M67854-23-R-4907_Government Responses to Industry Questions_2June2023.pdf

Government Responses to Industry Questions

M67854-23-R-4907

2 June 2023

Question

Document/ Section Paragraph

Number

Question/Issue/Concern Govt Response

1 Request the Contract Office to change or include the

NAICS code 541519 for this solicitation. We believe the solicitation incorporates deliverables specified in NACIS

541519 based on the definition of NACIS code 541519

‘An Information Technology Value Added Reseller

(ITVAR) provides a total solution to information technology acquisitions by providing multi-vendor hardware and software along with significant value-added services. Significant value-added services consist of, but are not limited to, configuration consulting and design, systems integration, installation of multi-vendor computer equipment, customization of hardware or software, training, product technical support, maintenance, and end user support. ‘With all the telecommunication support and labor categories, it would seem more appropriate.

The Government has reviewed the NAICS code recommended by your firm (541519, Other

Computer Related Services) against the NAICS code designated by the Government in the solicitation (541512, Computer Systems Design

Services) and believes that the

541512 NAICS is the most appropriate for this effort. Not only has this NAICS been utilized for historical contracting actions for similar scope, but the 541512 NAICS definition is also comparable to the scope for M6785423R4907 which entails planning and designing computer systems that integrate hardware, software, and communication technologies. In accordance with 13 CFR 121.402, the procuring agency contracting officer designates a single

NAICS code which best describes the principal purpose of the product or services be acquired. The Government has determined that 541512 is the most applicable and will remain for this effort.

2 Would it be appropriate to partner with one of our strong small businesses in response to this? Do you anticipate this remaining SB once it moves to RFQ status?

In accordance with FAR

19.502-2, solicitation

M6785423R4907 is being procured as a Total Small

Business Set-Aside. A company must be considered a small business under the size standard for NAICS 541512 to be eligible for award. Small businesses who meet the size standard for NAICS 541512 can partner with large companies in response to solicitation M6785423R4907, subject to any limitations in the solicitation, the FAR and

DFARS, and applicable SBA regulations.

3 As for the Evaluation Factors and Basis of Award discussed in Section 10 of the Solicitation, specifically for Volume II, Section 4, Factor 3 - Past Performance

(page 105), "relevant" past performance is described as a

"recent effort accomplished by the Offeror with a similar scope and complexity and a total value of $10M to

$30M." Considering this solicitation has been designed as a Total Small Business Set Aside under NAICS Code

541512 - Computer Systems Design Services with a

Small Business Size Standard of $30M in average annual revenue, the requirement for project sizes of between

$10M and $30M seems biased towards "larger" small businesses in this category, at the expense of many small businesses in this category which may not have project sizes in this range. We would encourage the Marine

The Government has reduced the minimum dollar value for past performance to $5M. As such, the Government has updated the definition of relevant past performance as described in Volume II, Section

4, Factor 3 - Past Performance

(page 105).

Corps to consider relaxing this relevancy requirement by revising the lower-end of this stipulated range to allow smaller projects, perhaps starting at the $1M value, of similar scope and complexity to be considered relevant."

Alternatively, we would request Marine Corps to consider Past performance of sub-contractors to increase small business participation, if PP of $10M-$30M cannot be relaxed

4 Reference: Section 10.1 Volume II, Section 4.1 - Recent and Relevant Past Performance; Paragraph 4, “The identified contracts shall be with Department of Defense or other Federal agencies.” Will PEO please allow for

State & Local past performances of similar size and scope considering many of these projects contain like complexities, technical solutioning, management, and are critical to the functioning of the state with regard to

Technology Readiness Level 9 (TRL-9).

No change will be made to the definition of Relevant Past

Performance as defined in

Section 10.1 Volume II, Section 4.1.

5 Currently Cisco Systems has a warranty and software

Enterprise agreement (GEMS) with the Marine Corps which allows the government to consume associated software and SmartNet warranty at no charge due to an existing contract. This contract is due to expire in 3 years. How would you like to see the warranty and associated hardware costs annotated in the initial PDO?

Shall we instruct our partners to price the warranty and software cost as if there is no current agreement, or with an agreement in place?

For the initial PDO, Offerors should submit their pricing as if the current Cisco GEMSS agreement for warranty and software is in place. Paragraph

5.12.4 of the Attachment 12

PDO has been updated.

6 Solicitation Section 1 Contract

Definition

The solicitation states, "It is anticipated that multiple base contracts will be awarded." Will the Government clarify the anticipated number of contract awards?

The Government does not have a set number of contract awards.

7 Solicitation Section 4 Period of

Performance

Will the Government clarify an anticipated award date which offeror's should propose as contract start date?

At this time the award date is projected to be no later than

February 2024.

8 Solicitation 1.5.9 Key Personnel Table 1 - Key Personnel lists "Licensed Professional

Engineer (PE)" as a skill for the Lead Systems Engineer

It is expected that the PE is licensed in the state where the

(LSE). Will the Government please clarify the state for preferred licensing?

Delivery Order is being performed.

9 Solicitation 1.5.9 Key Personnel

Table 1 - Key Personnel lists "Licensed Professional

Engineer (PE)" as a skill for the Lead Systems Engineer

(LSE). Instead, will the Government accept candidates with relevant industry certifications and experience i.e., CCIE, or demonstrated history of relevant experience performing work or similar scope and complexity across

DOD installations?

The Government requires that the LSE be a Licensed

Professional Engineer (PE).

10 Solicitation

Section 10.1 Recent and Relevant Past performance

The solicitation states, "relevant' past performance is defined…with a total value of $10-30 million." Will the

Government consider past performance references that exceed $30 million?

The Government has updated the definition of relevant past performance as described in

Volume II, Section 4, Factor 3

- Past Performance (page 105) to eliminate the upper dollar value and to revise the minimum value for relevant past performance to $5M.

Att. 10 Pricing

Workbook

Att. 10 PDO workbook

For the initial IDIQ submission please confirm that the

Offeror is only providing training at MCRD San Diego for the proposed PDO solution.

The Government confirms that the Offeror should only include training at MCRD San Diego for the proposed PDO solution in their initial submission.

12 SOW Att.12 5.3 - 5.4

Will the Government please confirm that there are no sections 5.3 and 5.4 omitted from the Att. 12 MCI West

SOW Document?

The Government confirms that there are no sections missing.

Attachment 12, page 8 states, “This work shall be performed in accordance with IDIQ Base

SOW Sections 5.1, 5.1.1, 5.2,

5.2.1 and 5.3, 5.3.1, as augmented by the guidance in this section.”

13 Other Exhibit C

Exhibits A, B, and D are provided with the solicitation and referenced throughout the document. Will the

Government please confirm there is no Exhibit C to reference?

The Government confirms that there is no Exhibit C.

14 Solicitation Appendix A

Item Number B004

Quality Control

Plan

The solicitation states the offeror is required to submit a

Quality Control Plan at proposal submission. Will the

Government specify the volume the offeror should include the Quality Control Plan? If required at proposal submission, suggest the Government require the Quality

Control Plan as part of Volume 1 Section 3.

The Quality Control plan shall be submitted as part of Volume

1. Solicitation has been updated to reflect this change

15 Solicitation Appendix A

Item Number B004

Quality Control

Plan

The solicitation states the offeror is required to submit a

Quality Control Plan at proposal submission in MS

Project format. Will the Government confirm the file type is correct? If required, suggest the Government request the deliverable in MS Word format.

The Government confirms that this deliverable may be MS project or MS word. Appendix

A has been updated to reflect this change.

16 Solicitation Appendix A

Item Number B004

Quality Control

Plan

The solicitation states the offeror is required to submit a

Quality Control Plan at proposal submission. Is the

Quality Control Plan excluded from page count? Suggest the Government clarify the Volume and page count requirements for this portion of the proposal submission.

The QCP shall be no more than

10 pages and will not count against the Volume I page count. Volume I has been updated to reflect this change.

17 Solicitation Appendix A

Item Number B004

Quality Control

Plan

The solicitation states the offeror is required to submit a

Quality Control Plan at proposal submission. Is the

Quality Control Plan evaluated as part of the technical volume? Suggest the Government clarify the evaluation requirements for the Quality Control Plan.

The Government will evaluate whether the QCP reflects a sound and accurate approach with respect to the elements listed in B004.

18 Solicitation Appendix A

Item Number B005

Project

Management Plan

The solicitation states the offeror is required to submit a draft Project Management Plan at proposal submission.

Will the Government specify the volume the offeror should include the draft project management plan? If required at proposal submission, suggest the Government require the project management plan as part of Volume 1

Section 3.

The Project Management Plan shall be submitted as part of

Volume I. Volume I has been updated to reflect this change.

19 Solicitation Appendix A

Item Number B005

Project

Management Plan

The solicitation states the offeror is required to submit a draft project management plan at proposal submission in

MS Project format. Will the Government confirm the file type is correct? If required, suggest the Government request the deliverable in MS Word format.

The Government confirms that this deliverable may be MS project or MS word. Appendix

A has been updated to reflect this change.

20 Solicitation Appendix A

Item Number B005

Project

Management Plan

The solicitation states the offeror is required to submit a draft project management plan at proposal submission. Is the project management plan excluded from page count?

Offeror’s Project Management

Plan shall be no more than 10 pages and will not count

Suggest the Government clarify the Volume and page count requirements for this portion of the proposal submission.

against management approach.

Volume I has been updated to reflect this change

21 Solicitation Appendix A

Item Number B005

Project

Management Plan

The solicitation states the offeror is required to submit a draft project management plan at proposal submission. Is the draft project management plan evaluated as part of the technical volume? Suggest the Government clarify the evaluation requirements for the draft project management plan.

Yes, the Government will evaluate the Project

Management Plan as part of the overarching management approach – Vol 1, Factor 2.

The Project Management Plan shall be no more than 10 pages and shall be drafted in accordance with B005. The solicitation has been updated to address this clarification.

22 Solicitation Section 8.1 Volume

I, Section 1.1 –

Executive

Summary, 3rd paragraph

The government is requesting a signed copy of the

SF1449 as part of the Executive Summary. Please confirm this is outside the page count for the Executive

Summary.

The Government confirms that the signed SF1449 is outside of the page count for the

Executive summary.

23 Solicitation Section 9.2 Volume

I, Section 3.2

Overarching

Staffing Plan

The government is requesting Labor Categories and descriptions, Approach to Managing Subcontractors, and a list of Subcontractors. Will the government please consider the Labor Categories and descriptions be outside of page count?

The Government has updated

Section 9.2 Volume I, Section

3.2 to identify the labor categories and descriptions as outside of the page count.

24 Solicitation Section 9.4 Volume

I, Section 3.4 PDO

Staffing Plan

The government is requesting Labor Categories and descriptions, Approach to Managing Subcontractors, and a list of Subcontractors. Will the government please consider the Labor Categories and descriptions be outside of page count?

The Government has updated

Section 9.4 Volume I, Section

3.4 to identify the labor categories and descriptions as outside of the page count.

25 Solicitation Page 104 - 9.2

Volume I, Overarching

Staffing Plan

Please confirm key personnel resumes are to be included in the Overarching Staffing Plan and will be outside of page count.

The Government has not required resumes and therefore if resumes are provided they will count against the page count. As such there will be no change to the allotted page count.

26 Solicitation Page 105 - 9.4

Volume I, Section

3.4 – PDO Staffing

Plan

Please confirm key personnel resumes are to be included in the PDO Staffing Plan and will be outside of page count.

See response to Q25 above.

27 Solicitation Page 105 - 10.

Volume II, Section

4, Factor 3 – Past

Performance

The government states: “Task or delivery orders awarded under single-award IDIQ or Multiple-Award Contracts

(MACs) will be considered standalone “contracts” for purposes of past performance evaluation. Thus, Offerors shall not propose an entire IDIQ or MAC as a past performance contract reference.”

Due to the fact that this contract will be a collection of task orders under a larger contract, would the

Government consider changing this requirement and allow multiple awarded task orders under the same IDIQ as a single past performance reference? Small businesses are normally offered and execute multiple task orders under an IDIQ. While each task order (TO) is technically relevant to the requirements of this solicitation, a single task order may not meet the $10-30M requirement but a consolidation of multiple TOs under the same contract

IDIQ within 5 years would be.

Per Q10, the Government has updated the definition of relevant past performance as described in Volume II, Section

4, Factor 3 - Past Performance

(page 105) to be a minimum of

$5M. No other changes have been captured for this section of the solicitation.

28 Attachment 12, PDO Section 5.2 Please confirm that the existing Passive Optical Network equipment is manufactured by Tellabs.

The Government Confirms that

Attachment 8 provides the existing configuration items for

RDSD.

29 Attachment 12, PDO Section 5.2 Please confirm the part numbers for the existing OLTs and ONTs.

The Government Confirms that

Attachment 8 provides the existing configuration items for

RDSD.

30 Attachment 12, PDO Section 5.2 Please confirm that the contractor will have access to the

EMS (Panorama, etc.) instance that manages the PON.

The awarded vendor will be provided appropriate access to include EMS.

31 Solicitation Section 1.5.6 Please confirm that a minimum SECRET facility clearance is required from all prime contractors on this effort given the contractor’s need to potentially access secure networks.

The Government does not require the Contractor have a

Secret facility clearance.

32 Solicitation Section 10.1 Please confirm that Subcontractor past performance references are acceptable.

Per the Solicitation, 10.1

Volume II, Section 4.1 - Recent and Relevant Past Performance

(pg 106), past performance by a company proposed as a

Subcontractor to this effort will be accepted.

33 Solicitation 10. Volume II, Section 4, Factor 3

– Past Performance

The government states: “However, past performance by the Offeror as a Subcontractor may be less relevant to the overall past performance rating than past performance by the Offeror as a Prime Contractor.”

Can the government further define the impact of relevancy as a Subcontractor?

No, the statement is self-explanatory. However, per the

Solicitation 3.3 Factor 3 – Past

Performance, “The

Government will not evaluate an Offeror’s lack of past performance unfavorably, but the Government may, in its tradeoff analysis, determine that more highly rated past performance is more beneficial than a neutral past performance rating.”

34 Solicitation 8.5.2 Volume I, Section 2.2 –

Technical Project

Solution PDO

Should we include the Material and Equipment

List/BOM as part of the technical narrative?

Yes, offerors shall include the

Material and Equipment

List/BOM as part of the technical narrative; Volume I.

Volume I, Section 2.2 –

Technical Project Solution

PDO has been updated.

35 Solicitation 8.5.2 Volume I, Section 2.2 –

Technical Project

Solution PDO

If so, will the government allow the Material and

Equipment List/BOM to be outside of page count and accept it in excel format.

The Government confirms that a material list/BOM shall be submitted with Volume 1 and is outside of the page count.

MS Word is an acceptable format. The solicitation has been updated to reflect this change.

36 Solicitation Section 3.4 Factor

PDO - Pricing

Workbook

In Section 3.4 Factor 4 PDO - Pricing Workbook of the

Solicitation, the Government states, "The Government will establish a “Total Evaluated Price to the

Government” for each Offeror by multiplying the

Offeror’s proposed unit price for each CLIN as listed in

Attachment 10: Pricing Workbook by the maximum quantity for each CLIN; the sum of these will determine the Total Evaluated Price to the Government".

Can the Government confirm that the quantities shown for each CLIN in the Supplies/Services schedule section of the solicitation is what will be used to calculate the

TEP (Total Evaluated Price) to the Government?

The quantities shown for each

CLIN in the Supplies/Services schedule section of the solicitation is NOT what will be used to calculate the Total

Evaluated Price (TEP). The

TEP for each offeror will be established by multiplying the

Offeror’s proposed unit price for each CLIN as listed in

Attachment 10: Pricing

Workbook by the maximum quantity for each CLIN; the sum of these will determine the

TEP to the Government.

Please refer the Price Summary

Tab in Attachment

10.

37 Marine Corps Recruit

Depot (MCRD) San

Diego

Telecommunications and

Network Infrastructure

Modernization

(attachment 12)

5.1 Can the following counts be provided, especially for

users not currently support by the PON MCEN network?

- Buildings counts covered

- TR room counts per building per floor

- End VoIP/Data port location counts

- Estimated remaining analog phone ports required and locations

- Existing fiber pathways

- Logical diagrams for End user building to ADN connectivity

Attachment 13, RDSD Current

PON Network and Expected

Growth, has been incorporated to include known network information to support PDO solution development.

38 Marine Corps Recruit

Depot (MCRD) San

Diego

Telecommunications and

Network Infrastructure

Modernization

(attachment 12)

5.1 For the San Diego task order, can you clarify the existing

OLT and ONT counts? A table in the IDIQ SOW shows

(2) OLTs and

(150) ONTs, a table in attachment 6 shows (1) OLT and

(165) ONTs, and attachment 12 only suggests (37) are to be considered to be upgraded to 10G ONTs.

Attachment 13, RDSD Current

PON Network and Expected

Growth, has been incorporated to include known network information to support PDO solution development.

39 Marine Corps Recruit

Depot (MCRD) San

Diego

Telecommunications and

Network Infrastructure

Modernization

(attachment 12)

5.1 What will determine which users can be to a migrated to

Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) (vs Gateway) and will that be determined at the time of proposal 4?

The Government requires the vendors utilize max VoIP based on industry standards.

40 Infrastructure Services, Transport and

Communications

Marine

Corps Enterprise

Network

Base Area Network –

Solution Architecture

Concept of Operations

(Attachment 6)

4.3.5 Is the technology required to support 802.1x for per user network authentication and is interoperability with

Forescout Counteract and Cisco ISE required?

The Government requires that offerors meet 802.1x and the

Government is currently using

Forescout Counteract as its comply to connect solution.

41 Solicitation N/A

Will the Government confirm the incorporation of the applicable Executive Order (EO) 14026 (Increasing the

Minimum Wage for Federal Contractors) incorporated via the revised FAR 52.222-55 (Minimum Wages for

Contractor Workers Under Executive Order 14026) for contracts awarded after January 30, 2022.

FAR 52.222-55 is not applicable to this contract as this is a production contract.

42 Solicitation Contract Clauses

Request inclusion of FAR 52.216-4 Economic Price

Adjustment-Labor and Material as the proposed contract is fixed price, one or more identifiable labor/material cost factors are subject to change OR (whichever is appropriate) provide for contract price adjustment in the event of changes to our established prices, and the inclusion of the clause will be necessary to protect the

Offeror and their OEMs against significant fluctuations in labor or material costs and enable completion of SOW tasks.

Since prices are established at the order level, the Government does not believe that FAR

52.216-4 Economic Price

Adjustment-Labor and Material should be included in this

Solicitation.

43 Solicitation Contract Clauses, Clause 52.204-14 Service Contract Reporting

Requirements (Oct 2016) is checked. Since this is an

FAR Clause 52.204-14 was inadvertently checked; neither

IDIQ, would the Government confirm that clause

52.204-15 Service Contract Reporting Requirements for

Indefinite-Delivery Contracts (Oct 2016) should be checked instead?

clause applies as this is a production contract.

44 Solicitation Contract Clauses, Will the Government confirm that Wage Determinations will be issued at the PDO level?

Wage Determinations are not appliable as this is a production contract.

45 Solicitation Contract Clauses, Will the Government include FAR 52.222-41, Service

Contract Labor Standards? 52.222-42, 52.222-43, and

52.222-62 are only to be included in solicitations/contracts when SCA coverage applies.

These clauses do not apply as this is a production contract.

46 Solicitation IDIQ SOW Are power systems upgrades a requirement of this solicitation?

The Government is not requiring power system upgrades as part of this requirement.

47 Solicitation 5.9.4

Will the Government confirm if a written Quality

Control Plan (QCP) is required to be submitted with the proposal response?

See response to Q16 and Q17 above.

48 Solicitation 5.9.4 What section of the Offeror's proposal should the QCP be located if required?

See response to Q16 and Q17 above.

49 Solicitation 8.1

Will the Government confirm if the signed copy of the

SF1449 is included in the maximum page limit of 2 pages?

See response to Q22 above.

50 Solicitation 8.2

Will the Government confirm that the first paragraph should actually be included in Para 8.1, Section 1.1

Executive Summary?

The paragraph states "An authorized official of the

Offeror shall sign the transmittal letter. On the first page of this volume, the Offeror shall certify that the proposal has been prepared completely consistent with the terms and conditions of the solicitation or that any exceptions, deviations, and waivers to the solicitation are addressed in the Executive Summary."

The Government has moved this statement to Section 8.1, Volume I, Section 1.1 -

Executive Summary.

Additionally, the Government has changed Section 8.1 to be reserved as a result of this change.

Attch_10_PDO

_0001_Pricing

_Workbook

Price Summary Tab

For consistency within the Pricing Workbook, would the

Government link the column E Element Totals to the applicable tab Totals?

Yes. The Element Total for the respective CLINs in Column E shall align with the respective material, labor, and travel tabs.

For example, the CLIN 0001

Material Total (Cell E3) under the Price Summary Tab shall equal the CLIN 0001 Material subtotal (Cell F18) under the

Material tab.

Attch_10_PDO

_0001_Pricing

_Workbook Price Summary Tab

Column K Unit Price formula cells are incorrectly linked. Will the Government modify formula to link the cells to the applicable CLIN totals in column E?

The Government has updated

Column K to reflect the appropriate totals for the respective CLINs.

Attch_10_PDO

_0001_Pricing

_Workbook Labor Tab

The Training CLIN (row 39) incorrectly reflects CLIN

003. Will the Government revise to reflect CLIN 004?

The Government has updated the title of Cell 39 under the

Labor tab to reflect CLIN 0004

Training.

Attch_10_PDO

_0001_Pricing

_Workbook ODC/Travel Tab

For consistency among Bidders, would the government include all the remaining required formulas in the

Proposed Travel Tables?

The Government has updated the Attachment 10 spreadsheet to include the remaining formulas.

Attch_10_PDO

_0001_Pricing

_Workbook ODC/Travel Tab

Will the Government modify the Proposed Travel table to include a column for any applicable burdens required in accordance with accounting practices policy?

The Government has added an additional column to account for any approved accounting practices.

Attch_10_PDO

_0001_Pricing

_Workbook

ODC/Travel Tab

Will the Government modify the Proposed Travel table to include columns for Baggage, Taxi/Uber, and Misc.

Costs?

The Government has added an additional column to account for any miscellaneous costs.

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.1

The SOW requires a voice solution for MCRD. Can the

Government provide the quantity of analog users currently in service in order to properly size the LSC and associated Gateway and VoIP phone set.

Attachment 13, RDSD Current

PON Network and Expected

Growth, has been incorporated to include known network

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.1

The SOW requires a voice solution for MCRD. Can the

Government provide the quantity of digital users currently in service in order to properly size the LSC and associated Gateway and VoIP phone set.

Attachment 13, RDSD Current

PON Network and Expected

Growth, has been incorporated to include known network information to support PDO solution development.

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.1

The SOW requires a voice solution for MCRD. Can the

Government provide the quantity of BRI users currently in service in order to properly size the LSC and associated Gateway and VoIP phone set.

Attachment 13, RDSD Current

PON Network and Expected

Growth, has been incorporated to include known network information to support PDO solution development.

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.1

The SOW requires a voice solution for MCRD. Can the

Government provide the quantity of MCEN users currently in service in order to properly size the LSC and associated Gateway and VoIP phone set.

The number of MCEN users is not required to size the LSC.

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.1

The SOW requires a voice solution for MCRD. Can the

Government provide the quantity of locations on MCRD that will be designated as Distribution Nodes from which voice and data services may originate?

The Government confirms that there is only one distribution node.

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.1

SOW requests voice mail solution for MCRD modernization. How many mailboxes should be used for sizing the voice email?

The Government is looking for the offeror to recommend the number of mailboxes based on industry standards.

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.1

What number of lines for entry-level and executive level sets should the contractor use for replacement VoIP sets?

For bidding purposes, assume

10% of the VoIP phones.

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.1

Are there SIP trunks for DSN and/or commercial trucking services running through the existing SBCs?

The Government confirms that there are currently no SBCs at

MCRD.

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD

5.1 What is the total number of EUB buildings on MCRD?

Attachment 13, RDSD Current

PON Network and Expected

Growth. has been incorporated to include known network

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.1

Are any of the 729GPs deployed on MCRD providing analog voice service to users

No, all voice services are currently delivered via the

Navy.

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.1

MCRD does not currently have a dedicated 911 system.

As part of the Navy PBX that MCRD is fed from, Navy

911 is supported by a regional dispatch center and 911 calls are currently routed to the regional dispatch. For the purposes of this solution, is the Government requiring the Offeror to provide a new 911 system for the base or configure the new MCRD PBX to continue routing emergency calls to the Navy Regional Dispatch 911 or different 911 system (i.e., Camp Pendleton)?

No new 911 system is to be provided as part of this effort.

This effort shall interface with the state of California 911 system.

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.1

Will the Government provide an inventory of cards and optics in the existing OLT 1150's?

The Government does not have an existing inventory of cards and optics in the existing OLT

1150’s.

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.1

Do all of the TRs have adequate power, rack space, PDUs, HVAC, and premise wiring to support the requested new ONT248s or will surveys of the TRs be required to determine viability and any remediation actions required to support to the upgraded solution?

Contractor shall identify any

TR inadequacies or other recommended remediation actions, but the actual remediation of any such issues is not a requirement of this effort, unless separately agreed to by the Contractor and

Government

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.1

The existing 729GP ONTs are JITC certified; however, they are currently End-of-Life. Can the Government confirm, that any of the existing ONTs supporting analog users?

See response to Q66 above.

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.1

Is the current PON infrastructure connected to the base

DoDIN for any network services?

The Government confirms that

PON is used to deliver

MCDSUS.mil to the users.

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.1

Is it the Government's intention to implement SDA, ISE, and Forescout for the BAN?

See response to Q40 above.

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.1

Can the Government provide a list and types of alarms, contact closures, camera's, FRCS, or other auxiliary

This is out of scope for the

MCRD voice effort.

systems/circuits if any that the contractor needs to support?

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.1

A conference bridge is not listed as a requirement. Can the Government confirm there are no conference bridge requirements for the sample task?

With use of MS TEAMS the conferencing requirement has been reduced eliminating the need for a separate conference bridge. If additional conferencing capabilities are identified in the VSS, the government will address at that time. Any conferencing capability is not a requirement of this effort, unless separately agreed to by the Contractor and

Government.”

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.1

If conference bridge capability is required, please identify the associated requirements.

See response to Q74 above.

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.1

Are there any adjunct systems currently connected by

PRI or SIP trunks? If so, do they need to be considered in the sample task and can the government please specify the system and number of trunks?

Any existing PRI and SIP trunks belong to the Navy and will remain so. New SIP trunks will be established for MCRD

SD.

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.2

Can the Government provide a breakdown by building and TR of where the 165 729GP ONTs are currently installed to include the active port count?

Attachment 13, RDSD Current

PON Network and Expected

Growth, has been incorporated to include known network information to support PDO solution development.

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.2

Will the Government provide a end-user count by type, TR, and ONT?

Attachment 13, RDSD Current

PON Network and Expected

Growth, has been incorporated to include known network information to support PDO solution development.

Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD 5.2

Are there any disparate networks, such as access controls/security cameras currently deployed on PON?

See response to Q73 above.

80 Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD

5.2 Will the Government be responsible for ensuring cyber

compliance of disparate network convergence onto the agnostic BAN?

There are no converged disparate networks in this

Delivery Order.

81 Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD

5.2 Is it the Government's intent to utilize PON as the base

agnostic BAN for transport of all tenant traffic?

Offerors should propose the best solution for the agnostic

BAN transport.

82 Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD

5.2 Will the Government be responsible for ensuring cyber

compliance for WAPs and wireless controllers converged onto the agnostic BAN to include reconfiguration and C2C integration?

Wireless is not required for this effort.

83 Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD

5.2 How many DWDM Nodes are there at MCRD San

Diego?

There are no DWDM nodes at

MCRD SD.

84 Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD

5.2 How many Degrees are configured per each node? See response to Q83 above.

85 Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD

5.2 Will the Government to provide a diagram of the

existing DWDM network?

See response to Q83 above.

86 Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD

5.2 Is it the Government's intention to transport the PON

OLT 10 Gb connections across the DWDM system?

See response to Q83 above.

87 Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD

5.2 Will the Government provide a complete DWDM circuit

list including any SONET [DS1, DS3, OC3, etc.] currently transported across the BAN?

See response to Q83 above.

88 Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD

5.2 Is it the Government's intention to add any additional

circuits to the DWDM system?

See response to Q83 above.

89 Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD

5.2 What Feature Package is presently installed on the

DWDM system?

See response to Q83 above.

90 Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD

5.2 Will the Government provide a current inventory of the

cards and optics presently installed in the DWDM system at MCRD San Diego?

See response to Q83 above.

91 Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD

5.2 Will the Government provide a current inventory of the

optical Channels presently in use at MCRD San Diego?

See response to Q83 above.

92 Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD

5.2 Will the Government provide a provide a list of any

existing GFE spares, per system, that could possibly be available for reuse?

There are no existing GFE spares.

93 Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD

5.2 Is there a 7194 or TNMS Management Platform for the

DWDM system?

See response to Q83 above.

94 Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD

5.2 If there a 7194 or TNMS Management Platform, what

versions of OS and Applications are on this system?

See response to Q83 above.

95 Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD

5.2 Is there a SONET device/equipment attached to the

DWDM system?

See response to Q83 above.

96 Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD

5.2 How many 1150 OLT's are presently being deployed? There are currently two 1150

OLTs presently deployed at

MCRD SD.

97 Attachment 12-SOW for MCRD

5.2 Does the current MCRD SD PON network employ PON

protection in the form of redundant OLT's, or redundant connections between ONTs and OLTs?

PON protection is not required as part of this effort.

98 Attachment 6-BAN

Solution Architecture

CONOPS

4.3.5 Will the Offeror be required to provided redundant

uplinks to all ONTs as part of the MCRD modernization, or only to critical users?

Redundant uplinks are not required as part of this effort.

99 Attachment 6-BAN

Solution Architecture

CONOPS

4.3.5 If redundant uplinks are only required for critical users, can the Government identify the quantity and locations of the critical users?

See response to Q98 above.

100 Solicitation Submission

Instructions

The Solicitation Instructions state that offerors shall submit their proposals via the PIEE Solicitation Module.

We were unable to find the Solicitation within the PIEE system. Can the Government please verify that PIEE should be used for proposal submissions.

Due to the CUI information included in this Solicitation offerors intending to submit proposals for this Solicitation shall provide their active

CAGE codes to the Contract

Specialists with a copy to the

Contracting Officer no later than 12:00pm on 11 July 2023 to ensure they have access to the Solicitation within the PIEE

Solicitation Module.

Submission Instructions within the Solicitation have been updated to reflect this.

101 Solicitation 3. QUESTIONS

AND

CLARIFICATIONS

Will the Government be reopening the Q&A dialogue period after they have digested the questions from industry?

The Government does not intend to hold further rounds of questions and answers but reserves the right to do so if in the Government’s best interests.

102 Solicitation 3. QUESTIONS

AND

CLARIFICATIONS

We respectfully request PEO Digital extend the period for offerors to submit questions/clarifications an additional two weeks, to June 5.

See response to Q101 above.

103 Solicitation 1. OVERVIEW Will the Government award the Proposed Delivery Order for the MCRD location as scoped and priced in the offeror's submitted response?

Yes, the Government plans to award the Proposed Delivery

Order for MCRD as scoped and priced in the offeror’s submitted response.

104 Solicitation 1. OVERVIEW Will offerors be given the opportunity to modify their proposed technical approach, materials and labor for the

MCRD location based on results from the Verification

Site Survey?

This will be a firm fixed price requirement, however, should a major discrepancy be found a modification may be executed after the VSS.

105 Other N/A Has the Government facilitated a pre-RFP site survey visit for the MCRD location?

A Pre-RFP site survey will not be conducted for MCRD, however, pre-solicitation surveys are likely in future orders under the IDIQ.

106 Attachment 8, Existing

Telecommunications and Network

Infrastructure

Pages 2 & 3 Can the Government provide current equipment make/model, quantities, and Approved Acquisition

Objective quantities for the RDSD location?

We have not established AAOs for any installation. Attachment

8 has been updated to change the title on page 2 to “Existing

Quantities.”

107 Solicitation 3. QUESTIONS

AND

CLARIFICATIONS

Regarding Submission Instructions: We respectfully request the contracting office extend the proposal due date by 30 days.

The Government had extended the due date from 26 June 2023 to 11 July 2023, the

Solicitation has been updated to reflect this change.

108 Solicitation 10.1 Volume II Past

Performance

Besides complying with the page limit for Volume II and the minimum of 3 past performance summaries, is there a maximum number of recent and relevant past performance summaries and PPQs an Offeror may submit?

The Government confirms that

3 is the maximum number of past performance summaries.

109 Solicitation Evaluation 3.3

Factor 3 - Past

Performance

Is an Offeror evaluated more favorably if they submit more than the minimum of 3 recent and relevant past performance efforts?

No. Past Performance for all offerors will be evaluated in accordance with FAR 52.212-2

Addendum, Section 3.3, Factor

3 – Past Performance.

110 Solicitation 10.1 Volume II Past

Performance

Is it acceptable for an Offeror to submit as past performance a contract where the dollar amount of their company's portion of the effort is less than the required

$10-30M parameters as long as the total value of the referenced project/contract is at least $10M?

See response to Q10 above.

111 Solicitation 10.1 Volume II Past

Performance

Is an Offeror's past performance evaluated more favorably if the effort their company actually performed is between $10-30 million of the total contract value?

See response to Q10 above.

112 Attachment 12 -

Statement of Work

1.3 This section states that "attachment 8 contains the

existing telecommunications and network infrastructure configuration items and should be consulted for consideration in compatibility." However, the column entitled "RDSD" found in attachment 8 is missing information for the existing voice equipment. Can this information be provided so that we can generate a comparable Bill of Materials and solution for this location?

There is no existing voice equipment on MCRD SD.

113 Attachment 8, Existing

Telecommunications and Network

Infrastructure

RDSD column The column entitled "RDSD" found in attachment 8 is missing information for the existing voice equipment. If that information is not available, can the contracting office please provide sample data so that all responses are using the same information to generate their BOM and response for easier evaluation and comparison by the contracting office?

There is no existing voice equipment on MCRD SD.

Attachment 13 has been provided to reflect current PON and expected growth at MCRD

SD.

114 Attachment 12 -

Statement of Work

5.1 How many total users can be migrated to VoIP? Per the Attachment 12 SOW, Offerors shall maximize VoIP.

See Attachment 13 for known network information to support

PDO solution development.

115 Attachment 12 -

Statement of Work

5.1 How many total users cannot be migrated to VoIP and

therefore must receive service via analog voice gateway?

Per the Attachment 12 SOW, Offerors shall maximize VoIP.

See Attachment 13 for known network information to support

PDO solution development.

116 Attachment 12 -

Statement of Work

5.1.2 Licenses for the phone system shall include 5% growth

over what number of total users?

The Government confirms 5% growth is required for licenses.

See Attachment 13 for known network information to support

PDO solution development.

117 Attachment 12 -

Statement of Work

5.1.2 Port capacity of analog voice gateways shall include

10% growth over what number of total ports?

The Government confirms 10% growth is required for analog voice. See Attachment 13 for known network information to support PDO solution development.

118 Attachment 12 -

Statement of Work

5.1.3 Replacement phones sets shall include 5% spares of what total quantity of phones?

The Government confirms 5% spares is required. See

Attachment 13 for known network information to support

PDO solution development.

119 Attachment 12 -

Statement of Work

5.2 Can the Government provide a diagram of the current

PON and a list of PON system components being used?

Attachment 13, RDSD Current

PON Network and Expected

Growth, has been incorporated to include known network information to support PDO solution development.

120 Solicitation 10.1 Volume II Past

Performance

Are Microsoft Word and PDF both acceptable formats for submitted Past Performance Questionnaires?

The Government confirms that both Microsoft word and PDF formats are acceptable for

PPQs.

121 Solicitation pg. 107, Section 11.1

3 & 4 Paragraph 4 says “the price proposal shall be submitted via Attachment 10: Pricing Workbook” but paragraph 3 says “The Offeror shall prepare and submit the cost/price proposal narrative substantiation and rationale in Adobe

Acrobat format...” Is a price narrative required for this proposal, and if so, what should it include?

The price narrative is an opportunity for offerors to provide any pricing methods that may need to be explained.

122 Solicitation pg. 100, Section 6

6 The “electronic file naming convention” instructions conflict with the File Naming Structure provided on pg.

101 in Table 2. Will the Government please clarify how our proposal files should be named?

The Government has updated the Table 2 naming structure.

The electronic file naming convention is as follows:

company, volume #, document title.xxx; where xxx is the file type (i.e., docx .xls, .mpp or

.pdf).

ABC_Vol I_Tech_App.xxx

123 Solicitation pg. 100, Section 6

6 The “electronic file naming convention” instructions conflict with the File Naming Structure provided on pg.

101 in Table 2. Will the Government please confirm that each Section of our proposal should be submitted in a separate file as shown in Table 2?

The Government has updated the Table 2 naming structure.

Each Offeror must submit its proposal materials in separate volumes and files as identified in Table 2.

124 Solicitation pg. 101, Table 2

- The File Naming Structure in Table 2 asks for files in

.docx format, but the instructions on pg. 100 say “All proposal volumes shall be in searchable Adobe Acrobat

.pdf files.” Should Offerors submit our proposals in .pdf or .docx format?

The Government has updated

Table 2 to remove docx. All proposal volumes shall be in searchable Adobe Acrobat .pdf files. The Offeror shall submit the Project Schedule in

Microsoft Project 2016 for PC and the price breakdown shall include Microsoft Excel 2016 spreadsheets with formulas intact.

125 Solicitation pg. 102, Section 8.2

1 This paragraph refers to the transmittal letter, should this paragraph be moved to Section 8.1?

See response to Q50 Above.

126 Solicitation, pg. 102, Section 8.1

2 The Executive Summary requires a signed SF1449, which will take up one of the allotted two pages. Can the

SF1449 be excluded from page count?

See response to Q22 above.

127 Solicitation, pg. 102, Section 8.3

1 Section 8.3 asks for a cross-reference matrix for Volume

I, Section 2, Factor 1 Technical Approach but

Solicitation Section 8.5.1 says that our Overarching

Technical Approach “will not address all of the

The Government will not remove the cross-reference requirement for Volume I, requirements in the Base IDIQ SOW.” Additionally, Section 8.5.2 says “the Offeror’s Technical Project

Solution will not address all of the requirements delineated in the PDO SOW.” Will the government remove the cross-reference requirement for Volume I, Section 2, Factor 1 Technical Approach?

Section 2, Factor 1 Technical

Approach.

The cross reference matrix shall only address SOW requirements identified in 8.5

Volume I, Section 2, Factor 1

Technical Approach, 9 Volume

I, Section 3, Factor 2

Management Approach and 10

Volume II, Section 4, Factor 3

– Past Performance.

128 Solicitation pg. 104, Section 9.2

1 The Solicitation states that “the Offeror’s [overarching] staffing plan shall indicate the place(s) of performance.”

In execution, Place of Performance will be determined at the Delivery Order level – will the Government remove this requirement?

The Government confirms that the “place of performance” requirement for the overarching staffing plan is not required.

Section 9.2 has been updated to reflect this change.

129 Solicitation pg. 105, Section 10.1

1 The instructions say the Government is looking for references with a “total value between $10-30 million.”

Will the Government accept a Past Performance reference for a project valued at more than $30 million that meets all past performance requirements?

See response to Q10 above.

130 Attachment 10, PDO

Pricing Workbook

Price Summary and

Labor Tabs

On the Price Summary tab, CLIN 0004 is shown as

“MCRD San Diego Training”, but “MCRD San Diego

Training” is listed as CLIN 0003 on the Labor tab.

Should the CLINs on the Labor tab be updated to reflect the CLIN numbering on the Price Summary tab?

See response to Q53 above.

131 Attachment 12, PDO

SOW, pg. 8, Section 5.1 and 5.1.1

1, 2 Will the government consider providing existing voice and data architecture designs for MCRD San Diego?

Understanding the current services running on ethernet and PON today will help ensure responses for the PDO

(Section 2.2) and Pricing Workbook estimates are built as accurately as possible.

Attachment 13, RDSD Current

PON Network and Expected

Growth, has been incorporated to include known network

132 Attachment 12, PDO

SOW, pg. 8, Section

5.1.3

1 The solicitation states that the “quantity of replacement phone sets shall include 5% spares.” Can the

Government provide detail on the current number of phones?

The Government Confirms 5% spares are required. Please see the incorporated Attachment

13, Current PON Network and

Expected Growth.

133 Attachment 12, PDO

SOW, pg. 8, Section

5.1.3

1 The solicitation states that the “The Contractor shall provide at least one voice gateway per Distribution Node

(DN)." Can the Government confirm how many phones need to be supported per each DN?

Per the Attachment 12 SOW, Offerors shall maximize VoIP.

Please see the incorporated

Attachment 13, Current PON

Network and Expected Growth.

134 Attachment 12, PDO

SOW, pg. 9, Section 5.2

2 To meet the solicitation requirements within Section 5.2

“Voice Equipment Installation and Configuration.” Will the government consider providing PON information such as buildings and rooms each OLT and ONT is installed along with the current OLT line card configurations and software versions? This information provides responders with the needed data to perform a full analysis for the 24-port to 48-port ONT exchange requirements as well as the requirement to ensure procured OLT cards and software updates included within the Pricing Workbook estimates are built as accurately as possible.

Attachment 13, RDSD Current

PON Network and Expected

Growth, has been incorporated to include known network information to support PDO solution development.

135 Attachment 12, PDO

SOW, Section 5.13.1

10 There is no Section 5.12.1 (Safety Systems) in the IDIQ

Base SOW. Will the government please provide task/ requirement language of Safety Systems for vendors to review and provide instructions as to where this section should be addressed (2.1 or 2.2) within proposal responses?

The Government confirms that this should state 5.12

(Environmental Safety and

Health). Attachment 12 paragraph 15.13.1 has been updated to reflect 5.12.

136 Solicitation Will the USMC allow use of existing enterprise software and/or support contracts in conjunction with this contract?

If GEMSS applicable equipment is used, it will be covered under the GEMSS contract. If the equipment is not covered under GEMSS then a warranty should be proposed.

137 Solicitation 5.11.4.1 Will the USMC define required service level agreement for warranty support? For example, Cisco currently has 8 hours a day X 5 days a week X Next Business Day

Shipping or 8x5xNBD

Section 5.11.4.1 has been updated to define service level agreement time frames for the

IDIQ.

138 We were delayed in receipt of CUI documentation and have not…