SMIT RFP Questions and Answers Set 2 11292018.pdf

N00039‐18‐R‐0005 ‐ Service Management, Integration and Transport (SMIT) Question and Answer Set #2 ‐ 29 November 2018

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

6 J‐1 PWS 125 9, 12 3.3.5.8 The use of "unlimited" with respect to "licenses" makes the cost of this section impossible to estimate. Provide a number of government users expected (or to be used as a bid estimate) for each tool license.

RFP Attachment 1 PWS will be updated in a future amendment to revise Section 3.3.5.8.f to specifically remove the requirement for unlimited Government users and instead provide a limited number.

12 References 53 7 4.4.6.2 Section 4.4.6.2 mentions the NEN Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP). We do not have this document. Please provide the referenced document.

The Government will add the NGEN TEMP to the bidder's library as a reference.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

17 SMIT RFP Section L 482 7 L‐4 Proposal Content

1. Subfactor 2.2(i)a states the Offeror shall describe its approach for Navy Enterprise Service Operations specifically to: "a. Managing Network Operations Center (NOC) services in accordance with PWS 3.3.5.1.2.d; f; and g"

2. PWS 3.3.5.1.2.d states the contractor shall "d.

Monitor and manage NMCI and MCEN network infrastructure, service components, and support elements (power/cooling) in accordance with the NMCI Event Management (EVT) Process Guide and USMC IRM 2300 series E‐ITSM Process Guides. " ‐ (1) Please confirm that the term "Navy Enterprise Service Operations" equates to NMCI.

(2) Given the instruction is to describe the approach for Navy Enterprise Service Operations, does the Government intend for Offerors to also describe their approach to monitor and manage the MCEN infrastructure . . . . in accordance with USMC IRM 2300 series E‐ITSM Process Guides?

(3) If the Government intends for Offerors to also describe their approach to monitor and manage the MCEN infrastructure . . ., please confirm that the approach described should be in accordance with the USMC IRM 2300‐03B E‐ITSM Event Management Process Guide, vice the complete IRM 2300 series E‐ITSM Process Guides.

This evaluation criteria only applies to the Navy CONUS Management Domain as defined in the PWS Section 1.1. RFP Section L will be updated in a future amendment to provide clarification to the evaluation criteria.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

18 J‐27 Cost and Software Listing

SMIT CSDR Plan pg 1 Tab

The "SMIT CSDR Plan pg 1" Tab appears to be inconsistent, both with the level of breakdown and alignment to the PWS. For example:

1. Productivity, User Support and Transport Services break down to the 4th level to include the services within each portfolio. However, Network Operations stops at the 3rd level.

2. Level 4 Services appear to be misaligned ‐‐ see COI services aligned User Support, vice Productivity.

3. IT Service Management is not included

4. Services aligned with PWS 3.3.7 are not consistently included, e.g. Logistics is not included in the attachment, but Training Services [level 5 in the PWS is included]. Request the Government review Attachment 27 breakdown and update or confirm the structure.

Attachment J‐27 (CSDR Plan) will be updated in a future amendment to be consistent with the services identified in the PWS.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

19 J‐1 PWS 176 1 3.5.1 Transition of the ONE‐Net Enterprise Service Desk (ESD), outside of the regional transition schedule, offers the least risk to the government and will allow for a simultaneous transition of FE and ER ESD ahead of the full transition of other services associated with FE and ER. Conducting transition of ESD in conjunction with regions, introduces risk, splitting the service between the ONE‐Net incumbent and the incoming SMIT provider until both regions are AFOR. Allowing vendors the ability to transition ESD services eliminates this risk.

Request the government validate that ONE‐Net Service Desk (ESD), since it is a service, may be transitioned on a separate timeline from the regions, and before individual regional transition.

Does the Government concur?

The Government is not requiring a "regional transition schedule" in Section 3.5 ONE‐NET AS IS SERVICES. Offerors can determine whether to propose to transition the ESD separately from the regional.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

24 SMIT RFP Section L 482 47 2.4 There is an inconsistency between RFP Section L and NEN Program Protection Plan, please clarify which of the following requirements is the correct NGEN‐R requirement.

• Section L, p. 482, Subfactor 2.4 ‐ Supply Chain Risk Management states that “… proposal shall address its approach to mitigating and/or eliminating risk of sabotage, maliciously introduced unwanted function, or other subversion … of devices delivered to the Government.”

• Naval Enterprise Network (NEN) Program Protection Plan (PPP) Version 1.7 dated 15 March 2018, Page 8, item 12 states that “Based on the finding that NGEN does not have Critical Component CPI, Anti‐Tamper measures are not required.

Although Anti‐Tamper measures are identified as not applicable in the PPP, Offerors are still required to address its approach to mitigating supply chain risk management in accordance with Section L.

28 J‐28 GFE GFE Licenses Tab Attachment 28 shows a GFE Master Software Listing, but no other reference is found in the PWS or RFP as to what is the purpose of this document and associated license counts?

Request the government clarify both the support and financial responsibilities the bidders have for GFE Software.

The contractor shall manage and maintain all GFE software listed in Attachment J‐28. Attachment J‐1 will be updated in a future amendment to include the Reference to J‐28 and Section 3.3.7.4.4.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

29 J‐1 PWS 172 25 3.4.1 Government PWS outlines the following in regard to transition "NMCI roles and responsibilities will remain the same during NGEN to SMIT Transition." Request Navy provide further clarification if this statement requires the SMIT provider only to transition like for like services, and any tools and services required to meet SMIT enhanced requirements, services and SLA's should be implemented post AFOR?

The SMIT SLRs are required to be met at AFOR.

31 J‐1 PWS 25 10‐11 3.3.1.4 Section 3.3.1.4 requests that the contractor shall "a. Provide unclassified and classified VTC services that connect with both Internet Protocol (IP) and Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) systems." Recommend "and" be "or"

Do not concur, the Government's requirement will remain the same.

36 J‐14 Network Infrastructure

Services Rate Card

ISP‐OSP Tab Tab "ISP‐OSP": A note in multiple task description cells states "cost for termination of new cable drops should be covered in other fixed price items." Please clarify which other fixed price items will cover the installation of new cable drops.

Attachment J‐14 will be updated in a future amendment.

37 J‐14 Network Infrastructure

Services Rate Card

HW Installation Tab

Tab "HW Installation": Cell C2 is labeled "Uninstallation ** Price Per Unit". Please verify that this pricing is for installation and not uninstallation.

Attachment J‐14 will be updated in a future amendment.

38 J‐14 Network Infrastructure

Services Rate Card relocate within Zone Tab

Tab "Relocate within Zone": Cell C2 is labeled "Uninstallation ** Price Per Unit". Please verify that this pricing is for relocation and not strictly uninstallation.

Attachment J‐14 will be updated in a future amendment.

39 J‐14 Network Infrastructure

Services Rate Card relocate within Zone Tab

Tab "Relocate within Zone": Cell C1 task description does not include any re‐configuration efforts. Please verify that all configuration is under other CLINs and that this is only a physical move.

Attachment J‐14 will be updated in a future amendment.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

40 J‐14 Network Infrastructure

Services Rate Card

Immediate Move to New Zone Tab

Tab "Immediate Move to New Zone": Cell C2 is labeled "Uninstallation ** Price Per Unit". Please verify that this pricing is for an immediate move to a new zone and not strictly uninstallation.

Attachment J‐14 will be updated in a future amendment.

41 J‐14 Network Infrastructure

Services Rate Card

Immediate Move to New Zone Tab

Tab "Immediate Move to New Zone": Cell C1 task description does not include any re‐configuration efforts. Please verify that all configuration is by others and that this is only a physical move.

Attachment J‐14 will be updated in a future amendment.

42 J‐14 Network Infrastructure

Services Rate Card

Delayed move to New Zone Tab

Tab "Delayed Move to New Zone": Cell C2 is labeled "Uninstallation ** Price Per Unit". Please verify that this pricing is for a delayed move to a new zone and not strictly uninstallation.

Attachment J‐14 will be updated in a future amendment.

43 J‐14 Network Infrastructure

Services Rate Card

Delayed move to New Zone Tab

Tab "Delayed Move to New Zone": Cell C1 task description does not include any re‐configuration efforts. Please verify that all configuration is under other CLINs and that this is only a physical move.

Attachment J‐14 will be updated in a future amendment.

44 J‐14 Network Infrastructure

Services Rate Card

Uninstall and Replace Tab

Tab "Uninstall and Replace": Cell C2 is labeled "Uninstallation ** Price Per Unit". Please verify that this pricing is for an uninstall, warehouse, and replace operation and not strictly uninstallation.

Attachment J‐14 will be updated in a future amendment.

49 J‐4 Navy Site Listing Column B NMCI Sites Tab The Site Tier column is completed for only a handful of sites. Please complete the Site Tier column for all sites.

Attachment J‐4 will be updated in a future amendment to add tiers to all locations.

54 SMIT RFP Section B 28 of 499 CLIN 0076AB CLIN 0076AB states "The Contractor shall provide DSTB FAK hardware based on the most up‐to‐ date DSTB FAK design…". We have been unable to find the DSTB FAK design in the materials provided. Would the government please provide the referenced DSTB design or the name of the file containing this design?

Attachment J‐19 will be updated in a future amendment to provide additional design details of the DSTBs.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

63 SMIT RFP Section C 272‐276 CLINs 0014AK, 0014AL, 0014AM, 0014AS, 0014BD, 0014BE, 0014BF, and 0014BJ

For high utilization Tier 1 and Tier 2 printers and MFDs in CLINs 0014AK, 0014AL, 0014AM, 0014AS, 0014BD, 0014BE, 0014BF, and 0014BJ, please provide an upper boundary for the average print range.

Operation needs vary, therefore an upper bound for average pages above 40K cannot be provided.

65 SMIT RFP Section C 267‐268 CLINs 0006AA and

0006AB

The description of CLIN 0006AA and 0006AB WAN Services excludes 3.3.3.2.2, should it also exclude

3.3.3.2.1 since Remote Access Services are covered by CLIN 0075AA?

CLIN 0075 is to install and enable Classified Remote access via an encryption device. PWS 3.3.3.2.1 provides support for all RAS infrastructure capabilities.

68 SMIT RFP Section C 268 of

CLIN 0006AB CLIN 0006AB (Infrastructure & Operations ‐ Classified) excludes the following PWS sections included in CLIN 0006AA (Infrastructure & Operations ‐ Unclassified): Service Desk Services (3.3.2.1) (with the exception of 3.3.2.1.v.i‐ii), Electronic Software Delivery Services (ESDS) (3.3.2.9), Cross Domain Solutions (3.3.3.3), Service Operations (3.3.5.1.a‐c), Information Technology Operations (3.3.5.1.1.a), Network Operations Center Services (3.3.5.1.2) (with the exception of 3.3.5.1.2.a.iii‐v), Government Directed Actions (3.3.5.1.6), IT Service Continuity (3.3.5.3), Directory Services (3.3.5.6). In which CLIN should these Classified PWS requirements be priced?

