Laredo International Bridges Toll Collection System and ... · PDF fileJanuary 16, 2015 1 City...

City of Laredo International Bridges

Electronic Toll Collection and Customer Service Center

Systems Upgrades

Request for Proposals

MIGUEL PESCADOR CITY OF LAREDO 5512 THOMAS AVE LAREDO, TX 78041

ADDENDUM

#2 January 16, 2015

January 16, 2015 1

City of Laredo International Bridges Request for Proposals Electronic Toll Collection and Customer Service Center Systems Upgrades ADDENDUM #2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. BRIDGE SITE VISIT AND PRE-PROPOSAL MEETING ATTENDEES ....................................................... 2

2. SECTION 3.4.2 PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA .......................................................................... 3

3. RESPONSES TO PROPOSERS’ QUESTIONS ........................................................................................ 4

4. TOLL COLLECTION SYSTEM DRAWINGS, AS-BUILTS, PLANS AND SCHEMATICS ............................ 13

January 16, 2015 2


Addendum #2, issued on January 16, 2015, is intended to interpret, clarify and/or amend information provided in the City of Laredo International Bridges Request for Proposals (RFP) for Electronic Toll Collection and Customer Service Center Systems Upgrades dated November 14, 2014. Addendum #2 reflects the following additions to the RFP:

1. Addition of Bridge Site Visit and Pre-Proposal Meeting Attendees List 2. Section 3.4.2-Proposal Evaluation Criteria 3. Responses to Proposers’ Questions 4. Toll Collection System Drawings, As-Builts, Plans, Schematics

All requirements of the RFP not modified herein shall remain unchanged. It is the responsibility of the Proposers to incorporate all changes into the base RFP dated November 14, 2014.

1. BRIDGE SITE VISIT AND PRE-PROPOSAL MEETING ATTENDEES Attendee sign in sheets from the Bridge Site Visit and Pre-Proposal Meeting are provided as follows.

January 16, 2015 3


2. SECTION 3.4.2 PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA Refer to modifications to the original RFP language below in strikeout and bold. Proposal Scoring In determining the best value for the CITY the following factors, listed in priority order, shall be considered in evaluating the Proposals:

RFP Section

Criteria (Response to RFP Sections)

6 Qualifications 7 Technical Requirements 8 Scope of Work 9 Price NA Other Information 9 Price 7 Technical Requirements 8 Scope of Work 6 Qualifications NA Other Information

January 16, 2015 4


3. RESPONSES TO PROPOSERS’ QUESTIONS Questions and responses are provided in the following Tables. Responses to questions have resulted in additions and/or modifications to the following sections as defined by the responses in the tables.

• Section 2 Proposal Content: Additional language • Section 2.8 Appendices: Additional language • Section 2.5 Scope of Work: Modified language • Section 4.1 Bridge Overviews: Modified language • Section 7.1.1 Automatic Vehicle Identification: Modified language • Section 7.1.4.2 Weigh in Motion: Modified language • Section 7.4.1-Vehicular Toll Collection System-KPI 2: Additional/modified language • Section 7.4.1-Vehicular Toll Collection System-KPI 10: Additional/modified language • Section 7.4.1-Vehicular Toll Collection System-KPI 17: Additional language • Section 7.4.1-Vehicular Toll Collection System-KPI 21: Modified language • Section 7.4.1-Vehicular Toll Collection System-KPI 23: Modified language • Section 7.4.1-Vehicular Toll Collection System-KPI 24: Modified language • Section 7.4.1-Vehicular Toll Collection System-KPI 25: Modified language • Section 7.4.1-Vehicular Toll Collection System-KPI 26: Modified language • Section 7.4.3-Customer Service Center System-KPI 33: Modified language • Section 7.4.3-Customer Service Center System-KPI 38: Modified language • Section 7.4.3-Customer Service Center System-KPI 43: Additional language • Section 7.4.3-Customer Service Center System-KPI 44: Modified language • Section 7.4.3-Customer Service Center System-KPI 45: Modified language • Section 7.4.3-Customer Service Center System-KPI 46: Modified language

Q

No.

RFP

Section

No.

RFP Section NameRFP

PageQuestion/Comment Responses to Questions

1 General N/A N/A Our company is interested in supplying equipment and

services to entities that are submitting proposals in response

to the RFP. Can the City please post a list of RFP holders or a

list of companies who plan to submit proposals?

The attendee sign in sheets from the Bridge Site Visit and Pre-

Proposal Meeting on December 4, 2014 are provided in

Addendum #2.

2 NA General NA During the pre-proposal meeting for the toll system project it

was stated that the attendee list for the meeting would be

posted on the project web site, so I did not make certain to

get business cards from all the bidders and in particular from

the folks from TransCore. I’d like very much to provide a

quote for the WIM scale portion of the project to all those

bidding but need their contact information to enable that.

Do you still plan to post the attendee list, with contact

information, on the project web site? And if so, when? If not,

could I get a copy to enable contact with the bidders?

The attendee sign in sheets from the Bridge Site Visit and Pre-

Proposal Meeting on December 4, 2014 are provided in

Addendum #2.

3 N/A General Question N/A Are license plate cameras required? There is no mention of

this in the RFP.

License plate cameras are NOT required.

4 1.16 Receipt and Opening of

Proposals

12 On page 12 of the RFP it states that proposals are due by 3:00

pm local time. However, on the procurement website it

states 5:00 pm. Would the City please clarify the correct

time?

Proposals are due by 3:00 pm local time.

Correction has been made on City (procurement) website.

5 2 Proposal Content 17 Bidders are instructed to include the “date of the proposal” in

the header/footer. Does this mean the due date or the date

of the opening?

"Date of the Proposal" refers to the "Date the Proposal is

Submitted".

City of Laredo International Bridges Request for Proposals

Electronic Toll Collection and Customer Service Center Systems Upgrades

RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS

Q

No.

RFP

Section

No.

RFP Section NameRFP





6 2 Proposal Content 17 The RFP requires Bidders to respond using minimum 10 pt

Arial or 12 pt Times New Roman font. May Bidders use a

smaller, still readable font for the following: headers and

footers, requirement text, exhibits, and tables?

Table 2-1 Proposal Format Requirements-Page Presentation

has been amended to include the following language:

"Headers/Footers, Exhibits, Covers, Tab Dividers and Tables

are not subject to the 10 pt Arial or 12 pt Times New Roman

font, however, the minimum font size for headers/footers,

exhibits, covers, tab dividers and tables is 8 pt Arial and 10 pt

Times New Roman."

7 2 Proposal Content 17 The RFP requires Bidders to respond using minimum 10 pt

Arial or 12 pt Times New Roman font. Several requested

documents/samples do not comply with font restrictions and

they are not available in a native MS Office format for font

adjustments. Would the City please confirm that it is

permissible to submit those documents as is.

Table 2-1 Proposal Format Requirements-Page Presentation

has been amended to include the following language:

"Resumes, report samples and financial documents may be

submitted in their native form and do not have to comply

with font restrictions."

8 2 Proposal Content 17 The RFP restricts page size to 8 ½ X 11 inch paper. For

complex documents like Microsoft Project plans (Gantt

Charts, etc.) and architecture diagrams, may Bidders use

larger paper folded down to 8 ½ X 11 inch size?

Yes

9 2 Proposal Content 17 Would the City please confirm that the page limit does not

include financial statements.

Section 2.8 Appendices has been amended to include the

following language:

"Appendix E is reserved for Financial Statements and may be

submitted as a hard copy or soft copy as a pdf on a CD".


include the Appendices (required forms, resumes, etc.)

Addendum #1 modified Table 2-1 Proposal Format

Requirements-Page Limitations: "Proposal shall be limited to

150 pages for Parts I, II, III and Appendices A, B and C,

excluding Cover and Dividers.

Appendix D has a page limitation of 25 pages."

Q

No.

RFP

Section

No.

RFP Section NameRFP






include the table of contents.

The page limit DOES include the table of contents.


include the title page.

The Cover page is excluded from the page limitation.

