SOLICITATION NOTICE
A -- Strategic Approaches at the Corridor and Network Levels to Minimize Disruption from the Renewal Process
- Notice Date
- 3/10/2009
- 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, Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2), 500 Fifth Street NW, Washington, District of Columbia, 20001
- ZIP Code
- 20001
- Solicitation Number
- SHRP2_R11
- Archive Date
- 5/6/2009
- Point of Contact
- Monica A. Starnes,, Phone: 202-334-1894, Linda Mason,, Phone: 202-334-3241
- E-Mail Address
-
mstarnes@nas.edu, lmason@nas.edu
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- SHRP 2 Request for Proposals Focus Area: Renewal Project Number: R11 Project Title: Strategic Approaches at the Corridor and Network Levels to Minimize Disruption from the Renewal Process Date Posted: March 10, 2009 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); congestion reduction through improved travel time reliability (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 $150 million with total program duration of 7 years. Renewal Focus Area The U.S. highway system is aging and must be rebuilt while we are driving on it and living next to it. Research in the SHRP 2 Renewal focus area therefore addresses the need to develop a consistent, systematic approach to completing highway projects quickly, with minimal disruption to the community, and producing facilities that are long-lasting. Identifying new technologies for locating underground utilities; developing procedures to speed the evaluation of designs and the inspection of construction; and applying new methods and materials for preserving, rehabilitating, and reconstructing roadways and bridges are among the goals for this focus area. Alternative strategies for contracting, financing, and managing projects and mitigating institutional barriers also are part of the emphasis on rapid renewal. The renewal scope applies to all classes of roads. Project Background Over the last several years, the transportation planning community has begun using the concept of corridor and network management to describe the current status and future needs for transportation improvements. However, the transportation corridor and network analysis at the planning stage may not consider the entirety of infrastructure needs within that corridor and/or network. The analysis may not consider the impact that significantly different project execution strategies may have on the overall budget, disruption to traveling public, disruption to commerce, and impacts on the local community during the actual construction operations. Decisions made during planning can enhance or constrain opportunities to accelerate construction or minimize disruption. These decisions may also overlook opportunities to minimize the number of construction interventions ultimately required in a corridor. Many transportation corridors and networks are becoming increasingly congested, limiting construction during traditional work times. Public agencies are now recognizing the need to examine various construction alternatives within those corridors and networks to determine the potential disruption and/or benefit these alternatives may have over time. In addition, many public agencies are anticipating the need to examine regional networks with multiple corridors in order to examine the effect of constructing multiple corridors concurrently. Without examination of the various construction strategies during the project development process, the impact on the traveling public and the local communities may increase dramatically. Future corridor and network improvement analyses need to address a variety of important questions, such as: • What is the optimal selection of renewal project features-roadway, bridge, soils, drainage, safety improvements, signing, and other upgrades-that should be packaged into discreet construction contracts? • How should public agencies address those components within the corridor that have significantly different remaining service lives? • How should geographic construction limits be set to minimize disruption to the traveling public, businesses, and adjacent communities? • What is the impact on the regional network when multiple corridors are being considered for concurrent reconstruction or are there phasing strategies which may minimize impacts on the regional network? • What is the best way to define and measure the benefits gained and limitations from various strategies as they relate to work accomplished, budget, traffic mitigation, and safety and related benefits? Objectives The objectives of this project are: (1) To identify and document effective practices for executing highway renewal activities as they affect the corridor and network level by considering construction alternatives, budget limitations, adjacent communities and impact to the traveling public; (2) To identify instances and examples of the transportation agency and project organizational designs that are most and least compatible with these effective practices; (3) To identify and develop new dynamic tools, techniques, and processes to help public agencies execute highway renewal activities at the corridor and network level and measure risks from the perspective of constructability, funding, economic/environmental/social constraints, and congestion and safety impacts; (4) To provide guidance for selecting appropriate tools, techniques, performance measures, and practices during project development (i.e., from planning through construction); and (5) To assess and develop training needs and materials and knowledge transfer methods for implementation. 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. 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: Investigation of current successes, and opportunities for improvement and identification of effective rapid renewal corridor and network practices Task 1: Review relevant literature, pertinent research and other appropriate information sources to identify current practices for minimizing transportation disruption during renewal activities of highway corridors/networks as they relate to: - Project sequencing - Project delivery and procurement methods - Construction industry input or experience in the planning and preconstruction project development process - Consideration of construction means, methods and techniques and associated design requirements early in the project development process - Consideration of periodic constructability reviews (both for building and bidding) throughout the project development process - Impacts and limitations on the construction industry as a result of possible longer project limits and the inclusion of more work within the traditional construction projects - Other considerations. Examine the current processes to determine when and how public agencies establish project limits and priorities based on specific metrics, including the type and extent of work limits, work items, and traffic management, as well as contractor's expertise and business structure. Task 2: Investigate how significantly different approaches are integrated into corridor and network traffic management to minimize disruption and what the results of those practices provide in terms of net traffic disruption, for example: • Examine total or partial shutdown of corridors with high-intensity work effort. • Examine incentives and disincentives to support rapid renewal of corridors • Examine short-duration closures (six hours or less) over longer periods of time. • Examine the impact of grouping nontraffic-impacting work into discrete packages separate from traffic-impacting work. • Examine the options of programming renewal activities within a corridor by elements (e.g., culvert replacements) vs. traditional segment construction vs. project delivery method (e.g., design-build) Task 3: Identify and evaluate practices that analyze total traffic impact on traveling public, local community and business, and commerce at the corridor level as a result of various strategies for performing renewal. Task 4: Identify and evaluate practices that analyze total traffic impact on traveling public, local community and business, and commerce at the network level as a result of various strategies for performing renewal. Task 5: Develop recommendations detailing effective practices and methodologies that can be generally applied among transportation agencies. A selection matrix that correlates effective practices to specific application situations is anticipated as a likely product of this task. Task 6: Identify and evaluate various tools (e.g., software, models, algorithms) that in whole or in part support the recommended practices developed in Task 5. For each tool, the strengths, weaknesses, and barriers to implementation should be identified. Task 7: Based on Task 6, provide recommendations and estimated resources (cost and time) to improve existing and/or develop new tools under this contract. Task 8: Prepare a Phase I Report documenting Tasks 1-7. Submit the report to SHRP 2 for review and approval. Phase II: Corridor and Network Analysis Tools After approval of the Phase I Report, and on receipt of direction to proceed, conduct the following tasks: Task 9: Based on the recommendations from Task 7, develop new dynamic tools, techniques, and/or processes to help public agencies plan highway renewal activities at the corridor and network level and to measure associated risks. The tools should provide the ability to analyze life-cycle costs associated with various corridor renewal strategies and the ability to estimate disruption to traffic flows, community services and fabric, and regional and local economies. Task 10: Develop guidance for selecting the proper tools, techniques, performance measures, and practices during project development (i.e., from planning through construction). Task 11: Prepare and submit to SHRP 2 a Phase II Report documenting tasks 9-10. Phase III: Piloting and Knowledge Transfer Task 12: After the Phase I report is approved, conduct at least two pilot workshops (aimed at different audiences) to test the practices identified during Phase I (task 5). Feedback from the pilots should be used to update the selection matrix developed in Phase I and to develop training material and methodology in Task 14. Task 13: After the Phase II report is approved, conduct two pilot workshops to test the best tools identified during Phase I and developed during Phase II. Feedback from the pilots should be used to update the list of tools and the guidance framework. Feedback from the pilots should also be used to develop training material and methodology in Task 14. Task 14: Based on feedback from Tasks 12 and 13, develop a program and training material in line with the National Highway Institute course development protocols ( http://www.nhi.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/resources.aspx ). Proposers should discuss their approach to meet NHI requirements. Task 15: Prepare and submit a Final Report documenting the entire project. Deliverables • Phase I Report • Phase II Report • Training material (Task 14) • Final Report • Quarterly and monthly progress reports • Three (3) interim meetings with SHRP 2 staff: two (2) in Washington, DC and one (1) at the contractor's facility • Telephone conference calls, as needed • One (1) interim meeting with the TCC in Washington DC; Irvine, CA; or Woods Hole, MA. Funds Available: Not to exceed $1,500,000 for the entire project. Contract Period: Thirty (30) months for the entire project Responsible Staff: Dr. Monica A. Starnes, mstarnes@nas.edu, 202-334-1894 Authorization to Begin Work: September 2009, anticipated Proposals (20 single-bound copies) are due not later than 4:30 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) on April 21, 2009 This is a firm deadline, and extensions simply are 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: 202-334-1430 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 summarily 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. Special Notes 1. The research for this project should include consideration of any related research by the SHRP 2 Capacity and Reliability focus areas. Examples include, but are not limited to, SHRP 2 projects C01, C07, and L04. 2. For Tasks 12 and 13 proposers should discuss their recommendations for the format, audience, and outline for the pilots. 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 from SHRP 2 staff and the ETG. The following factors are considered: (1) the proposer's demonstrated understanding of the problem; (2) the merit of the proposed research approach and experimental design; (3) the experience, qualifications, and objectivity of the research team in the same or closely related problem area; (4) the proposer's plan for participation by disadvantaged business enterprises (DBEs)-small firms owned and controlled by minorities or women; and (5) the adequacy of facilities. TRB and the SHRP 2 Oversight Committee strongly encourage the significant participation of 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. Contractors are required to submit periodic reports comparing actual with proposed payments to DBEs. The "Contractor Expression of Interest" section of the SHRP 2 website is a resource for proposers interested in participating on research teams. This database is being enhanced and will be renamed the Research Team Builder. 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 March 26, 2009, 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
-
FedBizOpps Complete View
(https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=58b649833e238f1c69bb8a741deabdbd&tab=core&_cview=1)
- Record
- SN01766349-W 20090312/090310220853-58b649833e238f1c69bb8a741deabdbd (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 |