The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
Attachment J-6 - Question Answer Submission Template for RFP HC1028-13-R-0015
| DOCUMENT |
| Solicitation Document |
| SECTION NO. |
| 2.2 - Table 2.2 and 4.2.1 |
| SECTION NAME |
| Organization/Page Limits – Proposal Organization and Technical/Management |
| SECTION TEXT |
| RFP Attachment J-2, Technical/Management Response to PWS |
and
The Proposal Format is the technical/management volume. 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.
| QUESTION |
| We understand that Volume II – Technical/Management will be the completed Attachment J-2; however, it seems that the government is expecting the vendor to address the PWS requirements. Attachment J-2 (Proposal Content) does not include all the requirements from Attachment J-1 (PWS). Please clarify how we must construct Volume II to be fully compliant with the government’s requirements for completeness of Volume II. |
| ANSWER |
| 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 of if it is included in the Proposal Format or not. |
| SECTION NO. |
| 6.1.1.1, 6.1.1.2, and 6.1.1.4 |
| SECTION NAME |
| Task 1 – Storage Solutions and Capabilities |
| SECTION TEXT |
| “Encryption of data at rest that complies with all levels of the FIPS 140-2 standard” |
| QUESTION |
| It is our understanding that no storage vendor has offerings that comply with all levels of the FIPS 140-2 standard. Given this understanding, please note that requiring any level of FIPS 140-2 would limit competition. Compliance with even the lowest levels (1, 2) of FIPS 140-2 will require some vendors to use encryption appliances or encryption blades within the SAN fabric, and perhaps even software on every server accessing these storage tiers, resulting in a far more complex solution than DISA employs today, at a far greater expense. It is also our understanding that there are alternatives to providing the protection DISA requires. |
Therefore, we request that DISA remove the requirement for "encryption of data at rest that complies with all levels of the FIPS 140-2 standard” for Enterprise, mid-range, and NAS storage. Alternatively, it is suggested that DISA require compliance with a NIST standard more appropriate to the storage environment, e.g., FIPS 197, Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) under which a storage vendor has implemented the AES and has successfully completed NIST Cryptographic Algorithm Validation Program (CAVP).
| ANSWER |
| The offeror’s solution must include all software and hardware required, to include key management. Encryption has been moved to the optional section. Storage systems that require the encryption option are listed in the PWS. Offeror solution can consist of multiple solutions, but meet the requirement to provide all four levels of FIPS 140-2. |
| SECTION NAME |
| Storage solutions and capabilities |
| SECTION TEXT |
| 1) Encryption of data at rest; 2) Supports data erasure/shredding compliant with DoD 5220.22-M |
| QUESTION |
| With encrypted data-at-rest, are hard drives required to be erased/shredded when removed from service in the NIPR, SIPR, and SCIF environments? Does the encryption negate the requirement to destroy the drives when systems are deactivated/removed from the SIPR and SCIF environments? |
| 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, even if the drives have been encrypted. Unclassified drives that have been encrypted do not require erasure before returning to the vendor.
Encryption does not negate the requirement for classified drive destruction.
Security requirements are subject to change.
| SECTION NO. |
| 6.1.4 Subtask 1.4 |
| SECTION NAME |
| Task 1 – Storage Solutions and Capabilities |
| SECTION TEXT |
| Provide solutions that include all required ancillary components such as racks, cables, power cables, etc. See Attachment 3 for rack and power details. |
| QUESTION |
| The proposed storage is provided in OEM furnished racks and, in nearly all cases, cannot be certified for installation in non-OEM provided racks. The power specifications differ from what is described in attachment 3. Please allow for delivery of these OEM provided racks with either single-phase or three-phase power and a varying number of drops. |
| ANSWER |
| Offeror should meet requirements set out in power specification as described in PWS Attachment 3, where possible. Waivers and exceptions can be provided on a case by case basis. |
| SECTION NAME |
| Additional Storage Capabilities. And, ATTACHMENT 6 of the PWS, Page 2, NIST Definition of Cloud Computing |
| SECTION TEXT |
| “6.2.2 Subtask 2.2 – Provide storage solutions that facilitate DISA’s ability to provide private, public and hybrid cloud storage capabilities to the DoD.” NIST definitions: “Deployment Models: Private cloud. The cloud infrastructure is operated solely for an organization. It may be managed by the organization or a third party and may exist on premise or off premise.” |
| QUESTION |
| Will DISA adhere to the NIST definition of private cloud, specifically that a private cloud may exist on or off DISA and government premise? |
| ANSWER |
| The following footnote has been added to PWS Attachment 4: "While NIST definition states private cloud may exist on premise or off premise, the DISA private cloud will exist on premise within DISA managed facilities." |
| SECTION NAME |
| Task 2 – Additional Storage Capabilities |
| SECTION TEXT |
| This solution will encrypt data in ‘flight’ and at rest with FIPS 140-2 compliant encryption |
| QUESTION |
| Please specify the FIPS 140-2 level required for 6.2.2.3 for the data in flight. |
| ANSWER |
| Offeror solution can consist of multiple solutions, but meet the requirement to provide all four levels of FIPS 140-2. |
| SECTION NAME |
| 6.2 TASK 2 Additional Storage Capabilities |
| SECTION TEXT |
| 6.2.2.3 Private cloud capabilities should include a storage solution to store disaster recovery backups and archival data for long retention periods. This solution will encrypt data in ‘flight’ and at rest with FIPS 140-2 compliant encryption. Solution should include reporting and management interfaces for DISA administrators to use in day to day operations. |
