Addendum_1.pdf

Office of State Procurement 112 Administration Building

50 Sherburne Avenue St. Paul, MN 55155

SOLICITATION ADDENDUM

Addendum No.: 1 Date of Addendum: August 7, 2026

Due Date, Time: August 10, 2026; 2:00 PM CT Revised Due Date, Time: August 19, 2026; 2:00 PM CT

Buyer: Lana DuPaul Agency:

Department of Administration, Office of State Procurement

SWIFT Event/Posting Ref. No.: 2000018485 Title: Traffic Signal Controllers

SCOPE OF ADDENDUM

This addendum, containing the following revisions, additions, deletions, or clarifications, is hereby made part of the Solicitation, including the Sample Contract and Exhibits if applicable.

The purpose of this addendum is to revise the due date and time of the Solicitation, revise the Solicitation, and respond to questions received by the deadline stated in the Solicitation.

Responders acknowledge receipt of this addendum by responding to SWIFT Event No. 2000018485, Version 2 (or more recent version) by the solicitation due date and time.

Except as modified by this addendum, all the terms and conditions remain in full force and effect.

ADDENDUM

I. The State extends the due date and time of the Solicitation from August 10, 2026, 2:00 PM CT to August 19, 2026, 2:00 PM CT.

II. The following sections of the Solicitation are amended as follows (strike through is used for deletions and underlining for insertions):

a. Exhibit C: Specifications, Duties, and Scope of Work is hereby DELETED and REPLACED with Exhibit C, Addendum 1: Specifications, Duties, and Scope of Work. Revisions to the original Exhibit C include:

i. Section references in 9.19.C.1 have been REVISED from “9.20.B and 9.20.C” to “9.19.B and 9.19.C.”

ii. 9.19.B is REVISED to say “Simple Network Management Protocol version 3 (SNMPv3) shall be used over SNMPv1 wherever subsequent published standards allow. SNMPv1 may be used for any standard which does not support v3.”

iii. All subsections in 11.5 are DELETED and REPLACED with “MnDOT will conduct network scanning including denial of service attacks (DoS) of the controller using the Tenable.sc™ security center tool while connected to existing MnDOT ATMS system where both the scanning tool and communications software are simultaneously trying to communicate with the controller. Failure to successfully complete testing as outlined in section 11.5 will disqualify the controller.”

iv. (Optional) is ADDED to each Subsection D, “GPS Module” for Sections 21.1-21.8, and to Subsections 21.7.C and 21.8.C for “C1 Connectors.”

b. Exhibit D, Supplement 2: Price Schedule is hereby DELETED and REPLACED with Exhibit D, Supplement 2, Addendum 1: Price Schedule. Revisions to the original Exhibit D, Supplement 2 include:

i. “GPS Module” is REMOVED from the descriptions provided for all controllers listed in Table 1. Responders may add additional rows if desired to propose additional controller products, or to propose costs for (optional) items detailed in Exhibit C.

III. Below are the State’s responses to questions received by the deadline stated in the solicitation.

Q1. Section 9.19.C.1 references 9.20.B and 9.20.C. These do not appear in the document. Should they say 9.19.B and 9.19.C?

A1. See the revision to Exhibit C in II.a.i above. 9.20.B and 9.20.C have been updated to 9.19.B and 9.19.C, respectively.

Q2. Until NTCIP 1202v4 is published, can a secure & documented API be used to satisfy section 9.19 A-C if the objects from NTCIP 1201: V 03 and NTCIP 1202: V 03A are supported?

A2. As long as the API also adheres to Sections 9.8 (ATMS Support) and 10.3 (MIB & API Files), this is acceptable. The acceptance of the API in lieu of these sections would be at the sole discretion of MnDOT in coordination with its ATMS vendor.

Q3. NTCIP 1201: V 03 and NTCIP 1202: V 03A mandate the use of SNMPv1. No solution can be compliant with Section 9.19.A (NTCIP 1201v03) & Section 9.19 C (NTCIP 1202 v3A) and also be compliant with Section 9.19 B (SMPMv3). Can Section 9.19 B be removed or updated to reference SNMPv1? The use of SNMPv3 vs SNMPv1 should be made clear by the other referenced NTCIP standards.

A3. See the revision to Exhibit C in II.a.ii above. 9.19.B has been revised to allow for SNMPv1.

Q4. Section 11.5 requires manufacturers to conduct network scanning using Tenable.sc. Are the manufacturers required to procure their own license for Tenable.sc or will MnDOT make resources available for scanning?

A4. See the revision to Exhibit C, Section 11.5 in II.a.iii above. Manufacturers are not required to conduct scanning using Tenable.sc, but should be aware that the controller is required to pass MnDOT’s testing using Tenable.sc during evaluation in order to be considered compliant.

Q5. Section 15.2 covers a GPS module as a desired feature. All controllers Bid Items (21.1 – 21.8) include a GPS module. How should manufacturers present pricing for a controller that does not include the desired GPS module?

A5. See the revisions to line items in 21.1 – 21.8 of Exhibit C and the revisions to Exhibit D, Supplement 2.

GPS Module and C1 Connectors have both been marked “optional.” For pricing, present the cost of the compliant controller in the respective line in the Price Schedule.

Q6. Are vendors required to provide pricing for all line items?

A6. No. Vendors should propose controllers that meet the minimum technical specifications in Exhibit C, but are not required to propose every type of controller listed in the line items section.

END OF ADDENDUM