SOLICITATION NOTICE
A -- Second SHRP 2 Freight Modeling and Data Innovation Symposium
- 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
- C43
- Archive Date
- 9/12/2012
- Point of Contact
- David Plazak, Phone: 202-334-1834, Stephen Andrle, Phone: 202-334-2810
- E-Mail Address
-
dplazak@nas.edu, sandrle@nas.edu
(dplazak@nas.edu, sandrle@nas.edu)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- SHRP 2 Request for Proposals Focus Area: Capacity Project Number: C43 Project Title: Second SHRP 2 Freight Modeling and Data Innovation Symposium Release Date: July 17, 2012 Proposal Due Date: August 28, 2012 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 has received approximately $170 million in funding with total program duration of 9 years, ending in 2015. Additional information about SHRP 2 can be found on the program's Web site at "http://www.trb.org/shrp" www.trb.org/shrp2. Capacity Focus Area The charge from Congress to SHRP 2 Capacity 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 Freight demand makes up a large and growing proportion of total travel demand; freight VMT growth is outpacing passenger VMT growth. Logistics costs now make up around 10 percent of the overall US economy. Freight transport activity is fundamentally different from passenger travel activity. One of three fundamental differences is that passenger travel decisions ultimately rest with the driver while freight transport decisions are usually made to meet the specific needs of a shipper or receiver and will often be subject to carrier company policy. An individual passenger car driver may quickly decide on his or her own to re-route around an incident or recurrent traffic jam, to forgo or postpone a trip, to shift modes, or to pay a variable congestion toll; in the freight realm, such decisions are much more complex in that customers may have tight delivery time windows or carriers may have negotiated fixed-cost agreements. Further, there are distinct differences within the highway freight transportation marketplace (e.g. between low-value commodities and high-value commodities and between short-haul urban freight/deliveries and intercity trucking). In general, our understanding of freight demand and how it can be effectively modeled at a detailed level is in a primitive state when compared with modeling of passenger travel. Many of our freight demand modeling tools have evolved from passenger demand modeling tools and it has become very clear that such adaptation has many fundamental drawbacks. Freight demand is very different from passenger demand, yet we continue to try to model in similar ways because we do not have more appropriate tools. SHRP 2 research project C20 (now completed with an approved report in the publication process) developed a strategic plan for dramatically improving the state of freight demand modeling and data quality. C20 identified gaps and needs and prepared a future research agenda built around the topics of knowledge, data, modeling, and visualization. The C20 research identified strategic research initiatives (SRIs) required to achieve seven strategic objectives. The C20 strategic plan SRI's include: •SRI A - Determine the freight and logistics knowledge and skill requirements for decision-makers and technical personnel. •SRI B - Establish techniques and standards practices to validate freight forecasts. •SRI C - Establish modeling approaches for "behavior-based" freight movement. •SRI D - Develop methods that predict mode shift and highway capacity implications of various "what if" scenarios. •SRI E - Develop a range of freight forecasting methods/tools that address decision-making needs and that can be applied at all levels (national, regional, state, MPO, municipal. •SRI F - Develop robust tools for freight cost analyses that go beyond financial to the full range of benefits, costs, and externalities. •SRI G - Establish analytical approaches that describe how elements of the freight transportation system operate, perform, and impact the larger overall transportation system. •SRI H - Determine how economic, demographic, and other factors/conditions drive freight patterns and characteristics. •SRI I - Develop freight data sources for application at sub-regional levels. •SRI J - Establish, pool, and standardize a portfolio of core freight data sources/sets that support planning, programming, and project prioritization. •SRI K - Develop procedures for applying freight forecasting to the design of transportation infrastructure such as pavement and bridges. •SRI L - Advance research to effectively integrate logistics practices (private sector) with transportation policy, planning, and programming (public sector). •SRI M - Develop visualization tools for freight planning and modeling through a two-pronged approach of discovery and addressing known decision-making needs. One of the work tasks within the completed SHRP 2 C20 project was an "Innovations in Freight Modeling and Data Symposium", held near the Dulles International Airport in the fall of 2010. This day-and-a-half event brought together innovators in freight data collection and freight demand modeling from around the world. The level of participant engagement in this symposium was high and that allowed the C20 project research team to understand the sorts of innovative research activities that were going on around the world at the time of the event. Objective of Project C43 The primary objective of project C43 is to plan, convene, and document a second Innovations Symposium for freight modeling and data tentatively to be held in the fall of 2013 in the Washington, DC area. SHRP 2 is seeking a contractor team that can handle all aspects of planning, arranging, hosting, and documenting a symposium. It is anticipated that the 2013 symposium would be about 1.5 days long, similar in length to the 2010 event. This event is intended to continue to advance the implementation of the strategic plan that resulted from the SHRP 2 C20 project. The 2010 Symposium was held as an experimental event and proved popular with the participants. The 2010 event was held primarily to gather information on the state of freight data collection and modeling and to identify innovators in freight forecasting. The 2013 event should also be designed to showcase and encourage sharing of innovations, but also to help to begin organizing a community of practice in freight data, modeling, and visualization, which will be needed if freight demand forecasting practice is to move forward more rapidly and more productively in the next decade. In carrying out the C20 project 2010 Symposium, the contractor team devised a way to award a cash prize for the best submitted paper/publication. (Prize money cannot come directly out of the project budget.) Proposing teams will need to plan on seeking outside sponsorship to allow such a prize or prizes to be offered as part of the 2013 symposium. Sponsors might come from a variety of sources, including the private sector companies involved in logistics and supply chain management or freight-oriented university research centers. Proposals should indicate preliminary thoughts on what sponsorship sources might be feasible and how they would be sought out. Ideally, sponsors will have a high level of interest in encouraging innovation in freight demand modeling and innovation in the future and an interest in forming a lasting public/private partnership for advancing the state of the practice. Since the SHRP 2 program will be ending in March 2015, it will not be possible for the current model of support for the symposium to be continued. Proposers should also give careful consideration to how a series of periodic symposia might be sponsored, organized, and carried out in the future in order to help support advancement of the state of the practice of freight demand modeling and the data required to support freight analysis and modeling. In developing this request for proposals (RFP), the C43 Expert Task Group (ETG) has indicated that it would like to broadly encourage innovation in freight demand modeling and data. However, the group also suggested a set of important issues and problems that could serve as the focus for the fall 2013 symposium. These are: 1.What can public sector freight modelers learn from private supply chain modelers? What techniques might be transferable? 2.Building consideration of the impacts of limited future funding for making infrastructure improvements into freight demand modeling. 3.How demand models represent supply chain reliability and the value of reliability of freight 4.Modeling of risks and incorporating consideration of potential supply chain disruptions and risk management into freight modeling. 5.Modeling of supply chain adaptation to the availability of larger ocean vessels, especially on the East Coast of the United States. 6.Urban goods movement forecasting and supply chain modeling. 7.Integrating economic development and land use considerations into freight demand modeling. 8.Using private supply chain data for public sector freight analysis and modeling. The 2010 innovation symposium papers and presentations primarily focused on applied research in freight modeling and on innovative methods for freight data collection. Paper submissions and presentations were predominantly made by public sector agencies (domestic and international) and university researchers. For 2013, the C43 ETG has indicated it would also like to see additional emphasis on: 1.Basic research into new approaches to freight demand modeling, including novel mathematical formulations and calibration algorithms. 2.Modeling and analytical techniques being used in the private supply chain management and optimization that might be transferable to or helpful to the public sector. 3.The use of visualization techniques in freight demand modeling and analysis. 4.Involving more private sector participants in the symposium. There is a private sector community in freight modeling that should be represented at in this event. The intent of the C43 ETG is that the 2013 symposium attract additional participants beyond the 45 or so that attended the original experimental event held in 2010, particularly from the private sector. On the other hand, the ETG encourages proposers to find ways to retain the high level of engagement that occurred at the original event. Almost all the attendees participated as presenters, judges, or in discussions following paper presentations. The C43 ETG recognizes that greater involvement of the private sector will not be easily accomplished since private shippers and carriers invariably view freight infrastructure and planning very differently. Private sector supply chain creation accepts publicly provided infrastructure "as is" and works to forge the best possible links between suppliers and customers. Public infrastructure providers take a much longer-term view and must balance the needs of freight vehicles with passenger vehicles as well as community and environmental considerations. Thus, modeling tools and data used by the private and public sectors are quite different. There may be some areas where the modeling and data interests of the private and public sectors intersect and those are the places where effort should be concentrated in terms of involving the private sector in the innovation symposium. Selection Criteria The standard SHRP 2 selection criteria apply ( see General Note 1 ). In summary, these are: understanding of the problem, quality of the proposal, general experience and qualifications of the research team, a plan for participation by disadvantaged businesses, and adequacy of facilities (if special facilities are needed). In addition, the following criteria will also be applied: 1.Subject matter expertise sufficient to support the planning and implementation of the 2013 innovation symposium. 2.Experience in organizing and implementing similar research symposia. 3.Creativity with regard to planning and organizing the symposium, especially with respect to attracting innovative participants from around the world and sponsors for a paper/presentation award. Proposal Content The proposal should explain WHAT is to be done, WHO is going to do it, and WHEN it is going to be done. A thorough but succinct proposal will be appreciated by the reviewers. 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): The proposal must use a task structure to describe the approach and must provide an estimate for each task in the Budget section. (See Item 11, section IV of the Manual for Conducting Research and Preparing Proposals for SHRP 2 [http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/shrp2/PreparingSHRP2Reports.pdf] for guidance) A task structure for project C43 could look something like this. Proposers are free use a task structure suitable to the project, but the first task and the last three tasks listed here are required. 1.Required: Following approval to proceed, prepare an amplified work plan for the C43 project 2.Develop a draft working agenda for the symposium, which will undergo revision during the planning phase of the project 3.Develop a draft strategy for attracting outside sponsorship (principally to support a paper/presentation prize or prizes) 4.Develop a draft marketing strategy for the symposium, which should give consideration to the ideal size of the event in terms of participants and tracks 5.Develop a draft participant invitation database and other draft marketing tactics and materials 6.Develop a working draft logistical plan for the symposium, including a proposed symposium location and hosting budget 7.Develop a draft plan for judging the symposium papers/presentations, which should include consideration of how papers and presentations contribute to the advancement of freight demand modeling and data 8.Develop a draft evaluation plan for the symposium indicating how success should be measured 9.Hold a series of web meetings for the C43 Technical Expert Task Group (TETG) to allow them to provide input and guidance for tasks 2 through 8 above 10.Finalize the symposium planning, including the agenda, the marketing strategy, the participant invitation database, the logistical plan, and the paper/presentation judging plan 11.Implement the above plans and hold the symposium (with a target date in the fall of 2013) 12. Manage invitational travel reimbursements for eligible presenters, participants, and judges 13.Prepare a summary of participant evaluations of the symposium and include these in an evaluation report 14.Prepare an annotated electronic compendium of symposium papers and presentations 15.Prepare a white paper that includes concepts for how the symposium might be continued following the conclusion of the SHRP 2 program in March 2015, including any potential long-term sponsorship opportunities that might have been identified during the course of the project 16.Required: Prepare a comprehensive draft final report for the C43 project based on SHRP 2 report preparation guidance 17.Required: Hold a web meeting to allow the C43 TETG to provide input on the compendium, evaluation summary, and draft final report 18.Required: Incorporate C43 TETG comments into a final report on the symposium Proposers should consult the special notes section below for additional information about the original 2010 symposium and the SHRP 2 C20 project. Suggested Deliverables 1.Amplified work plan for the C43 project 2.A draft, working agenda for the symposium 3.A draft marketing strategy with suggested marketing tactics and marketing materials 4.A draft participant invitation database for the symposium 5.A draft sponsorship strategy for the symposium to allow for awarding a paper prize 6.A draft logistical plan for the symposium 7.A plan for judging symposium papers and presentations 8.A draft event evaluation report, including a summary of participant evaluations for the symposium 9.Final materials (based on drafts 2-8 above and feedback from the C43 TETG) 10.Carry out the marketing plan and hold the symposium 11.A compendium of papers and presentations given at the symposium, including a synopsis of ideas put forward, a trend analysis, and any correlation of these ideas and trends to the strategic plan developed from the 2010 freight data symposium. See Special Note regarding access to the strategic plan and the final report. 12.A draft white paper containing concepts for how the symposium might be continued after SHRP 2 program support is no longer available 13.A comprehensive draft final report on the C43 project, including the synopsis, trend analysis, and strategic plan correlations included in the compendium of papers and presentations. 14.A final report incorporating the comments from the C43 Technical Expert Task Group Special Notes A record of the initial SHRP 2 Project C20 Innovations in Freight Modeling and Data Symposium is available at: http://www.freightplanning.com/ This site includes the 2010 symposium program, a list of the papers and presenters, the papers and presentations where available, and a summary of the participant comments on the symposium from the participant evaluation. Other reference materials useful to understanding the context of this project are on the SHRP 2 website at: http://www.trb.org/StrategicHighwayResearchProgram2SHRP2/Pages/RFP_C43_Resources_and_Reference_Material_625.aspx This page includes: The call for papers from the 2010 symposium A pre-publication version of the SHRP 2 C20 Strategic Plan A report of a workshop held in January 2012 on the implementation of the C20 plan. Funds Available: $200,000.00 total budget. It is expected that the selected contractor team would expend roughly half of these funds on planning, organizing, holding, and documenting the symposium and half the funds to support invitational travel for symposium participants. Invitational travel support must follow National Academies travel policies and any travel policies and restrictions that apply to SHRP 2 program funds. Please note that these funds cannot be used as prize money for winning papers and presentations. The contractor will need to seek out sponsors and obtain funding from them for this purpose. It will be the contractor's responsibility to pay for all costs associated with the symposium, including any meals, refreshments, meeting room costs, audio-visual costs, and printing costs. Contract Period: 12 months for the entire project. SHRP 2 ends in March 2015. Our goal is to have all final deliverables in hand at least one year before this termination date to allow for editing and publication of products. This contract period allows for completion of the C43 project within that time window. Three months should be allowed for review of the draft and delivery of the final report. Responsible Staff: David Plazak, dplazak@nas.edu, 202-334-1834 Authorization to Begin Work: March 1, 2013, estimated. Proposals (20 single-bound copies) are due not later than 4:30 p.m. Eastern Time on August 28, 2012 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: David Plazak 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 Liability 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. The Liability Statement is Figure 1 in the Manual for Conducting Research and Preparing Proposals for SHRP 2 (http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/shrp2/PreparingSHRP2Reports.pdf) (see General Note 4). Here is a printable version of the SHRP 2 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/C43/listing.html)
- Record
- SN02806365-W 20120719/120718000928-25ae81573e47705df6f0c71718904111 (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 |