Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program; Alaska Department of Transportation Fourth Audit Report, 62875-62878 [2023-19703]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2023 / Notices
The FHWA welcomes comments on
the PY 2024 Interim NBIP Compliance
Review Manual from any interested
party, including Federal, State, and
local agencies; industry groups; and the
public. A copy of the PY 2024 Interim
NBIP Compliance Review Manual is
available for download and public
inspection under the docket number
noted above at the Federal eRulemaking
portal at: www.regulations.gov. The
FHWA requests that commenters cite
the page number of the manual for
which each specific comment to the
docket is concerned, to help make the
FHWA’s docket comment review
process more efficient. The FHWA will
consider all comments received during
the comment period in developing
subsequent versions of the NBIP
Compliance Review Manual. However,
please note that the PY 2024 Interim
NBIP Compliance Review Manual is
currently in effect and will be utilized
for calendar year 2023 reviews.
Shailen P. Bhatt,
Administrator, Federal Highway
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2023–19702 Filed 9–12–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[FHWA Docket No. FHWA–2021–0019]
Surface Transportation Project
Delivery Program; Alaska Department
of Transportation Fourth Audit Report
Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA), U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice.
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 4
years of State participation to ensure
compliance with program requirements.
This notice makes available the final
fourth audit report for the Alaska
Department of Transportation and
Public Facilities (DOT&PF).
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Sep 12, 2023
Jkt 259001
Mr.
David T. Williams, Office of Project
Development and Environmental
Review, (202) 366–5074,
David.Williams@dot.gov, or Michelle
Andotra, Office of the Chief Counsel,
(404) 562–3679, Michelle.Andotra@
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:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
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 Alaska 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
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
FHWA published a notice in the
Federal Register at 87 FR 66352,
November 3, 2022, soliciting comments
PO 00000
Frm 00106
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
62875
for 30 days pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327(g).
The FHWA received comments on the
draft report from the American Road &
Transportation Builders Association
(ARTBA). The ARTBA’s comments were
supportive of the Surface Transportation
Project Delivery Program and did not
relate specifically to the audit. The team
has considered these comments in
finalizing the audit report. This notice
makes available the final audit report of
DOT&PF’s fourth audit under the
program. The final audit report is
available for download at
www.regulations.gov under FHWA
Docket No. FHWA–2021–0019.
Authority: Section 1313 of Public Law
112–141; section 6005 of Public Law
109–59; 23 U.S.C. 327; 23 CFR 773.
Shailen P. Bhatt,
Administrator, Federal Highway
Administration.
Surface Transportation Project Delivery
Program, FHWA’s Audit of the Alaska
Department of Transportation, April
12–16, 2021
Executive Summary
This report summarizes the results of
the Federal Highway Administration’s
(FHWA) fourth 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
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, and was amended
on August 20, 2020. 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
2020. The audit team reviewed
DOT&PF’s NEPA project files,
DOT&PF’s response to FHWA’s preaudit information request (PAIR), and
DOT&PF’s Self-Assessment Report. On
April 12–16, 2021, the audit team
conducted a virtual site visit for the
second year due to COVID–19 pandemic
safety concerns, rather than on-site
visits as had been used for the first two
audits.
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
62876
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2023 / Notices
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
The audit team appreciates DOT&PF’s
responsiveness to the questions
regarding the status of general
observations from the third audit. This
report concludes with a status update
for FHWA’s observations from the third
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 four 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 last of the 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 U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT)
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’s
Alaska Division Office, the
Headquarters Office of Project
Development and Environmental
Review, the Resource Center, Western
Legal Services Division, Office of
Stewardship, Oversight and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Sep 12, 2023
Jkt 259001
Management, and the DOT Volpe
Center.
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 conducted interviews 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
contained in the MOU: 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 47
individual project files for which the
environmental review had been
completed. The audit team evaluated
DOT&PF’s 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 sampled files included
CEs, Environmental Assessments (EA),
and environmental reevaluations.
PAIR Review: The audit team
reviewed DOT&PF’s responses to the
PAIR, which consisted of 28 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
December 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
interviews with 17 DOT&PF employees,
including staff from each of DOT&PF’s
three regional offices and the Statewide
Environmental Office (SEO). The audit
team selected invited DOT&PF
employees representing a diverse range
of expertise, experience, and program
responsibility to participate in
interviews.
In addition, the audit team conducted
interviews of two attorneys with the
Alaska Department of Law and
interviews with individuals at the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
United States Forest Service (USFS),
and the State Historic Preservation
Office (SHPO).
Policy/Guidance/Manual Review:
Throughout the document reviews and
interviews, the audit team verified
information on DOT&PF’s NEPA
Assignment Program using DOT&PF
policies, guidance, manuals, and
reports. These 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 four
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 third
audit.
Non-Compliance Observations
The audit team made no noncompliance observations in the fourth
audit.
Observations and Successful Practices
This section summarizes the audit
team’s observations of DOT&PF’s NEPA
Assignment Program implementation
and DOT&P’’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, if such steps have not already
been taken. ‘‘Successful practices’’ are
those 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 future monitoring events.
DOT&PF will continue to be able to
describe program improvements in their
annual Self-Assessment reports.
Program Management
Program Management includes the
overall administration of the NEPA
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2023 / Notices
Assignment Program. The audit team
noted the following successful practices
and observations related to Program
Management.
Successful Practice #1: Business
Program Management (BPM) System
Interviewees overwhelmingly
responded positively to questions
regarding the development and
implementation of the BPM system.
They acknowledged the efforts by the
developers and SEO to include the
following: virtual training sessions and
demonstrations, creation of a user’s
manual, PowerPoint handouts, and beta
testing with Regional Environmental
Managers (REMs) to work through
‘‘bugs’’ in the system.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Observation #1: Permitting Dashboard
Reporting Procedures
Section 5.1.1 of the MOU subjects
DOT&PF to the same procedural
requirements and substantive
requirements that apply to the DOT
Secretary including, but not limited to
Federal statutes or FHWA policy. Per 23
U.S.C. 139 and the Memorandum from
Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Transportation Policy, Federal
Permitting Dashboard Reporting
Standard, December 28, 2018, EA and
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
project information is required to be
entered in the Federal Infrastructure
Permitting Dashboard (Dashboard). The
Dashboard Reporting Standards require
EIS’s and EA’s permitting timetables to
be entered in the dashboard: (1) within
90 days after the issuance of a Notice of
Intent for an EIS, or (2) the class of
action determination for an EA initiated
after June 2016. Based on interviews,
only one project has been entered into
the Dashboard, which FHWA verified.
Based on DOT&PF records, three
projects should have been entered into
the Dashboard. The FHWA understands
that DOT&PF does not have written
procedures regarding how to carry out
these responsibilities. Written
procedures would provide opportunities
for consistent, timely, and compliant
reporting of the projects required to be
in the Dashboard.
Documentation and Records
Management
Documentation and Records
Management includes maintaining
project files and other recordkeeping
(whether hardcopy or electronic)
pertaining to the DOT&PF’s discharge of
the responsibilities it has assumed
under the 23 U.S.C. 327 Program. From
November 1, 2019, through October 31,
2020, DOT&PF made 228 project
decisions. Through employing both
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Sep 12, 2023
Jkt 259001
random and judgmental sampling
procedures, the audit team identified 47
project decisions to review.
Successful Practice #2: Tracking
Interviews with Section 106
Professionally Qualified Individuals
(PQI) revealed the use of an Excel
database in at least one DOT&PF region
to track and manage Section 106
information for projects. Tracking
information on consultation letters,
determinations of eligibility, effect
findings, SHPO concurrence, etc. allows
the PQI to stay on top of required tasks
and ensure work is completed. Once
Section 106 consultation is completed,
the PQI enters this data into the SEO
Access database tracking system that is
used for the Section 106 Programmatic
Agreement monitoring and annual
reporting.
