Vendor_Questions_and_Answers_as_of_A00002.pdf

Vendor Questions and Answers

# Reference Offeror Question TSA Response

RFP, Page 4, Sec. 2, Para. 2.1 and Page 6, Sec. 3.1, Para. 3.1.1

How many bins are to be provided with each AT/CT system?

In accordance with SOW Section 10, if the vendor requires bins that differ from the TSA bins, the Contractor shall provide 140 bins, 4 bin carts per system and one rerun bin cart. If the vendor's system utilizes TSA bins, the vendor need not provide bins, bin carts or a rerun cart.

2 RFP, Page 4, Sec. 2.1.1

Which APSS contract or version of the contract will be referenced for the upgrades and data rights? Existing (2017) contract? Pending (2018) modifications? Future modifications or contracts?

The successful Offeror's contract issued as a result of APSS BAA HSTS04-17-R-BAA226 will be referenced for the upgrades and data rights. This contract reference will include all modifications issued against that Contract up until the date of award of this contract.

3 RFP, Page 4, Sec. 2.1.1 When will offerors receive the FINAL APSS 6.2 standards?

TSA expects to release an approved APSS v6.2 no later than the first quarter of Fiscal Year 19.

4 RFP, Page 4, Sec. 2.1.1

How many new versions of the APSS standard does TSA anticipate during the period of performance of the AT/CT contract? Does TSA anticipate any versions beyond those described in the APSS Phase 2 development?

TSA expects all detection algorithm evaluation, certification, and/or upgrade requirements to be in accordance with APSS v6.2 for the next 24 months PoP. Throughout the APSS PoP the CT OEM will be enabled via government sponsored data collection and have the opportunity to demonstrate and take certification test against various "Levels" of 6.2. "Threshold" is the minimum performance expected and relabeled as "Level 0" and anticipated on or about

JAN 2019.

TSA does not envision upgrades beyond "threshold/Level0" and APSS 6.2 for this requirement at this time.

5 RFP, Page 4, Sec. 2.1.1

Due to the uncertainty about future standards and the work required to upgrade AT/CT systems to future standards, will TSA consider moving the work of upgrading AT/CT systems from CLINs 0001 and 0001A AT/CT systems to a new separate CLIN?

The CLIN structure shall remain unchanged.

RFP, Page 4, Sec. 2, Para.

2.1.1 and Attachment 14

SOW, Page 4, Sec. 4.1, Para.

4.1.1.6

How will contractors access the AT/CT systems to install the upgrade to APSS 6.2? Will TSA provide contractors physical access to the systems? Is upgrade over the TSA (STIP) network an option?

Physical access to systems will be granted to the contractors' technicians to install the appropriate upgrade(s).

At this time, system upgrades cannot be performed over the TSA (STIP) network.

RFP Page 61, Sec. V, Clause

A.5200.204.001, Para. 6

Contractor is to ship units F.O.B. Destination for locations within the United States and US Territories. Will any units be shipped outside the United States or US Territories? If so, what are the delivery terms?

No systems will be shipped outside of the US or its territories for this effort.

This information can be found on pages 68-69 in Section III.B (C)(h-

i) 5200.242.003 "Submission of Invoices Alternative I (Jun 2017)," which states that invoices shall:

a) Be submitted with an approved TSA Form 251/251-1, Vendor Shipping and Receiving Report for all equipment (base unit and peripheral equipment) with a cost of at least $5,000 including any equipment with data storage billed on the invoice.

b) Cite the site code, site name, location, serial number(s) and full TSA barcode number(s) of the equipment or peripheral equipment. For associated service(s), cite the serial number(s) and TSA barcode number(s) of the equipment or peripheral equipment for which the service(s) were provided. If the serial number(s) and TSA barcode number(s) are cited on supporting documentation rather than the invoice, the invoice must state, “See attached (title of supporting documentation) for detail.”

RFP Page 69, Sec. V, Clause C.5200.242.003, Para. 6.1(i)

What documentation must be submitted with invoices for services as opposed to equipment?

In accordance with 5200.242.003 "Submission of Invoices Alternative I (Jun 2017)" invoices for services, such as CLINs 00003- 00003D "Program Management" shall be invoiced monthly. No additional information is required to be submitted with these invoices.

RFP Page 73, Sec. V, Clause I, 5200.204.006

This section states the contractor must submit biographical information “90 days prior [to] the start of the contract.” When is the anticipated start of the contract? If it is less than 90 days from the date the proposal is due, can offerors still submit the information?

Will TSA Personnel Security accept such information from an offeror who is not under contract?

TSA cannot vet personnel until there is a valid contract in place.

However, Offeror's shall have enough personnel who are not Foreign Nationals to successfully perform work on the contract upon award.

RFP Page 69, Sec. V, Clause

C.5200.242.003, Para. 6.1(h) and (i)

What documents must be submitted with invoices for Shipping and Installation?

RFP Page 89, Sec. 8.4, Para. 8.4.2.1

What are the “TSA mandated fixes … from TSA … Testing?” Will TSA designate which test findings require a mandated fix? If so, when will TSA provide a list of mandatory fixes to offerors?

A list of required fixes from TSA testing was provided to vendors on September 20, 2018, which identifies the mandatory fixes.

RFP Page 89, Sec. 8.4, Para. 8.4.2.1

When will TSA provide results from the Operational Testing that was required to be concluded on 9/10/18 to offerors?

TSA anticipates sending the final System Evaluation Report from Operational Testing by the end of October.

RFP Page 91, Sec. 8.7, Para.

8.7.1 and 8.7.1.1 and Attachment 16

The Proposal Submission Requirements state that the Offeror shall utilize the pricing spreadsheet and break out the price for CLINs 0001 and 0001A, but the pricing spreadsheet does not provide a place for such a break out. Does TSA intend the offeror to price each item separately? If so, will TSA consider revising the RFP to list a separate CLIN for each of the items to be broken out?

Offeror's shall provide a separate breakdown of CLINs 00001 and 00001A, which breaks out the build-up for these CLINs. The RFP has been updated to reflect these instructions.

Attachment 14 SOW Page 4, Sec. 4.1, Para. 4.1.1.1.1

What does it mean that an AT/CT system is “deployed”?

Does that mean successful completion of SAT testing?

Does the 90 calendar day time limit include TSA or airport activities such as allowing contractor access to the site to install and test the systems?

Deployed means the AT/CT has been delivered and SAT completed at the assigned site. Any activities including accessing the site to complete the SAT must be completed in the 90 day time frame.

Attachment 14 SOW Pages 6-

7, Sec. 4.3, Para. 4.3.2

CLINs 0001 and 0001A for AT/CT systems include Site Acceptance Testing (SAT) but SAT cannot occur until after shipping and installation which is ordered separately under CLIN 0008. Will TSA always order one Installation / Shipping with each AT/CT System? If not, how can contractor perform the SAT? Will TSA consider moving SAT from CLIN 00001 and 00001A to CLIN 00008?

When a system is ordered under CLINs 00001 or 00001A, TSA will also fund a CLIN for shipping and installation in the relevant installation region via CLINs 00005-00008A. Therefore, the CLIN structure will remain unchanged.

Attachment 14 SOW Pages 7-

11, Sec. 4.4

CLINs 0001 and 0001A for AT/CT systems include Configuration Management. How many configuration changes does TSA anticipate to require during the period of performance? (E.g., how many upgrades and other changes?) How many units will TSA order during the period of performance? Will TSA consider moving Configuration Management from the AT/CT System (CLINs 00001 and 00001A) to Program Management (CLIN 00003)?

TSA cannot predict the number of configuration changes that will be needed during the period of performance, as this is dependent on end-of-life component changes needed, critical issues that arise, and bringing any detection algorithm up to the current standard.

The exact number of units to be ordered during the period of performance is unknown at this time and will be identified in the final contract award. Configuration Management is separate from Program Management. Therefore, the requirements will remain unchanged.

Attachment 14 SOW, Page

11, Sec. 5, Para. 5.3.2

How will contractors access the simulators to upgrade them to APSS 6.1? Should this be 6.2? Will contractors be required to upgrade the simulators in the field? Or will TSA ship the simulators to the contractor?

Upgrades to the simulators should be handled in the same manner as upgrades to the system. A tech should to travel to the airport or training facility to install the simulator. The SOW has been revised to reflect APSS 6.2 instead of 6.1

Attachment 14 SOW Page 11, Sec. 5.2

Will simulators always be ordered with AT/CT systems (so they can be shipped prior to SAT)? If so, will the simulators be shipped to the same location as the AT/CT systems? If not, Simulators will always be ordered with AT/CT systems; however the number of simulators will not be equal to the number of systems purchased. The quantity of simulators that will go to each location is based on a predetermined ratio of simulators per number of AT/CT systems to be deployed at each airport. Two to five simulators will be needed at each airport, depending on the number of AT/CT systems at each airport. Approximately one simulator will be needed per two AT/CT systems, but this will vary by airport. At least one simulator will be needed to be deployed to each delivery location under this requirement.

Attachment 14 SOW Page 11, Sec. 5.3 What are the functional requirements for a simulator?

The Training Simulator should be designed to emulate the human interface elements of a live AT/CT X-ray machine. The Training Simulator is intended to provide accurate replays of images with all applicable image interactions tools available.

Attachment 14 SOW, Page

13, Sec. 8, Para. 8.1.2

What is meant by “Warranty period shall include … upgrades?” How do upgrades affect the warranty period (start date, end date)?

Any software and hardware upgrades made shall be covered by the warranty during the POP.

Attachment 14 SOW Pages

35-36, Appendix B, Sec. C.1 – C.6

Which Configuration Management requirements apply to this contract?

The Configuration Management requirements outlined in the Statement of Work apply. The requirements set forth in Appendix B, Section C.1-C.6 have been removed.

22 RFP, Section I, 2.1.1 pg 4 When will APSS 6.2 be released to industry?

TSA expects to release an approved APSS v6.2 no later than the first quarter of Fiscal Year 19.

23 RFP, Section I, 2.1.1 pg 4

Multiple levels of 6.2 compliance have been defined by the TSA in previous APSS communications - (PDR M3 presentation), but not yet released. What is the level of

6.2 that must be met (“threshold”, “Level 1”, “Level 2”, etc)?

"Threshold" is the minimum performance level expected and has been relabeled as "Level 0."

24 RFP, Section I, 2.2 pg 4

The RFP states "Vendors are encouraged to maximize shipping efficiencies for CLINs 00005 – 00008A “Shipping and Installation.”" Please confirm that all systems for a single airport will be delivered "together" during the same single mobilization.

All systems for a single airport should be delivered together.

25 RFP, Section I, 2.2 pg 4

The RFP states "Vendors are encouraged to maximize shipping efficiencies for CLINs 00005 – 00008A “Shipping and Installation.”" Please confirm the minimum # of systems that will be delivered to an airport.

TSA anticipates sending a minimum of 1 system per airport where TSA will have systems delivered for this requirement.

26 RFP, Section I, 3, pg 6

The TSA TEDS System Integrator Contracts includes per unit FFP mileage-based shipping rates. Please confirm that TSA expects only one rate for each region as noted in

CLIN 00005/5A - 00008/8A.

This requirement is separate from the TEDS contracts. Offerors shall propose a rate for shipping units to each region as outlined in the RFP. Offerors are encouraged to offer quantity discounts.

27 RFP, Section I, 3.1.1, pg 7 Regarding APSS 6.2, is there a cap to the number and frequency of "subsequent" new versions under the APSS contract?

TSA expects all detection algorithm evaluation, certification, and/or upgrade requirements to be in accordance with APSS v6.2 for the next 24 months PoP. Throughout the APSS PoP the CT OEM will be enabled via government sponsored data collection and have the opportunity to demonstrate and take certification test against various "Levels" of 6.2. "Threshold" is the minimum performance expected and relabeled as "Level 0" and anticipated on or about

JAN 2019.

TSA does not envision upgrades beyond "threshold/Level 0" and APSS 6.2 for this requirement.

28 RFP, Section I, 3.1.1, pg 7 Please provide the maximum number of subsequent versions of APSS per base year and option period.

TSA expects all detection algorithm evaluation, certification, and/or upgrade requirements to be in accordance with APSS v6.2 for the next 24 months PoP. Throughout the APSS PoP the CT OEM will be enabled via government sponsored data collection and have the opportunity to demonstrate and take certification test against various "Levels" of 6.2. "Threshold" is the minimum performance expected and relabeled as "Level 0" and anticipated on or about

JAN 2019.

TSA does not envision upgrades beyond "threshold/Level0" and APSS 6.2 for this requirement.

29 RFP, Section I, 3.1.1, pg 7 Please provide maximum number of software upgrades that will be required of installed systems per the Base Year and Option Year(s).

TSA expects all detection algorithm evaluation, certification, and/or upgrade requirements to be in accordance with APSS v6.2 for the next 24 months PoP. Throughout the APSS PoP the CT OEM will be enabled via government sponsored data collection and have the opportunity to demonstrate and take certification test against various "Levels" of 6.2. "Threshold" is the minimum performance expected and relabeled as "Level 0" and anticipated on or about

JAN 2019.

TSA does not envision upgrades beyond "threshold/Level0" and APSS 6.2 for this requirement.

30 RFP, Section I, 3.1.1, pg 7

In order to adequately plan and complete Factor 1 - Production and Deployment, specifically manufacturing and deployment capabilities per month, please provide the minimum number and maximum number of units to be procured under CLIN 0001 for the base year.

The exact number of units to be ordered during the period of performance is unknown at this time and will be identified in the final contract award. Offeror's shall base their proposals on the maximum number of units identified in the step-ladder pricing.

31 RFP, Section I, 3.1.1, pg 7

In order to adequately plan and complete Factor 1 - Production and Deployment specifically manufacturing and deployment capabilities per month, please provide the minimum number and maximum number to be procured under CLIN 0001A for each Option Year.

The exact number of units to be ordered during the period of performance is unknown at this time and will be identified in the final contract award. Offeror's shall base their proposals on the maximum number of units identified in the step-ladder pricing.

32 RFP, Section I, 3.1.1.1, pg 7

Discounts in pricing is typically derived from efficiencies in manufacturing and quantity discounts through supply chain, therefore please confirm that the ladder pricing resets each year.

Ladder pricing is tied to each CLIN. Because CLIN 00001 is only active in the base year and CLIN 00001A is only active the following year, this is confirmed.

33 RFP, Section I, 3.1.1.1, pg 7

Discounts in pricing is typically derived from efficiencies in maintaining consistent staffing throughout manufacturing and consistent delivery through supply chain, therefore please confirm that any break in delivery orders will reset ladder pricing.

TSA intends to award a single contract award to the Offeror whose offer, conforming to this solicitation, that represents the “Best Value” to the Government. There will be no delivery orders issued under this contract. However, as stated in Sections 3.1.1.1 and

3.1.2.1 of the RFP, "Quantities ordered shall be cumulative (e.g., if TSA orders 25 AT/CT systems, and later orders three (3) more, the additional three (3) units will be purchased at the price associated with quantities of 26-50)."

34 RFP, Section I, 3.1.1.1, pg 7 If TSA options a ladder, does that guarantee all systems in that ladder will be procured during that base or option period.

Whatever is identified as the Quantity for CLINs 00001 and 00001A will be procured under these CLINs. Should TSA modify the contract to order additional units, the ladder pricing should build upon that quantity (e.g., if TSA orders 75 units under CLIN 00001A, but later orders more units, pricing would start at the ladder for units of 76). Additionally, per Section 2.3 of the RFP, "the Government reserves the right to re-state quantities of contract line item numbers (CLINs) in the final award, as well as partially exercise all Optional CLINs."

35 RFP, Section IIIB, II, B.f, pg 44 Please elaborate on how this clause would apply to the award of additional quantities and CLIN Options.

The procurement, including all subsequent modifications are subject to a qualification requirement and FAR 9.2

36 RFP, Section IIIB, II, B.f, pg 44 Please further define "location", is that physical address, State, Country?

Correct, this is physical location of manufacturer or assembly at the time of qualification

37 RFP, Section IIIB, II, B.f, pg 44 Please confirm that change in "ownership of the plant" would be applicable should an OEM decide to move production to a subcontract manufacturer.

This would be a change in location and would require a reevaluation of the qualification. Change in ownership contemplates the sale of the OEM to another entity.

38 RFP, Section IIIB, II, B.f, pg 44 Please elaborate on the steps required by TSA and the OEM for "reevaluation of the qualification".

This would require the vendor to restart the entire qualification process outlined in QPL announcement 70T04018QPL9DPSP001, beginning with Step 3 (Integration and Implementation Testing at the TSL).

39 RFP III.B, III, IV.B.(b), pg 59

This section states F.o.B. Destination Only and Section III.B,III,V.B.(h)1.1.2, pg 67 states "TSA will inspect and accept AT/CT units (to include transfer of title and risk of loss) after FAT..." F.o.B Destination typically means the transfer occurs the moment the goods are removed from the transport at the destination. Please clarify the differences between the two clauses.

This deals with two different concepts: 1) risk of loss, and 2) inspection and acceptance. Risk of loss can pass after destination delivery, but title does not pass until TSA accepts the goods. This occurs after SAT as outlined in Section III.B,III,V.B.(h)1.1.2, pg 67.

For this requirement, F.o.B. Destination means the final installation location.

RFP, Section III, V.C.h.1.3, pg

Please confirm if it is TSA's intention to withhold 20% from CLIN 00001 for any units shipped before APSS 6.2 is released to industry and OEMs have an opportunity to comply with the new standard.

Confirmed. 20% of CLINs 00001 and 00001A shall be withheld until the systems are upgraded to APSS 6.2.

RFP, Section III, V.C.h.1.3.1, pg 67

Please confirm how quickly an OEM will be tested at TSL for "qualification of its system to APSS 6.2" once a test is requested by the OEM, as possible TSL delays could adversely affect OEMs financially.

The TSL will try to begin testing within 2-4 weeks of being notified.

This date depends on resources, equipment availability, and installation times.

RFP, Section III, V.C.h.1.3.1 and 1.3.2 pg 67

Please confirm in the case of multiple OEMs being awarded contracts, that the "AT/CT fleet" is referencing the individual OEM's installed base and not all AT/CTs across all OEMs.

As stated in the RFP, TSA intends to award a single contract award to the Offeror whose offer, conforming to this solicitation, that represents the “Best Value” to the Government. Should more than one award be made, OEMs shall only be responsible for their own technology.

RFP, Section III, V.C.h.1.3.1 and 1.3.2 pg 67

Please confirm that the "AT/CT fleet" is installed systems that have completed SAT as of the day an OEM is approved for APSS 6.2. Therefore, for any systems: at airports and not yet installed, at rigger's warehouses, in storage, in transit or that have completed FAT but have not shipped are not included in the initial 50% or remaining 50% of the fleet referenced.

Confirmed. However, any systems purchased / installed after payment has been released shall include APSS 6.2.

RFP, Section III, V.C.h.1.3.1 and 1.3.2 pg 68

If a subsequent version of APSS is required and created before field upgrades to APSS 6.2 is 100% completed, does TSA intend to further withhold any remaining withhold until the subsequent version is deployed and therefore repositioning the goal line?

The applicable algorithm shall correlate to the development efforts being completed under the successful Offeror's contract issued as a result of APSS BAA HSTS04-17-R-BAA226. However, the applicable algorithm will not change once payment has been released for qualifying to the applicable APSS standard. Any additional algorithm changes will be funded separately once payment has been released for the initial algorithm upgrade.

RFP, Section III, V.C.h.1.3.4, pg 67 Is there a time limitation or a maximum number of tests that will determine "fails to meet" APSS 6.2?

No. Via the APSS Machine learning contracts identified in Question #2 above, the vendors will have a twenty-four (24) month Period of Performance to achieve the various certification levels of APSS v6.2.

RFP, Section V.A.8.4.2.1, pg

When will TSA make available results from 0T04018QPL9DPSP001 Development Testing and OT&E so that OEMs may review for ECP applicability?

A list of required RFP/ECP fixes was provided to the vendors undergoing testing on September 20, 2018, and full results from the System Evaluation Report will be available by the end of October.

RFP, Section V.A. 8.5.1.2 pg

Please provide require attributes of the "timeline to upgrade its system" as APSS 6.2 and subsequent versions are not yet released and the time and effort to comply with APSS 6.2 and other versions cannot be known at this time.

Upon successful certification to v6.2 (threshold/level0) estimated no earlier than February 2019; the OEM upgrade ECP shall be available and ready for deployment. Over the next 24 months and pending additional certification activity to Level 1,2,3; the OEM upgrade ECP shall be available and ready for deployment within 30 days of successful certification.

Please keep in mind that after passing CERT the algorithm is still required to be further tested at TSIF. Any and all new algorithms above and beyond AT/CT will require revised Standard Operating Procedures, training, etc. before being able to be deployed operationally. As a mitigation TSA may be amenable to deploy the algorithm to the rest of the fleet but not activate it until TSIF testing is complete. TSA does not envision upgrades beyond "threshold/Level0" and APSS 6.2 for this requirement.

48 RFP, Section V.A. 8.6.1 pg 90 Typically, Past Performance requires a time bound recency requirement. It is suggested that Past Performance should be limited to the past 5 years.

It is up to the Offeror to determine what past performance references to submit.

49 RFP, Section V.A. 8.6.1 pg 90

If a company has previous experience in producing machines of similar complexity in an effort of similar scope, but is planning on a sub-contracting out the manufacturing for this effort to a completely different entity that did not participate in that earlier experience, would that previous experience be considered as relevant?”

Per the requirements set forth in the RFP, the Offeror shall clearly address the scope/work performed for the contract and demonstrate the similarity of the contract to the requirements of this solicitation for each past performance example to demonstrate how the Offeror met the contractual requirements for projects of a similar scope and complexity. However, a past performance reference for a subcontractor who will be performing this work may be submitted.

50 SOW, Section 2.1, pg 2 Please confirm that the supply of or integration with Automated Screening Lanes (ASL) is not required by this contract.

The supply of or integration with Automated Screening Lanes (ASL) is not required by this contract.

51 SOW, Section 3.0, pg 2 Please confirm if TSA intends to reuse roller tables, inspection tables etc. currently on site

The vendor should be providing a complete end-to-end system to including any tables and conveyers to meet the checkpoint design guide.

52 SOW, Section 3.1, pg 2 Please confirm which specific pieces of “Ancillary Equipment” the OEM is obligated to provide.

The vendor should be providing a complete end-to-end system to including any tables and conveyers to meet the checkpoint design guide.

53 SOW, Section 3.1, pg 3 Please define ingress / egress conveyors and automatic diverter systems.

The ingress system is conveyances (rollers/belts) that introduce bags into the AT/CT. The Egress system is the conveyances (rollers/belts) to exit the bags from the system. These definitions have been added to the Statement of Work. Requirements for an Automatic Diverter have been removed from the Statement of Work.

54 SOW, Section 3.1, pg 3

Please define more specifically provide the configuration or peripheral equipment required for the 300 units (Stand-alone, ingress / egress conveyors and automatic diverter systems).

Offerors shall propose a single recommended configuration for the baselined system that was already submitted as part of the QPL process, inclusive of any change requests. This configuration includes all peripheral equipment. Specific ancillary equipment will be acquired separately via CLINs 00009 - 00012A.

55 SOW, Section 4.1.1.1, pg 3 What version of the Checkpoint Design Guide (CDG) is being referenced?

Version 6.1 is being referenced. This document has been added as an attachment to the RFP.

56 SOW, Section 4.1.1.1.1, pg 4 Please confirm that the minimum delivery requirement for the base year is 300 units (30 units delivered month 3- 12).

The exact number of units to be ordered during the period of performance is unknown at this time and will be identified in the final contract award. Offerors shall base their proposals on the maximum number of units identified in the step-ladder pricing.

57 SOW, Section 4.1.1.6, pg 4 Regarding APSS 6.2, is there a cap to the number and frequency of "subsequent" new versions under the APSS contract?

TSA expects all detection algorithm evaluation, certification, and/or upgrade requirements to be in accordance with APSS v6.2 for the next 24 months PoP. Throughout the APSS PoP the CT OEM will be enabled via government sponsored data collection and have the opportunity to demonstrate and take certification test against various "Levels" of 6.2. "Threshold" is the minimum performance expected and relabeled as "Level 0" and anticipated on or about

JAN 2019.

TSA does not envision upgrades beyond "threshold/Level0" and APSS 6.2 for this requirement.

58 SOW, Section 5.3.2, pg 11

Please acknowledge that immediate upgrade of emulators is not possible and confirm that upgrading of emulators that are co-located at airports with the AT/CT systems will be updated during the same mobilization as the CT units at that airport is acceptable to TSA.

Upgrades to the emulators/ should be handled in the same manner as upgrades to the system when any software upgrades are approved and installed on the AT/CT systems. A technician should to travel to the airport or training facility to install the upgrades to the simulator at the same time an upgrade is needed on the system.

59 SOW, Section 7.0, pg 11

Please confirm that Sustaining Engineering Services, Sustainment Support Program Management Services and Parts Obsolescence Management Services should be included in CLIN 00003 - 00003D

Sustainment Program Management should be included in CLIN 00003-00003D; and Parts Obsolescence Management is covered in section 8.3 and should be included in CLINs 00004 – 00004B, as well as Warranty under CLINs 00001 and 00001A. There is no requirement in the SOW for Sustaining Engineering Services.

60 SOW, Section 8.1.2, pg 13 Please define scope of "emerging TSA IT requirements'. This requirement has been removed from the Statement of Work.

61 SOW, Section 8.2.6, pg 14

Please confirm that if the nature affecting the impacted system occurs in the latter half of the month, that rescheduling preventive maintenance to the following month will not be reasonably withheld.

PM is expected to be performed no greater than seven (7) calendar days past the recommended period. PM should be performed upon resolution of the issue that prevents the OEM from performing PM, especially if the TSE has exceeded its recommend PM schedule. Any proposed changes in the above schedule should go through the COR.

62 SOW, Section 8.4.1, pg 15 Please provide the minimum number of units that will be deployed to a single airport

TSA anticipates sending a minimum of 1 system per airport where TSA will have systems delivered for this requirement.

63 SOW, Section 8.4.1, pg 15 If a single unit is deployed to an airport, which metric from Table 2 will apply?

Both metrics would apply. Machine level Ao is a fleet wide average metric. Airport level Ao is airport specific, even if only piece of equipment is deployed to that airport.

64 SOW, Section 9.3, pg 23

This section mentions an Installation and Design Reference Guide, and Section 10 mentions a CT Specification and Design Guide; are these the same document?

These are separate documents. The SOW has been updated to include an AT/CT Specification Cut Sheet instead of an "Installation and Design Reference Guide."

65 OTA – Article IV

A 3% limit on spare part pricing is not reasonable. TSA prefers COTS subassemblies where possible. COTS subassemblies have a higher obsolescence rate. In addition, OEMs need to be able to recoup costs associated with end of life management, the qualification of new vendors or parts as well as the acquisition and carrying costs of obsolete parts. A 5% increase is requested or add back the language from the draft that states "unless supported by a consumer price index change...."

The OTA shall remain unchanged. Per the requirements set forth in the RFP, 8.2.1.1. failure to provide the signed OTA, or submission of the OTA with proposed changes will result in the proposal being determined as “non-responsive” and removed from further award consideration.

Attachment B, AT/CT SOW, page 3 of 36, section 4.1.1.1

Per the requirements set forth in Section V.A, 8.7.1.1 Offeror's shall provide a separate breakdown of CLINs 00001 and 00001A, which breaks out the build-up for these CLINs.

Offerors shall propose a single recommended configuration for the baselined system that was already submitted as part of the QPL process, inclusive of any change requests. This configuration includes all peripheral equipment. Specific ancillary equipment will be acquired separately via CLINs 00009 - 00012A.

In OT&E data collection efforts of AT/CT systems conducted to date, the specific configuration of the checkpoints has varied by Offeror. For example, in some cases, configurations have used automatic tray diverters and in some cases, configurations have used manual tray diverters. The CDG also illustrates that there are numerous ways to configure a checkpoint. These different configurations will have important implications for our pricing to the Government. Would the Government consider specifying a standard checkpoint configuration with all minimally required ancillary and peripheral equipment?

CDG 6.1 is the version being referenced along with the applicable supplemental design guide. It has been added as an attachment to the RFP.

Attachment B, AT/CT SOW, page 3 of 36, section 4.1.1.1

Attachment B, AT/CT SOW, page 3 of 36, section 4.1.1.1

Can the Government please verify that the CDG revision being considered here is revision 6.1 dated July 2016?

In the pricing volume, shall Offerors provide separate line item pricing for various peripheral and ancillary equipment as defined on pages 2 and 3 of the SOW, attachment 14?

If the Government is allowing Offerors to use their own discretion on what ancillary and peripheral equipment to include in the pricing volume, how will the Government ensure best value is provided?

Will the Government allow the Offeror to quote a single and/or multiple configurations?

Has version 6.2 of APSS been released?

Will the Government allow Offerors to base their pricing on whatever configuration the Offeror deems appropriate?

Offeror's shall propose a single recommended configuration for the baselined system that was already submitted as part of the QPL process, inclusive of any change requests. This configuration includes all peripheral equipment. Specific ancillary equipment required will be ordered separately via CLINs 00009-00012A.

Attachment B, AT/CT SOW, page 3 of 36, section 4.1.1.1

Attachment B, AT/CT SOW, page 4 of 36, section 4.1.1.6.

Offeror's shall propose a recommended configuration for the baselined system that was already submitted as part of the QPL process, inclusive of any change requests. This means a single configuration should be quoted.

Attachment B, AT/CT SOW, page 3 of 36, section 4.1.1.1

Attachment B, AT/CT SOW, page 3 of 36, section 4.1.1.1

Offerors shall propose a single recommended configuration for the baselined system that was already submitted as part of the QPL process, inclusive of any change requests.

Should the costs associated with upgrading to APSS v6.2 be included in this proposal?

TSA expects to release an approved APSS v6.2 no later than the first quarter of Fiscal Year 19.

Attachment B, AT/CT SOW, page 4 of 36, section 4.1.1.6.

In accordance with the RFP, TSA will evaluate how the Offeror demonstrates how its platform is upgradeable to the APSS requirements as well as the timeline provided by the vendor to upgrade its system to achieve APSS 6.2 standards. Additionally, TSA may use its own test data to verify the accuracy of the vendor's response such as test results and progress made to this point for the ongoing APSS Algorithm development submitted to TSA.

How will the Government evaluate upgradeability to an unreleased standard such as APSS v6.2?

Attachment B, AT/CT SOW, page 4 of 36, section 4.1.1.6.

Per the requirements set forth in Section V.A, 8.7.1.1 Offeror's shall provide a separate breakdown of CLINs 00001 and 00001A, which breaks out the build-up for these CLINs, to upgrading the unit to the current APSS 6.2 standards and any subsequent new versions under the APSS contract. However, development of this upgrade shall not be included as these costs are included under the vendor's APSS contract as stated in RFP Section 2.1.1.

79 General The Offeror respectfully requests a 2 week delay to the submission deadline.

The proposal due date has been extend to 9AM EST on October 15, 2018.

Attachment B, AT/CT SOW, page 13 of 36, section 8.1.2.

These requirements have been removed from the Statement of Work.

Request for Proposal (RFP) 70T04018R9DAP2080, page 95 of 96, section 2.1. (Basis of Award)

It is up to the Agency to determine the procurement process to be used. For this procurement, TSA intends to make a single contract award to the Offeror whose offer, conforming to this solicitation, that represents the “Best Value” to the Government.

If IT requirements are not yet defined, how shall offerors provide pricing?

In past procurements, the Agency determined it was in their interest to have two or more vendors for TSE. Can you elaborate on why the Agency has now determined it is in the government’s best interest to award to only one vendor?

Attachment B, AT/CT SOW, page 5 of 36, section 4.1.1.7.

Production data and result data are the "final images" generated by the transportation screening equipment (TSE) and displayed to the operator of the TSE. The Government intends to use these images to :

- Identify anomalies

- Train screening staff

- Improve the performance ('train') detection algorithms.

Can the Government define production and result data?

What is the Government’s intended use of data as described in sections 4.1.1.7., 4.1.1.7.1., 4.1.1.7.2., 4.1.1.7.3?

Attachment B, AT/CT SOW, page 11 of 36, section 5.3.2.

Per section 5, Simulators shall be shipped with the currently approved software version, not APSS. Section 5.3.2 is saying that eventually, once APSS algorithm is certified and ready to be deployed to AT/CT systems, then the AT/CT simulators shall be upgradeable to that version. Until that time, the simulators should be provided at the configuration used during qualification testing.

Attachment B, AT/CT SOW, page 13 of 36, section 8.1.2.

These requirements have been removed from the Statement of Work.

This section requests Simulators be shipped certified to APSS v6.1. Attachment B, SOW, page 4 of 36, section

4.1.1.6 requests EDS provided certified to APSS v6.2. Is this correct? Prior to completion of APSS certification, can AT2 be supplied?

Can the Government define the IT requirements referenced in this SOW section?

Attachment 14, Page 3, Sec.

4, Para 4.1.1.1

Can TSA supply or publish the latest version of the Checkpoint Design Guide as listed on 4.1.1.1, in Attachment 14 of the SOW.

