BACKGROUND

Due to lithium-ion battery fires, electric vehicles (EVs) present unique challenges in traffic incident management (TIM) and emergency management (EM). TIM is a planned and coordinated multidisciplinary process aimed at detecting, responding to, and clearing traffic incidents while restoring traffic flow as safely and quickly as possible. In TIM, many state departments of transportation (DOTs) have safety service patrols (SSPs) that offer services ranging from courtesy patrols, which provide simple motorist assistance, to more advanced services involving aggressive roadway clearance of disabled or wrecked vehicles. EM is a programmatic activity with a comprehensive approach to the full cycle of prevention, protection, mitigation, response, and recovery of all hazards (including natural and manmade disasters), accidental disruptions, and other emergencies. 

State DOTs encounter EV fires in both TIM and EM situations. During an SSP response, an EV fire may influence whether the vehicle is pushed, pulled, dragged, or driven. Safety concerns arise regarding the personal protective equipment used for responding to EV fires, as well as considerations for transporting or storing EVs after a fire. Additionally, the risks posed by lithium-ion battery fires affect state DOTs as they electrify their fleets and store the vehicles. EV fires can affect infrastructure (e.g., pavement and bridges), have environmental impacts, and sometimes require warning people nearby. EM situations can become cascading events that make responding to EV fires more difficult (e.g., EV fires during earthquakes, tornadoes, and hurricanes). Further, EV fires require different considerations depending on whether they occur in urban, rural, or remote areas.

Research is needed to support state DOTs as they manage lithium-ion battery EV fires during situations ranging from normal TIM to situations where hazards, accidental disruptions, and other emergencies are cascading events.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this research is to develop a toolkit that addresses the risks, opportunities, solutions, and costs associated with lithium-ion battery EV fires. The research shall consider the all-hazards approach to EM and its cycle.

At a minimum, the toolkit shall address:

• Lessons learned from literature, the state of the practice, and the public and private sectors, both domestically and internationally
• Best, emerging, and novel practices and protocols
• The scale, severity, and cost of lithium-ion battery EV fires
• Practices, methods, and materials for suppressing
• lithium-ion battery EV fires
• battery energy storage system fires
• Guidelines for
• Responding to lithium-ion battery EV fires during TIM and EM situations
• Infrastructure prevention, protection, mitigation, and recovery (including damage assessment and repair) from lithium-ion battery EV fires
• Stockpiling lithium-ion battery EV fire suppression materials
• Scenarios for conducting practice drills for state DOT emergency responders during lithium-ion battery fires
• Brief documentation targeting primary and secondary audiences
• Equity implications, including danger avoidance and impacted parties
• Public-facing educational and outreach materials for lithium-ion battery EV fires

The primary audience for the toolkit includes state DOT employees responsible for TIM, SSPs, fleet management and operations, facilities management, evacuation planning, EM, and state EV planning. The secondary audience includes traffic incident responders from all disciplines, state emergency operations centers, state emergency managers, state environmental services, and state departments of energy. 

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 a 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 address (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.
• Additional interim deliverable(s) that can be published before the project is completed and a dissemination plan for those deliverables. These shall be approved by NCHRP before dissemination.
• Final deliverable(s) that present the entire research product and include a toolkit targeting different primary and secondary audiences.
• A PowerPoint presentation with presenter’s notes suitable for a webinar.
• A technical memorandum titled “Implementation of Research Findings and Products” (see Special Note M).

Note: The research plan may include additional deliverables as well as additional virtual panel meetings.

Note: The research plan shall include a schedule for completion of the research with 1 month for panel review of the interim report and 3 months for panel review and for contractor revision of the final research product(s).

SPECIAL NOTES

A. The proposed research team must include individuals with knowledge of suppressing fires from lithium-ion batteries.

B. The proposed research team must include individuals with experience working with state DOTs.

C. NCHRP recognizes the value of a multidisciplinary approach to research and encourages participation in the team by experts in TIM and EM.

D. 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.

E. 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.

F. 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.

G. 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/7086. Proposers may not contact panel members directly; this roster is provided solely for the purpose of avoiding potential conflicts of interest.

H. 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.

I. 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.

J. 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.

K. 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.

L. 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.

M. 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

N. 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.

O. 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.

P. 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.