Amend 0002 Attachment L-1 Question and Answer dtd June 28 2022.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 336 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- HC108422R0006
- Issued by
-
Defense Information Systems Agency
About this file
This solicitation notice announces a request for proposal for the Defense Information Systems Agency's Processor Capacity Services System P procurement to provide hardware, software, equipment, maintenance, and operating system software on an as-needed basis for reliable, secure, and cost-effective processor infrastructure services and equipment purchases for DISA and other approved locations. The period of performance consists of a 5-year base period and five 1-year options. DITCO intends to negotiate a firm fixed price, single indefinite delivery indefinite quantity contract utilizing FAR Part 12 and Part 15 procedures for a full and open competitive procurement with proposals due June 22, 2022. Questions are due by June 1, 2022 and should be addressed to the contracting officer and contracting specialist listed. Attachments include the price model, quality assurance plan, DD Form 254, instructions to offerors, small business participation plan, and evaluation factors.
View the file
Other files
Show all 24
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Instructions
| Q&A INSTRUCTIONS: The purpose of these specific instructions is to expedite the process of answering questions. Please do not change the format of this document. |
| Complete the spreadsheet tab below named "Q&A" with all questions, comments, and recommendations about the RFP. Examples provided in the spreadsheet. **Please delete the examples before submitting your questions. |
COLUMN A: Complete the "Page" column. This is the page number from the RFP located in the upper right hand corner of the page. Do not include the total page number. Enter only the page number where the topic begins.
COLUMN B: Complete the "Section/Paragraph" column with the applicable section and paragraph number (if applicable) of the RFP. For example: B2, C, or L5.1.2. For a section and paragraph number reference do not place a dot between the letter and the first number. Additional subparagraph references should be separated with a dot regardless of the format in the RFP, for example, L5.1.2.a. Do not including any other extraneous identifiers or other information other then instructed here. If the reference is to a CLIN, Clause, Appendix, or Attachment etc. the entry goes in the next column. At a minimum you will always insert at least the Section letter A through J in this column.
COLUMN C: Complete the "CLIN/Clause/Other" column. Insert the CLIN, Clause, Provision, Appendix, or Attachment number. For example: CLIN 0001, 52.217-8, Appendix A, or Attachment L3. Insert the section letter only in the Column B. This column will be completed only when there is not a more precise RFP reference number. NOTES: CLINs are in Section B. Most sections contain clauses so ensure you reference the correct section.
COLUMN D: Complete the Questions/Comments/Recommendations column. Start the question by referencing the topic. This may help the sort process. For example: Minimum Qualifications Checklist or Performance Area 10. Then insert the question or comment.
Issues must be submitted to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist listed in L2.1.1
Q&A
| Question # | RFP Page | RFP Section/ Paragraph | CLIN/ Clause/Appendix/Attachment/Other | Questions/Comments/Recommendations | Response | |
| 1 | Evaluation Quantities | Exhibit B-1 | All CLINS for Server SLINS 5201AA thru 5201AD and potential ALL SLINS in the Price Evaluation Model | The following formula (at Tab Evaluation Quantities!Q1:AB8 and other cells) does not appear to accurately calculate the Offeror's Annual Price | ||
| =IF(AND(BTable!$R3>0,Q$2>BTable!$R3),(((F5*(1-$B$1))*BTable!F3)+((F5*$B$1)*(BTable!F3*(1-BTable!$Q3)))),F5*BTable!F3) | "Exhibit B-1 - PCSSP Evaluation Price Model v2" has been updated and will be provided via RFP Amendment 0002. |
| In BTable!F3:P6, We entered a Monthly Unit Price of $1.00 | |
| BTable Tab ===> |
| In BTable!Q3:Q6, We entered a Proposed Economic Life Discount % of .20 | |
| In BTable!R3:R6, We entered a Proposed Economic Life of 4 (Years) | |
| BTable Tab ===> |
| Proposed Economic Life Discount when applied through the formula results in a 3% discount not 20% as shown to the right in Column V where the OPTYR 1 Totals are displayed | Per the "Instructions" tab 7.b - 15% of the assests will be discounted amount for every year beyond the identfied economic life. | |
| The YR 1 Totals reflect one month of the YR 1 Monthly Price of $1.00/Month. The correct YR 1 Totals should be $12.00 representing 12 months X $1.00/Mo per Server | "Exhibit B-1 - PCSSP Evaluation Price Model v2" has been updated and will be provided via RFP Amendment 0002. | |
| Evaluation Quantities Tab ===> |
| Finally, the Government's Formula does not appear to accurately reflect the 6Mo EXT Totals for every SLIN. In Column AA of the Evaluation Quantities Tab, one SLIN is represented as $0.49 (50% of the Previus Years' value) and the next SLIN is represented as $0.97 (100% of the previous year's value | "Exhibit B-1 - PCSSP Evaluation Price Model v2" has been updated and will be provided via RFP Amendment 0002. | |
| Again, the values in the Evaluation Quantities Tab doe not apperar to accurately represent the "Total Cost" to the Government for 12 month's of Service Fees per Server. | "Exhibit B-1 - PCSSP Evaluation Price Model v2" has been updated and will be provided via RFP Amendment 0002. | |
| Evaluation Quantities Tab ===> |
| 2 | 91 of 92 | Section L - Clauses Incroporated by Reference | 52.222-46 Evaluation Of Compensation For Professional Employees | |||
| FEB 1993 | Will the Government consider removing the provision at 52.222-46 since it is not required, applicable, or optional for the acquisition of Commercial Items (CI). | The Government has removed FAR 52.222-46 from the Solicitation. | ||||
| 3 | PWS Page 43 | PWS 5.8 | B-Table: SLINs 5202AA - 5202AE and SLINs 5205AA - 5205AE | The memory requirements stated in the PWS differs from the SLINs listed on the B-Table. PWS 5.8 requests the offeror to provide three levels of DIMM. Level One at 32GB, Level Two at 64GB and Level Three at 128GB. However, the B-Table list requirements for Five Levels of Internal Memory. Please clarify requirements. Additionally, please clarify "the SLINs will however be comprised of two of these individual DIMMs" statement in the PWS. For example, is Level One for 32GB comprised of 2x16GB DIMMs (for a total of 32GB of memory per DIMM pair)? Or 2x32GB DIMMs (for a total of 64GB of memory per DIMM pair)? | "Exhibit B-1 - PCSSP Evaluation Price Model v2" has been updated and will be provided via RFP Amendment 0002. As stated in the Solicitation 5.8, "The government views the following as the current individual DIMM sizes for each chipset, the SLINs will however be comprised of two of these individual DIMMs." Per your example: Level One memory SLIN will consist of 2x32GB DIMMs (for a total of 64GB of memory per DIMM pair). | |
| 4 | PWS Page 43 ====> | |||||
| B-Table ====> | ||||||
| 5 | PWS, Addendix ONE | Page 1 | All CLINS for Server SLINS 5201AA thru 5201AD and potential ALL SLINS in the Price Evaluation Model | The subject solicitation states the minimum requirement for CPU Capacity /Type as being “Power 7 or higher” for Tier 1 and Tier 2 and “Power 8 or higher” for Tier 3 and Tier 4. IBM POWER 7 and IBM POWER 8 were first introduced in 2012 and 2014, respectively. IBM has officially announced End of Support for Power 7 as of 3/31/2019 and POWER 7+ as of 12/31/2020. IBM withdrew the POWER 8 server from Marketing in January 2022. Additionally, IBM POWER 8 servers will go End of Support on or about 12/31/2023. It appears that both IBM POWER 7 and Power 8 servers are End of Life (EOL) according to the Government’s requirement at PWS 5.6 Hardware. |
“…is not a product the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) has withdrawn from marketing/sale, and/or has not been otherwise designated as end-of-life (EOL) by the OEM.”
