The following table identifies all corrections that have been applied to this CFP compared to the original release. Minor editorial changes (spelling, grammar, etc.) are not included.

Date Section Description

13 July

Appended to Corrigenda.

Not really a corrigendum, but rather just a summary of submission procedures.

15 July

Shortcuts for Interested Bidder.

Added Bidders Q&A Webinar registration link to list.

Summary of Procedures to Submit a CFP Response

Here are some shortcuts to help interested bidders respond to the CFP:


The following table lists abbreviations used in this CFP.


Three-Dimensional Portrayal Service or SWG


Application Domain Extension


Call for Participation


Change Request


Catalog Service for the Web


Draft Engineering Report


Domain Working Group


Engineering Report


Geography Markup Language


Initial Engineering Report


Innovation Program or Intellectual Property


International Organization for Standardization


LIght Detection And Ranging


National Alliance for Public Safety GIS


National Institute of Standards and Technology


Open Geospatial Consortium


OGC Reference Model


OGC Web Services


Participation Agreement


Point of Contact


(NIST) Public Safety Communications Research Division


Questions and Answers


Reference Model for Open Distributed Processing


Statement of Work


Standards Working Group


To Be Determine (at a later date)


OGC Technical Committee


Technical Evaluation Meeting


Technology Integration / Technical Interoperability Experiment


Uniform Resource Locator


Web Feature Service


Web Processing Service


Working Group (SWG or DWG)




The Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC®) is releasing this Call for Participation ("CFP") to solicit proposals for the OGC Indoor Mapping and Navigation Pilot Initiative ("Initiative" or "Pilot"). The proposal submission deadline and other key dates can be found in the Master Schedule.

This Initiative will address key challenges related to indoor mapping and navigation for first responders. While the focus is on developing the capabilities and workflow required for preplanning operations, the intent is that future OGC initiatives will address the real-time, event-driven aspects of indoor mapping and navigation for first responders.

First responders typically survey high-risk facilities in their jurisdiction at least once per year as part of a preplanning process. Preplanning outputs are often in report form, and first responders may annotate available floor plans (e.g. from computer-aided design models) or generate their own hand-drawn maps during the process. Preplanning is time-consuming, inefficient, and inherently complex considering the information and level of detail that should or could be captured, the lack of automation, and the difficulty identifying notable changes to facilities and infrastructure during successive preplanning surveys.

Indoor LiDAR from youtube 6cwhPMAap8
Figure 1. Indoor LiDAR scene (source: youtube)

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Communications Technology Laboratory (CTL), Public Safety Communications Research (PSCR) Division ("Sponsor") has identified mobile 3D light detection and ranging (LiDAR) as a potentially transformational technology for first responders. Using LiDAR and 360-degree cameras imagery, coupled with advanced software processing, first responders could efficiently capture 3D point clouds and a wealth of other information, both observed and derived, while walking through buildings as part of routine preplanning operations. The use of 3D LiDAR and imagery has many potential upsides beyond just creating point clouds for visualization and mapping, e.g., use in localization, object classification, integration with virtual/augmented reality solutions, change detection, etc. Though not widely used currently for surveying, especially outside the architectural, engineering, and construction (AEC) community, it is expected that investments by the automotive and unmanned aerial systems industries will drive the costs of 3D LiDAR down dramatically over the next five years, so that it will become a cost-effective tool for public safety, building owners/managers, and various service industries.

To accelerate research and development for this public-safety-driven scenario, this Initiative will conduct the following prototyping and demonstration activities:

  1. Create and convert 3D indoor LiDAR point cloud models and associated imagery to functional building and navigation models.

  2. Store and serve point cloud, building, and navigation models for visualization and navigation.

  3. Derive dynamic turn-by-turn indoor navigation instructions based on the navigation model.

  4. View and annotate point cloud data, imagery, and building models, along with navigation routes and instructions into, through, and out of buildings.

Under this CFP, the OGC will provide cost-sharing funds on behalf of the Sponsor to partially offset expenses uniquely associated with the Initiative. This CFP requests proposals (also referred to as "bids") from organizations ("Bidders") wishing to participate in delivery and, in some cases, to receive cost-sharing funds. Any Bidder interested in Initiative participation should respond by submitting a proposal per the instructions provided herein.

OGC intends to involve as many technology developers and providers ("Participants", to be selected from among the Bidders) as possible to the extent that each Participant can contribute to and benefit from Initiative outcomes. Not all proposals are required to request cost-sharing funds. While the majority are expected to include a combination of cost-sharing request and in-kind contribution, responses offering only in-kind contributions (i.e., requesting no cost-sharing funds whatsoever) are also welcomed.

The only offers that should be included in formal proposals are those directly addressing express CFP requirements. Proposals covering additional requirements should be submitted separately for independent consideration.

This Initiative is being conducted as part of the Indoor Mapping and Navigation Pilot project under the OGC Innovation Program. This Program provides global, hands-on, collaborative prototyping for rapid development and delivery of proven candidate specifications to the OGC Standards Program, where these candidates can then be considered for further action. In Innovation Program initiatives, Participants collaborate to examine specific geo-processing interoperability questions posed by initiative sponsors for the purpose of advancing the OGC Standards Baseline. These initiatives include testbeds, experiments, pilots, and plugfests – all designed to foster the rapid development and adoption of open, consensus-based standards. The OGC also maintains a list of candidate ideas for future initiatives.

Benefits of Participation

In general, Bidders should propose specifically against the list of deliverables described under the Summary of Deliverables.

This Initiative provides a business opportunity for stakeholders to mutually define, refine, and evolve service interfaces and protocols in the context of hands-on experience and feedback. The outcomes are expected to shape the future of geospatial software development and data publication. The sponsorship supports this vision with cost-sharing funds to partially offset the costs associated with development, engineering, and demonstration of these outcomes. This offers selected Participants a unique opportunity to recoup a portion of their Initiative expenses.

Initiative Policies and Procedures

This CFP incorporates the following additional documents:

This Initiative will be conducted in accordance with OGC Innovation Program Policies and Procedures.

OGC Principles of Conduct will govern all personal and public Initiative interactions.

One Initiative objective is to support the OGC Standards Program in the development and publication of open standards. Each Participant will be required to allow OGC to copyright and publish documents based in whole or in part upon intellectual property contributed by the Participant during Initiative performance. Specific requirements are described under the "Copyrights" clauses of the OGC Intellectual Property Rights Policy.

Initiative Roles

The roles generally played in any OCG Innovation Program initiative are defined in the OGC Innovation Program Policies and Procedures, including Sponsors, Bidders, Participants, Observers, and the Innovation Program Team ("IP Team").

Additional explanations of the roles of Sponsors, Bidders, Participants, and Observers are provided in the Tips for New Bidders.

The IP Team for this Initiative will include an Initiative Director and an Initiative Architect. Unless otherwise stated, the Initiative Director will serve as the primary point of contact (POC) for the OGC.

The Initiative Architect will work with Participants and Sponsors to ensure that Initiative activities and deliverables are properly assigned and performed. They are responsible for scope and schedule control, and will provide timely escalation to the Initiative Director regarding any severe issues or risks that happen to arise.

1. General Proposal Submission Guidelines

This section presents general guidelines for submitting a CFP proposal. Detailed instructions for submitting a response proposal using the Bid Submission Form web page can be found in Appendix A Management Requirements.

Proposals must be submitted before the appropriate response due date indicated in the Master Schedule.

Bidders responding to this CFP should be familiar with the OGC Mission, Vision, and Goals. Proposals from non-members will be considered provided that a completed application for OGC membership (or a letter of intent to become a member) is submitted prior to (or with) the proposal.

Information submitted in response to this CFP will be accessible to OGC staff members and to Sponsor representatives. This information will remain in the control of these stakeholders and will not be used for other purposes without prior written consent of the Bidder. Once a Bidder has agreed to become an Initiative Participant, it will be required to release proposal content (excluding financial information) to all Initiative stakeholders. Commercial confidential information should not be submitted in any proposal (and, in general, should not be disclosed during Initiative execution).

Bidders will be selected to receive cost sharing funds on the basis of adherence to the requirements (as stated in in the CFP Appendix B Technical Architecture) and the overall quality of their proposal. The general Initiative objective is for the work to inform future OGC standards development with findings and recommendations surrounding potential new specifications. Bidders are asked to formulate a path for producing executable interoperable prototype implementations that meet the stated CFP requirements, and for documenting the findings and recommendations arising from those implementations. Bidders not selected for cost sharing funds may still be able to participate by addressing the stated CFP requirements on a purely in-kind basis.

However, to help maintain a manageable process, Bidders are advised to avoid attempts to use the Initiative as a platform for introducing new requirements not included in the Appendix B Technical Architecture. Any additional in-kind scope should be offered outside the formal bidding process, where an independent determination can be made as to whether it should be included in Initiative scope or not. Items deemed out-of-scope might still be appropriate for inclusion in a later OGC Innovation Program initiative.

Each Participant (including pure in-kind Participants) that is assigned to make a deliverable will be required to enter into a Participation Agreement contract ("PA") with the OGC. The reason this requirement applies to pure in-kind Participants is that other Participants will be relying upon their delivery to show component interoperability.

Each PA will include a statement of work ("SOW") identifying Participant roles and responsibilities. The purpose of the PAs is to encourage and enable Participants to work together to realize Initiative goals for the benefit of the broader OGC community.

1.1. Questions and Clarifications

Once the original CFP has been published, ongoing authoritative updates and answers to questions can be tracked by monitoring the CFP Clarifications page. Instructions for accessing this page are included under Proposal Submission Procedures.

Bidders may submit questions via timely submission of email(s) to the OGC Technology Desk. Question submitters will remain anonymous, and answers will be regularly compiled and published on the CFP clarifications page.

OGC may also choose to conduct a Bidder’s question-and-answer webinar to review the clarifications and invite follow-on questions.

2. Proposal Evaluation Criteria

Proposals will be evaluated according to criteria that can be divided into two areas: Management and Technical.

2.1. Management Criteria

  • Bidder willingness and ability to comply with Appendix A Management Requirements,

  • Feasibility of proposed solution utilizing proposed resources, and

  • Proposed in-kind contribution in relation to proposed cost-share funding request.

2.2. Technical Criteria

  • Understanding of and compliance with requirements as stated in Appendix B Technical Architecture,

  • Quality and suitability of proposed design, and

  • Where applicable, proposed solutions are OGC-compliant.

3. Master Schedule

The following table details the major Initiative milestones and events. Dates are subject to change.

Table 1. Milestone schedule
Milestone Date Event


June 2018

CFP Release


10 July 2018

Bidder Questions Due


17 July 2018

Bidders Q&A Webinar


25 July 2018

CFP Proposal Submission Deadline


10 August 2018

First Round of Bidder Notifications Started


24 August 2018

Second Round of Bidder Notifications Started


30 September 2018

All Participation Agreements Signed


16-17 October 2018

Kickoff Workshop Event


30 November 2018

Initial Engineering Reports (IERs)


30 November 2018

NIST002 Public Safety Features CityGML ADE ER


31 December 2018

Component Implementation Designs


31 January 2019

IER-to-DER status check


31 January 2019

TIE Connectivity Test


31 January 2019

Early implementations of any component on which another component depends


28 February 2019

TIE Readiness Review


31 March 2019

TIE-Tested Component Implementations completed


31 March 2019

Preliminary DERs complete & clean, ready for internal Initiative reviews


30 April 2019

Near-Final DERs posted to Pending & WG review requested


30 April 2019

Ad hoc TIE demonstrations (as requested during the month) & Demo Assets posted to Portal


May 2019 [Date TBD]

Final DERs (incorporating WG feedback) posted to Pending to meet 3-week rule for vote at June TC Meeting


15 May 2019

Demonstration Event


31 May 2019

Participant Final Summary Reports


June 2019 [Date TBD]

Annual Public Safety Broadband Stakeholder Meetings

3.1. Sequence of Events, Phases, and Milestones

The following diagram provides a notional schedule of major Initiative events and milestones, and their approximate sequence of occurrence. The Initiative will consider using rolling-wave project planning whereby more detailed scheduling might take place as each milestone draws near.

Figure 2. Overview of events and milestones

Participant Selection and Agreements:

Once the original CFP has been published, ongoing authoritative updates and answers to questions can be tracked by monitoring the CFP Clarifications page. Instructions for accessing this page are included under Proposal Submission Procedures.

Bidders may submit questions via timely submission of email(s) to the OGC Technology Desk. Question submitters will remain anonymous, and answers will be regularly compiled and published in the CFP Clarifications page.

OGC may also choose to conduct a Bidder’s question-and-answer webinar to review the clarifications and invite follow-on questions.

Following the closing date for submission of proposals, OGC will evaluate received proposals, review recommendations with the Sponsor, and negotiate Participation Agreement (PA) contracts, including statements of work (SOWs), with selected Bidders. Participant selection will be complete once PA contracts have been signed with all Participants.

Kickoff Workshop: A Kickoff Workshop ("Kickoff") is a face-to-face meeting where Participants, guided by the Initiative Architect, will refine the Initiative architecture and settle upon specific use cases and interface models to be used as a baseline for prototype component interoperability. Participants will be required to attend the Kickoff, including breakout sessions, and will be expected to use these breakouts to collaborate with other Participants and confirm intended Component Interface Designs.

After the face-to-face Kickoff, most Initiative activities will be conducted remotely via web meetings and teleconferences until the Demonstration Event and other stakeholder meetings near the end of Initiative execution.

Development of Engineering Reports, Change Requests, and Other Document Deliverables: Development of Engineering Reports (ERs), Change Requests (CRs) and other document deliverables will commence during or immediately after Kickoff. Participants will deliver an Initial Engineering Report (IER) plus several iterations of a Draft Engineering Report (DER). Full process details can be found in the ER Development Process.

Under the Participation Agreement (PA) contracts to be formed with selected Bidders, ALL Participants will be responsible for contributing content to the ERs. But the ER Editor role will assume the duty of being the primary ER author.

Component Design, Development, and Preliminary Testing: Participants will continue documenting detailed and final Component Interface Designs using the testbed collaboration tool (e.g., GitHub). This documentation will allow task Participants to confirm a mutual understanding of each other’s interfaces so that subsequent interoperability testing can take place. A preliminary Technology Integration Experiment ("TIE", sometimes also referred to as a "Technical Interoperability Experiment") Connectivity Test milestone will be used to ensure that Initiative service endpoints can be reached by Initiative clients.

TIE Readiness Review: A TIE Readiness Review will be conducted with the Initiative Architect to confirm that each TIE Participant is prepared to start conducting TIE testing with counterpart Participants.

Component Interoperability Testing, and Acceptance: Participants should deliver completed and fully TIE-tested component implementations no later than the TIE-Tested Component Implementations milestone (unless an earlier milestone is required under the Appendix B Technical Architecture). The primary acceptance criterion for a component implementation deliverable is the conduct and recording of the TIE test. This test can also prove useful in accelerating the development of demonstration assets such as video recordings.

Draft Engineering Reports: Participants should also deliver complete and clean Draft Engineering Report (DERs) by the Preliminary DERs milestone. A complete DER is one for which all major clauses have been populated with meaningful content. A clean is one where all known editorial defects have been repaired. This milestone will impact ALL Initiative Participants, even component implementers, who will be responsible for making necessary documentation material available to the ER Editor for use in authoring the ER. The Sponsor and Initiative Architect will review these DERs in the weeks following delivery.

DER Rework and SWG/DWG Reviews: Participants will be required to perform rework based on the reviews from the Sponsor and the Initiative Architect. The ER editor will then make a request to the selected OGC SWG or DWG to perform its review and to consider making a request that the DER be voted on by the OGC Technical Committee (TC) for publication. The OGC 3-week rule must be followed if the DER is to receive a vote at a TC Meeting. The DER must be posted to the members-only OGC Pending Documents directory to enable this TC vote. Participants will likely have to perform one final round of rework based on SWG/DWG feedback. The further along the DER is when submitted to the WG, the less rework will be required.

Final Summary Reports, Demonstration Event and Other Stakeholder Meetings: Participant Final Summary Reports will constitute the close of funded activity. Further development work might take place to prepare and refine assets to be shown at the Demonstration Event and other stakeholder meetings.

Assurance of Service Availability: Participants selected to implement service components must maintain availability for a period of no less than one year after the Participant Final Summary Reports milestone. OGC might be willing to entertain exceptions to this requirement on a case-by-case basis.

Detailed requirements for meeting all these delivery milestones are provided in Appendix A Management Requirements.

4. Summary of Initiative Deliverables

The following table summarizes the full set of Initiative deliverables. Technical details can be found in the Appendix B Technical Architecture.

All Participants are required to provide at least some level of in-kind contribution (i.e., activities requesting no cost-share compensation). As a rough guideline, a proposal should include at least one dollar of in-kind contribution for every dollar of cost-sharing compensation requested. All else being equal, higher levels of in-kind contributions will be considered more favorably during evaluation.

Some participation may be fully in-kind. However, to help maintain a manageable process, Bidders are advised to avoid attempts to use the Initiative as a platform for introducing new requirements not included in the Appendix B Technical Architecture. Any additional in-kind scope should be offered outside of the formal bidding process, where an independent determination can be made as to whether it should be included in Initiative scope or not. Items deemed out-of-Initiative-scope might be more appropriate for inclusion in a later OGC Innovation Program initiative.

Any item proposed as a fully in-kind contribution to meet a requirement already included in Appendix B Technical Architecture will likely be accepted if it meets all the other evaluation criteria and does not create an added burden on other Participants.

4.1. Summary of Technical Deliverables

The following table summarizes the full set of technical deliverables for this Initiative. Additional details can be found under Technical Deliverables. Management deliverables are described in Appendix A Management Requirements.

Table 2. Technical Deliverables
ID Technical Deliverable


Building Data


Public Safety Features CityGML ADE ER (specification needed by the IER milestone for use by the Building Modeler Service)


Building Modeler Service I (1st instance)


Building Modeler Service II (2nd instance)


Navigation Modeler Service I (1st instance)


Navigation Modeler Service II (2nd instance)


Building Model Repository CSW


Building Model Repository WFS-T


Building Model Repository 3DPS


Indoor Navigation Service I (1st instance)


Indoor Navigation Service II (2nd instance)


Preplanning Tool Client I (1st instance)


Preplanning Tool Client II (2nd instance)


Presentation at PSBSM Meetings (mandatory for all Participants)


Indoor Mapping and Navigation ER (general-purpose)


Demonstration Video Assets (mandatory for all component providers)



< end of main body >

Appendix A: Management Requirements

This appendix presents detailed CFP management requirements for submitting a bid. It also covers procedures for participation during Initiative execution. The Appendix B Technical Architecture presents the detailed CFP technical requirements.

All potential Bidders should read this appendix carefully from end-to-end (and notify OGC immediately if any defects are discovered). There are significant differences as compared to prior solicitations. Bidders who are new to OGC Testbeds are also encouraged to review the Tips for New Bidders.

The following sections describe the processes for a Bidder to submit a proposal and for a Participant (i.e., a selected Bidder) to perform against a Participation Agreement (PA) contract. The order of topics roughly parallels the sequence described in the Master Schedule.

A.1. Proposal Submission Procedures

The process for completing an Initiative proposal is essentially embodied in an online Bid Submission Form. A summary is provided here for the reader’s convenience.

Once an online account has been created, the user will be taken to a home page indicating the "Status of Your Proposal." If any defects in the form are discovered, this page includes a link for notifying OGC. The user can return to this page at any time by clicking the OGC logo in the upper left corner.


Because the online Bid Submission Form is still relatively new, it might contain some areas that are still brittle or in need of repair. Please notify OGC of any discovered defects. Periodic version updates will be provided as needed.

Please consider making backup local copies of all inputs in case any of them need to be re-entered.

Please also note that this form will "go live" soon after the CFP release date. Any submitted bids will be treated as earnest submissions, even those submitted well before the response deadline. Be certain that you intend to submit your proposal before you click the Submit button on the Review page.

Clicking on the Clarifications link will navigate to the CFP clarifications page.

On the far right, the Review link navigates to a page summarizing all the deliverables the Bidder is proposing.


Consider regularly creating printed output copies of this Review page at various checkpoints during proposal creation in case an input error is made later.

Once the final version of the information for all the proposed deliverables has been entered, the Bidder can submit the completed proposal to OGC by clicking the Submit button at the bottom.


In general, up until the time that the user clicks this Submit button, the proposal may be edited as many times as the user wishes. There no "undo" capability, however, so please use caution in over-writing existing information.

The user is provided an opportunity under Attached Documentation at the bottom of this page to attach collateral documentation (one document per proposal). This document could conceivably contain any specialized information that wasn’t suitable for entry into a Proposed Contribution field under an individual deliverable. It should be noted, however, that this additional documentation will only be read on a best-effort basis. There is no guarantee it will be used during evaluation to make selection decisions; rather, it could optionally be examined if the evaluation team feels that it might help in understanding any specialized (and particularly promising) contributions.

The Propose link takes the user to the first page of the proposal entry form. This form contains fields to be completed once per proposal such as names and contact information.

It also contains an optional Organizational Background field where Bidders (particularly those with no experience participating in an OGC initiative) may provide a description of their organization. It also contains a click-through check box where each Bidder will required (before entering any data for individual deliverables) to acknowledge its understanding and acceptance of the requirements described in this appendix.

Clicking the Update and Continue button then navigates to the form for submitting deliverable-by-deliverable bids. On this page, existing deliverable bids can be modified or deleted by clicking the appropriate icon next to the deliverable name. Any attempt to delete a proposed deliverable will require scrolling down to click a Confirm Deletion button.

To add a new deliverable, the user would scroll down to the Add Deliverable section and click the Deliverable drop-down list to select the particular deliverable of interest. For each proposed deliverable, the user will see a form like the following.