High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) Program, 16562-16564 [2010-7338]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
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
