RFI Fire Panel System Upgrade - Answers.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 20 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA251726A007
About this file
This file is a Question and Answer document from a Request for Information (RFI) process for the Cheyenne Mountain Space Force Station (SFS) EST-3 to EST-4 Fire Alarm System Upgrade project. The RFI responses address 51 questions submitted by potential contractors regarding technical requirements, logistics, security protocols, and project scope. Key clarifications include: no bonding requirements; 30-page proposal limitation; FAR 52.225-1 Buy American provisions apply; no Davis-Bacon Wages required; the Period of Performance (PoP) of 120 days can be extended if needed; and 100% replacement of Local Rail Modules (LRMs) and chassis assemblies (3-CHAS7s) is required. The project involves upgrading 23 fire alarm nodes at the secure facility, with contractors responsible for providing their own escorts (possessing Cheyenne Mountain Restricted Area badges) and paying associated escort costs. All existing EST-3 annunciators and local operating consoles incompatible with EST-4 must be replaced with new enclosures matching existing surface or flush-mount configurations, including removal of old enclosures and associated patching, repair, and paint work.
The government confirmed it cannot provide as-built drawings or LRM firmware reports due to cybersecurity restrictions but has provided attachments including building lists, component counts, and photographs. All 23 nodes require network redundancy confirmation using existing dual ethernet ports at each panel. The RFI process determined that the requirement does not qualify for small business set-aside under FAR Part 19 due to the non-manufacturer rule applying to NAICS code 334290 with no available class waiver. Contractors must coordinate outage processes and facility disconnection/reconnection of 120VAC circuits with Cheyenne Mountain SFS facilities personnel. Storage space is available on-site for material staging. The related federal contract opportunity (Solicitation FA251726A007) issued Amendment 2, with RFI answers provided as of April 22, 2026.
View the file
Other files
Show all 30
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Cheyenne Mountain Fire Panels EST-4 Upgrade RFI | ||||
| Question | Answer (CONS) | Answer (21 CES) | ||
| 1) Is a bid bond required in our proposal submission? If yes, what are the bonding requirements? | CONS: No bonding requirements. | |||
| 2) Is the 20 page limitation for the entire proposal, which is to include three separate volumes – | ||||
| Part I, Part II, Part III? | CONS: Extension to page limitation will be extended to 30 pages. | |||
| 3) | Please advise which, if any, FAR clauses for Buy America(n) apply to this project | CONS: FAR 52.225-1 should be included, will amend solicitation. | ||
| 4) Will the contractors be required to pay Davis Bacon Wages? Will Certified Payroll be | ||||
| required for this project? | CONS: No, Davis-Bacon Wages apply to construction projects and no payroll is required. | |||
| 5) If so, please provide the applicable Colorado Wage Determination | CONS: N/A | |||
| 6) With the RFIs due to the Government on Monday 30 MARCH, there will not be much time for contractors to review responses before proposals are due on 3 APRIL. We request the bid date be extended 7-days beyond when RFI responses are provided. Will the Gov’t allow a proposal due date extension? | CONS: Extension to quote due date dependent on date of RFI response provided. | |||
| 7) | What are the requirements and limitations for escort within Cheyenne Mountain Restricted Area? | Each escort can be responsible for up to 10 people at a time. | ||
| 8) | Will Cheyenne Mountain provide escorts, or will the successful contractor need to include costs in bid for escorts? | It is the responsibility of the contractor to provide their own escorts. 21CES can not dictate which escort company the contractor decides to hire, however 21CES can make recommendations if asked. | ||
| 9) If escorts are to be provided by the contractor, can the government provide the requirements and limitations for escorting? | Escorts must posses a Cheyenne Mountain Restricted Area badge with escorting previgles added. 21CES can not dictate which escort company the contractor decides to hire, however 21CES can make recommendations if asked. | |||
| 10) Will company work vehicles be allowed into the Restricted Area and for how long? | A vehicles can drive into the restriced area only to deliver material, once material has been unloaded the vehicle must exit the restricted area. | |||
| 11) Please provide the process needed for obtaining vehicle entry into the Restricted Area. | 21CES will require: Company Name, Year of Vehicle, Make/Model, Color, License Plate Number/State, Vehicle Identification Number, Unit Number, Engine Type (gas, diesel, elec) | |||
| 12) | Our understanding of the Solicitation and CLINs leads us to believe all 23 NODEs are required to be completed within 120-days. With time to generate calculations and submittals, review and approval of submittals, and current lead time on Fire Alarm panels, the current PoP appears unachievable. Will a PoP of 200-days be acceptable for this scope of work? | CONS: PoP of 120 days was based off of industry feedback during market research. The PoP can be extended if needed. | ||
| 13) | Will the Superintendents or foreman be able to obtain a RA badge? How long will this process take? | RA badges typicaly are not issued to contractors unless the contractor is responsible for multiple projects and are expected to aquire more projects in the future | ||
| 14) | Are all field devices signature series, or are there still analog devices on AADC cards? | No AADC cards. | ||
| 15) | Will the Gov’t provide as built drawings to determine panel components? | if drawings do exist, they are more than likely to be inaccurate and outdated. The government does not wish to provide incorrect info | ||
| 16) | The SOW doesn’t directly address annunciators (ANN) or local operating consols (LOC). The existing EST3 ANN’s and LOC’s | |||
| are not compatible with new EST4 panels. Will all LOC’s and ANN’s be replaced as part of this project? | The intent is to have fully functioning EST-4 system. If any existing devices are not compatiple with the EST-4 those items will be required to be replaced | |||
| 17) | If LOCs and Annunciators need to be replaced, new enclosures will be required for both items at all locations. | |||
| Will the new enclosures need to be flush mounted or surface mounted? | yes, all annunciators and local area consoles need to be replaced. New back boxes, doors, and cmponents. New enclosures will match the existing (surface or flush) | |||
| 18) | Will contractors need to remove old enclosures for LOCs and Annunciators? | If it is determinied that the LOCs and Annuunciators need to be replaced, the contractor will be responible for the removal | ||
| 19) | If flush mounted, should contractor include all costs for patch, repair, and paint of surfaces in their proposals? | Yes | ||
| 20) | If so, can the Gov’t provide as built drawings showing LOCs and annunciators or let us know how many annunciators | |||
| and how many LOC’s there are? | if drawings do exist, they are more than likely to be inaccurate and outdated. The government does not wish to provide incorrect info | |||
| 21) | SOW #2 mentions design of network including redundant network. It appears there is a mesh of copper and fiber networks | |||
| in place for the existing panels. Please confirm all NODEs have a current operational network connection and this scope of work includes selecting communications cards based on existing infrastructure? | Each panel currently has two eathernet ports in the enclosure for network connection. | |||
| 22) | SOW #2; does the current network infrastructure have redundant operational network installed at all NODEs or does the | |||
| contractor need to install a new redundant communications network as part of this scope of work? | Yes, each panel has network redundancy. Two eathernet ports at each panel | |||
| 23) | SOW section 4.2.4 states batteries shall comply with NFPA which is less standby time than UFC standards. Please clarify if UFCor NFPA should be used for battery backup power calculations. | The more robust code shal always take priority | ||
| 24) | At the PPSV, it was discussed the intent behind SOW 4.3.9 is to Correct Deficiencies related to new installation only, not to correct any existing deficiencies which may exist. Please confirm this is correct. Can this SOW item be re-written to align with intended scope? | contractor will only be responsiblr for deficiencies of the new equipment that the contractor installs | ||
| 25) | SOW 4.1.3; Please advise who the “Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ)” is for this project. | Cheyene Mountain Space Force Fire Emergency Services Flight, Assistant Chief of Prevention | ||
| 26) | Please identify the outage process. How many days of notification will be needed? | This will be dissucesed and agreeded upon at the Pre-Installation Meeting | ||
| 27) Since the EST3 .SDU program file will not be released until the project is awarded, could the Government release the LRM Report in a Microsoft Excel Workbook (*.xls) file? This file requires login to the current 3.SDU file, select REPORTS, select LRM, select ALL CABINETS <OK>, save as type (*.xls) file. This file will provide all of the existing fire alarm control panel and remote annunciator cabinets internal Local Rail Module (LRM) information in a uniform method to all bidders. The bidder that has access to the current .SDU file is put at an unfair advantage to all other bidders with information that is excluded from others. | We are unable to export any reports from this system due to cyber security restrictions | |||
