[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 108 (Monday, June 6, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36381-36385]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-13261]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

[Docket No. DOT-OST-2016-0053]


Establishment of Interim National Multimodal Freight Network

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of Transportation (OST), Federal 
Aviation Administration (FAA), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Maritime Administration (MARAD), 
Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation (SLSDC), and U.S. 
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: Section 70103 of title 49, United States Code (U.S.C.), which 
was established in section 8001 of the Fixing America's Surface 
Transportation (FAST) Act, directs the Under Secretary of 
Transportation for Policy (Under Secretary) to establish a National 
Multimodal Freight Network (NMFN) to: (1) Assist States in 
strategically directing resources toward improved system performance 
for the efficient movement of freight on the NMFN; (2) inform freight 
transportation planning; (3) assist in the prioritization of Federal 
investment; and (4) assess and support Federal investments to achieve 
the national multimodal freight policy goals described in section 
70101(b) of title 49, U.S.C., and the national highway freight program 
goals described in section 167 of title 23, U.S.C.
    Within 180 days of the enactment of the FAST Act, the Under 
Secretary is directed to establish an Interim NMFN. This notice 
establishes an Interim NMFN per the statutory requirements and solicits 
public comment to help inform the Final NMFN that will be designated by 
December 4, 2017, per the statutory requirement.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 6, 2016 to 
receive consideration by DOT with respect to the final designation of 
the NMFN.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that you do not duplicate your docket submissions, 
please submit them by only one of the following means:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., W12-140, Washington, DC 
20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 
1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is (202) 366-
9329.
     Instructions: You must include the agency name and docket 
number at the beginning of your comments. All comments received will be 
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any 
personal information provided.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ryan Endorf, 202-366-4835 or email 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Additional Information

    Background: Each day, our roads, rails, bridges, seaports, 
airports, and waterways transport 55 million tons of goods, worth more 
than $49 billion. Freight travels over an extensive multimodal network 
of highways, railroads, ports, waterways, pipelines, and airways. A 
significant portion of the freight moved on this network requires 
multiple modes of transportation and intermodal connections to reach 
its final destination. Thus, the reliable movement of freight in the 
United States depends on all modes working together such that the 
multimodal freight system functions smoothly and without costly delays.
    In a transportation law passed in July, 2012--the Moving Ahead for 
Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21)--Congress directed DOT to 
develop a National Freight Strategic Plan and a National Freight 
Network (NFN) of highways. The NFN was to include the designation of a 
Primary Freight Network (PFN) of 27,000 centerline miles. On November 
19, 2013, DOT published a draft PFN for comment in the Federal 
Register. In developing the PFN and reviewing the resulting public 
comments, DOT determined that efforts to incorporate all of the 
criteria required by MAP-21 did not yield a network that could 
comprehensively represent the most critical elements of the national 
freight system. Among other factors, the effort to link qualifying PFN 
segments to achieve a contiguous network, and to ensure sufficient 
connections to Mexico and Canada, would require the designation of many 
thousands of miles beyond the 27,000 centerline miles allowed by MAP-
21. Significantly, the draft PFN also did not reflect the location of 
non-truck freight modes including rail, water and pipeline, which play 
an essential role in long-distance movement of freight.
    In October 2015, DOT released a draft Multimodal Freight Network 
(MFN) as part of its draft National Freight Strategic Plan (NFSP).\1\ 
That draft network addressed the deficiencies of the PFN by identifying 
65,000 centerline miles of road, more than 28 percent of the mileage of 
the National Highway System (NHS) and approximately 1.6 percent of the 
nation's total public road mileage; 49,900 route miles of railways 
representing 35 percent of the nation's rail route miles; 78 ports that 
accounted for approximately 90 percent of total 2013 U.S. tonnage; and 
56 airports that accounted for approximately 90 percent by weight of 
the nation's landed air cargo in 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ https://www.transportation.gov/freight/MFNOct2015
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 70103 of title 49, U.S.C., which was established in section 
8001 of the FAST Act, directs the Under Secretary to establish a NMFN 
that will be used to: (1) Assist States in strategically directing 
resources toward improved system performance for the efficient movement 
of freight on the NMFN; (2) inform freight transportation planning; (3) 
assist in the prioritization of Federal investment; and (4) assess and 
support Federal investments to achieve the national multimodal freight 
policy goals described in section 70101(b) of title 49, U.S.C., and the 
national highway freight program goals described in section 167 of 
title 23, U.S.C.
    Within 180 days of the enactment of the FAST Act, the Under 
Secretary is directed to establish an Interim NMFN that includes the 
following components: (1) The National Highway Freight Network (NHFN), 
as established under section 167 of title 23, U.S.C.; (2) the freight 
rail systems of Class I railroads as designated by the Surface 
Transportation Board; (3) the public ports of the United States that 
have total annual foreign and domestic trade of at least 2,000,000 
short tons, as identified by the Waterborne Commerce Statistics Center 
of the Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), using the data from the latest 
year for which such data are available; (4) the inland and intracoastal 
waterways of the United States, as described in section 206 of the 
Inland Waterways Revenue Act of 1978 (33 U.S.C. 1804); (5) the Great 
Lakes, the St. Lawrence Seaway, and coastal and ocean routes along 
which domestic freight is transported; (6) the 50 airports

[[Page 36382]]

located in the United States with the highest annual landed weight, as 
identified by the FAA; and (7) other strategic freight assets, 
including strategic intermodal facilities and freight rail lines of 
Class II and Class III railroads, designated by the Under Secretary as 
critical to interstate commerce.
    Not later than 1 year after the enactment of the FAST Act, the 
Under Secretary is directed, after soliciting input from stakeholders 
\2\ through a public process and providing notice and an opportunity 
for comment on a draft NMFN, to designate a Final NMFN with the goal of 
(1) improving network and intermodal connectivity; and (2) using 
measurable data as part of the assessment of the significance of 
freight movement, including consideration of points of origin, 
destinations, and linking components of domestic and international 
supply chains. The Interim NMFN will serve as the draft NMFN.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ These stakeholders include the following: multimodal freight 
system users, transportation providers, Metropolitan Planning 
Organizations (MPOs), local governments, ports, airports, railroads, 
and States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interim National Multimodal Freight Network Establishment: The 
Interim NMFN is based on the statutory requirements identified in 49 
U.S.C. 70103(b)(2).\3\ Maps and tables that provide details of this 
Interim NMFN can be found at https://www.transportation.gov/freight/InterimNMFN. This section will describe the factors used to establish 
the Interim NMFN.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Note that pipelines are not identified specifically in title 
49 as a network component to include on the Interim NMFN. DOT 
considered the inclusion of pipelines in the draft MFN released in 
October 2015 and concluded that mapping this system or identifying 
its most important components would likely not yield an enriched 
level of field information. Additionally, the inclusion of high 
volume pipelines would likely raise security concerns as pipelines 
carry valuable energy products that could be potential targets for 
acts of domestic terrorism and key pipeline networks stretch across 
miles of remotely populated areas that may not necessarily be 
monitored regularly. Moreover, pipelines carry only a limited number 
of product types and are primarily privately owned and operated. For 
all of these reasons, DOT has not included pipelines in the Interim 
NMFN.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NHFN is established under 23 U.S.C. 167 and includes: (1) The 
Primary Highway Freight System (PHFS), which Congress designated in the 
FAST Act to replace the PFN (the new PHFS is a 41,518-mile network 
identified during the designation process for the PFN); (2) the 
critical rural freight corridors established under 23 U.S.C. 167(e); 
(3) the critical urban freight corridors established under 23 U.S.C. 
167(f); and (4) the portions of the Interstate System not designated as 
part of the PHFS. States have the authority to designate critical rural 
freight corridors. Critical urban freight corridors may be designated 
by the relevant States or Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPOs), in 
consultation with each other, depending on population size. As no State 
or MPO has yet designated a critical rural or urban freight corridor as 
part of the NHFN, the highway portion of the Interim NMFN will consist 
of the 41,518-mile PHFS and the other portions of the Interstate System 
not designated as part of the PHFS. The current total mileage of the 
NHFN shown on the maps for the Interim NMFN is 51,029 miles, however, 
this mileage will continue to fluctuate as there are some Interstate 
System segments that have been recently constructed or converted to 
Interstate System designation and, as such, are automatically included 
in the NHFN. These additional segments are not yet shown on our NHFN 
maps or calculated in the 51,029 miles.
    As specified by the FAST Act, the Interim NMFN contains the freight 
rail systems of the Class I railroads as designated by the Surface 
