45220 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 187 / Thursday, September 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

(3) An engine shop visit is when the engine 

is subject to a serviceability check and repair, 

rebuild, or overhaul. 

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, ECO Branch, FAA, has 

the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, 

if requested using the procedures found in 14 

CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, 

send your request to your principal inspector 

or local Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the manager of the ECO Branch, send it to 

the attention of the person identified in 

paragraph (k)(1) of this AD. You may email 

your request to: ANE-AD-AMOC@faa.gov. 

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 

of the local flight standards district office/ 

certificate holding district office. 

(k) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Robert Green, Aerospace Engineer, 

ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, 

Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781–238– 

7754; fax: 781–238–7199; email: 

robert.green@faa.gov. 

(2) Refer to MCAI European Aviation 

Safety Agency AD 2017–0096, dated June 1, 

2017, for more information. You may 

examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the 

Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by 

searching for and locating it in Docket No. 

FAA–2017–0650. 

(3) Rolls-Royce plc Alert Non Modification 

Service Bulletin RB.211–72–AJ463, Revision 

2, dated June 28, 2017, can be obtained from 

RR plc, using the contact information in 

paragraph (k)(4) of this proposed AD. 

(4) For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Rolls-Royce plc, 

Corporate Communications, P.O. Box 31, 

Derby, England, DE24 8BJ; phone: 011–44– 

1332–242424; fax: 011–44–1332–249936; 

email: http://www.rolls-royce.com/contact/ 

civil_team.jsp; Internet: https://

customers.rolls-royce.com/public/ 

rollsroycecare. 

(5) You may view this service information 

at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Standards 

Branch, Policy and Innovation Division, 1200 

District Avenue, Burlington, MA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

September 22, 2017. 

Robert J. Ganley, 

Manager, Engine and Propeller Standards 

Branch, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2017–20718 Filed 9–27–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Highway Administration 

23 CFR Parts 778 and 773 

Federal Railroad Administration 

49 CFR Part 264 

Federal Transit Administration 

49 CFR Part 622 

[Docket No. FHWA–2016–0037] 

FHWA RIN 2125–AF73: FRA RIN 2130– 

AC66: FTA RIN 2132–AB32 

Program for Eliminating Duplication of 

Environmental Reviews 

AGENCY: Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), Federal 

Railroad Administration (FRA), Federal 

Transit Administration (FTA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM); request for comments. 

SUMMARY: This NPRM provides 

interested parties with the opportunity 

to comment on proposed regulations 

governing the U.S. Department of 

Transportation’s (DOT) Program for 

Eliminating Duplication of 

Environmental Reviews (Program) 

established by Section 1309 of the 

Fixing America’s Surface Transportation 

Act (FAST Act). Section 1309 directed 

the U.S. Secretary of Transportation 

(Secretary) to establish a pilot program 

authorizing up to five States to conduct 

environmental reviews and make 

approvals for projects under State 

environmental laws and regulations 

instead of the National Environmental 

Policy Act (NEPA). The FAST Act 

requires the Secretary, in consultation 

with the Chair of the Council on 

Environmental Quality (CEQ), to 

promulgate regulations to implement 

the requirements of the Program, 

including application requirements and 

criteria necessary to determine whether 

State laws and regulations are at least as 

stringent as the applicable Federal law. 

The FHWA, FRA, and FTA, hereinafter 

referred to as ‘‘the Agencies,’’ are 

proposing these regulations on behalf of 

the Secretary and seek comments on the 

proposals contained in this NPRM. This 

rule would also implement a provision 

in Section 1308 of the FAST Act that 

amends the corrective action period that 

the Agencies must provide to a State 

participating in the Surface 

Transportation Project Delivery Program 

(Section 327 Program). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 27, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by the document number at 

the top of this document, by any of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 1–202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Ave. SE., West Building 

Ground Floor Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., between 9:00 

a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. The 

telephone number is (202) 366–9329. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number or Regulatory 

Information Number (RIN) for this 

rulemaking. All comments received will 

be posted without change to 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to 

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

FHWA, James Gavin, Office of Project 

Development and Environmental 

Review, (202) 366–1473, or Diane 

Mobley, Office of Chief Counsel, (202) 

366–1366. For FRA, Michael Johnsen, 

Office of Railroad Policy and 

Development, (202) 493–1310, or Chris 

Van Nostrand, Office of Chief Counsel, 

(202) 493–6058. For FTA, Megan Blum, 

Office of Planning and Environment, 

(202) 366–0463, or Helen Serassio, 

Office of Chief Counsel, (202) 366–1974. 

The Agencies are located at 1200 New 

Jersey Ave. SE., Washington, DC 20590. 

Office hours are from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 

p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On December 4, 2015, President 

Obama signed into law the FAST Act 

(Pub. L. 114–94, 129 Stat. 1312), which 

contains new requirements related to 

the National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). Section 

1309 of the FAST Act, codified at 23 

U.S.C. 330, established a pilot program 

that allows the Secretary to approve up 

to five States to use one or more State 

environmental laws instead of NEPA for 

environmental review of surface 

transportation projects. In order to be 

eligible to participate in the Program, a 

State must have assumed the Secretary’s 

responsibilities for environmental 


jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 187 / Thursday, September 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules 45221 

reviews under 23 U.S.C. 327. To 

participate in the Program, a State must 

submit an application and enter into an 

agreement with DOT. 

Section 1308(5) of the FAST Act 

amended the 23 U.S.C. 327(j) 

termination procedures for the Section 

327 Program by: (1) Changing the 

number of days for corrective action the 

Agencies must provide to the State from 

30 days to not less than 120 calendar 

days, and 2) upon the request of the 

Governor of the State, requiring the 

Agencies provide a detailed description 

of each responsibility in need of 

corrective action. 

Under Section 1309 of the FAST Act 

(23 U.S.C. 330), DOT, in consultation 

with the Chair of CEQ, must promulgate 

regulations implementing the 

requirements of that provision. The 

proposed regulations would establish 

the Program, specify the information 

that applicants must submit to 

participate in the Program, and define 

the criteria the Agencies, in consultation 

with the Office of the Secretary and 

with the concurrence of the Chair of 

CEQ, will use to determine whether a 

State law or regulation is as stringent as 

the Federal requirements under NEPA, 

the procedures implementing NEPA, 

and NEPA-related regulations and 

Executive Orders. This NPRM proposes 

regulations establishing the Program 

and requests the public’s comments. 

Section-by-Section Discussion of the 

Proposals 

23 CFR Part 778—Pilot Program for 

Eliminating Duplication of 

Environmental Reviews 

The Agencies propose a title to this 

part that clearly describes the Program’s 

scope. 

