|
|
California State Department of Transportation
|
Various Reports can Approve a Project
The Project Report (PR) documents Caltrans' approval for most types of State highway projects. This includes new facilities, as well as improvements, modifications, or repairs to existing facilities - whether done by Caltrans or by others under an encroachment permit.
Some transportation projects use other reports for project approval. Some of these reports may serve a dual purpose as a project initiation document and a project approval document. These other project approval documents are described in Chapter 12, Section 4.
"Project Approval" means approval by Caltrans, and where required, approval by the FHWA and the CTC.
Transportation projects often require other types of approvals from outside entities before they may proceed to design and construction. Other project-related approvals, agreements, and permits are discussed in Chapter 13.
A separate approval must be obtained when changes in project concept or scope are proposed after project approval. This may include the need to write a Supplemental PR. See Chapter 12, Section 6, of this manual for details.
All projects for which an Environmental Impact Report/ Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) is prepared require the development and evaluation of project alternatives. Most projects for which a Negative Declaration (ND) is prepared also carry more than one alternative through the public hearing phase. Before such projects can be approved, a Preferred Alternative must be selected. This selection process is described in Chapter 12, Section 2.
Selection of the Preferred Alternative occurs only after specific effects and reasonable mitigation measures have been identified for each project alternative. The selection is made after all comments are received from the circulation of the Draft Environmental Document (DED) for public comment and from the public hearing process. These comments and the rationale for selecting the alternative are detailed in the Final environmental document and summarized in the Project Report.
The Preferred Alternative, with discussion substantiating its selection, is presented in the Final environmental document. In cases where more than one alternative is equally suitable, the Final environmental document can be structured to present such options. The "plan-to-ground" strategy utilized during the formal studies evaluation of alternatives (see Chapter 10, Section 4) permits the decision maker to select the alternative (which may or may not be the Preferred Alternative) that best meets the specific evaluation criteria associated with any particular project proposal.
Informed DecisionThe environmental document should present sufficient information to enable a reasoned choice among the project alternatives. The issues should be sharply defined and provide a clear basis for selection. The selection must reflect the consideration of all significant, reasonably foreseeable, adverse impacts that remain after incorporation of all reasonable mitigation measures. The selection decision must be structured, analytical, and clearly address the specific evaluation criteria developed for the project. It must ensure that the selected project meets the need and purpose for the project.
The Preferred Alternative is approved with Project Report (PR) approval by the District Director (or designee) after selection by the Project Development Team and recommendation of the Project Manager. The preparer of the environmental document has no authority to make an approval decision.
An alternative that results in a significant, adverse environmental impact or results in the use of protected resources will only be approved when all of the following are demonstrated:
"Reasonable Alternatives" are those that have been found to be reasonable and acceptable to Caltrans and FHWA in meeting the project's intended need and purpose.
The goal in defining reasonable alternatives for the Preferred Alternative selection is to gain a consensus of the community, the Project Development Team, and the permitting agencies. The agreement of the permitting agencies must be formally documented.
If there is a reasonable alternative that avoids all significant impacts, uses of protected resources, and impacts on hazardous waste, then efforts should be directed to the selection of this alternative. If there are multiple alternatives that avoid all significant impacts, then efforts should be made to select the avoidance alternative that best fulfills the project's need and purpose.
"Environmentally Preferred" Alternative
If there is no such "avoidance alternative", then efforts should be directed to selection of the reasonable alternative that causes the least harm, after mitigation, to protected resources and the environment. This is termed the "environmentally preferred alternative".
When overriding considerations dictate the selection of a Preferred Alternative that is not an available "avoidance alternative" or the environmentally preferred alternative - the decision must be substantiated with a statement of "overriding considerations." When "overriding considerations" are involved, the consensus reached with the involved resource and regulatory agencies should reflect any balancing of resource impacts.
At times it may be necessary to suggest the acceptance of impacts on one resource in order to avoid or minimize impacts on another resource. Efforts should be made to gain a consensus of the involved resource and regulatory agencies regarding identification of the "environmentally preferred" alternative.
In performing the analysis of identifying the "environmentally preferred" alternative, the "net harm" (after mitigation) on each resource should be determined in consultation with the agency having jurisdiction over, or ownership of, the particular resource.
Comparative "Net Harm" Evaluation
In practice, there is a generally accepted ordering of the value of these various resources that reflects both public values and the protections dictated by law. This valuation scale can be helpful when comparing relative "net harm" on various resources and the environment. The following scale is read from top to bottom, in descending order of value:
Higher Value
Lesser Value
This order is not absolute. It can change, depending upon specific project and community circumstances, and on the magnitude of the impacts.
When selection of the Preferred Alternative is highly controversial or if the proposed Preferred Alternative is significantly higher in overall cost as compared to other build alternatives, it may be appropriate to involve the CTC in the Preferred Alternative selection. In such an instance, a Preferred Alternative report should be submitted to the CTC as a monthly agenda item, with a request for their concurrence. If this is done, it should be done prior to PR approval. If the CTC becomes involved in selecting the Preferred Alternative, a CTC public hearing will probably be held before the selection.
The Project Report (PR) Documents Caltrans' approval for most types of State highway projects. A project receives Caltrans' approval when the PR is approved by the District Director or a Division Chief who has been delegated that authority.
Projects with Draft environmental documents (DED) require the preparation of a "Draft Project Report" (DPR) prior to finalizing the Project Report. The DPR documents the need for the transportation project and summarizes the studies of the cost, scope, and overall impact of project alternatives, so that an informed decision can be made on whether or not to proceed to the public hearing phase of project development. After a public hearing and the selection of a Preferred Alternative, the DPR is updated to become the Project Report. Refer back to Chapter 10 of this manual for information on the DPR.
When there is an environmental document for a project, it is a key project approval document. The environmental document is prepared to assure that the project complies with State and federal environmental laws. All project activities such as the development of project alternatives, public input, and selection of the Preferred Alternative are discussed in the Final Environmental Document (FED). Selection of the Preferred Alternative is discussed in Chapter 12, Section 2.
If a FED or Categorical Exemption/Exclusion (CE) is required for the project, it must be attached to the PR; otherwise a statement of compliance with environmental laws and regulations must be included in the body of the PR. Any PR discussion of items covered in the FED should be summary in nature, but should provide enough detail to allow District Management to obtain a concise picture of the project without researching the FED. The attached FED should be referenced for any detailed environmental information.
There may also be certain statutory requirements or report considerations that may not be appropriate for the FED. These items are incorporated into the PR.
Categorically Exempt / Excluded Projects
When a project is Statutorily or Categorically Exempt / Excluded, there is no ED, so all information must be provided in the PR. The executed CE is a required attachment unless the project does not require a CE form. (See Chapter 2 of the Environmental Handbook.)
An outline and detailed guidelines for PR preparation is provided in Appendix K.
To obtain a preliminary review of the PR before it is submitted for approval, forward three copies to Design and Local Program (DLP), Attention: Project Report Review, with a written request stating what is desired from the review. A review by other headquarters units should be requested directly from those units, if needed.
See Article 3 of this section for a detailed description of the PR approval process.
Following approval, two copies of all PRs covered by these guidelines are sent to DLP, Attention: Project Report. An additional five copies are sent to the Office of Program/Project Management & Support in the Engineering Service Center. Copies are not normally sent to other headquarters units unless specifically requested. See Chapter 12, Section 4, for other types of project approval documents that are sent to other headquarters units instead of DLPP.
The selection of the Preferred Alternative is documented in the PR (and also in the FED, when a FED is involved). The PR documents the detailed engineering reasons for selecting the Preferred Alternative. The FED documents the environmental reasons for selection of the preferred alternative.
When there is a Draft PR, it is used as a starting point for creating the PR. The Draft PR answered these three basic questions:
The Preferred Alternative should be documented in accordance with the Project Report guidelines and outline provided in Appendix K. The items in the following list should be covered:
"Project Approval" refers to approval by Caltrans, and where required, approval by the FHWA and the CTC. Transportation projects often require approvals from outside entities before they may proceed to design and construction. Other project-related approvals, agreements, and permits are discussed in Chapter 13.
When the FHWA is involved, it takes action to approve project design features before the project is approved by the District Director - except for route adoptions. Federal approval of general location and project design features for projects with a route adoption occurs after Caltrans' approval and after the CTC route adoption. FHWA approval is discussed in Chapter 12, Section 5, of this chapter.
State project approval is given by the District Director after the FED is approved by Caltrans and, if required, after FED and project design feature approval by the FHWA (except route adoptions). The CEQA environmental process is completed when Caltrans, as Lead Agency, approves a project and files a Notice of Determination (NOD) with the State Office of Planning and Research (OPR). Refer to Volume 1, Section 4-2.11 of the Environmental Handbook for further information. The process for projects that exclusively follow the State approval process differs from the federal approval process only to the extent that the various processing steps do not receive FHWA review or concurrence.
The CTC takes project approval action, if involved, after the project has been approved by the District Director. This is discussed in Section 5, of this chapter.
Refer to Figure 2 in Chapter 8 for a summary of project approval document requirements by program.
PSSR for Rehabilitation Projects
The Project Scope Summary Report (PSSR) for a Categorically Exempt project serves as the PR for a pavement rehabilitation (HA22), a structure rehabilitation project (HA21), a seismic retrofit project (HA4S1, HA4S2 or HA4S3), or an urban freeway off pavement access project (HA28). Occasionally a PSSR can also be processed with a Negative Declaration (ND). Development of such projects follows the PSSR process (also known as the task-force process) outlined in Chapter 9, Articles 5, 8 and 11. For rehabilitation projects in the "Minor A" program, the PSSR process is optional, but is encouraged; otherwise, the district processes a PR. The PSSR, which is the project initiation document, is also the project approval document once an approved Categorical Exemption (CE) or a Negative Declaration (ND) is attached. Following approval, two copies of all PSSRs covered by these guidelines are sent to DLP, Attention: PSSR. An additional five copies are sent to the Office of Program/Project Management & Support in the Engineering Service Center. See Appendices G, P, N or Q for guidelines for the appropriate PSSR.
NBSSR for Noise Barrier Projects
The PR for a retrofit noise barrier project (HB311) or for a school noise project (HB312) that is Categorically Exempt is the Noise Barrier Scope Summary Report (NBSSR). Occasionally a NBSSR can be processed with an ND. The NBSSR, which is the project initiation document, is also the project approval document once an approved Noise Study Report and a CE or an ND is attached. Following approval, two copies of all NBSSRs covered by these guidelines are sent to the Office of Environmental Engineering in the Corporate Environmental Program. An additional five copies are sent to the Office of Program/Project Management & Support in the Engineering Service Center. The process is described in Chapter 9, Article 9. Chapter 30 contains some other procedures related to noise barriers, and Appendix F contains guidelines for a NBSSR.
PR-HP&R for Planting and Irrigation Projects
The PR for a new highway planting project (HB32) or a rehabilitated planting and irrigation project (HA25) is prepared and processed as outlined in Chapter 29, Section 2, "Highway Planting", using a Project Report (Highway Planting and Restoration) (PR-HP&R) for project approval. See Appendix D for the PR-HP&R guidelines and outline.
PR-SRRA for Roadside Rests Projects
The PR for a new safety roadside rest area project (HB33) or a rehabilitated roadside rest project (HA26) is prepared and processed as outlined in Chapter 29, Section 3, "Safety Roadside Rest Areas", using a Safety Roadside Rest Area Project Report (PR-SRRA) for project approval. See Appendix M for the PR-SRRA guidelines and outline.
Combined PSR/PR for Certain Special Funded Projects
"Special Funded Projects" are State highway improvements constructed by others under encroachment permit, with an estimated construction cost of more than $1,000,000. Special Funded Projects are processed as State highway projects and require a PR. If the Special Funded Project is non-complex, non-controversial, and meets the criteria outlined in Chapter 9, Article 12, it may qualify for preparation as a Combined PSR/PR in accordance with the policies and procedures set forth in that section. The Combined PSR/PR is the project approval document. Once approved two copies of Combined PSR/PRs are sent to DLP, Attention: Project Report. An additional five copies are sent to the Office of Program/Project Management & Support in the Engineering Service Center. The district may utilize this document for similar State-sponsored projects, if appropriate. See Appendix A for guidelines and an outline for the Combined PSR/PR.
PEER for Encroachment Permit Projects
"Encroachment permit projects" are those State highway improvements constructed by others under encroachment permit, with an estimated construction cost of $1,000,000 or less. Encroachment permit projects utilize the Permit Engineering Evaluation Report (PEER) process in place of a PR for project approval to authorize issuance of an encroachment permit. (Districts may require a Combined PSR/PR in some cases, provided the cost is over $300,000.) Instructions covering the PEER process are included in Chapter 9, Article 13. See Appendix I for guidelines for preparing a PEER. The PEER process cannot be used for a project that requires an approval by the California Transportation Commission, such as new public road connection to a freeway or a controlled access highway: a PR would be required for such a situation.
Projects sponsored by other entities, such as rail transit projects, water projects, redevelopment projects, etc., often require relocation or modification of existing State highways. These are considered Special-Funded or encroachment-permit projects as described above. All required State highway construction or reconstruction to accommodate a project sponsored by others must be covered by a PR, by a Combined PSR/PR, or by a PEER - as appropriate. Coordination, review, and reimbursement provisions follow the general procedures found in the references cited in Chapter 2, Section 5, for locally funded State highway projects.
The PR for a "Minor A" project (see Chapter 4, Article 2, for a definition) serves as both the project initiation document and the project approval document. When approving a PR for a "Minor A" project (except for an occasional "Minor A" project that gets listed in the STIP), the district follows program priorities established by the Program Advisor. The Headquarters Program Advisor should be consulted in cases where the appropriate program is in question. See Appendix K for guidelines and an outline for the PR. Refer to the Traffic Manual, Sections 1-05.3 and 9-02.2, for additional requirements for traffic signal project reports.
If a logical project exceeds the "Minor A" dollar limit for construction, a major project should be initiated. Separate "Minor A" projects for segments of an overall project should not be considered. "Minor A" funds should not to be used to finance a series of small related and contiguous projects when a single contract is more appropriate. In those instances, to authorize the larger project, a project initiation document (PSR or equivalent) is prepared and the project is programmed in the appropriate programming document.
Development of a "Minor B" project (see Chapter 4, Article 2, for a definition) follows the procedural instructions for preparing contracts for services contained in the Service Contracts Manual. The EA Project Report or the cover letter format project report described in Chapter 9, Article 15, serves as both the project initiation document and the project approval document. An example is provided in Appendix B.
Director's Order for Urgent Projects
A Director's Order authorizes project work for emergencies which exceed established cost limits when done by informal bid procedures, force account procedures, equipment rental or day labor. Refer to the Major Damage Restoration Coordinator's Handbook.
Projects off the State Highway
Caltrans has occasionally been responsible for development of projects of others, such as State Parks roads, federal roads, rail transit, etc. The need, alternative solutions, costs, and reasons for selecting a specific design must be documented and reviewed. A PR is prepared and approved to accomplish this documentation. If State highways are involved, the PR documents decisions impacting the highway facility.
CAPM PR for Capital Preventive Maintenance Projects
All capital preventive maintenance (CAPM) projects (HA22 Program) utilize a CAPM Project Report (PR) to define project scope, cost and approve work. The completed CAPM PR serves as the project initiation document and the project approval document. Following approval, two copies of all CAPM-PRs covered by these guidelines are sent to DLP, Attention: PSSR. An additional five copies are sent to the Office of Program/Project Management & Support in the Engineering Service Center. See Appendix H for CAPM PR guidelines and outline.
EA PR for Maintenance Projects
All maintenance projects (HM Program) done by contract utilize an EA Project Report as both the project initiation document and the project approval document. An example is provided in Appendix B.
Caltrans' policy requires pre-qualification of most projects for federal funding participation. Minimum dollar amounts for federal participation are established by the Budgets Program for various program items. Current instructions from the Budgets Program should be consulted, as the limits change according to financial conditions. Refer to Deputy Directive Number DD-11, "Federal Aid Project Funding".
When State-only funding is requested for a project, but State-only funding has not been identified in the programming document, specific approvals must be obtained from the Programming Program. The PR proposing State-only funding should fully explain the efforts taken to qualify the project for federal participation and explain why federal funding could not be obtained.
If such a determination is made late in the process, approval from the Budgets Program is required. State-only funding requests must be reviewed and approved by the PD Coordinator prior to submittal to the Program Manager of the Programming Program or the Program Manager of the Budgets Program. A copy of the approved PR should be attached to the request.
The amount of State-only funds may be limited. All approvals are based on availability of funds at the time of advertising.
Certain projects require FHWA review and/or concurrence, regardless of source of funding. (See Chapter 2, Section 7, "Federal Involvement".)
Any requests for FHWA approval or concurrence are submitted by the district to the FHWA. To insure FHWA approval, it is necessary to involve and inform them of project development from the beginning of studies through preparation of the PS&E. Whenever possible, the FHWA Transportation Engineer should informally reviews requests for approvals prior to submittal of the formal request. This facilitates the processing of the formal request.
FHWA Location and Design Approval
For actions covered by an EIS or FONSI, FHWA signing of the FEIS Cover Sheet or execution of the FONSI constitutes FHWA acceptance of the general location and project design features unless delegated to Caltrans under Stewardship. If environmental documents are tiered and separate location and design hearings are held, FHWA makes specific acceptance of the location or the design. FHWA signing of the FONSI, or of the Record of Decision (ROD) for an FEIS, is required for FHWA approval to proceed with design or acquisition of right of way.
For other required FHWA approvals, by type of facility, refer to Chapter 2, Section 7, of this manual. For details on preparation (including level of documentation) and approval of the FONSI and the ROD, refer to the Environmental Handbook.
When the CTC approves a route adoption or a new freeway connection, or when it is a responsible agency under CEQA because it will approve the allocation of funding, CTC approval of the project is needed.
Reports for Route Adoptions
The Project Report serves as an information source for processing route adoptions through the CTC. When the PR (with the mandatory attachment of the FED) is transmitted to DLP, Attention: Project Report, a polyester reproducible and three prints of the route adoption map are submitted concurrently (not as attachments) to DLP, Attention: Route Adoption. DLP prepares the Route Adoption Report for CTC action. See Chapter 24 of this manual for route adoption procedures.
Reports for New Public Road Connections
Reports for CTC approval of new public road connections to freeways and controlled access highways are prepared by DLP. See Chapter 13 and Chapter 27 for new connection procedures.
Reports for Consideration of Future Funding
The Environmental Program prepares reports for approval of a project for future consideration of funding by the CTC. Refer to the Environmental Handbook for details.
Major / Minor Change Determination
To guard against future litigation, care should be exercised in determining whether a project change is major or minor. A highly detailed, approved plan of development establishes an understanding of what is to take place. Generally speaking, the greater the detail shown on the exhibit maps in the ED or at the public hearing, the smaller the proposed change must be to qualify as a minor change.
Minor changes are usually defined as small variations of design that do not significantly affect costs, adjacent properties, or environmental impacts. Minor changes to previously approved major design features normally do not require recycling of the environmental and public hearing processes, but do require concurrence from appropriate entities.
Approvals
Approval to proceed with a minor change to an approved project is given by the District Director, and when appropriate, by the FHWA. The approval request shall include an explanation of what prompted the change as well as a substantive justification for approving the change.
Major project changes include any change in project concept or a substantial change in project scope.
Reevaluate Concept
Because of the long lead-time associated with major projects, changing land-use patterns or loss of funding, there is often a need to reevaluate the concept and scale of previously approved projects. If a previously approved project or its ultimate scope has materially changed in concept, current detailed information should be evaluated before the extent of rescoping is decided. Proposed major deviations from approved concepts should be discussed with the Project Development Coordinator before undertaking full-scale environmental and design studies.
Required Reports
Any change in concept and substantial changes in scope should be discussed in a Supplemental PR. If the Project Development Team determines that a new or supplemental DED is required, a Supplemental DPR is prepared. In some cases, it may be appropriate to begin again with a new Project Study Report. After approval, two copies of the final document should be forwarded to DLP, Attention: Draft Project Report, Project Report or Project Study Report, as appropriate.
Rescoping
Supplemental Draft PRs and Supplemental PRs covering rescoping place particular emphasis on the following:
If rescoping involves rescission of an adopted alignment and the disposal of acquired right of way, then the processes for modifying an adopted route designation and the process for recycling freeway route adoptions are involved. These are outlined in Chapter 23.
The Office of Statewide Project Management and Control of the Project Management Program should be advised of cost and schedule changes.
Staged Projects
A Supplemental PR is not required if a currently programmed project has been identified as a stage of a previously approved project and it is consistent with the ultimate concept of the original project.
Staging, as appropriate, should be discussed in a DPR and a DED, or in an environmental reevaluation, or in a Supplemental DPR and DED, as appropriate. The Final PR and FED must address a fundable project.
Content of the Supplemental PR
All Supplemental PRs require the same signatures as a PR and require the same statements covering environmental determination. The magnitude of project change determines the format and level of detail for the body of the report: smaller project changes would require preparation of a memorandum that describes the changes to the original, approved project; changes of greater magnitude would require the preparation of a complete new report, following the Project Report outline provided in Appendix K.
|
|
|
|
|
|
For questions or feedback
concerning this web site email: vicki.zuppan@dot.ca.gov
This web site last modified July 1, 1999.
Go to Top of Document