[Federal Register: May 25, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 101)]
[Notices]
[Page 30221-30227]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr25my06-126]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[FHWA Docket No. FHWA-2005-23328]
Implementation of the Highways for LIFE Pilot Program
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FHWA is issuing this notice to announce the implementation
plan for the Highways for LIFE (HfL) Pilot Program outlined in Section
1502 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation
Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). LIFE is an acronym for
``Long-lasting, Innovative, Fast construction of Efficient and safe
pavements and bridges.'' The purpose of the HfL Pilot Program is to
accelerate the rate of adoption of innovations and technologies,
thereby improving safety and highway quality while reducing congestion
caused by construction. This will be accomplished through technology
transfer, technology partnerships, information dissemination, incentive
funding of up to 20 percent, but not more than $5 million on Federal-
aid highway projects (eligible for assistance under Chapter 1 of title
23, United States Code) and HfL Program accountability.
DATES: May 25, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Byron Lord, Office of Infrastructure,
HIHL-1, (202) 366-0131; Mr. Michael Harkins, Office of the Chief
Counsel, HCC-30, (202) 366-4928; Federal Highway Administration, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001. 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 and Filing
Internet users may access all comments received by the U.S. DOT
Dockets, Room PL-401, by using the universal resource locator (URL) for
the Document Management system (DMS) at http://dms.dot.gov. The DMS is
available 24-hours each day, 365 days each year. An electronic copy of
this document may be downloaded by using the Internet to reach the
Office of the Federal Register's home page at http://www.archives.gov and the Government Printing Office's Web site at http://
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara.
I. Background
The FHWA published a notice on December 30, 2005 (70 FR 77446),
that proposed an implementation plan for the HfL Pilot Program, as
outlined in Sections 1101 and 1502 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU)
(Pub. L. 109-59, August 10, 2005). The notice requested comments on the
FHWA's proposed plan to implement the program and to develop the final
implementation document for the program.
The purpose of the HfL Pilot Program is to accelerate the rate of
adoption of innovations and technologies, thereby improving safety and
highway quality while reducing congestion caused by construction.
II. Discussion of Comments and Responses
A. Summary of Comments
In response to the December 30, 2005, notice, the FHWA received
eight sets of comments. These comments were submitted by eight State
Transportation Agencies (STA), three highway-related associations; and
one private company. The comments were supportive of the proposed HfL
Program but offered suggestions of how it could be better implemented.
The following discussion summarizes the comments submitted to the
docket by the commenters on the proposed implementation plan for the
HfL Pilot Program and FHWA's responses to the comments.
B. Significant Comments and Changes to the Implementation Plan
1. Funding
a. Amount of Incentives
An industry association recommended that the FHWA consider
providing more HfL funds to fewer projects. We acknowledge that
$500,000 to $1,000,000 is a small incentive for a STA to implement new
innovations. The purpose of the HfL Program is not to simply fund
construction projects. It is to create within the highway community new
business practices that seek innovation and new technology for building
safer, better, less congested highways. The projects are platforms to
showcase innovation and deliver technology transfer. The goal of an HfL
project in each State is to provide a base across the nation for
innovation. It is possible that funding may be lower or higher than
$500,000 to $1,000,000. This amount is offered as guidance and reflects
available funds. In describing the projects phase of the program, the
legislation stipulated that ``the Secretary, to the maximum extent
possible, shall approve at least 1 project
[[Page 30222]]
in each State for participation in the pilot program and for financial
assistance''.
b. Funding for Projects Already Underway
An industry association suggested that the FHWA reward States that
already have projects underway that are meeting HfL Program goals.
Highways for LIFE has already taken steps to recognize States that have
sought innovative solutions to improve safety, quality and reduce
construction congestion through our Success Stories on the HfL Web
site.\1\ The purpose of the projects portion of HfL is to stimulate new
innovations and accelerate implementation. Using the limited funding to
``reward'' States for their innovation initiative would deplete an
already limited resource and not provide the platforms for
demonstrations and peer-to-peer exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Highways for LIFE Web site is available at the following
URL: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hfl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Match Waiver
An industry association suggested that the FHWA should allow a
match waiver not only for the grant itself but also for the use of
other Federal-aid in the project. The program does indeed allow for the
State match to be funded by other Federal-aid. For projects carried out
using funds apportioned to the State under section 104(b)(1)-(4) of
title 23, United States Code, (i.e., National Highway System,
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program, Surface
Transportation Program, and Interstate Maintenance funds), the State
may request the Federal share be adjusted up to 100 percent. The
funding category proposed in the nomination must meet the program
funding eligibility requirements. However, not more than 10 percent of
the total of any one particular apportioned Federal-aid fund can be
applied to the HfL project.
