Summary of Feedback and Outcomes
from the
Industry Consultative Process on the
Polar Communications Weather (PCW) Project
W6369-04DC01/A
Page of 22
1
Table of Contents
1.
Introduction
2.
Industry Consultative Process
3.
Purpose
4.
General Overview of the Industry Consultative Process Feedback
5.
Summary of Feedback and Outcomes
6.
5.1
Technical Considerations
5.2
Proposed Project Delivery Model(s)
5.3
Risk Assessment
5.4
Schedule
5.5
Competitive Procurement
Summary of Feedback and Outcomes
Annexes
Annex A:
List of companies that attended a one-on-one meeting
Annex B:
List of companies that responded to the Request for Information
Annex C
Request for Information
1
Introduction
The Government of Canada (GoC) is exploring options for a potential Canadian-led
project, with potential international partners, to satisfy requirements especially in the
Arctic Region in Satellite Communications (SATCOM), Earth Observation (EO),
operational meteorological applications and Space Situational Awareness (SSA).
The ‘’Polar Communications and Weather’’ (PCW) Project will explore technical
solutions but is not yet an approved Government Project.
In October 2013, Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) released a
Request For Information (RFI), attached as Annex C, on behalf of Canada to:



Inform industry of the Whole of Government (WoG) proposed PCW Project;
Seek industry comments on the PCW Business Requirements (BR); and
Seek viable, innovative technical and Project Delivery Model(s) to meet or
exceed the PCW Business Requirements (BR).
Respondents were to inform Canada if there are, at a high level, viable and costeffective solutions to meet the stated requirements, including potential technical options,
business viability, Project Delivery Model(s), costs, and risks.
Based on the responses received and other considerations, Canada may decide to
proceed with the PCW Project. The information gathered from the RFI responses may
also be used to refine the procurement strategy, Business Requirements, Project cost
envelope, Project Delivery Model, and timelines.
2
Industry Consultative Process
Period
Activities
Participants
October 31, 2013 and concludes with the release of the RFI
Summary of the feedback and outcomes.


October 31, 2013: RFI Release;
November 25 – 31: 2013, Industry Day and One-onOne Meetings;
 February to June 2014: Follow-on One-on-One
Meetings; and
 July 2014: Release of the RFI Summary of Feedback
and Outcomes.
44 companies were involved in this process. All companies
were represented at the Industry Day; 16 one-on-one
meetings were held with participants (see Annex A for a
complete list) and 20 companies provided responses to the
RFI (see Annex B for a complete list). An independent
Fairness Monitor was an integral part of the process.
1
3.
Purpose
This document summarizes the feedback received through the Industry Consultative
Process. This summary of feedback and outcomes is focused on:





4.
Technical Considerations;
Project Delivery Model(s);
Risk Assessment;
Schedule; and
Competitive Procurement.
General Overview of the Industry Consultative Process Feedback
The Consultative Process provided any interested party in industry with an opportunity
to contribute to the further development of the PCW Project by submitting comments,
questions, recommendations and suggestions.
The level of response from participants indicated strong interest in a PCW type of
mission. Industry feedback was positive and indicated that the project requirements, as
detailed in the Business Requirements document, can be substantially satisfied.
Nonetheless, some concerns were identified and additional clarification was sought by
some companies through the Consultative Process. As a result, Canada may adjust
some specific Business Requirements as necessary to address technical and
implementation concerns. Canada may also conduct additional studies to address
concerns and include suggestions received.
5.
Summary of Feedback and Outcomes
5.1
Technical Considerations
Original Approach as per the RFI
Canada seeks to optimize the implementation of a PCW Project in such a way that
requirements and capacity are balanced with best overall value. In consideration of the
number of objectives and the range (particularly in the areas of coverage and capacity)
of each expressed by its desirable requirement, there is a large span of potential
solutions. The PCW BR has been developed with the intent of encouraging innovative
solutions that represent best value (i.e. the optimization of capability versus cost).
Information sought by Canada as per the RFI
As per section 2.2 of the RFI, the respondents were requested to provide:


a description of the space systems, ground systems, operations, and ISS
(including Operations) solutions that they envision would meet the requirements;
an assessment of the scalability and expandability of the design solution.
2
They were also requested to specify any additions or amendments required to the PCW
BR in order to provide or ensure a more optimal solution.
The response provided was to be based on fifteen (15) years of operation.
RESPONDENT FEEDBACK
No concern was expressed by the respondents regarding the 15 years of
operations.
For solutions requiring smaller spacecrafts or lower orbiting satellites, additional
launches with replacement capacities were suggested.
Some elements of the PCW BR raised concerns and/or required additional
information from Canada.



High-level outcomes included:
Military Wideband Requirements:







Meeting all ‘mandatory requirements’ seems feasible, however significant
concerns were raised when attempting to meet some of the ‘desirable
requirements,’ in particular: UHF-301, KaX-125 and KaX-525;
Narrow Coverage Area (NCA) Beam Size requirements could be met using
different strategies;
Feasibility of the Communication-On-The-Move capability was not substantially
addressed;
Transfer of communication links between satellites, for multiple satellite solutions,
could result in service interruptions or require significant modifications to user
terminals;
Depending on orbital parameters selection, disadvantaged users with low power,
small handheld devices and mobile platforms could have services impaired;
To receive more detailed link budget forecasts and better spacecraft SATCOM
payload sizing, higher fidelity simulation scenarios or accurate real life examples
are required; and
Inter-coverage connectivity and cross-banding requirements have a high impact
on constellation architecture and complexity.
Military Narrowband Requirements:




Meeting all ‘mandatory requirements’ seems feasible;
Concerns were raised regarding the ‘desirable requirements’, particularly when
attempting to meet the number of channels;
Several technologies, modulation schemes and frequencies have the potential to
meet narrowband requirements.
Elements raised by industry requiring further studies:
o Doppler shift effect on legacy channel NATO standard;
o Transmission delays impact for orbits with parameters greater than the
legacy standard; and
3

o Re-assessment of current and future acquisition of user terminal assets to
possibly meet PCW narrowband mission design.
Solutions to minimize Electro-Magnetic Interferences (EMI) are not trivial for UHF
SATCOM missions
Civil SATCOM Requirements:







Some requirements required clarification (for example KaX-110, KaX-120, KaX320 and KaX-510);
Polar Coverage using latitude-longitude parameters imply a non-circular adaptive
coverage. It was recommended to use Earth angle or similar;
10 steerable spot beams in Ka is ambitious and would result in unrealistically
large and expensive satellites;
It is recommended to reword the KaX225 requirement;
Requirement for 23 overlapping Ka-band WCA beams should be stated in such a
way to let industry propose a useful solution to address capacity requirements;
KaX 160 seems to be addressing terminal requirements. Spacecraft contribution
to tracking is unclear;
Most respondents did not identify significant business opportunities to use extra
capacity for commercial civilian communications.
Meteorological Requirements:





Meteorological requirements can be met by next-generation meteorological
payload options in a two-satellite system;
There are several potentially qualified instruments in an advanced stage of
development that can meet meteorological requirements;
Meteorological payload tends to have a long fabrication time; there are potential
schedule risks if project start is delayed;
Some respondents suggested that splitting the communications and
meteorological/space weather missions would be preferable;
Meteorological ground segment data acquisition requires further analysis to
insure timely data distribution.
Space Weather:




Meeting all RFI requirements seems feasible, there are several potential qualified
options;
Most of the proposed particle detectors have limited Field of View, thus the full 4
steradian coverage requirement might be the subject of modification at a later
time;
The details of the Space Weather payload will be better clarified when the
mission orbit is ultimately selected;
The nature of in-situ Space Weather payload requires its placement on the same
spacecraft as other payloads (meteorological and communication);
4

Current optional requirement for in-situ measurement of Vector Magnetic Field
seems to add complexity and risks to the project.
Ground Segment:





Further studies are needed to evaluate the impact of modifications required to
COTS terminals in order to accommodate orbital factors (Doppler effects, delay,
tracking capability, spacecraft handover);
Certain orbits favour met payload performance while others optimize
communications;
A number of respondents opted for a centralized multiple payload gateway
including TT&C while others suggest separate ground segment functionalities
over several RF bands and across a distributed ground infrastructure;
Data acquisition/payload operation over other areas of the globe may be possible
for some scenarios that include optional ground stations outside of Canada (e.g.
Antarctica, Scandinavia);
Low or medium orbits require foreign ground infrastructure to complement the
Canadian Area of Interest coverage.
CANADA’S RESPONSE
Initial feedback from Industry indicated a need for clarification of some elements of the
PCW BR. If required, changes will be incorporated into a revised Business
Requirements that may be part of a draft Request for Proposal should the project
proceed. Further studies may also be conducted to minimize technical risks and to
determine the best courses of action.
5.2
Proposed Project Delivery Model(s)
Information sought by Canada as per the RFI
In section 2.3 of the RFI, the Respondents were requested to provide a description of
the Project Delivery Model(s) they were envisioning and demonstrate the benefits and
constraints associated to the proposed model(s).
It was also requested to provide budgetary cost estimates by segment and cash flows
for the proposed solution(s) and associated Project Delivery Model(s).
RESPONDENT FEEDBACK





