NGA CORE_my_questions-ADMIN_PEP_Response_1__SBU.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 23 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- Not on record
About this file
This file is a Questions and Answers (Q&A) document containing 42 government-provided responses to industry inquiries submitted for two separate National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) Requests for Information (RFIs) related to the NGA Common Operations Release Environment (CORE) modernization initiative.
RFI Structure and Submission Requirements: The RFIs are divided into two separate tracks: RFI 1 addresses Operations, Sustainment and Concurrent Modernization of the current DevSecOps environment with focus on scalability, affordability, and effectiveness; RFI 2 addresses direct engineering, architectural, coding, and integration support for Kubernetes deployment and container orchestration platforms. Respondents must submit two separate white papers with a 10-page limit for CORE Helm-IaC responses and a 12-page limit for CORE Modernization responses. All font must be 12-point, and supplemental comment matrices are excluded from page counts. Responses were due by 12:00 noon ET on 26 February 2026, with questions deadline extended to 30 January 2026. Submissions are accepted via the classified Intelligence Community Acquisition Research Center (ARC) website or email to Charlene.K.Fowler@nga.mil and Travarus.K.Davis@nga.mil.
Key Technical Requirements and Government Expectations: The Government expects performers to maintain configuration, feature, and software version parity across all supported security domains (IL2, IL4, IL6, JWICS, and edge deployments) supporting 8 edge nodes in air-gapped and internet-connected environments. NGA CORE operates over 100-plus nodes with 2000-plus hosted application/service deployments across multiple deployments per network. Vendors must package all NGA CORE applications into Kubernetes deployments managed by Helm and Infrastructure-as-Code (IaC), deploy "CORE in a box" to contractor and mission partner environments, and maintain existing Cross Domain Solution (CDS) capabilities. Performers are authorized to implement automated cloud account provisioning using IaC within existing security boundaries and must collaborate with NGA risk management for approval. The Government maintains monthly AMI refreshes, quarterly software version updates aligned to vendor release schedules, and accelerated updates for critical vulnerabilities. Cost allocation will leverage AWS Cost and Usage Reports (CUR) for equitable billing by CPU and memory consumption across tenant namespaces. NGA Cloud Operations retains VPC, networking, and IAM ownership with ticket-based provisioning interfaces, though the Government encourages automated alternatives aligned with NGA policies. Monthly deployment demonstrations are flexible regarding format, and respondents may propose industry best practices. Named technologies (GitLab, Grafana/Elastic, SonarQube) are not hard requirements, and vendors should recommend appropriate solutions for HPC integration and advanced scheduling primitives on a case-by-case basis.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Q-and-A_NGA-CORE_SAM.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| NGA CORE Modernization RFI_GOLD.pdf |
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
Data
| # | Question | RFP Ref | Question Classification | Question Status | Answer | Answer Classification | |
| 42 | Will the Government confirm that graphics and table font can be Arial 8pt? | CORE Helm-IaC, Section 4.2 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | No – 12 font per RFI. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 41 | Will the Government please confirm that the supplemental comment matrix is not included in the overall 10 NTE page count for the white paper? | NGA CORE Helm-IaC, Section 4.2.1 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | Correct. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 40 | Will the Government confirm whether it expects performers to maintain configuration, feature, and software version parity across all supported security domains (e.g., IL2, IL4, IL6, JWICS, and edge deployments), or whether the Government anticipates a phased or prioritized approach to capability deployment and sustainment based on mission criticality, operational constraints, or domain-specific accreditation timelines? | NGA CORE Helm-IaC, Section 2.1 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | The Government expects performers to maintain configuration, feature, and software version parity across all supported security domains (e.g., IL2, IL4, IL6, JWICS, and edge deployments). | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 39 | Will the Government articulate NGA’s assessment of the primary technical and operational risks associated with managing Kubernetes-based container orchestration platforms in NGA's hybrid cloud and on-premises environments (e.g., resiliency and high availability, scalability and capacity management, security control enforcement, configuration/compliance drift, and lifecycle sustainment)? | NGA CORE Helm-IaC, Section 2.1 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | The assessment of technical and operational risks is expected based upon the platform provider. Towards this end, it is important to involve many aspects of the platform lifecycle (security, scalability, resiliency, networks, etc.) into your proposed offering and plan for regularly scheduled, periodic platform upgrades and releases (N, N+1, etc.). | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 38 | Will the Government confirm whether approved Cross Domain Solution (CDS) capabilities will be Government-furnished to support secure workload synchronization, data transfer, and deployment activities across security domains, or whether offerors are expected to propose, integrate, accredit, and sustain CDS capabilities as part of their overall solution? | NGA CORE Helm-IaC, Section 2.3 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | The vendor is expected to maintain and enhance an existing Cross Domain Solution (CDS) that is composed of custom code and cloud service provider technology, collaborate with the NGA CDS Office, and propose, integrate, accredit and solutions to meet enterprise needs. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 37 | Will the Government confirm whether performers are authorized to implement automated cloud account provisioning and network-layer infrastructure management using Infrastructure-as-Code (IaC) and policy-as-code mechanisms across cloud, multi-cloud, and hybrid environments, or whether there are domain-, platform-, or governance-driven constraints (e.g., security controls, accreditation boundaries, or provider-specific limitations) that offerors must account for in their proposed solutions? | NGA CORE Helm-IaC, Section 2.3 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | Performers are authorized to implement automated cloud account provisioning and network-layer infrastructure management using Infrastructure-as-Code (IaC) and policy-as-code mechanisms within existing security boundaries. It is expected that the performer will propose efficiencies, collaborate with NGA risk management, and implement approved solutions. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 36 | With respect to the requirement for “monthly deployment demonstrations,” will the Government clarify whether the expectation is for performers to conduct live operational demonstrations versus providing objective evidence of deployment completion (e.g., artifacts, metrics, or attestations), and whether these demonstrations are intended to function as formal review or approval gates (e.g., milestone exit criteria) governing authorization to proceed to subsequent deployment or development activities? | NGA CORE Helm-IaC, Section 2.1 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | Respondents are free to suggest what they see as the best option. The government is seeking insight on industry and commercial best practices. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 35 | Will the Government quantify the anticipated number of distinct air-gapped customer or end-user environments that performers would be required to support under this requirement, for purposes of capacity planning, deployment architecture, and sustainment modeling, should a solicitation be issued? | NGA CORE Helm-IaC, Section 1.2 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | Secret, Top Secret, and 8 Edge Nodes | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 34 | When the government says "Support deployment to internet connected and/or air-gapped environments in an orchestrated fashion," is the government referring to the deployment of CORE tools to the relevant environment or to the deployment of program specific applications to the relevant environment? | CORE Helm-IaC | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | The government is referring to the deployment of CORE tools to the relevant environment. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 33 | Is the government asking NGA CORE to package all of its applications into a Kubernetes deployment managed by Helm, or are they asking NGA CORE to develop Helm solutions that address common challenges NGA programs face when migrating to Kubernetes and NGA CORE? | Helm-IaC RFI | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | The government is asking for all NGA CORE applications to be packaged into a Kubernetes deployment managed by Helm and IaC. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 32 | Is the Helm-IaC RFI asking for Helm-IaC solutions to provide support to programs migrating to the CORE platform or for Helm-IaC solutions to deploy "CORE in a box" to contractor and mission partner lab and production environments? | Helm-IaC RFI | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | A Helm-IaC solutions to deploy "CORE in a box" to contractor and mission partner lab and production environments. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 31 | "In order to provide for the most thorough responses, the following are intended to be furnished to by the Government via its NGA CORE baseline:" | ||||||
| Could the government clarify whether the intention is for the "following..." to be furnished to the government by the contractor or furnished by the government to the contractor? | Helm-IaC RFI | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | Secret, Top Secret, and 8 Edge Nodes | UNCLASSIFIED | ||
| 30 | Will the Government provide insight into the anticipated acquisition timeline for any solicitations resulting from the NGA CORE RFIs, including whether the Government plans to release Draft RFP(s) and Draft PWS(s) to support industry engagement and feedback prior to final solicitation issuance? | NGA CORE Modernization, Section 2.1 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | The Government has not made a commitment to procure any of the RFI requirements discussed, and release of this RFI should not be construed as such a commitment. Any potential requirments resulting from this RFI will be advertised. | UNCLASSIFED | |
| 29 | Will the Government confirm that the use of Arial 8-point font is acceptable for text contained within graphics and tables for the RFI response? | NGA CORE Modernization, Section 4.2 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | All font shall be 12 pt | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 28 | Will the Government please confirm that the supplemental comment matrix is not included in the overall 12 NTE page count for the white paper? | NGA CORE Modernization, Section 4.2.1 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | Correct. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 26 | Will the Government confirm whether performers are expected to support the migration or modernization of legacy, non-containerized applications as part of future deliveries? If so, can the Government identify anticipated technical or operational challenges related to integrating legacy mission applications with next-generation containerized architectures within the context of overall modernization efforts? | NGA CORE Modernization, Section 2 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | The performers are not expected to migrate, modernize, or deploy customer software applications. Performers are expected to provide technical documentation and customer engagement to convey the CORE, express standard expectations for use of the tools and services, and highlight known limitations to enable the success of customer software deployments. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 25 | Will the Government provide a breakdown of the total number of applications hosted within each security environment, including relevant metrics such as instance counts, deployment scale, or workload sizing, to enable respondents to assess the overall program scope and resource requirements holistically? | NGA CORE Modernization, Section 2 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | Platform size, scope, and scale can fluctuate based upon demand. There are multiple platform deployments per network with over 100-plus nodes, 2000-plus hosted app/service deployments, and a wide range of cpu and memory requirements. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 24 | Will the Government identify any key performance indicators (KPIs), success metrics, or evaluation criteria that may be applied to assess offeror proposals in response to this RFI and/or any subsequent solicitation, including metrics related to technical performance, operational/cost effectiveness, scalability, and resiliency? | NGA CORE Modernization, Section 2.1 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | This RFI is only intended for the Government to identify sources that can provide the needed services to fulfill the Government’s statement of objectives. The information provided in this RFI is subject to change and is not binding to the Government. The Government has not made a commitment to procure any of the RFI requirements discussed | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 23 | Will the Government clarify the rationale for issuing RFI 1 (Modernization) and RFI 2 (IaC/Helm) as separate requests, given the apparent overlap in scope and technical objectives, and whether the Government anticipates these RFIs informing distinct solicitations, acquisition strategies, or contract vehicles versus a single, integrated requirement? | NGA CORE Modernization | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | The government wants to provide industry the opportunity to respond to one or both sections. All other information requested is pre-decisional. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 22 | Per section 2.1, "In order to provide the most thorough responses, the following are intended to be furnished to by the Government via its NGA CORE baseline:" Can the Government please clarify if the five bullets that follow this statement are items that will be provided by the Government, or are items that will be provided to the Government (by the Offeror)?• | Provide tooling and services that empowers users to develop, build, test, scan, and deploy code that addresses NGA Mission | |||||
| • | Definition of the standard deployment procedures and dependencies between CORE components | ||||||
| • | Maintenance of product line release versions that comply with Semantic Versioning 2.0.0 standards and release notes for the entire CORE product line | ||||||
| • | Baseline configuration for security compliance within NGA environments | ||||||
| • | Enterprise agent configurations applicable to NGA internal deployments | RFI-CORE-IAC Helm; Section 2.1; page 3 of 9 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | These are documents that would be made available in a formal RFP. For the purposes of this RFI please use the following document descriptions to inform your responses. In order to provide for the most thorough responses, the following are intended to be furnished by the Government via its NGA CORE baseline: |
Provide tooling and services that empowers users to develop, build, test, scan, and deploy code that addresses NGA Mission Would be defined at the time of the RFP Definition of the standard deployment procedures and dependencies between CORE components
| NGA is primarily focused on deployment parity, lifecycle management, and full operational support once deployed. NGA CORE implements upgrades during recurring maintenance windows, with AMI refreshes occurring monthly. Software version updates are conducted quarterly or aligned to vendor release schedules, and may be expedited for critical security vulnerabilities. Mission requirements take precedence, requiring flexible adaptation of maintenance schedules. Continued below) | UNCLASSIFIED | ||
| Cell left blank intentionally. | (Continuation) Maintenance of product line release versions that comply with Semantic Versioning 2.0.0 standards and release notes for the entire CORE product line. NGA is primarily focused on deployment parity, lifecycle management, and full operational support once deployed. NGA CORE implements upgrades during recurring maintenance windows, with AMI refreshes occurring monthly. Software version updates are conducted quarterly or aligned to vendor release schedules, and may be expedited for critical security vulnerabilities. Mission requirements take precedence, requiring flexible adaptation of maintenance schedules. |
Baseline configuration for security compliance within NGA environments The Government expects performers to maintain configuration, feature, and software version parity across all supported security domains (e.g., IL2, IL4, IL6, JWICS, and edge deployments).
Enterprise agent configurations applicable to NGA internal deployments
| Would be based on a current state at the time of the RFP | UNCLASSIFIED | ||||||
| 21 | Can the government please clarify RFI submission requirements for 3.2 Experience? Is it the Government's intent to illicit three(3) separate representative experiences (Commercial, Government, and NGA), OR does the Government only require a single (1) representative experience for either Commercial, Government, or NGA acknowledging that a potential responder may not possess representative experience for each. | RFI-CORE-Modernization RFI-CORE-IAC Helm; Section 3.2 Experience; pages 5, 6 of 9 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | NGA is primarily focused on deployment parity, lifecycle management, and full operational support once deployed. NGA CORE implements upgrades during recurring maintenance windows, with AMI refreshes occurring monthly. Software version updates are conducted quarterly or aligned to vendor release schedules, and may be expedited for critical security vulnerabilities. Mission requirements take precedence, requiring flexible adaptation of maintenance schedules. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 20 | Can the government please clarify that the intent is to respond with a total of three (3) separate RFIs based on the responders capabilities and experience? |
RFI1: Operations, sustainment and concurrent modernization … CORE RFI2: Direct ("Hands-on") engineering, architectural, coding, and integration .. Kubernetes
| RFI3: HELM/IAC: Holistic deployment approach for NGA CORE current and future requirements | RFI-CORE-Modernization RFI-CORE-IAC Helm; Section 1.2; Page 1 of 9 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | Baseline configuration for security compliance within NGA environments | UNCLASSIFIED | ||
| 19 | Per Section 1.2, the purpose of this RFI is to gain information on RFI 1 and RFI 2. Will the Government please clarify whether the 12 page limit (per section 4.2) applies to RFI 1 and RFI 2 individually, or whether Offeror's are required to address RFI 1 and RFI 2 within the 12 page limit? | RFI-CORE-Modernization; Section 4.2; Page 1 of 9 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | The Government expects performers to maintain configuration, feature, and software version parity across all supported security domains (e.g., IL2, IL4, IL6, JWICS, and edge deployments). | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 18 | Per Section 1.2, the purpose of this RFI is to gain information on RFI 1 and RFI 2. Will the Government please clarify whether they intend for industry to submit two RFI responses (for RFI 1 and RFI 2) or if Offers should combine their responses into a single document? | RFI-CORE-Modernization; Section 1.2, Page 1 of 9 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | Enterprise agent configurations applicable to NGA internal deployments | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 17 | There are named technologies such as GitLab, Grafana/Elastic, SonarQube, etc. Are these hard requirements for your procurement or is the Government open to alternative technologies/tools? | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | Would be based on a current state at the time of the RFP | UNCLASSIFIED | ||
| 16 | Regarding the integration with future HPC environments and large data workloads, does the government require the Kubernetes platform to support advanced batch scheduling primitives (e.g., Gang Scheduling or Coscheduling via tools like Volcano or Kueue) to ensure distributed AI training jobs launch atomically, or will these workloads be strictly offloaded to external legacy schedulers? | HELM IaaS RFI 4 Modernization RFI 3 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | The government desires to foster a culture of innovation. Therefore it is expected that the vendor will provide recommendation on the most appropriate technical solution for integration with HPC environments and scheduling primitives on a case by case basis. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 15 | The RFI establishes a multi-tenant baseline while simultaneously calling for large compute workloads. To prevent resource starvation by intensive jobs, does the government require advanced API rate-limiting and network egress throttling (e.g., via an API Gateway like Kong or Service Mesh) at the tenant level, or are standard Kubernetes ResourceQuotas and LimitRanges considered sufficient for mission isolation? | HELM IaaS RFI 4 Modernization RFI 3 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | The expectation is for a multi-tenant baseline with large range of differing workload types. To ensure platform stability, ResourceQuotas and LimitRanges are used. To prevent resource starvation, performers should set appropriate pod limits and requests. To assist with abnormal compute workloads performers can request dedicated systems. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 14 | RFI 2 mandates support for 'teams that do not have an NGA affiliation' on shared infrastructure. To facilitate equitable cost recovery in this multi-agency model, does the platform require native charge-back or show-back metering capabilities (e.g., tracking CPU/RAM seconds per tenant namespace) integrated into NGA's enterprise financial systems, or is cost accounting handled at a higher subscription level? | HELM IaaS RFI 3 Modernization RFI 2 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | Our organization's cost allocation approach has undergone a strategic enhancement. The original Chargeback implementation utilized a custom-developed solution that extracted financial data directly through the AWS Cost Explorer API. Our upcoming modernized approach will leverage the more comprehensive AWS Cost and Usage Report (CUR) delivered to designated S3 storage. |
| Both methodologies maintain equitable billing by incorporating detailed resource consumption metrics—specifically CPU utilization and memory allocation—ensuring accurate cost distribution across tenant namespace. | UNCLASSIFIED | ||||||
| 13 | RFI 1 describes the 'Blue Factory' as an evaluation and experimentation space. Will the Platform Services contractor have administrative root access to this environment to implement and test new 'Maker and Builder' tradecraft resources, or is the Blue Factory managed under a separate Research & Development contract with limited integrator access? | Modernization RFI 2,3 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | Blue Factory is available to anyone at NGA. Currently, Platform Services does not utilize Blue Factory implementation/testing. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 12 | RFI 1 mentions integration with future High-Performance Compute (HPC) environments. Does the government envision the Kubernetes platform directly orchestrating HPC workloads (e.g., utilizing MPI Operators and converged clusters), or will the platform primarily serve as a submission gateway/interface to external, legacy HPC schedulers (e.g., Slurm)? | Modernization RFI 4 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | There is an expectation for integrating an enterprise HPC capability into the existing baseline. In addition, there is an expecataion that there is the capability to integrate with external enterprise systems. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 11 | The RFI requests a bundled solution for air-gapped environments. Does the government define this bundle as strictly the configuration code (Helm Charts/IaC), or does the requirement extend to the 'vendoring' of all binary dependencies (container images, OS packages) into a consolidated OCI Artifact or similar air-gap transfer package to mitigate supply chain dependency failures on disconnected networks? | HELM IaaS RFI 2 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | There is an expectation that all artifacts are available and transferrable with in-built auditing and lifecycle management. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 10 | RFI 2 mandates a 'bring your own license' (BYOL) model. For air-gapped and edge deployments where phone-home activation is impossible, does NGA possess offline-capable Enterprise License Agreements (ELAs) for the required stack (OpenShift, Fortify, SonarQube), or will the contractor be responsible for negotiating disconnected licensing terms and managing physical license files for all bundled vendors? | HELM IaaS RFI 3 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | ELAs should be maintained due to the lack of phone-home and would be negotiated via proper NGA channels and processes. Current software licensing is negotiated and procured through the NGA Software and Asset Management office, at times a contractor may negotiate licensing and deliver as part of a bundled service/product. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 9 | RFI 2 suggests the use of 'documentation-based orchestration' or a 'wrapper script' for the CaaS deployment. Would the government prefer a declarative 'GitOps' approach (e.g., bootstrapping via ArgoCD or Flux) that ensures continuous state reconciliation and drift management, particularly for air-gapped environments where manual updates carry high operational risk? | HELM IaaS RFI 1 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | There is an expectation that artifacts are easily trackable with version history, and that there are both visibility and the capability of reverting to previous versions or releases, with the added potential for disaster recovery. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 8 | RFI 2 notes that 'NGA Cloud Operations (Cloud OPS)' retains ownership of VPC, Networking, and IAM provisioning. To ensure the contractor can meet the 'ATO-in-a-Day' and rapid onboarding objectives , does a formalized Service Level Agreement (SLA) or automated API interface exist between the Platform Services office and Cloud OPS? Specifically, will the contractor be empowered to utilize Infrastructure as Code (Terraform) to trigger Cloud OPS provisioning, or is the interface strictly ticket-based? | HELM IaaS RFI 3 Modernization RFI 2 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | Cloud OPS maintains a formal SLA and requirement for operating in the environments, Currently, specific services would require a ticket to be created. We encourage the performer to welcome ideas that enhance CORE’s compute, storage, and identity services through automation and industry best practices cohering to NGA policies and frameworks. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 7 | RFI 2 requests support for 'teams that do not have an NGA affiliation'. Does the government envision the Platform Services contractor acting as a centralized 'Product Manager' and 'Help Desk' for external Intelligence Community (IC) partners utilizing the CORE CaaS bundle? Furthermore, will the Platform Services contractor be responsible for accommodating nuanced environment realities across multiple non-NGA environments? | HELM IaaS RFI 3 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | The NGA CORE is used by external, non-NGA affiliated, software product development teams across the IC and DoW. |
The performers are expected to operate the existing NGA CORE, providing onboarding and technical support to teams required for all software delivery teams to be successful developing and deploying software products.
| Additionally, the performers are expected to provide a fully documented HELM based deployment of the NGA CORE that IC, DoW, vendor, and academia partners can deploy within their own environments (Government Owned/Contractor Operated or otherwise). It is expected that the instructions will provide deployment requirements and limitations. The performer will not be responsible for providing direct support for the deployment of the NGA CORE in an environment that is not owned by or directly associated with (contractual) NGA. | UNCLASSIFIED | ||||||
| 6 | If responding to both RFI 1 and RFI 2, should the response be submitted as a single white paper not to exceed 12 total pages, or as two separate white papers not to exceed 10 pages and 12 pages, respectively? | Modernization RFI 8 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | Reponse shall be two separate white papers not to exceed 10 pages (CORE Helm) and 12 pages (CORE Modernization). | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 5 | Vendors are encouraged to respond to one or all RFIs per Section 1.2 (page |
1), and white papers are limited to 12 pages per Section 4.2 (page 8). May vendors address both RFIs within a single combined response, provided the total
| submission does not exceed the 12-page limit? | NGA CORE Modernization Section 1.2 (page 1), Section 4.2 (page 8) | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | Yes. | UNCLASSIFIED | ||
| 4 | Can the Government please clarify that RFI 1 and 2 in the Modernization RFI are both to be within the 12-page limit? | CORE Modernization, pages 7-8, Section 4.2 Responses | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | CORE Helm Iac has a 10 page limit and the CORE Modernization RFI has 12 page limit for white paper responses. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 3 | This document describes two RFIs in Section 1.2. What is the purpose of dividing these requirements? | NGA core modernization rfi_gold1.docx; Section 1.2 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | The government wants to provide industry the opportunity to respond to one or both sections. | UNCLASSIFIED | |
| 2 | Reference “NGA core helm-iac rfi_gold1.docx” and “NGA core modernization rfi_gold1.docx”: | ||||||
| If there are not two, separate responses from industry required, what is the page limitation for the single response as page limitations differ between the two documents published by the Government? | NGA core helm-iac rfi_gold1.docx; Section 4.2 and NGA core modernization rfi_gold1.docx; Section 4.2 | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | Two separate responses are required. CORE Helm Iac has a 10 page limit and the CORE Modernization RFI has 12 page limit for responses. | UNCLASSIFIED | ||
| 1 | Reference “NGA core helm-iac rfi_gold1.docx” and “NGA core modernization rfi_gold1.docx”: | ||||||
| Do the two RFI documents indicate that there are two, separate RFIs that require two, separate responses from industry? | Entire Document | UNCLASSIFIED | Submitted | Yes. There are two separate RFI with each requiring a separate response. | UNCLASSIFIED |
&"Courier"&12UNCLASSIFIED//NOFORN//SSI
&"Courier"&12UNCLASSIFIED//NOFORN//SSI
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .