Attachment L-11- Questions and Answers 07.31.2025.pdf

89233125RNA000262

Questions and Answers

Attachment L-11 July 31, 2025

22 Pages Number RFP Section Question Answer 1 Confirm whether the government is open to proposals from small businesses to deliver the analytics and reporting components, either as a prime contractor or as a subcontractor supporting a larger systems integrator.

In accordance with (IAW) FAR 52.219-14 Limitations on Subcontracting the Prime 8(a) must performa at least 51% of the cost of contract performance not including materials.

Keep in mind: If the prime and subcontractor are considered affiliated for size determination purposes. This means that their sizes will be combined for the contract at issue, which could lead to the small business exceeding the size standard for the procurement. The prime contractor must demonstrate that it performs the primary and vital requirements of the contract and is not unduly reliant on the subcontractor.

Factors such as the subcontractor's status, the extent of reliance, and the nature of the work performed can influence this determination. See 13 C.F.R. § 121.103(h)(3).

2 Do both members of a Joint Venture (JV) have to hold current Q clearance at time of proposal submission? If both members hold Top Secret clearance will that suffice to meet the requirement?”

Clearance is required at time of award/start date (not required at time of proposal).

Top Secret is sufficient.

3 Governance Participation – Will contractor team members be permitted to participate in formal Governance Board meetings for backlog and roadmap alignment?

Yes. Contractor is expected to participate in CGB meetings and requirements gathering sessions.

4 DevSecOps Tooling – Will DOE/NNSA provide existing static code scanning, pipeline security, or infrastructure-as-code tools, or should these be provisioned by the contractor?

Government will provide all necessary tools.

5 Data Migration Scope – Will historical CATS data require cleansing, transformation, and migration support as part of modernization efforts?

In this context, data migration refers to data that CATS could consume from external systems in support of new capabilities. That data must be cleansed and mapped to the existing CATS data structure, which requires data analysis skills and knowledge of the CATS data structure. Existing CATS data does not require migration to a new platform or external system.

6 Access to CPCI System – Are there specific technical or access protocols to support API integration and interoperability testing with the CPCI system?

Integration with CPCI uses RESTful APIs and development is based on validation documentation and data dictionaries provided by the CPCI team. Interoperability testing is performed in non-production environments on both ends of the API.

7 Support Windows – Are there any expectations or requirements for supporting users or stakeholders during extended or after-hours periods?

Since the application is used across the U.S. there may be times where the contractor is needed after hours to resolve issues or support special projects. This is not typical and overtime is authorized by the CO as needed.

8 Budget Guidance – Does DOE/NNSA have a projected funding range or budget cap for the CATS modernization and support effort?

This competition is limited to qualified 8(a) small business participants and the government is allowing the offerors to propose pricing per the solicitation instructions.

9 Is Attachment L-10 Key Personnel Resume elements, only for informational purposes, providing specific details for required resume elements? Or, is it a template that resume content should be inserted into

Required resume elements and the template should used and populated.

10 Solicitation Instructions Tab 2a: Key Personnel (Page Limit: 3; Resume – 2 pages, Letter of Intent – 1 page) - Indicates 2-page resume. Attachment L-10 Key Personnel Resume Elements – Indicates resumes shall be limited to 3 pages. Can the Government clarify allowable page limits for the resume and allowable page limits for the Letter of Intent

Page limit is four (4): Three (3) page resume and one (1) page for letter of intent.

11 In Attachment L-1 Solicitation Instructions, past performance is limited to 9 pages, 3 pages per reference. Can the government clarify if offerors are to insert “Attachment L-6 Past Performance Project Sheet” into the response volume (as part of 3-page limit) or reference as a separate attachment?

Attachment L-6 Past Performance Project Sheet has been removed from the solicitation.

12 In Attachment L-1 Solicitation Instructions, CPARS are identified as preferred, but not required. Where does the Government want copies of CPARS included? Are CPARs in page count?

See revised L-and Submit CPARS in Volume II Technical submission as required by attachment L-1. CPARS submissions are not included in the page count.

13 Can the Government provide instructions on where “Attachment L-8 - Past Performance Questionnaires Contract List 04-18-2025 1 pg.xlsx” should be included in the response.

Do we insert in technical volume appendix, or submit as a stand-alone file? Can we assume it is not included in the page count?

Submit in Volume II Technical submission as required by attachment L-1. L-8 submissions are not included in the page count.

14 Attachment J-1 Performance Work Statement, Section G, page 11 indicates a requirement to migrate to the cloud. Has The Government determined to use Microsoft Azure for cloud hosting?

Yes. The migration to the cloud is underway and highly likely to be complete before the new award.

15 Attachment J-1 Performance Work Statement, is the system accredited with an ATO? Yes. The system is already accredited with an ATO and operating in production.

16 Attachment J-1 Performance Work Statement, does the Government have a software development environment with existing, approved tools to facilitate DevOps development efforts? Could the Government identify the approved tools?

We have multiple dev environments. Azure Dev Ops is the approved tool.

17 Is there an incumbent contractor? Yes the Incumbent is Chenega Professional & Technical Services, LLC 18 Can the Government provide the current contract number 89233119CNA000081 19 Factor 1 – Mission

Suitability Tab 2a: Key Personnel #2

The instructions in Attachment L-1, Solicitation Instructions to Offerors and Evaluation, mention the page limit for the resume is 2 pages with a 1-page limit for the letter of consent. However, in Attachment L-10, Key Personnel Resume Elements, the page limit for the resume is indicated as 3 pages. Is the page limit for the resume 2 pages or 3 pages?

