Loren Data's SAM Daily™

fbodaily.com
Home Today's SAM Search Archives Numbered Notes CBD Archives Subscribe
FBO DAILY - FEDBIZOPPS ISSUE OF JUNE 25, 2016 FBO #5328
SOURCES SOUGHT

A -- RFI for Contraband Detection via Colorimetric Technologies

Notice Date
6/23/2016
 
Notice Type
Sources Sought
 
NAICS
541712 — Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology)
 
Contracting Office
Office of the Chief Procurement Officer, Washington, District of Columbia, 20528, United States
 
ZIP Code
20528
 
Solicitation Number
RFI-TSL0623
 
Point of Contact
Phyllis A. Reaves, Phone: 6098132894, James Deline, Phone: 609-813-2860
 
E-Mail Address
phyllis.reaves@hq.dhs.gov, james.deline@hq.dhs.gov
(phyllis.reaves@hq.dhs.gov, james.deline@hq.dhs.gov)
 
Small Business Set-Aside
N/A
 
Description
Request For Information (RFI) Contraband Detection via Colorimetric Technologies - Capability Characterization Testing The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Science and Technology Directorate (S&T), is conducting a market research study on colorimetric detection technologies and is reaching out to industry in order to identify companies that have applicable products. Interested companies must submit the following for each product they would like to be considered for future study: • White paper/data package covering information detailed in the Data Package Questionnaire (see attached) • Product Datasheet (please ensure this includes at least one picture of the product) • User Instructions/Directions • Company and/or product point of contact information There is currently a lack of formal DHS requirements for colorimetric detection technologies to guide developmental test and evaluation. Therefore, DHS S&T requests information to determine whether conducting characterization testing of various colorimetric detection capabilities, in order to support the development of relevant detection requirements for use by DHS component agencies, is in the best interest of the Government as that interest might relate to the DHS mission. If determined to be in the best interest, the assessment will take place at the Transportation Security Laboratory (TSL), located in Atlantic City, NJ. The objective of the assessment will be to characterize the capabilities of various commercially available colorimetric detection technologies and provide relevant DHS components with technical data summarizing the capability of the various technologies chosen by the Government to undergo assessment in order to determine whether or not the current state-of-the-art has potential to enhance current operations within the Homeland Security Enterprise. Please note that following the submission of the above information, companies selected for characterization testing will be contacted in regards to establishing a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) with the TSL. Each selected company will be required to establish a CRADA with the TSL prior to the delivery of any technologies. This is only a REQUEST FOR INFORMATION and NOT a formal solicitation. In accordance with FAR 15.201 (e), the purpose for this RFI is to ascertain interest from available companies who are capable of providing the Government with the information requested above. Vendors are cautioned that responses to this notice are not offers and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract. It is requested that all interested vendors provide the above information to the following individuals no later than 3:00 PM ET on Friday, August 5, 2016: Jim Deline, Ph.D. Research Chemist U.S. Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Directorate Transportation Security Laboratory William J. Hughes Technical Center, Bldg. 315 Atlantic City International Airport, NJ 08405 Office: (609) 813-2860 Fax: (609) 383-1973 Mobile: (609) 442-1478 james.deline@hq.dhs.gov Stephen M. Styk, PMP Research Chemist U.S. Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Directorate Transportation Security Laboratory William J. Hughes Technical Center, Bldg. 315 Atlantic City International Airport, NJ 08405 Office: (609) 813-2762 Fax: (609) 383-1973 Mobile: (609) 206-7190 stephen.styk@hq.dhs.gov Guidelines for Submission of a Data Package for System Evaluation Background: The data package is necessary for Transportation Security Laboratory (TSL) personnel to determine whether the system in question is of sufficient technical maturity to warrant a test via the TSL Technology Optimization Partnerships (TOPs) process. Although there are many aspects required of the data package that are detailed below, all must be answered in some level of detail. Ultimately, the decision to proceed with testing will be determined based on TSL lab resources and government stakeholder interest. The initial requirement of the data package provides necessary information for TSL to seek government stakeholder support. The data package itself will be reviewed for merit and may be returned to the technology provider (a.ka. the vendor) when incomplete or insufficient answers are provided. An equally important outcome of the data package will be to assist TSL in developing an appropriately challenging test for the system, thereby improving the system/technology via feedback to the vendor. As such, open and honest responses to the questions below are in the best interest of the vendor. Please answer the following in the form of a white paper: 1. Are you a US company? a. If so do you have a security clearance for classified material? b. If not where is your company located? 2. What is the theory of operation of your detection system? 3. What explosives and/or contraband materials are detectable on the system? 4. What are the limits of detection for each detectable threat? Please provide details of the experimental protocols used to derive these values. a. Were pure commercial standards (Accustandard/Cerilliant) used, or for example, trace levels of actual military/commercial/homemade explosives/drugs? b. For swab-based contact sampling trace systems, were detection limits determined from solutions direct deposited onto swab material, or a quantitative mass of explosive harvested from a realistic surface? If both values are known, what is the difference in detection limit between direct deposit and harvested protocols (what is the sampling efficiency)? c. Has there been any characterization of the system involving non-contraband materials causing signal suppression in the presence of an illicitic material? 5. What explosive threats/contraband material has the equipment been tested against? (May differ from response for question 2) 6. Detail the type of testing performed to date on the system, including type i.e. pure/military and quantities and location (lab vs. field). Who conducted the tests? Have the test results been verified by an independent laboratory? What were the results of those tests? Can a POC be provided for independent testing? 7. What is the false alarm rate of the system? Was this determined by lab studies or operational field studies? 8. Since the most recent testing, have any engineering changes or manufacturing process changes been implemented? If so, what were the changes? 9. What common substances cause a ‘false positive' reading or interference? 10. Can the equipment detect both large and small threat concentrations (high g to low ng)? Please provide data. 11. What is the time taken from sample introduction to response? What is the cleardown time? Is there a preferred cleardown process? 12. What is the time taken from a cold start to operational status? 13. If batteries are a power option, how long do the batteries last? How long does it take to replace batteries or recharge? What is the cost of new batteries? Are the expended batteries HAZMAT and what is the cost of disposal of batteries? Is there a change in system performance as power wanes? 14. Are you currently supplying this or other products to government or non-government agencies? If so, who? 15. What additional consumable items are required to operate/maintain the equipment? At what cost? What training materials are provided - manuals, videotapes, CD ROMs? What is the cost of training materials? 16. What are the required on-hand logistical support and costs? How often does the equipment need to be sent back to the manufacturer for maintenance? 17. How often does the equipment require calibration? Does calibration require returning the equipment to the manufacturer? Does the calibration involve hazardous materials? 18. Do you have a verification process for the system to ensure consistent shift-to-shift/day-to-day operation? How often does this need to be performed? 19. What is the shelf life of the equipment? (open exposed, open unexposed, closed exposed, closed unexposed) 20. Does this equipment contain a radioactive source? If so, what is it and what is the quantity? 21. What capability (if any) does this equipment offer DHS that it currently does not possess? 22. Does this equipment require any hazardous materials for cleaning? If yes, what are they? 23. What are the weight, size, and power requirements? 24. What are the environmental limitations - high temperature, low temperature, humidity, sand/dust? How have these been tested and verified? a. Has the system undergone physical hardening testing, i.e., shock/drop test? 25. What training is required to use the equipment and interpret the results? Does the company provide this training, and what is the cost? How often is refresher training required? 26. Does the company provide software to allow the data viewed to be on a stand-alone computer system? Does the software have batch reprocessing capabilities? 27. Are the system settings and/or parameters able to be changed as needed during testing or does this need to be done by the manufacturer? 28. Please describe the safety testing (electrical, radioactivity testing etc.) that has been completed to date on the system. a. Has UL or CE certification (or equivalent) been obtained? b. Does an NRC certificate for this device exist? 29. If multiple units exist, is the system under configuration control?
 
Web Link
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/DHS/OCPO/DHS-OCPO/RFI-TSL0623/listing.html)
 
Record
SN04159689-W 20160625/160623234624-36d3a8b124babe3999b600a0890dcb40 (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 |
ECGrid: EDI VAN Interconnect ECGridOS: EDI Web Services Interconnect API Government Data Publications CBDDisk Subscribers
 Privacy Policy  Jenny in Wanderland!  © 1994-2024, Loren Data Corp.