Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

§
Marginalia
Code · REGISTER · 2006-04-14 · Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT · Notices

Notices. Notice of final disposition

11,617 words·~53 min read·/register/2006/04/14/06-3606

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration [Docket No. FMCSA-2005-23773] Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of final disposition. SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt 19 individuals from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR). The exemptions will enable these individuals to operate commercial motor vehicles
(CMVs)in interstate commerce without meeting the vision standard prescribed in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The Agency has concluded that granting these exemptions will provide a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety maintained without the exemptions for these CMV drivers. DATES: The exemptions are effective April 14, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Chief, Physical Qualifications Division,
(202)366-4001, *maggi.gunnels@fmcsa.dot.gov,* FMCSA, Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Electronic Access You may see all the comments online through the Document Management System
(DMS)at *http://dmses.dot.gov.* Background On February 9, 2006, FMCSA published a Notice of receipt of exemption applications from 19 individuals, and requested comments from the public (71 FR 6826). The 19 individuals petitioned FMCSA for exemptions from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), which applies to drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce. They are: Scott E. Ames, Otto J. Ammer, Jr., Harold J. Barley, Jr., Arthur L. Fields, John W. Foggy, Rupert G. Gilmore, III, George R. Gorsuch, Jr., Walter R. Hardiman, Sergio A. Hernandez, Burt A. Hughes, Fredrick C. Ingles, Clyde Johnson, III, Paul E. Lindon, Aaron G. Lougher, Joe S. Nix, IV, Luis F. Saavedra, Raul R. Torres, Darwin J. Thomas and Darel G. Wagner. Under 49 U.S.C. 31315 and 31136(e), FMCSA may grant an exemption for a 2-year period if it finds “such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such exemption.” The statute also allows the Agency to renew exemptions at the end of the 2-year period. Accordingly, FMCSA has evaluated the 19 applications on their merits and made a determination to grant exemptions to all of them. The comment period closed on March 13, 2006. Vision and Driving Experience of the Applicants The vision requirement in the FMCSR provides: A person is physically qualified to drive a commercial motor vehicle if that person has distant visual acuity of at least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual acuity separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen) or better with corrective lenses, distant binocular acuity of a least 20/40 (Snellen) in both eyes with or without corrective lenses, field of vision of at least 70° in the horizontal meridian in each eye, and the ability to recognize the colors of traffic signals and devices showing standard red, green, and amber (49 CFR 391.41(b)(10)). Since 1992, the Agency has undertaken studies to determine if this vision standard should be amended. The final report from our medical panel recommends changing the field of vision standard from 70 to 120 degrees, while leaving the visual acuity standard unchanged. (See Frank C. Berson, M.D., Mark C. Kuperwaser, M.D., Lloyd Pual Aiello, M.D., and James W. Rosenberg, M.D., “Visual Requirements and Commercial Drivers, “ October 16, 1998, filed in the docket, FMCSA-98-4334.). The panel's conclusion supports the Agency's view that the present visual acuity standard is reasonable and necessary as a general standard to ensure highway safety. FMCSA also recognizes that some drivers do not meet the vision standard, but have adapted their driving to accommodate their vision limitation and demonstrated their ability to drive safely. The 19 exemption applicants listed in this Notice fall into this category. They are unable to meet the vision standard in one eye for various reasons, including amblyopia, aphakia, cataract, macular scarring and loss of an eye due to trauma. In most cases, their eye conditions were not recently developed. All but seven of the applicants were either born with their vision impairments or have had them since childhood. The seven individuals who sustained their vision conditions as adults have had them for periods ranging from 4 to 19 years. Although each applicant has one eye which does not meet the vision standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), each has at least 20/40 corrected vision in the other eye, and in a doctor's opinion has sufficient vision to perform all the tasks necessary to operate a CMV. Doctors' opinions are supported by the applicants' possession of valid commercial driver's licenses
(CDLs)or non-CDLs to operate CMVs. Before issuing CDLs, States subject drivers to knowledge and skills tests designed to evaluate their qualifications to operate a CMV. All these applicants satisfied the testing standards for their State of residence. By meeting State licensing requirements, the applicants demonstrated their ability to operate a commercial vehicle, with their limited vision, to the satisfaction of the State. While possessing a valid CDL or non-CDL, these 19 drivers have been authorized to drive a CMV in intrastate commerce, even though their vision disqualified them from driving in interstate commerce. They have driven CMVs with their limited vision for careers ranging from 3 to 30 years. In the past 3 years, one of the drivers had a conviction for failure to obey a traffic sign and none were involved in crashes. The qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each applicant were stated and discussed in detail in the February 9, 2006 Notice (71 FR 6826). Basis for Exemption Determination Under 49 U.S.C. 31315 and 31136(e), FMCSA may grant an exemption from the vision standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) if the exemption is likely to achieve an equivalent or greater level of safety than would be achieved without the exemption. Without the exemption, applicants will continue to be restricted to intrastate driving. With the exemption, applicants can drive in interstate commerce. Thus, our analysis focuses on whether an equal or greater level of safety is likely to be achieved by permitting each of these drivers to drive in interstate commerce as opposed to restricting him or her to driving in intrastate commerce. To evaluate the effect of these exemptions on safety, FMCSA considered not only the medical reports about the applicants' vision, but also their driving records and experience with the vision deficiency. To qualify for an exemption from the vision standard, FMCSA requires a person to present verifiable evidence that he/she has driven a commercial vehicle safely with the vision deficiency for 3 years. Recent driving performance is especially important in evaluating future safety, according to several research studies designed to correlate past and future driving performance. Results of these studies support the principle that the best predictor of future performance by a driver is his/her past record of crashes and traffic violations. Copies of the studies may be found at docket number FMCSA-98-3637. We believe we can properly apply the principle to monocular drivers, because data from the Federal Highway Administration's
(FHWA)former waiver study program clearly demonstrate the driving performance of experienced monocular drivers in the program is better than that of all CMV drivers collectively. (See 61 FR 13338, 13345, March 26, 1996.) The fact that experienced monocular drivers with good driving records in the waiver program demonstrated their ability to drive safely supports a conclusion that other monocular drivers, meeting the same qualifying conditions as those required by the waiver program, are also likely to have adapted to their vision deficiency and will continue to operate safely. The first major research correlating past and future performance was done in England by Greenwood and Yule in 1920. Subsequent studies, building on that model, concluded that crash rates for the same individual exposed to certain risks for two different time periods vary only slightly. (See Bates and Neyman, University of California Publications in Statistics, April 1952.) Other studies demonstrated theories of predicting crash proneness from crash history coupled with other factors. These factors—such as age, sex, geographic location, mileage driven and conviction history—are used every day by insurance companies and motor vehicle bureaus to predict the probability of an individual experiencing future crashes. (See Weber, Donald C., “Accident Rate Potential: An Application of Multiple Regression Analysis of a Poisson Process,” Journal of American Statistical Association, June 1971.) A 1964 California Driver Record Study prepared by the California Department of Motor Vehicles concluded that the best overall crash predictor for both concurrent and nonconcurrent events is the number of single convictions. This study used 3 consecutive years of data, comparing the experiences of drivers in the first 2 years with their experiences in the final year. Applying principles from these studies to the past 3-year record of the 19 applicants, we note that one of the applicants had a conviction for traffic violation, failure to obey a traffic sign. None of the applicants were involved in crashes. The applicants achieved this record of safety while driving with their vision impairment, demonstrating the likelihood that they have adapted their driving skills to accommodate their condition. As the applicants' ample driving histories with their vision deficiencies are good predictors of future performance, FMCSA concludes their ability to drive safely can be projected into the future. We believe the applicants' intrastate driving experience and history provide an adequate basis for predicting their ability to drive safely in interstate commerce. Intrastate driving, like interstate operations, involves substantial driving on highways on the interstate system and on other roads built to interstate standards. Moreover, driving in congested urban areas exposes the driver to more pedestrian and vehicular traffic than exists on interstate highways. Faster reaction to traffic and traffic signals is generally required because distances between them are more compact. These conditions tax visual capacity and driver response just as intensely as interstate driving conditions. The veteran drivers in this proceeding have operated CMVs safely under those conditions for at least 3 years, most for much longer. Their experience and driving records lead us to believe that each applicant is capable of operating in interstate commerce as safely as he/she has been performing in intrastate commerce. Consequently, FMCSA finds that exempting these applicants from the vision standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) is likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption. For this reason, the Agency is granting the exemptions for the 2-year period allowed by 49 U.S.C. 31315 and 31136(e) to the 19 applicants listed in the Notice of February 9, 2006 (71 FR 6826). We recognize that the vision of an applicant may change and affect his/her ability to operate a commercial vehicle as safely as in the past. As a condition of the exemption, therefore, FMCSA will impose requirements on the 19 individuals consistent with the grandfathering provisions applied to drivers who participated in the Agency's vision waiver program. Those requirements are found at 49 CFR 391.64(b) and include the following:
(1)That each individual be physically examined every year
(a)by an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the better eye continues to meet the standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), and
(b)by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41;
(2)that each individual provide a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to the medical examiner at the time of the annual medical examination; and
(3)that each individual provide a copy of the annual medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's qualification file, or keep a copy in his/her driver's qualification file if he/she is self-employed. The driver must also have a copy of the certification when driving, for presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement official. Discussion of Comments Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates) express continued opposition to FMCSA's policy to grant exemptions from the FMCSR, including the driver qualification standards. Specifically, Advocates:
(1)Objects to the manner in which FMCSA presents driver information to the public and makes safety determinations;
(2)objects to the Agency's reliance on conclusions drawn from the vision waiver program;
(3)claims the Agency has misinterpreted statutory language on the granting of exemptions (49 U.S.C. 31315 and 31136(e)); and finally
(4)suggests that a 1999 Supreme Court decision affects the legal validity of vision exemptions. The issues raised by Advocates were addressed at length in 64 FR 51568 (September 23, 1999), 64 FR 66962 (November 30, 1999), 64 FR 69586 (December 13, 1999), 65 FR 159 (January 3, 2000), 65 FR 57230 (September 21, 2000), and 66 FR 13825 (March 7, 2001). We will not address these points again here, but refer interested parties to those earlier discussions. Conclusion Based upon its evaluation of the 19 exemption applications, FMCSA exempts Scott E. Ames, Otto J. Ammer, Jr., Harold J. Barley, Jr., Arthur L. Fields, John W. Foggy, Rupert G. Gilmore, III, George R. Gorsuch, Jr., Walter R. Hardiman, Sergio A. Hernandez, Burt A. Hughes, Fredrick C. Ingles, Clyde Johnson, III, Paul E. Lindon, Aaron G. Lougher, Joe S. Nix, IV, Luis F. Saavedra, Raul R. Torres, Darwin J. Thomas and Darel G. Wagner from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), subject to the requirements cited above (49 CFR 391.64(b)). In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315 and 31136(e), each exemption will be valid for 2 years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if:
(1)The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption;
(2)the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained before it was granted; or
(3)continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31315 and 31136. If the exemption is still effective at the end of the 2-year period, the person may apply to FMCSA for a renewal under procedures in effect at that time. Issued on: March 31, 2006. Rose A. McMurray, Associate Administrator, Policy and Program Development. [FR Doc. E6-5592 Filed 4-13-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration [Docket Nos. FMCSA-99-6156, FMCSA-2002-11426] Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of renewal of exemption; request for comments. SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew the exemptions from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for 18 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt individuals from its vision standards if the exemptions granted will not compromise safety. The exemptions will enable these individuals to operate commercial motor vehicles
(CMVs)in interstate commerce without meeting the vision standard prescribed in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The Agency has concluded that granting these exemptions will provide a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety maintained without the exemptions for these commercial motor vehicle
(CMV)drivers. DATES: This decision is effective April 23, 2006. Comments must be received on or before May 15, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket Management System
(DMS)Docket Numbers FMCSA-99-6156 and FMCSA-2002-11426, using any of the following methods. • Web site: *http://dmses.dot.gov* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the DOT electronic docket site. • Fax: 1-202-493-2251. • Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590-0001. • Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. *Instructions:* All submissions must include the Agency name and docket numbers for this Notice. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to *http://dms.dot.gov* , including any personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading for further information. *Docket:* For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to *http://dms.dot.gov* at any time or Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The DMS is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. If you want us to notify you that we received your comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting comments on-line. *Privacy Act:* Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the Department of Transportation's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477; Apr. 11, 2000). This information is also available at *http://dms.dot.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Chief, Physical Qualifications Division,
(202)366-4001, *maggi.gunnels@fmcsa.dot.gov* , FMCSA, Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., E.T., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Exemption Decision Under 49 U.S.C. 31315 and 31136(e), FMCSA may renew an exemption from the vision requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), which applies to drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce, for a two-year period if it finds “such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such exemption.” The procedures for requesting an exemption (including renewals) are set out in 49 CFR part 381. This Notice addresses 18 individuals who have requested renewal of their exemptions in a timely manner. FMCSA has evaluated these 18 applications for renewal on their merits and decided to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period. They are: Louis N. Adams Lyle H. Banser Lloyd J. Botsford Joseph E. Buck, Sr. Paul D. Gaither Victor B. Hawks Edward W. Hosier Lucio Leal Terry W. Lytle Earl R. Mark Richard W. Neyens Anthony G. Parrish Bill L. Pearcy Robert H. Rogers George L. Silvia Mark J. Stevwing Frankie A. Wilborn Jeffrey L. Wuolett These exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1)That each individual have an examination every year
(a)by an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the better eye continues to meet the standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), and
(b)by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41;
(2)that each individual provide a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to the medical examiner at the time of the annual medical examination; and
(3)that each individual provide a copy of the annual medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's qualification file and retain a copy of the certification on his/her person while driving for presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement official. Each exemption will be valid for two years unless rescinded earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be rescinded if:
(1)The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption;
(2)the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained before it was granted; or
(3)continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31315 and 31136(e). Basis for Renewing Exemptions Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon application for additional two-year periods. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315 and 31136(e), each of the 18 applicants has satisfied the entry conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirements (64 FR 54948; 65 FR 159; 67 FR 10475; 69 FR 8260; 67 FR 10471; 67 FR 19798; and 69 FR 19611). Each of these 18 applicants has requested timely renewal of the exemption and has submitted evidence showing that the vision in the better eye continues to meet the standard specified at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and that the vision impairment is stable. In addition, a review of each record of safety while driving with the respective vision deficiencies over the past two years indicates each applicant continues to meet the vision exemption standards. These factors provide an adequate basis for predicting each driver's ability to continue to drive safely in interstate commerce. Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the exemption for each renewal applicant for a period of two years is likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption. Request for Comments FMCSA will review comments received at any time concerning a particular driver's safety record and determine if the continuation of the exemption is consistent with the requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31315 and 31136(e). However, FMCSA requests that interested parties with specific data concerning the safety records of these drivers submit comments by May 15, 2006. FMCSA believes that the requirements for a renewal of an exemption under 49 U.S.C. 31315 and 31136(e) can be satisfied by initially granting the renewal and then requesting and subsequently evaluating any comments submitted by interested parties. As indicated above, the Agency previously published Notices of final disposition announcing its decision to exempt these 18 individuals from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The final decision to grant the exemption to each of these individuals was based on the merits of each case and only after careful consideration of the comments received to its Notices of applications. Those Notices of applications stated in detail the qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each applicant for an exemption from the vision requirements. That information is available by consulting the above cited **Federal Register** publications. Interested parties possessing information that would suggest that any, or all of these drivers, are not currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31315 and 31136(e), FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the exemption(s) in question. Issued on: March 31, 2006. Rose A. McMurray, Associate Administrator, Policy and Program Development. [FR Doc. E6-5593 Filed 4-13-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Transit Administration Demonstration of Enhanced Human Service Transportation Models: Phase 1—System Development and Design AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration, DOT. ACTION: Notice; request for proposals. SUMMARY: This notice is a request for proposals
(RFP)for system development and design of enhanced human service transportation models. The USDOT seeks up to 10 local communities to carry out detailed development and design of coordinated human service transportation systems that utilize Intelligent Transportation Systems capabilities. The expected results from Phase 1 include up to 10 “deployment-ready,” replicable and scalable system detailed designs for enhanced human service transportation delivery models in communities representing a variety of operational environments and scenarios. DATES: Proposals will be accepted immediately, as of the issue date of this RFP. All proposals must be submitted electronically to Grants.Gov by June 13, 2006, or postmarked by June 13, 2006, for consideration. All potential applicants are advised to begin the Grants.Gov registration process immediately, if they have not previously submitted grant applications through *http://www.Grants.Gov* in order to be able to meet the deadline. ADDRESSES: Proposals should be submitted electronically to *http://www.Grants.Gov.* Grants.Gov allows organizations to electronically find and apply for competitive opportunities from all Federal grant-making agencies. Grants.Gov is the single access point for over 1,000 programs offered by the 26 Federal grant-making agencies. Proposals can also be submitted in hard copy. Should the applicant elect this option, five hard copies and one unbound reproducible hard copy of the proposal, along with an electronic copy of the proposal contained on a CD-ROM should be submitted to Ms. Aletha Goodine, Office of Mobility Innovation, Room 9402, TRI-10, Federal Transit Administration, USDOT, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. All proposals should reference “Enhanced Human Service Transportation System Development and Design.” FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For program management and cooperative agreement administrative questions: Aletha Goodine at PH: 202-366-4148; FAX: 202-366-3765; Office of Mobility Innovation, Room 9402, TRI-10, Federal Transit Administration, USDOT, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, or *aletha.goodine@fta.dot.gov.* For technical questions: Yehuda Gross at PH: 202-366-1988; FAX: 202-493-2027; ITS Joint Program Office, Room 3416, HOIT-1, Federal Highway Administration, USDOT, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, D.C. 20590, or *Yehuda.gross@fhwa.dot.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background There are 62 Federal programs that fund transportation services for the transportation disadvantaged. The February 2004 Presidential Executive Order on Human Service Transportation Coordination (Executive Order 13330) requested the establishment of the Federal Interagency Transportation Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility
(CCAM)to enhance accessibility and mobility for persons who are transportation disadvantaged, especially individuals with low-incomes, people with disabilities, and older Americans. This Council is chaired by the Secretary of Transportation with representation from 11 executive departments or agencies of the Federal Government. Currently, due to inefficiencies, limited resources, and a lack of coordination, delivery of human services transportation is challenging. New capabilities and opportunities are being created in both the transportation and health and human services communities through the use of emerging technologies and innovative services. However, the two communities are often unaware of the research, new approaches, and advances that each is making, and neither may have direct communication with the transportation disadvantaged community at large. In response to the Presidential Executive Order to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of current human service transportation delivery, the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) is leading two concurrent initiatives to bring the transportation and human service communities together to apply solutions to overcome service coordination and accessibility barriers for the transportation disadvantaged travelers, transportation service providers and human service program administrators. The first of the two initiatives is United We Ride (UWR), an initiative of the CCAM, chaired by the Department of Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta. This initiative has effectively engaged all 11 Federal departmental partners related to human service transportation delivery. It addresses policy implications and solutions of coordinated human service transportation systems from both technical and non-technical perspectives. Developed by an “expert panel” in 2003 as a key product of the UWR initiative, the Framework for Action is a comprehensive evaluation and planning tool designed to help state and community leaders and agencies involved in human service transportation and transit services, along with their stakeholders, assess and plan for coordinated transportation systems. It focuses on a series of core coordination elements (such as working together, needs assessment, putting customers first, funding adaptations, technology, and moving people efficiently) to help groups in states and communities assess their needs and plan their coordination efforts. The Framework for Action is actually two tools: one for communities and another for states. It is available at *http://www.unitedweride.gov.* The second initiative is the Mobility Services for All Americans
(MSAA)initiative. This initiative is funded through the USDOT Intelligent Transportation Systems
(ITS)Joint Program Office. ITS encompass a broad range of communications-based information and electronics technologies for surface transportation applications. When integrated into the transportation system's infrastructure, and in vehicles themselves, these technologies relieve congestion, improve safety and enhance productivity. The MSAA initiative focuses on applying ITS solutions to advance human service transportation delivery. It aims to provide technology improvements that address both the concerns of users, including the transportation disadvantaged, and the concerns of service providers, including program administration. In the CCAM report to the President on Human Service Transportation Coordination, the Council recommended developing demonstration projects in metropolitan, rural and/or tribal areas to test the technical and institutional feasibility of an enhanced human service transportation system. The demonstration projects have three major objectives. These are
(1)to establish a comprehensive set of transportation services to meet the full range of transportation needs for all, including low-income individuals, older adults, and persons with disabilities in a target area by coordinating the resources of various human service and transit programs;
(2)to create a simple point of access for consumers to obtain the transportation services needed from various programs, and
(3)to use intelligent transportation systems to enhance transportation service delivery and system accessibility. In these demonstration projects, a single transportation system (not necessarily a single provider) will be established to meet the mobility needs of all Americans in general and transportation-disadvantaged populations in particular. The demonstration will take a two-phase approach: model development and design (Phase 1) and model deployment and evaluation (Phase 2). I. Funding Opportunity Description This notice is a request for proposals
(RFP)for Phase 1—model development and design of the demonstration program. The USDOT is soliciting proposals to select up to 10 local communities to carry out detailed development and design of coordinated human service transportation systems that utilize Intelligent Transportation Systems
(ITS)capabilities. The geographic scope of a “local community” is to be determined by each applicant, such as a single municipality (or jurisdictional entity), a metropolitan area (or a portion of), statewide or even interstates, as deemed appropriate and necessary. Participation from various human service transportation funding agencies, service providers, private entities, faith-based and non-profit organizations and consumers is strongly encouraged. The expected result from Phase 1 will be up to 10 “deployment-ready,” replicable and scalable system detailed designs for models of travel management coordination centers
(TMCC)that deliver enhanced human service transportation across a variety of operational environments ( *e.g.* , urban, suburban, rural and remote) and scenarios. The vision of a TMCC is a system that: • From a customer perspective, provides a convenient access point (physical and/or virtual) for comprehensive traveler support. The types of services provided may range from general customer support and trip planning (including accessibility, scheduling and fare information), to automated reservation management, and real-time traveler information. The services should be conveniently accessible to all users, regardless of eligible programs, funding sources and travel modes. • From a service provider perspective, supports coordinated transportation service operations and management, including customer management, real-time fleet monitoring, automated scheduling, dispatching and routing, vehicle matching, automated reporting and invoicing. The overall interagency coordination mechanism should be transparent to the users. • From a human service program management perspective, enables streamlined program management requirements, including consumer management, automated accounting, financial transaction back-office coordination, reporting and data collection for program evaluation. The major objectives of the Phase 1—TMCC system development and design are to: • Develop “deployment-ready” designs of ITS-enhanced human service transportation models in up to 10 local communities that meet local requirements, yet are scalable and replicable for broader applications. The term “deployment-ready” refers to a completed, detailed TMCC system design that has been verified and validated by the USDOT designated experts and is ready for implementation subject to funding availability. • Identify gaps in national and regional ITS architectures and related ITS standards to address human service transportation system requirements. • Identify technical, regulatory and institutional related hurdles at the local level and identify solutions to overcome them. • Explore effective and creative approaches to engage local stakeholders for continuous and active support and participation in defining requirements and potential solutions. II. Award Information The TMCC system development and design cooperative agreements will fund up to 10 local communities at once and totaling no more than $3.25 million. It is anticipated that successful applicants will be notified within 45 days from the closing date of this RFP. This TMCC system development and design project will last a maximum of 15 months, beginning at the project kick-off, to complete all the tasks and deliver a detailed TMCC system design that is ready for implementation in a model deployment. Near the end of the period of performance of Phase 1, the USDOT intends to issue a second RFP to launch Phase 2 of the demonstration program to select two or more local communities to proceed with Phase 2—Model Deployment and Evaluation. Only those applicants awarded to participate in Phase I will be eligible to apply for Phase 2 of this demonstration. III. Eligibility Information 1. Eligible Applicants This solicitation is targeted for communities of any size, and the application can be submitted by a lead agency designated by the local community chief executive, such as Mayor or City/County Manager. If there are multiple jurisdictions working together to submit an application, there should be ONE lead agency identified, with letters of commitment submitted from each local community chief executive from all participating jurisdictions. Eligible lead agencies may include public entities currently establishing, operating, coordinating, or brokering general public and human service transportation, including, but not limited to, public transit agencies, state/local governments DOTs, health and human service agencies, federally recognized Indian tribes, and metropolitan planning organizations
(MPOs)in the U.S. All agencies submitting proposals in response to this RFP consent to be publicly identified as respondents. 2. Cost Sharing or Matching For each recipient, Federal ITS funds should not exceed 80% of total project costs. Each applicant is responsible for identifying the twenty
(20)percent matching share from other non-USDOT public or private sector sources. The matching funds may consist of cash, equipment contributions, or personnel services ( *e.g.* , in-kind match). Applicants are encouraged to solicit matching funds from multiple sources, including Federal (non-USDOT), state and local governments and private sector partners, as they will be considered by proposal reviewers as evidence of local partnership. 3. Other All public transit operators serving the local community, including those funded under either the FTA urbanized or non-urbanized formula programs (Sections 5307 and 5311) are expected to participate in the project. In cases where any public transit operator is unable to participate, a statement of explanation must be included in the proposal. IV. Application and Submission Information 1. Address To Request Application Package This announcement is intended to provide all information that applicants need in order to prepare and submit proposals. Applicants may contact FTA representatives as listed in Section VII should further clarifications be needed. 2. Content and Form of Application Submission Each proposal should include a Project Overview, a Technical Plan, a Financial Plan, and a Management and Staffing Plan that describes how the proposed objectives will be met within the specified time frame and budget. These plans should contain the following information: A. Project Overview 1. Describe local area/jurisdiction where the project will take place. This description should include size, population, general socio-economic characteristics, and characteristics of area ( *e.g.* , urban, suburban, rural, remote). The description should also include current public and community transportation systems, existing administration and coordination of human service transportation, and any other local conditions relevant to this RFP. 2. Describe the proposed system, including which organizations will participate and which transportation modes and human service programs (both federally and non-federally funded) will be represented by those participants. Also describe how the proposed project will be integrated with the existing transportation delivery systems and supported by leaders from the local transportation and human service communities. 3. Describe how consumers, which include people with disabilities, older adults, and individuals with lower incomes will be involved in the system development and design process. If a particular user community will be represented by a public or private organization, describe how this particular organization is qualified to represent local user needs and interests. 4. Describe which organizations will lead the project, and how responsibilities for task completion will be shared among proposed project partners. Identify existing operational and institutional integration within and across organizations, including joint operations, shared resources, etc. 5. Include documentation of any existing or planned interagency agreements or public/private cooperative arrangements necessary for conducting the project. If signed agreements cannot be included, a statement that an agreement is being developed, such as letter of commitment, will suffice. 6. Discuss how and the extent to which local stakeholders, including consumers, service providers and human service agencies, will benefit from the proposed TMCC system. For example, explain how the proposed TMCC system makes it easier for consumers to access transportation resources. 7. Include a “Statement of Intent” to develop a TMCC system that is consistent with all applicable laws and regulations, including the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996 and Section 508 requirements. 8. Include a “Statement of Intent” to develop a TMCC system that is consistent with the regional ITS architecture. There should be a “Statement of Intent” to adhere to Section 508 requirements for deliverables accessibility. B. Technical Plan The proposal must provide a comprehensive and concise technical plan that describes how the applicant will develop and design a model TMCC system, including the respective roles of all involved parties, and the extent of agency coordination. The technical plan must include the following components: Current State of ITS Applications for Human Service Transportation Delivery. 1. Provide a description of the current ITS system and its components in the targeted community/geographic areas and a detailed overview of the status and utilization of these components related to human service transportation coordination and accessibility enhancement. 2. Discuss the relationship of the current ITS system with current policies and practices in human service transportation systems. Include a description of how ITS is used with varying human service program operations and funding streams. 3. Describe the relationship of the current ITS system with other Federal systems change initiatives related to human service ( *e.g.* , 211/511 systems, Aging Disability Resource centers, Real Choice System Change Projects, etc.). Technical Approach. 1. Describe, in detail, how the applicant will produce the deliverables specified in Section VI.4 (Deliverables), including all associated tasks, the respective roles of all involved parties, and the extent of agency coordination. 2. Describe the technical and logistical details by which each proposed task will be carried out, including stakeholder participation, processes involved, and technologies and resources to be used. 3. Describe how the applicant will address institutional and regulatory issues, and in particular how it will handle the regulatory requirements and waivers and cost sharing, if applicable. Describe any plans and approaches for building interagency consensus across participating human service funding programs and service providers. 4. Describe approaches and processes by which the applicant will monitor and measure project performance and progress toward a coordinated human service transportation system. 5. Identify the project schedule (timeframe). The schedule should reflect the sequencing of/relationship among the tasks and the duration of each task. The schedule should also specify the milestone and deliverable dates (timeframes). a. Identify and discuss the major tasks to be performed. In addition, identify the estimated number of hours and cost for performing each task. b. Identify the project schedule (timeframe). The schedule should identify the sequencing of/relationship among the tasks and the duration of each task. The schedule should also specify the milestone and deliverable dates (timeframes). C. Management and Staffing Plan 1. Identify management and key professional/technical responsibilities for the overall program. Include an organizational chart providing the names, affiliated organizations, and positions of all project management and key professional/technical staff. 2. Identify one point of contact representing each project partners, including human service transportation program and organization, consumer groups, and private sector participants or sponsors. 3. Demonstrate that all key personnel, including project manager(s), are capable, available, and able to commit to a level of involvement that ensures project success. 4. Include biographical data on project management and key professional and technical personnel. 5. Provide the estimated number of hours by task for each job classification. 6. Discuss project management and oversight mechanisms and approaches to be used to monitor progress and gauge project performance. D. Financial Plan The proposal should provide an in-depth description and assessment of the total cost of achieving the objectives of the project. Specifically, the financial plan should: 1. provide a description of total project costs, 2. provide a budget and cost estimates by task and phase as defined in the technical plan, 3. identify staff members, labor categories, labor hours and burden rates (base rate and overhead), travel and other direct costs, and other standard budget items such as fees for each major task, and 4. include all evidence of financial commitments to the project from both public and private sectors, such as in signed Memoranda of Understanding (MOU). 3. Submission Dates and Times All proposals should be submitted electronically to *http://www.Grants.Gov* by June 13, 2006 for consideration. Grants.Gov allows organizations to electronically find and apply for competitive opportunities from all Federal grant-making agencies. Grants.Gov is the single access point for over 1,000 programs offered by the 26 Federal grant-making agencies. Proposals can also be submitted in hard copy and postmarked by June 13, 2006. Should the applicant elect this option, five hard copies and one unbound reproducible hard copy of the proposal, along with an electronic copy of the proposal contained on a CD-ROM should be submitted to Ms. Aletha Goodine, Office of Mobility Innovation, Room 9402, TRI-10, Federal Transit Administration, USDOT, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. All proposals should reference “Demonstration of Enhanced Human Service Transportation Models: Phase 1—System Development and Design.” 4. Funding Restriction Eligible expenses for this project are limited to activities related to the development and design of local coordinated human service transportation models, such as personnel, travel, and consulting services. This RFP is not to support operations of transportation services or capital equipment purchases, including the purchase of ITS hardware/software systems. Successful applicants should plan to participate in a 1.5 day face-to-face project kickoff workshop with the Federal Government representatives, invited subject experts, and peer recipients at the USDOT headquarters in Washington, DC. The workshop agenda will focus on project goals, objectives, potential approaches, strategies, available resources and USDOT expectations. The USDOT may elect to hold a second face-to-face workshop during the project performance period where all recipients can network with their peers and exchange information and lessons learned with one another. The successful applicant's project manager plus one key member assigned to the project should plan to attend both workshops. Associated travel expenses should be budgeted and presented in the financial plan. Successful applicants should also include a budget to develop and make presentations at up to two conferences to be specified by the FTA Project Manager. 5. Other Submission Requirements A proposal should not exceed 50 pages in length, including title, index, tables, figures, appendices, abstracts, and other supporting materials except resumes ( *i.e.* , resumes may be in addition to the 50 pages). A page is defined as one
(1)side of an 8.5 by 11-inch paper, line spacing no smaller than 1.5, with a type font no smaller than 12 point. The cover sheet or front page of the proposal should include the name, address, and phone number of an individual to whom correspondence and questions about the application may be directed. In addition, an SF-424, Application for Federal Assistance, form must be completed and submitted with the proposal. The form may be obtained at *http://www.Grants.Gov* . V. Application Review Information 1. Criteria The primary evaluation criterion for the proposal will be the applicant's demonstrated understanding and ability to accomplish the required project deliverables based on reasonable schedule and budget that are consistent with the vision of the project. Specific criteria and weights (in parentheses) against which each submitted proposal will be evaluated include the following: • Operations environment (NA)—To promote model replicability, the grants will be awarded to a mix of urban, suburban, rural and remote areas where different operational characteristics and user needs may lead to variations in TMCC system development and design. Since this criterion is beyond the control of the applicants, no weight is assigned. • Clarity and specificity of proposal (15%)—The reviewers will judge each proposal by the applicant's demonstrated ability to achieve the project goals and objectives. All proposals should follow proposal guidelines as laid out in Section IV.2 (Content and Form of Application Submission) and clearly provide information as requested, such as descriptions of how customers will be involved in the process and how is the proposed system supported by leaders from local transportation and human service communities. • Current state of human service transportation delivery system (15%)—Preference will be given to those applicants with existing policies, ongoing transportation coordination in place to support human service transportation improvements. Six areas of focus under this evaluation criterion include:
(1)Leadership and partnership;
(2)planning;
(3)operations;
(4)technology;
(5)customer service; and
(6)policy, program and funding. In the proposal, applicants are strongly encouraged to demonstrate their commitment and ability to build upon their existing resources and activities to advance the quality of human service transportation. The Implementation Tool for Coordinated Community Transportation, published jointly by the United We Ride and Mobility Services for All Americans initiatives, will be referenced by the reviewers in scoring proposals with respect to this criterion. • The current level of ITS Infrastructure in place (15%)—The USDOT will give preference to applicants with some levels of existing ITS infrastructure, such as wireless communications, in place to support human service transportation improvements. • Scope of human service transportation programs participation (10%)—The USDOT encourages all applicants to involve at least two and as many human service transportation programs as practically possible in their respective projects. The USDOT will also recognize effort to engage non-federally funded human service transportation programs. The proposal will be evaluated on established interagency relationship for human service transportation delivery through written legal agreements, such as the establishment of a coordination council, various resource centers, memorandum of understanding, and/or general documentation of cooperative working relationships, such as documented meetings and events. The term “interagency” may involve multiple human service program managing/funding agencies, user groups, and a wide spectrum of service modes and providers. • Strong public-private partnership and commitment (10%)—The USDOT strongly encourages the participation of private entities ( *e.g.* , private transportation operators, non-profit human service providers, advocacy groups and business community organizations) in this project. If a public-private partnership is included in the proposal, the business models and functional roles of the private partners should be described in detail. The proposal should also include evidence of commitment to the project from each of the participating organizations and assess the likelihood of continuing participation beyond the end of the project. • Integration with other technology and/or systems change initiatives (10%)—The USDOT encourages and recognizes applicants to integrate (or coordinate) with and build upon efforts made by other initiatives related to human service transportation enhancement, such as state-level United We Ride activities, HIPAA, 211 (local community services information systems) and 511 (travel information systems), Aging Disability Resource centers, and Real Choice System Change projects. • Cost (10%)—The cost of the project should reflect the scope of the project. • Qualifications and experience (10%)—The proposal demonstrates adequate qualifications and experience of individuals and organizations with respect to project management and technical capabilities. The applicants' past performance, if available, may be considered in the evaluation. • Timelines and Deliverables (5%)—The timeline incorporates sufficient time to develop and implement the institutional and technical aspects of the project. 2. Review and Selection Process The Federal Transit Administration will establish a proposal review panel to evaluate all eligible applications based on the criteria and requirements defined in this Notice. The review panelists may represent Federal agencies outside of the USDOT to provide diversified perspectives and expertise related to human service transportation. The Federal Transit Administration will notify successful applicants. VI. Award Administration Information 1. Award Notices It is anticipated that successful applicants will be notified within 45 days from the closing date of this RFP. Federal Transit Administration's
(FTA)Administrator will notify the successful applicants through postal mail. 2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements Following receipt of the FTA Administrator's notification letter, the successful applicants will be required to submit their proposal through the FTA Transportation Electronic Award and Management
(TEAM)system Web site. FTA will manage the cooperative agreement through the TEAM system Web site. Before FTA may award Federal financial assistance through a cooperative agreement, each applicant must submit all certifications and assurances pertaining to itself and its project as required by Federal laws and regulations. These certifications and assurances must be submitted to FTA irrespective of whether the project is financed under the authority of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53, or Title 23, United States Code, or another Federal statute. Since Federal fiscal year 1995, FTA has been consolidating the various certifications and assurances that may be required of its awardees and the projects into a single document published in the **Federal Register** . Fiscal year 2006 Annual List of Certifications and Assurances for FTA Grants and Cooperative Agreements and guidelines will be published in the **Federal Register** and posted on the FTA Web site at *http://www.fta.dot.gov* . 3. Reporting Recipients are required to submit quarterly reports to the FTA Project Manager through the FTA TEAM system Web site. The quarterly reports must discuss milestones related to the deliverables targeted for the end of the project period, and include the following elements: • Significant accomplishments, • Project issues/concerns and recommended solutions, • Updated project schedule, —List and status of current tasks —List of completed tasks —Percent complete by task —If slips in the schedule occur, the recipient should propose how to mitigate the schedule deviation(s) • total budget by task, and —Amount spent to date by task —Amount remaining by task • Travel expense report (if applicable). 4. Deliverables At a minimum, the lead agency should provide the following deliverables during and at the conclusion of the project: • A detailed project plan Based on the discussion at the project kickoff workshop, successful applicants should develop a detailed project plan. The project plan must include project background information, major tasks and approaches, implementation timelines, budgets, and deliverables. • A TMCC concept of operations The TMCC concept of operations provides a high-level definition of “what” the TMCC should or should not do. The concept of operations document should clearly and concisely describe user needs and operational policies and constraints corresponding to local characteristics. The identified user needs will serve as the foundation for system requirements and provide the justification for the functions desired. A comprehensive discussion of operational policies and constraints should establish expected policy environment for TMCC operation and set clear boundaries on the scope of the project. The Concept of Operations should explicitly document the specific shortcomings of the current human service transportation delivery in the local area that will be addressed by the proposed TMCC, from both an operator/program administration and a user point of view. • A TMCC system requirements A system requirement is the detailed “what.” The recipients should define both functional and performance requirements of the TMCC model. All system requirements must be unambiguous, concise, and achievable, and be consistent with and supportive of the concept of operations as laid out in the previous task. All requirements should map to an explicit user or operator need in the Concept of Operations, as described below. In developing the system requirements, it is anticipated that the recipients may find it necessary to clarify and update the needs described in the Concept of Operations. • A TMCC system design System design describes the “how” to implement the “what.” Recipients will explore different alternatives, including outlining strengths and weaknesses, examining technical and operational feasibility, institutional compatibility, and other constraints and costs. As part of this task, the recipients will produce a report documenting the approach, process, and outcome of the TMCC system designs. All TMCC system designs should take into account and be in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations and policies, including the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996. • A TMCC system phasing implementation plan • An existing ITS architecture and standards gaps report Upon completion and approval of the TMCC system design, recipients should analyze and identify any gaps in the existing regional ITS architecture and relevant available ITS-related standards with respect to implementation of the proposed TMCC. The USDOT anticipates that some gaps may exist given the specific operational characteristics and stakeholders involved in human service transportation. It should be noted that no recipients will be held responsible for updating the existing regional ITS architecture or for creating new standards within the scope of this project. Other deliverables: • Meetings and working sessions with the USDOT interdisciplinary technical assistance team as described in Section VIII.1—Technical Assistance Resources, • A proposal at the conclusion of the project to the USDOT for funding to implement and evaluate the TMCC system as designed (i.e., Phase 2); the USDOT will define the proposal format and requirements and release a separate request for proposal near the end of this project, and • Up to two face-to-face workshops at USDOT headquarters in Washington, DC or selected local communities to discuss progress, exchange information and network with peer groups. Recipients are required to submit written deliverables to the FTA Project Manager for review and approval. All written deliverables must be provided in a Section 508 compliant format, unless otherwise directed by the FTA Project Manager. For all deliverables to be published on the websites, recipients should provide the final approved products as follows to the FTA Project Manager: • The final products should be submitted in Adobe PDF, PowerPoint, MSWord, Excel, or other file format pre-approved by the FTA Project Manager that meets current FTA web posting standards. • The preferred source code file that the recipients should provide to the FTA Project Manager is Microsoft Word with images, if any, embedded into the document in JPEG format. • All documents, including final reports must be submitted in formats that meet 508 Requirements so that they can easily be posted on Federal websites. Where there are graphics (e.g., pictures, illustrations, logos, charts, tables as images, maps), Alt-tags text should thoroughly describe the image and be provided for every single image. Repeating a caption does not meet the intent of the law and is therefore on the lowest end of acceptability. The description in the Alt-tags text must fully describe the graphic (as if one were acting as a reader for a blind person). If the full description is contained in the text, the Alt-tags should reference the reader to where that description is (e.g.: graphic representation of noise waves as described in the previous paragraph). If the full description is not already in the text and is long a link should be created to a separate page that contains the description and the Alt-tags should direct the reader to this link. Graphics file size (e.g., pictures, illustrations, logos, charts, maps) must be submitted as individual files in addition to those that are embedded in the source file. The preferred format for images is JPEG. Graphics should (if at all possible) be kept to a width of 600 pixels or less—to prevent horizontal scrolling. Tables are never acceptable as graphics files. All tables should be laid out using the Word table feature. Do not use tabs. VII. Agency Contacts For program management and cooperative agreement administrative questions: Aletha Goodine at PH: 202-366-4148; FAX: 202-366-3765; Office of Mobility Innovation, Room 9402, TRI-10, Federal Transit Administration, USDOT, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, or *aletha.goodine@fta.dot.gov* . For technical questions: Yehuda Gross at PH: 202-366-1988; FAX: 202-493-2027; ITS Joint Program Office, Room 3416, HOIT-1, Federal Highway Administration, USDOT, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, or *Yehuda.gross@fhwa.dot.gov* . VIII. Other Information 1. Technical Assistance Resources To assist recipients in completing the TMCC development and design tasks within the project performance period, the USDOT will establish an interdisciplinary technical assistance team as a resource. This technical assistance team will provide technical assistance to and exchange information across the recipients as needed. The technical assistance team will be funded separately by the USDOT and involve people with diversified areas of expertise related to human service transportation, including ITS technology, transportation disadvantaged population, transportation planning, transit operations, human service program policy and regulatory compliance, system engineering, communications technology, software design and related topics. The technical assistance team may conduct on-site visits to address specific local community needs, including identifying technical and institutional hurdles and possible solutions, as well as other impacts that may affect the progression and quality of the project. In addition to site visits by the technical assistance task, recipients may contact the technical assistance team experts through emails, telephone calls or on-site visits for prompt technical consultation as needed. Recipients are not financially responsible for the technical assistance team, which will be procured by the USDOT through a separate RFP. However, each applicant is required to demonstrate in the proposal its willingness to utilize such technical assistance and cooperate with the interdisciplinary technical assistance team as appropriate. In addition, the Government Accountability Office
(GAO)has published several reports in recent years on subjects related to human service transportation. These reports provide a comprehensive overhaul of issues and challenges facing cost-effective delivery and access of human service transportation. These reports can be viewed and downloaded from the GAO Web site at *http://www.gao.gov* . Finally, three recently released publications may assist the applicants in preparing proposals and subsequently implementing the projects. The first publication, the Report to the President on Human Service Transportation Coordination ( *http://www.unitedweride.gov/1_866_ENG_HTML.htm* ), published in 2005, presented five broad recommendations that the CCAM believes will strengthen existing transportation services to be more cost-effective, and accountable and help providers become more responsive to consumers. These five recommendations include
(1)coordinated transportation planning;
(2)vehicle sharing;
(3)cost sharing;
(4)reporting and evaluations; and
(5)consolidated access transportation demonstration program. Second, as part of the joint effort of the United We Ride and Mobility Services for All Americans initiatives, the USDOT is in the process of developing additional tools to take the Framework for Action to the next level by providing communities and states with guidance to take concrete action and identify their progress along the way. These tools build on the same core elements as the Framework and assist in defining where a community or state is on the road to building a fully coordinated comprehensive transportation system that is inclusive of people with disabilities, older adults and individuals with lower incomes. The recipients may find these tools useful in designing their respective TMCC systems. Inquiries about the availability of these tools may be directed to the United We Ride program office at *unitedweride@fta.dot.gov* . The third publication is a generic TMCC concept of operations that provides a high-level, representative description of an enhanced human service transportation delivery system in terms of operational characteristics, service scenarios and relationships between system components. This publication is designed to provide an example that can be used by agency and other stakeholders as the basis for developing their own specific TMCC system concept of operations. This publication can be obtained via website at *http://www.its.dot.gov/msaa* or by contacting the FTA Project Manager. 2. Additional Resources • USDOT ITS Mobility Services for All Americans initiative *http://www.its.dot.gov/msaa/index.htm* • Federal Interagency United We Ride initiative *http://www.unitedweride.gov* • Information on Section 508 and web site accessibility: *http://www.section508.gov* • National ITS Architecture *http://www.its.dot.gov/arch/index.htm* • ITS Standards *http://www.standards.its.dot.gov/standards.htm* 3. List of Acronyms and Abbreviations CCAM Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility FHWA Federal Highway Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration GAO Government Accountability Office GIS Geographic Information Systems HIPAA Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ITS Intelligent Transportation Systems JPEG Joint Photographic Experts Group MOU Memorandum of Understanding MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization MSAA Mobility Services for All Americans PDF Portable Document Format RFP Request for Proposals TMCC Travel Management Coordination Center USDOT United States Department of Transportation UWR United We Ride Issued on: April 7, 2006. Sandra K. Bushue, Deputy Administrator. [FR Doc. E6-5588 Filed 4-13-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-57-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Transit Administration Federal Register Notice National Fuel Cell Bus Technology Development Program AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration (FTA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of funding availability; competitive solicitation for funding through the National Fuel Cell Bus Technology Development Program. SUMMARY: This competitive solicitation is for fiscal year 2006-2009 funding, subject to congressional appropriations action, for the new National Fuel Cell Bus Technology Development Program (NFCBP), administered by the Federal Transit Administration. The purpose of the program is to facilitate the development of commercially viable fuel cell bus technology and related infrastructure. FTA intends to enter into grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements with no more than 3 geographically diverse nonprofit organizations and recipients under chapter 53 of title 49, United States Code, to conduct fuel cell bus technology and infrastructure projects under the program. Regional consortia in partnership with transit agencies are encouraged to apply. The Federal share of the cost of a project carried out under this Program shall not exceed 50 percent of such cost. DATES: White papers must be received by FTA by the close of business May 10, 2006. Full proposals for the selected papers must be received by FTA by the close of business July 14, 2006. Close of business for FTA is 5:30 p.m. eastern time zone. ADDRESSES: White papers and full proposals for the selected white papers must be submitted to Shang Hsiung, Office of Research, Demonstrations and Innovation, Mail Code: TRI-10, Federal Transit Administration, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC 20590. Phone: 202-366-0241, or e-mail: *shang.hsiung@dot.gov.* The Solicitation Guidelines including the submission requirements are available at *http://www.fta.dot.gov/* . Submissions must be received by the deadline. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact Shang Hsiung, Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation, Federal Transit Administration, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC 20590, 202-366-0241, e-mail: *shang.hsiung@dot.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents 1. General Program Information 2. Solicitation Guidelines 3. Solicitation Schedule 4. Additional Program Information I. General Program Information A. Authority Section 3045 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act—A Legacy for Users of 2005 (SAFETEA-LU) establishes a new program called the National Fuel Cell Bus Technology Development Program (49 U.S.C. 5308, note). SAFETEA-LU authorizes $49 million in funding for the program for fiscal years 2006 through 2009. For fiscal year 2006, Congress appropriated $11,138,000 for the NFCBP. B. Background Transit continues to be in the forefront of the research, development, demonstration, and deployment of clean and energy efficient vehicle technologies. Factors that have made transit buses the vanguard for alternative fuels and hybrid electric systems are just as applicable in helping lead the introduction of fuel cell vehicle technologies into transportation applications. Bus weight and volume packaging constraints are less rigorous than cars. Unlike personal automobiles where we expect to turn the key and to immediately drive away, buses undergo a check-out procedure prior to the driver starting his or her run. Transit buses are centrally fueled and stored at discrete locations, whereas we all expect to be able to fill up our cars anywhere and everywhere. The fleet operation aspect of transit buses creates a more manageable and finite re-fueling infrastructure requirement, and can assist in the development of the overall transportation re-fueling infrastructure required. Transit buses are driven and maintained by professionals, easing the introduction of a new power plant. Perhaps most importantly, transit buses operate in the most densely populated corridors of our urban areas. Fuel cell buses could provide greater public exposure to the safe operation of zero emission vehicles leading to broader acceptance of this technology. The operational and maintenance experience gained from the early introduction of fuel cell vehicle technologies into buses could enhance its successful application in trucks and cars. The U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Transit Administration
(FTA)played an instrumental role in spurring the adoption of natural gas buses into routine revenue service operations. It is playing a similar role in helping to accelerate the adoption of electric drive technologies—battery electric, hybrid electric, and hydrogen fuel cell buses. The President's FreedomCAR and Hydrogen Fuel Initiative which are focused on light-duty vehicles have set forth bold visions for tackling our Nation's goals of energy independence and cleaner air without sacrificing personal mobility. FTA's expertise and experience in alternative fuels and hybrid electric systems for transit buses and its proven track record of successfully moving clean, fuel efficient buses from the drawing board to the street, make FTA the ideal agency to lead and implement a program to complement and support the Presidential Initiatives. C. Eligible Applicants Section 3045(b) directs the Secretary of Transportation to conduct a national solicitation for applications under the NFCBP. Recipients shall be selected on a competitive basis. The Secretary may enter into a grant, contract, or cooperative agreement with no more than three regionally diverse non-profit organizations and recipients ( *i.e.* , transit agencies eligible to receive FTA financial assistance). For-profit private entities or non-recipients of FTA funds are encouraged to partner with eligible non-profit organizations or recipients. Since the goal of the NCFBP is to facilitate the development of commercially viable fuel cell bus technology and related infrastructure, regional, multi-state advanced transportation technology consortia in partnership with transit agencies are specifically encouraged to apply. Section 3045(d) also directs that priority consideration be given to applicants that have successfully managed advanced transportation technology projects, including projects related to hydrogen and fuel cell public transportation operations for a period of not less than five years. The Federal share of the cost of a project carried out under this Program shall not exceed 50 percent of such cost. D. Eligibility Criteria Section 3045(c) establishes the statutory criteria for evaluating eligible applications. The criteria are the following: 1. ability to contribute significantly to furthering fuel cell technology as it relates to transit bus operations, including hydrogen production, energy storage, fuel cell technologies, vehicle systems integration, and power electronics technologies; 2. financing plan and cost share potential; 3. fuel cell technology to ensure that the program advances different fuel cell technologies, including hydrogen-fueled and methanol-powered liquid-fueled fuel cell technologies, that may be viable for public transportation systems; and 4. other criteria that the Secretary determines are necessary to carry out the program. FTA believes that the first three criteria provide a sufficient basis on which to evaluate applications; thus, FTA has determined that additional criteria under paragraph 4 are unnecessary. If warranted, however, criteria and application procedures may be reassessed for subsequent years, and FTA will provide adequate notice and an opportunity to comment on any proposed changes. E. Application Evaluation Criteria Consistent with the criteria identified in Section 3045(c), applications will be evaluated based on the following elements: • Ability to contribute significantly to furthering fuel cell technology as it relates to transit bus operations, including hydrogen production, energy storage, fuel cell technologies, vehicle systems integration, and power electronics technologies; • Financing plan and cost share potential; and • Fuel cell technology to ensure that the program advances different fuel cell technologies, including hydrogen-fueled and methanol-powered liquid-fueled fuel cell technologies, that may be viable for public transportation systems. Section 3045(d) also states that priority consideration will be given to applicants that have successfully managed advanced transportation technology projects, including projects related to hydrogen and fuel cell public transportation operations for a period of not less than five years. II. Solicitation Guidelines The competitive solicitation process including the submission requirements for the National Fuel Cell Bus Technology Development Program are available at *http://www.fta.dot.gov.* Click on the navigational tab for Grant Programs on the right hand side, then click on the Grant Programs link, and then click on the link for the National Fuel Cell Bus Technology Development Program. To receive the Solicitation Guidelines by e-mail, please send an e-mail to *shang.hsiung@dot.gov.* A synopsis of this announcement will also be posted in the FIND module of the government-wide electronic grants Web site at *http://www.grants.gov.* Projects requiring multi-year funding may be submitted. Note that funding in future fiscal years is not guaranteed and will be contingent upon the annual appropriation process. In order to minimize the effort required for proposal preparation and review, the selection will take place in two phases. First, non-profit organizations and recipients will prepare white papers for FTA to review, comment and select. The non-profit organizations and recipients will then prepare full proposals based on the best efforts selected by FTA. III. Solicitation Schedule The following is the timeline for the competitive solicitation under the NFCBP: • May 10, 2006—White Papers due. • June 9, 2006—FTA selects White Papers and notifies all applicants. • July 14—Full Proposals based on White Papers selected due. • August 14, 2006—FTA announces awards. Details are contained in the Solicitation Guidelines available at * http:// www.fta.dot.gov. * All deadline times are 5:30 p.m. eastern time zone. IV. Additional Program Information A. Funds Administration and Oversight Section 3045(f) of SAFETEA-LU directs the Secretary to apply the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5309 (Capital Investment Grants) to the projects awarded under this program and “such other terms and conditions as are determined by the Secretary.” FTA has reviewed the terms of its Capital Investment Grant program and does not believe additional terms and conditions are necessary. The NFCBP is inherently a research, development, and demonstration program; and such project activities to facilitate the development of commercially viable fuel cell bus technology and related infrastructure is allowed. Recipients of federal funds under 49 USC 5309 must comply with the general federal guidelines governing the management of federal funds, which are outlined in FTA's Master Agreement, available on FTA's Web site ( *http://www.fta.dot.gov* ). To this point, FTA will conduct reviews to ensure that projects under the NFCBP meet the basic statutory, administrative, and regulatory requirements as stipulated by the conditions for accepting Federal funds. B. Performance Measures Participants may be asked to collect and report data to FTA for use in measuring program performance. Issued in Washington, DC, this 7th day of April, 2006. Sandra K. Bushue, Deputy Administrator. [FR Doc. 06-3606 Filed 4-13-06; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 4
4 references not yet in our index
  • 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10)
  • 49 CFR 391.64(b)
  • 49 CFR 391.41
  • 49 CFR 381
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice of final disposition
U.S.C.§ 31315
Fed. Reg.Presidential Documents
U.S.C.§ 5308
U.S.C.§ 5309
Cite49 CFR 391.41(b)(10)
Cite49 CFR 391.64(b)
Cite49 CFR 391.41
Cite49 CFR 381
Cites 8Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.