Addendum 3 S-10700-00009858 EIS GEO Orthoimagery Services_Draft 2_doj approved.pdf

RFP: S-10700-00009858 – EIS GEO Orthoimagery Services Page 1 of 4

RFP: S-10700-00009858

EIS GEO ORTHOIMAGERY SERVICES – ADDENDUM 3

This Addendum 3 to the above-mentioned RFP (“Addendum”) modifies the RFP only to the extent specifically indicated in this document. All other provisions of the RFP that are not specifically addressed by this Addendum are not revised and shall remain in full force and effect. This Addendum is added as an integral part of the original

RFP.

SECTION 1: PURPOSE

The purpose of this addendum is to:

1.01 MODIFICATION OF Section 5.04 Point and Score Calculations

1.02 Formally answer questions that were submitted to the Agency during the Question-and-Answer portion of the Solicitation.

SECTION 2: MODIFICATIONS

Section 5.04 Point and Score Calculations, D – Quality Assurance, is modified as follows; new language is indicated by bold underlined font, deleted language is indicated by strikethrough font:

“Describe how the orthoimagery data is processed after being captured by the airplane instrumentation.

Describe the quality assurance process and steps taken to address the following common orthoimagery issues:

1. Atmospheric artifacts: Cloud cover, smoke and haze should be absent. Photographic Conditions:

Capture imagery during periods when the atmosphere is free of smoke, dust, and excessive haze, and when well-defined images can be resolved. Image tiles with greater than ten percent (10%) cloud cover or cloud shadows will not be accepted. The ground must be free from snow below timberline, standing water (other than natural or man-made ponds and lakes), flood waters from streams which have overflowed their banks, and wet ground which obscures field, soil or crop boundary lines. Minimize specular reflections, especially in agriculture areas, by avoiding acquisition during periods of peak solar reflectivity, or by patching the area using imagery from other exposures.”

SECTION 3: QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Question 1:

RFP Attachment A, State of Oregon Sample Standard Professional Services Contract, Section 9, Ownership of Work Product

This section requires that “All Work Product created by Consultant pursuant to the Contract, including derivative works and compilations, and whether or not such Work Product is considered a ‘work made for hire,’ shall be the exclusive property of Owner.”

RFP: S-10700-00009858 – EIS GEO Orthoimagery Services Page 2 of 4

Part 1: It is industry standard for the contractor or subcontractor to retain intellectual property rights of the acquired raw imagery, which is not yet processed to a final orthoimagery deliverable product under this contract.

The State will nevertheless retain the right to use the raw imagery as employed in the final deliverable product, but the contractor or subcontractor would like to retain intellectual property ownership of the raw imagery itself.

Can the State confirm whether it requires full ownership in the raw imagery, and if yes, may contractor or subcontractor retain a right to create and market derivative works, not in direct competition with the final products delivered under this contract?

Part 2: Further, we would like to propose a licensed data product to satisfy the requirements of this RFP while lowering the project costs to the State government while retaining the intellectual property of the data product for commercial purposes. We have attached here a sample of our Content Program Data License for State Government. Could you please review and let us know if this would be considered and, if so, is it acceptable in scope for the State’s needs? If data sharing to the public is a firm requirement, then we would recommend the following remedies:

1. Permit the State to make a public-facing website or mapping portal, under the data license, without imagery download capability.

2. Permit the State to allow imagery GeoTIFF data sharing at the end of the 3-year term of the contract.

3. Allow Consultant to retain the intellectual property on the data products for commercial purposes.

Answer 1:

Part 1: “Raw or pre-processed imagery” may or may not be considered “Consultant Intellectual Property,” as that term is defined and addressed in Section 9 of the Sample Contract. Within the scope of the RFP and any resulting Contract, “raw or pre-processed imagery” is specific to the Vendor and their business operations. The State is not requesting the delivery of raw imagery, but an orthorectified product that meets the Oregon specifications. The State requires full ownership of the final orthoimagery deliverable.

Part 2: At this time, the State will not be negotiating the Ownership of Work Product provisions, as outlined in Section 9, Ownership of Work Product in the RFP Attachment A – Sample Standard Professional Services Contract. Note, however, that the Section 9 provisions include “Consultant Use of Work Product” provisions in subsection f. of Section 9, that describe the flexibility provided to the Consultant on the use of any Work Product developed during the course of Contract performance.

Question 2:

Att-H-Statewide Standards Spreadsheet_Low-vOct2020.xlsx

We are unsure how to complete this matrix table. Could you please explain its purpose and how to complete this matrix?

Answer 2:

Per Section 5.04 Point and Score Calculations G. Security Provisions:

“Attachment H, Statewide Information and Cyber Security Standards, is provided to Proposers as a reference for what minimum security requirements will be. Proposers are not required to complete this Attachment H spreadsheet and to include the completed spreadsheet with their Proposals. This spreadsheet will be completed as part of resulting Contract negotiations.” Any Proposal that is received conditioned on Contracting Agency’s acceptance of any other terms and conditions or rights to negotiate will be rejected.

RFP: S-10700-00009858 – EIS GEO Orthoimagery Services Page 3 of 4

Question 3:

Section 5.04 Point and Score Calculations. Section D Quality Assurance Items in this section are in conflict with Exhibit A, Statement of Work, Section 3. For example, in Section D, it states cloud cover must be absent; whereas Exhibit A, Section 3.1.1.4. states that “Image tiles with greater than ten percent (10%) cloud cover or cloud shadows will not be accepted.”

Answer 3:

Section D. #1 is incorrect in stating that cloud cover should be absent. The correct language is in Exhibit A Section 3.1.1.4 stating that “Image tiles with greater than ten percent (10%) cloud cover or cloud shadows will not be accepted.”

See “Section 2: Modifications” above for specific revisions to the Section 5.04, subsection D Quality Assurance provisions of the RFP, addressing cloud cover requirements.

Question 4:

Section 3.1.1.4. Photographic Conditions

Minimize specular reflections – does this include water features?

Answer 4:

Yes, the statement does include water features as the key word in the phrase is “minimize” specular reflections.

Again, see “Section 2: Modifications” above for specific revisions to the Section 5.04, subsection D Quality Assurance provisions of the RFP, addressing standing water and water features.

Question 5:

Section 3.1.2.7. Preliminary Orthophotography

We would like to propose an online streaming imagery platform for viewing of preliminary orthophotography. Is that acceptable?

The Owner will review Preliminary Orthophotography based on Section 3.1.1 and its subsections as applicable and provide Consultant notice of errors or acceptance, within 30 Business Days of receipt.

Is it the State’s assumption with this timeline that field operations crew and equipment remain on site for 30 days after data acquisition should any re-flights be required?

Would the State be open to a discussion on the time to review the preliminary orthophotography and the period for any corrections to allow for the overall delivery to meet the 90-day target for processing?

Answer 5:

The State is not making any assumptions regarding Vendor operations and does not have any pre-defined expectations regarding crew and equipment that may be needed for the Vendor to deliver the products requested.

It is up to each Vendor to manage their operations to meet the terms of any resulting Contract.

Regarding timelines presented in the Statement of Work of the Sample Contract, the State would like the Vendors to address any timeline adjustments needed in their Proposals.

RFP: S-10700-00009858 – EIS GEO Orthoimagery Services Page 4 of 4

Question 6:

Section 3.1.2.8. Final delivery of orthophotography

Would the State be open to increasing the 45-day timeframe for completion of final delivery following preliminary QC acceptance?

Answer 6:

Regarding timelines presented in the Statement of Work of the Sample Contract, the State would like the Vendors to address any timeline adjustments needed in their Proposals.

Question 7:

Section 3.2. Survey/Ground Control Acquisition and Processing Services

We use licensed GCPs for ground control of orthophotography. This data is not owned by us. If GCP delivery is required, then we would need to refer you to our GCP source Vendor for purchase. Is that acceptable?

Answer 7:

This is a question that the State is unable to answer as it should be included as a part of the Proposer’s proposal.

The only resulting Contract from this solicitation will be between the Owner and the successful Proposer. Any Vendor data ownership issues between the Vendors and their subconsultants/subcontractors must be resolved separately, and then confirmed in any resulting Contract negotiated between the Owner and the successful Proposer.

Question 8:

Please confirm no pricing for services are required at this time.

Answer 8:

Correct, pricing is not required at this time, as this RFP is a qualifications-based solicitation process under ORS 279C.100 – 279C.125 and the applicable DAS and DOJ administrative rules. Pricing will be discussed during resulting contract negotiations, following issuance of the Notification of Intent to Award.

Question 9:

Please clarify the purpose of Attachment-G-Req and Specs Checklist.xlsx: Are you asking if the Vendor is/is not capable of providing these services at any point during the period of performance of the contract? Or are you asking if the Vendor can perform these services during the acquisition season of June 1, 2024 – August 31, 2024?

Answer 9:

The evaluation criteria within the RFP provide the topics upon which the Vendors and their proposals will be scored, including sections on Technical Capacity and Quality Assurance. Vendors should address the Vendors’ general capacity, ability, expertise, etc. within their Proposals. Attachment G is part of the Technical Specifications scoring and is tied directly to the Services to be performed, in order to produce the specified deliverables. The spreadsheet provides an easy method for Vendors to indicate the specifications they will or will not meet as part of the Services performed under any resulting Contract. It also provides a comment or notes column for the Vendors to address any deviations from the specifications.