Section 778.101 Purpose 

The Agencies propose a section to 

explain the purpose of the Program. 

Section 778.103 Eligibility and Certain 

Limitations 

The Agencies propose a section 

describing the Program’s eligibility 

requirements and the limitations of a 

State’s participation. 

This section proposes four 

requirements necessary for a State to 

participate in the Program. First, a State 

must act through the Governor or topranking State transportation official who 

is charged with responsibility for 

highway construction. Second, a State 

must expressly consent to the exclusive 

jurisdiction of the U.S. District Courts 

for compliance, discharge, and 

enforcement of any responsibility under 

this Program. Third, a State must have 

assumed the responsibilities of the 

Secretary under 23 U.S.C. 327. Fourth, 

a State must have laws in effect 

authorizing the State to take the actions 

necessary to carry out the alternative 

environmental review and approval 

procedures under State laws and 

regulations. 

Section 778.103 identifies two 

conditions governing a State’s 

participation in the Program. First, State 

environmental laws and regulations 

may only be substituted as a means for 

complying with NEPA, procedures 

governing the implementation of NEPA, 

and related regulations and Executive 

Orders. Second, compliance with State 

environmental laws and regulations 

does not substitute for compliance with 

any other applicable Federal 

environmental requirements. 

Section 778.105 Application 

Requirements for Participation in the 

Program 

The Agencies propose a section 

describing the required content of an 

eligible State’s application to participate 

in the Program. 

To participate in the Program, any 

eligible State would submit an 

application that includes: 

(1) A full and complete description of 

the alternative environmental review 

and approval procedures the State 

proposes to use, including (i) the 

procedures the State uses to engage the 

public and consider alternatives to the 

proposed action; and (ii) the extent to 

which the State considers 

environmental consequences or impacts 

on resources potentially impacted by 

the proposed actions (40 CFR 1508.7 

and 1508.8). 

(2) Identification of each Federal 

environmental requirement the State is 

seeking to substitute, within the 

limitations of this section; 

(3) Identification of each State 

environmental law and regulation that 

the State intends to substitute for a 

Federal environmental requirement, 

within the limitations of this section; 

(4) A detailed explanation of how the 

State environmental law and regulation 

intended to substitute for a Federal 

environmental requirement is at least as 

stringent as the Federal requirement; 

(5) A detailed description of the 

projects or classes of transportation 

projects for which the State anticipates 

exercising the authority that may be 

granted under the Program; 

(6) Verification that the State has the 

financial and personnel resources 

necessary to carry out the Program; 

(7) Evidence that the State has sought 

public comments on its application 

prior to its submittal and the State’s 

response to any comments it received; 

(8) A point of contact for questions 

regarding the application and a point of 

contact regarding potential 

implementation of the Program (if 

different); 

(9) Certification and explanation by 

the State’s Attorney General or other 

State official legally empowered by 

State law to issue legal opinions that 

bind the State that the State has legal 

authority to enter into the Program, and 

that the State consents to exclusive 

Federal court jurisdiction for the 

compliance, discharge, and enforcement 

of any responsibility under this 

Program; 

(10) Certification by the State’s 

Attorney General or other State official 

legally empowered by State law to issue 

legal opinions that bind the State that 

the State has laws that are comparable 

to the Freedom of Information Act 

(FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552, including 

providing that any decision regarding 

the public availability of a document 

under those laws is reviewable by a 

court of competent jurisdiction; and 

(11) The State Governor’s (or in the 

case of the District of Columbia, the 

Mayor’s) or the State’s top ranking 

transportation official’s signature 

approving the application. 

Section 778.107 Application Review 

and Approval 

The Agencies propose a section 

establishing the review and approval 

process for a State’s application to the 

Program. 

To begin the review and approval 

process, the applicable Operating 

Administration also would solicit 

public comments on a State’s complete 

application and would consider 

comments before making a decision on 

the application. In addition to the 

State’s application, the Operating 

Administration may provide other 

documents for public review such as a 

draft of the proposed agreement. After 

receiving a complete application, the 

Operating Administration would have 

120 calendar days to make a decision on 

the State’s application. The Operating 

Administration would transmit the 

decision to the applicant, with an 

explanation in writing. 

In making the decision, the Operating 

Administration would approve a State’s 

application only if: 

(1) That State is party to an agreement 

with the Operating Administration 

under 23 U.S.C. 327; 

(2) The Operating Administration has 

determined, after considering any 

public comments received, the State has 

the capacity, including financial and 


jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
45222 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 187 / Thursday, September 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

personnel, to undertake the alternative 

environmental review and approval 

procedures; and 

(3) The Operating Administration, in 

consultation with the Office of the 

Secretary, with the concurrence of the 

Chair of CEQ, and after considering 

public comments received, has 

determined the State laws or regulations 

described in the State’s application are 

at least as stringent as the Federal 

requirements they substitute. 

Before the Operating Administration 

approves the application, the State must 

enter into a written agreement with the 

Operating Administration. At a 

minimum the written agreement must: 

(1) Be executed by the Governor or 

top-ranking transportation official in the 

State charged with responsibility for 

highway construction; 

(2) Provide that the State agrees to 

assume the responsibilities of the 

Program, as identified by the Operating 

Administration; 

(3) Provide that the State expressly 

consents to accept Federal court 

jurisdiction for the compliance, 

discharge, or enforcement of any 

responsibility it undertakes for the 

Program; 

(4) Certify that State laws or 

regulations exist that authorize the State 

to carry out the responsibilities of the 

Program; 

(5) Certify that State laws or 

regulations exist that are comparable to 

FOIA (5 U.S.C. 552), including a 

provision that any decision regarding 

the public availability of a document 

under the State laws or regulations is 

reviewable by a Court of competent 

jurisdiction; 

(6) Commit the State to maintain the 

personnel and financial resources 

necessary to carry out its 

responsibilities under the Program; 

(7) Have a term of not more than 5 

years, the term of a State’s agreement 

with the Operating Administration in 

accordance with 23 U.S.C. 327, or a 

term ending on December 4, 2027, 

whichever is sooner; and 

(8) Be renewable. 

The Operating Administration’s 

execution of the Agreement would 

constitute approval of the application. A 

State approved to participate in the 

Program may further apply the 

approved alternative environmental 

review and approval procedures to 

locally administered projects for up to 

25 local governments at the request of 

those local governments. For such 

locally administered projects, the State 

would be responsible for ensuring that 

the requirements of the approved 

alternative State procedures are met. 

Section 778.109 Criteria for 

Determining Stringency 

After consultation with the Agencies, 

CEQ identified criteria the Agencies 

would use to determine whether the 

State laws or regulations are at least as 

stringent as the Federal NEPA 

requirements. These criteria provide for 

protection of the environment, provide 

opportunity for public participation and 

comment (including access to the 

documentation necessary to review the 

potential impact of a project), and 

ensure consistent review of projects that 

would otherwise have been covered 

under NEPA. The legislative and 

regulatory citations noted are intended 

to indicate, in general, the basis for the 

criteria. Based on CEQ’s criteria, the 

Agencies and CEQ propose that to be 

considered at least as stringent as the 

Federal NEPA requirements, a State 

environmental law or regulation, at a 

minimum, must: 

(a) Define the types of actions that 

normally require an environmental 

impact assessment, including 

government-sponsored projects such as 

those receiving Federal financial 

assistance or permit approvals. (42 

U.S.C. 4332(2)(C); 40 CFR 1508.18); 

(b) Ensure an early process for 

determining the scope of the action and 

issues that need to be addressed, 

identifying the significant issues, and 

for the classification of the appropriate 

environmental impact assessment in 

accordance with the significance of the 

likely impacts. For actions that may 

result in significant impacts on the 

human environment the scoping process 

should be an open and public process. 

(23 U.S.C. 139(e); 40 CFR 1501.3, 

1501.4, 1501.7, 1507.3(b), 1508.14, and 

1508.25); 

(c) Prohibit agencies and nongovernmental proponents from taking 

action concerning the proposal until the 

environmental impact evaluation is 

complete when such action would (1) 

have adverse environmental impacts or 

(2) limit the choice of reasonable 

alternatives. (40 CFR 1506.1 and 

1506.10(b)). 

(d) Protect the integrity and 

objectivity of the analysis by requiring 

the agency to take responsibility for the 

scope and content of the analysis and by 

preventing conflicts of interest among 

the parties developing the analysis and 

the parties with financial or other 

interest in the outcome of the project. 

(42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(D); 40 CFR 1506.5); 

(e) Based on a proposed action’s 

purpose and need, require objective 

evaluation of reasonable alternatives to 

the proposed action (including the 

alternative of not taking the action) if it 

may result in significant impacts to the 

human environment or, for those 

actions that may not result in significant 

impacts, consideration of alternatives if 

they will involve unresolved conflicts 

concerning alternative uses of available 

resources (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)(iii); 42 

U.S.C. 4332(2)(E); 23 U.S.C. 

330(b)(1)(A); 40 CFR 1502.13, 1502.14, 

and 1508.9); 

(f) Require an assessment of the 

reasonably foreseeable direct, indirect, 

and cumulative impacts of a proposed 

action (and any reasonable alternatives) 

on the human environment, and a 

comparison of those potential impacts 

with existing environmental conditions 

(42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C); 23 U.S.C. 

330(b)(1)(B); 40 CFR 1502.16, 1508.9(b), 

and 1508.4); 

(g) Require the consideration of 

appropriate mitigation for the impacts 

associated with a proposal and 

reasonable alternatives (including 

avoiding, minimizing, rectifying, 

reducing or eliminating the impact over 

time, and compensating for the impact) 

(40 CFR 1502.14(f), 1502.16(h), and 

1508.20); 

(h) Provide for adequate interagency 

participation, including appropriate 

coordination and consultation with 

State, Federal, tribal, and local agencies 

with jurisdiction by law, special 

expertise, or an interest with respect to 

any environmental impact associated 

with the proposal, and for collaboration 

that would eliminate duplication of 

reviews. For actions that may result in 

significant impacts to the human 

environment, the process should allow 

for the development of plans for 

interagency coordination and public 

involvement, and the setting of 

timetables for the review process (42 

U.S.C. 4332(2)(C); 23 U.S.C. 139(d) and 

139(g); 40 CFR 1500.5(e), 1501.6, 

1502.25, and part 1503); 

(i) Provide an opportunity for public 

participation and comment that is 

commensurate with the significance of 

the proposal’s impacts on the human 

environment, and require public access 

to the documentation developed during 

the environmental review and a process 

to respond to public comments. (42 

U.S.C. 4332(2)(C); 23 U.S.C. 

330(b)(1)(A); FAST Act, Sec. 

1309(c)(2)(B)(ii); 40 CFR 1502.19, part 

1503, and 1506.6; and E.O. 11514, Sec. 

1(b)); 

(j) Include procedures for the 

elevation and resolution of interagency 

disputes prior to a final decision on the 

proposed project. (23 U.S.C. 139(h); 40 

CFR part 1504); 

(k) Require, for the conclusion of the 

process, a concise documentation of 

findings (for actions that would not 


jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 187 / Thursday, September 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules 45223 

likely result in significant impacts to the 

human environment) or, for actions that 

may result in significant impacts, a 

concise record that states the decision 

that: (i) Identifies all alternatives 

considered (specifying which were 

environmentally preferable); (ii) 

identifies and discusses all factors that 

were balanced by the agency in making 

its decision, and states how those 

considerations entered into the 

decision; (iii) states whether all 

practicable means to avoid or minimize 

environmental harm have been adopted, 

and if not, why they were not; and (iv) 

describes the monitoring and 

enforcement program that will be 

adopted where applicable for any 

mitigation (40 CFR 1501.4 and 1505.2); 

(l) Require the agency to supplement 

environmental impacts assessments if 

there are substantial changes in the 

proposal that are relevant to 

environmental concerns or significant 

new circumstances or information 

relevant to environmental concerns and 

bearing on the proposed action or its 

impacts (23 U.S.C. 330(e)(3); 40 CFR 

1502.9); and 

(m) Allow for the use of procedures 

that facilitate process efficiency such as 

the identification of categories of actions 

that do not individually or cumulatively 

have a significant impact on the human 

environment and which have been 

found to not have such effect with 

procedures that require the 

consideration of extraordinary 

circumstances that would warrant a 

higher level of analysis, the use of 

tiering, programmatic approaches, 

adoption, incorporation by reference, 

approaches to eliminate duplication 

with other Federal requirements, and 

special procedures to address 

emergency situations (23 U.S.C. 

139(b)(3); 40 CFR 1502.20, 1502.21, 

1502.25, 1506.2, 1506.3, 1506.4, 

1507.3(b)(ii), and 1508.4). 

Section 778.111 Review and 

Termination 

The Agencies propose a section 

describing the termination date of the 

Program, the Operating 

Administration’s responsibilities to 

review each approved State’s 

performance implementing the Program, 

and the Operating Administration’s 

right to terminate a State’s participation 

in the Program early. 

Under FAST Act Section 1309, the 

Program will terminate 12 years after 

enactment (December 4, 2027). Until 

then, the Operating Administration 

would review each participating State’s 

performance, at least once every 5 years. 

The Operating Administration would 

provide public notice and an 

opportunity for public comment on the 

review. At the conclusion of the 

Operating Administration’s last review 

before the expiration of the term, the 

Operating Administration may extend a 

State’s participation in the Program for 

an additional term not to exceed 5 years 

(if this extension ends before December 

4, 2027) or it may terminate the State’s 

participation in the Program. 

Finally, the Operating Administration 

could terminate a State’s participation 

in the Program if the Operating 

Administration, in consultation with the 

Office of the Secretary and the Chair of 

CEQ, determines a participating State’s 

performance fails to meet the terms of 

the written agreement, the requirements 

of 23 CFR part 778, or 23 U.S.C. 330. 

Before terminating the State’s 

participation, the Operating 

Administration would first notify the 

State and allow 90 days for the State to 

take corrective action. If the State fails 

to take corrective action during this 

time, the Operating Administration may 

then terminate that State’s participation 

in the Program. 

23 CFR Part 773—Surface 

Transportation Project Delivery Program 

Application Requirements and 

Termination 

The Agencies propose to revise 

section 773.117(a)(2) by modifying the 

current termination time period 

language to state that the Operating 

Administration(s) must provide the 

State no less than 120 days to take 

corrective actions. 

The Agencies propose to add a new 

section 773.117(a)(3) to include that on 

the request of the Governor of the State, 

the Operating Administration(s) shall 

provide a detailed description of each 

responsibility in need of corrective 

action regarding an inadequacy 

identified by the Operating 

Administration. 

49 CFR Part 264—Program for 

Eliminating Duplication of 

Environmental Reviews and the Surface 

Transportation Project Delivery Program 

The Agencies propose to revise the 

heading for 49 CFR part 264 and add a 

reference to 23 U.S.C. 330 and the 

Program application procedures in 23 

CFR part 778 as applicable to rail 

projects. This cross-reference would 

assist potential FRA applicants, State 

and Federal agencies, and the public. 

49 CFR Part 622—Environmental 

Impact and Related Procedures 

The Agencies propose to revise the 

authorities in subpart A— 

Environmental Procedures to include a 

reference to 23 U.S.C. 330 and the 

application procedures in 23 CFR part 

778 as applicable to transit projects. 

This cross-reference would assist 

potential FTA applicants, State and 

Federal agencies, and the public. 

Statutory/Legal Authority for This 

Rulemaking 

The Agencies have the authority for 

this rulemaking action under 49 U.S.C. 

322(a), which provides authority to 

‘‘[a]n officer of the Department of 

Transportation [to] prescribe regulations 

to carry out the duties and powers of the 

officer.’’ The Secretary delegated this 

authority to the Agencies’ 

Administrators in 49 CFR 1.81(a)(3), 

which provides that the authority to 

prescribe regulations contained in 49 

U.S.C. 322(a) is delegated to each 

Administrator ‘‘with respect to statutory 

provisions for which authority is 

delegated by other sections in [49 CFR 

part 1].’’ 

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices 

The Agencies will consider all 

comments received before the close of 

business on the comment closing date 

indicated above and will make such 

comments available for examination in 

the docket at the above regulations.gov 

address. The Agencies will file 

comments received after the comment 

closing date and consider them to the 

extent practicable. In addition to late 

comments, the Agencies will also 

continue to file relevant information in 

the docket as it becomes available after 

the comment period closing date. 

Interested persons should continue to 

examine the docket for new material. 

The Agencies may publish a final rule 

at any time after close of the comment 

period. 

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory 

Planning and Review), Executive Order 

13563 (Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review), Executive Order 

13771 (Reducing Regulation and 

Controlling Regulatory Costs), and DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

direct agencies to assess all costs and 

benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distributive impacts, and 

equity). The Agencies have determined 

preliminarily that this action would not 

be a significant regulatory action under 

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 

and would not be significant within the 

meaning of DOT’s regulatory policies 

and procedures (44 FR 11032). This 


jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
45224 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 187 / Thursday, September 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

proposed rule is not expected to be an 

Executive Order 13771 regulatory action 

because this proposed rule is not 

significant under Executive Order 

12866. 

Executive Order 13563 emphasizes 

the importance of quantifying both costs 

and benefits, reducing costs, 

harmonizing rules, and promoting 

flexibility. The Agencies anticipate that 

the economic impact of this rulemaking 

would be minimal. The Agencies do not 

have specific data to assess the 

monetary value of the benefits from the 

proposed changes because such data 

does not exist and would be difficult to 

develop. 

This proposed rulemaking would not 

adversely affect, in any material way, 

any sector of the economy. This 

proposed rulemaking sets forth 

application requirements for the 

Program, which will result in only 

minimal costs to Program applicants. In 

addition, these changes would not 

interfere with any action taken or 

planned by another agency and would 

not materially alter the budgetary 

impact of any entitlements, grants, user 

fees, or loan programs. Consequently, a 

full regulatory evaluation is not 

required. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

In compliance with the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96–354, 5 U.S.C. 

601–612), the Agencies have evaluated 

the effects of this proposed rule on 

small entities and anticipate that this 

action would not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. ‘‘Small 

entities’’ include small businesses, notfor-profit organizations that are 

independently owned and operated and 

are not dominant in their fields, and 

governmental jurisdictions with 

populations under 50,000. The 

proposed rule addresses application 

requirements for States wishing to 

participate in the Program. As such, it 

affects only States, and States are not 

included in the definition of small 

entity set forth in 5 U.S.C. 601. 

Therefore, the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

does not apply, and the Agencies certify 

that this action would not have 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

This proposed rule would not impose 

unfunded mandates as defined by the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(Pub. L. 104–4, 109 Stat. 48). This 

proposed rule will not result in the 

expenditure by State, local, and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $155 million or more 

in any one year (2 U.S.C. 1532). Further, 

in compliance with the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995, the 

Agencies will evaluate any regulatory 

action that might be proposed in 

subsequent stages of the proceeding to 

assess the effects on State, local, and 

tribal governments and the private 

sector. Additionally, the definition of 

‘‘Federal Mandate’’ in the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act excludes financial 

assistance of the type in which State, 

local, or tribal governments have 

authority to adjust their participation in 

the Program in accordance with changes 

made in the Program by the Federal 

Government. 

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism 

Assessment) 

Executive Order 13132 requires 

agencies to ensure meaningful and 

timely input by State and local officials 

in the development of regulatory 

policies that may have a substantial, 

direct effect on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. The Agencies 

analyzed this proposed action in 

accordance with the principles and 

criteria contained in Executive Order 

13132 and determined that it would not 

have sufficient federalism implications 

to warrant the preparation of a 

federalism assessment. The Agencies 

have also determined that this proposed 

action would not preempt any State law 

or State regulation or affect the States’ 

ability to discharge traditional State 

governmental functions. The Agencies 

invite State and local governments with 

an interest in this rulemaking to 

comment on the effect that adoption of 

specific proposals may have on State or 

local governments. 

Executive Order 13175 (Tribal 

Consultation) 

The Agencies have analyzed this 

action under Executive Order 13175, 

and believe that it would not have 

substantial direct effects on one or more 

Indian tribes; would not impose 

substantial direct compliance costs on 

Indian tribal governments; and would 

not preempt tribal law. Therefore, a 

tribal summary impact statement is not 

required. 

Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects) 

The Agencies have analyzed this 

action under Executive Order 13211, 

Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. The Agencies have 

determined that this action is not a 

significant energy action under 

Executive Order 13211 because it is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. Therefore, a Statement of Energy 

Effects under Executive Order 13211 is 

not required. 

Executive Order 12372 

(Intergovernmental Review) 

The DOT’s regulations implementing 

Executive Order 12372 regarding 

intergovernmental consultation on 

Federal programs and activities (49 CFR 

part 17) apply to this program. 

Accordingly, the Agencies solicit 

comments on this issue. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.), 

Federal agencies must obtain approval 

from the Office of Management and 

Budget for each collection of 

information they conduct, sponsor, or 

require through regulations. The 

Agencies have determined that this 

proposal does not contain collection of 

information requirements for the 

purposes of the PRA. 

Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice 

Reform) 

This action meets applicable 

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform, to minimize litigation, 

eliminate ambiguity, and reduce 

burden. 

Executive Order 12898 (Environmental 

Justice) 

Executive Order 12898, Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations, and DOT 

Order 5610.2(a), 77 FR 27534 (May 10, 

2012), require DOT agencies to achieve 

environmental justice (EJ) as part of 

their mission by identifying and 

addressing, as appropriate, 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects, 

including interrelated social and 

economic effects, of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. The 

DOT Order requires DOT agencies to 

address compliance with the Executive 

Order and the DOT Order in all 

rulemaking activities. In addition, 

FHWA and FTA have issued additional 

documents relating to administration of 

the Executive Order and the DOT Order. 

On June 14, 2012, the FHWA issued an 

update to its EJ order, FHWA Order 

6640.23A, FHWA Actions to Address 


jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 187 / Thursday, September 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules 45225 

Environmental Justice in Minority 

Populations and Low-Income 

Populations. FTA also issued an update 

to its EJ policy, FTA Policy Guidance for 

Federal Transit Recipients, 77 FR 42077 

(July 17, 2012). 

The Agencies have evaluated this 

proposed rule under the Executive 

Order, the DOT Order, the FHWA 

Order, and the FTA Policy Guidance. 

The Agencies have determined that the 

proposed application regulations, if 

finalized, would not cause 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health and environmental effects 

on minority or low-income populations. 

States participating in the Program must 

comply with DOT’s and the appropriate 

Agency guidance and policies on 

environmental justice. 

Executive Order 13045 (Protection of 

Children) 

The Agencies have analyzed this 

action under Executive Order 13045, 

Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks. The Agencies certify that this 

action would not be an economically 

significant rule and would not cause an 

environmental risk to health or safety 

that may disproportionately affect 

children. 

Executive Order 12630 (Taking of 

Private Property) 

The Agencies do not anticipate that 

this action would affect a taking of 

private property or otherwise have 

taking implications under Executive 

Order 12630, Governmental Actions and 

Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

Agencies are required to adopt 

implementing procedures for NEPA that 

establish specific criteria for, and 

identification of, three classes of 

actions: those that normally require 

preparation of an EIS; those that 

normally require preparation of an EA; 

and those that are categorically 

excluded from further NEPA review (40 

CFR 1507.3(b)). This proposed action 

qualifies for categorical exclusions 

under 23 CFR 771.117(c)(20) 

(promulgation of rules, regulations, and 

directives) and 771.117(c)(1) (activities 

that do not lead directly to construction) 

for FHWA, and 23 CFR 771.118(c)(4) 

(planning and administrative activities 

which do not involve or lead directly to 

construction) for FTA. In addition, FRA 

has determined that this proposed 

action is not a major FRA action 

requiring the preparation of an 

environmental impact statement or 

environmental assessment under FRA’s 

Procedures for Considering 

Environmental Impacts (64 FR 28545, 

May 26, 1999, as amended by 78 FR 

2713, Jan. 14, 2013). The Agencies have 

evaluated whether the proposed action 

would involve unusual or extraordinary 

circumstances and have determined that 

this proposed action would not involve 

such circumstances. 

Under the Program, a selected State 

may conduct environmental reviews 

and make approvals for projects under 

State environmental laws and 

regulations instead of NEPA. These 

State environmental laws and 

regulations must be at least as stringent 

as the Federal requirements. As a result, 

the Agencies find that this proposed 

rulemaking would not result in 

significant impacts on the human 

environment. 

Regulation Identifier Number 

A regulation identifier number (RIN) 

is assigned to each regulatory action 

listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal 

Regulations. The Regulatory Information 

Service Center publishes the Unified 

Agenda in April and October of each 

year. The RIN contained in the heading 

of this document can be used to cross 

reference this action with the Unified 

Agenda. 

List of Subjects 

23 CFR Part 778 

Environmental protection, 

Eliminating duplication of 

environmental reviews pilot program, 

Highways and roads. 

23 CFR Part 773 

Environmental protection, Surface 

transportation project delivery program 

application requirements and 

termination, Highways and roads. 

49 CFR Part 264 

Environmental protection, 

Eliminating duplication of 

environmental reviews pilot program, 

Railroads. 

49 CFR Part 622 

Environmental protection, 

Environmental impact and related 

procedures, Public transportation, 

Transit. 

Brandye L. Hendrickson, 

Acting Administrator, Federal Highway 

Administration. 

Heath Hall, 

Acting Administrator, Federal Railroad 

Administration. 

Jane Williams, 

Acting Administrator, Federal Transit 

Administration. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Agencies propose to 

amend 23 CFR chapter I and 49 CFR 

chapters II and VI as follows: 

Title 23—Highways 

PART 773—SURFACE 

TRANSPORTATION PROJECT 

DELIVERY PROGRAM APPLICATION 

REQUIREMENTS AND TERMINATION 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 773 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 23 U.S.C. 315 and 327; 49 CFR 

1.81(a)(4)–(6); 49 CFR 1.85. 

■ 2. Amend § 773.117 by revising 

paragraph (a)(2) and adding paragraph 

(a)(3) to read as follows: 

(a) * * * 

(2) The Operating Administration(s) 

may not terminate a State’s participation 

without providing the State with 

notification of the noncompliance issue 

that could give rise to the termination, 

and without affording the State an 

opportunity to take corrective action to 

address the noncompliance issue. The 

Operating Administration(s) must 

provide the State a period of no less 

than 120 days to take corrective actions. 

The Operating Administration(s) is 

responsible for making the final 

decision on whether the corrective 

action is satisfactory. 

(3) On the request of the Governor of 

the State, the Operating 

Administration(s) shall provide a 

detailed description of each 

responsibility in need of corrective 

action regarding an inadequacy 

identified by the Operating 

Administration(s). 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Add part 778 to read as follows: 

PART 778—PILOT PROGRAM FOR 

ELIMINATING DUPLICATION OF 

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS 

Sec. 

778.101 Purpose. 

778.103 Eligibility and Certain Limitations. 

778.105 Application requirements for 

participation in the program. 

778.107 Application review and approval. 

778.109 Criteria for Determining 

Stringency. 

778.111 Review and Termination. 

Authority: 23 U.S.C. 330; 49 CFR 1.81. 

§ 778.101 Purpose. 

The purpose of this part is to establish 

the requirements for a State to 

participate in the pilot program for 

eliminating duplication of 

environmental reviews (‘‘Program’’) 

under 23 U.S.C. 330. This Program 

allows States to conduct environmental 

reviews and make approvals for projects 


jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
45226 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 187 / Thursday, September 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

under State environmental laws and 

regulations instead of the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). 

§ 778.103 Eligibility and Certain 

Limitations. 

(a) Applicants. To be eligible for the 

Program, a State must: 

(1) Act by and through the Governor 

or top-ranking State transportation 

official who is charged with 

responsibility for highway construction; 

(2) Expressly consent to the exclusive 

jurisdiction of U.S. District Courts for 

compliance, discharge, and enforcement 

of any responsibility under this 

Program; 

(3) Have previously assumed the 

responsibilities of the Secretary under 

23 U.S.C. 327 related to environmental 

review, consultation, or other actions 

required under certain Federal 

environmental laws; and 

(4) Identify laws authorizing the State 

to take the actions necessary to carry out 

the equivalent environmental review 

and approval procedures under State 

laws and regulations. 

(b) Certain Limitations. (1) State 

environmental laws and regulations 

may only be substituted as a means of 

complying with: 

(i) NEPA; 

(ii) Procedures governing the 

implementation of NEPA and related 

procedural laws under the authority of 

the Secretary, including 23 U.S.C. 109, 

128, and 139; and 

(iii) Related regulations and Executive 

Orders. 

(2) Compliance with State 

environmental laws and regulations 

may not serve as a substitute for the 

Secretary’s responsibilities regarding 

compliance with any other Federal 

environmental laws. 

§ 778.105 Application requirements for 

participation in the Program. 

(a) To apply to participate in the 

Program, a State must submit an 

application to the Federal Highway 

Administration, Federal Railroad 

Administration, or Federal Transit 

Administration, as appropriate. 

(b) Each application submitted must 

contain the following information: 

(1) A full and complete description of 

the alternative environmental review 

and approval procedures the State 

proposes, including: 

(i) The procedures the State uses to 

engage the public and consider 

alternatives to the proposed action; and 

(ii) The extent to which the State 

considers environmental consequences 

or impacts on resources potentially 

impacted by the proposed actions (such 

as air, water, or species). 

(2) Each Federal environmental 

requirement the State is seeking to 

substitute, within the limitations of 

§ 778.103(b); 

(3) Each State environmental law and 

regulation the State intends to substitute 

for a Federal environmental 

requirement, within the limitations of 

§ 778.103(b); 

(4) A detailed explanation (with 

supporting documentation incorporated 

by reference) of the basis for concluding 

the State environmental law or 

regulation intended to substitute for a 

Federal environmental requirement is at 

least as stringent as that Federal 

requirement; 

(5) A description of the projects or 

classes of projects for which the State 

anticipates exercising the authority that 

may be granted under the Program; 

(6) Verification that the State has the 

financial and personnel resources 

necessary to fulfill its obligations under 

the Program; 

(7) Evidence that the State has sought 

public comments on its application 

prior to the submittal and the State’s 

response to any comments it received; 

(8) A point of contact for questions 

regarding the application and a point of 

contact regarding potential 

implementation of the Program (if 

different); 

(9) Certification and explanation by 

the State’s Attorney General or other 

State official legally empowered by 

State law to issue legal opinions that 

bind the State that the State has legal 

authority to enter into the Program, and 

that the State consents to exclusive 

Federal court jurisdiction for the 

compliance, discharge, and enforcement 

of any responsibility under this 

Program; 

(10) Certification by the State’s 

Attorney General or other State official 

legally empowered by State law to issue 

legal opinions that bind the State that 

the State has laws that are comparable 

to the Freedom of Information Act, 5 

U.S.C. 552 (FOIA), including laws that 

allow for any decision regarding the 

public availability of a document under 

those laws to be reviewed by a court of 

competent jurisdiction; and 

(11) The State Governor’s (or in the 

case of the District of Columbia, the 

Mayor’s) or the State’s top ranking 

transportation official’s signature 

approving the application. 

§ 778.107 Application review and approval. 

(a) The Operating Administration 

must solicit public comments on the 

application and must consider 

comments received before making a 

decision to approve or disapprove the 

application. Materials made available 

for this public review must include the 

State’s application and may include 

additional supporting materials. 

(b) After receiving an application 

Operating Administration deems 

complete, the Operating Administration 

must make a decision on whether to 

approve or disapprove the application 

within 120 calendar days. The 

Operating Administration must transmit 

the decision in writing to the State with 

a statement explaining the decision. 

(c) The Operating Administration will 

approve an application only if it 

determines the following conditions are 

satisfied: 

(1) The State is party to an agreement 

with the Operating Administration 

under 23 U.S.C. 327; 

(2) The Operating Administration has 

determined, after considering any 

public comments received, the State has 

the capacity, including financial and 

personnel, to undertake the alternative 

environmental review and approval 

procedures; and 

(3) The Operating Administration, in 

consultation with the Office of the 

Secretary with the concurrence of the 

Chair of CEQ, and after considering 

public comments received, has 

determined that the State environmental 

laws and regulations described in the 

State’s application are at least as 

stringent as the Federal requirements for 

which they substitute. 

(d) The State must enter into a written 

agreement with the Operating 

Administration. 

(e) The written agreement must: 

(1) Be executed by the Governor or 

top-ranking transportation official in the 

State charged with responsibility for 

highway construction; 

(2) Provide that the State agrees to 

assume the responsibilities of the 

Program, as identified by the Operating 

Administration; 

(3) Provide that the State expressly 

consents to accept Federal court 

jurisdiction for the compliance, 

discharge, or enforcement of any 

responsibility undertaken as part of the 

Program; 

(4) Certify that State laws and 

regulations exist that authorize the State 

to carry out the responsibilities of the 

Program; 

(5) Certify that State laws and 

regulations exist that are comparable to 

FOIA (5 U.S.C. 552), including a 

provision that any decision regarding 

the public availability of a document 

under the State laws and regulations is 

reviewable by a court of competent 

jurisdiction; 

(6) Contain a commitment that the 

State will maintain the personnel and 

financial resources necessary to carry 


jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 187 / Thursday, September 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules 45227 

out its responsibilities under the 

Program; 

(7) Have a term of not more than 5 

years, the term of a State’s agreement 

with the Operating Administration in 

accordance with 23 U.S.C. 327, or a 

term ending on December 4, 2027, 

whichever is sooner; and 

(8) Be renewable. 

(f) The State must execute the 

agreement before the Operating 

Administration executes the agreement 

and approves the application. The 

Operating Administration’s execution of 

the agreement will constitute approval 

of the application. 

(g) The agreement may be renewed at 

the end of its term, but may not extend 

beyond December 4, 2027. 

(h) A State approved to participate in 

the Program may further apply the 

approved alternative environmental 

review and approval procedures to 

locally administered projects, for up to 

25 local governments at the request of 

those local governments. For such 

locally administered projects, the State 

shall be responsible for ensuring that 

the requirements of the approved 

alternative State procedures are met. 

§ 778.109 Criteria for Determining 

Stringency 

To be considered at least as stringent 

as a Federal requirement under this 

Program, the State laws and regulations, 

must, at a minimum: 

(a) Define the types of actions that 

normally require an environmental 

impact assessment, including 

government-sponsored projects such as 

those receiving Federal financial 

assistance or permit approvals. (42 

U.S.C. 4332(2)(C); 40 CFR 1508.18); 

(b) Ensure an early process for 

determining the scope of the action and 

issues that need to be addressed, 

identifying the significant issues, and 

for the classification of the appropriate 

environmental impact assessment in 

accordance with the significance of the 

likely impacts. For actions that may 

result in significant impacts on the 

human environment the scoping process 

should be an open and public process. 

(23 U.S.C. 139(e); 40 CFR 1501.3, 

1501.4, 1501.7, 1507.3(b), 1508.14, and 

1508.25); 

(c) Prohibit agencies and nongovernmental proponents from taking 

action concerning the proposal until the 

environmental impact evaluation is 

complete when such action would: 

(1) Have adverse environmental 

impacts or 

(2) Limit the choice of reasonable 

alternatives. (40 CFR 1506.1 and 

1506.10(b)). 

(d) Protect the integrity and 

objectivity of the analysis by requiring 

the agency to take responsibility for the 

scope and content of the analysis and by 

preventing conflicts of interest among 

the parties developing the analysis and 

the parties with financial or other 

interest in the outcome of the project. 

(42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(D); 40 CFR 1506.5); 

(e) Based on a proposed action’s 

purpose and need, require objective 

evaluation of reasonable alternatives to 

the proposed action (including the 

alternative of not taking the action) if it 

may result in significant impacts to the 

human environment or, for those 

actions that may not result in significant 

impacts, consideration of alternatives if 

they will involve unresolved conflicts 

concerning alternative uses of available 

resources (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)(iii); 42 

U.S.C. 4332(2)(E); 23 U.S.C. 

330(b)(1)(A); 40 CFR 1502.13, 1502.14, 

and 1508.9); 

(f) Require an assessment of the 

reasonably foreseeable direct, indirect, 

and cumulative impacts of a proposed 

action (and any reasonable alternatives) 

on the human environment, and a 

comparison of those potential impacts 

with existing environmental conditions 

(42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C); 23 U.S.C. 

330(b)(1)(B); 40 CFR 1502.16, 1508.9(b), 

and 1508.4); 

(g) Require the consideration of 

appropriate mitigation for the impacts 

associated with a proposal and 

reasonable alternatives (including 

avoiding, minimizing, rectifying, 

reducing or eliminating the impact over 

time, and compensating for the impact) 

(40 CFR 1502.14(f), 1502.16(h), and 

1508.20); 

(h) Provide for adequate interagency 

participation, including appropriate 

coordination and consultation with 

State, Federal, tribal, and local agencies 

with jurisdiction by law, special 

expertise, or an interest with respect to 

any environmental impact associated 

with the proposal, and for collaboration 

that would eliminate duplication of 

reviews For actions that may result in 

significant impacts to the human 

environment, the process should allow 

for the development of plans for 

interagency coordination and public 

involvement, and the setting of 

timetables for the review process (42 

U.S.C. 4332(2)(C); 23 U.S.C. 139(d) and 

139(g); 40 CFR 1500.5(e), 1501.6, 

1502.25, and part 1503); 

(i) Provide an opportunity for public 

participation and comment that is 

commensurate with the significance of 

the proposal’s impacts on the human 

environment, and require public access 

to the documentation developed during 

the environmental review and a process 

to respond to public comments (42 

U.S.C. 4332(2)(C); 23 U.S.C. 

330(b)(1)(A); FAST Act, Sec. 

1309(c)(2)(B)(ii); 40 CFR 1502.19, part 

1503, and 1506.6; and E.O. 11514, Sec. 

1(b)); 

(j) Include procedures for the 

elevation and resolution of interagency 

disputes prior to a final decision on the 

proposed project (23 U.S.C. 139(h); 40 

CFR part 1504); 

(k) Require, for the conclusion of the 

process, a concise documentation of 

findings (for actions that would not 

likely result in significant impacts to the 

human environment) or, for actions that 

may result in significant impacts, a 

concise record that states the agency 

decision that: 

(i) Identifies all alternatives 

considered (specifying which were 

environmentally preferable), 

(ii) Identifies and discusses all factors 

that were balanced by the agency in 

making its decision and states how 

those considerations entered into the 

decision, 

(iii) States whether all practicable 

means to avoid or minimize 

environmental harm have been adopted, 

and if not, why they were not; and 

(iv) Describes the monitoring and 

enforcement program that will be 

adopted where applicable for any 

mitigation (40 CFR 1501.4 and 1505.2). 

(l) Require the agency to supplement 

environmental impact assessments if 

there are substantial changes in the 

proposal that are relevant to 

environmental concerns or significant 

new circumstances or information 

relevant to environmental concerns and 

bearing on the proposed action or its 

impacts. (23 U.S.C. 330(e)(3); 40 CFR 

1502.9); and 

(m) Allow for the use of procedures 

that facilitate process efficiency such as 

the identification of categories of actions 

that do not individually or cumulatively 

have a significant impact on the human 

environment and which have been 

found to not have such effect with 

procedures that require the 

consideration of extraordinary 

circumstances that would warrant a 

higher level of analysis, the use of 

tiering, programmatic approaches, 

adoption, incorporation by reference, 

approaches to eliminate duplication 

with other Federal requirements, and 

special procedures to address 

emergency situations (23 U.S.C. 

139(b)(3); 40 CFR 1502.20, 1502.21, 

1502.25, 1506.2, 1506.3, 1506.4, 

1507.3(b)(ii), and 1508.4). 

§ 778.111 Review and Termination 

(a) In General. The Program shall 

terminate December 4, 2027. 

(b) Review. The Operating 

Administration must review each 


jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
45228 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 187 / Thursday, September 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

participating State’s performance in 

implementing the requirements of the 

Program at least once every 5 years. 

(1) The Operating Administration 

must provide notice and an opportunity 

for public comment during the review. 

(2) At the conclusion of its last review 

prior to the expiration of the term, the 

Operating Administration may extend a 

State’s participation in the Program for 

an additional term of not more than 5 

years (as long as such term does not 

extend beyond the termination date of 

the Program) or terminate the State’s 

participation in the Program. 

(c) Early Termination. (1) If the 

Operating Administration, in 

consultation with the Office of the 

Secretary and the Chair of CEQ, 

determines that a State is not 

administering the Program consistent 

with the terms of its written agreement, 

or the requirements of this part or 23 

U.S.C. 330, the Operating 

Administration must provide the State 

notification of that determination. 

(2) After notifying the State of its 

determination under paragraph (c)(1), 

the Operating Administration must 

provide the State a maximum of 90 days 

to take the appropriate corrective action. 

If the State fails to take such corrective 

action, the Operating Administration 

may terminate the State’s participation 

in the Program. 

Title 49—Transportation 

PART 264—PROGRAM FOR 

ELIMINATING DUPLICATION OF 

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS AND THE 

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION 

PROJECT DELIVERY PROGRAM 

■ 4. The authority citation for part 264 

is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 23 U.S.C. 327; 49 CFR 1.81; 23 

U.S.C. 330. 

■ 5. Revise the heading for part 264 to 

read as set forth above. 

■ 6. Revise § 264.101 to read as follows: 

§ 264.101 Procedures for complying with 

the surface transportation project delivery 

program application requirements and 

termination and the procedures for 

participating in and complying with the 

program for eliminating duplication of 

environmental reviews. 

The procedures for complying with 

the surface transportation project 

delivery program application 

requirements and termination are set 

forth in part 773 of title 23 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations. The procedures 

for participating in and complying with 

the program for eliminating duplication 

of environmental reviews are set forth in 

part 778 of title 23 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations. 

PART 622—ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 

AND RELATED PROCEDURES 

■ 7. The authority citation for part 622 

is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; 49 

U.S.C. 303 and 5323(q); 23 U.S.C. 139, 326, 

327, and 330; Pub. L. 109–59, 119 Stat. 1144, 

sections 6002 and 6010; 40 CFR parts 1500– 

1508; 49 CFR 1.81; Pub. L. 112–141, 126 Stat. 

405, sections 1315, 1316, 1317, and 1318; 

and Pub. L. 114–94, section 1309. 

■ 8. Revise § 622.101 to read as follows: 

§ 622.101 Cross-reference to procedures. 

The procedures for complying with 

the National Environmental Policy Act 

of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et 

seq.), and related statutes, regulations, 

and orders are set forth in part 771 of 

title 23 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations. The procedures for 

complying with 49 U.S.C. 303, 

commonly known as ‘‘Section 4(f),’’ are 

set forth in part 774 of title 23 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations. The 

procedures for complying with the 

surface transportation project delivery 

program application requirements and 

termination are set forth in part 773 of 

title 23 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations. The procedures for 

participating and complying with the 

program for eliminating duplication of 

environmental reviews are set forth in 

part 778 of title 23 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations. 

[FR Doc. 2017–20561 Filed 9–27–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–22–P 

NATIONAL INDIAN GAMING 

COMMISSION 

25 CFR Part 547 

RIN 3141–AA64 

Technical Standards 

AGENCY: National Indian Gaming 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The National Indian Gaming 

Commission proposes to amend the 

minimum technical standards for Class 

II gaming systems and equipment. The 

proposed rule would amend regulations 

that describe how tribal governments, 

tribal gaming regulatory authorities, and 

tribal gaming operations comply with 

the technical standards. In particular, 

the proposed rule amends the 

requirement that gaming systems 

manufactured before November 10, 

2008, be modified to meet standards 

applicable to gaming systems 

manufactured on or after November 10, 

2008, or be removed from the gaming 

floor by November 10, 2018. The 

Commission proposes this action to 

assist tribal governments, tribal gaming 

regulatory authorities, and operations in 

ensuring the integrity and security of 

Class II games and gaming revenue 

through minimum technical standards 

for Class II gaming systems and 

equipment. 

DATES: The agency must receive 

comments on or before November 13, 

2017. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Email: 547.5_Comments@nigc.gov. 

• Fax: 202–632–7066. 

• Mail: National Indian Gaming 

Commission, 1849 C Street NW., MS 

1621, Washington, DC 20240. 

• Hand Delivery: National Indian 

Gaming Commission, 90 K Street NE., 

Suite 200, Washington, DC 20002, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Austin Badger, National Indian Gaming 

Commission; Telephone: 202–632–7003. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Comments Invited 

Interested parties are invited to 

participate in this proposed rulemaking 

by submitting such written data, views, 

or arguments as they may desire. 

Comments that provide the factual basis 

supporting the views and suggestions 

presented are particularly helpful in 

developing reasoned regulatory 

decisions on the proposal. 

II. Background 

The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act 

(IGRA or Act), Public Law 100–497, 25 

U.S.C. 2701 et seq., was signed into law 

on October 17, 1988. The Act 

establishes the National Indian Gaming 

Commission (NIGC or Commission) and 

sets out a comprehensive framework for 

the regulation of gaming on Indian 

lands. On October 8, 2008, the NIGC 

published a final rule in the Federal 

Register called Technical Standards for 

Electronic, Computer, or Other 

Technologic Aids Used in the Play of 

Class II Games. 73 FR 60508. The rule 

added a new part to the NIGC’s 

regulations establishing a process for 

ensuring the integrity of electronic Class 

II games and aids. The standards were 

designed to assist tribal gaming 

regulatory authorities and operators 

with ensuring the integrity and security 

of Class II gaming, the accountability of 

Class II gaming revenue, and provide 

guidance to equipment manufacturers 


jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS