QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1

pogonotomyeyrarΔίκτυα και Επικοινωνίες

26 Οκτ 2013 (πριν από 3 χρόνια και 9 μήνες)

146 εμφανίσεις

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
1

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

1

3.4.2.2

In section 3.4.2.2 of the main IFB document it states "Most of the exhibits
require an original signature." Can you please clarify whether this
means an
original wet signature or, will an electronic signature suffice (as was permitted
in the pre
-
qualification round)?

Those exhibits requiring a signature
must have an original wet signature.

2


Please explain the purpose of SOW Appendix A
-

Glossary and SOW
Appendix B
-

Data Dictionary. It appears bidders are only required to submit
these IFB documents with Volume 1 of our Draft submission.

Can you please confirm and explain the purpose of these

documents, and
whether they contain any requirements to which the bidder must respond?

SOW Appendices A and B are provided
as supporting documentation to define
terms used in the IFB and resulting
Contract. They should be submitted with
your draft and fin
al response as
confirmation that you agree to the terms
as defined.

3

3.12.1.13.3
and
2.13.1.16.3

(now
1.3.2.1.13.3
and
1.2.3.1.16.3)

Please validate that we include all three for each handset:

Contractor will
implement SIP Digest Authentication, (AND)
set passwords on handsets,
(AND) disable telnet to handsets.

Confirmed, all three requirements must
be met for all handsets.

4

2.13.3.4 and
3.12.3.4 (now
1.2.3.3.4 and
1.3.2.3.4)

Please clarify the requirement for Web Based Attendant Console.

Does this
n
eed to be a network based service, or just utilize HTML locally?

Network based where the contractor
provides an interface via a web browser
and where serving equipment does not
reside on the customer premise.

5

2.15.6

(now 1.2.5.6)

What are the
concurrent call volumes that we should use to design our SIP
trunking capacities for this response?

Refer to Section 1.2.5.2
.

6

6.9.5

(now 1.6.4)

Does the sentence “The DNMA shall identify the availability and performance
of contracted MPLS services”
correctly refer to MPLS?

If not, what service is
meant?

Refer to Addendum #2
.

7

2.9.4.1

(now A.9.4.2)

In A.9.4.2: No compliance check box.

Refer to Addendum #1
.


CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
2

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

8

4.2.5.3

The IFB states that “each item offered by the Bidder and accepted by the
State
for evaluation must be found in a catalog that includes a name or
description equivalent to that offered by the Bidder in its CALNET 3 offer.”

Many items being requested by the State in this IFB (Mandatory) and items
being considered for response as Unsoli
cited Items, are highly customized in
the nature in which the State is requiring that they be delivered and/or priced,
and may not be found in any vendors “catalog”. This is due to several factors,
including the custom nature of the State’s requirements an
d communications
providers no longer filing tariffs for unregulated services. Mandatory items are
not subjected to this ‘catalog’ requirement.

Please explain how vendors are to propose unsolicited items that are not
published in a ‘catalog’.

Unsolicited
items offered must meet all
requirements as stated in sections
3.4.2.6, 3.4.2.7, and 4.2.5.3.

9

4.2.5.3

The IFB states that “Bidders will be scored based upon their relative discount
from their published catalog prices for those offered Unsolicited items
acceptable to the State compared to the relative discount offered by other
Bidders.”


For items that do appear in a vendors ‘catalog’, there appears to be an error in
this evaluation criteria/calculation that may not award the lowest cost Bidder
the most p
oints or guarantee the State the best price. For instance, in the
unlikely event Bidder A submits unsolicited items that is identical to that of
Bidder B and the ‘published catalog price’ is different, the higher cost Bidder
will be scored higher:

Example:

Bidder 1 Bidder 2

Catalog Total $100,000 $85,000

CALNET3 Cost $50,000 $45,000


Using the formula found in 4.2.5.3 Scoring of Unsolicited Item Costs, item 9,
Bidder 1 will be evaluated at a 50% “average discount percentage” and Bidder
2 will be evaluated a
t a 47.059% “average discount percentage”. Bidder 1, the
higher cost vendor, will be awarded 500 points, and Bidder 2, the lower cost
vendor, will be awarded only 471, according to the State’s evaluation criteria
found in item 11 of this section.

Please ex
plain or clarify the calculation in the event we are not applying it
appropriately.

The calculation is being applied
appropriately.


CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
3

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

10

4.2.5.3

The evaluation process seems to assume that all vendors are starting from
the same baseline price, which is
common with commodity equipment
purchases, where sellers are starting from the same manufacture’s list price.
Services and custom solutions that are required within the IFB do not have the
same baseline price across vendors.


Since the State is reserving t
he right to determine if Unsolicited Items are out
of scope or otherwise not in the State program interests, would the State
consider an alternative approach to evaluating Unsolicited Items, such as:

Following the selection of Bidder(s) based upon evaluati
on of only Mandatory
and Mandatory Scorable requirements, Unsolicited Items are evaluated to
confirm they are in scope and within the State program interest. Items not in
scope or in the State program interest may be rejected. The remaining items
would the
n be evaluated in greater detail during the negotiation process.
Bidder(s) would be required to produce evidence of the Unsolicited Item to be
below the market price for similar products or services and would not impose
unacceptable direct, indirect or hid
den program costs to the State or to the
CALNET Customers. Bidder(s) could use published data sources (other
contracts, Service Guides (where available), tariff’s (where applicable), etc.)
as evidence of competitive pricing. Following award, other Category

Contractors would have access to competing vendors CALNET3 Public
Website to view competing, Unsolicited Items for possible inclusion in their
Category Contracts. Continual, open competition would assure the State of
the best available price from all qual
ified Category Contractors.

Unsolicited Items will be evaluated and
accepted based on the application of the
Category/Subcategory for which they are
submitted.


For purposes of award, Unsolicited Items
will be weighed on the total percentage
of discount of
fered off the Bidder Catalog
and is not related to the cost of individual
items or the number of items offered.


The State will not change this
requirement.












CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
4

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

11

1.1

Is commencement of the initial term for all Subcategories 1.1 through 1.6
based
upon the Execution of a contract?


The initial term of Subcategories 1.1 through 1.5 Contracts shall end not later
than June 30, 2017 with two (2) one
-
year options to extend. The initial term of
Subcategory 1.6, Legacy Telecommunications, shall end not lat
er than June
30, 2016 with three (3) one
-
year options to extend. Extensions will be
exercised at the sole discretion of the State and shall not be denied by the
Contractor.


Issuance of this IFB does not commit the State of California to award a
Contract.
The State reserves the right to reject any or all proposals received,
or parts thereof, if the State determines that it is in the State’s best interest to
do so.

Refer to IFB section 5.6, Authorization to
Execute Agreement.

12

2.12

(now 1.2.2)

A) I
s
there a requirement for Video conference/bridging?


B)
Does the state plan to include video in a future RFP?

A)

No.


B)

Unknown at this time.

13

2.12.4

(now 1.2.2.4)

Can the State clarify and define the terms “On
-
Net” and “Off
-
Net” locations?

With respect to

Section 1.2.2.4, an On
-
Net location is one where the Contractor
can provide service to that location
without utilizing the services of a 3rd
party for access.

Off
-
Net is any location
that is not On
-
Net.

14

2.12.4

(now 1.2.2.4)

What type of agreement
does the State envision?

Retail / Wholesale
regulations and processes are already in place to support end to end services
between ILEC territories.

As described in Section 1.2.2.4, the
State envisions an agreement that gives
the Contractor the ability to
provide end
-
to
-
end service in areas open to
competition.

15

2.12.7

(now 1.2.2.7)

In table 2.12.7, items 7, 9, 16, 17, 25
-
28.

Each of these items indicate a
service or product that we don’t find in our pricing sheet.

Should these be
included

and if so w
here do we include pricing (items are:

Remote Access,
Firewall, MPLS port & POP diversity, wireless, DSL, and satellite)?

There are
no pricing components for these options or capabilities.

Since these are listed
as Mandatory Requirements, where are the
pricing tables for these elements?

Refer to T
able 1.2.2.8
.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
5

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

16

2.12.7

(now 1.2.2.7)

A) Can the State further define the requirement for supporting customer
access to the MPLS network via satellite communications?

B) Does this mean the network only needs the capability to support satellite
access?

There are no pricing components for these options or capabilities.

C) Since these are listed as Mandatory Requirements, where are the pricing
tables for these elements?

A)

Contracto
r must support the
capability.

B)

Contractor must support the
capability.

C)

The cost of the capability should be
included in the mandatory
requirement. Any additional services
that utilize the capability may be
addressed in Table 1.2.2.8.3.b.

17

2.12.7

(now 1.2.2.7)

A) There is no separate pricing component for CoS. What CoS profile should
the bidder assume to be part of the port price?

B) The State requirement asks for multiple CoS. There are no pricing
components for these options or capabiliti
es.

Since these are listed as
Mandatory Requirements, where are the pricing tables for these elements?

As stated in Table 1.2.2.7, Line 20,
Contractor must describe the CoS levels
and the ingress/egress profiles
supported.

Refer to Section 1.2.2.8
.

18

2
.13.1.9

(now 1.2.3.1.9)

Can the State clarify the requirement / need for SIP aware Firewalls since the
State has specified that the VoIP service is to be provided on a private MPLS
network and not the Internet?

This is addressed in Addendum #2.

19

2.13.1.16.3
(now
1.2.3.1.16.3)

A) Can the State clarify the requirement for setting passwords on VoIP sets
before they are shipped?


B) If the contractor performs this at a staging site prior to shipping to customer
site, is this permissible?

A)

Yes, per the

requirement of section
1.2.3.1.16.3.


B)

Yes.

20

3.12.1.13.3
(now
1.3.2.1.13.3)

A) Can the State clarify the requirement for setting passwords on VoIP sets
before they are shipped?


B) If the contractor performs this at a staging site prior to shipping to

customer
site, is this permissible?

A)

Yes, per the requirement of section
1.3.2.1.13.3.

B)

Yes.

21

All

A)

Can the State further define what is meant by Contractor’s
service area in
California?

B)
Since a contractor only has to provide a service in one city
to qualify, does
this mean that a Contractor with a small single city cost center or service area
will be scored and evaluated in the same fashion as a Contractor with multiple
city cost centers and large service areas?

A)

The geographic area where the
contra
ctor provides services as of the
date
of the final bid submission.

B)

Yes.




22

All

Can the Contractor offer different pricing for different cities within their service
areas?

Refer to the Instructions tab of the Cost
Worksheets.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
6

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

23

All

If a Contractor’s
products are only available in certain cities within their service
area, is it permissible to only list the cities within the Contractor’s service area
were the product will be generally available through the term of the contract?

Refer to Addendum #2.

24

All

Can a contractor offer a migration to another replacement service in a
different MSA if the service is grandfathered or discontinued during the term of
the contract or option years?

CALNET 3 provides flexibility for the
State to consider migration pol
icy and
strategy for the benefit of the State
following Contract award.

25

1.2.5.1

(now A.2.5.1)

In #9. “Inventory of CALNET3 Contract Services”


Is this the same as the
Product Catalog maintained by the current CALNET2 contractors?

No.

26

2.13.1.8 and

2.13.1.16.3
(now 1.2.3.1.8
and
1.2.3.1.16.3)

Will the State allow internal system non
-
SIP signaling protocol between the
network based VoIP call control switch and the IP phone, which will be
provided as part of the VoIP service, as long as all external
interfaces and
trunking is SIP based and interoperable with other Calnet 3 SIP based
services and technologies?

No
.

27

1.2.5.1 #1
(now A.2.2.5.1)

A)What does “first complete Service Request” mean?

B) Is this Per Agency?

C) First customer on CALNET 3 eve
r?

A)

This refers to the first Customer
Service Request for a service offered
within this IFB submitted to the
awarded Contractor for a CALNET 3
service regardless of the Category or
Subcategory.

B)

This is not per Agency
.

C)

No
.

28

A.2.4.4.1

Is it a requirement
for the Service Desk to be US based or can it be located
outside the US?

Refer to section A.2.4.4.1 through
A.2.4.4.4
.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
7

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

29


ADA Compliance Question: Will the procurement procedures will be
consistent with the disability related requirements of California
Government
Code Section 11135
-
11139.8 as described at:
http://www.disabilityaccessinfo.ca.gov/lawsregs.htm?


California Government Code Sections 11135 through 11139.8 provides
protection from discrimination from any program or activity that is conducted,
f
unded directly by, or receives any financial assistance from the State. This
section brings into State law the protection of Title II of the ADA which
ensures accessibility to government programs and also requires State
government to follow accessibility r
equirements standards of Section 508 of
the Rehabilitation Act, which ensures the accessibility of electronic and
information technology.

Yes
.

30

3.12.1

(now 1.3.2.1)

Is the requirement to include the LAN costs as part of the upfront initial
deployment,
or should it be rolled into the per seat price as part of the monthly
service?

Refer to the cost worksheet for the
allowable pricing component(s) for the
specific service. The state is not dictating
the method by which the contractor
recovers any costs rel
ated to the service.

31

3.12.1.5

(now 1.3.2.1.5)

For this section,

A)
Does this requirement mean that a gateway is not allowed on customer
premises for this solution to support analog devices such as fax machines or
to
provide local survivability.

B)
Th
is requirement implies that the bidder is a PSTN provider.

Our
understanding is that subcategory 1.3, Standalone VoIP, should be
supportable by any approved PSTN provider approved on CalNet3 in the
PSTN services category outside of subcategory 1.3.

A)

Yes
,
with

the exception of 3.12.3.1
(now 1.3.2.3.1) Standalone VoIP Site
Survivability Network Failure
.

B)

Please resubmit in the form a
question.

32

3.12.1.6

(now 1.3.2.1.6)

This requirement implies that the bidder is a PSTN provider.

Our
understanding is that

subcategory 1.3, Standalone VoIP, should be
supportable by any approved PSTN provider approved on CalNet3 in the
PSTN services category outside of subcategory 1.3.

Please resubmit in the form a question.




33

3.12.1.9

(
now 1.3.2.1.9)

Metric 1


Is the
MOS score required for an internal call or for PSTN calls as
well.

