Addendum No. 1 Questions Answers - DEP Solicitation No. 2022020_04.26.22.pdf

DEP Solicitation No. 2022020 Addendum No. 1 Page 1 of 22

ADDENDUM No. 1

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

DEP Procurement Section

3800 Commonwealth Boulevard, MS#93 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000

April 26, 2022

Addendum To: DEP Solicitation No. 2022020, entitled “Florida Seafloor Mapping Initiative”

The Department hereby answers questions posed by prospective Vendors. This addendum does not need to be returned with the response.

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page

Number Question / Answer

1. - -

I was provided with the following reference:

https://fdep.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=7139678b 571e46ee992610d48270cc30

Do you have a shapefile(s) for these areas, not tiled?

Shapefiles will be provided through the Department’s ArcGIS Online webpage and added to the SOW (Section 4.3 Project Area).

2. 1.1 – 1.2 5

Can FDEP please offer polygon outlines (digital shape files) for the 6x designate areas, as seen in Attachment-10 – with separation linework to the (currently) understood 20m contour transition border & same for potential SSS areas shown?

Please see answer to Question #1.

3. 1.1 – 1.2 5

Can FDEP please offer the final/established priority for area completion (of the 6x areas) – OR – within each separate area, is there an understood prioritization of smaller sectors? OR, Will this be at the full discretion of the awardee following receipt of a Task Order?

The Department will communicate any prioritization for a region during the Work Assignment Process outlined in section 4.14 of the revised RFP and may further refine specific data collection areas in the Technical Proposal approval process outlined in section 4.4.1 of the revised solicitation.

4. 1.1 – 1.2 5

The RFP documentation omits details on schedule expectations, i.e., ‘Award-to- Completion’ – For purpose of Form-D pricing calculations: Upon task order award, of an identified area, should it be assumed that a contractor can thereafter complete acquisition as convenient to a backlog of other assignments?

The Department anticipates data acquisition to begin in the fall of 2022.

Contractor schedules and backlogs need to be identified in the RFP response on Tab F. Schedule and data collection capability will be one of the prioritization criteria for contract awards.

https://fdep.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=7139678b571e46ee992610d48270cc30 https://fdep.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=7139678b571e46ee992610d48270cc30

Addendum No. 1 Page 2 of 22

5. 1.2 5

RFP suggests topo-bathy collected to maximum extent practicable as first step.

Can you please clarify if this includes deeper than 20m if possible for bathy lidar in a particular area.

Lidar data should be collected to the maximum depth possible, as step 1. See third paragraph of section 4.1 of the revised solicitation. (Only sonar data is divided into shallower and deeper areas in the Revised Price Sheet.) During the Task Assignment process, DEP staff will work with vendors to determine the depth potential for LiDAR data collection within each specific region at the anticipated time of data collection.

6. 1.8 7

Can FDEP please allow for Posting of Answers No-Later-Than +7-Days following the deadline for the ‘Questions-Due’ date – OR – Extend the ‘Responses-Due’ deadline to +14-Days following release of all Answers/Clarifications.

Based on changes to the RFP, a second Q&A period will be initiated. The revised RFP contains an updated timeline in Section 1.8 to reflect these changes and final proposal submittals.

7. 2.17 13

FDEP makes no reference to requirements for professional oversight to the works – typical of state topographic and federal hydrographic operations. Please advise requirements or intent, for quality of works to fall under the oversight of FL-registered professional land-surveyors or certified hydrographers?

All data collection efforts, which include LiDAR and sonar data; and/or any other surveys or data collection as defined in Rule 5J-17.050, F.A.C., will be completed under the direction of a Licensed Florida Professional Land Surveyor (PLS), in accordance with Chapter 472, F.S., which will be selected under a separate existing contract of the Department. Please see revised RFP Section 1.2, 4.1, and 4.4.

8. 3.1 15

For a company with primary operations outside the US, and no past-experience working for US private or US governmental clients (but with international experience) – provided the MFMP registration is accepted, are such bidders eligible for qualification & award?

No Florida law or regulation makes foreign vendors automatically ineligible for qualification and award under this solicitation, however, note that all selected contractors doing work in Florida must comply with all federal, state, and local laws, rules, codes, ordinances, and licensing requirements applicable to the conduct of its business in the state. Prior to the execution of a contract, the selected vendor(s) must be properly licensed to do business in Florida and appropriately registered with the Florida Department of State if required by federal or state law. Further, absent certain exceptions, a foreign company is considered ineligible if it is listed on Florida’s Convicted, Suspended, Discriminatory Vendor List(s), Antitrust Violator Vendor List(s), and/or Scrutinized List(s) of Prohibited Companies.

9. 4.1 20

Can FDEP please confirm that Aerial-Lidar data is a discrete exercise, to be completed in its entirety through the 6x State areas PRIOR to initiation of Vessel ‘Marine’ acquisition programs. Thus, Can FDEP declare or estimate their expectation for this transition to on-water ‘acoustic/sonar’ acquisition?

The LiDAR data collection effort will begin as phase 1 and the Department is targeting Fall 2022 for data collection to begin. Once contracts and Task Assignments are initiated with selected lidar vendors, the anticipated timeline for sonar will be refined. The Department intends to keep time lags between various

Addendum No. 1 Page 3 of 22 data collection efforts as short as practicable within a region to avoid potential changes in seafloor between LiDAR and sonar data collection efforts. Sonar data collection will begin as soon as lidar data quality and extent can be verified within a region to identify data gaps.

10. 4.1 20

Is it to be considered by bidding parties that Side-Scan Sonar systems and operators are intended to be onboard Acoustic/Sonar vessels at any time that MBES acquisition is undertaken? (i.e., SSS being a supplemental suite system) - OR - Is FDEP intending this to be a discrete activity scheduled in follow-up to Lidar/MBES coverage and processing, utilized for imaging of specific (resource) sites targeted for further investigation?

The solicitation is being modified to remove the request for side scan sonar. This revised RFP will continue with only LiDAR and MBES.

11. 4.7.1 25

What is noted for the vertical accuracy are for water depths less than 100m, per the NOAA HSSD2021 there are different criteria for water depths greater than 100m, can FDEP include this in the SOW? This seems to be ambiguous between under 100m and greater than 100m of water depths.

Accuracy requirements for sonar have been modified. Depths 0 to 20 meters shall follow IHO Special Order accuracy standards. NOAA's HSSD 2021 shall be followed for the rest of the depths (20 to 100 meters and greater than 100 meters).

Complete accuracy details have been added to the SOW. Please see revised RFP Section 4.7 for complete accuracy requirement details.

12. 4.7.1 25

Can FDEP confirm requirements for Order 1a water depths? Order 1a requirements in water depths greater than 100m is ambiguous to NOAA HSSD 2021.

Please see answer to Question #11.

13. 4.8.1 25

Can FDEP clarify the ASPRS “Positional_Accuracy_Standards.pdf”, if for topographic LiDAR only?

There are no major differences in the reporting standards between topographic or bathymetric LiDAR data. The ASPRS Positional Accuracy Standards for Digital Geospatial Data are standards used in the assessment and reporting of the horizontal and vertical accuracy of geospatial data generated mainly from LiDAR and aerial imagery. Collected topographic data shall follow all LiDAR applicable items described in the ASPRS standard including, but not limited to, calculating relative accuracy, absolute accuracy, number, type and distribution of checkpoints, and reporting.

14. 4.9.1 –

4.9.2 26

Can FDEP confirm that horizontal and vertical positioning for LiDAR and MBES can be derived from post processing methods such as the Trimble CenterPoint RTX (PP-RTX) multi-frequency GNSS positioning and using NOAA’s/NGS VDatum utility reduced the vertical data to the desired datum?

As long as required positional accuracies are met and final products are delivered in the requested datum, the methodology described above is acceptable.

15. 4.10 26

Can FDEP confirm all sonar Data Collection will follow NOAA’s HSSD 2021 document?

Please see answer to Question #11. Sonar data collection, general collection and processing procedures shall follow NOAA's HSSD 2021.

Addendum No. 1 Page 4 of 22

16. 4.10.4 27

Can FDEP please confirm that this relates to topographic Lidar Sensors covering the intertidal zone to 500m inland and also guiding operations for (1.5xSecchi) ALB systems that are seeking to maximize seabed penetration at low tide. Thus, allowing for 3xSecchi ALB systems to operate beyond the intertidal zone throughout the tide-cycle, where equivalent (maximized) coverage can be met or exceeded, where compared to 1.5xSecchi systems.

LiDAR systems intended for the topographic collection are required to be capable of at least 1.5x secchi depth for shallow waterbodies seaward of the shoreline and the intertidal zone, while LiDAR systems capable of 3x secchi depth or greater are required for the bathymetric collection. Please see revised RPF Sections 4.5 and 4.6.

17. 4.11 27

Can FDEP clarify that this section refers to LiDAR deliverable and all sonar deliverables are per NOAA’s HSSD 2021? Apart from sections 4.11.7 through 4.11.9.

Apart from the final deliverables (revised RFP sections 4.11.7 through 4.11.10), a Technical Proposal and Progress Reports are required as part of supplemental deliverables (sections 4.4.1 and 4.4.4 respectively).

18. 4.12.1 29

Can FDEP clarify if delivery is only by Azure, or would other equivalent cloud services be acceptable?

MS Azure is required for compatibility with current infrastructure used by the Department and federal partners (who will host a copy of the data set).

19. 4.12.4 –

4.12.5 29

This question is posed by way of a likely scenario… A contractor with a 1.5xSecchi product makes 3x consecutive attempts in acquisition of an assigned ALB ‘sector’ – flying test lines each attempt, failing to acquire data due to weather or turbidity levels.

According to the $-per-km2 rate-schedule for this awarded task-order, how is the contractor reimbursed for this unproductive coverage?

Is this same ‘sector’ then dismissed for ALB assignment, subsequently re-assigned to the Acoustic – OR – assigned to a vendor operating a 3xSecchi ALB system?

All data acquisition shall proceed according to standards set in Section 4.10 of revised RFP and as authorized by the Department’s PLS overseeing the Task Assignment.

20. 4.14 30

Can FDEP please confirm that Form-D pricing is an “Indicative-Price” – with post-qualification quotations on specific work-assignments subject to full re-evaluation of an appropriate price(Attachment-5 Insert to contracting docs) – OR – Can FDEP please advise any expected linkage/correlation between the Form-D pricing and subsequent Attachment-5 quotations that a vendor will submit?

Form D, Revised Price Sheet will be used as ceiling prices and individual task costs will be determined through the process outlined in section 4.14.

21. 6.1 34

With potential for >20 contractors submitting overlapping data sets on behalf of client – Can FDEP offer the philosophy of data integration, and therefore the limits of responsibility where data ambiguity is experienced. At what point is Contractor released from efforts (costs) in resolving mis-match between data-sets?

The State Geographic Information Office is coordinating with federal staff at the USGS Coastal National Elevation Database (CoNED) office who specialize in creating seamless digital elevation models from inland to offshore. As long as the Contractor meets the delivery specification for the product throughout the agreed

Addendum No. 1 Page 5 of 22 upon extent, the Department along with federal partners will merge the derived products to create a statewide product that will account for temporal differences in the source data collection.

22. 6.1 34

Offeror requests that FDEP present more detail on a ‘Sample Task Order’ (i.e., SOW parameters fully outlined) for bidders to rationalize a common/equitable assessment of a typical work-assignment, and its corresponding cost-base. FDEP may receive highly variable price-points where one vendor assumes ALB operations over an AOI of 500km2, while another assumes efficiencies from an assignment of 4,000km2 – similarly the productivity rates (hence price-pt) of bathymetric acquisition varies hugely between 30m water-depth, and that within a work-assignment with average depths 150m. Will FDEP acknowledge and accept eventual scalar growth of the price-point submitted, where the bidder’s assumed parameters do not match those of the eventual nominated work-assignment?

For LiDAR data collection, Task Assignments are envisioned to cover the extent of each region to the anticipated depth of light extinction. For deeper water sonar, Task Assignments will extend from the extent of quality LiDAR data collected to the project boundary identified in the solicitation by region. For shallow water sonar, anticipated data gaps may be smaller, disconnected and more widely spread. The Respondent will have the opportunity to refine their proposal based on the process identified in Section 4.14, Work Assignment Process.

23.

F38011882 7_FormDPr iceSheet.xl s

MBES_

shallow

Tab

In line 7 it refers to the ASPRS “Positional_Accuracy_Standards.pdf”, but in line 6 it states “All MBES data acquisition, processing, and creation of deliverable products shall follow National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Office of Coast Survey (OCS) Hydrographic Survey Specification and Deliverables, April 2021.” Can FDEP clarify which standard it to be followed for MBES?

Please see answer to Questions #11 and #13, along with Section 4.8 for Quality Level standards. Sonar data accuracy assessment and reporting shall follow the methodology in NOAA's HSSD 2021. The Price Sheet has been revised.

24.

F38011882 7_FormDPr iceSheet.xl s

MBES_

deep Tab

In line 7 it refers to the ASPRS “Positional_Accuracy_Standards.pdf”, but in line 6 it states “All MBES data acquisition, processing, and creation of deliverable products shall follow National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Office of Coast Survey (OCS) Hydrographic Survey Specification and Deliverables, April 2021.” Can FDEP clarify which standard it to be followed for MBES?

Please see answer to Question #23.

25. - - We would like to request information on the incumbent firms Proposal, Rates and Payments up to date issued for the previous awarded contract.

These services have not been previously procured.

26. 2 9 Can a vendor be prime on one proposal and a sub on another proposal?

Each vendor can only be a prime or a subcontractor.

27. 4.4.1.3.2 23

Is backscatter data collection required on this project?

Yes. Refer to section 6.2 of the HSSD, 2021, and Section 4.10.10 of the revised RFP.

“All multibeam echo sounder surveys require concurrent time series backscatter data acquisition to supplement the utility of hydrographic data for non-charting purposes.”

28. - - Is there a requirement for a specific data acquisition software?

Any data acquisition software may be used, as long as accuracy standards and quality levels are attained, and data is provided in the required format.

Addendum No. 1 Page 6 of 22

29. - -

Will singlebeam data collection be permitted in areas too shallow for multibeam (i.e. 0-5 meters)?

No. The areas unsuitable for MBES will be eliminated from planes data collection during the Task Assignment location.

30. - - If we submit a proposal as a prime, are we still permitted to be a sub on another team?

Please see answer to Question #26.

31. - -

The cost proposal is to be submitted as a per unit cost. Is there an allowance for weather days?

Costs are based on data collection per unit, and therefore the cost should include ancillary costs such as weather delays.

32. - -

Can the unit price for hydrographic data collection be changed to a linear measurement of survey lines rather than a unit of area measurement? Multibeam swath width is a function of depth therefore the same miles/kilometers traveled in 20 meters depth will cover a smaller area than in 200 meter depth waters.

Please use the requested unit price so that proposals can be standardized for evaluation.

33. - -

We have vessel mounted side scan and towed side scan. To help support our cost estimate, we would like to know what the side scan data is to be used for? For example, shallow water vessel-mounted side scan can provide quality side scan acquisition for hard bottom and wrecks but in deep water the imagery would not be high resolution or of high quality. Is it mandatory to have 100% coverage with the side scan in deeper water, the same as the multibeam?

Please see answer to Question #10.

34. 1.1 9

For award purposes, do we have 6 regions or 12 (6 regions x 2 depth strata per region)?

The proposal is structured for six (6) state regions with the potential for four different data collection methods per region: LiDAR, shallow water MBES, deep water MBES, and deep water_2 MBES.

Note: Please see answer to Question #10 regarding side scan sonar.

35. 11 9

The RFP states, "The Department intends to make an award of up to five (5) contracts per Data Collection Method for each of the six (6) regions," but some responses from Alex Reed during the Q&A strongly implied these figures were a floor (or at least a goal) rather than a ceiling (e.g., "We will award 5 contracts per DCM per region.") Which is it?

Please refer to Section 6.1 of the revised RFP. “The Department may award up to five (5) Contracts per Data Collection Method for each region, to the responsive and responsible Respondents whose Proposals receive the highest Final Scores and are determined to be the most advantageous to the State, taking into consideration the price and other criteria detailed in this solicitation.“

36. 3.4 16 Do the ‘tabs’ refer to a section of a word doc or an excel spreadsheet tab?

Neither. The purpose of tabs is to assist in organizing the Respondent’s proposal.

The tabs delineate each volume of information required in your response.

37. 3.4 17 If where are subs on a proposal, should each sub submit three (3) Client Reference Forms?

No, Client References must be completed for the Prime Contractor.

Addendum No. 1 Page 7 of 22

38. 3.4.2.4 17 In reference to the data storage requirements, will the State of Florida allow an encrypted AWS S3 Cloud storage as opposed to the MS Azure cloud storage?

Please see answer to Question #18.

39. - - Can a shapefile of the regions to be mapped be provided without tiling?

Please see answer to Question #1.

40. - - Will FDEP permit a contractor to respond to the solicitation as both a PRIME contractor and as a team member (subcontractor) with another organization?

Please see answer to Question #26.

41. - -

In consideration of the ambiguity surrounding the State of Florida's business licensing requirements as they apply to this Solicitation discussed during the pre-proposal conference, please clarify the specific requirements for personnel and business licensing.

Please see answer to Questions #7 and #8.

42. - -

Will existing and planned topobathy Lidar (i.e. JALBTCX data) be considered before reflying areas already mapped?

Prior to the Work Assignment process outlined in Section 4.14, the Department will identify existing datasets that meet the quality level and specifications required to compliment this initiative. Those areas will be removed from the data collection effort within that region prior to Task Assignment the pre-quote meeting and award.

43. 3.4 16-18

RFP indicates in 1.4 (pg. 6) “Definitions” that “Respondents” are the entity that submits a Response of this RFP. Does that mean that only the Prime entity’s information, as the Respondent, is required in the documents comprising Volumes I-III?

Yes, unless it is a joint venture. In that case, joint venture Respondents must submit one Business Response Form (Form A) per venturer.

44. 3.4 16-18 Does FDEP require each Subrecipient/Vendor providing a service for the Prime Respondent to submit their own Volumes and/or Forms?

No, only the Prime Respondent shall provide a Response.

45. 3.4 16-18

Should the Prime Respondent submit one version of Volumes I-III with information for each of their Subrecipients/Vendors incorporated? Should each vendor have its own tab for each, or one tab with information for multiple entities?

The Department is asking for one (1) response from the Prime Contractor as outlined within Section 3, of the revised RFP, Response Instructions. The Prime Contractor is responsible for its subcontractors and should only provide requested documentation for subcontractors if specifically requested within the Solicitation.

Also, please see answer to Question #122.

46. 3.4 16-18 Does each Subrecipient/Vendor need to submit its own copy of Forms A, B and C (with 3 client references)?

No.

47. 2.20 14

It’s noted that the State encourages CBEs to participate in the procurement. Is there a CBE or SB goal for this contract? How will teams with CBEs be evaluated?

The Department encourages fair and open competition with all vendors.

However, a preference is only granted in the event of a tie as further explained on

Addendum No. 1 Page 8 of 22

Form E, Award Preferences Form. All responses will be evaluated in accordance with Section 5, Evaluation Criteria.

48. 4.14.1 30

It’s noted that the Lowest Quote Method will be used to award task orders. We understand that this type of work requires a Quality Based Selection to be used for the state of FL. What is DEPs stance on this?

Please see answer to Question #7. This solicitation is for data collection only and is price based.

49. - -

Can you provide additional information regarding vendor cloud storage requirements for this RFP/data?

Please see answer to Question #18. Please provide more specificity if further clarification is needed.

50.

Please clarify if unit pricing is to include task management/project management and cloud storage, etc. Costs or if these costs will be addressed separately.

Please see answer to Question #31.

51.

Can a vendor be both a prime and a subcontractor for this solicitation response?

Please see answer to Question #26.

52.

What budget is available for this contract?

While funds have been appropriated to support this effort, a set dollar amount has not been determined at this time.

53.

In the draft contract for RFP provided, item 5b states, “The Department shall not reimburse the Contractor for any costs incurred in the performance of this Contract.” Can you please clarify this statement?

The Respondent’s proposed rates must be all inclusive to provide the services requested within the revised RFP as such services will not be eligible for cost reimbursement. Paragraph 5a of the draft contract states, “As consideration for the services rendered by Contractor under the terms of this Contract, the Department shall pay the Contractor on a fixed price and fixed unit rate basis for the completion of services as specified in the Scope of Work.” Payment will be based on the successful delivery of data and derived products outlined in the Task Assignment based on established unit price for km2.

54.

In the draft contract for RFP provided, under special terms and conditions, attachment 2, item 4: Retainage, what if any percent of the contract will be retained?

As stated in Attachment 2, Section 4 - Retainage of the Draft Contract, Retainage may be up to a maximum of 10% of the total amount of the Contract.

55.

Section 1.2 states that the side-scan sonar may be collected simultaneously in some areas. For the side-scan tab in Form D, the Price Sheet, can it be taken that the costs should reflect the additional cost of side-scan sonar collection only (i.e., that the vessel and other costs for multibeam survey are already covered and the per km2 cost reflects additional equipment, personnel and processing only)?

Please see answer to Question #10.

56. 4.10.3 26

The requirement of water clarity states that a clarity of 1.5 Secchi disk depth or greater is preferred for LiDAR. Can you please further explain this statement?

What is the unit of measurement of Secchi disk depth. If the unit is meters, does that mean that we use LiDAR for up to 1.5 m depth? Or is the intent to use the value as a measure of LiDAR sensor performance (for e.g., the LiDAR sensor should be able to perform 1.5x the Secchi depth)?

Addendum No. 1 Page 9 of 22

Please see answer to Question #16.

57. 4.10.3 26

The requirement of water clarity states that a clarity of 1.5 Secchi disk depth or greater is preferred for LiDAR. However, it is unclear if a topobathymetric lidar sensor should be used in areas that have depths greater than 1.5x Secchi disk depths. Depending on the type of sensor used, there may be more efficiency gained by using deep channel lidar sensors for water clarity that exceed 1.5x Secchi depth performance, as compared to collecting those areas with sonar in the 0-20 m water depths. However, these deep-channel sensors typically require a bigger aircraft and cost significantly more than the shallow-channel sensors. As a result, the cost per square kilometer may be higher if the deep channel sensor is used, yet, providing a lower overall cost to the State as there will be less sonar surveys to perform in the 0-20 m depth ranges. How do we account for these potential savings to the State when the requirement is to provide unit cost for each type of sensor (lidar, MBES, etc.)?

Please see answer to Question #16.

58. 4.10.3 26

The requirement of water clarity states that a clarity of 1.5 Secchi disk depth or greater is preferred for LiDAR. There is no mention of bottom reflectivity, which plays a significant role in the ability of the sensor to successfully map the bottom.

Is it acceptable to use LiDAR sensors that will have lower probability of obtaining a bottom elevation compared to other LiDAR sensors that have specifications which enable a higher probability of a bottom elevation for less reflective targets?

The latter sensors are often more expensive and require bigger and more expensive aircraft to operate and hence the cost per square kilometer is higher compared to the former sensors. How do we account for that price difference when the unit cost is not comparing sensors with the same capabilities? The overall cost to the State could be higher if we use less expensive “shallow channel” bathymetric sensors that have inferior performance compared to more expensive “deep channel” bathymetric sensors that have better system performance for less reflective targets.

Please see answer to Question #16 and revised RFP Sections 4.5 - 4.7 for Quality Level standards.

59. 4.10.3 26

The requirement of water clarity states that a clarity of 1.5 Secchi disk depth or greater is preferred for LiDAR. Furthermore, Section 4.10.7 Data Voids states under 4.10.7.4: “Where turbidity or other environmental conditions have deemed the area as not suitable for bathymetric LiDAR sensor returns.” Do these areas have to be surveyed with sonar to fill in the gaps greater than 9 m2? If yes, how is this accounted for in the unit cost (to determine lowest price), when sensor performance of bathymetric LiDAR sensors varies significantly, where some sensors are over two times more likely to acquire data in turbid waters compared to other sensors (for e.g., The Leica Hawkeye 4x and Teledyne Geospatial CZMIL sensors have Secchi depth performance capabilities of 3.0-4.0, whereas Riegl VQ880G and Leica Chiroptera has a Secchi depth capability of 1.5-2.0. The Hawkeye and CZMIL sensors are more expensive and require a bigger aircraft to operate. If we are to go by unit cost only with preference for lowest cost, is the State suggesting that we use the less efficient sensors to map in the 0-20 m depth range where there will be considerably more gaps due to the issues related to water clarity (turbidity and other environmental conditions)?

Please see answer to Question #16.

Addendum No. 1 Page 10 of 22

60. Form D Price Sheet N/A

The square kilometer cost for the use of sonar to meet the bathymetric accuracy requirement of QL4b can vary significantly based on water depth. For example, the number of boat track lines for 2-5 m water depths can be 4 times as many as those needed for 5-10 m water depths. Given that we don’t know the AOIs for the data gaps or the priorities of the State, the unit pricing per square kilometer will vary significantly for the 2 – 5 m water depths vs 15 – 20 m water depths.

Would it be possible to change the pricing form to provide unit cost for a line km for MBES and side scan sonar? Alternatively, can we provide pricing based on a matrix approach for depth ranges, for e.g., 0 – 2m, 2 – 5m, 5 – 10m, 10 – 20 m, 20

– 50 m, 50 – 100m, 100 – 200 m.

Please see answer to Question #32.

61. 4.7.1 25

As per section 4.7 on Page 25 for bathymetric sonar requirements, the minimum quality level for sonar data equates to QL4b with classification accuracy of Order 1a (except feature detection). However, the price sheet (Form D) requires the MBES_shallow and MBES_deep to have minimum quality level of QL2b. Can you please clarify?

Please see answer to Question #11 and revised RFP Sections 4.5 - 4.7 for Quality Level standards.

62. 1.2 5

The requirement is to collect topobathymetric lidar as step 1 and fill in the gaps with MBES in step 2. Data gaps can vary significantly based on the type of topobathymetric lidar sensor used for data acquisition. Sensors (often called ‘deep channel’ sensors) capable of capturing data in more turbid waters with lower bottom reflectivity cost significantly more than sensors that have limited capabilities due to the laser power, beam divergence, and other sensor characteristics (often called ‘shallow channel’ sensors). If the decision to acquire data is made based on the lowest price per square kilometer, only the ‘shallow channel’ sensors will be used. As a result, there will be more gaps in step 1 that will need to be filled during step 2 using less efficient MBES technology in the 0 – 20 m water depths. This will result in a higher overall cost to the government to create a seamless topobathy DEM. Data gaps can also depend on water clarity at the time of survey, reflectivity of the bottom, and location of the surf zone. If price is the defining factor, there is no incentive for the vendor to standby for good weather and water clarity days during data acquisition. Will the State accept an additional standby rate for each type of sensor/platform for data acquisition?

Will the State accept a separate ‘deep channel’ and ‘shallow channel’ lidar sensor cost for topobathymetric lidar data acquisition?

Please see answer to Question #16 and revised RFP Sections 4.5 - 4.7 for Quality Level standards. The evaluation process considers price, but it also takes into account all of the aspects listed in Section 5.4 of the revised RFP. Please note that data collection must account for the parameters outlined in Section 4.10 of the revised RFP.

63. 1.2 5

The requirement is to collect topobathymetric lidar as step 1 and fill in the gaps with MBES in step 2. The unit pricing requested in Form D asks for pricing for each type of technology (Lidar, MBES, SideScan) used for data acquisition. How should the vendor factor in the cost of data merge after Steps 1 and 2 are complete? To create a seamless DEM, there is considerable effort needed to merge data from various technologies to fill in the gaps, especially when they are collected at various times and in different seasons. Alternatively, will there be a separate task to merge these disparate data sets in the future?

Addendum No. 1 Page 11 of 22

The revised RFP is designed to result in delivery of point data and specified DEM (Digital Elevation Model) for data collection area specified in the Task Assignment.

All ancillary costs should be included in the per unit cost. See also answer to Question #31.

64. 1.1 5

Section 1.1 states “the Department intends to make an award of up to five (5) contracts per Data Collection Method for each of the six (6) regions.” Please clarify. Does this mean up to 5 awards to collect lidar, another 5 for MBES_shallow, another 5 for MBES_deep collection, and another 5 for Sidescan sonar collection in each of the six regions, I.e., a total of up to 120 awards.

Correct. Up to five (5) awards may be made per region per data collection method.

It is anticipated that multiple awards can be made per vendor in different data collection methods and different regions. All awards for an individual vendor will be combined into one contract for management.

Note: Please see answer to Question #10 regarding side scan sonar.

65. 2.17 13

Section 2.17 states that the selected Respondent must be properly licensed to do business within the State, and all entities must be appropriately registered with the Florida Department of State, if required by federal or state law. Does this statement apply ONLY to the prime contractor or to all sub-contractors within that Prime responder?

Respondent, or “prime”, is required to ensure that all employees, subcontractors, or agents performing work under the contract comply with all Departmental security and administrative requirements and must also comply with all controlling laws and regulations relevant to the services they are providing under the contract issued as a result of this solicitation. All employees, subcontractors, or agents performing work under the contract must also be appropriately registered with the Florida Department of State if required by federal or state law.

66. 4.4.1.4 23

Section 4.4.1.4 it discusses ground surveys for vertical and horizontal checkpoints as well as control station locations. Do these surveys require the signature and seal of a Florida-licensed Professional Surveyor and Mapper (PSM)?

Please see answer to Question #7. Data collection vendors will be required to coordinate with the Department’s contracted PLS during the planning phases of all data collection efforts. This procedure will be thoroughly outlined in the Task Assignment process.

67. 4.4.1.6 23

Section 4.4.1.6 it discusses the development of merged DEM. Does this process require supervision by a Florida-licensed Professional Surveyor and Mapper

(PSM)?

Please see answer to Question #66.

68. 4.4.2 23

Section 4.4.2, it indicates that the GIS data format may include Esri-hosted Feature Services, Esri file Geodatabases and/or shapefiles. As shapefiles are significantly less precise than file geodatabases, are the higher precision file geodatabases preferred?

No. The Department will only accept files that comply with reporting requirements of Section 4.4: General Requirements.

Required file formats for point cloud data and Digital Elevation Models (DEM) are defined in Section 4.11 of the revised RFP.

Addendum No. 1 Page 12 of 22

69. 4.4.1.5 23

Section 4.4.1.5 it discusses Quality Control procedures provided by the vendor to assure quality levels. Do these quality control procedures need to be completed under the supervision of a Florida-licensed Professional Surveyor and Mapper

(PSM)?

Please see answer to Questions #7 and #66.

70. N/A N/A Please confirm that Section 4 b of the State of Florida PUR 1000 regulations applies to products only and not services.

Confirmed.

71. 4.8.1 and

4.8.2 25

In Section 4.8.1 and 4.8.2 it states that the number of checkpoints and their distribution shall follow the ASPRS Positional Accuracy Standards for Digital Geospatial Data suggestions, for instance: Number of checkpoints = 100 per 2,500 km2 + 5 per 500 km2. The checkpoints requested for collection are NVA and VVA, which are all topographic checkpoints. Do we base the number collected on the size of the topographic area within the DPA only, or the full size of the DPA to include the submerged area?

Number of checkpoints shall be based on the topographic portion of the Defined Project Areas (DPA), as applicable.

72. 4.6.2 25

Section 4.6.2 states that horizontal positions shall be accurate to <= 1.5 meters (RMSE). Furthermore, Section 4.6.1 requires the collected data points to meet or exceed QL2B as defined by the IWG-OCM in the National Coastal Mapping Strategy 2018 v1.0. However, horizontal accuracy is not discussed in the referenced document. Please clarify if there is any specific method needed to verify the horizontal accuracy and provide reference to the document that shows how to validate horizontal accuracy for bathymetric LiDAR surveys.

The required horizontal accuracy in the Scope of Work (SOW) is the recommended accuracy given in the USACE Engineering Manual for Photogrammetric and LiDAR Mapping 2015 (EM 1110-1-1000), Chapter 7 Airborne Bathymetric LiDAR. There is no additional methodology to assess or validate this requirement other than the provided ASPRS Positional Accuracy Standards for Digital Geospatial Data.

73. 2.20 14

Section 2.20 (Diversity) on page 14 discusses fostering continued development and economic growth of several special categories of businesses. Does this apply strictly to Florida businesses? Does the Department of Environmental Protection allow off-shore, overseas, and/or non-US-owned businesses to be a subcontractor to a Prime and perform requested services, such as data acquisition, data processing, and or derived product (DEM) production on this project?

Florida’s Office of Supplier Diversity exists to help improve business opportunities for Florida-based woman-, veteran-, and minority-owned small businesses.

Nothing in Florida’s laws or regulations would prohibit an offshore, overseas, and/or non-U.S.-owned business from serving as a subcontractor, however, note that all employees, subcontractors, and agents performing work under the contract must comply with all Departmental security and administrative requirements and must also comply with all controlling laws and regulations relevant to the services they are providing under the contract issued as a result of this solicitation. All employees, subcontractors, and agents performing work under the contract must also be appropriately registered with the Florida Department of State if required by federal or state law.

Addendum No. 1 Page 13 of 22

74. 1.2 5

Will the “second step” be solicited as a follow-on task order once the Bathymetric LIDAR has been fully acquired, processed and a coverage analysis completed?

This revised RFP will be used to award contracts to vendors for lidar and MBES sonar. All specific data collection efforts will be further defined during the Task Assignment process outlined in Section 4.14 of the revised RFP. For more clarity, please see answer to Question #9.

Note: Please see answer to Question #10 regarding side scan sonar.

75. 1.2 5 What is the timeline estimated between completion of Bathymetric LIDAR coverage analysis and the start of the “sonar” phase of data acquisition?

Please see answer to Question #9.

76. 1.2 5

Could the “sonar” phase of data acquisition be implemented in area if Bathymetric LIDAR collection and coverage analysis completed but not yet initiated or complete in other areas, i.e., could they run concurrently?

Please see answer to Question #9. If LiDAR has been completed in one region, sonar data collection may begin while LiDAR is still being collected in other regions. There may be isolated areas where the Department may decide to move forward with shallow water sonar collection if LiDAR data is anticipated to not reach quality levels required.

77. 1.3 6

What type of Contract is envisioned? For example. Firm Fixed Price (FFP), Time & Materials (T&M), etc.?

This will be a Task Assignment contract and will be based on a fixed price and fixed unit rate. See Attachment 1, Draft Contract attached to the revised RFP for additional details.

78.

1.3 Attachment 1, Section

30 and Attachment 2, Section 7 of the draft contract

Attachment 1, Section

30 and Attachment 2, Section 7

Attachment 1, Section 30 and Attachment 2, Section 7 of the draft contract indicates that the Contractor shall not subcontract any work without prior written consent. Will subcontractors proposed and evaluated in the offeror’s proposal be exempt from this requirement and listed in the contract as accepted subcontractors? Does this requirement apply only to first tier subcontractors, or does it also apply to second tier subcontractors? For example, if a subcontractor requires to subcontract a survey ship (for example), the vessel supplier (a second-tier subcontractor) would be known to the Prime prior to the submission of their proposal and we would therefore assume that acceptance of our proposal as includes acceptance of any second-tier subcontractors or suppliers included in our proposal.

No, awarded Respondents must still meet the referenced requirements contained within for their data collection subcontractors and are not considered exempt by including this information as part of their response to the solicitation, however, Attachment 1, Section 30 and Attachment 2, Section 7 of the draft contract are intended to include only those subcontractors acting in a data collection capacity, not vessel rental or other logistical services vendors.

79. 4.4.1.3.2 23

Is the requirement to collect multibeam backscatter with no processing or are additional data products required?

Backscatter processed following NOAA’s HSSD 2021 standards and backscatter images in GeoTIFF format shall be delivered. Please see revised RFP Section 4.11.

80. 4.4.1.3.2 23 What are the “sonar” deliverables? The use of Bathymetric Attributed Grid (BAG) surfaces are referenced however in Section 4.4.2 it lists that data are to be in ESRI ArcGIS pro software. Please clarify.

Addendum No. 1 Page 14 of 22

Section 4.4.2 of the revised RFP refers to the requirements for supporting documentation provided during Task Assignments, technical proposals, or progress reporting. Bathymetric grid requirement has been added to the Final Deliverables, please see revised RFP Section 4.11.

81. 4.11.7 28

4.11 Final deliverables: Section 4.11.7 lists that sonar bathymetric data to be delivered in point cloud ASCII text file or .csv. Does this have to be compatible for ingesting into a third-party software? What is the goal for it being in a text file or csv as opposed to native format such as GSF?

Bathymetric data deliverable has been modified to require data in GSF format.

Please see revised RFP Section 4.11.

82.

4.11.9

(revised 4.11.10)

28 & 29 Will the Descriptive report be delivered in both a .XML format and .PDF format?

Descriptive reports shall be submitted in PDF and .XML format, as well as in an ESRI-hosted feature service, using the project tiling scheme (where applicable).

83. 1.2 5

What is the estimated time frame for start of topobathymetric LiDAR data collection, period for identification of gaps in coverage, and start of sonar data collection?

Please see answer to Question #9.

84.

3.4.3

Volume III, Price Sheet

‘MBES_shallow’ and ‘MBES_deep’ of Form D, Price Sheet states that prices per km2 must be provided for ‘MBES (0-20 meters depth)’ and ‘MBES (20-200 meters depth)’ respectively.

Will The Department consider / accept price details in any alternate forms such as:

- Price per km2, but for alternative/additional depth ranges

- Price per survey line km.

Price per day (operational and standby/weather) Please see answer to Question #32.

85. 4.4.1 22

Is there an anticipated requirement for the length of time between issuance of the notice to proceed by the Department, and the beginning of data acquisition activities by the contractor?

Is that period 14 days as referenced in 4.14.3 Method of Payment?

Please refer to Section 4.4. of the revised RFP. When a Task Assignment has been executed and the Department issues the vendor a notice to proceed, the vendor has 14 days to provide a Technical Proposal for data acquisition. Data collection should proceed based on the Project Schedule identified in the Technical Proposal, once approved by the Department.

86. 4.7.1 25

Bathymetric Sonar Survey Requirements Quality Level states that the survey shall meet or exceed classification Order 1a with the equation provided for vertical accuracy referencing QL4b.

‘MBES_shallow’ and ‘MBES_deep’ of Form D, Price Sheet however states Quality Level (minimum) at QL2B. Should this state Order 1a / QL4b as stated in the RFP document?

Please see answer to Question #11 and Sections 4.5 - 4.7 of the revised RFP for Quality Level standards. Form D, Price Sheet has been revised.

Addendum No. 1 Page 15 of 22

87.

2.17 Licensure

Registratio n, 3.4.2.3

Tab C:

Qualificatio ns and Experience, and 4.4 General

Requireme nts

Page 13, 17 and 25 of

According to Florida Statutes Chapter 472, a Florida Licensed Surveyor is required to perform and/or directly supervise the scope of work in this contract, is FDEP including this requirement?

Please see answer to Question #7.

88.

4.4 General

Requireme nts, Pages 25 and 26 of

Per 4.4 General Requirements, 4.4.1.4 Ground Surveys; 4.8 Accuracy Standards / Requirements, 4.8.4 Horizontal controls and 4.8.5 Vertical Controls, FDEP establishes the use of NGS Controls for accuracy requirements and the possibility of the contractor having to establish control monuments and tie vertical controls to existing NGS Control Monuments. How is FDEP considering the additional cost and time per task and how will the contractor bill for the extra effort and resources for these Control Surveys (This is not considered in FDEP's Bid Sheet)?

Please see answer to Questions #7 and #66. Controls for use will be identified and provided to the data collection vendor by the PLS contracted to provide project oversight for the Department.

89.

4.14 Work

Assignment Process &

Attachment

Page 30 of

What does FDEP propose for the 0 to -5 Feet(approx. 1.5 meters), were MBES collection is not possible? Will FDEP consider conventional or GPS surveys, if so will FDEP include a new price item in the bid sheet?

Please see answer to Question #29.

90.

F38011882 7_FormDPri ceSheet

Tab

"MBES_

shallow" & Tab "Side-scan

Will FDEP consider a unit of measure of Linear Feet for pricing MBES Shallow and Side-scan?

Please see answer to Question #84.

Note: Please see answer to Question #10 regarding side scan.

91.

3.4.1.2 Tab

B: Required

Forms

Is the principal place of business the company’s corporate headquarters or the main office location which will be responsible for managing the project, which will also hold the appropriate Florida licenses necessary for this contract?

“Principal place of business” refers to a company’s primary business office, the street address, or physical location that is designated on the business’s application for licensure or any amendment to such application.

92.

3.4.2, Volume II, Technical Response,

3.4.2.3 Tab

C:

Qualificatio ns and Experience

Do you consider the Project Manager and Principal Point of Contact to be two different individuals or can they be the same individual?

Either option is acceptable.

Addendum No. 1 Page 16 of 22

93.

3.4.2, Volume II, Technical Response

Tab F:

Calendar of data collection availability/ capacity through calendar year 2026

In what format would you like this information provided? Listing equipment/resources availability for the next four years will be difficult as schedules naturally change?

A narrative or calendar format are both acceptable formats.

94. - - Can a firm be a prime and also a sub-contractor with another Prime?

Please see answer to Question #26

95. - - Could you provide the latest information on the priority areas?

Please see answer to Question #1.

96. - - Can you provide a list of planholders for this solicitation?

Please clarify question in round 2 of the Q&A process.

97. 5.4 33

Scoring for this award, will there be any leverage based upon being a locally owned and operated Florida survey company? Likewise, minority, woman or veteran owned companies, is there scoring consideration for these types of companies.

States its encouraged but not scored according to the table.

As this solicitation is not for the purchase of personal property, there will be no scoring preference afforded to Florida-based businesses. Further, while minority-, woman-, and veteran-owned companies are encouraged to apply, no scoring preference will be afforded to such businesses. If the Department’s scoring evaluation results in a tie, the Department will provide Form E, Award Preference Form, to the Respondents having submitted those responses that resulted in the tie. Based on Form E, the Department will give the award to a Respondent if it is a minority-owned or veteran-owned business. If more than one Respondent is entitled to this preference, the preference will be given to the Respondent with the qualifying business having the smallest net worth, consistent with Section 295.187(4)(b), F.S. In the event that all preferences are equal or none of the Respondents are entitled to a preference, the tie will be broken using a coin toss.

98. 4.14.1.7 31

During the pre-qual MS Teams call on Tuesday, Apr. 5th, it was stated that the quality of past performance will drive this award however 4.14.1.7 clearly states "lowest price" wins.

The initial evaluation will be based on criteria outlined in Section 5 of the revised RFP. Individual Task Assignments will be awarded based on procedure outlined in Section 4.14 of the revised RFP.

99. Form D Price Sheet Pricing is based on km2 blocks.