[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 173 (Thursday, September 7, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52849-52851]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-14796]
[[Page 52849]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Transit Administration
[Docket No: FTA-2006-25750]
Policy Statement on When High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes
Converted to High-Occupancy/Toll (HOT) Lanes Shall Be Classified as
Fixed Guideway Miles for FTA's Funding Formulas and When HOT Lanes
Shall Not Be Classified as Fixed Guideway Miles for FTA's Funding
Formulas
AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration (FTA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of policy statement and request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice describes the terms and conditions on which the
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) proposes to classify High-
Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes that are converted to High-Occupancy/Toll
(HOT) lanes as ``fixed guideway miles'' for purposes of the transit
funding formulas administered by FTA. The notice also describes when
HOT lanes would be ineligible for classification as fixed guideway
miles in FTA's funding formulas, clarifies which HOT lanes shall not be
eligible for reporting as fixed guideway miles in FTA's funding
formulas, and seeks comment from interested parties. After
consideration of the comments, FTA will issue a second Federal Register
notice responding to comments received and noting any changes made to
the policy statement as a result of comments received.
DATES: Comments must be received by October 10, 2006. Late-filed
comments will be considered to the extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: To ensure your comments are not entered more than once into
the DOT Docket, please identify your submissions by the following
docket number: FTA-2006-25750. Please make your submissions by only one
of the following means:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for making submissions to the DOT
electronic docket site.
Web Site: http://dms.dot.gov. Follow the online
instructions for making submissions to the DOT electronic docket site.
Fax: 1-202-493-2478.
U.S. Post or Express Mail: Docket Management System, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building,
Room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590-001.
Hand Delivery: To the Docket Management System; Room PL-
401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
Instructions: All submissions must make reference to the ``Federal
Transit Administration'' and include the docket number for this notice
set forth above. Due to security procedures in effect since October
2001 regarding mail deliveries, mail received through the U.S. Postal
Service may be subject to delays. Parties making submissions responsive
to this notice should consider using an express mail firm to ensure the
prompt filing of any submissions not filed electronically or by hand.
Note that all submissions received, including any personal information
therein, will be posted without change or alteration to http://dms.dot.gov.
Docket: For access to the DOT docket to read materials relating to
this notice, please go to http://dms.dot.gov at any time or to the
Docket Management System.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David B. Horner, Esq., Chief Counsel, Federal Transit Administration,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,
DC 20590-0001. E-mail: [email protected]. Telephone: (202) 366-4040;
or
Robert J. Tuccillo, Associate Administrator, Office of Budget & Policy,
Federal Transit Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001. E-mail:
[email protected]. Telephone: (202) 366-4050.
Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Since the early 1980s, transportation officials have sought to
manage traffic congestion and increase vehicle occupancy by means of
High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes--highway lanes reserved for the
exclusive use of car pools and transit vehicles. Today, there are over
130 freeway HOV facilities in metropolitan areas in the U.S.,\1\ of
which approximately 10 have received funding through FTA's Major
Capital Investment program and approximately 80 are counted as ``fixed
guideway miles'' for purposes of FTA's formula grant programs.\2\ Since
1990, however, HOV mode share in 36 of the 40 largest metropolitan
areas has steadily declined,\3\ while both excess capacity on HOV lanes
and congestion have increased.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Office of Operations, Federal Highway Administration, U.S.
Department of Transportation.
\2\ National Transit Database.
\3\ Journey to Work Trends in the United States and its Major
Metropolitan Areas 1960-2000, Publication No. FHWA-EP-03-058
Prepared for: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration, Office of Planning, Prepared by: Nancy McGuckin,
Consultant, Nanda Srinivasan, Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
\4\ Office of Operations, Federal Highway Administration, U.S.
Department of Transportation. Demand for highway travel by Americans
continues to grow as population increases, particularly in
metropolitan areas. Construction of new highway capacity to
accommodate this growth in travel has not kept pace. Between 1980
and 1999, route miles of highways increased 1.5 percent while
vehicle miles of travel increased 76 percent. The Texas
Transportation Institute estimates that, in 2000, the 75 largest
metropolitan areas experienced 3.6 billion vehicle-hours of delay,
resulting in 5.7 billion gallons in wasted fuel and $67.5 billion in
lost productivity. And traffic volumes are projected to continue to
grow. The volume of freight movement alone is forecast to nearly
double by 2020. Congestion is largely thought of as a big city
problem, but delays are becoming increasingly common in small cities
and some rural areas as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
An increasing number of metropolitan areas are considering new
demand management strategies as alternatives to HOV lanes. One emerging
alternative is the variably-priced High-Occupancy/ Toll (HOT) lane. HOT
lanes combine HOV and pricing strategies by allowing Single-Occupant
Vehicles (SOVs) to access HOV lanes by paying a toll. The lanes are
``managed'' through pricing to maintain free flow conditions even
during the height of rush hours.
HOT lanes provide multiple benefits to metropolitan areas that are
experiencing severe and worsening congestion and significant
transportation funding shortages. First, variably-priced HOT lanes
expand mobility options in congested urban areas by providing an
opportunity for reliable travel times for users prepared to pay a
significant premium for this service. HOT lanes also improve the
efficiency of HOV facilities by allowing toll-paying SOVs to utilize
excess lane capacity on HOVs. In addition, HOT lanes generate new
revenue which can be used to pay for transportation improvements,
including enhanced transit service.
In August of 2005, recognizing the advantages of HOT lanes,
Congress enacted section 112 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU),
codified at 23 U.S.C. 166, to authorize States to permit use of HOV
lanes by SOVs, so long as the performance of the HOV lanes is
continuously monitored and continues to meet specified performance
[[Page 52850]]
standards. The Department has strongly endorsed the conversion of HOV
lanes to variably-priced HOT lanes, most recently in its Initiative to
Reduce Congestion on the Nation's Transportation Network. It is the
Department's policy to encourage jurisdictions to consider ``HOV-to-
HOT'' conversion as a means of congestion relief and possible revenue
enhancement.
The ability of HOT lanes to introduce additional traffic to
existing HOV facilities, while using pricing and other management
techniques to control the number of additional motorists, maintain high
service levels and provide new revenue, make HOT lanes an effective
means of reducing congestion and improving mobility. For this reason,
and given the new authority enacted by Congress to promote ``HOV-to-
HOT'' conversions, many States, transportation agencies and
metropolitan areas are seriously considering applying variable pricing
to both new and existing roadways. For example, the current long-range
transportation plan for the Washington, DC, metropolitan area includes
four new HOT lanes along 15 miles of the Capital Beltway in Virginia,
and six new variably-priced lanes along 18 miles on the Inter-County
Connector in Montgomery and Prince George's Counties in Maryland.\5\
Virginia is also exploring the possibility of converting existing HOV
lanes along the I-95/395 corridor into HOT lanes.\6\ Maryland is
considering express toll lanes along I-495, I-95 and I-270, as well as
along other facilities.\7\ Similarly, in San Francisco, the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Transportation 2030 Plan
advocates development of a HOT network that would convert that region's
existing HOV lanes to HOT lanes; \8\ Houston's 2025 Regional
Transportation Plan includes plans to implement peak period pricing
within the managed HOT lanes of the major freeway corridors in the
region; \9\ and the Miami-Dade, Florida 2030 Transportation Plan
includes conversion of existing HOV lanes to reversible HOV/HOT lanes
to provide additional capacity to I-95 in Miami-Dade County.\10\ Other
jurisdictions are exploring the potential for HOT lanes with grants
provided by the Department's Value Pricing Pilot Program.\11\ These
include the Port Authority of New York/New Jersey; San Antonio, Texas;
Seattle, Washington; Atlanta, Georgia; and Portland, Oregon.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Letter to U.S. Department of Transportation, August 28,
2006, from National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board.
\6\ Letter to U.S. Department of Transportation, August 28,
2006, from National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board.
\7\ Letter to U.S. Department of Transportation, August 28,
2006, from National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board.
\8\ A Vision for the Future Transportation 2030, February 2005,
Chapter 1, Page 6.
\9\ 2025 Regional Transportation Plan Houston-Galveston Area,
June 2005, Page 31.
\10\ Miami-Dade Transportation Plan (to the Year 2030) December
2004, FINAL DRAFT, Page 24.
\11\ Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation. The Department's Value Pricing Pilot Program (VPPP),
initially authorized by the Intermodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act as the Congestion Pricing Pilot Program and continued
as the VPPP under SAFETEA-LU, encourages implementation and
evaluation of value pricing pilot projects, offering flexibility to
encompass a variety of innovative applications including areawide
pricing, pricing of multiple or single facilities or corridors,
single lane pricing, and implementation of other market-based
strategies.
\12\ Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While an increasing number of metropolitan planning organizations
and State departments of transportation are studying the HOT lane
concept as a strategy to improve mobility, six HOT lane facilities
currently operate in the United States: State Route 91 (SR 91) Express
Lanes in Orange County, California; the I-15 FasTrak in San Diego,
California; the Katy Freeway QuickRide and the Northwest Freeway (US
290) in Harris County, Texas; I-394 in Minneapolis and St. Paul,
Minnesota; and I-25 in Denver, Colorado.
Prior FTA Policy
Since 2002, FTA's policy has been to continue to classify the lanes
of an HOV facility converted to HOT lanes as ``fixed guideway miles''
for funding formula purposes on the condition that the facility meets
two requirements: (i) The HOT facility manages SOV use so that it does
not impede the free-flow and high speed of transit and high-occupancy
vehicles and (ii) toll revenues collected on the facility will be used
for mass transit purposes.\13\ FTA has considered requiring as an
additional condition for eligibility that the lowest toll payable by
SOVs on a HOT facility be not less than the fare charged for transit
services on the HOT facility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ In a Letter to U.S. Representative Randall Cunningham,
dated June 10, 2002, concerning the I-15 FasTrak facility in San
Diego, FTA stated: ``* * * FTA will recognize, for formula
allocation purposes, exclusive fixed guideway transit facilities
that permit toll-paying SOVs on an incidental basis (often called
high occupancy/toll (HOT) lanes) under the following conditions: the
facility must be able to control SOV use so that it does not impede
the free flow and high speed of transit and HOV vehicles, and the
toll revenues collected must be used for mass transit purposes.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed FTA Policy
(a) Purpose of Revised Policy. The proposed FTA policy described
below would help ensure that federal transit funding for congested
urban areas is not decreased when existing HOV facilities are converted
to variably-priced HOT lanes in an effort by localities to reduce
congestion, improve air quality, and maximize throughput using excess
HOV lane capacity. The revised FTA policy would also promote a uniform
approach by the Department's operating agencies concerning HOV-to-HOT
conversions. In particular, FTA policy would be coordinated with the
statutes enacted by Congress under section 112 of SAFETEA-LU applicable
to the Federal Highway Administration intended to simplify conversion
of HOV lanes to HOT lanes. The policy statement would also support the
Administration's policy of encouraging HOV-to-HOT conversions.
(b) Proposed Policy. FTA would classify HOT lanes as ``fixed
guideway miles'' for purposes of the funding formulas administered
under 49 U.S.C. Sec. 5307(b) and 49 U.S.C. Sec. 5309(a)(E), so long
as each of the following conditions is satisfied:
(i) The HOT lanes were previously HOV lanes reported in the
National Transit Database as ``fixed guideway miles'' for purposes of
the funding formulas administered by FTA under 49 U.S.C. 5307(b) and 49
U.S.C. 5309(a)(E). Facilities that were not eligible HOV lanes prior to
being converted to HOT lanes would remain ineligible for inclusion as
fixed guideway miles in FTA's funding formulas. Therefore, neither non-
HOV facilities converted directly to HOT facilities nor facilities
constructed as HOT lanes would be eligible for classification as
``fixed guideway miles.''
(ii) The HOT lanes are continuously monitored and continue to meet
performance standards that preserve free flow traffic conditions as
specified in 23 U.S.C. 166(d). 23 U.S.C. 166(d) provides operational
performance standards for an HOV facility converted to a HOT facility.
It also requires that the performance of the facility be continuously
monitored and that it continue to meet specified performance standards.
Due to original project commitments, HOV facilities constructed using
capital funds available under 49 U.S.C. 5309(d) or (e) could be
required, when converted to HOT lanes, to achieve a higher performance
standard than required under 23 U.S.C. 166(d). Standards for
operational performance and determining degradation of operational
[[Page 52851]]
performance for facilities constructed with funds from FTA's New Starts
program would be determined by FTA on a case-by-case basis. FTA would
require real-time monitoring of traffic flows to ensure on-going
compliance with operational performance standards.
(iii) Program income from the HOT lane facility, including all toll
revenue, is used solely for ``permissible uses.'' ``Permissible uses''
could mean any of the following uses with respect to any HOT lane
facility, whether operated by a public or private entity: (a) Debt
service, (b) a reasonable return on investment of any private
financing, (c) the costs necessary for the proper operation and
maintenance of such facility (including reconstruction and
rehabilitation), and (d) if the operating entity annually certifies
that the facility is being adequately operated and maintained
(including that the permissible uses described in (a), (b) and (c)
above, if applicable, are being duly paid), any other purpose relating
to a project carried out under Title 49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq. (``transit
law''). In cases where the HOT lane facility has received (or receives)
funding from FTA and another Federal agency, such that use of the
facility's program income is governed by more than one Federal program,
FTA's restrictions concerning permissible use would not apply to more
than transit's allocable share \14\ of the facility's program income.
FTA would not require recipients to assign priority in payment to any
permissible use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Transit's allocable share of the facility's program income
shall be an amount equal to the facility's total program income, for
any period, multiplied by a ratio, (a) the numerator of which shall
be the cumulative amount of funds contributed to the facility
through a program established by transit law, and (b) the
denominator of which shall be the cumulative amount of all Federal
funds contributed to the facility, in each case at the time
transit's allocable share is calculated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) Transit Fares and Tolls on HOT Lane Facilities. FTA would not
condition reporting of HOT lanes as fixed guideway miles following
conversion from HOV lanes or condition any approval or waiver under a
Full Funding Grant Agreement on a grantee's adopting transit fare
policies or a tolling authority's adopting of tolling policies
concerning, respectively, the price of transit services on the HOT lane
facility and the tolls payable by SOVs. Instead, FTA would allow
grantees and tolling authorities to develop their own fare structures
for transit services and tolls, respectively, on HOT lane facilities.
Transit fares would remain subject to 49 U.S.C. 5332
(Nondiscrimination) and 49 U.S.C. 5307 (Urbanized area formula grants).
(d) No Return of Funds under Full Funding Grant Agreements. In the
event that an HOV facility is converted to a HOT facility and the HOV
facility has received funds through FTA's New Starts program, FTA would
not require the grantee to return such funds so long as the facility
complied with the conditions set forth in this guidance.
James S. Simpson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E6-14796 Filed 9-6-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-57-P