HC102817R0015_Amend0008_consolidated_Q&A.pdf

HC1028-17-R-0015

XSPCS Q&A

AMEND 0002

Attachment L-1 Question & Answer Template

RFP# HC1028-17-R-0015 (MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WORD FORMAT)

# Reference Questions Government Response 1 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.

The proposal due date is extended to July 12, 2017

2 5.9 In Section 5.9, the Government has provided Broadwell (v3) as the example chipset architecture.

Broadwell (v4) is currently available, and Skylake (v5) will be available in the summer of 2017. Is it desirable to bid technology that is old and will be obsolete, or should the Offeror be bidding current technology that would be the be in the best interest of DoD?

As stated in PWS 5.9, “the provided processors shall remain within the new generation at the same relative position or better as the previous generation at time of contract award.”

The offeror’s technical solution should provide technology commercially available at the time of contract award.

3 5.2.1 Unclassified and Classified Level Environments

Ref “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)” Please define “assets” and how are Offerors supposed to charge for these assets as the B-table does not have SLINs for these.

The assets referenced in PWS 5.2.1 are the components of the technical solution the offeror will provide in their response to meet the requirements of the RFP. The costs for these assets are captured in the SLINs submitted by the offeror for cost evaluation.

4 6.3.6 Subtask 3.6 - Capacity requirements can be cancelled at any time at no additional cost to the Government with the exception of orders placed using 12-month commitment SLINs. Those orders will remain in service for a minimum 12-month period.

For cancelled capacity, will the government reimburse the contractor for the financial loss that has

The Government will not reimburse the contractor for any financial loss associated with cancelled capacity.

The contractor will not be allowed to charge the government a cancellation fee.

The government is allowed to cancel any order, except orders placed using 12-month commitment SLINs, regardless of dollar threshold.

occurred? Are we allowed to charge the government a cancellation fee?

Is the government allowed to cancel any order, even if the dollar threshold of the order is $5M?

# Reference Questions Government response

5 6.4 Task 4 The Government states:

“Integration/Interfaces. All equipment provided must work with the existing DISA infrastructure and network. Refer to Appendix Four.”

Does the Government require the Offeror to qualify interoperability of all equipment provided to the existing DISA infrastructure?

The Offeror will need to be able to qualify interoperability of specific equipment, if necessary, at the request of the government.

The PWS 6.4, Task 4 is updated to reference "Appendix One".

6 6.5.1.1 Government will lead the operational acceptance testing with Contractor support. The Contractor shall provide release of new OS's and upgrade packaging for all upgrades. Server OS software is owned and licensed by the Contractor, with the Government having right to use through the capacity services contract

What SLINs can we use to charge for this?

The offeror’s technical solution and SLIN structure should capture all anticipated costs associated with their technical proposal within the current SLIN structure.

No additional SLINS will be added to charge for any costs associated with

PWS 6.5.1.1.

7 6.8.1.2 The Contractor shall include ancillary equipment such as MPDUs, grommets, blanking panels.

What SLINs can we use to charge for this?

The offeror’s technical solution and SLIN structure should capture all anticipated costs associated with their technical proposal within the current SLIN structure.

No additional SLINS will be added to charge for any costs associated with

PWS 6.8.1.2.

6.8.1.3 Each rack shall be supplied

with two (2) each three phase “modular power distribution units” (MPDU’s) that mount vertically into the rear access/cabling spaces of the rack and provide a SNMP interface or MODBUS external port capability.

The offeror’s technical solution and SLIN structure should capture all anticipated costs associated with their technical proposal.

No additional SLINS will be added to charge for any costs associated with

PWS 6.8.1.3.

What SLINs can we use to charge for this?

# Reference Questions Government Response

9 PWS 6.1.1.4

Provisioning Management Infrastructure

Does the Government require separate NIPR and SIPR Management Infrastructures at each site? Do each of these Management Infrastructures need to be in a high availability configurations? Do the Operating System Images to be provisioned need to be in a high availability configuration for Provisioning?

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.

10 PWS 6.1.6 Subtask

1.6 – Virtual Environments

Given the investment the Government has in training and knowledge of its current VMware Hypervisor environment, what will be the primary criteria the Government is considering to choose a new Hypervisor solution?

As stated in Section M.1.1.2, this is a This is a best value trade-off source selection, conducted in accordance with FAR 15.3, Source Selection, as supplemented by the DFARS and the

DARS.

11 Section 5.8 The Government is showing memory DIMMS starting at 4GB and increasing to 8GB, 16GB, or 32GB DIMMS. Industry Standard Servers no longer support a 4GB DIMM option. Contractor requests these options be updated to 8GB, 16GB, 32GB, 64GB and ending at 128GB DIMMS that align with current industry standards.

PWS Section 5.8 is updated for referenced memory levels.

12 L.4.2.3 Proof of Concept

Previous POCs for capacity services have allotted up to 4 days and have encompassed potentially all requirements of the PWS, inclusive of time for value-add capabilities to be demonstrated. The Offeror requests additional days and an increase in scope to demonstrate any and all capabilities that are in the best interest of the Government?

As stated in Section L.4.2.3, “if a proof of Concept (POC) is required, the first notification will go out after the competitive range is established”.

The POC demonstration is designed to validate Sub-factors 1, 2, and 3 of the offeror's technical solution. At this time, the Government cannot determine whether POC will be required for this

RFP.

The timelines specified in Section L.4.2.3 remain as stated in the original

RFP.

# Reference Questions Government Response

13 L.4.2.3 Proof of Concept

The section states that “Specific elements of Sub-factors 1 and 2 to be validated will be determined by the Government and provided to offerors as part of a detailed test plan”. Sub-factor 1 includes PWS 6.1.14 which requests a provisioning infrastructure. The government then later refers to the provisioning infrastructure in PWS 6.3.2 Subtask

3.2 which includes a request for automation in addition to provisioning. However, PWS 6.3.2 is evaluated in Sub-factor 4 which is not a part of the Proof of Concept.

Was this an oversight by the government or is there no desire to evaluate the vendor’s automation solution?

As stated in Section L.4.2.3, “The POC demonstration is designed to validate Sub-factors 1, 2 and 3 of the offeror's technical solution”. At this time, the Government cannot determine whether POC will be required for this proposal.

Section L.4.2.3 further states “If a POC is required, the first POC demonstration will occur within 30 calendar days. A detailed test plan and any government-provided data required to be used in the demonstration will be provided to each offeror 14 calendar days prior to the demonstration.”

The Government will not disclose details of the POC until the need for a POC has been determined and will then follow the schedule as stated in Section L.4.2.3.2

14 M.2.1.1 Technical/Managem ent Rating

The government asks the vendor in PWS 6.9 Task 9 to support DISA “Green” Initiatives, however, 6.9 does not appear to be evaluated at all in M.2.1.1. Does the government intend to make energy efficiency optional?

”Green” initiatives are a requirement, however they will not be evaluated.

15 PWS 6.1.1.4

Provisioning Management Infrastructure

The government states that “relevant DISA STIG and security policies” will be applied to the contractor management infrastructure. Does this require 2 Factor Authentication using CAC for all management interfaces?

The offeror’s Provisioning Management Infrastructure, as stated in section PWS 6.1.1.4, “will be subject to Risk Management Framework (RMF).” The offeror’s technical solution should be able to meet the RMF accreditation requirements.

16 PWS 6.1.1.4

Provisioning Management Infrastructure

The government states that “relevant DISA STIG and security policies” will be applied to the contractor management infrastructure. Does this require that all cryptography be FIPS 140-2 validated?

The offeror’s Provisioning Management Infrastructure, as stated in section PWS 6.1.1.4, “will be subject to Risk Management Framework (RMF).” The offeror’s technical solution should be able to meet the RMF accreditation requirements.

# Reference Questions Government Response

17 PWS 6.1.1.4

Provisioning Management Infrastructure

The government states that the management infrastructure will include event logging. Is the event logging required to be tied into an event correlation service?

The offeror’s technical solution for Provisioning Management Infrastructure is to support the offeror’s overall provisioning management processes.

At present, DISA has no current requirement for an offeror’s Provisioning Management event logging data to be tied to an event correlation service.

18 PWS 6.1.1.4

Provisioning Management Infrastructure

The government states that the management infrastructure will contain “provisioning capabilities, hardware diagnostics, hardware monitoring, event logging, image repositories” etc. Does the government expect the vendor to back up the management stack and provide DR for the management stack?

The offeror’s technical approach for Provisioning Management Infrastructure should ensure the vendor can meet the objectives as stated in PWS 4.0 Objectives, “to obtain reliable, responsive, and cost effective processor infrastructure services of “on-demand” processing capabilities for DISA and/or DISA-approved locations…”

19 PWS 6.1.1.4

Provisioning Management Infrastructure

Must the management infrastructure operate on enterprise class hardware, meet SLA of 99.5%, provide local site HA, and provide remote site DR?

As stated in the response to question 18 above, the offeror’s technical approach for Provisioning Management Infrastructure should ensure the vendor can meet the objectives as stated in PWS 4.0 Objectives, “to obtain reliable, responsive, and cost effective processor infrastructure services of “on-demand”

20 PWS 6.1.1.4

Management Infrastructure

May the contractor utilize DHCP and PXE processes to provision images to servers?

As stated in PWS 6.3.2, “Solution should include automation capabilities to provide efficiencies in provisioning and automation to streamline recurring vendor and Government tasks.”

21 PWS 6.1.1.4

Management Infrastructure

Is the management infrastructure required on NIPR only or does SIPR require a completely separate management infrastructure?

As stated in PWS 5.2, all locations may require a NIPR and SIPR environment.

The offeror’s approach should include Provisioning Management Infrastructure to support separate NIPR and SIPR capabilities.

22 PWS 6.1.6.4 PWS 6.1.6.4 states “All operating environments whether physical (rack mount or blade) or virtual must be able to provide connectivity for a minimum of 4 network ports supporting Ethernet traffic, and two separate ports for fiber storage connectivity.” Does the government intend to provision all VMs with 4 virtual NICs and what is government’s preferred oversubscription ratio of virtual NICs to Physical NICs?

The offeror’s technical approach should provide connectivity for a minimum of 4 network ports to all VM’s. The oversubscription ratio in the offeror’s technical approach should be based on the Objectives as stated in PWS 4.0, “to obtain reliable, responsive, and cost effective processor infrastructure services of “on-demand” processing capabilities…”

23 6.3.2 Subtask 3.2 The government states that the “Solution should include automation capabilities to provide efficiencies in provisioning and automation to streamline recurring vendor and Government tasks. Automation capabilities may be utilized by both the Contractor and the Government in sustainment of provisioned infrastructure.” Are the automation capabilities required to meet DoD RMF as well as relevant DISA STIG and security policies?

The offeror’s technical solution should provide automation capabilities with respect to their recommended industry best practices as well as the capabilities inherent to their recommended solution and technical approach.

Automation tools, processes and end-results provided by the vendor’s solution should meet DoD RMF as well as relevant DISA STIG and security policies.

24 6.3.2 Subtask 3.2 The government states that the “Solution should include automation capabilities to provide efficiencies in provisioning and automation to streamline recurring vendor and Government tasks. Automation capabilities may be utilized by both the Contractor and the Government in sustainment of provisioned infrastructure.” Are the automation capabilities required to utilize FIPS 140-2 validated cryptography?

The offeror’s Provisioning Management Infrastructure, as stated in section PWS 6.1.1.4, “will be subject to Risk Management Framework (RMF).” The offeror’s technical solution should be able to meet the RMF accreditation requirements as well as relevant DISA STIG and security policies.

# Reference Questions Government response

25 6.3.2 Subtask 3.2 The government states that the “Solution should include automation capabilities to provide efficiencies in provisioning and automation to streamline recurring vendor and Government tasks. Automation capabilities may be utilized by both the Contractor and the Government in sustainment of provisioned infrastructure.” Are the automation capabilities required to utilize 2 Factor Authentication via CAC?

The offeror’s Management Infrastructure should be compliant, as stated in section PWS 6.7.2, “Management solution and infrastructure provided must be compatible with government provided token authentication. (i.e. CAC- Enabled).”

26 6.3.2 Subtask 3.2 The government states that the “Solution should include automation capabilities to provide efficiencies in provisioning and automation to streamline recurring vendor and Government tasks. Automation capabilities may be utilized by both the Contractor and the Government in sustainment of provisioned infrastructure.” Must the automation capabilities be deployed on NIPR, SIPR, or both?

As stated in PWS 5.2, all locations may require a NIPR and SIPR environment.

The offeror’s approach should include automation capabilities to support separate NIPR and SIPR capabilities.

27 6.7 Task 7 - Security The government references ‘DoD Directive 8500.1, "Information Assurance (IA)"’ and DISA STIGs but does not mention FIPS 140-2 requirements. Is the use of FIPS 140- 2 validated cryptography by the contractor a requirement in both server out of band management and the management infrastructure or is non-validated insecure cryptography permissible?

The offeror’s technical solution, as stated in section PWS 6.1.1.4, “will be subject to Risk Management Framework (RMF).” The offeror’s technical solution should be able to continuously meet the RMF accreditation requirements as well as DISA STIG and security policies.

28 6.7.2 Subtask 7.2 Will the “government provided token authentication” always be a CAC and are all hardware and management infrastructure interfaces required to be CAC-enabled?

The offeror’s technical solution, as stated in section PWS 6.1.1.4, “will be subject to Risk Management Framework (RMF).” The offeror’s technical solution should be able to continuously meet the RMF accreditation requirements as well as DISA STIG and security policies.

29 6.13.3 Configuration Management

Per configuration management best practices and security controls, tracking configuration drift and unauthorized changes is essential to detecting malicious activity in computer hardware.

Does the government intend configuration management to include low level configuration of the server hardware such as but not limited to:

BIOS configuration, Boot configuration, local disk RAID configuration, firmware, etc.?

The offeror’s technical solution may address and/or include any configuration data deemed necessary to meet the requirement of PWS 6.13.3.

The solution should provide monthly configuration/asset summary reports to enable configuration/asset validation by DISA. The ability to provide low Level configuration information for provisioned server hardware would be dependent upon the offeror’s technical solution and approach to meet the requirements of PWS 6.13.3.

30 Appendix One x86 The table states that a Tier 5 server is “≥40 (minimum: see J-5 para 5.11 for description)”. The J-5 is the NDA document, can the government provide the reference for a Tier 5 server?

Amendment 0002 provides updates to PWS "Appendix One" and removes the reference to J-5.

31 5.4 Section 5.4 talks about Current environments; Offeror understands DISA also services Wainwright, Alaska, Camp Walker South Korea, Yokota, Japan, also, are processor services needed at these locations as well? Will Offeror be reimbursed for travel if travel to these other locations is required?

Yes, DISA may require processor services at OCONUS locations.

The vendor will be responsible for contractor travel costs, for CONUS or OCONUS locations, during the execution of contract responsibilities.

32 5.4, 6.2 If services are required at these locations also, can DISA provide the Performance and Availability expectations for these locations?

PWS section 6.2 Task 2 - Performance/Availability provides availability expectations.

33 5.7.1 Section 5.7.1 - Can the Government define any ancillary hardware or software for the internal storage device SLIN?

The offeror should address the need for ancillary hardware or software for the internal storage device SLIN based on their proposed technical solution.

34 5.7.1 Section 5.7.1 – For internal storage Encryption at rest, is FIPS level encryption required?

The offeror’s technical approach should include capability to support both unencrypted and encrypted internal drives. The encryption capability should support FIPS 140-2.

35 6.1.2 In PWS requirement 6.1.2, DISA states that the contractor is responsible for n-2 support; Is the contractor responsible for providing support even if the Operating System manufacturer is not supporting a particular version within the n-2 requirement?

If the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) no longer support an Operating System version, the contractor is released from being obligated to support it with respect to PWS 6.1.2.

36 6.1.4 In PWS Requirement 6.1.4, should the offeror provide support for all newly release images and customer specific images, inclusive of patching and STIGing?

Images distributed by the contractor in support of PWS 6.1.4 should be the standard image utilized in their technical solution at the time of order.

37 5.7 In PWS requirement 5.7, should the offeror take into account retained media, inclusive of HDD, memory and System boards?

PWS 6.12 Task 12 is updated to provide additional clarifying information.

Also, refer to section 13.9 of the PWS for additional information.

38 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

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.

Sub-factor 7: Technical Requirements and Architecture Factor 2: Past Performance Factor 3: Cost/Price

# Reference Questions Government Response

39 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 Subcontracting Plan will satisfy the requirement.

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.

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.

40 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

See the response to #39

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.

41 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

The reference was corrected to reflect M.2.1.1.

42 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.

43 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 response to #42

44 TAXES, 5.5 Will DISA allow Offeror to invoice for non-exemptible State (e.g., Alabama, Hawaii, etc.) or Local taxes incurred for hardware or capacity used in support of this contract?

Clause 52.229-3 provides the instructions regarding the type of taxes that are reimbursable.

45 SOFA/TESA Will DISA compensate Offeror for German taxes and fees for services and staff in Germany TESA approval is in progress/review?

Clause 52.229-6 should be able to address this concern.

46 PWS 6.1.4 Subtask

1.4 – Image

Does the Government wish the specified System Images to be preconfigured with all of the DISA Operating Systems specific STIG settings already applied?

Images distributed by the contractor in support of PWS 6.1.4 should be the standard image utilized in their technical solution at the time of order.

The standard image would be pre-configured with DISA-specified STIG settings applied.

47 PWS 6.1.6.4 The Government specifies 4 network ports and 2 Fibre Channel Ports. The PWS states “Fiber channels should support both 8 and 16 GB capabilities”. Current industry minimum standard speed is 20GbE.

Would this be the desired minimum requirement for the 4 network ports?

The Government’s current Fibre Channel interoperability supports both 8GB and 16GB for connectivity between server and storage arrays.

48 PWS 6.2.5.1

Maintenance Repair and Response Time

Does the Government have a requirement for to maintain ownership of failed Disk Drives, SSDs, and Accelerator Cards for any of the components provided under this Contract or will the Government allow potentially sensitive information to be removed from sites on these components?

Section 6.12 Task 12 – Removal of Equipment is updated to add additional verbiage.

Please refer to section 13.9 of the PWS for additional information on media removal.

49 6.2.5.2 Predictive Maintenance

Can the Government please provide details of monitoring for equipment / component as stated in 6.2.4 Subtask 2.4?

Section 6.2.4 Subtask 2.4is updated in with additional information to clarify the requirement.

50 6.2.5.2 Predictive Maintenance

Will the Government add “firmware and SW patches” into the list of items that are required to be monitored and also identified by the Contractor?

Section 6.2.5.2 Predictive Maintenance, is updated to include “firmware and software patches”.

51 Appendix One, Page 3 of 3, X-86 Tier Definitions

The table referenced above refers to Section J-5 para 5.11 for definitions.

There is no paragraph 5.11 in Section J-5. Please advise as to location of this information.

PWS "Appendix One" is updated and removes the reference to J-5.

52 PWS Appendix 1:

X86 Tier Definitions

In the referenced table, the memory capacity for Tier 1 and Tier 2 servers states all DIMM Slots must be populated with the Level 1 DIMM modules. Using current server architectures, this requirement would utilize 24 Level 1 DIMMS.

Populating all DIMM channels with these DIMMS will also slow the memory bus speed down to 77% of normal and will not be cost-effective.

This contractor requests the Government to evaluate this requirement and change the server requirement as having a required amount of RAM per server.

Examples would be:

Tier One Server with 96GB RAM which is the equivalent of all slots with the Level One DIMM.

Tier Two Server with 192GB RAM which is the equivalent of all slots with the Level One DIMM.

PWS Appendix 1: x86 Tier Definitions has been updated to “Memory ordered separately”.

53 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, 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

FAR 52.225-1 Buy American – Supplies is removed.

Technology products that are considered commercial items.

# Reference Questions Government response

54 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.

See response to #1

55 PWS 6.1.6 Subtask

1.6 – Virtual Environments

Does the VDI solution require the ability to scale compute resources independently from the storage resources to allow for lower costs when scaling up number of desktops/users?

As stated in PWS 4.0 Scope, the offeror’s technical approach should assist DISA in their goal to obtain a dynamically scalable processing capability utilizing an on-demand service approach, for new equipment, that will readily adjust to changes in processing and throughput requirements, both increases and decreases, and is priced on a utility ("as used") basis or tiered. The offeror’s solution may provide independent scaling of compute and storage resources.

56 PWS 6.1.1.4

Provisioning Management Infrastructure

Does the management infrastructure backup policy require local onsite and secure offsite tape backup?

The offeror’s technical approach for Provisioning Management Infrastructure should ensure the vendor can meet the objectives as stated in PWS 4.0 Objectives, “to obtain reliable, responsive, and cost effective processor infrastructure services of “on-demand”

57 PWS 6.1.1.4

Management Infrastructure

What is the backup retention policy for the management infrastructure for both local onsite and secure offsite tape backup?

The offeror’s technical approach for Provisioning Management Infrastructure should ensure the vendor can meet the objectives as stated in PWS 4.0 Objectives, “to obtain reliable, responsive, and cost effective processor infrastructure services of “on-demand”

# Reference Questions Govenrment response

58 6.2.5.5.2 Dial in feature: Please clarify that this can be requested for all SLINs and put in place long term to facilitate service.

The reference to 6.2.5.5.2 removed from PWS.

59 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.

PWS is updated 6.1.4 Subtask 1.4 – Image for the correct reference.

60 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. If the Offeror complies with this requirement to respond to all of the PWS sections, the page count for the Technical / Management portion of Vol. II would need to be increased.

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 II to 75 pages.

61 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.

62 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

L.1 is updated to change the page limitation for Volume II to 75 pages 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.

# Reference Questions Government response

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

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

64 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

Narrative Summary is added to Table L.1 with 5 page limit.

65 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

66 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?

Table L.1 is updated to remove Compliance Requirements.

67 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.

68 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.

69 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

70 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 other sources as well as that provided by the offerors, the "roadmap" should be both specifically applicable to the efforts you identify and general

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

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

71 RFP Page 43of 71 Section L.2.0 General Instruction;

and RFP Page 51of 71 Section L.5.3 Relevant Contracts

Will the Government please clarify the submission of subcontractor experience or past performance, as there appears to be conflicting information within Section L.

Section L2.0 states only one reference regarding subcontractor experience or past performance will be recognized,, however Section L5.3 states that the offeror should include significant subcontract past performance that are considered relevant in the performance of the proposed effort. If there are multiple subcontractors supporting the offeror with significant experience how should the offeror demonstrate past performance for these subcontractors?

If the offeror is submitting past performance references where the offeror was a subcontractor, only one instance where the offeror was a contractor will be accepted. In L.5.3 up to 3 past performance efforts will be recognized but only one of those three will be considered where the offeror was a subcontractor.

72 RFP Page 56 of 71 Section L.8.3.2 Small Business Subcontracting Plan

If an offeror already has an approved commercial subcontracting plan will the Government allow this plan to be submitted as a part of the solicitation response?

The government would like to clarify that while an offeror can submit a commercial plan, the commercial items and/or services that were included in the approved plan should correspond to the commercial items and/or services of the XSPCS requirement.

73 PWS Page 2 of 45 Scope Sections 5.1.2/5.1.3

Would the Government provide a license count for each OS in use for installed blades and rack mounts?

The DISA OS environment is dynamic, and the current environment is not necessarily a reflection of future requirements. The offeror’s proposed solution should provide a flexible and scalable to meet the Government’s for future requirements.

74 PWS Page 5 of 45 Virtual Environment Section 6.1.6.4

What is the speed requirement for the Network connections? Fiber channel speeds were specified in this reference, but not the network speeds.

DISA currently maintains access via 10Gbps SFP fiber uplinks bundled into 20Gbps and 40Gbps trunks.

75 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.

76 Attachment J-1 Appendix One page X-86 Tier Definitions

All 5 of the CPU Capacity/Type references Section J5 para.11 for description. We are unable to locate this reference please advise where in the document this information can be located?

PWS "Appendix One" is updated to remove the reference to J-5.

77 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

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.

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 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.

document from the Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

# Reference Questions Government response

78 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.

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.

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.

79 L.6.1.2 Cost/Price Information

Ref “Actual travel shall be for technical assistance-related work or at the Government’s discretion and authorized by the contracting officer’s representative (COR) (in writing, prior to performance) and will be paid IAW FAR Part 31.205-

Travel charges listed are not reimbursable. Per PWS section 9.3 Travel, charges for travel are permissible only in connection with a call order placed for technical support services as called for in the PWS. All

46.” Am I allowed to charge the government for travel for the following:

1. When the team needs to travel to conduct the quarterly reviews

2. When a support technician is required to travel to fix a problem

3. When services engineers come on site to install

4. When services engineers arrive to remove or move hardware other travel costs will be included in the utility chipset price.

# Reference Questions Government response

80 L.8.3 Small Business Participation

Ref “Government market research and historical information identified that approximately 25% of the total contract dollars should be attainable for small business”; this contract is essentially providing OEM hardware on a utility basis to DISA, it is not possible that approximately 25% of the total contract dollars could be attained by a small business.

Recommend removing this requirement for the OEM hardware.

The small business percentage requirement has been removed.

81 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

See response to #78

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.

# Reference Questions Government response

82 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 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 response to #78

83 Ref: 5.3 “The objective is for the Contractor to provide processor services using a “utility contract concept”. This utility concept requires that the Contractor provide all assets needed for the processor service. These assets shall include, but are not limited to, hardware, software, software maintenance

All applicable charges/costs associated with the Government’s requested contract concept shall be priced within the B-table construct provided in the XSPCS cost models as described in the

RFP.

No additional SLINS will be added to charge for any costs associated with licensing, design capabilities, logistical support, field maintenance, and systems engineering.” We can provide all of these assets; however, the Government has not provided a SLIN structure that allows us to charge for these, please advise. Also:

• where do we price the PMO?

• where do we price the call order management?

• where do we price for systems engineering works, and what is estimated level of effort (hours)?

• If an additional capability is offered, where do we price that?

PMO, call order management, system engineering work. Additional capabilities outside of the current technical requirements will be accessed at the…