[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 78 (Friday, April 23, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20048-20052]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-10246]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[FHWA Docket No. FHWA-1999-5382]
Fiscal Year (FY) 2000 Implementation Guidance for Interstate
Maintenance Discretionary Program Funds
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice; FHWA solicitation memorandum for FR 2000 funds; request
for comments on selection criteria for FY 2001 and beyond.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document provides implementation guidance on the
Interstate maintenance discretionary (IMD) program for FY 2000 and
beyond. On March 4, 1999, a memorandum on
[[Page 20049]]
this topic was issued to division offices soliciting candidate projects
from State transportation agencies for FY 2000 IMD funding, The
memorandum also contains information of criteria used by the FHWA in
evaluating candidate projects. This document seeks comments from all
interested parties on the selection criteria and their continued use by
the FHWA for FY 2001 and beyond.
DATES: Comments on the selection criteria for IMD funding for FY 2001
and beyond must be received on or before June 22, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Your signed, written comments on project selection criteria
for IMD founding for FY 2001 and beyond must refer to the docket number
appear at the top of this document and you must submit the comments to
the Docket Clerk, U.S. DOT Dockets, Room PL 401, Seventh Street, SW,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. All comments received will be available for
examination at the above address between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Those desiring
notification of receipt of comments should include a self-addressed,
stamped envelope or postcard.
Applications for candidate projects for FY 2000 funding should be
submitted to the FHWA Division Office in the State of the applicant in
accordance with the guidance provided in the solicitation memorandom.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cecilio Leonin, Office of Program
Administration, (202) 366-4651; or Wilbert Baccus, Office of the Chief
Counsel, (202) 366-1396; Federal Highway Administration, 400 Seventh
Street SW., Washington DC 20590. Office hours are from 7:45 a.m. to
4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday except Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access
Internet users can access all comments received by the U.S. DOT
Dockets, Room PL-401, by using the universal resource locator
(URL):http://www.dmsm.dot.gov. It is avaiable 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. Please follow the instructions online for more
information and help.
An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded using a modem
and suitable communications software from the Government Printing
Office Electronic Bulletin Board Service at (202) 512-1661. Internet
users may reach the Federal Register home page at: http://www.nara.gov/
fedreg and the Government Printing Office's database at: http://
www.access.gpo.gov/nara.
The solicitation memorandum is available on the FHWA web site at
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/discretionary.
Background
On March 4, 1999, the FHWA issued a memorandum to its division
offices, located in each State, the District of Columbia and Puerto
Rico, soliciting from the State transportation agencies candidate
projects for FY 2000 IMD funding. This memorandum is published for
informational purposes. The memorandum contains information on the IMD
program, eligible activities, the application process, and the
selection criteria used by the FHWA in evaluating candidate projects.
Also, the purpose of this document is to invite comments on the
selection criteria used by the FHWA for evaluating candidate projects
for FY 2001 and beyond. The attachment to the March 4, 1999, memorandum
presents the selection criteria that the FHWA will be using for FY
2000. These criteria reflect areas which are given preference when
evaluating candidate projects; however, any project submitted by a
State transportation agency which meets the eligibility requirements
for this discretionary program can potentially be selected for funding.
These are the same general selection criteria that the FHWA has used
for several years to evaluate candidates for this discretionary
program. Occasionally, a selection criterion may be added for an
individual year that reflects a special emphasis area, but for the most
part the selection criteria have remained unchanged.
The FHWA plans to continue to use these same basic selection
criteria for FY 2001 and beyond for this discretionary program.
However, before doing so, the FHWA is interested in the views of the
States or others on these selection criteria. Accordingly, comments are
invited to this docket on the selection criteria that the FHWA will use
for the IMD program for funding available during FY 2001 and beyond.
Publicaton of the implementation guidance for the Interstate
maintenance discretionary program satisfies the requirement of section
9004(a) of the TEA-21 Restoration Act, Pub. L. 105-206, 112 Stat. 685,
842 (1998).
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 118 and 315; 49 CFR 1.48.
Issued on: April 12, 1999.
Kenneth R. Wykle,
Federal Highway Administrator.
The text of the FHWA solicitation and implementation guidance
memorandum follows:
ACTION: Request for Project for FY 2000 Interstate Maintenance
Discretionary (IMD) Funds--March 4, 1999 (Reply Due: July 1, 1999)
Henry H. Rentz for Vincent F. Schimmoller, Program Manager,
Infrastructure, HIPA
Division Administrators
We are requesting submission of eligible candidate projects for FY
2000 IMD funds. It appears that approximately $90 million will be
available for allocation in FY 2000 Candidate project submissions are
to be received in Headquarters no later than July 1, 1999.
Please work with the States to identify viable projects to assure
high quality candidates for this program. The attached program guidance
for the IMB program provides information on eligibility, selection
criteria, and submission requirements. Your office should review all
candidates submitted by a State to ensure the application is complete
and contains all of the requested information as outlined in the
attached program guidance. After review, please forward candidate
project submissions to the Director of Program Administration, HIPA.
When sending in candidate projects, the States must understand that
any qualified project may or may not be selected, and it may be
necessary to supplement allocated IMD funds with other Federal-aid and/
or State funds to construct a section of highway which will be usable
to the traveling public in as short a period of time as possible.
Any allocations in FY 2000 will be made on the assumption that
proposed projects are viable and implementation schedules are
realistic. Obligation limitation will be distributed with each
allocation of funds.
In 1992, Headquarters established a policy (reference Mr. Willett's
November 3, 1992, memorandum to the regions; Subject: Transfer of
Funds/Discretionary Allocations) that Interstate 4R discretionary funds
would not be allocated to a State that had, in the preceding fiscal
year, transferred either National Highway System (NHS) or Interstate
Maintenance (IM) funds to the Surface Transportation Program (STP)
apportionment. This policy was based on the tremendous Interstate
System needs across the country and FHWA's belief that congressional
intent was to give priority consideration to high cost
[[Page 20050]]
projects in States where available apportionments were insufficient to
allow such projects to proceed on a timely basis. We believe this
policy is still appropriate at this time, and it will continue to be
applied to IMD funds, with modifications to reflect the uniform
transfer provisions enacted by the Transportation Equity Act for the
21st Century. Our policy is:
The IMD funds will not be allocated to a State that has, in the
preceding year, transferred either NHS or IM funds to the STP, the
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program, the
Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program, or to Recreational
Trails apportionments. However, this restriction will not apply to
transfers from (IM to NHS or vice-versa.
As a reminder, any requests to adjust the amount of IMD funds
allocated to a specific project or to shift funds among previously
approved IMD projects must be forwarded in writing to the Director of
Program Administration, HIPA, for approval.
Questions concerning preparation of applications and other matters
may be directed to Mr. Cecilio Leonin of the Office of Program
Administration, HIPA, telephone (202) 366-4651.
Attachment
INTERSTATE MAINTENANCE DISCRETIONARY PROGRAM PROGRAM GUIDELINES
Background
The Interstate Maintenance Discretionary Program provides funding
for resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation and reconstruction (4R)
work, including added lanes to increase capacity, on most existing
Interstate System routes. This discretionary program was first
established by the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982, where
funding were derived from lapsed I-4R apportionments, and was known as
the I-4R Discretionary Program. The Surface Transportation and Uniform
Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 and the Intermodal Surface
Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 continued funding with set asides
from I-4R and NHS authorizations, respectively, for each of fiscal
years 1988 through 1997. The 1998 Transportation Equity Act for the
21st Century (TEA-21) continued this program by authorizing set asides
from the Interstate Maintenance (IM) funds for fiscal years 1998
through 2003. This is now called the Interstate Maintenance
Discretionary (IMD) Program.
Statutory References
23 U.S.C. 118.
Funding
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorization..................... $50M $100M $100M $100M $100M $100M
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TEA-21 provides $2,914 million in FY 1998 and increasing each year
to $4,218 million in FY 2003 for the Interstate Maintenance Program. In
accordance with 23 U.S.C. 118(c), before any apportionment is made
under 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(4), the Secretary shall set aside $50 million in
FY 1998 and $100 million for each of FY's 1999 through 2003 for the IMD
program.
The amount of available funding is impacted by any obligation
limitation imposed on the Federal-aid highway program under the
provisions of TEA-21 Section 1102(f), Redistribution of Certain
Authorized Funds. Under this provision, any funds authorized for the
program for the fiscal year, which are not available for obligation due
to the imposition of an obligation limitation, are not allocated for
the IMD program, but are redistributed to the States by formula as STP
funds.
After the Section 1102(f) reduction, it is expected that
approximately $90 million will be available for candidate projects in
each of fiscal years 2000 through 2003. This available funding may also
increase or decrease each year depending on the obligation limitation
calculation and on the estimated receipts to the Highway Trust Fund.
Federal Share
In accordance with 23 U.S.C. 120 the normal pro-rata Federal share
of the costs for any project eligible under this program is 90 percent.
Obligation Limitation
The IMD discretionary funds are subject to obligation limitation.
The obligation limitation reduces the available funding for the program
under the provisions of TEA-21 Section 1102(f) discussed above.
Eligibility
The eligibility for IMD projects is provided in Section 118(c) of
23 U.S.C., as follows:
1. IMD funds are available for resurfacing, restoring,
rehabilitating and reconstructing (4R) work, including added lanes, on
the Interstate System. However, not eligible for allocation of IMD
funds are projects on any highway designated as a part of the
Interstate System under Section 139 of 23 U.S.C., as in effect before
the enactment of TEA-21 and any toll road on the Interstate System not
subject to an agreement under Section 119(e) of 23 U.S.C., as in effect
on December 17, 1991.
2. A State is eligible to receive an allocation of IMD funds if it
has obligated or demonstrates that it will obligate in FY 2000 all of
its IM funds apportioned under Section 104(b)(4) of 23 U.S.C. other
than an amount which, by itself, is insufficient to pay the Federal
share of the cost of a project for resurfacing, restoring,
rehabilitating and reconstructing the Interstate System which has been
submitted by the State to the Secretary for approval.
3. The applicant must be willing and able to obligate the IMD funds
within a year of the date the funds are made available, apply them to a
ready-to-commence project, and in the case of construction work, begin
work within 90 days of obligation.
In 1992, Headquarters established a policy that Interstate 4R
discretionary funds would not be allocated to a State that had, in the
preceding fiscal year, transferred either National Highway System (NHS)
or Interstate Maintenance (IM) funds to the Surface Transportation
Program (SIP) apportionment. This policy was based on the tremendous
Interstate System needs across the country and FHWA's belief that
congressional intent was to give priority consideration to high cost
projects in States where available apportionments were insufficient to
allow such projects to proceed on a timely basis. This policy is still
appropriate at this time, and will continue to be applied to IMD funds,
with modifications to reflect the uniform transfer provisions enacted
by the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century. The policy is:
IMD funds will not be allocated to a State that has, in the preceding
year, transferred either NHS or IM funds to the STP, the Congestion
Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program, the Bridge Replacement
and Rehabilitation Program, or to Recreational Trails apportionments.
However, this restriction will not apply to transfers from IM to NHS or
vice-versa.
[[Page 20051]]
Selection Criteria
The following criteria are used to evaluate the submitted
candidates for selection. The statutory criteria for priority
consideration are found in 23 U.S.C. 118(c)(3) and Section 1223 of TEA-
21, as follows:
Any project the cost of which exceeds $10 million (23
U.S.C. 118(c)(3)).
A project on any high volume route in an urban area or
high truck-volume route in a rural area (23 U.S.C. 118(c)(3)).
Priority may be given to funding a transportation project
relating to an international quadrennial Olympic or Paralympic event,
or a Special Olympics International event if the project meets the
extraordinary needs associated with such events and is otherwise
eligible for assistance with IMD funds (Section 1223, TEA-21).
There are no regulatory criteria for selection of IMD discretionary
projects; however, the following criteria are also considered in the
evaluation of candidates for his program:
Leveraging of private or other public funding--Because the
annual requests for funding far exceed the available IMD funds,
commitment of other funding sources to complement the requested IMD
funds is an important factor.
State priorities--For States that submit more than one
project, consideration is given to the individual State's priorities if
specified.
Expeditious completion of project--Preference is also
given to requests that will expedite the completion of a viable project
over requests for initial funding of a project that will require a
long-term commitment of future IMD funding. For large-scale projects
consideration is given to the State's total funding plan to expedite
the completion of the project.
Because the concept of equity was important in the development of
TEA-21, project selection will also consider national geographic
distribution among all of the discretionary programs as well as
congressional direction or guidance provided on specific projects or
programs.
Solicitation Procedure
Each year, usually around March, a memorandum is sent from the FHWA
Headquarters Office of Program Administration to the FHWA division
offices requesting the submission of candidate projects for the
following fiscal year's funding. This solicitation is also published in
the Federal Register. The FHWA division offices provide this
solicitation request to the State transportation departments, who are
the only agencies that can submit candidates. The State transportation
departments coordinate with local and Federal agencies within their
respective States in order to develop viable candidate projects. The
State transportation departments submit the candidate applications to
the FHWA division offices, who send them in to the Office of Program
Administration. Candidate projects are due in FHWA Headquarters usually
around the first of July. The specific timetable for the solicitation
process for any particular fiscal year is provided in the solicitation
memorandum. The most recent solicitation is provided in these
Guidelines for reference.
The candidate project applications are reviewed and evaluated by
the Office of Program Administration and an allocation plan is prepared
for presentation of the candidate projects to the Office of the Federal
Highway Administrator, where the final selection of projects for
funding is made. The announcement of the selected projects and the
allocation of funds is usually accomplished by the middle of November.
Submission Requirements
Only State transportation departments may submit applications for
funding under this program. Although there is not a prescribed format
for a project submission, the following information must be included to
properly evaluate the candidate projects. With the exception of the
project area map, all of the following must be included to consider the
application complete. Those applications that do not include these
items are considered incomplete and returned.
1. State in which the project is located.
2. Federal-Aid Project Number
3. Project Location--Describe the specific location of the project,
including route number and mileposts, if applicable.
4. County or Counties in which the project is located.
5. U.S. Congressional District No.(s) in which the project is
located.
6. U.S. Congressional District Member's Name(s).
7. Name of Urban Area or indicate if located in a rural area.
8. Proposed Work--Describe the project work to be completed under
this particular request, and whether this is a complete project or part
of a larger project. If the project is related to one of the Olympic
events listed in Section 1223 of TEA-21, that relationship should be
described.
9. Current 2-way Average Daily Traffic including percentage of
trucks.
10. Number of lanes before and after construction of the project.
The number of lanes and current ADT are used to gauge the degree of
congestion on the route.
11. Project Plan Status--PS&E Status.
12. Estimated Authorization Date (month/year).
13. Total Project Cost
14. Amount of IMD funds requested--Indicate amount of IMD funds
being requested. If a State is willing to accept partial funding of
this amount, that should be indicated. Sometimes, partial funding of
requests is utilized to provide funding for more projects since the
requests far exceed the available funds.
15. An Obligation Schedule--Demonstrate how the State will obligate
all of its IM apportionments before the end of FY 2000.
16. Commitment of Other Funds--Indicate the amounts and sources of
any private or other public funding being provided as part of this
project. Only indicate those amounts of funding that are firm with
documented commitments. The submission must include written
confirmation of these commitments from the entity controlling the
committed funds.
17. Previous Interstate 4R Discretionary (IDR) Funding--Indicate
the amount and fiscal year of any previous IDR discretionary funds
received for this project or route.
18. Future Funding Needs--Indicate the estimated future funding
needs for the project, including anticipated requests for additional
IMD funding, the items of work to be completed and projected
scheduling.
19. Talking Points Briefing--A one page talking points paper
covering basic project information is also needed for use by the Office
of the Secretary for the congressional notification process should a
project be selected for funding. Each State's request for discretionary
funds must include a talking points paper. A sample paper is included
in these Guidelines.
State Transportation Agency Responsibilities
1. Coordinate with State, local, and Federal agencies within the
State to develop viable candidate projects.
2. Ensure that the applications for candidate projects meet the
submission requirements outlined above.
3. Establish priorities for their candidate projects if desired.
4. Submit the applications to the local FHWA division office on
time so that the submission deadline can be met.
[[Page 20052]]
FHWA Division Office Responsibilities
1. Provide the solicitation memorandum and this program information
to the State transportation agency.
2. Request candidate projects be submitted by the State to the FHWA
division office to meet the submission deadline established in the
solicitation.
3. Review all candidate applications submitted by the State prior
to sending them to FHWA Headquarters to ensure that they are complete
and meet the submission requirements.
4. Submit the candidate applications to FHWA Headquarters by the
established submission deadline.
FHWA Headquarters Program Office Responsibilities
1. Solicit candidates from the States through annual solicitation
memorandum.
2. Review candidate project submissions and compile program and
project information for preparation of allocation plan.
3. Submit allocation plan to the Office of the Federal Highway
Administrator for use in making final project selections.
4. Allocate funds for the selected projects.
FHWA Headquarters Program Office Contact
Cecilio Leonin, Highway Engineer, Office of rogram Administration,
Phone: (202) 366-4651, Fax: (202) 366-3988, E-mail:
cecilio.leonin@fhwa.dot.gov.
Sample Talking Points Briefing for Secretary
Note: These talking points will be used by the Office of the
Secretary in making congressional notification contacts. Since some
of the recipients of the calls may not be closely familiar with the
highway program, layman's language should be used to the extent
possible. Information contained in the talking points may be used by
a member of Congress in issuing a press release announcing the
discretionary allocation.
Interstate Maintenance (IMD) Discretionary Funds
Grantee:
Project No: IMD-xxx-x(xxx)
FHWA Funds: $xx,xxx,xxx.
This project provides for resurfacing ____ miles of the
two northbound lanes of I-xx in __________ county, extending from the
U.S. Route 1 interchange at Hometown to the State Road 2 overpass in
the vicinity of Smallville.
The project provides for a 2-inch overlay of the existing
bituminous concrete pavement which is badly deteriorated and rutted.
(If there is anyhing innovative about the project be sure to mention in
layman's terms.)
This project is part of the second phase of a 5-year
program to resurface a 25-mile section of I-xx between Town-A and Town-
B. In 1998, the southbound lanes at this same location are being
resurfaced using State funds.
In addition to State matching funds, a portion of the
total project cost will be financed by $__________ in funds provided by
____________.
The project includes improvements to several safety
features within the project limits including upgrading of guardrail and
traffic signs.
The project will be advertised for construction in and is scheduled for completion in .
[FR Doc. 99-10246 Filed 4-22-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-M