Transportation Board (STB), totaling more than 95,000 route miles. 
Compared to the draft MFN released by DOT in October 2015, the rail 
network provided for in the FAST Act is much more expansive. 
Additionally, the statute specifically references other strategic 
freight assets, including other intermodal facilities and freight rail 
lines of Class II and Class III railroads, designated by the Under 
Secretary as critical to interstate commerce.
    DOT has included (as strategic freight assets) routes critical to 
interstate commerce which encompassed any rail connections to ports 
that are included on the Interim NMFN. In addition, those routes 
critical to national defense, which are designated by the U.S. 
Department of Defense's (DOD) Strategic Rail Corridor Network 
(STRACNET), are included in the Interim NMFN. These additional 
designations, which draw extensively from the Class II and Class III 
railroads, are necessary to promote network connectivity, which is 
vital for interstate commerce and national defense. The designation of 
the Interim NMFN consists of 104,296 rail route miles, which includes 
the entire Class I network of 95,200 route miles and 9,096 route miles 
of Class II and Class III railroad.\4\ Of these, the Class II and Class 
III rail lines account for 9 percent of the rail network by mileage in 
the Interim NMFN. Class IIs comprise 1,235 route miles while Class IIIs 
are represented by 7,861 route miles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Note that the entire combined network of Class II and Class 
III railroad route miles is slightly over 43,200.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, the 116 ports listed for the Interim NMFN exceed the 78 
ports identified in the October 2015 draft MFN proposed by DOT. Using 
the latest available data obtained from the USACE's Waterborne Commerce 
Statistics Center (calendar year 2014), DOT has determined that 113 
U.S. ports satisfy the 2,000,000 short ton threshold criterion 
specified in the FAST Act.\5\ DOT also included (as strategic freight 
assets) three additional ports (Portsmouth, VA, San Diego, CA, and Apra 
Harbor, Guam) in the Interim NMFN that did not satisfy the 2,000,000 
short ton threshold but which were strategic ports as of April 1, 2016 
as designated by the DOD, bringing the total ports included in the 
Interim NMFN to 116 ports.\6\ The 116 ports included in the Interim 
NMFN collectively handled more than 95 percent of the nation's domestic 
and foreign cargo in 2014. The total national waterborne traffic for 
2014 was more than 2.3 billion short tons, of which 937 million were 
domestic traffic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The 2014 calendar year tonnage by port for calendar year 
2014 published by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterborne 
Commerce Statistics Center can be found at http://www.navigationdatacenter.us/wcsc/porttons14.html.
    \6\ The U.S. Army Military Surface Deployment and Distribution 
Command (SDDC) of the DOD currently has 17 commercial seaports 
designated as strategic ports, 14 of which handle more than 
2,000,000 short tons and are included in the 113 ports described 
above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The maritime component of the Interim NMFN also includes navigable 
waterways that are used to transport domestic and international 
freight. The locations and dimensions of these waterways are based on 
data contained in the published USACE Waterway Network files (Waterway 
Network).\7\ As required by the FAST Act, the Interim NMFN includes 
U.S. inland and intracoastal waterways specified in section 206 of the 
Inland Waterways Revenue Act of 1978 (codified at 33 U.S.C. 1804), 
which provides explicit descriptions of the portions of waterways that 
are covered under it. DOT used these descriptions to spatially identify 
those inland and intracoastal waterway links on the Waterway Network 
that are shown on the NMFN map. As further directed by the FAST Act, 
other maritime routes on the Waterway Network commonly used for the 
transport of domestic freight are also depicted in the Interim NMFN,

[[Page 36383]]

including routes on the Great Lakes, U.S. components of the St. 
Lawrence Seaway, and coastal and open ocean areas.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterway Network can be 
found at http://www.navigationdatacenter.us/data/datanwn.htm.
    \8\ See 49 U.S.C. 70103(b)(2)(E).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In all cases, links between designated Interim NMFN ports and the 
Waterway Network are provided to show continuity. In total, the Interim 
NMFN includes approximately 26,000 miles of inland, intracoastal, Great 
Lakes, St. Lawrence Seaway, coastal, and open-ocean waterways. This 
total does not include the waterway mileage in international waters or 
foreign waters from the U.S. Mainland to our nation's non-contiguous 
states (Alaska and Hawaii) or to the territories of Puerto Rico, Guam, 
and other locations, although waterway routes at and around these 
locations are included where significant domestic trade takes place.
    Collectively, the routes described above also encompass the entire 
America's Marine Highways route system as designated by the Secretary 
of Transportation (46 U.S.C. 55601).\9\ Marine Highways are available 
to provide additional freight transportation capacity between U.S. 
ports, supplementing highway and rail systems. Routes on the inland 
waterways, intracoastal waterways, Great Lakes, St. Lawrence Seaway, 
coastal, and open-ocean that are officially designated as Marine 
Highways are labeled as such in the Interim NMFN map.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The short sea transportation routes authorized by 46 U.S.C. 
55601 are implemented under the America's Marine Highways program, 
with specific routes referred to as Marine Highways or Connectors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, DOT notes that the section 70103 of the FAST Act 
requires the Interim NMFN to include the top 50 airports by landed 
weight as identified by the FAA. The FAA identified the top 50 airports 
by landed weight using the Air Carrier Activity Information System 
(ACAIS), an FAA database that reflects the certificated maximum gross 
landed weight of all-cargo aircraft as required by 49 U.S.C. 47102(10) 
and 49 U.S.C. 47114(2). The ACAIS data, however, do not reflect the 
actual weight of the cargo being transported on all-cargo aircraft and 
do not account for other manner of cargo operations, such as belly 
cargo on passenger operations.
    Because the FAA's ACAIS database excludes belly cargo, which is a 
significant source of freight movement, DOT also considered Bureau of 
Transportation Statistics (BTS) data that capture cargo weight reported 
on DOT Form 41, Schedules T-100 [U.S. carriers] and T-100(f) [foreign 
carriers], which reflects the weight of cargo being transported on both 
passenger and cargo aircraft.
    When considering the top 50 airports in the BTS' Form 41 market 
data for 2014 (excluding mail and attributing weight by destination to 
be consistent with the cargo data in ACAIS), there are a total of six 
airports that are not in the top 50 using the FAA's ACAIS database for 
2014, presumably because these airports receive a large amount of belly 
cargo activity that is not captured by the FAA's ACAIS database.

1. Charlotte Douglas International Airport (CLT)--Charlotte, NC
2. McCarran International Airport (LAS)--Las Vegas, NV
3. Huntsville International Airport (HSV)--Huntsville, AL
4. Spokane International Airport (GEG)--Spokane, WA
5. Tampa International Airport (TPA)--Tampa, FL
6. Pittsburgh International Airport (PIT)--Pittsburgh, PA

    DOT has included these six additional airports on the Interim NMFN 
as ``other strategic freight assets'' that are critical to the movement 
of interstate commerce. Including these six airports on the Interim 
NMFN provides a more complete picture of how air freight (including 
belly cargo) is moving through the airports in the United States.
    Final National Multimodal Freight Network Designation: Not later 
than 1 year after the enactment of the FAST Act, the Under Secretary is 
directed, after soliciting input from stakeholders (listed in 49 U.S.C. 
70103(c)) \10\ through a public process and providing notice and an 
opportunity for comment on a draft NMFN, to designate a Final NMFN with 
the goal of: (1) Improving network and intermodal connectivity; and (2) 
using measurable data as part of the assessment of the significance of 
freight movement, including consideration of points of origin, 
destinations, and linking components of domestic and international 
supply chains. The Interim NMFN will serve as the draft NMFN. In 
designating the route miles and facilities on the Final NMFN, the Under 
Secretary shall have considered the following factors:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Stakeholders listed in 49 U.S.C. 70103(c)(1) include 
multimodal freight system users, transportation providers, MPOs, 
local governments, ports, airports, railroads, and States. States 
are assigned additional requirements described in 49 U.S.C. 
70103(c)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. Origins and destinations of freight movement within, to, and 
from the United States;
    2. Volume, value, tonnage, and the strategic importance of freight;
    3. Access to border crossings, airports, seaports, and pipelines;
    4. Economic factors, including balance of trade;
    5. Access to major areas for manufacturing, agriculture, or natural 
resources;
    6. Access to energy exploration, development, installation, and 
production areas;
    7. Intermodal links and intersections that promote connectivity;
    8. Freight choke points and other impediments contributing to 
significant measurable congestion, delay in freight movement, or 
inefficient modal connections;
    9. Impacts on all freight transportation modes and modes that share 
significant freight infrastructure;
    10. Facilities and transportation corridors identified by a multi-
State coalition, a State, a State freight advisory committee, or an 
MPO, using national or local data, as having critical freight 
importance to the region;
    11. Major distribution centers, inland intermodal facilities, and 
first- and last-mile facilities; \11\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ DOT proposes that the definition for major distribution 
centers, inland intermodal facilities, and first- and last-mile 
facilities include both those specific points, such as 
manufacturers, distribution points, rail intermodal, and port 
facilities, that handle high volumes of freight, and specific 
transportation assets, such as roadways, rail lines, or inland 
waterways, that provide the primary means of transport in the case 
of first mile, or to the final delivery point in the case of last 
mile.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    12. The significance of goods movement, including consideration of 
global and domestic supply chains.
    During this designation process, the Under Secretary shall: (1) 
Use, to the extent practicable, measurable data to assess the 
significance of goods movement, including the consideration of points 
of origin, destinations, and linking components of the United States 
global and domestic supply chains; (2) consider the 12 factors listed 
above and any changes in the economy that affect freight transportation 
network demand; and (3) provide the States with an opportunity to 
submit proposed designations.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See 49 70103(c)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOT seeks comments on corridors or facilities (across all modes) 
not included in the Interim NMFN that address one or more of the 12 
factors noted above, including a discussion of why additional 
components should be considered for inclusion on the Final NMFN. In 
particular, DOT seeks public comment on intermodal facilities and 
border crossings that are not included on the Interim NMFN. DOT 
requests that any proposed corridors or facilities be supported with 
data from the most

[[Page 36384]]

recent year available that demonstrate one or more of the above 
factors. DOT also requests that any proposed corridors or facilities be 
submitted with shapefiles, to the extent possible. Below, there is a 
list of specific questions or data requests pertaining to each mode of 
transportation reflected on the Interim NMFN.
    Highway: DOT seeks input on both the size and composition of the 
highway portion of the Final NMFN. DOT is also looking for input on 
what should be the relevant factors for including a land border 
crossing and roads at that crossing; on whether to include the entire 
Strategic Highway Network (STRAHNET) \13\ or some subset of its routes, 
such as STRAHNET connectors; and which specific roadway segments 
(including intermodal connectors and border crossings) should be added 
to or deleted from the Interim NMFN, with a fact-based or data-driven 
rationale. State-proposed additions should follow the statutory 
requirements identified below, under ``State Input.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Note that the 63,000 mile STRAHNET includes the 47,000 mile 
Interstate routes and an additional 16,000 non-Interstate routes. 
The bulk of the STRAHNET (the Interstate Routes) is already included 
in the Interim NMFN.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOT also seeks input on whether the 65,000-mile highway network 
included in the draft MFN released in October 2015 (as part of the 
draft NFSP)--with or without additional modification for STRAHNET, 
border crossings, urban or rural connectors, etc.--should be designated 
as the Final highway portion of the NMFN instead of the highway portion 
of the Interim NMFN. When proposed last fall, the draft MFN was 
uncapped and data-driven, featured a lower threshold for truck volumes 
to capture last and first mile connectors and reflected improved 
linkages to intermodal facilities compared to the PHFS in the NHFN. The 
additional continuity and connectivity of the 65,000-miles of the 
highway portion of the draft MFN provides a more complete 
representation of the multimodal system that is required to efficiently 
and effectively move freight in the U.S. For more information on the 
characteristics and methodology of the larger draft MFN, see the 
following links to maps, draft MFN, and Federal Register notice:

https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/DRAFT_NFSP_for_Public_Comment_508_10%2015%2015%20v1.pdf (See discussion 
of methodology in Appendix D beginning on p.138).
https://www.transportation.gov/freight/NationalMFN
https://www.transportation.gov/freight/StateMFNs
https://www.transportation.gov/freight/MFN
https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/FHWA-151002-013_F%20PFN.pdf

    Rail: DOT specifically requests comments relating to the proposed 
rail network. By statute, the Interim NMFN requires all Class I rail 
lines to be included. This type of designation does not consider the 
traffic density and volume across the Class I network, and that some 
Class II and III systems and segments can handle more traffic than 
lighter density Class I branch lines. Prior to the implementation of 
the FAST Act, DOT proposed a draft MFN and defined the rail network 
using traffic density and volume, among other factors.
    In this approach, FRA used the 2013 Carload Waybill Sample and the 
designated STRACNET coded within the FRA network to determine the rail 
components of the draft MFN map. Based on the Waybill Sample, FRA 
developed the following three categories of rail service for potential 
inclusion in the draft MFN:
     Intermodal rail traffic, which includes trailer on 
flatcar, container on flatcar, and rail double stack;
     Bulk shipments, which FRA defined to include all non-
intermodal moves that consisted of 50 cars or more of the same 
commodity on the same waybill;
     General merchandise shipments, which include moves that 
are not intermodal and did not meet the bulk traffic criteria.
    All intermodal rail routes are included in the draft MFN. For bulk 
and general merchandise shipments, FRA allocated the waybill data into 
three volume tiers and relied on the natural breaks in the volume data 
to determine those parts of the network that had the greatest volumes, 
removing those lines on the network with the lowest tier of tons for 
bulk and general merchandise. All STRACNET lines were included in the 
draft rail MFN map.
    The rail component of the draft MFN map consists of 49,900 route 
miles, representing 35 percent of the nation's rail route miles. Of 
this, approximately 94 percent belong to Class I railroads, with the 
balance belonging to Class II and Class III railroads. Collectively, 
the rail routes on the draft MFN map account for 60 percent of all rail 
freight traffic as measured by tons of freight.
    FRA also used the 2013 Surface Transportation Board Carload Waybill 
Sample to determine which rail connectors (interchange points with 
other modes) should be identified within the draft MFN map. FRA 
selected the top 50 bulk origination/destination markets (100 
locations) and the top 25 intermodal origination/destination markets 
(50 locations). Since there are duplicates in the 150 total locations, 
FRA consolidated these to 53 unique locations. This process gave FRA a 
narrow accounting of the rail connectors, since the waybill sample is 
not totally structured to identify multimodal connectors. DOT is 
seeking public comment on any other key factors that should be 
considered to better capture and identify freight moving on multiple 
modes. DOT seeks public input on FRA's methodology to structure the 
rail component of the Final NMFN. This approach would designate routes 
based primarily on traffic density and volume. Commenters should also 
address what density levels should be used to determine those lines 
which should be included in the network. Commenters should also 
consider Class II and Class III lines with particular attention focused 
on the statutory language identifying those lines that are critical to 
interstate commerce. Commenters should also note what criteria are used 
for determining critical to interstate commerce. Finally, DOT requests 
alternative methodologies and/or datasets to identify rail lines and 
the rail connection locations to construct a more robust rail component 
of the NMFN.
    Maritime: DOT requests public comment on the maritime component of 
the Interim NMFN. As specified by the FAST Act, the Interim NMFN 
depicts public ports that handle at least 2,000,000 short tons of 
domestic and foreign trade, annually.
    DOT seeks public input regarding the 2,000,000 short ton and 
strategic port standards that DOT was required to use as the selection 
criteria for U.S. ports in the Interim NMFN. Specifically, DOT requests 
comment on whether this standard should be maintained in the Final NMFN 
or if there are other selection criteria that would more appropriately 
identify commercial ports that are critical to the NMFN. DOT notes that 
special considerations (such as status as strategic ports or other 
ports critical to moving strategic freight assets efficiently by water, 
such as fuel or energy commodities) will be considered. For instance, 
DOT requests assistance in identifying any ports that are unique in 
handling specialty cargoes critical to economic competitiveness and 
resilience. DOT recognizes that some ports that fall below the 2 
million short ton threshold may become critical to movement of goods in 
times of national emergency and, in those times, could

[[Page 36385]]

become the cornerstone for large scale movement of goods. Further, DOT 
requests public input as to whether the navigable waterways included in 
the Interim NMFN sufficiently depict routes along which domestic 
waterborne freight is commonly transported.
    Aviation: DOT requests feedback regarding the most appropriate data 
to use when determining which airports to include in the Final NMFN. As 
noted above, the FAST Act directed that the Interim NMFN include the 
top 50 airports by landed all-cargo weight as identified by the FAA. 
However, this dataset does not account for the amount of cargo moved in 
the bellies of passenger aircraft. Further, this dataset captures 
maximum ``landed weight'' of all-cargo aircraft, which is based on the 
weight determined by aircraft type, regardless of actual cargo carried. 
DOT supplemented the Interim NMFN by considering additional candidates 
selected from the top 50 airports using cargo data reported to BTS. 
These BTS data reflect the weight of cargo being transported on both 
passenger and cargo aircraft.
    For determining how to supplement the interim network, several 
choices were made regarding the BTS data:
     DOT selected market data rather than segment data. We 
believe that market data provide a better sense of cargo moving on and 
off airports, which is appropriate for an intermodal network.
     DOT selected destination (landed) weight rather than 
origin weight, in order to be consistent with the type of data required 
in the interim network.
     DOT selected cargo weight only, excluding mail.
    Considering the data sources used to determine the interim network, 
DOT seeks public input regarding what data specifically should be 
considered for the Final NMFN. Should DOT use only the BTS data? Should 
DOT continue to combine the BTS data with the ACAIS data? DOT also 
requests comment on additional methodologies and data sources that have 
not been considered for the Interim NMFN.
    State Input: 49 U.S.C. 70103(c)(1) and 49 U.S.C. 70103(c)(3)(C) 
direct the Under Secretary to provide the States with an opportunity to 
submit proposed designations to the NMFN during the process of 
designating the Final NMFN. 49 U.S.C. 70103(c)(4)(A) requires each 
State that proposes additional designations to consider nominations for 
additional designations from a wide range of stakeholders, including 
MPOs, State Freight Advisory Committees (if applicable), and owners and 
operators of port, rail, pipeline, and airport facilities. 
Additionally, each State proposing additional designations is required 
to ensure that all additional designations are consistent with the 
State transportation improvement program (STIP) or freight plan. States 
may designate a freight facility or corridor within the borders of the 
State as a critical rural freight facility or corridor for the Final 
NMFN designation. Importantly, please note that this authority and 
process is unrelated to the highway-specific designation of critical 
rural freight corridors by States and critical urban freight corridors 
by States and MPOs for inclusion in the NHFN.\14\ In order to qualify 
as a critical rural freight facility or corridor for the NMFN, the 
facility or corridor must meet at least one of the following 
conditions:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ For more information on the designation of critical rural 
freight corridors under the NHFP program, please see FHWA's guidance 
located at http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/fastact/crfc/sec_1116_gdnce.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. Is a rural principal arterial;
    2. Provides access or service to energy exploration, development, 
installation, or production areas;
    3. Provides access or service to--
    a. A grain elevator;
    b. An agricultural facility;
    c. A mining facility;
    d. A forestry facility; or
    e. An intermodal facility;
    4. Connects to an international port of entry;
    5. Provides access to a significant air, rail, water, or other 
freight facility in the State; or
    6. Has been determined by the State to be vital to improving the 
efficient movement of freight of importance to the economy of the 
State.
    There is no limitation that such critical rural freight facilities 
or corridors must be highways. Each State may propose additional 
designations that are up to 20 percent of the total mileage of modal 
routes designated by the Under Secretary for the State. For the 
purposes of this first designation, the ``total mileage'' will be the 
total mileage in each State on the Interim NMFN. If a State wishes to 
propose a designation of a future Interstate or NHS route, it should 
provide information sufficient to demonstrate that the route is 
critical to the future efficient movement of goods and that the State 
will make such designation before the end of this year (when the Final 
NMFN is due). States should submit a list of additional designations to 
the Under Secretary as part of the public comment process described 
below. Each State submitting additional designations should also 
certify that the State has satisfied the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 
70103(c)(4) and that each proposed designation addresses one or more of 
the factors listed in 49 U.S.C. 70103(c)(2) (also listed above).
    Public Comment: The DOT invites comments by all those interested in 
the NMFN. Comments on the Interim NMFN may be submitted and viewed at 
Docket Number DOT-OST-2016-0053. Comments must be received on or before 
September 6, 2016 to receive full consideration by DOT with respect to 
the final designation of the NMFN. After September 6, 2016, comments 
will continue to be available for viewing by the public.
    The Final NMFN will be designated not later than December 4, 2016 
by the Under Secretary per the statutory requirement.

    Dated: May 27, 2016.
Carlos Monje Jr.,
Acting Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-13261 Filed 6-3-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P