Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program; Utah Department of Transportation Audit Report, 62870-62873 [2023-19705]
Download as PDF
62870
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2023 / Notices
Market St., Suite 2620, Philadelphia, PA
19103.
According to YARR, this action is
categorically excluded from
environmental review under 49 CFR
1105.6(c) and from historic reporting
requirements under 49 CFR 1105.8(b).
Board decisions and notices are
available at www.stb.gov.
Decided: September 7, 2023.
By the Board, Mai T. Dinh, Director, Office
of Proceedings.
Eden Besera,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. 2023–19752 Filed 9–12–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[FHWA Docket No. FHWA–2021–0010]
Surface Transportation Project
Delivery Program; Utah Department of
Transportation 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
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. The
program mandates annual audits during
each of the first 4 years of State
participation to ensure compliance with
program requirements. This notice
finalizes the findings of the fourth and
final audit report for the Utah
Department of Transportation (UDOT).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
David Cohen, Office of Project
Development and Environmental
Review, (202) 366–8531, David.Cohen@
dot.gov, or Ms. Diane Mobley, Office of
the Chief Counsel, (202) 366–1366,
Diane.Mobley@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:
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Sep 12, 2023
Jkt 259001
Electronic Access
An electronic copy of this notice may
be downloaded from the specific docket
page at www.regulations.gov.
Background
The Surface Transportation Project
Delivery Program, codified at 23 United
States Code (U.S.C.) 327, commonly
known as the NEPA Assignment
Program, allows a State to assume
FHWA’s 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 in lieu of FHWA.
The UDOT published its application for
NEPA assumption on October 9, 2015,
and made it available for public
comment for 30 days. After considering
public comments, UDOT submitted its
application to FHWA on December 1,
2015. The application served as the
basis for developing a memorandum of
understanding (MOU) that identifies the
responsibilities and obligations that
UDOT would assume. The FHWA
published a notice of the draft MOU in
the Federal Register on November 16,
2016 (81 FR 80710), with a 30-day
comment period to solicit the views of
the public and Federal agencies. After
the end of the comment period, FHWA
and UDOT considered comments and
proceeded to execute the MOU.
Effective January 17, 2017, UDOT
assumed FHWA’s responsibilities under
NEPA, and the responsibilities for other
Federal environmental laws described
in the MOU. On May 26, 2022, FHWA
and UDOT renewed the MOU for
another 5-year term.
Section 327(g) of Title 23, U.S.C.,
requires the Secretary to conduct annual
audits during each of the first 4 years of
State participation. After the fourth
year, the Secretary shall monitor the
State’s compliance with the written
agreement. The FHWA must make the
results of each audit available for public
comment. This notice finalizes the
findings of the fourth audit report for
UDOT participation in the NEPA
Assignment Program. The FHWA
published a draft version of this report
in the Federal Register on June 23, 2022
(87 FR 37547), and made it available for
public review and comment for 30 days
in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 327(g).
The FHWA received three responses to
the Federal Register notice during the
public comment period for the draft
report, and FHWA responds to these
comments in the final report, pursuant
to 23 U.S.C. 327(g)(2). The FHWA also
determined that the comments required
PO 00000
Frm 00101
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
no changes to the draft audit report.
This notice finalizes the fourth and final
NEPA Assignment audit report in Utah.
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 Audit of the Utah
Department of Transportation—Final
Report, July 1, 2019–June 30, 2020
Executive Summary
This report summarizes the results of
the Federal Highway Administration’s
(FHWA) fourth and final audit of the
Utah Department of Transportation’s
(UDOT) National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) review responsibilities and
obligations that FHWA assigned and
UDOT assumed pursuant to 23 United
State Code (U.S.C.) 327. Throughout this
report, FHWA uses the term ‘‘NEPA
Assignment Program’’ to refer to the
program codified at 23 U.S.C. 327.
Pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327, UDOT and
FHWA executed a memorandum of
understanding (MOU) on January 17,
2017, to memorialize UDOT’s NEPA
responsibilities and obligations for
Federal-aid highway projects and
certain other FHWA actions in Utah.
The FHWA and UDOT recently renewed
the MOU on May 26, 2022, for another
5-year term. The section 327 MOU
covers environmental review
responsibilities for projects that require
the preparation of environmental
assessments (EA), environmental impact
statements (EIS), and non-designated
documented categorical exclusions
(DCE). A separate MOU, pursuant to 23
U.S.C. 326, authorizes UDOT’s
environmental review responsibilities
for other categorical exclusions (CE),
commonly known as CE Program
Assignment. The scope of this audit did
not include the CE Program Assignment
responsibilities and projects.
As part of FHWA’s review
responsibilities under 23 U.S.C. 327,
FHWA formed a team (the ‘‘Audit
Team’’) in August 2020 to plan and
conduct an audit of NEPA
responsibilities UDOT assumed. Due to
COVID–19-related travel restrictions,
the Audit Team conducted a virtual
audit during the period from November
9, 2020, to December 2, 2020. Prior to
the virtual audit, the Audit Team
reviewed UDOT’s NEPA project files,
UDOT’s response to FHWA’s pre-audit
information request (PAIR), UDOT’s
NEPA Assignment Self-Assessment
Report, UDOT’s NEPA Quality
Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC)
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2023 / Notices
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Guidance, and UDOT’s NEPA
Assignment Training Plan. The Audit
Team conducted videoconference
interviews with four members of UDOT
central office staff, six of UDOT’s legal
counsel (one current Assistant Attorney
General assigned to UDOT, one former
Assistant Attorney General assigned to
UDOT, and four outside counsel), three
staff members from the U.S
Environmental Protection Agency, and
two staff members from the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS) as part of
the virtual audit.
Overall, the Audit Team found that
UDOT continues to successfully carry
out its DCE, EA, and EIS project review
responsibilities. The UDOT has also
made efforts to respond to the FHWA
findings from the third audit, including
improving document management and
QA/QC procedures. In the third audit,
the Audit Team found that UDOT
issued an environmental document
without a final legal sufficiency finding,
and had observed that there were ways
UDOT could improve their training.
In this fourth and final audit, the
Audit Team identified four observations
and two successful practices. The Audit
Team finds UDOT is carrying out the
responsibilities it has assumed, and they
are in substantial compliance with the
provisions of the MOU. This report also
concludes with the status of FHWA’s
non-compliance observation from the
third audit review, including any UDOT
self-imposed corrective actions. After
the fourth year of UDOT’s participation
in the program, FHWA will continue to
monitor UDOT’s compliance with the
terms of this MOU, in accordance with
23 U.S.C. 327(h).
Background
The NEPA Assignment Program
allows a State to assume FHWA’s
environmental responsibilities for
review, consultation, and compliance
for Federal-aid highway projects and
certain other FHWA actions. Under 23
U.S.C. 327, a State that assumes these
Federal responsibilities becomes solely
responsible and solely liable for
carrying them out. Effective January 17,
2017, UDOT assumed FHWA’s
responsibilities under NEPA and other
Federal environmental laws. Examples
of responsibilities UDOT 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.
Audits are the primary mechanism
through which FHWA oversees UDOT’s
compliance with the MOU and the
NEPA Assignment Program
requirements. This includes ensuring
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Sep 12, 2023
Jkt 259001
compliance with the applicable Federal
laws and policies, evaluating UDOT’s
progress toward achieving the
performance measures identified in
MOU Section 10.2, and collecting
information needed for the Secretary’s
annual report to Congress. The FHWA
must present the results of each audit in
a report and make it available for public
comment in the Federal Register.
Through this fourth and final audit,
FHWA will satisfy provisions of 23
U.S.C. 327(g) and Part 11 of the MOU.
This report summarizes the results of
the fourth and final audit in Utah, and
it includes a summary discussion that
describes progress since the last audit.
Scope and Methodology
The MOU (Part 3.1.1) states that
‘‘[p]ursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327(a)(2)(A), on
the effective date, FHWA assigns, and
UDOT assumes, subject to the terms and
conditions set forth in 23 U.S.C. 327 and
this MOU, all of the U.S. Department of
Transportation Secretary’s
responsibilities for compliance with the
NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. with
respect to the highway projects
specified under subpart 3.3. This
assignment includes statutory
provisions, regulations, policies, and
guidance related to the implementation
of NEPA for highway projects such as 23
U.S.C. 139, 40 CFR parts 1500–1508,
DOT Order 5610.1C, and 23 CFR 771 as
applicable.’’ Also, the performance
measure in MOU Part 10.2.1(A) for
compliance with NEPA and other
Federal environmental statutes and
regulations commits UDOT to
maintaining documented compliance
with requirements of all applicable
statutes and regulations as well as the
provisions in the MOU.
The Audit Team consisted of NEPA
subject matter experts from the FHWA
Utah Division, FHWA Resource Center,
the Volpe Center, FHWA Headquarters,
and FHWA Office of the Chief Counsel.
These experts received training on how
to evaluate implementation of the NEPA
Assignment Program.
The Audit Team conducted an
examination of UDOT’s NEPA project
files, UDOT’s responses to the PAIR,
and UDOT’s self-assessment. The audit
also included interviews with staff and
reviews of UDOT 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; QA/QC; legal
sufficiency; training; and performance
measurement. In particular, the Audit
Team reviewed UDOT’s process and
PO 00000
Frm 00102
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
62871
procedures for conducting
environmental reevaluations.
The focus of the audit was on UDOT’s
process and program implementation.
Therefore, while the Audit Team
reviewed project files to evaluate
UDOT’s NEPA process and procedures,
the Audit Team did not evaluate
UDOT’s project-specific decisions to
determine if they were, in FHWA’s
opinion, appropriate or not. The Audit
Team reviewed 20 NEPA Project files
with DCEs, EAs, EISs, and
reevaluations, representing all projects
with decision points or other actionable
items between July 1, 2019, and June 30,
2020. The Audit Team also interviewed
environmental staff in UDOT’s
headquarters office.
The PAIR consisted of 25 questions
about specific elements in the MOU.
The Audit Team used UDOT’s response
to the PAIR to develop specific followup questions for the UDOT staff. The
Audit Team conducted four interviews
with UDOT environmental staff, one
virtual interview with staff from the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), one interview with staff from the
FWS, two interviews with UDOT’s
outside legal counsel, and one interview
with legal counsel from the Utah
Attorney General’s Office. All
interviews were conducted as
videoconferences.
Throughout the document reviews
and interviews, the Audit Team verified
information regarding the UDOT NEPA
Assignment Program including UDOT
policies, guidance, manuals, and
reports. This included the NEPA QA/QC
Guidance, the NEPA Assignment
Training Plan, and the NEPA
Assignment Self-Assessment Report.
The Audit Team compared the
procedures outlined in UDOT
environmental manuals and policies to
the information obtained during
interviews and project file reviews to
determine if there were discrepancies
between UDOT’s performance and
documented procedures. The Audit
Team documented observations under
the six NEPA Assignment Program topic
areas and arrived at the following audit
opinion.
Overall, UDOT has carried out the
environmental responsibilities it
assumed through the MOU and the
application for the NEPA Assignment
Program, and as such, the Audit Team
finds UDOT is substantially compliant
with the provisions of the MOU.
Observations and Successful Practices
This section summarizes the Audit
Team’s observations of UDOT’s NEPA
Assignment Program implementation,
including successful practices UDOT
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
62872
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2023 / Notices
may want to continue or expand.
Successful practices are positive results
FHWA would like to commend UDOT
for developing. These may include ideas
or concepts that UDOT has planned but
not yet implemented. Observations are
items that the Audit Team would like to
draw UDOT’s attention to, which may
benefit from revisions to improve
processes, procedures, or outcomes. The
UDOT 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 UDOT could make
improvements. This report addresses all
six MOU topic areas as separate
discussions. Within each area, this
report discusses successful practices
followed by observations.
This audit report provides an
opportunity for UDOT to implement
actions to improve their NEPA
Assignment Program. The FHWA and
UDOT will continue to work together to
monitor UDOT’s compliance with the
terms of this MOU, as required by 23
U.S.C. 327(h).
Program Management
Successful Practice #1
The Audit Team identified one of
UDOT’s project websites which
included detailed information about the
proposed noise impact analyses, traffic
noise abatement measures, and the
proposed relocation of the existing noise
barriers as a successful practice. The
noise impact and abatement information
presented to the public was
comprehensive and easy to understand.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Observation #1
Section 5.1.4 of UDOT’s NEPA
Assignment MOU outlines an
interagency planning and coordination
protocol to make sure that all
programmatic agreements reflect
UDOT’s new roles and responsibilities
under NEPA Assignment. The Audit
Team observed that UDOT’s Section 106
programmatic agreements with four
Tribal governments predate NEPA
Assignment, and they do not reflect
UDOT’s assigned roles and
responsibilities. We recommend that
UDOT reach out to these Tribal
governments and implement the
interagency planning and coordination
provisions of Section 5.1.4, which may
include amending the programmatic
agreements or obtaining a ‘‘written
consent.’’ The recommended path
forward would enable UDOT to clarify
its assigned roles and responsibilities
during Section 106 consultations. The
overall consistency across all five of the
Section 106 programmatic agreements is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Sep 12, 2023
Jkt 259001
important to clarify the organizational
roles and responsibilities between
UDOT and FHWA for both Section 106
and Government-to-Government
consultations, resulting in more
predictable lines of communication,
more productive and meaningful
interagency dialogue with the Tribes,
and a positive reinforcement of FHWA’s
retained Tribal trust responsibilities.
Observation #2
In the course of reviewing the most
recent Manual of Instruction (MOI), the
Audit Team identified several areas that
do not address the most recent
requirements and guidelines associated
with the Fixing America’s Surface
Transportation Act; FHWA’s 2019
Reevaluation Q&A Guidance; Moving
Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century
Act Section 1319 interim guidance
relating to the appropriate use of the
combined Final Environment Impact
Statement/Record of Decision
documents; FHWA’s 2011
Environmental Justice and NEPA
guidance for identifying, disclosing and
mitigating impacts to environmental
justice communities; or FHWA’s
October 2018 memorandum addressing
activities that may be completed prior to
issuance of a Notice of Intent to prepare
an EIS. During interviews, UDOT
informed us that they make regular
updates to the MOI, as needed.
However, these examples illustrate that
the MOI would benefit from a regularly
scheduled, comprehensive review to
ensure that it reflects current national
policy and guidance.
Documentation and Records
Management
Successful Practice #1
During this audit period, the Audit
Team reviewed reevaluations for two
EIS projects that appeared to use the
same format. While it is not explicitly
required by the MOI, UDOT did appear
to use a standard procedure for these
reevaluations. For example, both
included a Summary of Re-evaluation
Analysis Table that functions like an
environmental checklist. This table
creates a standard process for looking at
changes in both the magnitude of
project impacts, as well as project scope
modifications.
Observation #1
The team reviewed multiple
reevaluations for the West Davis
Corridor Project. Each individual
reevaluation addressed the changes on
that portion of the larger project. The
FHWA suggests UDOT also add
language that summarizes the changes
PO 00000
Frm 00103
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
across all the reevaluations, such as
providing a listing of all the related
reevaluations and a statement
correlating them, to clearly demonstrate
and document that UDOT has
considered impacts across the entirety
of the project.
Quality Assurance/Quality Control
The UDOT has made improvements to
its QA/QC procedures. These
improvements are discussed in the
Legal Sufficiency section of this report.
Legal Sufficiency
During the audit period outside
counsel issued three findings of legal
sufficiency per the requirements of 23
CFR 771.125(b) and 23 CFR 774.7(d),
copies of which were provided to the
Audit Team. These include legal
sufficiency reviews of one EIS and two
Section 4(f) evaluations. The UDOT has
continued using the legal sufficiency
process it put in place for both Section
326 CE and Section 327 NEPA
Assignment; that is, contracting with
outside counsel who have extensive
experience in NEPA, other
environmental laws, and Federal
environmental litigation. Since the
signing of the initial FHWA–UDOT
MOU for the NEPA Assignment Program
in January 2017, no lawsuits have been
filed against NEPA-assigned projects in
the State of Utah.
Training
The UDOT has continued to develop
an annual training plan, in compliance
with Section 12.2 of the MOU.
Performance Measures
The UDOT has continued to assess its
performance as required under the
terms of the MOU. The UDOT’s annual
self-assessment report indicates that
they are meeting their performance
targets. The process of, and results from,
the State’s self-assessment have been an
important factor in the improvement of
UDOT’s NEPA Program. Observation #1
Section 10.2.1.C.i of the MOU requires
UDOT to assess change in and ensure
effective communication among UDOT,
Federal, and State resource agencies
resulting from assumption of
responsibilities under the MOU. In
interviews, resource agency staff at the
EPA and the FWS stated that overall
they have a good working relationship
with UDOT staff. Some FWS staff
indicated that they could utilize
additional information on the
differences between the 23 U.S.C. 326
(CE Assignment) program and the 23
U.S.C. 327 (NEPA Assignment) program.
The Audit Team also learned that
neither FWS nor EPA had responded to
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2023 / Notices
UDOT’s annual resource agency survey.
These are examples of where UDOT’s
program may benefit from more
consistent, program-level discussions
with resource agencies to ensure that all
parties understand their respective roles
and responsibilities, as well as the
provisions of the 326 and 327 programs.
Stronger managerial-level
communications with the resource
agencies may increase their
understanding of the importance of the
survey and improve the response rate.
No Non-Compliance Observations in
Audit #4
Non-compliance observations are
instances where the team found UDOT
was out of compliance or deficient in
proper implementation of a Federal
regulation, statute, guidance, policy, the
terms of the MOU, or UDOT’s own
procedures for compliance with the
NEPA process. Such observations may
also include instances where UDOT has
failed to maintain technical
competency, adequate personnel, and/or
financial resources to carry out the
assumed responsibilities. Other
noncompliance observations could
suggest a persistent failure to adequately
consult, coordinate, or consider the
concerns of other Federal, State, Tribal,
or local agencies with oversight,
consultation, or coordination
responsibilities. The FHWA expects
UDOT to develop and implement
corrective actions to address all noncompliance observations. The Audit
Team did not identify any noncompliance observations during this
audit.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Follow-up on the Prior NonCompliance Observations From Audit
#3
The FHWA had reported a
noncompliance observation relating to
UDOT not complying with the State’s
environmental review procedures as a
part of Audit #3. 2019 Audit #3—Issuing
a Document Without Final Legal
Sufficiency Finding As noted earlier, in
response to the 2019 audit finding that
legal sufficiency review documentation
was not provided prior to approval of a
project FEIS, UDOT and outside counsel
implemented a more formalized system
by instituting a Legal Sufficiency
Review Form to be completed by
UDOT’s outside counsel. The form
would ensure a record that the legal
sufficiency review occurred. The Audit
Team confirmed that UDOT developed
and implemented the form for the legal
sufficiency reviews during this audit
period.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Sep 12, 2023
Jkt 259001
Response to Public Comments on the
Draft Report and the Final Report
The FHWA received and responded to
three comments on the draft audit
report, pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327(g)(2).
The American Road & Transportation
Builders Association (ARTBA)
commented that they are in general
support of UDOT’s implementation of
the NEPA Assignment Program to
accelerate Federal-aid highway program
and project delivery in Utah. The
FHWA appreciates ARTBA’s input. A
private citizen commented that he is not
supportive of UDOT’s implementation
of the NEPA Assignment Program, due
to his experience with the Northern
Corridor Highway Project in the Bureau
of Land Management’s (BLM) Red Cliffs
National Conservation Area. The Audit
Team, in conjunction with the FHWA
Utah Division Office, independently
reviewed and confirmed that the
Federal action associated with this
concern was the BLM’s Federal land
management decision, including BLM’s
NEPA approval for that Federal land
management decision. It was not a
NEPA approval by UDOT under the
NEPA Assignment Program. Finally, an
anonymous commenter raised concerns
about UDOT’s traffic noise abatement
procedures as they apply to local public
agencies. Based on FHWA’s traffic noise
abatement regulations in 23 CFR
772.7(b), UDOT has developed noise
policies in conformance with 23 CFR
part 772, and FHWA Utah Division
Office approved them. The UDOT is
required to apply these policies
uniformly and consistently statewide,
including the uniform and consistent
application to the NEPA reviews of the
Federal-aid highway projects
administered by the local public
agencies in Utah.
After reviewing the public comments,
and looking into the concerns raised in
the comments, FHWA determined that
there is no need to revise the draft audit
report. The FHWA may also consider
the public comments in scoping the
future NEPA Assignment monitoring
reviews in Utah.
Therefore, FHWA is finalizing
UDOT’s fourth and final NEPA
Assignment audit report with this
Federal Register notice.
[FR Doc. 2023–19705 Filed 9–12–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
PO 00000
Frm 00104
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
62873
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[Docket No. FHWA–2023–0023]
National Bridge Inspection Program
Compliance Review Manual
Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA), U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice; request for comments.
AGENCY:
This notice requests
comments on the Performance Year (PY)
2024 Interim National Bridge Inspection
Program (NBIP) Compliance Review
Manual outlining the procedures FHWA
Division Bridge Engineers will follow
during calendar year 2023 when
performing compliance reviews of State
department of transportation bridge
safety inspection programs. The PY
2024 Interim NBIP Compliance Review
Manual incorporates revised provisions
of the National Bridge Inspection
Standards (NBIS), which came into
effect June 6, 2022. 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
by FHWA Division Bridge Engineers for
the calendar year 2023 reviews.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before October 13, 2023. Late-filed
comments will be considered to the
extent practicable.
To ensure that you do not duplicate
your docket submissions, please submit
all comments by only one of the
following means:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
www.regulations.gov and follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments.
• Mail: Docket Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The telephone number is (202)
366–9329.
• Instructions: You must include the
agency name and docket number at the
beginning of your comments. All
comments received will be posted
without change to www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
questions about this notice, contact Ms.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 176 (Wednesday, September 13, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62870-62873]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-19705]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[FHWA Docket No. FHWA-2021-0010]
Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program; Utah Department
of Transportation 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 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. The program mandates annual audits during each of the first 4
years of State participation to ensure compliance with program
requirements. This notice finalizes the findings of the fourth and
final audit report for the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David Cohen, Office of Project
Development and Environmental Review, (202) 366-8531,
[email protected], or Ms. Diane Mobley, Office of the Chief Counsel,
(202) 366-1366, [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
United States Code (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 in lieu of FHWA.
The UDOT published its application for NEPA assumption on October 9,
2015, and made it available for public comment for 30 days. After
considering public comments, UDOT submitted its application to FHWA on
December 1, 2015. The application served as the basis for developing a
memorandum of understanding (MOU) that identifies the responsibilities
and obligations that UDOT would assume. The FHWA published a notice of
the draft MOU in the Federal Register on November 16, 2016 (81 FR
80710), with a 30-day comment period to solicit the views of the public
and Federal agencies. After the end of the comment period, FHWA and
UDOT considered comments and proceeded to execute the MOU. Effective
January 17, 2017, UDOT assumed FHWA's responsibilities under NEPA, and
the responsibilities for other Federal environmental laws described in
the MOU. On May 26, 2022, FHWA and UDOT renewed the MOU for another 5-
year term.
Section 327(g) of Title 23, U.S.C., requires the Secretary to
conduct annual audits during each of the first 4 years of State
participation. After the fourth year, the Secretary shall monitor the
State's compliance with the written agreement. The FHWA must make the
results of each audit available for public comment. This notice
finalizes the findings of the fourth audit report for UDOT
participation in the NEPA Assignment Program. The FHWA published a
draft version of this report in the Federal Register on June 23, 2022
(87 FR 37547), and made it available for public review and comment for
30 days in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 327(g). The FHWA received three
responses to the Federal Register notice during the public comment
period for the draft report, and FHWA responds to these comments in the
final report, pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327(g)(2). The FHWA also determined
that the comments required no changes to the draft audit report. This
notice finalizes the fourth and final NEPA Assignment audit report in
Utah.
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 Audit of the Utah
Department of Transportation--Final Report, July 1, 2019-June 30, 2020
Executive Summary
This report summarizes the results of the Federal Highway
Administration's (FHWA) fourth and final audit of the Utah Department
of Transportation's (UDOT) National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
review responsibilities and obligations that FHWA assigned and UDOT
assumed pursuant to 23 United State Code (U.S.C.) 327. Throughout this
report, FHWA uses the term ``NEPA Assignment Program'' to refer to the
program codified at 23 U.S.C. 327. Pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327, UDOT and
FHWA executed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) on January 17, 2017,
to memorialize UDOT's NEPA responsibilities and obligations for
Federal-aid highway projects and certain other FHWA actions in Utah.
The FHWA and UDOT recently renewed the MOU on May 26, 2022, for another
5-year term. The section 327 MOU covers environmental review
responsibilities for projects that require the preparation of
environmental assessments (EA), environmental impact statements (EIS),
and non-designated documented categorical exclusions (DCE). A separate
MOU, pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 326, authorizes UDOT's environmental review
responsibilities for other categorical exclusions (CE), commonly known
as CE Program Assignment. The scope of this audit did not include the
CE Program Assignment responsibilities and projects.
As part of FHWA's review responsibilities under 23 U.S.C. 327, FHWA
formed a team (the ``Audit Team'') in August 2020 to plan and conduct
an audit of NEPA responsibilities UDOT assumed. Due to COVID-19-related
travel restrictions, the Audit Team conducted a virtual audit during
the period from November 9, 2020, to December 2, 2020. Prior to the
virtual audit, the Audit Team reviewed UDOT's NEPA project files,
UDOT's response to FHWA's pre-audit information request (PAIR), UDOT's
NEPA Assignment Self-Assessment Report, UDOT's NEPA Quality Assurance/
Quality Control (QA/QC)
[[Page 62871]]
Guidance, and UDOT's NEPA Assignment Training Plan. The Audit Team
conducted videoconference interviews with four members of UDOT central
office staff, six of UDOT's legal counsel (one current Assistant
Attorney General assigned to UDOT, one former Assistant Attorney
General assigned to UDOT, and four outside counsel), three staff
members from the U.S Environmental Protection Agency, and two staff
members from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) as part of the
virtual audit.
Overall, the Audit Team found that UDOT continues to successfully
carry out its DCE, EA, and EIS project review responsibilities. The
UDOT has also made efforts to respond to the FHWA findings from the
third audit, including improving document management and QA/QC
procedures. In the third audit, the Audit Team found that UDOT issued
an environmental document without a final legal sufficiency finding,
and had observed that there were ways UDOT could improve their
training.
In this fourth and final audit, the Audit Team identified four
observations and two successful practices. The Audit Team finds UDOT is
carrying out the responsibilities it has assumed, and they are in
substantial compliance with the provisions of the MOU. This report also
concludes with the status of FHWA's non-compliance observation from the
third audit review, including any UDOT self-imposed corrective actions.
After the fourth year of UDOT's participation in the program, FHWA will
continue to monitor UDOT's compliance with the terms of this MOU, in
accordance with 23 U.S.C. 327(h).
Background
The NEPA Assignment Program allows a State to assume FHWA's
environmental responsibilities for review, consultation, and compliance
for Federal-aid highway projects and certain other FHWA actions. Under
23 U.S.C. 327, a State that assumes these Federal responsibilities
becomes solely responsible and solely liable for carrying them out.
Effective January 17, 2017, UDOT assumed FHWA's responsibilities under
NEPA and other Federal environmental laws. Examples of responsibilities
UDOT 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.
Audits are the primary mechanism through which FHWA oversees UDOT's
compliance with the MOU and the NEPA Assignment Program requirements.
This includes ensuring compliance with the applicable Federal laws and
policies, evaluating UDOT's progress toward achieving the performance
measures identified in MOU Section 10.2, and collecting information
needed for the Secretary's annual report to Congress. The FHWA must
present the results of each audit in a report and make it available for
public comment in the Federal Register. Through this fourth and final
audit, FHWA will satisfy provisions of 23 U.S.C. 327(g) and Part 11 of
the MOU. This report summarizes the results of the fourth and final
audit in Utah, and it includes a summary discussion that describes
progress since the last audit.
Scope and Methodology
The MOU (Part 3.1.1) states that ``[p]ursuant to 23 U.S.C.
327(a)(2)(A), on the effective date, FHWA assigns, and UDOT assumes,
subject to the terms and conditions set forth in 23 U.S.C. 327 and this
MOU, all of the U.S. Department of Transportation Secretary's
responsibilities for compliance with the NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.
with respect to the highway projects specified under subpart 3.3. This
assignment includes statutory provisions, regulations, policies, and
guidance related to the implementation of NEPA for highway projects
such as 23 U.S.C. 139, 40 CFR parts 1500-1508, DOT Order 5610.1C, and
23 CFR 771 as applicable.'' Also, the performance measure in MOU Part
10.2.1(A) for compliance with NEPA and other Federal environmental
statutes and regulations commits UDOT to maintaining documented
compliance with requirements of all applicable statutes and regulations
as well as the provisions in the MOU.
The Audit Team consisted of NEPA subject matter experts from the
FHWA Utah Division, FHWA Resource Center, the Volpe Center, FHWA
Headquarters, and FHWA Office of the Chief Counsel. These experts
received training on how to evaluate implementation of the NEPA
Assignment Program.
The Audit Team conducted an examination of UDOT's NEPA project
files, UDOT's responses to the PAIR, and UDOT's self-assessment. The
audit also included interviews with staff and reviews of UDOT 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; QA/
QC; legal sufficiency; training; and performance measurement. In
particular, the Audit Team reviewed UDOT's process and procedures for
conducting environmental reevaluations.
The focus of the audit was on UDOT's process and program
implementation. Therefore, while the Audit Team reviewed project files
to evaluate UDOT's NEPA process and procedures, the Audit Team did not
evaluate UDOT's project-specific decisions to determine if they were,
in FHWA's opinion, appropriate or not. The Audit Team reviewed 20 NEPA
Project files with DCEs, EAs, EISs, and reevaluations, representing all
projects with decision points or other actionable items between July 1,
2019, and June 30, 2020. The Audit Team also interviewed environmental
staff in UDOT's headquarters office.
The PAIR consisted of 25 questions about specific elements in the
MOU. The Audit Team used UDOT's response to the PAIR to develop
specific follow-up questions for the UDOT staff. The Audit Team
conducted four interviews with UDOT environmental staff, one virtual
interview with staff from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), one interview with staff from the FWS, two interviews with
UDOT's outside legal counsel, and one interview with legal counsel from
the Utah Attorney General's Office. All interviews were conducted as
videoconferences.
Throughout the document reviews and interviews, the Audit Team
verified information regarding the UDOT NEPA Assignment Program
including UDOT policies, guidance, manuals, and reports. This included
the NEPA QA/QC Guidance, the NEPA Assignment Training Plan, and the
NEPA Assignment Self-Assessment Report.
The Audit Team compared the procedures outlined in UDOT
environmental manuals and policies to the information obtained during
interviews and project file reviews to determine if there were
discrepancies between UDOT's performance and documented procedures. The
Audit Team documented observations under the six NEPA Assignment
Program topic areas and arrived at the following audit opinion.
Overall, UDOT has carried out the environmental responsibilities it
assumed through the MOU and the application for the NEPA Assignment
Program, and as such, the Audit Team finds UDOT is substantially
compliant with the provisions of the MOU.
Observations and Successful Practices
This section summarizes the Audit Team's observations of UDOT's
NEPA Assignment Program implementation, including successful practices
UDOT
[[Page 62872]]
may want to continue or expand. Successful practices are positive
results FHWA would like to commend UDOT for developing. These may
include ideas or concepts that UDOT has planned but not yet
implemented. Observations are items that the Audit Team would like to
draw UDOT's attention to, which may benefit from revisions to improve
processes, procedures, or outcomes. The UDOT 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 UDOT could make
improvements. This report addresses all six MOU topic areas as separate
discussions. Within each area, this report discusses successful
practices followed by observations.
This audit report provides an opportunity for UDOT to implement
actions to improve their NEPA Assignment Program. The FHWA and UDOT
will continue to work together to monitor UDOT's compliance with the
terms of this MOU, as required by 23 U.S.C. 327(h).
Program Management
Successful Practice #1
The Audit Team identified one of UDOT's project websites which
included detailed information about the proposed noise impact analyses,
traffic noise abatement measures, and the proposed relocation of the
existing noise barriers as a successful practice. The noise impact and
abatement information presented to the public was comprehensive and
easy to understand.
Observation #1
Section 5.1.4 of UDOT's NEPA Assignment MOU outlines an interagency
planning and coordination protocol to make sure that all programmatic
agreements reflect UDOT's new roles and responsibilities under NEPA
Assignment. The Audit Team observed that UDOT's Section 106
programmatic agreements with four Tribal governments predate NEPA
Assignment, and they do not reflect UDOT's assigned roles and
responsibilities. We recommend that UDOT reach out to these Tribal
governments and implement the interagency planning and coordination
provisions of Section 5.1.4, which may include amending the
programmatic agreements or obtaining a ``written consent.'' The
recommended path forward would enable UDOT to clarify its assigned
roles and responsibilities during Section 106 consultations. The
overall consistency across all five of the Section 106 programmatic
agreements is important to clarify the organizational roles and
responsibilities between UDOT and FHWA for both Section 106 and
Government-to-Government consultations, resulting in more predictable
lines of communication, more productive and meaningful interagency
dialogue with the Tribes, and a positive reinforcement of FHWA's
retained Tribal trust responsibilities.
Observation #2
In the course of reviewing the most recent Manual of Instruction
(MOI), the Audit Team identified several areas that do not address the
most recent requirements and guidelines associated with the Fixing
America's Surface Transportation Act; FHWA's 2019 Reevaluation Q&A
Guidance; Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act Section
1319 interim guidance relating to the appropriate use of the combined
Final Environment Impact Statement/Record of Decision documents; FHWA's
2011 Environmental Justice and NEPA guidance for identifying,
disclosing and mitigating impacts to environmental justice communities;
or FHWA's October 2018 memorandum addressing activities that may be
completed prior to issuance of a Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS.
During interviews, UDOT informed us that they make regular updates to
the MOI, as needed. However, these examples illustrate that the MOI
would benefit from a regularly scheduled, comprehensive review to
ensure that it reflects current national policy and guidance.
Documentation and Records Management
Successful Practice #1
During this audit period, the Audit Team reviewed reevaluations for
two EIS projects that appeared to use the same format. While it is not
explicitly required by the MOI, UDOT did appear to use a standard
procedure for these reevaluations. For example, both included a Summary
of Re-evaluation Analysis Table that functions like an environmental
checklist. This table creates a standard process for looking at changes
in both the magnitude of project impacts, as well as project scope
modifications.
Observation #1
The team reviewed multiple reevaluations for the West Davis
Corridor Project. Each individual reevaluation addressed the changes on
that portion of the larger project. The FHWA suggests UDOT also add
language that summarizes the changes across all the reevaluations, such
as providing a listing of all the related reevaluations and a statement
correlating them, to clearly demonstrate and document that UDOT has
considered impacts across the entirety of the project.
Quality Assurance/Quality Control
The UDOT has made improvements to its QA/QC procedures. These
improvements are discussed in the Legal Sufficiency section of this
report.
Legal Sufficiency
During the audit period outside counsel issued three findings of
legal sufficiency per the requirements of 23 CFR 771.125(b) and 23 CFR
774.7(d), copies of which were provided to the Audit Team. These
include legal sufficiency reviews of one EIS and two Section 4(f)
evaluations. The UDOT has continued using the legal sufficiency process
it put in place for both Section 326 CE and Section 327 NEPA
Assignment; that is, contracting with outside counsel who have
extensive experience in NEPA, other environmental laws, and Federal
environmental litigation. Since the signing of the initial FHWA-UDOT
MOU for the NEPA Assignment Program in January 2017, no lawsuits have
been filed against NEPA-assigned projects in the State of Utah.
Training
The UDOT has continued to develop an annual training plan, in
compliance with Section 12.2 of the MOU.
Performance Measures
The UDOT has continued to assess its performance as required under
the terms of the MOU. The UDOT's annual self-assessment report
indicates that they are meeting their performance targets. The process
of, and results from, the State's self-assessment have been an
important factor in the improvement of UDOT's NEPA Program. Observation
#1 Section 10.2.1.C.i of the MOU requires UDOT to assess change in and
ensure effective communication among UDOT, Federal, and State resource
agencies resulting from assumption of responsibilities under the MOU.
In interviews, resource agency staff at the EPA and the FWS stated that
overall they have a good working relationship with UDOT staff. Some FWS
staff indicated that they could utilize additional information on the
differences between the 23 U.S.C. 326 (CE Assignment) program and the
23 U.S.C. 327 (NEPA Assignment) program. The Audit Team also learned
that neither FWS nor EPA had responded to
[[Page 62873]]
UDOT's annual resource agency survey. These are examples of where
UDOT's program may benefit from more consistent, program-level
discussions with resource agencies to ensure that all parties
understand their respective roles and responsibilities, as well as the
provisions of the 326 and 327 programs. Stronger managerial-level
communications with the resource agencies may increase their
understanding of the importance of the survey and improve the response
rate.
No Non-Compliance Observations in Audit #4
Non-compliance observations are instances where the team found UDOT
was out of compliance or deficient in proper implementation of a
Federal regulation, statute, guidance, policy, the terms of the MOU, or
UDOT's own procedures for compliance with the NEPA process. Such
observations may also include instances where UDOT has failed to
maintain technical competency, adequate personnel, and/or financial
resources to carry out the assumed responsibilities. Other
noncompliance observations could suggest a persistent failure to
adequately consult, coordinate, or consider the concerns of other
Federal, State, Tribal, or local agencies with oversight, consultation,
or coordination responsibilities. The FHWA expects UDOT to develop and
implement corrective actions to address all non-compliance
observations. The Audit Team did not identify any non-compliance
observations during this audit.
Follow-up on the Prior Non-Compliance Observations From Audit #3
The FHWA had reported a noncompliance observation relating to UDOT
not complying with the State's environmental review procedures as a
part of Audit #3. 2019 Audit #3--Issuing a Document Without Final Legal
Sufficiency Finding As noted earlier, in response to the 2019 audit
finding that legal sufficiency review documentation was not provided
prior to approval of a project FEIS, UDOT and outside counsel
implemented a more formalized system by instituting a Legal Sufficiency
Review Form to be completed by UDOT's outside counsel. The form would
ensure a record that the legal sufficiency review occurred. The Audit
Team confirmed that UDOT developed and implemented the form for the
legal sufficiency reviews during this audit period.
Response to Public Comments on the Draft Report and the Final Report
The FHWA received and responded to three comments on the draft
audit report, pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327(g)(2). The American Road &
Transportation Builders Association (ARTBA) commented that they are in
general support of UDOT's implementation of the NEPA Assignment Program
to accelerate Federal-aid highway program and project delivery in Utah.
The FHWA appreciates ARTBA's input. A private citizen commented that he
is not supportive of UDOT's implementation of the NEPA Assignment
Program, due to his experience with the Northern Corridor Highway
Project in the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) Red Cliffs National
Conservation Area. The Audit Team, in conjunction with the FHWA Utah
Division Office, independently reviewed and confirmed that the Federal
action associated with this concern was the BLM's Federal land
management decision, including BLM's NEPA approval for that Federal
land management decision. It was not a NEPA approval by UDOT under the
NEPA Assignment Program. Finally, an anonymous commenter raised
concerns about UDOT's traffic noise abatement procedures as they apply
to local public agencies. Based on FHWA's traffic noise abatement
regulations in 23 CFR 772.7(b), UDOT has developed noise policies in
conformance with 23 CFR part 772, and FHWA Utah Division Office
approved them. The UDOT is required to apply these policies uniformly
and consistently statewide, including the uniform and consistent
application to the NEPA reviews of the Federal-aid highway projects
administered by the local public agencies in Utah.
After reviewing the public comments, and looking into the concerns
raised in the comments, FHWA determined that there is no need to revise
the draft audit report. The FHWA may also consider the public comments
in scoping the future NEPA Assignment monitoring reviews in Utah.
Therefore, FHWA is finalizing UDOT's fourth and final NEPA
Assignment audit report with this Federal Register notice.
[FR Doc. 2023-19705 Filed 9-12-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P