Transit Asset Management: Final Guidebooks, 18960-18964 [2017-08143]

Agencies

• Federal Transit Administration
• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 77 (Monday, April 24, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18960-18964]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-08143]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Transit Administration

[Docket No. FTA-2016-0030]


Transit Asset Management: Final Guidebooks

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration (FTA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of availability of final guidebooks.

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

SUMMARY: FTA has placed in the docket and on its Web site guidance in 
the form of two guidebooks to assist grantees in complying with FTA's 
Transit Asset Management program. The purpose of the guidebooks is to 
inform the transit community of calculation methodologies for state of 
good repair (SGR) performance measures for infrastructure and 
facilities.

DATES: Reporting the performance measures discussed in these guidebooks 
will be optional in NTD report year 2017 with full implementation 
required in report year 2018.

ADDRESSES: For access to DOT Docket Number FTA-2016-0030 to read 
background documents and comments received, go to www.regulations.gov 
at any time or to the U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE., Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, 
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590 between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. 
Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For program matters, contact John 
Giorgis, FTA Office of Budget and Policy, at (202) 366-5430, or 
john.giorgis@dot.gov. For legal matters, contact Bruce Walker, FTA 
Attorney-Advisor, Office of Chief Counsel, at (202) 366-9109 or 
bruce.walker@dot.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Availability of Final Guidebooks

    This notice provides a summary of the final changes to the ``TAM 
Infrastructure Performance Measure Reporting Guidebook: Performance 
Restriction (Slow Zone) Calculation'' and the ``TAM Facility 
Performance Measure Reporting Guidebook: Condition Assessment 
Calculation.'' FTA requested comments on both proposed guidebooks in a 
Federal Register notice published July 26, 2016 (81 FR 48974). The 
guidebooks are available on the following FTA Web site: 
www.transit.dot.gov/TAM.

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Summary of Comments and FTA Responses
    A. Facility Condition Assessment Guidebook
    B. Guideway Performance Restriction Calculation Guidebook

I. Background

    The guidebooks discussed in this notice incorporate changes to 
FTA's programs due to the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century 
Act (MAP-21); the publication of the final rule for FTA's National 
Transit Asset Management (TAM) System and amendments to the National 
Transit Database (NTD) regulations; and changes in terminology used in 
the 2012 Asset Management Guide.
    FTA issued its final rule for the National Transit Asset Management 
(TAM) System and the final notice for the National Transit Database 
Asset Inventory Module in the Federal Register on July 26, 2016 (81 FR 
48971). The final rule includes four (4) state of good repair (SGR) 
performance measures for capital assets: (1) Equipment: (non-revenue) 
service vehicles. The performance measure for non-revenue, support-
service and maintenance vehicles equipment is the percentage of those 
vehicles that have met or exceeded their useful life benchmark (ULB); 
(2) Rolling stock. The performance measure for rolling stock is the 
percentage of revenue vehicles within a particular asset class that 
have either met or exceeded their ULB; (3) Infrastructure: rail fixed-
guideway, track, signals, and systems. The performance measure for rail 
fixed-guideway, track, signals, and systems is the percentage of track 
segments with performance restrictions; and (4) Facilities. The 
performance measure for facilities is the percentage of facilities 
within an asset class, rated below condition three (3) on the Transit 
Economic Requirements Model (TERM) scale.
    The final rule includes performance measures for infrastructure and 
facilities categories; however, it was silent with regard to 
calculation methodologies. To that end, FTA proposed guidebooks that 
provided both standard terminology and calculation options for transit 
providers to conform to the proposed SGR performance measures for 
infrastructure and facilities. The proposed guidebooks specifically 
describe how to measure and report the infrastructure and facility 
performance measures to the NTD and were published in the Federal 
Register for public comment on July 26, 2016. This notice responds to 
comments received and announces the availability of the revised final 
guidebooks: The ``TAM Infrastructure Performance Measure Reporting 
Guidebook: Performance Restriction (Slow Zone) Calculation'' and the 
``TAM Facility Performance Measure Reporting Guidebook: Condition 
Assessment Calculation.''
    The final guidebooks are not included in this notice; instead, 
electronic versions are available on FTA's Web site, at 
www.transit.dot.gov/TAM, and are also available on the docket, at 
www.regulations.gov. Paper copies of the proposed guidebooks may be 
obtained by contacting FTA's Administrative Services Help Desk at (202) 
366-4865.

II. Summary of Comments and FTA Responses

    FTA proposed guidebooks are intended to aid compliance with the 
Transit Asset Management Subpart D Performance Management requirements 
of 49 CFR part 625 \1\ and the National Transit Database (NTD) Asset 
Inventory reporting requirements of 49 CFR part 630. Thirteen 
commenters responded to the request for public comment. Based on 
comments received, FTA has clarified and revised sections of both 
guidebooks to provide better flow and clarity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Federal Register, notice of availability at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-07-26/pdf/2016-17076.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The comments and FTA responses are organized as follows (1) 
facility condition assessments, and (2) guideway performance 
restriction calculations.

A. Facility Condition Assessments

    Comments: Many commenters requested clarification regarding terms 
and definitions used and the procedures proposed in the guidebook. A 
number of the commenters indicated issues regarding Chapter 3.0 
Condition Assessment Procedures of the

[[Page 18961]]

guidebook. They provided recommendations for the process used to 
calculate weighted averages, improving the list to be rated in Table 7, 
as well as the methodology for assessing their condition. One commenter 
recommended the guidance be revised to clearly distinguish when a 
requirement is applicable to NTD reporting as opposed to TAM program 
reporting.
    Another commenter requested clarity on how facilities that are 
under construction should be reported; and, if whether a facility 
should be distinguished as individual buildings or a compound. Two 
other commenters questioned how equipment located in a facility should 
be inventoried. Another commenter also recommended that the guidebook 
photos used to indicate examples of condition ratings should better 
represent the condition levels they are supposed to exemplify.
    Several commenters strongly recommended that FTA offer flexibility 
to agencies that have well-developed and mature approaches for 
measuring SGR. A commenter noted that such flexibility can be offered 
without compromising FTA's ability to calculate SGR needs at the 
national level based on a consistent set of underlying data.
    FTA Response: The terms and definitions used in the guidebook are 
terms of general use within the transit industry. FTA recognizes that 
some transit agencies may use different nomenclature for the same or 
similar items. FTA recognizes that a transit agency may find it 
necessary to tailor the rating level descriptions provided. As noted in 
Section 3.3 of the proposed guidebook, a transit agency may customize 
its lists to address specialized assets or conditions, incorporate 
existing practices and data, and/or leverage more detailed data 
specific to the agency. Further FTA has revised the terminology in the 
facility guidebook to reduce confusion with other FTA regulation and 
guidance by removing the terms ``component'' and ``subcomponent''. The 
final guidebook utilizes the terms ``primary rating level'' and 
``secondary rating level'' to describe the asset and its hierarchy 
transit providers' will use in their calculation of the overall 
facility condition rating. As for facilities under construction, FTA 
notes that the TAM rule only requires assets that are in revenue 
service be included in the TAM plan or NTD asset inventories; hence 
construction projects are not required to be included when assessing 
facilities.
    In response to recommendations to clarify whether a facility is 
assessed as individual or multiple buildings; FTA clarifies that a 
single facility is defined as one building, so for example, a compound 
with four buildings would be four facilities. Further, FTA recommends 
agencies review the 2017 Asset Inventory Module (AIM) Manual,\2\ which 
itemizes all facility types that will be reported to the NTD. Each of 
these facility types and any other building where transit 
administrative, maintenance or operations functions are conducted 
should be considered an independent facility even when it is adjacent 
to or on the same property as another building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/2017%20Asset%20Inventory%20Module%20Reporting%20Manual_0.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With regard to equipment located in facilities, a transit agency 
should use their best judgement to determine whether or not it's 
administrative and maintenance facility equipment should be inventoried 
as an equipment category asset or as a facility category asset. If the 
asset is likely to be moved from one location to another, including at 
such time when the building is replaced, then it should be inventoried 
as an equipment asset and not as part of the facility. Likewise, if the 
asset is integral to the building, then it should be inventoried as a 
part of the administrative and maintenance facility. However, if 
factored within the facility it should be included in the facility 
condition assessment for as long as it is in use in the facility. FTA 
notes the agency will continue to refine the glossary of terms and 
definitions used in the NTD as appropriate to improve clarity. In 
addition, FTA has revised the introduction section of the guidebook to 
address the relationship between requirements for TAM and NTD.
    With regard to those commenters who expressed concern about the 
procedures and equal weighting factors proposed in the guidebook, FTA 
notes that each agency has discretion to determine importance within 
its systems. However, FTA has simplified the equation for aggregation 
calculations and revised the guidebook accordingly. FTA also notes the 
revised guidebook does not have photos of each condition for every 
rating level referenced. The photos were included as an example, but 
the examples may not be representative of all types.
    As for flexibility, FTA notes that a transit agency can customize 
its approach as long as it is documented and convertible to the TERM 
scale for reporting purposes (1 to 5). Transit agencies with more 
advanced and sophisticated processes are encouraged to apply those 
methodologies beyond the minimum standards required by the final rule. 
Furthermore, we note that throughout the TAM rulemaking process, FTA 
solicited feedback regarding performance measures and methodologies and 
the final rule requirements are a result of this effort.
    Comment: One commenter recommended the guidebook discuss the 
financial investment tradeoff for achieving various TERM ratings.
    FTA Response: FTA appreciates the significance of this issue but it 
is not within the scope of the guidebook.
    Comments: One commenter noted the Facility Condition Assessment 
process on page 11 of the proposed guidebook indicated that agencies 
calculate the ``percentage of all facilities with a condition of 1 or 
2'': while the rule indicates that the performance measure is the 
percentage of facilities scoring below a 3.0 on the TERM scale. The 
commenter requested clarification for how a facility with a 2.99 
aggregate score would be counted--as above or below the threshold.
    FTA Response: With regard to aggregate scores that result in 
decimals, FTA has clarified the guidebook instructions for rounding up 
or down (see Chapter 4).
    Comment: One commenter recommended FTA extend the requirement for 
assessing facilities to a five-year cycle instead of three years. The 
commenter indicated the frequency of condition assessment proposed in 
the guidebook was out of sync with their assessment cycle and appeared 
arbitrary.
    FTA Response: FTA notes that it originally established the three-
year cycle for facility assessments based on practitioner input. 
Nonetheless, FTA concurs with the commenter who indicated that a three-
year cycle could be burdensome to larger transit systems. FTA has 
modified the facility condition assessment to a four-year cycle in 
order to coincide with the TAM plan cycle of every four years. This 
aligns with the TAM planning efforts. FTA believes having facility 
condition data current within the TAM plan cycle allows an agency to 
use available information to accurately identify priorities. 
Accordingly, transit providers will be required to report to the NTD at 
least 25% of their facility condition assessments annually over the 
initial 4 year roll-out period. Providers may choose to roll out this 
requirement more quickly.
    Comment: One commenter requested clarification for reporting the 
condition for facilities owned by another entity.
    FTA Response: The TAM final rule applies to all capital assets used 
in the

[[Page 18962]]

provision of public transportation regardless of funding source, or 
ownership. However, transit agencies are only required to report 
condition of assets for facilities for which they have a direct capital 
responsibility. Transit agencies that have shared direct capital 
responsibilities for a facility must determine the roles and 
responsibilities each will have for conducting the condition 
assessment. Only one assessment needs to be conducted but each provider 
with capital responsibility will report the assessment to the NTD.
    Comments: One commenter requested clarification noting an 
inconsistency between the rule and the proposed guidebook. The 
commenter noted that the TAM rule indicates the cost threshold for 
equipment is over $50,000, but the guidebook includes equipment over 
$10,000 in value. Other commenters recommended grammatical edits and 
noted some inconsistencies in the proposed guidebook as follows: (1) A-
10: The table indicates that there are eight choices of administrative 
and maintenance facility types; however, the Form A-10 presently posted 
on the NTD Web site has 11 choices for facility type; (2) Table 2 
appears to be a copy of Table 1 without making the necessary changes in 
the Facility Name and Facility Type descriptions; (3) the guidebook 
uses the term ``capital interest'' to describe the facilities that must 
be reported on, whereas the TAM rule uses the term ``direct capital 
responsibility'' which infer a different meaning; (4) inconsistent 
description for parking facilities and passenger stations. Another 
commenter requested the NTD Asset Module be made available this fiscal 
year in order for agencies to gain experience with the inventory 
requirements.
    FTA Response: With regard to equipment thresholds, FTA clarifies 
that the dollar value the commenter stated only relates to the 
equipment for administrative and maintenance facilities. If an agency 
determined the equipment was more appropriate to be rated as part of 
the facility, the guidebook recommends that it be assessed in the 
facility condition assessment calculation. FTA is also reviewing the 
guidebook to address formatting and grammatical inconsistencies 
indicated by commenters and have made revisions where appropriate 
including clarifying guidance for assessing passenger and parking 
facilities. FTA also notes that in response to the commenters concern, 
the NTD Asset Module will be available in 2017 for optional reporting.

B. Guideway Performance Restriction Calculations

    Comment: Two commenters suggested their agency does not yet have 
systems in place to gather the proposed performance measure 
calculations, but noted they are in the process of putting those 
systems in place. One of the commenter further stated the performance 
measures will take significant time and labor investment from the 
agency distracting from other needs.
    FTA Response: FTA recognizes that agencies may not have the systems 
in place to collect and calculate the proposed performance measures and 
that this effort will require additional investment. FTA has estimated 
the burden of collecting and reporting this information in the TAM 
Final Rule and NTD Asset Reporting in the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 
for each.\3\ This is a statutory requirement and the purpose of the TAM 
rule and this performance measure guidance is to standardize the 
terminology and calculation of guideway performance restrictions 
nationally and for use by agencies in determining their TAM 
investments. Therefore, FTA does not concur with the commenter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-07-26/pdf/2016-16883.pdf and 
www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-07-26/pdf/2016-17075.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment: One commenter requested that FTA allow agencies to use 
their existing methodologies to calculate performance restrictions.
    FTA Response: FTA does not require agencies to forego their 
existing performance measure calculations. However this guidance 
provides the national standard for the reporting of performance 
restrictions to the NTD. If an agency chooses to use an additional 
performance measure to meet their operational objectives this is 
allowed under the TAM final rule. The NTD will collect the national 
performance measures as defined in the guidebook, but agencies are 
encouraged to use additional measures appropriate for their operations 
and level of sophistication.
    Comments: One commenter requested FTA provide an alternate time for 
performance restriction calculation as they do not offer service at 9 
a.m. on Wednesdays.
    FTA response: FTA selected the time and date for calculation of 
performance restrictions to fall within peak service operations and, 
therefore, minimize non-condition related performance restrictions. If 
an agency does not operate service at the time established in the 
guidance they may identify another peak time on the first Wednesday of 
the month for the calculation of speed restriction that meet the 
intended purpose.
    Comment: Five commenters stated the design speed of infrastructure 
could be greater than maximum allowable service speed due to vehicle 
capabilities and requested further information on how FTA made its 
determination and how it relates to other speed terms like maximum 
allowable speed, signal speed and civil speed. In addition, one 
commenter suggested FTA use safe operating speed instead and that 
seasonal adaptations be included in the determination.
    FTA Response: FTA selected design speed to use in calculating the 
infrastructure performance measure because it is objective, accessible 
and well understood by most operators. However, FTA agrees that the use 
of design speed in the performance restriction calculation could result 
in unreasonably large values for agencies that do not operate at their 
infrastructure design speed through policy decisions, not due to 
condition of the infrastructure. Therefore, FTA has removed the 
reference to `design speed' in the performance calculation and replaced 
it with `full service speed'. This term is defined in the guidebook as 
``The planned speed at time of installation at which vehicles can 
travel on a segment during normal operation, or the speed at which 
vehicles can travel on the segment absent any speed restriction on the 
segment.'' This term removes the possibility of conflict between what 
speed is achievable through design and what is planned for service at 
the time of installation. It is important to note that installation of 
new infrastructure, including signal systems, may impact the 
determination of full service speed for that segment if it changes the 
planned speed. Likewise the speed is determined by segments, so that 
improvement to one segment does not impact full service speed of 
another segment that may not have been improved. FTA anticipates that 
full service speed will take into account the vehicle capabilities and 
maximum allowable speeds due to policy as well as other operating 
characteristics that an agency considers when planning their service 
speed. FTA does not agree that safe operating speed is a reasonable 
alternative because it is subjective. FTA agrees with the commenter 
regarding the effect of weather impacts and notes that system wide 
restrictions placed for weather related incidents should not be 
reported as speed restriction. Section 3.2 of the guidebook describes 
how to identify performance restrictions.

[[Page 18963]]

    Comment: One commenter asked how the performance restriction 
calculation will impact agencies' ability to compete for funding. The 
commenter asked if the sole intent is to be compliant and continue the 
current FTA funding strategy or if agencies that have a history of 
systemic performance restrictions will show as higher priority from a 
national perspective.
    FTA Response: Currently, state of good repair performance measures 
are not linked to Federal funding decisions, including the performance 
measures and targets for slow zones. However, agencies may utilize 
their improved data and target setting procedures in concert with their 
TAM plan efforts to direct funding towards a state of good repair.
    Comments: Two commenters requested clarification about the modes 
used in the calculation of the infrastructure performance measure.
    FTA Response: The TAM final rule and NTD reporting requirements 
identify bus rapid transit mode and ferry boat as a fixed guideway 
infrastructure mode; however, the infrastructure performance measure 
only uses rail guideway for calculation of the performance 
restrictions. The revised performance restriction guidebook provides 
clarification of the modes to include in the calculations.
    Comments: Four commenters reported typographical errors: The last 
bullet point in section 2.3 was incomplete, Page 5: The information box 
at the bottom of the page was missing text, and on Page 10, Table 3, 
Segment ID 7.2--the mathematical calculation was incorrect.
    FTA Response: FTA has rectified each of the typographical errors. 
The last bullet point in former section 2.3 which was also the 
information box on page 5 now states ``For further details on the 
definition of modes, types of service, and calculation of track miles 
refer to the NTD Policy Manual.'' The mathematical calculation for 
segment ID 7.2 in table 3 now states ``(2.90-0.35 = 2.55, not 3.55)''.
    Comments: Several commenters had questions regarding reporting. 
Four commenters suggested FTA should provide, require or accept reasons 
and causes for the performance restriction in addition to the quantity. 
Specifically, commenters suggested that the FTA take the severity, 
seasonal or temporary status of the performance restriction and if it 
was an unplanned failure into account. Additionally, one commenter 
asked FTA to supply causes/reasons for performance restrictions in the 
reporting.
    FTA Response: FTA has established the performance restriction 
calculation for ease of reporting. Any speed restriction is counted in 
the calculation regardless of cause. The TAM Final Rule establishes a 
narrative report that is also submitted annually where agencies may 
provide causes or reasons for performance restrictions. The NTD will 
not collect the cause of performance restrictions in a standardized 
format. The complexity and subjectivity of adding causes to this data 
element could limit the standard reporting procedure.
    Comments: Two commenters requested clarification of reporting 
annually/monthly or daily one of which requested to report daily.
    FTA Response: FTA does not have the capability to collect daily 
performance restrictions but the TAM final rule and NTD reporting 
requirements do not limit agencies from collecting additional 
information. The NTD will collect the annual average performance 
restriction as calculated by the methodology in the performance 
restriction guidebook. The guidebook has been revised to clarify that 
NTD will not collect monthly performance restrictions. It is up to the 
agency to track their monthly values and report the annual average with 
the NTD report.
    Comments: Three commenters stated their concern about using the 9 
a.m. of the first Wednesday of the month to quantify performance 
restrictions (this is noted in a previous comment). One commenter 
stated this might lead to gaming the system by deferring restriction to 
avoid measurement, others suggested that performance restrictions do 
not generally occur at this time of day. Another commenter wanted a 
clarification for selecting this time. Two commenters suggested 
additional means such as using statistical sampling of performance 
restriction for a more accurate measure and to collect supplemental 
information to capture condition assessment of infrastructure.
    FTA Response: FTA established this time and day of the month for 
ease of calculation. FTA intended it to represent normal peak service 
during the middle of the week. The intention of this performance 
measure is to identify asset condition-related performance 
restrictions. If an agency schedules maintenance to avoid being 
measured in this calculation, that is acceptable because maintenance is 
not an asset condition-related performance restriction. It is unlikely 
an agency can or would remove a condition-related performance 
restriction solely to avoid being measured for this performance 
measure, due to the safety risk this could incur. FTA recognizes that 
more sophisticated and complex methods to determine performance 
restrictions exist; however, the intent of this guidance is to provide 
an easy to use, readily available data methodology that can be 
implemented nationwide.
    Comments: Three commenters asked for specific information regarding 
reporting of the performance restrictions. One commenter suggested that 
staging and storage areas should be included in a non-revenue asset 
(along with non-revenue miles) category because the agency has capital 
responsibility for rail within its yards and uses funding to maintain 
it. Another commenter asked for an explanation of the process when 
directional route miles (DRM) are changed. One other commenter asked if 
agencies report track miles or segments.
    FTA Response: FTA clarifies that the performance restriction 
guidebook relates only to the revenue track and guideway asset class 
within the infrastructure asset category. To ease reporting burden, not 
all asset classes are subject to performance measures. Non-revenue 
track miles such as those in staging and storage areas are not included 
in the calculation of performance restrictions, nor are they reportable 
to the NTD. However, the TAM final rule allows agencies to develop 
additional performance measures. The addition or subtraction of track 
miles or DRM will be reported to an agency's asset inventory and should 
be reflected in the performance measure calculations. FTA has added 
clarification in the guidebook that one hundredth (0.01) of a mile is 
equivalent to a segment to align the terminology in this guidebook to 
the TAM final rule infrastructure performance measure.
    Comment: Four commenters provided responses to the proposed 
performance measure calculations. Two commenters expressed concern 
about using Directional Route Miles (DRM) for agencies that have 
multiple tracks because it does not represent a realistic view of the 
actual track usage and could yield misleading calculation. One of those 
commenters requested that FTA use track miles instead of DRM. One 
commenter stated the information in Table 5 was an excellent 
summarization of the requirements. Another commenter asked for 
clarification on which of the guidebook templates are customizable.
    FTA Response: FTA agrees with the commenters that directional route 
miles (DRM) might misrepresent the performance restriction calculation. 
An additional benefit to using track miles is that it is a very simple, 
straight forward and widely understood parameter. FTA

[[Page 18964]]

has changed the infrastructure performance restriction calculation 
parameter from `directional route miles' to `track miles' in response 
to these comments. FTA appreciates the commenter's statement of support 
of the information contained in Table 5. The tables and templates 
provided in the guidebook can be used and modified/customized by an 
agency in the purpose of following the requirements. An agency must be 
sure that if they modify or customize a template that it does not 
conflict with the process outlined in the guidebook for calculation of 
the performance measure.
    Comments: Several commenters requested clarification of the 
proposed audience and intent of the guidebook specifically as it 
relates to NTD reporting. Suggested actions include adding an 
``intended audience'' statement and assumed background information, 
changing title to reflect more NTD focus, and clarify which are TAM 
requirements or NTD requirements. In addition, one commenter requested 
guidebook should clarify that agencies must incorporate more than just 
NTD reporting into their TAM plans.
    FTA Response: FTA agrees that the relationship of TAM and NTD 
requirements should be clarified in the guidebook. The TAM final rule 
establishes the performance measures that are reported to the NTD. This 
guidebook describes the standardized methodology requirements to 
calculate and report to the NTD. FTA has addressed these comments with 
a brief introduction section describing the relationship of TAM 
requirements and NTD reporting. The guidebook has also been renamed to 
``TAM Infrastructure Performance Measure Reporting Guidebook: 
Performance Restriction (Slow Zone) Calculation'' to better describe 
the document.
    Comments: Two commenters provided responses of a general nature not 
related to other topical areas. One commenter stated they feel the 
January 31, 2017, deadline for setting targets is too soon, due to 
having to work with multiple freight partners. Another commenter stated 
FTA did a very good job with the guidebooks; they support NTD and MAP-
21 requirements very well. One commenter stated a concern about the 
performance measure not reflecting some of the assets that an agency 
invests in heavily, such as Positive Train Control (PTC) and bridges, 
since those assets do not directly impact the performance restriction 
which is FTA's performance measure for infrastructure.
    FTA Response: FTA is aware of the short deadline for setting 
targets; however, FTA does not consider it is unreasonable. Throughout 
the rulemaking development process, the statutory requirement of a 
three-month deadline after the effective date of final rule to set 
performance measure targets was published and open for comment. 
Additionally, FTA has clarified that the January 1, 2017, deadline for 
setting initial targets does not include mandatory reporting to the 
NTD.\4\ FTA recognizes that not all capital items are included in a 
performance measure requirement for TAM. However, the TAM final rule 
allows agencies the flexibility to add additional performance measures 
in their TAM plans as they deem appropriate and useful in the 
operation, however only the standardized national TAM performance 
measures will be reported to the NTD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ https://www.transit.dot.gov/TAM/rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: One commenter stated concerns about freight 
considerations such as proprietary condition assessments of freight 
owned track assets and the non-dedicated nature of freight shared track 
and how TAM is applicable, lastly that their performance measures be 
compared to peer agencies due to their being subject to FRA regulations 
as a Class 4 railroad.
    FTA Response: The TAM final rule only applies to assets used in the 
provision of public transportation. Freight assets are not considered 
public transportation; however, if an agency uses freight asset to 
provide public transportation they must include it in their TAM plan 
and NTD inventory. If they have direct capital responsibility (or 
shared capital responsibility) they must report performance 
restrictions to the NTD. The proprietary nature of a freight asset may 
require the agency to innovate solutions to determine condition 
assessments.
    Comments: Three commenters felt that the performance restriction 
definition and or calculation were not appropriate, adequate or 
effective. One commenter stated that the performance restriction does 
not necessarily indicate poor infrastructure condition (could also mean 
maintenance, inspection, etc.). Another commenter did not feel the 
speed restrictions accurately reflect condition of the infrastructure, 
and thus disagrees with the performance restriction definition. 
Additionally, they were concerned that data based on the proposed 
performance restriction definition will misconstrue the reality and 
lead to irrational requests and unreasonable funding conditions. 
Another commenter stated that the calculations can cause transit 
systems to seem in a worse state of repair than is the reality.
    FTA Response: FTA does not agree that the performance restriction 
definition or the calculation is flawed. However, FTA has clarified and 
refined several parameters in the calculation for clarity, 1--design 
speed is now full service speed, 2--directional route miles is now 
track miles and 3--a segment is defined to one hundredth (0.01) of a 
mile in length. FTA believes these clarifications, formatting changes 
and additional description of the roles in both TAM metrics and NTD 
reporting have resolved the issues these commenters raised.
    FTA has revised each of the guidebooks to incorporate 
recommendations and edits as noted above. The revised guidebooks are 
located at the following Web site: www.transit.dot.gov/TAM. FTA 
encourages interested stakeholders to review the revised guidebooks in 
their entirety. Further assistance and guidance can be found at this 
Web site.

    Issued in Washington, DC, pursuant to authority under 49 CFR 
1.91.
Matthew J. Welbes,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 2017-08143 Filed 4-21-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE P