[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 5 (Monday, January 8, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1455-1459]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-392]



  Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2001 / 
Notices  

[[Page 1455]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Transit Administration


Federal Transit Administration National ITS Architecture Policy 
on Transit Projects

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration (FTA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) announces the FTA 
National ITS Architecture Policy on Transit Projects, which is defined 
in this document. The National ITS Architecture Policy is a product of 
statutory changes made by the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st 
Century (TEA-21) (Pub. L. 105-178) enacted on June 9, 1998. The 
National ITS Architecture Policy is also a product of the Request for 
Comment on the National ITS Architecture Consistency Policy for Project 
Development that was published in the Federal Register on May 25, 2000. 
Because it is highly unlikely that the entire National ITS Architecture 
would be fully implemented by any single metropolitan area or State, 
this policy requires that the National ITS Architecture be used to 
develop a local implementation of the National ITS Architecture, which 
is referred to as a ``regional ITS architecture.'' Therefore, 
conformance with the National ITS Architecture is defined under this 
policy as development of a regional ITS architecture within four years 
after the first ITS project advancing to final design, and the 
subsequent adherence of ITS projects to the regional ITS architecture. 
The regional ITS architecture is based on the National ITS Architecture 
and consists of several parts including the system functional 
requirements and information exchanges with planned and existing 
systems and subsystems and identification of applicable standards, and 
would be tailored to address the local situation and ITS investment 
needs.

DATE: Effective Date: This policy is effective from February 7, 2001.

ADDRESSES: For FTA staff, Federal Transit Administration, Department of 
Transportation (DOT), 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For Technical Information: Ron Boenau, 
Chief, Advanced Public Transportation Systems Division (TRI-11), at 
(202) 366-0195 or Brian Cronin, Advanced Public Transportation Systems 
Division (TRI-11), at (202) 366-8841. For Legal Information: Richard 
Wong, Office of the Chief Council (202) 366-1936. The policy is posted 
on the FTA website on the Internet under http://www.fta.dot.gov.
    Electronic Access: An electronic copy of this document may be 
downloaded using a computer, modem and suitable communications software 
from the Government Printing Office's Electronic Bulletin Board Service 
at (202) 512-1661. Internet users may reach the Office of the Federal 
Register's home page at: http://www.nara.gov/fedreg and the Government 
Printing Office's web page at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara.
    Internet users may access all comments received by the U.S. DOT 
Dockets, Room PL-401, for the Request for Comment that was issued on 
May 25, 2000 which were used to clarify this Policy, by using the 
universal resource locator (URL): http://dms.dot.gov. It is available 
24 hours each day, 365 days each year. Please follow the instructions 
online for more information and help. The docket number for the Request 
for Comment was FTA-99-6417.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) published a Request for 
Comment on May 25, 2000, to implement section 5206(e) of the 
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) (Pub.L. 105-
178), which was enacted on June 9, 1998.
    Section 5206(e) of TEA-21 requires that the Secretary of the DOT 
must

    Ensure that intelligent transportation system projects carried 
out using funds made available from the Highway Trust Fund, * * * 
conform to the national architecture, applicable standards or 
provisional standards, and protocols developed under subsection(a).

    The objectives for the FTA's National ITS Architecture Policy for 
Transit Projects are to:
     Provide requirements for ITS project development for 
projects implemented wholly or partially with highway trust funds.
     Achieve system integration of ITS projects funded through 
the highway trust fund with other transportation projects planned for 
the region, which will thereby enable electronic information and data 
sharing for advanced management and operations of the ITS 
infrastructure.
     Engage stakeholders (state DOT's, transit agencies, public 
safety agencies, other transportation operating agencies) in the 
project development and implementation process.
     Facilitate future expansion capability of the ITS 
infrastructure.
     Save design time through use of the National ITS 
Architecture requirements definitions and market packages.
    FTA has developed this policy to meet the TEA-21 requirement 
contained in Section 5206(e) and the DOT/FTA goal to encourage 
effective deployment of ITS projects. Additionally, DOT and FTA 
encourage the coordination of local ITS strategies and projects to help 
meet national and local goals for mobility, accessibility, safety, 
security, economic growth and trade, and the environment.
    The National ITS Architecture documents were developed by the US 
DOT, and are updated on an as-needed basis. Current work to update the 
National ITS Architecture is the Archive Data User Service, which 
provides the ability to store and process data over an extended period 
of time. FTA is pursuing the addition of a Rail ITS program for travel 
management, vehicles, and users. New versions of the documents, when 
they are issued, will be available from the US DOT on the DOT website 
at www.its.dot.gov. Version 3.0 is the latest version of the National 
ITS Architecture.
    The first section of this policy contains a complete analysis of 
and response to the comments provided to the docket. The remainder of 
the Notice contains the FTA National ITS Architecture Policy for 
Transit Projects.

II. Public Comments

    Eighteen comments were submitted to the FTA National ITS 
Architecture Consistency Policy for Project Development docket by the 
September 23, 2000, close of the comment period. Comments were 
submitted by transit operators (3), state and local governments (5), 
metropolitan planning organizations (4), industry associations (3), and 
consultants (3). As indicated earlier, a complete analysis and response 
to the docket comments is provided. In order to facilitate focused 
comments, FTA asked a series of questions about the policy. The public 
comment section is organized first by analysis and response to the 
specific questions asked; second by responses to comments not 
specifically related to one of the nine questions; and finally by an 
explanation of other changes. In general, the comments received were 
positive. Therefore, the FTA has kept the scope of the policy and made 
appropriate clarifications to the text of the policy to address 
concerns raised in comments. In response to the many comments 
requesting it, the FTA, in association with the ITS Joint Program 
Office, in the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) will also provide 
a program of guidance, training, and technical

[[Page 1456]]

support to assist with the implementation of this policy.

Questions

    1. Do reviewers understand the definition of a major ITS investment 
as defined in Section IV, ``Regional ITS Architecture,'' or is more 
clarification needed, and if so please explain?
    Comments: Nine commenters submitted responses to this question. In 
general, commenters found the definition confusing, and did not 
understand why major ITS projects need to be called out over other ITS 
projects. One commenter noted that small dollar projects can have a 
major impact on future development, while an expensive system may have 
no impact. Another commenter was unclear about the term ``supporting 
national interoperability.''
    Response: Of specific concern to the agency is the timing in which 
requirements for this policy are enacted. As such, the terms ``major 
ITS investment'' and ``major ITS project'' were provided so as to 
distinguish between projects that will require immediate correlation to 
the regional ITS architecture and those that do not. The term ``major 
ITS investment'' was also found to be redundant to ``major ITS 
project'' and was removed from the policy. Guidance on the 
classification of ``ITS projects'' and ``major ITS projects'' will be 
provided upon enactment of the policy.
    2. Do reviewers understand the definition of an ITS project, or is 
more clarification needed, and if so please explain?
    Comments: Nine commenters submitted responses to this question. 
Commenters found this term less confusing than ``major ITS 
investments,'' but requested more clarification. Some commenters 
proposed alternative language or asked for clarification on particular 
examples.
    Response: The agency has clarified the definition by deleting the 
potentially ambiguous examples provided and will develop guidance 
material that provides examples of projects that will be considered ITS 
projects and those that will not be considered ITS projects. In 
general, unless a technology project is implementing one of the ITS 
user services defined in the National ITS Architecture, it would not be 
considered an ITS project.
    3. Do reviewers understand the difference between a ``major ITS 
investment,'' and an ``ITS project'', or is more clarification needed, 
and if so please explain?
    Comments: Eight commenters submitted responses to this question. 
Commenters had mixed responses, as some commenters found the 
differences to be clear, while others requested that guidance material 
be provided to further explain the differences. Commenters did suggest 
that a ``project'' is a ``project'' and should not be quantified in 
terms of dollar amounts.
    Response: As described in the response to question 1, the agency 
has removed the term ``major ITS investment'' and will provide guidance 
on the term ``ITS project.''
    4. Are the requirements for development of a Regional ITS 
Architecture clear? If not, what is not clear about the requirement?
    Comment: Nine commenters provided responses to the question. Most 
commenters found the requirements to be unclear and/or did not agree 
with the requirements. One commenter suggested that a region will have 
different definitions. One commenter noted that a concept of operations 
and conceptual design are normally conducted at the project level. One 
commenter requested clarification as to the appropriate place to 
program projects, in the regional ITS architecture, or in the planning 
process.
    Response: Of specific concern to the agency is providing a flexible 
policy that allows the transportation stakeholders to define their 
region and the roles and responsibilities of each stakeholder during 
the development of a regional ITS architecture. As such, the agency has 
clarified the requirements of a regional ITS architecture and also 
removed the specific requirements for a Concept of Operations and a 
Conceptual Design. Instead, the agency has listed the specific 
requirements for a regional ITS architecture and has left the 
development, documentation, and maintenance of the regional ITS 
architecture to the stakeholders involved. Also, the region is defined 
as ``a geographical area that is based on local needs for sharing 
information and coordinating operational strategies among multiple 
projects.'' A region can be specified at a metropolitan, Statewide, 
multi-State, or corridor level. Additional guidance on this topic will 
be provided after enactment of the policy.
    5. What additional guidance, if any, is required to explain how to 
implement this proposed policy?
    Comments: Ten commenters provided responses to this question. All 
the comments called for additional guidance on the specifics of 
implementing this policy. Commenters requested guidance on the 
definition of a ``region,'' the ownership of the regional ITS 
architecture, determination of stakeholders, regional ITS architecture 
maintenance, certification and simplification of definitions. One 
commenter requested that the policy be limited to only the ITS 
Integration Requirements defined in the Metropolitan and Statewide 
Planning NPRM.
    Response: The agency will provide guidance materials to address the 
comments suggested. The ITS Integration Strategy, as defined in the 
NPRM, is part of the planning process and as such does not 
satisfactorily address project level requirements.
    6. The proposed rule allows regions to develop a Regional 
Architecture as a separate activity, or incrementally, as major ITS 
investments are developed within a region. Do reviewers anticipate 
particular difficulties with implementing and documenting either 
approach?
    Comments: Nine commenters provided responses to this question. 
Commenters largely did not favor one approach over the other. One 
commenter suggested that a regional ITS architecture with a twenty year 
time horizon is impractical and infeasible. One commenter suggested 
that either approach would require additional staff resources.
    Response: The agency was concerned about the time horizon and 
development process needed to create a regional ITS architecture within 
the time period required and as a result suggested both an incremental 
and initial comprehensive approach. Based on the responses, the agency 
has modified the policy to be silent on the approach used to develop 
the regional ITS architecture. Instead, the agency focused on the 
products included in the regional ITS architecture, the effective date 
of the requirements, and the catalyst for requiring the development of 
a regional ITS architecture.
    7. Do reviewers understand the relationships between the 
Integration Strategy, the Regional ITS Architecture, and the ITS 
Project Architecture?
    Comment: Seven commenters provided a response to this question. In 
general, commenters did not understand the relationship between the 
Integration Strategy, regional ITS architecture, and the ITS Project 
Architecture. One commenter suggested that flexibility in application 
of project architecture must be maintained to accommodate legacy 
systems and to take advantage of technological innovation, while 
maintaining the outcome of interoperability, where applicable.
    Response: The Agency is concerned with linkage between the planning 
process and the project development process. However, this policy only 
deals with the project level requirements.

[[Page 1457]]

Planning level requirements, including the Integration Strategy, will 
be explained as the Metropolitan and Statewide Planning Process 
rulemaking process is advanced. This policy only requires that the 
regional ITS architecture should be consistent with the transportation 
planning process. A definition for a project level ITS architecture has 
been added to the policy.
    8. What additional guidance, if any, is required regarding phasing 
of this rule?
    Comments: Six commenters submitted responses to this question. In 
general, the commenters stated that the phasing was clear. However, one 
commenter requested a three-year phase-in period. Several commenters 
requested that existing projects be exempt from the policy.
    Response: The agency has clarified the policy statements that refer 
to the project status and the applicability of this policy. Projects 
that have reached final design by the date of this policy are exempt 
from the policy requirements. The agency has extended the time period 
for regional ITS architecture development to four years. Any region 
that is currently implementing ITS projects shall have a regional 
architecture within four years of the effective date of the final 
policy. All other regions not currently implementing ITS projects shall 
have a regional ITS architecture in place within four years of the 
first ITS project for that region advancing to final design.
    9. Are the oversight and documentation requirements clear? If not, 
what is not clear about the requirements?
    Comments: Eight commenters submitted responses to this question. 
Commenters in general requested more guidance from FTA on oversight and 
documentation requirements, but few provided suggestions to clarify the 
requirements. One commenter suggested that checklists to verify 
consistency requirements will be needed. Other commenters suggested 
that self-certification should be allowed, but also needs to be clearly 
defined.
    Response: The agency will continue to use normal existing oversight 
procedures to review grantee compliance with FTA policies and 
regulations. Normal oversight procedures include the annual risk 
assessment of grantees performed by regional office staff, triennial 
reviews, planning process reviews, and project management oversight 
reviews, as applicable. In TEA-21, FTA was granted authority to use 
oversight funds to provide technical assistance to grantees in which 
oversight activities suggested non-compliance with agency policies and 
regulations. FTA is using oversight funds to specifically hire 
contractors with ITS experience who will monitor and assist grantees 
who are at risk of NOT meeting the National ITS Architecture Policy 
requirements. Additional guidance on oversight and documentation 
requirements will be provided.

Additional Comments

    One commenter suggested that the proposed guidance circular 
requires that all of the agencies in a region agree before a project 
can be implemented, thus conferring ``veto'' power over the project. 
The agency does not intend for the policy to halt ITS deployment in 
areas where agencies cannot agree on project designs. As part of the 
regional ITS Architecture development, the agencies can agree to 
disagree, however, the regional ITS architecture should include a 
representation of the stand-alone ITS deployments.
    One commenter suggests that the proposal infers that existing 
agreements between agencies will now need to be amended or redone, 
which would result in a halt in operations of successful ITS projects 
and prevent the completion of other ITS projects. In response to the 
comment, the agency has clarified the regional ITS architecture 
requirements to specify that existing agreements that address the 
regional ITS architecture requirements are sufficient and that new 
agreements are not necessarily required.
    One commenter noted that a definition of ITS was not included in 
the policy. The commenter suggested that the definition provided in 
TEA-21 section 5206(e) should be included in the policy. The agency 
agrees and has added the definition of ITS to the list of definitions. 
However, the legislative definition of ITS is broad and other 
commenters have suggested that if the policy is written to include 
every new piece of electronics or hardware, then the policy would be 
too limiting. As a result, the policy is intended to apply only to 
projects meeting the definition of an ``ITS project'' listed in the 
``Definitions'' section of the policy.
    One commenter suggested that DOT should ensure that the Federal 
Highway Administration's (FHWA's) regulation and the FTA policy have 
the same statutory standing and that their requirements in ITS planning 
and deployment be consistent if not identical. The FTA and FHWA have 
different processes and procedures for project development. Therefore, 
the FHWA has issued a regulation, and FTA has issued the policy. The 
policy language in each document is consistent and will be carried out 
in a coordinated fashion, as applicable under FTA and FHWA project 
management and oversight procedures. FTA and FHWA planning procedures 
are a joint regulation and as such will be identical.
    FTA received some comments regarding the use of standards. Several 
comments concern the premature use of required standards and 
interoperability tests, their impact on legacy systems, and confusion 
regarding the term ``adopted by the USDOT.''
    In response to the comments, FTA has significantly modified the 
final policy to eliminate reference to the use of standards and 
interoperability tests prior to adoption through formal rulemaking. It 
is not the intent of the USDOT to formally adopt any standard before 
the standard is mature; also, not all ITS standards should, or will, be 
formally adopted by the USDOT. The only interoperability tests that are 
currently contemplated by the USDOT are those associated with the 
Commercial Vehicle Operations (CVO) program. These tests are currently 
being used by States deploying CVO systems and will follow a similar 
set of criteria for adoption as those defined for standards.

Other Changes

    Several commenters expressed concern about linkages to the planning 
rule and the integration strategy. Comments regarding the portions of 
the National ITS Architecture conformity process included in the 
proposed transportation planning rule will be addressed as that rule 
proceeds to its issuance. The FHWA rule and the parallel FTA policy 
have been developed without direct reference to the proposed changes to 
the transportation planning process, including no mention of the 
development of an integration strategy. However, the policy statement 
of this guidance notes a link to transportation planning processes, and 
fully supports those collaborative methods for establishing 
transportation goals and objectives.

Policy Contents

I. Purpose
II. Definitions
III. Policy
IV. Applicability
V. Regional ITS Architecture
VI. Project Implementation
VII. Project Oversight
VIII. FTA Guidance

I. Purpose

    This policy provides procedures for implementing section 5206(e) of 
the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st

[[Page 1458]]

Century, Public Law 105-178, 112 Stat. 547, pertaining to conformance 
with the National Intelligent Transportation Systems Architecture and 
Standards.

II. Definitions

    Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) means electronics, 
communications or information processing used singly or in combination 
to improve the efficiency or safety of a surface transportation system.
    ITS project means any project that in whole or in part funds the 
acquisition of technologies or systems of technologies that provide or 
significantly contribute to the provision of one or more ITS user 
services as defined in the National ITS Architecture.
    Major ITS project means any ITS project that implements part of a 
regional ITS initiative that is multi-jurisdictional, multi-modal, or 
otherwise affects regional integration of ITS systems.
    National ITS Architecture (also ``national architecture'') means a 
common framework for ITS interoperability. The National ITS 
Architecture comprises the logical architecture and physical 
architecture which satisfy a defined set of user services. The National 
ITS Architecture is maintained by U.S. DOT (Department of 
Transportation) and is available on the DOT web site at http://www.its.dot.gov.
    Project level ITS architecture is a framework that identifies the 
institutional agreement and technical integration necessary to 
interface a major ITS project with other ITS projects and systems.
    Region is the geographical area that identifies the boundaries of 
the regional ITS architecture and is defined by and based on the needs 
of the participating agencies and other stakeholders. A region can be 
specified at a metropolitan, Statewide, multi-State, or corridor level. 
In metropolitan areas, a region should be no less than the boundaries 
of the metropolitan planning area.
    Regional ITS architecture means a regional framework for ensuring 
institutional agreement and technical integration for the 
implementation of ITS projects or groups of projects.
    Systems engineering is a structured process for arriving at a final 
design of a system. The final design is selected from a number of 
alternatives that would accomplish the same objectives and considers 
the total life-cycle of the project including not only the technical 
merits of potential solutions but also the costs and relative value of 
alternatives.

III. Policy

    ITS projects shall conform to the National ITS Architecture and 
standards in accordance with the requirements contained in this part. 
Conformance with the National ITS Architecture is interpreted to mean 
the use of the National ITS Architecture to develop a regional ITS 
architecture in support of integration and the subsequent adherence of 
all ITS projects to that regional ITS architecture. Development of the 
regional ITS architecture should be consistent with the transportation 
planning process for Statewide and Metropolitan Transportation Planning 
(49 CFR part 613 and 621).

IV. Applicability

    (a) All ITS projects that are funded in whole or in part with the 
Highway Trust Fund (including the mass transit account) are subject to 
these provisions.
    (b) The Secretary may authorize exceptions for:
    1. Projects designed to achieve specific research objectives 
outlined in the National ITS Program Plan under section 5205 of the 
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century or the Surface 
Transportation Research and Development Strategic Plan developed under 
section 5208 of Title 23, United States Code; or
    2. The upgrade or expansion of an ITS system in existence on the 
date of enactment of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century 
if the Secretary determines that the upgrade or expansion--
    a. Would not adversely affect the goals or purposes of Subtitle C 
(Intelligent Transportation Systems) of the Transportation Equity Act 
for the 21st Century and
    b. Is carried out before the end of the useful life of such system; 
and
    c. Is cost-effective as compared to alternatives that would meet 
the conformity requirement of this rule
    (c) These provisions do not apply to funds used for Operations and 
Maintenance of an ITS system in existence on June 9, 1998.

V. Regional ITS Architecture

    (a) A regional ITS architecture shall be developed to guide the 
development of ITS projects and programs and be consistent with ITS 
strategies and projects contained in applicable transportation plans. 
The National ITS Architecture shall be used as a resource in the 
development of the regional ITS architecture. The regional ITS 
architecture shall be on a scale commensurate with the scope of ITS 
investment in the region. Provision should be made to include 
participation from the following agencies, as appropriate, in the 
development of the regional ITS architecture: Highway agencies; public 
safety agencies (e.g., police, fire, emergency/medical); transit 
agencies; federal lands agencies; state motor carrier agencies; and 
other operating agencies necessary to fully address regional ITS 
integration.
    (b) Any region that is currently implementing ITS projects shall 
have a regional ITS architecture February 7, 2005.
    (c) All other regions not currently implementing ITS projects shall 
have a regional ITS architecture within four years of the first ITS 
project for that region advancing to final design.
    (d) The regional ITS architecture shall include, at a minimum, the 
following:
    (1) A description of the region;
    (2) Identification of participating agencies and other 
stakeholders;
    (3) An operational concept that identifies the roles and 
responsibilities of participating agencies and stakeholders in the 
operation and implementation of the systems included in the regional 
ITS architecture;
    (4) Any agreements (existing or new) required for operations, 
including at a minimum those affecting integration of ITS projects; 
interoperability of different ITS technologies, utilization of ITS-
related standards, and the operation of the projects identified in the 
regional ITS architecture;
    (5) System functional requirements;
    (6) Interface requirements and information exchanges with planned 
and existing systems and subsystems (for example, subsystems and 
architecture flows as defined in the National ITS Architecture);
    (7) Identification of ITS standards supporting regional and 
national interoperability;
    (8) The sequence of projects required for implementation of the 
regional ITS architecture.
    (e) Existing regional ITS architectures that meet all of the 
requirements of section V(d) shall be considered to satisfy the 
requirements of V(a).
    (f) The agencies and other stakeholders participating in the 
development of the regional ITS architecture shall develop and 
implement procedures and responsibilities for maintaining the regional 
ITS architecture, as needs evolve within the region.

VI. Project Implementation

    (a) All ITS projects funded with mass transit funds from the 
highway trust

[[Page 1459]]

fund shall be based on a systems engineering analysis.
    (b) The analysis should be on a scale commensurate with the project 
scope.
    (c) The systems engineering analysis shall include, at a minimum:
    (1) Identification of portions of the regional ITS architecture 
being implemented (or if a regional ITS architecture does not exist, 
the applicable portions of the National ITS Architecture).
    (2) Identification of participating agencies' roles and 
responsibilities;
    (3) Requirements definitions:
    (4) Analysis of alternative system configurations and technology 
options to meet requirements;
    (5) Analysis of financing and procurement options;
    (6) Identification of applicable ITS standards and testing 
procedures; and
    (7) Procedures and resources necessary for operations and 
management of the system;
    (d) Upon completion of the regional ITS architecture required in 
section V, the final design of all ITS projects funded with highway 
trust funds shall accommodate the interface requirements and 
information exchanges as specified in the regional ITS architecture. If 
the final design of the ITS project is inconsistent with the regional 
ITS architecture, then the regional ITS architecture shall be updated 
as per the process defined in V(f) to reflect the changes.
    (e) Prior to completion of the regional ITS architecture, any major 
ITS project funded with highway trust funds that advances to final 
design shall have a project level ITS architecture that is coordinated 
with the development of the regional ITS architecture. The final design 
of the major ITS project shall accommodate the interface requirements 
and information exchanges as specified in this project level ITS 
architecture. If the project final design is inconsistent with the 
project level architecture, then the project level ITS architecture 
shall be updated to reflect the changes. The project level ITS 
architecture is based on results of the systems engineering analysis, 
and includes the following:
    (1) A description of the scope of the ITS project
    (2) An operational concept that identifies the roles and 
responsibilities of participating agencies and stakeholders in the 
operation and implementation of the ITS project;
    (3) Functional requirements of the ITS project;
    (4) Interface requirements and information exchanges between the 
ITS project and other planned and existing systems and subsystems; and
    (5) Identification of applicable ITS standards
    (b) All ITS projects funded with Mass Transit Funds from the 
Highway Trust Funds shall use applicable ITS standards and 
interoperability tests that have been officially adopted through 
rulemaking by the United States Department of Transportation (US DOT).
    (c) Any ITS project that has advanced to final design by (effective 
date of policy) is exempt from the requirements of VI.

VII. Project Oversight

    (a) Prior to authorization of Mass Transit Funds from the Highway 
Trust Fund for acquisition or implementation of ITS projects, grantees 
shall self-certify compliance with sections V and VI. Compliance with 
this policy shall be monitored under normal FTA oversight procedures, 
to include annual risk assessments, triennial reviews, and program 
management oversight reviews as applicable.
    (b) Compliance with the following FTA Circulars shall also be 
certified:
     C5010.1C, Grant Management Guidelines
     C6100.1B, Application Instructions and Program Management 
Guidelines

VIII. FTA Guidance

    FTA will develop appropriate guidance materials regarding the 
National ITS Architecture Consistency Policy.

    Issued on: January 2, 2001.
Nuria I. Fernandez,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 01-392 Filed 1-5-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-57-P