U.S. DOT FY 2026 Phase I Pre-Solicitation Q&A
- To create a new account or to sign in with an existing account please click on “sign in” located at the top right of the page
- A new pop-up window will open to make a selection, you can use an existing Google or Facebook account to access the site or you might select to create a new account.
- If you choose to access UserVoice with an existing Google or Microsoft account, you will be required to enter your login credentials for Google or Microsoft and agree to terms of service
- If you need to create a new account, click "Create an Account" underneath the password box
- In the next screen, type in the e-mail and click "Verify E-mail".
- Navigate to your inbox and click the link within the e-mail to verify. The link will be generated by noreply@trymagic.com
- That link will be live for 20 minutes. Once that time elapses, you will have to request another one
- Navigate back to UserVoice, and you will need to provide your name, a password, and agree to terms of service and storage permissions. Click "Create Account".
- Select the research topic your question is related to from the drop-down menu that appears when you begin typing.
- You may add more detail in the Description box (optional). Do NOT attach any files. The U.S. DOT shall not consider any submitted materials other than questions.
- Enter your e-mail address and password.
- When finished, select “Post idea.” If you registered, you will be able to track responses to your post. Please include only one question or comment per post to help us keep the forum organized.
63 results found
-
For Phase II field testing, would a partnership with a transit authority satisfy the partner reuqirement?
For Phase II field testing, would a partnership with a metropolitan transit authority satisfy the requirement for a committed state or local agency partner?
2 votes -
Does mobile-device-as-OBU architecture count as V2X for low-adoption rate congestion mitigation?
The topic identifies low connected-vehicle adoption rate as a barrier to V2X deployment in congestion mitigation. Does the topic accept architectures where the "V" in V2X is provided by commercial mobile devices (smartphones in fleet vehicles, eventually consumer devices) rather than dedicated OBU hardware, provided the edge node still produces standards-compliant SAE J2735 messages for downstream infrastructure and vehicles? This approach directly addresses the adoption rate problem the topic identifies, but it inverts the traditional V2X hardware assumption. Is this considered responsive to the topic objectives?
2 votes -
High-intensity LED visual warning array
The topic states advisories must be delivered to drivers and that the system should function effectively at low connected-vehicle *********** rates. Is a high-intensity LED visual warning array integrated into roadside infrastructure — visible to all vehicles regardless of V2X equipment status — considered a compliant advisory delivery mechanism under this topic, satisfying the low-*********** performance requirement by providing 100% vehicle coverage as a parallel channel alongside V2X RSA broadcast?
2 votes -
V2X advisories and high-intensity visual warnings
Is a corridor-level RSU deployment that delivers location-specific V2X advisories and high-intensity visual warnings to vehicles approaching a detected safety event — such as a wrong-way driver, stalled vehicle, or work zone intrusion — considered responsive to the congestion prevention and mitigation scope of topic 26-FH1, even where the primary benefit metric is conflict reduction and incident prevention rather than travel time reduction alone?
2 votes -
Differentiation from Commercial Navigation Platforms
The topic envisions location-specific advisories delivered to drivers. How should proposers differentiate their system from existing commercial navigation platforms (e.g., Waze, Google Maps) that already provide real-time detour and speed advisories? Is the key differentiator the V2X delivery mechanism, the TMC integration, or the proactive zone-based approach?
2 votes -
2 votes
-
2 votes
-
2 votes
-
26-FH1
Would a solution that incorporates AI-powered diagnostics and fault detection for traffic signal cabinets to ensure continuous uptime of the edge computing nodes required by the Edge AI-V2X system fall within the scope of this topic?
2 votes -
26-FH1: How is 'edge' defined: RSU-class hardware, TMC server, or proposer-defined?
Does edge computing refer to RSU-class roadside hardware, a local server co-located at or near a Transportation Management Center, or is the proposer expected to define and justify their own edge-cloud boundary as part of the system architecture?
2 votes -
26-FH1: Is a formal agency partnership required for Phase I?
Is it sufficient to identify candidate state or local transportation agencies and document a plan for engagement, with a formal partnership established at the start of Phase II?
2 votes -
26-FH1
Does Phase I require physical edge hardware such as an RSU or roadside compute unit as part of the testbed, or is a high-fidelity software simulation environment acceptable as the primary validation platform, provided the system architecture is explicitly designed for transition to physical hardware in Phase II?
2 votes -
Privacy compliance standards
What privacy and data protection standards are expected for the proposed system (e.g., NIST 800-53, CCPA, anonymization protocols, retention limits)? Are there specific federal or state privacy regulations the proposed system must address in Phase I?
2 votes -
Phase II agency commitment level and timing
Phase II requires "at least one state or local agency committed to provide access to live traffic data." At what stage is that commitment expected, and at what level? Is a Letter of Intent or MOU at Phase I proposal time sufficient, or must a binding partnership agreement be in place at Phase II proposal time?
2 votes -
Diverse Local Traffic Data Clarification
For Topic 26-FH1, the solicitation refers to “diverse local traffic data.” Can FHWA clarify whether this phrase is limited to traditional traffic operations data, such as vehicle detectors, connected vehicle data, signal data, and third-party traffic feeds, or whether proposers may define a broader set of transportation-relevant local data sources, provided they explain how those sources support congestion detection, prediction, impact-zone definition, or mitigation strategy generation?
1 vote -
Are public transit operators (bus, light rail) considered eligible intended recipients for V2X advisories under this topic?
Are public transit operators (bus, light rail) considered eligible intended recipients for V2X advisories under this topic, alongside private vehicles and Transportation Management Centers?
1 vote -
Does the scope of eligible moving data sources include public transit vehicles?
Does the scope of eligible moving data sources include public transit vehicles (e.g., buses, light rail) operating on public roadways, or is moving data collection limited to private passenger vehicles?
1 vote -
HIL Testbed requirments clarification
The topic requires hardware-in-the-loop testing. For a proposer whose Phase I architecture includes both hardware (RSU with embedded firmware) and software (TMS platform), is a bench-level HIL testbed — consisting of the embedded hardware prototype connected to the TMS software processing archived traffic data — sufficient to satisfy the HIL requirement, without requiring a field-deployed corridor?
1 vote -
Budget flexibility
The Phase I budget ceiling is $200,000. For a proposer developing both hardware prototype components (RSU electronics, V2X radio integration) and software components (TMS proof-of-concept, ML congestion prediction model), is it acceptable to allocate the majority of the Phase I budget to personnel costs for two technical staff rather than equipment procurement, with hardware costs limited to evaluation kits and bench prototype components?
1 vote -
Corridors where no existing RSU infrastructure is present
For a proposer deploying new RSU infrastructure on rural interstate corridors where no existing RSU infrastructure is present, is the strong justification requirement satisfied by demonstrating: (1) absence of existing RSU coverage on the target corridor, (2) solar-powered off-grid installation requiring no civil works, (3) full interoperability with the existing connected vehicle fleet via standard SAE J2735 messaging, and (4) integration with existing state DOT TMC data systems via standard TIM message exchange?
1 vote