Addendum No 2 - Questions & Answers DEP RFI No. 2022024.pdf

DEP Solicitation No.2022024 May 17, 2022 Addendum No. 2

ADDENDUM No. 2

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

DEP Procurement Section

3800 Commonwealth Boulevard, MS#93 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000

May 18, 2022

Addendum To: DEP RFI No. 2022024, entitled “Permit Lifecycle Management System”

The Department hereby answers questions posed by interested entities. This addendum does not need to be returned with the response. The Department hereby answers the following questions:

Question # Solicitation Section Solicitation Page # Question / Answer

1. - - If this RFI greenlights a solicitation, what is the estimated timeframe for procurement?

Beginning Spring of 2023 with a targeted contract execution date in early July 2023.

2. - - What is the anticipated contract value for these services?

Unknown; we hope to use the information collected via the RFI to inform a legislative budget request.

3. - - Is there a current vendor providing these services? If so, how may I obtain copies of any contract documents?

No. The majority of the system is provided by the Department, custom written, internally supported applications.

4. - - What is the strategy behind not considering PaaS solutions as part of this RFI considering other Florida state entities/affiliates leverage low-code & PaaS platforms to rapidly build and deploy custom applications for similar use cases. Has the Florida DEP evaluated the benefits of leveraging those solutions?

The Department is first considering SaaS solutions that have already been created and vetted in environmental production environments in order to realize a functional solution faster and to reduce long-term maintenance obligations. If the RFI does not uncover viable solutions, alternate approaches will be pursued by the Department.

5. - - Will the State take into consideration PaaS solutions should the DEP solicit a RFP for this use case?

The Department will not be able to answer this question until it has reviewed the responses of this RFI.

6. - - How does the Florida DEP plan to account/solve for various nuances across different departments, complexities in workflows and business logic, and exception handling in certain scenarios as business needs change and new regulations are passed?

The Department is seeking a modular, highly configurable SaaS solution that can be altered in ordered to meet changing needs. It may be necessary to develop auxiliary solutions for specific use cases; in order to support these auxiliary solutions, the SaaS solution must have robust Application Program Interface (API) & services that allow for supporting integrations.

7. - - How does the Florida DEP plan on enabling/training their staff on future state solution?

The Department is seeking solutions that are highly intuitive and curated for functional areas. Training will be developed based on the implementation needs and may include videos, contextual help, manuals, and personal training sessions.

8. - - Has there been any consideration around ongoing maintenance of the future state application and the benefits around being trained on what is built for the Florida DEP?

The current Department’s solutions are in need of significant change in order to meet current business requirements. Regardless of solution chosen, we expect significant process changes for the users of the system(s).

Application maintenance is, and will continue to be, a shared responsibility among internal technical & program staff, as well as external vendor support staff of any commercial solution.

9. - - How does the Florida DEP plan to accommodate future state requirements / new features with a SaaS solution?

The Department is seeking a modular, highly configurable SaaS solution that can be altered in ordered to meet changing needs. It may be necessary to integrate with existing or new auxiliary solutions for specific use cases; in order to support these auxiliary solutions, the SaaS solution must have robust API & services that allow for supporting integrations.

10. - - What is the existing permitting solution currently being used Please see answer to question number 3.

11. - - Is there a budget estimate for this project? If so, what is the investment?

Please see answer to question number 2.

12. - - What is the compelling reason the Florida DEP is seeking a proposed solution?

There are gaps in technology solutions across program areas and functional deficiencies that must be addressed in order to meet the daily needs of the program areas that use them. A newer, better aligned solution will improve efficiency, quality, and the timeliness of Permit Lifecyle Management outputs.

13. - - Does the DEP have the necessary staff should a permitting solution be implemented for the state?

Yes. Solution should result in an equivalent or reduced workload compared to what our staff is using now.

14. - - What factors are the most crucial in the success of this project? (i.e. accelerated implementation, rapid application development) The Department’s current Permit Lifecycle Management domain and solutions have a high level of complexity. A project that excels in its tactical implementation is very important (due to the fact that we do not wish to implement everything all at once). A priority for implementation will be on Environmental Resource Permitting.

15. - - Will historical data be part of the implementation effort?

Yes; Data conversion and migration will be required. The Department will need to determine if there will be any limits to the extent of historical data to convert/migrate.

16. - - Can the Department elaborate on the EPA translation support functionality? As in what is the process and how ideally the Department would desire this functionality in a new system?

Please see answer to question number 30.

17. - - Please elaborate upon any timing considerations for when specific programs / areas / functions will need to be fully transitioned to the new solution.

A priority for implementation will be on Environmental Resource Permitting and Water Resource Compliance.

However, many factors must be considered for implementation due to integration dependencies and support for other existing permit lifecycle related applications & program areas.

18. - - Can respondents assume that the portable tablets for inspection staff and internet connectivity will be supplied by the agency?

Respondents can assume that the Department will supply hardware (field staff typically prefer large smartphones over tablets) and will provide connectivity. Importantly, some inspection and permitting sites are too remote for even cellular data connections. Applications that are designed to be used in the field must accommodate for this by allowing for disconnected data entry/use and post synchronization. Primary devices for DEP staff are Windows Pro 10/11 laptops.

19. - - What costs has Department incurred for the initial set up, ongoing maintenance, hosting, software licensing, support, and enhancements (i.e., “change orders”) over the lifetime of the current system(s) to be replaced by the new solution?

The legacy systems currently supporting the permit lifecycle management processes were developed over a period of 25+ years, in multiple technologies. These systems have undergone numerous technology upgrades and system functionality changes, ranging from routine minor enhancements to larger enhancements. Additionally, these systems have been relocated to numerous data centers over this period. It is not possible to determine the lifecycle costs of all supporting systems. Additionally, depending on the specific solution, DEP cannot determine at this time what legacy systems/processes may need to remain in place after the new solution is implemented.

20. - - Will the Department entertain presentations / software demonstrations from RFI respondents?

The Department will entertain presentations and demonstrations for select respondents.

21. - - For data conversion requirements, please inventory all data sources, file formats, and size of the current data sets to be converted and migrated into the new Licensing System.

The Department cannot provide this at this time, as the specific data to be migrated/converted depends on vendor’s specific solution.

22. - - When ideally does the Department want to have this new system “go live”?

This depends on implementation strategy which dependent on the solution. Best case scenario would have at least one priority area serviced by July 2025. Again, this depends on implementation considerations such as parallel processing, permit dependencies and the ability to segment parts of the existing and new permit lifecycle management systems for functional coexistence.

23. - - What has the Department budgeted for the new solution and what does the budget intend to cover? What, if any, amount of the budget is subject to expire by a certain timeframe and when? Please elaborate.

Please see answer to question number 2.

24. - Please provide an approximate number of standard email/letter templates that will be used by Department that are to be integrated and automated by the system.

This will vary by program area, but a good estimate is around 40 per four major program areas.

25. - - How many different or distinct permit and license application types will be supported in this solution? Please provide a comprehensive list.

A list of all active permit types is attached separately in VIP.

26. - - Please identify ALL other systems that the new solution will need to integrate with (i.e. payment processor, other systems such as financial, etc.) along with an inventory of which interfaces will need to be wither a one-way (import or export) or two-way data exchange?

Depending on the solution capabilities the number may vary. More detailed information will be provided in any subsequent solicitation.

27. - Please provide the annual number of applications / renewals processed by the Department?

Permits by Program chart are included at the end of this document.

28. - Please provide a breakdown of the number of State employees that will be using the new solution by Department Program, role, as well as which ones will be performing mobile inspections.

See answers to questions number 70 and 41.

29. - - Can the Department provide an inventory of all the reports that need to be replicated within the new system?

Currently there are approximately 45 reports in use for Permit Lifecycle Management. Each program area has additional reports for their respective domain. Additional information will be provided an any subsequent solicitation

30. - - EPA translation support (CDX): Could you please provide details?

For more details, please click the link below.

https://cdx.epa.gov/.

31. - Could you provide us with more information on Facility information management?

A key data entity for permit lifecycle management is the facility. Many permitted activities are for a particular facility. The system must be able to manage facility https://cdx.epa.gov/ information at an enterprise level as there may be multiple permit types and subtypes (managed by multiple program areas) for one facility. Some example of facility data may be Location, Type, Owner, Status, Contact Info, Operation Dates, Coordinates, etc. Solution should also be able to interface with facility information in the Department’s systems that will coexist with the Permit Lifecycle Management System.

32. - - Supports external data access via connectors and/or services :-

a. What type of external data do we need to access

b. Are there any applications?

This requirement primarily refers to the need for integration with the Department’s owned & supported applications.

One example would be the Department’s implementation of the Qlik data visualization tool.

33. - - Do you have any old data? If yes, what is their current database software?

Yes. There is a wealth of historical information. It is primarily contained in an Oracle RDBMS.

34. - - Is there any Data migration involved? What are the data size and the size of the documents?

Please see answer to question number 51.

35. - - Correspondence and Document Tracking? à Do you want to store the documents in S3 or any other file sharing systems The Department has no specific requirements on how the solution stores its data, as long as it is available, backed up, and has contingencies for recovery. Specifics on SLAs for these requirements will be posted in subsequent solicitation if the Department issues one.

36. - - Integration support for other Department systems: What departments and systems need integration? Please list the technologies on which these systems were developed.

The Department’s Permitting Management Solutions are currently written in Java, PHP, and Oracle Forms. Data for these applications are stored in Oracle databases.

37. - - Are the departments internal or external to FDEP?

There is one Department of Environmental Protection. Its regulatory program staff are dispersed across the state in 6 Department district offices and the Tallahassee office headquarters. Additionally, the Department has delegated some regulatory oversight to several Florida counties.

These delegated county users also use the Department’s systems.

38. - - Ability to access a sandbox instance of the system that will allow Department staff to review the system over one month (after any requested demonstrations) if requested by the Department: Does the review of a system last a month?

Based on the breadth of this type of solution and the busy schedules of those who would review their solution, a month seems like a reasonable estimate.

39. - - Does Florida Department of Environmental Protection have Salesforce and would it be available for use in this solution?

The Department owns and manages a Salesforce tenant. It would not be available for use for this solution; the provider would be expected to provide and manage a separate tenant in order to provision the Department’s users with a fully developed SaaS (Software as a Service) solution.

40. - How many DEP power users does DEP anticipate?

Approximately 2-4 per program areas for a total of 8-16.

41. - How many field agents performing inspections does DEP anticipate?

Up to 300 inspectors across all program areas.

42. - - How many unique applicants per year on average does DEP anticipate?

In 2021, we had 20,959 distinct applicants across 39,025 projects.

43. - Do applicants/users need the ability to identify delegates to perform certain functions on their behalf?

Yes.

44. - - How many different personas (user types) will be using this system?

It depends on the solution proposed.

45. - How many distinct templates/forms does DEP anticipate?

There are currently 55 active templates in Production.

46. - - How does the application lifecycle vary for each application type?

At a high-level the lifecycle can be abstracted to be the same. At a detailed level there are substantial differences.

47. - - How many applications by type does DEP anticipate monthly?

Annually?

Please see answer to question number 27.

48. - How many inspections does DEP conduct monthly? Annually?

Estimated up to 25,000 inspections a year.

49. - How many complaints does DEP receive monthly? Annually?

Less than 1000 per year.

50. - - Can you give us an overview of the current technical landscape?

a. Which systems does DEP want to retire vs. build into the new licensing system?

b. When does DEP want to retire those systems (e.g., do you want two systems running concurrently, turn one off/one on, etc.)?

c. Which systems does DEP want the new solution to integrate?

d. Does DEP have a dedicated payment processing tool/service? If yes, are you looking to replace it? Is there a 3rd party payment processing tool already identified?

e. Does DEP currently use any signature authentication systems (e.g., for applicant signature on applications)?

f. Does DEP use a BI/Analytics tool?

g. Does DEP currently have a document storage solution?

a-c Multiple options are on the table. The Department will not be able to replace all its permitting systems at once, so there will have to be some provision for parallel, and concurrent permit related systems. The Department will have to decide which permit related systems will stay, and which will go, and the order for which they will be addressed will be based on program area needs and dependencies on other systems. Initial focus would be to better enable Environmental Resource Permits (ERP). This would necessitate the provisioning of a core permit lifecycle management solution and configuring a curated ERP solution.

d. We have a custom built Java solution that interfaces with Wells Fargo services and the Department’s financial systems. We are not looking to replace it, though we are open to discussing options for alternatives and integration.

e. Not currently.

f. Yes; the Department has a Qlik enterprise license and supported infrastructure.

g. Yes; the Department uses Oculus but plans to move to a cloud-based SaaS document management system. Project will begin in July of 2023, if funded.

51. - - Can you provide more details regarding migration of current data?

a. Estimated size of data to migrate?

b. Is the data requiring migration currently on paper or electronic? If a mix of both, could you quantify the volume of each?

c. Will DEP take ownership of providing clean data?

a & c. The migration of data highly dependent on the solution provided; there will be ETL activities required for a successful data migration. Until more details are determined, detailed scope and delineation of responsibilities will be unknown.

b. The data is primarily structured data within Oracle database instances with references to documents in Oculus document management system.

52. - - Are there documents that need to be migrated?

No, but the references to documents in the electronic document management system need to be maintained.

53. - - Is there a current data warehouse?

The Department has a database instance containing a collection of replicated transactional data which has been denormalized, joined, and or otherwise prepared for non-transactional use such as reporting.

54. - How long are you required to retain data?

It varies, depending on data type, retention schedules and the data in question.

55. - Is there a budget allocated for this project?

Please see answer to question number 2.

56. - - Explain the “gaps” you have identified in the capabilities of your current systems?

The gaps are included along with existing functionality in the Key Functionality section of the RFI.

57. - Does the solution require multi-lingual support?

For public facing aspects of the solution, multi-lingual support would be preferred.

58. - Elaborate on the requirement to “consume & produce spatial information in order deliver functionality?”

A common use case would be for a permitter to use the spatial data provided by the Department and other authoritative resources (in the form of services such as GeoJSON) within the permit application to see if the permitted area overlaps with areas of concern (such as endangered species nesting, contaminated areas, flood zones, etc.). The solution must be able to consume the spatial data and provide a means for the permitter to analyze maps/data as part of the permitting process.

Another use case would be for an applicant to be able to create point line polygons of specific areas for identifying control areas for Conditional Closures.

59. - - Elaborate on the requirement for “EPA Translation support (CDX)?” Use cases/examples would be helpful.

Please see answer to question number 30.

60. - - Elaborate on the requirement for “Facility information management?”

Please see answer to question number 31.

61. - Elaborate on your reporting needs?

a. Required export file formats?

The system would have the ability to produce canned reports and develop reports from any data present in the database with export file formats of Excel, Word, CSV, PDF, ASP, PHP, etc.

62. - - Elaborate on “support for other Department systems”. Example:

will this support be through users or processes?

Solution needs to be able to integrate with existing and future Department supported systems.

63. - Explain the need for “timeclock management?” Is it the system tracking of time spent on each permit and related activity?

The system would track the time spent per user for each activity as well as overall time, with the ability to parse out certain areas of the process for time tracking.

64. - - Do applicants need to be able to upload supporting documents as part of their application?

Yes.

65. - Are there any workflows where DEP needs to issue a physical document to applicants?

Yes, there are some workflows which include public noticing requirements or certified letters which must be physically delivered to external parties.

66. - How does DEP collect complaints currently?

Primary mechanisms for complaint receipt are an online form and phone call. Infrequently, we also receive complaints via email or in person.

67. - Elaborate on the requirement for “Automatic flagging for permit condition violations?”

For example, database would provide automatic flagging (notification) when:

Required deliverables are not submitted within timeframes as required by permit; and Communicate with the Department database that houses laboratory data to provide notification when data is not in accordance with permit requirements.

68. - - Will Inspectors require offline mobile inspection capabilities?

Please see answer to question number 18.

69. - - Do you have an anticipated budget for this project? If so, will you share the budget amount?

Please see answer to question number 2.

70. - Please provide the number of internal users (state employees and other staff) who will need access to the system.

Approximately 1,000-1,100 users currently have security roles in the system.

71. - - Please provide the number of external users (applicants and licensees) who will need access to the system (via a secure web portal)

Since anyone requiring a Department permit is eligible to apply, we don't have an exact number; however, the total permit count for the last 12 months was 40,000.

72. - - Please provide the number of external users (constituents) who will need access to the public-facing web portal.

Please see answer to question number 71.

73. - - Approximately how many permit types do you manage?

Please see answer to question number 25.

74. - How many types of inspections do you conduct?

The Department conducts less than 200 types of inspections across program areas.

75. - - Please describe the data to be migrated to the new system, i.e.

the number and type of records, the total size of the files, etc.

Please see answer to question number 51.

76. - - Will the system need to integrate with any existing systems?

Please see answer to question number 9.

77. - - Do the systems you wish this solution to interface with have APIs available? If so, are they available for review? If not, please describe integration capabilities.

Yes. There are existing APIs and open for review should a solicitation or contract result. The need for new/additional APIs is a known issue and may be needed for future integrations. All options are open for discussion.

78. - - Does the agency hold licenses for an electronic signature tool you would like to use as part of this solution? If so, please provide the name. If not, do you have a preferred tool or would you like this to be included in the proposal?

No. Please feel free to include this in the proposal.

79. - - Please elaborate on the agency’s preference for future systems maintenance. Does the agency prefer future support and maintenance to be done by the selected partner, internal team or a combination of both?

The Department would prefer the provider to perform support and maintenance for the solution. Of course, this will involve a partnership with the Department to manage any dependencies and interfaces with Department managed applications that are supported and hosted by the Department.

80. - - Is the vendor required to be on site for any portion of the contract term?

Yes. Some portions of any subsequent contract as a result of a future solicitation.

81. - - Have you seen demonstrations of any licensing and regulatory solutions prior to issuing this RFI? If so, will you share which systems?

No, not recently.

82. - - How many internal DEP Employees will require access to this system?

Please see answer to question number 70.

83. - - How many external customers will need access to the system?

Please see answer to question number 71.

84. - How many inspectors will be performing mobile inspection, compliance & enforcement activities in the field?

Please see answer to question number 41.

85. - Is mass inspection scheduling required?

The Department does not have any specific requirements for mass scheduling at this time but would be interested in reviewing any options if proposed.

86. - - How much data, and in what formats, will be migrated to the new system.?

Please see answer to question number 51.

87. - - Please provide a list of external data integrations that are required with this system.

A list is not available at this time.

88. - - Please provide more information clarifying the report Capability section re: “Supports external data access via connectors and/or services”.

Please see answer to question number 32.

89. - - Is DEP is looking for a new payment system or is the requirement to integrate with existing payment system to process applications related payments?

Please see answer to question number 50d.

90. - - Is there an approved budget for this project in place? Can this be shared?

Please see answer to question number 2.

91. - - Has the Department seen any demos? If not, would you be interested in a demo?

Please see answer to question number 20.

92. - - Has the Department been working with an existing vendor/incumbent to share this RFI and potential, subsequent

RFP?

PERMITS BY PROGRAM CHART

– Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank –

No. The Department has not been working with any vendor on this RFI.

93. - - Are there any specific solutions the Department has been looking into to fulfil their business and technical requirements?

No; we are using this RFI to inform us about the available turn-key solutions available in the market today.

94. - - How many named-users will need licenses?

Number of named-users are unknown at this time, but refer to the answer to question 70 for additional information.

95. - - Is there a high-level timeline for the procurement phase and implementation project? Can this be shared?

Please see answer to questions number 1 & 22.