RFP Section C will be revised in a future amendment to revise the descriptions of CLIN 0006 and CLIN 0007.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

69 SMIT RFP Section C 269 of

CLIN 0007AA/AB Both CLIN 0007 AA/AB (Network Operations & Security Management ‐ Unclassified/Classified) and CLIN 0006AA (Infrastructure & Operations ‐ Unclassified) reference the same following PWS sections: Service Desk Services (3.3.2.1) (with the exception of 3.3.2.1.v.i‐ii), Electronic Software Delivery Services (ESDS) (3.3.2.9), Cross Domain Solutions (3.3.3.3), Service Operations (3.3.5.1.a‐ c), Information Technology Operations (3.3.5.1.1.a), Network Operations Center Services (3.3.5.1.2) (with the exception of 3.3.5.1.2.a.iii‐v), Government Directed Actions (3.3.5.1.6), IT Service Continuity (3.3.5.3), Directory Services (3.3.5.6). Should the requirements for these PWS sections be priced in 0006AA or 0007AA/AB?

RFP Section C will be revised in a future amendment to revise the descriptions of CLIN 0006 and CLIN 0007.

70 SMIT RFP Section C 299 of

CLIN 0017AX The description for CLIN 0017AX – “Program of Record Wall Plug Upgrade” is the same as the description for CLIN 0017AU Switch Port Connection ‐ Digital Devices. Please provide update to CLIN Description for Program of record Wall Plug Upgrade.

RFP Section C will be updated in a future amendment to revise the description of CLIN

0017AX.

71 SMIT RFP Section C 299 of

CLIN 0017AY The description for CLIN 0017AY – “Copper Test/Re‐Label Services ‐ 1 Wall Plug” is a copy of CLIN 0017AV “Switch Port Connection ‐ (5) Digital Devices”. Please provide update to CLIN Description for Copper Test/Re‐Label Services ‐ 1 Wall Plug

RFP Section C will be updated in a future amendment to revise the description of CLIN

0017AY.

72 SMIT RFP Section C 300 of

CLIN 0017AW The description for “CLIN 0017AZ – Copper Test/Re‐Label Services ‐ 5 Wall Plugs” is a copy of CLIN 0017AW “Switch Port Connection ‐ (20) Digital Devices”. Please provide an update to CLIN Copper Test /Re‐Label Services 5 Wall Plugs

RFP Section C will be updated in a future amendment to revise the description of CLIN

0017AZ.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

75 SMIT RFP Section L 480 L‐4 Section L, Subfactor 1.1 specifies that the Offerors deliver proposal content addressing SEP Section 4.4.8 Technical Reviews, in the SEMP [L‐ 4(b)(1)(i)b]. In the SEP, Table 4‐2 "NEN Gates 1‐4 Review Criteria", defines the four gates; however, none of these gates are identified in in the third column of Table 4‐7 Appendix C ‐ Engineering Stage Activities and Gate Reviews. SETR, CSR, and TRs are identified in the third column. Would the Government identify where those gate reviews occur in the overall engineering flow and development phases described in Table 4‐7 and 4‐ 10 respectively?

The four Gate reviews described in SEP Table 4‐2 are programmatic gate reviews, not technical reviews. The Offeror's SEMP will describe how the technical reviews described in SEP Section 4.4.8 and Appendix B support the four programmatic gate reviews described in SEP Table 4‐2. The Government will release a revised version of the SEP in conjunction with a solicitation amendment.

76 SMIT RFP Section L 480 L‐4 Section L, Subfactor 1.1 specifies that the Offerors deliver proposal content addressing SEP Section 4.4.8 Technical Reviews, in the SEMP [L‐ 4(b)(1)(i)b]. The third column of Table 4‐7 Appendix C ‐ Engineering Stage Activities and Gate Reviews, identifies three types of reviews:

SETR, Cyber Security Reviews (CSR), and TRs. The intent of the two CSRs, i.e., CSR‐Concept Level and CSR‐Detail Level, are not explained in either the NEN SEP or the PWS. Is it the Government's intent for the offerors to define the intent and their approach to support the CSRs? If not, would the Government please provide information concerning the intent, and any other additional details, they require the offeror to address concerning the CSRs?

The Government will release a revised version of the SEP in conjunction with a solicitation amendment to add clarifying language addressing Cyber Security Reviews.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

87 J‐1 PWS 152 18 3.3.7.4.1 DFARS 252.211‐7003.c has been copied into the SMIT RFP A‐M. but the tables have not been filled out. Please confirm that all GFE (Attachments J‐5/J‐6 ‐‐ purchased on behalf of the government and transferred into NGEN‐R by the government) where acquisition cost is < $5,000 do not need to be marked, inventoried, uploaded to the IUID registry, or be included in Asset Management accuracy SLR reporting.

Equipment that is serially managed, regardless of value, must be marked, inventoried, and uploaded into the IUID Registry. Bidders must refer to the entire requirement as stated in AM Section

3.3.7.4.3 ‐ Mark and report of all assets procured for the Government. Specifically, in its entirety, in accordance with DFARS 252.211‐7003 & 252.211.‐ 7007.

89 J‐1 PWS 33 27 3.3.2.1 Confirm that separation and segregation of people, process, tools, and reporting around the Service Desk capability will double tooling requirements. Given the interrelations of the ITSM processes (documented in process guides) and Service Desk's involvement, please confirm that the government will approve data Trusted Agents to move data from SIPR to NIPR to support the following governance entities:

Program Management Review (PMR), Service Operations Meeting, and Executive Leadership Team Meeting.

The Government will approve data Trusted Agents to move data from SIPR to NIPR to support the following governance entities.

90 J‐1 PWS 33 27 3.3.2.1 Confirm that separation and segregation of people, process, tools, and reporting around the Service Desk capability will double tooling requirements. Given the interrelations of the ITSM processes (documented in process guides) and Service Desk's involvement, please confirm that the government will furnish tooling to ensure classified information is removed from data being manually transferred from SIPR to

NIPR.

