ATTENTION PROPOSERS: A Research Project Statement for ACRP Project 04-34 was released on December 22, 2022; no award was made. The purpose of this Research Project Statement is to re-announce this project. This solicitation is open to all proposers, including any agencies that responded to the earlier Research Project Statement. This Research Project Statement has been modified from the original statement: revisions were made to the Background, Objectives, Research Plan, and the Special Notes.

BACKGROUND

Aircraft rescue and firefighting (ARFF) services are crucial and required for the safe operation of Part 139 certificated airports. Many ARFF departments depend on passing knowledge and experience from leader to leader or firefighter to firefighter. While Federal Aviation Regulations and guidance focus on operating procedures, training requirements, and equipment requirements, airports could benefit from guidelines to develop and/or manage an ARFF department the includes training programs, leadership development, mentorship enhancment, etc. 

ARFF training requires access to specialized facilities and equipment for meeting regulatory requirements and a number of facilities and companies have been developed. Private operators provide facilities and mobile equipment, and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has funded several regional training centers. The equipment and training centers are inherently complicated and expensive to build, operate, and maintain. Many of these facilities were closed as costs outweighed revenue and FAA funding for upkeep was difficult to obtain. Additionally, environmental issues, including concerns about aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), which contains per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), have forced even more training centers to close and/or restrict the type of training they can provide. Due to these shortages, many ARFF departments must travel long distances to complete training. ARFF departments not only have to pay for the cost of the training facilities and/or equipment but must cover the cost of employee wages, travel, and additional cost to ensure adequate staffing at the airport. Finally, with the shrinking number of training facilities, there is a real concern that the closure of any of the remaining facilities could cause a training crisis for the industry.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this research are to:

1. Provide guidelines for U.S. airports to establish or maintain and improve existing operationally ready ARFF programs; and
2. Identify current and future needs and requirements to train and maintain the national ARFF workforce. 

For objective 1, the guidelines must, at a minimum, (a) address airport requirements for all ARFF indexes including index-specific guidance, (b) provide documentation resources for airport sponsors that meets or exceeds regulatory requirements, (c) provide a comprehensive review and database of current practices U.S. airports are using to meet regulatory requirements and maintain an operationally ready ARFF program, and (d) include an executive summary for airport executives and leadership, including an overview of ARFF regulatory requirements. As part of this objective, a complimentary WebResource that provides an overview of ARFF response and recommended training resources for mutual aid providers must be developed. The guidelines and WebResource, where appropriate, should address the following topics:

• Airport ownership models,
• ARFF department organizational structures,
• ARFF department leadership development,
• ARFF department costs and budget requirements,
• Staffing including continuity of operations planning,
• Non-ARFF resources and mutual aid providers,
• ARFF equipment including maintenance and testing,
• ARFF facilities,
• Draft training programs including initial and recurrent training,
• Record keeping and meeting regulatory inspection requirements (include templates that meet regulatory requirements), and
• Future ARFF response considerations due to new entrants to aviation and additional research recommendations.

For objective 2, inventory and assess current and recently closed ARFF training facilities and capabilities, including mobile training operators, and identify future needs and requirements for facilities, providers, and training personnel to train and maintain the national ARFF workforce that meets or exceeds regulatory requirements. Evaluate the impacts on the U.S. ARFF training industry of the recent closure of ARFF training facilities and identify and analyze trends that led to the current state of industry. Additionally, develop and document best practices for planning, approving, building, operating, maintaining, funding, managing environmental issues, and decommissioning ARFF training facilities. Ensure, at a minimum, there is:

• An evaluation of the impacts of the lack of funding and the funding resources for ARFF training facilities, 
• A discussion on training techniques for using different types of approved foam and extinguishing agents,
• A review of training advancements and technologies that could be better utilized to train ARFF staff (i.e., virtual reality, simulators, etc.),
• A review of international facility design, and 
• A needs analysis and strategies to fund future ARFF training facilities that consider ARFF department training budgets and needs. 

RESEARCH PLAN

The ACRP is seeking the insights of proposers on how best to achieve the research objectives. Proposers are asked to provide a detailed research plan for accomplishing the project 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. The work proposed must be divided into tasks and proposers must describe the work proposed in each task in detail. 

The research plan should include deliverables, for ACRP and panel review and approval, that include at a minimum:

For objective 1:

• A data collection and outreach plan that represents airports from all indexes, all FAA regions, a variety of airport ownership models and ARFF providers, cold and warm weather climates, general aviation (GA) airports, and airports without on-site ARFF coverage and are covered exclusively by mutual aid,
• A rough draft of the executive summary,
• A mock-up of the WebResource, and
• An interim report documenting the research done to date, an updated work plan, rough drafts of the templates, and an annotated outline of the guide.

For objective 2:

• A plan for the inventory and assessment process,
• A data collection plan for developing the ARFF training facilities best practices.  Make sure to include ARFF training facilities that have recently closed, and
• An interim report documenting the research done to date, an updated work plan, and an annotated outline of the guide.  

A single research plan should be developed that addresses both objectives. It should include, at a minimum, checkpoints with the ACRP panel:

• A kick-off web meeting to be held within 1 month of the Notice to Proceed,
• A web meeting to review and approve the data collection and outreach plans for both objectives,
• One face-to-face interim deliverable review meeting, and  
• Web meetings tied to the panel review and ACRP approval of other interim deliverables deemed appropriate.

The final deliverables will include: 

• The guidelines for U.S. airports to maintain and improve existing operationally ready ARFF programs or establish a new operationally ready ARFF program,
• WebResource,
• Objective 2 ARFF training facility report,
• A Final Report documenting the entire research effort and results,
• A Summary of Key Findings (see Special Note O), 
• A Further Recommended Research Memo (see Special Note P), and
• A technical memo titled, “Implementation of Research Findings and Products” (see Special Note N).

Note: Following receipt of the draft final deliverables, there should be 3 months for ACRP review and comments and for contractor preparation of the final deliverables. For budgeting purposes, proposers should assume that ACRP will provide access to web-enabled teleconference services. ACRP will pay panel members’ travel costs for the face-to-face interim meeting. Proposers should assume that the meeting will be held in Washington, DC

SPECIAL NOTES 

A. As part of your proposal, please discuss all possible regulatory requirements an ARFF department may have to comply with. 

B. As part of your proposal, please include a table that identifies possible stakeholders that could be included in the data collection plan for both objectives 1 and 2 and the justification for including them.

C. Please deliver the interim reports for both objectives at the same time. 

D. CRP’s WebResources multi-site is hosted within an open-source content management system called WordPress in Amazon Web Services using an Ubuntu operating system. CRP manages two instances of WebResources (1) UAT used for development and review, and (2) PROD is CRP’s live production site. A list of approved WordPress plug-ins can be found here: https://crp.trb.org/approved-plugins/. WordPress plug-ins not listed in the approved list can be evaluated, but may not be approved. Contractor is responsible for lifetime subscription (if available) costs of new plug-ins, and must transfer the license to CRPs to ensure that the functionality from the plug-in will continue to operate correctly in the future. The selected contractor will be working within the UAT site for all updates.

E. Researchers should consider the limitations of written survey questionnaires and the impacts of “survey fatigue” on our stakeholders. In an effort to ensure an adequate response rate and collection of information, proposers may consider the use of focus groups, Internet/web-based technologies, social networking sites, and industry conferences or other techniques that may be appropriate.

F. The Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals for the Transportation Research Board’s Cooperative Research Programs were revised in May 2022. Please take note of the new and revised text which is highlighted in yellow.

G. Proposals must be submitted as a single PDF file with a maximum file size of 10 MB. The PDF must be formatted for standard 8 ½” X 11” paper, and the entire proposal must not exceed 60 pages (according to the page count displayed in the PDF). Proposals that do not meet these requirements will be rejected. For other requirements, refer to chapter V of the instructions.

H. The Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals for the Transportation Research Board’s Cooperative Research Programs have been modified to include a revised policy and instructions for disclosing Investigator Conflict of Interest. For more information, refer to chapter IV of the instructions. A detailed definition and examples can be found in the CRP Conflict of Interest Policy for Contractors. The proposer recommended by the project panel will be required to submit an Investigator Conflict of Interest and Disclosure Form as a prerequisite for contract negotiations.

I. Proposals will be rejected if any of the proposed research team members work for organizations represented on the project panel. The panel roster for this project can be found at https://www.mytrb.org/OnlineDirectory/Committee/Details/6818. Proposers may not contact panel members directly; this roster is provided solely for the purpose of avoiding potential conflicts of interest.

J. Proprietary Products - If any proprietary products are to be used or tested in the project, please refer to Item 6 in the Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals.

K. Proposals are evaluated by the ACRP staff and project panels consisting of individuals collectively knowledgeable in the problem area. The project panel will recommend their first choice proposal considering the following factors: (1) the proposer's demonstrated understanding of the problem; (2) the merit of the proposed research approach and experiment design; (3) the experience, qualifications, and objectivity of the research team in the same or closely related problem area; (4) the plan for ensuring application of results; (5) how the proposer approaches inclusion and diversity in the composition of their team and research approach, including participation by certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprises; and, if relevant, (6) the adequacy of the facilities. A recommendation by the project panel is not a guarantee of a contract. The National Academy of Sciences (NAS - the contracting authority for the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine) will conduct an internal due diligence review and risk assessment of the panel’s recommended proposal before contract negotiations continue. 

Note: The proposer's approach to inclusion and diversity as well as participation by Disadvantaged Business Enterprises should be incorporated in Item 11 of the proposal.

L. Copyrights - All data, written materials, computer software, graphic and photographic images, and other information prepared under the contract and the copyrights therein shall be owned by the National Academy of Sciences. The contractor and subcontractors will be able to publish this material for non-commercial purposes, for internal use, or to further academic research or studies with permission from TRB Cooperative Research Programs. The contractor and subcontractors will not be allowed to sell the project material without prior approval by the National Academy of Sciences. By signing a contract with the National Academy of Sciences, contractors accept legal responsibility for any copyright infringement that may exist in work done for TRB. Contractors are therefore responsible for obtaining all necessary permissions for use of copyrighted material in TRB's Cooperative Research Programs publications. For guidance on TRB's policies on using copyrighted material please consult Section 5.4, "Use of Copyrighted Material," in the Procedural Manual for Contractors.

M. Proposals should include a task-by-task breakdown of labor hours for each staff member as shown in Figure 4 in the Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals. Proposals also should include a breakdown of all costs (e.g., wages, indirect costs, travel, materials, and total) for each task using Figures 5 and 6 in the brochure. Please note that TRB Cooperative Research Program subawards (selected proposers are considered subawards to the National Academy of Sciences, the parent organization of TRB) must comply with 2 CFR 200 – Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. These requirements include a provision that proposers without a "federally" Negotiated Indirect Costs Rate Agreement (NICRA) shall be subject to a maximum allowable indirect rate of 10% of Modified Total Direct Costs. Modified Total Direct Costs include all salaries and wages, applicable fringe benefits, materials and supplies, services, travel, and up to the first $25,000 of each lower tier subaward and subcontract. Modified Total Direct Costs exclude equipment, capital expenditures, charges for patient care, rental costs, tuition remission, scholarships and fellowships, participant support costs and the portion of each lower tier subaward and subcontract in excess of $25,000.

N. The technical memorandum titled, “Implementation of Research Findings and Products” should provide: (a) recommended tactics to facilitate implementation; (b) possible institutions/partners and their potential implementation role; (c) potential impediments to successful implementation; (d) metrics to measure extent of product use and benefit; (e) related FAA guidance; and (f) appendices as needed. An annotated template for the memorandum is found here: https://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/acrp/ACRP_Implementation_TechMemo_Template_2019.pdf.

O. The Summary of Key Findings will be a stand-alone document. It should: (a) convey the most pertinent and applicable results of the project’s research; (b) be geared toward the airport industry practitioner while minimizing technical language; (c) present results using text and graphics as appropriate; and (d) encourage readers to explore the primary project deliverables. The Summary of Key Findings should be limited to no more than 4 pages.

P. The Further Recommended Research Memo will be a stand-alone document. It should: (a) identify logical follow-on research that would benefit the industry yet was beyond the original scope and budget of the project; (b) describe how the proposed follow-on research relates to ACRP’s research roadmaps, if applicable; and (c) for the highest priority research needs, include research ideas that could be submitted as ACRP problem statements.

Q. If the team proposes a Principal Investigator who is not an employee of the Prime Contractor, or if the Prime Contractor is proposed to conduct less than 50% of the total effort (by time or budget), then section five of the proposal should include: (1) a justification of why this approach is appropriate, and (2) a description of how the Prime Contractor will ensure adequate communication and coordination with their Subcontractors throughout the project.

R. All budget information should be suitable for printing on 8½″ x 11″ paper. If a budget page cannot fit on a single 8½″ x 11″ page, it should be split over multiple pages. Proposers must use the Excel templates provided in the Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals for the Transportation Research Board’s Cooperative Research Programs.