Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program; Florida DOT Audit #3 Report, 36657-36661 [2020-13005]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 117 / Wednesday, June 17, 2020 / Notices
received will be posted without change.
Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit
personal identifying information from
comment submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish
to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File
Number SR–GEMX–2020–14 and
should be submitted on or before July 8,
2020.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.31
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020–12987 Filed 6–16–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Proposed Collection for OMB Review;
Comment Request
Upon Written Request, Copies Available
From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services,
100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549–2736
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Extension:
Rule 30b1–10, Form N–LIQUID
SEC File No. 270–803, OMB Control No.
3235–0754
Notice is hereby given that, pursuant
to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the
‘‘Commission’’) is soliciting comments
on the collection of information
summarized below. The Commission
plans to submit this existing collection
of information to the Office of
Management and Budget for extension
and approval.
17 CFR 270.30b1–10 (Rule 30b1–10)
and 17 CFR 274.223 (Form N–LIQUID)
require open-end investment
companies, including exchange-traded
funds that redeem in kind (‘‘In-Kind
ETFs’’) but not including money market
funds, to file a current report on Form
N–LIQUID on a non-public basis when
certain events related to their liquidity
occur. The information reported on
Form N–LIQUID concerns events under
which more than 15% of a fund’s or InKind ETF’s net assets are, or become,
illiquid investments that are assets as
defined in 17 CFR 270.22e–4 (rule 22e–
4) and when holdings in illiquid
investments are assets that previously
exceeded 15% of a fund’s net assets
have changed to be less than or equal to
31 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Jun 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
15% of the fund’s net assets.1 The
information reported on Form N–
LIQUID also regards events under which
a fund’s holdings in assets that are
highly liquid investments fall below the
fund’s highly liquid investment
minimum for more than 7 consecutive
calendar days. A report on Form N–
LIQUID is required to be filed, as
applicable, within one business day of
the occurrence of one or more of these
events.2
Based on staff analysis, we estimate
that the Commission receives an average
of 30 reports per year on Form N–
LIQUID.3 When filing a report on Form
N–LIQUID, staff estimates that a fund
will spend on average approximately 4
hours of an in-house attorney’s time and
1 hour of an in-house accountant’s time
to prepare, review, and submit Form N–
LIQUID, at a total time cost of $1,894.4
Accordingly, in the aggregate, staff
estimates that compliance with rule
30b1–10 and Form N–LIQUID will
result in a total annual burden of
approximately 150 burden hours and
total annual time costs of approximately
$56,820.5
Compliance with rule 30b1–10 is
mandatory for all open-end investment
companies, other than money market
funds. Responses to the disclosure
requirements will be kept confidential.
The estimate of average burden hours is
made solely for the purposes of the
PRA. The estimate is not derived from
a comprehensive or even a
representative survey or study of the
costs of Commission rules. Complying
with this collection of information
requirement is necessary to enable the
36657
Commission to receive information on
fund liquidity events more uniformly
and efficiently, and to enhance the
Commission’s oversight of funds when
significant liquidity events occur and its
ability to respond to market events. An
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and
a person is not required to respond to
a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid control
number.
Written comments are invited on: (a)
Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate
of the burden of the collection of
information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information collected; and (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including
through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology. Consideration will be given
to comments and suggestions submitted
in writing within 60 days of this
publication.
Please direct your written comments
to David Bottom, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and
Exchange Commission, C/O Cynthia
Roscoe, 100 F Street NE, Washington,
DC 20549; or send an email to: PRA_
Mailbox@sec.gov.
Dated: June 12, 2020.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020–13065 Filed 6–16–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
See Item C.1 and Item C.2 of Part A of Form
N–LIQUID.
2 See General Instruction A.2 of Form N–LIQUID.
3 The estimated number of annual filings is based
on the number of filings in 2019, adjusted because
certain of these filings would no longer be
necessary going forward and a subset of funds were
not subject to the filing requirement for all of 2019.
4 This estimate is based on the following
calculations: (4 hours × $419/hour for an attorney
= $1,676), plus (1 hour × $218/hour for a senior
accountant = $218), for a combined total of 5 hours
at total time costs of $1,894. The estimates
concerning the wage rates for attorney and senior
accountant time are based on salary information for
the securities industry compiled by the Securities
Industry and Financial Markets Association. The
estimated wage figure is based on published rates
for in-house attorneys and senior accountants,
modified to account for a 1,800-hour work-year and
inflation, and multiplied by 5.35 to account for
bonuses, firm size, employee benefits, and
overhead. See Securities Industry and Financial
Markets Association, Report on Management &
Professional Earnings in the Securities Industry
2013.
5 This estimate is based on the following
calculations: 30 reports filed per year × 5 hours per
report = approximately 150 total annual burden
hours. 30 reports filed per year × $1,894 in costs
per report = $56,820 total annual costs.
1
PO 00000
Frm 00131
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[FHWA Docket No. FHWA–2019–0040]
Surface Transportation Project
Delivery Program; Florida DOT Audit
#3 Report
Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA), U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Surface Transportation
Project Delivery Program allows a State
to assume FHWA’s environmental
responsibilities for review, consultation,
and compliance for Federal highway
projects. When a State assumes these
Federal responsibilities, the State
becomes solely responsible and liable
for the responsibilities it has assumed,
in lieu of FHWA. This program
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\17JNN1.SGM
17JNN1
36658
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 117 / Wednesday, June 17, 2020 / Notices
mandates annual audits during each of
the first four years to ensure the State’s
compliance with program requirements.
