Interstate Oasis Program, 9855-9857 [E6-2682]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 38 / Monday, February 27, 2006 / Notices
404 permit and a floodplain
development permit from the State
Emergency Management Agency may be
required.
Alternatives under consideration
include (1) taking no action, (2)
implementing transportation system
management options, (3) and build
alternatives. Substantial preliminary
coordination has occurred with local
officials. As part of the scoping process,
an interagency coordination meeting
will be held with all appropriate
Federal, state and local agencies. This
coordination will continue throughout
the study as an ongoing process. In
addition, public information meetings
and further meetings with community
officials will be held to solicit public
and agency input. A location public
hearing will be held to present the
findings of the Draft EIS. Public notice
will be given announcing the time and
place of all public meetings and the
public hearing.
To ensure that the full range of issues
related to this proposed action are
addressed and all significant issues are
identified, comments and suggestions
are invited from all interested parties.
Comments or questions concerning this
proposed action and the EIS should be
directed to the FHWA or MoDOT at the
addresses previously provided.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program Number 20.205, Highways Planning
and Construction. The regulations
implementing Executive Order 12372
regarding intergovernmental consultation on
Federal programs and activities apply to this
program.)
Issued on February 13, 2006.
Peggy J. Casey,
Environmental Projects Engineer, Jefferson
City.
[FR Doc. 06–1774 Filed 2–24–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–22–M
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
Electronic Access and Filing
[FHWA Docket No. FHWA–2006–23550]
Interstate Oasis Program
Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice; request for comments.
hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The FHWA is soliciting
comments on a proposed Interstate
Oasis program. Specifically, section
1310 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (‘‘SAFETEA–LU’’, Pub.
L. 109–59, enacted August 10, 2005),
requires the Secretary of Transportation
to develop standards for designating
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:15 Feb 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
certain facilities as Interstate Oases and
to design a uniform logo for such
designated facilities. The FHWA has
developed a preliminary framework for
an Interstate Oasis program and is
seeking public comments in order to
refine and finalize the program.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before April 28, 2006.
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–
0001, or submit electronically at
https://dms.dot.gov/submit, or fax
comments to (202) 493–2251. 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 from 9
a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. Those
desiring notification of receipt of
comments must include a selfaddressed, stamped postcard or you
may print the acknowledgement page
that appears after submitting comments
electronically. Anyone is able to search
the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comments (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000, (Volume
65, Number 70, Pages 19477–78) or you
may visit https://dms.dot.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Hari Kalla, (202) 366–5915, Office of
Transportation Operations, HOTO, or
Mr. Robert Black, Office of the Chief
Counsel, HCC–30, (202) 366–1359.
Office hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15
p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
You may submit or retrieve comments
online through the Document
Management System (DMS) at: https://
dms.dot.gov/submit. 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 also be downloaded from the Office
of the Federal Register’s home page at:
https://www.archives.gov and the
Government Printing Office’s Web page
at: https://www.access.gpo.gov/nara.
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
9855
Background
In response to a provision in the Joint
Explanatory Statement of the Committee
of Conference (House Report 106–355)
that accompanied the Department of
Transportation and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2000 (Pub. L. 106–
69, 113 Stat. 986), the FHWA has been
in the process of investigating a number
of issues relating to rest areas on the
Interstate System. Of particular concern
is that States are considering closing or
privatizing rest areas on Interstate
highways because of the costs of
maintenance and operation, security
issues, and potential liability.
Insufficient truck parking has also been
found to be a significant problem in
some States at rest areas on the
Interstate system, on local road systems
near interchanges with Interstate
highways, and at adjoining businesses.
Commercialization of existing Interstate
highway public rest areas to allow
private firms to provide services such as
those found in ‘‘service plazas’’ on
many toll roads and turnpikes, in
exchange for private responsibility for
maintenance and operation of the rest
areas, has been advocated by some
States and by the American Association
of State Highway and Transportation
Officials (AASHTO). However, such
commercialization is not authorized by
current laws and regulations and is
strongly opposed by business interests
located off the Interstate system.
The designation of certain privately
owned facilities off the Interstate
system, such as commercial truck stops,
under public-private partnership
agreements, has been identified as a
potential alternative to address road
user needs in lieu of commercialization
of Interstate rest areas and as a possible
way to provide motorist services as well
as help address shortages of truck
parking. Such private facilities would be
required to meet certain minimum
standards and signing would be
provided on the highway to lead road
users to these facilities. The FHWA has
identified two States, Utah and
Vermont, that have programs in
operation for designation of and signing
to such off-Interstate facilities, and a
third State, Louisiana, that has
developed the framework for such a
program but has not implemented it.
In August 2005, SAFETEA–LU was
enacted. Section 1310 of SAFETEA–LU,
entitled ‘‘Interstate Oasis Program’’,
requires FHWA to establish an Interstate
Oasis program and, after providing an
opportunity for public comment,
develop standards for designating as an
Interstate Oasis a facility that, as a
minimum, offers products and services
E:\FR\FM\27FEN1.SGM
27FEN1
9856
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 38 / Monday, February 27, 2006 / Notices
hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
to the public, 24-hour access to
restrooms, and parking for automobiles
and heavy trucks. Section 1310 also
requires the standards for designation as
an Interstate Oasis to include the
‘‘appearance of a facility’’ and the
proximity of the facility to the Interstate
system, and requires FHWA to design a
logo to be displayed by a designated
Interstate Oasis facility. Further, section
1310 requires that, if a State elects to
participate in the Interstate Oasis
program, any facility meeting the
standards for designation shall be
eligible for designation as an Interstate
Oasis.
A related provision of SAFETEA–LU,
section 1305, authorized a separate
program to provide Federal funding for
building, expanding, or improving truck
parking facilities along the National
Highway System. The FHWA plans to
issue a separate notice in the Federal
Register to announce this program and
solicit applications for use of the
available funding. The FHWA will
closely coordinate the section 1305 and
section 1310 programs to assure they are
compatible and complementary to each
other in serving the public need.
Description of Proposed Interstate
Oasis Program
The FHWA has developed a
preliminary framework for an Interstate
Oasis program that FHWA believes is
responsive to the requirements in
section 1310 of SAFETEA–LU. Figures
will be developed and sign numbers
will be designated at a later date to
illustrate certain signing elements after
they are finalized. Therefore, figure
numbers included in the draft text of the
program document are left blank at this
time, and sign numbers are general and
not specific. The draft text of the
program document is as follows:
‘‘An Interstate Oasis shall be defined
as a facility near an Interstate highway,
but not within the Interstate right-ofway, designated by a State after meeting
certain eligibility criteria, that provides
products and services to the public, 24hour access to public restrooms, and
parking for automobiles and heavy
trucks.
Interstate Oasis facilities shall comply
with laws concerning:
1. The provisions of public
accommodations without regard to race,
religion, color, age, sex, national origin,
or disability; and
2. The State and local licensing and
approval of such service facilities.
If a State elects to provide Interstate
Oasis signing, there should be a
statewide policy, program, procedures,
and criteria for the designation and
signing of a facility as an Interstate
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:15 Feb 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
Oasis. To qualify for designation and
signing as an Interstate Oasis, a business
should, at a minimum:
1. Be located no more than 3 miles
from an interchange with an Interstate
highway, except a lesser distance may
be required when State laws restrict
truck travel to lesser distances from the
Interstate system;
2. As determined by an engineering
study, be accessible via highways that
are unrestricted as to vehicle weight or
vehicle type, size, or weight and from
which road users can safely and
conveniently travel to the facility, enter
and leave the facility, return to the
Interstate highway, and continue in the
same direction of travel;
3. As determined by an engineering
study, have physical geometry of site
layout and driveway access to safely
and efficiently accommodate ingress,
on-site travel, maneuvering, and
parking, and egress by all vehicles,
including heavy trucks of the size and
weight anticipated to use the facility;
4. Have modern sanitary facilities
(rest rooms) and drinking water,
available to the public at no charge or
obligation at all times (24 hours per day,
365 days per year);
5. Have adequate and well lit parking
accommodations for vehicles, including
heavy trucks, with maximum allowed
parking duration not less than 10 hours,
to meet demands based on volumes, the
percentage of heavy vehicles in the
Interstate highway traffic, and other
pertinent factors;
6. Be staffed by at least one person on
duty at all times (24 hours per day, 365
days per year); and
7. Provide, at a minimum, the
following products and services:
a. Public telephone;
b. Food (vending, snacks, fast food,
and/or full service); and
c. Fuel, oil, and water for automobiles
and trucks.
Statewide criteria may impose
additional minimum requirements,
beyond those listed above, determined
necessary by the State to promote and
enhance road user safety, efficiency, and
productivity. If a State elects to provide
Interstate Oasis signing, any facility
meeting the State’s minimum criteria
shall be eligible for designation as an
Interstate Oasis.
Signing to denote the availability of
an Interstate Oasis at an interchange, to
guide road users to an Interstate Oasis,
or to designate a business as an
Interstate Oasis should incorporate the
Interstate Oasis symbol depicted in
Figure ‘‘X’’. [Figure to be developed and
numbered later.]
States electing to provide Interstate
Oasis signing should use only one of the
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
following signing practices on the
freeway for any given exit:
1. If Specific Service signing (See
MUTCD Chapter 2F) is provided at the
interchange, a 12-inch diameter circular
‘‘patch’’ containing the Interstate Oasis
symbol may be located in the lower
right-hand corner of the specific service
logo panel for the designated business
in a manner in which it touches both
the specific service logo and the blue
sign panel; or
2. If General Service signing (See
MUTCD Figures 2E–41 and 2E–42) is
provided at the interchange, the
Interstate Oasis General Service Sign
(D9-x) may be included on or appended
above or below an existing D9–18, D9–
18a, or D9–18e General Service sign; or
3. If no other service signing is
provided at the interchange, the
Interstate Oasis General Service Sign
(D9-x) may be appended above or below
an existing ground mounted Advance
Guide or Exit Direction sign, or a
separate D9-y sign, incorporating both
the Interstate Oasis symbol and the
legend ‘‘Interstate Oasis’’ may be
installed in an effective location,
between the Advance Guide sign and
the Exit Direction sign and with
adequate spacing from other adjacent
signs, in advance of the exit leading to
the Oasis. The D9-y sign shall have a
blue background and white border and
legend and shall contain an action
message such as ‘‘NEXT EXIT’’ for
unnumbered interchanges or, for
numbered interchanges, the exit number
as illustrated in Figure ‘‘Y’’. [Figure to
be developed and numbered later.]
Signing should be provided near the
exit ramp terminal and along the cross
road to guide road users from the
interchange to the Interstate Oasis and
back to the interchange.’’
Discussion of Proposed Interstate Oasis
Program
The FHWA believes that the draft text
stated above meets the intent and the
specific requirements of section 1310 of
SAFETEA–LU and enhances the safety,
efficiency, and productivity of the
highway system and its users. It would
establish minimum criteria meeting the
needs of travelers on the Interstate
highway system in a manner that any
State could implement despite wide
varieties in existing conditions and
needs from State to State. Similar to
criteria for businesses to be eligible for
Specific Services signing, detailed in
Chapter 2F of the Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), States
could decide to impose additional
criteria, beyond the minimum national
criteria, that they deem appropriate for
their State.
E:\FR\FM\27FEN1.SGM
27FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 38 / Monday, February 27, 2006 / Notices
Section 1310 specifically states that
the standards for designation of an
Interstate Oasis shall include standards
relating to ‘‘the appearance of a
facility.’’ The FHWA does not believe
that it is feasible to prescribe uniform
nationwide standards for facility
appearance, in terms of building design,
site layout, or other potential elements
of appearance. The FHWA believes that
the minimum eligibility criteria, plus
the use of a standard nationwide
Interstate Oasis symbol (logo) on official
traffic signs and on private business
signing of designated facilities, will
meet the intent of assuring that travelers
can readily identify the specific
locations of facilities meeting the
required criteria.
The proposed Interstate highway
signing requirements for exits providing
access to an Interstate Oasis generally
follow the principles of General
Services and Specific Services signing,
as established in Part 2 of the MUTCD,
and the FHWA’s Interim Approval
dated September 6, 2005, for use of ‘‘RV
Friendly’’ symbol ‘‘patches’’ on Specific
Services signs. The complete MUTCD
and FHWA’s September 6, 2005, Interim
Approval can be accessed at FHWA’s
MUTCD Web site at https://
mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov. Proposed sign
numbers and figure numbers in the draft
text are indeterminate at this time and
will be finalized in the completed
document.
hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Specific Questions on Which FHWA Is
Seeking Comments
The FHWA is requesting comments
on this proposed Interstate Oasis
program as described above. The FHWA
is also seeking comments and input
regarding several specific questions to
help refine and finalize the program:
1. Is 3 miles an appropriate maximum
distance from the interchange? The
maximum distance specified in MUTCD
Section 2F.01 for specific services is 3
miles. If the concept of identifying an
Interstate Oasis by adding a ‘‘patch’’ to
the Specific Service logo panel is used,
consistency in the distance policies may
be needed. States would have the
flexibility to require a closer distance in
their State policies, especially if a
State’s laws limit certain trucks to a
lesser distance when traveling off the
Interstate system. However, in some
sparsely populated areas, it may be
difficult to find any facilities within 3
miles that would qualify as an Interstate
Oasis along very long sections of
Interstate highways. Should States have
the flexibility to extend the 3-mile
maximum (as they can do for existing
Specific Services) in cases such as this?
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:15 Feb 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
2. Should the criteria for safe and
convenient access to and from a
potential Interstate Oasis facility, and
for adequate on-site geometry, be more
specific, or is it sufficient to require the
States to perform an engineering study
to make these determinations?
3. Should the minimum national
criteria require a specific minimum
number of parking spaces for cars and/
or heavy trucks, or a specific minimum
percentage of total spaces that must be
designed for use by heavy trucks? If so,
what should those numbers be and on
what basis or rationale are they
recommended?
4. Are there other products and
services beyond those listed that are
essential for inclusion in the minimum
national criteria for designation as an
Interstate Oasis? States will have the
flexibility to add their own
requirements for products and/or
services beyond the national minimums.
However, States will not have the ability
to waive any required products or
services contained in the minimum
national criteria.
5. Should States have the flexibility to
designate and sign an exit for an
Interstate Oasis if all the criteria cannot
be met by any one business at the exit,
but the combination of two or more
businesses in close proximity to each
other do meet the criteria? For example,
one particular business may meet all
criteria except offering fuel, but fuel is
continuously available from another
nearby business. In areas where no
public rest areas are available for very
long distances along the Interstate
highway, would allowing States this
flexibility for Interstate Oasis
designation better serve the public
need?
6. What symbol (logo) should be used
to indicate an Interstate Oasis? The
symbol must be simple, conspicuous
and legible from a long distance at
freeway speeds, and easily understood.
It must also be capable of being
displayed by designated businesses on
their facilities and on their private
signing.
7. If a State provides separate signing,
such as ‘‘Interstate Oasis Next Exit’’,
advising road users of the availability of
an Interstate Oasis at an interchange,
should the business designated as an
Interstate Oasis be disqualified from
having business logos on Specific
Service signs for gas, food, etc. at that
interchange? Conversely, should the
States have the flexibility to include the
name and/or business logo of the
designated business on the separate
signing, such as ‘‘Interstate Oasis—
Business Name/Logo—Next Exit’’?
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
9857
8. Assuming proper marketing and
public education, will the name
‘‘Interstate Oasis’’ be readily understood
by the public and identified with the
type of service offered? Utah and
Vermont use the names ‘‘Rest Stop’’ and
‘‘Rest Exit,’’ respectively, for the types
of facilities contemplated under the
Interstate Oasis program. Would the
Vermont or Utah names, or other names,
better serve the public, and if so, what
names are suggested and why?
9. What educational and marketing
efforts would be necessary to familiarize
travelers and businesses with this
program?
Comments regarding the program
and/or the questions listed above should
clearly state the reasoning behind the
responses. After receiving and
considering comments submitted to the
docket in response to this Notice, the
FHWA may issue a policy memorandum
detailing the Interstate Oasis program.
The FHWA also may propose revising
the MUTCD via the normal formal
rulemaking process, to add pertinent
standards, guidance, and options
regarding Interstate Oasis signing in a
future edition of the MUTCD.
Authority: Sec. 1305, Pub. L. 105–59, 119
Stat. 1144; 23 U.S.C. 109(d), 315, and 402; 23
CFR 1.32 and 655.603; and 49 CFR 1.48(b).
Issued on: February 16, 2006.
J. Richard Capka,
Acting Federal Highway Administrator.
[FR Doc. E6–2682 Filed 2–24–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA–2006–23669]
Notice of Request for Clearance of a
New Information Collection:
Commercial Driver’s License Policies
and Practices Among the 51
Jurisdictions
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this
notice announces FMCSA’s plan to
submit the Information Collection
Request (ICR) abstracted below to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for approval and comment. The
ICR is related to Commercial Driver’s
License (CDL) policies and practices
among the 50 States and the District of
Columbia (referred to as the 51
E:\FR\FM\27FEN1.SGM
27FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 38 (Monday, February 27, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9855-9857]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-2682]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[FHWA Docket No. FHWA-2006-23550]
Interstate Oasis Program
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FHWA is soliciting comments on a proposed Interstate Oasis
program. Specifically, section 1310 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (``SAFETEA-
LU'', Pub. L. 109-59, enacted August 10, 2005), requires the Secretary
of Transportation to develop standards for designating certain
facilities as Interstate Oases and to design a uniform logo for such
designated facilities. The FHWA has developed a preliminary framework
for an Interstate Oasis program and is seeking public comments in order
to refine and finalize the program.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 28, 2006.
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 20590-0001, or submit electronically at
https://dms.dot.gov/submit, or fax comments to (202) 493-2251. 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 from 9 a.m. to 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 acknowledgement page that appears
after submitting comments electronically. Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comments (or signing the comment,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000, (Volume 65, Number 70, Pages
19477-78) or you may visit https://dms.dot.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Hari Kalla, (202) 366-5915, Office
of Transportation Operations, HOTO, or Mr. Robert Black, Office of the
Chief Counsel, HCC-30, (202) 366-1359. Office hours are from 7:45 a.m.
to 4:15 p.m., e.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) at: https://dms.dot.gov/submit. 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 also be downloaded from the
Office of the Federal Register's home page at: https://www.archives.gov
and the Government Printing Office's Web page at: https://
www.access.gpo.gov/nara.
Background
In response to a provision in the Joint Explanatory Statement of
the Committee of Conference (House Report 106-355) that accompanied the
Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act,
2000 (Pub. L. 106-69, 113 Stat. 986), the FHWA has been in the process
of investigating a number of issues relating to rest areas on the
Interstate System. Of particular concern is that States are considering
closing or privatizing rest areas on Interstate highways because of the
costs of maintenance and operation, security issues, and potential
liability. Insufficient truck parking has also been found to be a
significant problem in some States at rest areas on the Interstate
system, on local road systems near interchanges with Interstate
highways, and at adjoining businesses. Commercialization of existing
Interstate highway public rest areas to allow private firms to provide
services such as those found in ``service plazas'' on many toll roads
and turnpikes, in exchange for private responsibility for maintenance
and operation of the rest areas, has been advocated by some States and
by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials (AASHTO). However, such commercialization is not authorized
by current laws and regulations and is strongly opposed by business
interests located off the Interstate system.
The designation of certain privately owned facilities off the
Interstate system, such as commercial truck stops, under public-private
partnership agreements, has been identified as a potential alternative
to address road user needs in lieu of commercialization of Interstate
rest areas and as a possible way to provide motorist services as well
as help address shortages of truck parking. Such private facilities
would be required to meet certain minimum standards and signing would
be provided on the highway to lead road users to these facilities. The
FHWA has identified two States, Utah and Vermont, that have programs in
operation for designation of and signing to such off-Interstate
facilities, and a third State, Louisiana, that has developed the
framework for such a program but has not implemented it.
In August 2005, SAFETEA-LU was enacted. Section 1310 of SAFETEA-LU,
entitled ``Interstate Oasis Program'', requires FHWA to establish an
Interstate Oasis program and, after providing an opportunity for public
comment, develop standards for designating as an Interstate Oasis a
facility that, as a minimum, offers products and services
[[Page 9856]]
to the public, 24-hour access to restrooms, and parking for automobiles
and heavy trucks. Section 1310 also requires the standards for
designation as an Interstate Oasis to include the ``appearance of a
facility'' and the proximity of the facility to the Interstate system,
and requires FHWA to design a logo to be displayed by a designated
Interstate Oasis facility. Further, section 1310 requires that, if a
State elects to participate in the Interstate Oasis program, any
facility meeting the standards for designation shall be eligible for
designation as an Interstate Oasis.
A related provision of SAFETEA-LU, section 1305, authorized a
separate program to provide Federal funding for building, expanding, or
improving truck parking facilities along the National Highway System.
The FHWA plans to issue a separate notice in the Federal Register to
announce this program and solicit applications for use of the available
funding. The FHWA will closely coordinate the section 1305 and section
1310 programs to assure they are compatible and complementary to each
other in serving the public need.
Description of Proposed Interstate Oasis Program
The FHWA has developed a preliminary framework for an Interstate
Oasis program that FHWA believes is responsive to the requirements in
section 1310 of SAFETEA-LU. Figures will be developed and sign numbers
will be designated at a later date to illustrate certain signing
elements after they are finalized. Therefore, figure numbers included
in the draft text of the program document are left blank at this time,
and sign numbers are general and not specific. The draft text of the
program document is as follows:
``An Interstate Oasis shall be defined as a facility near an
Interstate highway, but not within the Interstate right-of-way,
designated by a State after meeting certain eligibility criteria, that
provides products and services to the public, 24-hour access to public
restrooms, and parking for automobiles and heavy trucks.
Interstate Oasis facilities shall comply with laws concerning:
1. The provisions of public accommodations without regard to race,
religion, color, age, sex, national origin, or disability; and
2. The State and local licensing and approval of such service
facilities.
If a State elects to provide Interstate Oasis signing, there should
be a statewide policy, program, procedures, and criteria for the
designation and signing of a facility as an Interstate Oasis. To
qualify for designation and signing as an Interstate Oasis, a business
should, at a minimum:
1. Be located no more than 3 miles from an interchange with an
Interstate highway, except a lesser distance may be required when State
laws restrict truck travel to lesser distances from the Interstate
system;
2. As determined by an engineering study, be accessible via
highways that are unrestricted as to vehicle weight or vehicle type,
size, or weight and from which road users can safely and conveniently
travel to the facility, enter and leave the facility, return to the
Interstate highway, and continue in the same direction of travel;
3. As determined by an engineering study, have physical geometry of
site layout and driveway access to safely and efficiently accommodate
ingress, on-site travel, maneuvering, and parking, and egress by all
vehicles, including heavy trucks of the size and weight anticipated to
use the facility;
4. Have modern sanitary facilities (rest rooms) and drinking water,
available to the public at no charge or obligation at all times (24
hours per day, 365 days per year);
5. Have adequate and well lit parking accommodations for vehicles,
including heavy trucks, with maximum allowed parking duration not less
than 10 hours, to meet demands based on volumes, the percentage of
heavy vehicles in the Interstate highway traffic, and other pertinent
factors;
6. Be staffed by at least one person on duty at all times (24 hours
per day, 365 days per year); and
7. Provide, at a minimum, the following products and services:
a. Public telephone;
b. Food (vending, snacks, fast food, and/or full service); and
c. Fuel, oil, and water for automobiles and trucks.
Statewide criteria may impose additional minimum requirements,
beyond those listed above, determined necessary by the State to promote
and enhance road user safety, efficiency, and productivity. If a State
elects to provide Interstate Oasis signing, any facility meeting the
State's minimum criteria shall be eligible for designation as an
Interstate Oasis.
Signing to denote the availability of an Interstate Oasis at an
interchange, to guide road users to an Interstate Oasis, or to
designate a business as an Interstate Oasis should incorporate the
Interstate Oasis symbol depicted in Figure ``X''. [Figure to be
developed and numbered later.]
States electing to provide Interstate Oasis signing should use only
one of the following signing practices on the freeway for any given
exit:
1. If Specific Service signing (See MUTCD Chapter 2F) is provided
at the interchange, a 12-inch diameter circular ``patch'' containing
the Interstate Oasis symbol may be located in the lower right-hand
corner of the specific service logo panel for the designated business
in a manner in which it touches both the specific service logo and the
blue sign panel; or
2. If General Service signing (See MUTCD Figures 2E-41 and 2E-42)
is provided at the interchange, the Interstate Oasis General Service
Sign (D9-x) may be included on or appended above or below an existing
D9-18, D9-18a, or D9-18e General Service sign; or
3. If no other service signing is provided at the interchange, the
Interstate Oasis General Service Sign (D9-x) may be appended above or
below an existing ground mounted Advance Guide or Exit Direction sign,
or a separate D9-y sign, incorporating both the Interstate Oasis symbol
and the legend ``Interstate Oasis'' may be installed in an effective
location, between the Advance Guide sign and the Exit Direction sign
and with adequate spacing from other adjacent signs, in advance of the
exit leading to the Oasis. The D9-y sign shall have a blue background
and white border and legend and shall contain an action message such as
``NEXT EXIT'' for unnumbered interchanges or, for numbered
interchanges, the exit number as illustrated in Figure ``Y''. [Figure
to be developed and numbered later.]
Signing should be provided near the exit ramp terminal and along
the cross road to guide road users from the interchange to the
Interstate Oasis and back to the interchange.''
Discussion of Proposed Interstate Oasis Program
The FHWA believes that the draft text stated above meets the intent
and the specific requirements of section 1310 of SAFETEA-LU and
enhances the safety, efficiency, and productivity of the highway system
and its users. It would establish minimum criteria meeting the needs of
travelers on the Interstate highway system in a manner that any State
could implement despite wide varieties in existing conditions and needs
from State to State. Similar to criteria for businesses to be eligible
for Specific Services signing, detailed in Chapter 2F of the Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), States could decide to impose
additional criteria, beyond the minimum national criteria, that they
deem appropriate for their State.
[[Page 9857]]
Section 1310 specifically states that the standards for designation
of an Interstate Oasis shall include standards relating to ``the
appearance of a facility.'' The FHWA does not believe that it is
feasible to prescribe uniform nationwide standards for facility
appearance, in terms of building design, site layout, or other
potential elements of appearance. The FHWA believes that the minimum
eligibility criteria, plus the use of a standard nationwide Interstate
Oasis symbol (logo) on official traffic signs and on private business
signing of designated facilities, will meet the intent of assuring that
travelers can readily identify the specific locations of facilities
meeting the required criteria.
The proposed Interstate highway signing requirements for exits
providing access to an Interstate Oasis generally follow the principles
of General Services and Specific Services signing, as established in
Part 2 of the MUTCD, and the FHWA's Interim Approval dated September 6,
2005, for use of ``RV Friendly'' symbol ``patches'' on Specific
Services signs. The complete MUTCD and FHWA's September 6, 2005,
Interim Approval can be accessed at FHWA's MUTCD Web site at https://
mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov. Proposed sign numbers and figure numbers in the
draft text are indeterminate at this time and will be finalized in the
completed document.
Specific Questions on Which FHWA Is Seeking Comments
The FHWA is requesting comments on this proposed Interstate Oasis
program as described above. The FHWA is also seeking comments and input
regarding several specific questions to help refine and finalize the
program:
1. Is 3 miles an appropriate maximum distance from the interchange?
The maximum distance specified in MUTCD Section 2F.01 for specific
services is 3 miles. If the concept of identifying an Interstate Oasis
by adding a ``patch'' to the Specific Service logo panel is used,
consistency in the distance policies may be needed. States would have
the flexibility to require a closer distance in their State policies,
especially if a State's laws limit certain trucks to a lesser distance
when traveling off the Interstate system. However, in some sparsely
populated areas, it may be difficult to find any facilities within 3
miles that would qualify as an Interstate Oasis along very long
sections of Interstate highways. Should States have the flexibility to
extend the 3-mile maximum (as they can do for existing Specific
Services) in cases such as this?
2. Should the criteria for safe and convenient access to and from a
potential Interstate Oasis facility, and for adequate on-site geometry,
be more specific, or is it sufficient to require the States to perform
an engineering study to make these determinations?
3. Should the minimum national criteria require a specific minimum
number of parking spaces for cars and/or heavy trucks, or a specific
minimum percentage of total spaces that must be designed for use by
heavy trucks? If so, what should those numbers be and on what basis or
rationale are they recommended?
4. Are there other products and services beyond those listed that
are essential for inclusion in the minimum national criteria for
designation as an Interstate Oasis? States will have the flexibility to
add their own requirements for products and/or services beyond the
national minimums. However, States will not have the ability to waive
any required products or services contained in the minimum national
criteria.
5. Should States have the flexibility to designate and sign an exit
for an Interstate Oasis if all the criteria cannot be met by any one
business at the exit, but the combination of two or more businesses in
close proximity to each other do meet the criteria? For example, one
particular business may meet all criteria except offering fuel, but
fuel is continuously available from another nearby business. In areas
where no public rest areas are available for very long distances along
the Interstate highway, would allowing States this flexibility for
Interstate Oasis designation better serve the public need?
6. What symbol (logo) should be used to indicate an Interstate
Oasis? The symbol must be simple, conspicuous and legible from a long
distance at freeway speeds, and easily understood. It must also be
capable of being displayed by designated businesses on their facilities
and on their private signing.
7. If a State provides separate signing, such as ``Interstate Oasis
Next Exit'', advising road users of the availability of an Interstate
Oasis at an interchange, should the business designated as an
Interstate Oasis be disqualified from having business logos on Specific
Service signs for gas, food, etc. at that interchange? Conversely,
should the States have the flexibility to include the name and/or
business logo of the designated business on the separate signing, such
as ``Interstate Oasis--Business Name/Logo--Next Exit''?
8. Assuming proper marketing and public education, will the name
``Interstate Oasis'' be readily understood by the public and identified
with the type of service offered? Utah and Vermont use the names ``Rest
Stop'' and ``Rest Exit,'' respectively, for the types of facilities
contemplated under the Interstate Oasis program. Would the Vermont or
Utah names, or other names, better serve the public, and if so, what
names are suggested and why?
9. What educational and marketing efforts would be necessary to
familiarize travelers and businesses with this program?
Comments regarding the program and/or the questions listed above
should clearly state the reasoning behind the responses. After
receiving and considering comments submitted to the docket in response
to this Notice, the FHWA may issue a policy memorandum detailing the
Interstate Oasis program. The FHWA also may propose revising the MUTCD
via the normal formal rulemaking process, to add pertinent standards,
guidance, and options regarding Interstate Oasis signing in a future
edition of the MUTCD.
Authority: Sec. 1305, Pub. L. 105-59, 119 Stat. 1144; 23 U.S.C.
109(d), 315, and 402; 23 CFR 1.32 and 655.603; and 49 CFR 1.48(b).
Issued on: February 16, 2006.
J. Richard Capka,
Acting Federal Highway Administrator.
[FR Doc. E6-2682 Filed 2-24-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P