HSBP1016Q0136_A0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

PAGE OF PAGES

3. EFF. DATE 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

FACILITY CODECODE

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR ( No., street, county, State and Zip Code)

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended. Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods: (a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES ( Such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc. ) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103 (b).

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT

ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority) copies to issuing office.

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

A0001 09/02/2016 20091459

DHS - Customs & Border Protection CBP, Procurement Directorate Intech Two, Suite 100 6650 Telecom Drive Indianapolis IN 46278

DHS - Customs & Border Protection CBP, Procurement Directorate Intech Two, Suite 100 6650 Telecom Drive Indianapolis IN 46278

HSBP1016Q0136

08/25/2016

1 8 is required to sign this document and return is not

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

PREVIOUS EDITION UNUSABLE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 16C. DATE

SIGNED

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 15C. DATE

SIGNED

BY

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15A NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

Nathan P. Briggs Contracting Officer

The purpose of this amendment is to:

a. incorporate the attached Questions and Answers into this solicitation, and

b. remove the the Arabic language requirement for the Foreign National training (the second line of optional training development and the second line for optional training classes in the schedule of supplies and services). These classes may be taught in English.

No other changes are made by this amendment.

X X

X 1

Questions and Answers for RFQ HSBP1016Q0136

RFP or SOW Part Subpart (if applicable) Question Response

1 RFP, ¶1, Page 7 CBP/CSI intends to procure Large Scale Non-Intrusive Inspection (LS-NII) Fixed imaging

Please clarify the meaning of the term “fixed.” Would a trailer mounted imaging system meet CBP’s definition of a “fixed” large scale NII system?

“Fixed” means a system that is stationary and operates from a fixed position. It is required that the system not be comprised of a vehicle. The government will evaluate the solution proposed by the vendor.

2 RFP - III.14 EVALUATION

AND AWARD CRITERIA

Evaluation Structure: This evaluation will be conducted using the lowest priced, technically acceptable analysis method

In the same section, under Additional Information: it is also stated that "Award can only be made to a vendor: a) Whose quote is technically acceptable and represents best value".

Doesn't this conflict with LPTA evaluation?

All federal procurements must establish best value; LPTA is one method of establishing that, trade-offs is another. The evaluation method will be LPTA for this procurement, not trade-offs.

3 RFP - I.4 DELIVERY

SCHEDULE

Delivery date for Item 10 and Item 20 is specified as 3/31/2018

Please confirm a Delivery requirement of 3/31/2018 for the NII System in Karachi as stated on Page 5 of the Solicitation document.

Confirmed – The delivery date for the system shall be 3/31/2018.

SOW 3.2.1 Performance

Requirements for CSI Medium Energy System

5. Image Display - Shall be capable of displaying the entire length and height of the scanned conveyance.

Can the height requirement be restated as Minimum Scan Height (meters above ground)?

Updating the Scan Size requirement defined in the SOW:

The system must be capable of scanning a vehicle up to 15.3 ft and 75 ft in length (no length limit preferred). Portal systems will only be required to scan the cargo area of these vehicles. Limited civil works (footing) may be utilized to satisfy the scan height requirements (footing additions shall not exceed 1.5 ft).

5. Image Display – Vertically, the system shall be capable of displaying the scanned conveyance from 2.5 ft (above the ground) to

15.3 ft. Horizontally, the system shall be capable of displaying the entire length of conveyance.

5 SOW 3.2.1 Please confirm item numbering in this section.

"6. Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) System" should be "9. Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) System"

"7. Optical character Reader (OCR)" should be "10. Optical character Reader (OCR)"

6 SOW 3.2.1-2, 3.5.1.1, 3.5.2

Several references are made to a demonstrated capability to operate in a similar environment. What does the government require from vendors to demonstrate this capability?

No capability demonstration is required in the releases SOW.

Please be certain to use the SOW released with the RFQ (Attachment A of solicitation 1)

7 SOW 3.2.1-17 Does 4MBPS mean megabits or megabytes per second? Megabits per second: Mbps

(Megabits/sec)

SOW 3.2.2 System Configurations and

Operational Specifications for Medium Energy Systems

The systems at this energy level could be a Re-locatable or an Operator Controlled Drive-Through Portal system.

Please define "Re-locatable" and "Operator Controlled Drive- Through Portal" system. Is the Government seeking a fixed portal system which could be easily relocatable with minimal civil works?

In reference to SOW 3.2.3:

“System and booth should be portable/re-locatable (with limited civil works – not requiring extensive foundational or other civil work beyond power and data communication conduit installation) or portal type configuration with minimum footprint.”

The government is seeking a fixed portal type system that can be easily re-located as defined above.

SOW 3.2.2 System Configurations and

Operational Specifications for Medium Energy Systems

1. Radiation Control Area "Should the vendor require any civil works or coordinate the repositioning and/or any infrastructure affected by the RCA, it shall be responsibility of the vendor to coordinate and resolve those issues with the Terminal Operator."

Can it be assumed that the Terminal operator is responsible for costs associated with civil works or the repositioning and/or any infrastructure affected by the RCA?

The government is expecting that the vendor coordinate and execute all civil work requirements with the terminal operators directly.

However, if the vendor fulfills the requirement to be relocatable, civil works are expected to be minimal.

In the event that a move is required the vendor would coordinate with the terminal operator to determine a price for the move. CBP would then evaluate the proposal and, if proved, provide the consideration.

SOW 3.2.3 System Configurations and

Operational Specifications, CSI Specific

1. System and booth should be portable/re-locatable (with limited civil works – not requiring extensive foundational or other civil work beyond power and data communication conduit installation) or portal type configuration with minimum footprint.

Does portal type configuration need to be portable/relocatable? Yes, a portal type configuration has the same portable/relocatable requirement.

SOW 3.2.3 System Configurations and

Operational Specifications, CSI Specific

17. System footprint desired to be less than 30’ x 50’ x20’

Is this L x W x H, or W x L x H?

W x L x H

12 SOW 3.2.8 Operator Booth D. The booth(s) shall be self-supporting aluminum or galvanized steel booth(s) for installation on existing asphalt, Are we to assume that existing asphalt, concrete pavement, or elevated steel structure exists

The vendor shall assume that limited civil works will be required for the booth. However, it shall be concrete pavement, or elevated steel structure.

for the placement of the Operator Booth? Or are we to assume that limited civil works may be required for the placement of the Operator Booth, and that this is the responsibility of the Terminal operator?

the vendor’s responsibility to coordinate the development of any required infrastructure (area surfacing) to prepare the site installation surface with the Terminal operator.

13 SOW 3.7 How does CBP evaluate government costs for training? The price will be evaluated in accordance with RFP section III.14.

14 SOW 3.10

The last sentence of 3.10 identifies paragraphs 3.11.1-

3.11.8 as included in warranty requirements; however this section ends with 3.11.7. Is this a typo, or has an item been inadvertently omitted?

Yes, this is a typo - it should be included read 3.11.1 - 3.11.7

15 SOW, 3.18 in General and

3.18.3.3 specifically

Security reporting to DHS central control points (i.e. the DHS Security Operations Center (SOC) and integration into DHS Security Incident Response

Can it be assumed that IT infrastructure provided in support of this solution for remote management/analysis can be implemented in DHS/CBP data centers and leverage CBP Networking, or should it be assumed that IT Infrastructure and applications should be hosted externally by the contractor?

There are 2 local networking efforts

– the first is in Pakistan and that requirement is defined by SOW

3.2.1 No. 17 and the second

location is in the US at CBP’s NTC.

The networking requirements for the second location are defined under Reference SOW 3.2.1 No. 18.

At both of these sites, CBP will be managing the network infrastructure and interfaces, the vendor is responsible for providing a solution that will comply with these requirements.

SOW, 3.18 in General

Can DHS/CBP clarify if they would prefer that the IT Infrastructure associated with the contractor solution be integrated within existing DHS Security Operations Center (SOC) Infrastructure and event management systems, or would they prefer to leverage the separately managed contractor solution with a real time feed of notable incidents to the DHS

SOC?

No, the vendor will work with CBP to comply with existing interface requirements. The vendor’s solution is required to be integrated into CBP’s security suite of tools and monitoring.

The SOW includes extensive IT Security requirements, which are very expensive to implement.

The Government acknowledges this and will evaluate the vendors approach during the source selection process.

Patch management (Section 3.18.12) in particular is difficult and expensive to implement.

The Government acknowledges this and will evaluate the vendors approach during the source selection process.

Given that this system will be deployed remotely with limited bandwidth and limited access, can these requirements be waived? Does CBP intend to run its own patch management process? Can critical patches be installed only as needed, as per vendor recommendation?

No, it is not the Government’s intent to waive these requirements at this time.

DHS and CBP both run their own patch management on all its systems. All critical patches from vendors are required by CBP IT Security to be installed no later than 30 days after release. In some case they are emergency patches pushed out depending on severity of the vulnerability.

Vendor will need to work with all patches as they are released to ensure system application compliance with DHS and CBP standard patching and security posture.

20 SOW, 4.1, Configuration Management

Contractor shall establish software CCB to review software changes until the delivery of the first LS-NII system. CCB approval shall be required for changes to the software baseline and after the first delivery of a LS-NII system.

Will CBP approval be required following each CCB review?

Prior to implementation of any changes, CBP approval will be required.

21 SOW - General

The Government is looking to procure Large Scale Non-Intrusive Inspection (LS- NII) Fixed imaging systems at Port Karachi, Pakistan.

Is the Government looking for a system that includes the prime mover to provide motive power for transporting the imaging system/booth, or can it be assumed that a flatbed truck or truck with trailer hitch exists for this purpose at the Port Karachi or provided by port operator, Hutchinson Port Holdings?

It shall be the vendor’s responsibility to provide a means of transport to and from any cargo vessel.

22 General

Will CBP authorize the awarded company to ship equipment directly from the equipment’s OCONUS point of origin to the Port of Karachi, Pakistan?

Yes

23 General

How will the government address the cost of civil works to the project? For example, if Solution A requires $1,000,000 more in civil works requirements than System B, would that figure be included in the evaluation price.

Yes - vendors should itemize the civil work required and provide an estimate of the costs.

24 General Would the system ever be relocated? How should the cost of relocation be addressed?

The Government has made the requirement that the system be relocatable in the event that a system relocation may occur. The RFQ and statement of work does not request an estimate for relocation costs at this time.

In the event that a relocation is needed, a relocation-specific price proposal can be submitted at that time.

25 General

Is there a requirement to demonstrate the ability to transmit the data over a low-bandwidth network prior to contract award? And if so, what level of substantiation is necessary to demonstrate this capability?

No

26 General Is there a requirement for demonstrated operational time in the field?

There is no demonstration requirement.