High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (“HSIPR”) Program, 29900-29929 [E9-14692]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
29900
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
[Docket No. FRA–2009–0045]
High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail
(‘‘HSIPR’’) Program
AGENCY: Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of funding availability;
issuance of interim program guidance.
SUMMARY: On April 16, 2009, President
Obama, together with Vice President
Biden and Secretary of Transportation
LaHood, announced a new vision for
developing high-speed rail in America.
They called for a collaborative effort
among the Federal Government, States,
railroads, and other key stakeholders to
help transform America’s transportation
system through a national network of
high-speed rail corridors. This notice
builds on this ‘‘Vision for High-Speed
Rail’’ (available on FRA’s Web site) by
detailing the application requirements
and procedures for obtaining funding
for high-speed rail projects under the
American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act of 2009 (ARRA) and the Department
of Transportation Appropriations Acts
of 2008 and 2009 (FY 2008/2009 DOT
Appropriations Acts), while laying the
foundation for a longer-term program to
establish a network of high-speed rail
corridors.
The evaluation and selection criteria
in this notice are intended to prioritize
projects that deliver transportation,
economic recovery and other public
benefits, including energy
independence, environmental quality,
and livable communities; ensure project
success through effective project
management, financial planning and
stakeholder commitments; and
emphasize a balanced approach to
project types, locations, innovation, and
timing.
This notice describes multiple
funding paths to accommodate projects
at different stages of development, while
also rationalizing the variety of statutory
and administrative requirements
underpinning the program. FRA
recognizes the unique challenges and
opportunities presented, and will seek,
to the maximum extent permitted under
law and administrative procedures, to
work collaboratively with applicants
and stakeholders throughout the
process.
DATES:
Public comments. Public comments
on this notice are due no later than July
10, 2009.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
Preapplications. Preapplications for
all funding Tracks are due no later than
July 10, 2009. (FRA encourages earlier
submission of preapplications).
Applications. Applications for
funding for Track 1 (Projects), Track 3
(Planning), and Track 4 (FY2009
Appropriations Projects) are due no
later than August 24, 2009; applications
for funding Track 2 (Service
Development Programs) are due no later
than October 2, 2009. (See Section 1.6
in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this notice for descriptions of
each funding Track, and Section 4.3.6 in
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
of this notice for additional information
on deadlines for both preapplications
and applications.) FRA reserves the
right to modify these deadlines, based
on comments received on this notice.
ADDRESSES:
Public comments. To ensure that
comments are not entered into the
docket more than once, please submit
comments, identified by docket number
[FRA–2009–0045], by only one of the
following methods:
• Web site: The U.S. Government
electronic docket site is https://
www.regulations.gov. Go to this Web
site and follow the instructions for
submitting comments into docket
number [FRA–2009–0045];
• Mail: Mail comments to U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Docket
Operations, MS–30, Room W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590;
• Hand delivery or courier: Bring
comments to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Docket Operations, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays; or
• Fax: Telefax comments to 202–493–
6330.
Instructions for submitting public
comments: The agency name (Federal
Railroad Administration) and the docket
number [FRA–2009–0045] for this
notice must be submitted with any
comments. If comments are submitted
by mail or by hand, please submit two
copies of the comments. For
confirmation that the Federal Railroad
Administration has received the
comments, a self-addressed stamped
postcard must be included. Note that all
comments received by any method will
be posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, and will
be available to Internet users. The
Department’s complete Privacy Act
Statement is available for review in the
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
Federal Register published April 11,
2000, (65 FR 19477), or by visiting
https://www.regulations.gov.
Preapplications. Preapplications must
be submitted to the HSIPR Program
Manager electronically via e-mail at
HSIPR@dot.gov. Pre-applicants should
receive a confirmation e-mail, but are
advised to request a return receipt to
confirm transmission. Only
preapplications received via e-mail as
provided above shall be deemed
properly filed.
Applications. Applications and
supporting documentation must be
submitted through https://
www.grantsolutions.gov. If problems
with https://www.grantsolutions.gov are
encountered, applications and
supporting documentation may be
submitted to the HSIPR Program
Manager electronically via e-mail at
HSIPR@dot.gov. Supporting materials
that cannot be submitted electronically
may be mailed or hand delivered to:
U.S. Department of Transportation,
Federal Railroad Administration, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, MS–20, Room
W38–202, SE., Washington, DC 20590
Attn. HSIPR Program. Applicants are
encouraged to use special courier
services to avoid shipping delays. Preapplication and application forms are
available at https://www.fra.dot.gov/us/
content/2243.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
further information regarding this notice
and the grants program, please contact
the FRA HSIPR Program Manager via email at HSIPR@dot.gov, or by mail: U.S.
Department of Transportation, Federal
Railroad Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, MS–20, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590 Attn. HSIPR
Program.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
Overview
1. Funding Opportunity Description
2. Award Information
3. Eligibility Information
4. Application and Submission Information
5. Application Review Information
6. Award Administration Information
7. FRA Contacts
List of Acronyms Appendix 1: Additional
Information on Eligibility
Appendix 2: Additional Information on
Planning and Engineering
Appendix 3: Additional Information on
Award Administrations and Grant
Conditions
Overview
FRA is soliciting public comment on
this document through Docket Number
FRA–2009–0045 (https://
www.regulations.gov). While the interim
guidance in this document does not
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
constitute a rulemaking, FRA will
consider all comments received by July
10, 2009 and will publish any resultant
clarifications or revisions to this
document in the Federal Register and
on FRA’s Web site (https://
www.fra.dot.gov). FRA began this
comment process during its outreach
sessions in May and June, in which over
1,100 stakeholders attended seven
sessions around the country; in
addition, a public docket was
established for comment, and 110
comments were received as of June 15,
2009. FRA has already adjusted the
approach contained herein based on this
initial feedback.
Preapplications are required and the
deadline for submissions (for all Tracks)
is July 10, 2009. Applications may not
be considered if preapplications are
received after July 10, 2009; FRA
encourages submission of
preapplications earlier than the July 10
deadline. FRA will work with preapplicants if necessary during the
period prior to the application deadlines
to ensure eligibility, appropriateness of
application Track, and structure of
project or program; applicants should
work on completing full grant
applications concurrent with
preparation and review of
preapplications.
Deadlines for submission of full grant
applications under the four Tracks (see
Section 1.6 for track descriptions) are:
Track 1 (Projects), Track 3 (Planning),
and Track 4 (FY2009 Appropriations
Projects)—August 24, 2009; Track 2
(High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger
Rail Service Development Programs)—
October 2, 2009. To give prospective
applicants adequate time to complete
their applications (while incorporating
any guidance clarifications or revisions),
FRA may adjust application dates to
allow for a minimum of 30 days for
application submission following any
material changes to guidance that arise
from comments. For full details on these
deadlines and how to satisfy them,
prospective applicants should consult
Section 4.3.6 of this guidance.
Section 1: Funding Opportunity
Description
1.1 Authority
This program guidance and financial
assistance announcement pertains to
FRA’s new High-Speed Intercity
Passenger Rail Program (‘‘HSIPR’’),
which consolidates the following
recently-authorized and closely-related
programs:
• The High-Speed Rail Corridor
Development program, authorized
under Section 501 of the Passenger Rail
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
Investment and Improvement Act of
2008 (‘‘PRIIA,’’ Division B of Pub. L.
110–432, October 16, 2008, codified at
49 U.S.C. 26106);
• The Intercity Passenger Rail Service
Corridor Capital Assistance program,
authorized under Section 301 of PRIIA
(codified at 49 U.S.C. chapter 244);
• The Congestion Grants program,
authorized under Section 302 of PRIIA
(codified at 49 U.S.C. 24105);
• The Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 Capital
Assistance to States—Intercity
Passenger Rail Service program,
authorized and funded under the
Department of Transportation
Appropriations Act, 2009 (‘‘FY 2009
DOT Appropriations Act,’’ Title I of
Division I of Pub. L. 111–8, March 11,
2009); and
• The FY 2008 Capital Assistance to
States—Intercity Passenger Rail Service
program, authorized and funded under
the Department of Transportation
Appropriations Act, 2008 (‘‘FY 2008
DOT Appropriations Act,’’ Title I of
Division K of Pub. L. 110–161,
December 26, 2007).
This document incorporates both (i)
interim guidance required for this
program pursuant to the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
(‘‘ARRA,’’ Pub. L. 111–5, February 17,
2009); and (ii) interim guidance
required pursuant to 49 U.S.C.
24402(a)(2). The funding made available
under this financial assistance
announcement was appropriated under
ARRA, and the FY 2008/2009 DOT
Appropriations Act. The funding
opportunities described in this guidance
are available under Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance (CFDA) numbers
20.317 and 20.319.
1.2 Program Description and
Legislative History
This program guidance and funding
opportunity announcement represents
the second major milestone in the
implementation of the new HSIPR
Program. It follows and builds upon
Vision for High-Speed Rail in America,
the Administration’s April 2009 highspeed rail strategic plan for the
implementation of this program
(available at https://www.fra.dot.gov/us/
content/31).
As one of President Obama’s foremost
transportation priorities, the HSIPR
Program helps to address the nation’s
transportation challenges by investing
in an efficient High-Speed Rail/Intercity
Passenger Rail network that connects
communities across America.
Congress established the framework
for the program through the passage of
three key pieces of legislation:
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
29901
• Capital Assistance to States—
Intercity Passenger Rail Service—In the
FY 2008 DOT Appropriations Act,
Congress established a new pilot
program for joint Federal-State intercity
passenger rail capital investment,
known as Capital Assistance to States—
Intercity Passenger Rail Service. Under
this program, $30 million in Federal
funding was made available to States on
a competitive basis to fund up to 50
percent of the capital cost of improving
Intercity Passenger Rail service; up to 10
percent of the $30 million was available
for rail corridor planning grants. An
additional $90 million was appropriated
under similar terms as part of the FY
2009 DOT Appropriations Act.
• Passenger Rail Investment and
Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA)—
Enacted in October 2008, PRIIA
represents the most sweeping
Congressional action on intercity
passenger rail since those that created
the National Railroad Passenger
Corporation (Amtrak) and the Northeast
Corridor Improvement Project during
the 1970s. In addition to reauthorizing
Amtrak, PRIIA established three new
competitive grant programs for funding
High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail
capital improvements, each of which, as
authorized, require a 20 percent nonFederal match:
Æ Intercity Passenger Rail Service
Corridor Capital Assistance (Section
301)—Under this section, the broadest
of PRIIA’s three new funding programs,
States (including the District of
Columbia), groups of States, interstate
compacts, and public Intercity
Passenger Rail agencies established by
one or more State(s) may apply for
grants for capital improvements to
benefit all types of Intercity Passenger
Rail service, including high-speed
service. Amtrak may participate through
a cooperative agreement with a State(s).
To be eligible for funding under this
program, proposed projects must meet a
number of requirements (e.g., inclusion
in a State Rail Plan).
Æ High-Speed Rail Corridor
Development (Section 501)—Although
similar in structure, criteria, and
conditions to Section 301, eligibility for
this program is restricted to projects
intended to develop Federallydesignated High-Speed Rail corridors
for Intercity Passenger Rail services that
may reasonably be expected to reach
speeds of at least 110 miles per hour
(mph). Applicant eligibility under
Section 501 is broadened from Section
301 to include Amtrak as well.
Æ Congestion Grants (Section 302)—
This program authorizes grants to States
or to Amtrak (in cooperation with
States) for facilities, infrastructure, and
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
29902
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
equipment for high-priority rail corridor
projects to reduce congestion or
facilitate Intercity Passenger Rail
ridership growth.
• American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA)—The
$8 billion in High-Speed Rail/Intercity
Passenger Rail funding under ARRA
‘‘jump starts’’ the widespread
improvement of High-Speed Rail/
Intercity Passenger Rail service in the
United States. The appropriation
references the authorities included in
Sections 301, 302, and 501 of PRIIA but
states the ‘‘Federal share of the costs for
which a grant is made * * * shall be,
at the option of the recipient, up to 100
percent.’’ It also does not require that
proposed projects be included in a State
Rail Plan (and it excludes the costs of
preparing such plans from eligibility for
ARRA funding).
1.3
Selection Process and Priorities
The application process begins with a
preapplication. The preapplication is a
simple form intended to give FRA an
early assessment of the universe of
projects and programs, and to provide
pre-applicants with any feedback
necessary to complete their applications
(e.g., eligibility issues, most appropriate
application Track to pursue, etc.). It also
allows FRA and preapplicants to start a
collaborative process for ensuring early
program success. Preapplications
should be submitted as early as
possible, but no later than July 10, 2009;
applicants should not wait for
submission of, or any comments on, a
preapplication before preparing their
full applications. In recognition of a
variety of considerations, including the
urgency of project implementation as
reflected in ARRA and the complexities
of launching a new HSIPR program,
FRA considers the preapplication to be
an essential component of the
application submission and decision
making processes. As a result, FRA will
only consider applications that were not
supported by a timely filed
preapplication only if there are special,
compelling circumstances. Complete
applications for Tracks 1, 3 and 4 are
due on August 24, 2009 and for Track
2 on October 2, 2009. Once an
application is received, it will proceed
through a three-step process.
• Screening for completeness and
eligibility (both applicant and project
eligibility);
• Evaluation panel review process,
applying ‘‘evaluation criteria’’; and
• Final review and selection,
applying ‘‘selection’’ criteria.
See Section 5 for a full description of
the review process and criteria.
1.3.1
Application Screening
Screening will confirm applicant and
project eligibility, and ensure that the
application provides complete and
sufficient information for the evaluation
process.
1.3.2
Evaluation Criteria
Eligible applications in all Tracks will
be individually reviewed and assessed
against seven evaluation criteria—
organized into three categories—
detailed below. For each of the
applicable criteria, the application will
be assigned a rating of between one and
five points, based on the application’s
fulfillment of the objectives of each
criterion. These individual criterion
ratings will then be accounted according
to priority of criteria (which vary by
Track, as described in Section 5), to
arrive at an overall rating for the
application.
FRA will require a rigorous analysis
of benefits and costs of proposed
projects, with a focus on the
transportation service and output
measures that are fundamental to
estimating other public benefits.
Applicants must provide requested
benefit and cost information the best
available tools in order to ensure
adequate assessment of business cases
for projects.
EVALUATION CRITERIA
Evaluation criteria1
Example factors
Key documentation
Public Return on Investment
1. Transportation Benefits
2. Economic Recovery
3. Other Public Benefits
• Improved Intercity Passenger Rail service
• Transportation network integration (including intermodal connections)
• Transportation safety benefits
• Preserving and creating jobs—particularly in economically-distressed areas
• Service Development Plan (including business case;
assessment of benefits and public investment).
• Quantitative output measures (service—reliability,
schedule, capacity; and transportation—passengermiles, including sources—aviation, highway, induced).
• Environmental quality
• Energy efficiency
• Livable communities
Project Success Factors
1. Project Management Approach
2. Sustainability of Benefits
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
1 See Section 4 for a detailed summary of
submission requirements, and Section 5 for
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
• Project management plan.
• Financial plan (capital and operating).
• Stakeholder agreements.
Organizational capacity
Track record of comparable projects
Adequacy of engineering
Reasonableness of schedule
Progress toward NEPA compliance
Thoroughness of management plan
Sufficiency of safety and security planning
Sufficiency of stakeholder agreements
Reasonableness of financial estimates
Availability of operating financial support
Quality of planning process
Jkt 217001
additional detail on evaluation and selection
criteria.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
29903
EVALUATION CRITERIA—Continued
Evaluation criteria1
Example factors
Key documentation
Other Attributes
1. Timeliness of Project
Completion
• Project readiness
• Reasonableness of completion schedule
1.3.3 Selection Criteria
After being assessed against the
evaluation criteria, applications for each
Track will collectively be reviewed to
• Project schedule.
ensure consistency and to balance
projects against national priorities and
schedules. For this review, the FRA
Administrator may consider several
cross-cutting comparative criteria before
final award determinations are made.
The table below summarizes these
additional selection criteria.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Selection criteria (balance and diversity)
1.
2.
3.
4.
Example factors
Region/location .....................................................................................
Innovation .............................................................................................
Partnerships .........................................................................................
Tracks and round timing ......................................................................
1.4 Program Implementation
Opportunities and Challenges
In addition to the fiscal constraints
currently affecting States, local
governments, and businesses, the
development of a comprehensive HighSpeed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail
network faces challenges specific to this
program and the rail industry. For
instance, FRA recognizes the challenges
associated with the need for agreements
among multiple States and with private
railroad companies, as well as the
shortage of engineering professionals,
planners, and managers with experience
in High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger
Rail development with project
implementation in the United States.
The intent to establish a pipeline of
future High-Speed Rail/Intercity
Passenger Rail programs and projects
poses a further challenge. The
traditional pipeline for major
transportation investments progresses
from alternatives analysis to investment
planning, preliminary engineering (PE)
and environmental clearance, final
design (FD), construction, and
operations. With very narrow
exceptions, States have historically
lacked a Federal funding partner in
High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail
development; thus, many States have no
High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail
program at all, and others find their
limited High-Speed Rail/Intercity
Passenger Rail development efforts
stalled at various points along the
typical progression.
This situation necessitates a Federal
funding approach that is flexible enough
to support the High-Speed Rail/Intercity
Passenger Rail development efforts of
each State—whether, for example, the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
•
•
•
•
Geography and economic conditions.
Technology and industrial/capacity development.
Multi-State agreements.
Project costs and schedules.
State has just initiated High-Speed Rail/
Intercity Passenger Rail planning, or has
prepared for capital investments to
enhance existing services, or has
readied itself to construct new
infrastructure to accommodate new
High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail
service. With such disparate situations
among the States, the Federal funding
approach must accommodate different
situations, offering an array of
possibilities to dovetail with the States’
diverse aspirations, capabilities, and
resources.
1.5 Environmental Review and
Approval
Central to High-Speed Rail/Intercity
Passenger Rail Program
implementation—and crucial to each
applicant’s choice of Track for a
proposal—is the environmental review
process required by the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and
related laws and regulations.2 NEPA
applies to all federal grant programs and
requires Federal agencies to integrate
environmental values into their
decision-making processes by
considering the environmental impacts
of their proposed actions and reasonable
alternatives to those actions. Agencies
must also make information on these
impacts and alternatives publicly
available before decisions are made and
actions occur. NEPA also mandates that
all reasonable alternatives be
considered, and to that end, an
alternatives analysis is typically
2 The National Historic Preservation Act, Clean
Water Act, 49 U.S.C. 303 relating to parks, wildlife
refuges and historic sites (commonly referred to as
Section 4(f)), and the Endangered Species Act are
examples.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
conducted during the environmental
review process.
FRA—as the Federal sponsoring
agency—has primary responsibility for
assuring NEPA compliance while
accomplishing the purposes, priorities,
and requirements of the HSIPR Program.
While NEPA compliance is a Federal
agency responsibility and the ultimate
decisions remain with the Federal
sponsoring agency, FRA encourages
applicants to take a leadership role in
NEPA documentation development,
consistent with existing law and
regulations. In the varied and flexible
HSIPR Program, with its four Tracks and
multiple authorizations, no single
approach to NEPA compliance will
work for every proposal and applicant.
Therefore, FRA will work closely with
applicants to assist in the timely and
effective completion of the NEPA
process in the manner most pertinent to
the applicant’s proposal.
NEPA reviews should focus on the
issues that are ripe for decision at each
stage of project or program
development. To help focus
environmental reviews, the Council on
Environmental Quality encourages
agencies to tier their environmental
reviews, whereby general matters or
broader programs are covered in a Tier
I NEPA document, such as a corridorwide (or ‘‘service’’) environmental
impact statement (EIS) or environmental
assessment (EA); and narrower more
site-specific projects or actions are
addressed in site-specific EISs, EAs or
categorical exclusion (CE) documents.
1.6
Funding Approach
In order to accommodate the variety
of potential applicant goals and stages of
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
29904
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
project development, while meeting the
statutory and program constraints, this
guidance provides four funding ‘‘tracks’’
in which applications may be
submitted. FRA has adopted this fourTrack approach to aid in near-term
economic recovery efforts and to
establish the path to realize a fullydeveloped national High-Speed Rail/
Intercity Passenger Rail network. The
deadlines for FRA obligation and
project(s) completion for each Track
reflect the imperatives of ARRA,
balanced with the longer-term
development goals. (See DATES above.)
1.6.2 Track 2—High-Speed Rail/
Intercity Passenger Rail Service
Development Programs (‘‘Track 2—
Programs’’)
This track is aimed at developing new
High-Speed Rail corridor and Intercity
Passenger Rail services, or substantial
upgrades to existing corridor services,
eligible under Section 501 (High-Speed
Rail Corridor Development) and Section
301 (Intercity Passenger Rail Corridor
Capital Assistance) of PRIIA. It is
intended to fund development of a set
of inter-related projects that constitute
the entirety or a distinct phase (or
geographic section) of a long-range
service development plan—projects
which collectively produce benefits
greater than the sum of each individual
project.4 Under this Track, not all
projects need to be ready-to-go; the
Federal Government provides a
commitment to fund the entire program,
generally through a Letter of Intent
(LOI), and obligates funds for FD/
construction projects through
cooperative agreements as soon as they
are deemed ready-to-go. Track 2 LOIs
and cooperative agreements must
include specific milestone deadlines for
completion of environmental,
engineering, design and other work.
To be eligible for awards under Track
2, Service Development Programs
(‘‘SDP’’—defined in Section 2.2) must
include completed: (a) A corridor-wide
‘‘service’’ NEPA study, such as a
programmatic or Tier I EIS; and (b) a
High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail
SDP, or an equivalent approach that
provides a business and investment
justification with sufficient project cost
and benefit estimates. Key elements of
an SDP or equivalent business case
include: (i) An overview of program
rationale (including purpose and need);
(ii) a service and operations plan, and a
prioritized capital investment plan for
infrastructure, fleet and stations/
facilities; and (iii) an implementation
approach, including schedule, project
management plan, stakeholder
agreements, and a financial plan for
funding both capital and operations. See
Appendix 2.1 for a summary of
expectations for a SDP.
Track 2 programs will generally
address infrastructure, equipment and
stations/facilities investments in a
comprehensive fashion. While these
programs are the most complicated and
need a particularly rigorous project
management approach, Track 2
programs represent the long-term
emphasis of the HSIPR Program, and
thus FRA expects to focus its
collaborative efforts on this Track. The
Federal funding share can be up to 100
percent, although evaluation criteria
favor projects that leverage federal
funding with non-federal investments.
3 While ARRA-funded projects are exempt from
State Rail Plan requirements, evaluation preference
is given to those that are part of a planning process
that includes a prioritized list of capital projects
supporting a corridor service development plan;
equipment projects should be consistent with
Section 305 of PRIIA, which calls for the
establishment of a standardized next-generation rail
corridor equipment pool (see Section 3.6.3).
4 A group of projects that collectively advance the
entirety, or a ‘‘phase’’ or ‘‘geographic section,’’ of
a corridor service development plan are referred to
here as a ‘‘program.’’
1.6.1 Track 1—Intercity Passenger Rail
Projects Funded Under ARRA (‘‘Track
1—Projects’’)
This track is aimed at chiefly
addressing the economic recovery goals
of ARRA through—(a) FD/construction
of ‘‘ready-to-go’’ projects—i.e., those
with completed site-specific NEPA
documentation (project-level final EIS,
final EA or CE documentation) along
with PE; and (b) completion of projectlevel NEPA and PE to prepare projects
for FD/construction grants that may be
available under future solicitations.
Track 1 projects should be completed
within two years of award. These
projects are funded through either
Section 301 (Intercity Passenger Rail
Corridor Capital Assistance) or Section
302 (Congestion Grants) of PRIIA, for
the benefit of existing services,
including those that support
development of High-Speed Rail.
Eligible projects include infrastructure,
facilities, and equipment, and must
have independent utility.3 The Federal
funding share can be up to 100 percent,
although evaluation criteria favor
projects that leverage federal funding
with non-federal investments.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
1.6.3 Track 3—Service Planning
Activities funded under the FY 2009
and FY 2008 DOT Appropriations Acts
(‘‘Track 3—Planning’’)
This track is aimed at helping
establish a pipeline of future HighSpeed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail
projects and service development
programs by advancing planning
activities for applicants at an earlier
stage of the development process. Under
Track 3, FRA will enter into cooperative
agreements for preparation of SDPs,
State Rail Plans and service-level
environmental documents.5 This Track
provides States an opportunity to
complete the prerequisite work needed
to submit applications under Tracks 1
and 2, so that applicants may be ready
for potential future solicitations. Under
the terms of the FY 2008/2009 DOT
Appropriations acts, planning activities
funded under this Track require a 50
percent non-Federal match.
1.6.4 Track 4—FY2009
Appropriations-Funded Projects (‘‘Track
4—FY2009 Appropriations Projects’’) 6
Track 4 provides an alternative for
projects that would otherwise fit under
Track 1, but for State applicants offering
at least a 50 percent non-Federal share
of financing. This Track offers
applicants simplified grant agreement
terms, and up to five years to complete
projects (vs. two years under Track 1).
Applicants providing at least a 50percent project match are strongly
encouraged to submit project
applications under Track 4 (those
submitting project application(s) under
Track 4 may also request concurrent
consideration of such application(s)
under Track 1).
1.7
Opportunity for Public Comment
FRA is soliciting public comment on
this document through Docket Number
FRA–2009–0045 (at https://
www.regulations.gov). While the interim
guidance in this document does not
constitute a rulemaking, FRA will
consider all comments received no later
than July 10, 2009 and will publish any
resultant clarifications or revisions to
5 Project-level NEPA documents are eligible for
funding under Tracks 1 and 2.
6 A total of $90 million was appropriated under
the FY 2009 DOT Appropriations Act under the
heading of Capital Assistance to States—Intercity
Passenger Service, of which no more than ten
percent, or $9 million, may be made available for
planning activities. In addition, a total of $540,500
in planning funding, and at least $1,352,573 in FD/
construction funding also remained available until
expended following the award of grants under the
FY 2008 Capital Assistance to States—Intercity
Passenger Service program.
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
this document in the Federal Register
and on FRA’s Web site (https://
www.fra.dot.gov). FRA began this
comment process during its outreach
sessions in May and June, in which over
1,100 stakeholders attended seven
sessions around the country; in
addition, a public docket was
established for comment, and 110
comments were received as of June 15,
2009. FRA has already revised the
approach contained herein based on this
initial feedback. To give prospective
applicants adequate time to complete
their applications (while incorporating
any guidance clarifications or revisions),
FRA may adjust application dates to
allow for a minimum of 30 days for
application submission following any
material changes to this guidance that
arise from comments.
Section 2: Award Information
2.1 General Award Information
ARRA appropriated a total of $8
billion under three Intercity Passenger
Rail capital investment programs
authorized by the PRIIA: Section 501
(High-Speed Rail Corridor
Development), Section 301 (Intercity
Passenger Rail Service Corridor Capital
Assistance), and Section 302
(Congestion Grants). ARRA left the mix
of funding among the three PRIIA
programs to the discretion of the
Secretary of Transportation. As
described in the Department’s April
2009 strategic plan for high-speed rail,
Vision for High-Speed Rail in America,
FRA will not allocate funding among
the three PRIIA programs in advance,
but will cumulate the amounts under
each PRIIA section from the funding
sources identified in the selected
applications, subject to the overall $8
billion ARRA limit. In addition to the
ARRA appropriation for High-Speed
Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail, this
funding opportunity announcement also
solicits applications for up to
$9,540,500 for Intercity Passenger Rail
planning activities, and at least
$82,352,573 in FD/construction funding
appropriated under the FY 2008/2009
DOT Appropriations Acts.7
This funding and announcement
solicits applications for funding
appropriated through ARRA, the FY
7 A total of $90 million was appropriated under
the FY 2009 DOT Appropriations Act to remain
available and unexpended under the heading of
Capital Assistance to States—Intercity Passenger
Service, of which no more than 10 percent, or $9
million, may be made available for planning
activities. In addition, a total of $540,500 in
planning funding, and at least $1,352,573 in FD/
construction funding also remained available until
expended following the award of grants under the
FY 2008 Capital Assistance to States—Intercity
Passenger Service program.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
2008/2009 DOT Appropriations Acts
under the four distinct Tracks described
above:
• Track 1—Projects (ARRA funds);
• Track 2—Programs (ARRA funds);
• Track 3—Planning (annual
appropriations funds for Interstate
Passenger Rail planning from FY 2009
and remaining from FY 2008); and
• Track 4—FY2009 Appropriations
Projects (annual appropriations funds
for Interstate Passenger Rail nonplanning from FY 2009 and remaining
from FY 2008).
FRA anticipates making multiple
awards under each of the four Tracks.
While the entire $9,540,500 under Track
3 and at least $82,352,573 under Track
4 may be awarded, FRA may choose not
to award through this solicitation the
full amount available for Tracks 1 and
2, to allow for potential future rounds of
solicitations and awards which occur
after 2009. There is no predetermined
allocation between Tracks 1 and 2 or
between this and any future
solicitations; all such distributions will
cumulatively reflect the nature and
timing of the selected applications (as
referenced in Section 5, selection
criteria).
2.2 Definitions of Key Terms,
Concepts, and Milestones for Track
Selection
A prospective applicant under this
solicitation should first determine into
which Track the applicant’s proposal
would most appropriately fit. The
choice of Track largely reflects the scope
of the proposed undertaking and the
proposed effort’s achievement of key
milestones within the project
development process. Below are
definitions of key terms, concepts, and
milestones for the HSIPR Program that
affect the selection of a Track. Section
2.3 is then intended to assist an
applicant in selecting a Track based on
the proposed investment’s relationship
to these terms, concepts, and
milestones.
Corridor—For the specific purposes of
the HSIPR Program, a corridor is an
existing or proposed Intercity Passenger
Rail route of approximately 100–600
miles in total length, linking population
centers at its endpoints and typically
points in between. Corridors may cross
State or national boundaries and thus
require a regional, multi-jurisdictional
approach to planning and
development.8
Final Design—The last phase of
project development, including: rightof-way acquisition, utility relocation,
8 Federal investment in corridor projects may be
limited to the United States.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
29905
the preparation of final design plans,
construction management plans, system
safety plans for construction
management & operations, safety
certification, any required collision
hazard analysis, final construction cost
estimates, and detailed specifications, as
well as procurement of construction
services and equipment. During this
phase, any remaining uncertainties or
risks associated with minor changes to
design scope and the procurement
processes are fully addressed, and plans
for financing the project or program
would be updated and refined to reflect
accurately the expected year-ofexpenditure costs and cash flow
projections.
Financial Plan—The financial plan
documents the recent and forecasted
financial condition of the applicant
agency and other key partners that will
provide capital or operating funding for
project development and/or
implementation. The Financial Plan
describes the current financial health of
the aforementioned agencies,
documents projected capital and
operating costs and revenues, and
details key assumptions and
methodologies. A financial plan also
details the sources, reliability and
feasibility of funding for both capital
and operating expenses and provides an
overview of the project sponsor’s
strategies to address potential project
cost increases.
FRA Obligation—Commitment of
Federal funding made through
execution of a grant agreement or
cooperative agreement.
High-Speed Rail—Intercity Passenger
Rail service that ‘‘is reasonably expected
to reach speeds of at least 110 mph’’ (49
U.S.C. 26106(b)(4)).
Independent Utility—A project, group
of projects, or Service Development
Program (or phase of a Service
Development Program) is considered to
have independent utility if it will result,
upon completion, in the creation of new
or substantially improved High-Speed
Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail service,
and will provide tangible and
measurable benefits even if no
additional investments in the same
High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail
service are made. Typical examples of
these benefits would include on-time
performance improvements, travel-time
reductions, and higher service
frequencies resulting in increased
ridership.
Intercity Passenger Rail—Defined in
statue as ‘‘rail passenger transportation
except commuter rail passenger
transportation’’ (49 U.S.C. 24102(4)); it
subsumes both High-Speed Rail and
conventional intercity passenger
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
29906
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
services. Commuter rail is defined at as
‘‘short-haul rail passenger transportation
in metropolitan and suburban areas
usually having reduced fare, multiple
ride, and commuter tickets and morning
and evening peak period operations’’
(49 U.S.C. 24102(3)); Federal funding for
commuter rail projects is available from
Federal Transit Administration
programs.
Intercity Passenger Rail Service—An
Intercity Passenger Rail service consists
of a group of one or more scheduled
trains (roundtrips) that provide Intercity
Passenger Rail transportation between
bona fide travel markets (not
constrained by State or jurisdictional
boundaries), generally with similar
quality and level-of-service
specifications, within a common (but
not necessarily exclusive or identical)
set of identifiable geographic markets.
An Intercity Passenger Rail service is
considered ‘‘substantially changed’’
when its inherent nature or market
focus is altered, or when its operating
frequencies (roundtrips per day) are
increased significantly; a substantial
change in service may include adding
short-distance corridor-type trains
where only long-distance service
operates, or service restoration where
trains ceased to operate several years
before. See Appendix 1.3 for further
discussion of the definition of Intercity
Passenger Rail.
Letter of Intent (LOI)—Represents a
contingent financial commitment by
FRA to provide up to a prescribed
amount of funding to fully implement a
service development program (or
specific phases of such a program), with
defined milestones for completion of
work necessary to ensure successful and
timely program development.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) Documentation—Includes four
principal levels (with respect to the
HSIPR Program):
• Tier I, ‘‘programmatic,’’ or servicelevel environmental impact statement
(Tier I EIS)—Addresses actions at a
broad level, such as a program concept
for an entire corridor, and typically does
not lead directly to project construction.
• Site-specific, or project EIS—
Addresses specific environmental issues
associated with a site or project, and is
intended to lead directly to construction
once applicable permits are secured.
• Environmental assessment (EA)—
May be programmatic or site-specific,
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
and concisely provides sufficient
evidence and analysis of the proposal to
determine whether to prepare an EIS or
a finding of no significant impact
(FONSI).
• Categorical exclusion (CE)—
Documentation that shows how a
proposal fits a category of predefined
actions which do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment and for which
neither an EIS nor an environmental
assessment are required.
Planning—Activities that support the
case for investing in project(s) or
program(s), such as: identification of
purpose and need; analysis comparing
the costs, benefits, and impacts of a
range of transportation alternatives;
studies that assess different levels of rail
service and investment; service-level,
programmatic, or Tier I NEPA studies;
Service Development Plans; and State
Rail Plans.
Preliminary Engineering (PE)—
Sufficient engineering design to define a
project, including identification of all
environmental impacts, design of all
critical project elements at a level
sufficient to assure reliable cost
estimates and schedules (in turn
sufficient to complete project
management and financial plans), and
definition of procurement requirements
and strategies. The PE development
process starts with specific project
design alternatives that allow for
assessment of a range of rail
improvements, specific alignments, and
project designs—sufficient to support
subsequent NEPA analysis. PE is
prerequisite to final design (FD) and
construction. Appendix 2.2 contains
additional information about PE.
Project—A High-Speed Rail/Intercity
Passenger Rail project is a discrete
action that has a distinct purpose, such
as adding track to an existing railroad
line, or the purchase of one or more
pieces of rolling stock.
Project Management Plan—Approach
for ensuring successful implementation
of a project or program, including: (i)
Identification of a manager accountable
for project or program delivery; (ii) an
organization/resource plan that
describes (e.g., through an organization
chart) the relationships among entities
involved in the proposed program and
a description of the relationships among
the entities responsible for the
financing, design, construction,
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
operation, and maintenance of the
proposed program; (iii) any new legal
entities required, how they would be
structured, and their relationship to
existing entities; (iv) stakeholder
agreements with owners of right-of-way,
operators, or other entities critical to
successful project/program delivery;(v)
required governmental actions and
approvals; and, (vi) an appropriate
system safety plan for the entire project
lifecycle consistent with FTA guidance
for safety and security management
plans. The project management plan
should address the safety certification
process and any required collision
hazard analysis consistent with the FRA
guidance. A project management plan
generally should also include metrics by
which the success of the project is
defined.
Right-of-Way—Railroad infrastructure
within the property lines of an existing,
or within the presumed property lines
of a proposed, railroad useful for
Intercity Passenger Rail service.
Service Development Plan (SDP)—A
plan for developing High-Speed Rail/
Intercity Passenger Rail service, either
initiating new service or improving
existing service (e.g., adding train
frequencies and/or reducing trip
times)—typically developed around
distinct phases and/or geographic
sections of service improvement. A
High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail
SDP or equivalent covers three general
topics: (i) Rationale (including purpose
and need), (ii) service/operating plan
and prioritized capital plan, and (iii)
implementation plan (including project
management approach, stakeholder
agreements and financial plan). The
precise structure of an SDP can vary, but
these elements must be covered in some
fashion. (See Appendix 2.1 for
additional explanation).
Service Development Program
(‘‘Program’’)—Implementation of a
High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail
SDP, generally broken into discrete
phases or geographic sections. Such
programs may be for new service on an
existing or new railroad alignment, or
for improved service on an existing
railroad alignment.
2.3
Guide to Track Selection
The table below should be used by
applicants as a guide for determining
the appropriate Track for application
submissions.
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
29907
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
TRACK SELECTION GUIDE
Funding track determination questions
Response
(yes/no)
Funding track
Has new or improved Intercity Passenger Rail service been selected as a promising alternative
in the transportation corridor where the project is located?
No .....................
Track 3—Service Planning.
Yes ...................
Proceed to Next Question.
No .....................
Proceed to Next Question.
Yes ...................
Track 2—Programs.
No .....................
Proceed to Next Question.
Yes ...................
Track 2—Programs.
No .....................
Proceed to Next Question.
Yes ...................
Track 2—Programs.
No .....................
Track 3—Service Planning.
Yes ...................
Proceed to Next Question.
No .....................
Track 1—PE/NEPA only.
Yes ...................
Proceed to Next Question.
No .....................
Track 1—FD/Construction.
Yes ...................
Track 4—FY 2008/2009
Appropriations Projects
(or Track 1—Projects).
Does the project(s) lead to—introduction of High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail service
within a corridor where no service of that type currently exists, or to a substantial change in
an existing service?
Does the project(s) include the rerouting of an existing Intercity Passenger Rail service onto a
new, expanded, or previously abandoned right-of-way?
Does the investment encompass multiple dispersed projects intended to produce a significant
benefit to one or more Intercity Passenger Rail services?
Even if no Service Development Plan exists, have specific Intercity Passenger Rail investment
projects been identified for implementation?
Have preliminary engineering (PE) and a project-level NEPA document been completed for the
proposed project?
If PE and project-level NEPA documentation is complete, is a 50 percent (or greater) non-Federal match available?
After selecting the appropriate
application Track, prospective
applicants should consult the relevant
Track-specific and general information
contained in the balance of this
document.
2.4 Anticipated Award Amounts
Tracks 1 and 2—Awards under Tracks
1 and 2 will be made using a portion of
the $8 billion appropriated through
ARRA. FRA anticipates making multiple
awards under Track 1 as a result of this
solicitation; however, FRA will not
award all of the available $8 billion to
Track 1 applicants. Funds will be
reserved for award to Track 2
applications under this solicitation, and
likely to Tracks 1 and 2 in potential
future rounds of solicitations—as
described in Section 5. As the
authorizations underlying Tracks 1 and
2 are new, the FRA cannot provide an
average amount of funding per award in
previous years.
Tracks 3 and 4—Awards under Tracks
3 and 4 will be made using the $90
million dedicated to Capital Grants to
States—Intercity Passenger Rail Service
in the FY 2009 DOT Appropriations
Act, plus the remaining funds
appropriated for the same purpose in
the Capital Assistance to States—
Intercity Passenger Service Program in
the FY 2008 DOT Appropriations Act
(currently estimated at $1,893,073). In
accordance with the provisions of the
Appropriations Acts, no more than 10
percent of appropriated amounts in each
fiscal year ($9,540,500 of the available
funds) may be allocated to Track 3—
Planning, with the balance available for
Track 4—FY2009 Appropriations
Projects. These funds require a nonFederal match of at least 50 percent of
total project cost.
2.5
Types of Awards
The table below summarizes the
characteristics of funding awards by
Track. For specific grant conditions,
refer to section 6 and appendix 3.
AWARD CHARACTERISTICS
Track 1—projects
Track 2—programs
Track 3—planning
Track 4—FY 2009
appropriations projects
Legislative Funding Source
• ARRA ............................
• ARRA ............................
Available Funding ..............
Instrument of Commitment
• Portion of $8 B ..............
• Final Design/Construction Grants.
• PE/NEPA Cooperative
Agreements
• Up to 100% Federal
share.
• Portion of $8 B ..............
• Letters of Intent .............
• Cooperative Agreements
• FY 2009, 2008 DOT Appropriations Act.
• Up to $9.54 M ...............
• Cooperative Agreements
• FY 2009, 2008 DOT Appropriations Act.
• No less than $82.3 M.
• Final Design/Construction Grants.
• At least 50% non-Federal match.
• At least 50% non-Federal match.
Match Requirement ...........
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
• Up to 100% Federal
share.
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
29908
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
2.5.1 Track 1
The FRA will make awards under
Track 1 through either: (a) Grant
agreements supporting FD and project
construction; or (b) cooperative
agreements for completion of PE and/or
project-level NEPA documentation.
Construction grants will fund both FD
(if not already completed) and
construction of projects for which PE
and project-level NEPA documentation
is complete at the time of application.9
FD/construction grant recipients will be
required to obtain FRA approval prior to
the commencement of construction
activities (the process will be set out in
the grant agreement). The grant
agreement can also be structured to
cover alternative construction scenarios,
such as through a design-build type
approach. Applicants under Track 1
will be considered for funding under
either Intercity Passenger Rail Corridor
Capital Assistance Grants (Section 301
of PRIIA), or Congestion Grants (Section
302 of PRIIA). Eligible projects intended
to reduce congestion by alleviating
major rail capacity bottlenecks,
particularly those that benefit multiple
railroad operators (e.g. Intercity
Passenger Rail, rail freight, and
commuter rail) in a congested corridor,
will likely be considered for funding
under the Congestion Grant program.
Note that where multiple railroad
operations benefit from project(s), FRA
will expect the costs for such project(s)
to be shared proportional to the benefit
each operator accrues from the
investment.
Under Track PE/NEPA cooperative
agreements, FRA will be more involved
in the project through collaborative
work with the recipient. In addition to
providing technical assistance to the
recipient, FRA will participate in key
project meetings, and will assist in the
preparation of engineering and
environmental documents. FRA will
also be responsible for approving project
deliverables at key milestones, and
providing authorization for progressing
with subsequent stages of the project.
Programs, and make subsequent awards
for program components through
cooperative agreements.
The issuance of a LOI represents the
expression of FRA’s full support of a
Service Development Program, and the
funding contingently committed
through an LOI will be reserved for that
Service Development Program from the
$8 billion in available ARRA funding.
An LOI will include milestones for
completion of work needed to advance
the program into obligation and
completion; if milestone deadlines are
not met, funding reserved under an LOI
will be returned to the pool of funds
available for future solicitations.
As milestones under an LOI are
reached, FRA will obligate funding to
implement approved portions of the
program through a cooperative
agreement. Funding to complete
remaining PE and project-level NEPA
would be awarded immediately
following the issuance of the LOI.
Funding for FD/construction would be
awarded through a grant or cooperative
agreement as milestones are reached
(e.g., completion of PE and NEPA for
project(s) with independent utility.
Even after funds are converted from LOI
into a cooperative/grant agreement (i.e.,
obligated), grantees will be required to
obtain FRA approval prior to the
commencement of construction
activities. This process will be included
in the grant agreement (which could
also be structured to address options
such as a design-build implementation
approach).
Recognizing the unique challenges
posed by complex new corridor
programs, a higher level of Federal
oversight and support will be involved
than under standard grant agreements.
The substantial Federal involvement of
FRA will extend across all aspects of
Service Development Programs and will
include technical assistance, review of
interim work products, support for
environmental reviews, review of PE
and FD, and continuous program
oversight.
2.5.2 Track 2
Under Track 2, FRA may issue Letters
of Intent (LOI) for Service Development
2.5.3 Track 3
FRA will make awards under Track 3
using the $9,540,500 available under the
FY 2008/2009 DOT Appropriations Acts
through cooperative agreements. The
substantial Federal involvement for
Intercity Passenger Rail planning
activities would include agreement on
the scope of study, review of draft
9 If substantial progress on NEPA documentation
has been made on NEPA documentation,
application may be reviewed for FD/Construction
grant funding; in any case, project-level NEPA
documentation must be complete at time of grant
agreement.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
studies, and acceptance of final
deliverables. Recognizing the
importance of planning to the long-term
success of the HSIPR Program and the
limited funding available under existing
appropriations, FRA will favorably
consider applicant expenditures for
High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail
project planning when evaluating the
State share or matching contributions
component of an evaluation under
subsequent solicitations.
2.5.4
Track 4
Awards under Track 4 will be made
using $82 million available under the
FY 2009 DOT Appropriations Act for
non-planning Intercity Passenger Rail
Capital Assistance to States, as well as
remaining non-planning funding under
the analogous FY 2008 DOT
Appropriations Act funding. FRA
anticipates making one or more awards,
and awarding the entire $82 million
under Track 4 as a result of this
solicitation.
Funding under Track 4 cannot exceed
50 percent of a project’s total cost. States
are the only eligible applicants under
Track 4, and must be able to certify in
their applications as to the availability
of the matching funds. As the source of
the Federal funds is a regular annual
appropriation rather than ARRA,
requirements specific to ARRA (e.g., job
retention and creation as an evaluation
factor, and various reporting
requirements) need not be met, although
States are encouraged to do so.
The average amount of Federal
funding per non-planning award in the
analogous FY 2008 program was $2.75
million.
Section 3: Eligibility Information
Applications will be required to meet
minimum requirements for each Track
in terms of applicant eligibility, project
eligibility, and the fulfillment of other
Track-specific application prerequisites.
To the extent that an application’s
substance exceeds the minimum
eligibility requirements described
below, such qualifications will be
considered in evaluating the merits of
an application.
3.1
Eligible Applicant Types
Eligibility of different types of
applicants varies by Track and
authorization, as summarized below.
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
29909
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
APPLICANT ELIGIBILITY
Track 1—projects
PRIIA
Section
301
States ...........................................................................................
Groups of States ..........................................................................
Interstate Compacts .....................................................................
Public agencies established by one or more States and having
responsibility for providing Intercity Passenger Rail service ...
Public agencies established by one or more States and having
responsibility for providing High-speed Passenger Rail service .............................................................................................
Amtrak ..........................................................................................
* Amtrak
** Amtrak
Track 1
An entity seeking assistance under
Track 1 must meet the definition of an
‘‘applicant’’ under the funding
authorization that would pertain to its
proposal(s)—either Section 301
(Intercity Passenger Rail Corridor
Capital Assistance) or Section 302
(Congestion Grants) of PRIIA. Eligible
applicant entities under those sections
are as follows:
• Intercity Passenger Rail Corridor
Capital Assistance (Section 301)—States
(including the District of Columbia),
groups of States, Interstate Compacts,
and public agencies established by one
or more States and having responsibility
for providing intercity passenger rail
service.
• Congestion Grants (Section 302)—
States (including the District of
Columbia), or Amtrak (in cooperation
with States).
3.1.2
Track 3—
planning
Track 4—FY
2008/2009
Appropriations
projects
PRIIA
Section
302
PRIIA
Section
301
PRIIA
Section
501
FY2008/2009
Appropriations
acts
✓
✓
✓
✓
..............
..............
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
..........................
..........................
✓
..........................
..........................
✓
..............
✓
..............
..........................
..........................
..............
✓*
..............
✓ **
..............
..............
✓
✓
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
FY2008/2009
Appropriations
acts
may enter into a cooperative agreement with one or more States to carry out an eligible project
is eligible in cooperation with States.
Further detail on the definitions of
‘‘eligible applicants’’ is available in
Appendix 3 under ‘‘Applicant Types.’’
3.1.1
Track 2—programs
Track 2
An entity seeking assistance under
Track 2 must meet the definition of an
‘‘applicant’’ under the funding
authorization that would pertain to its
proposal(s)—either Section 301
(Intercity Passenger Rail Corridor
Capital Assistance) or Section 501
(High-Speed Rail Corridor
Development) of PRIIA. Eligible
applicant entities under those sections
are as follows:
• Intercity Passenger Rail Corridor
Capital Assistance (Section 301)—States
(including the District of Columbia),
groups of States, interstate compacts,
and public agencies established by one
or more States and having responsibility
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
for providing Intercity Passenger Rail
service.
• High-Speed Rail Corridor
Development (Section 501)—States
(including the District of Columbia),
groups of States, interstate compacts,
and public agencies established by one
or more States and having responsibility
for providing High-Speed Rail service,
or Amtrak.
3.1.3
Tracks 3 and 4
Only States, including District of
Columbia, are eligible to apply under
Tracks 3 and 4.
3.2 Applicant and Key Partner
Qualifications
For an application submitted by an
eligible entity to be considered under
any Track, it must affirmatively
demonstrate that the applicant has or
will have the legal, financial, and
technical capacity to carry out the
proposal. In addition, for FD/
construction applications under Tracks
1, 2, and 4, the applicant must
demonstrate that it has or will have
satisfactory continuing control over the
use of equipment or facilities acquired,
constructed, or improved by the project,
and the capability and willingness to
maintain such equipment or facilities.
Further discussion of how applicants
can demonstrate compliance with these
minimum qualifications appears in
Appendix 1.2.
Entities other than States must submit
information and documentation
demonstrating the fulfillment of the
minimum applicant qualifications
described in this section as part of a
preapplication (see Section 4.3. for
complete preapplication information
and documentation requirements). On
the basis of such information, FRA will
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
issue a written decision on the entity’s
eligibility as an applicant.
3.3
Cost Sharing and Matching
3.3.1 Treatment of Applicant Cost
Sharing
3.3.1.1
Track 1
Pursuant to the provisions of the
ARRA appropriation for High-Speed
Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail, the
Federal share of the costs of projects
issued grants under Track 1 of this
solicitation will be, at the option of the
recipient, up to 100 percent.
The evaluation criteria provide
preference to applicants, should the
applicant choose the option of
leveraging federal funds with
contributions from its own project
partners’ resources toward the costs of
its proposed project. These
contributions may be considered in
evaluating the merit of its application
(See section 5 for a complete description
of evaluation and selection criteria).
3.3.1.2
Track 2
As in the case for Track 1, the Federal
share of the costs of projects issued
grants under Track 2 of this solicitation
shall be, at the option of the recipient,
up to 100 percent.
Again, the evaluation criteria provide
preference to applicants that leverage
federal funding with non-Federal
investment. Applicants for Service
Development Programs who do not
choose to contribute their own or their
project partners’ resources toward the
costs of the proposed project, and who
(i) have not demonstrated continuous,
sustained support to the proposed
program, and (ii) do not have a
demonstrable history of capital
investment in intercity passenger rail,
may, as a condition of the obligation of
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
29910
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
funding for FD/construction activities,
be required to establish a Capital
Reserve Account funded by their own
dedicated financial resources. Funds
deposited by recipients into a Capital
Reserve Account would be used to pay
for any project cost overruns.
3.3.1.3 Tracks 3 and 4
Pursuant to the provisions of the FY
2008/2009 DOT Appropriations Acts,
the Federal share of the costs of projects
issued grants under Tracks 3 and 4 of
this solicitation may not exceed 50
percent.
If an applicant chooses the option of
contributing, from its own or its partner
project stakeholders’ resources, more
than 50 percent of the costs of its
proposed project, such additional
contributions will be considered in
evaluating the merit of its application
(See Section 5 for a complete
description of evaluation and selection
criteria).
3.3.2 Requirements for Applicant Cost
Sharing
Whether optional (under Tracks 1 and
2) or mandatory (under Tracks 3 and 4),
an applicant’s contribution toward the
cost of its proposed project may be in
the form of cash or, with FRA approval,
in-kind contributions of services,
supplies, equipment, or real estate. As
part of its application, an applicant
offering an in-kind contribution must
provide a documented estimate of the
monetary value of any such
contribution, and its eligibility under 49
CFR 18.24.
The applicant must provide as part of
its application documentation that
demonstrates that it has committed and
will be able to fulfill any pledged
contribution, including committing any
required financial resources that are
budgeted or planned at the time the
application is submitted. Furthermore,
any applicant under Tracks 1 and 2 who
seeks to contribute toward its proposed
project funds from another Federal
financial assistance program that itself
requires a match, should be aware of the
prohibition in many such programs of
using any Federal funding (such as that
being applied for under this program) as
a matching share (See 49 CFR
18.24(b)(3)). Funds from other Federal
financial assistance programs may not
be used to satisfy the 50 percent match
requirement under Tracks 3 and 4.
3.4 Grantee Responsibility for Project
Delivery, Cost Overruns, and
Contributions Due From States under
PRIIA Section 209
All applicants will be required to
demonstrate the ability to:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
• Absorb any cost overruns and
deliver the proposed project with no
Federal funding or financial assistance
beyond that provided in grant or
cooperative agreement; and
• Cover all future cash needs
associated with the service benefiting
from the proposed program/project and
allocated to States as a result of the
costing methodology to be developed
under Section 209 of the PRIIA.
3.5
Eligible Projects
3.5.1
Track 1
Track 1 consists of two sub-Tracks:
Track 1 FD/construction and Track 1
PE/NEPA work in support of
construction projects. To be eligible
under either Track 1 FD/construction or
Track 1 PE/NEPA a project for which
construction or PE/NEPA funding is
sought must be eligible under Section
301 (Intercity Passenger Rail Corridor
Capital Assistance) and/or Section 302
(Congestion Grants) of PRIIA.
3.5.1.1 Intercity Passenger Rail
Corridor Capital Assistance (PRIIA
Section 301) Eligible Projects
Eligible projects for Intercity
Passenger Rail Corridor Capital
Assistance funding under Track 1
include:
• Acquiring, constructing, improving,
or inspecting equipment, track and track
structures, or a facility for use in or for
the primary benefit of Intercity
Passenger Rail service, including HighSpeed Rail; expenses incidental to the
acquisition or construction (including
designing, engineering, location
surveying, mapping, inspecting,
environmental studies, and acquiring
rights-of-way); payments for the capital
portions of rail trackage rights
agreements; highway-rail grade crossing
improvements related to Intercity
Passenger Rail service; mitigating
environmental impacts; communication
and signalization improvements; and
relocation assistance, acquiring
replacement housing sites, and
acquiring, constructing, relocating, and
rehabilitating replacement housing;
• Rehabilitating, remanufacturing, or
overhauling rail rolling stock and
facilities used primarily in Intercity
Passenger Rail service; and
• Projects to provide access to
Intercity Passenger Rail service rolling
stock for nonmotorized transportation,
including bicycles and recreational
equipment, and to provide storage
capacity in intercity passenger trains for
such transportation, equipment, and
other luggage, to ensure passenger
safety.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
3.5.1.2 Congestion Grants (PRIIA
Section 302) Eligible Projects
Eligible projects for Congestion Grants
funding under Track 1 include facilities,
infrastructure, and equipment for highpriority rail corridor projects necessary
to reduce congestion or facilitate
ridership growth in Intercity Passenger
Rail transportation, including HighSpeed Rail, as mandated in PRIIA
Section 302.
To be eligible for Congestion Grant
program funding in Track 1, an
applicant must demonstrate that the
proposed project:
• Has been identified by Amtrak as
necessary to reduce congestion or
facilitate ridership growth in Intercity
Passenger Rail transportation along
heavily traveled rail corridors; or
• Is sufficiently advanced to fulfill
the PRIIA Section 302 purposes on an
expedited schedule.
Applicants should give particular
consideration to applying for
Congestion Grants funding under
circumstances in which the proposed
project meets the eligibility
requirements described above and:
• Is anticipated to result in significant
joint benefits for multiple railroad
operators (e.g., Intercity Passenger Rail,
rail freight, and commuter rail) in a
congested corridor, with proportional
cost sharing among the operators;
• Involves the construction or
improvement of infrastructure that will
significantly benefit, but which will not
be directly used by, Intercity Passenger
Rail service (e.g., freight bypasses); and/
or
• Will benefit service within one
State, but will be physically located
within another State—under such
circumstances, the benefiting State may
choose to cooperate with Amtrak or
through a regional compact to put
forward an application for the proposed
project.
3.5.2
Track 2
Service Development Programs and
phases of such programs, that are
applied for under Track 2 must consist
of a coordinated and comprehensive
grouping of projects intended to result
in the introduction of new services or
significant improvements to existing
services that are eligible under PRIIA
Section 301 and/or Section 501.
3.5.2.1 Intercity Passenger Rail
Corridor Capital Assistance (PRIIA
Section 301)
Eligible Projects
These are listed under Track 1, above.
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
3.5.2.2 High-Speed Rail Corridor
Development (PRIIA Section 501
Eligible Projects)
Eligible projects for High-Speed Rail
Corridor funding under Track 2 include:
• Acquiring, constructing, improving
or inspecting equipment, track and track
structures, or a facility for use in or for
the primary benefit of High-Speed Rail
service; expenses incidental to the
acquisition or construction (including
designing, engineering, location
surveying, mapping, environmental
studies, and acquiring rights-of-way);
payments for the capital portions of rail
trackage rights agreements; highway-rail
grade crossing improvements related to
High-Speed Rail service; mitigating
environmental impacts; communication
and signalization improvements; and
relocation assistance, acquiring
replacement housing sites, and
acquiring, constructing, relocating, and
rehabilitating replacement housing.
Projects must be located on a high-speed
rail corridor designated by the Secretary
pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 104(d)(2).
3.5.3
Track 3
Eligible planning studies are those
that:
• Lead to the completion of a SDP to
support future applications under Track
2—Programs;
• Identify and compare the costs,
benefits, and impacts of a range of
transportation alternatives, including
High-Speed Rail and/or Intercity
Passenger Rail, as a means of providing
decision makers with the information
necessary to implement appropriate
transportation solutions;
• Support the preparation of
environmental documents that are
prerequisite to the fulfillment of Service
NEPA; and
• Consist of operational analyses and
simulations, and projections of future
service requirements, leading to
systematic and rational priority lists of
projects that could be eligible for PRIIA
Section 301 or 302 funding, and could
ultimately contribute to SDPs.
3.5.4
Track 4
To be eligible for funding under Track
4, a proposed project must be
specifically included in the applicant
State’s Statewide Transportation
Improvement Plan (STIP) at the time of
application. Eligible types of projects
under Track 4 include (1) acquiring,
constructing, or improving equipment,
track and track structures, or a facility
for use in or for the primary benefit of
Intercity Passenger Rail service
including High-Speed Rail service, (2)
expenses incidental to the acquisition or
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
construction (including designing,
engineering, location surveying,
mapping, environmental studies, and
acquiring rights-of-way), (3) highwayrail grade crossing improvements
related to Intercity Passenger Rail
service, (4) mitigating environmental
impacts, (5) communication and
signalization improvements, and (6)
rehabilitating, remanufacturing, or
overhauling rail rolling stock and
facilities used primarily in Intercity
Passenger Rail service.
3.5.5
Rail Operating Expenses
29911
project and the realization of the
operating benefits (e.g., those reflected
in changes to schedules) it is intended
to generate; and
• That the applicant has developed a
project management plan for managing
the implementation of the proposed
project, including the management and
mitigation of project risks; and
• That the applicant has developed a
Financial Plan—for each phase of
service that details the ‘‘sources and
uses’’ of both capital and operating
funding.
In no cases are Federal funds eligible
to be used for rail operating expenses.
3.6.3 Prerequisites for Equipment
Procurement or Design Grants
3.6
If the applicant is seeking a grant for
the procurement or design of railroad
equipment, the proposed equipment
should be consistent with Section 305 of
PRIIA, which calls for the establishment
of a standardized next-generation rail
corridor equipment pool. Compliance
with Section 305 of PRIIA will assist in
creating the economies of scale
necessary to achieve the
Administration’s goal, as outlined in
FRA’s Strategic Plan, of developing a
sustainable railroad equipment
manufacturing base in the United States.
Other Prerequisites
3.6.1
General Prerequisites
In general, proposals under all Tracks
must meet the following additional
prerequisites:
• Applications must be complete, as
defined in this notice;
• The complete application must
demonstrate that the project has been
identified through a rational planning
process (ideally a High-Speed Rail/
Intercity Passenger Rail SDP);
• The project (except for a planning
project under Track 3) must be
consistent with an overall plan for
developing the benefiting High-Speed
Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail service;
and
• The project (except for a planning
project under Track 3) must result in
independent utility, as defined under
Section 2.2 of this notice.
3.6.2 Prerequisites for Construction
Grants
If the applicant is seeking a
construction grant, then the application
must demonstrate all of the following:
• That PE (as defined under Section
2.2 of this notice) has been completed
for the proposed project, resulting in
project designs that are reasonably
expected to conform to all regulatory,
safety, security, and other design
requirements, including those under the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA);
• That a Project NEPA document
(e.g., a CE exclusion worksheet, a
completed EA, or a completed final EIS,
as defined under Section 2.2 of this
notice) has been completed for the
proposed project;
• That the applicant has reached, at a
minimum, agreements in principle with
key project partners, including but not
limited to infrastructure-owning
railroads and the railroad that operates
or will operate the benefiting HighSpeed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail
service, as to the scope of the proposed
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
3.6.4 Selection of Proposed Operator
(Tracks 1 and 2 only)
If the applicant has not selected the
proposed operator of the benefiting
High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail
service competitively, then the
application must demonstrate why the
proposed operator is the best choice,
taking into account all relevant
quantitative and qualitative factors, and
that use of the proposed operator will
not needlessly increase the cost of the
project or of the operations that it
enables or improves.
3.6.5 Service Development Plan (Track
2 Only; Desirable for Other Tracks)
All applicants under Track 2 are
required to have completed all the
components of an High Speed Rail/
Intercity Passenger Rail SDP, as defined
in Appendix 2.1 of this guidance.
3.6.6
Positive Train Control (PTC)
If the project involves improvements
to railroad signaling/control systems,
then the application must demonstrate
that the proposed improvements are
consistent with a comprehensive plan
for complying with the requirements for
PTC implementation under Section 104
of the Rail Safety Improvement Act of
2008 (‘‘RSIA,’’ Division A of Pub. L.
110–432, October 16, 2008, codified at
49 U.S.C. 20147).
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
29912
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
3.6.7 Inclusion in STIP (Tracks 3 and
4 Only)
Proposed projects must be specifically
included in the applicant State’s STIP at
the time of application to be eligible.
3.7
Eligibility Restrictions
Pursuant to the provisions of PRIIA
and ARRA, and the funding approach
described in Section 1.6 of this notice,
certain types of applications would be
subject to various eligibility restrictions.
The following table shows ineligible
types of applications by Track.
ELIGIBILITY RESTRICTIONS
Ineligible under track
1
Applications submitted by private entities other than Amtrak. Amtrak’s eligibility as an applicant
is restricted to PRIIA Section 302 (in cooperation with a State) and Section 501 .....................
For projects for which commuter rail passenger transportation is the primary intended beneficiary; ...........................................................................................................................................
For projects involving the development of State Rail Plans or High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail SDPs; ........................................................................................................................
For projects intended to support the introduction of a new Intercity Passenger Rail service (as
defined under Section 2.2 of this notice); ....................................................................................
For projects involving significant construction of railroad infrastructure on a new (e.g., greenfield, outside of existing railroad rights-of-way) or previously abandoned alignment; .................
For multiple discrete projects that would collectively yield a significant benefit to Intercity Passenger Rail services operating in one or more corridors. FRA will consider the magnitude of
the service improvement (e.g., travel-time savings and frequency increases), the total cost of
the investment, and the geographic scope of the proposed projects (e.g., at multiple versus
contiguous sites within the corridor) in determining whether an application (or group of applications) falls within the scope of this restriction; or .....................................................................
For projects in which the physical improvements are located outside of the United States. However, in the case of a joint project of a State or group of States and a foreign government, in
which construction of all physical improvements outside the United States will be paid for by
the foreign participants, planning, PE and NEPA work applicable to both the U.S. and foreign
portions of the project is eligible if funded on a proportional basis .............................................
For any expenses associated with passenger rail operating costs of rail operators ......................
Additional restrictions are fully
described in Section 4.3.8 of this notice.
Section 4: Application and Submission
Information
4.1
Applying Online
FRA participates in the Grants
Management Line of Business (GMLoB)
E–Gov initiative. As part of that
initiative, FRA uses the Administration
for Children and Families’ (ACF)
GrantSolutions (GS) Grants Management
System. All applications must be
submitted to FRA through
GrantSolutions. To access the system, go
to https://www.grantsolutions.gov. If
you have any problems accessing GS,
please contact the Custom Applications
Support and Training Unit (CAST)
helpdesk at 1–800–618–0223 or
help@grantsolutions.gov.
• Applicants must register in GS,
obtain a Data Universal Number System
(DUNS) number and register their
organization with the Central Contractor
Registration (CCR) database prior to
applying in GS. Applicants should
begin the process immediately to meet
the application submission deadlines.
• Standard application forms
(identified in Section 4.3.3.3), will be
available electronically on the Funding
Opportunity page at https://
www.GrantSolutions.gov. The Funding
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
Opportunity screen provides applicants
with general announcement information
and access to all application kit
materials in order to view and print
application forms and information. In
addition, applicants can apply online
through this screen.
• Program-specific preapplication
and application forms (also identified in
Sections 4.3 and 4.4 below) may be
downloaded from FRA’s Web site at
https://www.fra.dot.gov/
HSR_IPR_Program.
4.2 Address to Request Application
Package
If Internet access is unavailable,
please write to FRA at the following
address to request a paper application:
U.S. Department of Transportation,
Federal Railroad Administration,
Attn: HSIPR Program Information
(RDV–10),
Mail Stop 20,
1200 New Jersey Ave., SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
4.3
Content and Form of Application
4.3.1 Preapplication
All prospective applicants for all
Tracks must submit a preapplication in
order to establish communication with
FRA, and to afford FRA an opportunity
to provide feedback to the prospective
applicant as to the suitability of their
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
2
3
4
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
................
x
x
................
................
x
x
................
................
x
x
................
................
x
x
x
................
x
................
x
x
x
proposed project under the Track that
the applicant proposes to use.
Preapplications should be submitted as
early as possible, but no later than July
10, 2009, and applicants should not
wait for submission of, or any comments
on, a preapplication before preparing
their full applications. Prospective
applicants for potential future funding
rounds of solicitations are not required
to submit a preapplication at this time.
FRA will announce any corresponding
application as needed.
Preapplications consist of the
following components:
• Project Description—A brief
overview of the project’s main features,
type of proposed improvement,
location, purpose, expected outcome,
cost, ownership arrangements and the
Intercity Passenger Rail service(s) that
will benefit from the project;
• Project Development Status—The
status of key project development
elements, such as completion of the
planning documents through which the
project was identified, engineering
work, and NEPA documentation; and
• Applicant Eligibility—Answers to
questions regarding cost sharing, and
applicant and key partners’ legal,
financial, and technical capacity to
carry out their proposed project.
Prospective applicants that do not fall
within the definition of a State will also
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
be required to provide copies of
documentation (or references (URLs) to
such documentation that is located on
the Internet) that supports the answers
provided in the preapplication form.
Such supporting documentation should
include (to the extent available), but
need not be limited to, copies of laws
that established the applicant as a legal
entity, contractual agreements between
States (either as a group of States or an
interstate compact), financial statements
and audit reports, and technical reports
demonstrating the applicant’s technical
capacity and experience in carrying out
projects similar to that proposed.
In an effort to focus application efforts
and remedy concerns, FRA may contact
potential applicants if there are any
questions that arise from the
information submitted in a
preapplication, or if the information
raises questions as to the eligibility of
the proposed project or its proper
classification by Track. For
preapplications submitted by applicants
that do not fall within the definition of
a State, and for preapplications under
Track 2, FRA will contact the
prospective applicants to kick-off
discussions for the preparation of the
application.
4.3.2 Application Administrative
Requirements
Prior to submitting an application,
prospective applicants must have
completed two administrative
requirements: Establishment of a DUNS
(Data Universal Numbering System)
number, and registration in the Central
Contractor Registration (CCR) database.
These requirements need not be
completed prior to submitting a
preapplication, but FRA encourages
applicants to begin the process
immediately to meet the application
submission deadlines.
All applicants must include a DUNS
number in their application.
Applications without a DUNS number
are incomplete. A DUNS number is a
unique nine-digit number recognized as
the universal standard for identifying
and keeping track of entities receiving
Federal funds. The identifier is used for
tracking purposes and to validate
address and point of contact
information for Federal assistance
applicants, recipients and subrecipients.
The DUNS number will be used
throughout the grant lifecycle.
Obtaining a DUNS number is a free,
simple, one-time activity. Obtain a
number by calling 1–866–705–5177 or
by applying online at https://
fedgov.dnb.com/webform/
displayHomePage.do.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
FRA also requires that all applicants
(other than individuals) for Federal
financial assistance maintain current
registrations in the CCR database. The
CCR database is the repository for
standard information about Federal
financial assistance applicants,
recipients and subrecipients.
Organizations that have previously
submitted applications via https://
www.grants.gov are already registered
with CCR, as it is a requirement for
www.grants.gov registration. Please
note, however, that applicants must
update or renew their CCR registration
at least once per year to maintain an
active status. Information about
registration procedures can be accessed
at https://www.ccr.gov.
4.3.3 Application Package
Components
The application package for the
HSIPR Program consists of three
components—(1) program-specific
application forms—Narrative and
Templates Form—available from FRA’s
Web site at: https://www.fra.dot.gov/us/
content/2243, (2) supporting
documentation, and (3) standard
application forms available through
https://www.GrantSolutions.gov.
Applicants must complete all three
components of the application package
as required by Track and listed in the
section 4.2.5 application checklist;
failure to do so may result in the
application being removed from
consideration for award. Both the
standard application forms and the
Narrative and Templates Form must be
submitted through https://
www.GrantSolutions.gov—with
standard forms submitted directly as
electronic forms, and program-specific
forms submitted as attachments to the
application.
4.3.3.1 Narrative and Templates Form
The most significant component of
the application package is the Narrative
and Templates Forms, forms into which
the applicant enters specific information
about the proposed project. The forms
include templates that have been
developed by FRA to capture pertinent
qualitative and quantitative programspecific information needed for FRA to
confirm applicant and project’s
eligibility for the HSIPR Program, and
information needed for evaluation and
selection of applications. These forms
will be used to conduct a
comprehensive benefit cost analysis.
The forms allow for the applicant to
make quantitative and qualitative
arguments of the public return on
investment. In order to conduct this
analysis FRA requires specific
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
29913
quantitative data relating to service
outputs (delay reduction, schedule
improvement, or capacity increases),
and transportation outputs (increases in
passenger-miles traveled on Intercity
Passenger Rail services, including shifts
from other modes of transportation).
The information entered into the
Narrative and Templates Form falls into
two categories: (1) Narrative
information, provided in response to
specific application questions, with
length limitations for each response;
and (2) structured and/or quantitative
information, which is entered into
tables contained in the Forms.
Applicants may track and submit the
Narrative and Templates Forms through
GrantSolutions. Separate Track-specific
Narrative and Template Forms are
tailored to corresponding tracks.
Information requested in the Narrative
and Templates Form includes
information on project overview,
planning, purpose and need, project
development status, project benefits—
economic recovery, transportation,
environmental and livable
communities—project estimate/budget,
applicant qualifications, stakeholder
agreements and financial and operation
information. Completing the FRAdeveloped forms is expected to facilitate
information input for required OMB
standard forms described in section
4.3.3.3 below.
4.3.3.2 Application Supporting
Documentation
In order to provide information
referenced in the Narrative and
Templates Form, applicants must
submit additional documentation
supporting their entries on the forms
and confirming their eligibility under
the proposed Track. The supporting
documentation should largely include
information that applicants developed
during project planning activities thus,
the format and structure of supporting
documents is at the discretion of the
applicant. Supporting documentation
may be provided one of three ways—(1)
as attachments to the application; (2) as
Internet references (URLs) to
documentation that is available online;
or (3) in hard copy for materials that
cannot otherwise be provided (such as
oversized engineering drawings).
Applicants should provide any URL
references for supporting
documentation, along with notifications
of any documentation being submitted
in hard copy, in the appropriate section
of the narrative and templates form. The
supporting documentation includes
items as specified below:
• PE Materials—Applicants should
provide any documents that
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
29914
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
demonstrate the PE status (or FD, if
completed) of the proposed project. The
PE requirements are detailed in Section
2.2 and Appendix 2.2. The submission
of PE Materials is required for Track 1
FD/construction, Track 2 and Track 4.
PE Materials should be submitted as
attachments to the application in
GrantSolutions. If large-format materials
cannot be submitted electronically, they
should be mailed to FRA as described
in Section 4.3.9
• NEPA Documentation—Applicants
should provide any documents that
demonstrate the NEPA status of the
proposed project. The NEPA
requirements are defined in Appendix
3.2.9 and detailed by track in Section
1.6. The submission of NEPA
documentation is required for Track 1
FD/construction, Track 2 and Track 4.
• Project Management Plan—
Applicants should provide a project
management plan (or equivalent) that
documents assumptions and decisions
regarding the communication,
management processes, execution and
overall project control. The project
management plan shall be submitted by
applicants to Tracks 1 FD/construction,
Track 2 and Track 4. The form and
structure of the project management
plan (or equivalent) is at the discretion
of the applicant.
• Stakeholder Agreements—
Applicants should provide documents
that demonstrate the status of all
stakeholder agreements including
agreements with interstate partners, host
railroads, right-of-way owners and
contract railroad operator providing
service. The form and structure of the
stakeholder agreements are at the
discretion of the applicant however,
agreements should satisfy the eligibility
and award requirements listed in
Appendix 1.1 and 1.2. Stakeholder
agreements should be submitted for
applicants to Track 1 FD/construction,
Track 2 and Track 4.
• Financial Plan—Applicants should
provide a financial plan (or equivalent)
as per the description of the Financial
Plan in Section 2.2. A financial plan (or
equivalent) shall be submitted for
applications to Track 1 FD/construction,
Track 2 and Track 4.
• Service Development Plan—
Applicant should provide a Service
Development Plan (or equivalent) that
covers three general topics regarding the
underlying Service Development
Program: its rationale, its operating
strategy, and its path to implementation.
The Service Development Plan (or
equivalent) is required for Track 2
applicants only, and is described in
more detail in Appendix 2.1.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
• Economic Stimulus—Consistent
with ARRA, the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) Updated ARRA
Implementing Guidance (April 3, 2009),
and Federal laws guaranteeing equal
opportunity, applicants are encouraged
to provide information to assist FRA in
assessing (1) whether the applicant’s
proposal will promote the creating of
job opportunities for low-income
workers through the use of best practice
hiring programs and apprenticeship
(including pre-apprenticeship)
programs; (2) whether the project will
provide maximum practicable
opportunities for small businesses and
disadvantaged business enterprises,
including veteran-owned small
businesses and service disabled veteranowned small businesses; (3) whether the
project will make effective use of
community-based organizations in
connecting disadvantaged workers with
economic opportunities; (4) whether the
project will support entities that have a
sound track record on labor practices
and compliance with Federal laws
ensuring that American workers are safe
and treated fairly; and (5) whether the
project implements best practices,
consistent with the civil rights and
equal opportunity laws, for ensuring
that all individuals—regardless of race,
gender, age, disability, and national
origin—benefit from ARRA.
• Job Creation—Applicants should
provide information indicating whether
the applicant’s proposal promotes the
short- or long-term creation or
preservation of jobs and new or
expanded business opportunities during
construction of the project and
thereafter, including the total amount of
funds that will be expended on
construction and construction-related
activities by all of the entities
participating in the project and, to the
extent measurable, the number and type
of jobs to be created and/or preserved by
the project during construction and
thereafter, and an identification of any
business enterprises to be created or
benefited by the project during its
construction and once it becomes
operational. To the extent possible,
applicants should indicate whether the
populations most likely to benefit from
the creation or preservation of jobs or
new or expanded business opportunities
are from Economically Distressed Areas.
In addition, to the extent possible,
applicants should indicate whether the
project’s procurement plan is likely to
create follow-on jobs and economic
stimulus for manufacturers and
suppliers that support the construction
industry.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
4.3.3.3 Standard Forms
The Standard Forms are developed by
OMB and are required of all grant
applicants. These forms are available on
www.forms.gov and should be submitted
as attachments to the application in
GrantSolutions. Some of the information
required for these form will be in
provided with the Narrative and
Template Form.
• Standard Form 424, Application for
Federal Assistance—This form should
be scanned and submitted as an
attachment to the application in
GrantSolutions. This form should be
completed by all applicants.
• Standard Form 424A, Budget
Information—Non-Construction
Programs—This form should be scanned
and submitted as an attachment to the
application in GrantSolutions. This
form should be completed by applicants
where applicable.
• Standard Form 424B, Assurances—
Non-Construction Programs—This form
should be scanned and submitted as an
attachment to the application in
GrantSolutions. This form should be
completed by applicants to Track 1 PE/
NEPA and Track 3.
• Standard Form 424C, Budget
Information—Construction Programs—
This form should be scanned and
submitted as an attachment to the
application in GrantSolutions. This
form should be completed by applicants
where applicable.
• Standard Form 424D, Assurances—
Construction Programs—This form
should be scanned and submitted as an
attachment to the application in
GrantSolutions. This form should be
completed by applicants to Track 1 FD/
construction, Track 2 and Track 4.
• FRA Assurances Document—This
form can be obtained from FRA’s Web
site at https://www.fra.dot.gov/
downloads/admin/assurancesand
certifications.pdf. The document should
be signed by an authorized certifying
official for the applicant, scanned into
electronic format, and submitted as an
attachment to the application in
GrantSolutions. This form should be
completed by all applicants.
4.3.4 Additional Information Required
Prior to Award
4.3.4.1 For Construction Grants
(Tracks 1, where applicable, and Track
4)
A project NEPA determination
document (a Record of Decision,
Finding of No Significant Impact, or CE
determination) must have been issued
by FRA prior to award of a construction
grant. In addition to the supporting
documentation required to be included
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
29915
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
with an application, applicants will also
be required to submit the following
documentation prior to their receipt of
an award under Track 1.
4.3.4.2
For all Tracks
Comprehensive executed partnership
agreements, fulfilling all requirements
for such agreements as set forth in
Appendix 1.2.
4.3.4.3
For Tracks 1 and 2
As a condition of award, to the extent
applicable, grant recipients must
comply with the certification
requirements of ARRA. These include
Section 1201 (Maintenance of Effort);
Section 1511 (Transparency and
Oversight); and Section 1607
(Additional Funding Distribution and
Assurance of Appropriate Use of
Funds). On February 27, 2009, Secretary
of Transportation LaHood sent a letter to
the Governors of each State providing
guidance and a template for the
certifications required by ARRA, a copy
of which is available on DOT’s ARRA
Web site, at https://www.dot.gov/
recovery/. All applicable certifications
must be submitted to the DOT at
TigerTeam.Leads@dot.gov.
Certifications may be submitted via
email as electronic, scanned copies,
with original signed versions to follow
via U.S. mail. Additional guidance
regarding these certifications is
included in Appendix 3.2.4.
4.3.5 Application Package
Requirements Checklist
The following application
requirements checklist can be used by
applicants to verify the documents
necessary for submission under each
Track:
APPLICATION CHECKLIST
Applicable track
Required document
Track 1—projects
Format
Track 2—
programs
Track 3—
planning
Track 4—
FY09
funding
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
....................
....................
✓
....................
....................
No Specified Format ..
No Specified Format ..
No Specified Format ..
✓
✓
✓
....................
....................
....................
✓
✓
✓
....................
....................
....................
✓
✓
✓
No Specified Format ..
No Specified Format ..
✓
✓
....................
....................
✓
✓
....................
....................
✓
✓
Form ...........................
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Form ...........................
....................
✓
....................
✓
....................
Form ...........................
....................
✓
....................
✓
....................
Form ...........................
✓
....................
✓
....................
✓
Form ...........................
Form ...........................
✓
✓
....................
✓
✓
✓
....................
✓
✓
✓
FD/
construction
Program Forms
b Preapplication .......................................
b Narratives and Templates Workbook
(includes information on Project Benefits and Cost).
Supporting Documentation
b Service Development Plan (SDP) (or
equivalent).
b Preliminary Engineering (PE) Materials
b NEPA Documentation ..........................
b Project Management Plan (or equivalent).
b Stakeholder Agreements ......................
b Financial Plan (or equivalent) ..............
Standard Forms
b SF 424: Application for Federal Assistance.
b SF 424A: Budget Information—Non
Construction.
b SF 424B: Assurances—Non Construction.
b SF 424C: Budget Information—Construction.
b SF 424D: Assurances—Construction ..
b FRA Assurances Document .................
4.3.6
4.3.6.1
Submission Dates and Times
For Tracks 1, 3, and 4
• Preapplications must be submitted
to FRA via e-mail HSIPR@dot.gov (as
specified in Section 4.3.9) no later than
11:59 p.m. EDT, Friday, July 10, 2009.
• The submission date and time will
be determined based on email header
information. FRA will email the
applicant to confirm receipt of
preapplication submissions.
• Full applications must be submitted
to GrantSolutions (also as specified in
4.1) no later than 11:59 p.m. EDT,
Friday, August 24, 2009. GrantSolutions
will send the applicant an automated
email confirming receipt of the
application.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:05 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
PE/
NEPA
Template ....................
Template ....................
✓
✓
No Specified Format ..
• Supporting documentation that
cannot be submitted electronically
through GrantSolutions may be sent by
courier service with a waybill receipt
stamped no later than 11:59 p.m. EDT,
Friday, August 24, 2009. FRA will email
the applicant to confirm receipt of
supporting documentation sent by
courier service.
4.3.6.2
For Track 2
• Preapplications must be submitted
to FRA via e-mail HSIPR@dot.gov (as
specified in Section 4.3.9) no later than
11:59 p.m. EDT, Friday, July 10, 2009.
• The submission date and time will
be determined based on e-mail header
information. FRA will e-mail the
applicant to confirm receipt of
preapplication submissions.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
• Full applications must be submitted
to GrantSolutions (also as specified in
Section 4.1) no later than 11:59 p.m.
EDT, Friday, October 2, 2009?
GrantSolutions will send the applicant
an automated e-mail confirming receipt
of the application.
• Supporting documentation that
cannot be submitted electronically may
be sent by courier service with a waybill
receipt stamped no later than 11:59 p.m.
EDT, Friday, October 2, 2009. FRA will
e-mail the applicant to confirm receipt
of supporting documentation sent by
courier service.
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
29916
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
TRACK DEADLINES
Track 4—FY2009
appropriations projects
Track 1—projects
Preapplication ......................
Application ...........................
FRA Obligation ....................
Project(s) Completion ..........
Track 2—programs
Track 3—planning
July 10, 2009 ....................
August 24, 2009 ...............
ASAP after selection (No
later than September
30, 2010).
Within 2 years of obligation.
July 10, 2009 ....................
October 2, 2009 ...............
No later than September
30, 2011.
July 10, 2009 ....................
August 24, 2009 ...............
ASAP after selection ........
July 10, 2009.
August 24, 2009.
ASAP after selection.
September 30, 2017 * .......
Within 2 years of obligation.
Within 5 years of obligation.
* The FRA account shall be closed on that date and any remaining balance (whether obligated or unobligated) in the account shall be cancelled and no funds shall thereafter be available for obligation or expenditure for any purpose (31 U.S.C. 1552).
4.3.6.3 For All Tracks
• FRA will make individual
arrangements with applicants for the
submission of other information
required prior to award.
• Subject to demonstration of
unanticipated extenuating
circumstances, FRA may consider
application materials submitted after the
deadlines prescribed above.
4.3.7 Intergovernmental Review
This program has not been designated
as subject to Executive Order 12372
pursuant to 49 CFR part 17.
4.3.8 Funding Restrictions
In general, only those costs
considered allowable pursuant to OMB
Circular A–87, ‘‘Cost Principles for
State, Local, and Indian Tribal
Governments’’ (codified at 2 CFR part
225) will be considered for funding.
Additionally, the following funding
restrictions will apply to grants awarded
under all Tracks, and must be taken into
consideration in the development of
budget information submitted as part of
applications.
• Funding may not be used to fund
expenses associated with the operation
of Intercity Passenger Rail service;
• Funding may not be used for firstdollar liability costs for insurance
related to the provision of Intercity
Passenger Rail service;
• Funding may not be for any casino
or other gambling establishment,
aquarium, zoo, golf course, or
swimming pool; this restriction will be
applied generally in this program,
regardless of the source of funds, and;
• While there is no cap on grant
recipient’s use of grant funds for
management and administrative costs,
such costs must be allowable,
reasonable, allocable, and in accordance
with applicable OMB cost principles
cited above.
For Tracks funded under ARRA, FRA
will also consider reimbursement of preaward costs incurred as early as the
enactment of ARRA (February 17, 2009).
However, such costs will only be
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
considered for reimbursement to the
extent they are otherwise appropriate
under allowable costs principles, are
directly related to the award, and
involve either pre-construction
activities (e.g., PE, NEPA, or FD), or
construction activities that were subject
to an environmental determination
under NEPA made by FRA prior to the
commencement of such construction
activities. Projects for which
construction activities commenced prior
to receipt of an FRA environmental
determination under NEPA will not be
eligible for funding.
For Tracks funded under the FY 2008/
2009 DOT Appropriations, FRA will
also consider reimbursement of preaward costs incurred as early as the
enactment of the FY 2009 DOT
Appropriations Act (March 11, 2009).
However, such costs will only be
considered for reimbursement to the
extent they are otherwise appropriate
under allowable cost principles, are
directly related to the award, and
involve either pre-construction
activities (e.g., PE, NEPA, or FD), or
construction activities that were subject
to an environmental determination
under NEPA made by FRA prior to the
commencement of such construction
activities. Projects for which
construction activities commenced prior
to receipt of an FRA environmental
determination under NEPA will not be
eligible for funding.
4.3.9 Other Submission Requirements
Preapplications should be submitted
by e-mail to HSIPR@dot.gov. As detailed
in Section 4.1 of this guidance,
applications, including supporting
documentation, should be submitted
through GrantSolutions. Should an
applicant encounter technical
difficulties using the GrantSolutions
system that may cause the applicant to
miss the application deadline, the
application may be submitted by e-mail
to HSIPR@dot.gov. For applications
submitted by email, the applicant
should print, sign, scan into electronic
format (preferably Adobe Portable
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
Document Format (.pdf)), and attach to
the submission e-mail copies of all
application forms requiring the
applicant’s signature.
For supporting documentation
(described in Section 4.3.3 2 of this) that
an applicant is unable to submit
electronically (such as oversized
engineering drawings), applicants may
submit an original and two copies to the
following address:
U.S. Department of Transportation,
Federal Railroad Administration,
Attn: HSIPR Program Information
(RDV–10),
Mail Stop 20, Room W38–202,
1200 New Jersey Ave., SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
Due to delays caused by enhanced
screening of mail delivered via the U.S.
Postal Service, applicants are advised to
use other means of conveyance (such as
courier service) to assure timely receipt
of materials.
Section 5: Application Review
Information
5.1
Review Criteria
Once an application is screened for
completeness and eligibility (both
applicant and project eligibility), it will
go through a review process. This
process will involve two steps (detailed
further in Section 5.2): (i) Evaluation
and (ii) selection. For evaluation,
applications in all Tracks will be
individually reviewed and assessed
against up to seven evaluation criteria—
organized into three categories—
outlined below.10 For each of the
applicable criteria, the application will
be assigned a rating of between one and
five points, based on the application’s
fulfillment of the objectives of each
criterion. The ratings will be assigned
by professional staff employed by FRA
and other DOT modal administration
10 Tracks for which the sources of funding
antedated the ARRA (i.e., Tracks 3 and 4) will not
be rated on Criterion A.2, Economic Recovery
Benefits.
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
29917
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
staff as needed. Experts outside of DOT
may also be considered.11
These individual criterion ratings will
then be combined according to priority
of criteria (which vary by Track), to
arrive at an overall rating for the
application. The comparative priorities
appear in the table below.
EVALUATION CRITERIA PRIORITIES
Priority
Evaluation criteria
Track 1
Public Return on Investment.
1. Transportation Benefits ........................................................................................................
2. Economic Recovery Benefits ...............................................................................................
3. Other Public Benefits ...........................................................................................................
Project Success Factors.
1. Project Management Approach ............................................................................................
2. Sustainability of Benefits ......................................................................................................
Other Attributes.
1. Timeliness of Project Completion ........................................................................................
Track 2
Track 3 12
Track 4
2
1
6
1
5
2
1
n/a
n/a
1
n/a
5
3
5
3
4
2
n/a
2
3
4
6
3
4
12 The
specifics of the relevant Track 3 Planning evaluation criteria will vary somewhat from those of Tracks 1, 2 and 4 to reflect the unique
character of planning activities.
5.1.1
Public Return on Investment
Applications will be evaluated against
the following three criteria to assess the
proposed project’s ability to produce a
public return on investment, taking into
account both forecasted benefits, the
overall cost of the proposed project, and
the amount of Federal funding
requested. Evaluation against these
criteria will consider the qualitative
factors outlined below, as supported by
key quantitative metrics. As described
in Section 4, applicants for Tracks 1, 2,
and 4 must provide information
quantifying the anticipated benefits of
the proposed project; for Tracks 1 and
4, using service output data (delay
reduction, schedule improvement, or
capacity increases), and for Track 2,
using transportation output data
(increases in passenger-miles traveled
on Intercity Passenger Rail services,
including shifts from other modes of
transportation). For Track 3, public
return on investment criteria are limited
to transportation benefits.
Careful economic analysis that
quantifies and demonstrates the
monetary value of user benefits and, if
available, public benefits will be
particularly useful to FRA in evaluating
the applications. The systematic process
of comparing expected benefits and
costs helps decision-makers organize
information about, and evaluate tradeoffs between, alternative transportation
investments. FRA will consider benefits
and costs using standard data provided
by applicants and seek to evaluate
applications in a manner consistent
with Executive Order 12893, Principles
for Federal Infrastructure Investments,
59 FR 4233, to base infrastructure
investments on systematic analysis of
expected benefits and costs, including
both quantitative and qualitative
measures.
5.1.1.1
Transportation Benefits
Each application will be assessed
based on its demonstration of the
proposed project’s potential to meet the
purpose and need and to achieve
transportation benefits in a costeffective manner, as set forth through
the President’s strategic transportation
goals and the objectives of PRIIA.
Factors to be considered in assigning a
rating will include the contribution the
proposed project would make to:
• Supporting the development of
intercity high-speed rail service;
• Generating improvements to
Intercity Passenger Rail service, as
reflected by estimated increases in
ridership (as measured in passengermiles), increased on-time performance
(as measured in reductions in delays),
reduced trip time, additional service
frequency to meet anticipated or
existing demand, and other factors;
• Generating cross-modal benefits,
including anticipated favorable impacts
on air or highway traffic congestion,
capacity, or safety, and cost avoidance
or deferral of planned investments in
aviation and highway systems;
• Creating an integrated Intercity
Passenger Rail network, including
integration with existing Intercity
Passenger Rail services, allowance for
and support of future network
expansion, and promotion of technical
interoperability and standardization
(including standardizing operations,
equipment and signaling);
• Encouragement of intermodal
integration through provision of direct,
efficient transfers among intercity
transportation and local transit
networks at train stations, including
connections at airports, bus terminals,
subway stations, ferry ports, and other
modes of transportation;
• Enhancing intercity travel options;
• Ensuring a state of good repair of
key Intercity Passenger Rail assets;
• Promoting standardized equipment
(or rolling stock), signaling,
communications and power;
• Improved freight or commuter rail
operations, in relation to proportional
cost-sharing (including donated
property) by those other benefiting rail
users;
• Equitable financial participation in
the project’s financing, including, but
not limited to, consideration of donated
property interests or services; financial
contributions by freight and commuter
rail carriers commensurate with the
benefit expected to their operations; and
financial commitments from host
railroads, non-Federal governmental
entities, nongovernmental entities, and
others; and
• The overall safety of the
transportation system, including the
encouragement of the use of PTC
technologies, and commitments by
States or railroads of financial resources
to improve the safety of highway/rail
grade crossings over which intercity
passenger rail service operates.
5.1.1.2 Economic Recovery Benefits
Each application will be assessed
based on its demonstration of the
proposed project’s anticipated positive
economic and employment impacts and
11 Experts will be selected based on relevant
qualifications and assurance of lack of conflict of
interest.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
29918
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
potential to promote economic recovery
in a cost-effective manner, consistent
with the purposes and principles of
ARRA. Factors to be considered in
assigning a rating will include the
contribution the proposed project would
make to:
• Rapidly promoting new or
expanding business opportunities
including the short- and long-term
creation and preservation of jobs, during
construction and thereafter;
• Increasing efficiency by promoting
technological advances;
• Providing long-term economic
benefits; and
• Avoiding reductions in Stateprovided essential services.
5.1.1.3 Other Public Benefits
Each application will be assessed
based on its demonstration of the
proposed project’s potential to achieve
other public benefits in a cost-effective
manner. Factors to be considered in
assigning a rating will include the
contribution the proposed project would
make to:
• Environmental quality and energy
efficiency and reduction in dependence
on foreign oil, including use of
renewable energy sources, energy
savings from traffic diversions from
other modes, employment of green
building and manufacturing methods,
reductions in key emissions types, and
the purchase and use of
environmentally sensitive, fuel-efficient,
and cost-effective passenger rail
equipment; and
• Promoting livable communities,
including integration with existing highdensity, livable development (e.g.,
central business districts with public
transportation, pedestrian, and bicycle
distribution networks, and
incorporation of transit-oriented
development).
5.1.1.4 Public Return on Investment
for Track 3—Planning
Planning projects will be evaluated
based on the extent to which they meet
the President’s strategic transportation
goals by leading to benefits to the
public, including transportation
accessibility and interconnectivity.
Planning projects for Intercity Passenger
Rail service will be evaluated for the
extent that they: (1) Lead to benefits for
Intercity Passenger Rail including travel
time reductions, increased frequencies,
and enhanced service quality; (2)
resolve safety issues; (3) resolve
intercity passenger rail reliability issues;
(4) are integrated and complementary to
the relevant comprehensive planning
process (23 U.S.C. 135); and (5) support
livable communities. Proposed planning
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
projects will also be evaluated for their
effectiveness in: (1) Directly leading to
project and/or Service Development
Program applications and (2) leading to
NEPA for route selection; and leading to
completion of an SDP.
5.1.2 Project Success Factors
Applications will be evaluated against
the following two criteria to assess the
proposed project’s likelihood of
successful implementation and
realization of benefits. Evaluation
against these criteria will consider the
factors outlined below, which take into
account the thoroughness and quality of
the supporting documentation—the
project management plan, financing
plan, and SDP (or equivalent project
planning and programming
documents)—submitted with the
application.
5.1.2.1 Project Management Approach
While prioritizing projects that will
generate tangible transportation and
economic benefits, each application will
also be assessed to determine the risk
associated with the project’s delivery
within budget, on time, and as designed.
Factors to be considered in assigning a
rating will include:
• The applicant’s financial, legal, and
technical capacity to implement the
project including whether the
application depends upon receipt of any
waiver(s) of Federal railroad safety
regulations that have not been obtained;
• The applicant’s experience in
administering similar grants and
projects;
• The soundness and thoroughness of
the cost methodologies and
assumptions, and estimates for the
proposed project;
• The adequacy of any completed
engineering work to assess and manage/
mitigate the proposed project’s
engineering and constructability risks;
• The reasonableness of the schedule
for project implementation;
• The thoroughness and quality of the
project management plan;
• The sufficiency of system safety and
security planning;
• The timing and amount of the
project’s future noncommitted
investments;
• The project’s progress, at the time of
application, towards compliance with
environmental protection requirements;
• The comprehensiveness and
sufficiency, at the time of application, of
agreements with key partners
(particularly infrastructure owning
railroads) that will be involved in
implementing the project; and
• The overall completeness and
quality of the application, including the
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
comprehensiveness of its supporting
documentation.
5.1.2.2
Sustainability of Benefits
Each application will be assessed
based on the risk associated with the
proposed project’s capacity to generate,
as planned, its anticipated
transportation and economic benefits.
Factors to be considered in assigning a
rating will include:
• The presence and quality of a
financial plan that analyzes the
financial viability of the proposed rail
service;
• The quality and reasonableness of
revenue and operating and maintenance
cost forecasts for the benefiting Intercity
Passenger Rail service(s);
• The availability of any required
operating financial support preferably
from dedicated funding sources for the
benefiting Intercity Passenger Rail
service(s);
• The quality and adequacy of project
identification and planning;
• The reasonableness of estimates for
user and non-user benefits for the
project;
• The reasonableness of the operating
service plan, including its provisions for
protecting the future quality of other
services sharing the facilities to be
improved; and
• The comprehensiveness and
sufficiency, at the time of application, of
agreements with key partners (including
the railroad operating the Intercity
Passenger Rail service as well as
infrastructure-owning railroads) that
will be involved in the operation of the
benefiting Intercity Passenger Rail
service, including the commitment of
any affected host-rail carrier to ensure
the realization of the anticipated
benefits, preferably through a
commitment by the affected host-rail
carrier(s) to an enforceable on-time
performance of passenger trains of 80
percent or greater.
5.1.3
Other Attributes
Applications will also be evaluated
against the following two additional
criteria.
5.1.3.1 Timeliness of Project
Completion
Each application will be assessed
based on the timeliness of its
implementation schedule, including:
• The readiness of the project to be
commenced; and
• The timeliness of project
completion and the realization of the
project’s anticipated benefits.
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
5.2
Review and Selection Process
5.2.1 Application Evaluation Process
Submitted applications will be
screened for eligibility and
completeness. Applications determined
to be both complete and eligible will be
referred to a technical evaluation panel
consisting of subject-matter experts for
assignment of ratings, as described in
Section 5.1. Panel members will use a
merit-based approach to review
applications based on the above
evaluation criteria. Ratings assigned by
the evaluation panels will serve as the
basis for a presentation of applications
to the FRA Administrator, who will
determine the final selection of
applications for awards.
5.2.2 Additional Selection Criteria
In addition to the ratings against
evaluation criteria assigned by the
technical evaluation panels, the FRA
29919
Administrator may take into account
several cross-cutting and comparative
selection criteria to determine awards of
funding. The Administrator will review
the preliminary results to ensure that
the scoring has been applied
consistently, and that the collective
results meet several key priorities
essential to the success and
sustainability of the program as detailed
below.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Selection criteria
(balance and diversity)
1.
2.
3.
4.
Example factors
Region/location .....................................................................................
Innovation .............................................................................................
Partnerships .........................................................................................
Tracks and round timing ......................................................................
Following evaluation of each
application by review panels, the
Administrator will review the
preliminary results to ensure that the
scoring has been applied consistently,
and that the collective results meet
several key priorities essential to the
success and sustainability of the
program. To ensure a balanced national
program, this review will include:
5.2.2.1
Region/Location
• Ensuring appropriate level of
regional balance across the country.
• Ensuring appropriate level of
balance among large and small
population centers.
• Ensuring integration and
augmentation of the nationwide
transportation network.
• Addressing the ARRA requirement
to provide assistance to economicallydistressed regions most impacted by the
recession.
5.2.2.2
Innovation
• Pursuing new technology and
innovation where the public return on
investment is favorable, while ensuring
delivery of near-term transportation,
public and recovery benefits.
• Promoting domestic manufacturing,
supply and industrial development,
including U.S.-based equipment
manufacturing and supply industries.
• Developing professional railroad
engineering, operating, planning and
management capacity needed for
sustainable Intercity Passenger Rail
development.
5.2.2.3
Partnerships
• Where corridors span multiple
States, emphasizing those that have
organized multi-State partnerships with
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
■
■
■
■
Geography and economic conditions.
Technology and industrial/capacity development.
Multi-State agreements.
Project costs and schedules.
joint planning and prioritization of
investments.
• Employing creative approaches to
ensure workforce diversity and use of
disadvantaged and minority business
enterprises.
5.2.2.4 Preservation of Funding for
Track 2 Program and Future Award
Rounds
• While ready-to-go projects are
critical for delivering early program
benefits, the longer-term future of the
program depends on strong Track 2
corridor program development.
Sufficient funds will be set aside for
Track 2 and, if possible, for future
rounds of funding.
Section 6: Award Administration
Information
6.1 Award Notices
Upon approval of an application,
notification will be sent to the grant
recipient through GS that the award is
waiting acceptance.
FRA will publicly announce selected
projects and funding levels. For projects
that were not selected, FRA will notify
the applicant of their decision and
provide the following:
• Suggestions on application
revisions for any subsequent
resubmission rounds (if desired by
applicant); and
• Guidance regarding subsequent
rounds (e.g., new/revised guidance,
application due dates).
6.2 Administrative and National
Policy Requirements
Grant recipients must follow all
administrative and national policy
requirements including: procurement
standards, compliance with federal civil
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
rights laws and regulations,
disadvantaged business enterprises
(DBE), FRA’s and OMB’s Assurances
and Certifications, ADA, and NEPA. For
a complete list of all administrative and
national policy requirements, refer to
Appendix 3.2.
6.3 ARRA-Specific Grant
Requirements
Grant recipients receiving ARRAfunded grants must comply with all
requirements detailed in ARRA
including: The prohibition on using
funds for certain activities, signage
requirements, and certification
requirements. For a complete list of all
ARRA-specific grant requirements, refer
to Appendix 3.3.
6.4 Program-Specific Grant
Requirements
Grant recipients receiving PRIIAauthorized grants must comply with all
requirements set forth in PRIIA,
including adhering to: Buy America,
Labor Protection, and Davis-Bacon Act.
For a complete list of all PRIIA-specific
grant requirements, refer to Appendix
3.4.
6.5
General Requirements
Grant recipients must comply with
reporting requirements and, where
applicable, ARRA-specific reporting
requirements. All post-award
information pertaining to reporting,
auditing, monitoring, and the close-out
process is detailed in Appendix 3.5.
Section 7: Questions and Clarifications
Questions about this guidance and the
application process should be submitted
to the HSIPR Program Manager via
email at HSIPR@dot.gov.
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
29920
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
LIST OF ACRONYMS
Acronym
Meaning
ACF ......................................................
ADA ......................................................
April 2009 Strategic Plan .....................
Administration for Children and Families.
Americans with Disabilities Act.
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Vision for High-Speed Rail in
America, High-Speed Rail Strategic Plan [under] the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009, April 16, 2009; available at: https://www.fra.dot.gov/Downloads/Finalpercent20FRApercent
20HSRpercent20Stratpercent20Plan.pdf.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Pub. L. 111–5).
Custom Applications Support and Training Unit (GrantSolutions).
Central Contractor Registration database.
Categorical Exclusion—a class of action for the NEPA process.
Federal Railroad Administration, High-Speed Ground Transportation for America, September 1997;
available at: https://www.fra.dot.gov/us/content/515.
The U.S. Department of Transportation.
Data Universal Number System.
Environmental Assessment—a NEPA document.
Environmental Impact Statement— the most extensive type of NEPA document.
Final Design.
Finding of No Significant Impact—a possible decision concluding the NEPA process.
Federal Railroad Administration—an Operating Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation.
Federal Transit Administration.
Fiscal Year.
Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008
—Title I of Division K of Public Law 110–161, December 26, 2007.
Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2009
—Title I of Division I of Public Law 111–8, March 11, 2009.
GrantSolutions Grants Management System.
Interstate Commerce Commission.
Letter of Intent.
miles per hour.
National Environmental Policy Act.
National Transit Database.
On-time performance.
Preliminary engineering.
Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (Division B of Pub. L. 110–432).
Positive Train Control.
Record of Decision—a possible decision concluding of the NEPA process.
Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (Division A of Pub. L. 110–432, October 16, 2008).
State Department of Transportation.
Capital Assistance to States—Intercity Passenger Rail Service program—established in FY 2008 DOT
Appropriations Act and continued in the FY 2009 DOT Appropriations Act.
ARRA ....................................................
CAST ....................................................
CCR ......................................................
CE .........................................................
CFS report ............................................
Department ...........................................
DUNS ...................................................
EA .........................................................
EIS ........................................................
FD .........................................................
FONSI ...................................................
FRA ......................................................
FTA .......................................................
FY .........................................................
FY 2008 DOT Appropriations Act ........
FY 2009 DOT Appropriations Act ........
GS ........................................................
ICC .......................................................
LOI ........................................................
mph .......................................................
NEPA ....................................................
NTD ......................................................
OTP ......................................................
PE .........................................................
PRIIA ....................................................
PTC ......................................................
ROD ......................................................
RSIA .....................................................
State DOT ............................................
State Grant Program. ...........................
Appendix 1: Additional Information on
Eligibility
Appendix 1.1
Applicant Types
State—A State department of
transportation (State DOT) which is the
State-wide instrumentality or agency of
a State, in the form of a department,
commission, board, or official of any
State, charged by its laws with the
responsibility for transportation-related
matters within the State, including highspeed rail/intercity passenger rail.
Group of States—A group of two or
more States in which an agreement has
been established to work in
coordination to build and operate rail
projects within specified boundaries
and within the duration of agreement.
The agreement should specify the
commitments (financial and otherwise)
of all parties to developing and
maintaining rail operations for a
specified corridor. This type of
agreement requires the backing of
several political and administrative
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
entities within each State. Such
agreement should include but not be
limited to the following: identification
of all parties involved, the duration of
the agreement, governance
arrangements, commitment of partners,
risk and benefits sharing arrangements,
liabilities, level of service per partner or
client, services to be provided, dispute
resolution, substandard performance,
termination, signatories. A group of
States wishing to submit an application
must designate one State within the
group to serve as the lead State for the
application. This lead State would be
responsible for submitting the
application and administrating any
grant that is awarded to the group of
States.
Interstate Compact—An entity created
through an agreement between two or
more States. Frequently, these compacts
create a new governmental agency that
is responsible for administering or
improving some shared resource, such
as public transportation infrastructure.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
In some cases, a compact serves simply
as a coordination mechanism between
independent authorities in the member
States. Article I, Section 10 of the
United States Constitution provides that
no State shall enter into an agreement or
compact with another State without the
consent of Congress. Interstate compacts
for the purpose of Intercity Passenger
Rail development have been established
previously, based on the implied
general consent of Congress expressed
through Public Law 98–358, in which
Congress explicitly granted consent to
the creation of an interstate compact
between the States of Ohio, Indiana,
Michigan, Pennsylvania, Illinois, West
Virginia, and Kentucky for the purpose
of developing Intercity Passenger Rail.
Public Agencies, established by one or
more States (Having responsibility for
providing Intercity Passenger Rail
service)—A publicly created and
owned, not-for-profit agency, other than
direct instrumentalities of States or
agencies created under an interstate
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
compact, having responsibility for
providing or developing Intercity
Passenger Rail service. Such agencies
would include public authorities and
joint powers authorities created and
authorized under State law, and may
have responsibilities over a limited
geographic scope (such as a region
within a State), or related to a specific
service, project, or development effort
(such as the construction of a specific
infrastructure project).
Amtrak, in cooperation with States—
The National Railroad Passenger
Corporation undertaking a project
subject to an agreement with one or
more States (as defined above).
Appendix 1.2 Minimum Qualifications
for Applicant Eligibility
An applicant must, in addition to
demonstrating that it is of an eligible
type for the track and funding source
under which it is applying, affirmatively
demonstrate that it has or will have the
legal, financial, and technical capacity
to carry out the proposal. In addition,
for non-planning applications under
Track 1, Track 2, and Track 4, the
applicant must demonstrate that it has
or will have satisfactory continuing
control over the use of equipment or
facilities acquired, constructed, or
improved by the project, and the
capability and willingness to maintain
such equipment or facilities.
In the following discussion of the
means by which applicants can satisfy
these minimum requirements, the term
‘‘project’’ refers generally to the
substance of the applicant’s proposal,
regardless of the Track under which it
is being advanced.
For an applicant to demonstrate the
legal, financial, and technical capacity
to carry out its proposed project, it will
be required to address the following
qualifications:
• For an entity other than a State, its
legal authority to undertake the
proposed project and apply for Federal
financial assistance;
• The applicant’s ability to absorb
potential cost overruns or financial
shortfalls. For entities other than States,
the demonstration of such ability should
include a description of the entity’s own
financial resources, its ability to raise
revenue through taxation, dedicated
funding sources, or other means, and/or
explicit financial backing by one or
more State governments;
• The applicant’s experience in
effectively administering grants of
similar scope and value (including
timely completion of grant deliverables,
compliance with grant conditions, and
quality and cost controls); and
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
• The applicant’s experience in
managing railroad investment projects
of a nature similar to that for which
funding is being requested.
For an applicant to demonstrate that
it has or will have satisfactory
continuing control over the use of
equipment or facilities acquired,
constructed, or improved by the project,
it will be required to show either:
• That the applicant has or will have
direct ownership of the equipment or
facilities acquired, constructed, or
improved by the project; or
• That the applicant has secured or
has made progress towards securing and
will have contractual agreements in
place with the entity or entities (e.g., a
local government, or one or more
private railroads) that have or will have
direct ownership of such assets.
For an applicant to demonstrate that
it has or will have the capability and
willingness to maintain the equipment
or facilities acquired, constructed, or
improved by the project, it will be
required to show:
• That it has made progress towards,
and will have contractual agreements in
place with, any entity or entities (e.g., a
local government, or one or more
private railroads) that have or will have
direct ownership of the equipment or
facilities acquired, constructed, or
improved by the project, which address
financial and operational responsibility
for asset maintenance;
• That to the extent financial
responsibility will fall to the applicant,
the applicant has the ability to cover
maintenance costs. For entities other
than States, the demonstration of such
ability should include a description of
the entity’s own financial resources,
ability to raise revenue through taxation,
and/or explicit financial backing by one
or more State governments; and
• The applicant’s experience in
maintaining assets with similar
financial and operational maintenance
requirements as those for the assets for
which funding is being requested.
Information and documentation
demonstrating the fulfillment of the
minimum qualifications described
above will be required to be submitted
as part of full application (see Section
4.3.3.2).
Appendix 1.3 Definition of Intercity
Passenger Rail
‘‘Intercity rail passenger
transportation’’ is defined at 49 U.S.C.
24102(4) as ‘‘rail passenger
transportation except commuter rail
passenger transportation.’’ Likewise,
‘‘commuter rail passenger
transportation’’ is defined at 49 U.S.C.
24102(3) as ‘‘short-haul rail passenger
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
29921
transportation in metropolitan and
suburban areas usually having reduced
fare, multiple ride, and commuter
tickets and morning and evening peak
period operations.’’ In common use, the
general definition of ‘‘rail passenger
transportation’’ excludes types of local
or regional rail transit such as light rail,
streetcars, and heavy rail. Similarly,
both Intercity Passenger Rail
transportation and commuter rail
passenger transportation exclude singlepurpose scenic or tourist railroad
operations.
The since-terminated Interstate
Commerce Commission (ICC)
established six features to aid in
classifying a service as ‘‘commuter’’
rather than ‘‘intercity’’ rail passenger
transportation: 13
• The passenger service is primarily
being used by patrons traveling on a
regular basis either within a
metropolitan area or between a
metropolitan area and its suburbs;
• The service is usually characterized
by operation performed at morning and
peak periods of travel;
• The service usually honors
commutation or multiple-ride tickets at
a fare reduced below the ordinary coach
fare and carries the majority of its
patrons on such a reduced fare basis;
• The service makes several stops at
short intervals either within a zone or
along the entire route;
• The equipment used may consist of
little more than ordinary coaches; and
• The service should not extend more
than 100 miles at the most, except in
rare instances; although service over
shorter distances may not be commuter
or short haul within the meaning of this
exclusion.
FTA further refined the definition of
commuter rail in the glossary for its
National Transit Database (NTD) 14
Reporting Manual. In particular, FTA
refined the ICC’s third ‘‘feature’’ by
specifying that ‘‘predominantly
commuter [rail passenger] service means
that for any given trip segment (i.e.,
distance between any two stations),
more than 50 percent of the average
daily ridership travels on the train at
least three times a week.’’
In judging the eligibility of an
application under this solicitation, FRA
will determine whether the rail
passenger service that is primarily
intended to benefit from the proposal
13 Penn Central Transportation Company
Discontinuance or Change in Service of 22 Trains
between Boston, Mass, and Providence R.I.,
February 10, 1971, I.C.C. 338, 318–333.
14 In additional to serving as a reference database,
the NTD captures data that serve as the basis for
apportioning and allocating funding to eligible
grantees under FTA’s formula grant programs.
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
29922
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
constitutes ‘‘intercity passenger rail
transportation’’ under the statutory
definition and ICC and FTA
interpretations. FRA may also take into
account whether the primary intended
benefiting service has been or is
currently the direct and intended
beneficiary of funding provided by
another Federal agency (e.g., FTA) for
the purpose of improving commuter rail
passenger transportation and whether
the service in question is or will be
operated by or on behalf of a local,
regional, or State entity whose primary
rail transportation mission is the
provision of commuter or transit
service.
Appendix 2: Additional Information on
Planning and Engineering
Appendix 2.1 Service Development
Plan (or equivalent)
A Service Development Plan (SDP) is
a plan for developing High-Speed Rail/
Intercity Passenger Rail service, either
initiating new service or improving
existing service (e.g., adding train
frequencies and/or reducing trip
times)—typically focused on distinct
phases and/or geographic sections of
service improvement. A SDP or
equivalent covers three general topics:
(i) Rationale (including purpose and
need), (ii) service/operating plan and
prioritized capital plan, and (iii)
implementation plan (including project
management approach, stakeholder
agreements and financial plan).
The completion of a SDP is a prerequisite for eligibility for applications
for Track 2-Programs. FRA
acknowledges the inherent complexity
of the planning efforts required to
develop a SDP. The precise structure of
a SDP can vary at the discretion of the
applicant; FRA does not pre-determine
SDP form and structure. Only certain
illustrative topics need to be included in
a SDP—thus the applicant has the
flexibility to tailor the SDP to the needs
of their program.
After receiving the preapplications for
Track 2, subject to available resources,
FRA will be available for a kick-off
discussion with the prospective
applicant that will include a review of
the contents of the SDP. FRA will
provide assistance to Track 2 applicants
in clarifying whether the information
necessary for the SDP is complete. FRA
will also discuss submission
requirements with prospective
applicants.
A complete SDP is a planning
approach that would need to address
such topics as the following:
• Illustrative topics dealing with
program rationale—The SDP includes a
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
description of the corridor’s
transportation challenges and
opportunities based on current and
forecasted travel demand and capacity
conditions. Through the SDP, the
applicant has the opportunity to show
FRA and its constituents how the
proposed HSIPR Service Development
Program can cost-effectively address
transportation and other needs
considering system alternatives
(highway, air, other, as applicable).
Qualitative and quantitative
assessments of the costs, benefits and
impacts and risks of the alternatives will
provide decision makers with sufficient
information. The SDP might also
explore synergies between the HighSpeed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail
proposal and large-scale goals and
development plans within its service
region and communities.
• Illustrative topics dealing with
operations—The SDP describes the train
service to be provided for each phase of
new or improved Intercity Passenger
Rail service including: the service
frequency, timetable (including timedistance ‘‘stringline’’ diagrams), general
station locations, intermodal
connections, and train consists. The
SDP would describe the underlying
operational analyses, including railroad
operation simulations and equipment
and crew scheduling analyses, which in
turn reflect such variables as travel
demand and rolling stock configuration.
The planning horizon should be
consistent with the anticipated useful
lives of the improvements to be
introduced.
• Illustrative topics dealing with
capital needs—The SDP describes the
rail equipment and infrastructure
improvements for each discrete phase of
service implementation. If applicable,
the SDP would prioritize improvements
for each phase. The SDP presents
estimated capital costs for projects and
project groups, with documentation of
assumptions and methods. Initial
capital expenditures estimates to bring
the service to its full operating
capability, accommodation of future
traffic growth and ongoing expenditures
for replacement of system components
should be included.
• Illustrative topics dealing with
operating and financial results—The
SDP includes operating and financial
projections for each phase of the
planned intercity passenger rail service.
The SDP will address the methods,
assumptions and outputs for travel
demand forecasts, the expected revenue
from the service, and all operating
expenses for the train service including
maintenance of way, maintenance of
equipment, transportation (train
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
movement), passenger traffic and
services (marketing, reservations/
information, station, and on-board
services), and general/administrative
expenses. Cost-sharing arrangements
with infrastructure owners and rail
operators should also be included.
• Illustrative topics dealing with
public benefits—The SDP includes a
description of user and non-user
benefits and, to the extent readily
quantifiable, the estimated economic
value of those benefits, with particular
attention to topics prominent in ARRA,
i.e., job creation and retention and
potential energy savings.
• Illustrative topics dealing with
program implementation—The SDP
presents a Service Development
Program schedule for carrying out each
phase; a preliminary description of the
intended techniques of project
management that will assure quality,
cost, and budget control; and the
financing and organizational plans for
carrying out the proposed strategy.
If the High-Speed Rail/Intercity
Passenger Rail service contemplated
under the SDP makes use of facilities
that would be shared with freight,
commuter rail, or other Intercity
Passenger Rail services, the existing and
future characteristics of those services—
as developed cooperatively with freight,
commuter, and Intercity Passenger Rail
partners—would need to be integral to
the High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger
Rail SDP. In particular, the SDP needs
to show how the proposed Service
Development Program will protect the
quality of those other services through
a planning horizon year and under
assumptions mutually agreed to with
the other partners.
Appendix 2.2 Preliminary Engineering
(PE)
PE completion is a prerequisite for
projects submitted under Track 1—FD/
Construction projects, Track 2—
Programs, and Track 4. PE entails
sufficient engineering design to define a
project, including identification of all
environmental impacts, design of all
critical project elements at a level
sufficient to assure reliable cost
estimates and schedules (in turn
sufficient to complete project
management and financial plans), and
definition of procurement requirements
and strategies.
The PE development process starts
with the evaluation of project design
alternatives (a range of rail
improvements, specific alignments, and
project designs) sufficient to support
subsequent NEPA analysis. The NEPA
environmental determination is a
prerequisite for FRA to obligate
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
construction funds. As with the SDP,
FRA acknowledges the complexity of
the work required for PE, and that it will
vary depending on the project scope.
Thus, FRA does not pre-determine the
form and structure of the PE work. FRA
has opted to specify the illustrative
contents of PE—thus allowing the
applicant discretion to pursue the most
workable approach tailored to its needs
and suitable for the proposed project.
PE results in detailed estimates of
project costs, benefits, and impacts of
the preferred alternative that merit a
higher degree of confidence than those
prepared in earlier stages of planning.
FRA considers that PE for a major
capital investment project is complete
when:
• The signed environmental Record
of Decision (ROD) or Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) signals that
the NEPA process has been completed;
• The project scope, capital cost
estimates, and financial plan are
finalized;
• The project sponsor has adequately
demonstrated its technical capability to
advance the project into FD and
construction;
• The project sponsor has adequately
demonstrated its process and schedule
for filing any safety regulatory waivers
necessary to implement the project; and
• The project sponsor has provided
an adequate system safety program plan
and any necessary collision/derailment
hazard analysis.
The products of PE will include:
engineering designs; a detailed project
description, including provisions for
compliance with the ADA; a highly
accurate project cost estimate (including
a description of methodologies and
assumptions employed in developing
the estimate) that identifies major
components and that includes
contingencies that are reduced from
previous estimates and are broken down
by phase and functional area, a
thorough project management plan
suitable for this phase of project
development; and a solid project
financial plan that includes Federal and
non-Federal funding committed to the
project.
PE documentation will typically
include: (1) Scale maps or scale aerial
photography of existing conditions at a
scale of one inch = 100 to 500 feet
depending on location (built-up vs.
undeveloped areas); and (2) design plan
drawings overlaid on the maps/
photography. These design drawings
will typically show: (i) Existing railroad
right-of-way limits along with the
railroad ownership; (ii) Proposed track
changes including track removals and
track installations showing track
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
centers, turnout sizes, curve and spiral
data, etc.; (iii) Vertical profiles and
grades of existing and proposed
construction; (iv) Public and private atgrade highway crossings; and (v)
Passenger stations, building(s),
platforms, parking, access to the
primary highway system in the area,
and public transit services and facilities.
The detailed project description
developed in the PE typically includes
an assessment of the physical condition
and location of the existing project area
(generally two to three miles beyond the
project construction limits) and
elements associated with the design(s).
These elements may include: bridges
(rail and highway); track including the
number and location of previously
existing railroad tracks on a roadbed;
buildings (stations and maintenance
facilities, etc.); signal systems and
interlocked detectors, switches, derails,
and snow melters; utility systems on,
over, adjacent to or under the rail line
and agreements concerning them;
electrification systems, if any;
description of highway crossing
warning systems (if any) and daily
traffic counts at public and private atgrade highway crossings; existing and
proposed railroad operations and routes
of freight, commuter and intercity trains
with train daily numbers of trains by
type; a safety and security management
plan; and STRACNET routes and/or
moves for commercial high and wide
loads. For maintenance facilities, the PE
outputs will describe and provide
drawings that show the location, track
and facility layout, specialized
equipment (if any), office and employee
welfare facilities, etc.
FRA will be available, subject to
available resources, to assist applicants
in clarifying whether the PE is complete
and encourages applicants to contact
FRA to discuss PE.
Appendix 3: Additional Information on
Award Administration and Grant
Conditions
Appendix 3.1
Award Notices
Upon approval of an application,
notification will be sent to the grant
recipient through GrantSolutions that
the award is waiting acceptance.
FRA will publicly announce selected
projects and funding levels. For projects
that were not selected, FRA will notify
the applicant of its decision and provide
the following:
• Suggestions on application
revisions for any subsequent
resubmission rounds (if desired by
applicant); and
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
29923
• Guidance regarding subsequent
rounds (i.e., new/revised guidance,
application due dates)
Appendix 3.2 Administrative and
National Policy Requirements
FRA will make funds available to the
grant recipient through a grant or
cooperative agreement. FRA will decide
which vehicle to use based upon the
level of anticipated FRA involvement in
the project. FRA will use a grant
agreement where limited Federal
involvement is anticipated and a
cooperative agreement in those
situations involving greater Federal
participation.
Below is a discussion of some of the
more important specific requirements
that are a feature of FRA’s typical grant
agreement and will likely be included in
every grant agreement under this
program (FRA’s use of the term grant
herein is intended to encompass both
grant and cooperative agreements):
Appendix 3.2.1 Contracting
Information
A grant recipient’s procurement of
goods and services must comply with
the Procurement Standards
requirements set forth at 49 CFR 18.36
or 49 CFR 19.40 through 19.48,
whichever is applicable depending on
the type of grantee (part 18 covers State
and local governments and part 19
covers non-profit and for-profit entities),
and with applicable supplementary U.S.
DOT or FRA directives or regulations.
Appendix 3.2.2 Compliance With
Federal Civil Rights Laws and
Regulations
The grant recipient must comply with
all civil rights laws and regulations, in
accordance with applicable Federal
directives, except to the extent that the
FRA determines otherwise in writing.
These include, but are not limited to,
the following: (a) Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 (Pub. L. 88–352) (as
implemented by 49 CFR part 21), which
prohibits discrimination on the basis of
race, color or national origin; (b) Title IX
of the Education Amendments of 1972,
as amended (20 U.S.C. 1681–1683, and
1685–1686), which prohibits
discrimination on the basis of sex, (c)
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 794),
which prohibits discrimination on the
basis of handicaps; (d) the Age
Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended
(42 U.S.C. 1601–1607), which prohibits
discrimination on the basis of age; (e)
the Drug Abuse Office and Treatment
Act of 1972 (Pub. L. 92–255), as
amended, relating to nondiscrimination
on the basis of drug abuse; (f) the
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
29924
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and
Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment and
Rehabilitation Act of 1970 (Pub. L. 91–
616), as amended, relating to
nondiscrimination on the basis of
alcohol abuse or alcoholism; (g) §§ 523
and 527 of the Public Health Service Act
of 1912 (42 U.S.C. 290 dd–3 and 290 ee–
3), as amended, relating to
confidentiality of alcohol and drug
abuse patient records; (h) Title VIII of
the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C.
3601 et seq.), as amended, relating to
nondiscrimination in the sale, rental, or
financing of housing, (i) 49 U.S.C. 306,
which prohibits discrimination on the
basis of race, color, national origin, or
sex in railroad financial assistance
programs; (j) any other
nondiscrimination provisions in the
specific statute(s) under which
application for Federal assistance was
made; and (k) the requirements of any
other nondiscrimination statute(s)
which may apply to the grant recipient.
Grant recipients must comply with all
regulations, guidelines, and standards
adopted under the above statutes. The
grant recipient is also required to submit
information, as required, to the FRA
Office of Civil Rights concerning its
compliance with these laws and
implementing regulations, and its
activities implementing a grant award.
Appendix 3.2.3 Disadvantaged
Business Enterprises (DBE)
The FRA encourages its grant
recipients to utilize small business
concerns owned and controlled by
socially and economically
disadvantaged individuals (as that term
is defined for other DOT operating
administrations at 49 CFR part 26) in
carrying out projects funded under
ARRA, although FRA grant recipients
are not required to do so. The DOT DBE
regulation (49 CFR part 26) only applies
to certain categories of Federal highway,
Federal transit, and airport funds. The
FRA is not covered under the DOT DBE
regulations. The procurement standards
applicable to grant recipients require
grant recipients and subgrantees to take
all necessary affirmative steps to assure
that minority firms, women’s business
enterprises and labor surplus area firms
are used when possible (see 49 CFR
18.36(e) and 19.44(b)). The grant
recipient is also required to submit
information as required to the FRA
Office of Civil Rights concerning its
activities with respect to DBEs in
implementing a grant award.
Appendix 3.2.4 Assurances and
Certifications
Upon acceptance of the grant by the
FRA all certifications and assurances
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
provided by the grant recipient through
the application process are incorporated
in and become part of the grant
agreement. Applicable Assurance and
Certification forms include SF 424(A)/
(B), SF424(C)/(D) and FRA’s Assurances
and Certification form. The OMB
Standard Forms can be accessed at
https://www.forms.gov. The FRA
Assurances and Certifications Document
is available at https://www.fra.dot.gov/
downloads/admin/assurancesand
certifications.pdf.
Appendix 3.2.5 Debarment and
Suspension; and Drug-Free Workplace
Grant recipients must obtain
certifications on debarment and
suspension for all third party
contractors and subgrantees and comply
with all DOT regulations,
‘‘Nonprocurement Suspension and
Debarment’’ (2 CFR part 1200) and
‘‘Governmentwide Requirements for
Drug-Free Workplace (Grants),’’ (49 CFR
part 32).
Appendix 3.2.6 Safety Oversight
Grant recipients must comply with
any Federal regulations, laws, policy
and other guidance that FRA or DOT
may issue pertaining to safety oversight
in general, and in the performance of
any grant award, in particular. FRA has
in place a comprehensive system of
railroad safety oversight (see 49 CFR
part 209 et seq.) that is applicable to
railroad operations generally.
Appendix 3.2.7 Americans With
Disabilities Act (ADA)
Grant recipients must agree to use
funds provided under the grant
agreement in a manner consistent with
the requirements of Title II of the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
of 1990, as amended; Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended
(29 U.S.C. 794); and both statutes’
implementing regulations at 49 CFR
parts 27, 37, and 38. DOT (through its
delegate FRA) has responsibility to offer
technical assistance for the provisions of
the ADA about which it issues
regulations. 42 U.S.C. 12206(c)(1) reads:
‘‘Each Federal agency that has
responsibility under paragraph (2) for
implementing this chapter may render
technical assistance to individuals and
institutions that have rights or duties
under the respective subchapters of this
chapter for which such agency has
responsibility.’’ Grant recipients are
strongly encouraged to seek FRA’s
technical assistance with regard to the
accessible features of passenger rail
systems, to include accessibility at
stations and on railcars. FRA believes
such technical assistance is essential
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
where interpretation of DOT’s
regulatory requirements is necessary
and/or before the creation of any new
rail system.
Appendix 3.2.8 Environmental
Protection
All facilities that will be used to
perform work under an award shall not
be so used unless the facilities are
designed and equipped to limit water
and air pollution in accordance with all
applicable local, State and Federal
standards.
Grant recipients will conduct work
under an award, and will require that
work that is conducted as a result of an
award be in compliance with the
following provisions, as modified from
time to time: Section 114 of the Clean
Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7414, and Section 308
of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act, 33 U.S.C. 1318, and all regulations
issued there under. Through the grant
agreement, grant recipients will certify
that no facilities that will be used to
perform work under an award are listed
on the List of Violating Facilities
maintained by the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA). Grant
recipients will be required to notify the
Administrator as soon as it or any
contractor or subcontractor receives any
communication from the EPA indicating
that any facility which will be used to
perform work pursuant to an award is
under consideration to be listed on the
EPA’s List of Violating Facilities;
provided, however, that the grant
recipient’s duty of notification shall
extend only to those communications of
which it is aware, or should reasonably
have been aware. Grant recipients will
need to include or cause to be included
in each contract or subcontract entered
into, which contract or subcontract
exceeds Fifty Thousand Dollars
($50,000.00) in connection with work
performed pursuant to an award, the
criteria and requirements of this section
and an affirmative covenant requiring
such contractor or subcontractor to
immediately inform the grant recipient
upon the receipt of a communication
from the EPA concerning the matters set
forth herein.
Appendix 3.2.9 National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
Specific NEPA-related guidance is
included in Section 1.6 of this guidance.
The following is a description of FRA’s
general or standard grant provision on
NEPA compliance.
Generally, grant recipients may not
expend any of the funds provided in an
award on construction or other activities
that represent an irretrievable
commitment of resources to a particular
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
29925
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
course of action affecting the
environment until after all
environmental and historic preservation
analyses required by the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.
4332) (NEPA), the National Historic
Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470(f))
(NHPA), and related laws and
regulations have been completed and
the FRA has provided the grant
recipient with a written notice
authorizing them to proceed.
In instances where NEPA approval
has not been secured at the time of grant
award, grant recipients are required to
assist the FRA in its compliance with
the provisions of NEPA, the Council on
Environmental Quality’s regulations
implementing NEPA (40 CFR part 1500
et seq.), FRA’s ‘‘Procedures for
Considering Environmental Impacts’’
(45 FR 40854, June 16, 1980), as revised
May 26, 1999, 64 FR 28545), Section
106 of the NHPA, and related
environmental and historic preservation
statutes and regulations. As a condition
of receiving financial assistance under
an award, grant recipients may be
required to conduct certain
environmental analyses and to prepare
and submit to the FRA draft documents
required under NEPA, NHPA, and
related statutes and regulations
(including draft environmental
assessments and proposed draft and
final environmental impact Statements).
No publicly-owned land from a park,
recreational area, or wildlife or
waterfowl refuge of national, State, or
local significance as determined by the
Federal, State, or local officials having
jurisdiction thereof, or any land from an
historic site of national, State or local
significance as so determined by such
officials shall be used by grant
recipients without the prior written
concurrence of FRA. Grant recipients
shall assist the FRA in complying with
these requirements of 49 U.S.C. 303(c).
Appendix 3.2.10 Environmental
Justice
The grant recipient will be required to
agree to facilitate compliance with the
policies of Executive Order No. 12898,
‘‘Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations,’’ 42 U.S.C. 4321 note,
except to the extent that FRA
determines otherwise in writing.
Appendix 3.2.11 Operating and Access
Agreements
As discussed in the guidance, grant
recipients will be required to reach a
written agreement, approved by FRA,
with each of the railroads or other entity
on whose property the project will be
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
located. Among other things, such
railroad/owner agreements shall specify
terms and conditions regarding the
following issues: responsibility for
project design and implementation,
project property ownership,
maintenance responsibilities, and
disposition responsibilities, and the
owning entity’s commitment to helping
to achieve, to the extent it is capable,
the anticipated project benefits. If an
agreement between the grant recipient
and the owner which substantially
addresses the above-referenced issues is
already in place as of the date of
execution of the grant agreement, the
grant recipient will be required to
submit it to FRA for FRA’s review and
determination of adequacy. However, if
either no agreement is in place as of the
date of execution of this Agreement, or
if an existing agreement has been
determined by FRA to be inadequate,
the grant recipient shall, prior to the
grant recipient’s execution of an
agreement with the owner, submit the
final draft of such an agreement to FRA
for FRA’s review and approval. A
finding by FRA that the required
approved railroad/owner agreement(s)
are in place is a prerequisite for
reimbursement of construction-related
project expenses.
Appendix 3.2.12 Real Property and
Equipment Management,
Discontinuance of Service, and
Disposition Requirements
The grant recipient will be required to
ensure the maintenance of project
property to the level of utility (including
applicable FRA track safety standards)
which existed when the project
improvements were placed in service
for a period of a minimum of 20 years
from the date such project property was
placed in service. In the event that all
Intercity Passenger Rail service making
use of the project property is
discontinued during the 20-year period,
the grant recipient will be required to
continue to ensure the maintenance of
the project property, as set forth above,
for a period of one year to allow for the
possible reintroduction of Intercity
Passenger Rail service. In the event the
grant recipient should fail to ensure the
maintenance of project property, as set
forth above, for a period of time in
excess of six months, the grant recipient
will be required to refund to FRA a prorata share of the Federal contribution,
based upon the percentage of the 20year period remaining at the time of
such original default.
The grant recipient will also be
required to acknowledge that the
purpose of the project is to benefit
Intercity Passenger Rail service. In the
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
event that all Intercity Passenger Rail
service making use of the project
property is discontinued (for any
reason) at any time during a period of
20 years from the date such project
property was placed in service, as set
forth above, and if such Intercity
Passenger Rail service is not
reintroduced during a one-year period
following the date of such
discontinuance, the grant recipient will
be required to refund to FRA, no later
than 18 months following the date of
such discontinuance, a pro-rata share of
the Federal contribution, based upon
the percentage of the 20-year period
remaining at the time of such
discontinuance.
Appendix 3.3 ARRA-Specific Grant
Requirements (Apply to ARRA-Funded
Grants Only)
ARRA contains several specific
requirements associated with funding
provided in that statute. These include:
Appendix 3.3.1
Prohibited Activities
None of the funds appropriated or
otherwise made available in the grant
agreement may be used by any State or
local government, or any private entity,
for any casino or other gambling
establishment, aquarium, zoo, golf
course, or swimming pool.
Appendix 3.3.2 Recovery Act Funding
Announcement
The grant recipient will be required to
post a sign at all fixed project locations
at the most publicly accessible location
and a plaque in all purchased or
rehabilitated rail cars announcing that
the project or equipment was funded by
the U.S. Department of Transportation,
Federal Railroad Administration with
funds provided through the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The
configuration of the signs or plaques
will be consistent with guidance issued
by the Office of Management and
Budget and/or the Department of
Transportation and approved by the
FRA.
Appendix 3.3.3
Certifications
As a condition of award, to the extent
applicable, grant recipients must
comply with the Certification
requirements of ARRA. These include
Section 1201 (Maintenance of Effort);
Section 1511 (Transparency and
Oversight); and Section 1607
(Additional Funding Distribution and
Assurance of Appropriate Use of
Funds). These Certifications are
described in following sections.
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
29926
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
Section 1201(a): Maintenance of Effort
By March 19, 2009, State Governors
were required to certify to the Secretary
of Transportation that the State would
maintain its effort with regard to State
funding for the types of projects funded
by the appropriation, for each amount
distributed to a State or a State agency
under this program. As part of this
Certification, the Governor was required
to submit to the Secretary a statement
identifying the amount of funds the
State planned to expend from State
sources as of February 17, 2009, during
the period between February 17, 2009
and September 30, 2010, for the types of
projects funded by the appropriation.
The maintenance of effort requirement
in section 1201(a) applies to any grant
recipient that is a State government (or
agency thereof) that planned, as of
February 17, 2009, to expend State
funds on the project receiving a HighSpeed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail
grant under this guidance during the
period between February 17, 2009, and
September 30, 2010.
Section 1511: Transparency and
Oversight
For grant funds made available to
State or local governments for
infrastructure investments, the
Governor, mayor, or other chief
executive, as appropriate, must certify
that the infrastructure investment (1)
received the full review and vetting
required by law; and (2) that the chief
executive accepts responsibility that it
is an appropriate use of taxpayer
dollars. This certification must be
executed and posted on a Web site and
linked to https://www.recovery.gov prior
to the recipient of a High-Speed Rail/
Intercity Passenger Rail grant receiving
grant funds. If the project is not
included in the STIP, a separate
certification for the potential HighSpeed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail
project must be executed, attaching the
relevant information or linking to a
public Web site where the information
may be obtained. This certification must
include a description of the investment,
the estimated total cost, and the amount
of covered funds to be used, and must
be posted online and linked to the Web
site https://www.recovery.gov. The
certification must also state that the
projects have been properly reviewed
and vetted and are an appropriate use of
taxpayer dollars.
Section 1607: Additional Funding
Distribution and Assurance of
Appropriate Use of Funds
Section 1607 required that Governors
of States receiving funding under the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
Recovery Act certify by April 3, 2009,
that, for grant funds provided to any
State or State agency, the State would
request and use the funds provided in
the Recovery Act and that such funds
would be used to create jobs and
promote economic growth.
Alternatively, the State legislature could
have acted to accept such funds by the
adoption of a concurrent resolution.
States or State agencies ultimately
receiving High-Speed Rail/Intercity
Passenger Rail grant funds must ensure
that this certification has been
completed.
Submission of Certifications Under
Sections 1201, 1511, and 1607
All Certifications, once executed,
shall be submitted to the Secretary of
Transportation, c/o Joel Szabat, Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Transportation
Policy, at TigerTeam.Leads@dot.gov.
Certifications may be submitted via email as electronic, scanned copies, with
original signed versions to follow via
U.S. mail. As required by ARRA,
certifications under Section 1511 shall
be immediately posted on a Web site
and linked to the Web site https://
www.recovery.gov.
Appendix 3.3.4 Whistleblower
Protections
The grant recipient will be required to
provide the whistleblower protections
required by Section 1553 of ARRA.
Appendix 3.3.5 False Claims Act
The grant recipient and sub-recipients
will be required to promptly refer to the
DOT’s Inspector General credible
evidence that a principal, employee,
agency, contractor, sub-contractor, or
other person has submitted a false claim
under the False Claims Act or has
committed a criminal or civil violation
of laws pertaining to fraud, conflict of
interest, bribery, gratuity, or similar
misconduct involving ARRA funds.
Appendix 3.3.6 Contracting Provisions
To the maximum extent possible,
contracts funded under ARRA shall be
awarded as fixed-price contracts
through the use of competitive
procedures. Grant recipients will be
required to provide a summary of any
contract awarded with ARRA funds that
is not fixed-price and not awarded using
competitive procedures for posting on
the Recovery Accountability and
Transparency Board’s Web site.
Appendix 3.4 Program-Specific Grant
Requirements
These apply to PRIIA-authorized
grants, including ARRA grants only, and
do not necessarily pertain to grants
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
under Track 3 and Track 4 ARRA
funding is provided through several
existing FRA programs principally
based on programs authorized in PRIIA,
and PRIIA includes a number of
additional program-specific grant
requirements, including:
Appendix 3.4.1
Buy America
Grant recipients must comply with
the Buy America provisions set forth in
49 U.S.C. 24405(a) which specifically
provide that the Secretary of
Transportation may obligate ARRA
funds for a High-Speed Rail/Intercity
Passenger Rail or congestion project
only if the steel, iron, and manufactured
goods used in the project are produced
in the United States. The Secretary (or
the Secretary’s delegate, the FRA
Administrator) may waive this
requirement if the Secretary finds that
applying this requirement would be
inconsistent with the public interest; the
steel, iron, and goods produced in the
United States are not produced in a
sufficient and reasonably available
amount or are not of a satisfactory
quality; rolling stock or power train
equipment cannot be bought and
delivered in the United States within a
reasonable time; or including domestic
material will increase the cost of the
overall project by more than 25 percent.
For purposes of implementing these
requirements, in calculating the
components’ costs, labor costs involved
in final assembly shall not be included
in the calculation. If the Secretary
determines that it is necessary to waive
the application of the Buy America
requirements, the Secretary is required
before the date on which such finding
takes effect to publish in the Federal
Register a detailed written justification
as to why the waiver is needed; and
provide notice of such finding and an
opportunity for public comment on
such finding, for a reasonable period of
time, not to exceed 15 days. The
Secretary may not make a waiver for
goods produced in a foreign country if
the Secretary, in consultation with the
United States Trade Representative,
decides that the government of that
foreign country has an agreement with
the United States Government under
which the Secretary has waived the
requirement of this subsection, and the
government of that foreign country has
violated the agreement by
discriminating against goods to which
this subsection applies that are
produced in the United States and to
which the agreement applies. The Buy
America requirements described in this
section shall only apply to projects for
which the costs exceed $100,000.
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
Appendix 3.4.2
Rail Carriers
Operators Deemed
A person that conducts rail operations
over rail infrastructure constructed or
improved with funding provided in
whole or in part in a grant made under
this program shall be considered a rail
carrier as defined in Section 49 U.S.C.
10102(5) for purposes of title 49 of the
United States Code and any other
statute that adopts the definition found
in 49 U.S.C. 10102(5) including the
Railroad Retirement Act of 1974 (45
U.S.C. 231 et seq.); the Railway Labor
Act (43 U.S.C. 151 et seq.); and the
Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act
(45 U.S.C. 351 et seq.) (see 49 U.S.C.
24405(b))
Appendix 3.4.3
Railroad Agreements
As a condition of receiving a grant
under this program for a project that
uses rights-of-way owned by a railroad,
the grant recipient shall have in place a
written agreement between the grant
recipient and the railroad regarding
such use and ownership, including any
compensation for such use; assurances
regarding the adequacy of infrastructure
capacity to accommodate both existing
and future freight and passenger
operations; an assurance by the railroad
that collective bargaining agreements
with the railroad’s employees (including
terms regulating the contracting of
work) will remain in full force and
effect according to their terms for work
performed by the railroad on the
railroad transportation corridor; and an
assurance that the grant recipient
complies with liability requirements
consistent with 49 U.S.C. 28103. Grant
recipients that use rights-of-way owned
by a railroad must comply with FRA
guidance regarding how to establish a
written agreement between the
applicant and the railroad regarding use
and ownership as discussed in
Appendix 3.2.11. (See 49 U.S.C.
24405(c)).
Appendix 3.4.4
Labor Protection
As a condition of receiving a grant
under this program for a project that
uses rights-of-way owned by a railroad,
the grant recipient must agree to comply
with the standards of 49 U.S.C. 24312,
as such section was in effect on
September 1, 2003, with respect to the
project in the same manner that Amtrak
is required to comply with those
standards for construction work
financed under an agreement made
under 49 U.S.C. 24308(a) and the
protective arrangements established
under Section 504 of the Railroad
Revitalization and Regulatory Reform
Act of 1976 (45 U.S.C. 836) with respect
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
to employees affected by actions taken
in connection with the project to be
financed in whole or in part by grants
under this program. (see 49 U.S.C.
24405(c)).
Appendix 3.4.5 Davis-Bacon Act
Projects funded through ARRA are
required to comply with the DavisBacon Act (40 U.S.C. 3141 et seq.). The
Davis-Bacon Act is a measure that fixes
a floor under wages on Federal
government projects and provides, in
pertinent part, that the minimum wages
to be paid for classes of workers under
a contract for the construction,
alteration, and/or repair of a Federal
public building or public work, must be
based upon wage rates determined by
the Secretary of Labor to be prevailing
for corresponding classes of workers
employed on projects of a character
similar to the contract work in the civil
subdivision of the State in which the
work is to be performed.
Two provisos related to the DavisBacon Act are included in ARRA related
to HSIPR service. The first requires that
funded projects must comply with the
requirements of subchapter IV of
chapter 31 of title 40, United States
Code. The second provides that 49
U.S.C. 24405 shall also apply to the
funded projects. The first proviso
mandates compliance with the DavisBacon Act generally since it is included
in subchapter IV of Chapter 31 of title
40. The second proviso also mandates
compliance the Davis-Bacon Act
through subsection 24405(c) which
provides that the Secretary shall require
as a condition of making any grant that
uses rights-of-way owned by a railroad
that the applicant agree to comply with
the standards of Section 24312 of title
49 with respect to the project in the
same manner that Amtrak is required to
comply with those standards for
construction work financed under an
agreement made under 49 U.S.C.
24308(a). Section 24312 provides that
Amtrak shall ensure that laborers and
mechanics employed by contractors and
subcontractors in construction work
financed under an agreement made
under Section 24308 will be paid wages
not less than those prevailing on similar
construction in the locality, as
determined by the Secretary of Labor
under Sections 3141–3144, 3146 and
3147 of title 40 and that wages in a
collective bargaining agreement
negotiated under the Railway Labor Act
are deemed to comply with Sections
3141–3144, 3146, and 3147 of title 40.
Section 24308 authorizes Amtrak to
enter into agreements with rail carriers
or regional transportation authorities to
use facilities of and have services
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
29927
provided by the carrier or authority
under terms on which the parties agree.
FRA has concluded that the two
Davis-Bacon requirements can be
reconciled in a manner that allows the
HSIPR Program to be implemented in a
way that is both reasonable and
consistent with current practices. For
projects that use or propose to use
rights-of-way owned by a railroad, the
specific provisions of 24405(c) would
apply and applicants would be required
to comply with the standards of 49
U.S.C. 24312 (prevailing wages) in the
same manner that Amtrak is required to
comply with those standards for
construction projects it might
undertake. It follows that wages in a
collective bargaining agreement
negotiated under the Railway Labor Act
would be deemed to comply with DavisBacon Act requirements for these
projects. For projects that do not
propose to use rights-of-way owned by
a railroad, normal Davis-Bacon Act
requirements would apply and there
would be no specific exemption for
wages arrived at through a collective
bargaining agreement negotiated under
the Railway Labor Act. Wage rates on
these projects would have to meet the
Secretary of Labor’s prevailing wage
standards as described above.
Appendix 3.4.6 Project Labor
Agreements
Executive Order 13502, Use of Project
Labor Agreements for Federal
Construction Projects, issued by
President Obama on February 6, 2009,
authorizes Federal agencies in awarding
any contract in connection with largescale Federal government construction
projects to, on a project-by-project basis,
require the use of a project labor
agreement by a contractor where use of
such an agreement will (i) advance the
Federal Government’s interest in
achieving economy and efficiency in
Federal procurement, producing labormanagement stability, and ensuring
compliance with laws and regulations
governing safety and health, equal
employment opportunity, labor and
employment standards, and other
matters, and (ii) be consistent with law.
At this time, the Executive Order does
not apply directly to recipients of
financial assistance to either require or
preclude the use of a project labor
agreement. Rather, the Order directs the
Director of OMB, in consultation with
the Secretary of Labor and with other
officials as appropriate, to provide the
President within 180 days of the date of
the Order (August 5, 2009) with
recommendations about whether
broader use of project labor agreements,
with respect to both construction
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
29928
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
projects undertaken under Federal
contracts and construction projects
receiving Federal financial assistance,
would help to promote the economical,
efficient, and timely completion of such
projects. FRA will issue additional
guidance to applicants following
submission of the required report and
any further action by the President or
OMB.
Appendix 3.4.7 Replacement of
Existing Intercity Passenger Rail Service
Grant recipients providing Intercity
Passenger Rail transportation that begins
operations after October 16, 2008 on a
project funded in whole or in part by
grants made under this program, that
replaces Intercity Passenger Rail service
that was provided by Amtrak, unless
such service was provided solely by
Amtrak to another entity as of such date,
are required to enter into a series of
agreements with the authorized
bargaining agent or agents for adversely
affected employees of the predecessor
provider. (see 49 U.S.C. 24405(d)).
Appendix 3.5
Appendix 3.5.1
Requirements
General Requirements
Standard Reporting
• Progress Reports—Progress reports
must accompany each request for
payment, and at a minimum are to be
submitted quarterly. These reports shall
relate the state of completion of items in
the scope of work to expenditures of the
relevant budget elements. The grant
recipient shall furnish the quarterly
progress report to the FRA on or before
the 30th calendar day of the month
following the end of the quarter being
reported. Each quarterly report shall set
forth concise statements concerning
activities relevant to the project, and
shall include, but not be limited to, the
following: (a) An account of significant
progress (findings, events, trends, etc.)
made during the reporting period; (b) a
description of any technical and/or cost
problem(s) encountered or anticipated
that will affect completion of the grant
within the time and fiscal constraints as
set forth in this agreement, together with
recommended solutions or corrective
action plans (with dates) to such
problems, or identification of specific
action that is required by the FRA, or a
statement that no problems were
encountered; and (c) an outline of work
and activities planned for the next
reporting period.
• Quarterly Financial Status Report
(SF–269)—Grant recipients must report
obligations and expenditures on a
quarterly basis using the SF–269, which
is due within 30 days of the end of each
calendar quarter (e.g., for quarter ending
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
March 31, the SF–269 is due no later
than April 30). A report must be
submitted for every quarter of the period
of performance, including partial
calendar quarters, as well as for periods
where no grant activity occurs. The final
SF–269 is due 90 days after the end date
of the period of performance. Financial
Status Reports (SF–269) must be filed
online through GrantSolutions.
• Quarterly Federal Cash
Transactions Report—Grant recipients
will be required to submit a SF–272,
Federal Cash Transaction Report (and
when necessary the continuation sheet
SF–272a), for grants paid by Treasury
Check Advances, or Electronic Transfer
of Funds. FRA will use this report to
monitor cash advanced to the Grantee
and to obtain disbursement or outlay
information. Forecasts of Federal cash
outlays are required in the ‘‘Remarks’’
section of the report. Grantees will
furnish the quarterly Federal cash
transaction report to the FRA on or
before the 30th calendar day of the
month following the end of the quarter
being reported.
• Interim and/or Final Report(s)—
Upon project completion, grant
recipients will be required to furnish to
the FRA a Summary Project Report
detailing the results and benefits of the
grant recipient’s improvement efforts
due by the expiration date of the grant.
Appendix 3.5.2 ARRA-Specific
Reporting Requirements
• ARRA Section 1201 Report—
Periodic Reports—Each grant recipient
will be required to submit periodic
reports to the FRA as described in this
paragraph not later than February 17,
2010, February 17, 2011, and February
17, 2012. The Periodic Reports shall
include information describing: (1) The
amount of Federal funds appropriated,
allocated, obligated, and outlayed under
the grant agreement; (2) the number of
projects that have been put out to bid
under the grant agreement and the
amount of Federal funds associated with
such projects; (3) the number of projects
for which contracts have been awarded
under the grant agreement and the
amount of Federal funds associated with
such contracts; (4) the number of
projects for which work has begun
under such contracts and the amount of
Federal funds associated with such
contracts; (5) the number of projects for
which work has been completed under
such contracts and the amount of
Federal funds associated with such
contracts; (6) the number of direct, onproject jobs created or sustained by the
Federal funds provided for projects
under the grant agreement and, to the
extent possible, the estimated indirect
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
jobs created or sustained in the
associated supplying industries,
including the number of jobs created
and the total increase in employment
since February 17, 2009; and (7)
information tracking the actual
aggregate expenditures by the grant
recipient from its own sources for
projects eligible for funding under this
agreement during the period beginning
on February 17, 2009 through
September 30, 2010, as compared to the
level of such expenditures that were
planned to occur during such period as
of February 17, 2009. DOT or FRA may
issue additional guidance on the
preparation and submission of Periodic
Reports.
• Section 1512(c)—Jobs
Accountability Reports—Not later than
10 days after the end of each quarter,
each grant recipient will be required to
submit a Jobs Accountability Report to
the FRA that contains: (1) The total
amount of ARRA funds received
pursuant to this agreement; (2) the
amount of ARRA funds received that
were expended or obligated to projects
or activities; and (3) a detailed list of all
projects or activities for which ARRA
funds were expended or obligated,
including—(A) the name of the project
or activity; (B) a description of the
project or activity; (C) an evaluation of
the completion status of the project or
activity; (D) an estimate of the number
of jobs created and the number of jobs
retained by the project or activity; and
(E) detailed information on any
subcontracts or subgrants awarded by
the grant recipient to include the data
elements required to comply with the
Federal Funding Accountability and
Transparency Act of 2006 (Pub. L. 109–
282), allowing aggregate reporting on
awards below $25,000 or to individuals,
as prescribed by the Director of OMB.
OMB may issue additional guidance on
the preparation and submission of Jobs
Accountability Reports. The grant
recipient must also register with the
CCR database or complete other
registration requirements as determined
by the Director of OMB.
• Section 1609: Environmental
Reporting—Section 1609(c) of ARRA
requires that Federal agencies report via
the President (specifically, to the White
House Council on Environmental
Quality) every 90 days following
enactment of ARRA on the status of
projects funded under ARRA with
respect to compliance with NEPA. Grant
recipients may be requested to submit
information to assist FRA in completing
this report.
• Additional Information—To satisfy
the purposes of the ARRA, grant
recipients may be required to provide
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices
additional information in response to
requests from OMB, the Congressional
Budget Office, the Government
Accountability Office, or the
Department’s Inspector General. FRA
will inform grant recipients if and when
such additional reports or information
are required.
Appendix 3.5.3 Audit Requirements
Grant recipients that expend $500,000
or more of Federal funds during their
fiscal year are required to submit an
organization-wide financial and
compliance audit report. The audit must
be performed in accordance with U.S.
General Accountability Office,
Government Auditing Standards,
located at https://www.gao.gov/govaud/
ybk01.htm, and OMB Circular A–133,
Audits of States, Local Governments,
and Non-Profit Organizations, located at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/
circulars/a133/a133.html. Audit reports
are currently to be submitted to the
Federal Audit Clearinghouse no later
than nine months after the end of the
recipient’s fiscal year. In addition, FRA
and the Comptroller General of the
United States shall have access to any
books, documents, and records of grant
recipients for audit and examination
purposes. The grant recipient will also
give FRA or the Comptroller, through
any authorized representative, access to,
and the right to examine all records,
books, papers or documents related to
the grant. Grant recipients shall require
that sub-grantees comply with the audit
requirements set forth in OMB Circular
A–133. Grant recipients are responsible
for ensuring that sub-recipient audit
reports are received and for resolving
any audit findings.
Appendix 3.5.4 Monitoring
Requirements
Grant recipients will be monitored
periodically by FRA, both
programmatically and financially, to
ensure that the project goals, objectives,
performance requirements, timelines,
milestone completion, budgets, and
other related program criteria are being
met. Monitoring will be accomplished
through a combination of office-based
reviews and onsite monitoring visits.
Monitoring will involve the review and
analysis of the financial, programmatic,
performance and administrative issues
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:20 Jun 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
relative to each program and will
identify areas where technical
assistance and other support may be
needed. The recipient is responsible for
monitoring award activities, to include
sub-awards, to provide reasonable
assurance that the Federal award is
administered in compliance with
requirements. Responsibilities include
the accounting of recipients and
expenditures, cash management,
maintaining of adequate financial
records, and refunding expenditures
disallowed by audits.
Appendix 3.5.5 Closeout Process
Project closeout occurs when all
required project work and all
administrative procedures described in
49 CFR part 18, or 49 CFR part 19, as
applicable, have been completed, and
when FRA notifies the grant recipient
and forwards the final Federal
assistance payment, or when FRA
acknowledges the grant recipient’s
remittance of the proper refund. Project
closeout shall not invalidate any
continuing obligations imposed on the
Grantee by an award or by the FRA’s
final notification or acknowledgment.
Within 90 days of the Project
completion date or termination by FRA,
Grantees agree to submit a final
Financial Status Report (Standard Form
269), a certification or summary of
project expenses, and third party audit
reports, as applicable.
Appendix 3.6 Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA)
As a Federal agency, the FRA is
subject to the Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), which
generally provides that any person has
a right, enforceable in court, to obtain
access to Federal agency records, except
to the extent that such records (or
portions of them) are protected from
public disclosure by one of nine
exemptions or by one of three special
law enforcement record exclusions.
Grant applications and related materials
submitted by applicants pursuant to this
guidance would become agency records
and thus subject to the FOIA and to
public release through individual FOIA
requests. ARRA also mandates broad
public dissemination of information
related to the expenditure of funds
through reporting requirements and
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
29929
website postings that are addressed in
other sections of this guidance.
President Obama’s March 20, 2009
Memorandum for the Heads of
Executive Departments and Agencies on
Ensuring Responsible Spending of
Recovery Act Funds mandates the
strongest possible efforts to ensure
public transparency and accountability
of ARRA expenditures. Consistent with
these mandates, it is FRA’s intention to
employ a transparent process in
distributing and overseeing the
expenditure of ARRA funds. FRA also
recognizes that certain information
submitted in support of an application
for funding in accordance with this
guidance could be exempt from public
release under FOIA as a result of the
application of one of the FOIA
exemptions, most particularly
Exemption 4, which protects trade
secrets and commercial or financial
information obtained from a person that
is privileged or confidential (5 U.S.C.
552(b)(4)). In the context of this grant
program, commercial or financial
information obtained from a person
could be confidential if disclosure is
likely to cause substantial harm to the
competitive position of the person from
whom the information was obtained
(see National Parks & Conservation
Ass’n v. Morton, 498 F.2d 765, 770 (D.C.
Cir. 1974)). Entities seeking exempt
treatment must provide a detailed
statement supporting and justifying
their request and should follow FRA’s
existing procedures for requesting
confidential treatment in the railroad
safety context found at 49 CFR 209.11.
As noted in the Department’s FOIA
implementing regulation (49 CFR part
7), the burden is on the entity requesting
confidential treatment to identify all
information for which exempt treatment
is sought and to persuade the agency
that the information should not be
disclosed (see 49 CFR 7.17). The final
decision as to whether the information
meets the standards of Exemption 4
rests with the FRA.
Issued in Washington, DC, on June 17,
2009.
Joseph C. Szabo,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E9–14692 Filed 6–22–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
E:\FR\FM\23JNN2.SGM
23JNN2
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 119 (Tuesday, June 23, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29900-29929]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-14692]
[[Page 29899]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part IV
Department of Transportation
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Railroad Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (``HSIPR'') Program; Notice
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 /
Notices
[[Page 29900]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
[Docket No. FRA-2009-0045]
High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (``HSIPR'') Program
AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of funding availability; issuance of interim program
guidance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On April 16, 2009, President Obama, together with Vice
President Biden and Secretary of Transportation LaHood, announced a new
vision for developing high-speed rail in America. They called for a
collaborative effort among the Federal Government, States, railroads,
and other key stakeholders to help transform America's transportation
system through a national network of high-speed rail corridors. This
notice builds on this ``Vision for High-Speed Rail'' (available on
FRA's Web site) by detailing the application requirements and
procedures for obtaining funding for high-speed rail projects under the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) and the
Department of Transportation Appropriations Acts of 2008 and 2009 (FY
2008/2009 DOT Appropriations Acts), while laying the foundation for a
longer-term program to establish a network of high-speed rail
corridors.
The evaluation and selection criteria in this notice are intended
to prioritize projects that deliver transportation, economic recovery
and other public benefits, including energy independence, environmental
quality, and livable communities; ensure project success through
effective project management, financial planning and stakeholder
commitments; and emphasize a balanced approach to project types,
locations, innovation, and timing.
This notice describes multiple funding paths to accommodate
projects at different stages of development, while also rationalizing
the variety of statutory and administrative requirements underpinning
the program. FRA recognizes the unique challenges and opportunities
presented, and will seek, to the maximum extent permitted under law and
administrative procedures, to work collaboratively with applicants and
stakeholders throughout the process.
DATES:
Public comments. Public comments on this notice are due no later
than July 10, 2009.
Preapplications. Preapplications for all funding Tracks are due no
later than July 10, 2009. (FRA encourages earlier submission of
preapplications).
Applications. Applications for funding for Track 1 (Projects),
Track 3 (Planning), and Track 4 (FY2009 Appropriations Projects) are
due no later than August 24, 2009; applications for funding Track 2
(Service Development Programs) are due no later than October 2, 2009.
(See Section 1.6 in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
notice for descriptions of each funding Track, and Section 4.3.6 in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice for additional
information on deadlines for both preapplications and applications.)
FRA reserves the right to modify these deadlines, based on comments
received on this notice.
ADDRESSES:
Public comments. To ensure that comments are not entered into the
docket more than once, please submit comments, identified by docket
number [FRA-2009-0045], by only one of the following methods:
Web site: The U.S. Government electronic docket site is
https://www.regulations.gov. Go to this Web site and follow the
instructions for submitting comments into docket number [FRA-2009-
0045];
Mail: Mail comments to U.S. Department of Transportation,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Docket Operations, MS-30, Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590;
Hand delivery or courier: Bring comments to the U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Docket
Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC
20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays; or
Fax: Telefax comments to 202-493-6330.
Instructions for submitting public comments: The agency name
(Federal Railroad Administration) and the docket number [FRA-2009-0045]
for this notice must be submitted with any comments. If comments are
submitted by mail or by hand, please submit two copies of the comments.
For confirmation that the Federal Railroad Administration has received
the comments, a self-addressed stamped postcard must be included. Note
that all comments received by any method will be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, and will be available to Internet users. The Department's
complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in the Federal
Register published April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477), or by visiting https://www.regulations.gov.
Preapplications. Preapplications must be submitted to the HSIPR
Program Manager electronically via e-mail at HSIPR@dot.gov. Pre-
applicants should receive a confirmation e-mail, but are advised to
request a return receipt to confirm transmission. Only preapplications
received via e-mail as provided above shall be deemed properly filed.
Applications. Applications and supporting documentation must be
submitted through https://www.grantsolutions.gov. If problems with
https://www.grantsolutions.gov are encountered, applications and
supporting documentation may be submitted to the HSIPR Program Manager
electronically via e-mail at HSIPR@dot.gov. Supporting materials that
cannot be submitted electronically may be mailed or hand delivered to:
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, MS-20, Room W38-202, SE., Washington, DC 20590
Attn. HSIPR Program. Applicants are encouraged to use special courier
services to avoid shipping delays. Pre-application and application
forms are available at https://www.fra.dot.gov/us/content/2243.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information regarding this
notice and the grants program, please contact the FRA HSIPR Program
Manager via e-mail at HSIPR@dot.gov, or by mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, MS-20, SE., Washington, DC 20590 Attn. HSIPR Program.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
Overview
1. Funding Opportunity Description
2. Award Information
3. Eligibility Information
4. Application and Submission Information
5. Application Review Information
6. Award Administration Information
7. FRA Contacts
List of Acronyms Appendix 1: Additional Information on Eligibility
Appendix 2: Additional Information on Planning and Engineering
Appendix 3: Additional Information on Award Administrations and
Grant Conditions
Overview
FRA is soliciting public comment on this document through Docket
Number FRA-2009-0045 (https://www.regulations.gov). While the interim
guidance in this document does not
[[Page 29901]]
constitute a rulemaking, FRA will consider all comments received by
July 10, 2009 and will publish any resultant clarifications or
revisions to this document in the Federal Register and on FRA's Web
site (https://www.fra.dot.gov). FRA began this comment process during
its outreach sessions in May and June, in which over 1,100 stakeholders
attended seven sessions around the country; in addition, a public
docket was established for comment, and 110 comments were received as
of June 15, 2009. FRA has already adjusted the approach contained
herein based on this initial feedback.
Preapplications are required and the deadline for submissions (for
all Tracks) is July 10, 2009. Applications may not be considered if
preapplications are received after July 10, 2009; FRA encourages
submission of preapplications earlier than the July 10 deadline. FRA
will work with pre-applicants if necessary during the period prior to
the application deadlines to ensure eligibility, appropriateness of
application Track, and structure of project or program; applicants
should work on completing full grant applications concurrent with
preparation and review of preapplications.
Deadlines for submission of full grant applications under the four
Tracks (see Section 1.6 for track descriptions) are: Track 1
(Projects), Track 3 (Planning), and Track 4 (FY2009 Appropriations
Projects)--August 24, 2009; Track 2 (High-Speed Rail/Intercity
Passenger Rail Service Development Programs)--October 2, 2009. To give
prospective applicants adequate time to complete their applications
(while incorporating any guidance clarifications or revisions), FRA may
adjust application dates to allow for a minimum of 30 days for
application submission following any material changes to guidance that
arise from comments. For full details on these deadlines and how to
satisfy them, prospective applicants should consult Section 4.3.6 of
this guidance.
Section 1: Funding Opportunity Description
1.1 Authority
This program guidance and financial assistance announcement
pertains to FRA's new High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program
(``HSIPR''), which consolidates the following recently-authorized and
closely-related programs:
The High-Speed Rail Corridor Development program,
authorized under Section 501 of the Passenger Rail Investment and
Improvement Act of 2008 (``PRIIA,'' Division B of Pub. L. 110-432,
October 16, 2008, codified at 49 U.S.C. 26106);
The Intercity Passenger Rail Service Corridor Capital
Assistance program, authorized under Section 301 of PRIIA (codified at
49 U.S.C. chapter 244);
The Congestion Grants program, authorized under Section
302 of PRIIA (codified at 49 U.S.C. 24105);
The Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 Capital Assistance to States--
Intercity Passenger Rail Service program, authorized and funded under
the Department of Transportation Appropriations Act, 2009 (``FY 2009
DOT Appropriations Act,'' Title I of Division I of Pub. L. 111-8, March
11, 2009); and
The FY 2008 Capital Assistance to States--Intercity
Passenger Rail Service program, authorized and funded under the
Department of Transportation Appropriations Act, 2008 (``FY 2008 DOT
Appropriations Act,'' Title I of Division K of Pub. L. 110-161,
December 26, 2007).
This document incorporates both (i) interim guidance required for
this program pursuant to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009 (``ARRA,'' Pub. L. 111-5, February 17, 2009); and (ii) interim
guidance required pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 24402(a)(2). The funding made
available under this financial assistance announcement was appropriated
under ARRA, and the FY 2008/2009 DOT Appropriations Act. The funding
opportunities described in this guidance are available under Catalog of
Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) numbers 20.317 and 20.319.
1.2 Program Description and Legislative History
This program guidance and funding opportunity announcement
represents the second major milestone in the implementation of the new
HSIPR Program. It follows and builds upon Vision for High-Speed Rail in
America, the Administration's April 2009 high-speed rail strategic plan
for the implementation of this program (available at https://www.fra.dot.gov/us/content/31).
As one of President Obama's foremost transportation priorities, the
HSIPR Program helps to address the nation's transportation challenges
by investing in an efficient High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail
network that connects communities across America.
Congress established the framework for the program through the
passage of three key pieces of legislation:
Capital Assistance to States--Intercity Passenger Rail
Service--In the FY 2008 DOT Appropriations Act, Congress established a
new pilot program for joint Federal-State intercity passenger rail
capital investment, known as Capital Assistance to States--Intercity
Passenger Rail Service. Under this program, $30 million in Federal
funding was made available to States on a competitive basis to fund up
to 50 percent of the capital cost of improving Intercity Passenger Rail
service; up to 10 percent of the $30 million was available for rail
corridor planning grants. An additional $90 million was appropriated
under similar terms as part of the FY 2009 DOT Appropriations Act.
Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008
(PRIIA)--Enacted in October 2008, PRIIA represents the most sweeping
Congressional action on intercity passenger rail since those that
created the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) and the
Northeast Corridor Improvement Project during the 1970s. In addition to
reauthorizing Amtrak, PRIIA established three new competitive grant
programs for funding High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail capital
improvements, each of which, as authorized, require a 20 percent non-
Federal match:
[cir] Intercity Passenger Rail Service Corridor Capital Assistance
(Section 301)--Under this section, the broadest of PRIIA's three new
funding programs, States (including the District of Columbia), groups
of States, interstate compacts, and public Intercity Passenger Rail
agencies established by one or more State(s) may apply for grants for
capital improvements to benefit all types of Intercity Passenger Rail
service, including high-speed service. Amtrak may participate through a
cooperative agreement with a State(s). To be eligible for funding under
this program, proposed projects must meet a number of requirements
(e.g., inclusion in a State Rail Plan).
[cir] High-Speed Rail Corridor Development (Section 501)--Although
similar in structure, criteria, and conditions to Section 301,
eligibility for this program is restricted to projects intended to
develop Federally-designated High-Speed Rail corridors for Intercity
Passenger Rail services that may reasonably be expected to reach speeds
of at least 110 miles per hour (mph). Applicant eligibility under
Section 501 is broadened from Section 301 to include Amtrak as well.
[cir] Congestion Grants (Section 302)--This program authorizes
grants to States or to Amtrak (in cooperation with States) for
facilities, infrastructure, and
[[Page 29902]]
equipment for high-priority rail corridor projects to reduce congestion
or facilitate Intercity Passenger Rail ridership growth.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA)--The
$8 billion in High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail funding under
ARRA ``jump starts'' the widespread improvement of High-Speed Rail/
Intercity Passenger Rail service in the United States. The
appropriation references the authorities included in Sections 301, 302,
and 501 of PRIIA but states the ``Federal share of the costs for which
a grant is made * * * shall be, at the option of the recipient, up to
100 percent.'' It also does not require that proposed projects be
included in a State Rail Plan (and it excludes the costs of preparing
such plans from eligibility for ARRA funding).
1.3 Selection Process and Priorities
The application process begins with a preapplication. The
preapplication is a simple form intended to give FRA an early
assessment of the universe of projects and programs, and to provide
pre-applicants with any feedback necessary to complete their
applications (e.g., eligibility issues, most appropriate application
Track to pursue, etc.). It also allows FRA and preapplicants to start a
collaborative process for ensuring early program success.
Preapplications should be submitted as early as possible, but no later
than July 10, 2009; applicants should not wait for submission of, or
any comments on, a preapplication before preparing their full
applications. In recognition of a variety of considerations, including
the urgency of project implementation as reflected in ARRA and the
complexities of launching a new HSIPR program, FRA considers the
preapplication to be an essential component of the application
submission and decision making processes. As a result, FRA will only
consider applications that were not supported by a timely filed
preapplication only if there are special, compelling circumstances.
Complete applications for Tracks 1, 3 and 4 are due on August 24, 2009
and for Track 2 on October 2, 2009. Once an application is received, it
will proceed through a three-step process.
Screening for completeness and eligibility (both applicant
and project eligibility);
Evaluation panel review process, applying ``evaluation
criteria''; and
Final review and selection, applying ``selection''
criteria.
See Section 5 for a full description of the review process and
criteria.
1.3.1 Application Screening
Screening will confirm applicant and project eligibility, and
ensure that the application provides complete and sufficient
information for the evaluation process.
1.3.2 Evaluation Criteria
Eligible applications in all Tracks will be individually reviewed
and assessed against seven evaluation criteria--organized into three
categories--detailed below. For each of the applicable criteria, the
application will be assigned a rating of between one and five points,
based on the application's fulfillment of the objectives of each
criterion. These individual criterion ratings will then be accounted
according to priority of criteria (which vary by Track, as described in
Section 5), to arrive at an overall rating for the application.
FRA will require a rigorous analysis of benefits and costs of
proposed projects, with a focus on the transportation service and
output measures that are fundamental to estimating other public
benefits. Applicants must provide requested benefit and cost
information the best available tools in order to ensure adequate
assessment of business cases for projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Section 4 for a detailed summary of submission
requirements, and Section 5 for additional detail on evaluation and
selection criteria.
Evaluation Criteria
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evaluation criteria\1\ Example factors Key documentation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Return on Investment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Transportation Improved Intercity Passenger Rail Service Development Plan
Benefits service (including business case; assessment of
Transportation network benefits and public investment).
integration (including intermodal
connections)
Transportation safety benefits
2. Economic Recovery Preserving and creating jobs-- Quantitative output measures
particularly in economically-distressed (service--reliability, schedule,
areas capacity; and transportation--passenger-
miles, including sources--aviation,
highway, induced).
3. Other Public Benefits Environmental quality
Energy efficiency
Livable communities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Success Factors
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Project Management Organizational capacity Project management plan.
Approach Track record of comparable Financial plan (capital and
2. Sustainability of projects operating).
Benefits Adequacy of engineering Stakeholder agreements.
Reasonableness of schedule
Progress toward NEPA compliance
Thoroughness of management plan
Sufficiency of safety and
security planning
Sufficiency of stakeholder
agreements
Reasonableness of financial
estimates
Availability of operating
financial support
Quality of planning process
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 29903]]
Other Attributes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Timeliness of Project Project readiness Project schedule.
Completion Reasonableness of completion
schedule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.3.3 Selection Criteria
After being assessed against the evaluation criteria, applications
for each Track will collectively be reviewed to ensure consistency and
to balance projects against national priorities and schedules. For this
review, the FRA Administrator may consider several cross-cutting
comparative criteria before final award determinations are made. The
table below summarizes these additional selection criteria.
Selection Criteria
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Selection criteria (balance and
diversity) Example factors
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Region/location..................... Geography and economic
conditions.
2. Innovation.......................... Technology and
industrial/capacity
development.
3. Partnerships........................ Multi-State
agreements.
4. Tracks and round timing............. Project costs and
schedules.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.4 Program Implementation Opportunities and Challenges
In addition to the fiscal constraints currently affecting States,
local governments, and businesses, the development of a comprehensive
High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail network faces challenges
specific to this program and the rail industry. For instance, FRA
recognizes the challenges associated with the need for agreements among
multiple States and with private railroad companies, as well as the
shortage of engineering professionals, planners, and managers with
experience in High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail development with
project implementation in the United States.
The intent to establish a pipeline of future High-Speed Rail/
Intercity Passenger Rail programs and projects poses a further
challenge. The traditional pipeline for major transportation
investments progresses from alternatives analysis to investment
planning, preliminary engineering (PE) and environmental clearance,
final design (FD), construction, and operations. With very narrow
exceptions, States have historically lacked a Federal funding partner
in High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail development; thus, many
States have no High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail program at all,
and others find their limited High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail
development efforts stalled at various points along the typical
progression.
This situation necessitates a Federal funding approach that is
flexible enough to support the High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail
development efforts of each State--whether, for example, the State has
just initiated High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail planning, or
has prepared for capital investments to enhance existing services, or
has readied itself to construct new infrastructure to accommodate new
High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail service. With such disparate
situations among the States, the Federal funding approach must
accommodate different situations, offering an array of possibilities to
dovetail with the States' diverse aspirations, capabilities, and
resources.
1.5 Environmental Review and Approval
Central to High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail Program
implementation--and crucial to each applicant's choice of Track for a
proposal--is the environmental review process required by the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and related laws and regulations.\2\
NEPA applies to all federal grant programs and requires Federal
agencies to integrate environmental values into their decision-making
processes by considering the environmental impacts of their proposed
actions and reasonable alternatives to those actions. Agencies must
also make information on these impacts and alternatives publicly
available before decisions are made and actions occur. NEPA also
mandates that all reasonable alternatives be considered, and to that
end, an alternatives analysis is typically conducted during the
environmental review process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The National Historic Preservation Act, Clean Water Act, 49
U.S.C. 303 relating to parks, wildlife refuges and historic sites
(commonly referred to as Section 4(f)), and the Endangered Species
Act are examples.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRA--as the Federal sponsoring agency--has primary responsibility
for assuring NEPA compliance while accomplishing the purposes,
priorities, and requirements of the HSIPR Program. While NEPA
compliance is a Federal agency responsibility and the ultimate
decisions remain with the Federal sponsoring agency, FRA encourages
applicants to take a leadership role in NEPA documentation development,
consistent with existing law and regulations. In the varied and
flexible HSIPR Program, with its four Tracks and multiple
authorizations, no single approach to NEPA compliance will work for
every proposal and applicant. Therefore, FRA will work closely with
applicants to assist in the timely and effective completion of the NEPA
process in the manner most pertinent to the applicant's proposal.
NEPA reviews should focus on the issues that are ripe for decision
at each stage of project or program development. To help focus
environmental reviews, the Council on Environmental Quality encourages
agencies to tier their environmental reviews, whereby general matters
or broader programs are covered in a Tier I NEPA document, such as a
corridor-wide (or ``service'') environmental impact statement (EIS) or
environmental assessment (EA); and narrower more site-specific projects
or actions are addressed in site-specific EISs, EAs or categorical
exclusion (CE) documents.
1.6 Funding Approach
In order to accommodate the variety of potential applicant goals
and stages of
[[Page 29904]]
project development, while meeting the statutory and program
constraints, this guidance provides four funding ``tracks'' in which
applications may be submitted. FRA has adopted this four-Track approach
to aid in near-term economic recovery efforts and to establish the path
to realize a fully-developed national High-Speed Rail/Intercity
Passenger Rail network. The deadlines for FRA obligation and project(s)
completion for each Track reflect the imperatives of ARRA, balanced
with the longer-term development goals. (See DATES above.)
1.6.1 Track 1--Intercity Passenger Rail Projects Funded Under ARRA
(``Track 1--Projects'')
This track is aimed at chiefly addressing the economic recovery
goals of ARRA through--(a) FD/construction of ``ready-to-go''
projects--i.e., those with completed site-specific NEPA documentation
(project-level final EIS, final EA or CE documentation) along with PE;
and (b) completion of project-level NEPA and PE to prepare projects for
FD/construction grants that may be available under future
solicitations. Track 1 projects should be completed within two years of
award. These projects are funded through either Section 301 (Intercity
Passenger Rail Corridor Capital Assistance) or Section 302 (Congestion
Grants) of PRIIA, for the benefit of existing services, including those
that support development of High-Speed Rail. Eligible projects include
infrastructure, facilities, and equipment, and must have independent
utility.\3\ The Federal funding share can be up to 100 percent,
although evaluation criteria favor projects that leverage federal
funding with non-federal investments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ While ARRA-funded projects are exempt from State Rail Plan
requirements, evaluation preference is given to those that are part
of a planning process that includes a prioritized list of capital
projects supporting a corridor service development plan; equipment
projects should be consistent with Section 305 of PRIIA, which calls
for the establishment of a standardized next-generation rail
corridor equipment pool (see Section 3.6.3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.6.2 Track 2--High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail Service
Development Programs (``Track 2--Programs'')
This track is aimed at developing new High-Speed Rail corridor and
Intercity Passenger Rail services, or substantial upgrades to existing
corridor services, eligible under Section 501 (High-Speed Rail Corridor
Development) and Section 301 (Intercity Passenger Rail Corridor Capital
Assistance) of PRIIA. It is intended to fund development of a set of
inter-related projects that constitute the entirety or a distinct phase
(or geographic section) of a long-range service development plan--
projects which collectively produce benefits greater than the sum of
each individual project.\4\ Under this Track, not all projects need to
be ready-to-go; the Federal Government provides a commitment to fund
the entire program, generally through a Letter of Intent (LOI), and
obligates funds for FD/construction projects through cooperative
agreements as soon as they are deemed ready-to-go. Track 2 LOIs and
cooperative agreements must include specific milestone deadlines for
completion of environmental, engineering, design and other work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ A group of projects that collectively advance the entirety,
or a ``phase'' or ``geographic section,'' of a corridor service
development plan are referred to here as a ``program.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To be eligible for awards under Track 2, Service Development
Programs (``SDP''--defined in Section 2.2) must include completed: (a)
A corridor-wide ``service'' NEPA study, such as a programmatic or Tier
I EIS; and (b) a High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail SDP, or an
equivalent approach that provides a business and investment
justification with sufficient project cost and benefit estimates. Key
elements of an SDP or equivalent business case include: (i) An overview
of program rationale (including purpose and need); (ii) a service and
operations plan, and a prioritized capital investment plan for
infrastructure, fleet and stations/facilities; and (iii) an
implementation approach, including schedule, project management plan,
stakeholder agreements, and a financial plan for funding both capital
and operations. See Appendix 2.1 for a summary of expectations for a
SDP.
Track 2 programs will generally address infrastructure, equipment
and stations/facilities investments in a comprehensive fashion. While
these programs are the most complicated and need a particularly
rigorous project management approach, Track 2 programs represent the
long-term emphasis of the HSIPR Program, and thus FRA expects to focus
its collaborative efforts on this Track. The Federal funding share can
be up to 100 percent, although evaluation criteria favor projects that
leverage federal funding with non-federal investments.
1.6.3 Track 3--Service Planning Activities funded under the FY 2009 and
FY 2008 DOT Appropriations Acts (``Track 3--Planning'')
This track is aimed at helping establish a pipeline of future High-
Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail projects and service development
programs by advancing planning activities for applicants at an earlier
stage of the development process. Under Track 3, FRA will enter into
cooperative agreements for preparation of SDPs, State Rail Plans and
service-level environmental documents.\5\ This Track provides States an
opportunity to complete the prerequisite work needed to submit
applications under Tracks 1 and 2, so that applicants may be ready for
potential future solicitations. Under the terms of the FY 2008/2009 DOT
Appropriations acts, planning activities funded under this Track
require a 50 percent non-Federal match.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Project-level NEPA documents are eligible for funding under
Tracks 1 and 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.6.4 Track 4--FY2009 Appropriations-Funded Projects (``Track 4--FY2009
Appropriations Projects'') \6\
Track 4 provides an alternative for projects that would otherwise
fit under Track 1, but for State applicants offering at least a 50
percent non-Federal share of financing. This Track offers applicants
simplified grant agreement terms, and up to five years to complete
projects (vs. two years under Track 1). Applicants providing at least a
50-percent project match are strongly encouraged to submit project
applications under Track 4 (those submitting project application(s)
under Track 4 may also request concurrent consideration of such
application(s) under Track 1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ A total of $90 million was appropriated under the FY 2009
DOT Appropriations Act under the heading of Capital Assistance to
States--Intercity Passenger Service, of which no more than ten
percent, or $9 million, may be made available for planning
activities. In addition, a total of $540,500 in planning funding,
and at least $1,352,573 in FD/construction funding also remained
available until expended following the award of grants under the FY
2008 Capital Assistance to States--Intercity Passenger Service
program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.7 Opportunity for Public Comment
FRA is soliciting public comment on this document through Docket
Number FRA-2009-0045 (at https://www.regulations.gov). While the interim
guidance in this document does not constitute a rulemaking, FRA will
consider all comments received no later than July 10, 2009 and will
publish any resultant clarifications or revisions to
[[Page 29905]]
this document in the Federal Register and on FRA's Web site (https://www.fra.dot.gov). FRA began this comment process during its outreach
sessions in May and June, in which over 1,100 stakeholders attended
seven sessions around the country; in addition, a public docket was
established for comment, and 110 comments were received as of June 15,
2009. FRA has already revised the approach contained herein based on
this initial feedback. To give prospective applicants adequate time to
complete their applications (while incorporating any guidance
clarifications or revisions), FRA may adjust application dates to allow
for a minimum of 30 days for application submission following any
material changes to this guidance that arise from comments.
Section 2: Award Information
2.1 General Award Information
ARRA appropriated a total of $8 billion under three Intercity
Passenger Rail capital investment programs authorized by the PRIIA:
Section 501 (High-Speed Rail Corridor Development), Section 301
(Intercity Passenger Rail Service Corridor Capital Assistance), and
Section 302 (Congestion Grants). ARRA left the mix of funding among the
three PRIIA programs to the discretion of the Secretary of
Transportation. As described in the Department's April 2009 strategic
plan for high-speed rail, Vision for High-Speed Rail in America, FRA
will not allocate funding among the three PRIIA programs in advance,
but will cumulate the amounts under each PRIIA section from the funding
sources identified in the selected applications, subject to the overall
$8 billion ARRA limit. In addition to the ARRA appropriation for High-
Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail, this funding opportunity
announcement also solicits applications for up to $9,540,500 for
Intercity Passenger Rail planning activities, and at least $82,352,573
in FD/construction funding appropriated under the FY 2008/2009 DOT
Appropriations Acts.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ A total of $90 million was appropriated under the FY 2009
DOT Appropriations Act to remain available and unexpended under the
heading of Capital Assistance to States--Intercity Passenger
Service, of which no more than 10 percent, or $9 million, may be
made available for planning activities. In addition, a total of
$540,500 in planning funding, and at least $1,352,573 in FD/
construction funding also remained available until expended
following the award of grants under the FY 2008 Capital Assistance
to States--Intercity Passenger Service program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This funding and announcement solicits applications for funding
appropriated through ARRA, the FY 2008/2009 DOT Appropriations Acts
under the four distinct Tracks described above:
Track 1--Projects (ARRA funds);
Track 2--Programs (ARRA funds);
Track 3--Planning (annual appropriations funds for
Interstate Passenger Rail planning from FY 2009 and remaining from FY
2008); and
Track 4--FY2009 Appropriations Projects (annual
appropriations funds for Interstate Passenger Rail non-planning from FY
2009 and remaining from FY 2008).
FRA anticipates making multiple awards under each of the four
Tracks. While the entire $9,540,500 under Track 3 and at least
$82,352,573 under Track 4 may be awarded, FRA may choose not to award
through this solicitation the full amount available for Tracks 1 and 2,
to allow for potential future rounds of solicitations and awards which
occur after 2009. There is no predetermined allocation between Tracks 1
and 2 or between this and any future solicitations; all such
distributions will cumulatively reflect the nature and timing of the
selected applications (as referenced in Section 5, selection criteria).
2.2 Definitions of Key Terms, Concepts, and Milestones for Track
Selection
A prospective applicant under this solicitation should first
determine into which Track the applicant's proposal would most
appropriately fit. The choice of Track largely reflects the scope of
the proposed undertaking and the proposed effort's achievement of key
milestones within the project development process. Below are
definitions of key terms, concepts, and milestones for the HSIPR
Program that affect the selection of a Track. Section 2.3 is then
intended to assist an applicant in selecting a Track based on the
proposed investment's relationship to these terms, concepts, and
milestones.
Corridor--For the specific purposes of the HSIPR Program, a
corridor is an existing or proposed Intercity Passenger Rail route of
approximately 100-600 miles in total length, linking population centers
at its endpoints and typically points in between. Corridors may cross
State or national boundaries and thus require a regional, multi-
jurisdictional approach to planning and development.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Federal investment in corridor projects may be limited to
the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Design--The last phase of project development, including:
right-of-way acquisition, utility relocation, the preparation of final
design plans, construction management plans, system safety plans for
construction management & operations, safety certification, any
required collision hazard analysis, final construction cost estimates,
and detailed specifications, as well as procurement of construction
services and equipment. During this phase, any remaining uncertainties
or risks associated with minor changes to design scope and the
procurement processes are fully addressed, and plans for financing the
project or program would be updated and refined to reflect accurately
the expected year-of-expenditure costs and cash flow projections.
Financial Plan--The financial plan documents the recent and
forecasted financial condition of the applicant agency and other key
partners that will provide capital or operating funding for project
development and/or implementation. The Financial Plan describes the
current financial health of the aforementioned agencies, documents
projected capital and operating costs and revenues, and details key
assumptions and methodologies. A financial plan also details the
sources, reliability and feasibility of funding for both capital and
operating expenses and provides an overview of the project sponsor's
strategies to address potential project cost increases.
FRA Obligation--Commitment of Federal funding made through
execution of a grant agreement or cooperative agreement.
High-Speed Rail--Intercity Passenger Rail service that ``is
reasonably expected to reach speeds of at least 110 mph'' (49 U.S.C.
26106(b)(4)).
Independent Utility--A project, group of projects, or Service
Development Program (or phase of a Service Development Program) is
considered to have independent utility if it will result, upon
completion, in the creation of new or substantially improved High-Speed
Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail service, and will provide tangible and
measurable benefits even if no additional investments in the same High-
Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail service are made. Typical examples
of these benefits would include on-time performance improvements,
travel-time reductions, and higher service frequencies resulting in
increased ridership.
Intercity Passenger Rail--Defined in statue as ``rail passenger
transportation except commuter rail passenger transportation'' (49
U.S.C. 24102(4)); it subsumes both High-Speed Rail and conventional
intercity passenger
[[Page 29906]]
services. Commuter rail is defined at as ``short-haul rail passenger
transportation in metropolitan and suburban areas usually having
reduced fare, multiple ride, and commuter tickets and morning and
evening peak period operations'' (49 U.S.C. 24102(3)); Federal funding
for commuter rail projects is available from Federal Transit
Administration programs.
Intercity Passenger Rail Service--An Intercity Passenger Rail
service consists of a group of one or more scheduled trains
(roundtrips) that provide Intercity Passenger Rail transportation
between bona fide travel markets (not constrained by State or
jurisdictional boundaries), generally with similar quality and level-
of-service specifications, within a common (but not necessarily
exclusive or identical) set of identifiable geographic markets. An
Intercity Passenger Rail service is considered ``substantially
changed'' when its inherent nature or market focus is altered, or when
its operating frequencies (roundtrips per day) are increased
significantly; a substantial change in service may include adding
short-distance corridor-type trains where only long-distance service
operates, or service restoration where trains ceased to operate several
years before. See Appendix 1.3 for further discussion of the definition
of Intercity Passenger Rail.
Letter of Intent (LOI)--Represents a contingent financial
commitment by FRA to provide up to a prescribed amount of funding to
fully implement a service development program (or specific phases of
such a program), with defined milestones for completion of work
necessary to ensure successful and timely program development.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Documentation--Includes
four principal levels (with respect to the HSIPR Program):
Tier I, ``programmatic,'' or service-level environmental
impact statement (Tier I EIS)--Addresses actions at a broad level, such
as a program concept for an entire corridor, and typically does not
lead directly to project construction.
Site-specific, or project EIS--Addresses specific
environmental issues associated with a site or project, and is intended
to lead directly to construction once applicable permits are secured.
Environmental assessment (EA)--May be programmatic or
site-specific, and concisely provides sufficient evidence and analysis
of the proposal to determine whether to prepare an EIS or a finding of
no significant impact (FONSI).
Categorical exclusion (CE)--Documentation that shows how a
proposal fits a category of predefined actions which do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment and for which neither an EIS nor an environmental
assessment are required.
Planning--Activities that support the case for investing in
project(s) or program(s), such as: identification of purpose and need;
analysis comparing the costs, benefits, and impacts of a range of
transportation alternatives; studies that assess different levels of
rail service and investment; service-level, programmatic, or Tier I
NEPA studies; Service Development Plans; and State Rail Plans.
Preliminary Engineering (PE)--Sufficient engineering design to
define a project, including identification of all environmental
impacts, design of all critical project elements at a level sufficient
to assure reliable cost estimates and schedules (in turn sufficient to
complete project management and financial plans), and definition of
procurement requirements and strategies. The PE development process
starts with specific project design alternatives that allow for
assessment of a range of rail improvements, specific alignments, and
project designs--sufficient to support subsequent NEPA analysis. PE is
prerequisite to final design (FD) and construction. Appendix 2.2
contains additional information about PE.
Project--A High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail project is a
discrete action that has a distinct purpose, such as adding track to an
existing railroad line, or the purchase of one or more pieces of
rolling stock.
Project Management Plan--Approach for ensuring successful
implementation of a project or program, including: (i) Identification
of a manager accountable for project or program delivery; (ii) an
organization/resource plan that describes (e.g., through an
organization chart) the relationships among entities involved in the
proposed program and a description of the relationships among the
entities responsible for the financing, design, construction,
operation, and maintenance of the proposed program; (iii) any new legal
entities required, how they would be structured, and their relationship
to existing entities; (iv) stakeholder agreements with owners of right-
of-way, operators, or other entities critical to successful project/
program delivery;(v) required governmental actions and approvals; and,
(vi) an appropriate system safety plan for the entire project lifecycle
consistent with FTA guidance for safety and security management plans.
The project management plan should address the safety certification
process and any required collision hazard analysis consistent with the
FRA guidance. A project management plan generally should also include
metrics by which the success of the project is defined.
Right-of-Way--Railroad infrastructure within the property lines of
an existing, or within the presumed property lines of a proposed,
railroad useful for Intercity Passenger Rail service.
Service Development Plan (SDP)--A plan for developing High-Speed
Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail service, either initiating new service or
improving existing service (e.g., adding train frequencies and/or
reducing trip times)--typically developed around distinct phases and/or
geographic sections of service improvement. A High-Speed Rail/Intercity
Passenger Rail SDP or equivalent covers three general topics: (i)
Rationale (including purpose and need), (ii) service/operating plan and
prioritized capital plan, and (iii) implementation plan (including
project management approach, stakeholder agreements and financial
plan). The precise structure of an SDP can vary, but these elements
must be covered in some fashion. (See Appendix 2.1 for additional
explanation).
Service Development Program (``Program'')--Implementation of a
High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail SDP, generally broken into
discrete phases or geographic sections. Such programs may be for new
service on an existing or new railroad alignment, or for improved
service on an existing railroad alignment.
2.3 Guide to Track Selection
The table below should be used by applicants as a guide for
determining the appropriate Track for application submissions.
[[Page 29907]]
Track Selection Guide
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funding track determination questions Response (yes/no) Funding track
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Has new or improved Intercity No........................... Track 3--Service Planning.
Passenger Rail service been selected
as a promising alternative in the
transportation corridor where the
project is located?
Yes.......................... Proceed to Next Question.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does the project(s) lead to-- No........................... Proceed to Next Question.
introduction of High-Speed Rail/
Intercity Passenger Rail service
within a corridor where no service
of that type currently exists, or to
a substantial change in an existing
service?
Yes.......................... Track 2--Programs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does the project(s) include the No........................... Proceed to Next Question.
rerouting of an existing Intercity
Passenger Rail service onto a new,
expanded, or previously abandoned
right-of-way?
Yes.......................... Track 2--Programs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does the investment encompass No........................... Proceed to Next Question.
multiple dispersed projects intended
to produce a significant benefit to
one or more Intercity Passenger Rail
services?
Yes.......................... Track 2--Programs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Even if no Service Development Plan No........................... Track 3--Service Planning.
exists, have specific Intercity
Passenger Rail investment projects
been identified for implementation?
Yes.......................... Proceed to Next Question.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Have preliminary engineering (PE) and No........................... Track 1--PE/NEPA only.
a project-level NEPA document been
completed for the proposed project?
Yes.......................... Proceed to Next Question.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If PE and project-level NEPA No........................... Track 1--FD/Construction.
documentation is complete, is a 50
percent (or greater) non-Federal
match available?
Yes.......................... Track 4--FY 2008/2009 Appropriations
Projects (or Track 1--Projects).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After selecting the appropriate application Track, prospective
applicants should consult the relevant Track-specific and general
information contained in the balance of this document.
2.4 Anticipated Award Amounts
Tracks 1 and 2--Awards under Tracks 1 and 2 will be made using a
portion of the $8 billion appropriated through ARRA. FRA anticipates
making multiple awards under Track 1 as a result of this solicitation;
however, FRA will not award all of the available $8 billion to Track 1
applicants. Funds will be reserved for award to Track 2 applications
under this solicitation, and likely to Tracks 1 and 2 in potential
future rounds of solicitations--as described in Section 5. As the
authorizations underlying Tracks 1 and 2 are new, the FRA cannot
provide an average amount of funding per award in previous years.
Tracks 3 and 4--Awards under Tracks 3 and 4 will be made using the
$90 million dedicated to Capital Grants to States--Intercity Passenger
Rail Service in the FY 2009 DOT Appropriations Act, plus the remaining
funds appropriated for the same purpose in the Capital Assistance to
States--Intercity Passenger Service Program in the FY 2008 DOT
Appropriations Act (currently estimated at $1,893,073). In accordance
with the provisions of the Appropriations Acts, no more than 10 percent
of appropriated amounts in each fiscal year ($9,540,500 of the
available funds) may be allocated to Track 3--Planning, with the
balance available for Track 4--FY2009 Appropriations Projects. These
funds require a non-Federal match of at least 50 percent of total
project cost.
2.5 Types of Awards
The table below summarizes the characteristics of funding awards by
Track. For specific grant conditions, refer to section 6 and appendix
3.
Award Characteristics
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Track 4--FY 2009
Track 1--projects Track 2--programs Track 3--planning appropriations
projects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Legislative Funding Source...... ARRA..... ARRA..... FY 2009, FY 2009,
2008 DOT 2008 DOT
Appropriations Appropriations
Act. Act.
Available Funding............... Portion Portion Up to No less
of $8 B. of $8 B. $9.54 M. than $82.3 M.
Instrument of Commitment........ Final Letters Final
Design/ of Intent. Cooperative Design/
Construction Agreements. Construction
Grants. Cooperative Grants.
PE/NEPA Agreements.
Cooperative
Agreements.
Match Requirement............... Up to Up to At least At least
100% Federal 100% Federal 50% non-Federal 50% non-Federal
share. share. match. match.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 29908]]
2.5.1 Track 1
The FRA will make awards under Track 1 through either: (a) Grant
agreements supporting FD and project construction; or (b) cooperative
agreements for completion of PE and/or project-level NEPA
documentation. Construction grants will fund both FD (if not already
completed) and construction of projects for which PE and project-level
NEPA documentation is complete at the time of application.\9\ FD/
construction grant recipients will be required to obtain FRA approval
prior to the commencement of construction activities (the process will
be set out in the grant agreement). The grant agreement can also be
structured to cover alternative construction scenarios, such as through
a design-build type approach. Applicants under Track 1 will be
considered for funding under either Intercity Passenger Rail Corridor
Capital Assistance Grants (Section 301 of PRIIA), or Congestion Grants
(Section 302 of PRIIA). Eligible projects intended to reduce congestion
by alleviating major rail capacity bottlenecks, particularly those that
benefit multiple railroad operators (e.g. Intercity Passenger Rail,
rail freight, and commuter rail) in a congested corridor, will likely
be considered for funding under the Congestion Grant program. Note that
where multiple railroad operations benefit from project(s), FRA will
expect the costs for such project(s) to be shared proportional to the
benefit each operator accrues from the investment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ If substantial progress on NEPA documentation has been made
on NEPA documentation, application may be reviewed for FD/
Construction grant funding; in any case, project-level NEPA
documentation must be complete at time of grant agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under Track PE/NEPA cooperative agreements, FRA will be more
involved in the project through collaborative work with the recipient.
In addition to providing technical assistance to the recipient, FRA
will participate in key project meetings, and will assist in the
preparation of engineering and environmental documents. FRA will also
be responsible for approving project deliverables at key milestones,
and providing authorization for progressing with subsequent stages of
the project.
2.5.2 Track 2
Under Track 2, FRA may issue Letters of Intent (LOI) for Service
Development Programs, and make subsequent awards for program components
through cooperative agreements.
The issuance of a LOI represents the expression of FRA's full
support of a Service Development Program, and the funding contingently
committed through an LOI will be reserved for that Service Development
Program from the $8 billion in available ARRA funding. An LOI will
include milestones for completion of work needed to advance the program
into obligation and completion; if milestone deadlines are not met,
funding reserved under an LOI will be returned to the pool of funds
available for future solicitations.
As milestones under an LOI are reached, FRA will obligate funding
to implement approved portions of the program through a cooperative
agreement. Funding to complete remaining PE and project-level NEPA
would be awarded immediately following the issuance of the LOI. Funding
for FD/construction would be awarded through a grant or cooperative
agreement as milestones are reached (e.g., completion of PE and NEPA
for project(s) with independent utility. Even after funds are converted
from LOI into a cooperative/grant agreement (i.e., obligated), grantees
will be required to obtain FRA approval prior to the commencement of
construction activities. This process will be included in the grant
agreement (which could also be structured to address options such as a
design-build implementation approach).
Recognizing the unique challenges posed by complex new corridor
programs, a higher level of Federal oversight and support will be
involved than under standard grant agreements. The substantial Federal
involvement of FRA will extend across all aspects of Service
Development Programs and will include technical assistance, review of
interim work products, support for environmental reviews, review of PE
and FD, and continuous program oversight.
2.5.3 Track 3
FRA will make awards under Track 3 using the $9,540,500 available
under the FY 2008/2009 DOT Appropriations Acts through cooperative
agreements. The substantial Federal involvement for Intercity Passenger
Rail planning activities would include agreement on the scope of study,
review of draft studies, and acceptance of final deliverables.
Recognizing the importance of planning to the long-term success of the
HSIPR Program and the limited funding available under existing
appropriations, FRA will favorably consider applicant expenditures for
High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail project planning when
evaluating the State share or matching contributions component of an
evaluation under subsequent solicitations.
2.5.4 Track 4
Awards under Track 4 will be made using $82 million available under
the FY 2009 DOT Appropriations Act for non-planning Intercity Passenger
Rail Capital Assistance to States, as well as remaining non-planning
funding under the analogous FY 2008 DOT Appropriations Act funding. FRA
anticipates making one or more awards, and awarding the entire $82
million under Track 4 as a result of this solicitation.
Funding under Track 4 cannot exceed 50 percent of a project's total
co
