USCA25R0110 0001 Brand Name or Equal Apple BPA Solicitation QuestionsResponses - Copy.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 24 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Brand Name or Equal Apple Hardware BPA
- Solicitation number
- USCA25R0110
- Issued by
-
Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts
About this file
This is a Questions and Answers document for solicitation USCA25R0110, a Brand Name or Equal Apple Hardware Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA) for the Administrative Office of the US Courts. The Q&A clarifies several key requirements including that onsite warranty support is not required, there are no TAA compliance requirements, and the award will be made to one vendor based on Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) criteria.
Key technical clarifications include: monitors must have integrated webcams but Apple Center Stage is not required; RAM requirements were updated to 8GB and 16GB rather than 256GB; vendors must provide OEM authorization letters and pricing links to public OEM pricing; discontinued products can be quoted with current comparable models; and the submission deadline was extended to January 24, 2025. The BPA allows for technology refreshment with new product families requiring CO approval via modification. Vendors must provide pricing for quantity of one but may offer additional quantity discounts. This is not a small business set-aside procurement.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications Matrix MOD 0001.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| J.1 BPA SOW MOD 0001.pdf | ||
| USCA25R0110 0001.pdf | ||
| J.2 BPA Price Workbook MOD 0001.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Specifications Matrix.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| J.1 BPA SOW.pdf | ||
| J.2 BPA Price Workbook.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| USCA25R0110.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
Sheet1
| Question(s)/Comment(s) | Gov't Respons(s) | Gov't Comment(s) |
| Regarding the Monitor Specifications, please confirm that any integrated webcam is approved, and that the Apple Center Stage camera is not required. | Please see solicitation, M - Evaluation Factors for Award, M.1 Evaluation Criteria, Evaluation Approach Criteria (2) Factor 2. Technical Acceptability: The AO will verify that all brand name or equal products included in offers contain the minimum essential characteristics outlined in Tab 2 of attachment J.2. and comply with the requirements outlined in the statement of work, attachment J.1. If it is determined that products contained in the quote do not meet the minimum essential characteristics, the quote will be deemed technically unacceptable. | To be deemed technically acceptable the min characteristics stated were; 27" 5K, Intergrated webcam, and USB-C port hub. The webcam must be integrated. |
| Regarding the Specifications Matrix, spreadsheet row 10 and 11, please confirm that 256GB RAM is not required. | SD RAM has been updated, Row 10 has been updated to 8GB and Row 11 has been updatd to 16 GB | Please see updated Specification Matrix |
| Regarding pricing, can bidders assume that the government will ask Apple to add the winning organization to the Apple Macintosh Volume Purchase Program with Apple and utilize the discount is active in our provided discount levels in “J.2 BPA Price Workbook” submitted with our bid. | The offeror must show they are an authorized reseller, to be considered technically acceptable. It is determined by the OEM what is required for an authorized letter. | The AO will follow the specific procedures required for the BPA Brand OEM. |
| Regarding pricing, if bidders should not factor Apple Macintosh Volume Purchase Program (VPP) with Apple, confirm that the U.S. Courts will enter into a best and final pricing round with a small number LPTA bidders to determine final pricing assuming the VPP is requested and extended again between the government and Apple. | Please see solicitation, G.1 Ordering, 6 BPA CALL ORDERING PROCEDURES, 6.1 BPA Calls will be solicited in accordance with Vol 14 § 325.50.30 (Open Market Single Award BPA) through Vol 14 § 325.50.40 (a) (Ordering Under BPAs). | The AO only intends to award to ONE offeror, who is deemed the Lowest Price Techncial Acceptable, regardless of brand. |
Solicitation Document, Section M, Evaluation Approach Criteria, Factor 2 "Technical Acceptability". The requirement states the following: The offeror must be a certified authorized reseller that can provide all the items and product categories required under the BPA. This will be determined by evaluating the offeror's statement that they are an authorized reseller and reviewing the letter from the OEM confirming the offeror is a certified reseller who is able to provide onsite warranty service to OEM direct customers. The AO may contact the OEM, if needed, to confirm information provided in a letter or proposal. If this letter is being sent directly to the CO from the OEM, then the offeror should note that in their response. It is up to the offeror to verify with the OEM that the letter was sent. If the CO does not receive the letter, the offeror will be deemed technically unacceptable. Our question is in regard to the highlighted text regarding the warranty. This statement implies that on-site warranty support is required for all products under this BPA. Please clarify the warranty requirements for this solicitation. The word “onsite” has been removed from Section M, as onsite warranty support is not a requirement. Please see updated Solicitation, Section M
| What are the minimum requirements and technical specifications for Laptops to consider brand equals | Please see solicitation, M - Evaluation Factors for Award, M.1 Evaluation Criteria, Evaluation Approach Criteria (2) Factor 2. Technical Acceptability: The AO will verify that all brand name or equal products included in offers contain the minimum essential characteristics outlined in Tab 2 of attachment J.2. and comply with the requirements outlined in the statement of work, attachment J.1. If it is determined that products contained in the quote do not meet the minimum essential characteristics, the quote will be deemed technically unacceptable. | To be deemed technically acceptable, the Laptops must fulfill the minimum characteristics stated in the Specification Matrix |
| What are the minimum requirements and technical specifications for Tablets to consider brand equals | Please see solicitation, M - Evaluation Factors for Award, M.1 Evaluation Criteria, Evaluation Approach Criteria (2) Factor 2. Technical Acceptability: The AO will verify that all brand name or equal products included in offers contain the minimum essential characteristics outlined in Tab 2 of attachment J.2. and comply with the requirements outlined in the statement of work, attachment J.1. If it is determined that products contained in the quote do not meet the minimum essential characteristics, the quote will be deemed technically unacceptable. | To be deemed technically acceptable, the Tablets must fulfill the minimum characteristics stated in the Specification Matrix |
| What are the minimum requirements and technical specifications for Desktops to consider brand equals | Please see solicitation, M - Evaluation Factors for Award, M.1 Evaluation Criteria, Evaluation Approach Criteria (2) Factor 2. Technical Acceptability: The AO will verify that all brand name or equal products included in offers contain the minimum essential characteristics outlined in Tab 2 of attachment J.2. and comply with the requirements outlined in the statement of work, attachment J.1. If it is determined that products contained in the quote do not meet the minimum essential characteristics, the quote will be deemed technically unacceptable. | To be deemed technically acceptable, the Desktops must fulfill the minimum characteristics stated in the Specification Matrix |
| Do we have any TAA compliant on the products | No there are no TAA compliant requirements for this SOW | |
| Can we consider Surface, Dell, Lenovo and Samsung Tabs as equal products | Please see solicitation, M - Evaluation Factors for Award, M.1 Evaluation Criteria, Evaluation Approach Criteria (2) Factor 2. Technical Acceptability: The AO will verify that all brand name or equal products included in offers contain the minimum essential characteristics outlined in Tab 2 of attachment J.2. and comply with the requirements outlined in the statement of work, attachment J.1. If it is determined that products contained in the quote do not meet the minimum essential characteristics, the quote will be deemed technically unacceptable. | For brands to be deemed technically acceptable, the OEM products must fulfill the minimun characteristics stated in the Specificaion Matrix |
| Are we considering any small business set aside program for this initiative | USCA25R0110 is solicited in accordance with Vol 14 § 325.50.30 (Open Market Single Award BPA). | This initiative is not set aside. |
| How are product replacements handled if category doesn’t specifically call out what tablet or laptop they are referring to? (J.2 BPA Price Workbook | Sheet 3) | Please see SOW, TECHNOLOGY REFRESHMENT & REPLACEMENT: | ||
| New product families for product line(s) directly related to the OEM for the BPA category may only be introduced by the BPA holders. A new product family may not be sold under this BPA to any AO entity or court until it has been formally added to the respective BPA by a written and bilaterally signed modification from the BPA's Contracting Officer. | BPA holder shall submit tech refreshes/replacement as they occur | ||
| On sheet 3, are you able to describe the exact system that the category correlates too from sample orders on sheet 2? (J.2 BPA Price Workbook | sheet 2 & Sheet 3) | Please see SOW, Requirements section. |
| If additional discounting is provided for larger quantity call orders, is the offeror required to provide that same discounting if only quantity 1 would be ordered? (J.2BPA Price Workbook ) | The offeror must provide pricing for a quantity of 1. The offeror may also provide futhur discounts | |
| How is a best value determination made when the only criteria for award are Lowest Price Technically Acceptable and Technical Acceptability and the criteria for the technical volume doesn’t state how the offeror could be of the best value to the Judiciary? (USCA25R0110) | Please see solicitation, M - Evaluation Factors for Award, M.1 Evaluation Criteria, Evaluation Approach Criteria (2) Factor 2. Technical Acceptability: The AO will verify that all brand name or equal products included in offers contain the minimum essential characteristics outlined in Tab 2 of attachment J.2. and comply with the requirements outlined in the statement of work, attachment J.1. If it is determined that products contained in the quote do not meet the minimum essential characteristics, the quote will be deemed technically unacceptable. | |
| We would like to formally request an extension to January 24th, we are collecting all pricing and relative materials for our submission; with the holidays approaching – we are hoping an extension will allow us time to formulate our bid. (USCA25R0110) | Submission date extended to January 24, 2025 | See updated Solicition, USCA25R0110 |
Evaluation Approach Criteria, Pg 21. The Offeror is responsible for providing an easily accessible active link to the OEM pricing for ALL of the products. OEM pricing must be publicly available.
1.) Would the U.S. Courts like the bidders to provide product links to the OEM's website? Or would the U.S. Courts like the bidders to provide product links to the bidder's website?
2.) If a product is discontinued and a link is no longer available, how would the U.S. Courts like us to handle? These items are discontinued:
MK7T3LL/A - Row 54 MMFJ3Z1211 - Row 24 MQKV3Z1212 - Row 55
| MZ171LL/A - Row 34 | 1.) The offeror only needs to provide a link to the OEM's public pricing. Please see solicitation: M.1 Evaluation Criteria EVALUATION APPROACH CRITERIA (1) Factor 1. The Offeror is responsible for providing an easily accessible active link to the OEM pricing for ALL of the products. OEM pricing must be publicly available. 2.) If product/serivce is discontinued/end of life, please provide the most current closest comparable model. | |||
| J.1 BPA SOW, Requirements, Pg 2. The U.S. Courts has a specification requirement for a Trusted Platform Module chip. This chip is used with x86 processors in desktops and laptops. Apple devices have a functionally equivalent product called Secure Enclave. Can this requirement be updated to state the following? | ||||
| "Trusted Platform Module (TPM), Secure Enclave, or similar equivalent: The hardware and hardware OS shall utilize a TPM, Secure Enclave, or similar equivalent to securely store cryptographic keys and perform secure boot operations." | "Trusted Platform Module (TPM): The hardware and hardware OS(s) shall utilize a TPM to securely store cryptographic keys and perform secure boot operations in a dedicated separately secure environment (i.e. Secure Enclave)." | Please see updated SOW | ||
| J.2 BPA Price Workbook, Tab2 Column K. For the cells labeled 'OEM Market Price,' would the U.S. Courts prefer bidders to use the OEM's MSRP price, or can we use our advertised price, which is publicly available and updated 24/7? In addition, some bidders' advertised prices can be lower than the OEM's MSRP. | Please see solicitation: M.1 Evaluation Criteria EVALUATION APPROACH CRITERIA (1) Factor 1. Price The AO will analyze the proposed pricing against the OEM’s publicly posted market pricing. | Please utlized the OEM's pricing |
| RFP and L.3.3.2, Volume II - Technical Volume, Pg 1 and Pg 20. Your organization's Unique Entity ID (UEI) number and a statement noting whether your organization is registered and up to date with your registrations in SAM.gov. This can be provided on a cover page for this volume. The offeror may also provide a 1-page table of contents page as well. The table of contents and SAM statement may be on the same page. We are not able to edit form no. Judiciary Standard Form 33. Can you please share this document in an editable format? Can we add a two-page cover letter and one page table of content? Please clarify. | Please reference the following statement: This can be provided on a cover page for this volume. The offeror may also provide a 1-page table of contents page as well. The table of contents and SAM statement may be on the same page. | The AO is requesting the offeror submit a separate Technical Volume. |
| Please confirm if any exceptions (redlines) to terms and conditions are acceptable? | No, the AO will not accept any exceptions to terms and conditions. | |
| Based on the level of detail required to respond and the upcoming holiday week, requesting an extension for 30 days to the submission due date. This extension will together the most thorough, compliant, and competitive allow vendors the necessary time needed to put response possible. | Submission date extended to January 24, 2025 | See updated Solicition, USCA25R0110 |
| J.2 BPA Price Workbook, Tab 1 Instructions. Reference to tab 4 not being required – yet there is no tab 4 in the workbook only tab 5 related to pricing notes, so should we assume the AO intent to be ‘not required’ tab 5 from the workbook? | Tab 5 corrected to state Tab 4 | See updated BPA Price Workbook |
| Under BPA Pricing and Product Category Percent Discount. Where does the AO anticipate being able to access the OEM pricing, via a dedicated portal site or a SharePoint landing page? Can the AO clarify the distinction between the “Total Cumulative Discounted Price” cell M2 on Tab 2 from cell N3 on Tab 3 Product Category % Discounts? | Please see solicitation: M.1 Evaluation Criteria EVALUATION APPROACH CRITERIA (1) Factor 1. Price, The AO will analyze the proposed pricing against the OEM’s publicly posted market pricing. The lowest price will be determined by the lowest cumulative discounted price (shown in cell M2, Tab 2. Sample Orders and Pricing). The Offeror is responsible for providing an easily accessible active link to the OEM pricing for ALL of the products. OEM pricing must be publicly available. | The Offeror is responsible for providing an easily accessible active link to the OEM pricing for ALL of the products. |
| L.3.3.2 Volume II Technical Volume, RFP page 20, 4. An authorized reseller statement and a letter from the OEM confirming the offeror is a certfied reseller to OEM direct customers. Per our experience, Apple has historically provided LOA's without signature thus please clarify if we need to submit a signed letter from OEM? | The offeror must show they are an authorized reseller. It is determined by the OEM what is required for an authorized letter. | |
| J.1 BPA SOW, Application Security, Page 3 The contractor shall deliver a monthly report that captures all notifications, updates, bugs, troubleshooting, errata, and revisions for all products serviced under this BPA. How would the AO like to see this report via excel or some other productivity application software? Google DOCS? Word document? Who at the AO this report will go to, and would it need signed by the VAR monthly? | The report format will be determined within 30 days after the begining of the contract PoP and will be proposed by the contractor and approved by the Government. The report will need to be signed by the contractor's verifying official and the report will be received by a Government Civilian employee determined within 30 days after the begining of the contract PoP. | |
| J.1 BPA SOW OEM WARRANTIES, Pg 4, The BPA holder shall pass on all OEM warranties related to a BPA call to the BPA call's point of contact. How would the AO wish to have these Apple warranties communicated? Via Email? We will comply with Apple policy in their EULA related to warranty communications with end-users | The method in which the warranties will be communicated will be determined within 30 days after the begining of the contract PoP The warranties will be received by a Government Civilian employee determined within 30 days after the begining of the contract PoP. | |
| J.1 BPA SOW, TECHNOLOGY REFRESHMENT & REPLACEMENT, Page 4 New product families for product line(s) directly related to the OEM for the BPA category may only be introduced by the BPA holders. A new product family may not be sold under this BPA to any AO entity or court until it has been formally added to the respective BPA by a written and bilaterally signed modification from the BPA's Contracting Officer. How often will the BPA holder be permitted to make and submit tech refreshes to the BPA? as they occur? monthly /quarterly? | BPA holder shall submit tech refreshes/replacement as they occur | |
| Many of the products on your list are End of Life or no longer available. How do you want us to handle the pricing for these products? Can we provide pricing on the current closest comparison models? | If product/serivce is discontinued/end of life, please provide the most current closest comparable model. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .