FHWA files environmental costs report with House Appropriations Committee

Nov. 20, 2006

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), with the assistance of 24 state transportation agencies, filed a report to the House Committee on Appropriations late last month indicating that environmental costs represent up to 8% of a project's total, while there is an effort underway to better track these figures.

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), with the assistance of 24 state transportation agencies, filed a report to the House Committee on Appropriations late last month indicating that environmental costs represent up to 8% of a project's total, while there is an effort underway to better track these figures.

FHWA case study research identified four states--Maryland, Montana, Oregon and Washington--as currently having experience with extensive environmental cost tracking. For a variety of reasons, such as lack of resources, differentiating between environmental and non-environmental costs, unique geography and project specifics, states question the benefits of tracking environmental costs. The administration and states, however, are working to track environmental costs for better program accountability, project estimating, policy and decision making, the FHWA report said.

Because FHWA found only limited environmental costs data, the administration cautioned congress that the results contained in the report were limited. The information presented to the House committee was derived from research conduced by the FHWA in 2005-2006 in a report titled "Costs Related to Compliance with Federal Environmental Laws: Case Studies in the Federal-aid Highway Program."

FHWA looked at six projects in Maryland, Montana, New Jersey, Oregon, Utah and Washington. In the report's summary, FHWA found environmental review and design accounted for 23% of projects' costs; land acquisition 18%; construction engineering 5%; and construction 4%.

Federal-aid highway projects have to satisfy National Environmental Policy Act guidelines, as well as the following major laws and Executive Orders:

• Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, Title 16, U.S. Code, Section 1531;

• National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, Title 16, U.S. Code Section 470;

• Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended, Title 33, U.S. Code, Section 1251;

• Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended, Title 49, U.S. Code, Section 1563(f), as codified in Title 49, U.S. Code, Section 303 and commonly known as 4(f);

• Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, Title 16, U.S. Code, Sections 661-666(C); and

• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title 42, U.S. Code, Section 2000(d).

Other applicable laws and Executive Orders may be found at the FHWA website under the titles "Ecological: An Ecosystem Approach to Developing Infrastructure Projects"; Summary of Environmental Legislation Affecting Transportation"; and, "Federal Environmental Laws and Executive Orders Applicable to the Development and Review of Transportation Infrastructure Projects.

Sponsored Recommendations

The Science Behind Sustainable Concrete Sealing Solutions

Extend the lifespan and durability of any concrete. PoreShield is a USDA BioPreferred product and is approved for residential, commercial, and industrial use. It works great above...

Proven Concrete Protection That’s Safe & Sustainable

Real-life DOT field tests and university researchers have found that PoreShieldTM lasts for 10+ years and extends the life of concrete.

Revolutionizing Concrete Protection - A Sustainable Solution for Lasting Durability

The concrete at the Indiana State Fairgrounds & Event Center is subject to several potential sources of damage including livestock biowaste, food/beverage waste, and freeze/thaw...

The Future of Concrete Preservation

PoreShield is a cost-effective, nontoxic alternative to traditional concrete sealers. It works differently, absorbing deep into the concrete pores to block damage from salt ions...