7. Additional Program Policies

The purpose of this chapter is to address more complex Program policies that are not necessarily applicable to every project. This chapter contains policies and guidance on:

• 7.1: Stream Crossing Replacement
• 7.2: Driving Surface Aggregate
• 7.3: Full Depth Reclamation
• 7.4: Low-Volume Road Specific Guidance
• 7.5: Low-Volume Road Traffic Counts

This section applies to stream crossing replacements (not road drainage “cross pipes”) funded by the Dirt, Gravel, and Low-Volume Road (DGLVR) Program on both Low-Volume and Dirt and Gravel roads. Refer to Chapter 1 of the DGLVR Stream Crossing Replacement Technical Manual for additional discussion of the background, purpose, and intended benefits of the policies detailed here.

Replacement Structures: One of the DGLVR Program’s major goals of stream crossing replacements is to ensure that structures that are funded by the DGLVR Program are designed and implemented properly to achieve stream continuity through the roadway. Stream continuity refers to the connectivity and continuation of typical streambed features (profile, slope, width, composition, grade controls, pools) along its length upstream, downstream, and through a road crossing structure. DGLVR projects often reconnect segments of stream that have been disconnected and vertically offset by an undersized road crossing. New structures funded by the DGLVR Program must be wide enough to allow for construction of a functional stream channel through the crossing. This includes bank margins, low flow channel, grade controls, and other stream features. Construction of a bankfull-width stream channel through wider-than-bankfull-width structures will not only accommodate the hydraulic capacity of the stream but will also allow for better stream function through the road regarding flood resiliency, sediment and debris transport, and aquatic organism passage.

Existing Structure Eligibility for Replacement: Another major goal of the DGLVR stream crossing replacements is to limit paying for replacement of stream crossing structures to locations that are negatively impacting streams and the aquatic environment. The best overall approximation of environmental impact from a crossing is the width of the existing structure opening related to the bankfull width of the channel. A channel’s bankfull width is the width of flow at a “dominant channel forming flow stage” where sediment and bed material is moved most effectively through the stream system, typically associated with a one-to-two-year recurrence interval for Pennsylvania. Stream crossing structures that are significantly less than the channel’s bankfull width are typically associated with many problems, including gravel deposition upstream of the road, excessive stream scour and erosion downstream of the road, flooding, and washouts. DGLVR site eligibility policy (detailed in section 7.1.2.2) limits paying for structural replacement on existing pipes over 4’ in diameter to only those locations where the existing structure is less than 75 percent of the bankfull channel width. These structures are most likely to be causing negative stream impacts and are most likely to be sources of perpetual maintenance and road impacts to road owners (gravel bar removal, erosion, etc.).

This section details the DGLVR Stream Crossing replacement policy for eligibility, new structures, and additional responsibilities of the conservation district.

All stream crossing replacements funded in whole or in part with DGLVR funds, or listed as in-kind on a DGLVR Project, must follow the DGLVR Stream Crossing Design & Installation Standard, unless an “Exemption from DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard” (see section 7.1.3) is applicable. The Standard and its attachments are available online at https://www.dirtandgravel.psu.edu/. For projects receiving an Exemption from DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard, other site-specific requirements apply (see section 7.1.3).

Eligibility criteria for replacing stream crossings, in whole or in part, with DGLVR funds:

• Small Pipes: Existing stream crossing structures with an opening width less than or equal to 48″ are automatically eligible for replacement regardless of their relationship to the bankfull channel width, as long as they are replaced according to DGLVR Policy.
• Multiple Pipes: Existing stream crossings consisting of multiple (side-by-side) pipes are automatically eligible for replacement regardless of their relationship to the bankfull channel width, as long as they are replaced according to DGLVR Policy.  This automatic eligibility applies to multiple pipes only, not multi-cell or multi-opening bridges.
• All Other Structures: For existing single-opening structures with an opening width over 48″, only structures with a “structure opening width to bankfull channel width” ratio of 75% or less are eligible for replacement with DGLVR Program funds.
• SCC Notification: Conservation districts are required to notify the State Conservation Commission (SCC) of proposed stream crossing replacements as soon as practical before a contract is signed. An online notification system is available by logging in to the Center for Dirt and Gravel Road Studies website (same log-in as accessing the GIS system) at www.dirtandgravelroads.org.

