Questions__Answers_7_01_April_2015.pdf

Questions and Answers #7 (1 April 2015)

FA2823-15-R-3005

1. Is this a follow-on requirement? If so, could you please provide the incumbent contract number for this opportunity? If not, is this a new requirement?

Answer: This is a new requirement to completely replace the outdoor Mass Notification System at Eglin AFB, FL.

2. SOW 1.7.1.3 and RFP: This section calls for proposing an install at site D-51, however only option 1 camp Rudder, and option 2 C-6 are included as option CLINs in the RFP, is an additional option CLIN going to be added?

Answer: The SOW has two paragraphs numbered 1.7.1.3. The paragraph regarding Site D-51 is an oversight and should have been removed from the SOW. SOW has been amended.

3. SOW 1.7.1.5.3.11: "..GPS coordinates.." this references the GPS coordinates of individual building MNS systems is the government going to provide coordinates for the existing approximately 135 facilities or is the contractor going to be required to complete that in a survey?

Answer: This is a requirement in UFC 4-021-01. The GPS coordinates should be provided by Eglin. The scope of this contract is not to pay a contractor to identify the GPS coordinates of any building with an indoor MNS.

4. SOW 1.8, 1.9.1: This requirement states a minimum coverage area, is the contractor responsible for providing additional towers beyond those requested in section 1.2 of the SOW to meet an additional coverage area if required?

Answer: The contractor is responsible to evaluate the current GIANT VOICE positions to determine if these positions are necessary in order to provide the desired coverage. The contractor is also responsible to determine if different speaker positions are required to provide the desired coverage. The intent is to provide coverage in the affected areas with the fewest positions. The number of positions required should provide the optimum coverage in the affected area, without excessive overlapping coverage. As stated in paragraph 1.9.1, the number of speaker positions will not exceed the number of speaker positions currently employed.

5. SOW 1.7.3.1 vs 1.7.3.1.1: Multiple contradicting requirements appear to be referenced here.

Under 1.7.3.1 it states system will operate on an assigned VHF frequency however 1.7.3.1.1 and

1.8.5 reference APCO 25 and LMR standards. Is either method acceptable? If the system is capable of it can it also utilize the existing frequency for fire and MNS?

Answer: A correction has been made to paragraph 1.7.3.1. The frequency used by the GIANT VOICE system is an ultra-high frequency (UHF). The GIANT VOICE (Outdoor MNS) will operate on the currently assigned dedicated frequency and it will not use the existing frequency for fire and/or any other MNS.

6. SOW Appendix A: The Pre-Recorded Messages list contains over 35 messages, is it acceptable for some of the Pre-Recorded messages sound files to be programmed at the CCS?

Answer: Pre-recorded messages will be stored at the HPSA, per paragraph 1.7.2.7.2 of the SOW and UFC 4-021-01.

7. SOW Appendix A: Please provide a copy of the verbiage for each of the applicable messages as well as Pre or post tones that may be required

Answer: The exact verbiage for each message will be provided upon award of contract.

8. Is any paperwork needed to be filed out/base access requirements in order to attend the site survey on March 18th?

Answer: Yes. See paragraph 7 (a) of the Addendum to FAR provision 52.212-1 for the required paperwork. The documents are posted on the Federal Business Opportunities website. The documents are titled 1 –PZIOA Memorandum and 2- CAB Affidavit.

9. The SOW states 270 day period of performance (1.13.1) however the Delivery information on the RFP states 180 Days. Please clarify.

Answer: The delivery is 180-days after receipt of award. The SOW has been corrected.

10. Can we take photos?

Answer: Photos of the speaker positions are permitted. Photos will not be permitted of the locations of the control stations.

