BACKGROUND 

Many state departments of transportation (DOTs) plan and invest resources to improve their ability to mitigate, prepare for, and respond to emergencies; combat climate change; and build transportation systems that provide equitable services, improve multimodal access, and support long‐term resilience.

Current technology advances and deployments of connected and automated vehicle (CAV) technologies have the promise of significant system safety, operational improvements and equity and mobility opportunities to address current, unmet needs and support resiliency goals. However, available solutions and applications also pose challenges for infrastructure owners and operators (IOOs) who seek guidance as the learning curve is steep, risk tolerance is low, public perception is skeptical, and resources are constrained in the post‐COVID-19 era. Organizational readiness for automated solutions is becoming paramount and pressing. 

Many unknowns remain for CAV. These include:  the path and timeline to deployment is unclear; the CAV industry continues to evolve, consolidate, and change. While IOOs have limited resources, they are urged to embrace and deploy technologies. The results of this proposed peer exchange are to help IOOs to implement available technologies while achieving the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) policy goals and related strategies.  https://mobility.transportation.org/wp‐content/uploads/sites/65/2021/10/CAV‐Policy‐Principles‐v4‐press.pdf

OBJECTIVE 

The objective of this project is to conduct an in-person peer exchange and develop a document that identifies a set of best practices and lessons learned through the peer exchange to help inform DOTs in making practical and feasible technology investment and policy decisions.

TASKS 

NCHRP is looking for a contractor to convene, facilitate, and document an in-person peer exchange that maximizes representation from state DOTs, prioritizing experienced practitioners involved in leading their CAV programs. The in-person peer exchange will allow for the specific exchange of information between states in a focused and candid setting with the goal to crystallize and identify critical best practice information and decision support needed by many states. NCHRP envisions that the peer exchange will be between one to two days in duration. 

Using the peer exchange as the basis, the contractor must compile a list of lessons learned that will enhance DOTs’ understanding of how to approach stakeholders, areas, and disciplines involved in CAV testing, monitoring, deployments, and applications. The list should cover planning, financing, programming, policy development, risk management and resiliency, safety management, equity analysis, infrastructure readiness, data sharing and system operation and maintenance under urban and rural context. The peer exchange’s potential learning objectives may include, but not limited to:

• Programmatic approaches to administration of CAV programs, policy framework(s), and or legislative changes that were required;

• Overall project deployment, metrics for testing, and results achieved;

• Funding mechanisms, justifications, and financing models applied;

• Industry collaboration and partnership models used;

• Specific infrastructure readiness needs (physical or digital) required to enable pilots, and deployments;

• Data sharing agreements and data exchange platforms used;

• System performance impacts and specific system metrics/measurements used for the respective CAV program, pilot, and deployment;

• State CAV program organization and readiness (exploring organizational approaches, including success metrics identified);

• Safety and risk management approaches;

• Equity impact analysis and engagement methods employed;

• Scalability and commercialization potential;

• Use of application related dashboards;

• Use of Near‐Miss Identification Safety Systems;

• Public opinion, acceptance, and feedback received, education and outreach approaches used;

• Workforce and organizational readiness needs required;

• Governance approaches for CAV programs and testing; and

• Other lessons learned and insights gained.

Proposers should be aware of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Roadway Automated Driving Systems Integration Concept of Operations for Transportation Agencies: Version 1  (https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop22052/fhwahop22052.pdf) and are welcome to consider current IOO deployment use cases such as, but not limited to:

• Automated freight and package delivery – long-haul freight, local freight, home and package delivery, truck platooning (Texas DOT, Pennsylvania DOT, Florida DOT, Ohio DOT, Minnesota DOT);

• Automated transit – fixed-route, on-demand and microtransit, low-speed shuttles (California DOT, Pennsylvania DOT, Florida DOT, Ohio DOT, Minnesota DOT, Connecticut DOT, North Carolina DOT);

• Automated work zone operations (Colorado DOT, Missouri DOT, Washington State DOT);

• Automated agency operations – agency fleets (Colorado DOT, Missouri DOT, Washington State DOT);

• Automated individual travel and commuting – passenger vehicle ADS including fleets and privately owned broadband deployments (Utah DOT, North Carolina DOT);

• Dedicated short-range communication (DSRC) / connected vehicles to everything (CV2X) deployments (Michigan DOT, Utah DOT, Georgia DOT, Florida DOT); and

• Data exchange platforms/agreements (Colorado DOT, Wyoming DOT). 

The work proposed must be divided into tasks and/or phases. Proposers must describe the work proposed in each phase and task in detail. The research plan should build in appropriate checkpoints with the NCHRP project panel including, at a minimum, (1) a kick-off teleconference meeting to be held within 1 month of the contract’s execution date and (2) at least one face-to-face interim deliverable review meeting as well as web-enabled teleconferences tied to panel review and/or NCHRP approval of interim deliverables. Costs for the face-to-face meeting venue and travel costs for NCHRP panel members to attend the meeting will be paid separately by NCHRP.

Anticipated activities and deliverables include but not limited to: 

• Advance briefing materials for the peer exchange,
• Facilitation plans and detailed agendas for the event,
• Logistical, catering, and meeting services prior to and during the event (event location is to be determined, but is encouraged to be geographically centralized in the United States to maximize participation) The proposer may explore opportunities to coordinate with other organizations to leverage existing resources that may maximize state DOT attendance and participation, and
• Skillful facilitation.  

·         A final report that documents identified best practices based on lessons learned provided by peer exchange participants, it shall include at the minimum:

• A summary of the event;
• A list of recommended action items; 
• Identified opportunities to catalyze alignment between various organizations (coalitions, associations, metropolitan planning organization (MPO), etc.) to advance the lessons learned;
• A well-organized output deliverable (to be defined by the proposer) that operationalizes the collective input derived from the information at the peer exchange that can guide state DOTs in the future at a use case or learning objective level; and
• A stand-alone technical memorandum titled “Implementation of Research Findings and Products.”  

 STATUS: Research in progress.