Final BAA_ SOL_693JJ3-24-BAA-0001 8.14.2023_Unrestrictedv3.pdf

693JJ3-20-BAA-0001

Office of Acquisitions and Grants Management

Broad Agency Announcement (BAA)

693JJ3-24-BAA-0001

Advanced Driver Assistance Systems Microsimulation Model Development and Validation

I. General Information

Contracting Officer: Okpemitoritse (Torishay) Onuwaje, FHWA, o.onuwaje@dot.gov

Contract Type: This is a Firm-Fixed-Price . BAA

SUMMARY OF IMPORTANT DATES

The Federal Highway Administration anticipates that the proposal, evaluation, and award process for this

Broad Agency Announcement will generally proceed per the following schedule:

Question Period Closes August 30, 2023

Proposals Due 1:00 pm EST October 6, 2023

Anticipated Award Dates: Beginning November 20, 2023

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION: Electronic transmissions of the proposal shall be sent to HCFA-

23SRI@dot.gov and the Contracting Officer, o.onuwaje@dot.gov, no later than 1:00 p.m., EST, on

October 6, 2023. Submissions received after this date and time will not be considered.

The proposal transmission shall be titled in the following sample format:

Topic – ADAS/ADS Simulation Models, XYZ University – Development of ADAS/ADS Microsimulation Models BAA

FUNDING NOTE: Funding is available for $800,000 for all awards under this Broad Agency

Announcement. FHWA anticipates that one (1) to three (3) contracts may be awarded.

mailto:o.onuwaje@dot.gov mailto:HCFA-23SRI@dot.gov mailto:HCFA-23SRI@dot.gov mailto:o.onuwaje@dot.gov

II. Overview

INTRODUCTION: This solicitation is being conducted via a Broad Agency Announcement

(BAA) per Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15 Contracting by Negotiation and FAR 35.016

Broad Agency Announcement.

Statement of Objectives (SOO)

1. Purpose:

The U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) / Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is issuing this

Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) to procure models that describe how Advanced Driver Assistance Systems

(ADAS) and Automated Driving Systems (ADS)—with or without connectivity—operate in traffic. SAE defines

Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles

(J3016TM)1 for ADAS and ADS features and Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to Cooperative Driving

Automation for On-Road Motor Vehicles (J3216TM)2 for cooperative driving automation (CDA). ADAS features, which include SAE levels 1 and 2, are available in new commercially available vehicles and have features like automatic emergency braking and adaptive cruise control. ADS technology, SAE levels 3–5, is currently under development, with no vehicles now commercially available with ADS capabilities.

The models proposed in response to this proposal request should seek to fill gaps in current traffic operations modeling (e.g., microscopic simulation) capabilities. The Offeror should justify why this/these proposed model(s) are the most important to develop now. The justification should include, but is not limited to, the importance of developing the model (e.g., why infrastructure owners and operators need this modeling capability) and the feasibility of developing a generalizable and transferable model (e.g., what data are available so that the model(s) can be created and validated using ground truth data), and a list of research and policy questions that can be answered using this/these model(s).

2. Scope or Mission

The FHWA Connected and Automated Vehicle (CAV) Analysis, Modeling, and Simulation (AMS) Research

Program seeks to help State and local agencies understand the most likely impacts of CAVs on the roadways they operate and maintain to support improved investment and operations decision-making. One of the three goals of the

Traffic Analysis Tools program within the FHWA Office of Operations (HOP) is to “operate/analyze the transportation system in a more proactive, integrated, performance-driven manner.” However, existing traffic analysis tools do not accurately forecast the impact of ADAS/ADS on the Nation’s roadways. The models procured as part of this RFP will help to fill this gap.

3. Period of Performance

Depending on the proposed modeling effort's scope, FHWA anticipates a performance period of up to 36 months.

The period of performance should extend a minimum of six months past the delivery of the final report to accommodate the FHWA publications review process. For example, if you propose in your milestone table that the final report/deliverable will be delivered in month 24, the period of performance should be a minimum of 30 months; likewise, if you propose that your final report/deliverable will be delivered in month 30, the period of performance shall be 36 months. All technical work must be completed by month 30 to accommodate the FHWA final report review process.

4. Background

Connected and unconnected Advanced Driver Assistance System (ADAS) and Automated Driving System (ADS) technologies offer potentially transformative societal impacts, including significant mobility, safety, environmental, and equity benefits. Agencies need low-cost methods to quantify the effects of ADAS/ADS-enabled vehicles to make intelligent investment and operational decisions as the market penetration rate of these technologies grows. In theory, transportation analysis, modeling, and simulation (AMS) tools can solve this type of challenge. However, current AMS tools were built to model human driver behavior and need to be significantly updated to emulate automated driving behavior or realistic vehicle-to-everything (V2X) connectivity. Thus, before agencies can use

1 https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3016_202104/ 2 https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3216_202005/ these tools to evaluate robust case studies of the impacts of emerging technologies on their facilities, new connected and unconnected ADAS-enabled vehicle and ADS-enabled vehicle behavioral models for microsimulation tools are necessary.

This work builds off several completed and ongoing research projects:

• Development of an AMS Framework for Vehicle-to-Infrastructure (V2I) and Connected Vehicle (CV)

Environment3 | Completed | Identified connected and automated vehicle (CAV) modeling gaps and developed a CAV AMS framework.

• CAV AMS Tools Development | Completed | Developed a cooperative adaptive cruise control (connected

L1+) model, connected manually driven vehicle (connected L0) model2, speed harmonization (converged infrastructure) application, and cooperative merge (connected L2+) model, and automated lane change

(connected L2+) model, Developed I–664 and SR–995 case studies of the impact of ADAS-equipped vehicles.

• CARMA Use Cases | Complete | Developed use cases for essential travel, traffic incident management, and work zone management.

• Data Collection to Support the Development of AMS Tools for CAVs | Complete | Collecting 50 data collection runs in Northern Virginia using a manually driven vehicle (L0) and a CARMA vehicle with L2 capabilities. Collected adjacent vehicle data using sensors.

• Volpe Inter-Agency Agreement (IAA) HW33A2 | Complete | Developed Modeling Needs Report.

Developed a Data Management Plan (DMP), Data Collection Plan (DCP), and Data Processing Plan for

Data Collection to Support the Development of AMS Tools for the CAV project.

• Volpe Inter-Agency Agreement (IAA) HW33A3 | On-going | Processing data collected by Data Collection to Support the Development of AMS Tools for CAVs project.

• Acquiring CAV Performance Datasets | On-going | Collecting ~80 hours of discreet ADAS and readily-identifiable ADS-equipped vehicles on interstates and arterials in central Ohio. Collecting adjacent vehicle data using sensors.

• Third Generation Simulation | On-going | Collecting data using ADAS and ADS-enabled vehicles on interstates, urban expressways, and arterials in Chicago, IL, and Washington, DC. Collecting adjacent vehicle data using sensors, helicopters, and high-altitude fixed cameras.

• Developing Improved Analysis, Modeling, and Simulation Tools for Advanced Driver Assistance Systems and Automated Driving System Applications | On-going | Developing nonlinear adaptive cruise control model and calibrating human-driven vehicle model interacting with ADAS vehicles.

Under the “Developing Improved Analysis, Modeling, and Simulation Tools for Advanced Driver Assistance

Systems and Automated Driving System Applications” project, FHWA conducted a comprehensive literature review and a series of stakeholder engagement sessions to develop the ADAS and ADS Modeling Gaps Report. This effort used stakeholder engagement and a literature review to identify six critical modeling gaps:

• Impact of CAV technology uncertainties on vehicle operation and system performance.

• Behavior of ADAS- and ADS-equipped vehicles with different cooperation classes.

• Behavior of ADAS- and ADS-equipped vehicles with different power trains.

• Nonautomated vehicle (NAV) and vulnerable road user (VRU) modeling when interacting with ADAS-and ADS-equipped vehicles.

• Field data-supported ADAS- and ADS-equipped vehicle modeling.

• Networks and regions investigation, including ADAS- and ADS-equipped vehicles and other road users.

The specific modeling components identified by the ADAS and ADS Modeling Gaps report are shown in figure 1.

This figure is provided to show examples of the types of gaps the FHWA CAV AMS program are interested in addressing. However, Offerers are not limited to proposing models identified in figure 1 in their proposals.

3 https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/39965 4 https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/operations/21050/index.cfm 5 https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/operations/21039/index.cfm https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/operations/21050/index.cfm https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/operations/21039/index.cfm

Figure 1. ADAS and ADS modeling gaps identified in FHWA research

5. Performance Objectives, Goals, and Outcomes

The USDOT seeks to procure new, validated microsimulation models that can accurately characterize the behavior of ADAS, ADS, CDA, and human-driven vehicles (near ADAS/ADS-enabled vehicles) models using real-world data. These models must:

• Solve an identified need (e.g., if this model were developed, what sort of analyses would this enable State and local agencies (i.e., infrastructure owners and operators) to conduct? How critical are these analyses to

State and local agencies?).

• Be developed and validated using real-world datasets. Ideally, the dataset used to create, calibrate, and validate models funded through this procurement will have been collected on real roads in live traffic. We will consider efforts recommending the use of data collected on test tracks, though at a lower priority.

• Be generalizable and trasnferable meaning that they will be able to adequately characterize the behavior of

ADAS, ADS, CDA, and human-driven vehicles (near ADAS/ADS-enabled vehicles) on roadway geometries and traffic conditions different to the ones used to develop them.

• Be open source, well documented, and published onto the ITSCodeHub6:

o Source code and algorithm description documents must be delivered for all procured models. All code and models the project generates shall be licensed under Creative Commons Zero.

▪ Source code should be well documented to support the adoption of the model by the stakeholder community.

▪ At a minimum, the algorithm description document should contain the purpose, description of the model, inputs, outputs, assumptions, flowchart, and instructions for use by State and local agencies.

• Be demonstrated using real-world case studies (i.e., case studies conducted on actual, calibrated networks).

• Be well-communicated to AMS program stakeholders by disseminating information at conferences and webinars and publishing reports and journal publications. All deliverables must follow the Government

Publishing Office’s Style Guide7, Turner Fairbank Highway Research Center (TFHRC) Communications

Reference Guide8, and be 508 compliant9.

(If applicable) Any datasets generated from this project (e.g., by post-processing existing datasets) shall be licensed under Creative Commons Zero and be uploaded to a public-facing repository (e.g., ITSDataHub).

6 https://its.dot.gov/code/ 7 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-STYLEMANUAL-2016/pdf/GPO-STYLEMANUAL-2016.pdf 8 https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/general/15058/15058.pdf 9 https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/508/

A. Project Management Requirements

The Offeror shall be required to host a kickoff meeting, develop a draft and final project management plan, and provide monthly status updates through a progress report and a regularly scheduled call:

• The Offeror shall submit monthly progress reports no later than 30 days after the end of the month being written in the format specified by the COR. The progress report shall describe work completed during the period, anticipated work, problems encountered or anticipated, and financial status, including at least hours expended and other costs.

• The Offeror shall submit, to the Government, an initial project schedule in Microsoft Project format within sixty (60) days after the effective date of the contract and updates showing the percent completion of significant deliverables every thirty (30) days after that. The schedule shall include, at a minimum, the major deliverables and milestones and adhere to the Microsoft Project template structure provided by the COR. Any changes to due dates after the initial project schedule baseline must be approved by the Government. The Contractor shall support the identification of schedule dependencies related to the project per the Government defined process.

• The Offeror shall document risks that might affect the project and the risk characteristics defined by the ITS JPO. The COR will provide a Microsoft Excel-based Risk Register template for the

Contractor to populate and update as necessary. Each risk shall have a unique number, probability, and impact of occurrence rating. The risk log shall be updated monthly and submitted with monthly progress reports. ITS JPO templates are available at http://www.its.dot.gov/project_mang/index.htm

• The Offeror shall submit invoices per the specified monthly or quarterly period addressing work completed and hours expended.

• The Contractor shall submit the invoices directly to the Delphi system or as specified.

Additionally, the Contractor shall submit the invoices concurrently to the COR, ITSProjects@dot.gov, and other recipients (s) (if applicable) as directed by the COR. The

Contractor shall include the contract number in the subject line of emails to ITSProjects@dot.gov and any specified keywords requested by the Government.

• The Offeror shall submit Interim and Final Deliverables concurrently to the COR, the COTM (if applicable), and ITSProjects@dot.gov once the Government accepts these deliverables. The

Contractor shall include the contract number (and task order number if appropriate) in the email subject line for each deliverable. The Government may request the Contractor to include additional specified keywords in the subject line of emails containing deliverables. Additionally, the Government may request the Contractor to submit Deliverables to an electronic repository as specified by the COR. Specific directions for reports, data, and software codes are provided below:

o Reports – all the reports developed from the subject project shall be published through the ITS JPO. Detailed information, including ITS JPO Publication Template and 508

Compliance Guidance, is available on the Publication Editorial Guidelines page at https://www.its.dot.gov/communications/pubsguidance.htm. For any reason, if the

Contractor wants to publish the report(s) through a different publication procedure, the

Contractor shall first consult and obtain approval from the COR and the appropriate ITS

JPO Program Manager (PM) and later submit a link to the final published report to the

COR and the ITS JPO PM.

o Data – all the data collected or produced from the subject project shall be uploaded to the

ITS DataHub at https://its.dot.gov/data/. Detailed directions on submitting a data set are presented on the “DataHub Metadata Requirements” page at https://its.dot.gov/data/datahub-submission/.

o Codes – all the software codes developed from the subject project shall be uploaded to the ITS CodeHub at https://www.its.dot.gov/code/index.htm. Detailed directions on uploading a code(s) are presented on the page titled “Repository Registration” at https://www.its.dot.gov/code/repository-registration.htm.

B. Model Development Plan http://www.its.dot.gov/project_mang/index.htm https://www.its.dot.gov/communications/pubsguidance.htm https://its.dot.gov/data/ https://its.dot.gov/data/datahub-submission/ https://www.its.dot.gov/code/index.htm https://www.its.dot.gov/code/repository-registration.htm

The Offeror should plan to develop a Model Development Plan for the proposed model(s). The Model Development

Plan shall expand upon content shared in the project proposal with discussions including, but not limited to:

• Research gaps that the new model(s) support (e.g., types of analyses State and local agencies can conduct once these models are developed and validated).

• New model components will be developed, including detailed methodologies on how they will be created, calibrated, and validated and which existing data source/data types will be used.

• Existing model components/structures that will be calibrated and validated, including detailed methodologies on how they will be calibrated and validated and which existing data source/data types will be used.

• Plans for validating developed modeling components (e.g., what validation data can be used); what validation methodologies may be used, etc.).

• Plans for demonstrating validated models (e.g., integrating the model into the simulation tool).

Additionally, the Offeror should plan to deliver an external briefing on the model development plan to the simulation community.

C. Case Studies

The Offeror should plan to develop a Case Study Execution Plan, which expands upon the content shared in the project proposal with discussions including, but not limited to:

• Potential networks (e.g., I–66, SR 99, etc.).

• Base Case Calibration Data and Methodology.

• Future Case Scenario(s). Contractors are encouraged to partner with State and local agencies to define realistic future case scenario(s). (Examples: Infrastructure configuration, technology penetration rates, traffic management strategies, etc.).

• Assumptions.

• Performance Metrics (e.g., mobility, reliability, energy, safety).

State and local agency representatives are encouraged to be involved in developing the Case Study Execution Plan to ensure that the case studies are realistic and are studying deployments of interest to the local agencies.

D. Final Documents

The Offeror should plan to deliver a final report and a final project briefing using FHWA templates that follows the

ITS JPO Publication Guidelines10, Government Publishing Office’s Style Guide9, and TFHRC Communications

Reference Guide10.

6. RFP Responses

In response to this RFP, the Offeror should deliver a statement of work and corresponding proposal that addresses how their proposed team will provide products that meet the requests listed in section 5.

III. SPECIFIC RIGHTS RESERVED FOR THE GOVERNMENT UNDER THIS BAA

The Government reserves specific rights, in addition to rights described elsewhere in this document or by law or regulation, including:

1. The right to award multiple, single, or no awards.

2. The right to make an award without discussions or to conduct discussions or negotiations, whichever is determined to be in the Government’s interest.

3. The right to accept proposals in their entirety or to select only portions of submissions for award.

10 https://www.its.dot.gov/communications/pubsguidance.htm https://www.its.dot.gov/communications/pubsguidance.htm

4. The right to select for the award an instrument type appropriate to the specific development context, partner relationship, and proposal chosen for the award. Instrument types include but are not limited to contracts, grants, or cooperative agreements.

5. The right to request any additional, necessary documentation upon initial review. Such additional information may include but is not limited to, a further detailed proposal, budget, and representations and certifications.

6. The right to fund or co-invest in proposals in phases, with options for continued work at the end of one or more phases.

7. The right to remove proposers from award consideration should the parties fail to reach an agreement on award terms, conditions, and cost/price within a reasonable time, the proposer fails to provide requested additional information timely, or the Government believes it is in its best interest.

IV. INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS:

ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION: Offerors are required to follow the guidance contained herein. The following sections provide information on the proposal format, the submission process, evaluation and funding processes, and other general information. Proposals not meeting the format described in this BAA will not be reviewed.

All administrative correspondence or questions on this BAA should be directed to the Contracting Officer at the following email address: o.onuwaje@dot.gov and HCFA-23SRI@dot.gov.

The Contracting Officer (CO) is the exclusive point of contact for this acquisition. Address any questions or concerns you may have to the CO. Written requests for clarification shall be submitted using the

Questions Template (Attachment 1) and sent to the CO. Questions or requests for clarification shall be submitted on or before August 30, 2023. In the event of conflict between the answer to questions and the

BAA, the BAA shall take precedence. Please be advised that the Government reserves the right to transmit those questions and answers of a common interest to all prospective offerors. Questions shall contain the BAA number and Title. Please e-mail all questions to o.onuwaje@dot.gov and HCFA-

23SRI@dot.gov.

FHWA will not respond to questions received after the cut-off date.

V. EVALUATION CRITERIA:

The FHWA may select for award approximately one to three proposals.

Evaluations will be performed using the following criteria:

1) Technical Merit

The Government will use the following Technical Subfactors to evaluate the proposal's Technical Merit. The following Subfactors are listed in order of descending importance.

• Subfactor 1: Technical Approach

• Subfactor 2: Staffing

Subfactor 1: Technical Approach

• The proposal demonstrates a sound technical and staffing approach that would successfully deliver the requirements. This includes:

o A discussion of how the project will be managed.

o A discussion of what model(s) is/are recommended for development and why that/those model(s) is/are selected.

mailto:o.onuwaje@dot.gov mailto:HCFA-23SRI@dot.gov mailto:o.onuwaje@dot.gov o A discussion of how the Model Development Plan will be developed and the contents it will contain.

o A discussion of how models will be developed and validated.

o A discussion of quality control and assurance with developed models.

o A discussion of the Case Study Execution Plan will be developed and the contents it will contain.

o A discussion of how the Case Study will be conducted.

o A discussion of quality control and assurance surrounding the delivery of 508 and

Communication Reference Guide (CRG) compliant documents and presentations (where applicable).

Subfactor 2: Staffing

• The proposal includes an adequate and appropriate staff with the qualifications and experience to perform the requirement. The proposal must include the qualifications/experience of the project team’s technical experts in performing similar work and:

o Experience in project management.

o Experience, knowledge, and skills with advanced driver assistance and automated driving systems data.

o Experience, knowledge, and skills working with traffic driver behavior models.

o Experience calibrating and validating existing driver behavior and microsimulation models.

o Experience developing and validating new driver behavior models for microsimulation.

o Experience conducting case studies with microsimulation software.

o Experience working with State Departments of Transportation and Metropolitan Planning

Organizations.

o Experience, knowledge, and working with 508-accessibility and Communication

Reference Guide (CRG) compliance and technical writing.

2) Fund Availability: Funds availability will be considered in the ultimate award decision. The Government will evaluate proposals selected for award to determine the realistic and reasonableness of proposed prices.

3) Past Performance: Past performance will be evaluated on a “Pass/Fail” basis to determine acceptable or unacceptable risk and responsibility.

Experience and Past Performance

• The proposal demonstrates successful and relevant experience integrating transportation data from diverse sources.

• The proposal demonstrates successful and relevant experience working with transportation datasets, ADAS/ADS data, and vehicle trajectory datasets.

• The proposal demonstrates successful and relevant experience cleaning, post-processing, and documenting datasets, specifically trajectory datasets.

• The proposal demonstrates successful and relevant experience developing, calibrating, and validating microsimulation models and interpreting their results.

• The proposed personnel have the necessary and relevant qualifications to perform the contract successfully. Note: The term personnel includes the Offeror’s proposed employees, consultants, and subcontractor employees.

• The Government will evaluate the merits of each Offeror’s past performance based on its reputation with its current and former customers. The Government may review all or some of the following areas regarding past performance on projects and contracts relevant to the work required under this Broad Agency Announcement. The lack of a performance record may result in an unknown performance risk assessment, which will neither be used to the advantage or disadvantage of the Offeror.

o Timeliness;

o Delivery or Performance;

o Problem Responsiveness;

o Quality of Purchased Products or Services;

o Cost Control;

o Technical Support; and o Delivered Quantities.

The Government may evaluate the quality of the Offeror’s past performance based on information obtained from references provided by the Offeror and other relevant past performance information obtained from other sources known to the Government.

Past performance evaluation will be a subjective assessment based on relevant facts and circumstances. It will not be based on absolute standards of acceptable performance. The Government seeks to determine whether the Offeror consistently has demonstrated a commitment to customer satisfaction and timely delivery of quality services at fair and reasonable prices.

Note: This is used to evaluate how well the Offeror has performed work relevant to the work required under the Broad Agency Announcement. The Government will consider the information provided regarding the Offeror and, as appropriate, any predecessor companies, key personnel with relevant experience, and subcontractors proposed to perform significant or critical portions of the work. When an

Offeror lacks past performance history as an entity, the Government will evaluate the past performance of the Offeror’s principals, predecessor companies, and key personnel, nonsignificant major subcontractors in assessing the risk that the Offeror presents in fulfilling the contract requirement lacking who lack any relevant past performance information will be given a neutral rating.

VI. PROPOSAL FORMAT AND CONTENT

Your proposal shall become the property of the Government and will not be returned. Suppose your proposal contains information you do not wish to disclose to the public or used by the Government for any purpose other than evaluating your submission. In that case, such restrictions shall be indicated on each sheet containing such information.

Before submission of your proposal, the offeror is expected to reach an understanding of the requirements of this solicitation. Suppose such a review establishes the need for correction or clarification. In that case, such information should immediately be brought to the attention of the Contracting Officer so that the matter can be resolved.

The Government reserves the right to request additional information necessary to determine the offeror’s qualifications for the contract award or clarify any proposal aspects. Such information shall be furnished promptly upon the Government’s request. Copies of the successful submission will be retained only as needed for contract administration and monitoring.

The Offeror shall submit the proposal separated into the following volumes:

• Volume 1: Technical

• Volume 2: Cost/Price

VOLUME 1: TECHNICAL

DETAILED PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

The Offeror’s complete proposal (consisting of the Technical, Managerial, Past Performance, and Cost/Price

Volumes) will be evaluated per the evaluation criteria of this solicitation.

The following detailed proposal instructions ensure a consistent and precise description of the Offeror’s approach and the associated price. The Offeror must include the Volumes and Sections described above. Offerors may add

Sections and Chapters if deemed appropriate, but the numbering schema defined herein shall not be changed.

PROPOSAL FORMAT

There is a fifteen (15) page limit on the Technical Volume and no limit on the number of pages for the Cost/Price

Volume. Any pages over the page limit specified will not be evaluated. All documentation submitted shall be in any font, point size 12, single-spaced, double-sided (if practical and double-sided pages are considered two), 8.5x11 inch paper. Any pages larger than 8.5x11 inches will be regarded as two pages. These page format restrictions also shall apply to any responses to Notices sent to the Offeror requesting additional proposal information. Cover Pages, Tables of Contents, Executive Summaries, Assumptions, Conditions, Exceptions, past performance, and resumes are excluded from the page limitations of their respective volumes. However, Resumes and Executive Summaries shall be at most two pages each.

Proposals, signed by an official authorized to bind the offeror, shall set forth full, accurate, and complete information as required by this solicitation. The penalty for making false statements is prescribed in 18 USC 1001.

Please furnish the requested information to ensure an offer is accepted and responsive.

COVER PAGES AND TABLES OF CONTENTS

The Offeror shall provide a Cover Page in each Volume. The Cover Page will include the following information:

1. Company name

2. Name and title of the point of contact (POC) authorized to negotiate on behalf of the Offeror’s organization

3. Telephone number, email address, and mailing address of the POC

4. Names, titles, email addresses, and telephone numbers of other POCs that the Government may contact if clarification of responses is needed

The Offeror shall provide a Table of Contents in each Volume; these pages will not be counted against the page limit.

The labor categories shall be in Volume 1, Technical.

Technical Proposal Requirements:

The Offeror shall describe and provide the following:

• Detailed technical approach and understanding to performing the work;

• The offeror shall provide the title of all personnel and their duties and shall identify the Key Personnel for the project.

• The Technical Proposal shall set forth any information that the Offeror wishes to bring to the attention of the Government.

• Level of Effort table (table displaying labor categories and hours per task. (The Technical Proposal shall not provide Names and cost information.).

VOLUME 2: COST/PRICE

The Offeror’s Volume 2: Cost/Price Volume shall be submitted as described below.

All offerors shall include the following mandatory business information regarding your business or institution regardless of business size or non-profit status:

a. Business Size

b. Unique Entity Identifier (UEI)

c. Name and contact information (mail address, telephone, and email address) of your authorized business representative/point of contact

All offerors shall provide the following:

A single proposal may include the development and delivery of multiple models. If multiple models are proposed, one or more may be selected for funding. Provide a separate detailed budget by individual model development effort

(if applicable). The detailed budget plan shall consist of the following Fixed-Price guidelines:

1) Offerors shall submit, under a separate tab, all (if any) assumptions or conditions upon which the Price

Proposal is based. Note that assumptions or conditions that are non-conforming to the Government terms and conditions may result in a higher cost risk assessment.

2) Provide adequate detail in supporting documentation of the total price for each milestone payment and the total reached (i.e., proposed labor category: proposed hourly price multiplied by the proposed number of hours, which equals the subtotal price. Then clearly show how the subtotals are calculated to arrive at the

Grand Total Price (sum of subtotals).

3) Any information submitted must support the price proposed. Include sufficient detail or cross-references to establish the relationship of the information provided to the offered price. Support any information supplied by explanations or supporting rationale as needed to permit the Government to evaluate the documentation. Such information is not considered cost or pricing data and will not require certification per FAR 15.403.

4) You are encouraged to consider building milestone payments into your price proposal. However, for proposed milestone payments to be acceptable, they must follow the guidelines below:

a. Associated with only final deliverables.

b. Payments may not be made for draft deliverables, progress reports/meetings, or kickoff meetings.

c. Payments must be commensurate with the value of the deliverable being submitted.

VII. OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION:

It is the policy of the FHWA to treat all proposals as competitive information and to disclose the contents only for evaluation. The Government may use selected support contractor personnel as unique resources to assist in administering the evaluation of the proposals. These persons are restricted by their contracts from disclosing the proposal information or using it for other than performing the administrative task. Contractor personnel are required to sign non-disclosure statements. By submission of your proposal, you agree that your proposal information may be disclosed to those selected contractors for the limited purpose stated above.

This announcement constitutes the Broad Agency Announcement contemplated by FAR 6.102(d)(2). A formal

Request for Proposals or other solicitation regarding this announcement will not be issued. Requests for the same will be disregarded.

The Government reserves the right to select for award any, all, part, or none of the proposals received in response to this announcement. In addition, the Government reserves the right to award either contracts, grants, or other instruments determined to benefit the government in achieving the goals of this program.

This BAA is an expression of interest only and does not commit the Government to pay any proposal preparation costs. All responsible sources that satisfy the Government's needs may submit proposals, which will be evaluated.

Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Minority Institutions (MI) are encouraged to submit proposals and join others in submitting proposals. However, no portion of this BAA will be set aside for HBCU and

MI participation due to the desire to solicit ideas as broadly as possible.

VIII. AWARD SELECTION

Once proposal evaluations have been completed, the Contracting Officer will notify all offerors of the award. After an awardee is selected for an award, the USDOT may choose to enter into negotiations with the awardee regarding any aspect of the contract award. Offerors whose proposals were accepted for funding shall be contacted before the award to obtain additional information required for the award. The Government reserves the right to remove an awardee from award consideration should the parties fail to reach an agreement on contract terms, conditions, and cost/price within a reasonable time or if the offeror fails to promptly provide any additional information requested.

Awards received through this announcement are not controlled by general procedures of FAR Part 15, “Contracting by Negotiation.” Instead, they are awarded under the authority and procedures described in FAR Part 35, “Research and Development Contracting.” Accordingly, given the inherent nature of a broad agency announcement, specific terms, conditions, and contract clauses, including FAR, USDOT, and FHWA terms and conditions, can only be determined by specifics of a proposed project and will be determined based on the appropriate contract and entity type. Accordingly, contract clauses will be identified and defined during negotiations before the award.