11. Can we have a site plan showing area to be covered?

Answer: An aerial view of the coverage area is in the SOW (figure 1-4)

12. How large of an area is it?

Answer: See new picture in SOW Figure 1-4

13. Does the system need to cover indoor and outdoor?

Answer: See paragraph 1.7.1.4 in SOW. On-Installation Control. The outdoor MNS will also have the capability to interface with all individual building indoor MNS (currently approximately 135 buildings) and the six wide area controllers (WAC) towers at the 7th Special Forces Group Cantonment area. This contract does not entail connecting to the indoor MNS, only to provide the means, via an interface or a data feed, to the indoor MNS.

14. Do you have an IP phone system and if so which one?

Answer: The phone IP phone system is the Avaya AS5300 Release 3.

15. Would you like a product demonstration?

Answer: A product demonstration is not required.

16. (1.3.6) Para 1.3 does not identify 7 SFG Cantonment Area and Duke Field as Bid Options.

Where specifically are these areas located on a map of Eglin AFB? Should these two areas be removed from this para or added as additional separately priced Bid Options?

Answer: The 7SFG Cantonment Area and Duke Field are not bid options. They have been removed from paragraph 1.3.6/SOW.

17. (1.3.6) this para identifies a requirement to provide the capability to connect remote sites into the Eglin main central control stations. Please clarify that should such connection be required that the MNS at the remote sites would have been furnished and installed as part of the Bid

Options on this contract and that the requirement is not to connect an existing remote site MNS (if there is any) to the newly installed MNS?

Answer: The requirement is solely to provide the capability to connect to the remote sites and not to actually connect to the remote site.

18. (1.7.1.3) this para number appears twice. Please clarify the para numbering?

Answer: The SOW has been amended. Please refer to question number 2.

19. (1.7.1.3.1) The last phrase of this para references a central control station for Site D-51, which is not a Bid Option under para 1.3. Should the entire specification/reference to D-51 be deleted or should a separately priced D-51 Bid Option be added?

Answer: It’s been removed from the SOW. Refer to question 2

20. (1.7.1.4) Please clarify the government’s intent of para 1.7.1.4 “…Communications shall be provided between the MNS central control stations and individual building MNS via a data feed from the outdoor MNS…” and “…The outdoor MNS will also have the capability to interface with all individual building indoor MNS (currently approximately 135 buildings) and the six wide area controllers (WAC) towers at the 7th Special Forces Group Cantonment area. This contract does not entail connecting to the indoor MNS, only to provide the means, via an interface or a data feed to the indoor MNS.” and para 1.9.6 “Integrate the MNS with other peripheral systems (i.e. AdHoc, indoor MNSs).” Is the government expecting the contractor to furnish and install a radio (and ancillary equipment) compatible with the new outdoor wide area radio frequency (RF) network at each building and each WAC tower (without actually connecting the outdoor and indoor MNSs)?

Answer: The outdoor MNS CCS will activate the new outdoor MNS system HPSAs and provide a data feed to individual building controllers. Additionally, the CCS will provide a data feed to inject the message into the Navy Alert system and indoor MNSs.

21. (1.7.1.5.3.13) this para makes reference to a primary and redundant communication link.

Para 1.7.31 then indicates that primary communications will be via an assigned fixed very high frequency (VHF). Does the government have a planned or preferred redundant communication link?

Answer: Refer to question 5. SOW has been amended (1.7.3.1.). The frequency used by the GIANT VOICE system is an ultra-high frequency (UHF). The GIANT VOICE (Outdoor MNS) will operate on the currently assigned dedicated frequency and it will not use the existing frequency for fire and/or any other MNS. The Government does not have a requirement for a redundant path. The redundant path is considered to be the second CCU location.

22. (1.7.2.5.1 and 1.9.1) These paras indicate that the MNS is to be installed at locations/positions selected by the 96th Communications Squadron based on contractor recommendations and that all HPSA positions must be approved by the 96th Communications Squadron prior to installation. To enable offerors to develop their Master Schedule, please clarify how long the approval process takes (for planning purposes) once the contractor recommends specific site locations.

Answer: The Eglin approval process for locating new poles could possibly take up to 60 days.

23. (1.9.1) While this para indicates a site survey is to be conducted of the main base Eglin and military family housing, paras 1.8.1 and 1.9.2 make reference to the 33rd Fighter Wing area.

Recommend para 1.9.1 be modified to include the Fighter Wing area?

Answer: Paragraph 1.9.1 has been amended to reflect this recommendation.

24. (Figure 1-4) Does this figure also show the military family housing and 33rd Fighter Wing coverage areas? If not, please provide a coverage area map for either or both of the missing areas?

Answer: Figure 1-4 does show the military family housing area and the 33rd Fighter Wing area.

The illustration has been amended to identify the areas.

25. (1.9.5) Please clarify if the government is requiring the contractor to provide an outdoor wide area network (WAN) design that would enable connection to either or both of the Bid Option central control stations (CCSs) without the need for additional nodes should a subsequent decision be made to connect the nodes (i.e., the CLIN 0001 WAN design ensures line-of-sight to remote CCSs)?

Answer: The contractor is not required to provide a wide area network for the bid options. The requirement for the locations of the two bid options is for a dedicated and independent CCU to be installed at each location.

26. (4.1) please confirm the contractor is only required to identify recommended spares, not to provide the spares? Also, the last sentence of this para indicates spares are to be priced separately as optional items, yet there is no government-provided format or CLIN to do this?

Answer: The contractor is only required to recommend spares.

27. (4.2) this para indicates the contractor is to provide software support offering to be priced separately as an optional item, yet there is no government-provided format or CLIN to do this?

Answer: Software updates/support will be procured as a separate contract/requirement upon completion of warranty/when need/requirement arises

28. (Appendix C, 1.3) PWS 1.3.4 and PWS Appendix C, 1.1 both indicate the contractor is to install two HPSAs at Site C-6. Para 1.3 indicates the contractor is to conduct a site survey to determine how many HPSAs are required to provide adequate coverage of the operational area of the site and recommend placement of the HPSAs. Is the contractor to price the Bid Option 2 CLIN to provide two HPSAs (and one central control station)?

Answer: The contractor is to conduct a site survey and recommend placement of two HPSAs.

The SOW has been amended with the change.

29. (Solicitation, pages 6 and 7) CLINs 0001, 2, and 3 show a delivery date of 180 days ADC. Yet PWS 1.13.1 and 2.1 indicate 270 days after award. Recommend modify the delivery date of each of the three CLINs to align with the PWS delivery date of 270 days after award?

Answer: The delivery is 180-days after receipt of award. The SOW has been corrected.

30. (Solicitation, page 70, Proposal Preparation Instructions, g) [Vol III – Past Performance Information], iv) [Past Performance Information Forms], (1)) This para indicates that Past Performance Information Sheets are to be used to submit recent, relevant, and current performance information for the offeror, predecessor companies, major subcontractors, and teaming or joint venture partners. Yet page 71 of the Solicitation, Proposal Preparation Instructions, g) [Vol III – Past Performance Information], iv) [Past Performance Information Forms], (1) (c) indicates that Performance Information Fact Sheets are to be submitted to demonstrate KP, major subcontractor, teaming, and/or joint venture partners ability to perform the services specified in the Statement of Work. Is a Past Performance Information Sheet to be used to submit KP relevant experience that is to be evaluated as part of the Past Performance factor? If not, does the government have a preferred format, in lieu of the Information Sheet, for KP relevant experience?

Answer: Yes. Past Information Fact Sheets are to be utilized to submit Past Performance Information from all sources.

31. (Solicitation, page 71, Proposal Preparation Instructions, g) [Vol III – Past Performance Information], iv) [Past Performance Information Forms], (1) (c)) Please clarify that a maximum of five Performance Information Fact Sheets may be submitted, with no more than two Fact Sheets for key personnel, major subcontractors, teaming and/or joint venture partners?

Answer: You may submit up to five (5) total references, but you cannot submit more than two (2) references for key personnel, major subcontractors, teaming and/or joint venture partners.

32. (Solicitation, page 71, Proposal Preparation Instructions, g) [Vol III – Past Performance Information], vi) [Key Personnel]): For a current employee of an offeror planned to perform in a key position on the Eglin AFB MNS task, and who has recent and relevant experience while with a previous company, is a letter of consent from the individual required to be submitted with the proposal consenting to release of the individual’s contract past performance information to the prime (who is the individual’s current employer)?

Answer: The intent here is for us to have permission from the proposed Key Personnel to be able to speak with a previous employer regarding their performance on the referenced contract.

33. (Solicitation, page 73, Evaluation of Offers) Volume I (Price/Contracts) is to contain the material quantities, unit prices and other costs proposed for the MNS and Bid Options. Volume II (Technical) is to convey the offeror’s technical approach to meet the performance requirements. Since material quantities appear in Volume I, and the Technical Volume is limited to 15 pages (excluding product literature), will the government permit clearly articulated cross-referencing between all volumes so the offeror does not need to restate significant portions of the proposal in the different page-constrained volumes?

Answer: Offerors may cross reference between volumes as they deem necessary. Offerors are cautioned not to omit required information from any Volume as each Volume is evaluated separately in accordance with the respective evaluation criteria.

34. (Solicitation, page 74, Evaluation of Offers, Volume III – Past Performance, 2.a) When using relevant experiences of Key Personnel (KP) as part of an offeror’s Past Performance factor submission, is the Key Person to fill out the Past Performance Questionnaire or is the Questionnaire to be submitted to the government customer that the work was completed for to fill out as a Personal Experience reference vice company reference? If not, does the government have a preferred format for submission of KP relevant experience that is to be evaluated as part of the Past Performance factor?

Answer: The questionnaire should be completed by the customer.

35. (Past Performance Questionnaire, Section 2, A) Recommend change “Manufacturer of MNS” to read “Name of Contractor”. This enables association of the completed Questionnaire with a contractor. Additionally, the make and model of the MNS is requested in Section 2.H?

Answer: You are correct; this should have stated Name of Contractor. Offerors may make this change on the PPQ form prior to sending to their clients. An official change will not be made as we have already received questionnaires.

36. Page 69 of 77 – Proposal Preparation Instructions f) Volume II – Technical Proposal, i) (1) Technical Solution states: “The offeror shall provide their detailed technical solutions to the requirements identified in the Statement of Work and Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) 4-021- 01.” Further, it states, “Page Limits: Submit no more than fifteen (15) pages for the Technical Solution.” Eglin AFB’s Statement of Work is 26 pages long, not including the cover page and blank last page. We are concerned that we will not be able to provide a detailed solution to the requirements identified in the SOW and UFC 4-021-01, as it is impossible to address every requirement item by item. Is it acceptable to have up to 15 pages of responses to the requirements outlined SOW? Meaning, can the offeror provide a response document that is 41 pages in length? This would include 26 pages of Eglin AFB’s SOW along with 15 pages of response for a total of 41 pages? This would ensure a complete and detailed solution and response to the SOW by addressing every requirement, yet not exceeding the page limit.

Answer: The technical proposal consists of four different factors the Technical Solution, Coverage Map, Transition Plan and Quality Control Plan. Each factor has its own specific page limits. Offerors must submit a proposal that conforms to the specified page limits.

37. Bid Option Three for Site D-51, which was included in the Draft SOW back in December 2014 has been removed from this solicitation. Specifically, 1.2.4 and 1.3.5 are not included in the current SOW. However, 1.7.1.3, 1.7.1.3.1, and 1.8.1.3, all reference Site D-51 as a separate bid option. Should 1.7.1.3 and 1.8.1.3 be removed from this solicitation and 1.7.1.3.1 be altered?

Answer: SOW has been amended. Refer to Question 2 and 19. The paragraph regarding Site D- 51 is an oversight and has been removed from the SOW.

38. Can we use the current locations of where the existing sirens are located, if sound coverage is deemed acceptable by designer?

Answer: Yes. SOW paragraph 1.9.1, states “Where possible, the contractor will use existing speaker and pole locations, to the maximum extent.”

39. Please provide clarification on 1.7.1.4 - What are the six wide-area controllers (WAC) towers at the 7th Special Forces Group Cantonment area?

Answer: The six WAC towers are High Power Speaker Arrays (HPSA) that broadcasts highly intelligible live and recorded voice and tone announcements to Soldiers/personnel at 7th SFG/remote site outside of Eglin AFB. The wide area MNS shall have the capability to communicate with other notification systems/ the six wide area controllers (WAC) towers at the 7th Special Forces Group Cantonment area. Additionally, refer to the response to Question 20.

40. 1.7.2.6 - Should the speaker cables be provided with surge suppression as well?

Answer: Yes

41. 1.7.3 COMMUNICATIONS LINKS – In regard to communications, can the existing antenna and antenna cables be used with the new system?

Answer: No, refer to Question 38 and 1.3.1. of SOW. The contractor shall furnish all labor and necessary materials to include but not limited to tools, cabling, equipment, materials, and technical expertise to engineer, design and install a complete Mass Notification System on Eglin Air Force Base.

42. SOW paragraph 2.8. Please clarify and elaborate on the required functionality and details of this requirement. For example, how many consoles? What is the required functionality at each console? What is meant by integrating into the consoles? Can you please specify what these consoles are? Etc.

Answer: The console is a future requirement. The console will be used to consolidate the various operator functions performed by the command post from a centralized management console.

43. Section 1.7.2.4.3. Each speaker (or stack) shall be driven by a dedicated, modular amplifier.

What is the technical justification for this requirement? This is a restrictive requirement that is geared towards specific manufacturers. Every type of design has its own pros and cons. Other types of designs are equivalent or better, are perfectly suitable, and are currently used successfully at many bases.

Answer: This requirement has been deleted.

44. Page 70 of 77 – Proposal Preparation Instructions - f) Volume II – Technical Proposal, i) (4) Quality Control Plan. Since we are ISO 9001:2008 certified, our Quality Control Plan was written to comply with the requirements of ISO 9001:2008. In lieu of providing our 26 page Quality Control Plan (condensed to 5 pages to meet the page requirement), is it acceptable to provide a copy of our ISO Certificate as demonstration that we have an adequate Quality Control Plan?

Answer: No. Offerors are to submit a Quality Control Plan that addresses this specific requirement.

45. Are the areas covered by the existing tower/speaker locations receiving adequate coverage?

Answer: The requirement is for the new MNS to provide adequate coverage. Speaker locations may need to be adjusted to ensure the new system meets contract specifications.

46. Solicitation, page 68, item 8)a) [Proposal Format]: Please clarify whether foldouts count as one or two pages.

Answer: See paragraph 8 (a), Proposal Format, of the Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors. Foldouts follow the same rules as regular pages with the exception that the size may be 11” x 17” and foldouts are limited to charts, tables or diagram. A page is still defined as one face of a sheet of paper that contains information. Therefore, if a foldout has information on both faces of the foldout it would count as two pages.

47. Solicitation, page 68, item 8)a) [Proposal Format]: Would font that is legible, but smaller than 12 pitch be acceptable for use in table and figures?

Answer: Yes

48. The radio network used for this system has been stated as UHF . Will this be a conventional UHF system? If not, please clarify.

Answer: The radio network will be radios operating in a conventional mode with a fixed assigned frequency.

49. Is the site walk on March 18th a mandatory meeting?

Answer: No

50. Will Eglin AFB provide GPS coordinates for the speaker positions?

Answer: Yes

51. Is there a requirement for removing speakers that are currently on towers, and placing them on poles?

Answer: No.

52. Will we be responsible for re-using the existing frequency?

Answer: Yes, Refer to question 5. The GIANT VOICE (Outdoor MNS) will operate on the currently assigned dedicated frequency and it will not use the existing frequency for fire and/or any other MNS.

53. What constitutes an environmental study (as it relates to new pole placement)?

Answer: Any time a new structure is contemplated it requires an environmental study to determine its total impact on the environment.

54. At East Gate Track, Position 12, who is responsible for re-working the connection from the light pole to the speaker pole?

Answer: The Government would be responsible for this connection.

55. Why is Eglin AFB replacing the current system?

Answer: The current system has reached the end of its operational life cycle here at Eglin and due to evolving changes in infrastructure, policy, and regulations it has been determined that a new MNS is required in order to maintain operational readiness.

56. Is the current system working?

Answer: Yes

57. Will we be responsible for re-using existing solar panels for the power solution/power source?

Answer: Offerors are required to provide new solar panels. Reference paragraph 1.7.2.5 of the SOW. The requirement is for a complete new MNS and components of the current MNS may not be incorporated into the new MNS.

58. Will we receive a list of all pre-bids?

Answer: No

59. Is the C-6 CCS a stand-alone system? Does it link to Eglin Main?

Answer: Yes, it’s a stand-alone system and no, it does not link Eglin Main.

60. Can we replace with concrete poles?

Answer: No.

61. Who is the manufacture of the current system?

Answer: Acoustic Technology Incorporated (ATI).

62. Can we drill into water tower in order to add another bracket?

Answer: Yes

63. What color do the speakers have to be that are being mounted/placed onto water towers?

Answer: Same color as tower.

64. How many Central Control Stations (CCS) are at C6?

Answer: Two. There is one within the facility and one located in the Fire Department. The SOW has been revised to include two (2) CCUs

65. What’s the height/size of the pole position at Camp Rudder (Army Ranger Camp)?

Answer: The pole should be no more than 40-feet high.

66. What sites are powered by AC? What sites aren’t powered by AC?

Answer: Not all locations have AC power. A list of locations with and without AC power has been added to the SOW (Appendix D)

67. If they do not reuse a pole, is the contractor responsible to take down the pole?

Answer: No, requiring activity/unit will coordinate with CE in order to remove unused poles.

68. At the C41 Test Facility, can speakers be removed from the pole and mounted to the roof top with an acceptable mount?

Answer: The Government supports moving the speaker array to the rooftop. However, this method will have to be coordinated with CE to determine if the walls are structurally sound to support the mount. As this cannot be determined at this time, offerors should base their proposal on mounting the speaker array to the existing pole if an offeror determines that is the best solution for providing coverage in this area.

69. Can contractors get a picture of the CCU location in the MOC at C-6? Can they get wiring diagrams?

Answer: A photo cannot be provided as cameras are not allowed in the facility. Wiring diagrams are not available.

70. Which poles do not have AC power to the pole?

Answer: See response to Question 66.

71. Can we be provided with more information on the Unify console?

Answer: No. We are in the earlier planning stages and the requirement for the future console hasn’t been validated yet. It is unknown at this time what console will be procured.

72. Will the SOW clearly state a demarcation line between the new GV and the Unify Console?

Answer: No, the integration of the new Command Post console will be accomplished at a later date.

73. Will the Giant Voice CCU stay at its current position?

Answer: Yes, but as stated in the SOW the new GV should have the capability of being used through an external console if the new CP console is purchased.

74. What is the location of the radio used to trigger giant voice and what type of radio was it?

Answer: The radio is currently located inside the CCU. The radio currently in use is a commercial grade Motorola, model CDM 750t.

75. Will ATHOC still be used?

Answer: At Hoc is the current mass notification messaging system being used, but as stated in the SOW, the GIANT VOICE system must be capable of tying into the new Navy Alert system we are migrating to.

76. Will Camp Rudder's CCU be tied in or is it a Stand alone? What type of connection will be used if the remote sites are tied into the master CCU?

Answer: Camp Rudder is a standalone system. However, the CCU must be capable of tying into the Eglin Command Post if needed in the future. Tie-in to the Command Post will most likely be done via copper.

77. Does GV currently do daily speaker tests?

Answer: Yes, the system does do a daily silent test and the speaker stacks report back to the CCU their current status.

78. Are all of the CCU's configured the same way and where are they located?

Answer: The CCUs are currently configured the same way. Locations of the CCUs are stated in the SOW. Additionally, the Command Post also has a mobile CCU in a Pelican case.

Paragraph 1.2.1 of the SOW has been revised to identify the mobile CCU requirement.

79. Can the contractors sink new poles next to the old ones during the installation process to avert crippling the current system until the final cut over is performed?

Answer: The answer at this time is, no. However, this solution may be submitted as a part of an offeror’s Transition Plan for the Government to evaluate. The Government cannot determine the feasibility of this proposed method without the benefit of seeing all the details of an offeror’s proposed solution for transition.

80. During the site visit, mention was made of the government publishing the site visit attendee list. Would the government please provide the list?

Answer: The list has been published along with Amendment 6 to the FBO website.

81. SOW, para 1.3.1- May the contractor use the mounting hardware from the existing water tower and building mount speaker arrays?

Answer: No.

82. SOW, para 1.3.1 - Should the contractor deem the existing Motorola radios as fully functional, may one or more of the radios be repurposed and used in the new outdoor MNS solution?

Answer: No. The requirement is for a completely new MNS and components of the current MNS may not be incorporated into the new MNS.

83. SOW paras 1.13.1 and 5.5.1 - Please clarify the contract Period of Performance and the maintenance visit requirement. Para 1.13.1 of the SOW indicates the contractor shall complete all efforts in accordance with this SOW within 180-days after award. Yet para 5.5.1 identifies a requirement for both a 6 month and 11 month maintenance inspection and repair of findings prior to the expiration of the manufacturer’s warranty.

Answer: These are two (2) distinct requirements. IAW Paragraph 1.13.1 the contractor must have the system installed within 180-days. IAW Paragraph 1.11.3 the contractor is required to provide a 1-year warranty on all labor and system installation. The inspections listed in Paragraph 5.5.1 are to be conducted during the warranty period specified in Paragraph 1.11.3.

84. SOW 1.3.2; Are the CCSs to have hierarchical control capability?

Answer: No. They should all have the same priority.

85. SOW 1.6; What is the specified duty cycle of the HPSA units and system during the activation time?

Answer: The duty cycle is three minutes followed by five seconds off.

86. SOW 1.7.1; is the alternate command post CCS to provide full redundant operation of the system in the event of the loss of the primary CCS without loss of signals or control?

Answer: Yes

87. Is a mobile CCS required?

Answer: Yes, as specified in SOW paragraph 1.2.1.

88. SOW 1.7.1.5.1; is the GUI software and associated hardware to be UL 2572/UL 864 listed?

Answer: All equipment required to meet specific UL standards are listed in UFC-4-021-01. If the UFC or SOW does not specify a UL standard for a specific component then the component does not have to meet a UL standard.

89. SOW 1.7.1.5.2; is the Backup Power to be UL 1481 Listed?

Answer: All equipment required to meet specific UL standards are listed in UFC-4-021-01. If the UFC or SOW does not specify a UL standard for a specific component then the component does not have to meet a UL standard.

90. SOW 1.7.2.3; is the HPSA system required to support UFC 3-6.4 "Special Outdoor Areas" with 0.8 CIS/0.7 STI output ratings?

Answer: No, there are no special outdoor areas.

91. SOW 1.7.2.5; does every current HPSA location have 120 AC power run to the equipment enclosure?

Answer: Not all locations have AC power. A list of locations with and without AC power has been added to the SOW (Appendix D)

92. If the answer is no to the above, specifically what locations have 120 AC power run to the HPSA enclosures?

Answer: See Appendix D of the SOW. Locations with/without AC power are listed.

93. What amperage are the 120 AC power feeds to each HPSA equipment enclosure?

Answer: If the system an offeror is proposing requires special power requirements, identify this in the proposal.

94. SOW 1.7.2.7.7; what is the duty cycle (run time) of the system?

Answer: The duty cycle is three minutes followed by five seconds off.

95. SOW 1.7.2.9; if power connections specified in UFC 3-6.12 are provided, will power requirements specified in UFC 3-5.4.2 be acceptable for HPSA units?

Answer: UFC 4-021-01, paragraph 3-6.12 pertains to connection to portable electrical power generators, which is not applicable in this SOW. Paragraph 1.7.2.9, as written in this SOW, is applicable.

96. SOW 1.7.3; an engineered COTS NIS SP800-57 compliant mesh wireless system that exceeds FIPS 140-2 encryption will exceed the SOW requirements and provide for a flexible, long-term supportable communication method. Will be such a solution meet the intent of the

SOW?

Answer: No. Our intent is to use the existing communications infrastructure and assigned frequency.

97. SOW 1.7.3.3; is the operating time for system response to commands (not faults) 10 seconds as specified in NFPA 72-2013 10.12.1?

Answer: Yes. 10 seconds or less.

98. Would this project encompass all of the necessary hardware and service required to make all of the below required actually functional? Or are we to state that technically speaking, we can interface all of the below, but it may require additional resources?

Answer: No, this project encompasses providing the data feed and the interface to connect to peripheral systems. It does not encompass installing equipment beyond the MNS system to complete the interface. The intent is for the MNS system to provide a data feed or activation signals to enable other systems to disseminate the data.

99. There are many steel street light poles throughout the Air Base. The poles in question have flat tops, and single street light arms that protrude from a position below the top of the pole.

Will it be permitted to mount HPSA speaker arrays on the top of these poles, if the speaker arrays would not interfere with the street light arms or lights themselves? The amplifier modules would be mounted on the side of the poles. Can the AC power at the poles be used for powering the arrays?

Answer: No, power for speakers will have to be sourced separately, not all light poles have constant power and we do selective shut downs for energy conservation also some circuits may be at max capacity.

100. What is the exact frequency of the UHF radios to be used? What is the bandwidth of the channel 6.25 Hz or 12.5 Hz?

Answer: For operational security reasons, we will provide the actual frequency upon award for contract. The frequency is a UHF frequency with a 12.5KHz bandwidth.

101. Performance Information Fact Sheet; this government provided document template uses 10 pt font and text lines spaced less than 1 ½ spaces. Is it acceptable to complete this one document using 10 pt font and in Section 4 (Brief Description of Contract) to use single spacing to enable an offeror to better demonstrate relevancy and also include the requested SOW para number references?

Answer: Yes, that is acceptable.

102. I am under the impression that all locations have solar, with some solar only. Is that correct?

Answer: Yes, all locations are required to have solar panels. See Appendix D of the SOW to see which locations do not have AC power.

103. Regarding Q&A 20, Section 1.7.1.4 - Can you please clarify this requirement in greater detail? There still appears to be a discrepancy of the clearly stated intention of the Base during the site visit, compared to the answer given in response to Question 20 of the Q&A. At the site visit, the Base indicated that the need for the data feed to the individual building MNS from the outdoor MNS CCS is one of “capability only,” meaning that the Base does not want a radio controller that interfaces to the indoor MNS at each individual building to be procured and installed under this SOW, and rather just wants the system to be capable of providing this feature.

However, the wording in the response to Question 20 of the Q&A seems to indicate that the data feed is to actually be provided to individual building controllers, which in turn assumes the installation of an interfacing controller in each building. Please clarify whether each individual building MNS is to be physically integrated into the system or whether the Base just wants the capability to integrate.

Answer: The SOW covers only the capability to feed a signal to peripheral systems, such as the indoor MNS. The SOW does not cover the installation of radio controllers or additional equipment on the indoor MNS.

104. Regarding Q&A 28, are you saying that regardless of the site survey, that the Base wants two (2) HPSAs at site C-6, even if it is determined that one (1) HPSA will provide complete coverage for the indicated area?

Answer: The SOW has been revised to read one HPSA at site C-6.