**SBIR‑00‑1**

**PROGRAM SOLICITATION**

**Small Business Innovation**

**Research Program**

**Closing Date: May 1, 2000**

**DOT SBIR Program Office, DTS-22**

**U.S. Department of Transportation**

**Research and Special Programs Administration**

**John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center**

**55 Broadway, Kendall Square**

**Cambridge, MA 02142-1093**

**CONTENTS**

**SECTION PAGE**

I. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 1

II\. DEFINITIONS 3

III\. PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS 5

IV\. METHOD OF SELECTION AND EVALUATION CRITERIA 8

V. CONSIDERATIONS 10

VI\. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS 14

VII\. SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION SOURCES 15

VIII\. RESEARCH TOPICS 16

IX\. SUBMISSION FORMS AND CERTIFICATIONS 29

**APPENDICES**

### A. PROPOSAL COVER SHEET 30

### B. PROJECT SUMMARY 31

C. CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL 32

### D. PROPOSAL CHECKLIST 35

### E. PROPOSAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM 36

**DOT PROGRAM SOLICITATION FOR SMALL**

**BUSINESS INNOVATION RESEARCH**

**I. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION**

**A. Introduction**

This solicitation for research proposals is issued by the Department of
Transportation (DOT) pursuant to the Small Business Innovation
Development Act of 1982, P.L. 97‑219, as amended by P.L. 99‑443, and
P.L. 102‑564, Small Business Research and Development Act of 1992,
signed October 28, 1992. The law seeks to encourage the initiative of
the private sector and to use small business as effectively as possible
in meeting Federal research and development objectives.

The purposes of the Act are:

\(1\) To stimulate technological innovation;

\(2\) To use small business to meet Federal research and development
needs;

\(3\) To increase private sector commercialization of innovations
derived from Federal research and development; and

\(4\) To foster and encourage minority and disadvantaged participation
in technological innovation.

In consonance with the statutory obligations of the Act, the U.S.
Department of Transportation has established a Small Business Innovation
Research Program ‑ hereinafter referred to as the [DOT SBIR
Program]{.underline}.

The purpose of this solicitation is to invite small businesses with
their valuable resources and creative capabilities to submit innovative
research proposals that address high priority requirements of the
Department.

**B. Three‑Phase Program**

The DOT SBIR Program is a three‑phase process. **THIS SOLICITATION IS
FOR PHASE I PROPOSALS ONLY**.

**Phase I.** Phase I is for the conduct of feasibility-

related experimental or theoretical research or Research & Development
efforts on research topics as described herein. The dollar value of the
proposal may be up to \$100,000 unless otherwise noted and the period of
performance may be up to six months. The primary basis for award will be
the scientific and technical merit of the proposal and its relevance to
DOT requirements. **[Only awardees in Phase I are eligible to
participate in Phase II (by invitation only).]{.underline}**

**Phase II.** Phase II is the principal research or R&D effort having a
period of performance of approximately two years with a dollar value of
up to \$750,000 unless otherwise noted. Phase II proposals must be
prepared in accordance with guidelines provided by DOT to all Phase I
awardees. DOT will accept Phase II proposals under the DOT SBIR Program
only from firms which have previously received a DOT Phase I award.
Phase II awards will be based on results of Phase I efforts, technical
merit, Agency priority and commercial applications, and the availability
of appropriated funds to support the Phase II effort. Special
consideration may be given to proposals that have obtained commitments
for follow‑on funding from non‑Federal sources for Phase III.

**Phase III.** Phase III is to be conducted by the small business with
either non-Federal funds to pursue commercial applications of research
or R&D funded in Phases I and II, or non‑SBIR government funded
contracts for continued research or products or processes intended for
use by the United States Government.

**C. Eligibility**

Each concern submitting a proposal must qualify as a small business at
the time of award of Phase I and Phase II funding agreements. In
addition, **[the primary employment of the principal investigator must
be with the small business firm at the time of award and during the
conduct of the proposed research]{.underline}** unless otherwise
approved by the contracting officer. Primary employment means that more
than one‑half of the principal investigator\'s time is spent with the
small business. Also for both Phase I and Phase II, the research or R&D
work must be performed in the United States. \"United States\" means the
50 states, the Territories and possessions of the United States, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands, the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, and the District of
Columbia.

All types of small business organizations may submit proposals,
including high technology, R&D, manufacturing and service firms.
Companies with outstanding scientific or engineering competence in
highly specialized product, process or service areas may wish to apply
their expertise to the research topics in this solicitation through a
laboratory prototype. Ideally, the research should make a significant
contribution to the solution of an important transportation problem and
provide the small business concern with the basis for new products,
processes, or services.

**D. General Information**

This is a solicitation for Phase I research proposals on advanced,
innovative concepts from small business firms having strong capabilities
in applied science or engineering.

The Phase I research proposals should demonstrate a sound approach to
the investigation of an important transportation‑related scientific or
engineering problem categorized under one of the topics listed in
Section VIII.

A proposal may respond to any of the research topics listed in Section
VIII, but must be limited to one topic. The same proposal may not be
submitted under more than one topic. An organization may, however,
submit separate proposals on different topics, or different proposals on
the same topic, under this solicitation. Where similar research is
discussed under more than one topic, the [proposer]{.underline} should
choose that topic which appears to be most relevant to the
[proposer\'s]{.underline} technical concept.

The proposed research must have relevance to the improvement of some
aspect of the national transportation system or to the enhancement of
the ability of an operating element of the DOT to perform its mission.

Proposals should be confined principally to scientific or engineering
research which may be carried out through construction and evaluation.
Proposals must be for research or R&D, particularly on advanced or
innovative concepts, and should not be for incremental or scaled‑up
versions of existing equipment or the development of technically proven
ideas. Proposals for the development of already proven concepts toward
commercialization, or which offer approaches already developed to an
advanced prototype stage or for market research should not be submitted.
Commercialization is the objective of Phase III, in which private
capital or non‑SBIR funds are to be used to continue the innovative
research supported by DOT under Phase I and Phase II.

The proposal should be self‑contained and checked carefully by the
applicant to ensure that all preparation instructions have been
followed. (See proposal checklist)

Requests for additional information or questions relating to the DOT
SBIR Program may be addressed to:

Joseph Henebury

DOT SBIR Program Director, DTS‑22

U.S. Department of Transportation

Research and Special Programs Administration

John A. Volpe National

Transportation Systems Center

55 Broadway, Kendall Square

Cambridge, MA 02142‑1093

Telephone: (617) 494‑2051

Fax: (617) 494‑2370

E-Mail Address: henebury@volpe.dot.gov

Volpe Center Web Site: http://www.volpe.dot.gov/SBIR

**II. DEFINITIONS**

**A. Research or Research and Development**

Research or research and development (R or R&D) means any activity which
is:

\(1\) A systematic, intensive study directed toward greater knowledge or
understanding of the subject studied;

\(2\) A systematic study directed specifically toward applying new
knowledge to meet a recognized need; or

\(3\) A systematic application of knowledge toward the production of
useful materials, devices, and systems or methods, including design,
development, and improvement of prototypes and new processes to meet
specific requirements.

**B. Small Business Concern**

A small business concern is one that at the time of award of Phase I and
Phase II funding agreements meets the following criteria:

\(1\) Is independently owned and operated, is not dominant in the field
of operation in which it is proposing, and has its principal place of
business located in the United States and is organized for profit;

\(2\) Is at least 51 percent owned, or in the case of a publicly owned
business, at least 51 percent of its voting stock is owned by United
States citizens or lawfully admitted permanent resident aliens;

\(3\) Has, including its affiliates, a number of employees not exceeding
500, and meets the other regulatory requirements found in 13 CFR Part
121. Business concerns, other than investment companies licensed, or
state development companies qualifying under the Small Business
Investment Act of 1958, 15 U.S.C. 661, [et seq]{.underline}., are
affiliates of one another when either directly or indirectly (A) one
concern controls or has the power to control the other; or (B) a third
party or parties controls or has the power to control both. Control can
be exercised through common ownership, common management, and
contractual relationships. The term \"affiliation\" is defined in
greater detail in 13 CFR 121.401. The term \"number of employees\" is
defined in 13 CFR 121.407. Business concerns include, but are not
limited to, any individual, partnership, corporation, joint venture,
association or cooperative.

**C. Minority and Disadvantaged Small Business Concern**

A minority and disadvantaged small business concern is one that is:

\(1\) At least 51 percent owned by one or more minority and
disadvantaged individuals; or in the case of a publicly owned business,
at least 51 percent of the voting stock of which is owned by minority
and disadvantaged individuals; and

\(2\) Whose management and daily business operations are controlled by
one or more such individuals.

A minority and disadvantaged individual is defined as a member of any of
the following groups:

\(1\) Black Americans.

\(2\) Hispanic Americans.

\(3\) Native Americans.

\(4\) Asian‑Pacific Americans.

\(5\) Subcontinent Asian Americans.

**D. Women‑Owned Small Business Concern**

A women-owned small business concern is one that is a small business
that is at least 51 percent owned by a woman or women who also control
and operate it. \"Control\" in this context means exercising the power
to make policy decisions. \"Operate\" in this context means being
actively involved in the day‑to‑day management.

**E. Subcontract**

Subcontract means any agreement, other than one involving an
employer‑employee relationship, entered into by a Federal Government
funding agreement awardee calling for supplies or services required
solely for the performance of the original funding agreement.

# III. PROPOSAL PREPARATION

**INSTRUCTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS**

A.  **Limitation on Length of Proposal**

**[\*]{.underline}**[^1] **[In the Program Year 2000, proposals
may]{.underline}**

**[be submitted either electronically or in hard copy]{.underline}**

**[format.]{.underline}**

Please note that:

\(1\) SBIR Phase I proposals should not exceed a total of 25 pages
(regular size type ‑ no smaller than 10-point font size ‑ single or
double spaced, standard 8 1/2\" X 11\" pages) including proposal cover
sheet, budget and all enclosures or attachments.

(2) Attachments, appendices and references are included in the 25-page
    limitation. [Proposals in excess of 25 pages shall not be considered
    for review or award.]{.underline}

**[Electronic Submission Requirements:]{.underline}**

-   Each proposal should not exceed 25 pages

-   All proposals must be in all text, ie...no graphics, tables, etc.

-   All proposals must be a PDF file attached to e-mail

-   No duplicate proposals should be sent by any other means

-   Proposals must be sent via e-mail to: <henebury@volpe.dot.gov>

-   Proposals must be received by 5:00 p.m. on May 1, 2000

-   You must submit a completed and signed hardcopy of Appendices A, B,
    and C postmarked no later than May 1^st^ to: Joseph Henebury, DOT
    SBIR Program Director, DTS-22, U.S. Department of Transportation,
    Research and Special Programs Administration, John A. Volpe National
    Transportation Systems Center**,** 55 Broadway, Kendall Square,
    Cambridge, MA 02142-1093

-   The proposal file name should contain eight (8) characters -- the
    first three should be the topic \# you are proposing to, ie...FH3,
    and the remaining five characters should be a unique abbreviation of
    your company's name.

Your proposal will have the same protection/security as DOT e-mail. It
will be available to only the team of DOT engineers and/or scientist who
is responsible for evaluating your proposal.

**If you intend to submit your proposal electronically, you must
register at our website:**
[www.volpe.dot.gov/sbir](http://www.volpe.dot.gov/sbir) **by April 15,
2000.**

**B. Proposal Cover Sheet**

Complete the proposal cover sheet in Appendix A as Page 1 of each copy
of each proposal. All pages should be numbered consecutively, beginning
with the proposal cover sheet. [Do not add an overlay on the cover
sheet]{.underline}.

**C. Project Summary**

Complete the form in Appendix B as Page 2 of your proposal. The Project
Summary should include a technical abstract with a brief statement of
the problem or opportunity, project objectives, and description of the
effort. Anticipated results and potential applications of the proposed
research should also be summarized in the space provided. The Project
Summary of successful proposals may be published by the DOT and,
therefore, should not contain classified or proprietary information.
[The technical abstract must be limited to two hundred words in the
space provided on the Project Summary form]{.underline}.

**D. Technical Content**

Submitted proposals must include the following:

(1) **Identification and Significance of the Problem or Opportunity.**
    The specific technical problem or innovative research opportunity
    addressed and its potential benefit to the national transportation
    system should be clearly stated.

\(2\) **Phase I Technical Objectives.** State the specific objectives of
the Phase I R or R&D effort, including the technical questions it will
try to answer to determine the feasibility of the proposed approach.

\(3\) **Phase I Work Plan.** Describe the Phase I R or R&D plan. The
plan should indicate what will be done, where it will be done, and how
the R or R&D will be managed or directed and carried out. Phase I R or
R&D should address the objectives and the questions cited in (2) above.
The methods planned to achieve each objective or task should be
discussed in detail, including the level of effort associated with each
task.

\(4\) **Related R or R&D.** Describe significant R or R&D that is
directly related to the proposal including any conducted by the project
manager/principal investigator or by the proposing firm. Describe how it
relates to the proposed effort, and any planned coordination with
outside sources. The proposer must persuade reviewers of his or her
awareness of key recent R or R&D conducted by others in the specific
topic area.

\(5\) **Key Personnel and Bibliography of Directly Related Work.**
Identify key personnel involved in Phase I including their directly
related education, experience, and bibliographic information. Where
vitae are extensive, summaries that focus on the most relevant
experience or publications are desired and may be necessary to meet
proposal page limitation.

\(6\) **Relationship with Future Research and Development.**

\(a\) State the anticipated results of the

> proposed approach if the project is successful (Phase I and Phase II).
>
> \(b\) Discuss the significance of the Phase I effort in providing a
> foundation for Phase II research or research and development effort.

\(7\) **Facilities.** A detailed description, availability and location
of instrumentation and physical facilities proposed for Phase I should
be provided.

\(8\) **Consultants.** Involvement of consultants in the planning and
research stages of the project is permitted. If such involvement is
intended, it should be described in detail.

\(9\) **Potential Applications.** Briefly describe:

> \(a\) Whether and by what means the proposed project appears to have
> potential commercial application.
>
> \(b\) Whether and by what means the proposed project appears to have
> potential use by the Federal Government.

\(10\) **Similar Proposals or Awards.** Warning - while it is
permissible, with proposal notification, to submit identical proposals
or proposals containing a significant amount of essentially equivalent
work for consideration under numerous federal program solicitations, it
is unlawful to enter into contracts or grants requiring essentially
equivalent effort. If there is any question concerning this, it must be
disclosed to the soliciting agency or agencies before award.

> If a firm elects to submit identical proposals or proposals containing
> a significant amount of essentially equivalent work under other
> federal program solicitations, a statement must be included in each
> such proposal indicating:

\(a\) The name and address of the agencies to which proposals were
submitted or from which awards were received;

> \(b\) Date of proposal submission or date of award;
>
> \(c\) Title, number, and date of SBIR Program solicitations under
> which proposals were submitted or awards received;
>
> \(d\) The applicable research topics for each SBIR proposal submitted
> or award received;
>
> \(e\) Titles of research projects; and
>
> \(f\) Name and title of Project Manager or Principal Investigator for
> each proposal submitted or award received.

**E. Contract Pricing Proposal**

A firm fixed price Phase I Contract Pricing Proposal (Schedule 1) must
be submitted in detail as shown in Appendix C. Note: Firm Fixed Price
(FFP) is the type of contract to be used for Phase I SBIR awards. Some
cost breakdown items of Appendix C may not apply to the proposed
project. If such is the case, there is no need to provide information
for each and every item. It is important, however, to provide enough
information to allow the DOT to understand how the proposer plans to use
the requested funds if the contract is awarded. Phase I contract awards
may include profit.

**F. DUNS Identification Number**

If available, a firm should note its Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS) identification number on Appendix C, Contract Pricing Proposal,
(Schedule 1). This number is assigned by Dun & Bradstreet, Inc., and is
contained in that Company\'s DUNS.

**G. Acknowledgement of Proposal Receipt**

[Proposers]{.underline} should fill out the proposal acknowledgement
form and include it with the proposal to DOT.

**H. Prior SBIR Phase II Awards**

If the small business concern has received more than 15 Phase II awards
in the prior 5 fiscal years, submit name of awarding agency, date of
award, funding agreement number, amount, topic or subtopic title,
follow-on agreement amount, source and date of commitment and current
commercialization status for each Phase II. (This required proposal
information shall not be counted toward the proposal 25-page count
limitation.)

**IV. METHOD OF SELECTION**

**AND EVALUATION CRITERIA**

**A. General**

All Phase I and Phase II proposals will be evaluated and judged on a
competitive basis. Initially, all proposals will be screened to
determine responsiveness to the solicitation. Proposals passing this
screening will be evaluated to determine the most promising technical
and scientific approaches. Each proposal will be judged on its own
merit. The DOT is under no obligation to fund any proposal or any
specific number of proposals on a given topic or subtopic. It may elect
to fund several or none of the proposed approaches to the same topic or
subtopic.

**B. Evaluation Criteria**

The evaluation process involves the following factors:

\(1\) Scientific and technical merit and the feasibility of the
proposal\'s commercial potential, as evidenced by:

> a\) Past record of successful commercialization of SBIR or other
> research;
>
> b\) Existence of second phase funding commitments from private sector
> or non-SBIR funding sources;
>
> c\) Existence of third phase, follow-on commitments; and
>
> d\) Presence of other indicators of the commercial potential of the
> idea.

\(2\) The adequacy of the work plan and approach to achieve specified
work tasks and stated objectives of the proposed effort within budgetary
constraints and on a timely schedule.

\(3\) Qualifications of the proposed principal/key investigator(s)
including demonstrated expertise in a disciplinary field related to the
particular R or R&D topic that is proposed for investigation.

\(4\) Adequacy of supporting staff and facilities, equipment, and data
for the successful completion of the proposed R or R&D.

**C. Prescreening**

Each proposal submission will be examined to determine if it is complete
and contains an adequate amount of technical and financial data.
[Proposals that do not meet the basic requirements of the solicitation
will be excluded from further consideration]{.underline}. Each
organization will be notified promptly by letter of such action.

**D. Schedule**

[All DOT reviews should be completed and awards made within 5 months of
the closing date for Phase I proposals]{.underline}.

**E. Program Selection**

A Proposal Review Panel, chaired by the Department\'s SBIR Program
Director and comprising senior management officials representing the
Department\'s Operating Administrations and the Office of the Secretary,
will arrange for review and evaluation by professionals, in their
respective organizations, of all Phase I proposals that meet the
requirements of this solicitation. The Proposal Review Panel will review
the technical evaluations by the specialists and recommend to the
Program Director the proposals for awards. The Program Director will
announce the awards.

**F. Contact with DOT**

Contact with DOT relative to this solicitation during the Phase I
proposal preparation and evaluation period is restricted for reasons of
competitive fairness. Technical questions pertaining to 2000 SBIR
solicitation research topics may be submitted to the SBIR Program Office
by e-mail: henebury@volpe.dot.gov. Technical questions will be
researched and answers provided in as timely a manner as possible.
Technical questions submitted to the SBIR Program Office during the few
weeks prior to the closing date for receipt of Phase I proposals may not
be able to be answered before the closing date.

No information on proposal status will be available until the complete
list of [2000 Phase I Award Recommendations]{.underline} to receive
funding is posted on the DOT SBIR Program Web Page: www.volpe.dot.gov
(click on SBIR). For planning purposes the notification of [2000 Phase I
Award Recommendations]{.underline} is expected to be posted on the DOT
SBIR Program Web Page by October 2, 2000. **Phase I proposals which are
not included in the October 2^nd^ list of [2000 Phase I Award
Recommendations]{.underline} will not receive funding.** **No written
correspondence regarding proposal status will be made.**

After the [2000 Phase I Award Recommendations]{.underline} are posted on
the DOT SBIR Program Web Page, a debriefing comprised of the overall
comments on the proposal may be provided to the [proposer]{.underline}
upon request. [Debriefing requests should be submitted by e-mail
to:]{.underline} henebury@volpe.dot.gov[, and must include the
proposer's name, address, research topic number, and the proposal
identification number assigned on the acknowledgement of receipt
card]{.underline}. The identity of the evaluators shall not be
disclosed.

#   {#section .unnumbered}

# V. CONSIDERATIONS

**A. Awards**

It is estimated that during fiscal year 2000, DOT will award
approximately 18 Phase I contracts with an [anticipated
potential]{.underline} maximum of 23 awards, depending on actual funding
available and the responses from small business firms to the solicited
research topics in Section VIII.

All Phase I awards will be firm fixed‑price contracts and may be up to
\$100,000 each unless otherwise noted. Phase II awards anticipate
cost‑plus‑fixed-fee contracts with a value of up to \$750,000 each
unless otherwise noted. Phase II awardees will be required to have
acceptable accounting systems to receive a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract.

Only recipients of Phase I contracts will be eligible to compete for
Phase II awards.

DOT's Operating Administrations contribute to SBIR funding. Each
Operating Administration\'s contribution may be used only to support
research of concern to that Operating Administration. For example, funds
furnished by the Federal Highway Administration may not support research
solely of concern to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
Based on anticipated funding levels, there may not be adequate funding
within the SBIR program to support Phase I and/or Phase II awards for
research which is solely of concern to the following Operating
Administrations: Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Highway
Administration, Federal Railroad Administration, Federal Transit
Administration, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Research
and Special Programs Administration, and/or the U.S. Coast Guard. Phase
I and Phase II awards for such research will depend on the actual
funding available.

**B. Reports**

Under Phase I SBIR contracts, three reports will be required, consisting
of two interim letter reports, and a comprehensive final report.

**C. Payment Schedule**

Payments for Phase I contracts will be made in three equal installments
upon presentation of invoices by the contractor in conjunction with the
submission of acceptable reports as described above.

**D. Innovations, Inventions, and Patents**

1\. **Proprietary Information.** Information contained in unsuccessful
proposals will remain the property of the [proposer]{.underline}. The
Government may, however, retain copies of all proposals. Public release
of information in any proposal submitted will be subject to existing
statutory and regulatory requirements.

If proprietary information is provided by a [proposer]{.underline} in a
proposal which constitutes a trade secret, proprietary commercial or
financial information, confidential personal information or data
affecting the national security, it will be treated in confidence, to
the extent permitted by law, provided this information is clearly marked
by the [proposer]{.underline} with the term \"confidential proprietary
information\" and provided the following legend appears on the title
page of the proposal:

\"For any purpose other than to evaluate the proposal, these data shall
not be disclosed outside the Government and shall not be duplicated,
used, or disclosed in whole or in part, provided that if a contract is
awarded to this [proposer]{.underline} as a result of or in connection
with the submission of these data, the Government shall have the right
to duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent provided in the
contract. This restriction does not limit the Government\'s right to use
information contained in the data if it is obtained from another source
without restriction. The data subject to this restriction is contained
in pages \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ of this proposal.\"

Any other legend may be unacceptable to the Government and may
constitute grounds for return of the proposal without further
consideration and without assuming any liability for inadvertent
disclosure. The Government will limit dissemination of such information
to within official channels.

The DOT prefers that [proposers]{.underline} avoid inclusion of
proprietary data in their proposals. If the inclusion of proprietary
data is considered essential for meaningful evaluation of a proposal
submission, then such data should be provided on a separate page with a
numbering system to key it to the appropriate place in the proposal.

2\. **Rights in Data Developed under SBIR Funding Agreements**. Rights
in technical data, including software developed under any contract
resulting from this solicitation, shall remain with the contractor
except that the Government shall have the limited right to use such data
for Government purposes and shall not release such data outside the
Government without permission of the contractor for a period of four
years from completion of the project from which the data were generated.
However, effective at the conclusion of the four‑year period, the
Government shall retain a royalty‑free license for Federal Government
use of any technical data delivered under an SBIR contract whether
patented or not.

3\. **Copyrights**. With prior written permission of the Contracting
Officer, the contractor normally may copyright and publish (consistent
with appropriate national security considerations, if any) material
developed with DOT support. The DOT receives a royalty‑free license for
the Federal Government and requires that each publication contain an
appropriate acknowledgement and disclaimer statement.

4\. **Patents**. Small business firms normally may retain the principal
worldwide patent rights to any invention developed with government
support. The government receives a royalty‑free license for Federal
Government use, reserves the right to require the patent holder to
license others in certain circumstances, and requires that anyone
exclusively licensed to sell the invention in the United States must
normally manufacture it domestically. To the extent authorized by 35
U.S.C. 205, the government will not make public any information
disclosing a government- supported invention for a two‑year period to
allow the contractor a reasonable time to pursue a patent.

**E. Cost‑Sharing**

Cost‑sharing is permitted for proposals under this solicitation;
however, cost‑sharing is not required nor will it be a factor in
proposal evaluations.

**F.** **Profit or Fee**

A profit is allowed on awards to small business concerns under the DOT
SBIR Program.

**G. Joint Ventures or Limited Partnerships**

Joint ventures and limited partnerships are permitted provided the
entity created qualifies as a small business concern in accordance with
the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 631, and the definition included in
this solicitation.

**H. Research and Analytical Work**

1\. **[For Phase I, a minimum of two‑thirds of the research and/or
analytical effort must be performed by the proposing firm]{.underline}**
unless otherwise approved in writing by the Contracting Officer.

2\. **[For Phase II, a minimum of one‑half of the research and/or
analytical effort must be performed by the proposing firm]{.underline}**
unless otherwise approved in writing by the Contracting Officer.

**I. Contractor Commitments**

Upon award of a contract, the awardee will be required to make certain
legal commitments through acceptance of numerous contract clauses. The
outline that follows is illustrative of the types of clauses to which
the contractor would be committed. This list should not be understood to
represent a complete list of clauses to be included in Phase I
contracts, nor to be the specific wording of such clauses. Copies of
complete terms and conditions are available upon request.

1\. **Standards of Work.** Work performed under the contract must
conform to high professional standards.

2\. **Inspection.** Work performed under the contract is subject to
Government inspection and evaluation at all times.

3\. **Examination of Records.** The Controller General (or a duly
authorized representative) shall have the right to examine any directly
pertinent records of the contractor involving transactions related to
this contract.

4\. **Default**. The Government may terminate the contract if the
contractor fails to perform the work contracted.

5\. **Termination for Convenience**. The contract may be terminated at
any time by the Government if it deems termination to be in its best
interest, in which case the contractor will be compensated for work
performed and for reasonable termination costs.

6\. **Disputes**. Any dispute concerning the contract which cannot be
resolved by agreement shall be decided by the Contracting Officer with
right of appeal.

7\. **Contract Work Hours**. The contractor may not require an employee
to work more than eight hours a day or forty hours a week unless the
employee is compensated accordingly (i.e., overtime pay).

8\. **Equal Opportunity**. The contractor will not discriminate against
any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color,
religion, sex, or national origin.

9\. **Affirmative Action for Veterans**. The contractor will not
discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because he
or she is a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era.

10\. **Affirmative Action for Handicapped.** The contractor will not
discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because he
or she is physically or mentally handicapped.

11\. **Officials Not to Benefit**. No member of or delegate to Congress
shall benefit from the contract.

12\. **Covenant Against Contingent Fees**. No person or agency has been
employed to solicit or secure the contract upon an understanding for
compensation except bonafide employees or commercial agencies maintained
by the contractor for the purpose of securing business.

13\. **Gratuities.** The contract may be terminated by the Government if
any gratuities have been offered to any representative of the Government
to secure the contract.

14\. **Patent Infringement**. The contractor shall report each notice or
claim of patent infringement based on the performance of the contract.

15\. **Procurement Integrity**. Submission of a proposal under this
solicitation subjects the offeror to the procurement integrity provision
(§27) of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 423).
This statute, as implemented by Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR, 48
CFR) §3.104, prescribes the following conduct by competing contractors
during an agency procurement: offering or discussing future employment
or business opportunities with an agency procurement official; promising
or offering a gratuity to an agency procurement official; soliciting or
obtaining proprietary or source selection information regarding the
procurement. Violations of the statute may result in criminal and/or
civil penalties, disqualification of an [offeror]{.underline},
cancellation of the procurement, or other appropriate remedy.

**J. Additional Information**

1\. This solicitation is intended for informational purposes and
reflects current planning. If there is any inconsistency between the
information contained herein and the terms of any resulting SBIR
contract, the terms of the contract are controlling.

2\. Before award of an SBIR contract, the Government may request the
[proposer]{.underline} to submit certain organizational, management,
personnel, and financial information to assure responsibility of the
[proposer]{.underline}.

3\. The government is not responsible for any monies expended by the
proposer before award of any contract.

4\. This solicitation is not an offer by the government and does not
obligate the government to make any specific number of awards. Also,
awards under this program are contingent upon the availability of funds.

5\. The DOT SBIR Program is not a substitute for existing unsolicited
proposal mechanisms. Unsolicited proposals shall not be accepted under
the DOT SBIR Program in either Phase I or Phase II. Refer to
**www.volpe.dot.gov/procure/unsolguide.**

**html** [for specifics on unsolicited proposal submission
requirements.]{.underline}

6\. If an award is made pursuant to a proposal submitted under this
solicitation, the contractor will be required to certify that he or she
has not previously been, nor is currently being paid for essentially
equivalent work by any agency of the Federal Government.

7\. When purchasing equipment or a product with funds provided under the
DOT SBIR Program, purchase only American made equipment and products, to
the extent possible in keeping with the overall purposes of the program.

8\. In accordance with FAR 52.233-2, Service of Protest, the following
Service of Protest procedures shall be followed. Protests, as defined in
Section 33.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation that are filed
directly with an agency, and copies of any protests that are filed with
the General Accounting Office (GAO), shall be served on the Contracting
Officer (addressed as follows) by obtaining written and dated
acknowledgement of receipt from: Mary E. Doherty, DOT/RSPA/Volpe Center,
55 Broadway, Kendall Square, DTS-852, Cambridge, MA 02142-1093.

**VI. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS**

**A. Submittal Instructions**

For hard copy submissions:

An original and four copies of each proposal submitted under the DOT
SBIR Program should be sent to:

Joseph Henebury

> DOT SBIR Program Director, DTS‑22
>
> U.S. Department of Transportation
>
> Research and Special Programs Administration
>
> John A. Volpe National
>
> Transportation Systems Center
>
> 55 Broadway, Kendall Square
>
> Cambridge, MA 02142‑1093
>
> Telephone: (617) 494‑2051

Proposals must be postmarked [NO LATER]{.underline} than

May 1, 2000 to qualify for acceptance and consideration under the
current DOT SBIR Program. Proposals delivered or received via e-mail
later than May 1, 2000, 5:00 p.m. will not be accepted.

Proposals delivered to the DOT SBIR Program Office by any means other
than the U.S. Postal Service, must be received at the above address on
or before May 1, 2000, 5:00 p.m.

Electronic Submission Requirements:

-   Each proposal should not exceed 25 pages

-   All proposals must be in all text, ie...no graphics, tables, etc.

-   All proposals must be a PDF file attached to e-mail

-   No duplicate proposals should be sent by any other means

-   Proposals must be sent via email to: <henebury@volpe.dot.gov>

-   Proposals must be received by 5:00 p.m. on May 1, 2000

-   You must submit a completed and signed hardcopy of Appendices A, B,
    and C postmarked no later than May 1^st^ to: Joseph Henebury, DOT
    SBIR Program Director, DTS-22, U.S. Department of Transportation,
    Research and Special Programs Administration, John A. Volpe National
    Transportation Systems Center, 55 Broadway, Kendall Square,
    Cambridge, MA 02142-1093

-   The proposal file name should contain eight (8) characters -- the
    first three should be the topic \# you are proposing to, ie...FH3,
    and the remaining five characters should be a unique abbreviation of
    your company's name.

Your proposal will have the same protection/security as DOT e-mail. It
will be available to only the team of DOT engineers and/or scientist who
is responsible for evaluating your proposal.

**If you intend to submit your proposal electronically, you must
register at our website:**
[www.volpe.dot.gov/sbir](http://www.volpe.dot.gov/sbir) by April 15,
2000

**B. Additional Information**

1\. **Bindings.** [Please do not use special bindings or
covers]{.underline}. Staple the pages in the upper left corner of the
cover sheet of the proposal with a single staple.

2\. **Packaging.** All copies of the proposal should be sent in one
package together with the acknowledgement of receipt card which appears
on the back cover of this document.

3\. **Confirmation.** The DOT SBIR Program Office will assign an
identification number to each proposal received at the above address by
May 10, 2000 or postmarked no later than May 10, 2000. This number will
appear on the proposal acknowledgement form which will be sent to the
proposer by return mail confirming receipt of the proposal.

**Proposers who submitted their proposals electronically will receive
their proposal number via e-mail no later than May 10, 2000.**

**VII. SCIENTIFIC AND**

**TECHNICAL INFORMATION SOURCES**

The following organizations may be sources for providing technology
search and/or document services and may be contacted directly for
service and cost information:

Center for Technology Commercialization Great Lakes Industrial
Technology Center

1400 Computer Drive 25000 Great Northern Corporation Center

Westborough, MA 01581 Suite 260

\(508\) 870-0042 Cleveland, OH 44070-5320

\(440\) 734-0094

Federal Information Exchange, Inc. Southern Technology Applications
Center

555 Quince Orchard Road, Suite 360 University of Florida

Gaithersburg, MD 20878 1900 SW 34^th^ Street, Suite 206

\(301\) 975-0103 Gainesville, FL 32608

\(352\) 294-7822

Midcontinent Technology Transfer Center National Technical Information
Service

Texas Engineering Extension Service 5285 Port Royal Road

The Texas A&M University System Springfield, VA 22161

301 Tarrow Street, Suite 119 (800) 553-6847

College Station, TX 77840-7896

\(409\) 845-8762

MidAtlantic Technology Applications Center Technology Transfer Center

University of Pittsburgh University of Southern California

3400 Forbes Avenue, 5^th^ Floor 3716 South Hope Street, Suite 200

Pittsburgh, PA 15260 Los Angeles, CA 90007-4344

\(412\) 383-2500 (213) 743-2353

VIII\. RESEARCH TOPICS

Phase I research topics for DOT Operating Administrations are listed
below. These topics indicate the specific areas for which proposals are
to be considered for acceptance by DOT. The topics are not listed in any
order of priority. Each proposal must respond to one (and only one)
topic as described in this section. A proposal may, however, indicate
and describe its relevance to other topics.

**DOT OPERATING ADMINISTRATION/TOPICS. . . . . . . . POTENTIAL MAXIMUM**

**FY00 PHASE I AWARDS**

**FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION (FHWA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.15 Awards**

00-FH1 A Driver Early Warning Alert of Pedestrian Presence

00-FH2 Development and Implementation of Compact Disk Read Only Memory
(CDROM) Training Program

00-FH3 Analysis of Urban and Rural Transportation Corridor Development
Conflicts

00-FH4 Development and Implementation of Automated Management of
Additions/Deletions of

Highway Driveways

00-FH5 Development of an Educational Program Aimed at Increasing the
Public's Understanding of,

and Appreciation for the Nation's Highway System

^1^ 00-FH6 Development of an Ultra Violet (UV) Bulb for Use in
Automotive Headlamps

**^1^** 00-FH7 Software Package for Fitting and Evaluating Material
Models for the Finite Element Code

DYNA3D

00-FH8 Recycling of Portland Cement Concrete Pavement

**^1^** 00-FH9 Development of a Sidewalk Assessment Process

**^1^** 00-FH10 Development of Predictive Tools for Cultural Resources

00-FH11 Development of Outdoor Advertising Control Toolbox

00-FH12 Development of Technology to Increase Native Seed Source

00-FH13 Development of an Enforceable Handicapped Parking Placard

^2^ 00-FH14 Non-intrusive Wind Field Mapper

^4^ 00-FH15 Computer Design System for Pavement Repair

**DOT OPERATING ADMINISTRATION/TOPICS. . . . . . . . POTENTIAL MAXIMUM**

**FY00 PHASE I AWARDS**

**FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION (FTA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 4 Awards**

1 00-FT1 Innovative Pedestrian Signals to Avoid Fatalities at Light Rail
and Commuter Rail Pedestrian Crossings

^1^ 00-FT2 Multi-Port Rapid Chargers for Electric Vehicles

^1^ 00-FT3 Innovative Methods for Communicating Transportation Impacts
to Targeted Populations

^1^ 00-FT4 Satellite Sensing and Geographic Information System
Technology to Measure Impact of Transit Investment on Land Use

**NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION (NHTSA) .. 3 Awards**

3 00-NH1 Video Detection and Image Processing Systems for Traffic Law
Enforcement

^3^ 00-NH2 Dynamic Occupant Position Sensing System

^3^ 00-NH3 Development of Temperature-Independent and Tunable
MultiDirectional Thorax Structures for Application to Advanced
Anthropomorphic Test Devices

**UNITED STATES COAST GUARD (USCG) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . .. . 2 Awards**

3 00-CG1 Development of Unique Technological Alternatives to Ballast
Water Exchange

^3^ 00-CG2 Development of Unique Technological Protocols and
Instrumentation for the Verification of Ballast Water Exchange

# 

^1^ Phase I may be up to \$100,000 and Phase II may be up to \$500,000

^2^ Phase I may be up to \$75,000 and Phase II may be up to \$500,000

^3^ Phase I may be up to \$100,000 and Phase II may be up to \$300,000

^4^ Phase I may be up to \$75,000 and Phase II may be up to \$250,000

# 

# FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

**00-FH1 [A DRIVER EARLY WARNING ALERT OF PEDESTRIAN ]{.underline}**

**[PRESENCE]{.underline}**

Approximately 5,500 pedestrians per year are killed and 78,000 per year
are injured by motor vehicle traffic. Many of these pedestrians are hit
because the drivers have not detected them in time to avoid the crash.
Both young and older pedestrians are particularly vulnerable to injury
by motor vehicles. This project involves the development of an early
warning system that will alert drivers of pedestrians in or near the
road. The system would consist of a small transmitter that would be worn
by a pedestrian. A receiver in the vehicle would, when activated by the
pedestrian transmitter, provide a visual or auditory display (or both)
indicating the immediate presence of a pedestrian in or near the
roadway. The project involves the design and testing of a prototype
system, the review of the practicality of implementing the system, an
estimate of how much the system would cost to implement, and the
likelihood of public acceptance and use of the system.

The Phase I research effort will consist of a feasibility study and the
investigation of possible techniques for the development of an early
warning system to detect pedestrians. Upon successful completion of
Phase I, the actual development of the pedestrian detection system may
be undertaken.

**00-FH2 [DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPACT DISK READ
]{.underline}**

**[ONLY MEMORY (CDROM) TRAINING PROGRAM]{.underline}**

Research is needed in Phase I to develop a prototype training module
which includes specific automated inventory system explanations. It
should also provide an in-depth explanation of "best" methodology, and
ensure learning progress through pre- and post- techniques. Results of
the effort should establish attendance and completion of a confirmation
procedure.

Based on the successful results in Phase I there may be a Phase II
effort to prepare training CDROMS for automated inventory of Outdoor
Advertising, and to test learning effectiveness in selected student
communities. This would be followed by completion of final training
CDROMS and distribution nationally.

The main work in the Phase I research effort would consist of a
feasibility study and the investigation of possible techniques for the
development of a prototype training module. Upon successful completion
of Phase I, the actual development of the training module may be
undertaken.

**00-FH3 [ANALYSIS OF URBAN AND RURAL TRANSPORTATION ]{.underline}**

**[CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT CONFLICTS]{.underline}**

Research is needed in Phase I to develop a plan for software systems to
integrate diverse information on transportation corridors to include:
zoning, legislation, growth options, and agricultural mitigation
requirements (baseline legislative information is a component of current
research). Geographic Information System, multi-media databases,
information databases may be incorporated into such plans. Based on
successful results in Phase I, Phase II may be undertaken to prepare a
prototype integrated software system. This would be followed by test
application in urban and rural areas, and preparation of a software
system, and then be presented at six localities in the U.S. Distribution
system nationally.

The Phase I research is the main effort to study the feasibility and
investigate innovative techniques for the development of a plan for a
software system to integrate diverse information on transportation
corridors. Upon successful completion of Phase I, the actual development
of software systems may be undertaken.

**00-FH4 [DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF AUTOMATED ]{.underline}**

**[MANAGEMENT OF ADDITIONS/DELETIONS OF HIGHWAY]{.underline}**

**[DRIVEWAYS]{.underline}**

Research is needed in Phase I to explore methodologies for automated
management of additions/deletions of driveways to highway systems.
Following successful completion of Phase I, a follow-up effort in Phase
II may be undertaken to develop prototype software systems for use by
various state highway departments to evaluate, and monitor additions and
deletions of driveways to highway systems, including fee structure,
development

changes, plus owner and highway agency compensation issues.

**00-FH5 [DEVELOPMENT OF AN EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM AIMED AT ]{.underline}**

**[INCREASING THE PUBLIC'S UNDERSTANDING OF AND]{.underline}**

**[APPRECIATION FOR THE NATION'S HIGHWAY SYSTEM]{.underline}**

The Federal Highway Administration's FY2000 Performance Plan outlines
five specific, strategic goals: Safety, Mobility, Economic Growth and
Trade, Human and Natural Environment, and National Security. Of those,
perhaps none describes more succinctly what the agency does, at least in
terms the general public understands, than "mobility." An even more
mundane term would be "traffic." And "traffic" has been so much on the
public's collective mind of late that many large daily newspapers have
initiated weekly columns dedicated solely to traffic and the commuter.

Thus, it becomes quite important to meet the goal of "mobility." The
Performance Plan outlines several key performance measures and targets,
such as the percentage of the National Highway System that meets
acceptable ride quality standards, and the percentage of bridges on the
National Highway System that are classified as deficient. These are
relatively easy to measure. Another key performance measure is not as
easily defined, however. It is listed as "Percent user satisfaction with
the nation's highway system." The document states: "FHWA is committed to
excellence in service to its customers and partners. It is important to
understand highway users' perception of how well highways -- as part of
the Nation's intermodal transportation system -- serve their needs when
traveling to work, school, community services markets, and to visit
other people. FHWA is deciding how best to establish a baseline and
targets and collect data for assessing overall user satisfaction with
the highway system."

The plan lists strategies for attaining the goal such as, "Increased
user satisfaction should be one of the cumulative results of FHWA's
programs, services, and activities."

While relying on one's good works to increase customer satisfaction
might be admirable, it will probably not result in an increase in
customer satisfaction. The National Highway Users Survey completed for
FHWA by Coopers & Lybrand in 1996 showed what such an approach has
gained thus far: They remarked that "the 50% level of satisfaction is
lower than would be expected in measuring products or services in a
competitive market." Perhaps the primary difference between products and
services in a competitive market and "products" such as a highway system
is that those in a competitive market are driven to tell their story; to
educate their customers. It is not sufficient to have a good product;
one must publicize it.

Therefore, it would seem appropriate to determine if, based on the
various social, political, economic, and legal aspects, a national
educational program should be undertaken. And, if so, what form it
should take.

While there are disjointed programs aimed at educating specific aspects
of the general public, such as the "Stay Out of the No Zone," "Read Your
Road," and work zone safety programs, there is not now a single, unified
program which focuses on the highway system as a vital aspect of today's
society. Much as clean water and garbage collection are taken for
granted, the highway system is virtually ignored as long as it operates
smoothly. Once there is a breakdown in the system, however, the outcry
is great.

What is proposed is a two-phased study/plan. Phase I research would
include in-depth analysis of the positives and negatives of undertaking
a national education program. It would include depth interviews of
opinion leaders, surveys, and focus groups, all in an effort to
determine if such a program should be undertaken. Based on success in
Phase I, follow-on research and development may take place in Phase II
only if Phase I determines that a national education program should be
undertaken. Phase II would outline a specific plan of action for
educating the public through a diversity of communication tools, perhaps
including public service announcements, transportation curricula for
public schools, sponsorship of media events, tours of editorial boards
across the country, and signage along the nation's highways. It would
include detailed schedules, budgets, and educational campaign themes. A
key aspect will be the development of a measuring instrument for
determining -- before and after initiation of the educational program --
the public's satisfaction with its highway system.

**^1^ 00-FH6 [DEVELOPMENT OF AN ULTRA VIOLET (UV) BULB FOR
USE]{.underline}**

**[IN AUTOMOTIVE HEADLAMPS]{.underline}**

The use of ultraviolet lights with the combination of fluorescent
materials in pavement markings, signs, or paint offers an excellent
opportunity for improving driver visibility. Fluorescent materials are
available at a reasonable cost; however, a cost efficient light source
has not been developed, as yet. Once the light source is available, the
development and implementation of the technology can proceed.

The proposed Phase I research will look into the technical feasibility
and practicality of developing a lamp (bulb) that could be used in a
vehicle headlamp application similar to the metal halide Xenon (bulbs)
currently being introduced in automotive headlamps.

The research would include:

a.  Assess the technical feasibility of developing an HID lamp (bulb)
    with high UV-A emission as a source for motor vehicle application.

b.  Identify the technical issues that would have to be solved before
    large scale production could be expected.

c.  Determine the manufacturing complications and practicality of making
    the UV-lamp (bulb).

d.  Estimate the time required before UV-A lamps could be mass produced.

e.  Identify what would have to be done in a Phase II project if it were
    undertaken to permit development of sufficient lamps (bulbs) and
    proper ballasts for lamp operation from a 12 VDC system and to
    proceed with field test and evaluation of their technology.

**^1^ 00-FH7 [SOFTWARE PACKAGE FOR FITTING AND EVALUATING
]{.underline}**

**[MATERIAL MODELS FOR THE FINITE ELEMENT CODE]{.underline}**

**[DYNA3D]{.underline}**

LS-DYNA finite element simulations of vehicle collisions into roadside
safety structures are a cost-effective means of supplementing vehicle
impact tests. The accuracy of such simulations depends, to a large
extent, on the ability of the analyst to accurately fit the appropriate
material models (wood, soil, concrete, steel, composites, glass,
laminated glass, rubber, etc.) to basic material property data. Fitting
material models is a time consuming process. The accuracy of each fit
depends largely on the analysts experience and judgement. An automated
software package is needed to consolidate available data and material
models, and to automate the fitting procedure, so that optimized and
consistent sets of material parameters are readily generated and
available to all roadside safety analysts, regardless of experience.
Such a user-friendly software package is not currently available.

The Phase I research effort is needed to demonstrate the feasibility of
the proposed approach for a material model and data set applicable to
roadside safety applications. The proposed software package must
graphically compare the fit of the model to data for a variety of load
conditions (uniaxial stress and strain, triaxial compression and
extension, etc.). It should also be simple to use (even for beginning
analysts), run-time efficient, and cost effective. Contacts with
software companies capable of marketing this product on a Nationwide or
Worldwide basis would have to be explored.

Based on successful results in Phase I, a Phase II effort may be
undertaken to automate the fitting procedure, expand the number of
material models and the material properties database and provide a means
for including user-supplied material models (for analysts developing
their own material models). The Phase II team should include a software
company capable of marketing this product on a Nationwide or Worldwide
basis. A business plan would need to be developed during this phase.

**00-FH8 [RECYCLING OF PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE ]{.underline}**

**[PAVEMENT]{.underline}**

Removal and recycling of Portland Cement Concrete Pavement is currently
a somewhat slow and expensive operation. Reuse of this resource would be
enhanced if a cheaper, quicker, more effective way could be developed
and if it would address a number of environmental concerns.

Research is needed to develop a machine that would, in 8 to 10 hours,
process a lane mile of concrete, separate the steel and not disturb the
existing base. With success in this effort, pavement removal costs could
be reduced 2/3's from present-day costs.

Development of this technology would contribute to the five goals listed
in the DOT strategic plan which are: Safety; Mobility; Economic Growth
and Trade; Human and Natural Environment; and National Security.

**^1^ 00-FH9 [DEVELOPMENT OF A SIDEWALK ASSESSMENT
PROCESS]{.underline}**

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 is a Federal Civil
Rights Law which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability. On
July 26, 1999, Secretary Rodney Slater issued a U.S. Department of
Transportation Accessibility Policy to make accessibility a guiding
principle in the development of transportation systems, including
pedestrian networks. Sidewalks and other pedestrian walkways provide
transportation routes to public areas and services. DOT is partnering
with the U.S. Access Board to develop guidance on accessibility in
pedestrian public rights-of-way.

At present, there is no standard method to assess the accessibility of
sidewalks and other public rights-of-way. A reliable sidewalk assessment
process would be a valuable tool to help transportation agencies and
departments of public works meet the goals of the ADA. A sidewalk
assessment process will assist communities in evaluating pedestrian
facility conditions to target pedestrian improvements, and will help the
U.S. DOT and FHWA meet their Performance Plan mobility goals for
improving accessibility.

Research is needed in Phase I of the sidewalk assessment process and it
should compile and test objective measures and tools to assess and
describe the accessibility of sidewalks and other pedestrian walkways in
a manner usable by planners and designers. Phase I should include a
prototype database to compile data which can be generated into usable
information about pedestrian facility conditions. The database should
permit application in Geographic Information Systems (G.I.S.) so that
planners and designers can use its information for sidewalk
construction, reconstruction, and maintenance programs. Phase I also
should result in a prototype information system that provides
pedestrians with accessibility information through maps, signage,
computer kiosks, web sites, etc.

Based upon success in Phase I, follow-on work in Phase II may be
undertaken of the sidewalk assessment process to finalize the sidewalk
assessment database for use by planners and designers, and finalize the
accessibility information system for pedestrians. Phase II also should
develop a marketable training course and presentation materials to teach
the sidewalk assessment process to communities so they can implement the
process quickly and effectively.

**^1^ 00-FH10 [DEVELOPMENT OF PREDICTIVE TOOLS FOR CULTURAL
]{.underline}**

**[RESOURCES]{.underline}**

Transportation project sponsors have a continuing responsibility to
identify, evaluate, and consider project effects on cultural, historic,
and archaeological resources. These resources include archaeological
sites, historic structures, historic and cultural landscapes,
architectural and engineering properties, and traditional cultural
properties and places historically important to native Americans,
Hawaiians, and Alaskans. Transportation agencies, or their
representatives, investigate these resources in compliance with Section
106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as well as other
federal and state laws and regulations.

Research is needed to develop a software application that will identify
and allow users to assess cultural, historic, and archaeological
resources delimited in existing GIS systems as well as provide system
users the opportunity to add information on these resources to GIS
systems. The software should allow users to review these resources at a
broader, geographical scale so that the users may ultimately develop
more cost-effective approaches to preserve, rehabilitate, restore, and
reconstruct these resources.

The application must be able to access and be interchangeable among
industry standard GIS applications. Resulting data sets must be able to
be accessed by and be interchangeable among industry standard relational
database software packages.

As State DOTs and other agencies assume more leadership in this area,
there is an increasing need to advance the state-of-the-art. The
availability of new technologies, including remote sensing, geographic
information systems, and advanced relational databases provide new
opportunities for cost-effective analysis. This research directly
supports the FHWA Strategic Objective under the Human and Natural
Environment Strategic Goal, to "Enhance community and social benefits of
highway transportation."

**00-FH11 [DEVELOPMENT OF OUTDOOR ADVERTISING CONTROL ]{.underline}**

**[TOOLBOX]{.underline}**

Research is needed to develop CDROM interactive program to inform state
highway agencies of electronic automated inventory systems to control
Outdoor Advertising signs.

Major focus under this Phase I project is to develop CDROM presentations
to explain automated methodologies practiced in five States.

a.  Provide overview of five State automated systems.

b.  Provide assessment of each State automated system; such as nature of
    proprietary software; ease of software use; potential for adoption
    by other states; and costs for development and maintenance of
    electronic systems.

c.  Include examples of each State's system, including visual and
    interactive representations.

d.  Provide explanation of how each State system provides needed
    information for State and national inventory

e.  Include specific automated inventory system explanations, provide
    in-depth explanation of "best" methodology.

f.  Provide protocol for a unified automated inventory system.

Phase I is a valuable stand-alone product and will provide feasibility
and procedural information. The value of Phase I is three fold:

1.  Our customers and partners will benefit as principal users and
    implementers of the materials to be contained in the deliverable.

2.  FHWA will benefit because the deliverable will save travel and
    personnel resources for us.

3.  The successful contractor will enhance their expertise and
    potentially qualify for awards with other partners.

Based on the results of Phase I, Phase II may be undertaken to develop
CDROM interactive programs to train state highway agencies in "best"
methodology for Outdoor Advertising inventory control and reporting. It
would also include preparation of training CDROMs for automated
inventory of Outdoor Advertising.

a1. Use best methodology obtained from five State systems /or/a2. Use
new design protocol for unified automated inventory system. b. Provide
explanation of how selected methodology can be incorporated into State
inventory practice. c. Give module examples of how system is used within
a State. d. Give module examples of how system can be used to prepare
national reports. e. Test learning effectiveness in selected student
communities. f. Provide for learning progress assurance through pre- and
post- test techniques. g. Establish attendance and completion
confirmation procedure. h. Complete final training CDROMs and distribute
nationally.

**00-FH12 [DEVELOPMENT OF TECHNOLOGY TO INCREASE NATIVE ]{.underline}**

**[SEED SOURCE]{.underline}**

Mandates to use native wildflower and grass seed began in 1987 with
Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act (STURAA)
and have been reinforced with the 1994 Executive Memorandum on
Beneficial landscaping and the 1999 Executive Order on Invasive
Species....all calling for the use of native seed on projects.

The demand far exceeds the supply. Some incentive is necessary to expand
the seed supply especially in the Northeast, Southeast, and Southwest
regions of the country. Encouraging farmers to try these alternative
crops could add to the seed supply and diversify small farmers.

The key problems to this small business are 1) the cost of machinery to
handle this specialized crop (farmers already have much of it); 2) the 5
years of establishment before harvests are profitable (grasses now
selling for \$30+/pound and forbs for \$350+/pound); 3) and the lack of
banks willing to loan money to a new crop. Market studies in Minnesota
and Alberta, Canada have proven the market need and the potential
profits on native seed. All Federal land managers in the Forest Service,
Bureau of Land management, and the National Park Service use as much
available seed as they can find, leaving State Departments of
Transportation who are required to use native forbs and grasses little
seed supply to buy.

Because we, as one of many Federal agencies, require native seed for use
in erosion control, landscape and maintenance projects, we need to
research the subject and help develop the technology that will yield
seed sources in at least 3 regions of the country. This will help
DOT/FHWA lead the way for this environmental solution to roadside
disturbances and encourage an alternative crop to small farmers in need
of diversification. Users of seed are seeking source-identified or
regional seed for projects within those regions.

**00-FH13 [DEVELOPMENT OF AN ENFORCEABLE HANDICAPPED
PARKING]{.underline} [PLACARD]{.underline}**

This project would develop an enforceable handicapped parking placard.
Current handicapped parking placards are easy to forge. This makes it
difficult for the police to verify their validity.

This project is needed to create a handicapped parking placard which is
difficult to forge and easy to verify. The project should use technology
and concepts which maximize the ability of police to enforce and for
Divisions of Motor vehicles to distribute. The technology should
incorporate the ability to time limit the usefulness of the handicapped
parking placards for people whose handicaps will be of limited duration.

The proposer should have experience in police enforcement of handicapped
parking, experience with how DMVs deal with handicapped parking
placards, experience with a wide variety of state and local handicapped
parking and experience with DSRC and other communications technologies.

**^2^ 00-FH14 NON-INTRUSIVE WIND FIELD MAPPER**

Wind forces can have large and potentially deleterious effects on
highway structures such as bridges. Better understanding is needed to
ensure the safety of these structures against failure of major
components or full collapse of the structure and to minimize risk of
injury to the public. Furthermore, this is needed to enhance the
performance of major structures in wind storms so that the highway
system may function in a more productive and efficient manner. Testing
of structures to assess the effects of wind is essential to benchmarking
models and to developing reliable design criteria. At present, such
tests are constrained by the accuracy with which the wind around a model
of a complex structure can be mapped. Physical probes such as hot wires
and pitot tubes have limited accuracy and also perturb the flow being
measured. Optical techniques such as LDV's are expensive and usually
require seeding of the flow, which is impractical in a large test
facility.

What is needed is a nonperturbing method of mapping wind velocities in
the range of 5-30 mph with 1% accuracy to within a few millimeters of a
structure. The best solution would be a sensor that could measure the
flow at many points simultaneously. However, a method to map wind at
different points sequentially would also be of value, provided that this
could be done rapidly (e.g. a measurement every few seconds).

The Phase I research would include demonstration of concept, a survey of
alternative techniques and assessment of the cost of an instrument and
the accuracy that could be achieved. Phase II would develop,
demonstrate, and deliver a prototype wind field mapper instrument.

**^4^ 00-FH15 COMPUTER-DESIGN SYSTEM FOR PAVEMENT REPAIR**

Every year the FHWA spends billions of dollars repairing highway
pavements that have failed well before their design lifetime is reached.
The repaired pavements often need attention again too soon. A big reason
for these premature failures is the limited knowledge of how to quantify
the damaging effects of the size and weight of trucks, particularly for
pavements that are already damaged, and the lack of a practical method
of utilizing the knowledge we do have.

There is a need for tools to better design pavements for new
construction and also for pavement repair. These tools would be part of
a computer-based design system that would consider the many factors that
influence pavement damage response as well as the current state of
damage of the pavement section. Although pavement roughness generally
used by State Highway Departments to trigger pavement overlay and repair
it is the internal damage to the pavement in terms of permanent
deformations and cracks that lead to premature pavement failure. Once
cracking damage has occurred it cannot be healed and further damage
progresses at an alarming rate. It is therefore most prudent to be able
to estimate when cracking damage will be initiated and to design the
pavement to the longest damage free life possible.

The Phase I research will use the latest pavement damage crack
prediction algorithms available and develop a user friendly interface to
demonstrate the feasibility for the application of this system for use
in an overall computer design system for pavement repair. Upon
successful completion of Phase I, the development of the design system
together with the development of other damage mechanisms including
pavement layer rutting for inclusion in this system would be undertaken.

# FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

**^1^ 00-FT1 [INNOVATIVE PEDESTRIAN SIGNALS TO AVOID FATALITIES AT
]{.underline}**

**[LIGHT RAIL AND COMMUTER RAIL PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS]{.underline}**

The increased adoption of light rail systems in the United States is a
major benefit to cities, improving mobility and accessibility, while
reducing congestion and air quality. However, in many cities it is a
relatively new mode of transportation and patrons are not familiar with
the appropriate safety behaviors required. Also, the design of systems
to facilitate passenger transfers in some cases were not well planned
and thus ideal solutions are now costly to implement.

The problem of pedestrian safety in getting to rail transit facilities
is receiving increased attention. However, the solutions overlook both
the utilization of available technologies as well as their human factors
components necessary to garner the attention of patrons and command
respect. Research is needed to (1) provide in-depth analysis of signage
systems effective in similar environments, (2) assess their materials
and life-cycle cost, and (3) review and determine pedestrian geometric
improvements. These improvements should be designed to discourage
inappropriate behavior with signage reinforcement. The proposal should
also include research in the form of focus group studies of sign
content, color, and message to determine potential effectiveness, and
compare to secondary research in the same subject area from highway and
traffic engineering.

This topic addresses the "upfront" research necessary to move into the
product development cycle. An important aspect of undertaking this
research is the degree users and patrons are involved to identify issues
and deficiencies in current signage, as well as identify behaviors and
infrastructure deficiencies that directly or indirectly encourage unsafe
acts.

**^1^ 00-FT2 [MULTI-PORT RAPID CHARGERS FOR ELECTRIC
VEHICLES]{.underline}**

Rapid charging is highly desirable if the inherent range limitations of
electric vehicles are to be eliminated. In such cases, it is required
that charging be accomplished in minutes rather than hours, which would
require a high level power charging system. Presently available electric
vehicles (EVs) are equipped with battery packs having different
chemistries, and different amp-hour capacities. In order to overcome the
cost impacts of discrete chargers for the variable battery chemistries
and the variable amp-hour capacities, a universal rapid charging station
would be quite beneficial. Such a system would offer high and variable
power charging capabilities, programmable charging algorithms for
different battery chemistries, reduced charging times, and reduced
maintenance.

Research into the feasibility of multi-port charging capability is
needed for the efficient utilization of the charging infrastructure as
well as simultaneous charging of several vehicles. The benefits of a
multi-port charger include better utilization of the power capabilities
of the charger, simultaneous charging of several vehicles, reduced
capital costs, improved system performance, and a centralized utility
interface.

**^1^ 00-FT3 [INNOVATIVE METHODS FOR COMMUNICATING ]{.underline}**

**[TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS TO TARGETED POPULATIONS]{.underline}**

There is a growing need identified in metropolitan and statewide
planning processes nationwide to ensure that transportation plans and
programs comply with provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
Lawsuits have been proposed in several areas of the country by
communities concerned that their civil rights have been violated because
they were not allowed to participate in the transportation planning and
decision-making process. The single most important cause is the
inability for the planning process to reach-out to and involve minority
and low income communities in their work.

Research is needed to examine the feasibility of developing and testing
innovative, technology-supported approaches to communicating potential
impacts of transportation alternatives to the general public. The
techniques should particularly address the unique challenges associated
with engaging members of low income and minority communities in
meaningful dialogue on policy, program, and project development. These
communities typically are least informed and generally not active in the
public dialogue on transportation issues.

Interest in this type of community involvement tool has been expressed
by public agencies, communities, and professional practitioners, alike.
Furthermore, development of this tool responds to important public
involvement requirements set forth in the Transportation Equity Act for
the 21^st^ Century (TEA-21), as well as long-standing requirements of
the Civil Rights Act and principles of Environmental Justice.

It is envisioned that the research would be carried out with the
involvement of a working group comprised of DOT staff, States/MPOs, and
representatives of grassroots community organizations.

**^1^ 00-FT4 [SATELLITE SENSING AND GIS TECHNOLOGY TO MEASURE
]{.underline}**

**[IMPACT OF TRANSIT INVESTMENT ON LAND USE]{.underline}**

Two major changes have occurred in the nation's remote sensing programs
that will change the way transit professionals can measure the
effectiveness of transit investments. First, the Federal government has
taken back the management of the LandSat 7 satellite making the cost of
this low-resolution multispectral imagery affordable for State and
regional planning and research organizations to use in land use
analysis. The imagery from the ERTS/LandSat satellites provide more than
twenty years of data collection over the nation's rail transit systems
funded by FTA. Secondly, since September 25, 1999, intelligence-quality
1-meter resolution imagery is now available with daily coverage to
transit agencies and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) for
detailed analysis of land use and transportation changes. Lastly,
off-the-shelf geographic information systems (GIS) software now can
readily import both LandSat imagery and hi-resolution digital
orthophotos so that they can be integrated with vector-based
transportation GIS (GIS-T) programs. The integration of comparative
coverage of both low-and hi-resolution imagery into the spatial analysis
of "new start" transit systems over the past two decades can provide
valuable new data on the importance and efficacy of transit in
influencing positive changes in land use in our communities.

With the increased resolution of multispectral imagery from the LandSat
7 satellite, there is an opportunity to use pattern recognition
techniques and change detection algorithms to identify changes in land
use over time. Now, with the introduction of commercial high-resolution
satellite imagery, verification of land use categorization can be
greatly improved. The FTA has developed GIS databases of all rail
transit systems. By integrating land use analysis from satellite imagery
with GIS-based spatial analysis techniques using assessed valuation GIS
databases around rail transit stations and stops, the transit industry
can revolutionize methods of measuring the benefits of transit capital
investments in metropolitan areas.

This Phase I Research will address feasibility studies on selected
metropolitan areas where rapid transit systems have been built since the
availability of civilian satellite imagery (ERTS-1 1972). The
feasibility study will select sites where multi-spectral imagery, aerial
photography, and land use analysis are available in archives and are
readily adapted to spatial analysis. Secondly, the transit improvements
should have been completed for at least ten years so that significant
changes in land uses and land value could have occurred within the study
period. The feasibility study will determine the ability of the current
pattern recognition software to identify land use categories in
sufficient detail to be useful for transit benefits evaluation using
multispectral imagery from several generation of earth observing
satellites. The study will determine the utility of change detection
software to monitor changes in land usage over time. The Phase I effort
will determine the feasibility of integrating land use analysis software
based on raster imagery with vector-based GIS software common in
transportation analysis. The feasibility study will determine the
availability of GIS-based assessed valuation parcel databases for
transit capital investment analysis. Finally, if the feasibility study
indicates that using remote sensing and GIS technologies to measure the
impact of transit investments on land use is worth further study, a
study design may be sought in a Phase II application of the technologies
at two or more metropolitan areas.

**NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION**

**^3^ 00-NH1 [VIDEO DETECTION AND IMAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS FOR
]{.underline}**

**[TRAFFIC LAW ENFORCEMENT]{.underline}**

Over the last several years, there has been a growing concern about
aggressive high risk driving and an increased level of apprehension
among the motoring public about this traffic safety problem, as
evidenced by self-report surveys and national media attention. Drivers
engaging in dangerous, high risk and aggressive driving (e.g., excessive
speeding, running red lights, unsafe lane changes, following too
closely, traffic weaving, driving outside of the traffic lanes) is a
contributing factor in many fatal crashes. Due to limited traffic law
enforcement resources, the application of technology to address many of
these illegal driving behaviors offers considerable promise in reducing
the incidence of these behaviors and resulting crashes.

Recently, there has been growing interest in, and use of, red light
camera systems, and photo radar speed enforcement systems. Many other
illegal driving behaviors could be detected through the use of
state-of-the-art technology. Many major metropolitan areas have
installed video surveillance systems on the interstate and highway
systems. The development of reliable video detection and image
processing systems for illegal driving behaviors offers the potential to
aid traffic enforcement efforts in the future.

Thus, some form of real-time video image processing system designed to
detect and record illegal driving behaviors (e.g., speeding, following
too closely or distance between cars, driving on the shoulder, unsafe
lane changes, etc.) is sought.

Proposals for the phase I research effort should be based on concepts
for utilization of specific hardware and software. The proposal should
suggest a viable feasibility study of any proposed concepts and should
describe how the concept would provide real-time identification of
vehicles operating illegally. Upon successful completion of Phase I, the
actual development of the chosen concept may be undertaken.

**^3^ 00-NH2 [DYNAMIC OCCUPANT POSITION SENSING SYSTEM]{.underline}**

Air bags are proven as effective safety devices. From their introduction
in the late 1980's through September 1, 1999, air bags have saved
approximately 4,651 lives. However, they have also been attributed to
fatal and serious injuries to a small number of occupants in
low-to-moderate severity crashes. The one fact that is common to 145
fatally injured occupants is the fact that they were too close to the
air bag when it started to deploy.

NHTSA has been conducting research to develop performance specifications
for advanced air bag systems that will minimize the risks posed by air
bags to infants, children, and other occupants. This research has
revealed that many advanced sensing systems under development make use
of quasi-static measurements of occupant weight, size, belt use, or
position to make air bag deployment decisions in a crash event. However,
these systems may not always provide the optimum level of occupant
protection in all crash circumstances. For example, teenagers or adults
forced out-of-position due to pre-crash braking events may receive the
most powerful air bag inflation level due to their pre-recorded seating
weight. Similarly, unconscious, slumped-over drivers who normally sit
fully-rear could be subject to the most powerful air bag inflation level
due to their pre-recorded seat track location. Additionally, children
sitting on the laps of right front passengers may also receive the most
powerful level of air bag inflation due to the pre-recorded weight of
the right front passenger.

Proposals for Phase I research efforts should focus on concepts for the
development of low-cost dynamic occupant position sensing hardware and
software which will demonstrate significant improvements over
quasi-static occupant sensing technologies and should provide a reliable
basis for estimating the production cost to achieve them. The actual
development of the chosen concept may be pursued in a Phase II effort
upon successful completion of Phase I.

**^3^ 00-NH3 [DEVELOPMENT OF TEMPERATURE-INDEPENDENT AND TUNABLE
]{.underline}**

**[MULTIDIRECTIONAL THORAX STRUCTURES FOR APPLICATION]{.underline}**

**[TO ADVANCED ANTHROPOMORPHIC TEST DEVICES]{.underline}**

Current thorax structures of Anthropomorphic Test Devices (ATDs),
otherwise known as crash test dummies, are typically constructed of
assemblies of individual "ribs," which themselves are constructed of
layered steel strip bonded to viscoelastic "damping" material. Such
thorax structures exhibit two major deficiencies: a) high sensitivity of
impact response to ambient temperature, and b) difficulty in adjustment
or "tuning" impact performance at initial assembly or as the structure
ages in service.

Concepts and demonstration hardware are sought which can address these
performance limitations, which will become more important as future
efforts are made to realize multidirectional impact performance (e.g.,
frontal/side) in advanced crash test dummy designs.

Research is needed which can simultaneously address several or all of
the following general requirements:

1)  Low sensitivity of impact performance to ambient temperature;

2)  Capability for adjustment (tuning) of impact response to facilitate
    initial thorax certification, and to extend service life;

3)  Adaptability of concept to multidirectional application;

4)  Compatibility with multi-directional thoracic deflection/shape
    measurement concepts; and

5)  Maintenance of hysteresis characteristics common to existing thorax
    constructions.

Both passive and active control concepts should be considered in the
effort to meet the above requirements.

It is desired that the efforts of a successful Phase I provide clear
proof of concept, and some form of working prototype assemblies, so that
full development may be justified and pursued in a Phase II effort.

The Phase I research effort will consist of a feasibility study and the
investigation of possible techniques for the development of working
prototype assemblies. Upon successful completion of Phase I, the actual
full development of the chosen concept may be undertaken.

# UNITED STATES COAST GUARD

**^3^ 00-CG1 [DEVELOPMENT OF UNIQUE TECHNOLOGICAL ]{.underline}**

**[ALTERNATIVES TO BALLAST WATER EXCHANGE]{.underline}**

Bioinvasion of American harbors by aquatic nuisance species (ANS) is a
major marine environmental concern. Successful invasions of ANS
increased at a significant rate over the last decades resulting in
unexpected harmful impacts. The discharge of contaminated ballast water
and sediment from vessels operating outside the exclusive economic zone
(EEZ) and entering U.S. waters has played a major role in the
introduction and dispersal of ANS. Once established, ANS can cause
substantial, negative economic and environmental impacts resulting in
the loss of billions of dollars in this country alone. Exchanging
ballast water outside the 200 mile-wide EEZ in ocean depths greater than
2000 meters during transoceanic voyages effectively eliminates some ANS.
However, the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) considers ballast exchange an
interim process and supports the fact that alternatives to this method
must be identified and eventually replace ballast exchange when possible
in the near future.

Preliminary investigations have determined several unique technologies
or methods, which have the potential to replace ballast exchange as a
method to reduce the invasions of aquatic nuisance species from entering
navigable waters in the U.S. Some of the unique methods such as
acoustic, electromagnetic, electric pulse, plasma, or wastewater
treatment may show some promise to develop into a viable solution. It is
therefore the desire of the CG to design, model, and develop techniques
such as these so that they may be commercially feasible to use by ships
or other facilities to reduce the invasions of ANS by treating ballast
water instead of exchanging it at sea. Specific factors should be taken
into account during any consideration of development. These include ship
size, power, pumping capacity, and space available to utilize a new
technique aboard a vessel or possibly a harbor-based facility.

The Phase I research effort would consist of a feasibility study and the
in-depth investigation of the techniques described above for the
development of alternative methods capable of replacing ballast
exchange. However, the investigator is not limited to the methods
described and may include other unique ideas. Upon the successful
completion of Phase I, the actual development of the alternative
selected to replace ballast exchange may be undertaken.

**^3^ 00-CG2 [DEVELOPMENT OF UNIQUE TECHNOLOGICAL PROTOCOLS
]{.underline}**

**[AND INSTRUMENTATION FOR THE VERIFICATION OF]{.underline}**

**[BALLAST WATER EXCHANGE]{.underline}**

Bioinvasion of American harbors by aquatic nuisance species (ANS) is a
major marine environmental concern. Successful invasions of ANS
increased at a significant rate over the last several decades resulting
in unexpected harmful impacts. The discharge of contaminated ballast
water and sediment from vessels operating outside the exclusive economic
zone (EEZ) and entering U.S. waters has played a major role in the
introduction and dispersal of ANS. Once established, ANS can cause
substantial, negative economic and environmental impacts resulting in
the loss of billions of dollars in this country alone. Exchanging
ballast water outside the 200 mile-wide EEZ in ocean depths greater than
2000 meters during transoceanic voyages effectively eliminates some ANS.
Therefore, the USCG has developed voluntary guidelines that recommend
at-sea exchange as the preferred ballast management practice. To
evaluate the success of this program, the USCG must determine the rate
of voluntary compliance by foreign vessels. During routine boarding of
incoming vessels, USCG personnel obtain random samples of ballast water
and measure the levels of salinity using optical refractometry. Although
this method is relatively simple and cost-effective, it lacks the
reliability needed to definitively verify ballast water exchange in all
cases.

Preliminary investigations determined the existence of technologies,
which have the potential to supplement or replace salinity testing to
verify an at-sea exchange. Various studies revealed several unique
candidate methods, which include Acoustics, Epipelagic Bioluminescence,
Radium 226/228, Carbon Isotope Ratios, and DNA Biosensors. It is
therefore the desire of the USCG to design, model, and develop a
light-weight instrument/sensor and a standard test protocol for the
instrument/sensor that is capable of distinguishing ocean water from
coastal water. The instrument must possess a high discriminatory ability
and a low potential for providing ambiguous results. Specific factors
should be taken into consideration that determine what physical,
chemical, or biological properties give open-ocean water its unique
signature as well as criteria that directly or indirectly affect the
test results.

The Phase I research effort would consist of a feasibility study and the
in-depth investigation of the techniques described above for the
development of an instrument and test protocol capable of verifying an
at-sea exchange; however, the investigator is not limited to the methods
described and may include other unique ideas. Upon the successful
completion of Phase I, the actual development of the instrument and
protocols for the verification of at-sea exchange may be undertaken.

^1^ Phase I may be up to \$100,000 and Phase II may be up to \$500,000

^2^ Phase I may be up to \$75,000 and Phase II may be up to \$500,000

^3^ Phase I may be up to \$100,000 and Phase II may be up to \$300,000

^4^ Phase I may be up to \$75,000 and Phase II may be up to \$250,000

**IX. SUBMISSION FORMS AND CERTIFICATIONS**

1\. PROPOSAL COVER SHEET Appendix A

2\. PROJECT SUMMARY Appendix B

3\. CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL Appendix C

4\. PROPOSAL CHECKLIST

5\. PROPOSAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM

**APPENDIX A**

**U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

# SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION RESEARCH PROGRAM

# SOLICITATION NO. 00-1

# PROPOSAL COVER SHEET

Project Title
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Research Topic No. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Research
Topic Title \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Submitted by: Name
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Address
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

> City \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ State
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Zip +
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Amount Requested (Phase I) \$
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Proposed Duration
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(May be up to \$100,000 unless otherwise indicated) (in months) (Not to
exceed six months)

1\. The above concern certifies it is a small business firm

and meets the definition stated in section 11B; and that it
Yes\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

meets the eligibility requirement in Section 1C.

2\. The above concern certifies it \_\_\_\_\_does\_\_\_\_\_does not

qualify as a minority and disadvantaged small business as

defined in IIC. (For statistical purposes only.)

3\. The above concern certifies it\_\_\_\_\_does\_\_\_\_\_does not

qualify as a women-owned small business as defined in IID.

(For statistical purposes only.)

4\. This firm and/or Principal Investigator has submitted
Yes\_\_\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_\_\_

> proposals containing a significant amount of essentially
>
> equivalent work under other federal program solicitations,
>
> or has received other federal awards containing a significant
>
> amount of essentially equivalent work. (If yes, identify

proposals in the section III. D. 10. \"Similar Proposals

or Awards\".)

5\. Will you permit the Government to disclose the title and
Yes\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

technical abstract of your proposed project, plus the name,

address, and telephone number of the Corporate Official

and Principal Investigator of your firm, if your proposal

does not result in an award, to any party that may be

interested in contacting you for further information?

Principal Investigator Corporate/Business Official

Name
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Name
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Title
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Title
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Signature\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_Date\_\_\_\_\_
Signature\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_Date\_\_\_\_

Telephone No.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Telephone No.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**PROPRIETARY NOTICE (IF APPLICABLE, SEE SECTION V.D.1)**

> **APPENDIX B**

**U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION RESEARCH PROGRAM**

**SOLICITATION NO. 00-1**

**PROJECT SUMMARY**

  -------------------------------------------- --------------------------
  Name and Address of Proposer                 **FOR DOT USE ONLY**

                                               Proposal No.
  -------------------------------------------- --------------------------

+---------------------+------------------------------------------------+
| Name and Title of   |                                                |
| Principal           |                                                |
|                     |                                                |
| Investigator        |                                                |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------------+
| Project Title       |                                                |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------------+
| Research Topic No.  | Research Topic Title                           |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------------+
| Technical Abstract  |                                                |
| (Limited to two     |                                                |
| hundred words in    |                                                |
| this space only     |                                                |
| with no classified  |                                                |
| or proprietary      |                                                |
| information/data)   |                                                |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------------+
| Anticipated         |                                                |
| Results/Potential   |                                                |
| Commercial          |                                                |
| Applications of     |                                                |
| Results             |                                                |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------------+
| Provide key words   |                                                |
| (8 maximum)         |                                                |
| description of the  |                                                |
| project useful in   |                                                |
| identifying the     |                                                |
| technology,         |                                                |
| research thrust     |                                                |
| and/or potential    |                                                |
| commercial          |                                                |
| application.        |                                                |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------------+

**U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION APPENDIX C**

**SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION RESEARCH PROGRAM** (SCHEDULE 1)

**SOLICITATION NO. 00-1**

**CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL**

<table style="width:100%;">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 9%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 1%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 1%" />
<col style="width: 13%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 3%" />
<col style="width: 1%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 1%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 1%" />
<col style="width: 17%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="12"><strong>PROPOSAL COVER SHEET</strong></td>
<td colspan="17">1. SOLICITATION/CONTRACT/MODIFICATION NUMBER</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="12">2a. NAME OF OFFEROR</td>
<td colspan="17">3a. NAME OF OFFEROR’S POINT OF CONTACT</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="12">2b. FIRST LINE ADDRESS</td>
<td colspan="17">3b. TITLE OF OFFEROR’S POINT OF CONTACT</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="12">2c. STREET ADDRESS</td>
<td colspan="17"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="12"></td>
<td colspan="12">3c. TELEPHONE</td>
<td colspan="5">3c. FACSMILIE</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="5">2d. CITY</td>
<td colspan="3">2e. STATE</td>
<td colspan="4">2f. ZIP CODE</td>
<td colspan="6">AREA CODE</td>
<td colspan="6">NUMBER</td>
<td colspan="4">AREA CODE</td>
<td>NUMBER</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="5"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td colspan="6"></td>
<td colspan="6"></td>
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="12">4. TYPE OF CONTRACT OR SUBCONTRACT
<em>(Check)</em></td>
<td colspan="17">5. PRIME OFFEROR</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><p> FFP</p>
<p> FPI</p></td>
<td colspan="9"><p> CPFF CPIF</p>
<p> OTHER <em>(Specify)</em></p></td>
<td> CPAF</td>
<td colspan="18"><p> SUBCONTRACTOR
____________________________________</p>
<p>PRIME OFFEROR’S NAME</p></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="29">6. ESTIMATED COST, FEE AND PROFIT INFORMATION</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td colspan="13">A. ESTIMATED COST</td>
<td colspan="12"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td colspan="13">B. FIXED FEE</td>
<td colspan="12"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td colspan="13">C. AWARD FEE</td>
<td colspan="12"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td colspan="13">D. PROFIT</td>
<td colspan="12"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td colspan="13">E. TOTAL PRICE</td>
<td colspan="12"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td colspan="13"></td>
<td colspan="12"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="29">7. PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="15">NAME OF COGNIZANT CONTRACT ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY</td>
<td colspan="14">NAME OF COGNIZANT GOVERNMENT AUDIT AGENCY</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="15">STREET ADDRESS</td>
<td colspan="14">STREET ADDRESS</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="7">CITY</td>
<td colspan="2">STATE</td>
<td colspan="7">ZIP CODE</td>
<td colspan="10">CITY</td>
<td>STATE</td>
<td colspan="2">ZIP CODE</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="3">TELEPHONE</td>
<td colspan="3">AREA CODE</td>
<td colspan="8">NUMBER</td>
<td colspan="6">TELEPHONE</td>
<td colspan="5">AREA CODE</td>
<td colspan="4">NUMBER</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="3">FACSIMILE</td>
<td colspan="3">AREA CODE</td>
<td colspan="8">NUMBER</td>
<td colspan="6">FACSIMILE</td>
<td colspan="5">AREA CODE</td>
<td colspan="4">NUMBER</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="2">NAME OF CONTACT</td>
<td colspan="11"></td>
<td colspan="6">NAME OF CONTACT</td>
<td colspan="10"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2">PROPERTY SYSTEM</td>
<td colspan="11"><p> Reviewed by cognizant contract administrative</p>
<p>agency and determined acceptable</p></td>
<td colspan="9">APPROXIMATE DATE OF LAST AUDIT</td>
<td colspan="7"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="11"><p> Reviewed by cognizant contract administrative</p>
<p>agency and determined not acceptable</p></td>
<td colspan="6">PURPOSE OF AUDIT</td>
<td colspan="10"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="11"> Never reviewed</td>
<td colspan="6"></td>
<td colspan="10">(e.g. proposal review, establishment of billing rates,
finalize indirect rates, etc.)</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="2">PURCHASING SYSTEM</td>
<td colspan="11"><p> Reviewed by cognizant contract administrative</p>
<p>agency and determined acceptable</p>
<p> Reviewed by cognizant contract administrative</p>
<p>agency and determined not acceptable</p></td>
<td colspan="6">ACCOUNTING SYSTEM</td>
<td colspan="10"><p> Audited and determined acceptable</p>
<p> Audited and determined not acceptable</p>
<p> Never audited</p></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="11"> Never reviewed</td>
<td colspan="10">OFFEROR’S FISCAL YEAR</td>
<td colspan="6"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="15">8a. NAME OF OFFEROR <em>(Typed)</em></td>
<td colspan="14">9. NAME OF FIRM</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="15">8b. TITLE OF OFFEROR <em>(Typed)</em></td>
<td colspan="14"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="21">10. SIGNATURE</td>
<td colspan="8">11. DATE OF SUBMISSION</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

> **APPENDIX C** Continued

**U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION RESEARCH PROGRAM**

**CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL**

**Background**

> The following items, as appropriate, should be included in proposals
> responsive to this Solicitation.

**Cost Breakdown Items** (in this order, as appropriate); (See Section
III.E)

1\. Name of proposer

2\. Address of proposer

3\. Location where work will be performed

4\. Proposer\'s Project Title

5\. Research topic number and title from DOT SBIR Program Solicitation

6\. Total dollar amount of the proposal (dollars)

7\. Direct material costs

a\. Purchased parts (dollars)

b\. Subcontracted items (dollars)

c\. Other

\(1\) Raw materials (dollars)

\(2\) Standard commercial items (dollars)

d\. Total direct materials (dollars)

8\. Material overhead rate \_\_\_\_\_ % x total direct material =
dollars

9\. Direct labor (specify)

a\. Type of labor, estimated hours, rate per hour and dollar cost for
each type

b\. Total estimated direct labor (dollars)

10\. Labor overhead

a\. Identify overhead rate, the hour base and dollar cost

b\. Total estimated labor overhead (dollars)

11\. Special testing (include field work at Government installations)

a\. Specify each item of special testing, including estimated usage and
unit cost

b\. Estimated total special testing (dollars)

12\. Other special equipment

a\. If direct charge, specify each item of special equipment, including
usage and unit cost

b\. Estimated total other special equipment (dollars)

**APPENDIX C** Continued

13\. Travel (if direct charge)

a\. Transportation (detailed breakdown and dollars)

b\. Per diem or subsistence (details and dollars)

c\. Estimated total travel (dollars)

14\. Consultants Service

a\. Identify each consultant, including purpose and dollar rates

b\. Total estimated consultant service costs (dollars)

15\. Other direct costs (specify)

a\. Total estimated direct cost and overhead (dollars)

16\. General and administrative expense

a\. Percentage rate applied

b\. Total estimated cost of G&A expense (dollars)

17\. Royalties (specify)

a\. Estimated cost (dollars)

18\. Fee or profit (dollars)

19\. Total estimated cost and fee or profit (dollars)

20\. The cost breakdown portion of a proposal must be signed by a
responsible official of the firm (include typed name and title and date
of signature).

21\. Provide a [yes]{.underline} or [no]{.underline} answer to each of
the following questions:

a\. Has any executive agency of the United States Government performed
any review of your accounts or records in connection with any other
government prime contract or subcontract within the past twelve months?
If yes, provide the name and address of the reviewing office, name of
the individual and telephone/extension.

b\. Will you require the use of any government property in the
performance of this proposal? If yes, identify.

c\. Do you require government contract financing to perform this
proposed contract? If yes, specify type as advanced payments or progress
payments.

22\. Type of contract proposed, [firm-fixed price]{.underline}.

23\. DUNS number, if
available\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(See Section III.F)

**U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION RESEARCH PROGRAM**

**SOLICITATION NO. 00-1**

**PROPOSAL CHECKLIST**

This is a CHECKLIST OF REQUIREMENTS for your proposal. Please review the
checklist carefully to assure that your proposal meets the DOT SBIR
requirements. Failure to meet these requirements may result in your
proposal being returned without consideration. (See Sections III and
IV.C of this Solicitation). [Do not include this checklist with your
proposal]{.underline}.

\_\_\_\_ 1. The proposal reflects the fact that for Phase I a minimum of
two-thirds (and for Phase II a minimum of one-half) of the research
and/or analytical effort will be performed by the proposing firm as
required (see Sections V.H.1 and V.H.2) and the primary employment of
the principal investigator (for both Phase I and Phase II) must be with
the small business firm at the time of award and during the conduct of
the proposed research as required (see Section 1.C).

\_\_\_\_ 2. The proposal is 25 PAGES OR LESS in length. This limitation
does not apply to the additional information required by Section III.H.

\_\_\_\_ 3. The proposal is limited to only ONE of the research topics
in Section VIII.

\_\_\_\_ 4. The proposal budget may be up to \$100,000 unless otherwise
indicated and duration does not exceed six months.

\_\_\_\_ 5. The technical abstract contains no proprietary information,
does not exceed 200 words, and is limited to the space provided on the
Project Summary sheet (Appendix B).

\_\_\_\_ 6. The proposal contains only pages of 8 1/2\" x 11\" size.

\_\_\_\_ 7. The proposal contains no type smaller than 10 point font
size (except as legend on reduced drawings, but not tables).

\_\_\_\_ 8. The COVER SHEET (Appendix A) has been completed and is PAGE
1 of the proposal.

\_\_\_\_ 9. The PROJECT SUMMARY (Appendix B) has been completed and is
PAGE 2 of the proposal.

\_\_\_\_ 10. The TECHNICAL CONTENT of the proposal begins on PAGE 3 and
includes the items identified in SECTION III.D of the Solicitation.

\_\_\_\_ 11. The Contract Pricing Proposal (Appendix C) has been
included as the last section of the proposal.

\_\_\_\_ 12. The acknowledgement of proposal receipt card on the back
cover of the solicitation has been detached, filled out and included
with the proposal package.

\_\_\_\_ 13. An original and four copies of the proposal are submitted.

\_\_\_\_ 14. The additional information on prior Phase II awards, if
required, in accordance with Section III.H.

\_\_\_\_ 15. The proposal must be postmarked (or delivered to the DOT
SBIR Program Office by 5:00 p.m.) no later than May 1, 2000 as required
(see Section VI.A). If submitted electronically, the proposal must be
received by May 1, 2000, 5:00 p.m.

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **DOT SBIR PROGRAM SOLICITATION**                                     |
|                                                                       |
| **NO. 00-1**                                                          |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TO BE FILLED OUT BY THE PROPOSER:                                     |
|                                                                       |
| Project Title                                                         |
| \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\                                           |
| _\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ |
|                                                                       |
| \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\                       |
| _\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TO BE FILLED OUT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION:                 |
|                                                                       |
| Date Received \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Proposal No.     |
| \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_                                        |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

The form for acknowledging receipt of proposal appears above. Please
include it in the same package with the proposal submitted to DOT and
provide your address on the reverse side.

[^1]: (See section VI for further details.)