FY24-FY26 PROTECT App Template-Resilience.docx

Fiscal Years 2024 through 2026 Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient, and Cost-Saving Transportation Competitive Grant Program Resilience Grant Application Template

This is the Resilience Grant Application Template for the Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient, and Cost-Saving Transportation (PROTECT) Competitive Grant Program Fiscal Years 2024 through 2026 Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO).

Submission of this Application Template is required as part of a complete application package. The Application Template, in conjunction with the allowable attachments and standard forms, should provide all information necessary for U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to determine if the project satisfies the eligibility requirements described in NOFO Section B and to evaluate the criteria specified in NOFO Section F. DOT will consider applications submitted without the completed template as incomplete and will not review the submission. DOT encourages applicants to review the NOFO in its entirety to verify their project is eligible and ensure all required information is provided with their application.

Summary

[Applicants: delete instructions shown below in italic prior to submittal]

Project Title

Lead Applicant Name

Lead Applicant Type

Select from the below statutory eligible applicants:

☐ A State or political subdivision of a State.

☐ A metropolitan planning organization.

☐ A unit of local government.

☐ A special purpose district or public authority with a transportation function, including a port authority.

☐ A federally recognized Indian Tribe (as defined in Section 207(m)(1)).

☐ A Federal land management agency that applies jointly with a State or group of States.

☐ A multi-State or multijurisdictional group of entities described above.

☐ Community Resilience and Evacuation Route ☐ At-Risk Coastal Infrastructure

Eligible Activities

Only fill out the set of check boxes that corresponds to the type(s) of Resilience Grant that you are applying for.

Resilience Improvement Grants (23 United States Code (U.S.C.) § 176(d)(4)(A)(ii)): Identify the eligible construction activities to improve the resilience of surface transportation infrastructure that the proposal addresses (check all that apply):

☐ Resurfacing, restoring, rehabilitating, replacing, improving, or realigning a facility eligible for assistance under this program (see eligible facilities in the row below).

☐ Incorporating natural infrastructure.

☐ Upgrading existing surface transportation facilities to meet/exceed FHWA design standards.

☐ Installing flood mitigation measures.

☐ Strengthening rainwater removal systems.

☐ Upgrading or installing structural stormwater controls.

☐ Constructing a resilience project that addresses vulnerabilities described in the Resilience Improvement Plan (RIP) in your jurisdiction.

☐ Relocating roadways in a base floodplain.

☐ Stabilizing slide areas or slopes.

☐ Installing riprap.

☐ Lengthening or raising bridges.

☐ Increasing size or number of drainage structures.

☐ Installing seismic retrofits on bridges.

☐ Adding scour protection on bridges.

☐ Adding scour, stream stability, coastal, and other hydraulic countermeasures, including spur dikes.

☐ Implementing vegetation management in the right-of-way.

☐ Installing any other protective features, including natural infrastructure.

Community Resilience and Evacuation Route Grants (23 U.S.C. § 176(d)(4)(B)(ii)): Identify the eligible activities to strengthen and protect evacuation routes that the proposal addresses (check all that apply):

☐ Constructing a Resilience Improvement project under 23 U.S.C. § 176(d)(4)(A)(ii) that will improve an evacuation route.

☐ Restoring or replacing an evacuation route to ensure it can provide safe passage and/or making improvements to reduce the risk of damage to evacuation routes (e.g., steps to protect routes from mud, rock, or other debris slides).

☐ Expanding capacity of evacuation routes. This includes installation of communications and intelligent transportation systems, counterflow measures, and shoulders. (Note: if yes, explain how existing evacuation routes are not sufficient to adequately facilitate evacuations) ☐ Constructing new or redundant evacuation routes. (Note: if yes, explain how existing evacuation routes are not sufficient to adequately facilitate evacuations) ☐ Acquiring evacuation route or traffic incident management equipment/signage ☐ Constructing a project that will ensure access or service to critical destinations[footnoteRef:2] [2: “Critical destinations” could include hospitals and other medical or emergency service facilities, major employers, critical manufacturing centers, ports and intermodal facilities, utilities, and Federal facilities. See 23 U.S.C. § 176(d)(4)(B)(ii).]

At-Risk Coastal Infrastructure Grant (23 U.S.C. § 176(d)(4)(C)(iii)): Does the application include one of the following eligible activities? (check if yes):

☐ Strengthening, stabilizing, hardening, elevating, relocating, or otherwise enhancing the resilience of highway and non-rail infrastructure that are subject to, or face increased long-term future risks of, a weather event, a natural disaster, or changing conditions. Infrastructure includes: bridges, roads, pedestrian walkways, bicycle lanes, and associated infrastructure, such as culverts and tide gates to protect highways.

Long-Term Infrastructure Cost Reduction

Applicable for At-Risk Coast Infrastructure Grant applications only.

For At-Risk Coastal Infrastructure Grant applications only (check if yes):

☐ The proposal will reduce long-term infrastructure costs by avoiding larger future maintenance or rebuilding costs.

Documentation:

[Instructions: Include quantitative information to demonstrate that the proposal will reduce long-term infrastructure costs by avoiding larger future maintenance or rebuilding costs. Ensure that this documentation details:

· Projected costs associated with build and no-build case scenarios;[footnoteRef:3] and [3: The build case should account for the non-hazard maintenance costs associated with the project as well as the expected reduction in maintenance or rebuilding costs. For projects involving the construction of new infrastructure, total non-hazard maintenance costs would be zero in the base case, so net non-hazard maintenance costs would typically be positive, reflecting the ongoing expenditures needed to maintain the new asset over its lifecycle. For projects intended to replace, reconstruct, or rehabilitate existing infrastructure, however, the net change in non-hazard maintenance costs under the proposed project will often be negative, as newer infrastructure requires less frequent and less costly maintenance to keep it in service than would an aging, deteriorating asset.]

· Maintenance and rebuilding costs associated with existing and future hazard risk and those that would accrue apart from hazards altogether.]

Project Area

[Instructions: Provide State, and name of the city, county, town, or jurisdiction where project is located or focuses on.]

Cost Share Requested[footnoteRef:4] [4: See NOFO Section C.2 for Cost Sharing or Matching information.]

Which type(s) of natural hazards does the project address?

Which transportation modes are addressed by the project?

Project Description: Summarize project work to be completed under the project and succinctly describe how the PROTECT Competitive Grant Program funds would be used to complete the project. You may use this section to include the project’s history and describe any previously incurred costs. Limit summary to 250 words.

Attachments: Please list any attachments to this form, including letters of support. This includes any applicable State Department of Transportation (State DOT) support letters as described in Section B.4 of the NOFO.

I. Project Information

Expand the response blocks as necessary but limit the Project Information section of the application to three total pages in length. [Applicants: delete instructions shown below in italic prior to submittal]

☐ Yes ☐ No

☐ No

If yes, identify the floodplain in which the project is to be located and describe whether, if selected, the eligible entity would implement one or more components of the risk mitigation plan under Section 322 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5165) with respect to the area:

Joint applications should include a description of the roles and responsibilities of each applicant and should be signed or include a letter of support by each applicant.

If additional parties will be involved in delivery of the Resilience Grant activity, describe in detail all the other public and private parties who are involved in delivering the project, including a specific description of the role of each entity in delivering the project.]

☐ Highway project eligible for assistance under Title 23;

☐ Public transportation facility or service eligible for assistance under chapter 53 of Title 49;

☐ Facility or service for intercity rail passenger transportation (as defined in Section 24102 of Title 49); or ☐ Port facility, including a facility that:

a. Connects a port to other modes of transportation;

b. Improves the efficiency of evacuations and disaster relief; or

c. Aids transportation. (23 U.S.C. § 176(d)(5)C).

☐ No If yes, please specify the relevant State or Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) RIP and include as an attachment with the application or provide link to the applicable RIP.

☐ No If yes, please specify the relevant State or MPO RIP and include as an attachment with the application or provide link to the applicable RIP.

II. Budget and Funding

(Note: The Federal share for Resilience Grants should not exceed 80 percent of the total cost of the project. The non-Federal share requirement may be reduced with an applicable RIP (see Section C for cost sharing or matching information). The Federal share for federally recognized Indian Tribes and projects carried out in Territories for all grant categories is 100 percent.)

Other Federal programs and estimated amounts: (add lines as needed) Program: _________________ Amount: _________________

[Instructions: Identify each source of non-Federal funding and estimated amount in year-of-expenditure dollars, add lines as needed for each source.]

[Instructions: Sum of PROTECT Competitive Grant Program request, Other Federal funds, and non-Federal funds as an estimate in year-of-expenditure dollars, above.]

[Instructions: If costs have already been incurred for the project, such as planning or design costs, provide the total here]

[Instructions: Estimate in year-of-expenditure dollars (sum of ‘previously incurred costs’ and ‘future eligible costs’ above).]

[Instructions: The budget should include specifics and plans for covering the full cost of the proposed planning activity from all sources.

If the project will be completed in project development phases (such as Preliminary Engineering (PE) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); Final Design; Right-of Way Acquisition; Utility Relocation; and Construction), the budget should separate the costs of each phase. If the project contains construction components, the budget should separate the costs of each project component.

Include information showing that sufficient contingency amounts have been budgeted to cover unanticipated cost increases.]

Repeat or modify as needed.

Activity: Cost:

Activity: Cost:

Activity: Cost:

Activity: Cost:

☐ A detailed budget is attached separately.

The file is named:

If yes, specify in the budget the amount of grant funding that will fund the construction of new capacity (may not exceed 40 percent).

☐ No

If yes, specify in the budget the amount of grant funding that will fund development phase activities (may not exceed 10 percent).

☐ No

☐ No

If yes, specify the program name(s) and date(s) of application.

III. Merit Criteria In the space below, describe how the project will meet the merit criteria and the associated objectives as found in Section F of the FYs 2024 through 2026 PROTECT Competitive Grant Program NOFO. Where appropriate, reference attachments or other sections of the application. Expand the response blocks as needed but limit the length of the merit criteria section of the application to eight total pages in length.

Criterion #1: Vulnerability and Risk

Criterion #2: Criticality to American Families and Communities

Criterion #3: Design Elements, including Addressing Core Infrastructure

Criterion #4: Innovation

IV. Project Readiness

In the space below, describe how the project will meet the readiness considerations and the associated elements as found in Section F of the FYs 2024 through 2026 PROTECT Competitive Grant Program NOFO. Where appropriate, reference attachments or other sections of the application. Expand the response blocks as needed but limit the length of the project readiness section of the application to six total pages in length.

Readiness: Technical Assessment

Readiness: Financial Completeness Assessment

Readiness: Permitting Risk Assessment

V. Statutory and DOT Selection Priorities

In the space below, describe how the project will meet the selection priorities in Section F of the FYs 2024 through 2026 PROTECT Competitive Grant Program NOFO. Where appropriate, reference attachments or other sections of the application. Expand the response blocks as needed but limit the length of the statutory and DOT selection priorities section of the application to three total pages in length.

Statutory Selection Priorities

Check all that apply to the project:

For Resilience Improvement Grants:

☐ The benefits of the eligible activity proposed to be carried out by the eligible entity exceed the costs of the activity (as demonstrated by the economic analysis); and ☐ There is a need to address the vulnerabilities of surface transportation assets of the eligible entity with a high risk of, and impacts associated with, failure due to the impacts of weather events, natural disasters, or changing conditions, such as sea level rise, wildfires, and increased flood risk;

or ☐ The eligible activity is included in a RIP as described by 23 U.S.C. 176(e)(2).

☐ None of the above apply to the project.

For Community Resilience and Evacuation Route Grants:

☐ The activities are cost-effective (as demonstrated by the results of the economic analysis), taking into account: (1) current and future vulnerabilities to an evacuation route due to future occurrence or recurrence of emergency events that are likely to occur in the geographic area in which the evacuation route is located; and (2) projected changes in development patterns, demographics, and extreme weather events based on the best available evidence and analysis.

☐None of the above apply to the project.

Statutory Selection Priorities: Briefly describe below how the project meets the checked statutory priorities.

DOT Selection Priorities

Check all that apply to the project (DOT will utilize information in other portions of the application to determine responsiveness to the other Selection Priorities listed in the NOFO):

☐ The project supports critical infrastructure for industries of national interest.

☐ The project would contribute to promoting economic prosperity in communities, including rural areas and Tribal communities.

☐ The project prioritizes improvement of the condition and safety of existing transportation infrastructure, particularly infrastructure with high cost of failure, such as bridges with lengthy detours, impacts to critical corridors, or failures that will cause economic disruption.

☐ The project demonstrates an ability to meet PROTECT Competitive Grant Program obligation deadlines.

☐ The project improves access to national security and defense facilities or facilitate movement of military cargo or personnel.

☐ The project will reduce roadway traffic congestion.

☐ The project repurposes existing specialized travel lanes for bicycles, buses, or pedestrians for general purpose use by all motor vehicles, including single-occupant motor vehicles, and the applicant demonstrates the repurposing will meet the PROTECT program purpose, will reduce congestion on the facility, will utilize 40 percent or less of requested PROTECT funds for adding capacity consistent with 23 U.S.C. 176(d)(5)(G)(i)(I), will address safety consistent with the merit criteria described in Section F of the NOFO, and will comply with applicable federal requirements, including the Clean Air Act and criteria under 23 U.S.C. 217(e).

☐ None of the above apply to the project.

DOT Selection Priorities: Briefly describe below how the project meets the checked DOT priorities.

VI. Benefit-Cost Analysis

The purpose of the Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) is to enable FHWA to assess the project’s cost effectiveness by comparing its expected benefits to its expected costs, relative to a no-build scenario for the purpose of project prioritization.

Resilience Improvement Grant 23 U.S.C. § 176(d)(5)(E)(ii)(I) BCA is required for the project to be prioritized, unless the project is prioritized in a RIP. (see Completing a BCA below)

Please check the appropriate box:

☐ The applicant is not requesting Resilience Improvement Grant funds.

☐ The applicant requests Resilience Improvement Grant Funding, and the project is not prioritized in a RIP. A BCA is attached.

☐ The applicant requests Resilience Improvement Grant funding, and the project is prioritized in a RIP.

☐ The application is from a federally recognized Indian Tribe that is requesting Resilience Improvement Grant funds but is opting to provide raw data with its application to support the need for a project, without additional BCA*. The raw data is attached.

Community Resilience and Evacuation Route Grant 23 U.S.C. § 176(d)(5)(E)(ii)(II) BCA is required for the project to be prioritized. (see Completing a BCA below)

Please check the appropriate box:

☐ The applicant is not requesting Community Resilience and Evacuation Route Grant funds.

☐ The applicant requests Community Resilience and Evacuation Route Grant funding, and a BCA is attached.

☐ The application is from a federally recognized Indian Tribe that is requesting Community Resilience and Evacuation Route Grant funds but is opting to provide raw data with its application to support the need for a project, without additional BCA.* The raw data is attached.

At-Risk Coastal Infrastructure Grant 23 U.S.C. § 120(g) BCA is not required, but applications must demonstrate that the project will reduce long-term infrastructure costs by avoiding larger future maintenance or rebuilding costs.

Please check the appropriate box:

☐ The applicant is not requesting At-Risk Coastal Infrastructure Grant funds.

☐ The applicant requests At-Risk Coastal Infrastructure Grant funding and provides a demonstration of such long-term infrastructure cost reductions in the project application Summary section.

* Federally recognized Indian Tribe applicants for all PROTECT Resilience Grants may opt to provide raw data with their application to support the need for a project, without additional BCA (see Alternatives to a BCA below).

Completing a BCA

Review in detail NOFO Sections D and F and DOT’s BCA Guidance (https://www.transportation.gov/mission/office-secretary/office-policy/transportation-policy/benefit-cost-analysis-guidance) to understand how to conduct and document a BCA.

The materials provided must include (see NOFO Sections D and F for more information):

1. A narrative that describes the overall project;

2. An unlocked BCA spreadsheet document that uses calculations to estimate a benefit-cost ratio so that reviewers can see how the inputs are used; and

3. A BCA Memo that details the sources of values used and explains the methods used to calculate the benefit-cost ratio.

The spreadsheets and technical memos must present the calculations in sufficient detail and transparency to allow the analysis to be reproduced by FHWA evaluators.

Alternatives to a BCA

A federally recognized Indian Tribe may elect to provide raw data with its application to support the need for a project, without additional analysis. The narrative must include:

· Clear identification of the problem to be solved by the project (e.g., asset risk).

· Estimation of the costs of the proposed project.

· Current and projected future asset use (e.g., vehicle miles traveled, ridership, freight movement).

· Projection of the expected impacts of the project.