Amend 1 6913G625Q300052 Instructions to Offerors and Evaluation Criteria.pdf

RFQ No. 6913G625Q300052 Amendment No. 1

U.S. Department of Transportation

Volpe National Transportation Systems Center

Aviation Weather & PNT Applications Division (V345) LiDAR Evaluation for

Wake Turbulence Research

Instructions to Offerors and Evaluation Criteria - Addendum

1. INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS - SUBMISSION OF QUOTES:

Vendors are required to meet all solicitation requirements in addition to those identified as evaluation factors.

Failure to meet a requirement may result in a vendor submission being ineligible for award.

Quotes shall be submitted by 3:00 PM Eastern Standard Time on: November 6, 2025.

Questions and quotes shall be submitted to: Karen Marino at karen.marino@dot.gov.

Quote submission will consist of two (2) parts: Price and Technical Submission.

In addition to price the following technical factors will be used to determine best value.

• Technical Approach

• Past Performance

a. SECTION I – PRICE

The Government anticipates that a purchase order will be issued as a result of this RFQ. The vendor shall propose sufficient detail to meet the requirements of the Statement of Work (SOW).

b. SECTION II – TECHNICAL SUBMISSION

The Technical submission shall include the following:

FACTOR 1 – Technical Approach FACTOR 2 – Past Performance

FACTOR 1 – Technical Approach

Vendors shall provide a Technical Approach Summary of how they will successfully meet the requirements in the SOW for this Request for Quote (RFQ). The Technical Approach Summary shall be no longer than 5 pages. In addition to describing how they will meet the requirements, Vendors shall include information in the Technical Approach Summary which describes which, if any, of the desirable features listed in the Statement of Work that their proposed solution will be able to provide. These desirable features are summarized in Table 1-1 below. The desirable features listed in Table 1-1 have been assigned Low, Medium, or High weight describing their relative importance.

The Statement of Work and its attachments provide the authoritative description of all required and desirable features.

Table 1-1 does not provide an exhaustive list of all requirements. It only provides a convenient reference for specific requirements which have associated desirable features.

mailto:karen.marino@dot.gov

Table 1-1: Summary of Selected Requirements and Related Desirable Features

High-Level Description of Requirement and Statement of Work Section for Reference

Requirement Summary (see SOW for Controlling Language)

Related Desirable Features Summary (see SOW for Controlling Language)

Wake track parameters (Section 3.2.1)

[LOW WEIGHT]

• Unique Identifier

• Date/Time of Measurement

• Age of vortex at time of measurement

• Position of vortex core

• Direction of vortex rotation

• Vortex circulation at time of measurement

• ICAO type designator of generator aircraft

• Measurement quality data (e.g. SNR or CNR)

Scan geometry (Section 3.2.1 and Attachment B)

[HIGH WEIGHT]

Minimum scan geometry on Attachment A, slide 3

Desirable scan geometry on Attachment B, slide 4

Provision of raw Doppler spectra (Section 3.2.2)

[MEDIUM WEIGHT]

Not required • Raw Doppler spectra

• Processed in-plane velocity field

Data Re-Processing Tools (Section 3.3)

[MEDIUM WEIGHT]

Option 1: Contractor reprocesses lidar data with updated parameter set for at least two different subsets of data

OR

Option 2: Contractor provides software tools and documentation to allow the Volpe Center to perform reprocessing on its own

Option 2: Contractor provides software tools and documentation to allow the Volpe Center to perform reprocessing on its own (i.e. Option 2 is the preferred alternative)

OR

Option 1 and Option 2 combined

FACTOR 2 – Past Performance

The Government will evaluate the past performance record of the proposed Vendor and proposed major subcontractor(s) for this task order. The vendor shall submit documentation for one (1) recent and relevant project. The Government will evaluate the likelihood of successful performance and relative capability to perform the requirements outlined within the SOW. The Government will only evaluate projects or contracts that have already been performed. Past performance submission shall include:

• Recency and Relevancy of the past performance history.

o Recency - Projects are considered recent if they have been completed within the last five (5) years. Information that fails to meet this condition will not be evaluated.

o Relevancy- Projects are considered relevant if they are similar to the tasks of the type and complexity described in the SOW.

• For each contract or project, Vendors shall provide the following: customer’s name, organization, and contact information; contract or project number and title; dates of performance; a description of the work performed and how it is relevant to the SOW.

2. Evaluation of Offers - Evaluation and Basis of Award:

This order will be awarded to the Vendor that can provide the services that represent the best value to the Government.

The Government will make award to the responsible vendor whose submission conforms to the solicitation terms and conditions and represents the “Best Value” to the Government. Therefore, award may be made to other than the lowest priced offer.

The Government reserves the right to award without discussions. Therefore, each initial offer should contain the Vendor’s best terms. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if later determined by the Contracting Officer (CO) to be necessary.

In addition to price, this assessment will be based on the Technical Factors: Factor 1 – Technical Approach and Factor 2 – Past Performance.

Comparative Evaluation: The Government may perform a comparative evaluation (comparing offers to each other) to select the contractor that is best suited and provides the best value, considering the evaluation factors in this solicitation.