L-1_HC102817R0014_QA_AMEND_0002_final.pdf

HC1028-17-R-0014

ZIPPCS Q&A

AMEND 0002

Attachment L-1 Question & Answer Template

RFP# HC1028-17-R-0014 (MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WORD FORMAT)

# Reference Questions Government Response 1 Can the Government confirm that this contract is for five (5) base years, and five (5) one (1) year options?

The period of performance for each awarded contract will consist of a 5-year base period and (5) one-year options.

2 File: J-

3_HC102817R0014_B-

1_P_Series_Cost_Mode l_Locked.xls

Table B is locked and includes the ZIPPCS equipment list (in the case of P Series) that is out dated. Can the Government confirm that they are only interested in P Series 7?

The Government does not require P Series 7 hardware. The Government requires the hardware fulfill the Tier requirements outlined in Appendix One of the PWS. The J- 3 Cost Model is updated to have the P7 references removed from the Description column.

3 File: J-

1_P_Series_Cost_Mode l_Locked.xls

The price table for the System P response “J-3_HC102817R0014_B- 1_P_Series_Cost_Model_Locked” is locked, barring vendors from correcting errors in the table as it stands, or from proposing innovative and potentially costs saving (but still fully compliant with DISA requirements) options. Will the government unlock the B table and allow bidders to offer not only what is included in the required SLINs, but also fully compliant alternate SLINS? Such alternate SLINs could result in dramatically less expensive, fully compliant solutions.

With Amendment 002, the J-3 Cost Model is updated to have the P7 references removed from the Description column.

The Government will not unlock the Cost Model for the pre-defined SLINs. The Government encourages the inclusion of alternative SLINs as additional information only. The additional SLINs will not be evaluated.

4 J-

1_ P_Series_Cost_Model_ Locked.xls

The B table included, J-

3_HC102817R0014_B-

1_P_Series_Cost_Model_Locked.xls appears to be a literal copy of the last iteration of the B table from 2016. It contains the exact SLINs and descriptions from the SPE contract awarded nearly 5 years ago. As such, the SLIN descriptions do not reflect the current IBM Power Systems (generation "N") but rather the immediately past generation (generation "N -1"). Will the government reissue the System P PWS and B table to reflect the "N -1"

With Amendment 002, the Cost Model is updated to have the P7 references removed from the Description column.

The Government requires the hardware fulfill the Tier requirements outlined in Appendix One of the PWS.

generation, the Current "N" iteration, as well as a future "N +1"itteration of the IBM Power system architecture? See Question 4 above.

# Reference Questions Government Response 5 (PWS, 6.3) In section "6.3 Task 3 - Capacity.", as well as in other sections, of the PWS, the government requests features which cannot be included within the current locked B table. Would the government either remove the feature descriptions, or unlock the B table so that responders can add/update the offered services (SLINs) in a fashion that will reflect the PWS requirements?

With Amendment 002, the Cost Model is updated to have the P7 references removed from the Description column.

The Government will not unlock the Cost Model for the pre-defined SLINs. The Government encourages the inclusion of alternative SLINs as additional information only. The additional SLINs will not be evaluated.

6 (PWS, 6.5.2) In section "6.5.2 Subtask 5.2 - Manage the OS repository, and server" of the PWS, the government refers to a Contractor managed Operating System image repository facility. This requirement appears to have been brought forward from the last AIX RFP. This requirement was subsequently found to be unsatisfactory to the government, and was removed. Will the government remove this requirement from the System P?

PWS 6.5.2 is updated to provide an exception for the OS Repository requirement on both System P and Z Series in Amendment 002.

7 Will the government reschedule the closing date for the System P response until July 7th 2017 in order to accommodate these and other required changes?

With the release of Amendment 002, the PWS, cost model, and other RFP documents have been updated in response to vendor questions.

9 Due to the complexity of the requirements set forth in the solicitations and our desire to provide the Government with the most comprehensive and best priced solutions, we respectfully request that the subject proposal due dates of June 7th be pushed out to allow for an extra three weeks, making the revised due date June 30th.

With the release of Amendment 002, the PWS, cost model, and other RFP documents have been updated in response to vendor questions.

The date for proposal submission has been changed to June 21, 2017.

10 J-1 PWS Sections 4.0, 6.2.5.2, and 10.0

This vendor is unaware of any DISA-controlled System z equipment OCONUS. Elsewhere in the provided documentation, certain Sections note “…is not a requirement for the IBM System z chipset”. Please amend or confirm requirements for these sections.

System Z has no current OCONUS requirement for System Z, but may have a future OCONUS requirement if DISA missions changes in the future.

PWS 5.4.2.1 has been added to provide this clarification.

11 J-1 PWS Section 6.21 This vendor is unaware of any DISA-controlled System z equipment OCONUS. Therefore, we believe TESA/ASSA certification does not apply. Please amend or confirm requirements for this section.

DISA has no current OCONUS requirement for System Z, but may have a future OCONUS requirement if DISA missions changes in the future.

PWS 5.4.2.1 has been added to provide this clarification.

12 J-1 PWS Section 6.3.2 Since the Contractor is not responsible for the operating system (“images”) provisioning for the System z chipset (reference 6.1.7.1), we believe this section does not apply. Please amend or confirm requirements for this section.

PWS 6.1.7.1 states DISA will provide and maintain any Z-series operating system software. There is no System-Z requirement for a vendor-provided provisioning servers.

8 Will the government explain how they will “move” from the immediate use SLINs (the “monthly usage” ones found in section 5000) to permit the use of the 12 month SLINs found in section 6000 of the B table?

Does the government envision moving seamlessly between these two SLIN types for a given serial numbered system?

DISA will determine after the initial 12 month minimum period if an additional 12 months will be executed or if the call order will be transferred to a month-to-month SLIN. DISA will coordinate with the Contractor to administratively change the SLIN number if required.

13 J-3 z Series Cost Model B-Table Rows 11, 16, and 17 (and SLINS associated with these in Evaluation Quantities and Total Evaluated Price spreadsheets)

The products (IBM Feature Codes) associated with SLINs 1002AD, 1002AI and 1002AJ are no longer available by the manufacturer nor can they be supported by current System z processors. Please delete the requirements for these SLINs.

Concur that SLINs 1005AL through 1005AR are not required and the cost model is updated in Amendment 002.

SLINs 1005AS and 1005AT are required and should not be deleted.

14 J-3 z Series Cost Model B-Table Rows 43 through 49 (and SLINS associated with these in Evaluation Quantities and Total Evaluated Price spreadsheets)

This vendor is aware that the cabling infrastructure to support SLINs 1005AL through 1005AR are no longer supported by DISA DECCs. SLINs 1005AS and 1005AT have become the standard infrastructure to support operating system consoles. Please delete the requirements for SLINs 1005AL through 1005AR.

Concur that SLINs 1005AL through 1005AR are not required and the cost model will be updated in Amendment 002.

SLINs 1005AS and 1005AT are required and should not be deleted.

15 J-3 z Series Cost Model B-Table Rows 54 through 103 and Rows 154 through 203 (and SLINS associated with these in Evaluation Quantities and Total Evaluated Price spreadsheets)

This vendor is unaware of any DISA-controlled System z equipment OCONUS. Elsewhere in the provided documentation, certain Sections note “…is not a requirement for the IBM System z chipset”. Please amend or confirm requirements for these sections.

DISA has no current OCONUS requirement for System Z, but may have a future OCONUS requirement if DISA missions changes in the future.

PWS 5.4.2.1 has been added to provide this clarification and the cost model for System Z will be updated to set quantities to zero for OCONUS System Z SLINs in

16 RFP L.1 Proposal Organization. Volume 1 Executive Summary.

What is the page limitation for the Executive Summary narrative summary?

The Executive Summary narrative is added to Table L.1 with a 5 page limit

17 RFP M.2.1.1 Technical Management Rating.

Sub-Factor 7. Page 67 of

The PWS references are for Itanium and System P chipsets. Please confirm that Sub-Factor 7 does not apply to the Z- Series.

In RFP Amendment 002, PWS Appendix One is revised to include System P, Itanium and Z- Series chipsets.

18 RFP M.2.2.2.b Relevancy. Page 68 of

Please amend the language to include Sub-Factor 2: Technical Solution: Z- Series

RFP M.2.2.2.b will be updated to include Sub-Factor 2: Technical Solution: Z-Series.

19 RFP Table L.1. Volume II “Compliance Requirements.” Page 46 of 71

There are no instructions related to “Compliance Requirements.” Please delete the reference in Table L.1, Volume II.

The Compliance Requirement is removed from table L.1 Volume

II

20 PWS 6.3.2 Subtask 3.2

The PWS requirement states, “…(reference PWS 6.1.2.3).” There is no PWS 6.1.2.3 – please provide the correct PWS reference.

The correct PWS reference in Section 6.3.2 is be 6.1.4. The PWS is updated in Amendment 002 to reflect this correction.

21 5.2.1 Unclassified and Classified Level Environments. Where required under this contract, the 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). The Contractor will deploy separate equipment for classified and unclassified environments and will provide all assets needed for the processor infrastructure regardless of environment (classified or unclassified).

Is it the customer’s requirement that the supplier provide two separate management infrastructures to support both the SIPR and NIPR Net server environments?

The offeror’s technical solution will need to address both NIPR and SIPR Provisioning Management Infrastructures.

The offeror’s approach for their Provisioning Management Infrastructure should be determined by their overall technical approach for their solution to meet the Government’s requirements for this RFP.

22 PWS 6.3.2 Subtask 3.2 references PWS 6.1.2.3, however there is no PWS 6.1.2.3.

Request the Government correct the reference?

The correct PWS reference in Section 6.3.2 is 6.1.4. The PWS is updated in Amendment 002 to reflect this correction.

# Reference Questions Government Response

23 L.1 Proposal Organization, Vol 2, Factor 1, M.1.1.1, M.1.1.3

Per Sections L and M all PWS sections must be addressed in the response. Is the intent of the Gov’t to have every PWS section responded to within the 50-page limit?

If the entire PWS is to be addressed in the Offeror’s Technical / Management response, Offeror requests a page limit increase to 120 pages.

L.1 is updated to change the page limitation for Volume 2 to 60 pages.

24 L.8.5 OCCI Mitigation Plan & L.2.1.7 OCCI

L.8.5 Requirement states that if no OCCI exists, the OCCI plan shall set forth sufficient details to support such position. L.2.1.7 states If the offeror believes that no OCCI exists, the OCCI response shall set forth sufficient details to support such decision Request that L.8.5 be changed to “If the offeror believes that no OCCI exists, then offeror shall provide a response with sufficient detail. No plan is required unless the offeror has a known OCCI issue.

The language in L.8.5 and L.2.1.7 remains at stated. The Government is requiring offerors to 1. Explain that no OCCI exists and 2. If one was discovered what the plan would be to eliminate it.

