MODIFICATION
D -- Automated Fingerprint Identification System
- Notice Date
- 11/7/2007
- Notice Type
- Modification
- NAICS
- 334290
— Other Communications Equipment Manufacturing
- Contracting Office
- Department of State, Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, INL RM MS, 2430 E Street, N.W., South Building SA-4 Navy Hill, Washington, DC, 20520, UNITED STATES
- ZIP Code
- 20520
- Solicitation Number
- INL-0120-704001
- Response Due
- 11/15/2007
- Archive Date
- 11/30/2007
- Point of Contact
- Mary Pat Hayes-Crow, Logistics Management Specialist, Phone 2027768373, Fax 2027768775
- E-Mail Address
-
hayes-crowmp2@state.gov
- Description
- This amendment two provides further answers to questions: 1. Does the PNC?s existing repository include palm print images? No. If so, (a) how many, and (b) should offers include a price for palm print record conversion? 2. We have reviewed Amendment 1 but are still unclear about the assumptions to be used with regard to database size. The solicitation states that there will be 1 million tenprint and/or latent records, but the breakdown provided in Amendment 1 adds up to 800,000. Please confirm that the numbers provided in Amendment 1 are correct. Also, please break down the Latent Records category as Palm Latents and Finger Latents. El Salvador does not currently collect palm print data and has a limited latent database. For purposes of database scaling, it is assumed that the total data storage capacity will accommodate the equivalent of one million ten print records. Amendment 1 estimates a future database consisting of 600,000 ten print records, 100,000 palm records and 100,000 latent records. Given the larger average file size of palm records compared to ten print records (3:1) the total of 800,000 records as detailed is roughly equivalent to one million ten print records. 3. Please confirm that this is an accurate representatin of the daily workload requirement based on the information provided in the solicitation and in Amendment 1. If it is not, please clarify the workload requirements Transaction Type Daily Hourly (Average)* Tenprint-to-Tenprint 5,000 208 Tenprint-to-Latent 5,000 208 Latent-to-Tenprint 50 2 Latent Finger to Latent Finger 50 2 Palm Latent to Palm Print 100 4 Based on 24-hour day The figures listed in the above chart are accurate as listed. 4. The solicitation instructs offerors to provide minimum/maximum response times for all required transaction types. In order to provide this information, offerors would need to know the peak hourly workload for each required transaction type. Can you please provide this information or, alternatively, change the solicitation instructions to request only average response times. No peak hourly workload figures are available as this is a new application that will establish a national electronic fingerprint program. Given the size of the data base and the relatively low number of anticipated daily transactions, contractor is advised to assume that the majority of the daily workload will occur during the normal (8am-5pm) business day and scale their proposal so as to meet the response time requirements given. 5. For purposes of calculating response times, shall offerors assume a full search of the target database, without the use of demographic information or pattern classification? Contractor is free to choose the best method to achieve the established response times, as long as the response time is met for all transaction scenarios. 6. Data from benchmark tests performed by several major law enforcement agencies during the past three years suggests that it is now reasonable to expect an AFIS to achieve 99.9% accuracy. Given this, we suggest the government consider increasing the accuracy standard for tenprint-to-tenprint searches. Contractor is welcome to exceed the accuracy requirement without prejudice. 7. Please specify the accuracy requirement for latent palm and fingerprint searches. Minimum accuracy requirement for all searches is 99%. Higher accuracy percents are acceptable. 8. FAR 52.212-1 (4) requires that offerors provide a technical description of the items being offered in sufficient detail to evaluate compliance with the requirements of the solicitation. Please specify the information vendors must provide to demonstrate that their systems meet the government?s accuracy requirements. Offerors are free to provide whatever information/documentation they possess to demonstrate the accuracy of their proposed system -- independent testing, past performance, etc. 9. Please state how many FBI-certified printers are required and where they will be installed. One FBI certified printer is required and it is to be located with the AFIS at the PNC laboratory. 10. Please clarify what operations will be performed using the remote data entry terminals. In addition to being used for record entry and to receive results, will these workstations be used for latent fingerprint/palm print analysis and for verifying search results? If not, please state whether offerors should include workstations for latent print analysis and verification in their offers and, if so, where. Work station(s) supporting the central AFIS should be capable of performing latent print analysis and verification tasks. This work station should be co-located within the facility where the AFIS is installed. 11. The RFP states that the evaluation factors will be rated as acceptable/unacceptable and that an unacceptable rating on any factor will be cause to remove the offeror from further consideration. For the purposes of determining whether an offeror is deemed technically acceptable for corporate experience, can we assume that the offeror must demonstrate that it has successfully installed and supported multiple systems of similar size and scope? Contractor should be able to demonstrate that is has successfully installed and supported a system or systems of similar or larger size and scope. 12. FAR 52-212-1 (10) states that past performance information, when included as an evaluation factor, is to include ?recent and relevant contract for the same or similar items?. For purposes of determining if an offer is technically acceptable, what does the government consider ?recent?, and what does the government consider ?relevant?? Can we assume that a "relevant" system is a distributed system that stores 1 million or more records and processes thousands of transactions per day? Contractor may submit past performance experience regardless of contract dates and system requirements. Successfully completed contracts that more closely resemble the requirements and proposed solution for this contract will be considered more relevant. NOTE: THIS NOTICE WAS NOT POSTED TO FEDBIZOPPS ON THE DATE INDICATED IN THE NOTICE ITSELF (07-NOV-2007); HOWEVER, IT DID APPEAR IN THE FEDBIZOPPS FTP FEED ON THIS DATE. PLEASE CONTACT fbo.support@gsa.gov REGARDING THIS ISSUE.
- Web Link
-
Link to FedBizOpps document.
(http://www.fbo.gov/spg/State/INL/INL-RM-MS/INL-0120-704001/listing.html)
- Place of Performance
- Address: San Salvador and other cities
- Country: EL SALVADOR
- Country: EL SALVADOR
- Record
- SN01448932-F 20071109/071107225752 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |