Real-Time System Management Information Program, 1993-2005 [E9-392]

Agencies

• Federal Highway Administration
• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 9 (Wednesday, January 14, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1993-2005]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-392]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

23 CFR Part 511

[FHWA Docket No. FHWA-2006-24219]
RIN 2125-AF19


Real-Time System Management Information Program

AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

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

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

SUMMARY: Section 1201 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient 
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) requires the 
Secretary of Transportation (Secretary) to establish a Real-Time System 
Management Information Program that provides, in all States, the 
capability to monitor, in real-time, the traffic and travel conditions 
of the major highways of the United States and to share that data with 
State and local governments and with the traveling public. This 
proposed rule would establish minimum parameters and requirements for 
States to make available and share traffic and travel conditions 
information via real-time information programs.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 14, 2009. Late-
filed comments will be considered to the extent practicable.

ADDRESSES: Mail or hand deliver comments to the U.S. Department of 
Transportation, Docket Management Facility, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, or fax comments to (202) 493-
2251. Comments may be submitted electronically to the Federal 
eRulemaking portal at https://www.regulations.gov. 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 acknowledgment page that appears after submitting comments 
electronically. Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all 
comments in any one of our dockets by the name of the individual 
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf 
of an association, business, or labor union). 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://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert Rupert, FHWA Office of 
Operations, (202) 366-2194, or via e-mail at robert.rupert@dot.gov; or, 
Mr. James Pol, U.S. DOT ITS Joint Program Office, (202) 366-4374, or 
via e-mail at james.pol@dot.gov. For legal questions, please contact 
Ms. Lisa MacPhee, Attorney Advisor, FHWA Office of the Chief Counsel, 
(202) 366-1392, or via e-mail atlisa.macphee@dot.gov. Office hours for 
the FHWA 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 Federal 
eRulemaking portal at: https://www.regulations.gov. Electronic 
submission and retrieval help and guidelines are available under the 
help section of the Web site. The Federal eRulemaking portal is 
available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. Please follow the 
instructions. An electronic copy of this document may also be 
downloaded by accessing the Office of the Federal Register's home page 
at https://www.archives.gov or the Government Printing Office's Web page 
at https://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara.

A Brief Description of the Proposed Rule

    The FHWA proposes to require that each State establish a real-time 
information program that would provide traffic and travel conditions 
reporting and support other efforts related to congestion relief. The 
provision of traffic and travel conditions reporting to other agencies 
and to travelers would enable agencies to communicate the operational 
characteristics within their State or metropolitan area. Such 
information would disclose the presence and severity of congestion and 
other travel impedances that limit traveler mobility and the efficient 
movement of goods.
    These proposed regulations would not impose any requirement for a 
State to apply any particular technology, any particular technology-
dependent application, or any particular business approach for 
establishing a real-time information program. States and other public 
agencies instead would be encouraged to consider any salient 
technology, technology-dependent application, and business approach 
options that yield information products consistent with the 
requirements set forth in this proposed rule. States will be encouraged 
to work with value added information providers to establish real-time 
information programs. Value added information providers presently and 
in the future will create information products for commercial use, for 
sale to a customer base, or for other commercial enterprise purposes. 
Based upon this proposed rule, such products could be derived from 
information from public sector sources in addition to the private 
sector's own capabilities for creating information content.
    The FHWA proposes to require real-time information programs to be 
capable of delivering traffic and travel conditions on: traffic 
incidents that block roadway travel, roadway weather conditions, and 
construction activities affecting travel conditions. Those real-time 
information programs that deliver traffic and travel conditions for 
Metropolitan Areas exceeding a population of 1 million inhabitants also 
would provide travel times for highway segments.
    The FHWA proposes to require general uniformity among the real-time 
information programs to ensure consistent service to travelers and to 
other agencies. The table below identifies the proposed traffic and 
travel condition categories and characteristics:

[[Page 1994]]



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Timeliness for delivery
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Non-
             Category of information               Metropolitan    metropolitan    Availability    Accuracy  (in
                                                     areas (in       areas (in     (in percent)      percent)
                                                     minutes)        minutes)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction activities:
    Implementing or removing lane closures......              10              20              90              85
    Roadway or lane blocking traffic incident                 10              20              90              85
     information................................
    Roadway weather observation updates.........              20              20              90              85
    Travel time along highway segments..........              10              NA              90              85
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further details are provided in this notice on how the FHWA 
determined these categories of information, the timeliness for 
delivery, availability, and accuracy in the Section-by-Section 
description. Readers of this notice are directed to the description for 
Section 511.309, ``Provisions for traffic and travel conditions 
reporting'' for the details.
    The FHWA proposes to require that real-time information programs be 
established in two stages: First for reporting traffic and travel 
conditions along all Interstate highways in each State; second for 
reporting traffic and travel conditions along other Metropolitan Area, 
non-Interstate highways that sustain local mobility and that serve as 
diversion routes that alleviate congested locations.
    The FHWA proposes that the establishment of the real-time 
information programs for reporting traffic and travel conditions along 
all Interstate highways in each State should be completed within two 
years. Therefore, the FHWA proposes to require a completion date of two 
years after publication of the final rule in the Federal Register to 
establish the real-time information program for traffic and travel 
conditions reporting on all Interstate highways.
    Finally, the FHWA proposes to require that the establishment of the 
real-time information programs for reporting traffic and travel 
conditions along Metropolitan Area, non-Interstate highways be 
completed within 4 years of the date the final rule is published in the 
Federal Register. The selection of non-Interstate highways to be 
covered in a real-time information program will depend on factors 
determined by the local partners. The FHWA proposes to encourage 
selection criteria such as recurring or frequent congestion, utility 
for use as a diversion route, and susceptibility for other mobility and 
safety limiting impacts.
    The FHWA requests comment on the proposed approach summarized above 
and described in detail below to monitor traffic and travel conditions 
in real-time, and on how such monitoring can make the most cost-
effective use of the limited resources available to the States. 
Further, the FHWA requests comment on the consideration, options, and 
use of information to account for the analysis of the balance between 
the benefits and cost of the proposed rule, as described in detail in 
the ``Regulatory Cost Analysis of Proposed Rulemaking'', available in 
the docket.

Program Administration

    This proposed rule will be subject to the provisions set forth in 
Sec.  1.36 of Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations which states, 
``[i]f the Administrator determines that a State has violated or failed 
to comply with the Federal laws or the regulations in this part with 
respect to a project, he may withhold payment to the State of Federal 
funds on account of such project, withhold approval of further projects 
in the State, and take such other action that he deems appropriate 
under the circumstances, until compliance or remedial action has been 
accomplished by the State to the satisfaction of the Administrator.''

Background

    In May 2006, the Department announced its National Strategy to 
Reduce Congestion on America's Transportation Network (the Congestion 
Relief Initiative), a bold and comprehensive national program to reduce 
congestion on the Nation's roads, rails, runways, and waterways.\1\ The 
FHWA is concentrating on congestion relief by promoting a variety of 
technology and techniques, including: Tolling and Pricing; Public and 
Private Partnerships; Real-Time Traveler Information; Traffic Incident 
Management; Work Zone Mobility; and, Traffic Signal Timing. These 
efforts by the FHWA address many of the root causes of recurring and 
non-recurring congestion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Speaking before the National Retail Federation's annual 
conference on May 16, 2006, in Washington, D.C., former U.S. 
Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta unveiled a new plan to reduce 
congestion plaguing America's roads, rail, and airports. The 
National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America's Transportation 
Network includes a number of initiatives designed to reduce 
transportation congestion. The transcript of these remarks is 
available at the following URL: https://www.dot.gov/affairs/
minetasp051606.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At its most fundamental level, highway congestion is caused by the 
failure to develop mechanisms to efficiently manage use of existing 
capacity and expand capacity in locations where the benefits are the 
greatest. The ever increasing demands for the use of the nation's 
highways are severely imbalanced with the level of funding provided to 
maintain and construct new highways. For highway users, the phenomenon 
of demand outstripping supply ultimately manifests a cost upon 
individual travelers who have to bear increasing congestion. The price 
of highway travel (gas taxes, registration fees, etc.) currently bears 
little or no relationship to the cost of congestion. Put differently, 
the average rush hour driver pays out of pocket costs that do not 
reflect the true costs of the travel. As a result, the network gets 
swamped, vehicle throughput collapses, and the cost of congestion to 
all users grows rapidly.
    In more immediate terms, congestion is caused by a number of 
additional factors, including traffic incidents, special events, 
weather, work zones, and poor signal timing. Various research studies 
conducted by the FHWA indicate that half of recurring congestion occurs 
because of bottlenecks, poor signal timing, and special events. The 
remainder is divided among non-recurring phenomena such as work zones, 
traffic incidents, and bad weather.
    The purpose of the Real-Time System Management Information Program 
is to provide congestion relief by stimulating cooperation among State 
Departments of Transportation, other responsible agencies, and 
commercial entities to widen the accessibility of traffic and travel 
conditions information via real-time information programs. Travelers 
and transportation agencies increasingly will depend on traffic and 
travel conditions information, delivered by combinations of public and 
private

[[Page 1995]]

information providers, to manage congestion.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Additional discussion on the extensibility of traffic and 
travel conditions information is provided in Closing the Data Gap: 
Guidelines for Quality Advanced Traveler Information System (ATIS) 
Data available at the following URL: https://
www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov//JPODOCS/REPT_MIS/13580.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The value for a real-time information program to travelers is 
experienced at a personal level. Traffic and travel conditions 
information is ``decision-quality'' information that allows travelers 
to choose the most efficient mode, time of departure, and route to 
their final destination. This information should be easily accessed at 
a low cost in order to be useful to the average traveler. Timely and 
detailed information about traffic incidents, weather conditions, 
construction activities, and special events aid in improving travel 
time predictability, better choices, and reduced congestion.
    The value for a real-time information program to transportation 
agencies would be greater control of system-wide transportation assets. 
Information collection and dissemination are critical for enabling 
public agencies to provide for efficient interstate movement of goods 
and to reduce the level of congestion commonly experienced in 
metropolitan areas. Thus, the minimum set of information that would be 
required in this proposed rule include:
     Construction activities affecting travel conditions, such 
as implementing or removing lane closures;
     Roadway or lane blocking traffic incident information;
     Updated roadway weather observations; and,
     Travel time information along highway segments in 
metropolitan areas.
    This proposed rule results from the efforts of private industry, 
elected officials, and public officials to reduce congestion and the 
burden it places on travelers. The 109th Congress recognized the 
collaborative efforts to reduce congestion and directed the FHWA to 
provide congestion relief to American travelers.
    Under the heading of ``Congestion Relief,'' section 1201 of 
SAFETEA-LU (Pub. L. 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, Aug. 10, 2005) requires the 
Secretary of Transportation to establish a Real-Time System Management 
Information Program to provide, in all States, the capability to 
monitor, in real-time, the traffic and travel conditions of the major 
highways of the United States and to share that information to improve 
the security of the surface transportation system, to address 
congestion problems, to support improved response to weather events and 
surface transportation incidents, and to facilitate national and 
regional highway traveler information. The purposes of the Real-Time 
System Management Information Program are to:
    (1) Establish, in all States, a system of basic real-time 
information for managing and operating the surface transportation 
system;
    (2) Identify longer range real-time highway and transit monitoring 
needs and develop plans and strategies for meeting such needs; and
    (3) Provide the capability and means to share that data with State 
and local governments and the traveling public.
    Section 1201(c)(1) of SAFTEA-LU states that as State and local 
governments develop or update regional intelligent transportation 
system (ITS) architectures, described in 23 CFR 940.9, such governments 
shall explicitly address real-time highway and transit information 
needs and the systems needed to meet such needs, including addressing 
coverage, monitoring systems, data fusion and archiving, and methods of 
exchanging or sharing highway and transit information. The FHWA 
envisions that States carrying out updates of regional ITS 
architectures would consider broadening the geographic coverage area 
for gathering and reporting traffic and travel conditions.
    This NPRM does not pertain to subsections 1201(b) or 1201(c)(2) of 
the SAFETEA-LU, which address the establishment of data exchange 
formats. Data exchange formats shall be established to ensure that the 
data provided by highway and transit monitoring systems may be 
exchanged readily among State and local governments and information 
applications that communicate to the traveling public. The FHWA 
established these data exchange formats to satisfy the 2-year statutory 
deadline defined by SAFETEA-LU to complete this task. The SAFETEA-LU 
legislation establishes that States shall incorporate the data exchange 
formats established by the Secretary. The FHWA published data exchange 
formats and a technical memorandum describing the implementation and 
use of the data exchange formats in the Federal Register on October 15, 
2007 (72 FR 58347) and on the FHWA Office of Operations Web site, 
available at URL: https://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov.