25 M.1.1.3 M.1.1.3 Evaluation states that all aspects of the PWS shall be addressed, making special note of the evaluation factors in Section M.2.

In order to accomplish this requirement, the Offeror requests that the page count for the technical volume be increased to 120 pages so each PWS element can be addressed, with special attention given to areas as directed.

See the response to question #23

26 Table L.1 Proposal Organization – L5 Past Performance

The table shows a List of Past Performance Questionnaires sent to customers. However, there is not mention of a PP Questionnaire anywhere else in section L or M, nor a sample Questionnaire letter. Contractor

Reference of the questionnaire in table L.1 is removed. Vendors should use Attachment L-2 Past Performance Information Sheet.

requests this item to be removed from Table L.1.

# Reference Questions Government Response

27 Table L.1, L.5.1.a Government reference: “a. Summary Page describing the role of the offeror and each teaming partner, joint venture partner, and/or significant subcontractor that the offeror is submitting a Past Performance Information Sheet (Ref.

Attachment L-2).”

Although a Summary Page is called out in L.5.1.a, it is not present in Table L.1

– Proposal Organization. If a Summary Page is required, please list in Table L.1 and provide a Page Limit for this section.

Table L.1 is updated to add a Summary Page with a 1 page limit

28 Table L.1, L.5.3.2 Government reference:

“Organizational Structure Change History - Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant past efforts or between conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection.

As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this procurement. To facilitate this relevancy determination, include in this proposal volume a "roadmap" describing all such changes in the organization of your company. A pamphlet or other commercial document describing such reorganizations may suffice. As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevance of any efforts you identify for past performance evaluation. Since the Government intends to consider past performance information provided by

Organizational Structure Change History will be added to Table L.1 with a 1 page limit.

other sources as well as that provided by the offerors, the "roadmap" should be both specifically applicable to the efforts you identify and general enough to apply to efforts on which the Government receives information from other sources.”

Although an Organizational Structure Change History is called out in L.5.3.2, it is not present in Table L.1 – Proposal Organization. If an Organizational Structure Change History is required, please list in Table L.1 and provide a Page Limit for this section.

# Reference Questions Government Response

29 Table L.1, L3.1 Narrative Summary

Please clarify that the Narrative Summary is included in Volume 1 and specify the allotted page count for the Narrative Summary. If it is to be included, also add to the list for Volume I in Table L.1

See the response to question #16

30 Table L.1, L.2.2.7 Government reference: “Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms - Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, and with an explanation for each.

Glossaries of abbreviations and acronyms do not count against the page limitations for that volume. Each abbreviation and acronym shall be spelled out in its entirety the first time used.”

Table L.1 only shows a Glossary of Acronyms in Volume I. Is the Government’s intent for Offerors to submit a Master List of Acronyms for each volume submitted in Volume I only, or does each volume require its own Glossary of Acronyms?

Will the Government please clarify which volumes require a Glossary of Acronyms, and also modify Table L.1 accordingly?

Table L.1 is changed to add a Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms to each volumes

31 Table L.1, L4.0 Table L.1 refers to a “Compliance Requirements” section, with a Page Limit of 4 pages. This Offeror can find no reference in Section L.4.0 of a definition of what the Government requires in this section.

Will the Government please clarify, and either provide a statement of required information for this section under L.4.0 or delete the reference from Table L.1?

See the response to question #19

32 Table L.1, L.8.0 In Table L.1, Volume VI is referred to as “Additional Requirements”. In Section L.8.0, Volume VI is referred to as “Contract Documentation”. Will the Government please clarify as to which is the correct naming convention, and update the appropriate section(s) accordingly?

Section L and Section M are updated to both reflect Additional Requirements.

33 L.8.1.3 Government reference: “Section F - Deliveries or Performance. - Proposed Delivery Schedule. The offeror shall propose the delivery schedule by completing the blanks in the Technical Management Volume. The proposed schedule is subject to the following guidance:”

There is nothing listed or referenced after the last sentence. Will the Government please clarify as to what (if any) information is required as a response, and reference the applicable RFP section(s) that Offerors should respond to? Also, if this is required information to be submitted in Volume II (Technical/Management), please list in Table L.1 and provide the associated Page Limit for this information.

The offeror shall propose the delivery schedule in the Technical Management Volume in accordance with PWS 6.2.6.1 Subtask 2.6.1.

34 J-3 / SLIN2002AI Small Hard Drive

Would the Government allow the Offeror to propose a 300GB 12G 15K SAS HDD as the Small Hard Drive SLIN? The 146GB disk drive capacity is obsolete and no longer available for Integrity servers.

All information provided in the “Example” column of the B-1 are for reference only and do not indicate a requirement. The Government requires the hardware fulfill the Tier requirements outlined in Attachment 1 of the PWS.

35 J-3 / SLIN2002AJ Large Hard Drive

Would the Government allow the Offeror to propose a 900GB 12G 10K SAS HDD as the Hard Drive SLIN?

The 900GB 6G drive is obsolete and no longer available for Integrity servers.

All information provided in the “Example” column of the B-1 are for reference only and do not indicate a requirement. The Government requires the hardware fulfill the Tier

Attachment 1 of the PWS.

36 J-3 / SLIN 2001AF SD2 Would the Government allow the Offeror to propose the AM225A 2-port 10TGbE SR NIC in place of the NC552SFP NIC (product number AT118A)? The NC552SFP is obsolete and the AM225A is functionally equivalent.

All information provided in the “Example” column of the B-1 are for reference only and do not indicate a requirement. The Government requires the hardware fulfill the Tier

Attachment 1 of the PWS.

37 J-3 / SLIN 2001AF SD2 Would the Government recognize that the 4-wire PDU supplied with this SLIN will be a 3-phase PDU, and not a Single Phase PDU as listed in the RFP SLIN description?

All information provided in the “Example” column of the B-1 are for reference only and do not indicate a requirement. The Government requires the hardware fulfill the Tier requirements outlined in Appendix One of the PWS.

J-3 Cost Model and PWS are updated to reflect 3-Phase PDU in Amendment 002.

38 J-3 / SLIN 2001AF Would the Government consider changing the SD2 SLIN description to read, “SD2- 32-core (2 X 9560 16c blade), 2 x 2 lox Enclosures 2 X CISCO B22HP, 6 X 10GbE-SR 2p PCIe Adapter 2P Adapters, 2 X 2-port Qlogic HBA, HP-UX 11iv3 HA-OE, 642 1075mm shock intelligent rack, 4 wire Three Phase PDU, 42U 1075mm Side Panel Kit, 2x HP Cisco B22HP Fabric Extender, 4 x 10Gbe Short Range

All information provided in the “Example” column of the B-1 are for reference only and do not indicate a requirement. The Government requires the hardware fulfill the Tier

Appendix One of the PWS.

SFP+Transceiver)”? The NIC product number is removed from the description and the PDU is described as Three Phase.

Cost Model and PWS are updated to reflect 3-Phase PDU in

39 J-3 / SLIN 2002AD SD2

NC552SFP NIC

Would the Government allow the Offeror to propose the AM225A 2-port 10TGbE SR NIC in place of the NC552SFP NIC (product number AT118A)? The NC552SFP is obsolete and the AM225A is functionally equivalent.

All information provided in the “Example” column of the B-1 are for reference only and do not indicate a requirement. The Government requires the hardware fulfill the Tier requirements outlined in Appendix One of the PWS.

40 PWS Attachment J-1, Appendix One UX- Itanium Tier Definitions

J-3 / Itanium B-table spreadsheet tab section 2001, 2004, 3001, 3004 Tiers

The J-1 UX-Itanium tiers are labeled 1, 2 and 3, while the B-tables uses Zero A and B, One A and B, Two and Superdome 2. Would the government please clarify the tier definitions across these two documents? Are the J-1 UX- Itanium tier definitions meant to be used as guidelines while the B-table SLIN definitions have no flexibility?

Would the Government comment on the J-1 UX-Itanium Tier 3 description requiring 8 sockets relative to the B-table Superdome 2 tier requiring 4 sockets using 8-core processors (9560)?

Would the Government consider changing the J-1 UX-Itanium “Tier 3” label to “Superdome 2” and adjust the CPU Capacity/Type to a 4-socket minimum to match the B-table?

Cost Model and PWS is being updated to reflect proper Tier structure.

All information provided in the “Example” column of the B-1 are for reference only and do not indicate a requirement. The Government requires the hardware fulfill the Tier requirements outlined in Appendix One of the PWS.

41 General Due to the comprehensive Technical Volume requirements set forth in the solicitation, and the timing of Memorial Day weekend, this Offeror respectfully requests an extension from June 7th to June 30th for the proposed submittal due date.

With the release of Amendment 002, the PWS, J-3 Cost model, and other RFP documents have are updated in response to vendor

42 Section I – Contract Clauses – 52.225-1 Buy American Supplies (May 2014) (41 U.S.C. chapter 83)

Per FAR Part 25.103 (e) which states that “... The restriction on purchasing foreign end products does not apply to the acquisition of information technology that is a commercial item, when using fiscal year 2004 or subsequent fiscal year funds (Section 535(a) of division F, Title V, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2004, FAR Clause 52.225-1 is removed from the RFP and similar sections in subsequent appropriations acts)...”

This Offeror requests that provision “52.225-1 Buy American – Supplies” be removed from the Solicitation as it does not apply to manufacturers and supplier of Information Technology products that are considered commercial items.

# Reference Questions Government Response

43 M.3.0 – Small Business Participation

DISA in the past has always accepted the prime contractors “corporate small business plan” in place of the SBP, please add language that a corporate SBP can be provided in place of the

SBP.

An offerors' corporate small business plan" will not be acceptable. The offeror will need to provide a separate document based on the requirements outlined in the solicitation (M.3.1.), which is the Small Business Participation Plan. The Small Business Participation is a separate and different document from the Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

44 M.3.1 Small Business Participation Plan

DISA in the past has always accepted the prime contractors “corporate small business plan” in place of the SBP, please add language that a corporate SBP can be provided in place of the

SBP.

DISA has accepted approved commercial subcontracting plans that correspond with the commercial item and/or service of the contract requirement. An approved commercial subcontracting plan is not the same document as the requirement listed in Section M.3.1. Small Business Participation Plan. A Small Business Participation Plan is a separate and different document from a Small Business Subcontracting Plan. The offeror should refer to what is outlined in Section M.3.1. as it relates to the requirements for the Small Business Participation Plan.

45 L.7.0 Volume V – Supply Chain Risk Management (SCRM) Volume

This section references that an SCRM plan is required upon award and “The Government’s review of the SCRM evaluation factor…” SCRM is not part of the evaluation factors. Per section M2, SCRM is not part of the evaluation factors – should there be a Factor 4?

Factor 1: Technical/Management Sub-factor 1: Technical solution: X86 and SPARC Sub-factor 2: Technical solution:

Virtualization Sub-factor 3: Transition Plan Sub-factor 4: Capacity Sub-factor 5: Integration / Interfaces Sub-factor 6: Performance / Availability Sub-factor 7: Technical Requirements and Architecture Factor 2: Past Performance Factor 3: Cost/Price

L.7 is updated to remove is a part of the ‘technical proposal’ and replace ‘proposal submission.’

Table L.1 Vol. V is updated to reflect Factor 4.

46 L.8.3 Small Business Participation

The Offer’s products and/or services meet the definition of commercial item(s) as set forth in FAR 2.101. As a commercial supplier, and as encouraged and authorized by FAR 52.219-9(g), which states “A commercial plan is the preferred type of subcontracting plan for contractors furnishing commercial items. The commercial plan shall relate to the offeror’s planned subcontracting generally, for both commercial and Government business, rather than solely to the Government contract. Once the Contractor’s commercial plan has been approved, the Government will not require another subcontracting plan from the same Contractor while the plan remains in effect, as long as the product or service being provided by the Contractor continues to meet the definition of a commercial item.”

In the past, DISA has accepted approved Commercial Subcontract Plans. Please confirm that the submission of a Corporate

See the response to question #43

Subcontracting Plan will satisfy the requirement.

# Reference Questions Government Response

47 L.8.3.1 and Table L.2 The Offer’s products and/or services meet the definition of commercial item(s) as set forth in FAR 2.101. As a commercial supplier, and as encouraged and authorized by FAR 52.219-9(g), which states “A commercial plan is the preferred type of subcontracting plan for contractors furnishing commercial items. The commercial plan shall relate to the offeror’s planned subcontracting generally, for both commercial and Government business, rather than solely to the Government contract. Once the Contractor’s commercial plan has been approved, the Government will not require another subcontracting plan from the same Contractor while the plan remains in effect, as long as the product or service being provided by the Contractor continues to meet the definition of a commercial item.”

In the past, DISA has accepted approved Commercial Subcontract Plans. Please confirm that the submission of a Corporate Subcontracting Plan will satisfy the requirement.

See the response to question #44

48 L. 8.3.2 Small Business Subcontracting Plan

The Offer’s products and/or services meet the definition of commercial item(s) as set forth in FAR 2.101. As a commercial supplier, and as encouraged and authorized by FAR 52.219-9(g), which states “A commercial plan is the preferred type of subcontracting plan for contractors furnishing commercial items. The commercial plan shall relate to the offeror’s planned subcontracting generally, for both commercial and Government business, rather than solely to the Government contract. Once the Contractor’s commercial plan has been approved, the Government will not

See the response to question #44.

require another subcontracting plan from the same Contractor while the plan remains in effect, as long as the product or service being provided by the Contractor continues to meet the definition of a commercial item.”

In the past, DISA has accepted approved Commercial Subcontract Plans. Please confirm that the submission of a Corporate Subcontracting Plan will satisfy the requirement.

49 M.1.1.3 Evaluation

Ref “Additionally, the sub-factors identified in section M 2.1.2 will be evaluated as part of the best value trade off determination” We could not find section M 2.1.2

Section M is updated with the correct reference of M.2.1.1.

50 M.3.0 – Small Business Participation

DISA in the past has always accepted the prime contractors “corporate small business plan” in place of the SBP, please add language that a corporate SBP can be provided in place of the

SBP.

See the response to question #43

51 M.3.1 Small Business Participation Plan

DISA in the past has always accepted the prime contractors “corporate small business plan” in place of the SBP, please add language that a corporate SBP can be provided in place of the

SBP.

See the response to questions #44

Appendix One, P. 1 SPARC tier definition

Is it the Government’s intention to procure the services of SPARC / Solaris systems in through this RFP? If so, which SPARC/Solaris models are being requested?

The Government will not procure the services of SPARC / Solaris systems in through this RFP.

SPARC tier definitions will be removed from PWS Appendix One in Amendment 002.

53 Appendix One, P. 1 SPARC tier definition

If it is the Government’s intention to order SPARC / Solaris server services, please provide a B-Table for these server services.

The Government will not to procure the services of SPARC / Solaris systems in through this RFP. SPARC tier definitions will be removed from PWS Appendix One in Amendment 002.

54 Appendix One, p. 33 of

Does the Government have particular Itanium servers in mind for these requirements? If so, please specify the appropriate models.

The vendor’s technical approach should provide the OEM recommendations to best satisfy the Government’s requirement.

55 Appendix One, p. 33 of

Does the Government have a requirement for specific models of the Itanium process or family (i.e. 9500, 9550, 9700, etc.)?

If so, please specify.

The offeror’s technical approach should provide the OEM recommendations to best satisfy the Government’s requirement.

56 Appendix One, p. 33 of

Hewlett Packard and Intel have announced the final model of the Itanium processor family, the 9700.

Since Intel is not planning to continue development of the processor, does the Government have a desired alternative that will be acceptable for use under this multi-year contract?

The offeror’s technical approach should provide the OEM recommendations to best satisfy the Government’s requirement.

57 Appendix One, p. 33 of

How does the Government plan to migrate from the proprietary Itanium processor family when Intel ceases production?

The offeror’s technical approach should provide the OEM recommendations to best satisfy the Government’s requirement.

58 J-

3_HC102817R0014_B-

1_Itanium_Cost_Model_ Locked.xlsx, Row 3-7

The models referenced appear to be lifted intact from the last procurement.

Currently Hewlett Packard is delivering 4 core processors clocked at 1.73 GHz, is it the government’s intention to procure last generation “N -1”.

The information provided in the Example column of the J-3 are for reference only. Refer to Attachment one of the J-1 for minimum requirements.

59 Appendix Two -

SYSTEM Z TIER

DEFINITIONS

IBM currently supports several different models of System Z hardware. For each tier does the Government have a preference for a particular model of the System Z?

DISA is requesting the following models:

-z System: Models N, N+1 and -Linux: Models N, N+1

60 Appendix Two –

SYTEMS Z TIER

DEFINITIONS

The CPU capacities specified in Appendix Two show capacities from N -2 vintage systems, does the Government intend to purchase N -2 technology?

The Government has no requirement for an N-2 capacity using vintage systems. Please refer to the responses for questions 59 and 93.

61 Table L.1 Table L.1 refers to Past Performance Questionnaires – however as these are not referenced elsewhere in Section L (or supplied) can the Government confirm that these are not required to be submitted.

Reference of the questionnaire in table L.1 will be used. Vendors should use Attachment L-2 Past Performance Information Sheet.

62 Table L.1 Table L.1 refers to Compliance Requirements, however no details are given as to what these comprise. Can the Government please clarify which PWS requirements are to be included in this section?

See the response to question #19

63 Table L.1 - Proposal Organization, c.f.

L.4.2.2 Volume Organization

Table L.1 requires the Technical/Management Approach (Factor 1) (to include all sub-factors) and allocates a page limit of 50 pages to this section.

Section L.4.2.2 lists Sub-factor 1: as Technical Solution: Itanium and System P, and Sub-factor 2 as Technical Solution: Z-Series. Is an offeror only to address the sub-factor (or part thereof) for the chipsets they wish to submit a proposal for? If so what is the page count for this section?

An offeror must submit a complete and separate proposal for each chipset to be evaluated and considered for award.

64 L2.2.7; and Table L.1 Section L2.2.7 states that a glossary is required for each volume. However Table L.1 only requires a glossary for Volume I. Can the Government please clarify which volumes require a glossary?

See the response to question #30

65 L3.1. Narrative Summary

Where does the “Narrative Summary” go and what is the page limit?

See the response to question #16

66 Section L/ Table L.1 Section L does not correlate to Table L.1 – can the Government please issue a aligned Section L/Table L.1

Section L.3.1 contains Narrative Summary, but is not reflected in Table L.1 Table L.1 lists Compliance Requirements in L.4, is not reflected in Section L.4 Table L.1 lists Price Narrative in L.6, but is not reflected in Section L.6 Section L.8.0.h contains Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms, but is not reflected in Section 8 of Table L.1

See the responses to questions 16, 19, and 30. L.6 is updated to address the Price Narrative.

67 L.4 If a vendor will be responding to all 3 chipsets, can the Government please clarify if they are requiring 3 separate proposal responses, or if the response can contain all 3 chipsets in one response?

An offeror must submit a complete and separate proposal for each chipset to be evaluated and considered for award.

HC102817R0014

ZIPPCS PWS - System Z

System Z An incumbent bidder might be allowed by the OEM, IBM to "migrate" (officially known as "IBM System Z Migration Offer") previously enabled MIPS from an existing Z/OS system or systems onto a new system offered under this RFP. Such a vendor would therefore have an insurmountable competitive advantage (when compared to other vendors). Is it the government's intent to permit the incumbent offeror (should they decide to submit a bid) to re-migrate "mips" that have been previously activated under the previous contract?

As stated in PWS 5.6, “No hardware currently installed in DISA shall be used to satisfy the initial provisioning or vendor management stack requirements of this solicitation. All hardware to support the capacity service brought into DISA locations for the first time must be new hardware.”

69 HC102817R0014

The government does not appear to require any specific model of the IBM System Z servers. IBM currently supports EC12/BC12, and Z13/Z13s.

These systems provide different features and capabilities. Will the government specify which member of the System Z family they require; which they wish to consider as the "N" solution?

The Government considers the z/13s and Rockhopper to be the “N” solutions.

70 APPENDIX TWO, page

SYSTEM Z TIER

DEFINITIONS

OSA Cards

IBM OSA cards are available in a number of link speeds. The government has not specified the link speeds desired for these cards. Does the government have a speed requirement for these cards?

The Government does not have a speed requirement; however, the Government does require the latest generation OSA express 5S (feature codes 0417 copper & 0414 fiber) as well as an N+1 option. OSA cards must support auto negotiate.

71 APPENDIX TWO, page

SPARC SYSTEM TIER

DEFINITIONS

SPARC systems are described in the tier definitions of both RFPs. Where does the government intend to procure the SPARC/Solaris systems (under which RFP)? Please either remove the SPARC definitions from one or the other RFP, or add a B-table for this family.

The Government will not procure the services of SPARC / Solaris systems in through this RFP.

SPARC tier definitions will be removed from PWS Appendix One in Amendment 002.

HC102817R0014

System Z An incumbent bidder might be allowed by the OEM, IBM to "migrate" (officially known as "IBM System Z Migration Offer") previously enabled MIPS from an existing Z/OS system or systems onto a new system offered under this RFP. Such a vendor would therefore have an insurmountable competitive advantage (when compared to other vendors). Is it the government's intent to permit the incumbent offeror (should they decide to submit a bid) to re-migrate "mips" that have been previously activated under the previous contract?

As stated in PWS 5.6, "No hardware currently installed in DISA shall be used to satisfy the initial provisioning or vendor management stack requirements of this solicitation. All hardware to support the capacity service brought into DISA locations for the first time must be new hardware."

