SolicitationQuestionResponses6-27-07.xls

XLS spreadsheet 147 KB Posted Jun 27, 2007

Attached to: Passport Card Stock and Printer Supply Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number: S-AQMPD-06-R-1140
Issued by: Department of State Office of Acquisition Management

About this file

From the source

Q A 6/27/2007

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to Passport Card Stock and Printer Supply, newest first.
File	Type	Posted
DescriptionofDemonstrationArea(2).doc	DOC document	Jul 24, 2007
AttachmentH6-27-2007.xls	XLS spreadsheet	Jun 27, 2007
SF30Amendment2.doc	DOC document	Jun 27, 2007
SolicitationQuestionResponses6-11-07.xls	XLS spreadsheet	Jun 11, 2007
AttachmentH.xls	XLS spreadsheet	Jun 11, 2007
SF30Amendment1.doc	DOC document	Jun 11, 2007
5-29ResponsestoRFPQuestions.doc	DOC document	Jun 4, 2007
1_PassportCardRFP1.doc	DOC document	May 25, 2007
SF33.DOC	DOC document	May 25, 2007
PassportCardRFP1.doc	DOC document	May 24, 2007
DRAFT5_2_2007SectionJ.doc	DOC document	May 2, 2007
DRAFT5_2_2007SectionC.doc	DOC document	May 2, 2007
TCARD_FRONT_10_17_06_CLEAR.1.pdf	PDF	Jan 22, 2007
TCARD_BACK_10_17_06_BACKGROUND.pdf	PDF	Jan 22, 2007
IndustryDayTranscript.DOC	DOC document	Dec 21, 2006
RFIConferenceAttendeesList.xls	XLS spreadsheet	Nov 27, 2006
RFIConference.doc	DOC document	Oct 23, 2006
WHTIDraftSOW.doc	DOC document	Oct 23, 2006

Show all 18

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

Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

Solicitation Questions Solicitation Questions for Solicitation No.:

S-AQMPD-06-R-1140

Question #	RFP Reference	Page #	Question	Response
1	B.1, B.4	2	The RFP states that "Appendix A of Section B provides a template for providing price information." This Appendix A is not found. Will the government provide this pricing template? Will it be provided in an Excel format?	The pricing template will be posted on FedBizOpps by June 20th. The Pricing Template will reflect the CLIN structure.
2	B.3; CLIN 0002b:	3	As the Offeror understands the solicitation, this option would not require that the RFID chip be read and verified as operational until the QC function. This means card stock with "dead chips" would be personalized and only be detected at the QC station. Is this what the Department of State intends by this CLIN?	Yes, If CLIN 2b is exercised, current Passport CONOPS would discover the "dead chip" at QC. DoS invites Offerors to propose alternate solutions.
3	B.3; CLIN 0005a:	4	The Government has not specified whether there is an "acceptable" level of passport cards that reach the Government with "DOA" chips nor whether that level should change over time. Is it the Government's expectation that all passport cards that are delivered to the Government will be "live" in terms of their RFID capability?	It is the Offeror’s responsibility to produce preprinted RFID enabled Passport Card Stock, ready for personalization, that will remain fully functional after passing through the U.S. passport personalization process. Fully functional means that the ICC communicates and is able to operate according to the requirements within this RFP. If any card fails during the personalization process, then the card will be returned for replacement at the Offeror’s expense. When a group of cards are returned by DoS to the Offeror, the Offeror will account for the quantity returned and replace with a corresponding quantity of cards. The Offeror will not be responsible for replacing cards damaged due to Government equipment malfunctions or operator errors.
4	CLIN 0012	7	Please define the word response in the CLIN description.	Response means that the appropriate maintenance technician will be engaged in correcting the problem within 4 hours of the Government requesting remedial maintenance.
5	C.6	42	This requirement potentially imposes significant undefined risk to the offeror. Is the intent only to replace those cards deemed defective as a result of "normal" use.	The intent is to replace those cards deemed defective as a result of "normal" use.
6	C.6.1; B.3, CLIN0012	42	Please clarify the three year warranty requirements of C.6.1 as it pertains to printers, readers, and related equipment and the relationship to the specifications for CLIN0012	At a minimum, the Offeror shall warrant printers, readers, and related equipment, in accordance with industry best practices. For example, if industry best practice warrants printers for one year, then at minimum the Government expects the printer to be warranted for one year. Maintenance that falls beyond the warranty period will be covered under CLIN0012. The 3-year warranty requirement pertains to the industry standard for cards. CLIN0022 and CLIN0023 pertain only to cards.
7	C.7.2	44	Last paragraph, last sentence. Offeror recommends the word "desired" be changed to "required".	To minimize the possibility of confusion, the sentence should be considered removed. The subsequent subsection describes the requirements for the printers.
8	C.7.3	47	Can the Government elaborate on the issue of decals that may be attached to the card in the future? Where would they be placed on the card?	No further elaboration at this point. There are no current plans for decals to be adhered to the card. This will be negotiated if it becomes a future requirement.
9	C.7.3.1.d	48	The requirement states "…Offeror must provide sufficient evidence…" Please specify what constitutes "sufficient evidence" to satisfy this requirement.	Evidence such as test results that demonstrate to the Evaluation Team that durability performance is at least as good as the polycarbonate, and will meet all other requirements in the RFP.
10	C.7.3.3	50	Is there any use foreseen for this bar code except to associate the card stock to the data file for the passport card applicant? Is the Government willing to consider options that would facilitate that association without relying upon a 1-Dimensional Code 3 of 9 type bar code?	The bar code is required to be on the card, but the printer does not need a bar code reader as long as it can read ICC by RF (if option CLIN002a is offered).
11	C.7.5	51	Does the use of the word "enclose" mean that a responsive proposal cannot have an open end to facilitate insertion and removal of the card from the sleeve by the citizen?	"Enclose" means that when the card is in the sleeve, the sleeve provides shielding effectiveness as specified in section C.7.5, per Attachment I, compared to the passport card not in the sleeve.
12	C.7.6	52	Are the size and weight features of the QA reader "not to exceed" measurements or must the QA reader meet those exact specifications?	The QA reader must not exceed the QA reader size and weight characteristics in the RFP.
13	C.7.7	52	We interpret the requirement to supply parts and labor for remedial maintenance resulting from normal use of equipment and not due to damage or misuse by government or facility personnel. Please confirm our understanding.	Yes, the requirement is for parts and labor for remedial maintenance resulting from normal use of equipment and not due to damage or misuse by government or facility personnel.
14	C.7.11 and C.7.12, Second sentences	53	In reading these requirements we are not certain of whether you are requesting a packaging of required CLINS into an integrated solution to be owned and managed by the Government, or whether these elective options refer to an outsourced personalization of passport cards that is integrated into the DoS passport environment. Please clarify.	The Government is requesting a packaging of required and Offeror suggested "elective" CLINS into a delivered integrated solution to be owned and managed by the Government.
15	C.8.2	54	Installing Passport Card Personalization equipment, especially the high volume option, may require a site visit for planning purposes. Will the Government facilitate such a site visit?	Post award, the Government will permit site visits for installation planning purposes.
16	C.8.2	54	Electrical installation requires some specificity by the Government regarding maximum length of cable runs, existing power supply at the proposed point of installation, etc. Is the Government willing to provide such information to Offerors?	The Government is assuming the electrical characteristics of a modern office facility is sufficient for producing the installation plan. If installing the equipment requires non standard characteristics, the Offeror must describe them in the installation plan.
17	H.3	82	Contractor Commitments, Warranties and Representations, is inconsistent with RFP provision C.6.1 and FAR 52.246-25. Also, H.3 covers a subject that is governed by FAR 52.249-8, Default. Will the Government delete H.3 (given the coverage of the substance of the provision in other provisions in the RFP)?	The RFP will be amended to remove clause H.3
18	H.7	84	Safeguarding Of Information, contains the following sentence: “All documents and records (including photographs) generated during the performance of work under this contract shall be for the sole use of and become the exclusive property of the U.S. Government.” The foregoing language is so broad that it literally could cover all e-mail, presentation charts, meetings minutes and other such documents. Will the Government clarify or limit the coverage of this sentence, e.g. limitation to contract deliverables?	This Safeguarding of Information clause has been used in sensitive Department contracts for more than a decade without causing operational problems for the contractor. It is intended to safeguard the dissemination not only of contract deliverables, but of all substantive information concerning the contract.
19	Section J	93	Section J, Attachment H, Compliance Matrix indicates the matrix is provided as an attached file. No file has been provided or attached. Will the government provide this attachment or should the contractor develop its own Compliance Matrix?	The Government will provide the Compliance Matrix via an amendment to the RFP and will be posted to FedBizOpps by June 20th
20	L.6 (a)	111	Does the Government require the Small Business Subcontracting Plan to be included as Part of the Volume I, Business Management Plan, or the Volume II, Technical Proposal, Management Approach?	The Subcontracting Plan can be included in Volume I.
21	L.9	113	Please clarify the statement, "Proposals must use 8.5” by 11” size paper, with no foldouts (except where noted)" as these exceptions are not noted in the instructions. Can the Offeror include foldouts?	The Offeror can include foldouts but a foldout counts as two pages.
22	Section J - Attachment I; DoS security Feature Assessment; Section L.10	122	This deliverable requires preprinted cards. When and how will DoS artwork be available?	Artwork on CD-ROM is available. Offerors who would like to obtain a copy must complete a non-disclosure agreement which can be requested from the Contracting Officer by e-mailing MejiaKJ@state.gov. Once the NDA is received, the Department will ship the CD to the Offeror or make it available for in-person pick-up in Arlington, VA.
23	Section M.5.1.ii.a; C.4.1.22	128	Please clarify the "10 year physical durability" requirement and its relationship to C.6.1 Deliverable warranties and CLINs 0022 and 0023	Since an issued Passport Card is valid for 10 years, the Government expects the card to last 10 years. CLINs 0022 and 0023 provide the Government two extended warranty options, five and ten years from the date of delivery. These CLINs pertain to the cards.
24	Attachment B-Notional DHS Concept of Operations		In the subsection labeled Vehicle Entry Process under WHTI, the text refers to the vehicle being required "to pause…when stopped (emphasis added) the pre-read of RFID cards will occur" Late in the same paragraph is text that says "CPB anticipates that a vehicle will be traveling no faster than 10 miles per hour when passing the RFID card pre-readers". Please clarify?	DHS does not pre-suppose how the successful vendor for the projected DHS acquisition of RFID readers will accommodate the requirement to capture RFID tag reads in a vehicle and associate those tags with a vehicle license plate read. As such, RFID tag reads may be captured at a location where vehicles are required to stop, or upon the approach between the stop sign and the vehicle inspection booth. In addition, not all vehicles observe installed stop signs and may utilize a 'rolling stop' approach and/or the requirement to stop prior to halting at the vehicle inspection booth may not exist at all ports of entry. In any scenario, CBP anticipates that a vehicle will be traveling no faster than 10 miles per hour when passing RFID readers and offerors should take that requirement into consideration.
25	Attachment C		Figure 3 notes that "Card back artwork…will include a unique preprinted (emphasis added) card number and 1-Dimensional Code 3 of 9 bar code". This note seems to contradict earlier reference to at least the card number being "laser engraved". Please clarify.	Bar code need not be laser engraved.
26	Section J, Attachment I, Stage 1 - Lab Product Test		Will the Government allow Offerors to visit the DHS Customs and Border Protection facility in Newington, VA once the simulated land border port of entry is created for testing purposes? When does the Government anticipate that facility being operational?	Offerors will be permitted to visit the CBP test facilities (lab and outdoor).
27	Section J, Attachment I, Stage 1 - Lab Product Test		Will the Government share with Offerors the current standards for successful reads of NEXUS and SENTRI cards?	The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will not consider read rate comparisons with NEXUS and SENTRI cards as part of the evaluation.

The RFP will be amended to remove text in Section J, Attachment I, Test Strategy – Lab Card Performance Evaluation and Test Strategy – Live Card Performance Demonstration, concerning read rate comparisons with NEXUS and SENTRI.

28	Section L.9.2.c, Appendix I – Maintenance	For the response to this RFP, will the vendor be required to provide spare parts information and pricing on associated equipment. There is no CLIN specified for pricing requested for anything other than printers for this solicitation. Post-award will vendors be able to add CLINS for necessary spare parts?	The CLINs will be modified to include the price lists for all equipment proposed by the Offeror.
29	Section L.9.2.c, Appendix H – Installation	Will the government room where such equipment is scheduled to be installed be ready to accept the equipment at the time of equipment delivery?	Yes, the Government room where such equipment is scheduled to be installed will be ready to accept the equipment at the time of the equipment delivery.
30	Section L.9.2.c, Appendix H – Installation	Does the government have an anticipated minimum test period requirement for SAT?	The anticipated minimum test period requirement for site acceptance test is 1 week.
31	Section L.9.2.c, Appendix H – Installation	Since the awarded contractor must “minimize interference with on-going Passport operations”, does the government prefer that installation takes place after hours on weekends?	The Government prefers that installation take place after hours and/or on weekends. However, as circumstances allow, some installations may take place during normal business hours, as coordinated with each agency.
32	Section L.9.2.c, Appendix K – Training	CLIN 2017 specifies training to be priced for a minimum of 5-students. What is the maximum amount of students to be trained at each facility? Does the government intend to limit training classes to sizes of 5-students maximum per class? Does the government have a time limit on training class duration? Does the government prefer that training takes place after hours, or on weekends to minimize disruption of on-going Passport operations?	The Government expects to train a maximum of 5 team leaders at any one time at each facility. Training will take place during normal business hours and the Government expects training to not last more than a day.
33	Extension	In consideration of the time that it will take to fully incorporate the answers to the following questions into our offer, would the DoS please consider granting a four-week extension to the proposal due date and all subsequent procurement-related milestones?	The response date has been extended to July 30th.
34	Contract	With respect to the final contract, can the DoS please provide guidance on:

a. minimum length of contract term, and/or

b. minimum guaranteed quantities of cards to be purchased per year for the contracted term?	The contract's period of performance will be one base year plus four option years. Section B.2 states that CLIN 0001 will be executed by the Government upon contract award. All othe CLINS will be executed, as needed, at the Government's discretion.
	35	B.3, B.4	2, 36	References are made in both subsections to “Appendix A to Section B”, but this Appendix is not found. Is the pricing table in Section b.3 the correct and desired format for presentation of pricing?	See response to Question 1
	36	B.3 and elsewhere	2,36 and elsewhere	Can you please provide more details regarding the specific number, type, and locations of printers and readers to be deployed over the four years that are envisioned? This will be important in understanding production volume planning, delivery and installation costs, and service / maintenance delivery costs.	The Government anticipates having one low-to-mid volume printer at each of 17 agencies and 4 high volume printers at the Arkansas Print Center.
	37	B.3	3	The RFP refers to “ID-1, type 3 of 9 reader capability” (CLIN x002b).
Is it correct to interpret this to mean “1-D, type 3 of 9 reader capability”?	Yes, however, the proposed features must be clearly identified and the price for each alternative easily discernible.
	38	B.3, C.7.2, C.7.2.3, C.7.3.3	3, 44, 46, 50	The RFP requests prices for printers (CLIN x002a OR x002b) which are equipped either with a ISO 18000 6C RFID reader OR with a linear barcode reader.

There is also stipulation that the linear (1-D) barcode on the card must not be related in any way to the electronic serial number permanently entered into the chip in the card.

Can the DoS confirm that it envisions that:

a. the card manufacturing process includes the production of an electronic cross-reference file (inventory control file) between Barcode Serial Number and Electronic Serial Number,

b. this file is to be delivered with each card batch for import into TDIS,

c. the file will be used by the TDIS application to include the card ESN in the final personalized card production record and

d. the card ESN will be checked by the TDIS application using the ISO 18000 6C QA reader and comparing it against the value in the database record?	The Offeror shall print on each card submitted a unique serial number, between 9 and 16 characters, and print a 1-Dimensional Code 3 of 9 type bar code alongside according to artwork in Section J: Attachment C. This number shall not be related to the electronically written data described in C.7.3.4. DoS can confirm the other assumptions. See Section C.9.1.2 for information on Card Shipment / Inventory Data Transfer Requirements.
	39	B.3	5	The RFP requires optional card security features to be offered as 1, 2, or 3 unit bundles (CLINs x005b-d).
Would DoS accept an alternate pricing format that provides for individual pricing for each of the proposed optional security features? This would be in consideration of the fact that each of several optional features might be individually selected or combined with other features in different ways.	Yes, however, the proposed features must be clearly identified and the price for each alternative easily discernible.
	40	C.1.3.2.1	38	The RFI indicates an RFP process milestone item "Obtain NIST qualification of the card architecture described in SOW". We are aware of NIST SP800-98 "Guidelines for securing RFID systems".
Is this one of the elements of the NIST qualification referred to, and are there any other documents, specifications, or validation processes published by NIST or endorsed by NIST and the Department of State with which the proposed PASS card, and/or other components of the proposed solution should comply?	This refers to a government process and does not affect Offerors. All the appropriate standards are listed in the RFP.
	41	C.7.1	44	We note that the PCPS Integration Kit requires fully-pre-printed production cards. In consideration of:

- the requirement to deliver the PCPS Integration Kit within 10 days of Contract Signing,

- the fact that card design, printing, and production very likely will require weeks rather than days to complete, and

- the fact that the cards will only be used for integration purposes, would DoS consider changing this requirement to require the delivery of 6000 Test cards with the PCPS Integration Kit? The Government will be printing through both the OVD/hot stamp and must know how the laser engraved settings are impacted with these features. Minimum requirements for the PCPS Integration Kit cards are:

- RFID chips (including ICC #)

- Inventory Numbers

- Barcode

- OVD

- Any tactile features

- Front artwork

42	C.7.3.1	48	Does the DoS require that formal physical card test results from accredited test organizations be submitted at the time of proposal submission?	No, DoS does not require that formal physical card test results from accredited test organizations be submitted at the time of proposal submission.
43	C.7.3.2, Item (h iii).	49	The RFP States that artwork for the OVD will be provided, if Offeror does not provide. If an Offeror chooses to use the DoS-provided OVD, it will be available mid-July.

1) We understand that, due to the timelines associated with design, origination and production of a hologram, Vendors are not required to provide sample OVDs based on the DoS artwork with the proposal. Is this correct?

2) Can a Vendor provide conceptual artwork based on the image in Section J, Attachment C but provide samples with a generic hologram applied?

3) Would the DoS please provide a higher-resolution image of the desired OVD design to be used in the presentation of the conceptual design to be delivered with the proposal?

4) Different hologram application methods require that the holograms be received in different format (roll, sheet etc.), material, and adhesive configurations. Would the DoS please:

a. advise what format the sample OVDs for test will come in, and

b. provide a technical contact at the OVD supplier in order to coordinate materials compatibility?

5) For the purposes of costing, can the Vendors assume that the costs and logistics of the OVD design, origination, production, and procurement (in appropriate format for the Vendor’s proposed solution) will be the responsibility of DoS?

6) Can we assume that the Vendor need only include in our pricing the costs for receiving the OVD and applying it to the production cards? 1) Correct, if and only if the Offeror uses DoS- furnished OVD

2) No

3) No 4a) Hot Stamp foil 4b) Yes, if Offeror signs Nondisclosure Agreement with OVD provider. (See response to question #95 for more detail)

5) No; DoS is only providing OVDs for competition purposes (pre award), not production purposes

6) Offeror should include costs of OVD production as part of entire cost proposal

44	C.7.3.1	49	Tactile over photo – is this intended to be a static embossed feature on the surface of the card, or a personalized black or clear laser feature?	Tactile State seal is recessed (below card surface) and static (that is, not personalized). DoS is not requiring any specific manufacturing technique.
45	C.7.3.1	49	PASS System Optically Variable Ink (OVI) – in consideration of the fact that registration (alignment) of the OVI-printed text with the lithographically printed text associated with it may be difficult to reproduce consistently, would the DoS consider modification to the design to place the OVI feature in such a way that registration is less critical?	If by "OVI", the question refers to Color Shifting Ink, the answer is NO.
46	C.7.4	51	The RFP refers to “the word ‘TEST’ … pre-printed on each card of the Passport Card Test Stock”. Is it acceptable that the Vendor applies this pre-printed element during card construction using laser engraving rather than lithographic printing if this is more cost effective, and functionally equivalent?	Yes. Test Cards must also include:

- RFID chips (including ICC #)

- Inventory Numbers

- Barcode

	47	C.7.10	53	It is likely that the optional card delivery system will require at minimum an SDK, and a certain amount of integration work to be completed prior to system commissioning and cutover to production. Can the DoS please advise how they wish to see the pricing for this activity accounted for?
Can the DoS please identify its expectation of the nature of the technical interface envisioned or desired for this equipment?	DoS anticipates the cost of any integration work to be part of CLIN0010. The development work to integrate the Card Delivery System into TDIS will be done by Department of State.
	48	C.7.11	53	CLIN x020 and x021 specify an “integrated solution” for the personalization of the cards. Can the DoS clarify the elements of personalization functionality that are envisioned in this integrated solution, that may be different from those elements articulated in the requirements for CLINs x002 and x003?	See answer for Question 14.
	49	Attachment B		Is it envisioned that a PASS card may also serve as a NEXUS card (assuming that the appropriate additional entitlement adjudication has been completed)?	It has been proposed that RFID readers be installed in all lanes at designated ports of entry and that Trusted Traveler lanes be upgraded to accommodate both Gen 1 tags and Gen 2 tags. As such, the opportunity to introduce 'flex-lanes' (or multi-purpose lanes) into border operations would become available i.e. PASSport card holders may, in the future, utilize trusted traveler lanes as port operations and traffic flow allow. Holders of a PASSport card that apply for trusted traveler status (such as SENTRI and NEXUS), and are successfully adjudicated, will be able to utilize the PASSport Card for expedited border crossing sometime in the future.
	50	Attachment C – Data Format		Is there a specific requirement for the serial numbering scheme of the set of cards to be provided for pre-qualification – does DoS require specific value (s) for the 36-bit Serial Number?	No.
	51	Attachment C – Proposed Card Artwork		Would the DoS please provide a high(er) resolution rendering of the proposed card artwork so that conceptual line work may be completed for the date of proposal submission?	See the response to Question 22.
	52	Attachment H		Please advise whether an Attachment H will be provided.	See the response to Question 19.
	53	Attachment I		The RFP mentions in “Stage 1 – Lab Product Test” that “at least 100 cards per Offeror will be available”. Are these cards in addition to the 2000 + 200 cards required for the demonstrations, or are they to be taken from the set of demonstration cards?	These cards are part of the 2000 + 200.
	54	L.6	112	1. Can the DoS please clarify whether the subcontracting goals of the Federal Government as shown in this section will have any quantitative effect on the evaluation and scoring process?
2. Can the DoS please provide the quantitative scoring guidelines in this respect?	The subcontracting goals will not have any quantitative effect on the evaluation and scoring process. The scoring guidelines are detailed in Section M.5
	55	L.9.2.d	119	We understand that the first cards to be tested for RFID functionality will be those 2000 + 200 submitted for functional and operational testing.

We would then interpret this requirement to mean that it is neither necessary nor preferable to submit fully RFID functional cards on the July 11 Proposal Submission date.

Is this correct?	Correct.
	56	L.9.2.d	120	Can the DoS please clarify what artwork is required for the RF Attenuating Sleeves in final production (this paragraph stipulates that “sleeves do not require artwork for the purpose of this demonstration”?	"DoS reserves the right to print on the RF Attenuating Sleeve or direct the vendor to do so." (pg 51 of RFP). The Government has no current plans for printing on the sleeve.
	57	L.9.2.d	120	We understand that the pre-printed cards that are requested with the proposal, and for the purposes of adversarial testing and functional / operational testing, do not require specially rendered and printed line work based on the DoS card artwork depicted in Section C.

We would then interpret this requirement to mean that Vendors are asked to submit Vendor sample cards with artwork that is representative of the security features that are proposed, rather than representational of the DoS’ proposed artwork..

Is this correct?	Sample cards are to include all artwork and mandatory security features. Note that the security feature illustrations in Attachment C are not the same as the actual features, they are included for size and position reference and as a guide for imagery.
	58	L.10	122	Can the DoS please provide more details regarding the proposal evaluation schedule and task items? In particular, it will help very much to see a consolidated timeline that articulates the following items:

Questions Submitted (Written) Questions Answered (Written) Proposal Due Date

- which samples are required, how many, and for what purpose?

Security Features Evaluation Testing Preliminary Evaluation Complete and Downselect Notification

- invitation to qualified vendors to demonstrate cards and equipment Demonstrations Period

- which samples are required, how many, and for what purpose?

Demonstrations Evaluation Complete and Downselect Notification Functional and Operational Testing

- which samples are required, how many, and for what purpose?

Testing and Final Scoring Complete, and Vendors Notified of Decision Contract Signing Delivery of the PCPS Integration Kit Completion of PCPS Integration and Testing First Production Card Produced The key milestones to the schedule as it currently stands are:

- RFP Due: See FedBizOps

- Demonstration Notification: Two weeks prior to the demonstration

- Demonstrations: Beginning of September

- Government Testing: September through end of year

- Final Scoring: Early 2008

- First Production Card: Spring 2008

Concerning when samples are due, how many, and for what purposes, See L.10 SCHEDULE OF RFP DELIVERABLES, Samples Required. No samples are required with submission of the proposal. Please see attached Delivery Dates Table for more detailed information on required samples.

59 Section M – Evaluation 125 – 131 1. Will the DoS be applying specific weighting in the proposal evaluation and scoring process?

2. Can the DoS please provide additional detail regarding the specific weighting that will be used in the evaluation and scoring process?

3. Can the DoS illuminate further how “a determination will be made” between acceptable proposals “with a significant difference in technical rating”?	The Government will apply specific weightings in the proposal evaluation process. No additional detail is anticipated to be provided.
	60	C.8.2	• Government Statement: Site Installation Support.

• Question: Would the Government please provide specifics on the location (s) that the contractor will be required to install equipment including physical (loading dock, office area set up, in building transportation, etc), electrical, mechanical and cabling?

• Goal: What is the scope of the installation?	Specific details will be provided upon award. The location of the 17 passport agencies expected to receive low-to-mid volume printers is available at http://travel.state.gov/passport/about/agencies/agencies_913.html . The agencies expected to receive high volume printers will be located near Hot Springs, Arkansas and Tucson, Arizona.
	61	C.11 Key Personnel		• Question: Would the Government consider adding a CLIN structure for key personnel, project manager?	DoS has no anticipation of needing a dedicated Project Manager once the initial phase of the project is complete.
	62	Attachment I: Description of Pre-Award Solution Testing		• Question: In the description of the Lab and Outdoor Tests, the Government references the parameters of the environments as being consistent with the land border vehicle lanes currently deployed by CBP. Will the Government please provide the detailed specifications of these environments which include the physical and geo-environmental parameters as well as the specifications of the deployed hardware and software at the CBP?
• Goal: What do the test environments look like so we can replicate them for prototyping prior to proposal and QA.	Detailed specifications of the testing environment will not be provided, however, offerors will be permitted to visit the CBP test facility (both lab and outdoor) prior to any testing procedures. Offerors will also be provided technical specifications of readers and antennae to be utilized in the test environment.
	63	2. Section C.4.1.1, Passport Card Personalization Solution Integration Kit		The DoS needs to begin software development with this new equipment and the corresponding SDKs. Will DoS specify an Integration Kit that does not require the High Volume Laser (all other components would be included) and allow 30 business days after contract award for the delivery of the new Integration Kit? This allows DoS to begin integrating the devices into the existing process.
The High Volume Laser should be delivered 16 weeks after contract award. High Volume Laser equipment (even though it is commercially available) is not normally held in inventory by vendors. By allowing 16 weeks for delivery of the High Volume Laser, DoS can obtain the best of breed laser markers at a reasonable price. Requiring the High Volume Laser within 10 business days would eliminate qualified and high quality lasers that would be beneficial to the DoS program.	As long as SDKs are the same, USG will consider alternate integration kit solution delivery schedules. However, current schedule does not allow for 16 weeks for printer delivery. Additional features exist with the larger printer that would not be tested and integrated with the smaller printer up front. DoS is under considerable outside pressure to adhere to its current schedule.
	64	Attachment C: Data Format for Passport Card		• Question: Will the Government please supply the new artwork as shown in the RFP?	See response to Question 22
	65	n/a	n/a	Optical Stripe (aka “LaserCard”) technology has been used by the State Department in the past for the Border Crossing Card (BCC), but is not mentioned in this RFP. Will optical stripe technology be considered as an acceptable alternative for the polycarbonate card body requested in the RFP?	As stated in section C 7.3.1 D, the material of the card shall “Be polycarbonate or alternate substrate for which the Offeror must provide sufficient evidence that alternate will not degrade durability performance compared to polycarbonate, and will meet all other requirements herein.”
	66	n/a	n/a	Is the Department of State considering the use of the new Passport Card platform as a replacement for the existing BCC? In other words, does the Department intend to harmonize all of these different cards around a single card platform in the future?	USG is considering the use of the PASS Card platform as a replacement for the existing Border Crossing Card.
	67	n/a	n/a	Laser engraving: is the requirement for black and white engraving only, or will color laser engraving be considered?	The requirement for Laser Engraving is black and white.
	68	L.9.2c., Appendix J	119	Appendix J: Inventory Control Plan references C.7.9.1.2 which is not found in the proposal. Appendix J also references C.7.7 that comments on inventory control equipment and software. There are no CLINs included in the proposal for inventory control equipment and software.	The correct location is C.9.1.2 for Inventory control system. Delete reference to the card inventory control equipment and software in C.7.7.
	69	Section J, Attachment A, Passport Card Inventory Control	93	It is the Offeror's understanding that the Government plans to use an existing system to track the inventory of the passport cards. Since an existing system will be utilized following the same internal controls as for the Passport books, why does Appendix J request an inventory control plan that includes the set up of the inventory control system?	The inventory control system refers to C.9.1.2, Card Shipment / Inventory Data Transfer Requirements.
	70	B.3; CLIN 0012, 0013, 0014a, 0014b	7	The Government requests a price for one year of on-call remedial maintenance for both a High Volume and Low to Mid Volume printer that covers any repair inclusive of parts and labor. This requirement appears to be in conflict with CLINs 0014a and 0014b where the Government is requesting parts pricing to be separate. Please clarify.	There are a number of reasons for CLINs 0014a and 0014b. One reason is that the Government will explore a number of options concerning maintenance. Among those options are having the Offeror provide remedial maintenance or having government/existing contractor personnel perform maintenance. If the remedial maintenance is performed by government/existing contractor personnel, then the Government wants to know the price of the parts. Also, the Template for Replacement Part Information in Appendix A of Section B requests information concerning the warranty period of the part, the proration formula, the time period in which the item is replaced free of charge, and the average life expectancy of the part. This information will help the Government assess the costs of maintaining the equipment over its lifetime.
	71	C.7.8	52	There is no expanded description for CLINs 0014, 0015, 0016, 0017 included in section C.7 which makes it unclear what the Government would like to procure.	With respect to CLINs0014 – 0016, the Government will explore a number of options concerning maintenance. Among those options are having the government/existing contractor personnel perform preventative maintenance. If the preventative maintenance is performed by government/existing contractor personnel, then the Government wants to know the price of the maintenance kits for the equipment. The preventative maintenance kits include all the material, parts, and instructions to perform regular preventative maintenance.

With respect to CLIN0017, in Section L.9.2, Appendix K: Training Plan, it states “The Offeror shall provide a training plan that covers operational training for agency / facility staff.” This should include what the operational staff for an agency/facility needs to know to efficiently and safely operate the equipment including routine maintenance and change-out and/or re-supply of exhausted equipment, consumables and/or components.

72 1. System Architecture

CLIN 0002 (High Volume Personalization Laser) along with CLIN 0018 (Automatic Card Inspection System) and CLIN 0019 (Card Delivery System) are individual CLINs for equipment. CLIN 0020 (Card Personalization Unit) is for an integrated system. Reference C.7.11, Card Personalization Unit, “This elective CLIN should be used if the Offeror proposes an integrated solution …”

Please confirm the individual equipment CLINs (i.e., 0002, 0018, and 0019) must operate together but do not need to be connected together and that cards need not flow automatically from one unit to another. Automatic card motion from one module to another is correctly specified in CLIN 0020.

As a result, for Section C.7.9, Automatic Card Inspection Equipment (CLIN 0018) the wording “The Offeror may provide equipment IN THE PERSONALIZATION PRINTERS that can inspect 100% of card output” would be modified to “The Offeror may provide equipment that can inspect 100% of card output”. For a CLIN 0020 Card Personalization Unit, the Card Inspection Equipment would be inside the printer. For a CLIN 0018 Card Inspection Equipment, the equipment would not be IN THE PRINTER.	Correct.
	73	2. Price Evaluation of Options (Section B)

The RFP contains a number of CLINs that are OPTIONAL or ELECTIVE. The evaluation factors (Section M.6) do not explain how the cost of options or electives will be evaluated.

For example, in Section B.3 the RFP says “Offerors must propose a price for CLIN 0005a and may propose prices for any or all the following CLINs: 0005b, 0005c, 0005d”. It is certain that optional security features (0005b, c, and d) will add price/cost to the base card. Will the price of these options be considered or evaluated? If so, how? Will the technical security features be evaluated? If so, how will the security features be evaluated RELATIVE to the additional price? Will a proponent be penalized for not bidding optional (elective) CLINs (such as 0005b, 0005c, and 0005d)?

Similarly, the Automatic Card Inspection System (CLIN 0018), the Card Delivery System (CLIN 0019) are elective (optional). Will they be considered in the price evaluation? Will they be considered in the technical evaluation? If so, how?	CLINs 0018 - 0021 are elective, however, a solution with the elective CLINs that integrates better and/or would ensure better performance in the CA/PPT environment than a solution without the elective CLINs may receive a more favorable rating.
	74	3. Artwork, When Will It Be Available (Section L)

Section L.10 provides a schedule of RFP deliverables and Section L.10.2 indicates that the Government will furnish Artwork. When will the Artwork be provided? Section L.10.2 indicates that the Government will provide 500 foils for the OVD not later than July 30, 2007. Will the card Artwork also be provided by July 30, 2007?

Section L.10.2 also states that samples are required “before demonstrations (by 8/1/2007)” including “10 blank (non-artwork) cards and 10 cards with artwork and security features per bid by 8/1/07”.

There is not enough time to have artwork delivered by the Government (as Government Furnished Material) by July 30, 2007 and have completed cards with artwork by 8/1/07 (one day later). In reality, it requires up to 12 weeks from the time the Government delivers artwork to the time we can have completed sample cards containing this artwork and security features. The 12 weeks is needed for security design activities (4 weeks), security printing (4 weeks), lamination and die punching cards (3 weeks), and shipping between

subcontractors (1 week).	See response to Question 22.
	75	4. In Section B.3 the RFP says “Offerors must propose a price for CLIN 0005a and may propose prices for any or all the following CLINs: 0005b, 0005c, 0005d”. Each of these CLINs (0005a, b, and c) allow the proponent to offer one, two or three optional security features. If the optional security features are “additive” this CLIN structure is fine. However, we may offer security features that are not “additive” but are mutually exclusive (i.e., the second optional security feature does not co-exist with the first).

Can you provide a CLIN structure that allows this diversity of security features to be offered?	Optional Security Features that interfere with Mandatory Security Features or any other requirement are not acceptable. Also, see response to Question 73.
	76	5. Section M describes the Basis for Award stating that “technical merit is more important than cost or price”, and, “award will not be automatically determined by numerical calculation or formula relationship between cost or price and technical merit”. Further, it states that “cost is not a numerically weighted factor and will receive less consideration than technical merit and past performance”.

We suggest that the Government strengthen its evaluation criteria and communicate a specific scoring method. For example, the Government could state that the final score will include: 1) technical merit at 70%, 2) past performance at 20%, and 3) price at 10%. Then, within each of the three categories, the Government should identify how the points are scored.

