WF Imagery RFP - Questions Answered.pdf

Commercial Data Program (CDP) Wildfire Imagery Pilot Study

RFP 1332KP26R0016

Questions & Answers Form

# RFP Reference Page No. Question/Comment NOAA Response

Solicitation, Section 003 Addendum to

FAR 52.212-2,

Paragraph (e)(1) 40 & 42

How will objective requirements be evaluated (full credit vs partial credit vs binary)?

The Government will employ a Technical Evaluation Team (TET) to evaluate the proposed data capabilities, including the ability to exceed the Threshold requirements and meet or exceed objective requirements. TET evaluators will identify related strengths and weaknesses in the offer and evalute for the following:

- Strengths: aspects of the offer that exceed Threshold Requirements, enhance value to the Government, or that would increase the likelihood of successful contract performance.

- Weaknesses: failures to address Threshold Requirements of the technical proposal, aspects of the proposal that decrease value to the Government, or aspects of the proposal that decrease the likelihood of successful contract performance.

After identifying all applicable strengths and weaknesses, evaluators will assign appropriate confidence ratings to Technical Capabilities and Overall Technical Proposal. The TET will utilize confidence ratings to provide evaluators the ability to look holistically at the strengths and weaknesses of each offer.

Solicitation, Section

4, RFP 52.212-1

(2)(c) and Section 003 Addendum to

FAR 52.212-2,

Paragraph (e)(1) 39 & 42

How will risk be evaluated within the Technical Volume (standalone factor or embedded in technical capability)?

TET evaluators will identify and rate specific risks associated with technical capabilities in the offer; each TET member will identify risks as part of the overall evaluation and assign risks as weaknesses. Risks will be included in the development of confidence ratings for Technical Capabilities and Overall Technical Proposal.

Solicitation, Section

4, RFP 52.212-1

(2)(b) 39-40

Are appendices (e.g., technical tables, compliance summaries) evaluated or excluded from scoring since they are excluded from the page count?

Appendices are included in scoring as they are a part of the submitted proposal. However, appendices are intended to be used as reference material for the main proposal; a good guide for Offerors is to consider that the proposal should be able to completely respond to the RFP requirements in the main body. The examples of technical tables and compliance summaries mentioned are appropriate uses of appendices.

Solicitation, Section 2, SOW Section VI Security Requirements and Section 4, RFP 52.212-1

12-13 & 38-39

Are there specific security artifacts expected in the proposal (e.g., SSP, POA&M, accreditation approach)?

Please see VI SECURITY REQUIREMENTS for details on security compliance requirements expected in the contract.

Solicitation, Section 2, SOW Section II, Table 3 9

How will data latency be evaluated -- Average latency, Maximum latency, Percentile thresholds?

Latency will be evaluated along all of these methods. As this is a Pilot Project, the Government is interested in collecting latency data on the piloted datasets during the delivery period and in working with vendors to determine latency characteristics, causes, and methods to improve system latency in future operational data purchases.

Solicitation, Section 2, SOW Section IIIA. Operational Delivery Requirements 11

How will optional capabilities (e.g., Level 2 products) be evaluated?

How will additional value-added capabilities be evaluated? Scored positively, neutral, or ignored? Please see response to questions 1 and 2.

Solicitation, Section 2, SOW Section II.B 9

How will NOAA weigh the trade-off between higher revisit rates (quantity) and superior spectral or spatial resolution (quality) in the technical evaluation? Specifically, will data that exceeds the 200m spatial resolution threshold be given additional technical merit? Will data with more relavent spectral bands be given additional technical merit?

Every observational capability involves tradeoffs implemented in order to deliver data with the highest utility. For fire imagery, the Government has indicated its Threshold and Objective requirements in the SOW which indicate its understanding of system characteristics that could provide high utility. However, Applicants are invited to explain how their proposed solution tradeoffs provide high utility for the needs expressed in the SOW.

This Solicitation is for a Pilot Project and the Government understands that Applicants may not yet have a mature satellite constellation that can provide the revisit rates that their operational constellation will offer.

Solicitation, Section 2, SOW Section II.B 9

When will the specific coordinates defining the Regions of Interest (ROI) be finalized? Will there be a lead time for offerors to optimize tasking schedules?

Upon award, the Government will begin working with the Contractor to define ROIs and develop an effective tasking schedule. The Pilot includes a one-month Preparation Phase before Data Delivery, which will include time for optimizing tasking schedules.

Solicitation, Section 2, SOW Section II.B 9

How many Regions of Interest (ROI) are anticipated to be active at once? Please refer to II.B. OBSERVATION CAPABILITY AND REQUIREMENTS.

Solicitation, Section 2, SOW Section III, Delivery Requirements 9

How should the contractor handle Geographic Exclusion Areas that may fall within a predefined region of interest?

The Contractor is required to adhere to all GEAs as defined in Government data license agreements and security directives. It is noted that the risk of incidental capture of sensitive features is significantly mitigated by the coarse spatial resolution of the environmental datasets intended for geophysical characterization rather than high-resolution imaging. In the event that a GEA overlaps with a scientific Region of Interest, the following protocols may apply and shall be reviewed by the COR: Data Masking: The Contractor shall implement automated filtering to ensure no prohibited data is processed. Methodological Adjustment: Should a security exclusion overlap with a planned validation site, the Contractor shall notify the COR and recommend an alternative, non-excluded location that provides similar scientific value for the comparison.

Solicitation, Section 2, SOW Section III, Delivery Requirements and Section VII, Data Rights 9 & 13

To meet the latency requirements of this RFP, will NOAA provide the necessary authorization to operate or license modifications to allow for data delivery faster than current standard NOAA commercial license constraints (e.g. NOAA-dictated 24-hour imagery hold)?

License modifications provided by the Office of Space Commerce Commercial Remote Sensing Regulatory Affairs (CRSRA) office are beyond the scope of this Solicitation and resulting Pilot.

NOAA will consider modifications to the data licensing indicated in the SOW which help the Pilot exceed Threshold Requirements, enhance value to the Government, or increase the likelihood of successful contract performance.

Draft RFP Q&A