EUHW RFP Questions Pt 2 - 2NOV2018 Final.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 36 KB Posted
- Attached to
- NGEN-R End User Hardware as a Service and Supply
- Solicitation number
- N00039-18-R-0004
About this file
This document contains questions and answers regarding a solicitation for a Navy end user hardware contract. Key details include:
-
The solicitation will be released on or around July 31, 2018, with a closing date of September 14, 2018, for a single-award IDIQ contract with both fixed price and cost reimbursement CLINs. The period of performance includes a three-year base period and six one-year options.
-
The requirement is for procuring Department of Navy end user hardware as a service and supply, including laptops, desktops, tablets, virtual desktops, thin/zero clients, and associated peripherals, to support networks including NMCI, ONE-Net, and MCEN. Delivery of hardware as a service includes provisioning, storage, configuration, maintenance, and disposition.
-
Over 50 questions from industry are answered to provide clarification on technical requirements, delivery timelines, security protocols, and other contract details. Specifications include device types, minimum technical standards, and testing requirements.
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
Latest 50 of 62 listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Q&A 2 Ready to Post
| # | Question or Comment | Answer | RESPONSE POSTED ON ECOMMERCE |
| 1 | 14. Delivery Period for EUHW Orders |
Reference: Attachment 1 - PWS, Section 3.2.5 EUHWaaS Device Refresh, Page 16, Section 3.4.5 Shipping, Packing, .., Page 26 Attachment 11 - Service Level Requirements, SLR 37.1 Question: SOW Section 3.2.5 requires the Contractor to "deliver EUHWaaS refresh devices no earlier than three (3) days prior to the refresh date and no later than one (1) day prior to the refresh date, to specified location(s) as defined by the order."
SOW Section 3.4.5 then requires the Contractor to "deliver EUHW within five (5) days of order receipt [emphasis added]" Lastly SLR 37.1 calls for:
"Order to Delivery - End User Hardware as a Service (EUHWaaS) & Purchased EUHW Deliver EUHWaaS and purchased EUHW devices(s) to the location specified in the order in <= 5 days.
How Measured: Contractor acceptance [emphasis added] of a Task Order and/or build-out for an as-a-service or purchased device shall be the measurement start point; receipt and acceptance of the order at specified base, building and room shall be the measurement end point.
Target >= 99.00%" Could the Government reconcile the difference between Section 3.4.5 of the SOW which mandates delivery within "five (5) days of order receipt" and SLR 37.1 which counts the five (5) days from "Contractor acceptance of a Task Order"?
We are certain Government is aware that this five-day delivery period requirement is extremely challenging to meet given the number and how geographically diverse Navy sites are. We urge that the Government clearly define the requirements for (i) order receipt, (ii) order acknowledgement, and (iii) order acceptance to avoid confusion.
Secondly, we respectfully request that the Government allow vendors a period of up to 30 days to make deliveries after order acceptance. This 30-day period is consistently with most if not all Government contracts that require the delivery of COTS hardware. By mandating a 5-day delivery period, the EUHW Contractor must:
-Have the equipment ready in stock
- Ship them within 24 or 48 hours after order acceptance
- Rely on air freight to reach most CONUS sites
- Maintain warehousing & integration facilities overseas to be able to service OCONUS sites within 5 days As the Government can imagine, this 5-day delivery requirement will impose significant additional costs. At the same time, maintain warehousing and integration facilities will also expose the program to additional security risks.
We urge the Government to seriously consider the foregoing and revise the delivery requirement accordingly. A SOW is not included in the RFP, only a PWS. An amendment will be issued to clarify the language in the affected PWS sections and Attachment 11, SLR 37.1.
Regarding PWS section 3.2.5, the requirement is for delivery of refresh devices within a specific timeframe. The order for refresh devices will be establised in advance based on a previously coordinated refresh schedule. Typically, there is 30 days advance notice to fulfill refresh orders. The purpose for the timeframe at PWS section 3.2.5 is to minimize storage/equipment staging impacts at refresh sites.
Regarding PWS section 3.4.5, the requirement is for new orders, not refresh of existing devices. An RFP amendment will be issued to amend the CONUS and OCONUS delivery standards.
| 11/2/18 | |
| 2 | 10. Machine Name |
Reference: Attachment 1 - PWS, Section 3.2.1 Core Build Imaging, Page 9
| Question: We are under the assumption that the Government will provide a list of Machine Names with each Task Order. How will the Government provide this list? For example, will they be included in a spreadsheet? | The Machine Names will be provided by the Network Manager. The EUHW Contractor will need to work with the Network Manager on the logistics. | 11/2/18 |
| 3 | Security Requirements for Integration Facilities |
Reference: Attachment 1 - PWS, Section 3.2.1 Core Build Imaging, Page 9 Question: Does the Government have any specific security requirement for the facility where the EUHW Contractor will store and deploy NIPR disk images to EUHW devices and house its personnel who will do work on such devices after they have been properly imaged?
| We would like to repeat the same question for SIPR images. Does the Government have any specific security requirement for the facility where the EUHW Contractor will store and deploy SIPR disk images to EUHW devices and house its personnel who will do work on such devices after they have been properly imaged? Furthermore, is it necessary or required for this facility to include a SIPR network connection? Such a connection might be necessary to facilitate the transfer of images from the Government to the EUHW Contractor. | An amendment will be issued to the RFP to update PWS section 3.6, Program Security, update PWS section 3.4.5, Shipping, Packing, Tracking, Handling, Storage, and Transportation Requirements, and update the DD-254 to eliminate the requirement for the Contractor to generate or have access to classified information; a SIPR connection is not needed, desired, or required for this contract. Security requirements for CUI are stated in DFARS 252.204-7012 Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting. **The DD Form 254 will be updated at a later date. | 11/2/18 |
| 4 | Personnel Doing Imaging Work and Security Clearance |
Reference: Attachment 1 -PWS, Section 3.2.1 Core Build Imaging, Page 9 Question: Under the referenced section, the Government states the following:
"Personnel [emphasis added] who conduct imaging work will be cleared contractors, at Secret level, and meet Cybersecurity Workforce (CSWF) requirements."
Does the term "personnel" in the referenced sentence refer to individuals who are currently doing imaging work under contract with the Government? Or does it refer to individuals who will be employed by the EUHW Contractor to be selected via this RFP?
Does the Government have any specific security clearance requirements for personnel involved in the following phases of NIPR and SIPR imaging work?
| Creation, Deploying images to EUHW (manual), Deploying images to EUHW (automated with system attendants), and Operate EUHW to do quality check and enter/extract information as required (i.e., ComputerHardwareIDs, etc.) | References in the PWS to "Contractor personnel" refer to the personnel employed by the EUHW Contractor. In accordance with PWS section 3.6, Program Security, the contractor shall obtain and manage certifications for all personnel (as required) regardless of work phase, and in accordance with PWS section 3.2.1, all personnel involved in the imaging process must maintain a Secret Clearance. | 11/2/18 |
| 5 | 15. How to Calculate Delivery Time for EUHW Orders |
Reference:Attachment 1 - PWS, Section 3.2.5 EUHWaaS Device Refresh, Page 16, Section 3.4.5 Shipping, Packing, .., Page 26 Attachment 11 - Service Level Requirements, SLR 37.1 Question: We surmise that there will be many large consolidated Task Orders for EUHWaaS or Purchased EUHW involving many different sites with different installation schedules. On top of that SOW Section 3.2.5 gives the EUHW Contractor a very narrow window to make deliveries by requiring the Contractor to "deliver EUHWaaS refresh devices no earlier than three (3) days prior to the refresh date and no later than one (1) day prior to the refresh date, to specified location(s) as defined by the order."
Given this complexity, how does one go about counting the five (5) days to delivery after order receipt or acceptance (which is a matter we raised in Question 14 above)? We are afraid that SLR 37.1 is overly simplistic and cannot be implemented. Yet, it will impose extraordinary costs for the EQUHW Contractor has to bear and ultimately pass on to the Government. Outside of the 5-day delivery requirement, SLR 37.1 also needs to be restructured with an additional level of granularity to more accurately and realistically measure the Contractor's delivery performance. An amendment will be issued to clarify the language in the affected PWS sections and Attachment 11, Service Level Requirements, SLR 37.1.
Regarding PWS section 3.2.5, the requirement is for delivery of refresh devices within a specific timeframe. The order for refresh devices will be establised in advance based on a previously coordinated refresh schedule. Typically, there is 30 days advance notice to fulfill refresh orders. The purpose for the timeframe at PWS section 3.2.5 is to minimize storage/equipment staging impacts at refresh sites.
Regarding PWS section 3.4.5, the requirement is for new orders, not refresh of existing devices.
| 11/2/18 | |
| 6 | Special Sealing and Marking for Systems with SIPR Disk Images |
Reference: Attachment 1 - PWS, Section 3.4.5 Shipping, Packing, ..., Transportation Requirements
| Question: Must each SIPR system carton be sealed and is any special marking required? | An amendment to the RFP will update the PWS to include MIL-STD-129 . NOTE: SIPR image is Controlled Unclassified Information. | 11/2/18 |
| 7 | 1. Involvement of EUHW Contractor in the Creation of Government-Provided Software Image |
Reference: Attachment 1 - PWS, Section 2. Scope, Page 2 Attachment 1 - PWS, Section 3.2.1 Core Build Imaging, Page 9
| Question: In the referenced Section 2, the Government states that "the Contractor shall install the Government-provided core build software image on designated EUHW." Does the Government anticipate having the EUHW Contractor directly and actively involved in the creation of the image beyond answering questions, locating & providing software drivers, updates & patches, etc.? | No, the EUHW Contractor does not creaate the image. The Government or its designee, in all cases where an image copy is ordered, will provide the image. | 11/2/18 |
| 8 | Video Display Ports on 2-in-1 Detachable |
Reference: Attachment 10 - EUHW Device Specifications, <General>, Row 12 Question: The current requirement for the 2-in-1 Detachable calls for 1 VGA or higher and 1 Display Port or higher. Since the VGA interface has long been obsolete, could the Government remove this type of port requirement? Please also note that the Government does not specify this port for any of the desktop configurations.
| Furthermore, we request that the Government allow for mini-DisplayPort to meet the "Video Display Ports" requirement of the 2-in-1 Detachable. | An amendment to RFP Attachment 10 will clarify the visual display port requirement. | 11/2/18 |
| 9 | Speeds of the Processor for the Mid-Range Laptop |
Reference: Attachment 10 - EUHW Device Specifications, <General>, Row 5
| Question: The requirement calls for a processor "Base/Boost Clock Speed GHz" of "2.9/3.9 or higher" for the Mid-Range Laptop. The latest Intel Gen 8 i7 processor that is suitable for this requirement has lower clock frequencies. We request that the Government change the clock frequencies to read "1.9/4.2 or higher". | An amendment to RFP Attachment 10, Device Specifications, will update the "Base/Boost Clock Speed GHZ" Processor speed threshold for the Mid-Range Laptop. | 11/2/18 |
| 10 | Speeds of the Processors for the Rugged Laptop and Tablet |
Reference: Attachment 10 - EUHW Device Specifications, <General>, Row 5 Question: Similar to the clock speed issues discussed in Questions 19 and 20 above, the latest Intel Generation 8 processors have lower clock frequencies. We request that the Government make the following changes to make it possible for vendors to propose rugged devices based on the aforementioned processor generation.
- For the Rugged Laptop, please lower the "Base/Boost Clock Speed GHz" to "1.7/3.6"
| - For the Rugged Tablet, please lower the "Base/Boost Clock Speed GHz" to "1.2/3.3" | The thresholds for the "Base/Boost Clock Speed GHz" of the ruggedized devices remains unchanged in Attachment 10, Device Specifications. | 11/2/18 |
| 11 | USB Ports on 2-in-1 Detachable |
Reference: Attachment 10 - EUHW Device Specifications, <General>, Row 11
| Question: The current requirement for the 2-in-1 Detachable calls for 3 USB ports, 2 of which are to be USB 3.0 or USB C. This requirement is limiting to the selection of compliant products. We request that the Government modify the requirement to be 1 USB ports that is USB 3.0 or USB C. | The requirement for USB Ports on the 2-in-1 Detachable remains unchanged in Attachment 10, Device Specifications. | 11/2/18 |
| 12 | 17. FCC Class A |
Reference: Attachment 10 - EUHW Device Specifications, <Common HW REQs>, Row 13
| Question: Does the Government anticipate having Navy personnel work on their NGEN notebook or tablet computers from their homes? If so, we would advise the Government to adopt FCC Class B as a requirement as opposed to Class A as written. FCC Class A is meant for electronic devices that are used in an office environment whereas FCC Class B is applicable to the home. | An amendment to RFP Attachment 10, Device Specifications, "Common HW REQs" Tab will update the requirement to FCC Class B Compliant." | 11/2/18 |
| 13 | Video Display Ports for High Performance Desktop |
Reference: Attachment 10 - EUHW Device Specifications, <General>, Rows 12 Question: Each of the three notebook configurations, General Purpose, Mid-Range, and High-Performance Laptops, has a requirement for a VGA port. Since the VGA interface has long been obsolete, could the Government remove this type of port requirement? Please also note that the Government does not specify this port for any of the desktop configurations.
| Furthermore, we request that the Government allow for either DisplayPort or HMDI to meet the "Video Display Ports" requirement of all three notebook configurations. | An amendment to RFP Attachment 10 will clarify the visual display port requirement. | 11/2/18 |
| 14 | 19. Speeds of the Processor for the Ultra-Small Desktop |
Reference: Attachment 10 - EUHW Device Specifications, <General>, Row 5
| Question: The requirement calls for a processor "Base/Boost Clock Speed GHz" of "3.0/4.1 or higher" for the Ultra-Small Desktop. This is the same requirement for the General Purpose Desktop. OEMs typically use much less power consuming processors to build Ultra-Small Desktop computers. These processors operate at lower clock frequencies. We request that the Government change the requirement for "Base/Boost Clock Speed GHz" to "2.1/3.5 or higher". This change will help foster a more robust competition. | The processor Base/Boost Clock Speed GHz remains as stated in Attachment 10, Device Specifications, for the Ultra-Small Desktop. | 11/2/18 | ||
| 15 | Ultra-Small Desktop The requirement for TDP of 65W or lower allows vendors to position 35W processors which are highly prevelent in Micro Desktop space, however, the base and boost clock speed requirements are forcing this category into the 65W processor. To open up competition and provide a balance of performance and cost will govt relax clock speed requirement to allow base clockspeed of 2.0 or better and boost clockspeed of 3.5 or better? | The government's requirement remains unchanged. The thresholds have been set to ensure users receive the required capability; the intent is to provide the same capability using the two different form factors. | 11/2/18 | |
| 16 | Mid-Range Desktop In order to reduce costs while maintaining like performance with graphics, will the government accept dual graphics cards to meet the 8GB graphics requirement? | An amendment to RFP Attachment 10, Devices Specifications, will be issued to reflect a 4GB minimum threshold for discrete graphics memory for the mid-range desktop. | 11/2/18 | |
| 17 | High Performance Laptop All major OEM's in the Business Class system mobile workstation industry that offer a 17" Mobile Workstation are above 6 lbs. In order to meet the computer and screen size requirements, we request the government change the weight requirement for the High Performance Laptop CLIN to be state "a minimum of 6.99lbs" | An amendment to RFP Attachment 10, Device Specifications will reflect an increased high performance laptop maximum weight. | 11/2/18 | |
| 18 | High Performance Desktop Is there a particular processor you are looking at as a benchmark for these proc requirements? | There is no benchmark product; these are minimum requirements only. | 11/2/18 | |
| 19 | Rugged Laptop Based on market research, rugged handhelds that meet Processor, RAM, Storage, Weight and Display size are not available in the market today. In order to provide a government a compliant solution, we ask the govt to change the display size to 11.6" viewable? | An amendment to RFP Attachment 10, Device Specifications will reflect a change in the display threshold for the rugged tablet. | ||
| 11/2/18 | ||||
| 20 | General Purpose Laptop In in effort to increase fair and open competition, will the government allow alternative digital video outputs? For example, HDMI in lieu of of DP | An amendment to RFP Attachment 10, Device Specifications, "Common HW Reqs" tab will be updated to clearly state that offerings which exceed the thresholds established on the "Technical Thresholds" tab are acceptable. | 11/2/18 | |
| 21 | 2-in-1 Detachable Industry for Business and Enterprise Class mobile devices has moved away from minimum weight standards for devices in favor of technology advances in computer power and efficiency through ever-slimming devices. As such, in order to align with industry standards we request that the weight requirements for this category be removed. | An amendment to RFP Attachment 10, Device Specificationsm will reflect changes to the threshold. | 11/2/18 | |
| 22 | Mid-Range Desktop In order to allow for a greater range of higher performance processors, will the government please modify the TDP required to state "140W or lower" | The Government's requirement remains unchanged. This threshold is established to meet the government's minimum requirement. A processor that needs more than 65W TDP is outside of the required class of processor. | 11/2/18 | |
| 23 | Mid-Range Laptop In order to meet current Intel Coffee Lake processor standards and provide the government with the latest Intel technology, will the government please modify the base clockspeed to 2.5 Ghz or greater to match Intel standards? | An amendment to RFP Attachment 10, Device Specifications will reflect changes to the processor thresholds. | 11/2/18 | |
| 24 | Mid-Range Desktop In an effort to reduce costs, as this is a mid-range desktop, would the government consider reducing the video requirement from 8GB to 4GB? | An amendment to RFP Attachment 10, Device Specifications, will update the discrete graphics memory for Mid-Rand Desktop. | 11/2/18 | |
| 25 | All Laptop CLIN's Please clarify the intent of the webcam requirement. Is the Navy's intent that all laptops require a webcam installed in-factory? | Yes. An amendment to RFP Attachment 10, Device Specifications, will reflect a requirement for factory-installed webcams. | 11/2/18 | |
| 26 | General Purpose Desktop Please clarify what "or higher" means when it comes DVI? Will the government accept HDMI as an alernative to DVI? | An amendment to RFP Attachment 10, Device Specifications, "Common HW Reqs" tab will be updated to clearly state that offerings which exceed the thresholds established on the "Technical Thresholds" tab are acceptable. | 11/2/18 | |
| 27 | Mid-Range DesktopAre PCI expansion slots included in the 4-PCIe slot requirement? | Yes. An amendment to RFP Attachment 10, Device Specifications, will clarify the requirement. | 11/2/18 | |
| 28 | For the requirement of a video port that is DVI or higher, will the Government accept industry standards like DisplayPort, mini DisplayPort, or HDMI in lieu of DVI? | An amendment to RFP Attachment 10, Device Specifications, "Common HW Reqs" tab will be updated to clearly state that offerings which exceed the thresholds established on the "Technical Thresholds" tab are acceptable. | 11/2/18 | |
| 29 | Rugged Laptop Our Market Research shows that ruggedized systems which meet the environmental test and minimum standards specified in this RFQ point to a class of rugged systems that do not fall within the specified weight range. As such, in order to provide the goverment with a rugged offering that can meet minimum technical requirements and facilitate competition, we ask that the government please modify the weight requirement to state a maximum of 7.8 lbs | An amendment to RFP Attachment 10, Device Specifications, will reflect a change to the threshold. | 11/2/18 | |
| 30 | General Purpose Laptop Industry for Business and Enterprise Class mobile devices has moved away from minimum weight standards for devices in favor of technology advances in computer power and efficiency through ever-slimming devices. As such, in order to align with industry standards we request that the weight requirements for this category be removed. | An amendment to RFP Attachment 10, Device Specifications, will reflect the change to the threshold. | 11/2/18 | |
| 31 | Mid-Range Laptop In in effort to increase fair and open competition, will the government allow alternative digital video outputs? For example, HDMI in lieu of of DP? | An amendment to RFP Attachment 10, Device Specifications, "Common HW Reqs" tab will clearly state that offerings which exceed the thresholds established on the "Technical Thresholds" tab are acceptable. | 11/2/18 | |
| 32 | All Laptop CLIN's RFP documents state the standard order to have a webcam, but be disabled out of factory. Would the government consider optional CLIN's for orders that need a webcam versus including the webcam by default on every CLIN? | The Government's requirement remains unchanged. In accordance with the RFP, the default requirement is for laptops to include the disabled webcam. | 11/2/18 | |
| 33 | High Performance Desktop In order to allow for a greater range of higher performance processors, will the government please modify the base frequency minimum from 2.6GHz to 2.5GHz, while still exceeding the boost clock speed requirement, and increase the TDP to 140W or lower? | An amendment to RFP Attachment 10, Device Specifications, will reflect changes to the processor thresholds. | 11/2/18 | |
| 34 | High Performance Desktop In order to reduce costs while maintaining like performance with graphics, will the government accept dual graphics cards to meet the 24GB graphics requirement? | Attachment 10 will be updated to reflect changes to the graphics processing power and memory minimums. | 11/2/18 | |
| 35 | Ultra-Small Desktop In in effort to increase fair and open competition, will the government allow alternative digital video outputs? For example, HDMI in lieu of of DP | An amendment to RFP Attachment 10, Device Specifications, "Common HW Reqs" tab will clearly state that offerings which exceed the thresholds established on the "Technical Thresholds" tab are acceptable. | 11/2/18 | |
| 36 | Mid-Range Laptop Industry standard for minimum requirement to support Win10 functionality is 8GB RAM. In effort to reduce costs for the government, given this is a mid-range laptop, will the government consider reducing the memory capacity requirement to 32GB? | An amendment to RFP Attachment 10, Devices Specifications, will update the threshold. | 11/2/18 | |
| 37 | CLIN 0008 |
Reference: RFP N00039-18-R-0004 Document, Section L-4.(c)(3)(ii), Page 191
| Question: After entering into a business arrangement with the current NGEN Contractor, N00039-13-D-0013, how will the EUHW Contractor bill the Government for the legacy EUHW? A lump sum not to exceed the amount specified for CLIN 0008? Or must the Contractor bill the Government a monthly fee for each legacy device totaling not to exceed said amount by the time of the refresh of the last device? | CLIN 0008 will be negoitated after contract award. The Government intends to definitize the price of the Legacy EUHWaaS after contract award | 11/2/18 | ||
| 38 | As referenced in PWS 3.2.2.1 and 3.2.2.2, does the Government view image load separately from configuration? | No, the Government does not consider the image load separately from configuration. | 11/2/18 | |
| 39 | Does a PMI PMP Certification meet this requirement with sufficient clearance? If yes, perhaps changing the wording to say "c) Program Management Professional Certification, or Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act (DAWIA) Level III Program Management Certification, or equivalent" would add clarity to the requirement. | An amendment to the RFP will clarify the language in PWS section 3.1.1(a)(ii)(c). | 11/2/18 | |
| 40 | Does the Government have any specific security requirements for the packing of systems with NIPR or SIPR disk images installed for their transit to CONUS sites? Are there any additional requirements for transit to OCONUS sites? | In accordance with MIL-STD-129, for controlled, sensitive, classified, and pilferable items (except for FMS shipments), the shipping documentation shall be placed inside all containers rather than on the outside. For classified shipments, marking that indicates the classified nature of the materiel and its security classification shall not appear on the exterior of each container if it will identify the classified nature of the shipment. An amendment will be issued to add MIL-STD-129 to the PWS. | 11/2/18 | |
| 41 | Does the Government maintain multiple active versions of the NIPR and SIPR disk images for a given system configuration? |
If so, how does it identify which image variant is to be installed for any given order?
| For each MILDEP, there is a single active NIPR and single active SIPR image at any given time. Once a new image is provided by the government, it replaces the previous image. | 11/2/18 | ||
| 42 | How will the Government transfer disk images to the EUHW Contractor? To meet SLRs for OCONUS deliveries, will the EUHW Contractor be allowed to store these disk images outside of the United States? | An amendment to the RFP will be issued to clarify. | 11/2/18 |
| 43 | Is it necessary to affix a label with information from EUHWaaS and Purchased EUHW tags on the outside of each system carton to ease their receiving? | No, the shipping label should be prepared in accordance with MIL-STD-129. An amendment will be issued to add MIL-STD-129 to the PWS. | 11/2/18 |
| 44 | Must each individual carton be affixed with a shipping label? Or it is acceptable to only affix a shipping label for a pallet of systems at a time? | No, the shipping label should be prepared in accordance with MIL-STD-129. The pallet should have a label affixed in accordance with MIL-STD-129. An amendment to the RFP will add MIL-STD-129 to the PWS | 11/2/18 |
| 45 | Must each SIPR system carton be sealed and is any special marking required? | An amedment to the RFP will add MIL-STD-129 to the PWS. In accordance with MIL STD 129, controlled, sensitive, classified, and pilferable items (except for FMS shipments), the shipping documentation shall be placed inside all containers rather than on the outside. For classified shipments, marking that indicates the classified nature of the materiel and its security classification shall not appear on the exterior of each container if it will identify the classified nature of the shipment. | 11/2/18 |
| 46 | Per the requirements of FAR 52.219-9(g) which states that a commercial plan is the preferred type of subcontracting plan for contractors furnishing commercial items, please confirm that the Offeror’s approved Commercial Small Business Subcontracting Plan meets the requirements of Section L-4(d)(iv)(a-d) of the solicitation. | Yes, an approved Commercial Small Business Subcontracting Plan will permissible to fulfill the subcontracting plan for this requirement. An amendment to the RFP will be issued to update the Subcontract Plan section of the RFP. | 11/2/18 |
| 47 | Service Level Requirement 37.1 calls for the Contractor to Deliver EUHWaaS and purchased EUHW devices(s) to the location specified in the order in ≤ 5 days.We recommend ≤ 15 days for the Contractor to deliver EUHWaaS and purchased EUHW devices(s) to the OCONUS location. | An amendment will be issued to update the delivery time requirement reflected in SLR 37.1 and the PWS. | 11/2/18 |
| 48 | The price tables only include cells for prices through Option year 6. Where should the Contractor provide Option year 7 prices? | An amendment to the RFP Attachment L-1, Pricing Workbook, will be issued to update the spreadsheet. | 11/2/18 |
| 49 | There are no TAA Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM) that can meet both the weight and screen size requirements on the High Performance Laptops. We recommend that the DON either increase the weight to 7 lbs. or decrease the screen size to 15.6-inches. | An amendment to the RFP Attachment 10, Device Specifications, will be issued to reflect changes to the weight thresholds. | 11/2/18 |
| 50 | What will be the classification of the BIOS/Core Building Image to be loaded on the devices? If UNCLASSIFIED is access restricted to US citizen only? | All classification information is detailed in RFP Attachment 2 (DD Form 254). An amendment to the RFP will be issued to update the DD Form 254. **The DD Form 254 will be updated at a later date. | 11/2/18 |
| 51 | Will an Interim SECRET clearance be acceptable for employees performing the BIOS imaging? | An interim clearance is acceptable. | 11/2/18 |
| 52 | Will any Controlled Unclassified Information be required to be loaded on any devices? | An amendment to the RFP will update the DD Form 254. Note: The SIPR image is Controlled Unclassified Information. **The DD Form 254 will be updated a later date. | 11/2/18 |
| 53 | Would the Government please explain the difference between Deployable Seat Uplift and Legacy Deployable Seat Uplift? If the devices cannot be re-deployed, are we correct to assume that a 6-month-old device cannot be used again as a PUK? | Deployable Seat Uplift is ordered against the EUHW Set CLINs 0001xxx and the PUKs associated to this uplift will contain items compatible to those EUHW units. The Legacy Deployable Seat Uplift shall provide support and PUKs compatible with the Legacy Seat HW. | 11/2/18 |
| 54 | Would the Government please validate the pricing calculation to help understand how the 36-month lease payments are derived on the Price Workbook and how they are aggregated to reflect the total proposed cost? | There is no lease associated with this requirement. A clarifying amendment will be issued to the RFP. | 11/2/18 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .