3 Service Level Requirements | Several of the Web Portal requirements appear to be derived from the GSA EIS contract. Request the Government make use of the GSA EIS contract for these requirements or allow vendors to propose commercial customer portals (for example dropping the 28 character Agency Hierarchy Codes etc). Rational – Industry has spent millions of dollars developing the GSA EIS IT environments. We are not permitted to include non EIS customer in these IT environments. Recreating these IT environments specifically for VISP will result significant cost to the Government. | The use of EIS would create an IDIQ task order within an IDIQ contract, which is prohibited. |
| 165 | 5, 6 | Applicable CLIN Types | Request the Government provide definitions for the product types and CLINs requested in the VISP RFP. While they appear to be similar to the GSA EIS contract, this appears to be a stand alone separate contract. Unlike an EIS fair opportunity, the VISP RFP does not have a reference contract that provides the detailed definition of the services requested. For example, request the Government provide further detail / definition of the CLINs requested in Table 6.3 - (ie – what is required for Trunk bursting) | Please find the requested information in the "CLIN Reference" tab of Appendix D under Column E "Detailed CLIN Description" for each CLIN. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .