29900 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Railroad Administration 

[Docket No. FRA–2009–0045] 

High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail 

(‘‘HSIPR’’) Program 

AGENCY: Federal Railroad 

Administration (FRA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of funding availability; 

issuance of interim program guidance. 

SUMMARY: On April 16, 2009, President 

Obama, together with Vice President 

Biden and Secretary of Transportation 

LaHood, announced a new vision for 

developing high-speed rail in America. 

They called for a collaborative effort 

among the Federal Government, States, 

railroads, and other key stakeholders to 

help transform America’s transportation 

system through a national network of 

high-speed rail corridors. This notice 

builds on this ‘‘Vision for High-Speed 

Rail’’ (available on FRA’s Web site) by 

detailing the application requirements 

and procedures for obtaining funding 

for high-speed rail projects under the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act of 2009 (ARRA) and the Department 

of Transportation Appropriations Acts 

of 2008 and 2009 (FY 2008/2009 DOT 

Appropriations Acts), while laying the 

foundation for a longer-term program to 

establish a network of high-speed rail 

corridors. 

The evaluation and selection criteria 

in this notice are intended to prioritize 

projects that deliver transportation, 

economic recovery and other public 

benefits, including energy 

independence, environmental quality, 

and livable communities; ensure project 

success through effective project 

management, financial planning and 

stakeholder commitments; and 

emphasize a balanced approach to 

project types, locations, innovation, and 

timing. 

This notice describes multiple 

funding paths to accommodate projects 

at different stages of development, while 

also rationalizing the variety of statutory 

and administrative requirements 

underpinning the program. FRA 

recognizes the unique challenges and 

opportunities presented, and will seek, 

to the maximum extent permitted under 

law and administrative procedures, to 

work collaboratively with applicants 

and stakeholders throughout the 

process. 

DATES:

Public comments. Public comments 

on this notice are due no later than July 

10, 2009. 

Preapplications. Preapplications for 

all funding Tracks are due no later than 

July 10, 2009. (FRA encourages earlier 

submission of preapplications). 

Applications. Applications for 

funding for Track 1 (Projects), Track 3 

(Planning), and Track 4 (FY2009 

Appropriations Projects) are due no 

later than August 24, 2009; applications 

for funding Track 2 (Service 

Development Programs) are due no later 

than October 2, 2009. (See Section 1.6 

in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this notice for descriptions of 

each funding Track, and Section 4.3.6 in 

the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

of this notice for additional information 

on deadlines for both preapplications 

and applications.) FRA reserves the 

right to modify these deadlines, based 

on comments received on this notice. 

ADDRESSES:

Public comments. To ensure that 

comments are not entered into the 

docket more than once, please submit 

comments, identified by docket number 

[FRA–2009–0045], by only one of the 

following methods: 

• Web site: The U.S. Government 

electronic docket site is http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Go to this Web 

site and follow the instructions for 

submitting comments into docket 

number [FRA–2009–0045]; 

• Mail: Mail comments to U.S. 

Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Docket 

Operations, MS–30, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590; 

• Hand delivery or courier: Bring 

comments to the U.S. Department of 

Transportation, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Docket Operations, West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays; or 

• Fax: Telefax comments to 202–493– 

6330. 

Instructions for submitting public 

comments: The agency name (Federal 

Railroad Administration) and the docket 

number [FRA–2009–0045] for this 

notice must be submitted with any 

comments. If comments are submitted 

by mail or by hand, please submit two 

copies of the comments. For 

confirmation that the Federal Railroad 

Administration has received the 

comments, a self-addressed stamped 

postcard must be included. Note that all 

comments received by any method will 

be posted without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, and will 

be available to Internet users. The 

Department’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement is available for review in the 

Federal Register published April 11, 

2000, (65 FR 19477), or by visiting 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

Preapplications. Preapplications must 

be submitted to the HSIPR Program 

Manager electronically via e-mail at 

HSIPR@dot.gov. Pre-applicants should 

receive a confirmation e-mail, but are 

advised to request a return receipt to 

confirm transmission. Only 

preapplications received via e-mail as 

provided above shall be deemed 

properly filed. 

Applications. Applications and 

supporting documentation must be 

submitted through http:// 

www.grantsolutions.gov. If problems 

with http://www.grantsolutions.gov are 

encountered, applications and 

supporting documentation may be 

submitted to the HSIPR Program 

Manager electronically via e-mail at 

HSIPR@dot.gov. Supporting materials 

that cannot be submitted electronically 

may be mailed or hand delivered to: 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, MS–20, Room 

W38–202, SE., Washington, DC 20590 

Attn. HSIPR Program. Applicants are 

encouraged to use special courier 

services to avoid shipping delays. Preapplication and application forms are 

available at http://www.fra.dot.gov/us/ 

content/2243. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information regarding this notice 

and the grants program, please contact 

the FRA HSIPR Program Manager via email at HSIPR@dot.gov, or by mail: U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Federal 

Railroad Administration, 1200 New 

Jersey Avenue, MS–20, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590 Attn. HSIPR 

Program. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

Overview 

1. Funding Opportunity Description 

2. Award Information 

3. Eligibility Information 

4. Application and Submission Information 

5. Application Review Information 

6. Award Administration Information 

7. FRA Contacts 

List of Acronyms Appendix 1: Additional 

Information on Eligibility 

Appendix 2: Additional Information on 

Planning and Engineering 

Appendix 3: Additional Information on 

Award Administrations and Grant 

Conditions 

Overview 

FRA is soliciting public comment on 

this document through Docket Number 

FRA–2009–0045 (http:// 

www.regulations.gov). While the interim 

guidance in this document does not 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 29901 

constitute a rulemaking, FRA will 

consider all comments received by July 

10, 2009 and will publish any resultant 

clarifications or revisions to this 

document in the Federal Register and 

on FRA’s Web site (http:// 

www.fra.dot.gov). FRA began this 

comment process during its outreach 

sessions in May and June, in which over 

1,100 stakeholders attended seven 

sessions around the country; in 

addition, a public docket was 

established for comment, and 110 

comments were received as of June 15, 

2009. FRA has already adjusted the 

approach contained herein based on this 

initial feedback. 

Preapplications are required and the 

deadline for submissions (for all Tracks) 

is July 10, 2009. Applications may not 

be considered if preapplications are 

received after July 10, 2009; FRA 

encourages submission of 

preapplications earlier than the July 10 

deadline. FRA will work with preapplicants if necessary during the 

period prior to the application deadlines 

to ensure eligibility, appropriateness of 

application Track, and structure of 

project or program; applicants should 

work on completing full grant 

applications concurrent with 

preparation and review of 

preapplications. 

Deadlines for submission of full grant 

applications under the four Tracks (see 

Section 1.6 for track descriptions) are: 

Track 1 (Projects), Track 3 (Planning), 

and Track 4 (FY2009 Appropriations 

Projects)—August 24, 2009; Track 2 

(High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger 

Rail Service Development Programs)— 

October 2, 2009. To give prospective 

applicants adequate time to complete 

their applications (while incorporating 

any guidance clarifications or revisions), 

FRA may adjust application dates to 

allow for a minimum of 30 days for 

application submission following any 

material changes to guidance that arise 

from comments. For full details on these 

deadlines and how to satisfy them, 

prospective applicants should consult 

Section 4.3.6 of this guidance. 

Section 1: Funding Opportunity 

Description 

1.1 Authority 

This program guidance and financial 

assistance announcement pertains to 

FRA’s new High-Speed Intercity 

Passenger Rail Program (‘‘HSIPR’’), 

which consolidates the following 

recently-authorized and closely-related 

programs: 

• The High-Speed Rail Corridor 

Development program, authorized 

under Section 501 of the Passenger Rail 

Investment and Improvement Act of 

2008 (‘‘PRIIA,’’ Division B of Pub. L. 

110–432, October 16, 2008, codified at 

49 U.S.C. 26106); 

• The Intercity Passenger Rail Service 

Corridor Capital Assistance program, 

authorized under Section 301 of PRIIA 

(codified at 49 U.S.C. chapter 244); 

• The Congestion Grants program, 

authorized under Section 302 of PRIIA 

(codified at 49 U.S.C. 24105); 

• The Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 Capital 

Assistance to States—Intercity 

Passenger Rail Service program, 

authorized and funded under the 

Department of Transportation 

Appropriations Act, 2009 (‘‘FY 2009 

DOT Appropriations Act,’’ Title I of 

Division I of Pub. L. 111–8, March 11, 

2009); and 

• The FY 2008 Capital Assistance to 

States—Intercity Passenger Rail Service 

program, authorized and funded under 

the Department of Transportation 

Appropriations Act, 2008 (‘‘FY 2008 

DOT Appropriations Act,’’ Title I of 

Division K of Pub. L. 110–161, 

December 26, 2007). 

This document incorporates both (i) 

interim guidance required for this 

program pursuant to the American 

Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 

(‘‘ARRA,’’ Pub. L. 111–5, February 17, 

2009); and (ii) interim guidance 

required pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 

24402(a)(2). The funding made available 

under this financial assistance 

announcement was appropriated under 

ARRA, and the FY 2008/2009 DOT 

Appropriations Act. The funding 

opportunities described in this guidance 

are available under Catalog of Federal 

Domestic Assistance (CFDA) numbers 

20.317 and 20.319. 

1.2 Program Description and 

Legislative History 

This program guidance and funding 

opportunity announcement represents 

the second major milestone in the 

implementation of the new HSIPR 

Program. It follows and builds upon 

Vision for High-Speed Rail in America, 

the Administration’s April 2009 highspeed rail strategic plan for the 

implementation of this program 

(available at http://www.fra.dot.gov/us/ 

content/31). 

As one of President Obama’s foremost 

transportation priorities, the HSIPR 

Program helps to address the nation’s 

transportation challenges by investing 

in an efficient High-Speed Rail/Intercity 

Passenger Rail network that connects 

communities across America. 

Congress established the framework 

for the program through the passage of 

three key pieces of legislation: 

• Capital Assistance to States— 

Intercity Passenger Rail Service—In the 

FY 2008 DOT Appropriations Act, 

Congress established a new pilot 

program for joint Federal-State intercity 

passenger rail capital investment, 

known as Capital Assistance to States— 

Intercity Passenger Rail Service. Under 

this program, $30 million in Federal 

funding was made available to States on 

a competitive basis to fund up to 50 

percent of the capital cost of improving 

Intercity Passenger Rail service; up to 10 

percent of the $30 million was available 

for rail corridor planning grants. An 

additional $90 million was appropriated 

under similar terms as part of the FY 

2009 DOT Appropriations Act. 

• Passenger Rail Investment and 

Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA)— 

Enacted in October 2008, PRIIA 

represents the most sweeping 

Congressional action on intercity 

passenger rail since those that created 

the National Railroad Passenger 

Corporation (Amtrak) and the Northeast 

Corridor Improvement Project during 

the 1970s. In addition to reauthorizing 

Amtrak, PRIIA established three new 

competitive grant programs for funding 

High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail 

capital improvements, each of which, as 

authorized, require a 20 percent nonFederal match: 

Æ Intercity Passenger Rail Service 

Corridor Capital Assistance (Section 

301)—Under this section, the broadest 

of PRIIA’s three new funding programs, 

States (including the District of 

Columbia), groups of States, interstate 

compacts, and public Intercity 

Passenger Rail agencies established by 

one or more State(s) may apply for 

grants for capital improvements to 

benefit all types of Intercity Passenger 

Rail service, including high-speed 

service. Amtrak may participate through 

a cooperative agreement with a State(s). 

To be eligible for funding under this 

program, proposed projects must meet a 

number of requirements (e.g., inclusion 

in a State Rail Plan). 

Æ High-Speed Rail Corridor 

Development (Section 501)—Although 

similar in structure, criteria, and 

conditions to Section 301, eligibility for 

this program is restricted to projects 

intended to develop Federallydesignated High-Speed Rail corridors 

for Intercity Passenger Rail services that 

may reasonably be expected to reach 

speeds of at least 110 miles per hour 

(mph). Applicant eligibility under 

Section 501 is broadened from Section 

301 to include Amtrak as well. 

Æ Congestion Grants (Section 302)— 

This program authorizes grants to States 

or to Amtrak (in cooperation with 

States) for facilities, infrastructure, and 

29902 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 

1See Section 4 for a detailed summary of 

submission requirements, and Section 5 for 

additional detail on evaluation and selection 

criteria. 

equipment for high-priority rail corridor 

projects to reduce congestion or 

facilitate Intercity Passenger Rail 

ridership growth. 

• American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA)—The 

$8 billion in High-Speed Rail/Intercity 

Passenger Rail funding under ARRA 

‘‘jump starts’’ the widespread 

improvement of High-Speed Rail/ 

Intercity Passenger Rail service in the 

United States. The appropriation 

references the authorities included in 

Sections 301, 302, and 501 of PRIIA but 

states the ‘‘Federal share of the costs for 

which a grant is made * * * shall be, 

at the option of the recipient, up to 100 

percent.’’ It also does not require that 

proposed projects be included in a State 

Rail Plan (and it excludes the costs of 

preparing such plans from eligibility for 

ARRA funding). 

1.3 Selection Process and Priorities 

The application process begins with a 

preapplication. The preapplication is a 

simple form intended to give FRA an 

early assessment of the universe of 

projects and programs, and to provide 

pre-applicants with any feedback 

necessary to complete their applications 

(e.g., eligibility issues, most appropriate 

application Track to pursue, etc.). It also 

allows FRA and preapplicants to start a 

collaborative process for ensuring early 

program success. Preapplications 

should be submitted as early as 

possible, but no later than July 10, 2009; 

applicants should not wait for 

submission of, or any comments on, a 

preapplication before preparing their 

full applications. In recognition of a 

variety of considerations, including the 

urgency of project implementation as 

reflected in ARRA and the complexities 

of launching a new HSIPR program, 

FRA considers the preapplication to be 

an essential component of the 

application submission and decision 

making processes. As a result, FRA will 

only consider applications that were not 

supported by a timely filed 

preapplication only if there are special, 

compelling circumstances. Complete 

applications for Tracks 1, 3 and 4 are 

due on August 24, 2009 and for Track 

2 on October 2, 2009. Once an 

application is received, it will proceed 

through a three-step process. 

• Screening for completeness and 

eligibility (both applicant and project 

eligibility); 

• Evaluation panel review process, 

applying ‘‘evaluation criteria’’; and 

• Final review and selection, 

applying ‘‘selection’’ criteria. 

See Section 5 for a full description of 

the review process and criteria. 

1.3.1 Application Screening 

Screening will confirm applicant and 

project eligibility, and ensure that the 

application provides complete and 

sufficient information for the evaluation 

process. 

1.3.2 Evaluation Criteria 

Eligible applications in all Tracks will 

be individually reviewed and assessed 

against seven evaluation criteria— 

organized into three categories— 

detailed below. For each of the 

applicable criteria, the application will 

be assigned a rating of between one and 

five points, based on the application’s 

fulfillment of the objectives of each 

criterion. These individual criterion 

ratings will then be accounted according 

to priority of criteria (which vary by 

Track, as described in Section 5), to 

arrive at an overall rating for the 

application. 

FRA will require a rigorous analysis 

of benefits and costs of proposed 

projects, with a focus on the 

transportation service and output 

measures that are fundamental to 

estimating other public benefits. 

Applicants must provide requested 

benefit and cost information the best 

available tools in order to ensure 

adequate assessment of business cases 

for projects. 

EVALUATION CRITERIA

Evaluation criteria1 Example factors Key documentation 

Public Return on Investment 

1. Transportation Benefits • Improved Intercity Passenger Rail service 

• Transportation network integration (including intermodal connections) 

• Transportation safety benefits 

• Service Development Plan (including business case; 

assessment of benefits and public investment). 

2. Economic Recovery • Preserving and creating jobs—particularly in economically-distressed areas • Quantitative output measures (service—reliability, 

schedule, capacity; and transportation—passengermiles, including sources—aviation, highway, induced). 

3. Other Public Benefits • Environmental quality 

• Energy efficiency 

• Livable communities 

Project Success Factors 

1. Project Management Approach 

2. Sustainability of Benefits 

• Organizational capacity 

• Track record of comparable projects 

• Adequacy of engineering 

• Reasonableness of schedule 

• Progress toward NEPA compliance 

• Thoroughness of management plan 

• Project management plan. 

• Financial plan (capital and operating). 

• Stakeholder agreements. 

• Sufficiency of safety and security planning 

• Sufficiency of stakeholder agreements 

• Reasonableness of financial estimates 

• Availability of operating financial support 

• Quality of planning process 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 29903 

2The National Historic Preservation Act, Clean 

Water Act, 49 U.S.C. 303 relating to parks, wildlife 

refuges and historic sites (commonly referred to as 

Section 4(f)), and the Endangered Species Act are 

examples. 

EVALUATION CRITERIA—Continued 

Evaluation criteria1 Example factors Key documentation 

Other Attributes 

1. Timeliness of Project 

Completion 

• Project readiness 

• Reasonableness of completion schedule 

• Project schedule. 

1.3.3 Selection Criteria 

After being assessed against the 

evaluation criteria, applications for each 

Track will collectively be reviewed to 

ensure consistency and to balance 

projects against national priorities and 

schedules. For this review, the FRA 

Administrator may consider several 

cross-cutting comparative criteria before 

final award determinations are made. 

The table below summarizes these 

additional selection criteria. 

SELECTION CRITERIA

Selection criteria (balance and diversity) Example factors 

1. Region/location ..................................................................................... • Geography and economic conditions. 

2. Innovation ............................................................................................. • Technology and industrial/capacity development. 

3. Partnerships ......................................................................................... • Multi-State agreements. 

4. Tracks and round timing ...................................................................... • Project costs and schedules. 

1.4 Program Implementation 

Opportunities and Challenges 

In addition to the fiscal constraints 

currently affecting States, local 

governments, and businesses, the 

development of a comprehensive HighSpeed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail 

network faces challenges specific to this 

program and the rail industry. For 

instance, FRA recognizes the challenges 

associated with the need for agreements 

among multiple States and with private 

railroad companies, as well as the 

shortage of engineering professionals, 

planners, and managers with experience 

in High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger 

Rail development with project 

implementation in the United States. 

The intent to establish a pipeline of 

future High-Speed Rail/Intercity 

Passenger Rail programs and projects 

poses a further challenge. The 

traditional pipeline for major 

transportation investments progresses 

from alternatives analysis to investment 

planning, preliminary engineering (PE) 

and environmental clearance, final 

design (FD), construction, and 

operations. With very narrow 

exceptions, States have historically 

lacked a Federal funding partner in 

High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail 

development; thus, many States have no 

High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail 

program at all, and others find their 

limited High-Speed Rail/Intercity 

Passenger Rail development efforts 

stalled at various points along the 

typical progression. 

This situation necessitates a Federal 

funding approach that is flexible enough 

to support the High-Speed Rail/Intercity 

Passenger Rail development efforts of 

each State—whether, for example, the 

State has just initiated High-Speed Rail/ 

Intercity Passenger Rail planning, or has 

prepared for capital investments to 

enhance existing services, or has 

readied itself to construct new 

infrastructure to accommodate new 

High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail 

service. With such disparate situations 

among the States, the Federal funding 

approach must accommodate different 

situations, offering an array of 

possibilities to dovetail with the States’ 

diverse aspirations, capabilities, and 

resources. 

1.5 Environmental Review and 

Approval 

Central to High-Speed Rail/Intercity 

Passenger Rail Program 

implementation—and crucial to each 

applicant’s choice of Track for a 

proposal—is the environmental review 

process required by the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and 

related laws and regulations.2 NEPA 

applies to all federal grant programs and 

requires Federal agencies to integrate 

environmental values into their 

decision-making processes by 

considering the environmental impacts 

of their proposed actions and reasonable 

alternatives to those actions. Agencies 

must also make information on these 

impacts and alternatives publicly 

available before decisions are made and 

actions occur. NEPA also mandates that 

all reasonable alternatives be 

considered, and to that end, an 

alternatives analysis is typically 

conducted during the environmental 

review process. 

FRA—as the Federal sponsoring 

agency—has primary responsibility for 

assuring NEPA compliance while 

accomplishing the purposes, priorities, 

and requirements of the HSIPR Program. 

While NEPA compliance is a Federal 

agency responsibility and the ultimate 

decisions remain with the Federal 

sponsoring agency, FRA encourages 

applicants to take a leadership role in 

NEPA documentation development, 

consistent with existing law and 

regulations. In the varied and flexible 

HSIPR Program, with its four Tracks and 

multiple authorizations, no single 

approach to NEPA compliance will 

work for every proposal and applicant. 

Therefore, FRA will work closely with 

applicants to assist in the timely and 

effective completion of the NEPA 

process in the manner most pertinent to 

the applicant’s proposal. 

NEPA reviews should focus on the 

issues that are ripe for decision at each 

stage of project or program 

development. To help focus 

environmental reviews, the Council on 

Environmental Quality encourages 

agencies to tier their environmental 

reviews, whereby general matters or 

broader programs are covered in a Tier 

I NEPA document, such as a corridorwide (or ‘‘service’’) environmental 

impact statement (EIS) or environmental 

assessment (EA); and narrower more 

site-specific projects or actions are 

addressed in site-specific EISs, EAs or 

categorical exclusion (CE) documents. 

1.6 Funding Approach 

In order to accommodate the variety 

of potential applicant goals and stages of 

29904 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 

3While ARRA-funded projects are exempt from 

State Rail Plan requirements, evaluation preference 

is given to those that are part of a planning process 

that includes a prioritized list of capital projects 

supporting a corridor service development plan; 

equipment projects should be consistent with 

Section 305 of PRIIA, which calls for the 

establishment of a standardized next-generation rail 

corridor equipment pool (see Section 3.6.3). 

4A group of projects that collectively advance the 

entirety, or a ‘‘phase’’ or ‘‘geographic section,’’ of 

a corridor service development plan are referred to 

here as a ‘‘program.’’ 

5Project-level NEPA documents are eligible for 

funding under Tracks 1 and 2. 

6A total of $90 million was appropriated under 

the FY 2009 DOT Appropriations Act under the 

heading of Capital Assistance to States—Intercity 

Passenger Service, of which no more than ten 

percent, or $9 million, may be made available for 

planning activities. In addition, a total of $540,500 

in planning funding, and at least $1,352,573 in FD/ 

construction funding also remained available until 

expended following the award of grants under the 

FY 2008 Capital Assistance to States—Intercity 

Passenger Service program. 

project development, while meeting the 

statutory and program constraints, this 

guidance provides four funding ‘‘tracks’’ 

in which applications may be 

submitted. FRA has adopted this fourTrack approach to aid in near-term 

economic recovery efforts and to 

establish the path to realize a fullydeveloped national High-Speed Rail/ 

Intercity Passenger Rail network. The 

deadlines for FRA obligation and 

project(s) completion for each Track 

reflect the imperatives of ARRA, 

balanced with the longer-term 

development goals. (See DATES above.) 

1.6.1 Track 1—Intercity Passenger Rail 

Projects Funded Under ARRA (‘‘Track 

1—Projects’’) 

This track is aimed at chiefly 

addressing the economic recovery goals 

of ARRA through—(a) FD/construction 

of ‘‘ready-to-go’’ projects—i.e., those 

with completed site-specific NEPA 

documentation (project-level final EIS, 

final EA or CE documentation) along 

with PE; and (b) completion of projectlevel NEPA and PE to prepare projects 

for FD/construction grants that may be 

available under future solicitations. 

Track 1 projects should be completed 

within two years of award. These 

projects are funded through either 

Section 301 (Intercity Passenger Rail 

Corridor Capital Assistance) or Section 

302 (Congestion Grants) of PRIIA, for 

the benefit of existing services, 

including those that support 

development of High-Speed Rail. 

Eligible projects include infrastructure, 

facilities, and equipment, and must 

have independent utility.3 The Federal 

funding share can be up to 100 percent, 

although evaluation criteria favor 

projects that leverage federal funding 

with non-federal investments. 

1.6.2 Track 2—High-Speed Rail/ 

Intercity Passenger Rail Service 

Development Programs (‘‘Track 2— 

Programs’’) 

This track is aimed at developing new 

High-Speed Rail corridor and Intercity 

Passenger Rail services, or substantial 

upgrades to existing corridor services, 

eligible under Section 501 (High-Speed 

Rail Corridor Development) and Section 

301 (Intercity Passenger Rail Corridor 

Capital Assistance) of PRIIA. It is 

intended to fund development of a set 

of inter-related projects that constitute 

the entirety or a distinct phase (or 

geographic section) of a long-range 

service development plan—projects 

which collectively produce benefits 

greater than the sum of each individual 

project.4 Under this Track, not all 

projects need to be ready-to-go; the 

Federal Government provides a 

commitment to fund the entire program, 

generally through a Letter of Intent 

(LOI), and obligates funds for FD/ 

construction projects through 

cooperative agreements as soon as they 

are deemed ready-to-go. Track 2 LOIs 

and cooperative agreements must 

include specific milestone deadlines for 

completion of environmental, 

engineering, design and other work. 

To be eligible for awards under Track 

2, Service Development Programs 

(‘‘SDP’’—defined in Section 2.2) must 

include completed: (a) A corridor-wide 

‘‘service’’ NEPA study, such as a 

programmatic or Tier I EIS; and (b) a 

High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail 

SDP, or an equivalent approach that 

provides a business and investment 

justification with sufficient project cost 

and benefit estimates. Key elements of 

an SDP or equivalent business case 

include: (i) An overview of program 

rationale (including purpose and need); 

(ii) a service and operations plan, and a 

prioritized capital investment plan for 

infrastructure, fleet and stations/ 

facilities; and (iii) an implementation 

approach, including schedule, project 

management plan, stakeholder 

agreements, and a financial plan for 

funding both capital and operations. See 

Appendix 2.1 for a summary of 

expectations for a SDP. 

Track 2 programs will generally 

address infrastructure, equipment and 

stations/facilities investments in a 

comprehensive fashion. While these 

programs are the most complicated and 

need a particularly rigorous project 

management approach, Track 2 

programs represent the long-term 

emphasis of the HSIPR Program, and 

thus FRA expects to focus its 

collaborative efforts on this Track. The 

Federal funding share can be up to 100 

percent, although evaluation criteria 

favor projects that leverage federal 

funding with non-federal investments. 

1.6.3 Track 3—Service Planning 

Activities funded under the FY 2009 

and FY 2008 DOT Appropriations Acts 

(‘‘Track 3—Planning’’) 

This track is aimed at helping 

establish a pipeline of future HighSpeed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail 

projects and service development 

programs by advancing planning 

activities for applicants at an earlier 

stage of the development process. Under 

Track 3, FRA will enter into cooperative 

agreements for preparation of SDPs, 

State Rail Plans and service-level 

environmental documents.5 This Track 

provides States an opportunity to 

complete the prerequisite work needed 

to submit applications under Tracks 1 

and 2, so that applicants may be ready 

for potential future solicitations. Under 

the terms of the FY 2008/2009 DOT 

Appropriations acts, planning activities 

funded under this Track require a 50 

percent non-Federal match. 

1.6.4 Track 4—FY2009 

Appropriations-Funded Projects (‘‘Track 

4—FY2009 Appropriations Projects’’) 6

Track 4 provides an alternative for 

projects that would otherwise fit under 

Track 1, but for State applicants offering 

at least a 50 percent non-Federal share 

of financing. This Track offers 

applicants simplified grant agreement 

terms, and up to five years to complete 

projects (vs. two years under Track 1). 

Applicants providing at least a 50- 

percent project match are strongly 

encouraged to submit project 

applications under Track 4 (those 

submitting project application(s) under 

Track 4 may also request concurrent 

consideration of such application(s) 

under Track 1). 

1.7 Opportunity for Public Comment 

FRA is soliciting public comment on 

this document through Docket Number 

FRA–2009–0045 (at http:// 

www.regulations.gov). While the interim 

guidance in this document does not 

constitute a rulemaking, FRA will 

consider all comments received no later 

than July 10, 2009 and will publish any 

resultant clarifications or revisions to 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 29905 

7A total of $90 million was appropriated under 

the FY 2009 DOT Appropriations Act to remain 

available and unexpended under the heading of 

Capital Assistance to States—Intercity Passenger 

Service, of which no more than 10 percent, or $9 

million, may be made available for planning 

activities. In addition, a total of $540,500 in 

planning funding, and at least $1,352,573 in FD/ 

construction funding also remained available until 

expended following the award of grants under the 

FY 2008 Capital Assistance to States—Intercity 

Passenger Service program. 

8Federal investment in corridor projects may be 

limited to the United States. 

this document in the Federal Register 

and on FRA’s Web site (http:// 

www.fra.dot.gov). FRA began this 

comment process during its outreach 

sessions in May and June, in which over 

1,100 stakeholders attended seven 

sessions around the country; in 

addition, a public docket was 

established for comment, and 110 

comments were received as of June 15, 

2009. FRA has already revised the 

approach contained herein based on this 

initial feedback. To give prospective 

applicants adequate time to complete 

their applications (while incorporating 

any guidance clarifications or revisions), 

FRA may adjust application dates to 

allow for a minimum of 30 days for 

application submission following any 

material changes to this guidance that 

arise from comments. 

Section 2: Award Information 

2.1 General Award Information 

ARRA appropriated a total of $8 

billion under three Intercity Passenger 

Rail capital investment programs 

authorized by the PRIIA: Section 501 

(High-Speed Rail Corridor 

Development), Section 301 (Intercity 

Passenger Rail Service Corridor Capital 

Assistance), and Section 302 

(Congestion Grants). ARRA left the mix 

of funding among the three PRIIA 

programs to the discretion of the 

Secretary of Transportation. As 

described in the Department’s April 

2009 strategic plan for high-speed rail, 

Vision for High-Speed Rail in America, 

FRA will not allocate funding among 

the three PRIIA programs in advance, 

but will cumulate the amounts under 

each PRIIA section from the funding 

sources identified in the selected 

applications, subject to the overall $8 

billion ARRA limit. In addition to the 

ARRA appropriation for High-Speed 

Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail, this 

funding opportunity announcement also 

solicits applications for up to 

$9,540,500 for Intercity Passenger Rail 

planning activities, and at least 

$82,352,573 in FD/construction funding 

appropriated under the FY 2008/2009 

DOT Appropriations Acts.7

This funding and announcement 

solicits applications for funding 

appropriated through ARRA, the FY 

2008/2009 DOT Appropriations Acts 

under the four distinct Tracks described 

above: 

• Track 1—Projects (ARRA funds); 

• Track 2—Programs (ARRA funds); 

• Track 3—Planning (annual 

appropriations funds for Interstate 

Passenger Rail planning from FY 2009 

and remaining from FY 2008); and 

• Track 4—FY2009 Appropriations 

Projects (annual appropriations funds 

for Interstate Passenger Rail nonplanning from FY 2009 and remaining 

from FY 2008). 

FRA anticipates making multiple 

awards under each of the four Tracks. 

While the entire $9,540,500 under Track 

3 and at least $82,352,573 under Track 

4 may be awarded, FRA may choose not 

to award through this solicitation the 

full amount available for Tracks 1 and 

2, to allow for potential future rounds of 

solicitations and awards which occur 

after 2009. There is no predetermined 

allocation between Tracks 1 and 2 or 

between this and any future 

solicitations; all such distributions will 

cumulatively reflect the nature and 

timing of the selected applications (as 

referenced in Section 5, selection 

criteria). 

2.2 Definitions of Key Terms, 

Concepts, and Milestones for Track 

Selection 

A prospective applicant under this 

solicitation should first determine into 

which Track the applicant’s proposal 

would most appropriately fit. The 

choice of Track largely reflects the scope 

of the proposed undertaking and the 

proposed effort’s achievement of key 

milestones within the project 

development process. Below are 

definitions of key terms, concepts, and 

milestones for the HSIPR Program that 

affect the selection of a Track. Section 

2.3 is then intended to assist an 

applicant in selecting a Track based on 

the proposed investment’s relationship 

to these terms, concepts, and 

milestones. 

Corridor—For the specific purposes of 

the HSIPR Program, a corridor is an 

existing or proposed Intercity Passenger 

Rail route of approximately 100–600 

miles in total length, linking population 

centers at its endpoints and typically 

points in between. Corridors may cross 

State or national boundaries and thus 

require a regional, multi-jurisdictional 

approach to planning and 

development.8

Final Design—The last phase of 

project development, including: rightof-way acquisition, utility relocation, 

the preparation of final design plans, 

construction management plans, system 

safety plans for construction 

management & operations, safety 

certification, any required collision 

hazard analysis, final construction cost 

estimates, and detailed specifications, as 

well as procurement of construction 

services and equipment. During this 

phase, any remaining uncertainties or 

risks associated with minor changes to 

design scope and the procurement 

processes are fully addressed, and plans 

for financing the project or program 

would be updated and refined to reflect 

accurately the expected year-ofexpenditure costs and cash flow 

projections. 

Financial Plan—The financial plan 

documents the recent and forecasted 

financial condition of the applicant 

agency and other key partners that will 

provide capital or operating funding for 

project development and/or 

implementation. The Financial Plan 

describes the current financial health of 

the aforementioned agencies, 

documents projected capital and 

operating costs and revenues, and 

details key assumptions and 

methodologies. A financial plan also 

details the sources, reliability and 

feasibility of funding for both capital 

and operating expenses and provides an 

overview of the project sponsor’s 

strategies to address potential project 

cost increases. 

FRA Obligation—Commitment of 

Federal funding made through 

execution of a grant agreement or 

cooperative agreement. 

High-Speed Rail—Intercity Passenger 

Rail service that ‘‘is reasonably expected 

to reach speeds of at least 110 mph’’ (49 

U.S.C. 26106(b)(4)). 

Independent Utility—A project, group 

of projects, or Service Development 

Program (or phase of a Service 

Development Program) is considered to 

have independent utility if it will result, 

upon completion, in the creation of new 

or substantially improved High-Speed 

Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail service, 

and will provide tangible and 

measurable benefits even if no 

additional investments in the same 

High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail 

service are made. Typical examples of 

these benefits would include on-time 

performance improvements, travel-time 

reductions, and higher service 

frequencies resulting in increased 

ridership. 

Intercity Passenger Rail—Defined in 

statue as ‘‘rail passenger transportation 

except commuter rail passenger 

transportation’’ (49 U.S.C. 24102(4)); it 

subsumes both High-Speed Rail and 

conventional intercity passenger 

29906 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 

services. Commuter rail is defined at as 

‘‘short-haul rail passenger transportation 

in metropolitan and suburban areas 

usually having reduced fare, multiple 

ride, and commuter tickets and morning 

and evening peak period operations’’ 

(49 U.S.C. 24102(3)); Federal funding for 

commuter rail projects is available from 

Federal Transit Administration 

programs. 

Intercity Passenger Rail Service—An 

Intercity Passenger Rail service consists 

of a group of one or more scheduled 

trains (roundtrips) that provide Intercity 

Passenger Rail transportation between 

bona fide travel markets (not 

constrained by State or jurisdictional 

boundaries), generally with similar 

quality and level-of-service 

specifications, within a common (but 

not necessarily exclusive or identical) 

set of identifiable geographic markets. 

An Intercity Passenger Rail service is 

considered ‘‘substantially changed’’ 

when its inherent nature or market 

focus is altered, or when its operating 

frequencies (roundtrips per day) are 

increased significantly; a substantial 

change in service may include adding 

short-distance corridor-type trains 

where only long-distance service 

operates, or service restoration where 

trains ceased to operate several years 

before. See Appendix 1.3 for further 

discussion of the definition of Intercity 

Passenger Rail. 

Letter of Intent (LOI)—Represents a 

contingent financial commitment by 

FRA to provide up to a prescribed 

amount of funding to fully implement a 

service development program (or 

specific phases of such a program), with 

defined milestones for completion of 

work necessary to ensure successful and 

timely program development. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) Documentation—Includes four 

principal levels (with respect to the 

HSIPR Program): 

• Tier I, ‘‘programmatic,’’ or servicelevel environmental impact statement 

(Tier I EIS)—Addresses actions at a 

broad level, such as a program concept 

for an entire corridor, and typically does 

not lead directly to project construction. 

• Site-specific, or project EIS— 

Addresses specific environmental issues 

associated with a site or project, and is 

intended to lead directly to construction 

once applicable permits are secured. 

• Environmental assessment (EA)— 

May be programmatic or site-specific, 

and concisely provides sufficient 

evidence and analysis of the proposal to 

determine whether to prepare an EIS or 

a finding of no significant impact 

(FONSI). 

• Categorical exclusion (CE)— 

Documentation that shows how a 

proposal fits a category of predefined 

actions which do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment and for which 

neither an EIS nor an environmental 

assessment are required. 

Planning—Activities that support the 

case for investing in project(s) or 

program(s), such as: identification of 

purpose and need; analysis comparing 

the costs, benefits, and impacts of a 

range of transportation alternatives; 

studies that assess different levels of rail 

service and investment; service-level, 

programmatic, or Tier I NEPA studies; 

Service Development Plans; and State 

Rail Plans. 

Preliminary Engineering (PE)— 

Sufficient engineering design to define a 

project, including identification of all 

environmental impacts, design of all 

critical project elements at a level 

sufficient to assure reliable cost 

estimates and schedules (in turn 

sufficient to complete project 

management and financial plans), and 

definition of procurement requirements 

and strategies. The PE development 

process starts with specific project 

design alternatives that allow for 

assessment of a range of rail 

improvements, specific alignments, and 

project designs—sufficient to support 

subsequent NEPA analysis. PE is 

prerequisite to final design (FD) and 

construction. Appendix 2.2 contains 

additional information about PE. 

Project—A High-Speed Rail/Intercity 

Passenger Rail project is a discrete 

action that has a distinct purpose, such 

as adding track to an existing railroad 

line, or the purchase of one or more 

pieces of rolling stock. 

Project Management Plan—Approach 

for ensuring successful implementation 

of a project or program, including: (i) 

Identification of a manager accountable 

for project or program delivery; (ii) an 

organization/resource plan that 

describes (e.g., through an organization 

chart) the relationships among entities 

involved in the proposed program and 

a description of the relationships among 

the entities responsible for the 

financing, design, construction, 

operation, and maintenance of the 

proposed program; (iii) any new legal 

entities required, how they would be 

structured, and their relationship to 

existing entities; (iv) stakeholder 

agreements with owners of right-of-way, 

operators, or other entities critical to 

successful project/program delivery;(v) 

required governmental actions and 

approvals; and, (vi) an appropriate 

system safety plan for the entire project 

lifecycle consistent with FTA guidance 

for safety and security management 

plans. The project management plan 

should address the safety certification 

process and any required collision 

hazard analysis consistent with the FRA 

guidance. A project management plan 

generally should also include metrics by 

which the success of the project is 

defined. 

Right-of-Way—Railroad infrastructure 

within the property lines of an existing, 

or within the presumed property lines 

of a proposed, railroad useful for 

Intercity Passenger Rail service. 

Service Development Plan (SDP)—A 

plan for developing High-Speed Rail/ 

Intercity Passenger Rail service, either 

initiating new service or improving 

existing service (e.g., adding train 

frequencies and/or reducing trip 

times)—typically developed around 

distinct phases and/or geographic 

sections of service improvement. A 

High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail 

SDP or equivalent covers three general 

topics: (i) Rationale (including purpose 

and need), (ii) service/operating plan 

and prioritized capital plan, and (iii) 

implementation plan (including project 

management approach, stakeholder 

agreements and financial plan). The 

precise structure of an SDP can vary, but 

these elements must be covered in some 

fashion. (See Appendix 2.1 for 

additional explanation). 

Service Development Program 

(‘‘Program’’)—Implementation of a 

High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail 

SDP, generally broken into discrete 

phases or geographic sections. Such 

programs may be for new service on an 

existing or new railroad alignment, or 

for improved service on an existing 

railroad alignment. 

2.3 Guide to Track Selection 

The table below should be used by 

applicants as a guide for determining 

the appropriate Track for application 

submissions. 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 29907 

TRACK SELECTION GUIDE

Funding track determination questions Response 

(yes/no) Funding track 

Has new or improved Intercity Passenger Rail service been selected as a promising alternative 

in the transportation corridor where the project is located? 

No ..................... Track 3—Service Planning. 

Yes ................... Proceed to Next Question. 

Does the project(s) lead to—introduction of High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail service 

within a corridor where no service of that type currently exists, or to a substantial change in 

an existing service? 

No ..................... Proceed to Next Question. 

Yes ................... Track 2—Programs. 

Does the project(s) include the rerouting of an existing Intercity Passenger Rail service onto a 

new, expanded, or previously abandoned right-of-way? 

No ..................... Proceed to Next Question. 

Yes ................... Track 2—Programs. 

Does the investment encompass multiple dispersed projects intended to produce a significant 

benefit to one or more Intercity Passenger Rail services? 

No ..................... Proceed to Next Question. 

Yes ................... Track 2—Programs. 

Even if no Service Development Plan exists, have specific Intercity Passenger Rail investment 

projects been identified for implementation? 

No ..................... Track 3—Service Planning. 

Yes ................... Proceed to Next Question. 

Have preliminary engineering (PE) and a project-level NEPA document been completed for the 

proposed project? 

No ..................... Track 1—PE/NEPA only. 

Yes ................... Proceed to Next Question. 

If PE and project-level NEPA documentation is complete, is a 50 percent (or greater) non-Federal match available? No ..................... Track 1—FD/Construction. 

Yes ................... Track 4—FY 2008/2009 

Appropriations Projects 

(or Track 1—Projects). 

After selecting the appropriate 

application Track, prospective 

applicants should consult the relevant 

Track-specific and general information 

contained in the balance of this 

document. 

2.4 Anticipated Award Amounts 

Tracks 1 and 2—Awards under Tracks 

1 and 2 will be made using a portion of 

the $8 billion appropriated through 

ARRA. FRA anticipates making multiple 

awards under Track 1 as a result of this 

solicitation; however, FRA will not 

award all of the available $8 billion to 

Track 1 applicants. Funds will be 

reserved for award to Track 2 

applications under this solicitation, and 

likely to Tracks 1 and 2 in potential 

future rounds of solicitations—as 

described in Section 5. As the 

authorizations underlying Tracks 1 and 

2 are new, the FRA cannot provide an 

average amount of funding per award in 

previous years. 

Tracks 3 and 4—Awards under Tracks 

3 and 4 will be made using the $90 

million dedicated to Capital Grants to 

States—Intercity Passenger Rail Service 

in the FY 2009 DOT Appropriations 

Act, plus the remaining funds 

appropriated for the same purpose in 

the Capital Assistance to States— 

Intercity Passenger Service Program in 

the FY 2008 DOT Appropriations Act 

(currently estimated at $1,893,073). In 

accordance with the provisions of the 

Appropriations Acts, no more than 10 

percent of appropriated amounts in each 

fiscal year ($9,540,500 of the available 

funds) may be allocated to Track 3— 

Planning, with the balance available for 

Track 4—FY2009 Appropriations 

Projects. These funds require a nonFederal match of at least 50 percent of 

total project cost. 