Observation #2: Documentation of
Public and Agency Comments in CE
In 6 of 21 (28 percent) CE project files
reviewed, there was inadequate
documentation of public and/or agency
comments and resolution of the
comments. This is not in accordance
with Chapter 4 of the DOT&PF Highway
Preconstruction Manual, which requires
that CE Forms ‘‘list the issues raised by
the public and agencies and the manner
in which they were resolved.’’ In
addition, this observation appears to be
inconsistent with data reported in
Section 9.2.2. (Maintain completeness
and adequacy of documentation of SEO
records for projects done under the
program) of DOT&PF’s 2020–2021 SelfAssessment Report.
Interview responses to questions
about public involvement requirements
for CEs varied. Some interviewees
responded that they follow the guidance
in the Environmental Procedures
Manual. Several interviewees spoke to
responding directly to commenters via
emails or letters and the potential for
controversy to affect the class of action
decision. However, none specifically
mentioned the need to document
comments and/or controversy and
DOT&PF’s responses to them on the CE
forms. The FHWA recommends that
DOT&PF incorporate procedures for
documenting public involvement for
CEs when appropriate into the EPM.
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 continues to carry out
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
62877
regular QA/QC activities in accordance
with the MOU. The FHWA believes the
BPM system provides more opportunity
to augment data collection and reporting
for continued program improvement.
Observation #3: The State’s
Commitment of Adequate Resources
and QA/QC Performance
Sections 4.2.1 and 4.2.2 of the MOU
outline the requirements for the State’s
commitment of adequate resources to
carry out NEPA Assignment
successfully. Moderate to high staff
turnover has been a recurring issue.
This has been documented in Audit #1
report Observation #3 and Audit #2
report Observation #3. In the January
2020 Self-Assessment Report, DOT&PF
acknowledged the issue and indicated
that they will continue to track staffing
impacts on the program through the
QA/QC process. During Audit #4,
FHWA documented comments from
multiple DOT&PF staff in some of the
regions concerning workload, staffing,
and turnover issues affecting QA/QC
processes and observed a downward
trend in QA/QC performance (i.e., more
errors and omissions in NEPA approvals
relative to the previous audit
performance period). In addition,
interviews with the SHPO suggested
some of the Section 106 challenges,
such as incomplete applications during
Section 106 consultations, may be due
to workload issues at DOT&PF. Despite
these observations, FHWA found that
DOT&PF’s implementation of the 327
Program was in substantial compliance
with the MOU. The FHWA encourages
DOT&PF to continue to assess how
workload, staffing, and turnover issues
might affect the level of compliance
with the 327 MOU, organizational
performance for carrying out NEPA
Assignment and overall program
delivery, and consider using tools like
the BPM system, resource sharing,
increased use of consultants, and other
approaches to help address workload
and staffing issues raised by some
regions as well as the QA/QC
performance issues indicated in the
most recent self-assessment and
observed by the audit team.
Training
Under Sections 12.1 and 12.2 of the
MOU, the 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.
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
62878
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2023 / Notices
Observation #4: Training Needs
Assessment
Considering ongoing staff turnover, as
discussed in Observation #3, FHWA
encourages DOT&PF to conduct a
detailed statewide training needs
assessment of new environmental staff.
This will help DOT&PF allocate
resources more efficiently to identify
skill and knowledge gaps. The FHWA
also encourages DOT&PF to explore
cross training opportunities with other
agencies (e.g.: SHPO, BLM, USFS) and
engage them in development of their
annual training plan.
Performance Measures
The FHWA and DOT&PF mutually
established a set of performance
measures to evaluate DOT&PF’s
performance in assuming NEPA
Assignment Program responsibilities.
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
team noted the following successful
practice related to Performance
Measures.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Successful Practice #3: Relationships
With Agencies
The audit team found that DOT&PF
has very good and positive relationships
with BLM, USFS, and SHPO. The
FHWA has interviewed resource
agencies in previous audits and found
that overall, they had good working
relationships with DOT&PF. The audit
team decided to interview staff from
BLM and the USFS during Audit #4
since Federal Land Management
Agencies had not been interviewed in
past audits and they were included in
DOT&PF’s May 2020 agency poll. The
audit team also chose to interview the
SHPO since they had not been
interviewed since Audit #1. The
individuals interviewed from these
three agencies indicated that overall,
their working relationships with
DOT&PF were very good and positive.
This information correlates well with
the overwhelmingly positive responses
DOT&PF received to their agency poll.
Legal Sufficiency
Since 2017, the same attorney from
the Alaska Attorney General’s Office,
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 attorney
becomes involved early in project
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Sep 12, 2023
Jkt 259001
development, normally reviewing a
NEPA document before receiving a
formal request for a legal sufficiency
review. During the audit period, the
attorney did not review an EIS or a
Section 4(f) evaluation requiring a legal
sufficiency review. Although a legal
sufficiency review is not required for
EAs, the attorney reviewed two EAs
during the audit period. The attorney
reported that the review process for an
EA is like the review process for an EIS.
Department of Law Management
stated during the interviews that while
one attorney is currently assigned to the
program, should workload increase
significantly another attorney could be
assigned to NEPA work or litigation,
likely through the utilization of outside
counsel per 23 U.S.C. 327(a)(2)(G).
The audit team finds that DOT&PF
meets the legal sufficiency
determination and staffing requirements
set forth in the DOT&PF Environmental
Procedures Manual.
Status of Observations From Audit #3
Report (April 2020)
This section describes the actions
DOT&PF has taken in response to
observations made during the third
audit.
Observation #1: Self-Assessment
Procedures
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 REMs. During Audit #3
interviews, the audit team found that
DOT&PF did not develop the January
2020 Self-Assessment Report in
accordance with their procedures, nor
distribute the final report to the regions.
For Audit #4, DOT&PF indicated in
their responses to the PAIR that the
draft December 2020 Self-assessment
was sent to the REMs for review and
comment according to their procedures.
Comments were received and addressed
in the final Self-Assessment Report,
which was then shared with the regions.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Measures document located on its
website. At the time of Audit #3,
DOT&PF had not yet used a resource
agency poll, and FHWA recommended
that DOT&PF consider changing the
method for reporting this measure.
In May 2020 (prior to Audit #4),
DOT&PF conducted an agency survey to
assess changes in communication
among DOT&PF, State, and Federal
resource agencies. As described in
DOT&PF’s Self-Assessment Report, the
survey consisted of six questions
distributed via an online platform to a
representative cross section of State and
Federal resource Agency staff. Twentyfour responses were received from 11
different resource agencies. The
DOT&PF asked the question: ‘‘Has the
level of communication improved,
declined, or remained the same since
the MOU became effective?’’ Eleven of
the responses indicated that there had
been an improvement in
communication and the remaining
responses indicated there had been no
change.
[FR Doc. 2023–19703 Filed 9–12–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[FHWA Docket No. FHWA–2021–0020]
Surface Transportation Project
Delivery Program; Arizona Department
of Transportation FHWA Audit Report
Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA), U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Moving Ahead for
Progress in the 21st Century Act
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 is the
second audit of the Arizona Department
of Transportation’s (ADOT) performance
of its responsibilities under the Surface
Transportation Project Delivery Program
(NEPA Assignment Program). This
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 176 (Wednesday, September 13, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62875-62878]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-19703]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[FHWA Docket No. FHWA-2021-0019]
Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program; Alaska
Department of Transportation Fourth Audit Report
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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 makes available the final fourth
audit report for the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities (DOT&PF).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David T. Williams, Office of
Project Development and Environmental Review, (202) 366-5074,
[email protected], or Michelle Andotra, Office of the Chief
Counsel, (404) 562-3679, [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 Alaska 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 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 FHWA published a notice in the
Federal Register at 87 FR 66352, November 3, 2022, soliciting comments
for 30 days pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327(g). The FHWA received comments on
the draft report from the American Road & Transportation Builders
Association (ARTBA). The ARTBA's comments were supportive of the
Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program and did not relate
specifically to the audit. The team has considered these comments in
finalizing the audit report. This notice makes available the final
audit report of DOT&PF's fourth audit under the program. The final
audit report is available for download at www.regulations.gov under
FHWA Docket No. FHWA-2021-0019.
Authority: Section 1313 of Public Law 112-141; section 6005 of
Public Law 109-59; 23 U.S.C. 327; 23 CFR 773.
Shailen P. Bhatt,
Administrator, Federal Highway Administration.
Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program, FHWA's Audit of the
Alaska Department of Transportation, April 12-16, 2021
Executive Summary
This report summarizes the results of the Federal Highway
Administration's (FHWA) fourth 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 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, and was amended
on August 20, 2020. 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
2020. The audit team reviewed DOT&PF's NEPA project files, DOT&PF's
response to FHWA's pre-audit information request (PAIR), and DOT&PF's
Self-Assessment Report. On April 12-16, 2021, the audit team conducted
a virtual site visit for the second year due to COVID-19 pandemic
safety concerns, rather than on-site visits as had been used for the
first two audits.
[[Page 62876]]
The audit team appreciates DOT&PF's responsiveness to the questions
regarding the status of general observations from the third audit. This
report concludes with a status update for FHWA's observations from the
third 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 four 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 last of the 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 U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT) 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's
Alaska Division Office, the Headquarters Office of Project Development
and Environmental Review, the Resource Center, Western Legal Services
Division, Office of Stewardship, Oversight and Management, and the DOT
Volpe Center.
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 conducted interviews 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 contained in the MOU: 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 47 individual project files for which the environmental review had
been completed. The audit team evaluated DOT&PF's 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 sampled
files included CEs, Environmental Assessments (EA), and environmental
reevaluations.
PAIR Review: The audit team reviewed DOT&PF's responses to the
PAIR, which consisted of 28 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
December 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 interviews with 17 DOT&PF
employees, including staff from each of DOT&PF's three regional offices
and the Statewide Environmental Office (SEO). The audit team selected
invited DOT&PF employees representing a diverse range of expertise,
experience, and program responsibility to participate in interviews.
In addition, the audit team conducted interviews of two attorneys
with the Alaska Department of Law and interviews with individuals at
the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the United States Forest Service
(USFS), and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO).
Policy/Guidance/Manual Review: Throughout the document reviews and
interviews, the audit team verified information on DOT&PF's NEPA
Assignment Program using DOT&PF policies, guidance, manuals, and
reports. These 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 four 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 third audit.
Non-Compliance Observations
The audit team made no non-compliance observations in the fourth
audit.
Observations and Successful Practices
This section summarizes the audit team's observations of DOT&PF's
NEPA Assignment Program implementation and DOT&P''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, if such steps have not already been
taken. ``Successful practices'' are those 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 future monitoring events. DOT&PF
will continue to be able to describe program improvements in their
annual Self-Assessment reports.
Program Management
Program Management includes the overall administration of the NEPA
[[Page 62877]]
Assignment Program. The audit team noted the following successful
practices and observations related to Program Management.
Successful Practice #1: Business Program Management (BPM) System
Interviewees overwhelmingly responded positively to questions
regarding the development and implementation of the BPM system. They
acknowledged the efforts by the developers and SEO to include the
following: virtual training sessions and demonstrations, creation of a
user's manual, PowerPoint handouts, and beta testing with Regional
Environmental Managers (REMs) to work through ``bugs'' in the system.
