Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program; Alaska Department of Transportation Third Audit Report, 78914-78918 [2020-26790]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
78914
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 235 / Monday, December 7, 2020 / Notices
requirements under 49 CFR
1105.8(b)(3), because it will not
substantially change the level of
maintenance of railroad properties.
CPRC requests authority to control the
Tunnel by December 15, 2020, so that
the parties can close the transaction
before the end of the year. The
exemption will be effective December
15, 2020, and petitions to stay will be
due by December 10, 2020. Petitions to
reopen will be due by December 22,
2020.
It is ordered:
1. Under 49 U.S.C. 10502, the Board
exempts from the prior approval
requirements of 49 U.S.C. 11323–25 the
control transaction described above,
subject to the employee protective
conditions in New York Dock Railway—
Control—Brooklyn Eastern District
Terminal, 360 I.C.C 60, aff’d New York
Dock Railway v. United States, 609 F.2d
83 (2d Cir. 1979).
2. Notice of the exemption will be
published in the Federal Register.
3. The exemption will become
effective on December 15, 2020.
Petitions for stay must be filed by
December 10, 2020. Petitions to reopen
must be filed by December 22, 2020.
Decided: December 1, 2020.
By the Board, Board Members Begeman,
Fuchs, and Oberman.
Tammy Lowery,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. 2020–26811 Filed 12–4–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[FHWA Docket No. FHWA–2020–0014]
Surface Transportation Project
Delivery Program; Alaska Department
of Transportation Third 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
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:32 Dec 04, 2020
Jkt 253001
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 Alaska Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities
(DOT&PF).
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before January 6, 2021.
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 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
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.
David T. Williams, Office of Project
Development and Environmental
Review, (202) 366–5074,
David.Williams@dot.gov, or Mr. Jay
Payne, Office of the Chief Counsel, (202)
366–4241, James.O.Payne@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 U.S.C.
327, commonly known as the NEPA
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Assignment 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 liable for carrying out
the responsibilities it has assumed, in
lieu of FHWA. The DOT&PF published
its application for NEPA assumption on
May 1, 2016, and made it available for
public comment for 30 days. After
considering public comments, DOT&PF
submitted its application to FHWA on
July 12, 2016. The application served as
the basis for developing a memorandum
of understanding (MOU) that identified
the responsibilities and obligations that
the DOT&PF would assume. The FHWA
published a notice of the draft MOU in
the Federal Register on August 25,
2017, with a 30-day comment period to
solicit the views of the public and
Federal agencies. After the close of the
comment period, FHWA and DOT&PF
considered comments and proceeded to
execute the MOU. Effective November
13, 2017, DOT&PF assumed FHWA’s
responsibilities under NEPA, and the
responsibilities for NEPA-related
Federal environmental laws described
in 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 FHWA
must make the results of each audit
available for public comment. The
second audit report of DOT&PF
compliance was finalized on February
25, 2020. This notice announces the
availability of the third audit report for
DOT&PF 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.
Nicole R. Nason,
Administrator, Federal Highway
Administration.
Surface Transportation Project Delivery
Program, FHWA’s Audit of the Alaska
Department of Transportation
April 6–10, 2020
Executive Summary
This report summarizes the results of
the Federal Highway Administration’s
(FHWA) third audit of the Alaska
Department of Transportation and
Public Facilities’ (DOT&PF) assumption
of FHWA’s project-level National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
responsibilities and obligations
pursuant to a 23 U.S.C. 327
E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM
07DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 235 / Monday, December 7, 2020 / Notices
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU).
The DOT&PF entered the NEPA
Assignment Program after more than 8
years of experience making FHWA
NEPA Categorical Exclusion (CE)
determinations pursuant to 23 U.S.C.
326 (beginning September 22, 2009).
Alaska’s MOU became effective on
November 13, 2017. Currently, FHWA’s
NEPA responsibilities in Alaska include
the oversight and auditing of the
DOT&PF’s execution of the NEPA
Assignment Program and certain
activities excluded from the MOU, such
as the NEPA reviews of projects
advanced by direct recipients other than
the DOT&PF.
The FHWA audit team began to
prepare for the site visit in November
2019. The audit team reviewed
DOT&PF’s NEPA project files,
DOT&PF’s response to FHWA’s preaudit information request (PAIR), and
considered DOT&PF’s Self-Assessment
Report. On April 6–10, 2020, the audit
team conducted a completely virtual
site visit rather than its traditional onsite visit due to national health
emergency travel restrictions.
The audit team appreciates DOT&PF’s
responsiveness to the questions
regarding the status of general
observations from the second audit.
This report concludes with a status
update for FHWA’s observations from
the second audit report.
The audit team finds DOT&PF in
substantial compliance with the terms
of the MOU in meeting the
responsibilities it has assumed. This
report does not identify any noncompliance observations; it does
identify two general observations and
three successful practices.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Background
The NEPA Assignment Program
allows a State to assume FHWA’s
environmental responsibilities for
review, consultation, and compliance
for highway projects. This program is
codified at 23 U.S.C. 327. When a State
assumes these Federal responsibilities
for NEPA project decisionmaking, the
State becomes solely responsible and
solely liable for carrying out these
obligations in lieu of and without
further NEPA-related approval by
FHWA.
The FHWA assigned responsibility for
making project NEPA approvals and
other related environmental decisions
for highway projects to DOT&PF. The
MOU documents these responsibilities.
Examples of responsibilities DOT&PF
has assumed in addition to NEPA
include Section 7 consultation under
the Endangered Species Act and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:32 Dec 04, 2020
Jkt 253001
consultation under Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act.
This is the third of four required
annual audits pursuant to 23 U.S.C.
327(g) and Part 11 of the MOU. The
FHWA uses audits as the primary
mechanism to oversee DOT&PF’s
compliance with the MOU and the
NEPA Assignment Program
requirements. This includes ensuring
compliance with applicable Federal
laws and policies, evaluating DOT&PF’s
progress toward achieving the
performance measures identified in
Section 10.2 of the MOU, and collecting
information needed for the Secretary’s
annual report to Congress. The FHWA
must present its audit results in a report
and make it available for public
comment in the Federal Register.
The audit team included NEPA
subject matter experts from FHWA
Alaska Division Office, the Chief
Counsel’s Office, the Resource Center,
and Headquarters Office of Project
Development & Environmental Review
and Infrastructure.
Scope and Methodology
The audit team examined a sample of
DOT&PF’s NEPA project files, DOT&PF
responses to the PAIR, and DOT&PF’s
Self-Assessment Report. The audit team
also interviewed resource agencies and
DOT&PF staff and reviewed DOT&PF
policies, guidance, and manuals
pertaining to NEPA responsibilities. All
reviews focused on objectives related to
the six NEPA Assignment Program
elements: Program Management,
Documentation and Records
Management, Quality Assurance/
Quality Control (QA/QC), Training,
Performance Measures, and Legal
Sufficiency.
Project File Review: To consider
DOT&PF staff adherence to program
procedures and Federal requirements,
the audit team selected a sample of
individual project files for which the
environmental review had been
completed. The audit team evaluated
DOT&PFs compliance with assumed
responsibilities and adherence to their
own processes and procedures for
project-level environmental
decisionmaking. The audit team did not
evaluate DOT&PF’s project-specific
decisions. The 54 sampled files
included programmatic CEs (actions
approved in the regional offices as noted
in DOT&PF’s November 2017 NEPA
Assignment Categorical Exclusion
guidance), CEs and Environmental
Assessments (approved in the Statewide
Environmental Office (SEO)), and reevaluations (approved by the same
office as the original environmental
document).
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
78915
PAIR Review: The audit team
reviewed DOT&PF’s responses to the
PAIR, which consisted of 32 questions
about specific elements in the MOU that
DOT&PF must implement. The audit
team used these responses to develop
specific follow-up questions for
interviews with DOT&PF staff.
DOT&PF Self-Assessment Review:
The audit team reviewed DOT&PF’s
January 2020 Self-Assessment Report
and used it to develop specific followup questions for interviews with
DOT&PF staff. The NEPA Assignment
Program MOU Section 8.2.5 requires the
DOT&PF to conduct annual selfassessments of its QA/QC procedures
and performance.
Interviews: The audit team conducted
21 interviews with DOT&PF staff.
Interviewees included staff from each of
DOT&PF’s three regional offices and its
SEO. The audit team invited DOT&PF
staff and middle management to
participate in interviews to ensure they
represented a diverse range of staff
expertise, experience, and program
responsibility.
In addition, the audit team conducted
two phone interviews of attorneys with
the Alaska Department of Law and five
phone interviews with staff at the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers and the
National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS).
Policy/Guidance/Manual Review:
Throughout the document reviews and
interviews, the audit team verified
information on DOT&PF’s NEPA
Assignment Program including DOT&PF
policies, guidance, manuals, and
reports. This included the
Environmental Program Manual (EPM),
the NEPA Assignment QA/QC Plan, the
NEPA Assignment Program Training
Plan, and the NEPA Assignment SelfAssessment Report.
Overall Audit Opinion
This report identifies two
observations and three successful
practices. The audit team finds DOT&PF
is substantially in compliance with the
provisions of the MOU, has carried out
the environmental responsibilities it
assumed through the NEPA Assignment
Program, and has taken steps to address
observations identified in the second
audit.
Non-Compliance Observations
The audit team did not make any noncompliance observations in the third
audit.
Observations and Successful Practices
This section summarizes the audit
team’s observations of DOT&PF’s NEPA
Assignment Program implementation,
E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM
07DEN1
78916
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 235 / Monday, December 7, 2020 / Notices
and DOT&PF’s successful practices.
‘‘Observations’’ are items the audit team
would like to draw DOT&PF’s attention
to, which may benefit from revisions to
improve processes, procedures, or
outcomes. The DOT&PF may have
already taken steps to address or
improve upon the audit team’s
observations, but at the time of the audit
they appeared to be areas where
DOT&PF could make improvements.
‘‘Successful practices’’ are positive
results that FHWA would like to
commend DOT&PF on developing.
These may include ideas or concepts
that DOT&PF has planned but not yet
implemented. Successful practices and
observations are described under the six
MOU topic areas: Program Management,
Documentation and Records
Management, QA/QC, Training,
Performance Measures, and Legal
Sufficiency.
This audit report provides an
opportunity for DOT&PF to take further
actions to improve their program. The
FHWA will consider the status of areas
identified for potential improvement in
this audit’s observations as part of the
scope of the fourth audit. The fourth
audit report will include a summary
discussion that describes progress since
this audit.
Program Management
Program Management includes the
overall administration of the NEPA
Assignment Program. The audit team
noted the following successful practices
and observations related to Program
Management.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Successful Practice #1: Consultation
With Resource Agencies
The review team interviewed five staff
from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) and three staff from NMFS.
Under Section 3.2.1 of the MOU, the
State assumed the DOT Secretary’s
responsibilities for highway projects
under NEPA for environmental review,
reevaluation, consultation, or other
actions required under the Endangered
Species Act, the Clean Water Act, and
other environmental laws. The audit
teams’ assessment of DOT&PF’s
compliance with consultation and
permitting requirements under this
section of the MOU resulted in the
following five conclusions:
1. DOT&PF is submitting complete
and accurate information to both the
USACE and NMFS for consultation and
permitting requirements.
2. DOT&PF is very responsive when
agencies request additional information
or revisions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:32 Dec 04, 2020
Jkt 253001
3. DOT&PF submits comprehensive
and timely monitoring reports when
they are required for projects.
4. DOT&PF has improved their
oversight of construction contractors’
adherence to USACE permit conditions.
The DOT&PF has self-reported permit
violations and worked with the USACE
to remedy the situation.
5. DOT&PF has a good working
relationship with USACE and NMFS.
Some of the DOT&PF regions have set
up regular meetings with the agencies to
foster relationships and enhance
communication. Resource agency
interviews revealed that they think
those meetings are helpful and would
like them to continue.
The USACE interviews identified an
opportunity to increase the efficiency of
interagency coordination. The DOT&PF
should more clearly identify in the
permitting package whether a project is
a Federal undertaking or not, and
identify what coordination it has
completed.
Observation #1: Self-Assessment
Procedures
Section 8.2.5 of the MOU (Monitoring
and Oversight), requires DOT&PF to
perform annual self-assessments of its
QA/QC process and performance to
determine if the process is working as
intended. Section 10.1.3 of the MOU
(Performance Measurement) requires
DOT&PF to collect and maintain data
related to the attainment of performance
measures, monitor progress towards
meeting performance measures, and
include its progress in a self-assessment.
The DOT&PF’s 2018 NEPA Assignment
Program Self-Assessment Procedures
require that SEO develop the
preliminary and final self-assessment
report through coordination with, and
input from, the Regional Environmental
Managers. The audit team found that
DOT&PF did not develop the January
2020 Self-Assessment report in
accordance with their procedures, nor
distributed the final report to the
Regions. The audit team based this
finding on interviews.
Documentation and Records
Management
Documentation and Records
Management includes maintaining
project files and other recordkeeping
(whether hardcopy or electronic)
pertaining to DOT&PF’s discharge of the
responsibilities it has assumed under
the 23 U.S.C. 327 Program. From
November 1, 2018, through October 31,
2019, DOT&PF made 287 project
decisions. Through employing both
random and judgmental sampling
procedures, the audit team identified 54
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
project decisions to review, and did not
identify any systemic issues warranting
an observation.
Quality Assurance/Quality Control
Under Section 8.2.4 of the MOU,
DOT&PF agreed to carry out regular QA/
QC activities in accordance with the
MOU and DOT&PF procedures
established to implement the NEPA
Assignment Program. Based on the
information evaluated by the audit
team, DOT&PF is conducting regular
QA/QC activities in accordance with the
MOU, though opportunities exist to
utilize trend data to continue improving
the program.
Training
Under Sections 12.1 and 12.2 of the
MOU, DOT&PF committed to
implementing training necessary to
carry out the environmental
responsibilities assumed under the
NEPA Assignment Program. The
DOT&PF also committed to assessing its
need for training, developing a training
plan, and updating the training plan on
an annual basis.
Successful Practice #2: Central Region
Organizational Cross-Training Initiative
The central region has recently kicked
off an organizational cross-training
initiative, called ‘‘Share-TheKnowledge,’’ that provides
opportunities for environmental
analysts to get exposure to informal
training in other functional areas, such
as transportation planning, realty,
safety, highway design, operations, and
construction. Cross-training provides a
general awareness of how and to what
extent NEPA reviews can relate to
project planning and inform Federal-aid
highway project development.
Successful Practice #3: Taking
Advantage of Training Opportunities
Based on interviews, the audit team
learned the South Coast Region invited
Federal resource agency representatives
to monthly meetings to encourage
knowledge sharing and partnering.
During a time when training budgets are
limited, FHWA encourages DOT&PF to
continue to take advantage of training
opportunities that may be made
available by Federal partners. One
example was when DOT&PF staff
participated in the recent NMFS
acoustic training in Anchorage.
Performance Measures
The DOT&PF continues to collect,
maintain, and develop data towards
monitoring its performance as required
by Section 10.1.3 of the MOU. The audit
E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM
07DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 235 / Monday, December 7, 2020 / Notices
team noted the following observation
related to Performance Measures.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Observation #2: Assessing Resource
Agency Communication
Section 10.2.1 C. of the MOU requires
DOT&PF to ‘‘Assess change in
communication among DOT&PF,
Federal and State agencies, and the
public resulting from assumption of
responsibilities under this MOU.’’ The
MOU allows DOT&PF to determine the
method it will use to assess this change.
The DOT&PF selected to use an annual
resource agency poll. The DOT&PF
identified this measure in its DOT&PF
NEPA Assignment Program
Performance Measures document
located on its website. In addition,
DOT&PF reported in this audit, and
Audits 1 and 2, that an annual resource
poll would be the method for collecting
data towards monitoring this measure.
The DOT&PF has not used a resource
agency poll to date. Through the audit
team’s review of DOT&PF’s SelfAssessment, PAIR, and audit interviews
with DOT&PF, the audit team found that
a poll was not a useful tool to assess
changes in communication. The FHWA
recommends that the DOT&PF consider
changing the method for reporting this
measure.
Legal Sufficiency
Since 2017, the same attorney from
the Alaska Department of Law (Alaska
DOL), Transportation Section, has been
assigned to the NEPA Assignment
program. The assigned attorney has
significant experience with Federal-aid
highway projects and the Federal
environmental process. The attorney
works directly with DOT&PF staff on
project environmental documents.
Based on the interviews, the review
process exceeded the standard set forth
in the Environmental Procedures
Manual (EPM), with the attorney being
involved early in project development,
normally reviewing a NEPA document
before receiving a formal request for a
legal sufficiency review. During the
audit period, the attorney reviewed one
Final Section 4(f) Evaluation and issued
a finding of legal sufficiency in August
2019. The attorney did not review an
environmental impact statement during
the audit period.
The Alaska DOL management stated
during the interviews that while one
attorney is currently assigned to the
program, should workload increase
significantly another attorney would be
assigned to NEPA work, perhaps
through the utilization of outside
counsel per 23 U.S.C. 327(a)(2)(G).
Based on these observations, the audit
team finds that the DOT&PF meets the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:32 Dec 04, 2020
Jkt 253001
legal sufficiency determination and
staffing requirements set forth in the
DOT&PF EPM.
Status of Observations From Audit #2
Report (April 2019)
This section describes the actions
DOT&PF has taken (or is taking) in
response to observations made during
the second audit.
Observation #1: Applicability of Existing
Interagency Agreements
Section 5.1.3 of the MOU required the
DOT&PF to work with FHWA and the
resource agencies to modify existing
interagency agreements within 6 months
of the effective date of the MOU. During
Audit 2, the audit team determined that
none of DOT&PF’s existing agreements
applied to the current NEPA
Assignment Program under 23 U.S.C.
327. According to the January 2020 SelfAssessment Report, ‘‘DOT&PF is not
currently pursuing agency agreements
per Section 5.1.4 of the MOU regarding
appropriate processes and procedures.’’
Observation #2: DOT&PF Delegation of
Authority for NEPA Approvals
Section 3.3.1 of the MOU requires
DOT&PF to make NEPA approvals (CE
determinations, findings of no
significant impact, or records of
decision). Audit 2 revealed
inconsistencies regarding the delegation
of NEPA approvals within DOT&PF.
The DOT&PF’s January 2020 SelfAssessment states that DOT&PF will
incorporate a protocol that standardizes
the delegation authority for NEPA
approval in the regions in the February
2020 update of its EPM. The DOT&PF
has not made any changes to the EPM
since February 2018 per the DOT&PF’s
response to Audit 3’s Pre-Audit
Information Request. Based on
interviews conducted as part of Audit 3,
DOT&PF now plans to incorporate this
protocol into the EPM in May 2020.
Currently, each region has its own
delegation process. Generally, DOT&PF
delegates the NEPA approvals to the
senior staff and communicates that
delegation via email to affected parties.
Most staff interviewed understand their
region’s delegation process and new
staff are becoming oriented with the
process.
Observation #3: Staff Capacity
Sections 4.2.1 and 4.2.2 of the MOU
outline the requirements for the State’s
commitment of resources and adequate
organizational staff capacity. Moderate
to high staff turnover has been a
recurring issue since the MOU went into
effect (Audit #1 report Observation #3
and Audit #2 report Observation #3).
PO 00000
Frm 00097
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
78917
According to the January 2020 SelfAssessment Report, ‘‘DOT&PF’s staffing
levels were a concern during this audit
period and senior staff expended
considerable effort to hire new qualified
staff and to retain current staff. As a
result of this effort, the regional offices
are now fully or near fully staffed.’’ The
DOT&PF is aware of the issue and
continues to track staffing impacts on
the NEPA Assignment Program through
the QA/QC process.
Observation #4: Documentation of
Environmental Commitments
Section 5.1.1 of the MOU requires the
State to follow Federal laws,
regulations, policies, and procedures to
implement the responsibilities assumed.
Audit 2 revealed inconsistencies
regarding how DOT&PF was
documenting environmental
commitments and making sure that
DOT&PF carries the environmental
commitments through the project
development process and into
construction. The DOT&PF developed
written guidance on the documentation
of environmental commitments.
According to the January 2020 SelfAssessment Report, the guidance was
implemented on May 5, 2019. Based on
the interviews conducted as part of
Audit 3, DOT&PF staff understood who
certified that the environmental
commitments were included in the
plan, specifications, and estimates, as
well as their role in the certification
process.
Observation #5: Inconsistency in Project
Termini and Statewide Transportation
Improvement Program (STIP)
Section 3.3.1 of the MOU requires
DOT&PF, at the time of NEPA approval
(CE determination, finding of no
significant impact, or record of
decision), to ensure that the project’s
design concept, scope, and funding is
consistent with current planning
documents. During Audit 2, the audit
team found one project file with an
inconsistency between project termini
shown in a project plan and that
described in the STIP, and similar
inconsistencies in the DOT&PF’s Audit
2 Self-Assessment. Project scope
inconsistencies were not found by the
file review team during Audit 3. The
DOT&PF’s Audit 3 Self-Assessment
identified one instance of a project
description discrepancy that did not
affect the scope of the project. Regional
QC efforts appear to have improved this
issue, although DOT&PF noted in their
self-assessment that using the STIP
project description as the project scope
in environmental documents is not
possible for all projects.
E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM
07DEN1
78918
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 235 / Monday, December 7, 2020 / Notices
Observation #6: Training Plan Update
Section 12.2 of the MOU commits
DOT&PF and FHWA to update the
DOT&PF training plan annually in
consultation with other Federal agencies
as appropriate. The DOT&PF did not
update its Training Plan prior to or
during the Audit 2 process. In their
response to the Audit 3 PAIR, DOT&PF
stated ‘‘the training plan was updated
on October 29, 2019 with minor
revisions to Section 5. A list of proposed
training has been added to this section
and the RD&T2 [Research, Development,
and Technology Transfer], FHWA, and
Prior Training Requests subsections
have been removed.’’ Based on the
information gathered through the PAIR
and interviews, the audit team is
satisfied that the DOT&PF addressed the
training observation from the second
audit. Moving forward, DOT&PF
committed to coordinating with the
Alaska Division Office for future annual
updates of the Training Plan.
[FR Doc. 2020–26790 Filed 12–4–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA–2020–0122]
Parts and Accessories Necessary for
Safe Operation; Application for an
Exemption From Grote Industries, LLC
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of final disposition; grant
of exemption.
AGENCY:
The Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration (FMCSA)
announces its decision to grant Grote
Industries, LLC’s (Grote) application for
a limited 5-year exemption to allow
motor carriers operating trailers and van
body trucks to install amber brakeactivated pulsating warning lamps on
the rear of trailers and van body trucks
in addition to the steady-burning brake
lamps required by the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs).
The Agency has determined that
granting the exemption would likely
achieve a level of safety equivalent to or
greater than the level of safety provided
by the regulation.
DATES: This exemption is effective
December 7, 2020 and ending December
2, 2025.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Luke Loy, Vehicle and Roadside
Operations Division, Office of Carrier,
Driver, and Vehicle Safety, MC–PSV,
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:32 Dec 04, 2020
Jkt 253001
(202) 366–0676, Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590–
0001.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments submitted to notice
requesting public comments on the
exemption application, go to
www.regulations.gov at any time or visit
Dockets Operations, Room W12–140 on
the ground level of the West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., ET, Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. To be sure
someone is there to help you, please call
(202) 366–9317 or (202) 366–9826
before visiting Dockets Operations. The
on-line Federal document management
system is available 24 hours each day,
365 days each year. The docket number
is listed at the beginning of this notice.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315 to grant exemptions
from certain parts of the FMCSRs.
FMCSA must publish a notice of each
exemption request in the Federal
Register (49 CFR 381.315(a)). The
Agency must provide the public an
opportunity to inspect the information
relevant to the application, including
any safety analyses that have been
conducted. The Agency must also
provide an opportunity for public
comment on the request.
The Agency reviews safety analyses
and public comments submitted, and
determines whether granting the
exemption would likely achieve a level
of safety equivalent to, or greater than,
the level that would be achieved by the
current regulation (49 CFR 381.305).
The decision of the Agency must be
published in the Federal Register (49
CFR 381.315(b)) with the reasons for
denying or granting the application and,
if granted, the name of the person or
class of persons receiving the
exemption, and the regulatory provision
from which the exemption is granted.
The notice must also specify the
effective period and explain the terms
and conditions of the exemption. The
exemption may be renewed (49 CFR
381.300(b)).
Grote’s Application for Exemption
Section 393.25(e) of the FMCSRs
requires all exterior lamps (both
required lamps and any additional
lamps) to be steady-burning, except turn
signal lamps, hazard warning signal
lamps, school bus warning lamps,
amber warning lamps or flashing
warning lamps on tow trucks and
PO 00000
Frm 00098
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
commercial motor vehicles (CMV)
transporting oversized loads, and
warning lamps on emergency and
service vehicles authorized by State or
local authorities.
Grote applied for an exemption from
49 CFR 393.25(e) to allow motor carriers
operating trailers and van body trucks to
install brake-activated pulsating
warning lamps on the rear of trailers
and van body trucks in addition to the
steady-burning brake lamps required by
the FMCSRs. Specifically, Grote
requested allowance to use: (1) An
upper pair of brake-activated warning
lamps centered about the centerline of
the trailer such that the centerline of the
outermost identification (ID) lamps to
the centerline of the auxiliary braking
lamps is between 6–12 inches and
collinear with the three ID lamp cluster;
(2) a single brake-activated warning
lamp centrally located on or below the
rear sill collinear with the stop/tail/turn
lamps; (3) an upper pair of brakeactivated warning lamps (as described
in (1) above) and a single brakeactivated warning lamp centrally
located on or below the rear sill
collinear with the stop/tail/turn lamps;
(4) a lower pair of brake-activated
warning lamps centered about the
centerline of the trailer located on or
below the rear sill; or (5) an upper pair
of brake-activated warning lamps (as
described in (1) above and a lower pair
of brake-activated warning lamps as
described in (4) above). The same brakeactivated warning lamp options would
also be applicable to van body straight
trucks. These brake-activated warning
lamps would be amber in color and act
as a Class II strobe (pulsate) for up to 4
seconds with each application of the
brake, then steadily burn red for the
duration of the time the brake circuit is
activated. The brake-activated pulsating
warning lamps would be in addition to
the steady-burning brake lamps required
by the FMCSRs.
Grote is a manufacturer of vehicle
lighting and safety equipment, and
requests this relief on behalf of
interstate motor carriers because
previous research has demonstrated that
the use of pulsating brake-activated
warning lamps increases visibility of
equipment and vehicles. The use of
amber pulsating brake-activated
warning lamps, in addition to steadyburning red brake lamps required by the
FMCSRs, would allow commercial
carriers to not only maintain operational
safety levels, but also implement more
efficient and effective operations.
A copy of the application is included
in the docket referenced at the
beginning of this notice.
E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM
07DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 235 (Monday, December 7, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 78914-78918]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-26790]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[FHWA Docket No. FHWA-2020-0014]
Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program; Alaska
Department of Transportation Third 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 Alaska Department of Transportation
and Public Facilities (DOT&PF).
DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 6, 2021.
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 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
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. David T. Williams, Office of
Project Development and Environmental Review, (202) 366-5074,
[email protected], or Mr. Jay Payne, Office of the Chief Counsel,
(202) 366-4241, [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 environmental responsibilities for 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 DOT&PF published its application for NEPA assumption on May 1,
2016, and made it available for public comment for 30 days. After
considering public comments, DOT&PF submitted its application to FHWA
on July 12, 2016. The application served as the basis for developing a
memorandum of understanding (MOU) that identified the responsibilities
and obligations that the DOT&PF would assume. The FHWA published a
notice of the draft MOU in the Federal Register on August 25, 2017,
with a 30-day comment period to solicit the views of the public and
Federal agencies. After the close of the comment period, FHWA and
DOT&PF considered comments and proceeded to execute the MOU. Effective
November 13, 2017, DOT&PF assumed FHWA's responsibilities under NEPA,
and the responsibilities for NEPA-related Federal environmental laws
described in 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 FHWA must make the results of each audit
available for public comment. The second audit report of DOT&PF
compliance was finalized on February 25, 2020. This notice announces
the availability of the third audit report for DOT&PF 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.
Nicole R. Nason,
Administrator, Federal Highway Administration.
Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program, FHWA's Audit of the
Alaska Department of Transportation
April 6-10, 2020
Executive Summary
This report summarizes the results of the Federal Highway
Administration's (FHWA) third audit of the Alaska Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities' (DOT&PF) assumption of FHWA's
project-level National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) responsibilities
and obligations pursuant to a 23 U.S.C. 327
[[Page 78915]]
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The DOT&PF entered the NEPA
Assignment Program after more than 8 years of experience making FHWA
NEPA Categorical Exclusion (CE) determinations pursuant to 23 U.S.C.
326 (beginning September 22, 2009).
Alaska's MOU became effective on November 13, 2017. Currently,
FHWA's NEPA responsibilities in Alaska include the oversight and
auditing of the DOT&PF's execution of the NEPA Assignment Program and
certain activities excluded from the MOU, such as the NEPA reviews of
projects advanced by direct recipients other than the DOT&PF.
The FHWA audit team began to prepare for the site visit in November
2019. The audit team reviewed DOT&PF's NEPA project files, DOT&PF's
response to FHWA's pre-audit information request (PAIR), and considered
DOT&PF's Self-Assessment Report. On April 6-10, 2020, the audit team
conducted a completely virtual site visit rather than its traditional
on-site visit due to national health emergency travel restrictions.
The audit team appreciates DOT&PF's responsiveness to the questions
regarding the status of general observations from the second audit.
This report concludes with a status update for FHWA's observations from
the second audit report.
The audit team finds DOT&PF in substantial compliance with the
terms of the MOU in meeting the responsibilities it has assumed. This
report does not identify any non-compliance observations; it does
identify two general observations and three successful practices.
Background
The NEPA Assignment Program allows a State to assume FHWA's
environmental responsibilities for review, consultation, and compliance
for highway projects. This program is codified at 23 U.S.C. 327. When a
State assumes these Federal responsibilities for NEPA project
decisionmaking, the State becomes solely responsible and solely liable
for carrying out these obligations in lieu of and without further NEPA-
related approval by FHWA.
The FHWA assigned responsibility for making project NEPA approvals
and other related environmental decisions for highway projects to
DOT&PF. The MOU documents these responsibilities. Examples of
responsibilities DOT&PF has assumed in addition to NEPA include Section
7 consultation under the Endangered Species Act and consultation under
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
This is the third of four required annual audits pursuant to 23
U.S.C. 327(g) and Part 11 of the MOU. The FHWA uses audits as the
primary mechanism to oversee DOT&PF's compliance with the MOU and the
NEPA Assignment Program requirements. This includes ensuring compliance
with applicable Federal laws and policies, evaluating DOT&PF's progress
toward achieving the performance measures identified in Section 10.2 of
the MOU, and collecting information needed for the Secretary's annual
report to Congress. The FHWA must present its audit results in a report
and make it available for public comment in the Federal Register.
The audit team included NEPA subject matter experts from FHWA
Alaska Division Office, the Chief Counsel's Office, the Resource
Center, and Headquarters Office of Project Development & Environmental
Review and Infrastructure.
Scope and Methodology
The audit team examined a sample of DOT&PF's NEPA project files,
DOT&PF responses to the PAIR, and DOT&PF's Self-Assessment Report. The
audit team also interviewed resource agencies and DOT&PF staff and
reviewed DOT&PF policies, guidance, and manuals pertaining to NEPA
responsibilities. All reviews focused on objectives related to the six
NEPA Assignment Program elements: Program Management, Documentation and
Records Management, Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC),
Training, Performance Measures, and Legal Sufficiency.
Project File Review: To consider DOT&PF staff adherence to program
procedures and Federal requirements, the audit team selected a sample
of individual project files for which the environmental review had been
completed. The audit team evaluated DOT&PFs compliance with assumed
responsibilities and adherence to their own processes and procedures
for project-level environmental decisionmaking. The audit team did not
evaluate DOT&PF's project-specific decisions. The 54 sampled files
included programmatic CEs (actions approved in the regional offices as
noted in DOT&PF's November 2017 NEPA Assignment Categorical Exclusion
guidance), CEs and Environmental Assessments (approved in the Statewide
Environmental Office (SEO)), and re-evaluations (approved by the same
office as the original environmental document).
PAIR Review: The audit team reviewed DOT&PF's responses to the
PAIR, which consisted of 32 questions about specific elements in the
MOU that DOT&PF must implement. The audit team used these responses to
develop specific follow-up questions for interviews with DOT&PF staff.
DOT&PF Self-Assessment Review: The audit team reviewed DOT&PF's
January 2020 Self-Assessment Report and used it to develop specific
follow-up questions for interviews with DOT&PF staff. The NEPA
Assignment Program MOU Section 8.2.5 requires the DOT&PF to conduct
annual self-assessments of its QA/QC procedures and performance.
Interviews: The audit team conducted 21 interviews with DOT&PF
staff. Interviewees included staff from each of DOT&PF's three regional
offices and its SEO. The audit team invited DOT&PF staff and middle
management to participate in interviews to ensure they represented a
diverse range of staff expertise, experience, and program
responsibility.
In addition, the audit team conducted two phone interviews of
attorneys with the Alaska Department of Law and five phone interviews
with staff at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS).
Policy/Guidance/Manual Review: Throughout the document reviews and
interviews, the audit team verified information on DOT&PF's NEPA
Assignment Program including DOT&PF policies, guidance, manuals, and
reports. This included the Environmental Program Manual (EPM), the NEPA
Assignment QA/QC Plan, the NEPA Assignment Program Training Plan, and
the NEPA Assignment Self-Assessment Report.
Overall Audit Opinion
This report identifies two observations and three successful
practices. The audit team finds DOT&PF is substantially in compliance
with the provisions of the MOU, has carried out the environmental
responsibilities it assumed through the NEPA Assignment Program, and
has taken steps to address observations identified in the second audit.
Non-Compliance Observations
The audit team did not make any non-compliance observations in the
third audit.
Observations and Successful Practices
This section summarizes the audit team's observations of DOT&PF's
NEPA Assignment Program implementation,
[[Page 78916]]
and DOT&PF's successful practices. ``Observations'' are items the audit
team would like to draw DOT&PF's attention to, which may benefit from
revisions to improve processes, procedures, or outcomes. The DOT&PF may
have already taken steps to address or improve upon the audit team's
observations, but at the time of the audit they appeared to be areas
where DOT&PF could make improvements. ``Successful practices'' are
positive results that FHWA would like to commend DOT&PF on developing.
