Government_Rd1_Answers_(09092019).pdf

SP7000-19-R-1002 Attachment 5 - Question and Comment Form Page 1 of 9

Document Description Page # Section/ Paragraph Question/ Comment Proposed Action/ Change Government Answer

Please submit the proposal in five

(5) different parts: 4 2

The RFP mentions proposal "parts" instead of "volumes."

Should the Offerror submit Parts I, II, III, and IV of the proposal in separate Volumes/ documents?

Change "parts" to "volumes" and explicitly state "Please submit the proposal in five (5) different volumes/ documents."

Merriam-Webster's definition for "part" is: one of the often indefinite or unequal subdivisions into which something is or is regarded as divided and which together constitute the whole. Based upon this definition the Government is correct in requesting the vendors submit their proposals in five different parts because all subdivisions as divided constitute a whole. This vendor comment results in no change to the RFP by the Government.

Part Titles 6 Table 1 Is there a maximum page count for the Technical Part?

Add a column in Table 1 with maxinum page counts.

The Government is not setting a page limitation for the technical part of the RFP. This vendor comment results in no change to the RFP by the Government.

Offeror is required to submit information, on a single page, identifying federal, and/or state and/or local Government and/or private contracts performed within the past three years, which are similar in scope and complexity to the effort described in this solicitation. 7

Past Performance, para. 1

The RFP states "Offeror is required to submit information, on a single page, identifying federal, and/or state and/or local Government and/or private contracts performed within the past three years." Please confirm that each past performance reference is allowed 1 page.

Explicitly state that "Each Past Performance customer reference should be contained on one (1) page."

The Government is not setting page limitations for the past performance part of the RFP. As such, the "Part III - Past Performance" sections on the RFP's pages 4 and 7 have been updated by the Government to remove "on a single page."

N/A N/A N/A

Does DLA have an existing ticketing system (ServiceNow, Remedy, etc.)? No.

N/A N/A N/A

If DLA does have a ticketing system, will DLA allow the Offeror to create/ use a separate queue for software issues? No.

N/A N/A N/A

Can DLA provide any metrics about the current print fleet to include number/ type of printers, number of printers per location, number of users per location, etc.?

Metrics on current fleet for order/requirement planning purposes cannot be determined in advance.

Orders will be placed as customers provide their requirements for MPS software.

N/A N/A N/A Is DLA currently using MPS software? No.

SP7000-19-R-1002 Attachment 5 - Question and Comment Form Page 2 of 9

N/A N/A N/A

If DLA is currently using MPS software, can DLA provide the name of the software currently in use? N/A

(The redacted version is used during the technical evaluation and, therefore, it should be without company logo, identifying marks, and names. 4

Please confirm that the only identifying marks that need to be removed for the redacted version are related to the Offerror company name itself (logo and text), not any solution or software component being proposed.

Recommend changing this statement to:

"(The redacted version is used during the technical evaluation and, therefore, it should be without company logo, identifying Offerror company marks, and Offerror company names)."

The Government updated this part of the paragraph on page 4 of the RFP to, "The redacted version is used during the technical evaluation and, therefore, it should be without the Offeror’s company logo, identifying marks, and names."

Attachment 2 - Statement of Work (06042019)

3 4.3.2 "Capability for users to authenticate and release print jobs from a queue to any device on the network (Secure-Release and Pull-Printing)", please advise if this extends to all networked devices from any OEM. Does this include both MFDs and Single Function Printers?

If the intent is to provide this function for all OEM devices on any given customer's network, please consider that each device manufacturer will need to be engaged to prepare each device for this capability, with API configurations specific to each OEM. Please consider this requirement as an OEM specific modification to existing and future awards instead.

Capability for users to authenticate and release print jobs from a queue to any device on the network (Secure-Release and Pull-Printing), extends to all MFD devices on the network from any

OEM.

Statement of Work 1 2 / Scope 1. Will DLA consider two (2) COTS solutions that work together (both solutions are vetted and working together as one supporting network and non-network attached devices in the DoD today for CONUS and Non- Foreign OCONUS customers) to support fleet management, migration planning, fleet right sizing, reporting and analysis, print management, rules based printing and secure print release?

DLA is asking for one (1) COTS solution to perform the functions of a Device Management Solution and an Output Mangaement Solution and support Compliance with DOD wide SMARTCARD and DOD PKI standards. Ricoh Proposes that DLA leverage both solutions that are already in production today within the DoD and meeting the requirements in this SOW to reduce the TCO.

Section 2.0 of the SOW has been updated to remove the requirement of a single COTS solution with additional details provided.

Statement of Work 7 8.3-8.4 / Software Maintenance &

Technical Support

Section 8.3 and 8.4 appear to be SLA's for Hardware and Not Software.

The proposed action / recommendation is to remove 8.3 and 8.4 in it’s entirety as these are SLA's for hardware and not software.

Sections 8.3 and 8.4 of the SOW have been removed.

SP7000-19-R-1002 Attachment 5 - Question and Comment Form Page 3 of 9

2 4.1 Please list all of the manufacturer brands. This will aid in compatibility analysis

A list of manufacturer brands for order/requirement planning purposes cannot be determined in advance.

Orders will be placed as customers provide their requirements for MPS software. As stated in SOW paragraph

2.0 the MPS solution must be vendor neutral and able to manage a range of device manufacturers.

3 4.3.4 Consideration of a secondary log in credential utilized

Adapt to different manufacturers CAC authentication types for server based print Release could be an additional Pin

Secure-Release and Pull-Printing via CAC/PIV to Active Directory is required. Section 4.3.4 of the SOW has been updated.

1 2.0 Are their printer only devices being tracked as well? Yes.

7 8.0 Tech support ltd to software?

No support of hardware repair/updates/service?

Tech support is limited to the MPS software. Section 8.2 of the SOW has been updated to require MPS Help Desk Support and Sections 8.3 and 8.4 have been removed.

1 2.0 Please list actual locations city/state. A list of locations and # of locations

As stated in Block 20 of the SF1449 and Statement of Work paragraph 2.0 the MPS software acquired by the Government will support multifunctional devices located in the Contentental United States (CONUS) and non-foreign Outside Continental United States (OCONUS) locations (Hawaii, Alaska, Guam, and Puerto Rico).

7 8.3 Identify examples of a work stoppage

Section 8.3 and 8.4 of the SOW have been removed.

5 7.0

If a device has data on it and is ready for removal (end of life) will DLA or the vendor who supplied hardware be responsible for removing all sensitive information (Full Sanitization) …..delete and encrypt any data.

The Government and the hardware vendor are responsible for removing sensitive information from individual MFD's.

Who is the publisher of these services?

This is to be determined by the vendor not the Government.

SP7000-19-R-1002 Attachment 5 - Question and Comment Form Page 4 of 9

SOW & CLIN Structure 1 3.0 Scope

DLA requests to manage across different networks. Pricing /CLIN structure does not designate how many networks are required at each license level.

# of networks is needed in order to respond correctly at each license level.

Each network requires separate server and implementation costs

The number of networks will be determined by the individual customer requirements. The number of servers required will be charged in CLIN 0009.

SOW & CLIN Structure 2

4.1 and 4.2 Fleet Device Mngt.

Reqts. as written cannot be met with a single COTS software.

Recommend changing CLIN to allow for more than print software licenses. A device management tool is required to manage "device" reqts. in SOW as well as centrally manage all devices no matter who the OEM is.

Section 2.0 of the SOW has been updated to remove the requirement of a single COTS solution with additional details provided. Also, Section 4.1 in the SOW has been renamed to Device/Inventory Auditing.

Attachment 3 1

Whole document

Will the government please clarity if a reverse auction will be conducted or not be conducted after the technical review is completed.

The reverse auction will be held with all the vendors whose proposals are found to be technically acceptable.

SOW & CLIN Structure 1 Scope & Objective

Will DLA provide the detail ist of devices for MFDs and printers to vendors to better understand the scope

Vendors require detail device list for MFDs and Printers to assess most cost effective MPS solution

Each order will be unique and based on individual customer requirements.

Solutions and requirements will be determined by the customer's network environment. As stated in SOW paragraph 2.0 the MPS solution must be vendor neutral and able to manage a range of device manufacturers.

SP7000-19-R-1002 Attachment 5 - Question and Comment Form Page 5 of 9

SOW 4 4.5 508 compliant Software is not labeled as 508 compliant. Only hardware. Please remove.

Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 & 29 U.S.C § 794(d) applies to all Federal agencies when they develop, procure, maintain, or use electronic and information technology.

Information technology, as defined by FAR 2.101, includes software and is as follows, "The term “information technology” includes computers, ancillary equipment (including imaging peripherals, input, output, and storage devices necessary for security and surveillance), peripheral equipment designed to be controlled by the central processing unit of a computer, software, firmware and similar procedures, services (including support services), and related resources.

SOW 6 7.13

Ipv.6 is not active in most DOD environments today

Please allow IPv.4 & hybrid at award with IPv.6 to come in 1st year

IPV6 is required now IAW DoD CIO Memorandum, Internet Protocol Version 6 Implementation Direction and Guidance, dated 27 February 2019, and OMB 28 September 2010 Directive, Transition to IPv6.

SOW 7 8.3 and 8.4

When an issue is discovered with an active software, it is typically not addressed with an end user. An SA (server architect) or IT support person will call the contractor and they will try to resolve over the phone. It that does not fix the issue, they will remote in. An onsite visit is a last resort.

Suggest changing the 2 and 4 hour reqts.

to match industry practice. Suggest requiring contractor to set up remote capability on each client's network during implementation or immediately after.

Remote capability will not be allowed, but Sections 8.3 and 8.4 have been removed from the SOW.

SP7000-19-R-1002.pdf 3 Important Dates

Will the government extend the RFQ by 2 weeks after the Round 2 Questions are responded

Request to extend 2 weeks after Round 2 Questions are answered by DLA

The RFP closing date has been updated to 10/16/2019 at 4:00 PM EDT.

SP7000-19-R-1002 Attachment 5 - Question and Comment Form Page 6 of 9

Managed Print Services Fleet Assessment Software

Requirements for DLA Information Operations

Data Management Services

STATEMENT OF WORK

(Version: 04/08/2019)

Reference Scope – “single commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) solution”

Can the software included in the Contractor’s response be from multiple vendors or is it DLA’s intent to have only one software vendor’s suite that will perform all these requirements?

If multiple vendors are allowed, will DLA sponsor certification of various software?

Section 2.0 of the SOW has been updated to remove the requirement of a single COTS solution, and additional details are provided that allow a proposed software suite that is developed and distributed by one vendor.

Managed Print Services Fleet Assessment Software

Requirements for DLA Information Operations

Data Management Services

STATEMENT OF WORK

(Version: 04/08/2019)

Reference 4.1 Fleet/Device Management

Does DLA intend to include patch management (e.g firmware updates, vendors CAC/PIV solution, security updates) and configuration management (e.g. device STIGs, CAC configuration, default device configurations etc.) under device management.

Section 4.1 in the SOW has been renamed to Device/Inventory Auditing.

The MPS software does not have to be able to remotely configure or "patch" devices.

Managed Print Services Fleet Assessment Software

Requirements for DLA Information Operations

Data Management Services

STATEMENT OF WORK

(Version: 04/08/2019)

Reference 4.2.3 - Device and user data must be gathered in real time and must be made available for analysis or viewing for any given time or period.

Real time gathering of data requires lots of bandwidth. Recommend DLA lax this requirement to allow for better network performance and latency.

Real time data collection is a requirement.

Managed Print Services Fleet Assessment Software

Requirements for DLA Information Operations

Data Management Services

STATEMENT OF WORK

(Version: 04/08/2019)

Reference 4.3 Print Management – “For authentication, the user must be able to authenticate at the device with CAC/PIV card to release the held print job(s).”

Does the printing software need to interact with vendor’s embedded CAC solution or are 3rd party authentication devices (e.g. Netgard, Cryptek) be authorized?

Within the DOD the software must be compatible with an embedded CAC solution and a 3rd party CAC solution, whatever is used on the existing device.

SP7000-19-R-1002 Attachment 5 - Question and Comment Form Page 7 of 9

Assessment Software

Requirements for DLA Information Operations

Data Management Services

STATEMENT OF WORK

(Version: 04/08/2019)

Reference 4.3.4 Secure-Release and Pull-Printing function to work in compliance with the device DOD PKI/CAC and NIST

FIPS 201/PIV

standards. For authentication, the user must be able to authenticate at the output device with domain username/password (Active Directory/LDAP), and CAC/PIV card to release the held print job.

Can DLA clarify this requirement? (e.g. Is it DLA intent to allow devices to authenticate via username/password and/or

CAC/PIV?)

Secure-Release and Pull-Printing via CAC/PIV to Active Directory is required.

Managed Print Services Fleet Assessment Software

Requirements for DLA Information Operations

Data Management Services

STATEMENT OF WORK

(Version: 04/08/2019)

Reference 4.5 - Section 508 Compliance

Will DLA provide a grace period if software is currently not fully Section 508 accredited? (Ref:

http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/guide/1194.2 1.htm)

As stated in the RFP's DLAD Procurement Note L29 Section 508 Requirements on page 46, "By submission of its offer, the offeror affirms that its Electronic Information Technology (EIT) supplies and services are accessible as outlined in the law, the standard, and FAR Subpart 39.2." IAW this statement, an offerors MPS proposed software shall be 508 compliant at time of submission of its offer.

SP7000-19-R-1002 Attachment 5 - Question and Comment Form Page 8 of 9

Assessment Software

Requirements for DLA Information Operations

Data Management Services

STATEMENT OF WORK

(Version: 04/08/2019)

Reference 7.5 Compliance with DOD wide SMARTCARD and DOD PKI standards, and support all approved physical cards related to CAC released print, throughout the contract term.

Will DLA remove this requirement? Compliance of DoD wide physical smartcards are the responsibility of the hardware vendors, not the software vendor providing the pull print function. The MPS software must be compatible with SMARTCARD and DOD PKI requirements.

Managed Print Services Fleet Assessment Software

Requirements for DLA Information Operations

Data Management Services

STATEMENT OF WORK

(Version: 04/08/2019)

Reference 7.8 - Enforce SNMPv3 only for secure management of the device.

Can DLA define " secure management" of a device? – Will the software need to apply security (i.e.. DISA MFD STIGS) or vendors CAC configuration? SNMP MIBs lack the OID values for writing these settings.

Recommended that current or new labor-provided Managed Printer Setrvices (MPS) be used to ensure DISA STIG settings are applied to all networked print devices. This requirement has been removed from the SOW.

Managed Print Services Fleet Assessment Software

Requirements for DLA Information Operations

Data Management Services

STATEMENT OF WORK

(Version: 04/08/2019)

Reference 7.6 - Utilize CAC/PIV for authentication related to CAC released print and 7.7 - Enforce Secure-Release and Pull-Printing via user credentials with AD/LDAP, user name/password, and CAC/PIV identity certificate-based authentication.

Will DLA explain the difference with respect to these two requirements? They list several authentication and authorization requirements.

Section 7.7 of the SOW has been updated to state: Enforce Secure- Release and Pull-Printing via CAC/PIV to Active Directory.

SP7000-19-R-1002 Attachment 5 - Question and Comment Form Page 9 of 9

CLIN Structure 1 CLIN 0012 1. Is $30,000 the max ceiling for the life of the contract? The maximum ceiling is stated on page

3 of the RFP and is as follows, "The maximum program ceiling is 50,000 licenses or $57,792,000.00, whichever is reached first…". The $30,000 listed on Attachment 1, CLIN 0012, is a set amount the Government expects to obligate to cover the awardee's travel required for orders placed for MPS during life of the IDIQ contract and its subsequent orders. Any unused CLIN 0012 funds will be deobligated from the IDIQ orders.

CLIN Structure Provide explanation of how travel will be applied for CLINs 0009, 0010, 0011

Travel will be applied to CLIN 0010 and CLIN 0011 only, if travel is required to provide the requested service.

Statement of Work N/A Entire Document 2. Is DLA looking for the vendor to provide complete management of the solution (s) with full time onsite personal or is DLA taking ownership of the solution ?

Explain how the vendor will account for fulltime manhours if that is what the Govt is requesting. Solutions like these are normally managed by the local agencies IT dept.

The Government customer(s) will provide the management of the software solution locally after the initial installation, setup, and training is complete.

Statement of Work

7 Software Maintenance & Technical Support

3. Remove the word service Tech and replace with (help Desk)?

This is a software contract and the verbiage used by DLA would suggest that it’s a hardware based contract and the local management of the solution and maintenance is the responsibility of the Agency.

Section 8.2 has been updated to require Help Desk Support and to update the days and time required. Also, 8.3 and

8.4 of the SOW have been removed.

CLIN Structure 1 Entire Document 4. What CLIN will the vendor use to charge the Govt for Server rework when agency makes changes to the network enviroment?

Identify a CLIN to bill for the possible reinstallation and set up of local servers -due to changes in the network or Agency IT caused issues and the normal process of software support does not resolve the issue.

Section 10.5 is added to the SOW to address server rework. Also, CLIN 0009 description is updated to include server rework.

what security clearance level, if any, is required when our technology gets deployed onsite?

Up to Secret, if required by the customer's network environment.

Section 13.0 is added to the SOW to cover Base Installation Access & Security Clearance requirements.

Attachment 7