| 28) The EST3 to EST4 migration requires the internal Local Rail Modules (LRM) to meet minimum firmware requirements for the various components such as signature driver cards (3-SxDC2)(rev.5.40 and higher), amplifiers (3-ZAxx)(rev.3.64 and higher), 3-MODCOM (rev.3.60 and higher) components. It is highly recommended that all LRM’s be replaced with currently manufactured signature driver cards, amplifiers, MODCOM’s, etc. Is it the government’s desire to re-use some of the existing LRM’s that meet the earliest firmware versions or replace 100% of all LRM’s throughout all fire alarm control panels within this project? | 100% replacement of all LMRs | |||
| 29) | The LRM modules are connected / inserted into a chassis assembly (3-CHAS7). Over time, the plastic insert connections/components on the 3-CHAS7’s can become brittle. Many of the fire alarm panels are also currently equipped with a 3-ASU/4 chassis assembly that is NOT compatible with the EST4 fire alarm systems and will be required to be replaced with new 3-CHAS7’s. Is it the government’s desire to replace 100% of the existing 3-CHAS7’s with all new in order to avoid potential cracked or slightly damaged existing 3-CHAS7 chassis assemblies from remaining in existing EST3 fire alarm panels? | It is the government’s desire to replace 100% of the existing 3-CHAS7’s with all new | ||
| 30) SOW sections 4.3.7 & 4.3.8 reference testing all field devices. Could the government release the Loop Controllers detectors & modules reports to all bidders? This file requires login to the current 3.SDU file, select REPORTS, select LOOP CONTROLLER DEVICES, select SIGNATURE: DETECTORS/MODULES, select ALL, save as type (*.xls) file. | We are unable to export any reports from this system due to cyber security restrictions | |||
| 31) | SOW section 4.3.9 states to correct any deficiencies identified during testing and re-test the affected components. Are there any known deficiencies within the fire alarm system that have been identified and/or are known long standing issues within the existing EST3 fire alarm system? Please provide details of known deficiencies to include device type, location within the site, deficiency details (i.e. smoke detector, 2nd level office area, water damage). | No known deficiencies | ||
| 32) Does Cheyenne Mountain SFS utilize an offsite central monitoring station via an AES mesh radio network, or a cellular communicator dialer? Or does the Cheyenne Mountain SFS EST3 fire alarm system report to the Fireworks graphic computers only and does not transmit off normal signals to an offsite central monitoring station? | There is a Fireworks computer at Peterson Fire Dispatch monitors Cheyenne Mountain via fiber connection. | |||
| 33) | Can the government provide the total quantity of addressable detectors and modules, and the total quantity of notification appliance speakers/strobes that are included in the 23 fire alarm nodes installed throughout Cheyenne Mountain SFS? | see attached prints | ||
| 34) | SOW section 8.1 states in part that “the contractor’s company shall ensure contractors have been authorized to enter the restricted area and must provide their own escorts, if necessary. 21 CES can provide recommendations for approved escorts.” Please provide recommendations for approved escorts. | 21CES cannot dictate who the contractor hires, however, we can recommend: Rocky Mountain Protective Service, www.rmpsllc, (729) 553-9204 | ||
| 35) Does the existing EST3 fire alarm system interface with a smoke control system? | no | |||
| 36) | Are there existing as-built CAD files (.dwg) of the EST3 fire alarm network available to be provided to the awarded contractor? | if drawings do exist, they are more than likely to be inaccurate and outdated. The government does not wish to provide incorrect info | ||
| 37) Will the government provide Cheyenne Mtn SFS facilities personnel to disconnect & reconnect 120vac circuits to the fire alarm control panels for this upgrade project? | Yes | |||
| 38) Requests that the Government consider setting this requirement aside for Small Business concerns under FAR Part 19. | CONS: Based off the Revolutionary FAR Part 19 (updated 20 Feb 2026): |
(f)(1) Any concern, including a supplier, that is awarded a contract or order subject to the nonmanufacturer rule, other than a construction or service acquisition, but proposes to furnish an end item that it did not itself manufacture, process, or produce (i.e., a “nonmanufacturer”), is required to provide an end item that a small business has manufactured, processed, or produced in the United States or its outlying areas.
(2) When the end item being acquired is a kit of supplies the offeror may not exceed 500 employees, or 150 employees for information technology value-added resellers under NAICS code 541519.
(3)(i) The SBA may grant an individual or a class waiver to the nonmanufacturer rule to allow a nonmanufacturer to provide an end item of an other than small business without regard to the place of manufacture, processing, or production.
(A) Class waiver. An agency may request that SBA waive the requirement at paragraph (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this section for a specific product or class of products. See 13 CFR 121.1202 for an explanation of when SBA will issue a class waiver.
(B) Individual waiver. The contracting officer may also request a waiver of the requirements at paragraph (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this section for an individual acquisition once the contracting officer determines through market research that no known small business manufacturers, processors, or producers in the United States or its outlying areas can reasonably be expected to offer an end item meeting the requirements of the solicitation. This type of waiver is known as an individual waiver and would apply only to a specific acquisition.
The NAICS 334290 for this requirement does NOT have a Class Waiver to the Non-Manufacturing Rule on the SBA website. The Non-Manufacturing Rule applies to this acquisition, therefore we are unable to set aside for small business. The NAICS will remain for commodities and will not be changed to a services NAICS given the labor for this requriement is heavily outweighed by the value of purchasing the product. CONS will not be requested an individual waiver for this requirment at this time given it will halt the acquisition timeline substaintailly.
| 39) Will System As-Builts be provided for all buildings? | if drawings do exist, they are more than likely to be inaccurate and outdated. The government does not wish to provide incorrect info |
| 40) There are 23 EST3 FACPs within the project. Can we get a count on Annunciators and LOCs per building? Please include components if possible. |
- 15 Located inside Secure
| - 8 Located outside Secure Area | see attached list | |||
| 41) Are we getting escorted to the secure site only vs. non secure site? | Contactor will suply their own escorts. Escorts will not be required outside of the restricted area, NODES: 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, & 23 | |||
| 42) | What size boxes are the FACPs and Annunciators? Please provide breakdown per building if possible. | see attached list | ||
| 43) | Can pictures of the EST3 Panels and Annunciators be provided? | yes, see atachements | ||
| 44) Will a device list be provided per building? If possible separate Initiating and Notification. | see attached prints | |||
| 45) Will graphic maps be required at any area they are currently not installed? | no | |||
| 46) Please confirm updating existing graphic maps for current conditions are excluded from this scope of work. | all Graphic map are excluded for this project | |||
| 47) Are all the existing panels voice? | Yes | |||
| 48) What version Fireworks are you running? Is it 9.2 Version? Is an alternate price requested to bring fireworks up to date? | v9.20.0 software upgrades are not part of this project | |||
| 49) | Will the SDU’s be available at the time of bid? | |||
| (Note) If not, a full inventory of all controllers, modules, power supplies per panel will be needed to accurately price replacement of the 23 panels. Plus any annunciators that currently exist. | see attached prints | |||
| 50) | Will the Client provide a storage area to leave equipment on site? | Space can be made available to stage material | ||
| 51) Are we getting escorted to the secure site only vs. non secure site? | Contractor will need to provide their own escorts inside the restricted area only |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .