Capital Project Management, 16460-16462 [2013-06082]
Download as PDF
16460
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 51 / Friday, March 15, 2013 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Affairs Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice),
202–418–0432 (tty).
In addition, we request that one copy
of each pleading be sent to each of the
following:
(1) Ryan Yates, Telecommunications
Access Policy Division, Wireline
Competition Bureau, 445 12th Street
SW., Room 6–B–441A, Washington,
DC 20554; email: Ryan.Yates@fcc.gov;
(2) Charles Tyler, Telecommunications
Access Policy Division, Wireline
Competition Bureau, 445 12th Street
SW., Room 5–A452, Washington, DC
20554; email: Charles.Tyler@fcc.gov.
25. This matter shall be treated as a
‘‘permit-but-disclose’’ proceeding in
accordance with the Commission’s ex
parte rules. Persons making ex parte
presentations must file a copy of any
written presentation or a memorandum
summarizing any oral presentation
within two business days after the
presentation (unless a different deadline
applicable to the Sunshine period
applies). Persons making oral ex parte
presentations are reminded that
memoranda summarizing the
presentation must (1) list all persons
attending or otherwise participating in
the meeting at which the ex parte
presentation was made, and (2)
summarize all data presented and
arguments made during the
presentation. If the presentation
consisted in whole or in part of the
presentation of data or arguments
already reflected in the presenter’s
written comments, memoranda or other
filings in the proceeding, the presenter
may provide citations to such data or
arguments in his or her prior comments,
memoranda, or other filings (specifying
the relevant page and/or paragraph
numbers where such data or arguments
can be found) in lieu of summarizing
them in the memorandum. Documents
shown or given to Commission staff
during ex parte meetings are deemed to
be written ex parte presentations and
must be filed consistent with rule
1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by
rule 1.49(f) or for which the
Commission has made available a
method of electronic filing, written ex
parte presentations and memoranda
summarizing oral ex parte
presentations, and all attachments
thereto, must be filed through the
electronic comment filing system
available for that proceeding, and must
be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc,
.xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants
in this proceeding should familiarize
themselves with the Commission’s ex
parte rules.
VerDate Mar<14>2013
17:29 Mar 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
Federal Communications Commission.
Kimberly A. Scardino,
Acting Division Chief, Telecommunications
Access Policy Division, Wireline Competition
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2013–06047 Filed 3–14–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Transit Administration
49 CFR Part 633
[Docket No. FTA–2009–0030]
RIN 2132–AA92
Capital Project Management
Federal Transit Administration
(FTA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of withdrawal of
proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Federal Transit
Administration is withdrawing its
September 13, 2011, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking to revise the agency’s
project management oversight
regulations, in light of the recent,
fundamental changes to the statutes that
authorize the discretionary and formula
capital programs at 49 U.S.C. Chapter
53. Given the repeal of the Fixed
Guideway Modernization program, the
creation of the Core Capacity
Improvement and State of Good Repair
programs, and the streamlining of the
New Starts and Small Starts project
development process, FTA must reexamine its proposed definition of
major capital project and its policy and
procedure for risk assessment. Also, the
agency must develop policy and
regulatory proposals for addressing
several explicit directives in the new
surface transportation authorization
statute, the Moving Ahead for Progress
in the 21st Century Act (‘‘MAP–21’’).
FTA will reinitiate a rulemaking for
project management oversight in the
near future. Additionally, FTA may seek
to set policy on major capital projects
through public notice-and-comment,
and provide technical assistance
through guidance.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
program matters, Carlos M. Garay at
(202) 366–6471 or carlos.garay@dot.gov.