Only a small number of Respondents provided detailed Project Delivery Models;
Most companies indicated that they are open and able to comply with a variety of
Project Delivery Models;
Some Respondents indicated the need for Canada to clarify its preferred Delivery
Model before a detailed response can be provided;
The majority of Respondents indicated that “commercial opportunities” are limited
beyond meeting PCW BR requirements.
Only limited estimates of the level of Canadian Content were presented.
5
CANADA’S RESPONSE


5.3
Canada will further analyze options for the Delivery Model and will incorporate
the preferred solution into a draft Request for Proposal should the project
proceed.
The selected option will consider best value for Canadians and shall be aligned
with Government strategies and priorities and balanced with the needs of
potential partners and Allies.
Risk Assessment
Information sought by Canada as per the RFI
In Section 2.4 of the RFI, Respondents were requested to present a risk assessment,
indicating the technical risks along with their associated mitigation strategies, for the
proposed PCW solution(s)



RESPONDENT FEEDBACK
Combining all the capabilities/mandatory requirements into a single spacecraft
bus introduces complexity and some limitations.
Most Respondents assessed that the level of technical risk is acceptable and
manageable.
The meteorological payload could introduce a schedule and delivery risk if
procurement is delayed.
CANADA’S RESPONSE
Canada will develop a mitigation strategy to address the potential risks.
5.4
Schedule
Information sought by Canada as per the RFI
Section 2.5 of the RFI requested information pertaining to a possible schedule given an
estimated start date of November 2016.


RESPONDENT FEEDBACK
The meteorological payload can impact the scheduled path if procurement is
delayed;
Most Respondents can achieve an Initial Operating Capability within 5 to 6 years
after contract award;
CANADA’S RESPONSE
Canada understands that achieving Initial Operating Capability in a timely manner will
require an aggressive timeline, should the project be approved.
6
5.5
Competitive Procurement
Original Approach
If Canada decides to proceed with a project, a competitive procurement process may be
initiated. Canada may consider implementing the process in two phases: Request for
Qualification (RFQ), followed by an RFP to be issued only to qualified Respondents.
Information sought by Canada as per the RFI
Section 2.7 of the RFI focused on potential criteria to be included should a competitive
procurement process was to be initiated.



RESPONDENT FEEDBACK
A competitive process was identified as the preferred procurement approach;
Most Respondents identified the need for Canadian Content and/or Value
Proposition as part of the Selection Methodology;
Most Respondents identified a need for stringent corporate requirements,
focussing on financial stability and a minimum number of years of relevant
experience.
CANADA’S RESPONSE
Should a draft Request for Proposal be developed, Canada will assess each of the
proposed criteria in the context of the selected procurement approach and Government
policies, priorities and strategies. The draft Request for Proposal, once developed, will
be shared with the Industry to solicit comments/inputs.
6.
Summary of Feedback and Outcomes
Overall, the feedback from industry was enthusiastic and positive. The approaches put
forth in the RFI were supported by industry and the responses demonstrated that PCW
BR requirements can be met. Industry feedback has contributed to informing Canada on
the technical options, business viability, Project Delivery Model(s), costs, and risks for
industry to support PCW. All the information received will support Canada as it moves
the project forward.
The Government of Canada PCW team members wish to thank all Respondents for
their substantive responses and for taking part in the Consultation Process.
7
ANNEX A
List of companies that attended a one-on-one meeting
















ABB
Boeing
Com Dev International
Dauria Aero
EADS
Exelis
Harris Corporation Government Communications Systems
Lockheed Martin
MacDonald Dettwiler and Associate
Magellan Aerospace
Omnispace LLC
Raytheon
Telesat
Thales Alenia Space
University of Calgary
ViaSat
8
ANNEX B
List of companies that responded to the Request for Information





















ABB
Boeing
Canadensys
Exelis
GigaSat Communications Ltd
Hammers Company
iDirect
Inmarsat
Lockheed Martin
Magellan Aerospace
Mott MacDonald
Northeast Space Company
Northrop Grumman
Omnispace LLC
Raytheon
Southwest Research Institute
Telesat
Thales Alenia Space
University of Alberta
University of Calgary
ViaSat
0
ANNEX C
Request for Information
1
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) for
POLAR COMMUNICATIONS AND WEATHER (PCW) Project
Version 3.0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................1
2.
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ........................................................................................1
2.1.RESPONDENT INFORMATION .......................................................................................... 1
2.2.TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS ......................................................................................... 2
2.3.PROPOSED PROJECT DELIVERY MODEL(S) ........................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.4.RISK ASSESSMENT ............................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.5.SCHEDULE ......................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.6.COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT .......................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.7.PROCUREMENT FRAMEWORK .......................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.8. RECOMMENDATIONS, SUGGESTIONS OR COMMENTS Error! Bookmark not defined.
3.
NOTES TO INTERESTED RESPONDENTS.................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.
CONFIDENTIALITY ...............................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
5.
CONTRACTING AUTHORITY .................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
6.
ENGAGEMENT PROCESS ......................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
7.
INDUSTRY DAY INFORMATION SESSION ..............................Error! Bookmark not defined.
8.
COSTS FOR RESPONSES .......................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
9.
DELIVERY ADDRESS FOR RFI RESPONSES ..............................Error! Bookmark not defined.
10.
SECURITY REQUIREMENTS...................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
11.
CONTROLLED GOODS PROVISIONS ......................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
12.
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AGREEMENTS (TAAS) AND INTERNATIONAL TRAFFIC IN ARMS
REGULATIONS (ITAR) PROVISIONS .......................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
ANNEX A - ACRONYMS .................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
ANNEX B - BUSINESS REQUIREMENTS ...........................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
ANNEX C - RULES OF ENGAGEMENT ..............................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
PCW RFI
i
1.
INTRODUCTION
The Government of Canada (GoC) is exploring options for a potential Canadian-led project, with
potential international partners, to satisfy requirements in Satellite Communications (SATCOM),
Earth Observation (EO) coverage of the Arctic, and Space Situational Awareness (SSA).
The ‘’Polar Communications and Weather’’ (PCW) Project will explore technical solutions but is
not yet an approved Government Project.
Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) is releasing this Request For
Information (RFI) on behalf of Canada to:



inform industry of the Whole of Government (WoG) proposed PCW Project;
seek industry comments on the attached Annex B DRAFT PCW Business Requirements
(BR); and
seek viable, innovative technical and Project Delivery Model(s) to meet or exceed the
DRAFT PCW BR.
The RFI results will be used to inform the GoC on the technical options, business viability,
potential Project Delivery Model(s), costs, and risks for industry to support such a project.
Based on this information and other considerations, Canada may decide to proceed with the
project or not, and this decision may lead to a competitive procurement for project
implementation;
The information provided by Respondents may be used to refine the PCW procurement
strategy, BR, Project cost envelope, and timeline. The information gathered through this RFI may
be used to assist in the development of a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the implementation of
an Arctic-focused communications and meteorological capability.
Respondents are to demonstrate to Canada that there is, at a high level, a viable, attractive and
cost-effective solution to meet the stated requirement. Respondents are to consider the
information provided in the BR for the meteorological, communication, space weather, ground
segment and in-service support (ISS) requirements, when preparing their response to this RFI.
2
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
The Respondents are invited to submit a reply to the RFI that addresses each of the topics listed
below. To facilitate the review of the responses to this RFI, Respondents are asked to address
and present the requested information in the order in which the topics are presented below.
The topics are:
2.1
Respondent Information
2.1.1
Provide background information on the Respondent’s company (or member companies
of the consortium that might be created for such a project), company/consortium
PCW RFI
1
management team and company/consortium experience with projects of similar scope
and complexity as described in the DRAFT PCW BR.
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.2
Indicate and attest which capabilities the Respondent can provide, for example:

Communications Payload; and/or

Meteorological Payload; and/or

Ground Segment; and/or

Space Weather Payload; and/or

In-Service Support (including Operations) (ISS).
Provide the name, telephone number, and e-mail address of a representative who may
be contacted for clarification or other matters related to the Respondent’s RFI response.
Respondent Information
2.2.1
Canada seeks to optimize the implementation of a PCW Project in such a way that
requirements and capacity are balanced with best overall value. In consideration of the
number of objectives and the range (particularly in the areas of coverage and capacity)
of each expressed by its desirable requirement, there is a large span of potential
solutions. The attached DRAFT PCW BR has been developed with the intent of
encouraging innovative solutions that represent best value (i.e. the optimization of
capability versus cost).

For the PCW Space Segment, it is anticipated that some of the key design
decisions will be in the selection of orbit, number of satellites, and satellite bus
(i.e. capacity/launch requirements), and suggested satellite bus configurations.
Respondents are encouraged to respond in such a way that this trade-off space
is clearly identified and substantiated.
2.2.2
Provide a description of the space systems, ground systems, operations, and ISS
(including Operations) solutions that the Respondent envisions would meet the
mandatory and as many of the desirable requirements possible of the DRAFT PCW BR as
possible. This description should provide a first elaboration, containing as much detail as
is practicable, of the preferred system and support concept, together with the technical
evidence supporting its validity in terms of feasibility. Where possible, explain why a
desirable requirement was not or could not be included.
2.2.3
Provide an assessment of the scalability and expandability of the design solution.
2.2.4
The Respondent should also specify any additions or amendments it would propose to
the DRAFT PCW BR in order to provide or ensure a more optimal solution.
2.2.5
Design Life
PCW RFI
2
The Response should be based on fifteen (15) years of operation. Respondents should
identify those components in their proposed solution that are not expected to be fully
operational for the duration of the Project and should discuss trade-offs between
longevity and cost.
2.2.6
Performance Based Requirements
As much as possible, the requirements expressed in the attached DRAFT PCW BR are
intended to represent performance-based requirements and not impose unnecessary
restrictions on potential solutions. Should any requirement impose a limitation on this
optimal solution, it should be identified to Canada.
2.2.7
Project Policy Considerations
Respondents should consider the following policies:




2.3
Canada First Defence Strategy;
Canada’s Northern Strategy and Canada’s Arctic Foreign Policy;
World Meteorological Organization (WMO) Policy on Exchanging Meteorological
Data; and
Remote Sensing Space Systems Act (RSSSA).
Proposed Project Delivery Model(s)
2.3.1
The Respondent should provide a description of the Project Delivery Model(s) it
envisions and demonstrate the benefits and constraints to Canada rendered by the
proposed model(s).
The Project Delivery Model(s) envisioned for the technical solution(s) presented for the
PCW Project should be based on fifteen (15) years of operation.
2.4
2.3.2
The Respondent should indicate the level and timing of government and/or private
investment required in the model(s) proposed. Opportunities that Canada should
consider that may result in reducing disbursement of public funds should be identified
(for example, a potential increase of commercial revenues through the inclusion of
additional commercial payload or commercial utilization of payloads).
2.3.3
The Respondent should provide budgetary cost estimates by segment and cash flows for
the proposed solution(s) and associated Project Delivery Model(s). Any underlying
assumptions used to establish these costs and cash flows should be described.
Risk Assessment
2.4.1
Given the wide range of potential solutions in meeting the mandatory requirements, as
well as all, or part, of the desirable requirements of the DRAFT PCW BR, the Respondent
PCW RFI
3
should demonstrate how its proposed solution(s) optimizes the balance between
capacity vs. risk (cost/technical risk/programmatic risk).
2.5
2.4.2
The Respondent should indicate the technical risks, including associated mitigation
strategies, for the proposed PCW solution(s)? What risks does (do) the Respondent’s
solution(s) avoid?
2.4.3
The Respondent should indicate the programmatic risks, including associated mitigation
strategies, for the proposed PCW solution(s) and associated Project Delivery Model(s)?
The Respondent should demonstrate how Canada’s overall risk is reduced by its
proposed solution in comparison to other solution(s)/Project Delivery Model(s).
2.4.4
The intent is to minimize both cost and programmatic risk by leveraging existing
technology where possible. Should new technology be incorporated or existing
technology be used in a substantially innovative manner it should be identified along
with an elaboration on how any associated risk has been minimized with respect to the
added value gained by its use.
Schedule
2.5.1
The Respondent should provide the schedule to complete the Project, given an
estimated start date of November 2016:
a.
b.
c.
2.6
to develop the PCW ground and space segments;
to build the PCW ground and space segments; and
to launch and commission the PCW satellites and ground infrastructure.
Competitive Procurement
If Canada decides to proceed with a project, a competitive procurement process may be initiated.
Canada may consider implementing the process in two phases: Request for Qualification (RFQ),
followed by an RFP to be issued only to qualified Respondents.
2.6.1
2.7
The Respondent may suggest criteria to be included in the RFQ selection process. The
Respondent should limit its response to what it considers the five (5) most important
criteria and provide substantiation.
Procurement Framework
2.7.1
The Government is committed to better ensuring that purchases of military equipment
create economic opportunities for Canadians. To that end, the Respondent should
identify:
a.
b.
c.
which Canadian companies it potentially intends to engage to complete the Project;
the type of work that could potentially be undertaken by the Respondent in Canada;
the potential for Canadian companies to be integrated into the Respondent’s global
value chains as a result of the Project;
PCW RFI
4
d.
e.
2.8
the kind of technology and intellectual property that could potentially be transferred
to Canadian companies to complete the Project; and
the kind of research and development investments the Respondent could potentially
make in Canada.
2.7.2
Industrial and Regional Benefits (IRBs) may apply to this procurement.
2.7.3
A value proposition, in addition to IRB obligations, may be applied to this procurement.
2.7.4
Exclusions under Trade Agreements may be imposed.
2.7.5
National Security Exceptions may be invoked.
Recommendations, Suggestions or Comments
The Respondent may provide general feedback and/or any recommendations, inputs or comments
(including technical information) that could assist Canada in developing potential future RFQ
and/or RFP documents.
3
NOTES TO INTERESTED RESPONDENTS
Respondents should note that this RFI is not a pre-selection process. There will be no short listing of
firms for purposes of undertaking any future works, as a result of this RFI. Similarly, participation in
this process is not a condition or prerequisite for participation in a potential RFQ or RFP.
This RFI is neither a Call for Tenders, nor an RFP, and no agreement or contract will be entered into
with any Respondent, based on responses to this RFI. The issuance of this RFI is not to be considered
in any way as a commitment by Canada, or as authority for the Respondent to undertake any work
which could be charged to Canada, nor is this RFI to be considered a commitment to issue potential
RFPs or award eventual contracts in relation to this Project.
4
CONFIDENTIALITY
Respondents are advised that any information submitted to Canada in response to this RFI may be
used by Canada in the development of a subsequent competitive RFQ and/or RFP.
As such, Respondents responding to this RFI should identify any submitted information that is to be
considered as either company confidential or proprietary.
5
CONTRACTING AUTHORITY
5.1
Enquiries are to be made in writing (preferably by e-mail) to the Contracting Authority indicated
below.
5.2
Enquiries should be received no less than ten (10) working days prior to the RFI closing date to
allow sufficient time to provide a response or to prepare a meeting. Enquiries received after that
time might not be answered prior to the RFI closing date.
PCW RFI
5
5.3
To ensure consistency and quality of information provided to Respondents, the replies to
enquiries will be provided to all Respondents having requested a RFI package through the
Government Buy and Sell Website without revealing the sources of the enquiries.
5.4
It should be noted that any information provided in relation to this RFI will not be binding upon
