Department of the Treasury (DY), Bureau of Engraving and Printing Office of Procurement, 14th & C Sts., SW, Room 708-A, Washington, DC 20228

B -- FACILITY INVESTMENT DATA ANALYSIS SERVICES SOL BEP-98-121 DUE 022098 POC Denise Wright, Contracting Officer, 202-874-2246 The following answers are provided from questions regarding solicitation BEP-98-121. The revised date for proposals due is changed from February 9, 1998, to February 20, 1998 at 4pm EST. 1) Has BEP started to do the analysis or has it been completed? If it has been completed, is there a draft report available that BEP wants reviewed? The BEP has started the analysis. This solicitation's scope of work requires an iterative, inter-active critiquing of study assumptions and study methodology, as well as input on the study and report final format and presentation. The consultant will provide written recommendations resulting from this review in three stages: preliminary, draft final, and final. 2) If there is no report and no data to be reviewed, does BEP want the consultant to predominately review methodology? There are data to review. Review of the study methodology includes an assessment of data quality and statistical / analytical applications to the data. 3) Is there any preferred format for presenting the cost proposal or does BEP simply want a fixed price quote based on an hourly rate- direct labor costs + overhead + fee? The preferred format is to submit a fixed fee with details of cost elements including number of hours and hourly rates, travel or transportation costs, overhead rate and profit. 4) Is there a desired format for the consultant's final report? Yes. Submittals should be in MSWord, Times New Roman -- 12 font. Any spreadsheet work or presentation materials should be in Excel or PowerPoint, respectively. Additionally, each review submittal should include 10 hard copies and an electronic version on 3.5in. floppy disc. 5) Is the contracting period a year plus? The task performance period is as follows: Preliminary review by March 16, 1998; Final draft review by June 8, 1998; Final review by June 30, 1998. 6) Is the data already available for analysis, or is further data collection necessary? Further data collection may be necessary. Data collection is often time consuming, however, and consideration should be given to the submittal timeframes identified above. One of the components of this effort requires the consultant to identify report / study weaknesses and to identify and assist in ways to alleviate these weaknesses. 7) Is the background data available for your initial assumptions, scope, parameters, etc.? Some background data is available, however, much of this information will have to be obtained through interviews of study team members. 8) Who are the interim reviewers for the report (1 dept, 3 depts., 5 depts.)? What is the lead time required for drafts and what is your turn around time? Interim reviewers are BEP executives, Treasury Dept. Assistant Secretary, numerous Department level senior executive personnel, and senior management at the Office of Management and Budget. Lead times are incorporated into the submittal schedule identified above. 9) If February 27 is a firm date, when will you award, given your February 9 cutoff date? The original task performance period has been amended. Proposals are now due February 20, 1998. 10) Are the data, scenarios, and assumptions, to be a model or only applied to a specific situation? The data, scenarios, and assumptions are specific to the study objective which is to consider facility alternatives for economically producing United States currency. The alternatives for maintaining a public tour at the existing D.C. facility are also to be considered in this study. 11) Is the task a subset of the Facility Investment Analysis (i.e., independent validity, methodology, data gathering, analysis, etc., ONLY -- to be included as a part of the Congressional report) or does it include writing the full report with identified weaknesses and strengths? The consultant should consider themselves a contributor to the report for the purposes of assuring the highest quality in the final report product to Congress. 12) Can the work be accomplished at our locationor does it have to be done at the BEP? There will be very close communication during consultant's performance period. Although much of the submittal writing can be done at the consultant's work place, much of the consultant's information gathering stage will need to be spent talking with key BEP personnel and reviewing their documentation. This would most efficiently be done at the BEP facilities in Washington, D.C. 13) How large of a report will there be to review? Is there only one item to review or a series of items? As stated earlier the report is not yet completed and the consultant's work will be essential to generating a quality final product. The report approach is to consolidate the work of several teams that have generated working papers. These teams have focused on the following critical areas: facilities investment alternatives, net present value analysis; next generation technology discussions; site selection discussion and site selection criteria; twenty year product demand projections; Security criteria and issues; Maintaining a tourist presence in Washington, D.C.; Funding; Report drafting; The work of the consultant is to critically evaluate the various team reports, to assist in consolidating the various report components into a cohesive final product, and to assist the team coordinator in assuring the best final report is delivered. 14) How deep is the requested review to go (i.e., does it require validation of specific data assumptions?)? Some validation of the data will need to be done. However, this will only require assessing the quality of existing data documentation. The contractor is asked to address issues of uncertainty and risk in regard to the study assumptions, data quality, and final recommendations. 15) Are meetings with BEP personnel required/suggested/anticipated? Consultant should anticipate three formal meetings scheduled to correspond with the three submittals. In the proposal, the consultant should anticipate a significant level of interaction with BEP personnel. 16) Will a telefax or e-mail response be acceptable? A hard copy of the offeror's proposal should be received at the BEP's Office of Procurement prior to close of business, 20 February 1998. 17) What is the scope of the facility analysis in terms of amount of square feet, number of buildings, functions performed, operating life? The fundamental question (and scope) which the report is to address is whether the BEP should proceed with extensive renovations of existing facilities in Washington D.C. (consisting of two multistory buildings constructed in 1911 and 1936, respectively, comprising 1.39 million sq.ft.) or build a new facility. 18) In how much detail must costs be quoted? Please refer to the answer of question number 3. One last point: In their proposals, consultants should highlight experience working on similar analytical projects in a manufacturing setting. Fundamentally, this effort should be considered as business case development that will provide decision support for major capital investments necessary to effectively and efficiently manufacture U.S. currency. (0041)

Loren Data Corp. http://www.ld.com (SYN# 0015 19980212\B-0007.SOL)