[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 5 (Wednesday, January 8, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1105-1114]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-105]



[[Page 1105]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

23 CFR Part 973

[FHWA Docket No. FHWA-99-4968]
RIN 2125-AE53


Federal Lands Highway Program; Management Systems Pertaining to 
the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Reservation Roads Program

AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), 
requires the Secretary of Transportation and the Secretary of each 
appropriate Federal land management agency to develop, to the extent 
appropriate, safety, bridge, pavement, and congestion management 
systems for roads funded under the Federal Lands Highway program 
(FLHP). The Secretary of Transportation has delegated the authority to 
the FHWA to serve as the lead agency within the U.S. DOT to implement 
the FLHP. The roads funded under the FLHP include Park Roads and 
Parkways, Forest Highways, Refuge Roads, and Indian Reservation Roads. 
This rulemaking proposes to provide for the development and 
implementation of pavement, bridge, safety, and congestion management 
systems for transportation facilities providing access to Indian lands 
and funded under the FLHP.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 10, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Mail or hand deliver comments to the U.S. Department of 
Transportation, Dockets Management Facility, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh 
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, or submit electronically at http://dmses.dot.gov/submit. All comments should include the docket number 
that appears in the heading of this document. All comments received 
will be available for examination and copying at the above address 
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays. Those desiring notification of receipt of comments must 
include a self-addressed, stamped postcard or you may print the 
acknowledgment page that appears after submitting comments 
electronically.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Bob Bini, Federal Lands Highway, 
HFPD-2, (202) 366-6799, FHWA, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20590; office hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays. For legal questions, Ms. 
Vivian Philbin, HFL-16, (303) 716-2122, FHWA, 555 Zang Street, 
Lakewood, CO 80228. Office hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., m.t., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Access and Filing

    You may submit or retrieve comments online through the Document 
Management System (DMS): http://dmses.dot.gov/submit. Acceptable 
formats include: MS Word (versions 95 to 97), MS Word for Mac (versions 
6 to 8), Rich Text File (RTF), American Standard Code Information 
Interchange (ASCII)(TXT), Portable Document Format (PDF), and 
WordPerfect (versions 7 to 8). The DMS is available 24 hours each day, 
365 days each year. Electronic submission and retrieval help and 
guidelines are available under the help section of the Web site.
    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded by 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.

Background

    Section 1115(d) of the TEA-21 (Pub. L. 105-178, 112 Stat. 107, 156 
(1998)) amended 23 U.S.C. 204 to require the Secretary of 
Transportation and the Secretary of each appropriate Federal land 
management agency, to the extent appropriate, to develop safety, 
bridge, pavement, and congestion management systems for roads funded 
under the FLHP. A management system is a process for collecting, 
organizing, and analyzing data to provide a strategic approach to 
transportation planning, program development, and project selection. 
Its purposes are to improve transportation system performance and 
safety, and to develop alternative strategies for enhancing mobility of 
people and goods.
    The roads funded under the FLHP include, but are not limited to, 
Park Roads and Parkways, Forest Highways, Refuge Roads, and Indian 
Reservation Roads. The Secretary of Transportation delegated to the 
FHWA the authority to serve as the lead agency within the U.S. 
Department of Transportation to administer the FLHP (see 49 CFR 1.48 
(b)(29)). This rulemaking action addresses the management systems for 
the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the Indian Reservation Roads 
(IRR) program.
    On September 1, 1999, the FHWA issued an advance notice of proposed 
rulemaking (ANPRM) to solicit public comments concerning development of 
this proposed rule pertaining to the BIA and the IRR program (64 FR 
47746). The ANPRM requested comments on the feasibility of developing a 
rule to meet both the transportation planning and management systems 
requirements of the TEA-21. Therefore, comments made to the docket 
addressed both transportation planning and management systems issues. 
However, the FHWA has decided to publish separate NPRMs for 
transportation planning and management systems. For this reason, this 
NPRM concerns only the development of the management systems. This NPRM 
includes responses to the comments submitted to the docket on the ANPRM 
that addressed the proposed development of the four management systems. 
Those comments on the ANPRM that addressed transportation planning will 
be addressed at a later date. The FHWA received comments addressing the 
management systems from various State DOT's, Tribal representatives 
from the Indian Reservation Roads Program Negotiated Rulemaking 
Committee (Committee), the United South and Eastern Tribes, Inc. 
(USET), and an intertribal council of twenty-three federally recognized 
Tribes (Council). These comments are summarized in the following 
section. Specific comments may be obtained by reviewing the materials 
in the docket.
    Pursuant to Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation), the FHWA 
has participated in a number of consultation sessions on this 
rulemaking with numerous Tribal government representatives. The purpose 
of these sessions was to explain the FHWA's intent in developing the 
NPRM, as well as to seek input and feedback. To the extent feasible, 
the FHWA will continue to use the Committee and other key Tribal 
transportation meetings to consult and coordinate with the (Indian 
Tribal Governments) ITGs on this rulemaking throughout the remainder of 
the process. In addition, the FHWA will hold seven informational 
meetings during the comment period in the following locations at a date 
and time to be announced in the Federal Register: Albuquerque, NM; 
Anchorage, AK; Minneapolis, MN; Nashville, TN; Portland, OR; Las Vegas, 
NV; and Tulsa, OK. These meetings will be used to provide an overview 
of the rulemaking

[[Page 1106]]

process and describe FHWA's purpose and intent in developing the rules. 
Tribal representatives are encouraged to attend these meetings and to 
provide suggestions and comments.
    Based on the comments we received on the ANPRM and during Tribal 
consultations, the FHWA has developed this NPRM to provide for the 
development and implementation of pavement, bridge, safety, and 
congestion management systems for transportation facilities providing 
access to Indian lands and funded under the FLHP. Separate NPRM's on 
management systems have also been developed for the National Park 
Service (NPS) and the Park Roads and Parkways program, the Fish and 
Wildlife Service (FWS) and the Refuge Roads program, and the Forest 
Service (FS) and the Forest Highway program. The other three related 
NPRM's are published elsewhere in today's Federal Register.
    On April 21, 2000, then President Clinton issued Executive Order 
(EO) 13148, Greening the Government Through Leadership in Environmental 
Management. This EO requires all Federal agencies to implement an 
environmental management system (EMS) to ensure that agencies develop 
strategies to support environmental leadership in programs, policies, 
and procedures and that senior level managers explicitly and actively 
endorse these strategies. The EO requires that agencies implement an 
EMS no later than December 31, 2005. Furthermore, in an April 1, 2002, 
letter, the Bush Administration encouraged all agencies to promote the 
use of EMS in Federal, State, local, and private facilities and 
directed the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to report annually 
on how well each agency has done in promoting EMS.
    The FHWA has already begun working toward establishing an EMS. 
Additionally, the FWHA is working with the American Association of 
State Highway and Transportation Officials' (AASHTO) Center for 
Environmental Excellence to include EMS as part of an environmental 
stewardship demonstration project. The FHWA is currently providing 
technical and financial assistance to the Center, which in turn 
supports States that have initiated EMSs.\1\ Furthermore, the FHWA 
continues to demonstrate environmental stewardship by encouraging the 
use of EMS in the construction, operation, and maintenance of 
transportation facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ More information on how EMS applies to transportation 
organizations can be found on the AASHTO's Center for Environmental 
Excellence Web site at the following URL: http//itre.ncsu.edu/AASHTO/stewardship.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although an EMS may have some overlap with the four management 
systems that are the subject of this proposed rulemaking, the FHWA has 
decided not to incorporate the EMS in this rulemaking. The FHWA 
believes that great progress has been made on the EMS and promoting the 
use of EMS by the States. In addition, the FHWA has a long-standing 
working relationship with the Federal Land Management Agencies (FLMAs) 
through the Federal Lands Highway Program. The natural resource 
conservation and preservation missions of these agencies have led to 
the development of a jointly held environmental ethic that pervades 
transportation project decision-making through the use of context 
sensitive design, best management practices, and a heightened 
sensitivity to environmental impacts. This relationship provides a 
strong foundation for the FHWA to encourage the use of environmental 
management systems by the FLMAs. For example, the National Park Service 
currently has an initiative underway to implement a service-wide EMS 
approach. The FHWA and the NPS can evaluate ways to coordinate the use 
and development of the EMS with the transportation management systems 
through the joint development of the management system implementation 
plan called for in this rulemaking. A similar approach can be used with 
all of the FLMAs.
    Any EMS developed by the FHWA, or by a FLMA, will not have an 
adverse effect on any of the management systems in this proposed 
rulemaking. Instead, such an EMS may help foster a movement toward the 
use of a comprehensive asset management system that incorporates EMS, 
along with the transportation management systems proposed in this 
rulemaking, and others not covered in this proposed action, such as a 
maintenance management system. The role of the EMS in a more 
comprehensive approach would demonstrate a commitment to environmental 
stewardship that goes beyond the individual project level or the 
development of a multi-project transportation program. The EMS should 
be a fundamentally important business tool that pervades all aspects of 
FLMA transportation decision-making. The FHWA will continue to advance 
its EMS and promote the EMS initiatives of the FLMAs through 
implementation planning for the transportation management systems. In 
addition, the FHWA will continue to promote the use of EMSs in the 
construction, operation, and maintenance of transportation facilities.
    In developing the management system implementation plans, the need 
for data elements that address the environmental performance measures 
can be evaluated in relationship to individual agency plans to 
implement an EMS. This could provide an opportunity for the ongoing 
collection of environmental information, if appropriate and necessary. 
At a minimum, this would provide an opportunity to link existing 
environmental data to the transportation management systems using a 
geographic information system common to both systems.
    From the FHWA's stewardship perspective regarding the Federal Lands 
Highway Program, EMS is most appropriately pursued as part of sound 
FLMA business management planning. Thus, the FHWA has decided not to 
address the EMS requirement in this proposed rulemaking action.

Summary of Comments Received on the ANPRM Pertaining to the BIA and the 
Indian Reservation Roads Program

    The following discussion summarizes the comments received on the 
ANPRM and the FHWA's response to these comments. This discussion 
provides the public a general sense of the issues addressed in the 
comments. As previously stated, this NPRM is intended for the 
development of management systems. Therefore, this summary contains 
only comments and responses related to the management systems. There 
are instances where reference is made to transportation planning issues 
because the management systems serve as a guide to planning activities.

Rule Development

    Comments: The majority of comments supported the FHWA's proposal to 
develop ``separate rules'' pertaining to the BIA and the Indian 
Reservations Roads program, the FWS and the Refuge Roads program, the 
NPS and the Park Roads and Parkways program, and the FS and the Forest 
Highway program. The commenters in favor of this proposal pointed out 
the fact that transportation planning functions for the different 
Federal lands highways are performed by various Federal, State, and 
local entities, depending on ownership of the roadways and 
responsibilities for constructing and maintaining the facilities.
    The Wisconsin DOT and the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet offered 
an opposite view. These two State Transportation Departments requested 
that we develop only one

[[Page 1107]]

general rule applicable to all four agencies. The Wisconsin DOT 
suggested that this rule be flexible so that it recognizes the 
different approaches used by the States. The Kentucky Transportation 
Cabinet recommended that the rule should require the Federal land 
management agencies (FLMAs) to develop Memoranda of Understanding or 
Agreements that would address the consistency between the Federal land 
transportation planning procedures and those required under 23 U.S.C. 
134 and 135. The Kentucky Transportation Cabinet was concerned that the 
additional rules might jeopardize existing procedures already in 
effect.
    Response: Following the recommendations from the majority of 
commenters, the FHWA, in consultation with each appropriate Federal 
land management agency, developed a separate rule pertaining to each 
agency: the BIA, the FWS, the NPS, and the FS. The variance among the 
rules allows for the significant differences in the ownership, 
jurisdiction, and maintenance responsibilities that the FLMAs exercise 
over the subject roadways addressed in the rule. To ensure uniformity, 
the FHWA coordinated the development of each NPRM, so that similar text 
and format are contained in each of the rules.
    Comments: Tribal representatives from the Committee, the USET, and 
the Council recommended against the proposed development of a rule 
relating to transportation planning and management systems for the IRR 
program in a process separate from the one presently underway through 
the Committee. In addition, they stated that the Committee would 
utilize the Indian Reservation Roads Program Transportation Planning 
Procedures and Guidelines (Guidelines),\2\ that had been developed with 
Tribal consultation and implemented by the DOT in October 1999, to 
develop regulations that address transportation planning and management 
issues. These commenters believed that the proposed rule and the rule 
derived from the Guidelines would be inconsistent with each other.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``Indian Reservation Roads Program Transportation Planning 
Procedures and Guidelines,'' October 1999, is available at the URL: 
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/flh/reports/indian/intro.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Response: This proposed rule was developed to fulfill the 
requirement set forth by the TEA-21. This requirement was separate and 
apart from the negotiated rulemaking requirement for the IRR program. 
The language set forth in this NPRM is, with the exception of proposed 
funding sources, consistent with the draft language on management 
systems set forth in the IRR negotiated rulemaking. While the 
Guidelines help the Indian Tribal Governments (ITGs) address 
transportation planning and management system requirements, the 
Guidelines do not meet the requirements for rulemaking set forth in the 
TEA-21.