| QUESTION |
| Does DISA require external key management for this encryption function? Do we need to interface to a particular GFE key management device/protocol? |
| ANSWER |
| The offeror’s solution must include all software and hardware required, to include key management. |
| SECTION NAME |
| 6.2 TASK 2 Additional Storage Capabilities |
| SECTION TEXT |
| 6.2.2.3 Private cloud capabilities should include a storage solution to store disaster recovery backups and archival data for long retention periods. This solution will encrypt data in ‘flight’ and at rest with FIPS 140-2 compliant encryption. Solution should include reporting and management interfaces for DISA administrators to use in day to day operations. |
| QUESTION |
| With regard to “archive” and this cloud function, does DISA require archive to be solely long-term storage, or do you need data management functions (compliance, search, discovery, etc.) associated with some archives? |
| ANSWER |
| Offeror’s solution should provide long retention times, but offeror can provide any innovations that allow for enhanced capability and functionality. |
| SECTION NAME |
| 6.2 TASK 2 Additional Storage Capabilities |
| SECTION TEXT |
| Private cloud capabilities should include a file sharing solution that provides access to content via both desktop and mobile devices. Solution should have ability for end users to control security access to their files and include reporting capabilities for administrators and end users. Solution must support DoD Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) Common Access Card authentication. |
| QUESTION |
| Are we correct in assuming that this CAC authentication is in conjunction with the DISA MDM solution? |
| ANSWER |
| The solution should be stand alone, but should also provide the flexibility necessary to interoperate with Mobile Device Management. |
| SECTION NAME |
| 6.4 TASK 4 – Provisioning, Management, and Reporting Infrastructure |
| SECTION TEXT |
| 6.4.2.1 The SRM solution should provide server storage and array capacity utilization information for DISA financial billing purposes. |
| QUESTION |
| What interfaces with the DISA billing process are provided for ingesting this SRM-derived data? Please also define server storage; does it include storage internal to a server? |
| ANSWER |
| The SRM solution should provide the capability to provide billing reports. Offeror solution should provide some level of export capability with the possibility of being incorporated into other government provided billing systems. The offeror solution must provide the ability to track all storage provided under offeror solution, but the offeror may present any solution that also includes additional functionality. |
| SECTION NAME |
| 6.11.6 Pricing |
| SECTION TEXT |
| The unit pricing per SLIN at award WILL BE the maximum rates used for the life of the contract. |
| QUESTION |
| This offeror interprets the requirement to mean that the unit price for month one, year one, will be the highest price the SLIN will ever be over the life of the contract. Is this the correct interpretation? |
| ANSWER |
| The unit pricing per SLIN at award WILL BE the maximum rates used for the life of the contract. |
| DOCUMENT |
| J-2 Proposal Format |
SECTION NO.
| SECTION NAME |
| Unclassified, Classified, SCI Level Environments (2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence |
| SECTION TEXT |
| Unclassified, Classified, SCI Level Environments. Where required under this contract, Contractor will provide engineering and maintenance support personnel with the appropriate clearance for DISA’s classified and unclassified environments. (See para 13 for individual personnel security requirements). Contractor will deploy separate equipment for classified and unclassified environments and will provide all assets needed for the storage infrastructure regardless of environment (classified or unclassified). |
No storage hardware currently installed in DISA shall be used to satisfy the requirements of this solicitation. All hardware to support solutions brought into DISA locations for the first time must be new hardware. If the call order is later canceled, the hardware to support the service may be reutilized as long as the technology is not a product that the OEM has withdrawn from marketing/sale.
The intent of this contract is to cover both present and future requirements for storage solutions. As technology performance and capabilities improve, the class of storage will support any advances in improvement to performance or capabilities at the awarded SLIN price.
| QUESTION |
| Can DISA further describe/define the meaning of “new hardware” in the sentence highlighted above? |
| ANSWER |
| All vendor owned hardware must be new to the DISA environment. Hardware is tracked by Serial Number and Bar Code that will be used to verify existing hardware is not being redeployed. |
PAGE
| SECTION NO. |
| Scenario 1 tab, Cell J6 |
| SECTION NAME |
| SLIN 0001AA01 – Enterprse class disk storage - capacity |
| SECTION TEXT |
| “based on 1000 gigabytes = 1 terabyte; specify drive types and capacity sizes“ |
| QUESTION |
| Enterprise storage subsystems support a wide range of high-performance and high-capacity storage media, from Solid State Drives (SSD) to 15K/10K SAS high-performance drives, to two (2) TB and three (3) TB SAS/SATA high-capacity drives. Cost per Raw TB can vary by an order of magnitude. Is the offeror to add additional lines for SLIN 0001AA01 and identify and price each of the available disk storage geometries available on the Enterprise storage subsystem? Which drive type and size will be used in the cost evaluation? |
| ANSWER |
| Offerors should provide daily unit pricing in the B-Table tab of Attachment J-3 Cost Model for the government-provided SLINs. |
Offerors may propose additional SLINs in the B-Table tab of Attachment J-3 Cost Model to support their technical solution IAW the Instructions tab of Attachment J-3 Cost model.
PAGE
| SECTION NO. |
| Scenario 1 tab, Cell J16 |
| SECTION NAME |
| SLIN 0001AB01 – Mid range class disk storage - capacity |
| SECTION TEXT |
| “based on 1000 gigabytes = 1 terabyte; specify drive types and capacity sizes“ |
| QUESTION |
| Mid-range storage subsystems support a wide range of high-performance and high-capacity storage media, from Solid State Drives (SSD), to 15K/10K SAS high-performance drives, to two (2) TB and three (3) TB SAS/SATA high-capacity drives. Cost per Raw TB can vary by an order of magnitude. Is the offeror to add additional lines for SLIN 0001AB01 and identify and price each of the available disk storage geometries available on the mid-range storage subsystem? Which drive type and size will be used in the cost evaluation? |
| ANSWER |
| Offerors should provide daily unit pricing in the B-Table tab of Attachment J-3 Cost Model for the government-provided SLINs. |
Offerors may propose additional SLINs in the B-Table tab of Attachment J-3 Cost Model to support their technical solution IAW the Instructions tab of Attachment J-3 Cost model.
PAGE
| SECTION NO. |
| Scenario 1 tab, Cell J25 |
| SECTION NAME |
| SLIN 0001AC01 – Bulk class disk storage - capacity |
| SECTION TEXT |
| “based on 1000 gigabytes = 1 terabyte; specify drive types and capacity sizes“ |
| QUESTION |
| Bulk class disk storage subsystems may support a wide range of high-performance and high-capacity storage media, from Solid State Drives (SSD), to 15K/10K SAS high-performance drives, to two (2) TB and three (3) TB SAS/SATA high-capacity drives, with high performance storage used for meta-data indexes and high-capacity storage used for bulk storage. Cost per Raw TB can vary by an order of magnitude. Is the offeror to add additional lines for SLIN 0001AC01 and identify and price each of the available disk storage geometries available on the bulk storage subsystem? Which drive type and size will be used in the cost evaluation? |
| ANSWER |
| Offerors should provide daily unit pricing in the B-Table tab of Attachment J-3 Cost Model for the government-provided SLINs. |
Offerors may propose additional SLINs in the B-Table tab of Attachment J-3 Cost Model to support their technical solution IAW the Instructions tab of Attachment J-3 Cost model.
PAGE
| SECTION NO. |
| Scenario 1 tab, Cell J28 |
| SECTION NAME |
| SLIN 0001AD01 – Network Attached Storage (NAS) disk storage - capacity |
| SECTION TEXT |
| “based on 1000 gigabytes = 1 terabyte; specify drive types and capacity sizes“ |
| QUESTION |
| NAS disk storage subsystems may support a wide range of high performance and high capacity storage media, from Solid State Drives (SSD), to 15K/10K SAS high-performance drives, to two (2) TB and thee (3) TB SAS/SATA high-capacity drives, with high-performance storage used for meta-data indexes and high-capacity storage used for bulk storage. Cost per Raw TB can vary by an order of magnitude. Is the offeror to add additional lines for SLIN 0001AD01 and identify and price each of the available disk storage geometries available on the bulk storage subsystem? Which drive type and size will be used in the cost evaluation? |
| ANSWER |
| Offerors should provide daily unit pricing in the B-Table tab of Attachment J-3 Cost Model for the government-provided SLINs. |
Offerors may propose additional SLINs in the B-Table tab of Attachment J-3 Cost Model to support their technical solution IAW the Instructions tab of Attachment J-3 Cost model.
SECTION NO.
| SECTION NAME |
| OCONUS PRICING |
SECTION TEXT
| QUESTION |
| Providing and maintaining storage services in OCONUS locations is more costly at CONUS locations. In previous capacity-as-a-service solicitations, DISA has duplicated their SLIN list to permit the offeror to price the OCONUS SLINs separately from CONUS SLINs. Will the Government expand its SLIN list to allow the storage services to be priced separately for OCONUS SLINs and, thus, address the increased costs associated with the OCONUS locations? |
| ANSWER |
| OCONUS SLINs have been added to t he B-Table and Scenario tabs in Attachment J-3 Cost Model. |
PAGE
SECTION NO.
| SECTION NAME |
| DESTRUCTION OF SIPR AND SCIF STORAGE ASSETS |
SECTION TEXT
| QUESTION |
| In the classified SIPR and SCIF environments, storage assets must be destroyed when the systems are deactivated. For the SIPR environment, this involves turning over all non-volatile storage devices (e.g., hard drives) to the local site for destruction. For the SCIF environment, this may involve turning over the entire subsystem (controllers; power supplies; racks; hard drives) for destruction. Please clarify what part of the storage assets must be destroyed when deactivated from the SIPR and SCIF environments, and provide either a separate set of SLINs for each security environment or SLINs for the destruction of the storage assets when deactivated from the SIPR and SCIF environments. |
| 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, even if the drives have been encrypted. Unclassified drives that have been encrypted do not require erasure before returning to the vendor.
Encryption does not negate the requirement for classified drive destruction.
Security requirements are subject to change.
| SECTION NAME |
| Maintenance Response and Repair time |
| SECTION TEXT |
| Response and repair times for CONUS and OCONUS will be 2 hour response/4 hour restore, unless otherwise specified by DISA ESD. |
| QUESTION |
| Will you be following the response and restore time (item 1 below) noted under |
- Maintenance Response and Repair time in subtask 5.1 of QASP (pg. 5 of 20)
- Task 5-Maintenance within J2-ESSII PWS proposal format (pg. 3 of 13)
- 6.5.1 Subtask 5.1-Maintenance Response and Repair Time within J-1 PWS (pg. 8 of 36) or
- Each performance standard (item 2 below) within the Service Maintenance Section of the QASP (pg. 19 of 20).
Item 1: Response and repair times for CONUS and OCONUS will be 2 hour response/4 hour restore, unless otherwise specified by DISA ESD.
Item 2:
SERVICE MAINTENANCE
Response and Repair for Hardware – CONUS 24x7x365 Coverage
Level 1 – 4 Hour Response/ 8 Hour Restore
Level 2 – 4 Hour Response/8 Hour Restore
Level 3 – 8 Hour Response/Next Business Day
Response and Repair for Hardware – OCONUS including Hawaii 24x7x365 Coverage
Level 1 – 4 Hour Response/ 8 Hour Restore
Level 2 – 4 Hour Response/8 Hour Restore
Level 3 – 8 Hour Response/Next Business Day
Software and Firmware 24x7x365 Coverage
Level 1 – 4 Hour Response/ 8 Hour Restore
Level 2 – 4 Hour Response/8 Hour Restore
Level 3 – 8 Hour Response/Next Business Day"
| ANSWER |
| Response and Repair times have been revised in Subtask 5.1 and performance standards in the QASP, in Task 5 of the Proposal Format and Section 6.5.1 Subtask 5.1 in the PWS to 2 hour response/4 hour repair for CONUS and 4 hour response/8 hour repair for OCONUS. |
| SECTION NO. |
| 5.2.1 Subtask 5.2 |
| SECTION NAME |
| Predictive Maintenance |
| SECTION TEXT |
| Contractor shall monitor equipment/component performance using diagnostics defined in paragraph 4.2.4 |
| QUESTION |
| Should the reference be to 5.2.4 Remote Diagnostics rather than 4.2.4? |
| ANSWER |
| Reference in Section 5.2.1, Subtask 5.2 of QASP has been changed from 4.2.4 to 5.2.4. |
PAGE
SECTION NO.
SECTION NAME
SECTION TEXT
| QUESTION |
| Given the current Government shutdown, do you anticipate any extension of the due date for ESS II and/or the questions due today. |
| ANSWER |
| The Government shutdown does not prohibit your company from continuing to work on your proposal. |
| DOCUMENT |
| Attachment J-1; Attachment J-2; Attachment J-4; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx |
| PAGE |
| Attachment J-1, page 4 of 36, Attachment J-2, page 4 of 13; Attachment J-4, page 2 of 20; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 1; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 2; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 3 |
| SECTION NO. |
| Attachment J-1, 6.1.1.2 ; Attachment J-2, Midrange storage options; Attachment J-4, 1.1.2; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 1, SLIN 0001AB06; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 2, SLIN 0001AB06; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 3, SLIN 0001AB06 |
SECTION NAME
| SECTION TEXT |
| All references but Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx: “Support synchronous data replication, point-in-time and snap shot copies” |
In Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx: “Optional - Mid range class disk storage - synchronous replication to external arry”
| QUESTION |
| The Attachment J-1, Attachment J-2, and Attachment J-4 references all state the following for the optional software description: “Support synchronous data replication, point-in-time and snap shot copies”. |
The three scenarios in the Cost Model spreadsheet all state the following for the optional software description: “Optional - Mid range class disk storage - synchronous replication to external arry”
This vendor assumes that the description in the Cost Model spreadsheet is in error due to a cut-and-paste error. Can you confirm that the correct description in the cost model should be: “Optional - Mid range class disk storage - synchronous data replication, point-in-time and snap shot copies”?
| ANSWER |
| SLIN 0001AB06 in Attachment J-3 Cost Model has been revised to: Optional-Mid Range class disk storage CONUS-synchronous data replication, point-in-time and snap shot copies. |
| DOCUMENT |
| Attachment J-1; Attachment J-2; Attachment J-4 |
| PAGE |
| Attachment J-1, page 4 of 36, Attachment J-2, page 4 of 13; Attachment J-4, page 1 of 20 |
| SECTION NO. |
| Attachment J-1, 6.1.1.2 ; Attachment J-2, Midrange Storage Solutions; Attachment J-4, 1.1.2 |
| SECTION NAME |
| Midrange Storage Solutions |
| SECTION TEXT |
| Encryption of data at rest that complies with all levels of the FIPS 140-2 standard |
| QUESTION |
| The industry practice for providing encryption for data-at-rest on hard drives is to either deploy encryption using SAN switches or else make use of self-encrypting disk drives. These solutions are not compliant at “all levels” of the FIPS 140-2 standard. This vendor is not aware of any solutions that are compliant at “all levels” of the FIPS standard. |
Would DISA please revise this requirement to state: “Encryption of data at rest that complies with level 2 of the FIPS 140-2 standard”?
| ANSWER |
| The offeror’s solution must include all software and hardware required, to include key management. Encryption has been moved to the optional section. Storage systems that require the encryption option are listed in the PWS. |
Offeror solution can consist of multiple solutions, but meet the requirement to provide all four levels of FIPS 140-2.
| DOCUMENT |
| Attachment J-1; Attachment J-2; Attachment J-4 |
| PAGE |
| Attachment J-1, page 4 of 36, Attachment J-2, page 4 of 13; Attachment J-4, page 1 of 20 |
| SECTION NO. |
| Attachment J-1, 6.1.1.2 ; Attachment J-2, Midrange Storage Solutions; Attachment J-4, 1.1.2 |
| SECTION NAME |
| Midrange Storage Solutions |
| SECTION TEXT |
| Encryption of data at rest that complies with all levels of the FIPS 140-2 standard |
| QUESTION |
| The term “complies” is ambiguous in this requirement. Some manufacturers have self-encrypting disk drives which are “compliant” in that they would be able to be validated by NIST certification testing, but have not undergone testing. Other drive manufactures provide self-encrypting disk drives which are “compliant” in that they have been validated by NIST certification testing. Please clarify whether “complies” means “validated” or “capable of being validated”? |
| ANSWER |
| In this context the government requires a solution that is validated or capable of being validated by NIST certification testing. |
| DOCUMENT |
| Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 1; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 2; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 3 |
| PAGE |
| Tabs: “Scenario 1”, “Scenario 2”, “Scenario 3” |
| SECTION NO. |
| 0001AB04, 0001AB05 |
| SECTION NAME |
| Midrange Storage |
| SECTION TEXT |
| 0001AB04 “Optional - Mid range class disk storage - asynchronous replication”; 0001AB05 “Optional - Mid range class disk storage - synchronous replication to external arry” |
| QUESTION |
| Are we to assume that each proposed option is standalone meaning that even if the functionality requested was provided by a software package bid for another option, it must still be repeated in all applicable options? |
For example, if the same software that provides asynchronous replication for SLIN “0001AB04, Optional - Mid range class disk storage - asynchronous replication” also provide synchronous replication for SLIN “0001AB05, Optional - Mid range class disk storage - synchronous replication to external arry”, the software cost must be proposed under both SLINs. Is this correct?”
| ANSWER |
| DISA will order asynchronous or synchronous replication to external array based on technical requirements. Offerors are instructed to reference the Instructions tab inserted into the Attachment J-3 Cost Model. |
| DOCUMENT |
| Attachment J-1 PWS; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx |
| PAGE |
| Attachment J-1, page 26 of 36; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 1; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 2; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 3 |
| SECTION NO. |
| Attachment J-1, Attachment 1 Storage Inventory ; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 1, SLIN 0001AB01; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 2, SLIN 0001AB01; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 3, SLIN 0001AB01 |
| SECTION NAME |
| Mid-range class disk storage |
| SECTION TEXT |
| “Mid-range class disk storage - capacity” |
| QUESTION |
| This question is based upon this vendor’s observation that DISA is not permitting the creation of additional SLINs to the cost model. The SLIN 0001AB01 “Mid-range class disk storage - capacity” does not provide any distinction between standard industry offerings of disk drive technology (e.g. SAS, SATA, SSD) that DISA will require. Further, the Attachment-1 “Storage Inventory” to the PWS document provides no details as to how much of any class of storage has been deployed. The Cost Model needs to be modified in order to allow vendors to provide the solutions that DISA requires, to reduce risk for DISA and vendors, refine DISA investments for cost savings, and to provide a more objective evaluation of vendor offerings. |
Will DISA expand the “Mid-range class disk storage - capacity” SLIN and associative evaluation quantities to represent a model for how vendors are to provide the solution offerings that DISA requires?
| ANSWER |
| The B-Table tab and Scenario tabs in Attachment J-3 Cost Model have been revised to include additional capacity SLINs. |
| DOCUMENT |
| Attachment J-1 PWS; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx |
| PAGE |
| Attachment J-1, page 26 of 36; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 1; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 2; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 3 |
| SECTION NO. |
| Attachment J-1, Attachment 1 Storage Inventory ; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 1, SLIN 0001AB01; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 2, SLIN 0001AB01; Attachment J-3_Cost_Model.xlsx, Scenario 3, SLIN 0001AB01 |
| SECTION NAME |
| Mid-range class disk storage |
| SECTION TEXT |
| “Mid-range class disk storage - capacity” |
| QUESTION |
| If DISA does not intend on allowing for the expansion of SLINs to allow for additional disk drive technologies (versus one SLIN 0001AB01 for mid-tier storage), DISA must have an optimal drive category (e.g. SAS or SATA or SSD) in mind. This preferred technology should be stated or the incumbent will have a distinct advantage. Non-incumbents will be at a distinct disadvantage if left to guess or generate a blended price. If only one SLIN is available for Mid Range, will DISA please clearly state the preferred drive technology? |
| ANSWER |
| Offerors should provide daily unit pricing in the B-Table tab of Attachment J-3 Cost Model for the government-provided SLINs. |
Offerors may propose additional SLINs in the B-Table tab of Attachment J-3 Cost Model to support their technical solution IAW the Instructions tab of Attachment J-3 Cost model.
| DOCUMENT |
| J-1_Performance_Work_Statement_(PWS).docx |
| SECTION NAME |
| Storage Inventory |
| SECTION TEXT |
| Table showing “Manufacturer” and “Description” |
| QUESTION |
| DISA has provided in this table a list of the products deployed within the DISA ES environment but has not provided an estimated quantity of the units deployed and a breakdown by location. This vendor believes that not including this information creates an ambiguous solicitation that can be subject to more than one reasonable interpretation. To permit competition on an equal basis, would DISA provide a breakdown of quantities of each of these units, amount and type of each storage flavor (FC, SAS, SATA, SSD. etc.), and the locations where they are deployed in order to assure the requirements are sufficiently definite and free from ambiguity? |
| ANSWER |
| The storage environment is dynamic, and the current environment is not a reflection of future requirements. Offeror’s proposed solution may determine the types of storage capacity ordered for future requirements. |
| PAGE |
| RFP page 61; PWS page 11 |
| SECTION NO. |
| RFP M002, Subfactor 1: Technical Solution 1.2 Data Migration; PWS Section 6.8 Task 8 Service Transition 6.8.1 Subtask 8.1 |
SECTION NAME
1.2 RFP Data Migration Strategy
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 strategy on service continuity during the migration process.
PWS
6.8.1 Subtask 8.1 – Implementation Transition Strategy. The implementation transition strategy will begin immediately upon award of the contract. The contractor must provide a detailed non disruptive strategy for transitioning data stored on the current storage inventory to solutions provided in their proposal. The transition strategy must provide for completing the transition of all data to the proposed contractor’s solutions by, or before, the end of the existing Enterprise Storage Services (ESS) contract’s period of performance. This plan must address how it will minimize the impact to current storage operations and data replication. The contractor will be required to meet with the existing Enterprise Storage Services contractor and the government within 45 days of award to plan the transition strategy. The contractor will provide a written transition plan within 60 days of award.
| QUESTION |
| The RFP calls out completing the migration on 1/16/2016. The PWS calls out the migration being completed by the end date of the existing ESS which is 1/29/2015. What is the correct date for completing the migration? |
| ANSWER |
| The Period of Performance (POP) end date for ESS contract HC101307D2009, if all option years are exercised, is 07 February 2016. |
| DOCUMENT |
| RFP and Attachment J-2 Proposal Format |
| SECTION NAME |
| Format and Specific Content |
| SECTION TEXT |
| Please construct and present your response according to and within the Proposal Format. |
| QUESTION |
| Are Offerors required to submit the Proposal Format document in its entirety (with response text inserted), or may Offerors deliver the proposal response within the Technical/Management Volume using appropriate headers and eliminating the solicitation requirements that the Offeror is responding to? This will allow the Offferor to utilize the full 60 page limit. |
| ANSWER |
| Offerors should submit Attachment J-2 Proposal Format in its entirety with response text inserted. The page limit is increased from 60 to 70 pages for additional response space. |
| DOCUMENT |
| RFP and Attachment L-2 |
| SECTION NAME |
| Relevant Contracts |
| SECTION TEXT |
| Section 5.2: “The total of Past and Present Performance Information references will not exceed 4 of which 2 must be for the offeror/prime…” |
Attachment L-2 Section B, #3: The total for Performance Information sheets only will not exceed six – two of which must be from the offeror/prime.”
| QUESTION |
| Please clarify the maximum number of past performance references to be submitted. |
| ANSWER |
| The maximum number of Past Performance Information Sheet/Reference submissions is 4. |
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 NAME |
| Unclassified, Classified, SCI Level Environments |
SECTION TEXT
| QUESTION |
| Will the Government please amend the Solicitation to detail how many of the sites currently have an Unclassified environment? |
| ANSWER |
| The storage environment is dynamic, and the current environment is not a reflection of future requirements. Offeror should assume that any and all sites could contain a classified environment. 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 |
| Unclassified, Classified, SCI Level Environments |
SECTION TEXT
| QUESTION |
| Will the Government please amend the Solicitation to detail how many of the sites currently have a Classified environment? |
| ANSWER |
| The storage environment is dynamic, and the current environment is not a reflection of future requirements. Offeror should assume that any and all sites could contain a classified environment. 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 |
| Unclassified, Classified, SCI Level Environments |
SECTION TEXT
| QUESTION |
| Will the Government please amend the Solicitation to detail how many of the sites currently have an SCI environment? |
| ANSWER |
| The storage environment is dynamic, and the current environment is not a reflection of future requirements. Offeror should assume that any and all sites could contain a classified environment. 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 |
| Enterprise class storage solutions |
SECTION TEXT
| QUESTION |
| Will the Government please amend the Solicitation to detail how many Terabytes of storage is currently used at Enterprise Class level? |
| ANSWER |
| The storage environment 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 |
| Mid-range class storage solutions |
SECTION TEXT
| QUESTION |
| Will the Government please amend the Solicitation to detail how many Terabytes of storage is currently used at Mid-Range Class level? |
| ANSWER |
| The storage environment 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 |
| Inexpensive bulk storage disk solutions |
SECTION TEXT
| QUESTION |
| Will the Government please amend the Solicitation to detail how many Terabytes of storage is currently used at Inexpensive bulk Class level? |
| ANSWER |
| The storage environment 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 |
| Network attached storage (NAS) solutions |
SECTION TEXT
| QUESTION |
| Will the Government please amend the Solicitation to detail how many Terabytes of storage is currently used for NAS solutions? |
| ANSWER |
| The storage environment 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 |
| Big data, object-addressable storage solution |
SECTION TEXT
| QUESTION |
| Will the Government please amend the Solicitation to detail how many Terabytes of storage is currently used for Big data, object-addressable storage solutions? |
| ANSWER |
| The storage environment 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 |
| Current Environment |
SECTION TEXT
| QUESTION |
| Will the Government please amend the Solicitation to detail how many Terabytes of storage is currently used in CONUS? |
| ANSWER |
| The storage environment 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 |
| Current Environment |
SECTION TEXT
| QUESTION |
| Will the Government please amend the Solicitation to detail how many Terabytes of storage is currently used in OCONUS? |
| ANSWER |
| The storage environment 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 |
| Unclassified, Classified, SCI Level Environments |
SECTION TEXT
| QUESTION |
| Will the Government please amend the Solicitation to detail how many Terabytes of storage is currently used at Unclassified level? |
| ANSWER |
| The storage environment is dynamic, and the current environment is not a reflection of future requirements. Offeror should assume that any and all sites could contain an unclassified environment. 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 |
| Unclassified, Classified, SCI Level Environments |
SECTION TEXT
| QUESTION |
| Will the Government please amend the Solicitation to detail how many Terabytes of storage is currently used at Classified level? |
| ANSWER |
| The storage environment is dynamic, and the current environment is not a reflection of future requirements. Offeror should assume that any and all sites could contain an unclassified environment. 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 |
| Unclassified, Classified, SCI Level Environments |
SECTION TEXT
| QUESTION |
| Will the Government please amend the Solicitation to detail how many Terabytes of storage is currently used at SCI level? |
| ANSWER |
| The storage environment is dynamic, and the current environment is not a reflection of future requirements. Offeror should assume that any and all sites could contain an unclassified environment. The offeror is expected to provide all capacity to all sites listed in sections 5.5 and 5.5.1. |
| DOCUMENT |
| HC102813R0015.doc and |
| SECTION NAME |
| 5.0 Volume III – Past Performance – Factor 2 |
SECTION TEXT
| QUESTION |
| Will the Government please amend the Solicitation to specify when the Present Performance Information forms are due to the Government? |
| ANSWER |
| Past or Present Performance Information questionnaires must be submitted no later than 10AM CST, 14 November 2013. |
| DOCUMENT |
| HC102813R0015.doc and J-1_Performance_Work_Statement_(PWS).docx |
PAGE
SECTION NO.
SECTION NAME
| SECTION TEXT |
| Section L 2.2.3 says “no classified requirements exist for the ESS II, security requirements outlined in J5 DD 254”, but PWS 5.2 states “this initiative will support controlled unclassified and classified including SCI level environments” |
| QUESTION |
| Will the Government please amend the Solicitation to resolve this discrepancy? |
| ANSWER |
| Section L 2.2.3 is included in a solicitation to address classified information as part of the offeror’s response. Classified information is not required in the offeror’s response for this requirement. |
| DOCUMENT |
| HC102813R0015.doc and J-1_Performance_Work_Statement_(PWS).docx |
PAGE
| SECTION NAME |
| Performance Requirements |
| SECTION TEXT |
| Throughout Section 6 |
| QUESTION |
| For every subtask, the Government has specified a deliverable, a total of over 70 items. Will the Government please amend the PWS to specify if the Contractor will be required to submit each of these deliverables in draft form, and if so please indicate the amount of time the Government Program Management Office has to review and return comments, and then the amount of time the Contractor has to submit the deliverables in final form? Finally, please specify the amount of time the Government has to accept the deliverables. |
| ANSWER |
| Contract deliverables associated with subtasks reflect expected delivery of requirements. The offeror’s proposed technical/management solution should demonstrate that the deliverables will be met. Deliverables identified in Attachment J-1 PWS will become part of the contact after award. If additional deliverables are identified or required during the life of the contract, time limits for review and acceptance will be determined at that time. |
| DOCUMENT |
| HC1028-13-R-0015 RFP |
| SECTION NAME |
| Technical/Management Risk |
| SECTION TEXT |
| Address technical/management risk by identifying those aspects of the PWS requirements you consider to have the potential for disruption of schedule, increased cost, poor performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and/or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. |
| QUESTION |
| In order to provide the risk assessment described above it is necessary to understand the current level of service provided within the ESS environment. There are no performance metrics given for either the services or operational components within the current DISA environment. Can the government please provide performance metrics so the offeror can assess the impact to the environment by the proposed solution? |
| ANSWER |
| Offeror’s risk assessment may be based on performance standards as identified in Attachment J-4 QASP. |
| DOCUMENT |
| HC1028-13-R-0015 RFP and Attachment J-1 PWS |
| PAGE |
| Pages 39, 58 and 59 of the RFP, and pages 3 through 5 of Attachment J-1 |
| SECTION NO. |
| Section L, Section M, an Attachment J-1 |
| SECTION NAME |
| 7.2 Assumptions to Solicitation Requirements |
M002 Evaluation Factors, B. Technical/Management Factor, Subfactor 1: Technical Solution
PWS Section 6.0 Performance Requirements
| SECTION TEXT |
| 7.2 Assumptions to Solicitation Requirements |
Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical/management requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. No assumptions or exceptions will be entertained. [Emphasis added]
RFP Page 58: Factor 1- Technical/Management: “(1) Technical/Management Rating. The technical/management rating represents the government’s assessment of the Offeror’s capability to satisfy the Government’s technical storage requirements. Each technical/management subfactor will receive one of the color ratings described in the DoD Source Selection Procedures, paragraph 3.1.2.2.1, Table 2 – Technical/Management Ratings, excerpted below.
The ratings focus on the strengths, deficiencies, and uncertainties of the Offeror's proposal. The color rating depicts how well the Offeror’s proposal meets the technical/management subfactor requirements. …”
J-1: Section 6.1 Task 1- Storage solutions and capabilities, Section 6.1., Subtask 1.1, Subtasks 6.1.1.1 through 6.1.1.2
| QUESTION |
| The technical requirements for storage solutions are set forth in the PWS in Section 6.1., Subtask 1.1, Subtasks 6.1.1.1 through 6.1.1.2.. These subtasks specify requirements for storage solution capabilities by class of storage service for Enterprise and Mid range, but do not specify the following performance requirements by class of storage services: |
· Storage capacity
· IOPS
· Throughput in MB/s
· % R/W
· % Random/Sequential
· Latency
· Block size
Without knowing what the unstated performance requirements by class of service are, an offeror has insufficient information to offer storage services that can be evaluated fairly by the Government to determine whether an offered storage service is Acceptable, Good or Outstanding. Moreover, performance requirements have a significant effect on the overall price, and will affect the overall best value determination.
An incumbent contractor or subcontractor that may submit a proposal in response to this solicitation knows or should know what the actual day to day performance requirements are, and may have an unfair competitive advantage over competitors who are not informed by the RFP or PWS.
Offerors are prohibited from making assumptions by Section 7.2 of the RFP. Uniformed offerors risk proposal disqualification if left to state assumptions about performance requirements.
1. How does the government plan to ensure that proposed technical solutions not only meet the stated requirements for storage services but also unstated requirements for storage capacity, IOPS, Throughput, %R/W, % Random/Sequential, latency, and block size?
2. Since the unstated requirements represent a wide range of acceptable outcomes, the government will potentially receive a wide range of proposed solutions, some more expensive than others. How does the government plan to ensure a fair comparative best value determination among proposed solutions including cost given the potentially wide range of acceptable performance characteristics upon which proposed solutions are necessarily based?
| ANSWER |
| 1. The offeror’s technical solution and approach should provide a flexible, scalable and robust solution able to address a wide range of storage capabilities and requirements. The offeror’s solution should discuss their approach to satisfy a dynamic environment and detail how their approach meets the Government’s stated technical storage requirements, and provide innovative and adaptable solutions in collaboration with the Government’s technical team. During execution of ESS-II, the Government technical team will work closely with the vendor to ensure performance requirements are attained. |
2. In the RFP, Section M002 Evaluation Factors and Subfactors discusses how the Government will assess the best value determination.
| DOCUMENT |
| Attachment J-1 PWS |
| SECTION NAME |
| Unclassified, Classified, SCI Level Environments |
| SECTION TEXT |
| Where required under this contract, Contractor will provide engineering and maintenance support personnel with the appropriate clearance for DISA’s classified and unclassified environments. (See para 13 for individual personnel security requirements). Contractor will deploy separate equipment for classified and unclassified environments and will provide all assets needed for the storage infrastructure regardless of environment (classified or unclassified). |
| QUESTION |
| Can the government please provide average capacities for each storage class? |
| ANSWER |
| The offeror is expected to provide solutions based on requirements dictated in the PWS. The storage environment is dynamic, and the current environment is not a reflection of future requirements. |
| DOCUMENT |
| Attachment J-1 PWS |
| SECTION NAME |
| Unclassified, Classified, SCI Level Environments |
| SECTION TEXT |
| Where required under this contract, Contractor will provide engineering and maintenance support personnel with the appropriate clearance for DISA’s classified and unclassified environments. (See para 13 for individual personnel security requirements). Contractor will deploy separate equipment for classified and unclassified environments and will provide all assets needed for the storage infrastructure regardless of environment (classified or unclassified). |
| QUESTION |
| Can the government please provide storage capacity for each security class in each site referenced in the RFP? |
| ANSWER |
| The storage environment is dynamic, and the current environment is not a reflection of future requirements. Offeror should assume that any and all sites could contain a classified environment. The offeror is expected to provide all capacity to all sites listed in sections 5.5 and 5.5.1. |
| DOCUMENT |
| Attachment J-1 PWS |
| SECTION NAME |
| Network attached storage (NAS) solutions. |
| SECTION TEXT |
| NAS solutions that meet all of the following criteria: |
(two bulleted…
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
Defense Information Systems Agency