Be aware, once a call goes out to the PSTN, the voice quality of other
party is also taken into account when determining the Mean Opinion Score
(MOS).

So, calls to cell phones for example

may receive a lower MOS than
3.6 simply because the cell phone quality is below a 3.6.

Please refe
r to the requirement in full,
"
The VoIP network shall meet the
technical measurement metrics listed"
.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
8

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

34

3.12.1.9

(now 1.3.2.1.9)

Metric 3


While an under

3 second call setup time is easy to achieve in North
America, some international calls require additional time to setup.

This is
because of the quality of the PSTN in those specific countries, the number of
intermediate points that must be traversed to r
each those countries, or other
factors.

This can also happen when calling a cell phone that is roaming
internationally.

Please clarify if this requirement is just for North America or
for all calls.

For all calls on the VoIP network. Refer
to Table 1.3.2
.1.9, Technical
Measurement Metrics
.

35

2.2

1. Please clarify the date for Category 1 Final Bids. The bid end date on the
BidSync portal lists 12/28/13 while the key action dates table of the IFB states
6/10/13.

The dates provided in Section 2.2, Key
Acti
on Dates are the official dates
applicable to the solicitation. The
BidSync date is for posting purposes
only.

36

2.3.7 and 2.3.8

2. Please clarify which, if any, of the required exhibits need to be executed for
inclusion in the draft bid responses due
2/21/13. For example, Section 2.3.8
“Service Taxes, Fees, Surcharges and Surcredits (M)” of the IFB states, “In
response to this requirement, Bidders shall submit Exhibit 6, Service Taxes,
Fees, Surcharges and Surcredits, with their Final Bid that identifi
es all
regulatory service taxes, fees, surcharges and surcredits that they plan to
include on their invoices”. However, Section 2.3.7 “Worker’s Compensation
(M)” states, “The Bidder is required to sign Exhibit 5, Workers’ Compensation
Certification, and su
bmit it with the Bid response”.

All required exhibits are to be submitted
with both the draft and final response.

37

3.4.2.7

3. Please provide a copy of the Catalog A document described in Section
3.4.2.7 of the IFB.

Refer to Addendum #2.

38

1.1

A)

Please provide a definition of “Awarded Procurement Value” on page 8,
Section 1.1, and how the amount is determined by the State?


B)

Will all contractors awarded in a specific product category have the same
“Awarded Procurement Value” for a specific pr
oduct category?

A)

"Awarded Procurement Value" refers
to the Dollar Threshold awarded with

the Contractor PMAC award.

B)

No
.

39

2.2

Bidder understands proposed changes to Special Terms and Conditions are
due to the State on 1/8/13. Please clarify if proposed
changes to Special
Terms and Conditions can also be submitted to the State prior to the 1/29/13
“Last Day to Submit Written Questions and Request Changes to IFB
Requirements prior to Draft Bid submission” deadline as well.

Proposed changes to the Special T
erms
and Conditions will not be accepted past
the date identified in IFB section 2.2, Key
Action Dates.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
9

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

40

A.1.2.4.3

Is Contractor required to provide a different SPOC for each Category or
Subcategory awarded?

Not initially, but CALNET 3 CMO may
require a

SPOC for each of the
Contractor's awarded Category or
Subcategory Contracts if necessary after
award.

41

A.5.1 #9

What is CALNET's acceptance policy?

Section A.5.1 #9 addresses "Customer
Acceptance" which is defined in the
Statement of Work, Appendix A
G
LOSSARY.

42

A.11

For the installed and maintained service interfaces, can Contractor bill for
these services? Can Contractor bill for installation and maintenance?

If there is a line item cost for such
services, a cost can be provided and
billed.


If no line item cost is provided
then the Bidder must consider such
costs as part of the overall service
offering
.

43

General

Will CALNET provide its security policy?

CALNET does not maintain a separate
security policy other than those
specifically detai
led in the Technical
requirements of the IFB.


The Contractor
must adhere to Section 89 of the
General Provisions
-

Telecommunications.

44

General

Can Contractor request changes, or take exception, to provisions of the
Special Terms and Conditions?

Refer to Section 2.2, Key Action Dates,
Last Day to Request Changes to Special
Terms and Conditions.

Exceptions will
not be permitted.

45

General

Once a Contractor has been awarded to provide services, does the Contractor
have to accept all orders from
CALNET customers?

Yes, in areas where the Bidder has
committed to offer services.

46

M
-
S Items

On a requirement noted as (M
-
S), if the vendor cannot provide the requested
services, does it disqualify the Contractor from the entire IFB?

No; only for that S
ubcategory, except for
M
-
S requirements that are within the
SOW Business Requirements.

47

Mandatory
Requirements

If a Contractor cannot provide a (M) requirement, are they disqualified from
the entire IFB process?

Refer to IFB section 2.4.2,
Identification
and Classification of IFB Requirements.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
10

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

48


A)

Will CALNET explain the award process that will take place in Phase 3
when customer
s place orders for services?

B)

Will CALNET issue request for quotes to Contractors or will the Contractor
be

notified of award based on our posted catalog of services and prices?

A)

User instructions will b
e issued after
Contract award.

B)

User instructions will be issued after
Contract award.

49

General

There are many Mandatory services and features that are
currently provided
within the CALNET2 contract that are not listed as Mandatory requirements in
the IFB.

Some features may be essential to certain services functioning
correctly and/or prov
ide enhanced functionality.

A) Is this an oversight?

B)

Does thi
s mean that existing customers utilizing these services and
features provided in CALNET2 will not have access to them under the
CALNET3 contract?

A)

No
.

B)

No.

50

1.5.2.5

No pricing tables are included for requirement 1.5.2.5 International Toll
-
Free
Service.
Please provide direction on how bidders are to supply pricing for the
required services.

Refer to Addendum #2.

51


Is there a scheduled/projected date for release of additional Phase 2/Specific
Category Contract solicitations?

Specifically, for Category
9/Cellular Voice
and Data?

The State is preparing for the release of
the additional Phase 2 categories.
Although no specific timeline is being
provided, the State's overall goal is for all
Categories to be awarded by Jan
uary

2014.

52


Will there be
separate Special Terms and Conditions for each Phase 2
Category/Subcategory of service?

Yes
.

53


Or should Contractor assume that the Special Terms and Conditions being
negotiated for (by way of example) Subcategories 1.1


1.6 will also be
applicable to
future Phase 2 categories/subcategories (e.g., Category 9)?

No
.

54

2.2

A) How will the State incorporate additional terms and conditions that may be
required by a Contractor for use of Contractor’s products/services (e.g.,
Product
-
specific annexes or
other items not addressed in the State’s Special
Terms and Conditions)?


B) Should Contractor be submitting all Contractor
-
required additional terms
and conditions by the 1/8/13 Key Action Date as set forth in Section 2.2 of IFB
OTP 12
-
001
-
A?


C) Or shou
ld Contractor submit its additional terms and conditions as part of
Step 4 (1/29/13) of the Key Action Dates?

A)

Refer to IFB section 3.4.2.4, Special
Terms and Conditions
.

B)

Yes.

C)

No.


CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
11

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

55

4.2.4.2 Table 9
(Legacy)

Part I, General Instructions, page 50, Table 9:

Maximum MS points for
Subcategory 1.6, Legacy Telecommunications, Bidder has noticed that Frame
Relay is included in Catastrophic Outage 3 scorable item, but is excluded in
Catastrophic Outage 2 and Catastrophic Outage 1 scorable items. Please
confirm tha
t it is not an omission, and in fact you want exclude Frame Relay
from Catastrophic Outage 1 and 2.

This is addressed in Addendum #2.

56

2.3.12

Part I, General Instructions, Section 2.3.12 (DVBE Program and Incentive)


Please clarify whether Bidders are
required to declare the percentage of work
that we anticipate subcontracting to a DVBE on the Exhibit 12
-
GSPD
-
05
-
105
Bidder Declarations form.

Yes, a Bidder must declare the
percentage of work that a subcontractor
will provide in order to be responsive to
the DVBE Program and Incentive.

57

A.5.1

Business Requirements SOW, Section A.5.1
-
Billing and Invoicing, #11
-

A)
Please clarify the start date of rate changes as a result of amendments.


B) Is it the same day as the last signature date?

C) First day of month following signature date?

D) 30 days after signature date?

A)



D)

The effective date of the rate
change will be identified on the
Amendment and/or in accordance with
the Special Terms and Condi
tions.


58

A.5.2

Business Requirements

SOW, Section A.5.2
-
Invoice Delivery Methods
-

A)
Will contractors be required to provide both web
-
based and double sided
paper format? B) Or can we offer the State the choice of Web based default,
and paper invoicing upon request in an effort to support St
ate and Corporate
Green Initiatives?

A)

Refer to
Addendum #2.

B)

Refer to
Addendum #2.

59

1.1.4.6

Technical Requirements, Section 1.1.4.6, Technical SLA General
Requirements
-

Please provide the definition of Average Daily Usage Charges
(ADUC).Is it based on 1
month, the month the SLA violation occurred in,
other?

Refer to
Addendum #2.

60

A.2.5.4 #8

A) Business Requirements SOW, Section A.2.5.4, #8

The ATO states that
local agencies are required to give 30
days’ notice

to disconnect a service.

B) Does this same 30
days’ notice

for disconnect apply to state agencies?

A)

The ATO states that Non
-
State
Entities must give 30 calendar days
to terminate the ATO

agreement in
full or in part.
The ATO does not
state Non
-
State Entities must give 30
calendar
days to terminate a s
ervices
procured under the ATO.

B)

No.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
12

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

61


Under the State’s Order of Precedence as set forth in Section 14 of Appendix
A
-
1 GENERAL PROVISIONS


TELECOMMUNICATIONS, Addendum #8,
Revised 09/21/2012, the General Provisions have the highest

order of
precedence. The only reference to Special Terms and Conditions is in the
Statement of Work, which has the third highest order of precedence.

The
State has moved certain General Provisions to a new document,

IFB OTP
12
-
001
-
Ak
-

Statement of Work,

Appendix C,

SPECIAL TERMS AND
CONDITIONS


TELECOMMUNICATIONS FOR CALNET 3, CATEGORY 1
-
VOICE AND DATA SERVICES
-
Addendum #1, Revised 12/17/2012
(“Appendix C
-

Addendum #1”).



A) Does the State intend to assign to Appendix C
-
Addendum #1 the third
highest
order of precedence, and no longer to assign the provisions of
Appendix C
-
Addendum #1 the highest order of precedence?


B)If that is the case, may a Vendor agree to the Statement of Work, Appendix
C, Special Terms and Conditions, but then provide for alter
native terms within
the service specific descriptions of particular features, functions and serving
arrangements in other sections of the Statement of Work?

A)

The General Provisions
-

Telecommunications, Addendum #8,
Revised 09/21/12 retains the highest
orde
r of pre
cedence as noted in
Section 14.

B)

No.

62

3.2

Part I, General Instructions, Section 3.2 Draft Bids and Section 4.1.2
Evaluation of Draft Bids


Section 3.2 states, “Draft Bids should be identical to
the Final Bid”.

A) Does this apply to the mandatory technical submission of our response?

B) Can the vendor make changes/modifications/additions to the responses in
the Final Bid submission on June 10, 2013?

C) Section 4.1.2 states, “Draft Bids are optional and failure
to submit a Draft
Bid will not disqualify a Bidder” which appears to conflict with the instructions
in Section 3.2 and could provide an unfair advantage to those vendors that do
not submit a draft bid on February 21, 2013 because those vendors would
have a
pproximately an additional 4 months to prepare their response.
Vendors that do submit a draft response on February 21, 2013 would not have
the opportunity to make changes/modifications/additions to their response,
according to Section 3.2 that requires dra
ft bids be identical to final bids.
Please clarify.

A)

Yes.

B)

Refer to IFB Section 2.4.13,
Withdrawal and Resubmission of
Bids.

C)

Submission of a Draft Bid affords the
Bidder with an opportunity for the
State to review the bid for material
deviations and to meet
with the State
for confidential discussions regarding
their submission.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
13

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

63

1.1.2.4.2

DS3 Geographic Availability

1.1.2.4.2 Contractor’s DS3 service shall be available statewide in all CPUC
ILEC territories open to competition.

Bidder understands the
Requirement and shall meet or exceed it? Yes_____
No_____


We were specifically asked which areas we could serve in Phase 1 in which
case our response did not correlate to all CPUC ILEC territories.

We do not
want to be disqualified by this type of Geogra
phic Availability question so we
would request that this question be taken out or amended to reflect our
response to the geographic availability questions for the various service
categories in phase 1.

This requirement will not be amended.












64

General

When does the State anticipate responding to the Questions and Request
Changes to the Special Terms and Conditions?

The Q
&A set will
be
posted as soon after
the 01/29/13 date as possible.
Responses to requests for changes to
the Special Terms and C
onditions will be
provided as soon as responses are
prepared.

65

General

When does the State anticipate responding to submitted questions regarding
IFB requirements?

See response to Question 64.

66


Will the State please clarify the current total telecom

spend on the CalNet 2
contract and identify what spend is from the State and related agencies that
are required to purchase from the contract versus Local and Municipal
government entities.

The approximate total
charges per State
fiscal year 2011/2012 are

$349
million.

Local agency expenditures
are

estimated at 53% and State
expenditures is estimated at 47%.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
14

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

67

D, G, I and K
of Special
Provisions

A) Sections D (Price Guarantee), G (Pricing and Service Review); I (“Most
Favored Nation” Status) and K
(Benchmarking) of the Special Provisions
seem to overlap with respect to the State’s ability to review and require
changes in vendor’s pricing or other aspects of the services.

Could the State
provide clarification on how those provision will be applied?


B) And if the State or an Authorized User requests pricing lower than vendor
is able to provide, would the vendor have the ability to withdraw from
consideration with respect to those services (if prior to provision of services)
or cease providing those
services (if during a service term)?

A)

These will be further clarified in
Phase 3

1.

"Price Guarantee” the Contractor
self
-
monitors pricing and ensures
pricing at or below market value.

2.

"Pricing and Service Review" the
Contractor performs a joint review
with th
e State to ensure State is
receiving cost
-
competitive and
technologically competitive
services.

3.

