EIS_RFP_QTA0015THA3003_-_SF30_-_Amend_03_Q A_-_FBO.docx

OMB Approval 2700-0042

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6)

CODE

General Services Administration/FAS/ITS Office of Acquisition Operations 1800 F Street, NW, 4th Floor Washington DC 20405

QTA0015THA3003

1710 H. Street, NW, 7th Floor

10/16/2015

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is |_| extended, X is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copy of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATA SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and data specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor _ is not, _ is required to sign this document and return 1 copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

SEE ADDITIONAL PAGES

Except at provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

Timothy Horan Contracting Officer

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

RFP # QTA0015THA3003

Amendment #03

Questions, Answers and Clarifications to the EIS RFP

Listed below are the following:

· Questions received from potential offerors regarding the RFP. The list does not include all of the questions received thus far.

· Answers to the questions listed.

· Clarifications to the RFP provided by the Government that were not based on a potential offeror’s question. The Government entered questions into Acquserve in order to document the corresponding clarification.

The RFP questions, answers and clarifications contained herein do not include any changes to the RFP. This document is being issued using an SF30 and amendment number for tracking purposes only; however, the RFP is not being amended as a result of any of the questions, answers or clarifications contained herein.

The Government does anticipate issuing a subsequent SF30 that contains questions and answers that will result in a formal amendment to the RFP.

The questions, answers and clarifications are listed based on the UCF Sections. The question numbers are from the Acquserve portal and are not in sequential order.

Question:

International Mobile Roaming is listed as an optional feature. but in the associated CLIN Table in B.2.6.6.3, certain CLINS are labeled optional and other CLINs are not. Should the offeror assume that if International Roaming is bid, all CLINs not labeled optional are mandatory and those labeled optional are "options with the option?"

Answer:

Within Wireless Service (MWS), International Mobile Roaming is an optional offering. Further, both of the tables "International Mobile Roaming Bucket and Unlimited Prices Table" and "International Mobile Roaming Catalog Table" are optional. This means that only one of the two tables is required if the service is offered. If pricing within either table is proposed, then all CLINs within the proposed table that are not labeled optional are mandatory and the CLINs within that table that are labeled optional are optional.

Question:

Where are CONUS-OCONUS, CONUS-Non-domestic; and OCONUS -Non-Domestic services priced? B.2.1.3.2.1, B.2.1.3.2.2, B.2.11.3.2.3

Answer:

CLINs OW00101 through OW00106 are to be priced in Table B.2.1.3.2.1 for Metro OWS.

CLINs OW00107 through OW00112 can be used to price CONUS to CONUS OWS in Table B.2.1.3.2.2. The same CLINs can be used to price CONUS to OCONUS and OCONUS to OCONUS in Table B.2.1.3.2.3.

CLINs OW00113 through OW00118 are to be priced in Table B.2.1.3.2.4, and are only to be used when at least one side of the circuit is a non-domestic location.

Question:

Which CLINs will be used for CONUS to Non-Domestic, OCONUS to Non-Domestic, and Non-Domestic to Non-Domestic services? B.2.1.3.2.1, B.2.1.3.2.2, B.2.11.3.2.3

Answer:

CLINs OW00101 through OW00106 are to be priced in Table B.2.1.3.2.1 for Metro OWS.

CLINs OW00107 through OW00112 can be used to price CONUS to CONUS OWS in Table B.2.1.3.2.2. The same CLINs can be used to price CONUS to OCONUS and OCONUS to OCONUS in Table B.2.1.3.2.3.

CLINs OW00113 through OW00118 are to be priced in Table B.2.1.3.2.4, and are only to be used when at least one side of the circuit is a non-domestic location.

Question:

VPNS. CLIN VN21001 has a charging unit of Megs/Day. How many days does the traffic model assume for each year? For example in Year 1 there are 232 quantities. For Year 1, would the total price = unit price x 232 x 365?

Answer:

For any usage CLIN, the quantity in the traffic table represents the usage for a typical month in the stated contract year. The total anticipated usage for the year would be found by multiplying the traffic table quantity by the number of months in that contract year (as defined in the months_factor reference table). For the example cited in the question, the total price for year 1, which has 11 months, would be: unit price x 232 x 11.

Question:

Would the Government define "small", "medium", and "large"?

Answer:

The government is not defining "small", "medium", etc. The offeror shall describe their approach to device size assignment as required in Section L.34.1 Price Response, bullet #8. In addition, if an offeror decides to propose SREs, then each device shall be classified in the SRE catalog (section B.2.10.2.1 SRE Catalog - Product Specification Table), specifically the field labeled "device size".

Question:

Would the Government define device size "small", "medium", and "large"?

Answer:

The government is not defining "small", "medium", etc. The offeror shall describe their approach to device size assignment as required in Section L.34.1 Price Response, bullet #8. In addition, if an offeror decides to propose SREs, then each device shall be classified in the SRE catalog (section B.2.10.2.1 SRE Catalog - Product Specification Table), specifically the field labeled "device size".

Question:

The B-Tables reference the use of a "Case Number" related to both ICB and TUC pricing. Is our understanding of a "Case Number" as being an unique identifier to distinguish one instance of a CLIN ("Case") from another of the same CLIN correct?

Answer:

Yes, that is correct.

Question:

In the SRE table is it expected that the contractor specifically build a configuration (VPN , T1, US power, I gig Ethernet interface, QoS ) for each combination of features, Interfaces, options, and country (power supplies are different based the country) or is it expected to include base equipment ( Cisco ISR4421) and list the optional interfaces (NIM-4MFT-T1/E1), features (software SL-4320-IPB-K9), options and power supplies (PWR-4320-AC) so the customer can pick each line item they need?

Answer:

Either or both approaches are acceptable as long as the required pricing information is provided with each item as specified in B.2.10. Historically, agencies have ordered using both approaches.

The government's intention is to allow offerors to mirror their commercial practices and to make use of published commercial information to the maximum practicable extent in establishing acceptable discount classes and discount structures for catalog offerings to the government.

Catalog items may be added at any time by providing the required information, including associating each new item with a pre-established discount class appropriate to the item.

Offerors who offer catalog items as part of their EIS proposals will be establishing such pre-negotiated discount class structures for all awarded catalog offerings.

Also, see response to question 258.

Question:

The table in B.2.8.1.3.2 specifies different CLINs for different sized devices. Please provide a better description of each size. For example: extra small may mean a desk top or hand held devices where extra large may refer to a piece of equipment that is 10 or more rack units or larger.

Answer:

The government is not defining "small", "medium", etc. The offeror shall describe their approach to device size assignment as required in Section L.34.1 Price Response, bullet #8. In addition, if an offeror decides to propose SREs, then each device shall be classified in the SRE catalog (section B.2.10.2.1 SRE Catalog - Product Specification Table), specifically the field labeled "device size".

Question:

For the Auto-Sold CLIN Table (B.1.2.11.1); if we have a case where there are more than one Auto-Sold CLIN associated with a base CLIN do we list them in the same row separated by commas or do we list each pair as separate rows in the table?

Answer:

The offeror shall list each pair as a separate row in the table.

Question:

B.2.8.2.5.2, page 122. CLIN WC90001 appears to be an MRC based on the number of months but the charging unit is identified as "GB" increments. Will GSA please change the charging unit to "Presentation"?

Answer:

CLIN WC90001 represents the charge for storage per GB for additional months on a monthly basis. The initial 3 months are included as part of the basic service at no additional charge. This approach follows the commercial pricing paradigm adopted by the web service providers.

Question:

Section B.2.8.5.1, page 129. This section defines the pricing structure for EIS for Managed Security Services as Catalog-based. Section B.2.8.5.4 lists the categories for the service offering: Managed Prevention Service (MPS), Vulnerability Scanning Service (VSS), and Incident Response Service (INRS). The first two services are based on mature offerings that allow for commercially defined services to be priced in a catalog structure as that defined for EIS. The third service category (INRS) requires at a minimum, an ICB price structure in addition to the catalog structure defined in the RFP. This need for ICB pricing is due to the nature of the services encompassed under this category, which require considerations on the nature of the incident, size and scope, and the depth and scope of the analysis to be performed in response to an incident. As such, the current structure defined under MSS for INRS is not adequate to allow for the provision of the undefined scope of services defined for this category. Would GSA amend the solicitation to add Task Order Unique CLINs to MSS to allow for the provision of services that can be customized to the size, scope and scale of incidents?

Answer:

No, the government will not amend the RFP. Incident response is also a mature, commercially available service. Offerors should be able to generate prices based on cost estimations to account for differences in the nature of the incident, size and scope, and the depth and scope of the analysis to be performed in response to an incident.

Question:

B.2.12.2, page 174. The specification of "up to 150ft of wiring" does not state the type of wiring this applies to. Would GSA please amend the solicitation to specify CAT 6 wiring?

Answer:

The government did not specify a single wire type for the fixed CW CLINs. The fixed CW CLINs exist for ease of ordering, are intended for "typical" wiring installs, and may include a variety of wiring types. If an install varies significantly from the "typical" install, it may be proposed using the ICB CLIN CW00103.

Question:

B.2.8.2.4.2, page 121. The current CLIN charges require 15 minute increments which cannot be tracked when a user disconnects/reconnects during a session, and the agency will be charged for multiple 15 minute increments. Will GSA please modify the solicitation to the industry standard of "per minute per participant"?

Answer:

The CLINs WC00100/WC00110 represent event based pricing based on the individual bands identified on page 121 (Table B.2.8.2.4.1) and not individual attendees. The charging unit is consistent with the pricing paradigm used in the market place.

To address the example provided in the question, the agency will not be charged for multiple increments even if a user disconnects/connects during a session, considering the pricing is based on banding.

Question:

The pricing table for MNS device management has 5 CLINs (1 Extra Small - 2 Small - 3 Medium - 4 Large - 5 Extra-Large) without further description of parameters in Section C. Please describe and elaborate on bandwidth - physical size - system scope etc.

Answer:

The government is not defining "extra small", "small", "medium", etc. The offeror shall describe their approach to device size assignment as required in Section L.34.1 Price Response, bullet #8. In addition, if an offeror decides to propose SREs, then each device shall be classified in the SRE catalog (section B.2.10.2.1 SRE Catalog - Product Specification Table), specifically the field labeled "device size".

Question:

In the pricing tables - The concern is that were a vendor to enter a finite number - the Government may deem that vendor as noncompliant for placing an upper band limit for an IDIQ. Please clarify how offerors should indicate that there is no upper band limitation.

Answer:

Offerors should use their judgement to determine what is a reasonable upper band limit per CLIN that will encompass all possible ordering situations. At a minimum, the traffic model provides information on the floor of the upper band limit.

Question:

IPVS Table B.2.2.1.3.2 references Table B.2.2.2.1.3 in the Notes column. That referenced table is applicable to CSVS. Is the Government stating that this table also applies to IPVS even though it is in a CSVS section? If that is the case why is the same Note not present in Table B.2.2.1.3.3.2?

Answer:

The usage increments, defined in Table B.2.2.2.1.3, for applicable increments of six-second usage apply to both CSVS and IPVS. The non-domestic mobile termination surcharge, defined in Table B.2.2.1.3.3.2, is a separate per six-second increment additional add-on charge that applies to certain non-domestic telephone calls that terminate to a mobile phone or other wireless devices.

Question:

IPVS Table B.2.2.1.3.2 references Table B.2.2.2.1.3 in the Notes column. That referenced table is applicable to CSVS. Is the Government stating that this table also applies to IPVS - even though it is in a CSVS section? If that is the case - Should the same Note be present in Table B.2.2.1.3.3.2?

Answer:

The usage increments, defined in Table B.2.2.2.1.3, for applicable increments of six-second usage apply to both CSVS and IPVS. The non-domestic mobile termination surcharge, defined in Table B.2.2.1.3.3.2, is a separate per six-second increment additional add-on charge that applies to certain non-domestic telephone calls that terminate to a mobile phone or other wireless devices.

Question:

Will agencies be required to conduct Fair Opportunity at the end of each period?

Answer:

The RFP does not require agencies to conduct fair opportunity at the end of each period. The ordering procedures in FAR 16.505 shall be followed for every order placed utilizing EIS. FAR 16.505(a)(2) defines orders as "Individual orders shall clearly describe all services to be performed or supplies to be delivered so the full cost or price for the performance of the work can be established when the order is placed. Orders shall be within the scope, issued within the period of performance, and be within the maximum value of the contract." Fair opportunity as listed in FAR 16.505(b)(1) will apply to all orders unless an exception applies as listed in FAR 16.505(b)(2).

Question:

Would a wireless data solution be acceptable for this offering?

Answer:

If the solution meets the VPNS requirements in Section C, then it may be acceptable; however, the Government cannot give a definitive answer without an actual proposal.

Question:

Question 171 Old Question B.2.2.1.5.3 Para 3 and Table B.2.2.1.5.3. Managed LAN Pricing Instruction table is not mentioned in the B.2.2.1.5 section introduction. Managed LAN Service with Call Server and Maintenance Premise Based second CLIN is not easily priced on a per seat basis. We recommend that this pricing be based on a per component i.e. switch or router etc and that the cost of the equipment and management of the equipment will be covered by the SRE charge. Will GSA please modify the RFP and make these change? Answer The Government requires a per seat banded price for the Managed LAN premises based solution due to established market offerings and agency buying behavior preferences. New Question Would the Government consider making the per-seat-price ICB-based per Task Order on varying customer requirements and/or differing environments e.g. campus vs building and other customer specific conditions not known or provided with in the RFP?

Answer:

As stated in the response to question #171 and published in Amendment 1, the Government requires a per seat banded price for the Managed LAN premises-based solution and not as a per seat ICB price.

The government will not modify the RFP.

Question:

Question 171 Old Question B.2.2.1.5.3 Para 3 and Table B.2.2.1.5.3. Managed LAN Pricing Instruction table is not mentioned in the B.2.2.1.5 section introduction. Managed LAN Service with Call Server and Maintenance Premise Based second CLIN is not easily priced on a per seat basis. We recommend that this pricing be based on a per component i.e. switch or router etc and that the cost of the equipment and management of the equipment will be covered by the SRE charge. Will GSA please modify the RFP and make these change?

Answer:

As stated in the response to question #171 and published in Amendment 1, the Government requires a per seat banded price for the Managed LAN premises-based solution and not a per component price.

Moreover, Section B.2.2.1.5 specified that the contractor shall be responsible for providing and managing all Managed LAN networking hardware components (e.g. layer 2 switching devices, routers, call servers, etc.) to extend the IPVS from the site demarcation point to the terminating subscriber device. Managed LAN per seat pricing shall include all equipment necessary to provide the Managed LAN solution.

The government will not modify the RFP.

Question:

Will GSA review agency task orders for Task Order Unique CLINs for scope and compliance to the EIS contract and the FAR?

Answer:

Yes, GSA will require a scope review for all requirements prior to the issuance of a solicitation. Additionally, GSA will review TUCs during the administration of the contract to verify compliance with the EIS terms and conditions identified in Section G.

Question:

Table B.2.8.1.4.2 requires POTS line and Wireless Access out of band, specifying a single price for CONUS and a single price for OCONUS. There is very little detail in Section C to describe this. POTS line pricing varies within CONUS depending on locality and it varies widely among the OCONUS territories. We request that the RFP be amended to provide more detail and mitigate the ridk of bidding a single rate to apply anywhere OCONUS. Otherwise bidders will have no choice but to bid at the highest rates.

Answer:

The RFP will not be amended. Agencies prefer the current mechanism, which is being used today, therefore, MNS Out-of-Band services will remain as a fixed price across localities. Costs may be averaged to come up with a fixed price.

Question:

If all of the necessary CLINs were not added to EIS to conduct a like for like transition, and the agency Contracting Officer will have to include the necessary requirements in the agency Task Order, how will this impact the 3 year transition schedule if there are delays in conducting Fair Opportunity and making task order awards?

Answer:

The RFP includes all of the CLINs and services necessary for agencies to conduct a like for like transition. The Government anticipates that incumbent contractors, at a minimum, will propose the necessary CLINs and services in their proposals to ensure that they can submit offers to their existing customers for their current services.

Question:

Did GSA add all of the necessary CLINs for every agency to conduct a like for like transition from Networx to EIS?

Answer:

GSA's goal was to create a robust set of CLINs that represented a mix of current and future services. Not every CLIN that has been ordered on Networx is represented on EIS; however, the EIS contract has the flexibility for an agency and contractor to use a mix of EIS fixed price CLINs, ICB CLINs, the contract modification process for adding new CLINs and TUCs to handle any issues. (See Question 510).

Question:

Will GSA please describe the process for adding " not listed but logical CLINs" to the contract before TO.

Answer:

CLINs can be added to the contract via the contract modification process in Section J.4. New CLINs can not be ordered within a TO before the CLIN is added to the contract. After the CLIN is added to the contract, the TO will need to be modified to add the new CLIN in coordination with the agency.

Question:

How will GSA mitigate any unfair incumbent advantage as a result of not including all of the CLINs necessary for like for like contract, since the incumbent currently provides those services to the agency conducting the Task Order Fair Opportunity? These requirements should be included in the base contract?

Answer:

GSA has appointed an ombudsman to review complaints from contractors and ensure that they are afforded a fair opportunity to be considered, consistent with the procedures in the contract. See Section G.3.2.3 and Section I 552.216-74 for the information on the ombudsman. Additionally,41 U.S.C. 4103(d) and 41 U.S.C. 4106(f) allow for protests of TOs valued in excess of $10 million.

Question:

Will GSA review and agency task order for scope and FAR compliance as it relates to adding "not listed but logical task orders"?

Answer:

Yes. GSA will require a scope review for all requirements prior to the issuance of a solicitation. Additionally, GSA will review TUCs during the administration of the contract to verify compliance with the EIS terms and conditions identified in Section G.

Question:

Will GSA arbitrate any disagreements between the vendor and the agency as a result of an agency requiring the additions of not listed but logical CLINs that the contractor believes that the requirements are unrealistic or out of scope? If so, please describe that process.

Answer:

All CLINs must be included in the initial TO award or added by subsequent bilateral agreements to the TO. GSA delegates authority to OCOs to place TOs under EIS. Section J.3 lists all the delegated authority. Unless GSA is a party to the award or administration of the TO, it will not arbitrate any disagreements pre or post TO award. See Section G.3.2.3.1 for protests of TO awards and Section I 52.233-1 and 52.233-1 Alternate I for disputes under the contract.

Question:

Question 215 Old Question Custom solutions are typically re-quired for Contact Center Hosted and Premise Based pricing. Can GSA revise the requirement to make all Contact Center Hosted and Premise Based pricing including Features ICB? Answer No the government will not revise Contact Center Hosted and Premise Based pricing including Features to ICB. The government understands that Contact Center Service is typically customized to agency requirements and has identified all such CLINs as ICB especially related to service initiation of the solution and to a great extent when it came to features. There are only a few non-ICB CLINs that the government feels did not need customization and can be priced accordingly. New Question Since some of the features that the Government is asking to be fixed price can be priced based on volume bands in usage based features would the Government please consider pricing for these features in a volume bands? Further does the Government envision that additional features added after award be added through GSA and the contract modification process or as a TUC in an agency Task Order?

Answer:

Volume specific pricing/discounting can be provided to the ordering agency via the Task Order (TO).

The government envisions that new additional features will be added through GSA’s contract modification process, to be available to all agencies. Agency specific features can be added as a TUC CLIN in an agency Task Order.

Question:

Section B.1.2.11 states that as new capabilities and features are added to the contract for the services that have auto-sold CLINs (such as Audio, Web and Video Conferencing), contractors shall update (in this example) Table B.1.2.11.1. Within this context what is the definition of the "contract"? If an auto-sold CLIN is added to the contract, is the contractor automatically required to add the new auto-sold capabilities and features to all Services across all customers and all task orders? Does this automatically get added to the Billing to each customer? In the case where the parent CLIN of an auto-sold CLIN is a TUC, do only the existing parent CLINs within the Task Order receive the new auto-sold capabilities and features?

Answer:

See the answer to question 319.

Question:

This question is in Reference to The Government's response to Question #62 on pages 4 and 5 of 55 in Amendment #01 released on 11/27/2015. The Government answered that the contractor is only required to price mandatory access services at NSCs when demand for that class of access service is found in the traffic model. What is unclear is if the contractor is required to price all speeds within a given access category (i.e. wireline or Ethernet) when only a subset of speeds is represented in the traffic model. For example, a small, remote site may only have demand for a DS0 but one could interpret the requirements to indicate that the contractor has to offer pricing for all types of mandatory wireline access services (i.e. DS0, T1, ISDN PRI, ISDN BRI, T3, SDSL, ADSL) at that remote location. Several of the wireline access types such as T3 and DSL are not universally available, particularly to small and rural locations where service only up to a T1 is often available. Is this the correct interpretation of this requirement or does the contractor only need to offer the specific service at a given location for which there is demand in the traffic table?

Answer:

The contractor's interpretation that all types of mandatory wireline and/or ethernet access services must be priced, is correct. See Section J.1.3.1.1, which states the requirements for pricing mandatory access at each NSC.

Question:

Please confirm that table B.1.2.14.1 is not required for proposal submittal, regardless of the services selected for inclusion in the proposal submittal. In the event table B.1.2.14.1 is required to be uploaded, it is not clear what the content of the table would be since it is general ICB.

Answer:

Table B.1.2.14.1 must be populated for proposal submittal if the contractor is proposing any catalog based service. Each case number in the catalog must also be included in Table B.1.2.14.1.

Question:

Under B.2.3.2.4.3 Premises-Based CCS Feature Pricing Instructions Table, CLIN CC92019 (Web Call Through - Premises-Based) is an NRC which will support the establishment of the service. However, the table does not include a corresponding MRC or Usage CLIN to support the operation of the service. We recommend GSA amend the RFP to define an MRC and/or a Usage CLIN to support the Web Call Through - Premises-Based service. This would align with how agencies procure this service under other federal contracts.

Answer:

The government reviewed how agencies were procuring the feature under other federal contracts. The functionality of the service compared to price elements was also reviewed. Web Call Through should be part of the contractor’s Contact Center design.

The government does not see the need for additional CLINS.

Question:

Under B.2.1.6.3.2 DFS Feature Pricing Instructions Table, DK09005 Splicing is not defined as ICB as all DFS components have been. Dispatch pricing is dependent on geographic location. We recommend GSA define DK09005 as ICB to allow vendors to change the appropriate pricing per geographic location.

Answer:

CLIN DK09005 was changed from fixed price to ICB in Amendment 02, Question #271.

Question:

Under B.2.3.2.4.3 Premises-Based CCS Feature Pricing Instructions Table, CLIN CC92017 (Text Chat (Web Chat) - Premises-Based) is an NRC to support the establishment of the service. However, the table does not include a corresponding MRC to support the operation of the service. We recommend GSA amend the RFP to define an MRC to support the Text Chat (Web Chat) - Premises-Based service. This would align with how agencies procure this service under other federal contracts.

Answer:

The feature should be part of the Contact Center design regardless of the platform.

Text Chat (Web Chat) - Premises-Based CLIN CC92017 is not intended to support the establishment of the service. The charging unit is per instance and the CLIN will be charged every time the feature is utilized.

Question:

B.2.1.4.2.2 PLS Feature Pricing Instructions Table, PL00201 Special Routing Transport Diversity does not include a bandwidth delineation. Transport diversity pricing depends on bandwidth. (For example, transport diversity price for a T1 differs from that of an OC192c.) We recommend GSA define PL00201 as ICB, or delineate the price by bandwidth.

Answer:

The PLS Transport Diversity and Avoidance Routing feature CLINs will not be changed to ICB. As stated in the Notes column of the PLS Feature Pricing Instructions Table B.2.1.4.2.2, each of these PLS Feature CLIN charges are in addition to the transport circuit prices.

In the case of Transport Diversity features, the MRC is in addition to the transport circuit price that will apply to each transport circuit in each diverse relationship pair. Both the primary and diverse circuits are priced using the PLS prices, this diversity feature charge is intended to cover added administrative charges of the service.

Additionally, note that in the example stated in the question, the OC192c circuit prices, both the primary and the diverse would be priced ICB.

Question:

Under B.2.3.2.4.2 Host-Based CCS Feature Pricing Instructions Table, CLIN CC90016 (Outbound Dialer - Host-Based) is an NRC which will support the establishment of the service. However, the table does not include a corresponding MRC to support the operation of the service. We recommend GSA amend the RFP to define an MRC to support the Outbound Dialer - Host based service. This would align with how agencies procure this service under other federal contracts.

Answer:

Outbound Dialer - Host Based CLIN CC90016 is not intended to support the establishment of the service. The charging unit is per instance and the CLIN will be charged every time the feature is utilized.

Question:

B.2.2.2 Circuit Switched Voice Service Pricing Table does not allow for regional pricing. To allow vendors to provide region-unique pricing that could potentially provide cost savings to EIS customers, we recommend that GSA add additional tables for optionally priced CSVS services in specific regions.

Answer:

The prices for Circuit Switched Voice Service (CSVS) calling plans and features are fixed throughout CONUS and in each Country/Jurisdiction where the service is offered. However, regional sensitive pricing can be proposed on the corresponding access arrangement CLINs for CSVS using the contractor-defined PHubs.

Question:

B.2.1.2.2.1 E-Line Port Prices Table, B.2.1.2.3.1 E-LINE EVC Prices Table, and B.2.1.2.4.1 E-LAN Port Prices Table all include the "Country/Jurisdiction ID" field. However, B.2.1.2.5.1 Ethernet Transport Feature Prices table does not include a field for Jurisdiction. Commercially, Ethernet Transport feature prices differ based on jurisdiction. We recommend adding a field for "Country/Jurisdiction ID" to B.2.1.2.5.1 Ethernet Transport Feature Prices Table to be consistent with the E-LINE and E-LAN tables in B.2.1.2.2.1, B.2.1.2.3.1 and B.2.1.2.4.1. and allow vendors to define Ethernet Transport feature prices by jurisdiction.

Answer:

All Ethernet Transport Features found in the Ethernet Transport Pricing Instructions table B.2.1.2.5.2 were removed from the RFP. This update is in Amendment 02 to the RFP.

Table B.2.1.2.5.1 is now reserved for future use.

Question:

B.2.9.1.5 Access Pricing Instructions Table does not include a specific CLIN for 100 Gbps Access to OWS. We recommend GSA update B.2.9.1.5 to include this CLIN.

Answer:

GSA will not add a CLIN for "100 Gbps Access to OWS".

GSA's goal was to create a robust set of CLINs that represent a mix of current and future services. The EIS contract has the flexibility for an agency and contractor to use a mix of fixed price CLINs, ICB CLINs, as well as the contract modification process to add new CLINs and TUCs to accommodate the best solution for the government.

Question:

Under B.2.3.2.4.3 Premises-Based CCS Feature Pricing Instructions Table, CLIN CC92011 supports a fixed rate (non ICB) Premises-Based Language Interpretation Service, but the RFP does not define the scope of support required. Contact center requirements will vary between contact centers. In order to provide the government the most complete and price-competitive solution that will meet the service levels of each individual contact center, we recommend the following changes: 1) update CLIN CC92011 to be an ICB NRC, 2) add in a corresponding ICB MRC to support the dedicated Language Interpretation staff, and 3) remove CLINs CC92212, CC92213, CC92214 and CC92215

Answer:

Language Interpretation Service is a mandatory Contact Center Feature (Table C.2.3.1.5 item #10). Usage CLINs for Languages other than Spanish are Optional and are ICB. The CLINs are mandatory to meet agency requirements.

The CLINs are aligned with how the service is procured under other federal contracts.

Question:

B.2.1.2.5.2 Ethernet Transport Feature Pricing Instructions Table states CLIN EN60005-Reserved Protection Bandwidth is to be priced at 10Mbps increments. However, there is no corresponding NRC CLIN in the RFP. To align with how agencies consume this service today, we suggest adding an ICB NRC for initial configuration.

Answer:

CLIN EN60005 for Reserved Protection Bandwidth has been removed from the RFP with the removal of B.2.1.2.5.2 Ethernet Transport Feature Pricing Instructions table. The update is in Amendment 02 to the RFP.

Question:

Under B.2.9.1.5 Access Pricing Instructions Table, CLIN AA00201/AA00301 Dedicated Ethernet 1 Mbps is not an industry standard commercial offering. We recommend AA00201/AA00301 be designated as optional, and we recommend that GSA begin with the normal lowest speed of 2 Mbps.

Answer:

The requirement remains as stated in the RFP.

Question:

Under B.2.9.1.5 Access Pricing Instructions Table, CLIN AA00401/AA00501 Shared Ethernet 1 Mbps is not an industry standard commercial offering. We recommend AA00401/AA00501 be designated as optional, and we recommend that GSA begin with the normal lowest speed of 2 Mbps.

Answer:

No. The requirement remains as stated.

Question:

In B.2.1.4.1.5 PLS Full Channel Pricing Instructions Table, CLIN PL00108 OC-12c is not marked as ICB. B.2.9.1.5 Access Pricing Instruction Table lists AA00008/AA00108 OC-12c as ICB. We recommend PL00108 OC-12c be defined as ICB under B.2.1.4.1.5 to be consistent with AA00008/AA00108 OC-12c under B.2.9.

Answer:

The government intentionally marked the access arrangement CLINs for OC-12c as ICB and the CLIN for PLS transport OC-12c as fixed price. Additionally, the government does not see the need for access and transport prices to be consistently ICB or fixed price across the same speeds since access charges to a specific location (NSC) are more likely to be priced on an Individual Case Basis than transport between offerors' POPs.

Question:

Under B.2.3.2.4.3 Premises-Based CCS Feature Pricing Instructions Table, CLIN CC92018 (Web Call Back - Premises-Based) is an NRC to support the establishment of the service. However, the table does not include a corresponding MRC or Usage CLIN to support the operation of the service. We recommend GSA amend the RFP to define an MRC and/or a Usage CLIN to support the Web Call Back - Premises-Based service. This would align with how agencies procure this service under other federal contracts.

Answer:

The government reviewed how agencies were procuring the feature under other federal contracts. The functionality of the service compared to price elements was also reviewed. Web Call Back should be part of the contractor’s Contact Center design.

Question:

Regarding B.2.1.4.1.5 PLS Full Channel Pricing Instructions Table, CLIN PL00102: DS0 is a TDM offering that is being phased out commercially. To align with commercial best practices, we recommend GSA define DS0-related CLINs as optional.

Answer:

The RFP will not be changed. The government continues to require DS0 as a mandatory technical capability under PLS.

Question:

Under B.2.3.2.4.3 Premises-Based CCS Feature Pricing Instructions Table, CLIN CC92016 (Outbound Dialer - Premises-Based) is an NRC to support the establishment of the service. However, the table does not include a corresponding MRC to support the operation of the service. We recommend GSA amend the RFP to define an MRC to support the Outbound Dialer - Premises based service. This would align with how agencies procure this service under other federal contracts.

Answer:

Outbound Dialer - Premises Based CLIN CC92016 is not intended to support the establishment of the service. The charging unit is per instance and the CLIN will be charged every time the feature is utilized.

Question:

Under B.2.3.2.4.3 Premises-Based CCS Feature Pricing Instructions Table, CLIN CC92018 (Web Call Back - Premises-Based) is a fixed rate NRC, but the RFP does not define the scope of support required. Contact center requirements will vary between contact centers. In order to provide the government the most complete and price-competitive solution that will meet the service levels of each individual contact center, we recommend GSA revise CLIN CC92018 to be an ICB NRC.

Answer:

The feature description for Web Call Back is included in Section C C.2.3.1.5. CLIN CC92018 is intended for the service initiation of the feature. Web Call Back should be part of the contractor’s Contact Center design. Any customization to the Contact Center solution will be priced using the appropriate ICB CLIN for Contact Center Service initiation.

Question:

Under B.2.3.2.4.2 Host-Based CCS Feature Pricing Instructions Table, CLIN CC90019 (Web Call Through - Host-Based) is an NRC that supports the establishment of the service. However, the table does not include a corresponding MRC or Usage CLIN to support the operation of the service. We recommend GSA amend the RFP to define an MRC to support the Web Call Through - Host-Based service. This would align with how agencies procure this service under other federal contracts.

Answer:

The government reviewed how agencies were procuring the feature under other federal contracts. The functionality of the service compared to price elements was also reviewed. Web Call Through should be part of the contractor’s Contact Center design.

Question:

Under B.2.3.2.4.2 Host-Based CCS Feature Pricing Instructions Table, CLIN CC90018 (Web Call Back - Host-Based) is an NRC which will support the establishment of the service. However, the table does not include a corresponding MRC or Usage CLIN to support the operation of the service. We recommend GSA amend the RFP to define an MRC to support the Web Call Back - Host-Based service. This would align with how agencies procure this service under other federal contracts.

Answer:

The government reviewed how agencies were procuring the feature under other federal contracts. The functionality of the service compared to price elements was also reviewed. Web Call Back should be part of the contractor’s Contact Center design.

Question:

Under B.2.3.2.4.2 Host-Based CCS Feature Pricing Instructions Table, CLIN CC90017 (Text Chat (Web Chat) - Host-Based) is an NRC which will support the establishment of the service. However, the table does not include a corresponding MRC to support the operation of the service. We recommend GSA amend the RFP to define an MRC to support the Text Chat (Web Chat) - Host-Based service. This would align with how agencies procure this service under other federal contracts.

Answer:

Text Chat (Web Chat) - Host-Based CLIN CC90017 is not intended to support the establishment of the service. The charging unit is per instance and the CLIN will be charged every time the feature is utilized.

Question:

B.2.8.2.2.2 and B.2.8.2.3.2 Web Conferencing Subscription and Usage Based pricing tables. The requested Web Conferencing features and audience capacities are provided by several underlying products (as is done under Networx). Each WCS product has differing audience capacities, features, billing methodology and price points. The current WCS B tables do not provide sufficient flexibility to price multiple products. Implementing a single product to cover maximum requested audience sizes will lead to unnecessarily expensive solutions. To enable vendors to provide the most economic service designed to specific agency requirements, will GSA please further define WCS products into small, medium and large audience sizes (i.e., ?50, ?150 and >1000 participants) with both subscription and usage based pricing? Additionally, vendors require CLINs to price presentation and storage replay services required for each underlying service. Will GSA please provide CLINs for price presentation and storage replay services?

Answer:

The RFP through Tables 2.8.2.2.1 and 2.8.2.2.2 enables the vendors the flexibility to define multiple bands to provide the most economic service designed to meet specific agency requirements for subscription based service; the Usage based service through Tables B.2.8.2.3.1 and B.2.8.2.3.2 is based on the actual # of participants in a conference call. The RFP provides further flexibility through the use of TUC CLINs as appropriate to address more specific agency requirements. There are CLINS already defined for replay (WC90002) and for storage (WC900001) in Table B.2.8.2.5.2

Question:

A total of 79,186 traffic records (out of total 89,980) in traffic 2loc were assigned to the following tables: btable_id btable_name btable_no 2132111 ows_conus 2.1.3.2.1.1.1 214120 pls_conus 2.1.4.1.2.1 214122 pls_conus2oconus 2.1.4.1.2.2 214123 pls_conus2nd 2.1.4.1.2.3 214124 pls_oconus2nd 2.1.4.1.2.4 214125 pls_oc2oc_diff 2.1.4.1.2.5 214126 pls_oconus 2.1.4.1.2.6 Those tables (as defined in wdm_eis.btables_ref) are not defined in Section B of the RFP. Will GSA amend the reference data to ensure alignment with Section B of the RFP?

Answer:

No amendment of the reference data is required. The btable_id's cited in the question are assigned to views used by the pricing logic. They do not correspond to price tables that the offeror needs to populate. Offerors should refer to RFP Sections B.2.1.3 and B.2.1.4 for specific instructions on pricing OWS and PLS.

Question:

B.2.9 Access Arrangements. GSA has made 1 Mbps, 3 Mbps and 6 Mbps Dedicated Ethernet Access mandatory. Because this type of access is provided as Ethernet over DS-3, over SONET or over Wave, this access bandwidth is not widely available commercially and is limited in coverage. With all other dedicated bandwidth tiers being optional, it would be logical that these three tiers be also optional, as they are no different in implementation. Making this access mandatory can also have adverse impact CBSA coverage maximization. In contrast, by having these as Optional CLINs, any and all current agency requirements can be met at the Task Order level without impacting offeror's coverage of CBSAs at the IDIQ level. Would GSA amend the solicitation to make all CLINs for Dedicated Ethernet Access tiers Optional?

Answer:

To meet agency needs these requirements will remain unchanged.

Question:

Section B.2.12.2 - Cable and Wiring Pricing Instructions Table. CLINs CW00301 and CW00302 have been defined for fixed pricing for Wiring Repair in CONUS and OCONUS, respectively. The description/notes for of these CLINs reads "Restore inside wire service by dispatching qualified personnel to resolve a problem within 4 hours on site." The scope as defined in the RFP is too broad to develop a fixed price for a task that is not bound or capped at a certain number of hours and materials. For example, a repair could involve replacing outlets or connectors, or could require re-running cable. Furthermore, should cable re-runs be needed but not possible due to damage or obstructions in the conduit, trays or other guiding structures for the cable, the scope can creep up beyond that intended in the pricing of this CLIN. Finally, for CLINs CW00101 and CW00102, the type of cable or associated materials are not specified and not constrained to a certain amount of material. For CLINs CW00301 and CW00302, please amend the RFP to quantify the scope of wiring repair by both number of hours and types of materials. Also, for CLINs CW00101 and CW00102, please amend the RFP to specify the type of cable or associated materials required and the quantities of each.

Answer:

Both fixed price and ICB CLINs are specified in Section B.12 Cable and Wiring for site surveys, wiring…