Note: When measuring the width of an existing structure, measure the most limiting width (for example: the narrowest pipe in a series of “necked-down” pipes, or the narrowest point perpendicular to the flow between abutments of a skewed bridge).

All stream crossing replacements funded in whole or in part with DGLVR funds, or listed as in-kind on a DGLVR Project, must follow the DGLVR Stream Crossing Design & Installation Standard, unless an “Exemption from DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard” (see section 7.1.3) is applicable. The Standard and its attachments are available online at https://www.dirtandgravel.psu.edu/. For projects receiving an Exemption from DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard, other site-specific requirements apply (see section 7.1.3).

For DGLVR Program purposes, the stream crossing policy outlined here applies to situations where streams, including intermittent channels, with identified bed and banks are flowing into the road or the uphill ditch.  See section 7.1.3 for more information on Automatic and SCC-requested exemptions from the DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard. Contact the State Conservation Commission in questionable circumstances.

Routine maintenance of stream crossing structures is not eligible for DGLVR funding. This applies both to stream crossing structures that are ineligible to be replaced with DGLVR funds or are eligible for replacement with DGLVR funds but are not being replaced. For these structures, no work may be performed directly on the stream crossing structure or its components unless the structure is replaced according to DGLVR Program Policy. “Work” includes, but is not limited to, culvert lining, extending undersized stream crossings, bridge deck repairs, and adding or replacing headwalls and endwalls to an existing stream crossing structure. The policies and qualifications for replacement with DGLVR Program funds outlined here and in the DGLVR Stream Crossing Design & Installation Standard do not exempt projects from any permitting or engineering requirements.

As outlined in section 3.7.4.7, Program funds can be used to cover engineering, permitting, or similar consultant costs, but such costs are limited to a combined maximum of 20 percent of the total contract amount between the district and the grant recipient, not to exceed $25,000. A Request for Proposals (RFP) is available on the Center for Dirt and Gravel Road Studies website. This document is highly recommended for use in hiring an engineer/consultant for stream crossing projects.

Education Requirements for Conservation Districts: Effective July 1, 2023, at least one conservation district staff member must have completed the DGLVR Program’s “Stream Crossing Replacement Certification Training” and received a certificate of completion before the QAB can recommend or the conservation district Board can approve a contract for a project involving a stream crossing replacement. A Stream Crossing Replacement Re-Certification Training must be taken once every three years to maintain staff certification. This training requirement does not apply to crossings that qualify for an automatic exemption from the DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard (see section 7.1.3.1).

• Conservation Districts are required to hold meetings including:
  • Pre-application: Meeting, typically held with grant applicant before application submittal.
  • Pre-design: If an engineer is required by permitting or DGLVR standard, then a pre-design meeting must be held. On-site meeting, typically held with grant applicant and project engineer, occurs after the grant applicant signs a contract with the conservation district for DGLVR funding and hires an engineer, and before design and permitting.
  • Pre-construction: On-site meeting, typically held with grant recipient, project engineer, and sub-contractor (if applicable), prior to starting construction.
• Conservation Districts are required to attend a bid site showing (if held): On-site meeting, typically held with the grant recipient, project engineer, and potential bidders/contractors, for structure installation before bids are due.  These meetings are highly recommended but at the discretion of the grant recipient.
• A “Stream Crossing Eligibility Determination” (Appendix H) must be completed by the conservation district and kept in the project file for all stream crossing replacements, even those with an exemption from the DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard. This form requires measurement of the bankfull channel and existing structure to determine DGLVR Program eligibility.
• Stream crossing replacements nearly always extend outside the road right-of-way. Applicants are strongly encouraged to get verbal permission from landowners for off right-of-way work before contracting. Before working outside the right-of-way, the grant recipient must obtain written permission from the landowner. Landowner permission should be sought as early as possible in the funding process, ideally before contracting, to ensure the project can be implemented as planned. A sample landowner agreement is provided on the Center’s Blank Forms page. Districts and grant recipients can use their own landowner agreements as long as they are in a form and manner similar to the sample provided.  Districts must keep a copy of the signed landowner consent form with the project file for any work performed off the right of way. If landowner permission is required to achieve stream continuity and meet the DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard, but cannot be obtained, the project cannot be completed.  Contact the SCC in questionable circumstances.  This off-ROW policy is detailed in section 3.7.4.8 of the DGLVR Administrative Manual.
• A site assessment must be completed for each stream crossing prior to the QAB recommending the project for funding. This site assessment must be completed by the conservation district or their designee and must be used to support development of cost estimates and the grant application.  A site assessment includes obtaining a longitudinal profile and a minimum of two cross-sections of the existing stream channel.  The longitudinal profile and cross sections can be used by the conservation district to review future surveys and project plans to ensure they meet DGLVR Program policies and the DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard. The longitudinal profile and cross sections must be completed in accordance with section IV. K of the DGLVR Stream Crossing Design and Installation Standard.  Additional details for completing longitudinal profiles and cross sections are available in Chapter 4 of the Stream Crossing Technical Manual and in the technical bulletins attached to the Stream Crossing Technical Manual. If, later in the design process, the design engineer completes their own site assessment to support their project design, the conservation district staff is required to be on-site while the site assessment is being performed by the engineer and/or surveyor.  The conservation district’s role during the engineer’s site assessment is to observe and assist with the longitudinal profile and cross sections and ensure that all important data points are obtained. The site assessment requirement does not apply to sites that are eligible for an automatic Exemption from the DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard but does apply to sites that may later receive an Exemption from the DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard through the SCC (see section 7.1.3.2).
• If a project is required to be designed by an engineer, the grant recipient or engineer must provide all permit applications, Site Assessment, and design plans and specifications (per DGLVR stream crossing replacement standard) to the conservation district.  The conservation district must review the documents and provide written confirmation to the grant recipient or engineer that these submitted documents comply with DGLVR policy and the Stream Crossing Standard before they are submitted (or resubmitted) for permit review. The purpose of this review is to verify consistency with DGLVR policies and the Stream Crossing Standard, not to review engineering calculations or permit completeness. “Consistency” and “deficiency” form letters for conservation district use can be found on the Center’s website.
• If a project is required to be bid out for construction, the grant recipient or engineer must provide all draft bid packages to the conservation district.  The conservation district must review the draft documents and provide written confirmation to the grant recipient or engineer that those draft bid documents comply with DGLVR policy and the Stream Crossing Standard before they are provided to potential bidders. The purpose of this review is to verify consistency with DGLVR policies and the Stream Crossing Standard, not to review engineering calculations or bidding requirements.  It is up to the grant recipient to comply with applicable bidding requirements. “Consistency” and “deficiency” form letters for conservation district use can be found on the Center’s website.
• Conservation districts must be on-site regularly during construction to ensure that DGLVR Program policies and the Stream Crossing Standard are being met. At a minimum, the conservation district must be onsite during the installation of “Critical Stages of Construction” as defined in the DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard.
• In situations where no current stream crossing exists and a new crossing is to be installed, DGLVR Program policy must still be followed.  The conservation district must contact the SCC for eligibility guidance.  This requirement does not apply to sites that receive an exemption from the DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard (see section 7.1.3).
• Conservation districts must complete the “Project Lifecycle Checklist” (Appendix J) during the planning and implementation of stream crossing replacements, and the form must be kept in the project file. This requirement does not apply to sites that receive an exemption from the DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard (see section 7.1.3).

The State Conservation Commission (SCC) recognizes that it is not always practical, cost effective, or biologically beneficial to complete a comprehensive stream continuity project in certain situations. Stream crossing replacements vary drastically around the state, and this section on exemptions from the DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard is designed to provide maximum leeway for the conservation district and SCC to adapt to unique situations. The exemptions from the DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard discussed in this section only exempt projects from DGLVR requirements and do not exempt projects from any applicable permit requirements from DEP or other entities.

The following existing conditions may be, at the discretion of the conservation district, considered “Exempt from the DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard” without SCC approval for channels with a bankfull width of 4’ or less and:

• The defined bed and bank coming to the road does not extend more than 500’ upslope of the road ditch, or
• The drainage area of the bed and bank coming to the road is 20 acres or less.

Complete the “Automatic Exemption from the DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard” form (Appendix I) and keep it in the project file. Automatic exemptions still need to be reported in the SCC notification system.

Occasionally, circumstances may exist where a conservation district would like to request an exemption from the DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard from the SCC on a larger stream that does not qualify for an automatic exemption as outlined in 7.1.3.1. These situations must be handled individually, and a signed “SCC Exemption from the DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard” form must be obtained from the SCC and kept in the project file. Examples of some conditions where an exemption from the DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard may be requested:

• Small channels that fall outside the automatic exemptions above.
• Crossings with extensive outlet drops that would make establishing connectivity impossible or prohibitively expensive for the amount of habitat improvement it would provide.
• Other stream crossings with special circumstances.

A signed “SCC Approval for Exemption from the DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard Request” form (Appendix I) must be kept in the project file.

What is waived with an Exemption from DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard (either automatic or SCC):

• The need to follow the DGLVR Stream Crossing Design and Installation Standard,
• The need to achieve stream continuity as it relates to slope, streambed material depth, and establishing grade control within the structure, and
• The need to establish a low-flow channel and bank margins through the structure.

Requirements for projects covered by an Exemption from DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard (either automatic or SCC).

If continuity cannot be achieved, the following steps must be taken to ensure stream crossings that receive an exemption from the DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard will still result in a stable crossing that will not lead to accelerated erosion or other issues:

• Any requirements from local, state, and federal laws and all applicable permits are not waived as part of this exemption and must be followed.
• New structures must still be a single span at a minimum of 1.25 times or 125% of the bankfull channel width unless otherwise approved by the SCC.
• Ensure the stability of the channel upstream and downstream.  Grade controls must be shown on plan drawings if drawings are required.
  • Upstream: Grade control(s) are required immediately (between one and two bankfull widths) upstream of the inlet of the new structure to prevent headcutting (headward erosion lowering channel elevation that moves upstream over time). These grade controls are typically installed at the existing streambed elevation. If a larger structure is installed in a channel with road height limitations, installing a larger structure below the existing streambed elevation without grade control(s) will likely cause a headcut.
  • Downstream: Outlet stabilization is required in the form of grade controls, bank armoring, and/or filling in scour holes. Any grade controls are typically installed at the existing streambed elevation. Pipes may need to be extended further off the road, and the erosion potential caused by any elevation drops must be considered.
• New structures must be properly aligned with the channel, unless this is not feasible due to permitting restrictions or other constructability restraints.
• Consider floodplain connectivity when necessary (e.g., high water by-pass, overflow pipes, etc.).
• If permits and engineered plans are required, conservation districts are required to review all plans and specifications to ensure the project complies with DGLVR policy and requirements before they are submitted for permit review.
• Divert surface runoff and road drainage away from the stream and structure in a manner that prevents erosion and prevents discharges to the stream.
• For projects receiving an exemption from the DGLVR Stream Crossing Standard, other site-specific requirements may apply. If applicable, these will be identified by the SCC on a project-specific basis.

DSA is a crushed stone mixture developed by the Center in 2001 to be used as a wearing course for unpaved roads. DSA is designed to achieve maximum density compared to other aggregates in order to resist erosion and support traffic. DSA has a few key differences compared to traditional aggregates such as PennDOT 2A or 2RC:

• Well graded to include a range of rock sizes from 1.5″ to “stone dust”.
• 11-15 percent of the material is composed of “rock fines” that bind the material together (up to 17% fines if Plasticity Index is less than 2).
• Placement by motor paver is highly encouraged, and required for placements over 500 tons.
• Several other requirements including a maximum plasticity limit, a pH range, a minimum hardness specification, and optimum moisture requirements.

The Program goal is to improve water quality. DSA is designed to resist erosion and stand up to the forces of traffic. DSA has been proven to reduce sediment loads compared to traditional aggregates by as much as 90 percent, and reduce dust by as much as 75 percent. Since DSA was designed to resist erosion, it was originally intended to be placed on sections of road adjacent to streams where draining road runoff to the waterway is unavoidable. Over the years, DSA has evolved into a “standard practice” on projects in many districts, and is being overused. DSA is NOT a required component of every Program project. The extent to which DSA is used on projects is at the discretion of individual Districts and QABs. When DSA is used as part of a project, it should be the very last phase of the project. DSA alone does not constitute a comprehensive Program project. All possible base and drainage improvements (new pipes, underdrain, road fill, French mattresses, etc.) must be completed first to reduce environmental impacts of the road and extend the longevity of the DSA. Avoid placing DSA on entrenched roads, or on roads where surface drainage issues are not resolved.

Driving surface aggregate meeting the Commission’s Standard and Specification is the only approved road surface material that may be purchased (for DGR projects) with Program funds. The only exception to this is on road fill projects.  Road fill projects are defined as projects which install an average compacted thickness of 12-inches or more of fill material, not including the driving surface, to allow for proper drainage and/or strengthen the existing road base.  Road fill projects must be capped with DSA or an alternative aggregate at a minimum depth of 6-inches.  Shale or bank-run gravel may not be used as the final driving surface.  This exception is not meant to replace DSA with fill.

DSA must be placed in accordance with the DSA specification and certification found in the DSA Handbook. A DSA certification is required for every project where DSA is used. The DSA certification does not apply to an entire quarry. The DSA certification applies only to a particular source or pile of DSA that is being purchased. Additional certifications are required if the quarry changes the DSA production process (for example switching to a different seam of stone). The DSA certification must be obtained by the grant recipient before aggregate is placed, and must be kept with project files.

DSA must be sampled and tested by an independent lab before it is delivered to a project site. Sampling can be done by district representatives following the guidelines in the Aggregate handbook. DSA sampling, testing, and approval is “pile-specific”, not “quarry-specific”. Testing must be done on the aggregate pile that is directly supplying the job. The costs of testing can be incorporated into project costs, or paid out of a district’s admin/education funds. Sampling can also be done by the Center’s “DSA Clearinghouse”.

The Center will act as a “DSA Clearinghouse” for DSA projects. The purpose of this DSA Clearinghouse is to ensure quality DSA purchase and placements for districts statewide by:

• Visiting and talking with quarries to ensure they understand the DSA requirements.
• Collecting samples and performing testing to ensure DSA meets all material requirements before delivery and placement.
• Keeping records of aggregate testing to avoid duplicating efforts.
• Establishing a central point of contact for quarries on DSA issues.
• Assistance with contractor coordination.
• On-site assistance during DSA placement.

If districts plan to use the DSA Clearinghouse, it is recommended that they contact the Center when a potential DSA supplier is chosen, at least 30 days before placement. Notification can be made utilizing the DSA Purchase Notification Form, provided in the Aggregate Handbook, or on the Center’s website. If districts choose to sample their own DSA, they should share testing results with the Center in order to provide a more comprehensive statewide database and avoid duplicate testing.

FDR is an eligible expense in the Program, at the discretion of individual districts, for use on paved Low-Volume Road (LVR) projects. FDR is not an eligible expense on unpaved roads. FDR shall not be funded on paved LVR roads with DGLVR Program funds unless all applicable drainage improvements and Environmentally Sensitive Maintenance practices have been employed, as road owners are hesitant to install drainage practices at a later point when it would disturb the new road base. Shallow surface grinds for the purpose of road resurfacing are not considered FDR projects. FDR is a major rehabilitation technique in which the full depth (minimum 6″) of the surface and predetermined portion of the underlying base is uniformly pulverized and blended to provide a stronger, homogeneous road base.

FDR is an expensive process that may not be necessary everywhere it is proposed. When considering funding FDR projects, consider alternative base improvement techniques such as:

• Imported fill: Importing fill to raise the elevation of a road can be less expensive than FDR in some cases. Entrenched roads in particular will benefit from road fill to eliminate drainage issues while providing a sound road base.
• French Mattress: In some cases, road base instabilities are a direct result of spring and seeps coming up near or under the road. French mattresses provide excellent road base while insuring that wet areas around and under the road will not affect the road above.
• Geo-synthetics: The use of geo-synthetics such as geogrid can increase the structural strength and stability of the road base. Geogrid is an excellent solution to fix base problems and is cost effective on small projects.

If a district chooses to fund an FDR project, the following requirements apply:

• The Center must be made aware of the proposed FDR project before a contract is signed. A site visit from Commission or Center staff may be requested.
• FDR must follow specifications in PennDOT Publication 447 (Approved Products for Lower Volume Local Roads)
• The mix design for FDR projects must be determined by an independent third-party.
• FDR is a base stabilization technique and does not provide a final running surface. Consideration for asphalt, “tar and chip”, or some other final running surface must be part of the planning for FDR projects.
• Any additives or binding agents used in chemical stabilization must be on the Program’s “Approved Products” list, detailed here.

This section applies only to Low Volume funds, not Dirt and Gravel funds. The previous guidance and policy in this manual also applies to LVR projects and funds. For the purposes of the LVR Program, a “paved” road is defined to include any road surfaced with asphalt, “tar and chip”, “chip seal”, bitumen, concrete, or other asphalt-like coating.

The focus of road projects in the LVR portion of the Program should be on similar ESM principles that have been used in the Program since its inception. Projects in the LVR Program must contain benefits to both the road systems (improved drainage, reduced surface, ditch and bank erosion, smoother surface, more durable surface, reduced maintenance costs, etc.) and the environmental systems (water quality, stream quality, reduced storm water flows, improved air quality, increased infiltration). The balance between road improvements and environment benefits sho

Similar to Dirt and Gravel Projects, the focus of LVR projects should be on long-term road and environmental improvement projects.

• Routine maintenance of LVR or storm water systems such as cleaning inlets, street sweeping, crack sealing, etc. is not eligible for funding under this Program.
• Program funds should not be used to pay for deferred or neglected maintenance on drainage/storm water systems without road improvements.
• Program funds should not be used to fund any LVR issues that do not provide a long term benefit to the road and to the environment.

Program funds should not be used to correct recent mistakes and or design errors on LVRs that are the responsibility of the original project engineer or construction firm. If recent (within its reasonable design lifespan) LVR construction projects contain design or construction flaws, correction of these problems should be the duty of the project’s engineer or contractor of record, and LVR funds should not be allocated for these purposes.

In order to be eligible for LVR funding, a road must have an existing paved (including chip sealed) surface, and it must have a verified average daily traffic count of less than 500 vehicles per day (according to Commission guidance). For more information on traffic count guidance, see section 7.5.

All projects must apply ESM principles and practices to address an environmental concern directly related to the road, make improvements to the road system, or to meet all other Program requirements (ie. permits or approvals). The project eligibility requirements in section 3.7 of this manual apply to Low-Volume Roads.

Resurfacing paved roads (sealing or paving) is not a primary focus of the LVR Program component. Resurfacing costs can be considered by a district as a component part of a larger ESM project. It is at the discretion of individual districts and QABs whether resurfacing costs (sealing or paving) will be funded through the Program, either on individual projects or as countywide policy. Before funding any resurfacing work on projects, the following ESM principles must be addressed:

• Drainage issues
• Base instability issues
• Other necessary and appropriate issues such as bank stability, road entrenchment, vegetation, etc.

The use of petroleum solvent based “cutback asphalts” such as MC-30 and MC-70 are NOT allowed for use in the Program.

It is not the intent of the Program to encourage the sealing or paving of existing dirt or gravel roads and converting them to sealed or paved low-volume roads. While eligible entities may choose to seal or pave a DGR project on their own at some future point in time, no Program funds should be utilized for the specific purpose of converting unpaved roads to paved or “tar and chip”, unless otherwise approved by the Commission.

The Program recognizes the value of converting a poorly constructed or poorly maintained paved low-volume road into a high quality gravel road through full depth reclamation or other similar processes. Districts may utilize either dirt and gravel, or low-volume road program component funds for these purposes.

Many ESM principles and practices in use by the Program can be readily adapted to paved LVRs in a rural environments. LVR funding, however, is not limited to rural roads or rural environments. LVR projects in urban areas will require a new set of best management practices (BMPs) that will take some time to develop and disseminate through the Program. The level of focus in rural and urban environments will be at the discretion of districts and QABs.

The LVR portion of the Program is not JUST a storm water program. Projects, especially in urban areas, need to strike a balance between environmental improvements and road improvements. It will be up to districts and QABs to determine the proper balance for projects in their counties.

The Commission recognizes the fact that many LVR component projects will have higher levels of daily traffic and higher levels of posted speed than projects on unpaved roads. Grant Recipients are required to follow the same safety protocols as with all other road work (flaggers, signs, etc). The funding of any traffic control and safety components of a Program project is at the discretion of the district.

Before a contract can be signed for a low-volume road project, the applicant is responsible for validating that the road has 500 vehicles per day or less consistent with Commission and any local QAB policy. The Program’s “Traffic Count Validation form and Instructions” can be found in Appendix F.

• Applicant is responsible for providing traffic counts before a contract can be signed.
• A traffic count is not required in order to submit an application, unless required by local QAB policy.
• The district is responsible for verifying that a count exists, and that the count meets the criteria established in state and local policy.
• Traffic counts are considered valid for a period of five years, provided there are no new significant changes in traffic flow volumes or patterns.
• Documentation of traffic counts using a signed “Traffic Count Validation Form” must be retained with project files according to the Commission’s record retention policy. Districts may opt to include the completed traffic count validation form as an attachment to the project contract.
• Districts may, at their discretion, use administrative and education funding to facilitate or support traffic counts for applicants. Districts should ensure that all potential applicants have equal access to any traffic count facilitation measures they may employ.
• Traffic counts only apply to a segment of road between intersections, not to an entire length of road. Application sites that include intersections may require multiple counts.
• Traffic counts should be done on the proposed project location, or on a road that ensures that traffic on the project location can be determined.

Existing traffic counts can be used to verify road eligibility for LVR funding. Existing data must have been collected within the previous five years and conform to the Program’s Level 2 count protocol at a minimum. “Estimated” traffic counts that exist for many municipal roads cannot be used.

It is permissible to use existing data for roads with 500 vehicles per day or less to logically extrapolate to subsidiary roads. (For example, a spur road between two state roads where both state roads have less than 500 vehicles per day must also have less than 500.) This extrapolation of data can be used to verify that a road has 500 vehicles per day or less without performing a count. This extrapolation of traffic counts must prove the ADT on the road is 500 or less to be eligible for LVR funding. Potential sources of existing traffic count data include:

• State Roads: Traffic Volume Maps
• Local Roads: PennDOT regional offices or County Planning Commissions.

An applicant may do a Level 1 count to determine the traffic count on a potential project site. This involves counting traffic for a two hour period, either by hand tally, video recording, or an automated traffic counter. A Level 1 count of 500 vehicles per day or less will qualify the road for LVR funding. A Level 1 count must meet the following criteria:

• It must be conducted between March 1 and the week before Thanksgiving.
• It cannot be conducted on a holiday, or the day before or after a holiday.
• It must be conducted on a Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday
• It must be conducted for a minimum of two consecutive hours between 3:00 pm and 6:00 pm.
• Only the number of vehicle passes is counted, regardless of direction of travel or type of vehicle.
• The traffic count for the time period will be adjusted to a 24 hour period by simply multiplying the 2 hour count volume times twelve (12)
• Applicants may skip the Level 1 count and go straight to a Level 2 count if desired
• Only licensed motor vehicles should be counted.

If a Level 1 count produces a count of 500 vehicles per day or less, the project on the road is considered eligible without a Level 2 count. If a Level 1 count produces a count of more than 500 vehicles per day, it does not disqualify the road, but necessitates a Level 2 count because of its increased accuracy. The purpose of a Level 1 count is to provide a reasonably accurate traffic count with minimal time investment.

Example 1: A traffic count for two consecutive hours between 4:00 pm and 6:00 pm produces a count of 25 vehicles. 24 hours (per day) / 2 hours (per study) = 12

12 x 25 =300 average daily count.

This worksite would be eligible (no Level 2 count needed).

Example 2: A traffic count for two consecutive hours between 3:30 pm and 5:30 pm produces a count of 53 vehicles. 24 hours (per day) / 2 hours (per study) = 12

12 x 53 = 636 average daily count.

This does not disqualify the road. It simply means that a more accurate Level 2 count is required if the applicant wants to continue to pursue Program funding.

A Level 2 count involves the placement of an automated traffic counter on the road for a minimum period of 24 hours. Note that these are the minimum criteria for a count. More comprehensive or longer counts can be substituted as long as they meet the minimum requirements below for a “Level 2 count”. A Level 2 count of 500 vehicles per day or less will qualify the road for LVR funding. Level 2 counts supersede Level 1 counts if there is a discrepancy. A level 2 count must meet the following criteria:

• It must be conducted between March 1 and the week before Thanksgiving.
• It cannot be conducted on a holiday, or the day before or after a holiday.
• It must be conducted between 12 AM Tuesday and 12 AM Friday.
• It must be conducted for a minimum of 24 consecutive hours.
• Only the number of vehicle passes is counted, regardless of direction of travel or type of vehicle.

If a Level 2 count produces a count of 500 vehicles per day or less, the project on the road is considered eligible. If a Level 2 count produces a count of more than 500 vehicles per day, a project on that road is not eligible for LVR funding. 24 hour counts do not have be broken up by hour or any smaller time unit.

The criteria described in the Level 2 count represent a “minimum acceptable criteria”. Counties may use or adopt more stringent traffic count requirements as long as it meets or exceeds the requirements here. (A more stringent requirement is a count that provides more statistically accurate data. For example: requiring Level 2 counts for all roads, requiring 48 hour counts, or requiring hourly totals on counts to provide information to PennDOT.)

A traffic count survey cannot be conducted in a timeframe or manner that intentionally causes artificially low average daily traffic counts on a particular road segment. This includes conducting a traffic count during summer recess for a school access road, or conducting a traffic count when access to a road segment is temporarily or partially restricted or reduced (i.e. detoured, weight, or size restricted, etc.) or conducting a traffic count in any other timeframe or manner that intentionally causes low average daily traffic counts.