FEDERAL-AID POLICY GUIDE
December 9, 1991, Transmittal 1
NS 23 CFR 660E
1 June 1981
Administrative Guidelines for T-E Routes
(1) Coordinate the DOD transportation interest in public highways.
(2) Review and analyze DOD access road needs from the standpoint of approved transportation engineering practices, statutory provisions, and established policies of the defense access road program.
(3) Determine the importance of national defense of all public highway projects proposed by DOD components.
(4) Furnish funding authorization to FHWA for approved projects.
(1) Serve as program manager for all Minuteman and Titan II missile access road matters involving regraveling, EM and ESR, and serve as sole point of contact between MTMC and the bases.
(2) Maintain liaison with HQ USAF.
(3) Review base submittals and recommend projects to MTMC.
(4) Forward FHWA evaluations and Air Force justifications to MTMC as necessary.
(1) Identify deficiencies on T-E routes and bring to the attention of responsible public highway authorities.
(2) Request public highway authorities to perform EM and ESR when conditions warrant.
(3) Coordinate FHWA evaluations and provide written concurrence w/deficiencies identified.
(4) Furnish evaluation and justification data to SAC IAW SACR 85-1, Chapter 13.
(5) Program and budget funds through local BCE funds manager.
(1) Administer MTMC approved projects in accordance with Federal-aid laws and established defense access road procedures.
(2) Allocate funds as authorized by MTMC.
(3) Provide for EM and ESR (through agreements with State and local public highway authorities as appropriate).
(4) As requested by SAC, evaluate deficiencies on T-E routes and recommend correction considering Federal-aid laws, previously agreed upon route standards, and the responsibilities of public highway authorities.
(5) Resolve problems between Air Force and road owners regarding disputes over road maintenance responsibilities.
(6) Evaluate proposed T-E route changes.
(1) Transfer of funds from the Department of the Air Force to the FHWA will be according to the provisions of certifications of public highway needs by the Commander, MTMC.
(2) Each Fiscal Year, wings will have immediately available a predetermined amount for operational EM and ESR as soon as transfer to FHWA is completed. The amount will be determined by the chief missile engineer at each base and programmed through their local BCE funds manager, using input from FHWA Divisions based on previous experience and expected operational problems. Justification for use of these funds will not be required until the predetermined amount is exceeded.
(3) If additional operational funding is necessary during the fiscal year, the request will be forwarded through proper channels to MTMC. Authorization of additional funds will be contingent upon availability and proper justification.
(4) Funding for projects other than annual operations (Para b(2)) will be authorized by MTMC upon the receipt of a request, justification, and official FHWA evaluation. The type of projects in this category are major regraveling, bridge upgrading, rebuilding roadbeds, etc. These projects may be requested at any time. The annual survey should be completed, and the evaluation forwarded to MTMC by 15 July each year in time for funds to be requested in the next FY program. Periodic maintenance of asphalt or DBST surfaces is not eligible.
(5) EM funds will be used for preliminary engineering evaluations that are in excess of the FHWA's normal support.
(6) Funds which may be declared excess to the EM, and ESR operational needs will be used for unfunded MTMC authorized projects upon MTMC approval. HQ SAC will notify MTMC of their priorities for the use of year-end funds.
(7) Since the extent of any excess funds may not be normally known until late in the fiscal year, FHWA will maintain flexibility in shifting these funds to other established priorities so that funds do not lapse. All shifts in funds will be coordi nated verbally by FHWA with MTMC, which agency will in turn coordinate verbally with SAC.
(8) All additional funding requests, priority changes, or route changes will be directed to MTMC from HQ SAC.
(1) Construction standards and bridge criteria as agreed upon by DAF, MTMC, and FHWA are shown on Enclosure 1. Deviation from these standards will not be permitted unless the proposal has the written approval of all concerned. DAF proposed changes are to be forwarded to MTMC through HQ USAF.