13 2.5 Scope of Work 18 In this section it states: "The Proposer shall address

requirements defined in the RFP in Section 9 and include only

the information specified for each section. Innovative project

management approaches are encouraged." Does the City

mean Section 8, Scope of Work?

Section 2.5 Scope of Work has been modified to read:

"The Proposer shall address requirements defined in the RFP

in Section 9 Section 8 and include only the information

specified for each section. Innovative project management

approaches are encouraged."

14 4.1 Bridge Overviews 24-25 This section indicates Bridge III is open 7 days a week, 8:00

a.m. to 12:00 p.m., but does not indicate hours of operation

for Bridge IV. What are the hours of operation for Bridge IV?

Section 4.1 Bridge Overviews has been modified to read:

"Bridge III - Colombia Solidarity: Bridge III was constructed

July 31, 1991 at a cost of $12 million on the United States

side. It has eight (8) lanes and is open from 8:00 a.m. until

12:00 p.m. a.m. (midnight) seven (7) days a week."

Hours of operations for all the Bridges are provided in Table 4-

1 Bridge Summary.

15 5 Existing Systems

Technology

28-34 In order to accurately determine details and extent of civil

work required, it's necessary to understand not just the

equipment currently installed but the existing infrastructure

supporting that equipment as well (wiring/diagrams, conduit

layouts, drainage layouts, power distribution layouts, etc).

Can the City provide as-built drawings for the existing systems

to provide that information?

Contact Yvette Limon at [email protected] for copies of

available as-builts, drawings, plans, and schematics. Contact

must be made on or before January 23, 2015 at 3 p.m. local

Laredo, TX time.

Q

No.

RFP

Section

No.

RFP Section NameRFP





16 5.1.1 Automatic Vehicle

Identification

28 Would the City please specify which lanes are to be equipped

with AVI readers and antennas? In RFP Section 5.1.1

Automatic Vehicle Identification, Page 28 it states:

“Bridge I has an AVI subsystem installed in lanes 3 and 4 only.

Every lane of Bridges III and Bridge IV has an AVI subsystem.

Bridge II has an AVI subsystem installed in lanes 4, 5 and 6

only.” However, in Exhibit #6, Equipment Summary, shows 4

AVI antenna and 4 readers at Bridge I. Bridge II shows 6

antennas and 3 readers.

AVI subsystem installations prior to 2005 toll system upgrade

required two AVI antennas (one to receive and to transmit)

for the old transponders. After 2005 upgrade to new

Encompass 6 Multiprotocol Reader and eGo sticker tags, only

one antenna and one reader was necessary per lane. Bridge I

currently has Lanes 3 and 4 with AVI subsystems. Lane 3 has

one reader and one antenna. Lane 4 has one reader and two

antennas, but only one antenna is connected and only one

currently being used.

Bridge II has two antennas and one reader at Lane 5 (only one

antenna is active and only one is being used), one antenna

and reader at Lane 6, one antenna and reader at Lane 4.

17 6.3 Financial Stability and

Resources

37 Given the length of our audited financial statements, can

Bidders provide these documents in electronic format only?

Yes, on a separate CD that is marked as "Financial

Statements".

18 7.1.1 Automatic Vehicle

Identification

39 AVI Readers: Replacement with the vendor’s latest

multiprotocol reader is required.”

The requirement above states replace with vendor’s latest

multiprotocol reader. Does this mean Transcore’s latest

multiprotocol reader or do we have the option to install other

vendor’s readers that are capable of reading the required

protocols?

If the requirement is to use TransCore readers we suggest the

City break the AVI portion out into a separate procurement.

Yes, Proposers have the option to install their choice of

multiprotocol reader as long as it is capable of reading the

required protocols.

Section 7.1.1 Automatic Vehicle Identification has been

modified to read as follows:

"1. AVI Readers: Replacement with the vendor’s Contractor's

latest multiprotocol reader is required. "

Q

No.

RFP

Section

No.

RFP Section NameRFP





19 7.1.4 Weigh In Motion 40 Paragraph 2 indicates Bridge III will have four lanes equipped

with Dynamic Weighing Platforms (WIM), however at present

there are seven such lanes. Is the intention to eliminate three

of the existing WIM lanes, and if so is the intention for those

existing WIM lanes to be converted for use by non-

commercial vehicles only? If so, does the City require as part

of this Project removal of the existing WIM equipment for

those three lanes?

Laredo Bridge System currently has and will require Lanes 2-7

equipped with weighing platforms and a WIM subsystem.

The total number of lanes with WIM at Bridge 3 is 6. Lane 1 is

currently not equipped with a WIM subsystem and will not

require it.

Section 7.1.4.2 Number of Lanes has been modified as

follows:

"2. Number of Lanes: There will be twelve (12) fourteen (14)

lanes that will be equipped with Dynamic Weighing Platforms,

four (4 lanes) six (6) lanes at Bridge III and eight (8) lanes at

Bridge IV."

20 7.1.4 Weigh-In-Motion 40 Can the City provide plans/drawings of the sites, as well as

detail on the existing WIM scale installations (pit dimensions,

etc)?

Contact Yvette Limon at [email protected] for copies of

available as-builts, drawings, plans, and schematics. Contact

must be made on or before January 23, 2015 at 3 p.m. local

Laredo, TX time.

21 7.1.4 Weigh-In-Motion 40 No specific WIM performance requirements are identified in

the RFP. Can the City provide performance requirements

including accuracy requirements for the WIM system?

Refer to Section 7.4.1 Vehicular Toll Collection System Weigh

In Motion KPI 29.

22 7.4.1 Vehicular Toll Collection

System

58 Regarding KPI 2, Availability. This requirement appears to be

above industry standard. Would the City please consider

adjusting availability to 99.5%?

Section 7.4.1 has been modified to the following:

KPI 2 Availability: "99.99% 99.5% availability; with no more

than fifty (50) minutes down time per year

approved scheduled down time is not included in calculating

the 99.5% requirement."


System

58 Regarding KPI 8. Scalability. It appears that FY2014 had a

combined traffic and pedestrian volume of approximately

10,000,000 (Table 4-2 on RFP page 27). However, the

1,000,000 transactions per day for this Scalability

requirement seem to be considerably higher than the

historical data found in Table 4-2. Would the City please

clarify the discrepancy?

No changes to KPI requirement.

Q

No.

RFP

Section

No.

RFP Section NameRFP






System

58 Regarding KPI 10, Availability. This requirement appears to be

above industry standard. Would the City please consider

adjusting availability to 99.5%?


KPI 10 Availability:

"99.99% 99.5% availability; with no more than fifty (50)

minutes down time per year approved scheduled down time

is not included in calculating the 99.5% requirement."


System

59 Regarding KPI 17, Availability (Lane Controller). Would the

City please clarify that the system referenced is just the Lane

Controller or is this perhaps all Lane Controller availability

combined?

Yes, this is the lane controller. The requirement stands at

99.99%, however, requirement has been modified to include

the following language. "Approved scheduled down time is

not included in calculating the 99.99% requirement."


System

59 Regarding KPI 21, Processing Speed. We would expect 650 to

800 vehicles per hour per conventional lane. Can this

number be adjusted to a value more appropriate for a

conventional lane?


Lane Controller: KPI 21. Processing Speed: "Process minimum

of 2,400 800 vehicles per hour per lane."


System

59 Regarding KPI 23, AVI Transponder Read Accuracy. This

requirement appears to be above industry standard. Would

the City please consider adjusting to 99.95%?


KPI 23 AVI Transponder Read Accuracy: "Correctly read all

transponders travelling thru the toll lane at an accuracy rate

of 99.99%. Accurately report transponder read information

from the AVI subsystem to the roadside lane controller at an

accuracy rate of 99.95%."


System

59 Regarding KPI 24, AVI Association Accuracy. This requirement

appears to be above industry standard. Would the City

please consider adjusting to 99.9%?


KPI 23 AVI Association Accuracy: "Correctly assign the proper

transponder to the vehicle at an accuracy rate of 99.95%

99.9%."


System

59 Regarding KPI 25, Vehicle Presence Detection. This




KPI 25 Vehicle Presence Detection: "100% 99.9%"

Q

No.

RFP

Section

No.

RFP Section NameRFP






System

59 Regarding KPI 26, Properly Separate Vehicles. This is a




KPI 26 Properly Separate Vehicles: "Equal or greater than

99.9% 99.8%"

31 7.4.3 Customer Service Center

System

60 Regarding KPI 33, CSC Host Availability. This requirement


please consider adjusting to 99.5%?


KPI 33 CSC Host Availability: "99.99% 99.5% availability."


System

61 Regarding KPI 38, DBMS Processing Speed. It appears that

FY2014 had a combined traffic and pedestrian volume of

approximately 10,000,000 (Table 4-2 on RFP page 27).

However, the 1,000,000 transactions per day for this

requirement seem to be considerably higher than the

historical data found in Table 4-2. Would the City please

clarify the discrepancy?



System

61 Regarding KPI 39, DBMS Storage. It appears that FY2014 had a

combined traffic and pedestrian volume of approximately

10,000,000 (Table 4-2 on RFP page 27). However, the

1,000,000 transactions per day for this requirement seem to

be considerably higher than the historical data found in Table

4-2. Would the City please clarify the discrepancy?



System

62 Regarding KPI 42, Repair Hardware. Measuring daily is very

granular - monthly mean times is the industry standard. Can

this be measured using monthly mean times?

No change, the requirement remains as written in the RFP.


System

62 Regarding KPI 43, Repair Software. What exactly is being

requested here in the Mean time to repair software? Is this a

reference to configuration changes, corrupt files or file

system, 3rd party issues (Oracle, WebSphere, …)? Repairing

software can be quite a lengthy process requiring debugging,

coding and extensive testing.


Maintenance: KPI 43. Repair Software: "Mean time to repair

(software) – three (3) hours unless otherwise approved by

the City"

Q

No.

RFP

Section

No.

RFP Section NameRFP






System

62 Regarding KPI 44, Telephone System Availability. This


the City please consider adjusting to the IVR availability to

99.5%?


KPI 44 Telephone System Availability: "99.95% 99.5%

excluding scheduled maintenance downtimes."


System

62 Regarding KPI 45, Web Site Availability. This requirement


please consider adjusting web site availability to 99.5% and

remove the external link requirement?


KPI 45 Web Site Availability: "99.95% 99.5% excluding

scheduled maintenance downtimes."

Clarification to "(including all requisite interactive links to

external sites )": it is the contractor's responsibility to ensure

that links to external sites work properly, not the external

site.


System

62 Regarding KPI 46, Customer Access Through Website for

Account Maintenance Purposes. This requirement appears to

be above industry standard. Would the City please consider

adjusting to 99.5%?


KPI 46 Customer Access Through Website for Account

Maintenance Purposes: "99.95% 99.5% excluding scheduled

maintenance downtimes. (Data shall be secured by SSL

certificate or similar certified technology)."

39 8.4.1.1. Project Schedule 68 This paragraph states that commercial lanes may only be

closed one lane at a time, which indicates work is assumed to

be performed during bridge operating hours. Are there any

restrictions to performing work during non-operating hours?

There are no restrictions to work during non-operating hours

except for the day restrictions noted in Section 8.4.1.1.

40 10.1.1.4. Maintenance 84 The Contract Term specified in this section includes a 1-year

warranty period and also a 1-year maintenance period that

begins at the end of the warranty period. Does that indicate

that the cost of the maintenance contract covering this

second year should be included in the bid price, or does the

City intend for that to be paid separately?

The Contractor is responsible for all maintenance during the

Warranty Phase at no additional cost. First year of

maintenance is included in the price sheets.

January 16, 2015 13


4. TOLL COLLECTION SYSTEM DRAWINGS, AS-BUILTS, PLANS AND SCHEMATICS Contact Yvette Limon at [email protected] for copies of available as-builts, drawings, plans, and schematics. Contact must be made on or before January 23, 2015 at 3 p.m. local Laredo, TX time.

END OF ADDENDUM #2

Date post:	24-Feb-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	lecong
View:	216 times
Download:	2 times

Laredo International Bridges Toll Collection System and ... · PDF fileJanuary 16, 2015 1 City...

Documents