Q A_ETS2_10-4-2010.pdf

QUESTIONS and ANSWERS

QMAD-JM-100001-N, OCTOBER 4, 2010

Question or Comment Answer

"If the GSA Authorizing Official determines that risks have been adequately mitigated, ETS2 will not be permitted to operate." Please clarify. Should this be "risks have NOT been adequately mitigated"?

GSA intends to amend this requirement.

The following personnel should not be listed in the proposal, but instead, listed in the task order:

Agency Account Manager - The agency may not come on board for months or ever.

GSA intends to amend the solicitation to clarify key personnel requirements as it relates to when they are to start performance.

Would GSA consider funding efforts until the C&A is complete and transaction processing begins?

GSA will take this under advisement. Minimally, GSA intends to amend the solicitation to clarify key personnel requirements as it relates to when they are to start performance.

Section 5 mentions SAS-70. Please define the SAS-70 requirement and why is this a requirement since OMB put out a statement that it is not required?

SAS 70 stands for Statement of Auditing Standards. Organizations that provide shared financial services, from a credit card company to a shared service in the federal government, perform SAS 70 audits as part of their annual audit of financials for compliance with corporate standards. It serves as an indicator of the financial integrity of their service to accurately compute and transmit data.

SAS 70 has a financial integrity component in regards to computation and also a security component. The Offerors are expected to propose the level/Type of SAS audit best meets the requirements and services they are offering.

At what point do C&A activities commence (outlined in the timeline of events)? C&A begins immediately after a contract award.

Does the ETS2 vendor have to directly subcontract with small business TMCs or can this relationship be managed through the large embedded TMC who in turn subcontracts with the small business TMC?

It is GSA's intention to amend the solicitation to state that if the offeror proposes 2nd tier sub-relationship to meet this SLA, they must permit the ETS2 PMO to audit the validity of their performance.

For accommodated TMCs required by an agency, who is responsible for C&A activities? Since accomodated TMCs are procured outside of ETS, the agency conducting the procurement would be responsible to perform the C&A under the specific procurement terms agreed to with the travel agency that accomodated the TMC.

Question or Comment Answer

The difference between the subcontracting plan and the SLA is that under the subcontracting plan you don't need it as a TMC. The SLA specifically has to be a small business TMC and that would be met through the large TMC subcontracting to a small

TMC.

That could be one approach to take.

On the SLA, disabled veteran-owned companies was identified-- which I am a veteran-owned company. In order to satisfy that category, the contractor would have to meet each one of those subcontracting goals in order to reach the 23 percent. Is that a yes or no?

No, it is two separate issues. SLA 3 does not designate what type of small business, aside from it needing to be a small business

TMC. The subcontracting plan, which is a different requirement, is where you start breaking into various different subcategories including small disabled veteran, veteran-owned, small women-owned, HUBZones, etc. The SLA does not specifically state that you need to do business with a particular type of business aside from being a small business TMC.

Will the IDIQ ceiling be raised to reflect a 15 year period of performance? The ceiling has already been adjusted to reflect the 15-year period of performance.

Please clarify how online adoption rates are calculated for SLA2. Calculation is based on reservations that are processed through embedded TMCs. For TMCs that are part of a subcontracting plan

(or not part of a subcontracting plan but part of the contract offering), domestic travel reservations processed online will be able to be included. At the moment (subject to change over the 15 year period of performance), the most complex international reservations are better handled by a skilled travel professional who understands routing and faring through diverse, multiple destinations. Therefore, the percent of online adoption use will be calculated by the total number of tickets issued for domestic travel divided by the total number of tickets fulfilled using online processes.

Question or Comment Answer

In regards to the online adoption rate, what about special travel scenarios like surge travel where they would have to call a TMC, or your invitational travel, or it is just not capable or easily done online. Would you consider excluding them from the online adoption SLA?

The Government understands the concerns. The travel patterns for government users as whole are such that the formula for SLA 2 has proven to be achievable in the timeframes being measured under ETS1. ETS2 contractors are anticipated to have a deployed base that has cross-section of user types such that these isolated travel events (e.g., surge travel) are not statistically relevant in the calculation for online adoption performance. In the event

Government travel patterns change substantively during the performance of ETS2 over recurring review periods, the

Government may consider alternative formulas and/or methods for measuring online adoption.

Separate mandatory? Will this be required for demonstrations and/or IVV? The separately priced, mandatory requirements may be evaluated on the date that the Offeror proposes they will be available.

With respect to separately priced mandatory CLINs, does the government expect the cost to be incremental to the base cost per voucher, or be a total price for that category of document?

Solicitation calls for transactional pricing. Should that change, an amendment will be issued.

How will ETS2 vendors bill for software enhancements requested by Federal agencies?

What CLINs apply for billing for Federal agencies?

The ETS2 contractor is expected to account for continuous improvement in functionality, usability, and regulatory changes.

Extensive market research indicates that organizations that provide services to the federal government anticipate a change in services over the course of the contract due to new regulations, changes in technology, etc. They have established methods for providing ongoing maintenance and continuous improvement as a fixed price, which in our case is requested in the form of transactional pricing.

In event that an agency has a truly unique agency specific requirement, the Supplement Service CLIN 0019 would be the appropriate CLIN for this work.

Question or Comment Answer

How will the cost of background investigations be incorporated into the ETS2 CLINs? How should the cost of these background investigations be applied to the CLINs?

The cost of background investigations to include specific government clearances is personnel overhead expense incurred by companies as a part of doing business with the Government.

Pricing-- how is the contractor to price services in foreign countries where TMC services are often higher than in the US and sometimes lower depending upon the geographic region?

There are separate CLINs in the solicitation to pay for reservation and fulfillment services produced by the dedicated on-site facility.

Each on-site service may be separately priced based on the specific requirements for each location at the task order level.

The question related to onsite hourly rates has been addressed, but not the transaction fee; agencies will try to negotiate the hourly rate, and in fact, there is a requirement in the solicitation that the fee will be renegotiated at the task order level-- the hourly onsite rate.

But, the question is: where does the transaction fee for overseas come from? Because that will differ-- the cost of providing services overseas differs. So there is no provision to seperately price that, and the transaction fees that any vendor comes in with will have to be sufficiently high to cover those high cost areas, unless you are going to price those CLINs separately.

There are separate CLINs in the solicitation to pay for reservation and fulfillment services produced by the dedicated on-site facility.

Each on-site service may be separately priced based on the specific requirements for each location at the task order level.

Under these circumstances, there would not be a separate transaction fee for reservation services, only for use of OTRS and

TAVS services.

Onsite Reservations and Fulfillment Services states that hourly rates will be negotiated at the TO/sub TO level for the services required for each country or geographic region, as applicable. Question-- this wording makes it mandatory that the contractor has to renegotiate its hourly rates. What is the basis for requiring renegotiation of hourly rates as opposed to it being permissible? What constitutes negotiations? What are the repercussions if a contractor chooses not to re-negotiate hourly rates?

The referenced CLINs are by design negotiable at the task order level. The Government will consider amending the solicitation from

'will' to 'may' be negotiated at the task order level. Each Offeror has the latitude to determine its best offer for these services at the

Master Contract level, and then upon award, also its preferred position around these services at the task order level. The

Government similarly retains the right to obtain these services through an ATMC.

Please clarify the requirement for logical separation. While one solicitation requires logical separation, its description suggests a physical separation.

The government intends to amend the logical / physical separation requirement to clarify that logical separation is an acceptable level of separation.

Question or Comment Answer

Why is the government asking for something that is not currently considered an industry best practice? Shouldn't this be done at the task order level?

The reference section refers to an objective versus a mandatory requirement. The Agent Assisted Travel Reservation Service should provide reservations for non-emergency travel 24/7/365.

Market research has shown that some travel agencies are moving to 24/7/365 operations. Since the Government is a 24/7/365 operation in many agencies, the Government wishes benefit from this level service if industry can provide it.

E-folio feeds into the vouchers; this is a 3rd party contract. What type of security precautions have been considered to requiring this 3rd party feed into the service?

This is an objective, and should conform to Section C.6 Security

Capabilities and Characteristics.

Regarding browser compatibility standards; within a new version of release, how soon must the service be compatible?

The introduction of a new browser would be coordinated with the

ETS vendors when the browser is approved for use by the appropriate Government authority (e.g., NIST and Agency CIOs).

In regards to security, the physical separation of government data from other data is a new requirement. What is the market research that supports making that a stringent requirement?

The government intends to amend the logical / physical separation requirement to clarify that logical separation is an acceptable level of separation.

If physical separation is going to drive the cost up and only some agencies want it, is it not possible to do either a separate CLIN or an objective?

The government intends to amend the logical / physical separation requirement to clarify that logical separation is an acceptable level of separation.

Also based on our analysis that physical separation doesn't often offer more secure nor security of the data. Oftentimes with existing tools that are available that logical separation oftentimes offers greater security of the data.

The government intends to amend the logical / physical separation requirement to clarify that logical separation is an acceptable level of separation.

How far down does this physical data have to go because you know, the OTRs, the PNRs, and the GDS-- are they required to do physical separation also or is that just applies to the

TAVs?

The government intends to amend the logical / physical separation requirement to clarify that logical separation is an acceptable within the accredited boundary.

Question or Comment Answer

In regards to the after hours question-- there is a CLIN for pricing after hours service, and there is an objective that states 24/7/365 service provided at no additonal cost. There are a number of federal agencies that don't use the after hours service. There are others that use it when there is no cost associated wtih it and use it very frequently, driving up costs for everyone else. Why make the TMC and small business TMCs typically outsource that service to a third party, resulting in a hard cost associated with it? Why make the TMC oversestimate the cost of providing 24/7/365 when you have certain agencies that want it and others that don't? There is typically a price tag on after hours service, if nothing else, to drive behavior so that people get their sutff done during normal business hours.

The reference section refers to an objective versus a mandatory requirement. The Agent Assisted Travel Reservation Service should provide reservations for non-emergency travel 24/7/365.

Market research has shown that some travel agencies are moving to 24/7/365 operations. Since the Government is a 24/7/365 operation in many agencies, the Government wishes benefit from this level service if industry can provide it.

What if the process requires manual authorization (e.g., forms faxed to the TMC)? Point being…it's more costly to process than an ETS2 online authorization.

ETS contractors should manage these circumstances with their customer agencies and negotiate supplemental services when necessary.

Competing vehicles-- Will GSA be ensuring that new and existing contracts not be allowed to compete with ETS2? For instance, the existing TSS contract allows other travel options to compete directly against ETS1. Can you explain how this will be addressed?

ETS2 will retain the capability for customer agencies to contract for

TMC services separately from their ETS2 task order.

In one of the presentation slides, I believe you indicated that someone who is currently under ETS contract, would be able to migrate to ETS2 before the current contract expires.

For example, their current contract with ETS doesn't expire until November of 2013. So, if the agency wanted to migrate to ETS2 prior to the expiration of their current contract, will they be able to? Also, at the point that you award the ETS2 in 2011, could an agency decide that they are going to migrate beginning in 2011 and by 2012 the process is compeltely done?

Both ETS1 and ETS2 are contracts are indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contracts. We anticipate that agencies will transition and must begin that transition from ETS1 to ETS2 before the ETS1 contract expires.

Question or Comment Answer

The intent of the government is to mirror all requirements from QC to security to whatever has been detemined by the consultants that needed to be done in ETS2; the intent is to migrate those to the TSS schedule so that when the agency makes a determination of whether they want to go accommodated or embedded, they can rest assured that the teo

TMC offerings are the same under embedded and accomodated, based on the requirements. Is that a true statement? And wherever the requirements came from will be the same in ETS2?

All is true except the part regarding the consultants. The requirements were developed through extensive market research and focus groups with customers. (Consultant have been engaged to provide validation of what services are available in the commercial market.) The Government's requirements and objectives are based on the needs of customers and what has been identified as commericially available or emerging in travel industry.

Kindly provide the incumbent information. I am looking for the contract #, contractor name, total value of the contract, and the date the current contract is expiring.

(a) Contractor Name: CW Government Travel Inc.; Contract

Number: GS-33F-N0017; Total Value of Contract:

$432,243,381.50; Date of Contract Expiration: November 11, 2013;

(b) Contractor Name: Northrop Grumman Mission Systems;

Contract Number: GS-33F-N0018; Total Value of Contract:

$467,832,135.30; Date of Contract Expiration: November 11, 2013; (c)

Contractor Name: HP Enterprise Services, LLC; Contract Number:

GS-33F-P0015; Total Value of Contract: $436,649,665.92; Date of

Contract Expiration: November 11, 2013.

Will knowledge-based authentication (KBA) be required in addition to PIN & PSWD? "Knowledge-based" authentication is assumed to refer to the

"something you know" element of two-factor authentication. Two-factor authentication is being implemented in the federal government.

MIS data-- Will the GSA be controlling the method by which data will be securely provided to the MIS provider (e.g., Dataman). If so, will there be a method by which the ETS2 vendor can be compensated for ongoing changes?

Yes, GSA will be controlling the method by which the data is transmitted to the MIS provider because the data is owned by the government and it must be transmitted in a secure manner that meets the government's security requirements-- specifically, encryption requirements. ETS2 Offerors should factor the costs of data transfer to designated 3rd parties or the Government in their business model.

Question or Comment Answer

The cost associated with the security and the quality control and the other requirements could be burdensome on small TMCs. I am curious as to what the impact could conceivably be with respect to their ability for a prime and to meet the 23 percent small business target, when small business TMCs may or may not be able to meet the security and other appointments that are in the solicitation.

The prime is responsible for ensuring subcontractor compliance with contract requirements, terms, and conditions.

What, if anything, is not being provided under ETS1 that is in the RFP? Offerors are encouraged to only consider the requirements specified in ETS2 when preparing their offers for ETS2.

This puts non-TMC small business at a disadvantage. Is there any thought about adding an SLA for other small business? Other small business need incentives!

The Government created SLA #3 to support TMC small business subcontracting to promote innovation and encourage growth and diversity in the travel reservations and fulfillment services market.

The small business subcontracting plan required from large businesses focuses on socio-economic opportunities for the entire small business spectrum.

ETS2-- the nature of security requirements is largely cost prohibitive for small businesses.

How will this issue be accounted for under the small business SLA?

The prime is responsible for ensuring subcontractor compliance with contract requirements, terms, and conditions.

Would the government consider requiring contractors to seperately price each objective thereby facilitating a more equitable evaluation of how well contractors meet requirements, objectives, and CLIN pricing and their overall best value determination?

No. The objectives are either agency specific services and emerging commercial services that can potentially be provided in an ETS2 providers core service offering.

When do personnel have to be submitted to meet HSPD 12 requirements -- upon award of contract?

Prior to accessing sensitive data including PII, personnel will need to receive the appropriate clearances. Upon award, specific guidance will be provided for the initial clearance process.