Question: Will you provide additional information on the scoring algorithm(s)?	No.
	77	6. Section B.4, Pricing Table. “Offerors shall submit unit and extended pricing using the attached Appendix A to Section B. Where is Appendix A? Is it the pricing tables identified in Section B.3: Services and Price/Cost?	See response to Question 1
	78	7. Section C.7.1, Page 44 identifies “Personalization QA Reader(s) as specified in C.7.6” as one component of the Integration Kit (CLIN 0001). Please specify how many Personalization QA Readers are to be supplied as part of CLIN 0001.	One (1) Personalization QA reader for development purposes is to be supplied.
	79	8. Section C.7.2.2, Personalization Printer Interface requests a “Printer Driver for MS Windows 2003 and XP Operating Systems and Server”. Large printers do not typically provide a printer driver since they are operated via an SDK (which DoS has requested). We suggest that the requirement for a printer driver be removed.	At a minimum, an SDK interface is required. A Windows Print Driver is a desirable feature.
	80	9. Section C.7.2.4, Personalization Printer, identifies the Height, Length, and Depth of the High Volume and Low-Mid Volume printers. Please change this requirement to list your room size and allow vendors to offer equipment that fits properly in the room	Section C.7.2.3 describes a maximum acceptable size for the printers. We assume this is the Section referenced.
	81	10. Section C.7.3.1, Card Stock Mandatory Features (CLIN 0005a), Item h.i., “Tactile element(s) over photo area of face”. Please provide guidance on the tactile feel feature. Is it static (unchanged card to card) or personalized (changes for each card)? Is it intended to be in the blank card stock or created later during personalization?

Attachment C, Data Format for Passport Card, Figure 1, “Front of card artwork, showing tactile Great Seal …”. Please confirm that DoS requires both a tactile element over the photo area of the face AND a tactile Great Seal. Please provide guidance on the tactile Great Seal? For example, how much is to be tactile? What the tactile image should be? Does DoS really require two tactile feel areas on the same side of the card? Is it intended to be in the blank card stock or created later during personalization?

When will DoS provide us with the artwork for the tactile feel in both areas of the card?	See response to Question 44
	82	11. The card specification calls for conformance to ISO 7810/ICAO 9303 thickness specifications. Will the thickness of the cards be measured in areas with tactile features or without?	The thickness of the card includes tactile features prior to personalization. See response to Question 44.
	83	12. Section C.7.3.4, ICC Tag Requirements. The RFP states that the ICC shall be locked with the “Permalock” command, setting access to 00000000. Is there any special meaning to setting the access to 00000000?	Setting the access to 00000000 is a requirement. There is no special meaning.
	84	13. Section C.7.6, Personalization QA Reader(s) provides a summary of the QA reader features with specific requirements such as the weight must be 5 pounds and the dimensions are 12” L x 10” W x 3” H. Please confirm that these are MAXIMUM specifications and not the actual specifications required for the delivered readers (i.e., we cannot find a reader that weighs exactly 5 pounds).	See response to Question 12
	85	14. Section C.7.7, Technical Support, “The Offeror shall provide DoS on call technical support in its set up and testing of both the High Volume and …”. DoS answered our question indicating that the on-call support expected is 24x7. Please confirm that the “on call” support means telephone response only (and not physical presence at the personalization site).	See response to Question 4
	86	15. Section C.7.9, Automatic Card Inspection Equipment (CLIN 0018). No mention is made of the speed of the Automatic Card Inspection System. Faster inspection machines will cost more and would not be served properly in the format of merely quoting prices for machine quantity. Price should be evaluated on a cards per hour per machine basis.	CLIN0018 is "elective" and will not be included in the evaluation.
	87	16. Section C.7.10, Card Delivery System (Optional), “If a Card Delivery System is provided, Offeror shall also provide the Automatic Inspection System (CLIN 0018).” And from the bullets, “Accept input of printed cards directly from printer in automated fashion”. Our previous question was answered with the comment “The final RFP was updated to clarify this issue”. Our question was not fully answered. Section C.7.10 still has the bullet: “Accept input of printed cards directly from printer in automated fashion”. We request that this bullet be removed.	Agree, RFP will be changed to delete bullet
	88	17. Section C.8.2.4, Electrical Installation states “Contractor shall be responsible for the complete electrical installation of the equipment”. Please confirm that DoS will provide the Contractor-specified electrical circuits, conduits, and outlets so that we can plug our electrical equipment into the DoS supplied outlets (i.e., confirm that we will not be running conduit or making electrical upgrades to the DoS facility).	Yes, USG will provide the Offeror specified electrical circuits, conduits, and outlets upon contract award.
	89	18. Section C.9.1.2, Transportation, “The Offeror shall ship all Card products using bonded shippers, in accordance with practices for security products as approved by DoS Bureau of Diplomatic Security …”	No question asked.
	90	19. Is Federal Express Overnight Priority shipment acceptable? If not, please provide a list of acceptable bonded carriers so we can correctly compute shipping charges.	The document "Example of Security Requirements for Shippers", separately posted, is an example of the security requirements for a shipper of card products.
	91	20. Section L.9.2, Submission of Technical Proposal (Part II), Section d, Content Requirements for the Solution Demonstration describes a full-speed demonstration of all equipment at a Government provided facility in the Washington, DC metropolitan area.”

This requirement is burdensome. Contractor would have to pack and ship a machine of approximately 3000 lbs to Washington D.C., unpack, set-up, and repack and ship back to the manufacturer. This is cost prohibitive to do in the short period of time allotted in the solicitation. Will the Government consider doing the demonstration of various types of equipment at the manufacturer’s facility?

Will the Government consider doing an Operational Capability Demonstration that illustrates full functionality but not at full speed?

Will the Government consider excluding optional equipment from the demonstration?

The government requires a full-speed demonstration to ensure that Offerors are capable of meeting the government's requirements. Offerors are not required to demonstrate proposed optional equipment in the demonstration; however, this makes evaluation of the offeror’s complete proposed solution more difficult.

This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated Nov 14, 2017.