BACKGROUND

New federal and state requirements increasingly tie greenhouse gas (GHG) evaluation to transportation decision-making. The Carbon Reduction Program, established under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, requires state departments of transportation (DOTs) and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to develop carbon reduction strategies to support the reduction of transportation emissions. The Federal Highway Administration promulgated a GHG Transportation Performance Management measure that would require state DOTs and MPOs to set decreasing targets for transportation emissions on the National Highway System. In addition, a growing number of states, including Colorado and Minnesota, have adopted planning standards that require DOTs and MPOs to evaluate and reduce GHG emissions from transportation projects. These programming changes occur within the context of an evolving transportation field, adapting to technological trends such as the deployment of artificial intelligence and the increasing availability of big data-driven models. 

Recent research efforts including NCHRP WebResource 1: Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions: A Guide for State DOTs and NCHRP WebResource 3: GHG Emissions and Climate Change in Environmental Reviews have examined GHG emissions practices at the planning and environmental review stages. Research is needed to understand the current deployment of tools as related to the effects of transportation investments on GHG emissions and the capabilities and limitations of these tools to develop recommendations for improvement and provide suggestions for new tools.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this project are to develop (1) a guide to help DOTs and MPOs to evaluate the capabilities and limitations of existing tools for estimating the effects of transportation investments on GHG emissions and (2) a research roadmap providing recommendations to advance the state of the practice. At minimum, the research will: 

• Ascertain the current state of GHG emission analysis practices.
• Evaluate the utility of existing assumptions, including land-use impacts, fleet turnover, the effects of induced demand, and other factors.
• Prioritize the most consequential gaps in current emission analysis practice.
• Suggest effective practices for transparent model validation in evaluating the effectiveness of existing tools.
• Provide suggestions for the development of new tools.   

 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 objectives. 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 objectives.

Note: As much as practical, NCHRP Project 25-74 will coordinate with pending NCHRP Project 25-70, “Evaluating Carbon Reduction in Project Selection and Planning,” to ensure complementary research outcomes.

PHASE I: Planning and Initial Outreach

Task 1. Conduct a review of literature, tools, and resources used for evaluating the effects of transportation investments on GHG emissions. 

Task 2. Develop a stakeholder outreach plan. The outreach should target practitioners and subject matter experts from state DOTs, MPOs, academic institutions, policy organizations, and other relevant organizations. The plan will detail the strategy for eliciting participant feedback on practices, limitations, and desired improvements on current models. The plan should also consider lessons learned from outreach efforts for earlier associated projects. Submit technical memorandum #1 including the results of Task 1 and the plan developed in Task 2. NCHRP approval of technical memorandum #1 is required before work on subsequent tasks may begin.

Task 3. Administer and summarize the stakeholder outreach. Submit technical memorandum #2 summarizing the results of the stakeholder outreach. NCHRP approval of technical memorandum #2 is required before work on subsequent tasks may begin.

Task 4. Examine the available validation and analysis of relevant GHG evaluation tools and methodologies, focusing on the capabilities and limitations of available resources.

Task 5. Propose a method to achieve the research objective to be fully developed in Phase II. At minimum, the method will include:

• An appraisal of the current state of GHG emission analysis practices.
• An evaluation of capabilities and limitations of current practice.
• An evaluation of existing assumptions and prioritization of the most consequential gaps in current practices at the planning and pre-engineering stages, including the interdependencies of differing models and strategies.
• Suggested best practices for transparent validation of analytical models and tools.
• An annotated outline of a guide and roadmap to further advance the state of the practice. 

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 process and rationale for the work proposed for Phase II.

Note: Following a 1-month review of the interim report by NCHRP, the research team is required to meet with the NCHRP project panel to discuss the interim report. Work on Phase II will not begin until authorized by NCHRP.

For budgeting purposes, the proposer shall plan on having one in-person panel meeting in Washington, DC. Costs for the meeting venue and travel costs for NCHRP panel members to attend the meeting will be paid by NCHRP.

PHASE II: Execute the Method and Produce Final Deliverables

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

Task 8. Develop the guide and research roadmap. The draft guide and research roadmap shall be submitted for NCHRP approval no later than 6 months before the contract end date.

Task 9. Conduct a follow-on stakeholder outreach effort, with the goal of eliciting practitioner feedback on the draft deliverables. Summarize the outreach in an online debrief with NCHRP, including any recommended changes to the deliverables. Any proposed changes must be approved by NCHRP.

Task 10. Prepare the draft final deliverables, which shall include the following:

• A conduct of research report that documents the entire research effort.
• The final guide and research roadmap.
• Public outreach materials, including a PowerPoint presentation with speaker notes.
• A standalone technical memorandum entitled “Implementation of Research Findings and Products” (see Special Note J for additional information).

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. 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. 

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/7108. 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.