High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) Program, 16562-16564 [2010-7338]

Download as PDF 16562 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 62 / Thursday, April 1, 2010 / Notices mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Appendix 4: Additional Information on Application Budgets Applicants must present a detailed budget for the proposed project that includes both Federal funds and matching funds. Items of cost included in the budget must be reasonable, allocable and necessary for the project. At a minimum, the budget should separate total cost of the project into the following categories: • Personnel: List each position by title and name of employee, if available, show the annual salary rate and the percentage of time to be devoted to the project. Compensation paid for employees engaged in grant activities must be consistent with that paid for similar work within the applicant organization. • Fringe Benefits: Fringe benefits should be based on actual known costs or an established formula. Fringe benefits are for personnel listed in the ‘‘Personnel’’ budget category and only for the percentage of time devoted to the project. • Travel: Itemize travel expenses of project personnel by purpose (training, interviews, and meetings). Show the basis of computation (e.g., X people to Y-day training at $A airfare, $B lodging, $C subsistence). • Equipment: List non-expendable items that are to be purchased. Nonexpendable equipment is tangible property having a useful life of more than two years and an acquisition cost of $5,000 or more per unit. (Note: Organization’s own capitalization policy may be used for items costing less than $5,000.) Expendable items should be included either in the ‘‘Supplies’’ category or in the ‘‘Other’’ category. Applicants should analyze the cost benefits of purchasing versus leasing equipment, especially high cost items and those subject to rapid technical advances. Rented or leased equipment should be listed in the ‘‘Contractual’’ category. Explain how the equipment is necessary for the success of the project. Attach a narrative describing the procurement method to be used. • Supplies: List items by type (office supplies, postage, training materials, copying paper, and expendable equipment items costing less than $5,000) and show the basis for computation. (Note: Organization’s own capitalization policy may be used for items costing less than $5,000.) Generally, supplies include any materials that are expendable or consumed during the course of the project. • Consultants/Contracts: Indicate whether applicant’s formal, written Procurement Policy (see 49 CFR 18.36 or 19.40–19.48) or the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) are followed. Consultant Fees: For each consultant enter the name, if known, service to be provided, hourly or daily fee (8-hour day), and the estimated time on the project. Consultant Expenses: List all expenses to be paid from the grant to the individual consultants in addition to their fees (travel, meals, and lodging). Contracts: Provide a description of the product or service to be procured by contract and an estimate of the cost. Applicants are encouraged to promote free and open competition in awarding contracts. A separate justification must be provided for sole source contracts in excess of $100,000. VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:51 Mar 31, 2010 Jkt 220001 • Other: List items (rent, reproduction, telephone, janitorial or security services, etc.) by major type and the basis of the computation. For example, provide the square footage and the cost per square foot for rent, or provide the monthly rental cost and how many months to rent. • Indirect Costs: Indirect costs are allowed only if the applicant has a Federally approved indirect cost rate. A copy of the rate approval, (a fully executed, negotiated agreement), must be attached. If the applicant does not have an approved rate, one can be requested by contacting the applicant’s cognizant Federal agency, which will review all documentation and approve a rate for the applicant organization. Issued in Washington, DC, on March 29, 2010. Karen Rae, Deputy Administrator. [FR Doc. 2010–7340 Filed 3–31–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–06–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Railroad Administration High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) Program AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of solicitation for proposals for Federally-led multi-state passenger rail corridor planning demonstration projects. SUMMARY: On January 28, 2010, President Obama announced the first grant awards for the High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) Program. The Department of Transportation Appropriations Act of 2010 (FY 2010 DOT Appropriations Act) allocated an additional $2.5 billion for the HSIPR Program, of which up to $50 million can be used for planning activities. The appropriations act permits the Secretary of Transportation to retain a portion of this planning funding to facilitate, at the Federal level, the preparation of planning documents for high-speed rail corridors that cross multiple States. This is a solicitation for proposals from groups of States that wish to be considered for this innovative approach to planning multistate passenger rail corridors. Concurrent with this solicitation, FRA has issued a notice of funding availability (NOFA) for the FY 2010 planning funds, also published in this edition of the Federal Register. DATES: Proposals are due no later than 5 p.m. EST, May 19, 2010 and must be submitted via e-mail to HSIPR@dot.gov. The form for these proposals can be PO 00000 Frm 00141 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 found at https://www.fra.dot.gov/Pages/ 2243.shtml. 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, SE., MS–20, Room W38–302, Washington, DC, 20590 Attn. HSIPR Program. States are encouraged to use special courier services to avoid shipping delays. Materials must be postmarked by May 19, 2010 to be eligible for consideration. Overview: FRA is seeking proposals from groups of States interested in participating in a FRA-led demonstration project that could provide a future model for Federal collaboration with States on complex, multi-state corridor planning efforts. The planning project would be identified by the States, but funded and managed by FRA in close coordination with the States and other stakeholders. Proposals are sought for projects that would result in a ‘‘passenger rail corridor investment plan.’’ A passenger rail corridor investment plan provides the comprehensive information necessary to support a decision to proceed with funding and implementation of a major investment in a passenger rail corridor. Feasibility studies alone would not satisfy this requirement. Passenger rail corridor investment plans include both a service development plan (SDP) and corridorwide environmental documentation. Groups of states submitting proposals should identify whether they are proposing that FRA lead the development of both documents, a stand-alone SDP, or corridor-wide environmental document. Service Development Plan Service Development Plans (SDPs) should support future corridor development and must include the following elements: • Corridor Development Program Rationale—Description of the corridor’s transportation challenges and opportunities, based on current and forecasted travel demand and capacity conditions, demonstrating how the proposed project/program would costeffectively address transportation and other needs. Development of the program rationale should consider multimodal system alternatives (highway, air, other, as applicable), including a qualitative and quantitative assessments of the costs, benefits and impacts and risks of the alternatives. Program rationale may also explore synergies between the proposed service E:\FR\FM\01APN1.SGM 01APN1 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 62 / Thursday, April 1, 2010 / Notices and large-scale goals and development plans within its service region and communities. • Service Plan—Detail on the train service alternatives to be provided for each phase of new or improved HSIPR service, including: the service frequency, timetable (including timedistance ‘‘stringline’’ diagrams), general station locations, intermodal connections, and train consists. The Service Plan will rely on or include operational analyses, including, where appropriate, 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. If the proposed service makes use of facilities that would be shared with freight, commuter rail, or other intercity passenger rail services, the planning study should consider the existing and future characteristics of those services, as developed cooperatively with freight, commuter, and intercity passenger rail partners. • Capital Investment Needs Assessment—Identification of infrastructure, rolling stock and facilities improvements for each discrete phase of new or improved service implementation, including any sequence or prioritization. The plan will include cost estimates for specific capital investments needed to achieve and sustain the service plan. • Financial Forecast—Operating financial projections for each phase of the planned service, with documentation of the methods, assumptions and outputs of the following: travel demand forecasts, projected revenue, and operating expenses, including maintenance of way, maintenance of equipment, transportation (train movement), passenger traffic and services (marketing, ticketing, station, and onboard services), and general/ administrative expenses. Cost-sharing arrangements with infrastructure owners and rail operators should also be included. • Public Benefits Assessment— Description of user and non-user benefits and, to the extent readily quantifiable, the estimated economic value of those benefits, with particular attention to job creation and retention, ‘‘green’’ environmental outcomes, potential energy savings, and effects on community livability. • Program Management Approach— A phased program implementation strategy including a preliminary VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:51 Mar 31, 2010 Jkt 220001 16563 including ridership, on-time performance, travel time, service frequencies, safety and other factors; • The potential of the corridor program to promote economic development, including contributions to Corridor-Wide Environmental a sustainable U.S. manufacturing and Documents supply base; Environmental documentation funded • The potential of the corridor through this solicitation must satisfy program to enhance energy efficiency Service NEPA requirements. FRA has and environmental quality; defined Service NEPA as at least a • The potential of the corridor programmatic/Tier 1 environmental program to promote interconnected review (using tiered reviews and livable communities, including documents), or a project environmental complementing local or state efforts to review, that also addresses broader concentrate higher-density, mixed-use, questions and likely environmental development in areas proximate to effects for the entire corridor relating to multi-modal transportation options the type of service(s) being proposed, (including intercity passenger rail including cities and stations served, stations); and route alternatives, service levels, types • The consideration of other of operations (speed, electric, or diesel transportation modes in the planning powered), ridership projections, and process. major infrastructure components. 2. Future Program Viability and Simple corridor programs are often best Sustainability: The proposal should addressed with project NEPA explain how the planning activities documentation, while more complex would lead to a long-term, viable highcorridor programs may need a tiering speed rail corridor program: approach. FRA is responsible for • The likelihood that the final establishing the scope of the deliverables (Service Development Plan, environmental review, including the use Environmental Document, or State Rail of tiering or use of project NEPA Plan) will be ready and capable of being documentation. implemented; Proposal Form: The proposal form • The demonstrated commitment of should be downloaded from: https:// the State and other stakeholders to www.fra.dot.gov/Pages/2243.shtml. The quickly execute the program once form has been developed by FRA to planning is complete; capture pertinent qualitative and • The degree to which the planning quantitative information that is needed process meaningfully incorporates input to confirm project eligibility, as well as from affected communities, local information FRA needs for governments, regional councils and consideration of proposals. States planning organizations, neighboring should provide as much information as States, railroads, transportation modal possible about the proposed planning partners, environmental interests, the activities. FRA would finalize a project’s public and other stakeholders—early goals, scope, schedule, and budget and and throughout the process; carry out the project in coordination • The likelihood that the corridor with the group of States. Decision Process: FRA will be making programs being studied can yield measurable service and public benefits decisions regarding FRA-funded in a reasonable period of time; activities considering the narrative • The demonstrated ability of the responses provided in the proposals States to support the future capital and received from States on the following operating needs of the corridor being topics: 1. Potential Transportation and Public studied; • The thoroughness of the proposed Benefits: Proposals should describe the underlying corridor program that will be deliverables; • The quality of proposed the subject of the planning activities, methodology and assumptions; and including such factors as: 3. Project Management Proposal: • The clarity and detail with which the States have identified the problem to Describe the proposed method for managing the project, including a be addressed by the proposed service; • The market potential of the corridor description of the shared being studied, taking into consideration responsibilities between the FRA and the States, and the relationships and such factors as population, density, means of coordination among the economic activity, and travel patterns; • The potential for the corridor to participating States, service operators, deliver high-speed and intercity and host railroads. This section should passenger rail service benefits, detail the mechanism by which States 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. PO 00000 Frm 00142 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01APN1.SGM 01APN1 16564 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 62 / Thursday, April 1, 2010 / Notices will coordinate their views during the project. 4. Justification Statement: Identify the rationale for Federal leadership on the planning project, such as specific institutional barriers or operational complexities. Conditions that may call for a Federal leadership role include multi-state and multi-jurisdictional complexity and/or operational complexity involving multiple operating entities and/or divided property ownership and rights. Additionally, proposals should provide a narrative on how the proposed project could serve as a demonstration project and national model for future FRA-managed, multiState planning projects. Submission Package: States interested in providing proposals must submit the following documents to HSIPR@dot.gov no later than 5 p.m. EST, May 19, 2010. • Required—One Application Form provided at https://www.fra.dot.gov/ Pages/2243.shtml. • Required—Letter(s) signed by all the chief executives of State transportation departments or agencies that will be part of the project, stating their commitment to participate. • Optional—Letter(s) from other stakeholders or interested parties. • Optional—Other supporting documents that the applicant believes would assist FRA in understanding the proposal (including, but not limited to, maps or previous planning documents). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information regarding this notice, please contact the FRA HSIPR Program Manager via e-mail at HSIPR@dot.gov. Issued in Washington, DC, on March 29, 2010. Karen Rae, Deputy Administrator. [FR Doc. 2010–7338 Filed 3–31–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–06–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Railroad Administration High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) Program Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of funding availability. mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: On January 28, 2010, President Obama announced the first selections for the High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) Program. This notice builds on the program framework established by FRA in the June 23, 2009 interim program guidance (74 FR 16:51 Mar 31, 2010 Jkt 220001 DATES: Applications for funding under this solicitation are due no later than 5 p.m. EST, May 19, 2010 and must be submitted via Grants.gov (see instructions in Section 3.1). See Section 3 for additional information regarding the application process. FRA reserves the right to modify this deadline. 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, SE., MS–20, Room W38–302, Washington, DC 20590, Att’n: HSIPR Program. Applicants are encouraged to use special courier services to avoid shipping delays. Application forms are available at https://www.fra.dot.gov/ Pages/2243.shmtl. 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, SE., MS–20, Washington, DC 20590, Att’n: HSIPR Program. Table of Contents AGENCY: VerDate Nov<24>2008 29900), and details the application requirements and procedures for obtaining funding for high-speed rail planning activities under the Department of Transportation Appropriations Act of 2010 (FY 2010 DOT Appropriations Act). This solicitation is only applicable to the planning funds available under the FY 2010 appropriation; a future solicitation will be released in the coming months for the stand-alone project and corridor program funds under the FY 2010 appropriation. FRA has also concurrently issued a separate solicitation for projects to be funded with funds available under the Department of Transportation Appropriations Act of 2009 that have not yet been allocated to projects. This solicitation is also published in today’s edition of the Federal Register. 1. Financial Assistance Description 2. Eligibility Information 3. Application and Submission Information 4. Application Review Information 5. Award Administration Information 6. Questions and Clarifications Appendix 1: Additional Information on Eligibility Appendix 2: Additional Information on Award Administrations and Grant Conditions Appendix 3: Additional Information on Applicant Budgets PO 00000 Frm 00143 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Section 1: Financial Assistance Description 1.1 Authority This financial assistance announcement pertains to the funding made available for planning activities under FRA’s High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) Program. The authority for these planning funds is contained in two pieces of legislation: • The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, under Sections 301, 302, and 501—Intercity Passenger Rail Service Corridor Capital Assistance (codified at 49 U.S.C. chapter 244); and • The Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act (‘‘FY 2010 DOT Appropriations Act,’’ Title I of Division A of Pub. L. 111–117, December 16, 2009), under the title ‘‘Capital Assistance for High Speed Rail Corridors and Intercity Passenger Rail Service.’’ This document incorporates interim guidance required for this financial assistance opportunity pursuant to the FY 2010 DOT Appropriations Act and 49 U.S.C. 24402(a)(2). The funding made available under this financial assistance announcement was appropriated under the FY 2010 DOT Appropriations Act. The funding opportunities described in this guidance are available under Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number 20.319. 1.2 Program Description and Legislative History As one of President Obama’s foremost transportation priorities, the HSIPR Program is intended to help address the nation’s transportation challenges by investing in an efficient network of high-speed and intercity passenger rail corridors that connect communities across America. On January 28, 2010, President Obama announced the first recipients selected to receive funding under the HSIPR Program. These initial awards were funded from the $8 billion appropriated under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA or Recovery Act) and $90 million appropriated under the FY 2009 DOT Appropriations Act. Within the $90 million of FY 2009 funding, approximately $9 million worth of planning projects were selected. Congress established the framework for the HSIPR Program through the passage of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA). Enacted in October 2008, PRIIA represents the most sweeping Congressional action on intercity E:\FR\FM\01APN1.SGM 01APN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 62 (Thursday, April 1, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16562-16564]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-7338]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration


High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) Program

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of solicitation for proposals for Federally-led multi-
state passenger rail corridor planning demonstration projects.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On January 28, 2010, President Obama announced the first grant 
awards for the High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) Program. The 
Department of Transportation Appropriations Act of 2010 (FY 2010 DOT 
Appropriations Act) allocated an additional $2.5 billion for the HSIPR 
Program, of which up to $50 million can be used for planning 
activities. The appropriations act permits the Secretary of 
Transportation to retain a portion of this planning funding to 
facilitate, at the Federal level, the preparation of planning documents 
for high-speed rail corridors that cross multiple States. This is a 
solicitation for proposals from groups of States that wish to be 
considered for this innovative approach to planning multi-state 
passenger rail corridors.
    Concurrent with this solicitation, FRA has issued a notice of 
funding availability (NOFA) for the FY 2010 planning funds, also 
published in this edition of the Federal Register.

DATES: Proposals are due no later than 5 p.m. EST, May 19, 2010 and 
must be submitted via e-mail to HSIPR@dot.gov. The form for these 
proposals can be found at https://www.fra.dot.gov/Pages/2243.shtml.
    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, SE., MS-20, Room W38-302, 
Washington, DC, 20590 Attn. HSIPR Program. States are encouraged to use 
special courier services to avoid shipping delays. Materials must be 
post-marked by May 19, 2010 to be eligible for consideration.
    Overview: FRA is seeking proposals from groups of States interested 
in participating in a FRA-led demonstration project that could provide 
a future model for Federal collaboration with States on complex, multi-
state corridor planning efforts. The planning project would be 
identified by the States, but funded and managed by FRA in close 
coordination with the States and other stakeholders.
    Proposals are sought for projects that would result in a 
``passenger rail corridor investment plan.'' A passenger rail corridor 
investment plan provides the comprehensive information necessary to 
support a decision to proceed with funding and implementation of a 
major investment in a passenger rail corridor. Feasibility studies 
alone would not satisfy this requirement.
    Passenger rail corridor investment plans include both a service 
development plan (SDP) and corridor-wide environmental documentation. 
Groups of states submitting proposals should identify whether they are 
proposing that FRA lead the development of both documents, a stand-
alone SDP, or corridor-wide environmental document.

Service Development Plan

    Service Development Plans (SDPs) should support future corridor 
development and must include the following elements:
     Corridor Development Program Rationale--Description of the 
corridor's transportation challenges and opportunities, based on 
current and forecasted travel demand and capacity conditions, 
demonstrating how the proposed project/program would cost-effectively 
address transportation and other needs. Development of the program 
rationale should consider multimodal system alternatives (highway, air, 
other, as applicable), including a qualitative and quantitative 
assessments of the costs, benefits and impacts and risks of the 
alternatives. Program rationale may also explore synergies between the 
proposed service

[[Page 16563]]

and large-scale goals and development plans within its service region 
and communities.
     Service Plan--Detail on the train service alternatives to 
be provided for each phase of new or improved HSIPR service, including: 
the service frequency, timetable (including time-distance 
``stringline'' diagrams), general station locations, intermodal 
connections, and train consists. The Service Plan will rely on or 
include operational analyses, including, where appropriate, 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. If the 
proposed service makes use of facilities that would be shared with 
freight, commuter rail, or other intercity passenger rail services, the 
planning study should consider the existing and future characteristics 
of those services, as developed cooperatively with freight, commuter, 
and intercity passenger rail partners.
     Capital Investment Needs Assessment--Identification of 
infrastructure, rolling stock and facilities improvements for each 
discrete phase of new or improved service implementation, including any 
sequence or prioritization. The plan will include cost estimates for 
specific capital investments needed to achieve and sustain the service 
plan.
     Financial Forecast--Operating financial projections for 
each phase of the planned service, with documentation of the methods, 
assumptions and outputs of the following: travel demand forecasts, 
projected revenue, and operating expenses, including maintenance of 
way, maintenance of equipment, transportation (train movement), 
passenger traffic and services (marketing, ticketing, station, and on-
board services), and general/administrative expenses. Cost-sharing 
arrangements with infrastructure owners and rail operators should also 
be included.
     Public Benefits Assessment--Description of user and non-
user benefits and, to the extent readily quantifiable, the estimated 
economic value of those benefits, with particular attention to job 
creation and retention, ``green'' environmental outcomes, potential 
energy savings, and effects on community livability.
     Program Management Approach--A phased program 
implementation strategy including 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.

Corridor-Wide Environmental Documents

    Environmental documentation funded through this solicitation must 
satisfy Service NEPA requirements. FRA has defined Service NEPA as at 
least a programmatic/Tier 1 environmental review (using tiered reviews 
and documents), or a project environmental review, that also addresses 
broader questions and likely environmental effects for the entire 
corridor relating to the type of service(s) being proposed, including 
cities and stations served, route alternatives, service levels, types 
of operations (speed, electric, or diesel powered), ridership 
projections, and major infrastructure components. Simple corridor 
programs are often best addressed with project NEPA documentation, 
while more complex corridor programs may need a tiering approach. FRA 
is responsible for establishing the scope of the environmental review, 
including the use of tiering or use of project NEPA documentation.
    Proposal Form: The proposal form should be downloaded from: https://www.fra.dot.gov/Pages/2243.shtml. The form has been developed by FRA to 
capture pertinent qualitative and quantitative information that is 
needed to confirm project eligibility, as well as information FRA needs 
for consideration of proposals. States should provide as much 
information as possible about the proposed planning activities. FRA 
would finalize a project's goals, scope, schedule, and budget and carry 
out the project in coordination with the group of States.
    Decision Process: FRA will be making decisions regarding FRA-funded 
activities considering the narrative responses provided in the 
proposals received from States on the following topics:
    1. Potential Transportation and Public Benefits: Proposals should 
describe the underlying corridor program that will be the subject of 
the planning activities, including such factors as:
     The clarity and detail with which the States have 
identified the problem to be addressed by the proposed service;
     The market potential of the corridor being studied, taking 
into consideration such factors as population, density, economic 
activity, and travel patterns;
     The potential for the corridor to deliver high-speed and 
intercity passenger rail service benefits, including ridership, on-time 
performance, travel time, service frequencies, safety and other 
factors;
     The potential of the corridor program to promote economic 
development, including contributions to a sustainable U.S. 
manufacturing and supply base;
     The potential of the corridor program to enhance energy 
efficiency and environmental quality;
     The potential of the corridor program to promote 
interconnected livable communities, including complementing local or 
state efforts to concentrate higher-density, mixed-use, development in 
areas proximate to multi-modal transportation options (including 
intercity passenger rail stations); and
     The consideration of other transportation modes in the 
planning process.
    2. Future Program Viability and Sustainability: The proposal should 
explain how the planning activities would lead to a long-term, viable 
high-speed rail corridor program:
     The likelihood that the final deliverables (Service 
Development Plan, Environmental Document, or State Rail Plan) will be 
ready and capable of being implemented;
     The demonstrated commitment of the State and other 
stakeholders to quickly execute the program once planning is complete;
     The degree to which the planning process meaningfully 
incorporates input from affected communities, local governments, 
regional councils and planning organizations, neighboring States, 
railroads, transportation modal partners, environmental interests, the 
public and other stakeholders--early and throughout the process;
     The likelihood that the corridor programs being studied 
can yield measurable service and public benefits in a reasonable period 
of time;
     The demonstrated ability of the States to support the 
future capital and operating needs of the corridor being studied;
     The thoroughness of the proposed deliverables;
     The quality of proposed methodology and assumptions; and
    3. Project Management Proposal: Describe the proposed method for 
managing the project, including a description of the shared 
responsibilities between the FRA and the States, and the relationships 
and means of coordination among the participating States, service 
operators, and host railroads. This section should detail the mechanism 
by which States

[[Page 16564]]

will coordinate their views during the project.
    4. Justification Statement: Identify the rationale for Federal 
leadership on the planning project, such as specific institutional 
barriers or operational complexities. Conditions that may call for a 
Federal leadership role include multi-state and multi-jurisdictional 
complexity and/or operational complexity involving multiple operating 
entities and/or divided property ownership and rights. Additionally, 
proposals should provide a narrative on how the proposed project could 
serve as a demonstration project and national model for future FRA-
managed, multi-State planning projects.
    Submission Package: States interested in providing proposals must 
submit the following documents to HSIPR@dot.gov no later than 5 p.m. 
EST, May 19, 2010.
     Required--One Application Form provided at https://www.fra.dot.gov/Pages/2243.shtml.
     Required--Letter(s) signed by all the chief executives of 
State transportation departments or agencies that will be part of the 
project, stating their commitment to participate.
     Optional--Letter(s) from other stakeholders or interested 
parties.
     Optional--Other supporting documents that the applicant 
believes would assist FRA in understanding the proposal (including, but 
not limited to, maps or previous planning documents).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information regarding this 
notice, please contact the FRA HSIPR Program Manager via e-mail at 
HSIPR@dot.gov.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 29, 2010.
Karen Rae,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2010-7338 Filed 3-31-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.