A19_RFP_Amendment 2_Vendor_Questions and Answers.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 24 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 1605C3-25-R-00002
About this file
This file is a Questions and Answers (Q&A) document for the Department of Labor's Site Exposure Matrices (SEM) Scientific and Technical Services solicitation (1605C3-25-R-00002). The labor-hour contract will support the Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, Division of Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation, requiring scientific and technical services related to documenting worker exposures to toxic substances across Department of Energy sites. Key details include a contract proposal due date of August 15, 2025 at 2:00 PM ET, with a Q security clearance requirement and provisions for handling classified documents.
The Q&A document addresses numerous technical and administrative questions, including clarifications on labor categories, pricing template updates, training requirements, database specifications, and security protocols. Notable requirements include maintaining a database of toxic substance and disease correlations, conducting in-person or virtual trainings, and adhering to specific personnel qualifications such as education levels for roles like SEM Database Manager and Database Administrators. The solicitation includes small business subcontracting goals and requires vendors to demonstrate maximum practicable opportunities for various small business categories, with a full subcontracting plan based on FAR 52.219-9 mandatory.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| A19_RFP_Attachment 3 - Pricing Template Updated.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| A19_RFP Amendment 2_Computer Security Handbook.docx | DOCX document | |
| A19_RFP_Amendment 2.pdf | ||
| A19_RFP_Amendment 1.pdf | ||
| A19_RFP_Attachment 4 - Wage Determination.pdf | ||
| A19_RFP_Attachment 3 - Pricing Template.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| A19_RFP_Attachment 5 - Subcontract Plan Template.docx | DOCX document | |
| A19_RFP_Attachment 2 - PPQ.pdf | ||
| A19_RFP_Attachment 1 - Vendor Questions Template.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| A19_RFP_1605C3-25-R-00002.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
PWS Technical Questions
| Vendor RFQ Question(s) Template | |||||
| Question Number | Document / PWS Section/ | ||||
| Reference | Page | Question | Responses | ||
| 1 | A19_RFP_1605C3-25-R-00002.pdf | 1 | The government indicates proposals are due July 23, 2025 at 1400; would the government grant an extension of one (1) week for the due date extending it to July 30 at 1400? | Yes, the proposals due 8/15/25 at 2pm (ET) | |
| 2 | A19_RFP_Attachment_3_-_Pricing_Template | The Pricing Template indicates NTE for the Travel CLINS (if required) but does not provide a NTE value. Can the government indicate a NTE value for the Travel CLINS. | 0002: $28,500; 1002:$29,600; 2002: $30,000; 3002: $32,000; 4002: $33,000 |
Updated pricing template is attached and titled "A19_RFP_Attachment 3 - Pricing Template Updated"
| 3 | Government Furnished Property, Equipment, And Services | 3&4, 20 | Can the government provide additional details on CLINS 0003, 1003, 2003, 3003 and 4003 in terms of what ODCs these CLINS have covered historically, i.e. GFE such as laptops and peripherals needed by staff as "equipment" would fall under these CLINS, but what additional materials or direct costs has the government deemed as approved and allowable under the current contract for these ODC CLINS? | Office expenses, software licenses, cyber security, expert consultation, and expenses related to data services. |
| 4 | Government Furnished Property, Equipment, And Services | 3&4, 20 | Is the labor required to maintain the secure limited access area an allowed cost under CLINS 0003, 1003, 2003, 3003 and 4003? | No |
| 5 | 1.3.6 Training, explaining and addressing inquiries: | 7 | Can the government provide examples of the typical audience type that request training on the SEM outside of those groups mentioned in 1.3.6? | DOL staff, claimants, authorized representatives, advocacy groups, advisory boards. |
| 6 | 1.3.6 Training, explaining and addressing inquiries: | 7 | Can the government confirm if the required trainings are to be conducted in person? | Trainings are in-person or virtual as needed and do not occur on a regular schedule. |
| 7 | 1.3.6 Training, explaining and addressing inquiries: | 7 | Please provide the number of trainings conducted in FY 24 and how many were virtual vs. in person. | FY24 SEM trainings were conducted by DOL staff. However, the contractor may be asked to provide trainings if there is a need. |
| 8 | 1.3.1, 1.3.5 | 7 | Please describe the technology stack of the internal and external systems used by the project. Is this in a cloud computing environment, government data center, or contractor managed data center. | This information is proprietary to the current vendor. |
| 9 | 1.3.1 | 7 | Please provide database dictionary, database size, and row counts of the tables. | The SEM DB table that expresses the correlations between: |
Work process Area Facility Building Labor Category Toxic Material Incident and Contractor currently has 1,041,831 rows.
The SEM DB table that expresses linkages between toxic substances and diseases currently has 9,587 rows, of which 7,163 are indicated as “active” links.
| 10 | 1.3 | 7 | Please describe the workflow process and how information is gathered, collated in the database, and transferred to the publicly accessible database. | Contractor works with DOE staff and contractors at covered sites to collect information realted to labor categories, work processes, accidents, and toxins. The relationship between toxic substances and diagnosed illnesses shown in SEM are based on data sources reported by authoritative bodies such as the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), the National Toxicology Program (NTP), the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), International Labour Organization (ILO), as well as disease links identified in toxic substance databases such as Haz-Map® and the Collaborative for Health & Environment (CHE) Toxicant and Disease Database and accepted by DOL. Updates are made to the publicly accessible after undergoing a bi-annual security classification review by DOE. |
| 11 | 1.3.1,1.3.5 | 7 | What is the lifecycle plan for the code and database? Is any of the technology End-of-Life or End-of-Support? | This information is proprietary to the current vendor. |
| 12 | Specific Technical Requirements; 2) Physical Data Security | 8 and 80 | For planning purposes, what is the frequency/volume levels of working with the various levels of classified documents i.e., Top Secret Restricted Data, Formerly Restricted Data, National Security Information, and Secret Restricted Data? | The volume is varied. The information requires a Q Security clearance. |
| 13 | 1.6.8.2.1 | 10 | "Can you provide an rough volume and level of classification for classified materials currently held in support of this contract and in what form (paper, digital, etc.)? What is the highest classification and are there any categories that require additional read-in or special access?" | The volume is varied. The information may be in paper and/or digital form. |
| 14 | Attachment 26; 1.6.8.2 Personal Information and Privacy: | 11 | Can you provide US DOL Computer Security Handbook (DOL’s implementation of NIST SP |
800 53). (Reference Attachment 25 - Computer Security Handbook 5.0)
• DLMS – 9 – Chapter 1200, DOL Safeguarding Sensitive Data Including Personally Identifiable Information (Reference Attachment 26 - Department of
| Labor Manual Series (DLMS) 9 Chapter 1200) | This information is provided as an attachment titled "A19_RFP Amendment_Computer Security Handbook" | ||||
| 15 | 1.6.12 Key Personnel: | 14 | Can the government clarify if the Contract Manager and the PM are the same position, and if so, would the government prefer Contract Manager or Program Manager to be used in the proposal? | Yes, they are used interchangeably | |
| 16 | RFP and Attachment 3 - Pricing Template | 15-17 | The RFP provides education and experience requirements for a SEM Clinical Profile Manager (CPM), Facility Security Officer (FSO) and SEM Medical Consultant (MC), however; these roles are not included in the A19_RFP_ Attachment_3_Pricing_Template (Pricing Template). Can the government provide guidance on pricing these personnel to include estimated hours for each of the three roles since they are not included in the Pricing Template? | Yes, additonal catergories have been added to the updated pricing template. | |
| 17 | Field Security Officer | 17 | In the Experience section for FSO, could the government clarify if DoD Secret and Confidential documents would require a DoD clearance or will the Q Clearance be adequate? | Q clearance is adequate | |
| 18 | 1.6.12.1 Non-Key Personnel | 17 | The SEM Database Manager (DBM) requires a Bachelor's degree from an accredited university or college. Would the government consider modifying the degree requirement to an associates degree in conjunction with 15 or more years of relevant experience in database development? | No | |
| 19 | SEM Database Administrators (DBA) | 18 | Would the government consider accepting a HS diploma and years of experience in lieu of a college degree, similar to the FSO position? | No | |
| 20 | Government Furnished Property, Equipment, And Services | 20 | Can the government indicate the number of laptops currently in use as GFE for this project? | The number of laptops is contingent upon the number of contractor employees that are working the requirement. The contractor does not maintain GFE. | |
| 21 | Section 4.2 Clearance 1.6.9 | 22 | If individuals do not have a clearance, will there be applicable time to obtain one? | Please refer to section 4.2 Clearance: |
The Contractor shall possess or be eligible to receive and maintain a “Q Clearance” from the DOE, prior to the commencement of work for all employees providing services in support of this contract.
| 22 | Specific Task - Services 5.1.7 | 23 | Please provide additional details on the minimum requirements /standards for securing the DOE data, i.e. if a vendor meets the DoD/Intelligence Community standards (ICD-705) and a SCIF, will that be sufficient for handling the classified data and materials for this contract. | Requirements and standards must meet DOE standards for securing DOE data. |
| 23 | Technical Exhibit 1 | 26 | It is our understanding that the public facing version of the SEM database used Adobe Cold Fusion as a platform. What is the version of Adobe Cold Fusion for the Database? | This information is proprietary to the current vendor. |
| 24 | FAR Clauses | 37 | Can the government clarify if there is a requirement for classified operations or protection of classified information, if so, the contractor will ensure requirements are met with a full battery of requirements (CFRs, EOs, NISP, CNSSI, DOE Directives…). For NIOSH, we are required to maintain a DOE Facility Clearance and Q access authorizations (personnel security clearances), provided that all classified information remains at the visited sites and exported data is reviewed by site classification staff to ensure no classified information ends up on the SRDB or elsewhere. So we have access to classified, but no storage capabilities. | There is a requirement for the protection of classified information. |
| 25 | Table: Subcontracting Category Percentage Goals - Small business (all types) | 78 and 82 | "These goals are considered to be minimum allocations per category". If the prime does not have 65% of Small businesses, even with subbing, will we be compliant? The last bullet, page 82 states in no case are "zero" goals accepted, and failure to submit a plan that meets the percentage requirements (goals) set forth by the CO for all small business categories may render their proposal nonresponsive. | No, a proposal will not be deemed non responsive if the Subcontracting Plan does not meet all goals set forth by the CO. However, the vendor's detailed subcontracting plan should describe how the vendor is affording maximum practicable opportunity for small business, veteran-owned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business, small disadvantaged business, and women-owned small business concerns to participate, and the burden placed on offerors. |
The bullet that was on page 77 of the RFP, that stated "In no case are “zero” goals accepted, failure to submit a plan that meets the percentage requirements (goals) set forth by the Contracting Officer for all small business categories may render the proposal nonresponsive", has been removed and updated information has been added to explain the above direction.
| 26 | VOLUME IV – SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN; | 76 | Page 76 of 81 of the solicitation, states that “Offerors shall submit a plan using the template provided in the Subcontracting Plan Summary Sheet, Attachment 5;” however, the paragraph above that requirement states that “The Offeror’s Subcontracting Plan shall address all elements of FAR 52.219-9.” Does submission of the Summary Sheet only satisfy this requirement or is a full subcontracting plan based on FAR 52.219-9 required? | A full subcontracting plan based on FAR 52.219-9 is also required. The Summary sheet is just a snapshot of the % goals that the prime vendor is proposing. |
| 27 | Table: Subcontracting Category Percentage Goals | 77 | Page 77 of 81 of the solicitation requires the provision of cage codes for the primary bidder and all proposed small business subcontractors; however, there is not a space for this to be included in the Subcontracting Plan Summary Sheet, Attachment 5. Should this be provided as a separate document? | This information should be provided in your detailed subcontracting plan. The Summary sheet is just a snapshot of the % goals that the prime vendor is proposing. |
| 1 | Solicitation 1605C3-25-R-00002; PWS Section 1.6.12.1 Non-Key Personnel; and Attachment 3, Pricing Template | 15-18 | Section 1.6.12.1 identifies two non-key personnel categories not included in the Pricing Template - SEM Chemical Profile Manager (CPM), and Facility Security Officer (FSO). Can those positions be added as additional labor categories with their associated hours in Attachment 3 Pricing Template submissions? | Yes, additonal catergories have been added to the updated pricing template. |
| 2 | Solicitation 1605C3-25-R-00002; PWS Section 1.6.8.2.1 Personal Information and Privacy, and 1.6.8.4 System Security | 10-11 and 12-13 | These sections invoke NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-53, Rev. 5, and assign a "Moderate" rating under FIPS PUB 199. Currently SEM's ATO is for Rev 4 and "Low" rating. Would DOL consider maintaining the rating as "Low"? Section 1.8.4.4 requires "the equivalent of an Authority to Operate" under the 800-53 standard. Would DOL consider an ATO equivalent under NIST SP 800-171, as typically used for non-Federal information systems and organizations? Complying with the RFP as stated will potentially necessitate a significant increase in both funding and labor hours. | The current contract requires the equivalent of an authority to operate using the |
NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-53, Rev. 4, Security and Privacy Controls for Federal Information Systems and Organizations moderate controls as a guide to provide reasonable assurance to the government that the appropriate security controls have been implemented on the system to safeguard any PII or other classified information contained in the database. The current contract also states the contractor shall adhere to DOL and Federal security standards as they apply for “moderate” systems (defined by FIPS PUB 199) and be in compliance with NIST SP 800-18, NIST 800-30, NIST SP 800-37, DLMS Ch. 400, and NIST SP 800-63-3. The government intends to maintain the same level of requirements that currently exists.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .