[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 127 (Friday, July 1, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38719-38740]
[FR Doc No: 2011-16514]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

[Docket No. DOT-OST-2011-0107]

Interim Notice of Funding Availability for the Department of
Transportation's National Infrastructure Investments Under the Full-
Year Continuing Appropriations, 2011; and Request for Comments

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of Transportation, DOT.

ACTION: Interim notice of funding availability, request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This interim notice announces the availability of funding and
requests proposals for the Department of Transportation's National
Infrastructure Investments, or ``TIGER Discretionary Grants.'' In
addition, this interim notice announces selection criteria and pre-
application and application requirements for these grants.
    On April 15, 2011, the President signed the Full-Year Continuing
Appropriations, 2011 (Div. B of the Department of Defense and Full-Year
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 (Pub. L. 112-010, Apr. 15, 2011))
(``FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act''). The FY 2011 Continuing
Appropriations Act appropriated $526.944 million to be awarded by the
Department of Transportation (``DOT'') for National Infrastructure
Investments. This appropriation is similar, but not identical to the
appropriation for the Transportation Investment Generating Economic
Recovery, or ``TIGER Discretionary Grant'', program authorized and
implemented pursuant to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009 (the ``Recovery Act''), and the National Infrastructure
Investments or ``TIGER II Discretionary Grant'' program under the
Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act for 2010 (``FY 2010 Appropriations Act''). Because
of the similarity in program structure, DOT has referred to the grants
for National Infrastructure Investments under the FY 2010
Appropriations Act as ``TIGER II Discretionary Grants''. Given that
funds have now been appropriated for these similar programs in three
separate statutes, DOT is referring to the grants for National
Infrastructure Investments under the FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations
Act simply as ``TIGER Discretionary Grants.'' As with the TIGER and
TIGER II programs, funds for the FY2011 TIGER program are to be awarded
on a competitive basis for projects that will have a significant impact
on the Nation, a metropolitan area or a region. Through this interim
notice, DOT is soliciting applications for TIGER Discretionary Grants.
    This interim notice requests comments on the proposed selection
criteria and guidance for awarding funds. DOT will take all comments
into consideration and may publish a supplemental notice revising some
elements of this notice. If substantive changes to this notice are
necessary, DOT will publish a supplemental Federal Register notice. In
the event that this solicitation does not result in the award and
obligation of all available funds, DOT may decide to publish an
additional solicitation(s).

DATES: Comments must be received by July 18, 2011, at 5 p.m. EDT. Late-
filed comments will be considered to the extent practicable. Pre-
applications should be submitted by October 3, 2011, at 5 p.m. EDT (the
``Pre-Application Deadline''). Final applications must be submitted
through Grants.gov by October 31, 2011, at 5 p.m. EDT (the
``Application Deadline''). The DOT pre-application system will open on
or before August 23, 2011 to allow prospective applicants to submit
pre-applications. Subsequently, the Grants.gov ``Apply'' function will
open on October 5, 2011, allowing applicants to submit applications.
While applicants are encouraged to submit pre-applications in advance
of the Pre-Application Deadline, pre-applications will not be reviewed
until after the pre-application deadline. Similarly, while applicants
are encouraged to submit applications in advance of the Application
Deadline, applications will not be evaluated, and awards will not be
made, until after the Application Deadline.

ADDRESSES: For Comments: You must include the agency name (Office of
the Secretary of Transportation) and the docket number DOT-OST-2011-
0107 with your comments. To ensure that your comments are not entered
into the docket more than once, please submit comments, identified by
the docket number DOT-OST-2011-0107, by only one of the following
methods:
    Web site: The U.S. Government electronic docket site is http://www.regulations.gov. Go to this Web site and follow the instructions
for submitting comments into docket number DOT-OST-2011-0107;
    Fax: Telefax comments to<PHONE_NUMBER>;
    Mail: Mail your comments to U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Docket Operations, M-30, Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590; or
    Hand Delivery: Bring your comments to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Docket Operations, M-30,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590, between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Instructions for submitting comments: You must include the agency
name (Office of the Secretary of Transportation) and Docket number DOT-
OST-2011-0107 for this notice at the beginning of your comments. You
should submit two copies of your comments if you submit them by mail or
courier. For confirmation that the

Office of the Secretary of Transportation has received your comments,
you must include a self-addressed stamped postcard. Note that all
comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, and
will be available to Internet users. You may review DOT's complete
Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published April 11, 2000,
(65 FR 19477), or you may visit http://www.regulations.gov.
    For Pre-Applications and Applications: Pre-applications must be
submitted electronically to DOT and applications must be submitted
electronically through Grants.gov. Only pre-applications received by
DOT and applications received through Grants.gov will be deemed
properly filed. Instructions for submitting pre-applications to DOT and
applications through Grants.gov are included in Section VII (Pre-
Application and Application Cycle).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information concerning
this notice please contact the TIGER Discretionary Grant program
manager via e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call Robert Mariner at
202-366-8914. A TDD is available for individuals who are deaf or hard
of hearing at<PHONE_NUMBER>. In addition, DOT will regularly post
answers to questions and requests for clarifications on DOT's Web site
at http://www.dot.gov/TIGER.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice is substantially similar to the
Final notice published for the TIGER II Discretionary Grant program in
the Federal Register on June 1, 2010. However, there are a few
significant differences that applicants should be aware of. These
differences are as follows:
    1. Unlike the FY 2010 Appropriations Act, the FY 2011 Continuing
Appropriations Act does not provide any funding for projects solely for
the planning, preparation, or design of capital projects (``TIGER
Planning Grants''); however these activities may be eligible to the
extent that they are part of an overall construction project that
receives TIGER Discretionary Grants funding
    2. As specified in section VI of this notice, any applicant that is
applying for a TIGER TIFIA Payment must also submit a TIFIA letter of
interest along with their application.
    3. As specified in section VII (A) of this notice, eligible
applicants may submit, as a lead applicant, no more than three
applications for consideration. However, multistate applications, will
not count towards the lead applicant's three application limit.
Additionally, applicants may be identified as a partnering agency on
the application of another lead applicant and such an application will
not count towards a partnering applicant's three application limit as a
lead applicant.

Other than these differences, and minor edits made to conform the
notice to the factual circumstances of this round of TIGER funding,
there have been no material changes made to the notice. Each section of
this notice contains information and instructions relevant to the
application process for these TIGER Discretionary Grants and
prospective applicants should read this notice in its entirety so that
they have the information they need to submit eligible and competitive
applications.

Table of Contents

I. Background
TIGER Discretionary Grants
II. Selection Criteria and Guidance on Application of Selection
Criteria
III. Evaluation and Selection Process
IV. Grant Administration
V. Projects in Rural Areas
VI. TIGER TIFIA Payments
Application Requirements
VII. Pre-Application and Application Cycle
VIII. Project Benefits
IX. Questions and Clarifications
Appendix A: Additional Information on Cost Benefit Analysis
Appendix B: Additional Information on Applying Through Grants.gov
Appendix C: Additional Information on Guidelines for Project
Readiness

I. Background

Recovery Act TIGER and Fiscal Year 2010 TIGER II Discretionary Grants

    On February 17, 2009, the President of the United States signed the
Recovery Act, which appropriated $1.5 billion of discretionary grant
funds to be awarded by DOT for capital investments in surface
transportation infrastructure. DOT has referred to these grants as
Grants for Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery or
``TIGER Discretionary Grants''. DOT solicited applications for TIGER
Discretionary Grants through a notice of funding availability published
in the Federal Register on June 17, 2009 (an interim notice was
published on May 18, 2009). Applications for TIGER Discretionary Grants
were due on September 15, 2009 and DOT received over 1400 applications
with funding requests totaling almost $60 billion. Funding for 51
projects totaling nearly $1.5 billion was announced on February 17,
2010.
    On December 16, 2009, the President signed the FY 2010
Appropriations Act that appropriated $600 million to DOT for National
Infrastructure Investments using language that was similar, but not
identical, to the language in the Recovery Act authorizing the TIGER
Discretionary Grants. DOT has referred to those grants for National
Infrastructure Investments as TIGER II Discretionary Grants.
    The FY 2010 Appropriations Act permitted DOT to use an amount not
to exceed $35 million of the available TIGER II funds for projects that
involved solely the planning, preparation, or design of Eligible
Projects, and not their construction (``TIGER II Planning Grants'').
The Recovery Act did not explicitly provide funding for similar
activities under the TIGER Discretionary Grant program.
    DOT solicited applications for TIGER II Discretionary Grants
through a notice of funding availability published in the Federal
Register on June 1, 2010 (an interim notice was published on April 26,
2010). Applications for TIGER II Discretionary Grants were due on
August 23, 2010 and nearly 1700 applications were received with funding
requests totaling about $21 billion. Funding awards for 42 capital
projects totaling nearly $557 million were announced on October 20,
2010. Grant announcements ranged from $1.01 million to $47.6 million
for individual capital projects, with an average award size of
approximately $13.25 million; the median award amount was $10.5
million. Additionally, funding for 33 planning projects totaling nearly
$28 million was announced on October 20, 2010. TIGER II Planning Grant
announcements ranged from $85 thousand to $2.8 million for individual
projects, with an average award size of approximately $835 thousand;
the median award size was $720 thousand. Fourteen TIGER II Planning
Grant recipients received HUD Sustainable Community Challenge Grants
that were also announced on October 20, 2010. Projects were selected
for funding based on their alignment with the selection criteria
specified in the June 1, 2010, Federal Register notice for the TIGER II
Discretionary Grant program.
    On April 15, 2011, the President signed the FY 2011 Continuing
Appropriations Act. This Act appropriated $526.944 million to DOT for
National Infrastructure Investments using language that is similar, but
not identical to the language in the FY 2010 Appropriations Act
authorizing the TIGER II Discretionary Grants. DOT is referring to
these grants for National Infrastructure Investments as TIGER
Discretionary Grants.

    The most significant difference between the 2010 and 2011
appropriations is that there is no funding available for TIGER Planning
Grants in the 2011 Act.
    Section 1101 of the FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act, Title
I--General Provisions, states that the appropriations are for such
amounts as may be necessary, at the level specified and under the
authority and conditions provided in applicable appropriations Act for
fiscal year 2010, for projects or activities for which appropriations,
funds, or other authority were made available under the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2010 (Pub. L. 111-117). Because of this general
provision in the FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act, DOT is applying
the authority and conditions outlined in the following section.
FY 2011 TIGER Discretionary Grants
    Like the TIGER and TIGER II Discretionary Grants, this year's TIGER
Discretionary Grants are for capital investments in surface
transportation infrastructure and are to be awarded on a competitive
basis for projects that will have a significant impact on the Nation, a
metropolitan area, or a region. Key requirements of the TIGER
Discretionary Grant program are summarized below, and material
differences from the previous TIGER Discretionary Grant programs are
highlighted.
    ``Eligible Applicants'' for TIGER Discretionary Grants are State,
local, and tribal governments, including U.S. territories, tribal
governments, transit agencies, port authorities, metropolitan planning
organizations (MPOs), other political subdivisions of State or local
governments, and multi-State or multi-jurisdictional groups applying
through a single lead applicant (for multi-jurisdictional groups, each
member of the group, including the lead applicant, must be an otherwise
eligible applicant as defined in this paragraph).
    Projects that are eligible for TIGER Discretionary Grants under the
FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act (``Eligible Projects'') include,
but are not limited to: (1) highway or bridge projects eligible under
title 23, United States Code; (2) public transportation projects
eligible under chapter 53 of title 49, United States Code; (3)
passenger and freight rail transportation projects; and (4) port
infrastructure investments. Federal wage rate requirements included in
subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40, United States Code, apply to
all projects receiving funds. This description of Eligible Projects is
identical to the description of eligible projects under the TIGER II
Discretionary Grant program.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Consistent with the FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act,
DOT will apply the following principles in determining whether a
project is eligible as a capital investment in surface
transportation: (1) Surface transportation facilities generally
include roads, highways and bridges, ports, freight and passenger
railroads, transit systems, and projects that connect transportation
facilities to other modes of transportation; and (2) surface
transportation facilities also include any highway or bridge project
eligible under title 23, U.S.C., or public transportation project
eligible under chapter 53 of title 49, U.S.C. Please note that the
Department may use a TIGER Discretionary Grant to pay for the
surface transportation components of a broader project that has non-
surface transportation components, and applicants are encouraged to
apply for TIGER Discretionary Grants to pay for the surface
transportation components of these projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    However, while in the past applicants could submit as many
applications as they wished, for the Fiscal Year 2011 TIGER
Discretionary Grant Program, to help ensure that applicants submit only
those applications that are most likely to align well with DOT's
selection criteria, each applicant may submit no more than three
applications for consideration. While applications may include requests
to fund more than one project, applicants should not bundle together
unrelated projects in the same application for purposes of avoiding the
three application limit that applies to each applicant. Please note
that the three application limit applies only to applications where the
applicant is the lead applicant, and there is no limit on applications
for which an applicant can be listed as a partnering agency. Also, DOT
will not count any application for a multistate project against the
three application limit to the extent multiple states are partnering to
submit the application.
    The FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act requires a new
solicitation of applications and, therefore, any unsuccessful applicant
for a TIGER or TIGER II Discretionary Grant that wishes to be
considered for a TIGER Discretionary Grant this year must reapply
according to the procedures in this notice. Additionally, TIGER II
planning grant recipients must reapply to be considered for a TIGER
Discretionary Grant for capital funding, if they meet the eligibility
criteria and schedule requirements for TIGER and are ready to proceed
to the construction phase of the project.
    The FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act specifies that TIGER
Discretionary Grants may be not less than $10 million (except in rural
areas) and not greater than $200 million. Based on DOT's experience
with the TIGER and TIGER II Discretionary Grant programs, it is
unlikely that the $200 million maximum grant size for this year's TIGER
Discretionary Grant program will be reached for any project. The FY
2011 Continuing Appropriations Act, like the FY 2010 Appropriations
Act, does not provide authority to waive the minimum $10 million grant
size for TIGER Discretionary Grants. For projects located in rural
areas (as defined in section V (Projects in Rural Areas)), the minimum
TIGER Discretionary Grant size is $1 million, as it was in the FY 2010
Appropriations Act. The term ``grant'' in the provision of the FY 2011
Continuing Appropriations Act specifying a minimum grant size does not
include TIGER TIFIA Payments, as defined below.
    Pursuant to the FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act, no more than
25 percent of the funds made available for TIGER Discretionary Grants
(or $131.736 million) may be awarded to projects in a single State.
This maximum State share is consistent with the maximum State share
under the TIGER II Discretionary Grants program. The comparable figure
for TIGER II Discretionary Grants was also 25 percent (or $150
million).
    The FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act directs that not less
than $140 million of the funds provided for TIGER Discretionary Grants
is to be used for projects located in rural areas. The comparable
amount set aside for rural areas under the FY 2010 Appropriations Act
was also $140 million. In awarding TIGER Discretionary Grants pursuant
to the FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act, DOT must take measures to
ensure an equitable geographic distribution of grant funds, an
appropriate balance in addressing the needs of urban and rural areas
and the investment in a variety of transportation modes. The FY 2010
Appropriations Act included the same provisions for the TIGER II
Discretionary Grant program.
    TIGER Discretionary Grants may be used for up to 80 percent of the
costs of a project, but priority must be given to projects for which
Federal funding is required to complete an overall financing package
and projects can increase their competitiveness by demonstrating
significant non-Federal contributions.\2\ The FY 2010

Appropriations Act included the same priority for TIGER II
Discretionary Grants. Once again for this year's TIGER Discretionary
Grants, DOT may increase the Federal share above 80 percent only for
projects located in rural areas, in which case DOT may fund up to 100
percent of the costs of a project. Therefore, for projects not located
in rural areas, based on the statutory requirements of at least 20
percent non-Federal cost share and a minimum grant size of $10 million,
the minimum total project size for an eligible project is $12.5 million
(where the minimum $10 million TIGER Discretionary Grant request
represents 80 percent of the total project cost). The minimum total
project size for an eligible project in a rural area is 1 million
(where the entire project cost is funded with a TIGER Discretionary
Grant). However, the statutory requirement to give priority to projects
that use Federal funds to complete an overall financing package applies
to projects located in rural areas as well, and projects located in
rural areas can increase their competitiveness for purposes of the
TIGER program by demonstrating significant non-Federal financial
contributions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ DOT will consider any non-Federal funds for purposes of
meeting the 20 percent match requirement, whether such funds are
contributed by the public sector (State or local) or the private
sector; however, DOT will not consider funds already expended at the
time of the award for purposes of meeting the 20 percent match
requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Recovery Act required DOT to give priority to projects that
were expected to be completed by February 17, 2012. Like the FY 2010
Appropriations Act, the FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act does not
include any similar requirements for the TIGER Discretionary Grants,
although this year's TIGER funds are only available for obligation
through September 30, 2013. The limited amount of time for which the
funds will be made available means that DOT will consider the extent to
which a project is ready to proceed with obligation of grant funds when
evaluating applications.
    The Recovery Act emphasized the generation of near-term economic
effects from expenditures on project costs, such as construction job
creation. However, the FY 2010 and FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations
Acts do not include explicit emphasis on job creation and instead focus
more broadly on the impact of projects on the Nation, a metropolitan
area, or a region including the medium and long-term benefits that
would accrue post-project completion. Therefore, in all cases, TIGER
Discretionary Grant applications will need to be competitive on the
merits of the medium to long-term impacts of the projects themselves,
as demonstrated by a project's alignment with the Long-Term Outcomes
selection criterion described in Section II(A) (Selection Criteria)
below. However, because communities nationwide continue to face
difficult economic circumstances, including high unemployment, DOT will
also continue to incorporate near-term impacts like job creation in its
evaluation of TIGER applications, as demonstrated by a project's
alignment with the Job Creation & Near-Term Economic Activity selection
criterion described in Section II(A) below. Consideration of near-term
benefits will apply particularly in the case of projects that will
employ people in Economically Distressed Areas as discussed in more
detail in Section II(A) below.
    The FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act allows for an amount not
to exceed $150 million of the $526.944 million to be used to pay the
subsidy and administrative costs of the Transportation Infrastructure
Finance and Innovation Act of 1998 (``TIFIA'') program, a Federal
credit assistance program, if it would further the purposes of the
TIGER Discretionary Grant program. DOT is referring to these payments
as ``TIGER TIFIA Payments.'' The FY 2010 Appropriations Act also
authorized DOT to use up to $150 million of the amount available for
TIGER II Discretionary Grants for similar purposes.
    Based on the subsidy amounts required for projects in the TIFIA
program's existing portfolio, DOT estimates that $150 million of TIGER
TIFIA Payments could support approximately $1.5 billion in TIFIA credit
assistance. The amount of budget authority required to support TIFIA
credit assistance is calculated on a project-by-project basis.
Applicants for TIGER TIFIA Payments should submit an application
pursuant to this notice and a separate TIFIA letter of interest, as
described below in Section VI (TIGER TIFIA Payments). Unless otherwise
noted, or the context requires otherwise, references in this notice to
TIGER Discretionary Grants include TIGER TIFIA Payments.
    DOT reserves the right to offer a TIGER TIFIA Payment to an
applicant that applied for a TIGER Discretionary Grant even if DOT does
not choose to fund the requested TIGER Discretionary Grant and the
applicant did not specifically request a TIGER TIFIA Payment.
Therefore, as described below in Section VI (TIGER TIFIA Payments),
applicants for TIGER Discretionary Grants, particularly applicants that
require a substantial amount of funds to complete a financing package,
should indicate whether or not they have considered applying for a
TIGER TIFIA Payment. To the extent an applicant thinks that TIFIA may
be a viable option for the project, applicants should provide a brief
description of a project finance plan that includes TIFIA credit
assistance and identifies a source of revenue which may be available to
support the TIFIA credit assistance.
    The FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act provides that the
Secretary of Transportation may retain up to $25 million of the
$526.944 million to fund the award and oversight of TIGER Discretionary
Grants. Portions of the $25 million may be transferred for these
purposes to the Administrators of the Federal Highway Administration,
the Federal Transit Administration, the Federal Railroad
Administration, and the Federal Maritime Administration.
    The purpose of this notice is to solicit applications for TIGER
Discretionary Grants.

TIGER Discretionary Grants

II. Selection Criteria and Guidance on Application of Selection
Criteria

    This section specifies the criteria that DOT will use to evaluate
applications for TIGER Discretionary Grants. The criteria incorporate
the statutory eligibility requirements for this program, which are
specified in this notice as relevant. This section is divided into two
parts. Part A (Selection Criteria) specifies the criteria that DOT will
use to rate projects. Additional guidance about how DOT will apply
these criteria, including illustrative metrics and examples, is
provided in Part B (Additional Guidance on Selection Criteria).

A. Selection Criteria

    TIGER Discretionary Grants will be awarded based on the selection
criteria as outlined below. There are two categories of selection
criteria, ``Primary Selection Criteria'' and ``Secondary Selection
Criteria.''
    The Primary Selection Criteria include (1) Long-Term Outcomes and
(2) Job Creation & Near-Term Economic Activity. The Secondary Selection
Criteria include (1) Innovation and (2) Partnership. The Primary
Selection Criteria are intended to capture the primary objective of the
TIGER provisions of the FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act, which is
to invest in infrastructure projects that will have a significant
impact on the Nation, a metropolitan area, or a region. The Secondary
Selection Criteria are intended to capture the benefits of new and/or
innovative approaches to achieving this programmatic objective.

1. Primary Selection Criteria:
(a) Long-Term Outcomes
    DOT will give priority to projects that have a significant impact
on desirable long-term outcomes for the Nation, a metropolitan area, or
a region. Applications that do not demonstrate a likelihood of
significant long-term benefits in this criterion will not proceed in
the evaluation process. The following types of long-term outcomes will
be given priority:
    (i) State of Good Repair: Improving the condition of existing
transportation facilities and systems, with particular emphasis on
projects that minimize life-cycle costs.
    (ii) Economic Competitiveness: Contributing to the economic
competitiveness of the United States over the medium- to long-term.
    (iii) Livability: Fostering livable communities through place-based
policies and investments that increase transportation choices and
access to transportation services for people in communities across the
United States.
    (iv) Environmental Sustainability: Improving energy efficiency,
reducing dependence on oil, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and
benefitting the environment.
    (v) Safety: Improving the safety of U.S. transportation facilities
and systems.
(b) Job Creation & Near-Term Economic Activity
    While the TIGER Discretionary Grant program is not a Recovery Act
program, job creation and near-term economic activity remain a top
priority of this Administration; therefore, DOT will give priority (as
it did for the TIGER and TIGER II Discretionary Grant programs) to
projects that are expected to quickly create and preserve jobs and
promote rapid increases in economic activity, particularly jobs and
activity that benefit economically distressed areas as defined by
section 301 of the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965,
as amended (42 U.S.C. 3161) (``Economically Distressed Areas'').\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ While Economically Distressed Areas are typically identified
under the Public Works and Economic Development Act at the county
level, for the purposes of this program DOT will consider regions,
municipalities, smaller areas within larger communities, or other
geographic areas to be Economically Distressed Areas if an applicant
can demonstrate that any such area otherwise meets the requirements
of an Economically Distressed Area as defined in section 301 of the
Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Secondary Selection Criteria
(a) Innovation
    DOT will give priority to projects that use innovative strategies
to pursue the long-term outcomes outlined above.
(b) Partnership
    DOT will give priority to projects that demonstrate strong
collaboration among a broad range of participants and/or integration of
transportation with other public service efforts.

B. Additional Guidance on Selection Criteria

    The following additional guidance explains how DOT will evaluate
each of the selection criteria identified above in Section II(A)
(Selection Criteria). Applicants are encouraged to demonstrate the
responsiveness of a project to any and all of the selection criteria
with the most relevant information that applicants can provide,
regardless of whether such information has been specifically requested,
or identified, in this notice. Any such information shall be considered
part of the application, not supplemental, for purposes of the
application size limits specified below in Section VII(D) (Length of
Application).
1. Primary Selection Criteria:
(a) Long-Term Outcomes
    In order to measure a project's alignment with this criterion, DOT
will assess the public benefits generated by the project, as measured
by the extent to which a project produces one or more of the following
outcomes.
    (i) State of Good Repair: In order to determine whether the project
will improve the condition of existing transportation facilities or
systems, including whether life-cycle costs will be minimized, DOT will
assess (i) whether the project is part of, or consistent with, relevant
State, local or regional efforts and plans to maintain transportation
facilities or systems in a state of good repair, (ii) whether an
important aim of the project is to rehabilitate, reconstruct or upgrade
surface transportation assets that, if left unimproved, threaten future
transportation network efficiency, mobility of goods or people, or
economic growth due to their poor condition, (iii) whether the project
is appropriately capitalized up front and uses asset management
approaches that optimize its long-term cost structure, and (iv) the
extent to which a sustainable source of revenue is available for long-
term operations and maintenance of the project. The application should
include any quantifiable metrics of the facility or system's current
condition and performance and, to the extent possible, projected
condition and performance, with an explanation of how the project will
improve the facility or system's condition, performance and/or long-
term cost structure, including calculations of avoided operations and
maintenance costs and associated delays.
    (ii) Economic Competitiveness: In order to determine whether a
project promotes the economic competitiveness of the United States, DOT
will assess whether the project will measurably contribute over the
long term to growth in the productivity of the American economy. For
purposes of aligning a project with this outcome, applicants should
provide evidence of how improvements in transportation outcomes (such
as time savings and operating cost savings) translate into long-term
economic productivity benefits. These long-term economic benefits that
are provided by the completed project are different from the near-term
economic benefits of construction that are captured in the Job Creation
& Near-Term Economic Activity criterion. In weighing long-term economic
competitiveness benefits, applicants should describe how the project
supports increased long-term efficiency and productivity.
    Priority consideration will be given to projects that: (i) Improve
long-term efficiency, reliability or cost-competitiveness in the
movement of workers or goods (including, but not limited to, projects
that have a significant effect on reducing the costs of transporting
export cargoes), or (ii) make improvements that increase the economic
productivity of land, capital or labor at specific locations,
particularly Economically Distressed Areas. Applicants may propose
other methods of demonstrating a project's contribution to the economic
competitiveness of the country and such methods will be reviewed on a
case-by-case basis.
    Economic competitiveness may be demonstrated by the project's
ability to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the
transportation system through integration or better use of all existing
transportation infrastructure (which may be evidenced by the project's
involvement with or benefits to more than one mode and/or its
compatibility with and preferably augmentation of the capacities of
connecting modes and facilities), but only to the extent that these
enhancements lead to the economic benefits that are identified in the
opening paragraph of this section.

    For purposes of demonstrating economic benefits, applicants should
estimate National-level or region-wide economic benefits on
productivity and production (e.g., reduced shipping costs or travel
times for U.S. exports originating both inside and outside of the
region), and should net out those benefits most likely to result in
transfers of economic activity from one localized area to another.
Therefore, in estimating local and regional benefits, applicants should
consider net increases in economic productivity and benefits, and
should take care not to include economic benefits that are being
shifted from one location in the United States to another location.
Highly localized benefits will receive the most consideration under
circumstances where such benefits are most likely to improve an
Economically Distressed Area (as defined herein) or otherwise improve
access to more productive employment opportunities for under-employed
and disadvantaged populations.
    Finally, the TIGER program strives to promote long-term economic
growth in a manner that will be sustainable for generations to come.
Therefore, for projects designed to enhance economic competitiveness,
applicants should also provide evidence that the project will achieve
the goals of this outcome in an environmentally sustainable manner. To
satisfy this condition, applicants should reference the fourth
criterion in this Section II(B) ``Environmental Sustainability'' for
more information on what features promote sustainable growth and be
sure to address the extent to which sustainability features are
incorporated into the proposed project's economic impact.
    (iii) Livability: Livability investments are projects that not only
deliver transportation benefits, but are also designed and planned in
such a way that they have a positive impact on qualitative measures of
community life. This element of long-term outcomes delivers benefits
that are inherently difficult to measure. However, it is implicit to
livability that its benefits are shared and therefore magnified by the
number of potential users in the affected community. Therefore,
descriptions of how projects enhance livability should include a
description of the affected community and the scale of the project's
impact as measured in person-miles traveled or number of trips
affected. In order to determine whether a project improves the quality
of the living and working environment of a community, DOT will consider
whether the project furthers the six livability principles developed by
DOT with HUD and EPA as part of the Partnership for Sustainable
Communities, which are listed fully at http://www.dot.gov/affairs/2009/dot8009.htm. For this criterion, the Department will give particular
consideration to the first principle, which prioritizes the creation of
affordable and convenient transportation choices.\4\ Specifically, DOT
will qualitatively assess whether the project:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In full, this principle reads: ``Provide more transportation
choices. Develop safe, reliable and economical transportation
choices to decrease household transportation costs, reduce our
nations' dependence on foreign oil, improve air quality, reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and promote public health.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Will significantly enhance or reduce the average cost of user
mobility through the creation of more convenient transportation options
for travelers;
    (2) will improve existing transportation choices by enhancing
points of modal connectivity, increasing the number of modes
accommodated on existing assets, or reducing congestion on existing
modal assets;
    (3) will improve accessibility and transport services for
economically disadvantaged populations, non-drivers, senior citizens,
and persons with disabilities, or will make goods, commodities, and
services more readily available to these groups; and/or
    (4) is the result of a planning process which coordinated
transportation and land-use planning decisions and encouraged community
participation in the process.
    Livability improvements may include projects for new or improved
biking and walking infrastructure. Particular attention will be paid to
the degree to which such projects contribute significantly to broader
traveler mobility through intermodal connections, enhanced job
commuting options, or improved connections between residential and
commercial areas. Projects that appear designed primarily as isolated
recreational facilities and do not enhance traveler mobility as
described above will not be funded.
    (iv) Environmental Sustainability: In order to determine whether a
project promotes a more environmentally sustainable transportation
system, DOT will assess the project's ability to:
    (1) improve energy efficiency, reduce dependence on oil and/or
reduce greenhouse gas emissions, (applicants are encouraged to provide
quantitative information regarding expected reductions in emissions of
CO2 or fuel consumption as a result of the project, or
expected use of clean or alternative sources of energy; projects that
demonstrate a projected decrease in the movement of people or goods by
less energy-efficient vehicles or systems will be given priority under
this factor); and
    (2) maintain, protect or enhance the environment, as evidenced by
its avoidance of adverse environmental impacts (for example, adverse
impacts related to air or water quality, wetlands, and endangered
species) and/or by its environmental benefits (for example, improved
air quality, wetlands creation or improved habitat connectivity).
    Applicants are encouraged to provide quantitative information that
validates the existence of substantial transportation-related costs
related to energy consumption and adverse environmental effects and
evidence of the extent to which the project will reduce or mitigate
those costs.
    (v) Safety: In order to determine whether the project improves
safety, DOT will assess the project's ability to reduce the number,
rate and consequences of surface transportation-related crashes,
injuries, and fatalities among drivers and/or non-drivers in the United
States or in the affected metropolitan area or region, and/or the
project's contribution to the elimination of highway/rail grade
crossings, the protection of pipelines, or the prevention of unintended
release of hazardous materials.
    Evaluation of Expected Project Costs and Benefits: DOT believes
that benefit-cost analysis (``BCA''), including the monetization and
discounting of costs and benefits in a common unit of measurement in
present-day dollars, is an important discipline. For BCA to yield
useful results, full consideration of costs and benefits is necessary.
These include traditionally quantified fuel and travel time savings as
well as reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, water quality impacts,
public health effects, and other costs and benefits that are more
indirectly related to vehicle-miles or that are harder to measure. In
addition, BCA should attempt to measure the indirect effects of
transportation investments on land use and on the portions of household
budgets spent on transportation. The systematic process of comparing
expected benefits and costs helps decision-makers organize information
about, and evaluate trade-offs between, alternative transportation
investments. DOT has a responsibility under Executive Order 12893,
Principles for Federal Infrastructure Investments, 59 FR 4233, to base
infrastructure investments on systematic analysis of expected benefits
and costs, including both quantitative and qualitative measures.

    Therefore, applicants for TIGER Discretionary Grants are generally
required to identify, quantify, and compare expected benefits and
costs, subject to the following qualifications:
    All applicants will be expected to prepare an analysis of benefits
and costs; however, DOT understands that the level of expense that can
be expected in these analyses for surveys, travel demand forecasts,
market forecasts, statistical analyses, and so on will be less for
smaller projects than for larger projects. The level of resources
devoted to preparing the benefit-cost analysis should be reasonably
related to the size of the overall project and the amount of grant
funds requested in the application. Any subjective estimates of
benefits and costs should still be quantified, and applicants are
expected to provide whatever evidence they have available to lend
credence to their subjective estimates. Estimates of benefits should be
presented in monetary terms whenever possible; if a monetary estimate
is not possible, then at least a quantitative estimate (in physical,
non-monetary terms, such as ridership estimates, emissions levels,
etc.) should be provided.
    The lack of a useful analysis of expected project benefits and
costs may be the basis for denying an award of a TIGER Discretionary
Grant to an applicant. If it is clear to DOT that the total benefits of
a project are not reasonably likely to outweigh the project's costs,
DOT will not award a TIGER Discretionary Grant to the project.
Consistent with the broader goals of DOT and the FY 2011 Continuing
Appropriations Act, DOT can consider some factors that do not readily
lend themselves to quantification or monetization, including equitable
geographic distribution of grant funds and an appropriate balance in
addressing the needs of urban and rural areas and investment in a
variety of transportation modes.
    Detailed guidance for the preparation of benefit-cost analyses is
provided in Appendix A. Benefits should be presented, whenever
possible, in a tabular form showing benefits and costs in each year for
the useful life of the project. Benefits and costs should both be
discounted to the year 2011, and present discounted values of both the
stream of benefits and the stream of costs should be calculated. If the
project has multiple parts, each of which has independent utility, the
benefits and costs of each part should be estimated and presented
separately. A project component has independent utility if the
component itself could qualify as an Eligible Project and would provide
benefits that satisfy the selection criteria specified in this notice,
as described further in Section III(B) (Evaluation of Eligibility)
below. The results of the benefit-cost analysis should be summarized in
the Project Narrative section of the application itself, but the
details may be presented in an attachment to the application.
    DOT recognizes that some categories of costs and benefits are more
difficult to quantify or monetize than others. In presenting benefit-
cost analyses, applicants should include qualitative discussion of the
categories of benefits and costs that they were not able to quantify,
noting that these benefits and costs are in addition to other benefits
and costs that were quantified. However, in the event of an
unreasonable absence of data and analysis, or poor applicant effort to
put forth a robust quantification of benefits and costs, the
application is unlikely to receive further consideration. In general,
the lack of a useful analysis comparing benefits and costs for any such
project is ground for denying the award of a TIGER Discretionary Grant.
    Evaluation of Project Performance: Each applicant selected for
TIGER Discretionary Grant funding will be required to work with DOT on
the development and implementation of a plan to collect information and
report on the project's performance with respect to the relevant long-
term outcomes that are expected to be achieved through construction of
the project.
(b) Job Creation & Near-Term Economic Activity
    In order to measure a project's alignment with this criterion, DOT
will assess whether the project promotes the short- or long-term
creation or preservation of jobs and whether the project rapidly
promotes new or expanded business opportunities during construction of
the project or thereafter. Demonstration of a project's rapid economic
impact is critical to a project's alignment with this criterion.
Applicants are encouraged to provide information to assist DOT in
making these assessments, including the total amount of funds that will
be expended on construction and construction-related activities by all
of the entities participating in the project and, to the extent
measurable, the number and type of jobs to be created and/or preserved
by the project by calendar quarters during construction and annually
thereafter. Applicants should also identify any business enterprises to
be created or benefited by the project during its construction and once
it becomes operational.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Executive Office of the President, Council of Economic
Advisers, issued a memorandum in May 2009 on ``Estimates of Job
Creation from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.''
The memorandum is available at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/cea/Estimate-of-Job-Creation/. Table 5 of this
memorandum provides a simple rule for estimating job-years created
by government spending, which is that $92,000 of government spending
creates one job-year. Of this, 64% of the job-year estimate
represents direct and indirect effects and 36% of the job-year
estimate represents induced effects. Applicants can use this
estimate as an appropriate indicator of direct, indirect and induced
job-years created by TIGER Discretionary Grant spending, but are
encouraged to supplement or modify this estimate to the extent they
can demonstrate that such modifications are justified. However,
since the May 2009 memorandum makes job creation purely a function
of the level of expenditure, applicants should also demonstrate how
quickly jobs will be created under the proposed project. Projects
that generate a given number of jobs more quickly will have a more
favorable impact on economic recovery. A quarter-by-quarter
projection of the number of direct job-hours expected to be created
by the project is useful in assessing the impacts of a project on
economic recovery. Furthermore, applicants should be aware that
certain types of expenditures are less likely to align well with the
Job Creation & Near-Term Economic Activity criterion. These types of
expenditures include, among other things, engineering or design work
and purchasing existing facilities or right-of-way.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with the Recovery Act, the Updated Implementing Guidance
for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 issued by the
Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') on April 3, 2009 (the ``OMB
Guidance''), which were applied both to TIGER I and TIGER II, and which
DOT will continue to apply to the TIGER Discretionary Grants program as
a matter of policy, and consistent with applicable Federal laws,
applicants are encouraged to provide information to assist DOT in
assessing (1) whether the project will promote the creation of job
opportunities for low-income workers through the use of best practice
hiring programs and apprenticeship (including pre-apprenticeship)
programs; (2) whether the project will provide maximum practicable
opportunities for small businesses and disadvantaged business
enterprises, including veteran-owned small businesses and service
disabled veteran-owned small businesses; (3) whether the project will
make effective use of community-based organizations in connecting
disadvantaged workers with economic opportunities; (4) whether the
project will support entities that have a sound track record on labor
practices and compliance with Federal laws ensuring that American
workers are safe and treated fairly; and (5) whether the project
implements best practices, consistent with our Nation's civil rights
and equal opportunity laws, for

ensuring that all individuals--regardless of race, gender, age,
disability, and national origin--benefit from TIGER grant funding.
    To the extent possible, applicants should indicate whether the
populations most likely to benefit from the creation or preservation of
jobs or new or expanded business opportunities are from Economically
Distressed Areas. In addition, to the extent possible, applicants
should indicate whether the project's procurement plan is likely to
create follow-on jobs and near-term economic activity for manufacturers
and suppliers that support the construction industry. A key
consideration in assessing projects under this criterion will be how
quickly jobs are created.
    In evaluating a project's alignment with this criterion, DOT will
assess whether a project is ready to proceed rapidly upon receipt of a
TIGER Discretionary Grant, as evidenced by:
    (i) Project Schedule: A feasible and sufficiently detailed project
schedule demonstrating that the project can begin construction quickly
upon receipt of a TIGER Discretionary Grant,\6\ and that the grant
funds will be spent steadily and expeditiously once construction
starts; the schedule should show how many direct, on-project jobs are
expected to be created or sustained during each calendar quarter after
the project is underway;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Applicants should demonstrate that their project can
obligate grant funds no later than June 30, 2013 in order give DOT
comfort that the TIGER Discretionary Grant funds are likely to be
obligated in advance of the September 30, 2013 statutory deadline,
and that any unexpected delays will not put TIGER Discretionary
Grant funds at risk of expiring before they are used.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (ii) Environmental Approvals: Receipt (or reasonably anticipated
receipt) of all environmental approvals necessary for the project to
proceed to construction on the timeline specified in the project
schedule, including satisfaction of all Federal, State and local
requirements and completion of the National Environmental Policy Act
(``NEPA'') process;
    To demonstrate satisfaction of this requirement, applicants should
provide assurances with their pre-applications and evidence with their
applications that NEPA review is complete or substantially complete and
submit relevant draft or final NEPA documentation--preferably by way of
a Web site link--for DOT review. DOT is unlikely to select a project
for TIGER Discretionary Grant funding if it involves, or potentially
involves, significant environmental impacts and has not begun or has
not substantially completed required environmental and regulatory
reviews. For such projects that have not begun, or have not
substantially completed these reviews, it may be difficult to complete
environmental and regulatory review as well as all activities needed to
be complete prior to construction and meet the obligation deadline of
September 30, 2013.
    DOT will consider exceptions to the requirement that NEPA be
substantially complete upon application in accordance with this
paragraph. If an applicant has not substantially completed the NEPA
process the applicant should provide information on the project's
current status in the NEPA process and an estimate of the latest date
that the NEPA process is reasonably expected to be completed. If an
applicant has not initiated the NEPA process the applicant must provide
a reasonable justification for why the NEPA process has not yet been
initiated as of the date of this notice, and an assurance that the
necessary environmental reviews can be completed with enough time for
any post-NEPA, pre-obligation activities to be completed by June 30,
2013, in order to give DOT comfort that all of the TIGER Discretionary
Grant funds are likely to be obligated in advance of the September 30,
2013 statutory deadline, and that any unexpected delays will not put
TIGER Discretionary Grant funds at risk of expiring before they can be
obligated (see Appendix C for additional guidance). An example of a
reasonable justification for why an applicant has not initiated NEPA
review would be if, prior to the availability of TIGER Discretionary
Grant funds, there were no reasonable expectations of receiving Federal
funding for the project. A project selected for award that has not
completed the NEPA process may not be permitted to use grant funds for
construction and related activities until NEPA is complete and all
other necessary environmental approvals have been received.
    An applicant seeking to justify an exception to this requirement
should submit the information listed below with its application:
    a. The information required under Sections VII(C)(2)(V) and VII(F)-
(G) (Contents of Applications) of this notice;
    b. Environmental studies or other documents--preferably by way of a
Web site link--that describe in detail known potential project impacts,
and possible mitigation for those impacts;
    c. A description of completed, or planned and anticipated
coordination with Federal and State regulatory agencies for permits and
approvals;
    d. An estimate of the time required for completion of NEPA and all
other required Federal, State or local environmental approvals; and
    e. An identification of the proposed NEPA class of action (i.e.,
Categorical Exclusion, Environmental Assessment, or Environmental
Impact Statement).
    (iii) Legislative Approvals: Receipt of all necessary legislative
approvals (for example, legislative authority to charge user fees or
set toll rates), and evidence of support from State and local elected
officials; evidence of support from all relevant State and local
officials is not required, however, the evidence should demonstrate
that the project is broadly supported;
    (iv) State and Local Planning: The planning requirements of the
operating administration administering the TIGER project will apply.\7\
Where required by an operating administration, a project should
demonstrate that a project is included in the relevant State,
metropolitan, and local planning documents, or will be included. To
demonstrate satisfaction of this requirement, applicants should provide
evidence that the project is included in the relevant planning
documents. One way applicants may do this is by providing a link to a
Web site showing the planning documents. If the project is not included
in the relevant planning documents at the time the application is
submitted, applicants should submit a certification from the
appropriate planning agency that actions are underway at the time of
the application to include the project in the relevant planning
document. The applicant should provide a schedule demonstrating when
the project will be added to the relevant planning

documents; any applicant that is applying for a TIGER Discretionary
Grant and does not own all of the property or right-of-way required to
complete the project should provide evidence that the property and/or
right-of-way owner whose permission is required to complete the project
supports the application and will cooperate in carrying out the
activities to be supported by the TIGER Discretionary Grant;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ All regionally significant projects requiring an action by
the FHWA or the FTA must be in the metropolitan transportation plan,
TIP and STIP. Further, in air quality non-attainment and maintenance
areas, all regionally significant projects, regardless of the
funding source, must be included in the conforming metropolitan
transportation plan and TIP. To the extent a project is required to
be on a metropolitan transportation plan, TIP and/or STIP it will
not receive a TIGER Discretionary Grant until it is included in such
plans. Projects not currently included in these plans can be amended
in by the State and MPO. Projects that are not required to be in
long range transportation plans, STIPs and TIPs will not need to be
included in such plans in order to receive a TIGER Discretionary
Grant. Freight and passenger rail projects are not required to be on
the State Rail Plans called for in the Passenger Rail Investment and
Improvement Act of 2008. This is consistent with the exemption for
high speed and intercity passenger rail projects under the Recovery
Act. However, applicants seeking funding for freight and passenger
rail projects are encouraged to demonstrate that they have done
sufficient planning to ensure that projects fit into a prioritized
list of capital needs and are consistent with long-range goals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (v) Technical Feasibility: The technical feasibility of the
project, including completion of substantial preliminary engineering
work; and
    (vi) Financial Feasibility: The viability and completeness of the
project's financing package (assuming the availability of the requested
TIGER Discretionary Grant funds), including evidence of stable and
reliable financial commitments and contingency reserves, as
appropriate, and evidence of the grant recipient's ability to manage
grants.
    DOT reserves the right to revoke any award of TIGER Discretionary
Grant funds and to award such funds to another project to the extent
that such funds are not timely expended and/or construction does not
begin in accordance with the project schedule. Because projects have
different schedules DOT will consider on a case-by-case basis how much
time after selection for award of a TIGER Discretionary Grant each
project has before funds must be obligated (consistent with law) and
construction started. This deadline will be specified for each TIGER
Discretionary Grant in the project-specific grant agreements signed by
the grant recipients and will be based on critical path items
identified by applicants in response to items (i) through (vi) above,
but all deadlines will reflect DOT's preference that pre-conditions be
complete and TIGER Discretionary Grants funds obligated on or before
June 30, 2013 in order to give DOT comfort that all TIGER Discretionary
Grant funds will be obligated before the statutory deadline of
September 30, 2013. For example, if an applicant reasonably anticipates
that NEPA requirements will be completed and a final decision made
within 30 to 60 days of announcement of the award of a TIGER
Discretionary Grant, this timeframe will be taken into account in
evaluating the application, but also in establishing a deadline for
obligation of funds and commencement of construction. By statute, DOT's
ability to obligate funds for TIGER Discretionary Grants expires on
September 30, 2013 and DOT has no authority to extend the deadline.
2. Secondary Selection Criteria
(a) Innovation
    In order to measure a project's alignment with this criterion, DOT
will assess the extent to which the project uses innovative technology
(including, for example, intelligent transportation systems, dynamic
pricing, rail wayside or on-board energy recovery, smart cards, real-
time dispatching, active traffic management, radio frequency
identification (RFID), or others) to pursue one or more of the long-
term outcomes outlined above and/or to significantly enhance the
operational performance of the transportation system. DOT will also
assess the extent to which the project incorporates innovations that
demonstrate the value of new approaches to, among other things,
transportation funding and finance, contracting, project delivery,
congestion management, safety management, asset management, or long-
term operations and maintenance. The applicant should clearly
demonstrate that the innovation is designed to pursue one or more of
the long-term outcomes outlined above and/or significantly enhance the
transportation system.
    Innovative, multi-modal projects are often difficult to fund under
traditional transportation programs. DOT will consider the extent to
which innovative projects might be difficult to fund under other
programs and will give priority to projects that align well with the
Primary Selection Criteria but are unlikely to receive funding under
traditional programs.
(b) Partnership
    (i) Jurisdictional & Stakeholder Collaboration: In order to measure
a project's alignment with this criterion, DOT will assess the
project's involvement of non-Federal entities and the use of non-
Federal funds, including the scope of involvement and share of total
funding. DOT will give priority to projects that receive financial
commitments from, or otherwise involve, State and local governments,
other public entities, or private or nonprofit entities, including
projects that engage parties that are not traditionally involved in
transportation projects, such as nonprofit community groups. Pursuant
to the OMB Guidance, DOT will give priority to projects that make
effective use of community-based organizations in connecting
disadvantaged people with economic opportunities. Letters of commitment
and other supporting documentation showing existing or confirmed
collaboration, partnerships, etc., should be provided (preferably
through a Web site link) to demonstrate alignment with this criterion
    In compliance with the FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act, DOT
will give priority to projects for which a TIGER Discretionary Grant
will help to complete an overall financing package. An applicant should
clearly demonstrate in the application the extent to which the project
cannot be readily and efficiently completed without Federal assistance,
and the extent to which other sources of Federal assistance are or are
not readily available for the project. DOT will assess the amount of
private debt and equity to be invested in the project or the amount of
co-investment from State, local or other non-profit sources.
    DOT will also assess the extent to which the project application
demonstrates collaboration among neighboring or regional jurisdictions
to achieve National, regional or metropolitan benefits. Multiple States
or jurisdictions may submit a joint application and should identify a
lead State or jurisdiction as the primary point of contact. Where
multiple States or jurisdictions are submitting a joint application,
the application should demonstrate how the project costs are
apportioned between the States or jurisdictions to assist DOT in making
the distributional determinations described below in Section III(C)
(Distribution of Funds).
    (ii) Disciplinary Integration: In order to demonstrate the value of
partnerships across government agencies that serve various public
service missions and to promote collaboration on the objectives
outlined in this notice, DOT will give priority to projects that are
supported, financially or otherwise, by non-transportation public
agencies that are pursuing similar objectives. For example, DOT will
give priority to transportation projects that create more livable
communities and are supported by relevant public housing agencies or
are consistent with State or local efforts or plans to promote economic
development, revitalize communities, or protect historic or cultural
assets; similarly, DOT will give priority to transportation projects
that encourage energy efficiency or improve the environment and are
supported by relevant public agencies with energy or environmental
missions.

III. Evaluation and Selection Process

A. Evaluation Process

    TIGER Discretionary Grant applications will be evaluated in
accordance with the below discussed

evaluation process. DOT will establish a pre-application evaluation
team to review each pre-application that is received by DOT on or prior
to the Pre-Application Deadline. This evaluation team will be organized
and led by the Office of the Secretary and will include members from
the relevant modal administrations in DOT with the most experience and/
or expertise in the relevant project areas (the ``Cognizant Modal
Administrations''). These representatives will include technical and
professional staff with relevant experience and/or expertise. This
evaluation team will be responsible for analyzing whether the pre-
application satisfies the following key threshold requirements:
    1. The project is an Eligible Project;
    2. NEPA is complete or underway, as described above in Section
II(B)(2)(b)(ii) (Environmental Approvals);
    3. The project is included in the relevant State, metropolitan, and
local planning documents, or will be included, if applicable;
    4. The project expects to be ready to obligate all of the TIGER
Discretionary Grant funds no later than June 30, 2013; \8\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See footnote 7, above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. Local matching funds to support 20 percent or more of the costs
for the project are identified and committed.\9\ DOT will consider any
non-Federal funds as a local match for purposes of this program,
whether such funds are contributed by the public sector (State or
local) or the private sector. However, DOT cannot consider funds
already expended as a local match. Furthermore, the 20 percent matching
requirement for projects that are not in rural areas is an eligibility
requirement. All projects, whether in an urban or rural area, can
increase their competitiveness by demonstrating significant non-Federal
contributions in excess of the required local match, and DOT will give
priority, based on the FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act, to
projects for which Federal funding is required to complete an overall
financing package.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ For FHWA and FTA committed funds are defined as: ``Funds
that have been dedicated or obligated for transportation purposes''
as described in 23 CFR 450.104.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To the extent the pre-application evaluation team determines that a
pre-application does not satisfy these key threshold requirements, DOT
will inform the project sponsor that an application for the project
will not be reviewed unless the application submitted on or prior to
the Application Deadline can demonstrate that the requirement has been
addressed.
    DOT will establish application evaluation teams to review each
application that is received by DOT prior to the Application Deadline.
These evaluation teams will be organized and led by the Office of the
Secretary and will include members from each of the Cognizant Modal
Administrations. These representatives will include technical and
professional staff with relevant experience and/or expertise. The
evaluation teams will be responsible for evaluating and rating all of
the projects and making funding recommendations to the Secretary. The
evaluation process will require team members to evaluate and rate
applications individually before convening with other members to
discuss ratings. The composition of the evaluation teams will be
finalized after the Pre-Application Deadline, based on the number and
nature of pre-applications received.
    DOT will not assign specific numerical scores to projects based on
the selection criteria outlined above in Section II(A) (Selection
Criteria). Rather, ratings of ``highly recommended,'' ``recommended,''
``not recommended'', or ``negative'' will be assigned to projects for
each of the selection criteria. DOT will award TIGER Discretionary
Grants to projects that are well-aligned with one or more of the
selection criteria, with projects that are well-aligned with multiple
selection criteria being more likely to receive TIGER Discretionary
Grants. In addition, DOT will consider whether a project has a negative
effect on any of the selection criteria, and any such negative effect
may reduce the likelihood that the project will receive a TIGER
Discretionary Grant. To the extent the initial evaluation process does
not sufficiently differentiate among highly rated projects, DOT will
use a similar rating process to re-assess the projects that were highly
rated and identify those that should be most highly rated.
    DOT will give more weight to the two Primary Selection Criteria
(Long-Term Outcomes and Job Creation & Near-Term Economic Activity),
which will be weighted equally, than to the two Secondary Selection
Criteria (Innovation and Partnership) which will also be weighted
equally. Projects that are unable to demonstrate a likelihood of
significant long-term benefits in any of the five long-term outcomes
identified in Section II(A)(1)(a) (Long-Term Outcomes) will not proceed
in the evaluation process. A project need not be well aligned with each
of the long-term outcomes in order to be successful in the long-term
outcomes criterion overall. However, projects that are strongly aligned
with multiple long-term outcomes will be the most successful in this
criterion. Furthermore, a project that has a negative effect on safety
or environmental sustainability will need to demonstrate significant
merits in other long-term outcomes in order to be selected for funding.
    For the Job Creation & Near-Term Economic Activity criterion,
projects need not receive a rating of ``highly recommended'' in order
to be recommended for funding, although a project that is not ready to
proceed quickly, as evidenced by the items requested in Section
II(B)(1)(b)(i)-(vi) (Project Schedule, Environmental Approvals,
Legislative Approvals, State and Local Planning, Technical Feasibility,
and Financial Feasibility), is less likely to be successful under this
criterion.
    The following table summarizes the weighting of the selection
criteria, as described in the preceding paragraphs:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Primary Selection Criteria
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Long-Term Outcomes................  DOT will give more weight to this
                                     criterion than to either of the
                                     Secondary Selection Criteria. In
                                     addition, this criterion has a
                                     minimum threshold requirement.
                                     Projects that are unable to
                                     demonstrate a likelihood of
                                     significant long-term benefits in
                                     any of the five long-term outcomes
                                     identified in this criterion will
                                     not proceed in the evaluation
                                     process.
Job Creation & Near-Term Economic   DOT will give more weight to this
 Activity.                           criterion than to either of the
                                     Secondary Selection Criteria. This
                                     criterion will be considered after
                                     it is determined that a project
                                     demonstrates a likelihood of
                                     significant long-term benefits in
                                     at least one of the five long-term
                                     outcomes identified in the long-
                                     term outcomes criterion.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      Secondary Selection Criteria
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Innovation & Partnership..........  DOT will give less weight to these
                                     criteria than to the Primary
                                     Selection Criteria. These criteria
                                     will be weighted equally.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted below in Section III(C) (Distribution of Funds), upon
completion of this competitive rating process DOT will analyze the
preliminary list and determine whether the purely competitive ratings
are consistent with the distributional requirements of the FY 2011
Continuing Appropriations Act. If necessary, DOT will adjust the list
of recommended projects to satisfy the statutory distributional
requirements while remaining as consistent as possible with the
competitive ratings.

B. Evaluation of Eligibility

    To be selected for a TIGER Discretionary Grant, a project must be
an Eligible Project and the applicant must be an Eligible Applicant.
DOT may consider one or more components of a large project to be an
Eligible Project, but only to the extent that the components have
independent utility, meaning the components themselves, not the project
of which they are a part, are Eligible Projects and satisfy the
selection criteria identified above in Section II(A) (Selection
Criteria). For these projects, the benefits described in an application
must be related to the components of the project for which funding is
requested, not the full project of which they are a part. DOT will not
fund individual phases of a project if the benefits of completing only
these phases would not align well with the selection criteria specified
in the Notice because the overall project would still be incomplete.
    To the extent that an application requests a substantial amount of
grant funds for a larger project or a group of related projects, DOT
reserves the right to award funds for a part of the project, not the
full project, if a part of the project has independent utility and
aligns well with the selection criteria specified in this notice. To
the extent applicants expect that DOT may wish to consider funding one
or more parts of a project and not the full project that is the subject
of the application, then applicants should clearly identify in their
applications the separate parts of the project and the benefits that
each part of the project provides, and how these benefits align with
the selection criteria. Similarly, if a project is not viable unless
DOT funds the full project, this should be stated in the application.

C. Distribution of Funds

    As noted above in Section I (Background), the FY 2011 Continuing
Appropriations Act prohibits the award of more than 25 percent of the
funds made available under the TIGER program to projects in any one
State. The FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act also requires that DOT
take measures to ensure an equitable geographic distribution of funds,
an appropriate balance in addressing the needs of urban and rural
areas, and the investment in a variety of transportation modes. DOT
will apply an initial unconstrained competitive rating process based on
the selection criteria identified above in Section II(A) (Selection
Criteria) to determine a preliminary list of projects recommended for
TIGER Discretionary Grants. DOT will then analyze the preliminary list
and determine whether the purely competitive ratings are consistent
with the distributional requirements of the FY 2011 Continuing
Appropriations Act. If necessary, DOT will adjust the list of
recommended projects to satisfy the statutory distributional
requirements while remaining as consistent as possible with the
competitive ratings.
    As noted above in Section II(B)(2)(b)(i) (Jurisdictional &
Stakeholder Collaboration), applications submitted jointly by multiple
Eligible Applicants must include an allocation of project costs to
assist DOT in making these determinations. In addition, DOT will use
the TIFIA subsidy and administrative cost estimate, not the principal
amount of credit assistance, to determine any TIGER TIFIA Payment's
effect on these distributional requirements.

D. Transparency of Process

    In the interest of transparency, DOT will disclose as much of the
information related to its evaluation process as is practical and
consistent with law. DOT expects that the TIGER Discretionary Grant
program may be reviewed and/or audited by Congress, the U.S. Government
Accountability Office, DOT's Inspector General, or others, and has
taken, and will continue to take steps to document its decisionmaking
process.

IV. Grant Administration

    DOT expects that each TIGER Discretionary Grant will be
administered by one of the Cognizant Modal Administration, pursuant to
a grant agreement between the TIGER Discretionary Grant recipient and
the Cognizant Modal Administration. In accordance with the FY 2011
Continuing Appropriations Act, the Secretary has the discretion to
delegate such responsibilities to the appropriate operating
administration.
    Applicable Federal laws, rules and regulations of the Cognizant
Modal Administration administering the project will apply to projects
that receive TIGER Discretionary Grants.
    As noted above in Section II(B)(1)(b) (Job Creation & Near-Term
Economic Activity), how soon after selection for award a project is
expected to obligate grant funds and start construction will be
considered on a case-by-case basis and will be specified in the
project-specific grant agreements. DOT reserves the right to revoke any
award of TIGER Discretionary Grant funds and to award such funds to
another project to the extent that such funds are not timely expended
and/or construction does not begin in accordance with the project
schedule. DOT's ability to obligate funds for TIGER Discretionary
Grants expires on September 30, 2013.

V. Projects in Rural Areas

    The FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act directs that not less
than $140 million of the funds provided for TIGER Discretionary Grants
are to be used for projects in rural areas. For purposes of this
notice, DOT is generally defining ``rural area'' as any area not in an
Urbanized Area, as such term is defined by the Census Bureau,\10\ and
will consider a project to be in a rural area if all or the majority of
a project is located in a rural area. To the extent more than a de
minimis portion of a project is located in an Urbanized Area,
applicants should identify the estimated percentage of project costs
that will be spent in Urbanized Areas and the estimated percentage that
will be spent in rural areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ For Census 2000, the Census Bureau defined an Urbanized
Area (UA) as an area that consists of densely settled territory that
contains 50,000 or more people. Updated lists of UAs are available
on the Census Bureau Web site. Urban Clusters (UCs) will be
considered rural areas for purposes of the TIGER Discretionary Grant
program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For projects located in rural areas the FY 2011 Appropriation Act
does not require matching funds (although the

statute does direct DOT to give priority to projects, including
projects located in rural areas, for which Federal funding is required
to complete an overall financing package that includes non-Federal
sources of funds) and the minimum grant size is $1 million. Applicants
for TIGER Discretionary Grants of between $1 million and $10 million
for projects located in rural areas are encouraged to apply and should
address the same criteria as applicants for TIGER Discretionary Grants
in excess of $10 million.

VI. TIGER TIFIA Payments

    Up to $150 million of the $526.944 million available for TIGER
Discretionary Grants may be used for TIGER TIFIA Payments. Based on the
average subsidy cost of the existing TIFIA portfolio, $150 million in
TIGER TIFIA Payments could support approximately $1.5 billion in
Federal credit assistance.
    Applicants seeking TIGER TIFIA Payments should apply in accordance
with all of the criteria and guidance specified in this notice for
TIGER Discretionary Grant applications and will be evaluated
concurrently with all other applicants. Any applicant seeking a TIGER
TIFIA Payment is also required to submit a TIFIA letter of interest
concurrent with the TIGER TIFIA Payment application. If selected for a
TIGER TIFIA Payment, the applicant must comply with all of the TIFIA
program's standard application and approval requirements including
submission of a complete TIFIA application and $50,000 application fee
(the TIFIA program guide can be downloaded from http://tifia.fhwa.dot.gov/).
    Applicants should demonstrate that the TIFIA loan will be ready to
close on or before September 30, 2013, in accordance with the guidance
specified above in Section II(B)(1)(b) (Job Creation & Near-Term
Economic Activity). DOT's TIFIA Joint Program Office will assist DOT in
determining a project's readiness to proceed rapidly upon receipt of a
TIGER TIFIA Payment.
    Applicants seeking TIGER TIFIA Payments may also apply for a TIGER
Discretionary Grant for the same project and must indicate the type(s)
of funding for which they are applying clearly on the face of their
applications. An applicant for a TIGER TIFIA Payment must submit an
application pursuant to this notice for a TIGER TIFIA Payment even if
it does not wish to apply for a TIGER Discretionary Grant.
    DOT reserves the right to offer a TIGER TIFIA Payment to an
applicant that applied for a TIGER Discretionary Grant even if DOT does
not choose to fund the requested TIGER Discretionary Grant request and
the applicant did not request a TIGER TIFIA Payment. Therefore,
applicants for TIGER Discretionary Grants, particularly applicants that
require a substantial amount of funds to complete a financing package,
should indicate whether or not they have considered applying for a
TIGER TIFIA Payment. To the extent an applicant thinks that TIFIA may
be a viable option for the project, applicants should provide a brief
description of a project finance plan that includes TIFIA credit
assistance and identifies a source of revenue which may be available to
support the TIFIA credit assistance.
    Unless otherwise expressly noted herein, any and all requirements
that apply to TIGER Discretionary Grants pursuant to the FY 2011
Continuing Appropriations Act, this notice, or otherwise, apply to
TIGER TIFIA Payments.

Pre-Application and Application Cycle

VII. Pre-Application and Application Cycle

A. Two Stages of Application Cycle

    The application cycle for TIGER Discretionary Grants has two
stages:
    1. Pre-Application: In Stage 1, applicants must submit a pre-
application form to the DOT. This step qualifies applicants to submit
an application in Stage 2. No application submitted during Stage 2 that
does not correlate with a properly completed Stage 1 pre-application
will be considered.
    2. Application: In Stage 2, applicants must submit a complete
application package through Grants.gov. If an applicant is seeking a
TIGER TIFIA payment, applicants must submit electronically a TIFIA
letter of interest to the TIFIA office at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>TIFIA
letters of interest must comply with all of the program's standard
requirements (the TIFIA program guide can be downloaded from http://tifia.fhwa.dot.gov/).
    Pre-applications should be submitted to DOT by the Pre-Application
Deadline, which is October 3, 2011, at 5 p.m. EST. Final applications
must be submitted through Grants.gov by the Application Deadline, which
is October 31, 2011, at 5 p.m. EST. The Grants.gov ``Apply'' function
will open on October 5, 2011, allowing applicants to submit
applications. While applicants are encouraged to submit pre-
applications in advance of the Pre-Application Deadline, pre-
applications will not be reviewed until after the Pre-Application
Deadline. Similarly, while applicants are encouraged to submit
applications in advance of the Application Deadline, applications will
not be evaluated, and selections for awards will not be made, until
after the Application Deadline.
    Pre-applications (stage 1) must be submitted to the DOT. The pre-
application form will be available on the DOT Web site at http://www.dot.gov/TIGER on August 23, 2011, together with instructions for
submitting the pre-application form electronically to DOT.
    Applications (Stage 2) must be submitted through Grants.gov. To
apply for funding through Grants.gov, applicants must be properly
registered. Complete instructions on how to register and submit
applications can be found at http://www.grants.gov. Please be aware
that the registration process usually takes 2-4 weeks and must be
completed before an application can be submitted. If interested parties
experience difficulties at any point during the registration or
application process, please call the Grants.gov Customer Support
Hotline at 1-800-518-4726, Monday-Friday from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. EST.
Additional information on applying through Grants.gov is available in
Appendix B, attached hereto.
    To help ensure that applicants submit only those applications that
are most likely to align well with the department's selection criteria,
each applicant may submit no more than three applications for
consideration under the TIGER Discretionary Grant Program. While
applications may include requests to fund more than one project,
applicants should not bundle together unrelated projects in the same
application for purposes of avoiding the three application limit that
applies to each applicant. Please note that the three application limit
applies only to applications where the applicant is the lead applicant,
and there is no limit on applications for which an applicant can be
listed as a partnering agency. Also, DOT will not count any application
for a multistate project against the three application limit to the
extent multiple states are partnering to submit the application.

B. Contents of Pre-Applications

    An applicant for a TIGER Discretionary Grant should provide all of
the information requested below in its pre-application form. DOT
reserves the right to ask any applicant to supplement the data in its
pre-application, but expects pre-applications to be complete upon
submission. Applicants must complete the pre-application form and send
it to

DOT electronically on or prior to the Pre-Application Deadline, in
accordance with the instructions specified at http://www.dot.gov/TIGER.
The pre-application form must include the following information:
    i. Name of applicant (if the application is to be submitted by more
than one entity, a lead applicant must be identified);
    ii. Applicant's DUNS (Data Universal Numbering System) number;
    iii. Type of applicant (State government, local government, U.S.
territory, Tribal government, transit agency, port authority,
metropolitan planning organization, or other unit of government);
    iv. State(s) where the project is located;
    v. County(s) where the project is located;
    vi. City(s) where the project is located;
    vii. Information about the geographic location of the project for
mapping purposes using one of the following methods:
    1. A geographic information system (GIS) file that indicates the
location of the project;
    2. For locating point specific projects, latitude and longitude in
decimal degrees to an accuracy of 5 decimal places (e.g. 0.12345) using
the WGS 84 datum (the default datum used by Global Positioning System
(GPS) equipment); or
    3. For linear projects on existing roads, route number (Interstate,
U.S. Route, or State Route) or road name and the latitude and longitude
in decimal degrees to an accuracy of 5 decimal places (e.g. 0.12345) of
the beginning and ending points of the project;
    viii. Project title (descriptive);
    ix. Project type: highway, transit, rail, port, multimodal, or
bicycle and pedestrian activity (if the project is a multimodal
project, the pre-application form will require that applicants provide
additional information identifying the affected modes);
    x. Whether the project is requesting a TIGER TIFIA Payment;
    xi. Project description (describe the project in plain English
terms that would be generally understood by the public, using no more
than 50 words (e.g. ``the project will replace the existing bridge over
the W river on interstate-X between the cities of Y and Z''; please do
not describe the project's benefits, background, or alignment with the
selection criteria in this description);
    xii. Total cost of the project;
    xiii. Total amount of TIGER Discretionary Grant funds requested;
    xiv. Contact name, phone number, e-mail address, and physical
address for applicant;
    xv. Congressional districts affected by the project;
    xvi. Type of jurisdiction where the project is located (urban or
rural, as defined above in Section V (Projects in Rural Areas));
    xvii. Whether or not the project is in an Economically Distressed
Area, as defined in Section II(A) (Selection Criteria);
    xviii. An assurance that the NEPA and/or environmental review
process is complete, substantially complete, or in progress (and the
expected outcome of the process), unless an exception is justified
pursuant to Section II(B)(1)(b)(ii) (Environmental Approvals). Absent
an acceptable justification, DOT will not evaluate applications for
projects that have not made substantial progress in the environmental
review process, including all Federal, State, and local environmental
requirements, by the Pre-Application Deadline;
    xix. The schedule for completing right-of-way acquisition and final
design; approval of plans, specifications, and estimates;
    xx. The date that the project is expected to be ready for
obligation of grant funds, which should be no later than June 30, 2013
in order to give DOT comfort that the funds will be obligated before
they expire on September 30, 2013; and
    xxi. An assurance that local matching funds to support 20 percent
or more of the costs of the project are identified and committed (as
noted in Section I (Background), this requirement does not apply to
projects located in rural areas (as defined above in Section V
(Projects in Rural Areas)), and these projects do not need to provide
this assurance); however, DOT will give priority to projects that also
will be funded with non-Federal sources of funds.
    To the extent the pre-application does not provide adequate
assurances for items xvii through xxii, DOT will inform the project
sponsor that an application for the project will not be reviewed unless
the application submitted on or prior to the Application Deadline can
demonstrate that each requirement has been addressed.

C. Contents of Applications

    An applicant for a TIGER Discretionary Grant must include all of
the information requested below in its application. DOT reserves the
right to ask any applicant to supplement the data in its application,
but expects applications to be complete upon submission. To the extent
practical, DOT encourages applicants to provide data and evidence of
project merits in a form that is publicly available or verifiable. For
TIGER TIFIA Payments, these requirements apply only to the applications
required under this notice; the standard TIFIA letter of interest and
loan application requirements, including the standard $50,000.00
application fee, are separately described in the Program Guide and
Application Form found at http://tifia.fhwa.dot.gov/.
1. Standard Form 424, Application for Federal Assistance
    Please see http://www07.grants.gov/assets/SF424Instructions.pdf for
instructions on how to complete the SF 424, which is part of the
standard Grants.gov submission. Additional clarifying guidance and FAQs
to assist applicants in completing the SF-424 will be available at
http://www.dot.gov/TIGER by September 16, 2011, when the ``Apply''
function within Grants.gov opens to accept applications under this
notice.
2. Project Narrative (Attachment to SF 424)
    The project narrative must respond to the application requirements
outlined below. DOT recommends that the project narrative be prepared
with standard formatting preferences (e.g. a single-spaced document,
using a standard 12-point font, such as Times New Roman, with 1-inch
margins).
    A TIGER Discretionary Grant application must include information
required for DOT to assess each of the criteria specified in Section
II(A) (Selection Criteria), as such criteria are explained in Section
II(B) (Additional Guidance on Selection Criteria). Applicants must
demonstrate the responsiveness of a project to any and all of the
selection criteria with the most relevant information that applicants
can provide, regardless of whether such information has been
specifically requested, or identified, in this notice. Applicants
should provide concrete evidence of project milestones, financial
capacity and commitment in order to support project readiness. Any such
information shall be considered part of the application, not
supplemental, for purposes of the application size limits identified
below in Part D (Length of Applications). Information provided pursuant
to this paragraph must be quantified, to the extent possible, to
describe the project's benefits to the Nation, a metropolitan area, or
a region. Information provided pursuant to this paragraph should
include projections for both the build and no-build

scenarios for the project for a point in time at least 20 years beyond
the project's completion date or the lifespan of the project, whichever
is closest to the present.
    All applications should include a detailed description of the
proposed project and geospatial data for the project, including a map
of the project's location and its connections to existing
transportation infrastructure. An application should also include a
description of how the project addresses the needs of an urban and/or
rural area. An application should clearly describe the transportation
challenges that the project aims to address, and how the project will
address these challenges. The description should include relevant data
such as, for example, passenger or freight volumes, congestion levels,
infrastructure condition, or safety experience.
    DOT recommends that the project narrative generally adhere to the
following basic outline, and include a table of contents, maps and
graphics that make the information easier to review:
    I. Project Description (including a description of the
transportation challenges that the project aims to address, and how the
project will address these challenges);
    II. Project Parties (information about the grant recipient and
other project parties);
    III. Grant Funds and Sources/Uses of Project Funds (information
about the amount of grant funding requested, availability/commitment of
funds sources and uses of all project funds, total project costs,
percentage of project costs that would be paid for with TIGER
Discretionary Grant funds, and the identity and percentage shares of
all parties providing funds for the project (including Federal funds
provided under other programs));
    IV. Selection Criteria (information about how the project aligns
with each of the primary and secondary selection criteria and a
description of the results of the benefit-cost analysis):
    a. Long-Term Outcomes
    i. State of Good Repair
    ii. Economic Competitiveness
    iii. Livability
    iv. Sustainability
    v. Safety
    b. Job Creation & Near-Term Economic Activity
    c. Innovation
    d. Partnership
    e. Results of Benefit-Cost Analysis
    V. Project Readiness and NEPA (information about how ready the
project is to move forward quickly, including information about the
project schedule, environmental approvals, legislative approvals, state
and local planning, technical feasibility, and financial feasibility);
    VI. Federal Wage Rate Certification (an application must include a
certification, signed by the applicant, stating that it will comply
with the requirements of subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40,
United States Code (Federal wage rate requirements), as required by the
FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act); and
    VII. To the extent relevant, the final page of the application
should describe (in one page or less) any material changes that need to
be made to the pre-application form, including changes to the
assurances provided in items xvii through xxii regarding initiation of
NEPA, planning, and required cost sharing.
    The purpose of this recommended format is to ensure that
applications are provided in a format that clearly addresses the
application requirements and makes critical information readily
apparent and easy to locate.

D. Length of Applications

    The project narrative may not exceed 25 pages in length.
Documentation supporting the assertions made in the narrative portion
may also be provided, but should be limited to relevant information. If
possible, Web site links to supporting documentation (including a more
detailed discussion of the benefit-cost analysis) should be provided
rather than copies of these materials. At the applicant's discretion,
relevant materials provided previously to a Cognizant Modal
Administration in support of a different DOT discretionary program (for
example, New Starts or TIFIA) may be referenced and described as
unchanged. To the extent referenced, this information need not be
resubmitted for the TIGER Discretionary Grant application (although
provision of a Web site link would facilitate DOT's consideration of
the information). DOT recommends use of appropriately descriptive file
names (e.g., ``Project Narrative,'' ``Maps,'' ``Memoranda of
Understanding and Letters of Support,'' etc.) for all attachments.
Cover pages and tables of contents do not count towards the 25-page
limit for the narrative portion of the application, and the Federal
wage rate certification and one-page update of the pre-application form
(if necessary) may also be outside of the 25-page narrative. Otherwise,
the only substantive portions of the application that should exceed the
25-page limit are any supporting documents (including a more detailed
discussion of the benefit-cost analysis) provided to support assertions
or conclusions made in the 25-page narrative section.

E. Contact Information

    Contact information is requested as part of the SF-424. DOT will
use this information to inform parties of DOT's decision regarding
selection of projects, as well as to contact parties in the event that
DOT needs additional information about an application.

F. National Environmental Policy Act Requirement

    An application for a TIGER Discretionary Grant must detail whether
the project will significantly impact the natural, social and/or
economic environment. If the NEPA process is completed, an applicant
must indicate the date of, and provide a Web site link or other
reference to, the final Categorical Exclusion, Finding of No
Significant Impact or Record of Decision. If the NEPA process is
underway but not complete, the application must detail where the
project is in the process, indicate the anticipated date of completion
and provide a Web site link or other reference to copies of any NEPA
documents prepared.

G. Environmentally Related Federal, State and Local Actions

    An application for a TIGER Discretionary Grant must indicate
whether the proposed project requires actions by other agencies (e.g.,
permits), indicate the status of such actions and provide a Web site
link or other reference to materials submitted to the other agencies,
and/or demonstrate compliance with other Federal, State and local
regulations as applicable, including, but not limited to, Section 4(f)
Parklands, Recreation Areas, Refuges, & Historic Properties; Section
106 Historic and Culturally Significant Properties; Clean Water Act
Wetlands and Water; Executive Orders Wetlands, Floodplains,
Environmental Justice; Clean Air Act Air Quality (specifically note if
the project is located in a nonattainment area); Endangered Species Act
Threatened and Endangered Biological Resources; Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat; The
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act; and/or any State and local
requirements.

H. Protection of Confidential Business Information

    All information submitted as part of or in support of any
application shall use publicly available data or data that

can be made public and methodologies that are accepted by industry
practice and standards, to the extent possible. If the application
includes information that the applicant considers to be a trade secret
or confidential commercial or financial information, the applicant
should do the following: (1) Note on the front cover that the
submission ``Contains Confidential Business Information (CBI);'' (2)
mark each affected page ``CBI;'' and (3) highlight or otherwise denote
the CBI portions. DOT protects such information from disclosure to the
extent allowed under applicable law. In the event DOT receives a
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the information, DOT will
follow the procedures described in its FOIA regulations at 49 CFR Sec.
7.17. Only information that is ultimately determined to be confidential
under that procedure will be exempt from disclosure under FOIA.

VIII. Project Benefits

    DOT expects to identify and report on the benefits of the projects
that it funds with TIGER Discretionary Grants. To this end, DOT will
request that recipients of TIGER Discretionary Grants cooperate in
Departmental efforts to collect and report on information related to
the benefits produced by the projects that receive TIGER Discretionary
Grants.
    The benefits that DOT reports on may include the following: (1)
Improved condition of existing transportation facilities and systems;
(2) improved economic competitiveness in the form of reduced travel
time, less traffic congestion, improved trip reliability, fewer vehicle
miles traveled, or lower vehicle operating costs; (3) long-term growth
in employment, production or other high-value economic activity; (4)
improved livability of communities across the United States through
expansion of transportation options, efficiency, and reliability; (5)
improved energy efficiency, reduced dependence on oil and reduced
greenhouse gas emissions; (6) reduced adverse impacts of transportation
on the natural environment; (7) reduced number, rate and consequences
of surface transportation-related crashes, injuries and fatalities; (8)
greater use of technology and innovative approaches to transportation
funding and project delivery; (9) greater collaboration with state and
local governments, other public entities, private entities, nonprofit
entities, or other non-traditional partners; (10) greater integration
of transportation decision making with decision making by other public
agencies with similar public service objectives; or (11) any other
benefits claimed in the project's benefit-cost analysis.
    Because of the limited nature of this program, these benefits are
likely to be reported on a project-by-project basis and trends across
projects that were selected for TIGER Discretionary Grants may not be
readily available. In addition, because many of these benefits are
long-term outcomes, it may be years before the value of the investments
can be quantified and fully reported. DOT is considering the most
appropriate way to collect and report information about these potential
project benefits.

IX. Questions and Clarifications

    For further information concerning this notice please contact the
TIGER Discretionary Grant program manager via e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call Robert Mariner at<PHONE_NUMBER>. A TDD is
available for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing at 202-366-
3993. DOT will regularly post answers to these questions and other
important clarifications on DOT's Web site at http://www.dot.gov/TIGER.

Appendix A: Additional Information on Benefit-Cost Analysis

    As previously discussed in the Notice, the lack of a useful
analysis of expected project benefits and costs may be a basis for
denying an award of a TIGER Discretionary Grant to any applicant.
Additionally, if it is clear that the total benefits of a project
are not reasonably likely to outweigh the project's costs, the
Department will not award a TIGER Discretionary Grant to the
project. Consequently, it is incumbent upon the applicant to prepare
a thorough benefit-cost analysis that demonstrates clearly the
derivation of both the costs and the benefits of the project.
However, DOT understands that the level of expense that can be
expected in these analyses for surveys, travel demand forecasts,
market forecasts, statistical analyses, and so on will be less for
smaller projects than for larger projects. The level of resources
devoted to preparing the benefit-cost analysis should be reasonably
related to the size of the overall project and the amount of grant
funds requested in the application. Any subjective estimates of
benefits and costs should still be quantified, and applicants are
expected to provide whatever evidence they have available to lend
credence to their subjective estimates. Estimates of benefits should
be presented in monetary terms whenever possible; if a monetary
estimate is not possible, then at least a quantitative estimate (in
physical, non-monetary terms, such as ridership estimates, emissions
levels, etc.) should be provided.
    This appendix provides general information and guidance on
conducting an analysis. In addition to this guidance, applicants
should also refer to OMB Circulars A-4 and A-94 in preparing their
analysis (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/). Circular A-4
also cites textbooks on cost-benefit analysis (e.g., Mishan and Quah
\11\) if an applicant wants to review additional background
material. The Department will rate all analyses as indicated below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ E.J. Mishan and Euston Quah, Cost-Benefit Analysis, 5th
edition (New York: Routledge, 2007).

                Table 1--Ratings of Benefit-Cost Analyses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Rating                             Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very useful.......................  The economic analysis (i) is
                                     comprehensive (quantifying and
                                     monetizing the full range of costs
                                     and benefits, including the likely
                                     timing of such costs and benefits,
                                     for which such measures are
                                     reasonably available), (ii)
                                     attempts to describe the indirect
                                     effects of transportation
                                     investments on land use (when
                                     applicable), (iii) helps the
                                     Department organize information
                                     about, and evaluate trade-offs
                                     between, alternative transportation
                                     investments, (iv) provides a high
                                     degree of confidence as to the
                                     extent to which the benefits of the
                                     project will exceed the project's
                                     costs on a net present value basis,
                                     and (v) provides sensitivity
                                     analysis to show how changes in key
                                     assumptions affect the outcome of
                                     the analysis.
Useful............................  The economic analysis (i)
                                     identifies, quantifies, monetizes,
                                     and compares the project's expected
                                     benefits and costs, but has minor
                                     gaps in coverage of benefits and
                                     costs or the precise timing of
                                     benefits and costs, or fails in
                                     some cases to quantify or monetize
                                     benefits and costs for which such
                                     measures are reasonably available,
                                     and (ii) provides a sufficient
                                     degree of confidence that the
                                     benefits of the project will exceed
                                     the project's costs on a net
                                     present value basis.
Marginally Useful.................  The economic analysis (i)
                                     identifies, quantifies, monetizes,
                                     and compares the project's expected
                                     benefits and costs, but has
                                     significant gaps in coverage,
                                     quantification, monetization, or
                                     timing of benefits and costs, or
                                     significant errors in its
                                     measurement of benefits or costs,
                                     and (ii) the Department is
                                     uncertain whether the benefits of
                                     the project will exceed the
                                     project's costs on a net present
                                     value basis.

Not Useful........................  The economic analysis (i) does not
                                     adequately identify, quantify,
                                     monetize, and compare the project's
                                     expected benefits and costs or
                                     timing of benefits and costs, (ii)
                                     provides little basis for
                                     concluding that the benefits of the
                                     project will exceed the project's
                                     costs on a net present value basis,
                                     and (iii) demonstrates an
                                     unreasonable absence of data and
                                     analysis or poor applicant effort
                                     to put forth a robust
                                     quantification of net benefits.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A benefit-cost analysis attempts to measure the dollar value of
the benefits and the costs to all the members of society (in this
context, ``society'' means all residents of the United States) on a
net present value basis. The benefits represent a dollar measure of
the extent to which people are made better off by the project--that
is, the benefits represent the amount that all the people in the
society would jointly be willing to pay to carry out the project,
and feel as if they had generated enough benefits to justify the
project's costs, after accounting for the relative timing of those
benefits and costs. In some cases, benefits may be difficult to
measure in dollar terms. Applicants must at least describe the
nature of each of the major types of benefits described in this
guidance. To the extent possible, applicants must also quantify each
of those types of benefits (e.g., in terms of the number of users
making use of a transportation facility). Finally, applicants must
attempt to measure those benefits in dollar terms (i.e.,
``monetize'' them). These benefits must then be compared with a
dollar measure of the costs of the project. Both benefits and costs
must be estimated for each year after work on the project is begun
and for a period of time at least 20 years in the future (or the
project's useful life, whichever is shorter), and these streams of
annual benefits and costs must be discounted to the present using an
appropriate discount rate, so that a present value of the stream of
benefits and a present value of the stream of costs is calculated.
    As a starting point for any analysis, applicants should provide
a Project Summary describing the project and what it changes. The
Project Summary should provide:
     A description of the current infrastructure baseline
(e.g., an existing two-lane road);
     A description of what the proposed project is and how
it would change the current infrastructure baseline (e.g., extension
of a trolley line);
     A general justification for the project and how it
affects the long-term outcomes relative to the current baseline;
     A description of who would be the users of the project
or what groups of people would benefit from it; and
     A description of what types of economic effects the
project is expected to have.
    If an application contains multiple separate projects (but that
are linked together in a common objective), each of which has
independent utility, the applicant should provide a separate summary
(and analysis) for each project.
    The summary should also identify the types of societal benefits
the project might generate. The applicant should list the types of
benefits here and then clearly demonstrate in the analysis how it
estimated benefits for each category. The summary should also
include the full cost of a project, including Federal, State, local,
and private funding, as well as expected operations and maintenance
costs, and not simply the requested grant amount or the local
amount.
    Each application must include in its analysis estimates of the
project's expected benefits with respect to each of the five long-
term outcomes specified in Section II(A) (Selection Criteria). We
recognize that it may in some cases be unclear in which of these
categories of outcomes a benefit should be listed. In these cases,
it is less important in which category a benefit is listed than to
make sure that the benefit is listed and measured (but only once).
Applicants must demonstrate that the proposed project has
independent utility as defined in this Notice. It cannot be a
component of a larger project such that, if the larger project were
not built, this project would have little or no transportation value
(or, if it is part of a larger project, the application must
demonstrate that funding for the larger project is committed). If
the applicant provides a benefit-cost analysis for a larger project,
then it must estimate what portion of the benefits and costs of the
larger project apply to the smaller project for which funding is
being sought. The following sections describe baselines, affected
population, discounting, forecasting, costs, and benefit categories
in more detail. The Department expects a thorough discussion of
these items in the body of the analysis.

Benefit-Cost Analysis vs. Economic Impact Analysis

    First, it is important to recognize that a benefit-cost analysis
is not an economic impact analysis. Applicants are required to
provide a benefit-cost analysis in support of their proposed
projects. An economic impact analysis is not a substitute for a
benefit-cost analysis.
    A benefit-cost analysis attempts to measure the dollar value of
the benefits and the costs to all the members of society (in this
context, ``society'' means all residents of the United States). The
benefits represent a dollar measure of the extent to which people
are made better off by the project--that is, the benefits represent
the amount that all the people in the society would jointly be
willing to pay to carry out the project, and feel as if they had
generated enough benefits to justify the project's costs.
    An economic impact analysis, on the other hand, typically
focuses on local and regional impacts rather than national impacts.
Some of the impacts that are counted in an economic impact analysis,
such as diversion of economic activity from one region of the
country to another, represent gains to one part of the country but
losses to another part, so they are not gains from the standpoint of
the nation as a whole.
    Moreover, economic impact analyses estimate ``impacts'' rather
than ``benefits,'' and the ``impacts'' are normally quite different
from the ``benefits.'' For example, the total payroll of workers on
a project is usually considered one of the ``impacts'' in an
economic impact analysis. The total payroll is not a measure of the
``benefits'' of the project, however, for two reasons. First, a
payroll is a cost to whoever pays the employees, at the same time
that it is a benefit to the employees, so it is not a net benefit.
Second, even for the employees, the employees have to work for their
wages, so the amount they are paid is not a net benefit to them--it
is a benefit only to the extent that they value their wages more
than the cost to them of having to be at work every day.
    Economic impact analyses also often treat real estate
investments induced by a project as one of the economic ``impacts.''
The full value of such an investment is not a ``benefit,'' however,
because the benefit of those investments to the community in which
they are made is balanced by the cost of the investment to the
investor. Because these investments are a cost as well as a benefit,
they are not a net benefit for purposes of a benefit-cost analysis.
    There is often an element of benefit in these ``impacts.'' A
worker who gets a higher-paying job as a result of a transportation
investment project benefits if he or she works just as hard as he or
she did at his or her previous job but is paid more. Such projects
produce benefits by increasing the productivity of labor. A
transportation investment project that increases the value and
productivity of land and thus induces real estate investment can
also provide a benefit, but the benefit must be measured net of the
cost of making the real estate investment. Measuring these labor and
land productivity effects requires a careful analysis of the local
labor market and how that market is changed by the transportation
investment. Similarly, measuring the effects of transportation
projects on the productivity of land requires a careful netting out
of increases in land values that are compensated by costs of real
estate investment and increases in land values that in effect
capitalize other types of benefits that have already been counted,
such as time savings.
    In summary, applicants must be careful to measure only the net
benefits of a project, and should avoid using software packages that
are designed primarily to produce economic impact analyses. An
application containing only an economic impact analysis does not
meet the program's requirements and may be denied an award for that
reason.

Baselines and Alternatives

    Applicants should measure costs and benefits of a proposed
project against a baseline (also called a ``base case'' or a ``no
build'' case). The baseline should be an assessment of the way the
world would look if the project did not receive the requested TIGER
Discretionary Grant funding. Usually, it is reasonable to forecast
that that baseline world resembles the present state. However, it is
important to factor in any projected changes (e.g., baseline
economic growth, increased traffic volumes, or completion of already
planned and funded projects) that would occur even if the proposed
project were not funded. In some cases the proposed project already
has a financing plan that would allow it to be built, but that
involves a slower construction schedule than would occur if it
received TIGER Discretionary Grant funding. Or it may be likely
that, in the absence of TIGER Discretionary Grant funding, the
project would be built later using ordinary funding sources. In
these cases, the TIGER Discretionary Grant funding may accelerate
completion of the project, but it does not allow a project to be
built that would never otherwise have been built. The benefits and
costs in this case should thus be limited to the marginal benefits
(and marginal costs) of having the project completed in a shorter
period of time and including the cost of expending resources on the
project sooner than otherwise planned.
    Many projects have multiple parts or multiple phases, only one
or two of which would actually receive funding from a TIGER
Discretionary Grant. It is important in these cases that both the
costs and the benefits pertain to the same portion of the project.
If the part or phase of the project funded by a TIGER Discretionary
Grant has independent utility, then the analysis should compare the
costs and the benefits of just that part or phase. If the part or
phase of the project funded by a TIGER Discretionary Grant does not
have independent utility, then the applicant must first demonstrate
that funding is committed for the entire project (or for an entire
portion of the project, including the TIGER Discretionary Grant-
funded portion, that has independent utility). In this case, the
applicant should compare the benefits and costs of the entire
project (or the entire portion of the project that has independent
utility). The applicant must make clear exactly what portions of the
project form the basis of the estimates of benefits and costs. It is
incorrect to claim benefits for the entire project but only count as
costs the costs of the portion of the project funded by the TIGER
Discretionary Grant. Thus, it would be incorrect to attribute all
the benefits from a new port facility to a TIGER Discretionary Grant
when the costs that are counted only cover a portion of the project
funded by the TIGER Discretionary Grant, for example, paving a
loading area. In some cases, the applicant may choose to allocate
the benefits of the project proportionately to the costs of the
project that would be funded by the TIGER Discretionary Grant, but
this should generally be done only if (1) the TIGER Discretionary
Grant funds are commingled with non-TIGER Discretionary Grant funds
for a single, non-divisible structure that has independent utility)
and (2) the project has sufficient funding in place to be completed
as a whole unit. If a project is being funded by multiple Federal,