Difference between revisions of "LPA:136.3 Federal Aid Basics"
m (→220.127.116.11 Audit and Final Reimbursement: Per LPA, added link to Title 49 CFR 18.42)
m (Per LPA, updated CCO drafts of various LPA Agreements (Figs. 136.3.6, 136.3.9, 136.3.10 and 136.3.11))
|Line 9:||Line 9:|
|[[media:136.3.5 2015.pdf|Fig. 136.3.5, HS 4, Safe Routes to School Program Agreement]]
|[[media:136.3.5 2015.pdf|Fig. 136.3.5, HS 4, Safe Routes to School Program Agreement]]
|[[media:136.3.6 .docx|Fig. 136.3.6, FS 11, STP Urban Program Agreement]]
|[[media:136.3.7 2015.docx|Fig. 136.3.7, FS 12, Transportation Enhancement Funds Program Agreement]]
|[[media:136.3.7 2015.docx|Fig. 136.3.7, FS 12, Transportation Enhancement Funds Program Agreement]]
|Line 15:||Line 15:|
|[[media:136.3.8 2015.docx|Fig. 136.3.8, FS 12 SUP, Transportation Enhancement Funds Supplemental Agreement]]
|[[media:136.3.9 .docx|Fig. 136.3.9, FS 13, Off-System Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program Agreement]]
|[[media:136.3.10 .docx|Fig. 136.3.10, FS 14, On-System Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program Agreement]]
|[[media:136.3.11 .docx|Fig. 136.3.11, FS 15, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Agreement]]
|[[media:136.3.12 2015.docx|Fig. 136.3.12, FS 16, Transportation and Community and System Preservation Program Agreement]]
Revision as of 12:38, 22 January 2016
- 1 136.3.1 Introduction
- 2 136.3.2 Federal Aid for Local Public Agencies
- 3 136.3.3 Finding Appropriate Funds
- 4 136.3.4 Project Selection and Programming
- 5 136.3.5 STIP/TIP
- 6 136.3.6 Obligation of Funds
- 7 136.3.7 Reasonable Progress Policy
- 8 136.3.8 Programs
- 8.1 18.104.22.168 Highway Bridge Program (BRO & BRM)
- 8.2 22.214.171.124 Surface Transportation Program (STP) Large Urban – Attributable
- 8.3 126.96.36.199 Surface Transportation Program (STP) Small Urban – Non-Attributable
- 8.4 188.8.131.52 Surface Transportation Program (STP) – Enhancement
- 8.5 184.108.40.206 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)
- 8.6 220.127.116.11 Safe Routes to School (SRTS)
- 8.7 18.104.22.168 Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP)
- 8.8 22.214.171.124 Scenic Byways
- 8.9 126.96.36.199 Earmarks/Discretionary (Federal Awards)
- 8.10 188.8.131.52 Bridge Engineering Assistance Program (BEAP)
- 8.10.1 184.108.40.206.1 Purpose
- 8.10.2 220.127.116.11.2 Personnel
- 8.10.3 18.104.22.168.3 Administration
- 8.10.4 22.214.171.124.4 Funding and Authorized Costs
- 8.10.5 126.96.36.199.5 General Process for a BEAP Study
- 8.10.6 188.8.131.52.6 Local Public Agency Responsibilities
- 8.10.7 184.108.40.206.7 Consultant Responsibilities
- 8.10.8 220.127.116.11.8 MoDOT District Responsibilities
- 8.10.9 18.104.22.168.9 MoDOT Bridge Division Responsibilities
- 8.11 22.214.171.124 Traffic Engineering Assistance Program (TEAP)
- 8.11.1 126.96.36.199.1 Introduction
- 8.11.2 188.8.131.52.2 Purpose
- 8.11.3 184.108.40.206.3 Eligibility and Project Selection
- 8.11.4 220.127.116.11.4 TEAP Process and Timeline
- 8.11.5 18.104.22.168.5 Funding
- 8.11.6 22.214.171.124.6 Administration
- 8.11.7 126.96.36.199.7 Engineering Consultants
- 8.11.8 188.8.131.52.8 Responsibilities
- 9 136.3.9 Local Match Guidelines
- 10 136.3.10 Bridge Soft Match Credit
- 10.1 184.108.40.206 Background
- 10.2 220.127.116.11 Project Eligibility
- 10.3 18.104.22.168 Eligible Costs for Bridge Soft Match Credit
- 10.4 22.214.171.124 Final Design
- 10.5 126.96.36.199 Construction Letting
- 10.6 188.8.131.52 Construction
- 10.7 184.108.40.206 Request for Credit Submittal
- 10.8 220.127.116.11 Use of Bridge Soft Match Credit
- 11 136.3.11 Other Federal Funding Used as Match
- 12 136.3.12 Federal-aid Participation for Local Work
- 12.1 18.104.22.168 Introduction
- 12.2 22.214.171.124 Funding Obligation
- 12.3 126.96.36.199 Federal-aid Participation for In-House Services
- 12.4 188.8.131.52 Federal-aid Participation for Construction by Local Agency Forces
- 13 136.3.13 Agreements
- 14 136.3.14 Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA)
- 15 136.3.15 Reimbursement and Auditing
- 16 136.3.16 Key Submittals/Requirements
- 17 136.3.17 Emergency Relief
Using federal funding for transportation projects is a complex process. This chapter describes the funding programs, processes, documents, and approvals necessary for programming and obtaining federal funds through MoDOT. If an LPA intends to seek federal funds for any phase of a project, it must be programmed as a federal-aid project from its inception; all phases of the project must be developed in compliance with federal law. Federal funds also include discretionary or demonstration funds (earmarks). Projects not programmed as federal-aid will not be processed through MoDOT or FHWA.
We encourage you to refer to the MoDOT district contact list to find the appropriate representative to assist you with this process.
136.3.2 Federal Aid for Local Public Agencies
Federal-aid transportation funds are authorized by Congress to assist the states and LPAs in maintaining and reconstructing roads and bridges on eligible federal-aid roadway routes and for other special purpose programs and projects. Federal funds are normally apportioned at the beginning of every federal fiscal year (October 1st). MoDOT will then allocate federal funds to each of the different federal-aid programs. All federal funds remain available for three (3) years after the close of the fiscal year in which they were authorized. Unused funds may be withdrawn by MoDOT to make other arrangements for their expenditure. This may be necessary in order to prevent loss of the funds through statutory lapse. FHWA is a reimbursable agency which means that the LPA incurs the costs initially (after receiving the FHWA authorization) and then will be reimbursed by FHWA once the proper billing/invoice is submitted by MoDOT.
136.3.3 Finding Appropriate Funds
Finding the appropriate funds for an LPA project is dependent on federal-aid eligibility requirements, which are provided for each program in EPG 136.3.8.
136.3.4 Project Selection and Programming
Projects that are being contemplated on MoDOT right of way must be reviewed and approved by the appropriate MoDOT district prior to project selection and programming.
The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1987 provides that reports, surveys, schedules and lists or data compiled for the purpose of developing highway safety improvements shall not be admitted into evidence in federal or state courts.
Project selection and programming is dependent on program requirements and whether the LPA is located within an MPO boundary. Specific information is provided for each program in EPG 136.3.8.
Federal law requires each state to develop a State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), listing all regionally significant projects, along with their anticipated costs and funding sources that are planned for the upcoming four (4) years. The STIP is developed annually by MoDOT’s Transportation Planning Division in cooperation with other MoDOT divisions, the Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and other affected federal, state and LPA entities. All federally funded projects must be identified in the STIP for the funding to be authorized and released for the project. MoDOT will work with all LPAs to ensure every new or current project gets listed in the STIP.
Each MPO must develop a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for projects that fall within their metropolitan area. MoDOT includes these TIPs by reference in their STIP. LPAs must have their road, trail and bridge projects referenced in the TIP of the MPO for their region.
For each LPA outside an MPO, the STIP will be developed in consultation between MoDOT and the LPAs with responsibility for transportation projects using MoDOT processes. Federal law also requires that MoDOT and the MPOs provide citizens, affected public agencies, representatives of transportation agency employees, representatives of users of public transit and other interested parties with a reasonable opportunity to comment on the proposed STIP and TIP.
136.3.6 Obligation of Funds
An obligation is a commitment by the federal government to reimburse MoDOT for the federal share of a project’s eligible cost. This commitment occurs at each phase of the project and prior to advancing to the next phase. Obligated funds are considered “used” and, therefore, are unavailable for other purposes even though no cash has been transferred.
Federal aid transportation projects are developed by completing work in the following distinct work phases:
- 1. Preliminary Engineering (PE)
- 2. Right of Way (ROW)
- 3. Utilities, if applicable
- 4. Construction
Each new work phase requires FHWA to: 1) approve obligation of funds, 2) authorize work in that phase to begin, and 3) MoDOT to issue a notice-to-proceed to the LPA.
It is MoDOT’s responsibility to request obligation of funds. It is FHWA’s responsibility to authorize the reimbursement of eligible expenses. When a federal authorization date for a specific phase is given, a notice-to-proceed is issued by MoDOT to the LPA. This authorization date is the day on which eligible work phase expenses can begin to be incurred.
MoDOT approval of an executed project program agreement shall not be considered a general “Notice-to-Proceed” for the entire project. The LPA must have a written Notice-to-Proceed from MoDOT prior to the performance of each new federal phase of work.
It is important to understand that the obligation of funds to the work phase does not automatically make expenses for that phase eligible for federal-aid. For project costs to remain eligible, LPAs must follow all federal and state regulations and requirements.
Any expenses incurred in a work phase prior to the authorization of federal funds will not be eligible for federal reimbursement.
136.3.7 Reasonable Progress Policy
The Reasonable Progress policy ensures the State of Missouri is getting the maximum benefit of its federal transportation funds. The policy has two objectives: (1) ensure that federal funds will be programmed for a project within one year of the funds being allocated by MoDOT; (2) ensure that once a project is programmed, it will be constructed.
TMAs with a Reasonable Progress Policy in place will be exempt from MoDOT’s Reasonable Progress Policy. However, the TMAs federal fiscal year ending balance will not be allowed to exceed a total of three years of allocation for that TMA. Any funds over the three-year allocation will be reprogrammed in the TMA area at the discretion of MoDOT and the TMA.
The time frames shown represent maximum expected times for implementation approvals and concurrences; schedules will vary depending on project type. Actual progress towards implementation will be measured against the schedule submitted by the LPA.
|Project Development/Implementation Schedule|
|Phase||Maximum Cumulative Time Frame||Funds Obligated?|
|1||Allocation of Funds||0 months||No|
|2||Project Programming 1, 2||3 months||No|
|3||Engineering Services Contract Approval||6 months||Yes|
|4||Preliminary and Right of Way Plans Submittal (if applicable)||12 months||Yes|
|5||Plans, Specifications & Estimate (PS & E) Submittal||18 months||No|
|6||Plans, Specifications & Estimate (PS & E) Approval||20 months||Yes|
|7||Construction Contract Award||23 months||Modified|
|8||Final Certification/Project Closeout 3||Variable||Modified (as needed)|
|1 The completion of the Project Programming phase is defined by submitting the approved project’s programming data form to MoDOT and the project receiving a federal project number from MoDOT.|
|2 The evaluation of environmental and cultural impacts on the project must begin immediately after Preliminary Engineering (PE) authorization. The LPA must submit Fig. 136.6.4 LPA Request for Environmental Review (RER) to the MoDOT district contact within 60 days of preliminary engineering (PE) authorization for all federal-aid projects as discussed in EPG 136.6 Environmental and Cultural Requirements.|
|3 The time lapse between construction contract award and project closeout will depend on project type. Final certifications as discussed in EPG 136.11 Local Public Agency Construction must be submitted to the appropriate MoDOT district representative 60 days after final inspection.|
Exceptions to the Project Development/Implementation Schedule will be identified in agreements, as necessary.
184.108.40.206 Verification of Reasonable Progress
For all federal-aid funds, “reasonable progress” shall have been made if a project has been programmed within one year of funding allocation. Verifiable steps toward achieving reasonable progress shall include submittal of all required documents to the appropriate MoDOT district office, entering into an Engineering Services Contract (if retaining outside engineering services) and initiation of the development of preliminary plans.
The development of right of way, utility and railroad plans, if required, should be concurrent with preliminary plan development. The authorization to proceed with right of way negotiations should begin once MoDOT approves right of way plans. The award of the construction contract should occur no later than six months after the plans, specifications and estimate approval.
220.127.116.11 Progress Invoices
The LPA must submit invoices for reimbursement of costs incurred as the work progresses. The invoices may not be submitted more than once every two weeks. Progress invoices must be submitted monthly. The final invoice must be submitted within 30 days of final acceptance. The LPA may use either of the following alternate methods of seeking progress payments:
- 1. the LPA pays the contractor/consultant for work performed and then submits a progress invoice for reimbursement; or
- 2. the LPA prepares the pay estimate for work performed and monies due the contractor/consultant. This estimate is placed in line for payment under the LPA’s normal payment procedure, and at the same time, the LPA submits a progress invoice to MoDOT. If the LPA adopts this method, it must develop cash management procedures to ensure payment is made to the contractor/consultant within two (2) business days of receipt of funds from MoDOT. Failure to disburse the funds promptly will result in a violation of federal cash management provisions and may result in an interest penalty assessment against the funds.
Whichever of the above methods is used, the state will expedite reimbursement back to the LPA as quickly as possible. It is estimated that the average length of time from invoice submittal to receipt of federal reimbursement will be about 20 working days. An LPA cannot withhold or make payment to a contractor/consultant contingent upon "reimbursement" of progress invoices.
The invoice shall be based on the total incurred costs, provided that no nonparticipating costs are involved. The invoice may include material allowance, the payment for which is subject to the approval or disapproval of MoDOT.
If nonparticipating costs are involved, it will be necessary for the LPA to include on each invoice an itemization of nonparticipating charges incurred to date and to deduct them from the total incurred cost of the project. If nonparticipating costs are involved in the project but not yet paid, a statement by the LPA to that effect will suffice.
Consultant services invoices (Fig 136.4.10) must be used when submitting for reimbursement from MoDOT. This can be supplemented with Fig. 136.3.18 but is not required. For construction invoices (Fig. 136.11.14 and Fig. 136.11.15) can be used as an example invoice. A form resembling Fig 136.3.18 must accompany the construction invoice when submitting construction invoices. Items not applicable to the project may be omitted. Special items peculiar to that project should be added. See EPG 136.4 Consultant Selection and Consultant Contract Management for more information on consultant invoicing and EPG 136.11 Local Public Agency Construction for more information on construction invoicing.
Two copies of the progress invoice shall be submitted by the LPA. Invoices shall be accompanied by one copy of the supporting details indicating the units for which payment is allowed, the unit price for each item and total price for each item. MoDOT personnel may request additional documentation to support the costs billed on the progress invoice to obtain assurance that the costs are reasonable and allowable. Such documentation may include, but not be limited to, detailed engineering invoices, contractor pay estimates, expense reports, equipment usage logs, payroll information, timesheets, materials or other vendor invoices, and other documentation as needed. The LPA shall also submit two copies of a request for payment of the invoice. If the invoice is submitted on the LPA’s letterhead and signed by an authorized LPA official, the letter requesting payment may be omitted.
18.104.22.168 Prompt Payment Policy
The Prompt Payment policy ensures that LPAs make progress payments to vendors (consultants, contractors, etc.) in a timely manner as work progresses. The policy has two objectives: (1) ensure that vendors are paid within at least two months of the date on the vendor invoice; (2) ensure the LPA has adequate financial procedures in place to pay vendors in a timely manner.
22.214.171.124.1 State Law
The State of Missouri, in section 34.057 RsMO, requires public owners of public works contracts to make progress payments to the contractor on at least a monthly basis as the work progresses, or, on a lump sum basis according to the terms of the lump sum contract. The payment will be based upon monthly estimates prepared by the contractor and approved by the project architect or engineer. This requirement applies to ALL projects in Missouri whether it contains federal funds or not. This law also discusses retainage of up to five percent of the total contract, but retainage is not allowed to be automatically applied on federal aid projects without a specific project reason per EPG 126.96.36.199.2.1 Retainage. Keep in mind that federal laws supersede state laws if the project has federal funding.
188.8.131.52.2 Verification of Prompt Payment
The LPA must submit invoices for reimbursement of costs incurred as the work progresses per EPG 184.108.40.206 Progress Invoices. The invoices may not be submitted more than once every two weeks.
Progress invoices submitted to MoDOT for reimbursement more than thirty (30) calendar days after the date of the vendor invoice shall also include documentation that the vendor was paid in full for the work identified in the progress invoice. Examples of proof of payment may include a letter or e-mail from the vendor, lien waiver or copies of reimbursement checks. Reimbursement will not be made on these submittals until proof of payment is provided.
Progress invoices submitted to MoDOT for reimbursement within thirty (30) calendar days of the date on the vendor invoice will be processed for reimbursement without proof of payment to the vendor. If the LPA has not paid the vendor prior to receiving reimbursement, the LPA must pay the vendor within two (2) business days of receipt of funds from MoDOT.
220.127.116.11 Policy Enforcement
If a project falls six months behind schedule at any point in its development, without a written explanation provided by the LPA and approved by MoDOT, the LPA and/or MPO will be contacted by MoDOT requesting information as to the cause of the delays. A letter will notify the LPA of the schedule lapse and the possible implications of further delays. The LPA and/or MPO will be required to reply in writing within 30 days of the letter date as to the project status and provide a revised timeline for the project. The LPA will be allowed to reschedule a project one time after MoDOT has programmed a project. Any shifts in subsequent phases of a project caused by that rescheduling (if identified at the time of the rescheduling) will not be considered a separate change.
If a project falls one year behind the Project Development/Implementation Schedule at any phase, MoDOT will notify the LPA and/or MPO of the schedule lapse by letter. The notification will serve as a final notice, giving the LPA an opportunity to respond to the situation before MoDOT takes action. Information about the project will be submitted to MoDOT within 30 days of the letter date. The information will include:
- 1. Project status,
- 2. Current phase of project implementation, and
- 3. Funds obligated and spent on the project.
Actions taken by MoDOT may include removal of the project, which, per federal requirements, would require the LPA to repay any federal funds spent on the project. The MPO and MoDOT will make the ultimate decision regarding the disposition of each project.
It is not the responsibility of MoDOT to keep the LPA informed as to the status of the project. The LPA will keep MoDOT informed as to any delays and/or unforeseen conditions that may hinder the project’s progress. Failure to provide the required documentation will cause the project to be withdrawn and the funds redistributed at the discretion of MoDOT or the MPO. Federal regulations require the LPA to repay any federal funds spent on a cancelled project. The LPA would be required to repay these funds prior to the programming of any future projects. In addition, LPAs failing to fulfill the obligations as stated in the contract agreement or showing reasonable progress for any project will not be allowed to request future project funds for a minimum period of one year, and then only with the approval of MoDOT.
Prior to incurring costs for any survey, design or other work against any federal-aid project, the project must first be approved and programmed. Programming of all projects will be initiated by the LPA by submitting a location map, Fig. 136.3.1 Programming Data Form and a scope of engineering services (if available) to MoDOT. LPAs that are in the St. Louis MPO may submit their TIP application in place of the Programming Data Form.
The programming data form requires an estimate of total project costs for which federal participation is desired and the source of local match if applicable. LPAs that are in a MPO must include the TIP Number. The LPA must submit pictures of existing bridge structures for projects that include replacement or repair of existing bridge structures or low water crossings.
Warrants for traffic signals, if applicable, shall be checked by the LPA at the time program information is submitted. Signal installation should not be programmed if current traffic conditions do not warrant as required by the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).
MoDOT will obtain the necessary input from both the Regional Planning Commission (RPC) and the State Clearinghouse under the Missouri State and Local Review Process. For any project located within the urbanized limits of one of the MPOs (St. Louis, Kansas City, Columbia, Jefferson City, Joplin, St. Joseph or Springfield), the LPA shall ensure that the project is included in the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).
After the project has been reviewed for eligibility, the LPA will be notified when they can begin preliminary engineering. MoDOT will also provide the LPA with a project number.
If any work is to be performed by a consultant, it will also be necessary to obtain approval of the contract between the LPA and the consultant before work is eligible for federal reimbursement. Any work performed before the federal obligation date will not be eligible for reimbursement. MoDOT will notify the LPA when preliminary engineering authorization has been approved. If the LPA will be performing their own preliminary engineering and would like to receive federal reimbursement, they must submit a cost estimate to MoDOT for review and approval (refer to EPG 18.104.22.168 Federal-aid Participation for In-House Services).
Preliminary engineering authorization will enable the LPA to receive reimbursement for charges incurred for preliminary engineering and miscellaneous right of way charges, such as title search and preliminary right of way estimates necessary to determine a proper location and design. Work performed by a consulting engineer requires prior approval of the consultant contract by MoDOT (refer to EPG 136.4 Consultant Selection and Consultant Contract Management). Approvals for right of way acquisition must be acquired separately. Right of way acquisition should be in accordance with EPG 136.8 Local Public Agency Land Acquisition.
The LPA must submit Fig. 136.6.4 LPA Request for Environmental Review (RER) to the MoDOT district contact within 60 days of preliminary engineering (PE) authorization for all federal-aid projects. The RER form will be used to determine the NEPA classification for the project and if any further environmental documentation will be required. If the project does not qualify for a categorical exclusion classification, additional environmental documentation will be required (refer to EPG 136.6 Environmental and Cultural Requirements).
22.214.171.124 Highway Bridge Program (BRO & BRM)
126.96.36.199.1 Background and Funding
The Highway Bridge Program (HBP) has been authorized for public bridges beginning with Fiscal Year 1979. Funds are normally apportioned on or about October 1, each year. Funds are available for three years after the close of the fiscal year for which they were authorized. Unused funds may be withdrawn by MoDOT to make other arrangements for their expenditure. This is necessary in order to prevent loss of the funds through statutory lapse.
Federal funds are available to finance up to 80% of the eligible project cost, but may be increased with the use of credit earned from replacing an eligible bridge that is not on the federal-aid system with their own funds. Otherwise, it will be necessary for the LPA to provide the necessary matching funds. The fair market value of donated right of way (after March 1987) may be credited to the LPA's matching share with the amount not to exceed the LPA's share. For further details regarding donated right of way, refer to EPG 136.8 Local Public Agency Land Acquisition or contact the MoDOT district representative. Refer to EPG 136.3.9 Local Match Guidelines for additional information.
If an LPA replaces or rehabilitates an eligible bridge that is not on the federal aid system with their own funds, they may receive a credit that can be applied to the non-federal share on other federal aid bridge projects. Details are included in EPG 136.3.10 Bridge Soft Match Credit.
The HBP Program is intended for bridge rehabilitation and replacement and only a minimal amount of approach roadway construction will be allowed. Eligible limits may include reasonable approach roadway necessary to connect to the existing road and to return the new grade to normal ground.
The funds will be administered according to the following policies:
- 1. The current transportation bill requires that at least 15% of the state's total bridge appropriation in fiscal year 2009 be allocated for use on off-system bridges (BRO). The Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission approve the amount of funds allocated to this program. Off-system bridges are bridges that are on roads that are functionally classified as a local road or street and rural minor collectors.
- 2. BRO funds allocated to the counties will be based on the ratio of the replacement cost of the square footage of deficient bridge deck in the county to the replacement cost of the square footage of deficient bridge deck in all counties of the state.
- 3. BRO funds may be programmed by counties for future projects. If the county does not have a sufficient balance of off-system bridge funds, they may borrow up to three years of future allocations for preliminary engineering or one year of future allocation for construction costs.
- 4. The Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission approves the amount of funds allocated to the Kansas City, Springfield and St. Louis TMAs and other cities with an urban cluster population of greater than 5,000 for use on on-system bridges (BRM). On-system bridges are bridges that are on roads that are functionally classified as urban collectors, rural major collectors, and arterials. Funds for cities with an urban cluster population between 5,000 and 200,000 are distributed on a selection process which is conducted annually. The amount of money programmed will be the maximum amount the city will receive. Any costs over the programmed amount will be funded with the city's allocated STP funds or with local funds.
- 5. On-System Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (BRM) fund balances in excess of three years of annual allocations for Transportation Management Areas (TMAs) will lapse on September 30, 2009, and on September 30th of each year thereafter. Transportation improvements within the TMA will use the lapsed funds.
There are two types of projects that can be evaluated to see if exceptions to these guidelines should be made. Projects will be evaluated on an individual basis to see if any exceptions are warranted.
- 1. Emergency Project - When a bridge has fallen down or washed out and is essential for travel in the area, MoDOT will consider allowing the county to exceed its amount of available funds by more than the guidelines.
- 2. County Receives Small Allocation - Some counties do not receive enough allocation to reasonably finance a bridge project. Some allowance will be made for these counties to exceed the guidelines so they can participate in the program.
188.8.131.52.2 Project Eligibility and Selection
Project selection is the prerogative of the LPA. MoDOT personnel will be available to advise and assist in project estimating and selection, if desired. LPAs located within an MPO boundary are required to submit their project selection to the MPO for review and approval. The following listing includes the type of eligible bridge projects that may be selected by the LPA:
- 1. Replacement or full rehabilitation of eligible structures from MoDOT's eligible bridge list.
- 2. Seismic retrofitting of deficient as well as non-deficient bridges is eligible for funding. The design of seismic improvements or retrofits shall follow applicable AASHTO and current FHWA publication guidelines. The reasonable costs of associated structural repairs, which are considered necessary or economically prudent for properly accomplishing the seismic retrofit are also considered to be participating.
- 3. Projects involving the application of paint overcoat systems, or the complete blast cleaning and repainting of the structural steel are considered to be eligible. The reasonable costs of structural repairs considered necessary or economically prudent to properly accomplish the repainting or overcoat project are considered to be participating.
- 4. Installation of scour countermeasures to protect an existing bridge is eligible for funding.
- 5. Preventative maintenance activities may be eligible for funding if the LPA has in place a systematic process such as a Bridge Management System which demonstrates the cost effectiveness of extending the service life of their bridges. This systematic process must previously have been reviewed and approved by FHWA. Preventative maintenance activities include those that preserve bridge components and extend the useful service life of the bridge. These activities would typically be performed on a bridge in good condition in order to keep it in good condition. Increasing the capacity of a structure is not considered a preventative maintenance activity. Although not all inclusive, below are the two basic types of preventative maintenance and examples of acceptable activities:
- a. Systematic Servicing Bridges on a Scheduled Basis: Generally includes cleaning decks; beam seats, beam caps and salt splash zones; cleaning drainage systems; cleaning expansion joints; cleaning and lubricating expansion bearing assemblies; sealing concrete decks or substructure elements.
- b. As Needed Preventative Maintenance: Generally includes resealing expansion joints; spot painting of steel members; minor structural repairs, removing debris from channel; replace wearing surface; extending or enlarging deck drains.
- 6. Projects involving the application of calcium magnesium acetate, sodium acetate/format, or other environmentally acceptable, minimally corrosive anti-icing and de-icing compositions to a bridge are considered to be eligible for structures on MoDOT’s eligible bridge list.
- The bridge to be replaced or rehabilitated must be on MoDOT's eligible list for funding. The MoDOT eligible list is compiled from the most recent submittal of Missouri’s National Bridge Inventory data to FHWA. MoDOT's eligible list will indicate whether the bridge is considered eligible for replacement (full funding) or only rehabilitation (partial funding), based on the existing inventory and inspection data. If the existing structure is currently eligible for rehabilitation only and the LPA elects to replace the structure, the amount of eligible federal funding will be limited to that which will not exceed the rehabilitation cost estimate unless appropriate justification is provided by the LPA that a new structure represents the best value. If the rehabilitation cost is at least 68% of the replacement costs, then it can generally be assumed that the new replacement structure will provide a better value than the rehabilitation of the existing structure. The proposed rehabilitation work should eliminate the items that caused the bridge to be identified as deficient unless the proposed deficient item may remain based on MoDOT’s approval. Refer to EPG 136.1 General and EPG 184.108.40.206 Structures for additional information. Ratings for bridges within the LPA will be furnished by the state indicating whether the bridge is eligible for replacement or rehabilitation.
- Under certain conditions, it may be possible to eliminate a deficient bridge and to provide the desired service by constructing roadway instead of a new bridge. Such projects will generally be eligible. A definite determination can be obtained if the LPA submits a schematic sketch showing the factors involved.
- The LPA may also use their allocation of HBP funds to replace existing low water crossings at locations that are not included on the bridge inventory. The low water crossing must be replaced with a new bridge meeting the guidelines and requirements provided in EPG 136.1 General and EPG 220.127.116.11 Structures. Section 123(d) of the 1987 Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act (STURAA) allows for the use of HBP funds to construct a new bridge to replace low water crossings that are not classified as bridges and are therefore not eligible to be added to the National Bridge inventory. The interpretation is that the replacement structure should not only meet the traditional definition of a bridge (20 ft. length, etc.) but should also improve the overtopping frequency of the facility, thus improving safety.
- For bridge rehabilitation and replacement projects, the bridge site will not be eligible for selection to use HBP funding if the structure was replaced or had a major rehabilitation within 10 years of the planned new construction date. The FHWA 10-year rule applies regardless of the source of funds (local, state, federal, etc.) that were used to replace or reconstruct the bridge.
18.104.22.168.3 Project Programming
Once a bridge has been selected for programming, the LPA should contact the MoDOT Representative to initiate project programming by completing a Fig. 136.3.1 Programming Data Form. LPAs that are in the St. Louis MPO may submit their TIP application in place of the Programming Data Form. This form, with a letter signed by the LPA's officials requesting the project to be programmed, will initiate a series of checks by MoDOT to review eligibility.
22.214.171.124 Surface Transportation Program (STP) Large Urban – Attributable
126.96.36.199.1 Background and Funding
The STP-Urban Program has been authorized for all cities with a population of over 5,000 beginning with Fiscal Year 1974. Legislation authorizes the expenditure of federal funds for highway related construction and improvements on federal-aid routes and bridges that are on or off the federal aid system within the approved urban and urbanized boundaries. In MPOs designated as Transportation Management Areas (TMAs), the funds may be used for projects anywhere within the metropolitan planning area. The term "urbanized area" means an area so designated by the Bureau of Census having an urban cluster population of 50,000 or more with boundaries to be fixed by responsible state and local officials in cooperation with each other and subject to approval of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Such boundaries shall as a minimum encompass the entire corporate limits of the urban area.
Funds are normally apportioned on or about October 1 each year. Funds are available for three years after the close of the fiscal year for which they were authorized. Unused funds may be withdrawn by MoDOT to make other arrangements for their expenditure. This is necessary in order to prevent loss of the funds through statutory lapse.
Funds are usually authorized by Congress for several years under a single transportation bill, but are apportioned annually for a single year to the state. In Kansas City, Springfield and St. Louis, the distribution of funds will be determined by the TMA through coordination with the LPAs within the TMA boundary.
Federal funds are available to finance up to 80% of eligible project costs. It will be necessary for the LPA to provide the necessary matching funds. Federal funds from other federal agencies cannot be used to match STP-Urban funds, except as defined EPG 136.3.11 Other Federal Funding Used as Match.
The funds will be administered according to the following policies:
- 1. The current transportation bill specifically designates federal funds for use within the Kansas City, Springfield and St. Louis Metropolitan Areas. These funds are referred to as "attributable funds" and are allocated by MoDOT to the respective TMAs.
- 2. Surface Transportation Program (STP) Large Urban – Attributable fund balances in excess of three years of annual allocations for Transportation Management Areas (TMAs) will lapse on September 30, 2009, and on September 30th of each year thereafter. Transportation improvements within the TMA will use the lapsed funds.
188.8.131.52.2 Project Eligibility and Selection
For projects involving roadway improvements to be eligible for selection under the STP-Urban program, the [route must be functionally classified as an urban collector, rural major collector, arterial or expressway. Bridges meeting the eligibility requirements discussed below are not restricted to these routes and may be located on any public road. However, if the bridge is located on a route not on the federal-aid system, federal funding for roadway improvements will be limited to the attainable touchdown point as discussed for Highway Bridge Program (HBP) funding.
Projects for improvements that utilize STP-Urban Funds are to be selected by the appropriate LPA officials with the concurrence of MoDOT. LPAs located within an MPO boundary are required to submit their project selection to the MPO. STP-Urban funding should be programmed for projects that will benefit the area within the urban cluster boundary. Prior to submitting the projects to MoDOT for programming, the LPA should submit a location sketch of the proposed project and ensure that the route has the proper functional classification. For cities that are part of a MPO, the project must be on the TIP.
Types of projects may include new construction, reconstruction and upgrading. Projects classified as maintenance are not permitted. Resurfacing of existing streets is generally permissible, both to restore a smooth riding surface or to increase the load carrying capabilities of the street. The design of pavement rehabilitation projects shall provide a performance period of at least five years. Patching, minor pavement repairs, undersealing, etc., are permitted only as a necessary part of restoration for resurfacing. Funds may be used to change from mercury vapor luminaries to high pressure sodium vapor luminaries as an energy conserving measure.
The following listing indicates the categories of bridge improvement projects considered eligible to be selected for STP-Urban funding:
- 1. Replacement, rehabilitation addressing all bridge deficiencies, or partial rehabilitation for deficient bridges from MoDOT's eligible list for HBP funding.
- 2. Seismic Retrofitting as described in EPG 184.108.40.206 Highway Bridge Program (BRO & BRM). Painting structures as described in EPG 220.127.116.11 Highway Bridge Program (BRO & BRM).
- 3. Complete upgrading of traffic safety railing features for a bridge as determined appropriate by the engineer of record and LPA based on the guidelines provided in EPG 18.104.22.168 Structures. Project must address safety of both bridge railing and related approach roadway guardrail features.
- 4. Projects to correct identified operational and/or condition problems with any existing bridge are generally eligible.
- 5. Replacement of existing cross-roadway drainage features not on the bridge inventory with an appropriate replacement structure or bridge (available for routes on the federal-aid system).
- 6. New bridge construction required for construction of new approved corridors of federal-aid system routes.
- 7. Widening of any bridge to accommodate the widening and upgrading of routes on the federal aid system.
STP-Urban funds may be used for the construction of preferential bus lanes, turnouts and loading facilities for buses and fringe and corridor transportation parking facilities. The construction of parking facilities to replace on-street parking is eligible in areas where the improvement of the street would not be possible without removing on-street parking and where insufficient off-street parking exists. Funds may be used to acquire vans for vanpool demonstration projects. However, this is permitted on a loan basis only and the funds must be repaid through user revenues.
The construction of bicycle trails and pedestrian walkways on the highway right of way is eligible for federal participation, either as an integral part of a construction project or as an independent project and is not subject to functional classification requirements. For further information, refer to EPG 641 Bicycle Facilities and EPG 642 Pedestrian Facilities.
For additional guidance on eligible activities for STP funds, refer to FHWA's MAP-21 Fact Sheet.
22.214.171.124.3 Project Programming
126.96.36.199 Surface Transportation Program (STP) Small Urban – Non-Attributable
188.8.131.52.1 Background and Funding
The STP-Urban Program has been authorized for all cities with a population of over 5,000 beginning with Fiscal Year 1974. Legislation authorizes the expenditure of federal funds for highway related construction and improvements on on-system routes and bridges that are on or off the federal aid system within the approved urban and urbanized boundaries. The term "urbanized area" means an area so designated by the Bureau of Census having an urban cluster population of 50,000 or more with boundaries to be fixed by responsible state and local officials in cooperation with each other and subject to approval of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Such boundaries shall as a minimum encompass the entire corporate limits of the urban area.
Funds are usually authorized by Congress for several years under a single transportation bill, but are apportioned annually for a single year to the state. Cities outside the three TMAs will be permitted to utilize funds they expect to receive for the number of years for which funds are authorized in the current transportation bill, provided statewide balances permit.
The funds will be administered according to the following policies:
- 1. A share of the STP-Urban funds is allocated to cities with an urban cluster population between 5,000 and 200,000. These funds are referred to as "non-attributable funds". The Missouri Highway and Transportation Commission approves the amount of STP-Urban funds allocated to this program. These funds will be available to the various recipients on a first-ready, first-served basis with the amount available to any city being up to the total amount estimated to receive during the current Transportation bill, provided statewide balances permit.
- 2. Surface Transportation Program (STP) Small Urban – Non-Attributable fund balances in excess of six years of annual allocations for cities with an urban cluster population between 5,000 and 200,000 will lapse on September 30, 2009, and on September 30th of each year thereafter. Transportation improvements throughout the state will use the lapsed funds.
184.108.40.206.2 Project Eligibility and Selection
For projects involving roadway improvements to be eligible for selection under the STP-Urban program, the route must be functionally classified as an urban collector, rural major collector, arterial or expressway. Bridges meeting the eligibility requirements discussed below are not restricted to these routes and may be located on any public road. However, if the bridge is located on a route not on the federal-aid system, federal funding for roadway improvements will be limited to the attainable touchdown point as discussed for Highway Bridge Program (HBP) funding.
Projects for improvements that utilize STP-Urban Funds are to be selected by the appropriate LPA officials with the concurrence of MoDOT. LPAs located within an MPO boundary are required to submit their project selection to the MPO. STP-Urban funding should be programmed for projects that will benefit the area within the urban cluster boundary.
Prior to submitting the projects to MoDOT for programming, the LPA should submit a location sketch of the proposed project and ensure that the route has the proper functional classification. For cities that are part of a MPO, the project must be on the TIP.
The construction of bicycle trails and pedestrian walkways on the highway right of way is eligible for federal participation, either as an integral part of a construction project or as an independent project. For further information, refer to EPG 641 Bicycle Facilities and EPG 642 Pedestrian Facilities.
For additional guidance on eligible activities for STP funds, refer to FHWA's MAP-21 Fact Sheet.
220.127.116.11.3 Project Programming
18.104.22.168 Surface Transportation Program (STP) – Enhancement
22.214.171.124.1 Background and Funding
The STP-Enhancement Program offered states different options to enhance their transportation system. All levels of government had the opportunity to plan and develop intermodal transportation systems (various forms of transportation that are integrated and interconnected) tailored to their specific needs. Federal requirements concerning STP Enhancements are quite extensive. For information on the selection and programming of a Transportation Enhancement project please see A Guide to Transportation Enhancements. At least 10% of the Surface Transportation Program funds were allocated towards transportation enhancement activities.
Transportation enhancement activities can be stand-alone projects or can be implemented as part of an on-going transportation project. In either case, the project must relate to the intermodal transportation system in terms of function, proximity, or impact. For example, an independent bike path is a functional component of the intermodal transportation system. Removal of outdoor advertising within an individual’s view of a highway is justified in light of its proximity. Retrofitting an existing highway by creating a wetland to filter runoff from the highway would qualify based on the impact of the highway in terms of water pollution.
Up to 80% of a transportation enhancement project can be financed with federal STP funds. The LPA is required to match the project with at least 20%. Refer to EPG 136.3.9 Local Match Guidelines for local match guidelines for enhancement projects.
126.96.36.199.2 Project Eligibility and Selection
Enhancement projects must be projects that are over and above what is considered routine construction or maintenance. Transportation enhancement funds may be used in the following categories:
- 1. Pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
- 2. Pedestrian and bicycle safety and education activities.
- 3. Acquisition of scenic easements and scenic or historic sites including historic battlefields.
- 4. Scenic or historic highway programs including the provision of tourist and welcome center facilities.
- 5. Landscaping and other scenic beautification.
- 6. Historic preservation.
- 7. Rehabilitation and operation of historic transportation buildings, structures, or facilities including historic railroad facilities and canals.
- 8. Preservation of abandoned railroad corridors including the conversion and use thereof for pedestrian or bicycle trails.
- 9. Control and removal of outdoor advertising.
- 10. Archaeological planning and research.
- 11. Mitigation of water pollution due to highway runoff or reduce vehicle-caused wildlife mortality while maintaining habitat connectivity.
- 12. Establishment of transportation museums.
Renovation work utilizing STP Transportation Enhancement funds for bridges on a public road that will be open to vehicular traffic upon project completion are expected to follow the submittal processes for bridge rehabilitations. For information on the eligibility and selection of a Transportation Enhancement project please refer to A Guide to Transportation Enhancements.
188.8.131.52.3 Project Programming
For information on the programming of a Transportation Enhancement project please refer to A Guide to Transportation Enhancements.
184.108.40.206 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)
220.127.116.11.1 Background and Funding
The CMAQ Program was created by the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) to assist cities in attaining federal air quality guidelines. Funds are distributed to states based on weighted non-attainment and maintenance area population. Legislation authorizes the expenditure of CMAQ funds on projects that have a documented emissions reduction associated with them and are available for use only in non-attainment and maintenance areas, or as determined by federal law for ozone and particulate matter pollution. In Missouri, the CMAQ Program is limited to the Kansas City and St. Louis metropolitan areas. Typical activities include revisions and installation of traffic signals, developing transportation management systems, public transportation facilities, and activities to encourage car pooling and van pooling.
18.104.22.168.2 Project Eligibility and Selection
Projects eligible for selection using CMAQ funds must indicate that the project will have a demonstrated effect on reducing emissions.
Projects for improvements that utilize CMAQ funds are requested by the appropriate LPA officials, submitted to the MPO for selection, and if selected, added to the TIP.
For additional guidance on eligible activities for CMAQ funds, refer to FHWA's MAP-21 Fact Sheet.
22.214.171.124.3 Project Programming
126.96.36.199.3.1 Roadway Type Projects
188.8.131.52.3.2 Non-Infrastructure Projects
Prior to the purchase of any item or the charging any work against any federal-aid project, the project must first be programmed and approved. Programming of all projects will be initiated by the LPA by submitting a copy of the TIP application to MoDOT.
MoDOT will notify the LPA when project authorization has been obtained. Any work performed before the federal authorization date will not be eligible for reimbursement. If any work is to be performed by a consultant, it will also be necessary to obtain approval of the contract between the LPA and consultant before this work is eligible. Refer to EPG 136.5 Non-Infrastructure for requirements on projects that do not involve physical construction of transportation facilities.
The LPA must submit Fig. 136.5.5 LPA Request for Environmental Review – Non-Infrastructure (RER) to the MoDOT district contact within 60 days of project authorization for all federal-aid projects. The RER form will be used to determine the NEPA classification for the project and if any further environmental documentation will be required. If the project does not qualify for a categorical exclusion classification, additional environmental documentation will be required (refer to EPG 136.6 Environmental and Cultural Requirements).
184.108.40.206 Safe Routes to School (SRTS)
220.127.116.11.1 Background and Funding
The federal-aid Safe Routes to School Program (SRTS) was created by SAFETEA-LU. Funds were distributed to states based on total school enrollment in primary and middle schools (grades K-8). The funds were available for infrastructure and non-infrastructure projects that benefit elementary and middle school children.
18.104.22.168.2 Project Eligibility and Selection
Typical infrastructure project activities include but are not limited to construction or replacement of sidewalks and cross walks or traffic flow modifications. Non-infrastructure projects may be educational activities to teach community members the rules and regulations of biking or walking in or with traffic as well as local law enforcement monitoring around the school. For information on the eligibility and selection of a SRTS project, please see Administrative Guidelines for Safe Routes to School.
22.214.171.124.3 Project Programming
For information on the programming of an SRTS project, please see Administrative Guidelines for Safe Routes to School or contact the SRTS Coordinator at hotlink.
126.96.36.199 Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP)
188.8.131.52.1 Background and Funding
MAP-21 established a new program to provide for a variety of alternative transportation projects, including many that were previously eligible activities under separately funded programs. The TAP replaces the funding from pre-MAP-21 programs including Transportation Enhancements, Recreational Trails, Safe Routes to School, and Scenic Byways, wrapping them into a single funding source.
Transportation alternative activities can be stand-alone projects or can be implemented as part of an on-going transportation project. Up to 80% of a transportation alternatives project can be financed with federal TAP funds. The LPA is required to match the project with at least 20%. Refer to EPG 136.3.9 Local Match Guidelines for local match guidelines for transportation alternatives projects.
184.108.40.206.2 Project Eligibility and Selection
Transportation alternatives projects must be projects that are over and above what is considered routine construction or maintenance. Transportation alternatives funds may be used for the following:
- Construction, planning and design of on-road and off-road trail facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists and other nonmotorized forms of transportation.
- Construction, planning and design of infrastructure-related projects and systems that will provide safe routes for non-drivers, including children, older adults and individuals with disabilities to access daily needs.
- Conversion and use of abandoned railroad corridors for trails for pedestrians, bicyclists or other nonmotorized transportation users.
- Construction of turnouts, overlooks and viewing areas.
- Community improvement activities, including:
- o inventory, control, or removal of outdoor advertising;
- o historic preservation and rehabilitation of historic transportation facilities;
- Any environmental mitigation activity, including pollution prevention and pollution abatement activities and mitigation to:
In addition to defined Transportation Alternatives (as described above), the following projects or activities are eligible:
- The recreational trails program.
- The safe routes to school program.
- Planning, designing or constructing boulevards and other roadways largely in the right-of-way of former Interstate System routes or other divided highways.
Workforce development, training and education activities are also eligible uses of TAP funds.
In general, TAP funds are administered by MoDOT. TAP funds must be obligated for eligible projects submitted by eligible entities (see below) through a competitive process. Funds suballocated to urbanized areas over 200,000 must be on the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The MPO, through a competitive process, selects the projects in consultation with MoDOT from proposed projects submitted by eligible entities. Funds suballocated to small urban areas and rural areas will be administered by MoDOT. MoDOT, through a competitive process, selects the projects from proposed projects submitted by eligible entities.
Eligible project sponsors are defined in EPG 220.127.116.11 Project Sponsor Eligibility.
18.104.22.168.3 Project Programming
For information on the programming of a Transportation Alternatives project please refer to Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) Guidance.
22.214.171.124 Scenic Byways
126.96.36.199.1 Background and Funding
The National Scenic Byways Program was created by the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). Funds were distributed to states based on competitive applications. Scenic Byways funds were available for projects on routes designated as state scenic byways.
188.8.131.52.2 Project Eligibility and Selection
Typical project activities include but are not limited to safety improvements; construction of facilities for use of pedestrians and bicyclists, such as rest areas turnouts, overlooks and interpretive facilities; access improvements to recreational areas; protection of historical and cultural resources; tourist information and marketing plans. Funding is allocated by project annually via a competitive application process. For information on the eligibility and selection of a Scenic Byway project, please visit http://www.modot.org/scenicbyways/. Table 184.108.40.206.2 lists the approved Missouri Scenic Byways.
220.127.116.11.3 Project Programming
For information on the programming of a Scenic Byway project, please visit http://www.modot.org/scenicbyways/.
18.104.22.168 Earmarks/Discretionary (Federal Awards)
22.214.171.124.1 Background and Funding
The current transportation act includes funding for Earmarks / Discretionary Programs. Some funds are subject to obligation limitation which limits the amount funds available for the project.
126.96.36.199.2 Project Eligibility and Selection
Funding is allocated by project annually via a competitive application process. Additional information can be found at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/discretionary/.
188.8.131.52.3 Project Programming
For information on the programming of an Earmarks / Discretionary project, please contact your MoDOT district representative. Additional information regarding MoDOT’s district representatives is available.
184.108.40.206 Bridge Engineering Assistance Program (BEAP)
|If you have any questions or comments regarding EPG 220.127.116.11 BEAP, please contact David Koenig at 573-526-0556 or by e-mail at David.Koenig@modot.mo.gov; or Jamey Laughlin at 573-526-5167 or by e-mail at James.Laughlin@modot.mo.gov.|
The Bridge Engineering Assistance Program (BEAP) allows local public agencies to receive engineering assistance on bridge problems when they do not have their own engineering staff to effectively evaluate and arrive at solutions for these problems.
The hydraulic and structural adequacy of the bridges on their local road system is a major concern to the local public agencies of Missouri. Local public agencies need to conduct effective bridge evaluations to determine priorities for maintenance, rehabilitation and replacements. Many of these local public agencies and their political subdivisions have neither the funds nor the engineering expertise necessary to conduct effective bridge evaluations or determine bridge maintenance and repair priorities.
As a result, the Missouri Highway and Transportation Commission has developed the BEAP program to provide Missouri’s local public agencies with the assistance necessary to study bridge engineering problems.
The services of this program are to be used for bridges on local roads that are not part of the MoDOT road system, but are under the jurisdiction of local public agencies. These services are intended to be available to evaluate definite operational or structural problems being experienced on an existing bridge, and are not intended to be used for the development of detailed plans for new bridges. BEAP program services are not intended to duplicate services already available to local public agencies thru the MoDOT district office or Bridge Division. The consultant services provided under this program are intended to maximize the availability of professional advice or services to local public agencies with minimal technician and drafting time. The BEAP program does not provide funding for construction or construction engineering services.
The BEAP program is generally limited to one study per bridge with the expectation that the local public agency would implement the recommendations from that study. Requests for additional studies for the same problem on a bridge will not be approved unless the local public agency implemented the previous recommendations but had the same or a similar problem develop again. If the previous recommendations were never implemented, the local public agency will need to provide a reasonable explanation as to why the previous recommendations were not implemented. Studies for newly developed problems on a bridge will be considered. When requesting a study, the local public agency should have the consultant address all of the operational or structural concerns that they may have for that bridge. Multiple studies on the same bridge to address issues on a “piece meal” basis will not be approved.
The structural and hydraulic engineering expertise necessary to provide this assistance to the local public agencies and their political subdivision will be provided from a pool of pre-qualified engineering consultants. The consultant firms selected for the pre-qualified pool will be required to use engineering personnel having a background that includes bridge inspection and design experience and familiarity with developing bridge maintenance priorities and low cost bridge improvements. (See Fig. 136.3.19, Current BEAP Consultant List).
The personnel utilized by the consultant shall be those that were identified in the consultant's proposal whenever the firm was being considered for inclusion on the pre-qualified listing. If the consultant desires to utilize personnel not included in their original proposal, they will need to obtain approval from the Bridge Division prior to using these people.
The local implementation of this program is under the immediate direction of MoDOT's district engineer, with coordination of the statewide consultant contract and technical policy interpretation being provided by the Bridge Division. The statewide contract is normally in effect for a three year period, after which time it may either be extended for an additional year or a new solicitation done to develop a new list of pre-approved consultants (See Fig. 136.3.21, for a sample contract).
A local public agency experiencing a bridge problem and desiring to use the services of this program need merely inform the district personnel in that particular area and/or contact an approved consultant for assistance in developing a project to address these problems. The district's authorized representative or the local public agency will discuss the problem with the consultant so that they can prepare a fee estimate and submit the BEAP Project Tracking Form for further eligibility review by the district office and Bridge Division. (For an electronic copy of this form, see Fig. 136.3.20, BEAP Project Tracking Form.)
If the project is confirmed by the Bridge Division to meet the eligibility and program cost requirements, the BEAP Project Tracking Form will be returned to the district office so that they can provide the consultant with the notice to proceed.
Upon completion of the consultant's evaluation of the bridge problem, a final copy of the report shall be sent to the local public agency, Bridge Division, and the district office. The report shall be signed and sealed by a professional engineer registered in the state of Missouri.
All announcements, printings, and advertisements shall list the Missouri Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration as program sponsors.
18.104.22.168.4 Funding and Authorized Costs
The services of the program are generally provided free of direct costs to requesting, eligible local public agencies in Missouri through the cooperation of the Missouri Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. However, local public agencies are expected to provide active assistance to the consultant during the project. Eligibility is based on the local public agency not having personnel with sufficient engineering expertise to conduct effective bridge evaluations and develop immediate structural repair procedures and details.
If a project is approved, the consultant selected by the local public agency will be reimbursed in accordance with the agreed upon hourly rates, overhead and fringe benefit rates, fixed profit percentage, and the direct non-salary costs as set forth in the contract. Direct non-salary costs submitted for reimbursement shall be well documented including a description of the item as well as the cost. When vehicle mileage is being submitted for reimbursement, the mileage rate used to determine the reimbursable amount must be the IRS mileage rate in effect at the time the work was done.
Each specific BEAP project must receive prior approval from the district office and Bridge Division. This requires that the consultant submit a BEAP Project Tracking Form to the district contact outlining the work to be performed. The BEAP Project Tracking Form shall include a total cost for the project, including personnel costs as well as direct costs. Development of the BEAP Project Tracking Form should be done based on the consultant's initial contact with the local public agency or the district office. If a project is approved, costs for travel expenses and personnel time required for one site inspection during the course of the project are normally eligible for reimbursement.
The consultant shall provide the Bridge Division with an itemized invoice for their services and the Bridge Division personnel will, upon verification of the eligible charges, authorize that payment be made to the consultant. The itemized invoice should also show the signature of the consultant. Only one invoice shall be submitted for each BEAP project. Payment to the consultant for their services will done utilizing an electronic funds transfer.
The BEAP program is funded using Technology Transfer Assistance Program funds. The amount of funding from each of these sources may vary each year. The future availability of these funds for this program is not guaranteed.
22.214.171.124.5 General Process for a BEAP Study
The local public agency identifies a bridge problem that they desire to utilize the BEAP program for. The local public agency will either directly contact one of the consultants on the pre-approved listing to discuss the bridge problem or contact the district office for information and assistance on using this program. After being notified of the bridge problem, the consultant will fill out the BEAP Project Tracking Form and submit it electronically to the district office for review. The district office will review the proposed project and then forward it to Bridge Division for their review and approval to move forward with the study. After being given the notice to proceed, the consultant will perform the study in accordance with the information provided on the BEAP Project Tracking Form. The consultant shall submit a draft electronic copy of the report to the Bridge Division and district office for review and approval. The Bridge Division will review the report, consult with the district office as needed, and provide the consultant with feedback on any desired changes to the report. Once any changes/updates to the report have been completed, a finalized copy of the report shall be submitted to the local public agency, the district office and Bridge Division. The finalized copy of the report may be submitted electronically to all of the involved parties and shall be signed and sealed by a professional engineer registered in the state of Missouri.
After the report has been reviewed and accepted, the consultant will prepare and submit a single invoice to Bridge Division for review and approval. This invoice shall be submitted within 45 days of the completion of the project. Payments to consultants for services provided under the BEAP Program will be done electronically.
126.96.36.199.6 Local Public Agency Responsibilities
The local public agency is responsible for identifying the bridge problem that they need assistance on and then initiating the request for assistance for this program either through the consultant or through the district office. When the BEAP study involves a structure that is not on the National Bridge Inventory, the local public agency shall provide the consultant with some general pictures of the structure along with a location of the structure to aid them in the development of their cost proposal. The local public agency should provide any assistance needed by the consultant during the BEAP study. Examples of the types of assistance include but are not necessarily limited to traffic control, site access, and trucks or equipment for load testing. After completion of the study, the local agency should perform the work as specified in the report and then notify the district office once this work is completed.
188.8.131.52.7 Consultant Responsibilities
The services made available under this program are intended for the review of existing bridges where definite problems exist. It is anticipated that these reviews can be performed in 60 or fewer total person hours per bridge. Time spent developing the proposed BEAP study will not be eligible for reimbursement. The consultant is allowed to perform BEAP studies in any part of the state. If the consultant has multiple office locations, it is expected that they would utilize personnel from the office closest to the bridge site so as to minimize the travel related costs for the study, including personnel time.
The general services provided by the consultant for a typical project include a single site visit to the bridge to collect information, review and analysis of conditions, and formulation of recommendations to the local public agency. The types of recommendations could include the items listed below:
- 1. Recommendations for repair of damaged elements of the bridge.
- 2. Recommendations for strengthening of deteriorated elements of the bridge.
- 3. Recommendations for strengthening of elements of the bridge to increase the load capacity of the bridge.
- 4. Recommendations for emergency repairs from flood damage.
- 5. Studies on the hydraulic adequacy of the bridge.
- 6. Recommendations on channel repair and scour mitigation or repair.
- 7. Recommendations on load posting limitations for the bridge.
- 8. Cost studies for repair or replacement alternatives for the bridge.
- 9. Recommendations on whether or not to close a bridge.
The services provided under the BEAP program shall not include the preparation of a complete design and plans for a replacement structure. When the consultant has recommended that a structure be closed because of unsafe conditions, the consultant may provide suggestions for various alternative structure types, but the actual design of a replacement structure is beyond the normal scope of a BEAP project.
As part of a BEAP Study, the consultant may recommend low-cost bridge renovations projects, and it will be acceptable in this situation for the consultant to prepare conceptual engineering sketches to illustrate any recommendations for remedial action.
It is also not intended for the BEAP program to duplicate services already normally available to local public agencies through MoDOT. MoDOT currently provides bridge inspection services through the district office for local public agency owned bridges in most parts of the state. MoDOT also provides load rating services through Bridge Division for local public agency owned bridges where the information available is sufficient enough to perform a load rating analysis.
Load posting recommendations for a BEAP study are limited to considerations involving comparisons with normal state legal loads. Evaluations for special permit or other non-legal loads are not allowed as part of a BEAP study.
Determination of load postings for bridges using proof load testing is allowed under the BEAP program for concrete bridges. Proof load testing for other types of bridges is not allowed.
Whenever load rating calculations are done as part of the scope of a BEAP study, the consultant must provide inventory and operating ratings for the HS20 design vehicle and provide a load posting recommendation for the structure. Load rating calculations must be done in accordance with current MoDOT policy, as defined in the Engineering Policy Guide.
A general review of the traffic control devices and other safety measures at the bridge site should be included as part of a BEAP study. Any recommendations for changes needed in these items should be included in the BEAP report.
184.108.40.206.8 MoDOT District Responsibilities
1. Advise the local public agencies within the district of the pre-qualified list of consultants and that they may select any of the firms on this list to perform the study.
2. Assist with or provide coordination with the local public agency.
3. Provide Bridge Division advice related to the qualifications or expertise of any engineering personnel that a local public agency may have on their staff.
4. Make decisions on the relevant bridge information needed for the project, and assist with collecting this information from the local public agency or from the appropriate area within MoDOT. Typical information provided for these projects includes inspection reports, location maps for the bridge, rating information, photos that are on file, and the most recent structure inventory and appraisal (SIA) sheet.
5. Assist the local public agency or consultant with developing the scope of services for the project, as needed.
6. Receive the BEAP Project Tracking Form from the consultant, and review the problem and scope of services to determine the appropriateness of the project for the BEAP program.
7. Forward the BEAP Project Tracking Form to Bridge Division for review and concurrence with moving forward on the project.
8. Provide the consultant with the notice to proceed after concurrence has been received from Bridge Division.
9. In a timely manner, check with the local public agency to see if they utilized the engineering services.
10. For structures that were closed, inspect the repairs made before the bridge is opened to traffic.
11. Review repairs that are made to verify that they were done in accordance with the recommendations in the BEAP report and provide an updated SIA sheet, as appropriate.
12. If the consultant recommends closure of the bridge during the BEAP study, initiate a Critical Inspection Finding (CIF) in accordance with current practice for the nonstate system.
220.127.116.11.9 MoDOT Bridge Division Responsibilities
1. Provide contract administration for the program.
2. Provide technical policy interpretation for the program.
3. Review the project scope and estimate and provide the district office with approval for the project to move forward.
4. Review the final report for conformance with the scope of services identified on the BEAP Project Tracking Form.
5. Update the approved load posting in the bridge inventory records based on the information or recommendations provided by the consultant. In situations where strengthening of a bridge is required to increase the posting, any posting changes will be delayed until information is provided to indicate that the strengthening has been completed and was done in accordance with the BEAP report.
6. BEAP project invoices shall be sent directly to Bridge Division. Bridge Division will review and approve the invoices and forward them on to the appropriate unit within MoDOT for electronic payment to the consultant.
18.104.22.168 Traffic Engineering Assistance Program (TEAP)
The Traffic Engineering Assistance Program (TEAP) allows local public agencies (LPA) to receive engineering assistance for studying traffic engineering problems. LPAs facing a traffic safety or operational problem can utilize the LPA On-Call Consultant List (see EPG 22.214.171.124.7 Engineering Consultants) to perform a traffic study. The LPA On-Call Consultant List is available. Typical studies may include corridor safety and/or operational analysis, intersection(s) safety and/or operational analysis, speed limit review, sign inventory, pedestrian/bike route analysis, parking issues, and other traffic studies. The program is administered by MoDOT with funds coming from MoDOT and the LPA (see EPG 126.96.36.199.5 Funding).
The safe and efficient flow of traffic and the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists are major concerns to the local public agencies of Missouri. These public agencies need to conduct accurate and timely traffic studies to determine effective countermeasures for these concerns. Many of these local agencies and their political subdivisions have neither the funds nor the engineering expertise necessary to conduct expert traffic engineering studies.
As a result, the Missouri Highway and Transportation Commission (MHTC) developed TEAP to provide Missouri LPA’s with assistance to proficiently study traffic engineering problems.
The consultant services provided under this program are intended to maximize the availability of professional advice or services to LPAs and minimize technician and drafting time.
188.8.131.52.3 Eligibility and Project Selection
The services of this program are to be used for locations on public roads under the jurisdiction of LPAs that are located off the state system. TEAP services are not intended to duplicate services already available to LPAs through MoDOT. If a local road adjoins the state system and is part of a TEAP application the appropriate MoDOT District Traffic Engineer must grant approval of TEAP funds and ensure no duplication of funds. TEAP funds are not intended to be utilized for design type projects but rather projects that are more geared towards an engineering study or analysis that may result in a design type project in the future. Examples of eligible projects may include corridor safety and/or operational analysis, intersection(s) safety and/or operational analysis, speed limit review, sign inventory, pedestrian/bike route analysis, parking issues, and other traffic studies.
All TEAP project applications that are submitted to the MoDOT District Office are reviewed for eligibility and scored by a MoDOT review team. Scoring criteria used to rate the submitted projects are based on several factors including, but not limited to: engineering resources available to the LPA, safety, congestion, innovation, feasibility of implementing improvements, and overall value.
- "Engineering Resources" refers to the local agency's own staffing resources. Agencies with little or no traffic engineering resources will be rated higher than agencies with their own traffic engineering resources.
- "Safety" refers to the degree to which traffic safety is addressed via the project.
- "Congestion" refers to the degree to which traffic congestion is addressed via the project.
- "Innovation" refers to countermeasures being considered (roundabouts, flashing yellow arrow, j-turns, prismatic sheeting, etc.).
- "Implementation" refers to the feasibility of the local agency following through with changes as a result of the project.
- "Value" refers to the overall gain the project could offer compared to the total cost.
TEAP requirements cap the MoDOT funds that are applied to any project at 80% or $8,000, whichever is less. The local agency can however submit applications for projects that are in excess of the funding cap but the local agency must fund the excess dollar amount. See EPG 184.108.40.206.5 Funding for more information.
220.127.116.11.4 TEAP Process and Timeline
The general process for TEAP starts in the fall of each year with a call for projects. The LPA will produce a project application (Fig. 136.3.24, TEAP Program Application) and submit it to the appropriate MoDOT District Office. MoDOT will evaluate and score each application and make a final selection. MoDOT's review team will then notify the LPA that the project has been selected and enter into a Programming Agreement with the LPA. The LPA is given authorization to select a consultant from the "Traffic Engineering & TEAP" category of the LPA On-Call Consultant List. The LPA must then execute an Engineering Services Contract (see Fig. 136.4.1 Engineering Services Contract) with the consultant and give the consultant a notice to proceed. The consultant will then begin work and finish the scope and all invoicing prior to the end of the particular fiscal year.
Federal Highway Safety Funds (HSP), Technology Transfer (TT) Funds, and LPA Funds are used to fund the program. Payments to the consultant for the services of this program are generally provided at an 80/20 split. The HSP and TT Funds are administered by MoDOT and will provide 80% of the TEAP project cost, up to $8,000 per project. Funds from the LPA will be used for the remaining 20% of expenditures. However, if the total project cost is greater than $10,000, the LPA can pay more than 20% to complete the TEAP project if desired as shown in Example #1.
- Example #1:
- Total Project Cost: $15,000
- HSP/TT Funds: $15,000 x .80 = $12,000 BUT the max is $8,000
- LPA: $15,000 x .20 = $3,000 (Plus the overage of $4,000 of the HSP/TT Funds) = $7,000
- Example #2:
- Total Project Cost: $5,000
- HSP/TT Funds: $5,000 x .80 = $4,000
- LPA: $5,000 x .20 = $1,000
The HSP and TT Funds are normally available on a yearly basis from October 1 to September 30 and from July 1 to June 30, respectively.
It is the responsibility of the LPA to invoice and secure payment for the TEAP project. Invoices for 80% of the project cost should be sent to MoDOT for payment by emailing LPASubmit@modot.mo.gov or mail a hard copy invoice to:
- Attn: MoDOT Design Division
- 105 W Capitol Ave
- Jefferson City MO 65102.
Upon verification of the eligible charges, payment may be made to the LPA. Invoices shall be submitted on Fig. 136.3.26, the TEAP Project Invoice Form. MoDOT will reimburse the LPA for 80% of the eligible charges.
The consultant will be reimbursed on a cost plus fixed fee basis with the maximum profit set at 12%. The consultant must use their most current overhead/indirect cost rate on file with MoDOT.
The direction of this program will be under the jurisdiction of MoDOT’s Local Program Administrator. Questions can be directed to MoDOT district staff or MoDOT Local Program staff. MoDOT’s Local Program website outlines all contact information.
18.104.22.168.7 Engineering Consultants
An LPA must choose a consultant from the LPA On-Call Consultant List – Traffic Category, to perform TEAP engineering services. The list of on - call LPA consultants for TEAP is re-solicited and updated every 3 years. The consulting firms selected from the list will be required to use engineering personnel having a background in traffic engineering with actual traffic engineering field experience on state, county or city roadway projects.
22.214.171.124.8.1 LPA Responsibilities
- Identify problem
- Initiate request for TEAP assistance
- Choose a prequalified consultant from the Traffic Category in the LPA On-call Consultant List
- Provide assistance to consultant during the course of the project (examples are traffic control, traffic counts, assisting in any physical measurements needed.)
126.96.36.199.8.2 Consultant Responsibilities
Below is a list of available consultant scopes of work. This list is not intended as a complete list and is only a suggested list of what studies a traffic engineering consultant may be called upon to perform.
- Traffic Accident Analysis
- Traffic Control Devices Inventory Application and Layout
- Traffic Signal Progression Analysis and Design
- Speed Surveys
- Minor Origin and Destination Studies
- Traffic Counts
- Parking Supply and Demand
- Capacity Analysis
- Lighting Analysis
- Transit Studies
The consultant must also submit invoices to MoDOT for payment as outlined in EPG 188.8.131.52.5 Funding.
184.108.40.206.8.3 MoDOT Responsibilities
- Call for projects
- Contract Administration
- Review & select project applications
- Confirm with the LPA that they do not have the in-house expertise to provide traffic engineering.
- Give notice to proceed to LPA (LPA gives NTP to consultant)
- Review final report
136.3.9 Local Match Guidelines
Federally participating projects require LPAs to match costs of the project, generally at the pro rata share established for the program. LPAs can use a variety of funding methods for local match, including cash, donations and soft match. Eligible donations may be applied only to the project on which the donation was made. Donations cannot be used to revise matching shares on unrelated projects. At no time may the federal share of costs exceed the total project costs actually incurred. For right of way or other real property to be eligible as match, it must be or have been acquired within the requirements set forth in the parameters of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended, (Uniform Act) of the Code of Federal Regulations, regardless of the date of acquisition. Guidelines for determining local match amounts are as follows:
As described in EPG 136.3.10 Bridge Soft Match Credit, credit can be received for locally funded bridge replacement or rehabilitation projects. This credit, referred to as soft match credit, may be applied to the LPA’s share of costs on Off-System Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (BRO) and On-System Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (BRM) projects. This soft match credit cannot be used as part of the local match for STP Enhancement, STP-Urban, CMAQ or other federal projects.
Donated Services. The fair market value of donated funds, materials or services (i.e., labor) donated from private third parties to the LPA are eligible for credit against match. Third parties may include an individual, company, association, etc., but do not include a federal, state or local government agency. Donations are applied at the pro rata share percent established for the project. Donations must be made after the project is programmed and no later than concurrence in award. In addition, all donated services and materials must meet the eligibility requirements of the project. Donations must be documented and records maintained to show how the values placed on materials and services were derived. Volunteer services must be supported by time sheets, time cards or other records. The value of volunteer time should be consistent with the guidelines published by the nonprofit organization Independent Sector.
The fair market value of local government funds, materials, or services performed by local government employees, may be applied to a project. The local government must maintain documentation that is adequate to support the costs being claimed. This documentation should include, but not be limited to vendor invoices, time sheets, time cards or other records.
Right of way property may be donated by a private third party or state or local government agency. Donations from a state or local government agency can only be accepted after June 9, 1998. Donated property is applied at the same pro rata share percent established for the project. The donation must be appraised to determine the fair market value. Donated property must be incorporated into the project and cannot influence the environmental assessment.
Credit for donations of funds, materials, services or real property must be approved by MoDOT and FHWA in order to secure funding. Donations made to the project as match must be applied no later than concurrence in award. Once credits toward local match have been established and approved, they cannot be changed. Credits toward local match must be approved prior to the execution of the work.
136.3.10 Bridge Soft Match Credit
Federal regulations originating in Section 123(e) of the 1987 Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act (STURAA) provides that agencies (state, county, or city) may receive soft match credit for the cost of a locally funded bridge replacement or rehabilitation that would count toward the local match on federally funded bridge replacement projects. It is not the intent of the program to give credit for all bridge work that is done by the LPA, but only for the eligible replacement and rehabilitation work which is performed according to the appropriate guidelines.
The bridge being replaced or rehabilitated for which the agency desires credit must meet the contractual requirements of the LPA and the MoDOT intent of the Highway Bridge Program (HBP).
One of the objectives of the Bridge Soft Match Credit Program is to provide an alternate process for LPAs to remove deficient bridges from the Bridge Inventory. A number of requirements that would apply to projects receiving HBP funding are waived in the Soft Match Credit Program. These exceptions are highlighted in bold print in this article. The federal contract requirements may be waived, but all state and local contract requirements shall still be met. Projects may be constructed by qualified LPA forces, competitive bid, or negotiated bid. (Refer to EPG 136.3.12 Federal-aid Participation for Local Work for information regarding work by local forces.)
The design drawings shall be prepared under the direction of a registered professional engineer and be signed and sealed by that engineer. By signing and sealing the drawings, the engineer of record will be representing that the MoDOT intent of the HBP has been met in accordance with the criteria set forth in EPG 220.127.116.11 Highway Bridge Program. A registered professional engineer shall direct the construction inspection.
18.104.22.168 Project Eligibility
To be eligible for credit, the bridge that is being submitted must meet all of the requirements listed below.
- 1. The bridge must have been on MoDOT’s list of structures that were eligible for federal bridge funds for the year that the bridge was built.
- 2. The bridge must be on a route with a functional classification of rural local, urban local or rural minor collector.
Projects involving the removal of an existing eligible bridge that is replaced with something other than a new bridge may be eligible for credit. An example of an eligible project meeting this criteria would be the replacement of a bridge over an abandoned railroad with roadway fill. An example of a project that would not be considered eligible would be the replacement of an eligible bridge with a low water crossing. If scenarios other than these two are proposed by an LPA, the district should consult with Bridge Division in the Central Office for assistance in determining eligibility.
Projects involving the replacement of an existing eligible bridge with a bridge that is less than twenty feet in length are typically eligible for credit. Under this scenario, some of the deliverables required in a normal credit submittal may be waived. The District should consult with Bridge Division in the Central Office to determine what deliverables are needed and to confirm eligibility.
22.214.171.124 Eligible Costs for Bridge Soft Match Credit
An agency may receive credit for no more than 80% of the eligible costs. The items that are eligible for receiving credit include preliminary engineering services, surveys, environmental and cultural documentation, subsurface investigations, right of way services, bridge construction, minimal road construction, construction engineering for inspection, and those portions of utility relocation costs for which the county is obligated.
The following federal funds from other federal agencies may be used on credit projects but only up to a maximum of 20% of the eligible costs.
- 1. Community Development Block Grant Funds if authorized by the Department of Housing and Urban Development
- 2. Local Public Works Funds authorized by the Economic Development Administration.
Any federal funds above this 20% will reduce the costs eligible for credit.
Only a minimal amount of approach roadway work may be counted. Eligible limits may include reasonable approach roadway necessary to connect to the existing road and to return the new grade to normal ground. This corresponds to the eligible limits of HBP projects authorized to date.
126.96.36.199 Final Design
On projects for which credit is desired, the engineer of record shall have the responsibility for the selection of the specific design parameters along with verifying that the MoDOT intent of the Highway Bridge Program (HBP) is being met as described and given in EPG 136.1 General and EPG 188.8.131.52.5 Preliminary Design.
The engineer of record is also responsible for providing certification that the following requirements have either been met or are not applicable to the project.
- 1. Applicable federal clearances and permits have been obtained as outlined in EPG 136.6.4 Beyond NEPA—Complying with Other Federal and State Environmental Laws and Regulations.
- 2. Applicable state clearances and permits have been obtained as outlined in EPG 136.6.4 Beyond NEPA—Complying with Other Federal and State Environmental Laws and Regulations.
- 3. Coordination was done with local utilities when the project involved the disturbance or relocation of utilities.
- 4. Coordination was done with railroads when the project involved structures over railroads.
- 5. Coordination was done with local levee and drainage districts when the project involved the disturbance of drainage or flood control structures under the control of these local districts.
- 6. New bridge cannot be scour critical.
The specifications and job special provisions for the project shall also be determined by the engineer based on specific site conditions and guidance given in EPG 184.108.40.206 Structures.
A preconstruction itemized engineer's cost estimate is required to be retained by the engineer with the project file. This estimate will be based either on the local forces constructing the project or on a contractor constructing the project.
220.127.116.11 Construction Letting
The Federal Aid contract requirements of EPG 136.10 Advertisement for Bid and Project Award are not required. When the LPA elects to build the project by contractor, then the State and Local requirements for competitive bidding shall be used.
The federal requirements for construction in EPG 136.11 Local Public Agency Construction may be waived. The construction inspection, testing and sampling shall be done under the direction of a registered professional engineer.
18.104.22.168 Request for Credit Submittal
Requests for Bridge Soft Match Credit on a bridge project are submitted after the bridge has been built and opened to traffic. Submittal at the PS&E stage of the project is not necessary. However, if the engineer of record or the LPA has specific eligibility questions regarding the project that they would like MoDOT to address before construction, then contact MoDOT’s Bridge Division. Specific questions should be provided by the engineer of record or the LPA on their cover letter with the submitted package.
The LPA should send the Bridge Soft Match Credit submittal package to the local district office of MoDOT. This submittal package shall include a cover letter that provides the information and certifications listed in EPG 22.214.171.124.1 as well as the project deliverables listed in EPG 126.96.36.199.2. After this package is reviewed by the district office, it will be submitted along with the additional required information provided by the district office to Bridge Division at the Central Office. The MoDOT files for Bridge Soft Match Credit projects, at a minimum will be required to have the documentation as outlined in the checklist provided in Fig. 136.3.4. The district can utilize this checklist as a means to verify that all required information has been obtained prior to submittal of the Bridge Soft Match Credit package to Bridge Division. A copy of this checklist should be included with the submittal package to Bridge Division.
188.8.131.52.1 Information/Certifications on LPA Cover Letter
- 1. The cover letter should indicate the beginning date and the completion date for the construction on the credit project.
- 2. The LPA shall certify that the project is non-controversial. For the purpose of the Bridge Soft Match Credit program, “non-controversial” will be defined as meaning that the project does not have a history of litigation, disputes, negative media reports or any other controversy.
- 3. The LPA shall certify that the project has been built in accordance with the standards applicable to the Highway Bridge Program (HBP), except as noted in EPG 136.10 Advertisement for Bid and Project Award, and that the project was constructed substantially in conformity with the plans and specifications.
- 4. The LPA or the engineer of record shall provide certification that the costs claimed for the project, provided as a deliverable in EPG 184.108.40.206.2, are the actual costs incurred for the project.
220.127.116.11.2 Deliverables Provided by LPA
- 1. As built plans and specifications (size 11 in. x 17 in.), signed and sealed by the engineer of record and approved by the LPA. Refer to EPG 18.104.22.168.6.2 Plan Information for specific requirements.
- 2. Structural Inventory and Appraisal sheet (SI&A), completed for the project bridge and signed and sealed by the engineer of record. Refer to EPG 22.214.171.124.6.3 Structure Inventory and Appraisal Sheet for specific requirements.
- 3. Load rating calculations including a load rating summary sheet, signed and sealed by the engineer of record. Refer to EPG 126.96.36.199.6.4 Load Ratings for specific requirements.
- 4. The LPA shall provide documentation of the eligible final costs for the credit project. When the quantities documented for costs do not match the list of quantities as compared to the engineer’s pre-construction itemized cost estimate, the LPA shall submit justification for the changes in the planned quantities. If the existing structure is currently eligible for rehabilitation only and the LPA elects to replace the structure, the amount of eligible federal funding will be limited to that which will not exceed the rehabilitation cost estimate unless appropriate justification is provided by the LPA that a new structure represents the best value. If the rehabilitation cost is at least 68% of the replacement costs, then it can generally be assumed that the new replacement structure will provide a better value than the rehabilitation of the existing structure.
- 5. Certification from the engineer of record that the applicable requirements as discussed in EPG 188.8.131.52 Final Design have been met. The engineer of record can satisfy this requirement by submitting a letter listing the applicable requirements from EPG 184.108.40.206 and indicating that the appropriate clearances and permits were obtained.
- 6. Photographs of the as built bridge including, at a minimum, a view of the bridge along the roadway and a profile view of the bridge from the stream. Photographs of the bridge during construction are also encouraged, but are not required as part of the credit submittal.
220.127.116.11.3 Information Provided by the District
The district office will be responsible for providing the additional information needed to complete a Bridge Soft Match Credit submittal. The additional items required are shown below and are completed after the district has been notified by the LPA that construction has been completed on the project.
- 1. A final “walk-through” inspection of the bridge has to be completed by someone in the district that has been Team Leader certified for nonstate bridge inspections as designated in EPG 753.3 Inspection and Reporting Aids (Section 3). This inspection has to include the items as listed below.
- a. Assignment of appraisal and condition ratings consistent with the normal inspection practice for nonstate bridges.
- b. Verification that the bridge is in "good" condition.
- c. Verification that the bridge was constructed in general conformance with the bridge plans, which basically includes verification of the bridge location, bridge type, bridge width, bridge length and the number of members.
- 2. The inspector must submit a letter or some other appropriate form of documentation to the District person overseeing the credit project indicating that the inspection has been completed and the date that the inspection was completed. This letter should also indicate that the structure was found to be in “good” condition and that the structure was built in general conformance with the plans. A copy of the inspection report should be provided with the letter along with any photographs that were taken.
- 3. Once all of the information has been received from the LPA and from the bridge inspector, the District should submit the Bridge Soft Match Credit package along with the documentation provided by the inspector to Bridge Division at the Central Office. This submittal package should include a cover letter recommending that credit be approved for this bridge project.
18.104.22.168 Use of Bridge Soft Match Credit
The eligible costs may apply as credit toward the 20% local match required on federal-aid bridge projects. This credit provision does not increase an agency's allocation of Highway Bridge Program (HBP) funds, but will permit usage of funds already allocated to an agency at a rate up to 100%.
Any BRO project submitted for programming by an LPA will be set up using soft match credit, if available. As a result, the LPA's preliminary engineering costs will be eligible for more than 80% federal reimbursement. As the project moves to construction authorization, credit will continue to be applied, as long as it is available. LPAs will not be allowed to have a negative soft match credit balance.
Soft match credit can be used to satisfy the matching requirements for BRM projects, if requested by the LPA.
If an LPA does not want to use its soft match credit on a project, it will need to submit a letter to the MoDOT district office indicating this.
Soft match credit can be applied to the construction phase of a bridge project at the time of construction authorization, even if soft match credit was not used for the design phase.
The federal reimbursable share of design costs cannot be increased by applying additional soft match credit after the preliminary engineering authorization date.
An LPA agency may elect to transfer its soft match credit earned under the Bridge Soft Match Credit Program to another LPA. The following guidelines must be followed to transfer credit:
- 1. A written request must be submitted to the MoDOT district office. The request shall be on the LPA's letterhead and state the dollar amount that is being transferred and the LPA that will be receiving the transferred funds. This letter must be signed by all of the county commissioners or the appropriate city officials. The MoDOT district office will forward this request to Financial Services at the Central Office for review and approval. See Figure 136.3.27 for an example of a Soft Match Credit Transfer Request.
- 2. The request must be approved by Financial Services at the Central Office prior to using the soft match credit on a bridge project.
A LPA may elect to transfer its soft match credit earned under the Bridge Soft Match Credit Program to another LPA for BRO funds. The following guidelines should be followed to transfer credit for funds:
- 1. Both LPAs must submit written requests to the local MoDOT district office on their LPA's letterhead
- 2. and state the dollar amount of BRO funds and soft match credit to be transferred by each LPA. This letter must be signed by all of the county commissioners or the appropriate city officials. The MoDOT district office will forward this request to Financial Services at the Central Office for review and approval.
- 3. The request must be approved by Financial Services at the Central Office prior to using the soft match credit and BRO funds on a bridge project.
- 4. No transfer can result in an LPA having a negative balance of BRO funds.
136.3.11 Other Federal Funding Used as Match
Federal funds provided by other federal agencies may be used to match federally funded transportation projects as allowed by each federal agency’s funding requirements.
Listed below is a table showing what other federal funds may be used to satisfy the federal-aid highway matching requirements.
|Federal-to-Federal Matching Opportunities|
|Source of Federal Funding||Eligible Categories of Highway Projects|
|Federal Land Management Agencies, including but not limited to:
* U.S. Forest Service
* Bureau of Indian Affairs
* Bureau of Reclamation
* Bureau of Land Management
* National Park Service
* Numerous military agencies
(authorized at 23 U.S.C. 120(k))
|Federal highway projects funded under the following program categories: |
* National Highway Performance Program
* Surface Transportation Program
* Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program
* Transportation Alternatives Program
|Federal Lands Highway Program (authorized at 23 U.S.C. 120(1))||Federal highway projects funded under the programs shown above and that serve or provide access to federal or Indian lands, except Scenic Byways|
|Federal programs with special legislative authorization to match other federal funds, including funds provided under:
* State and Local Assistance Act
* HUD Community Development Block Grants
* Public Works Employment Act of 1976
* Delaware and Lehigh Navigation Canal National Heritage Corridor Act of 1988
|Any Federal-aid highway project|
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) funds are not eligible to be used as match on federally funded transportation projects including the HBP Program. Corps of Engineers funds are eligible for match on federally funded transportation projects.
The LPA must confirm with all the federal funding agencies that the funding provided may be used as match for federally funded transportation projects before the funding will be accepted by MoDOT.
136.3.12 Federal-aid Participation for Local Work
For some projects, due to their nature, size, or special considerations, it may be desirable for the LPA to use its own resources rather than a contractor or consultant. The federal requirement for use of local work varies depending on the type of service or work being provided by the LPA. EPG 136.3.12 includes guidelines and procedures to receive federal-aid reimbursement for the costs related to services or work completed by the LPA. Additional information on federal aid participation is available.
22.214.171.124 Funding Obligation
Any participation of federal-aid for local work must be pre-approved. Any funds spent or work completed prior to obligation of funds, FHWA authorization, will not be reimbursable!
126.96.36.199 Federal-aid Participation for In-House Services
This article includes guidelines and procedures to receive federal-aid reimbursement for the costs of project-related services performed by LPA staff. Topics addressed include eligible costs and activities, submittal requirements, and the procedures for requesting, reviewing and authorizing federal funds for such use.
188.8.131.52.1 Eligible Costs
Federal funds may participate in the direct costs of salaries, wages, and related payroll expenses of LPA employees, but only for those costs incurred when the LPA’s employees are directly engaged in eligible activities. Related payroll costs include travel, transportation, leave, holidays, social security, retirement and other payroll benefits.
Federal funds may also participate in the associated indirect costs, provided such costs have been allocated to the Federal-aid project in accordance with an approved cost allocation plan that meets the requirements of 2 CFR 225 (previously OMB Circular A-87). Such cost allocation plans must be independently reviewed and audited on an annual basis. MoDOT and FHWA may also elect to review the LPA’s cost allocation plan at any time. If reimbursement of indirect costs is desired, the LPA should contact MoDOT for additional assistance.
184.108.40.206.2 Eligible Activities
Only project-related activities that directly contribute to the planning, design, development, or implementation of the approved project scope are eligible for Federal participation. These include the following:
Preliminary Engineering – This includes conceptual plans, planning or environmental studies, preliminary design, final design, and all other related design work necessary to advance a project to physical construction. Examples include preparation of surveys, environmental documents, plans, specifications, and estimates.
Construction Engineering – This includes supervision and inspection of construction activities; additional staking functions considered necessary for effective control of the construction operations; testing materials incorporated into construction; checking shop drawings; and measurements needed for the preparation of pay estimates.
Right of Way Acquisition Services – This includes all work associated with acquisition of property interests needed for the project. Examples include preparation of right of way plats, appraisals for parcel acquisitions, review of appraisals, preparation for and trial of condemnation cases, and furnishing of relocation advisory assistance.
Other Services – For projects that do not result in physical construction, this includes activities that are necessary for the development or implementation of the project. Examples include developing or preparing safety programs, feasibility studies, conceptual studies, or other planning documents.
- Note: This does not include services of LPA staff that perform general administrative work. For example, attendance at project meetings by managers or other administrative staff not directly involved in the development or implementation of the project would not be eligible.
Please note that acquisition of right of way shall not begin until after receipt of FHWA Environmental Concurrence (NEPA classification).
220.127.116.11.3 Submittal Requirements
An estimate of the in-house services costs must be submitted to MoDOT when requesting Federal-aid participation for in-house services. The following information shall be included in the estimate:
Staff time (hours) for each phase of the work (e.g., survey, design, inspection, etc.). Staff time should be estimated separately for individual employees or classifications of employees. A services documentation form is available in Fig. 136.5.1.
Wage rates for each employee or classification of employee. Include supporting documentation that shows how the wage rates were calculated, including any payroll expenses that are part of the wage rate, such as IPERS, FICA, employee benefits, or other related payroll expenses.
Equipment usage and other design-related costs. Include supporting documentation to show how the estimated costs or cost rates were determined. Examples include: estimated CADD hours and rate, vehicle miles and rate, outside printing costs, etc. A worksheet is available to document equipment usage, Fig 136.5.3.
Cost allocation audit report if indirect costs are included in the estimate.
The necessary procedures to request, review and approve in-house services costs are summarized below:
The LPA submits a request for Federal-aid participation in in-house services to MoDOT, including a cost estimate and all supporting documentation.
MoDOT reviews the cost estimate and completeness of submittal. If the submittal is incomplete, MoDOT works with the LPA to address any concerns.
Once the LPA’s request is acceptable, MoDOT requests FHWA authorization. It is important to ensure the scope and estimate are complete and accurate since supplements to in-house services are not allowed.
After FHWA authorization is received, MoDOT notifies the LPA and provides the effective date of FHWA authorization.
After performing the in-house services, the LPA will submit periodic requests for reimbursement to MoDOT.
MoDOT reviews and processes the requests for reimbursement as appropriate.
Upon completion of the in-house services, the LPA notifies MoDOT and requests final reimbursement for such costs.
If a final audit is conducted, MoDOT provides a copy of the final audit outcome to the LPA. If additional reimbursement is due, MoDOT processes the final reimbursement. If the final audit finds the LPA has been over-reimbursed, MoDOT will invoice the LPA for the appropriate federal share or deduct this amount from the balance of federal reimbursement that is due to the LPA for other project costs.
18.104.22.168 Federal-aid Participation for Construction by Local Agency Forces
This article includes guidelines and procedures to receive federal-aid reimbursement for the costs of construction performed by LPA forces. Topics addressed include eligible costs and activities, submittal requirements, and the procedures for requesting, reviewing and authorizing federal funds for such use.
22.214.171.124.1 Federal Law
23 CFR 635.114(a) requires Federal-aid projects to be constructed by contracts awarded on the basis of competitive bidding. However, in rare cases, this requirement may be waived if the LPA fails to receive competitive bids and finds it is more cost effective to use some other method, as provided for in 23 CFR 635, Subpart B. One such method is the use of LPA forces to perform the construction. The LPA’s finding of cost effectiveness shall be reviewed and approved by MoDOT and FHWA before construction by LPA forces can proceed.
The term “cost effective” means the efficient use of labor, equipment, materials, and supplies to assure the lowest overall cost. A “finding of cost effectiveness” must demonstrate two things:
- Completing the proposed construction work using LPA forces will be cost effective. (Refer to 23 CFR 635.204.)
- There are special or unique circumstances that justify deviating from the competitive bidding process. (Refer to 23 CFR 635.204.)
126.96.36.199.2 Eligible Costs
Subject to the approvals and procedures outlined in EPG 188.8.131.52, federal funds may participate in the direct costs of labor, equipment, materials, or supplies provided by LPA to complete the project construction, either in whole or in part. Labor costs include salaries, wages, and other related payroll expenses, such as leave, holidays, social security, retirement, and other payroll benefits.
Federal funds may also participate in the associated indirect costs, provided such costs have been allocated to the federal-aid project in accordance with an approved cost allocation plan that meets the requirements of 2 CFR 225 (previously OMB Circular A-87). Such cost allocation plans must be independently reviewed and approved on annual basis. MoDOT and FHWA may also elect to review the LPA’s cost allocation plan at any time. If reimbursement of indirect costs is desired, the LPA should contact MoDOT for additional assistance.
184.108.40.206.3 Eligible Activities
For a project to be eligible for 100 percent construction by local forces the following criteria must be met:
If a region has been determined to have a history of failed competitive bidding, the LPAs that construct federal-aid projects with local forces shall take at least one similar project to letting for every 3rd federal-aid project or every two years, whichever comes first to ensure the bidding market has not changed.
Construction by local forces will not be allowed on bridges greater than two lanes or having a total length longer than 80 feet.
Partial construction work by local forces is allowed on a limited basis provided the work is not in direct conflict with the contractors operations and the use of LPA forces is cost effective. The submittal requirements for partial work by local forces must follow EPG 220.127.116.11.4 except the requirements for proving a history of failed competitive bidding is not required.
18.104.22.168.4 Submittal Requirements
To receive federal-aid reimbursement for construction by LPA forces, the LPA must submit the following information to MoDOT to support its finding of cost effectiveness (see Fig. 136.3.17):
- An explanation, including supporting documentation, of the reasons or special circumstances that justify using LPA forces in lieu of traditional competitive bidding. Examples of supporting documentation may include things such as:
There may be other reasons or situations that justify the use of LPA forces. However, in all cases, they must be unusual and are unlikely to recur.
An explanation of the LPA’s ability to construct the proposed type of work including experience in recent years with its own forces. This explanation shall demonstrate the LPA is adequately staffed and suitably equipped to undertake and satisfactorily complete the proposed work without adding staff.
An estimate of the construction costs to be performed by LPA forces that includes the following:
- 1. Staff time (hours) for each different phase of the work. Staff time should be estimated separately for each employee or classification of employees.
- 2. Wage rates for each employee or classification of employee including any payroll expenses that are part of the wage rate, such as IPERS, FICA, employee benefits, etc.
- 3. Equipment type, hours of use, and unit costs (such as the rental rate per hour or per mile). Note: If an LPA must acquire or rent substantially more equipment than required for its normal operations, it may be difficult to justify the use of LPA forces.
- 4. Costs of materials and supplies to be incorporated in the project. Include sources and suppliers, if known.
- 5. Source documentation for the unit costs (labor, equipment, and materials) used to prepare the estimate.
- 6. A cost estimate of the work that assumes the work will be competitively bid. This estimate is for comparison purposes with the estimate described in item no. 3, above. Source documentation for the unit costs should also be included with this estimate. Unit bid price information for similar work shall not be more than 1 year old and must be from within the same geographic bidding region. LPAs could also use appropriate bidding information for similar projects from adjacent counties that are not more than 1 year old to meet this periodic competitive bidding verification requirement.
- 7. The amount of federal funds requested.
The necessary procedures to request, review and approve Federal participation in construction by LPA forces are summarized below:
Prior to execution of the program agreement, the LPA must submit and receive approval of financial qualifications to perform construction by local forces. The financial pre-qualification is used to demonstrate the LPA is capable of providing the local match if construction by local forces is not approved.
The LPA submits a finding of cost-effectiveness and a request for federal-aid participation in construction by LPA forces to MoDOT, including a cost estimate and all supporting documentation, as described above.
MoDOT reviews the cost estimate and completeness of submittal. If the submittal is incomplete or is not acceptable, MoDOT works with the LPA to address any concerns. MoDOT also verifies that Environmental Concurrence has been obtained. If not, MoDOT reminds the LPA that construction work by LPA forces may not proceed until Environmental Concurrence and FHWA Authorization has been obtained.
Once the LPA’s request is acceptable, and after verifying that Environmental Concurrence has been obtained, MoDOT requests FHWA authorization. MoDOT’s request shall indicate its concurrence with the LPA’s finding of cost-effectiveness and include all supporting documentation. It is important to ensure the scope and estimate are complete and accurate since change orders to construction by local forces are not allowed.
After incurring construction costs by LPA forces, the LPA will submit periodic requests for reimbursement to MoDOT. The requests shall document the actual costs incurred, including: staff hours and rates, equipment usage and rates, and costs of materials or supplies.
MoDOT reviews and processes the requests for reimbursement as appropriate.
Upon completion of construction by LPA forces, the LPA notifies MoDOT and requests final reimbursement for such costs.
It will be necessary for the LPA to enter into an agreement with the Missouri Highway and Transportation Commission for each project or group of projects. This is a legal instrument necessary in order to pass through federal funds and outlines the responsibilities of the LPA and the Missouri Highway and Transportation Commission.
A multi-party or three-party agreement may be necessary if another unit of government such as a township or special road district is involved.
If the LPA elects to construct any portion of the project with its own forces, it will be necessary to include a provision in the agreement that requires the LPA to comply with Section II, Equal Opportunity and Section III, Nonsegregated Facilities, as set out in FHWA Form 1273. FHWA Form 1273 will be attached to all project agreements.
The MoDOT district representative will initiate preparation of the agreement. The district representative will consult with the LPA to pinpoint the various arrangements and details that will be covered. The agreement will first be presented to the LPA for signature. Seven copies of the agreement, signed by the LPA should be submitted to MoDOT's district representative. Projects being constructed by cities must also return 1 copy of an enabling legislation at the time of the execution. After approval and signature by the Missouri Highway and Transportation Commission, a fully executed copy will be returned to the LPA.
If a supplemental agreement is necessary, an ordinance may be required if the original ordinance makes references to specific project information such as but not limited to, amount of federal funds, project timeline or the original agreement. Please refer to Fig. 136.3.16 Sample Ordinance for a sample ordinance. The LPA may elect to fill in the areas providing project descriptions in a general project descriptive manner to preclude the passage of another ordinance.
No work is to be initiated on any part of the project until federal funding has been approved (obligated) by FHWA and the LPA has been notified by MoDOT to proceed.
|Additional Information for MoDOT Employees|
|Refer to CCO’s SharePoint site, EPG 134.2.4 and EPG 136.3.13 for access to current contracts.|
|Additional Information for LPAs, PDF Files available for:|
|Fig. 136.5.1 HS4 Safe Routes to School Program Agreement||Fig. 136.5.2 RM 11,STP Urban Program Agreement|
|Fig. 136.5.3 RM 12, Transportation Enhancement Funds Program Agreement||Fig. 22.214.171.124 RM 12 SUP, Transportation Enhancement Funds Supplemental Agreement|
|Fig. 136.5.4 RM 13, Off-System Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program Agreement||Fig. 136.5.5 RM 14, On-System Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program Agreement|
|Fig. 136.5.6 RM 15, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Agreement||Fig. 136.5.7 RM 16, Transportation and Community and System Preservation Program Agreement|
|Fig. 136.5.8 RM 17, Federal Aid Program Agreement||Fig. 136.5.8 RM 17 ARRA, Federal Aid Program Agreement, ARRA|
|Fig. 136.5.9 RM 15E, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Agreement (Vehicle and Equipment Purchases)||Fig. 126.96.36.199 RM 15 SUP, CMAQ Supplement|
|Fig. 136.5.10 Sample Ordinance|
136.3.14 Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA)
The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) was signed on September 26, 2006. The intent is to empower every American with the ability to hold the government accountable for each spending decision. The end result is to reduce wasteful spending in the government. The FFATA legislation requires information on federal awards (federal financial assistance and expenditures) be made available to the public via a single, searchable website. Federal awards include grants, subgrants, loans, awards, cooperative agreements and other forms of financial assistance as well as contracts, subcontracts, purchase orders, task orders, and delivery orders. Additional information regarding FFATA is available.
136.3.15 Reimbursement and Auditing
MoDOT will request from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) payments for cost of completed work which meets eligibility requirements as set forth by FHWA directives. As a supplement to the specific requirements as outlined elsewhere in EPG 136 Local Public Agency (LPA) Policy, the following audit requirements shall be applied by the LPA to ensure full participation:
- 1. Authorization and federal funding must be approved prior to incurring costs. This applies to all types of work, such as preliminary engineering or right of way. Preliminary engineering costs may be incurred only up to the construction contract award stage. Specific MoDOT concurrence in the awarding of any contract must be obtained before a notice to proceed is issued.
- 2. All costs incurred by the LPA for both contract work and work performed by LPA personnel for whom reimbursement is sought must be supported by original source documents or documentation which provides adequate assurance that the quantities of completed work were determined accurately and on a uniform basis. Whenever the actual cost method of payment is used, reimbursement requests for costs incurred should be substantiated as follows:
- a. Labor costs are supported by the documentation described below in item 3.
- b. Material and equipment costs are supported by submitting a paid receipt from the vendor.
- c. Machinery rental costs are supported by submitting a paid receipt from the rental vendor.
- d. Rental fees for agency-owned equipment and machinery are supported with hourly documentation.
- The rental rates and operating costs shall be based on either the Dataquest (Dunn & Bradstreet) Rental Rate Blue Book or the current Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) public assistance schedule of equipment rates. The blue book is a standard reference for rental rates on all classes of construction equipment. The FEMA equipment rates and the agency developed prepared rates are an acceptable alternative.
- 3. Project-specific LPA costs (except for administration costs) are allowable to the extent that they are supported by original source documentation. Daily time records supported by a project number must be kept for audit. They shall include the daily breakdown of the employee's time. The hourly rates must be the rate the employee actually received, plus actual labor additives calculated on a percent of labor basis (Social Security, Workmen's Compensation, insurance, etc.). The cost of vehicle and other equipment usage may be claimed on an hourly or mileage basis to the extent that the cost can be supported.
- 4. Incidental costs, arbitrary or otherwise unsupported costs or items not necessary to complete the project will not be reimbursed.
- 5. Additional construction costs due to error on the part of the contractor are not eligible for federal participation. Also, additional inspection costs incurred as a result of contractor error are normally assessed against the contractor and are not eligible for federal reimbursement. The term "contractor" shall also include subcontractors, fabricators, and suppliers working on the project.
- 6. A request must be submitted for additional federal funding if the construction change orders for the project exceed the construction contract. Federal funding for change orders is limited to the TIP amount for projects within an MPO, agreement amount for enhancement projects, and programmed amounts for BRM projects. Change orders for projects are limited to the LPA's federal allocation balance.
- 7. Additional engineering and/or resulting construction costs due to design errors and omissions, resulting in a re-design, are not eligible for federal participation. Participation in added project costs resulting from re-design or plan changes can only be considered in cases where it can definitely be established that the changes were the result of unforeseen site conditions or other causes that would not reasonably be under the control of the LPA or its engineer.
188.8.131.52 Final Invoices
Two copies of the final invoice should be submitted after all work has been completed and accepted. The final invoice must be marked "Final Invoice" and be accompanied by a detailed itemization of total project costs. The final invoice should be submitted in the same manner as progress payment invoices. For detailed information on the procedures to be followed see EPG 136.11 Local Public Agency Construction.
184.108.40.206 Audit and Final Reimbursement
The FHWA and MoDOT have the right to audit the LPA's records at any stage of completion. MoDOT will process invoices by requesting payment from the FHWA. The final invoice will require an audit of project records that will be conducted by MoDOT Audits and Investigations Staff. It is the LPA's responsibility to supply a copy of the final audit report to their respective MPOs. Source documentation (timesheets, lodging receipts, etc.), accounting records, and project records (construction diary, etc.) must be retained for three years following the date on which the LPA receives reimbursement of their final invoice from MoDOT. Retention and access requirements for records, from Title 49 CFR 18.42 - Federal Acquisition Regulations System, are available.
220.127.116.11 OMB Audit
If the city/county/grantee expend(s) $750,000 or more in a year in federal financial assistance it is required to have an independent annual audit conducted in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200. A copy of the audit report shall be submitted to MoDOT within the earlier of 30 days after receipt of the auditor's report(s), or 9 months after the end of the audit period. Subject to the requirements of 2 CFR Part 200, if the city/county/grantee expend(s) less than $750,000 a year, the city/county/grantee may be exempt from auditing requirements for that year but records must be available for review or audit by applicable state and federal authorities.
136.3.16 Key Submittals/Requirements
|Task/Submittal||LPA Responsibility||MoDOT Responsibility||MoDOT Timeframe|
|Programming data form / TIP application||Provide project information||Verify eligibility||10 working days|
|Reasonable Progress||Ensure project development / implementation schedule is being met||Verify project development / implementation schedule is being met||Ongoing|
|Force Account||Justify cost effectiveness and LPA’s ability to perform the task||Review and approve/deny||10 working days|
|Work By Local Forces||Justify cost effectiveness and LPA’s ability to perform the task||Review and approve/deny||10 working days|
|Donated Services||Document fair market value of donated materials, services and real property||Review and approve/deny||10 working days|
|Request for Bridge Soft Match Credit||Provide submittal package||Review and approve/deny||10 working days|
|Transfer Bridge Soft Match Credit||Request letter signed by all commissioners from transferring county||Review and approve/deny||10 working days|
|Transfer BRO and Bridge Soft Match Credit||Request letters signed by all commissioners from transferring and receiving counties||Review and approve/deny||10 working days|
|Indirect Costs||Provide cost allocation plan||Review and approve/deny||20 working days|
|Agreement||Execution by LPA governing body||Review and approve/deny for Execution by the commission||20 working days|
|FFATA||Provide federal awards information, Form-1590||Post federal awards information||10 working days|
|Reimbursement Request||Provide original source documents for costs incurred to date||Review and approve/deny||20 working days|
|Final Invoice||Submit within 30 days of final acceptance||Review and approve/deny||20 working days|
136.3.17 Emergency Relief
18.104.22.168 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
Additional information on program guidelines is available.
22.214.171.124 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
Additional information on program guidelines is available.
126.96.36.199 State Emergency Management Agency (SEMA)
Additional information on program guidelines is available.