BACKGROUND 

Coordination between transportation agencies and utility companies is key to successful implementation of transportation projects and utility accommodation on public rights-of-way (ROWs). Coordination at the programmatic, planning/design, and field levels is particularly important to minimize infrastructure damage and cost overruns, mitigate design-utility conflicts, and anticipate ROW impacts during utility investigation/relocation. Coordination has often been challenging, and the recent combination of several factors has made that coordination even more challenging: staff turnover within transportation agencies and utility companies; increasing numbers and complexity of transportation projects; varying legislation across the states; varying structures of transportation agencies and utility companies; use of innovative project delivery processes; and use of ROWs for broadband and green energy initiatives. The need for enhanced, mutually beneficial partnerships between transportation agencies and utility companies at all levels continues to be critical and could lead to improved coordination and project outcomes. 

OBJECTIVE 

The objective of this research is to develop a guide to improve the interaction and coordination between transportation agencies and utility companies. The guide will focus on successful practices in both transportation agencies and utility companies implemented at the legislative, program, project, and field levels, as they relate to utilities in publicly owned ROWs. 

RESEARCH TASKS 

The NCHRP is seeking 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 described in sufficient detail to demonstrate their understanding of the issues and the soundness of their approach in meeting the research objective. 

PHASE I 

Task 1. Conduct preparations for stakeholder outreach.

Task 1a. Conduct a literature review. The primary focus of the literature review is to determine which transportation agencies and utility companies have had positive interaction and coordination. The review shall include national- and state-level research and, as applicable, international and gray literature. The review should consider industry standards, utility manuals, services such as 811, and existing case studies. 

Task 1b. Develop a stakeholder outreach plan. Using Task 1a findings, focus outreach on transportation agencies and utility companies that have had consistently successful coordination. The stakeholder cross-section should include those with potential input on legislative and program-, planning/design-, and field-level practices that have been successfully implemented. Submit a technical memorandum containing the literature review and draft outreach plan. NCHRP approval is required before work on subsequent tasks begins. 

Task 2. Conduct stakeholder outreach. Identify stakeholders interested in participating in a workshop in Phase II.    

Task 3. Prepare an annotated outline for the guide and the research plan for Phase II.  Based on findings from Tasks 1 and 2, prepare an annotated outline of the guide and a research plan for developing the different sections of the guide according to the research plan. At minimum, the guide should:  

• Identify legislation or statutory requirements that facilitate utility coordination aspects
• Identify successful coordination practices on the program, project development, and field levels from interaction between transportation agencies and utility companies  
• Explain how various transportation agencies and utility companies are organized to coordinate with one another
• Discuss the perspectives of the utility industry in a cross-section of states
• Determine key decision-makers and functions in transportation agencies and utility companies to optimize coordination 
• Confirm what transportation agencies can effectively control and/or change 
• Describe transportation agency coordination with utilities to negotiate reasonable, mutually acceptable project costs and schedules 
• Explain how transportation agencies can leverage 811 ("Call Before You Dig") and other tools to facilitate coordination with utility companies

Task 4. Prepare Interim Report No. 1 that documents Tasks 1 through 3 and includes potential participation from stakeholders in Phase II. The report shall provide an updated and refined work plan for the remainder of the research in Phase II. 

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

PHASE II

Task 5. Develop a draft guide. Develop a draft manual according to the approved Interim Report No. 1. The draft guide should be submitted at least 12 months before the contract end date. NCHRP approval of the draft guide is required before work on subsequent tasks may begin. 

Task 6. Conduct a virtual stakeholder workshop. After NCHRP approval of the draft guide, conduct a virtual workshop to obtain feedback from stakeholders on the draft guide. Revise the draft proposed guide and workshop materials according to the feedback gathered during the workshop. 

Task 7. Prepare final deliverables. Deliverables shall include (1) a conduct of research report summarizing the research effort; (2) the guide; (3) an implementation plan for state departments of transportation (DOTs) and other transportation agencies (see Special Note J); and (4) the workshop materials with a slide summary introducing the guide. 

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

SPECIAL NOTES 

A. The Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals for the Transportation Research Board’s Cooperative Research Programs were revised in May 2023. Please take note of the new and revised text which is highlighted in yellow. 

B. 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. 

C. 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. 

D. 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/7100. Proposers may not contact panel members directly; this roster is provided solely for the purpose of avoiding potential conflicts of interest. 

E. 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. 

F. 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. 

G. 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. 

H. 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. 

I. 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. 

J. 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. 

K. 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. 

L. 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. 

M. 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.