Attachment 4 DID Workbook.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 52 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Alarm Resolution Capability Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 70T04021R7573N004
About this file
This document contains a request for proposal from the Transportation Security Administration seeking development solutions for alarm resolution capabilities. The RFP requests proposals to provide near-term improvements to current security operations and capabilities that can provide improved sampling for explosives, non-explosive precursors for homemade explosives, and non-explosive threat materials. Offerors are required to submit proposals by 2PM ET on September 13, 2021 via email. The solicitation involves NAICS codes 334511 and 334516 with small business size standards of 1,250 and 1,000 employees respectively. All questions regarding the solicitation must be submitted by September 3, 2021.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment 6a Price WorksheetRev1.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| SF30 AR RFP A3FE1.pdf | ||
| DD 254 Form_AR RFP.pdf | ||
| SF30 AR RFP A2FE1.pdf | ||
| SF1449-12a2.pdf | ||
| AR RFP questionsresponses.pdf | ||
| SF30 AR RFP A1FE1.pdf | ||
| Attachment 2 Bailment agreement model template for TSA as Bailee.pdf | ||
| Attachment 3 TRL definitions.pdf | ||
| AR RFP70T04021R7573N004.pdf | ||
| Attachment 5 Safety Requirements.pdf | ||
| Attachment 1 SOW.pdf | ||
| Attachment 6 Price Worksheet.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
Show all 13
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Cover Sheet
Request for Proposal (RFP) Alarm Resolution Capability 70T04021R7573N004
| Data Item Description (DID) | ||
| 1. TITLE | ||
| Vendor Material Analysis Capability | 2. DESCRIPTION/PURPOSE |
This document provides a fillable format for the vendor to complete and submit in conjunction with the proposal.
| 3. Vendor | 4. System |
| 5. Current Library Size | |
| 6. System Weight | 7. System Dimensions |
(length (l) x width (w) x height (h))
PREPARATION/INSTRUCTIONS
Complete the attached fillable fields depicted in the attached worksheets. Include applicable references to internal or third party test reports.
Worksheet 1: SOC Analysis Worksheet 2: Threat Analysis Worksheet 3: Containment Specifications
Worksheet 1-SOC Analysis
| SOC Analysis: Describe system performance capability to detect the following categories of SOC substances as outlined in TSA's What Can I Bring? resource center (https://www.tsa.gov/travel/security-screening/whatcanibring/all). When defined, describe the current system capability versus the proposed system capability. Note the proposed capability in brackets. Refer to row 3 as an example on how to distinguish between current system performance and the proposed system performance. Please reference specific RFP sections or provided Test Report that substantiate the current and proposed system performance. | ||
| Substance category | Substance | Is the material currently in the vendor library? |
Current system capability [proposed system capability] Can the system identify substances in bulk mode (no sampling or opening of the containment)?
Current system capability [proposed system capability] Can the system identify substances in small bulk mode (opening of the containment and collecting of a sample)?
Current system capability [proposed system capability] Does the inherent technology in the system allow the substance to be screened?
Current system capability [proposed system capability] Define system Limits of Detection (LOD)/Probability of False Alarms ( Pfa)
Current system capability [proposed system capability] Description of alarm readout (name and color coding)
Current system capability Example Sample Entry for (Alcohol) Yes color of alcohol is of no impact [No Change] No [Yes- Based on RFP Section X.x.x, expected enhancements will allow for bulk mode sampling] Yes [No Change] Yes [No Change] LOD: >X% Pfa: >Y%
| [Based on Test Report Section X.x.x, the LOD is estimated to increase by A% and Pfa is expected to remain the same] | Ethanol: Yellow [No change] | |
| Food | Alcohol | |
| Baby products (food, formula-powdered and liquid, milk) | ||
| Water | ||
| Coffee (beans/ground) | ||
| Coffee (liquid) | ||
| Cheese (creamy) | ||
| Chocolate (solid) | ||
| Chocolate (liquid) | ||
| Creamy dips/spreads | ||
| Gel ice packs | ||
| Gravy | ||
| Honey | ||
| Ice Cream | ||
| Hummus | ||
| Jam/jelly | ||
| Juice (baby) | ||
| Juices | ||
| Maple syrup | ||
| Oil | ||
| Vinegar | ||
| Peanut butter | ||
| Pet food (solid) | ||
| Pet food (wet) | ||
| Protein or energy powders | ||
| Salad dressing | ||
| Salsa and sauces | ||
| Salt | ||
| Snack bar | ||
| Soda | ||
| Soups | ||
| Spices | ||
| Tea (dry tea bags or loose tea leaves) | ||
| Yogurt | ||
| Medical | Insulin | |
| Contact lens solution | ||
| Eye drops | ||
| Instant hot/cold packs | ||
| Liquid medications | ||
| Liquid vitamins | ||
| Medication pills | ||
| NG pills | ||
| Syringes | ||
| Vitamins (solid/powdered) | ||
| Flammable | Butane/propane | |
| Chlorine for pools and spas | ||
| Flammable liquid, gel, or aerosol paint | ||
| Flammable paints | ||
| Fuels | ||
| Liquid bleach | ||
| Spray paint | ||
| Household and tools | Baby powder | |
| Bug repellent | ||
| Cooking spray | ||
| Cream | ||
| Deodorant (aerosol, liquid, and solid) | ||
| Detergent (liquid, powder, pellet) | ||
| Freezer pack | ||
| Hand sanitizers | ||
| Heating pack (gel) | ||
| Electronics | ||
| Lotion | ||
| Magic 8 ball | ||
| MREs | ||
| Printer ink | ||
| Shaving cream | ||
| Spray starch | ||
| Turpentine and paint thinner | ||
| Vacuum robots | ||
| Sporting and camping | Aerosol insecticide | |
| Bear spray | ||
| Bicycle pumps | ||
| Sand | ||
| Miscellaneous | ChapStick® | |
| Cologne | ||
| Concealer | ||
| Conditioner | ||
| Dry shampoo | ||
| E-liquids | ||
| Fertilizer | ||
| Foundation | ||
| Glow sticks | ||
| Hair gel | ||
| Hair texturizer | ||
| Hairspray | ||
| Makeup remover | ||
| Nail polish remover | ||
| Perfume | ||
| Play-Doh | ||
| Powdered makeup | ||
| Putty balls | ||
| Shampoo | ||
| Snow Globes | ||
| Soap (bar and liquid) | ||
| Solid makeup | ||
| Sunscreen | ||
| Tattoo inks | ||
| Tobacco | ||
| Toothpaste | ||
| Wine bottle |
Worksheet 2-Threat Analysis
| Threat Analysis: Describe system performance capability to detect the following categories of threat substances. When defined, describe the current system capability versus the proposed system capability. Note the proposed capability in brackets. Refer to row 3 as an example on how to distinguish between current system performance and the proposed system performance. Please reference specific RFP sections or provided Test Report that substantiate the current and proposed system performance. The vendor shall expand on the list per explosive categories to include specific explosives and chemicals that have been tested. | |||
| Substance category | Substance sub-category | Threat | Is the material currently in the vendor library? |
Current system capability [proposed system capability] Can the system identify substances in bulk mode (no sampling or opening of the containment)?
Current system capability [proposed system capability] Can the system identify substances in small bulk mode (opening of the containment and collecting of a sample)?
Current system capability [proposed system capability] Does the inherent technology in the system allow the substance to be screened?
Current system capability [proposed system capability]
List system LOD/ system response time/clear-down times/dynamic range of response/Probability of Detection (Pd)/Probability of False Alarms (Pfa)
Current system capability [proposed system capability] Description of alarm readout (name and color coding)
Current system capability Example Military Military Substance A Yes [No Change] No [Yes- see vendor provided Test Report reference Section X.x.x.] Yes [No Change] Yes [No Change] LOD: >X% Avg. Response Time: Z seconds Avg. Clear-down Time:
Y seconds Range: X-Y Order of Magnitude Pd: >Y% Pfa: <X%
| [Based on RFP Section X.x.x, the LOD is estimated to increase by A%, No change to Avg. Response and clear-down time, dynamic range, and Pfa] | Explosive Name: Red | ||||||
| Military Substance B | Yes [No Change] | No [Yes- see RFP Section X.x.x] | Yes [No Change] | Yes [No Change] | LOD: >X% |
Avg. Response Time: Z seconds Avg. Clear-down Time:
Y seconds Range: X-Y Order of Magnitude Pd: >Y% Pfa: <X%
| [Based on RFP Section X.x.x, a reduction in Pfa by A%, No change to the LOD, Avg. Response and clear-down time, dynamic range] | Explosive Name: Red | |
| Explosives | Military | |
| Commercial | ||
| HME | ||
| Precursors | ||
| Narcotics | Synthetic Opiates (Fentanyl and Fentanyl Analogs) | |
| Weapons of Mass Destruction | Toxic Industrial Chemicals (TICs) and Toxic Industrial Materials (TIMs) | |
| Chemical Warfare Agents (CWAs) | ||
| Biological | ||
| Radiological | ||
| Nuclear |
Worksheet 3-Containment
| Containment Specifications: Describe system performance capability to detect substances outlined in worksheet 1 and 2 in the selected container types. Include a description addressing whether the system is intended to perform analysis through the container, impacts of varying containment thickness, and the operating principles for scanning through materials. When defined, describe the current system capability versus the proposed system capability. Note the proposed capability in brackets. Refer to row 3 as an example on how to distinguish between current system performance and the proposed system performance. Please reference specific RFP sections or provided Test Report that substantiate the current and proposed system performance. | ||
| Containment type | Containment material (to include bottles, bags, etc.) | Is the system intended to scan through the defined containment? |
Current system capability [proposed system capability] Describe the mechanism by which the system scans through barrier based on the containment type for bottles, bags, etc.
Current system capability [proposed system capability] List the largest thickness the system is able to penetrate based on material.
Current system capability [proposed system capability] Describe the impact of container walls on the content's signature.
Current system capability [proposed system capability]
| Example (Amber) | Plastic | Yes [No Change] | The system uses x, y, and z to penetrate amber containers [No Change] | 5.5 mm [Yes- see vendor provided Test Report reference: Section X.x.x. for recent R&D supporting an increase to 7 mm] | The container has X impact on the overall system signal [See vendor provided Test Report reference: Section X.x.x. to see R&D supporting reduce container influence on overall signature] |
| Clear fully transparent/unclouded | Plastic | ||||
| Glass | |||||
| Translucent, colored (amber, green, etc.)/obstructed | Plastic | ||||
| Glass | |||||
| Opaque non-transparent or obstructed | Plastic | ||||
| Glass | |||||
| Metal | |||||
| Ceramic | |||||
| Cardboard | |||||
| Mixed material/Double walled or barrier | |||||
| Wood |
image1.png
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .