Real-Time System Management Information Program |
|---|
Topics: Federal Highway Administration
|
Victor M. Mendez
November 8, 2010
[Federal Register: November 8, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 215)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 68418-68429]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr08no10-4]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
23 CFR Part 511
RIN 2125-AF19
Real-Time System Management Information Program
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Section 1201 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) requires the
Secretary of Transportation (Secretary) to establish a Real-Time System
Management Information Program that provides, in all States, the
capability to monitor, in real-time, the traffic and travel conditions
of the major highways of the United States and to share these data with
State and local governments and with the traveling public. This rule
establishes minimum parameters and requirements for States to make
available and share traffic and travel conditions information via real-
time information programs.
DATES: This rule is effective December 23, 2010. Establishment of the
real-time information program for traffic and travel conditions
reporting along the Interstate system highways shall be completed no
later than November 8, 2014. Establishment of the real-time information
program for traffic and travel conditions reporting along the State-
designated metropolitan area routes of significance shall be completed
no later than November 8, 2016. Comments must be received on or before
December 23, 2010. Late-filed comments will be considered to the extent
practicable.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert Rupert, FHWA Office of
Operations, (202) 366-2194, or via e-mail at robert.rupert@dot.gov. For
legal questions, please contact Ms. Lisa MacPhee, Attorney Advisor,
FHWA Office of the Chief Counsel, (202) 366-1392, or via e-mail at
lisa.macphee@dot.gov. Office hours for the FHWA are from 7:45 a.m. to
4:15 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 on line through the Federal eRulemaking
portal at: http://www.regulations.gov. The Web site is available 24
hours each day, 365 days each year. Please follow the instructions.
An electronic copy of this document may also be downloaded by
accessing the Office of the Federal Register's home page at http://
www.archives.gov or the Government Printing Office's Web page at http:/
/www.gpoaccess.gov/nara.
Comments may be submitted electronically to the Federal eRulemaking
portal at http://www.regulations.gov. All comments should include the
docket number that appears in the heading of this document. All
comments received will be available for examination and copying at the
above address from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. Those desiring notification of receipt of
comments must include a self-addressed, stamped postcard or you may
print the acknowledgment page that appears after submitting comments
electronically. Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments in any one of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, or labor union). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70, Pages 19477-78) or you may visit
http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
Background
History
Under the heading of ``Congestion Relief,'' section 1201 of
SAFETEA-LU (Pub. L. 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, Aug. 10, 2005) requires the
Secretary of Transportation to establish a Real-Time System Management
Information Program to provide, in all States, the capability to
monitor, in real-time, the traffic and travel conditions of the major
highways of the United States and to share that information to improve
the security of the surface transportation system, to address
congestion problems, to support improved response to weather events and
surface transportation incidents, and to facilitate national and
regional highway traveler information. The purposes of the Real-Time
System Management Information Program are to:
(1) Establish, in all States, a system of basic real-time
information for managing and operating the surface transportation
system;
(2) Identify longer range real-time highway and transit monitoring
needs and develop plans and strategies for meeting such needs; and
(3) Provide the capability and means to share that data with State
and local governments and the traveling public.
Section 1201(c)(1) of SAFETEA-LU states that as State and local
governments develop or update regional intelligent transportation
system (ITS) architectures, described in 23 CFR 940.9, such governments
shall explicitly address real-time highway and transit information
needs and the systems needed to meet such needs, including addressing
coverage, monitoring systems, data fusion and archiving, and methods of
exchanging or sharing highway and transit information. The FHWA
envisions that States carrying out updates of regional ITS
architectures would consider broadening the geographic coverage area
for gathering
[[Page 68419]]
and reporting traffic and travel conditions.
These regulations do not impose any requirement for a State to
apply any particular technology, any particular technology-dependent
application, or any particular business approach for establishing a
real-time information program. States and other public agencies are
instead encouraged to consider any salient technology, technology-
dependent application, and business approach options that yield
information products consistent with the requirements set forth in this
rule. States are encouraged to work with value added information
providers to establish real-time information programs. Value added
information providers presently and in the future will create
information products for commercial use, for sale to a customer base,
or for other commercial enterprise purposes. Based upon this rule, such
products could be derived from information from public sector sources
in addition to the private sector's own capabilities for creating
information content.
The extent of the final rule is solely the provision of real-time
information. It does not require the dissemination of the information
in any particular manner, just that the State make said information
available. The final rule does not require or mandate a particular
technology nor on a technology-dependant application. States
establishing a real-time information program would be able to employ
any solution chosen to make information available. States and public
agencies can enter into collaborative agreements with the private
sector for establishing the program and gathering data. States and
public agencies could purchase value added information products from
value added information providers. States and public agencies could
apply combinations of these, and other approaches to establish a
successful real-time information program.
A Request for Comments was published on May 4, 2006, at 71 FR
26399, that presented a proposed scope for a Real-Time System
Management Information Program. Using responses to this request, an
NPRM proposing the creation of a new part 511 of 23 CFR was published
on January 14, 2009, at 74 FR 1993. The purpose was to propose the
establishment of minimum parameters and requirements for States to make
available traffic and travel conditions information via real-time
information programs.
A two-stage implementation was proposed in the NPRM that included
the Interstate highway system as the first stage for coverage within 2
years, followed by other routes of significance as identified by the
States within 4 years. The real-time information elements include lane
or road closures because of traffic incidents and work zones, road
weather observations, and, in metropolitan areas with populations
greater than one million, travel times. The timeframes proposed for the
information were 20 minutes outside of applicable metropolitan areas
and 10 minutes for information in the metropolitan areas (except for
roadway weather observations that remained at 20 minutes). It was
proposed that the information be 85 percent accurate and available 90
percent of the time.
Summary Discussion of Comments Received in Response to the NPRM
The following presents an overview of the comments received in
response to the NPRM.
Profile of Commenters
Comments were submitted by a representative cross-section of State
and local agencies, business organizations, and individuals that will
be affected by the Real-Time System Management Information Program
established through this rule. The docket contained comments from 35
parties, two of which were duplicates. The commenters included 16 State
departments of transportation (DOT); one automobile manufacturer; 2
State associations, the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO), and the Northwest Passage Pooled
Fund Study; the Intelligent Transportation Society of America, a
technical association; Texas Transportation Institute (TTI), a
university research center; the Vehicle Traffic Information Coalition,
a trade association; 3 traffic information providers; the 511
Coalition, a public/private traffic information coalition; 2 traffic
information related software and equipment providers; 2 metropolitan
planning organizations; a public safety operations and communications
agency; and 2 individuals.
Overall, the commenters supported the goals of the proposed rule,
namely collecting traffic information and making it available to other
public and private entities. The comments from commercial companies
tended to favor deployment to an even broader base than that specified
in the proposed rule with the same or more aggressive schedule.
