Print 2010 Draft RFP Questions and Answers

Q&A posting for answers to questions received by June 6, 2006

Q&A posting for answers to questions received between June 7-16, 2006

Q&A posting for answers to questions received between June 17-July 28, 2006

Q&A posting for answers to questions received after July 28, 2006

The GPO and Census Bureau sincerely appreciates your attention to the Print 2010 Draft RFP and looks forward to receiving your proposal responses this fall.

Print 2010 GPO/Census Vendor Conference - June 6, 2006

Census and GPO met with vendors at GPO on June 6 to discuss the draft Print 2010 RFP and have an interactive question and answer session. These Q&A are being posted on the GPO web site for this solicitation for the benefit of all interested parties.

Questions and Answers

All questions and answers posted here are paraphrased and not a literal transcript of the discussions on June 6. The answers to these questions do not supersede in any way the Print 2010 request for proposal (RFP) to be released by GPO for Census work; they are simply provided as information only to potential offerors. You must refer to the draft RFP for contractual requirements.

Q. Current industry technology for inkjet systems such as Kodak, Scitex, etc. use water resistant inks when maintaining the integrity of the bar code through the mailstream is required. These inks pass the critical "water test" used by the United States Postal Service and are used in a variety of USPS forms such as Express and Certified Mail. Will Census accept water resistant inks approved by the USPS?
A. The draft RFP contains requirements for variable imaging to be "black, permanent (water resistant) medium, and shall not 'run,' 'smear,' or 'bleed' when exposed to moisture (mist, rain, snow or other adverse conditions)," but does not reference a specific postal test. The Government will review these requirement(s) to see if any test or standard can add clarity.

Q. Is it a possibility to change the fold sequence and final dimension of the 25½" x 11" form so that it will finish as 11" x 5½" instead of 9" x 5½"? This will also change the OE and BRE specification accordingly. The effects of this change will be to eliminate an off-line 'cross folding' step, improve throughput, reduce waste and damage replacement, improve overall control and reduce security risk, and it will still fall within current First Class automated postal handling specs.
A. No. The Census Bureau is not only concerned about response from each household, but response to each question and comparison to previous surveys and censuses. With the very dense content on a Census form, it is often difficult to find the balance that allows the public to consistently follow the question flow. Many parallel fold concepts were tested in preparation for the 2000 Census without success. The success of the tri-fold/cross-fold design in the 2000 Census works against building a case for an alternative design this late in the Census 2010 planning process.

Q. Is the intent to award one contract for all the work to one vendor?
A. Award to a single Offeror may have some advantages to the Government. However, we desire to obtain best value for the stated requirements, and intend to award to as many vendors as needed to provide us with best value.

Q. Will there be an opportunity to ask additional questions/get clarifications once the initial responses are posted by July 14?
A. The Government could extend the due date if we feel the need, although we would expect to extend no more than two weeks.

After discussion, we have decided to reopen the window for additional vendor questions from July 14-28. Answers to those questions will be posted not later than August 4.

Q. The draft RFP refers to using the PostNet bar code, Planet Code, or the proposed 4-State Bar Code (4CB). What will the goals of the use of these bar codes be? Postal automation discounts? Individual mail piece tracking? Address change service (ACS)? Forwarding? Other?
A. Yes, the Government plans to use bar codes to facilitate postal automation discounts. Yes, the Government plans to use bar codes to facilitate individual piece tracking. The Government has no plans to use ACS. The Government does not want to use forwarding.

Postal tracking is a primary goal, driven by the replacement mailing (RM). That is, the Census needs to be able to identify who should get a replacement package, and tracking incoming responses will help us to eliminate unnecessary replacement mailings. Other opportunities also exist for use of this bar code, such as to identify UAAs (undeliverable as addressed). Also, in the event one data capture center is closed down, Census has a supplemental source of check-in data.

Q. The 4-State Bar Code is proposed at this time. The specification is in question, and the pricing/services offered are undefined (pricing is subject to the 2006-1 rate case.) Will the use depend on how the technology and services evolve?
A. Pricing for the Confirm Service using 4CB is currently expected to follow that of the Confirm Service using Planet Codes. The Government expects to use 4CB bar codes with the Platinum Service.

[A vendor noted that at a recent forum this pricing came into question.]

However, Census met with the USPS on 6/7/06 and understands that there is a proposal to change the rate structure for the Confirm Service. If approved, this would occur in mid-2007. Instead of the Platinum Service with a heavy subscription fee, there would be a reduced subscription fee, but the subscriber would have to purchase blocks of scans. If this rate structure changes, the Government will need to re-evaluate the best way to obtain this service.

The Government will re-evaluate whether we should have Offerors include this in their fixed price pricing.

In regards to the specification for printing the 4CB bar code, note that this specification is NOT yet final. Offerors will need to continue to stay abreast of this standard as with any other USPS standard, and price to what is known at the time of the proposal.

Q. Question about the document integrity (DI) bar code: There has been reference to putting it on both sides of the 25½” x 11” page. With that in mind it seems that it is variable along with the recipient’s address. How do you pre-construct or pre-package 45 or 50 million ready-to mail pieces and address them through the window?
A. The DI bar code must be on both sides of the 25” form, and must be unique on every form. There is NO requirement to link the DI bar code to the address bar code. The placement of the DI bar codes is not defined at this time. We expect you to note any limitations with your solution to DI bar code placement in your proposal.

Q. Will the DI bar code be produced in multiple locations on the [bilingual] booklet format as well?
A. Yes. The Government requires unique identifiers on BOTH pages of one side of each two page printers spread. For example, in a 12-page booklet, you will need a DI bar code on either pages 1 AND 12, OR pages 2 AND 11, for a total of six (6) unique identifiers.

Q. Will there be bilingual booklets for the RM?
A. No, the RM will be an English only form with all of the same requirements as the mail out/mail back English short form.

Q. Are there physical samples we can look at?
A. There are NO final forms yet. Acrobat .pdf samples of forms from recent tests will be provided on the web site as examples only.

Q. Will there be some sort of construction that identifies the location of the variable print, whether it’s the large questionnaire or the booklet format, so we can see what the actual placement will be? Can you also identify the different placements for the DI bar codes?
A. No, we are not supplying construction examples. Please see Section C.4.8.1.7 in the Draft RFP for variable imaging requirements. Please note: the bar codes that do appear in any .pdf samples on the web site are static bar codes that are part of the .pdf file. They identify the form type and page.

Q. Of the 18 items to be printed, can you bid on just some of these items?
A. You must submit a proposal for all requirements.

Q. Will there be set aside opportunities for small businesses for 2010 printing?
A. GPO encourages all business, from small to large to bid. Historically it awards the majority of contracts to small businesses in any given year, so there are no small business requirements on the Print 2010 contract, or other Census printing contracts, specifically.

Q. The RFP mentions that the contractor would need to secure and guarantee print facilities, staffing and so on. Do you expect that the facility would have to be dedicated solely to this project?
A. No, the Government is not requiring dedicated facilities.

Q. In terms of the award, is there a possibility that you may decide to award to only one company? Is there a possibility that you may decide to split the award between multiple companies? Is there a possibility that you may award “segments” of the work for specific programs or pieces of the work to different companies?
A. Yes to all three questions, but it is not desirable to award segments to different companies. Note that the Government intends to add the following clause to the solicitation: “All proposals submitted as a result of this solicitation shall price all requirements by Contract Line Item Number (CLIN), as indicated in Section B and as described in Section L. Offeror proposals that do not comply with this clause will be rejected as Not Acceptable.”

Q. Is this a requirements type contract?
A. No, this is an IDIQ type contract.

Q. Can you please elaborate on what you mean by the Technical Collaboration and Consulting Services, which is defined as fixed price?
A. This is an opportunity for the Government to collaborate with you to refine requirements, during meetings with GPO, Census, USPS and the data capture contractor. The Government has provided some assumptions for pricing this CLIN in Section B. For the contract, these hours can be adjusted by negotiation.

Q. What kind of travel do you expect?
A. Mostly travel to come to the Washington, D.C. area for the meetings/collaboration just mentioned. If the travel requirement is not clear in the RFP, please let us know and the Government will attempt to clarify.

Q. Can you address what you envision is the collaborative and consultative relationship that would exist; when you talk about traveling and coming to meetings, what do you expect from us?
A. The Government wants YOU to tell us YOUR business rather than us guessing or making assumptions. This is the purpose of the Technical Collaboration work, and is meant to identify problems early.

Q. We could not find a reference to a letter being part of the bilingual booklet; should there be one?
A. No. The current design has the letter as a page within the booklet.

Q. The RM requirement specifies a pre-made package with ink jet through an open window. Is there any other option for printing it?
A. Not at this time. The Government’s extensive research led us to the conclusion that this is the preferred method to accomplish the RM.

Q. For the RM, what if the actual volume is higher or lower than the 40+M specified right now in the requirements? (Follow on) What if the estimate is 5-10M short? Will you ask the contractor to quickly do more? Will you pay for extra to be printed and sit there “just in case” and maybe not get used?
A. We do have business strategies for dealing with the RM, to keep the volume within the expected range. We will work with you to make sure we are within range, talk to you about the numbers, and talk about contingencies and what to do in each situation. We will pay for extra packages that are printed and not mailed if we direct you to print them. If the volume does change, we will make the necessary contractual modifications after coming to agreement with you on methods.

Q. It seems the schedule allows just over a month from RFP release to when proposals are due. Is there enough time after the RFP release to include a Q&A process? Especially if there are substantial changes between now and the final release?
A. The Government feels there is sufficient time in the schedule for the Q&A process. This is part of the reason we started this acquisition process early and released a draft RFP. Right now we don’t expect “substantial” changes. We will also consider republishing certain sections prior to final release, especially if there are changes to B, L, M, or C.

Q. Can we get a list of attendees here today for information or partnering?
A. Yes, just follow the list of attendees link. You can also view all interested parties, their areas of expertise, and whether they are interested in partnering by following the vendor list link.

Q. You stated that forms are not final yet, will they all be final before the RFP release?
A. Definitely not, although right now we don’t expect sizes, colors, and the basic form structure to change.

This posting provides answers to all additional questions on the Print 2010 Draft RFP received between June 7 - 16, 2006.

Q. Are Re-mail addresses coming in one shipment or multiple shipments?
A. Offerors shall construct their proposals based on receiving one shipment of Replacement Mailing (RM) addresses.

Q. How much is trimmed off booklet before scanning?
A. The current booklet is designed to be trimmed at the spine. A 0.4 inch trim area is included on the spine side of each page of the booklet.

Q. Will GPO/Census accept varnish over barcode to make it water resistant?
A. No, the GPO/Census Bureau will not accept varnish over the bar codes.

Q. Can we add a unique control # on the document for QA purposes?
A. Yes, a unique control number can be added to the questionnaires. The Census Bureau must approve the size and placement of the control number during the Technical Collaboration phase.

Q. Is the "DI" # unique sequential number? If not, may we add our own sequential number to the form for control purposes?
A. The document integrity (DI) number consists of an 8-digit unique numeric sequence and two (2) check digits.

Q. How is the 12-page booklet Questionnaire being scanned? As 6 - 9" x 11" sheets or 3 - 18" x 11" sheets?
A. The questionnaire booklet will be scanned as six (6) 9"x 11" sheets.

Q. For the booklet Questionnaire, how are the staples removed? Is the spine chopped off (guillotined) or is a half-moon die cut around the staple area?
A. It will be guillotined.

Q. How is the booklet Questionnaire imaged? Is the "DI" Barcode needed on every page? Is it needed on only one side of every scanned page?
A. Processes for scanning are still under development. The Census Bureau requires unique identifiers on BOTH pages of one side of each two-page printers spread. For example, in a 12-page booklet, you will need a DI bar code on either pages 1 AND 12, OR pages 2 AND 11, for a total of six (6) unique identifiers.

Q. When will the preliminary PDF for artwork be available to view on the web site?
A. Preliminary PDF artwork will not be available before final RFP release. The GPO has provided Acrobat .pdf samples as examples only.

Q. What are the packaging requirements to deliver to the USPS? Are mail trays acceptable?
A. The GPO will modify the RFP, Section D.2, to read as follows: "The Contractor shall sort printed/finished products into mail trays to qualify for Automation, Presorted, and Single-Piece rates according to the USPS DMM standards for First-Class Mail preparation, as specified under "Mailing Packages." Mail tray labels shall be prepared according to USPS DMM requirements in Section M130, M820, and M032.

Q. Will you allow other more economical printing processes as long as they adhere to the same specifications and tolerances given in the RFP?
A. No, printing processes other than those stated in the RFP may add additional risk to other downstream processes.

Q. Page 133 - Is it 15-6 or 15-2 table?
A. It should be 15-2.

Q. Do all the security requirements referenced apply to all Contractor operations and all subcontractors, etc. even where non-imaged pieces are printed or, as referenced in C.3.3.1.1.2, just the Contractor locations where Census Address File or other sensitive data are transferred?
A. The requirement to provide appropriate security applies to all Contractor and all subcontractor operations. The term "security" encompasses three elements: Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability. In terms of Confidentiality, electronic address files are clearly Title 13 and must be protected with stringent electronic security measures as addressed in the RFP. For operations not requiring access to Title 13 information, or exposing Title 13 material, there are no confidentiality requirements. However, the obligation remains to provide physical protection of non-imaged pieces so that contamination, change to files or printed products, or loss/destruction does not occur. Each Offeror shall propose a plan for protecting all aspects of the operation appropriately.

Q. In Section C.4.6, Contractor Testing & Random Copies, please confirm that you wish the contractor to randomly select samples of live work, and in the event of selecting variably imaged samples, you wish the contractor to re-run those records for census mailing purposes.
A. Yes, the Census Bureau wants you to select random samples of live work; and yes, these samples are to be reprinted and mailed.

Q. Section E.5 - Please confirm the effective transfer of ownership to the GPO. At shipping dock of contractor, or at receiving dock of USPS.
A. Transfer of ownership from the contractor to the Government takes place either when materials are loaded on USPS trucks AND all documents used by USPS to verify and accept the mail including GPO's Form 712 (Certificate of Conformance) are completed, or when the materials are delivered to the Local Census Offices or the Census Bureau facilities in Suitland, Maryland and Jeffersonville, Indiana, AND the proper paperwork, such as delivery receipts and/or Bill of Ladings are completed.

Q. B.2 references paragraph G.12. When will G.12 be available?
A. The RFP Paragraph B.2 should be changed to read: "Each Task Order and/or Delivery Order will be issued in accordance with paragraph G.3 [MMAR 52.216-18 Ordering (OCT 1995)] and H.22 [CAR 1352.216-78 Task Orders (March 2000)]."

Q. B.2 states that GPO may award multiple contracts. How should offerors propose a Contract Ceiling Price for B.5.1?
A. The GPO will change the RFP wording as follows: "Contract Target Cost" to "CLIN Target Cost"; "Contract Target Profit" to "CLIN Target Profit"; "Share Ratio" to "CLIN Share Ratio"; and "Contract Ceiling Price" to "CLIN Ceiling Price."

Q. If the Government awards multiple contracts, will it compete individual task orders?
A. No, the GPO will not compete individual task orders.

Q. Can you identify other government contracts awarded on a FPI-F basis?
A. Yes, there are several hybrid contracts that have utilized FPI-F pricing, for example Contract TIRNO-99-D-00001 (Internal Revenue Service) and Contract F41689-97-C00509 (Air Force).

Q. May the Contractor retain a copy for its records of the Quality Control file referenced in C.3.1.4.7?
A. Yes, there is no security reason why the Contractor cannot retain a copy of the quality control files as long as those file contain no restricted access datA.

Q. How should the Contractor price the tests that the Government may or may not run as referenced in C.4.3.3?
A. The GPO will delete from the RFP the 2nd bullet item "The Contractor shall also . . ." in its entirety.

Q. H.9 requires Contractor to indemnify the Government for "all suits and damages of any character whatsoever resulting from injuries or damages sustained by any person, persons or property by virtue of performance of this contract." Does this clause require the Contractor to indemnify the Government for suits or damages resulting from a terrorist attack, the destruction or non-delivery of Census packages after delivery to USPS, failure to protect the confidentiality of Census-provided name and address information? Do damages covered by this clause include consequential damages for the Government? Of third parties? (E.g., some questionnaires are late or printed as the wrong size and therefore cannot be included in the totals, can individuals or states or local governments claim appropriations were lost and [the contractor] be liable for such dollars?)
A. The purpose of this clause is to establish that the Government will not be liable for any "...fault, negligence, wrongful act or wrongful omission of the Contractor, or any Subcontractor, their employees, agents, etc." Specific questions about the possible scope of this clause can best be answered by submitting such questions to your attorney for specific legal advice as to specific situations that may be of specific concern to you.

Q. H.22 sets forth a task order procedure. Do you intend to compete task order awards?
A. No, the GPO does not intend to compete task order awards.

Q.The contract has a 6 1/2 month base period and 4 option periods. If the Contractor makes an investment in supplies or equipment to be used during an option period that is never exercised by the Government, can the Contractor recover the costs incurred? Please assume no termination for convenience.
A. Yes, since the GPO will make an award on the basis of best value (cost and other factors). The Offeror shall identify any investment costs or all total costs proposed in their initial pricing proposal (see Table 15-2, II. Cost Elements, paragraph A) [Note: In accordance with MMAR 31.201-1(a) ["(a) The total cost of a contract is the sum of the direct and indirect costs allocable to the contract, incurred or to be incurred, less any allocable credits, plus any allocable cost."].

Q. K.14 refers to 52.227-14 and -16. Do you intend to include these clauses in section I?
A. No, the GPO does not intend to include these clauses in Section I.

Q. L.2 refers to H.24. Did you mean H.22?
A. Yes, the RFP should say H-22 and this will be corrected.

Q. During the public meeting held June 6 there was a statement made by a man identified as the Government's procurement process consultant. From this statement we understood that the government may make an award of the overall contract to multiple companies, and, that after an initial award is made to select the winning offerors there will be subsequent awards of "tasks". We understand that "tasks" are the 18 individual jobs or components that make up the sum of this RFP. If this is what is intended, how does a potential service provider know how to spread it's fixed costs over the work when we don't know what tasks we may be awarded until well after our selection? An example of this problem cited by industry at the June 6 meeting is the very significant investment we will be asked to make to address security concerns. It may very well take the entire 18 tasks to spread the cost of security most efficiently. If we spread our costs across all 18 tasks and then are actually awarded only 2 tasks we could never recover our costs and the potential losses could be rather significant. If this concern is not addressed it may force very well qualified companies to withdraw from this procurement. How will the Government structure or restructure this procurement to mitigate that kind of risk?
A. Tasks and/or Delivery Orders will be awarded after the initial IDIQ contract or contracts are awarded. There is no limit on the quantity of tasks and/or Delivery Orders that can be issued or awarded. The GPO does not intend to restructure this procurement to mitigate the risk of "security costs" as long as the Offeror identifies all total costs proposed within its cost/pricing proposal. Any security costs or investment costs identified in the initial proposal and contract can be included in any of the task order proposals and invoiced accordingly. Awarding separate task orders for all 18 items to be printed would be counterproductive to this effort. IF the GPO DOES decide to split up the award of some of these items and award to separate contractors through separate contracts, we are required to allow you to re-negotiate your proposed costs.

Q. Has the GPO or the 2010 Census Team been in consultation with the USPS about the delivery window and feasibility of achieving a three-day "in home"?
A. Yes, the 2010 Census Team has consulted with the USPS.

Q. Given the security concerns over this mailing, has there been any discussion with the USPS about containerization beyond the normal trays utilized for First-Class mail? Any new/ different delivery requirements or documentation?
A. No, there have been no discussions with the USPS on either one of those topics.

Q. The initial mailing schedule for "in home" is shown as a three-day window, March 13th to 15th, 2010. How strong is the need for such a tight delivery window for 197 million mail pieces?
A. The "in home" three-day window is the requirement. However, the dates in the RFP will change to March 15 - March 17, 2010.

Q. Also, that includes a Sunday (3/14/10), effectively making it a two-day delivery by the USPS. Is this going to be modified?
A. The "in home" delivery date in the RFP will change to March 15 - March 17, 2010.

Q. Will there be a supplier performing the list modifications and hygiene, or will it be done by the GPO?
A. If you are referring to the use of CASS/PAVE software, then the Contractor will be required to perform this effort.

Q. The schedule shows a large window between receipt of the address files (September 21st) and entry into the USPS for delivery (March 13th). This exceeds the requirement by the USPS for "Move/ Update" for First-Class mail. Is there a procedure for this requirement, or is there a written exemption from the USPS?
A. The GPO and the Census Bureau are aware this window exceeds the 90-day requirement of the USPS using CASS/PAVE software. While we currently have no exemption, the Census Bureau has recently received National Mailer status with the USPS, and is negotiating with them on this matter.

Q. The Four State Barcode specifications and service offering has not been finalized by the USPS. Is this requirement subject to modification based on the progress of the USPS with technology and service support?
A. The specification for printing the 4CB bar code is NOT yet final. Offerors will need to continue to stay abreast of this standard as with any other USPS standard, and price to what is known at the time of the proposal.

Q. If the Four State barcode is finalized, and the service offerings approved by 2010, exactly what services will be used, and how? ACS? Forwarding service? AEC? AEC-II? Has the impact of PARS been considered?
A. The Census Bureau has included in the RFP the service offerings related to the 4CB that we are currently interested in utilizing. We are aware that other services may be offered over the next several years, and will consider the costs/benefits of use of services as they become available.

Q. The CONFIRM service pricing is subject to the USPS Rate Case (R2006-1) filed on 5/3/06. Is the use of CONFIRM subject to any pricing modifications approved and implemented before 2010?
A. Yes, the Census Bureau met with the USPS on 6/7/06 and understands there is a proposal to change the rate structure for the Confirm Service. If this rate structure changes, the Census Bureau will need to re-evaluate the best way to obtain this service. Propose to the current USPS pricing structure in force when you submit your proposal.

Q. The "re-mail" is subject to quantity and address modifications based on CONFIRM data for the initial mailing. Please describe the process. Will there be multiple modifications to the re-mail list and multiple mailings? Will it be one mailing with specific "in home" requirements?
A. The RM is subject to quantity and address modification; however, it is not based on Confirm data only. While Origin Confirm Service is one of the services that may be used to enable RM, it is not the only operation that will be used. The Census Bureau will work with stakeholders to develop the best strategy for performing this operation. We expect the RM packages to be addressed and mailed on a continuous flow basis. This flow should continue until the entire RM is completed in the required 10 calendar days.

Q. Many of the Contractor's security obligations specified in C.5.2 will not be detailed until after contract award. Will the Contractor be able to adjust contract costs after award to take account of these items?
A. The GPO expects all Offerors to provide their approaches to security in their proposals. The approaches must meet all RFP requirements. You must price the proposed approach. If the GPO then requires a change(s) to this approach, you will have the opportunity to propose new pricing.

Q. When during the term of the contract, including unexercised options, will the Contractor be required to meet the security requirements specified in C.5?
A. The security requirements in the RFP are effective the entire term of the contract. Again, you must propose the approach to meet these security requirements. The vendor will be required to meet security requirements prior to receiving approval to operate with Sensitive - Statistical (i.e., Title 13) data, e.g., the address file. The requirement continues unaltered until final certification is submitted and accepted (process TBD) verifying that all Sensitive - Statistical data have been purged from the vendor's systems, per the terms of the approved security plan.

Q. 1352.239-74 appears to require that the Contractor's employees meet various training requirements within 5 days of contract award although access to protected information will not occur until the Dress Rehearsal more than a year later. Is this correct?
A. Yes, as employees begin working on the task they will have five (5) days to meet the training and security requirements. Given the staged nature of this contract, we do not expect all employees to be identified on day one.

Q. Please confirm that the change in the applicable security level specified in C.5 of moderate impact level for integrity regarding the Dress Rehearsal to high impact level for integrity thereafter will require the Contractor to comply with 800-53 Annex 2 for the Dress Rehearsal and Annex 3 thereafter.
A. This is a correct interpretation.

Q. How far into the organization does the "Special Sworn Status" apply - data handling only (or) everyone else in the facility?
A. Everyone working on the contract will be required to have "Special Sworn Status." Individuals who are not on the contract but have access to or may come in contact with Title 13 information (Census material) are also required to have "Special Sworn Status." The second and third paragraphs on page 47 of the RFP are succinct. Describe how you will assure that your promises in regard to confidentiality are kept, and propose accordingly.

Q. Is there additional definition/description of specifically what the terms Confidentiality, Integrity, & Availability relates to/mean?
A. Yes, please see FIPS 199, page 2.

Q. The references to Security Awareness Training & Special Sworn Status - Who will deliver the training and lead the swearing in, what will the training consist of, when during the process will training be conducted, and how will the training/swearing in be delivered - on-site at contractor facility (single or multiple facilities), or some other location?
A. The Security Awareness Training & Special Sworn Status Training is available via the web. A Census Bureau employee will perform the swearing in at your location. The timing of this effort will be coordinated after contract award.

Q. Materials Destruction - does security-shredding (to specific piece size) count as an acceptable method?
A. Yes, shredding is acceptable, as long as the resultant pieces do not allow an address or other Sensitive - Statistical information to be recreated. The Department of Commerce document entitled Manual of Security Policies and Procedures (4 Apr 2003), Section 2307, item 1, provides a reference of 1/32 x 3/8.

Q. Considering the mail will enter the Postal stream at one or two points, how does the Census plan to handle the logistics of delivery to the SCF/BMC/DDC level? Is there a separate contract for this service?
A. The Census Bureau does not plan to handle the logistic of mail delivery to the USPS. It will be the responsibility of the Contractor to work with the USPS to plan the entry of each mailing into the mail stream.

Q. May a bidder submit one proposal as a prime contractor and participate as a subcontractor on another prime contractor's proposal?
A. Yes, there is no restriction. An Offeror may submit as a prime contractor and participate as a subcontractor.

Q. In order to further understand and meet the requirements outlined in C.3.3.4.1, and to further enable the process that is driving these requirements, we submit the following question. What scanners are being used to scan the Census forms returned to the Census Bureau? Please provide specifications and scanning requirements of this equipment. Please include manufacturer, model and any other relevant information.
A. The scanner that will be used for forms processing has not been determined. Please base your bid on producing forms in the size and format requested in the RFP.

Q. Please confirm 2nd round of questions are due by 7/28/06, when will these questions be answered?
A. The window for vendor questions will be reopened from July 14-28. Answers to those questions will be posted not later than August 4.

Q. Will there be a 2nd Draft version of the RFP before the final RFP is issued?
A. No, the GPO will not post another Draft of the RFP unless major changes occur before the Final RPF is released.

Q. Can the Bilingual outgoing envelope (DX-6B, D-6B) be constructed with a side seam (welded seam) envelope construction and the size adjusted to 10-1/4" x 12-1/2"?
A. No, please base your bid on producing forms in the size and format requested in the RFP.

Q. Can the Initial mailing envelopes for both the outgoing (DX-6A, DX-6 (UL), D-6C, D-6A, D-6 (UL), D-6 (UL) PR, D-6C) and return envelope (DX-8A, D-8A1, D-8A2, D-8A3, D-8A PR) be constructed with a side seam (welded seam) envelope construction and the size be adjusted to: Outgoing = 6" x 11- 1/4" and Return = 5-3/4" x 10"?
A. No, please base your bid on producing forms in the size and format requested in the RFP.

Q. 5.2.8 - What are the specifics on what additional controls would be required for Incident Handling?
A. If you'd like to view the Census Bureau document, "Census Bureau IT Security Program Policies (March 2006)," for the purpose of responding to the RFP, please send a request to print2010@gpo.gov and an electronic version will be sent by return E-mail.

In conformance with the advice from the Census Bureau's Information Technology Security Officer, the document should not be distributed beyond the vendor team that needs it for preparation of the response to the RFP. Post award, further advice will be provided regarding use of the document during the performance period.

In your request message, please use the following:

Subject: Request Copy of CB IT Security Program Policies

Body: Please send a copy of the Census Bureau IT Security Program Policies (March 2006) for our use in developing our response to the RFP. We understand the distribution for purposes other than development of the response is prohibited.

Q. 5.2.10 - Census data needs to be tracked and removed from all systems. How often does the data need to be removed from each of the systems?
A. The data need only be removed once, if the system is continually protected according to an approved Security Plan. If there are periods when the vendor wishes to remove Sensitive - Statistical or other limited access data from a system or device, then this should be addressed in the Security Plan.

Q. 5.2.15 - Please define encryption key management procedures.
A. This is addressed in Special Publication 800-57, 800-21 and in the Census Bureau IT Security Program Policies (CBITSPP) (Updated version from March 2006), Section 4.1.7, page 125.

Q. Do any of the printed documents require bleed?
A. There will be no bleeds.

Q. Is the Document Integrity Bar Code different on every booklet and questionnaire? Does it print in more than one place?
A. Yes, on a finished single sheet form, the DI is printed on each side of the sheet. For a booklet, the DI will be printed on BOTH pages of one side of each two-page printers spread, so that it appears on one side of each sheet after the spine is guillotined. The exact bar code placement will be determined by final forms design, and the selected contractor will provide input to this decision during the Technical Collaboration phase.

Q. Please consider the option to press paste bind the 12 pager instead of saddle stitching. This would eliminate the need for an additional operation and the security, transportation, handling and waste associated with the binding off line operation.
A. The Offeror should propose and price a solution that meets the RFP requirements. Alternative ideas are welcome and should be proposed following the guidance in Section L.14.1.3.6.

This posting provides answers to all additional questions on the Print 2010 Draft RFP received between June 17 - July 28, 2006.

Q. We have a question regarding the last sentence in the Print 2010 RFP section H.18 "Exclusions from Print 2010 Participation", on page 85, which reads as follows: "In addition, Contractors working on the Decennial Response Integration System (DRIS) contract are considered to have a possible conflict of interest with this solicitation, and will be precluded from bidding on this Print 2010 contract."

[As} a member of the Lockheed Martin DRIS team, [we] did not participate in developing or reviewing any sections of the Print 2010 RFP, and we do not have any role in the paper data capture channel. We would like to ask that you provide clarification as to the rationale for this exclusion of anyone working on the DRIS contract, and if possible, to revisit this restriction at least for those members of the team not involved with the paper data capture.
A. The last sentence of section H.18, “In addition, Contractors working on the Decennial Response Integration System (DRIS) . . .”, will be deleted in its entirety.

Q. As you suggested, we consulted our attorney about the indemnity included in section H.9 of the Draft RFP. We understand that is extremely rare to include an indemnification by a contractor in a contract with the United States because it increases the cost to the government as contractors adjust prices to take account of the indemnity. Instead, we think you should delete section H.9 and insert instead MMAR 52.228-7 (attached), which requires contractors to maintain insurance, but also provides that the government will reimburse the contractor for death, bodily injury or damage to property of third parties in the circumstances described in the clause. Although MMAR 28.311 provides that MMAR 52.228-7 should be included in cost reimbursable contracts, the FPI-F contract is sufficiently similar to warrant the inclusion of this clause.

Our company will often agree to indemnify customers for "bodily injury" and damage to "real or tangible property" caused by our gross negligence. In the normal commercial setting, such an indemnity is an acceptable risk because a limited number of persons come in contact with our employees and services. The H.9 provision requires a broader indemnification for "injuries or damages sustained by any person or persons or property." This could cover exclusively economic injuries rather than just bodily injuries. We will not provide such an indemnity to our commercial customers because we are not in the insurance business. However, in the context of this procurement, our normal indemnity would also require us to take on too much risk. The services required by this contract could conceivably reach 200 million homes. In such a situation, it is unfair to require the contractor to bear the associated risks by including H.9.
A. Concur in part. Special Provision H.9 in the Draft RFP, dated May 31, 2006 (through Change 7) will be deleted in its entirety with the following special provision H.9 being added in the final RFP: “H.9 HARMLESS FROM LIABILITY DUE TO GROSS NEGLIGENCE

The Contractor shall hold and save the Government, its officers, agents and employees, harmless from liability for “bodily injury” and damage for “real or tangible property resulting from injuries or damages sustained by any person or persons or property by virtue of performance of this contract, arising or resulting in whole or in part from the gross negligence, of the Contractor, or any subcontractor, their employees, agents, etc. (End of Special Clause)”

In addition MMAR clause 52.228-7 is not being added to the final RFP as it does not apply to a fixed price type contract.

This posting provides answers to all additional questions on the Print 2010 Draft RFP received after July 28, 2006.

Q. A quick question on Past Performance examples: In Section M.3.3.1 it states that the past performance examples must be within the last 5 years. This would exclude us (and others) from citing our past performance on the 2000 Census. It would seem that prior work on census projects would be worth consideration in the evaluation process. Please let me know if this can be changed to include previous Census work beyond the last 5 years and all non-Census work would have to be within the last 5 years.

A. The Government does not intend to change the proposal instructions to allow past performance references beyond five years. This does not preclude offerors from mentioning other past performance or experience in other sections of the proposal if appropriate.

Q. Current GPO Vendors do not have CAS compliant accounting systems. The time and cost to set up such a system is significant. This cost would be allocated to the Census contract, since GPO and its vendors will not have any other contracts requiring CAS. Can this requirement be waived?

A. The CAS requirements have been removed from the solicitation while a formal waiver for this requirement is being processed. Although the requirement for a CAS compliant accounting system is being waived the requirement to use Contract Cost Principles will remain in place. CAS and cost principles are related, but the concepts are not interchangeable. CAS addresses accounting--the measurement, assignment, and allocation of costs to Government contracts. Cost principles address cost allowability. Cost allowability is a procurement matter and is a function of law, regulation, or contract clauses. Costs may be allocable but not allowable. Cost principles are outlined in MMAR Part 31.

Under the proposed contract each Offeror is required to develop a “Pricing Proposal” in accordance with MMAR Table 15-2. The Government Cost/Price Evaluation Team will initially determine the adequacy of all proposals; identify any deficiencies and omissions, and request additional data if needed.
After award of the initial contract or contracts, all supplies and services will be contracted by the Government through the issuance of task orders and delivery orders as indicated in paragraphs G.3 and H.22 of the RFP. All task orders will be negotiated allowing the Contractor to re-price the requirement and re-negotiate the ceiling price. Once the price is agreed to, a delivery order may be issued by the Government against the established contract.

Q. The way in which the current procurement methodology would function would be to cause the winning contractor to have to absorb all costs - including materials cost increases - over and above the "ceiling price." Of course, with paper and ink being volatile, and constituting a significant percentage of the contract price, this arrangement would be unacceptable to any rational vendor. Could the materials be bid based on actual costs, plus a handling fee or markup, to avoid the need to “crystal ball” materials prices years into the future?

A. Each task order will be negotiated and issued prior to the performance period for that task. See Section B.6 for the periods of performance for each requirement. The ceiling price will be proposed by the potential contractor and agreed to by both parties through negotiations conducted prior to the issuance of each task order. Addressing exceptional changes in the paper and ink market may be part of these negotiations, as well as, the negotiations conducted to determine final costs.