d. Spending Plan
After considering the comment offered by several stakeholders, the
FHWA has decided to increase the funding provided for Projects from 60
to approximately 70 percent of the available HfL funding. The goal of
Highways for LIFE is to accelerate the adoption of innovations and
technologies and to create new practices in developing and delivering
highways and bridges. It is not intended solely to create additional
funds for Federal-aid projects. We acknowledge that with a $75 million
program, the amount designated for projects would not be significant
enough to change the culture at a STA to adopt the HfL philosophy.
Therefore, appropriate funding for the marketing and communication
tools such as technology transfer, information dissemination, and
technology partnership is essential to accomplish the intent of the HfL
Program.
2. Performance Goals
a. Whether a project is bound to program performance measures or
may States propose their own performance measures
Several stakeholders commented that the STAs should be allowed to
propose performance goal targets for their projects to reflect a range
of project scenarios and that those should be measured as percent
improvements. The HfL Project application will allow the STA to propose
their performance goal targets within Safety, Construction Congestion,
Quality, and User Satisfaction. However, the STA must explain why it is
not accepting the HfL performance goal and justify their proposed goal.
Industry associations and STA suggested that the FHWA not narrow
project selections based on meeting all of the Performance Goals.
Rather, the FHWA should consider project proposals that may do an
extraordinary job accomplishing one or more of the Performance Goals.
Project proposals that only meet one or two of the Performance Goals
will be reviewed and may be selected. However, project proposals that
meet all Performance Goals will be given preference.
b. User Satisfaction Surveys
There were a number of comments concerned with the effort, cost,
value, and reporting of user satisfaction. One comment states that ``a
user satisfaction survey could eat up a large portion of the funding
(for a project), and that past experience with user satisfaction
surveys is that they are expensive to conduct, receive poor response
rates, and are generally inconclusive.''
The proposed implementation plan published in the Federal Register
in December outlined a feedback mechanism, which lists two questions,
``How satisfied the user is with the new facility;'' and (2)'' How
satisfied the user is with the approach used to construct the new
facility in terms of minimizing disruption?'' A five-point Likert scale
(1 = Not at all; 2 = Somewhat; 3 = Neutral; 4 = Somewhat positive; 5 =
Very positive) is to be used, with a 4 + score being the level of
success sought.
While scientifically based ``omnibus'' surveys (which cover a wide
range of topics) can be costly, the type of feedback sought here does
not need to be. It may be specific to the project itself and nothing
else, and contain nothing but the two key questions stipulated, if the
agency so desires. Agency public affairs offices have come up with
creative ways of surveying affected publics. They have, for example,
worked with the local newspaper's editorial board or transportation
writer, and had the survey featured as a piece in the neighborhood
edition that covers the project's area. In other cases, public affairs
offices have set up newsletters distributed to businesses and residents
in the project locale, and these could be used to carry the survey
questions.
Historically, the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) has recognized the vital role
customer satisfaction plays in the quality of a highway project or
program. In 2000, AASHTO's Standing Committee on Quality issued a
Knowledge Sharing Database, which listed responses from 22 of 31 states
surveyed on how they obtain feedback from highway users and other
customers.\2\ Such case studies, as well as shared experiences will be
helpful in determining how an agency wishes to respond to this
requirement. Also, the FHWA will develop a toolbox of techniques and
instruments, which can be used. The toolbox will be available on the
HfL Web site by June 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The user satisfaction toolbox is available at the following
URL: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hfl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is an implied sense that, as long as an agency maintains high
performance goals for the areas of safety, construction congestion, and
quality, then user satisfaction will be taken care of; however, that is
not always the case. There are a number of cases where agencies wished
to use a particular approach in developing a project that supported
those three key goals, yet found that the neighborhood community
impacted by the project was set against the particular approach. The
overarching goal of the Highways for LIFE Program is to dramatically
enhance the driving experience of the American public. Having a method
for direct feedback from the public is the only way to ensure that the
goal is attained.
The two questions posed to the highway users as an integral aspect
of the project often means a need for some level of user education on
the need the project and the approaches taken will fill. While some
might feel that the work speaks for itself, all too often, such is not
the case. For example, where an agency goes to great trouble and
expense
[[Page 30223]]
to remove an old bridge structure and replace it overnight, many
members of the driving public will not even know that the effort
occurred. On the other hand, if the agency had used conventional
approaches of using extensive work zones for months on end, the public
would certainly be aware of the work, although the resulting customer
satisfaction level may not be ideal. What is often needed is an
educational effort to make customers aware of the work the agency is
doing, so that, once the work is completed and surveys are taken,
highway users can make informed decisions in their survey question
responses. The FHWA will focus extra attention on the media and other
interested parties on Highways for LIFE projects, making all aware of
the importance and the benefits they have for the public.
c. Quality
An industry association recommended additional emphasis on
longevity and durability. The FHWA recognizes the importance of
longevity and durability; these characteristics are very much a part of
the HfL Program. However, the ability to identify reliable metrics to
provide sufficient reliability in the prediction of performance has
remained elusive. Performance measures are intended to provide an
achievable, measurable level of outcome that defines the desired
outcome without directing how to achieve it. We will continue to work
with stakeholders to maintain the importance of durability and
longevity.
An industry association suggested the use of the new Mechanistic-
Empirical Pavement Design Guide as an index for longevity. The new
Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide is a tool currently in
development and refinement by FHWA and AASHTO. Its suitability for this
purpose has not been demonstrated. If projects are submitted that use
the new Guide in the pavement design as an innovative practice, it will
be taken under consideration in the evaluation.
We received several comments concerning the improvement of material
quality by specifying uniformity (low variability). While low
variability of material tests may be an indication of more uniformity
in material, there are many factors that are necessary to obtain a
quality project with an extended life. The FHWA is willing to work with
STAs' efforts to quantify quality using uniformity of materials as a
measure and encourages other innovative measures that indicate a
quality product and extended life.
An industry association suggested that the FHWA should consider
allowing the measurement of smoothness and noise as part of user
satisfaction. Smoothness and noise are related to the users and will
effect user satisfaction. Many factors, along with smoothness and
noise, are involved in user satisfaction, which is much more difficult
and complex to quantify. The FHWA will consider smoothness and noise in
determination of user satisfaction, and will still consider smoothness
and noise measurements as measures of quality.
An industry association suggested including pavement friction and
light reflectivity as a quality measurement. Friction or the ability of
the surface of the pavement or bridge to provide a safe platform for
steering and stopping is an important safety component of the system.
The FHWA will accept innovative practices to assure safety along with
performance measures to determine it has been achieved. The FHWA will
work with the States to identify appropriate performance levels for
pavement friction as a quality measurement. Light reflectivity is an
important performance measure for striping, signs and delineators. How
to do this for pavement surfaces to set safety performance measures
remains to be identified. The HfL Program only considers proven
technology. We are not aware of any light reflectivity requirements on
pavement surfaces at this time. We will work with the States that
desire to identify appropriate performance levels for reflectivity as a
quality measurement.
3. Proprietary Products and Processes
A private company supported the implementation of Super-Slab
System[reg], and proprietary products. Super-Slab System[reg]
(prefabricated pavement) is eligible to be considered as innovative
practices to speed construction and minimize construction caused
congestion. Proprietary products frequently offer benefits in safety,
quality and speed of construction. The FHWA is open to their use and
will work with States to allow the flexibility to incorporate all forms
of innovation into the HfL Program.
Contracting agencies are subject to the FHWA regulations at 23 CFR
635.411 concerning the use of patented and proprietary products and
processes. For more guidance of the application of these regulations,
please refer to http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/programadmin/contracts/011106.cfm.
However, contractors are free to select their own products,
including proprietary products, as long as they meet contract
specifications. In order to encourage contractors to be innovative and
use products that further the objectives of the HfL Program, STAs
should consider performance-based specifications.
Conclusion
As a result of stakeholder feedbacks, the following are the major
changes that have been made to the proposed implementation plan that
was published in December 2005:
Revised the performance goals in the areas of Work Zone
Safety During Construction, Worker Safety During Construction, and
Construction Congestion.
Allow the STA to propose their performance goal targets
within Safety, Construction Congestion, Quality and User Satisfaction
with justification.
Established a goal to solicit the project nominations for
FY06 and FY07 simultaneously.
All candidate project applications are to be submitted
electronically through the following Web site: http://www.Grants.gov.
Clarified the HfL Project funding options.
Revised the HfL spending plan.
III. Highways for LIFE Implementation Plan
HfL Pilot Program
Reflecting on the condition of existing highways and the
traditional processes used for building new ones, the American public
has expressed, through national and local surveys, public meetings, and
other means, a need for an improved driving experience. Elements such
as reducing congestion in construction work zones, reducing
construction time, a need for improved levels of safety and quality,
and more cost effective approaches have become the subject of much
concern.
Congress intended the HfL Pilot Program to incentivize the use of
innovative technologies and practices with the expectation that safe,
efficient highways and bridges can be built faster, and with greater
durability. The legislation reflects an understanding that the best
approach to improving the quality of the highway system is made by
working through the individuals and organizations charged with
designing, building, and operating it. The FHWA intends to create an
atmosphere that encourages and enables the rapid adoption of
innovations in the design, construction and operation of highways.
The HfL Program has six program elements, which are discussed in
detail below. These program elements are as follows: Technology
transfer,
[[Page 30224]]
technology partnerships, information dissemination, projects, funding,
and accountability.
Technology Transfer
The key approach for improving the quality of the highway system is
the application of existing but under-utilized, high payoff highway
innovations, such as, equipment, techniques, processes, materials and
management processes. The key to using these innovations is a
knowledgeable workforce that is aware of the benefits and committed to
improving the driving experience of all Americans.
The purpose of the technology transfer initiative is to train,
inform, motivate, enable and equip the highway community workforce to
more efficiently deliver projects that meet the HfL Pilot Program
performance goals using the above-mentioned innovations. Components of
the technology transfer program may include technology training for
public and private sector personnel, a knowledge exchange Web site
where practitioners can log on and share ideas, technology workshops,
and HfL project showcases demonstrating the actual use of the
technology. The phrase, ``technology transfer'' has long been used to
describe the process for taking such infrequently used innovations and
making them standard approaches that a transportation agency is
comfortable using on a day-to-day basis. Unfortunately, it has
traditionally taken years or even decades to bring about such
adoptions. This delay is not merely a factor of limited resources,
workload, lack of awareness, and conservatism on the part of agency
staffs, but also a lack of a standard concentrated approach for rolling
out innovations. As part of the HfL Program, a major effort will be
undertaken to develop an improved technology transfer process to
significantly speed the adoption of innovations. This improved
technology transfer process will be piloted focusing on a few
innovations.
Specifically, the FHWA is proposing an innovation in each of the
areas of safety, congestion and quality. These innovations need to be
national in scope and have the potential for adding significant
benefits to the highway community and highway users. The FHWA has
already proposed three innovations that meet the HfL criteria:
Prefabricated Bridge Systems and Elements \3\; Road Safety Audits \4\;
and ``Making Work Zones Work Better \5\.'' Focusing on these three
innovations does not mean that they are requirements for any proposed
HfL-funded project. On the contrary, as outlined later in this
document, any innovation that addresses the HfL performance goals may
be used in an HfL-funded project.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ For more information on Prefabricated Bridge Elements and
systems go to: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/prefab/ \4\ For more information on Road Safety Audits go to: http://.
safety.fhwa.dot.gov/index.htm.
\5\ For more information on ``Making Work Zones Work Better'' go
to: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/wz/index.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional technology transfer efforts would be provided by the HfL
Program through an innovations workshop for each HfL-funded project.
The workshop may be similar in scope and structure to the Accelerated
Construction Technology Transfer \6\ workshops sponsored by the
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO) and FHWA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ For more information on ACTT go to: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/construction/accelerated
.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technology Partnerships
Within the HfL Pilot Program, Technology Partnerships are intended
to foster the development, improvement and creation of innovative
technologies and facilities, including the use of proprietary products,
technologies or methodologies. Due to limited resources, the FHWA
intends to focus this element of the HfL Program on refining and
improving existing innovations for application on highway construction.
The FHWA would enter into either a grant or cooperative agreement with
public or private organizations to jointly fund or otherwise
participate in adapting and/or making market-ready innovations to
support the HfL Pilot Program. These agreements may be with traditional
partners in the highway construction business or other organizations
outside of the highway industry, which have promising innovations that
can be made ready for timely implementation.
The HfL Technology Partnerships have a two-fold purpose: First,
they are intended to foster the implementation of under-utilized
innovations that will improve the safety, speed of highway
construction, quality, cost effectiveness, and durability of pavements
and bridges. Second, they provide an opportunity for those not involved
in construction of the HfL projects aspect of the program to
participate in, contribute to, and benefit from the Program.
The HfL Technology Partnerships would provide financial impetus
needed to move some of the many proven but underutilized innovations
and methods into routine practice in the highway industry. Innovations
brought forward through the technology partnerships may be used in the
HfL Projects and promoted through HfL technology transfer and
information dissemination.
To be considered for participation, the innovation must have been
used successfully in highway, transportation, or in some related venue
which has a clear potential for successful use in the United States
highway industry.
A detailed approach to technology partnerships has not yet been
developed because this is an area where stakeholder and industry input
is needed. Due to the desire to obtain input, as well as the lower
level of funding in the first year of the HfL Program, it is proposed
that funding for Technology Partnerships would begin in fiscal year
2007. However some deviations may be necessary, since the HfL
technology partnerships effort focuses on proven technologies, rather
than research.
Information Dissemination
An essential component of transferring technology is information
dissemination, including the communication of the HfL goals, concepts
and services. Communicating the HfL story is critical for several
reasons: First, without a high level of communication, there would be
no ``technology transfer;'' innovative approaches would remain with
those people who initially employed them. Secondly, recounting others'
successes tends to instill within organizations a higher level of
competition and peer-pressure to keep up with the rest of the
community.
Although Information Dissemination is a major element of Technology
Transfer, the importance of this communication element within the
overall HfL Pilot Program is sufficient to create a separate category
of activities. One key reason is that others, outside the primary
audience of individuals and organizations who design, build, and
operate the nation's highways, need to be informed as well about safer,
less congested and improved quality highways and bridges. The driving
public, for example, needs to be a key recipient because they are the
ultimate beneficiaries of the overall effort. Providing the information
starts the dialog to ensure that activities undertaken within the
program really are pertinent to improving the public's driving
experience. Finally, the public needs to be informed because public
opinion can be a major motivator to getting individuals and
organizations who are slow to adopt innovations to move faster. Telling
the public about the
[[Page 30225]]
highway community's push for better roads and the HfL projects builds
goodwill and shows an appropriate level of responsiveness to the
public's need. It demonstrates that the highway community is being a
good steward of the public trust. It also has the potential to show
highway builders the benefits of using HfL approaches on more of their
projects.
A key tool for information dissemination would be the publicizing
of HfL success stories, showing how innovation can improve safety,
reduce construction-related congestion, and improve quality, and why it
is beneficial to pursue non-traditional approaches and innovations.
Communication tools such as publications, videos, special events,
media relations, the Internet, and a web-based Community of Practice
can be employed in getting information on the various elements of the
HfL Program to different audiences. Specifically, those audiences may
include the highway community, academia, associated industries and
private sector groups, schools, elected officials, media, and the
public in general.
Another facet of information dissemination will be publicizing the
success of each of the HfL demonstration projects. This will be
accomplished at the local, regional and national levels and will be
done during and after construction. The focus in publicizing the HfL
project success stories will be on the innovations, the resulting
benefits and the people in the State DOT, Industry and Division Office
that made it happen. One technique may be the establishment of an
annual awards program and celebration for the HfL projects. Another
technique would be a ribbon cutting ceremony for the HfL project.
Additionally, HfL can work with other organizations such as the
national Partnership on Highway Quality, industry associations,
American Automobile Association, American Trucking Associations, State
DOT Public Affairs offices in publicizing HfL projects and the people
involved in constructing the projects. Positive information
dissemination coupled with recognition will be used as a means to
perpetuate the behavior and outcomes achieved on the HfL projects.
Projects
While training such as that outlined previously in the technology
transfer section is important, the challenge is to get the
transportation professional to put that training to use on an actual
project. Such on-the-job experience will be provided through the
Projects activity of the HfL Program. State transportation agencies
will be asked to work with the FHWA Division Offices to identify
candidate projects for HfL incentives where it intends to employ
innovations that it was not used or rarely used in its State.
Funding construction projects within the HfL Program will allow for
detailed documentation of the potential improvements in safety,
construction-related congestion and quality that can be achieved
through the application of innovations on actual projects. It may also
serve as a new business model for how a State manages its highway
project delivery process. The demonstration will involve showing the
highway community and the public how the HfL projects are designed,
built, and perform. Widespread demonstration of successes will, in
turn, provide the impetus for more widespread application of the
performance goals and innovations in the future.
Performance Goals
Paragraphs (a)(3) and (b)(4)(A) of Section 1502 of SAFETEA-LU makes
reference to ``performance standards.'' In the HfL Program, the term
``performance standards'' are also synonymous with ``performance
goals,'' which define the desired end result to be achieved on the
projects. The FHWA has selected performance goals to put the emphasis
on the highway motorist needs, to foster the acceptance and adoption of
innovations, and to reinforce the need to address all goals--safety,
congestion, user satisfaction, and quality--in every project. The
individual HfL performance goals would be set at levels representing
the best the highway community has and is able to produce.
In proposing performance goals for HfL projects, the FHWA
considered whether a candidate goal has a highway community accepted
definition, metric, measure, method, procedure, process and/or
equipment. Candidate goals were evaluated with these considerations
since it is expected that the State and its contractor(s) will be
monitoring the goals for the design and/or construction of HfL
projects.
It is FHWA's intention that the approved HfL projects would include
the Performance Goals in each of the goal areas. The performance goals
for HfL projects include:
Safety
Work Zone Safety During Construction--work zone crash rate
equal to or less than the pre-construction rate at the project
location;
Worker Safety During Construction--an incident rate for
worker injuries to be less than 4.0 based on the OSHA 300 rate;
Facility Safety After Construction--20 percent reduction
in fatalities and injuries as reflected in 3-year average crash rates,
using pre-construction rates as the baseline.
Construction Congestion
Faster Construction--50 percent reduction, compared to
traditional methods, in the duration that highway users are impacted;
Trip Time During Construction--less than 10 percent
increase in trip time during construction as compared to the average
pre-construction speed using 100 percent sampling; or
Queue Length During Construction--a moving queue length
less than \1/2\ mile (travel speed 20 percent less than posted speed)
in a rural area OR a moving queue length less than 1\1/2\ mile (travel
speed 20 percent less than posted speed) in an urban area.
Quality
Smoothness--an inertial Profile, International Roughness
Index (IRI) of less than 48 inches/mile.
Noise--a close Proximity (CPX) noise measurement of less
than 96.0 decibels.
User Satisfaction
User satisfaction--project construction surveys will be
used to determine user satisfaction in two areas: (1) How satisfied the
user is with the new facility, compared with its previous condition,
and (2) how satisfied the user is with the approach used to construct
the new facility in terms of minimizing disruption. A five-point Likert
scale \7\ will be used for measurement, and the goal for each area will
be 4+.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ For more information on the Likert scale go to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liker_scale
.
\8\ A typical question using a Likert scale poses a statement
and asks the respondents whether he strongly agrees--agrees--is
undecided--disagrees or strongly disagrees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The HfL Project application will allow the STA to propose their
performance goal targets within Safety, Construction Congestion,
Quality and User Satisfaction. However, the STA must explain why they
are not accepting the HfL performance goal and justify their proposed
goal.
Solicitation
The FHWA has established a goal to solicit the project nominations
for fiscal year (FY) 2006 and FY07 simultaneously and proceed with the
[[Page 30226]]
award of the FY06 projects in October 2006 and award FY07 projects in
January 2007. All subsequent solicitations and awards will occur in
March and August, respectively, beginning with the solicitation of FY08
projects in March 2007.
The FHWA has been notified that, in the very near future (beginning
in FY 2007), all Federal agencies will be required to use http://www.grants.gov/
, an electronic format for receiving applications.
Therefore, the HfL Program will use it from the beginning to avoid any
confusion in the future. Grants.gov was developed as part of the
President's Management Agenda and related E-Government Strategy, which
charged Federal grant-making agencies with developing a single
electronic system to find and apply for Federal grant opportunities.
The annual solicitation for HfL Projects will be posted in
Grants.gov. Additionally, the announcement would be publicized through
various other means, including posting on the World Wide Web, providing
facilitation by the FHWA Division Offices, and through other outreach
to the States.
All candidate project applications are to be submitted
electronically through Grants.gov. The STA should submit the draft
candidate project application form to the FHWA Division Office for
review prior to official submittal to Grants.gov. The Division Offices
shall rrrreview the project(s) application to ensure that they are
complete and meet the submission requirements. Once the application has
been determined to be acceptable, the Division Office shall notify STA,
with a cc: to the FHWA HfL Team that the candidate project has been
reviewed and that it meets the submission requirements.
Eligibility Criteria
Section 1502(b)(2) of SAFETEA-LU establishes the eligibility
criteria for a project's participation in the HfL Pilot Program. The
eligibility criteria includes:
The project must construct, reconstruct, or rehabilitate a
route or connection on a Federal-aid highway eligible for assistance
under chapter 1 of title 23, United States Code; and
The project must use innovative technologies,
manufacturing processes, financing, or contracting methods that improve
safety, reduce congestion due to construction, and improve quality.
Application Requirements
Section 1502(b)(1) of SAFETEA-LU requires States to submit an
application to the Secretary in order for a project to participate in
the HfL Pilot Program. This application must contain the following
information:
An identification and description of the project,
including when the project will be ready for construction;
An identification and description of the specific
performance goals that are proposed for the project;
A description of the innovative technologies,
manufacturing processes, financing, and contracting methods that will
be used for the proposed projects;
A description of how the project will result in improved
safety, reduced congestion due to construction, improved quality and
user satisfaction; and
Whether the State is willing to (a) participate in
subsequent technology transfer and information dissemination activities
associated with the project(s) (examples of such activities include
conducting an ``open house'' for highway practitioners on the project,
providing information to the FHWA for success stories, and providing
briefings to the FHWA and general public on the success of the
technology and process used); (b) provide information needed by HfL to
evaluate the project and innovations (costs incurred as a result of
supplying this information to FHWA would be an eligible project
expense); and (c) accept FHWA Division Office oversight if the project
is approved by HfL.
Project Selection and Evaluation
Section 1502(b)(4) of SAFETEA-LU establishes the selection criteria
for approving projects for participation in the HfL Pilot Program. This
criteria requires the Secretary to give priority to projects that:
Address achieving the HfL performance goals for safety,
construction congestion, quality and user satisfaction;
Deliver and deploy innovative technologies, manufacturing
processes, financing, contracting practices, and performance measures
that will demonstrate substantial improvements in safety, congestion,
quality, and cost-effectiveness;
Include innovation that will lead to change in the
administration of the State's transportation program to more quickly
construct long-lasting, high-quality, cost-effective projects that
improve safety and reduce congestion; and
Are or will be ready for construction within one year of
approval of the project application. For purposes of the HfL Program,
the FHWA considers a project to be ``ready for construction'' when the
FHWA Division Office authorizes the construction project.
In addition, the Secretary will also give priority to projects
where the State demonstrates a willingness to participate in subsequent
technology transfer and information dissemination activities associated
with the project(s).
The evaluation committee will be composed of FHWA staff who will
evaluate project applications based on the priorities noted above.
Number of Projects
Section 1502 establishes a maximum of 15 projects per year that may
receive HfL funding. In considering such factors as the purpose and
scope of the program available funding and the various associated costs
and activities needed for each HfL construction project to contribute
to the desired outcome, it is proposed that the total number of HfL
projects be kept at 15 per year, with the understanding that FHWA may
consider adding projects to take advantage of unique opportunities.
Only 15 projects may receive HfL funding each year, there is no limit
on the number of projects that may receive a waiver of the matching
share requirements. However, because of required program support, HfL
is limiting the number of waiver match projects it can approve.
Funding
Section 1101(a)(20) of SAFETEA-LU established total program funding
at $75,000,000 through 2009, including $15,000,000 for fiscal year
2006, and $20,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2009. This
funding includes incentive grants of up to 20 percent, but not more
than $5 million of the total cost of qualifying demonstration projects.
A maximum of 15 projects may receive incentive funds in any fiscal
year. Up to 100 percent Federal share is also allowed on HfL
demonstration projects. There is a goal of providing funds for at least
one project in each State by 2009. Based on the level of incentive
funding provided in SAFETEA-LU, it is anticipated that individual
project funding levels will be in the $500,000 to $1,000,000 range per
project. Project funding options are:
Option 1: The State may request HfL funding of up to 20 percent of
the total cost of a construction project as outlined in SAFETEA-LU. The
maximum HfL funding available for any one project is $5 million. The
HfL funds may be applied to the non-Federal share of the cost of
construction. Based on funding limitations it is unlikely any project
will be given the maximum amount. It is anticipated that individual
project funding levels will be in the range of
[[Page 30227]]
$500,000 to $1,000,000 per project. This HfL funding would be in
addition to the State apportionment.
Option 2: For projects carried out using funds apportioned to the
State under section 104(b)(1)-(4) of title 23, United States Code,
(i.e., NHS, CMAQ, STP, and IM funds), the State may request the Federal
share be adjusted up to 100 percent. The funding category proposed in
the nomination must meet the program funding eligibility requirements.
However, not more than 10 percent of the total of any one particular
apportioned Federal Aid fund can be applied to the HfL project.
Option 3: The State may request a combination of both Option 1 and
Option 2.
Spending Plan
The majority of the HfL funding, in the order of 70 percent, is
planned to be used for projects; a significant portion of the funds,
approximately 20 percent, is planned to be used for technology transfer
and the remainder of the funds would be expended on technology
partnerships, information dissemination and stakeholder input and
involvement. This approximate distribution of funds includes the costs
for monitoring and evaluation for each element.
Accountability
As a means of ensuring appropriate stewardship of public funds, the
HfL Program will include several monitoring and evaluation efforts to
measure the effectiveness of the program and projects, as well as
stakeholder input and involvement procedures. Although the individual
activities within the HfL Program will require extensive effort and
funding, there will need to be measurements beyond the basic levels of
success or failure of those activities taken individually. The higher
level of evaluation should reflect the primary objective of the program
as a whole: to accelerate the adoption of innovations and technologies
thereby improving safety and highway quality while reducing congestion
caused by congestion.
Monitor and Evaluation
The FHWA has the lead for monitoring and evaluation of HfL
projects, and would be responsible for data collection, data storage
and access, analysis, and reporting. FHWA personnel and private
contractors will be used for this function. The owners of HfL-funded
projects would supply or provide access to data and information. Costs
associated with these activities are an eligible project expense. The
FHWA Division Offices would serve as points of contact and coordination
between the FHWA's contractor(s) and the State. While the FHWA will be
taking the lead in the monitoring and evaluation of HfL Projects, the
FHWA regards the project owner as a partner and looks forward to
working with them in all aspects of the Highways for LIFE Program.
The monitoring and evaluation effort will be used to fully describe
and quantify the outputs, results, and outcomes in the goal areas and
to provide an assessment of the benefits derived from the overall
investment. A cost effective economic analysis on HfL projects will be
conducted by the FHWA HfL Team using economic techniques for measuring
and valuing user cost; this might include but not be limited to Event-
Only Analysis, Life Cycle Cost Analysis or Benefit-Cost Analysis. The
resulting information would serve as a resource to highway program
decision makers on the value of the innovations demonstrated in the HfL
projects, help maintain the momentum needed to achieve the HfL goals,
demonstrate the value of the entire pilot program, and provide the
basis for projecting the benefits gained from expanding such an
approach in the future.
The monitoring and evaluation element would encompass the entire
HfL Program. For the HfL projects, information collected prior to,
during, and immediately after construction would include a full array
of highway condition, financing, design, contracting, construction,
operations, and safety data, as well as user statistics and opinions.
The costs, outcomes, impacts, and benefits of the technology
partnerships would also be fully documented. To the extent possible,
information collected for the technology transfer and information
dissemination aspects would include objective measures of the
effectiveness and impact of the individual activities that are
undertaken, in addition to information on the costs of those
activities. The information gathered on the HfL projects, technology
transfer and technology partnerships will also be used in research and
development for the next generation of technologies and innovations and
future technology transfer initiatives.
Stakeholder Input
The HfL stakeholders include highway owners, builders, suppliers,
consultants, academicians, users (commercial motor carriers, motorists,
bicyclist, and pedestrians), and those impacted secondarily by highways
(neighbors and adjacent landowners, receivers of goods shipped over
highways). Through stakeholder input and involvement, the FHWA desires
to refine the approach and implementation of the HfL Program as well as
to build ownership for the program. Stakeholder input and involvement
will be an ongoing element of the HfL Program in order to evaluate the
progress of the program, consider appropriate redirection in light of
progress, and assess the overall program results. Stakeholders had
opportunities to provide input on both the HfL Implementation plan, and
the conduct of the program itself, including:
The HfL performance goals;
Applicable technologies and practices;
Technology partnerships approaches; and
Evaluation of HfL outcomes and benefits including
demonstration projects, technology partnerships, technology transfer
and information dissemination.
The FHWA is considering several additional stakeholder input and
involvement approaches for the HfL Program. Providing information and
soliciting feedback would happen routinely through notices published in
the Federal Register, presentations at highway town hall meetings or
regional forums, and the establishment of a Web-based communications
interchange site, or ``Community of Practice'' on the HfL Internet Web
site http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hfl/.
(Authority: Pub. L. 109-59, Sec. 1502, 23 U.S.C. 502 and 23 U.S.C.
315)
Issued on: May 19, 2006.
J. Richard Capka,
Acting Federal Highway Administrator.
[FR Doc. E6-7954 Filed 5-23-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P