For legal matters, Scott A. Biehl at (202)
366–0826 or scott.biehl@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The NPRM on Capital Project
Management and the Dear Colleague
Letters on Risk Assessment: On
September 13, 2011, FTA published a
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
to transform the current regulation for
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
project management oversight at 49 CFR
part 633 into a discrete set of managerial
principles for sponsors of major capital
projects. (76 FR 56363–56381). The
NPRM was designed to enable FTA to
more clearly identify the necessary
management capacity and capability of
a sponsor of a major capital project;
spell out the many facets of project
management that must be addressed in
a project management plan; tailor the
level of FTA oversight to the costs,
complexities, and risks of a major
capital project; set forth the means and
objectives of risk assessments for major
capital projects; and articulate the roles
and responsibilities of FTA’s project
management oversight contractors.
A critical component of the NPRM
was the proposed definition of major
capital project. Under the current
regulation, 49 CFR 633.5, a major
capital project is defined in pertinent
part as any project funded with any
amount of discretionary New Starts
funds, or any Fixed Guideway
Modernization (FGM) project, of a total
cost of $100 million or more, receiving
funds under the formula FGM program.
In the September 2011 NPRM, FTA
proposed that a major capital project be
redefined as either of the following: Any
New Starts or FGM project for which the
sponsor sought $100 million or more
under the New Starts or FGM programs,
or any capital project the Federal
Transit Administrator found would
benefit from the FTA project
management oversight program, given
the size or complexity of the project, the
uniqueness of the technology, the
previous project management
experience of the sponsor, or any other
risks inherent in the project. Thus, in
the NPRM, the agency suggested that the
level of Federal investment in a project
is a more appropriate benchmark than
the total capital costs of a project, and
that $100 million in Federal grant funds
is an appropriate number for that
purpose. Also, FTA proposed that in his
or her discretion, the Administrator
could designate any capital project
seeking funds under the discretionary
Small Starts program as a major capital
project subject to the 49 CFR part 633
regulations. See generally, 76 FR 56365–
56368.
Another key element of the NPRM
was the proposed rule and guidance on
risk assessment. Specifically, under
proposed Section 633.23, FTA would
have been vested with the discretion to
perform or allow a project sponsor to
perform a risk assessment at a level
commensurate with the size, cost, or
complexity of a major capital project at
any point during project development.
Also, under proposed Section 633.23,
E:\FR\FM\15MRP1.SGM
15MRP1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 51 / Friday, March 15, 2013 / Proposed Rules
FTA would have had explicit authority
to require a sponsor to develop explicit
plans and tools for risk and contingency
mitigation, measures for additional
management capacity and capability, or
financial mechanisms to accommodate
the unfunded risks. In an appendix to
the proposed rule FTA set forth the
agency’s basic methodology for
conducting risk assessments, at that
time. See, 76 FR 56378–56380.
Shortly after the issuance of the
NPRM, on September 30, 2011, the
Federal Transit Administrator and his
Associate Administrators for Planning &
Environment and Program Management
issued Dear Colleague letters to the
transit industry which announced a
more streamlined process for
conducting risk assessments for New
Starts projects. https://www.fta.dot.gov/
newsroom/12910_13883.html. In brief,
the Dear Colleague letters announced an
approach whereby the risk assessment
for a New Starts project would be
tailored to the unique capabilities of the
project sponsor, the sponsor’s
experience in construction of transit
infrastructure, the size and complexity
of the project, and the total amount of
New Starts funding requested for the
project, and that, in some instances, a
sponsor would be allowed to conduct its
own risk assessment, in lieu of an
assessment by FTA. It must be
emphasized, however, that the Dear
Colleague letters of September 30, 2011,
were based on the New Starts project
development process under the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users (‘‘SAFETEA–LU’’), the
authorization statute that preceded
MAP–21. Under MAP–21, the New
Starts project development process is
designed to be considerably quicker and
less onerous for the project sponsor.
Changes to the FTA Capital Programs
Under MAP–21: MAP–21 took effect on
October 1, 2012. Of the many changes
to the FTA capital programs under
MAP–21, two of the most important are
the repeal of the longstanding formula
program for Fixed Guideway
Modernization (FGM) and the creation
of the State of Good Repair (SGR)
program. In one respect, the SGR
program, now codified at 49 U.S.C.
5337, is the successor to the FGM
program, in that the SGR program will
support many of the same types of
projects that were funded under the
FGM program. It is clear, however, that
in establishing the new SGR program
under MAP–21, the Congress has raised
its expectations of both FTA and the
public transportation industry as
compared to the previous FGM program.
Specifically, through the mandate of a
VerDate Mar<14>2013
17:29 Mar 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
national Transit Asset Management
(‘‘TAM’’) system at 49 U.S.C. 5326, the
Congress is requiring FTA to establish
systematic means for transit asset
management by all operators of public
transportation, for all modes of public
transportation, throughout the United
States. This national system of TAM
will be based on a definition of the term
State of Good Repair—to be developed
through rulemaking—and performance
measures for making improvements in
the condition of transit agencies’
facilities and equipment. Moreover,
through the tiered formula of the SGR
program at Section 5337, the Congress is
targeting the largest amounts of Federal
financial assistance to the operators of
public transportation most in need of
that assistance, for the express purpose
of improving the condition of those
operators’ existing assets. In light of
these fundamental changes to the
principal formula program for capital
assistance, FTA must consider whether,
and if so, under what circumstances an
SGR project should be defined as a
major capital project subject to the
oversight rules at 49 CFR part 633.
Another change of upmost importance
under MAP–21 is the establishment of
the new competitive, discretionary Core
Capacity Improvement (‘‘CCI’’) program,
codified at 49 U.S.C. 5309(e). The single
purpose of the CCI program is to
provide Federal financial assistance for
capital projects that will increase the
capacities of existing fixed guideway
systems in discrete corridors by at least
ten percent—but explicitly, the statute
excludes any elements of a project
designed to maintain the State of Good
Repair of the existing fixed guideway
system. Here again, FTA must consider
whether, and if so, under what
circumstances a CCI project should be
defined as a major capital project
subject to the oversight rules at 49 CFR
part 633.
Yet another change of upmost
importance is the streamlining of the
New Starts project development
process. Under the authorization
statutes that preceded MAP–21, the
New Starts process entailed the discrete,
sequential phases of ‘‘alternatives
analysis,’’ ‘‘preliminary engineering,’’
and final design,’’ prior to the
construction of a project under a Full
Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA).
Under MAP–21, however, there are now
only two sequential steps that preceded
the construction of a project under an
FFGA: The phases of ‘‘project
development’’ and ‘‘engineering.’’ See,
49 U.S.C. 5309(d)(1), (2). No longer will
there be an analysis of alternatives other
than the evaluation of alternatives
necessary for compliance with the
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
16461
National Environmental Policy Act. No
longer will there be a requirement that
FTA approve a New Starts project for
entry into project development, as there
was, for example, during SAFETEA–LU,
when FTA had to approve a project for
entry into preliminary engineering.
Under MAP–21, a project sponsor must
complete all activities required to obtain
a rating and evaluation against the New
Starts criteria for project justification,
supportive land use policy and patterns,
and local financial commitment, within
two years from the date the sponsor’s
project enters ‘‘project development,’’
absent a waiver from the deadline. All
of these changes to the New Starts
program will affect FTA’s project
management oversight, and in
particular, the agency’s policy and
procedure for risk assessment.
Also, under MAP–21, there are a
number of explicit directives for FTA’s
management of the New Starts, Small
Starts, and Core Capacity Improvement
programs that will affect FTA’s
oversight of major capital projects under
the rules at 49 CFR part 633. Among
them are the following:
• In accordance with 49 U.S.C.
5309(c)(3), FTA is obliged to ‘‘use an
expedited technical capacity review
process’’ for any sponsor that has
‘‘recently and successfully completed’’ a
New Start or CCI project, provided the
budget, cost, and ridership outcomes for
the previous project were consistent
with or better than the projections, and
the sponsor demonstrates that it
‘‘continues to have the staff expertise
and other resources necessary to
implement’’ the New Start or CCI
project.
• In accordance with 49 U.S.C.
5309(g)(3), ‘‘to the maximum extent
practicable’’ FTA is obliged to use
‘‘warrants’’ in making a determination
of project justification for a New Start or
CCI project for which the Federal share
will be less than $100 million or 50
percent of the total project costs, and the
sponsor has certified that its existing
public transportation system is in a
State of Good Repair.
• In accordance with 49 U.S.C.
5309(g)(4), ‘‘to the maximum extent
practicable’’ FTA is obliged to issue
Letters of Intent and enter into Early
Systems Work Agreements to
‘‘expedite’’ a New Start or CCI project
towards construction.
• In accordance with 49 U.S.C.
5309(f)(2)(F), in assessing the stability,
reliability, and availability of proposed
sources of local financing for a New
Start or CCI project, FTA must consider
‘‘private contributions to the project,
including cost-effective project delivery,
management or transfer of project risks,
E:\FR\FM\15MRP1.SGM
15MRP1
16462
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 51 / Friday, March 15, 2013 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
expedited project schedule, financial
partnering, and other public-private
partnership strategies.’’
• In accordance with 49 U.S.C.
5309(h), in rating and evaluating a
Small Start project, FTA must assess
‘‘the benefits of the project as compared
to the Federal assistance to be provided
and the degree of local financial
commitment.’’
• In accordance with 49 U.S.C.
5309(i), a federally funded New Start or
CCI project in a ‘‘program of interrelated
projects’’ may advance through the New
Start or CCI process provided the entire
program of interrelated projects, as a
whole, meets the requirements for
project justification and local financial
commitment; each project within the
entire program of interrelated projects
enters construction ‘‘within a reasonable
time frame’’; and the entire program of
interrelated projects ‘‘is supported by an
acceptable degree of local financial
commitment.’’
Next Steps: FTA intends to reinitiate
the rulemaking proposed on September
11, 2011, at 76 FR 56363–56381, for the
same purposes as stated in that NPRM.
There is no change in the objective to
attain stronger capital project
management by project sponsors.
VerDate Mar<14>2013
17:29 Mar 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
Moreover, the agency is committed to
developing more effective means of
overseeing the major capital projects in
which it invests taxpayer funds.
Currently, FTA expects to issue a new
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to
transform the project management
oversight regulations at 49 CFR part 633
into rules for Capital Project
Management in fall 2013. In the interim,
FTA will issue guidance to the public
transportation industry on the use of
risk assessments for major capital
projects.
Additionally, over the next several
months, FTA will propose a number of
policies and rulemakings on the New
Starts, Small Starts, Core Capacity
Improvement, and State of Good Repair
programs, and a rulemaking on Transit
Asset Management, all of which, as
noted above, have implications for the
future rulemaking on Capital Project
Management. The agency must carefully
coordinate these various policy and
regulatory initiatives, in balance with
the agency’s obligation to stand up the
new Public Transportation Safety
Program authorized at 49 U.S.C. Section
5329, which the agency’s single highest
priority. Accordingly, the Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking to amend the
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
regulations at 49 CFR part 633 is hereby
withdrawn.
Regulatory Impact
Since this action is a withdrawal of a
proposed rulemaking it is neither a
proposed nor a final rule, therefore, it is
not subject to Executive Order 12866,
Executive Order 13563, the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, or the U.S. Department
of Transportation’s Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February
26, 1979).
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 633
Transportation, Mass transportation,
Project management oversight, Major
capital projects, Fixed guideway
projects, Risk assessment, Project
management plans.
Accordingly, the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, Docket No. FTA–2009–
0030, published in the Federal Register
on September 13, 2011 (76 FR 56363) is
withdrawn.
Issued in Washington, DC on March 8,
2013.
Peter Rogoff,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2013–06082 Filed 3–14–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
E:\FR\FM\15MRP1.SGM
15MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 51 (Friday, March 15, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16460-16462]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-06082]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Transit Administration
49 CFR Part 633
[Docket No. FTA-2009-0030]
RIN 2132-AA92
Capital Project Management
AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration (FTA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of withdrawal of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Transit Administration is withdrawing its
September 13, 2011, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to revise the
agency's project management oversight regulations, in light of the
recent, fundamental changes to the statutes that authorize the
discretionary and formula capital programs at 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53.
Given the repeal of the Fixed Guideway Modernization program, the
creation of the Core Capacity Improvement and State of Good Repair
programs, and the streamlining of the New Starts and Small Starts
project development process, FTA must re-examine its proposed
definition of major capital project and its policy and procedure for
risk assessment. Also, the agency must develop policy and regulatory
proposals for addressing several explicit directives in the new surface
transportation authorization statute, the Moving Ahead for Progress in
the 21st Century Act (``MAP-21''). FTA will reinitiate a rulemaking for
project management oversight in the near future. Additionally, FTA may
seek to set policy on major capital projects through public notice-and-
comment, and provide technical assistance through guidance.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For program matters, Carlos M. Garay
at (202) 366-6471 or carlos.garay@dot.gov. For legal matters, Scott A.
Biehl at (202) 366-0826 or scott.biehl@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The NPRM on Capital Project Management and the Dear Colleague
Letters on Risk Assessment: On September 13, 2011, FTA published a
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to transform the current
regulation for project management oversight at 49 CFR part 633 into a
discrete set of managerial principles for sponsors of major capital
projects. (76 FR 56363-56381). The NPRM was designed to enable FTA to
more clearly identify the necessary management capacity and capability
of a sponsor of a major capital project; spell out the many facets of
project management that must be addressed in a project management plan;
tailor the level of FTA oversight to the costs, complexities, and risks
of a major capital project; set forth the means and objectives of risk
assessments for major capital projects; and articulate the roles and
responsibilities of FTA's project management oversight contractors.
A critical component of the NPRM was the proposed definition of
major capital project. Under the current regulation, 49 CFR 633.5, a
major capital project is defined in pertinent part as any project
funded with any amount of discretionary New Starts funds, or any Fixed
Guideway Modernization (FGM) project, of a total cost of $100 million
or more, receiving funds under the formula FGM program. In the
September 2011 NPRM, FTA proposed that a major capital project be
redefined as either of the following: Any New Starts or FGM project for
which the sponsor sought $100 million or more under the New Starts or
FGM programs, or any capital project the Federal Transit Administrator
found would benefit from the FTA project management oversight program,
given the size or complexity of the project, the uniqueness of the
technology, the previous project management experience of the sponsor,
or any other risks inherent in the project. Thus, in the NPRM, the
agency suggested that the level of Federal investment in a project is a
more appropriate benchmark than the total capital costs of a project,
and that $100 million in Federal grant funds is an appropriate number
for that purpose. Also, FTA proposed that in his or her discretion, the
Administrator could designate any capital project seeking funds under
the discretionary Small Starts program as a major capital project
subject to the 49 CFR part 633 regulations. See generally, 76 FR 56365-
56368.
Another key element of the NPRM was the proposed rule and guidance
on risk assessment. Specifically, under proposed Section 633.23, FTA
would have been vested with the discretion to perform or allow a
project sponsor to perform a risk assessment at a level commensurate
with the size, cost, or complexity of a major capital project at any
point during project development. Also, under proposed Section 633.23,
[[Page 16461]]
FTA would have had explicit authority to require a sponsor to develop
explicit plans and tools for risk and contingency mitigation, measures
for additional management capacity and capability, or financial
mechanisms to accommodate the unfunded risks. In an appendix to the
proposed rule FTA set forth the agency's basic methodology for
conducting risk assessments, at that time. See, 76 FR 56378-56380.
Shortly after the issuance of the NPRM, on September 30, 2011, the
Federal Transit Administrator and his Associate Administrators for
Planning & Environment and Program Management issued Dear Colleague
letters to the transit industry which announced a more streamlined
process for conducting risk assessments for New Starts projects. https://www.fta.dot.gov/newsroom/12910_13883.html. In brief, the Dear
Colleague letters announced an approach whereby the risk assessment for
a New Starts project would be tailored to the unique capabilities of
the project sponsor, the sponsor's experience in construction of
transit infrastructure, the size and complexity of the project, and the
total amount of New Starts funding requested for the project, and that,
in some instances, a sponsor would be allowed to conduct its own risk
assessment, in lieu of an assessment by FTA. It must be emphasized,
however, that the Dear Colleague letters of September 30, 2011, were
based on the New Starts project development process under the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy
for Users (``SAFETEA-LU''), the authorization statute that preceded
MAP-21. Under MAP-21, the New Starts project development process is
designed to be considerably quicker and less onerous for the project
sponsor.
Changes to the FTA Capital Programs Under MAP-21: MAP-21 took
effect on October 1, 2012. Of the many changes to the FTA capital
programs under MAP-21, two of the most important are the repeal of the
longstanding formula program for Fixed Guideway Modernization (FGM) and
the creation of the State of Good Repair (SGR) program. In one respect,
the SGR program, now codified at 49 U.S.C. 5337, is the successor to
the FGM program, in that the SGR program will support many of the same
types of projects that were funded under the FGM program. It is clear,
however, that in establishing the new SGR program under MAP-21, the
Congress has raised its expectations of both FTA and the public
transportation industry as compared to the previous FGM program.
Specifically, through the mandate of a national Transit Asset
Management (``TAM'') system at 49 U.S.C. 5326, the Congress is
requiring FTA to establish systematic means for transit asset
management by all operators of public transportation, for all modes of
public transportation, throughout the United States. This national
system of TAM will be based on a definition of the term State of Good
Repair--to be developed through rulemaking--and performance measures
for making improvements in the condition of transit agencies'
facilities and equipment. Moreover, through the tiered formula of the
SGR program at Section 5337, the Congress is targeting the largest
amounts of Federal financial assistance to the operators of public
transportation most in need of that assistance, for the express purpose
of improving the condition of those operators' existing assets. In
light of these fundamental changes to the principal formula program for
capital assistance, FTA must consider whether, and if so, under what
circumstances an SGR project should be defined as a major capital
project subject to the oversight rules at 49 CFR part 633.
Another change of upmost importance under MAP-21 is the
establishment of the new competitive, discretionary Core Capacity
Improvement (``CCI'') program, codified at 49 U.S.C. 5309(e). The
single purpose of the CCI program is to provide Federal financial
assistance for capital projects that will increase the capacities of
existing fixed guideway systems in discrete corridors by at least ten
percent--but explicitly, the statute excludes any elements of a project
designed to maintain the State of Good Repair of the existing fixed
guideway system. Here again, FTA must consider whether, and if so,
under what circumstances a CCI project should be defined as a major
capital project subject to the oversight rules at 49 CFR part 633.
Yet another change of upmost importance is the streamlining of the
New Starts project development process. Under the authorization
statutes that preceded MAP-21, the New Starts process entailed the
discrete, sequential phases of ``alternatives analysis,'' ``preliminary
engineering,'' and final design,'' prior to the construction of a
project under a Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA). Under MAP-21,
however, there are now only two sequential steps that preceded the
construction of a project under an FFGA: The phases of ``project
development'' and ``engineering.'' See, 49 U.S.C. 5309(d)(1), (2). No
longer will there be an analysis of alternatives other than the
evaluation of alternatives necessary for compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act. No longer will there be a requirement that
FTA approve a New Starts project for entry into project development, as
there was, for example, during SAFETEA-LU, when FTA had to approve a
project for entry into preliminary engineering. Under MAP-21, a project
sponsor must complete all activities required to obtain a rating and
evaluation against the New Starts criteria for project justification,
supportive land use policy and patterns, and local financial
commitment, within two years from the date the sponsor's project enters
``project development,'' absent a waiver from the deadline. All of
these changes to the New Starts program will affect FTA's project
management oversight, and in particular, the agency's policy and
procedure for risk assessment.
Also, under MAP-21, there are a number of explicit directives for
FTA's management of the New Starts, Small Starts, and Core Capacity
Improvement programs that will affect FTA's oversight of major capital
projects under the rules at 49 CFR part 633. Among them are the
following:
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5309(c)(3), FTA is obliged to
``use an expedited technical capacity review process'' for any sponsor
that has ``recently and successfully completed'' a New Start or CCI
project, provided the budget, cost, and ridership outcomes for the
previous project were consistent with or better than the projections,
and the sponsor demonstrates that it ``continues to have the staff
expertise and other resources necessary to implement'' the New Start or
CCI project.
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5309(g)(3), ``to the maximum
extent practicable'' FTA is obliged to use ``warrants'' in making a
determination of project justification for a New Start or CCI project
for which the Federal share will be less than $100 million or 50
percent of the total project costs, and the sponsor has certified that
its existing public transportation system is in a State of Good Repair.
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5309(g)(4), ``to the maximum
extent practicable'' FTA is obliged to issue Letters of Intent and
enter into Early Systems Work Agreements to ``expedite'' a New Start or
CCI project towards construction.
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5309(f)(2)(F), in assessing
the stability, reliability, and availability of proposed sources of
local financing for a New Start or CCI project, FTA must consider
``private contributions to the project, including cost-effective
project delivery, management or transfer of project risks,
[[Page 16462]]
expedited project schedule, financial partnering, and other public-
private partnership strategies.''
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5309(h), in rating and
evaluating a Small Start project, FTA must assess ``the benefits of the
project as compared to the Federal assistance to be provided and the
degree of local financial commitment.''
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5309(i), a federally funded
New Start or CCI project in a ``program of interrelated projects'' may
advance through the New Start or CCI process provided the entire
program of interrelated projects, as a whole, meets the requirements
for project justification and local financial commitment; each project
within the entire program of interrelated projects enters construction
``within a reasonable time frame''; and the entire program of
interrelated projects ``is supported by an acceptable degree of local
financial commitment.''
Next Steps: FTA intends to reinitiate the rulemaking proposed on
September 11, 2011, at 76 FR 56363-56381, for the same purposes as
stated in that NPRM. There is no change in the objective to attain
stronger capital project management by project sponsors. Moreover, the
agency is committed to developing more effective means of overseeing
the major capital projects in which it invests taxpayer funds.
Currently, FTA expects to issue a new Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to
transform the project management oversight regulations at 49 CFR part
633 into rules for Capital Project Management in fall 2013. In the
interim, FTA will issue guidance to the public transportation industry
on the use of risk assessments for major capital projects.
Additionally, over the next several months, FTA will propose a
number of policies and rulemakings on the New Starts, Small Starts,
Core Capacity Improvement, and State of Good Repair programs, and a
rulemaking on Transit Asset Management, all of which, as noted above,
have implications for the future rulemaking on Capital Project
Management. The agency must carefully coordinate these various policy
and regulatory initiatives, in balance with the agency's obligation to
stand up the new Public Transportation Safety Program authorized at 49
U.S.C. Section 5329, which the agency's single highest priority.
Accordingly, the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to amend the regulations
at 49 CFR part 633 is hereby withdrawn.
Regulatory Impact
Since this action is a withdrawal of a proposed rulemaking it is
neither a proposed nor a final rule, therefore, it is not subject to
Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, or the U.S. Department of Transportation's Regulatory
Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979).
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 633
Transportation, Mass transportation, Project management oversight,
Major capital projects, Fixed guideway projects, Risk assessment,
Project management plans.
Accordingly, the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Docket No. FTA-
2009-0030, published in the Federal Register on September 13, 2011 (76
FR 56363) is withdrawn.
Issued in Washington, DC on March 8, 2013.
Peter Rogoff,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2013-06082 Filed 3-14-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P