U.S. Department of Commerce/National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/OFA/AGFS/AMD -- OFA51, 1305 East West Highway -- Station 7604, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910

70 -- HIGH PERFORMANCE COMPUTING SYSTEM DUE 100798 POC William L. Voitk (301) 713-0839, extension 185 E-MAIL: click here to contact Contracting Officer, william.voitk@agf.noaa.gov. The Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR), within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), contemplates the acquisition of equipment and services to augment the computing facilities at the Forecast Systems Laboratory (FSL). Currently, FSL has an Intel Paragon XPS/15 which it plans to decommission and a 16 node (32 CPU) Silicon Graphics Inc. Origin/2000. The current systems are not sufficient to meet FSL's research goals. FSL needs a computing system that can provide the best available, affordable computing architecture and system for its research, development and evaluation mission. In fulfilling its strategic objectives, FSL is utilizing components of the new streamlined acquisition process described in the document entitled "Department of Commerce (DOC) Acquisition Process Case for Change", retrievable from the Reference Library on the Internet at (http://www.CONOPS.doc.gov). A High Performance Computing System Acquisition Team ("the Team"), has been formed within the Department of Commerce, and a Project Agreement has been executed between the Team and management to spell out the project objectives, milestones, approach, budget and resources available for the project. The Project Agreement and background documents describing this project are available on the Internet at the Project website (http://hpcs.fsl.noaa.gov). Vendors should continue to monitor this website for additional information concerning this project. Please refer to Section VIII of the Project Agreement for a tentative approach and schedule for this project. FSL is seeking varied concepts and innovative approaches to obtain the needed computing system within the time frame and budget allocated. Publishing of the Project Agreement (http://hpcs.fsl.noaa.gov/ProjectAgreement.html) is intended to provide industry an overview of the requirements, time frames and budget, as well as to open a formal communication channel between industry and the Team. The Team also anticipates providing a draft Statement of Need (SON) on the Project website in September 1998 and preliminary benchmarks in September 1998. The Team welcomes industry comments, questions and suggestions which will aid the Team in developing its acquisition strategy and finalizing the SON. The Team will consider input received in response to this RFI as it develops the Statement of Need. The Team does not anticipate the need for a pre-proposal conference, but if one is deemed necessary, information will be posted on the Project website. The Team may conduct one-on-one meetings in an effort to benefit fully from industry responses to this RFI. Parties interested in providing information which the Team may use in developing the Government's technical and/or acquisition approach should review carefully the Project Agreement and supporting documents referenced in the Project Agreement that are available on the Internet at the Project website (http://hpcs.fsl.noaa.gov). Instructions for acquiring the benchmarks will also appear on the web site. A primary purposefor this RFI is to ask vendors to run FSL's benchmark codes which will give the vendor community an indication of the programs that may be expected to run on the new FSL system. The Team requests that vendors submit their benchmark test results in order to give FSL an indication of what computers are recommended. One of the principal outcomes of vendor/Government dialog will be to ensure that viable approaches are considered during the competition. The Government may therefore utilize the information provided to design its acquisition strategy to take into account viable acquisition alternatives. In addition to using the information provided by vendors to assist in its acquisition strategy, the Team may also use the information to determine which vendors do not appear to be viable candidates for eventual award of a contract. Those vendors will be contacted and informed that it does not appear to be in their best interests to compete for the FSL requirement. However, if those vendors choose to remain in thecompetition and later submit proposals, the Team will not be prejudiced by its initial determination. Any vendor who so wishes will receive a written or oral explanation of the Team's initial determination as it pertains to that vendor. It is not the Government's intent to disclose vendor proprietary information and trade secrets to the public. The information submitted by vendors during the pre-solicitation period may be used by the Government in preparing its RFP or finalizing the SON, provided this can be done without disclosing proprietary vendor information that is protected from disclosure pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act and other laws and regulations. Interested vendors should respond in writing to the following topics (vendors who submit written responses will be invited to augment their written responses with a 3-hour oral presentation approximately the end of October/beginning of November): (a) A description of a system which maximizes computational performance while remaining within the estimated budget. Performance will be measured by the expected execution of the final benchmarks. (b) An upgrade plan (including business and technical approach) of how the Government will benefit during the life-cycle of this acquisition. (c) A description of the limited services which will be provided to maintain the system over its 6-year life. (See draft SON, available September 1998.) (d) Potential financing alternatives, such as straight leasing, LTOPs, purchase and rough cost estimates for the alternatives, broken down by hardware, software, and services, and any other associated costs. It is the intent of FSL to acquire the HPCS via a contractual arrangement satisfying the following conditions: (i) The payments for system acquisition or lease will extend over 5 fiscal years(1999-2003) and may conclude with the system belonging to the Government. (ii) The intended life-cycle for the system is 6 years -- the optional cost in the 6th year (which is 2004) being limited to maintenance charges. FSL's plan is to use this 6th year to manage a phased migration to a successor system. (iii) If the Government owns the system at the conclusion of its intended life, the system could be operated longer than is now planned, at the option of the Government. (iv) If a vendor recommends straight leasing, the vendor must demonstrate the Government's benefit in not owning the equipment at the end of the project life cycle. (e) A description of past experience in providing relevant computational capabilities and the vendor's capabilities (including the extent of subcontracting) that will be required. (f) Benchmarks (i) The vendor should attempt to compile and run as many benchmark codes as is feasible, compare the vendor's results with FSL's results, and keep a record of the time required to run the code. FSL expects to receive two sets of timings and results: those from (1) the code essentially unmodified and (2) an optimized code. For purposes of this RFI, essentially unmodified means that the Fortran applications are untouched, but modifications to the internals of the software system known as SMS may be extensive provided the Fortran subroutine interfaces and the associated semantics are unchanged. If a benchmark simply cannot be run essentially unmodified, the vendor should inform FSL through the web page to initiate a dialogue regarding that benchmark code. It is not critical at this point in the process for the vendor to try to optimize performance on the benchmarks because this RFI is not a solicitation. FSL only requests timings to establish a basis for dialogue and a better overall market picture. All results and timings which the vendor reports will be kept in complete confidence. For the optimized code, the vendor is allowed to make any changes to the benchmark codes, as long as they still run successfully. However, if FSL determines that the changes are too extensive or system dependent, it may first enter into a dialog with the vendor to discuss the nature of the changes. Ultimately, FSL may decide that the essentially unmodified timings and results are most meaningful. For further insight into FSL's requirements regarding source code modifications see the Project Web site (http://hpcs.fsl.noaa.gov/RFI/Portability.html). (ii) FSL requests that the vendor run as many of the benchmarks as is feasible. The benchmarks are the numerical weather prediction models RUC40, SFM (a derivative of the commercial product RAMS), GFS, and QNH. The benchmarks may be acquired by following the instructions on the Project web site (http://hpcs.fsl.noaa.gov). There are instructions on how to run each benchmark, as well as how to determine if a run is successful. (iii) The vendor is requested to provide results on running the benchmarks. Precisely what should be provided is included in the benchmark instructions supplied with each benchmark. (g) A performance-based contractor incentive plan. The vendor's submission should reflect an understanding of the scope of the project and an overall approach to providing the required system. Multiple or alternative approaches are welcome. Although this RFI requests specific information, it is not intended to discourage innovative thinking on the part of industry to propose alternative solutions or approaches that NOAA may not have considered. Interested parties may also submit comments or suggestions in addition to or in lieu of a written approach. Those comments are welcome, but will not be considered an approach for the purpose of advising vendors as to their viability as candidates for the planned competition. For the comments/suggestion submission, the vendor is encouraged to provide any comments or recommendations it may have on technology, acquisition strategy, contractual mechanism or other issues that would assist the Team in developing the RFP. The vendor is also encouraged to provide suggestions for inclusion of information in the RFP that would enable the vendor to prepare a complete and accurate proposal. Vendors responding should provide a point-of-contact including: representative's name, email address, mailing address, and telephone number. Written submissions in response to this RFI should not exceed fifteen (15) pages for each system (including charts and graphs). Please submit ten (10) paper copies (double-sided) and one (1) 3.5" high-density diskette, formatted for IBM compatible personal computers, in WordPerfect 6, formatted for 8 " by 11" sheets, single-spaced with margins of one (1) inch on all sides. The type for all documents submitted (including charts and graphs) should be black print on white paper, should not exceed twelve (12) characters-per- linear-inch or be smaller than twelve (12) point, and should not exceed six (6) lines-per- vertical-inch. The vendor should include one or more additional 3.5" high-density diskettes, formatted for IBM compatible personal computers containing the benchmark source code and the textual output from the postprocessors supplied with each benchmark. The Team requests that all documents/diskettes be received by the Government by 4:00 PM Washington DC local time, on October 7, 1998. All documents/diskettes should be delivered as a single package to the following location: Mr. William Voitk U. S. Department of Commerce/NOAA Acquisition Management Division/ADP Contracts Branch 1305 East-West Highway, Room 7604 Silver Spring, MD 20910-3281 The Team will operate a "Questions and Answers" page on the NOAA website for vendor questions related to this requirement. Questions should be submitted electronically to the NOAA website. The Team will post the vendor questions and Government answers on the NOAA website for public viewing, without revealing the source of the questions. If a vendor asks a question which involves proprietary information, the vendor should provide detailed information explaining why the question should be protected from disclosure. Vendor questions designated as proprietary or confidential will be protected from disclosure (except where otherwise required by law and judicial process). The Team will attempt to answer questions on the NOAA website within a week of receipt of questions. Posted 09/02/98 (W-SN244725). (0245)

Loren Data Corp. http://www.ld.com (SYN# 0301 19980904\70-0018.SOL)