According to Exhibit B-1 of the Subject solicitation, the Government references Tier 1 and Tier 2 as E850 Servers, Tier 3 as E870 Servers, and Tier 4 as E880 servers. We understand these are the server models currently deployed at DISA Locations. The deployed Power 8 servers have been withdrawn from marketing and OEM support will end in 2023. The current marketed IBM Power server products are IBM Power 9 and Power 10.
| Will the Government update the the minimum requirements at Appendix ONE, page 1 to reflect the current marketed and supported IBM Power 9 and Power 10 Servers? | Exhibit B-1 contains the minimum technical requirements only. Proposed solutions by offerors must meet the requirements outlined in the entire PWS, including PWS Section 5.6, and proposed solution can exceed the minimum requirements outlined in Exhibit B-1. | ||||
| 6 | PWS 5.6 | Page 42 | All CLINS for Server SLINS 5201AA thru 5201AD and potential ALL SLINS in the Price Evaluation Model | The subject solicitation, at PWS 5.6 Hardware, allows the incumbent contractor to propose utilization of current hardware and gives DISA the discretion to request the utilization of current hardware, post award. |
"However, upon request by DISA, the Contractor may utilize current hardware inventory for initial provisioning where the current hardware is the latest technical version with the understanding that this hardware may be later replaced by new hardware. The Contractor may propose utilization of current hardware. In this requirement, current hardware is defined as hardware currently installed by the Contractor at a DISA operating location." This language was not in the Government's prior Solicitiation HC1028-17-R-0014 J-1, ZIPPCS PWS Attachment J-1.
Will the Government replace the current PWS 5.6 Paragraph with the language previously included in Solicitiation HC1028-17-R-0014 J-1, ZIPPCS PWS Attachment J-1 at the same PWS 5.6 Reference? To wit:
| 5.6 Hardware. 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. If the call order for capacity service is later cancelled, the hardware to support the service may be reutilized as long as the technology meets the criteria of the most current tier structure, is not a product the OEM has withdrawn from marketing/sale, and/or has not been otherwise designated as end-of-life (EOL) by the OEM. DISA has the final determination on re-use of hardware. | Paragraph 5.6 will be updated to remove the statement, "The Contractor may propose utilization of current hardware. In this requirement, current hardware is defined as hardware currently installed by the Contractor at a DISA operating location." An updated PWS will be provided via RFP Amendment 0002. | ||||
| 7 | PWS 5.6 | Page 42 | All CLINS for Server SLINS 5201AA thru 5201AD and potential ALL SLINS in the Price Evaluation Model | This requirement to allow the incumbent contractor to propose re-use of its currently deployed hardware and for DISA to request the incumbent re-utilize its currently deployed hardware seems to contradict the requirement that “…hardware to support the service may be reutilized as long as the technology… is not a product the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) has withdrawn from marketing/sale, and/or has not been otherwise designated as end-of-life (EOL) by the OEM.” |
| Will the Government clarify the apparent contradiction? | The Government's requirement is outlined clearly in PWS section 5.6. Paragraph 5.6 will be updated to remove the statement, "The Contractor may propose utilization of current hardware. In this requirement, current hardware is defined as hardware currently installed by the Contractor at a DISA operating location." An updated PWS will be provided via RFP Amendment 0002. | ||||
| 8 | PWS 5.6 | Page 42 | All CLINS for Server SLINS 5201AA thru 5201AD and potential ALL SLINS in the Price Evaluation Model | Should DISA desire to continue to utilize currently deployed assets, it may do so under the existing incumbent contract negating the need for re-use language in PWS 5.6. Historically, the Government has not ordered IBM Power servers in the first year of any awarded IBM Power Capacity Services contract making continued use of the incumbent’s deployed hardware a viable alternative under the existing contract, which has 3 remaining option years. It is clear, however, at some point during the term of the contract, DISA will require Power 9 and/or Power 10 servers. Changing the minimum requirement in APPENDIX One for “CPU Capacity /Type” to POWER 9 and/or Power 10 and replacing the current PWS 5.6 language provides all Offerors a fair opportunity to compete and a level playing field for pricing DISA’s requirements. |
The current minimum requirements for “CPU Capacity /Type” in APPENDIX One indicate products that are end-of-life in contradiction to the Governmnet's End of Life definition, the requirement for re-use clearly favors the incumbent and the language at PWS 5.6 reverses DISA’s long standing requirement to not allow the reuse of any hardware currently deployed at DISA Locations. This long-standing requirement ensured a fair opportunity for all Offerors in a Full and Open Competition. The language in the requirement establishes a price disadvantage for all Offerors except the incumbent. Only the incumbent may propose and only from the incumbent may DISA request re-use of currently deployed hardware. The language provides the incumbent contractor with an unfair price and operational advantage compared to other Offerors.
| How does the Government ensure a level playing field in the evaluation of Offers under a Best Value procurement? | Paragraph 5.6 will be updated to remove the statement, "The Contractor may propose utilization of current hardware. In this requirement, current hardware is defined as hardware currently installed by the Contractor at a DISA operating location." An updated PWS will be provided via RFP Amendment 0002. | ||||
| 9 | Pages 2, 4, 5 | Section M – Evaluation Factors for Award | All CLINS for Server SLINS 5201AA thru 5201AD and potential ALL SLINS in the Price Evaluation Model | The Offeror is concerned with manner and method the Government will use to evaluate all offerors’ proposals given the Government will allow the incumbent the advantage of proposing equipment currently deployed at DISA locations. as mentioned in previous questions, there are conflicting statements at PWS 5.6. (i.e. – allowing the reutilization of hardware that has reached End of Life). Upon further review of Section M – Evaluation Factors for Award and the relevant sections of the Performance Work Statement, The Offeror has the following questions: |
a. Consistent with M.1.1.9 Competitive Advantage for Use of Government Furnished Property, what method will the Government use to eliminate any competitive advantage resulting from the Offeror’s proposed “…utilization of current hardware.” (PWS 5.6)?
b. Will the Government assess a Technical/Management rating of Unacceptable (Red Color rating) for all offerors who propose Power 8 servers, which have been withdrawn from marketing, reached End of Support or will reach end of support within 12 months of contract award?
c. Will the Government assess a Technical Risk rating of Unacceptable for all offerors who propose Power 8 servers that are End of Life (see PWS 5.6) and will reach End of Support within 12 months of contract award?
d. With regard to the ratings terminology applicable to Tables M.2 and M.3, Will the Government identify Power 8 servers as a “Deficiency” for all offerors who propose to use or reuse Power 8 servers? Based on the Government’s definition of End of Life at PWS 5.6, will the Government identify “…a material failure of a proposal to meet a government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.” a. Paragraph 5.6 will be updated to remove the statement, "The Contractor may propose utilization of current hardware. In this requirement, current hardware is defined as hardware currently installed by the Contractor at a DISA operating location." An updated PWS will be provided via RFP Amendment 0002.
b. The Government will evaluate all offeror's proposals against provided PWS requirements and IAW Section M guidance.
c. The Government will evaluate all offeror's proposals against provided PWS requirements and IAW Section M guidance.
d. The Government will evaluate all offeror's proposals against provided PWS requirements and IAW Section M guidance.
10 B-Table Exhibit B-1 5203AA and 5206AA “High Availability (IBM Power HA Enterprise Edition) Exhibit B, B-Table, SLINs 5203AA and 5206AA “High Availability (IBM Power HA Enterprise Edition) are required to be priced “per installed socket”. IBM currently licenses and prices this software on a per core basis. If the Government changes the basis of pricing to “per licensed core” it will lower the price DISA pays for High Availability software capability as the core density per installed socket changes from Tier 1 to Tier 4. DISA can reduce excess capacity of licensed software and its total costs by changing the basis of pricing to “per licensed core”.
| Will the Goverment change the basis of pricing? | "Exhibit B-1 - PCSSP Evaluation Price Model v2" has been updated and will be provided via RFP Amendment 0002. | ||||
| 11 | Page 15 | section L – Instructions Conditions and Notices to Offerors | All CLINS for Server SLINS 5201AA thru 5201AD and potential ALL SLINS in the Price Evaluation Model | In section L – Instructions Conditions and Notices to Offerors, page 15, the Government provides the following instruction: |
“If DISA requests the Contractor utilize current hardware inventory, request the Contractor propose a discount percentage in the ‘B-Table’ under “Discount % for SLINs Utilizing Current Hardware”. This discount percentage would apply to the following SLINs:
For System P; SLINs 5201AA - 5201AD and 5204AA – 5204AD
This economic life discount would be applied to the Monthly Price of the applicable SLIN price, post-award, and that is the rate that would be billed at the task order level. The proposed discount percentage will not be included in the Total Evaluated Price for each requirement. During post award, any task order approved to use current hardware, would automatically be executed at the defined Economic Life Discounted price.”
The Offeror asks the following:
1. In the B-Table tab of Exhibit B-1 – PCSSP Price Model.xls.xls, what cell(s) are labeled “Discount % for SLINs Utilizing Current Hardware”? What is the Row and/or Column Reference to input this Value?
2. How will the Government ensure against unbalanced pricing through the application of “Discount % for SLINs Utilizing Current Hardware” and the “economic life discount”?
3. Are Offerors allowed to propose understated pricing?
4. If the Government intends to request utilization of the incumbent’s current inventory, shouldn’t the Government complete and publish a Justification for Other than Full and Open Competition and cancel this solicitation?
5. Can the Government explain this statement “The proposed discount percentage will not be included in the Total Evaluated Price for each requirement?
a. Does the Government mean to say that it will physically remove the value(s) an offeror places in the cell(s) designated “Discount % for SLINs Utilizing Current Hardware” to make a pre-award determination on Total Evaluated Price?
b. What does the Government mean when it says “…for each requirement.”?
6. Can the Government state the probability it will request the [incumbent] Contractor utilize current hardware inventory and for which year or years the Government may allow re-use if the incumbent’s proposal is selected for award?
7. The Government describes two discounts in Section L, “Discount % for SLINs Utilizing Current Hardware” and “economic life discount”. Are both discounts available to all Offerors?
8. Assuming an Offeror proposing IBM Power 9 servers has Total Evaluated Price less than or equal to the incumbent contractor’s Total Evaluated Price WITHOUT the “Discount % for SLINs Utilizing Current Hardware” and all ratings of Power 9 proposal are equal to or greater than the incumbent contractor, how will the Government evaluate the dollar value of the “Discount % for SLINs Utilizing Current Hardware” for award purposes?
9. Asked another way, if the Government’s Total Evaluated Price does not include “Discount % for SLINs Utilizing Current Hardware”, Why include the discount in the solicitation but not in the pre-award evaluation? 1. Section L will be updated via RFP Amendment 0002 to provide additional clarity.
2. Section L will be updated via RFP Amendment 0002 to provide additional clarity.
3. The Government will evaluate the Cost/Price Factor in accordance with RFP Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award 2.3.
4. Paragraph 5.6 will be updated to remove the statement, "The Contractor may propose utilization of current hardware. In this requirement, current hardware is defined as hardware currently installed by the Contractor at a DISA operating location." An updated PWS will be provided via RFP Amendment 0002.
5. Section L will be updated via RFP Amendment 0002 to provide additional clarity. 5a. Section L will be updated via RFP Amendment 0002 to provide additional clarity. 5b. Section L will be updated via RFP Amendment 0002 to provide additional clarity.
6. No.
7. Section L will be updated via RFP Amendment 0002 to provide additional clarity.
8. Section L will be updated via RFP Amendment 0002 to provide additional clarity.
9. Section L will be updated via RFP Amendment 0002 to provide additional clarity.
12 67 RFP 13. Other Pertinent Information or Special Considerations b. Identification of Non-Disclosure Requirements The PDF document shows an image of an embedded document for the referenced NDA document. Does the government require the NDA documents to be completed and submitted with the proposal? If so, please send the NDA document as it is not embedded in the PDF.
| If the NDA is required with proposal submission, please identifiy which volume and location it should be placed. | Yes, the Government requires the NDA to be completed and submitted. The NDA can be submitted under Volume VI - Contract Documentation. The attachment will be provided in Section J via RFP Amendment 0002. | |||||
| 13 | 67 | RFP 13. Other Pertinent Information or Special Considerations | e. Property Accountability | Similarly, this requirement contained an image of the EPL. If the government requires this document to be submitted with the proposal, please send the EPL and identify which volume and location it is required. | Yes, the Government requires the EPL to be completed and submitted. The NDA can be submitted under Volume VI - Contract Documentation. The attachment will be provided in Section J via RFP Amendment 0002. | |
| 14 | 11 | Section L - Instructions Conditions and Notices to Offerors.docx | L3.1. Narrative Summary | The Narrative Summary requested is not included in Table L.1 - Proposal Organization which identifies page limits. Does the Narrative Summary have a page limit? | Section L - Instructions, Conditions, and Notice to Offerors has been updated and provided via RFP Amendment 0002. | |
| 15 | 11 | Section L - Instructions Conditions and Notices to Offerors.docx | L3.2. Table of Contents | L3.2 instruction repeats the request from L.3.0 Volume I Executive Summary item letter (c). Please confirm the Table of Contents is only needed prior to the Read Me file and not reiterated after the Narrative Summary. | Table of Contents required as currently listed in Section L - Instructions, Conditions, and Notice to Offerors. | |
| 16 | 16-18 | L.7.1 Small Business Participation Plan | This type of contract and this specific contract seems to not align with the small business objectives outlined in the PWS. While the small business 25% goal is achievable, the soci-economic mandatory goals are hard to achieve with this type of contract. This contract requires substantial financing and brings significant risk that the soci-economic companies in the small business plan would have challenges meeting, as well as the increased risk the government would then assume after award. The other challenge is equipment is shipped from the OEM to DISA, and there is very little opportunity for any company to leverage a soci-economic small businesses in the day to day operation of the P-Series contract. Will the government remove the mandatory goals for the soci-economic statuses currently in the PWS? | No. If the Offeror cannot meet the Minimum Quantitative Requirements (MQRs) for all small business categories listed in the solicitation, they shall provide detailed explanations when the percentages proposed fall short of the MQR. As a reminder, the Government generally does not recognize zero percent as a goal. However, if zero percent goals are submitted, they must be supported with a detailed explanation and/or a mitigation plan to address how the offeror will achieve participation where zero goals are cited. If the offeror does not submit a detailed rationale/explanation, the zero percentage will be deemed unacceptable. | ||
| 17 | N/A | Section L | The Government does not ask for Past Performance as part of the proposal requirements. This introduces risk to the program, and seems to be noncompliant with FAR Subpart 15.304 Evaluation factors and significant subfactors. Can the government please amend the solicitaion to require Past Performance. | The Government is compliant with FAR 15.304 and sees no risk in not evaluating Past Performance. In accordance with FAR 15.304(c)(3)(iii), the Government has determined that the evaluation of past performance information as an evaluation criterion will not support meaningful comparison and discrimination for processor capacity infrastructure as a capacity service to meet current and future Department of Defense (DoD) requirements across the Defense Information System Network, and any other networks utilized by DoD users. Evaluating past performance as a key discriminator under this BVTO acquisition, would not provide any value to the Government. | ||
| 18 | 6; 11 | Table L.1: L.3.1 | Section L.3.1 asks for a narrative summary as part of Volume I of proposals, but this is not listed in Table L.1 - Proposal Organization. Can the government please clarify if a narrative summary is required? | The Narrative Summary is required as requested in Section L - Instructions, Conditions, and Notice to Offerors. | ||
| 19 | 6; 11 | Table L.1: L.3.1 | Section L.3.1 asks for a narrative summary as part of Volume I of proposals, but this is not listed in Table L.1 - Proposal Organization. A page limit for such a summary is also not included. If this C is required can the Government please suppy a page limit for this section of the proposal? | The Narrative Summary is required as requested in Section L - Instructions, Conditions, and Notice to Offerors. There will be no page limit for the Narrative Summary. | ||
| 20 | 43 | M.1.2.1 : PWS 6.1.1.2; PWS 6.1.1.2.1 | M.2.1.1 states: "Subfactor 1: Technical Solution: System P. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s ability to provide a management infrastructure solution to include the following: provisioning capabilities, hardware diagnostics, hardware monitoring, event logging, image repositories and additional back-office processes that deliver processor capabilities. (Reference: PWS 6.1.1.2 and 6.1.2.) " Section 6.1.1. states "The Contractor-provided infrastructure will be managed and maintained by the Contractor." However, 6.1.1.2.1 states: "Contractor management and maintenance is not required for System P provisioning management infrastructure." These sections contradict each other. Can the Government please clarify. | PWS Paragraph 6.1.1.2.1 has been deleted via RFP Amendment 0002. | ||
| 21 | Exhibit B-1 - PCSSP Evaluation Price Model.xlsx | Reference PWS 5.4.1 CONUS locations and 5.4.2 Future locations | PWS Sections 5.4.1 CONUS locations and 5.4.2 Future locations identify specific current and future locations that are CONUS only. There are no locations identified for OCONUS. Offeror requests the government remove OCONUS evaluation quantities from the Evaluation Price Model, specifically these lines: |
B-Table Tab: CLINs 5204, 5205, and 5206 (Lines 25 through 46) Evaluation Quantities Tab: CLINs 5204, 5205, and 5206 (Lines 27 through 48)
| Total Evaluated Price Tab: CLINs 5204, 5205, and 5206 (Lines 17 through 19) | No. DISA provides operational capability to Mission Partners globally. This means we have to be able to provide processor capacity at both CONUS and OCONUS sites on demand regardless of what is deployed today. | |||||
| 22 | Exhibit B-1 - PCSSP Evaluation Price Model.xlsx | Evaluations Quantities Tab Proposed Economic Life percentage | Will the Government consider changing the value in Cell B-1, Evaluation Quantities Tab, Exhibit B-1 from 0.15 to 1.0 given the Government is evaluating 1 server in each of 3 of the 4 Server Tiers? 15% of the 12-Server Total being evaluated means Offerors Economic Life Discount is applied to a total server quantity of 0.15 servers for Tiers 1,2 and 4 and a server quantity of 1.35 servers for Tier 3. | No. Regardless if the quantity is 1 or 100, the percentage impact of economic discount is the same for the overall price evaluation. | ||
| 23 | 9 | Section L - Instructions Conditions and Notices to Offerors.docx | L.2.4 Electronic Offers f. Due Date/Time. | |||
| Extension request | Does the government have an expected date of release to the questions submitted by bidders? Offeror requires sufficient time to process the answers to questions which materially impact our approach and to evaluate solutions that can best meet DISA requirements. |
| Therefore, we respectfully request a three (3) week extension from release of answers to questions to complete a compliant response. | Please refer to dates provided via RFP Amendment 0002. | ||||
| 24 | 6 | Section L - Instructions Conditions and Notices to Offerors.docx | Table L.1 - Proposal Organization | L.6.0 Volume IV – Supply Chain Risk Management (SCRM) Volume (Evaluation Factor 3) asks offerors to provide an organization-wide SCRM plan which identifies and analyzes the risk of failure points within the supply chain and how the offeror is prepared to deal with those risks and execute in accordance with Committee on National Security Systems (CNSSI) 1253 and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800-53. |
Offeror has worked with multiple federal and defense agencies to create our comprehensive organizational SCRM plan to meet the requirements. However, our plan exceeds the 20 page limit.
Offeror requests DISA remove the page limit for the SCRM plan or increase the page limit to at least 35 pages. Page Count has increased to 35 pages via RFP Amendment 0002.
image1.tmp image2.tmp image3.tmp image4.png image5.png image6.tmp
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .