SOLICITATION NOTICE
A -- Resource on Advanced Integrated Models and an Implementation Strategy
- Notice Date
- 7/17/2012
- 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_C46
- Archive Date
- 9/12/2012
- Point of Contact
- Stephen Andrle, Phone: 202-334-2810, Linda Mason, Phone: 202-334-3241
- E-Mail Address
-
sandrle@nas.edu, lmason@nas.edu
(sandrle@nas.edu, lmason@nas.edu)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- SHRP 2 Request for Proposal Focus Area: Capacity Project Number: C46 Project Title: Resource on Advanced Integrated Models and an Implementation Strategy Date Posted: July 17, 2012 Proposal Due Date: August 28, 2012 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 seven years. Additional information about SHRP 2 can be found on the program's web site at www.trb.org/SHRP 2. Capacity Focus Area The Capacity charge from Congress is to develop approaches for systematically integrating environmental, economic, and community requirements into the analysis, planning, and design of new highway capacity. The scope of the SHRP 2 Capacity program extends from the early stages of the transportation planning process, when many potential alternatives are being considered, through project development. When decisions include a major highway component, further development of the highway option is within the scope of the program. When decisions are made that lead to non-highway options, further development of the non-highway component is outside the scope. Project Background This RFP combines two topics approved by the SHRP 2 Oversight Committee. Part 1 allocates $150,000 to develop a primer on activity-based (AB) travel demand models and their relationships, linkages, and interactions with land use models and dynamic traffic assignment (DTA) network models. The purpose is to develop a how-to guide for practitioners that de-mystifies AB model concepts and the practical decisions associated with implementing them. The product of Part 1 should be a clearly-written primer with a structure that would facilitate repackaging it at a later date into Travel Forecasting Resources, a web site being jointly developed by TRB and FHWA: http://www.tfresource.org. Part 2 allocates $30,000 to develop an implementation strategy for the results of SHRP 2 projects C10A&B and similar advanced models. See Special Note 2. This effort should look at the barriers and how to overcome the barriers in metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), state departments of transportation (DOTs), and other agencies that do travel demand forecasting. It is anticipated that the strategy would be implemented by FHWA and American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) beginning in 2013. Part 1: Primer on Activity-Based (AB) Travel Demand Models and Integration with Dynamic Network and Land Use Models For more than 10 years, transportation agencies have been developing and experimenting with activity-based travel demand models (AB Models) that describe how people plan and schedule their daily travel. This type of model more closely replicates actual traveler decisions and thus can better forecast future travel patterns. While there have been recent successes implementing practical AB models, this has been limited to a few large MPOs and a few state DOTs. In parallel with the development of AB models, great strides have been made in network simulation models, most notably those that fall under the category of simulation-based dynamic traffic assignment models. Instead of assigning temporally aggregated demand forecasts from the travel demand model to a static representation of the network, DTA models simulate travel behavior at detailed spatial and temporal resolutions. DTA network models are capable of representing traffic characteristics such as bottlenecks, spillback, and queues, and can be sensitive to operational features of a network such as traffic signal timing, intersection geometry, and traveler information. Because of their disaggregate representation, they have the potential to maintain and use the same individual-level characteristics as AB models in order to represent heterogeneity in travel choices. The SHRP 2 program has nearly completed two research projects (C10 A&B) in which an AB travel demand model interacted back-and-forth with a simulation-based DTA network model. (See Special Note 2) This is termed a Dynamic Integrated Model. The essence of the problem addressed by the C10 projects is that traveler behavior responds to network conditions and network conditions respond to behavior. "Traditional" models are not sensitive to this dynamic interplay and, therefore, cannot properly analyze some types of transportation alternatives. In other words, the planning representation of demand is not informed by operating conditions on the network at the time the travel occurs. In turn, the representation of network operations is not informed by changes in demand. Because of these shortcomings "traditional' models cannot effectively estimate behavioral responses to transportation management strategies such as: •Peak spreading (changes in time of day for travel) •Variable road pricing •Ramp metering •ITS strategies-customer information on road conditions, travel time, incidents, etc. •Reversible lanes •Policies affecting the time of travel demand such as parking pricing, transit pricing, flexible work schedules, reversible lanes, HOV lanes, and HOT lanes. •Work- and shop-at-home policies •Variable speed limits •Bottleneck improvements (reduction in lane width to add a lane, geometric improvements to ramps, etc.) •Shift to non-highway mode The C10 research is testing the ability of a dynamic integrated model to be more sensitive to operational alternatives. Finally, a third dimension in advancing travel demand modeling is to link a land use model to a travel demand model so the impacts of long-range location decisions can be tested and the effects of transportation improvements on land use can be examined. There are practical developments in a number of MPOs and state DOTs on this topic as well. At the center, connecting the land use to the network conditions, is the travel demand model, with AB models being the current state-of-the-art example. This project focuses on AB models and their relationships with land use and DTA models. Many MPOs and states are considering moving forward with new AB models, but the skills required to build, test, and implement an AB model are limited to a small number of MPOs, state DOTs, vendors, and consulting firms. The primary purpose of Part 1 is to develop a practical primer on AB models, a "how-to" guide for practitioners and managers. The AB primer should become the go-to resource to answer management and implementation questions such as: •Do I need an AB model? •What resources are needed to start building an AB model (data, computers, staff)? •How long does AB model development take? •How do you transition to a completely new modeling framework? To answer AB model development questions such as: •What model structure is appropriate for my region? •What data to do I need to assemble and how should it be formatted? •What are the steps to estimating and developing an AB model? •How can I get a model that runs in a decent amount of time? And touch on AB model application questions such as: •What are the best ways to manage and interpret results from detailed person-records? The maximum benefit of AB models is not captured if the network software is not as sensitive as the AB model. For instance, if the AB model operates on a continuous clock or a small time interval and the network can only handle 3-4 hour time windows, some of the benefit of the AB model is lost. Similarly, if the network cannot represent congestion and feed that back to travel decisions in the AB model, the ability to analyze operational improvements is limited. A secondary purpose of Part 1 is to describe AB models' possible relationships and linkages to, and interactions with a DTA model. Some resources are available for DTA models, such as the DTA Primer developed by TRB's Transportation Network Modeling Committee, which is available at http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/circulars/ec153.pdf. This project should build on such references, and address practical considerations in implementing a DTA network to complement an AB model. Practical issues should be covered, such as using averaged versus direct network skims, translating disaggregate demand from an AB model to a disaggregate network model, and leveraging additional network performance characteristics from a DTA model that are not possible with a traditional static model. A third purpose of Part 1 is to describe how to link an AB model to a land use model. This project should reference prior work and focus only on practical considerations in linking an AB model with a land use model. It is recognized that resources already exist or are in development for many of the pieces involved in this work, but there is no single source that addresses the objectives of Part 1 in a clear and concise fashion. Special Note 1 lists some of the resources known to the Expert Task Group that developed this RFP. It is expected that proposers will be familiar with these resources and will take maximum advantage of them. A number of land use, activity-based travel demand, and DTA models are commercially or freely available. The Primer must be independent of software packages. The Primer should focus on concepts, algorithms, and utility functions used by activity-based models, not how to run software. Manual exercises structured around algorithms are appropriate, as in a graduate-level text. Part 2. Strategic Implementation Plan for SHRP 2 Travel Demand Forecasting Products Part 2 will examine the benefits, barriers, and practical issues that MPOs, state DOTs, and other transportation agencies face in migrating from a "traditional" approach to travel demand modeling to an activity-based modeling approach. This implies disseminating the results of SHRP 2 projects C10 A&B and other similar work developed by others. (See Special Note 2.) The product will be a strategic plan for moving forward that will inform implementation efforts to be carried out by FHWA, AASHTO, and others over multiple years starting in 2013. Part 2 should be started immediately upon receipt of notice to proceed and should be completed by the summer of 2013. This document must be written clearly but should not make recommendations. Rather it should suggest ways to approach agencies of various types and sizes that do travel demand forecasting. The intent is to identify or recap known barriers to implementation and suggest ways to overcome them. Objectives 1.Part 1. For managers who make decisions about what travel demand models an agency will use, identify considerations for moving to activity-based models with dynamic, time-sensitive networks and land use models. 2.Part 1. For planning and modeling managers, develop a roadmap for migrating from current practice to activity-based, dynamic, time-sensitive network methods with land use models. 3.Part 1. For practitioners, prepare a practical primer for implementing activity-based demand model concepts and algorithms. 4.Part 2. Develop a strategic implementation plan for SHRP 2 travel demand forecasting products. 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 objective. 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 meet the research objective(s). Tasks may be done concurrently as appropriate to meet the project schedule. Part 1 Tasks. Primer on Activity-Based (AB) Travel Demand Models For each task, submit draft sections as they are developed. The Technical Expert Task Group wants to be closely involved in the development of the primer. Task 1.1. Assemble background resources listed in Special Note 1 and others of which the proposer is aware to provide a foundation for the AB Model Primer. Task 1.2. Prepare an annotated chapter outline of the topics to be covered and the structure of the AB Primer. Subsequent tasks specify major topics that must be included but the proposer has latitude to structure the document. Tasks 1.3 and 1.4 set the context for moving to advanced integrated models and Task 1.5 is a detailed guide. Each of these tasks has a different audience as described in the task. Structure the outline to best serve these discrete audiences. Submit the annotated outline to SHRP 2 for review and approval. Note: Include initial thoughts in the proposal. SHRP 2 is very concerned about the clarity of writing and clarity begins with structure. Task 1.3. (The Why. The audience for this section is managers who decide which models an agency will use.) Prepare a section of the Primer that identifies considerations for moving to activity based models with time-sensitive networks and land use models. At a high level, describe why the pieces need to be integrated and what is missing from conventional approaches. Describe the types of questions that can best be addressed by advanced modeling techniques. Provide real-world examples of cases in which advanced models have been successfully used to answer difficult forecasting or policy questions. Write this in such a way that it could be a stand-alone document and submit for review. Note: Start Task 1.3 immediately in conjunction with Part 2. A product is due by summer 2013. The budget for this task should be approximately $25,000.) Task 1.4. ( The What and When. The audience is modeling or planning managers.) Develop a technical roadmap, time frame, and risk management approach for migrating to disaggregate demand models/ time-sensitive network models that integrate with land use models. Discuss resource requirements, including staff, computational power, schedule, and data. This document should be clearly written with appropriate illustrations. (The budget for this task should be approximately $25,000) Task 1.5. ( The How. The audience is hands-on practitioners.) Write a section of the AB Primer focusing on concepts and algorithms for AB models. Recognize that the model must receive demographic inputs and provide travel patterns to a DTA network model. Describe options, tradeoffs, and factors that go into designing various components of activity-based models. Describe typical sources of data and how to process it for use in an AB model. Describe examples of transferability of models and parameters from one location to another that work around data limitations. Model design considerations include but are not limited to: 1.Representation of space (e.g., parcels, blocks, microzones, TAZs, continuous) 2.Representation of transportation network: oStreet network oTransit network oBicycle network oPedestrian network 3.Representation of population and employment (i.e., synthetic populations, models that evolve households and firms over time) 4.Representation of time 5.Representation of long-term and short-term travel choices 6.Model estimation techniques based on local survey data or use of borrowed parameters 7.Calibration 8.Validation 9.Feedback loops to and from the network and land use Consider which network models and data are needed in a particular application and at what level of detail. (The approximate budget for Task 5 is $100,000) Task 1.6. Submit a draft final AB Primer for review that includes all chapters. Task 1.7. Revise according to SHRP 2 comments and submit a final primer. Part 2 Tasks. Strategic Implementation Plan for SHRP 2 Travel Demand Forecasting Products. ( Note: The budget for Part 2 is $30,000 and a deliverable is expected by the summer of 2013.) Task 2.1. Identify successful implementations or implementation efforts in progress of AB models and dynamic networks. What is the migration path from old to new? Task 2.2. Identify how agencies that have begun to use AB models and dynamic networks have dealt with particular implementation issues. This implies dealing with barriers, but rather than enumerate barriers focus on strategies that have overcome barriers. Identify systemic issues that are bigger than any one agency. Focus on generic problems that are independent of software. Examples of implementation issues include: 1.Systemic issues a.Limited consultant capacity and consultant workforce development b.Lack of a long-term business model for some software products c.Availability of DTA models that can function efficiently at the regional level at useful fidelity d.Market fragmentation in DTA software e.AB models are largely tied to individual firms f.Methodologies for integrating AB Models and DTA software are just emerging and have very little practice behind them 2.Agency issues a.Limited staff capacity and workforce development b.Open source unsupported models vs proprietary supported models. Pros and cons. c.Computing resources d.Air quality conformity e.Disaggregate modeling of public transit f.New transit starts forecasting g.Transition issues Task 2.3 Prepare a strategic plan of action. The strategic plan should include the findings of Tasks 2.1 and 2.2 and strategies for moving forward. As noted above this should be clearly written but should not make recommendations. Rather it should suggest implementation strategies that could be effective. The decision about which strategies to apply will be decided by others. Submit the strategic plan for review. Task 2.4. Revise the strategic plan based on SHRP 2 review. Deliverables: 1.Task 1.2 Outline of the AB Primer 2.Task 1.3 Sections of the AB Primer for a decision-maker audience. Submit work in progress as well as final chapters. 3.Task 1.4 Sections of the roadmap for modeling and planning managers. Submit work in progress as well as final chapters. 4.Task 1.5 Sections of AB Primer for practitioners. Submit work in progress as well as final chapters. 5.Draft and Final AB Primer 6.Part 2 implementation strategy report Special Notes 1. Resource list: •FHWA-NHI-152054: "Introduction to Urban Travel demand Forecasting" 4 days http://www.nhi.fhwa.dot.gov/training/course_detail.aspx?num=FHWA-NHI-152054&topicnum=151 •FHWA TMIP Activity-Based Model Webinar Series (8 sessions in 2012). Slides, notes, and recorded sessions http://tmiponline.org/Clearinghouse/Subject-Category/Activity-based-modeling.aspx •DTA Primer, TRB Transportation Network Modeling Committee: http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/circulars/ec153.pdf •NCHRP Synthesis 406: Advanced Practices in Travel Forecasting http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_syn_403.pdf •FHWA webinar series on land use models. Slides, notes, and recorded sessions http://tmiponline.org/Clearinghouse/Subject-Category/Land-use.aspx •AMPO travel demand modeling resources: http://www.ampo.org/content/index.php?pid=98 •FHWA traffic analysis tools team: Guidebook on Dynamic Traffic Modeling. (focus on corridors and projects) In progress 2. The primary objective of C10 A&B is to make operational in two public agencies a dynamic integrated model-an integrated, advanced travel-demand model with a fine-grained, time-dependent network (integrated activities and networks). Both projects started with open source software and modified it as necessary to meet project objectives. The secondary objectives of C10 A&B are: (1) Produce a portable, transferrable, product, process, and sample data set that can be adapted for use elsewhere or used for research. (2) Incorporate SHRP 2 Capacity products from projects C04 (pricing) and C05 (operations) into the model capabilities. (3) Incorporate travel time reliability into the modeling capabilities. (4) Demonstrate the application of outputs of the integrated model to estimate greenhouse gas emissions using EPA's MOVES Model. (5) Demonstrate the dynamic integrated model set in a real-world environment. SHRP 2 Project C10 A is being conducted in partnership with the North Florida Transportation Planning Organization. In addition to the objectives described above, C10 A was amended to analyze whether the Jacksonville model parameters can be successfully transferred to Tampa. C10 A uses Daysim for the activity-based model and Transims for the DTA network model. C10 A is scheduled for completion in September 2012. Project C10 B is being conducted in partnership with the Sacramento Area Council of Governments. C10 B uses Daysim for the activity-based model and DynusT for the DTA network model. C10 B includes a schedule-based transit model, FastTrips. C10 B is scheduled for completion in December 2012. All software used in C10 A&B and upgrades made during the project are open source and available to anyone. At the completion of the projects all software, networks, and input data will be made available. Software code is available now, but a strategy for posting data and networks has not yet been developed. 3. The SHRP 2 program is very concerned about the quality of writing, because of the variety of audiences and varying levels of technical background. Assign a technical editor/task manager to Tasks 3, 4, and 5 in part 1. In the proposal, submit writing samples from each individual. During the project submit a short writing sample of each chapter early in its development. Describe the quality control you will exercise over the written document. Provide a schedule of Task l deliverables in your proposal 4: Proposers' teams should include professionals with experience implementing activity-based travel demand models, DTA network models or simulation, and land use models. The team should also include writers that can communicate with various audiences. Funds Available: The total project budget is $180,000. The budget for Part I is $150,000. Budget allocation guidelines are suggested by the ETG. •The budget for Task 1.3 should be approximately $25,000 •The budget for Task 1.4 should be approximately $25,000 •The budget for Task 5 should be approximately $100,000 The Budget for Part 2 is $30,000 Contract Time: Total project time: 14 months total-11 months for research and 3 months for product review and revision. Part 2 should be delivered within six months of the contract start date. Responsible Staff: Stephen Andrle, sandrle@nas.edu 202-334-2810 Authorization to Begin Work: January 2013, expected Proposals (20 single-bound copies) are due not later than 4:30 p.m. on August 28, 2012 This is a firm deadline, and extensions 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: Stephen Andrle Deputy 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 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. 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-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 Disadvantaged Business Enterprises 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 selection of the research contractor, and the contractor's adherence to its DBE plan will be monitored during the contract period. The "Research Team Builder" section of the SHRP 2 web site (http://www.trb.org/StrategicHighwayResearchProgram2SHRP2/Pages/Research_Team_Builder_177.aspx) 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 August 15, 2012, after which 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. Suggested features of 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). 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 will be 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_C46/listing.html)
- Record
- SN02806364-W 20120719/120718000926-4e81a2925d974b629491fc112dfc7dde (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 |