Although several State DOTs commented that the data collection goals
were already being met or were achievable in the proposed time frame,
over two thirds of the DOTs indicated that the proposed schedule was
too short, or that the deployment of the mandated capability would be
too expensive. The AASHTO noted in its comments that AASHTO members
believe the goals of the NPRM are good but would not be attainable for
several of the members in the time frame proposed. The AASHTO also
commented on the potential coordination challenges and conflicts among
the existing federally-required processes related to regional ITS
architectures and to transportation planning and the proposed real-time
system management information program.
The AASHTO commented that FHWA needs to consider employing a phased
approach, establishing goals and targets for the program with much
longer timelines. The AASHTO and the States also recommend that any
Real-Time System Management Information Program be based on
implementing the State and regional ITS architectures and be based on
regionally determined customer needs. Finally, AASHTO and the States
asked FHWA to recognize that the proposed Real-Time System Management
Information Program will have significant fiscal impacts to the States
for implementing the necessary ITS capabilities initially and for
ongoing operating and maintenance of the systems over time.
The FHWA has reviewed and analyzed the comments received and thanks
the commenters for their insightful input. Based on other input from
DOTs and on FHWA's observations of the various traffic and information
systems that States and local agencies have deployed, the FHWA
continues to find that many States have already accomplished much of
the work necessary to establish their real-time information program and
that the costs are containable within the funding eligibility
categories identified by the rule. However, agencies almost unanimously
responded that the 2-year time frame proposed in the NPRM to develop
the information program was insufficient due to constraints imposed by
their existing planning and budgeting cycles. Many agencies indicated
that additional time was necessary to enable eligible funding
categories to be programmed to develop their real-time management
information program. Consequently, the FHWA reevaluated the
consequences of extending the period of implementation. The FHWA
concluded that a 4-year compliance date of the rule is an appropriate
time frame for States to establish the real-time information program
for traffic and travel conditions that encompass all
[[Page 68420]]
Interstate highways operated by the State. Further, FHWA found
appropriate a 6-year effective date to establish the real-time
information program along the State-designated metropolitan area routes
of significance. The additional time provided by the rule is expected
to afford States adequate time to establish their real-time information
management program in concert with their other needs, priorities, and
budgets.
Another area of concern expressed by a majority of DOTs is the
accuracy that will be required of the data they are to share and
expectations about how the program will be monitored. The TTI commented
that a number of implementation details are not specified in the
proposed rule. The TTI cited examples of how State agencies will know
if their data meet the quality requirements, what evaluation guidance
will be used, and how often agencies are to evaluate accuracy or
timeliness. Kansas DOT (KDOT) further elaborated by commenting that
many of the elements that are proposed to be provided will be
subjectively measured or difficult to measure accurately. KDOT
recommended that FHWA provide more information regarding the
flexibility that States will have to determine levels of accuracy
States can set or are able to achieve. KDOT further commented that FHWA
needs to provide more information regarding expectations of how States
would monitor performance or measure accuracy of the information.
The FHWA agrees philosophically that a highly detailed set of data
quality statistics and an associated validation process are desirable.
However, achievement of specific parameters and methodologies requires
identifying in detail the intended usage for the data and the
technology to be used for its acquisition. The FHWA believes that
adopting this approach would place limitations on the use of the data
that were not intended or desired, and in many instances would impose
an unnecessary cost on agencies while attempting to comply with more
detailed requirements. However, FHWA does acknowledge that, based on
the comments received, additional clarification is needed for the
effective implementation of the program. In response, and as suggested
by a number of commenters, modifications have been incorporated into
sec. 511.311(b) to better define the collaborative responsibilities and
contributions of the State and the FHWA Division Office during the
creation of the real-time information management program to include the
identification of the processes to be used by the States in gauging and
assuring the quality of the information to be made available by the
real-time system management information program.
Several commenters included discussions about the methods used to
disseminate the information. The methods and technologies to
disseminate or distribute the information available from the Real-Time
System Management Information Program are not within the scope of the
regulation. In fulfilling the requirements of sec. 1201 of SAFETEA-LU,
this regulation establishes a base level of information for traffic and
travel conditions for all States. To provide agencies maximum latitude
in their use of the information and the use of the information by their
partners, the rule does not specify requirements or details related to
information distribution methods. States and other public agencies are
instead encouraged to consider any salient technology, technology-
dependent application, and business approach options that yield
information products consistent with the requirements set forth in this
rule.
Many DOTs expressed concern about the proposed rule's requirements
to provide roadway weather information, with particular concern
expressed about the 20 minute update requirement. The California DOT
agreed that weather information is vital but noted that there are
numerous providers currently in the business, and suggested that the
requirements be diminished. The KDOT commented that it is relatively
easy to report weather information through existing weather stations
but it is more difficult to produce road information that is useful to
the motorist, and that updating this information every 20 minutes is
not feasible without large investments in unproven technology. After
further review, the FHWA agrees that the proposed requirements for
weather information exceed the proposed requirements for other travel
conditions and are not as uniformly applicable for all States. To be
consistent with information for other travel conditions under the Real-
Time System Management Information Program, sec. 511.309(a)(3) of the
rule has been modified to indicate that the State's Real-Time System
Management Information Program is required to provide confirmed weather
related hazardous driving conditions and roadway- or lane-closure
information, and that the information made available is to be updated
within 20 minutes of notice of a changed condition.
A number of agencies commented on the difficulty of providing
travel time data on the non-Interstate roadways designated as routes of
significance. The Michigan DOT (MDOT) remarks summarized these concerns
in its comments, noting that the MDOT does not believe there is a
current system or algorithm that can be implemented at a reasonable
cost that can collect travel times on surface streets. The FHWA agrees
with this comment. Accordingly, the definition for traffic and travel
conditions in sec. 511.303 removes the extent and degree of congested
conditions as one of the characteristics of traffic and travel
conditions and the requirements are modified in sec. 511.309(a)(4) for
the real-time system management system to make available travel time
information in metropolitan areas only on Interstate and other limited-
access roadways that are designated as routes of significance.
In the NPRM, the FHWA requested comments on the viability and
practicality for including transit event information. With the
exception of one individual and the Chicago Office of Emergency
Management and Communications, the commenters did not encourage
including transit information. AASHTO's response was, ``We recognize
the value of reporting transit information along with roadway
information through similar channels to the end user. However, there
are significant challenges associated with achieving this goal. A real-
time system management information program requiring transit
information would require agreements with transit agencies over which
the state DOT has no control.'' NAVTEQ recommended that instead of
including transit event information in this rule that a parallel
outreach and rule-making process be established to develop the transit
portion of the program. Based on this input the FHWA determined that
including transit event information delivery from a real-time
information program is not practical at this time.
The FHWA requested comments on the viability and practicality for
using varying roadway segment lengths for conveying travel time for a
real-time information program. AASHTO, several DOTs, and INRIX
indicated that requiring segment lengths as part of the rule will make
it difficult for many agencies to comply. The Pennsylvania DOT pointed
out that imposing maximum segment lengths potentially eliminates
public-private partnerships from occurring. The AASHTO requested in its
comments that States have flexibility to work with FHWA to develop
provisions for traffic and travel time reporting that are specific to
each State's individual situation. After evaluating the comments
received regarding specifying roadway segment
[[Page 68421]]
lengths for conveying travel time in the rule, FHWA concurs with
AASHTO's recommendation and has not added specifications for roadway
segment lengths referenced in sec. 511.309(a)(4) in the regulation.
In the NPRM discussion of Executive Order 12866, the FHWA requested
comments on the economic analysis of the proposed regulations including
appropriateness of using the Georgia Navigator study in the
``Regulatory Cost Analysis of Proposed Rulemaking'' to estimate
benefits. INRIX commented that the estimates using data from the
Navigator study dramatically overstate costs associated with urban area
traffic monitoring. INRIX contends that the data collection
technologies Navigator uses are much more expensive than currently
available data collection technologies. Since the choice of
technologies is to be determined by the agencies, INRIX's comment
indicates the analysis performed may be conservative in some cases. The
KDOT concurred with AASHTO's comments agreeing with the benefit-cost
analysis that shows a positive return on investment. However, AASHTO
also identifies two concerns: The cost associated with trying to
measure travel times on signalized arterial streets, and a request for
the cost of variable message signs to be considered in the analysis. As
discussed previously, the requirement to deliver travel time on
arterial streets has been removed from the rule, which alleviates the
first concern. Regarding the second concern, specific delivery methods
or technologies are not within the scope of this regulation. FHWA
determined that the cost of these signs is not relevant as the rule
pertains only to making the real-time information available and does
not include the delivery mechanism or the costs associated with the
mechanism.
The FHWA also requested comments regarding how DOTs anticipated
they will comply with the proposed regulations, including technologies
and cost. The ``Regulatory Cost Analysis of Proposed Rulemaking''
assumed a traditional device-based approach for estimating costs to
ensure a conservative (high) implementation estimate as a basis. Other
techniques for gathering traffic flow information, such as those
offered by the private sector, could result in implementation costs
that are 87 percent lower.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The ``Regulatory Cost Analysis of Proposed Rulemaking''
assumed a cost of $76,789 per mile to instrument a freeway to gather
information consistent with that proposed in this rulemaking. A
project undertaken by the I-95 Corridor Coalition that procured
real-time information from a private provider (INRIX) used a data
acquisition cost model that provides traffic flow information
consistent with the information proposed in this rulemaking for a
cost of $9,535 per mile, amortized over 10 years. Information about
the I-95 Coalition project is available at http://
www.i95coalition.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The MDOT and Virginia DOT (VDOT) submitted cost estimates. The MDOT
noted a number of activities that it believed needed to be completed to
properly implement the Real-Time System Management Information Program
as proposed. These activities included developing a real-time cell
phone application to be used by field personnel for lane closures and
openings, developing a central application to receive the field reports
and transmit those reports to other systems and the public, developing
Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) interfaces with every 911 call center and
CAD implementation in the State of Michigan, and maintaining additional
staff on a 24-hour basis, with at least one person needed to handle
each of MDOT's seven regions and possibly more in the Detroit
metropolitan area. MDOT estimated that the system will cost $55,000,000
to $85,000,000 to develop. Of this, $28,000,000 to $56,000,000 is for
deployment of an extensive roadway weather information system that
likely is not required for a real-time information program.
At the low end of the cost range, VDOT commented that for it to
fully comply with aspects of the proposed rule, an expansion of
existing data services and of CAD and transportation operations center
integration efforts would be required. To meet the requirements for
real-time traveler information, including travel times, VDOT noted that
it would likely expand an existing data services contract to receive
data for approximately 1,200 miles of Interstate, estimated to require
a minimum investment of $1,000,000 per year. The VDOT further commented
that it would need to integrate information from approximately 60 of
the 127 local 911 centers in Virginia. The VDOT estimates that the
approximate cost to integrate a 911 center with a transportation
operations center is $125,000, for a total statewide capital cost of
$7,500,000, plus increased costs for operations, maintenance and
hosting services. The VDOT commented that FHWA should consider funding
this effort with an annual commitment of $2M, based on VDOT's ability
to only apply a limited level of funding over the next few years.
The differences in the two agencies' comments related to the costs
for implementing the regulation reflect the different levels of
existing capabilities and reinforce the need to allow flexibility to
the States in identifying roadways beyond the Interstate routes to be
included in the Real-Time System Management Information Program. The
considerable differences in the two agencies' interpretations of the
proposed requirements confirms the need for implementation guidance
that FHWA will develop for DOTs as assistance in the development of
their real-time information programs. Later in this document, the FHWA
is requesting additional comments on the cost benefit analysis to
obtain more specific information in order to achieve the objectives of
the statute and the rule to ensure an optimal benefit and cost balance.
Comments Directed at Specific Sections of the Proposed New 23 CFR Part
511
Section 511.301--Purpose
As indicated previously, almost every response supports the goals
of the proposed rule. A common comment among all responders is ``we
support the desire of FHWA to promote advances in the delivery of
traveler information,'' and the NPRM was praised for being well meaning
and ultimately beneficial as travelers will be more informed than they
are today. However, as already discussed and as presented in subsequent
sections, commenters did not uniformly support all of FHWA's approaches
to achieving those goals.
Section 511.303--Definitions
In the NPRM, definitions were included in proposed Sec. 511.305,
but for this final rule to be consistent with other regulations,
definitions are in Sec. 511.303.
As indicated earlier, comments were received requesting
clarification about the definition of ``accuracy,'' and a similar
clarification concerning roadway weather conditions. In both cases, the
definitions for these terms and related language in Sec. 511.303 have
been supplemented to clarify these distinctions.
INRIX suggested that the term ``(e.g., volume and speed are * *
*)'' used in the definition for ``availability'' be changed to ``(e.g.,
speed and travel time)'' since volume is only used one time in the
rule, and only for illustrative purposes. The TTI suggested eliminating
definitions for ``accessibility'' and ``coverage'' as these terms are
not used in the proposed rule. The FHWA agrees with these comments and
Sec. 511.303 of the rule has been modified accordingly.
Comments on subsequent sections of the proposed rule that are
discussed
[[Page 68422]]
elsewhere resulted in including additional definitions in the rule. The
definitions of ``full construction activities'' and the definition of
``routes of significance'' have been added to Sec. 511.303.
Although no specific comments were received concerning the
``traffic and travel conditions'' definition allowing the reporting of
predicted conditions, this clause was determined to be unnecessary and
was removed from Sec. 511.303.
Section 511.307--Eligibility for Federal Funding
Section 511.307 outlines the eligibility of Federal funding to plan
and deploy the real-time monitoring elements and the project
applications to establish a real-time information program on Interstate
and non-Interstate highways. Almost all agencies commented that
establishing a real-time information program either costs too much or
puts a financial hardship on them, and requested that dedicated funding
be provided. Addressing this request for dedicated funding is beyond
the purview of the rule. However, additional comments indicated
financial burdens were due to the inability of agencies to use eligible
funds within the time frame specified in the rule due to their planning
and budgeting cycles. As indicated previously, FHWA determined that
extending completion of establishing the real-time information program
for traffic and travel conditions will facilitate State and local
agencies use of the eligible funds identified in this section.
The AASHTO, five DOTs, and INRIX identified funding for the
operation and maintenance costs of a Real-Time System Information
Management Program as a barrier to its implementation. In several
instances the comments also indicated a misunderstanding of the
eligibility of the operating and maintenance costs of such a system for
Federal funding. The funds identified in Sec. 511.307 Eligibility for
Federal funding of the final rule may be applied to the operating and
maintenance costs of a Real-Time System Information Management Program.
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) reinforces
the Federal commitment to manage and operate the Nation's
transportation system. Under TEA-21, the Federal-aid Highway Program
continues eligibility of operating costs for traffic monitoring,
management, and control. The legislation defines operating costs as
including labor costs, administrative costs, costs of utilities and
rent, and other costs associated with the continuous management and
operation of traffic systems. Additional information concerning
operating cost eligibility under the Federal-aid Highway Program can be
found at URL: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/travelinfo/resources/ops_
memo.htm. To more completely illustrate funding eligibility, the final
rule's language has been modified to include an explicit reference to
the eligibility of operations, including applicable preventative
maintenance to ensure reliable operations, for funding.
Section 511.309--Provisions for Traffic and Travel Time Conditions
Reporting
Section 511.309 presents the timeliness, accuracy, and availability
provisions that the real-time information programs are subject to for
reporting traffic and travel time conditions; and authorizes use of
legacy or new mechanisms to establish the real-time information
programs. Almost all of the commenters included a comment on one or
more of the proposed provisions with most expressing concern that many
of the requirements were not achievable. The San Francisco Bay Area
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) commended FHWA for basing
the proposed requirements on the work of an industry group such as the
511 Coalition. However, MTC expressed concerns about translating the
recommended goals from the industry group to required minimum
requirements for the Real-Time System Management Information Program
and commented that there needs to be some tailoring of the
recommendations. In contrast, several companies viewed the requirements
differently and commented that more restrictive provisions should be
specified. For example, NAVTEQ commented that the final rule should
reduce the timeliness requirements from 10 and 20 minutes (urban and
rural) to 5 and 10 minutes. BMW also commented that 5 minutes or less
was more appropriate, but also indicated that the reduced time limits
initially should be treated as goals. The following summarizes the
responses to this section.
511.309(a)(1) Construction Activities
The NPRM proposed a timeliness requirement for providing full
construction activities from the time of occurrence of 20 minutes or
less for highways outside of metropolitan areas and 10 minutes or less
for highways within metropolitan areas. As noted previously, many DOTs
described the difficulty of obtaining construction activity information
in rural areas and asserted that the cost to provide construction
activity information specified in the proposed rule would greatly
exceed any potential benefit. They also requested clarification of the
expectations intended in the time thresholds. The FHWA finds many of
the difficulties described by the proposed rule to be valid and has
included the definition for ``full construction activities'' in Sec.
511.301 and has modified the rule language in Sec. 511.309(a)(1) to
clarify which construction activities that close or reopen roads and
lanes are to be reported, how quickly the information is to be made
available, and the information update requirements.
Section 511.309(a)(2) Roadway or Lane Blocking Incidents and Events
Section 511.309(a)(2) presents the requirements for providing
information about roadway or lane blocking traffic incidents. The
requirements for providing this information are similar to those
specified in Sec. 511.309(a)(1) above, and received similar comments.
Many commenters requested clarification related to whether the
reporting requirement for traffic incidents was related to the time of
the occurrence of the incident or to the verification of the incident.
The FHWA has modified the rule language in Sec. 511.309(a)(2) to
clarify the requirements of the information to be made available are
based on when the traffic incident is verified.
Section 511.309(a)(3) Roadway Weather Observations
Section 511.309(a)(3) presents the requirements for delivering
roadway weather observations. As discussed earlier, many DOTs expressed
concern about the timeliness requirements in the proposed rule that the
roadway weather observation information was to be made available. They
also requested clarification of the information to be reported. The
FHWA has modified the rule language in Sec. 511.309(a)(3) to clarify
that the minimum reporting requirements are for weather conditions that
result in hazardous driving conditions or roadway and lane closures.
Section 511.309(a)(4) Travel Time Information
Section 511.309(a)(4) presents the requirement for providing
updated travel time information along highways within metropolitan
areas. In response to comments that practical algorithms and systems to
derive travel times on roadways currently exist only for limited access
highways, the rule's
[[Page 68423]]
language in Sec. 511.309(a)(4) has been modified to clarify the
minimum requirement for updated travel time information is for
Interstate and designated routes of significance in the Metropolitan
Areas that are limited access highways.
Section 511.309(a)(5) Information Accuracy and Section 511.309(a)(6)
Information Availability
In response to requests for clarification of the accuracy and
availability relationship from several agencies, the rule's language in
Sec. 511.311(b) has been modified as noted below.
Section 511.311(b) Real-Time Information Program Establishment--Data
Quality
Section 511.311(b) requires States to develop methods by which data
quality can be ensured to the data consumer. Several agencies
questioned how timeliness, availability, and accuracy will be measured.
They asked what are FHWA's expectations for how DOTs will monitor the
program. The rule's language in Sec. 511.311(b) has been modified to
afford flexibility to States in meeting quality requirements based on
the methods they select to implement the Real-Time System Management
Information Program. The States shall develop procedures or processes
for measuring and ensuring the quality of the information provided
under the Real-Time System Management Information Program, and receive
concurrence from FHWA on the selected processes. The States shall
demonstrate how the selected processes measure the quality of the
information in meeting the requirements of sections 511.309(a)(5) and
511.309(a)(6) and provide for remedial actions to maintain the required
levels of quality.
Section 511.311(c) Real-Time Information Program Establishment--
Participation
Agencies that should participate in implementation of a real-time
information program are listed in Sec. 511.311(c). The comments
generally acknowledged that significant cooperation is desired, but
mentioned drawbacks of requiring multiple partners. Several DOTs
pointed out that State agencies cannot verify the accuracy or
timeliness of data from another agency. Commenters also pointed out
that widespread agency participation will necessitate education and
training be provided for first responders such as county/local law
enforcement and fire departments. The FHWA recognizes the institutional
difficulties that must be resolved for multiagency participation in a
real-time information program, but continues to believe that the
benefits realized far exceed the efforts required to craft a successful
program.
Section 511.311(d) Real-Time Information Program Establishment--Update
of Regional ITS Architecture
Section 511.311(d) discusses the requirement that States and
regions that have created a Regional ITS architecture are required to
maintain and update the architecture, and indicates in broad terms the
general factors that must be addressed by the updated architecture
including featuring the components and functionality of the Real-Time
System Management Information Program. Several comments mistakenly
applied the regional ITS architecture general factors to the
requirements of the Real-Time System Management Information Program.
The AASHTO commented that the State and regional ITS architectures that
have been developed are based on regionally determined customer needs
and may have identified other higher priority needs in their
architecture than those identified in the NPRM. The AASHTO notes that
this may present a particular concern to the State agencies if funding
has already been allocated to those areas. Many commenters expressed
that the 2 year time frame is too short for some States and regions to
address their regional ITS architecture issues. For this reason, among
others, FHWA has extended the time requirement in sections 511.311(e)
and 511.313(d) to establish the real-time information program to 4
years after publication of final rule.
The San Francisco Bay Area MTC commented that, while Sec.
511.311(d) requires ITS architectures to be updated to reflect the
requirements of the Real-Time System Management Information Program,
some ITS architectures may already include requirements for the Real-
Time System Management Information Program. The MTC comments that Sec.
511.311(d) should be modified to require ITS architectures to be
evaluated to determine if updates are needed to reflect the Real-Time
System Management Information Program, and that those that do not
adequately reflect the Real-Time System Management Information Program
should be updated accordingly. The FHWA agrees with this comment and
the rule language in Sec. 511.311(d) has been modified to require
evaluation of ITS architectures to determine whether they need to be
updated to reflect requirements of the Real-Time System Management
Information Program.
Section 511.311(e) Real-Time Information Program Establishment--
Effective Date
Section 511.311(e), which specifies an effective date of 2 years
after publication to establish a Real-Time System Management
Information Program, drew many responses. As reported earlier, based on
the comments received, FHWA has changed the Sec. 511.311(e) to require
establishment of the Real-Time System Management Information Program
for traffic and travel conditions reporting along the Interstate system
highway within 4 years after the date of the rule's publication.
Section 511.313(b) Metropolitan Area Real-Time Information Program
Supplement--Requirement
Metropolitan Areas are required to implement a Real-Time System
Management Information Program on both Interstates and routes of
significance in the Metropolitan Area. The term ``Metropolitan Area''
is intended to allow options for either the State or the Metropolitan
Area's local government agency to implement the program, based on what
works best for each location.
Section 511.313(c) Metropolitan Area Real-Time Information Program
Supplement--Routes of Significance
Several DOTs submitted questions concerning designation of ``routes
of significance'' in metropolitan areas. Several of the commenters
observed that success of these provisions require cooperation between
the agencies and FHWA concerning priorities, funding, and staffing, and
that consultation with FHWA is necessary to define their specific
system. The FHWA concurs with these observations. Furthermore, upon
reviewing this section, the specific responses to the questions raised
are dependent upon local conditions and should be resolved through a
dialogue between the local agencies and their respective FHWA
Divisions. In response to the comments received about ``routes of
significance,'' its definition is included in Sec. 511.303
As indicated, many of the DOTs responding to the NPRM identified
the 4-year time requirement to establish routes of significance real-
time information program to be unattainable. Based on these comments,
Sec. 511.313(c) of the rule has been changed to indicate a 6-year time
requirement for implementation of the Real-Time System Management
Information Program on ``routes of significance'' in Metropolitan
Areas.
[[Page 68424]]
Section 511.313(d) Metropolitan Area Real-Time Information Program
Supplement--Effective Date
As indicated earlier, AASHTO and many of the DOTs responding to the
NPRM identified the 2-year time requirement to establish the
Metropolitan Area real-time information program to be unattainable. The
rule now allows 4-years for establishment of the program in Interstate
routes in Metropolitan Areas.
Section 511.315 Program Administration
Section 511.315 concerns compliance with the rule and the ability
for FHWA to withhold highway trust funds based on compliance. Many DOTs
were concerned about that possibility and wanted to know more about how
compliance would be assessed and judged. As stated previously, Sec.
511.311(b) of the rule has been edited to provide additional parameters
regarding data quality and completeness, and to include language that
describes the compliance verification processes to be applied in each
State, as agreed between the State and FHWA. Section 511.315 states
that procedures normally available to FHWA for Federal-aid actions are
also applicable to actions related to the Real-Time System Management
Information Program. Paragraph (a) of Sec. 511.315 has been deleted
because the subsection presented a potential ambiguity or contradiction
in requiring compliance prior to approving projects to establish the
Real-Time System Management Information Program. The proposed Sec.
511.315(a) provisions are included in the remaining paragraph of Sec.
511.315 by including a reference to ITS project administration
contained in 23 CFR 940.13.
Request for Comments
While the FHWA is issuing this final rule, which will become
effective on the dates noted above, the FHWA is also seeking additional
comments relating to the costs and benefits of the Real-Time System
Management Information Program and general information about current
and planned programs. Although the Regulatory Cost Analysis found in
the docket for this rulemaking attempts to capture the scope of costs
and benefits associated with this rule, it is challenging to determine
a comprehensive picture of costs and benefits given the flexibility of
approaches that can be used and the limitations of the current studies.
The FHWA seeks comments related to the following:
(1) What are the costs and benefits of each individual provision
required under rule? If some provisions have net costs, would certain
modifications to those provisions lead to net benefits?
(2) What are the impacts of requiring these provisions on States
and Metropolitan Areas (do some States and Metropolitan Areas realize
net costs instead of net benefits)? If some States and Metropolitan
Areas realize net costs, would certain modifications to provisions
ensure net benefits?
(3) Is there a specific, alternative approach to calculating costs
and benefits that would be more appropriate than the current use of the
Atlanta Navigator Study?
(4) Although information dissemination to the public is not within
scope of this rule, it is important to understand how information is
typically disseminated so that the technologies used to collect and
monitor data is compatible with technologies used to disseminate this
information. This is especially important to keep up with new
technological advances and to ensure that States use the most
effective, low cost methods to both collect and disseminate
information.
(A) What technologies will States use to collect and monitor
information under this rule?
(B) What technologies are States planning to use to disseminate
this information or what are they already using?
(C) Do the technologies States plan to use present any
interoperability issues? Do they allow for use of advanced technologies
that could be the most cost-effective means of collecting and
disseminating this information?
(D) Are there any structural impediments to using low-cost advanced
technologies in the future given the provisions and specifications
contained in this rule?
(E) Given the research investment into wireless communications
systems in the 5.9 GHz spectrum for Intelligent Transportation Systems
applications, to what extent could systems in this spectrum also be
used to fulfill the requirements of this rule and/or enable other
applications?
(F) Given that there are legacy technologies in place now, and that
there are new technologies on the horizon that are being adopted, how
can we ensure that investments made today to comply with this rule are
sustainable over the long term?
(5) This rule defines Metropolitan Areas to mean the geographic
areas designated as Metropolitan Statistical Areas by the Office of
Management and Budget with a population exceeding 1,000,000
inhabitants. Is this population criterion appropriate, rather than
considering traffic, commuting times, or other considerations?
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
The FHWA has determined that this rule is an economically
significant rulemaking action within the meaning of Executive Order
12866 and is a significant rulemaking action within the meaning of the
U.S. Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures.
This rule establishes provisions and parameters for States to implement
real-time monitoring of the transportation system as mandated in
section 1201 of SAFETEA-LU. The Real-Time System Management Information
Program is a newly created and complex program, receiving no dedicated
Federal funding. This action is considered significant because of the
substantial State and local government, and public interest in the
information products enabled through this program.
This rule does not adversely affect, in a material way, any sector
of the economy. This rule sets forth provisions and parameters for
State DOTs to implement on Interstate highways and maintain from 2010
until 2019 an effective Real-Time System Management Information
Program, which will result in some cost impacts to States or
Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs). This period would reflect
the establishment of real-time information programs plus a 7-year
period of operation. The 7-year period of operation assumes that
equipment and supporting material for the real-time information program
is fully replaceable after the operational life cycle. The FHWA has
conducted a cost analysis identifying each of the proposed regulatory
changes that would have a significant cost impact for MPOs or DOTs.
This cost analysis is included as a separate document, entitled
``Regulatory Cost Analysis of Proposed Rulemaking,'' and is available
for review in the docket. Based on the cost analysis, FHWA estimates
that the net present value of the estimated costs and benefits through
2021 represents at least a $315 million benefit to American travelers
and taxpayers, corresponding to a benefit-cost ratio of 1.3. In
addition, the DOTs have the flexibility to use most other Federal
highway dollars including Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)
program and Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds for real-time
monitoring program
[[Page 68425]]
implementation. Additionally, State Planning and Research funds can be
applied fully towards the planning of real-time monitoring projects.
Based on the annual costs and the annual benefits noted above, the
following table summarizes the annualized costs, benefits, and net
benefits (in million $) at discount rates of 3 percent and 7 percent.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR08NO10.022
Regulatory Flexibility Act
In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-354,
5 U.S.C. 601-612) FHWA has evaluated the effects of this action on
small entities. The FHWA has determined that States and MPOs are not
included in the definition of small entity set forth in 5 U.S.C. 601.
Small governmental jurisdictions are limited to representations of
populations of less than 50,000. MPOs, by definition, represent
urbanized areas having a minimum population of 50,000. The FHWA
certifies that this action does not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
(Pub. L. 1041-4; 109 Stat. 48) requires Federal agencies to prepare a
written assessment of the costs, benefits, and other effects of
proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to result
in the expenditure by States, local, or tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than $100 million annually
(adjusted for inflation to $141.3 million in 2008 dollars). Before
promulgating a rule for which a written statement is needed, section
205 of the UMRA generally requires the agency to identify and consider
a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objective of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do
not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows the agency to adopt an alternative other than the
least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if
the agency publishes with the final rule an explanation of why that
alternative was not adopted.
This final rule does not impose unfunded mandates as defined by the
UMRA. The definition of ``Federal Mandate'' in the UMRA 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. (2 U.S.C. 658, 1502) The Federal-aid highway program
permits this type of flexibility. Conditions for obtaining Federal
grant funds, including new conditions on existing grant programs, are
not considered Federal Mandates under the law. States have the
flexibility to offset the costs of this statutory requirement by
amending their responsibilities for financing and carrying out their
program, and any additional costs resulting from this Federal action
can be offset by changes in State or local policies.
The effects of this rule are discussed earlier in the preamble and
in the ``Regulatory Cost Analysis of Proposed Rulemaking'' contained in
the docket for this rulemaking. The FHWA has taken care to craft the
final rule for this statutory requirement in such a way that offers
States broad flexibility to minimize costs of compliance with the
standard. Because the rule is neither centered on a particular
technology nor on a technology-dependent application, these documents
consider a number of alternatives and provide a number of technological
choices. This rule provides a phased implementation approach and limits
the content requirements for a real-time information system only to
those needed to provide congestion relief. Additionally, while no new
funding is available for this program, to the extent that the final
rule will require expenditures by State, local, or tribal governments,
these activities will not be unfunded mandates because States and MPOs
are afforded flexibility to use their National Highway System, CMAQ,
and STP Federal-aid apportionments for activities related to the
planning and deployment of real-time monitoring elements that advance
the goals of the Real-Time System Management Information Program. How
the States use these funds is only limited by the statutory and
regulatory grant requirements and conditions. As such, the agency has
chosen the most cost-effective alternative that achieves the objectives
of the rulemaking.
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
This rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 13132, and the FHWA has
determined that this action does not have sufficient
[[Page 68426]]
federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism
assessment. The FHWA has also determined that this action would not
preempt any State law or State regulation or affect the States' ability
to discharge traditional State governmental functions. The FHWA
contacted the National Governors' Association in writing about this
determination. The National Governors' Association did not respond.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they
conduct, sponsor, or require through regulations.
The FHWA has determined that this rule contains a requirement for
data and information to be collected and maintained in the support of
operational decisions that affect the safety and mobility of the
traveling public related to information on construction activities,
including implementing and removing lane closures; roadway or lane
blocking traffic incident information; roadway or lane blocking roadway
weather conditions; and calculated travel times along highway segments.
In order to streamline the process, FHWA requested that OMB approve a
single information collection clearance for all of the data in this
regulation. The Real-Time System Management Information Program
supports the collection of transportation system data, including the
use of automated methods, with the transportation system data available
for other use. The Real-Time System Management Information Program
itself does not produce informational or reporting products that are
required by the U.S. Department of Transportation or other entities in
the Federal Government.
Commenters to this information collection include DOTs from all 50
States, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia. The FHWA estimates
that 17 States presently do not appear to provide real-time information
on a continual basis to the public or to other States using
conventional information dissemination technologies.\2\ The FHWA
estimates that a total of 148,920 burden hours per year would be
imposed on these non-Federal entities to provide all the required
information to comply with the proposed regulation requirements for
real-time information programs.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Based upon the table ``Freeway Miles Under Traffic
Surveillance'' from the 2007 Metropolitan Summary survey. This table
is retrievable from the ITS Deployment Statistics Web site,
available at the following URL: http://
www.itsdeployment.its.dot.gov/Results.asp?year=2007&rpt=M&filter=1&ID
=307.
\3\ Burden hour calculation based on 8,760 hours per year
multiplied by the number of locations (17).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, there are 36 States operating at least one 511 traveler
information dissemination service that provide nearly all of the
information categories identified in this proposed regulation.\4\ The
automated systems that gather the input for delivery for 511 also
convey information via Dynamic Message Signs (DMS) for en-route
travelers. The use of DMS is common for conveying travel time
information messages. Based on known reports for 511 delivery services
and for travel time messages on DMS in metropolitan areas \5\ a more
accurate calculation of the burden hours is possible. For all 36 States
known to provide automated real-time traveler information: All 36
States provide construction activities information; all 36 States
provide roadway incident information; and 31 States provide roadway
weather observations. Of the 49 metropolitan areas currently subject to
the provisions of travel time information required by this regulation,
33 provide travel time information on highway segments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Based upon the ``Locations with 511 Services'' information
available at the following URL: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/511/. As
of July 2009 there are 39 known 511 systems in operation.
\5\ Based on the page ``Travel times on DMS Status,'' available
at the following URL: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/travelinfo/dms/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The estimated total burden to provide the additional information
needed to attain full compliance with the proposed regulation includes
148,920 burden hours for States with no observable real-time
information capability, plus 140,160 burden hours for subject
metropolitan areas to deliver travel time information, plus 43,800
burden hours for States with real-time information capabilities to
deliver weather observation updates. The total estimated burden,
therefore, is 332,880 hours for automated sources to deliver the
information categories identified in this regulation.
National Environmental Policy Act
The agency has analyzed this proposed action for the purpose of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347) and has
determined that the establishment of the Real-Time System Management
Information Program, as required by the Congress in SAFETEA-LU, may
yield a $384 million benefit from the reduction of greenhouse gas
emissions and also from reductions of fuel consumption \6\ and has
determined that this rule will not significantly affect the quality of
the human environment. The promulgation of regulations has been
identified as a categorical exclusion under 23 CFR 771.117(c)(20).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ This estimated benefit is documented in Table 1 on Page 14
of the Regulatory Benefit-Cost Analysis of Proposed Rulemaking
included in this docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property)
The FHWA has analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order
12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights. The FHWA does not anticipate that this
action would affect a taking of private property or otherwise have
taking implications under Executive Order 12630.
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)
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. The FHWA certifies that this action would not cause any
environmental risk to health or safety that might disproportionately
affect children.
Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation)
The FHWA has analyzed this action 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 laws. The final rule
addresses provisions and parameters for the Real-Time System Management
Information Program and would not impose any direct compliance
requirements on Indian tribal governments. Therefore, a tribal summary
impact statement is not required.
Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)
We have analyzed this proposed action under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use dated May 18, 2001.
[[Page 68427]]
We have determined that the final rule is not a significant energy
action under that order since it is not likely to have a significant
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy.
Therefore, a Statement of Energy Effects is not required.
Executive Order 12898 (Environmental Justice)
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 has
determined that this final rule does not raise any environmental
justice issues.
Regulation Identification Number
A regulation identification 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 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 511
Grant programs--transportation, Highway traffic safety, Highways
and roads, Transportation, Travel, Travel restrictions.
Issued on: October 22, 2010.
Victor M. Mendez,
Administrator.
0
In consideration of the foregoing, FHWA adds a new part 511, to Title
23, Code of Federal Regulations, to read as follows:
PART 511--REAL-TIME SYSTEM MANAGEMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM
Subpart A--[Reserved]
Subpart B--[Reserved]
Subpart C--Real-Time System Management Information Program
Sec.
511.301 Purpose.
511.303 Definitions.
511.305 Policy.
511.307 Eligibility for Federal funding.
511.309 Provisions for traffic and travel conditions reporting.
511.311 Real-time information program establishment.
511.313 Metropolitan area real-time information program supplement.
511.315 Program administration.
Authority: Section 1201, Pub. L. 109-59; 23 U.S.C. 315; 23
U.S.C. 120; 49 CFR 1.48.
Subpart A--[Reserved]
Subpart B--[Reserved]
Subpart C--Real-Time System Management Information Program
Sec. 511.301 Purpose.
The purpose of this part is to establish the provisions and
parameters for the Real-Time System Management Information Program.
These provisions implement Subsections 1201(a)(1), (a)(2), and (c)(1)
of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity
Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (Pub. L. 109-59; 119 Stat. 1144),
pertaining to Congestion Relief.
Sec. 511.303 Definitions.
Unless otherwise specified in this part, the definitions in 23
U.S.C. 101(a) are applicable to this subpart. As used in this part:
Accuracy means the measure or degree of agreement between a data
value or set of values and a source assumed to be correct.
Availability means the degree to which data values are present in
the attributes (e.g., speed and travel time are attributes of traffic)
that require them. Availability is typically described in terms of
percentages or number of data values.
Congestion means the level at which transportation system
performance is unacceptable due to excessive travel times and delays.
Data quality means the fitness of data for all purposes that
require such data.
Full construction activities mean roadway construction or
maintenance activities that affect travel conditions by closing and
reopening roadways or lanes.
Metropolitan areas means the geographic areas designated as
Metropolitan Statistical Areas by the Office of Management and Budget
in the Executive Office of the President with a population exceeding
1,000,000 inhabitants.
Real-time information program means the program by which States
gather and make available the data for traffic and travel conditions.
Such means may involve State-only activity (including cooperative
activities engaging multiple State agencies), State partnership with
commercial providers of value-added information products, or other
effective means that enable the State to satisfy the provisions for
traffic and travel time conditions reporting stated in this section.
Routes of significance are non-Interstate roadways in metropolitan
areas that are designated by States as meriting the collection and
provision of information related to traffic and travel conditions.
Factors to be considered in designating routes of significance include
roadway safety (e.g., crash rate, routes affected by environmental
events), public safety (e.g., routes used for evacuations), economic
productivity, severity and frequency of congestion, and utility of the
highway to serve as a diversion route for congestion locations. All
public roadways including arterial highways, toll facilities and other
facilities that apply end user pricing mechanisms shall be considered
when designating routes of significance. In identifying these routes,
States shall apply the collaborative practices and procedures that are
used for compliance with 23 CFR part 940 and 23 CFR part 420.
Statewide incident reporting system means a statewide system for
facilitating the real-time electronic reporting of surface
transportation incidents to a central location for use in monitoring
the event, providing accurate traveler information, and responding to
the incident as appropriate. This definition is consistent with Public
Law 109-59; 119 Stat. 1144, Section 1201(f).
Timeliness means the degree to which data values or a set of values
are provided at the time required or specified.
Traffic and travel conditions means the characteristics that the
traveling public experiences. Traffic and travel conditions include,
but are not limited to, the following characteristics:
(1) Road or lane closures because of construction, traffic
incidents, or other events;
(2) Roadway weather or other environmental conditions restricting
or adversely affecting travel; and
(3) Travel times or speeds on limited access roadways in
metropolitan areas that experience recurring congestion.
Validity means the degree to which data values fall within the
respective domain of acceptable values.
Value-added information products means crafted products intended
for commercial use, for sale to a customer base, or for other
commercial enterprise purposes. These products may be derived from
information gathered by States and may be created from other party or
proprietary sources. These products may be created using the unique
means of the value-added information provider.
[[Page 68428]]
Sec. 511.305 Policy.
This part establishes the provisions and parameters for the Real-
Time System Management Information Program for State DOTs, other
responsible agencies, and partnerships with other commercial entities
in establishing real-time information programs that provide
accessibility to traffic and travel conditions information by other
public agencies, the traveling public, and by other parties who may
deliver value-added information products.
Sec. 511.307 Eligibility for Federal funding.
(a) Subject to project approval by the Secretary, a State may
obligate funds apportioned to the State under Title 23 U.S.C. sections
104(b)(1), also known as National Highway System funds, 104(b)(2), also
known as CMAQ Improvement funds, and 104(b)(3), also known as STP
funds, for activities relating to the planning, deployment and
operation, including preventative maintenance, of real-time monitoring
elements that advance the goals and purposes of the Real-Time System
Management Information Program. The SPC funds, apportioned according to
23 U.S.C. 505(a), may be applied to the development and implementation
of a real-time information program.
(b) Those project applications to establish a real-time information
program solely for Interstate System highways are entitled to a Federal
share of 90 percent of the total project cost, pursuant to 23 U.S.C.
120(a). Those project applications to establish a real-time information
program for non-Interstate highways are entitled to a Federal share of
80 percent of the total project cost, as per 23 U.S.C. 120(b).
Sec. 511.309 Provisions for traffic and travel conditions reporting.
(a) Minimum requirements for traffic and travel conditions made
available by real-time information programs are:
(1) Construction activities. The timeliness for the availability of
information about full construction activities that close or reopen
roadways or lanes will be 20 minutes or less from the time of the
closure for highways outside of Metropolitan Areas. For roadways within
Metropolitan Areas, the timeliness for the availability of information
about full construction activities that close or reopen roadways or
lanes will be 10 minutes or less from the time of the closure or
reopening. Short-term or intermittent lane closures of limited duration
that are less than the required reporting times are not included as a
minimum requirement under this section.
(2) Roadway or lane blocking incidents. The timeliness for the
availability of information related to roadway or lane blocking traffic
incidents will be 20 minutes or less from the time that the incident is
verified for highways outside of Metropolitan Areas. For roadways
within Metropolitan Areas, the timeliness for the availability of
information related to roadway or lane blocking traffic incidents will
be 10 minutes or less from the time that the incident is verified.
(3) Roadway weather observations. The timeliness for the
availability of information about hazardous driving conditions and
roadway or lane closures or blockages because of adverse weather
conditions will be 20 minutes or less from the time the hazardous
conditions, blockage, or closure is observed.
(4) Travel time information. The timeliness for the availability of
travel time information along limited access roadway segments within
Metropolitan Areas, as defined under this subpart, will be 10 minutes
or less from the time that the travel time calculation is completed.
(5) Information accuracy. The designed accuracy for a real-time
information program shall be 85 percent accurate at a minimum, or have
a maximum error rate of 15 percent.
(6) Information availability. The designed availability for a real-
time information program shall be 90 percent available at a minimum.
(b) Real-time information programs may be established using legacy
monitoring mechanisms applied to the highways, using a statewide
incident reporting system, using new monitoring mechanisms applied to
the highways, using value-added information products, or using a
combination of monitoring mechanisms and value-added information
products.
Sec. 511.311 Real-time information program establishment.
(a) Requirement. States shall establish real-time information
programs that are consistent with the parameters defined under Sec.
511.309. The real-time information program shall be established to take
advantage of the existing traffic and travel condition monitoring
capabilities, and build upon them where applicable. The real-time
information program shall include traffic and travel condition
information for, as a minimum, all the Interstate highways operated by
the State. In addition, the real-time information program shall
complement current transportation performance reporting systems by
making it easier to gather or enhance required information.
(b) Data quality. States shall develop the methods by which data
quality can be ensured to the data consumers. The criteria for defining
the validity of traffic and travel conditions made available from real-
time information programs shall be established by the States in
collaboration with their partners for establishing the programs. States
shall receive FHWA's concurrence that the selected methods provide
reasonable checks of the quality of the information made available by
the real-time information program. In requesting FHWA's concurrence,
the State shall demonstrate to FHWA how the selected methods gauge the
accuracy and availability of the real-time information and the remedial
actions if the information quality falls below the levels described in
Sec. 511.309(a)(5) and Sec. 511.309(a)(6).
(c) Participation. The establishment, or the enhancement, of a
real-time information program should include participation from the
following agencies: Highway agencies; public safety agencies (e.g.,
police, fire, emergency/medical); transit operators; and other
operating agencies necessary to sustain mobility through the region
and/or the metropolitan area. Nothing in this subpart is intended to
alter the existing relationships among State, regional, and local
agencies.
(d) Update of Regional ITS Architecture. All States and regions
that have created a Regional ITS Architecture in accordance with
Section 940 in Title 23 CFR shall evaluate their Regional ITS
Architectures to determine whether the Regional ITS Architectures
explicitly address real-time highway and transit information needs and
the methods needed to meet such needs. Traffic and travel conditions
monitoring needs for all Interstate system highways shall be
considered. If necessary, the Regional ITS Architectures shall be
updated to address coverage, monitoring systems, data fusion and
archiving, and accessibility to highway and transit information for
other States and for value added information product providers. The
Regional ITS Architecture shall feature the components and
functionality of the real-time information program.
(e) Effective date. Establishment of the real-time information
program for traffic and travel conditions on the Interstate system
highways shall be completed no later than November 8, 2014.
[[Page 68429]]
Sec. 511.313 Metropolitan Area real-time information program
supplement.
(a) Applicability. Metropolitan Areas as defined under this
subpart.
(b) Requirement. Metropolitan Areas shall establish a real-time
information program for traffic and travel conditions reporting with
the same provisions described in Sec. 511.311.
(c) Routes of significance. States shall designate metropolitan
areas, non-Interstate highways that are routes of significance as
defined under this subpart. In identifying the metropolitan routes of
significance, States shall collaborate with local or regional agencies
using existing coordination methods. Nothing in this subpart is
intended to alter the existing relationships among State, regional, and
local agencies.
(d) Effective date. Establishment of the real-time information
program for traffic and travel conditions reporting along the
Metropolitan Area Interstate system highways shall be completed no
later than November 8, 2014. Establishment of the real-time information
program for traffic and travel conditions reporting along the State-
designated metropolitan area routes of significance shall be completed
no later than November 8, 2016.
Sec. 511.315 Program administration.
Compliance with this subpart will be monitored under Federal-aid
oversight procedures as provided under 23 U.S.C. 106 and 133, 23 CFR
1.36, and 23 CFR 940.13.
[FR Doc. 2010-27987 Filed 11-5-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P