The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
RFP-2016000096
Microwave RFP Replacement Round 2 Questions & Answers January 27, 2016
| 1 |
| Will the Design/Build contractor design the towers and tower modifications the ANSI/TIA 222-G or 222-H? |
| It is not anticipated that TIA-222-H will be complete and adopted by the version of IBC that is adopted by the Office of the State Architect the time this project begins. It is anticipated at this time that the towers are to be designed and constructed per TIA-222-G. |
| 2 |
| If a new tower is required is it the responsibility of the Design/Build contractor to design and supply the tower? |
| We expect the D/B to subcontract with one of our pre-qualified tower builders as listed in the RFP. |
| 3 |
| If so, what type of tower loading should we assume (i.e. (2) di-pole antennas, one at 195’ and the other at 165’, (1) 6’ M/W dish with radome at 150’)? |
| The towers are to be designed for the existing loading, plus any additional equipment as provided by the Vendor for this RFP. The towers need, at a minimum, be designed and erected considering the environmental loads listed in the summary and the requirements of the Appendix D Specifications. |
| 4 |
| If a new tower or tower structural modifications is required for a site, will the Design/Build contractor be responsible to supply the microwave antenna system? |
| Yes |
| 5 |
| Will the Design/Build contractor be responsible for installing the tower foundations for new towers? |
| We expect the D/B to subcontract with one of our pre-qualified tower builders as listed in the RFP to install the foundations. The foundations need to be designed and constructed per the requirements of Appendix D and Appendix D5 |
| 6 |
| If a new greenfield site is needed for the system will the Design/Build contractor be responsible for the site design, zoning, permitting, regulatory requirements, supplying site construction materials, and construction of the site? |
If so, will the State’s Tower Vendor be responsible for the tower erection?
We expect the D/B to subcontract with one of our pre-qualified tower builders as listed in the RFP
| 7 |
| If the Design/Build contractor is installing the waveguide and there are available ports to use for the waveguide, will the Design/Build contractor be required to install a new waveguide port? |
| No. A new waveguide port will only be required if a new tower is constructed, which would require a new port at a different location on the building, or if there are no available ports in the existing waveguide port. |
| 8 |
| Is the Design/Build contractor responsible for supplying and installing new ice bridges and waveguide supports for all sites? |
| No. Only at sites where a new tower is constructed. |
| 9 |
| Are construction drawings required for all sites? |
| Only if the tower is to be replaced or modified. |
| 10 |
| Have structural analysis been performed on all of the sites? |
| Yes. See Appendix D5 |
| 11 |
| If structural analysis has not been performed on the sites does the State want the Design/Build contractor to perform structural analysis on the towers? |
| No. It is the responsibility of the D/B contractor to use the data in Appendix D5 to reanalyze the tower, if necessary, for the addition of their proposed equipment. If the tower is overloaded in this condition then the tower may need to be replaced or modified. |
| 12 |
| Will the Design/Build contractor be responsible for disassembling existing towers that the State determines need to be removed? |
| We expect the D/B to subcontract with one of our pre-qualified tower builders as listed in the RFP to disassemble the towers. |
| 13 |
| Is Appendix D5 – Tower Structural Analyses the same document identified as “Appendix G” in the compliance matrix section “5.1 General Item A”? |
| Yes |
| 14 |
| Is the date range for the Oral Interviews correct (2/16 – 2/19)? |
| Yes |
| 15 |
| Appendix D Technical Specifications, item 4.B refers to over 200 monitored hot-standby by microwave paths, and the table in 4.D mentions 377 deployments of radio. Please confirm that the scope of this project is limited to the number of microwave sites and paths contained in Appendix D4, which provides details of 5 ring |
| The scope of the project is to develop the 5 rings defined in Appendix D4. All other sites should be included in the proposed design as spurs. |
| 16 |
| Could the State tell us the amount of outages and the amount of down time for each outage over the past three years on the current network? |
No, not at this time
| 17 |
| Would you mind telling me what the plans are for monitoring the network? Does DTR have a Network Operating Center (NOC) you are going to use for managing the devices? Or is that in scope of this RFP? We are not clear on that. |
| DTR has an existing NOC and plans to manage the proposed microwave network with the proposed NMS from the existing NOC and DTB locations with the ability to monitor the proposed microwave network from other locations. |
| 18 |
| Given the significant financial impact of service levels on system pricing and the fact that the customer will be acquiring systems with varying levels of criticality we would propose to establish and negotiate availability and response times on a per RFP basis in order to achieve optimal pricing according to the use and requirements of each system. Is this an acceptable approach? |
| No that is not acceptable please use the specification in Appendix D, Section 9 H, Table 4. |
| 19 |
| Based on the latest direction given to us during oral interviews, our plan is to respond to Terms and Conditions as part of our formal RFP response and not as part of the pre-qualification process. Please confirm our understanding is correct. |
| That is correct however, be aware that a lot of the contract language is based on Colorado statute and laws and cannot be negotiated. |
| 20 |
| Appendix D, sections 4.E through 4.I make reference to the existing topology and desired/new topology. The total number of sites represented in Appendices D2 and D3 is 228. Appendix D4 provides a map of the desired/new topology, which consists of 46 sites. We want to clarify the intent is to establish spurs and/or additional rings from the desired/new topology for connectivity to the remaining balance of the 228 sites in the existing topology. Is this correct? |
| The scope of the project is to develop the 5 rings defined in Appendix D4. All other sites should be included in the proposed design as spurs. For the RFP proposal response 228 is the correct number of sites to use. |
However, keep in mind the system in continuous flux. The ring and spur count will be determined based on the actual count at the time of contracting.
| 21 |
| This listing includes all of the towers that are critically loaded and those that have already been determined as “to be replaced.” Should we assume that our cost proposal needs to include the replacement of those towers identified as “to be replaced?” If yes, can you provide the details associated with those towers (the details are not currently included in Appendix D5). |
Also, should we assume that our cost proposal needs to include the replacement or remediation of towers identified as critically loaded, or will the State take responsibility for such replacement or remediation?
No
No, the State does not anticipate remediation or replacement of the existing critically loaded towers. Cost for towers should only be included for proposed new sites.
| 22 |
| During the pre-bid meeting on January 14, 2016, the design/build concept was discussed in terms of the sequence of events pertaining to system design and the development of a final price. The information gathered during the meeting revealed the following: The initial design will be based on the information contained in Appendices D2-D4 and will be reflected in the Cost Proposal Forms and clarifications cited in the Compliance Matrix The effort to finalize the design is considered a sold service within the contract The design is finalized after the contract is awarded The price is also finalized after the contract is awarded, as a result of the final design Can you confirm this is the correct understanding? |
| Yes that is correct. |
| 23 |
| Section 5.3 pertains to tower replacement and the pricing tables include fields for optional pricing for tower structures and tower analyses. Since the final design won’t occur until after contract award, and quantity and type of towers to be replaced and/or analyzed will remain undetermined until then, will it be acceptable to establish an average price estimate for tower structures and analyses based on a sampling of the data given in Appendix D3 and D5? |
| Yes |
| 24 |
| This section refers to redundant controllers to eliminate single points of failure. Will you require 1+0 or 1+1 redundancy on each path? For example, is 1+0 acceptable for paths located on a ring, and 1+1 for paths located on a spur? |
| 1+0 for ring paths and 1+1 for spur paths is acceptable. |
| 25 |
| This section refers to the network management system. Do you require full monitoring and management capabilities at each of the 13 radio shops, or would you prefer just monitoring capabilities at those locations such that management functions are performed at just the DTB and OIT locations? |
| Full monitoring and management is required at just the DTB and NOC locations. Monitoring capabilities are required at each of the 13 radio shops. |
| 26 |
| Will the State provide a list of existing call signs per link? This will be used to determine the suitability (bandwidth, etc.) of existing frequencies to be used by the new system vs. the quantity and location of frequencies requiring new licensing or modification. |
| This will be provided to vendors on the short list. |
| 27 |
| These sections identify the need for pseudo-wire and legacy TDM capabilities. Do you intend to emulate TDM interfaces via the IP transport scheme for legacy radio interfaces (e.g. pseudo-wire), or do you require native, non-emulated TDM interfaces for legacy radio interfaces? |
Native, non-emulated TDM is the preferred method. Vendors have the option to quote a pseudo-wire option with a clear understanding of the end to end latency requirement. Vendors shall describe their method of legacy radio interfaces and provide a description as to why that method was chosen.
| 28 |
| This section refers to staging. During the pre-bid the questions and answers on this topic revealed the following: Staging can occur in the field or at the vendor’s facility, and if the State needs to travel to a staging facility, the vendor should account for costs (travel and per diem) for ten (10) customer representatives. Can you confirm this to be the correct expectation, or clarify as necessary? |
| The State prefers a local or regional staging area. If travel is required to another location 10 is the correct number of OIT staff to plan for. The State will accept a proof of concept demonstration of 10 sites at the OIT DTRS offices. The State reserves the right to wave the staging requirement at any time during the contract period. Please show the line item costs for the staging and travel in your proposal. |
| 29 |
| 1. Please confirm the scope of this project includes only the paths in the 5 rings detailed in Appendix D4, and that no spur paths are a part of this RFP. |
| The scope of the project is to develop the 5 rings defined in Appendix D4. All other sites should be included in the proposed design as spurs. |
| 30 |
| 3. In Appendix D Technical Specifications, 4.1.4.H states ‘Contractor shall perform and provide documentation for the necessary intermodulation and interference studies prior to installing antenna equipment.’ Please comment on what form the documentation should take. |
| Vendors should provide appropriate documentation (such as ComSearch) to verify intermodulation and interference studies have been performed and no intermodulation and interference will exist on the proposed microwave network. |
| 31 |
| 4. In Appendix D Technical Specifications, 4.2.A.1 and 4.2.A.2 provide the design criteria and reliability objective, albeit in slightly different ways. Both criteria apply to ‘Each microwave link…’, so we assume the criteria is applied on a per link basis. Are we correct to interpret 4.2.A.1 and 4.2.A.2 to mean each link shall meet or exceed 99.999% 1-way at a BER of 10-3? |
| That is correct. Each microwave link shall meet or exceed 99.999% one way at a BER of |
| 32 |
| 5. In Appendix D Technical Specifications, 4.2.B states ‘the microwave network shall support bandwidth higher than the requirements of the actual bearer traffic’. Please clarify the meaning of this requirement. Is it in reference to link capacity or the channel bandwidth supported by the radio? |
| This is in reference to link capacity. The link capacity of the microwave network shall support bandwidth higher than the requirements of the actual bearer traffic. |
| 33 |
| 6. In Appendix D Technical Specifications, 4.3.I.2.B states that waveguide ‘connectors shall be standard, premium type’. Waveguide connectors are either tunable or non-tunable, with the standard being non-tunable. Please confirm that standard non-tunable connectors are acceptable. |
| Non-tunable and tunable connectors are acceptable. Vendors should describe what connectors are being supplies and provide details as to why their specific connector type was chosen. |
| 34 |
| 7. In Appendix D Technical Specification, 4.3.D states the minimum capacity on each ring path is 180 Mbps. For those paths that are common to more than one ring, what should the capacity of those paths be? Still a minimum of 180 Mbps, or 360 Mbps if common to two rings, and 540 Mbps if common to 3 rings? |
| All rings paths should have a capacity of 180 Mbps. If a path is common to more than one ring, the path capacity should still be a minimum of 180 Mbps. |
| 35 |
| 8. Some of the sites mentioned in appendix D6 are not there on appendix D4, are we supposed to proposed Battery’s and charger for all the sites on appendix D6 or just appendix D4 ??? |
| Please propose for all sites so we have this information for evaluation purposes. |
We have other ongoing maintenance projects to replace batteries and rectifiers that are listed for informational purposes in Appendix D6 of what is currently known.
| 36 |
| 9. If the battery’s and chargers are supposed to be proposed for all the sites mentioned on appendix D6, can you please clarify which sites belongs to which ring. There are total 5 rings on the cost proposal form. |
This information will be provided to the short list of Vendors.
| 37 |
| Can we use an alternate ELTEK rectifier which can handle the load of proposed equipment’s instead of ElTek Trilogy Rectifier System with the Smartpack 2 Master Controller. |
| No this is the OIT standard equipment. |
| 38 |
| P32 of Appendix D, 4.5 A, how many alarm points needed at each? Is analog input needed? |
Vendors shall describe their basic alarm monitoring capabilities to monitor digital, analog, and relays alarms. As an option, Vendors shall provide the maximum number of alarm monitoring capabilities along with the expansion methodology to attain the maximum number of alarms.
Minimum requirements are:
· 32 Digital Inputs
· 16 Analog inputs
· 8 Relay outputs
| 39 |
| What is the State’s temporary loading requirements? |
| Tower loading during equipment installation shall be in accordance PIA 1019-A. |