Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Current Environment
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.


Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Current Environment


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. State of Oregon Department of Administrative Services State Procurement Office 1225 Ferry St SE Salem, OR 97310-1530 State of Oregon Request for Proposals Design and Engineering Consultant State Public Safety Wireless Communications System Issue Date: 09/02/2005 Due Date: 10/04/2005 Contact: Timothy E. Walker, State Procurement Analyst Phone #: (503) 378-4091 E-Mail: 1 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 2. I. Introduction The State of Oregon (State), acting by and through its Department of Administrative Services (DAS), State Procurement Office, (SPO), on behalf of the State’s Office of Emergency Management, (OEM), hereby requests proposals (“Proposal” or “Proposals”) to establish a Contract for Public Safety Wireless Communications System Design and Engineering Services. The purpose of this solicitation (“RFP”) is to receive solutions-based Proposals from qualified entities (“Proposer” or “Proposers”). It is anticipated that the project will require two (2) phases. In general, Phase I will involve conceptual design and engineering services for a statewide digital microwave system, a trunked statewide digital radio system, and the facilities/towers required to support and house that infrastructure across Oregon. Phase I must be completed by November 1, 2006. Since each of the three (3) subject areas depends upon the others, the Proposer is to consider the design of each major area in concert with the needs of the other two. Phase II is an optional phase for consulting and quality assurance oversight services related to the new system detailed design that will be activated, if at all, at the State’s discretion. At some reasonable point before or after completion of Phase I, DAS, in conjunction with OEM, will determine whether or not to engage in Phase II consulting and quality assurance oversight services with the successful Proposer. However, the State may ultimately determine to go out with an RFP for the Phase II consulting and quality assurance oversight services. The Phase II detailed design services, the construction of the statewide digital microwave system and the trunked digital radio system (including the facilities/towers to support and house the system), and the quality assurance on the construction of the statewide digital microwave and radio system are not within the scope of this RFP. II. Overview Public safety of all Oregonians is essential. The State must ensure that law enforcement, first responders, forest managers, transportation officials, local communities and the State’s military components have the tools necessary to prevent crime, plan for and respond to natural and man-made emergencies, and otherwise provide for the security of all Oregonians. Public safety communication systems allow public safety professionals to readily communicate with one another, and help ensure timely and coordinated emergency response. The essential role these mission critical communications systems play in protecting the lives and property of citizens and the public safety professionals that serve them cannot be overstated. 2 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 3. Current Situation – State Public Safety Communications Infrastructure The State of Oregon’s public safety communications infrastructure is owned, operated, and maintained independently; and was not, for the most part, designed to support interoperable communications within or across jurisdictions. The State, itself, owns four (4) independent wireless/radio systems: i.e., Department of Corrections (DOC), Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF), Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), and Oregon State Police (OSP). The predominant portion of that infrastructure, owned and operated by OSP and ODOT, is: rapidly aging, out of production, outdated, not compliant with FCC narrowbanding mandates, and at risk of failing. Depleted staffing levels for State Agency wireless/radio programs within those agencies put the entire State public safety communications’ system (State, local, federal) at risk. At the State Agency level, every dollar spent maintaining current systems are a sunk cost never to be recovered as the “system” is well past the “end of life.” Further, spare parts are increasingly hard to find or not in existence. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) The FCC has ordered a nationwide change in the use of the radio spectrum allocated for public safety radio operations. That mandate means that licensed radio systems now operated by DOC, ODF, ODOT, and OSP, all must move to narrowband technology by 2013. In fact, by January 1, 2008, FCC rules prevent the manufacture or purchase of the only kind of equipment that will operate on our existing systems. These FCC adopted policies and standards will affect Oregon’s public safety communications systems and the State’s ability to use FCC licensed frequencies if action is not taken. Deadlines for compliance are quickly approaching. There is an urgent need to replace and modernize the current statewide infrastructure to meet known FCC deadlines and to avoid probable system failure and the loss of essential FCC public safety radio spectrum licenses. Statewide improvement in the ability of public safety professionals to exchange voice and /or data communications with one another on demand, in real time, and when needed is imperative to achieve what is known as interoperability. Current Environment ODOT presently has approximately eighty (80) hops of analog microwave, and OSP has approximately thirty (30) hops of digital microwave. OSP and ODOT have developed a concept of a consolidated microwave system that is needed to support a statewide digital radio system that could result in as many as 150 individual microwave sites or nodes. This information will be supplied to the successful Proposer of the RFP. 3 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 4. The State has determined, and the legislature has confirmed, that Oregon should replace its disparate radio systems with a statewide, trunked, digital radio system and a statewide microwave system for the use by all State Agencies. OSP currently uses 103 sites, ODOT, uses approximately 90, and ODF uses about 60. Many of these sites are used by all three (3) agencies. In total, these agencies have approximately 170 different radio sites. Other than for the OSP system, most of those sites are not currently connected to dispatch centers by microwave. The state expects that a trunked radio system will require more sites to have microwave connectivity to centralized control equipment. The State is also a primary supporter of the Oregon State Interoperability Executive Council (SIEC). The SIEC is charged with providing policy level direction for matters related to planning, designing, and implementing guidelines, best practices, and standard approaches to address Oregon’s public safety communications interoperability issues. Recent SIEC policy action and legislative direction, from the 2005 State Legislative Assembly via House Bill 2101, has expanded the charter of the SIEC to include the identification and recommendation of a solution for public safety wireless communications interoperability in concert with the Office of Emergency Management. The State’s microwave system and its series of communications buildings and towers is thought to be the infrastructure that is needed to support a secure, dedicated Internet Protocol network for statewide support of public safety’s interoperability needs. Integrated Wireless Network (IWN) Planners for the Federal IWN project have approached the Oregon Departments of State Police (OSP) and Transportation (ODOT). IWN is a first of its kind shared communications resource within the Federal Government. It will replace at least three (3) separate federal law enforcement radio systems with a single, shared use and nationwide radio system. IWN opted to build a modern, digital, trunked two-way radio system starting along Interstate 5 in the State of Washington. IWN planners are working to continue that system development along Interstate 5 in Oregon. IWN’s initial discussions with Oregon involve their need for radio connectivity in the Oregon I-5 corridor and the Oregon coastal region. IWN planners have identified several specific sites owned by ODOT and OSP that they would like to use to integrate their network. Given the age and condition of State-owned infrastructure and equipment, IWN is willing to give the State federal funding for the State to rebuild several of these sites. In addition to providing funding for the State to purchase some digital microwave equipment, this can include some building modernization, tower and electrical upgrades, and fencing around the facilities. Also, IWN is willing to fund State costs in maintaining the systems that IWN needs (e.g. costs for training, test equipment, continued operations and maintenance costs, and funding for a suitable number of FTE’s of trained maintenance personnel. 4 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 5. An upgrade and expansion of the ODOT and OSP microwave networks will accommodate the statewide interconnection of sites and dispatch centers to meet the FCC mandated narrowband technology Oregon must use in the future. II.1 Goals of Public Safety Wireless Communication System Project The goals of this public safety wireless communications system - design and engineering consultant services - RFP are to: II.1.1 Understand with a high degree of certainty the design and construction requirements, costs, and implementation schedule for the consolidated statewide public safety wireless communications system; II.1.2 Acquire the information needed to develop and deliver a State public safety wireless communications interoperability plan to the Oregon Legislature by January 2007; II.1.3 Acquire technical consulting and quality assurance services related to future State procurements for the construction and build out of: II.1.3.1 a digital microwave system connecting major Oregon communications facilities into a coordinated system of dispatch and radio transmitter and receiver locations; II.1.3.2 a consolidated, State Agency public safety wireless communications system, meeting FCC mandates, State agency operational requirements, and State interoperability requirements, by 2013. II.1.3.3 a series of reliable communications facilities to meet the operational capacity and coverage needs of State Agencies and the collocation needs of other government public safety and emergency responder agencies. II.2 Scope II.2.1 The scope of this RFP includes the following: II.2.1.1 The Contractor shall conduct an analysis of the “Current State” of the State’s existing public safety wireless communications infrastructure (DOC, ODF, ODOT, and OSP). In accomplishing this, the Contractor shall work with State staff to review and understand State operational and interoperability requirements and the FCC 2013 mandates for public safety frequency use and systems interoperability mandates. This work will define the “Future State” of the State’s public safety wireless communications infrastructure. After clearly identifying the gap between the current and future states of State systems, the Contractor will complete 5 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 6. a comprehensive conceptual design of the Future Public Safety wireless communications infrastructure and will clearly document the microwave system, trunked radio system, and facility/tower design and engineering requirements. II.2.1.2 This work will culminate in the development of a business case document that identifies and compares alternative approaches to constructing and building out the State’s public safety wireless communications infrastructure over time. Further, the Contractor will create and present a high-level implementation plan for the recommended construction and build out alternative. II.2.1.3 Upon State approval, the contractor will develop a proposed statement of work and develop the mandatory and desired requirements for RFPs leading to the detailed design, construction and build out of the State’s public safety wireless communications radio system, microwave system, and system of buildings and towers. II.2.2 OEM anticipates other contracts will be solicited through separate RFPs. The following are not included within the scope of this RFP: II.2.2.1 Construction of microwave radio towers II.2.2.2 Construction of facilities/mountain top radio sites. II.2.2.3 Purchase, installation, or deployment of digital trunked radio system equipment II.2.2.4 FCC public safety radio spectrum licensing applications or ongoing statewide frequency management and coordination II.2.2.5 Quality assurance of construction and build out of microwave, radio, and building/tower contract performance. II.2.2.6 Project management of implementation of the microwave, radio, and building/tower contracts. II.3 Phased Approach and Deliverables The contractor shall use a phased approach to accomplish the work. Anticipated task stages are set forth below. The State of Oregon may choose not to proceed with all or part of Phase II independent of Phase I work. The State of Oregon may proceed with Phase II using the same or other suppliers at its sole discretion. The maximum not to exceed contract amount for Phase I is $1,000,000.00. II.3.1 Conceptual Design and Engineering Study - Phase I 6 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 7. A proposed list of task areas is reflected below, and further reflected with anticipated related deliverables and an estimated time table for submission of completed deliverables in RFP Attachment A. This list is illustrative, not exhaustive, and is negotiable as to the specifics of task and sub-task areas, nature of related deliverables, when particular deliverables are due, the sequence in which deliverables are due, and the content of the deliverables. The list is the State’s best estimation of the tasks and related deliverables necessary to accomplish the Scope of Work outlined in Section II.2. After negotiations are complete, the parties will reflect their agreement in a Statement of Work (SOW) that will comprise Exhibit A to the contract. II.3.1.1 During Phase I, contractor shall: II.3.1.2 Conduct an inventory review and validate all latitude, longitude, and elevation data on existing State-owned microwave tower and repeater locations across Oregon. In addition, at each and every site, the contractor shall document: II. Tower antenna inventory. II. Emergency power rated capacity II. HVAC rated capacity II. Building electrical system rated capacity II. Variance from R56 grounding, security, and electrical standards. II. Height and general location of nearby obstructions that could affect microwave paths expected from that site. II. Inventory of all microwave and radio equipment in State-owned facilities. II.3.1.3 Conduct a frequency assessment for all FCC licensed public safety radio spectrum currently in use by State radio owning agencies, the State Use 700 MHz band, and other frequencies that are identified by the State. Once the contractor has developed a conceptual design for the replacement radio system and can determine core sites, the contractor is to develop and present statewide composite comparison coverage estimates using the VHF (150-160 MHz) band and the State Use 700 MHz band. 7 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 8. II.3.1.4 The Contractor is also to produce a county-by-county coverage estimate of each of the ODF, ODOT, and OSP radio systems to serve as an estimated baseline for statewide coverage comparisons. Coverage requirements will be identified by the State in the contractor’s contract. II.3.1.5 The contractor is to make a comparison of potential State systems in each band (VHF and 700 MHz), and the contractor is to make a recommendation on frequency selection to the State. II.3.1.6 Complete a conceptual design and document the design and engineering requirements for a future State public safety wireless communications infrastructure in Oregon. The contractor is to complete an assessment that details coverage, capacity, reliability, and a risk assessment for the proposed-conceptual consolidated system. II.3.1.7 Considering the State’s present radio systems and the conceptual design, the contractor is then to complete a GAP analysis for each of the four major radio user departments considering those same elements. II.3.1.8 Develop a business case that identifies and compares alternative approaches to constructing and building out the State’s public safety wireless communications infrastructure over time. The contractor is to analyze and recommend digital and digital/analog radio technologies for State Agency use. At a minimum, the radio system must be Project 25 compatible for law enforcement and homeland security purposes. Compatibility in this instance means compliant with the Project 25 Common Air Interface, the Project 25 trunking documents, and the Project 25 Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) encryption. Because of the need for encryption and statewide voice and data, the State believes that migration to a digital platform is imperative. One question is whether other state agencies can operate in a consolidated trunking system on an analog basis or whether all units in the consolidated system must operate in a digital mode. The conceptual design is to recognize the need for some ODOT and ODF personnel in tactical situations to operate in conventional, analog modes. System design must also consider statewide tactical use of VHF frequencies in a conventional mode. II.3.1.9 Create and present a high-level implementation plan for the recommended construction and build out alternative. The State favors a three-phase implementation approach with the first phase east of the Cascade Mountains, the second phase in southwest 8 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 9. Oregon, and the final phase in northwest Oregon, but it is up to the Proposer to recommend the best approach. Each phase should include the microwave system, buildings and towers, and the radio system so that each area becomes completely operable at the end of the phase. As each phase of infrastructure is constructed and made operable, loading of subscribers should begin. The contractor should estimate how this can be accomplished along with major milestones. II.3.1.10 For each phase, the contractor’s recommended implementation plan at a minimum should include timing for: II. Opening contract discussions II. Completing contract discussions II. Equipment procurement II. System staging II. Start of installation II. Completion of installation II. Testing and Preliminary acceptance II. Testing and full system acceptance II. Subscriber loading II.3.1.11 Upon State approval, the contractor will develop a proposed statement of work and develop the mandatory and desired requirements for RFPs leading to the detailed design, construction and build out of the three (3) major areas (microwave, radio, buildings/towers) of the State’s public safety wireless communications infrastructure. Within the radio system, it is the intent to let the manufacturer of the radio system have the freedom to choose sites and equipment needed to meet capacity and coverage requirements. With that freedom comes the explicit contractor responsibility to implement a system that meets those capacity and coverage requirements. The purpose of the conceptual design is for the State to better understand the scope, scale, and estimated cost for construction. The contractor will develop a capacity model based upon the projected year one use of the radio system by all State departments and, expecting growth of 8% per year in traffic, ensure that system capacity will be adequate to serve state agencies to 2015. 9 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 10. II.3.2 Consulting and Quality Assurance Oversight for Detailed Design of the System – Optional Phase II II.3.2.1 OEM in its sole and absolute discretion, may choose to proceed with Phase II consulting and quality assurance services on the detailed design of the digital microwave and radio system. In the event OEM desires to proceed with the Phase I Contractor for the Phase II services, the parties will attempt to negotiate mutually agreeable amendment(s) to the contract for the performance of such work. II.3.2.2 Prior to commencing the Phase II services, the parties must negotiate a not to exceed fee for each deliverable contained within the statement of work. II.3.2.3 In the event the OEM does not negotiate a satisfactory contract amendment(s) with the Phase I contractor for the Phase II services (which OEM desires to initiate by January 2007) OEM reserves the right to re-solicit with other potential suppliers for all or part of the Phase II services. II.3.2.4 Progress payments - The terms of the contract payments in Phase II will be negotiated with the contractor. III.1 Sole Point of Contact (SPC): Timothy E. Walker, State Procurement Analyst DAS – State Procurement Office 1225 Ferry St., SE, U-140 Salem, OR 97301 503.378.4091 Phone 503.373.1626 Fax All Proposer communications concerning this solicitation must be directed only to the SPC listed above unless otherwise identified in this RFP. Any unauthorized contact regarding this RFP with other State employees or officials may result in Proposal rejection. Any oral communications will be considered unofficial and non-binding. Proposers should rely only on written statements issued by the SPC. Responses to Proposer’s verbal requests for information or clarification are not binding unless provided in writing by SPC. III.2 Schedule of Events: Release of RFP: September 02, 2005 Mandatory Pre-proposal Conference: September 16, 2005 10 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 11. Protest of RFP Requirements and Terms and Conditions Due: 4:00 pm PDT on Friday, September 23, 2005 Closing Date: 4:00 pm PDT on Friday, October 07, 2005 Intent to Award Announcement: TBD Protest of Intent to Award Due: TBD (Aside from the date for Release, all dates are subject to change) III.3 Mandatory Pre-Proposal Conference A Pre-Proposal Conference is scheduled for the Oregon Department of Veterans’ Affairs Auditorium located at 700 Summer Street NE in Salem, OR 97301, on Friday, September 16, 2005 from 9:00 AM PDT to 12:00 PM PDT. The purpose of the conference is to explain the proposal requirements and to answer any questions Proposers may have. Personal attendance at the Pre-Proposal Conference is mandatory. Prospective Proposers who plan to attend the conference must RSVP via email to the SPC by Tuesday, September 13, 2005. The prospective Proposer’s RSVP must identify by name and contact information each representative who will attend the conference on its behalf. Proposals will not be accepted from Proposers who fail to attend. Regardless of statements made at the conference, Proposers are cautioned that proposal requirements will change only if confirmed by a written addendum to the RFP issued by OEM. III.4 Reservation of Rights DAS reserves all rights regarding this RFP, including, without limitation, the right to: III.4.1 Amend or cancel this RFP without liability, if amendment or cancellation would be in the public interest; III.4.2 Reject any and all Proposals received by reason of this request without liability, if such rejection would be in the public interest. DAS is not responsible for any costs incurred by Proposers while submitting their Proposals, and all Proposers who respond do so solely at their own expense; III.4.3 Waive any minor irregularity, informality, or non-conformance with the provisions or procedures of this RFP, and to seek clarification of each Proposal, if required; III.4.4 Reject any Proposal that fails to substantially comply with all prescribed solicitation procedures and requirements; III.4.5 Negotiate a statement of work and to negotiate separately in any manner necessary to serve the best interest of the public; 11 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 12. III.4.6 Amend any contracts that are a result of this RFP within the scope of services described in this RFP; III.4.7 Engage Contractors by selection or procurement independent of this RFP process and/or any contracts under it; III.4.8 Extend any contracts that are a result of this RFP without an additional solicitation process for the period(s), if any, described in this RFP; III.4.9 Enter into direct negotiations with a Proposer to negotiate the statement of work within the scope of work described in this RFP, in the event there is only one response to this RFP and that response is judged a qualified respondent. In the event that the sole respondent is not judged a qualified respondent, DAS reserves the right to solicit other Proposers; III.4.10 Make the determination, in its sole discretion and judgment, and in accordance with the evaluation process and criteria set forth in this RFP, whether a Proposer who receives the highest cost proposal score will be awarded a contract under this RFP. Although price is a consideration when engaging a Proposer, the intent is to provide DAS with a Proposer who has a given level of specialized skill, knowledge and resources. Qualifications, performance history, expertise, knowledge and the ability to exercise sound professional judgment are primary considerations in the selection process. Due to the highly technical nature of some of these tasks, the Proposer with the lowest price or rate will not necessarily be awarded the contract. III.5 Solicitation Addenda The terms of this RFP shall not be waived, altered, modified, supplemented or amended in any manner whatsoever except by written addendum issued by DAS. If addendums are necessary to expand or alter the statement of work, or otherwise change the terms and conditions of this RFP, then DAS will issue the addendum in the same manner that it advertised the original RFP. III.6 Data Confidentiality III.6.1 As used in this context, "Data" means the terms and conditions of any contract(s) resulting from this RFP and all information, whether written or verbal, including tracings, drawings, plans, models, photographs, schedules, estimates, studies, investigations, surveys, audits, specifications, analyses, samples, reports, designees, calculations, memos of telephone conversations, internal memos, meeting minutes, data, field 12 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 13. notes, work product, proposals, and any other similar documents or information prepared by or obtained from the State by the contractor in the performance of this contract. III.6.2 The parties agree that all Data, including originals and reproductions, prepared by, obtained by, or transmitted by the State to the contractor in connection with the contractor’s performance of this contract is confidential and proprietary information of the State. III.6.3 The Proposer shall not divulge Data to any third party without the prior written consent of the State. The Proposer shall not use the Data for any purpose except to perform the Services required under this contract. These prohibitions shall not apply to Data that: III.6.3.1 Was known to Proposer prior to its performance under this contract unless such Data was acquired in connection with work performed for the State; III.6.3.2 Is acquired by the contractor in its performance under this contract that is disclosed to the Proposer by a third party or from a non-State information source, who to the best of the contractor’s knowledge and belief, has the legal right to make such disclosure and the contractor is not required to hold such Data in confidence; or III.6.3.3 I required to be disclosed by virtue of law, regulation, or court order to which the Proposer is subject. III.6.3.4 In the event the Proposer is required or requested to disclose Data to a third party, the Proposer shall first notify the State so that the State can be given an opportunity to first take such action that the State may deem appropriate to protect such Data. III.6.4 Upon request of the State, either before or after completion of the services, the Proposer shall promptly deliver all Data to the State. Proposer may retain a copy of any final report for its records that shall be subject to the confidentiality requirements of the contract that results from this RFP process. III.6.5 The Proposer assumes all liability for maintaining the confidentiality of the Data in its possession and agrees to compensate the State if the Proposer, its employees, agents or subcontractors violate any of the provisions of this section. Solely for the purposes of seeking injunctive relief, it is agreed that a breach of this Section shall be deemed to cause irreparable harm that justifies injunctive relief in court. 13 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 14. III.6.6 The obligations of Proposer under this section shall survive the termination of this contract. III.7 Self Dealings Proposer shall not be eligible to provide equipment or services, either directly or indirectly, for any equipment purchased under the contracts for construction that result from this RFP process. The Proposer shall also ensure that no financial relationship exists, either directly or indirectly, between the Proposer and the equipment provider(s) for the microwave system contract, for the trunked radio contract, and/or for the buildings/towers contracts that are entered into as a result of the Proposer’s request for proposal. III.8 Modification or Withdrawal of a Proposal III.8.1 A Proposal may be not modified, withdrawn or canceled by a Proposer for ninety (90) days following the required submittal date, or for such longer period of time as the State may direct in writing, and each Proposer so agrees in submitting the Proposal. III.8.2 Proposals may be withdrawn, altered, or resubmitted at any time prior to the required submittal date. III.8.3. Notice of pre-proposal withdrawal shall be in writing over the signature of the Proposer or may be by telegram, telex, or fax. If by telegram, telex, or fax, written confirmation over the signature of Proposer shall have been mailed and postmarked on or before the submittal date. III.8.4. Withdrawn Proposals may be resubmitted up to the required submittal date and time, provided that they are then fully in conformance with these general terms and conditions. III.9 Proposer’s Responsibilities III.9.1 The Proposer shall assign only competent personnel to the project. In the event that the State, in its sole discretion, desires removal of any person or persons from the project for wrongful or incompetent acts, the State will notify the Proposer in writing. Upon receiving such notification, the Proposer shall immediately remove the person or persons listed in the notification, and take the necessary action to replace or reassign tasks in a manner that does not negatively impact the project or the project schedule. 14 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 15. III.9.2 In the event that the Proposer wants to add or replace personnel to the project, the Proposer shall submit relevant data concerning the personnel to the State. The State, in its sole discretion, shall have the option of accepting or rejecting personnel to work on this project. III.9.4 The Proposer contracted under this RFP shall not be eligible to bid or provide equipment or services, either directly or indirectly, for any equipment purchased under the trunked radio contract that the Proposer is responsible for developing. III.9.5 The Proposer shall ensure that no financial relationship exists, either directly or indirectly, between the Proposer and the vendor(s) for the elements of systems within this contract. IV.1 Minimum Proposal Requirements IV.1.1 At a minimum, responses to the RFP shall include: IV.1.1.1 One (1) original signed hard copy of your Proposal with pricing information removed. This hard copy must be signed, in ink, by the Proposer’s authorized representative. The hard copy must be submitted in sealed package(s) or envelope(s) clearly marked with the RFP number. IV.1.1.2 One (1) cover letter summarizing the Proposer’s interest in the RFP, signed by the Proposer’s authorized representative in ink. IV.1.1.3 One (1) original hard copy of the pricing information, IN A SEPARATELY SEALED ENVELOPE CLEARLY MARKED “Cost Proposal to Request for Proposals #102-7013-5.” IV.1.1.4 Five (5) CDROM’s, of your Proposal EXCLUDING PRICING INFORMATION in Word, WordPerfect, or similar document format. IV.1.1.5 Cover Letter Contents. The cover letter shall include the following statements: IV. A Statement that no attempt has been made or will be made by the Proposer to induce any other person or firm to submit or not submit a Proposal; IV. A statement that any submitted response and costs shall remain valid for a minimum of ninety (90) days after the Proposal due date or until a Contract is executed, whichever comes first; IV. A statement that Proposer agrees to be bound by all contract terms and conditions stated in this RFP, including those 15 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 16. stated in the sample contract attached to this RFP, as they may be revised by addenda issued before the closing date, or permissibly negotiated as set forth elsewhere in this RFP. IV.1.2 The person signing the RFP shall initial alterations or erasures in ink. IV.1.3 Hardcopy proposals, pricing information, and CDROM’s must be received concurrently by the deadline set forth in the schedule of events and date time-stamped by SPO, at the address on the cover of this RFP. Soft copies submitted by e-mail as well as oral, telegraphic, telephone or facsimile proposals will not qualify to meet the deadline as only hard, original copies, in quantities specified, printed in ink can satisfy the deadline. V. Mandatories V.1 Proposer shall submit the following: V.1.1 The Proposer shall provide a brief description of its organization, including history. In addition, the Proposer shall submit a copy of its most recent audited, or reviewed, financial statements with the name, address, and telephone number of a contact in the company’s financing or banking organization. V.1.1.1 If the Proposer is not a publicly held corporation, it may comply with this requirement by describing the proposing organization, including size, longevity, client base, areas of specialization and expertise, and any other pertinent information in such a manner that the proposal evaluation team may reasonably formulate an opinion about the stability and financial strength of the organization. Proposer shall also provide a banking reference or credit rating and name the rating service. V.1.2 Disclose any and all judgments, pending or expected litigation, or other real or potential financial reversals that might materially affect the viability or stability of the proposing organization, or warrant that no such condition is known to exist. If the Proposer is a national firm, it shall disclose the above information for its region and all material judgments and pending or expected litigation on a nationwide basis. V.1.3 If the Proposer has had a contract terminated for default during the past five (5) years, all such incidents shall be described. Termination for default is defined as a notice to stop performance due to the Proposer’s nonperformance or poor performance, and the issue was either (a) not litigated or (b) litigated and such litigation determined the Proposer to be in default. 16 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 17. V.1.3.1 Submit full details of all terminations for default experienced by the Proposer during the past five (5) years, including the other party’s name, address, and telephone number. Present the Proposer’s position on the matter. The State will evaluate the facts and may, at its sole discretion, reject the Proposer’s proposal if the facts discovered indicate that completion of a contract resulting from this RFP may be jeopardized by selection of the Proposer, i.e., a determination that the Proposer is not responsible within the meaning of ORS 279B.110 and OAR 125-247-0500. V.1.3.2 Moreover, Proposer shall disclose material contractual disputes based upon its alleged nonperformance or poor performance that did not result in termination for default. Proposer shall submit full details of all such incidents experienced by the Proposer during the past five (5) years, including the other party’s name, mailing and email addresses, and telephone number. Proposer shall also present its position on the matter(s). The State will evaluate the facts and may, at its sole discretion, reject the Proposer’s Proposal if the facts discovered indicate that completion of a contract resulting from this RFP may be jeopardized by selection of the Proposer, i.e., a determination that the Proposer is not responsible within the meaning of ORS 279B.110 and OAR 125-247-0500. V.1.3.3 If no such terminations for default or contract performance disputes have occurred, so indicate. V.1.4 Description of management experience with similar engagements for organizations of similar size and scope. Proposer shall submit examples of product generated in previous engagements of a similar size and scope. V.1.5 Resumes for key staff resources that will be assigned to this project. V.1.6 Five (5) References to include the following information: V.1.6.1 Client Name. V.1.6.2 Objectives and/or deliverables. V.1.6.3 Start and end dates. V.1.6.4 Approximate number of Proposer staff hours expended. V.1.6.5 Any additional information that will help the agency understand the scope and complexity of the engagement, such as dollar value of the project. 17 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 18. V.1.6.6 Contact Name V.1.6.7 Contact Telephone Number V.1.6.8 Contact e-mail Address V.1.7 Sample work product(s) your firm has provided that most closely represent the type of deliverables anticipated by State in planned Phase I. V.1.8 Comprehensive list of clients (private and governmental) for which you have provided services at least comparable in scope and complexity to the planned Phase I and optional Phase II services. V.1.9 Description of your firm’s availability to start work immediately, dedicate staff until completion of the project, attend meetings, and complete Phase I prior to 11/01/2006. Indicate whether your firm has other contracts/commitments that may interfere with dedication to the project. V.1.10 Timeline for delivery of Phase I. The earliest delivery/completion is preferred, but must be completed prior to 11/01/2006. VI EVALUATION AND SELECTION CRITERIA The State may select one Proposer who is professionally recognized in the services requested in this RFP and who has demonstrated the ability to perform the required services in an acceptable manner, price notwithstanding. Evaluation will result in a single award to provide all services. There are a total of 550 points available. The Proposal shall be evaluated according to the following criteria: VI.1 Company Profile (75 pts.) VI.1.1 Company longevity VI.1.2 Company financial stability VI.1.3 Previous similar projects completed VI.1.4 Breadth of digital microwave and standards based digital trunked radio technology experience. 18 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 19. Include specific experience in conducting communications design and engineering projects of similar size and scope, involving government and/or private sector entities, and Proposer’s financial capacity and experience. Specifically address experience in conducting design and engineering studies with governmental entities and specific experience in conducting communication systems design and engineering management involving private and government entities. Proposers should demonstrate basic knowledge of governmental public safety communications systems and the legal constraints that apply. VI.2 Client Reference List (50 pts.) VI.2.1 Similarity to State project VI.2.2 Quality of project performance and timely completion of project VI.2.3 Delivery of project within its originally approved budget VI.2.4 Results consistent with clients’ stated requirements. A member of the evaluation committee, or other designated individual, will make three (3) attempts to contact the specified individual within a one (1) week period. No additional attempts will be made and failure to reach the designated contact will result in a zero point allocation to Proposer on the evaluation factors. Points for all five references will be totaled and divided by five (5) to get an average score for all references. VI.3 Staffing and Facilities (75 pts.) VI.3.1 Proposed staffing for this project. The proposed key personnel's specific experience on projects of similar nature, size, complexity and scope as the project described in this RFP; length of their employment with your firm, their planned responsibilities on this project, and their primary office location; and time commitments of personnel assigned for this project. List all key employees and subcontractors, their experience and qualifications, and the portions of the project they will work on. Also list the location of Oregon facilities, or proposed facilities, and location of backup facilities. VI.3.2 Backup staffing VI.3.3 Proposed Oregon facilities 19 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 20. VI.3.4 Backup company facilities VI.4 Project Approach (175 pts.) VI.4.1 Microwave system – describe the specific methodologies used in the system design and engineering of the microwave portion of the system. VI.4.2 Radio system – describe the specific methodologies used in the system design and engineering of the radio portion of the system. VI.4.2 Physical Plant - describe the specific methodologies used in the system design and engineering of the facilities portion of the system. VI.5 Project schedule (75 pts.) VI.5.1 Provide a proposed project work plan and schedule of deliverables. VI.6 Cost (100 pts.) VI.6.1 Not to Exceed (NTE) cost for Phase I. This cost proposal shall include all costs. The State will not reimburse separately for any travel or support costs. The Proposer’s cost proposal shall include a breakdown of anticipated travel and support costs. These costs shall be included in the NTE cost for Phase I. The Proposer submitting the lowest proposed cost will receive the maximum available points related to cost. The final price score for each Proposer submitting a higher proposed cost will be a portion of the total amount of points designated for the NTE indicated in this Section V.6.1 according to the following formula: (L/X)*Y = A, where: X = Proposed NTE being scored L = Lowest proposed NTE scored Y = Maximum possible points (100) A = Awarded points EXAMPLE: The lowest proposed NTE is $100,000.00 and the next lowest proposed NTE is $150,000.00. The maximum possible points (100) are awarded to the lowest proposed NTE. Calculating the equation of ($100,000 / $150,000 = .6666666) * 100 = 20 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 21. 66.6666 results in the award of 66.7 Pricing/Cost points to the higher proposed NTE. VI.6.2 A proposed deliverable payment schedule that maps to the proposed project work plan and schedule. It is acceptable to structure the deliverable payment to reflect a monthly amount for a group of deliverables, as opposed to a price per deliverable. VI.6.3 The State intends to negotiate a mutually agreeable monthly retainage that would be paid upon final acceptance of the Phase I deliverables. VI.7 Sufficient supporting documentation must be provided to assist the State in evaluating each response. Unsupported statements (e.g. "Will Comply") are unacceptable and the Proposer may be found non- responsive and their Proposal rejected. "Understood" is an acceptable response to paragraphs that provide information only. VII PROPOSAL FORMAT VII.1 Certifications The Proposal shall include the completed certifications sheets, if any, attached to this RFP. VII.2 Statement of Proposer's Qualifications The statement of Proposer's qualifications shall include at least the information called for in this RFP and any additional pertinent information the Proposer may view necessary to support its qualifications. VII.3 Project Personnel The Proposal shall state the name(s) and phone numbers of proposed project personnel along with a copy of appropriate resume(s) and the percent of time to be spent on each task by such person. VII.4 Subcontractors The Proposal shall identify all subcontractors that the Proposer shall use in the performance of any services required by this Proposal and specifically identify the services that such subcontractor will provide. With respect to any such subcontractor, the Proposal shall submit the same information for the subcontractor as that required of the Proposer under this Proposal Format. VII.5 Strategy / Project Approach The Proposal shall include a point by point response for accomplishing the project tasks reflected in this RFP, including without limitation those reflected at Attachment A. 21 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 22. VII.6 Capability The Proposal shall include documentation to demonstrate the Proposer's capability to prepare accurate, clear, comprehensive, and unbiased design and engineering specifications for 1) a statewide, digital microwave system, 2) an digital trunked radio system, and 3) communications buildings and towers, and to prepare an implementation plan for moving from current to future systems.. VII.7 Conformance to Requirements The Proposal shall include a statement of agreement to conform to terms and conditions and scope of work. VII.8 Statement of Availability The Proposal shall include a statement of availability and a projected timeline for the Proposer to perform the project tasks listed under Sections C of scope of work. VII.9 Disclosure Statement The Proposer shall specifically identify any civil or criminal proceeding or other action or adverse findings against the Proposer or any of its subcontractors for violations of any regulations as identified in this RFP. VIII. Process VIII.1 Proposal submissions in response to this RFP must be in the form of a Proposal package containing the Proposal and all required supporting information and documents, and must be addressed to the SPC and clearly referenced as “Proposal to Request for Proposals #102-7013-5.” Proposals must address all submission requirements set forth in this RFP, and must describe how the services will be provided. Proposals which merely offer to provide services as stated in this RFP will be considered non-responsive to this RFP and will not be considered further. Proposals will be evaluated on criteria set forth in this RFP and responsiveness to the purpose and specifications of this RFP. Only those Proposals that include complete information, as required by this RFP will be considered for evaluation. VIII.2 The cost Proposal in response to this RFP shall be separate from the technical Proposal and must be addressed to the SPC as shown in Section I.1 herein and clearly referenced as “Cost Proposal to Request for Proposals #102-7013-5.” VIII.3 Trade Secrets 22 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 23. Any information Offeror submits in response to the RFP that Offeror considers a trade secret under ORS 192.501(2) or confidential proprietary information, and that Offeror wishes to protect from public disclosure, must be identified with particularity and clearly labeled with the following: "This information constitutes a trade secret under ORS 192.501(2) or confidential proprietary information, and is not to be disclosed except in accordance with the Oregon Public Records Law, ORS Chapter 192." Offerors are cautioned that price information submitted in response to an RFP is generally not considered a trade secret under the Oregon Public Records Law. Further, information submitted by Offeror that is already in the public domain is not protected. The State shall not be liable for disclosure or release of any information when authorized or required by law or court order to do so. The State shall also be immune from liability for disclosure or release of information under the circumstances set out in ORS 646.473(3). VIII.4 Protests VIII.4.1 The Proposer may submit a written protest or request for change of particular provisions, specifications, or Contract terms and conditions that must be received by the OEM no later than the date specified in the schedule of events. The protest shall state the reasons for the protest and any proposed changes to the RFP provisions, specifications or contract terms and conditions. Protests or requests for change must be submitted in writing in an envelope marked “Protest of RFP Requirements and Terms and Conditions” and must be delivered via U.S. Mail or courier or hand-delivered to the address set forth in Section I.1. Late, faxed or electronically transmitted protests will not be accepted. VIII.4.2 Contract Protest and Negotiations In general, the negotiations of this contract will consist of Proposers’ protest of the sample contract provisions followed by negotiation of Phase I Contract terms and conditions identified as negotiable. Following the Protest process, including negotiation of payment provisions, if the successful Proposer is also selected to perform Phase II work, the negotiations will consist of negotiation of the Phase II statement of work, together with payment provisions and contract terms and conditions specifically applicable to the Phase II work. The sample contract (Attachment B) contains the terms and conditions that will govern this contract between OEM and the successful Proposer. A Proposer who believes any of the terms and conditions contained in the State's sample contract are unnecessarily restrictive or limit competition, or a Proposer who would like to request that specific terms and conditions contained in the sample contract be considered for negotiation, shall submit a written request for negotiation to the 23 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 24. SPC identified. The request shall identify the specific provision that Proposer would like to negotiate, shall include an explanation of why the Proposer believes the provision should be a negotiable provision, and the suggested revised language. Requests which are not submitted in this format may not be considered. Requests which state that the entire sample contract be negotiated will not be considered. The OEM will also consider for negotiation, contract provisions specifically related to the performance of Phase II statement of work at the time of contracting with Proposer to initiate Phase II work. THIS IS THE PROPOSER'S ONLY OPPORTUNITY TO PROTEST THE RFP PROVISIONS AND TERMS AND CONDITIONS CONTAINED IN THE SAMPLE CONTRACT AND TO REQUEST THE NEGOTIATION OF PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THE SAMPLE CONTRACT. FOLLOWING THE SOLICITATION PROTEST PERIOD, ANY SUBMITTED PROPOSAL THAT TAKES EXCEPTION TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE SAMPLE CONTRACT (AS CHANGED BY ADDENDUM) OR REQUIRES NEGOTIATION OF ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS SHALL BE DEEMED NON-RESPONSIVE AND THE PROPOSAL SHALL BE REJECTED. At the conclusion of this protest period, no further protests of the terms and conditions contained in the sample contract or requests for additional language designated as “Negotiable Item” will be considered except as may be specifically related to the implementation of Phase II work. IX. Evaluation Process. Pursuant to OAR 125-247-0261 (1) through (4) and (6), DAS and OEM may acquire the desired services through the use of a multistep competitive sealed proposal solicitation process (“Multistep Solicitation”). This Multistep Solicitation will allow DAS and OEM to exercise their discretion in using a Competitive Range evaluation process for discussions, revisions and negotiations, and a Best and Final Offer evaluation process as described below. For all rights reserved under the Multistep Solicitation rule, DAS and OEM will exercise one, some or all such rights, if any, in the sole exercise of their discretion. For the convenience of the Proposers, the relevant excerpts from OAR 125-247-0261 are attached to the RFP at Attachment C. (Please note that any inconsistency between the text of this attachment and the text of the official rule filing with the Office of the Secretary of State for the State of Oregon shall be resolved in favor of the text in the official rule filing. Proposers may access the official rule filing online at: 24 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 25. IX.1 All proposals will be reviewed and evaluated by an Evaluation Committee. “Best Value” concepts will be used for the evaluation and award. “Best Value,” means the overall combination of quality, price, and various elements of required services that in total are optimal relative to a public body’s needs. The evaluation committee will recommend to OEM the proposal(s) that most closely fit the evaluation goals and criteria set forth in this RFP. IX.2 The RFP’s will be evaluated according to how the vendors proposal solution fits with the goals of the project and evaluation criteria described in this RFP. IX.3 The RFP’s will be evaluated by the members of the evaluation committee. Each proposal will be independently and separately scored by each member of the evaluation committee. They will reconvene to discuss the scores and rescore where appropriate. A final score, comprised of an average of all scores, will be tabulated for each Proposer. At that point, OEM reserves the right to: IX.3.1 Issue a notice of intent to award to the highest ranked apparent successful Proposer. Proposer who claims to have been adversely affected or aggrieved by the selection of a competing Proposer shall have seven (7) calendar days after receiving the notice of intent to award to deliver, via U.S. Mail or courier, or by hand-delivery a written, signed protest to the SPC. To be adversely affected or aggrieved, a Proposer must demonstrate that all higher ranked Proposals were ineligible for selection. OEM shall not consider a protest submitted after the deadline. Protests shall be resolved according to Oregon Administrative Rules. Late, faxed or electronically transmitted protests will not be accepted.; OR IX.3.2 Determine a competitive range, enter into discussions and receive best and final offers. IX.3.2.1 Step One - Determining the Competitive Range The evaluation committee will establish a competitive range after evaluating all responsive Proposals in accordance with the criteria set forth in this RFP. The competitive range will be the 3 highest ranked Proposals. However, the evaluation committee may increase the number of Proposers in the competitive range if there is a natural break in the scores of the Proposers indicating that a number of Proposers greater than the initial competitive range are 25 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 26. closely competitive, or have a reasonable chance of being determined the most advantageous Proposer. But, the evaluation committee may decrease the number of Proposers in the initial competitive range only if the excluded Proposers have no reasonable chance to be the most advantageous Proposer. IX.3.2.2 Step Two – Protesting Competitive Range An adversely affected or aggrieved Proposer may submit a written protest of SPO's decision to exclude the Proposer from the competitive range per OAR 125-247-0720. If you are an aggrieved Proposer, Proposer must submit a written protest within five (5) business days after issuance of the notice of the competitive range to the SPC. SPO will not consider a protest of exclusion from the competitive range submitted after 5:00 PM PT on the date specified for protests in the notice of competitive range. SPO will consider all protests received, if any, and: IX. Reject any and all protests and proceed with final evaluation and possible discussions with those Proposers in the competitive range; OR IX. Sustain a meritorious protest and issue a new notice of competitive range, and allow any new adversely effected Proposers the opportunity to protest; OR IX. Reject all Proposals and cancel the procurement. IX.3.2.3 Step Three – Intent to Award or Discuss/Negotiate After determination of the competitive range and after the protest period provided in Section IX.3.2.2 expires, OEM may: IX. Provide all Proposers with a notice of intent to award to the highest-ranked Proposer in the competitive range. Proposer who claims to have been adversely affected or aggrieved by the selection of a competing Proposer shall have seven (7) calendar days after receiving the notice of intent to award to deliver, via U.S. Mail or courier, or by hand-delivery a written, signed protest to the SPC. To be adversely affected or aggrieved, a Proposer must demonstrate that all higher ranked Proposals were ineligible for selection. OEM shall not consider a protest submitted after the deadline. Protests shall be resolved according to Oregon Administrative Rules. Late, faxed or electronically transmitted protests will not be accepted; OR 26 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 27. IX. Engage in discussions with Proposers in the competitive range. SPO will notify all Proposers in the competitive range that discussions will take place. IX.3.2.4 Step Four - Discussions with Proposers in Competitive Range IX. If discussions are held, they will be conducted in person in Salem, Oregon. OEM will treat all Proposers in the competitive range to the extent feasible equally and fairly so that the process does not provide a competitive advantage to any Proposer. The content of the discussions may include, but may not be limited to: IX. Clarifications of materials provided in the Proposer's original Proposal that will assist OEM in making a more precise evaluation of Proposer's Proposal; IX. Proposers alternatives not addressed in the RFP or Proposer's initial Proposal. IX. OEM may also conduct discussions on any other aspects of Proposer's Proposal that are related to the scoring criteria, and revision of which may effect evaluation of the Proposal. IX. Termination Of Discussions: OEM may terminate discussions with a Proposer in the competitive range at any time. OEM may also: (i) continue discussions with a particular Proposer; or (ii) t erminate discussions with a particular Proposer and continue discussions with other Proposers in the competitive range; or (iii) conclude discussions with all remaining Proposers in the competitive range. However, OEM will offer any eligible Proposer the same opportunity to discuss their Proposal with OEM before OEM notifies eligible Proposer of the date and time that best and final Proposals will be due. IX.3.2.5 Step Five - Submission of Revised Proposals IX. OEM will notify all Proposers in the competitive range of the conclusion of discussions, and may direct them to submit revised Proposals by a time and date established in the notice, but which shall be no earlier than five business days from the date of the Notice. If a revised Proposal is submitted, it shall incorporate, to the extent Proposer desires, the substance of its discussions with OEM. OEM will not consider revised Proposals 27 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 28. submitted after the date specified in such notice. If this event occurs, OEM will use the original Proposal scoring for completion of the evaluation of the Proposal. IX. Format Of Revised Proposals: Proposers who have chosen not to submit a revised Proposal must, at a minimum, submit a written notice, on company letterhead, signed by an authorized representative of Proposer stating that the Proposer has chosen to stand on their original Proposal. If Proposer is submitting a revised Proposal, the revised Proposal must clearly identify those areas that have been modified, including ALL deletions, additions, or other modifications. Proposers are not to submit an entirely new Proposal unless the entire Proposal is changed and is so noted on the face of the revised Proposal. Revised Proposals shall identify and state the specific mandatory, desirable, or pricing item that has been revised. Proposer shall restate their original response followed by Proposer's revised response. Revised Proposals, including revised Pricing Proposal, must be received and time-stamped by the Department of Administrative Services, State Procurement Office (See Section I.6 for correct address) prior to the date and time identified in the notice to submit best and final offers. Cost of the delivery of the revised Proposal shall be the responsibility of the Proposer. OEM shall not accept revised Proposals that require payment by the State. No oral, e-mailed, telephone or facsimile revised Proposals will be accepted. Revised Proposals and revised pricing Proposals shall be typed or printed in ink, and shall be signed in ink by an authorized representative of the company. The Proposer shall submit one original and nine (9) paper copies and one(1) electronic copy of the revised Proposal and revised pricing Proposal. The revised technical Proposal and the revised pricing Proposal shall be in separate, sealed envelopes. Each envelope shall be correctly identified as "ORIGINAL REVISED TECHNICAL PROPOSAL" and "ORIGINAL REVISED PRICING PROPOSAL". If the Proposer does not provide the required number of copies, the State will charge the Proposer an administrative fee for all copies made in order to meet this requirement. The Proposal will not be evaluated until the administrative fee is paid. 28 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 29. IX.3.2.6 Step Six - Best and Final Offer Evaluation IX. OEM will establish a common date and time by which Proposers will submit their best and final offer. Best and final offers will only be submitted once, unless OEM makes a written determination that it is in OEM’s best interest to conduct additional discussions or changed OEM’s requirements and require another submission of best and final offers. Otherwise, no further discussions between Proposer and OEM nor change of the best and final offers will be allowed prior to award. If Proposers do not submit a notice of withdrawal or another best and final offer, their immediately previous offer will be construed as their best and final offer. IX. Revised Proposals will be evaluated and scored by the evaluation committee. The evaluation and scoring will be based upon the value of the revised Proposal to the stated requirements of this RFP. Each member of the evaluation committee will evaluate each revised Proposal separately. The evaluation points given by each evaluator will be summed and divided by the number of evaluators to compute an average score for each revised Proposal to this point. IX.3.2.7 Step Seven - Final Evaluation IX. At the conclusion of the evaluation and scoring of Proposals, OEM will notify Proposers of the score assigned to each Proposal to this point of the evaluation process. The highest ranked apparent successful Proposer will be issued a notice of intent to award. IX. The scores will be ranked and the highest ranked apparent successful Proposer will be notified via the notice of intent to award. IX. Every Proposer shall be notified of its selection status . A Proposer who claims to have been adversely affected or aggrieved by the selection of a competing Proposer shall have seven (7) calendar days after receiving the notice of intent to award to deliver, via U.S. Mail or courier, or by hand-delivery a written, signed protest to the SPC. To be adversely affected or aggrieved, a Proposer must demonstrate that all higher ranked Proposals were ineligible 29 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 30. for selection. OEM shall not consider a protest submitted after the deadline. Protests shall be resolved according to Oregon Administrative Rules. Late, faxed or electronically transmitted protests will not be accepted. X. Sample Contract and Scope of Amendments Contractor shall enter into a contract with DAS, substantially in the form of Attachment B to this RFP, sample contract, which reflects the contract terms and conditions under which the Services must be provided. The Contract may be amended during its term in accordance with Article XVIII of the Contract. X.1 ANTICIPATED CONTRACT TERM The initial term of the contract is two (2) years or the acceptance of the final deliverables for Phase I, whichever occurs first. DAS will have the option to renew the contract for additional phases, as contemplated by the RFP, up to a total contract term of ten (10) years. The State anticipates the future need to modify the contract for the Phase II consulting and quality assurances services as reflected in the “amendment” provision, Section 19.15 of the Sample Contract. X.2 NEGOTIATIONS Upon conclusion of the evaluation process, DAS may commence any remaining permissible negotiations with the highest ranked Proposer in the competitive range for purposes of establishing the final terms and conditions of the Contract. DAS will only negotiate those terms and conditions identified as negotiable in this Section X.3. At any time during negotiations, DAS may terminate negotiations with the highest ranked Proposer or the Proposer with whom it is currently negotiating, if DAS believes that: (a) the Proposer is not negotiating in good faith; or (b) further negotiations will not result in the parties’ agreement to terms and conditions of a final contract in a timely manner. DAS may then commence negotiations with the next highest scoring Proposer in the competitive range and continue the negotiation process described in this Section X.2 until DAS determines to award the contract, if any. Alternatively, DAS may elect to concurrently engage all competitive range Proposers in permissible negotiations. X.3 The following provisions are negotiable: X.3.1. A statement of work; 30 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 31. X.3.2. Price as it is affected by negotiating a statement of work; X.3.3. The following provisions of the sample contract, Attachment B: X.3.3.1 Section 4, Payment; X.3.3.2 Section 8, Intellectual Property Rights ; X.3.3.3 Section 10.4, Limitation of Liability; X.3.3.4 Section 19.15, Amendments; and X.3.3.5 Any other terms and conditions identified as negotiable in Addenda issued during the solicitation process. DAS will not negotiate any contract provisions other than those identified as negotiable in this Section X.3. DAS will reject Proposals that require DAS’s acceptance of alternate contract provisions that DAS has not identified as negotiable (CERTIFICATION AND SIGNATURE PAGES FOLLOW ON THE NEXT PAGE) 31 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 32. CERTIFICATION AND SIGNATURE PAGES EACH PROPOSER MUST READ AND COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS. FAILURE TO DO SO MAY RESULT IN PROPOSAL REJECTION. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH NON-DISCRIMINATION LAWS By my signature in this RFP, I hereby attest or affirm under penalty of perjury: That I am authorized to act on behalf of Proposer in this matter and, to the best of my knowledge, Proposer has not discriminated against minority, women or emerging small business enterprises in obtaining any required subcontracts, and that Proposer is not in violation of any non-discrimination laws. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH TAX LAWS By my signature in this RFP, I hereby attest or affirm under penalty of perjury: That I am authorized to act on behalf of Proposer in this matter, and that I have authority and knowledge regarding the payment of taxes, and that Proposer is, to the best of my knowledge, not in violation of any Oregon Tax Laws. For purposes of this certification, “Oregon Tax Laws” means those tax laws listed in ORS 305.380(4), namely ORS Chapters 118, 314, 316, 317, 318, 320, 321 and 323 and Sections 10 to 20, Chapter 533, Oregon Laws 1981, as amended by Chapter 16, Oregon Laws 1982 (first special session); the elderly rental assistance program under ORS 310.630 to 310.706; and any local taxes administered by the Oregon Department of Revenue under ORS 305.620 RESPONSIBILITY The State will investigate and evaluate, at any time prior to award and execution of the Contract, if any, the apparent successful Proposer’s responsibility to perform the Contract. Submission of a signed Proposal, as evidenced by the signature in this section of this RFP, shall constitute approval for the State to obtain any information the State deems necessary to conduct the investigation and evaluation. Before awarding a Contract, a contracting Agency must determine that the Proposer submitting the most advantageous Proposal is Responsible. The State must use the standards set forth in ORS 279B.110 and OAR 125-247-0640(1)(c)(F) to determine if a Proposer is Responsible. In the event the contracting Agency determines a Proposer is not Responsible, it must prepare a Written determination of non-Responsibility as required by ORS 279B.110 and must reject the Offer. The State may postpone the award of the Contract after announcement of the apparent successful Proposer in order to complete its investigation and evaluation. 32 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 33. RECYCLED PRODUCTS Contractors shall use recyclable products to the maximum extent economically feasible in the performance of the Contract work set forth in this document. State contracting agencies shall use, or require persons with whom the contracting agency contracts to use in the performance of the contract work, to the maximum extent economically feasible, recycled paper and recycled PETE products as well as other recycled plastic resin products. (ORS 279B.270 (1) (e)). “Recycled paper” means a paper product with not less than fifty percent of its fiber weight consisting of secondary waste materials; or twenty-five percent of its fiber weight consisting of post-consumer waste. (ORS 279A.010 (1) (ee)). ORS 279A.010 (1) (gg) states: "'Recycled product' means all materials, goods and supplies, not less than 50 percent of the total weight of which consists of secondary and post-consumer waste with not less than 10 percent of total weight consisting of post- consumer waste. 'Recycled product' also includes any product that could have been disposed of as a solid waste, having completed its life cycle as a consumer item, but otherwise is refurbished for reuse without substantial alteration of the product's form." ORS 279A.010 (1) (s) states: "'Post-consumer waste' means a finished material which would normally be disposed of as solid waste, having completed its life cycle as a consumer item. 'Post-consumer waste' does not include manufacturing waste." ORS 279A.010 (1) (hh) states: "'Secondary waste materials' means fragments of products or finished products of a manufacturing process which has converted a virgin resource into a commodity of real economic value, and includes post-consumer waste, but does not include excess virgin resources of the manufacturing process. For paper, 'secondary waste materials' does not include fibrous waste generated during the manufacturing process such as fibers recovered from waste water or trimmings of paper machine rolls, mill broke, wood slabs, chips, sawdust, or other wood residue from a manufacturing process." ORS 279A.010 (1) (ff) states: "'Recycled PETE product' means a product containing post-consumer polyethylene terephthalate material." I, the undersigned duly authorized representative of the Proposer (Proposer), hereby certify that the products, if any, offered in this bid/proposal contain the following minimum percentages: a) ____ % (recycled product as defined in ORS 279A.010 (1)(gg) b) ____ % (post-consumer waste as defined in ORS 279A.010 (1)(s) c) ____ % (secondary waste materials as defined in ORS 279A.010 (1)(hh) d) ____ % (recycled PETE product as defined in ORS 279A.010 (1)(ff) 33 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 34. It is the Proposer's responsibility to provide additional signed copies of the Certification of Compliance for each item which contains a different percentage of recycled materials than listed above. SIGNATURES SIGNATURE OF PROPOSER’S DULY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE THIS PROPOSAL MUST BE SIGNED IN INK BY AN AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PROPOSER; ANY ALTERNATIONS OR ERASURES TO THE PROPOSAL MUST BE INITIALED IN INK BY THE UNDERSIGNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE. The undersigned acknowledges, attests and certifies individually and on behalf of the Proposer that: a) He/she is a duly authorized representative of the Proposer, has been authorized by Proposer to make all representations, attestations, and certifications contained in this Proposal and all addenda, if any, issued, and to execute this Proposal on behalf of Proposer; b) Proposer, acting through its authorized representatives, has read and understands all RFP instructions, specifications, and terms and conditions and all provisions contained in this Proposal (including all listed attachments and addenda, if any, issued); c) Proposer certifies that this Proposal has been arrived at independently and has been submitted without any collusion designed to limit independent bidding or competition. d) Proposer is bound by and will comply with all requirements, specifications, and terms and conditions contained in the RFP and Proposal (including all listed attachments and addenda, if any, issued); e) Proposer will provide the system and furnish the designated Services in accordance with specifications and requirements, and will comply in all respects with the terms of the resulting Contract upon award. (Signatures begin on next page) 34 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 35. PROPOSER WILL PROVIDE FEDERAL EMPLOYEE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (FEIN) OR SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER (SSN) WITH PROPOSAL SUBMISSION. Authorized Signature and Date Typed or Printed Name and Title of Signatory FEIN ID# or SSN# (required) ________________________________________ Typed or Printed Name of Contact Person Telephone Number: Fax Number: E-mail Address: AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE(S) FOR THE STATE OF OREGON The State of Oregon hereby awards a contract to the above Proposer for the services designated in this RFP. Authorized Signature and Date Typed or Printed Name and Title of Signatory Term of Contract: ______________________________________ Contract Number: _______________________________________ Additional Signature and Date (if required) Typed or Printed Name and Title of Signatory 35 of 36 current-environment662.doc
  • 36. Additional Signature and Date (if required) Typed or Printed Name and Title of Signatory 36 of 36 current-environment662.doc