[Federal Register: March 22, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 55)]
[Notices]
[Page 13552-13556]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr22mr07-117]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
Solicitation of Applications for Certain Federal-Aid Highway
Funding Available in Fiscal Year 2007 Under Federal Highway
Discretionary Grant Programs
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of funding availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is to solicit applications for
Federal grant funding and to issue supplemental notice and information
to eligible grantees concerning discretionary grant funds available for
obligation in Fiscal Year 2007 under eight discretionary grant programs
administered by FHWA. It seeks applications (either new or amended) to
the programs that both meet the programs' respective statutory criteria
and emphasize the proposed projects' highway safety and congestion
reduction benefits. The FHWA will make its funding determinations
through a merit-based selection process.
This notice applies to the following programs: the Ferry Boat
Discretionary Program (23 U.S.C. 147), the Innovative Bridge Research
and Construction Program (23 U.S.C. 503(b)), the Interstate Maintenance
Discretionary Program (23 U.S.C. 118(c)), Public Lands Highway
Discretionary Program (23 U.S.C. 202-204), the Highways for Life Pilot
(HfL) Program (Sec. 1502 of Pub. L. 109-59), the Transportation
Community and System Preservation Program (Sec. 1117 of Pub. L. 109-
59), the Truck Parking Facilities Pilot Program (Sec. 1305 of Pub. L.
109-59), and the Delta Region Transportation Development Program (Sec.
1308 of Pub. L. 109-59).
DATES: Applications must be submitted by April 30, 2007, unless
otherwise specified (see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Section D). Late-
filed applications may be considered to the extent practical. This
deadline generally represents an extension of approximately 30 days
from the original deadline for applications.
ADDRESSES: Applications should be submitted electronically in MS Word
format by eligible applicants, generally State transportation
departments, by following the instructions provided under the
Supplemental Action Memoranda issued by FHWA to the State DOTs for the
above-referenced discretionary programs. The Supplemental Action
Memoranda for the various discretionary programs are posted on the FHWA
Web site: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/discretionary/currsol.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Please address questions concerning this
notice to Steve Rochlis, Office of Chief Counsel, Federal Highway
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, via e-mail at
Steve.Rochlis@dot.gov or (202) 366-1395, or to Thomas M. McNamara,
Office of the Secretary, via e-mail at Thomas.McNamara@dot.gov.
Questions concerning the specific grant program should be directed to
the point of contact listed on the information memoranda and posted on
the FHWA Web site.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access: An electronic copy of this document may be
downloaded
[[Page 13553]]
from the Office of the Federal Register's home page at: http://www.archives.gov
and the Government Printing Office's Web page at:
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara.
A. Background
The FHWA Administrator, acting on behalf of the Secretary, is
authorized to provide Federal grant assistance for the above programs
on a discretionary basis, and is seeking applications for the Ferry
Boat Discretionary Program, the Innovative Bridge Research and
Construction Program, the Interstate Maintenance Discretionary Program,
the Public Lands Highway Discretionary Program, the Highways for Life
Pilot Program, the Transportation Community and System Preservation
Program, the Truck Parking Facilities Pilot Program, and the Delta
Region Transportation Development Program. This notice supplements
FHWA's requests for applications to all eight discretionary programs.
It seeks applications (either new or amended) to the programs that both
meet the programs' respective statutory criteria and emphasize the
proposed projects' highway safety and congestion reduction benefits.
In a 1999 report (GAO/RCED 99-263 ``Transportation Infrastructure--
FHWA Should Assess and Compare the Benefits of Projects When Awarding
Discretionary Grants''), the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
found that FHWA's process for considering applications for
discretionary grants did not sufficiently emphasize a comparative
analysis of the projects' transportation benefits. In the report, GAO
urged FHWA to do more such analysis, and to ensure that FHWA funds
projects that provide the greatest transportation benefits. To address
the concerns outlined in the GAO report, as well as others raised
during an internal review, FHWA has decided to be more strategic in its
FY 2007 discretionary grant awards process by targeting its resources
toward projects that provide the greatest benefits. FHWA is
particularly focusing on projects with substantial benefits related to
either highway safety or congestion relief and invites application of
large-scale high-cost projects that provide strategic and substantial
safety or congestion reduction benefits within the particular
discretionary grant program.
