SLED Opportunity · CALIFORNIA · BAY AREA AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
AI Summary
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District requests proposals to develop a cloud-native Data Management System for air quality monitoring, featuring real-time processing, advanced analytics, and regulatory reporting support. A Proof-of-Concept trial may be required.
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (Air District) seeks proposals from qualified and experienced firms to design, develop, and implement a new Data Management System (DMS) for air quality monitoring. The new DMS must be a comprehensive, cloud-native solution that enhances data ingestion and supports automated quality control, advanced analytics, robust reporting, and user accessibility.
Key deliverables include a secure, scalable platform with a modern web interface, real-time data processing, extensive API integration, and full support for regulatory reporting and audit readiness. This project aims to modernize the Air District’s data management infrastructure to improve efficiency, data integrity, and public access to air quality information.
Shortlisted firms may be required to participate in a Proof-of-Concept (PoC) exercise. During this exercise, firms will provide a fully functional PoC or trial of the proposed solution for a minimum of sixty (60) days to allow the Air District to test and assess the capability, usability, and performance of the proposed solutions. Respondents must include the cost, if any, for the PoC exercise in their proposal.
The Air District is the government agency responsible for protecting air quality in the San Francisco Bay Area. The Air District is tasked with regulating stationary sources of air pollution in the nine counties that surround San Francisco Bay: Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, southwestern Solano, and southern Sonoma counties. It is governed by a 24-member Board of Directors composed of locally elected officials from each of the nine counties. The Air District’s mission is to improve air quality to protect public health, reduce historical and current environmental inequities, and mitigate climate change and its impacts.
The Air District aims to achieve its mission through many strategic goals, including: reducing and eliminating health problems caused by air pollution, achieving and maintaining air quality standards, leading the Bay Area’s efforts to fight global climate change, creating high-quality regulatory programs, and applying environmental best practices in all operations. To do so, the Air District regulates air pollution emissions from stationary emission sources such as factories, refineries, and power plants, and from smaller facilities like gas stations and dry cleaners. The Air District ensures that such facilities comply with air pollution laws and regulations, provides incentives to replace older, higher-emitting vehicles and equipment with cleaner alternatives, and gives grants and provides outreach to encourage healthy clean air choices by businesses and consumers. The Air District implements these efforts with an equity focus, aiming to reduce air quality disparities and promote environmental justice by targeting local air pollution in overburdened communities.
Please use the See What Changed link to view all the changes made by this addendum.
Attachment A - DMS Requirements was updated on January 21, 2026.
Please use the See What Changed link to view all the changes made by this addendum.
Attachment A - DMS Requirements was updated on January 21, 2026.
Please use the See What Changed link to view all the changes made by this addendum.
Please use the See What Changed link to view all the changes made by this addendum.
Please use the See What Changed link to view all the changes made by this addendum.
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District has added the following to the Attachments section to supplement the Questions and Answers:
Please use the See What Changed link to view all the changes made by this addendum.
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District has added the following to the Attachments section to supplement the Questions and Answers:
Experience and qualifications of the firm and, in particular, proven track record and experience of the firm successfully delivering similar, large scale data management systems for governmental or environmental agencies. Past projects are comparable, relevant, and of similar scope and complexity.
The proposed solution meets or exceeds the stated functional and compliance requirements. The proposed solution can handle real workflows and data and offers comprehensive features, functionalities, and capabilities.
Clarity and feasibility of the approach and methodology to be used to accomplish the scope of work, including but not limited to development methodology, risk management, data migration strategy, testing plan, training plan, and post-implementation support.
Qualifications and expertise of proposed personnel and their ability to complete the work in a competent and professional manner.
Quality and applicability of references. References include governmental organizations.
Overall cost effectiveness, clarity of cost proposal, and alignment of resources with the proposed solution.
The Air District gives preferences to local businesses. “Local business” means that a firm’s headquarters is located within the nine counties of the Air District’s jurisdiction. Bidder must include a statement in their proposal self-certifying that the bidder qualifies as a local business to receive points for this criteria.
The Air District gives preferences to businesses that are certified as green businesses by a government agency or independent private rating organization. Bidder must include a statement in their proposal self-certifying that the bidder qualifies as a certified green business to receive points for this criteria.
Speed and thoroughness of responding to inquiries, requests and number of days. Ability to provide full-time foreign language assistance to prospective participants.
Proposed plan to target customers. The advertising plan will be evaluated for effectiveness and the ability to reach as many prospective customers in the Bay Area as possible.
(conducted at the Air District’s discretion)
Capability, usability, and verified performance of the proposed solution in Air District environment.
Provide the business address of the office nearest to San Francisco, California.
Are there any proposed personnel that work out of an office different than the business address noted above?
Provide the address(es) of the office that each of the proposed personnel are based out of if different than the business address provided above.
Provide the full name and title of the point of contact for this RFP.
Is the assigned project manager different than the designated firm representative?
Provide an overview of your firm, including the type of business (corporation, partnership, etc.), number of years in business, number of employees, location of headquarters, and organizational structure.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Provide a detailed description of the proposed approach and methodology to be used to accomplish the Scope of Work of the RFP.
Provide the projected timeline, key milestones, and benchmarks for implementing the new DMS by June 30, 2027. Milestones should include, but not be limited to, project kick-off, design, development, user acceptance testing, data migration, deployment, implementation, and training. Include any scheduling and control methodologies that will be used to ensure the schedule will be met.
Describe the proposed management structure and organization of the proposed team. Provide a statement addressing your firm’s ability and willingness to commit and maintain staffing to successfully provide the services outlined in this RFP.
Provide the following information about the staff to be assigned to the project:
Provide a minimum of three (3) references of other, similar projects including company name or government entity, contact name, title, phone number and e-mail address for all references listed. For each reference, include a description of services provided and dates the services were provided. The Air District may contact the references provided.
All working papers are the property of the Air District. Respondent hereby acknowledges that if respondent's firm is awarded the contract, the firm will retain project related papers and related reports for a minimum of five (5) years.
List any subcontractors that will be used and be sure to provide the following for each subcontractor:
Address possible conflicts of interest with other clients affected by contractors’ actions performed by the firm on behalf of the Air District. The Air District recognizes that respondent's may have contracts to perform similar services for other clients. Include a complete list of such clients for the past three (3) years with the type of work performed and the total number of years performing such tasks for each client. The Air District reserves the right to consider the nature and extent of such work in evaluating the proposal.
If applicable, include a statement self-certifying that your firm qualifies as a local business and/or certified green business. “Local business” means that a firm’s headquarters is located within the nine counties of the Air District’s jurisdiction. A green business must be certified by a government agency or independent private rating organization.
“Generative AI (GenAI)” means an artificial intelligence system that can generate derived synthetic content, including text, images, video, and audio that emulates the structure and characteristics of the system's training data (Gov. Code § 11549.64.). Respondents must include a statement disclosing:
If GenAI was used in the preparation of the proposal or if Gen AI will be used during contract performance, include a brief description of its use.
If awarded a contract, all work performed must comply with applicable state, federal, and local laws and regulations, including any restrictions or disclosure requirements related to the use of GenAI.
Identify all costs including any expenses to be billed for performing the services necessary to accomplish the work required in the RFP. Provide the estimated total initial cost, and the annual and on-going costs post-implementation for up to five (5) years. Itemize all applicable costs including, but not limited to:
Shortlisted firms may be required to participate in a Proof-of-Concept (PoC) exercise. During this exercise, firms will provide a fully functional PoC or trial of the proposed solution for a minimum of sixty (60) days to allow the Air District to test and assess the capability, usability, and performance of the proposed solutions.
If needed, upload any additional information or other essential data that may assist in the evaluation of your proposal.
NOTE: DO NOT INCLUDE ANY COST INFORMATION HERE
Respondent hereby certifies that all information provided within this proposal is accurate to the best of their knowledge. Respondent acknowledges that they have examined and carefully studied all solicitation documents and any addenda. The individual submitting this proposal is authorized to submit a proposal on behalf of the Company thereby committing the Company to the information contained within.
Briefly describe the services within which you are looking for qualified service providers.
Provide your response in a format as if filling in the highlighted blank of the statement below:
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (“Air District”) seeks proposals from qualified firms to provide _____________________.
Has the Air District established a budget for this project?
What is the established budget amount for this project?
NOTE: Please input just the number. Do not type the "$"
Is local/green business criteria applicable to this RFP?
Select all pieces of the technical proposal that you wish to require. You will be given the ability to modify existing requirements and add any additional requirements as necessary for this individual RFP by updating the Proposal Format, Content, and Submittal (Vendor Questionnaire) section.
Do you wish to utilize the electronic pricing table available within OpenGov Procurement? Do you wish to obtain a full breakdown of fees and other costs submitted by Proposers within the Vendor Questionnaire? You may choose to use both if you wish.
An example of when you may wish to use both is to obtain consistent pricing for a project through the electronic pricing table for an easier evaluation process but you may also wish to receive a more in depth breakdown via an uploaded file as well.
Select the evaluation criteria that you will be applying to the review and scoring of the proposals received in response to this RFP. The evaluation committee will be scoring all criteria that you select here and any additional criteria you add to this individual RFP. You may add additional criteria and modify the options for these later in the creation process.
Which contract type is the applicable type that will be awarded as a result of this RFP?
Q (Hosting): Is the vendor responsible for hosting Azure, Snowflake, etc, or will the District be holding the hosting?
A: The Air District has a strong preference for a vendor-hosted, fully managed Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) solution. This is the model that best ensures scalability, continuous updates/optimization, and dedicated vendor accountability for performance, security, and integration maintenance (e.g. API updates). If the Air District were to host, it would be within its own Azure tenant, but this is not the preferred path.
Q (ESRI integration): Please detail the expected feature set and requirements in “Integration with ESRI”? Is this mostly being able to export a data set with time/value/lat/long data for ingestion into ESRI?
A: The requirement is for deep, two-way integration with the Air District's ESRI platform (ArcGIS Enterprise/Online. This includes: Pushing data: Automated creation of feature layers and shapefiles (KML/KMZ) representing station locations, real-time and historical pollutant concentrations, meteorological data, and QA/QC status. Nice to have: Embedding & Pulling: Ability to embed interactive ESRI maps within the DMS web application for spatial data visualization would be nice but can be done in Power BI/ Microsoft Fabric/vendor choice should also be able to consume GIS layers (e.g., land use, boundaries) for enhanced analysis. Use Case: Exporting time/value/latitude/longitude datasets is a basic function. The goal is dynamic, visual integration where spatial context is part of the analytical workflow. Base Elevation and collection heights should be optional features.
Q (MET data management integration): What is required for “Integration with MET data management system”? What is the current system? What degree of integration is requirement.
