J-6_Question_Answer_Submission_289_thru_341.doc

Attachment J-6 - Question Answer Submission Template for RFP HC1028-13-R-0015

Table 2.2 – Proposal Organization

Table of Contents – 1 page

Summary Page – 1 page per past performance effort.

Organizational Documentation – 1 Summary Page, 1 pamphlet or 1 commercial document.

Past performance efforts - 40 total pages – Cannot exceed a total of 4 pages each to include Attachment L-3, Attachment L-3 – 4 pages per effort.

Offerors must submit 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. Consent letters cannot exceed a total of 2 pages. Client Authorization letters cannot exceed 1 page.

Attachment L-2, B. Past Performance Information Sheet

Answer 250: 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.

3. The total for Performance Information sheets only will not exceed four - two of which must be from the offeror/prime. Total page count will not exceed 40 pages.

With respect, the answers provided, and the changes to the instructions did not clarify the Government’s requirements. The Past Performance Information Sheets, Attachment L-3 are slightly more than 2 pages as provided by the government. When completed by the offeror, the instructions seem to require that L-3 can be no more than 4 pages in length, effectively limiting the offerors response to L-3 to 2 pages. “Past performance effort” is mentioned in several places, not defined. The page limit of each “past performance effort” is 10 pages.

Since Volume II represents 40% of the evaluation, clarity in requirements is important.

To clarify all the requirements of Volume III, please confirm or correct the following:

1. Volume III Table of Contents is limited to one (1) page. The Table of Contents is not included in a total page count for Volume III.

2. No matter what the configuration of an offeror’s team is, there must be a minimum of two (2) and maximum of four (4) past performance references. The answer to question 088 and 250 state: “The page limit for each past performance effort submitted, to include the Past Performance Information Sheet, is 10 pages.” Please confirm that “past performance effort” includes the Attachment L-3 Past Performance Information Sheet and any other relevant information, and that each “past performance effort” may be up to 10 pages in length. Please confirm that Attachment L-3 together with other relevant information, when completed by the offeror may be up to ten (10) pages in length. Further, please confirm that only total of all “past performance efforts” submitted are limited to a total of forty (40) pages. If this is not correct please clarify.

3. The answer to question 088 states “The Summary Page (per offeror, subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner) is limited to 1 page.” And, in Attachment L-2, item A.2 it also states a “Summary Page (per offeror, subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner)…”. However, Table 2.2 in Section L states “Table of Contents – 1 page Summary Page – 1 page per past performance effort.” Please confirm that the Government wants one Summary limited to one page (per offeror, subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner), and that this/these page(s) are not included in the total forty (40) page count for “past performance efforts”.

4. Please confirm that the “Consent Letters” cannot exceed two (2) pages, AND that the “Consent Letters” are not included in the total forty (40) page count for “past performance efforts”.

5. Please confirm that the “Client Authorization Letters” cannot exceed one (1) page, AND that the “Client Authorization Letters” are not included in the total forty page count for “past performance efforts”.

6. Please confirm that “Organization Structure Change History” is limited to one (1) summary page, or one (1) pamphlet (which has no page limit), or one (1) commercial document (which has no page limit), AND that the “Organization Structure Change History” is not included in the total forty page count for “past performance efforts”, as is stated in the answer to question 216.

2. Attachment L-3 may only include up to 4 pages. Additional past performance information per effort may be provided up to 6 pages. The total page limit for Attachment L-3 and additional past performance information, per effort, may not exceed 10 pages. The total of all past performance efforts submitted may not exceed 40 pages.

3. It is correct that the summary page is limited to one page for each offeror, subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner. The summary page is not included in the total page count for Volume III.

4. As stated in Table 2.2 of the RFP, consent letters cannot exceed two pages. It is correct that consent letters are not included in the total page count for Volume III.

5. As stated in Table 2.2 of the RFP, Client Authorization Letters cannot exceed one page. It is correct that Client Authorization Letters are not included in the total page count for Volume III.

6. As stated in Table 2.2 of the RFP, the Organization Structure Change History cannot exceed one summary page, one pamphlet or one commercial document. It is correct that the Organization Structure Change History is not included in the total page count for Volume III.

Question 070 Response: The master table of contents is included in the 10-page limit for the total Executive Summary.

2.2.1 - Each page will be counted except the following: Cover pages, tables of contents, tabs, glossaries.

Original Solicitation

FAR 52.212-4

52.229-3 Federal State and Local Taxes

52.212-4 (k) Taxes

52.243-1 Alt I Changes--Fixed Price (Aug 1987) - Alternate I APR 1984

52.212-4 (c) Changes 52.246-20 Warranty of Services

52.212-4 (o) Warranty

52.249-2 Termination for the Convenience of the Government (Fixed Price)

52.212-4 (l) Termination for the Government’s convenience 52.249-8 Default (Fixed Price Supply and Service)

52.212-4 (m) Termination for cause We understand that the PWS and QASP set forth the standards of performance required by the contract. However, with regard to warranty, 52.212-4 (0) and the prescription at 12.302 (d) permit the negotiation and inclusion of customary commercial warranties to the extent they do not conflict with statutory or other contract requirements.

With regard to termination, the prescription at 12.403 Termination provide in part: “(a) General. The clause at 52.212-4 permits the Government to terminate a contract for commercial items either for the convenience of the Government or for cause. However, the paragraphs in 52.212-4 entitled “Termination for the Government’s Convenience” and “Termination for Cause” contain concepts which differ from those contained in the termination clauses prescribed in Part 49. Consequently, the requirements of Part 49 do not apply when terminating contracts for commercial items…”

Will the Government resolve these redundancies by deleting 52.229-3, 52.243-1, 52.246-20, 52.249-2, and 52.249-8? In the alternative will the Government agree that FAR 52.212-4 takes precedence in the event of a conflict between FAR 52.212-4 and any other FAR clause in Section I?

J-1 PWS

Contract Terms and Conditions--Commercial Items JUL 2013

52.212-4 (s) (4) permits including “Addenda to this solicitation or contract, including any license agreements for computer software”.

PWS 4.0, page 2: “The Government will maintain day-to-day operational control of the storage environment and complete oversight responsibility. This operational control includes the installation of all software updates after the initial delivery. However, any software required for the Contractor’s solution to operate, including software maintenance and licensing shall be included under this contract. “

FAR 12.302 Tailoring of provisions and clauses for the acquisition of commercial items generally,

(d) Tailoring shall be by addenda to the solicitation and contract provides that” …addenda may include, any other terms or conditions necessary for the performance of the proposed contract ...”

In commercial item contracts additional terms such as commercial software, express warranties or other additional terms necessary for the performance of the contract are incorporated through addenda, as specified in 52.212(s)(4). In order for the Government to maintain operational control, the Government will have to be properly licensed to operate contractor owned and installed products. Where in Volume V shall additional terms, such as software licenses be included?

Q 027: All existing capacity from the old contract must be removed and replaced with new hardware. Hardware is tracked by Serial Number and Bar Code that will be used to verify existing hardware is not being redeployed. Incumbent must provide new serial numbered assets that are not barcoded by the government.

Q 134 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.

Q 222 The Government maintains an inventory of storage hardware installed in the current environment. Hardware is tracked by Serial Number and Bar Code that will be used to verify existing hardware is not being redeployed. Incumbent must provide new serial numbered assets that are not barcoded by the government.

Provide solutions for multi-site enterprise scale backup/data protection and archiving. Solution should cover all related aspects of backup and data protection, including server software components and host agents. Solution will include centralized management capabilities, robust reporting features, be easy to install and maintain. Solution must support email archiving, single instancing, compression, compliance archiving, eDiscovery (content indexing, search, export) and journaling. Solution should be able to support retention rates greater than one year.

Original question:

Does the multi-site enterprise scale backup/data protection and archiving solution need to support any applications or environments other than Microsoft Exchange? If so, can the government please provide the same level of detail (i.e. compliance archiving, journaling and content indexing, retention rates, etc) for these other environments and applications?

PWS paragraph 6.2.3 is being updated to clarify government requirements.

The incumbent contractor likely has access to, or inherently knows, this information. Incumbent Chipset contractors that may submit proposals for ESS II may have insight as well. All other offerors are at a competitive disadvantaged in terms of pricing and scoping of solutions.

Provide solutions for multi-site enterprise scale backup/data protection and archiving. Solution should cover all related aspects of backup and data protection, including server software components and host agents. Solution will include centralized management capabilities, robust reporting features, be easy to install and maintain. Solution must support email archiving, single instancing, compression, compliance archiving, eDiscovery (content indexing, search, export) and journaling. Solution should be able to support retention rates greater than one year.

Original question:

Does the multi-site enterprise scale backup/data protection and archiving solution need to support any applications or environments other than Microsoft Exchange? If so, can the government please provide the same level of detail (i.e. compliance archiving, journaling and content indexing, retention rates, etc) for these other environments and applications?

PWS paragraph 6.2.3 is being updated to clarify government requirements.

This information is critical to our pricing calculations and represents an advantage to competitors with an existing install base.

Previous question was – “What are the required retention periods for disaster recovery backups and archival data?”

For migration sizing, can the government please provide the “current retention requirements” and the amount of archived data that exists in the environment today that maps to each of those retention requirements?

The incumbent contractor likely has access to, or inherently knows, this information. Incumbent Chipset contractors that may submit proposals for ESS II may have insight as well. All other offerors are at a competitive disadvantaged in terms of pricing and scoping of solutions.

The service provider will acquire, install, de-install, transport, configure, and provide the necessary hardware (including cabinets/racks/cabling/cable management/PDUs), hardware maintenance, as well as, any software required for the Contractor’s solution to operate, and services to support the storage infrastructure associated with this con-tract. The Government will maintain day-to-day operational control of the storage environment and complete oversight responsibility. This operational control includes the installation of all software updates after the initial delivery. However, any software required for the Contractor’s solution to operate, including software maintenance and licensing shall be included under this contract.

The incumbent contractor likely has access to, or inherently knows, this information. Incumbent Chipset contractors that may submit proposals for ESS II may have insight as well. All other offerors are at a competitive disadvantaged in terms of pricing and scoping of solutions.

Previous question was – “Can the government please provide detail on the level of compliance archiving they expect in the solution?”

Can the government please provide the details on the level of compliance archiving that they expect in the solution?

Question/Response for #63

Does the requirement for data de-duplication, data replication apply as features of all storage classes, or a separate capability that can be added as needed?

De-duplication can be provided as a separate capability. The de-duplication solution must include the ability to replicate de-duplicated data.

Original 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?

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."

Answer 182: The storage environment within DISA is dynamic and the current environment is not a reflection of future requirements. This information will be passed to the Offeror once the award has been made.

Answer 222: The Government maintains an inventory of storage hardware installed in the current environment. Hardware is tracked by Serial Number and Bar Code that will be used to verify existing hardware is not being redeployed. Incumbent must provide new serial numbered assets that are not barcoded by the government.

We understand that DISA’s future requirements are dynamic, and that offeror’s solutions must be dynamically flexible as a result.

However, our questions were not directed toward DISA’s future environment. Rather we seek information about DISA’s current, existing environment. This information is critical in order to develop a migration plan and transition strategy, and to properly size SRM requirements for purposes of migration. Most importantly, this information is critical so that transition and migration can be priced in the most cost effective manner for DISA and DISA’s customers.

DISA stated in its answer to Question 222 that the Government maintains an inventory of storage hardware, tracked by serial number. Although Attachment 1 is labeled “Storage Inventory”, it is only a list of products by manufacturer. It does not provide the kind of information that a detailed, serialized inventory would contain.

The incumbent contractor likely has access to, or inherently knows, this information. Incumbent Chipset contractors that may submit proposals for ESS II may have insight as well. All other offerors are at a competitive disadvantaged in terms of pricing and scoping of solutions.

To be fair to all competitors, will DISA please amend the solicitation and incorporate the detailed “inventory of storage hardware installed in the current environment” so that all competitors have equal access to this information?

SLIN 0003AN - Continuous data protection solution - OCONUS. Unit of Per terabyte protected per day

1) Provide the number of recover point objectives that will be required and maintained for each of the 30-minute or less, 8-hour or less, and 24-hour SLINs so we can accurately size the solution

- or –

2) To make costs predictable, can the government make the SLIN numbers measured as raw terabytes per day for replicated capacity.

The Government will utilize a protected per TB per day metric to maintain consistency.

SECTION TEXT

How does this break out for storage side ports and server side ports?

Question #002 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.”

Question: If Section L.2.2., Table 2.2 indicates a maximum of 9 pages per effort and Question #088 ANSWER indicates a maximum of 10 pages per effort, will the Government please clarify what is to be included in the additional one page per past performance effort?

In an effort to reduce redundancy, would the Government please confirm that a Summary Page is required for each “offeror, subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner” and not for each past performance effort?

“B.3. The total for Performance Information sheets only will not exceed four – two of which must be from the offeror/prime.

L.2.2, Table 2.2: “a minimum of two references for each subcontractor as stated in L-2 para b”

“B. …This information is required on the offeror/prime, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners and subcontractors proposed to perform at least 40% of the proposed effort based on the total proposed price, or perform aspects of the effort the offeror considers relevant to overall successful performance.”

“B.2. TWO – Performance Information Sheets (Attachment L-3) for each major or critical subcontractor.”

“B.3. The total for Performance Information sheets only will not exceed four – two of which must be from the offeror/prime.”