May 2006 Request for Information

    On May 4, 2006, the FHWA published a notice in the Federal Register 
(71 FR 26399) outlining some proposed preliminary program parameters 
and seeking public comments on the proposed description of the Real-
time System Management Information Program, including its outcome 
goals, definitions for various program parameters, and the current 
status of related activities in the States. The comments submitted in 
response to this notice were used to develop this proposed 
rulemaking.\3\ We received a total of 44 comments to the docket, of 
which 22 of the submissions were from State Departments of 
Transportation (DOT's). Responses also were received from 
representatives of the private sector and national associations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ All comments received via the U.S. DOT Docket Management 
System or the Federal eRulemaking portal can be viewed at https://
www.regulations.gov. The submitted comments can be retrieved via 
Docket No. 24219.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Many of the State DOT's that responded identified that they were 
capable of achieving many of the goals outlined in the notice by 2009, 
provided that there would be a phased approach for achieving key 
milestones. The public sector responses often cited funding 
limitations, budget and planning cycles, and the lack of data 
collection infrastructure as obstacles to fully achieving all of the 
program goals by a 2009 date. All of the private sector responses 
indicated that all of the stated objectives could be achieved by 2009 
and perhaps sooner.
    The private sector respondents generally believed that having the 
information on nearly every road, at least in urban areas, was a 
reasonable goal. Many State and local public sector respondents did 
support reporting of conditions along arterial highways, but preferred 
to define which ones locally. Respondents generally noted that rural 
and urban areas might have different needs for coverage. Several rural 
States noted that monitoring the National Highway System plus other 
limited access roadways would overwhelm their strained resources and 
would not necessarily improve the quality of the traffic and travel 
conditions reporting. One private sector respondent suggested using the 
same definition of ``major highway'' as the mapping industry.
    There was general support for including travel times and speeds, as 
well as extent and degree of congested conditions in urban areas. 
Several rural States objected to the congestion requirement. Several 
States suggested adding expected duration for incidents, scheduled 
events, Homeland Security emergency notifications, maintenance work 
zones as well as construction work zones, hurricane evacuation, and 
terrorist acts. There was strong and

[[Page 1996]]

articulate opposition from States about including information on public 
transportation disruptions.
    There was general support for the proposed definition of ``real-
time'' for congestion, travel time, and lane blockage information. 
There was no consensus among the respondents concerning the proposed 
thresholds for timeliness and accuracy: Private sector respondents 
commonly suggested more stringent thresholds, some State agencies 
suggested weaker thresholds; some overall respondents agreed with the 
thresholds identified in the notice. Several respondents, including 
State DOTs, noted that a more stringent timeliness threshold (5 minutes 
or less) would be more useful to the public. A few State agencies and 
private sector organizations noted that they were already meeting and 
exceeding these proposed threshold requirements. A few States objected 
to the timeliness threshold requirements as inappropriate for rural 
areas. Several respondents noted that the timeliness threshold 
requirements imply either a fully automated system or a 24/7 staff, 
which is likely not available immediately in all areas of the country.
    Overall the responses reflected reasonable support for the proposed 
scope of the program, with the acknowledgement that there were 
dissenting opinions on some details. Nearly all the respondents 
anticipated that the FHWA would propose a rule to establish a program 
to advance the level of traffic and travel conditions reporting 
available today. The FHWA is proposing this NPRM to exercise the 
authority established by Congress to provide for congestion relief and 
to support the Department's Congestion Relief Initiative. This proposed 
rule enables various methods for mitigating the effects of recurring 
and non-recurring congestion by assisting agencies in providing 511 
telephone-based traveler information; enhancing traffic incident 
management; improving work zone mobility; updating and coordinating 
traffic signal timing; and providing localized bottleneck relief.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Additional information about FHWA's focus on congestion is 
available at the following URL: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/congestion/
toolbox/index.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The comments that were received in the docket contributed 
substantially to this proposed rule in two key areas: program phasing 
and content requirements. The preference for a phased approach in 
achieving the program implementation milestones led to the two distinct 
dates proposed for establishing a real-time information program: One 
deployment for all Interstates 2 years after the date the final rule is 
published in the Federal Register, the other for non-Interstate 
highways in metropolitan areas by 4 years from the date the final rule 
is published in the Federal Register. The FHWA viewed that the combined 
efforts of the public and private sectors could successfully achieve 
these proposed milestones. The FHWA noted the interest of many public 
sector respondents about their preference to select the routes for 
traffic and travel conditions reporting.
    There was wide variability in the content requirements for traffic 
and travel conditions reporting, especially in selecting a threshold 
for disseminating information after it has been collected. The FHWA 
considered the responses in parallel with the types of information that 
are needed to provide congestion relief. Based on the comments, the 
focus of the information to be reported centered on non-recurrent 
events like construction/maintenance; road closures and major delays; 
major special events; and, weather and road surface conditions.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ These types of content are consistent with those documented 
in Implementation and Operational Guidelines for 511 Services, v.3.0 
(2005), available at the following URL: https://www.deploy511.org/
implementationguide.htm. The guidelines were prepared by the 511 
Deployment Coalition of the American Association of State Highway 
and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), ITS America, the American 
Public Transportation Association (APTA), and the USDOT to promote 
service consistency to help achieve a nationwide 511 system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Transportation System Operations Enhancements Enabled by the Proposed 
Rule

    A critical factor in the ability of transportation managers to 
respond effectively to a wide variety of events and situations is the 
availability of information that conveys the operating status of 
transportation facilities in real-time. Through the availability of 
information that improves upon today's geographic coverage, data 
accessibility, accuracy, and availability, transportation system 
operators would have the tools necessary to reduce congestion, 
facilitate incident management, and improve management of 
transportation systems assets.
    Real-time information programs are proposed to be established so 
that States easily can exchange information on the real-time 
operational status of the transportation network with other States and 
with the private sector, value-added information market.\6\ This 
cooperation and sharing of information could stimulate the 
dissemination of traffic and travel conditions that include Web or 
wireless access to route-specific travel time and toll information; 
route planning assistance using historical records of congestion by 
time of day; and communications technologies that gather traffic and 
incident-related data from a sample of vehicles traveling on a roadway 
and then publishing that information to travelers via mobile phones, 
personal digital assistants (PDAs), in-car units, or dynamic message 
signs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The value-added information market creates products intended 
for commercial use, for sale to a customer base, or for other 
commercial enterprise purposes. The market may rely on information 
gathered by States, from other sources, or from the market's own 
capabilities to create the information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The establishment of real-time information programs could enable 
the exchange of commonly applied information among public and private 
partners, which would stimulate national availability of travel 
conditions information. Real-time information programs could increase 
the available quantity of data for conditions prediction, expand 
commercial markets that broker information, provide validated and 
accurate data for performance measure development and reporting, and 
stimulate new information products that could not be achieved with 
present day methods.
    The Real-Time System Management Information Program as described in 
the statute is focused upon making data available for a range of 
applications that benefit States and travelers. The proposed rule would 
implement that statute to provide a substantial foundation for the 
collection and gathering of data in a manner that would provide 
coherent use for other applications. The 511 Implementation and 
Operational Guidelines Version 3.0 \7\ (2005) illustrate what detailed 
information from a real-time information program could be provided for 
other applications:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Available at the following URL: https://www.deploy511.org/
implementationguide.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Location--The location or portion of route segment where a 
reported item is occurring, related to mileposts, interchange(s) and / 
or common landmark(s).
     Direction of Travel--The direction of travel where a 
reported item is occurring.
     General Description and Impact--A brief account and impact 
of the reported item.
     Days/Hours and/or Duration--The period in which the 
reported item is ``active'' and possibly affecting travel.
     Travel Time or Delay--The duration of traveling from point 
A to

[[Page 1997]]

point B, a segment or a trip expressed in time (or delay a traveler 
will experience).
     Detours/Restrictions/Routing Advice--As appropriate, 
summaries of required detours, suggested alternate routes or modes and 
restrictions associated with a reported item.
     Forecasted Weather and Road Surface Conditions--Near-term 
forecasted weather and pavement conditions along the route segment.
     Current Observed Weather and Road Surface Conditions--
Conditions known to be in existence that impact travel along the route 
segment.
    The extent of the proposed rule would be solely the provision of 
real-time information, yet the outcomes possible through this program 
would also reach the business of the private sector and the public 
sector. The proposed rule itself is neither centered on a particular 
technology nor on a technology-dependent application. States 
establishing a real-time information program would be able to employ 
any solution chosen to make the information available. States and 
public agencies can enter into collaborative agreements with the 
private sector for establishing the program and gathering the data. 
States and public agencies could purchase value added information 
products from value added information providers. States and public 
agencies could apply combinations of these, and other, approaches to 
establish a successful real-time information program.

Section-by-Section Discussion

    This NPRM proposes to incorporate a new, Part 511 to be titled 
Real-Time System Management Information Program.

Section 511.301 Purpose

    The purpose of this part would be to implement the requirements of 
subsections 1201(a)(1); 1201(a)(2); and, 1201(c)(1) of SAFETEA-LU, 
which directs the Secretary to establish a Real-Time System Management 
Information Program that creates the capability in each State to 
monitor and collect, in real-time, the operational status of the 
transportation system network.

Section 511.303 Policy

    Researchers working on a study on mobility considered the following 
question, ``Are Traffic Congestion and/or Travel Reliability Getting 
Worse?'' Their observations noted that ``four years (2000 through 2003) 
of archived detector data in the Mobility Monitoring Program point to 
an overall national trend of steady growth in traffic congestion and 
decline in travel reliability.'' \8\ The continued growth in congestion 
poses a burden on society by degrading quality of life, diminishing 
economic productivity, and jeopardizing personal safety.\9\ The Real-
Time System Management Information Program would become an asset for 
the Department as it advances the Congestion Relief Initiative. 
Promoting Operational and Technical Improvements is featured as one of 
the elements in the Departmental Congestion Initiative, stressing the 
need to improve operational performance, including providing better 
real-time traffic information to all system users.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Monitoring Urban Roadways in 2003: Current Conditions and 
Trends from Archived Operations Data, available at the following 
URL: https://mobility.tamu.edu/mmp/FHWA-HOP-05-018/findings.stm.
    \9\ Detailed facts and figures are provided on the FHWA Focus on 
Congestion Web site, available at the following URL: https://
www.fhwa.dot.gov/congestion/describing_problem.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In Subtitle B to the SAFETEA-LU, Congress directs the FHWA to 
improve the security of the surface transportation system, to address 
congestion problems, to support improved response to weather events and 
surface transportation incidents, and to facilitate national and 
regional highway traveler information. Section 1201 of SAFETEA-LU 
directs the Department of Transportation to establish a Real-Time 
System Management Information Program that establishes real-time 
monitoring of traffic and travel conditions of the major highways of 
the United States and to enable States to share that data with other 
governments and with the traveling public. The data used to craft 
traffic and traveler conditions information are extensible, which 
systems developers would apply towards enabling a range of applications 
that agencies and travelers use to make more effective decisions.
    In the Travel Time Data Collection Handbook,\10\ the FHWA 
documented that the availability of traffic conditions reporting offers 
data that are extensible for a broad array of uses:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Report No. FHWA-PL-98-035, published in 1998, is available 
at the following URL: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/timedata.htm. The 
Travel Time Data Collection Handbook provides guidance to 
transportation professionals and practitioners for the collection, 
reduction, and presentation of travel time data. The handbook 
provides a reference for designing travel time data collection 
efforts and systems, performing travel time studies, and reducing 
and presenting travel time data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Planning and Design

Develop transportation policies and programs
Perform needs studies/assessments
Rank and prioritize transportation improvement projects for funding
Evaluate project-specific transportation improvement strategies
Input/calibration for air quality/mobile source emission models
Input/calibration for travel demand forecasting models
Calculate road user costs for economic analyses

Operations

Develop historical travel time data base
Input/calibration for traffic models (traffic, emissions, fuel 
consumption)
Real-time freeway and arterial street traffic control
Route guidance and navigation
Traveler information
Incident detection

Evaluation

Congestion management system/performance measurement
Establish/monitor congestion trends (extent, intensity, duration, 
reliability)
Identify congested locations and bottlenecks
Measure effectiveness and benefits of improvements
Communicate information about transportation problems and solutions
Research and development
    The utility of the information may extend to events of various 
breadths of impact and scale. The information that is conveyed via 
real-time information programs can be considered highly valuable for 
the coordination of response and recovery from no-notice events, such 
as industrial accidents and willful acts of destruction, as well as 
those events that stimulate large displacements of people and 
disruptions to goods movements, such as in the event of hurricanes. The 
real-time information program should be treated as an asset for the 
first responder community, the homeland security community, and the 
transportation community.
    The FHWA does not propose to require a particular technology or 
methodology for use in establishing the real-time information program. 
Instead, the FHWA encourages States to consider all available and cost-
effective approaches, including those that involve the participation of 
the value added information providers or other public-private 
partnership ventures.

Section 511.305 Definitions

    This section proposes to include definitions for terms that have 
special significance to a proposal under the Real-Time System 
Management Information program.
    The proposed definition for ``Statewide incident reporting system'' 
is the same that is listed in section 1201(f) of SAFETEA-LU.

[[Page 1998]]

Section 511.307 Eligibility for Federal Funding

    The FHWA proposes to permit a State to use its National Highway 
System, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) 
program, and Surface Transportation Program Federal-aid program 
apportionments for activities related to the planning and deployment of 
real-time monitoring elements that advance the goals of the Real-Time 
System Management Information Program. The FHWA has issued policy 
guidance, available at https://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/travelinfo/
resources/ops_memo.htm, indicating that transportation system 
operations activities, such as real-time monitoring, are eligible under 
the major Federal-aid programs noted previously, within the 
requirements of the specific programs. State planning and research 
funds would also be available for activities relating to the planning 
of real-time monitoring elements.
    Title 23, U.S. Code, section 120(a) provides for a 90 percent 
Federal share payable for projects providing traffic and travel 
conditions reporting on the Interstate System. Only projects that 
provide traffic and travel conditions reporting on the Interstate 
highways are subject to this provision. The establishment of real-time 
information programs on non-Interstate highways is subject to an 80 
percent Federal share payable, as provided under 23 U.S.C. 120(b).

Section 511.309 Provisions for Traffic and Travel Conditions Reporting

    This section describes the proposed parameters and performance 
characteristics for States to establish effective traffic and travel 
conditions reporting capabilities. The parameters and performance 
characteristics were outlined in the notice published in the Federal 
Register on May 4, 2006 (discussed in more detail in the Background 
section). The responses to this notice were applied to define the 
proposed project parameters.
    At a minimum, the proposed information categories for traffic and 
travel conditions reporting would include: construction activities 
affecting travel conditions, such as implementing or removing lane 
closures; roadway or lane blocking traffic incident information; 
regularly updated roadway weather conditions; and, travel time along 
metropolitan area highway segments.
    The responses to the May 2006 Federal Register notice indicated 
little preference for the provision of transit event information to be 
included with the other categories of traffic and travel conditions 
reporting. The FHWA requests and welcomes comments on the viability and 
practicality for including transit event information. Additionally, the 
FHWA requests and welcomes comments on whether transit event 
information should be explicitly identified as part of the final 
regulation to be codified in the Code of Federal Regulations.
    The following table summarizes the proposed categories and criteria 
for the data. Also note that there are separate characteristics for 
traffic and travel conditions reporting in metropolitan areas and non-
metropolitan areas.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Timeliness for delivery
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Non-
             Category of information               Metropolitan    metropolitan    Availability    Accuracy (in
                                                     areas (in       areas (in     (in percent)      percent)
                                                     minutes)        minutes)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction activities:
    Implementing or removing lane closures......              10              20              90              85
    Roadway or lane blocking traffic incident                 10              20              90              85
     information................................
    Roadway weather observation updates.........              20              20              90              85
    Travel time along highway segments..........              10              NA              90              85
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The rationale for determining these proposed traffic and travel 
conditions characteristics is based upon responses to the request for 
comments notice dated May 2006, several research studies commissioned 
by FHWA and other transportation associations, and guidance documents 
published by the FHWA. The following paragraphs provide the details on 
how the FHWA determined that these characteristics are appropriate for 
the proposed rule.
    The relationship between data accuracy and timeliness for delivery 
may be described as indirectly proportional: the longer the time-span 
for delivery the more accurate the data become. There are other 
contributing factors involved and the relationship does not hold true 
in every possible application. However, it is unmistakable that 
unambiguous and efficient data exchange depends on data quality. One 
way to ensure that data quality and data accuracy satisfy a minimum 
threshold is to perform validity checks to test if data have become 
corrupted from the time it is created at the source location to the 
time it is received. Simply put, performing validity checks takes time.
    Researchers who have studied the characteristics of metropolitan 
area information gathering have noted a wide variance in the timeliness 
characteristic.\11\ ``The time aggregation level varies widely, from 20 
seconds in San Antonio to 15 minutes in several areas.'' The timeliness 
characteristic in this proposed rule is most essential for reporting of 
travel time along highway segments in metropolitan areas. A common 
practice in many metropolitan areas is the point detection of speeds 
and volume, in which information is collected discreetly for one point 
along the highway. Such an approach lends to preparing estimates of 
travel times along highway segments because of the lack of a spatial 
dimension in the original information gathering.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Monitoring Urban Roadways in 2003: Current Conditions and 
Trends from Archived Operations Data, available at the following 
URL: https://mobility.tamu.edu/mmp/FHWA-HOP-05-018/data.stm. The 
Mobility Monitoring Program is an effort by the FHWA to track and 
report traffic congestion and travel reliability on a national 
scale. The referenced document provides an analysis of archived 
traffic detector data, spanning 2000 through 2003, from nearly 30 
cities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are several contributing factors that led to the timeliness 
thresholds that the FHWA proposes in this rule: The wide array of 
traffic and travel conditions information gathering; the short life 
span of travel time information; the temporal variability in which many 
metropolitan areas gather information from source locations; the time 
needed to perform estimate calculations; and, the time needed to amass 
the data from other sources to perform adequate validity checks to 
ensure accuracy.
    The FHWA proposes that metropolitan areas should be subject to a 
more stringent timeliness threshold than non-metropolitan areas. The 
basis for this is rooted in the results of several ITS Deployment 
Tracking Surveys that indicate growing sophistication in metropolitan 
area traffic and travel

[[Page 1999]]

conditions reporting.\12\ Also, metropolitan areas are subject to 
congestion effects which can be measured through travel time and delay.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Based upon freeway miles with real-time traffic data 
collection technologies as described in the ``National Trends'' page 
of the ITS Deployment Statistics Web site, available at the 
following URL: https://www.itsdeployment.its.dot.gov/
Trendsgraph.asp?comp=FM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FHWA proposes that non-metropolitan areas should satisfy a 
timeliness metric for information delivery threshold, yet such a 
threshold should consider the context of transportation operations in 
such locations. Non-metropolitan areas commonly feature fewer source 
locations for which traffic and travel conditions information are 
generated. The broader distances between the likely sources of 
information, the reduced availability of power and communications to 
convey source information, and the lower susceptibility to recurring 
congestion effects (e.g., poor signal timing, bottlenecks) justify a 
longer timeliness threshold. The timeliness threshold values for non-
metropolitan areas in this proposed rule are oriented towards the 
movement of goods and for promoting the safety of travelers along the 
nation's Interstate highways.
    It should also be noted that higher accuracy and more rapid 
availability of data likely will be needed to support complex 
operations such as High Occupancy Toll (HOT) operations and other 
congestion and value pricing applications. Additionally, States 
increasingly will rely on accurate performance measure data to 
determine the effectiveness of High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes for 
mitigating regional congestion. States should consider the data quality 
implications in advance of developing congestion management 
applications that rely upon data from various sources. Some States may 
consider the data gathering methods for specific transportation 
facilities such as dedicated HOT/HOV lanes, cordon area entry points, 
and other zones which may feature rigorous and complex data gathering 
mechanisms.
    The FHWA believes that conveying travel times along highway 
segments would be valuable for a real-time information program. In a 
guidance document titled Travel Time Data Collection Report (Report 
FHWA-PL-98-035) the FHWA identifies the following broad characteristics 
for defining highway segments:

    The segment lengths may vary depending upon the data collection 
technique, but should be no longer than the following general 
ranges:
     Freeways/Expressways: 1.6 to 4.8 km (1 to 3 mi)
     Principal Arterials: 1.6 to 3.2 km (1 to 2 mi)
     Minor Arterials: 0.8 to 3.2 km (1/2 to 2 mi)

    The FHWA welcomes comments on the viability and practicality for 
using the above mentioned parameters as a guide for highway segment 
definition. Additionally, the FHWA welcomes comments on whether such 
parameters should be explicitly identified as part of the final 
regulation to be codified in the Code of Federal Regulations.

Section 511.311 Real-Time Information Program Establishment

    This section proposes to require that every State establish a real-
time information program for delivering traffic and travel conditions 
reporting along Interstate highways no later than 2 years after the 
date the final rule is published in the Federal Register. This section 
reiterates SAFETEA-LU section 1201(c)(1), requiring that updates to 
existing Regional ITS architectures shall conform to the National ITS 
Architecture \13\ as described in 23 CFR 940. Furthermore, section 
1201(c)(1) requires that updated Regional ITS architecture ``address 
real-time highway and transit information needs and the systems needed 
to meet such needs'' and include ``methods of exchanging or sharing 
highway and transit information.'' States would continue the current 
practice of providing the real-time information through common 
Internet-based communications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The National ITS Architecture is a common framework for 
Intelligent Transportation Systems interoperability. The National 
ITS Architecture is maintained by the U.S. DOT and is available on 
the DOT Web site at https://www.its.dot.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FHWA anticipates that the capability exists to establish 
traffic and traveler information by the proposed completion date. There 
is ample evidence that traffic and travel conditions reporting exists 
that can be leveraged to establish the enhancements in this proposed 
rule. As of October 31, 2007, there were 40 active 511 systems \14\ for 
delivering traveler information via telephony along with 29 co-branded 
511 Web sites.\15\ Several hundred information outlets spanning every 
State have been documented by the FHWA to illustrate a vibrant traveler 
information marketplace.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Simply stated, 511 is an easy-to-remember 3-digit telephone 
number, available nationwide, that provides current information 
about travel conditions, allowing travelers to make better choices--
choice of time, choice of mode of transportation, choice of route.
    \15\ Information on the deployment of 511 is available at the 
following URL: https://www.deploy511.org.
    \16\ Information on the 511 program is available at the 
following URL: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/trafficinfo/index.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The information types for non-metropolitan area traffic and travel 
conditions reporting are most often produced by individuals at the 
incident scene and construction site, and thus may be information 
produced by resources available in the present day. Updated weather 
conditions information commonly involves automated mechanisms to 
produce actionable observations. The FHWA, working with States and 
associations, continue to work collaboratively to produce information 
management tools that extend today's weather observation capabilities. 
The FHWA has preliminarily determined that the wealth of information 
sources that exist today make establishing the real-time information 
program within the proposed completion date feasible.

Section 511.313 Metropolitan Area Real-time Information Program 
Supplement

    This section pertains to those Metropolitan Statistical Areas 
(MSAs) of 1 million inhabitants or more.\17\ As of December 31, 2006, 
the MSAs that exceed the 1 million population threshold include the 
following 49 locations:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ As defined in Table 3a of the ``Ranking Tables for 
Population of Metropolitan Statistical Areas (Areas defined by the 
Office of Management and Budget as of June 6, 2003)'', available at 
the following URL: https://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/phc-
t29.html.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1..............................  New York-Northern New        18,323,002
                                  Jersey-Long Island, NY-
                                  NJ-PA.
2..............................  Los Angeles-Long Beach-      12,365,627
                                  Santa Ana, CA.
3..............................  Chicago-Napeville-            9,098,316
                                  Joliet, IL-IN-WI.
4..............................  Philadelphia-Camden-          5,687,147
                                  Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE.
5..............................  Dallas-Fort Worth-            5,161,544
                                  Arlington, TX.
6..............................  Miami-Fort Lauderdale-        5,007,564
                                  Miami Beach, FL.
7..............................  Washington-Arlington-         4,796,183
                                  Alexandria, DC-VA-MD.

[[Page 2000]]

 
8..............................  Houston-Baytown-              4,715,407
                                  SugarLand, TX.
9..............................  Detroit-Warren-Livonia,       4,452,557
                                  MI.
10.............................  Boston-Cambridge-             4,391,344
                                  Quincy, MA-NH.
11.............................  Atlanta-Sandy Springs-        4,247,981
                                  Marietta, GA.
12.............................  San Francisco-Oakland-        4,123,740
                                  Fremont, CA.
13.............................  Riverside-San                 3,254,821
                                  Bernardino-Ontario, CA.
14.............................  Phoenix-Mesa-                 3,251,876
                                  Scottsdale, AZ.
15.............................  Seattle-Tacoma-               3,043,878
                                  Bellevue, WA.
16.............................  Minneapolis-St. Paul-         2,968,806
                                  Bloomington, MN-WI.
17.............................  San Diego-Carlsbad-San        2,813,833
                                  Marcos, CA.
18.............................  St. Louis, MO-IL.......       2,698,687
19.............................  Baltimore-Towson, MD...       2,552,994
20.............................  Pittsburgh, PA.........       2,431,087
21.............................  Tampa-St. Petersburg-         2,395,997
                                  Clearwater, FL.
22.............................  Denver-Aurora, CO......       2,179,240
23.............................  Cleveland-Elyria-             2,148,143
                                  Mentor, OH.
24.............................  Cincinnati-Middletown,        2,009,632
                                  OH-KY-IN.
25.............................  Portland-Vancouver-           1,927,881
                                  Beavertown, OR-WA.
26.............................  Kansas City, MO-KS.....       1,836,038
27.............................  Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-      1,796,857
                                  Roseville, CA.
28.............................  San Jose-Sunnyvale-           1,735,819
                                  Santa Clara, CA.
29.............................  San Antonio, TX........       1,711,703
30.............................  Orlando, FL............       1,644,561
31.............................  Columbus, OH...........       1,612,694
32.............................  Providence-New Bedford-       1,582,997
                                  Fall River, RI-MA.
33.............................  Virginia Beach-Norfolk-       1,576,370
                                  Newport News, VA-NC.
34.............................  Indianapolis, IN.......       1,525,104
35.............................  Milwaukee-Waukesha-West       1,500,741
                                  Allis, WI.
36.............................  Las Vegas-Paradise, NV.       1,375,765
37.............................  Charlotte-Gastonia-           1,330,448
                                  Concord, NC-SC.
38.............................  New Orleans-Metairie-         1,316,510
                                  Kenner, LA.
39.............................  Nashville-Davidson-           1,311,789
                                  Murfreesboro, TN.
40.............................  Austin-Round Rock, TX..       1,249,763
41.............................  Memphis,TN-MS-AR.......       1,205,204
42.............................  Buffalo-Niagara Falls,        1,170,111
                                  NY.
43.............................  Louisville, KY-IN......       1,161,975
44.............................  Hartford-West Hartford-       1,148,618
                                  East Hartford, CT.
45.............................  Jacksonville, FL.......       1,122,750
46.............................  Richmond, VA...........       1,096,957
47.............................  Oklahoma City, OK......       1,095,421
48.............................  Birmingham-Hoover, AL..       1,052,238
49.............................  Rochester, NY..........       1,037,831
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the provisions of section 511.311, the State 
Departments of Transportation that correspond to the qualifying 
metropolitan areas would be required to deliver travel time information 
along Interstate highway segments throughout the entire metropolitan 
area. This section continues to propose a requirement to establish the 
real-time information program to deliver traffic and travel conditions 
reporting along the Interstate System highways within qualifying 
metropolitan areas no later than two years after the date the final 
rule is published in the Federal Register.
    Section 511.313(d) proposes to require every State to identify 
routes of significance from among other non-Interstate highways that 
merit traffic and travel conditions reporting. States would apply 
existing coordination practices that are applied to make decisions 
concerning regional transportation system operations, management, and 
maintenance. Routes of significance would be identified by States, in 
consultation with the FHWA, to identify non-Interstate highways that 
would be included in a metropolitan area real-time information program. 
Federally-funded, State and locally-funded, and privately-funded 
highways could be designated routes of significance. Other highways 
that apply tolling and variable end-user pricing could be designated 
routes of significance. It would be up to the discretion of the States 
to define the criteria for selecting routes of significance, however, 
States are encouraged to consider highway safety (e.g., crash rate, 
routes affected by environmental events), public safety (e.g., routes 
used for evacuations), economic productivity, and severity of 
congestion among the criteria. The FHWA proposes to require the State 
Departments of Transportation corresponding to the qualifying 
metropolitan areas to establish the real-time information program 
components for traffic and travel conditions reporting along the State-
designated routes of significance within these metropolitan areas no 
later than 4 years after publication of the final rule.
    The rationale for determining the completion dates for Metropolitan 
Area traffic and travel conditions reporting is based upon responses to 
the request for comments notice dated May 2006, reported availability 
from States to the level of deployment of transportation operations 
applications, and research studies conducted by the FHWA and other 
organizations on operational challenges on the arterial highways that 
commonly serve as diversion routes away from congestion. The following 
paragraphs provide the details on how the FHWA determined that these 
time limits are appropriate for the proposed rule.
    The FHWA anticipates that the capability exists in the largest 
metropolitan areas to establish traffic and traveler information by the 
proposed completion date. Deployment statistics collected by the FHWA 
from State and other public agencies illustrate substantial 
capabilities to perform traffic and travel conditions

[[Page 2001]]

reporting.\18\ In 2005 there were 56 metropolitan areas out of 71 
surveyed metropolitan areas that feature traffic and travel reporting 
capabilities, providing reporting coverage of over 6,500 miles of 
metropolitan area freeways. This figure corresponds to a 38 percent 
proportion of coverage of all 17,000 freeway miles contained within the 
56 metropolitan areas known to have reporting features. There is ample 
evidence that traffic and travel conditions reporting exists today that 
can be leveraged to establish the enhancements in this proposed rule. 
The FHWA believes that the wealth of information sources that exist 
today enable Interstate reporting by the proposed completion date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The ITS Deployment Statistics Database Web site is 
available at the following URL: https://
www.itsdeployment.its.dot.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A separate completion date is proposed for establishing real-time 
information programs that extend geographic coverage to State selected 
highways. Many of the responses to the May 2006 Request for Comments 
indicated a desire for a phased approach in which States could 
establish broader geographic coverage. The responses also indicated 
that traffic and travel conditions reporting along non-Interstate 
highways may lack some key information characteristics, most notably 
travel time reporting. The FHWA recognizes that travel time reporting 
along non-Interstate highways and arterial highways can be challenging 
because of issues such as property access features, coordination with 
Interstate interchanges, and signalized intersection control. The FHWA 
also recognizes that metropolitan areas need to coordinate with a range 
of partners to agree upon additional non-Interstate highways that merit 
traffic and travel conditions reporting to serve a number of purposes, 
including providing a diversion route away from congestion. In this 
proposal, the FHWA estimates that the additional 24 months represents 
adequate time to determine the additional facilities and establishing 
the real-time information program for these locations.

Section 511.315 Program Administration

    This section proposes that compliance with Part 511 will be 
monitored by the FHWA. The FHWA may decline to approve Federal-aid 
projects pursuant to 23 CFR 1.36 if a State fails to establish a real-
time information program described in section 511.311 and section 
511.3