Checkpoint Design Guide 6.1 has been added as an attachment to the RFP.

RFP Attachment 15,OTA, Article III

In Article III, the TSA states that any selected OEM will enter into good faith agreements with the TSA’s chosen third-party maintenance provider. Does the TSA contemplate or anticipate selecting a third-party provider that has not pre-coordinated its bid to the TSA with the OEM’s supplying the AT/CT equipment?

No. The Government anticipates that any prospective third-party maintenance providers would coordinate with all TSE OEMs during the bid and proposal process. However, per the requirements set forth in the OTA and the AT/CT SOW, it is up to the OEM to negotiate, in good faith, and enter into any necessary agreements with TSA’s third-party service providers to provide any Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM)-certified repair parts, consumables, tools and test equipment, technical documentation, technician training and certification, and labor as required to requesting Maintenance Service Providers to enable effective and affordable maintenance services for AT/CT systems. Further, per the RFP, failure to provide the signed OTA, or submission of the OTA with proposed changes will result in the proposal being determined as “non-responsive” and removed from further award consideration.

The SOW states, “All solutions and services shall meet DHS and TSA Enterprise Architecture policies, standards, and procedures.” The OEM requests that copies of the applicable documents be provided to support its proposal response.

This section has been revised. In order to comply with the updated requirements, TSA will use the information / data contained in the configuration management (CM) documentation submitted at the time of QDP submission. No additional information is required to be submitted by Offerors for this requirement.

Attachment 14, Appendix B.

Page 32, Sec. 6, “DHS and

TSA Enterprise Architecture Compliance”, Para. (b), Sentence 1

The Tradeoff Process is discussed in FAR Part 15 "Contracting by Negotiation."

Request for Proposal (RFP) 70T04018R9DAP2080, page 95 of 96, section 2.1. (Basis of Award)

The RFP states the Agency will use the “tradeoffs methodology” to evaluate proposals. Can you elaborate on how this methodology works? Is there a publicly available document that explains this methodology that you can reference to us?

85 RFP, Section III.A, B, page 37

Can you please provide Point of Contact Information at Global Systems Technology, Inc. and Deloitte Consulting LLP for Offerors to contact to establish the agreements referenced in the RFP?

Offerors may reach out to the Contracting Officer, Jessica Seay, at Jessica.Seay@tsa.dhs.gov prior to the proposal due date for contact information at these companies if necessary.

86 RFP, Page 5, Section I(3)

Is CLIN 0001A (Optional: AT/CT System) intended to allow OEMs to offer a variation of a lane configuration that will still meet all the requirements of the SOW (e.g. the word “Optional” refers to an alternative design) or is the Optional CLIN 0001A simply an extension of the quantity of the same configuration as CLIN 0001, beyond the 300 units in CLIN 0001?

Optional CLIN 00001A is additional units at the same configuration of CLIN 00001. The quantities for these CLINs will be identified in the award document.

Attachment B, AT/CT SOW, page 3 of 36, section 4.1.1.1

What configuration should Offerors use in their proposal?

Offerors shall utilize the configuration that underwent qualification testing, inclusive of any change requests, which was submitted as part of the initial qualification data package (QDP) submission, bailed by TSA, and purchased for Operational Test and Evaluation (OT&E). Any systems outside of this configuration, except for any change requests requested to be approved prior to delivery that are submitted as part of the Offeror’s proposal, will need to go through further qualification testing and will not be considered for award under this solicitation

RFP, Section III.A, I.A, page

Can Offerors propose multiple configurations or other ancillary equipment that is not currently part of their configuration undergoing qualification testing via FAR 52.204-22 “Alternative Line Item Proposal (Jan 2017)?"

No. As clarified in the response above, Offerors shall utilize the configuration that underwent qualification testing, inclusive of any change requests, which was submitted as part of the initial qualification data package (QDP) submission, bailed by TSA, and purchased for Operational Test and Evaluation (OT&E). Any systems outside of this configuration, except for any change requests requested to be approved prior to delivery that are submitted as part of the Offeror’s proposal, will need to go through further qualification testing and will not be considered for award under this solicitation. The intent of this clause is ensure “the resulting contract is economically and administratively advantageous to the Government and the Offeror” rather than allow for different configurations. Further, per FAR 52.204-22(b) “Offers that do not comply with the line items specified in this solicitation may be determined to be nonresponsive or unacceptable."

89 RFP, Section I, 3, pg 5 What is the purpose of CLIN 00001A? Is it to order additional AT/CT units or for the future APS requirements?

The solicitation requirements are solely for AT/CT units in the configuration that underwent qualification testing, inclusive of any change requests, which was submitted as part of the initial qualification data package (QDP) submission, bailed by TSA, and purchased for Operational Test and Evaluation (OT&E). CLIN 00001A an Optional CLIN that allows the Government to order additional AT/CT units should there be a need after the initial units are purchased under CLIN 00001. A separate solicitation will be issued for the future APS requirements.

Sheet1