2010 The Year in Review

Our RoleHighlightsOverview of Program & FundingStrategic Goals & InitiativesAwards & Recognition 	

Program Levels & Resources TrendsTitle 23 Appropriations, Allocations & ObligationsRecovery Act Status of FundsRecovery Act Project StatusConstruction Contracts AwardedConstruction Contract Award ValueConstruction Award Fund LeveragingRecovery Act Obligations by Division (FY 2009 & 2010)FLH Recovery Act Project Delivery SummaryProgram Delivery SummaryProject Delivery SummaryCustomer Satisfaction Survey ScoreFLH Program Funds ObligatedFunds on the Ground and Project Delivery CostsAll Employee Survey 

Note: Additional information can be made available upon request.

The Federal Lands Highway Program

2010

The Year in Review

89

10111111121213141524252530






Cover photo: Mike O’Callaghan — Pat Tillman Memorial Bridge, Hoover Dam Bypass Project, Arizona & Nevada



	
		

		







	



	

	

	

		



	


		




	











	



	







		

		

		



				 	



		

	














	




		


		

	

	
	

	
	

	
	










		



 5

68

1631
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review 

ganization, as a critical part of FHWA, had a fantastic year of accomplishment for our Nation. Through individual and team 

ignificant program in our history, with the Recovery Act effort as the highlight. Administrator Mendez continues to remind us of the 

We delivered the largest program in our history in partnership with tribal governments, providing critically needed infrastructure 

non-traditional projects, and projects for existing and new partners. We are supporting our military efforts and those soldiers 

d for our country with honor. And, we delivered a world-class bridge at the Hoover Dam that inspires all of us, and our Nation, to 

for the next generation.

r Business Plan, one of our most significant goals was to expand our partner base through successful delivery and superior skills. 

ped us achieve in this last year will help us achieve that important goal. Federal Lands has been throughout its history, and will 

oice. We continue to receive accolades from across our industry, and our success will lead us to new opportunities — to our future.

am congratulations to everyone, and thank you for contributing to our continued success.

	


John R. Baxter, P.E.Associate Administrator for Office of Federal Lands HighwayJohn R. Baxter, P.E.A i t Ad i i t t f

The Federal Lands Highway Leadership Team — left to right: Melisa Ridenour, Eastern Federal Lands Division Engineer; Clara Conner, Western Federal Lands Division Engineer; John Baxter, Office of Federal Lands Highway Associate Administrator, and Ricardo Suarez, Central Federal Lands Division Engineer
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review

Smoky Mountains National Park, Tennessee

e the best transportation system

nce with the values of

 and Tribal lands.

ion

Mission

Improving transportation

to and within Federal and Tribal Lands 

and providing technical services

to the highway community.
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review 

stration’s (FHWA) Office of Federal Lands 

 for delivering projects that meet the varied 

We are relied upon to solve and manage unique 

 sensitive locations through engineering 

the context of the land. Whether it is building 

ensitive projects, constructing roads that are 

ing critical access using low-cost transportation 

nt of consistently delivering distinct, sensitive 

ts. 

e National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Forest 

al Land Management Agencies (FLMAs) in the 

hetically pleasing and environmentally sensitive 

n. FLH worked with these agencies on the 

nd construction of many of this Nation’s national 

ral Lands Highway Program (FLHP) in 1982 

 and reliable administration for a coordinated 

ridges; protect and enhance our Nation’s 

 needed transportation access for 

ate the best transportation system in balance 

 Tribal lands and have succeeded this year in 

ission by providing quality technical services to 

s of a Headquarters Office in Washington, 

ffices located in Sterling, Virginia; Lakewood, 

shington.

ponsible for program development and 

gram review for FLH program funds, and 

half of FHWA on Federal and Tribal land 

ivisions; Western Federal Lands (WFL); 

and Eastern Federal Lands (EFL) are responsible 

oject management; transportation planning; 

eparation of plans, specifications and estimates; 

ruction supervision and inspection. Our 

highway and bridge design; survey; mapping 

ulics; geotechnical; traffic; safety; intelligent 

visualization; materials; consultant and 

construction acquisition; road and bridge inventory and inspection; and asset management. Our design and construction projects range from simple rural resurfacing to highly complex, high volume, urban arterial parkways.FLH provides context sensitive designs and solutions, across the 50 States,the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands, and PacificIsland Territories.The Federal Government, through various FLMAs: the NPS; USFS; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS); Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and Tribal Governments; Bureau of Land Management (BLM); Military Surface Deployment and Distribution Command (SDDC); U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE); Bureau of Reclamation (BOR); and the Tennessee Valley Authority, have ownership responsibilities for more than 30% of the Nation’s land. This responsibility covers more than 500,000 miles of public and administrative roads. The Federal Lands Division Offices work very closely with these partners to deliver the program, providing access to rural communities and our national treasures.

Cave Loop Road, Pavement Preservation, Lava Beds National Monument, Tulelake, California
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review

ncredible in terms of this Nation’s history. America 

 of an economic recession and funding for future 

ents remains uncertain. The Department of 

ticular the FHWAs goals center on improving the 

nfrastructure, generating new jobs, and ensuring 

spent. Legislation and initiatives, in particular 

nd Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) and 

have taken center stage and are encouraging us to 

. In light of this FLH has aligned strategies to focus 

of National Leadership; Program Delivery; System 

ate Capacity. 

 its most significant program ever in terms of 

ecific accomplishments. We have highlighted these 

nts as follows:

overy Act, spanning 2009 to 2010 added a 

e already large FLH Program. Virtually all 

5% or $550 million) was authorized on 621 projects 

3% of these obligated funds were expended to 

nd jobs underway! FLH also assisted our various 

overy Act projects authorized under their own 

boost from the Recovery Act, FLH achieved its 

warded construction contracts delivered to our 

er, the FLH Divisions awarded 148 contracts, 

ributed among the partner agencies, States, 

termodal partnerships. These totals are 

he collaborative efforts put forth by all parties to 

These projects, awarded in FY 2010, will result in the 

e miles of road and 56 new or rehabilitated bridges 

nationwide.

nd over $1.6 billion (total of FLHP, other Title 

pt for Recovery Act authority) on transportation 

deral Lands Highway Program (FLHP) funds, other 

funds. Of the more than $1.0 billion authorized in 

or the Indian Reservation Roads (IRR) program; 

oads and Parkways Program; 15.7% were for the 

gram; 14.6% were for the Public Lands Highway 

nd 2.5% were for the Refuge Roads Program. Our 

82 active design projects worth $2.1 billion and 305 

cts worth $1.6 billion.

 requires extraordinary effort. FLH devoted 

to deliver its program. This number reflects 121.7 

administratively-funded work years, 575.3 project-funded work years, and 249.8 work years outsourced. Approximately 36% of FLH work effort was outsourced.Projects: Some of our most significant projects delivered this year exemplify our FHWA goals. In fact these projects are not only nationally recognized for their significance, but also because of the FLH commitment to strong project delivery and management, our partnerships, and technical innovation: 

Mike O’Callaghan — Pat Tillman Memorial Bridge and the Hoover Dam Bypass: The $240 million Hoover Dam Bypass Project (which includes 8 separate bridges, 5 miles of roadway, and the centerpiece (Mike 

O’Callaghan — Pat Tillman Memorial Bridge)) was completed in FY 2010. Sitting 900 feet above the Colorado River adjacent to the Hoover Dam, it is the highest and longest arched concrete bridge in the Western Hemisphere. The bridge also has the tallest concrete columns of its kind. Construction was substantially complete in September 2010, and the bridge was dedicated on October 14, 2010. The project was completed on original budget without disputes or claims. This world-class bridge is a testament to FLH technical expertise and project management!Heartland Corridor Clearance Project: On September 9, 2010, the first double-stacked freight train passed through the Heartland Corridor. Construction started on this $200 million “Project of National and Regional Significance” in October 2007 and was completed in September 2010. Work included increasing vertical clearances in 28 tunnels and removing 24 overhead obstructions in Virginia, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Ohio, enabling double-stacked international maritime and domestic containers to be transported by rail between the Port of Virginia and Columbus, Ohio (1,200 miles). This project benefits the public by generating economic development, removing trucks from congested highways, and reducing fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions! Prince of Wales Island: The Organized Village of Kasaan in cooperation with the Alaska Department of Transportation State Scenic Byways Program and other stakeholders successfully nominated the Prince of Wales Island Road System (260 miles) and received designation as a State Scenic Byway in May 2010. The FH Program began improving roads on Prince of Wales Island around 1980. Since that time approximately $139 million in FH funding has been spent for improvements on 88 miles of roads on the island. Routes that have been partly or completely reconstructed by the FH program include: Big Salt Road; Control Lake to Thorne Bay Road; Sandy Beach Road, North Prince of Wales Road; and Coffman Cove Road. This project demonstrates FLHs long-term commitment to improving economic development, and unwavering support to our partners!

Our Program is not just about our projects, it is also about our business delivery, training and developing our staff, and who we are as a public agency. 
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review 

For several years FLH has been working to 

t delivery and green initiatives. EDC provided 

moted proven safety countermeasures by 

e” paving technique on projects in design 

ating its Standard Specifications and 

e to implement warm-mix asphalt technology. 

(GRS) technology is continuing to be 

re projects for both bridges and retaining walls. 

Design-Build contracting by incorporating this 

this year.

rn Federal Lands Highway Division (WFL) 

ional unit to receive the “Going Greener 

olved over the past decade as WFL ensured 

ions were taken into account as part of any 

within the buildings. Successes include office

g programs, installation of waterless urinals, 

HVAC equipment and utilizing recycled paint. 

substantial progress, including decreases in 

and increases in recycled supplies. 

— WFL received the Organizational Excellence 

0 years that WFL has maintained a consistent 

cused strategic planning processes to 

cs are tracked and combined with other 

tiveness to achieve continuous improvement. 

dership and staff are accomplished through 

gnment. The results are reflected in program 

ments, cost control, partner satisfaction, 

kforce development.

stern Federal Lands Highway Division (EFL) 

ons independently audited in FY 2010 by the 

oordination with the FHWA Office of the Chief 

sis of the audit was on financial operations 

 the audit, the firm advised the Chief Financial 

h the progress on closing inactive obligations 

on balances. The auditors were impressed 

em (QBS), a system that is ISO 9001 compliant 

: Stewardship & Oversight; developing the 

and constructing projects. EFL illustrated how 

ncluding the Financial Integrity Review and 

ment, is integrated into daily business. Other 

 bridge inspection program; our procurement 

n policy regarding commitment of funds; 

; project management system; and the project 

ASCE Peer Review — FLH participated in a Peer Review conducted by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). This review assessed our corporate capacity as an organization. The ASCE Peer Review Team provided recommendations on a variety of subjects, but also recognized some of FLH’s exceptionally strong practices related to project management that stand out as an example to other engineering organizations.FHWA Discipline Training — FLH fully supported the Federal-aid Divisions by sponsoring rotational assignments for various Federal-aid employees. FLH employees also participated with Federal-aid in Discipline Training and the Learning Highways Initiative throughout the country by offering and leading specific training sessions.Employee Satisfaction — FLH is especially proud to report that employee satisfaction has reached its highest level ever at 70%. This level of satisfaction is extremely high and important because of the number of employees each Division is responsible for in comparison to many FHWA offices nationwide. This score reflects FLH’s commitment to listen to and provide for its employees.Procurement — The Recovery Act stretched our resources beyond normal limits and efforts by our acquisitions staff allowed for construction contracting at its highest level. FLH supported the goals of the Department of Transportation’s Small and Disadvantaged Business Office whose mission is to promote successful partnerships which result in an inclusive and effective small business program. The FHWA target for small business is 38% of our total procurement. In FY 2010 FLH exceeded that target with a 45% accomplishment, as well as achieving specific performance targets for 3 of the 4 small business categories. Ensuring a productive and competitive contracting environment is important for both our economy and for business development.The FHWA and FLH corporate goals and initiatives are the framework of our 2010 Annual Report — The Year in Review, a summary of our accomplishments; an assessment of our organizational health and a testament to the importance we place in our role as stewards of public funds. As an engineering organization we are dedicated to providing engineering excellence, preserving our environment, and providing efficient and cost-effective services for our partners and the public.

Hoover Dam Bypass Heartland Corridor Prince of Wales Island
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review

dship and oversight responsibility for the 

ars that fund the Program, totaling over $1 billion 

 Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation 

sers (SAFETEA-LU).

he trends of the annual program delivered by FLH 

ed to work years of effort required. The programs: 

 Park Roads and Parkways, Forest Highways and 

ually grown during the last authorizations. To 

o the growing programs without comparable 

orkforce, the FLH has increased the use of consultant 

e mechanisms used for obtaining consultant and 

 of the Federal Acquisition Regulations for fair 

y and best value to the government. Program levels 

nnual contract award dollars, Full Time Equivalent 

racted (outsourced) workyears.

ssion areas, Program Administration and Program 

nistration addresses FLH’s stewardship and 

for our resources, both human and monetary, and 

al functional areas, including but not limited to 

programming, financial management, 

gy. Program Administration provides management 

am.




Our business delivery in FY 2010 focused predominantly on our financial accountability and stewardship roles to effectively and efficiently manage taxpayer dollars.FLH is entrusted with many different types of funds. The majority are authorizations through DOTs transportation legislation, specifically Title 23, Section 204, which is the FLHP.  

The FLHP funding categories are as follows: Indian Reservation Road and Bridge Programs; Park Roads and Parkways Program; Public Lands Highway Program; (Forest Highways; and Public Lands Highway Discretionary); and Refuge Roads Program.$%
%&$%%'(#" provides funding which may be used by Indian tribal governments, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and the FHWA for the planning, design, construction, or reconstruction of designated public roads that provide access to or within an Indian reservation, Tribal lands, Indian communities, and Alaska native villages. The IRR Bridge Program (IRRBP) was established as a set aside within the IRR program to fund bridge replacement or rehabilitation and to also provide funding for design.#)%#)&#%#'#" provides funding which may be used by the National Park Service (NPS) and FHWA for planning, design, construction, or reconstruction of designated public roads that provide access to or within National Parks, recreation areas, historic areas, and other units of the National Park System. The Park Road System consists of 8,000+ miles of public roads owned by the NPS.# &#'#" allows for the use of funds for construction and transportation planning activities. There are two components of this program, namely the PLH Discretionary Program and the Forest Highway (FH) Program. Thirty-four percent of the PLH category funds, as reflected in SAFETEA-LU, are available for the PLH Discretionary Program. FHWA solicits for candidates and selects projects for funding based on applications received for this program. Sixty-six percent of PLH funds are available for the FH program. Approximately 29,000 miles of State, local and federally-owned public roads are designated as Forest Highways.% %&%%#'#"* first authorized in 1998, provides funds for the maintenance and improvement of public roads that provide access to or within a unit of the National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) System. The USFWS manages and maintains approximately 4,800 miles (paved and unpaved) of public use roads, 87 public use bridges, and over 5,400 miles of roads for administrative use.These FLHP funds are summarized in the following table by funding category.

been adjusted by the Composite Price Trend for Federal-aid 

ar.

"	% 
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review 	




,-./.
-0#1222
*1
	









 !
"#!




$!


%!



  &

 
"#! &
'#




$! 
'"!

(

%)* +
'#! 

R) $447,750,000 $(29,103,750) $54,620,577 $473,266,827 $435,670,564 $37,596,263 92.1%

dge 

 $14,000,000 $(910,000) $827,137 $13,917,137 $13,902,133 $15,004 99.9%

P) $223,278,000 $0 $7,204,472 $230,482,472 $228,071,171 $2,411,302 99.0%

 $197,010,000 $(12,805,650) $33,248,120 $217,437,470 $158,562,931 $58,874,539 72.9% $101,490,000 $(6,596,850) $128,369,376 $223,262,526 $137,314,701 $85,947,824 61.5%

(PLH-TP) $0 $0 $9,937,435 $9,937,435 $9,761,762 $175,674 98.2%

$28,855,000 $(1,875,575) $4,967,489 $31,946,914 $26,348,268 $5,598,647 82.5%

$1,012,383,000 $(51,291,825) $239,174,606 $1,200,250,781 $1,009,631,530 $190,619,252 84.1%

 FLH administers additional important 

ograms outside the core FLHP. FLH-related 

 and manage transportation appropriations 

3 include Emergency Relief for Federally 

l-aid funding from states, special congressional 

grams.

%FLH also administers the ERFO 

RFO Program is to help pay the unusually heavy 

repair and reconstruction of Federal roads and 

a natural disaster over a wide area. Restoration 

ons is the predominate type of repair. 

assistance for roads that have been defined as 

, forest development roads, park roads and 

roads, refuge roads, public lands highways, and 

ds.

 The FLH is also authorized to administer 

& Air Force Operations and Maintenance 

he Department of Defense.

The DAR Program provides a means for the military to pay the cost of public highway improvements necessary to mitigate an unusual impact of a defense activity. An unusual impact could be a significant increase in personnel at a military installation relocation of an access gate, or the deployment of an oversized or overweight vehicle or transporter unit.The Department of Defense also provides O&M funds to States having gravelsurfaced roads that support the Minuteman Missile System. O&M funds are allocated based upon needs identified by the Air Force in cooperation with the States and the FHWA. When requested by States, projects are designed, constructed and administered directly by the FLH Divisions.The FLH may also receive other Federal, state, or local funding to support a new project or leverage additional funds for a Title 23 funded project.

re OST review and approval
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review

nto law by President Obama on February 17, 2009

ort to jump-start our economy, create or save 

 down payment on addressing long-neglected 

ountry to thrive in the 21st century. The Recovery 

sponse to a crisis unlike any since the Great 

measures to modernize our nation’s infrastructure, 

ence, expand educational opportunities, preserve 

ealth care, provide tax relief, and protect those in 

n included $27 billion in highway funds for states and 

 critical repairs to our nation’s crumbling roads and 

ed $550 million directly for FLH projects.

funds be obligated by September 30, 2010. It also 

given to projects that can be completed within two 

rojects that are in Economically Distressed Areas 

ograms that are distributed by statutory formula, 

tary to redistribute funds within the program to 

y September 30, 2010.

slation in 2009, we worked with our partners to finalize 

of projects. The effort continued into 2010 and the 

hat all funds could be obligated before September 30. 

 the Statewide Transportation Improvement

o deliver 100% of the additional RR funds and about 

nds. The BIA and Tribes took the lead delivering 

al IRR funds. At the end of FY 2010, the status of 

m was: 

ry Act funding (99.95%) was obligated by the 

Approximately $25.4 million of the IRR funds were 

es, which ensured substantial obligation of the 

gram.

Just as important as getting the funds obligated, we expended (paid out to contractors) 53% of the funds. This number is somewhat inflated, since funds transferred to Tribes are expended almost immediately after the agreement is signed. Not including these tribal agreements, our expenditure rate was closer to 40%. So not only did we get contracts awarded, we got them well underway — the driving force for creating jobs.We also delivered Recovery Act projects for funding directly authorized to our partners. The Recovery Act funds administered by our partners are referred to as “Title 16 funds.” The funds were transferred under streamlined procedures using interagency agreements and reimbursable authority. We awarded more than $110 million in construction contracts for the NPS, BLM, FWS, BOR, and USFS. The majority of the Title 16 Recovery Act projects were BLM projects and NPS pavement preservation projects.Recovery Act funds require an array of reporting requirements to assure Congress and the public that the funds will be managed well and that all data will be transparent and available to all. These stringent reporting requirements affect Federal agencies, State DOTs, Tribes, and contractors. Additional FTE and GOE funds were distributed within FHWA to ensure the funds are spent according to all applicable laws, regulations, and policies. FLH received two FTE that were used to fill IRR program positions, in Vancouver, Washington and in Headquarters, where the overall reporting effort was rolled up and compiled.FY 2011 will bring additional challenges, as we work with our partners to rebuild our long-range programs that were largely depleted with our delivery of the Recovery Act program. The Recovery Act has proven to our stakeholders that FLH can deliver a larger program, as our number of active construction jobs will peak in the summer of 2011. FLH is up to the challenge. 

1
#"
 
4



 2 5#6


$309,720,570 $159,549,581 518$169,999,081 $92,708,009 38

$59,999,959 $34,744,798 54

10,000,000 $5,609,311 11

$549,719,610 $292,611,699 621




Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review ))

6
!

 !2
"0.*-./.

4





#%##"7/<.91 
4

/..:
*;?=;:2

%%#"7/.91 
4

/..:
*;8=/:2

2@2





uccessful program of awarded construction 

tner agencies in FY 2010. Our contract award 

umbers ever acheived by the organization and 

m as well as Recovery Act projects. Together, 

ntracts totaling $529 million, distributed among 

ational initiatives and intermodal partnerships. 

and reflect the collaborative efforts put forth by 

er year.

A/ 7<<*->/*.<- 7>-*<.A*..>

A

7?*0>.*8A>

7;*8.>*0//



 



1

5#6




 



1B 

&9'

7777777
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review




%1

,-..>	-./.

&9'


 
1 

The Recovery Act provided another opportunity to showcase FLH’s delivery capabilities. Over the past 2 years, FLH continued to deliver FLHP (Title 23) and “Agency” (Title 16) Recovery Act projects by sharing FLH resources and acquiring consultant design services. By using innovative contracting (Design Build), FLH successfully awarded 41 FLHP Recovery Act projects in FY 2009 and 64 projects in FY 2010. In addition, the Divisions played a key role in assisting several partner agencies receive Recovery Act funding to deliver their projects. 

om sources other than FLHP has dramatically 

2008, FLH began to focus attention on leveraging 

d our core program funds. This year 54%, or over 

ruction related obligations were non-FLHP funds as 

08 million, in FY 2007.
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review )

%1
&%1'#6
! "",-..>	-./.

%1#6


,-./. 
 2
  9%$"2 !C
( $"2"
 5( $"2

5%1

#6


1

%11

1" 
79 %11
 D
-0 %1  D
/8 %1  D
-0 %1  D
/8 %1  0% ?% 3 E % 3 % 3

4 16 $75,026,069 $150,157,644 $181,351,659 $291,824 $117,187,399 $0 135.1 89.9 0.0 0.0 39,835 37,456 4 39 13 $29,467,763 $59,131,383 $52,697,810 $0 $36,334,087 $0 34 48 4.2 8.6 0 6,332 0 22 4 $2,747,936 $10,000,000 $10,000,000 $0 $7,947,172 $0 36 0 0 0.0 0 4,901 1 3

0 3 $27,960,459 $51,231,739 $51,319,759 $0 $26,679,821 $0 0 0 5.3 0 0 2,500 0 2

5 0 $ 0 $5,537,155 $5,537,155 $0 $4,438,552 $0 .7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4 7 $33,544,201 $70,616,587 $0 $75,567,697 $0 $58,041,841 1,287.8 .2 0 0 1,453 2,352 1 1

2 6 $15,947,290 $3,428,000 $0 $18,662,714 $0 $5,261,447 22.1 10 0 0 0 47,800 0 96 14 $11,295,743 $16,084,280 $0 $17,010,615 $0 $12,125,795 64.3 16.5 0 122.5 0 2,565 0 1

0 1 $3,592,518 $4,425,000 $0 $4,360,957 $0 $456,639 .3 0 0 0 0 12,811 0 1

1 64 $199,581,980 $370,611,788 $300,906,383 $115,893,808 $192,587,030 $75,885,721 1,580 165 9.4 131.1 41,289 116,716 6 22

inistered like Title 23 or Title 16 funds.



	
	
		2010 The Year in Review




,-./.#"! ""
#"

9  ,
  
 +

ject Design Amount ($M) $2,065 $496 $935 $634

t Value ($M) $697 $278 $246 $173

153 56 66 31 

ted Value ($M) $666 $276 $217 $173

Expenditures ($M) $78 $22 $29 $27

%) 12% 8% 13% 16%

vertised (#) 150 58 55 37 

ect Designs (#) 482 182 149 151 

Awarded (#) 148 56 55 37 

Actual Contract Amount $529 $188 $208 $133

tracts (#) 305 123 115 67

tract Amount ($M) $1,663 $472 $779 $412

ompleted (#) 98 30 27 41 

t Amount ($M) $348 $64 $161 $122

ayments ($M) $600 $189 $279 $133

g Expenditures ($M) $54 $12 $28 $14

ineering Administration (%) 9% 6% 10% 11%
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review )




,-./.#6
! ""
#"


 1


 
#6
 

 
#6

"2
,-./.

 
#2 
#"! "" 9%$"2 !C 
( $"2"
 3 "( $"2



5







79F

" 


2 "

5 79F " 
 0% ?% 3 E % 3 % 3

1.8 129.0 $706.4 28.0 $82.6 46.9 28.8 0.8 0 22,377.0 27,132.5 3.0 3.0 2.3 50.0 $324.8 17.0 $110.0 45.1 33.3 0 17.5 3,440.0 37,562.0 3.0 6.0 1.5 3.0 $16.8 1.0 $0.4 0.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.1 25.0 $36.3 13.0 $12.2 8.4 0 0.6 52.3 0 3,318.0 1.0 2.0 5.9 0 $0 0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01.1 33.0 $71.2 27.0 $18.8 5.2 21.6 1.0 1.5 720.0 2,576.0 1.0 2.0 0.5 65.0 $507.8 12.0 $124.0 51.2 1.0 1.0 51.5 0 20,596.0 0 2.0 5.1 305 $1,663.3 98 $348.0 157.4 84.7 3.4 122.8 26,537 91,185 8.0 15.0
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review

	

are focused on fulfilling both our Vision and 

d on our strategic alignment with the four FHWA 

hip; Program Delivery; System Performance; and 

H has identified key initiatives and measures of 

e various levels of the organization (Headquarters 

ation they serve to support the overall delivery of 

 carefully utilized to track results, to monitor our 

ways in which to strengthen the overall effectiveness 

se initiatives include:

 (II): FLH concentrated on 6 specific improvement 

on & Climate Change, National Bridge Inventory 

versight, Indian Reservation Roads Program, 

rge Elimination System (NPDES) Compliance and 

mprovement initiatives increase the efficiency and 

am and project delivery and have a positive impact 

and strategic goals.

ives (OP): FLH continues to concentrate on

ds Obligated, Funds-On-The-Ground, and 

e charts pgs. 25-26) as indicators of business 

ss.

nitiatives (PE): FLH must carefully monitor and 

ovation, Safety, Infrastructure, Environment, and 

n the Nation’s infrastructure.

2

g and advocating solutions to national 

FY 2010 FLH has identified 4 strategies and 

ories of Transportation and Climate Change, 

mate Change (II): Work with our partners in 

e associated with transportation in selected parks, 

 public lands.

with the FLMAs the FLH is addressing climate 

 Transportation Plans (LRTPs) in selected parks, 

 public lands. The FLH Planning Team coordinated 

updates to General Management Plans (NPS) and 

tion Plans (USFWS). The Team also utilized 

a for analysis and prioritization of investments 

ange. In FY 2010, there was increased emphasis 

nd national strategies to reduce greenhouse gas 

 strategies included alternative transportation, 

and multimodal transportation in parks and refuges 

vel.

Innovation (PE): Implementing innovative solutions to transportation challenges in key areas. Results: For many years, FLH has been a proven leader in implementing innovative solutions to the many challenges transportation officials face in key areas. In FY 2010, we continued to seek opportunities to leverage the FLHP program within surrounding communities and States through development of LRTPs, and emphasized the need for State and Regional integrated plans. FLH also expanded its outreach to partners by establishing a multi-agency team tasked to identify and promote more sustainable practices in project delivery. We also worked closely with our partners and other FHWA units to advance Research and Technology (R&T) initiatives.The following measures are indicators of our innovation strategy.

Funding Measure: Leverage our program by increasing the percent of annual awards comprised of non-FLHP funds. Results: (See “Construction Award Fund Leveraging” chart, pg. 13) for analysis and trends. FLH project funding derived from sources other than FLHP, has been growing over the years. The amount of leveraged funds has doubled in the last 3 years and leveraged funds for this year’s program accounted for 51.8% of the total program, at a dollar value of $360 million, significantly higher than the FLH target of 35%.Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) Measure: Improve CSS SelfAssessment Score.Results: FLH emphasized CSS training in FY 2010. CSS training courses were presented in the Divisions and CSS principles were emphasized in other related training sessions. Additionally, the FLH website was assessed for opportunities to strengthen the visibility of FLH’s commitment to CSS. Proposed improvements have been showcased in a beta website that includes video clips, case studies and links to CSSrelated projects that are delivered through the Technology Deployment Program (Greenroads, Roadside Revegetation Guide, and the Context Sensitive Road Surfacing Selection Guide). FLH’s self assessment score for FY 2010 achieved the target of 4.4.Technology Measure: Measures effectiveness of FLH Technology (TD) Program by increasing number of technologies deployed; ensuring that technology deployment products have wide-reaching applicability and results are publicized and shared among FHWA, FLMAs and State DOTs.Results: FLH successfully competed with other FHWA program offices for FY 2010 R&T Strategic Initiatives funding. Two projects were selected in the areas of Tribal Safety ($450 thousand) and Visualizing FLMA Systems Data ($220 thousand). These projects will be advanced 
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review )



sult for our technology measure is 100%, 

. 

ram is responsible for deploying, promoting,

g, and implementing new and improved 

This program is carried out in 3 ways: 

echnology transfer; and technical assistance.

 million in this important mission area during 

 technology development and deployment 

he Coordinated Technology Implementation 

IP is a cooperative technology deployment 

ween FLH and FLMAs to provide a forum for 

umenting and transferring technology to the 

y. In partnership with the FLMAs, the program 

utions from the IRR, FH, and RR Programs. 

was allocated through a theme based method, 

focused approach for making investments in the 

ployment team also distributes FLH technology

rticles to the transportation community through 

ce Program (TTAP) and Local Tribal Assistance 

and through FLH partners. FLH completed 9 

rojects and published the following 8 technical 

Nails Pullout Test Program; Hollow Bar Soil 

n Recommendations; Retaining Wall Inventory 

nt Program (WIP); SNAP (Soil Nail Wall 

rt Assessment and Decision-Making Procedures 

ffic Monitoring: A Guidebook; and Traffic 

al Areas.

oyment Teams continue to provide technical 

LMAs, State DOTs, and local transportation agen

 of the technology team served on Transportation 

iversity Transportation Center advisory groups, 

ertise to local TTAP and LTAP centers.

se additional accomplishments that represent 

ut FY 2010, CFL was identified as having 

hrough several internal and external reviews, 

wards/recognitions. Reviews conducted by 

 Review Team, FLH’s Financial Management 

Organizational Risk Review Team, and a Peer 

American Society of Civil Engineers praised the 

nt matrix structure and its capabilities to deliver 

ving well defined roles and responsibilities; 

an International Organization for Standardization/International Electrotechnical Commission (ISO/IEC) accredited laboratory (one of only 9 in the country); the contractor option to lease field laboratories, a construction modification process (noting pre-negotiation memorandum); a Career Development Program; and excellent Quality Control/Quality Assurance (QC/QA) process. Additionally, during FY 2010, CFL earned the 2010 Administrator’s Excellence in Teamwork Award presented to the Hoover Dam Bypass Team.CFL also received an Honorable Mention recognition in the “Rural Highway” category as part of the FHWA Excellence in Highway Design Award for the SR-200/Saddle Road (Hawaii) project, while the multidisciplinary “FH Program Transportation Planning Team” won the “Collaboration” category under FHWA’s Transportation Planning Discipline Recognition Program for its advancement of systems-level long-range transportation planning for the FH Program.Long Range Transportation Planning: With WFL planning project management and the support of CFL and EFL planners, USFWS completed the first long range transportation plan at the regional level for the Department of Interior and is embarking on a national level plan. At the regional level, these plans describe the needs and priorities of the agency, how projects are selected, and identify potential partnering and funding resources available to support a viable, multi-state transportation system. At the national level, this plan will describe the conditions of the USFWS transportation system, what is needed to maintain or improve that system and provide policy level guidance.

Saddle Road, Hawaii
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review

	

tive approach, these planning documents recognize 

e visitor experience, natural and cultural resource 

system preservation, safety, mobility, and climate 

s. Having completed the USDA, Oregon FH Long 

Plan, WFL has also embarked on facilitating a long 

plan development for the Armed Forces, DAR 

ngoing efforts with the NPS and BLM in Alaska.

 Clearance Project: On September 9, 2010 the 

n Railroad, and the states of Virginia, West Virginia, 

elebrated completion of this project when the first 

ht train passed through the Heartland Corridor. 

on the $200 million project of National and 

 in October 2007 and was completed in September 

 increasing vertical clearances in 28 tunnels and 

d obstructions by increasing tunnel clearances 

overhead obstructions in western Virginia, West 

nd Ohio. The project has enabled double-stacked 

me and domestic containers to be transported by rail 

Virginia and Columbus, OH (1,200 miles). Through 

iles of tunnel were modified using 30,000 tons of 

000 tons of grout behind walls, and 110 miles of 

ect benefits the public by: generating economic 

trucks off congested highways, and reducing fuel 

enhouse gas emissions.

E-G!
"#"The System Performance goal is defined as providing safe, reliable, effective, and sustainable mobility for all users on our Nation’s highways. FLH has identified 7 strategies and measures under the categories of Compliance with the National Bridge Inspection Inventory System, Safety, and Infrastructure.Compliance with the National Bridge Inventory System (NBIS) (II):FLH will coordinate with federal owners of public bridges to assess their inspection efforts and the quality and accuracy of data required for submission through FLH to the NBIS database.

Bridge Inspection: FLH continued to work with 19 federal owners of public bridges to assess their inspection efforts and the quality and accuracy of data required for submission. A number of inspection activities for FLMAs were completed:

NPS: evaluated the Trail Bridge System to define the scope of effort to provide inspection services for those bridges; and identified 7 NPS bridges that will require scour analyses. FS Region: provided support for under bridge inspection for 7 bridges. BIA: provided 3 load permit reviews at their request.Air Force: evaluated load rating information for structures 10 feet and longer along missile transport routes in Montana, North Dakota, Nebraska, Colorado, and Wyoming.

Bridge Management: In working with the federal agencies, the Bridge Team was successful in forming stronger relationships with bridge coordinators to assist them with submitting bridge inspection data, and to better utilize FLHs bridge management services. This resulted in better coordination and also helped to advance the efforts of one Federal agency to submit data and achieve compliance with NBIS. These outreach efforts will continue in FY 2011. The Bridge Team also had an opportunity to provide technical assistance to NPS on their bridge management program. These efforts will greatly assist NPS inaddressing the need for bridge rehabilitation and maintenance for longterm objectives. Bridge Design: The Bridge Team completed the following: 1) assisted with the acquisition of design-build services for the construction of remaining bridges on the Foothills Parkway; 2) 24 projects including 2 Design-Build projects for which the Team assisted with the development of the RFQ and RFP; and 3) provided support for bridge-related issues on several major projects (Fairfax County Parkway and Fort Belvoir).

d train passing through the Heartland Corridor, Virginia
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review )	



nd fatal crashes. The FLH Safety Team will 1) 

recommendations; 2) Support the NPS rollout 

eport and the joint 5-year strategic plan that 

ons; 3) initiate the process of inputting 2005 and 

tional database; 4) continue statewide Tribal 

al tribal safety summit in conjunction with the 

n Conference; and 6) conduct two roadside 

tersections accessing refuges. 

ned for the NPS Northeast Region, including 

with the most crashes to review crash analyses 

 May, the Safety Team presented the National 

d NPS Leadership, which identified a set of 

ng safety in parks. Implementation of the 

n FY 2011. Working with the NPS, the Safety 

eement to move forward with a Safety program. 

ties to: 1) correct crash data and allow for 

nal Capital Region; 2) develop crash analysis 

3) develop a Statement of Work to conduct a 

ammoth Cave National Park. The agreement 

uidelines for other parks to follow when 

nt RSAs.

d safety countermeasures, which included 

estimate safety on several projects under design.

ay Counts Accelerating and Innovation 

ative, FLH promoted proven safety 

ating the use of Safety Edge paving techniques 

gn.

Team included a RSA at Suitland Parkway (NPS) 

). In addition, a contract was initiated for RSAs 

ent (NPS) and Cow Creek (BLM).

mit was held in Arizona, in November, in 

 Tribal Transportation Conference. 

ty Summit took place in Oklahoma in April. 

completed.

Infrastructure (PE): Maintain and improve condition of transportation infrastructure serving federal and tribal lands by 1) delivering the FLHP program, unobligated levels of Recovery Act funds, and partner Recovery Act funds as appropriate using its existing delivery structure; and 2) implementing Risk Plans for the Recovery Act.Results: FLH’s project delivery effort in FY 2010 resulted in the construction improvement of 1,300 lane miles of road, 150 lane miles more than our anticipated target of 1,150. FLH awarded contracts to construct and improve 56 bridges on federal and tribal lands nationwide, 19 more than originally targeted for the year.Two programs/projects representing FLH’s commitment to system performance are highlighted as follows:

Prince of Wales Island Project: The Organized Village of Kasaan in cooperation with the Alaska Department of Transportation State Scenic Byways Program and other stakeholders successfully nominated the Prince of Wales Island Road System (260 miles) and received designation as a State Scenic Byways on May 28, 2010. The FH Program began improving roads on Prince of Wales Island around 1978. Since that time approximately $139 million in FH funding has been spent for improvements on 88 miles of roads on the island. Most improvements were upgrading the geometry, drainage, and surfacing of rough or primitive arterial island roads to a safe standard appropriate for passenger cars. All but a couple of the construction contracts have been developed and administered by the WFL. The FH funding amount above includes preliminary engineering and construction contract 

Road Safety Audit team comparing crash data to field conditions, Navajo Nation Road Safety A duit team comparing crash d taa to fi led condi itons

Navajo

N taion
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review

	

 There are currently just over 300 miles of formally 

ds on the island. Routes that have been partly or 

cted by the FH program include: Big Salt Road; 

rne Bay Road; Sandy Beach Road, North Prince of 

fman Cove Road. 

ation and Preservation Program: CFL had a 

oving, rehabilitating, and preserving roads by 

ing 46 pavement rehabilitation and preservation 

d over $325 million. These projects improved and 

miles of roadway, and included the placement of 

asphalt mix and 10,800,000 square yards of surface 

2010 project delivery is unprecedented and was 

ultiple sources of funding including the Recovery 

and FLHP program. The nearest comparable 

Division was in 1995 when 470,000 tons of asphalt 

Y 2010, not only did CFL exceed this tonnage by 

ivered a $29 million preservation program.

System: Develop pavement preservation system for 

oad system.

ent condition indices for the Road Inventory 

were developed that will better support project 

nt preservation projects as well as pavement 

ment management pilot efforts with the NPS 

egions; and the USFWS Regions 2 and 6. Methods 

g the Highway Pavement Management Application 

l for project programming and selection were 

 pilot efforts. The Team also completed a 

 preservation program appraisal which involved 

information gathering and interviews with over 30 FLH staff and 20 client-agency staff. A final report of the findings and recommendations was completed in September. The report will be a catalyst for future enhancements to FLH’s pavement preservation efforts.RIP: In FY 2010 RIP completed 100% of the Automated Road Analyzer (ARAN) data collection and 100% of the data analysis for the NPS Cycle 4 Parks; 98% of all Cycle 4 reports were completed and delivered. RIP also worked with the NPS (and their contractors) to test and upgrade their alignment tool and to complete a major alignment effort with Facility Management Systems Software (FMSS) using the NPS AlignmentPortal Tool. NPS RIP Cycle 5: RIP acquired a new data collection vehicle in FY 2009. At the beginning of FY 2010, RIP employees began training on the new vehicle and collected data on 2 large parks, 9 small parks, and 2 Long Term Pavement Preservation sites as part of the NPS Cycle 5 Pilot. Since that time, FLH has worked closely with the Data Analysis Contractor and HPMA to get a solid start on Cycle 5. There are many changes from Cycle 4. The new collection vehicle has several upgrades such as a laser rut measurement and laser line scan cameras, the data that is collected and processed differs between large and small parks using the newer geodatabase design for storing data; and working closely with HPMA to recommend (for approval by the NPS) a new indices formula. There are currently 307 parks in the NPS Cycle 5 Schedule. The NPS Cycle 5 status as of the end of FY 2010 was: 

Island, Alaska 

I l d Al k

Conzelman Road, San Francisco, California
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review )



Conference Meetings were completed; 11% of 

 trips were completed; and 10% of the Cycle 5 

n trips were completed.

dition Assessment Reports track the condition 

ur major FLH programs: IRR, PRP, FH and 

Rating (PCR) is determined for the roads in 

0-85, Fair = 84-61 and Poor = 60-0). A weighted 

 for each program. Data collection for all 

either automated collection vehicles or a visual 

blished collection procedures and practices.

ted by FLH for the PRP program, in addition, 

gency condition data submitted to the Federal 

hnology, for the bridges in the remaining FLH 

are reported with two types of deficiency: 

tionally obsolete, which are added together 

uctural deficiency is determined primarily by 

n (NBI) structural condition codes that assess 

substructures, culvert and retaining walls, 

rway adequacy. Functional obsolescence is 

ional aspects such as bridge geometry and 

clearances. Any bridge classified as structurally deficient is excluded from the functionally obsolete category.For the IRR Program the BIA/DOT Area offices and Indian tribal 

governments collect the data annually. Since there is some subjective interpretation of road conditions, there may be consistency issues among the area offices and tribes.There are nationally accepted methods (assigning values of 0-5) used to indicate the road condition that corresponds to a range of conditions from “Poor” to “Good”. 

Road Condition Assessments: In FY 2010 the BIA 26,000 mile road network underwent selective road condition assessments performed by the Tribe or Contractor personnel. The additional condition data resulted in an Average PCR of 66, as compared to an Average PCR of 65 for the roads assessed in FY09. The percentage of roads in the “Good” category increased (13% to 18%) and the percentage in the poor category decreased (47% to 46%).Bridge Condition Assessments: The existing bridges were inspected, rated and reported in the National Bridge Inspection database by the States’ Bridge Inspection Program (BIP). Trend data shows over the last 5 years bridge conditions exhibit mild fluctuations with no significant changes. From 2006 to 2010, the percent of bridges which are not structurally deficient has risen from 75.5% to 78.1%. During that same time period the percentage of bridges that were deficient or obsolete decreased from 24.5% to 21.9%.

For the PRP Program data is collected by FLH over a 3 to 4 year cycle. Using the automatic road analyzer vehicle, data is collected for cracking, rutting, roughness, geometrics, and global positioning information. This data is processed thru index formulas and used to create a PCR value for pavedroad assets.A more realistic and reliable NPS road network condition is reportable thru the utilization of pavement management system (PMS) Software. PMS Software uses pavement performance modeling (a condition deterioration trend curve) for each pavement segment so that current pavement condition is projected. This accounts for network asset deterioration since a previous RIP inspection cycle, as well as improvements thru preservation and rehabilitation efforts. This makes it possible to estimate an accurate snapshot of the pavement condition at any given point in time. Development of the PCR value thru performance modeling is a more rational and dependable method of determining pavement conditions reported each year.

Road Condition Assessments: FLH continued updating the RIP Program and PMS database for the PRP. The data was analyzed in the PMS via the pavement performance modeling approach and shows there 

“PathRunner” 

“P hR ”
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review

	

ward trend of PCR values from 2008 to 2010. In 

en a significant increase in the percentage of roads 

m 48% to 61%. Both the Good and Fair categories 

s to the Poor condition rating.

sessments: The existing bridges were inspected and 

he NPS BIP. Compared to States and other Federal 

s a low percentage of structurally deficient bridges 

e of functionally obsolete bridges; the latter is 

NPS roadway standards and emphasis on historical 

006 to 2010, the percentage of bridges that are not 

has increased from 75.7% to 76.1%. During this 

e percentage of bridges that are deficient or obsolete 

4.3% to 23.9%.

Western and Central U.S., data is primarily 

nty governments. The RIP Program performs an 

sive, and objective road inventory condition survey 

st Highways and paved Forest Service Roads in 

 of Puerto Rico of the Eastern Region (R9) and 

he U.S. Forest Service. The PCR is a combination 

 or Surface Condition Rating (SCR) and the 

IRI) providing a weighted value for each (60/40, 

ed to present a normalized 1-100 scale where the 

better overall pavement condition.

essments: FLH continued updating the RIP for 

e roads assessed in FY 2010 were in the states 

th Dakota, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, 

da, California and Hawaii. The Average PCR for 

wer than the PCR determined in FY 09 for roads 

rn states of Alaska, Oregon, Washington, Idaho and 

ntage of roads rated “Good” fell from 57% to 36% 

or” decreased from 11% to 13%. Those rated “Fair” 

o 51%.

sessments: The existing bridges were inspected, 

 the NBI database by the States’ BIP. Trend data 

st 5 years FH bridge conditions exhibit very mild 

ignificant changes. From 2006 to 2010, the 

 that are not structurally deficient has increased 

During this same time period, the percentage of 

ent or obsolete has decreased from 22.7% to 22.6%.

manually collected by FLH and based on a 

SL) system for distress identification. Therefore, 

ctive. The PCR is a combination of the collected 

distresses normalized to a 1-100 scale, where the higher the value the better the overall condition.

Road Condition Assessments: From 2006 to 2010, the Average PCR for the USFWS system increased from 73 to 81. The percentage of roads rated “Good” increased from 38.7% to 64.5% while those rated “Poor” fell from 29.7% to 11.8%. Those rated “Fair” decreased from 31.6% to 23.7%.Bridge Condition Assessments: Trend data show that over the last five years RRP highway bridge conditions reflect slight fluctuations. From 2006 to 2010, the percentage of bridges that are not structurally deficient has increased from 65.1% to 70.6%. During this same time period, the percentage of bridges that are deficient or obsolete has decreased from 34.9% to 29.4%.

E0G#"The Program Delivery goal is defined as the effective and consistent delivery of the FLH Programs through successful partnerships, value-added stewardship, and risk-based oversight. FLH has identified 14 strategies and measures under the categories of Stewardship and Oversight/Enhance Partnerships, IRR Program, NPDES Compliance, Environment, Planning, and Program Delivery to meet this goal in FY 2010.Stewardship and Oversight (S&O)/Enhance Partnerships (II): The annual objectives for this goal area included: 1) Sign S&O Agreements with NPS;2) Draft Report of Findings and Action Plan stemming from national/regional 

Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona G d C N ti l P k A i
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review 



a minimum of 10 project reviews on Recovery 

1 program review supporting the FH Program.

ources were directed first and foremost 

use of core program and Recovery Act 

y Act reviews were conducted at each FLH 

view Teams (NRTs) from FHWA’s Program 

eam. These reviews focused on the Plans, 

(PS&E), contract administration and QC/QA 

 provided an independent perspective on FLH’s 

 a NRT conducted a series of reviews on tribal 

eas as above. FLH far exceeded its goal to 

0 Recovery Act funded projects. FLH was in a 

 to deliver many of the Recovery Act projects 

erefore, FLH provided both programmatic and 

umber of projects that approached the agency’s 

T reviews were conducted in the last month 

e “Draft Report of Findings” is targeted for 

1. The Program fell short on meeting its goals 

ment with the NPS and conducting a review 

was made in addressing regional concerns 

 of focused meetings on S&O and delivery. 

in gathering feedback on policy and program 

hrough a series of one-on-one leadership 

 

rogram has made strides under S&O but it 

 that, if we are to have meaningful agreements 

 S&O actions that will improve delivery, the 

S&O Policy and Guidance document to ensure 

d buy-in to their role in supporting S&O. The 

a primary SIP initiative in FY 2011. Once 

much better position to finish S&O agreement 

BIA and implement meaningful S&O activities 

Program continued to evolve as more tribes 

eements directly with FHWA. Funds from the 

reased the overall funding threshold from 

2009-2010, the program received an additional 

funds. This high-risk program required special 

e program and provide the necessary oversight 

very Act funds were effectively used for eligible 

eorganized structure was formally approved and 

d to work with an expanding number of Tribes 

entering formal agreements with FHWA. In FY 2010, there were a total of 78 FHWA tribes, with more agreements expected in FY 2011. Over the summer, the IRR Team worked closely with the FHWAs Human Resources office to fill much needed vacancies to accommodate the increased workload as a result of these agreements. It was also an extremely busy year because of the influx of additional funding for the IRR Program from the Recovery Act. Close to 100% of Recovery Act funding was obligated in FY 2010, this was accomplished with close coordination with the BIA and the Tribes. This was a significant achievement for the IRR Program and was made possible by focused implementation of Recovery Act Mitigation Strategies.In addition, the IRR Team led the program reviews of the BIA Pacific and Southwest Regions. A report of the findings of the review is expected to be completed in FY 2011. The Team met face to face with each FHWA Tribe as well as every BIA Region to better understand the program and provide technical assistance and support to the Tribes. NPDES Compliance (II): Implement approved FLH-wide recommendations 

from the FLH NPDES Process Review Final Report by committing resources to training development and updating project delivery guidance.Results: A draft training curriculum to improve NPDES compliance was distributed for review and comment. A review of the PDDM and Construction Manual was also initiated to better align NPDES requirements. FLH expects to complete both efforts by January 31, 2011.

Mission Ridge, Washington
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review

	

ove the quality and streamline the delivery of the 

g the median time for Environmental Impact (EIS) 

sment (EA) document delivery, and improving the 

al Collaboration Survey. 

No Significant Impact (FONSI) and one Record of 

ne FONSI delayed project delivery. One hundred 

ions were signed which accounted for 92% of all 

-65, CFL-18, and EFL-32). FLH achieved our target 

EIS and EAs within the median time. Sixty-nine 

m our partner, resource, regulatory and permitting 

projects, reflecting a score of 85.2%, slightly above 

decision-making through development of Long

ns (LRTP) 

g Team made significant progress at the National/

 following projects were completed: Alaska Multi

mate Change Adaptation project; and NPS NER. 

ning Team completed the following: Yosemite NP 

hita Mountains NWR Alternative Transportation 

National Park/Estes Park Transportation Study; and 

National Forest Transportation Study.

ther completed or moving toward completion. 

ted for the Forest Service in Oregon, California, 

Nevada, Colorado, Utah, Georgia, Virginia, and Minnesota, and 8 are in progress: Washington, Idaho, Montana, Alaska, New Mexico, Arizona, South Dakota, and Wyoming. Progress on FH LRTPs in Region 8 and 9 has been delayed pending the new Federal transportation authorization bill. For the NPS, 4 plans are in process: National Capital Region, Northeast Region, Alaska Region, and Intermountain Region. For the USFWS, 5 plans are in progress: National Capital Region, Pacific Region, Alaska Region, Midwest Region, and Mountain-Prairie Region. The BLM has 2 plans in process: National and Alaska Regions.Program Delivery: The FLH overall program measures reflect FLHs ongoing efforts to improve customer satisfaction and delivery of projects.Customer Satisfaction (OP): Results of three surveys (Program Administration, Project Development and Completed Project) focus on the delivery of the FLH Program.Results: The FLH Program conducts these surveys to continually improve on the products and services we provide to our customers as well as continually improve as an organization in meeting FHWA strategic goals. In FY 2010, FLH exceeded the 85% target for the Project Development and Completed Project Surveys. For all 3 surveys combined, our score meets our target of 85%. Percent of Funds Obligated (OP): Cumulative obligation rates for coreFLHP Programs.Results: Annual data for funds obligations at the end of the fiscal year includes the four major FLH programs: PLH, PRP, RRP and RR. The percent of funds obligated is a reflection of the efficiency of using or spending these funds. In FY 2010, PLHD funding and allocations required OST review and approval. Corporately, FLH obligated 84.1% of FLHP funds available. Our division obligated 91.6% of available funds.


 
"!

! !


"2
!

ction, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review 



ound” (OP): Construction funds obligated as a 

ions.

obligate a minimum of 75% of our funds for 

and a maximum of 25% of our funds for the 

eliver our projects. By managing these costs, 

unds that are spent “on the ground”. The trend 

a decrease in our percentage of funds on the 

his decrease is most likely because of delivery 

s that were financed with FLHP funds while the 

nanced with Recovery Act funds. 

 full corporate risk assessment internally.

2011 corporate risk assessment using a 

he Stewardship & Oversight Coordinator. The 

risk assessment results were packaged with the FIRE risk assessment results and presented to leadership in March 2010. After validation by leadership, three high risk corporate areas were identified for attention in the FY 2011 FLH SIP, unit action plans, or individual performance plans. They were: 

Recovery Act delivery; the IRR program; and NBIS compliance by federal agencies. The corporate risk assessment data was provided to the divisions to assist them with their own division-specific risk assessment and their Recovery Act risk assessments. It was also used to complete the Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA) Unit Risk Profile sent to FHWA.Financial Oversight: Identify an FTE in the FHWA Office of the Chief Financial (CFO) Office dedicated to FLH financial management activities and liaison with the Federal Land Management Agencies’ contacts. Include the individual in FLH activities as appropriate; Finalize/update “all” outstanding financial management policies and launch a new FLH website that contains all updated policies and financial technical discipline information from FHWA; If needed, institutionalize local processes where financial management activities are executed by staff possessing the right skill sets & competencies and the appropriate checks and balances exist between project delivery and financial functions; Conduct FIRE Reviews and issue FMFIA certifications in June and September; Issue Project Reconciliation policy and procedures; and continue to track progress of DELPHI Transformation effort and continue to dedicate FLH resources on teams charged to define requirements of the next generation accounting system.Results: The Finance Team continued to build upon the recommendations identified during the Financial Review conducted in FY 2009. The Team tracked the progress of the DELPHI Transformation effort and dedicated FLH resources on teams charged to define requirements of the next generation accounting system. Team members provided critical policy and program issues related to FLH program delivery requirements to ensure that its’ concerns were considered during the discussions and as final decisions on a system were made. The Team also updated financial policies for Project and Financial Module Reconciliation, and Managing Reimbursable Authority. The changes were implemented throughout the FLH organization and were instrumental in achieving a successful close out of FY 2010. A financial risk assessment was also completed using the FLH corporate tool and was presented last April. This assessment also provided supporting documentation that was used during an FIRE Financial Management Process review of inactive obligations, inactive projects and project closeouts.An audit was conducted by the firm, Clifton Gunderson, at EFL on July 29, 2010, one of three FHWA divisions audited in FY 2010. The emphasis was on financial operations and business processes. EFL staff provided a presentation to give the auditors a better understanding of FLH and how we compare to Federal-aid Divisions. The auditors requested numerous documents, including the presentation, risk assessment, reimbursable process, organization chart, FLH policy memorandum regarding the point 

# 


 B

E #6



	
	
		2010 The Year in Review

obligations spreadsheet from the FIRE Standard 

analysis of inactive obligations from 2007 through 

 for specific inactive obligations. Staff conducted 

ecific projects, and provided over 160 pages of 

The auditors were impressed with the Quality 

n ISO 9001 compliant system, which defines our 

trated risk assessment process and FIRE risk 

ted into daily business. Other areas of interest 

ction program, procurement process, the point 

ding commitment of funds, construction closeout 

ment system, and the project reconciliation process. 

firm contacted the FHWA CFO indicating their 

ogress with closing inactive obligations and with 

gation balance from over $71 million to $8.7 million 

active obligations are still considered a top risk that 

tegy to address in FY 2011.

e Asset Management (AM) Team was tasked with 

o AM that is consistent across all the FLH Division 

ount the various stages of understanding and 

s within the FLMAs, and identifies the incremental 

data and management systems are used to make 

and resource allocation decisions, while providing 

ecisions.

HWA/NPS Transportation AM Team developed 

ridge Management, Safety Management, 

Transportation Data Integration Program, and Pavement Management Systems. A Project Agreement was also designed for the Forest Service “Land Between the Lakes” Safety Management Pilot Project.As part of the agreement with Safety Management, crash analysis best practices and crash data entry options were reviewed. The Team also completed a modification to the Statement of Work (SOW) to continue work on the Data Integration Task Order. The agreement with the Pavement Management System resulted in delivery of regional PMS analyses, development of a life cycle cost analysis tool, and an investigation of RIP indices.A Program Management tracking tool incorporating all Management System activities into Microsoft Project was also developed: to define roles, responsibilities, and communication protocols between MS; to complete and summarize the risk assessment results for all MS; to develop and apply a task prioritization methodology based on a selected group of factors; and to generate resources and budget scenarios to compliment the risk assessment and prioritization methodology for selecting FY 2011 tasks.The Team also developed a SOW for a Region 2 USFWS Pilot Project for Project Prioritization to look at using “Stantec” pavement management software to prioritize the unpaved roads, as well as the paved roads in the Region. The results of this pilot project will determine if the software can be used in other USFWS regions and on Forest Service unpaved roads.Geographic Information System (GIS): The GIS Team focused on three 

activities this year: Developing tools to view and analyze FLMA management system information; assisting with decision-making to help manage FLMAs transportation assets; and developing new and innovative ways to streamline processes within FLH.Results: In FY 2010, the GIS Team completed several NPS-related activities. A business case was prepared for the development of a GIS website for NPS RIP data and NPS safety management system data. The Team ensured that the business case aligned with DOT, FHWA, and FLH strategic objectives, provided a cost-benefit analysis on multiple alternatives, determined life-cycle costs, and identified an implementation and reporting plan for the project. The Team also coordinated NPS activities with the Safety Management Team to develop a methodology to locate crashes using GIS tools that could be used by NPS law enforcement; to manage development of software for the NPS Washington Area Support Office to enter crash data into a database; and to provide GIS maps and Google Earth files to be used in performing safety studies for parks in the NE Region.For a USFWS project related to climate change, the GIS Team assisted the Hydraulics Team with developing methodologies to show effects of flooding and inundation by sea level rise, and provided instructions on how GIS methods are used to prepare maps for climate change and to determine flooding effects on USFWS roadways. 

	

West Virginia 

West Virginia
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review 

ed a number of activities across FLH including: 

GIS mapping reporting and web page design 

ry Act project information; assisting RIP and 

ng an extensive step-by-step, easy to use manual 

in the field; development of a website for 

ports; and deployment of the ERFO program, 

ws ERFO applicants to apply, track approval 

 of projects that will provide real time locations 

m also developed best practices for sharing 

o allow real time access to Division data for 

g, Award, and Construction System 

EBACS core team completed testing the 

e and the system security (the Design and 

mpleted prior to FY 2010). EEBACS was 

nd is now in the maintenance and support 

n begin as soon as FHWA issues an Authority 

mation systems security Certification and 

The C&A process for EEBACS, includes 

ormation Systems Security Officer (ISSO) and 

menting, developing, and updating procedures 

n Operations Manual and EEBACS User 

gan this year on the “off-line” module for 

 anticipated to have limited internet access. 

 to coordinate with FHWAs ISSO, the FLH 

f Directors (BOD), and EEBACS sub-team 

 implementation process.

Procurement: The delivery of the core program coupled with the Recovery Act was, and continues to be, front and center for the organization. Transportation improvements and job creation are not possible until the projects are advertised and awarded by our acquisition staff. Countless other acquisition actions are needed to keep projects on schedule, and services and supplies to keep our Divisions operating. In FY 2010, an unprecedented level of acquisition actions were initiated and accomplished by our acquisition professionals. The FLH BOD and the Leadership Team purposefully minimized corporate activities to support the delivery of the program and projects. Countless hours (and weekends/after hours) were worked to ensure the projects were advertised and awarded within the appropriate timelines. Our program’s successful obligation Recovery Act rates were the result of the hard work of all FLH employees. Our acquisition corps shares a significant part in that success.FLH supports the goals of the DOT’s Small and Disadvantaged Business Office whose mission is to promote successful partnerships which result in an inclusive and effective small business procurement process. The FHWA target for small business is 38% of our total procurement, we exceeded that target with a 45% accomplishment. In addition, there are 4 small business categories with performance targets. In FY 2010, FLH exceeded the targets in 3 of those areas.FP-12: FLH is currently using the Standard Specifications for Construction of Roads and Bridges on Federal Highway Projects (FP) — FP-03, published in 2003. During the past two years the FLH Specification Coordination Group (SCG) has coordinated an effort to have technical teams from Bridge, Construction, Design, Environment, Geotechnical, Hydraulics, Pavement and Materials, Procurement, and Safety review all FLH Division and FLHwide specifications and propose changes for the new FP. FHWA goals for accelerating technology and innovation deployment are being implemented with new specifications for items such as Warm Mix Asphalt and Safety Edge. The Forest Service, which also uses the FP, is participating. This is resulting in a large number of proposed specification changes that the SCG is processing with the goal of publishing an FP-12 in 2012.Discipline Management: Manage technical disciplines within FLH. Ensure alignment with FHWA disciplines and learning highway initiatives. Results: The FLH Discipline Champions are responsible for: 1) representing FLH on FHWA Discipline efforts; 2) coordinating interaction within FLH; and 3) coordinating policy issues. Many steps were taken to meet our objective of managing the technical disciplines and ensure alignment with FHWA disciplines and Learning Highway initiatives. These included monitoring accomplishments and resource needs of the Discipline Champions, financial accountability, reviewing individual goals and objectives, coordination with Every Day Counts technologies and supporting attendance at FHWA Discipline Seminars. 



nia 

nia
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review

t: In FY 2010, the Project Management Technical 

mpleted the following activities: 1) provided 

anagement-Project Control Methods and Tools 

ering Seminar in April 2010; 2) assisted in a 1-day 

ent Workshop utilizing input from representatives 

line to develop a USFWS project risk register; 

140 possible risks on USFWS projects into a 

project risk register template; 4) coordinated 

r FLH Project Management Handbook so new 

answers to common questions that are asked 

and manage projects; 5) promoted sharing best 

ng a detailed report documenting each Division’s 

hen sharing this report with Division leadership; 

g competencies for the FHWA Construction and 

Discipline; 7) worked with the FHWA Innovative 

fice to train 15 FLH employees under the FHWA 

Certification Program and obtain Associate Project 

ates; and 8) for the second year administered the 

y course to educate senior college students on the 

highway projects. The course was held during the 

ge Mason University.

draulics Team developed and delivered new FHWA 

gineering guidance document, HEC 26, “Culvert 

rganism Passage.” An associated computer 

developed to facilitate implementation and use of 

m Passage (AOP) design procedure. The spreadsheet 

e all iterative computations required by the 

a “bridge” between the procedure and the software 

 culvert hydraulics (i.e., HY8 or HEC-RAS softwares). 

 also developed and delivered new Culvert 

sion-Making guidance for use during project 

with a new Culvert Assessment policy, which was 

Project Development and Design Manual (PDDM) 

revisions were drafted for existing roadway drainage 

gn policy. 

ded the development of a suite of hydraulic 

rs for conducting a variety of hydraulic analyses 

 and updates to various sections of the Standard 

 associated standard drawings, and test methods 

As part of its ongoing discipline efforts, the 

delivered Hydraulic Engineering sessions during 

e Seminar last May and the National Hydraulic 

nce in August. 

Geotechnical: FLH geotechnical engineers completed discipline improvement initiatives such as: 1) completed the final phase of the FP-12 updates; 2) delivered Discipline Support (DSS) training and attended DSS sessions in both Dallas and Memphis; 3) delivered multiple technology development projects; 4) participated in the development and delivery of National Highway Institute (NHI) courses; and 5) assisted with Resource Center support activities such as the Columbia River Crossing (CRC) bridge type, size and location review.

FLH is especially proud of these additional accomplishments, projects, that represent FLH’s commitment to Program Delivery:

Mike O’Callaghan-Pat Tillman Memorial Bridge: The $240,000,000 Hoover Dam Bypass project (which includes 8 separate bridges, 5-miles 

of roadway, and the centerpiece (the Mike O’Callaghan-Pat Tillman Memorial Bridge)) was completed in FY 2010. Sitting 900 feet above the Colorado River adjacent to the Hoover Dam, it is the highest and longest arched concrete bridge in the Western Hemisphere. The bridge also has the tallest concrete columns of its kind. Construction was substantially complete in September 2010, and the bridge was dedicated on October 14, 2010. The project was completed on original budget without disputes or claims.

	

Seismic Study, Apache Trail Scenic Byway, Tonto National Forest, Arizona
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review 	



— Emergency Slide Repairs, Hurricane 

dway failure occurred January 18th, 2010 at 

cane Ridge Road, located within the Olympic 

Angeles, Washington. The slide resulted in the 

adway, when approximately 7,000 cubic yards 

was flushed down the steep drainage channel, 

ely 50 feet of the existing concrete culvert. 

owever the roadway was rendered impassible. 

rk requested assistance and WFL responded 

geotechnical and construction support. 

ympic National Park and WFL were able to use 

procure a local Contractor and construction 

010, scarcely 4 days after the slide occurred. 

d removal of 19,400 cubic yards of unsuitable 

ck borrow for the embankment replacement 

ch plastic coated steel culvert. Due to the 

e plan and the unseasonably good weather, the 

ted in 5 weeks, beating even the most optimistic 

 opened to the public on February 27th.

n September 11, 2010 the FHWA and FLH 

d to participate in the celebration of the 75th 

idge Parkway. Numerous Congressman, 

fficials, including our own Mr. Greg Nadeau, 

me and spoke. The event was marked with 

tural events, presentations, music, displays 

 the 9/11 World Trade Center disaster. This 

nly a celebration, but a reunion of past and 

mployees, including those who either worked 

Public Roads.

E?G
2

2
 —Corporate Capacity is defined as the ability to optimally deploy our organizational resources to meet today’s and tomorrow’s mission. FLH has identified 4 key strategies to meet this goal in FY 2010; IT Governance, Employee Satisfaction, Discipline Management, and Marketing & Graphic Design. IT Governance (II): Develop a structure in which FLH will utilize IT by integrating existing and former IT-related teams with the FHWA IT Strategic Plan.Results: While FLH has successfully delivered programs and projects for its partners and customers for many years, a critical foundational element of successful program and project delivery has been our ability to leverage IT to support and enable our business arm. In the past few years, the agency has experienced many changes including but not limited to centralization of IT services, heightened security via certification and accreditation of systems, applications and hardware; and the institution of streamlined and coordinated agency investment protocols via IT Governance Procedures/Investment Review Board. During this period, FLH has complied with Federal and agency requirements while attempting to mitigate adverse impacts to delivery and/or seek opportunities to deliver more effectively. These initiatives have required extensive resources and have left the office little time to seek proactively internal opportunities, outside standing teams e.g., EDM, to operate more consistently, effectively and efficiently across units. As a result, FLH Leadership decided to change the focus of this initiative in order to gain a better perspective of FLH’s environment and opportunities. In FY 2011, we will convene a team of outside experts to conduct an assessment of FLH’s IT processes. The recommendations made by the team will be used to formulate IT policies and corporate implementation strategies to ensure FLH continues to administer its IT functions consistently and in accordance with agency policies. Additionally, the findings will provide FLH leaders 

FHWA Deputy Administrator presents plaque to the Blue Ridge Parkway Superintendant during 75th Anniversary festivities at Cumberland Knob, North CarolinaFHWA D t Ad i i t t t l t th Bl Ridg P k S i t d t

d, Olympic National Park, Washington
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review

ntial improvements that will improve delivery and 

o related, complementary efforts involve an internal 

eness of existing FLH IT Standing Teams in addition 

novative practices with an IT component, that could 

gement (EDM): The Data Management Team 

hange and sharing is readily available to support 

ns by developing policy and standards to ensure data 

ligned, resources are being used effectively, and 

s and support IT systems are being developed.

veloped a Data Policy and submitted it to the BOD for 

rred and forwarded the document to the Leadership 

pproval. In developing the Policy, the team collected 

sion on the types of databases and applications being 

ation to the revised Data Catalog Tool. The Data 

e and track metadata about all known FLH databases 

e how the data is being used, and identify who is 

he data. The information collected and stored in the 

t all data activity conforms to the Data Management 

Policy. The Team plans to roll out the Data Policy and 

n FY 2011.

OP): The FLH overall program measure below 

orts to improve job satisfaction of FLH employees:

i-annual surveys until 2006 and will no longer 

ployee survey. The survey results shown for 2010 

nual “short” survey. The survey includes customer 

t categories: job quality, communication flow, 

onal structure, customer focus, learning and 

development, workgroup management, and work life quality. FLH achieved our new target of 70% this year with the highest satisfaction score ever achieved on this survey!Marketing & Graphic Design: Providing graphics and marketing expertise to promote FLH/FHWA programs and projects to educate the general public, partners and members of Congress through print, web, and multimedia.Results: The following activities were successfully completed in FY 2010: redesign 

of FLH Annual Report to facilitate expanded use as an internal & external tool; redesign of the Natchez Trace Parkway informational brochure documenting FLH role in construction of the famous Double Arch Bridge for use in training courses in the project local area; designed SAFETEA-LU accomplishments brochure, a tool for Congressional and citizen education on the delivery of the FLH program and use of taxpayers’ dollars; coordinated planning for the Blue Ridge Parkway 75th Anniversary event, including logistical support, designed commemorative partnership plaque, book and poster working very closely with the NPS planning team. The event was a great success that drew large crowds of retirees, dignitaries and the public solidifying the lasting relationship between EFL & NPS; facilitated general web content management and OMB policy compliance while ensuring the continuation of a coordinated web presence for FLH; collaborated with NPS to develop communication plans aimed at easing delays to the traveling public for several projects this year.FLH is pleased to report these additional accomplishments and activities that exemplify Corporate Capacity: 

Training and Development: FLH has continued its commitment to train and develop employees by attracting new, entry-level, employees through the Student Temporary Employment Program/Student Career Employment Program (SCEP/STEP) programs, details and FHWA’s Professional Development Program (PDP). Because of a well developed recruitment program we have attracted a sizeable number of young employees in both the professional and technical fields. Our SCEP program had 21 enrollees and the STEP program provided 31 employees. During FY 2010 we hired 68 new employees which increased our participation in minority and female employment.Not only did we succeed in attracting many new employees during FY 2010, we continue to train and develop our existing workforce. Through the PDP, 24 employees obtained valuable experience in our division offices. We also provided detail opportunities for 16 employees. This included in-house assignments, a Federal-aid assignment, a partner agency assignment and support to efforts in Afghanistan. We have hosted a number of NHI training courses providing opportunities for both our employees and non-FLH transportation professionals.All of these programs continue to fortify our organization as a whole by producing knowledgeable and qualified personnel.

1"2! 

	
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review )

hip Development Award —

onor those team leaders, managers and 

re nurturing and supporting the development of 

ture cadre of FHWA organizational leaders.

ablished in 1995 to honor the memories of 

he Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City 

n of the survivors. This award is granted to 

 team whose exceptional service to the public 

ation and determination exemplified by the 

s.

ward —

y Award is FLH most prestigious award, which 

s who most exemplify the characteristics and 

arol H. Jacoby throughout her career in FLH. 

been unwavering throughout his 30 years of 

ne to accept challenges and see issues through 

spected by all.

ded:

Lynda L. Moore, EFL

Peter C. Field, WFL

rd —

 with the completion of the Heartland Corridor, 

huge accolades within the transportation 

Committee (NHRC) Award —

yees of FHWA that exhibit and/or provide 

 of implementing the requirements of their 

t, her leadership abilities and her determination 

service are exemplary of the superior qualities 

Secretary’s Team Award — Recovery Act Evaluation and Data TeamGalen Balster, FLHTerry Haussler, FLHJeffrey Mann, FLHAdministrator’s Awards for Superior AchievementAron Reif, FLH Mark Meng, CFL Teresa Daniel, EFL Kevin Black, CFLRaymond Hatten, EFL Henry “Paul” Rettinger, WFLJeffrey Johnson, EFL Dennis Quarto, WFLMichael Voth, CFLLeadership Award in recognition of conducting outreach to our Nation’s wounded soldiers and creating an engaging partnership Darcel Collins, FLHAdministrator’s Award for Excellence in Teamwork — CFLHoover Dam Bypass Team for the successful delivery of the highest and largest concrete arch bridge in the Western Hemisphere.Ed Hammontree Suzanne SchmidtCraig Holsopple Ricardo SuarezBonnie Klamerus Scott WolfertPatricia Mayorga Barbara QuintanaTyler Young Dave ZanetellFHWA’s Transportation Planning Discipline Recognition Program Award for “Collaboration” — Forest Highway Program Transportation (Multi-Disciplinary) Planning Team — CFLRecognized for its advancement of systems-level long-range transportation planning for the Forest Highway Program.Susan Law Rick SimansonsElijah Henley Melissa DickardRyan TylerFHWA Every Day Counts Team AwardsTerry Haussler, FLHMargaret Lomax, FLH 
	
	
		2010 The Year in Review

n the Livability Initiative

nagement Transition Team

making Tunnel Team

hway Design Award — CFL

or an Honorable Mention recognition in the “Rural 

e SR-200/Saddle Road, Hawaii project.

ntal & Engineering Geologic Project — EFL

onmental & Engineering Geologists (AEG) & the 

ineering Companies/Metropolitan Washington 

nized a George Washington Memorial Parkway 

or its innovative rock slope stabilization design, a 

achieving the dual goals of protecting the traveling 

preserving highway aesthetics.

ce Award — WFL

ears that Western’s Senior Leadership Team (SLT) 

nt vision and utilized business focused strategic 

ize that vision. Key metrics are tracked and 

combined with other indicators of operational effectiveness, which the SLT reviews and analyzes to achieve continuous improvement.Communications between leadership and staff are accomplished through various methods to ensure alignment. The results are reflected in program and project delivery improvements, cost control, partner satisfaction, technical innovation, and workforce development.Going Greener Award — WFLThe first organizational unit of FHWA to receive this award. These efforts have evolved over the past decade to the point that environmental considerations are now an integral part of how we operate our building. Successes include, office wide recycling, and composting programs, installation of waterless urinals, energy efficient electrical and HVAC equipment and use of recycled paint. The results of these changes are tracked and show substantial progress, including decreases in utility costs and landfill waste and increases in recycled supplies.Partnership Award — EFLThe State of Virginia, Department of Rehabilitative Services (DRS) presented the Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division a Partnership Award for championing the employment and advancement of Virginians with disabilities through the contract with “Every Citizen Has Opportunities (ECHO).” Echo provides Eastern’s mailroom and central reception services and has provided great support for extensive office renovations done during 2010.

ce Award Going Greener Award
The Federal Lands Highway Program — 2010 The Year in Review