CAD_RFP906_Questions_5.doc

731 views
663 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
731
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

CAD_RFP906_Questions_5.doc

  1. 1. SFD CAD-RFP 906 Vendor Questions Last updated: 12/20/01 Please note: Questions are numbered in the sequence that they were received. Please include the question number in your query when asking for further clarification on any previously submitted question. All new responses will be designated as such by the BLUE date in the answer column and the yellow highlighting. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date 1 11/9/01 With regard to Volume 1 Introduction, will The City would like the option of procuring a 11/14/01 the City please clarify its intent to procure a Police CAD in the future via two methods: (a) a combined Police and Fire CAD system as a normal RFP process to arrive at a selected vendor result of this proposal to the Seattle Fire and contract. (b) a negotiated Police CAD from Department? Is the City requesting firm, the selected Fire CAD vendor. fixed prices for the Police CAD system? If If the selected Fire CAD vendor proposes a so, the will the City provide require more Police CAD in the Finance Bid Form 4.5, the information regarding the configuration of resultant Fire CAD contract with the City will this system, the interfaces to be supported, include language that will allow the City to issue and expected workload levels, among other a work order for a Police CAD in the future. It is items? If this is not to be a firm price, is the up to the City to exercise this option if it is City asking for a budgetary price only, deemed to be in the best interest of the City. based upon the general specifications as Interested vendors with an existing combined Fire stated for the Fire Department? In this case, and Police CAD product may wish to position the vendors may still need additional themselves for both options and be diligent in the information about the system required. price proposal to provide this information. Follow up question: Will police be included Answer: No. The Bid form 4.5 will not be City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 1 Last updated: 12/20/01
  2. 2. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date in the evaluation. Will 4.5 be part of the evaluated in this Fire CAD RFP process but if the evaluation. offer for a Police CAD in Bid Form 4.5 is attractive, the City may use that information in the later negotiations to procure the additional Police CAD. Answer: The Police specification will not be Follow up question: Can vendors get ready for a few months, but many quantities are general specifications for police (i.e. already in Bid Form 4.5. Interested vendors workstation numbers etc.) should provide as much detail, including assumptions, in Bid form 4.5. This information will ensure that potential future negotiations are easier. 2 11/9/01 With regard to Volume 1 Appendix C, CAD This should read “6 primary and 1 call 11/15/01 Specifications and Diagram, Section C.2.4, taking/training positions.” Most likely, the City are all four positions, as well as the one will be responsible for the network between training position, to be configured as full workstations and host computers. Beyond the call taker and dispatcher workstations? Is Locution product, the City does not expect the five the correct quantity of workstations to CAD vendor to provide equipment for the fire be configured? Will the City be responsible stations. The RFP asks the vendor to include a for the network between these workstations diagram of the proposed system, but not to and the associated server equipment, or is provide all components that might be in the this to be provided by the vendor? What diagram. type of equipment is desired and functionality expected for each of the thirty- three fire stations? City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 2 Last updated: 12/20/01
  3. 3. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date 3 11/9/01 With regard to Appendix C, CAD The City cannot provide a name for detailed 11/15/01 Specifications and Diagram, Section C.2.5, technical questions regarding wall map. All will the City please provide a contact name communications need to go through proper for detailed technical questions regarding channels as per the RFP Volume One. However, the existing wall map and interface a site tour is scheduled to see the wall map. software? Please forward any questions regarding the wall map or any other interface directly to the RFP coordinator. 4 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, Technical Page 1 of Volume Two describes how vendors 11/20/01 Specifications, Page 1, Instructions: may respond. As that section states, if the vendor Will the City please explain in detail how cannot fully meet a specification then the vendors should respond in the following response needs to be ‘no’. However, vendors cases: may include explanations for any response, even There is more than one requirement in the if the RFP does not ask for an explanation. For individual paragra3h, for which the answer the examples presented by the question, the to one may be “Y” and another an “N”. An explanations should go into a separate document example of this would be a requirement for with reference back to the RFP section and vice a search on unit identifier, unit type and versa. personnel ID, where the proposed system supports the first and last, but not the middle criteria. The functionality is provided by the proposed system but in a manner different from one suggested by the requirement. For example, section 3.1.8.2 states that a “Next Action” code of “U” is used to request that additional information is to be added. CAD systems may use a different approach than typing a “U” in a field to provide this same City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 3 Last updated: 12/20/01
  4. 4. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date functionality. 5 11/9/01 If a brief note clarifying a response is Yes. Include short explanations within the 11/19/01 required, should it be added to the response response matrix. Be sure to include the response matrix itself, with the understanding that within the same table cell as the specification. DO any long or complex explanation would be NOT add another row in the table for your written separately with a reference added to response. Longer or complex explanations can be the response matrix? provided in a separate document, but it is the responsibility of the vendor to accurately reference this material within the matrix. 6 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement Appendix C just describes the current 11/16/01 1.4.3, the specified load test requires twenty environment – e.g., number of workstations, etc. CAD workstations be used, where the The City expects that increasing workload requirement in section C.2.4 states that five demands in the future will require a new CAD CAD workstations are to be configured. system that can support more workstations than The higher load can be supported but will what currently exists. Specification 1.4.3 lists the City confirm the total number of CAD more workstations than Appendix C in workstations to be proposed? Will the City anticipation of this growth. The also indicate its approach to the fact that this EXPLANATION clause in 1.4.3 asks vendors to load test would need to be performed under describe how they plan on meeting the a simulated loading environment due to the requirement. The City is not dictating the lower number of actual workstations vendor’s proposed approach. available? 7 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement New incidents will be queued to a 11/15/01 2.4.3, will the City please provide additional waiting/pending incident window. Users shall be description of the queuing of incident able to select a waiting/pending incident with a records required? single function keystroke. City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 4 Last updated: 12/20/01
  5. 5. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date 8 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement Videos sources: State Department of 11/16/01 2.5, will the City detail the intended source Transportation and Seattle Transportation of the multimedia video feeds, providing Department arterial and highway cameras. additional clarification, specifications of the Signals will come across a fiber network into the feeds to be supported, number of feeds, Fire Alarm Center building. All dispatcher intended method and location of display, workstations and at least four (4) other and other relevant information? workstations in the Fire Department will need this capability. The City expects to install a video server, running Windows NT or Windows 2000 to support the capture of video feeds (digital and analog), conversion/compression, caching, and distribution of digital video to the workstations. 9 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement This flag lets the radio dispatcher know that 11/15/01 2.6.12, will the City please describe the incident details have been relayed to the intended purpose and use of this function responding units. CAD does not need to do regarding the placement of a flag in an anything except display the flag. incident, and the expected action of the CAD system? 1 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement Incident initiation time is the same as the time the 11/15/01 0 3.16, will the City please describe the incident is dispatched. difference between the two times specified in section 3.1.6.11 (Time and date of incident initiation) and 3.1.6.13 (time call received by PSAP)? 1 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement The EMD disposition code is the medical triage 11/15/01 1 3.16.16, is the EMD disposition code the code. same as the final disposition code for the incident, where the requirement calls for the capability to assign this code during the City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 5 Last updated: 12/20/01
  6. 6. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date incident entry process? 1 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement The next action field is used for multiple actions 11/15/01 2 3.1.8.1, will the City please explain the use from dispatching to updating an incident. The ‘D’ of this field? is used to dispatch an incident. “ ‘D’ is the default code if no action is specified. 1 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement This allows an authorized user – which does not 11/16/01 3 3.1.18.1, will the City please describe the have to be a dispatcher – to associate people with intended use of this functionality, an incident without dispatching so the incident associating an employee with an incident record has a more complete picture of people at without actually dispatching the employee? the incident. Examples include the Fire Chief, PIO, “friends of the firefighters” and others who just show up at the scene. Now, dispatchers have to dispatch a person to have the “event” recorded. Allowing this association to occur without requiring a dispatch event frees the dispatchers from performing this important, but non-critical record keeping function. Also, the City is not asking for other capabilities in this specification – e. g., the ability to disassociate a person from the incident. 1 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement The City’s GIS database includes one-way 11/16/01 4 4.5.17, in order to support the calculation of streets, elevations, overpasses and bridges, and ETA, does the City’s GIS database include can include road blockages, etc. Emergency emergency vehicle speed limits, one-way vehicle speed limits or averages are not currently streets, and other data needed to generate available. The City will be implementing a GPS- City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 6 Last updated: 12/20/01
  7. 7. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date this information? based AVL in early 2002 so raw data will then be available to estimate average emergency vehicle speeds between geographic points or areas. 1 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement Yes to both parts of the question – the intent is 11/16/01 5 5.3.3, is there any intent to support multi- support multiple services within a Fire service incidents within a Fire Department- Department-only system and the system needs to only system, or is this to be used only if the have the ability to support multiple services Seattle Police Department uses the same within a Fire and Police system. CAD system? 1 11/9/01 In at least one case, the City has used the Vendors need to review page one of Volume 11/16/01 6 term, “unlimited,” in its RFP. Considering Two, which describes the types of responses that eventual hardware capacity limitations, it is are permissible. The term “unlimited” is used in likely that no vendor can provide a numerous places in the RFP and the City’s intent compliant response cannot be given to any for those specifications is to acquire a system that such requirement. Given the weight of the does not have arbitrary limitations. For example, response codes in terms of the City’s there should be no arbitrary limitation on the evaluation of the proposals, if the proposed number of response codes. As a practical matter, system satisfies the spirit of the requirement Seattle Fire does not expect to have 1 million and any relevant limitations are described, different response codes, or even a hundred can the vendor indicate a compliant thousand. However, the City is not setting an response? upper limit on response codes that must be supported. 1 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement A second IP address. For example, many of the 11/16/01 7 5.6.1.1.f, will the City please define mobile computers that the Fire Department “Secondary network address” as related to a deploys in 2002 will have an IP address for the unit? CDPD network and an IP address for a wireless LAN (e. g., 802.11b). City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 7 Last updated: 12/20/01
  8. 8. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date 1 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement In a multiple fire jurisdiction system, or a system11/16/01 8 5.6.1.1.m, will the City please define the where mutual aid apparatus from another expected use of the “State apparatus field” jurisdiction are loaded in the system, the as related to a unit definition? Is this field to department needs a method of distinguishing be used within the SFD CAD or exclusively apparatus call signs or codes (e. g., Engine 10) for external reference? that may be used by multiple jurisdictions. The State Apparatus field is used to indicate whether the apparatus is from Seattle, Bellevue, Kirkland, or some other jurisdiction. 1 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement User category is, essentially, a group. Section 5.7 11/16/01 9 5.7, will the City please explain the describes a number of situations where groups of intended use of the “user category” feature users are created, managed (i.e., security), and requested? used in the CAD system. 2 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement The department’s EMS quality assurance person 11/15/01 0 7.1.18, will the City please define “random needs to evaluate dispatchers on a random basis. incident evaluation”? CAD needs to generate a report of randomly selected incidents for each dispatcher. (every 10/15 EMS/Fire incident). Section 7.1.18 should be restated as follows: The proposed system shall provide the ability to generate a report of randomly selected incident evaluations by dispatcher identifier or for all dispatchers. City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 8 Last updated: 12/20/01
  9. 9. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date 2 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement A Seattle Fire Only system may be used by and 11/16/01 1 8.1.2, how does the fact that this section support the following agencies: a private states that unauthorized users from one ambulance company (e. g., AMR), a separate agency are not to be able to access incident EOC, Police, and the Transportation Department. records from another relate to incidents A multiple casualty incident (MCI) record may supported by multiple agencies? It seems include patient injury data that is confidential. that, in this case, each agency would need The Transportation Department may be involved access to the common incident record. Will in responding to an MCI on a major arterial in the City please detail the logistics of this order to close the road and assist in a rescue. requirement? However, Transportation would not have privileges to view the incident record. Neither would the EOC staff because the MCI does not constitute a major emergency. The Police would have limited access to the record (i.e., everything but patient medical information). Only Fire and the ambulance company would be given full access to the incident record. This is only an example. Vendors are encouraged to describe how the specification will be met for a wider range of situations. 2 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement The specification should read as follows: 1/20/01 2 10.1.3.4, will the City clarify if this The proposed application shall provide the ability requirement is meant to indicate that the to see a set of phone calls that have come into a map is to show the incoming telephone call position on the workstation map. The proposed as it is processed or a historical view of application must support selection of the set of recent phone calls that have come into the calls by the following criteria: time (starting specific workstation? If an historical view, date/time and ending date/time) and/or a number for what length of time would the calls need of prior calls (starting from the most recent call to be to be displayed? back to a set number) and/or geography. The City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 9 Last updated: 12/20/01
  10. 10. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date proposed application must allow the geographic parameters to be established by the user drawing a polygon on a map display on the workstation. 2 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement The City GIS base map and layers will be used 11/16/01 3 10.2.24, given the requirements that the periodically to update the CAD. Likewise, some CAD system include a method to maintain layers will be maintained within the CAD by the the GIS database, this appears to imply that Fire Department (e. g., commonplace names). the base map provided by the City of Seattle The Fire Department needs a means to update all Public Utilities department is a one-time parts of the geofiles in CAD when necessary and transfer, with all further GIS maintenance not have to defer maintenance to a schedule City done by the SFD. Will the City please GIS update process. In the future the Fire confirm that this is the desired approach to Department and City GIS agency will establish a the maintenance of the geographic file? more frequent “near real-time” update and synchronization process. That technology is not in place and will not be available before the new CAD is implemented. 2 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement These are pre-fire identification numbers 11/15/01 4 12.6.1.12, will the City please define the generated by SFD. There is no application or intended use of the “pre-fire code”? process currently in place that uses this code. It is a code that firefighters will use to locate pre-fire diagram in a stand-alone application. In the near future the client application on the mobile computers in the apparatus will use the code to retrieve and display pre-fire information. That application will be external to the new CAD. City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 10 Last updated: 12/20/01
  11. 11. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date 2 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement The City has the Spectracom device. See the 11/16/01 5 12.7.3, is the City providing the Spectracom description in Appendix C. master time source or is this to be provided by the vendor? 2 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement TDD is provided by Positron. Part of the interface 11/15/01 6 12.11.11, is the TDD support provided by with the Positron system needs to include the the Positron system or is this to be a CAD transfer of TDD text from the Positron to CAD. function? If provided by Positron, will the system installed by the SFD make this information available as part of the CAD interface? If it is to be vendor-provided, are the TDD modems also to be provided by the vendor? 2 11/9/01 With regard to Volume Two, requirement There are no direct interfaces to the CAD systems 11/16/01 7 12.12, will the City please provide the elsewhere in King County. The PSAPNet interface specifications and all applicable technology includes an application running on a APIs related to the interface of the SFD centrally managed computer (switch) that handles CAD system to the other CAD systems in the interfaces between the Fire and Police CAD King County? and any other CAD connected to the switch. The RFP will be modified to clarify what features/functions are currently available: Only the specification described in 12.12.6 and 12.12.7 are operational. The specifications in 12.12 are features that are planned for the near future (2002/2003). PLEASE NOTE: The PSAPNet provides the City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 11 Last updated: 12/20/01
  12. 12. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date interface to the 800 MHz radio system described in Section 12.14. The City will distribute all PSAPNet documentation – including the radio interface – currently available to vendors who submit letters of interest. 2 11/9/01 With regard to Volume One, requirement Yes. 11/15/01 8 2.16, should the vendors include the Volume Two responses in the Technical Proposal? 2 11/9/01 Will the City please describe what must be There is no special form for the verification of 11/21/01 9 contained in the Verification of Signatory signature authorization. We really don't require a Authorization section and provide any "verification of signature authorization" as long required forms? as the cover letter accompanying the proposal is signed by a vice president, director of sales, or higher. 3 11/14/01 Should vendors note assumptions regarding Please provide a detailed description of any 11/16/01 0 terms and conditions in regards to the assumptions and exceptions regarding the terms pricing of the system? and conditions that directly affect pricing. Include this information within the Financial Proposal for consideration. 3 11/16/01 Should our company choose to become a No. The City understands that the motive for the 12/20/01 1 sub contractor to another Prime that question is to see if a prime can be used to satisfy had NOT attended the Pre Bid mandatory the City’s equal benefit terms and conditions. The meeting, will the prime still be City is willing to provide direct vendor access to allowed to bid using our attendance as City’s equal benefit office to explore method of representation at the pre bid? compliance that is acceptable to the City (please City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 12 Last updated: 12/20/01
  13. 13. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date see response to question #40) 3 11/19/01 Does Seattle have a hardware platform The City does not have a preference on server 11/20/01 2 preference?? hardware. The City’s standard desktop hardware is Gateway. The Seattle Fire Department has predominantly rack mounted Dell PowerEdge servers and Gateway desktops. Server hardware should be rack mountable. Other server and desktop requirements are described in the RFP. 3 11/20/01 Does Seattle have an operating system or The RFP describes the operating system 11/30/01 3 database preference?? requirements for the desktop or client - Windows 2000 or XP. There is no City standard for servers, however the Seattle Fire Department preference for servers is Windows NT or Windows 2000. The City’s standard for databases is Access, Oracle or Microsoft SQL Server. The Fire Department preference for databases is Microsoft SQL Server. 3 11/20/01 Section 1.6.2. on page 5 Mandatory The City does not have a preference on server 11/30/01 4 Requirements. Will the City consider hardware. The City’s standard desktop hardware this requirement met if the vendor is Gateway. The Seattle Fire Department has distinguishes between the CAD production predominantly rack mounted Dell PowerEdge server and the CAD Reporting server and servers and Gateway desktops. Server hardware the CAD Reporting Server provides should be rack mountable. Other server and all data in an ODBC compliant database? desktop requirements are described in the RFP. 3 11/20/01 I have a question, in relation to the Seattle No, the City is not willing to relax this mandatory 11/21/01 5 Fire Department's RFP for a Computer requirement for the Fire CAD RFP. Aided Dispatch System. Will you consider a vendor with superior products, even if they do not meet the following mandatory City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 13 Last updated: 12/20/01
  14. 14. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date requirement? 3.3.1.2 CAD Vendor Experience - "Vendors wishing to submit proposals shall have been supplying CAD systems to public or private entities for a minimum of three (3) … While Viking may be perceived as a relatively new company, being incorporated in February of 1999, our experience and leadership are clearly not. Our combined staff knowledge and experience approaches 400 years in the information technology field. Additionally, our parent company, PEC Solutions, has been providing e- government solutions for over 16 years. 3 11/15/01 After a careful review of the Seattle Fire A one-time extension has been granted. The 12/05/01 6 Department CAD System RFP - amended Proposal due date is 4 PM on January Specification No. 906, TriTech Software 31st, 2002. The deadline for asking questions or Systems are requesting an extension requesting an addendum to the RFP is December to the January 10, 2002 proposal due date in 21st, 2001 and the deadline for receiving order to prepare an adequate responses and addendum from the City is January response. With a two week extension, we 10th, 2002. An addendum to Volume One will be will have the additional time necessary to published to describe this change in detail. fully research and qualify the best solution to meet the Fire Department's needs. 3 11/27/01 Please confirm that the requirement for SMC 20.45.020(A) states that "[n]o contractor on 11/29/01 7 "Equal Benefits" is required at time of a City contract shall discriminate. . . ." A bid is City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 14 Last updated: 12/20/01
  15. 15. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date contracting with the City, and that Vendors not a contract. Therefore, companies that do not not currently compliant may bid, if such a currently comply with the Equal Benefits policy exists at time of contract signing. The ordinance may bid on City contracts, but the City request for clarification is not to be exempt may not enter into a contract with a company from law and policy, but to clarify when until that company has demonstrated compliance such compliance must be certified. with the Equal Benefits Ordinance. 3 11/27/01 "Please confirm that the "Equal Benefits" The relevant portions of SMC 20.45.020 read as 11/29/01 8 applies to vendor employees that will work follows: "The requirements of this Chapter only and live in the City of Seattle, and not shall apply to those portions of a contractor's necessarily all employees of the Contractor. operations that occur (i) within the City; . . . (iii) The request is not for exemption from law elsewhere in the United States where work related or policy, but clarification of the to a City contract is being performed." Therefore, application." if the vendor has an office in Seattle, that office must make benefits available on an equal basis. If the vendor has an office outside the City, but still within the U.S., and employees in that office perform work related to the City contract, that office must make benefits available on an equal basis. 3 11/27/01 Please provide a mechanism in the response The response codes will stay as described on page 12/04/01 9 coding to allow vendors to indicate that a 1 of Volume Two. Vendors can include requirement is provided, just not in every explanations with any response to further clarify sense of the wording of the requirement. As their compliance with the specification. Adding an example, a vendor has the requested more codes or “compliance with an explanation” feature, just that it is accessed by clicking a does not really help the City conduct a better button, rather than double clicking a data evaluation or provide more information than the item. The request is to allow vendors to existing codes supplemented with an explanation. have codes that more accurately reflect the compliancy of their solution, perhaps City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 15 Last updated: 12/20/01
  16. 16. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date adding an asterisk to the YES code or NO code to indicate special consideration rather than having responses that are compliant except for a minor variant be coded NO, and indistinguishable from responses where the requirement is not met at all. A benefit to the City will be that the coding will more accurately reflect the level of compliance beyond the effort expended by the City to read each requirement in detail to make such a determination. An example additional code and definition might be: CC - Comply with Clarification. The Vendor's product does not currently satisfy the requirement in the manner stated or does not meet all of the specifications stated, but the Vendor in its clarification may clearly state how the system meets the spirit of the requirement, provides an alternative solution to meet the requirement, or clarifies the level of compliance with the requirement. 4 11/27/01 Please clarify how a vendor may submit a Per your request, we are preparing a list of the 12/05/01 0 proposal and take issue with a "Term and mandatory terms and conditions. We anticipate Condition" of the RFP, with the realization that this will be available by December 13th, that such items will be negotiated prior to 2001. contract signing. For items that are mandatory and not negotiable, please The vendor should feel free to comment on terms clarify. Such clarifications will provide the and conditions, but please note that only the City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 16 Last updated: 12/20/01
  17. 17. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date opportunity for vendors to accurately assess exceptions/considerations that have been whether they can participate in the identified within the financial proposal (and procurement, and thus make best use of affect pricing) will be considered in the initial City's and the Vendor's resources. evaluation. Compliance with the following terms and 12/12/01 conditions is considered mandatory. However, since the City is committed to receiving the best possible products through a competitive process, it is strongly advised that any Vendor wishing to propose, but not currently compliant with these terms and conditions, contact the RFP Coordinator prior to withdrawing from the proposal process. B.15. Insurance B.22 Access to Books and Records B.23 Equal Employment B.24 Non-Discrimination in Benefits* B.25 Women and Minority Business Enterprise Requirements *Information regarding the City of Seattle’s Non- Discrimination in Benefits requirements is located at the City of Seattle’s website: http://www.cityofseattle.net/contract/equalbenefit s Vendors who have specific concerns or questions City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 17 Last updated: 12/20/01
  18. 18. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date regarding the Non-Discrimination in Benefits requirements are encouraged to contact the City of Seattle Equal Benefits Manager, Steve Gross, ph: 206-733-9583 for assistance. The Equal Benefits Manager can provide guidance for companies wishing to meet the compliance standards. All other concerns or questions regarding the Request for Proposal should be directed to the RFP Coordinator specified in RFP Section 2.2. 4 11/27/01 Per Section 1.1.1.1, it is mandatory that the UDP is an alternative to TCP. The stated 12/04/01 1 proposed application shall only use TCP/IP. requirement is TCP/IP, not any subset or Please clarify that subsets of TCP/IP are alternative. included, specifically UDP. 4 11/27/01 Per Section 1.4.1, it is mandatory that the Section 1.4.1 does not require any particular type 12/05/01 2 system application shall be designed to of hardware/software solution. The specification provide 99.999% application availability, simply states that the application must be inclusive of scheduled and unscheduled available 99.999% of the time. Vendors can maintenance. Since systems provided with propose whatever solution they feel appropriate redundant servers, automatic failover, and to meet this requirement. Please note that the City no-impact recovery, are designed for does not intend to measure compliance at the time continuous use, please confirm that such of evaluation; however, it is intended that the systems are acceptable without requiring successful Vendor shall be bound by this special 5 9s fault-tolerant hardware. The mandatory requirement in the final contract. clarification allows vendors to know that they can bid and have their proposals accepted without the use of special/specific technology. Otherwise please clarify how City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 18 Last updated: 12/20/01
  19. 19. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date the vendor is to verify to the City that their design was for 5 9s or better. 4 11/27/01 Per Section 1.4.3, it is mandatory that all Altering the specification is not warranted. 12/04/01 3 transactions complete within two seconds. Vendors should provide an explanation if they Please confirm that the City's intent is for feel it is necessary. calltaking and dispatching commands used in a normal workflow. The request is to allow special or administrative commands to take more than two seconds, and to recognize that complex and voluminous queries can be constructed that will exceed two seconds. 4 11/27/01 Per Section 1.4.7, it is mandatory that there The specification and explanation address the 12/04/01 4 shall never be a case where a user is question. prohibited from updating a record because another user is updating the same record. Please confirm that this is a workflow issue, and that the intent of the requirement is to allow one dispatcher to dispatch a unit to an event, while another dispatcher has control of the event, and may also be dispatching units to the event. 4 11/27/01 Per Section 2.3.3, it is mandatory that the The specification requires command line 12/04/01 5 operator be able to issue any command from functions for all functions that can be executed by the command line. Please confirm that this a button press, selecting an item from a menu, or is a workflow issue and is relative to normal populating a field from a pick list, etc. Functions calltaking and dispatching commands, and that cannot be executed by button, menu or pick not necessarily every operation of the list selection – e. g., drawing a free-hand polygon system. For example there may be on a map – would be an exception to this City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 19 Last updated: 12/20/01
  20. 20. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date commands that require interaction with the specification. An addendum to the RFP will be map that cannot be executed via command issued that includes an explanation for 2.3.3, as line. follows: EXPLANATION: This requirement applies to commands associated with call taking and dispatching and any function executed by pressing a button or icon, function key, menu selection, or selection from a pick list. The City does not expect electronic mapping actions that are only practical by use of a mouse to be included in this requirement. For example, selecting an area on a map for purpose of zooming in/out is not the type of action that the City expects to be executed from a command line. (The zooming feature, should, however, alternate means of execution such as function key, key combination, or button/icon press.) 4 11/27/01 Please refer to Section B.19.7, "Services The Terms and Conditions included in Appendix 11/30/01 6 Warranty", which states: The Vendor B were included for information only at this point warrants that, in performing the services in the proposal process. It is anticipated that the under the Maintenance Agreement vendor will provide a proposed Maintenance appended as Appendix [ ]. Agreement once they have been identified as a finalist (short list) vendor. Would the City please provide the Maintenance Agreement referenced? 4 12/05/01 The purpose of this note is to clarify that As stated in the RFP, a bid (proposal) bond is 12/06/01 7 while the new RFP document not required. The "Contract Bond Instructions", City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 20 Last updated: 12/20/01
  21. 21. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date includes a document entitled "Contract is a multipurpose document that we use to Bond Instructions," that states that provide vendors with instructions for a many a bid bond, if required, must be for 5% of different types of bonds. the contract amount. I would like to confirm that a bid bond is not required for this proposal. 4 12/05/01 Can we submit a proposal even if we did No, the City is not willing to relax this mandatory 12/06/01 8 not attend the pre-proposal conference? requirement. 4 12/12/01 Will the City waive the requirement that the While the City is not willing to remove the 12/20/01 9 internal CAD database application be mandatory requirement, the City will allow that ODBC compliant and consider an the proposed response is compliant with the intent alternative solution that would output data of the mandatory requirement for ODBC and to a server running an ODBC compliant SQL, provided that the requirement of 99.999% database? availability described elsewhere in the RFP for hardware and application must also apply to the hardware/application supporting the secondary ODBC database. 5 12/20/01 Will the City please clarify where, in the Vendors are not required to response to the 12/21/01 0 proposal, vendors should include responses mandatory terms and condition in the first phase. to the Mandatory Terms and Conditions and The finalist will be required to provide such which of the Terms and Conditions response. (please also see questions and answer provided in Appendix B are mandatory? #40.) However, if Vendor’s financial proposal are impacted by any term or condition, those need to be noted in the financial proposal as conditions. 5 12/20/01 As part of the proposal, should the vendors RFP 2.15 is for Vendor’s information only. 1/3/02 1 provide a completed copy of the Form W-9 Vendors are not required to provide a completed or simply acknowledge that, upon selection, copy of Form W-9 with their proposal. City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 21 Last updated: 12/20/01
  22. 22. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date the form will be completed and submitted? In either case, in what section of the proposal should either the aforementioned form or acknowledgment be included? 5 12/20/01 Does the City require any sort of Executive No. There City does not require an Executive 1/3/02 2 Summary, summarizing the entire system? summary. If any Vendor wishes to do so, it If so, where should this be included in the should be part of cover letter. proposal? If not, where should this summary information be provided? 5 12/20/01 Does the quantity of “2” for Base CAD The number “2” is placed there as an example, 1/3/02 3 System hardware indicate a redundant Vendor should input the correct number based on server configuration or the need for a server their own proposal design. at the FAC site and another at the backup FAC? 5 12/20/01 The quantity of Base CAD System software The number “1” is placed there as an example, 1/3/02 4 is “1.” As related to the above question, Vendor should input the correct number based on does this reflect the software for one of the their own proposal design. sites only? 5 12/20/01 The quantity of the Message Switch and The number “1” is placed there as an example, 1/3/02 5 Mapping systems is “1.” Does this indicate Vendor should input the correct number based on that these systems are required at the their own proposal design. primary FAC site only, and not at the backup FAC site, or should the vendor modify the quantities as needed to reflect the full dual-site configuration? 5 12/20/01 Will the City please explain what is Pending 1/10/02 6 intended by the item entitled “CAD Remote Site workstation software (site license)”? The rows following appear to identify the City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 22 Last updated: 12/20/01
  23. 23. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date actual workstation counts at the remote FAC. 5 12/20/01 Will the City please confirm that all Pending 1/10/02 7 workstations listed (quantity 183) are to have the ability to show status maps? If not, will the City please define which workstations are to have this capability? 5 12/20/01 For the AVL system pricing, will the City The initial deployment of Fire vehicles is 90 with 1/3/02 8 please define the total number of mobile AVL, but it could grow to 300 vehicles. AVL units to be supported? The total number of vehicles listed in C.2.4 is 65; is AVL to be installed in the reserve vehicles? 5 12/20/01 Regarding the Cost Breakdown form, Yes. Within each category, please feel free to add 1/3/02 9 should the form be modified to reflect the or delete lines as you see fit to reflect your pricing model that we are able to provide pricing model. for each of these categories? 6 12/20/01 Will the City please confirm that the vendor Confirmed 1/3/02 0 is not to propose any network equipment, cabling or installation tasks? 6 12/20/01 In light of the extended proposal due date, No. Vendors has 50 days (11/1/2001 to 1/3/02 1 will the City consider an extension of the 12/21/2001) to ask questions. RFP questions due date? 6 12/20/01 Will the City please verify that the printers Alerting printers are attached to the Zetron Model 1/3/02 2 referenced in paragraph 12.3.6.1 are 6's in the station. Model 6's are connected to the connected via the Zetron 6/26 system? Model 25 via leased line. Vol 1, Appendix C.2.24. Vendors can propose another method for alert printing - they don't necessarily have to use the Zetron. City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 23 Last updated: 12/20/01
  24. 24. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date 6 12/20/01 Will the City please define what type of Inquiry returns are, essentially, database searches. 1/3/02 3 “inquiry returns”, as referenced in For example, a search transaction may be started paragraph 4.6.11 are applicable to a fire against a dangerous building database or a GIS CAD system? database. The results may come back (asynchronously) as a 'message' that search results are available. These messages must be clearly distinguished from a a text message sent from a CAD work station, a system message, etc. . 6 12/21/01 Pending 1/10/02 4 Volume Two – Technical Specifications Is it mandatory for a proposer to provide a hardware solution or will Seattle accept hardware specifications only? If hardware is provided by a separate vendor will the hardware meet the requirements of question 1.8.3? 6 12/21/01 Pending 1/10/02 5 Section 1.4 Performance and Capacity 1.4.6 The application shall continue to meet the performance requirements even when the database is encrypted. Question: What standard and what level of encryption is required? City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 24 Last updated: 12/20/01
  25. 25. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date 6 12/21/01 Pending 1/10/02 6 Section 1.7 System Failure Processing 1.7.6 In the event that any disk or other synchronized storage device is out of sync, the system shall automatically synchronize the deficient storage device with its twin without operator intervention and without degrading the performance of the application. Note: Finalists will be required to demonstrate this capability in on-site demonstrations. Question: Is this question referring to replication or hard drive mirroring/RAID technology? 6 12/21/01 Pending 1/10/02 7 Section 2.1 Design Requirements 2.1.2 It is desired that the proposed application offer a thin client for call taking that does not require application-specific software to be installed on the user’s workstation. This will allow remote locations to enter new incidents when City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 25 Last updated: 12/20/01
  26. 26. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date necessary. EXPLANATION REQUIRED: Describe functional capabilities of the thin client. Question: Is the proposed application required to run inside a web browser? 6 12/21/01 When the screen or work window is full of 1/3/02 8 Section 2.3 System Commands – Features text/information there needs to be a command and and Options Key stroke combination to clear the screen to a blank status. 2.3.1 The proposed application shall offer a command that can be used to clear each work screen. Question: What is meant by “clear each work screen”? 6 12/21/01 Pending 1/10/02 9 Section 2.5 Multimedia Display Requirements 2.5.1 It is desired that the proposed application allow the user to open a screen to support streaming multimedia feeds (video and audio). Question: What format are the multimedia City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 26 Last updated: 12/20/01
  27. 27. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date feeds? Is the vendor responsible for storing the multimedia files for playback or archiving? 7 12/21/01 The (PTT) is visual identification of the current 1/3/02 0 Section 2.6 Status Monitor Requirements active transmitting radio or mobile AVL status change. This information will be acquired from 2.6.8 The status screen shall include a the PSAP Net (see interface section) interface and marquee displaying at least the last ten (10) the AVL (see interface section) interface. unit status changes and Push-To-Talk (PTT) Examples of a marquee would be: identifications for portable, mobile, and station radios transmitting on the radio E6 (mobile radio transmission) system. STA13 (station radio transmission) E10:AOR (AVL transmission) Question: Please provide more information E5:EMR (AVL transmission) about the Push-To-Talk (PTT) identifications? And what is required for See question 71 for color-coding of the the marquee display. identifiers. 7 12/21/01 There needs to be different Color-Coding for 1/3/02 1 Section 2.6 Status Monitor Requirements Mobile radios, Portable radios, Station radios, 2.6.9 The marquee shall use color to AVL status changes, and Emergency button differentiate between status changes and the activation. three different kinds of PTT identifiers. Example: Mobile Radios = Blue Question: Please provide more information Portable Radios = Yellow on the Push-To-Talk (PTT) identifiers? AVL changes = Green City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 27 Last updated: 12/20/01
  28. 28. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date Emergencies = Red 7 12/21/01 3.1 Incident Initiation If the dispatcher is given an address that is not in 1/3/02 2 the GEO file system there needs to be a way to 3.1.6.15 GEO override field. override the system and manually dispatch to an address, XY etc. Question: Can you please explain the use of The CAD system would enter the incident into this 28ield? the waiting incident window just like a verified address incident. Unit recommendations and dispatch would be manual for this override. 7 12/21/01 3.1 Incident Initiation Advised incidents are incidents that are created 1/3/02 3 for tracking purposes and receive an incident 3.1.18 The proposed application shall allow number. a user to enter and immediately close an incident without routing it to a dispatcher. Example: (Advised Incident). Alarm company calls to put a fire system out of service. We would create an incident and Question: Can you describe in further detail ADVISE it. Then if we received an alarm to that what is meant by an Advised Incident and address we would see the duplicate or advised what is required? Please provide an information. We also use this when we receive example. multiple calls for the same incident, were we want to track who called in the information. 7 12/21/01 3.2 Emergency Medical Dispatch and Other The Department needs the ability to create and 1/3/02 4 Instructions modify questions and answers for EMD. The current program is not automated – i. e., the The City of Seattle currently utilizes an questions and protocols are maintained manually. emergency medical dispatcher (EMD) The Fire Department does not have a specific City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 28 Last updated: 12/20/01
  29. 29. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date program that was developed by the local requirement for an electronic format, although a medical director. It is expected that the solution using web technology (HTML, XML, protocols associated with this EMD system ASP, JavaScript, etc.) would be desirable. will be automated in the new CAD application. Question: Can a third party product such as ProQA be used? If not, please provide the EMD file format of the current system. 7 12/21/01 3.3 Address Verification Same as question 72: 1/3/02 5 3.3.12 In case the location entered by the If the dispatcher is given an address that is not in user is unverifiable (i.e., location does not the GEO file system there needs to be a way to exist), the user shall have the capability to override the system and manually dispatch to an exit the verification process and manually address, XY etc. route the incident at any time. The CAD system would enter the incident into Question: Please clarify what is meant by the waiting incident window just like a verified location i.e. street address, x,y, etc. Also address incident. please provide an example of what is Unit recommendations and dispatch would be required. manual for this override. 7 12/21/01 3.3 Address Verification Pending 1/10/02 6 Extra-Jurisdictional Addresses 3.3.32 It shall be possible to include addresses and locations in the geofile that City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 29 Last updated: 12/20/01
  30. 30. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date are outside the City’s corporate limits. Question: Will street centerline data for the areas outside of the City be available? 7 12/21/01 Section 3.9 Incident Reopen Incidents are reopened to dispatch units back to 1/3/02 7 the original site without creating a new incident. 3.9.1 The proposed application shall allow an authorized user to reopen any closed Authorized Users i.e. Dispatchers, will have the incident. ability to reopen an incident for a minimum of 48 hours. Question: For how long and under what circumstances can a user reopen a closed incident? I.e. if an incident is locked can it be reopened by a dispatcher? 7 12/21/01 4.3 Incident Processing Example: We have multiple waiting calls for 1/3/02 8 minor incidents such as water jobs etc. Incidents need to be able to be put on HOLD until a Holding Incidents specific unit goes in service. 4.3.7 The proposed application shall include HOLD incident #12345 for Ladder 3. a command that will convert a waiting incident to a held incident. (Hold Incident). When L3 goes in service CAD will recommend City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 30 Last updated: 12/20/01
  31. 31. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date the incident for dispatch for L3. Question: What is meant by a held incident? Does this mean that the incident was picked up from the queue and is being held in the second stage of call-taking? Please provide an example. 7 12/21/01 4.3 Incident Processing See Question #78 for further information. 1/3/02 9 4.3.8 The proposed application shall include The incident is held for L3 and L3 is going to be a command that will convert a previously out of service for a lengthy period of time, there held incident to a waiting incident. (Cancel needs to be a command to cancel the HOLD on a Held Incident). incident and return it to a waiting status for dispatch. Question: Does this mean that the incident would be returned to the queue due to the inability of the call-taker to address the call? 8 12/21/01 Pending 1/10/02 0 Section 4.4 Unit Recommendations 4.4.4 In place of the sequential station search, the proposed application shall have the ability to search for the units required by the equipment complement based on the Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) reported location of the units and the estimated travel time for each unit. City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 31 Last updated: 12/20/01
  32. 32. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date Question: Will Seattle be providing a routing network? 8 12/21/01 The first priority should be travel distance, then 1/3/02 1 Section 4.4 Unit Recommendations radius of the incident to the station. 4.4.13 Once the application has determined the equipment complement, it will sequentially search the stations nearest the incident location unit it has located enough units of the appropriate type to fill the equipment complement. Question: Is the nearest incident location determined by travel distance or travel time, etc.? 8 12/21/01 Pending 1/10/02 2 Section 4.5 Unit Functions 4.5.17 The proposed application shall have the ability to calculate an estimated time of arrival for each assigned unit. Question: Will Seattle be providing a City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 32 Last updated: 12/20/01
  33. 33. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date routing network? 8 12/21/01 Pending 1/10/02 3 Section 4.11 Hospital Status 4.11.1 The proposed application shall have the ability to track the receiving and admitting capability of local hospitals. Question: Is this currently managed electronically? If so, will an interface be required? 8 12/21/01 5.3 Incident Options Advised incidents are incidents that are created 1/3/02 4 for tracking purposes and receive an incident 5.3.5 The proposed application shall allow number. the authorized user to configure some incident types as advised incidents. Advised Example: incidents are not to be routed to a dispatcher Alarm company calls to put a fire system out of but shall be assigned an incident number service. We would create an incident and and the incident details recorded as with a ADVISE it. Then if we received an alarm to that normal call for service. address we would see the duplicate or advised information. We also use this when we receive Question: What is meant by an “Advised multiple calls for the same incident, were we Incident”? Please provide an example. want to track who called in the information. 8 12/21/01 5.3 Incident Options Pending 1/10/02 5 5.3.18.1 Incident number shall be a 10-digit number in the following format: YY###### (YY two digit year) and ####### 8-digit City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 33 Last updated: 12/20/01
  34. 34. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date sequential number reset annually. Question: This contradicts question #5.3.18 – The proposed application shall allow the authorized user to define the incident number format for each user agency – which one fits Seattle’s requirements? 8 12/21/01 This is in conjunction with 3.2 1/3/02 6 EMD Configuration 5.3.20 The proposed application shall allow the authorized user to define question and answer sequences in association with each incident type. Question: Can you further explain the requirement here? Is this referring to the same requirements as 3.2? 8 12/21/01 Pending 1/10/02 7 5.3.24 The proposed application shall allow the authorized user to reuse questions, answers, or instructions, which have already been entered for other sequences without retyping. Question: Need format of Seattle EMD coding system. City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 34 Last updated: 12/20/01
  35. 35. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date 8 12/21/01 “Available” means that the unit is available to be 1/3/02 8 Section 5.6 Units dispatched to a new incident. 5.6.5 The proposed application shall allow the authorized user to define, for each unit status, if the unit is available for assignment. Question: What is meant by “available”? 8 12/21/01 “Recommended” means that the unit is available 1/3/02 9 Section 5.6 Units to be recommended for dispatched to a new incident. 5.6.6 The proposed application shall allow the authorized user to define, for each unit status, if the unit should be recommended for assignment. Question: What is meant by “recommended”? 9 12/21/01 Section 10.1 Geofile Requirements Pending 1/10/02 0 10.1.3.1 The proposed application shall support Washington State Plane coordinates. City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 35 Last updated: 12/20/01
  36. 36. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date Question: Can vendors be provided with the Washington State Plane coordinates? 9 12/21/01 10.2 Mapping Functions No. The interested vendors should not contact 1/3/02 1 Trimble/Aveltech. 10.2.13 The proposed application shall have The Aveltech Mapping system interface with the the ability to receive unit position updates CAD through the Aether Server. from the City’s Trimble/AvelTech AVL Please see answer #94 for Aether API. controller and display them on the map in real-time. Question: Need AvelTech AVL specifications. Is there a contact name and number for Trimble/AvelTech? 9 12/21/01 10.2 Mapping Functions Pending 1/10/02 2 10.2.20 The proposed application shall have the ability to determine a route of travel for a unit from its present AVL reported location to any user-designated location. Question: Will a routing network be provided? 9 12/21/01 12. Interfaces Pending 1/10/02 3 12.1 General Interface Requirements City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 36 Last updated: 12/20/01
  37. 37. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date 12.1.1 The proposed application shall include a message switch that supports open and industry standard protocols. Question: What standard industry protocols for messaging are being referred to? I.e. SOAP, XML, TCP/IP, MSMQ, Web Services, etc. 9 12/21/01 Section 12.2 Automated Vehicle Location Please do not contact Aether System or Aveltech. 1/3/02 4 System The Aether API is attached. 12.2.1 The proposed application shall have the ability to interface with City’s Cerulean (Aether Systems) Packet Cluster Server and Trimble/AvelTech navigation AVL system. The proposed system must accept the information and conform to the interface specifications described in Volume One- Appendix C. Question: Can the City provide an contact name and number for the Cerulean system. 9 12/21/01 Section 12.12 PSAP Net City is in the process of obtaining the API for 1/3/02 5 PSAPNet. Will distribute to interested Vendor as 12.12.1 The proposed application shall have soon as it becomes available. the ability to send an incident record from the proposed CAD application to PSAPNet. City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 37 Last updated: 12/20/01
  38. 38. # Date Question Answer Answer Recv’d Date Question: Can the City provide a standard and format for the PSAPNet? Also, what is being messaged back and forth and is the send/receive manually initiated or is it sent automatically on a frequent basis? 9 12/21/01 Section 12.14 Radio System Interface The new proposed CAD will interface with 1/3/02 6 PSAPNet for the regional 800 MHz radio system. Question: Can the City provide a contact The 800 MHz regional radio system serves name and number for Motorola? multiple PSAPs within King County. The Motorola 800 MHz system only has one port to communicate with multiple CADs. Therefore, one of the functions of the PSAPNet is to function as message switches to connect CADs from different PSAPs to the Motorola 800 MHz radio system. 9 12/21/01 Section 12.15 Wall Map Interface Cobol. 1/3/02 7 Question: What language is the Wall Map software written in? City of Seattle Fire CAD RFP 906—Questions and Responses 38 Last updated: 12/20/01

×