No, Attachment J‐28, GFE Master Software Listing references what software will be provided to the Contractor and Attachment J‐29, NGEN Master Tools Library denotes the AS‐IS tool ownership. It is the contractor's responsibility to provide all software, tools, and labor necessary to deliver the service.

95 L‐3 Cost Price Evaluation Template

Section B Summary

Tab

Should the Unit of Issue for 73AF Enable Classified Wireless NIC be "Each" instead of "Monthly", similar to that of CLIN 72AL Enable Wireless NIC?

Attachment L‐3 will be revised in a future amendment to correct the unit of issue for CLIN

0073AF.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

96 L‐3 Cost Price Evaluation Template

Section B Summary

Tab

Should the Unit of Issue for 73AE Classified Seat Connection Service be "Each" instead of "Monthly", similar to that of CLIN 72AG Unclassified Seat Connection Service?

Attachment L‐3 will be revised in a future amendment to correct the unit of issue for CLIN

0073AE.

97 L‐3 Cost Price Evaluation Template

Section B Summary

Tab

Should cell B523 (and all other references to SIPR Standard Classroom with Whiteboard+) be CLIN x061AX instead of x061A0?

Attachment L‐3 and RFP Sections B and C will be revised in a future amendment to correct the CLIN number.

101 J‐14 Network Infrastructure

Services Rate Card

Under which CLIN will the items in the J‐14 NIS Rate Card be ordered (given that the CLIN 0600 definition does not completely cover all J‐14 items)?

Any line items identified as "priced via rate card" may use any rate card in the pricing of the service.

For example, a CLIN x600 project may utilize the Travel Rate Card, the Labor and Material Discounts Rate Card, and the Network Infrastructure Services Rate Card for pricing. The same would apply the a CLIN x500 project as the Network Infrastructure Services Rate Card may be used to price certain components of the project.

104 J‐1 PWS 69 26‐27 3.3.3.1 Can the Navy confirm that the OCONUS WLAN requirement does not take effect until after ONE‐ Net Convergence?

Individual projects are priced when ordered. Any OCONUS wireless requirements would be addressed post‐convergence.

107 J‐1 PWS 27 14 3.3.1.5 In the Storage Services Section there is a requirement "h" with multiple sub‐requirements on page 27. This requirement is essentially requiring the Contractor to provide tools that will allow Government directed personnel to have rights to manage file shares as a file share administrator. Can the Government please confirm that this will provide new functionality to the Navy that is not being provided under the current contract?

The equipment is as stated in the PWS 3.3.1.5.h with multiple sub‐requirements. The current tool does not have the capability.

109 J‐1 PWS 168 24 3.3.7.5 USMC requires OCONUS shipping to go through DLA. Can DLA be used for Navy location?

This requirement is specific to the USMC. For USN OCONUS shipping, commercial carrier is preferred and DLA is optional.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

115 J‐1 PWS 74 10‐20 3.3.3.3 Provide estimated number of CDSes to be deployed and supported on the contract and an estimated schedule of deployment.

There are no cross domain solutions in place at this time.

116 J‐1 PWS 75 all 3.3.3.5 What volumes are anticipated for these services?

How many ship movements are anticipated at each location per year? How much UCA maintenance/replacement UCAs is/are anticipated yearly? How many ship movements involving WPCS are anticipated? Provide estimated or bid‐to values for requested data elements.

The RFP will be amended to change CLINs 0028, Piers Connectivity Support, to priced via rate card.

119 J‐1 PWS 129 26 3.3.6.5 In order to measure the various SLRs/PLRs within this PWS an incredible volume of data will be recorded (BAN/LAN utilization, for instance, requires a data point every 60 seconds for every LAN segment. Also latency, availability, etc.). We estimate the NMCI will generate 11TB of data/day which would need to be retained so that the government can recreate/audit/verify the contractor's reported SLR/PLR attainment. Is that the government's intent? Clarify which data is expected to be kept for the entire life of the contract. Where data flows are captured, are entire flows to be kept or just header information? For availability data, for instance, is every single data point required for the life of the contract?

The Government requirement is focused around the measurement of service performance data of the systems and sub systems, and the aggregation of that data into a data source used to develop SLR metrics. Summary data is assumed to be retained for the life of the contract. Attachment J‐1 will be updated in a future amendment to revise Section

3.3.6.5 to clarify data storage.

125 References 10 11 SEP, 1.4.1 Section 1.4.1 still mentions the requirement for a draft SEMP with the proposal. Please confirm a draft SEMP is no longer required.

Per RFP Section L‐4(b)(1)(i), the Offeror shall provide subsections of its draft NMCI Systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP).

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

127 References 16 12 SEP, 2.1.2 Section 2.1.2 Mentions that architectural elements will be provided by SPAWAR. What elements will be provided from the SPAWAR Integrated Dictionary? Provide a list of elements that are available to incorporate into the model.

The Government will add the SPAWAR Integrated Dictionary v2.1 to the bidder's library.

129 References 31 30 SEP, 3.4.2 The SEP mentions in Section 3.4.2 that the Technical Reviews are to be held at two levels ‐ one at the PSO level and one at the Program level. Please clarify the entry and exit criteria for each of the two types of reviews

The entry and exit criteria are the same regardless of level, it is the authority and scope that changes based on the level of SETR. Program SETRs occur when the NEN Program is progressing through the DoD Acquisition Lifecycle (Acquisition Milestones).

Product Service Owner SETRs occur as part of projects during normal operations when the Program is post‐Milestone C.

At the PSO level, Technical Reviews include TR‐RQ, TR‐HD, TR‐DD and TR‐TR as depicted in the SEP at Figure 4‐7 Technical Reviews. The entrance criteria for these are Class I Request for Changes (RFC) that represent changes to the technical baseline. These changes are more frequent and represent the majority of changes that will occur throughout the contract that will be executed by the NGEN‐R Service Provider(s). Refer to the SEP Table 4‐7 Appendix C ‐ Engineering Stage Activities and Gate Reviews for additional details for each review stream. Refer to the NGEN Change Management Plan for details regarding the entrance and exit criteria for Class I Changes.

At the Program level, Technical Reviews include SRR, SFR, PDR, CDR, TRR as depicted in the SEP Figure 4‐7 Technical Reviews. The entrance criteria for these are major changes to the program that include new and/or major changes to Services as

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

130 References 38 2 SEP, 3.5.2.2 Section 3.5.2.2 indicates that SPAWAR will provide architectures, interfaces, technical standards, tools, systems engineering, and integration processes. What specific tools will be provided? What specific integration processes will be provided? Where are the standards?

Clarify what SPAWAR will be providing, and when access to that information will be available.

The SPAWAR Integrated Dictionary will be added to the Bidders Library. Software tools to be provided are captured in Attachment J‐28 GFE Master Software List. The remainder of the information is included on the Supplemental Network Technical Data encrypted disks. Exports out of the NGEN Program's instantiation of DOORS (IBM), System Architect (Unicom), Rational Asset Manager (IBM), Universal Configuration Management Database (HP uCMDB) will be provided post contract award.

135 References 58 1 SEP, 4.4.8.1 The SEP mentions in Section 4.4.8.1 a Technical Review Board (TRB), and in Section 4.4.8.3, a Technical Review Group (TRG). At what point(s) in the SE life‐cycle would the TRB meet? Would either the TRB or the TRG be staffed with supplier SME's? Please clarify.

Both TRB and TRG will be staffed with the Government and may be staffed with supporting SME's. The Government will add an updated SEP to the bidder's library.

136 SMIT RFP Section M 496 37 d (2.4) Section M ‐ Subfactor 2.4: Supply Chain Risk Management, item 2 states: "Ensure that it and its Subcontractors, at all tiers, can source items using a process that comports with DFARS

246.870.2. PWS Section 3.3.7.4.10 states:

"Contractor shall develop, submit, execute an SCRM plan in accordance with DFARS 246.870‐ 2(a). Update RFP Section M3(c)(2) to align with the PWS.

It is the Government's intent that both Section M and the PWS refer to DFARS 246.870‐2 in its entirety. Attachment J‐1 PWS Section 3.3.7.4.10 will be updated in a future amendment to revise the reference from DFARS 246.870‐2(a) to DFARS 246.870‐2.

141 SMIT RFP Section L 490 1 Section 5 ‐ Small Business

Subcontracting Plan

As most SBs have not or cannot establish business entities in OCONUS countries. Can you confirm that SB goals do not apply to OCONUS work locations?

Small business goals apply to the total contract value regardless of the place of performance.

148 J‐13 Labor Rate Card Material Discount

Final

Labor Category Descriptio ns

Info Systems Coordinator

Senior

Please provide labor description for Info Systems Coordinator Senior role in J‐13

An amendment will update Attachment J‐24 to accurately reflect the labor categories listed in J‐13.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

159 L‐3 Cost Price Evaluation Template

Section B Summary

Tab

CLIN 6AA, 7AA,

7AB

All of these CLINs include scope references that include Service Desk 3.3.2.1. Please confirm these service costs should be included in each of these 3 CLINs. Updated CLIN description to confirm this belongs is in CLIN 6 or CLIN 7. It should not be in both. Also both xAA and xAB have the same CLIN descriptions.

The Government will issue an amendment to the solicitation to clarify scope for referenced PWS sections and CLIN descriptions.

160 L‐3 Cost Price Evaluation Template

Section B Summary

Tab

CLIN 0014AT Certain CLINs appear duplicative ‐ 0014AT & CLIN

0014AE, 0014AU & 0014AJ, 0014AV & 0014AN,

0014BG & 0014AZ, 0014BH & 0014BC, 0014BJ &

0014BD. If these CLINs are not duplicated clarify how these CLINs are different so we can accurately estimate the price.

The CLINs are not duplicates; CLIN x014AT is a color MFD, x014AE is not.

161 SMIT RFP Section B 301 CLIN 0017BE CLIN STRUCTURE CLIN description states "...label and repair five (5) ISP" but the CLIN title states "1 Wall Plug".

Support for 5 wall plugs is included in the next CLIN, 0017BF. Revise description to state this service is for only 1 wall plug.

RFP Section C will be updated in a future amendment to revise the description of CLIN

0017BF.

162 L‐3 Cost Price Evaluation Template

Section B Summary

Tab

CLIN 19AC Does CLIN with title "IPN NFRK" aligns to Attachment J‐6 "NRFK"?

RFP Attachment L‐3 and Sections B&C will be revised in a future amendment to correct the title.

163 L‐4 ONE‐Net Estimated Transition Support Services

Manning

ONE‐Net LOE Tab

Attachment L‐4 directs that those rates are to be populated using J‐13 rates with associated clearance and locality uplifts. J‐13 instructions state those rates anticipate support from Contractor site locations. Our assumption is L‐4 support will be performed on Gov’t site. This discrepancy will cause the L‐4 evaluated price to be higher than anticipated. Please confirm this understanding.

The Government acknowledges the instructions in Attachment J‐13 direct Offerors to price labor rates assuming performance at a contractor site.

Offerors should follow the instructions in Attachment L‐4 for pricing labor rates.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

174 SMIT RFP Section B 26 CLIN x0064AE‐

ZZ

Can the Government confirm that CLIN x0064AE‐ ZZ (Productivity Services Enterprise Cloud Migration Other Services) listed in N00039‐18‐R‐ 0005 SMIT RFP 10182018.docx has been removed? The CLIN x0064AE‐ZZ is not currently listed in SMIT Attch L‐3 Cost Price Evaluation Template.xlsx.

An amendment will be issued to remove

CLIN0064AE‐ZZ.

178 J‐1 PWS 187 23 4.3 The Navy has provided requirements for unified telephony services in multiple places in the RFP and the PWS. Section L 1.2 outlines objectives for unified communications. Sections 4.3 also provides requirements for unified capabilities for video. Please clarify how the Sections L and PWS

4.3 align, or should they be treated as separate projects.

RFP Section L‐4(b)(2)(ii)(a)(ii) in Subfactor 1.2 describes the high level objectives of unified capabilities and will be utilized for purposes of evaluation. The project at PWS Section 4.3 is the modernization of the VTC and VOIP infrastructure and aligns to the objectives in Subfactor 1.2 and provides a plan for execution. Sections 3.3.1.3 and

3.3.1.4 describe VTC and VOIP services only.

179 SMIT RFP Section L 481 FACTOR 1:

TECHNICAL

APPROACH

Regarding the facilities environmental equipment provided in Attachment 5 is not aligned to the locations listed in the RFP. Request the government provide an updated list. Will the Government be providing all facilities equipment such as HVAC, generators, and large batteries

(GFE)?

All GFP is listed in Attachment J‐5. Attachments J‐4 and J‐5 will be updated in a future amendment to ensure consistency, however not all Government Furnished Property listed on J‐5 will be at sites with NMCI users.

184 SMIT RFP Section M 496 5 2.4 (2) Inconsistent DFAR references in RFP Section M versus PWS. RFP Section M‐3, Subfactor 2.4 on page 496 states "Ensure that it and its Subcontractors, at all tiers, can source items using a process that comports with DFARS 246.870‐2 " whereas PWS Section 3.3.7.4.10 on page 168 states that "The Contractor shall develop, submit, and execute an SCRM plan in accordance with DFARS 246.870‐2(a) and … " Is the requirement for the contractor and its subcontractors to comply with DFARS 246.870‐2 or DFARS 246.870‐2(a)?

It is the Government's intent that both Section M and the PWS refer to DFARS 246.870‐2 in its entirety. Attachment J‐1 PWS Section 3.3.7.4.10 will be updated in a future amendment to revise the reference from DFARS 246.870‐2(a) to DFARS 246.870‐2.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

188 SMIT RFP Section L 7 L‐4 PROPOSAL CONTEN L‐4(b)(2)(ii)c. refers to prioritization recommendations "for all remaining project descriptions ." Does this refer to the projects the offeror recommends in addition to those required to achieve Objectives i‐viii?

Yes, the phrase, "for all remaining project descriptions" refers to the projects needed to implement the notional NMCI Network Transformation/Modernization Plan (NT/MP) that are not already prioritized under the requirement of L‐4(b)(2)(ii)(a) .

192 J‐1 PWS 39 8 3.3.2.3 We request the government provide some additional clarity for the Classroom CLINS as to what equipment is required in each of the CLINs.

In reviewing this PWS 3.3.2.3 section, the associated CLIN 61s, and the NAVEDTRA 136 document, it is not clear which technology items must be installed in the different classroom CLIN 61 types. For example, in CLIN 0061AR and 0061AS, 0061BD, and 0062BE, which technology items make up an "AUTO ELECT CLASSROOM" and "AUTO ELECT CLASSROOM with MEDIA

CENTER".

Attachment 1 will be revised in a future amendment to provide additional details for the requirements at Section 3.3.2.3, Electronic Classroom Services.

196 J‐1 PWS 12 2 3.1.7 It appears the government has provided conflicting requirements as to the time frame to integrate the GOMO interface. PWS Section 3.17 states within 90 days of completing certification and accreditations. Sections 3.3.6.14 states 90 after contract award. Please clarify?

Attachment J‐1 PWS will be updated in a future amendment to revise Section 3.1.7 to state 90 days after contract award.

198 L‐3 Cost Price Evaluation Template

Section B Summary

Tab

370 Capstone Services listed in Attach L‐3 are not described in PWS. Would the government please provide a description of Capstone Services requirements and any associated service level requirements?

The Government will issue a clarifying amendment to the solicitation. Attachment J‐1 will be revised in a future amendment to define Capstone Services.

199 J‐1 PWS 121 12 3.3.5.6 In regard to PWS 3.3.5.6, item N. Is it the Government's intent to have the EDS be the authoritative source?

Enterprise Directory Services (EDS) is the authoritative source.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

200 J‐1 PWS 123 2 3.3.5.6 Government has outlined in item W of this section, the requirement to Implement Microsoft Privileged Access Management (PAM). Please clarify if this activity should built into transition or be considered part of the NT/MP.

Not part of NT/MP and should be included within Navy Base CLIN x007 Network Operations and Security Management.

201 J‐1 PWS 65 6 3.3.2.10 Regarding Enterprise Mobility 3.3.2.10.c.iv.

Sharing data securely among secure containers to include application‐to‐application communications: Did the government intend to state that data sharing should be allowed within a secure container between applications, not between distinct containers?

Attachment J‐1 PWS will be updated in a future amendment to revise Section 3.3.2.10.

203 References SMIT Process Guide Asset Management

Please confirm this process guide is no longer applicable as Asset Management is no longer an ITSM process per PWS 3.3.6.

The Government will issue an amendment to the ITSM Process Section 3.3.6 referring to the Asset Management (AM) Process Guide located in Section 3.3.7.4 Logistics Management.

206 J‐1 PWS 70 12 3.3.3.1.2 Please clarify to which CLIN(s) PWS section

3.3.3.1.2 apply and where the costs for that section should be estimated.

RFP Section C will be revised in a future amendment to correct the PWS reference for CLIN

0032AK.

208 J‐5 GFP Navy GFP Tab

Column E The asset list includes both active instances and inactive instances. Please define active vs.

inactive. What responsibilities will the awardee have towards inactive assets?

The responsibility is for the life of an asset from order to disposal. ACTIVE is if it is installed and working. INACTIVE is the asset is not connected to the network.

209 J‐5 GFP Navy GFP Tab

Column DB The asset list appears to include only physical hardware and does not represent the total workloads which would also include virtualized workloads. Can the Government furnish volume counts for virtual workloads the bidder will have responsibility to support categorized by OS in each location?

Offeror should use all RFP, PWS, Supplemental Network Technical Data, and other technical data provided in the NGEN‐R bidder's library.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

210 J‐28 GFE GFE

Licenses Tab

Column A It is unclear how many SQL and Oracle databases exist across environments that will be supported by the awardee. Can the Government provide the number of SQL and the number of Oracle databases to be supported?

The information in Attachment J‐28 provides a number of servers hosting SQL and Oracle databases.

212 J‐5 GFP Navy GFP Tab

Column B Attachment 5 contains an asset listing. Can the Government specify whether an asset is considered classified vs. unclassified. This will facilitate the appropriated pricing.

No. The Government cannot specify if an asset is either unclassified or classified until the asset is connected to the network. Due to security requirements, the Government will not release the classification of the assets.

214 References SEP In Section 4.4.6, in the Interface Management section one of the considerations of the characteristics of the systems that need to be interfaced was how the 'interfaced' system was being developed ‐ mentioning incremental, agile, and V‐model. Does this imply that the SEP accommodates development methodologies other than V‐model?

Section 4.4.6 of the SEP will be revised to remove the reference to "V‐model".

The Government will issue an updated document to the bidder's library.

217 J‐7 SLR SMIT SLRs & PLRs Tab

Row 5 Column A USMC‐1 SLR, criteria, last sentence, references "…for a duration of 14 days." Will immediate backfill of a vacancy eliminate position from being considered a "separation"?

No.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

218 SMIT RFP Section C 335 CLIN 0037AB C Section C defines CLIN ‐‐37AB as: "Develop and maintain all Training Content in accordance with the following Sections in the PWS: Training Services (3.3.7.4.9.b‐g) and End User Training Services (3.3.7.4.9.2)"

Question: To appropriately size the level of effort necessary to develop and maintain Training Content, request the Government provide current Training Courseware volumes by (a) Type of training [e.g., classroom, web based, documentation], (b) Training category (e.g., IT OPS Training, End User Training, and Process and Tools Training), and (c) number of training artifacts.

The Government will provide the Current Training Courseware list to the bidder's library.

222 SMIT RFP Section L 480 2 Subfactor 1.1.i In Section L, Subfactor 1.1.i explicitly references

3.3.7.1 and 3.3.7.1.3.1, which implies that other subsections of 3.3.7.1 are not in the scope of the response. Clarify if only these two sections are in scope.

Yes, in accordance with the RFP section L subfactor 1.1., the deliverables for subfactor 1.1 are not intended to address all of the SEP, only portions identified.

225 SMIT RFP Section L 7 L‐4. b. How does the Government plan to effectively evaluation operations and service delivery, given the fact that the Technical Proposal Volume only maps to a fraction of the PWS Scope.

Due to the technical breadth for all services expected under this IDIQ, the Government is utilizing the technical volume to focus on those technical elements that are most important for delivery of network services. Therefore, the technical volume is not intended to address all possible scenarios under this IDIQ.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

228 SMIT RFP Section B ages 26, 36CLIN 0064AE‐AZ Productivity Services Enterprise Cloud Migration Other Services

CLIN 0064AE‐AZ (Productivity Services Enterprise Cloud Migration Other Services) is listed in the CLIN line items and description for the RFP Section B. However, it is not listed in the Attach.

L‐3 COST PRICE TEMPLATE Section B Summary tab as Priced Via Rate Card (such as, CLIN 0016AA‐ AZ Cloud Services). Can you please clarify this omission on the Section B Summary tab of Attach. L‐3 COST PRICE TEMPLATE?

An amendment will be issued to remove

CLIN0064AE‐AZ.

231 SMIT RFP Section B 17 CLIN 0019AX PWS 3.3.5.2 references Boise Service Desk as a CONUS Installation Service Node in Table 3.3.5.2‐ 2 and associated CLIN 0019AX. Since this site is not listed in Attachment J‐4 Navy Site Listing is this a valid NMCI ISN site? If so, since this is the incumbent site is Navy directing the Offeror to use this site.

No, the reference to Boise reflects the incumbent's help desk solution, which is currently a valid NMCI ISN site. Offeror's should expect this node to remain a valid NMCI ISN site, but will be replaced with the Awardee's service desk location under SMIT contract.

235 SMIT RFP Section L 476 L‐2.1.c The RFP allows eight (8) point on drawings, figures, and tables. Does this include schedules?

Section L of the RFP will be revised in a future amendment to update Section L‐2.1.c to specify the font size for schedules.

236 SMIT RFP Section L 476 L‐2.1.c Offerors may use foldout pages up to 11” X 17” only for diagrams, charts or graphic material.

May 11X17's also be used for schedules?

Section L of the RFP will be revised in a future amendment to update Section L‐2.1.c to specify the page size for schedules.

239 SMIT RFP Section H FAR clause 52.222‐42The RFP includes FAR clause 52.222‐42, STATEMENT OF EQUIVALENT RATES FOR FEDERAL

HIRES (MAY 2014), however the table has not been completed. Will the Government provide this information to assist offerors in developing their response to the RFP? Will the Government use the equivalent rates for Federal hires to evaluate the realism of proposed pricing?

Clause 52.222‐42 will be revised in a future amendment to incorporate the table of equivalent rates.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

240 SMIT RFP Section C 367 CLIN 0072AB The title of this CLIN is Unclassified Standard Portable Seat Connectivity Support Services but the description describes Classified Standard Seat desktop Support Services. Will the Government confirm this CLIN is for Classified Standard Seat Desktop Support?

RFP Section C will be revised in a future amendment to correct the description for CLIN

0072AB.

241 SMIT RFP Section L 482 L‐4(c)(4) The instructions for the Supply Chain Risk Management section state to use the RFP, PWS, and NEN Program Protection Plan (PPP) as resources for developing its SCRM approach. A NEN PPP was not released with the Final RFP.

There was a PPP released with the Draft RFP in July dated April 10, 2018 V1.7. 1) Is this version of the PPP the most recent and should be used in the development of the SCRM approach? 2) Please incorporate the latest version of the PPP into the FRFP; and 3) Please provide the Classified Appendix A.

The NEN PPP is a reference to Attachment J‐1. The current version is available in the bidder's library and is version 1.7, dated 15 March 2018.

244 J‐13 Labor Rate Card Material Discount

Final

Discount Rate Tab The J‐13 CONUS Labor Rates indicates that offeror's are to provide pricing or information addressing a 6‐month extension under FAR 52.217‐8 Option to Extend Services; however, the Discount Rates Tab under the same attachment does not identify a requirement to provide discount rates for the 6‐month option. Should Discount rates also be included during a 6‐month extension period?

Attachment J‐13 will be revised in a future amendment to add the 6 month option period to the tab "Discount Rates".

245 J‐1 PWS 1 10 PWS references Australia as a OCONUS performance locations; however, Australia is not identified anywhere else in the RFP as such.

The RFP will be amended, reflecting a change to J‐ 13 attachment to add Australia as an uplift for USMC labor.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

251 SMIT RFP Section I 461 &

The RFP includes FAR 52.234‐3 in Section I and Section L. However, DFAR 234.203 Solicitation provisions and contract clauses indicates that DFAR 252.234‐7001 should be used in lieu of FAR 52.234‐3 . The Government has already included DFAR 252.234‐7001 but FAR 52.234‐3 remains.

FAR clause 52.234‐3 will be removed in a future amendment.

252 SMIT RFP Section I Attachment J‐5 (Navy GFP) contains GFP at sites that are not listed in Attachment J‐4 (Navy Site Listing). Is the GFP listed in J‐5, at sites not listed in J‐4, not NMCI GFP (e.g. it may be MCEN GFP or GFP given to the current incumbent); and therefore, not included in the workload related to NMCI GFP requirements in the PWS? If this is not the case, please provide a listing of which sites in J‐5 should be included in the NMCI GFP requirements in the PWS?

Attachments J‐4 and J‐5 will be updated in a future amendment to ensure consistency, however not all Government Furnished Property listed on J‐5 will be at sites with NMCI users.

253 J‐1 PWS 153 19 PWS states The Contractor shall serially manage GFP listed in Navy Government Furnished Property (GFP) (Attachment J‐5) and Navy Government Furnished Facilities (GFF) (Attachment J‐6). Should Government Furnished Facilities be referred to as being "serially managed"?

Navy Government Furnished Property (GFP) is "serially managed", however "Government Furnished Facilities (GFF) are not. RFP Attachment J‐ 1 will be updated in a future amendment to remove the requirement to serially manage GFF.

255 SMIT RFP Section L 472 N/A DFAR Clause 252.234‐7003 Notice of Cost and Software Data Reporting System states "(6) Submit the DD Form 1921, Cost Data Summary Report, and DD Form 1921–1, Functional Cost‐ Hour Report, with its pricing proposal:" however, J‐27 CSDR Plan does not identify DD Form 1921‐1 as required report. Please confirm that offerors are not required to submit DD Form 1921‐1 with their IDIQ proposal submissions.

Flexfiles (a new, more user‐friendly CSDR document) will be used to satisfy the 1921 and 1921‐1 requirement per DFAR. As part of proposals, the Government is not looking for estimated dollar amounts in the CSDR forms, just "X"s ( 13.) DD 1921‐1 / 1921‐5 EAC, b) Flexfile(CDSR) and c. DD 1921‐Q) identifying that the $ will be provided in regular submissions post award during execution, and as agreed to at the Post Award Conference.

Item No. Document Type/Title Page

Number

Line Number (where applicable)

Section/Block Number

Issue/Comment/Question Government Response

256 SMIT RFP Section L 472 N/A DFAR Clause 252.234‐7003 Notice of Cost and Software Data Reporting System states "(6) Submit the DD Form 1921, Cost Data Summary Report, and DD Form 1921–1, Functional Cost‐ Hour Report, with its pricing proposal." How do offerors submit a DD Form 1921 preaward with no cost data? Is it acceptable not to submit these items given they require cost data that will only be available during execution?

As part of proposals, the Government is not looking for estimated dollar amounts in the CSDR forms, just "X"'s s ( 13.) DD 1921‐1 / 1921‐5 EAC, b) Flexfile(CDSR) and c. DD 1921‐Q) identifying that the $ will be provided in regular submissions post award during execution, and as agreed to at the Post Award Conference.

258 J‐1 PWS 12 28 Section 3.1.8 Earned Value Management

Question: Please clarify whether Earned Value Management System (EVMS) will apply to the NGEN‐R SMIT contract, and if it does, please describe how it will apply? The EVMS requirements were deleted from FRFP L‐ 4(g)(2)(vii) but references remain in the PWS and CDRLs.

The Incorporated by Reference EVMS Clause 252.234‐7001/441 “Notice of Earned Value Management System” has been replaced by 252.234‐7002 (Deviation 2015‐O0017, September 2015), EVMS Threshold, allowing the Contract Officer to raise EVM requirement review thresholds from $50 Million to $100 Million.

The…