BACKGROUND

In general, carriers and drivers operating commercial motor vehicles must comply with federal hours of service (HOS) regulations, which specify the maximum amount of time drivers are permitted to be on duty, as well as the number and length of rest periods, to help ensure drivers stay awake and alert. Truck parking areas provide legal and safe facilities for drivers to get adequate rest to comply with federal HOS regulations. Truck parking also refers to staging areas, which are the pickup and delivery windows at facilities, and to emergency truck parking areas, which are used during disruptive events. The United States Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) has a public database of truck parking facilities, and states have truck parking information in their state freight plans.

Truck parking plays a vital role in critical supply chains in the freight industry, which rely on interconnected systems, resources, and processes essential for the efficient and reliable movement of goods across local, national, and international markets. Truck parking shortages in critical supply chains have been widely documented. When adequate truck parking isn’t available, truck drivers may park on the shoulders and ramps of highways, in areas that may not be safe. 

State departments of transportation (DOTs) have limited construction, operations, and maintenance funds for truck parking areas, and research is needed to help them as they plan for and manage authorized truck parking areas.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this research is to develop a framework to evaluate authorized truck parking areas in the context of critical supply chains, safety, and resilience for decision-makers who develop and manage those truck parking areas. 

At a minimum, the evaluation framework shall consider:

• A variety of multimodal critical supply chains and a variety of commodities and flow types
• Funding mechanisms for constructions, operations, and maintenance
• Innovations (including emerging technologies and new developments in land use and funding) and opportunities (such as land development)
• Intrastate and multistate freight corridors in rural, urban, and suburban contexts
• Prioritization and strategic planning for current and future truck parking demand (including the allocation of resources, access to facilities, and the number of spaces in both existing and new areas)
• Design of parking area (including circular versus single point of entry and lighting) and security in and near the parking area
• How to access and assess inventories of truck parking areas (including amenities and capacity), considering how often the data is updated and if the data provides the information needed for decision-making
• Data availability
• Truck loads that meet size and weight limits, as well as oversize and overweight truck loads
• An analysis of barriers and how to overcome them (including federal, state, and local regulatory constraints)
• Safety (including crashes involving trucks and the personal safety of the truck driver)
• Resilience, which is the ability to sustain critical supply chains during and after a disruptive event

At a minimum, the framework shall include the following criteria to evaluate truck parking areas:

• Measures of success
• Environmental aspects
• Freight system fluidity, which is the performance of the supply chain, including the reliability of travel time and the cost of freight
• Emerging trends and industry conditions (such as alternative fuels, changes in demand for truck parking and services, changes that affect the supply of trucks and truck services, and contextual changes in technology, public goals, and economic development)
• Operations and maintenance costs of public facilities
• Application factors (such as land availability, land ownership, proximity to truck routes, and utilities)
• Multicriteria prioritization (such as crash data, cost, demand, site size, and configuration)

The primary audience for the evaluation framework is decision-makers responsible for truck parking areas both in public agencies (including state DOT leadership) and in private entities. The evaluation framework shall be tested with the primary audience as well as:

• Other state DOT staff
• State legislatures
• Law enforcement, emergency management, and economic development agencies
• Officials from cities, counties, and metropolitan planning organizations
• Port, airport, and turnpike authorities
• Freight community (including truck drivers)
• State public-private partnership offices and private sector partners (including the technology sector and developers for truck parking areas)
• Other relevant stakeholders

RESEARCH PLAN

Proposers are asked to develop and present a detailed research plan for accomplishing the project objective. The work proposed must be divided into tasks and proposers must describe the work proposed in each task. Proposers are expected to present a research plan that can realistically be accomplished within the constraints of available funds and contract time. Proposals shall (1) present the proposer’s current thinking in sufficient detail to demonstrate their understanding of the topic and issues and the soundness of their approach to meeting the research objectives, (2) identify data and data sources that may be used to undertake this research, and (3) propose the format(s) for the final research product(s), which must include:

• An interim report and meeting with the NCHRP project panel. The interim report shall contain (1) analyses and results of completed tasks, (2) a detailed plan and schedule for the remaining research tasks, (3) an annotated outline of each of the final research product(s), and (4) strategies for dissemination and implementation of the final research deliverables. The panel meeting will take place after the panel review of the interim report. The interim report and panel meeting shall occur after the expenditure of no more than 40 percent of the project budget.
• Final deliverables. The final deliverables shall include an evaluation framework and a research report that documents the research process and contains an analysis of barriers and how to overcome them (including federal, state, and local regulatory constraints), examples of effective practices, and a glossary of terms related to truck parking.
• A PowerPoint presentation with presenter’s notes, suitable for a webinar.
• A technical memorandum titled “Implementation of Research Findings and Products” (see Special Note L).

Note: Following receipt of the draft final deliverables, the remaining 3 months shall be for NCHRP review and comment and for research agency preparation of the final deliverables.

SPECIAL NOTES

A. This research shall not develop a new inventory of truck parking spaces; instead, the research project shall use existing publicly available databases from the U.S. DOT, recent information from state freight plans, and other sources.

B. The NCHRP encourages individuals with practical and demonstrated expertise in truck parking to be on the research team.

C. The Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals for the Transportation Research Board’s Cooperative Research Programs were revised in May 2024. Please take note of the new and revised text which is highlighted in yellow.

D. 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.

E. 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.

F. 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/7056. Proposers may not contact panel members directly; this roster is provided solely for the purpose of avoiding potential conflicts of interest.

G. 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.

H. Proposals are evaluated by the NCHRP 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.

I. 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.

J. The text of the final deliverable is expected to be publication-ready when it is submitted. It is strongly recommended that the research team include the expertise of a technical editor as early in the project timeline as possible. See Appendix F of the Procedural Manual for Contractors Conducting Research in the Transportation Research Board’s Cooperative Research Program for technical editing standards expected in final deliverables.

K. 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.

L. The required technical memorandum titled “Implementation of Research Findings and Products” should (a) provide recommendations on how to best put the research findings/products into practice; (b) identify possible institutions that might take leadership in applying the research findings/products; (c) identify issues affecting potential implementation of the findings/products and recommend possible actions to address these issues; and (d) recommend methods of identifying and measuring the impacts associated with implementation of the findings/products. Implementation of these recommendations is not part of the research project and, if warranted, details of these actions will be developed and implemented in future efforts.

The research team will be expected to provide input to an implementation team consisting of panel members, AASHTO committee members, the NCHRP Implementation Coordinator, and others in order to meet the goals of NCHRP Active Implementation: Moving Research into Practice, available at http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/docs/NCHRP_ActiveImplementation.pdf

M. 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.

N. 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.

O. The National Academies have an ethical and legal obligation to provide proper attribution whenever material from other sources is included in its reports, online postings, and other publications and products. TRB will review all Cooperative Research Programs draft final deliverables using the software iThenticate for potential plagiarism. If plagiarized text appears in the draft final deliverable, the research team will be required to make revisions and the opportunity to submit future proposals may be affected.