The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
Attachment J-6 - Question Answer Submission Template for RFP HC1028-13-R-0015
| DOCUMENT |
| · HC102813R0015.doc |
J-1_Performance_Work_Statement_(PWS).docx
J-2_Proposal_Format.docx
| SECTION NAME |
| Page Limitations |
| SECTION TEXT |
| “The response to the PWS should be constructed in the Proposal Format provided (RFP Attachment J-2) and will include all the Government requirements identified in the Proposal Format. This represents the technical management portion of the offeror’s proposal.” |
| QUESTION |
| Per Section L, Table 2.2, the Technical/Management Volume is limited to 60 pages and “includes all Government requirements and Offeror’s proposal.” However, in comparing the PWS (Attachment J-1) with the Proposal Format (Attachment J-2), there are a significant number of requirements listed in the PWS (J-1) that are not included in the Proposal Format (J-2). The missing PWS sections include: |
· 5.3
· 6.2.1
· 6.6.4
· 6.10.1
· 6.11.4.1
· 5.4
· 6.6
· 6.9.1
· 6.10.2
· 6.11.4.2
· 6.1.4
· 6.6.1
· 6.9.2
· 6.11.3
· 6.11.4.3
· 6.1.6
· 6.6.2
· 6.9.3
· 6.11.3.1
· 6.11.4.4
· 6.1.7
· 6.6.3
· 6.10
· 6.11.4
· 6.11.5.2
In addition, Attachment J-2 does not include any requirements after Section 6.11.5.1.2 of the PWS.
Section L.4.2.1 also states that “All information for your approach will be identified directly in the Proposal Format (RFP Attachment J-2). All information provided in the PWS will be included in the final contract award.” Because Section L states that “all” information in the PWS should be addressed in our response (J-2) and will also be included in the eventual final contract, it appears that Attachment J-2 will have to be updated to include all requirements from the PWS.
The answer to this question is critical as it impacts the preparation of the Technical/Management Volume significantly. Please clarify the following:
a) Please confirm if offerors are required to address any PWS requirements that are not explicitly restated in the Proposal Format document (Attachment J-2).
b) If we should respond to all PWS requirements, please provide a revised Attachment J-2 that includes all required PWS sections?
| ANSWER |
| a) Offerors are not required to address any PWS requirements that are not explicitly restated in the Proposal Format document but they are required to meet the PWS requirement regardless if it is included in the Proposal Format or not. |
b) A revised Attachment J-2 is not required.
| DOCUMENT |
| HC102813R0015.doc |
| SECTION NO. |
| Section 2.2; Exhibit 2.2; Section 5.2; Attachment L-2 |
| SECTION NAME |
| Organization / Page Limits; Relevant Contracts; Past and Present Performance Information Format |
| SECTION TEXT |
| · Section L; Pages 32-33: “Complete Attachment L-3 for a minimum of two references for the offeror/prime, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner (within the same division or cost center) and a minimum of two references for each subcontractor as stated in L-2 para b. Cannot exceed a total of 4 maximum past performance efforts 10 pages each.” |
· Section L; Page 37: “The total of Past and Present Performance Information references will not exceed 4 of which 2 must be for the offeror/prime and teaming partner/joint venture partner/subcontractor that may perform more than 40% of the requirement.
· Attachment L-2; Section B.2: “Each Performance Information Sheet for each contract is limited to 4 pages…. The total for Performance Information sheets only will not exceed six - two of which must be from the offeror/prime.
| QUESTION |
| There appear to be several discrepancies regarding the maximum number of past performance information sheets permitted (4 versus 6) as well as the page limits permitted per reference (4 versus 10). Would the Government please answer the following questions regarding past performance: |
a) What is the maximum number of Past Performance Information Sheets permitted?
b) What is the page limit for each Past Performance Information Sheet?
| ANSWER |
| a) The maximum number of Past Performance Information Sheet/Reference submissions is 4. |
b) The page limit for each Past Performance Information Sheet (Attachment L-2) is 4 pages. The page limit for each past performance effort submitted, to include the Past Performance Information Sheet, is 10 pages.
| DOCUMENT |
| J-1_Performance_Work_Statement_(PWS).docx |
| SECTION NO. |
| 5.5 and 5.5.1 |
| SECTION NAME |
| Current Environment |
| SECTION TEXT |
| · “DISA ESD currently provides processor services at 18 computing facilities in the CONUS…” |
“Six (6) current OCONUS locations…”
| QUESTION |
| In the interest of ensuring all offerors have a common understanding of the storage environment, would the Government please provide the amount of storage by class (i.e., Enterprise class, Mid-range class; Inexpensive bulk storage disk solution, and Network Attached Storages solution) and by site for each of the (18) CONUS and (6) OCONUS locations under the existing ESS contract? |
| ANSWER |
| The storage environment within DISA is dynamic and the current environment is not a reflection of future requirements. The offeror is expected to provide all capacity to all sites listed in sections 5.5 and 5.5.1. |
| DOCUMENT |
| J-1_Performance_Work_Statement_(PWS).docx |
| SECTION NAME |
| Not Provided |
| SECTION TEXT |
| “All systems, components and/or writeable media being removed from the site (tapes, hard drives, mass storage devices, etc.) will be sanitized or may be retained by the government for destruction in accordance with DoD, DISA and ESD Security guidance. The contractor must be aware that the sanitation process is to prevent any compromise of classified and/or controlled unclassified data and may render the system components and/or writeable media unserviceable and/or completely destroyed. The Government will make the determination as to whether drives can be sanitized or destroyed.” |
| QUESTION |
| Would the Government please provide the process that determines whether disk drives will be sanitized or destroyed as well as the historical metrics of disks destroyed? |
In addition, please provide the defined, acceptable DoD/DISA process for the sanitization of disk drives to allow removal from DISA locations instead of destruction.
| ANSWER |
| Disk sanitization and destruction is based upon several instructions: |
1) Assistant Secretary of Defense Memorandum – Disposition of Unclassified DoD Computer Hard drives
2) National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication 800-88 – Guidelines for Media Sanitization
3) Department of Defense Manual 5200.01, Volume 3, Incorporating Change 2, March 19, 2013
All hard drives exposed to classified data have the potential to be destroyed. All drives dedicated to classified environments must be destroyed. All other drives can be wiped with software based utilities and returned to the vendor.
Security requirements are subject to change.
PAGE
SECTION NO.
SECTION NAME
SECTION TEXT
| QUESTION |
| Although the FedBizOpps synopsis indicates DISA’s intent to acquire commercial items, the RFP does not actually specify that the resultant contract will be a contract for commercial items. Please confirm that the resultant contract will be a contract for commercial items. |
| ANSWER |
| The resultant contract awarded from RFP HC102813R0015 will be a contract for commercial items. |
PAGE
| SECTION NO. |
| 52.230-2, Cost Accounting Standards, (MAY 2012) |
SECTION NAME
SECTION TEXT
| QUESTION |
| The solicitation incorporates 52.230-2, Cost Accounting Standards, (MAY 2012). As you know “Firm fixed-priced …..contracts and subcontracts for the acquisition of commercial items” are exempt from all CAS requirements (48 CFR 9903.201-1(b)(6)). We don’t have any contracts subject to CAS, and consequently don’t have a CAS Disclosure Statement or the accounting systems that CAS would require. We are confident that other companies that provide commercial items are in the same situation. Please either confirm that the resultant contract will be subject to CAS or confirm that 52.230-2 will be deleted by amendment of the solicitation. |
| ANSWER |
| The Government will remove 52.230-2, Cost Accounting Standards, (MAY 2012). |
| SECTION NAME |
| Cost or Pricing Information Requirements |
| SECTION TEXT |
| “…if the KO determines that there is insufficient information available to determine price reasonableness and none of the exceptions in FAR 15.403-1 <https://workspaces.disa.mil/Documents%20and%20Settings/Deborah.Wellen/Local%20Settings/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/Content.IE5/far/FAR15.DOC#b154031> apply, the Offeror shall be required to submit cost or pricing data.” |
| QUESTION |
| If the contract will be a contract for commercial items, we believe that the exception to cost or pricing data requirements at 15.403-1(b)(3) already applies. If the exception does indeed apply please confirm that DISA will delete this requirement by a solicitation amendment. If DISA intends to reserve the right to require cost or pricing data, please confirm that is the case. A rationale for that decision would be appreciated. |
| ANSWER |
| The Government will remove the following statement from Section 6.1.3. |
"If, after receipt of proposals, the KO determines that there is insufficient information available to determine price reasonableness and none of the exceptions in FAR 15.403-1 apply, the Offeror shall be required to submit cost or pricing data."
SECTION NO.
SECTION NAME
SECTION TEXT
| QUESTION |
| Because we are a provider of commercial items, we have a government approved “Commercial Plan” under 52.219-9 Small Business Subcontracting Plan. As you know, a commercial plan covers the entire production of commercial items for the contractor’s fiscal year, and does not require specific subcontract goals under individual contracts. Paragraph 7.3.3, Small Business Participation and Commitment, requires participation commitments for small businesses at the first and second tier specifically for the DISA ESS II contract, effectively requiring an individual subcontracting plan. No consideration of Commercial Plans is mentioned. Will DISA accept a government approved Commercial Plan in response to paragraph 7.3.3, and if so how will a Commercial Plan be compared fairly to an individual plan? |
| ANSWER |
| Yes, DISA will accept a valid Commercial Subcontracting Plan in accordance with FAR 19.704(d). The approved Commercial Subcontracting Plan will not be compared to individual plans but accepted on its own merit. |
| SECTION NAME |
| Section L - Assumptions to Solicitation Requirements |
| SECTION TEXT |
| Section L states: “No assumptions or exceptions will be entertained.” However on page 68, Section M states: “M003 Solicitation Requirements, Terms and Conditions” indicates that may provide a rationale for exceptions to the Ts&Cs. |
| ANSWER |
| Section M003 Solicitation Requirements, Terms and Conditions language has been revised to match the language in Section L, 7.2. |
| DOCUMENT |
| J-1 Performance Work Statement (PWS) |
| SECTION NAME |
| Storage Solution and Capabilities |
| SECTION TEXT |
| Encryption of data at rest that complies with all levels of the FIPS 140-2 Standard |
| QUESTION |
| DISA used to define "Data at Rest" as data residing on a tape. Please provide a current definition of Data at Rest. |
| ANSWER |
| The Government defines ‘Data at Rest’ as any data that is not in transit, to include data on tape and data on disk. |
| DOCUMENT |
| J-1 Performance Work Statement (PWS) |
| SECTION NAME |
| Storage Solutions and Capabilities |
| SECTION TEXT |
| Encryption of data at rest that complies with all levels of the FIPS 140-2 Standard |
| QUESTION |
| a) Is it assumed that all data stored on Enterprise, Mid-Tier and Network Attached Storage will be encrypted? |
b) What percentage of data on each tier (Enterprise, Mid-Tier and NAS) will be encrypted?
c) Must encryption be done within the storage array, or may it be done in the SAN and/or Ethernet fabric?
| ANSWER |
| a) Encryption has been moved to an optional priced feature for Enterprise, Mid-Tier and Network Attached Storage in the PWS. An optional ordering SLIN has been added to the cost model for these three types of storage. |
b) It is unknown at this time how much capacity will be encrypted.
c) Offeror will determine which storage based (non-host) solution will be utilized.
| DOCUMENT |
| J-1 Performance Work Statement (PWS) |
| SECTION NO. |
| 6.4.1 Subtask 4.1 |
| SECTION NAME |
| TASK 4 – Provisioning, Management, and Reporting Infrastructure |
| SECTION TEXT |
| This offeror-provided infrastructure will be managed and maintained by the offeror while DISA personnel will have access to the solution |
| QUESTION |
| Please explain the scope of the offeror’s obligation to manage and maintain the infrastructure. |
| ANSWER |
| Offeror will manage solution under government operational control. |
Offeror will:
a) Provide a solution that complies with STIG requirements
b) Provide software updates for the application and all additional software components required for the application
c) Install and upgrade hardware and software as required to meet DISA requirements
d) Provide technical expertise and support for products
e) Provide hardware maintenance
DISA will maintain:
a) Operating System
b) Application user accounts
| DOCUMENT |
| J-1 Performance Work Statement (PWS) |
| SECTION NO. |
| 6.5.1 Subtask 5.1 |
| SECTION NAME |
| Maintenance Response and Repair Time |
| SECTION TEXT |
| The offeror shall deliver a minimum 99.95% availability per orderable system with options to provide up to 99.999% availability per orderable system… |
| QUESTION |
| States that offeror shall deliver a minimum 99.95% availability with the options to provide 99.999% availability. However, there is no place in the SLIN table for additional options. Please provide clarification. |
| ANSWER |
| The offeror shall provide storage performance/availability of 99.95% for all systems other than Enterprise class storage and 99.999% availability for Enterprise class storage. The PWS has been modified. No changes will be made to the SLIN table. |
| DOCUMENT |
| RFP HC102813R0015 |
| SECTION NO. |
| Section M Para. 1.2 |
| SECTION NAME |
| Data Migration Strategy |
| SECTION TEXT |
| The Government will evaluate the offer’s solution to migrate data from the current storage inventory to the solutions identified in their proposal by 15 Jan 2016, and the impact of the strateby on service continuity during the migration process. |
| QUESTION |
| a) What is the scope of offeror’s responsibility for migration? |
b) Must offeror actually perform all migrations?
| ANSWER |
| a) Offeror will be required to provide a migration plan and migration technology that will be used for migration. |
b) Execution of the migration will be a partnership between the government and the offeror.
Defense Information Systems Agency