Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001 / Notices 23077

available NCPD and CBI program

funding in a given year would be

expected to be subject to extra scrutiny

to determine whether the likely

consequences would be commensurate

with that level of funding).

3. Clarity and conciseness of the grant

application in submission of the

required information, especially

regarding the work to be accomplished

and the source and amount of the non

federal share of funds.

4. State priorities and endorsement of,

or opposition to, projects by other

States, MPOs, and other public and

private agencies or organizations, as

well as the status of the project on the

State transportation improvement

program (STIP) and the metropolitan

transportation improvement program

(TIP).

5. The extent to which the project

may be eligible under both the NCPD

and the CBI program.

6. Other quantitative information that

relates to the strategic goals of the

FHWA, the other DOT modal agencies

and the DOT as a whole at the time of

the full solicitation. At the time of this

notice, the FHWA anticipates that a

goal(s) related to the safety of

commercial vehicles in the region near

the U.S. border with Mexico will be

important at the time full applications

are evaluated and selected.

Section III—Request for Comments on

Program Implementation in FY 2002, FY

2003.

The FHWA is specifically requesting

comments NCPD/CBI program

implementation. In addition, agencies

that wish to reconsider their previous

comment(s) or make additional

comments on other aspects of program

implementation are invited to do so.

Commenters should reference the

docket number noted in the beginning

of this notice.

Section IV—Solicitation of Intent to

submit Applications for FY 2002 Grants

As explained earlier, the FHWA is

requesting only statements of intent to

submit grant applications at this time.

Send such statements of intent to

submit applications for grants to the

division office in the State where the

applicant is located. If a project is

located in more than one State, send the

application to the division office in the

lead State. The FHWA will not penalize

a State or MPO that, subsequent to the

Appropriations Act and subsequent

solicitation for full applications,

chooses not to apply for funding or

submits an application that is close to

but not the same as the submittal of

intent or where priorities are

reestablished between the submittal of

intent and the submittal of the

application. In fact, the FHWA expects

project definitions and priorities to

evolve in complex and/or multistate

projects. Future applications will not be

precluded if the State or MPO did not

submit their intent in response to this

request. However, those States or MPOs

must demonstrate a reasonable basis for

failing to submit their intent as

requested. The FHWA anticipates that

the actual format for full applications

will be very similar to that of FY 2001

with a decrease in the amount of

narrative requested on some points and

some additional clarification of

financial information. However, the

suggested format for the intent to submit

is as follows:

Format for Intention to Submit an

Application for NCPD or CBI

Discretionary Funds

1. State (if a multistate or multi MPO

project, list the lead State/MPO and

participating States/MPO);

2. Work to be funded and location of

work to be funded.

3. Amount of federal funds to be

requested.

4. State priority, as of time the intent

is established.

Note 1: Please provide 2 copies of intention

to submit a grant application.

Note 2: Assuming that funds are available

for discretionary allocation, the FHWA

would solicit full applications for such

funds. Awards for the funds available for

discretionary allocation should be expected

to be announced by late spring calendar

2002.

(Authority: 23 U.S.C. 315; secs. 1118 and

1119, Pub. L. 105–178, 112 Stat. 107, at 161

(1998); and 49 CFR 1.48)

Issued on: April 27, 2001.

Vincent F. Schimmoller,

Deputy Executive Director, Federal Highway

Administration.

[FR Doc. 01–11402 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–22–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

[FHWA Docket FHWA–98–4300]

Transportation Equity Act for the 21st

Century; Implementation for

Participation in the Value Pricing Pilot

Program

AGENCY: Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice; solicitation for

participation.

SUMMARY: This notice invites State or

local governments or other public

authorities to make applications for

participation in the Value Pricing Pilot

Program (Pilot Program) authorized by

section 1012(b) of the Intermodal

Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of

1991 (ISTEA) (Public Law 102–240, 105

Stat. 1914), as amended by 1216(a) of

the Transportation Equity Act for the

21st Century (TEA–21) (Public Law No.

105–178, 112 Stat. 107 (1998)) and

presents guidelines for program

applications. This notice updates an

October 5, 1998, notice by providing

revised procedures, processes and

timelines. This document also describes

the statutory basis for the Pilot Program

and procedures that will be used to

implement the program. The FHWA

will accept comments on these

administrative guidelines throughout

the life of the Pilot Program and, as

necessary, will issue additional

guidance in response to public

comments and program experience.

DATES: The solicitation for participation

in the Pilot Program will continue to be

held open until further notice. To

ensure that all projects receive fair

consideration, the FHWA encourages all

potential grant applicants to submit

their proposals no later than October 1,

2001, for fiscal year (FY) 2002 funds and

October 1, 2002, for FY 2003 funds.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Patrick DeCorla-Souza, Highway Pricing

and System Analysis Team (202) 366–

4076; or Mr. Steven Rochlis, Office of

the Chief Counsel, (202) 366–1395;

FHWA, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20590. Office hours are

from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Access

You may submit or retrieve comments

online through the Document

Management System (DMS) at: http://

dms.dot.gov/submit. Acceptable formats

include: MS Word (versions 95 to 97),

MS Word for Mac (versions 6 to 8), Rich

Text File (RTF), American Standard

Code Information Interchange

(ASCII)(TXT), Portable Document

Format (PDF), and WordPerfect

(versions 7 to 8). The DMS is available

24 hours each day, 365 days each year.

Electronic submission and retrieval help

and guidelines are available under the

help section of the web site.

An electronic copy of this document

may be downloaded using a modem and

suitable communications software from

the Government Printing Office’s

Electronic Bulletin Board Service at

(202) 512–1661. Internet users may

reach the Federal Register’s home page

at: http://www.nara.gov/fedreg and the

23078 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001 / Notices

Government Printing Office’s database

at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara.

Background

Section 1012(b) of the ISTEA, as

amended by section 1216(a) of the TEA–

21, authorizes the Secretary of

Transportation (the Secretary) to create

a Pilot Program by entering into

cooperative agreements with up to 15

State or local governments or other

public authorities, to establish,

maintain, and monitor local value

pricing pilot programs. The statute

provides that any value pricing project

included under these programs may

involve the use of tolls on the Interstate

system. This is an exception to the

general provisions concerning tolls on

the Interstate system as contained in 23

U.S.C. 129 and 301. A maximum of $11

million is authorized for each of the

fiscal years 2000 through 2003 to be

made available to carry out Pilot

Program requirements. The Federal

share payable under the program is 80

percent of the cost of the project. Funds

allocated by the Secretary to a State

under this section shall remain available

for obligation by the State for a period

of three years after the last day of the

fiscal year for which funds are

authorized. If, on September 30 of any

year, the amount of funds made

available for the Pilot Program, but not

allocated, exceeds $8 million, the excess

amount will be apportioned to all States

for purposes of the Surface

Transportation Program.

Funds available for the Pilot Program

can be used to support pre-project study

activities and to pay for implementation

costs of value pricing projects.

Section 1216(a)(5) of the TEA–21

amends section 1012(b) of the ISTEA by

adding subsection (6) which provides

that a State may permit vehicles with

fewer than two occupants to operate in

high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes if

the vehicles are part of a local value

pricing pilot program under this section.

This is an exception to the general

provision contained in 23 U.S.C. 102,

that no fewer than two occupants per

vehicle are allowed on HOV lanes.

Potential financial effects of value

pricing projects on low-income drivers

shall be considered and, where such

effects are expected to be significant,

possible mitigation measures should be

identified, such as providing new or

expanded transit service as an integral

part of the value pricing project. The

costs of such mitigation measures can be

included as part of the value pricing

project implementation cost. The

Secretary is required to report to

Congress every two years on the effects

of local value pricing pilot programs.

The Value Pricing Pilot Program is a

continuation of the Congestion Pricing

Pilot Program authorized by section

1012(b) of the ISTEA. Under this

program, pricing projects have reached

the implementation stage in San Diego,

California; Lee County, Florida;

Houston, Texas; and San Francisco,

California. In addition, pre-program

planning activities have been completed

or are on-going in the following States:

Oregon, California, Colorado,

Minnesota, Washington, Florida,

Maryland, Texas, and New York. Funds

were also used to support the California

DOT’s monitoring and evaluation study

of the private, variable-priced toll lanes

along State Route 91 in Orange County,

California.

Discussion of Comments

The FHWA received three comments

to our previous notice published on

October 5, 1998, at 63 FR 53487. One

was a comment from a private citizen,

one from a metropolitan planning

organization, and one from a national

trade association. Two of the comments

were favorable. The third commenter, a

national trade association expressed

support for the value pricing concept.

However, as a matter of policy, the

association opposes new or increased

peak period tolls on Interstate highways

because it does not consider such tolls

to be efficient and truckers do not have

the same flexibility with regard to their

schedules as motorists engaged in

personal travel. However, based on the

pilot projects to date that have

implemented pricing programs on

Interstates, tolling has only been

implemented on special-use lanes, and

has actually improved traffic flow

slightly in the regular unrestricted use

lanes by shifting some traffic from them

to the tolled lanes.

Purpose

The purpose of this notice is to

provide general information about the

Pilot Program and the FWHA’s plans for

implementing the program, and to invite

State or local governments or other

public authorities to make applications

for participation in the Pilot Program.

Definitions

‘‘Value pricing,’’ ‘‘congestion

pricing,’’ ‘‘peak-period pricing,’’

‘‘variable pricing,’’ or ‘‘variable tolling,’’

are all terms used to refer to direct timeof-travel charges for road use, possibly

varying by location, time of day,

severity of congestion, vehicle

occupancy, or type of facility. By

shifting some trips to off-peak periods,

to mass transit or other higheroccupancy vehicles, or to routes away

from congested facilities, or by

encouraging consolidation of trips,

value pricing charges are intended to

promote economic efficiency both

generally and within the commercial

freight sector. They also reduce

congestion, improve air quality,

conserve energy, and meet transit

productivity goals.

A ‘‘value pricing project’’ means any

implementation of value pricing

concepts or techniques meeting the

definitions contained in this notice and

included under a ‘‘local value pricing

pilot program’’ under this section,

where a local value pricing pilot

program includes one or more value

pricing projects serving a single

geographic area, such as a metropolitan

area. ‘‘Cooperative agreement’’ means

the agreement signed between the

FHWA and a State or local government,

or other public authority to implement

local value pricing pilot programs under

this section (See 49 CFR part 18).

Program Objective

The overall objective of the Pilot

Program is to support efforts by State

and local governments or other public

authorities to establish local value

pricing pilot programs, to provide for

the monitoring and evaluation of value

pricing projects included in such

programs, and to report on their effects.

While the Pilot Program’s primary focus

is on value pricing on roads,

consideration will also be given to the

use of other market-based approaches to

congestion relief, such as parking

pricing, freight access pricing, electronic

payment services linked to value

pricing, or pay-as-you-drive services,

such as usage based auto insurance,

provided the project incorporates

significant price variations by time,

location, and/or level of congestion.

Potential Project Types

The FHWA is seeking proposals to

use value pricing projects to reduce

congestion, improve system

performance, and promote mobility.

Value pricing charges are expected to

accomplish this purpose by encouraging

the use of alternative times, modes,

routes, or trip patterns. To increase the

likelihood of generating information on

a variety of useful value pricing

strategies, proposed projects having as

many of the following characteristics as

possible will receive highest priority for

Federal support. Projects of interest

include:

1. Applications of value pricing

which are comprehensive, such as area

wide pricing, pricing of multiple

facilities or corridors, and/or

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001 / Notices 23079

combinations of road pricing and

parking pricing.

2. Pricing may be available at key

traffic bottlenecks, single traffic

corridors, or pricing on single highway

facilities, including bridges and tunnels.

Proposals to shift from a fixed to a

variable toll schedule on existing toll

facilities are encouraged (i.e.,

combinations of peak-period surcharges

and off-peak discounts). Pricing of

queue jumps is also eligible. A queue

jump is defined as a facility that can be

used by certain types of traffic to bypass

points on the transportation network

where congestion is particularly severe

and occurs in a predictable pattern

(colloquially called ‘‘bottlenecks’’).

Queue jumps can be as elaborate as an

elevated facility or as simple as an atgrade lane addition.

3. There are other applications of

value pricing that are also acceptable,

including pricing on lanes otherwise

reserved for high occupancy vehicles,

known as high occupancy toll (HOT)

lanes, or pricing on newly constructed

lanes. Highest priority will be given to

lane pricing proposals that cover

multiple facilities and/or offer

innovative pricing, enforcement, or

operational technologies. In order to

protect the integrity of HOV programs,

the FHWA will give priority to those

HOT lane proposals where it is clear

that an HOV lane is underutilized and

where local officials can demonstrate

that the pilot project would not

undermine a long term regional strategy

to increase ridesharing. In addition,

areas proposing HOT lane projects are

encouraged to use revenues from the

project to promote improved transit

service or other programs that will

encourage transit use and ridesharing.

4. Innovative time-of-day parking

pricing strategies, provided the level

and coverage of proposed parking

charges, is sufficient to reduce

congestion. Parking pricing strategies

that are integrated with other marketbased pricing strategies (e.g., value

pricing) are encouraged. Parking pricing

strategies should be designed to

influence trip-making behavior, and

might include peak-period parking

surcharges, or policies such as parking

cash-out, where cash is offered to

employees in lieu of subsidized parking.

Pricing of a single parking facility,

coverage of a few employee spaces, or

pricing of parking spaces in a small

area, for example, are unlikely to receive

priority treatment, unless they

incorporate a truly unique element

which might facilitate broader

applications of value pricing across

local areas and States.

5. Projects with anticipated value

pricing charges that have as the key

characteristic that they are targeted at

vehicles causing congestion, and are set

at levels significant enough to encourage

drivers to use alternative times, routes,

modes, or trip patterns during congested

periods, are likely to receive favorable

consideration. Proposed projects that

contemplate value pricing charges that

are not significant enough to influence

demand, such as minor increases in fees

during peak-periods, or moderate toll

increases instituted primarily for

financing purposes, will be given low

priority.

6. Projects that are likely to add to the

base of knowledge about the various

design, implementation, effectiveness,

operational, and acceptability

dimensions of value pricing are eligible

for consideration under the Pilot

Program. The FHWA is seeking

information related to the impacts of

value pricing on the following: travel

behavior (mode use, time-of-travel, trip

destinations, trip generation, etc., by

private and commercial trips); on traffic

conditions (trip lengths, speeds, level of

service); on implementation issues

(technology, innovative pricing

techniques, public acceptance,

administration, operation, enforcement,

legality, institutional issues, etc.); on

revenues, their uses and financial plans;

on different types of users and

businesses; and on measures designed

to mitigate possible adverse impacts and

their effectiveness. These diverse

information needs mean that the FHWA

may fund different types of value

pricing applications in different local

contexts to maximize the potential of

the pilot program.

7. Projects that do not have adverse

effects on alternative routes or modes, or

on low-income or other transportation

disadvantaged groups, are encouraged

under the Pilot Program. If such effects

are anticipated, proposed pricing

programs should incorporate measures

to mitigate any major adverse impacts,

including enhancement of

transportation alternatives for peakperiod travelers, services such as ‘‘lifeline’’ toll rates aimed at low income

travelers, and toll credits earned by

motorists in regular lanes which can be

used to pay tolls on priced lanes.

While the FHWA is seeking proposals

that incorporate some or all of these

project characteristics, these guidelines

are intended only to illustrate selection

priorities, not to limit potential program

participants from proposing new and

innovative pricing approaches for

incorporation in the program.

Pre-Project Studies

A small amount of Pilot Program

funds will be used to assist State and

local governments in carrying out preproject study activities designed to lead

to implementation of a value pricing

project, including activities such as preproject planning, public participation,

consensus building, modeling, impact

assessment, financial planning studies,

and work necessary to meet any Federal

or State environmental or other

planning requirements that assist in

establishing value pricing projects and

programs. The intent of the pre-project

study phase of the Pilot Program is to

support efforts to identify and evaluate

value pricing project alternatives, and to

prepare the necessary groundwork for

possible future implementation. Purely

academic studies of value pricing (not

designed to lead to possible project

implementation), or broad, area-wide

planning studies which incorporate

value pricing as an option, will not be

funded under this program. Broad

planning studies can be funded with

regular Federal-aid highway or transit

planning funds. Proposals for preproject studies will be selected based on

the likelihood that they will lead to

implementation of pilot tests of value

pricing meeting the characteristics

described in the previous section.

Eligible Costs

Funds available for the Pilot Program

can be used to support pre-project study

activities and to pay for implementation

costs of value pricing projects. Costs

eligible for reimbursement include costs

of planning for, setting up, managing,

operating, monitoring, evaluating, and

reporting on local value pricing pilot

projects. Examples of specific costs

eligible for reimbursement include the

following:

1. Pre-Project Study Costs—Preproject study activity costs allowed

include: pre-project planning, public

participation, consensus building,

marketing, impact assessment,

modeling, financial planning,

technology assessments and

specifications, and other preimplementation work that relate to the

establishment of the value pricing

project. Costs of pre-project study

activities cannot be reimbursed for

longer than three years.

2. Implementation Costs—

Implementation costs are costs

necessary for implementation of specific

value pricing projects such as costs for

setting up, managing, operating,

evaluating, and reporting on a value

pricing project, including:

23080 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001 / Notices

a. Costs associated with

implementation of a value pricing

project, including necessary salaries and

expenses or other administrative and

operational costs, such as installation of

equipment necessary for operation of a

pilot project (e.g., AVI technology, video

equipment for traffic monitoring, other

instrumentation), enforcement costs,

costs of monitoring and evaluating

project operations, and costs of

continuing public relations activities

during the period of implementation.

b. Costs of providing transportation

alternatives, such as new or expanded

transit service provided as an integral

part of the value pricing project. Funds

are not available to replace existing

sources of support for transit services.

c. Depending on the availability of

funds, a limited amount of funds may be

made available to toll authorities to

purchase an insurance policy that will

cover unanticipated lost revenue

resulting from a pilot test of value

pricing. This may be necessary to avoid

jeopardizing a toll authority’s bond

covenants. If an agency decides to

purchase an insurance policy to cover

anticipated loss of revenue, federal

participation would be no more than 50

percent of the total cost or a dollar cap.

For example, a toll authority might

propose a revenue-neutral pricing

strategy with peak-period surcharges

and off-peak discounts designed to shift

demand patterns and improve customer

service, or to reduce the need for future

capacity expansion. Even though no

reduction in toll revenues is intended,

the FHWA recognizes that forecasting

traffic and revenue changes is

inherently uncertain, and that an

insurance policy to offset any

unintended toll revenue losses would be

designed to help overcome institutional

barriers to the testing and use of value

pricing by existing toll authorities.

Project implementation costs can be

supported for a period of at least one

year, and thereafter until such time that

the project generates sufficient revenues

to fund its implementation costs

without Federal support, except that

implementation costs for a pilot project

cannot be reimbursed for longer than

three years. Each implementation

project included in a local value pricing

pilot program will be considered

separately for this purpose. Funds may

not be used to pay for activities

conducted prior to approval of Pilot

Program participation. Funds may not

be used to construct new highway

through lanes, bridges, etc., even if

those facilities are to be priced, but toll

ramps or minor pavement additions

needed to facilitate toll collection or

enforcement are eligible.

Complementary actions such as

construction of HOV lanes, the

implementation of traffic control

systems or transit projects can be

funded through other highway and

transit programs eligible under TEA–21

and from new revenues raised as a

result of a pilot. Those interested in

participating in the Pilot Program are

encouraged to explore opportunities for

combining funds from these other

programs with Pilot Program funds.

This is not meant to imply that Federal

funds may be used to match Pilot

Program funds unless specific statutory

authority permits such matching.

Eligible Uses of Revenue

The FHWA will provide up to the

legislatively allowable 80 percent share

of the estimated costs of an approved

project. Any revenues generated by a

pilot project must be applied first to pay

for pilot project implementation costs.

Any project revenues in excess of pilot

project implementation expenses may

be used for any programs eligible under

title 23, U.S. Code. Uses of revenue are

encouraged which will support the

goals of the value pricing program,

particularly uses designed to provide

benefits to those traveling in the

corridor where the project is being

implemented.

Applying for Program Participation

Qualified applicants include local,

regional and State government agencies,

as well as public tolling authorities.

Although project agreements must be

with public authorities, a local value

pricing program partnership may also

include private tolling authorities and

non-profit organizations. To streamline

the process of applying for program

participation as much as possible, it is

suggested that, prior to submitting a

formal application for program

participation, potential applicants

contact their State FHWA Division

Office and/or the FHWA Highway

Pricing and Systems Analysis Team in

the Office of Transportation Policy

Studies to discuss their interest in the

Pilot Program and the general nature of

the proposed local value pricing Pilot

Program or pre-project study. The

FHWA will then be able to provide

materials and technical support to assist

in the development of the application.

Following this initial contact, potential

applicants should submit a sketch plan

for the proposed pricing program before

developing a full-scale proposal. To

facilitate a streamlined application

process, the sketch plan need not

exceed 15 pages. The sketch plan

should provide a brief description of the

following:

1. Congestion problem to be

addressed.

2. Nature of proposed or potential

pricing projects to respond to that

problem, including overall project goals,

potential facilities to be included, time

line for study and possible

implementation of value pricing

projects.

3. Parties proposed as being

signatories to the cooperative agreement

with the FHWA. At a minimum, by the

time the refined proposal is submitted,

the local Metropolitan Planning

Organization (MPO) and the owner/

operator of the facility or facilities to be

priced should express support for the

program. Indications of support from

affected parties, including

representatives of business, labor,

industry, transportation users, and/or

local residents, or plans for obtaining

such support should be included.

4. Extent of public participation in the

development of the proposal, or of plans

for future public participation activities.

Potential equity consequences of any

proposed projects should be portrayed

in general terms, and if adverse impacts

are anticipated, preliminary plans for

responding to such problems should be

identified.

5. Legal and administrative authority

needed to carry out a value pricing

project, extent to which these have been

obtained, and further steps needed to

obtain necessary authority.

6. Plans for pre-project study, or

findings from complete pre-project

studies. The sketch plan should be

submitted through the State Department

of Transportation to the appropriate

FHWA Division Administrator, who

will forward the plan to FHWA’s

Director, Office of Transportation Policy

Studies. To expedite the review, the

applicant should concurrently send a

copy directly to the FHWA Highway

Pricing and System Analysis Team at

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,

D.C. 20590.

Based on initial review of the sketch

plan, the FHWA will work with the

proposing authority to develop a refined

proposal for review by the Federal

Interagency Review Group which

provides support to the FHWA in

evaluating program applications (see the

caption ‘‘Review Process,’’ in this

preamble below). Ideally, the refined

proposal will include:

1. A description of the congestion

problem being addressed (current and

projected);

2. A description of the proposed

pricing program and its goals, including

description of facilities included, and,

for implementation projects, expected

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001 / Notices 23081

pricing schedules, technology to be

used, enforcement programs, and so on;

3. Preliminary estimates of the social

and economic effects of the pricing

program, including potential equity

impacts, and a plan or methodology for

further refining these estimates for all

pricing project(s) included in the

program;

4. The role of alternative

transportation modes in the project, and

anticipated enhancements proposed to

be included in the pricing program;

5. A time line for the pre-project study

and implementation phases of the

project (proposals indicating early

implementation of pricing projects that

will allow evaluation during the life of

TEA–21 will receive priority);

6. A description of tasks to be carried

out as part of each phase of the project,

and an estimate of costs associated with

each;

7. Plans for monitoring and evaluating

value pricing implementation projects,

including plans for data collection and

analysis, before and after assessment,

and long term monitoring and

documenting of project effects;

8. A detailed finance and revenue

plan, including for implementation

projects a budget for capital and

operating costs; a description of all

funding sources, planned expenditures,

proposed uses of revenues, and a plan

for projects to become financially selfsustaining (without Federal support)

within three years of implementation;

9. Plans for involving key affected

parties, coalition building, media

relations, etc., including either

demonstration of previous public

involvement in the development of the

proposed pricing program, or plans to

ensure adequate public involvement

prior to implementation;

10. Plans for meeting all Federal, State

and local legal and administrative

requirements for project

implementation, including necessary

Federal-aid planning and environmental

requirements. The FHWA will give

priority to proposals where projects are

included as a part of (or are consistent

with) a broad program addressing

congestion, mobility, air quality and

energy conservation, where an area has

congestion management systems (CMS)

for Transportation Management Areas

(urbanized areas over 200,000

population or those designated by the

Secretary) and the congestion mitigation

and air quality (CMAQ) program.

If some of these items are not

available or fully developed at the time

the proposal is submitted, proposals

will still be considered for support if

they meet some of the priority interests

of the FHWA as described in this

preamble under the caption ‘‘Potential

Project Types,’’ and include some of the

proposal characteristics described in

this section, and there is a strong

indication that these items will be

completed within a short time.

Review Process

Upon receipt of the detailed proposal,

the FHWA’s Highway Pricing and

Systems Analysis Team will arrange for

a review of the proposal by the Federal

Interagency Review Group established

to assist the FHWA in assessing the

likelihood that proposed local value

pricing programs will provide valid and

useful tests of value pricing concepts.

The Review Group is composed of

representatives of several concerned

offices in the U.S. DOT, including

offices in the FHWA, the Federal Transit

Administration, the Office of the

Secretary of Transportation, and the

Office of Intermodalism. The U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency and

the U.S. Department of Energy are also

represented on the Review Group. To

facilitate review, applicants should

submit an electronic copy of their

application, plus an unbound

reproducible hard copy of the proposal.

As with the sketch plan, detailed

proposals should be submitted through

the MPO and/or State DOT to the

appropriate FHWA Division

Administrator, who will forward the

plan to the FHWA’s Director, Office of

Transportation Policy Studies. The

FHWA will review applications

received and make program participant

selections based on the criteria

contained in this notice.

To ensure that all projects receive fair

consideration, the FHWA encourages all

potential grant applicants to submit

their proposals no later than October 1,

2001, for FY 2002 funds and October 1,

2002, for FY 2003 funds. This timeline

will allow for a fair comparison among

proposals received and will also allow

the FHWA to make timely

recommendations to the Secretary

regarding how to expend available

funds in accordance with the criteria

discussed in this preamble.

Cooperative Agreement

Based on the recommendations of the

Review Group, the FHWA will identify

those Pilot Program proposals which

have the greatest potential for promoting

the objectives of the Pilot Program,

including demonstrating the effects of

value pricing on driver behavior, traffic

volume, ridesharing, transit ridership,

air quality, availability of funds for

transportation programs, and other

measures of the effects of value pricing.

Those Pilot Program candidates will

then be invited to enter into

negotiations with the FHWA to develop

a cooperative agreement to define the

scope of work for the value pricing

program. The cooperative agreement

will be governed by the Federal statutes

and regulations cited in the agreement

and 49 CFR part 18, Uniform

Administrative Requirements for Grants

and Cooperative Agreements to State

and Local Governments, as they relate to

the acceptance and use of Federal funds

for this program.

Prior to the FHWA approval of pricing

project implementation, value pricing

programs must be shown to be

consistent with Federal metropolitan

and statewide planning requirements.

Implementation projects outside

metropolitan areas must be included in

the approved statewide transportation

improvement program and be selected

in accordance with the requirements set

forth in section 1204(f)(3) of the TEA–

21.

Implementation projects in

metropolitan areas must be: (a) Included

in, or consistent with, the approved

metropolitan transportation plan (if the

area is in nonattainment for a

transportation related pollutant, the

metropolitan plan must be in

conformance with the State air quality

implementation plan); (b) included in

the approved metropolitan and

statewide transportation improvement

programs (if the metropolitan area is in

a nonattainment area for a

transportation related pollutant, the

metropolitan transportation

improvement program must be in

conformance with the State air quality

implementation plan); (c) selected in

accordance with the requirements in

Public Law No. 105–178, section

1203(h)(5) or (i)(2); and (d) consistent

with any existing congestion

management system in transportation

management areas, developed pursuant

to 23 U.S.C. 134(i)(3).

Authority: 23 U.S.C. 315; sec. 1216(a), Pub.

L. 105–178, 112 Stat. 107; 49 CFR 1.48

Issued on: April 27, 2001.

Vincent F. Schimmoller,

Deputy Executive Director.

[FR Doc. 01–11403 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–22–P