RFP_Q_and_A.pdf

RFP 693JJ319R000018

“Non-Traditional Methods to Obtain Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Evaluation and Analysis”

Questions Received

1. Does FHWA or other US Government resources have established agreements with passive data source providers that can be utilized in this solution? If Yes, is this data updated and made available on a regular basis?

No.

2. Is it up to the contractor to identify relevant passive data sources and establish agreements with the providers to be able to access this data?

Yes

3. RFP Section D.1: Packaging refers to the rules and guidance for shipments. Is the contractor expected to ship physical items?

No other than the data if it is larger than what can be communicated electronically (DVD, thumb drive or large hard drive).

4. What deliverables (data, intermediary results, etc) will be required to be delivered to the winner of the 2nd RFP for validation? Producing these deliverables may take some time that should be accounted for in this budget. If they are delivered for validation purposes, can you confirm that these data will be used only for validation purposes (ie, not used for reporting purposes by the states involved without an additional purchase).

Data, intermediary results and final results are all required to be delivered to the Validation contractor directly. And the validation contractor shall use such deliverables only for the purpose of validation.

5. It is our understanding that under the small business set-aside requirement that a prime contractor that qualifies as a small business can use non-small subcontractors but the prime contractor would need to meet the small business participation requirement for each task separately, and not just for the contract as a whole. There is a reading of these requirements which would allow a small prime contractor to perform less than the minimum levels of work for a particular task so long as they performed above the minimum levels of work for the contract as a whole. Which interpretation applies to this contract?

Per FAR Part 52.219-14 Limitations on Subcontracting.

a. (1) Services (except construction). At least 50 percent of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel shall be expended for employees of the concern.

The subcontractors utilized may be large or small business concerns. The RFP has been revised to include this clause.

6. The deliverables do not include actual data with AADT estimates (for example – Location X estimate of 4,500). Of course, this data will be necessary to create many of the required reports internal to the team performing the work. Can you confirm that delivery of the AADT estimates is not intended?

It is expected that AADT data be provided for 4,500 segments

7. Of course, this data will be necessary to create many of the required reports internal to the team performing the work. Can you confirm that delivery of the AADT estimates is not intended?

AADT estimates are needed per methods development. The project itself is not to obtain AADT data.

8. How will the handoff to the follow-up validation RFP work in this case?

The main contractor will provide the data sources used and the AADT estimates for 4,500 (min) segments for the secondary contractors to evaluate/validate using their own methods. The Validation contractor will work with the selected contractor for this effort throughout the project.

9. If data are to be delivered for the validation RFP, will usage be limited to validation purposes only?

Yes

10. Will the RFP for “Validation of Non-Traditional Methods to Obtain Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)” be published after selection of the “Non-Traditional Methods to Obtain Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Evaluation and Analysis” contractor?

Yes.

11. This research will require a significant amount of base data to calculate representative results. Will such base data be shared with FHWA, the committee, or the validator?

Yes. The fundamental issue is to ascertain whether methods deployed to produce AADT are statistically valid, the outputs is reliable. If the outputs at the current stages are not reliable, what other work needs to be done. It is expected that data used for the methods developments be available for the FHWA, committee and the evaluator/validator to analyze only.

12. Will AADT estimates be shared with FHWA, the committee, or the validator?

Yes the estimates will be shared with all 3. Keep in mind that the project is not to generate AADT data for other than methods developments and validation purposes. This is not to deliver national AADT data.

13. Is there a minimum or maximum budget associated with this activity?

Maximum budget would be limited to the PF: TPF-5(384).

14. What size sample is required for this project? Is there a minimum # miles for each of the conditions mentioned in the RFP?

No. However, there is a segment number outlined. These segments are supposed to be samples representing the study population.

15. Does FHWA expect the sample to also be representative of a product. For example, we could choose representative road segments scattered throughout a state on which to test all the conditions in the RFP. Or, we could develop a sample that represents an entire sub-jurisdiction such as a city or county.

The RFP has some specific stratifications with regard to coverages. For example, if a contractor determines one state can represent all climate conditions, then it can propose just using one state.

But we do not believe that will work.

16. Does FHWA expect the sample deliverables to be licensed to the participating states and FHWA for use as a product going forward? Or does FHWA expect all deliverables to be “works for hire” and owned by FHWA?

All deliverables will be owned by the FHWA. Keep in mind, the project objective is not to deliver a set of data. The project is to assess the feasibility of using passive data for AADT and other traffic data estimation from both theoretical and practical standpoints.

17. Regarding the variables for testing…. Is the intent that the contractor will work with each supporting state to identify which factors are present in their state and develop samples from this collaboration?

This is not to deliver any data for a specific state. Whatever parameters used for a given FC, area type, region, climate, et al should be covered in a comprehensive way.

18. Are these the participating states? They are the only ones mentioned in the RFP.

Virginia, North Dakota, Idaho, Ohio, California, Texas, Minnesota, Florida

There are other state highway agencies which are part of the pool funded project but are not listed here.