Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program; Ohio Department of Transportation Audit Report, 8560-8563 [2019-04231]
Download as PDF
8560
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 46 / Friday, March 8, 2019 / Notices
through Friday, except State and
Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Effective
January 17, 2017, FHWA assigned to
UDOT certain responsibilities of FHWA
for environmental review, consultation,
and other actions required by applicable
Federal environmental laws and
regulations for highway projects in
Utah, pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327. Actions
taken by UDOT on FHWA’s behalf
pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327 constitute
Federal agency actions for purposes of
Federal law. Notice is hereby given that
UDOT has taken final agency actions
subject to 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1) by issuing
licenses, permits, and approvals for the
I–15; Payson Main Street Interchange
project in the State of Utah. This project
proposes to address current and future
travel demand and improve safety at the
Payson Main Street Interchange. The
project includes reconfiguring the Main
Street Interchange to increase capacity
and realigning Main Street to connect to
900 North. A new interchange would be
constructed northeast of the existing
Main Street Interchange, connecting
Nebo Beltway to I–15. Nebo Beltway—
a new five lane arterial road—would
connect I–15 to Main Street (SR–115)
and SR–198. Braided ramps (i.e., ramps
that cross over each other) would
connect the Main Street and Nebo
Beltway interchanges. Finally, the
railroad west of I–15 would be realigned
to accommodate interchange
improvements and provide grade
separation at surface streets. These
improvements were identified in the
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
as Alternative C1. The actions by UDOT,
and the laws under which such actions
were taken, are described in the EIS and
UDOT Record of Decision (ROD) for the
project (Record of Decision,
Environmental Impact Statement, 1–15;
Payson Main Street Interchange in Utah
County, Utah, Project No. F–I15–
6(214)251), issued on February 8, 2019,
and in other documents in the UDOT
project records. The EIS and ROD, and
other project records are available by
contacting UDOT at the address
provided above. The EIS and ROD can
also be viewed and downloaded from
the project website at https://
www.udot.utah.gov/paysoneis/
index.php.
This notice applies to the EIS, the
ROD, the Section 4(f) determination, the
NHPA Section 106 review, the noise
assessment, the Endangered Species Act
determination, and all other UDOT
decisions and other actions with respect
to the project as of the issuance date of
this notice and all laws under which
such actions were taken, including but
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:24 Mar 07, 2019
Jkt 247001
not limited to the following laws
(including their implementing
regulations):
1. General: National Environmental
Policy Act,42 U.S.C. 4321–4351;
Federal-Aid Highway Act, 23 U.S.C. 109
and 23 U.S.C. 128.
2. Air: Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7401–
7671q.
3. Land: Section 4(f) of the
Department of Transportation Act of
1966, 49 U.S.C. 303; 23 U.S.C. 138;
Landscaping and Scenic Enhancement
(Wildflowers), 23 U.S.C. 319.
4. Wildlife: Endangered Species Act,
16 U.S.C. 1531–1544 and Section 1536;
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 16
U.S.C. 661–667d; Migratory Bird Treaty
Act, 16 U.S.C. 703–712.
5. Water: Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1344; E.O. 11990,
Protection of Wetlands; Section 402 of
the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1342.
6. Historic and Cultural Resources:
Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966, 16 U.S.C. 470f;
Archeological Resources Protection Act
of 1977, 16 U.S.C. 470aa–470mm;
Archeological and Historic Preservation
Act, 16 U.S.C. 469–469c.
7. Noise: Federal-Aid Highway Act of
1970, Public Law 91–605, 84 Stat. 1713.
8. Executive Orders: E.O. 11593
Protection and Enhancement of Cultural
Resources; E.O. 13287 Preserve
America; E.O. 12898, Federal Actions to
Address Environmental Justice and
Low-Income Populations.
Federal Domestic Assistance Program
Number 20.205, Highway Planning and
Construction. The regulations
implementing Executive Order 12372
regarding intergovernmental
consultation on Federal programs and
activities apply to this program.)
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1).
Issued on: Dated: March 1, 2019.
Ivan Marrero,
Division Administrator, Federal Highway
Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah.
[FR Doc. 2019–04229 Filed 3–7–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–RY–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[FHWA Docket No. FHWA–2019–0001]
Surface Transportation Project
Delivery Program; Ohio Department of
Transportation Audit Report
Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA), U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice; request for comment.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The Moving Ahead for
Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP–
21) established the Surface
Transportation Project Delivery Program
that allows a State to assume FHWA’s
environmental responsibilities for
environmental review, consultation, and
compliance under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for
Federal highway projects. When a State
assumes these Federal responsibilities,
the State becomes solely responsible
and liable for carrying out the
responsibilities it has assumed, in lieu
of FHWA. This program mandates
annual audits during each of the first 4
years of State participation to ensure
compliance with program requirements.
This notice announces and solicits
comments on the third audit report for
the Ohio Department of Transportation
(ODOT).
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before April 8, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Mail or hand deliver
comments to Docket Management
Facility: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Room W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590. You may also
submit comments electronically at
www.regulations.gov. All comments
should include the docket number that
appears in the heading of this
document. All comments received will
be available for examination and
copying at the above address from 9
a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. Those
desiring notification of receipt of
comments must include a selfaddressed, stamped postcard, or may
print the acknowledgment page that
appears after submitting comments
electronically. Anyone can search the
electronic form of all comments in any
of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on
behalf of an association, business, or
labor union). The DOT posts these
comments, without edits, including any
personal information the commenter
provides, to www.regulations.gov, as
described in the system of records
notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can
be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
James G. Gavin, Office of Project
Development and Environmental
Review, (202) 366–1473, James.Gavin@
dot.gov, Federal Highway
Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, or
Mr. David Sett, Office of the Chief
Counsel, (404) 562–3676, david.sett@
dot.gov, Federal Highway
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\08MRN1.SGM
08MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 46 / Friday, March 8, 2019 / Notices
Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 60 Forsyth Street 8M5,
Atlanta, GA 30303. Office hours are
from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., e.t., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
An electronic copy of this notice may
be downloaded from the specific docket
page at www.regulations.gov.
Background
The Surface Transportation Project
Delivery Program, codified at 23 U.S.C.
327, commonly known as the NEPA
Assignment Program, allows a State to
assume FHWA’s responsibilities for
environmental review, consultation, and
compliance for Federal highway
projects. When a State assumes these
Federal responsibilities, the State
becomes solely liable for carrying out
the responsibilities it has assumed, in
lieu of FHWA. The ODOT published its
application for assumption under the
NEPA Assignment Program on April 12,
2015, and made it available for public
comment for 30 days. After considering
public comments, ODOT submitted its
application to FHWA on May 27, 2015.
The application served as the basis for
developing the memorandum of
understanding (MOU) that identifies the
responsibilities and obligations that
ODOT would assume. The FHWA
published a notice of the draft MOU in
the Federal Register on October 15,
2015, at 80 FR 62153, with a 30-day
comment period to solicit the views of
the public and Federal agencies. After
the comment period closed, FHWA and
ODOT considered comments and
executed the MOU.
Section 327(g) of Title 23, U.S.C.,
requires the Secretary to conduct annual
audits to ensure compliance with the
MOU during each of the first 4 years of
State participation and, after the fourth
year, monitor compliance. The results of
each audit must be made available for
public comment. The first audit report
of ODOT compliance was finalized on
July 7, 2017. The second audit report of
ODOT compliance was finalized on
October 3, 2018. This notice announces
the availability of the third audit report
for ODOT and solicits public comment
on same.
Authority: Section 1313 of Public Law
112–141; Section 6005 of Public Law 109–59;
23 U.S.C. 327; 23 CFR 773.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:24 Mar 07, 2019
Issued on: March 1, 2019.
Brandye L. Hendrickson,
Deputy Administrator, Federal Highway
Administration.
demonstrated commitment to success of
the program. The team found zero noncompliance observations but did note
six general observations.
Surface Transportation Project Delivery
Program
Background
The Surface Transportation Project
Delivery Program (NEPA Assignment
Program) allows a State to assume
FHWA’s responsibilities for review,
consultation, and compliance with
environmental laws for Federal-aid
highway projects. When a State assumes
these responsibilities, it becomes solely
responsible and liable for carrying out
the responsibilities assumed, in lieu of
FHWA.
The State of Ohio represented by
ODOT completed the application
process and entered an MOU with
FHWA on December 28, 2015, and
amended on June 6, 2018. With this
agreement, ODOT assumed FHWA’s
project approval responsibilities under
NEPA and NEPA-related Federal
environmental laws.
The FHWA is obligated to conduct
four annual compliance audits of
ODOT’s compliance with the provisions
of the MOU. Audits serve as FHWA’s
primary mechanism of determining
ODOT’s compliance with the MOU,
applicable Federal laws and policies,
evaluating ODOT’s progress toward
achieving the performance measures
identified in the MOU, and collecting
information needed for the Secretary’s
annual report to Congress.
The team provided a draft of this
report to ODOT for its review and the
team considered the resulting comments
in preparing this draft, which will be
available for public review and
comment. The FHWA will consider any
public comments on this draft in
finalizing the report.
Draft FHWA Audit of the Ohio
Department of Transportation
Electronic Access
Jkt 247001
8561
August 5, 2017 to August 10, 2018
Executive Summary
This is the third audit of the Ohio
Department of Transportation’s (ODOT)
assumption of National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) responsibilities,
conducted by a team of Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) staff
(the team). The ODOT made the
effective date of the project-level NEPA
and environmental review
responsibilities it assumed from FHWA
on December 28, 2015, as specified in a
memorandum of understanding (MOU)
signed on December 11, 2015, and
amended on June 6, 2018. Within
ODOT, the Division of Planning Office
of Environmental Services (OES) is
responsible to manage and deliver the
environmental program. This audit
examined ODOT’s performance under
the MOU regarding responsibilities and
obligations assigned therein.
Prior to the on-site visit, the team
performed reviews of ODOT’s project
NEPA approval documentation in
EnviroNet (ODOT’s official electronic
environmental document filing system).
This audit consisted of a review of a
sample of 39 higher-risk project files out
of 1,042 approved documents for
Federal projects in ODOT’s EnviroNet
system with an environmental approval
date between April 1, 2017, and March
31, 2018. The team also reviewed
ODOT’s response to the pre-audit
information request (PAIR) and ODOT’s
Self-Assessment report. In addition, the
team reviewed ODOT’s environmental
processes, manuals, and guidance;
ODOT NEPA Quality Assurance and
Quality Control (QA/QC) Processes and
Procedures; and the ODOT NEPA
Assignment Training Plan (collectively,
‘‘ODOT procedures’’). The team
conducted an on-site review during the
week of August 6 to August 10, 2018.
The team conducted interviews with
ODOT’s central office staff on August 6
and with three district office staffs on
August 7. The team also interviewed
staff with the Ohio Department of
Natural Resources (ODNR) on July 23,
2018, as part of the review.
Overall, the team found evidence that
ODOT continues to make reasonable
progress in implementing the NEPA
Assignment Program based on Audit 1
and Audit 2 observations and
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Scope and Methodology
The team conducted a careful
examination of the ODOT NEPA
Assignment Program through a review
of ODOT procedures and project
documentation, ODOT’s PAIR response,
and the self-assessment summary report,
as well as interviews with ODOT central
office and district environmental staff
and resource agency staff. This review
focuses on the following six NEPA
Assignment Program elements: (1)
program management; (2)
documentation and records
management; (3) QA/QC; (4) legal
sufficiency; (5) performance
measurement; and (6) training.
The PAIR consisted of 18 questions,
based on the responsibilities assigned to
ODOT in the MOU. The team reviewed
ODOT’s response and compared the
responses to ODOT’s written
E:\FR\FM\08MRN1.SGM
08MRN1
8562
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 46 / Friday, March 8, 2019 / Notices
procedures. The team utilized ODOT’s
responses to draft interview questions to
clarify information in ODOT’s PAIR
response.
The ODOT provided its NEPA
Assignment Self-Assessment summary
report 30 days prior to the team’s on-site
review. The team considered this
summary report both in focusing on
issues during the project file reviews
and in drafting interview questions. The
report was compared against the
previous year’s self-assessment report
and the requirements in the MOU to
identify any trends.
Between March 16 and May 31, 2018,
the team conducted a project file review
by identifying and reviewing 39 higherrisk project files out of 1,042 approved
documents of Federal-aid projects in
ODOT’s EnviroNet system with an
environmental approval date between
April 1, 2017, and March 31, 2018. The
selection of these projects was based on
a 100 percent sampling of d-listed
Categorical Exclusions (CE), as well as
all Environmental Assessments (EA)
and Environmental Impact Statements
(EIS). The team excluded from review
those projects approved by ODOT under
23 CFR 771.117(c) (c-listed CEs) based
on the review performance of those
types of projects since ODOT assumed
NEPA responsibilities in 2015. The
projects reviewed represented all
remaining NEPA classes of action
available, including projects
representing 9 out of 12 ODOT Districts
and the Ohio Rail Development
Commission (ORDC).
In addition, the team reviewed
ODOT’s project file review associated
with its Self-Assessment to determine if
ODOT evaluated its projects in a similar
fashion and using similar standards to
that of the Federal portion of this
review. The ODOT reviewed projects
within the same sampling period as
FHWA, however, ODOT samples
included Federal-aid and State-only
funded projects. The ODOT conducts
NEPA on all projects regardless of
funding source as they routinely convert
funding from State to Federal later via
the Advanced Construction (AC)
process. The ODOT reviewed 248
projects, including 186 c-listed projects,
61 d-listed projects, and 1 EA. The team
determined the State performed a
rigorous annual QA review of its own
projects.
During the on-site review week, the
team conducted interviews with 21
ODOT staff members at the central
office and three districts: District 6
(Delaware); District 7 (Sydney); and
District 10 (Marietta). Interviewees
included ODOT OES management and
subject matter experts, Office of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:24 Mar 07, 2019
Jkt 247001
Diversity and Inclusion (ODI), District
Environmental Coordinators (DEC),
environmental staff, and public
information officers, representing a
diverse range of expertise and
experience. These interviews focused on
NEPA Assignment with emphasis on
items where additional information was
deemed necessary to complete the
review.
The team conducted interviews 2
weeks prior to the on-site review with
personnel from the ODNR. The ODNR
staff provided valuable insight to the
review team regarding ODOT’s
performance and relationships with
partner resource agencies.
The team identified gaps between the
information from the desktop review of
ODOT procedures, PAIR, selfassessment, project file review, and
interviews. The team documented the
results of its reviews and interviews and
consolidated the results into related
topics or themes. From these topics or
themes, the team developed the review
observations and successful practices.
The audit results are described below.
Overall, the team found evidence that
ODOT continues to make reasonable
progress in implementing the NEPA
Assignment Program based on the Audit
1 and Audit 2 observations and
demonstrated commitment to success of
the program. The team found zero noncompliance observations but did note
six general observations.
The FHWA team urges ODOT to
monitor and make additional
improvements to the program for
continued successes of the program.
Observations and Successful Practices
Program Management
Observation 1: Opportunities exist to
strengthen coordination between ODOT
OES and ODOT ODI.
The team encourages ODOT to ensure
that a proper level of communication
exists between OES and ODI in order to
facilitate the coordination of OES
guidance and training with the ongoing
ODOT-wide Title VI program
enhancements. The FHWA recognizes
and is supportive of the coordination
and partnering efforts between OES and
ODI undertaken to date and stands
ready to contribute to these efforts,
where appropriate.
Observation 2: There are
inconsistencies in the communication
and management of ODOT policy,
manuals, procedures, and guidance.
The ODOT developed and
implemented over 140 procedures to
implement NEPA Assignment, manage
the program, and provide detailed
instruction for completion of
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
environmental actions to document
preparers and reviewers. The ODOT
shares these documents and other
guidance with NEPA practitioners on a
quarterly basis via email, NEPA chats
and DEC Meetings, and via training. In
addition, these documents are saved on
a local drive accessible by ODOT
environmental staff and posted to
ODOT’s website for consultants and
local public agencies.
The FHWA found that policies,
manuals, and other guidance documents
are readily available. However,
interviews with district staff indicate
that opportunities exist to improve upon
the communication of this
documentation in order to ensure more
consistent implementation. In addition,
there are examples of training materials
containing information that is not
included in the related guidance
documents. In these cases, some
environmental staff indicated they rely
on the information in the guidance
while others indicated they rely on OES
instruction provided verbally or through
email. Information prepared for ODOT
staff should exhibit consistency,
regardless of the form in which its
presented.
Observation 3: Inconsistencies remain
in Public Involvement (PI) activities
specifically regarding outreach activities
to underserved and protected
populations.
The team notes and appreciates
ongoing efforts by ODOT in response to
previous audit recommendations for
improvement and enhancement of the
PI process. The team was provided
examples of effective PI efforts during
the interviews with district staff.
However, as demonstrated in the project
file reviews and the interviews, there
remain areas of note in application and
consistency of public involvement
efforts and activities. During FHWA’s
review, ODOT stated that the intent of
its process regarding Environmental
Justice (EJ) is to identify any
disproportionately high and adverse
impacts and disparate impacts on the
associated populations. Although OES
staff indicated that they have updated
the guidance, developed new training,
and provided forums for instructive
discussion for all environmental staff,
consultants, and Local Public Agencies,
it is not clear how ODOT will ensure
that outreach efforts and activities are
commensurate with the level of impact
or potential mitigation, as there is no
discussion of outreach efforts in the
ODOT–OES’ Underserved Populations
Guidance. It is unclear that the
distinctions and specific requirements
of protected populations are fully
discerned and distinguished from each
E:\FR\FM\08MRN1.SGM
08MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 46 / Friday, March 8, 2019 / Notices
other in the guidance document,
including thresholds and requirements.
In addition, interview responses within
OES indicated a difference of opinion in
terms of what constituted outreach to
underserved and protected populations.
At the district level, ODOT district
environmental staff indicated that they
had inconsistent information on how to
determine if there were protected
populations and how to conduct the
required outreach activities, even if
there were no disproportionately
negative impacts. However, OES is
trusting the districts, on projects with a
lower level of NEPA classification, to
ensure full and fair participation by
underserved and protected populations
in public involvement, NEPA and the
transportation decisionmaking
processes.
Documentation and Records
Management
Observation 4: Opportunities exist to
continue improving documentation in
the areas of PI, EJ, and environmental
commitments.
In response to previous audits and
self-assessments, ODOT updated many
procedures relating to the NEPA process
to improve its processes and meet
Federal requirements. The updates
included changes to ODOT’s internal
documentation and filing guidelines
and updates to EnviroNet. The review
team thinks these changes have
positively impacted the program since
Audits 1 and 2.
The quality of documentation for
projects is trending in a positive
direction since Audits 1 and 2, as
approximately 50 percent of all projects
reviewed had zero deficiencies noted by
the team. However, although there were
examples of high quality PI, EJ reviews,
development of environmental
commitments, and documentation for
some projects, these same elements
were lacking in others. For the projects
reviewed, 42 percent of substantive
comments made by the team related to
EJ, 22 percent to PI, 17 percent to
environmental commitments, 11 percent
to QA/QC, and 8 percent to
documentation. This demonstrates
inconsistencies in practice, which may
indicate additional training, guidance,
and/or quality controls may be needed
to improve consistency in application of
documentation statewide.
The team met with ODOT to discuss
individual deficiencies noted by both
FHWA and ODOT OES during this
audit. The ODOT evaluated these
deficiencies at OES and then
communicated them individually with
the districts. The ODOT remains
committed to improvements in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:24 Mar 07, 2019
Jkt 247001
documentation, with plans to continue
updates to EnviroNet and guidance, as
needed, and with the training required
to deliver results.
Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/
QC)
Observation 5: There are variations in
awareness, understanding, and
implementation of QA/QC process and
procedures.
The inconsistencies and missing
information noted in the Documentation
and Records Management section are an
indication of inconsistency in ODOT’s
QA/QC process. The team found
inconsistencies in awareness and use of
peer reviews in the ODOT Districts, as
well as use of comments in EnviroNet.
Selected ODOT OES and district
environmental staff said that they rely
on the ODOT Central Office for QC
support. No training is provided
exclusively for QA/QC.
Legal Sufficiency Review
The ODOT utilized its guidance for
legal sufficiency to review one
Environmental Impact Statement Reevaluation, one EA, and two Individual
Section 4(f) approvals.
Performance Measures
The development of Performance
Measures is required in MOU Section
10.2. The ODOT has refined their
Performance Measures to provide a
better overall indication of ODOT’s
execution of its responsibilities as
assigned by the MOU. The team found
evidence that the results obtained
through the Performance Measures are
beginning to provide actionable
feedback, allowing ODOT to make
appropriate changes as it manages its
environmental program.
Training Program
During the previous audits, it was
noted that ODOT has a robust
environmental training program and
provides adequate budget and time for
staff to access a variety of internal and
external training. To add to the training
program and plan, ODOT has
complemented its traditional,
instructor-based training courses,
quarterly DEC meetings, and monthly
NEPA chats with the development of
several online courses. During the audit,
ODOT reported that 10 online courses
are anticipated to be available in August
2018, with an additional 19 online
courses anticipated to be developed
within the year. As of October 2018, it
is not evident that these courses were
yet deployed.
Observation 6: Opportunities exist to
expand required and continuous
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
8563
training to additional staff and develop
additional instructor-led or online
training in NEPA-related subject areas.
Also, during the previous audit, it was
noted ODOT’s training plan states that
all ODOT environmental staff (both
central and district offices) and
environmental consultants are required
to take the pre-qualification training
courses. The ODOT should consider
extending this requirement to NEPA
project managers and public
involvement officers. Extending the
training to additional staff may improve
public outreach efforts and overall
program delivery. The ODOT should
focus on training in NEPA and NEPArelated subject areas such as Limited
English Proficiency and Public
Involvement. The FHWA encourages
ODOT to include specific EJ training
opportunities in its training plan, such
as the Web-based course currently
under development.
Next Steps
The FHWA provided a draft of this
audit report to ODOT for a 14-day
review and comment period and
considered ODOT’s comments in
developing this draft report. In addition,
FHWA will consider comments on the
draft report received from the public
within the 30-day comment period after
publication in the Federal Register,
pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327(g). No later
than 60 days after the close of the
comment period, FHWA will respond to
all comments submitted, pursuant to 23
U.S.C. 327(g)(2)(B). Once finalized,
FHWA will publish the final audit
report in the Federal Register.
The FHWA will consider the results
of this audit in preparing the scope of
the next annual audit. The next audit
report will include a summary that
describes the status of ODOT’s
corrective and other actions taken in
response to this audit’s conclusions.
[FR Doc. 2019–04231 Filed 3–7–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA–2019–0023]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Revision of an Approved
Information Collection: Hours of
Service (HOS) of Drivers Regulations
FMCSA, DOT.
Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
E:\FR\FM\08MRN1.SGM
08MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 46 (Friday, March 8, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8560-8563]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-04231]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[FHWA Docket No. FHWA-2019-0001]
Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program; Ohio Department
of Transportation Audit Report
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice; request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21)
established the Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program that
allows a State to assume FHWA's environmental responsibilities for
environmental review, consultation, and compliance under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for Federal highway projects. When a
State assumes these Federal responsibilities, the State becomes solely
responsible and liable for carrying out the responsibilities it has
assumed, in lieu of FHWA. This program mandates annual audits during
each of the first 4 years of State participation to ensure compliance
with program requirements. This notice announces and solicits comments
on the third audit report for the Ohio Department of Transportation
(ODOT).
DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 8, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Mail or hand deliver comments to Docket Management Facility:
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, Washington, DC 20590. You may also submit comments
electronically at www.regulations.gov. All comments should include the
docket number that appears in the heading of this document. All
comments received will be available for examination and copying at the
above address from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. Those desiring notification of receipt of
comments must include a self-addressed, stamped postcard, or may print
the acknowledgment page that appears after submitting comments
electronically. Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments
in any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an
association, business, or labor union). The DOT posts these comments,
without edits, including any personal information the commenter
provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records
notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. James G. Gavin, Office of Project
Development and Environmental Review, (202) 366-1473,
James.Gavin@dot.gov, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, or Mr.
David Sett, Office of the Chief Counsel, (404) 562-3676,
david.sett@dot.gov, Federal Highway
[[Page 8561]]
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 60 Forsyth Street
8M5, Atlanta, GA 30303. Office hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access
An electronic copy of this notice may be downloaded from the
specific docket page at www.regulations.gov.
Background
The Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program, codified at 23
U.S.C. 327, commonly known as the NEPA Assignment Program, allows a
State to assume FHWA's responsibilities for environmental review,
consultation, and compliance for Federal highway projects. When a State
assumes these Federal responsibilities, the State becomes solely liable
for carrying out the responsibilities it has assumed, in lieu of FHWA.
The ODOT published its application for assumption under the NEPA
Assignment Program on April 12, 2015, and made it available for public
comment for 30 days. After considering public comments, ODOT submitted
its application to FHWA on May 27, 2015. The application served as the
basis for developing the memorandum of understanding (MOU) that
identifies the responsibilities and obligations that ODOT would assume.
The FHWA published a notice of the draft MOU in the Federal Register on
October 15, 2015, at 80 FR 62153, with a 30-day comment period to
solicit the views of the public and Federal agencies. After the comment
period closed, FHWA and ODOT considered comments and executed the MOU.
Section 327(g) of Title 23, U.S.C., requires the Secretary to
conduct annual audits to ensure compliance with the MOU during each of
the first 4 years of State participation and, after the fourth year,
monitor compliance. The results of each audit must be made available
for public comment. The first audit report of ODOT compliance was
finalized on July 7, 2017. The second audit report of ODOT compliance
was finalized on October 3, 2018. This notice announces the
availability of the third audit report for ODOT and solicits public
comment on same.
Authority: Section 1313 of Public Law 112-141; Section 6005 of
Public Law 109-59; 23 U.S.C. 327; 23 CFR 773.
Issued on: March 1, 2019.
Brandye L. Hendrickson,
Deputy Administrator, Federal Highway Administration.
Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program
Draft FHWA Audit of the Ohio Department of Transportation
August 5, 2017 to August 10, 2018
Executive Summary
This is the third audit of the Ohio Department of Transportation's
(ODOT) assumption of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
responsibilities, conducted by a team of Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) staff (the team). The ODOT made the effective date of the
project-level NEPA and environmental review responsibilities it assumed
from FHWA on December 28, 2015, as specified in a memorandum of
understanding (MOU) signed on December 11, 2015, and amended on June 6,
2018. Within ODOT, the Division of Planning Office of Environmental
Services (OES) is responsible to manage and deliver the environmental
program. This audit examined ODOT's performance under the MOU regarding
responsibilities and obligations assigned therein.
Prior to the on-site visit, the team performed reviews of ODOT's
project NEPA approval documentation in EnviroNet (ODOT's official
electronic environmental document filing system). This audit consisted
of a review of a sample of 39 higher-risk project files out of 1,042
approved documents for Federal projects in ODOT's EnviroNet system with
an environmental approval date between April 1, 2017, and March 31,
2018. The team also reviewed ODOT's response to the pre-audit
information request (PAIR) and ODOT's Self-Assessment report. In
addition, the team reviewed ODOT's environmental processes, manuals,
and guidance; ODOT NEPA Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC)
Processes and Procedures; and the ODOT NEPA Assignment Training Plan
(collectively, ``ODOT procedures''). The team conducted an on-site
review during the week of August 6 to August 10, 2018. The team
conducted interviews with ODOT's central office staff on August 6 and
with three district office staffs on August 7. The team also
interviewed staff with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR)
on July 23, 2018, as part of the review.
Overall, the team found evidence that ODOT continues to make
reasonable progress in implementing the NEPA Assignment Program based
on Audit 1 and Audit 2 observations and demonstrated commitment to
success of the program. The team found zero non-compliance observations
but did note six general observations.
Background
The Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program (NEPA
Assignment Program) allows a State to assume FHWA's responsibilities
for review, consultation, and compliance with environmental laws for
Federal-aid highway projects. When a State assumes these
responsibilities, it becomes solely responsible and liable for carrying
out the responsibilities assumed, in lieu of FHWA.
The State of Ohio represented by ODOT completed the application
process and entered an MOU with FHWA on December 28, 2015, and amended
on June 6, 2018. With this agreement, ODOT assumed FHWA's project
approval responsibilities under NEPA and NEPA-related Federal
environmental laws.
The FHWA is obligated to conduct four annual compliance audits of
ODOT's compliance with the provisions of the MOU. Audits serve as
FHWA's primary mechanism of determining ODOT's compliance with the MOU,
applicable Federal laws and policies, evaluating ODOT's progress toward
achieving the performance measures identified in the MOU, and
collecting information needed for the Secretary's annual report to
Congress.
The team provided a draft of this report to ODOT for its review and
the team considered the resulting comments in preparing this draft,
which will be available for public review and comment. The FHWA will
consider any public comments on this draft in finalizing the report.
Scope and Methodology
The team conducted a careful examination of the ODOT NEPA
Assignment Program through a review of ODOT procedures and project
documentation, ODOT's PAIR response, and the self-assessment summary
report, as well as interviews with ODOT central office and district
environmental staff and resource agency staff. This review focuses on
the following six NEPA Assignment Program elements: (1) program
management; (2) documentation and records management; (3) QA/QC; (4)
legal sufficiency; (5) performance measurement; and (6) training.
The PAIR consisted of 18 questions, based on the responsibilities
assigned to ODOT in the MOU. The team reviewed ODOT's response and
compared the responses to ODOT's written
[[Page 8562]]
procedures. The team utilized ODOT's responses to draft interview
questions to clarify information in ODOT's PAIR response.
The ODOT provided its NEPA Assignment Self-Assessment summary
report 30 days prior to the team's on-site review. The team considered
this summary report both in focusing on issues during the project file
reviews and in drafting interview questions. The report was compared
against the previous year's self-assessment report and the requirements
in the MOU to identify any trends.
Between March 16 and May 31, 2018, the team conducted a project
file review by identifying and reviewing 39 higher-risk project files
out of 1,042 approved documents of Federal-aid projects in ODOT's
EnviroNet system with an environmental approval date between April 1,
2017, and March 31, 2018. The selection of these projects was based on
a 100 percent sampling of d-listed Categorical Exclusions (CE), as well
as all Environmental Assessments (EA) and Environmental Impact
Statements (EIS). The team excluded from review those projects approved
by ODOT under 23 CFR 771.117(c) (c-listed CEs) based on the review
performance of those types of projects since ODOT assumed NEPA
responsibilities in 2015. The projects reviewed represented all
remaining NEPA classes of action available, including projects
representing 9 out of 12 ODOT Districts and the Ohio Rail Development
Commission (ORDC).
In addition, the team reviewed ODOT's project file review
associated with its Self-Assessment to determine if ODOT evaluated its
projects in a similar fashion and using similar standards to that of
the Federal portion of this review. The ODOT reviewed projects within
the same sampling period as FHWA, however, ODOT samples included
Federal-aid and State-only funded projects. The ODOT conducts NEPA on
all projects regardless of funding source as they routinely convert
funding from State to Federal later via the Advanced Construction (AC)
process. The ODOT reviewed 248 projects, including 186 c-listed
projects, 61 d-listed projects, and 1 EA. The team determined the State
performed a rigorous annual QA review of its own projects.
During the on-site review week, the team conducted interviews with
21 ODOT staff members at the central office and three districts:
District 6 (Delaware); District 7 (Sydney); and District 10 (Marietta).
Interviewees included ODOT OES management and subject matter experts,
Office of Diversity and Inclusion (ODI), District Environmental
Coordinators (DEC), environmental staff, and public information
officers, representing a diverse range of expertise and experience.
These interviews focused on NEPA Assignment with emphasis on items
where additional information was deemed necessary to complete the
review.
The team conducted interviews 2 weeks prior to the on-site review
with personnel from the ODNR. The ODNR staff provided valuable insight
to the review team regarding ODOT's performance and relationships with
partner resource agencies.
The team identified gaps between the information from the desktop
review of ODOT procedures, PAIR, self-assessment, project file review,
and interviews. The team documented the results of its reviews and
interviews and consolidated the results into related topics or themes.
From these topics or themes, the team developed the review observations
and successful practices. The audit results are described below.
Overall, the team found evidence that ODOT continues to make
reasonable progress in implementing the NEPA Assignment Program based
on the Audit 1 and Audit 2 observations and demonstrated commitment to
success of the program. The team found zero non-compliance observations
but did note six general observations.
The FHWA team urges ODOT to monitor and make additional
improvements to the program for continued successes of the program.
Observations and Successful Practices
Program Management
Observation 1: Opportunities exist to strengthen coordination
between ODOT OES and ODOT ODI.
The team encourages ODOT to ensure that a proper level of
communication exists between OES and ODI in order to facilitate the
coordination of OES guidance and training with the ongoing ODOT-wide
Title VI program enhancements. The FHWA recognizes and is supportive of
the coordination and partnering efforts between OES and ODI undertaken
to date and stands ready to contribute to these efforts, where
appropriate.
Observation 2: There are inconsistencies in the communication and
management of ODOT policy, manuals, procedures, and guidance.
The ODOT developed and implemented over 140 procedures to implement
NEPA Assignment, manage the program, and provide detailed instruction
for completion of environmental actions to document preparers and
reviewers. The ODOT shares these documents and other guidance with NEPA
practitioners on a quarterly basis via email, NEPA chats and DEC
Meetings, and via training. In addition, these documents are saved on a
local drive accessible by ODOT environmental staff and posted to ODOT's
website for consultants and local public agencies.
The FHWA found that policies, manuals, and other guidance documents
are readily available. However, interviews with district staff indicate
that opportunities exist to improve upon the communication of this
documentation in order to ensure more consistent implementation. In
addition, there are examples of training materials containing
information that is not included in the related guidance documents. In
these cases, some environmental staff indicated they rely on the
information in the guidance while others indicated they rely on OES
instruction provided verbally or through email. Information prepared
for ODOT staff should exhibit consistency, regardless of the form in
which its presented.
Observation 3: Inconsistencies remain in Public Involvement (PI)
activities specifically regarding outreach activities to underserved
and protected populations.
The team notes and appreciates ongoing efforts by ODOT in response
to previous audit recommendations for improvement and enhancement of
the PI process. The team was provided examples of effective PI efforts
during the interviews with district staff. However, as demonstrated in
the project file reviews and the interviews, there remain areas of note
in application and consistency of public involvement efforts and
activities. During FHWA's review, ODOT stated that the intent of its
process regarding Environmental Justice (EJ) is to identify any
disproportionately high and adverse impacts and disparate impacts on
the associated populations. Although OES staff indicated that they have
updated the guidance, developed new training, and provided forums for
instructive discussion for all environmental staff, consultants, and
Local Public Agencies, it is not clear how ODOT will ensure that
outreach efforts and activities are commensurate with the level of
impact or potential mitigation, as there is no discussion of outreach
efforts in the ODOT-OES' Underserved Populations Guidance. It is
unclear that the distinctions and specific requirements of protected
populations are fully discerned and distinguished from each
[[Page 8563]]
other in the guidance document, including thresholds and requirements.
In addition, interview responses within OES indicated a difference of
opinion in terms of what constituted outreach to underserved and
protected populations.
At the district level, ODOT district environmental staff indicated
that they had inconsistent information on how to determine if there
were protected populations and how to conduct the required outreach
activities, even if there were no disproportionately negative impacts.
However, OES is trusting the districts, on projects with a lower level
of NEPA classification, to ensure full and fair participation by
underserved and protected populations in public involvement, NEPA and
the transportation decisionmaking processes.
Documentation and Records Management
Observation 4: Opportunities exist to continue improving
documentation in the areas of PI, EJ, and environmental commitments.
In response to previous audits and self-assessments, ODOT updated
many procedures relating to the NEPA process to improve its processes
and meet Federal requirements. The updates included changes to ODOT's
internal documentation and filing guidelines and updates to EnviroNet.
The review team thinks these changes have positively impacted the
program since Audits 1 and 2.
The quality of documentation for projects is trending in a positive
direction since Audits 1 and 2, as approximately 50 percent of all
projects reviewed had zero deficiencies noted by the team. However,
although there were examples of high quality PI, EJ reviews,
development of environmental commitments, and documentation for some
projects, these same elements were lacking in others. For the projects
reviewed, 42 percent of substantive comments made by the team related
to EJ, 22 percent to PI, 17 percent to environmental commitments, 11
percent to QA/QC, and 8 percent to documentation. This demonstrates
inconsistencies in practice, which may indicate additional training,
guidance, and/or quality controls may be needed to improve consistency
in application of documentation statewide.
The team met with ODOT to discuss individual deficiencies noted by
both FHWA and ODOT OES during this audit. The ODOT evaluated these
deficiencies at OES and then communicated them individually with the
districts. The ODOT remains committed to improvements in documentation,
with plans to continue updates to EnviroNet and guidance, as needed,
and with the training required to deliver results.
Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC)
Observation 5: There are variations in awareness, understanding,
and implementation of QA/QC process and procedures.
The inconsistencies and missing information noted in the
Documentation and Records Management section are an indication of
inconsistency in ODOT's QA/QC process. The team found inconsistencies
in awareness and use of peer reviews in the ODOT Districts, as well as
use of comments in EnviroNet. Selected ODOT OES and district
environmental staff said that they rely on the ODOT Central Office for
QC support. No training is provided exclusively for QA/QC.
Legal Sufficiency Review
The ODOT utilized its guidance for legal sufficiency to review one
Environmental Impact Statement Re-evaluation, one EA, and two
Individual Section 4(f) approvals.
Performance Measures
The development of Performance Measures is required in MOU Section
10.2. The ODOT has refined their Performance Measures to provide a
better overall indication of ODOT's execution of its responsibilities
as assigned by the MOU. The team found evidence that the results
obtained through the Performance Measures are beginning to provide
actionable feedback, allowing ODOT to make appropriate changes as it
manages its environmental program.
Training Program
During the previous audits, it was noted that ODOT has a robust
environmental training program and provides adequate budget and time
for staff to access a variety of internal and external training. To add
to the training program and plan, ODOT has complemented its
traditional, instructor-based training courses, quarterly DEC meetings,
and monthly NEPA chats with the development of several online courses.
During the audit, ODOT reported that 10 online courses are anticipated
to be available in August 2018, with an additional 19 online courses
anticipated to be developed within the year. As of October 2018, it is
not evident that these courses were yet deployed.
Observation 6: Opportunities exist to expand required and
continuous training to additional staff and develop additional
instructor-led or online training in NEPA-related subject areas.
Also, during the previous audit, it was noted ODOT's training plan
states that all ODOT environmental staff (both central and district
offices) and environmental consultants are required to take the pre-
qualification training courses. The ODOT should consider extending this
requirement to NEPA project managers and public involvement officers.
Extending the training to additional staff may improve public outreach
efforts and overall program delivery. The ODOT should focus on training
in NEPA and NEPA-related subject areas such as Limited English
Proficiency and Public Involvement. The FHWA encourages ODOT to include
specific EJ training opportunities in its training plan, such as the
Web-based course currently under development.
Next Steps
The FHWA provided a draft of this audit report to ODOT for a 14-day
review and comment period and considered ODOT's comments in developing
this draft report. In addition, FHWA will consider comments on the
draft report received from the public within the 30-day comment period
after publication in the Federal Register, pursuant to 23 U.S.C.
327(g). No later than 60 days after the close of the comment period,
FHWA will respond to all comments submitted, pursuant to 23 U.S.C.
327(g)(2)(B). Once finalized, FHWA will publish the final audit report
in the Federal Register.
The FHWA will consider the results of this audit in preparing the
scope of the next annual audit. The next audit report will include a
summary that describes the status of ODOT's corrective and other
actions taken in response to this audit's conclusions.
[FR Doc. 2019-04231 Filed 3-7-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P