Access to the Interstate System, 43743-43746 [E9-20679]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 165 / Thursday, August 27, 2009 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
[STB Docket No. AB–33 (Sub-No. 280X);
STB Docket No. AB–1038X); STB Docket
No. AB–546X]
Union Pacific Railroad Company—
Abandonment Exemption and
Discontinuance of Service—in Tarrant
County, TX; Fort Worth and Dallas Belt
Railroad Company—Discontinuance of
Service—in Tarrant County, TX; Fort
Worth and Western Railroad
Company—Discontinuance of
Service—in Tarrant County, TX
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
On August 7, 2009, Union Pacific
Railroad Company (UP), Fort Worth and
Dallas Belt Railroad Company (FWDB),
and Fort Worth and Western Railroad
Company (FWWR) (collectively,
petitioners) jointly filed with the
Surface Transportation Board (Board) a
petition under 49 U.S.C. 10502 for
exemption from the provisions of 49
U.S.C. 10903 to permit: (1) UP to
abandon and discontinue service over a
segment of its North Fort Worth Branch
line of railroad between milepost 633.02
and milepost 634.25, a distance of
approximately 1.23 miles in Tarrant
County, TX; (2) FWDB to discontinue
operations over the subject line
segment; 1 and (3) FWWR to discontinue
overhead and local trackage rights over
the subject line segment.2 The line
traverses United States Postal Service
Zip Code 76106.3
In addition to an exemption from the
prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C.
10903, petitioners seek exemption from
49 U.S.C. 10904 (offer of financial
assistance procedures) and 49 U.S.C.
10905 (public use conditions).
Petitioners also seek relief from the trail
use provisions of the Board’s regulations
at 49 CFR 1152.29. In support,
petitioners state that the sole purpose of
their joint petition is to allow the
proposed acquisition of the right-of-way
associated with the line segment by the
Tarrant Regional Water District for a
public flood control and redevelopment
project in the north downtown area of
Forth Worth, TX, commonly known at
1 FWDB operates the line pursuant to a lease with
UP. See Fort Worth and Dallas Belt Railroad–
Acquisition and Operation Exemption–Certain
Lines of St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company,
Finance Docket No. 32514 (ICC served June 22,
1994).
2 FWDB, a corporate affiliate of FWWR, granted
FWWR these trackage rights. See Forth Worth &
Western Railroad Company–Trackage Rights
Exemption–Forth Worth and Dallas Belt Railroad
Company, Finance Docket No. 32590, (ICC served
Nov. 10, 1994).
3 Petitioners state that the lease and trackage
rights will remain in full force and effect for the
remainder of the North Fort Worth Branch.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:19 Aug 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
the Trinity Uptown Project. These
requests will be addressed in the final
decision.
The line does not contain federally
granted rights-of-way. Any
documentation in petitioners’
possession will be made available
promptly to those requesting it.
The interest of railroad employees
will be protected by the conditions set
forth in Oregon Short Line R. Co.—
Abandonment—Goshen, 360 I.C.C. 91
(1979).
By issuing this notice, the Board is
instituting an exemption proceeding
pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10502(b). A final
decision will be issued by November 25,
2009.
Any offer of financial assistance
(OFA) under 49 CFR 1152.27(b)(2), will
be due no later than 10 days after
service of a decision granting the
petition for exemption. Each OFA must
be accompanied by a $1,500 filing fee.
See CFR 1002.2(f)(25).
All interested persons should be
aware that, following abandonment of
rail service and salvage of the line, the
line may be suitable for other public
use, including interim trail use. Any
request for a public use condition under
49 CFR 1152.28 or for trail use/rail
banking under 49 CFR 1152.29 will be
due no later than September 16, 2009.
Each trail use request must be
accompanied by a $200 filing fee. See 49
CFR 1002.2(f)(27).
All filings in response to this notice
must refer to STB Docket No. AB–33
(Sub-No 280X), STB Docket No. 1038X),
and STB Docket No.546X, and must be
sent to: (1) Surface Transportation
Board, 395 E Street, SW., Washington,
DC 20423–0001; and (2) Mack H.
Shumate, Jr., 101 North Wacker Drive,
Room 1920, Chicago, IL 60606, and Paul
H. Lamboley, Bank of America Plaza, 50
W. Liberty Street, Suite #645, Reno, NV
89501. Replies to the petition are due on
or before September 16, 2009.
Persons seeking further information
concerning abandonment or
discontinuance procedures may contact
the Board’s Office of Public Assistance,
Governmental Affairs, and Compliance
at (202) 245–0238 or refer to the full
abandonment or discontinuance
regulations at 49 CFR part 1152.
Questions concerning environmental
issues may be directed to the Board’s
Section of Environmental Analysis
(SEA) at (202) 245–0305. Assistance for
the hearing impaired is available
through the Federal Information Relay
Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339.
An environmental assessment (EA) (or
environmental impact statement (EIS), if
necessary) prepared by SEA will be
served upon all parties of record and
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43743
upon any agencies or other persons who
commented during its preparation.
Other interested persons may contact
SEA to obtain a copy of the EA (or EIS).
EAs in these abandonment proceedings
normally will be made available within
60 days of the filing of the petition. The
deadline for submission of comments on
the EA will generally be within 30 days
of its service.
Board decisions and notices are
available on our Web site at https://
www.stb.dot.gov.
Decided: August 24, 2009.
By the Board, Joseph H. Dettmar, Acting
Director, Office of Proceedings.
Jeffrey Herzig,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. E9–20743 Filed 8–26–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
Access to the Interstate System
AGENCY: Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of revised policy
statement.
SUMMARY: This document issues the
revised FHWA policy statement
regarding requests for new or modified
access points to the Interstate System.
The policy includes the requirements
for the justification and documentation
necessary to substantiate any request
that is submitted to FHWA for approval.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical information: Mr. Jon
Obenberger, Office of Program
Administration (HIPA–20), (202) 366–
2221. For legal information: Mr. Robert
Black, Office of the Chief Counsel
(HCC–32), (202) 366–1359, Federal
Highway Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC
20590. Office hours are from 7:45 a.m.
to 4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The surface transportation system
plays a key role in shaping the
economic health, quality of life and
sustainability of a metropolitan area,
region, and State. The Interstate System
is a critical element providing a network
of limited access freeways which
facilitate the distribution of virtually all
goods and services across the United
States. The Interstate System also
influences the mobility and safety of
people and goods by providing access to
local highways and a network of public
E:\FR\FM\27AUN1.SGM
27AUN1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
43744
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 165 / Thursday, August 27, 2009 / Notices
streets. As a result, it is in the national
interest to preserve and enhance the
Interstate System to meet the needs of
the surface transportation system of the
United States for the 21st century.
The FHWA’s Policy on Access to the
Interstate System provides the
requirements for the justification and
documentation necessary to substantiate
any proposed changes in access to the
Interstate System. This policy also
facilitates decisionmaking regarding
proposed changes in access to the
Interstate System in a manner that
considers and is consistent with the
vision, goals and long-range
transportation plans of a metropolitan
area, region and State. This policy
reflects the congressional intent and
direction provided in section 1909(a)(3)
of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (SAFETEA–LU)
(Pub. L. 109–59, 119 Stat. 1144), which
amended section 101 of title 23, United
States Code by adding subsection
(b)(3)(H): ‘‘the Secretary should take
appropriate actions to preserve and
enhance the Interstate System to meet
the needs of the 21st century.’’
Section 111 of title 23, United States
Code, provides that all agreements
between the Secretary and the State
departments of transportation (State
DOTs) for the construction of projects
on the Interstate System shall contain a
clause providing that the State will not
add any points of access to, or exit from,
the project in addition to those
approved by the Secretary in the plans
for such project, without the prior
approval of the Secretary. The Secretary
has delegated the authority to
administer 23 U.S.C. 111 to the Federal
Highway Administrator pursuant to 49
CFR 1.48(b)(1). A formal policy
statement including guidance for
justifying and documenting the need for
additional access to the existing sections
of the Interstate System was published
in the Federal Register on October 22,
1990 (55 FR 42670), and modified on
February 11, 1998 (63 FR 7045).
The FHWA has adopted the AASHTO
publication ‘‘A Policy on Design
Standards—Interstate System’’ as the
standard for projects on the Interstate
System as incorporated by reference at
23 CFR 625.4(a)(2). Section 625.4(a)(2)
further requires that access to the
Interstate System shall be fully
controlled, and that access to the
Interstate System shall be achieved by
interchanges at selected public
highways.
Summary of Changes
The changes in FHWA’s policy were
made to reflect the direction provided in
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:19 Aug 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
SAFETEA–LU, to clarify the operational
and safety analysis and assessment of
impacts that provides the basis for
proposed changes in access to the
Interstate System, and to update
language at various locations to
reference Federal laws, regulations, and
FHWA policies. The following specific
revisions have been made to the existing
policy statement:
1. Updates were made to Requirement
1 clarifying the need for agencies to
analyze and justify that the projected
design-year traffic demands cannot be
adequately accommodated by existing
access to the Interstate.
2. Additional examples were added to
Requirement 2 to identify the type of
improvements to be considered in the
planning for and development of
proposed changes in access.
3. Text was added to Requirement 3
to clarify that the safety and operational
analysis to be performed and
documentation to be submitted provide
the justification for proposed changes in
access.
4. Revisions were made to
Requirement 4 clarifying the need to
meet or exceed design standards for all
roadway improvements included in
proposals to change access.
5. Changes were made to Requirement
5 to reference the current requirements
contained in SAFETEA–LU and 23 CFR
part 450.
6. Text was added to Requirement 6
clarifying the analysis to be performed
in support of proposed changes in
access involving multiple interchanges.
7. Clarification to Requirement 7 was
made identifying the justification
needed to support any proposed change
in access due to changes in land use or
density of development.
8. Revision was made to Requirement
8 to clarify and avoid duplication with
Requirement 5.
9. Updates were made to the
Application section to reference current
Federal laws, regulations, and FHWA
policies. Revisions were made to
paragraph 4 and a new paragraph 5 was
added to clarify what is a change in
access and how this policy may apply
to different types of access changes.
Paragraph 8 was added to clarify how
FHWA’s review and approval of
proposed changes in access relate to
other Federal actions, reviews, and
approvals. Paragraph 9 was added to
clarify that proposals for changes in
access need to be reevaluated and the
proposal resubmitted to FHWA for
review and approval if the project has
not proceeded to construction within 8
years.
The revised policy statement also
includes various editorial changes to
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
enhance clarity and readability. The
revised policy statement is as follows:
Policy
It is in the national interest to
preserve and enhance the Interstate
System to meet the needs of the 21st
Century by assuring that it provides the
highest level of service in terms of safety
and mobility. Full control of access
along the Interstate mainline and ramps,
along with control of access on the
crossroad at interchanges, is critical to
providing such service. Therefore,
FHWA’s decision to approve new or
revised access points to the Interstate
System must be supported by
substantiated information justifying and
documenting that decision. The
FHWA’s decision to approve a request
is dependent on the proposal satisfying
and documenting the following
requirements.
Considerations and Requirements
1. The need being addressed by the
request cannot be adequately satisfied
by existing interchanges to the
Interstate, and/or local roads and streets
in the corridor can neither provide the
desired access, nor can they be
reasonably improved (such as access
control along surface streets, improving
traffic control, modifying ramp
terminals and intersections, adding turn
bays or lengthening storage) to
satisfactorily accommodate the designyear traffic demands (23 CFR 625.2(a)).
2. The need being addressed by the
request cannot be adequately satisfied
by reasonable transportation system
management (such as ramp metering,
mass transit, and HOV facilities),
geometric design, and alternative
improvements to the Interstate without
the proposed change(s) in access (23
CFR 625.2(a)).
3. An operational and safety analysis
has concluded that the proposed change
in access does not have a significant
adverse impact on the safety and
operation of the Interstate facility
(which includes mainline lanes,
existing, new, or modified ramps, ramp
intersections with crossroad) or on the
local street network based on both the
current and the planned future traffic
projections. The analysis shall,
particularly in urbanized areas, include
at least the first adjacent existing or
proposed interchange on either side of
the proposed change in access (23 CFR
625.2(a), 655.603(d) and 771.111(f)). The
crossroads and the local street network,
to at least the first major intersection on
either side of the proposed change in
access, shall be included in this analysis
to the extent necessary to fully evaluate
the safety and operational impacts that
E:\FR\FM\27AUN1.SGM
27AUN1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 165 / Thursday, August 27, 2009 / Notices
the proposed change in access and other
transportation improvements may have
on the local street network (23 CFR
625.2(a) and 655.603(d)). Requests for a
proposed change in access must include
a description and assessment of the
impacts and ability of the proposed
changes to safely and efficiently collect,
distribute and accommodate traffic on
the Interstate facility, ramps,
intersection of ramps with crossroad,
and local street network (23 CFR
625.2(a) and 655.603(d)). Each request
must also include a conceptual plan of
the type and location of the signs
proposed to support each design
alternative (23 U.S.C. 109(d) and 23 CFR
655.603(d)).
4. The proposed access connects to a
public road only and will provide for all
traffic movements. Less than ‘‘full
interchanges’’ may be considered on a
case-by-case basis for applications
requiring special access for managed
lanes (e.g., transit, HOVs, HOT lanes) or
park and ride lots. The proposed access
will be designed to meet or exceed
current standards (23 CFR 625.2(a),
625.4(a)(2), and 655.603(d)).
5. The proposal considers and is
consistent with local and regional land
use and transportation plans. Prior to
receiving final approval, all requests for
new or revised access must be included
in an adopted Metropolitan
Transportation Plan, in the adopted
Statewide or Metropolitan
Transportation Improvement Program
(STIP or TIP), and the Congestion
Management Process within
transportation management areas, as
appropriate, and as specified in 23 CFR
part 450, and the transportation
conformity requirements of 40 CFR
parts 51 and 93.
6. In corridors where the potential
exists for future multiple interchange
additions, a comprehensive corridor or
network study must accompany all
requests for new or revised access with
recommendations that address all of the
proposed and desired access changes
within the context of a longer-range
system or network plan (23 U.S.C.
109(d), 23 CFR 625.2(a), 655.603(d), and
771.111).
7. When a new or revised access point
is due to a new, expanded, or
substantial change in current or planned
future development or land use,
requests must demonstrate appropriate
coordination has occurred between the
development and any proposed
transportation system improvements (23
CFR 625.2(a) and 655.603(d)). The
request must describe the commitments
agreed upon to assure adequate
collection and dispersion of the traffic
resulting from the development with the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:19 Aug 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
adjoining local street network and
Interstate access point (23 CFR 625.2(a)
and 655.603(d)).
8. The proposal can be expected to be
included as an alternative in the
required environmental evaluation,
review and processing. The proposal
should include supporting information
and current status of the environmental
processing (23 CFR 771.111).
Application
This policy is applicable to new or
revised access points to existing
Interstate facilities regardless of the
funding of the original construction or
regardless of the funding for the new
access points. This includes routes
incorporated into the Interstate System
under the provisions of 23 U.S.C.
103(c)(4)(A) or other legislation.
Routes approved as a future part of
the Interstate System under 23 U.S.C.
103(c)(4)(B) represent a special case
because they are not yet a part of the
Interstate System. Since the intention to
add the route to the Interstate System
has been formalized by agreement, any
proposed new or significant changes in
access beyond those covered in the
agreement, regardless of funding, must
be approved by FHWA.
This policy is not applicable to toll
roads incorporated into the Interstate
System, except for segments where
Federal funds have been expended or
these funds will be used for roadway
improvements, or where the toll road
section has been added to the Interstate
System under the provisions of 23
U.S.C. 103(c)(4)(A). The term ‘‘segment’’
is defined as the project limits described
in the Federal-aid project agreement.
Each break in the control of access to
the Interstate System right-of-way is
considered to be an access point. For the
purpose of applying this policy, each
entrance or exit point, including
‘‘locked gate’’ access, is considered to be
an access point. For example, a
diamond interchange configuration has
four access points.
Ramps providing access to rest areas,
information centers, and weigh stations
within the Interstate controlled access
are not considered access points for the
purpose of applying this policy. These
facilities shall be accessible to vehicles
only to and from the Interstate System.
Access to or from these facilities and
local roads and adjoining property is
prohibited. The only allowed exception
is for access to adjacent publicly owned
conservation and recreation areas, if
access to these areas is only available
through the rest area, as allowed under
23 CFR 752.5(d).
Generally, any change in the design of
an existing access point is considered a
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43745
change to the interchange configuration,
even though the number of actual points
of access may not change. For example,
replacing one of the direct ramps of a
diamond interchange with a loop, or
changing a cloverleaf interchange into a
fully directional interchange would be
considered revised access for the
purpose of applying this policy.
All requests for new or revised access
points on completed Interstate highways
must closely adhere to the planning and
environmental review processes as
required in 23 CFR parts 450 and 771.
The FHWA approval constitutes a
Federal action and, as such, requires
that the transportation planning,
conformity, congestion management
process, and the National
Environmental Policy Act procedures be
followed and their requirements
satisfied. This means the final FHWA
approval of requests for new or revised
access cannot precede the completion of
these processes or necessary actions.
To offer maximum flexibility,
however, any proposed change in access
can be submitted by a State DOT to the
FHWA Division Office for a
determination of engineering and
operational acceptability. This
flexibility allows agencies the option of
obtaining this acceptability
determination prior to making the
required modifications to the
Transportation Plan, performing any
required conformity analysis, and
completing the environmental review
and approval process. In this manner,
State DOTs can determine if a proposal
is acceptable for inclusion as an
alternative in the environmental
process. This policy in no way alters the
planning, conformity or environmental
review and approval procedures as
contained in 23 CFR parts 450 and 771,
and 40 CFR parts 51 and 93.
An affirmative determination by
FHWA of engineering and operational
acceptability for proposals for new or
revised access points to the Interstate
System should be reevaluated whenever
a significant change in conditions
occurs (e.g., land use, traffic volumes,
roadway configuration or design,
environmental commitments). Proposals
shall be reevaluated if the project has
not progressed to construction within 8
years of receiving an affirmative
determination of engineering and
operational acceptability (23 CFR
625.2(a)). If the project is not
constructed within this time period, an
updated justification report based on
current and projected future conditions
must be submitted to FHWA to receive
either an affirmative determination of
engineering and operational
acceptability, or final approval if all
E:\FR\FM\27AUN1.SGM
27AUN1
43746
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 165 / Thursday, August 27, 2009 / Notices
other requirements have been satisfied
(23 U.S.C. 111, 23 CFR 625.2(a), and 23
CFR 771.129).
Implementation
State DOTs are required to submit
requests for proposed changes in access
to their FHWA Division Office for
review and action under 23 U.S.C. 106
and 111, and 23 CFR 625.2(a). The
FHWA Division Office will ensure that
all requests for changes in access
contain sufficient information, as
required in this policy, to allow FHWA
to independently evaluate and act on
the request. Guidance to assist with the
implementation and consistent
application of this policy can be
accessed electronically through the
FHWA Office of Infrastructure’s Web
page at: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/
programadmin/index.htm.
Policy Statement Impact
The policy statement, first published
in the Federal Register on October 22,
1990 (55 FR 42670), and modified on
February 11, 1998 (63 FR 7045),
describes the justification and
documentation needed for requests to
add or revise access to the existing
Interstate System.
The revisions made by the publication
of this policy statement reflect the
direction provided in SAFETEA–LU,
clarify the operational and safety
analysis to accompany proposed
changes in access on the Interstate
System, and update language at various
locations to ensure consistency with
other Federal laws, regulations and
FHWA policies. State DOTs should take
these factors into consideration when
making requests for new or revised
access points, but the overall effort
necessary for developing the request
will not be significantly increased.
(Authority: 23 U.S.C. 111 and 315; 49 CFR
1.48)
Issued on August 18, 2009.
Victor M. Mendez,
Federal Highway Administrator.
[FR Doc. E9–20679 Filed 8–26–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
ACTION:
Notice of exemption.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SUMMARY: Subject to a Programmatic
Agreement negotiated by the parties and
environmental mitigation measures, the
Board is granting exemptions under 49
U.S.C. 10502 from the prior approval
requirements of 49 U.S.C. 10901 for the
Port of Moses Lake (Port) in STB
Finance Docket No. 34936 to construct
two segments of rail line in Moses Lake,
WA, one between the community of
Wheeler and Parker Horn at the mouth
of Crab Creek and another between
Columbia Basin Railroad Company, Inc.
(CBRW) trackage and the east side of the
Grant County International Airport, and
in STB Finance Docket No. 34936 (SubNo. 1) to acquire a segment of rail line
from CBRW that runs approximately
from Parker Horn near Stratford Road to
near the Grant County International
Airport, which would connect the
newly constructed segments. The Port
plans to rehabilitate and upgrade this
line segment, including the upgrade of
two signalized grade crossings. The Port
estimates the total mileage of its
construction and acquisition proposals
to be approximately 11.5 miles in
length.
DATES: The exemption will be effective
on September 11, 2009. Petitions to
reopen must be filed by September 16,
2009.
An original and 10 copies of
all pleadings, referring to STB Finance
Docket No. 34936 and STB Finance
Docket No. 34936 (Sub-No. 1), must be
filed with the Surface Transportation
Board, 395 E Street, SW., Washington,
DC 20423–0001. In addition, one copy
of all pleadings must be served on
petitioner’s representative: Adrian L.
Steel, Jr., Mayer Brown LLP, 1909 K
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20006.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joseph H. Dettmar, (202) 245–0395.
Assistance for the hearing impaired is
available through the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at
1–800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
[STB Finance Docket No. 34936]
Port of Moses Lake—Construction
Exemption—Moses Lake, WA [STB
Finance Docket No. 34936 (Sub-No. 1)];
Port of Moses Lake—Acquisition
Exemption—Moses Lake, WA
AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board,
Department of Transportation.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:19 Aug 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
Additional information is contained in
the Board’s decision. Board decisions
and notices are available on our Web
site at https://www.stb.dot.gov.
Decided: August 21, 2009.
By the Board, Chairman Elliott, Vice
Chairman Nottingham, and Commissioner
Mulvey.
Jeffrey Herzig,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. E9–20666 Filed 8–26–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Federal Aviation Administration
Westfield-Barnes Airport, Westfield
MA; FAA Approval of Noise
Compatibility Program
AGENCY: Federal Aviation
Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) announces its
findings on the noise compatibility
program submitted by the Westfield
Airport Commission under the
provisions of Title I of the Aviation
Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979
(Pub. L. 96–193) and 14 CFR part 150.
These findings are made in recognition
of the description of federal and nonfederal responsibilities in Senate Report
No. 96–52 (1980). On August 3, 2009,
the Airports Division Manager approved
the Westfield-Barnes Airport noise
compatibility program. All of the
proposed program elements were
approved.
DATES: Effective Date: The effective date
of the FAA’s approval of the WestfieldBarnes Airport noise compatibility
program is August 3, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard Doucette, Federal Aviation
Administration, New England Region,
Airports Division, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington,
Massachusetts 01803, Telephone (781)
238–7613.
Documents reflecting this FAA action
may be obtained from the same
individual.
This
notice announces that the FAA has
given its overall approval to the
Westfield-Barnes Airport noise
compatibility program, effective August
3, 2009.
Under Section 104(a) of the Aviation
Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979
(hereinafter the Act), an airport operator
who has previously submitted a noise
exposure map may submit to the FAA
a noise compatibility program which
sets forth the measures taken or
proposed by the airport operator for the
reduction of existing non-compatible
land uses and prevention of additional
non-compatible land uses within the
area covered by the noise exposure
maps.
The Act requires such programs to be
developed in consultation with
interested and affected parties including
local communities, government
agencies, airport users, and FAA
personnel.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\27AUN1.SGM
27AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 165 (Thursday, August 27, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43743-43746]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-20679]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
Access to the Interstate System
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of revised policy statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document issues the revised FHWA policy statement
regarding requests for new or modified access points to the Interstate
System. The policy includes the requirements for the justification and
documentation necessary to substantiate any request that is submitted
to FHWA for approval.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information: Mr. Jon
Obenberger, Office of Program Administration (HIPA-20), (202) 366-2221.
For legal information: Mr. Robert Black, Office of the Chief Counsel
(HCC-32), (202) 366-1359, Federal Highway Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. Office hours are from 7:45
a.m. to 4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The surface transportation system plays a key role in shaping the
economic health, quality of life and sustainability of a metropolitan
area, region, and State. The Interstate System is a critical element
providing a network of limited access freeways which facilitate the
distribution of virtually all goods and services across the United
States. The Interstate System also influences the mobility and safety
of people and goods by providing access to local highways and a network
of public
[[Page 43744]]
streets. As a result, it is in the national interest to preserve and
enhance the Interstate System to meet the needs of the surface
transportation system of the United States for the 21st century.
The FHWA's Policy on Access to the Interstate System provides the
requirements for the justification and documentation necessary to
substantiate any proposed changes in access to the Interstate System.
This policy also facilitates decisionmaking regarding proposed changes
in access to the Interstate System in a manner that considers and is
consistent with the vision, goals and long-range transportation plans
of a metropolitan area, region and State. This policy reflects the
congressional intent and direction provided in section 1909(a)(3) of
the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (Pub. L. 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144), which
amended section 101 of title 23, United States Code by adding
subsection (b)(3)(H): ``the Secretary should take appropriate actions
to preserve and enhance the Interstate System to meet the needs of the
21st century.''
Section 111 of title 23, United States Code, provides that all
agreements between the Secretary and the State departments of
transportation (State DOTs) for the construction of projects on the
Interstate System shall contain a clause providing that the State will
not add any points of access to, or exit from, the project in addition
to those approved by the Secretary in the plans for such project,
without the prior approval of the Secretary. The Secretary has
delegated the authority to administer 23 U.S.C. 111 to the Federal
Highway Administrator pursuant to 49 CFR 1.48(b)(1). A formal policy
statement including guidance for justifying and documenting the need
for additional access to the existing sections of the Interstate System
was published in the Federal Register on October 22, 1990 (55 FR
42670), and modified on February 11, 1998 (63 FR 7045).
The FHWA has adopted the AASHTO publication ``A Policy on Design
Standards--Interstate System'' as the standard for projects on the
Interstate System as incorporated by reference at 23 CFR 625.4(a)(2).
Section 625.4(a)(2) further requires that access to the Interstate
System shall be fully controlled, and that access to the Interstate
System shall be achieved by interchanges at selected public highways.
Summary of Changes
The changes in FHWA's policy were made to reflect the direction
provided in SAFETEA-LU, to clarify the operational and safety analysis
and assessment of impacts that provides the basis for proposed changes
in access to the Interstate System, and to update language at various
locations to reference Federal laws, regulations, and FHWA policies.
The following specific revisions have been made to the existing policy
statement:
1. Updates were made to Requirement 1 clarifying the need for
agencies to analyze and justify that the projected design-year traffic
demands cannot be adequately accommodated by existing access to the
Interstate.
2. Additional examples were added to Requirement 2 to identify the
type of improvements to be considered in the planning for and
development of proposed changes in access.
3. Text was added to Requirement 3 to clarify that the safety and
operational analysis to be performed and documentation to be submitted
provide the justification for proposed changes in access.
4. Revisions were made to Requirement 4 clarifying the need to meet
or exceed design standards for all roadway improvements included in
proposals to change access.
5. Changes were made to Requirement 5 to reference the current
requirements contained in SAFETEA-LU and 23 CFR part 450.
6. Text was added to Requirement 6 clarifying the analysis to be
performed in support of proposed changes in access involving multiple
interchanges.
7. Clarification to Requirement 7 was made identifying the
justification needed to support any proposed change in access due to
changes in land use or density of development.
8. Revision was made to Requirement 8 to clarify and avoid
duplication with Requirement 5.
9. Updates were made to the Application section to reference
current Federal laws, regulations, and FHWA policies. Revisions were
made to paragraph 4 and a new paragraph 5 was added to clarify what is
a change in access and how this policy may apply to different types of
access changes. Paragraph 8 was added to clarify how FHWA's review and
approval of proposed changes in access relate to other Federal actions,
reviews, and approvals. Paragraph 9 was added to clarify that proposals
for changes in access need to be reevaluated and the proposal
resubmitted to FHWA for review and approval if the project has not
proceeded to construction within 8 years.
The revised policy statement also includes various editorial
changes to enhance clarity and readability. The revised policy
statement is as follows:
Policy
It is in the national interest to preserve and enhance the
Interstate System to meet the needs of the 21st Century by assuring
that it provides the highest level of service in terms of safety and
mobility. Full control of access along the Interstate mainline and
ramps, along with control of access on the crossroad at interchanges,
is critical to providing such service. Therefore, FHWA's decision to
approve new or revised access points to the Interstate System must be
supported by substantiated information justifying and documenting that
decision. The FHWA's decision to approve a request is dependent on the
proposal satisfying and documenting the following requirements.
Considerations and Requirements
1. The need being addressed by the request cannot be adequately
satisfied by existing interchanges to the Interstate, and/or local
roads and streets in the corridor can neither provide the desired
access, nor can they be reasonably improved (such as access control
along surface streets, improving traffic control, modifying ramp
terminals and intersections, adding turn bays or lengthening storage)
to satisfactorily accommodate the design-year traffic demands (23 CFR
625.2(a)).
2. The need being addressed by the request cannot be adequately
satisfied by reasonable transportation system management (such as ramp
metering, mass transit, and HOV facilities), geometric design, and
alternative improvements to the Interstate without the proposed
change(s) in access (23 CFR 625.2(a)).
3. An operational and safety analysis has concluded that the
proposed change in access does not have a significant adverse impact on
the safety and operation of the Interstate facility (which includes
mainline lanes, existing, new, or modified ramps, ramp intersections
with crossroad) or on the local street network based on both the
current and the planned future traffic projections. The analysis shall,
particularly in urbanized areas, include at least the first adjacent
existing or proposed interchange on either side of the proposed change
in access (23 CFR 625.2(a), 655.603(d) and 771.111(f)). The crossroads
and the local street network, to at least the first major intersection
on either side of the proposed change in access, shall be included in
this analysis to the extent necessary to fully evaluate the safety and
operational impacts that
[[Page 43745]]
the proposed change in access and other transportation improvements may
have on the local street network (23 CFR 625.2(a) and 655.603(d)).
Requests for a proposed change in access must include a description and
assessment of the impacts and ability of the proposed changes to safely
and efficiently collect, distribute and accommodate traffic on the
Interstate facility, ramps, intersection of ramps with crossroad, and
local street network (23 CFR 625.2(a) and 655.603(d)). Each request
must also include a conceptual plan of the type and location of the
signs proposed to support each design alternative (23 U.S.C. 109(d) and
23 CFR 655.603(d)).
4. The proposed access connects to a public road only and will
provide for all traffic movements. Less than ``full interchanges'' may
be considered on a case-by-case basis for applications requiring
special access for managed lanes (e.g., transit, HOVs, HOT lanes) or
park and ride lots. The proposed access will be designed to meet or
exceed current standards (23 CFR 625.2(a), 625.4(a)(2), and
655.603(d)).
5. The proposal considers and is consistent with local and regional
land use and transportation plans. Prior to receiving final approval,
all requests for new or revised access must be included in an adopted
Metropolitan Transportation Plan, in the adopted Statewide or
Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (STIP or TIP), and the
Congestion Management Process within transportation management areas,
as appropriate, and as specified in 23 CFR part 450, and the
transportation conformity requirements of 40 CFR parts 51 and 93.
6. In corridors where the potential exists for future multiple
interchange additions, a comprehensive corridor or network study must
accompany all requests for new or revised access with recommendations
that address all of the proposed and desired access changes within the
context of a longer-range system or network plan (23 U.S.C. 109(d), 23
CFR 625.2(a), 655.603(d), and 771.111).
7. When a new or revised access point is due to a new, expanded, or
substantial change in current or planned future development or land
use, requests must demonstrate appropriate coordination has occurred
between the development and any proposed transportation system
improvements (23 CFR 625.2(a) and 655.603(d)). The request must
describe the commitments agreed upon to assure adequate collection and
dispersion of the traffic resulting from the development with the
adjoining local street network and Interstate access point (23 CFR
625.2(a) and 655.603(d)).
8. The proposal can be expected to be included as an alternative in
the required environmental evaluation, review and processing. The
proposal should include supporting information and current status of
the environmental processing (23 CFR 771.111).
Application
This policy is applicable to new or revised access points to
existing Interstate facilities regardless of the funding of the
original construction or regardless of the funding for the new access
points. This includes routes incorporated into the Interstate System
under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 103(c)(4)(A) or other legislation.
Routes approved as a future part of the Interstate System under 23
U.S.C. 103(c)(4)(B) represent a special case because they are not yet a
part of the Interstate System. Since the intention to add the route to
the Interstate System has been formalized by agreement, any proposed
new or significant changes in access beyond those covered in the
agreement, regardless of funding, must be approved by FHWA.
This policy is not applicable to toll roads incorporated into the
Interstate System, except for segments where Federal funds have been
expended or these funds will be used for roadway improvements, or where
the toll road section has been added to the Interstate System under the
provisions of 23 U.S.C. 103(c)(4)(A). The term ``segment'' is defined
as the project limits described in the Federal-aid project agreement.
Each break in the control of access to the Interstate System right-
of-way is considered to be an access point. For the purpose of applying
this policy, each entrance or exit point, including ``locked gate''
access, is considered to be an access point. For example, a diamond
interchange configuration has four access points.
Ramps providing access to rest areas, information centers, and
weigh stations within the Interstate controlled access are not
considered access points for the purpose of applying this policy. These
facilities shall be accessible to vehicles only to and from the
Interstate System. Access to or from these facilities and local roads
and adjoining property is prohibited. The only allowed exception is for
access to adjacent publicly owned conservation and recreation areas, if
access to these areas is only available through the rest area, as
allowed under 23 CFR 752.5(d).
Generally, any change in the design of an existing access point is
considered a change to the interchange configuration, even though the
number of actual points of access may not change. For example,
replacing one of the direct ramps of a diamond interchange with a loop,
or changing a cloverleaf interchange into a fully directional
interchange would be considered revised access for the purpose of
applying this policy.
All requests for new or revised access points on completed
Interstate highways must closely adhere to the planning and
environmental review processes as required in 23 CFR parts 450 and 771.
The FHWA approval constitutes a Federal action and, as such, requires
that the transportation planning, conformity, congestion management
process, and the National Environmental Policy Act procedures be
followed and their requirements satisfied. This means the final FHWA
approval of requests for new or revised access cannot precede the
completion of these processes or necessary actions.
To offer maximum flexibility, however, any proposed change in
access can be submitted by a State DOT to the FHWA Division Office for
a determination of engineering and operational acceptability. This
flexibility allows agencies the option of obtaining this acceptability
determination prior to making the required modifications to the
Transportation Plan, performing any required conformity analysis, and
completing the environmental review and approval process. In this
manner, State DOTs can determine if a proposal is acceptable for
inclusion as an alternative in the environmental process. This policy
in no way alters the planning, conformity or environmental review and
approval procedures as contained in 23 CFR parts 450 and 771, and 40
CFR parts 51 and 93.
An affirmative determination by FHWA of engineering and operational
acceptability for proposals for new or revised access points to the
Interstate System should be reevaluated whenever a significant change
in conditions occurs (e.g., land use, traffic volumes, roadway
configuration or design, environmental commitments). Proposals shall be
reevaluated if the project has not progressed to construction within 8
years of receiving an affirmative determination of engineering and
operational acceptability (23 CFR 625.2(a)). If the project is not
constructed within this time period, an updated justification report
based on current and projected future conditions must be submitted to
FHWA to receive either an affirmative determination of engineering and
operational acceptability, or final approval if all
[[Page 43746]]
other requirements have been satisfied (23 U.S.C. 111, 23 CFR 625.2(a),
and 23 CFR 771.129).
Implementation
State DOTs are required to submit requests for proposed changes in
access to their FHWA Division Office for review and action under 23
U.S.C. 106 and 111, and 23 CFR 625.2(a). The FHWA Division Office will
ensure that all requests for changes in access contain sufficient
information, as required in this policy, to allow FHWA to independently
evaluate and act on the request. Guidance to assist with the
implementation and consistent application of this policy can be
accessed electronically through the FHWA Office of Infrastructure's Web
page at: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/programadmin/index.htm.
Policy Statement Impact
The policy statement, first published in the Federal Register on
October 22, 1990 (55 FR 42670), and modified on February 11, 1998 (63
FR 7045), describes the justification and documentation needed for
requests to add or revise access to the existing Interstate System.
The revisions made by the publication of this policy statement
reflect the direction provided in SAFETEA-LU, clarify the operational
and safety analysis to accompany proposed changes in access on the
Interstate System, and update language at various locations to ensure
consistency with other Federal laws, regulations and FHWA policies.
State DOTs should take these factors into consideration when making
requests for new or revised access points, but the overall effort
necessary for developing the request will not be significantly
increased.
(Authority: 23 U.S.C. 111 and 315; 49 CFR 1.48)
Issued on August 18, 2009.
Victor M. Mendez,
Federal Highway Administrator.
[FR Doc. E9-20679 Filed 8-26-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P