A: Bidirectional Data Flow: Ingesting meteorological data (wind speed/direction, temperature, humidity, etc) from the MET system into the DMS for combined analysis with air quality data. Event Synchronization: Sharing metadata and event logs (e.g., sensor calibration, maintenance, between systems to maintain data integrity, and chain of custody. Degree: Near-real-time API-based integration is required to support timely validation and analysis where meteorological conditions are a factor.
Q (Forecast System Integration): What is required for “Integration with Forecast System”? Is providing the API for query of met and pollutant data from the DMS system sufficient?
A: This is an access database that needs to be replaced and will be replaced. If a bidder has a system or has a partner, the Air District is open to suggestions, and/or may issue an RFP at a later date. Providing a queryable API for met and pollutant data is the minimum requirement. The ideal integration is proactive and event driven: The DMS should be able to push validated, recent historical data to the Forecast System upon request or on a scheduled basis to initialize models. The DMS should be able to consume forecast outputs (e.g. predicted high-pollution zones) to trigger targeted monitoring reviews or public alerts.
Q (Cylinder PE): What is required for the “include Performance Evaluation in Tracking” in relation to the “track cylinders between sites”. What exactly does that look like?
A: Include "Performance Evaluation in Tracking" means the system must log and associate every certified gas cylinder's usage and performance over its lifecycle. This looks like: A master inventory of cylinders with serial numbers, certification dates, concentration values and expiration dates. Tracking each deployment: which site, which instrument, start/end dates. Recording the results of Performance Evaluation audits that use the cylinder, automatically flagging if a cylinder was expired or out of tolerance, and linking that flag to the affected ambient data periods.
Q (QC Check Data Flagging): What is the District logic for auto-flagging data ‘impacted by a failed QC check’? What defines a failure? Is data invalidated back to the last good check? If there are different checks (daily, weekly, quarterly), do some check types invalidate but others do not?
A: Failure Definition: A failure is any QC check (daily zero/span, weekly precision, quarterly audit, etc) where the result falls outside pre-configured, parameter-specific acceptance criteria. Auto-Flagging Invalidation: Data is automatically flagged with a "suspect" qualifier. The system should implement intelligent "bookending" - invalidating data from the last known good QC check up to the next passing QC check (or present time), not just to the failed check. Check Type Handling: All check types can invalidate data. The system must be configured to define the temporal influence of each check type (e.g. a failed zero daily zero may invalidate 24 hours; a failed quarterly audit may invalidate up to 90 days).
Q (DAPITS): Please detail what is meant by “Input / Respond to DAPITS”. Further down, the phrase “alert parties with DaPITS open/closed” is used- do these two requirements together imply development of a ticket system (similar to support tickets) for data edits? Does the District already use a ticket system? Would that system be abandoned in favor of one provided by the vendor?
A: DaPITS (Data and Process Improvement Tools, similar to a Corrective Action Process) is an internal ticketing/workflow for managing edits, corrections and instrument issues. Current System: A Microsoft Power Apps application. The Air District is in search of a Ticketing System. Requirements: The DMS must have a bi-directional API integration with DaPITs. This means automatically creating a DaPITs ticket when certain system events occur (e.g., persistent data gap, failed QC). Allowing data validators to initiate a DaPITs ticket from within the DMS UI to request a formal data review or edit. Reflecting DaPITs ticket status (open/closed) within the DMS record and alerting relevant parties of status changes. The Air District will consider replacing the current DaPIT PowerApps in favor of one provided by the bidder if the usability and functionality meets the Air Districts needs.
Q (Mixed intervals on one chart): Please provide an example what a “compare data by intervals (minute, hour, day, month, year) graph/chart would look like.
A: A chart where the X-axis is time, but the user can select multiple parameters aggregated at different intervals (e.g. PM2.5 as daily averages, Ozone as 8-hour rolling maxima, and NO2 as hourly values) all plotted together for trend comparison.
Q (Vector / Box Plots): Please clarify the requirements for “validating wind vector and creating box plots” including visual examples.
A: Vector/ Box Plots Requirements: For wind data (speed/direction treated as a vector entity): Validation Tools to visualize wind vectors on a time-series to spot calibration shifts. Box plots: The ability to generate statistical box plots for wind/speed/direction by time period (hour, month, season), to analyze climatology and sensor performance
Q (KML / GIS): Mapping and GIS integration: is the intent that the system create shape files (KML) for use by the District-provided web site? What should the shape files represent? (Examples, requirements).
A: Would like Station Points: with pop-up attributes showing current status, latest pollutant values. Contour maps: Interpolated surfaces of pollutant concentrations for a given period. Wind Plume: Visualization of wind patterns from meteorological stations.
Q (Lab Logs): Lab Logs: Please provide more detailed requirements and examples.
A: This system requires a unified chain-of-custody module for filter-based samples.
Q (Definition of “processed and available” (2-minute p95)): 1. For the 2-minute p95 ingestion requirement, what exactly constitutes “processed and available”: (a) persisted in the time-series store, (b) QA/QC rules computed and stored, and/or (c) visible/queryable via UI and REST API?
A: (2-min p95): For the 2-minute data ingestion requirement, "processed and available" means: (a) Persisted in the time-series store, (b) QA/QC rules computed and flags/stored, AND © Queryable via both the UI and REST API-all within the 2-minute SLA from instrument measurement
Q (Data Acquisition Systems/logger integration + retransmission commands): 2. What DAS/logger/telemetry vendors/models/protocols must be supported at go-live, and for “on-demand re-transmission commands,” is the DMS expected to issue retransmission commands directly to field devices or through an existing intermediary/service?
A: The DMS will connected to the central Data Acquisition System (AirVision)
Q (Migration scope and acceptance criteria): 3. Please confirm whether “all historical” migration includes raw + validated values, QA/QC flags/codes, edit history, comments/notes, attachments/evidence, and audit-trail equivalents. What is the District’s expected reconciliation/acceptance method (golden datasets, sampling %, allowable error thresholds)?
A: Migration includes all historical: raw & validated values, QA/QC flags/codes, edit history, comments/notes, attachments/evidence, and complete audit trails Acceptance Criteria: The Air District will use a combination of methods: "golden dataset" reconciliation for key tables, statistical sampling (eg., 5% of time-series records across date ranges), and defined allowable error thresholds (e.g., 99.99% data fidelity). A bidder must propose a detailed verification plan.
Q (Noise monitoring devices): Is it possible to know how many monitoring stations you have and who the manufacturer is?
A: The Air District has 33 sites with different instruments at the sites connected to Agilaire 8872 DAS which feed into AirVision (as the central DAS)
Q (No subject): Can you please provide a description of the legacy SQL database including size, number of tables, number of fields within each table, level of normalization, adherence to valid values, and number of records / rows in the database?
A: DMS system comprises the DMS database. Most of the data is held in the Data table, 100GB in 2.3B rows. There are 92 tables in all, most of these help the system operate, but some actually hold data like the Data table.
Q (No subject): Can you provide a description of the metadata referenced in "Key Objectives"? Are the metadata structured data suitable for inclusion in a relational database schema, such as a logger serial number, or are they unstructured data such as PDFs and images, or both? Please indicate the size of the metadata to be migrated and if it is included in the legacy SQL database or if it is to be migrated from a different source?
A: The legacy system is a relational database, however there are images, pdfs that the Air District would want to collect and include.
Q (No subject): The RFP seems to request a COTS, cloud-based solution which are generally hosted in the vendor's cloud tenant. However, the RFP also seems to include build specifications for a custom solution deployed in the BAAQMD's Azure tenant. Please provide clarity as to hosting location and whether or not the AQMD is requesting a custom built solution or the configuration and deployment of a COTS solution in AQMD's Azure tenant.
A: The Air District has a strong preference for a vendor-hosted, fully managed Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) solution. This is the model that best ensures scalability, continuous updates/optimization, and dedicated vendor accountability for performance, security, however if one does not exist then the solution can be deployed in the Air District's Azure tenant. The Air District preferably seeks a configurable system not a customized system, and understands some customization may be necessary for the system.
Q (No subject): Can you please provide a project schedule indicating the time between shortlist / proof-of-concept and award / project start date? This timeline is critical to confirming system Go-Live by June 30, 2027.
A: The estimate is minimum of 18 months to complete the project, and will depend on conclusion of the RFP and, subsequently, when contract/ contracts are signed for work to begin.
Q (No subject): Please provide a breakdown of number of total users (not including public) and number of field users expected to collect data using digital logbook.
A: This is to be determined
Q (Infrastructure): Will the DMS be a fully managed solution where the vendor controls, optimizes and updates the infrastructure or will IT deploy the solution to its own Azure environment where BAAQMD retains infrastructure control long-term? For example, if AirNow or other external entities update their APIs, who will be responsible for updating API dependencies?
A: The Air District prefers a fully managed system where the selected vendor controls, optimizes and updates the infrastructure, maintains backup, provides multiple environments (test and production) and will be responsible for updating API dependencies. However if the Air District deploys the solution, updating the API dependencies will be a joint effort.
Q (Microsoft Office Integration): Can you provide additional information on the desired outcomes for the Microsoft Office integrations to showcase how data will be transacted between the two systems? If possible, please provide a few user stories to showcase this connection (e.g. Microsoft Teams + the DMS integration use case).
A: Automated posting of systems alerts (including Site Group > 4 hours') to designated Teams channels with user tagging capabilities. The ability for authorized users to query live DMS data directly from Microsoft Excel via secure API connections (Odata/JSON) for ad-hoc analysis. Integration with Power BI to expose real-time network health metrics for executive dashboards, and Managers dashboards. The capacity to generate and archive reports directly to SharePoint online or a document management system/ Data Quality Management System). Support for standardized log entry templates to ensure data consistency across field operations.
Q (Project Management & Stakeholder Communication): Can you clarify the project management structure and which BAAQMD stakeholders will be engaged throughout the project? For example, will the vendor have access to stakeholder experts across varying subject areas like AQS workflows, field operations, IT, security, etc.?
A: Yes, the Air District will assign a primary project manager to work with the selected vendor and respective subject matter experts will be made available when needed
Q (Input/respond to DaPITs): Please define 'DaPITs' and the expected workflows and reports associated with it.
A: DaPITS (Data and Process Improvement Tools, similar to a Corrective Action Process) is an internal ticketing/workflow for managing edits, corrections and instrument issues. Current System: A Microsoft Power Apps application. The Air District is in search of a Ticketing System. Requirements: The DMS must have a bi-directional API integration with DaPITs. This means automatically creating a DaPITs ticket when certain system events occur (e.g., persistent data gap, failed QC). Allowing data validators to initiate a DaPITs ticket from within the DMS UI to request a formal data review or edit. Reflecting DaPITs ticket status (open/closed) within the DMS record and alerting relevant parties of status changes. The Air District is willing to replace the current DaPIT PowerApps in favor of one provided by the bidder if the usability and functionality meet the Air District's needs.
Q (DaPITs report): Can you please provide an example of the DaPITs report?
A: DaPITS (Data and Process Improvement Tools, similar to a Corrective Action Process) is an internal ticketing/workflow for managing edits, corrections and instrument issues. Current System: A Microsoft Power Apps application. The Air District is in search of a Ticketing System. Requirements: The DMS must have a bi-directional API integration with DaPITs. This means automatically creating a DaPITs ticket when certain system events occur (e.g., persistent data gap, failed QC). Allowing data validators to initiate a DaPITs ticket from within the DMS UI to request a formal data review or edit. Reflecting DaPITs ticket status (open/closed) within the DMS record and alerting relevant parties of status changes. The Air District is willing to replace the current DaPIT PowerApps in favor of one provided by the bidder if the usability and functionality meet the Air District's needs.
Q (Alert interested parties when DaPITs opened/closed): Please define 'DaPITs' and the expected workflows and reports associated with it, including open/close notifications and statuses.
A: DaPITS (Data and Process Improvement Tools, similar to a Corrective Action Process) is an internal ticketing/workflow for managing edits, corrections and instrument issues. Current System: A Microsoft Power Apps application. The Air District is in search of a Ticketing System. Requirements: The DMS must have a bi-directional API integration with DaPITs. This means automatically creating a DaPITs ticket when certain system events occur (e.g., persistent data gap, failed QC). Allowing data validators to initiate a DaPITs ticket from within the DMS UI to request a formal data review or edit. Reflecting DaPITs ticket status (open/closed) within the DMS record and alerting relevant parties of status changes. The Air District is willing to replace the current DaPIT PowerApps in favor of one provided by the bidder if the usability and functionality meet the Air District's needs.
Q (Incumbent vendor): Who is the incumbent vendor currently providing similar services?
A: The current DMS system was created by STI Technologies and is a legacy system that has not been supported by STI Technologies for over a decade. The Air District has been modifying and maintaining the system itself.
Q (Incumbent vendor): Is the incumbent vendor allowed to participate in this RFP?
A: There is no restriction on who is allowed to participate in the RFP process. The Air District is looking for a modern system that will be able to meet its current needs and future plans.
Q (Hosting service provider ): Who will be responsible for hosting?
A: The Air District would like the selected bidder to host, however, if the Air District hosts it will be on Azure
Q (Existing Database Size): What is the approximate size (TB) of the legacy SQL Server database, including raw, validated, and archived data?
A: The legacy database is a Microsoft SQL Server. 270GB. 100GB in 2.3B rows. 92 tables
Q (Data Migration): How many years of historical data (GB or TB) must be migrated?
A: 350 GB
Q (Existing Data): Are legacy schemas, data dictionaries, and business rules fully documented and available?
A: The Air District will provide its available documentation with the selected bidder.
Q (Data Quality Issue): Are there known data quality issues in the legacy system that vendors should plan to remediate?
A: Yes
Q (Data Feeds): Are data feeds primarily push, pull, or mixed?
A: Mixed
Q (Data Growth Rate): What is the expected growth rate for new sensors and data volume?
A: This information is not yet known and to be determined
Q (Report Format): Does the Air District require the new DMS to replicate existing legacy report formats exactly, or will functionally equivalent reports that meet regulatory, operational, and audit requirements be acceptable?
A: Functionally equivalent reports that meet regulatory, operational, and audit requirements are acceptable
Q (External BI tool): Is the use of external BI tools (e.g., Power BI) acceptable for supplemental analytics and dashboards, provided that all regulatory and compliance reports are generated natively within the DMS?
A: Yes
Q (SOC 2): Is SOC 2 Type II required at time of proposal submission or prior to production go-live?
A: At time of proposal. A SOC 2 Type II or otherwise applicable (ISO 27001, CSA STAR Level 2, or an additional third-party attestation validating the security controls of the environment)
Q (Onsite/Remote): Do you expect the vendor to perform any tasks on-site, or can all work be performed remotely?
A: Work can be completed remotely
Q (Offshore Resources): Do you accept offshore resources?
A: The Air District does not have any prohibition with using offshore resources however, the preference is U.S. based resources.
Q (Project Budget): What is the approved budget or range allocated for this project?
A: This it to be determined. The Air District will evaluate proposals and work with the selected vendor on anticipated costs
Q (Project Start Date): What is the anticipated project start date?
A: Tentatively in Nov-26
Q (Ongoing Support and Maintenance): What are the expectations and timeline for ongoing support and maintenance after the system is implemented?
A: Ongoing annual support and maintenance during the lifetime of the system
Q (Requirements - Mandatory vs Preferred): After reviewing the Attachment A XLSX, please identify which requirements are mandatory versus preferred.
A: The Air District prefers a COTs system and will configure what it needs and pay for the enhancements that are requested and delivered.
Q (Cloud site of the PoC): Where does the district prefer the Proof-Of-Concept (POC) is sited? Installed within its cloud system or on the Proponent’s hosting environment?
A: Flexible - If the selected vendor hosted then on vendor's site, if Air District is to host then on Air District environment.
Q (PoC details: sample datasets and availability): Will sample datasets be provided for the POC? What date or month should the POC be ready?
A: Yes sample datasets will be provided. The POC should tentatively be ready in July 2026
Q (Data migration details): 1) Please provide details concerning data migration (legacy database structures, # of timeseries, rasters, time-ranges etc.) for a better understanding of the level of effort anticipated. 2) Please describe "verified integrity" applied to the data migrated into the new system? as pertains to the full data set? the metadata? time-series?
A: The information is unavailable at this time
Q (Specialized Data Handling): In section 3.1.G. (1) How do you measure “meet(ing of) stringent regulatory requirements”? Is this solely EPA AQS submissions? (2) How do you assess the “uphold(ing of) legal defensibility”?
A: “Meeting stringent regulatory requirements” is not limited to EPA AQS submissions. It includes compliance with applicable federal and state regulations, proper QA/QC documentation, accurate metadata management, reporting timeliness, data completeness, and successful audit outcomes. “Upholding legal defensibility” refers to maintaining transparent, auditable, and reproducible records. This includes role-based access, audit trails, change tracking, documented QA/QC workflows, and the ability to reconstruct data history during regulatory review or legal proceedings.
Q (Performance - Query Response Time): (1) Please define "normal operating conditions" for which dashboard and API queries should return results within 400 ms. (2) What atypical condition(s) should Proponents also be aware of?
A: The information is unavailable at this time
Q (Proprietary datasets): Is access to any of the datasets for this project proprietary?
A: They are not proprietary
Q (Separate databases for metadata, time-series ): How mandatory is the requirement for separate databases? If performance requirements are met, would the district accept a solution with a database that accommodates both metadata and timeseries?
A: The Air District will accept a solution that meets its requirements and performance needs
Q (Network schematic): Please provide a network overview schematic.
A: Provided to the shortlist. There is a central data acquisition system (Agilaire AirVision) that the new Data Management System (DMS) will connect to. The DMS will then send out the data to EPA (AQMS, AirNow,) CARB and to the Air District's public website
Q (Data Integration, Acquisition, and Import): re: 3.1.B "multiple data sources... and other discrete data sources" Please provide additional details including sample files or API descriptions. Our product already interfaces with numerous devices and sources; more info is needed to assess potential development efforts.
A: All are listed in Attachment A, DMS Requirements: A public-facing REST API for data retrieval and integration Data streaming capabilities from external data sources Support from multiple data ingest formats (AQS RD, AQCSV, native formats) Cloud-based access without requiring a VPN Mobile and tablet-friendly interface or dedicated mobile app Integration with SampleMaster Integration to Snowflake and/or Microsoft Fabric Integration with Microsoft M365 to use: Excel, Word, Outlook, Teams, Loop, PowerPoint, Planner, Task, Microsoft Agents, GitHub, Power BI Integration with ESRI Integration with Asset Management / Work Order System Integration with Agilaire AirVision, Data Loggers Integration with Learning Management System Integration with Quality Data/Document Management System Integration with MET Data Management System Integration with Forecast System Integration with Air District Website Integration to Open Air
Q (Data - SampleMaster): Since SampleMaster by ATL is now Confience, is any change in LIMS and/or data formats anticipated (in the near future)?
A: No changes anticiapted
Q (Data Archiving and Storage): re: 3.1.I ”retain 18-24 months of raw data with real time accessibility” -- please elaborate on the parameters of raw data and time resolution.
A: Raw data is data from the instruments / central data acquisition system that has not been validated / processed, minute data from each instrument at each site
Q (Interviews): re: 4.3 Will interviews be on-site or remote (via Teams, etc.) or hybrid (representative on-site & team members remote)?
A: Tentatively, interviews will likely be hybrid or remote
Q (No subject): Is there a cost ceiling?
A: This it to be determined. The Air District will evaluate proposals and work with the selected vendor on anticipated costs
Q (No subject): What data loggers and instruments are in their inventory (or will be) that need to be supported?
A: 8872 and AirVsion from Agilaire
Q (No subject): What data resolution is required (second, minute, hourly, etc.)?
A: Minute
Q (No subject): What format are the instrument health and maintenance reports? Is instrument diagnostic information entered manually or pulled via data acquisition system?
A: Currently it is manual, the Air District is looking for a way to track, asset/work order system
Q (No subject): Does all historical data migration need to be completed by June 30, 2027?
A: Completion date of the system will depend on when the contract/s is are signed with the selected vendor
Q (No subject): Will the vendor have access to the Air District's Azure account for e.g., deployment, or maintenance and troubleshooting?
A: Work in the Air District's Azure account will be done in collaboration between the Air District and the selected vendor
Q (No subject): Is Azure Database for MySQL an acceptable alternative to Azure SQL?
A: It is not an acceptable alternative
Q (No subject): Please elaborate on the expectations for the SOC2 Type II attestation?
A: A SOC 2 Type II or otherwise applicable (ISO 27001, CSA STAR Level 2, or an additional third party attestation validating the security controls of the environment)
Q (PoC (Proof of Concept)): What use cases are scoped for the 60-day PoC?
A: TBD - The Air District is working on this and will be provided to the shortlist
Q (PoC (Proof of Concept) ): What sample data will the Air District provide for PoC?
A: Data from the central data acquisition system will be made available
Q (AgreeYa Question): PoC (Proof of Concept) 1. What use cases are scoped for the 60-day PoC? 2. What sample data will the Air District provide for PoC? 3. What success criteria will be used to score PoC performance? 4. Should the solution be deployed in the vendor’s cloud tenancy or in the Air District’s own Azure environment? 5. Will test DAS streams be provided for PoC? 6. We assume, the PoC needs to integrate with Azure AD Single Sign-On (SSO), or can PoC use local accounts, please confirm?
A: TBD - The Air District is in the process to develop this
Q (No subject): Data Migration: 7. With respect to the new Cloud based DMS replacing the legacy MS SQL system, should the solution redesign the database schema, or should it retain the existing schema and fine-tune it for performance, scalability, cybersecurity, and Azure SQL compatibility? 8. What is the total size of the legacy SQL Server database (GB/TB)? 9. Should all existing audit trails, QC flags, and Metadata history also be migrated? 10. What is the ingestion frequency for each DAS (1-sec, 30-sec, 1-min)? 11. Are there known data quality or schema inconsistencies in the historical data that vendors must address? 12. Will the migration need to be phased (parallel run) or a single cutover? 13. Will the Air District provide database documentation (ERD, table definitions)? 14. Are there legacy ETL scripts or stored procedures that need to be replicated? 15. Could you please provide details on: • Application Inventory: How many distinct applications (internal, third-party, or custom-built) currently connect to the on-premises SQL Server instances for read/write operations? If available, a list with brief descriptions would be helpful. • Connection Ownership & Modification Responsibility: i. Will your team handle updating connection strings/endpoints in these applications post-migration, or should our proposal include this refactoring effort? ii. Are there applications owned by third parties/vendors that may require coordination for connectivity updates?
A: The solution provided should be better than the over 16 year old system that is currently in place. The Air District needs a system that is capable of what it does now and address the pain points the Air District has encountered. The Air District seeks a solution that is scalable, provide better performance, follow the NIST framework, be SOC II Type 2 / otherwise applicable (ISO 27011, CSA STAR Level 2, or an additional third party attestation validating the security controls of the environment) 350 GB. Yes all existing audit trails, QC flags, and metadata history also has to be migrated. 1 min ingestion frequency. No known data quality or schema inconsistencies, The migration will be parallel run, The Air District will provide the documentation it has, the processes and outcomes of the ETL / stored procedures need to be replicated not the ETL/ stored procedures themselves, list of connections will be provided. the proposal should include the refactoring effort. Yes there are third parties/vendors that may require coordination for connectivity updates.
Q (PoC (Proof of Concept) ): What success criteria will be used to score PoC performance?
A: TBD - The Air District is in the process to develop this
Q (No subject): Data Ingestion: 16. Are there existing APIs available from DAS vendors that the new DMS must integrate with? 17. The RFP mentions ingestion from multiple data loggers and Sample Master. Can you provide the list of specific logger vendors/models/protocols used (e.g., API, FTP, CSV drop, proprietary protocols)? 18. Does the current SQL system contain historical chain-of-custody (CoC) data, and is migration of this data to the new DMS required?
A: 38x Agiliare 8872s are the DAS systems being implemented and AirVision is the central DAS. The current SQL system does contain historical chain-of-custody (CoC) data, and the migration of this data is required
Q (No subject): QA/QC Automation and Validation workflow: 19. Does the Air District have existing QC rules documented, or will the vendor define them? 20. Must validation workflows be configurable by admin users? 21. How automated should QC be? a. Strict auto-flagging only? b. Automated corrections? c. ML-based anomaly detection (if allowed)?
A: The Air District follows EPA guidance for QA/QC. Level 0 should be automated. ML- based anomaly detection would be preferred
Q (PoC (Proof of Concept)): Should the solution be deployed in the vendor’s cloud tenancy or in the Air District’s own Azure environment?
A: Prefer the vendor's cloud tenancy, but Air District's own Azure environment is also acceptable
Q (No subject): Reporting Requirement 24. For complex regulatory reports (e.g., AQS RD/RP, AirNow AQCSV), will the Air District provide sample files, rule definitions, or validation scripts? 25. Should the reporting engine support i.e. SQL-based report builders? 26. Does the Air Quality team have any preferences regarding reporting tools, such as Power BI, Tableau, Gafana etc?
A: The complex regulator reports are provided by EPA. The Air District has Power BI. The reporting engine should what is going to be relevant in the future.
Q (No subject): Data Retention and Archiving 27. Should archived data be available to query through the API?
A: Yes
Q (No subject): Security 28. Must the vendor’s company already hold a SOC2 Type II attestation, or is it sufficient for the hosted solution to adhere to SOC2 controls?
A: SOC 2 Tylpe II is required before a contract is signed. A SOC 2 Type II or otherwise applicable (ISO 27001, CSA STAR Level 2, or an additional third party attestation validating the security controls of the environment)
Q (PoC (Proof of Concept) ): Will test DAS streams be provided for PoC?
A: Yes
Q (No subject): Operational Monitoring Site Log System Feature 29. With reference to the requirement stating “Forms for consistency – ability to create, edit, and add built-in forms for site visits (capturing the Who, What, When, Why, How of routine site visits, maintenance, calibration, audits, etc.)”, could you please clarify whether this also implies that the solution should include a dynamic form builder allowing the Air District to create new forms without vendor involvement?
A: It would be desirable to have a dynamic form but the form has to feed into a database for the data to be useful.
Q (PoC (Proof of Concept)): We assume, the PoC needs to integrate with Azure AD Single Sign-On (SSO), or can PoC use local accounts, please confirm?
A: PoC can use local accounts.
Q (No subject): Data Access and Integration 30. Should integrations (Snowflake, Fabric, ESRI, AirVision, Asset Management) be real-time or batch-based? 31. Should integrations (AirVision, Sample Master, ESRI, Snowflake, Asset Management) be one-way, two-way, or event-driven real-time? 32. With respect to the requirement for integrating with Snowflake or Microsoft Fabric, could you please clarify a. the intended purpose of this integration? Specifically, is the expectation to support analytical workloads, archiving, BI dashboarding, machine-learning modeling, or another use case? b. Additionally, should the solution push data through ETL/ELT processes, or should data instead be exposed via interfaces for Snowflake/Fabric to pull? 33. With respect to the requirement for integration with ESRI, a. Could you please clarify the expected scope? Specifically, which ESRI products should the solution integrate with (ArcGIS Online, ArcGIS Enterprise, or Portal)? b. Additionally, should the system support pushing geospatial data—such as station locations, live pollutant data layers, and historical spatial datasets—and is ESRI map embedding within the DMS user interface also required? 34. Could you please clarify the expectations for integration with the District’s asset management and work order systems? a. which systems should be supported (e.g., Maximo, Cityworks, Infor, ServiceNow), b. what integration method is preferred (REST APIs, webhooks, file-based exchange such as CSV/XML, or vendor-supplied connectors), c. Whether the District requires two-way synchronization or one-way integration only? 35. With respect to the requirement for integrating with Agilaire AirVision and associated data loggers, could you please clarify a. The expected integration approaches specifically whether the solution should use API-based integration, file-based transfers, or direct database access. b. What real-time polling or ingestion interval is required (e.g., minute-level). 36. With respect to the requirement for integrating with the Quality Data / Document Management System, could you please clarify a. Which document management platform is in scope (e.g., SharePoint, Laserfiche, Box, OpenText), b. (and) whether metadata from the DMS should be synchronized into the system’s document records?
A: Real-time. For Snowflake/ Fabric the Air District has many systems would provide great insight if the data was combined and analyzed to provide insights, trends, correlations. The Air District did not get a Quality/ Data Management System but the idea is to track all the SOP and training (continuous) that a person has to have before operating an instrument/ work to show the data that the data collected and validated are done correctly and auditable. Integrations will be dependent on the system. Please see responses to other questions throughout the Q&A for other answers.
Q (Data Migration: ): With respect to the new Cloud based DMS replacing the legacy MS SQL system, should the solution redesign the database schema, or should it retain the existing schema and fine-tune it for performance, scalability, cybersecurity, and Azure SQL compatibility?
A: The Air District is open to a solution redesign, the bidder will need to have a solid plan to crosswalk all the data in the legacy DMS. The solution the bidder presents must be better than the Air District's current state.
Q (No subject): Database Optimization 37. Does the District prefer a multi-database architecture (e.g., time-series + relational), or a single consolidated store? 38. Does the Air District prefer a specific time-series engine—Azure Data Explorer (ADX), TimescaleDB, or another platform?
A: The Air District does not have a preference
Q (Data Migration:): What is the total size of the legacy SQL Server database (GB/TB)?
A: 350 GB
Q (No subject): Specialized Data Handling (Meteorological & Spatial) 39. What meteorological parameters (wind speed, wind direction, vector data, temperature, humidity) must be ingested and at what frequencies? 40. Are there existing ESRI or GIS layers for meteorological data that the DMS must integrate with?
A: Mandatory parameters needed to process AERMOD-ready met inputs are scalar and vector wind speed and wind direction, temperature, humidity, solar radiation, UV radiation, and sigma-theta. Other parameters that the Air District collects at some of its towers include dewpoint temperature or relative humidity, precipitation, and solar radiation. These should ingested as well. Hourly and sub-hourly (1-minute, 5-minute, 15-minute). There are some general layers that may be standard, such as terrain and the Air District boundary, that should be integrated.
Q (No subject): Data Analysis Tools 1. Should the DMS support direct data access for analysis (SQL endpoints, APIs)? 2. Are ML-based analytics expected (beyond anomaly detection)? 3. Should analysts be able to run ad hoc analytical queries directly against the production system, or only against an analytical replica?
A: Yes DMS should support direct data analysis. ML based analytics would be great for anomalies and will help especially with forecasting. If the bidder can build a robust enough system to complete ad hoc analytical queries which are pain points with the current system, please propose to do so. Provide a solution where the queries feel like they are all in one system as a user. The Air District favors a system that will be able to complete the functions it currently processes and address the pain points the Air District have identified and is future proof.
Q (No subject): General 1. Has DHCS defined a recommended cost sheet / pricing template for submitting the cost proposal? If yes, please provide the template? 2. What is the anticipated or estimated budget range allocated for this initiative? 3. Is there a preference or scoring advantage given to MBE, WBE, VBE, local businesses, or certified green businesses in the evaluation of RFP submissions? 4. If such a preference or scoring advantage exists, could you please clarify the specific evaluation criteria, point allocation, or any target participation rates associated with these categories? 5. We understand that resumes, CVs, or summary sheets are required only for key personnel—such as the Project Manager etc. and other primary roles—and not for the entire staff who might be assigned to this project, please clarify?
A: No. Budget is TBD. The Air District is looking for the best system for that fits its needs. Please provide information on all personnel on the team who will contribute to the project
Q (Data Migration:): Should all existing audit trails, QC flags, and Metadata history also be migrated?
A: Yes
Q (Data Migration:): What is the ingestion frequency for each DAS (1-sec, 30-sec, 1-min)?
A: 1-min
Q (Data Migration:): Are there known data quality or schema inconsistencies in the historical data that vendors must address?
A: Yes
Q (Data Migration:): Will the migration need to be phased (parallel run) or a single cutover?
A: Parallel run
Q (Data Migration:): Will the Air District provide database documentation (ERD, table definitions)?
A: The Air District will provide the selected bidder with the documentation that it has
Q (Data Migration:): Are there legacy ETL scripts or stored procedures that need to be replicated?
A: All the processes have to be replicated, not the ETL scripts or stored procedures.
Q (Data Migration:): Could you please provide details on: Application Inventory: How many distinct applications (internal, third-party, or custom-built) currently connect to the on-premises SQL Server instances for read/write operations? If available, a list with brief descriptions would be helpful. Connection Ownership & Modification Responsibility: Will your team handle updating connection strings/endpoints in these applications post-migration, or should our proposal include this refactoring effort? Are there applications owned by third parties/vendors that may require coordination for connectivity updates?
A: The only "connections" that are in place leaving the DMS system is to the Air District's website, EPA and CARB. The Air District is in the process of getting an Asset Management System/Work Order /Ticketing System (DaPIT). Coordination with the vendors will be required. Do include refactoring efforts.
Q (Data Ingestion: ): Are there existing APIs available from DAS vendors that the new DMS must integrate with?
A: Agilaire AirVision is the Central DAS that is being implemented the DMS must integrate with Agiliare AirVIsion
Q (Data Ingestion: ): The RFP mentions ingestion from multiple data loggers and Sample Master. Can you provide the list of specific logger vendors/models/protocols used (e.g., API, FTP, CSV drop, proprietary protocols)?
A: The 8872 data loggers are connected to AirVIsion the central DAS that the DMS provided by the bidder must connect to. Loggernet for MET data will also connect into AirVision before going into the provided solution.
Q (Data Ingestion: ): Does the current SQL system contain historical chain-of-custody (CoC) data, and is migration of this data to the new DMS required?
A: Yes historical CoC is in the SQL system and must migrate to the new DMS.
Q (QA/QC Automation and Validation workflow: ): Does the Air District have existing QC rules documented, or will the vendor define them?
A: Existing QC rules will be provided, and the system must support implementation of those rules, with flexibility to refine or expand them as needed.
Q (QA/QC Automation and Validation workflow: ): Must validation workflows be configurable by admin users?
A: Validation workflows should be configurable by amin. Design system with least privilege. RBAC
Q (QA/QC Automation and Validation workflow: ): How automated should QC be? a. Strict auto-flagging only? b. Automated corrections? c. ML-based anomaly detection (if allowed)?
A: "QC automation should remain rule-based and fully transparent. The system should support automated flagging based on predefined, configurable thresholds and validation checks, with no autonomous corrections applied without documented review and approval. Any anomaly detection functionality should rely on deterministic logic (e.g., statistical limits, rate-of-change checks, instrument status triggers), ensuring full traceability and regulatory defensibility."
Q (User Interface/Web Application): What is the expected number of screens/pages for internal users? (Validation, Site admin, Instrument admin, Parameters, QC review, Reporting, Metadata, Audit logs, etc.)
A: Yes, validation workflows should be configurable by authorized administrative users. The solution should allow administrators to define, modify, and manage QC rules, flags, approval steps, and review levels without requiring vendor intervention, while maintaining audit trails and version control.
Q (Reporting Requirement ): For complex regulatory reports (e.g., AQS RD/RP, AirNow AQCSV), will the Air District provide sample files, rule definitions, or validation scripts?
A: The Air District can provide the information. Sample reports will be provided but many of the reports requested are ones on the EPA site
Q (Reporting Requirement ): Should the reporting engine support i.e. SQL-based report builders?
A: Yes, report building is required for quality assurance and quality control review. This includes calibration reports, configuration reports, custom range reports, data logger connectivity reports,
Q (Reporting Requirement ): Does the Air Quality team have any preferences regarding reporting tools, such as Power BI, Tableau, Gafana etc?
A: PowerBI is a preferable solution, however, the Air District has also has been using Tableau for over 10 years.
Q (Data Retention and Archiving ): Should archived data be available to query through the API?
A: Archived data will need to be made available for data modeling
Q (Security ): Must the vendor’s company already hold a SOC2 Type II attestation, or is it sufficient for the hosted solution to adhere to SOC2 controls?
A: A SOC 2 Type II or otherwise applicable (ISO 27001, CSA STAR Level 2, or an additional third party attestation validating the security controls of the environment)
Q (Operational Monitoring Site Log System Feature ): With reference to the requirement stating “Forms for consistency – ability to create, edit, and add built-in forms for site visits (capturing the Who, What, When, Why, How of routine site visits, maintenance, calibration, audits, etc.)”, could you please clarify whether this also implies that the solution should include a dynamic form builder allowing the Air District to create new forms without vendor involvement?
A: The requirement is intended to include the ability for the Air District to create, edit, and manage forms internally without requiring vendor intervention. This includes a configurable form-building capability that allows authorized users to define new forms, modify existing ones, and update required fields or workflows as operational and regulatory needs evolve. The solution should support administrative control, versioning, and appropriate user permissions to ensure form consistency, traceability, and QA/QC defensibility.
Q (Data Access and Integration ): Should integrations (Snowflake, Fabric, ESRI, AirVision, Asset Management) be real-time or batch-based?
A: Real-time
Q (Data Access and Integration ): Should integrations (AirVision, Sample Master, ESRI, Snowflake, Asset Management) be one-way, two-way, or event-driven real-time?
A: This is to be determined
Q (Data Access and Integration ): With respect to the requirement for integrating with Snowflake or Microsoft Fabric, could you please clarify: a. The intended purpose of this integration? Specifically, is the expectation to support analytical workloads, archiving, BI dashboarding, machine-learning modeling, or another use case? b. Additionally, should the solution push data through ETL/ELT processes, or should data instead be exposed via interfaces for Snowflake/Fabric to pull?
A: The expectation for integrating the new DMS with a cloud data platform like Snowflake or Microsoft Fabric is to support advanced analytical and operational use cases. The purpose is to server as a scalable, offloaded compute and storage layer for: Advance Analytics & Big Data Exploration: the ability to run complex, resource-intensive queries against the full unabridged historical dataset without impacting the performance of the operational DMS. Long-term trends, complex statistical modeling, joining air quality data with data sets from other Air District systems/ external databases (census data, traffic patterns, land use) stored in the platform for environmental justice / public health studies. ML Modeling, predictive analytics, BI Dashboards & Executive Reporting. Long-term performance and Cold Storage.
Q (Data Access and Integration ): With respect to the requirement for integration with ESRI: a. Could you please clarify the expected scope? Specifically, which ESRI products should the solution integrate with (ArcGIS Online, ArcGIS Enterprise, or Portal)? b. Additionally, should the system support pushing geospatial data—such as station locations, live pollutant data layers, and historical spatial datasets—and is ESRI map embedding within the DMS user interface also required?
A: It would be preferable, however, the Air District is ok with DMS pushing data to ESRI / Microsoft Fabric etc for geospatial data of station locations, live pollutant data layers, and historical spatial datasets.
Q (Data Access and Integration ): Could you please clarify the expectations for integration with the District’s asset management and work order systems? a. Which systems should be supported (e.g., Maximo, Cityworks, Infor, ServiceNow), b. What integration method is preferred (REST APIs, webhooks, file-based exchange such as CSV/XML, or vendor-supplied connectors), c. Whether the District requires two-way synchronization or one-way integration only?
A: The Air District has Asset Panda for an asset management system, as well as FreshServices. The Air District would like its M&M team to use systems in use. M&M is looking for one system to manage assets, inventory, work orders, support tickets that can be integrated with this projects scope a Data Management System for Ambient Air Monitoring
Q (Data Access and Integration ): With respect to the requirement for integrating with Agilaire AirVision and associated data loggers, could you please clarify: a. The expected integration approaches specifically whether the solution should use API-based integration, file-based transfers, or direct database access. b. What real-time polling or ingestion interval is required (e.g., minute-level).
A: Connection to Agilaire AirVision (has APIs) will be in collaboration with Agilaire. Polling of data is at 1 minute from the data acquisition systems (8872) DMS will be connected to AirVision for data coming data from the 8872s. LoggerNet for met data is TBD but most likely will be connecting to AirVision Central before going into DMS.
Q (Data Access and Integration ): With respect to the requirement for integrating with the Quality Data / Document Management System, could you please clarify: a. Which document management platform is in scope (e.g., SharePoint, Laserfiche, Box, OpenText), b. Whether metadata from the DMS should be synchronized into the system’s document records?
A: The Air District has access to SharePoint, but is open to suggestions that meet the security requirements for the Quality Data/Document Management System (is to track all SOP, Training of all the instruments and systems for Air District's M&M division) before use of any of the instruments/systems training must be signed off. Pdf, videos, pictures for the monitoring sites need to be stored preferably accessible from DMS, provide a solution.
Q (Database Optimization ): Does the District prefer a multi-database architecture (e.g., time-series + relational), or a single consolidated store?
A: The Air District is flexible in this regard and will evaluate the system options that best meets its needs
Q (Database Optimization ): Does the Air District prefer a specific time-series engine—Azure Data Explorer (ADX), TimescaleDB, or another platform?
A: The Air District will choose a system that best meets its needs. The Air District is currently reliant on Microsoft
Q (Specialized Data Handling (Meteorological & Spatial) ): What meteorological parameters (wind speed, wind direction, vector data, temperature, humidity) must be ingested and at what frequencies?
A: Mandatory parameters that the Air District needs to process AERMOD-ready met inputs are scalar wind speed and wind direction, temperature, and sigma-theta. Other parameters that the Air District collects at some of its towers include dewpoint temperature or relative humidity, precipitation, and solar radiation. These should be ingested as well. Hourly data are mandatory. Sub-hourly, such as one-minute and five-minute, are desirable if they become available from the Air District's network. b. There are some general layers that may be standard, such as terrain and the Air District boundary, that should be integrated, however currently, the Air District does not have any layers to integrate.
Q (Specialized Data Handling (Meteorological & Spatial) ): Are there existing ESRI or GIS layers for meteorological data that the DMS must integrate with?
A: There are some general layers that may be standard, such as terrain and the Air District boundary, that should be integrated, however currently, the Air District does not have any layers to integrate.
Q (Data Analysis Tools ): Should the DMS support direct data access for analysis (SQL endpoints, APIs)?
A: Yes
Q (Data Analysis Tools ): Are ML-based analytics expected (beyond anomaly detection)?
A: No, but would be desirable for use in forecasting
Q (Data Analysis Tools ): Should analysts be able to run ad hoc analytical queries directly against the production system, or only against an analytical replica?
A: Currently ad hoc analytical queries are directly against the production system which causes some of the performance issues / pain points. There is no analytical replica in the current system.
Q (General ): Has Bay Area Air District defined a recommended cost sheet / pricing template for submitting the cost proposal? If yes, please provide the template?
A: No
Q (General ): What is the anticipated or estimated budget range allocated for this initiative?
A: This it to be determined. The Air District will evaluate proposals and work with the selected vendor on anticipated costs
Q (General ): Is there a preference or scoring advantage given to MBE, WBE, VBE, local businesses, or certified green businesses in the evaluation of RFP submissions?
A: No preference for this RFP
Q (General ): If such a preference or scoring advantage exists, could you please clarify the specific evaluation criteria, point allocation, or any target participation rates associated with these categories?
A: Details of the evaluation criteria can be found under Proposal Evaluation of the RFP
Q (General ): We understand that resumes, CVs, or summary sheets are required only for key personnel—such as the Project Manager etc. and other primary roles—and not for the entire staff who might be assigned to this project, please clarify?
A: Please provide for the entire team who will be primary points of contact, subject matter experts, essential staff and major contributors to the proposed project
Q (API): Apart from the Backend Web API Services, we identified all requirements to be a part of an internal Admin portal. The project is aimed at improving the backend processing and modernizing the Internal Admin portal user interface. Is this a correct understanding?
A: The Air District is looking for a new improved system to allow all its staff to complete their work in one system
Q (SOW): Under Section 3- scope of work – Page 4 a. Scope involved in the Proof of Concept? What use cases are involved?
A: TBD - The Air District is working on this and will be provided to the shortlist
Q ( Key Objectives): Under A. Key Objectives – Page 5 a. Point B. Data Integration, Acquisition, and Import – Is the data outputted / made available to DMS is in the form of data files / APIs by the external data sources?
A: Will be connected to AirVision
Q (Key Objectives 2): Under A. Key Objectives– Page 5 b. Point F. Improving Accessibility - What do we mean by provide intuitive web based tool and offer easier access to aur quality information though modern Dashboard? Do we need to upgrade the existing website/web pages https://www.baaqmd.gov/en/about-air-quality/current-air-quality/air-monitoring-data/#/ ?
A: Will need to be able to calculate the AQI and provide the raw data (data that has not been validated) to the website and Open Air system via API.
Q ( Foundation and Architectural ): Under B. Foundation and Architectural Requirements – Page 7 a. Point C. Data Ingestion and Instrument Management in Point D – What do we mean by ability to track instruments movements between sites?
A: This means maintaining a complete, auditable history of each instruments' installation over time. The system should support tracking of instrument serial numbers, AQS parameter codes, method designations (FRM/FEM), installation and removal dates, site assignments, calibrations, and status changes.
Q (Foundation and Architectural ): Under B. Foundation and Architectural Requirements – Page 7 a. Point D. Data Integrity and Monitoring – Point C says created real-time system health dashboard for data review. Is this a part of the reports or Internal Admin Portal?
A: The Air District's M&M team will need to be able to see/ and get notified if a site/ instrument is not polling so it can be rectified. A quick easy dashboard view is needed, access also by mobile is preferred. Reports of how, why long a site has been down or instruments are also needed.
Q (Foundation and Architectural ): Under B. Foundation and Architectural Requirements – Page 7 a. Point E User Interface, Validation and Reporting – Is this web application for Public or Internal Admin users since it speaks that it will be used by all user roles, edit data and so on?
A: Internal staff
Q (Specialized Data Handling): Under F. Specialized Data Handling – Page 9 a. Point B. What do we mean by Implement a Tiered System with distinct workflows for operators, validators, etc ? Is this a part of the Admin portal? b. Point C. What do we mean by creatin integrated module for laboratory? What do we mean by Sample tracking and data validation? Is this part of the Import and QA/QC service ?
A: Air Monitoring systems have Level 0 -3 QA/QC - Validation. Filter based sample are given to the lab for analysis the information then needs to be entered into the DMS
Q (DMS Requirements ): In the DMS Requirements document a. Under System Wide and Foundation Requirements: Are these Data Access and Integrations via API for the following? Integration with SampleMaster Integration to Snowflake and/or Microsoft Fabric Integration with Microsoft M365 to use: Excel, Word, Outlook, Teams, Loop, PowerPoint, Planner, Task, Microsoft Agents, GitHub, PowerBI Integration with ESRI Integration with Asset Management / Work Order System Integration with Agilaire AirVision, Data Loggers Integration with Learning Management System Integration with Quality Data/Document Management System Integration with MET Data Management System Integration with Forecast System Integration with Air District Website Integration to Open Air
A: It will be a collaboration on what is the best way to integrate based on the functions required
Q (Under Data Integrity and Completeness Assurance): Under Data Integrity and Completeness Assurance i. Is the Ingestion Health Dashboard part of an internal portal such an admin portal?
A: Yes
Q (Data Validation): Under Data Validation, Review and Reporting i. Are these reports part of an internal admin portal?
A: Operators and QA/QC teams need the reports to help validate the data
Q (Visualization, Dashboard): Under Visualization, Dashboard and Analytics i. Is the System health dashboard a part of the internal admin portal? ii. Data Analysis tools – Are these tools part of the internal admin portal?
A: System health should be made accessible for Air District's M&M team. Data Analysis tools are used by M&M staff for many things including validating the data
Q ( Alerting and Notification): Under Alerting and Notification system i. Tiered Audit System – Is this workflow based on User Groups? Will this be like a Menu driven linear screen flow with business audit rules defined in the backend?
A: The Air District requests possible solutions for this system
Q (Budget): Do you have a specific budget for this project? If so, how much was that?
A: This it to be determined. The Air District will evaluate proposals and work with the selected vendor on anticipated costs
Q (Database): Is there a preference for a cloud-native database? If yes, please provide the preferred technologies or platforms.
A: The Air District's preference is Azure. Vendor hosting is preferred
Q (Budget): What is the budget for the engagement?
A: This it to be determined. The Air District will evaluate proposals and work with the selected vendor on anticipated costs
Q (Technical Question): What specific capabilities, datasets, or workflows will be used to evaluate Proof-of-Concept (PoC) success?
A: TBD - The Air District is working on this and will be provided to the shortlist
Q (No subject): Are integrations with external systems (e.g., EPA systems beyond AQS, AirNow enhancements, third-party analytics tools) considered baseline requirements or optional?
A: Base line requirements.
Q (No subject): Is the Air District expecting mostly configuration of standard components, or significant custom development?
A: Dependent on selected proposal
Q (No subject): Does the Air District expect or allow vendors to use AI for implementation and innovation?
A: AI is acceptable, however bidders should detail its AI use under Submission Format and Contents of the RFP
Q (No subject): Please provide details on legacy data volume and formats, including but not limited to approximate size (TB), record counts, and data types (continuous, discrete, laboratory, metadata).
A: The solution provided should be better than the over 16 year old system that is currently in place. The Air District needs a system that is capable of what it does now and address the pain points the Air District has encountered. The Air District seeks a solution that is scalable, provide better performance, follow the NIST framework, be SOC II Type 2 / otherwise applicable (ISO 27011, CSA STAR Level 2, or an additional third party attestation validating the security controls of the environment) 350 GB. Yes all existing audit trails, QC flags, and metadata history also has to be migrated. 1 min ingestion frequency. No known data quality or schema inconsistencies, The migration will be parallel run, The Air District will provide the documentation it has, the processes and outcomes of the ETL / stored procedures need to be replicated not the ETL/ stored procedures themselves, list of connections will be provided. the proposal should include the refactoring effort. Yes there are third parties/vendors that may require coordination for connectivity updates.
Q (No subject): Are there known data gaps, inconsistencies, or historical QA/QC issues that vendors should plan for?
A: Yes. bidders should assume that, as with any long-standing regulatory monitoring network and legacy data management system, historical datasets may include typical operational conditions such as null codes, instrument downtime, configuration changes, method transitions, metadata inconsistencies, or legacy formatting differences. Bidders should propose a structured data assessment and validation approach to identify, document, and appropriately handle any anomalies encountered during migration, integration, or system transition.
Q (No subject): Will the legacy system run in parallel post go-live, and if so, for how long?
A: Parallel for a few months to ensure the expected outcome is produced
Q (No subject): Will the solution be deployed within an existing Air District Azure tenant, or should vendors propose a new subscription structure?
A: The preference is for the selected bidder to host. If not a collaborative effort will be used to provision the Azure infrastructure
Q (No subject): Are there Azure services that are mandated, preferred, or prohibited (e.g., Azure Data Explorer versus alternatives)?
A: No
Q (No subject): Please provide load assumptions, such as the peak number of stations, sensors, and concurrent users, to size the system accurately.
A: The current system is 350 GB
Q (No subject): Can the Air District share primary user roles and approximate user counts (operators, validators, auditors, public users)?
A: This will be dependent on how the rules and processes are handled in the system.
Q (No subject): What is the preferred training format (live, recorded, train-the-trainer), and what is the expected duration?
A: The Air District seeks a well developed training format, initial with live training, recorded for the growing knowledgebase and documentation with screen shot for users who prefer to read.
Q (No subject): Will real production data be provided for the PoC, or should vendors use synthetic or sample datasets?
A: The Air District can provide data for the PoC
Q (No subject): How will the PoC environment be hosted within the Air District’s Azure environment or vendor-hosted?
A: Vendor hosted is prefered
Q (No subject): Who will participate in scoring the PoC (e.g., IT, scientists, management, public affairs)?
A: The Air District will utilize SME's with knowledge in Ambient Air Monitoring Systems
Q (No subject): Is the Air District open to phased pricing, not-to-exceed milestones, or outcome-based payment structures?
A: The Air District's preference is payments will be made by milestones
Q (No subject): Will custom-developed components be owned by the Air District or licensed to the Air District?
A: Yes
Q (No subject): Are post-implementation support response times predefined, or should vendors propose tiered support models?
A: Tiered support models are acceptable. However business hour support is expected.
Q (No subject): How and who is maintaining the existing DMS system? In-house? or External vendor?
A: In-house
Q (Incumbent): Has BAAQMD previously contracted with an incumbent for similar services? If so, who was the incumbent, and are they permitted to bid again? If there is no incumbent, did BAAQMD review any vendor demonstrations for comparable solutions, and if so, which vendors participated?
A: No, the Air District has not demoed a system that addresses the pain points.
Q (Database): Can we get a copy of the current SQL Database schema and test data?
A: Will be added to the short list
Q (Database): What is the expected size of production database - # of tables, # or rows
A: That is up to the selected bidder
Q (Sensors/Devices): How are monitoring devices communicating with BAAQMD currently. i.e. what protocols?
A: Most instruments are connected to Agiliare AirVision.
Q (Sensors/Devices): What frequency and volume of data does each device provide?
A: The instruments are collecting 1 minute data
Q (Sensors/Devices): Is the device data pushed or pulled?
A: the DMS will connect to the central data acquisition system AirVision.
Q (Sensors/Devices): Assuming that each device has a unique id, can we get a summary/breakdown/type classification of the existing devices?
A: the DMS will connect to the central data acquisition system AirVision.
Q (Sensors/Devices): How many of these devices are currently in use and how many more do you expect in the future?
A: The DMS will connect to the central data acquisition system AirVision.
Q (Sensors/Devices): For POC purposes, will we have access to the live data feed from some of these devices?
A: Yes
Q (Sensors/Devices): Assuming that these devices either belong to BAAQMD or the companies producing the pollutant, we presume that the new application’s responsibility is simply to collect the device’s data and monitor that it is returning valid data on some kind of heartbeat schedule. We are assuming that problems with the devices themselves are the responsibility of either BAAQMD or the company that placed the device. Is this correct?
A: The instruments are the responsibility of the Air District.
Q (Sensors/Devices): Are these devices intended for localized pollutant streams, i.e. placed within a smokestack or are they for ambient wide area monitoring?
A: Ambient wide area
Q (Sensors/Devices): Are any of these devices two way and are they intended to be field programable?
A: This project is for a data management system to store the data stream from a central data acquisition system
Q (Sensors/Devices): Is meteorology data acquired from BAAQ sensors, or is it a separate data source? How is this data sent to BAAQ?
A: The data would be acquired from an Air District network of instruments that are connected to the 8872 data loggers.
Q (Sample data): How many of the sample data are created in a week?
A: Including analyzers + diagnostics: ~700,000 records per day network-wide, a standard site with no additional diagnostics: ~7,200.
Q (Existing system): Can we get a demo of the existing system?
A: The selected vendor will have an opportunity to demo the existing system
Q (Future system): What is the Minimum Viable Product (MVP) for this project? Please describe the must-have features.
A: See Attachment A in the RFP
Q (Future system): Will the AQM system have a publicly accessible component, or will all users be internal? What is the expected number of simultaneous users?
A: The Air Quality data collected in the DMS will need to be connected to the Air District WebSite / Open Air System, sent to AQMIS, AirNow.
Q (Future system): A public-facing REST API has been requested. What data should be accessible to this API? What are its security requirements?
A: Agilaire AirVision has a list of API
Q (Future system): Integration has been requested with asset management systems, work order systems, GIS systems, LIMS, etc. Which of these systems, and what versions, are currently in place at BAAQ MD? Will we have access to these systems for integration development and testing?
A: The Air District has ESRI, Sample Master. The Air District is setting up Asset Panda in its Finance division and has Fresh Services for a Ticketing System in the Information Services department. The Air District's M&M has not built out the assets or ticketing system yet. The desire of the Air District is to use Asset Panda and FreshServices but M&M has not started implementing in either system. M&M prefers one system for ticketing/work orders/inventory/ asset management that integrates with the DMS / Data Acquisition System and Sample Master.
Q (Future system): What use cases need to be supported on small-format devices (phones and tablets) vs on large screens?
A: Phones / tablets and large screen
Q (Logistics): We prefer to work in short iterations to get immediate feedback on UI and other design decisions. Will we have access to BAAQ MD personnel on a weekly basis?
A: Yes, an Air District project manager will be available and Air District staff will be available to help with feedback on configurations of the system
Q (No subject): In case firms are submitting confidential information in the response, is it required to provide a redacted version?
A: If a firm submits information it considers confidential or proprietary, it should clearly identify and label those sections accordingly. In addition, a redacted version of the proposal suitable for public release should be provided. The firm is responsible for ensuring that confidential material is properly marked and that the redacted version removes only the information claimed as confidential.
Q (No subject): Could Air District please grant an extension on the due date?
A: The due date was recently updated to April 28, 2026, 4:00pm
Q (No subject): Could Air District please confirm if vendors must have a local office in Bay Area/San Francisco?
A: The Air District does not require vendors to maintain a local office in the Bay Area/San Francisco region. However interested bidders must demonstrate their ability to meet any on-site support, coordination, or response time requirements identified in the scope of work, regardless of physical office location. Proposals should clearly describe how these requirements will be satisfied.
Q (No subject): Are commercial references allowed?
A: References from similar industry that have similar needs as the Air District is preferred
Q (No subject): In the “Conflict of Interest” section, should we provide a complete list of all clients for whom we have performed similar services within the past three (3) years, or only those engagements where an actual or potential conflict of interest exists?
A: Only potential conflict of interest that exist
Q (No subject): Does Air District accept remote resources to work on this engagement?
A: Yes
Q (No subject): Does Air District accept offshore resources to work on this engagement?
A: It is not mandatory for proposed personnel to be located at a local office unless specifically stated in the solicitation. However, bidders should ensure that the proposed staff can meet any requirements for on-site support, coordination, or response times identified in the scope of work. Proposals should clearly describe how the team will deliver timely, effective service, whether through local presence, hybrid support, or remote delivery.
Q (No subject): Does Air District prefer on-site resources to execute this engagement?
A: It is not mandatory for proposed personnel to be located at a local office unless specifically stated in the solicitation. However, bidders should ensure that the proposed staff can meet any requirements for on-site support, coordination, or response times identified in the scope of work. Proposals should clearly describe how the team will deliver timely, effective service, whether through local presence, hybrid support, or remote delivery.
Q (No subject): Could Air District please clarify if firms can utilize subcontractors to meet the requirements of this opportunity?
A: Bidders may propose personnel from subcontractors, provided the subcontractor relationship is clearly identified in the proposal. The bidder should specify: The subcontractor firm name, the role and responsibilities of the proposed personnel how the subcontractor will be managed and integrated into the project team, and that the prime contractor remains responsible for overall contract performance and deliverable quality.
Q (No subject): Could Air District please clarify if subcontractor references are allowed to be used for the services provided?
A: Bidders may propose personnel from subcontractors, provided the subcontractor relationship is clearly identified in the proposal. The bidder should specify: The subcontractor firm name, the role and responsibilities of the proposed personnel how the subcontractor will be managed and integrated into the project team, and that the prime contractor remains responsible for overall contract performance and deliverable quality.
Q (No subject): Is the Air District seeking a Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) solution or a custom-built solution for this project? The scope references design and development of a DMS, while Attachment A lists features and functionalities that appear to reflect an existing solution. Please clarify.
A: The Air District's preference is a Commercial Off-the-shelf (COTS) solution, but will evaluate all potential solutions
Q (No subject): Will shortlisted firms be provided sufficient time to develop and demonstrate a Proof of Concept (PoC)?
A: The preference is for a COTS system that can be configured for use at the Air District
Q (No subject): Is it mandatory for proposed personnel to be available at local offices?
A: It is not mandatory for proposed personnel to be located at a local office unless specifically stated in the solicitation. However, bidders should ensure that the proposed staff can meet any requirements for on-site support, coordination, or response times identified in the scope of work. Proposals should clearly describe how the team will deliver timely, effective service, whether through local presence, hybrid support, or remote delivery.
Q (No subject): Are bidders permitted to propose personnel from subcontractors?
A: Bidders may propose personnel from subcontractors, provided the subcontractor relationship is clearly identified in the proposal. The bidder should specify: The subcontractor firm name, the role and responsibilities of the proposed personnel how the subcontractor will be managed and integrated into the project team, and that the prime contractor remains responsible for overall contract performance and deliverable quality.
Q (No subject): Can projects delivered by subcontractors be included in the Experience and Qualifications section?
A: Projects delivered by subcontractors may be included in the Experience and Qualifications section, provided the bidder clearly identifies: The subcontractor’s role and scope of work on the project, the specific tasks performed by the subcontractor, and whether that subcontractor is proposed to participate in this project. The experience presented should demonstrate the team’s collective capability to deliver the required services under this contract.
Q (No subject): Does the development scope for this project primarily involve configuration and customization of an existing DMS, or does it also include custom development?
A: The development scope for this project is expected to focus primarily on configuring and customizing the selected Data Management System to meet the Air District’s operational, regulatory, and reporting requirements. However, the scope may also include limited custom development where necessary to support system integrations, data validation workflows, reporting outputs (e.g., AQS equivalency), or automation that cannot be achieved solely through standard configuration. Any custom development should be clearly identified, justified, and aligned with maintainability and long-term support considerations.
Q (No subject): Will the Air District cover licensing costs for Azure cloud hosting and any required third-party tools?
A: Yes
Q (No subject): Does the “Software License Fees” mentioned in the Cost Proposal refer specifically to licensing of a COTS solution?
A: Any and all applicable fees needed to deliver on the proposal of the bidder
Q (No subject): May bidders include relevant projects delivered to commercial clients in the Experience and Qualifications section?
A: Yes
Q (No subject): Are resumes required for all personnel proposed to deliver the project, or only for key personnel?
A: Please provide for the entire team who will be primary points of contact, subject matter experts, essential staff and major contributors to the proposed project Bidders should include a summary of relevant education, completed training programs, and professional certifications for proposed staff that are directly applicable to the scope of work (e.g., air monitoring systems, database management, QA/QC, AQS reporting, software administration, or regulatory compliance). No additional detail beyond qualifications relevant to the project is required unless specifically requested (e.g., copies of certificates or training transcripts).
Q (No subject): Should bidders submit named resumes for proposed personnel, or are sample resumes acceptable?
A: Bidders should include a summary of relevant education, completed training programs, and professional certifications for proposed staff that are directly applicable to the scope of work (e.g., air monitoring systems, database management, QA/QC, AQS reporting, software administration, or regulatory compliance). No additional detail beyond qualifications relevant to the project is required unless specifically requested (e.g., copies of certificates or training transcripts).
Q (No subject): Are bidders required to provide hourly rates only for proposed personnel, or may bidders also include additional roles required to deliver the project?
A: Bidders should provide hourly rates for all personnel expected to perform work under the contract. This includes both specifically proposed staff and any additional roles necessary to successfully deliver the project (e.g., project management, technical support, data migration specialists, QA reviewers, or system administrators), even if those individuals are not yet named. All proposed roles that may bill time should have corresponding hourly rates clearly identified in the cost proposal.
Q (No subject): For the statement of education and training programs in Assigned Personnel section, should bidders include relevant training programs and professional certifications completed by proposed staff, or are any additional details required?
A: Bidders should include a summary of relevant education, completed training programs, and professional certifications for proposed staff that are directly applicable to the scope of work (e.g., air monitoring systems, database management, QA/QC, AQS reporting, software administration, or regulatory compliance). No additional detail beyond qualifications relevant to the project is required unless specifically requested (e.g., copies of certificates or training transcripts).
Q (No subject): Will the Air District share the allocated budget or estimated budget range for this project?
A: This it to be determined. The Air District will evaluate proposals and work with the selected vendor on anticipated costs
Q (No subject): Is the Proof of Concept (PoC) expected to cover all required functional, technical, and operational requirements?
A: Yes
Q (No subject): Does the Air District expect the selected vendor to deliver the entire DMS as a single integrated platform, or are there existing tools (e.g., validation, reporting, public data portals) that must be retained and integrated?
A: The Air District's preference is an enitre DMS as a single integrated platform.
Q (No subject): Are there phase-wise acceptance milestones planned or is acceptance expected only at full system go-live?
A: There will be phase -wise acceptance milestones
Q (No subject): Will the Air District provide a Product Owner / business SME with decision authority during requirements finalization and UAT?
A: Yes
Q (No subject): Will vendor be provided access to an existing Azure subscription, or is provisioning of Azure infrastructure part of the vendor’s responsibility?
A: The preference is for the vendor to host. If not a collaborative effort will be used to provision the Azure infrastructure
Q (No subject): "Can the Air District provide a catalog of all current data sources, including: o Number of monitoring stations o Instrument types and vendors o Data logger models and protocols "
A: This can be found in the Annual Network Plan on the Air District's website (except for the data logger information)
Q (No subject): Are there anticipated new data sources (e.g., low-cost sensors, mobile monitoring, satellite data) that should be considered in the initial architecture?
A: The initial architecture should accommodate room for growth in the system
Q (No subject): What is the current and projected data volume (records per day, per station, per parameter)?
A: Including analyzers + diagnostics: ~700,000 records per day network-wide, a standard site with no additional diagnostics: ~7,200.
Q (No subject): Are there defined sampling intervals (e.g., 1-min, 5-min, hourly), and do these vary by parameter?
A: Yes, there are defined sampling intervals, and they do vary by parameter.
Q (No subject): Are there regulatory or legal requirements for long-term archival beyond 24 months?
A: Yes
Q (No subject): "Can the Air District share: o Legacy SQL Server schema documentation o Data dictionaries and metadata definitions o Known data quality issues or inconsistencies?
A: What the Air District has will be made available to the selected proposer.
Q (No subject): Are there custom stored procedures, triggers, or business rules embedded in the legacy database that must be replicated?
A: Yes, in the sense that the expected outcome is accomplished, however, the Air District does not have a preference on how it is completed, only that it needs to be efficient
Q (No subject): Is the expectation for a one-time migration, or will there be a period of dual-run / incremental synchronization?
A: There will be a period of dual-run/incremental synchronization.
Q (No subject): What level of historical validation is required post-migration (row-level reconciliation vs aggregate checks)?
A: Power BI is used at the Air District, however the Air District will consider alternative tools to reach the solution
Q (No subject): "Should dashboards be built using: o Power BI o Another preferred BI framework?
A: Power BI is used at the Air District, however the Air District will consider alternative tools to reach the solution. The dashboard should be compatible with mobile.
Q (No subject): Are there known external API consumers (research institutions, public portals, mobile apps)?
A: The current system is not capable of API connection, but there are consumers of the data that the Air District collects.
Q (No subject): Does the Air District expect the web application to be a fully custom-built solution, or is the use of frameworks, low-code platforms, or embedded analytics tools acceptable as part of the implementation?
A: The preference is to have an off the shelf system
Q (No subject): Can the Air District clarify the primary user groups for the web application (e.g., internal analysts, administrators, field staff, public users) and whether different workflows and feature sets are expected for each role?
A: The preference is to have an off the shelf system
Q (No subject): Are there existing design standards, UI guidelines, or reference applications the web application should align with, and should the application support integration with third-party visualization or reporting tools versus fully native visual components?
A: There are none
Q (No subject): Post-go-live, does the Air District expect: o Full vendor-managed operations? o Co-managed support? o Knowledge transfer to internal IT?
A: Co-managed support and transfer of knowledge to Monitoring Data Systems Team
Q (No subject): What are the expected support hours and response SLAs?
A: 8-5 PM PST - will be determined in collaboration with the selected vendor
Q (No subject): Will vendor be responsible for runbooks, disaster recovery drills, and cost-optimization monitoring?
A: Yes
Q (No subject): Are there target constraints or guidance on monthly Azure operating costs?
A: No
Q (No subject): Where is BAAQMD’s current SQL server housed physically?
A: Azure
Q (No subject): Can BAAQMD rank the following criteria in terms of importance for the full life-cycle of the proposed solution: Scalability/uptime/reliability/cost. This will be important to optimize the system design to meet BAAQMD’s long-term needs.
A: Reliability, uptime, scalability, cost
Q (No subject): Can you please define what constitutes a “fully functional Proof-Of-Concept” as referenced in Section I, III, and V.A?
A: The PoC is designed to test the core functionality. The scoped cases: Data ingestion from AiriVision, Automated QC & Alerting (show that the system can automatically apply configurable QC checks to incoming data and trigger an alert (email, Teams message, SMS) upon failure. Data Validation Workflow: Level 1-2, including the ability to view time-series data, select data points, apply QC/OP codes. Reporting: see reports attached for examples. And data to EPA (AQMIS, AIRNOW) CARB and Air District's website
Q (No subject): Can you please expand on the anticipated process to solicit and review the Proof-of-Concept Exercise? In particular, please provide the anticipated schedule to shortlist candidates, the anticipated POC submittal deadline, BAAQMD’s 60-day review of the POC, and contractor selection dates in relation to the June 30, 2027 delivery date.
A: TBD - The Air District is in the process to develop this
Q (COTS exclusive?): Are you seeking an off the shelf (COTS) software product to meet this need or are you open to developing a custom software system that is purpose built for your data and workflows?
A: The Air District is seeking an off-the shelf software (COTS) product.
Q (Azure tenant ownership and costs): Will the Air District provide and manage the Microsoft Azure tenant and subscriptions, or is the selected vendor expected to provision and pay for Azure infrastructure and pass costs through as part of the proposal?
A: The Air District would prefer a fully managed system where the vendor controls, optimizes and updates the infrastructure, maintains backup, provides multiple environments (test and production) and will be responsible for updating API dependencies. However if the Air District is to host, maintenance and support will be completed via screen sharing.
Q (Preferred Azure service patterns): For the time series and analytics workloads, does the Air District have a preferred reference architecture among Azure Data Explorer, Azure SQL, or other PaaS services, or should vendors propose and justify the optimal combination?
A: The vendor should propose and justify optimal combination
Q (Legacy SQL Server schema and data volume): Will schema diagrams, data dictionaries, and record counts from the legacy Microsoft SQL Server database be made available to bidders to support accurate migration planning and cost estimation?
A: What the Air District has will be made available to the selected vendor
Q (Historical data scope confirmation): Does the Air District expect all historical ambient, meteorological, QA, and metadata to be migrated, or are there archival thresholds or cut‑off dates where older data may remain in cold storage or read‑only systems?
A: For modeling purposes, all met sites back through 2009 should be migrated. It would be preferable to have data prior to 2009 available in the new DMS.
Q (Supported data loggers and DAS platforms): Can the Air District provide a list of currently deployed data loggers, DAS vendors, and communication protocols to scope real‑time ingestion, heartbeat monitoring, and re‑transmission requirements more precisely?
A: Agilaire 8872 data loggers are used, AirVision is the central data acquisition system
Q (SampleMaster and third‑party integrations): For integrations such as SampleMaster, AirVision, MET systems, and Asset Management platforms, should vendors assume direct API access is available, or are file‑based or intermediary integration patterns expected?
A: High preference for direct API access, but file-based is acceptable if API is not available
Q (EPA AQS submission responsibilities): Is the new DMS expected to fully replace all existing AQS preparation and submission workflows, or will it coexist with other internal or EPA‑provided tooling during transition periods?
A: The DMS is expected to coexist for a specified period and to create similar AQS submission workflows during the testing/transition period.
Q (Tiered audit workflows detail): For the Level 0–3 audit system, will the Air District provide role definitions, sample audit scenarios, and acceptance criteria to ensure vendors align implementation with legal defensibility expectations?
A: The Air District will provide sample audit scenarios, acceptance criteria, and definitions for the Level 0-3 audit system as it currently exists.
Q (Proof‑of‑Concept evaluation criteria): For shortlisted firms participating in the 60‑day Proof‑of‑Concept, what specific success metrics or evaluation criteria will be used (performance benchmarks, usability, QA/QC accuracy, reporting completeness)?
A: TBD - The Air District is in the process to develop this
Q (Hybrid delivery model): Does the Air District permit a hybrid delivery model that includes a combination of on‑shore, near‑shore, and off‑shore resources?
A: The Air District does not have any prohibition with using offshore resources however, the preference has been U.S. based resources.
Q (On-site Training - Travel and accommodation cost.): The RFQ indicates that on‑site work is not a baseline requirement but may be needed for specific activities such as training, subject to mutual agreement. For any such on‑site work, should respondents include estimated travel and accommodation costs in the cost proposal?
A: If it is part of the proposals, respondents should include estimated travel and accommodation costs in the cost proposal. Do note, selected vendors will need to take reasonable measures to secure the lowest fares and prices for transportation, lodging, and other travel expenses, including adhering to federal GSA FTR rates, as applicable.
Q (Submit more than one proposal): Does the Air District allow respondents to submit more than one proposal under this RFQ, for example one based on a SaaS solution and another based on a custom‑built Data Management System? If the Air District allow more than one proposal, how do we submit those?
A: The preference is for the proposer to submit one proposal. The Air District's preference is to have an off the shelf system (COTS)
Q (Report Requirements and Examples Sought): Please provide examples of some reports (and business logic if not clear from the examples) that are unclear by their title: Screening group Inventory, Monitor Network, QA Raw Assessment, QA Data Quality Indicator, Reduced Frequency District, Raw Data Preproduction, Combined Site Sample Values, Raw Data Qualifier, Raw Values By Year, Certification Evaluation and Concurrence, and QA Performance Audit Reports by Pollutant Type).
A: Please reference the Attachments section of the RFP
Q (No subject): User Interface/Web Application 22. What is the expected number of screens/pages for internal users? (Validation, Site admin, Instrument admin, Parameters, QC review, Reporting, Metadata, Audit logs, etc.) 23. Are there existing UI mockups, desired workflows, or current pain points for: a. Validation interface b. Reporting interface c. Data visualization d. Instrument management
A: Please reference the Attachments section of the RFP
Q (User Interface/Web Application): Are there existing UI mockups, desired workflows, or current pain points for: a. Validation interface b. Reporting interface c. Data visualization d. Instrument management
A: Please reference the Attachments section of the RFP
Q (Technical Question): Which limitations of the current MS SQL Server system are the most urgent to eliminate?
A: Please reference the Attachments section of the RFP
Q (Sample data): Can we get examples of the current field sample data, instrument data entry, and maintenance history forms that need to be collected?
A: Please reference the Attachments section of the RFP
Q (Existing system): What are the current bottlenecks with the existing system?
A: Please reference the Attachments section of the RFP
Q (Future system): Integration has been requested with Microsoft 365 product suite (Excel, Word, Outlook, Teams, etc.). What are the primary use cases for this integration?
A: Please reference the Attachments section of the RFP
Q (Reports): Can we get examples of any standardized reports that are currently produced by the existing system?
A: Please reference the Attachments section of the RFP
SLED stands for State, Local, and Education. These are solicitations issued by state governments, counties, cities, school districts, utilities, and higher education institutions — as opposed to federal agencies.
SamSearch Platform
AI-powered intelligence for the right opportunities, the right leads, and the right time.