Design Standards for Highways |
|---|
|
Gregory G. Nadeau
Federal Highway Administration
October 13, 2015
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 197 (Tuesday, October 13, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 61302-61308]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-25931]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
23 CFR Part 625
[Docket No. FHWA-2015-0003]
RIN 2125-AF67
Design Standards for Highways
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule updates the regulations governing the required
design standards to be utilized on Federal-aid highway program (FAHP)
projects. In issuing the final rule, FHWA incorporates by reference the
latest versions of design standards and standard specifications
previously adopted and incorporated by reference, and removes the
corresponding outdated or superseded versions of these standards and
specifications. This rule also makes technical changes to the
regulatory text consistent with updated Federal Register procedures.
DATES: This final rule is effective November 12, 2015. The
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the rule
is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of November 12,
2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael Matzke, Office of Program
Administration (HIPA-20), (202) 366-4658, or via email at
michael.matzke@dot.gov, or Mr. Robert Black, Office of the Chief
Counsel (HCC-30), (202) 366-1373, or via email at robert.black@dot.gov.
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 and Filing
This document, the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), and all
comments received may be viewed online through the Federal eRulemaking
portal at: http://www.regulations.gov. The Web site is available 24
hours each
[[Page 61303]]
day, 365 days each year. Please follow the instructions. An electronic
copy of this document may also be downloaded by accessing the Office of
Federal Register's home page at: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/, or the Government Printing Office's Web page at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys.
Background
This rulemaking updates existing regulations governing new
construction, reconstruction, resurfacing (except for maintenance
resurfacing), restoration, and rehabilitation projects on the National
Highway System (NHS), including the Interstate System, by incorporating
by reference the current versions of design standards and standard
specifications previously adopted and incorporated by reference under
23 CFR 625.4, and removing the outdated or superseded versions of these
standards and specifications. Several of these design standards and
standard specifications were established by the American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and the American
Welding Society (AWS) and were previously adopted by FHWA through
rulemaking. The updated standards or specifications replace previous
versions of these documents and represent the most recent refinements
that professional organizations have formally accepted. The FHWA
formally adopts them for NHS projects.
The revisions include referencing the 2011 edition of the AASHTO A
Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, commonly referred
to as the Green Book. The revisions also include referencing the
current version of AASHTO's Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD)
Bridge Design Specifications; LRFD Movable Highway Bridge Design
Specifications; and Standard Specifications for Structural Supports of
Highway Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals. In addition, the
revisions reference the current version of the AWS Bridge Welding Code
and the Structural Welding Code--Reinforcing Steel.
The AASHTO is an organization that represents 52 State
transportation agencies (STA) (including the District of Columbia and
Puerto Rico). Its members consist of the duly constituted heads and
other chief officials of those agencies. The Secretary of
Transportation is an ex-officio member, and DOT staff participates in
various AASHTO activities as nonvoting representatives. Among other
functions, AASHTO develops and issues standards, specifications,
policies, guides, and related materials for use by the States for
highway projects. Many of the standards, policies, and standard
specifications that were approved by FHWA and incorporated into 23 CFR
part 625 were developed and issued by AASHTO.
The revisions also include updated versions of welding codes
published by AWS. The AWS is a nonprofit organization known for its
code and certification procedures, providing industry standards for
welding, including in the transportation field. The AWS reports about
66,000 members worldwide and develops updated materials for welding
professionals and other interested parties, including those related to
bridge welding and structural welding.
While these adopted standards and specifications apply to all
projects on the NHS (including the Interstate System), FHWA encourages
the use of flexibility and a context-sensitive approach to consider a
full range of project and user needs and the impacts to the community
and natural and human environment. The STA and local agencies may
consider using design exceptions to achieve a design that balances
project and user needs, performance, cost, environmental implications,
and community values. These adopted design standards provide a range of
acceptable values for highway features, and FHWA encourages the use of
this flexibility to achieve a design that best suits the desires of the
community while satisfying the purpose for the project and needs of its
users.
At a minimum, STAs and local agencies should select design values
based on an evaluation of the context of the facility, needs of all the
various project users, safety, mobility, human and natural
environmental impacts, and project costs. For most situations, there is
sufficient flexibility within the range of acceptable values to achieve
a balanced design. However, when this is not possible, STAs and local
agencies may consider designs that deviate from the design standards
when warranted based on the project's impact on the environment
(natural and built), historical and recreational facilities, and other
factors. In instances where design standards for a particular element
cannot be attained, a design exception, subject to approval by FHWA, or
on behalf of FHWA if an STA has assumed the responsibility through a
Stewardship and Oversight agreement, is required for projects on the
NHS. Additional information on FHWA's adopted design standards and
design exceptions is available electronically at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/design/standards and in FHWA's publication titled
Mitigation Strategies for Design Exceptions available at http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/geometric/pubs/mitigationstrategies/fhwa_sa_07011.pdf.
In addition, FHWA supports using design guides that national
organizations develop from peer-reviewed research, or equivalent guides
developed in cooperation with State or local officials, when such
guides are not in conflict with Federal laws and regulations.
The rule also makes technical changes to the regulatory text
consistent with updated Federal Register procedures, including updating
mailing addresses and including telephone and Web site addresses in 23
CFR 625.4(d) pertaining to the availability of documents incorporated
by reference.
Discussion Under 1 CFR Part 51
The documents FHWA is incorporating by reference are reasonably
available to interested parties, primarily STAs and local agencies
carrying out Federal-aid highway projects. These documents represent
the most recent refinements that professional organizations have
formally accepted and are currently in use by the transportation
industry. The documents are also available for review at the U.S.
Department of Transportation's National Transportation Library, the
National Archives and Records Administration, or may be obtained from
AASHTO or AWS.
The documents incorporated by reference in this final rule are:
(1) A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 6th
Edition, AASHTO 2011. The AASHTO, 2011 edition incorporates the latest
research and current industry practices, with the basic criteria
identified for geometric design standards remaining essentially the
same. This Policy is a comprehensive manual to assist STAs and local
agencies in administrative, planning, and educational efforts
pertaining to design formulation. The Policy includes design guidelines
for freeways, arterials, collectors, and local roads in both urban and
rural locations.
(2) A Policy on Design Standards Interstate System, AASHTO, January
2005. This Policy complements A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways
and Streets and Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges. Topics
include design traffic, right-of-way, geometric controls and criteria,
cross section elements, interchanges, and bridges and other structures.
(3) Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, 17th Edition,
AASHTO, 2002. This document details
[[Page 61304]]
the design standards for the maintenance and rehabilitation of older,
existing structures. For new bridge designs, it is superseded by the
AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (see related item).
(4) AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications, 3rd Edition,
AASHTO 2010, with 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2014 Interim Revisions. This
new edition has been revised to be consistent with its companion, the
recently updated AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (see related
item). Among the revisions are improved testing and acceptance
criteria, updated material references, and recommended guidelines for
construction loads.
(5) AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 7th Edition, AASHTO,
2014, with 2015 Interim Revisions. The AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design
Specifications are intended for use in the design, evaluation, and
rehabilitation of bridges, and are mandated by the FHWA for use on all
bridges using Federal funding. These Specifications employ the LRFD
methodology using factors developing from current statistical knowledge
of loads and structural performance.
(6) AASHTO LRFD Moveable Highway Bridge Design Specifications, 2nd
Edition, AASHTO, 2007, including 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2014, and 2015
Interim Revisions. This guide includes information on design of bridge
spans, mechanical systems (motors, hydraulics, etc.), electrical
systems, and bridge protection systems. The guidelines also cover
seismic analysis and vessel impact analysis. Several types of movable
bridges as discussed, including Bascule span, Swing span, and Vertical
Lift bridges.
(7) AASHTO/AWS D1.5M/D1.5: 2010 Bridge Welding Code, 6th Edition,
AASHTO, 2010, with 2011 and 2012 Interim Revisions. This document
covers AASHTO welding requirements for welded highway bridges made from
carbon and low-alloy construction steels. Chapters cover design of
welded connections, workmanship, technique, procedure and performance
qualification, inspection, and stud welding. This document features the
latest AASHTO revisions and nondestructive examination requirements, as
well as a section providing a ``Fracture Control Plan for Nonredundant
Bridge Members.''
(8) Standards for Structural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaires
and Traffic Signals, 6th Edition, AASHTO, 2013. These Standards are
applicable to the structural design of supports for highway signs,
luminaires, and traffic signals. The Standards are intended to serve as
a standard and guide for the design, fabrication, and erection of these
types of supports.
(9) D1.4/D1.4M: 2011 Structural Welding Code--Reinforcing Steel,
7th Edition, American Welding Society, 2011. This manual covers welding
of reinforcing steel in most reinforced concrete applications. It
includes sections on allowable stresses, structural details,
workmanship requirements, technique, procedure and performance
qualification, and inspection.
Summary Discussion of Comments Received in Response to the NPRM
On June 2, 2015, FHWA published an NPRM in the Federal Register at
80 FR 31327 soliciting public comments on its proposal to update the
existing regulations. The following presents an overview of the
comments received to the NPRM. The docket contained comments from 11
different parties including 3 STAs, 4 industry organizations, and 4
individuals. The FHWA appreciates the feedback the commenters provided,
carefully reviewed and analyzed all the comments that were submitted,
and made revisions to the NPRM to incorporate suggestions where
necessary.
Summary of STA Comments
The Pennsylvania DOT was concerned that the NPRM lacked
implementation timeframes for the updated standards. As an example,
they stated that STAs will need to update standard designs for
structural support for overhead signs and traffic signals and estimated
that it may take 3 years to accomplish this. Pennsylvania DOT went on
to suggest implementation timeframes of 1-2 years for standards 23 CFR
625.4(b)(1), (2), (3), (4), (5), and (6); and 3-4 years for standard 23
CFR 625.4(b)(7).
The FHWA believes that the standards and manuals incorporated by
reference under this rulemaking, where not in conflict with standards
and manuals under the previous regulation, have been used by STAs for
projects on the NHS. This final rule is effective for all NHS projects
authorized to proceed with design activities on or after the effective
date of this rule. While FHWA will not establish any extended
implementation timeframes within the regulation, STAs should work
closely with their FHWA division office in implementing the final rule.
Both Oklahoma DOT and California DOT expressed support for the
update of the standards, specifications, and text.
The Oklahoma DOT and California DOT support was noted. No change
was made to the regulation.
Individual's Comments
An individual commenter advised that the address shown in the NPRM
23 CFR 625.4(d)(2) was incorrect and should be: American Welding
Society, 8869 NW 36 Street, #130, Miami, FL 33166-6672.
The FHWA agrees and the final rule was revised accordingly.
The individual also noted that in July 2015, the AASHTO Standard in
23 CFR 625.4(c)(2) (Standard Specifications for Transportation
Materials and Methods of Sampling and Testing, parts I and II, AASHTO
1995), was superseded by the latest edition of the manual (Standard
Specifications for Transportation Materials and Methods of Sampling and
Testing, 35th Edition and AASHTO Provisional Standards, 2015 Edition).
Furthermore, the Standard Specifications for Structural Supports for
Highway Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals, 6th Edition, AASHTO 2013
was superseded by LRFD Specifications for Structural Supports for
Highway Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals, 1st Edition, AASHTO 2015
in August of 2015.
The timing of the updates for the AASHTO materials and structural
support publications did not allow for FHWA to propose the adoption of
them in the NPRM. The FHWA will consider adopting these two manuals in
a future update to the regulations. No change was made to the final
rule.
The individual also recommend several other documents for
incorporation by reference including a specification for bridge and
parking garage deck overlays and several roadway lighting guides and
specifications. Generally, the guides and specifications suggested by
the commenter refer to specific roadway materials and appurtenances and
are left up to STAs to reference as necessary for projects. No changes
were made to the final rule to adopt the additional documents suggested
by the commenter.
Another individual commenter suggested that the time period for
adopting newer versions of the Green Book can be shortened or
eliminated by not including specific edition information in the
regulation, and that by doing so, FHWA could avoid a formal rulemaking
process and adopt newer editions of the Green Book by only issuing a
memo or policy paper.
Procedures and requirements for incorporation by reference are
covered in 1 CFR part 51. This regulation requires that the language
incorporating
[[Page 61305]]
a publication by reference be precise and complete and must clearly
state the title, date, edition, author, publisher and identification
number of the publication. Therefore, no change was made to the final
rule.
An individual expressed support for the update as long as it
eliminates outdated options for road and road-related infrastructure. A
review of the list of outdated options provided by the commenter showed
that they mainly related to signing and striping issues and therefore
fall under the purview of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices, or are based on specific design decisions that are made on a
project-by-project basis by STAs and local agencies. No change was made
to the final rule.
An individual commented that the regulation needs to contain
timeline limits for highway projects and that it must require that more
time is spent on drainage design since rework after completion of
construction can be costly. In addition, the individual suggested that
all cloverleaf on and off ramps be replaced to provide for smoother
operations on the highway system.
Establishing design and construction schedules and timelines for
highway projects is left to STAs and/or local agencies and will depend
on many factors such as project complexity, engineering and
environmental issues, and agency staffing and resources, to name a few.
Similarly, as the owners of the highway system, STAs and/or local
agencies are responsible for setting highway improvement priorities
according to local needs. As such, it is outside the scope of this
rulemaking to set or otherwise require timelines for design and
construction of projects. The standards adopted by this regulation
address the need for proper drainage design and interchange geometrics,
including cloverleaf on and off ramps. No change was made to the final
rule.
Industry Organization Comments
The National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO),
Smart Growth America, and People For Bikes all recommended amending 23
CFR 625 to include the NACTO Urban Street Design Guide \1\ and an ITE
Recommended Practice/Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares: A Context-
Sensitive Approach \2\ as design guidance or as standards for urban
streets. The NACTO points out that 23 U.S.C. 109(c)(2) requires the
Secretary to consider the publication entitled Flexibility in Highway
Design and the context-sensitive design approach in the development of
design criteria. The NACTO also points out that many city-owned
arterial streets were added to the NHS under the Moving Ahead for
Progress in the 21st Century Act (Pub. L. 112-141), known as MAP-21,
and that a context-sensitive design approach is critical to achieving a
balanced design on these roadways. The Smart Growth America and People
For Bikes additionally urge FHWA to include; the NACTO Urban Bikeway
Design Guide,\3\ and the FHWA Separated Bike Lane Planning and Design
Guide.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ http://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/.
\2\ http://www.ite.org/css/online/.
\3\ http://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/.
\4\ http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/separated_bikelane_pdg/page00.cfm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part 625, Design Standards for Highways, contains a listing of
documents that define specific criteria and controls for the design of
NHS projects. Such documents are referred to as standards. The FHWA and
other organizations produce many other documents that serve to
complement the design standards. These documents are often referred to
as guides, references, or best practices. Non-regulatory information,
such as guides and references that serve to complement or supplement
design standards need not be included within the Code of Federal
Regulations. Instead, FHWA typically recognizes guidance through policy
memoranda or development of separate FHWA publications.
As an example, on August 20, 2013, FHWA issued a memorandum \5\
expressing its support for taking a flexible approach to bicycle and
pedestrian facility design. The memorandum listed several good
resources that can be referenced to develop non-motorized
transportation networks, particularly in urban areas. The memorandum
references the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide and ITE Designing
Walkable Urban Thoroughfares guide. Subsequent to the date of the
memorandum, NACTO published the Urban Street Design Guide. The FHWA
expressed support for using the new guide in Frequently Asked Questions
available on the internet at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/guidance/design_guidance/design_flexibility_qa.cfm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/guidance/design_guidance/design_flexibility.cfm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While adopted standards and specifications apply to all projects on
the NHS, the AASHTO Green Book encourages the use of flexibility and a
context-sensitive approach to consider the full range of project and
user needs and the impacts to the community and natural and human
environment. The 2011 edition, adopted under this rulemaking,
strengthens such language and incorporates many of the principles
contained in the materials referenced in 23 U.S.C. 109(c)(2). For most
situations, there is sufficient flexibility within the range of
acceptable values contained in the standards to achieve a balanced
design for a variety of roadway classification types. However, when
this is not possible, a design exception may be appropriate.
The FHWA does not intend to adopt the guides as standards for the
NHS but will continue to recommend the use of a wide array of design
resources to achieve context-sensitive urban street designs. Instead,
language has been added to the rule to recognize that FHWA supports the
use of guides that national organizations develop from peer-reviewed
research, or equivalent guides developed in cooperation with State or
local officials, when such guides are not in conflict with other
Federal laws or regulations.
In addition, FHWA will consider including a similar statement about
FHWA support of other guides that serve as supplements to the
regulatory standards in future updates to 23 CFR part 652.
The Public Resource.org asserted that the documents to be
incorporated by reference into the rule are not reasonably available to
the public.
As stated earlier, when proposing to incorporate a document by
reference in the regulations, FHWA follows the policies and procedures
under 1 CFR part 51 to ensure that the materials proposed to be
incorporated are reasonably available to interested parties and usable
by the class of persons affected. The NPRM describes where the
materials can be obtained by members of the public, including in-person
at the Department of Transportation headquarters office. The materials
have been formally adopted by professional organizations and have been
in use by the community for some time. The FHWA believes these
documents to be in use by the STAs and local agencies affected by this
rulemaking and thus are reasonably available.
[[Page 61306]]
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), Executive Order
13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), and DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures
The FHWA determined that this action does not constitute a
significant regulatory action within the meaning of Executive Order
12866 or within the meaning of DOT regulatory policies and procedures.
The amendments update several industry design standards and standard
specifications adopted and incorporated by reference under 23 CFR part
625 and remove the corresponding outdated or superseded versions of
these standards and specifications. This rule makes technical changes
to the regulatory text consistent with updated Federal Register
procedures.
In addition, this action complies with the principles of Executive
Order 13563. After evaluating the costs and benefits of these
amendments, FHWA determined that the economic impact of this rulemaking
would be minimal. These changes are not anticipated to adversely
affect, in any material way, any sector of the economy. In addition,
these changes will not create a serious inconsistency with any other
agency's action or materially alter the budgetary impact of any
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs. These updated
standards and specifications represent the most recent refinements that
professional organizations have formally accepted, and are currently in
use by the transportation industry. The FHWA anticipates that the
economic impact of this rulemaking will be minimal; therefore, a full
regulatory evaluation is not necessary.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-354,
5 U.S.C. 601-612), FHWA evaluated the effects of this rule on small
entities, such as local governments and businesses. The FHWA determined
that this action would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. The amendments would update
several industry design standards and standard specifications adopted
and incorporated by reference under 23 CFR part 625. The FHWA believes
the projected impact upon small entities that utilize Federal-aid
highway program funding for the development of highway improvement
projects on the NHS would be negligible. Therefore, FHWA certifies that
the rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This final rule does not impose unfunded mandates as defined by the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4, March 22, 1995,
109 Stat. 48). Furthermore, in compliance with the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995, FHWA evaluated this rule to assess the effects on
State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. This rule
does not result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $143.1
million or more in any one year (2 U.S.C. 1532). In addition, the
definition of ``Federal Mandate'' in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
excludes financial assistance of the type in which State, local, or
tribal governments have authority to adjust their participation in the
program in accordance with changes made in the program by the Federal
Government. The Federal-aid highway program permits this type of
flexibility.
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism Assessment)
This rule was analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 13132, dated August 4, 1999, and
it was determined that this rule does not have a substantial direct
effect or sufficient federalism implications on States that would limit
the policymaking discretion of the States. Nothing in this rule
directly preempts any State law or regulation or affects the States'
ability to discharge traditional State governmental functions.
Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)
The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding
intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and activities apply
to this program. This Executive Order applies because State and local
governments would be directly affected by the proposed regulation,
which is a condition on Federal highway funding. Local entities should
refer to the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number
20.205, Highway Planning and Construction, for further information.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management
and Budget for each collection of information they conduct, sponsor, or
require through regulations. This rule does not contain a collection of
information requirement for the purpose of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.).
National Environmental Policy Act
The FHWA analyzed this rule for the purposes of the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and determined
that this action would not have any effect on the quality of the human
and natural environment because it only makes technical changes and
incorporates by reference the latest versions of design standards and
standard specifications previously adopted and incorporated by
reference under 23 CFR part 625 and removes the corresponding outdated
or superseded versions of these standards and specifications. The rule
qualifies as a categorical exclusion to NEPA under 23 CFR
771.117(c)(20).
Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation)
The FHWA analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13175, dated
November 6, 2000, and believes that this action would not have
substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, would not
impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian tribal
governments, and would not preempt tribal law. This rule establishes
the requirements for the procurement, management, and administration of
engineering and design related services using FAHP funding and directly
related to a construction project. As such, this rule would not impose
any direct compliance requirements on Indian tribal governments nor
would it have any economic or other impacts on the viability of Indian
tribes. Therefore, a tribal summary impact statement is not required.
Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)
The FHWA analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We determined that this action would not be a
significant energy action under that order because any action
contemplated would not be likely to have a significant adverse effect
on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, FHWA
certifies that a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order
13211 is not required.
Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property)
The FHWA analyzed this rule and determined that this action would
not affect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking
implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights.
[[Page 61307]]
Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
This action meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children)
The FHWA analyzed this action under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks, and certifies that this proposed action would not cause an
environmental risk to health or safety that may disproportionately
affect children.
Executive Order 12898 (Environmental Justice)
The Executive Order 12898 requires that each Federal agency make
achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and
addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human
health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and
activities on minorities and low-income populations. The FHWA
determined that this rule does not raise any environmental justice
issues.
Regulation Identifier Number
A regulation identifier number (RIN) is assigned to each regulatory
action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. The
Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda in
April and October of each year. The RIN number contained in the heading
of this document can be used to cross-reference this action with the
Unified Agenda.
List of Subjects in 23 CFR Part 625
Design standards, Grant programs-transportation, Highways and
roads, Incorporation by reference.
Issued on: October 6, 2015.
Gregory G. Nadeau,
Administrator, Federal Highway Administration.
In consideration of the foregoing, the FHWA amends 23 CFR part 625
as follows:
PART 625--DESIGN STANDARDS FOR HIGHWAYS
0
1. The authority citation for part 625 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 109, 215, and 402; Sec. 1073 of Pub. L.
102-240, 105 Stat. 1914, 2012; 49 CFR 1.48(b) and (n).
0
2. Amend Sec. 625.4 by revising paragraphs (a), (b), and (d), and
adding paragraph (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 625.4 Standards, policies, and standard specifications.
* * * * *
(a) Roadway and appurtenances. (1) A Policy on Geometric Design of
Highways and Streets, AASHTO, 2011 (incorporated by reference; see
Sec. 625.4(d)).
(2) A Policy on Design Standards Interstate System, AASHTO, January
2005 (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 625.4(d)).
(3) The geometric design standards for resurfacing, restoration,
and rehabilitation (RRR) projects on NHS highways other than freeways
shall be the procedures and the design or design criteria established
for individual projects, groups of projects, or all non-freeway RRR
projects in a State, and as approved by the FHWA. The other geometric
design standards in this section do not apply to RRR projects on NHS
highways other than freeways, except as adopted on an individual State
basis. The RRR design standards shall reflect the consideration of the
traffic, safety, economic, physical, community, and environmental needs
of the projects.
(4) Location and Hydraulic Design of Encroachments on Flood Plains,
refer to 23 CFR part 650, subpart A.
(5) Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and
Construction Noise, refer to 23 CFR part 772.
(6) Accommodation of Utilities, refer to 23 CFR part 645, subpart
B.
(7) Pavement Design, refer to 23 CFR part 626.
(b) Bridges and structures. (1) For existing bridges originally
designed to any edition of the AASHTO Standard Specifications for
Highway Bridges, modifications may be designed to the Standard
Specifications for Highway Bridges, 17th Edition, AASHTO, 2002
(incorporated by reference; see Sec. 625.4(d)), or to the standards
and specifications that are listed in Sec. 625.4(b).
(2) AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications, 3rd Edition,
AASHTO, 2010, with 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2014 Interim Revisions
(incorporated by reference; see Sec. 625.4(d)).
(3) AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 7th Edition, AASHTO,
2014, with 2015 Interim Revisions (incorporated by reference; see Sec.
625.4(d)).
(4) AASHTO LRFD Movable Highway Bridge Design Specifications, 2nd
Edition, AASHTO, 2007, including 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2014, and 2015
Interim Revisions (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 625.4(d)).
(5) AASHTO/AWS D1.5M/D1.5: 2010 Bridge Welding Code, 6th Edition,
AASHTO, 2011, with 2011 and 2012 Interim Revisions (incorporated by
reference; see Sec. 625.4(d)).
(6) D1.4/D1.4M: 2011Structural Welding Code-Reinforcing Steel,
American Welding Society, 2011 (incorporated by reference; see Sec.
625.4(d)).
(7) Standard Specifications for Structural Supports for Highway
Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals, 6th Edition, AASHTO, 2013
(incorporated by reference; see Sec. 625.4(d)).
(8) Navigational Clearances for Bridges, refer to 23 CFR part 650,
subpart H.
* * * * *
(d) Documents incorporated by reference. The Director of the
Federal Register approves the incorporation by reference of the
documents listed in this section in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and
1 CFR part 51. The documents listed in this paragraph are incorporated
by reference and available for inspection at the U.S. Department of
Transportation's National Transportation Library at 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590; (800) 853-1351. The documents also
are available for inspection at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html. Copies
of these documents may be obtained from the following organizations:
(1) American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials (AASHTO), Suite 249, 444 North Capitol Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20001; www.transportation.org; or (202) 624-5800.
(i) A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 6th
Edition, 2011.
(ii) A Policy on Design Standards Interstate System, January 2005.
(iii) Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, 17th Edition,
2002
(iv) AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications, 3rd Edition,
2010; with:
(A) Interim Revisions, 2010,
(B) Interim Revisions, 2011,
(C) Interim Revisions, 2012, and
(D) Interim Revisions, 2014.
(v) AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 7th Edition, 2014,
with:
(A) 2015 Interim Revisions.
[[Page 61308]]
(B) [Reserved].
(vi) AASHTO LRFD Movable Highway Bridge Design Specifications, 2nd
Edition, 2007, with:
(A) Interim Revisions, 2008,
(B) Interim Revisions, 2010,
(C) Interim Revisions, 2011,
(D) Interim Revisions, 2012,
(E) Interim Revisions, 2014, and
(F) Interim Revisions, 2015
(vii) AASHTO/AWS D1.5M/D1.5: 2010 Bridge Welding Code, 6th Edition,
2010, with:
(A) Interim Revisions, 2011, and
(B) Interim Revisions, 2012
(viii) Standard Specifications for Structural Supports for Highway
Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals, 6th Edition, AASHTO 2013.
(2) American Welding Society (AWS), 8869 NW 36 Street, #130 Miami,
FL 33166-6672; www.aws.org; or (800) 443-9353 or (305) 443-9353.
(i) D1.4/D1.4M: 2011 Structural Welding Code--Reinforcing Steel,
2011.
(ii) [Reserved].
(e) The FHWA supports using, as design resources to achieve context
sensitive designs, guides that national organizations develop from
peer-reviewed research, or equivalent guides that are developed in
cooperation with State or local officials, when such guides are not in
conflict with Federal laws and regulations.
[FR Doc. 2015-25931 Filed 10-9-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P