QA_26I4414_130526.pdf

No. Question RFI Page # Answer Comments

1 Does the Government hold perpetual Oracle E Business Suite licenses for GCSS-MC?

Section 3.2 Capability Support Services; Capability Narrative

Yes, the Government holds perpetual Oracle E Business Suite licenses for GCSS-MC.

2 Are Oracle EBS licenses owned directly by the Government, or held via an integrator or third party contracting vehicle?

Section 3.2 Capability Support Services; Capability Narrative

The licenses are owned directly by the Government. The contractor will be authorized to operate and maintain the software under the Government's license agreement.

Which Oracle components are licensed today (EBS modules, Oracle Database, middleware, SOA, OBIEE, Identity, etc.)?

Section 3.2 Capability Support Services; Capability Narrative

Oracle Database 19c, OAM 12c, OIM 12c, OID 12c, and EBS 12.2.5

4 Are any Oracle licenses term-based or subscription-only, or are all licenses perpetual?

Section 3.2 Capability Support Services; Capability Narrative

The licenses are term based and are sufficient for sustainment activities.

5 Are there any policy or contractual constraints that would require OEM support rather than third party support during sustainment?

Section 3.2 Capability Support Services; Capability Narrative

No. The Government is seeking a qualified contractor to provide sustainment support. There are no known constraints that mandate the use of OEM-direct support for the activities described in this PWS.

6 Is Oracle currently under an active support contract for GCSS-MC?

Section 3.2 Capability Support Services; Section 3.4 Legacy PWS Context

Oracle Consulting is not under active support for GCSS-MC.

7 If so, when does Oracle support expire, and are renewals planned?

Section 3.2 Capability Support Services; Section 3.4 Legacy PWS Context

N/A. As stated, Oracle Consulting is not under active support. The incoming contractor will be responsible for all sustainment activities.

8 Which responsibilities are currently handled by Oracle versus the incumbent PDSS contractor?

Section 3.2 Capability Support Services; Section 3.4 Legacy PWS Context

GCSS-MC support is performed by the incumbent PDSS contractor.

Is the Government intentionally seeking alternatives to OEM direct support as part of the move to a narrower sustainment model?

Section 3.2 Capability Support Services; Section 3.4 Legacy PWS Context

The Government is seeking support for sustainment and decommissioning and will conduct full and open competition to gain that support.

10 What is the current Oracle EBS and database version in Production?

Section 3.2 Capability Support Service

Oracle Database 19c and EBS 12.2.5.

11 Is the system considered functionally frozen, with only break/fix and security driven changes authorized?

Section 3.2 Capability Support Service

GCSS-MC will only receive break/fix & security changes IAW this PWS. However, if an update outside of those boundaries is required, the Government may or may not authorize the change. This methodology will be adhered to from contract award through complete GCSS-MC decommissioning.

Are Oracle CPUs, IAVAs, and emergency patches currently applied:

- by the incumbent,

- by Oracle,

- or by Government-directed processes?

Section 3.2 Capability Support Service

Oracle CPUs, IAVAs, and emergency patches are currently applied by the system integrator using Government-directed processes (i.e. Change Advisory Board (CAB)).

13 Are there known system stability or technical debt risks the Government expects the next contractor to manage through the end of life?

Section 3.2 Capability Support Service

The Government's expectation is the contractor will sustain GCSS-MC in accordance with historic PDSS metrics. Any updates to the system will be made on a "by exception only" basis. All activities necessary to maintain the system at its current level and all cyber security requirements will be supported by the contractor.

14 Who currently owns RMF artifacts and ATO maintenance for GCSS-MC?

Section 3.2 – Cybersecurity and Information Assurance

The Government owns the RMF artifacts. The contractor supports ATO maintenance.

Is the sustainment contractor expected to:

- maintain existing RMF documentation only, or

- support full ATO reauthorization cycles?

Section 3.2 – Cybersecurity and Information Assurance

The contractor shall generate, review, and update cybersecurity documentation as required by the DoD RFM processes, therefore maintain existing and create new documentation when necessary. The DoD RFM process includes the ATO process, therefore the Contractor shall support the full ATO reauthorization cycles. The reauthorization process is currently underway and will be complete prior to the contract award.

16 Are there known POA&Ms, audit findings, or vulnerability trends that must be managed through the end of life?

Section 3.2 – Cybersecurity and Information Assurance

Yes, for as long as there is an ATO, per the DoD RFM process, all must be managed through End of Life.

17 Is the Government open to risk-based vulnerability mitigation approaches versus full OEM patch application?

Section 3.2 – Cybersecurity and Information Assurance

Yes, with appropriate approval.

18 Will Tier 1 and Tier 2 user support remain Government provided or contractor provided?

Section 3.2 – Help Desk and User Support; 3.2 – System Monitoring

Contractor provided.

19 Is the contractor expected to operate a physical GOC, or integrate with an existing operations center?

Section 3.2 – Help Desk and User Support; 3.2 – System Monitoring

The contractor will integrate with and manage the existing operations center. The GOC is led by the Government and supported and managed by the contractor. The Government retains full authority and oversight.

20 Which ITSM tools are authoritative today (Remedy, BMC, ServiceNow)?

Section 3.2 – Help Desk and User Support; 3.2 – System Monitoring

Remedy is used for Help Desk Management and SBM is used for Configuration Management.

Are SLA targets expected to remain consistent with historical PDSS metrics, or adjusted under a minimum essential sustainment model?

Section 3.2 – Help Desk and User Support; 3.2 – System Monitoring

SLA agreements will remain consistent with historic PDSS metrics.

22 Is there a target decision point or sunset window for GCSS-MC shutdown?

Section 3.3 Decommissioning Services

Currently, the Government is targeting 3 years for decommission of the current system.

23 Has a successor logistics system been selected or is it still under evaluation?

Section 3.3 Decommissioning Services

The USMC has conducted a Materiel Solutions Analysis which reviewed successor systems.

The final determination for the successor system is not complete.

What level of responsibility is expected of the sustainment contractor for:

- data archiving,

- documentation,

- execution versus planning support?

Section 3.3 Decommissioning Services

The contractor will be responsible for data archiving, all documentation, and collaborating with the System Integrator responsible for transitioning GCSS-MC with regards to data migration.

25 Will post shutdown read only access be required for compliance or audit purposes?

Section 3.3 Decommissioning Services

All documentation required for audit and compliance post shutdown will be developed by the contractor. Additionally, prior to system decommission, the contractor will be required to back up the legacy system in the event there is an issue during system transition.

26 Are system documentation, scripts, and artifacts Government owned data?

Section 3.1 Transition In;

Section 3.3 Documentation Management

Yes, this information will be made available during transition and upon request by the contractor.

Will full access to existing runbooks, interface definitions, and historical documentation be provided during transition?

Section 3.1 Transition In;

Section 3.3 Documentation Management

Yes, this information will be made available during transition.

28 Are there any restrictions on the reuse of historical documentation strictly for sustainment purposes?

Section 3.1 Transition In;

Section 3.3 Documentation Management

No.

29 Does the Government anticipate a full and open competition or a limited source vehicle?

Contract Vehicles / Capability Narrative

The Government will conduct a full and open competition.

30 Are small business subcontracting goals expected?

Contract Vehicles / Capability Narrative

No

Is the Government receptive to teamed solutions separating sustainment, service desk, and physical decommissioning execution?

Contract Vehicles / Capability Narrative

The Government is not receptive to separation of these activities.

From the Government’s perspective, what defines success for GCSS-MC over the next 24–48 months: operational stability, cost reduction, cybersecurity risk reduction, or continuity through decommissioning?

Applies Across Sections 3 & 4 Success is defined as continuous operations at current levels, maintained cyber security posture and its risk reduction, and continuity and collaboration through GCSS-MC decommissioning as required.

The introduction for section 3.2 states “This RFI does not include system enhancements or functional upgrades.”; however, the first bullet states “The vendor shall design, build, test, and implement code, configuration, and other Government approved design changes/fixes into the GCSS-MC Production and Production Support System (PSS).”

Please clarify the scope of anticipated design and development work.

Pg. 2 The design and development work will be restricted to break/fixes and addressing cybersecurity vulnerabilities. No new capabilities will be added to the existing system.

34 During the decommissioning of the system, would the vendor have any involvement in transitioning to a new environment?

Pg. 3, 4 The successful offeror will be responsible for collaboration for the transition efforts. The vendor will not be responsible for building the new environment.

OCI Consideration: Is it anticipated that the contractor performing sustainment and decommissioning services will be subject to Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) restrictions for any future follow-on enterprise logistics system replacing GCSS-MC?

N/A No

Successor System Coordination: To what extent should the contractor plan for coordination with or integration into a successor logistics system during the decommissioning period (e.g., containerization, data migration, interface transition, or parallel operations)?

Sec 3.3

Parallel operations while the new system is being built, data migration, and interface transition will be required. The contractor shall be responsible for planning and executing the sustainment of parallel operations, supporting data migration activities as defined in the Data Migration Plan, and managing the transition of interfaces from GCSS-MC to the successor system.

Data Strategy (Archival vs. Migration): Does the Government anticipate that GCSS-MC data will be solely archived for compliance purposes, or should contractors plan for structured data migration and transformation to support a successor system?

Sec 3.3 There will be some data archiving, but current data will have to be transformed and migrated.

Interface Transition Responsibility: What level of responsibility will the contractor have for managing or transitioning GCSS-MC external interfaces during the decommissioning period, particularly as connected systems evolve or are replaced?

Sec 3.2

An interface with the replacement system will have to be established during parallel operations, the successor system systems integrator will be responsible for this interface and its implementation. The contractor selected for this PWS will be responsible for maintaining current, active interfaces.

Definition of Minimum Essential Sustainment: Can the Government further clarify the boundaries of “minimum essential sustainment,” particularly regarding allowable activities for system stability, security, and operational continuity?

Sec 3.4

Changes to address break/fixes and cybersecurity vulnerabilities are considered minimal essential sustainment. Additionally, the Contractor must meet the RAM, GOC, and Help Desk requirements as minimal essential sustainment. 24/7/365 ESD, Reliability of 99.44%, Availability 95%, Maintainability of less than 4 hours downtime are considered minimal essential requirements. Minimal essential sustainment is defined as the limited application of technical and engineering activities necessary to maintain the current operational capability, security posture, and compliance of the legacy GCSS-MC system in its existing configuration until its phased decommissioning.

What is INCLUDED in this scope:

Operational Continuity: Maintaining the system's baseline operational availability, reliability, and maintainability (e.g., 24/7/365 Help Desk support, incident management).

Defect Resolution: Analysis, root cause identification, and resolution of existing system defects (break/fix).

Cybersecurity & Compliance: Implementation of mandatory cybersecurity updates, security patches, Information Assurance Vulnerability Alerts (IAVAs), and Security Technical Implementation Guides (STIGs) to maintain the Authority to Operate (ATO).

40 288 Maintenance Change requests - Can you provide how many of these are bug fixes

vs. functionality update vs. new functionality development?

Sec 3.2

This level of detail will be made available as part of the GFI. However, consistent with the PWS, all future changes will be limited to break/fixes and cybersecurity vulnerabilities.

Historical Metrics:

Total Average Yearly Sustainment CRs = 245

Total Average Yearly Sustainment Defects = 38

Total Functionality Update = 79

Total New Functionality Development = 6

36 interfaces across 20+ external parties – Can you quantify interface exchange frequencies by real-time interfaces vs. batch interfaces? How many per day, per week, per month, etc.?

Sec 3.2

8 On Demand 1 Event Driven 1 Weekly 20 Daily 6 multiple times per day

42 60 REMEDY requests daily – Can you provide an average split of these across Levels 0, 1, and 2?

Sec 3.2

This level of detail regarding the split of service requests will be made available as part of the GFI.

Historical Metrics:

Sheet1