Page limit is four (4): Three (3) page resume and one (1) page for letter of intent.

20 Factor 2 – Past Performance Tab 3

It is mentioned on page 5 in the Tab 3 paragraph that, “References with Government contracts and copies of CPARS are preferred but not required.” However, on page 6 in section (c), the solicitation says, “The Offeror is responsible for ensuring that all references are directed to return a copy of the questionnaire Attachment L-7 [Past Performance Questionnaire] directly to the Contracting Officer.” Can CPARS be substituted in lieu of Past Performance Questionnaires, or must Past Performance Questionnaires be submitted even if we submit CPARS with our past performance?

See updated language in L-1 rev 1

21 Sol_

89233125RNA000262

_Amd_0001 Proposal Preparation Instructions

“Electronic signatures are not accepted; therefore, a signed original Standard Form (SF) 328, “Certificate Pertaining to Foreign Interests”, executed in accordance with the instructions under provision NNS-L-1009 shall be submitted with each proposal under Volume 1, Tab 2.” Should an Offeror submit this even if they have facility clearance?

As of this Amendment, do we need to submit SF 328 in lieu of Attachment L-5 - FOCI

FCL?

Provide CAGE code per instructions in L-1

22 Sol_

89233125RNA000262

_Amd_0001 Proposal Preparation Instructions

Electronic signatures are not accepted; therefore, a signed original Standard Form (SF) 328, “Certificate Pertaining to Foreign Interests”, executed in accordance with the instructions under provision NNS-L-1009 shall be submitted with each proposal under Volume 1, Tab 2.” Are all subcontractors also required to submit the SF 328 form?

Yes; Yes all subcontractors must have their own facility clearance

23 Who developed the Clearance Action Tracking System (CATS) that was deployed in June 2019?

The existing development team and incumbent contractor - Chenega

24 Is CATS the personnel security system/system of record used across the entire Department of Energy? If not, what other systems existing within DOE that manage personnel security?

CATS is the system of adjudication and processing but the official system of record is eDISS/CPCI. All of DOE "works" in CATS. Final determinations and other data is transmitted to CPCI via an API. CPCI is read-only.

25 Is the government planning to modernize and/or replace the current CATS during the period of performance of this contract?

There are no plans to replace the system. CATS is consistently enhanced and modernized as new, more efficient/secure technology is identified.

26 Who is the incumbent vendor(s) currently supporting CATS? The Incumbent is Chenega Professional & Technical Services, LLC 27 What is the contract number for the incumbent contract? 89233119CNA000081 28 How many vendor resources currently support CATS? One 29 What are the unique roles on the vendor team currently supporting CATS? See PWS 2.0 for details 30 PWS 7.0 Does NNSA currently utilize USAccess, and if so, has its case management system been integrated with USAccess via an API connection? If no API connection exists, is NNSA interested in establishing one as part of future modernization efforts?

Yes, we use USAccess and have plans to implement an API connection.

31 PWS 7.0.A Does NNSA currently collect SEAD-3 data? If so, what methods or processes are used to receive this information from subjects?

Our CATS customer portal has an online information reporting tool

32 PWS 1.0 and 7.0 How does NNSA currently receive and process new applicant information, including the submission of required documents?

Our CATS customer portal has an electronic clearance action request tool

33 PWS 1.0 and 7.0 What automation capabilities are built into the current case management system? 33...Cases "flow" through the system and are assigned per DOE Order requirements.

Automation is used for data integration where APIs do not exist using SQL SSIS and for CI/CD pipelines using ADO. Continuous evaluation alerts and 92A SACs with no record results are auto-adjudicated. AI and RPA is not currently used in CATS.

34 PWS 7.0.A Has the case management system been integrated with ODNI’s CES for Continuous Evaluation reports?

No. ODNI does not offer an API but we are currently developing a more automated solution to ingest and validate ODNI alerts.

35 PWS 7.0.A What integrations or automations are currently in place to support Trusted Workforce requirements?

Auto-adjudication of no-record or duplicate CE alerts.

36 PWS 4.0.A Is NNSA open to adopting additional tools or technologies, beyond the existing stack, to modernize the case management system?

Yes, we encourage technical advancement and proactive lifecycle management so long as value and risk can be qualified/quantified in support of CATS functional requirements. All tools and technologies must be reviewed and approved by NA-IM prior to implementation following formal configuration management practices.

37 PWS 1.0 and 3.0.G Have any preliminary steps been taken to prepare for migration to Azure, or will this initiative begin under the new contract?

Yes. The migration to the cloud is underway and highly likely to be complete before the new award.

38 PWS 3.0.B What is the size and current state of the product backlog in Azure DevOps? Are backlog items primarily defect-related or new feature requests?

15 bugs and 173 PBIs. New feature requests.

39 PWS 4.0.A Are there any components or services currently in use that are not identified in the technology stack described in the PWS?

CATS is currently built on the .NET 9 framework. All new features are built with the Blazor feature of .NET, legacy modules use MVC. The current SQL version is 2019.

CATS UI components are based on the latest version of Progress Telerik UI libraries.

40 PWS 1.0 and 3.0.G What is the anticipated timeline and scope for migrating CATS to the cloud, and are there any defined milestones or dependencies we should plan for?

Yes. The migration to the cloud is underway and highly likely to be complete before the new award. End of FY25

41 Would the government consider extending the proposal response due date by 2 weeks to allow vendors the opportunity to incorporate the government’s responses to vendor questions?

Updated in Amendment 0003

42 What is the size and roles of the current team supporting CATS? Current team: Project Manager; Solutions Architect two Business Analysts, two Quality Assurance Specialists, and eight software engineers.

43 Is the scope of the current support contract the same as the scope of this solicitation? Although similar in scope, the solicitation is specific for this acquisition as the scope has increased to include cloud operations and maintenance and enhanced /automated software testing.

44 PWS 2.0 A, B Would the government consider revising the work experience requirement for the Project Manager and Solutions Architect roles under the DOE/NNSA scope?

Specifically, the current threshold of 5 to 10 years of DOE/NNSA-specific experience appears to disadvantage non-incumbent vendors. We respectfully recommend allowing relevant experience with personnel security or similar federal systems to satisfy these criteria.

Five years is necessary for both based on: the complexities of understanding both personnel security and information system management requirements, processes, and organizations within DOE/NNSA; application complexity; maintaining the current development and release pace; maintaining the security posture of the system and data; understanding how to quickly and appropriately navigate requirement, technical, integration, process, and documentation changes; and the amount of training and ramp-up/transition time it would take for applicants lacking DOE/NNSA-specific experience (two years minimum for a highly qualified candidate).

45 Transition Effort –

SF1447

The government has requested a 17 day FFP for transition and appears to overlap with base period T&M. Can the government clarify the following:

1. Will the existing incumbent staff continue to deliver planned deliverables of incumbent contract and not be required to support incoming transition?

2. Is the FFP supposed to cover the cost of additional transition team activities, requiring additional staff, such as badging, clearances, knowledge transfer, etc.?

3. What deliverables will be required of the incoming team during transition?

4. Are we to assume there will not be overlapping T&M deliverable efforts expected of the incoming contractor as well as the Firm Fixed Price effort?

1. Incumbent staff will continue to deliver per their contract

2. FFP covers labor hours during the transition to allow the new contractor to become familiar processes however the work remains with the incumbent.

3. see Attachment J-2 - Reporting Requirements Checklist

4. CLIN 00001 period of performance has been modified to reflect a reduction of 17 days. The 17 days for transition period is covered in CLIN 00003.

46 Proposal Evaluation Can the government provide a matrix or weightings for the technical evaluation criteria beyond Attachment L-1 narrative? Attachment L-1 states two factors as follows: Factor 1 – Mission Suitability and Factor 2 Past Performance. The Section M evaluation factors for award seem to be missing from the solicitation.

See amendment 0001 which incorporates Attachment M-1 Provisions into the solicitation.

Cost Model Attachment L-3

In reviewing the Cost Model spreadsheet (Attachment L-3), we noted that the worksheet tab titled “Subs - Tbl 2” does not appear to be linked or pulled into the “Summary” tab.

Could the Government please clarify how subcontractor costs input into the “Subs - Tbl 2” tab should be rolled into the Summary tab totals to ensure the final pricing reflects all team member contributions?

If this linkage is intentional, would the Government prefer Offerors to manually aggregate subcontractor totals into the Summary tab? Or will a revised model be issued with integrated formulas?

The sub costs should be captured in the Labor Hours and Summary Dollars and the Transition Period tables. We do not need the subcontractor costs to be included in the Summary tab. The contractor should provide a fully burdened rate and direct productive labor hours for each subcontractor employee. The labor rate should be included in the T&M Rates table and Labor Rate and Summary Dollars. The costs from the Labor Rate and Summary Dollars are linked to the Summary Table.

Clarification is provided in an updated spreadsheet.

Key Personnel Resume PWS 2A and Attachment L-10

Will the government consider expanding the key personnel resume page count allowance to 3? We don’t believe we can represent the experience, certifications and value to the government in 2 pages, given the layout constraints of using Attachment L- 10, and we want to maximize the government’s ability to evaluate the candidate thoroughly

Page limit is four (4): Three (3) page resume and one (1) page for letter of intent.

Instruction to Offerors Attachment L-1

Tab 1: Technical Approach (Page Limit: 20 pages) The Offeror shall describe its proposed technical approach to include citing relevant experience where similar activities were performed for accomplishing the Technical Requirements identified under PWS Sections 3.0, 4.0, 8.0, and 10.0.

We understand the government’s directions to address PWS sections 3, 4, 8 and 10 in the technical submittal volume. We want to ensure that our submission would not be deemed non-compliant by not addressing all the other aspects in the PWS. Would the government please confirm this direction?

Technical submission is only required to address PWS sections 3, 4, 8, and 10. It is the government's assumptions that the contractor can/will meet all other PWS requirements if selected. Only sections listed are being evaluated.

Reps & Certs

In the instructions to bidders the government has instructed, in the Reps and Certs section, to complete several documents including a reference for 52.215-3, called “Place of Performance”. In fact, that reference number is mistitled. Place of Performance is 52.219-6. 52.215-3 is titled “Request for Information or Solicitation for Planning Purposes”. Can the government clarify which rep/cert is required?

The FAR reference is updated in L-1 to reflect 52.215-6 Place of performance.

51 Can the government confirm it is sufficient for bidders to copy/paste the information related to NNS-K-1001 and NNS-K-1003 from the solicitation document into individual forms for submittal in Volume I? These forms do not seem to be readily available elsewhere.

Confirmed, the government will accept either the certifications in the solicitation or submitted is a separate document

SF1447

There appear to be errors on the SF1447 regarding CLINS. Firstly item 02001 on page 5 has a description of 01002 Year 2 ODC. We believe it should be year 2 Labor. Also on page 8 there appears to be erroneous information related to another ODC CLIN that is not required (immediately before CLIN 04001).

Corrected and included in Amendment 0003

53 The instructions regarding SF1447 seem to be contradictory. The government has asked for the form to be included in Volume I (Offer) but has also instructed bidders to include it in Volume III (Pricing).

Please submit two (2) separate versions per the solicitation instructions

54 The SF1447 that has been provided as part of the solicitation package cannot be edited due to a signature (invalid). Could the government please issue an editable version of the form for bidders to complete?

Wet signature & scan will be acceptable

55 Section M Factor 2 Past Performance

Will the Government please consider removing the requirement for Offerors to have a PPQ completed on contract references where there is a CPARS, which Offerors can provide copies of in their proposal?

See revised L-1

Section M Factor 2 Past Performance

Will the Government please provide evaluation criteria that outlines how the Government will clearly differentiate their evaluation on Past Performance amongst Offerors such as including the following recommended confidence ratings (or something similar)?

The government will make a decision based on a comparative assessment of the proposals against evaluation factors in the solicitation.

Performance Confidence Assessment Rating Adjectival Rating Substantial Confidence Satisfactory Confidence Neutral Confidence Limited Confidence No Confidence

57 Section M Factor 2 Past Performance

Will the Government please consider adding evaluation criteria that states the Government will review the Past Performance references in aggregate?

The government will evaluate the Offeror’s recent and relevant past performance to assess the Offeror’s ability to successfully perform the contract requirements as stated in the solicitation.

Will the Government please provide evaluation criteria that outlines how the Government will clearly differentiate their evaluation amongst Offerors such as including the following recommended rating table (or something similar)?

The government will evaluate the Offeror’s recent and relevant past performance to assess the Offeror’s ability to successfully perform the contract requirements as stated in the solicitation.

Adjectival Rating Outstanding Good Acceptable Marginal

Submission due date

Will the Government please extend the proposal submission due date to August 14th, to allow Offerors the time needed to adjust/modify their proposals as a result of responses to industry’s questions?

See Amendment 3 for updated proposal due date

PWS 2.0, A. Project Manager (Key Personnel)

Will the Government please revise the criteria to state that 5 of the 15 years must be as a manager for cross-functional teams supporting DOE or NNSA?

Per the PWS, the PM must possess a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Information Systems or similar Information Technology related discipline, paired with at least 15 years of experience in information systems/technology, five of which must be as a manager for cross-functional software engineering teams supporting DOE or NNSA.

60 Attachment L-1, Attachment L-2

Attachment L-2 requests a cost/price narrative to explain the basis of estimate, labor mix, escalation, etc. However, Attachment L-1 does not identify where or how this narrative should be included in Volume III. Should the cost/price narrative be submitted as a separate PDF file within Volume III alongside the Excel cost model, or embedded within the Excel file via comments or notes?

Cost/price narrative shall be submitted as a separate PDF file within Volume III

Section M Factor 1 Mission Suitability

61 Attachment L-1 Solicitation Instructions to Offerors and Evaluation

The SF1447 is required in both Volume I (fully signed and dated) and Volume III (with Block 22 completed). Can the Government confirm whether offerors must submit two separate versions of the SF1447, one included in Volume I to meet the signature requirement and another in Volume III to include CLIN pricing details, or if a single completed SF1447 with Blocks 13, 22, and 27 filled may be submitted once and used to satisfy both volume requirements?

Please submit two (2) separate versions per the solicitation instructions

62 Attachment J-1 PWS Section 1.0

"The contractor will assume responsibility for planning, migration, and operations of the cloud while NA-IM will continue to oversee all cyber activities." The PWS indicates that the Contractor will be responsible for all operations of the cloud-hosted CATS environment, while NA-IM retains oversight of cybersecurity. Can the Government clarify which post-migration functions (e.g., OS patching, platform monitoring, log collection, IIS/SQL configuration) will be performed by the Contractor versus retained by NA-IM?

Roles and responsibilities between NA-IM and NA-74 will be defined in a Cloud Service Agreement (CSA) - previously identified as an SLA in the PWS - which is not yet finalized. Generally speaking, NA-74 (Contractor) will be responsible for the deployment, configuration, and management of all CATS-specific resources in the tenant provided NA-74/Contractor staffs resources with the commensurate experience and qualifications, and NA-IM will be responsible for tenant-wide functions that are not CATS-specific, including incident response, compliance, log aggregation/analysis, patching, etc.

63 Attachment J-1 PWS Section 4.0(F)

The Contractor shall build and maintain CATS such that PIV Authentication…to users."

Can the Government confirm whether the Contractor is responsible for the entire Identity and Access Management (IAM) implementation, including role definitions, access control enforcement, and integration with external authentication providers (e.g., Okta, Azure AD)? Or will external authentication components be handled separately by

NA-IM?

The Contractor is responsible for ensuring that CATS integrates with enterprise identity providers and mechanisms. PIV authentication is required, OneID is the defined identity provider, and no others are required/expected. Authorization is managed within CATS using custom role-based access controls.

Attachment J-1 PWS Section 4.0(D) & 7.0(D)

“The Contractor shall use existing CATS technologies…” / “Completed work items will be demonstrated… pushed to an appropriate Stage environment for UAT.” Does the Government expect all future case management workflows to remain within the existing .NET/Blazor framework, or is integration with tools like Pega, UiPath, Tungsten, or other BPM/RPA systems permissible where automation or efficiency gains can be achieved?

Although CATS expects to remain on .NET, technical advancement and proactive lifecycle management is encouraged as long as value and risk can be qualified/quantified in support of CATS functional requirements. All tools and technologies must be reviewed and approved by NA-IM (for use in hosting environment and within CATS) and/or DOE (for use on issued laptops) prior to implementation following formal configuration management practices.

General

Will proposals be accepted from offerors who have initiated the Q-clearance and FOCI processes but may not have final clearance determinations by the proposal due date, provided proof of submission and in-process status is included?

Yes

66 Are incumbents allowed to submit proposals again? yes: This competition is limited to qualified 8(a) small business participants and the government is allowing eligible participants to propose per the solicitation instructions.

67 The response mentions three past performances; are there specific requirements regarding whether they should come from a Prime or Subcontractor? Please suggest a preference.

No preference.

68 Are there any requirements for the contract vehicle? Per the solicitation DOE/NNSA plans to issue a single award, hybrid contract, comprised of Time and Material (T&M) and Fixed-Price (FP) Unit Cost Contract Line Items Numbers (CLINs).

69 As the incumbent is Tribal 8(a), are regular SBA-certified 8(a) businesses equally eligible?

Yes-This competition is limited to qualified 8(a) small businesses.

70 If the proposed resources are unavailable at the time of potential contract award, can vendors replace them with equally qualified resources?

See the minimum qualification as stated in the PWS.

71 Is there a mandatory subcontracting requirement for this contract? If yes, is there a specific subcontracting goal?

For 8(a) set-aside contracts, there are subcontracting limitations, requiring the 8(a) firm to perform a certain percentage of the work with their own employees. This ensures the 8(a) program's goal of developing these businesses is met, rather than allowing them to simply act as pass-throughs.

72 Are there restrictions on candidates holding work permits, such as H1-B, Green Card, or U.S. Citizenship?

Yes. Work requires a Q Clearance, which will only be granted to U.S. Citizens. See DOE Order 472.2A change 1

73 Are there specific clearance requirements, such as Public Trust, Secret, or Top Secret? Yes; See attachment L-4

74 What is the anticipated financial scope or headcount for the project? Are there any caps? This competition is limited to qualified 8(a) small business participants and the government is allowing the offerors to propose pricing per the solicitation instructions.

75 Is there a preference for companies that have prior experience working with Department of Energy?

Per PWS 2.0 DOE/NNSA-specific experience is required for proposed PM and strongly desired for other positions supporting the contract

RFP

89233125RNA000262

The solicitation does not indicate whether this effort is a follow-on to an existing contract. Could the Government please confirm whether there is a current incumbent contractor performing work related to the Clearance Action Tracking System (CATS) and the name of the incumbent?

Yes the Incumbent is Chenega Professional & Technical Services, LLC

RFP

89233125RNA000262

If there is no incumbent, could the Government identify any vendors or contractors presently performing similar or supporting services for the Office of Personnel and Facility Clearances and Classification (OPFCC) or systems like CATS (e.g., CPCI), either within DOE/NNSA or affiliated offices?

there is and the Incumbent is Chenega Professional & Technical Services, LLC

78 Attachment J-1 – Performance Work Statement

Will the Government provide documentation on the current CATS system architecture, workflows, and configuration artifacts (e.g., database schema, code repository access) to facilitate accurate estimation and transition planning?

Due to the sensitivity of the information it would only be provided after award.

Attachment J-1 – Performance Work Statement

Section 2.0 of the PWS provides offerors with the listing of Required Positions and Position Qualifications, to include the minimum number of personnel by position expected by the Government. By our count, a tally of the minimum number of positions (personnel) specified in paragraphs A – I of PWS Section 2.0 equals 20 personnel.

see Section 2.0 of the PWS which provides offerors with the listing of Required Positions and Position Qualifications, to include the minimum number of personnel by position expected by the Government.

Attachment J-1 – Performance Work Statement

Section ii. Staffing Plan of Attachment M-1 Evaluation Factors for Award states that the offeror’s proposed staffing will be evaluated to ensure the minimum required positions are proposed, with the statement that failure to meet the minimum required positions may result in elimination without further consideration. Given the emphasis and potential severity placed by the Government on the evaluation of the minimum required positions, can the Government confirm that the minimum number of positions is 20 across the labor category titles in paragraphs A-I of PWS Section 2.0 or otherwise specify the minimum number of expected positions/personnel pursuant to this stated evaluation criteria?

see Section 2.0 of the PWS which provides offerors with the listing of Required Positions and Position Qualifications, to include the minimum number of personnel by position expected by the Government.

81 Attachment J-1 – Performance Work Statement

Are there any specific monitoring or SIEM tools (e.g., Splunk, Azure Monitor, Sentinel) that the contractor is required to use for application and system monitoring/logging?

NA-IM is responsible for all cybersecurity and tenant-level/hosting environment monitoring . Contractor is required to conduct only monitoring as stated in the PWS Section 3.0(H), which is currently being performed using native SQL functionality.

82 Attachment J-1 – Performance Work Statement

The PWS mentions dynamic and static code analysis tools (e.g., Checkmarx, WebInspect, Invicti). Will licenses and access to these tools be Government-furnished, or must the contractor acquire and manage them?

Software is provided by the inhouse hosting provider and not charged to the contract

Attachment J-1 – Performance Work Statement

What is the anticipated timeline and volume of new development tasks associated with Trusted Workforce 2.0 initiatives, and does DOE expect all modules to be fully functional by a specific milestone date?

As it relates to this RFP, Contractor is responsible for completing development activities as they become prioritized and approved by NA-74 Product Owners. TW

2.0 is broad and Department requirements and timelines are subject to change, all of which is outside the scope of this RFP. Development work related to TW 2.0 will be evaluated against the existing backlog and prioritized by the Government using state resource allotments.

Attachment J-1 – Performance Work Statement

For the data migration effort, will the Government provide data dictionaries or sample data sets from legacy environments to support planning and validation?

In this context, data migration refers to data that CATS could consume from external systems in support of new capabilities. That data must be cleansed and mapped to the existing CATS data structure, which requires data analysis skills and knowledge of the CATS data structure. Existing CATS data does not require migration to a new platform or external system.

85 Attachment L-1 Solicitation Instructions

Attachment L-1, Section 3.3, states: “Offerors may include a Cover Page and Table of Contents for each volume which will not be included in the page count.” Is a Cover Letter also acceptable and will it be exempt from page count?

Cover letters would be considered in the page count

Attachment L-1 Solicitation Instructions

The instructions for Volume I, Tab 1 state: “In addition, the RFP and any subsequent amendments must be acknowledged electronically in FedConnect.” Is there a specific place in FedConnect where Offerors are to acknowledge the RFP and amendments?

Please clarify.

Offerors are encouraged to check FedConnect for current amendments.

Attachment L-1 Solicitation Instructions

The instructions for Volume I, Tab 2 state: “Fill out Attachment L-5, FOCI FCL Verification Spreadsheet.” Since Volume I is required to be submitted in Adobe Acrobat or Microsoft Word (per Attachment L-1, Section 3.4) and Attachment L-5 is an Excel spreadsheet, please confirm that it is to be submitted as a separate attachment to Volume I, Tab 2.

Yes please submit L-5 in excel format

88 Attachment L-1 Solicitation Instructions

Under Volume I, Tab 3, one of the listed Section K clauses is 52.215-3, Place of Performance. Please confirm that it should instead be 52.215-6.

The FAR reference is updated in L-1 the reflect 52.215-6 Place of performance.

Attachment L-1 Solicitation Instructions

The instructions for Volume I, Tab 2a require the submission of Attachment L-9, Key Personnel Matrix. Since Volume II is required to be submitted in Adobe Acrobat or Microsoft Word (per Attachment L-1, Section 3.4) and Attachment L-9 is an Excel spreadsheet, please confirm that it is to be submitted as a separate attachment to Volume II, Tab 2a.

No specific location in Vol II and L-9 is not included in the page count

90 Attachment L-1 Solicitation Instructions

The instructions require past performance submissions for major subcontractors with estimated annual value over $100K. Could the Government clarify whether this $100K threshold applies per year or to the total value over the life of the contract?

Annual = per year

Attachment L-1 Solicitation Instructions

Volume II, Factor 2 (Tab 3) states that Attachment L-6 and Attachment L-7 are required to be submitted; however, the solicitation does not explicitly state that Attachment L-8, Past Performance Questionnaires Contract List, needs to be submitted. Please confirm that Offerors are required to submit Attachment L-8 as a separate Excel attachment to Volume II, Factor 2 (Tab 3).

See Questions 11 & 13, L-8 is required to know who should be sending CO the PPQs. not required if submitting CPARS in place of the PPQ.

92 Attachment L-1 Solicitation Instructions

Volume II, Factor 2 (Tab 3) states that a DUNS Number is required for Past Performance. Please confirm that this should instead be the SAM Unique Entity Identifier.

DUNS Number is no longer required for Past Performance. Confirmed the SAM Unique Entity Identifier is requested.

Attachment L-1 Solicitation Instructions

Volume II, Factor 2 (Tab 3) states: “Offerors, including entities comprising joint ventures, and any major subcontractors…shall provide information on up to three past contracts...” Please confirm that Offerors are to submit a collective total of up to three past contracts across their entire team, including joint venture entities and subcontractors (and NOT up to three past contracts per joint venture entity or per major subcontractor).

See revised L-1

94 Attachment L-1 Solicitation Instructions

Volume III requires a completed SF1447. Please confirm that the Government’s intent is for the same SF1447 to be provided in Volume I and Volume III (but with Block 22 completed in the Volume III version).

Please submit two (2) separate versions per the solicitation instructions

Attachment L-2 – Pricing Instructions

Section (a)(4) of Attachment L-2 Pricing Instructions refers to the Cost Model for this solicitation as “RFP Attachment 4”; however, the list of Enclosures within Amendment 0001 refers to the Cost Model as Attachment L-3. Please clarify which Attachment reference is correct.

See L-2 Rev 1

Attachment L-2 – Pricing Instructions

Section (a)(5) of Attachment L-2 states: “Offerors shall complete and submit the electronic Cost Model in Microsoft Excel version 2013 or lower.” However, Attachment L-1 (Section 3.4) states: “Proposal files are to be formatted in the following applications:…and Volume III – Excel 2000 (or higher, unlocked with formulas intact).”

Should Volume III be submitted in Excel version 2013 or lower or Excel version 2000 or higher?

See L-1 Rev 1

97 Attachment L-2 – Pricing Instructions

Section (a)(6) of Attachment L-2 requires a price narrative. Please confirm there is no page limit for the price narrative.

Attachment L-1 (p. 6) Paragraph 3.7 states "VOLUME III -Price Submission (no Page Limit)

98 Attachment L-2 – Pricing Instructions

Referencing paragraphs (a)(3) and (b) of Attachment L-2 – Pricing Instructions, please confirm that team member price proposals need only provide the necessary detail to support their proposed labor category rates proposed to the prime.

Yes

Attachment L-2 – Pricing Instructions

Paragraph (b) instructs offerors that a copy of these [pricing] instructions shall be provided to all potential team members that will provide Direct Productive Labor Hours (DPLHs) under this effort. Paragraph (b) further defines team members as any members of a joint venture or partnership, Limited Liability Company or Partnership (LLC/LLP), and any subcontractors. Given the instruction that all team member proposals shall be received by the due date/time in the solicitation, can the Government confirm its expectation that team members will utilize Attachment L-3 Cost Model to detail the buildup of their pricing data provided to the prime and submit that proprietary data directly to the Government?

Additionally, please confirm that if a team member elects to provide their price buildup directly to their prime contractor for inclusion in the prime’s submission that a separate proposal submission by that team member would not be required.

Yes- submit to the Contracting Officer & Contract Specialist Yes- if submitted to Prime

100 Attachment L-2 – Pricing Instructions

Could the Government clarify if there is a standard or recommended number of annual DPLH (e.g., 1,880 hours) expected for pricing consistency?

The government is allowing the offerors to propose pricing per the solicitation instructions.

Attachment L-3 – Cost Model

The instructions in Row 7 of the Labor Rate Pricing tab in Attachment L-3 Cost Model indicate that: “For pricing purposes, assume a contract start date of September 15, 2025.” However, paragraph (d)(5) of Attachment L-2 Pricing Instructions and Section

3.8 of Attachment L-1 Solicitation Instructions stipulates that offerors are to assume a start date of March 9, 2026, with corresponding dates identified for the Base Period and Option Years 1 through 4. Please confirm that the start date and dates listed for the Base Period and Option Years listed in Section 5 of Attachment L-2 and Section 3.8 of Attachment L-1 are correct for pricing purposes.

See attachment L-3 Rev 1

102 Attachment L-7 – Past Performance Questionnaire

Question 2 asks for the contract number. Directly underneath that question are yes and no checkboxes. Please clarify if those boxes refer to the existence of a contract number or something different.

L-7 had been revised to remove those boxes

103 Attachment L-1, Section 3.3

Would the government allow the inclusion of a glossary of acronyms and abbreviations outside of page count?

Please submit proposals per Attachment L-1- a glossary would be included in the page count

104 Attachment L-1, Section 3.5

Would the government confirm that an “image area of 7x9” indicates that left and right margins should be 0.75 inches and top and bottom margins should be one inch?

See L-1 Rev 1 update to paragraph 3.5

105 Attachment L-1, Section 3.5 Attachment L-6

May offerors reformat the past performance project sheet in Attachment L-6, ensuring all elements are included to optimize the three-page limit? Reformatting appears to also be necessary as the version provided to offerors in Attachment L-6 is larger than the permitted 7x9 image area per RFQ section 3.5.

See questions 11 & 105

106 Attachment L-1, Section 3.6 Attachment L-3

If offerors are required to provide their price narrative in the Attachment L-3 Cost Model, should offerors use the same font and sizing conventions as articulated in Attachment L-1 Section 3.6 for the Microsoft Word Volume I and II submissions (e.g., Times New Roman 12pt. font)?

Use the font and sizing provided in L-3

107 Attachment L-1, Section 3.7, Volume I Attachment L-5

May the government confirm that offerors need to provide a completed Attachment L-5 in addition to Volume I at the time of proposal submission?

Confirmed; yes please submit L-5 in excel format

108 Attachment L-1, Section 3.7, Volume II, Factor 1, Tab 2 Attachment L-10

Would the government please confirm that 3 pages are allocated for the Key Personnel resume and letter of commitment in total? Attachment L-10 indicates the resume is limited to three pages, while L-1 sets a 2-page limit, plus one page for the letter of commitment.

Page limit is four (4): Three (3) page resume and one (1) page for letter of intent.

109 Attachment L-1, Section 3.7, Volume II, Factor 2, Tab 3

Would the government confirm that offerors who are submitting CPARS do not need to submit a PPQ for the same project reference?

See Questions 11 & 13, L-8 is required to know who should be sending CO the PPQs. not required if submitting CPARS in place of the PPQ.

110 Attachment L-1, Section 3.7, Volume II, Factor 2, Tab 3

Would the government confirm that CPARS may be included as an Appendix to the Volume II submission and are outside of page count?

Confirmed

111 Attachment L-1, Section 3.7, Volume II, Factor 2, Tab 3

If CPARS are being used in lieu of PPQs, can the government confirm that only project references that require a PPQ are to be included in Attachment L-8?

Confirmed

112 Attachment L-1, Section 3.7, Volume II, Factor 2, Tab 3 Attachment L-8

Is Attachment L-8 required to be submitted as a separate document or included in Volume II? If included in Volume II, is it acceptable for offerors to provide the L-8 information in an Appendix outside of page count?

See revised L-1

Attachment L-1, Volume III, 1.

The instructions state "Attachment L-3 is provided to Offerors in a Microsoft Office Excel format. Offerors shall not alter the format of the workbook except that column(s) may be widened…" Please confirm that we can alter the workbook to increase the number of rows to accommodate the number of Labor Categories as required by the minimum staffing levels and Attachment J-1 PWS.

The workbook may be altered to increase the number of rows to accommodate the number of Labor Categories as required by the minimum staffing levels and Attachment J-1 PWS.

Attachment L-1, Section 3.7, Volume III Attachment L-2 Pricing instructions, (d), (1)

Please confirm that the government is expecting a price submission that includes a completed attachment L-3 cost model and a separate price proposal that contains the Price Proposal cover sheet, completed SF1447 block 22 and any supporting pricing narratives, methodologies, and other supporting pricing information.

Confirmed; submit two (2) separate versions per the solicitation instructions

Attachment L-1 Section 3.8, Attachment L-2 Pricing Instructions, (d), (5), Attachment L-3 Labor Rate Pricing Tab and Labor Hours and Summary Dollars Tab

The instructions in the Attachment L-3 Labor Rate Pricing Tab state "For pricing purposes, assume a contract start date of September 15, 2025", and in the Labor Hours and Summary Dollars tab, the period of performance is written as 12/01/2020 – 11/30/2025. However, Attachment L-1 Page 6 Section 3.8 and Attachment L-2 Pricing Instructions Period of Performance states: "Base Period (Year 1): 03/09/2026 to 03/08/2027." Please confirm if these dates were intended to be different and whether offerors should use the September 15, 2025 date for pricing purposes or the 03/09/2026 date.

see attachment L-3 Rev 1

Attachment L-2 Pricing I

The pricing instructions in attachment L-2 state that “the Offeror shall identify its proposed prices by completing and submitting the Cost Model (see RFP Attachment 4."

Can the government confirm that the RFP Attachment in this instruction should reflect Attachment L-3 Cost Model and not Attachment L-4?

See L-2 Rev 1

Attachment L-6

For the past performance project sheet section that requests “provide information on any problems encountered and your corrective actions (not included in page count)”, how would the government prefer for this information to be presented outside of page count?

Is it acceptable for offerors to provide this content in an Appendix to Volume II?

yes that is acceptable

Attachment L-6

In the past performance project sheet, if the Contracting Officer Representative is also the Customer POC/Project Manager, are we required to provide the COR’s contact information twice (both in the customer POC field and the government agency POC field)?

Attachment L-6 Past Performance Project Sheet has been removed from the solicitation.

Attachment J-1, Section

Please confirm that all offerors are required to bid the minimum staffing levels and labor categories as they are listed in Attachment J-1 Performance Work Statement?

Correct

Attachment M-1 (h)

Is it the government’s intent to assess proposals using an adjectival rating scale of exceptional, good, satisfactory, marginal, and unsatisfactory, based on the adjectival ratings that were referenced in Attachment M-1 (marginal and unsatisfactory)?

The government will evaluate the Offeror’s recent and relevant past performance to assess the Offeror’s ability to successfully perform the contract requirements as stated in the solicitation.

121 Performance Work State Please identify the target Cloud environment for CATS modernization. Microsoft Azure 122 Solicitation Instructions Please Confirm Volume II has a total page allocation of 38 pages consisting of 29 pages for Factor 1 and 9 pages for Factor 2.

There has been a revision to L-1 and the correct page limit is 39

123 Solicitation Instructions Is remote work permitted for resources other than the PM? See PWS Section 17 124 Performance Work

Statement What tools are used to implement the Customer Service Portal? As a .NET application, the CSP uses the same development tools as CATS.

125 Performance Work Statement

What are the current monitoring tools used in the hosting environment? NA-IM is responsible for all cybersecurity and tenant-level/hosting environment monitoring . Contractor is required to conduct only monitoring as stated in the PWS Section 3.0(H), which is currently being performed using native SQL functionality.

126 Solicitation Instructions If a cross reference table is provided, is it outside of current page count?

127 Performance Work

Statement CATS duplicates some functionality available from DCSA, can this DCSA functionality be NBIS be leveraged during cloud migration and modernization?

The program has piloted NBIS and it does not meet the need.

128 Attachment L-1 States that the KP resume is limited to 2 pages, yet attachment L-10 says the KP resume is limited to 3 pages. Could you please clarify the limit on the KP resume and the LOI?

Page limit is four (4): Three (3) page resume and one (1) page for letter of intent.

129 Attachment L-1 - Based on the instructions and page limitations for Volume II it does not appear there was any page allocation given to the L-9 KP Matrix in the staffing plan.

Could you please clarify where the L-9 KP Matrix should be located in Volume II and the page allocation for this attachment?

No specific location in Vol II and L-9 is not included in the page count

130 Attachment L-1 – Factor 2 Past Performance states that each L-6 Past Performance Project sheet is limited to 3 pages per contract for a total of 9 pages. However, in subsection (c) it further states that the offeror, major subks (>$100K of estimated annual value) and JV members may submit L-6 past performance project sheets – if this is the case then the page count of 9 pages would be exceeded.