(2) It has been generally agreed that regraveling will be limited to a 5 or 6 year cycle. However, in many instances, the time since last regraveling may have very little impact on decision to regravel again. If regraveling is proposed for individual routes on a cycle other than 5 or 6 years, supporting justification is necessary for MTMC approval. If regraveling is proposed on a regular cycle, FHWA's evaluation should so state.
(1) Evaluations are required for MTMC authorization of projects where the funding is in excess of the amount furnished for yearly EM/ESR. Evaluations will be conducted by (or arranged for) the FHWA upon request of the appropriate SAC officials. All evaluations will be signed by appropriate FHWA and SAC officials attesting to the accuracy and authenticy, and coordinated with appropriate State Highway Departments and the appropriate counties. The evaluations must contain the length of time since last regravelling. Recommended projects will be based upon the existing design standards for T-E routes. Evaluations may be forwarded through their respective channels; however, MTMC authorization of funding is contingent upon requests from SAC and evaluations by FHWA.
(2) MTMC will authorize the expenditures of EM/ESR funds up to the predetermined amount for each wing. These funds are intended strictly for day to day operational/emergency conditions.
(3) Requests for additional EM/ESR funds in a given FY can be approved only by MTMC and must be accompanied by supporting justification. The justification should include (a) how the yearly given amount was expended and (b) how the additional funds (and for what purpose) will be expended.
(4) Approval of additional funding may depend upon amount considered excess in other wing accounts. Improperly prepared justification reports will be returned, thereby resulting inevitably in delay.
(1) The provisions of 23 U.S.C. 210(h) are to be used when damage is done to public highways during the construction or major modification of a ballistic missile site. Payment of damages under 210(h) requires, by law, special actions not associated with regular EM. When such damage is considered to have occurred (or is likely to occur), the Department of the Air Force will transfer funds to the FHWA to cover such damage. The Deputy Assistant Secretary (Installations) of the Air Force will make the determination required by 210(h) that construction bids did not include allowances for repairing damage to highways used in the construction of the project in question. FHWA must determine that the responsible highway agency is or has been unable to prevent such damage by restrictions upon the use of such highways without interferences with, or delay in, the completion of such contracts.
(2) The procedure in Enclosure 2 shall apply.
(3) Construction traffic should be restricted to designated T-E system roads as much as possible since repair of such routes is eligible for regular EM funding. Off-system roads are restricted to 210(h) funding and procedures since they are not certified as important to national defense.
T-E ROUTE STANDARDS (Enclosure 1)
Fills over 6 feet 2:1 Fills less than 6 feet 4:1 Back slopes in cut 2:1 *
* Note: If County, State, or AASHTO standards are appreciably different than those shown above, T-E route standards for cut-and-fill sections can comply with the different standards, if sufficient justification is provided.
Span length less than 10 feet H-10 Span length 10 feet to 17 feet H-12 Span length 17 feet to 30 feet H-15 Span length 30 feet or more H-20 or H-15-S-12
For new structures, use H-15 or H-15-S-12 for span length less that 30 feet, and H-20 or H-15-S-12 for span length 30 feet or more.
Title 23, U.S. Code, Subsection 210(h)
Title 23, U.S. Code, Subsection 210(h) provides for payment of the cost of repairing damage caused to highways by the operation of vehicles and equipment in the construction of classified military installations and facilities for ballistic missiles if the Secretary of Transportation determines that the responsible highway agency is, or has been, unable to prevent such damage by restrictions upon the use of such highway without interference with, or delay in, the completion of a contract for such construction. The Secretary of Defense or his designee shall determine, in fact, that construction estimates and bids did not include allowance for repairing such damage.
Changes to the Designated T-E Route Systems
It is necessary that changes to the T-E systems be approved by MTMC. The expenditure of DOD funds is legal only if the Commander, MTMC, certifies that the road is important to national defense (Title 23, United States Code, Section 210a). The designated system has been approved and certified by MTMC. Thus, proposed changes must be evaluated and justified by MTMC to determine that inclusion is warranted. The following procedure will be used:
Local government officials should be made aware of the
above and recognize that the DOD will not participate in resurfacing all-weather routes on a periodic basis.