REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS

Cover Sheet

General Information

Project Name Transit Signal Priority (TSP) Scoping Study for Bus and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Corridors

Project Description *There is a flash drive available for existing models for those vendors interested in responding. Email Pat Postell @ppostell@rideuta.com to obtain a copy.

UTA is seeking proposals from qualified consultants to conduct a modeling-based study to optimize TSP deployment and better utilize the technology. The results of the study will allow UTA to determine actionable strategies to improve bus network performance. This may result in a five-year contract.

Project Start Date Anticipated May 2026

Contract Type Professional Services Agreement shall be issued on a fixed labor rate NTE basis

UTA Project Manager Vaishali Apte

Funding Source Local DBE Participation Goal N/A

Procurement Process Information

RFQu No. 26-04040PP

Contract Administrator Pat Postell – ppostell@rideuta.com

Evaluation Criteria:

Evaluation Selection Weighting: 100 Points

• Technical:

• 1. Key Personnel Qualifications, 20 Points including Organizational Chart

• 2. Project Understanding and 45 Points Scope of Work

• 3. Team Experience and Quality 35 Points

RFQu Schedule:

A) Issue Request for Qualifications April 2, 2026, 2026, 2:00 pm MST

B) Deadline to Submit Questions and Requests for Approved Equals or Changes to UTA

April 15, 2026, 10:00 am MST

C) Last Day for UTA to Issue Addenda and Clarifications April 20, 2026 4:00 pm MST

D) Deadline to Submit Statement of Qualifications April 27, 2026 10:00 am MST mailto:ppostell@rideuta.com

E) Presentations/Interviews/Problem Solving Exercises (Optional) TBD if needed

Included as part of this RFQu

Part 1 – Project Information

Part 2 – Procurement Process Information

Part 3 – Procurement Terms and Conditions

Part 4 – Sample Contract

Part 5 – Forms including Appendices Appendix I – Proposed Cost/Price Proposal Form

Appendix II – Respondent’s Proposed Schedule for First Year

Appendix III – SOQ Declarations (in Part 4) Appendix IV – W-9 Tax Form Appendix V – UTA’s Quality Management Plan

RFQu Contents

Page Limit *Cover Letter, section dividers, quality control plan, corporate safety plans, full page resumes, required Federal and UTA forms and other documents expressly stated herein do not count toward page limit.

Pages

2 pages of the 10 may be 11” x 17”

Submittal Instructions

One (1) electronic copy of the technical SOQ and one electronic copy of the price SOQ shall be uploaded to Euna on or before the deadline referenced above. See Part 3 of this RFQu for further instructions.

Submission of Cost Pricing Form Proposals:

Cost Pricing Form proposals should be prepared at the same time as the consultant prepares a response to this solicitation (Appendix I Cost Pricing Form). Respondents must not submit their cost pricing form as part of their initial response. The most qualified consultant(s) will be notified and must submit their cost pricing form upon the completion of the technical evaluation. Cost Pricing Forms must be submitted within 5 business days of such request. The failure to submit a cost pricing form within 5 business days of request shall render a response to this solicitation as non-responsive.

Attachments and Forms Required Forms. To be considered responsive, SOQs must include those additional forms, declarations, and certifications listed below:

Appendix I – Sample Cost/Price Proposal Form Appendix II – Respondent’s Proposed Schedule for First Year Appendix III – SOQ Declarations (in Part 4) Appendix IV – W-9 Tax Form

Appendix V – UTA Quality Management Plan

A Respondent or potential Respondent shall not have any communications with any of the Project

Team members concerning the Program or this RFQu after it is released, except for the submission of questions and requests for clarification in the manner provided in this RFQu through the UTA

Contract Administrator.

Part 1 – Project Information

Transit Signal Priority (TSP) Scoping Study for

Bus and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Corridors

Project Overview

Utah Transit Authority (UTA) has invested significantly in transit signal priority (TSP), a technology that gives equipped vehicles higher priority at intersections. TSP is one mechanism that can improve bus speed and reliability, along with other factors and strategies.

UTA is seeking proposals from qualified consultants to conduct a modeling-based study to optimize TSP deployment and better utilize the technology. The results of the study will allow UTA to determine actionable strategies to improve bus network performance.

The consultant will perform a study to model the impact of TSP adjustments on UTA Route

35, Utah Valley Express (UVX), and Ogden Express (OGX) corridors. The study will analyze the effects of adjusting transit signal settings on bus speed and reliability, as well as

TSP’s impacts on overall traffic flow and cross-traffic. UTA will provide the consultant with some preexisting modeling work (on flash drives), which can be used to build upon. Impacts to all affected modes, including pedestrians and autos, must be assessed. The results will provide actionable insights for UTA and Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) to optimize TSP. Following the completion of the study, the consultant will be retained on an on-call basis for the remainder of the five-year contract term to support implementation, ongoing analysis, or related needs as they arise.

Project Background

UTA seeks to optimize service efficiency, reliability, and passenger experience through the strategic implementation of TSP. Through partnership with UDOT, signalized intersections and UTA vehicles continue to be equipped with TSP systems, and are operational, but a comprehensive understanding and systematic application of TSP is lacking, limiting UTA's ability to maximize the potential of its bus transit network. Currently, TSP-equipped buses are granted permission for delays greater than 5+ minutes for regular routes and 2+ minutes for BRT route buses. However, many routes are scheduled with extra time between stops.

This results in good reliability performance, but at the cost of longer travel time for customers, making the bus a less competitive option compared to private vehicle use. TSP has the potential to reduce travel times, but measurement of delay caused by signals and modeling of expected improvement as a result of different TSP settings are needed to make informed decisions to accommodate faster travel. UTA seeks holistic expertise of TSP to evaluate options to maximize the benefits from the technology while also minimizing undesired impacts to traffic flow.

V2X and LiDAR system opportunities

V2X technology allows for new opportunities to improve communication between buses, signals, and other vehicles. UDOT intersections are being equipped with LiDAR which offers new opportunities to detect active transportation uses and other vehicles to improve safety and performance. These technologies may have additional use cases for optimizing the overall network.

Study Approach

This study will develop and validate a data-driven analysis for optimizing TSP corridor implementations. By leveraging simulation modeling, the study will assess the consequences of varying transit signal parameters on bus performance (speed and reliability), overall traffic dynamics, impacts to other modes such as pedestrians and autos, and cross-traffic efficiency.

The study will begin by modeling and analyzing current traffic conditions, including roadway dynamics and existing TSP performance, to quantify signal-related delays and simulate potential traffic flow variations. The consultant will review existing available

UDOT dashboards and tools, as well as pertinent UTA data. Previously conducted VISSIM modeling will be provided to the consultant, and the consultant can validate those models on two bus corridors, OGX and UVX. The consultant will conduct new VISSIM modeling on

Route 35. The existing communication between buses and traffic signals can be assumed to remain the same for the purposes of the study. The consultant will model the traffic signal controllers currently deployed in order to give realistic analysis results. Analysis may focus on the weekday PM peak period. Pedestrian facilities, transit facilities and general purpose automobile traffic are to be modeled in VISSIM, with existing signal timing, including pedestrian phasing. Furthermore, the study will incorporate an analysis of industry best practices, including parameter settings and next-generation TSP systems. The results of the study may also assist in the determination of switching from schedule-based systems to headway-based systems. The contract will also include the option for additional on-call support for TSP-related assistance. The results of the study will be used by UTA to develop concrete, actionable strategies for UTA and its partners' planning teams to refine TSP operations and enhance overall bus transit efficiency across the network. This approach will then be designed for consistent application across all UTA bus corridors.

Project Benefit Summary

This project is expected to deliver several key benefits, including:

1. Improved On Time Performance: By prioritizing buses at signalized intersections, TSP will make travel times more predictable and consistent throughout the day.

2. Improved Bus Travel Times: TSP will also reduce delays and improve travel times for bus passengers, making transit a more competitive and attractive mode of transportation, especially when there is enough travel time benefit to reduce time in bus schedules.

3. Improved route efficiency: Fewer buses could be needed to provide the same or better frequency and reliability. Operator costs could be saved as well.

4. System-Wide Efficiency Gains: Analyzing the impact of TSP implementation on a single route within a selected corridor in terms of cost and resource savings will provide valuable insights into system-wide efficiency improvements. These findings can inform future TSP configurations and optimize transit network performance.

5. Enhanced Stakeholder Collaboration: This study will provide data-driven evidence to demonstrate to a broad audience the positive impact of TSP on people throughput, while minimizing any negative effects on general traffic flow and other modes.

Scope of the Project

This study will focus specifically on TSP for bus and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) operations.

It will include simulation modeling for UTA Route 35, UVX and OGX. The analysis will evaluate how implementing various TSP settings on individual bus or BRT routes can contribute to improving on-time performance, overall route efficiency, and minimizing impacts on other modes.

This project includes refreshing the existing VISSIM models for the UVX and OGX corridors, as well as developing a new end-to-end TSP model for the Route 35 bus corridor.

The consultant will also review existing available UDOT TSP dashboards and tools. In addition, the consultant will remain available on an on-call basis for the full five-year period to support future modeling needs and other analyses. Routes used for recreational locations may be studied during the on-call period. The study will provide updated and new models that can be used to assess the potential benefits of TSP on other existing routes, helping to guide decisions on system-wide TSP implementation. The results will provide actionable insights for UDOT and UTA to optimize TSP.

Corridor Features

Table 1 includes details of features for the three corridors to be analyzed: UTA Route 35, UVX, and OGX.

Table 1. Study Corridor Features

Route Route 35 Utah Valley

Express (UVX)

Ogden Express

(OGX)

Length 15 miles - end to end

12 miles - end to end 6 miles - end to end

Points of interest

Serves 1 rail station, 1 retail center

Serves 2 rail stations, 3 university campuses, 2 retail centers

Serves 1 rail station, 1 university campus, 1 events center

Signals 30 55 22

Roundabouts 0 3 1

Unsignalized 50 30 26

Freeway

Interchanges

2 2 0

Grade crossings

0 0 0

Bus Stops 117 (46 WB +

21 Magna

Loop/ 50 EB)

15 SB/ 15 NB 13 SB/ 13 NB

Potential Challenges and Risks

• Results from modeling data will need to be communicated clearly to facilitate partners’ evidence-based decision-making

• Strong communication and coordination needed between all stakeholders/partners to improve synergy and avoid conflict with concurrent related work such as UDOT's

TSP dashboard(s) and analyses, and UTA's Bus Speed Reliability Program

• Achieving faster speeds will likely require implementation of factors beyond TSP, such as schedule adjustments, bus stop placements, and other system improvements.

Deliverables

TSP Deliverables will include:

• Updated/refreshed modeling for UVX

• Updated/refreshed modeling for OGX

• Modeling for Route 35

• Biweekly progress meetings with partners

• Technical memo including modeling results and documentation of modeling methods in order to replicate for other corridors as needed

• Documentation of a set of allowable TSP settings that can serve as a framework for implementing TSP on other corridors

• Presentation to partners

• V2X and LiDAR Deliverables will include:

• V2X opportunities road map

• Technical memo

The consultant will develop a V2X opportunities road map which will consider how V2X and LiDAR technology could be applied to improve safety and bus performance. The technical memo will include use cases for further evaluation and development. Possible use cases could include, but are not limited to:

• Spotting pedestrians in low light conditions for safety

• Identifying customers at bus stops that are difficult to see in low light conditions thereby allowing the bus operators to better see waiting customers

• Improved vehicle detection at intersections for more accurate TSP check ins and ETA analysis

Milestones (See Figure 1 below)

1. Existing Model Validation and Development – 6 weeks after award of contract

2. Corridors UVX and OGX including calibration, validation, scenarios, final modeling and UTA review –3 to 4 months each after approval of Model Validation and Development

3. New Model for Rt35 Corridor including calibration, validation, scenarios, final modeling and

UTA review – 4 to 5 months

4. There is some overlap with the start time for the corridors, this allows the work to be completed in – Estimated 12 months

Figure 1: Proposed Schedule for First Year

Part 2 - Procurement Process Information

Statement Of Qualifications (SOQ) FORMAT

SOQs must adhere to the following format:

• SOQs should be formatted primarily to 8 ½ by 11 inches. 11 by 17-inch format may be used for charts, tables, and schedules. No text should be included on 11 by 17-inch size format except for text that is required for the interpretation of the chart, table, or schedule.

• SOQs should use a minimum 12-point font.

• If a SOQ is submitted in double-sided format, both sides of the page will be counted against the Page Limit.

• The SOQ must not exceed the Page Limit shown on the RFQu Cover Sheet. The Proposer shall not submit brochures or additional materials. At its discretion, UTA will not consider such additional materials in the selection of the successful Proposer.

• Maximum file upload size in Euna is 50mb

Failure to follow the format described above may result in the SOQ being deemed non-responsive.

The SOQ information must be divided as follows:

• Cover Letter

• Section 1: Key Personnel Qualifications/Organization Chart

• Section 2: Project Understanding and Scope of Work

• Section 3: Team Experience and Quality of Similar Work

• Section 4: Attachments & Forms

Headers separating the sections, the cover letter, resumes, the Respondent’s general Quality

Control and safety plans, federal attachments, UTA forms and the example contract objections sheet will not count as pages in the RFQu page count. Failure to follow the format described above may result in the SOQ being deemed non-responsive.

SOQ CONTENT

The SOQ should consist of the following sections which clearly identify, in the order listed below, the following information.

Cover Letter

Identify the Respondent's point of contact name, address, telephone, and e-mail address. The

Cover Letter must be signed by a principal of the Firm or other person authorized to commit the Firm and its resources to this project.

Section 1: Key Personnel Qualifications including an Organization Chart (20 Points)

In the SOQ, the Respondent shall provide an organizational chart showing its proposed team members, including Key Personnel and any proposed subconsultants, and their duties and responsibilities for the Project. The Respondent shall also describe the experience for each Key Personnel identified in this Section.

Respondents may provide descriptions of other staff identified in the Respondent’s organizational chart, as Respondent deems proper, to highlight the capabilities of critical staff members and their proposed role in the Project and may include their resumes if relevant. At a minimum, the first two Key Personnel listed below must be proposed by each Respondent; additional personnel may be identified and listed.

Deletions or removal of Key Personnel during the proposal review, award, and contracting process will not be considered by UTA and may cause a SOQ to be deemed non-responsive.

Identify the following Key Personnel as needed for the project:

• Project Manager

• Lead Traffic Engineer(s)

• Other(s) as identified (optional)

A) Key Personnel Qualifications (15 points)

In Section 1 of the SOQ, for each of the Key Personnel, describe their experience with projects similar to the work in this Project. Additionally, provide any unique/relevant qualifications that may set this Respondent apart from other

Respondents. In addition, provide references for each proposed Key Personnel.

References should have been directly involved in work performed by the Key

Personnel in the five years preceding the date on which this RFQu is issued.

References must include the Client’s name; project name, date, and location; client's representative in charge with their address and telephone number. UTA reserves the right to contact the reference specifically named by the Respondent or any other additional references as deemed appropriate by UTA, including references suggested by the Respondent's named references or references known to UTA through its own knowledge of the industry.

In the qualifications specified below, the word "must" indicates a required minimum qualification. The words "should or shall" indicate UTA's preferred qualification, but such qualification is not a mandatory requirement. It is the responsibility of the

Respondent to propose personnel that it believes will meet the stated objectives of

UTA. UTA understands that one of the major factors for the success of a project is that the personnel are experienced in the work that is to be performed. As such, UTA has stated the qualifications of each Key Personnel to provide the Respondent with the criteria that UTA will use to evaluate the Key Personnel proposed.

Key Personnel:

Project Manager

The Project Manager (PM) should have a minimum of ten years of experience in traffic engineering, traffic simulation modeling, developing Transit Signal Priority

(TSP) models, and/or transit operations and should have five years of experience in management of traffic engineering projects that included work of a similar scope, nature, and complexity in this Project. The PM should have experience managing comparable projects and familiarity with applicable government standards. The PM should have experience working with state and local governments and agencies on similar types of projects, or comparable experience on projects that consisted of multiple components. The PM should have a Professional Engineer license issued by the State of Utah or be able to obtain a license prior to commencing any work on this

Project. At least one reference for the PM should be from a municipality, city, county, local, transit or transportation agency.

Lead Traffic Engineer(s)

The Lead Engineer(s) should have a minimum of seven years’ experience in developing TSP models, traffic simulation modeling, relevant traffic engineering principles and/or transit operations for similar facilities. The Lead Engineer(s) must possess knowledge of VISSIM. They must have demonstrated experience successfully conducting traffic simulation modelling for comparable projects. They should have a Professional Engineer license issued by the State of Utah or be able to obtain a license prior to commencing any work on this Project.

Other(s)

The Respondent may include other personnel it believes would contribute to the success of the project. The experience of each person shall be described to indicate how their involvement will enhance the outcome of the project.

B) Organizational Chart (5 points)

The organizational chart provided in response to this section shall count as a page for purposes of the page limit stated in the RFQu Cover Sheet. Narratives of Key

Personnel experience and other team members shall also count as pages for purposes of the page limit. Additionally, identify any other subconsultants that the Respondent is committed to using on these Projects.

The Respondent must seek and receive permission from UTA before removing or substituting any of the above Key Personnel from these Projects prior to completion and must propose a substitute person meeting the above qualifications in connection with such request.

Section 2: Project Understanding and Approach to Work (45 Points)

The Respondent shall describe its approach to completing the work. The Respondent is encouraged to describe its approach to technical and procedural elements it perceives to be significant to the success of the Project. The Respondent shall include the following:

A) Approach to the Work (25 points) and Project Schedule (5 points)

Describe the detailed approach to completing the scope of work for this Project.

Respondents shall also include a proposed bar scaled schedule of the proposed task activities for the relevant phases for the project. As part of the approach, Respondents shall make recommendations on the level of modeling needed for each corridor. Respondents shall describe their approach to utilization of existing data and existing modeling. Respondents shall describe their understanding of utilizing

V2X and LiDAR for innovative opportunities in the project area. The Scope of

Services set forth in Part 1 of this RFQu is provided to give Respondents an understanding of the anticipated services that may be needed. Describe your approach to completing what your team determines are the most critical and challenging items listed to ensure the success of the Project as well as your approach to schedule and budget control. Describe the approach to applying innovative solutions to challenging TSP modeling problems. Additionally, Respondents must describe their intended approach to controlling costs to ensure that the Project does not exceed its budget from the available funds.

B) Approach to Quality Control (5 points)

In addition to providing a copy of its general corporate Quality Control Plan (which shall not count toward the page limit on the RFQu Cover Sheet and should be included at the end of Section 4), the Respondent shall provide a narrative of its QC approach to a similar Project and shall illustrate and describe the proposed QC organization. The Respondent shall show and describe how QC functions and organization are independent of production managers. The Respondent shall describe the QC reviews planned. The Respondent shall describe methods of corrective action and recovery techniques used to institutionally correct an issue or problem once issues or problems are identified. The QC plan should demonstrate the Respondent's familiarity with and commitment to adhere to UTA's Quality Management Plan

(included in Part 5 of this RFQu.

C) Approach to Critical Issues and Risks Identification/Risk Management (10 points)

The Respondent shall provide information and its approach regarding its perception of the critical issues and risks affecting each Initial Project design and construction.

For each project, identify the top critical issues and risks (ranked in order of severity), proposed owners, challenges, conflicts, impacts, opportunities, and what the approach and strategies are to mitigate the critical issues and risks. It is important to list risks based upon past similar project experience and how the Respondent

Section 3: Team Experience and Quality of Similar Work (35 Points)

Team experience in developing TSP models, success in TSP, systems integration and relevant traffic engineering, developing innovative, implementable solutions, and quality of similar work (35 points)

A) Team Experience and Quality of Similar Work (35 points)

In the SOQ, discuss the team’s past project work highlighting similar experience, expertise, and level of involvement on projects developing TSP models, success in

TSP, systems integration and traffic engineering. Discuss team experience in developing innovative, implementable solutions. Provide any unique project experience that may set this team apart from other Respondents. Respondents should identify how their experience, and lessons learned on prior similar projects will facilitate successful completion of these Projects.

Describe past projects highlighting experience in the five years preceding the date on which this RFQu is issued that are relevant to the Project. Include information on project management methods used to meet project goals that are similar to those required for this Project, including projects where the budget and schedule were met and/or expectations were exceeded. Describe, to the extent possible, those projects having a scope comparable, or reasonably comparable, to that anticipated for this

Project.

Discuss details of how your team made the past projects a success, including lessons learned and how the projects correlate to the scope of services and goals of this project. Include information on project management methods used to meet project goals that are similar to those required for this Project, including how the budget and schedule were met and/or expectations were exceeded.

Provide any unique project experience that may set this team apart from other

Respondents. Respondents should identify how their experience, and lessons learned on prior similar projects will facilitate successful completion of this Project.

In addition to a description in the SOQ, provide named owner references for the projects identified. References must have been directly involved, as a representative of the owner, in the project work performed by the Respondent. UTA reserves the right to contact the reference specifically named by the Respondent or any other additional reference deemed appropriate by UTA, including references suggested by the Respondent's named references or references known to UTA though its own knowledge of the industry.

B) Fines, Claims and Disputes (not rated, zero points)

The Respondent shall provide information outlining any fines, claims, dispute proceedings, litigation, and arbitration proceedings with an amount in controversy in excess of $100,000.

The Respondent shall additionally identify any fines assessed by OSHA, EPA, or a state agency with jurisdiction over workplace safety or environmental quality. Additionally, the

Respondent must include information concerning any contract over $100,000 that resulted in the assessment of penalties such as stipulated damages or liquidated damages against the

Respondent or any identified subconsultants over the past five years, where the assessment was settled, damages were finalized, or a judgment was entered. Further, the Respondent shall describe any conditions surrounding any contract entered into by the Respondent or any identified subconsultant over the past five years that has been terminated for cause or default or which required performance by another party. In addition, the Respondent must indicate any disciplinary action taken against the Respondent or any identified subconsultants within the past five years by any governmental agency or licensing board.

For purposes of responding to and providing this and other required information, if the

Respondent is a newly formed entity for purposes of submitting this SOQ and performing work on this Project, the Respondent shall provide all required information for each of the constituent individuals or entities comprising the Respondent.

WEIGHTING OF EVALUATION CRITERIA

SOQ will be evaluated based on responses to the information requested herein. UTA may interview one or more firms as part of the evaluation process; however, a decision to award a contract may be based solely upon the submitted SOQ.

This is a best value procurement wherein the award will be made to the responsive and responsible respondent(s) whose SOQ is determined to be the most advantageous to UTA.

In the evaluation, the factors shall be weighed as follows:

• (Note: Additional Scoring Points will be given for working within the proposed schedule provided in Milestones, Appendix II “Proposed Schedule for First Year”.)

• Section 1: Key personnel qualifications, including organizational chart (20 points) o Key personnel qualifications (15 points) o Organization chart (5 points)

• Section 2: Project Understanding and scope of work (45 points) o Approach to the Work (25 points) o Approach to the Project Schedule (5 points) o Approach to Quality Control in Design Services (5 points) o Approach to Critical Issue and Risks Identification (10 points)

• Section 3: Team Experience and Quality of Similar Work (35 Points) o Team experience in developing TSP models, success in TSP, systems integration and relevant traffic engineering, developing innovative, implementable solutions, and quality of similar work (35 points) o Fines, Claims, and Disputes (not rated, zero points)

Part 3 – Standard Terms of Solicitation

A. INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS

1. Submission of SOQs.

SOQs must be uploaded to Euna by the “Bid ends” date and time listed on Euna. SOQs uploaded after the deadline will be considered non-responsive. It is the responsibility of the Proposer to ensure that its SOQ is properly uploaded by the deadline.

Log onto Euna at https://solutions.Euna.com/apps/Router/SupplierLogin?CustOrg=StateOfUtah; if you have already registered, login and search by Utah Transit Authority or the RFQu number.

If you need to create an account, please select “Create Account” and then you can search UTA, or the RFQu number identified on the Cover Page. If you need assistance, please email the Utah Supplier Portal Support at Eunaadmin@utah.gov. Instructions to proposers are included in the RFQu documents.

For ease of review, UTA may also request delivery of hard copies of SOQs (see RFQu Cover Sheet).

2. Federal Requirements. (Not Applicable to this solicitation)

If federal funds are being used to finance this project, the Consultant shall also comply with the additional applicable federal terms and conditions listed in Appendix C-1 and submit all applicable certifications, forms and reports listed in Appendix C-2.

a. UTA eComply Solutions. In addition, where federal funds are being used, the Bidder/Proposer shall submit required labor and subconsultant information to UTA through following portal: https://uta.ecomply.us. The information provided shall include the following:

• Set up and maintain Consultant login for all persons inputting information in the system

• Description of payments received from UTA, and payments made to subconsultants of all tiers including amounts and confirmation of payment

• All certified payroll must be input into eComply Solutions which may be accomplished either through direct input or importation from the Consultant’s accounting system.

• All subcontract award amounts, date signed, and change orders

• Certified payroll information shall be uploaded on a weekly basis; all other information shall be uploaded or input no less than monthly.

• The Consultant shall include this clause in all subcontracts and manage and monitor compliance of all subconsultants within the UTA eComply system.

https://solutions.sciquest.com/apps/Router/SupplierLogin?CustOrg=StateOfUtah mailto:sciquestadmin@utah.gov https://uta.ecomply.us/

3. Minimum Standards.

This RFQu sets forth the minimum requirements that all SOQs must meet. Failure to submit SOQs in accordance with this RFQu may render the SOQ unacceptable or non-responsive. UTA may, in its sole discretion, waive minor irregularities in a SOQ that do not alter the quality or quantity of the information provided.

4. Confidential, Protected, and Public Information

In accordance with Utah Code Section 63G-2-305(6) of the Government Records Access and Management Act (GRAMA) and UTA's Procurement Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), procurement information related to this procurement will not be made public until after execution of the Contract with the successful Proposer. Procurement information includes the SOQs submitted by Proposers in response to this RFQu and any accompanying documentation, as well as records maintained by UTA during the procurement process.

UTA will maintain a process to ensure confidentiality for the duration of this procurement. If the Proposer submits information in its SOQ that it believes is "trade secret," the Proposer must follow the procedure set forth in Section 63G-2-309 of GRAMA.

Additionally, for ease of SOQ evaluation, UTA requests that each Proposer also follow the steps identified below:

a) Clearly mark all trade secret information as such in its SOQ at the time the SOQ is submitted and include a cover sheet stating, “DOCUMENT CONTAINS TRADE SECRET INFORMATION” and identifying each section and page which has been so marked;

b) Include a statement with its SOQ justifying the Proposer’s determination that certain records are trade secret information for each record so defined;

c) In addition to the SOQ uploaded to Euna, upload a second copy of the SOQ (as an attachment) that has all the trade secret information deleted, and label such copy of the SOQ “Public Copy.” If a Proposer uploads a SOQ containing no trade secret information, no "Public Copy" need be submitted. However, any Proposer that submits a SOQ containing no trade secret information must so certify in a cover letter to its SOQ; and

d) Defend any action seeking release of the records it believes to be trade secret information and indemnify, defend, and hold harmless UTA and the State of Utah and its agents and employees from any judgments awarded against UTA and its agents and employees in favor of the party requesting the records, including any and all costs connected with that defense. This indemnification survives UTA’s cancellation or termination of this procurement or award and subsequent execution of the Contract. In submitting a SOQ, the Proposer agrees that this indemnification survives as long as the trade secret information is in possession of UTA.

All records pertaining to this procurement will become public information after execution of the Contract unless such records are identified as trade secret information as specified above. No liability will attach to UTA for the errant release of trade secret information by UTA under any circumstances.

5. Submitting Questions to UTA

Questions and Requests for changes to the RFQu must be submitted via the Euna Q&A page before the end of the Question-and-Answer period. UTA’s answers to timely questions will be posted on the Euna Q&A page. All communications regarding this RFQu should be addressed solely to the Contract Administrator whose name and contact information is listed on the Cover Page of the RFQu or IFB.

6. Addenda to the Request for SOQs

UTA reserves the right to make changes to the RFQu, by issuing a written addendum to the RFQu which will be posted to Euna.

7. Withdrawal of SOQs

A Proposer may withdraw its SOQ from Euna before the SOQ due date without prejudice to itself.

8. Cost of SOQs

UTA is not liable for any costs incurred by Proposers in the preparation, presentation, or negotiation of SOQs submitted in response to this RFQu.

9. Examination of Request for SOQs

The submission of a SOQ constitutes an acknowledgment upon which UTA may rely that the Proposer: (i) has thoroughly examined and is familiar with the RFQu, including the contractual terms in Part 4, (ii) is familiar with any work site identified in the RFQu, and (iii) has reviewed and inspected all applicable statutes, regulations, ordinances, and resolutions addressing or relating to the goods and services to be provided hereunder. The failure or neglect of a Proposer to receive or examine such documents, work sites, statutes, regulations, ordinances, or resolutions will in no way relieve the Proposer from any obligations with respect to the Proposer’s SOQ or to any contract awarded pursuant to this RFQu. No reduction or modification in the Proposer’s obligations will be allowed based upon a lack of knowledge or misunderstanding of this RFQu, work sites, statutes, regulations, ordinances, or resolutions.

10. Negotiation of Firm Offer

Unless otherwise stated in this RFQu, submission of a SOQ constitutes a willingness to negotiate a fair and reasonable price for the services described in the RFQu.

B. SELECTION PROCESS

1. No Public Opening

This is an RFQu and, as such, the SOQs submitted in response to this RFQu will not be subject to a public opening.

2. UTA’s Procurement Options

Based on submitted information, UTA may do or take any of the following actions, without limitation:

• select a Proposer based solely on the written SOQs, for further price negotiations;

• ask for more information or Clarifications before making a selection;

• use Presentations/Interviews/Problem-Solving Exercises before making a selection;

• under specific circumstances described in the Utah Procurement Code, determine a Competitive Range, conduct Discussions, and/or request Best and Final Offers (BAFO) before making a selection if a material error in the RFQu is discovered during the evaluation process, UTA may issue an addendum to all Proposers that have submitted SOQs requesting revised SOQs based upon the corrected RFQu.

• decline to accept any SOQ;

• re-advertise;

• cancel the procurement; or

• elect to otherwise procure the needed services in accordance with UTA policy and procedures.

UTA reserves the right to negotiate price, scope, schedule, and other contract terms with the preferred Proposer after a selection is made.

3. Responsibility

UTA will not select a Proposer who is deemed by UTA, in its sole discretion, to lack the ability or responsibility to perform successfully under the terms of the contract. Such determination of responsibility may encompass management, technical, legal, and financial matters

4. Checking References

UTA reserves the right to contact any reference specifically named by the Proposer in its SOQ or any other additional references as deemed appropriate by UTA, including references suggested by the Proposer's named references or references known to UTA through its own knowledge of the transportation industry.

5. Requests for Clarification

The Proposer shall provide accurate and complete information to UTA. If information is incomplete, appears to include a clerical error, or is otherwise unclear, UTA may either (i) declare the SOQ non-responsive, (ii) evaluate the SOQ as submitted, or (iii) issue a Request for Clarifications to the Proposer stating the information needed and a date and time by which the information must be provided. If the Proposer does not respond to the Request for Clarifications in a timely manner, or if the Proposer’s response is deemed to be insufficient by UTA, in its sole discretion, then UTA may declare the SOQ non-responsive.

All requests for Clarification will be in writing via Euna Q&A page, responses submitted as per the instructions contained in the request for Clarification. Responses must be limited to answering the specific information requested by UTA.

6. Presentations / Interviews / Problem-Solving Exercises

UTA may utilize presentations, interviews, and/or problem-solving exercises during this procurement if, at the sole discretion of UTA, it is considered to be in UTA's best interest. If UTA determines that presentations and/or interviews and/or problem-solving exercises are in its best interest, UTA will notify all or a short-list of the most highly qualified Proposers of the decision to utilize presentations and/or interviews and/or problem-solving exercises and schedule the presentations and/or interviews and/or problem-solving exercises in such a way as to not unduly delay the procurement process.

UTA reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to conduct multiple rounds of presentations and/or interviews and/or problem-solving exercises, if it deems necessary to do so, with one or more Proposers.

7. Price Negotiations

After selection but prior to award of the Contract, UTA will negotiate a fair and reasonable price with the successful Offeror.

If UTA and the selected Proposer are unable to reach a meeting of the minds on the scope, contractual terms, and/or price of the Contract, then UTA may, in its sole discretion, negotiate with the next most advantageous Proposer or choose to terminate the procurement in its entirety.

Once negotiations have been terminated with any Proposer, the negotiations may not be reopened with that Proposer under any circumstances.

If UTA receives only one responsive SOQ, UTA reserves the right to negotiate all elements of the SOQ and the Contract with the sole responsive Proposer, including, but not limited to, profit.

8. Notice to Unsuccessful Proposers

Following execution of the Contract between UTA and the successful Proposer, UTA will inform unsuccessful Proposers of the number of SOQs received by UTA and the name of the successful Proposer. UTA will attempt to give this notice promptly after the Contract execution. However, UTA’s failure to give this notice will not be deemed to affect the validity of the Contract.

9. Debriefs

Upon request by an unsuccessful Proposer, UTA may, but is not required to, provide debriefing information for the sole purpose of discussing, in a limited way, the strengths and weaknesses of an unsuccessful SOQ.

10. Protests

Protests are governed by the Utah Procurement Code, Utah Code Ann. § 63G-6a-1601 et seq. To be valid, a protest must be in writing and be filed with UTA within the time frames set forth in Utah Code Ann. § 63G-6a-1602. A protest will be deemed to be filed pursuant to these procedures when actually received by the designated recipient by delivery via email to protests@rideuta.com.

All protests must include:

• The name and address, and email address of the protester;

• The appropriate contact person for the protester, to whom all protest correspondence shall be addressed;

• The solicitation or project number; and

• A detailed statement as to the nature of the protest including, without limitation: (i) the alleged facts and evidence giving rise to the protestor to claim that it has been aggrieved; (ii) the protestor’s standing to protest; and (iii) the legal grounds upon which the protest is based.

The Procurement Officer shall make a written determination regarding the protest. An unfavorable determination of the UTA Procurement Officer is eligible for administrative reconsideration by a panel mailto:protests@rideuta.com determined by the Chair of the UTA Board of Trustees. A notice of appeal must be delivered by the Protestor within five (5) calendar days of the date of the Procurement Officer’s decision. A notice of appeal addressed as follows:

Chair, UTA Board of Trustees c/o Utah Transit Authority 669 West 200 South Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 Attn: Board Coordinator

CONTAINS TIME-SENSITIVE PROTEST MATERIALS

Any further appeal may only be made pursuant to Utah Code Ann. § 63G-6a-1801 et seq. A protesting entity must exhaust administrative appeals prior to filing a judicial appeal pursuant to Utah Code Ann. § 63G-6a- 1801 et seq.

*Note: Identify any deviations from this sample contract in the submitted proposal

Part 4 – SAMPLE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

UTA CONTRACT #26-04040PP

Transit Signal Priority (TSP) Scoping Study for Bus and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Corridors

This Professional Services Agreement is entered into and made effective as of the date of last signature below (the “Effective Date”) by and between UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY, a public transit district organized under the laws of the State of Utah (“UTA”), and [INSERT NAME OF CONSULTANT ], a [INSERT DESCRIPTION OF ENTITY TYPE] (“Consultant ”).

RECITALS

WHEREAS, UTA desires to hire professional services for Transit Signal Priority (TSP) Scoping Study for Bus and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Corridors.

WHEREAS, On March 23, 2026, UTA issued Request for Proposal Package Number RFP

26-04040PP (“RFP”) encouraging interested parties to submit proposals to perform the services described in the RFP.

WHEREAS, Upon evaluation of the proposals submitted in response to the RFP, UTA selected Consultant as the preferred entity with whom to negotiate a contract to perform the Work.

WHEREAS, Consultant is qualified and willing to perform the Work as set forth in the Scope of Services.

AGREEMENT

NOW, THEREFORE, in accordance with the foregoing Recitals, which are incorporated herein by reference, and for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements hereafter set forth, the mutual benefits to the parties to be derived here from, and for other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which the parties acknowledge, it is hereby agreed as follows:

1. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED

a. Consultant shall perform all Work as set forth in the Scope of Services (Exhibit A) .

Except for items (if any) which this Contract specifically states will be UTA-provided, Consultant shall furnish all the labor, material and incidentals necessary for the Work.

b. Consultant shall perform all Work under this Contract in a professional manner, using at least that standard of care, skill and judgment which can reasonably be expected from similarly situated professionals.

c. All Work shall conform to generally accepted standards in the transit industry.

Consultant shall perform all Work in compliance with applicable laws, regulations, rules, ordinances, permit constraints and other legal requirements including, without limitation, those related to safety and environmental protection.

d. Consultant shall furnish only qualified personnel and materials necessary for the performance of the Work.

e. When performing Work on UTA property, Consultant shall comply with all UTA work site rules including, without limitation, those related to safety and environmental protection.

2. MANAGEMENT OF WORK

a. Consultant ’s Project Manager will be the day-to-day contact person for Consultant and will be responsible for all Work, as well as the coordination of such Work with UTA.

b. UTA’s Project Manager will be the day-to-day contact person for UTA and shall act as the liaison between UTA and Consultant with respect to the Work. UTA's Project Manager shall also coordinate any design reviews, approvals or other direction required from UTA with respect to the Work.

3. PROGRESS OF WORK

a. Consultant shall prosecute the Work in a diligent and continuous manner and in accordance with all applicable notice to proceed, critical path schedule and guaranteed completion date requirements set forth in (or developed and agreed by the parties in accordance with) the Scope of Services.

b. Consultant shall conduct regular meetings to update UTA's Project Manager regarding the progress of the Work including, but not limited to, any unusual conditions or critical path schedule items that could affect or delay the Work. Such meetings shall be held at intervals mutually agreed to between the parties.

c. Consultant shall deliver monthly progress reports and provide all Contract submittals and other deliverables as specified in the Scope of Services.

d. Any drawing or other submittal reviews to be performed by UTA in accordance with the Scope of Services are for the sole benefit of UTA, and shall not relieve Consultant of its responsibility to comply with the Contract requirements.

e. UTA will have the right to inspect, monitor and review any Work performed by Consultant hereunder as deemed necessary by UTA to verify that such Work conforms to the Contract requirements. Any such inspection, monitoring and review performed by UTA is for the sole benefit of UTA, and shall not relieve Consultant of its responsibility to comply with the Contract requirements.

f. UTA shall have the right to reject Work which fails to conform to the requirements of this Contract. Upon receipt of notice of rejection from UTA, Consultant shall (at its sole expense and without entitlement to equitable schedule relief) promptly re-perform, replace or re-execute the Work so as to conform to the Contract requirements.

g. If Consultant fails to promptly remedy rejected Work as provided in Section 3.F, UTA may (without limiting or waiving any rights or remedies it may have) perform necessary corrective action using other Consultant s or UTA’s own forces. Any costs reasonably incurred by UTA in such corrective action shall be chargeable to Consultant.

4. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

This Contract shall commence as of the Effective Date. This Contract shall remain in full force and effect for an initial one (1) - year period expiring [INSERT INITIAL TERM EXPIRATION DATE].

UTA may, at its sole election and in its sole discretion, extend the initial term for up to three

(3) additional one-year option periods, for a total Contract period not to exceed fi five (5) years.

Extension options may be exercised by UTA upon providing Consultant with notice of such election at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the initial term or then-expiring option period (as applicable).