Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2007/08/07/07-3781/environmental-impact-and-related-procedures
Timestamp: 2014-04-17 12:41:34
Document Index: 496976570

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 771', 'art 771', 'arts 1500', 'arts 1500', '§ 771', '§ 771', '§ 771', '§ 771', '§ 771', '§ 771', '§ 771', '§ 771', 'art 450', '§ 771', '§ 771', '§ 771', '§ 771', '§ 771', '§ 771', '§ 771', '§ 771', '§ 771', '§ 771', '§ 771', '§ 771', '§ 771', '§ 771', '§ 771', '§ 771']

A Proposed Rule by the Federal Transit Administration and the Federal Highway Administration on
Dates: Comments must be received by October 9, 2007.
-44050 (13 pages)
Document Number: 07-3781
Shorter URL: https://federalregister.gov/a/07-3781 Related Topics
Revisions to the Joint FTA/FHWA NEPA Regulation 3 actions from August 7th, 2007 to June 2008
Section 771.101Purpose
Section 771.105Policy
Section 771.107Definitions
Section 771.109Applicability and Responsibilities
Section 771.111Early Coordination, Public Involvement, and Project Development
Section 771.113Timing of Administration activities
Section 771.117Categorical exclusions
Section 771.119Environmental Assessments
Section 771.123Draft Environmental Impact Statements
Section 771.125Final Environmental Impact Statements
Section 771.129Re-Evaluations
Section 771.130Supplemental Environmental Impact Statements
Section 771.131Emergency Action Procedures
Section 771.133Compliance With Other Requirements
Section 771.135Section 4(f) (49 U.S.C. 303)
Section 771.139Statute of Limitations
In a Federal Register notice published on November 15, 2006 (71 FR 66576), the FTA and the FHWA made available final joint guidance implementing the provisions of section 6002 of SAFETEA-LU. The final guidance is available at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/section6002/.
This NPRM proposes to revise 23 CFR 771.117 by adding new CE provisions and revising one existing provision. One newly proposed CE is for stand-alone intelligent transportation systems (ITS) projects. Section 6010 of SAFETEA-LU mandates the initiation of a rulemaking process to establish, as appropriate, a CE from the need to prepare either EISs or environmental assessments (EAs) for activities that support the deployment of intelligent transportation infrastructure and systems. ITS, an initiative begun with enactment of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) (102, 105 Stat. 114) in 1991, encompass a broad range of wireless and wire line communications-based information and electronics technologies. When integrated into the transportation system's infrastructure, and into vehicles themselves, these types of technology may relieve congestion, improve safety, and enhance productivity.
Categorical exclusion of activities that support the deployment of intelligent transportation infrastructure and systems also finds substantiation in the CEs of other Federal departments and agencies, including the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and agencies within that department. A 200-page “Administrative Record for Categorical Exclusions (CATEX)” supporting the DHS CEs provides additional substantiation for categorically excluding activities that support the deployment of intelligent transportation infrastructure and systems. That administrative record can be reviewed at http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/nepa/Mgmt_NEPA_AdminRecdetailedCATEXsupport.pdf. The substantiation by the DHS includes a comparative review of other Federal agency CEs that reflect similar activities and impacts. The class of actions identified in the DHS administrative record is virtually identical to activities that support deployment of intelligent transportation infrastructure and systems: “Construction, installation, operation, maintenance, and removal of utility and communication systems (such as mobile antennas, data processing cable, and similar electronic equipment) that use existing rights-of-way, easements, utility distribution systems, and/or facilities.” (See CE E1 in the DHS administrative record referenced above). Those activities are similar to, and would have the same impacts as, the ITS activities proposed for a CE herein. Several other classes of action identified in the DHS administrative record also support categorical exclusion of activities that support deployment of intelligent transportation infrastructure and systems. Foremost among those classes of action are those identified as CEs B8 and B9.
Actions categorically excluded under the DHS CE B8 include acquisition, installation, maintenance, operation, or evaluation of security equipment. Examples include cameras and biometric devices, as well as access controls, screening devices, and traffic management systems. Actions categorically excluded under CE B9 include acquisition, installation, operation, or evaluation of physical security devices, or controls to enhance physical security. Examples include motion detection systems, use of temporary barriers, fences, and jersey walls on or adjacent to existing facilities or on land that has already been disturbed or built upon, and remote video surveillance systems.
The environmental procedures of the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) also contain a class of categorically excluded actions quite similar to activities that support deployment of intelligent transportation infrastructure and systems. Under section 4(c)(18) of the FRA's procedures, “[r]esearch, development and/or demonstration of advances in signal communication and/or train control systems on existing rail lines provided that such research, development and/or demonstrations do not require the acquisition of a significant amount of right-of-way, and do not significantly alter the traffic density characteristics of the existing rail line” qualifies for categorical exclusion from the need to prepare either an EIS or an EA. See FRA Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts, 64 FR 28545, 28547 (May 26, 1999), also available at http://www.fra.dot.gov/Downloads/RRDev/FRAEnvProcedures.pdf.
The environmental procedures of the FRA also contain a class of categorically excluded actions quite similar to acquisition of a pre-existing railroad ROW. Under section 4(c)(17) of the FRA's procedures, “[a]cquisition of existing railroad equipment, track and bridge structures * * * and other existing railroad facilities or the right to use such facilities, for the purpose of conducting operations of a nature and at a level of use similar to those presently * * * existing on the subject properties” qualifies for a CE from the need to prepare either an EIS or an EA. See FRA Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts, 64 FR 28545, 28547 (May 26, 1999), also available at http://www.fra.dot.gov/Downloads/RRDev/FRAEnvProcedures.pdf.
The current language of 771.117(c)(5) provides that the “[t]ransfer of Federal lands pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 317 when the subsequent action is not an FHWA action” is categorically excluded. This language categorically excludes Federal land transfers for projects for which FHWA has no involvement apart from the Federal land transfer. An example of such a situation is the perfection of title to an existing highway over Federal land for which no document of title previously had been delivered to the State DOT and recorded. This situation may exist for any number of reasons, such as where a highway had been built based on a right-of-entry but was not followed by execution of a deed. The Federal land transfer in such cases is merely to perfect title and is not followed by project construction or any subsequent FHWA action. In the FHWA's experience, use of the CE for this situation is appropriate, but that use is not clear under the existing wording because in such cases there is no “subsequent action” following the land transfer.
Another provision added by section 6002 of SAFETEA-LU establishes a 180-day statute of limitations for FTA and FHWA projects. That 180-day time period commences with publication in the Federal Register of a notice that informs the public that one or more Federal agency decisions on a project is final. The FTA and the FHWA propose to reference this new limitation on claims in their joint NEPA procedures. Detailed information on the actual mechanisms for carrying out this provision appear in the section 6002 final guidance that is available at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/section6002/.
Congestion management activities include measures such as value pricing
and converting existing high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes to high occupancy toll (HOT) lanes.
Based on experience to date, most of these types of projects would normally qualify for a CE because they are not major Federal actions affecting the quality of the human environment. Thus, the Administration is considering the addition of one or more CEs to explicitly identify those congestion management activities that typically meet CE criteria. To that end, the Administration requests comments, including data and information on the experiences of project sponsors and others with these types of projects, to assist with determining their appropriate class of action under NEPA. Interested parties are also invited to submit written evidence about particular congestion management activities that they believe qualify as CEs and specific regulatory language that might be used in one or more CEs for these types of projects.
The section-by-section analysis that follows cites the provisions of SAFETEA-LU that result in inconsistencies with the joint environmental procedures, as currently constituted, and advances proposed amendments that conform to the supplemental environmental review requirements. Other minor changes to help eliminate confusion among practitioners, or to bring the regulation into better alignment with current practice, are also proposed. Because of the limited scope of this rulemaking, there will continue to be some inconsistencies between provisions in the part 771 regulation and provisions of statutes and regulations adopted under Title 23 and Title 49 since the last comprehensive revision of part 771. The FTA and the FHWA anticipate addressing such matters in a subsequent, more comprehensive rulemaking proceeding.
A statutory reference in paragraph (d) would be updated. Section 771.111Early Coordination, Public Involvement, and Project Development
The FTA and the FHWA experience has shown that a stand-alone ITS project that is not an element of a larger construction project typically does not have significant impacts on the human environment. The Administration is proposing in new paragraph (c)(21) that the stand-alone ITS activities be categorically excluded, in accordance with SAFETEA-LU section 6010. The Administration is not proposing to exclude an ITS activity when it is an element of a larger construction project. In this case, the magnitude and location of the construction activities will, in all likelihood, dictate the appropriate class of action. In addition, even though an ITS project might satisfy CE criteria for NEPA purposes, that does not affect the requirements applicable to the ITS activity under other Federal and State environmental laws.
Paragraph (c)(3) requiring the prior concurrence of FTA Headquarters in all final EISs for major transit capital investments is deleted. This concurrence has become perfunctory as the size of the transit New Starts program has grown, and it is no longer needed. The FTA Headquarters can still require prior concurrence for final EISs that fall in the categories listed in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2), including actions involving national policy issues, actions with major unresolved issues or opposition on environmental grounds by a State or local government, and any action which the Administration’s Headquarters determines should require its prior concurrence. Paragraph (c)(1) is proposed to be revised to clarify that the list of the types of projects requiring prior FTA or FHWA Headquarters concurrence is not intended to be all inclusive, and that, at its discretion, the FTA or the FHWA Headquarters may require prior concurrence in other cases.
This proposed action would not have any effect on the quality of the environment under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and is categorically excluded under 23 CFR 771.117(c)(20). The proposed action is intended to incorporate new statutory requirements into the agencies regulations and to add new CEs from the NEPA process. Additionally, this proposed rule seeks to improve the description of the procedures and to provide clarification with respect to the interpretation of certain provisions.
Subpart A—Environmental Procedures Back to Top
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; 49 U.S.C. 303, 5301(a) and (e), 5323(b), and 5324; 23 U.S.C. 139 and 326; Pub. L. 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, section 6010; 40 CFR parts 1500-1508; 49 CFR 1.51.
Title 23—Highways Back to Top
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; 23 U.S.C. 106, 109, 128, 138, 139, 315, 325, 326, and 327; 49 U.S.C. 303, 5301(e), 5323(b), and 5324; Pub. L. 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, section 6010; 40 CFR parts 1500-1508; 49 CFR 1.48(b) and 1.51.
3. Revise § 771.101 to read as follows:
§ 771.101 Purpose.
4. Amend § 771.105 by revising paragraph (a) and its footnote to read as follows:
§ 771.105 Policy.
(a) To the fullest extent possible, all environmental investigations, reviews, and consultations be coordinated as a single process, and compliance with all applicable environmental requirements be reflected in the environmental document required by this regulation.
5. Amend § 771.107 by revising paragraph (d) and adding paragraphs (f) and (g) to read as follows:
6. Amend § 771.109 by removing the words “by the Administration” from paragraph (a)(3) and by revising paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as follows:
7. Amend § 771.111 by revising paragraphs (a), (b), (d), (h)(1), and (i) and adding paragraphs (h)(2)(vii) and (h)(2)(viii) to read as follows:
§ 771.111 Applicability and responsibilities.
(2) The information and results presented in publicly available documents produced by, or in support of, the transportation planning process in 23 CFR part 450 may be incorporated into NEPA documents.
(d) During the early coordination process, the lead agencies may request other agencies having an interest in the action to participate, and must invite such agencies if the action is subject to the project development procedures in 23 U.S.C. 139.
Agencies with special expertise may be invited to become cooperating agencies. Agencies with jurisdiction by law must be requested to become cooperating agencies.
8. Amend § 771.113 by revising the introductory text of paragraph (a), paragraph (a)(2), and first sentence of paragraph (b), and adding paragraph (d), to read as follows:
(2) Exceptions for hardship and protective acquisitions of real property are addressed in§ 771.117(d)(12).
9. Amend § 771.117 by adding paragraphs (c)(21) and (c)(22), and by revising paragraphs (c)(5) and (d)(12) to read as follows:
§ 771.117 Categorical exclusions.
(ii) Protective acquisition is done to prevent imminent development of a parcel which is needed for a proposed transportation corridor or site. Documentation must clearly demonstrate that development of the land would preclude future transportation use and that such development is imminent. Advance acquisition is not permitted for the sole purpose of reducing the cost of property for a proposed project.
10. Amend § 771.119 as follows:
11. Amend § 771.123 by revising paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), (i), and (j) to read as follows:
(b) After publication of the Notice of Intent, the lead agencies, in cooperation with the applicant (if not a lead agency), will begin a scoping process. The scoping process will be used to identify the range of alternatives and impacts and the significant issues to be addressed in the EIS and to achieve the other objectives of 40 CFR 1501.7. For FHWA, scoping is normally achieved through public and agency involvement procedures required by § 771.111. For FTA, scoping is achieved by soliciting agency and public responses to the action by letter or by holding scoping meetings. If a scoping meeting is to be held, it should be announced in the Administration's Notice of Intent and by appropriate means at the local level.
12. Amend § 771.125 by removing paragraph (c)(3) and revising paragraphs (a)(1), (c)(1), and (e) to read as follows:
(a)(1) After circulation of a draft EIS and consideration of comments received, a final EIS shall be prepared by the lead agencies, in cooperation with the applicant (if not a lead agency). The final EIS shall identify the preferred alternative and evaluate all reasonable alternatives considered. It shall also discuss substantive comments received on the draft EIS and responses thereto, summarize public involvement, and describe the mitigation measures that are to be incorporated into the proposed action. Mitigation measures presented as commitments in the final EIS will be incorporated into the project as specified in § 771.109(b) and (d). The final EIS should also document compliance, to the extent possible, with all applicable environmental laws and Executive Orders, or provide reasonable assurance that their requirements can be met.
(e) Approval of the final EIS is not an Administration action as defined in § 771.107(c) and does not commit the Administration to approve any future grant request to fund the preferred alternative.
13. Revise § 771.129 to read as follows:
(c) A written evaluation of the final EIS will be required before further approvals may be granted if major steps to advance the action (e.g., authority to undertake final design, authority to acquire a significant portion of the right-of-way, or approval of PSE) have not occurred within three years after the approval of the final EIS, final EIS supplement, or the last major Administration approval or grant.
14. Amend § 771.130 as follows:
§ 771.130 Supplemental environmental impact statements.
15. Amend § 771.133 by revising the last sentence to read as follows:
16. Add § 771.139 to read as follows:
§ 771.139 Statute of Limitations.
1. Other parts of the DHS administrative record that describe categoriesof action that are similar in many respects to activities that support deployment of intelligent transportation infrastructure and systems include CEs A7, B7, D1, and E2.
2. Value pricing concepts presently include variably priced lanes or tolls,cordon charges, or area-wide charges (see http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/congestionpricing/sec2.htm).
3. An HOV lane, sometimes called a carpool lane, is a lane reserved for the use of carpools, vanpools and buses. HOV lanes usually are located next to the regular, unrestricted, (“general purpose”) lanes. HOV lanes enable those who carpool or ride the bus to bypass the traffic in the adjacent, unrestricted lanes. HOT lanes are limited-access, normally barrier-separated highway lanes that provide free or reduced cost access to qualifying HOVs and also provide access to other paying vehicles not meeting passenger occupancy requirements. By using price and occupancy restrictions to manage the number of vehicles traveling on them, HOT lanes maintain volumes consistent with non-congested levels of service during peak travel periods. HOT lanes utilize sophisticated electronic toll collection and traffic information systems that also make variable, real-time toll pricing of non-HOV vehicles possible. For more detailed information on HOV lanes, see http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freewaymgmt/hov.htm and on HOT lanes, see http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov//JPODOCS/REPTS_TE//13668.html.
5. The FHWA published a detailed discussion of DOT's interpretation of 23 U.S.C. 139(l), together with information applicable to FHWA projects about implementation procedures for 23 U.S.C. 139(l), in Appendix E to the “SAFETEA-LU Environmental Review Process: Final Guidance,” dated November 15, 2006. The implementation procedures in Appendix E apply only to FHWA projects. The section 6002 guidance, including Appendix E, is available at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov//, or in hardcopy by request.