SOLICITATION NOTICE
A -- Incorporation of Travel Time Reliability into the Highway Capacity Manual
- Notice Date
- 7/27/2010
- Notice Type
- Combined Synopsis/Solicitation
- NAICS
- 541712
— Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology)
- Contracting Office
- The National Academies, Transportation Research Board, SHRP2, 500 Fifth Street NW, Washington, District of Columbia, 20001, United States
- ZIP Code
- 20001
- Solicitation Number
- SHRP2_L08
- Archive Date
- 10/12/2010
- Point of Contact
- William Hyman, Phone: 202-334-1914, Linda Mason, Phone: 202-334-3241
- E-Mail Address
-
whyman@nas.edu, lmason@nas.edu
(whyman@nas.edu, lmason@nas.edu)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- SHRP 2 Request for Proposals Focus Area: Reliability Project Number: L08 Project Title: Incorporation of Travel Time Reliability into the Highway Capacity Manual Date Posted: July 27, 2010 SHRP 2 Background To address the challenges of moving people and goods efficiently and safely on the nation's highways, Congress has created the second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2). SHRP 2 is a targeted, short-term research program carried out through competitively awarded contracts to qualified researchers in the academic, private, and public sectors. SHRP 2 addresses four strategic focus areas: the role of human behavior in highway safety (Safety); rapid highway renewal (Renewal); improved travel time reliability through congestion reduction (Reliability); and transportation planning that better integrates community, economic, and environmental considerations into new highway capacity (Capacity). Under current legislative provisions, SHRP 2 will receive approximately $170 million with total program duration of 7 years. Additional information about SHRP 2 can be found on the program's Web site at www.trb.org/shrp2. Reliability Focus Area The major objective of SHRP 2 Reliability research is to greatly improve the reliability of highway travel times by reducing the frequency and effects of events that cause travel times to fluctuate in an unpredictable manner. The results of the research program should help local, state, and national agencies reduce travel time variability for travelers and shippers. The Reliability research plan addresses both recurring and nonrecurring congestion with an emphasis on nonrecurring congestion. The following seven potential sources of unreliable travel times (i.e., events that cause variable travel times) were identified: 1.Traffic incidents 2.Work zones 3.Demand fluctuations 4.Special events 5.Traffic control devices 6.Weather 7. Inadequate base capacity. The Reliability focus area targets travel time variation-that frustrating characteristic of the transportation system that means you must allow an hour to make a trip that normally takes 30 minutes. Not only is reliability an important component for travelers and shippers, it is also an area of the congestion problem in which transportation agencies can make significant gains even as travel demand grows. The seven unreliability sources account for approximately half of the total delay. Reducing reliability-related delay will also result in fewer crashes, reduced vehicle emissions and fuel use, and other benefits. These benefits can be realized through a mix of leading-edge research into a better understanding of strategies and their consequences, new technology and practices, and reducing institutional barriers so that our existing knowledge can be more fully exploited. The goals of the Reliability focus area address the first five of the seven sources mentioned above. Project Background The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) historically has been among the most important reference guides used by transportation professionals seeking a systematic basis for evaluating the capacity, level of service, and performance measures for elements of the surface transportation system, particularly highways but also other modes. The HCM is useful for planning, design, preliminary engineering, and operations analysis. The HCM provides analytic concepts for characterizing traffic flow, capacity, and quality and level- of-service. It also provides guidance on analyzing facilities, segments, and points for uninterrupted flow such as freeways and multilane highways and for interrupted flow such as urban streets, signalized intersections and two-way stop controlled intersections. The HCM distinguishes between capacity - an hourly flow rate at which persons or vehicles can be reasonably expected to traverse a uniform section of road (a function of various factors); quality and level-of-service concepts and their underlying service measures (e.g. density, speed and delay), and performance measures, for example speed, number of stops, queue length, and volume-to-capacity ratio. Travel time reliability is increasingly recognized as an important mobility performance measure. The HCM does not include a method to address travel time reliability. Nor does it have mobility performance measures or a method to address reliability for specific types of facilities such as freeways, multilane highways and urban corridors, and segments such as freeway weaving areas. Much research has been completed within SHRP 2 that provides analytic procedures for computing travel time reliability on urban freeways. These analytic procedures are not in a form that can be applied directly to perform the types of analysis in the HCM. Moreover, gaps exist in SHRP 2 research regarding arterials and corridors. Nevertheless, the SHRP 2 Reliability research is a strong foundation for performing the type of analysis in the HCM to address nonrecurring congestion. In sum, analytic procedures are needed to incorporate travel time reliability into the methods used within the HCM. The HCM has undergone numerous updates since the first version was published in 1950. A major revision will be released this year, referred to as the 2010 HCM, and for the first time will recognize travel time reliability as an important performance measure. Objectives The objective of this project is to determine how data and information on the impacts of differing causes of nonrecurrent congestion (incidents, weather, work zones, special events, etc.) in the context of highway capacity can be incorporated into the performance measure estimation procedures contained in the HCM. The methodologies contained in the HCM for predicting delay, speed, queuing, and other performance measures for alternative highway designs are not currently sensitive to traffic management techniques and other operation/design measures for reducing nonrecurrent congestion. A further objective is to develop methodologies to predict travel time reliability on selected types of facilities and within corridors, specifically: •Develop travel time reliability as a performance measure in the HCM for freeway facilities •Develop travel time reliability as a performance measure in the HCM for urban street facilities •Address freeway and urban streets in a corridor context. These procedures should inform planning, preliminary engineering, design, and systems operations and management. Tasks Task descriptions are intended to provide a framework for conducting the research. SHRP 2 is seeking the insights of proposers on how best to achieve the research objectives for this project. Proposers are expected to describe research plans that can realistically be accomplished within the constraints of available funds and contract time. Proposals must present the proposers' current thinking in sufficient detail to demonstrate their understanding of the issues and the soundness of their approach to meeting the research objectives. Phase I Task 1. Conduct a literature review including but not limited to the draft 2010 HCM, SHRP 2 Research, especially Projects L03 and L07 and other projects in both the Reliability and Capacity Focus Areas. (See Special Note A), state procedures, Federal Highway Administration source materials, and international input. Task 2. Identify gaps in the availability of methodologies to be able to satisfy the project objectives. Task 3. Develop a study methodology to satisfy the project objectives. Include a definition of travel time reliability as a performance measure within the context of the 2010 HCM. Define and interpret key concepts of the proposed analytic and predictive procedures. Address reliability during different time periods. The reliability performance measure must be field-measurable. Task 4. Develop a data collection plan/methodology including data fusion requirements, quality assurance, testing and validation. Task 5. Prepare a Phase I Report including a work plan for Phase II. Present the results of Phase I to the Highway Capacity and Quality of Service Committee (HCQSC) at a suitable location. A webinar may be used. The contractor may not proceed with Phase II until approval is received from SHRP 2. Phase II Task 6. Collect data in accordance with the data collection plan/methodology. Task 7. Analyze the data by following the methodology described in Task 3. Develop models that can be used to assess travel time reliability as a performance measure in the HCM for (a) freeway facilities (b) urban street facilities and (c) freeways and urban streets in a corridor context. Task 8. Test and validate models in a manner consistent with the methodologies established in Tasks 3 and 4. Task 9. Develop computational procedures to document each model and make it easy to independently apply the reliability assessment models. Task 10. Present two webinars during the course of the project, one before data collection and the other after preliminary model development. Record comments and questions from the webinar audiences and consider if any are useful to the project. Task 11. Prepare a guide that encompasses chapters evocative of the 2010 HCM that addresses freeway facilities, urban street facilities, and freeway and urban streets in a corridor context. The text should be suitable for potential inclusion in a future update of the 2010 HCM Task 12. Between 120 and 60 days of the end of the contract, present the project work to the HCQSC during one of its periodic meetings. Also present the project work to the SHRP 2 Technical Expert Task Group, and other key stakeholders such as the Institute of Traffic Engineers. The contractor may negotiate alternate times with SHRP 2 in order that the presentations coincide with the dates of key meetings of the HCQSC and other key stakeholders. List the key points made by participants in these meetings and submit to SHRP 2. The contractor will be expected to respond to these points in preparing the Draft and/or Final Reports. Task 13. At least 90 days before the end of the contract, prepare a Draft Final Report and submit to SHRP 2. SHRP 2 will provide the contractor with comments on the Draft Final Report within 30 days. Task 14. Prepare a Final Report upon receipt of comments from SHRP 2 and submit before the contract end date. Deliverables 1.Report on Phase I of the research including a plan for conducting Phase II. This report should be in a searchable form. 2.A list of points made by participants at webinars, meetings with the HCQSC, the L08 TETG, and other key stakeholders 3.Computational procedures to document each of the methods used to develop travel time reliability assessment models 4.Two webinars, one before data collection and the other after preliminary model development 5.Draft Final Report 6.Final Report 7.Quarterly Progress Reports Special Notes Special Note A: Project L03 is entitled, "Analytic Procedures for Determining the Impacts of Reliability Mitigation Strategies." Project L07 is entitled, "Evaluation of Costs and Effectiveness of Highway Design Features to Improve Travel Time Reliability. See the SHRP 2 Reliability webpage (www.TRB.org/SHRP2/Reliability) to access the L03 Final Report (not yet approved for publication) and a report on Phase I activities of the L07 research. Special Note B: Because of the interaction between projects, parallel timing of some projects, and tight schedule, it will be necessary for SHRP 2 researchers to coordinate with each other and with the SHRP 2 staff. Proposers should allow resources for at least two meetings in Washington, D.C. In addition, a SHRP 2 staff officer may request a briefing once or twice during the project at the researcher's offices. Special Note C: The proposal should include a management plan that at the minimum identifies responsibilities of key team members according to task or function. Include a diagram. The management plan should also address other important considerations necessary to successfully complete the project including issues concerning project control, progress monitoring and reporting, delegation, and completion of the project on time and within budget. Special Note D: The proposal should include a plan for quality control and quality assurance. Special Note E: The SHRP 2 Reliability Focus Area, through project L13a, will be developing an archive for travel reliability data for SHRP 2 Reliability and related projects. The L08 contractor should be prepared to supply any data collected and produced (structured and unstructured) for inclusion in the archive either in advance of its completion or if the archive is completed before L08 concludes. Funds Available: Entire Project: $1,500,000 Budgets for project phases should be consistent with the level of effort proposed. As a guideline, the effort should be distributed as follows: Phase I: $300,000 Phase II: $1,200,000 Contract Time: 21 months; Phase I: 7 months; Phase II: 14 months Responsible Staff: William Hyman, whyman@nas.edu, 202-334-1914 Authorization to Begin Work: February 2011, anticipated Proposal Due Date: September 27, 2010 Proposals (20 single-bound copies) are due not later than 4:30 p.m. on September 27, 2010. This is a firm deadline, and extensions are simply not granted. In order to be considered, all 20 copies of the agency's proposal accompanied by the executed, unmodified Liability Statement must be in our offices not later than the deadline shown, or they will be rejected. Delivery Address: PROPOSAL-SHRP 2 ATTN: Neil F. Hawks Director, Strategic Highway Research Program 2 Transportation Research Board 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington DC 20001 Phone: 202-334-1340 Liability Statement The signature of an authorized representative of the proposing agency is required on the unaltered statement in order for SHRP 2 to accept the agency's proposal for consideration. Proposals submitted without this executed and unaltered statement by the proposal deadline will be rejected. An executed, unaltered statement indicates the agency's intent and ability to execute a contract that includes the provisions in the statement. Here is a printable version of the Liability Statement (http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/shrp2/LiabilityStatement.pdf). A free copy of the Adobe Acrobat PDF reader is available at http://www.adobe.com. The Liability Statement is included as Figure 1 in the Manual for Conducting Research and Preparing Proposals for SHRP 2 referred to in General Note 4. General Notes 1. Proposals will be evaluated by SHRP 2 staff and Expert Task Groups (ETGs) consisting of individuals collectively very knowledgeable in the problem area. Selection of an agency is made by the SHRP 2 Oversight Committee, based on the recommendation of the SHRP 2 staff and the ETG. In regard to proposals submitted to conduct Project L08, the SHRP 2 staff and the ETG are looking for a scope of work that, to the greatest extent possible, will maximize the value of research results to road users, planners, designers, those performing preliminary engineering, and individuals responsible for systems operations and management. Selection of a contractor will be primarily based on the value added of the work proposed by a contractor. Other selection criteria are: (1) the proposer's demonstrated understanding of the problem; (2) the merit of the proposed research approach and experimental design; (3) methods that are easy to understand, apply and communicate; (4) the experience, qualifications, and objectivity of the research team in the same or closely related problem area; (5) the proposer's plan for participation by disadvantaged business enterprises-small firms owned and controlled by minorities and women; and (6) the adequacy of facilities TRB and the SHRP 2 Oversight Committee strongly encourage the significant participation of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBEs) in SHRP 2 research contracts. Although no quota is specified nor is DBE participation mandated, the proposer's plan for involvement of DBEs is a factor in contractor selection, and the contractor's adherence to its DBE plan will be monitored during the contract period. The Research Team Builder database on the SHRP 2 website is a resource for proposers interested in participating on research teams. 2. Any clarifications regarding this RFP will be posted on the SHRP 2 Web site (www.TRB.org/SHRP2). Announcements of such clarifications will be posted on the front page and, when possible, will be noted in the TRB e-newsletter. Proposers are advised to check the Web site frequently until September 13, 2010, when no further comments will be posted. 3. According to the provisions of Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 21, which relates to nondiscrimination in federally assisted programs, all parties are hereby notified that the contract entered into pursuant to this announcement will be awarded without discrimination on the grounds of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or disability. 4. The essential features required in a proposal for research are detailed in the Manual for Conducting Research and Preparing Proposals for SHRP 2 (http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/shrp2/PreparingSHRP2Reports.pdf). Proposals must be prepared according to this document, and attention is directed specifically to Section IV for mandatory requirements. Proposals that do not conform to these requirements will be rejected. 5. The total funds available are made known in the project statement, and line items of the budget are examined to determine the reasonableness of the allocation of funds to the various tasks. If the proposed total cost exceeds the funds available, the proposal is rejected. 6. All proposals become the property of the Transportation Research Board. Final disposition will be made according to the policies thereof, including the right to reject all proposals. IMPORTANT NOTICE Potential proposers should understand that the research project described herein is tentative. The final content of the program depends on the level of funding made available. Nevertheless, to be prepared to execute research contracts as soon as possible after sponsors' approvals, the Strategic Highway Research Program is assuming that the tentative program will become official in its entirety and is proceeding with requests for proposals and selections of research agencies.
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/NationalAcademies/NATRB/TRBSHRP2/SHRP2_L08/listing.html)
- Record
- SN02219868-W 20100729/100728000232-f66db8948c96de13ffc9173c5428860f (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |