B4_Amendment_01.pdf

Amendment 01, 06/15/2017

Questions and Responses:

1) Question: There is a conflict in the size requirement on page 1 of the RFQ document. It states unrestricted, but then lists a NAICS code with a small business size of 1250 employees. Is there a small business designation and is the size 1250? Response: This RFQ is unrestricted. We are mandated to put the size standard in a solicitation.

2) Question: Training – what is the desired training on the new CM 7? Response: This would be administrator training. Address anything that is new or changed in this release from and administration perspective.

3) Question: Telephone set installation – all of the 9608’s are listed under Indianapolis, however, in the

CLIN list each site has set installation in the description. Will you break down the number of sets by location? Do you want the vendor to install them (unbox, install at the desktop)? Response: All 9608's will be delivered to Indianapolis. No installation required.

4) Question: First Day of business – there does not appear to be a requirement for onsite support First Day of Business. Do you require support at the Indianapolis site? How many days/hours? Can the support be remote for first day of business? Response: DFAS would expect first day of business support. Can be either onsite or remote. Onsite is preferred.

5) Question: Section 4 – Place of Performance – 3 of the sites have the same address in Cleveland, OH.

Please provide the correct addresses for Columbus and Limestone. Response:

DFAS Columbus

3990 East Broad Street

Columbus, OH, 43213

DFAS Limestone

27 Arkansas Rd

Limestone, ME, 04751

6) Question: Is there remote access today? What type? Does DFAS require the vendors to include an

ION Defender SA5610 for remote Access? Response: Remote access is via ION modem. DFAS will provide access to the modem.

7) Question: Please provide more detail around the requirements of ‘ability to accomplish the requirements’.

a. Does the Government want relevant past performance examples provided within the technical response or in a section separate from the technical response to the PWS?

b. Does the Government want draft project plans included?

c. Can the Government provide examples of partner responses that will affect the

Governments perception of our ability to accomplish positive evaluation rating?

d. What level of detail does the Government require for teaming partners that are needed to accomplish the implementation of the project?

e. Does the Government want to see details regarding the inclusion of teaming partners relevant to the project CLIN requirements.

Response for a-e: The basis for award selection is Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA). Quotes are requested only from Avaya or Avaya authorized re-sellers. Provide proof of a teaming arrangement with Avaya and an Avaya reseller certification. Describe how the period of performance will be met.

8) Question: On page 31, the Notice of Price Evaluation Preference for HUBZone is not marked

X. Please include this clause. Response: RFQ, page 31, FAR 52.212-5, “Contract Terms and Conditions

Required to Implement Statutes or Executive Orders -- Commercial Items (Jan 2017).” (12)(i) 52.219-4

“Notice of Price Evaluation for HUBZone Small Business Concerns (Oct 2014)” is marked and included.

9) Question: The RFQ keeps referencing 7.0 but is DFAS actually asking for Release 7.1? Response:

Avaya CM 7.0 is the latest version approved by DISA. This is the version we must use.

10) Question: The Indianapolis, Cleveland and Columbus site configuration system recommendation is

Avaya's server using the Dell R630 instead of the DL360G9 server. The price is the same. That is different from what is being asked for. Can DFAS please specify this to the bidders? Response: Both of these server models were approved for use by DISA in the evaluation of CM 7.0. Either is acceptable to

DFAS.

11) At Rome and Limestone the Avaya design tool is now providing the DL360G8 server instead of the

G9 server. The G8 server is a special promotion that Avaya has and is priced XXXX less than the G9.

The reason for this is Avaya is no longer using the G8's and is moving to the G9 platform. If DFAS uses the older server it will result in a difference of XXXX across the 2 sites. However, DFAS would be installing a platform that is not going to be used any longer by Avaya. The concern is that some of the bidders may bid the G8 servers giving their bid a significant discount over the bidders using the G9 server platform. Can DFAS specify to all of the bidders the server type request for all 5 locations so this can be a level playing field? It is highly recommended the G9 servers be used by DFAS so you have the same platform at every site. No reason to install a platform that is end of life. Response: Both of these server models were approved for use by DISA in the evaluation of CM 7.0. DFAS requires the servers identified in RFQ attachment 1 or equivalent.

12) There has been a changed in how base licenses are now upgraded. They were previously included in the overall license count and now they are not. This results in a reduction of upgrade licenses needed.

This reduces the licenses count to 17,513 from 17,903. Response: The DFAS requirement is that our current licenses be upgraded. If that calculation has changed, the bidder should make this clear in their bid. DFAS has no knowledge about how licenses are upgraded within Avaya.

The quotation due date and time is unchanged.