73 HC102817R0014

The government does not appear to require any specific model of the IBM System Z servers. IBM currently supports EC12/BC12, and Z13/Z13s.

These systems provide different features and capabilities. Will the government specify which member of the System Z family they require; which they wish to consider as the "N" solution?

DISA is requesting the following models:

z System: Models N, N+1 -Linux: Models N, N+1

The Government considers the z/13s and Rockhopper to be the “N” solutions.

74 APPENDIX TWO, page

SYSTEM Z TIER

DEFINITIONS

OSA Cards

IBM OSA cards are available in a number of link speeds. The government has not specified the link speeds desired for these cards. Does the government have a speed requirement for these cards?

The government does not have a speed requirement; however, the government does require the latest generation OSA express 5S (feature codes 0417 copper & 0414 fiber) as well as an N+1 option. OSA cards must support auto negotiate.

75 APPENDIX TWO, page

SPARC SYSTEM TIER

DEFINITIONS

SPARC systems are described in the tier definitions of both RFPs. Where does the government intend to procure the SPARC/Solaris systems (under which RFP)? Please either remove the SPARC definitions from one or the other RFP, or add a B-table for this family.

The Government will not procure the services of SPARC / Solaris systems in through this RFP.

SPARC tier definitions will be removed from PWS Appendix One in Amendment 002.

76 J-

3_HC102817R0014_B-

1_Z-series_Cost_Model_Loc ked.xlsx

Line numbers 11, 37, 63, 89, 113, 139, 163, and 189 reference zAAP which is no longer available. Does the government intend to require the vendor to provide this feature?

The Government does not require the zAAP feature and references will be removed from the System Z cost model in Amendment 002.

77 J-

3_HC102817R0014_B-

1_Z-series_Cost_Model_Loc ked.xlsx

Line numbers 17, 69, 119, and 169 reference ISC couple link which is no longer available. Does the government intend to require the vendor to provide this feature?

The Government does not require ISC couple links. However, Infiniband (feature code 0170) support is required.

78 J-

1_HC102817R0014_PW

S_050217.docx, APPENDIX TWO, SYSTEM Z TIER

DEFINITIONS,

Capacity Scaling

On/Off Capacity on Demand (COD) is a fixed capacity daily charge that is equal to 1/90 of purchase price. It is not in the best interest of the government to require the vendor to provide this feature because of excessive cost beyond 90 days.

The Government requires the On/Off CoD feature.

79 PWS Page 27 of 45 Facility Security Clearance Sections 13.1, 13.2, 13.3

The RFP states IT-I access required, however it does not justify the need for TS and the DD254 specifies Secret. Please confirm access requirements are IT-II not IT-I.

As stated in the PWS, section

13.1 “work to be performed under this contract is up to the SECRET level and will require SECRET IT-I access eligibility for some personnel. Therefore the company must have a final Secret Facility Clearance (FCL)”.

Section 13.2 indicates Tasks requiring IT-I for system access.

80 J-

3_HC102817R0014_B-

1_Z-series_Cost_Model_Loc ked.xlsx

Line numbers 16, 34, 35, 68, 86, 87, 118, 136, 137, 168, 186, and 187 all reference an "ESCON channel adapter", which is no longer available on new Z servers from the OEM, IBM. Does the government actually require the bidders to provide this feature or capability?

No. The government does not require this feature or capability.

Amendment 002 provided updates to the cost model to remove these references.

81 J-

3_HC102817R0014_B-

1_Z-series_Cost_Model_Loc ked.xlsx

Line numbers 38, 41, 90, 93, 140, 143, 190, and 193 all reference specific MIPS rating (3139 MIPs) which are associated with N -2 mainframe systems (i.e. z114). Does the government intend to source z114 mainframes from this solicitation?

No. The government does not intend to source z114 mainframes from this solicitation.

82 J-

1_HC102817R0014_PW

S_050217.docx, section 6.1.6.1

Does the government intend to specify 8 and 16 Gb fibre channel/FICON line capabilities instead of "8 and 16 GB capabilities"? (Bytes vs bits?)

The government specifies GB (bytes).

83 J-

1_HC102817R0014_PW

S_050217.docx, APPENDIX TWO, SYSTEM Z TIER

DEFINITIONS,

Capacity Scaling http://www- 01.ibm.com/support/doc view.wss?uid=isg2bf200 5026fef8aaf85257ba600 50e202&aid=1

Both Business Class and Enterprise Class of mainframes have options for multiple CPC drawers (a.k.a. "Books").

In some models (the BC class systems) processing is not scaled by adding "Books"; in other models (the EC machines) adding "Books" can increase processing, but not without taking down the system to be augmented. Having multiple CPC drawers enables non-disruptive scaling from one CPC drawer to the next – but necessarily increases the cost, and therefore the price to the government. Will the government clarify the requirement of CUoD? Is it as defined in the referenced IBM document, zEnterprise BC12 System Overview, page 138? How much excess CUoD capacity of which sort (processor, I/O or Memory) does the government intend for the bidders to provide? Knowing this is important because the only way to provide non-disruptive scaling of processing capacities, memory, and I/O is to preinstall it, and raise the costs of these systems accordingly.

The government requires the ability to permanently add CPs, ICFs, IFLs, zIIPs, SAPs, memory, and channels non-disruptively.

We have no way to predict how much memory, processors, or I/O that may be required for future projects. With dynamic workload requirements, the government is unable to estimate how much of each would be required.

Please see the response to question 84 regarding CUoD which exceeds the maximum capacity of the hardware in place.

84 J-

1_HC102817R0014_PW

S_050217.docx, APPENDIX TWO, SYSTEM Z TIER

DEFINITIONS,

Capacity Scaling http://www- 01.ibm.com/support/doc view.wss?uid=isg2bf200 5026fef8aaf85257ba600 50e202&aid=1

Will the government clarify the requirement for "CUoD"? The term is defined by the OEM, IBM, in the referenced IBM document, zEnterprise BC12 System Overview, page 138. If an incremental requirement exceeds the configured capability of a given system, will the government deem the proposed system non-compliant if the addition of CUoD resources involves an outage in order to provide the required increment?

No. The government would not consider the proposed system non-compliant if an upgrade would require and outage if, and only if, the required capacity upgrade would exceed the limitations of the current system.

85 J-

1_HC102817R0014_PW

S_050217.docx, section

5.8 and 5.8.2.

In the PWS, at section 5.8.2, referring to Memory (section 5.8), the PW states “This is not a requirement for the IBM System z chipset”. Will the government specifically identify to what capacity of feature "This" refers? I.E. which one of the several stated memory specifications is not required for the System z chipset?

The DIMM references found in PWS 5.8 apply to Itanium and System P servers only.

The DIMS levels presented in PWS 5.8 have been updated in Amendment 002.

86 J-

1_HC102817R0014_PW

S_050217.docx, section

6.2.5.2. Maintenance

Repair and Response Time

Will the government clarify and delineate the specific responsibilities of the contractor providing the System z in this section in reference to operating system software and any other software required for the contractor’s solution to operate?

The System Z operating system is not a requirement of this contract.

The offeror’s solution must include any other software required by their solution to meet the stated requirements.

87 J-

1_HC102817R0014_PW

S_050217.docx, section

6.2.5.3. Predictive

Maintenance

Since the bidder of a System Z is not providing the Operating System software, nor any third party applications (other than those required to monitor and maintain the system) will the government identify all of the responsibilities of a bidder with regard to the System z in this section in reference to "operating system software and any other software required for the contractor’s solution to operate"?

The offeror is not required to provide, install, or support the operating system or third party applications, except those required to maintain and/or monitor the hardware solution.

88 J-

1_HC102817R0014_PW

S_050217.docx, section

6.2.5.4. Remedial

Maintenance

Since the bidder of a System Z is not providing the Operating System software, nor any third party applications (other than those required to monitor and maintain the system) will the government identify all of the responsibilities of a bidder with regard to the System z in this section in reference to "operating system software

The offeror is not required to provide, install, or support the operating system or third party applications, except those required to maintain and/or monitor the hardware solution.

http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=isg2bf2005026fef8aaf85257ba60050e202&aid=1 http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=isg2bf2005026fef8aaf85257ba60050e202&aid=1 http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=isg2bf2005026fef8aaf85257ba60050e202&aid=1 http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=isg2bf2005026fef8aaf85257ba60050e202&aid=1 http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=isg2bf2005026fef8aaf85257ba60050e202&aid=1 and any other software required for the contractor’s solution to operate"?

# Reference Questions Government Response

89 J-

1_HC102817R0014_PW

S_050217.docx, section

6.2.5.5. Preventative

Maintenance

Since the bidder of a System Z is not providing the Operating System software, nor any third party applications (other than those required to monitor and maintain the system), will the government identify all of the responsibilities of a bidder with regard to the System z in this section in reference to "operating system software and any other software required for the contractor’s solution to operate"?

The offeror is not required to provide, install, or support the operating system or third party applications, except those required to maintain and/or monitor the hardware solution.

90 J-

1_HC102817R0014_PW

S_050217.docx, section

6.2.5.6. Remote

Diagnostics

Will the government further clarify and delineate the responsibilities of the contractor providing the System z in this section in reference to operating system software and any other software required for the contractor’s solution to operate?

The offeror is not required to provide, install, or support the operating system or third party applications, except those required to maintain and/or monitor the hardware solution.

91 J-

1_HC102817R0014_PW

S_050217.docx, section

6.2.5.6. Remote

Diagnostics

Will the government provide secure IP network connectivity between the management ports of the Host management Console(s) and the Internet so that a bidder can remotely manage the System Z processor complexes? Will the government provide assurance that such remote diagnostics capabilities will be accommodated by DISA IA operations?

Yes. Remote call home to IBM Enhanced RSF service is currently in place and operational.

DISA IA operations will not interfere with this feature.

92 J-

1_HC102817R0014_PW

S_050217.docx, section

6.2.6 Subtask 2.6 –

Delivery, Installation, and Deinstallation

Since the government will be providing the Z/OS operating system software for use on the System Z processors, will the government further clarify and delineate the responsibilities of the contractor providing the System z in this section in reference to operating system software and any other software required for the contractor’s solution to operate? In short, if a bidder is not providing the OS, are they required to install it?

The offeror is not required to provide, install, or support the operating system or third party applications, except those required to maintain and/or monitor the hardware solution.

93 J-

1_HC102817R0014_PW

S_050217.docx, section

6.3.3 Subtask 3.3, J-

3_HC102817R0014_B-

1_Z-series_Cost_Model_Loc ked.xlsx

In both the PWS and the cost model associated with the IBM System Z servers, the government specifies four distinct tiers of mainframe computer, based upon “MIPs”. Is it the government's intent to procure the services of individual systems i.e.

discrete hardware platforms) for each tier specified in the SLIN list?

The government’s requirement is to procure services for any/all types of IBM System z and Rockhopper machines within each tier.

Wi…