RFP__M00264-13-R-0047_--_EMERGENCY_MANAGEMENT_INCIDENT_MANAGEMENT_SYSTEM_(EMIMS)_-_Amendment_2.pdf

M9549413RCCU202

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is:

1 - To answ er the questions received on or before Thursday, July 25, 2013 at 4:00 P.M (EST) in regards to the solicitation; 2 - To remove L-4.3.1.4 from page 68, and M-3.1.1.4 from page 74 of the original RFP; 3 - To edit paragraph 8.17 in Section C, page 22, to remove "...3.1 - 3.12..." and replace it w ith "...8.1 - 8.12"; 4 - To edit paragraph 1.4 in Section C, bullet #1, page 20, to remove "...analysis, COTS adaptation, integration, training, and testing."; 5 - To remove the follow ing sentence "How ever, the Contractor shall support and advise the Government regarding configuration management and COOP efforts for EMIMS including the softw are and data in Government’s test and production environment." from paragraph 8.11.1, Section C, page 20; 6 - To edit paragraph 8.8 in Section C, page 20; 7 - To edit CLIN 0002; 8 - To add criteria L-4.3.1.14 to Volume I, and factor M-3.1.1.14 to Factor 1; and 9 - To EXTEND the proposal DUE DATE and TIME to Tuesday, August

20, 2013, 10:00AM EST.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 54

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 08-Aug-2013

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X M00264-13-R-0047

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10-Jul-2013

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer X is extended, is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

08-Aug-2013

CODE

COMMANDING GENERAL - REG CON OFFICE NCR

2010 HENDERSON RD

BOZADJIAN, GEORGE

QUANTICO VA 22134-5001

M00264 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

M00264-13-R-0047

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

USMC RFP# M00264-13-R-0047: “USMC EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT INCIDENT

MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (EMIMS)”

Questions & Answers

1. Question:

I was hoping that you could clarify the Small Business Set Aside restrictions for this RFP.

The NAICS code 511210 has a size standard of $35.5 M, but I was wondering if large businesses are allowed to sub on this work? We are slightly over with a $40 M a year average but we are less than 500 employees. I would appreciate any information that you can provide, as we are trying to determine if we are eligible to participate in this RFP?

Answer:

Large businesses are allowed to perform as subcontractors as long as they perform less than 51 percent of the contract.

Reference FAR 52.219-1(a)(3) – The small business size standard for a concern which submits an offer in its own name, other than on a construction or service contract, but which proposes to furnish a product which it did not itself manufacture, is 500 employees.

2. Question:

A large business could sub on this as long as they did a minority of the work, correct?

Answer:

Yes. Please see FAR 52.219-14 – Limitations on Subcontracting (NOV 2011).

3. Question:

We are teaming with a SB to satisfy the solicitation SB-Set Aside direction. Is it appropriate to ask you to confirm the estimated value published by Centurion of $17,000,000.00?

Answer:

USMC Regional Contracting Office is not affiliated with “Centurion” and does not agree with Centurion’s publication(s).

4. A) Question:

Page 22 – 8.17 – We believe this contains a typo and should read 8.1 – 8.12. Please clarify.

Page 22, paragraph 8.17, should read: “…identified above in 8.1 – 8.12 to be fielded within ….”

B) Question:

Although the RFP does not mention hosting, we assume the solution will be hosted by the Marines on NMCI. However, Section 8.7 states that the system will need to be accessible to key decision makers, both DoD and civilian, which would infer that the solution will be hosted externally to the NMCI because we are not aware of civilian access to NMCI. Please clarify.

Answer:

The system will be accessible to key decision makers, both DOD and DOD civilian and DOD Support Contractors by use of their CAC. Non- DOD by data exchange.

C) Question:

Page 68, L-4.3.1.4 – This section refers to Table 1 of the PWS, which we are unable to identify. Where is this located?

L-4.3.1.4 on page 68 and M-3.1.1.4 on page 74 have been deleted.

5. Question:

[Company Name] is a small woman owned business. We are trying to determine whether to bid on this opportunity with another company (large business) that would do most if not all of the work detailed in the [RFP]. Is it possible to team with another company in this way? Or, what would be required of all teaming parties?

Answer:

As stated on page 1, block 10, of the RFP, this requirement is 100% (percent) Small Business Set-Aside.

That is, a Small Business must perform more than 51% (percent) of the work stated in the requirement. The remaining 49% (percent) can be performed by a large and/or small business sub-contractor(s). Please see FAR 52.219-14 – Limitations on Subcontracting (NOV 2011) for additional details.

6. Reference: RFP Section C – PWS – 8.1 Security Engineering Support second paragraph references:

"The second area of effort is to provide a technical analysis of impacts or risks associated with specific technologies specific technologies and IA strategies currently employed with WebEOC."

A) Question:

What is the relationship of this ESI developed COTS product to the "COTS adaptation" requirement found in PWS Section 1.4 - General Information - Bullet #1?

Answer:

There is no relationship between ESI and COTS adaptation.

B) Question:

Is WebEOC the legacy application this solicitation is intended to replace?

Answer:

No.

C) Question:

Is WebEOC the desired COTS Solution that should be adapted?

No.

D) Question:

Is WebEOC a COTS application our proposed solution will be required to integrate with?

Answer:

Yes.

E) Question:

To provide an adequate technical solution and determine the appropriate level of effort for PWS Section 8.1, it is necessary for Offerors to be provided WebEOC details reverenced in this section. How does the government propose providing the "specific technologies and IA strategies currently employed with WebEOC" referenced in this requirement?

Answer:

Government will provide Type Accreditation for WebEOC and vendor should read DODI 8510.01. At the conclusion of the C&A effort a Type Accreditation will be signed by the AO/DAA as prescribed in the

DODI 8510.01.

7. Question:

I was just reviewing the RFP posted and was hoping to get one quick question answered. It states the need for the EMIMS would be for 6 USMC locations. Is the $12,000 mentioned what is budgeted for this entire initiative for all 6 locations or is the $12,000 a budget per location?

Answer:

The $12,000 mentioned is what the Government budgetted for Travel only for all 6 locations. The $12,000 IS NOT per location. The $12,000 is per Travel CLIN that includes ALL 6 locations..

8. A) Question:

Has MCICOM thought about using the BMC Software Remedy IT Service Management Suite as the software application to be used enterprise-wide for this requirement? The Marine Corps NOSC has made a major commitment to the Remedy ITSM suite, which includes a Service Catalog, Incident, Change and Asset Management applications.

Answer:

No. The offerors can propose whateveer system they believe satisfies the needs of the Government.

B) Question:

How many users are expected for the chosen software at each site?

There are a maximum of about 250 possible users at each site.

9. A) Question:

Is COTS software previously delivered to government customers excluded from the conflict of interest provisions set forth in Section H-1 Organizational Conflict of Interest? Reference: Section K, DFARS 252.227-7028, Technical Data or Computer Software Previously Delivered to the Government

Answer:

Section H-1.6 has been deleted. Moreover, we do require the submission of the information required under DFARS 252.227-7028.

What specific C&A deliverables in Section C-4.0 are required to be created by the contractor and which deliverables will be the responsibility of the government personnel that are tasked with operating/maintaining the system?

Answer:

The Contractor is required to provide IA documentation planning, preparation and review support, technical expertise support, and general IA process management support for the DoD Information Assurance Certification and Accreditation Process (DIACAP).

C) Question:

Will all C&A activities of Section C-4.0 (DIP, SIP, and IV&V activities) be expected to be accomplished for all security controls for the system within the 140 hours annually as per CDRL x004 Information Assurance Labor?

Answer:

Yes.

D) Question:

Will the contractor be expected to perform the C&A activities listed in the PWS for the entire EMIMS system or just the web based application being procured on this proposal?

Answer:

Just the web based application being procured.

E) Question:

Will the C&A activities be based upon a full system accreditation culminating in an ATO for the system or will it be based on obtaining C&A documentation in support of a type accreditation for the web based application being procured?

Answer:

It will be based on Type Accreditation (full ATO) for the web based application being procured.

F) Question:

Per Section C-4.1.7, Contactor will obtain and maintain an MCCAST account. Will the contractor be expected to develop and maintain C&A documentation and artifacts within the MCCAST system or just monitor for security significant events that will need attention?

Answer:

Contractor will be expected to develop and maintain C&A documentation and artifacts within the MCCAST system and monitor for security significant events.

G) Question:

The DON DIACAP Handbook calls for every DON Information System C&A package to include a risk assessment in the system security documentation. Will the contractor be expected to determine the level of operational risk by assessing the operational procedures and safeguards (security controls), as well as system and network security design features to be evaluated to determine their effectiveness and ability to offset risk as part of the 140 hours annual IA labor?

Answer:

Yes.

H) Question:

Will the contractor be expected to provide personnel to function as the system IAM to ensure that MCCAST systems and networks are being maintained at an acceptable level of risk?

Yes.

10. A) Question:

Is the annual limit for the entire project travel CLIN $12,000?

Answer:

No. The limit for the Travel CLINS (0004, 1003, 2003, 3003, and 4003) is $12,000 per CLIN for all six (6) locations.

B) Question:

Is there any travel planned for the IA process and maintenance requirements?

Answer:

Such travel is possible. There are no restrictions on the type of work accomplished during the CLIN travel.

C) Question:

Is the annual limit of labor hours included in CLIN 0005 of 140 for the IA and maintenance process? That seems drastically low for the requirements listed. Can the contractor propose a different labor amount?

Answer:

Yes, the contractor may propose a different labor amount. However, the government will evaluate the cost and benefits of the different labor amount and determine the best-value to the government.

D) Question:

Is the intent of the Marine Corps to make EMIMS a web application to reside within the MCEITS domain?

If not, is there a preference?

Answer:

Yes.

E) Question:

If the entire project is to be web based, will it be necessary for hardware to be installed at 6 locations?

Wouldn’t a web-based application be able to operate from one central location for all?

Answer:

No, it is not necessary for hardware to be installed at 6 locations. Architecture to be provided to the winner at the PAC.

Yes, a web-based application may be able to operate from one central location for all. However, Government desires for 6 locations for COOP.

F) Question:

Are the Marine Corps providing all hardware for installation or will that be covered in the contract via the

ODC CLIN?

Answer:

The Marine Corps is providing all hardware.

G) Question:

Will the Validator be provided or will the winning contractor be required to pay for the validator's service?

Validator will be provided.

H) Question:

There are no ODC costs listed, is the government providing hardware on which to install the application?

Answer:

Yes.

I) Question:

As a web application, would a primary and a COOP site be enough as the application could be accessed from the six locations?

Answer:

No.

J) Question:

Is EMIMS going to be a web application only or is there a desire to install a client on workstations?

Answer:

EMIMS is going to be a web application only. There is no desire to install the software on individual work stations.

K) Question:

What type of accreditation is desired, system or site?

Answer:

Neither system nor site. Type accreditation for the web based software being procured. There are several different types of accreditation as detailed in the DODI 8510.01. For this particular requirement, a Type Accreditation will be completed.

L) Question:

Will the winning contractor be required to install a suite into a COOP site or is the government responsible for that installation?

No, the 6 sites provide COOP.

11. A) Question:

C-8.10 – The mapping capability must be able to leverage and display existing Marine Corps authoritative installation geospatial data, which is stored and managed on an ESRI platform using ESRI standard data formats.

1) What versions of ESRI software are being used to manage existing Marine Corp authoritative installation geospatial data?

2) What are the specific ESRI APIs and Data Formats that are required and can we get details on those?

3) How is current ESRI data being consumed/visualized?

Answer:

The information requested in the questions above are not required for the purposes of writing a proposal and will be provided to the winning contractor as Government Furnished Information (GFI).

C-8.10 – The mapping capability must be able to leverage and display existing Marine Corps authoritative installation geospatial data, which is stored and managed on an ESRI platform using ESRI standard data formats.

What software application, including version, is map data or geo object data currently being stored in?

Please also include data / file types for the data.

Answer:

Any information in addition to paragraph C-8.10 info will be provided to the winning contractor as GFI.

C) Question:

C-8.8, 8.9 – The Contractor’s application shall provide near real-time send and receive exchange of emergency incident information among Marine Corps emergency management command sites and local, state and federal emergency management partners, What are the current format(s) for emergency response information coming from partner civilian jurisdiction organizations?

Answer:

All USMC installation addressed in this PWS communicate through data exchange with outside agencies (local, state and federal emergency management partners) who are using WebEOC.

D) Question:

C-8.8, 8.9 – The Contractor’s application shall provide near real-time send and receive exchange of emergency incident information among Marine Corps emergency management command sites and local, state and federal emergency management partners, What are the data specifications for near real-time send and receive exchange of emergency incident information and a sample of the data coming from partner civilian jurisdiction organizations.

Answer:

All USMC installation addressed in this PWS communicate through data exchange with outside agencies (local, state and federal emergency management partners) who are using WebEOC.

E) Question:

C-8.5, 8.6, 8.7 – On what network is EMIMS to be hosted on?

Answer:

EMIMS is to be hosted on NMCI or Next Gen network.

F) Question:

C-8.8 – The Contractor’s application shall provide near real-time send and receive exchange of emergency incident information among Marine Corps emergency management command sites and local, state and federal emergency management partners, including the following views: Map View of Incident & Operational activity view.

- What data is required to be displayed in the Operational Activity View?

- When the Map View of Incidents and Operational Activity View are combined, is this view considered the common operating picture?

- Do near-real time assets involved in Emergency Management Response need to be included in these views?

Will be provided to the winning contractor as GFI.

G) Question:

PWS C-8.8 – Are the external links to Government identified incident management applications that are mentioned in section 8.8 of the PWS, simply web links or is there a requirement to integrate those applications with the EMIMS application? Please provide further definition on the desired end-state of external links.

Answer:

All USMC installation addressed in this PWS communicate with outside agencies (local, state and federal emergency management partners) who are using WebEOC. In addition, as stated in 8.8 all other external links will be provided to the winning contractor as GFI.

H) Question:

C-8.8 – The Contractor shall install, configure, and provision a minimum of six interoperability links per Marine Corps node with external links to Government identified incident management application(s).

1) What is the total number of "interoperability links" that need to be installed, configured and provisioned across the 6 Marine Corps Nodes?

2) Please provide reference information on the volume of data expected to be received per Marine Corp node?

Answer:

There is no specific number of links and volume expected. The volume of data is limited by the enterprise network, and limits of data should not be an inhibitor to the system. Architecture to be provided to the winner at the PAC. Upon contract award, the full list of requirements and notional architecture will be provided.

I) Question:

C-8.10 – The application shall include, but not be limited to, the following capabilities among its features:

standard navigational and annotation tools…

Is the request for standard navigational tools related to being able to navigate the mapping capability or to provide navigation for the users?

Answer:

It is related to providing navigation for the users.

J) Question:

C-8.10 – The application shall include, but not be limited to, the following capabilities among its features:

standard navigational and annotation tools…

Does the "standard navigational tools" requirement need to provide automated navigation (i.e., Google Maps Directions) or just allow navigation of the user interface capability?

Answer:

Just allow navigation of the user interface capability.

K) Question:

C-8.5, 8.6, 8.7 – How long does data in EMIMS need to be archived for and is it the contractor’s responsibility to maintain the data archive? Is there an aging off policy for the data after a certain period of time?

Answer:

- EMIMS needs to be archived for 10 years, and it is the contractor’s responsibility to maintain the data archives.

- There is no aging off policy for EMIMS.

L) Question:

C-8.5, 8.6, 8.7 – Does the data on EMIMS need to persist for future access or does EMIMS just need to visualize information from other emergency incident reporting systems.

Answer:

Data needs to persist for future access.

M) Question:

L-4.2.2 Proposal Format – Proposals must be submitted on 8½ by 11 inch page size using a Times New Roman font size no smaller than 12 point.

Does the 12 point font size apply to all text, including tables, callouts, pull quotes, figure captions, graphics, headers, footers, page numbers, etc.?

Answer:

Yes. Font size shall be NO SMALLER THAN 12 POINT.

N) Question:

L-1.5 – The Government intends to award a single Firm Fixed Price (FFP) C-Type Contract...

How does a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) C-Type Contract differ from a Firm Fixed Price Contract?

Answer:

An FFP C-Type Contract implies that the award will be what is commonly referred to as a regular firm-fixed-price contract. See DFARS 204.7003(a)(3)(iii).

O) Question:

C-8.3 – Section 8.13 of the PWS requests Informal Communication capabilities such as chat and Twitter.

- Is the requirement to integrate twitter feeds with the EMIMS application?

- Is the requirement to include a chat capability inside the application or to connect to an external chat tool (e.g., Google chat, Skype, etc).

Answer:

- No. The requirement does not require integrating Twitter feeds with the EMIMS application.

- The requirement is to include chat capability inside the application.

P) Question:

- Is it a requirement to host all components of the EMIMS system on a USMC network?

- Are publicly available mapping capabilities (e.g., Bing Maps, Open Layers, Google Maps, etc) accessible from the network the USMC intends to field the EMIMS system on? If they are accessible, can they be used as part of a proposed solution or will all components of the EMIMS system need to be self contained in a “disconnected” fashion from the publicly available internet.

Answer:

- Yes.

- No, review paragraph C-8.10 for product mapping capabilities.

Q) Question:

PWS C-8.10 – The application shall have the ability to display both imagery (raster) data and feature (vector) data in industry standard GIS formats. The mapping capability must be able to leverage and display existing Marine Corps authoritative installation geospatial data, which is stored and managed on an ESRI platform using ESRI standard data formats.

Specifically what is the Marine Corp's authoritative installation geo data composed of?

Any information in addition to that which is contained in paragraph C-8.10 will be provided to the winning contractor as GFI.

R) Question:

C-8.17 – The only identifiable portion of the PWS with a section C-3.0 does not have sub-categories of 3.1-

3.12. Please clarify the specific sections being referenced and the specific deliverables required.

Answer:

Page 22, paragraph 8.17, should read: “…identified above in 8.1 – 8.12 to be fielded within ….”

S) Question:

General Tech Question – How many unique users will require access to the EMIMS system at each USMC Node?

Answer:

There will be a maximum of about 250 possible users at each USMC Node.

T) Question:

C-8.1 – The Security Engineering SME support will be in the nature of specific technical questions or problems being presented to the Contractor with a…

What is the requirement for user authentication within EMIMS? Is there any standard to reference (e.g.

LDAP, PKI, etc.) or is this open to definition?

Answer:

No it is not open to definition. It is PKI on NMCI systems and log in name and password on non-NMCI systems.

U) Question:

Section B and various PWS sections – There are a number of IA tasks noted in the PWS. What CLIN should these IA tasks be mapped against?

Answer:

CLINs 0005, 1004, 2004, 3004, and 4004.

V) Question:

Section B and various PWS sections – Are the 140 hours identified in CLIN tables supposed to cover the level of effort for all IA tasks listed in PWS Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8?

Answer:

Yes.

W) Question:

L.4.3.1.4 – Since there is not a "table 1" in the PWS, is the offer to assume the bulleted list of topics found under Section 1.1 Scope is the "Activities" intended to be referenced in "table 1"?

Answer:

L-4.3.1.4 on page 68 and M-3.1.1.4 on page 74 have been deleted.

X) Question:

PWS C-8.11.2.1 – Please confirm this Attachment is outside of the 15 page limit for Volume 1.

The attachment is outside the 15 page limit.

Y) Question:

C-8.11.1 & 8.9 – Please clarify whether or not the contractor is to provide full EMIMS Systems Disaster Recovery / COOP capability as required in PWS 8.9 or if the Government is providing COOP solution and contractor is to provide support and advice as specified in PWS 8.11.

Answer:

The Government is providing COOP solution and contractor is to provide support and advice as specified in PWS 8.11.1.

Z) Question:

PWS C-8.0 – While some 8.X sub-sections lend themselves to IV&V of SW/Solution Features, many of the activities appear to be ones where IV&V of the requirement should likely not be performed – such as, but not limited to:

8.5 Facility, Travel & ODC Requirements

8.11 Maintenance and Training

8.12 Program Management

8.17 System Fielding Plan of Action & Milestones.

Will the government please confirm its intent for IV&V to be performed on all 8.X PWS Activities listed under the 8.0 Perform Verification and Validation Support requirement?

Answer:

The 8.5, 8.11, 8.12 and 8.17 do not depict IV&V activities but rather how the contractor should conduct the activities titled.

AA) Question:

C-8.5, 8.6, 8.7 – Will a proposal that recommends hosting the EMIMS solution to PWS Sections 8.5 - 8.7 in a virtual private cloud (e.g., Terramark, Amazon Web Services Gov Cloud, and Google Compute Engine) be acceptable?

Or will this be in a USMC or other DoD data center?

If NO,

1) What, if any Hardware will the Contractor be responsible for providing for the 6 fielded nodes?

2) What, if any Hardware will the Contractor be responsible for providing for the "suitable infrastructure to manage, test and validate program requirements"?

Answer:

No it will not be acceptable. Hosting the EMIMS solution will be in a USMC or other DoD data center.

1) Contractors will not be responsible for providing hardware.

2) Contractors will not be responsible for providing hardware.

AB) Question:

PWS C-8.1 – “The second area of effort is to provide a technical analysis of impacts or risks associated with specific technologies specific technologies and IA strategies currently employed with WebEOC.”

1) What is the relationship of this ESI developed COTS product to the "COTS adaptation" requirement found in PWS Section 1.4 - General Information - Bullet #1?

2) Is WebEOC the legacy application this solicitation is intended to replace?

3) Is WebEOC the desired COTS Solution that should be adapted?

4) Is WebEOC a COTS application our proposed solution will be required to integrate with?

5) To provide an adequate technical solution and determine the appropriate level of effort for PWS Section 8.1, it is necessary for Offerors to be provided WebEOC details reverenced in this section. How does the government propose providing the "specific technologies and IA strategies currently employed with WebEOC" referenced in this requirement?

Answer:

1) There is no relationship between ESI and COTS adaptation.

2) No.

3) No.

4) All USMC installation addressed in this PWS communicate through data exchange with outside agencies (local, state and federal emergency management partners) who are using WebEOC.

5) Government will provide Type Accreditation for WebEOC and vendor should read DODI 8510.01.

12. A) Question:

Page 3 of 77 – Section B – Supplies or Services and Prices – Item No 0002: EMIMS Software License Fees; Enterprise Licenses for six (6) locations to accommodate multiple installation as well as multiple users per location.

QUESTION: Please share the estimated number of users requiring web-based access to EMIMS across all six (6) locations/sites (or) at each location/site.?

Answer:

There will be a maximum usage of about 1500 possible users from across all Marine Corps installations.

B) Question:

Page 13 of 77 – Section 1.2 – Expected Outcome: The Deputy Commandant for Installations and Logistics (DC I&L) and Commander, Marine Corps Installations Command (MCICOM) expect to gain efficient, high quality, customer-oriented contractor technical support for all EMIMS users located worldwide. Contracting for these services will allow I&L and MCICOM staff to focus on providing improved emergency management services to the Commander, MCICOM, Regional Installations Commanders, Commanders at Marine Corps Installations, and Marines and their families, while at the same time, reducing cost through innovative applications by the contractor.

QUESTION: This section only describes technical support and does not mention the actual product. Is the outcome more than just support?

Answer:

See Section C-1.1 Scope.

C) Question:

Page 14 of 77 – Section 1.4 – General Information: A U.S. Government employee, Program Manager, shall be assigned to the contractor team to provide oversight and analysis of the effort, and the team shall include expert personnel with experience and knowledge of performing information assurance, analysis, COTS adaptation, integration, training, and testing.

QUESTION: IA, training are mentioned as a CLIN, but analysis, COTS adaptation, and testing are not.

Should there be a CLIN for analysis, COTS adaptation, and testing?

Answer:

RFP has been amended to remove “analysis”, “COTS adaptation”, "integration” “and testing” from paragraph C-1.4 General information, bullet #1.

D) Question:

Page 18 of 77 – Section 8.1 - Security Engineering Support - The second area of effort is to provide a technical analysis of impacts or risks associated with specific technologies and IA strategies currently employed with WebEOC. This may include issues related to particular vulnerabilities identified during the C&A process or issues related to proposed technologies or solutions.

QUESTION: Is the specific reference to WebEOC intentional?

Is WebEOC a pre-determined solution?

Answer:

- Yes, the specific reference to WebEOC is intentional.

- No, WebEOC is not a predetermined solution.

E) Question:

Page 19 of 77 – Section 8.7 – Web-based System Access: The Contractor shall provide a web-based capability that provides emergency management incident coordination and allows users immediate access to important incident details and resource information that can be used and share among key decision makers, DoD and civilian, for every day events and in times of crisis.

QUESTION: Does this include resource (vehicles, equipment, etc.) management to track and coordinate requisition, acquisition, allocation, tracking and returns?

Does this include team management to track and coordinate key personnel and individual team members through activation, deployment and demobilization?

Does this include an interface to Blue Force Tracker?

Answer:

- Yes.

- Yes.

- No.

F) Question:

Page 20 of 77 – Section 8.10 – Mapping Capability: The Contractor shall provide an application with an interactive mapping capability to provide situational awareness and incident information in a visual display.

The application shall have the ability to display both imagery (raster) data and feature (vector) data in industry standard GIS formats.

QUESTION: Is it a mandatory requirement for the application providing mapping capability to be web-based?

Please share the estimated number of users requiring mapping capability across all six (6) locations/sites

(or) at each location/site.

Answer:

- Yes, interfacing with GIS mapping is mandatory.

- There are about 100 possible users per site for mapping capability.

G) Question:

Page 22 of 77 – Section 8.17 – System Fielding Plan of Action and Milestones: The contractor shall provide in response to the request for proposal (RFP) a detailed fielding plan of action identifying milestones that will allow the deliverables identified above in 3.1 – 3.12 to be fielded within 6 months of contract award.

QUESTION: Section C-3 of the RFP does not have subsections. What does 3.1 – 3.12 refer to?

H) Question:

Page 45 of 77 – Section L-4. – Performance Requirements: Refer to the untitled table on this page. These requirements are not directly linked to other sections of the RFP. Sections L-4.3.1.4 on page 68 of 77 and M-3.1.1.4 on page 74 of 77 both refer to “table 1”.

QUESTION: Is the table shown on page 45 of 77 the appropriate table as referenced above? The table does not address the delivery of a system. Is system delivery part of this Task Order?

Answer:

L-4.3.1.4 on page 68 and M-3.1.1.4 on page 74 have been deleted.

I) Question:

Page 68 of 77 – Section L- 4.3.1.11 – Demonstrating the Offeror’s ability to adequately identify a suitable level of technical understanding of the issues: This includes, at a minimum, describing contract level performance objectives that can be accomplished by their technical approach; describe the benefits and advantages of that approach; and effectively illustrate the roles of staff and team resources to execute the intended strategy.

QUESTION: Is this requirement linked to the QASP Performance Requirements listed in the table on page 45 of 77?

13. A) Question:

Is there an incumbent? If so, why is the RFP being issued?

Answer:

There is no incumbent.

B) Question:

Proposal Content Requirement 4.3.1.5 states, “Providing documentation of compliance with appropriate DOD 8500.2 IA controls that are associated with the system and information of this requirement.” Does this mean that the USMC expects the vendor to be in compliance with DOD 8500.2 IA controls prior to award?

Answer:

Yes.

C) Question:

Does the USMC own an ESRI ArcGIS Enterprise license that could be leveraged for this program?

14. A) Question:

General. According to Amendment 1, FAR Clause 52.219-14 (Limitations on Subcontracting) was added to this solicitation. Given that this clause does not apply to service contracts, will the government please clarify whether a Small Business vendor may utilize a large business as a subcontractor to provide services under this solicitation (e.g. Information Assurance Labor, Maintenance Support, EMIMS Training, etc.)?

FAR Clause 52.219-14 applies to Services and Supplies. Subcontracting with a large and/or small business is permitted in accordance with FAR Clause 52.219-14.

B) Question:

General. Our firm is aware of an existing DoD Government-Off-The-Shelf (GOTS) web-based application that is DIACAP certified (current ATO), classified as MAC Level III SBU, meets the baseline technical requirements identified in the solicitation (e.g. web-based information sharing, GIS mapping capabilities with the ability to ingest data layers and satellite imagery, and interoperable with existing emergency management systems including WebEOC), and has a centralized architecture that can support an unlimited number of locations. Based on this information, would MCICOM consider leveraging existing Government investments by adopting a GOTS system with no licensing costs rather than purchasing commercial software licenses for six (6) USMC locations? If so, then would the Government consider changing the NAICS code for this solicitation from 511210 (Software Publishers) to 541511 (Custom Computer Programming Services) in order to support the transfer and implementation of an existing DoD system since there are no licensing costs associated with the GOTS application?

Answer:

- Use of a GOTS system is not precluded from consideration.

- The NAICS will NOT be changed.

C) Question:

General. Is there an incumbent contractor who is currently supporting EMIMS? If so, then please identify the incumbent contractor and the previous contract(s) that has/have previously been awarded for EMIMS.

Answer:

There is no incumbent contractor. EMIMS is a new requirement, therefore, there were no contracts previously awarded for EMIMS.

D) Question:

REF. Section C-1.4 – General Information (Page 14 of 77) – According to the solicitation, “EMIMS is considered to be MAC III SBU.” Is this determination based on an existing EMIMS system that is currently in use or based on the projected requirements that EMIMS will be required to support? If the classification is based on an existing system, please clarify whether the system is currently in production use, whether it is in a pilot phase, or whether it is still in development.

Answer:

Based on current directives and system requirements, incident management systems (including EMIMS) have been determined to be MAC III Sensitive system. The classification is based upon directives and policy governing all incident management systems.

E) Question:

REF. Section C-4.1.6 – Maintain Staff Certifications (Page 16 of 77) – According to the solicitation, “The Contractor shall meet the applicable information assurance certification requirements… as required by DoD 8570.01-M.” Has the Government identified the minimum IA certification requirements for contractors that will be performing IA services for this engagement (e.g. IA Baseline certification, CE/OS Certificate, CISSP, etc.)? Also, are the contractor’s proposed IA personnel required to meet a certain level (e.g. IAT I, IAT II, IAT III, etc.) in order to support EMIMS IA requirements?

Answer:

IAT I and IAT II see DODI 8570.10. The DODI 8570.10 provides the minimum certification for each IAT levels. Vendors should reference the instruction for specific base requirement per level. The following link provides all the security certifications that meet the IAT level 1 & 2 certification requirements:

http://iase.disa.mil/eta/iawip/content_pages/iabaseline.html <http://iase.disa.mil/eta/iawip/content_pages/iabaseline.html> http://iase.disa.mil/eta/iawip/content_pages/iabaseline.html http://iase.disa.mil/eta/iawip/content_pages/iabaseline.html

It is incumbent upon the vendor to meet these certification requirements upon contract award. No personnel certification requirements placed onto the contract in support of the government effort can be waived for any period of time in accordance with HQMC policy and directives (i.e. vendor cannot come on board and then certify their people. They must be certified before they come on board.)

F) Question:

REF. Section C-4.1.9 – Certification and Accreditation (Page 16 of 77). Is there an existing Application Security Plan (ASP), Systems Security Authorization Agreement (SSAA), or other existing C&A documentation for EMIMS? Or, will the contractor be responsible for creating all documentation required for EMIMS?

Answer:

Yes, there is an ASP to support the ATO for WebEOC. Yes the contractor will be responsible for creating the ASP for their proposed solution.

G) Question:

REF. Section C-5.0 – Preparatory Phase (Page 17 of 77) – In conjunction with the IV&V process, is the Contractor expected to assemble the IV&V team and conduct the vulnerability scans for the EMIMS system? Or, is it the Government’s intent to perform these activities? Please clarify.

Answer:

All of these activities will be conducted by the contractor. Government will provide list of approved validators to winner at PAC.

H) Question:

REF. Section C-8.1 – Security Engineering Support (Page 18 of 77) – The solicitation indicates that the “the second area of effort is to provide a technical analysis of impacts or risks associated with specific technologies and IA strategies currently employed within WebEOC.” Does this imply that the Government intends to continue to utilize WebEOC to support EMIMS?

Or, is it the Government’s intent for the contractor to analyze existing technologies and IA strategies used in supporting EMIMS, in general?

Answer:

Yes, the Government intends to continue to utilize current Marine Corps WebEOC licenses to support EMIMS until licenses expire and/or fielding of enterprise-wide system is complete. However, if a contractor proposes a different system, then it is the Government’s intent for the contractor to analyze USMC’s existing systems and technologies, and IA strategies to support EMIMS.

I) Question:

REF. Section C-8.3 – Subject Matter Expert Representation (Page 18-19 of 77). According to the solicitation, “Effort for SME representation will typically be drawn from effort assigned to other task items but the Contractor should identify to the Government the impact on other activities for providing requested SME representation.” In light of the significant discrepancies between typical labor rates for IA analysts/consultants compared to true “Subject Matter Experts”, would the Government consider creating an “Optional CLIN” that would provide bidders with an opportunity to separate SME costs from IA support costs while providing MCICOM with greater flexibility to procure these services, if required?

Answer:

No.

J) Question:

REF. Section C-8.5 – Facility, Travel, and ODC requirements (Page 19 of 77). According to the solicitation, “All Government printing requirements must be done through DLA Document Services.”

Does this include all project deliverables, including status reports and documentation?

Or, does this only refer to products that are not printed either using MCICOM equipment or contractor-owned equipment?

Answer:

- No, this does not include all project deliverables, including status reports and documentation.

- No, this does not refer to products that are not printed either using MCICOM equipment or contractor-owned equipment.

K) Question:

REF. Section C-8.8 – Information Sharing (Page 20 of 77). The solicitation indicates that the following views must be supported:

- Map View of Incident

- Operational activity view Does MCICOM have any sample screen shots of these two views available to provide to potential bidders?

Answer:

No. Sample screen shots if available, will be provided to the winning contractor as GFI.

L) Question:

REF. Section C-8.8 – Information Sharing (Page 20 of 77). The solicitation indicates that “the Contractor shall install, configure, and provision a minimum of six (6) interoperability links per Marine Corps node with external links to Government identified incident management applications.” Please clarify what the meaning of “link” is in this instance.

For example, does the Government expect the Contractor to incorporate a clickable hyperlink to other applications?

Or, does the Government expect the Contractor to create direct interfaces between EMIMS and other incident management applications?”

Answer:

All USMC installation addressed in this PWS communicate through data exchange with outside agencies (local, state and federal emergency management partners) who are using WebEOC. In addition, as stated in C-8.8, all other external links will be provided to the winning contractor as GFI.

M) Question:

REF. Section C-8.9 – Disaster Recovery (Page 20 of 77). According to the solicitation, “The Contractor shall provide an application with the capability of providing maximum information redundancy to allow emergency management functions to relocate and reconstitute when necessary.” Please clarify MCICOM’s expectation with regards to EMIMS implementation. For example, does MCICOM expect the Contractor to provide EMIMS as a hosted service or cloud implementation?

or does MCICOM expect the Contractor to implement EMIMS as an on-premises solution within a USMC data center (e.g. MCEITS)?

Also, in the case of an on-premises implementation, has MCICOM identified a secondary failover/disaster recovery site?

Answer:

- No, MCICOM does not expect the Contractor to provide EMIMS as a hosted service or cloud implementation.

- Yes, MCICOM expects the Contractor to implement EMIMS as an on-premises solution within a USMC data center. No hardware provided by contractor.

- No.

N) Question:

REF. Section C-8.10 – Mapping Capability (Page 20 of 77). Does MCICOM intend to leverage the Marine Corps GeoFidelis program for authoritative installation geospatial data? If so, then will MCICOM facilitate contractor access to the data in order to support ingest and integration?

Answer:

Yes. And Yes

O) Question:

REF. Section C-8.11.1 – Maintenance Plan (Page 20 of 77). Please clarify the number and type of “environments” utilized by the EMIMS program (e.g. Development, Training, Test, Production, COOP, etc.).

Also, please indicate whether the contractor is responsible for providing licenses for all of these environments.

Answer:

- There are six (6) EOC environments.

- Yes, the contractor is responsible for providing the licenses to all these environments.

P) Question:

REF. Section C-8.11.2 – Help Desk Support (Page 21 of 77). Please clarify the Help Desk support requirements, including hours of operation, location (on-site, off-site, etc.), and accessibility. Also, in the event that a contractor is providing remote support to an EMIMS user, will the contractor be granted remote access to the EMIMS system?

Answer:

- Support requirements will be Off-site, 24/7.

- Yes, the contractor will be granted remote access to the EMIMS system.

Q) Question:

REF. Section C-8.13 – Informal Communication (Page 22 of 77). Please clarify whether the Contractor must support the Informal Communication requirement within the EMIMS application itself or outside of the EMIMS application.

Answer:

Informal Communication capability will be inside the application.

R) Question:

REF. Section C-8.14 – Updates and Alerting (Page 22 of 77). Please clarify whether the Contractor must support the Updates and Alerting requirement within the EMIMS application itself or outside of the EMIMS application.

Also, please clarify the types of alerts and updates that should be available to users and how user(s) should have access to these updates and alerts (e.g. self-enrollment, automatic notification, etc.).

Answer:

- Support within the EMIMS application itself.

- Notifications on registered PCs and cell phones.

S) Question:

REF. Section C-8.15 – Contact Tracking (Page 22 of 77). Please clarify the requirements for tracking personnel contact information, including:

- Data fields for contact (e.g. name, address, phone number, e-mail address, etc.).

- Manual data entry vs. imported data from existing source.

- Security restrictions associated with updating contact information (e.g. is this functionality limited to certain users or can all users update anyone’s contact information?).

Answer:

- Data Fields:

Last name First name Work section Work phone Cell phone Email address

- Manual data entry.

- PKI.

T) Question:

REF. Section C-8.16 – File Sharing (Page 22 of 77). Please clarify the requirements for document and file sharing, including:

- Does this capability need to be integrated into EMIMS?

- If integrated, then should document & file sharing be event-specific (incident-specific) or general (e.g.

EMIMS Library).

- What file formats should be supported?

Answer:

- Yes.

- It should be both.

- PDF, Microsoft Office, MPEG, and all common picture formats.

U) Question:

REF. Section C-11.0 – Government Furnished Equipment, Information, Facilities, and Services (Page 22 of 77). According to the solicitation, “Government furnished property, equipment, facilities, and services will not be provided.” Accordingly, please indicate whether the Government intends to procure EMIMS as a hosted service or an on-premises implementation. If an on-premises implementation is required, then should the Contractor include equipment costs (e.g. server hardware, etc.) in its bid?

Answer:

- The Government intends to procure EMIMS as an on-premises implementation.

- No, do not include equipment costs in the bid.

V) Question:

REF. Section C-13.1 – Data Materials and Information Requirements (Page 23 of 77). Please clarify the Contractor’s intellectual property rights for existing items (e.g. software, presentations, training materials, etc.) created prior to this solicitation that are utilized for this EMIMS engagement. For example, does the Government expect to obtain intellectual property ownership for pre-existing materials developed by the contractor?

Answer:

Unless the Government is entitled to such ownership or other use rights, or ownership or other use rights were previously provided to the Government (see, DFARS 252.227-7028), the Government does not expect to obtain intellectual property ownership of pre-existing materials. However, if not already provided, the Government will require that it is provided a license of sufficient scope to allow the Government to use these pre-existing materials during and after the term of this contract.

W) Question:

REF. Section C-13.3 – Data Materials and Information Requirements (Page 23 of 77). Please provide a table/matrix of all deliverables that MCICOM expects to receive in conjunction with this engagement.

Answer:

Please refer to the PWS for all the deliverables requested in the solicitation.

X) Question:

REF. Section H-1.6 – Organizational Conflict of Interest (Page 31 of 77) –…