This notice makes available the final
report of the Florida Department of
Transportation’s (FDOT) third audit
under the program.
Ms.
Marisel Lopez Cruz, Office of Project
Development and Environmental
Review, (407) 867–6402, marisel.lopezcruz@dot.gov, or Mr. David Sett, Office
of the Chief Counsel, (404) 562–3676,
david.sett@dot.gov, Federal Highway
Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
Office hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access
An electronic copy of this notice may
be downloaded from the specific docket
page at www.regulations.gov.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
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. Effective December 14,
2016, FDOT assumed FHWA’s
responsibilities for environmental
review and the responsibilities for
reviews under other Federal
environmental requirements.
Section 327(g) of Title 23, U.S.C.,
requires the Secretary to conduct annual
audits to ensure compliance with the
memorandum of understanding during
each of the first four years of State
participation and, after the fourth year,
monitor compliance. The results of each
audit must be made available for public
comment. This notice finalizes the
findings of the third audit report on
FDOT participation in the program. A
draft version of this report was
published in the Federal Register on
February 21, 2020, at 85 FR 10212, and
was available for public review and
comments. The FHWA received no
responses to the Federal Register Notice
during the public comment period for
the draft report.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Jun 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
Authority: Section 1313 of Public Law
112–141; Section 6005 of Public Law 109–59;
23 U.S.C. 327; 23 CFR 773.
Nicole R. Nason,
Administrator, Federal Highway
Administration.
Final: Surface Transportation Project
Delivery Program, FHWA Audit #3 of
the Florida Department of
Transportation, May 2018 to April 2019
Executive Summary
This is the third audit of the Florida
Department of Transportation’s (FDOT)
assumption of the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
responsibilities under the Surface
Transportation Project Delivery
Program. Under the authority of 23
U.S.C. 327, FDOT and the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA)
executed a memorandum of
understanding (MOU) on December 14,
2016, whereby FHWA assigned, and
FDOT assumed, FHWA’s NEPA
responsibilities and liabilities for
Federal-aid highway projects and other
related environmental reviews for
transportation projects in Florida.
The FHWA formed a team in January
2019 to conduct an audit of FDOT’s
performance according to the terms of
the MOU. The team held internal
meetings to prepare for an on-site visit
to the Florida Division and FDOT
offices. Prior to the on-site visit, the
team reviewed FDOT’s 2019 Project
Development & Environment (PD&E)
Manual and NEPA project files, FDOT’s
response to FHWA’s pre-audit
information request (PAIR), and FDOT’s
NEPA Assignment Self Assessment
Summary Report. The team presented
initial project file observations to FDOT
Office of Environmental Management
(OEM) on August 1, 2019. The team
conducted interviews with FDOT and
prepared preliminary audit results from
September 23–26, 2019. The team
presented these preliminary
observations to FDOT OEM leadership
on September 27, 2019.
The FDOT continues to develop,
revise, and implement procedures and
processes required to carry out the
NEPA Assignment Program. Overall, the
team found that FDOT is committed to
delivering a successful NEPA Program.
This report describes numerous
successful practices and one noncompliance observation. The FDOT has
carried out the responsibilities it has
assumed in keeping with the intent of
the MOU and FDOT’s application.
Through this report, FHWA is notifying
FDOT of the one non-compliance
observation that requires FDOT to take
corrective action. By addressing the
PO 00000
Frm 00132
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
observation in this report, FDOT will
continue to assure a successful program.
The report concludes with the status of
FHWA’s non-compliance observations
from the first and second audit reviews,
including any FDOT self-imposed
corrective actions.
Background
The purpose of the audits performed
under the authority of 23 U.S.C. 327 is
to assess a State’s compliance with the
provisions of the MOU as well as all
applicable Federal statutes, regulations,
policies, and guidance. The FHWA’s
review and oversight obligation entails
the need to collect information to
evaluate the success of the NEPA
Assignment Program; to evaluate a
State’s progress toward achieving its
performance measures as specified in
the MOU; and to collect information for
the administration of the NEPA
Assignment Program. This report
summarizes the results of the third audit
in Florida and includes a summary
discussion that describes progress since
the last audit. Following this audit,
FHWA will conduct one more annual
NEPA Assignment Program audit.
Scope and Methodology
The overall scope of this audit review
is defined both in statute (23 U.S.C. 327)
and the MOU (Part 11). An audit
generally is defined as an official and
careful examination and verification of
accounts and records, especially of
financial accounts, by an independent
unbiased body. With regard to accounts
or financial records, audits may follow
a prescribed process or methodology
and be conducted by ‘‘auditors’’ who
have special training in those processes
or methods. The FHWA considers this
review to meet the definition of an audit
because it is an unbiased, independent,
official, and careful examination and
verification of records and information
about FDOT’s assumption of
environmental responsibilities.
The team consisted of NEPA subject
matter experts (SME) from FHWA
offices in Texas, Georgia, and
Headquarters, as well as staff from
FHWA’s Florida Division. The diverse
composition of the team, as well as the
process of developing the review report
and publishing it in the Federal
Register, are intended to make this audit
an unbiased official action taken by
FHWA.
The team conducted a careful
examination of FDOT policies,
guidance, and manuals pertaining to
NEPA responsibilities, as well as a
representative sample of FDOT’s project
files. Other documents, such as the
August 2019 PAIR responses and
E:\FR\FM\17JNN1.SGM
17JNN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 117 / Wednesday, June 17, 2020 / Notices
FDOT’s August 2019 Self Assessment
Summary Report, also informed this
review. In addition, the team
interviewed FDOT staff in person and
via video conference. This review is
organized around the six NEPA
Assignment Program elements: Program
management; documentation and
records management; quality assurance/
quality control (QA/QC); legal
sufficiency; performance measurement;
and training program. In addition, the
team considered three cross-cutting
focus areas: (1) Interchange Access
Requests (IAR); (2) project
authorizations; and (3) permanent
Emergency Repair (ER) projects.
The team defined the timeframe for
highway project environmental
approvals subject to this third audit to
be between May 2018 and April 2019,
when 616 projects were approved. The
team drew judgmental samples totaling
23 projects from data in FDOT’s online
file system, Statewide Environmental
Project Tracker (SWEPT). In the context
of this report, descriptions of
environmental documents are consistent
with FDOT’s PD&E Manual. The FHWA
judgmentally selected all Type 2
Categorical Exclusions (CEs) (21
projects) and all Environmental
Assessments (EA) with Findings of No
Significant Impacts (2 projects). The
audit team selected all IARs that were
pending for approval during the audit
period (five projects) to determine if
FDOT was following protocols for
environmental review. The team
reviewed all project authorization files
in the audit period (252 project files)
downloaded from FHWA Fiscal
Management Information System (FMIS)
to determine if the NEPA certification
was completed for these projects prior
to the authorization. For permanent ER
projects, FHWA judgmentally sampled
41 projects in SWEPT and FMIS and
identified those with construction
contracts to determine if the NEPA was
completed prior to authorization and if
the NEPA scope was consistent with the
contract.
The team submitted a PAIR to FDOT
that contained 20 questions covering all
6 NEPA Assignment Program elements.
The FDOT responses to the PAIR were
used to develop specific follow-up
questions for the on-site interviews with
FDOT staff.
The team conducted a total of 18
interviews. Interview participants
included staff from five FDOT District
offices, Districts 3 through 7, and the
FDOT Central Office. The team
interviewed FDOT legal, financial,
planning, and environmental staff.
The team compared FDOT policies
and procedures (including the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Jun 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
published 2019 PD&E Manual) for the
audit focus areas to the information
obtained during interviews and project
file reviews to determine if FDOT’s
performance of its MOU responsibilities
are in accordance with FDOT policies
and procedures and Federal
requirements. Individual observations
were documented during interviews and
reviews and combined under the six
NEPA Assignment Program elements.
The audit results are described below by
program element.
Overall Audit Opinion
The team recognizes that FDOT’s
efforts have included implementing the
requirements of the MOU by: Processing
and approving projects; refining
policies, procedures, and guidance
documents; refining the SWEPT
tracking system for ‘‘official project
files’’; training staff; implementing a
QA/QC Plan; and conducting a self
assessment for monitoring compliance
with the assumed responsibilities. The
team found evidence of FDOT’s
continuing efforts to train staff in
clarifying the roles and responsibilities
of FDOT staff, and in educating staff in
an effort to assure compliance with all
of the assigned responsibilities.
During the third audit, the team
identified numerous successful
practices and one non-compliance
observation that FDOT will need to
address through corrective actions.
These results came from a review of
FDOT procedures, Self Assessment,
PAIR responses, project files, and
interviews with FDOT personnel.
The FDOT has carried out the
responsibilities it has assumed
consistent with the intent of the MOU
and FDOT’s application. The team finds
that FDOT is in substantial compliance
with the terms of the MOU. By
addressing the observations in this
report, FDOT will continue to assure a
successful program.
Successful Practices and Observations
Successful practices are practices that
the team believes are positive, and
encourages FDOT to consider
continuing or expanding those programs
in the future. The team identified
numerous successful practices in this
report. Observations are items the team
would like to draw FDOT’s attention to,
which may improve processes,
procedures, and/or outcomes. The team
identified no observations in this report.
A non-compliance observation is an
instance where the team finds the State
is not in compliance or is deficient with
regard to a Federal regulation, statute,
guidance, policy, State procedure, or the
MOU. Non-compliance may also
PO 00000
Frm 00133
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
36659
include instances where the State has
failed to secure or maintain adequate
personnel and/or financial resources to
carry out the responsibilities they have
assumed. The FHWA expects the State
to develop and implement corrective
actions to address all non-compliance
observations. The team identified one
non-compliance observation during this
third audit.
The team acknowledges that sharing
initial results during the site visit
closeout and sharing the draft audit
report with FDOT provided them the
opportunity to clarify any observation,
as needed, and/or begin implementing
corrective actions to improve the
program. The FHWA will also consider
actions taken by FDOT to address these
observations as part of the scope of
Audit #4.
The Audit Report addresses all six
MOU program elements as separate
discussions.
Program Management
Successful Practices
The team learned through interviews
that FDOT has a strong process for
addressing its Self Assessment
corrective actions. The process includes
creating an action plan, dedicating staff
to the plan, and identifying timeframes
for follow up. The FHWA confirmed in
FDOT’s Self Assessment documentation
that FDOT provides a status regarding
its ‘‘opportunities for improvement’’
which includes a strong process for
corrective actions and a corrective
action status update section.
As FDOT’s NEPA Assignment
Program matures, communication
continues to improve between FDOT’s
SMEs, consultants, and FDOT’s District
staff. Through interviews the team
confirmed the improved
communication. For example, some
districts invite environmental staff to
the District Interchange Review
Committee meetings to discuss IAR
projects early in the process. The team
encourages FDOT to implement this
practice statewide. Another example of
good communication is the process that
OEM uses to implement new FHWA
guidance. When new guidance is issued
and FDOT changes its process, it
communicates with the districts through
changes in the manuals, periodic
meetings, and training. During the audit,
the team confirmed broad awareness of
how FDOT chose to implement the
FHWA June 12, 2018, Additional
Flexibilities in CEs memorandum.
The team learned that the
enhancements to the SWEPT system
continue to create efficiencies for the
NEPA Assignment Program
E:\FR\FM\17JNN1.SGM
17JNN1
36660
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 117 / Wednesday, June 17, 2020 / Notices
implementation and FDOT continues to
dedicate resources to improve SWEPT.
Interviewees stated that these
investments have resulted in more
consistent documentation from the
districts. Additional enhancements to
SWEPT include cross references to
FDOT’s PD&E manual and updates to
the Type 1 CE, Type 2 CE, and
reevaluation forms. The FDOT OEM
now has direct responsibility and
control for SWEPT updates, which
allows for quicker revisions to SWEPT
to adapt to its changing needs. For
example, when FDOT implemented its
process for documenting legal
sufficiency determinations,
modifications to SWEPT were needed to
allow users to specify the type of legal
sufficiency review being performed,
such as for an Environmental Impact
Statement or a Section 4(f) evaluation.
The FDOT expeditiously addressed this
need and now SWEPT permits users to
distinguish type of document being
reviewed for legal sufficiency.
The SWEPT is considered by FDOT
staff to be a significant program level
QA/QC tool as it requires input of
needed information prior to allowing
the project to advance further. For
example, a project cannot advance to
FDOT OEM for QA/QC review until the
QA/QC review is completed at the
district level by the Environmental
Administrator and the Engineering
Administrator. Another example of
SWEPT’s QA/QC control is the
environmental certification process. The
environmental certification document is
used to document NEPA completion to
authorize Federal funding in subsequent
project phases. The SWEPT will
generate the environmental certification
only after NEPA has been approved.
Quality Assurance/Quality Control
Successful Practice
During interviews, FDOT staff
presented the Electronic Review
Comments internal review platform as a
tool that allows continuous engagement
among environmental staff and SMEs.
This tool allows continuous QC as the
environmental project is developed.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Legal Sufficiency
The team’s review of FDOT’s legal
sufficiency program found that FDOT
has continued to structure the legal
sufficiency process for the NEPA
Assignment Program by having in-house
counsel, as well as outside counsel with
NEPA experience, available. The FDOT
has made one legal sufficiency Section
4(f) determination during the audit time
frame, implementing the internal
procedures that were previously
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Jun 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
developed. The FDOT’s Office of
General Counsel (OGC) continues to
participate in monthly coordination
meetings and topic-specific meetings
with OEM and the districts. It also
reviews other environmental documents
when requested for legal input. There
remains close collaboration throughout
the process amongst and between OGC,
OEM, and the district attorneys.
Successful Practice
The SWEPT has a form that has the
capability to document the legal
sufficiency finding within the system.
This tool ensures that proper
documentation is captured in the
project file without the need for
additional supporting documentation.
Training Program
The FDOT’s training program
continues to be exemplary. The FDOT
has continued to focus resources
ensuring staff, other agencies, and
consultants are adequately trained. In
the last year, FDOT again trained over
2,000 people in their NEPA process,
endangered species, traffic analysis,
cultural resources, and noise technical
areas. Through information presented in
the FDOT Self Assessment and through
interviews of FDOT staff, the review
team learned of the variety in and
growth of FDOT’s environmental
training program.
The FDOT OEM promotes staff
awareness of its Self Assessments
through multiple notices to districts, a
statewide Self Assessment kick-off
Webinar, and the use of Self Assessment
computer-based training courses.
Through information presented in the
FDOT Self Assessment and through
interviews of FDOT staff, the team
learned that FDOT is one of the few
NEPA assignment States to internally
promote its self assessments.
Successful Practice
The team learned through interviews
of OEM staff that FDOT has increased
its environmental training outreach to
multiple disciplines. The
Transportation Symposium has
included environmental review training
on a wide spectrum of topics. This year,
the number of environmental training
courses at the symposium increased by
about 50 percent and were targeted to
individuals from a broad range of
disciplines.
The team also learned that FDOT’s
YouTube channel includes a variety of
environmental training Webinars and
videos. The FDOT has migrated its Web
trainings to YouTube so that trainings
are available and accessible to staff and
PO 00000
Frm 00134
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the public through the MyFDOT
channel.
Performance Measures
Based on information reported in
FDOT’s 2019 Self Assessment Summary
Report, FDOT is meeting or exceeding
all performance measures.
Documentation and Records
Management
The team reviewed the environmental
documentation for 41 permanent repair
projects to determine if the NEPA was
completed prior to authorization and if
the NEPA scope was consistent with the
contract. All 41 permanent ER projects
were determined compliant.
The team reviewed all IAR projects
(five projects) to determine if FDOT was
following protocols for environmental
review. The projects selected for the IAR
file review had NEPA documents that
were still under development; therefore,
no conclusions could be drawn from the
project file review.
Successful Practice
The FDOT Central Office has
procedures that ensure IAR projects
receive NEPA review as part of the
FHWA IAR approval. Systems planning
staff have been trained in SWEPT and
verify that the NEPA documentation
supports FHWA’s NEPA review
expectations for IAR projects.
Non-Compliance Observation #1:
Some FDOT project files contain
insufficient documentation to support
the project authorization, environmental
analysis, or decision.
The team reviewed environmental
documentation for 21 Type 2 CEs and 2
EAs to determine if the environmental
review met Federal requirements. The
team found CEs missing U.S. Coast
Guard permits and Endangered Species
Act consultation documentation (two
projects). Finally, at the time FDOT
prepared a Finding of No Significant
Impact, the review team determined the
scope of the EA was inconsistent with
the State Transportation Improvement
Program.
The team also reviewed 252 Project
Authorization files to determine if the
NEPA certification was completed for
these projects prior to the authorization.
The team found that some Project
Authorizations did not have
documentation verifying that NEPA was
completed (18 projects).
The team’s observations on the
environmental documentation and on
the Project Authorization files were
shared with FDOT for its consideration
and initial responses. The team received
responses from FDOT either resolving
the observation or verifying missing
E:\FR\FM\17JNN1.SGM
17JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 117 / Wednesday, June 17, 2020 / Notices
documentation and/or procedural
deficiencies. While these projects were
found non-compliant at the time of the
review, the missing documents have
subsequently been uploaded by FDOT
or FDOT committed to implementing a
process improvement to address these
concerns.
Update from 2017 Audit #1, NonCompliance Observation #1 and 2018
Audit #2, Non-Compliance Observation
#1: Some FDOT project files contain
insufficient documentation to support
the environmental analysis or decision.
The FHWA reported a noncompliance observation related to some
FDOT project files that lacked
documentation to support the
environmental analysis or decision as
part of Audit #1 and Audit #2. The
FDOT and FHWA have productively
worked together to resolve
documentation issues from these
previous audits. The FDOT continues to
implement process improvements to
address noted procedural deficiencies.
These improvements will be considered
during the next audit.
The FHWA and FDOT have also been
working together through previous
audits to mutually understand FDOT’s
implementation of reasonable assurance
that the project impacts would not be
significant when full compliance for a
project is not possible by the time the
NEPA decision has been prepared.
Through the interviews and project file
reviews, the team received clarification
from FDOT regarding the differences in
the applicability of standard
specifications and special provisions
when addressing endangered species
impacts and consultation, and how
these tools support reasonable
assurances of no significant impacts to
support the NEPA decision. In addition,
the team learned that FDOT provided
training and clarifications internally to
ensure reasonable assurance is
appropriately applied during NEPA
document development.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Finalizing This Report
The FHWA received no responses to
the Federal Register Notice during the
public comment period for the draft
report. This report is a finalized version
of the draft report without substantive
changes.
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 FDOT’s
corrective and other actions taken in
response to this audit’s conclusions.
[FR Doc. 2020–13005 Filed 6–16–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Jun 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[FHWA Docket No. FHWA–2020–0008]
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:
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
four years of State participation to
ensure compliance with program
requirements. This notice announces
and solicits comments on the fourth and
final audit report for the Ohio
Department of Transportation (ODOT).
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before July 17, 2020.
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 notifications of receipt of
comments must include a selfaddressed, stamped postcard or you
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
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00135
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
36661
described in the system of records
notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can
be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Megan Cogburn, Office of Project
Development and Environmental
Review, (202) 366–2056,
megan.cogburn@dot.gov; or Mr. David
Sett, Office of the Chief Counsel, (404)
562–3676, david.sett@dot.gov; Federal
Highway Administration, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590. 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 United
States Code (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 the 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. The FHWA and
ODOT amended the MOU on June 6,
2018, to update recent national program
guidance and objectives for consistency
with other States under the NEPA
Assignment Program.
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 four years
of State participation and, after the
fourth year, monitor compliance. The
results of each audit must be made
E:\FR\FM\17JNN1.SGM
17JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 117 (Wednesday, June 17, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36657-36661]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-13005]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[FHWA Docket No. FHWA-2019-0040]
Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program; Florida DOT
Audit #3 Report
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program allows a
State to assume FHWA's environmental responsibilities for review,
consultation, and compliance for Federal highway projects. When a State
assumes these Federal responsibilities, the State becomes solely
responsible and liable for the responsibilities it has assumed, in lieu
of FHWA. This program
[[Page 36658]]
mandates annual audits during each of the first four years to ensure
the State's compliance with program requirements. This notice makes
available the final report of the Florida Department of
Transportation's (FDOT) third audit under the program.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Marisel Lopez Cruz, Office of
Project Development and Environmental Review, (407) 867-6402,
[email protected], or Mr. David Sett, Office of the Chief
Counsel, (404) 562-3676, [email protected], Federal Highway
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. 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.
Effective December 14, 2016, FDOT assumed FHWA's responsibilities for
environmental review and the responsibilities for reviews under other
Federal environmental requirements.
Section 327(g) of Title 23, U.S.C., requires the Secretary to
conduct annual audits to ensure compliance with the memorandum of
understanding during each of the first four years of State
participation and, after the fourth year, monitor compliance. The
results of each audit must be made available for public comment. This
notice finalizes the findings of the third audit report on FDOT
participation in the program. A draft version of this report was
published in the Federal Register on February 21, 2020, at 85 FR 10212,
and was available for public review and comments. The FHWA received no
responses to the Federal Register Notice during the public comment
period for the draft report.
Authority: Section 1313 of Public Law 112-141; Section 6005 of
Public Law 109-59; 23 U.S.C. 327; 23 CFR 773.
Nicole R. Nason,
Administrator, Federal Highway Administration.
Final: Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program, FHWA Audit #3
of the Florida Department of Transportation, May 2018 to April 2019
Executive Summary
This is the third audit of the Florida Department of
Transportation's (FDOT) assumption of the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) responsibilities under the Surface Transportation Project
Delivery Program. Under the authority of 23 U.S.C. 327, FDOT and the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) executed a memorandum of
understanding (MOU) on December 14, 2016, whereby FHWA assigned, and
FDOT assumed, FHWA's NEPA responsibilities and liabilities for Federal-
aid highway projects and other related environmental reviews for
transportation projects in Florida.
The FHWA formed a team in January 2019 to conduct an audit of
FDOT's performance according to the terms of the MOU. The team held
internal meetings to prepare for an on-site visit to the Florida
Division and FDOT offices. Prior to the on-site visit, the team
reviewed FDOT's 2019 Project Development & Environment (PD&E) Manual
and NEPA project files, FDOT's response to FHWA's pre-audit information
request (PAIR), and FDOT's NEPA Assignment Self Assessment Summary
Report. The team presented initial project file observations to FDOT
Office of Environmental Management (OEM) on August 1, 2019. The team
conducted interviews with FDOT and prepared preliminary audit results
from September 23-26, 2019. The team presented these preliminary
observations to FDOT OEM leadership on September 27, 2019.
The FDOT continues to develop, revise, and implement procedures and
processes required to carry out the NEPA Assignment Program. Overall,
the team found that FDOT is committed to delivering a successful NEPA
Program. This report describes numerous successful practices and one
non-compliance observation. The FDOT has carried out the
responsibilities it has assumed in keeping with the intent of the MOU
and FDOT's application. Through this report, FHWA is notifying FDOT of
the one non-compliance observation that requires FDOT to take
corrective action. By addressing the observation in this report, FDOT
will continue to assure a successful program. The report concludes with
the status of FHWA's non-compliance observations from the first and
second audit reviews, including any FDOT self-imposed corrective
actions.
Background
The purpose of the audits performed under the authority of 23
U.S.C. 327 is to assess a State's compliance with the provisions of the
MOU as well as all applicable Federal statutes, regulations, policies,
and guidance. The FHWA's review and oversight obligation entails the
need to collect information to evaluate the success of the NEPA
Assignment Program; to evaluate a State's progress toward achieving its
performance measures as specified in the MOU; and to collect
information for the administration of the NEPA Assignment Program. This
report summarizes the results of the third audit in Florida and
includes a summary discussion that describes progress since the last
audit. Following this audit, FHWA will conduct one more annual NEPA
Assignment Program audit.
Scope and Methodology
The overall scope of this audit review is defined both in statute
(23 U.S.C. 327) and the MOU (Part 11). An audit generally is defined as
an official and careful examination and verification of accounts and
records, especially of financial accounts, by an independent unbiased
body. With regard to accounts or financial records, audits may follow a
prescribed process or methodology and be conducted by ``auditors'' who
have special training in those processes or methods. The FHWA considers
this review to meet the definition of an audit because it is an
unbiased, independent, official, and careful examination and
verification of records and information about FDOT's assumption of
environmental responsibilities.
The team consisted of NEPA subject matter experts (SME) from FHWA
offices in Texas, Georgia, and Headquarters, as well as staff from
FHWA's Florida Division. The diverse composition of the team, as well
as the process of developing the review report and publishing it in the
Federal Register, are intended to make this audit an unbiased official
action taken by FHWA.
The team conducted a careful examination of FDOT policies,
guidance, and manuals pertaining to NEPA responsibilities, as well as a
representative sample of FDOT's project files. Other documents, such as
the August 2019 PAIR responses and
[[Page 36659]]
FDOT's August 2019 Self Assessment Summary Report, also informed this
review. In addition, the team interviewed FDOT staff in person and via
video conference. This review is organized around the six NEPA
Assignment Program elements: Program management; documentation and
records management; quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC); legal
sufficiency; performance measurement; and training program. In
addition, the team considered three cross-cutting focus areas: (1)
Interchange Access Requests (IAR); (2) project authorizations; and (3)
permanent Emergency Repair (ER) projects.
The team defined the timeframe for highway project environmental
approvals subject to this third audit to be between May 2018 and April
2019, when 616 projects were approved. The team drew judgmental samples
totaling 23 projects from data in FDOT's online file system, Statewide
Environmental Project Tracker (SWEPT). In the context of this report,
descriptions of environmental documents are consistent with FDOT's PD&E
Manual. The FHWA judgmentally selected all Type 2 Categorical
Exclusions (CEs) (21 projects) and all Environmental Assessments (EA)
with Findings of No Significant Impacts (2 projects). The audit team
selected all IARs that were pending for approval during the audit
period (five projects) to determine if FDOT was following protocols for
environmental review. The team reviewed all project authorization files
in the audit period (252 project files) downloaded from FHWA Fiscal
Management Information System (FMIS) to determine if the NEPA
certification was completed for these projects prior to the
authorization. For permanent ER projects, FHWA judgmentally sampled 41
projects in SWEPT and FMIS and identified those with construction
contracts to determine if the NEPA was completed prior to authorization
and if the NEPA scope was consistent with the contract.
The team submitted a PAIR to FDOT that contained 20 questions
covering all 6 NEPA Assignment Program elements. The FDOT responses to
the PAIR were used to develop specific follow-up questions for the on-
site interviews with FDOT staff.
The team conducted a total of 18 interviews. Interview participants
included staff from five FDOT District offices, Districts 3 through 7,
and the FDOT Central Office. The team interviewed FDOT legal,
financial, planning, and environmental staff.
The team compared FDOT policies and procedures (including the
published 2019 PD&E Manual) for the audit focus areas to the
information obtained during interviews and project file reviews to
determine if FDOT's performance of its MOU responsibilities are in
accordance with FDOT policies and procedures and Federal requirements.
Individual observations were documented during interviews and reviews
and combined under the six NEPA Assignment Program elements. The audit
results are described below by program element.
Overall Audit Opinion
The team recognizes that FDOT's efforts have included implementing
the requirements of the MOU by: Processing and approving projects;
refining policies, procedures, and guidance documents; refining the
SWEPT tracking system for ``official project files''; training staff;
implementing a QA/QC Plan; and conducting a self assessment for
monitoring compliance with the assumed responsibilities. The team found
evidence of FDOT's continuing efforts to train staff in clarifying the
roles and responsibilities of FDOT staff, and in educating staff in an
effort to assure compliance with all of the assigned responsibilities.
During the third audit, the team identified numerous successful
practices and one non-compliance observation that FDOT will need to
address through corrective actions. These results came from a review of
FDOT procedures, Self Assessment, PAIR responses, project files, and
interviews with FDOT personnel.
The FDOT has carried out the responsibilities it has assumed
consistent with the intent of the MOU and FDOT's application. The team
finds that FDOT is in substantial compliance with the terms of the MOU.
By addressing the observations in this report, FDOT will continue to
assure a successful program.
Successful Practices and Observations
Successful practices are practices that the team believes are
positive, and encourages FDOT to consider continuing or expanding those
programs in the future. The team identified numerous successful
practices in this report. Observations are items the team would like to
draw FDOT's attention to, which may improve processes, procedures, and/
or outcomes. The team identified no observations in this report.
A non-compliance observation is an instance where the team finds
the State is not in compliance or is deficient with regard to a Federal
regulation, statute, guidance, policy, State procedure, or the MOU.
Non-compliance may also include instances where the State has failed to
secure or maintain adequate personnel and/or financial resources to
carry out the responsibilities they have assumed. The FHWA expects the
State to develop and implement corrective actions to address all non-
compliance observations. The team identified one non-compliance
observation during this third audit.
The team acknowledges that sharing initial results during the site
visit closeout and sharing the draft audit report with FDOT provided
them the opportunity to clarify any observation, as needed, and/or
begin implementing corrective actions to improve the program. The FHWA
will also consider actions taken by FDOT to address these observations
as part of the scope of Audit #4.
The Audit Report addresses all six MOU program elements as separate
discussions.
Program Management
Successful Practices
The team learned through interviews that FDOT has a strong process
for addressing its Self Assessment corrective actions. The process
includes creating an action plan, dedicating staff to the plan, and
identifying timeframes for follow up. The FHWA confirmed in FDOT's Self
Assessment documentation that FDOT provides a status regarding its
``opportunities for improvement'' which includes a strong process for
corrective actions and a corrective action status update section.
As FDOT's NEPA Assignment Program matures, communication continues
to improve between FDOT's SMEs, consultants, and FDOT's District staff.
Through interviews the team confirmed the improved communication. For
example, some districts invite environmental staff to the District
Interchange Review Committee meetings to discuss IAR projects early in
the process. The team encourages FDOT to implement this practice
statewide. Another example of good communication is the process that
OEM uses to implement new FHWA guidance. When new guidance is issued
and FDOT changes its process, it communicates with the districts
through changes in the manuals, periodic meetings, and training. During
the audit, the team confirmed broad awareness of how FDOT chose to
implement the FHWA June 12, 2018, Additional Flexibilities in CEs
memorandum.
The team learned that the enhancements to the SWEPT system continue
to create efficiencies for the NEPA Assignment Program
[[Page 36660]]
implementation and FDOT continues to dedicate resources to improve
SWEPT. Interviewees stated that these investments have resulted in more
consistent documentation from the districts. Additional enhancements to
SWEPT include cross references to FDOT's PD&E manual and updates to the
Type 1 CE, Type 2 CE, and reevaluation forms. The FDOT OEM now has
direct responsibility and control for SWEPT updates, which allows for
quicker revisions to SWEPT to adapt to its changing needs. For example,
when FDOT implemented its process for documenting legal sufficiency
determinations, modifications to SWEPT were needed to allow users to
specify the type of legal sufficiency review being performed, such as
for an Environmental Impact Statement or a Section 4(f) evaluation. The
FDOT expeditiously addressed this need and now SWEPT permits users to
distinguish type of document being reviewed for legal sufficiency.
The SWEPT is considered by FDOT staff to be a significant program
level QA/QC tool as it requires input of needed information prior to
allowing the project to advance further. For example, a project cannot
advance to FDOT OEM for QA/QC review until the QA/QC review is
completed at the district level by the Environmental Administrator and
the Engineering Administrator. Another example of SWEPT's QA/QC control
is the environmental certification process. The environmental
certification document is used to document NEPA completion to authorize
Federal funding in subsequent project phases. The SWEPT will generate
the environmental certification only after NEPA has been approved.
Quality Assurance/Quality Control
Successful Practice
During interviews, FDOT staff presented the Electronic Review
Comments internal review platform as a tool that allows continuous
engagement among environmental staff and SMEs. This tool allows
continuous QC as the environmental project is developed.
Legal Sufficiency
The team's review of FDOT's legal sufficiency program found that
FDOT has continued to structure the legal sufficiency process for the
NEPA Assignment Program by having in-house counsel, as well as outside
counsel with NEPA experience, available. The FDOT has made one legal
sufficiency Section 4(f) determination during the audit time frame,
implementing the internal procedures that were previously developed.
The FDOT's Office of General Counsel (OGC) continues to participate in
monthly coordination meetings and topic-specific meetings with OEM and
the districts. It also reviews other environmental documents when
requested for legal input. There remains close collaboration throughout
the process amongst and between OGC, OEM, and the district attorneys.
Successful Practice
The SWEPT has a form that has the capability to document the legal
sufficiency finding within the system. This tool ensures that proper
documentation is captured in the project file without the need for
additional supporting documentation.
Training Program
The FDOT's training program continues to be exemplary. The FDOT has
continued to focus resources ensuring staff, other agencies, and
consultants are adequately trained. In the last year, FDOT again
trained over 2,000 people in their NEPA process, endangered species,
traffic analysis, cultural resources, and noise technical areas.
Through information presented in the FDOT Self Assessment and through
interviews of FDOT staff, the review team learned of the variety in and
growth of FDOT's environmental training program.
The FDOT OEM promotes staff awareness of its Self Assessments
through multiple notices to districts, a statewide Self Assessment
kick-off Webinar, and the use of Self Assessment computer-based
training courses. Through information presented in the FDOT Self
Assessment and through interviews of FDOT staff, the team learned that
FDOT is one of the few NEPA assignment States to internally promote its
self assessments.
Successful Practice
The team learned through interviews of OEM staff that FDOT has
increased its environmental training outreach to multiple disciplines.
The Transportation Symposium has included environmental review training
on a wide spectrum of topics. This year, the number of environmental
training courses at the symposium increased by about 50 percent and
were targeted to individuals from a broad range of disciplines.
The team also learned that FDOT's YouTube channel includes a
variety of environmental training Webinars and videos. The FDOT has
migrated its Web trainings to YouTube so that trainings are available
and accessible to staff and the public through the MyFDOT channel.
Performance Measures
Based on information reported in FDOT's 2019 Self Assessment
Summary Report, FDOT is meeting or exceeding all performance measures.
Documentation and Records Management
The team reviewed the environmental documentation for 41 permanent
repair projects to determine if the NEPA was completed prior to
authorization and if the NEPA scope was consistent with the contract.
All 41 permanent ER projects were determined compliant.
The team reviewed all IAR projects (five projects) to determine if
FDOT was following protocols for environmental review. The projects
selected for the IAR file review had NEPA documents that were still
under development; therefore, no conclusions could be drawn from the
project file review.
Successful Practice
The FDOT Central Office has procedures that ensure IAR projects
receive NEPA review as part of the FHWA IAR approval. Systems planning
staff have been trained in SWEPT and verify that the NEPA documentation
supports FHWA's NEPA review expectations for IAR projects.
Non-Compliance Observation #1: Some FDOT project files contain
insufficient documentation to support the project authorization,
environmental analysis, or decision.
The team reviewed environmental documentation for 21 Type 2 CEs and
2 EAs to determine if the environmental review met Federal
requirements. The team found CEs missing U.S. Coast Guard permits and
Endangered Species Act consultation documentation (two projects).
Finally, at the time FDOT prepared a Finding of No Significant Impact,
the review team determined the scope of the EA was inconsistent with
the State Transportation Improvement Program.
The team also reviewed 252 Project Authorization files to determine
if the NEPA certification was completed for these projects prior to the
authorization. The team found that some Project Authorizations did not
have documentation verifying that NEPA was completed (18 projects).
The team's observations on the environmental documentation and on
the Project Authorization files were shared with FDOT for its
consideration and initial responses. The team received responses from
FDOT either resolving the observation or verifying missing
[[Page 36661]]
documentation and/or procedural deficiencies. While these projects were
found non-compliant at the time of the review, the missing documents
have subsequently been uploaded by FDOT or FDOT committed to
implementing a process improvement to address these concerns.
Update from 2017 Audit #1, Non-Compliance Observation #1 and 2018
Audit #2, Non-Compliance Observation #1: Some FDOT project files
contain insufficient documentation to support the environmental
analysis or decision.
The FHWA reported a non-compliance observation related to some FDOT
project files that lacked documentation to support the environmental
analysis or decision as part of Audit #1 and Audit #2. The FDOT and
FHWA have productively worked together to resolve documentation issues
from these previous audits. The FDOT continues to implement process
improvements to address noted procedural deficiencies. These
improvements will be considered during the next audit.
The FHWA and FDOT have also been working together through previous
audits to mutually understand FDOT's implementation of reasonable
assurance that the project impacts would not be significant when full
compliance for a project is not possible by the time the NEPA decision
has been prepared. Through the interviews and project file reviews, the
team received clarification from FDOT regarding the differences in the
applicability of standard specifications and special provisions when
addressing endangered species impacts and consultation, and how these
tools support reasonable assurances of no significant impacts to
support the NEPA decision. In addition, the team learned that FDOT
provided training and clarifications internally to ensure reasonable
assurance is appropriately applied during NEPA document development.
Finalizing This Report
The FHWA received no responses to the Federal Register Notice
during the public comment period for the draft report. This report is a
finalized version of the draft report without substantive changes.
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 FDOT's corrective and other
actions taken in response to this audit's conclusions.
[FR Doc. 2020-13005 Filed 6-16-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P