BACKGROUND

The responsibility for conducting the right-of-way (ROW) and utility research activities to confirm ownership of the ROW and identify the impacts to adjacent properties is essential for state departments of transportation (DOTs) during project delivery. However, the extent, type, level, and timing of these research activities varies, due to limited information and guidelines for conducting ROW research.

The timing and depth of ROW research can differ as some state DOTs will initiate ROW and adjacent property research during the planning phase while others may not coordinate the research until later in the design stages. Also, the scope of research can vary as some state DOTs will investigate all parcels indicated in plans, whereas others focus solely on those directly impacted. Furthermore, title searches with inaccurate or incomplete information could lead to delays when ROW research is conducted later in project delivery. Research is needed to study state DOTs current ROW research practices and develop effective methods and procedures to implement in the project delivery process.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this research is to develop a guide for state DOTs to conduct ROW and adjacent property research activities throughout the project delivery process.

Accomplishment of the project objective will require at least the following tasks.

TASKS

Task descriptions are intended to provide a framework for conducting the research. The NCHRP 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 meeting the research objective.

Note: Proposers shall include the schedule for each phase in their research plans. The sequencing of tasks and deliverables (such as technical memorandums or summary reports) should be structured for delivery in quarterly progress report submissions. An in-person or virtual interim meeting should follow the submission of each interim report.

PHASE I – Planning and Data Collection

Task 1. Conduct a literature review of relevant research related to ROW and adjacent property research activities throughout the project delivery process. The review shall include published and unpublished research conducted through the NCHRP; the Federal Highway Administration; and other national, international, state, and pooled fund sponsored research (see Special Note B).

Task 2. Propose an approach (e.g., surveys, targeted interviews, focus groups, and other appropriate methods and/or tools) to collect information from state DOTs, practitioners, and relevant stakeholders as it relates to ROW and adjacent property research activities throughout the project delivery process.

At a minimum, the proposed approach shall identify, evaluate, and summarize information needed to characterize the current state of practice as well as future needs, including:

• Utilization of readily available information-based details (e.g., recorded deeds and plats, accurate coordinate locations, reliable detection, markers, and utility property interest);
  
  
• Interactions between other local, state, tribal, rail, transit, and federal agencies and the state DOT;
  
  
• Definitions of terminology for (1) the customary types of title research conducted, (2) the dedicated staff assigned to perform the ROW research, and (3) the initiation of ROW research;
  
  
• Quantification of potential financial and project schedule benefits for performing research throughout project delivery process as compared to deferring ROW research until acquisition of real property;
  
  
• Environmental concerns, utility accommodation, and other property interest issues impacting ROW and adjacent properties;
  
  
• Potential variations between design-bid-build (DBB), design-build (DB), construction manager/general contractor (CMGC), and other project delivery methods; and
  
  
• Data exchange standards and requirements to ensure compatibility and continuous flow of data from inception to asset management (e.g., creation or expansion of digital as-built drawings and as-acquired drawings).

Note: Task 2 Report is to be submitted for NCHRP review and approval before Task 3 can begin.

Task 3. Execute the data collection approach according to the approved Task 2 Report. Synthesize the results of Tasks 1 and 2 and identify knowledge gaps that involve ROW and adjacent property research. These knowledge gaps should be addressed in this research or in the recommended future research, as budget permits.

Task 4. Propose the research plan, to be executed in Phases II and III, to achieve the research objective. At a minimum, the research plan shall include:

• Developing a performance matrix to identify, evaluate, and quantify customary types of property interests (e.g., lots, units, parcels, easements) that may be identified during the design stage in the project delivery process;
  
  
• Procuring current state DOTs’ ROW research methods and practices that address confirming ownership of the existing ROW and adjacent parcels;
  
  
• Assessing the level of effort for ROW research based on scope of work that may be identified during the design stage in the project delivery process;
  
  
• Evaluating and assessing operational relationships between ROW engineering and other state DOT staff involved in project development;
  
  
• Evaluating and assessing state DOTs’ processes and procedures for the level of coordination and acceptance for real property title searches (e.g., deeds, easements, liens, taxes) during the chain-of-title research process;
  
  
• Identifying methods and technologies for long-term storage and management of ROW and adjacent property title data and information (e.g., geographic information system, repositories, and depositories);
  
  
• Developing representative case studies with a concentration on exemplary practices and lessons learned as it relates to ROW and adjacent properties research that quantify the impacts to project schedules and budgets;
  
  
• Developing draft language for consideration by American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) to incorporate the research results, hereafter called the AASHTO Deliverable (see Special Note C) to be developed in Phase III; and
  
  
• Conceptualizing a guide to be developed in Phase III (e.g., complementary tools, infographics, spreadsheets, framework, and roadmap) for conducting ROW and adjacent property research activities throughout the project delivery process with examples. At a minimum, a selection of examples should demonstrate the effectiveness of:
  
  
  • Communicating information within relevant state DOT departments (e.g., ROW engineering, survey, design, real estate, property management, and utility coordination); and
    
    
  • Determining solutions for long-term storage and management for ROW and adjacent property title data and information.

Task 5. Propose an annotated outline with table of contents for the guide based on the findings from Phase I, which should incorporate key findings supported with examples.

Task 6. Prepare Interim Report No. 1 that documents Tasks 1 through 5 and provides an updated work plan for the remainder of the research. The updated plan must describe the work proposed for Phases II through IV.

Note: Following a 1-month review of Interim Report No. 1 by the NCHRP, the research team will be required to meet with the NCHRP project panel to discuss the interim report. Whether in person in Washington, DC, or online, the NCHRP will host the meeting and be responsible for any panel member costs to attend. Work on Phase II will not begin until authorized by the NCHRP.

PHASE II – Research Plan Execution

Task 7. Execute Task 4 according to the approved Interim Report No.1.

Task 8. Revise the annotated outline and table of contents based on the research findings.

Task 9. Prepare Interim Report No. 2 that documents Tasks 7 and 8 and provides an updated work plan for the remainder of the project. The updated plan must describe the work proposed for Phases III and IV.

Note: Following a 1-month review of Interim Report No. 2 by the NCHRP, the research team will be required to meet with the NCHRP project panel to discuss the interim report, if necessary. Work on Phase III will not begin until authorized by the NCHRP.

PHASE III – Guide Development

Task 10. Develop the guide according to the approved Interim Report No. 2, supported with examples.

Task 11. Develop the AASHTO Deliverable.

Task 12. After NCHRP approval of the guide and the AASHTO Deliverable, plan and conduct a workshop with 20 representatives of state DOTs and other stakeholders to review the draft guide, AASHTO Deliverable, and complementary tools. Revise the draft deliverables according to the outcomes of the workshop. The invited representatives shall be approved by NCHRP.

Note: The costs for the workshop, including invitational travel for 20 attendees and the costs associated with catering service for up to 30 attendees, should be included in the detailed budget for the project. For the purpose of estimating these costs, assume that the workshop will be held at the Beckman Center in Irvine, CA, or the Keck Center in Washington, DC. The TRB will cover costs associated with NCHRP panel member travel.

Task 13. Prepare Interim Report No. 3 that documents the results of Tasks 10 through 12 and provides an updated work plan for the remainder of the research. The updated plan must describe the work proposed for Phase IV.

Note: Following a 1-month review of Interim Report No. 3 by the NCHRP, the research team will be required to meet with the NCHRP project panel to discuss the interim report, if necessary. Work on Phase IV will not begin until authorized by the NCHRP.

PHASE IV – Final Products

Task 14. Revise the guide and the AASHTO Deliverable after consideration of the panel’s review comments.

Task 15. Submit the final deliverables including (1) a final research report documenting the entire research effort and findings; (2) the guide; (3) AASHTO Deliverable; (4) prioritized recommendations for future research; (5) presentation material and resources; and (6) technical memorandum on implementation (see Special Note M).

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.    NCHRP wishes to award the contract for NCHRP Project 20-134 for a fixed price of $600,000; this amount will not be subject to any adjustment by reason of the contractor’s cost experience in the performance of the contract. In addition to providing a detailed budget, the proposer should provide a proposed schedule of project milestones, deliverables, and progress payments that is tied to the detailed budget and schedule.

B.    The proposer will develop the research plan that expands from current resources, and active and conducted research including: (1) NCHRP Research Report 1054: Acquiring Utility Property Interests and Reimbursing Utility Relocation Costs: A Guide; (2) NCHRP Web-Only Document 360: Acquisition of Utility Property Interests and Compensation Practices for Utility Relocations; (3) NCHRP Report 771: Strategies to Optimize Real Property Acquisition, Relocation Assistance, and Property Management Practices; and (4) NCHRP Project 10-138, “Guide for Early Right-of-Way Engineering Involvement.”

C.    The objective of the AASHTO Deliverable is to function as a foundation alongside other current and future AASHTO Deliverables for potential creation of ROW Engineering sections in the AASHTO Green Book. Research activities related to the AASHTO Deliverable should: (1) align with tasks involving work for product development, and (2) provide specific highlights that signify the need for future research that would expand from NCHRP Project 20-134 research findings.

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/7088. 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.