Observation #1: Permitting Dashboard Reporting Procedures
Section 5.1.1 of the MOU subjects DOT&PF to the same procedural
requirements and substantive requirements that apply to the DOT
Secretary including, but not limited to Federal statutes or FHWA
policy. Per 23 U.S.C. 139 and the Memorandum from Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Transportation Policy, Federal Permitting Dashboard
Reporting Standard, December 28, 2018, EA and Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) project information is required to be entered in the
Federal Infrastructure Permitting Dashboard (Dashboard). The Dashboard
Reporting Standards require EIS's and EA's permitting timetables to be
entered in the dashboard: (1) within 90 days after the issuance of a
Notice of Intent for an EIS, or (2) the class of action determination
for an EA initiated after June 2016. Based on interviews, only one
project has been entered into the Dashboard, which FHWA verified. Based
on DOT&PF records, three projects should have been entered into the
Dashboard. The FHWA understands that DOT&PF does not have written
procedures regarding how to carry out these responsibilities. Written
procedures would provide opportunities for consistent, timely, and
compliant reporting of the projects required to be in the Dashboard.
Documentation and Records Management
Documentation and Records Management includes maintaining project
files and other recordkeeping (whether hardcopy or electronic)
pertaining to the DOT&PF's discharge of the responsibilities it has
assumed under the 23 U.S.C. 327 Program. From November 1, 2019, through
October 31, 2020, DOT&PF made 228 project decisions. Through employing
both random and judgmental sampling procedures, the audit team
identified 47 project decisions to review.
Successful Practice #2: Tracking
Interviews with Section 106 Professionally Qualified Individuals
(PQI) revealed the use of an Excel database in at least one DOT&PF
region to track and manage Section 106 information for projects.
Tracking information on consultation letters, determinations of
eligibility, effect findings, SHPO concurrence, etc. allows the PQI to
stay on top of required tasks and ensure work is completed. Once
Section 106 consultation is completed, the PQI enters this data into
the SEO Access database tracking system that is used for the Section
106 Programmatic Agreement monitoring and annual reporting.
Observation #2: Documentation of Public and Agency Comments in CE
In 6 of 21 (28 percent) CE project files reviewed, there was
inadequate documentation of public and/or agency comments and
resolution of the comments. This is not in accordance with Chapter 4 of
the DOT&PF Highway Preconstruction Manual, which requires that CE Forms
``list the issues raised by the public and agencies and the manner in
which they were resolved.'' In addition, this observation appears to be
inconsistent with data reported in Section 9.2.2. (Maintain
completeness and adequacy of documentation of SEO records for projects
done under the program) of DOT&PF's 2020-2021 Self-Assessment Report.
Interview responses to questions about public involvement
requirements for CEs varied. Some interviewees responded that they
follow the guidance in the Environmental Procedures Manual. Several
interviewees spoke to responding directly to commenters via emails or
letters and the potential for controversy to affect the class of action
decision. However, none specifically mentioned the need to document
comments and/or controversy and DOT&PF's responses to them on the CE
forms. The FHWA recommends that DOT&PF incorporate procedures for
documenting public involvement for CEs when appropriate into the EPM.
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 continues to carry out
regular QA/QC activities in accordance with the MOU. The FHWA believes
the BPM system provides more opportunity to augment data collection and
reporting for continued program improvement.
Observation #3: The State's Commitment of Adequate Resources and QA/QC
Performance
Sections 4.2.1 and 4.2.2 of the MOU outline the requirements for
the State's commitment of adequate resources to carry out NEPA
Assignment successfully. Moderate to high staff turnover has been a
recurring issue. This has been documented in Audit #1 report
Observation #3 and Audit #2 report Observation #3. In the January 2020
Self-Assessment Report, DOT&PF acknowledged the issue and indicated
that they will continue to track staffing impacts on the program
through the QA/QC process. During Audit #4, FHWA documented comments
from multiple DOT&PF staff in some of the regions concerning workload,
staffing, and turnover issues affecting QA/QC processes and observed a
downward trend in QA/QC performance (i.e., more errors and omissions in
NEPA approvals relative to the previous audit performance period). In
addition, interviews with the SHPO suggested some of the Section 106
challenges, such as incomplete applications during Section 106
consultations, may be due to workload issues at DOT&PF. Despite these
observations, FHWA found that DOT&PF's implementation of the 327
Program was in substantial compliance with the MOU. The FHWA encourages
DOT&PF to continue to assess how workload, staffing, and turnover
issues might affect the level of compliance with the 327 MOU,
organizational performance for carrying out NEPA Assignment and overall
program delivery, and consider using tools like the BPM system,
resource sharing, increased use of consultants, and other approaches to
help address workload and staffing issues raised by some regions as
well as the QA/QC performance issues indicated in the most recent self-
assessment and observed by the audit team.
Training
Under Sections 12.1 and 12.2 of the MOU, the 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.
[[Page 62878]]
Observation #4: Training Needs Assessment
Considering ongoing staff turnover, as discussed in Observation #3,
FHWA encourages DOT&PF to conduct a detailed statewide training needs
assessment of new environmental staff. This will help DOT&PF allocate
resources more efficiently to identify skill and knowledge gaps. The
FHWA also encourages DOT&PF to explore cross training opportunities
with other agencies (e.g.: SHPO, BLM, USFS) and engage them in
development of their annual training plan.
Performance Measures
The FHWA and DOT&PF mutually established a set of performance
measures to evaluate DOT&PF's performance in assuming NEPA Assignment
Program responsibilities. 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 team noted the following
successful practice related to Performance Measures.
Successful Practice #3: Relationships With Agencies
The audit team found that DOT&PF has very good and positive
relationships with BLM, USFS, and SHPO. The FHWA has interviewed
resource agencies in previous audits and found that overall, they had
good working relationships with DOT&PF. The audit team decided to
interview staff from BLM and the USFS during Audit #4 since Federal
Land Management Agencies had not been interviewed in past audits and
they were included in DOT&PF's May 2020 agency poll. The audit team
also chose to interview the SHPO since they had not been interviewed
since Audit #1. The individuals interviewed from these three agencies
indicated that overall, their working relationships with DOT&PF were
very good and positive. This information correlates well with the
overwhelmingly positive responses DOT&PF received to their agency poll.
Legal Sufficiency
Since 2017, the same attorney from the Alaska Attorney General's
Office, 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 attorney becomes
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 did not review an EIS or
a Section 4(f) evaluation requiring a legal sufficiency review.
Although a legal sufficiency review is not required for EAs, the
attorney reviewed two EAs during the audit period. The attorney
reported that the review process for an EA is like the review process
for an EIS.
Department of Law Management stated during the interviews that
while one attorney is currently assigned to the program, should
workload increase significantly another attorney could be assigned to
NEPA work or litigation, likely through the utilization of outside
counsel per 23 U.S.C. 327(a)(2)(G).
The audit team finds that DOT&PF meets the legal sufficiency
determination and staffing requirements set forth in the DOT&PF
Environmental Procedures Manual.
Status of Observations From Audit #3 Report (April 2020)
This section describes the actions DOT&PF has taken in response to
observations made during the third audit.
Observation #1: Self-Assessment Procedures
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 REMs.
During Audit #3 interviews, the audit team found that DOT&PF did not
develop the January 2020 Self-Assessment Report in accordance with
their procedures, nor distribute the final report to the regions. For
Audit #4, DOT&PF indicated in their responses to the PAIR that the
draft December 2020 Self-assessment was sent to the REMs for review and
comment according to their procedures. Comments were received and
addressed in the final Self-Assessment Report, which was then shared
with the regions.
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. At the time of
Audit #3, DOT&PF had not yet used a resource agency poll, and FHWA
recommended that DOT&PF consider changing the method for reporting this
measure.
In May 2020 (prior to Audit #4), DOT&PF conducted an agency survey
to assess changes in communication among DOT&PF, State, and Federal
resource agencies. As described in DOT&PF's Self-Assessment Report, the
survey consisted of six questions distributed via an online platform to
a representative cross section of State and Federal resource Agency
staff. Twenty-four responses were received from 11 different resource
agencies. The DOT&PF asked the question: ``Has the level of
communication improved, declined, or remained the same since the MOU
became effective?'' Eleven of the responses indicated that there had
been an improvement in communication and the remaining responses
indicated there had been no change.
[FR Doc. 2023-19703 Filed 9-12-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P