S05 36C24623B0019 Facility Wide Security Camera Upgrade Questions 3-20-2023.pdf

Questions for Salem Facility Wide Camera Upgrade

1. Calculation of Storage – Regarding Amendment 2, Item #12

The designer’s response provides an allowable framerate range of 6-10 frames per second depending on the camera. There is no information provided to correlate this range to specific cameras or camera model numbers contained in the project.

Therefore, one bidder could estimate all cameras at 6 frames per second (providing less fluid video), and another could estimate cameras at 10 frames per second (more fluid). This would have a notable impact on required storage, and thus the number of servers needed to achieve the desired retention. It would be suggested that the designer either provide an updated camera schedule to include a frame rate for each camera or a single universal framerate in lieu of a range.

USG Response: Bidders shall assume the maximum frame rate range for LPR and multi-sensor cameras. Assume 15 FPS for all others.

Please confirm that all cameras are to record on motion only at 25% duty cycle.

USG Response: Bidders shall assume all records of motion at 50% duty cycle.

The VA RECORDS CONTROL SCHEDULE 10-1 Item # 5252.27 states a requirement of 30 days retention for Video Surveillance Monitoring Records. Based on the designer’s response of 33 days, is it to be assumed that a 10% spare capacity for future growth outside of this contract is desired?

USG Response: The assumption is correct; bidders shall provide 10% spare capacity.

2. Servers – NVR4 vs NVR5 Regarding Amendment 2, Item #11

The basis of the design was the Avigilon NVR4 series recorder, which has been replaced by the NVR5. The NVR5 offers additional throughput and is pre-hardened to meet FIPS 140-2 security requirements generally required for deployment on government networks.

In consideration of the performance and FIPS 140-2 compliance offered by the NVR5, a substantial cost difference exists between the two generations.

Spec Section 28 23 10, Section 2.3.B.2-4 provides conflicting storage capacities for each server.

Recommendation: Replace the NVR4 basis of design with the NVR5 Premium FIPS P/N: NVR5-PRM-160TB-FIPS-NA. The designer’s response that an NVR5 is acceptable leaves the door open to the older, cheaper, non-FIPS-compliant server.

USG Response: Bidders shall replace the NVR4 basis of design with the NVR5 Premium.

3. Spec Section 28 23 10, Section 3.2.E.1-4 – Integration Requirements

The above spec section requires the Video Surveillance System to integrate into the PACS, IDS, Security Access Detection, and EPPS.

USG Response: Integration for the Lenel access control system is the sole requirement. Delete requirements of Para graphs 3.2.E 2, 3.2.E 3, and 3.2.E 4 from Specification 28 23 00, Specification 28 23 10, Specification 28 23 20, 28 23 30, and Specification 28 23 40. Also, delete Paragraph 2.7.F.2 of Specification 28 23 20.

The Salem VAMC PACS and IDS systems are believed to be Lenel. These sections require cameras to be recorded on a 24-hour basis. Are the cameras to be recorded in motion or on a continuous basis?

USG Response: Cameras are to record the motion at 50% duty.

The Security Access Detection sub-section requires the Video Surveillance system to provide full coverage of all vehicle and lobby entrance screening areas which is not accomplished by the design layout provided. Is full coverage of these areas required?

USG Response: No additional cameras or areas shall be included with the works.

Are cameras to be required by the spec in areas not shown on the plans?

USG Response: No additional cameras are to be added; all cameras included in works are indicated on Drawings and in the Camera Schedules.

This section also states, “The VASS shall have facial recognition software to assist in identifying individuals for current and future purposes.” Is this to be construed as requiring all cameras to be actively licensed for such functionality within their technical limitations (minimum resolution, effective distances, etc.)

USG Response: Provide 20 facial recognition licenses on cameras capable of the task. Salem VAMC will identify cameras to be activated with these licenses.

Is integration to the EPPS required? This appears to reference emergency call boxes which are not capable of integration today.

USG Response: No, integration with the EPPS is not part of the work.

Please confirm integration requirements.

USG Response: No additional integration beyond Lenel access control is required.

4. Spec Section 28 23 20, Video Management System

The Video Management System specifications list all three editions of Avigilon Control Center as the basis of design. Please confirm that Avigilon Control Center 7 Enterprise is the basis of design as it is the only viable solution that meets other technical specs.

USG Response: Avigilon Control Center 7 Enterprise is confirmed as the basis of design.

Please confirm whether failover licensing is required (allows redundancy across recorders).

USG Response: Failover licensing is required. The requirement of a failover connection for video and audio is cited in Paragraph 2.9.B.4.d of Specification 28 23 20.

Please confirm whether software assurance should be required for a 1- or 3-year term if applicable (software update access).

USG Response: Pursuant to Specification 28 05 00, software updates are required for a period of one year.

Please confirm whether any spare camera channel licenses are to be provided.

USG Response: Licensing structure requirements are described in Paragraph 2.1.E of Specification 28 23 00. Ten (10) spare licenses are to be provided.

Please confirm if face recognition licenses are to be provided, and for all cameras or only a subset of cameras.

USG Response: Twenty (20) facial recognition licenses are to be provided. The VA will direct which cameras are to be activated with these licenses.

Please confirm if LPR licenses are to be provided for the (2) main gates.

USG Response: License plate recognition camera licenses are confirmed as required for the two

(2) main gates.

Please confirm if eligible cameras should have FIPS 140-2 Level 1 license to encrypt communications between the cameras and video management software.

USG Response: Pursuant to Paragraph 1.6.H of Specification 28 23 00, and Paragraph 1.8.H of Specifications 28 23 10 and 28 23 40, compliance with FIPS 140-2-02 shall be required.

5. License Plate Recognition

The drawings reflect a license plate camera at each entrance. The 360-degree multisensor cameras noted as LPR cameras will not function as such. There is a technical distinction between being able to read the license plate on the video, and a true LPR that captures, decodes, and stores the plate in the Video Management Software for the query. The selected camera is capable of neither.

For a true LPR, the H4-LPC is Avigilon’s License Plate Capture Camera. This is a purpose-designed camera with multiple components to provide infrared illumination and visible light filtering. It should be noted that these cameras have specific technical mounting requirements. The server requires an ACC7-LPR Lane License.

For a camera capable of viewing plates in most circumstances, a 5.0-H5A-BO2-IR bullet camera is generally utilized and narrowly focused on the portion of the entryway where a plate is expected to pass.

Recommendation: Confirm LPR intent, a true LPR would allow for alerts on specific plates – such as a potential threat entering the campus. Both entrances may require redesign to include an LPR-specific camera, as well as an overview camera to capture the general area.

USG Response: Provide two License Plate Recognition cameras as described on the camera schedule, including a lane license and kit. No additional cameras are required.

6. Camera Placements (General)

The designer has selected cameras and placements that would not generally be recommended by the manufacturer in certain areas.

For example:

2TK111 – Cameras 46 & 49 are described as 180-degree multisensors which contain 3 imaging heads. The third imaging head will only capture the wall. The better camera for these locations would be a dual-headed camera – P/N 10.0C-H5DH-DO1-IR, which offers significant savings.

USG Response: The dual-headed camera suggested above may be substituted for the model 24MP 24C-H4A-3MH for Cameras 46 and 49 in Building 2.

2TK111 – Main Entrance of Bldg 2 lacks coverage

USG Response: No additional cameras are to be added to the main entrance of Building 2.

2TK101 – Bldg 2 Basement, lack of sufficient effective coverage on the long hallway, no coverage on Stair 2 entrance from the exterior.

USG Response: No additional cameras are to be added to the basement corridor of Building 2.

170TK101 – Bldg 170 Day Rooms – The use of column-mounted multisensor 180-degree cameras create significant blind zones in each pod. Avigilon recommended 4 staggered fisheyes.

USG Response: The staggered fisheye cameras suggested above may be substituted for model 24MP 24C-H4A-3MH for Building 170 Cameras 104 and 105 in Rms 169 and 170, as well as Cameras 117 and 119 in Rms 147 and 148.

143TK01 – Bldg 143 Basement - Rear Staff Entrance Near Service Bay has no camera coverage.

Exits near logistics and other trafficked areas have no camera coverage.

USG Response: No additional cameras are to be added to the service bay of Building 143.

Recommendation: Review coverages of entrances/exits, overall objectives, appropriate camera types, and placements with manufacturer’s representatives.

7. Drawing T-502, Detail 5 Existing Poles

This drawing reflects that the existing poles have a 120V unswitched circuit feeding the light, which would imply the light is controlled by photocell and not timeclock. It would be unusual to see parking lot lighting fed from 120V on an enterprise site. The detail reflects tapping the existing 120V circuit.

It is unclear from previous experience how the existing Pelco cameras on these poles are powered. They may be powered by DC power supplies located in the building.

Please confirm that is acceptable for the contractor to power these cameras either via local power supplies, a hybrid fiber/bundled low voltage solution (fiber with a couple of copper conductors married to it and a power supply within the relevant IT closet), or a long-range copper PoE solution with lightning protection as the contractor sees fit as long as the contractor can provide evidence that the work complies with the NEC, and delivers sufficient power in accordance with manufacturer recommendations. This will allow the use of existing pathways.

USG Response: The suggested solutions cited above for the provision of power to the cameras are acceptable and, if utilized, shall comply withal the requirements of the most recent NEC.

8. Buy American FAR Requirements

It appears the solicitation contains a restrictive version of the Buy American FAR section that does not include trade agreements. Almost none of the specified basis of design products can meet that requirement. I am unaware of any substitute products that can be due to the large amounts of technology managed overseas.

The alternate version of the Buy America FAR language that includes the world trade agreements, free trade agreements, etc. would appear to be suitable to accomplish this product.

USG Response: Exceptions that fall under FAR 25.202 Exceptions will be permissible for example:

• Servers

• Viewing Workstations

• Cameras

• Midspan Injectors

• UPS Power Supplies