[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 39 (Friday, February 27, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9470-9476]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-4052]



[[Page 9469]]

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

Part III





Department of Transportation





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



Federal Highway Administration



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



23 CFR Parts 970, 971 et al.



Federal Lands Highway Program; Management Systems Pertaining to the 
National Park Service and the Park Roads and Parkways Program; 
Management Systems Pertaining to the Forest Service and the Forest 
Highway Program; Management Systems Pertaining to the Fish and Wildlife 
Service and the Refuge Roads Program; Management Systems Pertaining to 
the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Reservation Roads Program; 
Final Rules

  Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 39 / Friday, February 27, 2004 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 9470]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

23 CFR Part 970

[FHWA Docket No. FHWA-99-4967]
FHWA RIN 2125-AE52


Federal Lands Highway Program; Management Systems Pertaining to 
the National Park Service and the Park Roads and Parkways Program

AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule provides for the development and 
implementation of safety, bridge, pavement, and congestion management 
systems for transportation facilities under National Park Service (NPS) 
jurisdiction and funded under the Federal Lands Highway Program (FLHP) 
as required by the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-
21). The roads funded under the FLHP include Park Roads and Parkways, 
Forest Highways, Refuge Roads, Indian Reservation Roads, and Public 
Lands Highways. These management systems provide a strategic approach 
to transportation planning, program development, and project selection.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 29, 2004.

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

    This final rule, the ANPRM, the NPRM, and all comments received by 
the U.S. Docket Facility, Room PL-401, may be viewed through the Docket 
Management System (DMS) at http://dms.dot.gov. 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 this 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.archives.gov and the Government Printing 
Office's Web site 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 by rule 
safety, bridge, pavement, and congestion management systems for roads 
funded under the FLHP. The roads funded under the FLHP include, but are 
not limited to, Park Roads and Parkways (PRP), Forest Highways (FH), 
Refuge Roads (RR), Indian Reservation Roads (IRR), and Public Lands 
Highways. 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 NPS and the 
PRP program. Separate final rules on management systems have also been 
developed for the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the RR program, 
the Forest Service (FS) and the FH program, and the Bureau of Indian 
Affairs (BIA) and the IRR program. The other three related final rules 
are published elsewhere in today's Federal Register.
    The requirements in the TEA-21 are not intended in any way to 
interfere with any portion of the National Park Service Organic Act, 16 
U.S.C. 1 et seq., which established the NPS. The four management 
systems serve to guide the NPS in making resource allocation decisions 
for the PRP transportation improvement programs (PRPTIPs) and help the 
NPS implement the purpose of the Organic Act, which is to promote and 
regulate the use of the lands managed by the NPS.
    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 NPS and the PRP program (64 FR 
47749). 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. 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. Subsequently, the FHWA decided to issue a separate 
rulemaking document for the management systems and address 
transportation planning at a later date.
    On January 8, 2003 (68 FR 1080), the FHWA issued the notice of 
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) seeking comments on the proposal to develop 
and implement management systems. These comments are summarized in the 
``Summary of Comments'' section. Based on the comments received to the 
docket, the FHWA has developed this final rule to provide for the 
development and implementation of pavement, bridge, safety, and 
congestion management systems for roads under NPS jurisdiction and 
funded under the FLHP. There are instances where reference is made to 
transportation planning because the management systems serve as a guide 
to planning activities; however, this final rule only implements the 
development of management systems.
    During the rulemaking process, the FHWA considered other elements 
for their relationship to the management systems. Among these was the 
need for an environmental management system (EMS). The FHWA is 
currently supporting and participating in the development of the 
American Association of Highway and Transportation Officials' Center 
for Environmental Excellence in which EMSs, as they relate to 
transportation, are a major component. This is consistent with the 
FHWA's priority on environmental stewardship and streamlining. The FHWA 
continues to demonstrate environmental stewardship by promoting the use 
of EMSs in the construction, operation, and maintenance of 
transportation facilities. As implementation plans are developed for 
the management systems, the FHWA will promote coordination of the 
transportation management systems with individual agency plans to 
implement an EMS. At a minimum, this would provide an opportunity to 
link existing environmental data to the transportation management 
systems using a common geographic information system. The FHWA decided 
not to address EMS as part of this rulemaking action, but recognizing 
the importance of EMS initiatives, the FHWA believes that EMSs are most 
appropriately pursued as part of sound business planning of each 
individual agency.

Summary of Comments

    The FHWA received three comments to the docket on the NPRM. Of 
these three, one was from a five-State coalition of State Departments 
of Transportation (State DOTs), comprised of the State DOTs of Idaho, 
Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and

[[Page 9471]]

Wyoming (the State DOT coalition), and the other two were from the 
California (Caltrans) and Washington (WSDOT) State DOTs. The following 
discussion summarizes the specific comments received on the NPRM and 
the FHWA's response to the comments.

Rule Development

    Comment: The WSDOT and Caltrans provided supportive comments. WSDOT 
stated the application of management systems for transportation 
facilities on Federal lands was a good business practice, and the 
agency offered to provide technical assistance to the Federal land 
management agencies (FLMAs).
    Caltrans indicated general support for the FHWA's efforts to 
develop management systems for transportation facilities on Federal 
lands.
    Response: The FHWA supports efforts by the WSDOT to provide 
technical assistance in the development of the management systems, and 
encourages all State DOTs to provide technical assistance, if 
requested. In addition, the FHWA appreciates recognition by Caltrans 
and the WSDOT of the importance of the management systems to the FLMAs.

Implementation--Process and Coordination Issues

    Comments: Caltrans and the State DOT coalition suggested Federal 
agencies should use existing systems to avoid redundancy and assure 
compatibility with existing State systems.
    The State DOT coalition further suggested that two options to 
achieve this are coordinating with the State DOTs that currently have 
management systems in place to assure compatibility, and/or pooling 
resources with other Federal land management agencies. The State DOT 
coalition also indicated management systems should be implemented 
efficiently to control costs, including limiting the data collected to 
the minimum necessary to achieve goals and objectives for the PRP 
program. The State DOT coalition further indicated that judicious 
determination of the extent of the requirements for the new management 
systems could preserve program funds for actual projects. In addition, 
the State DOT coalition suggested including a provision in the rule 
that excludes from the management systems any roads that are already 
the responsibility of a State.
    Response: Section 970.204 of the final rule, entitled ``Management 
systems requirements,'' includes a requirement for the NPS and the FHWA 
to develop an implementation plan for each of the management systems. 
The plans will include, but are not limited to: Overall goals and 
policies concerning the management systems, each agency's 
responsibilities for developing and implementing the management 
systems, implementation schedule, data sources, and cost estimate. 
Other process issues, such as avoiding redundancy, coordination for 
data sharing, compatibility of data and systems, and specific data 
required to support the management systems can also be addressed in the 
implementation plans.
    The implementation plans will also provide an opportunity to 
clarify roles and responsibilities. Nothing in the rule is intended to 
affect a State's or MPO's role in providing accident or congestion data 
for its facilities covered by the management systems. The plans are 
intended to develop effective means of collecting and using information 
to improve decision-making for the PRP program, and to promote data 
sharing. Inclusion of State or MPO data in the management systems does 
not assume that the NPS would duplicate the data collection effort 
already undertaken by a State or MPO. Emphasis is on the importance of 
cooperation and coordination in understanding responsibilities, and 
sharing data.
    While the FHWA has acknowledged that part of the data collection 
burden may be a State responsibility, minimizing that burden is a 
responsibility of the NPS in their role of establishing and maintaining 
the management systems. States will have the opportunity to help 
determine how the information is collected and used during the 
development of the implementation plans. One important component of the 
management systems will be compatibility with existing State systems, 
as a means to minimize any additional data collection burden or 
duplication of effort.

Implementation: Management System Structure and Data Standards

    Comment: The NPS indicated the desire and need for some flexibility 
in designing the management systems to meet the goals, policies and 
needs of the PRP program consistent with the intent and requirements of 
the proposed rule.
    Response: The FHWA agrees with the NPS comment, and has revised 
Sec.  970.204(a) to provide for professional engineering and planning 
judgment in determining the nature and extent of the required 
management systems coverage.
    Comment: The State DOT coalition indicated it might be unduly 
costly to develop a pavement management system for all roads by 
including unpaved roads.
    Response: For clarification, the NPS pavement management system 
already limits coverage to paved park roads and parkways, parking 
areas, and other associated facilities.

Section-by-Section Analysis

    After careful consideration of the comments received, the FHWA has 
modified the final rule to address the NPS concern over the need for 
flexibility in meeting the intent and requirements of the rule. This 
section-by-section analysis describes the change.

Section 970.204 Management System Requirements

    Comment: The NPS indicated a need and desire for flexibility in 
determining how to best structure the management systems to meet the 
intent and requirements of the rule, yet implement the systems in a 
cost effective and efficient manner.
    Response: The FHWA supports the NPS need and desire for flexibility 
in developing and implementing procedures for the development, 
establishment, implementation and operation of the management systems. 
To provide the necessary flexibility, the FHWA has modified the second 
sentence of Sec.  970.204(a) by inserting the following after the word 
needs, ``* * * using professional engineering and planning judgment to 
determine the required nature and extent of systems coverage consistent 
with the intent and requirements of this rule.''

Conclusion

    The FHWA anticipated public interest in this rulemaking. The 
comments to the docket have helped to raise awareness about roles and 
responsibilities of all entities involved in the implementation of the 
final rule that will be important to consider in the development of the 
implementation plans. These implementation plans can be an effective 
tool in avoiding duplication and redundancy, minimizing the burden on 
States and other non-Federal entities, and determining the required 
extent of management systems coverage. The FHWA believes that the 
resulting changes in the final rule address the flexibility concerns of 
the NPS and will yield enhanced cooperation and coordination with the 
State DOTs in its implementation.

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

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

    The FHWA has determined that this final rule is a significant 
regulatory

[[Page 9472]]

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 in the 
transportation facilities of the National Parks. The Office of 
Management and Budget has reviewed this document under E.O. 12866. The 
FHWA anticipates that the economic impact of any action taken in this 
rulemaking process will be minimal. The FHWA anticipates the final rule 
will not adversely affect any sector of the economy in a material way. 
Though this action will impact the NPS, it will not likely interfere 
with any action taken or planned by the NPS or another agency, or 
materially alter the budgetary impact of any entitlement, grants, user 
fees, or loan programs.
    The FHWA has considered the costs and benefits associated with this 
rulemaking and the information provided in response to the proposed 
rule, and believes the benefits outweigh the costs. Information 
provided by the management systems will enhance transportation 
investment decisions for the PRP program, and improve the overall 
efficiency of the NPS transportation system. In addition, the 
management systems will assist the FHWA in its stewardship and 
oversight roles. The benefits of the management system information will 
be significant in relationship to the costs of implementation.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-
612), the FHWA has evaluated the effects of this action on small 
entities and has determined that this rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    This final rule will not impose a mandate that requires further 
analysis under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4, 
March 22, 1995; 109 Stat. 48). This final 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 final rule provides for the development and 
implementation of pavement, bridge, safety, and congestion management 
systems for transportation facilities under the NPS jurisdiction that 
are funded under the FLHP, therefore, this action is not considered an 
unfunded mandate.

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    This final 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 action will not have sufficient 
federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism 
assessment. The FHWA has also determined that this final action will 
not preempt any State law or State regulation or affect the States' 
ability to discharge traditional State governmental functions.