Policies and Investments To Improve Highway Safety
Highway safety has been an increasing focus and priority for FHWA
over the recent past. Targeting discretionary funding in a results-
oriented comprehensive approach to safety is a means of directing
limited discretionary funding to those projects that will yield
tangible transportation and safety benefits. Improving highway safety
is achieved most effectively through a comprehensive approach which
integrates the ``4Es'' of safety: Engineering, Education, Enforcement,
and Emergency Medical Systems. It allows safety professionals to
consider the full range of safety tools to address problems, make the
choice based on the most effective countermeasure, and implement
strategies that may require not only an engineering fix but also
targeted enforcement and greater public awareness.
Specific Actions Enhancing the Safety of Highway Users
Highway fatalities totaled 43,443 on our Nation's highways in 2005,
up from 42,836 in 2004; according to the Fatality Analysis Reporting
System (FARS). The rate of highway fatalities, measured in terms of
deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled has remained relatively
constant over the past several years at approximately 1.45; failing to
maintain a steady decline in the 2000's as was seen over the previous 3
decades or more. If the fatality rate remains at the current level, the
Nation would experience nearly 50,000 deaths a year by the end of this
decade. In addition to the tragedy of lives lost and millions of
serious injuries sustained, the economic impact to the Nation is
enormous.
According to a study conducted by the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, it is estimated that current levels of highway
crashes have an annual economic impact of over $230 billion (in year
2000 dollars) in the United States,
Improving highway safety is achieved most effectively through a
comprehensive approach which integrates the ``4Es'' of safety:
Engineering, Education, Enforcement, and Emergency Medical Systems. It
allows safety professionals to consider the full range of safety tools
to address problems, make a choice based on the most effective
countermeasure, and implement strategies that may require not only
engineering solutions, but also targeted enforcement and greater public
awareness.
Highway design, the infrastructure side of the engineering ``E'' of
safety, also plays a significant role. The FHWA is focusing resources
on three major crash types to improve infrastructure safety: Roadway
departure, intersection, and pedestrian crashes. In addition, a number
of cross-cutting programs support infrastructure safety, such as work
zones, visibility, older and younger road users, and speed management.
Roadway Departure--Roadway departure crashes, which include
vehicles leaving the roadway as well as head-on crashes, represent 59
percent of all fatalities. Two-lane rural roads are a particular
concern, as vehicles have little opportunity to recover if they leave
the pavement, and the opportunity for head-on collisions is greater.
Barrier systems are designed to mitigate the consequences of leaving
the roadway, if a hazardous roadside object cannot otherwise be
removed. Barrier systems may also be applied in the median of divided
roadways to physically separate traffic and prevent head-on collisions
from occurring. Rumble strips (longitudinal and transverse) have proven
to be a life-saving countermeasure, on shoulders of divided four-lane
facilities, as centerlines on two-lane roadways, and at approaches to
intersections and sharp curves.
Intersection--Intersection crashes represent 21 percent of all
fatalities. This includes both signalized as well as unsignalized
intersections. Intersection-related crashes represent more than 50
percent of all crashes in urban areas and 30 percent of all crashes in
rural areas. Safety strategies for intersections range from simple
adjustments to the signal timing to innovative intersection designs.
Traditional intersection safety strategies include improving horizontal
and/or vertical sight distances, adding a protected-only left turn
phase, improving advance signing, and installing and improving
lighting. Reducing the occurrence of red light running through camera
enforcement can be an effective tool from an enforcement perspective.
In addition, installation of an innovative intersection design, such as
a roundabout, and the application of Intelligent Transportation System
(ITS) technologies are promising for safety overall, and particularly
for intersections.
Pedestrian--Pedestrian fatalities represent 11 percent of all
highway fatalities. While the pedestrian safety challenge is
predominantly urban in nature, some States do have rural pedestrian
issues. The types of safety strategies effective at reducing pedestrian
fatalities are similar to those effective for intersection fatalities.
Adequate lighting can make a significant impact on pedestrian safety.
Good delineation and advance signing are also important. Channeling
pedestrian movements can improve safety, as the majority of pedestrian
fatalities occur at mid-block locations. Traffic calming techniques
that reduce
[[Page 13554]]
and control speed are also important to increased pedestrian safety. In
addition, adequate sidewalks and walkways are critical to safe and
efficient pedestrian movements.
Cross-cutting Programs--In addition to the three focus areas noted
above, safety can be advanced in a number of cross-cutting areas. Work
zone fatalities represent approximately 1,000 fatalities annually. Work
zone safety may be increased through proper planning and phasing; use
of standard signing and markings; use of technologies such as work area
intrusion alarms, queue detection sensors, and speed feedback signs;
and strong enforcement. Older and younger road users experience a much
higher fatality rate than the general population. Improved lighting and
adequate retroreflective signs and pavement markings allow all users to
benefit from good roadway delineation and provide all drivers with the
information needed to make safe decisions. Speed management has great
potential for significantly advancing safety; this activity includes
education and training needed to set appropriate speed limits,
enforcement to ensure compliance with appropriate speeds, and
engineering roadways to encourage safe speeds. Speed management
strategies range from the application of automated enforcement to
traffic calming techniques.
Behavioral Safety Issues--The safe engineering of roads and
roadsides is only one part of the safety equation. Without consistent
improvement in driver behavior, traffic enforcement, and emergency
medical services, dramatic reductions in highway fatalities will not
occur, even with engineering improvements. To address these behavioral
problems, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration works
closely with State and local governments to increase public education
and awareness and support targeted enforcement campaigns.
The Challenges of Highway Congestion
Transportation system congestion is one of the single largest
threats to U.S. economic prosperity and the American way of life. In
response to the challenges of congestion, in May 2006 the Department of
Transportation established the National Strategy to Reduce Congestion
on America's Transportation Network (the ``Congestion Initiative'').
FHWA's increased emphasis on congestion reduction in its distribution
of FY 2007 discretionary funding is directly in support of the
Congestion Initiative, and FHWA expects that the projects funded
through the eight discretionary programs described in this notice will
yield tangible economic and transportation benefits that are likely to
far exceed the Federal investment in each project.
Traffic congestion affects people in nearly every aspect of their
daily lives--where they live, where they work, where they shop, and how
much they pay for goods and services. According to 2003 figures, in
certain metropolitan areas the average rush hour driver loses as many
as 93 hours per year to travel delay--the equivalent of more than two
weeks of work that amounts annually to a ``congestion tax'' as high as
$1,598 per traveler in wasted time and fuel.\1\ Nationwide, congestion
imposes costs on the economy of at least $63 billion per year.\2\ The
costs of congestion are significantly higher when taking into account
the cost of unreliability to drivers and businesses, the environmental
impacts of idle-related auto emissions, increased gasoline prices and
the immobility of labor markets that result from congestion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Texas Transportation Institute (``TTI''), 2005 Urban
Mobility Report, May 2005 (http://tti.tamu.edu/documents/mobility_report_2005.pdf
), Tables 1 and 2.
\2\ TTI, 2005 Urban Mobility Report, p. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nationally, in a 2005 survey conducted by the National League of
Cities, 35% of U.S. citizens reported traffic congestion as the most
deteriorated living condition in their cities over the past five years;
85% responded that traffic congestion was as bad as, or worse than, it
was in the previous year.\3\ Similarly, in a 2001 survey conducted by
the U.S. Conference of Mayors, 79% of Americans from ten metropolitan
areas reported that congestion had worsened in the prior five years;
50% believe it has become ``much worse.''\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ National League of Cities survey of cities (2005).
\4\ U.S. Conference of Mayors survey on traffic congestion
(2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Policies and Investments To Reduce Congestion
A variety of transportation policies and investments serve to
reduce congestion, including design, engineering, operational and
technological improvements. The most important--albeit often
misunderstood--congestion reduction measure is congestion pricing.
Congestion pricing leverages the principles of supply and demand to
manage traffic. It does this by charging drivers a user fee that varies
by traffic volume (or as a proxy for volume--by time of day), thus
managing highway resources in a manner that promotes free-flow traffic
conditions on highways virtually twenty-four hours per day. Congestion
pricing achieves free-flow conditions by shifting rush hour highway
travel to other transportation modes or routes or to off-peak periods,
taking particular advantage of the fact that many rush hour drivers on
typical urban highways are not commuters. By removing a fraction of the
vehicles from a congested rush hour roadway, pricing enables the system
to flow much more efficiently, allowing more cars to move through the
same physical space. Similar variable charges have been successfully
utilized in other industries (on airline tickets, cell phone rates, and
electricity, for example), and there is a consensus among economists
that congestion pricing represents the single most viable approach to
reducing traffic congestion.
Congestion pricing is no longer simply a theory; it has
demonstrated positive results both here in the U.S. and around the
world. Successful American applications of congestion pricing include
California's SR-91 between Anaheim and Riverside, portions of I-15
outside of San Diego, and Express Lanes on I-394 between downtown
Minneapolis and the western suburbs. The pricing of each of these
facilities has enabled congestion-free rush hour commuting and proven
popular with drivers of all income levels. Internationally, congestion
pricing has yielded dramatic reductions in traffic congestion and
increases in travel speeds in Singapore, London, and Stockholm.
Notably, a small reduction in vehicles can yield dramatic improvements
in traffic, as demonstrated by a British study, which projected that a
9% drop in traffic could yield a 52% drop in congestion delay.\5\ This
same dynamic plays out in metropolitan areas every August, as family
vacations lead to a minor decrease in rush hour drivers, which
substantially reduces area traffic congestion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Department of Transport, U.K., Feasibility Study of Road
Pricing in the U.K.: A Report to the Secretary of State for
Transport, Road Price Steering Group, Chapter 4, Figure 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In all its forms, congestion pricing benefits drivers and
businesses by reducing delays and stress, increasing the predictability
of trip times, and allowing for more deliveries per hour. It benefits
public transportation by improving transit speeds and the reliability
of transit service, increasing transit ridership and lowering costs per
traveler for transit providers. State and local governments benefit by
improving the quality of transportation services without tax increases
or large capital
[[Page 13555]]
expenditures, providing additional revenues for funding transportation,
retaining businesses and expanding the tax base. It saves lives by
shortening incident response times for emergency responders. And, it
benefits society as a whole by reducing fuel consumption and vehicle
emissions, allowing for more efficient land use decisions, reducing
housing market distortions, and increasing time available for
participation in civic life.
Beyond pricing, technological advancements may be deployed to
reduce urban congestion by improving system operations and safety.
Examples of technological innovations that may help reduce congestion
include:
Longitudinal control designed to enhance spatial
efficiency on existing highways, precision docking, and real-time
travel information;
Traffic management technology, including adaptive traffic
signal control systems and the use of cameras to provide real-time
information to first responders to help them determine what equipment
they will need before they arrive at the site of an accident or
incident; and
Advanced traveler information systems that provide web or
wireless access to route-specific travel time and toll information;
route planning assistance using historical records of congestion by
time of day; parking alerts; vehicle locator systems; or communications
technologies that gather traffic- and incident-related data from a few
vehicles traveling on a roadway and then publish that information to
drivers via mobile phones, in-car units or dynamic message signs.
B. Discretionary Grant Applications Should Specify Safety and
Congestion Reduction Benefits Associated With the Project Seeking
Funding
Discretionary grant applications to any of the programs must be
responsive to each program's specific statutory criteria. However, in
addition to those criteria, the applicant should provide further
description of the highway safety and congestion reduction benefits of
the project, as follows:
1. Highway Safety benefits. With respect to safety, the applicant
should describe the safety benefits associated with the project or
activity for which funding is sought, including whether the project,
activity, or improvement:
Will result in a measurable reduction in the loss of
property, injury, or life;
Incorporates innovative safety design or operational
techniques, including variable pricing for congestion reduction,
electronic tolling, barrier systems, and intersection-related
enhancements;
Incorporates innovative construction work zone strategies
to improve safety;
Is located on a rural road that is in need of priority
attention based on analysis of safety experience; and/or
Is located in an urban area of high injury or fatality,
and is an initiative to improve the design, operation or other aspect
of the existing facility that will result in a measurable safety
improvement.
2. Congestion reduction benefits. With respect to congestion, the
applicant should describe the extent (if any) to which the project,
activity, or improvement:
Relieves congestion in an urban area or along a major
transportation corridor;
Employs operational and technological improvements that
promote safety and congestion relief; and/or \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Traditional toll plazas may create traffic backups that
present a safety hazard; the conversion of traditional plazas to
electronic toll collection systems should greatly reduce such
hazards and improve safety on toll roads. See Highway Accident
Report NTSB/HAR-06/03 ``Multivehicle Collision on Interstate 90
Hampshire-Marengo Toll Plaza Near Hampshire, Illinois'' (October 1,
2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Addresses major freight bottlenecks.
C. Coordination With Other Congestion Initiative Solicitations
In keeping with the Department's emphasis on congestion reduction,
the Department has issued a number of other solicitations related to
the Congestion Initiative. The Department encourages applicants to
coordinate their responses to this Notice with any applications
submitted in response to the solicitations listed below. Applicants
that also apply for funding under the Urban Partnership Agreement
Program (see (1) below), Intelligent Transportation System Operational
Testing to Mitigate Congestion Program (see (2) below), Value Pricing
Pilot Program (see (3) below), and/or Corridors of the Future Program
(see (4) below) must respond separately to each solicitation from which
they seek funding. However, the Department will give priority
consideration in its funding decisions to parties designated as either
Urban Partners or Corridors of the Future.
The related solicitations are:
(1) Solicitation for the Urban Partnership Agreement (UPA),
published on December 8, 2006, in the Federal Register at 71 FR 71233.
The purpose of the UPA solicitation is to solicit proposals by
metropolitan areas to enter into UPAs with the Department in order to
demonstrate strategies with a combined track record of effectiveness in
reducing traffic congestion.
(2) Solicitation for the Value Pricing Pilot (VPP) Program. The VPP
Program, Sec. 1012(b) of Public Law 102-240, as amended by Sec.
1216(a) of Public Law 105-178, and Sec. 1604(a) of Public Law 109-59,
119 Stat. 1249, supports implementation of a variety of pricing-based
approaches for managing congestion on highways. The solicitation for
the VPP Program, published December 22, 2006, in the Federal Register
at 71 FR 777084, aligns the program with the Congestion Initiative to
support metropolitan areas in implementing broad congestion pricing
strategies in the near term.
(3) Solicitation for the Intelligent Transportation System
Operational Testing to Mitigate Congestion (ITS-OTMC) Program. The ITS
Research and Development program, as reauthorized in SAFETEA-LU,
supports the research, development and testing of ITS for a variety of
purposes. The solicitation for the ITS-OTMC Program, published on
December 18, 2006, in the Federal Register at 71 FR 75806, supports the
operational testing and evaluation of advanced technologies to reduce
metropolitan congestion.
(4) In addition to these solicitations, the DOT's new ``Corridors
of the Future Program'' (CFP) is part of the Congestion Initiative, and
is specifically designed to accelerate the development of multi-State,
and possibly multi-use, transportation corridors to help reduce
congestion. The primary goal of the CFP is to encourage States to
leverage public and private resources to develop innovative national
and regional approaches to reducing congestion, increase freight system
reliability and enhance the quality of life for U.S. citizens. The CFP
contributes to the objectives of the DOT corridor programs by
specifically working with multi-State coalitions to identify innovative
funding sources for corridors of national and regional significance in
need of investment and improved operations for the purpose of reducing
congestion. Eligible CFP public and private sector entities should work
with their State DOT to identify and submit appropriate candidate
applications for discretionary grant fund allocations under the
discretionary programs discussed herein.
For more information on the DOT Congestion Initiative, please refer
to http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/congestion/index.htm and http://www
.fightgridlocknow.gov/.
[[Page 13556]]
D. Solicitation Deadline Extension
Applications for discretionary projects were generally solicited
through FHWA Division offices to the State DOTs in early January 2007,
with a deadline of March 30, 2007. This solicitation extends the
deadline to April 30, 2007, except for the HfL program, which shall
close two weeks after the publication of this notice. By this notice,
and by the dissemination of the Supplemental Action Memoranda for the
discretionary programs, the FHWA is issuing new notices amending prior
notices and re-soliciting applications for these programs in accordance
with their statutory criteria under a merit based selection process.
This notice also clarifies that project applications should specify
safety and congestion reduction benefits associated with the project,
improvement, or activity. The amended grant application procedures are
posted at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/discretionary/currsol.htm and will be
distributed electronically to all FHWA Division offices and through the
Division offices to the State DOTs.
The Administrator, acting on behalf of the Secretary, may amend,
revise, waive or modify the terms for funding set forth in this notice
at any time.
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 315.
Issued on: March 16, 2007.
J. Richard Capka,
Federal Highway Administrator.
[FR Doc. E7-5161 Filed 3-21-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P