2.5 Types of Awards 

The table below summarizes the 

characteristics of funding awards by 

Track. For specific grant conditions, 

refer to section 6 and appendix 3. 

AWARD CHARACTERISTICS

Track 1—projects Track 2—programs Track 3—planning Track 4—FY 2009 

appropriations projects 

Legislative Funding Source • ARRA ............................ • ARRA ............................ • FY 2009, 2008 DOT Appropriations Act.• FY 2009, 2008 DOT Appropriations Act. 

Available Funding .............. • Portion of $8 B .............. • Portion of $8 B .............. • Up to $9.54 M ............... • No less than $82.3 M. 

Instrument of Commitment • Final Design/Construction Grants.

• PE/NEPA Cooperative 

Agreements 

• Letters of Intent .............

• Cooperative Agreements 

• Cooperative Agreements • Final Design/Construction Grants. 

Match Requirement ........... • Up to 100% Federal 

share.

• Up to 100% Federal 

share.

• At least 50% non-Federal match.• At least 50% non-Federal match. 

29908 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 

9 If substantial progress on NEPA documentation 

has been made on NEPA documentation, 

application may be reviewed for FD/Construction 

grant funding; in any case, project-level NEPA 

documentation must be complete at time of grant 

agreement. 

2.5.1 Track 1 

The FRA will make awards under 

Track 1 through either: (a) Grant 

agreements supporting FD and project 

construction; or (b) cooperative 

agreements for completion of PE and/or 

project-level NEPA documentation. 

Construction grants will fund both FD 

(if not already completed) and 

construction of projects for which PE 

and project-level NEPA documentation 

is complete at the time of application.9

FD/construction grant recipients will be 

required to obtain FRA approval prior to 

the commencement of construction 

activities (the process will be set out in 

the grant agreement). The grant 

agreement can also be structured to 

cover alternative construction scenarios, 

such as through a design-build type 

approach. Applicants under Track 1 

will be considered for funding under 

either Intercity Passenger Rail Corridor 

Capital Assistance Grants (Section 301 

of PRIIA), or Congestion Grants (Section 

302 of PRIIA). Eligible projects intended 

to reduce congestion by alleviating 

major rail capacity bottlenecks, 

particularly those that benefit multiple 

railroad operators (e.g. Intercity 

Passenger Rail, rail freight, and 

commuter rail) in a congested corridor, 

will likely be considered for funding 

under the Congestion Grant program. 

Note that where multiple railroad 

operations benefit from project(s), FRA 

will expect the costs for such project(s) 

to be shared proportional to the benefit 

each operator accrues from the 

investment. 

Under Track PE/NEPA cooperative 

agreements, FRA will be more involved 

in the project through collaborative 

work with the recipient. In addition to 

providing technical assistance to the 

recipient, FRA will participate in key 

project meetings, and will assist in the 

preparation of engineering and 

environmental documents. FRA will 

also be responsible for approving project 

deliverables at key milestones, and 

providing authorization for progressing 

with subsequent stages of the project. 

2.5.2 Track 2 

Under Track 2, FRA may issue Letters 

of Intent (LOI) for Service Development 

Programs, and make subsequent awards 

for program components through 

cooperative agreements. 

The issuance of a LOI represents the 

expression of FRA’s full support of a 

Service Development Program, and the 

funding contingently committed 

through an LOI will be reserved for that 

Service Development Program from the 

$8 billion in available ARRA funding. 

An LOI will include milestones for 

completion of work needed to advance 

the program into obligation and 

completion; if milestone deadlines are 

not met, funding reserved under an LOI 

will be returned to the pool of funds 

available for future solicitations. 

As milestones under an LOI are 

reached, FRA will obligate funding to 

implement approved portions of the 

program through a cooperative 

agreement. Funding to complete 

remaining PE and project-level NEPA 

would be awarded immediately 

following the issuance of the LOI. 

Funding for FD/construction would be 

awarded through a grant or cooperative 

agreement as milestones are reached 

(e.g., completion of PE and NEPA for 

project(s) with independent utility. 

Even after funds are converted from LOI 

into a cooperative/grant agreement (i.e., 

obligated), grantees will be required to 

obtain FRA approval prior to the 

commencement of construction 

activities. This process will be included 

in the grant agreement (which could 

also be structured to address options 

such as a design-build implementation 

approach). 

Recognizing the unique challenges 

posed by complex new corridor 

programs, a higher level of Federal 

oversight and support will be involved 

than under standard grant agreements. 

The substantial Federal involvement of 

FRA will extend across all aspects of 

Service Development Programs and will 

include technical assistance, review of 

interim work products, support for 

environmental reviews, review of PE 

and FD, and continuous program 

oversight. 

2.5.3 Track 3 

FRA will make awards under Track 3 

using the $9,540,500 available under the 

FY 2008/2009 DOT Appropriations Acts 

through cooperative agreements. The 

substantial Federal involvement for 

Intercity Passenger Rail planning 

activities would include agreement on 

the scope of study, review of draft 

studies, and acceptance of final 

deliverables. Recognizing the 

importance of planning to the long-term 

success of the HSIPR Program and the 

limited funding available under existing 

appropriations, FRA will favorably 

consider applicant expenditures for 

High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail 

project planning when evaluating the 

State share or matching contributions 

component of an evaluation under 

subsequent solicitations. 

2.5.4 Track 4 

Awards under Track 4 will be made 

using $82 million available under the 

FY 2009 DOT Appropriations Act for 

non-planning Intercity Passenger Rail 

Capital Assistance to States, as well as 

remaining non-planning funding under 

the analogous FY 2008 DOT 

Appropriations Act funding. FRA 

anticipates making one or more awards, 

and awarding the entire $82 million 

under Track 4 as a result of this 

solicitation. 

Funding under Track 4 cannot exceed 

50 percent of a project’s total cost. States 

are the only eligible applicants under 

Track 4, and must be able to certify in 

their applications as to the availability 

of the matching funds. As the source of 

the Federal funds is a regular annual 

appropriation rather than ARRA, 

requirements specific to ARRA (e.g., job 

retention and creation as an evaluation 

factor, and various reporting 

requirements) need not be met, although 

States are encouraged to do so. 

The average amount of Federal 

funding per non-planning award in the 

analogous FY 2008 program was $2.75 

million. 

Section 3: Eligibility Information 

Applications will be required to meet 

minimum requirements for each Track 

in terms of applicant eligibility, project 

eligibility, and the fulfillment of other 

Track-specific application prerequisites. 

To the extent that an application’s 

substance exceeds the minimum 

eligibility requirements described 

below, such qualifications will be 

considered in evaluating the merits of 

an application. 

3.1 Eligible Applicant Types 

Eligibility of different types of 

applicants varies by Track and 

authorization, as summarized below. 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 29909 

APPLICANT ELIGIBILITY

Track 1—projects Track 2—programs Track 3— 

planning 

Track 4—FY 

2008/2009 

Appropriations 

projects PRIIA 

Section 

301 

PRIIA 

Section 

302 

PRIIA 

Section 

301 

PRIIA 

Section 

501 

FY2008/2009 

Appropriations 

acts 

FY2008/2009 

Appropriations 

acts 

States ........................................................................................... ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 

Groups of States .......................................................................... ✓ .............. ✓ ✓ .......................... ..........................

Interstate Compacts ..................................................................... ✓ .............. ✓ ✓ .......................... ..........................

Public agencies established by one or more States and having 

responsibility for providing Intercity Passenger Rail service ... ✓ .............. ✓ .............. .......................... ..........................

Public agencies established by one or more States and having 

responsibility for providing High-speed Passenger Rail service ............................................................................................. .............. .............. .............. ✓ .......................... ..........................

Amtrak .......................................................................................... ✓ * ✓ ** .............. ✓ .......................... ..........................

*Amtrak may enter into a cooperative agreement with one or more States to carry out an eligible project 

**Amtrak is eligible in cooperation with States. 

Further detail on the definitions of 

‘‘eligible applicants’’ is available in 

Appendix 3 under ‘‘Applicant Types.’’ 

3.1.1 Track 1 

An entity seeking assistance under 

Track 1 must meet the definition of an 

‘‘applicant’’ under the funding 

authorization that would pertain to its 

proposal(s)—either Section 301 

(Intercity Passenger Rail Corridor 

Capital Assistance) or Section 302 

(Congestion Grants) of PRIIA. Eligible 

applicant entities under those sections 

are as follows: 

• Intercity Passenger Rail Corridor 

Capital Assistance (Section 301)—States 

(including the District of Columbia), 

groups of States, Interstate Compacts, 

and public agencies established by one 

or more States and having responsibility 

for providing intercity passenger rail 

service. 

• Congestion Grants (Section 302)— 

States (including the District of 

Columbia), or Amtrak (in cooperation 

with States). 

3.1.2 Track 2 

An entity seeking assistance under 

Track 2 must meet the definition of an 

‘‘applicant’’ under the funding 

authorization that would pertain to its 

proposal(s)—either Section 301 

(Intercity Passenger Rail Corridor 

Capital Assistance) or Section 501 

(High-Speed Rail Corridor 

Development) of PRIIA. Eligible 

applicant entities under those sections 

are as follows: 

• Intercity Passenger Rail Corridor 

Capital Assistance (Section 301)—States 

(including the District of Columbia), 

groups of States, interstate compacts, 

and public agencies established by one 

or more States and having responsibility 

for providing Intercity Passenger Rail 

service. 

• High-Speed Rail Corridor 

Development (Section 501)—States 

(including the District of Columbia), 

groups of States, interstate compacts, 

and public agencies established by one 

or more States and having responsibility 

for providing High-Speed Rail service, 

or Amtrak. 

3.1.3 Tracks 3 and 4 

Only States, including District of 

Columbia, are eligible to apply under 

Tracks 3 and 4. 

3.2 Applicant and Key Partner 

Qualifications 

For an application submitted by an 

eligible entity to be considered under 

any Track, it must affirmatively 

demonstrate that the applicant has or 

will have the legal, financial, and 

technical capacity to carry out the 

proposal. In addition, for FD/ 

construction applications under Tracks 

1, 2, and 4, the applicant must 

demonstrate that it has or will have 

satisfactory continuing control over the 

use of equipment or facilities acquired, 

constructed, or improved by the project, 

and the capability and willingness to 

maintain such equipment or facilities. 

Further discussion of how applicants 

can demonstrate compliance with these 

minimum qualifications appears in 

Appendix 1.2. 

Entities other than States must submit 

information and documentation 

demonstrating the fulfillment of the 

minimum applicant qualifications 

described in this section as part of a 

preapplication (see Section 4.3. for 

complete preapplication information 

and documentation requirements). On 

the basis of such information, FRA will 

issue a written decision on the entity’s 

eligibility as an applicant. 

3.3 Cost Sharing and Matching 

3.3.1 Treatment of Applicant Cost 

Sharing 

3.3.1.1 Track 1 

Pursuant to the provisions of the 

ARRA appropriation for High-Speed 

Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail, the 

Federal share of the costs of projects 

issued grants under Track 1 of this 

solicitation will be, at the option of the 

recipient, up to 100 percent. 

The evaluation criteria provide 

preference to applicants, should the 

applicant choose the option of 

leveraging federal funds with 

contributions from its own project 

partners’ resources toward the costs of 

its proposed project. These 

contributions may be considered in 

evaluating the merit of its application 

(See section 5 for a complete description 

of evaluation and selection criteria). 

3.3.1.2 Track 2 

As in the case for Track 1, the Federal 

share of the costs of projects issued 

grants under Track 2 of this solicitation 

shall be, at the option of the recipient, 

up to 100 percent. 

Again, the evaluation criteria provide 

preference to applicants that leverage 

federal funding with non-Federal 

investment. Applicants for Service 

Development Programs who do not 

choose to contribute their own or their 

project partners’ resources toward the 

costs of the proposed project, and who 

(i) have not demonstrated continuous, 

sustained support to the proposed 

program, and (ii) do not have a 

demonstrable history of capital 

investment in intercity passenger rail, 

may, as a condition of the obligation of 

29910 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 

funding for FD/construction activities, 

be required to establish a Capital 

Reserve Account funded by their own 

dedicated financial resources. Funds 

deposited by recipients into a Capital 

Reserve Account would be used to pay 

for any project cost overruns. 

3.3.1.3 Tracks 3 and 4 

Pursuant to the provisions of the FY 

2008/2009 DOT Appropriations Acts, 

the Federal share of the costs of projects 

issued grants under Tracks 3 and 4 of 

this solicitation may not exceed 50 

percent. 

If an applicant chooses the option of 

contributing, from its own or its partner 

project stakeholders’ resources, more 

than 50 percent of the costs of its 

proposed project, such additional 

contributions will be considered in 

evaluating the merit of its application 

(See Section 5 for a complete 

description of evaluation and selection 

criteria). 

3.3.2 Requirements for Applicant Cost 

Sharing 

Whether optional (under Tracks 1 and 

2) or mandatory (under Tracks 3 and 4), 

an applicant’s contribution toward the 

cost of its proposed project may be in 

the form of cash or, with FRA approval, 

in-kind contributions of services, 

supplies, equipment, or real estate. As 

part of its application, an applicant 

offering an in-kind contribution must 

provide a documented estimate of the 

monetary value of any such 

contribution, and its eligibility under 49 

CFR 18.24. 

The applicant must provide as part of 

its application documentation that 

demonstrates that it has committed and 

will be able to fulfill any pledged 

contribution, including committing any 

required financial resources that are 

budgeted or planned at the time the 

application is submitted. Furthermore, 

any applicant under Tracks 1 and 2 who 

seeks to contribute toward its proposed 

project funds from another Federal 

financial assistance program that itself 

requires a match, should be aware of the 

prohibition in many such programs of 

using any Federal funding (such as that 

being applied for under this program) as 

a matching share (See 49 CFR 

18.24(b)(3)). Funds from other Federal 

financial assistance programs may not 

be used to satisfy the 50 percent match 

requirement under Tracks 3 and 4. 

3.4 Grantee Responsibility for Project 

Delivery, Cost Overruns, and 

Contributions Due From States under 

PRIIA Section 209 

All applicants will be required to 

demonstrate the ability to: 

• Absorb any cost overruns and 

deliver the proposed project with no 

Federal funding or financial assistance 

beyond that provided in grant or 

cooperative agreement; and 

• Cover all future cash needs 

associated with the service benefiting 

from the proposed program/project and 

allocated to States as a result of the 

costing methodology to be developed 

under Section 209 of the PRIIA. 

3.5 Eligible Projects 

3.5.1 Track 1 

Track 1 consists of two sub-Tracks: 

Track 1 FD/construction and Track 1 

PE/NEPA work in support of 

construction projects. To be eligible 

under either Track 1 FD/construction or 

Track 1 PE/NEPA a project for which 

construction or PE/NEPA funding is 

sought must be eligible under Section 

301 (Intercity Passenger Rail Corridor 

Capital Assistance) and/or Section 302 

(Congestion Grants) of PRIIA. 

3.5.1.1 Intercity Passenger Rail 

Corridor Capital Assistance (PRIIA 

Section 301) Eligible Projects 

Eligible projects for Intercity 

Passenger Rail Corridor Capital 

Assistance funding under Track 1 

include: 

• Acquiring, constructing, improving, 

or inspecting equipment, track and track 

structures, or a facility for use in or for 

the primary benefit of Intercity 

Passenger Rail service, including HighSpeed Rail; expenses incidental to the 

acquisition or construction (including 

designing, engineering, location 

surveying, mapping, inspecting, 

environmental studies, and acquiring 

rights-of-way); payments for the capital 

portions of rail trackage rights 

agreements; highway-rail grade crossing 

improvements related to Intercity 

Passenger Rail service; mitigating 

environmental impacts; communication 

and signalization improvements; and 

relocation assistance, acquiring 

replacement housing sites, and 

acquiring, constructing, relocating, and 

rehabilitating replacement housing; 

• Rehabilitating, remanufacturing, or 

overhauling rail rolling stock and 

facilities used primarily in Intercity 

Passenger Rail service; and 

• Projects to provide access to 

Intercity Passenger Rail service rolling 

stock for nonmotorized transportation, 

including bicycles and recreational 

equipment, and to provide storage 

capacity in intercity passenger trains for 

such transportation, equipment, and 

other luggage, to ensure passenger 

safety. 

3.5.1.2 Congestion Grants (PRIIA 

Section 302) Eligible Projects 

Eligible projects for Congestion Grants 

funding under Track 1 include facilities, 

infrastructure, and equipment for highpriority rail corridor projects necessary 

to reduce congestion or facilitate 

ridership growth in Intercity Passenger 

Rail transportation, including HighSpeed Rail, as mandated in PRIIA 

Section 302. 

To be eligible for Congestion Grant 

program funding in Track 1, an 

applicant must demonstrate that the 

proposed project: 

• Has been identified by Amtrak as 

necessary to reduce congestion or 

facilitate ridership growth in Intercity 

Passenger Rail transportation along 

heavily traveled rail corridors; or 

• Is sufficiently advanced to fulfill 

the PRIIA Section 302 purposes on an 

expedited schedule. 

Applicants should give particular 

consideration to applying for 

Congestion Grants funding under 

circumstances in which the proposed 

project meets the eligibility 

requirements described above and: 

• Is anticipated to result in significant 

joint benefits for multiple railroad 

operators (e.g., Intercity Passenger Rail, 

rail freight, and commuter rail) in a 

congested corridor, with proportional 

cost sharing among the operators; 

• Involves the construction or 

improvement of infrastructure that will 

significantly benefit, but which will not 

be directly used by, Intercity Passenger 

Rail service (e.g., freight bypasses); and/ 

or 

• Will benefit service within one 

State, but will be physically located 

within another State—under such 

circumstances, the benefiting State may 

choose to cooperate with Amtrak or 

through a regional compact to put 

forward an application for the proposed 

project. 

3.5.2 Track 2 

Service Development Programs and 

phases of such programs, that are 

applied for under Track 2 must consist 

of a coordinated and comprehensive 

grouping of projects intended to result 

in the introduction of new services or 

significant improvements to existing 

services that are eligible under PRIIA 

Section 301 and/or Section 501. 

3.5.2.1 Intercity Passenger Rail 

Corridor Capital Assistance (PRIIA 

Section 301) 

Eligible Projects 

These are listed under Track 1, above. 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 29911 

3.5.2.2 High-Speed Rail Corridor 

Development (PRIIA Section 501 

Eligible Projects) 

Eligible projects for High-Speed Rail 

Corridor funding under Track 2 include: 

• Acquiring, constructing, improving 

or inspecting equipment, track and track 

structures, or a facility for use in or for 

the primary benefit of High-Speed Rail 

service; expenses incidental to the 

acquisition or construction (including 

designing, engineering, location 

surveying, mapping, environmental 

studies, and acquiring rights-of-way); 

payments for the capital portions of rail 

trackage rights agreements; highway-rail 

grade crossing improvements related to 

High-Speed Rail service; mitigating 

environmental impacts; communication 

and signalization improvements; and 

relocation assistance, acquiring 

replacement housing sites, and 

acquiring, constructing, relocating, and 

rehabilitating replacement housing. 

Projects must be located on a high-speed 

rail corridor designated by the Secretary 

pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 104(d)(2). 

3.5.3 Track 3 

Eligible planning studies are those 

that: 

• Lead to the completion of a SDP to 

support future applications under Track 

2—Programs; 

• Identify and compare the costs, 

benefits, and impacts of a range of 

transportation alternatives, including 

High-Speed Rail and/or Intercity 

Passenger Rail, as a means of providing 

decision makers with the information 

necessary to implement appropriate 

transportation solutions; 

• Support the preparation of 

environmental documents that are 

prerequisite to the fulfillment of Service 

NEPA; and 

• Consist of operational analyses and 

simulations, and projections of future 

service requirements, leading to 

systematic and rational priority lists of 

projects that could be eligible for PRIIA 

Section 301 or 302 funding, and could 

ultimately contribute to SDPs. 

3.5.4 Track 4 

To be eligible for funding under Track 

4, a proposed project must be 

specifically included in the applicant 

State’s Statewide Transportation 

Improvement Plan (STIP) at the time of 

application. Eligible types of projects 

under Track 4 include (1) acquiring, 

constructing, or improving equipment, 

track and track structures, or a facility 

for use in or for the primary benefit of 

Intercity Passenger Rail service 

including High-Speed Rail service, (2) 

expenses incidental to the acquisition or 

construction (including designing, 

engineering, location surveying, 

mapping, environmental studies, and 

acquiring rights-of-way), (3) highwayrail grade crossing improvements 

related to Intercity Passenger Rail 

service, (4) mitigating environmental 

impacts, (5) communication and 

signalization improvements, and (6) 

rehabilitating, remanufacturing, or 

overhauling rail rolling stock and 

facilities used primarily in Intercity 

Passenger Rail service. 

3.5.5 Rail Operating Expenses 

In no cases are Federal funds eligible 

to be used for rail operating expenses. 

3.6 Other Prerequisites 

3.6.1 General Prerequisites 

In general, proposals under all Tracks 

must meet the following additional 

prerequisites: 

• Applications must be complete, as 

defined in this notice; 

• The complete application must 

demonstrate that the project has been 

identified through a rational planning 

process (ideally a High-Speed Rail/ 

Intercity Passenger Rail SDP); 

• The project (except for a planning 

project under Track 3) must be 

consistent with an overall plan for 

developing the benefiting High-Speed 

Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail service; 

and 

• The project (except for a planning 

project under Track 3) must result in 

independent utility, as defined under 

Section 2.2 of this notice. 

3.6.2 Prerequisites for Construction 

Grants 

If the applicant is seeking a 

construction grant, then the application 

must demonstrate all of the following: 

• That PE (as defined under Section 

2.2 of this notice) has been completed 

for the proposed project, resulting in 

project designs that are reasonably 

expected to conform to all regulatory, 

safety, security, and other design 

requirements, including those under the 

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA); 

• That a Project NEPA document 

(e.g., a CE exclusion worksheet, a 

completed EA, or a completed final EIS, 

as defined under Section 2.2 of this 

notice) has been completed for the 

proposed project; 

• That the applicant has reached, at a 

minimum, agreements in principle with 

key project partners, including but not 

limited to infrastructure-owning 

railroads and the railroad that operates 

or will operate the benefiting HighSpeed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail 

service, as to the scope of the proposed 

project and the realization of the 

operating benefits (e.g., those reflected 

in changes to schedules) it is intended 

to generate; and 

• That the applicant has developed a 

project management plan for managing 

the implementation of the proposed 

project, including the management and 

mitigation of project risks; and 

• That the applicant has developed a 

Financial Plan—for each phase of 

service that details the ‘‘sources and 

uses’’ of both capital and operating 

funding. 

3.6.3 Prerequisites for Equipment 

Procurement or Design Grants 

If the applicant is seeking a grant for 

the procurement or design of railroad 

equipment, the proposed equipment 

should be consistent with Section 305 of 

PRIIA, which calls for the establishment 

of a standardized next-generation rail 

corridor equipment pool. Compliance 

with Section 305 of PRIIA will assist in 

creating the economies of scale 

necessary to achieve the 

Administration’s goal, as outlined in 

FRA’s Strategic Plan, of developing a 

sustainable railroad equipment 

manufacturing base in the United States. 

3.6.4 Selection of Proposed Operator 

(Tracks 1 and 2 only) 

If the applicant has not selected the 

proposed operator of the benefiting 

High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail 

service competitively, then the 

application must demonstrate why the 

proposed operator is the best choice, 

taking into account all relevant 

quantitative and qualitative factors, and 

that use of the proposed operator will 

not needlessly increase the cost of the 

project or of the operations that it 

enables or improves. 

3.6.5 Service Development Plan (Track 

2 Only; Desirable for Other Tracks) 

All applicants under Track 2 are 

required to have completed all the 

components of an High Speed Rail/ 

Intercity Passenger Rail SDP, as defined 

in Appendix 2.1 of this guidance. 

3.6.6 Positive Train Control (PTC) 

If the project involves improvements 

to railroad signaling/control systems, 

then the application must demonstrate 

that the proposed improvements are 

consistent with a comprehensive plan 

for complying with the requirements for 

PTC implementation under Section 104 

of the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 

2008 (‘‘RSIA,’’ Division A of Pub. L. 

110–432, October 16, 2008, codified at 

49 U.S.C. 20147). 

29912 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 

3.6.7 Inclusion in STIP (Tracks 3 and 

4 Only) 

Proposed projects must be specifically 

included in the applicant State’s STIP at 

the time of application to be eligible. 

3.7 Eligibility Restrictions 

Pursuant to the provisions of PRIIA 

and ARRA, and the funding approach 

described in Section 1.6 of this notice, 

certain types of applications would be 

subject to various eligibility restrictions. 

The following table shows ineligible 

types of applications by Track. 

ELIGIBILITY RESTRICTIONS

Ineligible under track 

1 2 3 4 

Applications submitted by private entities other than Amtrak. Amtrak’s eligibility as an applicant 

is restricted to PRIIA Section 302 (in cooperation with a State) and Section 501 ..................... x x x x 

For projects for which commuter rail passenger transportation is the primary intended beneficiary; ........................................................................................................................................... x x x x 

For projects involving the development of State Rail Plans or High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail SDPs; ........................................................................................................................ x x ................ x 

For projects intended to support the introduction of a new Intercity Passenger Rail service (as 

defined under Section 2.2 of this notice); .................................................................................... x ................ ................ x 

For projects involving significant construction of railroad infrastructure on a new (e.g., greenfield, outside of existing railroad rights-of-way) or previously abandoned alignment; ................. x ................ ................ x 

For multiple discrete projects that would collectively yield a significant benefit to Intercity Passenger Rail services operating in one or more corridors. FRA will consider the magnitude of 

the service improvement (e.g., travel-time savings and frequency increases), the total cost of 

the investment, and the geographic scope of the proposed projects (e.g., at multiple versus 

contiguous sites within the corridor) in determining whether an application (or group of applications) falls within the scope of this restriction; or ..................................................................... x ................ ................ x 

For projects in which the physical improvements are located outside of the United States. However, in the case of a joint project of a State or group of States and a foreign government, in 

which construction of all physical improvements outside the United States will be paid for by 

the foreign participants, planning, PE and NEPA work applicable to both the U.S. and foreign 

portions of the project is eligible if funded on a proportional basis ............................................. x ................ ................ x 

For any expenses associated with passenger rail operating costs of rail operators ...................... x x x x 

Additional restrictions are fully 

described in Section 4.3.8 of this notice. 

Section 4: Application and Submission 

Information 

4.1 Applying Online 

FRA participates in the Grants 

Management Line of Business (GMLoB) 

E–Gov initiative. As part of that 

initiative, FRA uses the Administration 

for Children and Families’ (ACF) 

GrantSolutions (GS) Grants Management 

System. All applications must be 

submitted to FRA through 

GrantSolutions. To access the system, go 

to https://www.grantsolutions.gov. If 

you have any problems accessing GS, 

please contact the Custom Applications 

Support and Training Unit (CAST) 

helpdesk at 1–800–618–0223 or 

help@grantsolutions.gov. 

• Applicants must register in GS, 

obtain a Data Universal Number System 

(DUNS) number and register their 

organization with the Central Contractor 

Registration (CCR) database prior to 

applying in GS. Applicants should 

begin the process immediately to meet 

the application submission deadlines. 

• Standard application forms 

(identified in Section 4.3.3.3), will be 

available electronically on the Funding 

Opportunity page at http:// 

www.GrantSolutions.gov. The Funding 

Opportunity screen provides applicants 

with general announcement information 

and access to all application kit 

materials in order to view and print 

application forms and information. In 

addition, applicants can apply online 

through this screen. 

• Program-specific preapplication 

and application forms (also identified in 

Sections 4.3 and 4.4 below) may be 

downloaded from FRA’s Web site at 

http://www.fra.dot.gov/ 

HSR_IPR_Program. 

4.2 Address to Request Application 

Package 

If Internet access is unavailable, 

please write to FRA at the following 

address to request a paper application: 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Federal Railroad Administration, 

Attn: HSIPR Program Information 

(RDV–10), 

Mail Stop 20, 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

4.3 Content and Form of Application 

4.3.1 Preapplication 

All prospective applicants for all 

Tracks must submit a preapplication in 

order to establish communication with 

FRA, and to afford FRA an opportunity 

to provide feedback to the prospective 

applicant as to the suitability of their 

proposed project under the Track that 

the applicant proposes to use. 

Preapplications should be submitted as 

early as possible, but no later than July 

10, 2009, and applicants should not 

wait for submission of, or any comments 

on, a preapplication before preparing 

their full applications. Prospective 

applicants for potential future funding 

rounds of solicitations are not required 

to submit a preapplication at this time. 

FRA will announce any corresponding 

application as needed. 

Preapplications consist of the 

following components: 

• Project Description—A brief 

overview of the project’s main features, 

type of proposed improvement, 

location, purpose, expected outcome, 

cost, ownership arrangements and the 

Intercity Passenger Rail service(s) that 

will benefit from the project; 

• Project Development Status—The 

status of key project development 

elements, such as completion of the 

planning documents through which the 

project was identified, engineering 

work, and NEPA documentation; and 

• Applicant Eligibility—Answers to 

questions regarding cost sharing, and 

applicant and key partners’ legal, 

financial, and technical capacity to 

carry out their proposed project. 

Prospective applicants that do not fall 

within the definition of a State will also 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 29913 

be required to provide copies of 

documentation (or references (URLs) to 

such documentation that is located on 

the Internet) that supports the answers 

provided in the preapplication form. 

Such supporting documentation should 

include (to the extent available), but 

need not be limited to, copies of laws 

that established the applicant as a legal 

entity, contractual agreements between 

States (either as a group of States or an 

interstate compact), financial statements 

and audit reports, and technical reports 

demonstrating the applicant’s technical 

capacity and experience in carrying out 

projects similar to that proposed. 

In an effort to focus application efforts 

and remedy concerns, FRA may contact 

potential applicants if there are any 

questions that arise from the 

information submitted in a 

preapplication, or if the information 

raises questions as to the eligibility of 

the proposed project or its proper 

classification by Track. For 

preapplications submitted by applicants 

that do not fall within the definition of 

a State, and for preapplications under 

Track 2, FRA will contact the 

prospective applicants to kick-off 

discussions for the preparation of the 

application. 

4.3.2 Application Administrative 

Requirements 

Prior to submitting an application, 

prospective applicants must have 

completed two administrative 

requirements: Establishment of a DUNS 

(Data Universal Numbering System) 

number, and registration in the Central 

Contractor Registration (CCR) database. 

These requirements need not be 

completed prior to submitting a 

preapplication, but FRA encourages 

applicants to begin the process 

immediately to meet the application 

submission deadlines. 

All applicants must include a DUNS 

number in their application. 

Applications without a DUNS number 

are incomplete. A DUNS number is a 

unique nine-digit number recognized as 

the universal standard for identifying 

and keeping track of entities receiving 

Federal funds. The identifier is used for 

tracking purposes and to validate 

address and point of contact 

information for Federal assistance 

applicants, recipients and subrecipients. 

The DUNS number will be used 

throughout the grant lifecycle. 

Obtaining a DUNS number is a free, 

simple, one-time activity. Obtain a 

number by calling 1–866–705–5177 or 

by applying online at http:// 

fedgov.dnb.com/webform/ 

displayHomePage.do. 

FRA also requires that all applicants 

(other than individuals) for Federal 

financial assistance maintain current 

registrations in the CCR database. The 

CCR database is the repository for 

standard information about Federal 

financial assistance applicants, 

recipients and subrecipients. 

Organizations that have previously 

submitted applications via http:// 

www.grants.gov are already registered 

with CCR, as it is a requirement for 

www.grants.gov registration. Please 

note, however, that applicants must 

update or renew their CCR registration 

at least once per year to maintain an 

active status. Information about 

registration procedures can be accessed 

at http://www.ccr.gov. 

4.3.3 Application Package 

Components 

The application package for the 

HSIPR Program consists of three 

components—(1) program-specific 

application forms—Narrative and 

Templates Form—available from FRA’s 

Web site at: http://www.fra.dot.gov/us/ 

content/2243, (2) supporting 

documentation, and (3) standard 

application forms available through 

http://www.GrantSolutions.gov. 

Applicants must complete all three 

components of the application package 

as required by Track and listed in the 

section 4.2.5 application checklist; 

failure to do so may result in the 

application being removed from 

consideration for award. Both the 

standard application forms and the 

Narrative and Templates Form must be 

submitted through http:// 

www.GrantSolutions.gov—with 

standard forms submitted directly as 

electronic forms, and program-specific 

forms submitted as attachments to the 

application. 

4.3.3.1 Narrative and Templates Form 

The most significant component of 

the application package is the Narrative 

and Templates Forms, forms into which 

the applicant enters specific information 

about the proposed project. The forms 

include templates that have been 

developed by FRA to capture pertinent 

qualitative and quantitative programspecific information needed for FRA to 

confirm applicant and project’s 

eligibility for the HSIPR Program, and 

information needed for evaluation and 

selection of applications. These forms 

will be used to conduct a 

comprehensive benefit cost analysis. 

The forms allow for the applicant to 

make quantitative and qualitative 

arguments of the public return on 

investment. In order to conduct this 

analysis FRA requires specific 

quantitative data relating to service 

outputs (delay reduction, schedule 

improvement, or capacity increases), 

and transportation outputs (increases in 

passenger-miles traveled on Intercity 

Passenger Rail services, including shifts 

from other modes of transportation). 

The information entered into the 

Narrative and Templates Form falls into 

two categories: (1) Narrative 

information, provided in response to 

specific application questions, with 

length limitations for each response; 

and (2) structured and/or quantitative 

information, which is entered into 

tables contained in the Forms. 

Applicants may track and submit the 

Narrative and Templates Forms through 

GrantSolutions. Separate Track-specific 

Narrative and Template Forms are 

tailored to corresponding tracks. 

Information requested in the Narrative 

and Templates Form includes 

information on project overview, 

planning, purpose and need, project 

development status, project benefits— 

economic recovery, transportation, 

environmental and livable 

communities—project estimate/budget, 

applicant qualifications, stakeholder 

agreements and financial and operation 

information. Completing the FRAdeveloped forms is expected to facilitate 

information input for required OMB 

standard forms described in section 

4.3.3.3 below. 

4.3.3.2 Application Supporting 

Documentation 

In order to provide information 

referenced in the Narrative and 

Templates Form, applicants must 

submit additional documentation 

supporting their entries on the forms 

and confirming their eligibility under 

the proposed Track. The supporting 

documentation should largely include 

information that applicants developed 

during project planning activities thus, 

the format and structure of supporting 

documents is at the discretion of the 

applicant. Supporting documentation 

may be provided one of three ways—(1) 

as attachments to the application; (2) as 

Internet references (URLs) to 

documentation that is available online; 

or (3) in hard copy for materials that 

cannot otherwise be provided (such as 

oversized engineering drawings). 

Applicants should provide any URL 

references for supporting 

documentation, along with notifications 

of any documentation being submitted 

in hard copy, in the appropriate section 

of the narrative and templates form. The 

supporting documentation includes 

items as specified below: 

• PE Materials—Applicants should 

provide any documents that 

29914 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 

demonstrate the PE status (or FD, if 

completed) of the proposed project. The 

PE requirements are detailed in Section 

2.2 and Appendix 2.2. The submission 

of PE Materials is required for Track 1 

FD/construction, Track 2 and Track 4. 

PE Materials should be submitted as 

attachments to the application in 

GrantSolutions. If large-format materials 

cannot be submitted electronically, they 

should be mailed to FRA as described 

in Section 4.3.9 

• NEPA Documentation—Applicants 

should provide any documents that 

demonstrate the NEPA status of the 

proposed project. The NEPA 

requirements are defined in Appendix 

3.2.9 and detailed by track in Section 

1.6. The submission of NEPA 

documentation is required for Track 1 

FD/construction, Track 2 and Track 4. 

• Project Management Plan— 

Applicants should provide a project 

management plan (or equivalent) that 

documents assumptions and decisions 

regarding the communication, 

management processes, execution and 

overall project control. The project 

management plan shall be submitted by 

applicants to Tracks 1 FD/construction, 

Track 2 and Track 4. The form and 

structure of the project management 

plan (or equivalent) is at the discretion 

of the applicant. 

• Stakeholder Agreements— 

Applicants should provide documents 

that demonstrate the status of all 

stakeholder agreements including 

agreements with interstate partners, host 

railroads, right-of-way owners and 

contract railroad operator providing 

service. The form and structure of the 

stakeholder agreements are at the 

discretion of the applicant however, 

agreements should satisfy the eligibility 

and award requirements listed in 

Appendix 1.1 and 1.2. Stakeholder 

agreements should be submitted for 

applicants to Track 1 FD/construction, 

Track 2 and Track 4. 

• Financial Plan—Applicants should 

provide a financial plan (or equivalent) 

as per the description of the Financial 

Plan in Section 2.2. A financial plan (or 

equivalent) shall be submitted for 

applications to Track 1 FD/construction, 

Track 2 and Track 4. 

• Service Development Plan— 

Applicant should provide a Service 

Development Plan (or equivalent) that 

covers three general topics regarding the 

underlying Service Development 

Program: its rationale, its operating 

strategy, and its path to implementation. 

The Service Development Plan (or 

equivalent) is required for Track 2 

applicants only, and is described in 

more detail in Appendix 2.1. 

• Economic Stimulus—Consistent 

with ARRA, the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) Updated ARRA 

Implementing Guidance (April 3, 2009), 

and Federal laws guaranteeing equal 

opportunity, applicants are encouraged 

to provide information to assist FRA in 

assessing (1) whether the applicant’s 

proposal will promote the creating of 

job opportunities for low-income 

workers through the use of best practice 

hiring programs and apprenticeship 

(including pre-apprenticeship) 

programs; (2) whether the project will 

provide maximum practicable 

opportunities for small businesses and 

disadvantaged business enterprises, 

including veteran-owned small 

businesses and service disabled veteranowned small businesses; (3) whether the 

project will make effective use of 

community-based organizations in 

connecting disadvantaged workers with 

economic opportunities; (4) whether the 

project will support entities that have a 

sound track record on labor practices 

and compliance with Federal laws 

ensuring that American workers are safe 

and treated fairly; and (5) whether the 

project implements best practices, 

consistent with the civil rights and 

equal opportunity laws, for ensuring 

that all individuals—regardless of race, 

gender, age, disability, and national 

origin—benefit from ARRA. 

• Job Creation—Applicants should 

provide information indicating whether 

the applicant’s proposal promotes the 

short- or long-term creation or 

preservation of jobs and new or 

expanded business opportunities during 

construction of the project and 

thereafter, including the total amount of 

funds that will be expended on 

construction and construction-related 

activities by all of the entities 

participating in the project and, to the 

extent measurable, the number and type 

of jobs to be created and/or preserved by 

the project during construction and 

thereafter, and an identification of any 

business enterprises to be created or 

benefited by the project during its 

construction and once it becomes 

operational. To the extent possible, 

applicants should indicate whether the 

populations most likely to benefit from 

the creation or preservation of jobs or 

new or expanded business opportunities 

are from Economically Distressed Areas. 

In addition, to the extent possible, 

applicants should indicate whether the 

project’s procurement plan is likely to 

create follow-on jobs and economic 

stimulus for manufacturers and 

suppliers that support the construction 

industry. 

4.3.3.3 Standard Forms 

The Standard Forms are developed by 

OMB and are required of all grant 

applicants. These forms are available on 

www.forms.gov and should be submitted 

as attachments to the application in 

GrantSolutions. Some of the information 

required for these form will be in 

provided with the Narrative and 

Template Form. 

• Standard Form 424, Application for 

Federal Assistance—This form should 

be scanned and submitted as an 

attachment to the application in 

GrantSolutions. This form should be 

completed by all applicants. 

• Standard Form 424A, Budget 

Information—Non-Construction 

Programs—This form should be scanned 

and submitted as an attachment to the 

application in GrantSolutions. This 

form should be completed by applicants 

where applicable. 

• Standard Form 424B, Assurances— 

Non-Construction Programs—This form 

should be scanned and submitted as an 

attachment to the application in 

GrantSolutions. This form should be 

completed by applicants to Track 1 PE/ 

NEPA and Track 3. 

• Standard Form 424C, Budget 

Information—Construction Programs— 

This form should be scanned and 

submitted as an attachment to the 

application in GrantSolutions. This 

form should be completed by applicants 

where applicable. 

• Standard Form 424D, Assurances— 

Construction Programs—This form 

should be scanned and submitted as an 

attachment to the application in 

GrantSolutions. This form should be 

completed by applicants to Track 1 FD/ 

construction, Track 2 and Track 4. 

• FRA Assurances Document—This 

form can be obtained from FRA’s Web 

site at http://www.fra.dot.gov/

downloads/admin/assurancesand

certifications.pdf. The document should 

be signed by an authorized certifying 

official for the applicant, scanned into 

electronic format, and submitted as an 

attachment to the application in 

GrantSolutions. This form should be 

completed by all applicants. 

4.3.4 Additional Information Required 

Prior to Award 

4.3.4.1 For Construction Grants 

(Tracks 1, where applicable, and Track 

4) 

A project NEPA determination 

document (a Record of Decision, 

Finding of No Significant Impact, or CE 

determination) must have been issued 

by FRA prior to award of a construction 

grant. In addition to the supporting 

documentation required to be included 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 29915 

with an application, applicants will also 

be required to submit the following 

documentation prior to their receipt of 

an award under Track 1. 

4.3.4.2 For all Tracks 

Comprehensive executed partnership 

agreements, fulfilling all requirements 

for such agreements as set forth in 

Appendix 1.2. 

4.3.4.3 For Tracks 1 and 2 

As a condition of award, to the extent 

applicable, grant recipients must 

comply with the certification 

requirements of ARRA. These include 

Section 1201 (Maintenance of Effort); 

Section 1511 (Transparency and 

Oversight); and Section 1607 

(Additional Funding Distribution and 

Assurance of Appropriate Use of 

Funds). On February 27, 2009, Secretary 

of Transportation LaHood sent a letter to 

the Governors of each State providing 

guidance and a template for the 

certifications required by ARRA, a copy 

of which is available on DOT’s ARRA 

Web site, at http://www.dot.gov/ 

recovery/. All applicable certifications 

must be submitted to the DOT at 

TigerTeam.Leads@dot.gov. 

Certifications may be submitted via 

email as electronic, scanned copies, 

with original signed versions to follow 

via U.S. mail. Additional guidance 

regarding these certifications is 

included in Appendix 3.2.4. 

4.3.5 Application Package 

Requirements Checklist 

The following application 

requirements checklist can be used by 

applicants to verify the documents 

necessary for submission under each 

Track: 

APPLICATION CHECKLIST

Required document Format 

Applicable track 

Track 1—projects 

Track 2— 

programs 

Track 3— 

planning 

Track 4— 

FY09 

funding FD/ 

construction 

PE/ 

NEPA 

Program Forms 

b Preapplication ....................................... Template .................... ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 

b Narratives and Templates Workbook 

(includes information on Project Benefits and Cost).

Template .................... ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 

Supporting Documentation 

b Service Development Plan (SDP) (or 

equivalent).

No Specified Format .. .................... .................... ✓ .................... ....................

b Preliminary Engineering (PE) Materials No Specified Format .. ✓ .................... ✓ .................... ✓ 

b NEPA Documentation .......................... No Specified Format .. ✓ .................... ✓ .................... ✓ 

b Project Management Plan (or equivalent).No Specified Format .. ✓ .................... ✓ .................... ✓ 

b Stakeholder Agreements ...................... No Specified Format .. ✓ .................... ✓ .................... ✓ 

b Financial Plan (or equivalent) .............. No Specified Format .. ✓ .................... ✓ .................... ✓ 

Standard Forms 

b SF 424: Application for Federal Assistance.Form ........................... ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 

b SF 424A: Budget Information—Non 

Construction.

Form ........................... .................... ✓ .................... ✓ ....................

b SF 424B: Assurances—Non Construction.Form ........................... .................... ✓ .................... ✓ ....................

b SF 424C: Budget Information—Construction.Form ........................... ✓ .................... ✓ .................... ✓ 

b SF 424D: Assurances—Construction .. Form ........................... ✓ .................... ✓ .................... ✓ 

b FRA Assurances Document ................. Form ........................... ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 

4.3.6 Submission Dates and Times 

4.3.6.1 For Tracks 1, 3, and 4 

• Preapplications must be submitted 

to FRA via e-mail HSIPR@dot.gov (as 

specified in Section 4.3.9) no later than 

11:59 p.m. EDT, Friday, July 10, 2009. 

• The submission date and time will 

be determined based on email header 

information. FRA will email the 

applicant to confirm receipt of 

preapplication submissions. 

• Full applications must be submitted 

to GrantSolutions (also as specified in 

4.1) no later than 11:59 p.m. EDT, 

Friday, August 24, 2009. GrantSolutions 

will send the applicant an automated 

email confirming receipt of the 

application. 

• Supporting documentation that 

cannot be submitted electronically 

through GrantSolutions may be sent by 

courier service with a waybill receipt 

stamped no later than 11:59 p.m. EDT, 

Friday, August 24, 2009. FRA will email 

the applicant to confirm receipt of 

supporting documentation sent by 

courier service. 

4.3.6.2 For Track 2 

• Preapplications must be submitted 

to FRA via e-mail HSIPR@dot.gov (as 

specified in Section 4.3.9) no later than 

11:59 p.m. EDT, Friday, July 10, 2009. 

• The submission date and time will 

be determined based on e-mail header 

information. FRA will e-mail the 

applicant to confirm receipt of 

preapplication submissions. 

• Full applications must be submitted 

to GrantSolutions (also as specified in 

Section 4.1) no later than 11:59 p.m. 

EDT, Friday, October 2, 2009? 

GrantSolutions will send the applicant 

an automated e-mail confirming receipt 

of the application. 

• Supporting documentation that 

cannot be submitted electronically may 

be sent by courier service with a waybill 

receipt stamped no later than 11:59 p.m. 

EDT, Friday, October 2, 2009. FRA will 

e-mail the applicant to confirm receipt 

of supporting documentation sent by 

courier service. 

29916 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 

10Tracks for which the sources of funding 

antedated the ARRA (i.e., Tracks 3 and 4) will not 

be rated on Criterion A.2, Economic Recovery 

Benefits. 

TRACK DEADLINES

Track 1—projects Track 2—programs Track 3—planning Track 4—FY2009 

appropriations projects 

Preapplication ...................... July 10, 2009 .................... July 10, 2009 .................... July 10, 2009 .................... July 10, 2009. 

Application ........................... August 24, 2009 ............... October 2, 2009 ............... August 24, 2009 ............... August 24, 2009. 

FRA Obligation .................... ASAP after selection (No 

later than September 

30, 2010).

No later than September 

30, 2011.

ASAP after selection ........ ASAP after selection. 

Project(s) Completion .......... Within 2 years of obligation.September 30, 2017 * ....... Within 2 years of obligation.Within 5 years of obligation. 

* The FRA account shall be closed on that date and any remaining balance (whether obligated or unobligated) in the account shall be cancelled and no funds shall thereafter be available for obligation or expenditure for any purpose (31 U.S.C. 1552). 

4.3.6.3 For All Tracks 

• FRA will make individual 

arrangements with applicants for the 

submission of other information 

required prior to award. 

• Subject to demonstration of 

unanticipated extenuating 

circumstances, FRA may consider 

application materials submitted after the 

deadlines prescribed above. 

4.3.7 Intergovernmental Review 

This program has not been designated 

as subject to Executive Order 12372 

pursuant to 49 CFR part 17. 

4.3.8 Funding Restrictions 

In general, only those costs 

considered allowable pursuant to OMB 

Circular A–87, ‘‘Cost Principles for 

State, Local, and Indian Tribal 

Governments’’ (codified at 2 CFR part 

225) will be considered for funding. 

Additionally, the following funding 

restrictions will apply to grants awarded 

under all Tracks, and must be taken into 

consideration in the development of 

budget information submitted as part of 

applications. 

• Funding may not be used to fund 

expenses associated with the operation 

of Intercity Passenger Rail service; 

• Funding may not be used for firstdollar liability costs for insurance 

related to the provision of Intercity 

Passenger Rail service; 

• Funding may not be for any casino 

or other gambling establishment, 

aquarium, zoo, golf course, or 

swimming pool; this restriction will be 

applied generally in this program, 

regardless of the source of funds, and; 

• While there is no cap on grant 

recipient’s use of grant funds for 

management and administrative costs, 

such costs must be allowable, 

reasonable, allocable, and in accordance 

with applicable OMB cost principles 

cited above. 

For Tracks funded under ARRA, FRA 

will also consider reimbursement of preaward costs incurred as early as the 

enactment of ARRA (February 17, 2009). 

However, such costs will only be 

considered for reimbursement to the 

extent they are otherwise appropriate 

under allowable costs principles, are 

directly related to the award, and 

involve either pre-construction 

activities (e.g., PE, NEPA, or FD), or 

construction activities that were subject 

to an environmental determination 

under NEPA made by FRA prior to the 

commencement of such construction 

activities. Projects for which 

construction activities commenced prior 

to receipt of an FRA environmental 

determination under NEPA will not be 

eligible for funding. 

For Tracks funded under the FY 2008/ 

2009 DOT Appropriations, FRA will 

also consider reimbursement of preaward costs incurred as early as the 

enactment of the FY 2009 DOT 

Appropriations Act (March 11, 2009). 

However, such costs will only be 

considered for reimbursement to the 

extent they are otherwise appropriate 

under allowable cost principles, are 

directly related to the award, and 

involve either pre-construction 

activities (e.g., PE, NEPA, or FD), or 

construction activities that were subject 

to an environmental determination 

under NEPA made by FRA prior to the 

commencement of such construction 

activities. Projects for which 

construction activities commenced prior 

to receipt of an FRA environmental 

determination under NEPA will not be 

eligible for funding. 

4.3.9 Other Submission Requirements 

Preapplications should be submitted 

by e-mail to HSIPR@dot.gov. As detailed 

in Section 4.1 of this guidance, 

applications, including supporting 

documentation, should be submitted 

through GrantSolutions. Should an 

applicant encounter technical 

difficulties using the GrantSolutions 

system that may cause the applicant to 

miss the application deadline, the 

application may be submitted by e-mail 

to HSIPR@dot.gov. For applications 

submitted by email, the applicant 

should print, sign, scan into electronic 

format (preferably Adobe Portable 

Document Format (.pdf)), and attach to 

the submission e-mail copies of all 

application forms requiring the 

applicant’s signature. 

For supporting documentation 

(described in Section 4.3.3 2 of this) that 

an applicant is unable to submit 

electronically (such as oversized 

engineering drawings), applicants may 

submit an original and two copies to the 

following address: 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Federal Railroad Administration, 

Attn: HSIPR Program Information 

(RDV–10), 

Mail Stop 20, Room W38–202, 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

Due to delays caused by enhanced 

screening of mail delivered via the U.S. 

Postal Service, applicants are advised to 

use other means of conveyance (such as 

courier service) to assure timely receipt 

of materials. 

Section 5: Application Review 

Information 

5.1 Review Criteria 

Once an application is screened for 

completeness and eligibility (both 

applicant and project eligibility), it will 

go through a review process. This 

process will involve two steps (detailed 

further in Section 5.2): (i) Evaluation 

and (ii) selection. For evaluation, 

applications in all Tracks will be 

individually reviewed and assessed 

against up to seven evaluation criteria— 

organized into three categories— 

outlined below.10 For each of the 

applicable criteria, the application will 

be assigned a rating of between one and 

five points, based on the application’s 

fulfillment of the objectives of each 

criterion. The ratings will be assigned 

by professional staff employed by FRA 

and other DOT modal administration 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 29917 

11Experts will be selected based on relevant 

qualifications and assurance of lack of conflict of 

interest. 

staff as needed. Experts outside of DOT 

may also be considered.11

These individual criterion ratings will 

then be combined according to priority 

of criteria (which vary by Track), to 

arrive at an overall rating for the 

application. The comparative priorities 

appear in the table below. 

EVALUATION CRITERIA PRIORITIES

Evaluation criteria 

Priority 

Track 1 Track 2 Track 3 12 Track 4 

Public Return on Investment.

1. Transportation Benefits ........................................................................................................ 2 1 1 1 

2. Economic Recovery Benefits ............................................................................................... 1 5 n/a n/a 

3. Other Public Benefits ........................................................................................................... 6 2 n/a 5 

Project Success Factors.

1. Project Management Approach ............................................................................................ 3 3 2 2 

2. Sustainability of Benefits ...................................................................................................... 5 4 n/a 3 

Other Attributes.

1. Timeliness of Project Completion ........................................................................................ 4 6 3 4 

12The specifics of the relevant Track 3 Planning evaluation criteria will vary somewhat from those of Tracks 1, 2 and 4 to reflect the unique 

character of planning activities. 

5.1.1 Public Return on Investment 

Applications will be evaluated against 

the following three criteria to assess the 

proposed project’s ability to produce a 

public return on investment, taking into 

account both forecasted benefits, the 

overall cost of the proposed project, and 

the amount of Federal funding 

requested. Evaluation against these 

criteria will consider the qualitative 

factors outlined below, as supported by 

key quantitative metrics. As described 

in Section 4, applicants for Tracks 1, 2, 

and 4 must provide information 

quantifying the anticipated benefits of 

the proposed project; for Tracks 1 and 

4, using service output data (delay 

reduction, schedule improvement, or 

capacity increases), and for Track 2, 

using transportation output data 

(increases in passenger-miles traveled 

on Intercity Passenger Rail services, 

including shifts from other modes of 

transportation). For Track 3, public 

return on investment criteria are limited 

to transportation benefits. 

Careful economic analysis that 

quantifies and demonstrates the 

monetary value of user benefits and, if 

available, public benefits will be 

particularly useful to FRA in evaluating 

the applications. The systematic process 

of comparing expected benefits and 

costs helps decision-makers organize 

information about, and evaluate tradeoffs between, alternative transportation 

investments. FRA will consider benefits 

and costs using standard data provided 

by applicants and seek to evaluate 

applications in a manner consistent 

with Executive Order 12893, Principles 

for Federal Infrastructure Investments, 

59 FR 4233, to base infrastructure 

investments on systematic analysis of 

expected benefits and costs, including 

both quantitative and qualitative 

measures. 

5.1.1.1 Transportation Benefits 

Each application will be assessed 

based on its demonstration of the 

proposed project’s potential to meet the 

purpose and need and to achieve 

transportation benefits in a costeffective manner, as set forth through 

the President’s strategic transportation 

goals and the objectives of PRIIA. 

Factors to be considered in assigning a 

rating will include the contribution the 

proposed project would make to: 

• Supporting the development of 

intercity high-speed rail service; 

• Generating improvements to 

Intercity Passenger Rail service, as 

reflected by estimated increases in 

ridership (as measured in passengermiles), increased on-time performance 

(as measured in reductions in delays), 

reduced trip time, additional service 

frequency to meet anticipated or 

existing demand, and other factors; 

• Generating cross-modal benefits, 

including anticipated favorable impacts 

on air or highway traffic congestion, 

capacity, or safety, and cost avoidance 

or deferral of planned investments in 

aviation and highway systems; 

• Creating an integrated Intercity 

Passenger Rail network, including 

integration with existing Intercity 

Passenger Rail services, allowance for 

and support of future network 

expansion, and promotion of technical 

interoperability and standardization 

(including standardizing operations, 

equipment and signaling); 

• Encouragement of intermodal 

integration through provision of direct, 

efficient transfers among intercity 

transportation and local transit 

networks at train stations, including 

connections at airports, bus terminals, 

subway stations, ferry ports, and other 

modes of transportation; 

• Enhancing intercity travel options; 

• Ensuring a state of good repair of 

key Intercity Passenger Rail assets; 

• Promoting standardized equipment 

(or rolling stock), signaling, 

communications and power; 

• Improved freight or commuter rail 

operations, in relation to proportional 

cost-sharing (including donated 

property) by those other benefiting rail 

users; 

• Equitable financial participation in 

the project’s financing, including, but 

not limited to, consideration of donated 

property interests or services; financial 

contributions by freight and commuter 

rail carriers commensurate with the 

benefit expected to their operations; and 

financial commitments from host 

railroads, non-Federal governmental 

entities, nongovernmental entities, and 

others; and 

• The overall safety of the 

transportation system, including the 

encouragement of the use of PTC 

technologies, and commitments by 

States or railroads of financial resources 

to improve the safety of highway/rail 

grade crossings over which intercity 

passenger rail service operates. 

5.1.1.2 Economic Recovery Benefits 

Each application will be assessed 

based on its demonstration of the 

proposed project’s anticipated positive 

economic and employment impacts and 

29918 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 

potential to promote economic recovery 

in a cost-effective manner, consistent 

with the purposes and principles of 

ARRA. Factors to be considered in 

assigning a rating will include the 

contribution the proposed project would 

make to: 

• Rapidly promoting new or 

expanding business opportunities 

including the short- and long-term 

creation and preservation of jobs, during 

construction and thereafter; 

• Increasing efficiency by promoting 

technological advances; 

• Providing long-term economic 

benefits; and 

• Avoiding reductions in Stateprovided essential services. 

5.1.1.3 Other Public Benefits 

Each application will be assessed 

based on its demonstration of the 

proposed project’s potential to achieve 

other public benefits in a cost-effective 

manner. Factors to be considered in 

assigning a rating will include the 

contribution the proposed project would 

make to: 

• Environmental quality and energy 

efficiency and reduction in dependence 

on foreign oil, including use of 

renewable energy sources, energy 

savings from traffic diversions from 

other modes, employment of green 

building and manufacturing methods, 

reductions in key emissions types, and 

the purchase and use of 

environmentally sensitive, fuel-efficient, 

and cost-effective passenger rail 

equipment; and 

• Promoting livable communities, 

including integration with existing highdensity, livable development (e.g., 

central business districts with public 

transportation, pedestrian, and bicycle 

distribution networks, and 

incorporation of transit-oriented 

development). 

5.1.1.4 Public Return on Investment 

for Track 3—Planning 

Planning projects will be evaluated 

based on the extent to which they meet 

the President’s strategic transportation 

goals by leading to benefits to the 

public, including transportation 

accessibility and interconnectivity. 

Planning projects for Intercity Passenger 

Rail service will be evaluated for the 

extent that they: (1) Lead to benefits for 

Intercity Passenger Rail including travel 

time reductions, increased frequencies, 

and enhanced service quality; (2) 

resolve safety issues; (3) resolve 

intercity passenger rail reliability issues; 

(4) are integrated and complementary to 

the relevant comprehensive planning 

process (23 U.S.C. 135); and (5) support 

livable communities. Proposed planning 

projects will also be evaluated for their 

effectiveness in: (1) Directly leading to 

project and/or Service Development 

Program applications and (2) leading to 

NEPA for route selection; and leading to 

completion of an SDP. 

5.1.2 Project Success Factors 

Applications will be evaluated against 

the following two criteria to assess the 

proposed project’s likelihood of 

successful implementation and 

realization of benefits. Evaluation 

against these criteria will consider the 

factors outlined below, which take into 

account the thoroughness and quality of 

the supporting documentation—the 

project management plan, financing 

plan, and SDP (or equivalent project 

planning and programming 

documents)—submitted with the 

application. 

5.1.2.1 Project Management Approach 

While prioritizing projects that will 

generate tangible transportation and 

economic benefits, each application will 

also be assessed to determine the risk 

associated with the project’s delivery 

within budget, on time, and as designed. 

Factors to be considered in assigning a 

rating will include: 

• The applicant’s financial, legal, and 

technical capacity to implement the 

project including whether the 

application depends upon receipt of any 

waiver(s) of Federal railroad safety 

regulations that have not been obtained; 

• The applicant’s experience in 

administering similar grants and 

projects; 

• The soundness and thoroughness of 

the cost methodologies and 

assumptions, and estimates for the 

proposed project; 

• The adequacy of any completed 

engineering work to assess and manage/ 

mitigate the proposed project’s 

engineering and constructability risks; 

• The reasonableness of the schedule 

for project implementation; 

• The thoroughness and quality of the 

project management plan; 

• The sufficiency of system safety and 

security planning; 

• The timing and amount of the 

project’s future noncommitted 

investments; 

• The project’s progress, at the time of 

application, towards compliance with 

environmental protection requirements; 

• The comprehensiveness and 

sufficiency, at the time of application, of 

agreements with key partners 

(particularly infrastructure owning 

railroads) that will be involved in 

implementing the project; and 

• The overall completeness and 

quality of the application, including the 

comprehensiveness of its supporting 

documentation. 

5.1.2.2 Sustainability of Benefits 

Each application will be assessed 

based on the risk associated with the 

proposed project’s capacity to generate, 

as planned, its anticipated 

transportation and economic benefits. 

Factors to be considered in assigning a 

rating will include: 

• The presence and quality of a 

financial plan that analyzes the 

financial viability of the proposed rail 

service; 

• The quality and reasonableness of 

revenue and operating and maintenance 

cost forecasts for the benefiting Intercity 

Passenger Rail service(s); 

• The availability of any required 

operating financial support preferably 

from dedicated funding sources for the 

benefiting Intercity Passenger Rail 

service(s); 

• The quality and adequacy of project 

identification and planning; 

• The reasonableness of estimates for 

user and non-user benefits for the 

project; 

• The reasonableness of the operating 

service plan, including its provisions for 

protecting the future quality of other 

services sharing the facilities to be 

improved; and 

• The comprehensiveness and 

sufficiency, at the time of application, of 

agreements with key partners (including 

the railroad operating the Intercity 

Passenger Rail service as well as 

infrastructure-owning railroads) that 

will be involved in the operation of the 

benefiting Intercity Passenger Rail 

service, including the commitment of 

any affected host-rail carrier to ensure 

the realization of the anticipated 

benefits, preferably through a 

commitment by the affected host-rail 

carrier(s) to an enforceable on-time 

performance of passenger trains of 80 

percent or greater. 

5.1.3 Other Attributes 

Applications will also be evaluated 

against the following two additional 

criteria. 

5.1.3.1 Timeliness of Project 

Completion 

Each application will be assessed 

based on the timeliness of its 

implementation schedule, including: 

• The readiness of the project to be 

commenced; and 

• The timeliness of project 

completion and the realization of the 

project’s anticipated benefits. 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 29919 

5.2 Review and Selection Process 

5.2.1 Application Evaluation Process 

Submitted applications will be 

screened for eligibility and 

completeness. Applications determined 

to be both complete and eligible will be 

referred to a technical evaluation panel 

consisting of subject-matter experts for 

assignment of ratings, as described in 

Section 5.1. Panel members will use a 

merit-based approach to review 

applications based on the above 

evaluation criteria. Ratings assigned by 

the evaluation panels will serve as the 

basis for a presentation of applications 

to the FRA Administrator, who will 

determine the final selection of 

applications for awards. 

5.2.2 Additional Selection Criteria 

In addition to the ratings against 

evaluation criteria assigned by the 

technical evaluation panels, the FRA 

Administrator may take into account 

several cross-cutting and comparative 

selection criteria to determine awards of 

funding. The Administrator will review 

the preliminary results to ensure that 

the scoring has been applied 

consistently, and that the collective 

results meet several key priorities 

essential to the success and 

sustainability of the program as detailed 

below. 

SELECTION CRITERIA

Selection criteria 

(balance and diversity) Example factors 

1. Region/location ..................................................................................... ■ Geography and economic conditions. 

2. Innovation ............................................................................................. ■ Technology and industrial/capacity development. 

3. Partnerships ......................................................................................... ■ Multi-State agreements. 

4. Tracks and round timing ...................................................................... ■ Project costs and schedules. 

Following evaluation of each 

application by review panels, the 

Administrator will review the 

preliminary results to ensure that the 

scoring has been applied consistently, 

and that the collective results meet 

several key priorities essential to the 

success and sustainability of the 

program. To ensure a balanced national 

program, this review will include: 

5.2.2.1 Region/Location 

• Ensuring appropriate level of 

regional balance across the country. 

• Ensuring appropriate level of 

balance among large and small 

population centers. 

• Ensuring integration and 

augmentation of the nationwide 

transportation network. 

• Addressing the ARRA requirement 

to provide assistance to economicallydistressed regions most impacted by the 

recession. 

5.2.2.2 Innovation 

• Pursuing new technology and 

innovation where the public return on 

investment is favorable, while ensuring 

delivery of near-term transportation, 

public and recovery benefits. 

• Promoting domestic manufacturing, 

supply and industrial development, 

including U.S.-based equipment 

manufacturing and supply industries. 

• Developing professional railroad 

engineering, operating, planning and 

management capacity needed for 

sustainable Intercity Passenger Rail 

development. 

5.2.2.3 Partnerships 

• Where corridors span multiple 

States, emphasizing those that have 

organized multi-State partnerships with 

joint planning and prioritization of 

investments. 

• Employing creative approaches to 

ensure workforce diversity and use of 

disadvantaged and minority business 

enterprises. 

5.2.2.4 Preservation of Funding for 

Track 2 Program and Future Award 

Rounds 

• While ready-to-go projects are 

critical for delivering early program 

benefits, the longer-term future of the 

program depends on strong Track 2 

corridor program development. 

Sufficient funds will be set aside for 

Track 2 and, if possible, for future 

rounds of funding. 

Section 6: Award Administration 

Information 

6.1 Award Notices 

Upon approval of an application, 

notification will be sent to the grant 

recipient through GS that the award is 

waiting acceptance. 

FRA will publicly announce selected 

projects and funding levels. For projects 

that were not selected, FRA will notify 

the applicant of their decision and 

provide the following: 

• Suggestions on application 

revisions for any subsequent 

resubmission rounds (if desired by 

applicant); and 

• Guidance regarding subsequent 

rounds (e.g., new/revised guidance, 

application due dates). 

6.2 Administrative and National 

Policy Requirements 

Grant recipients must follow all 

administrative and national policy 

requirements including: procurement 

standards, compliance with federal civil 

rights laws and regulations, 

disadvantaged business enterprises 

(DBE), FRA’s and OMB’s Assurances 

and Certifications, ADA, and NEPA. For 

a complete list of all administrative and 

national policy requirements, refer to 

Appendix 3.2. 

6.3 ARRA-Specific Grant 

Requirements 

Grant recipients receiving ARRAfunded grants must comply with all 

requirements detailed in ARRA 

including: The prohibition on using 

funds for certain activities, signage 

requirements, and certification 

requirements. For a complete list of all 

ARRA-specific grant requirements, refer 

to Appendix 3.3. 

6.4 Program-Specific Grant 

Requirements 

Grant recipients receiving PRIIAauthorized grants must comply with all 

requirements set forth in PRIIA, 

including adhering to: Buy America, 

Labor Protection, and Davis-Bacon Act. 

For a complete list of all PRIIA-specific 

grant requirements, refer to Appendix 

3.4. 

6.5 General Requirements 

Grant recipients must comply with 

reporting requirements and, where 

applicable, ARRA-specific reporting 

requirements. All post-award 

information pertaining to reporting, 

auditing, monitoring, and the close-out 

process is detailed in Appendix 3.5. 

Section 7: Questions and Clarifications 

Questions about this guidance and the 

application process should be submitted 

to the HSIPR Program Manager via 

email at HSIPR@dot.gov. 

29920 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 

LIST OF ACRONYMS

Acronym Meaning 

ACF ...................................................... Administration for Children and Families. 

ADA ...................................................... Americans with Disabilities Act. 

April 2009 Strategic Plan ..................... U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Vision for High-Speed Rail in 

America, High-Speed Rail Strategic Plan [under] the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 

2009, April 16, 2009; available at: http://www.fra.dot.gov/Downloads/Finalpercent20FRApercent

20HSRpercent20Stratpercent20Plan.pdf. 

ARRA .................................................... American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Pub. L. 111–5). 

CAST .................................................... Custom Applications Support and Training Unit (GrantSolutions). 

CCR ...................................................... Central Contractor Registration database. 

CE ......................................................... Categorical Exclusion—a class of action for the NEPA process. 

CFS report ............................................ Federal Railroad Administration, High-Speed Ground Transportation for America, September 1997; 

available at: http://www.fra.dot.gov/us/content/515. 

Department ........................................... The U.S. Department of Transportation. 

DUNS ................................................... Data Universal Number System. 

EA ......................................................... Environmental Assessment—a NEPA document. 

EIS ........................................................ Environmental Impact Statement— the most extensive type of NEPA document. 

FD ......................................................... Final Design. 

FONSI ................................................... Finding of No Significant Impact—a possible decision concluding the NEPA process. 

FRA ...................................................... Federal Railroad Administration—an Operating Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation. 

FTA ....................................................... Federal Transit Administration. 

FY ......................................................... Fiscal Year. 

FY 2008 DOT Appropriations Act ........ Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008 

—Title I of Division K of Public Law 110–161, December 26, 2007. 

FY 2009 DOT Appropriations Act ........ Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2009 

—Title I of Division I of Public Law 111–8, March 11, 2009. 

GS ........................................................ GrantSolutions Grants Management System. 

ICC ....................................................... Interstate Commerce Commission. 

LOI ........................................................ Letter of Intent. 

mph ....................................................... miles per hour. 

NEPA .................................................... National Environmental Policy Act. 

NTD ...................................................... National Transit Database. 

OTP ...................................................... On-time performance. 

PE ......................................................... Preliminary engineering. 

PRIIA .................................................... Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (Division B of Pub. L. 110–432). 

PTC ...................................................... Positive Train Control. 

ROD ...................................................... Record of Decision—a possible decision concluding of the NEPA process.

RSIA ..................................................... Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (Division A of Pub. L. 110–432, October 16, 2008). 

State DOT ............................................ State Department of Transportation. 

State Grant Program. ........................... Capital Assistance to States—Intercity Passenger Rail Service program—established in FY 2008 DOT 

Appropriations Act and continued in the FY 2009 DOT Appropriations Act. 

Appendix 1: Additional Information on 

Eligibility 

Appendix 1.1 Applicant Types 

State—A State department of 

transportation (State DOT) which is the 

State-wide instrumentality or agency of 

a State, in the form of a department, 

commission, board, or official of any 

State, charged by its laws with the 

responsibility for transportation-related 

matters within the State, including highspeed rail/intercity passenger rail. 

Group of States—A group of two or 

more States in which an agreement has 

been established to work in 

coordination to build and operate rail 

projects within specified boundaries 

and within the duration of agreement. 

The agreement should specify the 

commitments (financial and otherwise) 

of all parties to developing and 

maintaining rail operations for a 

specified corridor. This type of 

agreement requires the backing of 

several political and administrative 

entities within each State. Such 

agreement should include but not be 

limited to the following: identification 

of all parties involved, the duration of 

the agreement, governance 

arrangements, commitment of partners, 

risk and benefits sharing arrangements, 

liabilities, level of service per partner or 

client, services to be provided, dispute 

resolution, substandard performance, 

termination, signatories. A group of 

States wishing to submit an application 

must designate one State within the 

group to serve as the lead State for the 

application. This lead State would be 

responsible for submitting the 

application and administrating any 

grant that is awarded to the group of 

States. 

Interstate Compact—An entity created 

through an agreement between two or 

more States. Frequently, these compacts 

create a new governmental agency that 

is responsible for administering or 

improving some shared resource, such 

as public transportation infrastructure. 

In some cases, a compact serves simply 

as a coordination mechanism between 

independent authorities in the member 

States. Article I, Section 10 of the 

United States Constitution provides that 

no State shall enter into an agreement or 

compact with another State without the 

consent of Congress. Interstate compacts 

for the purpose of Intercity Passenger 

Rail development have been established 

previously, based on the implied 

general consent of Congress expressed 

through Public Law 98–358, in which 

Congress explicitly granted consent to 

the creation of an interstate compact 

between the States of Ohio, Indiana, 

Michigan, Pennsylvania, Illinois, West 

Virginia, and Kentucky for the purpose 

of developing Intercity Passenger Rail. 

Public Agencies, established by one or 

more States (Having responsibility for 

providing Intercity Passenger Rail 

service)—A publicly created and 

owned, not-for-profit agency, other than 

direct instrumentalities of States or 

agencies created under an interstate 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 29921 

13Penn Central Transportation Company 

Discontinuance or Change in Service of 22 Trains 

between Boston, Mass, and Providence R.I., 

February 10, 1971, I.C.C. 338, 318–333. 

14 In additional to serving as a reference database, 

the NTD captures data that serve as the basis for 

apportioning and allocating funding to eligible 

grantees under FTA’s formula grant programs. 

compact, having responsibility for 

providing or developing Intercity 

Passenger Rail service. Such agencies 

would include public authorities and 

joint powers authorities created and 

authorized under State law, and may 

have responsibilities over a limited 

geographic scope (such as a region 

within a State), or related to a specific 

service, project, or development effort 

(such as the construction of a specific 

infrastructure project). 

Amtrak, in cooperation with States— 

The National Railroad Passenger 

Corporation undertaking a project 

subject to an agreement with one or 

more States (as defined above). 

Appendix 1.2 Minimum Qualifications 

for Applicant Eligibility 

An applicant must, in addition to 

demonstrating that it is of an eligible 

type for the track and funding source 

under which it is applying, affirmatively 

demonstrate that it has or will have the 

legal, financial, and technical capacity 

to carry out the proposal. In addition, 

for non-planning applications under 

Track 1, Track 2, and Track 4, the 

applicant must demonstrate that it has 

or will have satisfactory continuing 

control over the use of equipment or 

facilities acquired, constructed, or 

improved by the project, and the 

capability and willingness to maintain 

such equipment or facilities. 

In the following discussion of the 

means by which applicants can satisfy 

these minimum requirements, the term 

‘‘project’’ refers generally to the 

substance of the applicant’s proposal, 

regardless of the Track under which it 

is being advanced. 

For an applicant to demonstrate the 

legal, financial, and technical capacity 

to carry out its proposed project, it will 

be required to address the following 

qualifications: 

• For an entity other than a State, its 

legal authority to undertake the 

proposed project and apply for Federal 

financial assistance; 

• The applicant’s ability to absorb 

potential cost overruns or financial 

shortfalls. For entities other than States, 

the demonstration of such ability should 

include a description of the entity’s own 

financial resources, its ability to raise 

revenue through taxation, dedicated 

funding sources, or other means, and/or 

explicit financial backing by one or 

more State governments; 

• The applicant’s experience in 

effectively administering grants of 

similar scope and value (including 

timely completion of grant deliverables, 

compliance with grant conditions, and 

quality and cost controls); and 

• The applicant’s experience in 

managing railroad investment projects 

of a nature similar to that for which 

funding is being requested. 

For an applicant to demonstrate that 

it has or will have satisfactory 

continuing control over the use of 

equipment or facilities acquired, 

constructed, or improved by the project, 

it will be required to show either: 

• That the applicant has or will have 

direct ownership of the equipment or 

facilities acquired, constructed, or 

improved by the project; or 

• That the applicant has secured or 

has made progress towards securing and 

will have contractual agreements in 

place with the entity or entities (e.g., a 

local government, or one or more 

private railroads) that have or will have 

direct ownership of such assets. 

For an applicant to demonstrate that 

it has or will have the capability and 

willingness to maintain the equipment 

or facilities acquired, constructed, or 

improved by the project, it will be 

required to show: 

• That it has made progress towards, 

and will have contractual agreements in 

place with, any entity or entities (e.g., a 

local government, or one or more 

private railroads) that have or will have 

direct ownership of the equipment or 

facilities acquired, constructed, or 

improved by the project, which address 

financial and operational responsibility 

for asset maintenance; 

• That to the extent financial 

responsibility will fall to the applicant, 

the applicant has the ability to cover 

maintenance costs. For entities other 

than States, the demonstration of such 

ability should include a description of 

the entity’s own financial resources, 

ability to raise revenue through taxation, 

and/or explicit financial backing by one 

or more State governments; and 

• The applicant’s experience in 

maintaining assets with similar 

financial and operational maintenance 

requirements as those for the assets for 

which funding is being requested. 

Information and documentation 

demonstrating the fulfillment of the 

minimum qualifications described 

above will be required to be submitted 

as part of full application (see Section 

4.3.3.2). 

Appendix 1.3 Definition of Intercity 

Passenger Rail 

‘‘Intercity rail passenger 

transportation’’ is defined at 49 U.S.C. 

24102(4) as ‘‘rail passenger 

transportation except commuter rail 

passenger transportation.’’ Likewise, 

‘‘commuter rail passenger 

transportation’’ is defined at 49 U.S.C. 

24102(3) as ‘‘short-haul rail passenger 

transportation in metropolitan and 

suburban areas usually having reduced 

fare, multiple ride, and commuter 

tickets and morning and evening peak 

period operations.’’ In common use, the 

general definition of ‘‘rail passenger 

transportation’’ excludes types of local 

or regional rail transit such as light rail, 

streetcars, and heavy rail. Similarly, 

both Intercity Passenger Rail 

transportation and commuter rail 

passenger transportation exclude singlepurpose scenic or tourist railroad 

operations. 

The since-terminated Interstate 

Commerce Commission (ICC) 

established six features to aid in 

classifying a service as ‘‘commuter’’ 

rather than ‘‘intercity’’ rail passenger 

transportation: 13

• The passenger service is primarily 

being used by patrons traveling on a 

regular basis either within a 

metropolitan area or between a 

metropolitan area and its suburbs; 

• The service is usually characterized 

by operation performed at morning and 

peak periods of travel; 

• The service usually honors 

commutation or multiple-ride tickets at 

a fare reduced below the ordinary coach 

fare and carries the majority of its 

patrons on such a reduced fare basis; 

• The service makes several stops at 

short intervals either within a zone or 

along the entire route; 

• The equipment used may consist of 

little more than ordinary coaches; and 

• The service should not extend more 

than 100 miles at the most, except in 

rare instances; although service over 

shorter distances may not be commuter 

or short haul within the meaning of this 

exclusion. 

FTA further refined the definition of 

commuter rail in the glossary for its 

National Transit Database (NTD) 14

Reporting Manual. In particular, FTA 

refined the ICC’s third ‘‘feature’’ by 

specifying that ‘‘predominantly 

commuter [rail passenger] service means 

that for any given trip segment (i.e., 

distance between any two stations), 

more than 50 percent of the average 

daily ridership travels on the train at 

least three times a week.’’ 

In judging the eligibility of an 

application under this solicitation, FRA 

will determine whether the rail 

passenger service that is primarily 

intended to benefit from the proposal 

29922 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 

constitutes ‘‘intercity passenger rail 

transportation’’ under the statutory 

definition and ICC and FTA 

interpretations. FRA may also take into 

account whether the primary intended 

benefiting service has been or is 

currently the direct and intended 

beneficiary of funding provided by 

another Federal agency (e.g., FTA) for 

the purpose of improving commuter rail 

passenger transportation and whether 

the service in question is or will be 

operated by or on behalf of a local, 

regional, or State entity whose primary 

rail transportation mission is the 

provision of commuter or transit 

service. 

Appendix 2: Additional Information on 

Planning and Engineering 

Appendix 2.1 Service Development 

Plan (or equivalent) 

A Service Development Plan (SDP) is 

a plan for developing High-Speed Rail/ 

Intercity Passenger Rail service, either 

initiating new service or improving 

existing service (e.g., adding train 

frequencies and/or reducing trip 

times)—typically focused on distinct 

phases and/or geographic sections of 

service improvement. A SDP or 

equivalent covers three general topics: 

(i) Rationale (including purpose and 

need), (ii) service/operating plan and 

prioritized capital plan, and (iii) 

implementation plan (including project 

management approach, stakeholder 

agreements and financial plan). 

The completion of a SDP is a prerequisite for eligibility for applications 

for Track 2-Programs. FRA 

acknowledges the inherent complexity 

of the planning efforts required to 

develop a SDP. The precise structure of 

a SDP can vary at the discretion of the 

applicant; FRA does not pre-determine 

SDP form and structure. Only certain 

illustrative topics need to be included in 

a SDP—thus the applicant has the 

flexibility to tailor the SDP to the needs 

of their program. 

After receiving the preapplications for 

Track 2, subject to available resources, 

FRA will be available for a kick-off 

discussion with the prospective 

applicant that will include a review of 

the contents of the SDP. FRA will 

provide assistance to Track 2 applicants 

in clarifying whether the information 

necessary for the SDP is complete. FRA 

will also discuss submission 

requirements with prospective 

applicants. 

A complete SDP is a planning 

approach that would need to address 

such topics as the following: 

• Illustrative topics dealing with 

program rationale—The SDP includes a 

description of the corridor’s 

transportation challenges and 

opportunities based on current and 

forecasted travel demand and capacity 

conditions. Through the SDP, the 

applicant has the opportunity to show 

FRA and its constituents how the 

proposed HSIPR Service Development 

Program can cost-effectively address 

transportation and other needs 

considering system alternatives 

(highway, air, other, as applicable). 

Qualitative and quantitative 

assessments of the costs, benefits and 

impacts and risks of the alternatives will 

provide decision makers with sufficient 

information. The SDP might also 

explore synergies between the HighSpeed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail 

proposal and large-scale goals and 

development plans within its service 

region and communities. 

• Illustrative topics dealing with 

operations—The SDP describes the train 

service to be provided for each phase of 

new or improved Intercity Passenger 

Rail service including: the service 

frequency, timetable (including timedistance ‘‘stringline’’ diagrams), general 

station locations, intermodal 

connections, and train consists. The 

SDP would describe the underlying 

operational analyses, including railroad 

operation simulations and equipment 

and crew scheduling analyses, which in 

turn reflect such variables as travel 

demand and rolling stock configuration. 

The planning horizon should be 

consistent with the anticipated useful 

lives of the improvements to be 

introduced. 

• Illustrative topics dealing with 

capital needs—The SDP describes the 

rail equipment and infrastructure 

improvements for each discrete phase of 

service implementation. If applicable, 

the SDP would prioritize improvements 

for each phase. The SDP presents 

estimated capital costs for projects and 

project groups, with documentation of 

assumptions and methods. Initial 

capital expenditures estimates to bring 

the service to its full operating 

capability, accommodation of future 

traffic growth and ongoing expenditures 

for replacement of system components 

should be included. 

• Illustrative topics dealing with 

operating and financial results—The 

SDP includes operating and financial 

projections for each phase of the 

planned intercity passenger rail service. 

The SDP will address the methods, 

assumptions and outputs for travel 

demand forecasts, the expected revenue 

from the service, and all operating 

expenses for the train service including 

maintenance of way, maintenance of 

equipment, transportation (train 

movement), passenger traffic and 

services (marketing, reservations/ 

information, station, and on-board 

services), and general/administrative 

expenses. Cost-sharing arrangements 

with infrastructure owners and rail 

operators should also be included. 

• Illustrative topics dealing with 

public benefits—The SDP includes a 

description of user and non-user 

benefits and, to the extent readily 

quantifiable, the estimated economic 

value of those benefits, with particular 

attention to topics prominent in ARRA, 

i.e., job creation and retention and 

potential energy savings. 

• Illustrative topics dealing with 

program implementation—The SDP 

presents a Service Development 

Program schedule for carrying out each 

phase; a preliminary description of the 

intended techniques of project 

management that will assure quality, 

cost, and budget control; and the 

financing and organizational plans for 

carrying out the proposed strategy. 

If the High-Speed Rail/Intercity 

Passenger Rail service contemplated 

under the SDP makes use of facilities 

that would be shared with freight, 

commuter rail, or other Intercity 

Passenger Rail services, the existing and 

future characteristics of those services— 

as developed cooperatively with freight, 

commuter, and Intercity Passenger Rail 

partners—would need to be integral to 

the High-Speed Rail/Intercity Passenger 

Rail SDP. In particular, the SDP needs 

to show how the proposed Service 

Development Program will protect the 

quality of those other services through 

a planning horizon year and under 

assumptions mutually agreed to with 

the other partners. 

Appendix 2.2 Preliminary Engineering 

(PE) 

PE completion is a prerequisite for 

projects submitted under Track 1—FD/ 

Construction projects, Track 2— 

Programs, and Track 4. PE entails 

sufficient engineering design to define a 

project, including identification of all 

environmental impacts, design of all 

critical project elements at a level 

sufficient to assure reliable cost 

estimates and schedules (in turn 

sufficient to complete project 

management and financial plans), and 

definition of procurement requirements 

and strategies. 

The PE development process starts 

with the evaluation of project design 

alternatives (a range of rail 

improvements, specific alignments, and 

project designs) sufficient to support 

subsequent NEPA analysis. The NEPA 

environmental determination is a 

prerequisite for FRA to obligate 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 29923 

construction funds. As with the SDP, 

FRA acknowledges the complexity of 

the work required for PE, and that it will 

vary depending on the project scope. 

Thus, FRA does not pre-determine the 

form and structure of the PE work. FRA 

has opted to specify the illustrative 

contents of PE—thus allowing the 

applicant discretion to pursue the most 

workable approach tailored to its needs 

and suitable for the proposed project. 

PE results in detailed estimates of 

project costs, benefits, and impacts of 

the preferred alternative that merit a 

higher degree of confidence than those 

prepared in earlier stages of planning. 

FRA considers that PE for a major 

capital investment project is complete 

when: 

• The signed environmental Record 

of Decision (ROD) or Finding of No 

Significant Impact (FONSI) signals that 

the NEPA process has been completed; 

• The project scope, capital cost 

estimates, and financial plan are 

finalized; 

• The project sponsor has adequately 

demonstrated its technical capability to 

advance the project into FD and 

construction; 

• The project sponsor has adequately 

demonstrated its process and schedule 

for filing any safety regulatory waivers 

necessary to implement the project; and 

• The project sponsor has provided 

an adequate system safety program plan 

and any necessary collision/derailment 

hazard analysis. 

The products of PE will include: 

engineering designs; a detailed project 

description, including provisions for 

compliance with the ADA; a highly 

accurate project cost estimate (including 

a description of methodologies and 

assumptions employed in developing 

the estimate) that identifies major 

components and that includes 

contingencies that are reduced from 

previous estimates and are broken down 

by phase and functional area, a 

thorough project management plan 

suitable for this phase of project 

development; and a solid project 

financial plan that includes Federal and 

non-Federal funding committed to the 

project. 

PE documentation will typically 

include: (1) Scale maps or scale aerial 

photography of existing conditions at a 

scale of one inch = 100 to 500 feet 

depending on location (built-up vs. 

undeveloped areas); and (2) design plan 

drawings overlaid on the maps/ 

photography. These design drawings 

will typically show: (i) Existing railroad 

right-of-way limits along with the 

railroad ownership; (ii) Proposed track 

changes including track removals and 

track installations showing track 

centers, turnout sizes, curve and spiral 

data, etc.; (iii) Vertical profiles and 

grades of existing and proposed 

construction; (iv) Public and private atgrade highway crossings; and (v) 

Passenger stations, building(s), 

platforms, parking, access to the 

primary highway system in the area, 

and public transit services and facilities. 

The detailed project description 

developed in the PE typically includes 

an assessment of the physical condition 

and location of the existing project area 

(generally two to three miles beyond the 

project construction limits) and 

elements associated with the design(s). 

These elements may include: bridges 

(rail and highway); track including the 

number and location of previously 

existing railroad tracks on a roadbed; 

buildings (stations and maintenance 

facilities, etc.); signal systems and 

interlocked detectors, switches, derails, 

and snow melters; utility systems on, 

over, adjacent to or under the rail line 

and agreements concerning them; 

electrification systems, if any; 

description of highway crossing 

warning systems (if any) and daily 

traffic counts at public and private atgrade highway crossings; existing and 

proposed railroad operations and routes 

of freight, commuter and intercity trains 

with train daily numbers of trains by 

type; a safety and security management 

plan; and STRACNET routes and/or 

moves for commercial high and wide 

loads. For maintenance facilities, the PE 

outputs will describe and provide 

drawings that show the location, track 

and facility layout, specialized 

equipment (if any), office and employee 

welfare facilities, etc. 

FRA will be available, subject to 

available resources, to assist applicants 

in clarifying whether the PE is complete 

and encourages applicants to contact 

FRA to discuss PE. 

Appendix 3: Additional Information on 

Award Administration and Grant 

Conditions 

Appendix 3.1 Award Notices 

Upon approval of an application, 

notification will be sent to the grant 

recipient through GrantSolutions that 

the award is waiting acceptance. 

FRA will publicly announce selected 

projects and funding levels. For projects 

that were not selected, FRA will notify 

the applicant of its decision and provide 

the following: 

• Suggestions on application 

revisions for any subsequent 

resubmission rounds (if desired by 

applicant); and 

• Guidance regarding subsequent 

rounds (i.e., new/revised guidance, 

application due dates) 

Appendix 3.2 Administrative and 

National Policy Requirements 

FRA will make funds available to the 

grant recipient through a grant or 

cooperative agreement. FRA will decide 

which vehicle to use based upon the 

level of anticipated FRA involvement in 

the project. FRA will use a grant 

agreement where limited Federal 

involvement is anticipated and a 

cooperative agreement in those 

situations involving greater Federal 

participation. 

Below is a discussion of some of the 

more important specific requirements 

that are a feature of FRA’s typical grant 

agreement and will likely be included in 

every grant agreement under this 

program (FRA’s use of the term grant 

herein is intended to encompass both 

grant and cooperative agreements): 

Appendix 3.2.1 Contracting 

Information 

A grant recipient’s procurement of 

goods and services must comply with 

the Procurement Standards 

requirements set forth at 49 CFR 18.36 

or 49 CFR 19.40 through 19.48, 

whichever is applicable depending on 

the type of grantee (part 18 covers State 

and local governments and part 19 

covers non-profit and for-profit entities), 

and with applicable supplementary U.S. 

DOT or FRA directives or regulations. 

Appendix 3.2.2 Compliance With 

Federal Civil Rights Laws and 

Regulations 

The grant recipient must comply with 

all civil rights laws and regulations, in 

accordance with applicable Federal 

directives, except to the extent that the 

FRA determines otherwise in writing. 

These include, but are not limited to, 

the following: (a) Title VI of the Civil 

Rights Act of 1964 (Pub. L. 88–352) (as 

implemented by 49 CFR part 21), which 

prohibits discrimination on the basis of 

race, color or national origin; (b) Title IX 

of the Education Amendments of 1972, 

as amended (20 U.S.C. 1681–1683, and 

1685–1686), which prohibits 

discrimination on the basis of sex, (c) 

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 

1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 794), 

which prohibits discrimination on the 

basis of handicaps; (d) the Age 

Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended 

(42 U.S.C. 1601–1607), which prohibits 

discrimination on the basis of age; (e) 

the Drug Abuse Office and Treatment 

Act of 1972 (Pub. L. 92–255), as 

amended, relating to nondiscrimination 

on the basis of drug abuse; (f) the 

29924 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 

Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and 

Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment and 

Rehabilitation Act of 1970 (Pub. L. 91– 

616), as amended, relating to 

nondiscrimination on the basis of 

alcohol abuse or alcoholism; (g) §§ 523 

and 527 of the Public Health Service Act 

of 1912 (42 U.S.C. 290 dd–3 and 290 ee– 

3), as amended, relating to 

confidentiality of alcohol and drug 

abuse patient records; (h) Title VIII of 

the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 

3601 et seq.), as amended, relating to 

nondiscrimination in the sale, rental, or 

financing of housing, (i) 49 U.S.C. 306, 

which prohibits discrimination on the 

basis of race, color, national origin, or 

sex in railroad financial assistance 

programs; (j) any other 

nondiscrimination provisions in the 

specific statute(s) under which 

application for Federal assistance was 

made; and (k) the requirements of any 

other nondiscrimination statute(s) 

which may apply to the grant recipient. 

Grant recipients must comply with all 

regulations, guidelines, and standards 

adopted under the above statutes. The 

grant recipient is also required to submit 

information, as required, to the FRA 

Office of Civil Rights concerning its 

compliance with these laws and 

implementing regulations, and its 

activities implementing a grant award. 

Appendix 3.2.3 Disadvantaged 

Business Enterprises (DBE) 

The FRA encourages its grant 

recipients to utilize small business 

concerns owned and controlled by 

socially and economically 

disadvantaged individuals (as that term 

is defined for other DOT operating 

administrations at 49 CFR part 26) in 

carrying out projects funded under 

ARRA, although FRA grant recipients 

are not required to do so. The DOT DBE 

regulation (49 CFR part 26) only applies 

to certain categories of Federal highway, 

Federal transit, and airport funds. The 

FRA is not covered under the DOT DBE 

regulations. The procurement standards 

applicable to grant recipients require 

grant recipients and subgrantees to take 

all necessary affirmative steps to assure 

that minority firms, women’s business 

enterprises and labor surplus area firms 

are used when possible (see 49 CFR 

18.36(e) and 19.44(b)). The grant 

recipient is also required to submit 

information as required to the FRA 

Office of Civil Rights concerning its 

activities with respect to DBEs in 

implementing a grant award. 

Appendix 3.2.4 Assurances and 

Certifications 

Upon acceptance of the grant by the 

FRA all certifications and assurances 

provided by the grant recipient through 

the application process are incorporated 

in and become part of the grant 

agreement. Applicable Assurance and 

Certification forms include SF 424(A)/ 

(B), SF424(C)/(D) and FRA’s Assurances 

and Certification form. The OMB 

Standard Forms can be accessed at 

http://www.forms.gov. The FRA 

Assurances and Certifications Document 

is available at http://www.fra.dot.gov/

downloads/admin/assurancesand

certifications.pdf. 

Appendix 3.2.5 Debarment and 

Suspension; and Drug-Free Workplace 

Grant recipients must obtain 

certifications on debarment and 

suspension for all third party 

contractors and subgrantees and comply 

with all DOT regulations, 

‘‘Nonprocurement Suspension and 

Debarment’’ (2 CFR part 1200) and 

‘‘Governmentwide Requirements for 

Drug-Free Workplace (Grants),’’ (49 CFR 

part 32). 

Appendix 3.2.6 Safety Oversight 

Grant recipients must comply with 

any Federal regulations, laws, policy 

and other guidance that FRA or DOT 

may issue pertaining to safety oversight 

in general, and in the performance of 

any grant award, in particular. FRA has 

in place a comprehensive system of 

railroad safety oversight (see 49 CFR 

part 209 et seq.) that is applicable to 

railroad operations generally. 

Appendix 3.2.7 Americans With 

Disabilities Act (ADA) 

Grant recipients must agree to use 

funds provided under the grant 

agreement in a manner consistent with 

the requirements of Title II of the 

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) 

of 1990, as amended; Section 504 of the 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended 

(29 U.S.C. 794); and both statutes’ 

implementing regulations at 49 CFR 

parts 27, 37, and 38. DOT (through its 

delegate FRA) has responsibility to offer 

technical assistance for the provisions of 

the ADA about which it issues 

regulations. 42 U.S.C. 12206(c)(1) reads: 

‘‘Each Federal agency that has 

responsibility under paragraph (2) for 

implementing this chapter may render 

technical assistance to individuals and 

institutions that have rights or duties 

under the respective subchapters of this 

chapter for which such agency has 

responsibility.’’ Grant recipients are 

strongly encouraged to seek FRA’s 

technical assistance with regard to the 

accessible features of passenger rail 

systems, to include accessibility at 

stations and on railcars. FRA believes 

such technical assistance is essential 

where interpretation of DOT’s 

regulatory requirements is necessary 

and/or before the creation of any new 

rail system. 

Appendix 3.2.8 Environmental 

Protection 

All facilities that will be used to 

perform work under an award shall not 

be so used unless the facilities are 

designed and equipped to limit water 

and air pollution in accordance with all 

applicable local, State and Federal 

standards. 

Grant recipients will conduct work 

under an award, and will require that 

work that is conducted as a result of an 

award be in compliance with the 

following provisions, as modified from 

time to time: Section 114 of the Clean 

Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7414, and Section 308 

of the Federal Water Pollution Control 

Act, 33 U.S.C. 1318, and all regulations 

issued there under. Through the grant 

agreement, grant recipients will certify 

that no facilities that will be used to 

perform work under an award are listed 

on the List of Violating Facilities 

maintained by the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA). Grant 

recipients will be required to notify the 

Administrator as soon as it or any 

contractor or subcontractor receives any 

communication from the EPA indicating 

that any facility which will be used to 

perform work pursuant to an award is 

under consideration to be listed on the 

EPA’s List of Violating Facilities; 

provided, however, that the grant 

recipient’s duty of notification shall 

extend only to those communications of 

which it is aware, or should reasonably 

have been aware. Grant recipients will 

need to include or cause to be included 

in each contract or subcontract entered 

into, which contract or subcontract 

exceeds Fifty Thousand Dollars 

($50,000.00) in connection with work 

performed pursuant to an award, the 

criteria and requirements of this section 

and an affirmative covenant requiring 

such contractor or subcontractor to 

immediately inform the grant recipient 

upon the receipt of a communication 

from the EPA concerning the matters set 

forth herein. 

Appendix 3.2.9 National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

Specific NEPA-related guidance is 

included in Section 1.6 of this guidance. 

The following is a description of FRA’s 

general or standard grant provision on 

NEPA compliance. 

Generally, grant recipients may not 

expend any of the funds provided in an 

award on construction or other activities 

that represent an irretrievable 

commitment of resources to a particular 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 29925 

course of action affecting the 

environment until after all 

environmental and historic preservation 

analyses required by the National 

Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 

4332) (NEPA), the National Historic 

Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470(f)) 

(NHPA), and related laws and 

regulations have been completed and 

the FRA has provided the grant 

recipient with a written notice 

authorizing them to proceed. 

In instances where NEPA approval 

has not been secured at the time of grant 

award, grant recipients are required to 

assist the FRA in its compliance with 

the provisions of NEPA, the Council on 

Environmental Quality’s regulations 

implementing NEPA (40 CFR part 1500 

et seq.), FRA’s ‘‘Procedures for 

Considering Environmental Impacts’’ 

(45 FR 40854, June 16, 1980), as revised 

May 26, 1999, 64 FR 28545), Section 

106 of the NHPA, and related 

environmental and historic preservation 

statutes and regulations. As a condition 

of receiving financial assistance under 

an award, grant recipients may be 

required to conduct certain 

environmental analyses and to prepare 

and submit to the FRA draft documents 

required under NEPA, NHPA, and 

related statutes and regulations 

(including draft environmental 

assessments and proposed draft and 

final environmental impact Statements). 

No publicly-owned land from a park, 

recreational area, or wildlife or 

waterfowl refuge of national, State, or 

local significance as determined by the 

Federal, State, or local officials having 

jurisdiction thereof, or any land from an 

historic site of national, State or local 

significance as so determined by such 

officials shall be used by grant 

recipients without the prior written 

concurrence of FRA. Grant recipients 

shall assist the FRA in complying with 

these requirements of 49 U.S.C. 303(c). 

Appendix 3.2.10 Environmental 

Justice 

The grant recipient will be required to 

agree to facilitate compliance with the 

policies of Executive Order No. 12898, 

‘‘Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority 

Populations and Low-Income 

Populations,’’ 42 U.S.C. 4321 note, 

except to the extent that FRA 

determines otherwise in writing. 

Appendix 3.2.11 Operating and Access 

Agreements 

As discussed in the guidance, grant 

recipients will be required to reach a 

written agreement, approved by FRA, 

with each of the railroads or other entity 

on whose property the project will be 

located. Among other things, such 

railroad/owner agreements shall specify 

terms and conditions regarding the 

following issues: responsibility for 

project design and implementation, 

project property ownership, 

maintenance responsibilities, and 

disposition responsibilities, and the 

owning entity’s commitment to helping 

to achieve, to the extent it is capable, 

the anticipated project benefits. If an 

agreement between the grant recipient 

and the owner which substantially 

addresses the above-referenced issues is 

already in place as of the date of 

execution of the grant agreement, the 

grant recipient will be required to 

submit it to FRA for FRA’s review and 

determination of adequacy. However, if 

either no agreement is in place as of the 

date of execution of this Agreement, or 

if an existing agreement has been 

determined by FRA to be inadequate, 

the grant recipient shall, prior to the 

grant recipient’s execution of an 

agreement with the owner, submit the 

final draft of such an agreement to FRA 

for FRA’s review and approval. A 

finding by FRA that the required 

approved railroad/owner agreement(s) 

are in place is a prerequisite for 

reimbursement of construction-related 

project expenses. 

Appendix 3.2.12 Real Property and 

Equipment Management, 

Discontinuance of Service, and 

Disposition Requirements 

The grant recipient will be required to 

ensure the maintenance of project 

property to the level of utility (including 

applicable FRA track safety standards) 

which existed when the project 

improvements were placed in service 

for a period of a minimum of 20 years 

from the date such project property was 

placed in service. In the event that all 

Intercity Passenger Rail service making 

use of the project property is 

discontinued during the 20-year period, 

the grant recipient will be required to 

continue to ensure the maintenance of 

the project property, as set forth above, 

for a period of one year to allow for the 

possible reintroduction of Intercity 

Passenger Rail service. In the event the 

grant recipient should fail to ensure the 

maintenance of project property, as set 

forth above, for a period of time in 

excess of six months, the grant recipient 

will be required to refund to FRA a prorata share of the Federal contribution, 

based upon the percentage of the 20- 

year period remaining at the time of 

such original default. 

The grant recipient will also be 

required to acknowledge that the 

purpose of the project is to benefit 

Intercity Passenger Rail service. In the 

event that all Intercity Passenger Rail 

service making use of the project 

property is discontinued (for any 

reason) at any time during a period of 

20 years from the date such project 

property was placed in service, as set 

forth above, and if such Intercity 

Passenger Rail service is not 

reintroduced during a one-year period 

following the date of such 

discontinuance, the grant recipient will 

be required to refund to FRA, no later 

than 18 months following the date of 

such discontinuance, a pro-rata share of 

the Federal contribution, based upon 

the percentage of the 20-year period 

remaining at the time of such 

discontinuance. 

Appendix 3.3 ARRA-Specific Grant 

Requirements (Apply to ARRA-Funded 

Grants Only) 

ARRA contains several specific 

requirements associated with funding 

provided in that statute. These include: 

Appendix 3.3.1 Prohibited Activities 

None of the funds appropriated or 

otherwise made available in the grant 

agreement may be used by any State or 

local government, or any private entity, 

for any casino or other gambling 

establishment, aquarium, zoo, golf 

course, or swimming pool. 

Appendix 3.3.2 Recovery Act Funding 

Announcement 

The grant recipient will be required to 

post a sign at all fixed project locations 

at the most publicly accessible location 

and a plaque in all purchased or 

rehabilitated rail cars announcing that 

the project or equipment was funded by 

the U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Federal Railroad Administration with 

funds provided through the American 

Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The 

configuration of the signs or plaques 

will be consistent with guidance issued 

by the Office of Management and 

Budget and/or the Department of 

Transportation and approved by the 

FRA. 

Appendix 3.3.3 Certifications 

As a condition of award, to the extent 

applicable, grant recipients must 

comply with the Certification 

requirements of ARRA. These include 

Section 1201 (Maintenance of Effort); 

Section 1511 (Transparency and 

Oversight); and Section 1607 

(Additional Funding Distribution and 

Assurance of Appropriate Use of 

Funds). These Certifications are 

described in following sections. 

29926 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 

Section 1201(a): Maintenance of Effort 

By March 19, 2009, State Governors 

were required to certify to the Secretary 

of Transportation that the State would 

maintain its effort with regard to State 

funding for the types of projects funded 

by the appropriation, for each amount 

distributed to a State or a State agency 

under this program. As part of this 

Certification, the Governor was required 

to submit to the Secretary a statement 

identifying the amount of funds the 

State planned to expend from State 

sources as of February 17, 2009, during 

the period between February 17, 2009 

and September 30, 2010, for the types of 

projects funded by the appropriation. 

The maintenance of effort requirement 

in section 1201(a) applies to any grant 

recipient that is a State government (or 

agency thereof) that planned, as of 

February 17, 2009, to expend State 

funds on the project receiving a HighSpeed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail 

grant under this guidance during the 

period between February 17, 2009, and 

September 30, 2010. 

Section 1511: Transparency and 

Oversight 

For grant funds made available to 

State or local governments for 

infrastructure investments, the 

Governor, mayor, or other chief 

executive, as appropriate, must certify 

that the infrastructure investment (1) 

received the full review and vetting 

required by law; and (2) that the chief 

executive accepts responsibility that it 

is an appropriate use of taxpayer 

dollars. This certification must be 

executed and posted on a Web site and 

linked to http://www.recovery.gov prior 

to the recipient of a High-Speed Rail/ 

Intercity Passenger Rail grant receiving 

grant funds. If the project is not 

included in the STIP, a separate 

certification for the potential HighSpeed Rail/Intercity Passenger Rail 

project must be executed, attaching the 

relevant information or linking to a 

public Web site where the information 

may be obtained. This certification must 

include a description of the investment, 

the estimated total cost, and the amount 

of covered funds to be used, and must 

be posted online and linked to the Web 

site http://www.recovery.gov. The 

certification must also state that the 

projects have been properly reviewed 

and vetted and are an appropriate use of 

taxpayer dollars. 

Section 1607: Additional Funding 

Distribution and Assurance of 

Appropriate Use of Funds 

Section 1607 required that Governors 

of States receiving funding under the 

Recovery Act certify by April 3, 2009, 

that, for grant funds provided to any 

State or State agency, the State would 

request and use the funds provided in 

the Recovery Act and that such funds 

would be used to create jobs and 

promote economic growth. 

Alternatively, the State legislature could 

have acted to accept such funds by the 

adoption of a concurrent resolution. 

States or State agencies ultimately 

receiving High-Speed Rail/Intercity 

Passenger Rail grant funds must ensure 

that this certification has been 

completed. 

Submission of Certifications Under 

Sections 1201, 1511, and 1607 

All Certifications, once executed, 

shall be submitted to the Secretary of 

Transportation, c/o Joel Szabat, Deputy 

Assistant Secretary for Transportation 

Policy, at TigerTeam.Leads@dot.gov. 

Certifications may be submitted via email as electronic, scanned copies, with 

original signed versions to follow via 

U.S. mail. As required by ARRA, 

certifications under Section 1511 shall 

be immediately posted on a Web site 

and linked to the Web site http:// 

www.recovery.gov. 

Appendix 3.3.4 Whistleblower 

Protections 

The grant recipient will be required to 

provide the whistleblower protections 

required by Section 1553 of ARRA. 

Appendix 3.3.5 False Claims Act 

The grant recipient and sub-recipients 

will be required to promptly refer to the 

DOT’s Inspector General credible 

evidence that a principal, employee, 

agency, contractor, sub-contractor, or 

other person has submitted a false claim 

under the False Claims Act or has 

committed a criminal or civil violation 

of laws pertaining to fraud, conflict of 

interest, bribery, gratuity, or similar 

misconduct involving ARRA funds. 

Appendix 3.3.6 Contracting Provisions 

To the maximum extent possible, 

contracts funded under ARRA shall be 

awarded as fixed-price contracts 

through the use of competitive 

procedures. Grant recipients will be 

required to provide a summary of any 

contract awarded with ARRA funds that 

is not fixed-price and not awarded using 

competitive procedures for posting on 

the Recovery Accountability and 

Transparency Board’s Web site. 

Appendix 3.4 Program-Specific Grant 

Requirements 

These apply to PRIIA-authorized 

grants, including ARRA grants only, and 

do not necessarily pertain to grants 

under Track 3 and Track 4 ARRA 

funding is provided through several 

existing FRA programs principally 

based on programs authorized in PRIIA, 

and PRIIA includes a number of 

additional program-specific grant 

requirements, including: 

Appendix 3.4.1 Buy America 

Grant recipients must comply with 

the Buy America provisions set forth in 

49 U.S.C. 24405(a) which specifically 

provide that the Secretary of 

Transportation may obligate ARRA 

funds for a High-Speed Rail/Intercity 

Passenger Rail or congestion project 

only if the steel, iron, and manufactured 

goods used in the project are produced 

in the United States. The Secretary (or 

the Secretary’s delegate, the FRA 

Administrator) may waive this 

requirement if the Secretary finds that 

applying this requirement would be 

inconsistent with the public interest; the 

steel, iron, and goods produced in the 

United States are not produced in a 

sufficient and reasonably available 

amount or are not of a satisfactory 

quality; rolling stock or power train 

equipment cannot be bought and 

delivered in the United States within a 

reasonable time; or including domestic 

material will increase the cost of the 

overall project by more than 25 percent. 

For purposes of implementing these 

requirements, in calculating the 

components’ costs, labor costs involved 

in final assembly shall not be included 

in the calculation. If the Secretary 

determines that it is necessary to waive 

the application of the Buy America 

requirements, the Secretary is required 

before the date on which such finding 

takes effect to publish in the Federal 

Register a detailed written justification 

as to why the waiver is needed; and 

provide notice of such finding and an 

opportunity for public comment on 

such finding, for a reasonable period of 

time, not to exceed 15 days. The 

Secretary may not make a waiver for 

goods produced in a foreign country if 

the Secretary, in consultation with the 

United States Trade Representative, 

decides that the government of that 

foreign country has an agreement with 

the United States Government under 

which the Secretary has waived the 

requirement of this subsection, and the 

government of that foreign country has 

violated the agreement by 

discriminating against goods to which 

this subsection applies that are 

produced in the United States and to 

which the agreement applies. The Buy 

America requirements described in this 

section shall only apply to projects for 

which the costs exceed $100,000. 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 29927 

Appendix 3.4.2 Operators Deemed 

Rail Carriers 

A person that conducts rail operations 

over rail infrastructure constructed or 

improved with funding provided in 

whole or in part in a grant made under 

this program shall be considered a rail 

carrier as defined in Section 49 U.S.C. 

10102(5) for purposes of title 49 of the 

United States Code and any other 

statute that adopts the definition found 

in 49 U.S.C. 10102(5) including the 

Railroad Retirement Act of 1974 (45 

U.S.C. 231 et seq.); the Railway Labor 

Act (43 U.S.C. 151 et seq.); and the 

Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act 

(45 U.S.C. 351 et seq.) (see 49 U.S.C. 

24405(b)) 

Appendix 3.4.3 Railroad Agreements 

As a condition of receiving a grant 

under this program for a project that 

uses rights-of-way owned by a railroad, 

the grant recipient shall have in place a 

written agreement between the grant 

recipient and the railroad regarding 

such use and ownership, including any 

compensation for such use; assurances 

regarding the adequacy of infrastructure 

capacity to accommodate both existing 

and future freight and passenger 

operations; an assurance by the railroad 

that collective bargaining agreements 

with the railroad’s employees (including 

terms regulating the contracting of 

work) will remain in full force and 

effect according to their terms for work 

performed by the railroad on the 

railroad transportation corridor; and an 

assurance that the grant recipient 

complies with liability requirements 

consistent with 49 U.S.C. 28103. Grant 

recipients that use rights-of-way owned 

by a railroad must comply with FRA 

guidance regarding how to establish a 

written agreement between the 

applicant and the railroad regarding use 

and ownership as discussed in 

Appendix 3.2.11. (See 49 U.S.C. 

24405(c)). 

Appendix 3.4.4 Labor Protection 

As a condition of receiving a grant 

under this program for a project that 

uses rights-of-way owned by a railroad, 

the grant recipient must agree to comply 

with the standards of 49 U.S.C. 24312, 

as such section was in effect on 

September 1, 2003, with respect to the 

project in the same manner that Amtrak 

is required to comply with those 

standards for construction work 

financed under an agreement made 

under 49 U.S.C. 24308(a) and the 

protective arrangements established 

under Section 504 of the Railroad 

Revitalization and Regulatory Reform 

Act of 1976 (45 U.S.C. 836) with respect 

to employees affected by actions taken 

in connection with the project to be 

financed in whole or in part by grants 

under this program. (see 49 U.S.C. 

24405(c)). 

Appendix 3.4.5 Davis-Bacon Act 

Projects funded through ARRA are 

required to comply with the DavisBacon Act (40 U.S.C. 3141 et seq.). The 

Davis-Bacon Act is a measure that fixes 

a floor under wages on Federal 

government projects and provides, in 

pertinent part, that the minimum wages 

to be paid for classes of workers under 

a contract for the construction, 

alteration, and/or repair of a Federal 

public building or public work, must be 

based upon wage rates determined by 

the Secretary of Labor to be prevailing 

for corresponding classes of workers 

employed on projects of a character 

similar to the contract work in the civil 

subdivision of the State in which the 

work is to be performed. 

Two provisos related to the DavisBacon Act are included in ARRA related 

to HSIPR service. The first requires that 

funded projects must comply with the 

requirements of subchapter IV of 

chapter 31 of title 40, United States 

Code. The second provides that 49 

U.S.C. 24405 shall also apply to the 

funded projects. The first proviso 

mandates compliance with the DavisBacon Act generally since it is included 

in subchapter IV of Chapter 31 of title 

40. The second proviso also mandates 

compliance the Davis-Bacon Act 

through subsection 24405(c) which 

provides that the Secretary shall require 

as a condition of making any grant that 

uses rights-of-way owned by a railroad 

that the applicant agree to comply with 

the standards of Section 24312 of title 

49 with respect to the project in the 

same manner that Amtrak is required to 

comply with those standards for 

construction work financed under an 

agreement made under 49 U.S.C. 

24308(a). Section 24312 provides that 

Amtrak shall ensure that laborers and 

mechanics employed by contractors and 

subcontractors in construction work 

financed under an agreement made 

under Section 24308 will be paid wages 

not less than those prevailing on similar 

construction in the locality, as 

determined by the Secretary of Labor 

under Sections 3141–3144, 3146 and 

3147 of title 40 and that wages in a 

collective bargaining agreement 

negotiated under the Railway Labor Act 

are deemed to comply with Sections 

3141–3144, 3146, and 3147 of title 40. 

Section 24308 authorizes Amtrak to 

enter into agreements with rail carriers 

or regional transportation authorities to 

use facilities of and have services 

provided by the carrier or authority 

under terms on which the parties agree. 

FRA has concluded that the two 

Davis-Bacon requirements can be 

reconciled in a manner that allows the 

HSIPR Program to be implemented in a 

way that is both reasonable and 

consistent with current practices. For 

projects that use or propose to use 

rights-of-way owned by a railroad, the 

specific provisions of 24405(c) would 

apply and applicants would be required 

to comply with the standards of 49 

U.S.C. 24312 (prevailing wages) in the 

same manner that Amtrak is required to 

comply with those standards for 

construction projects it might 

undertake. It follows that wages in a 

collective bargaining agreement 

negotiated under the Railway Labor Act 

would be deemed to comply with DavisBacon Act requirements for these 

projects. For projects that do not 

propose to use rights-of-way owned by 

a railroad, normal Davis-Bacon Act 

requirements would apply and there 

would be no specific exemption for 

wages arrived at through a collective 

bargaining agreement negotiated under 

the Railway Labor Act. Wage rates on 

these projects would have to meet the 

Secretary of Labor’s prevailing wage 

standards as described above. 

Appendix 3.4.6 Project Labor 

Agreements 

Executive Order 13502, Use of Project 

Labor Agreements for Federal 

Construction Projects, issued by 

President Obama on February 6, 2009, 

authorizes Federal agencies in awarding 

any contract in connection with largescale Federal government construction 

projects to, on a project-by-project basis, 

require the use of a project labor 

agreement by a contractor where use of 

such an agreement will (i) advance the 

Federal Government’s interest in 

achieving economy and efficiency in 

Federal procurement, producing labormanagement stability, and ensuring 

compliance with laws and regulations 

governing safety and health, equal 

employment opportunity, labor and 

employment standards, and other 

matters, and (ii) be consistent with law. 

At this time, the Executive Order does 

not apply directly to recipients of 

financial assistance to either require or 

preclude the use of a project labor 

agreement. Rather, the Order directs the 

Director of OMB, in consultation with 

the Secretary of Labor and with other 

officials as appropriate, to provide the 

President within 180 days of the date of 

the Order (August 5, 2009) with 

recommendations about whether 

broader use of project labor agreements, 

with respect to both construction 

29928 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 

projects undertaken under Federal 

contracts and construction projects 

receiving Federal financial assistance, 

would help to promote the economical, 

efficient, and timely completion of such 

projects. FRA will issue additional 

guidance to applicants following 

submission of the required report and 

any further action by the President or 

OMB. 

Appendix 3.4.7 Replacement of 

Existing Intercity Passenger Rail Service 

Grant recipients providing Intercity 

Passenger Rail transportation that begins 

operations after October 16, 2008 on a 

project funded in whole or in part by 

grants made under this program, that 

replaces Intercity Passenger Rail service 

that was provided by Amtrak, unless 

such service was provided solely by 

Amtrak to another entity as of such date, 

are required to enter into a series of 

agreements with the authorized 

bargaining agent or agents for adversely 

affected employees of the predecessor 

provider. (see 49 U.S.C. 24405(d)). 

Appendix 3.5 General Requirements 

Appendix 3.5.1 Standard Reporting 

Requirements 

• Progress Reports—Progress reports 

must accompany each request for 

payment, and at a minimum are to be 

submitted quarterly. These reports shall 

relate the state of completion of items in 

the scope of work to expenditures of the 

relevant budget elements. The grant 

recipient shall furnish the quarterly 

progress report to the FRA on or before 

the 30th calendar day of the month 

following the end of the quarter being 

reported. Each quarterly report shall set 

forth concise statements concerning 

activities relevant to the project, and 

shall include, but not be limited to, the 

following: (a) An account of significant 

progress (findings, events, trends, etc.) 

made during the reporting period; (b) a 

description of any technical and/or cost 

problem(s) encountered or anticipated 

that will affect completion of the grant 

within the time and fiscal constraints as 

set forth in this agreement, together with 

recommended solutions or corrective 

action plans (with dates) to such 

problems, or identification of specific 

action that is required by the FRA, or a 

statement that no problems were 

encountered; and (c) an outline of work 

and activities planned for the next 

reporting period. 

• Quarterly Financial Status Report 

(SF–269)—Grant recipients must report 

obligations and expenditures on a 

quarterly basis using the SF–269, which 

is due within 30 days of the end of each 

calendar quarter (e.g., for quarter ending 

March 31, the SF–269 is due no later 

than April 30). A report must be 

submitted for every quarter of the period 

of performance, including partial 

calendar quarters, as well as for periods 

where no grant activity occurs. The final 

SF–269 is due 90 days after the end date 

of the period of performance. Financial 

Status Reports (SF–269) must be filed 

online through GrantSolutions. 

• Quarterly Federal Cash 

Transactions Report—Grant recipients 

will be required to submit a SF–272, 

Federal Cash Transaction Report (and 

when necessary the continuation sheet 

SF–272a), for grants paid by Treasury 

Check Advances, or Electronic Transfer 

of Funds. FRA will use this report to 

monitor cash advanced to the Grantee 

and to obtain disbursement or outlay 

information. Forecasts of Federal cash 

outlays are required in the ‘‘Remarks’’ 

section of the report. Grantees will 

furnish the quarterly Federal cash 

transaction report to the FRA on or 

before the 30th calendar day of the 

month following the end of the quarter 

being reported. 

• Interim and/or Final Report(s)— 

Upon project completion, grant 

recipients will be required to furnish to 

the FRA a Summary Project Report 

detailing the results and benefits of the 

grant recipient’s improvement efforts 

due by the expiration date of the grant. 

Appendix 3.5.2 ARRA-Specific 

Reporting Requirements 

• ARRA Section 1201 Report— 

Periodic Reports—Each grant recipient 

will be required to submit periodic 

reports to the FRA as described in this 

paragraph not later than February 17, 

2010, February 17, 2011, and February 

17, 2012. The Periodic Reports shall 

include information describing: (1) The 

amount of Federal funds appropriated, 

allocated, obligated, and outlayed under 

the grant agreement; (2) the number of 

projects that have been put out to bid 

under the grant agreement and the 

amount of Federal funds associated with 

such projects; (3) the number of projects 

for which contracts have been awarded 

under the grant agreement and the 

amount of Federal funds associated with 

such contracts; (4) the number of 

projects for which work has begun 

under such contracts and the amount of 

Federal funds associated with such 

contracts; (5) the number of projects for 

which work has been completed under 

such contracts and the amount of 

Federal funds associated with such 

contracts; (6) the number of direct, onproject jobs created or sustained by the 

Federal funds provided for projects 

under the grant agreement and, to the 

extent possible, the estimated indirect 

jobs created or sustained in the 

associated supplying industries, 

including the number of jobs created 

and the total increase in employment 

since February 17, 2009; and (7) 

information tracking the actual 

aggregate expenditures by the grant 

recipient from its own sources for 

projects eligible for funding under this 

agreement during the period beginning 

on February 17, 2009 through 

September 30, 2010, as compared to the 

level of such expenditures that were 

planned to occur during such period as 

of February 17, 2009. DOT or FRA may 

issue additional guidance on the 

preparation and submission of Periodic 

Reports. 

• Section 1512(c)—Jobs 

Accountability Reports—Not later than 

10 days after the end of each quarter, 

each grant recipient will be required to 

submit a Jobs Accountability Report to 

the FRA that contains: (1) The total 

amount of ARRA funds received 

pursuant to this agreement; (2) the 

amount of ARRA funds received that 

were expended or obligated to projects 

or activities; and (3) a detailed list of all 

projects or activities for which ARRA 

funds were expended or obligated, 

including—(A) the name of the project 

or activity; (B) a description of the 

project or activity; (C) an evaluation of 

the completion status of the project or 

activity; (D) an estimate of the number 

of jobs created and the number of jobs 

retained by the project or activity; and 

(E) detailed information on any 

subcontracts or subgrants awarded by 

the grant recipient to include the data 

elements required to comply with the 

Federal Funding Accountability and 

Transparency Act of 2006 (Pub. L. 109– 

282), allowing aggregate reporting on 

awards below $25,000 or to individuals, 

as prescribed by the Director of OMB. 

OMB may issue additional guidance on 

the preparation and submission of Jobs 

Accountability Reports. The grant 

recipient must also register with the 

CCR database or complete other 

registration requirements as determined 

by the Director of OMB. 

• Section 1609: Environmental 

Reporting—Section 1609(c) of ARRA 

requires that Federal agencies report via 

the President (specifically, to the White 

House Council on Environmental 

Quality) every 90 days following 

enactment of ARRA on the status of 

projects funded under ARRA with 

respect to compliance with NEPA. Grant 

recipients may be requested to submit 

information to assist FRA in completing 

this report. 

• Additional Information—To satisfy 

the purposes of the ARRA, grant 

recipients may be required to provide 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 23, 2009 / Notices 29929 

additional information in response to 

requests from OMB, the Congressional 

Budget Office, the Government 

Accountability Office, or the 

Department’s Inspector General. FRA 

will inform grant recipients if and when 

such additional reports or information 

are required. 

Appendix 3.5.3 Audit Requirements 

Grant recipients that expend $500,000 

or more of Federal funds during their 

fiscal year are required to submit an 

organization-wide financial and 

compliance audit report. The audit must 

be performed in accordance with U.S. 

General Accountability Office, 

Government Auditing Standards, 

located at http://www.gao.gov/govaud/ 

ybk01.htm, and OMB Circular A–133, 

Audits of States, Local Governments, 

and Non-Profit Organizations, located at 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/ 

circulars/a133/a133.html. Audit reports 

are currently to be submitted to the 

Federal Audit Clearinghouse no later 

than nine months after the end of the 

recipient’s fiscal year. In addition, FRA 

and the Comptroller General of the 

United States shall have access to any 

books, documents, and records of grant 

recipients for audit and examination 

purposes. The grant recipient will also 

give FRA or the Comptroller, through 

any authorized representative, access to, 

and the right to examine all records, 

books, papers or documents related to 

the grant. Grant recipients shall require 

that sub-grantees comply with the audit 

requirements set forth in OMB Circular 

A–133. Grant recipients are responsible 

for ensuring that sub-recipient audit 

reports are received and for resolving 

any audit findings. 

Appendix 3.5.4 Monitoring 

Requirements 

Grant recipients will be monitored 

periodically by FRA, both 

programmatically and financially, to 

ensure that the project goals, objectives, 

performance requirements, timelines, 

milestone completion, budgets, and 

other related program criteria are being 

met. Monitoring will be accomplished 

through a combination of office-based 

reviews and onsite monitoring visits. 

Monitoring will involve the review and 

analysis of the financial, programmatic, 

performance and administrative issues 

relative to each program and will 

identify areas where technical 

assistance and other support may be 

needed. The recipient is responsible for 

monitoring award activities, to include 

sub-awards, to provide reasonable 

assurance that the Federal award is 

administered in compliance with 

requirements. Responsibilities include 

the accounting of recipients and 

expenditures, cash management, 

maintaining of adequate financial 

records, and refunding expenditures 

disallowed by audits. 

Appendix 3.5.5 Closeout Process 

Project closeout occurs when all 

required project work and all 

administrative procedures described in 

49 CFR part 18, or 49 CFR part 19, as 

applicable, have been completed, and 

when FRA notifies the grant recipient 

and forwards the final Federal 

assistance payment, or when FRA 

acknowledges the grant recipient’s 

remittance of the proper refund. Project 

closeout shall not invalidate any 

continuing obligations imposed on the 

Grantee by an award or by the FRA’s 

final notification or acknowledgment. 

Within 90 days of the Project 

completion date or termination by FRA, 

Grantees agree to submit a final 

Financial Status Report (Standard Form 

269), a certification or summary of 

project expenses, and third party audit 

reports, as applicable. 

Appendix 3.6 Freedom of Information 

Act (FOIA) 

As a Federal agency, the FRA is 

subject to the Freedom of Information 

Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), which 

generally provides that any person has 

a right, enforceable in court, to obtain 

access to Federal agency records, except 

to the extent that such records (or 

portions of them) are protected from 

public disclosure by one of nine 

exemptions or by one of three special 

law enforcement record exclusions. 

Grant applications and related materials 

submitted by applicants pursuant to this 

guidance would become agency records 

and thus subject to the FOIA and to 

public release through individual FOIA 

requests. ARRA also mandates broad 

public dissemination of information 

related to the expenditure of funds 

through reporting requirements and 

website postings that are addressed in 

other sections of this guidance. 

President Obama’s March 20, 2009 

Memorandum for the Heads of 

Executive Departments and Agencies on 

Ensuring Responsible Spending of 

Recovery Act Funds mandates the 

strongest possible efforts to ensure 

public transparency and accountability 

of ARRA expenditures. Consistent with 

these mandates, it is FRA’s intention to 

employ a transparent process in 

distributing and overseeing the 

expenditure of ARRA funds. FRA also 

recognizes that certain information 

submitted in support of an application 

for funding in accordance with this 

guidance could be exempt from public 

release under FOIA as a result of the 

application of one of the FOIA 

exemptions, most particularly 

Exemption 4, which protects trade 

secrets and commercial or financial 

information obtained from a person that 

is privileged or confidential (5 U.S.C. 

552(b)(4)). In the context of this grant 

program, commercial or financial 

information obtained from a person 

could be confidential if disclosure is 

likely to cause substantial harm to the 

competitive position of the person from 

whom the information was obtained 

(see National Parks & Conservation 

Ass’n v. Morton, 498 F.2d 765, 770 (D.C. 

Cir. 1974)). Entities seeking exempt 

treatment must provide a detailed 

statement supporting and justifying 

their request and should follow FRA’s 

existing procedures for requesting 

confidential treatment in the railroad 

safety context found at 49 CFR 209.11. 

As noted in the Department’s FOIA 

implementing regulation (49 CFR part 

7), the burden is on the entity requesting 

confidential treatment to identify all 

information for which exempt treatment 

is sought and to persuade the agency 

that the information should not be 

disclosed (see 49 CFR 7.17). The final 

decision as to whether the information 

meets the standards of Exemption 4 

rests with the FRA. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on June 17, 

2009. 

Joseph C. Szabo, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. E9–14692 Filed 6–22–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P