New Hampshire

Department of Safety

Division of Motor Vehicles

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection

Program Management Project

Request for Proposals

RFP #2003-907

September 4, 2002
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 1 of 70

OBDII/Safety Inspection Program RFP Table of Contents 

1 Instructions 

1.1 Vendor Conference 

1.2 Proposal Inquiries 

1.3 Proposal Instructions 

1.4 Proposal Submission 

1.5 Oral Presentation 

1.6 Terms of Submission 

1.7 Project Start Work Date 

1.8 Vendor Responsibility 

1.9 Evaluation & Award of Contract 

1.10 Contract Security 

1.11 Liability 

1.12 Non-Commitment 

1.13 Schedule of Events 

1.14 Definition of Terms 

2. General Information 

2.1 Program Goals & Objectives 

2.2 Current Situation 

2.3 Future Systems Environment 

3. Scope of Services 

3.1 General Requirements 

3.1.1 Vendor Stability 

3.1.2 Support Program 

3.1.3 Proposal must meet RFP requirements 

3.1.4 Price Quotes 

3.1.4.1 Per-Test Price 

3.1.4.2 Monthly State Operations Payment 

3.1.5 Reasonable Travel Expenses 

3.1.6 Shipping & Delivery Fee Exemption 

3.1.7 Performing Services 

3.1.8 Confidential Information 

3.1.9 Performance Reporting (Program & Revenue) 

3.1.10 Contracting Department Workspace 

3.1.11 Contracting Department Vendor Selection 

3.1.12 DMV Access 

3.1.13 DMV Prior Authorization 

3.1.14 DMV Introductory Meeting 

3.1.15 DMV Project/Status Meetings 

3.1.16 DMV Exit Meeting 

3.1.17 Project Fee (or payment) Hold Back 

3.1.18 Dispute Resolution 

3.1.19 Equipment 

3.2 General Statement of Work 

3.3 Business Requirements 

3.3.1 Project Startup 

3.3.2 Hardware, software, support 

3.3.3 Motorcycle-only inspection stations 

3.3.4 Inspection stickers (on-site printing) 

3.3.5 Inspection stickers (traditional paper system) 

3.3.6 Number of participating stations 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 2 of 70

3.3.7 Data collection if using paper-based system for motorcycle-only stations 

3.3.8 EPA reports 

3.3.9 Changes in EPA reporting requirements 

3.3.10 Changes in state reporting requirements 

3.3.11 Federal compliance 

3.3.12 Submission of reports to EPA 

3.3.13 Audit & Reporting Requirements 

3.3.13.1 Equipment audits/surveillance 

3.3.13.2 Financial, managerial, technical data availability 

3.3.13.3 Quality assurance 

3.3.13.4 Compliance with 40 CFR Section 51.370 

3.3.14 Training & Certification 

3.3.14.1 Ethics and fraud 

3.3.14.2 DMV oversight 

3.3.15 In-State Testing Facility 

3.3.16 Toll-Free Help Line for Consumers and Inspection Stations 

3.3.17 Incidents Related to Use 

3.3.18 Identification of Responsibilities of Incidents Related to Use 

3.3.19 Resumption of Services 

3.3.20 Liquidated Damages 

3.3.21 Liquidated Damages for Incidents Related to Use – Future Applications 

3.3.22 Incidents of Non-Performance 

3.3.23 Damages for Incidents of Non-Performance 

3.3.24 Use of Software 

3.3.24.1 Contracting vendor bankruptcy 

3.3.24.2 Preserving rights to functionality 

3.3.25 Reinspection 

3.3.26 Refunds 

3.4 Technical Requirements 

3.4.1 System Development Methodology 

3.4.1.1 User Requirements Package 

3.4.1.2 Logical Design Package 

3.4.1.3 Project Plan Package 

3.4.1.4 Data Design Specifications 

3.4.1.5 Process Design Specifications 

3.4.1.6 Develop Test Plan 

3.4.1.7 Test Environment 

3.4.1.8 User Test Plan 

3.4.1.9 System Deployment 

3.4.2 Minimum Data Collection/Reporting System Functions 

3.4.3 Ad Hoc (or Special Reports) 

3.4.4 Compatibility 

3.4.5 Acceptance Testing 

3.4.6 Disaster Recovery Plan 

3.5 Project Deliverables 

3.5.1 Logical Design 

3.5.2 Physical Design 

3.5.3 Post-Implementation Warranty Period 

3.6 Schedule & Pricing 

3.7 IT Policy Standards 

3.8 Change Control Procedures 

3.8.1 Originator 

3.8.2 Change request log 

3.8.3 Impact of change request 

3.8.4 DMV as originator 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 3 of 70

3.8.4.1 If both parties agree 

3.8.4.2 If parties cannot agree 

3.8.5 Project Management Plan 

3.9 Termination of Contract 

4. Staffing 

4.1 Key Personnel 

4.1.1 DMV 

4.1.2 Vendor 

4.2 Staff Retention/Performance and Non-Substitution of Key Project Personnel 

4.3 Vendor Role 

5. Proposal Format/Guidelines 

5.1 General Information 

5.2 Proposal Outline 

5.3 Proposal Description 

5.3.1 Cover Page 

5.3.2 Transmittal Letter 

5.3.3 Table of Contents 

5.3.4 Glossary of Terms & Abbreviations 

5.3.5 Executive Summary 

5.3.6 Company Profile 

5.3.6.1 Overview 

5.3.6.2 Current Financial Statement 

5.3.6.3 Outstanding litigation 

5.3.6.4 Certificate of Authority 

5.3.7 Sub-Contracted Vendor Profile 

5.3.7.1 Overview 

5.3.7.2 Contractual relationship with vendor 

5.3.8 Experience 

5.3.8.1 Overview 

5.3.8.2 Capability 

5.3.8.3 Public Sector Experience 

5.3.8.4 References (minimum of three) 

5.3.8.4.1 Public Sector 

5.3.8.4.2 Other References 

5.3.9 Personnel Resumes 

5.3.10 Detailed Response 

5.3.10.1 Overview 

5.3.10.2 Project Approach & Technical Proposal 

5.3.10.2.1 Methods and services 

5.3.10.2.2 Tools and skills 

5.3.10.2.3 Management 

5.3.10.2.4 Basic project approach/methodology 

5.3.10.3 Maintenance & Enhancements Proposal 

5.3.11 Cost Proposal 

5.3.11.1 Compensation 

5.3.12 Terms & Conditions Agreement 

5.3.13 Offer of Gratuities Prohibited 

5.3.14 Legal References 

6. Selection/Evaluation Process & Criteria 

6.1 Proposal Receipt and Review 

6.2 Proposal Evaluation and Categories 

6.2.1 Proposal Evaluation Committee 

6.2.1.1 Stakeholders 

6.2.1.2 Core Evaluation Group 

6.2.1.3 Audit Group 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 4 of 70

6.2.1.4 Management Review Group 

6.3 Evaluation Criteria 

6.3.1 Experience (40%) 

6.3.2 Cost (20%) 

6.3.3 Understanding of project and ability to deliver (20%) 

6.3.4 Project management ability (10%) 

6.3.5 Personnel Resumes (10%) 

6.4 Proposal Rejection 

6.5 Public Disclosure 

6.6 Best & Final Offer 

6.7 Agreement of General Provisions 

6.8 Selection, Notification, and Award of Contract 

6.9 Contract Law 

6.10 Copyright, Intellectual Property Rights, and Confidentiality 

6.10.1 WWW Copyright and Intellectual Property Rights 

6.10.2 Confidentiality of Data and Information 

7. Terms & Conditions 

7.1 Deliverables/Schedules/Payments 

7.1.1 Development costs 

7.1.2 Documentation and Source Code 

7.1.2.1 Documentation Updates and Maintenance 

7.1.3 State Owned Documents and Copyright Privileges 

7.1.4 Escrow Agreement 

7.2 Pricing 

7.2.1 Dates and Schedules 

7.2.2 Invoicing 

7.3 Project Budget/Annual Price Breakdown 

7.4 Term 

7.5 Warranty 

7.5.1 Warranty Period 

7.5.2 Warranty Problems 

7.5.3 Failure to Meet Startup Date(s) 

7.6 Software/Hardware Enhancements 

8. Guaranteed Most Favorable Terms 

Appendix 1A – IT Services Activities/Deliverables/Milestones 

Appendix 1B – IT Services Position and Rate Chart 

Appendix 1C – IT Services Per-Test/Safety Inspection Fee 

Appendix 2 – State of New Hampshire Required Work Procedures 

Appendix 3 – Computer Access and Use Agreement 

Appendix 4 – Reserved 

Appendix 5 – Contractor Authorized Signature Verification Form 

Appendix 6 – New Hampshire Certificate of Authority or Certificate of Good Standing 

Appendix 7 – 40 CFR Chapter I – Part 51 (51.365) 

Appendix 8 – 40 CFR Chapter I – Part 51 (51.366) 

Appendix 9 – Current OBD and Safety Inspection Rules for New Hampshire 

Appendix 10 – New Hampshire Inspection Rules 

Appendix 11 – Sample Software Escrow Agreement 

NH Department of Safety – Division of Information Technology Systems Development Methodology 

P-37 Contract Form 

2002 Inspection Station Survey Questionnaire 

2002 Inspection Station Survey Results Summary 

2002 Inspection Station Survey Response Chart 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 5 of 70

This is a Request for Proposal (RFP) for On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program 

Management issued by the Department of Safety – Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV), as approved by the 

Department of Administrative Services, Division of Information Technology Management, (DAS-DITM). 

This RFP solicits expressions of interest from all VENDORS who wish to be considered as a provider of 

Information Technology Professional Services consistent with all specifications set forth in the State of 

New Hampshire Contract Terms and Conditions (Form P-37). 

1. INSTRUCTIONS. 

Purpose. The New Hampshire Division of Motor Vehicles, also known as the “DMV”, is issuing this 

request, soliciting vendors qualified to provide a FULL scope of services for On-Board Diagnostics and

Safety Inspection Program Management. The program will result in a state-licensed, vendor-managed 

relational database, with the vendor providing all hardware, software, and services necessary to assure a 

secure, high quality, user friendly front-end, communications, and quality assurance/improvement system. 

The system must be compatible with the existing DMV IT system and provide two-way communications 

between itself and a network of approximately 2,600 OBD testing/safety inspection stations, which 

employ roughly 15,000 automotive technicians. The system must also provide a clear audit trail for every 

test/inspection/transaction. The DMV will sign a contract with the vendor and the participating Inspection 

Stations will be considered as agents of the DMV. 

The purpose of this RFP is not only to designate a Program Manager, but also to assist the DMV in 

determining the overall design of the VID, which will best suit the administrative and reporting needs of 

the DMV and the convenience of end users at remote inspection sites. The DMV is prepared to consider 

any feasible approach that will achieve the desired results as described in this RFP. The DMV 

encourages innovative solutions and pricing options, which will make the system user friendly and 

affordable to all participants. 

1.1 Vendor Conference. A mandatory Vendor Conference will be held at the following 

location as identified in section 1.13: Schedule of Events: 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

10 Hazen Drive 

Concord, NH 03305 

The purpose of the Vendor Conference is to: 

1. Request clarification of any section of the RFP.

2. Request changes to the RFP for requirements considered so restrictive as to 

prohibit or discourage responses. 

3. Offer suggestions or changes to the RFP, which could improve the RFP 

competition or lower the offered price. 

4. Review any applicable documentation. 

All written questions received prior to the Vendor Conference, or received at the 

conference, will be read aloud and will receive unofficial oral responses at the 

conference. Official written answers to these questions will be distributed in accordance 

with Section 1.2: Proposal Inquiries of this RFP. 

Vendors are encouraged to submit written questions prior to the conference in order to enable the DMV to 

formulate better Vendor Conference oral responses. No responses will be given prior to the Vendor 

Conference. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 6 of 70

Vendors are requested to RSVP via US mail or e-mail by the date identified in Section 

1.13: Schedule of Events, indicating the number of individuals who will attend the 

Vendor Conference. Vendors are limited to no more than three (3) representatives. 

1.2 Proposal Inquiries. All inquiries concerning this RFP shall be made in writing/email, 

citing the RFP Title, RFP Number, Page, Section, and Paragraph, and submitted to: 

Tom Hettinger, Administrator 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

10 Hazen Drive 

Concord, NH 03305 

Phone: 603-271-0351 

E-mail: thettinger@safety.state.nh.us

Vendors are encouraged to submit questions via email. Questions must be submitted by 

an individual authorized to commit the organization to provide services necessary to meet 

the requirements of this RFP. 

Questions on and clarifications of this RFP and the New Hampshire Terms and 

Conditions (P-37) will not be addressed until after the end of the vendor inquiry period. 

Final inquiries must be received no later than the date specified in Section 1.13: 

Schedule of Events. Inquiries received after this date and time will be addressed only if 

they are deemed by the DMV to be critical to the competitive selection process. An 

official written answer will be provided to all questions meeting these requirements. 

1.3 Proposal Instructions. The DMV encourages free and open competition among 

vendors. Specifications, proposals, and conditions are designed to accomplish this 

objective, consistent with the Department’s needs and guidelines. 

The vendor’s signature on a proposal submitted in response to this RFP guarantees that 

the prices quoted have been established without collusion with other eligible vendors 

and without effort to preclude the State of New Hampshire from obtaining the best 

possible competitive proposal. 

Specifications required by the RFP are detailed in Section 3: Scope of Services. In 

responding to the RFP, the vendor shall address all requirements for information, and 

frame their proposal in the format outlined in Section 5: Proposal Format/Guidelines. 

1.4 Proposal Submission. All proposals in response to this RFP shall be submitted as 

outlined in Section 1.13: Schedule of Events to: 

State of New Hampshire 

Bureau of Purchase and Property 

c/o Robert Lawson 

25 Capitol Street, 1st Floor 

Concord, New Hampshire 03301 

(603) 271-3147
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 7 of 70

Vendors shall submit one (1) original and twelve (12) clearly identified copies of their 

proposal. The original and all copies shall be in separate binders, delivered in sealed 

containers, and permanently marked: 

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

 On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project RFP #2003-907 

RESPONSE TO Division of Motor Vehicles RFP #2003-907 

All proposals shall remain valid for a period of 180 days from the Proposal Due Date. 

A vendor’s disclosure or distribution of proposals other than to the Department will be 

grounds for disqualification. No more than one proposal per respondent should be 

submitted. 

1.5 Oral Presentation. Prior to the determination of the award, a vendor may be required 

to make an oral presentation to clarify any portion of their response or to describe how 

the functional requirements will be accomplished. Vendor finalists may be asked to 

conduct the presentation during the week designated in Section 1.13: Schedule of 

Events. 

1.6 Terms of Submission. All material received in response to this RFP shall become the 

property of the DMV and will not be returned to the vendor. Regardless of the vendor 

selected, the DMV reserves the right to use any information presented in a proposal. 

The content of each vendor’s proposal shall become public information once a contract 

has been awarded. 

1.7 Project Start Work Date. Anticipated project start work date is December 2002 and 

support services, plus implementation of new stations and decommissioning of stations 

leaving the program, will be required through June 30, 2007, as well as any period(s) 

covered by any extension(s) to the contract resulting from this RFP. 

1.8 Vendor Responsibility. The successful vendor shall be solely responsible for meeting 

all terms and conditions specified in the RFP, their proposal, and any resulting contract. 

The Director of Motor Vehicles shall approve any subcontracted vendor. 

1.9 Evaluation and Award of Contract. The New Hampshire Department of Administrative 

Services, Division of Information Technology Management (DITM), has approved this 

RFP for issue. The RFP process is a procurement option allowing the DMV to award a 

contract based upon stated criteria or evaluation factors as listed in Section 6: 

Evaluation Process of this RFP. 

Upon review by New Hampshire Department of Administrative Services (Division of 

Information Technology Management and approval by the Governor and Council, the 

signed contract shall become valid. 

1.10 Contract Security. The contracting vendor will be required to post a performance bond. 

The vendor must be bondable at a minimum level of $1,000,000. A final amount for the 

bond will be negotiated as part of the final contract and will be based on the estimated 

total cost of the statewide program. 

1.11 Liability. The DMV shall not be held liable for any costs incurred by the vendor in the 

preparation of their proposal, or for work performed prior to contract issuance. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 8 of 70

1.12 Non-Commitment. The solicitation of the Request for Proposals shall not commit the 

DMV to award a contract. 

1.13 Schedule of Events. The DMV reserves the right to accelerate all dates after 

“VENDOR NOTIFICATION OF SELECTION” if multiple bids are accepted or after 

“FINAL DATE FOR PROPOSAL SUBMISSION” if only one bid is accepted. 

EVENTS DATE TIME 

RFP Released to Vendors (on or about) 09/04/02 

Vendor Inquiry Period Begins (on or about) 09/04/02 

Notification to DMV of the number of representatives 

attending the Vendor Conference 09/12/02 2:30 P.M. 

Pre-proposal Vendor Conference 09/18/02 1:00 P.M. 

Vendor Inquiry Period Ends (Final inquiries due) 09/23/02 2:30 P.M. 

Final DMV Responses to Vendor Inquiries 10/07/02 

Final Date for Proposal Submission 10/28/02 2:30 P.M. 

Invitation for Presentations, if necessary 10/31/02 

Vendor Presentations/Discussion Sessions/Interviews-, 

if necessary, week of 11/04/02 

Proposal evaluation completed 11/18/02 

Submission of Best and Final Offers (BAFO), if 

necessary 11/22/02 

Vendor Notification of Selection for contract negotiation 11/25/02 

Contract Finalization 12/04/02 

State Approval / Governor & Council Approval 12/18/02 

Notification to Non-Selected Vendors 12/19/02 

Commence Work 12/20/02 

1.14 Definition of Terms. The following definitions are for reference purposes only and 

should not be regarded as a complete list of terms. Terms not listed below are 

described elsewhere in this RFP. 

Department – means the New Hampshire Department of Safety. 

Director - means the Director of Motor Vehicles. The Director may authorize one or 

more designees to act in her place by granting such individual(s) power of attorney, but 

shall not be required to do so as a condition of any contract resulting from this RFP or 

responses thereto. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 9 of 70

DITM – means the Division of Information Technology Management. 

DLC – refers to the Data Link Connector, which provides a point of communication 

between the vehicle’s OBD system and a scan tool. 

DMV – means the New Hampshire Department of Safety – Division of Motor Vehicles. 

DMV may also be referred to as “the state.” 

EPA – refers to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which may also be called the 

USEPA. 

I/M – means Inspection/Maintenance programs that are designed to oversee vehicle 

safety inspections and to assure that necessary repairs are properly made by competent 

and properly licensed technicians. 

Information Technology (IT) – refers to the tools and processes used for gathering, 

storing, manipulating, transmitting, sharing, and sensing of information including, but not 

limited to, data processing, computing, information systems, telecommunications, and 

various audio and video technologies. 

Inspection or Safety Inspection – refers to the annual vehicle safety inspection that is 

required to maintain registration in the State of New Hampshire. The items, which must 

be inspected and the criteria for pass/fail are detailed in Saf-C 3200. 

Normal Business Hours – 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM EST Monday through Friday, excluding 

State of New Hampshire Holidays. State Holidays are: New Years Day, Martin Luther 

King Day, President’s Day, Memorial Day, July 4th, Labor Day, Veterans Day, 

Thanksgiving Day, the day after Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Specific Dates 

will be provided. 

OBD (OBDII) – The 2nd generation On-Board Diagnostics system, which is an integral 

part of the computer systems in most passenger cars and light trucks manufactured in 

1996 or later. The OBDII system detects the deterioration of powertrain components or 

emission controls that may result in increases in vehicle exhaust emissions. 

OBD Program Manager – means the vendor/company that will be responsible for 

providing or overseeing the provision of the full scope of services as requested by this 

RFP. The OBD Program Manager may subcontract with other companies to provide 

these services. 

Scan Tool – means the electronic device (and connector cable) specifically used to 

connect to a vehicle’s OBD system to perform the official OBD test as part of the 

vehicle’s annual safety inspection. 

State – means the State of New Hampshire Department of Safety – Division of Motor 

Vehicles. Also see DMV. 

Vendor – means a firm submitting a proposal in response to this RFP. 

VID – means the Vehicle Inspection Database, which will hold all OBDII and Safety 

Inspection data as submitted electronically from remote inspection sites, as well as data 

that may be retrieved from the DMV mainframe or other IT system(s) used to maintain 

databases of vehicle registration and related information. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 10 of 70

2. GENERAL INFORMATION. The DMV administers the state’s vehicle emissions programs. As part of 

the state's clean air strategy originally outlined in the federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, New 

Hampshire expanded the ongoing annual safety inspection to include several emissions components. A 

significant portion of the 1.2 million vehicles registered in the state now undergoes the enhanced safety 

inspection. We estimate that 1.3 million inspections/reinspections are performed annually. The federal

government agreed that considerable savings to the public could be achieved if the emissions inspection 

program remained within the Division of Motor Vehicles, under the domain of the state's more than 2,600 

certified safety inspection stations. The DMV also oversees statewide safety inspections of all motor

vehicles registered in the state. 

2.1 Program Goals and Objectives. The New Hampshire inspection and maintenance State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) was approved by EPA in January, 2001. The SIP included 

requirements to implement on-board diagnostic (OBDII) checks of all passenger cars and light 

duty trucks, which were manufactured in 1996 or later. Because of its filesize (13MB+), the main 

body of the SIP is being supplied as a separate PDF document. If filesize creates any email 

problems for the vendor, the SIP will be shipped on a CD-ROM. 

During the past year, the DMV has extensively researched technological advances, which have 

brought new capabilities to the OBDII program arena. The EPA recently granted the State of 

New Hampshire an extension, which allows the state to delay implementing an OBDII program 

until January 1, 2003. The State recognizes that it is unlikely that an entire statewide program 

will be operational as of January 1, 2003. 

Given the present time constraints for program development and implementation, any prospective 

vendor must present a detailed implementation plan, which will deploy the OBDII/Safety 

Inspection System first to those counties of the State that have been declared “non-attainment” 

areas beginning on or before January 1, 2003. Cheshire, Hillsborough, Rockingham, and 

Strafford counties have been identified as “non-attainment” areas. The deployment plan must 

also describe the overall process and specific steps that the vendor will take to assure that full 

statewide deployment will be achieved by September 30, 2003. Proposals that provide for rapid 

deployment of a statewide system will be given preference. Vendors should be aware that failure 

to meet their stated target implementation date will be grounds for recovery of liquidated 

damages by the State. 

By contracting with a vendor to provide full OBDII/Safety Inspection program management 

services, the DMV seeks to: 

!" Reduce or eliminate manual and/or paper-based data collection wherever 

possible, 

!" Reduce the time required for automotive technicians to report test/inspection 

results, 

!" Improve the scope and quality of data available for administering a statewide 

vehicle I/M program, 

!" Improve customer service, 

!" Facilitate earlier detection of vehicle repair and maintenance issues, 

!" Facilitate more effective diagnosis and repairs to improve vehicle safety and 

performance. 

The DMV is interested in receiving the best rates and the best quality product or service. Quotes 

from responsive and responsible vendors will be evaluated on a BEST VALUE basis using the 

criteria identified in Section 6: Evaluation Process. As a result of this request, the State will 

award a purchase order to a single vendor. This vendor shall be responsible for subcontracting 

any necessary services, subject to the approval of the Director of Motor Vehicles. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 11 of 70

2.2 Current Situation. New Hampshire is currently served by approximately 2,600 individual 

safety inspection stations, which are located throughout the state in both urban and rural 

communities. These stations employ approximately 15,000 licensed automotive safety 

inspectors. These inspectors are automotive mechanics/technicians, who have been specially 

trained, tested, and licensed by the DMV to perform the annual vehicle safety inspections, which 

are a requirement for maintaining vehicle registration in New Hampshire. Currently, these 

inspectors perform 1.3 million annual vehicle inspections/reinspections. All of these inspectors 

will require training, certification, and continuing education to participate in the new OBDII/Safety 

Inspection Program. The DMV does not have the resources necessary to train and support 

these technicians for a statewide OBDII/Safety Inspection system of this scope and complexity. 

2.3 Future Systems Environment. The desired OBDII/Safety Inspection system will: 

!" Provide the DMV with the ability to oversee a decentralized statewide OBDII/Safety 

Inspection program. 

!" Enable safety inspectors to collect necessary inspection and OBDII test data more 

accurately and efficiently than with the current paper-based system. 

!" By electronically linking every inspection station to a centralized data 

collection/processing system, enable stations to verify vehicle and registration 

information, maintain the security of such data during the testing/inspection process, 

and report test/inspection results in a timely manner. 

!" Include motorcycle inspections in addition to passenger cars and trucks. However, any 

inspection station that limits its inspections to only motorcycles shall not be required to 

participate in the electronic reporting system if such an approach will enable the vendor 

to provide the State with a more cost effective proposal. The vendor’s proposal must 

include an acceptable inspection and reporting system for motorcycle-only inspection 

stations. 

!" Reduce the time required for inspectors to collect and report data.

!" Improve the scope, accuracy, and timeliness of statewide OBDII/Safety Inspection data 

necessary to assure that unsafe vehicles are not registered and that the safety 

inspection community will adhere to those standards and practices as required by the 

state, in the interest of public safety. 

!" Be able to accommodate at least 2,600 stations initially, as well as be able to 

accommodate any reasonable increase in the number of inspection stations, which may 

result from population increases and economic growth within the State. 

!" Also include provisions for decommissioning inspection stations that decide to stop 

performing vehicle inspections. 

!" Be able to immediately lockout any inspector(s) or inspection station(s), whose 

license(s) has/have been suspended or revoked by the DMV. 

!" Be able to read data from the New Hampshire Department of Safety's IBM mainframe 

computer, running a Computer Associates IDMS database. 

!" Be adaptable to receive necessary data from any proposed future information 

management system(s) used by the DMV, which relate to vehicle registrations, 

inspections, or other necessary DMV business functions. 

!" Not directly access the State’s mainframe, nor will the state's existing mainframe house 

the VID. 

Visit the New Hampshire Department of Safety - Division of Information Technology web site at 

www.state.nh.us/safety/infotech/ for more information about the existing IT environment. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 12 of 70

Note: When this document refers to “2,600 licensed OBDII/safety inspection stations,” this is an 

approximatation of the current number of stations. See Section 3.4 for Technical Requirements.

 

3. SCOPE OF SERVICES. 

3.1 General Requirements. The qualified vendor will be contracted to provide or 

subcontract services in one or more service categories specified in this section of the 

RFP: Section 3: Scope of Services. 

The State of New Hampshire reserves the right to utilize, wherever possible, existing 

Statewide Software and Hardware Contracts with its volume license agreements to 

reduce costs as well as record the software as an asset. 

The Systems Development Methodology of the NH Department of Safety – Division of 

Information Technology, as well as any other State standards and/or guidelines, must be 

used for project development. The Systems Development Methodology has been 

attached to this RFP for reference. 

3.1.1 The successful vendor will have demonstrated stability and prominence in the 

development, implementation, and support of decentralized statewide OBDII and vehicle 

safety inspection programs. 

3.1.2 The successful vendor will have a well-developed and readily accessible support 

program that can efficiently and effectively diagnose and resolve customer problems. 

Customers are defined as the State, individual participating inspection stations, 

inspection station personnel, and the general public. 

3.1.3 The successful vendor will have submitted a proposal that meets or exceeds the 

requirements of this RFP. 

3.1.4 Price Quotes. The DMV seeks a cost model based on a per-test/safety inspection 

fee. The vendor will be responsible for establishing contractual agreements with every 

licensed inspection station and for collecting all fees as described in this RFP and the 

resulting contract. The vendor will not charge for OBDII tests/safety inspections that are 

performed at state or municipal facilities on vehicles owned by the state or any 

municipality thereof. Vendors should also provide costs for a system with one off-site 

secondary/backup VID and one VID server located at an in-state site selected by the 

DMV; as well as a system configured with both VID servers located off-site at locations 

to be determined by the vendor. In this configuration, both VIDs may be located out-ofstate. The DMV prefers to have one of the VID servers located in-state, but is willing to 

consider both approaches in the interest of obtaining the best price solution. 

3.1.4.1 QUOTES (PER-TEST PRICE) The vendor must include a pertest/safety inspection price, together with a description of the services to be 

provided and an explanation of how the per-test/safety inspection price was 

calculated. There shall be no charge for any OBDII test or safety inspection for 

a state or municipally-owned vehicle, if the test/inspection is performed at a 

state or municipal facility. There shall also be no additional charge or penalty 

charged to any licensed inspection station that decides to stop performing 

vehicle inspections and therefore withdraws from the inspection program. 

The DMV will not pay for the costs of application development and/or 

procurement of any hardware or software or project personnel necessary to 

establish, operate, and maintain the program. No direct charges will be made to 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 13 of 70

the State for ongoing operations and maintenance. The vendor may propose 

more than one funding model, but must include a list of advantages v. 

disadvantages of the proposed cost models. The vendor must also attach a 

work flow diagram that illustrates the proposed business model for each cost 

recovery option. 

3.1.4.2 Monthly State Operations Payment. The vendor will pay to the State 

one dollar ($1.00) for every test/safety inspection performed, except for those 

that are exempted elsewhere by the terms of this RFP. Payment shall be 

monthly and the details shall be covered in the contract that is awarded from this 

RFP. 

3.1.5 Reasonable Travel Expenses. The vendor must agree that, if it is awarded a 

contract from this RFP, it will assume all travel expenses including but not limited to: 

Meals 

Hotel, 

Airfare, 

Car rentals, 

Car mileage, and 

Out of pocket expenses. 

3.1.6 Shipping and Delivery Fee Exemption. There shall be no separate charges for 

shipping or delivery of any equipment to any location covered by the contract. 

3.1.7 Performing Services. The vendor will perform all OBD/Safety Inspection Program 

Management services in a manner acceptable to the DMV, as determined by the 

Director of Motor Vehicles. 

3.1.8 Confidential Information. The vendor agrees that all discussions or information 

gained during an engagement shall be considered confidential and that no information 

gathered by the vendor shall be released without prior consent of the Director of Motor 

Vehicles or her designee. 

3.1.9 Performance Reporting (Program & Revenue). The vendor must make 

available to the DMV all administrative and operations information on the project(s), 

personnel, and/or services performed for the DMV utilizing this contract. The vendor 

shall maintain a system for monitoring performance of all statewide system components 

in real time and shall use data from this monitoring system to generate performance 

reports. These reports shall include a monthly report of all downtime or any other 

interruptions in service and/or equipment malfunctions, describing both the nature of the 

problem and the steps taken to correct it, as well as the time required to do so. The 

vendor shall also report the number of vehicles inspected, the number of inspections 

performed, passed, failed, and voided, as well as the extent to which any interruptions in 

service negatively affected any inspection station, individual customer, or the DMV. The 

vendor shall also include a monthly Help Line Performance Report, which shall include 

statistics regarding numbers of calls, types of calls, services provided, and response 

times for all calls. These data may be used to assess liquidated damages as described 

in Section 3.3.20 – Liquidated Damages. Acceptance of these reports shall be a basis 

for determining the vendor’s compliance with the terms of the contract. Failure to 

provide these reports by the 10th of the following month shall result in an immediate 

withholding by the DMV of all funds that would have otherwise been paid to the vendor. 

The DMV shall continue to withhold all such funds until the vendor has fully complied 

with the reporting requirement of this section. At such time as the DMV determines that 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 14 of 70

the vendor has complied fully, the DMV will release all such funds to the vendor, less 

any damages as may be assessed pursuant to Section 3.3.20 - Liquidated Damages. 

Within 60 days of contract award, a final template format will be developed, detailing 

performance and reporting responsibilities. 

3.1.10 Contracting Department Workspace. The DMV will work with the vendor to 

determine the requirements for providing all necessary workspace, office equipment, 

including a desktop computer for the vendor’s staff. However, once OBDII/safety 

inspection program is operational, the vendor will be expected to maintain its own office, 

equipment, and personnel at an off-site location. 

3.1.11 Contracting Department Vendor Selection. Agencies are required to solicit 

proposals from all eligible vendors. 

3.1.12 DMV Access. If appropriate, and subject to the applicable laws and regulations, 

the Department will be responsible for providing the selected vendor with access to all 

program files, libraries, personal computer based systems, software packages, network 

systems, security systems, and hardware as required to complete the contracted 

Program Management services. 

3.1.13 DMV Prior Authorization. The vendor must obtain approval from the 

Department before installing or utilizing any automated tools or software packages on 

the Department's systems. 

3.1.14 DMV Introductory Meeting. The vendor must participate in an introductory 

meeting with the Department’s program management and information technology 

professionals, if requested by the Department. 

3.1.15 DMV Project/Status Meetings. The vendor must participate in project and/or 

status meetings with administrative and information technology professionals from the 

Department, during the term of the contract, as required by the DMV. It is anticipated 

that the beginning of the project will require, at a minimum, bi-weekly project/status 

meetings. 

These meetings shall include, at a minimum, the DMV Project Manager (or designee), 

Division of Information Technology representatives, and either the vendor Project 

Manager or Production Manager. Other DMV staff or project members will attend as 

mutually agreed upon by the DMV and vendor Project managers. DMV Senior 

Management will be kept informed on the project status by attending the meetings or, in 

the event of a major decision, by scheduling a Senior Management meeting. The 

Director of Motor Vehicles must approve all decisions, which could result in a substantial 

change to the program’s design, deployment, or ongoing operation. 

These meetings will cover the technical, schedule, and resource aspects of the project. 

Emphasis should be placed on the accomplishments for the concluded reporting period, 

the planned activity for the future reporting period, and identification and resolution of all 

issues and problems. The review shall be conducted at a time and location to be 

determined jointly by the DMV and vendor Project Manager. The agenda and minutes of 

each meeting shall be produced and distributed as mutually agreed by the DMV and 

vendor Project Managers. 

3.1.16 DMV Exit Meeting. The vendor must participate in an exit meeting with the 

DMV Program Manager or other designee of the Director of Motor Vehicles, where the 

vendor has secured the contract, if requested by the DMV. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 15 of 70

3.1.17 Project Fee Hold Back. If the vendor fails to comply with any terms of the 

contract, which results in an interruption of or inability to provide service to one or more 

inspection stations, or to comply with any other management or reporting requirements 

of the contract, the State may assess and collect liquidated damages as described in 

Section 3.3.20 – Liquidated Damages, and other referenced sections. Failure to comply 

with the reporting requirements of Section 3.1.9 – Performance Reporting (Program & 

Revenue) shall be grounds for assessing and collecting liquidated damages. For 

additional details, also see Section 3.9 - Termination of Contract. 

3.1.18 Dispute Resolution. In the event that any dispute arises between the vendor 

and the DMV, the following escalation of resolution shall be used. All disputes will be 

negotiated starting with the “1st level” and escalating to the 4th level (Commissioner), who 

shall be the final authority to act on behalf of the State. 

1

st Level: Tom Hettinger, DMV Administrator 

 (within 5 business days) 

2

nd Level: Peter Croteau, Director of Information Technology 

 (within 10 business days) 

3

rd Level: Virginia Beecher, Director of Motor Vehicles 

 (within 15 business days) 

4

th Level: Richard Flynn, Commissioner of Safety 

 (within 20 business days) 

3.1.19 Equipment. All equipment provided by the vendor shall be unencumbered and 

free and clear of any liens or security interests. Any future encumbrances of program 

equipment shall be considered a breach of the contract. 

3.2 General Statement of Work. The successful vendor will be responsible for working in 

partnership with the DMV’s and the Department of Safety’s technical and non-technical staff to 

meet all requirements and provide all deliverables, as defined in Section 3.3: Business 

Requirements and Section 3.4: Technical Requirements.

The vendor will be responsible for designing, testing, and implementing a statewide On-Board 

Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program. The program will result in a DMV-licensed, vendormanaged relational database, with the vendor providing all hardware, software, and connectivity 

services necessary to assure a high-quality, user-friendly front-end, communications, and quality 

assurance/improvement system. 

3.3 Business Requirements. 

3.3.1 The vendor must be able to begin implementation of the proposed OBDII/safety 

inspection system at one or more inspection stations on or before January 1, 

2003 and expand system deployment to include all participating stations in the 

state on or before September 30, 2003. 

3.3.2 The vendor must supply all necessary hardware, software, support, 

maintenance, and training necessary to deploy an effective and cost-efficient 

statewide data collection, and communications system, which the individual 

inspection stations will need to perform OBDII tests/safety inspections on 

passenger cars, trucks, and motorcycles and report their results electronically to 

the DMV. 

3.3.3 Any inspection station that limits its inspections to only motorcycles shall not be 

required to participate in the electronic reporting system if such an option enables 

the vendor to provide the State with a substantially more cost-effective program. 

The vendor’s proposal must include an acceptable inspection and reporting 

system for motorcycle-only inspection stations. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 16 of 70

3.3.4 The DMV wants to simplify the recordkeeping associated with issuing inspection 

stickers. To this end, the DMV will entertain proposals that will enable individual 

inspection stations, in the future, to print inspection stickers on-site. This 

technology should be phased in over a period of three years, starting with the 

second year of the initial contract, and being fully implemented by the conclusion 

of the initial 5-year contract period. 

3.3.5 The DMV will also accept proposals that use the current or similar inspection 

stickers, provided that the system will eliminate the current mechanic’s work stub 

and will track all stickers electronically. The only exception to this shall be those 

inspection stations that limit their inspections to only motorcycles. These 

inspection stations shall be allowed to participate by using a paper-based 

reporting system if such an approach will enable the vendor to provide the State 

with a more cost effective proposal. 

3.3.6 The vendor’s proposed system must be able to accommodate 2,600 inspection 

stations initially, as well as be able to accommodate any reasonable increase in 

the number of inspection stations, which may result from population increases 

and economic growth within the State. The system must also include provisions 

for decommissioning inspection stations that decide to stop performing vehicle 

inspections. There shall be no additional fee or penalty charged to any licensed 

inspection station that voluntarily decides to stop performing vehicle inspections 

and therefore withdraws from the inspection program. 

3.3.7 If a paper-based solution is proposed for “motorcycle-only” stations, the vendor 

shall be responsible for all data collection and reporting to satisfy the full 

reporting and management requirements of the contract. The DMV will not be 

responsible for performing any data entry functions, nor will the DMV accept 

paper reports submitted by individual inspection stations. These functions shall 

be the sole responsibility of the vendor. 

3.3.8 The vendor shall prepare and submit to the DMV all reports as required by EPA 

regarding the results of OBDII testing, together with a summary report, which 

shall include numbers of vehicles tested/inspected, failure rates, and other 

information necessary to meet the DMV’s reporting needs to the federal 

government, State Legislature, and to the citizens of New Hampshire. 

3.3.9 The vendor shall further be responsible for complying with any changes in the 

reporting requirements that may come as the result of federal or state legislation 

or rule changes. 

3.3.10 It shall be the responsibility of the DMV to notify the vendor of any changes to 

state-level reporting or regulation. 

3.3.11 The vendor shall be responsible for maintaining compliance with any federallevel regulatory or reporting requirement changes. 

3.3.12 Following approval and sign-off by the DMV, all appropriate reports will be 

forwarded to the USEPA 

3.3.13 Audit and Reporting Requirements. The DMV is responsible for conducting 

an ongoing evaluation of the OBDII/safety inspection program and to file reports 

of the results of its evaluation a biennial basis, in accordance with 40 CFR 

Section 51.353 (c). For this purpose the DMV (or its authorized representative) 

is required to obtain test data "from the representative, random sample, taken at 

the time of initial inspection (for repair), of at least 0.1 percent of vehicles subject 

to inspection in a given year." Proposals should address the need of the state 

for assistance in performing this duty. 

3.3.13.1 The DMV has the right to audit and/or conduct surveillance on 

any equipment, any procedure or any operation required under the 

inspection system at any time and any inspection/testing site. Providers 

should address how they will accommodate this as DMV and/or their 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 17 of 70

authorized agents will perform regular overt and covert site audits 

and/or surveillance. 

3.3.13.2 Financial, managerial and technical data must be available for 

audit at any time during normal business hours. Technical audits include 

performance, records and equipment, as well as site-specific operational 

audits. The performance audits will include immediate access to testing 

equipment and a check of data collection/reporting equipment. 

Operational audits include, among other things, areas of customer 

courtesy, cleanliness, complaint resolution and proper accounting of 

fees. The financial audits will include audits of all records relating to the 

issuance of inspection stickers, inventory records and supporting 

documents. Also see Section 3.1.9 – Performance Reporting (Program 

& Revenue).

3.3.13.3 Providers should review the specific quality assurance objectives 

and data requirements of 40 CFR section 51.366 (b), in light of the basic 

purposes of determining whether (a) procedures are being followed 

correctly, (b) records are being maintained adequately, (c) equipment is 

functioning properly, or (d) any other problems exist that impact the 

effectiveness of the OBDII / safety inspection program. 

3.3.13.4 Systems, operations and procedures instituted by the vendor 

shall be consistent with and shall enable the DMV to meet the 

obligations of 40 CFR section 51.370, concerning methods to ensure 

that subject vehicles have had necessary emissions related repairs 

completed. 

3.3.14 Training and Certification. In accordance with the EPA regulations, 40 CFR 

Section 51.367, the vendor shall develop jointly with the DMV an effective 

program for inspector training certification, for which the vendor shall bear the 

cost. The technical competence and dedication of inspection personnel must be 

assured at all times, as a cornerstone of the statewide inspection system and to 

meeting SIP requirements. At present, the state’s 2,600 licensed inspection 

stations employ approximately 15,000 automotive technicians, who perform 

annual safety inspections. 

3.3.14.1 In addition to training in basic inspection and OBDII testing skills, 

the vendor shall also provide a component to address ethics and fraud 

prevention. The inspectors must be given, at a minimum, information on 

the vendor's fraud protection system, the legal penalties for fraud and/or 

bribery as well as clear and explicit policies for reporting attempted fraud 

or bribery. 

3.3.14.2 The training program must be such as to allow DMV to have a 

complete oversight function, to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness 

and integrity of the curricula and the results of the written and hands-on 

tests for inspector training. Vendors must submit an outline of their 

training plan as part of the proposal.

3.3.15 In-State Testing Facility. 

The vendor shall maintain a fully operational testing facility in at least one 

location within the State of New Hampshire in order to resolve disputes arising 

from conflicting or otherwise challenged OBDII test results. The DMV would 

prefer to see the vendor maintain two facilities, with one situated in a location 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 18 of 70

convenient to the northern regions of the state. Proposals, which provide for two 

testing facilities will be given preference in the evaluation process. 

3.3.16 Toll-Free Help Line for Consumers and Inspection Stations. 

The vendor must operate a toll-free telephone Help Line for consumers and 

inspection stations. The DMV is open to innovative solutions to meet this 

requirement, provided that they meet the following operational criteria: Calls 

from either consumers or inspection stations to the vendor’s Help Line must be 

answered within 60 seconds for 80% of the calls, within 90 seconds for 90% of 

the calls, and within 120 seconds for 98% of the calls. These requirements shall 

exclude periods when unusual occurrences cause call volumes to exceed 2,000 

calls per day during the first four months of the program’s operation, and 1,600 

calls per day thereafter. The vendor’s proposal must detail how this issue will be 

addressed and how call volumes and related statistics will be collected and 

reported. Monthly Help Line performance reports shall be required as described 

in Section 3.1.9 – Performance Reporting (Program & Revenue). 

3.3.17 Incidents Related to Use. 

An incident shall be a service outage or other equipment or component failure 

that prevents the users or state personnel from utilizing some portion or all of the 

services provided under this contract. Incidents related to use include but are not 

limited to: 

a. Inability of inspection stations or state administrative staff to access 

applications. 

b. Inability of DMV staff to perform online administrative tasks. 

c. Unavailability of customer service for inspection stations or state staff 

d. Unavailability of technical support 

e. Failure of any scan tool or other equipment or component that prevents an 

inspection station from performing an OBDII test or safety inspection as 

described in the vendor’s proposal. 

When any outage is identified the contracting vendor must take corrective actions 

and notify the appropriate DMV contract administrator by email within one hour of 

the outage, or within one hour of being notified by an inspection station if the 

outage originates at the station’s end of the system. The subject line of the email 

to the DMV administrator shall say, “OBDII/Safety Inspection System Outage 

Report.” The contracting vendor must provide a detailed explanation as to what 

occurred, the steps taken to resolve the issue, and the timeframe in which the 

issue was/will be resolved. The vendor must also detail what steps were taken to 

avoid a recurrence of the outage. For purposes of acceptance of an incident, the 

DMV and the vendor must make use of and rely on independently definable data, 

such as user phone reports, systems logs, state generated phone report, and 

critical outage notifications and any other such data. 

3.3.18 Identification of Responsibilities of Incidents Related to Use 

If the cause of any incident is determined to be failure of the State communications 

network or State telecommunications system, the contractor shall not be responsible for 

liquidated damages. If the vendor provides the communication network as part of their 

proposal, they shall be responsible for any failure of their communication system. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 19 of 70

If the cause of any outage is determined to have been the result of any direct action of a 

state employee, agent or sub-contractor of the State, the contracting vendor will not be 

liable for liquidated damages. 

The contracting vendor shall not be liable for liquidated damages when, in the opinion of 

the State, incidents result directly from causes beyond the control and without the fault or 

negligence of the vendor. Such causes may include, but are not restricted to, acts of 

God, acts of a public enemy, fires, floods, epidemics, and strikes; but in every case the 

cause must be beyond the control of and without the fault or negligence of the contracting 

vendor. If the incidents are caused by the default of a subcontractor, and if such default 

arises out of causes beyond the control of both the contracting vendor and the approved 

subcontractor, in the opinion of the DMV, and without the fault or negligence of either of 

them, the contracting vendor shall not be liable for liquidated damages for services 

furnished by the subcontractor. However, if it is the case that an approved subcontractor 

is at fault, the contracting vendor shall be liable for liquidated damages. 

3.3.19 Resumption of Services 

Resumption of services in accordance with the approved contingency plan shall 

terminate the period of the incident. Efforts to restore services are to continue until the 

level of normal functionality is achieved. 

3.3.20 Liquidated Damages 

The vendor agrees that failure of the vendor to comply with its obligations under the 

Contract will result in loss and damage to the DMV and to the individual inspection 

stations, and that it shall be difficult, if not impossible to ascertain all such actual 

damages. The vendor agrees that the following sections describe the liquidated 

damages the vendor shall pay the DMV, at the DMV’s sole discretion, in the form of credit 

in US currency for each occurrence listed below, and agree that the Vendor could incur 

liquidated damages for more than one occurrence if simultaneous violations occur. 

The assessment of liquidated damages does not constitute a waiver or release of any 

breach of Vendor’s obligations under the Contract, including but not limited to, the DMV’s 

right to terminate the contract, and pursue all remedies available to the DMV under the 

Contract including, without limitation, its right to recover associated or actual damages 

caused by the Vendor’s failure to perform its obligations under the Contract.

If an incident occurs that prevents the public or DMV users from normal use of any of the 

web-based or other applications deployed under the terms of this RFP the DMV shall 

have the option to collect liquidated damages. Liquidated damages payable to the DMV 

for incidents will be assessed according to system usage time per station per week and 

time of incident occurrence. 

a. Critical hours of operation are defined as the period 6:00 AM to 9:00 PM Monday 

through Saturday, including holidays. Non-critical hours of operation are defined as the 

period outside of the critical hours, 9:00 PM to 6:00AM. 

b. The DMV and vendor will develop a formula to quantify the liquidated damages 

resulting from any system failure or other related equipment malfunction at any one or 

more participating inspection stations. The formula will be based on the length of time 

during which the “system” is unavailable or otherwise inoperable, factored in with the 

number of scan tools in operation at the station(s), to calculate a percentage of operating 

time that will be considered as “downtime.” It is understood that a small station, with a 

single scan tool, could suffer more “damage” than a larger facility with multiple scan tools. 

The DMV is willing to consider any reasonable process by which liquidated damages can 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 20 of 70

be assessed to protect the DMV and participating inspection stations, without subjecting 

the vendor to unreasonable terms or requirements. 

In the absence of any proposed solutions from prospective vendors, the DMV shall adopt 

a standard of 99.9% system availability per scan tool per station per week during critical 

hours. This means that, out of a possible 54 critical hours of operation (3240 minutes per 

week per scan tool), downtime cannot exceed 3.24 minutes in any given week for any 

given scan tool or other system component. This standard shall also apply to 

connectivity to the communications network/electronic reporting system. 

c. Because the DMV may find it necessary to work outside of normal business hours, the 

system should be available to the DMV 100% of the time, 24 hours-a-day, 7 days-aweek, unless there is a mutually agreed upon scheduled “down-time”. The DMV shall 

use the standard of 99.9% system availability to assess liquidated damages. This means 

that, out of a possible 10,080 minutes of potential “uptime” per week, the system cannot 

be down for more than a total of 10.08 minutes per week. 

d. The decision to declare an incident as resulting from the contracting vendor’s failure to 

meet the requirements of the outsourced services will be at the sole discretion of the 

DMV, after consultation with contracting vendor. Once the decision is made by the DMV 

that an incident did occur, liquidated damages may be assessed. 

e. Liquidated damages will be “collected” by withholding payment to the vendor from the 

inspection stations until the incident has been satisfactorily resolved, as described in 

section 3.1.17 – Project Fee (or Payment) Hold Back. 

f. Failure of the vendor to satisfy the requirements of the toll-free Help Line for 

consumers or inspection stations, as set forth in Section 3.4.2 - Minimum Data 

Collection/Reporting System Functions for An Electronic Data Collection and Reporting 

System, will result in an assessment of damages against the vendor of $50.00 per call, 

which will be deducted from the DMV’s monthly payment to the vendor. 

3.3.21 Liquidated Damages for Incidents Related to Use – Future Applications 

Each application deployed beyond any pilot applications will be subject to assessment of 

damages for incidents related to use or non-performance. The terms of liquidated 

damages relative to incidents of non-performance may be negotiated at the DMV’s 

discretion as part of the Service Level Agreement and Statement of Work for each 

application. The amount of liquidated damages assessed will be computed based on 

current agreed practice, criticality of application, etc. 

3.3.22 Incidents of Non-Performance 

An incident of contract non-performance shall be one failure of the contracting 

vendor to provide the services, meet the service levels agreed to, or comply with 

State standards and policies. 

Incidents of Non-performance include but are not limited to the following: 

a. Vendor breach of confidentiality of state data and/or information. 

b. Failure of vendor to provide performance, financial and/or audit reports. 

c. Failure to provide DMV staff to real time access to system performance data. 

d. Failure to secure authorization from agencies prior to altering agency systems in any 

way. 

e. Failure to comply with meeting requirements. 

f. Failure to provide software as specified. 

g. Failure to meet design requirements. 

h. Failure to provide timely deliverables. 

i. Failure to provide customer and technical support as specified. 

j. Failure to retain data and records relative to contract. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 21 of 70

k. Failure to meet system availability and accessibility requirements due to design of the 

applications. 

l. Failure to install infrastructure sufficient to meet requirements. 

m. Breach of system security. 

n. Virus attack on system. 

o. Breach of constituent privacy. 

p. Failure of financial management engine to perform as specified. 

q. Failure of disaster recovery plans/test(s) to enable timely recovery. 

r. Failure to notify the DMV of occurrence of contract non-performance incident(s) within 

5 business days of the incident(s). 

s. Failure to provide any reports required by the State or federal government when due. 

This shall include those reports used by the DMV to determine if the vendor’s system is 

functioning as promised and that any other terms of the contract are, in fact, being met to 

the satisfaction of the DMV as determined by the Director of Motor Vehicles or her 

designee. 

3.3.23 Damages for Incidents of Non-Performance 

Damages for incidents related to use will be determined as described in section 3.1.17- 

Incidents Related to Use. 

If the vendor fails to comply with the terms of the contract to the extent that the DMV 

terminates the contract, or the vendor seeks to withdraw from the contract, then the DMV 

shall retain full ownership of all of the vendor’s hardware, software, and communications 

systems necessary to continue operating the statewide program while transitioning to 

another vendor. The initial vendor shall, as liquidated damages, be assessed for any 

additional expenses incurred by the DMV in finding a cover. 

3.3.24 Use of software 

3.3.24.1 Contracting vendor bankruptcy 

All rights and licenses granted under or pursuant to the contract resulting from 

this RFP between the vendor and the DMV are and shall otherwise be deemed to 

be for purposes of Section 365(n) of the United States Bankruptcy Code or 

replacement provision therefore (the “code”), licenses to rights to “intellectual 

property” as defined in the code. 

The parties agree that the DMV, as licensee of such rights under the contract 

resulting from this RFP, shall retain and may fully exercise all of its rights and 

elections under the code. The parties further agree that, in the event of the 

commencement of bankruptcy proceedings by or against the vendor under the 

code, the DMV shall be entitled to retain all of its rights under the agreement. 

3.3.24.2 Preserving rights to functionality 

In the event that the vendor deletes functions from the software and offers those 

functions in other or new products, the portion of those other or new products 

that contain the functions in question, or the entire product, if the functions 

cannot be separated out, shall be provided to the DMV under the terms of this 

license at no cost to the DMV and shall be covered under maintenance at no cost 

to the DMV. 

3.3.25 Reinspection 

Vehicles that have failed an initial scheduled test shall be eligible for re-inspection if they 

return within ten (10) calendar days, as noted in the State Implementation Program (SIP). 

Subsequent re-inspections shall be assessed the standard inspection fee. Vendors must 

explain in their proposal how re-inspection will be accomplished. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 22 of 70

3.3.26 Refunds 

The vendor shall respond to and process written requests for refunds of the 

inspections/testing fees and for the cost of diagnosis or repair costs incurred by vehicle 

owners as a result of improper or incorrect vehicle OBDII tests/safety inspections. The 

vendor will provide a copy of the refund request to DMV when it is received, together a 

copy of the vendor's response. 

Refunds for the cost of diagnosis or repair costs incurred by vehicle owners due to 

improper or incorrect OBDII tests/safety inspections are the vendor's responsibility and 

must be reimbursed in full to the vehicle owner from the vendor’s funds, upon written 

direction from DMV's contract representative. 

3.4 Technical Requirements. 

3.4.1 The vendor shall adhere to the Department of Safety’s System Development 

Methodology (SDM), as attached to this RFP as a reference. The following should be 

considered as a minimum list of requirements. 

3.4.1.1 User Requirements package: 

a. Overview and Proposal/Recommendation (See Appendix C of the SDM) 

b. Current Workflow Chart 

c. Input documents 

d. Sample reports/output requirements 

e. Questions/answers document 

3.4.1.2 Logical Design Package: 

a. Logical Process Flowchart (“visual blueprint”) (See Appendix E of the SDM). 

b. Logical Design text 

c. A system diagram of any interfaces or bridges. 

d. Data Flow Diagram (See Appendix F of the SDM). 

e. Preliminary data dictionary. 

f. Enhanced Workflow Chart. 

g. An Entity Relationship Diagram. 

h. A network topology. 

i. Logical Design Sign-Off 

3.4.1.3 Project Plan Package: 

a. Define a work breakdown structure (WBS), list of orderings and milestones. 

b. Prepare Project Schedule to include the following fields: 

c. Task name. 

d. Duration. 

e. Start date. 

f. Finish date. 

g. Effort. 

h. Resource allocation (percentage). 

i. Determine the critical path. 

j. Level resource histogram. 

3.4.1.4 Data Design Specifications: 

a. Entity Relationship Diagram (See Appendix G of the SDM) 

b. Finalized Data Dictionary 

c. Finalized Data Flow Diagram, when applicable 

3.4.1.5 Process Design Specifications: 

a. Software Prototype 

b. Technical instructions: 

c. Library references 

d. Critical assumptions 

e. Complicated algorithms or methods 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 23 of 70

f. Finalized Logical Process Flowchart (See Appendix E of SDM) 

g. Process Specifications Sign-Off 

3.4.1.6 Develop Test Plan 

a. Test plan/matrix 

b. Security matrix 

c. Sign-off 

3.4.1.7 Locate and setup test environment, including physical location/facility 

a. Successfully test VID prior to user testing 

3.4.1.8 Develop & Test User Test Plan 

a. Develop user test plan 

b. Develop test deployment schedule/plan for users

c. User deployment for testing 

d. Sign-off on user testing (by State) 

3.4.1.9 Full System Deployment 

a. Develop deployment plan and schedule for statewide system deployment 

b. Acceptance and sign-off on deployment plan by State 

c. Statewide system deployment on schedule (as determined by deployment plan 

and agreed to by both the vendor and the State) 

Note: Providers must include in their proposals a system architecture blueprint. In this 

document, providers are required to graphically represent the specific system they are 

proposing. Providers must be as detailed as possible showing software, hardware, 

interface screens, printers, etc. Providers must include references to pertinent proposal 

text in the graphical representation. The System Architecture Blueprint must be provided 

in both electronic media (CD or diskette) as well as in printed form. 

Though a decision has not been finalized regarding communication methods to be 

employed, the VID may be located on an Oracle, DB2, or other mutually agreed upon 

software platform. The State intends to use Triple.Des security through an FTP server

via a VPN. The vendor shall be allowed to download batch data daily from the 

Department of Safety’s mainframe to update the VID. The vendor shall maintain 

appropriate physical and application design security measures to guarantee that 

confidential Department data are available to only those persons with proper clearance. 

The vendor must include in their proposal, screen and application design standards. In 

order to provide dependable, uninterrupted service to the public, all testing facilities must 

interface with the VID, both in real-time and as stand-alone units capable of off-line 

test/inspection processing with subsequent transmitting and receiving of updates. 

3.4.2 Minimum Data Collection/Reporting System Functions for An Electronic Data 

Collection and Reporting System. These are the required business functions that the 

proposed OBDII/Safety Inspection Program must accomplish. This should not be 

interpreted to mean that additional functionalities are not desirable. Once again, the 

DMV wants to encourage prospective vendors/Program Managers to propose innovative 

features and solutions, which will further enhance the system’s overall quality and user 

acceptance. 

a. The scan tool must be able to read and review the OBDII information from the 

vehicle's onboard computer. 

b. The system must report to the safety inspector any problems found from the 

OBDII test. 

c. The scan tool must be able to collect OBDII test data and vehicle safety 

inspection data for EPA and DMV reporting and queries. See Appendix 9 for the 

proposed Saf-C 3200’s. (NH Administrative Rules), which detail state reporting 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 24 of 70

requirements. Federal reporting requirements are covered in Appendices 7 and 

8 (40CFR51.365 and 40CFR51./366) 

d. The system must be able to provide a printed on-site report of the OBDII and 

vehicle inspection results to the vehicle owner/driver. These data shall also be 

transmitted to a central location. 

e. The proposed system must provide for an electronic connection from the 

vehicle inspection station to a central location. All forms of communications 

systems will be considered in proposed solutions. 

f. The proposed system must enable the inspector, using the VIN, to verify 

owner, registration, and vehicle information from a central database. 

g. The proposed system must include a detailed explanation of the calculations 

and reporting for all testing done. 

h. The proposed system must provide for an audit trail to track the use of all 

OBDII testing equipment. 

i. The proposed system must provide for replacing the Current Mechanic’s Work 

Stub (part of the safety inspection/sticker booklet) with an electronic means for 

capturing and reporting the same information. 

j. The proposed system must provide and explain a security system, which will 

verify the identity and access rights (license status) of each individual inspector 

and the licensed inspection station at the time that they attempt to access the 

test/reporting system. The system must also demonstrate its ability to lock-out 

inspectors and/or inspection stations, whose privileges have been suspended or 

revoked. 

k. The proposed system must be able to check for a vehicle having been 

previously tested at another inspection station, and inform the current inspector 

as to the reason that the vehicle did not pass the previous test if it failed. 

l. The proposed system must include and describe its method for prompting the 

vehicle inspector as to what items are to be inspected, as well as to provide 

information about the location of the diagnostic link connectors (if queried). 

m. The proposed system must be able to accommodate approximately 2600 

inspection stations, 15,000 licensed inspectors, and 1.3 million annual vehicle 

inspections, with the capability to accommodate increasing or decreasing 

numbers of inspections and/or inspection stations/inspectors in future years. 

n. The proposed system should include provisions for including the use of the 

AAMVA standard 2D bar-code on vehicle registration forms. 

o. The proposed system should also include an electronic means for issuing and 

tracking safety inspection stickers. Such a system should minimize manual data 

entry and facilitate effective inventory control of all inspection stickers printed and 

issued. Future system configuration could include on-site printing of inspection 

stickers at the inspection station, although this is not a requirement of the initial 

system design and function. 

p. Subject to final approval by the Director of Motor Vehicles, the 

vendor/Program Manager will determine the most effective distribution of 

hardware and software. In order to enable the vendor/Program Manager to 

recoup their investment, it may be necessary to establish a minimum number of 

safety inspections required for an inspection station to be able to participate in 

the program. However, prospective vendors are encouraged to propose systems 

that minimize any negative impact on small service station owners. The vendor 

must provide an acceptable alternative to electronic reporting to accommodate 

those small stations that may happen to fall below any minimum number of 

annual inspections necessary to provide a cost-effective proposal. All data 

collection and reporting under this “minimum-level” system will be the 

responsibility of the vendor. The DMV will not devote personnel or other 

resources to compensate for the limitations of a paper-based system. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 25 of 70

q. The vendor will be responsible for maintaining a toll-free help desk for both 

safety inspectors and to respond to inquiries from the general public. 

r. The system must also be able to communicate, recall, and report other critical 

information to the inspector at the time when the inspector first logs onto the 

system, or at any time during the test/inspection when criteria meet the 

requirement for generating a warning or advisory notice to the inspector. These 

features must be inherent in the system’s operation, and must not depend on the 

end user to query the system database. 

s. Previous repair data should be available to the inspector on request, but only 

in a format that will describe the nature of previous problems and repairs 

performed. Cost information shall not be available to any inspection station other 

than to retrieve data from reports submitted by that particular station, and only 

then if an individual with appropriate security clearance at that station initiates the 

request, which shall be tracked as part of the system’s audit system. 

t. The vendor must describe how they will provide an alternative method of 

collecting/storing/reporting data, which the inspection stations can use in the 

event that the primary system fails, communications capabilities go down, or any 

other interruption in service occurs. The DMV is concerned that no data are lost 

and that there will be a minimum inconvenience to the inspection stations, 

particularly in the remote regions of the state. 

u. With respect to each on-line transaction, the software, in conjunction with the 

hardware, shall receive, process, and respond in no greater than 60 seconds for 

90% of the time, and in no instance greater than 90 seconds, from the time that 

the transaction is completely keyed and/or scanned into a terminal until the 

appropriate response appears on the terminal. 

v. The proposed system will encompass inspections performed on all passenger 

cars, trucks, and motorcycles. Any inspection station that limits its inspections to 

only motorcycles shall not be required to participate in the electronic reporting 

system if such an approach will enable the vendor to provide the State with a 

more cost effective proposal. The vendor’s proposal must include an acceptable 

inspection and reporting system for motorcycle-only inspection stations. 

3.4.3 Ad Hoc (or Special Reports). The VID and any other necessary databases 

maintained by the vendor shall be structured and maintained so as to facilitate ad hoc 

queries and the generation of occasional non-standard reports as may be needed by the 

state. The vendor’s databases must be compatible with Microsoft Access to query and 

design/produce reports as needed without assistance from the vendor. The vendor must 

be able to assist in the event of technical problems with the server(s), database(s), or 

user interface. 

3.4.4 Compatibility. The system must be compatible with the existing IT system of the 

Department of Safety and must provide two-way communications between itself and a 

network of approximately 2600 OBDII testing/safety inspection stations, which employ 

roughly 15,000 safety inspectors. The vendor's system will not directly access the 

Department's mainframe system. However, the vendor's system may need to copy down 

data from the Department's IBM mainframe. The vendor’s proposal must include a 

statewide inventory control system to track all inspection stickers. 

3.4.5 Acceptance Testing. Regardless of the system(s) proposed, the vendor shall 

thoroughly test and debug all systems. The vendor must thoroughly test and debug the 

entire data collection and reporting/analysis system and certify and demonstrate to the 

DMV’s satisfaction that the entire system is fully functional and that it is operating in full 

compliance with all State and federal EPA data collection and reporting/analysis 

requirements. As part of the acceptance testing process, the vendor must submit reports 

to the DMV, which shall account for all OBDII tests and/or state safety inspections 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 26 of 70

performed, all such tests/inspections which were passed, failed and/or voided, and all 

such tests/inspections, which were performed at no charge (state or municipally owned 

vehicles and retests, as shall be negotiated in the contract with the vendor). The vendor 

must also submit reports detailing any bugs or other problems encountered, together with 

all details related to their resolution. As part of the initial contract negotiation process, the 

vendor will develop jointly with the DMV the reporting requirements for acceptance 

testing, including a list of required reports and their structure, format, and content. As part 

of the initial contract negotiations, the vendor and the DMV shall agree on the frequency 

and deadlines for all project implementation and subsequent management reports. 

Before “accepting” the vendor’s system, the DMV will require a real-world test of the 

vendor’s Disaster Recovery Plan, which shall comply with the general requirements as 

described in Section 3.4.6 – Disaster Recovery Plan. Failure of the vendor to satisfy the 

DMV that the data collection and reporting/analysis system, or any component(s) thereof, 

is/are performing as promised shall be grounds for the DMV to assess and collect 

damages and, if it is in the State’s best interests, to terminate the contract. (See Section 

3.8 – Termination of Contract.) 

3.4.6 Disaster Recovery Plan. 

Because disaster recovery is mission critical, the vendor’s proposed Disaster Recovery 

Plan must include, but not be limited to, the following: 

a. Plan for testing Disaster Recovery Plan before and after implementation; 

b. Scope of recovery plan (degree to which outline covers all likely events); 

c. Provider’s ability to take immediate action; 

d. Degree to which redundancies exist; 

e. Assessment of how long the recovery process will take; 

f. Time required to make the system operational; 

g. Prioritization for recovery of critical applications. 

3.5 Project Deliverables. 

 3.5.1 Logical Design 

3.5.1.1 Project Schedule and Milestone Review 

3.5.1.2 Kickoff Meeting 

a. Design and implementation rollout review/approval 

b. Review and Update User Requirements 

c. Network topology 

d. Hardware/software review/approval 

e. Disaster recovery plan review/approval 

3.5.1.3 Business Workflow 

3.5.2. Physical Design 

3.5.2.1 Walk through with DMV personnel 

3.5.2.2 System testing 

3.5.2.3 User training 

3.5.2.4 User testing 

3.5.2.5 Documentation review and approval 

3.5.2.6 Implementation 

3.5.2.7 Successful real-world test of disaster recovery plan 

3.5.3 Post-Implementation Warranty Period 

3.5.3.1 Ongoing user training 

3.5.3.2 New inspection station logical design/physical design/implementation 

(production cutover)/post implementation warranty 

3.5.3.3 Troubleshooting 

3.5.3.4 Correct deficiencies 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 27 of 70

3.5.3.5 Acceptance report 

a. Post-implementation reports submitted on-time 

b. Monthly performance reports submitted by 15th of following month, as 

described in Section 3.1.9 – Performance Reporting 

c. New and closed stations reported quarterly 

d. Quarterly management reports 

e. Capabilities that will allow DMV personnel to run queries and generate ad hoc 

reports as necessary, based on VID data 

3.6 Schedule and Pricing. 

Vendors shall provide a preliminary schedule and pricing plan to accomplish the services, 

activities and tasks to produce the deliverables required. See Appendix 1A: IT ServicesActivities/Deliverables/ Milestones. 

The vendor must provide a per-test price, together with a description of the services to be 

provided and an explanation of how the per-test price was calculated. The per-test price will be 

the amount that is charged to the inspection station for each billable OBDII test/safety inspection. 

There shall be no fee charged for any OBDII test or safety inspection transaction for a state or 

municipally-owned vehicle, if the test/inspection is performed at a state or municipal facility.

3.7 IT Policy and Standards. 

The vendor shall abide by the IT Policy and Standards as specified by the Department of Safety. 

3.8 Change Control Procedures. 

If either of the parties wishes to alter the Specification or the Statement of Work the following 

procedure will apply: 

3.8.1 The person who requests the change (the “Originator”) will forward to the other 

party (the “Recipient”) a Change Request, which will include the following: 

!" Project identification 

!" Originator’s name and title 

!" The date of the Change Request 

!" A description of the proposed change 

!" The reason for the proposed change 

3.8.2 The DMV will assign a number to and log each Change Request. All Change 

Requests will be categorized by the Originator as Priority 1 (urgent) or Priority 2 

(ordinary) or Priority 3 (post acceptance). 

3.8.3 The recipient will make reasonable efforts to investigate the impact of the Change 

Request on the price, timetable, Statement of Work, Specifications and relevant 

obligations in accordance with the schedule set out in the Project Management Plan for 

each priority category. 

3.8.4 If the DMV is the Originator, the vendor will inform the DMV if there will be any 

charges for the vendor services in conducting the impact study and the DMV will decide 

whether the vendor should conduct the impact study.

3.8.4.1 If both parties agree on the impact study and any necessary amendments 

to the price, timetable, Statement of Work, Specification and relevant obligations 

under the Agreement, the Agreement will automatically be varied to take into 

account the agreed changes. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 28 of 70

3.8.4.2 If the parties cannot agree upon the impact study, the Change Request 

will not be implemented. 

3.8.5 The parties will agree in the Project Management Plan to a period prior to any 

scheduled delivery for review and acceptance at which the Specifications will be 

frozen. The DMV will deal with any subsequent Change Request after 

acceptance. 

3.9 Termination of Contract 

The DMV may terminate the contract at any time and without cause if directed to do so by statute. 

The contracting vendor may terminate the contract resulting from this RFP for any material 

breach or evasion by the DMV of the terms and conditions and amendments of the contract. 

If the contracting vendor fails to perform the work in accordance with the terms of the said 

contract or breaches any term and does not correct such failure within a period of thirty days after 

receipt of the DMV’s written notice, the whole or any part of the contract resulting from this RFP 

may be terminated by written notice. The notice shall specify the provision of the contract that 

was breached or the “for cause” reason that gives rise to the termination and shall specify 

reasonable appropriate action that can be taken by the contracting vendor to avoid termination of 

the contract. “For cause” shall mean: 

a. A material breach or evasion by the contracting vendor of the terms and conditions of 

the contract and amendments. 

b. Cessation or material degradation of services by the contracting vendor. 

c. Conviction of fraud, misappropriation, embezzlement, malfeasance, significant 

misfeasance, or illegal conduct by the contracting vendor, its officers, directors, or by any 

corporation or shareholder owning a controlling interest in the contracting vendor. 

d. Dissolution of the contracting vendor company or forfeiture of its corporate existence 

without assignment or a successor acceptable to the DMV. 

e. Commencing a proceeding seeking liquidation, reorganization, or other relief with 

respect to itself or its debts under any bankruptcy insolvency or other similar law. 

f. Failing to pay its debts as they become due. 

g. Intentional or negligent act or omission by the contracting vendor resulting in the 

disclosure of any information indicated as being confidential. 

If the DMV terminates the contract “for cause,” the DMV shall have the option of retaining full 

ownership of all of the vendor’s hardware, software, and other systems necessary to continue 

operating the OBDII/safety inspection program as it is transitioned to another vendor. The initial 

vendor may also be held liable for any additional costs incurred in order to affect a smooth 

transition to a subsequent vendor. 

The vendor’s proposal should describe what measures the vendor is prepared to employ to 

transition the DMV from the vendor-hosting environment, to a different hosting environment at the 

termination of the contract. Include descriptions of how the software licenses will be transferred 

to the DMV, how software/hardware will be moved from the vendor environment, how hardware 

specifications will be defined, etc. 

 

4. STAFFING. 

Using all information contained in or referenced in this RFP, and its prior experience, the 

selected vendor must propose to provide a baseline complement of staff to provide full project 

management functions associated with the maintenance of the OBDII/Safety Inspection 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 29 of 70

Program. The selected vendor must also propose to provide these functions outside of normal 

business hours, if necessary. 

4.1 Key Personnel. 

4.1.1 DMV. 

DMV will assign the following Program Administrator, or a replacement designee, to this 

project as the Project Manager: 

Tom Hettinger, Administrator 

NH Division of Motor Vehicles 

10 Hazen Drive 

Concord, NH 03305 

603-271-0351 

Email: thettinger@safety.state.nh.us 

4.1.2 Vendor. 

A. QUALIFICATIONS OF KEY PERSONNEL 

Key personnel are defined as the proposed PROJECT MANAGER, 

PRODUCTION MANAGER, OBDII SPECIALIST, and DATABASE 

ADMINISTRATOR. 

The Project Manager: has overall project responsibility for all vendor proposed 

staff and activities. The Project Manager will work closely with members of the 

DMV project organization. Qualifications for the vendor’s Project Manager 

should include seven (7) years of information technology experience including 

three (3) years of project management experience on complex client server 

applications, wherein responsibilities included systems analysis, development, 

maintenance and -enhancement, and implementation. The project manager 

should also have had significant responsibility for a project similar in size, 

functionality and scope. 

It is highly desirable that each of the proposed Key Personnel resource

possesses the experience described below. 

The following are considered Key Personnel and the roles and responsibilities 

desired by DMV. These Key Personnel will comprise the selected vendor’s core 

team. 

Key Personnel Qualifications 

Project 

Manager 

Minimum of seven years of experience in successfully 

managing all aspects of projects of similar scope and 

complexity. 

Production 

Manager 

Minimum of five years of experience in successfully

managing multiple operations within a larger project, whose 

scope and complexity shall have been substantially the same 

as the proposed response to this RFP. 

OBDII 

Specialist 

Documented expertise in all aspects of OBD, OBDII, 

including but not limited to technical and automotive 

engineering issues, legal reporting requirements, testing 

equipment selection, training, and deployment on a 

statewide level of a decentralized program of similar size. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 30 of 70

Database 

Administrator 

3-5 years of experience in design, development, and

implementation of relational databases used to implement 

and maintain similar statewide programs. 

Additional 

Personnel 

The vendor is encouraged to submit details of any additional 

program staff, who will be necessary to assure that the 

proposed statewide program is designed, implemented, and 

maintained in a professional and cost-effective manner, 

which benefits the citizens of New Hampshire. 

 B. QUALIFICATIONS OF SUPPORTING PERSONNEL STAFF 

Support personnel are defined as the proposed PROGRAMMERS, 

DEVELOPERS, ANALYSTS, BUSINESS CONSULTANTS, ETC. 

It is highly desirable that each of the proposed support personnel resource 

possesses the experience described below. SPECIFIC EXPERIENCE GAINED 

IN A GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT MATCHING THE SYSTEMS 

ENVIRONMENT IS DESIRABLE. 

The following are considered support personnel and the roles and 

responsibilities desired by DMV. These support personnel will comprise the 

selected vendor’s core team. 

Supporting 

Personnel 

Qualifications 

Programmers Minimum five years of experience in complex systems 

design and applications development with expertise in any 

areas necessary to meet the unique needs of a combined 

OBDII/Safety Inspection Program. 

Hardware 

Specialists 

3-5 years of experience in all aspects of hardware selection, 

operation, maintenance, and deployment in addition to 

expertise in any areas necessary to meet the unique needs 

of a combined OBDII/Safety Inspection Program. 

Networking 

Specialists 

3-5 years of experience in all aspects of network 

configuration, operation, maintenance, and deployment in 

addition to expertise in any areas necessary to meet the 

unique needs of a combined OBDII/Safety Inspection 

Program. 

Training & PR 3-5 years of experience in training and public 

relations/education, with a documented emphasis on OBDII 

and automotive testing and maintenance issues and topics. 

All training/public relations personnel must be able to 

develop and maintain individual and programwide credibility 

and a professional public image when interacting with State 

staff, inspection station personnel, or any citizen. 

Additional 

Personnel 

The vendor is encouraged to submit details of any additional 

program staff, who will be necessary to assure that the 

proposed statewide program is designed, implemented, and 

maintained in a professional and cost-effective manner, 

which benefits the citizens of New Hampshire. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 31 of 70

4.2 Staff Retention/Performance and Non-Substitution of Key Project Personnel. 

The DMV reserves the right to interview anyone, including non-key staff proposed for 

work on this contract. The DMV reserves the right to request the removal of any vendor 

supplied employee who fails to perform at acceptable levels or, for any other reason, at 

the sole discretion of the DMV. The vendor will immediately remove said individual from 

the project. The vendor will have seven (7) business days to provide resumes of 

proposed candidates with the same or greater skill set at the same or lesser rate. 

During the RFP process, all contract negotiations, and for the full period of the resulting 

contract (and any negotiated extensions thereto), the vendor shall not replace any key 

project personnel without the explicit permission of the Director of Motor Vehicles or her 

designee.

4.3 Vendor Role. 

The Vendor, in consideration of the terms and conditions consistent with all 

specifications set forth in this RFP and the State of New Hampshire Contract Terms and 

Conditions (Form P-37), also hereby agrees to the following Statements of Agreement: 

Appendix 2: Required Work Procedures and Appendix 3: Computer Access and Use 

Agreement. 

5. PROPOSAL FORMAT/GUIDELINES. 

5.1 General Information. 

Non-Alteration of RFP Document

This is an electronic version of a Request for Proposals (RFP). Any alteration to the text 

or any file associated with this RFP in any way that could be construed to change the 

intent of the original document is forbidden. Any changes made to the original document 

may result in your proposal being considered non-responsive. 

The original signed document is on file with the State of New Hampshire, DMV. 

The vendor shall respond to this RFP according to the format specified below. All 

responses must be concise, well organized and provide sufficient detail, where 

appropriate, which will allow the evaluators to clearly determine the benefit of the 

vendor’s offering. 

If the company product literature or other publications are attached and intended to be 

used in direct response to an RFP requirement, the response must include reference to 

the document name and page number. 

Responses should include proposals for planning, implementing, and managing the 

delivery of the personnel resources to the DMV. Proposals should also include a 

detailed review of those factors that differentiate a respondent from those competing for 

this project. Proposal responses shall be no longer than 100 pages, excluding resumes. 

The Proposal will be evaluated and scored as described in Section 6: Evaluation 

Process.

5.2 Proposal Outline. 

The vendor, when presenting the proposal, must use the following outline: 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 32 of 70

5.2.1 Cover Page

5.2.2 Transmittal Letter

5.2.3 Table of Contents

5.2.4 Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations 

5.2.5 Section I: Executive Summary 

5.2.6 Section II: Company Profile 

5.2.7 Section III: Sub-Contracted Vendor Profiles 

5.2.8 Section IV: Experience 

5.2.9 Section V: Personnel Resumes 

5.2.10 Section VI: Detailed Response 

5.2.11 Section VII: Cost Proposal 

5.2.12 Section VIII: Contractor Authorized Signature Verification Form, Appendix 5 

 5.2.13 Section IX: New Hampshire Certificate of Authority, Appendix 6 

5.3 Proposal Description. 

5.3.1 Cover Page. 

The first page of the vendor’s Proposal must be a cover page containing: 

 

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

RESPONSE TO DMV RFP 2003-907 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management 

Project 

It must include the vendor’s name, contact person, contact telephone number, 

address, city, state and zip code, fax number and e-mail address. All 

subsequent pages must be numbered. 

5.3.2 Transmittal Letter. 

The transmittal letter shall be a formal letter from the vendor and shall be 

prepared in a standard business format. The letter should be brief, signed by a 

person authorized to commit the organization to perform the work specified in 

the RFP, and identify all materials and enclosures being forwarded. The letter 

should also include the name of the person who will serve as the vendor’s 

representative for all matters relating to the RFP. A statement must be included 

indicating the vendor’s submitted proposal is valid for a minimum of 180 days 

from the proposal due date. The letter must acknowledge that the vendor has 

read this RFP, understands it, and agrees to be bound by its requirements. 

5.3.3 Table of Contents. 

The vendor must provide a Table of Contents with corresponding page numbers 

relating to their proposal. Vendors are encouraged to provide as much detail as 

necessary but at a minimum, the Table of Contents must conform to the outline 

listed in Section 5.2 - Proposal Outline. 

5.3.4 Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations. 

The vendor must provide a glossary of all terms and/or abbreviations used 

throughout their proposal. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 33 of 70

5.3.5 Executive Summary. 

The Executive Summary must summarize the vendor’s proposed solution, the 

services to be performed, and the estimated total price of the project. The 

vendor should clearly identify their qualifications to meet the requirements 

defined in the RFP and offer an approach that reveals a clear understanding of 

the requirements of the RFP. This summary provides vendors the opportunity to 

describe those factors, which they believe distinguish them from other vendors. 

5.3.6 Company Profile. 

The vendor shall provide at a minimum the following information: 

5.3.6.1 General company overview, background, number of employees, and 

current project commitment; 

5.3.6.2 Current financial statement including most recent audited annual report, 

audited statement of income and retained earnings for the last two years, 

audited balance for the last two years; 

5.3.6.3 Any litigation, previous or currently outstanding, relating to the vendor 

and any proposed subcontractor’s, performance on Information 

Technology projects; 

5.3.6.4 Out-of-state vendors must have a Certificate of Authority as required by 

New Hampshire law RSA § 293-A:15.03: 

<http://sudoc.nhsl.lib.nh.us/rsa/293-A-15.03.htm>

“Application for Certificate of Authority. – (a) A foreign corporation may 

apply for a certificate of authority to transact business in this state by 

delivering an application to the secretary of state for filing. The form 

should be acquired through the New Hampshire Secretary of State.” 

Form: http://www.state.nh.us/sos/corporate/PDF/Form%2040%20V1.0.pdf .

5.3.7 Sub-Contracted Vendor Profile.

5.3.7.1 General company overview, background, number of employees, current 

project commitment, and prior project experiences; 

5.3.7.2 Contractual relationship between companies. The primary vendor is 

responsible for all deliverables, schedule deadlines, and any other 

contractual matters. 

5.3.8 Experience. 

5.3.8.1 Overview. 

Vendors must include the length of the time for the project, contracted 

dollar value of the project, project description, and state if the project 

was completed on time and within the contracted dollar amount. 

5.3.8.2 Capability. 

Vendor must provide information demonstrating their staff is of sufficient 

size and experience to complete the requirements outlined in this RFP. 

5.3.8.3 Public Sector Experience. 

Vendor must provide knowledge of public sector and State government 

needs. 

5.3.8.4 References (minimum of three). 

Vendor must provide references from all projects where the vendor has 

developed, implemented, or otherwise been associated with deploying a 

system similar to that requested by this RFP. Failure to furnish a 

complete list of references may be used as grounds for rejecting the 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 34 of 70

proposal. Vendors should also submit copies of all contracts under 

which they have provided services similar to those requested by this 

RFP. 

5.3.8.4.1 Public sector, including State agencies and the federal or 

other State government: 

Name 

Title 

Address 

Phone/fax numbers 

E-mail address 

5.3.8.4.2 Other references, for projects of similar scope: 

Organization name 

Dates of project/contract 

5.3.9 Personnel Resumes. 

The vendor shall confirm that all personnel to be assigned to this project shall be 

qualified to perform such services, and must include resumes of those 

individuals. Each resume must clearly indicate the qualifications and 

responsibilities to be assigned to the individuals identified. 

Resumes, which include experience, education, and training, must be included 

for the Project Manager, Production Manager, and any other lead or senior 

proposed development and support personnel. 

5.3.10 Detailed Response. 

The vendor must confirm that their proposed solution will meet or exceed the 

requirements as outlined in the RFP, and must clearly describe how the 

vendor’s proposed solution will accomplish this. In this section, vendors should 

provide a comprehensive and detailed description of the products and services 

to be provided in response to the requirements described in Section 3: Scope of 

Services of the RFP. An explanation of how each requirement can, or cannot, 

be met must be included. Responses must be in the same sequence and 

format as listed in Section 3: Scope of Services and must cite section number(s) 

or page and paragraph number. 

5.3.10.1 Overview. 

Provide an overview of the vendor’s understanding of the DMV’s requirements 

as specifically identified or implied in the RFP. A statement must be included 

specifying the vendor’s acceptance of the contractual specifications set forth in 

Section 3: Scope of Services. 

5.3.10.2 Project Approach & Technical Proposal. 

Describe in detail the vendor’s current expertise in the following areas: 

5.3.10.2.1 Description of the method(s) and/or services to be used. 

5.3.10.2.2 Description of tools, including automated tools, and skills to 

match DMV requirements. 

5.3.10.2.3 Description of the management of these services. 

5.3.10.2.4 Description of the approach and services to be provided to 

fulfill detailed requirements and deliverables as listed in 

section 3.3: Business Requirements, Section 3.4 Technical 

Requirements, and section 3.5: Project Deliverables. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 35 of 70

Note: Providers must include in their proposals a system architecture

blueprint. In this document, providers are required to graphically 

represent the specific system they are proposing. Providers must be as 

detailed as possible showing software, hardware, interface screens, 

printers, etc. Providers must include references to pertinent proposal 

text in the graphical representation. The System Architecture Blueprint 

must be provided in both electronic media (CD or diskette) as well as in 

printed form. The vendor must also include screen and application 

design standards. 

The vendor must provide the time frame for completion of the activities 

and deliverables described in Section 3.5: Project Deliverables of this 

RFP. 

5.3.10.3 Maintenance and Enhancements Proposal. 

Describe in detail the vendor’s current expertise in handling maintenance and 

enhancements for development projects. Include cost and resource availability. 

5.3.11 Cost Proposal. 

This section describes the requirements to be addressed by vendors in 

preparing the Cost Proposal. The Cost Proposal must be submitted according 

to the requirements presented in Appendices 1A, 1B, 1C : IT Services. The 

DMV reserves the right to review all aspects of the Cost Proposal for 

reasonableness and to request clarification of any proposal where the cost 

component shows significant and unsupported deviation from the vendor’s 

proposal, industry norms, or in areas where detailed pricing is required. 

5.3.11.1 Compensation. 

DMV recognizes there are certain industry practices for IT serviceconsulting firms. However, the DMV encourages respondents, in 

their responses to the RFP, to be as creative as possible regarding 

cost to the DMV, as cost efficiency for the DMV will be a 

consideration in determining whether a contract(s) will be awarded. 

5.3.12 Terms and Conditions Agreement. 

The vendor must acknowledge that the respondent has read the standard State 

contract (Form P-37). 

5.3.13 Offer of Gratuities Prohibited. In the proposal, the vendor must provide a 

written statement that warrants, represents, and certifies that, in connection with 

the proposal, no elected or appointed official, employee or agent of the State of 

New Hampshire has or will benefit financially or materially from the RFP, 

proposal, or contract process of from the final contract. Any contract or award 

arising from this RFP may be terminated by the State if it is determined that 

gratuities of any kind were either offered to or received by any of the 

aforementioned officials, employees or agents from the vendor or the vendor’s 

agent(s), representative(s), or employee(s). 

5.3.14 Legal References. All legal references and citations contained in this RFP are 

furnished for informational purposes. Such citations are not meant to be 

exhaustive, nor should any statements contained in this RFP be taken as a legal 

interpretation or opinion by the DMV with reference to any of the materials cited. 

All vendors should check the citations and review all relevant legal sources and 

materials on their own initiative to the extent they deem necessary or advisable. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 36 of 70

6. SELECTION/EVALUATION PROCESS AND CRITERIA. 

The DMV has selected a group of personnel to act as an evaluation team. The procedure for 

evaluating the proposals will be as follows: 

6.1 Proposal Receipt and Review. 

Proposals will be reviewed by the Bureau of Purchase and Property to initially determine 

if minimum submission requirements have been met. The review will verify that the 

proposal was received before the date and time specified in Section 1.13: Schedule of 

Events with the correct number of copies, the presence of all required signatures, and 

the proposal is sufficiently responsive to the needs outlined in the RFP to permit a 

complete evaluation. Failure to meet minimum submission requirements could result in 

the proposal being rejected and not included in the evaluation process. 

Upon receipt, the proposal information will be disclosed to the evaluation committee 

members only. The proposal will not be publicly opened. The possible need for 

negotiations or “BEST AND FINAL OFFER” necessitates the need for privacy. 

Although proposals may be accepted and a contract awarded without discussion, the 

State may initiate discussions should clarification or negotiation be necessary. 

6.2 Proposal Evaluation and Categories. 

Scoring shall include information obtained by reviewing the vendor’s proposal 

documents, contacting references, and conducting vendor interviews and product 

demonstrations if applicable. Possible points to be awarded for each section of the RFP 

are identified below. The Evaluation Team shall be under no obligation to contact 

vendors for clarification of proposals, but it shall reserve the right to do so at any time 

prior to contract award. 

Each proposal will be evaluated on the basis of the categories below. A point score will 

be established for each response in each category. Based on the results of the 

evaluation, the proposals determined to be most advantageous to the DMV, taking into 

account all of the evaluation factors, may be selected by the DMV for further action. If 

technical proposals are close to equal, greater weight could be given to price. 

6.2.1 Proposal Evaluation Committee. The overall proposal evaluation process will 

include input from four (4) groups, who will represent the DMV and various 

constituents that have a direct interest or stake in the program. The groups are 

as follows: 

6.2.1.1 Stakeholders. 

Director of Motor Vehicles 

Assistant Director of Motor Vehicles 

Emissions Administrator 

DMV Business Administrator 

Motor Vehicle Highway Enforcement Bureau 

Attorney for the Department of Safety – DMV 

Director of Information Technology – Department of Safety 

Senior Management from Division of Information Technology – Dept. of Safety 

Application Development Mgr. – NH Div. of Information Tech. – Dept. of Safety 

Network Administrator 

Enhanced Safety Inspection (ESI) Workgroup 

Division of Information Technology Management – NH Dept. of Admin. Svcs. 

NH Department of Environmental Services 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 37 of 70

6.2.1.2 Core Evaluation Group.

Director or Assistant Director of Motor Vehicles 

Emissions Administrator 

Director/Assistant Manager: Div. of Information Technology – Dept. of Safety 

DMV Business Administrator 

Motor Vehicle Highway Enforcement Bureau 

Enhanced Safety Inspection Workgroup (ESI) 

NH Dept. of Environmental Services 

6.2.1.3 Audit Group. 

Division of Information Technology Management – Dept. of Admin. Svcs. 

IT Network Manager – NH Department of Safety 

IT Systems Development Manager – NH Department of Safety 

6.2.1.4 Management Review Group. 

Director of Motor Vehicles 

Assistant Commissioner of Safety / Dept. Legal Counsel 

Director of Information Technology – Dept. of Safety 

!" The Stakeholder representatives will attend vendor demonstrations and forward 

comments to the Core Evaluation Group. 

!" The Core Evaluation Group will review proposals, score proposals, and select a 

winning vendor or two top contenders. 

!" The Audit Group will attend Core Evaluation Group meetings as a spectator and will 

have no scoring or voting authority. 

!" The Management Review Group will review and approve the recommendation(s) 

from the Core Evaluation Group and shall make the final decision to select a single 

vendor. 

6.3 Evaluation Criteria. 

Proposals will be evaluated based upon the proven ability of the respondent to satisfy 

the requirements of this Request in a cost-effective manner. Because of a federally 

mandated startup date, timely program implementation is of the essence. 

Therefore, proposals, which address this issue, will be given preferential 

consideration. Specific criteria are: 

6.3.1 Experience in providing similar services/references (40%) (Reference 

Section 5.3.8: Experience) Note: comments from the vendor’s references will 

play a major role in evaluating the vendor’s “experience” in providing similar 

services.

6.3.2 Cost (20%) (Reference Section 5.3.11: Cost Proposal) 

6.3.3 Statement of understanding and technical approach defining the ability to 

deliver quality technical resources, services, products (20%) (Reference 

Section 5.3.10: Detailed Response) 

6.3.4 Project Management Ability (10%) (Reference Section 5.3.10.2.3: Description 

of Management of Services) 

6.3.5 Personnel Resumes (10%) (Reference Section 5.3.9: Personnel Resumes)

6.4 Proposal Rejection.

DMV reserves the right to reject any and all proposals deemed non-responsive to the 

requirements set forth in the RFP. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 38 of 70

6.5 Public Disclosure. 

The information submitted by the vendor, including statements and letters, shall be 

subject to public disclosure as required by Federal and State right-to-know law, RSA Ch. 

91-A (1990). Responses to the RFP will be disclosed to the evaluation committee only, 

and responses will not be publicly opened until after contract award. The possible need 

for negotiations or, for “Best and Final Offers”, and to protect the integrity of the public 

procurement process, precludes general release of this information until after contract 

award. 

Award will be made to the responsible vendor whose proposal is deemed to be the most 

advantageous to the DMV, taking into consideration all evaluation factors. Only those 

evaluation criteria outlined in the RFP will be used. A register of proposals will be 

prepared and open to the public after all discussions, negotiations, and final awards 

have been made. 

6.6 Best and Final Offer. 

The DMV may determine if it is in the best interest of the State to seek a “BEST AND 

FINAL OFFER” from vendors submitting acceptable and/or potentially acceptable 

proposals. The “BEST AND FINAL OFFER” would provide a vendor the opportunity to 

amend or change their original proposal to make it more acceptable to the DMV. The 

DMV reserves the right whether or not to exercise this option. 

6.7 Agreement of General Provisions. 

Vendors must indicate their agreement to enter into a contract with DMV. 

6.8 Selection, Notification, and Award of Contract. 

Although proposals may be accepted and a contract awarded without discussion, the 

DMV may initiate discussions should clarification become necessary. These discussions 

will usually be limited to all acceptable proposals but may also be extended to the 

potentially acceptable proposals. Vendors shall be prepared to send qualified personnel 

to discuss technical and contractual aspects of the proposal. 

If DMV awards a contract relative to this RFP, a letter shall advise the successful 

vendor. The contract shall incorporate in its provisions the New Hampshire Terms and 

Conditions agreement (Form P-37), this RFP, the successful vendor’s Proposal and any 

other pertinent documents. 

Public announcements or news releases pertaining to any contract awarded shall not be 

made without the written permission of the Director of Motor Vehicles or her designee. 

6.9 Contract Law. 

The DMV, shall originate any contract awarded as the result of this RFP. The contract 

shall be constructed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of New 

Hampshire, and upon review by New Hampshire Department of Administrative Services 

(Division of Information Technology Management), and approval by the Governor and 

Council, the signed contract shall become valid. 

6.10 Copyright, Intellectual Property Rights, and Confidentiality 

6.11.1 WWW Copyright and Intellectual Property Rights. All right, title and interest 

to the DMV site, including copyright to all data and information, shall be and remain with 

the Department of Safety – Division of Motor Vehicles. The DMV shall also have, to the 

fullest extent permitted by law, all rights to any user interfaces and computer instructions 

embedded within the user interfaces or WWW pages. All WWW pages and any other 

data or information shall, where applicable, display the DMV’ copyright. All right, title and 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 39 of 70

interest to the Contractor's WWW site shall be and remain with the Contractor. This 

section shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement. 

6.11.2 Confidentiality of Data and Information. Contractor shall maintain in 

confidence all DMV data and DMV customer data and information derived from this data, 

which becomes available to the Contractor in connection with its services under this 

Agreement and shall use such information only for providing services under this 

Agreement. All data and information acquired or developed by the Contractor in 

performance of this Agreement shall be and remain the property of the DMV. This 

section shall survive the termination of this agreement. 

7. TERMS AND CONDITIONS. 

7.1 Deliverables/Schedules/Payments. 

7.1.1 The vendor/Program Manager will be expected to absorb all costs for designing, 

developing, and implementing the proposed system. These shall include, but not be 

limited to, providing the NH DMV and all participating inspection stations with all 

necessary hardware, software, and communications capabilities necessary to operate a 

high-quality OBDII/Safety Inspection program. The vendor shall also pay monthly to the 

State the sum of one dollar ($1.00) for every test/safety inspection performed, except 

those that have been exempted elsewhere by the terms of this RFP. The vendor must 

complete Appendix 1-A. 

 

7.1.2 Documentation and Source Code. 

The DMV recognizes that the availability of comprehensive, well-organized and easy to 

use documentation is critical to both the short and long-range success of any project. 

Documentation developed by the vendor shall be supplied both in printed and electronic 

format to allow for easier modification in the future: 

Data shall be provided as required on machine-readable media, a 3.5” diskette, CDROM, or electronic transmission, as mutually agreed to by the vendor and the DMV 

Project Manager. 

The DMV expects that the vendor will supply manuals and/or documentation including 

but not limited to: Procedure Manuals/User Manuals for all hardware and software used 

to perform OBDII tests/Safety Inspections, description(s) of network configuration(s), 

data dictionaries, and any other documentation necessary to fully understand the scope 

and complexity of the overall systems design, operation, and maintenance. This shall 

also include all source code for any software developed for operating/managing the 

statewide system or any part thereof. All such code and documentation shall become

the property of the DMV. Source code shall not be compiled or otherwise transformed 

into any proprietary format or language that would prevent the DMV from easily reading 

and/or modifying the code in the event that the State might find it necessary to take over 

operation of any or all aspects of the system. Related technical documents shall have 

one hard copy and one electronic version of every document. The electronic version 

shall be in Microsoft Word97 or Microsoft Word2000. The vendor shall enter into an 

Escrow Agreement with the Department of Safety – Division of Motor Vehicles for the 

protection of the Source Code and documentation. See attached Sample Escrow 

Agreement (at end of RFP). 

7.1.2.1 Documentation Updates and Maintenance. 

The DMV anticipates that modifications and updates to the project 

documentation, both electronic and paper, will be required. Documentation 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 40 of 70

updates may include user manuals, system documentation (logical and physical) 

and system operations. 

Whenever changes or updates occur in data items that have been delivered to 

the DMV, the correction sheets shall specify the document number and title, 

date of the original issue, the date of the effective change, and change bars 

designating the changes. 

 

When major changes to a document are made, as determined by the vendor in 

its reasonable discretion, a complete revision of the document shall be issued 

and delivered in accordance with the original instructions for the data item. 

Revisions will be numbered and dated. The vendor will also furnish the State 

with revised source code that will include all changes or other modifications, to 

guarantee that the State will always have the most recent version of both code 

and documentation. 

7.1.3 State Owned Documents and Copyright Privileges. 

During the period of the contract, the DMV shall provide access to the vendor to 

all appropriate State-owned documents, materials, reports and other work in 

progress relating to this RFP. The Director of Motor Vehicles or her designee 

shall determine which documents or other information will be made available to 

the vendor. Upon expiration or termination of the contract with DMV, the vendor 

will turn over all state-owned documents, material, reports and work in progress 

relating to this RFP to DMV. 

The DMV shall have all ownership of and title to software developed for, or in 

the course of, this contract or modifications thereof, and associated 

documentation of the complete system, including any and all performance 

enhancing operational plans and vendors’ special utilities. DMV shall have sole 

right to produce, publish, or otherwise use, such software, modifications and 

documentation developed under the contract, and to authorize others to do so. 

7.1.4 Escrow Agreement.

The vendor shall be required to sign and maintain a Software Escrow 

Agreement for all Source Code and related documentation for the proposed 

system. See Appendix 10 for a sample agreement. 

7.2 Pricing. 

7.2.1 Dates and Schedules. 

The vendor must provide a per-test price, together with a description of the 

services to be provided and an explanation of how the per-test price was 

calculated. The per-test price will be the amount that is charged to the 

inspection station for each billable OBDII test/safety inspection. There shall be 

no fee charged for any OBDII test or safety inspection transaction for a state or 

municipally-owned vehicle, if the test/inspection is performed at a state or 

municipal facility. In addition, the vendor shall pay the State of New Hampshire 

the sum of one dollar ($1.00) for every test/safety inspection performed, except 

for those that are exempted by the terms of this RFP. The vendor and the DMV 

will finalize a mutually acceptable schedule for program deployment within 60 

days of the award of the contract. 

7.2.2 Invoicing.
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 41 of 70

The vendor shall maintain documentation for all costs and revenues under this 

contract. The books, records, and documents of the vendor, insofar as they 

relate to work performed or money received under this contract, shall be 

maintained for a period of five (5) full years from the date of the final payment, 

and shall be subject to audit at any reasonable time and upon reasonable 

notice, by the State or any appropriate federal agency, or their duly appointed 

representatives. The records shall be maintained in accordance with Generally 

Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). 

7.3 Project Budget/Annual Price Breakdown. 

As part of the contract with the selected vendor, the vendor shall detail each annual cost 

of the contract and the per-test fee charged for each year of the initial five-year contract. 

The vendor shall also provide for making monthly payment to the State for every 

test/safety inspection performed, except those that have been exempted elsewhere by 

the terms of this RFP. Any subsequent increase in total charges or per-test fees to be 

charged in either of the two annual contract extensions or in any subsequent contract 

shall be cause for renegotiating those sections of the contract and may constitute cause 

for the DMV refuse to extend the contract. 

7.4 Term. 

The contract shall become effective upon approval by the New Hampshire Governor and 

Executive Council. The contract will be five (5) years from the start date with annual 

options to extend for up to two (2) additional years of support not to extend beyond June 

30, 2009. 

Specific due dates for the various products and services to be delivered under any 

resulting contract will be set by mutual agreement between the vendor and DMV through 

the New Hampshire Department of Administrative Services, Division of Information 

Technology Management, and Governor and Council, as appropriate. 

The DMV will be under no obligation to reimburse the vendor for any work 

undertaken by the vendor prior to the effective date of the contract. 

7.5 Warranty. 

Stability and responsiveness to problems is essential. The vendor must guarantee to 

have the OBDII/Safety Inspection Program operating within the time agreed upon. 

Should it fail to do so, and the failure was not caused by the acts or omissions of the 

DMV, then the vendor will be liable for all additional costs to DMV to assure that the 

system is in place and operating. This includes the addition and replacement of 

equipment, additional personnel, and additional costs to the DMV for its day-to-day 

operation above the anticipated cost had the system been available and operating as 

planned. 

7.5.1 Warranty Period. The warranty shall extend for 120 days after final installation of 

the proposed system. 

7.5.2 Warranty Problems. All problems found during the Warranty Period shall be 

corrected by the vendor in a manner and on a schedule as mutually agreed by the 

vendor and the DMV at no additional cost to the DMV. 

 

7.5.3 Failure to Meet Start-Up Date(s). As part of the contract negotiations, the DMV 

and the vendor will agree on a written schedule of dates for implementing the program 

statewide. If the vendor is found responsible for any failure to deliver and/or perform 

with respect to any such scheduled due date, damages shall be assessed and collected 

by the DMV as described in Section 3.1.17 – Project Fee (or Payment) Hold Back. Such 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 42 of 70

damages may be assessed separately, and cumulatively, with respect to individual 

inspection stations that are in delinquent status with respect to any relevant part of the 

implementation schedule. The vendor shall include a proposed deployment plan and 

schedule as part of the proposal, which shall be considered when evaluating the 

proposal’s merit and feasibility.

7.6 Software/Hardware Enhancements. 

It is anticipated that modifications and improvements to the software/hardware may be 

required from time to time to incorporate changes to State or Federal regulations, add 

new functionality, or address changing business needs. Any such changes must be 

authorized by the DMV’s designated contract point of contact, subject to the approval of 

the Director of Motor Vehicles. Such modifications/enhancements must be completed by 

a due date that shall be mutually agreed upon by both the State and the vendor. 

8. GUARANTEED MOST FAVORABLE TERMS.

All of the prices, terms, warranties and benefits granted by the vendor herein are comparable to 

or better than those offered by the vendor to the other customers contracting under the same 

material terms and conditions. As used herein, material terms and conditions include those terms 

related to price and vendor performance. Should the vendor announce a general price reduction 

or make generally available to other customers more favorable terms or conditions with respect to 

the type of services provided hereunder, such prices, terms or conditions will be available to the 

DMV upon the date the general price reduction or change in terms and conditions becomes 

effective. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 43 of 70

APPENDIX 1A - IT SERVICES 

ACTIVITIES/ DELIVERABLES/ MILESTONES 

The vendor’s proposal shall include a detailed list of project design and implementation milestones, 

together with dates by which each item is to be achieved. This shall form the basis for the deliverables 

of the contract. The ultimate deliverable shall be a continuously operational statewide OBDII/Safety 

Inspection Program, which shall satisfy all of the requirements as stated in this RFP. 

Deliverables shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 

 

 Project Deliverable Completion 

Date 

Cost 

I Logical Design 

I a Project Schedule and Milestone Review/Approval 

I b Kickoff Meeting 

I b i Design and implementation rollout approval 

I c Review and Update User Requirements 

I c i Network topology 

I c ii Hardware/software review/approval 

I c iii Disaster recovery plan review/approval 

II Physical Design 

II a Walk through with Dept. of Safety Personnel 

II b System Testing 

II c User Training 

II d User Testing 

II e Documentation Review/Approval 

II f Implementation 

II g Successful Real World Test of Disaster Recovery Plan 

III Post-Implementation Warranty Period 

III a Ongoing User Training 

III b New Inspection Station Logical Design/Physical Design/Implementation 

(production cutover) / Post-Implementation 

 

III c Troubleshooting 

III d Correct Deficiencies 

III e Acceptance Report 

III e i Post-implementation reports submitted 

III e ii Monthly performance reports submitted by 15th of following month 

III e iii New and closed stations reported quarterly 

III e iv Quarterly management reports 

III e v Ad Hoc reporting capabilities for State staff 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 44 of 70

APPENDIX 1B - IT SERVICES 

POSITION AND RATE CHART 

Page 1 

IT Services 

Hourly Rates for Current Project 

(Please detail the rates used to provide the State with reference information to assist in evaluating the 

overall cost of the proposal.) 

Position Title* % Time on Program Rate 

Project Manager % $0.00 

Production Manager % $0.00 

OBDII Specialist % $0.00 

Database Administrator % $0.00 

Programmers % $0.00 

Hardware Specialists % $0.00 

Networking Specialists % $0.00 

Training & Public Relations % $0.00 

Other Positions * % $0.00 

* Vendors should include all proposed positions, together with the percentage of each 

individual’s time that will be devoted to the NH Program. 

IT Services 

Hourly Rates for Future Projects 

(Please detail the rates used to provide the State with reference information to assist in evaluating the 

overall cost of the proposal.) 

Position Title* % Time on Program Rate 

Project Manager % $0.00 

Production Manager % $0.00 

OBDII Specialist % $0.00 

Database Administrator % $0.00 

Programmers % $0.00 

Hardware Specialists % $0.00 

Networking Specialists % $0.00 

Training & Public Relations % $0.00 

Other Positions * % $0.00 

* Vendors should include all proposed positions, together with the percentage of each 

individual’s time that will be devoted to the NH Program. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 45 of 70

APPENDIX 1B - IT SERVICES 

 POSITION AND RATE SHEET 

Page 2 

Resource Table Proposal Sheet 

Vendor Staff (Hours) 

 Logical Design Phase Physical Design 

Phase

Post 

Implementation 

Phase

Project Manager 

Production Manager 

OBDII Specialist 

Database Administrator 

Programmers 

Hardware Specialists 

Networking Specialists 

Training & Public Relations 

Totals 

NH DOS and DMV Resource Table Proposal Sheet 

State Staff (Hours)

 Logical Design Phase Physical Design 

Phase

Post 

Implementation 

Phase

Project Manager 

Senior IT Staff (identify personnel required) 

IT Programmers and support staff (identify 

personnel required) 

 

Other personnel required 

Other personnel required 

Other personnel required, etc. 

Totals 

Remainder of this page intentionally left blank. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 46 of 70

APPENDIX 1C - IT SERVICES 

 PER-TEST/SAFETY INSPECTION FEE 

Page 3 

Fee Calculation Sheet 

Note: Vendors must include $1.00 in their per-test fee, which shall be paid monthly to the State 

for every test/safety inspection, unless exempted elsewhere by the terms of this RFP. 

 Initial Contract 

Period through June 

30, 2007 

1

st Optional Contract 

Extension: 07/01/07 

– 06/30/08 

2

nd Optional Contract 

Extension: 07/01/08 

– 06/30/09 

 Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 

Per-Test/Safety Inspection 

Fee (show each year) 

 

Hardware Depreciation 

Hardware 

Replacement/Maintenance 

 

Software Development 

Software Maintenance 

Administrative/Salaries 

Communications/Access 

Other (Please break down 

other program expenses 

used to calculate the pertest fee.) 

 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 47 of 70

APPENDIX 2 

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE REQUIRED WORK PROCEDURES 

1. Each person must submit a weekly timesheet to the assigned State Supervisor or Manager. The 

timesheet must show all time in hours or fractions (to the nearest quarter hour) spent in 

producing the work and the applicable contract hourly rate for the services provided. The 

appropriate State Supervisor or Manager must sign the timesheet; a copy of the timesheet must 

be submitted with the invoice or payment will be not be tendered. Payments will normally be 

processed on a monthly basis. 

2. All work done must conform to standards and procedures established by the Department of 

Administrative Services, Division of Information Technology Management and the Information 

Technology division of the requesting agency. Statewide standards and procedures can be 

found at www.state.nh.us/das/ditm/docs.htm.

3. All products developed (requirements, specifications, documentation, program code, etc.) are 

work for hire and ownership is in accordance with the New Hampshire Contract Terms and 

Conditions, Form P-37, as signed by the qualified vendor. 

4. Any technical education needed by the vendor to successfully complete the assumed 

assignment will be at the sole expense of the vendor and provided by the vendor. 

5. All work performed is expected to be completed during normal State business hours: Monday 

through Friday (excluding State holidays) from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. An agency representative must 

be present for any work done on-site outside of normal working hours. Any exception to this 

provision must be approved in advance by management of the agency. 

6. Vendor must be willing to work overtime at a quoted hourly rate upon 24 business hours 

advance notice. The vendor is not authorized to work overtime hours without prior approval from 

the agency. 

7. Vendor shall submit a resume for each individual expected to be assigned to State projects. The 

resumes must be comprehensive and include educational background, work experience, length 

of service with the firm, and significant projects on which the individual has worked. 

8. Vendor must agree to provide an “equal or better” replacement for any personnel who leave 

employment of the vendor during the course of the contract. 

9. Vendor must make the individuals available to be interviewed by the State prior to the project 

assignment. 

10. Vendor and its employees assigned to this project must sign an “Employee’s Computer Access 

and Use Agreement.” 

11. The State may require a detailed background check on any individual assigned to the project, as 

this project may involve confidential or sensitive information. 

12. Personnel assigned to the State must be available to work within 10 business days of the 

contract signing. 

13. Individuals shall be assigned 100 percent of the time to a given project unless otherwise agreed 

upon in writing between the parties.
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 48 of 70

APPENDIX 3 

COMPUTER ACCESS AND USE AGREEMENT 

PLEASE READ THIS AGREEMENT CAREFULLY. IT CONTAINS IMPORTANT INFORMATION 

ABOUT THE DUTIES YOU MUST UNDERTAKE AND THE RULES YOU MUST ADHERE TO ONCE 

YOU ARE GRANTED ACCESS TO USE THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE’S COMPUTER 

FACILITIES. 

In consideration for accessing and using the computer facilities, network, licensed or developed 

software, software maintained or operated by any of the State entities, systems, equipment, 

documentation, information, reports, or data of any kind (hereinafter “information”), User understands 

and agrees to the following rules: 

1. That at all times utmost care shall be used in protecting information from unauthorized access, 

misuse, theft, damage, destruction, modification or disclosure. 

2. That any person or any use not specifically known by the User as being authorized to access or use 

information must be promptly reported to the appropriate Supervisor. 

3. That information shall be used solely for the purpose of conducting official State business, and all 

other use or access is strictly forbidden including, but not limited to, personal or other private use. 

4. That at no time shall User access or attempt to access any information without having the express 

authority to do so. 

5. That at no time shall User access or attempt to access any information in a manner inconsistent with 

the approved method of system entry. 

6. That all information developed while on the job or while utilizing State facilities or resources shall be 

the exclusive property of the State of New Hampshire. 

7. That all software licensed, developed or being evaluated by the State cannot be copied, shared, 

distributed, sub-licensed, modified, reverse engineered, rented or sold, and that at all times User 

must use utmost care to protect and keep such software strictly confidential in accordance with the 

license or any other agreement executed by the State. 

8. That only equipment or software owned, licensed or being evaluated by the State can be used by 

User. Use of personal or a third part’s equipment or software at State facilities is strictly forbidden 

unless prior written approval has been obtained, and in the case microcomputer software, a virus 

scan has been performed by the State LAN administrator. 

9. That at no time shall User’s confidential computer password(s) or premises access card be shared 

with or used by any other person. 

10. That at no time shall User share or use another person’s confidential computer password(s) or 

premises access card. 

11. That at no time shall User leave a workstation without first ensuring that the workstation is properly 

secured from unauthorized access. 

12. That User must report any and all violations of this agreement to the appropriate Supervisor promptly 

upon learning of such violation. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 49 of 70

13. That if User is found to be in violation of any of the above stated rules, the User may face disciplinary 

sanctions, including a reprimand, suspension, termination from employment, or criminal or civil 

prosecution if the act constitutes a violation of law. 

14. That from time to time circumstances may require that this agreement be modified by the State to 

reflect any changes in procedure or policy. The User will be notified in writing of any changes and 

will be required to adhere to such changes. 

15. That the User acknowledges that he or she has read, fully understands and agrees to abide by each 

of the above stated rules as a condition of being granted access to use information. 

The remainder of this page has been intentionally left blank. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 50 of 70

APPENDIX 4 

RESERVED 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 51 of 70

APPENDIX 5 

CONTRACTOR AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE VERIFICATION FORM 

Individuals: Individuals have two options to verify signature authorization: 

 

1. Official Sample of Signature. Signature verification may be accomplished by submitting a copy of a driver’s 

license, passport, social security card, business ID or other official form or identification containing the 

authorized signatory’s signature. OR

2. Notarization. In the alternative, the Bidder can have their signature notarized in the space below. 

Corporations: Corporations have two options to verify signature authorization [select one option]. 

1. Authorization and Clerk Certification: The Corporate Clerk must certify in the space below that they have 

witnessed the authorized signatory’s signature (made in the Clerk’s presence) AND that the signatory is 

authorized to execute contracts and other documents and legally bind the corporation. (NOTE: Clerks may 

not self-certify if they are acting as the Clerk and as an authorized signatory. Alternative documentation 

should be submitted). OR

2. Authorization and Official Sample of Signature or Notarization (Complete both “a” and “b” below) 

a. Authorization. The Bidder may attach a copy of a board of directors’ vote stating that each 

signatory is authorized to execute contracts and other documents and legally bind the 

corporation. AND

b. Official Sample of Signature or Notarization (select one). 

!" Official Sample of Signature. Attach a copy of a driver’s license, passport, social 

security card, business ID or other official form or identification containing an 

example of the authorized signatory’s signature. OR

!" Notarization. Have each of the signatory’s signature notarized (made in a notary’s 

presence) below. 

Partnership or Other Entities

1. Authorization. Attach documentation for each signatory of authorization to execute contracts and other 

documents and legally bind the partnership or other entity. AND

2. Official Sample of Signature or Notarization (select one option): 

a. Official Sample of Signature. Attach a copy of a driver’s license, passport, social security 

card, business ID or other official form or identification containing an example of the 

authorized signatory’s signature. OR

b. Notarization. Have their signature notarized in the space below.

THIS SECTION IS FOR NOTARIZATION OR CORPORATE CLERK CERTIFICATION 

PRINT SIGNATORY’S FULL LEGAL NAME: _______________________________________ 

SIGNATURE: (as it will appear on document) _________________________________________ 

(NOTARY) I, __________________________________ as a notary public certify under the pains and penalties of 

perjury that I witnessed the signature of the aforementioned signatory on behalf of the Bidder and the individual’s identity 

was verified on this date: _________________, 200 _____. My commission expires on: 

(CORPORATE CLERK) I, _________________________________ as corporate clerk of the Bidder/Contractor certify under 

the pains and penalties of perjury that I witnessed the signature of the aforementioned signatory and the signatory is authorized to 

execute contrasts and other instruments and legally bind the Bidder/Contractor. This date: ______________________, 200 ___. 

AFFIX CORPORATE SEAL OR NOTARY SEAL HERE: 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 52 of 70

APPENDIX 6 

NEW HAMPSHIRE CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY 

or CERTIFICATE OF GOOD STANDING 

Vendors need to provide a NH Certificate of Authority with their response to this RFP. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 53 of 70

APPENDIX 7 

THIS DATA CURRENT AS OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER DATED FEBRUARY 1, 2002 

 40 CFR - CHAPTER I - PART 51 

§ 51.365 Data collection. 

Accurate data collection is essential to the management, evaluation, and enforcement of an I/M 

program. The program shall gather test data on individual vehicles, as well as quality control 

data on test equipment (with the exception of test procedures for which either no testing 

equipment is required or those test procedures relying upon a vehicle's OBD system). 

(a) Test data. The goal of gathering test data is to unambiguously link specific test results to a 

specific vehicle, I/M program registrant, test site, and inspector, and to determine whether or not 

the correct testing parameters were observed for the specific vehicle in question. In turn, these 

data can be used to distinguish complying and non-complying vehicles as a result of analyzing 

the data collected and comparing it to the registration database, to screen inspection stations and 

inspectors for investigation as to possible irregularities, and to help establish the overall 

effectiveness of the program. At a minimum, the program shall collect the following with respect 

to each test conducted: 

(1) Test record number; 

(2) Inspection station and inspector numbers; 

(3) Test system number (where applicable); 

(4) Date of the test; 

(5) Emission test start time and the time final emission scores are determined; 

(6) Vehicle Identification Number; 

(7) License plate number; 

(8) Test certificate number; 

(9) Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR); 

(10) Vehicle model year, make, and type; 

(11) Number of cylinders or engine displacement; 

(12) Transmission type; 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 54 of 70

(13) Odometer reading; 

(14) Category of test performed (i.e., initial test, first retest, or subsequent retest); 

(15) Fuel type of the vehicle (i.e., gas, diesel, or other fuel); 

(16) Type of vehicle preconditioning performed (if any); 

(17) Emission test sequence(s) used; 

(18) Hydrocarbon emission scores and standards for each applicable test mode; 

(19) Carbon monoxide emission scores and standards for each applicable test mode; 

(20) Carbon dioxide emission scores (CO+CO2) and standards for each applicable test 

mode; 

(21) Nitrogen oxides emission scores and standards for each applicable test mode; 

(22) Results (Pass/Fail/Not Applicable) of the applicable visual inspections for the 

catalytic converter, air system, gas cap, evaporative system, positive crankcase 

ventilation (PCV) valve, fuel inlet restrictor, and any other visual inspection for which 

emission reduction credit is claimed; 

(23) Results of the evaporative system pressure test(s) expressed as a pass or fail; 

(24) Results of the evaporative system purge test expressed as a pass or fail along with 

the total purge flow in liters achieved during the test (where applicable); and 

(25) Results of the on-board diagnostic check expressed as a pass or fail along with the 

diagnostic trouble codes revealed (where applicable). 

(b) Quality control data. At a minimum, the program shall gather and report the results of the 

quality control checks required under § 51.359 of this subpart, identifying each check by station 

number, system number, date, and start time. The data report shall also contain the concentration 

values of the calibration gases used to perform the gas characterization portion of the quality 

control checks (where applicable). 

[ 57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 61 FR 40945, Aug. 6, 1996; 65 FR 45534, July 24, 

2000] 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 55 of 70

 APPENDIX 8 

THIS DATA CURRENT AS OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER DATED FEBRUARY 1, 2002 

 40 CFR - CHAPTER I - PART 51 

§ 51.366 Data analysis and reporting. 

Data analysis and reporting are required to allow for monitoring and evaluation of the program 

by program management and EPA, and shall provide information regarding the types of program 

activities performed and their final outcomes, including summary statistics and effectiveness 

evaluations of the enforcement mechanism, the quality assurance system, the quality control 

program, and the testing element. Initial submission of the following annual reports shall 

commence within 18 months of initial implementation of the program as required by § 51.373 of 

this subpart. The biennial report shall commence within 30 months of initial implementation of 

the program as required by § 51.373 of this subpart. 

(a) Test data report. The program shall submit to EPA by July of each year a report providing 

basic statistics on the testing program for January through December of the previous year, 

including: 

(1) The number of vehicles tested by model year and vehicle type; 

(2) By model year and vehicle type, the number and percentage of vehicles: 

(i) Failing initially, per test type; 

(ii) Failing the first retest per test type; 

(iii) Passing the first retest per test type; 

(iv) Initially failed vehicles passing the second or subsequent retest per test type; 

(v) Initially failed vehicles receiving a waiver; and 

(vi) Vehicles with no known final outcome (regardless of reason). 

(vii)-(x) [Reserved] 

(xi) Passing the on-board diagnostic check; 

(xii) Failing the on-board diagnostic check; 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 56 of 70

(xiii) Failing the on-board diagnostic check and passing the tailpipe test (if 

applicable); 

(xiv) Failing the on-board diagnostic check and failing the tailpipe test (if 

applicable); 

(xv) Passing the on-board diagnostic check and failing the I/M gas cap 

evaporative system test (if applicable); 

(xvi) Failing the on-board diagnostic check and passing the I/M gas cap 

evaporative system test (if applicable); 

(xvii) Passing both the on-board diagnostic check and I/M gas cap evaporative 

system test (if applicable); 

(xviii) Failing both the on-board diagnostic check and I/M gas cap evaporative 

system test (if applicable); 

(xix) MIL is commanded on and no codes are stored; 

(xx) MIL is not commanded on and codes are stored; 

(xxi) MIL is commanded on and codes are stored; 

(xxii) MIL is not commanded on and codes are not stored; 

(xxiii) Readiness status indicates that the evaluation is not complete for any 

module supported by on-board diagnostic systems; 

(3) The initial test volume by model year and test station; 

(4) The initial test failure rate by model year and test station; and 

(5) The average increase or decrease in tailpipe emission levels for HC, CO, and NOX (if 

applicable) after repairs by model year and vehicle type for vehicles receiving a mass 

emissions test. 

(b) Quality assurance report. The program shall submit to EPA by July of each year a report 

providing basic statistics on the quality assurance program for January through December of the 

previous year, including: 

(1) The number of inspection stations and lanes: 

(i) Operating throughout the year; and 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 57 of 70

(ii) Operating for only part of the year; 

(2) The number of inspection stations and lanes operating throughout the year: 

(i) Receiving overt performance audits in the year; 

(ii) Not receiving overt performance audits in the year; 

(iii) Receiving covert performance audits in the year; 

(iv) Not receiving covert performance audits in the year; and 

(v) That have been shut down as a result of overt performance audits; 

(3) The number of covert audits: 

(i) Conducted with the vehicle set to fail per test type; 

(ii) Conducted with the vehicle set to fail any combination of two or more test 

types; 

(iii) Resulting in a false pass per test type; 

(iv) Resulting in a false pass for any combination of two or more test types; 

(v)-(viii) [Reserved] 

(4) The number of inspectors and stations: 

(i) That were suspended, fired, or otherwise prohibited from testing as a result of 

covert audits; 

(ii) That were suspended, fired, or otherwise prohibited from testing for other 

causes; and 

(iii) That received fines; 

(5) The number of inspectors licensed or certified to conduct testing; 

(6) The number of hearings: 

(i) Held to consider adverse actions against inspectors and stations; and 

(ii) Resulting in adverse actions against inspectors and stations; 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 58 of 70

(7) The total amount collected in fines from inspectors and stations by type of violation; 

(8) The total number of covert vehicles available for undercover audits over the year; and 

(9) The number of covert auditors available for undercover audits. 

(c) Quality control report. The program shall submit to EPA by July of each year a report 

providing basic statistics on the quality control program for January through December of the 

previous year, including: 

(1) The number of emission testing sites and lanes in use in the program; 

(2) The number of equipment audits by station and lane; 

(3) The number and percentage of stations that have failed equipment audits; and 

(4) Number and percentage of stations and lanes shut down as a result of equipment 

audits. 

(d) Enforcement report. 

(1) All varieties of enforcement programs shall, at a minimum, submit to EPA by July of 

each year a report providing basic statistics on the enforcement program for January 

through December of the previous year, including: 

(i) An estimate of the number of vehicles subject to the inspection program, 

including the results of an analysis of the registration data base; 

(ii) The percentage of motorist compliance based upon a comparison of the 

number of valid final tests with the number of subject vehicles; 

(iii) The total number of compliance documents issued to inspection stations; 

(iv) The number of missing compliance documents; 

(v) The number of time extensions and other exemptions granted to motorists; and 

(vi) The number of compliance surveys conducted, number of vehicles surveyed 

in each, and the compliance rates found. 

(2) Registration denial based enforcement programs shall provide the following 

additional information: 

(i) A report of the program's efforts and actions to prevent motorists from falsely 

registering vehicles out of the program area or falsely changing fuel type or 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 59 of 70

weight class on the vehicle registration, and the results of special studies to 

investigate the frequency of such activity; and 

(ii) The number of registration file audits, number of registrations reviewed, and 

compliance rates found in such audits. 

(3) Computer-matching based enforcement programs shall provide the following 

additional information: 

(i) The number and percentage of subject vehicles that were tested by the initial 

deadline, and by other milestones in the cycle; 

(ii) A report on the program's efforts to detect and enforce against motorists 

falsely changing vehicle classifications to circumvent program requirements, and 

the frequency of this type of activity; and 

(iii) The number of enforcement system audits, and the error rate found during 

those audits. 

(4) Sticker-based enforcement systems shall provide the following additional 

information: 

(i) A report on the program's efforts to prevent, detect, and enforce against sticker 

theft and counterfeiting, and the frequency of this type of activity; 

(ii) A report on the program's efforts to detect and enforce against motorists 

falsely changing vehicle classifications to circumvent program requirements, and 

the frequency of this type of activity; and 

(iii) The number of parking lot sticker audits conducted, the number of vehicles 

surveyed in each, and the noncompliance rate found during those audits. 

(e) Additional reporting requirements. In addition to the annual reports in paragraphs (a) through 

(d) of this section, programs shall submit to EPA by July of every other year, biennial reports 

addressing: 

(1) Any changes made in program design, funding, personnel levels, procedures, 

regulations, and legal authority, with detailed discussion and 

evaluation of the impact on the program of all such changes; and 

(2) Any weaknesses or problems identified in the program within the two-year reporting 

period, what steps have already been taken to correct 

those problems, the results of those steps, and any future efforts planned. 

(f) SIP requirements. The SIP shall describe the types of data to be collected. 
State of New Hampshire 

Department of Safety 

Division of Motor Vehicles 

On-Board Diagnostics and Safety Inspection Program Management Project 

RFP 2003-907

DAS (DITM) RFP Template v032101 9/6/02 11:46 AM Page 60 of 70

[ 57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 61 FR 40945, Aug. 6, 1996; 65 FR 45534, July 24, 

2000; 66 FR 18178, Apr. 5, 2001]