City of Seattle Request for Proposal #RFP-DIT-2996 Addendum

3/27/12

The following is additional information regarding Request for Proposal RFP-DIT-2996, titled Port Security Video Surveillance System with Wireless Mesh Network released on 02/21/2012. The due date has been extended to April 2, 2012 at 2:00pm (Pacific). This addendum includes both questions from prospective proposers and the City’s answers, and revisions to the RFP. This addendum is hereby made part of the RFP and therefore, the information contained herein shall be taken into consideration when preparing and submitting a proposal.

072dc22abaf4f9bc80998c835d210e66.doc Page 1 of 4 Item # Date Date Vendor’s Question City’s Answer RFP Revisions Received Answered 1. 2/22/12 On Page 19 of the Request for Proposal (RFP) City of Seattle Request for Proposal #RFP-DIT-2996document, under Section 22.2, add in the following Addendum as number 7a: 7.a Financial Proposal Form: This response is 3/27/12

RFP DIT 2966 Financial Proposal Form 020712.xlsx mandatory. 2. 2/23/12 On Page 1 of the RFP, under Schedule of Events & Date for Pre-Proposal Conference,

Change the Conference Line from : 1-800-400-5257

To

1-866-400-5257

3. 2/22/12 2/24/12 Do you have an existing system? The Seattle Police Department has N/A one existing system. It is used for a mobile command post configuration. It has three outdoor WAP, three indoor WAP, and five single-radio edge devices.

4. 2/22/12 2/24/12 On Page 17 of the Technical No. N/A Specifications Spec #1.4 says:

The vendor shall provide four Dedicated Micros model DVIP- RT, or equivalent, sixteen channel Network video recorders to record each of the IP streams from the IP cameras shown on the diagram.

Do you have an existing “Dedicated Micros model DVIP- RT” NVR?

5. 2/22/12 2/24/12 Will you take substitution of the The City is requesting 30 outdoor Technical Specification/Response for Specification 36 Cannon security cameras for cameras and 6 marine cameras. I.1 is amended as follows: a different name brand of See RFP Revisions. 072dc22abaf4f9bc80998c835d210e66.doccameras? Page 2 of 4 “I.1 The vendor shall provide thirty (30) Canon The Vendor may propose model VB-M40, or equivalent, PTZ IP cameras ‘equivalent’ to the models specified installed:” by the City. Technical Specification/Response is amended by City of Seattle Request for Proposal #RFP-DIT-2996 Addendum

3/27/12

072dc22abaf4f9bc80998c835d210e66.doc Page 3 of 4 115. 3/9/12 3/12/12 There appears to be a conflict See answer to #109 and RFP between the RFP (P.12, Section Section 22.2 Subsection 8. 9.11) and the Contract (P.8, 12.16). The RFPCity states of Seattle that the Request for Proposal #RFP-DIT-2996 City will not enter into an agreement for Addendum maintenance/warranty/support but the Contract refers to such an 3/27/12 agreement as an attachment. Can you please explain which is correct? If the referenced attachment is a City sourced agreement, may we please have a copy and an opportunity to review and ask questions?

116. 3/9/12 3/12/12 Contract, section 12.10: This See RFP Section 22.2 Subsection says that a date warranty must 8. be provided and will last perpetually. This is difficult, since any software or hardware date numbering system is based on a stored value which will eventually roll over. A great number of devices in the market today will roll over in 2038 and others much later - but basically all will eventually do so. Please provide a fixed date until which equipment is expected to operate without issue and we will obtain manufacturer validation of this.

117. 3/9/12 3/12/12 Contract, Section 12.12: This See RFP Section 22.2 Subsection section indicates that many 8. warranty items are perpetual and survive the end of the contract. Apparently included in these are things like software upgrades, equipment warranty, date warranty, law compliance warranty, media warranty, etc. This is not realistic - request you change this to reflect that warranties are valid only during the term of a valid, paid, support agreement.

118. 3/9/12 3/12/12 Contract, P.5, #13: There is a So noted. The contract numbering 072dc22abaf4f9bc80998c835d210e66.docnumbering issuePage in 4 theof 4 contract. will be corrected after The Warranty section (labeled announcement of the apparent 13) begins at the end of page 5, successful vendor. but it's constituent elements are numbered in 12.x (in other words,