U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
202-366-4000


Skip to content U.S. Department of Transportation/Federal Highway AdministrationU.S. Department of Transportation/Federal Highway Administration

New Mexico Division

Home / About / Field Offices / New Mexico Division

Stewardship and Oversight Agreement

Previous | Table of Contents | Next

Appendix A – Oversight Screening Criteria Form

FHWA New Mexico Division and New Mexico Department of Transportation Oversight Screening Criteria
Federal Project Number:  
State Control Number:   


Tier I Criteria

Check One

Projects on the NHS that alter current geometry.

 

Project determined to be of high risk or importance to the Federal-aid program

 

Use Tier I Criteria to determine the first line filter for Federal Oversight.


Tier II Criteria

Risk (0-3)

Level of Environmental Review (EIS/EA/CE)

0-3

Natural Resources

0-3

Cultural Resources

0-3

Public Controversy

0-3

Certifications (Environment, Utilities, R/W)

0-3

Project Complexity

0-3

Design

0-3

Access Control Issues

0-3

Construction

0-3

Innovative Contracting Techniques

0-3

Special Interest

 

Federal

0-3

State

0-3

Local

0-3

Other

0-3

Other - Use of the "other" category is for projects which involve other Federal or State agencies (exclusive of FHWA and NMDOT). Use of the ‘other" category can extend to projects with atypical funding or legislative (State or Federal) programs.


TOTAL SCORE for Tier II

Check One

Full Oversight

 

State Oversight

 

Notes:


Concurred on by:
NMDOT   Date:  

FHWA     Date:  


Tier I:

Use Tier I Criteria to determine the first line filter for Federal Oversight.  If a project meets Tier I Criteria, then further review the project using Tier II for final determination.  If Tier I criteria is not met, the project will be considered as State Administered.

Tier II:

Categorize a project as Federal Oversight if it scores 20 points or higher in Tier II.  Use the project scores for guidance only.  The final determination rests with the rating officials.  Consider the size and complexity of the overall program needs as well when rating a project.

Rate each element with a score of 0 to 3, with 3 representing the higher risk or complexity.  Enter the total of those scores in the TOTAL SCORE for Tier II box.  Each element receives a rating.  For example, if in the ‘Special Interest’ category, the Federal, State and Local elements each receive a rating of two (2), then the total rating for that category is six (6).

Other:

Examples of the use of the ‘other’ category are:

Procedure:

FHWA’s Field Operations Team Leader and NMDOT’s State Construction Engineer will meet quarterly to review the list of upcoming projects and assign oversight.  The first meeting will be at the beginning of each Federal fiscal year and upon STIP approval. Preliminary annual assignments will be made for the upcoming three years.

The FHWA retains responsibility of authorizing environmental documents.  The FHWA’s Operations Engineer, in cooperation with NMDOT, will further evaluate oversight assignment at this time and document that determination on the Screening Criteria form.

A Screening Criteria will be filled out for each project and kept in the project file. NMDOT’s Construction Bureau will keep these on file for all projects.  The FHWA will keep those that are Federal Oversight only. The Criteria will become part of the project records.

Risk Levels Assignment:

The level of risk associated with each element of a project in the Oversight Screen Criteria above varies from 0 to 3. A rating of 0 indicates that the project element has little or no risk associated with it; conversely a 3 would indicate that this project element has a considerable or high risk.  An example of a 0 risk level would for instance be an overlay or pavement preservation project where all elements detailed above were considered and no impact to any environmental characteristic (natural resources waterways etc., cultural resources historical or tribal, Project complexity was minimal as no geometric or capacity issues were entertained, No Special Interest groups or issues were identified. e.g. equestrian or bicycle activities or groups, special political interest groups local or other, and no atypical funding or other regulatory office. e.g. Army Corp, Federal Lands, State Lands etc. were impacted by the project. The project will be reviewed twice at a minimum and the appropriate risk level assigned and final oversight responsibility developed.

 

Previous | Table of Contents | Next

Federal Highway Administration | 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE | Washington, DC 20590 | 202-366-4000