Canada under any circumstances.
Requests for clarification or meetings should be sent to the Contracting Authority:
Sandra Labbé
PCW Procurement Manager
Science Procurement Directorate
Services and Specialized Acquisitions Management Sector
Acquisitions Branch
Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC)
11C1, Phase III, Place du Portage
11 Laurier Street
Gatineau, Quebec, Canada
K1A 0S5
Telephone Number:
819-956-1345
E-mail address:
sandra.labbe@tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca
6
ENGAGEMENT PROCESS
The Industry Engagement Process will begin with the publication on the Government Electronic
Tendering Service (GETS) – www.buyandsell.gc.ca/tenders of this RFI and will conclude with the
dissemination of the RFI Summary of the feedback and outcomes. The Industry Engagement
Process consists of the following events:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
Release of one or more RFI;
Industry Day;
One-on-One Industry Day Meetings;
Submission of the RFI Responses;
One-on-One Post-RFI Submission Meetings; and
Release of the RFI Summary of the feedback and outcomes.
At any point within the Industry Engagement Process, the above-listed Industry Engagement
events or their scheduling may change. Except for changes brought about by unforeseen events
or adverse weather, Canada will endeavour to provide a minimum of five (5) calendar days
notice to Respondents of any planned change. Industry Day, as well as all one-on-one meetings
will be held at a location within the National Capital Region.
Advance written information provided by Canada with respect to this Industry Engagement will
be provided only to those entities that:
a.
Have requested the RFI documentation;
PCW RFI
6
b.
c.
Meet the registration criteria for Industry Day and the one-on-one engagement
meetings; and,
Have signed the Rules of Engagement Terms and Conditions, attached as Annex C.
Proceedings from all of the consultation workshops, such as Industry Day and one-on-one
meetings will be recorded. The information gathered during these workshops will be
summarized and published on GETS.
7
INDUSTRY DAY INFORMATION SESSION
A number of consultations and workshops will be conducted on various topics to solicit industry
feedback/comments. As the initial consultation, PWGSC will hold an Industry Day information
session for the PCW Project. Questions should be submitted to PWGSC at least a week before
the event. All questions submitted within that time will be addressed during the Industry Day
information session. At this information session, there will also be an opportunity for interested
potential Respondents to seek clarifications from the PCW Project Team concerning the
requirements. All questions submitted after that time will be addressed through the enquiry
process described in Section 5 above.
First Industry Day:
Time:
Location:
7.1
November 25, 2013
9:00 am, Eastern Daylight Time (EDT)
[To be determined]
Please note that all parties intending to participate in the Industry Day information session and
further one-on-one meetings must:
a.
have completed and submitted a signed Rules of Engagement form to the Contracting
Authority referenced above; and
b.
register at least five (5) days in advance of the session date by contacting the
Contracting Authority referenced above. Only registered participants will be allowed to
participate in the information session.
Participants will be provided with the opportunity to arrange for one-on-one meetings with
representatives from the PCW Project Team, the day of the session (if time allows) or later
during the period of the RFI.
8
COSTS FOR RESPONSES
No payment shall be made to the Respondents by Canada for costs incurred in the preparation
and submission of responses to this RFI nor for any activities associated with the industry
consultation.
9
DELIVERY ADDRESS FOR RFI RESPONSES
Responses to this RFI shall be sent to the Contracting Authority referenced above.
The closing date to submit a response is: January 13, 2014, 2:00 pm EST.
PCW RFI
7
Respondents are requested to provide their responses in one (1) printed copy and 2 copies on
CD-ROMs. The electronic file formats of the response must be in either the Adobe Portable
Document Format (PDF)TM or in a file format that is readable by the Microsoft OfficeTM Suite.
Provision of an electronic copy is required in order to facilitate the distribution of the RFI
responses to the PCW Project Team.
Responses are to be submitted in one of the two Official Languages of Canada (English or
French).
All the documentation submitted must be marked with the following:
Name of Respondent
PCW Project RFI Response - Reference # W6369-04DC01/A
Date (YYYY-MM-DD)
10
SECURITY REQUIREMENTS
The security requirements for the PCW Project are still to be determined. It is expected that
there will be a requirement for SECRET level facilities and clearances for both facility and staff.
The Respondents are requested to comment on their current and planned capabilities/facilities,
in terms of physical security and screened personnel, to address these requirements.
Respondents are encouraged to familiarize themselves with potential security provisions. Details
are available at: http://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/services/secinfo-eng.html.
11
CONTROLLED GOODS PROVISIONS
This Project may require the production of or access to controlled goods that are subject to the
Defence Production Act, the Respondents are encouraged to familiarize themselves with the
provisions of the Controlled Goods Program (CGP) at the earliest opportunity. Details on how to
register under the CGP are available at: http://ssi-iss.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/dmc-cgd/indexeng.html.
12
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AGREEMENTS (TAAs) AND INTERNATIONAL TRAFFIC IN ARMS
REGULATIONS (ITAR) PROVISIONS
This Project may require the production of or access to controlled goods that are subject to the
INTERNATIONAL TRAFFIC IN ARMS REGULATIONS (ITAR) of the United States of America for
which Technical Assistance Agreements (TAA) will be required to be in place in advance of Bid
Evaluation in order that ITAR-Controlled material may be included in any forthcoming proposed
solution. Respondents are encouraged to familiarize themselves with the ITAR provisions and
TAA requirements at the earliest opportunity. Details are available at:
http://www.pmddtc.state.gov/regulations_laws/itar_official.html.
PCW RFI
8