U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
202-366-4000
Federal Highway Administration Research and Technology
Coordinating, Developing, and Delivering Highway Transportation Innovations
| TECHNICAL REPORT |
| This report is an archived publication and may contain dated technical, contact, and link information |
 |
| Publication Number: FHWA-HRT-17-036 Date: March 2018 |
Publication Number: FHWA-HRT-17-036 Date: March 2018 |
PDF Version (1.41 MB)
PDF files can be viewed with the Acrobat® Reader®
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has initiated an effort to evaluate the Research and Technology (R&T) Development Program and communicate the full range of its benefits. The program helps FHWA assess how effectively it is meeting its goals and objectives and provides useful data to inform future project selections.
This report examines outcomes associated with the Eco-Logical Program, namely, (1) the extent to which FHWA has enabled transportation agencies to adopt the Eco-Logical approach, (2) the manner in which transportation agencies have incorporated the Eco-Logical approach into their business practices, and (3) the ways in which the Eco-Logical Program has contributed to improved project processes and environmental outcomes. This report should be of interest to FHWA staff, the Eco-Logical user community, and transportation professionals interested in advancing environmental mitigation.
Hari Kalla, P.E.
Associate Administrator, Office of Research, Development, and Technology
Notice
This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of the information contained in this document.
The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers’ names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the objective of the document.
Quality Assurance Statement
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high-quality information to serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous quality improvement.
| 1. Report No. FHWA-HRT-17-036 |
2. Government Accession No. | 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4. Title and Subtitle Federal Highway Administration Research and Technology Evaluation Final Report: Eco-Logical |
5. Report Date March 2018 |
|||||
| 6. Performing Organization Code | ||||||
| 7. Author(s) Gina Solman, Jessica Baas, and Heather Hannon |
8. Performing Organization Report No. | |||||
| 9. Performing Organization Name and Address John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center U.S. Department of Transportation 55 Broadway Cambridge, MA 02142 |
10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) | |||||
| 11. Contract or Grant No. | ||||||
| 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Office of Corporate Research, Technology, and Innovation Management Federal Highway Administration 6300 Georgetown Pike McLean, VA 22101-2296 |
13. Type of Report and Period Covered Final Report; March 2015–November 2016 |
|||||
| 14. Sponsoring Agency Code | ||||||
| 15. Supplementary Notes The Research and Technology Program Manager and Contracting Officer’s Representative was John Moulden (HRTM-10). |
||||||
| 16. Abstract This report documents an evaluation of Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Research and Technology Program’s activities on the implementation of the Eco-Logical approach by State transportation departments and metropolitan planning organization recipients of FHWA Eco-Logical funding. The evaluation team collected information on FHWA’s efforts to disseminate information to stakeholders, the extent to which stakeholders have adopted the Eco-Logical approach, and stakeholder-identified processes and environmental impacts obtained by agencies implementing the Eco-Logical approach. Data collected from literature reviews and stakeholder interviews (see main report for specific reference information) suggest that FHWA has consistently recognized the value of demonstrating its commitment to the Eco-Logical approach by providing funding and technical assistance to its stakeholders and encouraging practitioners to share results with their peers. FHWA research and funding has enabled its recipients to adopt the Eco-Logical approach sooner and more comprehensively. Funding recipients are building relationships with partners, sharing and using data in better ways, and incorporating information gathered to inform project prioritization and to develop integrated transportation plans. Most recipients focused their efforts on completing earlier planning-level steps and stages of the Eco-Logical approach. Few recipients identified, tracked, or quantified impacts related to project delivery or environmental mitigation. FHWA, partners, and stakeholders demonstrated a commitment to the Eco-Logical approach. Stakeholders adopted the Eco-Logical approach by building relationships, sharing and using data, integrating plans, and prioritizing project selection and mitigation. |
||||||
| 17. Key Words Eco-Logical, FHWA, Ecosystems, Mitigation, Infrastructure |
18. Distribution Statement No restrictions. This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161. https://www.ntis.gov |
|||||
| 19. Security Classif. (of this report) Unclassified |
20. Security Classif. (of this page) Unclassified |
21. No. of Pages 122 |
22. Price N/A |
|||
Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized.
SI* (Modern Metric) Conversion Factors
| Abbreviation | Term |
|---|---|
| AASHTO | American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials |
| ALIVE | A Landscape Level Inventory Valued of Ecosystem Components |
| AMBAG | Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments |
| ARC | Atlanta Regional Commission |
| BMP | best management practice |
| Caltrans | California Department of Transportation |
| CA-MPO | Charlottesville-Albemarle Metropolitan Planning Organization |
| CAPCOG | Capital Area Council of Governments |
| CDOT | Colorado Department of Transportation |
| CE | categorical exclusion |
| CPT | conservation planning tool |
| EIA | Ecological Integrity Assessment |
| EIS | environmental impact statement |
| ESA | Endangered Species Act |
| FHWA | Federal Highway Administration |
| FWS | U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service |
| GIS | geographic information system |
| HEP | Federal Highway Administration’s Office of Planning, Environment, and Realty |
| H-GAC | Houston-Galveston Area Council |
| HUD | U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development |
| IAP | Implementation Assistance Program |
| IDFG | Idaho Department of Fish and Game |
| ILF | in-lieu fee |
| ITD | Idaho Transportation Department |
| ITEEM | Integrated Transportation and Ecological Enhancements for Montana |
| LOSRC | Land-of-Sky Regional Council |
| LRTP | long-range transportation planning |
| MaineDOT | Maine Department of Transportation |
| MARC | Mid-America Regional Council |
| MDC | Missouri Department of Conservation |
| MDOT | Michigan Department of Transportation |
| Michigan DNR | Michigan Department of Natural Resources |
| MoDOT | Missouri Department of Transportation |
| MOU | memorandum of understanding |
| MPO | metropolitan planning organization |
| NCDENR | North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources |
| NCTCOG | North Central Texas Council of Governments |
| NEPA | National Environmental Policy Act |
| NHA | New Hampshire Audubon |
| NHDOT | New Hampshire Department of Transportation |
| NYSDOT | New York State Department of Transportation |
| OKICOG | Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments |
| OSU | Oregon State University |
| PCED | Proctor Creek Environmental District |
| PPACOG | Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments |
| R&T | Research and Technology |
| REAP | regional ecological assessment protocol |
| REF | regional ecosystem framework |
| SCAG | Southern California Association of Governments |
| SHRP2 | Second Strategic Highway Research Program |
| SWEEP | Stream and Wetland Ecological Enhancement Program |
| TAC | technical advisory committee |
| TCRPC | Tri-County Regional Planning Commission |
| TCSWCD | Tioga County Soil and Water Conservation District |
| TJPDC | Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission |
| TRB | Transportation Research Board |
| USACE | U.S. Army Corps of Engineers |
| USEPA | U.S. Environmental Protection Agency |