These may include ideas or concepts that DOT&PF has planned but not yet
implemented. Successful practices and observations are described under
the six MOU topic areas: Program Management, Documentation and Records
Management, QA/QC, Training, Performance Measures, and Legal
Sufficiency.
This audit report provides an opportunity for DOT&PF to take
further actions to improve their program. The FHWA will consider the
status of areas identified for potential improvement in this audit's
observations as part of the scope of the fourth audit. The fourth audit
report will include a summary discussion that describes progress since
this audit.
Program Management
Program Management includes the overall administration of the NEPA
Assignment Program. The audit team noted the following successful
practices and observations related to Program Management.
Successful Practice #1: Consultation With Resource Agencies
The review team interviewed five staff from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) and three staff from NMFS. Under Section 3.2.1 of the
MOU, the State assumed the DOT Secretary's responsibilities for highway
projects under NEPA for environmental review, reevaluation,
consultation, or other actions required under the Endangered Species
Act, the Clean Water Act, and other environmental laws. The audit
teams' assessment of DOT&PF's compliance with consultation and
permitting requirements under this section of the MOU resulted in the
following five conclusions:
1. DOT&PF is submitting complete and accurate information to both
the USACE and NMFS for consultation and permitting requirements.
2. DOT&PF is very responsive when agencies request additional
information or revisions.
3. DOT&PF submits comprehensive and timely monitoring reports when
they are required for projects.
4. DOT&PF has improved their oversight of construction contractors'
adherence to USACE permit conditions. The DOT&PF has self-reported
permit violations and worked with the USACE to remedy the situation.
5. DOT&PF has a good working relationship with USACE and NMFS. Some
of the DOT&PF regions have set up regular meetings with the agencies to
foster relationships and enhance communication. Resource agency
interviews revealed that they think those meetings are helpful and
would like them to continue.
The USACE interviews identified an opportunity to increase the
efficiency of interagency coordination. The DOT&PF should more clearly
identify in the permitting package whether a project is a Federal
undertaking or not, and identify what coordination it has completed.
Observation #1: Self-Assessment Procedures
Section 8.2.5 of the MOU (Monitoring and Oversight), requires
DOT&PF to perform annual self-assessments of its QA/QC process and
performance to determine if the process is working as intended. Section
10.1.3 of the MOU (Performance Measurement) requires DOT&PF to collect
and maintain data related to the attainment of performance measures,
monitor progress towards meeting performance measures, and include its
progress in a self-assessment. The DOT&PF's 2018 NEPA Assignment
Program Self-Assessment Procedures require that SEO develop the
preliminary and final self-assessment report through coordination with,
and input from, the Regional Environmental Managers. The audit team
found that DOT&PF did not develop the January 2020 Self-Assessment
report in accordance with their procedures, nor distributed the final
report to the Regions. The audit team based this finding on interviews.
Documentation and Records Management
Documentation and Records Management includes maintaining project
files and other recordkeeping (whether hardcopy or electronic)
pertaining to DOT&PF's discharge of the responsibilities it has assumed
under the 23 U.S.C. 327 Program. From November 1, 2018, through October
31, 2019, DOT&PF made 287 project decisions. Through employing both
random and judgmental sampling procedures, the audit team identified 54
project decisions to review, and did not identify any systemic issues
warranting an observation.
Quality Assurance/Quality Control
Under Section 8.2.4 of the MOU, DOT&PF agreed to carry out regular
QA/QC activities in accordance with the MOU and DOT&PF procedures
established to implement the NEPA Assignment Program. Based on the
information evaluated by the audit team, DOT&PF is conducting regular
QA/QC activities in accordance with the MOU, though opportunities exist
to utilize trend data to continue improving the program.
Training
Under Sections 12.1 and 12.2 of the MOU, DOT&PF committed to
implementing training necessary to carry out the environmental
responsibilities assumed under the NEPA Assignment Program. The DOT&PF
also committed to assessing its need for training, developing a
training plan, and updating the training plan on an annual basis.
Successful Practice #2: Central Region Organizational Cross-Training
Initiative
The central region has recently kicked off an organizational cross-
training initiative, called ``Share-The-Knowledge,'' that provides
opportunities for environmental analysts to get exposure to informal
training in other functional areas, such as transportation planning,
realty, safety, highway design, operations, and construction. Cross-
training provides a general awareness of how and to what extent NEPA
reviews can relate to project planning and inform Federal-aid highway
project development.
Successful Practice #3: Taking Advantage of Training Opportunities
Based on interviews, the audit team learned the South Coast Region
invited Federal resource agency representatives to monthly meetings to
encourage knowledge sharing and partnering. During a time when training
budgets are limited, FHWA encourages DOT&PF to continue to take
advantage of training opportunities that may be made available by
Federal partners. One example was when DOT&PF staff participated in the
recent NMFS acoustic training in Anchorage.
Performance Measures
The DOT&PF continues to collect, maintain, and develop data towards
monitoring its performance as required by Section 10.1.3 of the MOU.
The audit
[[Page 78917]]
team noted the following observation related to Performance Measures.
Observation #2: Assessing Resource Agency Communication
Section 10.2.1 C. of the MOU requires DOT&PF to ``Assess change in
communication among DOT&PF, Federal and State agencies, and the public
resulting from assumption of responsibilities under this MOU.'' The MOU
allows DOT&PF to determine the method it will use to assess this
change. The DOT&PF selected to use an annual resource agency poll. The
DOT&PF identified this measure in its DOT&PF NEPA Assignment Program
Performance Measures document located on its website. In addition,
DOT&PF reported in this audit, and Audits 1 and 2, that an annual
resource poll would be the method for collecting data towards
monitoring this measure. The DOT&PF has not used a resource agency poll
to date. Through the audit team's review of DOT&PF's Self-Assessment,
PAIR, and audit interviews with DOT&PF, the audit team found that a
poll was not a useful tool to assess changes in communication. The FHWA
recommends that the DOT&PF consider changing the method for reporting
this measure.
Legal Sufficiency
Since 2017, the same attorney from the Alaska Department of Law
(Alaska DOL), Transportation Section, has been assigned to the NEPA
Assignment program. The assigned attorney has significant experience
with Federal-aid highway projects and the Federal environmental
process. The attorney works directly with DOT&PF staff on project
environmental documents. Based on the interviews, the review process
exceeded the standard set forth in the Environmental Procedures Manual
(EPM), with the attorney being involved early in project development,
normally reviewing a NEPA document before receiving a formal request
for a legal sufficiency review. During the audit period, the attorney
reviewed one Final Section 4(f) Evaluation and issued a finding of
legal sufficiency in August 2019. The attorney did not review an
environmental impact statement during the audit period.
The Alaska DOL management stated during the interviews that while
one attorney is currently assigned to the program, should workload
increase significantly another attorney would be assigned to NEPA work,
perhaps through the utilization of outside counsel per 23 U.S.C.
327(a)(2)(G).
Based on these observations, the audit team finds that the DOT&PF
meets the legal sufficiency determination and staffing requirements set
forth in the DOT&PF EPM.
Status of Observations From Audit #2 Report (April 2019)
This section describes the actions DOT&PF has taken (or is taking)
in response to observations made during the second audit.
Observation #1: Applicability of Existing Interagency Agreements
Section 5.1.3 of the MOU required the DOT&PF to work with FHWA and
the resource agencies to modify existing interagency agreements within
6 months of the effective date of the MOU. During Audit 2, the audit
team determined that none of DOT&PF's existing agreements applied to
the current NEPA Assignment Program under 23 U.S.C. 327. According to
the January 2020 Self-Assessment Report, ``DOT&PF is not currently
pursuing agency agreements per Section 5.1.4 of the MOU regarding
appropriate processes and procedures.''
Observation #2: DOT&PF Delegation of Authority for NEPA Approvals
Section 3.3.1 of the MOU requires DOT&PF to make NEPA approvals (CE
determinations, findings of no significant impact, or records of
decision). Audit 2 revealed inconsistencies regarding the delegation of
NEPA approvals within DOT&PF. The DOT&PF's January 2020 Self-Assessment
states that DOT&PF will incorporate a protocol that standardizes the
delegation authority for NEPA approval in the regions in the February
2020 update of its EPM. The DOT&PF has not made any changes to the EPM
since February 2018 per the DOT&PF's response to Audit 3's Pre-Audit
Information Request. Based on interviews conducted as part of Audit 3,
DOT&PF now plans to incorporate this protocol into the EPM in May 2020.
Currently, each region has its own delegation process. Generally,
DOT&PF delegates the NEPA approvals to the senior staff and
communicates that delegation via email to affected parties. Most staff
interviewed understand their region's delegation process and new staff
are becoming oriented with the process.
Observation #3: Staff Capacity
Sections 4.2.1 and 4.2.2 of the MOU outline the requirements for
the State's commitment of resources and adequate organizational staff
capacity. Moderate to high staff turnover has been a recurring issue
since the MOU went into effect (Audit #1 report Observation #3 and
Audit #2 report Observation #3). According to the January 2020 Self-
Assessment Report, ``DOT&PF's staffing levels were a concern during
this audit period and senior staff expended considerable effort to hire
new qualified staff and to retain current staff. As a result of this
effort, the regional offices are now fully or near fully staffed.'' The
DOT&PF is aware of the issue and continues to track staffing impacts on
the NEPA Assignment Program through the QA/QC process.
Observation #4: Documentation of Environmental Commitments
Section 5.1.1 of the MOU requires the State to follow Federal laws,
regulations, policies, and procedures to implement the responsibilities
assumed. Audit 2 revealed inconsistencies regarding how DOT&PF was
documenting environmental commitments and making sure that DOT&PF
carries the environmental commitments through the project development
process and into construction. The DOT&PF developed written guidance on
the documentation of environmental commitments. According to the
January 2020 Self-Assessment Report, the guidance was implemented on
May 5, 2019. Based on the interviews conducted as part of Audit 3,
DOT&PF staff understood who certified that the environmental
commitments were included in the plan, specifications, and estimates,
as well as their role in the certification process.
Observation #5: Inconsistency in Project Termini and Statewide
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)
Section 3.3.1 of the MOU requires DOT&PF, at the time of NEPA
approval (CE determination, finding of no significant impact, or record
of decision), to ensure that the project's design concept, scope, and
funding is consistent with current planning documents. During Audit 2,
the audit team found one project file with an inconsistency between
project termini shown in a project plan and that described in the STIP,
and similar inconsistencies in the DOT&PF's Audit 2 Self-Assessment.
Project scope inconsistencies were not found by the file review team
during Audit 3. The DOT&PF's Audit 3 Self-Assessment identified one
instance of a project description discrepancy that did not affect the
scope of the project. Regional QC efforts appear to have improved this
issue, although DOT&PF noted in their self-assessment that using the
STIP project description as the project scope in environmental
documents is not possible for all projects.
[[Page 78918]]
Observation #6: Training Plan Update
Section 12.2 of the MOU commits DOT&PF and FHWA to update the
DOT&PF training plan annually in consultation with other Federal
agencies as appropriate. The DOT&PF did not update its Training Plan
prior to or during the Audit 2 process. In their response to the Audit
3 PAIR, DOT&PF stated ``the training plan was updated on October 29,
2019 with minor revisions to Section 5. A list of proposed training has
been added to this section and the RD&T2 [Research, Development, and
Technology Transfer], FHWA, and Prior Training Requests subsections
have been removed.'' Based on the information gathered through the PAIR
and interviews, the audit team is satisfied that the DOT&PF addressed
the training observation from the second audit. Moving forward, DOT&PF
committed to coordinating with the Alaska Division Office for future
annual updates of the Training Plan.
[FR Doc. 2020-26790 Filed 12-4-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P