Addressing the Management Systems Requirements

    Comments: Many States believe that the management systems should 
only be developed as needed and should relate to systems that are 
already implemented by States and local agencies. It was recommended 
that the FHWA encourage the Federal agencies to explore and use the 
States' existing systems. The States also recommended the systems be 
tailored to fit local conditions, and be applicable solely to the 
portion of the Federal lands highways owned and maintained by Federal 
agencies. Many of the States are concerned that the implementation of 
the management systems may affect the current working relationships 
among State, local, and Federal agencies. The Wisconsin DOT encouraged 
the FHWA to work with the FLMAs and State Transportation Departments to 
clarify ownership discrepancies between Federal and State data. They 
suggested that the FLMAs have accurate data reflecting the amount of 
mileage the agencies own by location. Further, these data have to agree 
with data reported by States in the Highway Performance Monitoring 
System (HPMS) database.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``The HPMS was developed in 1978 as a national highway 
transportation system datanbase. It includes limited data on all 
public roads, more detailed data for a sample of the arterial and 
collector functional system, and certain summary information for 
urbanized, small urban and rural areas. Additional information about 
this database is available online at the URL: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Response: The stakeholders' concerns presented above were 
considered in the development of this NPRM. Each of the proposed 
management system rules calls for the FHWA, in cooperation with the 
FLMA, to develop an implementation plan or implementation procedures 
for each of the management systems. In addition, flexibility is 
provided to determine criteria for the need and applicability of each 
of the FLMA's management systems. These implementation plans will 
provide the opportunity to relate the FLMA management systems to 
systems already implemented by States and local agencies. It will also 
allow the management systems to be tailored to fit a broad range of 
local conditions, and to avoid inefficient duplication of management 
systems already in use by the States. Development of the implementation 
plans will provide an opportunity to strengthen the working 
relationships among Federal, State, Tribal and local agencies, as well 
as define responsibility for and ownership of data.
    Comments: The Wisconsin DOT also stated that the FHWA should 
clarify that this rule and the National Highway System (NHS) 
Designation Act of 1995, Public Law 104-59, 109 Stat. 568, do not make 
the implementation of management systems mandatory.
    Response: While it is correct that the Public Law 104-59 made the 
management systems optional for States and Metropolitan Planning 
Organizations (MPOs), except for the congestion management systems in 
MPOs with a population of greater than 200,000, section 1115(d) of TEA-
21 applies to the Federal land management agencies, not directly to the 
States; however, the States may be requested to provide information. 
The TEA-21, enacted on June 9, 1998, amended 23 U.S.C. 204 to specify 
that ``The Secretary and the Secretary of each appropriate Federal land 
management agency shall, to the extent appropriate, develop by rule 
safety, bridge, pavement, and congestion management systems for roads 
funded under the Federal lands highways program.'' Therefore, the 
development and implementation of the management systems, where 
appropriate, is mandated by law for the Federal land management 
agencies.

Approach to Structure of Proposed Regulation

    In the development of this proposed rule, the FHWA has attempted to 
minimize the level of data collection and analyses required. The FHWA 
now solicits comments on the extent to which this strategy has been 
achieved. Any comments suggesting that the strategy has not been 
successful should identify specific reasons why the requirements and/or 
provisions are burdensome. Suggestions to lessen burdens are welcome.

Section-by-Section Analysis

Subpart A

Section 973.100 Purpose

    This section states that subpart A provides definitions for terms 
used in this rule.

Section 973.102 Applicability

    This section states that the definitions in subpart A are 
applicable to this rule.

[[Page 1108]]

Section 973.104 Definitions

    This section incorporates the terms defined in 23 U.S.C. 101(a), 49 
U.S.C. 5302, and 23 CFR part 450; and also includes additional 
definitions for terms used in this part.
    The phrase ``Indian lands'' would be added to the definitions of 
``bridge management system (BMS),'' ``congestion management system 
(CMS),'' ``pavement management system (PMS),'' and ``safety management 
system (SMS)'' to indicate the distinction between the Indian lands, 
Federal lands and Federal-aid management systems (refer to 23 CFR part 
500 for definitions of the Federal-aid management systems). The NPRMs 
for the FS, FWS and NPS would use the phrase ``Federal lands'' to 
indicate the distinction between the Federal lands, Indian lands and 
Federal-aid management systems. The management system definitions also 
specify their applicability to the BIA, FS, FWS and NPS, as 
appropriate.

Subpart B

Section 973.200 Purpose

    This section states the purpose of this proposed rule, which is to 
fulfill the requirements set forth by the TEA-21.

Section 973.202 Applicability

    This section defines the applicability of the management systems.

Section 973.204 Management Systems Requirements

    This section sets forth general requirements for all four 
management systems. Additional requirements applicable to specific 
systems are in Sec. Sec.  973.208 through 973.214.
    Paragraph (a) states that the BIA shall develop, establish, and 
implement the nationwide management systems. Paragraphs (a) and (h) 
provide flexibility in the development of the nationwide management 
systems. Paragraph (b) requires the FHWA and the BIA to develop 
implementation plans for the nationwide management systems.
    Paragraph (c) states that a Tribe may develop, establish, and 
implement Tribal management systems.
    Paragraph (d) directs the BIA, in consultation with the Tribes, to 
develop criteria for cases in which Tribal management systems are not 
appropriate.
    Paragraph (e) directs the BIA or Tribes, as appropriate, to 
incorporate data provided by States and local governments in the 
nationwide or Tribal management systems for State and locally owned 
IRRs.
    To ensure the management systems are developed, implemented, and 
operated systematically, paragraph (f) requires the development of 
procedures that will include the following: Consideration of management 
system results in the planning process; system analysis; a description 
of each management system; operation and maintenance of management 
systems and databases; and data collection, processing, analysis, and 
updating. Paragraph (g) ensures that the database has a geographical 
reference system so that information can be geolocated. Paragraph (h) 
encourages the use of existing data sources to the maximum extent 
possible.
    Paragraph (i) states that a nationwide congestion management system 
is not required. The BIA and the FHWA, in consultation with the Tribes, 
will develop criteria to determine when congestion management systems 
are required for specific BIA transportation facilities. The BIA or the 
Tribe may develop, establish and implement the congestion management 
systems when they are required.
    Paragraph (j) requires a periodical evaluation process of the 
effectiveness of the management systems, preferably as part of the 
transportation planning process. Paragraph (k) ensures that 
transportation investment decisions based on management system results 
would be used at the BIA region or Tribal level and can be used 
throughout the transportation planning process.

Section 973.206 Funds for Establishment, Development, and 
Implementation of the Systems

    This section provides that the funds available for the IRR program 
can be used for development, establishment, and implementation of the 
nationwide and required congestion management systems in accordance 
with legislative provisions for the funds.

Section 973.208 Indian Lands Pavement Management System (PMS)

    Paragraph (a) defines the applicability of the PMS. Paragraph (b) 
requires Tribes that collect data for a PMS to provide the data to the 
BIA to be used in the nationwide PMS. Paragraph (c) recommends the use 
of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation 
Officials' (AASHTO) ``Pavement Management Guide'' \4\ as a guide for 
the development of the PMS. Paragraph (d) provides flexibility for the 
development of the PMS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``Pavement Management Guide,'' AASHTO, 2001, is available 
for inspection as prescribed at 49 CFR part 7. It may be purchased 
online at http://www.transportation.org/publications/bookstore.nsf 
or mail addressed to the American Association of State Highway and 
Transportation Officials (AASHTO), Publication Order Dept., P.O. Box 
96716, Washington, DC 20090-6716.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This section further sets forth processes and procedures that must 
be included in a PMS. They include requirements for a basic framework 
composed of data collection and maintenance, network level analysis, 
and reporting procedures.

Section 973.210 Indian Lands Bridge Management System (BMS)

    Paragraph (a) defines the applicability of the BMS. Paragraph (b) 
requires Tribes that collect data for a BMS to provide the data to the 
BIA to be used in the nationwide BMS. Paragraph (c) recommends the use 
of the AASHTO's ``Guidelines for Bridge Management Systems'' \5\ as a 
guide for the development of BMS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``Guidelines for Bridge Management Systems,'' AASHTO, 1993, 
is available for inspection as prescribed at 49 CFR part 7. It may 
be purchased on line at http://www.transportation.org/publications/bookstore.nsf or mail addressed to the American Association of State 
Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), Publication Order 
Dept., P.O. Box 96716, Washington, DC 20090-6716.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The section sets forth components that must be included in a BMS. 
They consist of data collection and maintenance, analysis procedures, 
and reporting procedures.

Section 973.212 Indian Lands Safety Management System (SMS)

    Paragraph (a) defines the applicability of the SMS. Paragraph (b) 
requires Tribes that collect data for a SMS to provide the data to the 
BIA to be used in the nationwide SMS. Paragraph (c) encourages the use 
of the FHWA publication entitled ``Safety Management Systems: Good 
Practices for Development and Implementation.'' \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ ``Safety Management Systems: Good Practices for Development 
and Implementation,'' FHWA and NHTSA, May 1996, may be obtained at 
the FHWA, Office of Safety, Room 3407, 400 Seventh St., SW., 
Washington, DC 20590, or electronically at http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/media/documents.htm. It is available for 
inspection and copying as prescribed at 49 CFR part 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because of the strong emphasis the TEA-21 has on safety, paragraph 
(d) requires the SMS to be used to ensure that safety is considered and 
implemented as appropriate in all phases of transportation planning, 
programming and project implementation. Paragraph (e) states that the 
level of complexity of the nationwide and Tribal SMS's depends on the 
nature of the facilities involved.
    The section sets forth the components that must be included in a 
SMS. They include data collection and maintenance, identification and

[[Page 1109]]

correction of potential safety problems, communications, public 
education, training needs, and reporting.
    To provide flexibility, paragraph (g) states that the extent of SMS 
requirements set forth in this proposed rule for low volume roads may 
be tailored to be consistent with the functional classification of the 
roads. However, each functional classification should include adequate 
requirements to ensure effective safety decisionmaking.

Section 973.214 Indian Lands Congestion Management System (CMS)

    Paragraph (b)(1) requires the BIA and the FHWA, in consultation 
with the Tribes, to develop criteria for determining when a CMS will be 
required for a specific transportation system.
    Paragraph (b)(2) further sets forth the components to be included 
in a CMS. They include the following: Identification and documentation 
of measures for congestion; identification of the causes of congestion; 
development of evaluation processes; identification of benefits; 
determination of methods to monitor and evaluate performance of the 
overall transportation system after strategies are implemented; and 
consideration of example strategies provided in the proposed rule.

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

    All comments received before the close of business on the comment 
closing date indicated above will be considered and will be available 
for examination using the docket number appearing at the top of this 
document in the docket room at the above address. The FHWA will file 
comments received after the comment closing date in the docket and will 
consider late comments to the extent practicable. In addition to late 
comments, the FHWA will also continue to file in the docket relevant 
information becoming available after the comment closing date, and 
interested persons should continue to examine the docket for new 
material. A final rule may be published at any time after close of the 
comment period.

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and U.S. DOT 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    The FHWA has determined preliminarily that the proposed rule would 
be a significant regulatory action within the meaning of Executive 
Order 12866, and under the regulatory policies and procedures of the 
U.S. Department of Transportation, because of the substantial public 
interest anticipated in the transportation facilities of the Indian 
lands. The FHWA anticipates that the economic impact of any action 
taken in this rulemaking process will be minimal. The FHWA anticipates 
that the proposed changes will not adversely affect any sector of the 
economy in a material way. Though the proposed action will impact the 
BIA, it will not likely interfere with any action taken or planned by 
the BIA or another agency, or materially alter the budgetary impact of 
any entitlement, grants, user fees, or loan programs.
    Based upon the information received in response to this proposed 
action, the FHWA intends to carefully consider the costs and benefits 
associated with this rulemaking. Accordingly, comments, information, 
and data are solicited on the economic impact of the proposal described 
in this document or any alternative proposal submitted.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-
612), the FHWA has evaluated the effects of this proposed action on 
small entities and has determined that the proposed action would not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. Commenters are encouraged to evaluate any options addressed 
here with regard to the potential for impact.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    This proposed rule would not impose a mandate that requires further 
analysis under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 
104-4, March 22, 1995, 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 $100 million or more in any 
one year (2 U.S.C. 1532). This rulemaking proposes to provide for the 
development and implementation of pavement, bridge, safety, and 
congestion management systems for transportation systems providing 
access to and within Indian lands. These roads are funded under the 
FLHP; therefore, the proposed rule is not considered an unfunded 
mandate. Further, in compliance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
of 1995, the FHWA 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.

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    This proposed rule has been analyzed in accordance with the 
principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132, dated 
August 4, 1999. The FHWA has determined that this proposed action would 
not have sufficient Federalism implications to warrant the preparation 
of a Federalism assessment. The FHWA has also determined that the 
proposed action would not preempt any State law or State regulation or 
affect the States' ability to discharge traditional State governmental 
functions. However, commenters are encouraged to consider these issues, 
as well as matters concerning any costs or burdens that might be 
imposed on the States as a result of actions considered here.

Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.205, 
Highway Planning and Construction. The regulations implementing 
Executive Order 12372 regarding intergovernmental consultation on 
Federal programs and activities apply to this program.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), 
Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct, sponsor, 
or require through regulations. The FHWA has determined that this 
proposed rule contains a requirement for data and information to be 
collected and maintained in the four management systems that are to be 
developed. In order to streamline the process, the FHWA intends to 
request that the OMB approve a single information collection clearance 
for all of the data in the four management systems at the time that the 
requirements in this proposal are made final. The FHWA is sponsoring 
this proposed clearance on behalf of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
    The FHWA estimates that a total of 5,600 burden hours per year 
would be imposed on non-Federal entities to provide the required 
information for the BIA management systems. Respondents to this 
information collection include State Transportation Departments, 
Metropolitan Planning Organizations, Tribal governments, regional 
transportation planning agencies, and county and local governments. The 
BIA would bear the burden of developing the management systems in a 
manner that would incorporate any existing data in the most efficient 
way and without additional burdens to the public. The estimates here 
only include burdens on the respondents to provide information

[[Page 1110]]

that is not usually and customarily collected.
    Where a substantial level of effort may be required of non-Federal 
entities to provide BIA management system information, the effort has 
been benchmarked to the number of miles of State, local or Tribally 
owned roads or the number of State, local or Tribally owned bridges 
within the BIA's jurisdiction. This approach has been applied to the 
PMS, BMS and SMS. For BIA implementation of the PMS, BMS, and SMS, the 
total annual burden estimate is 3,600 of the 5,600 hours per year. The 
level of burden on non-Federal entities for these management systems is 
modest since the agency will incorporate existing data into the system. 
Of these three systems, the most substantial burden is associated with 
the collection of data to implement the BMS. The BMS burden is 
estimated at 1,400 hours per year. The PMS and SMS burdens are 
estimated at 1,100 hours per year for each of these management systems.
    For the CMS, the non-Federal burden, if applicable, would likely 
fall to the MPOs, and represents the need for the BIA to coordinate its 
management system with the MPOs, for those limited instances when a 
portion of its transportation system is within an MPO area. For 
estimating purposes, approximately 50 MPOs nationwide may be burdened 
by the proposed regulation. Forty hours of burden were assigned to each 
of the 50 MPOs, resulting in a total burden of 2000 hours attributable 
to the CMS.
    The FHWA is required to submit this proposed collection of 
information to OMB for review and approval, and accordingly, seeks 
public comments. Interested parties are invited to send comments 
regarding any aspect of these information collection requirements, 
including, but not limited to: (1) Whether the collection of 
information is necessary for the performance of the functions of the 
FHWA, including whether the information has practical utility; (2) the 
accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, 
utility and clarity of the collected information; and (4) ways to 
minimize the collection burden without reducing the quality of the 
information collected.

National Environmental Policy Act

    The agency has analyzed this proposed action for the purpose of the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347) and has 
determined that this proposed action would not have any effect on the 
quality of the environment. An environmental impact statement is, 
therefore, not required.

Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation)

    The FHWA has analyzed this proposed action under Executive Order 
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, 
dated November 6, 2000, and believes that the proposal will have 
substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes.
    Section 5 (b) of Executive Order 13175 states:

    To the extent practicable and permitted by law, no agency shall 
promulgate any regulation that has Tribal implications, that imposes 
substantial direct compliance costs on Indian Tribal governments, 
and that is not required by statute, unless:
    (1) Funds necessary to pay the direct costs incurred by the 
Indian Tribal government or the Tribe in complying with the 
regulation are provided by the Federal Government; or
    (2) The agency, prior to formal promulgation of the regulation,
    (A) Consulted with Tribal officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation.

    The Executive Order states similar requirements for any regulation 
that has Tribal implications and preempts Tribal law.
    As stated previously, this rulemaking is statutorily required under 
section 1115(d) of the TEA-21. While there are no specific additional 
dedicated funds for implementing this regulation, funds already 
available under the IRR program can be used for the development, 
establishment, and implementation of the management systems. The FHWA 
has utilized key Tribal transportation meetings to consult and 
coordinate with Indian Tribal Governments on this rulemaking since its 
inception. At these meetings, the FHWA advised the Tribes of the ANPRM 
and encouraged them to submit comments and suggestions to the docket. 
In addition, after the docket was closed, the FHWA shared with them all 
comments submitted to the docket, including those from State 
Transportation Departments questioning provisions of the IRR statute.

Tribal Summary Impact Statement

    As stated earlier, the FHWA published an ANPRM on September 1, 
1999, to solicit public comments concerning development of this 
proposed rule pertaining to the BIA and the IRR program (64 FR 47746). 
Among the comments the FHWA received are the comments from the Tribal 
representatives to the Indian Reservation Roads Program Negotiated 
Rulemaking Committee, the United South and Eastern Tribes, Inc., and an 
intertribal council of twenty-three federally recognized Tribes. These 
comments are summarized in the section entitled ``Summary of Comments 
Received on the ANPRM Pertaining to the BIA and the Indian Reservation 
Roads Program.'' Specific comments may be obtained by reviewing the 
materials in the docket.
    Pursuant to Executive Order 13175, during the development process 
of this NPRM, the FHWA participated in a number of consultation 
sessions on this rulemaking with numerous Tribal government 
representatives. The purpose of these sessions was to explain the 
FHWA's intent in developing the NPRM, as well as to seek input and 
feedback. These discussions were scheduled agenda items with time 
provided for questions and answers and took place at the following 
events: The ``Transportation Improvements: Experiences Among Tribal, 
Local, State, and Federal Governments Conference,'' Albuquerque, NM, 
October 2000; the ``Annual Providers Conference,'' Anchorage, AK, 
November 2000; the ``Intertribal Transportation Association Annual 
Meeting,'' Las Vegas, NV, December 2000; and the ``Northern Plains 
Transportation Exposition,'' Aberdeen, SD, March 2001.
    During these discussions, the Tribes addressed two major concerns. 
The first concern dealt with the funding for the establishment, 
development, and implementation of the management systems. As a 
response, Sec.  973.206 of this proposed action states that the IRR 
program management funds may be used to conduct nationwide management 
systems activities. Additionally, the IRR two-percent Tribal 
transportation planning or construction funds may be used for Tribal 
management systems activities.
    The second concern surrounded the Tribes' desire to utilize the IRR 
Negotiated Rulemaking in lieu of this proposed rule. This comment also 
was addressed to the ANPRM published on September 1, 1999. The FHWA 
responds to this comment in this NPRM in the ``Summary of Comments 
Received on the ANPRM Pertaining to the BIA and the Indian Reservation 
Roads Program'' section. As the response indicates, the requirements 
for the management systems and the requirements for the IRR program are 
separate. However with the exception of funding, the language set forth 
in this NPRM is consistent with the draft language on management 
systems set forth in the IRR Negotiated Rulemaking Notice.

[[Page 1111]]

Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This proposed action meets applicable standards in section 3(a) and 
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize 
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children)

    We have analyzed this proposed action under Executive Order 13045, 
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks. This proposed rule is not economically significant and does not 
concern an environmental risk to health and safety that may 
disproportionately affect children.

Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property)

    This proposed rule will not affect a taking of private property or 
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, 
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected 
Property Rights.

Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, 
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a significant 
energy action under that order because, although this proposed action 
is considered to be a significant regulatory action under Executive 
Order 12866, it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on 
the supply, distribution, or use of energy.

Regulation Identification Number

    A regulation identification 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 in 23 CFR Part 973

    Bridges, Grant programs--transportation, Highway safety, Highways 
and roads, Indians--Lands, Public lands. Transportation.
    For reasons set forth in the preamble, the Federal Highway 
Administration proposes to amend chapter I of title 23, Code of Federal 
Regulations, as set forth below.

    Issued on: December 20, 2002.
Mary E. Peters,
Federal Highway Administrator.
    1. Add part 973 to read as follows:

PART 973--BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

Subpart A--Definitions
Sec.
973.100 Purpose.
973.102 Applicability.
973.104 Definitions.
Subpart B--Bureau of Indian Affairs Management Systems
973.200 Purpose.
973.202 Applicability.
973.204 Management systems requirements.
973.206 Funds for establishment, development and implementation of 
the systems.
973.208 Indian lands Pavement Management System (PMS).
973.210 Indian lands Bridge Management System (BMS).
973.212 Indian lands Safety Management System (SMS).
973.214 Indian lands Congestion Management System (CMS).

    Authority: 23 U.S.C. 204, 315, 42 U.S.C. 7410 et seq.; 49 CFR 
1.48.

Subpart A--Definitions


Sec.  973.100  Purpose.

    The purpose of this subpart is to provide definitions for terms 
used in this part.


Sec.  973.102  Applicability.

    The definitions in this subpart are applicable to this part, except 
as otherwise provided.


Sec.  973.104  Definitions.

    Alternative transportation systems means modes of transportation 
other than private vehicles, including methods to improve system 
performance such as transportation demand management, congestion 
management, and intelligent transportation systems. These mechanisms 
help reduce the use of private vehicles and thus improve overall 
efficiency of transportation systems and facilities.
    Elements means the components of a bridge important from a 
structural, user, or cost standpoint. Examples are decks, joints, 
bearings, girders, abutments, and piers.
    Federal Lands Highway program (FLHP) means a federally funded 
program established in 23 U.S.C. 204 to address transportation needs of 
Federal and Indian lands.
    Indian lands bridge management system (BMS) means a systematic 
process used by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) or Tribal 
governments for analyzing bridge data to make forecasts and 
recommendations, and provides the means by which bridge maintenance, 
rehabilitation, and replacement programs and policies may be 
efficiently considered.
    Indian lands congestion management system (CMS) means a systematic 
process used by the BIA or Tribal governments for managing congestion 
that provides information on transportation system performance and 
alternative strategies for alleviating congestion and enhancing the 
mobility of persons and goods to levels that meet Federal, State and 
local needs.
    Indian lands pavement management system (PMS) means a systematic 
process used by the BIA or Tribal governments that provides information 
for use in implementing cost-effective pavement reconstruction, 
rehabilitation, and preventive maintenance programs and policies, and 
that results in pavement designed to accommodate current and forecasted 
traffic in a safe, durable, and cost-effective manner.
    Indian lands safety management system (SMS) means a systematic 
process used by the BIA or Tribal governments with the goal of reducing 
the number and severity of traffic accidents by ensuring that all 
opportunities to improve roadway safety are identified, considered, 
implemented and evaluated, as appropriate, during all phases of highway 
planning, design, construction, operation and maintenance by providing 
information for selecting and implementing effective highway safety 
strategies and projects.
    Indian reservation road means a public road that is located within 
or provides access to an Indian reservation or Indian trust land or 
restricted Indian land that is not subject to fee title alienation 
without the approval of the Federal government, or Indian and Alaska 
Native villages, groups, or communities in which Indians and Alaskan 
Natives reside, whom the Secretary of the Interior has determined are 
eligible for services generally available to Indians under Federal laws 
specifically applicable to Indians.
    Indian Reservation Roads (IRR) program means a part of the FLHP 
established in 23 U.S.C. 204 to address the transportation needs of 
federally recognized Indian Tribal Governments (ITG).
    Indian Reservation Roads transportation improvement program 
(IRRTIP) means a multi-year, financially constrained list by year, 
State, and Tribe of IRR-funded projects selected by ITGs from Tribal 
TIP's, or other Tribal

[[Page 1112]]

actions, that are programmed for construction in the next 3 to 5 years.
    Indian Reservation Roads transportation plan means a document 
setting out a Tribe's long-range transportation priorities and needs. 
The IRR transportation plan, which can be developed by either the Tribe 
or the BIA on behalf of that Tribe, is developed through the IRR 
transportation planning process pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 204.
    Indian Tribal Government (ITG) means a duly formed governing body 
of an Indian or Alaska Native Tribe, Band, Nation, Pueblo, Village, or 
Community that the Secretary of the Interior acknowledges to exist as 
an Indian Tribe pursuant to the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List 
Act of 1994, 25 U.S.C. 479a.
    Life-cycle cost analysis means an evaluation of costs incurred over 
the life of a project allowing a comparative analysis between or among 
various alternatives. Life-cycle cost analysis promotes consideration 
of total cost, to include maintenance and operation expenditures. 
Comprehensive life-cycle costs analysis includes all economic variables 
essential to the evaluation: Safety costs associated with maintenance 
and rehabilitation projects, agency capital cost, and life-cycle 
maintenance costs.
    Operations means those activities associated with managing, 
controlling, and regulating highway traffic.
    Secretary means the Secretary of Transportation.
    Serviceability means the degree to which a bridge provides 
satisfactory service from the point of view of its users.
    State means any one of the fifty States, the District of Columbia, 
or Puerto Rico.
    Transportation facilities means roads, streets, bridges, parking 
areas, transit vehicles, and other related transportation 
infrastructure.

Subpart B--Bureau of Indian Affairs Management Systems


Sec.  973.200  Purpose.

    The purpose of this subpart is to implement 23 U.S.C. 204 which 
requires the Secretary and the Secretary of each appropriate Federal 
land management agency to develop, to the extent appropriate, safety, 
bridge, pavement, and congestion management systems for roads funded 
under the FLHP.


Sec.  973.202  Applicability.

    The provisions in this subpart are applicable to the Bureau of 
Indian Affairs (BIA) and the Indian Tribal Governments (ITGs) that are 
responsible for satisfying these requirements for management systems 
pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 204.


Sec.  973.204  Management systems requirements.

    (a) The BIA, in consultation with the Tribes, shall develop, 
establish and implement nationwide pavement, bridge, and safety 
management systems for Federally and Tribally owned IRR. The BIA may 
tailor the nationwide management systems to meet the agency's goals, 
policies, and needs.
    (b) The BIA and the FHWA, in consultation with the Tribes, shall 
develop an implementation plan for each of the nationwide management 
systems. These plans will include, but are not limited to, the 
following: Overall goals and policies concerning the nationwide 
management systems, each agency's responsibilities for developing and 
implementing the nationwide management systems, implementation 
schedule, data sources, and cost estimate.
    (c) Tribes may develop, establish, and implement Tribal management 
systems under a self-determination contract or self-governance annual 
funding agreement. The Tribe may tailor the management systems to meet 
its goals, policies, and needs.
    (d) The BIA, in consultation with Tribes, shall develop criteria 
for cases in which Tribal management systems are not appropriate.
    (e) The BIA, in consultation with Tribes, or the Tribes under a 
self-determination contract, shall incorporate data provided by States 
and local governments into the nationwide or Tribal management systems, 
as appropriate, for State and locally owned IRRs.
    (f) The BIA, in consultation with the Tribes, shall develop and 
implement procedures for the development, establishment, implementation 
and operation of nationwide management systems. If a Tribe develops 
Tribal management systems, the Tribe shall develop and implement 
procedures for the development, establishment, implementation and 
operation of Tribal management systems. The procedures shall include:
    (1) A description of each management system;
    (2) A process to operate and maintain the management systems and 
their associated databases;
    (3) A process for data collection, processing, analysis and 
updating for each management system;
    (4) A process for ensuring the results of the management systems 
are considered in the development of IRR transportation plans and 
transportation improvement programs and in making project selection 
decisions under 23 U.S.C. 204; and
    (5) A process for the analysis and coordination of all management 
systems outputs to systematically operate, maintain, and upgrade 
existing transportation assets cost-effectively;
    (g) All management systems shall use databases with a common or 
coordinated reference system that can be used to geolocate all database 
information.
    (h) Existing data sources may be used by the BIA and Tribes to the 
maximum extent possible to meet the management system requirements.
    (i) A nationwide congestion management system is not required. The 
BIA and the FHWA shall develop criteria for determining when congestion 
management systems are required for BIA or Tribal transportation 
facilities providing access to and within the Indian reservations. 
Either the Tribes or the BIA, in consultation with the Tribes, shall 
develop, establish and implement congestion management systems for the 
transportation facilities that meet the criteria.
    (j) The BIA shall develop an appropriate means to evaluate the 
effectiveness of the management systems in enhancing transportation 
investment decisions and improving the overall efficiency of the 
affected transportation systems and facilities. This evaluation is to 
be conducted periodically, preferably as part of the BIA planning 
process.
    (k) The management systems shall be operated so investment 
decisions based on management system outputs can be accomplished at the 
BIA region and Tribal level and can be utilized throughout the 
transportation planning process.


Sec.  973.206  Funds for establishment, development, and implementation 
of the systems.

    The IRR program management funds may be used to accomplish 
nationwide management system activities. For Tribal management system 
activities, the IRR two percent Tribal transportation planning or 
construction funds may be used. (Refer to 23 U.S.C. 204(b) and 204(j)). 
These funds are to be administered in accordance with the procedures 
and requirements applicable to the funds.


Sec.  973.208  Indian lands Pavement Management System (PMS).

    In addition to the requirements provided in Sec.  973.204, the PMS 
must meet the following requirements:

[[Page 1113]]

    (a) The BIA shall have a PMS for all federally and Tribally owned 
IRRs included in the IRR inventory.
    (b) Where a Tribe collects data for the Tribe's PMS, the Tribe 
shall provide the data to the BIA to be used in the nationwide PMS.
    (c) The nationwide and Tribal PMSs may be based on the concepts 
described in the AASHTO's ``Pavement Management Guide.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ ``Pavement Management Guide,'' AASHTO, 2001, is available 
for inspection as prescribed at 49 CFR part 7. It may be purchased 
online at http://www.transportation.org/publications/bookstore.nsf 
or mail addressed to the American Association of State Highway and 
Transportation Officials (AASHTO), Publication Order Dept., P.O. Box 
96716, Washington, DC 20090-6716.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (d) The nationwide and Tribal PMSs may be utilized at various 
levels of technical complexity depending on the nature of the pavement 
network. These different levels may depend on mileage, functional 
classes, volumes, loading, usage, surface type, or other criteria the 
BIA and ITGs deem appropriate.
    (e) A PMS shall be designed to fit the BIA's or Tribes' goals, 
policies, criteria, and needs using the following components, at a 
minimum, as a basic framework for a PMS:
    (1) A database and an ongoing program for the collection and 
maintenance of the inventory, inspection, cost, and supplemental data 
needed to support the PMS. The minimum PMS database shall include:
    (i) An inventory of the physical pavement features including the 
number of lanes, length, width, surface type, functional 
classification, and shoulder information;
    (ii) A history of project dates and types of construction, 
reconstruction, rehabilitation, and preventive maintenance. If some of 
the inventory or historic data is difficult to establish, it may be 
collected when preservation or reconstruction work is performed;
    (iii) A condition survey that includes ride, distress, rutting, and 
surface friction (as appropriate);
    (iv) Traffic information including volumes and vehicle 
classification (as appropriate); and
    (v) Data for estimating the costs of actions.
    (2) A system for applying network level analytical procedures that 
are capable of analyzing data for all federally and Tribally owned IRR 
in the inventory or any subset. The minimum analyses shall include:
    (i) A pavement condition analysis that includes ride, distress, 
rutting, and surface friction (as appropriate);
    (ii) A pavement performance analysis that includes present and 
predicted performance and an estimate of the remaining service life 
(performance and remaining service life to be developed with time); and
    (iii) An investment analysis that:
    (A) Identifies alternative strategies to improve pavement 
conditions;
    (B) Estimates costs of any pavement improvement strategy;
    (C) Determines maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation strategies 
for pavements using life-cycle cost analysis or a comparable procedure;
    (D) Performs short and long term budget forecasting; and
    (E) Recommends optimal allocation of limited funds by developing a 
prioritized list of candidate projects over a predefined planning 
horizon (both short and long term).
    (f) For any roads in the inventory or subset thereof, PMS reporting 
requirements shall include, but are not limited to, percentage of roads 
in good, fair, and poor condition.


Sec.  973.210  Indian lands Bridge Management System (BMS).

    In addition to the requirements provided in Sec.  973.204, the BMS 
must meet the following requirements:
    (a) The BIA shall have a nationwide BMS for the federally and 
Tribally owned IRR bridges that are funded under the FLHP and required 
to be inventoried and inspected under 23 CFR part 650, subpart C, 
National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS).
    (b) Where a Tribe collects data for the Tribe's BMS, the Tribe 
shall provide the data to the BIA to be used in the nationwide BMS.
    (c) The nationwide and Tribal BMSs may be based on the concepts 
described in the AASHTO's ``Guidelines for Bridge Management Systems.'' 
\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``Guidelines for Bridge Management Systems,'' AASHTO, 1993, 
is available for inspection as prescribed at 49 CFR part 7. It may 
be purchased online at http://www.transportation.org/publications/bookstore.nsf or mail addressed to the American Association of State 
Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), Publication Order 
Dept., P.O. Box 96716, Washington, DC 20090-6716.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (d) A BMS shall be designed to fit the BIA or Tribe's goals, 
policies, criteria, and needs using the following components, as a 
minimum, as a basic framework for a BMS:
    (1) A database and an ongoing program for the collection and 
maintenance of the inventory, inspection, cost, and supplemental data 
needed to support the BMS. The minimum BMS database shall include:
    (i) The inventory data described by the NBIS (23 CFR 650.311);
    (ii) Data characterizing the severity and extent of deterioration 
of bridge components;
    (iii) Data for estimating the cost of improvement actions;
    (iv) Traffic information including volumes and vehicle 
classification (as appropriate); and
    (v) A history of conditions and actions taken on each bridge, 
excluding minor or incidental maintenance.
    (2) A systematic procedure for applying network level analytical 
procedures that are capable of analyzing data for all bridges in the 
inventory or any subset. The minimum analyses shall include:
    (i) A prediction of performance and estimate of the remaining 
service life of structural and other key elements of each bridge, both 
with and without intervening actions; and
    (ii) A recommendation for optimal allocation of limited funds by 
developing a prioritized list of candidate projects over a predefined 
planning horizon (both short and long term).
    (e) The BMS may include the capability to perform an investment 
analysis (as appropriate, considering size of structure, traffic 
volume, and structural condition). The investment analysis may include 
the ability to:
    (1) Identify alternative strategies to improve bridge condition, 
safety and serviceability;
    (2) Estimate the costs of any strategies ranging from maintenance 
of individual elements to full bridge replacement;
    (3) Determine maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation strategies 
for bridge elements using life cycle cost analysis or a comparable 
procedure; and
    (4) Perform short and long term budget forecasting.
    (f) For any bridge in the inventory or subset thereof, BMS 
reporting requirements shall include, but are not limited to, 
percentage of non-deficient bridges.


Sec.  973.212  Indian lands Safety Management System (SMS).

    In addition to the requirements provided in Sec.  973.204, the SMS 
must meet the following requirements:
    (a) The BIA shall have a nationwide SMS for all federally and 
Tribally owned IRR and public transit facilities included in the IRR 
inventory.
    (b) Where a Tribe collects data for the Tribe's SMS, the Tribe 
shall provide the data to the BIA to be used in the nationwide SMS.
    (c) The nationwide and Tribal SMS may be based on the guidance in 
``Safety Management Systems: Good Practices

[[Page 1114]]

for Development and Implementation.'' \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``Safety Management Systems: Good Practices for Development 
and Implementation,'' FHWA and NHTSA, May 1996, may be obtained at 
the FHWA, Office of Safety, Room 3407, 400 Seventh St., SW., 
Washington, DC 20590, or electronically at http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/media/documents.htm. It is available for 
inspection and copying as prescribed at 49 CFR part 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (d) The BIA and ITGs shall utilize the SMSs to ensure that safety 
is considered and implemented as appropriate in all phases of 
transportation system planning, design, construction, maintenance, and 
operations.
    (e) The nationwide and Tribal SMSs may be utilized at various 
levels of complexities depending on the nature of the IRR facility 
involved.
    (f) A SMS shall be designed to fit the BIA or ITG's goals, 
policies, criteria, and needs using, as a minimum, the following 
components as a basic framework for a SMS:
    (1) A database and an ongoing program for the collection and 
maintenance of the inventory, inspection, cost, and supplemental data 
needed to support the SMS. The minimum SMS database shall include:
    (i) Accident records;
    (ii) An inventory of safety hardware including signs, guardrails, 
and lighting appurtenances (including terminals); and
    (iii) Traffic information including volume and vehicle 
classification (as appropriate).
    (2) Development, establishment and implementation of procedures 
for:
    (i) Routinely maintaining and upgrading safety appurtenances 
including highway-rail crossing warning devices, signs, highway 
elements, and operational features where appropriate;
    (ii) Routinely maintaining and upgrading safety features of transit 
facilities;
    (iii) Identifying and investigating hazardous or potentially 
hazardous transportation system safety problems, roadway locations and 
features; and
    (iv) Establishing countermeasures and setting priorities to correct 
the identified hazards and potential hazards.
    (3) A process for communication, coordination, and cooperation 
among the organizations responsible for the roadway, human, and vehicle 
safety elements;
    (4) Development and implementation of public information and 
education activities on safety needs, programs, and countermeasures 
which affect safety on the BIA's and ITG's transportation systems; and
    (5) Identification of skills, resources and training needs to 
implement safety programs for highway and transit facilities and the 
development of a program to carry out necessary training.
    (g) While the SMS applies to all IRRs in the IRR inventory, the 
extent of system requirements (e.g., data collection, analyses, and 
standards) for low volume roads may be tailored to be consistent with 
the functional classification of the roads. However, adequate 
requirements should be included for each BIA functional classification 
to provide for effective inclusion of safety decisions in the 
administration of transportation by the BIA and ITGs.
    (h) For any transportation facilities in the IRR inventory or 
subset thereof, SMS reporting requirements shall include, but are not 
limited to, the following:
    (1) Accident types such as right-angle, rear-end, left turn, head-
on, sideswipe, pedestrian-related, run-off-road, fixed object, and 
parked vehicle;
    (2) Accident severity per year measured as number of accidents with 
fatalities, injuries, and property damage only; and
    (3) Accident rates measured as number of accidents (fatalities, 
injuries, and property damage only) per 100 million vehicle miles of 
travel, number of accidents (fatalities, injuries, and property damage 
only) per 1000 vehicles, or number of accidents (fatalities, injuries, 
and property damage only) per mile.


Sec.  973.214  Indian lands Congestion Management System (CMS).

    (a) For purposes of this section, congestion means the level at 
which transportation system performance is no longer acceptable due to 
traffic interference. The BIA and the FHWA, in consultation with the 
Tribes, shall develop criteria to determine when a CMS is to be 
implemented for a specific Federally or Tribally owned IRR 
transportation system that is experiencing congestion. Either the Tribe 
or the BIA, in consultation with the Tribe, shall consider the results 
of the CMS in the development of the IRR transportation plan and the 
IRRTIP, when selecting strategies for implementation that provide the 
most efficient and effective use of existing and future transportation 
facilities to alleviate congestion and enhance mobility.
    (b) In addition to the requirements provided in Sec.  973.204, the 
CMS must meet the following requirements:
    (1) For those BIA or Tribal transportation systems that require a 
CMS, consideration shall be given to strategies that reduce private 
automobile travel and improve existing transportation system 
efficiency. Approaches may include the use of alternate mode studies 
and implementation plans as components of the CMS.
    (2) A CMS will:
    (i) Identify and document measures for congestion (e.g., level of 
service);
    (ii) Identify the causes of congestion;
    (iii) Include processes for evaluating the cost and effectiveness 
of alternative strategies;
    (iv) Identify the anticipated benefits of appropriate alternative 
traditional and nontraditional congestion management strategies;
    (v) Determine methods to monitor and evaluate the performance of 
the multi-modal transportation system; and
    (vi) Appropriately consider the following example categories of 
strategies, or combinations of strategies for each area:
    (A) Transportation demand management measures;
    (B) Traffic operational improvements;
    (C) Public transportation improvements;
    (D) ITS technologies; and
    (E) Additional system capacity.
[FR Doc. 03-105 Filed 1-7-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P