"Most Favored Nation" the
Contractor self
-
monitors CALNET
3 pricing against similarly situated
Contractor customers and adjust
rates to any lower rates
,

if foun
d.

4.

"Benchmarking", the State
engages an independent third
party and the State and
Contractor share the cost of hiring
the independent third party.


B)

No
.

68

I

A) With respect to Section I (Most Favored Nation” Status), could the State
clarify or provide
additional details on the comparisons to be made for
purposes of this provision?


B) Would all public customers of Contractor or its Affiliates be on a nation
-
wide basis?

C) Would services to be analyzed include provision of wholesale services,
those sub
ject to any special or limited
-
time discounts?


D) Does “similarly situated” mean in terms of all of the following: size and
location of public customer; amount and/or type of services; geographic
constraints?

A)

Per section K, Special Terms and
Conditions,
the "Most Favored
Nation" status requires the
Contractor to self
-
monitor CALNET 3
pricing against similarly situated
Contractor customers.

B)

Yes.

C)

No.

D)

Yes, it may include these and
additional items.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
15

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

69

K

A) With respect to Section K (Benchmarking), could the

State clarify or
provide additional details on how such benchmarking would be conducted?


B) Which service providers would be used for any benchmarking
comparison?


C) Would comparison be made on a per
-
Service; per
-
location or service
address; or per
-
Au
thorized User basis?

A)

Per section K, Special Terms and
Conditions, the State and the
Contractor will discuss and determine
in advance of the Benchmarking how
it will be executed.

B)

The State will solicit an independent
third party with subject matter
expertis
e.

C)

Per section K, Special Terms and
Conditions, the State and Contractor
will discuss and determine the scope,
methodology, relative comparisons
and execution.

70

T

With respect to Section T, Service Taxes, Fees, Surcharges and Surcredits,
would the State

please clarify whether the service taxes, fees, surcharges and
surcredits that are mandated by the applicable Federal, State or local entity
would include such the service taxes, fees, surcharges and surcredits that are
mandated to be paid by Contractor b
ut with respect to which Contract is
required or permitted by law or a tariff to collect from the State or applicable
Authorized User?

Please clarify your question and
resubmit.

71

A.2.5.3 #7

Does the State require a complex technical drawing?

No. For
section A.2.5.3, technical
drawings are required under #6
.


72

A.2.6, #5

Training and ADA compliance


Vendor can only guarantee ADA compliance
if a Vendor
-
managed site is used for training or if the site requested for a
training location is already ADA c
ompliant. Will the State amend the IFB to
note that Vendor cannot guarantee ADA compliance if a CALNET customer
requests a location that is not ADA compliant?

To be addressed in a future addendum.

73

A.4.2

Naming Convention


Vendor is willing to use the
required naming
convention; however, Vendor has some platform limitations. A) Is the State
willing to work with Vendor to meet your requirements with some exceptions?
B) If yes, what does the State require for this IFB submission?

A)

Contractor shall be requi
red to use
the State's Customer Naming
Conventions. See IFB section 4.2.2,
Evaluation of Required Information.

B)

Not applicable.

Refer to
Addendum
#2.


CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
16

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

74

A.5.9

Fraud


A) Will the State clarify how Vendor is to know how a CALNET
customer is using services

fraudulently or invoicing fraudulently if Vendor has
completed verification that customer can purchase from the CALNET 3
contract? B) Will the State provide details as to how this fraud program is
managed today?

A)

Section A.5.9 pertains to the
Contractor's
ability and
responsibilities to perform Fraud
Detection, Monitoring and Prevention
Services related to services provided
in IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A Categories 1
through 6.

B)

No.

75

A.9.4

Trouble Ticket Reporting Tool


A) If Vendor has a similar tool already in
place, is the State willing to work with the vendor to make minor modifications
in order to use Vendor’s tool rather than creating a new tool? B) Would the
State allow Vendor to provide a demonstration of the tool already in place for
comparison to the Sta
te’s request prior to IFB submission?

A)

Refer to IFB section 2.4.2,
Identification and Cla
ssification of
IFB Requirements.


B)

No
.

76

A.11

Does testing of services also include testing of technician’s aptitude sent to
the lab to turn up services?

No specific
testing of the technician will
be given however the State expects the
Contractor's representatives to be
knowledgeable in, and their technicians
to be qualified to work on, the specific
services of this IFB.

77

A.11

Please clarify the type of testing that

will be completed. For example, is this a
ping test?

Testing of the actual functionality of the
service and/or any associated tests that
produce data metrics that qualify the
functionality of the service, e.g., ping.

78

A.11

A) Is the State or the Vendor

responsible for retention of testing results?

B) Does the State require the Vendor to deliver results to customer and if so,
in what format are the results to be delivered? PDF?

A)

Both the State and Contractor

will
retain all results.

B)

No.

79

A.2.2, Table
2.2.1, A.2.5.1,
A.2.5.4

A.2.2: #11, Table A.2.2.1: #7, A.2.5.1:

#2, A2.5.4:

#1: These sections all
discuss Delegation. What is the process for contractor to obtain a copy of the
Delegation?

Refer to Addendum #2.


80

A.4.2

In regards to new Customer
Name appearing on the invoice, are you requiring
all current CALNET 2 customers (state and local) to change their billing entity
name to the state assigned customer name?

Refer to Addendum #2.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
17

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

81

A.4.2

A) Excel spread sheet that lists the assigned custome
r name and customer
code, please include a delineation of sector and sub sector to ensure that all
are in agreement.


B) Is there any need to know exemption status of state agencies?

A)

Refer to Addendum #2.

B)

Not applicable in Phase 2.

82

A.5.1.1.1, #7

Please clarify what is meant by “…time interval for which the adjustments are
being applied…” we believe this should be under Adjustments not MRC?

Refer to Addendum #2.

83

A.5.1.1.4 #3
and A.5.1.1.5
#11

A) #3:Itemized Service Taxes, Fees, Surcharges, and
Surcredits for each
Product Identifier at

the BTN/Circuit ID/WTN level;

B) #11: Service Taxes & Surcharges applied to each of the items on the
record

Bidder applies taxes and surcharges at the BTN level. Would the State
consider allowing Itemized Service T
axes, Fees, Surcharges, and Surcredits
at lowest possible level.

A)

Refer to Addendum #2.

B)

Please clarify question identifying
your "…lowest possible level…"

84

A.5.1.1.5 #5

Please clarify what “contain service and equipment sections detailing the type
of
listing for the account” means.

Please provide an example.

Refer to Addendum #2.

85

A.5.2

Currently in CALNET 2 agencies receive invoices via other electronic options
(raw data file, CD).

Confirm these options are being eliminated.

Refer to Addendum #2.

86

A.8 #12

By telephone number do you mean WTN as defined in the data dictionary?

Refer to Addendum #2.

87

Glossary

Please define these data elements missing from the Data Dictionary and/or
Glossary:

A) Charge (A.5.1.1.2 #8): Billing invoice section

B)
Invoice Date: Billing Invoice (A.5.1) and Fiscal Management sections (A.8)

C) Description (A.5.1.1.3): Billing Invoice section

D) Bill Period: Billing Invoice (A.5.1)and Fiscal Management section

E) Telephone Number (A.8 #12): Fiscal Management section

A
-

E) Refer to Addendum #2.

88

1.1
-

1.1.2.5

Shall this service include DS1 transport to the customer site for the purpose of
responding to the pricing tables?

No, the DS1 circuit will be priced and
purchased separately by the customer
from the Carrier
Service product section.

89

1.4.2.5
(Addendum 2)

Bidder and the industry are phasing out live operator assistance (for instance,
see attached announcement from similar OS provider).

Would the State
consider removing the requirement for live operator serv
ices? A fully
automated platform will be available 24x365 to serve most customer calls that
we do today.

No
.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
18

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

90

1.4.2.5.2
(Addendum 2)

Bidder and the industry are phasing out this live operator service (for instance,
see attached announcement from similar

OS provider). Would the State
consider removing the requirement for this live operator services? With the
availability of 911 across the state, we urge customer’s to use 911 for efficient
Emergency Call Handling. As such, we are taking steps to assist cal
lers in
making the shift from calling the Local / Long Distance Operator for 911
assistance to dialing 911 directly by putting a message on our upfront
announcements alerting the customer “if this is an emergency. Please hang
up and dial 911.”

No
.

91

1.4.2.5.4
(Addendum 2)

Bidder and the industry are phasing out this live operator service (for instance,
see attached announcement from similar OS provider). Would the State
consider removing the requirement for this live operator services? Within the
last

5 years, calls of this type have dramatically declined. In 2008, we handled
a combined total of 44,353 Busy Line Verify/Interrupt calls in the U.S. In 2012,
we handled a combined total of 4,924 Busy Line Verify/Interrupt


an 89%
reduction in calls. With
the advent of cell phones, most callers will try a mobile
or other alternate number if unable to reach them on their primary landline.

No
.

92

1.4.2.5.4
(Addendum 2)

Bidder and the industry are phasing out this live operator service (for instance,
see atta
ched announcement from similar OS provider). Would the State
consider removing the requirement for this live operator services? Within the
last 5 years, calls of this type have dramatically declined. In 2008, we handled
a combined total of 44,353 Busy Line

Verify/Interrupt calls in the U.S. In 2012,
we handled a combined total of 4,924 Busy Line Verify/Interrupt


an 89%
reduction in calls. With the advent of cell phones, most callers will try a mobile
or other alternate number if unable to reach them on th
eir primary landline.

No
.

93

1.4.2.5.5
(Addendum 2)

Bidder and the industry are phasing out live operator directory assistance.
Would the State consider removing the portions of this requirement for (A) live
operator services, (B) reverse directory
assistance, and (C) requirements for
name, address, and zip code information? Note that many free, web
-
based
services provide this information and the State has directed users to these
services in past published notifications. Directory Assistance will rem
ain
available via a fully automated platform.

A
-

C) No
.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
19

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

94

1.4.2.5.
(Addendum 2)

Bidder and the industry are phasing out live operator assistance (for instance,
see attached announcement from similar OS provider). Would the State
consider removing the
requirement for live operator services? Domestic and
International call completion will remain available via our fully automated
platform. The options to bill to a calling card or commercial credit card will still
be available.

No
.

95

1.2.2.4

1.2.2.4

MPLS REQUIRED GEOGRAPHIC SERVICE AREAS

The Contractor shall provide MPLS services in all Incumbent Local Exchange
Carrier (ILEC) territories open to competition as defined by the California
Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).


We were specifically asked
which areas we could serve in Phase 1 in which
case our response did not correlate to all CPUC ILEC territories.

We do not
want to be disqualified by this type of Geographic Availability question so we
would request that this question be taken out or amen
ded to reflect our
response to the geographic availability questions for the various service
categories in phase 1.


Refer to Addendum #2.

96

1.6.3.2.2.1

Bidder shall provide ISDN BRI service to End
-
Users throughout the
Contractor’s service area within Ca
lifornia. Bidder shall provide a list of cities
covered by the Contractor’s service area within California and a coverage
map of California. Bidder must provide service in at least one (1) city. We do
not want to be disqualified from Category 1.6 as we do
not offer BRI services
so we would request that this question be amended or taken out so that we
could compete for the remainder of the service areas under Category 1.6.

Refer to IFB
S
ection 2.4, Bidding Rules.



97

Data
Dictionary

Please define the
following data fields as they are not found in either the Data
Dictionary or Glossary:

• Customer Service Location (A)

• Customer Service Location (Z)

• Order #/Order Number

• Order Date

• Order Type

To be addressed in a future a
ddendum.

98

Data
Dictionar
y

Restore Time: field’s Data Type is noted as “Text”, we believe the Data Type
to be a typo and should be “Time” like [Ticket Open Time]


please confirm

To be addressed in a future addendum.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
20

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

99

Data
Dictionary

Ticket Close Time: field’s Data Type is
noted as “Text”, we believe the Data
Type to be a typo and should be “Time” like [Ticket Open Time]


please
confirm

To be addressed in a future addendum.

100

Data
Dictionary

BTN: maximum field size is listed as 20, current CALNET 2 services have
BTNs
greater than 20 characters in length


Would the State please
reconsider field length to support existing BTN’s?

No.

101

A.9.5

The three SLA reports listed in this section do not include Customer Code, it is
our recommendation this data field be included
for improved data
manipulation/review.

The State has defined its requirements.

102

A.9.6

The two project reports listed in this section do not include Customer Code, it
is our recommendation this data field be included for improved data
manipulation/review.

The State has defined its requirements.

103

A.9.6

Please confirm data field “SOW Date” as found in the required data fields for
both project reports is the same as data field “Scope of Work Date” defined in
the Data Dictionary


if
not, please define “SOW Date”.

To be addressed in a future addendum.

104

A.9.6.2

The format of data field “Project Mgr. Contract #” as defined in the Data
Dictionary (999
-
999
-
9999) is not consistent with Requirement A.8
-
12 “…shall
convert all telephone nu
mbers to a 10 character field and strip all non
-
numeric
data…”


please advise

Refer to Addendum #2.






105

1.2.2.7

Can the State please provide the following:

• Number of sites

• Bandwidth allocation per site

• Applications used

• Will the VSAT’s be
used as Primary or backup

This requirement is a capability, not a
requirement to design and price a
particular satellite solution.



CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
21

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

106

3.4.2.5

Section 3.4.2.5 SOW mandatory Business and Technical Requirements:
“Where no description is allowed or
requested the Bidder must meet the
requirement exactly as stated without deviation.”

If a question is answered “yes” or “no” but requires additional clarification
regarding our capabilities, can we include an attachment with that
information? This question

applies when we are not provided with the
following response option:

Bidder understands the requirement in Section 1.4.2.6 and shall meet or
exceed it? Yes_____ No_____

Reference:
document______________________________________________

location____________
__________ page______ paragraph______

Description:

No.

107

Q&A

When does the State anticipate responding to questions? As the timeline
stands, Draft Bids are due on February 21, 2013. Will this timeline be
extended if the State requires lengthy time to
respond to questions?

Refer to Addendum #2
.

108

3.4.2.7

Part 1


General Instructions, 3.4.2.7 : Where is SOW Catalog A (without
costs)? The State indicated that an addendum will be issued with the Catalog
format to be completed with Draft Bid; however
this document has not been
released.

Refer to Addendum #2.




CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
22

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

109

3.2

Section 3.2 Draft Bids, Part 1


General Instructions, “Draft Bids should be
identical to the Final Bid identified below in IFB Section 3.4, Final Bids, except
that Volume 3, Cost
Information, should not be included.

Any product
supporting literature containing costs or rates, (such as catalogs, maintenance
service rates, etc.), submitted as part of the Draft Bid should have all cost
figures replaced with “XXX”, or otherwise obscur
ed. Bidders are strongly
cautioned that each Draft Bid should contain the Bidder’s complete SOW
Catalog A as described in Section 3.4.2.7, SOW Catalog A (without
costs).

The State expects to confirm Catalog A descriptions with the Bidder
following the Sta
te’s review of the Bidder’s Draft Bid.

If the State is not able to
confirm these descriptions, the Bidder’s Catalog A in its Final Bid will likely be
found to be non
-
compliant and possibly result in bid
-
rejection.”


A) Can the State further define its exp
ectations in a Draft Bid response?

B) Is it expected that vendor’s final responses are exactly identical to those in
the draft bid, with the exception of items flagged by the State for additional
information/clarification/correction?

C) If in developing
our Final Bid, we determine we are able to provide services
for an area not responded to within our Draft Bid, may we then bid on those
items?

D) Is the converse also true: if we determine we are unable to provide
services originally bid in our Draft Bid,

may we remove them from our Final
Bid?

E) Please further define what must be “identical” in both draft and final bids?

F)
Per Attachment 2


Competitive Bidding and Bid Responsiveness, #6, bids
cannot be changed after the time designated for receipt and

opening thereof.
Does this apply strictly to Final Bids.

A)

The Draft Bid provides the State an
opportunity to review the IFB
response and identify areas which
may cause the Final Bid to be
rejected as nonresponsive and
provides an opportunity for each
Bidde
r to correct problem areas.

B)

The language provided in Section
3.2, Draft Bids will be modified in a
future Addendum.

C)

Yes.

D)

Yes.

E)

See response

to
B
)
.

F)

Your interpretation of Attachment 2 is
correct.

110

Bid Sync

www.bidsync.com lists the “time ends” for the
bid as December 28, 2013. Per
2.2 Key Action Dates of Part 1


General Instructions, the final bid is due June
10, 2013. Please clarify the final bid due date.

The "time ends" date has no relation to
when Bids are due. The dates as
provided in Section 2.2,

Key Action
Dates are the official procurement
related dates.

111

T&C

When will responses to requests for Changes to Special Terms and
Conditions be delivered?

When the State's review is complete.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
23

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

112

a.2.4.4.2

SOW Business Requirements, A.2.4.4.2 U.S.
Citizen Access Restriction

Will the State accept a provider who cannot provide only U.S. Citizen Access
to services, the network, network equipment directly or indirectly associated
with any service proposed?

No
.

113

SLAs

Regarding Technical Service Level

Agreements presented in Subcategories
1.1
-
1.4: Will the State consider any alternative SLAs? Will the State consider
bidder’s SLA definitions, objectives, metrics, remedies, etc. in any form or are
all pieces mandatory requirements?

Refer to IFB section 2
.4.2, Identification
and Classification of IFB Requirements.

114

1.1.2.2

Section 1.1.2.2 Carrier DS0 Service

-


If vendor does not offer DS0, can vendor proceed?

See IFB section 2.4, Bidding Rules.



115

1.1.2.3.1

Section 1.1.2.3.1 DS1 Functionality &

1.1.2.4.1 DS3 Functionality



#4 Packet Delivery

Will the State accept that for TDM/SONET (Transport) services, Packet
Delivery is not an industry standard performance measurement?

Bit Error
Ratio (BER) is the acceptable performance standard for TDM/SO
NET
service.

Vendor uses Bit Error Ratio as a performance objective with the
understanding that the service has an SLA only for availability.

So if the
service is taking errors in a sufficient amount the service will be deemed as
having an outage.

Refer

to IFB section 2.4.2, Identification
and Classification of IFB Requirements.


116

1.1.2.3.2 and
1.1.2.4.2

Section 1.1.2.3.2 DS1 Geographic Availability & 1.1.2.4.2 DS3 Geographic
Availability

Vendor is not in every city in California. Will the State
accept that one end of
the DS1 or DS3 service must originate or terminate in a Vendor Market/City?

No
.

117

1.1.4 SLA

4. 1.1.4
-

SLA

Vendor only offers an SLA for an outage/Service Availability.

Will the State
accept?

No.

118

1.1.2.5.3

Table 1.1.2.5.3a
ISDN PRI Configurations and Features

Can the State please verify that you are asking for standard ISDN
-
PRI
services to be provisioned from the Carrier’s Voice Switch to an end
-
user
address with standard ISDN protocols and not a point
-
point T
-
1 transport
be
tween two end
-
user locations in which case the customer’s CPE PBXs are
in control of provisioning it as a PRI (not the carrier)?

The service shall be a Carrier network
based service provisioned from the
Carriers voice switch.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
24

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

119

1.2.2

Section 1.2.2,
Table 1.2.2 MPLS Service Functionality

In Item 7a, please explain what is meant by Port Only Configuration.

The service does not include an access
circuit or router.

The port exists at the
provider edge.

120

1.2.2.2

Table 1.2.2.2 MPLS WAN VPN Standards

A) In Items 1


7, will the State provide a detailed list of the RFC’s of specific
interest that you desire be met?

B) What technologies are these RFCs applied to?

A)

No.


B)

The specific area of applicability has
been identified in the table.

121

1.2.2.2

Table 1.2.2.2

Please define:

-

IETF MPLS Working Group Standards Track RFCs

-

IETF Layer 3 VPN Working Group Standards Track RFCs

The definitions can be found at the IETF.

122

1.2.2.2

Section

1.2.2.2
-

MPLS WAN VPN STANDARDS

If Vendor is unable to meet
requirements at this time but can do so in the
future, will vendor be disqualified?

See IFB section 2.4, Bidding Rules.


123

1.2.2.3

Section 1.2.2.3 MPLS Performance Metrics

1. Service availability shall be 99.9% measured port to port

2. MPLS shall have a

packet loss of <0.2% measured port to port.

For the two items above, will the state accept a network average instead of
port to port?

No
.


124

1.2.2.7

Section 1.2.2.7 MPLS TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS

Table 1.2.2.7, MPLS Technical Requirements

A) In Item 12,
will the State provide a list of the specific Layer 2 access
protocols you wish to be supported?

B) How does Item 12 differ from Item 24?

A)

The requirement requires the Bidder
to describe the Layer 2 access
protocols that are suppor
ted by the
Bidder's solution.

B)

To be addressed in a future
addendum.

125

Table 1.2.2.7

Table 1.2.2.7

A)

Please clarify if the State is looking for Multi
-
VRF for items 4, 13 and
21?

B)

If yes and vendor does not currently provide but will in the future, will
the State allow vendor to proceed?

A)

Item 4:

No
,
Item 13:

Yes
,
Item 21
:
Yes.

B)

See IFB Section 2.4, Bidding Rules
.


CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
25

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

126

Table 1.2.2.7

Table 1.2.2.7 #7: Contractor shall provide a remote access service that allows
an off
-
net Customer location

access to any
on
-
net Customer site contained
within the same VPN. The solution may utilize the public Internet.

Please clarify what is meant by this requirement.

This is commonly known as a Small
Office Home Office (SOHO) solution,
whereby a customer teleworker can
util
ize the public internet to connect to
the customer MPLS VPN to reach
customer resources attached to that
same MPLS VPN.

127

Table 1.2.2.7

Table 1.2.2.7 #9: The MPLS WAN VPN service shall support controlled and
monitored connections between the MPLS network and the public Internet via
a hardened trusted managed firewall.

If vendor is unable to support this requirement at this time, will the
State allow
vendor to proceed?

See IFB S
ection 2.4, Bidding Rules.

128

Table 1.2.2.7

Table 1.2.2.7#12: Contractor shall provide support for multiple Layer 2 access
protocols

Please provide clarification as to what is required by this item.

The requirement

is to support more than
one Layer 2 protocol, not a specific
Layer 2 protocol.

129

Table 1.2.2.7

Table 1.2.2.7#18 Bidders shall describe here the dial backup capability
supported by the Contractor’s solution:

#19 The MPLS WAN VPN service shall support IP Multicasting

If Vendor does not support multicasting, is vendor allowed to proceed?

See IFB S
ection 2.4, Bidding Rules.

130

Table 1.2.2.7

Table 1.2.2.7 # 22: The MPLS WAN VPN service shall support access spee
ds
from 56 Kbps to 10 Gbps.

Vendor requires a minimum of 1.5 Mbps.

Will the State accept this minimum
bandwidth requirement?

See IFB S
ection 2.4, Bidding Rules.

131

1.2.2.8.1

Table 1.2.2.8.1.a #1: MPLS Transport DS0 Port service at minimum line rate
of 56 Kbps.

If Vendor’s minimum speed is 1.5 Mbps, will state allow vendor to proceed?

See IFB S
ection 2.4, Bidding Rules.

132

Table 1.2.2.8.4

Table 1.2.2.8.4.a #2: MPLS port,
access and router on
-
net Transport service
at minimum line rate of 625 Mbps (OC12).

Vendor cannot provide a managed router for OC12 or OC48, can vendor
proceed?

See IFB S
ection 2.4, Bidding Rules.

133

Table 1.2.2.8.5

Table 1.2.2.8.5.a #3: MPLS port,
access and router off
-
net Transport service
at minimum line rate of 2.5 Gbps (OC48).

Vendor cannot provide a managed router for OC48, can vendor proceed?

See IFB S
ection 2.4, Bidding Rules.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
26

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

134

Table 1.2.2.8.5

Table 1.2.2.8.5.a #4: MPLS port, access and
router off
-
net Transport service
at minimum line rate of 10 Gbps (OC192).

Vendor cannot provide a managed router for OC192, can vendor proceed?

See IFB S
ection 2.4, Bidding Rules.

135

1.4.2.3.1

Section 1.4.2.3.1 10
-
Digit/14
-
Digit Restriction

Can the State

please provide a definition for “universal range privileges”
and/or provide an example to describe the exact requirement?

Please
provide detail surrounding different ranges (i.e.


Range 1). What is the
expectation surrounding international calling?

To b
e addressed in a future addendum.





136

1.4.2.3.1

Section 1.4.2.3.1
-

10
-
Digit/14
-
Digit Restriction

How many numbers (range of numbers) does the State have in each of the
“Blocked” screening groups?

The numbers (range of numbers) in each
of the blocked
screening groups is not a
defined requirement.

137

1.4.2.2.2

Section 1.4.2.2.2.a Off
-
Net Overflow on Terminating Busy

Please clarify the meaning of this requirement. Is the State looking for
switched access to send calls when all dedicated channels are
busy?

Yes
.

138

1.4.2.3.4.2

Section 1.4.2.3.4.2

Service Management System

Can the State define “flexible routing configurations”?

To be addressed in a future addendum.

139

1.4.12.3.4.2

Section 1.4.2.3.4.2
-

Service Management System

What are the exact
requirements for a usage report?

To be addressed in a future addendum.

140

1.4.12.3.4.2
new
1.4.2.3.4.2

Section 1.4.2.3.4.2
-

Service Management System

If a carrier’s invoice provides calling detail and itemized usage by
authorization code, will that fit
the requirement?

Calling detail and itemized usage
provided by means of the invoice is
ac
ceptable specifically for the "
usage
reports" portion of this requirement only.

141

1.4.2.3.6

Section 1.4.2.3.6.b.


Per the request: “Bidders shall indicate in Table

1.4.2.3.6.b each of the
additional countries where Contractor provides commercially available Long
Distance service.

Bidders shall list the product identifier for each country
where the Contractor provides long distance service. By listing the product
id
entifier, the Bidder commits to provide service in that specific country.”


Can the State please clarify if you are requesting information regarding a
provider’s ability to offer services to customers within these countries OR if
this is in reference to a
Domestic LD customer calling into these countries?

This is the per minute service/charge for
a domestic caller calling into the listed
country.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
27

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

142

Table 1.4.2.6

Table 1.4.2.6 Audio Conferencing Features

If provider is unable to meet requirements listed
in items 9 and 10, specifically
transcription service and real
-
time interpretation and translation services, can
we still bid this section?

See IFB S
ection 2.4, Bidding Rules.




143

1.4.2.3.5
1.4.2.3.6

Tables 1.4.2.3.5, 1.4.2.3.6a, and 1.4.2.3.6b

Please
explain or provide a definition for “Bidders Product Identifier”?

What
exactly should a bidder be placing in this column?

A unique identifier for the product,
service or feature.

144

Exhibit 2

Exhibit 2


Requires that personnel provide a signed
Confidentiality Statement
to the “representative listed below.”

Would that be a representative at bidder’s
company, or a CA governmental person?

The "representative listed below" refers
to the Bidder's company representative.

145

1.2.2.7

1.2.2.7 MPLS
Technical Requirements
-

Requirement 16 and 17


Port and
POP diversity options. The State asks for MPLS network Port and POP
diversity options, yet there are no pricing elements for these options. These
diversity options normally require additional charges

depending on port speed,
due to the inherent network costs of providing the diversity.

Was this an
oversight?

No, as the requirement refers to
capability.

Refer to IFB
S
ection 3.4.2.9,
Cost Information, paragraph E.



146

1.3.5.8.2 SLA

1.3.5.8.2: More details are required on how a CAT 1 outage is declared.

The
SOW refers to failure of two or more services types



A1) Does this mean 50 or more users are impacted by failure of two services,
or A2) could it be a single user/smaller group
of users impacted by failure of
two services?


B) On the CAT 1 restore time, if you have a group of 25 standard users and
25 premier users that are impacted, is the restore time for all now one hour?


C) Or how does that get measured?

D) Or would all st
andard users be on a separate system from the premier
users?

A)

A1) No.

A2) Yes
.

B)

Refer to 1.3.5.4 Bidder Response to
Service Level Agreements
.

C)

Please cla
rify this question and
resubmit.

D)

Please clarify this question and
resubmit
.

147

1.3.5.8.2 SLA

1.3.5.8.2:
On the Remedy/Penalty amount


for clarification purposes, is the
following example correct?

50 users were out of service and the Bidder
missed the SLA restore time.

The Bidder will pay penalties on the 50 users
TMRC for the month.

If each user charge i
s $10, then the Bidder would be
provided remedy of $500 (50 x $10) for a missed SLA?

Please clarify this question and resubmit
.



CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
28

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

148

1.3.5.8.5 SLA

1.3.5.8.5:

A) Is this related to MOS scores


jitter/packet loss?


B) If so, then the Bidder can monitor
and create events and notifications when
network issues are detected.

These loops are typically not under the control
of the Bidder, but the Bidder can notify the customer or vendor of the issues
as detected.

A)

No
.

B)

Not applicable.

149

1.3.5.8.6 SLA

1.3.5.8.6: The State of California is already requesting remedies if the Bidder
fails to meet the restore times.

Are the penalties in this section in addition to
the penalties for restore reflected in the SOW Technical Requirements
document/Section 3 SLA
Submittals
-

1.3.5.8.2; 1.3.5.8.3; and 1.3.5.8.4?

Refer to 1.3.5.6 #2.

150

1.3.5.8.7 SLA

1.3.5.8.7: How is this different than 1.3.5.8.5?

The Bidder is already
measuring VoIP delay per 1.3.5.8.5 and jitter would potentially be a result of
that delay.

The

State requires both metrics for the
SLAs.


151

1.3.5.8.8 SLA

1.3.5.8.8: If there is a natural disaster or threat, typically the customer would
monitor and know of the impending event.

Is this meant to request if the
Bidder detects an outage to notify th
e customer regardless of what the event
was?

If there is an event that impacts the Bidder's ability to deliver service,
we would notify customer of the issue, and the steps we would take to
mitigate that issue.

No. Refer to A.3.2, Network Outage
Response.

152

1.3.5.8.9 SLA

1.3.5.8.9:

How is this different than 1.3.5.8.5?

The Bidder is already
measuring VoIP delay per 1.3.5.8.5 and jitter would potentially be a result of
that delay.

See response to Question 150
.

153

1.2.5.8.11 SLA

1.2.5.8.11:

A) Is
this actually restore time or is it meant to be resolution time?

Resolution
to the Bidder means that the incident is completed and no other actions are
necessary.


B) In those cases where the service is restored, there are times when the
closing actions
take time to complete


such as changing out hardware or
loading a patch.

Would those examples be included in this measure and need
to be completed within 4
-
6 hours?

A)

This SLA is based on Unavailable
Time as defined in the glossary.

B)

This SLA is based on
Unavailable
Time as defined in the glossary.

154

2.3.23

Will the State of California agree to work with the Bidder to fully communicate
and remediate the issue(s) or after mutual agreement that the service failed to
transition properly and was not
recoverable, the parties would agree to
discuss alternatives?

No, refer to 2.3.23, second paragraph.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
29

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

155

A.5.1.1 #6

A) A.5.1.1 #6: When the Statement of Account is mentioned as a Component
of the Invoice itself, is this the same as the Statement of Accoun
t in
A.5.1.1.6?

B) Our understanding is that the Statement of Account referenced
in A.5.1.1.6 would be a separate document from the invoice.

Please provide
clarification.

A)

Yes.

B)

The Statement of Account shall be
included with the invoice, identifying
account history.

156

A.5.1.1.2

A.5.1.1.2 #10: Can you advise what is meant by SR Number?

Service Request (SR) is defined in the
Statement of Work, Appendix A
-

Glossary.

157

A8

The Bidder has reviewed this section and it appears to be directed towards a
Network Vendor.

Can you advise if there is any portion of this section that the
Bidder should respond to?

Refer to 2.4, Bidding Rules.




158

A.9

We need more detail around the difference between Public and Private
Access.

Our current assumption is that

a private access link would be used
by specific State of California personnel and the Bidder's Personnel that will
have the responsibility of managing the services being provided.

Public
Access implies a much broader access base.

What are some examples
of
personnel that would be utilizing public access beyond our assumption of
private access?

Any person with Internet access.

159

A.9

In Section A.9,

A) does the State of California have a mandatory format for the reporting
information, or

B) can the
Bidder provide our own format as long as the mandatory
information is still provided?

A)

Yes. Refer to A.9.5 Service Level
Agreement (SLA) Reports and A.9.6
Contracted Service Project Work

Reports

for report format.

B)

No
.

160

A.10.1.3

A.10.1.3: Will the State

of California agree to discuss the nature of the failure
and work with the Bidder in order to remediate the issue(s) and if, after mutual
agreement it is determined that the service failed and was not recoverable,
the parties would agree to discuss altern
atives?

Refer to PMAC General Provisions
-

Telecommunications, section 45,
Continuing Standards of Performance for
Contractor Services
.

161

2.1

A) Can we do a no
-
bid on individual bid requests?


B) If a local entity requests a bid and it isn’t cost effec
tive for us to bid on it,
can we decline or not respond.


C) If so, does it affect our total number of no
-
bids for the over
-
all contract?


D) Are local entities counted differently than State entities with this regards?

A
-

D) The State needs clarificati
on of
the questions in order to provide an
answer.

Please resubmit the question.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
30

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

162

2.3.4

“…assign financial documents to a third
-
party without prior written approval by
the State, and an amendment to the resulting Contract.”

Please clarify this
statement. We need further clarification as to which
financial documents the State is referring to.

Any document which changes or
modifies the financial responsibility of the
Contractor. This may include
, but it is not
limited to
:

1. Change in ownership

2.

Name change

3.Change in insurance coverage

4. Assignment of payment

163

2.3.13

We need further clarification as to what “normal industry practices” the State is
referring to. Please clarify this statement.

Refer to the codes cited in 2.3.13.

164

2.4.5

Can the State identify sites to survey now?

Or when will there be a future
Discovery Process and Opportunity before final bidding?

Site surveys will be made during Phase
3 as requested by Customers.


165

3.4.2.6

Please provide an example of an
“unsolicited” item for clarification.

Refer to IFB section 3.4.2.6, Unsolicited
Offerings
.

166

3.4.2.7

Please provide the Catalog Format for bidders or date when it will be
available.

Refer to Addendum #2.

167

3.4.2.9

If the customer is moving from a
legacy product to a new product, do they
expect the new product to be the equivalent price of a legacy product? For
example: FR to MPLS?

The State cannot determine the
Customers' expectations.

168

4.2.5.3

Please clarify whether this applies to Equipment,
Services, or Transport?

Unsolicited items are as offered by the
Bidder per IFB Section 3.4.2.6.

169

A.2.5.4

Will the State consider adding language to this requirement providing vendors
with 30 days to disconnect service?

Please refer to Section 2.4,
Bidding
Rules
.

170

A.4.3.1

A) Can the State provide additional details regarding the secure file transfer
process?


B) Will the vendor be required to purchase additional software or licenses?

A)

To be add
ressed in a future
addendum.

B)

No.

171

Attach 5 & 6

Do the amount of services represented in these CALNET 2 attachments
account for services for the 200 State agencies only or do they include
services for the 1,675 non
-
state agencies as well?

All CALNET customers are included.

172

1.2.8.3

Will the State pr
ovide the items 1
-
5 that do not fall under special construction?

Yes.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
31

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

173

1.2.9.8.1.1

Would the state consider different committed interval calendar days based on
access bandwidth requirements?

For instance, 70 business days for
managed Ethernet orders
(1.2.2.8.6; 1.2.2.8.7) and a 50 business days for
managed DS3 Broad Band services and a 70+ business days for managed
OCN circuits taken on a case by case basis?

Please refer to

S
ection 2.4, Bidding
Rules
.

174

1.2.2.8.1, 2, 3,
4 and 6

Bidder will require
addresses for the given speeds to provide costs.


A) When will addresses be provided?


B) Further, please explain what is meant by “Product Identifier”?


C) How is Product Identifier different form “Catalog Code”?

D) For “Model One Time Qty”


is tha
t in reference to the number of circuits
installed per month?


E) Is it meant that the number of circuits does not match the model recurring
qty.

A)

Add
resses will not be provided.

B)

Refer to Question 143.

C)

Refer to IFB section 3.4.2.5, SOW
Mandatory Business
and Technical
Requirements.

D)

No.

It is in direct reference to the
cost model used f
or evaluation
purposes only.

E)

Yes.

175

1.2.2.8.1, 2, 3,
4 and 6

A) Do the line items listed under “unsolicited MPLS Port Transport Speeds”
refer to the line items listed in
section 1.2.2.8.1.a?


B) What is meant by unit of measure in section 1.2.2.8.1b? Is that the quantity
of product or service?

A)

Each Mandatory requirement has its
own Unsolicited table (b).

B)

Refer to Tables (a), column "H" (Unit
of Measure) for examples.

176

1.2.2.8.5 & 7

One time and monthly recurring costs are listed as ICB. Is cost needed for
those columns?

No.

177

Cost
Worksheets
-

all

Can we provide text comments at the bottom of the workbook for fully explain
our offerings and pricing structures? If
so, can a new workbook be provided
with a section at the bottom for notes or can we have a password to unlock
the workbook and add notes?

For example


We may need to provide name and nomenclature of the

router
being proposed.

The bidder has an opportunit
y to provide
descriptions within the SOW Technical
Requirements document and Catalog A.

178

A.9.1

Please provide details of this required website. Such a website may require
intensive development and cost for limited purpose and it’s important to
understa
nd in detail the scope of work and LOE needed. In some cases, an
URL to an existing website may provide needed data or information needed
rather than creating a new site.

To be addressed in a future addendum.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
32

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

179

IFB 4.2.4.1,
4.2.4.4 &
3.4.2.5

Most
requirements in the Subcategories are Mandatory, and per Section
4.2.4.1, Bidders will be disqualified for not complying with all Mandatory
requirements.

Section 4.2.4.1 states that a bidder will receive a score of 1500 points per
Subcategory for 100% “Yes
” compliant responses for all requirements.

We
understand the intention of the State is to have multiple PMAC contractors
qualify as Category Contractors so the State receives broader vendor
participation and competitive pricing for next generation teleco
mmunication
services.

The current requirement that all features and services be mandatory
has the effect of limiting competition and stifling innovation by either requiring
offerors to invest in last generation features and services or to No Bid entire
su
bcategories.

This is contrary to the State’s vision which is to provide “more
customer choices and the capability to obtain and rapidly deploy new
technologies”.


In Phase 1, the State indicated that “CALNET 3 and other
Telecommunications contracts will

address the wide variety of State and local
government business and technical requirements in the context of the States
vision. In addition, the procurement process will ensure smooth transition or
migration to the awarded contracts, provide for continuou
s modernization of
the infrastructure, and rapid deployment of new technologies to meet the
State’s ever
-
increasing telecommunications demands.

.

Consistent with this procurement approach, we respectfully request the State
consider having Bidders offer t
hose services and features where offered by
the Bidder commercially.

This ensures offerors have an incentive to
participate where it makes financial sense to do so and provides

for a more
robust competitive Subcategory bidding during

Phase 3 when Orders

are
actua
lly placed by the agency.



We request the State amend Section 4.2.4 of

the IFB to states “Bidders are
required to bid those services and features where Bidder currently

offers such
services commercially and

to certify where services and feat
ures are not
offered commercially.

The State will not change the
requirement.




























CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
33

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

180

1.2.3

The CALNET 3 RFQP specification for Subcategory 1.2 was defined as
“Network based MPLS data services where the switching equipment is owned
and maintained by the Contractor; Converged VoIP services where the end
user LAN is utilized and VoIP traffic is converged with data traffic via an MPLS
access circuit.” In the IFB, Subcategory 1.2 includes Mandatory (M)
requirements for items such as VoIP

Hardware, VoIP Software and VoIP
Handsets.


With respect to VOIP services, this offeror interprets Subcategory 1.2

to
mean the transport of VOIP traffic via an MPLS Access circuit.

However, the
State has included VOIP specific hardware, software and hea
dsets which
were not mentioned in the Phase 1 solicitation, are not required for transport
of VOIP traffic and which we believe are more appropriate for a Standalone
VOIP service ( Subcategory 1.3, Standalone ).

Will the State please amend
the solicitatio
n to remove the reference to hardware, software and handsets in
Subcategory 1.2?

No.

181

A.3.1 #5

Item #5 states that “Contractor shall provide notification to CALNET 3 CMO
within 30 minutes for significant and Catastrophic events and status every 60
minutes per Section A.3.2 (Network Outage Response).


What are the definitions of “significant” and “Catastrophic” events?

Refer to Definition of Notification SLA
Sections 1.1.4.8.6, 1.2.9.8.9, 1.3.5.8.8,
1.4.4.8.6, 1.5.4.7.6, 1.6.6.8.9 and
Section A.3.2 #
3.

182

A.3.2

What are the definitions of “Major” and “Catastrophic” network outages?

Refer to Definition of Catastrophic
Outages throughout the SOW SLA
sections and Section A.3.2 #3.

183

IFB 3.4.2.7

The IFB states “the State will provide via addendum
Bidders with the Catalog
format as a separate MS Word file for Bidders to complete and submit with
their Draft and Final Bids”


When will the State provide this Addendum?

The bidder will need adequate
time to fully complete the Catalog A requirements for
the SOW Subcategories
that we are bidding.

Refer to Addendum 2.







CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
34

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

184

A.4.1

In the Sections requiring data referenced in the requirements, some Data
Field Names and their corresponding Data Field Definitions, Data Types, and
Formats are missing from
the Data Dictionary (Appendix B).

For example:

A.8.1


Order Number, Order Date, Special Pricing

A.8.4


Invoice Date, Special Pricing

A.9.4.1 and A.9.5.1


Service

A.9.5.2


Order #, Order Type, Order Date

A.9.6.1


Order Number, Order Date, SOW Date, Se
rvice(s)

A.10.2.5 and A.10.2.7


Service


For “Special Pricing” referred to under A.8 #15, should Data Type and Data
Format be added to Data Dictionary as well?


Request the IFB Data Dictionary be amended to include all field data
definitions.

To be addre
ssed in a future addendum.

185

A.5.1

The IFB states that " Billing of all usage
-
based services (including local, long
distance and international) shall be for the first minute in whole and in six (6)
second increments or less thereafter.”


Would the State

be open to different usage
-
based billing increments for
domestic vs. international as long as the bidder clearly articulates the billing
increments in the pricing and service catalog?

This would be fiscally
advantageous to the State.

No.








186

A.5.1.1.2

IFB states that “SR Number” must be included on the NRC section of the bill.

A) Is the bidder required to provide the SR Number only for NRC charges?


B) Will the State require it for MRC billing?

C) Some services may not have NRC (install) char
ges to bill, is the SR
Number still required?

A)

No.

B)

Yes.

C)

To be addressed in a future
addendum.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
35

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

187

1.2.3.4.4,
1.2.3.5.b,
1.2.3.6.2

Using Section 1.2 as an example, the IFB refers in varying tables to “Bidder’s
Product Identifier”, “Bidder’s Unique
Identifier”, and “Bidder Identifier” in the
notated section tables and pages.

In table 1.2.3.6.2 in which a column is labeled “Bidder Identifier”, the
preceding paragraph has instructions that state: “Bidders shall list the product
identifier for each loca
tion where the Contractor provides Converged VoIP and
VoIP Voice Mail service. By listing the product identifier, the Bidder commits to
provide service in that specific location.” This shows them as possibly the
same identifier.


Will the State please prov
ide clarification that the three different references to
Bidder Product Identifier, Bidder Unique Identifier and Bidder Identifier are the
same or have different definitions?

And if same, will they please correct and
make changes via addendum?

If differe
nt, please clearly define?

To be addressed in a future addendum.

188

1.5.3.2, 1.5.3.3

Tables 1.5.3.2 and 1.5.3.3 under Section 1.5 require information about
services yet are not referenced in the Cost Sheets.

For example, other
sections such as 1.4 reque
st cost sheet information for Special
Construction.

However 1.5.3.3 for Special Construction is not referenced
anywhere under cost sheets for 1.5.


Will the State please amend the solicitation to add the appropriate Cost Sheet
tabs for the services refere
nced in Tables 1.5.3.2 and 1.5.3.3?

Refer to Addendum #2.








189

1.2.2.4 (and
similar in other
Subcategories)
, Attachments
5 & 6

The CALNET2 Service information was provided in IFB Attachments 5 and 6,
but the information was not complete.

To assist Bidders in providing the most
competitive Local Access pricing available, please provide a list of all existing
CALNET 2 service addr
esses and the related services that are installed at
each location.


A) Request that the State provide a current inventory of all services by Bidder
IDs and/or product feature name under CALNET 2, by specific location, e.g.
Street Address or NPA/ NXX.

Th
is is data that is included in the fiscal
management report provided by the current CALNET 2 vendors, without the
cost information.

This information will be provided on a
case
-
by
-
case basis by the customer in
Phase 3.


CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
36

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

190

IFB 2.2

Due to the extensive
amount of research to provide all required responses for
several subcategories, and because Bidders have not yet received SOW
Catalog A information from the State, we respectfully request a 5 week
extension of the Due Date for Draft Proposal, to March 28.

Refer to Addendum #2.

191

DD 6, 7, 34,
71, 74, 82, 89

Request that the State amend the Data Dictionary referenced SOW
Subcategory Section numbers to match to latest section numbers from the
Addendum 1 files.

Refer to Addendum #2.

192

IFB
Attachment 1

The

Bid Submission Checklist fails to mention the applicable SOW Technical
Requirements Response for each of the subcategories

Please amend the
solicitation to insert the SOW Technical requirements for each subcategory.

To be addressed in a future addendum.

193

IFB 3.4.2.5

Should the words “Contract Award” in Section 3.4.2.5 be changed to
“Subcategory Contract Award”?

Please Clarity

No.

194

A.5.8

A) Please provide a list of all the CA state, local and county and municipal
taxes and surcharges that the
State would be exempt from under this contract
award.

B) Please confirm this requirement is specific to the State of California taxes
and surcharges.

C) If yes, can the requirement be updated with clarification?

A)

No
.

B)

Additional information is available in
the Statement of Work, Appendix C,
Special Terms and Conditions
-
Telecommunications, section T,
Service Taxes, Fees, Surcharges,
and Surcredits.

C)

No
.

195

A.2.2.1

Before Performance Deficiency Charges should apply, Vendors should be
provided an adequate
opportunity to cure any alleged deficiency.

An objective
standard should be used to determine whether the deficiency was cured or
not.

Would the State please consider making the following change to “4.”?


From: “4.

If cure is unsatisfactory, State shall

invoice Contractor for the
Deficiency Charges detailed in Table A.2.2.1 (CPM Deficiencies and
Charges).”


To: "4.

If cure does not materially comply with contract requirements, State
shall invoice Contractor for the Deficiency Charges detailed in Table A
.2.2.1
(CPM Deficiencies and Charges).”

To be addressed in a future addendum.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
37

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

196

A.2.2.1


Table
A.2.2.1

Under “Deficiency” “1”, would the State consider clarifying that the State’s
requests must be in writing?



From: “1.

CPM’s failure to respond in w
riting within five (5) Business Days to
CALNET 3 Program Manager’s requests.”


To: “1.

CPM’s failure to respond in writing within five (5) Business Days to
CALNET 3 Program Manager’s written requests.”

To be addressed in a future addendum.







197

A.2.2.1


Table
A.2.2.1

Under “Deficiency” “3”, would the State consider clarifying that the vendor’s
obligation to provide written notice of regulatory changes is limited to material
changes?



From: “CPM fails to provide written notice to CALNET 3 CMO o
f regulatory
changes within 60 calendar days of effective date that impact the Provisioning
of Contract services and/or the administration of the Contract”.


To:

“CPM fails to provide written notice to CALNET 3 CMO of regulatory
changes within 60 calendar

days of effective date that materially impact the
Provisioning of Contract services and/or the administration of the Contract”.

No.

198

A.2.2.1


Table
A.2.2.1

Under “Deficiency” “5”, would the State consider clarifying that the CMO will
respond within
five (5) business days to vendor ICB Pricing requests or the
request will be deemed approved?

Vendors need a commitment from the
State to review such requests in a timely manner.



From: “Contractor fails to obtain CALNET 3 CMO approval prior to
implemen
tation of Individual Case Basis Pricing option.”


To: “Contractor fails to obtain CALNET 3 CMO approval prior to
implementation of Individual Case Basis Pricing option.

CMO agrees to
respond to any such request within five (5) working days or the request
will be
deemed approved by CMO.”

No.









CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
38

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

199

A.2.2.1


Table
A.2.2.1

Under “Deficiency” “6”, would the State consider clarifying that the CMO will
respond within five (5) business days to vendor IPR Pricing requests or the
request will be deemed
approved?

Vendors need a commitment from the
State to review such requests in a timely manner.



From: “Contractor fails to obtain CALNET 3 CMO approval prior to
implementation of Individual Pricing Reductions option.”


To: “Contractor fails to obtain CA
LNET 3 CMO approval prior to
implementation of Individual Pricing Reductions option.

CMO agrees to
respond to any such request within five (5) working days or the request will be
deemed approved by CMO.”

No.

200

A.2.2.1


Table
A.2.2.1

Under “Deficiency”

“10”, 30 days is an accelerated time line to interpret,
evaluate, render a business decision and notify the State of a potential new
regulatory fee.

Would the State consider extending the time frame to 60
days?


From: “Contractor fails to provide writte
n notice to CALNET 3 CMO within 30
calendar days ...”


To: “Contractor fails to provide written notice to CALNET 3 CMO within 60
calendar days …”

To be addressed in a future addendum.

201

A.2.2.1


Table
A.2.2.1

Under “Charges” “1”


“11”, the size of the

requested penalties is inconsistent
with the State’s asserted purpose being to simply identify and resolve
performance deficiencies.

Would the State consider more reasonable
charges of $250 per occurrence and $100 per week thereafter?

No.




202

A.2.5.4

Under “8”, would the State consider clarifying that “Customer Acceptance” is a
defined concept set forth in Section 21 of the RFQP 12
-
001 General
Provisions


Telecommunications.”

“8.

For moves, adds and changes, service billing shall commence upon the
d
ate of Customer Acceptance as defined in Section 21 of the RFQP 12
-
001
General Provisions


Telecommunications;”

No.






CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
39

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

203

A.2.5.4

Under “9”, would the State consider clarifying that a Customer cannot request
a retroactive disconnection date?

The
language as currently drafted would
allow such a result at the expense of the vendor.

Would the State consider
the following language?


From: “9. The Contractor shall not charge to delete (disconnect) a CALNET 3
Service. Charges for services shall cease o
n the Customer requested
disconnect date;”


“9. The Contractor shall not charge to delete (disconnect) a CALNET 3
Service. Charges for services shall cease on the Customer requested
disconnect date, provided that Customer has provided advance notice to
Con
tractor of the requested disconnection date;”

This will be addressed in a future
addendum.












204

A.5.4

In the second paragraph, would the State consider adding a reasonability
standard to the timeline for the resolution of billing disputes?

The
requirement
as written requires the resolution of disputes within 30 or 60 days.

It is not
reasonable to establish such a hard and fast timeline in an area where
everyone understands that not every dispute can be resolved in such a
timeline regardless of
how diligent the parties may act.



From: “The Contractor shall resolve billing disputes by issuing adjustments for
the full amount or provide acceptable evidence the disputed amount should
not be adjusted. The Contractor shall resolve billing disputes wi
thin the
following timeframes:"


To: “The Contractor shall resolve billing disputes by issuing adjustments for
the full amount or provide acceptable evidence the disputed amount should
not be adjusted. The Contractor shall exercise reasonable efforts to re
solve
billing disputes within the following timeframes:"

No
.
















CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
40

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

205

A.5.4

A.5.5

In the second paragraph, would the State consider clarifying the credit period
will be three years unless otherwise dictated by statute and the addition of a
reasonability standard for the timeline of posting credit adjustments?


From: “The Contractor shall provide Customer billing credits for up to three (3)
years from the time of invoice billing date for any invoicing errors requiring a
credit adjustment. The

Contractor shall issue credit adjustment within 30
-

60
calendar days of CALNET 3 CMO or Customer notification.


To: “Unless otherwise dictated by statute or regulation, the Contractor shall
provide Customer billing credits for up to three (3) years from
the time of
invoice billing date for any invoicing errors requiring a credit adjustment. The
Contractor shall exercise reasonable efforts to issue credit adjustment within
30
-

60 calendar days of CALNET 3 CMO or Customer notification."

No
.

206

A.5.9

Fraud represents an industry issue that can only be controlled through the
diligent efforts of vendors, customers and end users.

The language proposed
by the State places the entire burden for fraud on the vendor regardless of
whether the vendor has done
anything wrong or has been negligent or even
has any control over the situation.

For example, where a customer is in
control of the access or entry point for the fraudulent activity and/or fails to
take timely industry standard steps to stop an ongoing fr
aud, it is not fair for
the vendor to be financially responsible for the services.

Even worse, such a
structure places no accountability on customers and end users who, like it or
not, can either aid in the prevention of fraud or be a facilitator of it.

Would the
State consider clarifying that responsibility for fraud cannot be preset in the
abstract but must be based on the specific facts underlying each event?



From: “CALNET 3 Customers will not be responsible for costs of services
associated with any

fraudulent activity.”


To: "Responsibility for costs of services associated with any fraudulent activity
will be determined on a case
-
by
-
case basis consistent with the terms of the
final contract.”

No.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
41

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

207

A.7.1

Under “3”, would the State consider clarif
ying that the CMO will respond within
five (5) business days to vendor IPR requests or the request will be deemed
approved?

Vendors need a commitment from the State to review such
requests in a timely manner.



Proposed additional language: “CMO agrees t
o respond to any such request
within five (5) working days or the request will be deemed approved by CMO;”

No
.







208

A.7.2

Under “3”, would the State consider clarifying that the early cancellation of
service under a Standard IPR by a Non
-
State Entity

shall expose the Non
-
State Entity to an early termination charge that mirrors the charge for an early
termination of a Duration IPR and a Non
-
Exemption IPR?

In CALNET 2, the
existence of a term commitment with early termination penalties did not deter
no
n
-
state entities from utilizing the contract in record numbers.

Whether the
IFQ structure is a winner
-
take
-
all format as was CALNET 1 and CALNET 2, or
is a multi
-
vendor structure, a reasonable term commitment by customers is
essential to vendors being abl
e to offer its best pricing to the State.



From: "3.

Customer may cancel any or all service(s) subject to Standard IPR
without penalty; and,”


To: "3.

Customer may cancel any or all service(s) subject to Standard IPR
without penalty In the event that a

Non
-
State Entity elects to terminate
Service(s) subject to Standard IPR Pricing for reasons other than (1) a
Contractor default, or (2) circumstances outside such Customer’s reasonable
control, such Customer shall be liable to Contractor for an early term
ination
charge. This charge shall be calculated based on the following: a) fifty percent
(50%) of the Non
-
State Entity’s average monthly bill for the disconnected
Service(s), multiplied by the number of full months remaining in the term of the
IPR; and b a
ny unrecovered nonrecurring charges owed to contractor on the
date of termination; and,”

No
.

















CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
42

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

209

A.7.3

Under “6”, would the State consider modifying the early termination fee to a
reasonable industry standard amount?

In CALNET 2, the
existence of such a
reasonable industry standard fee did not deter non
-
state entities from utilizing
the contract in record numbers.

Where unique rates are being offered to a
Customer, such a fee is reasonable when a Customer elects to unilaterally
termin
ate a service and is essential to vendors being able to offer its best
pricing to the State.


From: “6.

In the event that a Customer elects to terminate Service(s) subject
to Duration IPR Pricing for reasons other than (1) a Contractor default, or (2)
cir
cumstances outside such Customer’s reasonable control, such Customer
shall be liable to Contractor for an early termination charge. This charge shall
be calculated based on the following: a) monthly difference in the original
contract rate and the Duration

IPR rate multiplied by the number of months
the service was used under the Standard IPR; b) 10% of the original Contract
Rate multiplied by the number of months used under the Duration IPR ; and c)
any unrecovered nonrecurring charges owed to contractor o
n the date of
termination.”


To: “6.

In the event that a Customer elects to terminate Service(s) subject to
Duration IPR Pricing for reasons other than (1) a Contractor default, or (2)
circumstances outside such Customer’s reasonable control, such Custome
r
shall be liable to Contractor for an early termination charge. This charge shall
be calculated based on the following: a) fifty percent (50%) of the Non
-
State
Entity’s average monthly bill for the disconnected Service(s), multiplied by the
number of full

months remaining in the term of the IPR; and b) any
unrecovered nonrecurring charges owed to contractor on the date of
termination.”

No
.




























CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
43

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

210

A.7.4

Under “2”, would the State consider removing its proposed right to select the
qualified vendors who can respond to a Non
-
Exemption IPR Request?

In a
multi
-
vendor environment, the State should exercise no such control over
which vendors can bid and which cannot bid.

Each vendor has already been
qualified and selected by the State t
o provide the requested service.

In the
spirit of fair and open competition, allowing the State to exercise any
additional control can lead to assertions of partisanship on the part of the
State that have no place in a public procurement process.

Whateve
r the
number of vendors that compete in the Non
-
Exemption IPR, that
determination should be made by the underlying Customer and the qualified
vendors.



Delete: “2.

...Contractors may be selected at the discretion of the Customer or
under the direction
of the CALNET 3 CMO;”

No
.








CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
44

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

211

A.7.4

Under “6”, would the State consider modifying the early termination fee to a
reasonable industry standard amount?

In CALNET 2, the existence of such a
reasonable industry standard fee did not deter non
-
state
entities from utilizing
the contract in record numbers.

Where unique rates are being offered to a
Customer, such a fee is reasonable when a Customer elects to unilaterally
terminate a service and is essential to vendors being able to offer its best
pricin
g to the State.


From: “6. In the event that a Customer elects to terminate service(s) subject to
Non
-
Exemption IPR Pricing for reasons other than (1) a Contractor default, or
(2) circumstances outside such Customer’s reasonable control, such
Customer shal
l be liable to Contractor for an early termination charge. This
charge shall be calculated based on the following: a) monthly difference in the
original contract rate and the Non
-
Exemption IPR rate multiplied by the
number of months the service was used un
der the Non
-
Exemption IPR; b)
plus, 10% of the original Contract Rate multiplied by the number of months
used under the Non
-
Exemption IPR; and c) and any unrecovered Non
-
Recurring Charges owed to Contractor on the date of termination."


To: “6.

In the eve
nt that a Customer elects to terminate service(s) subject to
Non
-
Exemption IPR Pricing for reasons other than (1) a Contractor default, or
(2) circumstances outside such Customer’s reasonable control, such
Customer shall be liable to Contractor for an earl
y termination charge. This
charge shall be calculated based on the following: a) fifty percent (50%) of the
Non
-
State Entity’s average monthly bill for the disconnected Service(s),
multiplied by the number of full months remaining in the term of the IPR; a
nd
b) any unrecovered nonrecurring charges owed to Contractor on the date of
termination."

No
.




























CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
45

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

212

A.10.2.1

The fourth subparagraph gives the State the unbounded unilateral right to
modify Conversion Plans at its discretion.

Would the State consider clarifying
that any such modifications need to be reasonably agreed upon by the
parties?

Such open ended and absolute control by the State in an area as
complicated as conversion activities is not reasonable.


From: “The State re
serves the right to modify the Conversion Plans where it is
deemed in the best interest or benefit of the State or authorized Customers of
the Contract.”


To: “The State reserves the right to reasonably request modifications to the
Conversion Plans where i
t is deemed in the best interest or benefit of the
State or authorized Customers of the Contract and Contractor agrees to
review and discuss any such requests in good faith to reach a mutually
agreed upon solution.”

No
.

213

A.10.2.2

The concluding
paragraph makes a blanket statement that no additional costs
for Transition
-
In activities shall be charged to the Customer.

Would the State
consider clarifying that should a Customer make unique, out
-
of
-
scope, type
requests, a vendor has the right to char
ge for such activities?


From: “Incumbent Bidders shall confirm their understanding that no additional
costs shall be charged to the Customer for Transition of services.”


To: “Incumbent Bidders shall confirm their understanding that no additional
costs sh
all be charged to the Customer for Transition of services, provided
that unique services requested by a Customer will be priced as agreed upon
by the parties.”

No
.









CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
46

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

214

A.10.2.6

The second paragraph makes a blanket statement that no additional
costs for
Migration
-
Out activities shall be charged to the Customer.

Would the State
consider clarifying that should a Customer make unique, out
-
of
-
scope, type
requests (ex., weekend, after normal business hours, etc.), a vendor has the
right to charge fo
r such activities?


From: “Contractor shall implement the Migration
-
Out Plan and perform all
tasks identified in the Migration
-
Out plan in a timely manner to mitigate
disruption in CALNET 3 service from Contractor to the State or State’s
designee. Contract
or shall participate in meetings with the State and the
State’s alternate service provider(s) (e.g., CALNET 4) as reasonably required
by the State in planning for a conversion and implementing the Migration
-
Out
Plan. There shall be no additional cost to th
e State.”


To: “Contractor shall implement the Migration
-
Out Plan and perform all tasks
identified in the Migration
-
Out plan in a timely manner to mitigate disruption in
CALNET 3 service from Contractor to the State or State’s designee.
Contractor shall pa
rticipate in meetings with the State and the State’s
alternate service provider(s) (e.g., CALNET 4) as reasonably required by the
State in planning for a conversion and implementing the Migration
-
Out Plan.
There shall be no additional cost to the State, pr
ovided that unique services
requested by a Customer will be priced as agreed upon by the parties.”

No.



















CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
47

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

215

Attachment 4

The fifth paragraph of the ATO states that by executing the ATO, Customer
agrees to procure and Contractor agrees to
provide services pursuant to the
terms of the ATO and the Master CALNET 3 contract.

The commitment being
established by the proposed language, however, is nothing more than a
month to month commitment.

Obtaining best pricing from any vendor is
unlikely w
here there exists no meaningful term commitment for the services
being selected.

In CALNET 2, the existence of a reasonable industry
standard term and exclusivity commitment did not deter non
-
state entities
from utilizing the contract in record numbers.

These provisions are no less
important in a multi
-
vendor award structure where Customers can choose
their vendors, but still must make a reasonable commitment to that
vendor.

Bidder is recommending a very reasonable term of two years that will
allow a Cus
tomer to make an initial assessment of vendors and thereafter
have complete freedom at the end of two years to migrate to a different
vendor.

The Customer retains important flexibilities while vendors have the
opportunity to establish a fair pricing struc
ture.

We request that the State
consider the following language change:

From: “By executing this ATO, Non
-
State Entity agrees to subscribe to, and
Contractor agrees to provide Service(s), in accordance with the terms and
conditions of this ATO and the Con
tract. Upon execution of this ATO by Non
-
State Entity and Contractor, Contractor shall deliver this ATO to Otech/STND
for review and approval.”

To: “By executing this ATO, Non
-
State Entity agrees to subscribe to, and
Contractor agrees to provide Service(s)
, in accordance with the terms and
conditions of this ATO and the Contract.

With respect to Services ordered
under this ATO. Non
-
State Entity agrees to obtain such Services exclusively
through this Contract and this ATO for a two (2) year commitment perio
d
starting with the Effective Date of the ATO, provided that such commitment
does not extend beyond the Term of the Contract, including any extension
periods.

Upon expiration of the two (2) year period, Customer may add,
delete or change Services without

penalty or additional commitment periods
(unless a specific Service requires a term per the Contract).

Upon execution
of this ATO by Non
-
State Entity and Contractor, Contractor shall deliver this
ATO to Otech/STND for review and approval.”

Refer to Secti
on 2.4
,

Bidding Rules.

































CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
48

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

216

Attachment 4

The seventh paragraph of the ATO sets forth the Customer’s right to terminate
service on thirty (30) calendar
days’ notice
.

This language is consistent with a
Customer month
-
to
-
month

commitment for it imposes no early termination
penalty.

Obtaining best pricing from any vendor is unlikely where there exists
no meaningful term commitment for the services being selected.

In CALNET
2, the existence of a reasonable industry standard ter
m and early termination
penalty did not deter non
-
state entities from utilizing the contract in record
numbers.

These provisions are no less important in a multi
-
vendor award
structure where Customers can choose their vendors, but still must make a
reason
able commitment to that vendor.

The bidder is recommending a very
reasonable term of two years that will allow a Customer to make an initial
23assessment of vendors and thereafter have complete freedom at the end of
two years to migrate to a different ven
dor.

The Customer retains important
flexibilities while vendors have the opportunity to establish a fair pricing
structure.

We request that the State consider the following language change:


From: “Non
-
State Entity may terminate this ATO, for specific Se
rvice(s) or in
total, prior to termination of the Contract, by providing the Contractor with
thirty (30) calendar days’ of written notice of cancellation.”


To: “Non
-
State Entity may terminate this ATO, for specific Service(s) or in
total, prior to termina
tion of the Contract, by providing the Contractor with
thirty (30) calendar days’ of written notice of cancellation. This ATO shall not
exceed the term of the CALNET 3 Contract for this Subcategory.

If Non
-
State
Entity elects to terminate Service prior to

completion of the two (2) year
commitment period, a termination charge may apply.

The termination charge
may not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the Non
-
Entity’s average monthly bill for
the disconnected Service(s), multiplied by the number of full months
remaining in the two (2) year commitment period.

If Service(s) are terminated
after the two (2) year commitment period, no termination penalty shall apply.”

Refer to Section 2.4
,

Bidding Rules.

217

Exhibit 9

In item C, Bidder requests deleting the
parenthetical phrase because the
names for surcharges and surcredits will not always match the name used by
an issuing authority.

No
.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
49

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

218

Exhibit 9

In item h,: Bidder believes the following revisions are consistent with the
intended meaning of the
question. Our intention is to clarify that the question
is asking if the tax/fee/surcharge/surcredit is mandatory or discretionary.


From: “Identification of whether the law, resolution or order is mandatory or
discretionary (that is, allowed but not requi
red):”


To: “Identification of whether the tax, fee, surcharge or surcredit is mandatory
or discretionary (that is not required):”

To be addressed in a future addendum.

219

Exhibit 9

Item l: Bidder requests deletion of the phrase “and is the State exempt?

(yes/no)” because this exhibit only covers taxes, fees, surcharges and
surcredits that will be included on invoices.

Since Bidder will not include any
taxes, fees, surcharges or surcredits that CALNET is exempt from on its
invoices the phrase is not nece
ssary.

No
.

220

A.2.2.1

Table A.2.2.1 #4. Bidder requests adding the phrase “within 2 billing cycles
(60 days)” to the end of the Deficiency explanation to be consistent with
changes proposed to Special Terms and Conditions on January 8, 2013.

No.

221

A.2.2.1

Table A.2.2.1 #8: This is a State agency to agency requirement based on non
-
exempt status.

Please clarify and resubmit in the form of
a question.

222

A.2.2.1

Table A.2.2.1 #8: Bidder requests changing “three (3) Business Days” to “five
(5)
Business Days” to bring this in line with what is current standard practice
under CALNET 2.

To be addressed in a future addendum.

223

A.2.2.1

Table A.2.2.1 #10: Bidder requests changing “30 calendar days” to “60
calendar days”.

To be addressed in a future

addendum.

224

A.2.2.1

Table A.2.2.1 #11: Bidder requests changing “ad hoc reports” to “standard
reports” to bring this requirement in line with standard business practices
under CALNET 2.

No
.

225

A.5.8

A.5.8. In the last paragraph, Bidder requests an
extension of the deadline for
Contractor to respond to inquiries from 10 days to 15 days. In most cases we
believe Contractor will be able to meet the 10 day deadline (as it has under
CALNET 2) but we would like for the deadline to be 15 days so that we ca
n
ensure Bidder can respond to any request within the contractually required
timeframe

To be addressed in a future addendum.





CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
50

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

226

A.5.8.1

A.5.8.1: Bidder requests an extension of the deadline for providing Exhibit 9s
in the case of a new service tax, fee, surcharge or surcredit.

In most cases
we believe Contractor will be able to meet the 30 day deadline (as it has
under CALNET 2) and it wi
ll use commercially reasonable efforts to do so but
we would also like to have a maximum deadline of 60 days so that we can be
sure that Bidder will have time to accurately find and provide the required
information within the contractually required timefra
me. Bidder requests the
following language changes:


From: “The Contractor shall submit additional Exhibit 9s within 30 calendar
days after the release or notification of any new law, …”


To: “The Contractor shall make commercially reasonable efforts to s
ubmit
additional Exhibit 9s within 30 calendar days and in no case later than 60
calendar days after the release or notification of any new FCC or CPUC law,
…”

N
o
.


227

A.12.2.1

A.12.2.1, Objective 2: Bidder’s systems are currently configured only to issue
these funds as billing credits as part of normal business operations in Calnet
2.


Bidder request the following language change:


From: “the Contractor shall deliver an accura
te amount check or electronic
fund transfer notification to California Technology Agency no later than the
end of the calendar month for services billed two (2) months prior.”


To: “the Contractor shall deliver an accurate amount check, billing credit, or
electronic fund transfer notification to California Technology Agency no later
than the end of the calendar month for services billed two (2) months prior.”

No
.











CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
51

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

228

1.3.2.1

1.3.2.1 (Standalone VoIP Minimum Network Requirements) states “The
Contractor shall provide a VoIP network in Standalone configurations. The
VoIP network in a Standalone configuration will include the Local Area
Network (LAN).”

A) Is it the State’s intention that a new LAN infrastructure, separate from any
existing LAN in
frastructure, be provided for each new VoIP service?

B) Is it the State’s intention that any existing LAN infrastructure be prohibited
from being leveraged as part of any new VoIP service?

A)

Yes for Standalone Service.

No For
Converged Service.

B)

Yes for
Standalone Service.

Refer to
Converged VoIP Services for LAN
utilization option.

229

1.3.2.2

1.3.2.2 (Standalone VoIP Service) states “The Contractor shall provide
Standalone VoIP service that will work independently of the Customer’s Local
Area Networks

(LANs).”

A) Is it the State’s intention that a new LAN infrastructure, separate from any
existing LAN infrastructure, be provided for each new VoIP service?

B) Is it the State’s intention that any existing LAN infrastructure be prohibited
from being lever
aged as part of any new VoIP service?

See response to Question

228
.





230

1.3.2.2.2

1.3.2.2.2 (Interoperability of Standalone VoIP with Other CALNET 3
Technologies) states “In the event at Contractor is awarded a CALNET 3
Contract for Converged VoIP
services and SIP Trunking services
(Subcategory 1.2), this Standalone VoIP service shall be interoperable with
the other two services and the State shall not incur any changes for calls
between these two (2) services.”
--

Also please see SubCategory 1.2 SO
W
Technical Requirements Section 1.2.3.2 (Converged VoIP Services) states “In
the event at Contractor is awarded a CALNET 3 Contract for Standalone VoIP
services, this service shall be interoperable and the state shall not incur any
charges to place calls
between the two (2) services).


Is the State’s intention to allow the customer to purchase MPLS services via
SubCategory 1.2 and VoIP Services via SubCategory 1.3 that integrate and
leverage the customers currently existing LAN equipment and connections?

N
o
.












CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
52

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

231

1.3.2.1.5

1.3.2.1.5 (Network Based) states “The Contractor shall not be permitted to
use State property for the deployment, collocation or supplementation of the
Contractors’ network signaling and management, call control and setup, or
access to other PSTN or VoIP network providers” whereas Section 1.3.2.2.1.1
(Standalone VoIP Equipment and Hardware) states “Unless otherwise noted
in the detailed product listing below, the Contractor shall furnish and install all
equipment and hardware r
equired to deliver the service to the workstation
handset including switches, routers, wire management, cross
-
connects, patch
and device cords, and the workstation handset.”


Is the State’s intention that all required switches, routers, wire management,
cr
oss
-
connects, patch and device cords, and workstation handsets be
installed at the customer sites?

Yes, but only in accordance with
1.3.2.1.5.









232

Cost Table
1.3.2.2.4

Cost Worksheet 1.3.2.2.4:

A) Both Column E “Model One Time Monthly Qty” &
Column F “Model One
Time Monthly Costs” have “One Time Fee” and “Monthly” in the title.

Based
on the Instructions, these are “typically for installation charges.”

B) What is the Unit of Measure for Column E “Model One Time Monthly Qty”

C) Please further e
xplain what the intentions of these 2 columns are?

D) Are we to provide upfront charges fees such as installation?

A)

"Fee" is not included in the title of
either column E or F.

B)

Unit of measure is as listed in column
H, Unit of Measure.

C)

The cost entered by
the Bidder in
column D will be multiplied by the
quantity in column E to generate the
one time monthly costs in column F
for the cost model used for
evaluation purposes.

D)

In column D, Bidders have the option
of including a one
-
time non
-
recurring
charge per
each Bidder's Product
Identifier.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
53

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

233

Cost Table
1.3.2.2.4

Cost Worksheet 1.3.2.2.4


Offer 1 (Standard Standalone VoIP handset
service package without station cabling) shows a “one time qty” of 200 and a
“recurring monthly qty” of 12,000. We understand
that this is for scoring
purposes only, but please see questions below:

A) Does the “one time qty” represent 200 installations (as example)?

B) Given that the “monthly qty” shows 12,000 seats for these 200 installations


is it correct to assume that the “
Model” averages 60 seats per installation?

RE: Unsolicited Offerings

C) If offering an “additional feature”


does the bidder need to include this
feature (and therefore the price) in the Bundle/Package/Offering or does the
bidder add the line item (and pr
ice that is over and above the
Bundle/Package/Offering price) but refer to which Bundle/Package that the
“additional feature” ties to?

D) If offering an “additional feature” that ties to multiple
Bundles/Packages/Offerings, how does the bidder represent th
is?

A)

This can represent installations,
activations, or any other one
-
time
charge associated with the service. It
is at the Bidder's option as to what
costs are included in the One Time
Qty column.

B)

No.

C)

Refer IFB section 3.4.2.6, Unsolicited
Offerings
.

D)

Refer
IFB section 3.4.2.6, Unsolicited
Offerings
.


234

1.3.2.4.5

1.3.2.4.5 Standalone VoIP International Off
-
Net Calling states “the Contractor
shall provide Standalone VoIP international off
-
net calling to the countries
listed in Table 1.3.2.4.5 and at the
rate identified in accordance with
Subcategory 2.4 (Long Distance International Calling Configurations).”

A) Should the reference to SubCategory 2.4 be SubCategory 1.4 (Long
Distance Calling), Section 4.12.3.6 (Long Distance Calling Configurations)?

B) Can

you please explain the intention of “at the rate identified in accordance
with SubCategory 2.4” if the bidder did not submit for the Long Distance
Calling, SubCategory 1.4?

A)

To be addressed in a future
addendum.

B)

Bidder shall enter the LD rates in the
cost
table associated with Table
1.3.2.4.5

235

A.12.2.3

Mandatory Scored Items: If the highest available score is S (Standard)


for
example, Section A.12.2.3 (Report and Test File Timeliness and Accuracy):
How will the State score this? Will each vendor
responding with an S receive
the full 27 Points or will each vendor receive 85% of 27 points, therefore
reducing the total available score?

To be addressed in a future addendum.

236

1.1.3

Can the State amend the document to include Unsolicited Extended
De
marcation Wiring Services as outlined in the other subcategories?

No.



CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
54

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

237

1.6.3.2.4,
1.6.3.2.5

Bidder has positioned with the service providers supporting technologies to
migrate Frame Relay (FR) and Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) services
to Private
IP Layer 2 for FR and Private IP Layer 3 for ATM.

Bidder would like
to respond to these two sections of the RFP with Private IP Layer 2 for FR
and Private IP Layer 3 for ATM.

Bidder wants to make sure this approach will
be compliant with the RFP submissi
on substituting Private IP in place of
FR/ATM equivalent.

No.







238

A.2.2

Bidder respectfully requests an extension of the questions and proposed
changes deadline of January 29, 2013 to February 14, 2013 due to the
following:


We will not receive
answers to questions and the SOW Catalog A template
until Friday of this week (February 1, 2013) which allows limited time for
review and no time for submission of requests for clarification.

Refer to Addendum #2.

239

A.2.2

Bidder respectfully requests an

extension of the draft submission due date of
February 21, 2013 to March 15, 2013 due to the following:

• To allow the State time to respond to any requests for clarification of
answers to previously submitted questions and to questions regarding SOW
Cata
log A, Which has not yet been issued by the State

• To allow Bidder time to complete the SOW Catalog A prior to production of
hard copies.

To allow Bidder time to gain the internal approvals needed to determine the
specific Bidder companies responding, whi
ch will affect the signature pages
required, size of our draft bid, number of binders required, and how we
organize our draft response.

Refer to Addendum #2.











CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
55

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

240

A.8.4

A.8.4:

In order to

provide an example of the layout of the Service Location

Detail Text File that demonstrates our ability to meet the requirements above,
Bidder has the following issues and questions which must be addressed in
order to be able to create the

Production .csv and text files

A) Please provide a list of acceptable v
alues for CONTRACTOR CODE for
Bidder.

Or is this Vendor
-
determined?

B) Please provide a list of acceptable values for CONTRACTOR NAME for
Bidder.

Or is this Vendor
-
determined?


C) Please provide a list of acceptable values for SERVICE TYPE for each
p
roduct.

D) Please provide a definition of TERM (as noted in Field 20 New Term
Quantity) for each product?

We need to know the correct definition for
Production.

E) Please provide a definition of SPECIAL PRICING, which is shown as a
data field in the RF
P.

The definition of the field is NOT in the Data Dictionary.
Should the data dictionary should be modified by the State to include this
element and definition?

F) Please provide a definition of INVOICE DATE, which is shown as a data
field in the RFP.

T
he definition of the field is NOT in the Data Dictionary.
Please confirm the format the State is expecting in this field.

(For the report
example, we put in 1/20/2013, but need to know if the data dictionary should
be modified by the State to include this

element and definition.)

A)

A list will be available upon Contract
award.

B)

A list will be available upon Contract
award.

C)

Refer to SOW and Catalog A for a list
of acceptable values.

D)

To be addressed in a future
addendum.

E)

To be addressed in a future
addendum.

F)

Re
fer to Addendum #2

241


Will the state publish physical addresses of the sites it will be asking us to
quote services for? Specifically MPLS. Will you be publishing the addresses?

No.

242


Is there a scheduled/projected date for release of additional
Phase 2/Specific
Category Contract solicitations?

Specifically, for Category 9/Cellular Voice
and Data?

The State is preparing for the release of
the additional Phase 2 categories.
Although no specific timeline is being
provided, the State's overall goal
is for all
Categories to be awarded by Jan
uary

2014.

243


Will there be separate Special Terms and Conditions for each Phase 2
Category/Subcategory of service?


Future Phase 2 Category solicitations
released may/or may not have their own
set of specific Special T’s and C’s
attached as applicable.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
56

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

244


Should Contractor assume that the Special Terms and Conditions being
negotiated for (by way of example) Subcateg
ories 1.1


1.6 will also be
applicable to future Phase 2 categories/subcategories (e.g., Category 9)?

For IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A the State is
allowing for Special Terms and
Conditions to be negotiated.

However, it
will be up to the States discretion if future
Phase 2 solicitations will/or will not all
ow
for negotiations of specific
Special T’s
and C’s.

Several factors are taken into
account when deciding on this process
of negotiations (how, what, etc.) and it’s
specific to each category.

245


How will the
State incorporate additional terms and conditions that may be
required by a Contractor for use of Contractor’s products/services (e.g.,
Product
-
specific annexes or other items not addressed in the State’s Special
Terms and Conditions)?

Should Contractor b
e submitting all Contractor
-
required additional terms and conditions by the 1/8/13 Key Action Date as set
forth in Section 2.2 of IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A?

Or should Contractor submit its
additional terms and conditions as part of Step 4 (1/29/13) of the Key Acti
on
Dates?

If a bidder has additional terms and
conditions that they would like to present
to the State for inclusion in the Special
T’s and C’s, the bidder must s
ubmit all of
these requests by
the 1/8/13

Key Action
date (Last Day to Submit Requests for
Ch
anges to the Special Terms and
Conditions) as set forth in Section 2.2 of
IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A. The bidder should be
sure to follow the submission instructions
and provide in the request ample, clear,
and concise justification/explanation for
the States consid
eration of inclusion to
the Special T’s and C’s

246

1.3.5.6

1.3.5.6 Excessive Outage Objective Table. Table lists "video conferencing".
Should this be "audio conferencing".

To be addressed in a future addendum.

247

A.2.6

Incumbents are required to have
a training plan in place upon award, without
knowing what should be included until contract award. Considering the level of
detail required would the State consider changing the timeframe to 90 days
after award, as required for non
-
incumbents?

Refer to Add
endum 2.





CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
57

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

248

A.2.6

Please provide clarification on what is meant by ADA compliant in regards to
training materials.

It is a Bidder’s responsibility to be
knowledgeable regarding ADA
compliancy. As a reference the State
recommends the following website:

http://www.ada.gov/



249

Data
Dictionary

Please define the following data
elements as they are not found in either the
Data Dictionary or Glossary:

o

Actual Migration
-
In Date

o

Order Date

o

Order Number

o

Service

o

Special Pricing

Total C3 DVBE Percentage Revenue (confirm this is the same as “Total
DVBE Revenue”

To be addressed in a
future addendum.

250

A.10.2

A) The two migration reports include circuit id as an account level data
element while the transition report does not;

B) however none of them require full account level data elements such as
BAN and BTN, Node (a field not required in any reports and is a relevant
detail at a Product ID level).

C) Should specific account level data elements be required?

A)

To be addressed in

a future
addendum
.

B)

Refer to
Addendum #2.

C)

To be addressed in a future
addendum
.

251

A.10.2.3

This report is missing the Customer Service State (A) and (B) fields, they are
required in the Migration
-
In/Out reports; are they to be included in this report?

To be addressed in a future addendum.

252

A.10.2.5

This report requires Circuit ID, but not WTN (for voice services). Please
confirm, as we believe the WTN should be required.

Refer to Appendix B, Data Dictionary for
definition of Circuit ID
.

253

A.10.2.6

This report requires Circuit ID, but not WTN (for voice services). Please
confirm, as we believe the WTN should be required.

See response to Question 252.

CALIFORNIA TECHNOLOGY AGENCY



IFB OTP 12
-
001
-
A

OFFICE OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROCUREMENT

CALNET 3 VOICE AND DATA SERVICES





QUESTION AND ANSWER SET #1









02/11/13
Page
58

of
58

#

Section

Question

Response

254

1.1.2.2.2

1.1.2.2.2 Geographic Availability
-

Carrier DS0 service shall be available
statewide in all CPUC ILEC territories open to competition.



We were specifically asked which areas we could serve in Phase 1 in which
case our response did not correlate to all CPUC ILEC territories.

We do not
want to be disqualified by this type of Geo
graphic Availability question so we
would request that this question be taken out or amended to reflect our
response to the geographic availability questions for the various service
categories in phase 1.

The Phase 1 Geographic availability
question was fo
r informational purposes
only. This requirement will not be
amended.

255

1.1.2.3.2

1.1.2.3.2

DS1 Geographic Availability

Contractor’s DS1 service shall be available statewide in all CPUC ILEC
territories open to competition.



We were specifically asked which areas we could serve in Phase 1 in which
case our response did not correlate to all CPUC ILEC territories.

We do not
want to be disqualified by this type of Geographic Availability question so we
would request that this qu
estion be taken out or amended to reflect our
response to the geographic availability questions for the various service
categories in phase 1.

See response to Question 254.

256

1.1.2.5.2

1.1.2.5.2

ISDN PRI Geographic Availability

ISDN PRI
Service shall be made available statewide in all CPUC ILEC
territories open to competition.



We were specifically asked which areas we could serve in Phase 1 in which
case our response did not correlate to all CPUC ILEC territories.

We do not
want to be
disqualified by this type of Geographic Availability question so we
would request that this question be taken out or amended to reflect our
response to the geographic availability questions for the various service
categories in phase 1.

See response to Que
stion 254.