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 final 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 requested that the OMB approve a single information collection 
clearance for all of the data in the four management systems at the 
time the final rule is published. The FHWA is sponsoring this clearance 
on behalf of the National Park Service.
    The FHWA estimates that a total of 4,100 burden hours per year 
would be imposed on non-Federal entities to provide the required 
information for the NPS management systems. Respondents to this 
information collection include State transportation departments, 
Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), regional transportation 
planning agencies, and county and local governments.
    A measurable level of effort may be required of non-Federal 
entities to provide management system information for the safety and 
congestion management systems. A similar level of effort is not 
anticipated for the pavement and bridge management systems, since the 
entire PRP system is under the jurisdiction of the NPS. The burden on 
States and MPOs will be at a level commensurate with the relatively 
substantial extent of the PRP system. For estimating purposes, each 
State has been assigned 34 hours of burden for the safety management 
system (SMS). Thus, the annual burden estimate for the NPS SMS is 1,700 
hours. The level of burden on non-Federal entities will be relatively 
modest since the NPS will incorporate existing State and local data 
into the management systems, where feasible.
    For the congestion management system (CMS), the non-Federal burden, 
if applicable, would likely fall to the MPOs, and represents the need 
for the NPS to coordinate its management system with the MPOs, for that 
portion of its transportation system that is within an MPO area. This 
results in a total annual burden estimate of 2,400 hours per year for 
the NPS CMS.
    The State DOT coalition provided comments on the proposed data 
collection indicating that the management systems should be implemented 
in a way that does not burden States or adversely affect the funding or 
other resources available for the State programs. The State DOT 
coalition's comments encouraged a cooperative process using approaches 
that would avoid redundancy and duplication in implementing the 
management systems.
    The FHWA anticipated some burden on States and MPOs in the burden 
estimates prepared as part of the rulemaking. The State DOT coalition 
did not question the need for management systems or the FHWA's burden 
estimates. The FHWA believes that the value of the management systems 
information for transportation decision-making outweighs the burden of 
collecting it. The FHWA has tried to keep the data collection burden to 
the lowest level possible, while providing for the necessary data, and 
believes the burden estimates to be fair and equitable. The NPS has 
responsibility to develop the management systems in a manner that would 
incorporate any existing data in the most efficient way and without 
additional burdens to the public.

National Environmental Policy Act

    The FHWA analyzed this action for the purpose of the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347) and has 
determined that this final rule will not have any effect on the quality 
of the environment.

[[Page 9473]]

Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation)

    The FHWA has analyzed this action under Executive Order 13175, 
dated November 6, 2000, and concluded that this final rule will not 
have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes; will not 
impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian tribal government, 
and will not preempt tribal law. The requirements set forth in the 
final rule do not directly affect one or more Indian tribes. Therefore, 
a tribal summary impact statement is not required.

Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This final rule 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)

    Under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks, this final rule is not 
economically significant and does not involve an environmental risk to 
health and safety that may disproportionately affect children.

Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property)

    This final rule will not effect 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)

    This final rule has been analyzed under Executive Order 13211, 
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. The FHWA has determined that it is not a 
significant energy action under that order because, although it is a 
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, the final 
rule 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 970

    Bridges, Congestion management, Grant program--transportation, 
Highways and roads, Management systems, National parks, Pavement 
management, Public lands, Safety management, Transportation.

    For reasons set forth in the preamble, the Federal Highway 
Administration amends chapter I of title 23, Code of Federal 
Regulations, as set forth below.

    Issued on: February 18, 2004.
Mary E. Peters,
Federal Highway Administrator.

0
1. Add a new subchapter L, consisting of part 970 to read as follows:

SUBCHAPTER L--FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAYS

PART 970--NATIONAL PARK SERVICE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

Subpart A--Definitions
Sec.
970.100 Purpose.
970.102 Applicability.
970.104 Definitions.
Subpart B--National Park Service Management Systems
970.200 Purpose.
970.202 Applicability.
970.204 Management systems requirements.
970.206 Funds for establishment, development and implementation of 
the systems.
970.208 Federal lands pavement management system (PMS).
970.210 Federal lands bridge management system (BMS).
970.212 Federal lands safety management system (SMS).
970.214 Federal lands congestion management system (CMS).

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

Subpart A--Definitions


Sec.  970.100  Purpose.

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


Sec.  970.102  Applicability.

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


Sec.  970.104  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 bridge management system (BMS) means a systematic 
process used by the Forest Service (FS), the Fish and Wildlife Service 
(FWS) and the National Park Service (NPS) for collecting and 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 and effectively considered.
    Federal lands congestion management system (CMS) means a systematic 
process used by the NPS, the FWS and the FS 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.
    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.
    Federal lands pavement management system (PMS) means a systematic 
process used by the NPS, the FWS and the FS 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.
    Federal lands safety management system (SMS) means a systematic 
process used by the NPS, the FWS and the FS 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.
    Highway safety means the reduction of traffic accidents on public 
roads, including reductions in deaths, injuries, and property damage.
    Intelligent transportation system (ITS) means electronics, 
communications, or information processing used singly or in combination 
to improve the efficiency

[[Page 9474]]

and safety of a surface transportation system.
    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, including maintenance and operation expenditures. 
Comprehensive life-cycle cost analysis includes all economic variables 
essential to the evaluation, including user costs such as delay, safety 
costs associated with maintenance and rehabilitation projects, agency 
capital costs, and life-cycle maintenance costs.
    Metropolitan planning area means the geographic area in which the 
metropolitan transportation planning process required by 23 U.S.C. 134 
and 49 U.S.C. 5303-5306 must be carried out.
    Metropolitan planning organization (MPO) means the forum for 
cooperative transportation decision-making for the metropolitan 
planning area pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 134 and 49 U.S.C. 5303.
    National Park Service transportation plan means an official NPS 
multimodal transportation plan that is developed through the NPS 
transportation planning process pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 204.
    Operations means those activities associated with managing, 
controlling, and regulating highway and pedestrian traffic.
    Park road means a public road, including a bridge built primarily 
for pedestrian use, but with capacity for use by emergency vehicles, 
that is located within, or provides access to, an area in the National 
Park System with title and maintenance responsibilities vested in the 
United States.
    Park Road Program transportation improvement program (PRPTIP) means 
a staged, multi-year, multimodal program of NPS transportation projects 
in a State area. The PRPTIP is consistent with the NPS transportation 
plan and developed through the NPS planning processes pursuant to 23 
U.S.C. 204.
    Park Roads and Parkways program means a program that is authorized 
in 23 U.S.C. 204 with funds allocated to the NPS by the Federal Highway 
Administration (FHWA) for each fiscal year as provided in 23 U.S.C. 
202(c) and 23 U.S.C. 204.
    Parkway means a parkway authorized by Act of Congress on lands to 
which title is vested in the United States.
    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.
    Transportation Management Area (TMA) means an urbanized area with a 
population over 200,000 (as determined by the latest decennial census) 
or other area when TMA designation is requested by the Governor and the 
MPO (or affected local officials), and officially designated by the 
Administrators of the FHWA and the Federal Transit Administration 
(FTA). The TMA designation applies to the entire metropolitan planning 
area(s).

Subpart B--National Park Service Management Systems


Sec.  970.200  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 the extent appropriate, to develop by rule 
safety, bridge, pavement, and congestion management systems for roads 
funded under the FLHP. These management systems serve to guide the 
National Park Service (NPS) in developing transportation plans and 
making resource allocation decisions for the PRPTIP.


Sec.  970.202  Applicability.

    The provisions in this subpart are applicable to the NPS and the 
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) that are responsible for 
satisfying these requirements for management systems pursuant to 23 
U.S.C. 204.


Sec.  970.204  Management systems requirements.

    (a) The NPS shall develop, establish and implement the management 
systems as described in this subpart. The NPS may tailor all management 
systems to meet the NPS goals, policies, and needs using professional 
engineering and planning judgment to determine the required nature and 
extent of systems coverage consistent with the intent and requirements 
of this rule. The management systems also shall be developed so they 
assist in meeting the goals and measures that were jointly developed by 
the FHWA and the NPS in response to the Government Performance and 
Results Act of 1993 (Pub. L. 103-62, 107 Stat. 285).
    (b) The NPS and the FHWA shall develop an implementation plan for 
each of the management systems. These plans will include, but are not 
limited to, the following: Overall goals and policies concerning the 
management systems, each agency's responsibilities for developing and 
implementing the management systems, implementation schedule, data 
sources, and cost estimate. The FHWA will provide the NPS ongoing 
technical engineering support for the development, implementation, and 
maintenance of the management systems.
    (c) The NPS shall develop and implement procedures for the 
development, establishment, implementation and operation of management 
systems. The procedures shall include:
    (1) A process for ensuring the outputs of the management systems 
are considered in the development of NPS transportation plans and 
PRPTIPs and in making project selection decisions under 23 U.S.C. 204;
    (2) A process for the analysis and coordination of all management 
system outputs to systematically operate, maintain, and upgrade 
existing transportation assets cost-effectively;
    (3) A description of each management system;
    (4) A process to operate and maintain the management systems and 
their associated databases; and
    (5) A process for data collection, processing, analysis and 
updating for each management system.
    (d) All management systems will use databases with a geographical 
reference system that can be used to geolocate all database 
information.
    (e) Existing data sources may be used by the NPS to the maximum 
extent possible to meet the management system requirements.
    (f) The NPS shall develop an appropriate means to evaluate the 
effectiveness of the management systems in enhancing transportation 
investment decision-making and improving the overall efficiency of the 
affected transportation systems and facilities. This evaluation is to 
be conducted periodically, preferably as part of the NPS planning 
process.
    (g) The management systems shall be operated so investment 
decisions based on management system outputs can be considered at the 
national, regional, and park levels.


Sec.  970.206  Funds for establishment, development, and implementation 
of the systems.

    The Park Roads and Parkways program funds may be used for

[[Page 9475]]

development, establishment, and implementation of the management 
systems. These funds are to be administered in accordance with the 
procedures and requirements applicable to the funds.


Sec.  970.208  Federal lands pavement management system (PMS).

    In addition to the requirements provided in Sec.  970.204, the PMS 
must meet the following requirements:
    (a) The NPS shall have PMS coverage of all paved park roads, 
parkways, parking areas and other associated facilities, as 
appropriate, that are funded under the FLHP.
    (b) The PMS may be utilized at various levels of technical 
complexity depending on the nature of the transportation network. These 
different levels may depend on mileage, functional classes, volumes, 
loading, usage, surface type, or other criteria the NPS deems 
appropriate.
    (c) The PMS shall be designed to fit the NPS 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) Condition data that includes roughness, 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 park roads, parkways and other 
appropriate associated facilities in the inventory or any subset. The 
minimum analyses shall include:
    (i) A pavement condition analysis that includes roughness, 
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) Provides for 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).
    (e) For any park roads, parkways and other appropriate associated 
facilities 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.  970.210  Federal lands bridge management system (BMS).

    In addition to the requirements provided in Sec.  970.204, the BMS 
must meet the following requirements:
    (a) The NPS shall have a BMS for the bridges which are under the 
NPS jurisdiction, funded under the FLHP, and required to be inventoried 
and inspected as prescribed by 23 U.S.C. 144.
    (b) The BMS shall be designed to fit the NPS goals, policies, 
criteria, and needs using, as a minimum, the following components:
    (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) Data described by the inventory section of the National Bridge 
Inspection Standards (23 CFR part 650, subpart C);
    (ii) Data characterizing the severity and extent of deterioration 
of bridge elements;
    (iii) Data for estimating the cost of improvement actions;
    (iv) Traffic information including volumes and other pertinent 
information; and
    (v) A history of conditions and actions taken on each bridge, 
excluding minor or incidental maintenance.
    (2) A system 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 
through development of a prioritized list of candidate projects over 
predefined short and long term planning horizons.
    (c) 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:
    (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;
    (4) Provide short and long term budget forecasting; and
    (5) Evaluate the cultural and historical values of the structure.
    (d) 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.  970.212  Federal lands safety management system (SMS).

    In addition to the requirements provided in Sec.  970.204, the SMS 
must meet the following requirements:
    (a) The NPS shall have an SMS for all transportation systems 
serving NPS facilities, as appropriate, funded under the FLHP.
    (b) The NPS shall use the SMS to ensure that safety is considered 
and implemented, as appropriate, in all phases of transportation system 
planning, design, construction, maintenance, and operations.
    (c) The SMS shall be designed to fit the NPS goals, policies, 
criteria, and needs and shall contain the following components: (1) An 
ongoing program for the collection, maintenance and reporting of a data 
base that includes:
    (i) Accident records with details for analysis such as accident 
type, using standard reporting descriptions (e.g., right-angle, rear-
end, head-on, pedestrian-related), location, description of event, 
severity, weather and cause;
    (ii) An inventory of safety appurtenances such as signs, 
delineators, and guardrails (including terminals);
    (iii) Traffic information including volume, speed, and vehicle 
classification, as appropriate.

[[Page 9476]]

    (iv) Accident rates by customary criteria such as location, roadway 
classification, and vehicle miles of travel.
    (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) Identifying and investigating hazardous or potentially 
hazardous transportation elements and systems, transit vehicles and 
facilities, roadway locations and features;
    (iii) Establishing countermeasures and setting priorities to 
address identified needs.
    (3) A process for communication, coordination, and cooperation 
among the organizations responsible for the roadway, human, and vehicle 
safety elements;
    (d) While the SMS applies to appropriate transportation systems 
serving NPS facilities funded under the FLHP, 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 road and number and types of transit and other 
vehicles operated by the NPS.


Sec.  970.214  Federal 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. For portions of the NPS transportation system 
outside the boundaries of TMAs, the NPS shall:
    (1) Develop criteria to determine when a CMS is to be implemented 
for a specific transportation system; and
    (2) Have CMS coverage for all transportation systems serving NPS 
facilities that meet minimum CMS needs criteria, as appropriate, funded 
through the FLHP.
    (b) The NPS shall consider the results of the CMS when selecting 
congestion mitigation strategies that are the most time efficient and 
cost effective and that add value (protection/rejuvenation of 
resources, improved visitor experience) to the park and adjacent 
communities.
    (c) In addition to the requirements provided in Sec.  970.204, the 
CMS must meet the following requirements:
    (1) For those NPS transportation systems that require a CMS, in 
both metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas, consideration shall be 
given to strategies that promote alternative transportation systems, 
reduce private automobile travel, and best integrate private automobile 
travel with other transportation modes.
    (2) For portions of the NPS transportation system within 
transportation management areas (TMAs), the NPS transportation planning 
process shall include a CMS that meets the requirements of this 
section. By agreement between the TMA and the NPS, the TMA's CMS 
coverage may include the transportation systems serving NPS facilities, 
as appropriate. Through this agreement(s), the NPS may meet the 
requirements of this section.
    (3) If congestion exists at a NPS facility within the boundaries of 
a TMA, and the TMA's CMS does not provide coverage of the portions of 
the NPS transportation facilities experiencing congestion, the NPS 
shall develop a separate CMS to cover those facilities. Approaches may 
include the use of alternate mode studies and implementation plans as 
components of the CMS.
    (4) 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 strategies, or combinations of 
strategies for each area, such as:
    (A) Transportation demand management measures;
    (B) Traffic operational improvements;
    (C) Public transportation improvements;
    (D) ITS technologies; and
    (E) Additional system capacity.

[FR Doc. 04-4052 Filed 2-26-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P