TITLE 43.TRANSPORTATION

Part 1. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Chapter 2. ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY

Subchapter B. MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING WITH NATURAL RESOURCE AGENCIES

The Texas Department of Transportation (department) adopts amendments to §2.21, concerning purpose, the repeal of §2.24, concerning memorandum of understanding with the Texas Historical Commission, and simultaneously adopts new §2.24 concerning memorandum of understanding with the Texas Historical Commission (THC). New §2.24 is adopted with changes to the proposed text as published in the February 13, 2004, issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 1307). The amendments to §2.21 and the repeal of §2.24 are adopted without changes to the proposed text as published in the February 13, 2004, issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 1307) and will not be republished.

EXPLANATION OF ADOPTED AMENDMENTS, REPEAL, AND NEW SECTION

Transportation Code, §201.607, requires the department to adopt a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with each state agency that has responsibilities for the protection of the natural environment, the preservation of the natural environment, or for the preservation of historic or archeological resources. Section 201.607 also requires the department to adopt the MOU and all revisions by rule and to periodically evaluate and revise the MOU. In order to meet the legislative intent and to ensure that historic and archeological resources are given full consideration in accomplishing the department’s activities, the department has evaluated the MOU adopted in 1998 and finds it necessary to repeal existing §2.24 and simultaneously adopt new §2.24.

Section 2.21 is amended to update a statutory citation from Texas Civil Statutes to Transportation Code, §201.607, and to update the term "article" to "section."

The adopted new MOU between THC and the department satisfies the statutory requirement for reviewing and revising MOUs with resource agencies. It also replaces the existing MOU, which has been in effect since December 13, 1998, with an MOU that streamlines THC’s review of the department’s projects and simultaneously allows THC to focus on those projects with significant historic and archeological concerns. The adopted MOU has many new provisions and procedures that were developed based on experience gained from numerous projects that the department has submitted and THC has reviewed since the December 13, 1998. MOU was executed.

The adopted new MOU seeks to expedite the project review process by classifying and specifying new responsibilities of each agency relating to the review of a department project. Another objective of this MOU is to focus THC resources on projects that may adversely affect significant historic and archeological resources.

The adopted new MOU seeks to meet these objectives by evaluating and classifying projects to better determine the appropriate level of review. The MOU identifies certain types of projects that experience has shown are unlikely to have any adverse effects to historic or archeological resources. These projects include routine maintenance activities (e.g., repaving existing roads) and other common projects that are unlikely to cause negative effects (e.g., landscaping, and constructing bike and pedestrian paths). Under the adopted new MOU, these and similar projects will not require THC review.

Another category of projects warrant review, but not necessarily automatic individual coordination with THC. For these projects, the department is required to investigate, evaluate, and document information that demonstrates that no individual coordination is automatically required in advance under the criteria specified in the MOU. If the department’s evaluation determines that individual coordination is appropriate for a given project, that project would move to the next higher level of review, individual coordination. Under this MOU, the department must utilize personnel from its staff or consultants that meet the federal and state standards for historic architects, historians, and archeologists that review transportation projects.

Although there are expedited procedures for projects identified as not requiring THC review and projects that the department is required to evaluate and document as not requiring individual coordination with THC, there are criteria and procedures in the MOU to ensure that appropriate investigation, evaluation, and classification occur. If the department determines, during the investigation or evaluation, that a project would have an adverse effect on historic and archeological resources, that project would be submitted to the THC for individual review. The MOU requires the department to individually coordinate projects with THC in cases where the evaluation shows that the project would have an adverse effect on historic and archeological resources. The MOU provides for THC oversight of this process. Under the MOU, the department is required to submit to THC a quarterly report of projects not individually coordinated. THC may also audit the department or request information about any given project at any time.

The next level of review is for those projects that require individual coordination. For these projects, the MOU requires the department to provide all the information that is needed for a comprehensive review of the project by THC. THC has agreed to review the information within 20 days.

In some cases, a project potentially affecting a significant archeological or historic site may be resolved with only one submission to THC. For example, the department could submit an effects evaluation that shows to THC’s satisfaction that the site will be avoided. In other cases, the department will be required to provide additional information, mitigation proposals, permit applications, final reports, etc.

One goal of the MOU is to enable THC staff to spend more time on these larger or more complex projects that require more extensive individual review, evaluation, and negotiation. It is anticipated that the expedited review of projects that do not require individual coordination will allow THC staff to have the time available to perform these more intense reviews of projects individually coordinated.

It is also the goal of the MOU to use THC resources for early evaluation of large projects (e.g., projects involving construction of the Trans Texas Corridor) that are considered to potentially have adverse effects on historic and archeological resources. The department hopes to avoid or minimize any adverse effects from large projects through early coordination and collaboration with THC in the project planning process.

SUBSECTION BY SUBSECTION ANALYSIS OF ADOPTED NEW SECTION

Subsection (a) states the purpose of the MOU. This subsection expresses both agencies’ intent to make the project review process more efficient.

Subsection (b) cites the authorities that allow for the drafting of a MOU to increase effective coordination between agencies. To implement provisions of the MOU, it is the express intent of the department and THC to enter into a programmatic agreement that adopts similarly streamlined procedures for projects that are federally assisted, permitted, or licensed.

Subsection (c) defines some of the words and terms used in this MOU. These definitions are intended to clarify the scope and nature of evaluations and reviews conducted under this MOU. Section 2.24(c) has been adopted with changes to add a definition of the term "environmental document" which is used in the MOU but was not defined in the proposed version.

Subsection (d) sets forth the responsibilities of the department and THC as they relate to this MOU. It includes a commitment by the department to establish a funding agreement to support THC’s commitment to streamlined project review, and a commitment by THC to use that funding agreement only for department projects and in the most efficient manner that achieves streamlining.

Subsection (e) provides for early coordination between the department and THC. This subsection expresses THC and department agreement that routine roadway maintenance projects do not require review by THC. Section 2.24(e) is adopted with changes because the department believed clarification was needed in this section of the MOU. The department modified the section with THC’s concurrence to note that these projects would not merit review unless graves are present or the maintenance affects historic bridges, highways, picnic areas, or rest areas, or the maintenance work would involve more than 100 cubic yards of excavation below the original grade. This subsection expresses both agencies’ commitment to identify and apply a broad range of strategies to comply with the Antiquities Code of Texas, Natural Resources Code, Chapter 191 (ACT). This subsection specifies how the department will ensure that the public and interested parties, including federally recognized Indian tribes, will be afforded the opportunity to provide input about potential impact to historic properties. This subsection provides for independent evaluation of public comments or new information by the department and THC.

Subsection (f) states the circumstances under which Antiquities Permits will be required for archeological investigations to be performed in conjunction with the department’s projects. This subsection expresses the procedures the department will use to determine if archeological sites are present and, if present, to determine their significance, and coordinate adverse effects with THC. If no sites are found or if sites are found but are not recommended for further work, this subsection states that the projects will not require individual review and will be reported to THC as part of a quarterly report.

If a project is individually coordinated with THC, this subsection specifies that THC will have 20 days to complete review of the project and its potential effects on significant sites. Depending on the project and site, the department may be required to make additional submissions or take additional actions. Section 2.24(f) is adopted with changes, with THC's concurrence, to note that if the THC does not respond within 20 days, the department may assume THC's concurrence with its determination and may proceed with the project in accordance with the procedures required in the MOU. This subsection also provides for alternative mitigation and public outreach efforts, where appropriate. Subsection (f) is also adopted with changes to eliminate references in the subsection to principal investigators. Principal investigators are either staff of the department or are consultants hired by the department. As such, they are an arm of the department and do not need to be singled out in the MOU. This provision would allow the department, subject to THC approval, to develop mitigation strategies that address specific stakeholder concerns and unusual circumstances. This subsection also sets forth the process that the department and THC will use when archeological sites are found after award of contract. Finally, this subsection outlines how artifacts will be recovered and curated.

Subsection (g) pertains to coordination procedures for non-archeological historic sites. This subsection identifies the types of projects that do not require individual coordination with THC, and specifies how the department will make that determination. A quarterly report of projects that do not require individual coordination will be provided to THC. THC reserves the right to audit such projects to ensure that the department has made appropriate determinations. In addition to the quarterly report and audit provisions, THC may request information on a given project while the department is evaluating and making the determinations authorized by this MOU.

Subsection (h) specifies how non-archeological historic-age properties will be identified and evaluated. This subsection establishes the procedures that will be used to identify and evaluate historic-age bridge-class structures.

Subsection (i) specifies how the department will assess and mitigate effects of its projects on non-archeological historic properties, particularly historic bridges, and how the department will coordinate those effects with THC. This subsection specifies that THC will have 20 days to complete its review of the department's assessment of effects and proposed mitigation. Depending on the project and site, the department may be required to make additional submission or take additional action. If THC objects to the department’s assessment of effects or proposed mitigation and the dispute cannot be resolved, §2.24(p) would govern dispute resolution. Subsection (p) applies not only to effects assessments and mitigation, but also to other situations such as if THC does not grant the department required approvals.

Subsection (j) specifies the documentation that the department must maintain in its files for each project that is included in the quarterly report, and the documentation that the department must submit to THC for projects that are individually coordinated with THC. The period allotted for THC to respond to report submittals is 20 days.

Subsection (k) requires that applicable environmental documents summarize the department’s efforts to comply with its responsibilities to identify historic and archeological sites, determine project-specific effects on such properties, and minimize or mitigate those effects.

Subsection (l) allows the department to make a commitment to complete its archeological responsibilities prior to any construction-related impacts if right of entry to private land is denied during environmental studies. This provision is intended to address cases where the department is denied access during preliminary or early surveys or studies. Although this provision would be applicable if the department ultimately acquired the property, it is not intended to place any obligation on the department to do so.

Subsection (m) describes that the department may use the procedures of this MOU, which has been developed with THC specifically for department projects, instead of the generic requirements of Title 13, TAC, Part 2.

Subsections (n) and (o) allow THC to audit the department’s project files for projects carried out under this MOU, and to require an annual meeting of appropriate staff of both agencies.

Subsection (p) sets forth the procedures for dispute resolution. The MOU requires the department to submit numerous documents to THC. Depending on the particular document, THC review, comment, concurrence, or approval may be required. This subsection specifies the procedures that will be used to resolve disagreements or disputes. To summarize these provisions, there is an opportunity for informal consultation on a disputed matter, followed by formal federal dispute resolution procedures or an appeal under state law as provided in 13 TAC Chapter 27.

COMMENTS

No comments were received on the proposed amendments, repeal, and new section.

43 TAC §2.21, §2.24

STATUTORY AUTHORITY

The amendments and new section are adopted under Transportation Code, §201.101, which provides the Texas Transportation Commission with the authority to establish rules for the conduct of the work of the department, and more specifically, Transportation Code, §201.607, which requires that the department adopt memoranda of understanding with each agency that has responsibility for the protection of the natural environment, the preservation of the natural environment, or for the preservation of historic or archeological resources, and that these memoranda and all revisions be adopted as rules.

CROSS REFERENCE TO STATUTE: Transportation Code, §201.607.

§2.24.Memorandum of Understanding with the Texas Historical Commission.

(a) Purpose.

(1) It is the policy of the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) to:

(A) identify the environmental impacts of TxDOT transportation projects, to coordinate these projects with applicable state and federal agencies, and reflect these investigations and coordination in the environmental documentation for each project;

(B) base project decisions on a balanced consideration of the need for a safe, efficient, economical, and environmentally sound transportation system;

(C) receive input from the public through the public involvement process;

(D) utilize a systematic interdisciplinary approach as an essential part of the development process for transportation projects; and

(E) strive for environmentally sound transportation activities through appropriate avoidance, treatment or mitigation, where feasible and prudent, in coordination with appropriate resource agencies.

(2) In order to pursue this policy, the Texas Department of Transportation and the Texas Historical Commission (THC) have agreed to adopt this new Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), which will supersede the MOU which became effective on December 13, 1998.

(3) This MOU is entered into by THC and TxDOT in accordance with Government Code, §442.005 and §442.007, Natural Resources Code, §191.0525(f), and Transportation Code, §201.607, to adequately provide for coordination of projects with THC. It is the intent of this MOU to provide a formal mechanism for THC review of TxDOT projects that have the potential to adversely affect cultural resources in order to assist TxDOT in making environmentally sound decisions, and to develop with TxDOT a system by which information developed by TxDOT and THC may be exchanged to their mutual benefit. This MOU also provides for an efficient and streamlined review of TxDOT projects in keeping with state and national initiatives for environmental streamlining.

(b) Authority.

(1) Transportation Code, §201.607, directs TxDOT to adopt MOUs with appropriate environmental resource agencies, including THC. The rules for coordination of state-assisted transportation projects found in Subchapter C of this chapter (relating to Environmental Review and Public Involvement for Transportation Projects), underline the need for and importance of comprehensive environmental coordination for transportation projects.

(2) Transportation Code, §201.607(a)(5) also authorizes and contemplates other agreements necessary for the effective coordination of the review of the historic or archeological effect of highway projects.

(3) Provisions of this MOU may in part be implemented through a Programmatic Agreement (PA) among the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Texas State Historic Preservation Officer (TSHPO), the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (Council), and TxDOT. TxDOT and THC will seek to revise the existing PA, executed in 1995, to reflect the streamlined procedures contained in this MOU.

(c) Definitions. The following words and terms, when used in this section, shall have the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.

(1) Antiquities Code of Texas (ACT)--The state statute (Natural Resources Code, Chapter 191) that designates the Texas Historical Commission as the legal custodian of all cultural resources, historic or prehistoric, within the public domain of the state, and as the body that issues antiquities permits, in accordance with Title 13, Part 2, TAC, concerning the Texas Historical Commission.

(2) Antiquities permit--A permit issued by the Texas Historical Commission in order to regulate the taking, alteration, damage, destruction, salvage, archeological survey, testing, excavation and study of state archeological landmarks including prehistoric and historic archeological sites, and the preservation, protection, stabilization, conservation, rehabilitation, restoration, reconstruction, or demolition of historic structures and buildings designated as a State Archeological Landmark or listed in the National Register of Historic Places.

(3) Area of potential effects--The geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may cause changes in the character or use of historic properties, as that term is defined in 36 CFR Part 800, if any such properties exist.

(A) The area of potential effects for archeological properties on federal undertakings will be confined to the limits of the proposed project right of way (including permanent and temporary easements), utility relocations, and project-specific locations designated by TxDOT.

(B) Unless TxDOT and THC in consultation determine a need for a wider area of potential effects, the area of potential effects for other properties on federal undertakings will be:

(i) 300 feet beyond the proposed right of way for projects constructed on new locations;

(ii) 150 feet beyond the proposed right of way for projects constructed in existing transportation corridors, including abandoned railroad lines.

(C) The area of potential effects for all non-federal undertakings will be confined to the limits of the proposed project right of way (including permanent and temporary easements), utility relocations, and project-specific locations specifically designated by TxDOT.

(4) Cultural resources--A general term referring to buildings, structures, objects, sites, and districts more than 50 years of age with the potential to have significance in local, state, or national history.

(5) Eligibility--A property’s eligibility for the National Register of Historic Places as set forth in 36 CFR Part 60 and 36 CFR Part 800, or for designation as a State Archeological Landmark, as set forth in 13 TAC Chapter 26.

(6) Environmental document--a decision-making document that incorporates environmental studies, coordination, documentation, consultation efforts, and engineering elements, and may include categorical exclusion documentation, environmental assessment, and environmental impact statements.

(7) Historic property--Any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object which is included or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, as defined in 36 CFR Part 800 and 36 CFR Part 60, or meets the requirements for designation as a State Archeological Landmark as set forth in 13 TAC Chapter 26.

(8) Historic-age property--Any site, building, structure, or object that will be 50 years old or older in age at the time of the award of the construction contract.

(9) Impact evaluation--Field inspection by a qualified archeologist to determine the extent to which physical conditions affect the eligibility of known or unknown archeological deposits within the area of potential effects of the proposed project.

(10) National Register--The National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), which is the nation's inventory of historic places maintained by the U.S. Secretary of the Interior. (Historic properties included in or eligible for inclusion must meet National Register criteria for evaluation, as defined in 36 CFR Part 60.)

(11) Project specific location--The location of specific material sources (base material, borrow, sand pits, etc.) and other sites used by a construction contractor for a specific project.

(12) Quarterly report--A report that TxDOT submits to THC 20 days after the end of each quarter listing all projects for which TxDOT has documented that no historic properties are present in the project’s area of potential effect, and those where the projects will have no adverse effects on historic properties as determined by background research and/or field investigation, and project review, as appropriate, that is used to fulfill TxDOT’s reporting requirements under this MOU.

(13) State Archeological Landmark (SAL)--Archeological and historic-age properties that are designated or eligible for designation as landmarks as defined in Subchapter D of the Antiquities Code of Texas (ACT) and identified in accordance with 13 TAC Chapter 26.

(14) State Historic Bridge Inventory (SHBI)--An ongoing evaluation effort to determine the eligibility of historic-age bridges in Texas.

(d) Responsibilities.

(1) Texas Department of Transportation. The responsibilities of TxDOT pertain primarily to its functions as a transportation agency, and include:

(A) planning and designing safe, efficient, effective, and environmentally sensitive transportation facilities while avoiding, minimizing, or compensating for impacts to cultural resources to the fullest extent practicable;

(B) the timely and efficient construction of transportation facilities, in a manner consistent with approved plans, agreements and commitments that TxDOT has executed regarding the protection of historic properties;

(C) ongoing maintenance to provide safe, efficient, and environmentally sound transportation facilities for the traveling public;

(D) coordinating projects with THC through TxDOT’s Environmental Affairs Division or its successor as established by TxDOT administration; and

(E) provide funding to THC to enable THC to implement measures to facilitate early coordination, streamlining and expedited review of TxDOT's transportation projects.

(2) Texas Historical Commission. The responsibilities of THC relate primarily to its functions as a cultural resource agency, and include:

(A) serving as the State Historic Preservation Office in Texas with responsibility under 36 CFR Part 800--the regulations implementing §106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470f);

(B) reviewing federally assisted, licensed, or permitted undertakings with the potential to affect properties included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places;

(C) providing assistance to agencies in their efforts to comply with the §106 process;

(D) regulating the identification, disposition and management of State Archeological Landmarks which are affected by non-federal undertakings, as described in the Antiquities Code of Texas and 13 TAC Chapter 26;

(E) issuing permits for the taking, excavation, restoration, rehabilitation or study of State Archeological Landmarks as provided in ACT, §191.054 and §191.091-191.098; and

(F) applying TxDOT's funding solely to the review of TxDOT's projects in a manner that most efficiently streamlines THC's effective review and early coordination.

(e) Early project planning for cultural resources.

(1) TxDOT and THC agree that routine roadway maintenance projects, by their nature and definition, do not require review by THC under 36 CFR Part 800 or 13 TAC Chapter 26. Such projects include activities (such as vegetation control, traffic control, and routine painting and striping) that do not have the potential to affect State Archeological Landmarks or properties listed or eligible for listing on the National Register. TxDOT and THC agree that the following activities do not require review:

(A) installation, repair, or replacement of fencing, signage, traffic signals, railroad warning devices, safety end treatments, cameras and intelligent highway system equipment;

(B) earthmoving projects involving less than 100 cubic yards of excavation below the original grade;

(C) routine structural maintenance and repair of non-historic bridges, highways, railroad crossings, picnic areas, and rest areas;

(D) in-kind repair, replacement of non-historic lighting, signals, curbs and gutters, and sidewalks;

(E) crack seal, overlay, milling, grooving, resurfacing, and restriping;

(F) replacement, upgrade, and repair of safety barriers, ditches, storm drains, and culverts constructed after the depression-era period (i.e. after 1939) except in association with historic bridges;

(G) intersection improvements that require no additional right of way;

(H) placement of riprap to prevent erosion of waterway banks and bridge piers provided no ground disturbance is required;

(I) all maintenance work between a highway and an adjacent frontage road;

(J) installation of noise barriers or alterations to existing publicly owned buildings less than 50 years old, to provide for noise reduction except in potential or listed National Register districts;

(K) driveway and street connections;

(L) all work within interchanges and within medians of divided highways except where graves are present;

(M) all work between the flowlines of the ditches and channels and above the original line and grade;

(N) ditch and channel maintenance provided removal of fill is above the original line and grade;

(O) repairs needed as a result of an event, natural or man-made, that causes damage to a designated state highway, resulting in an imminent threat to life or property or that substantially disrupts or may disrupt the orderly flow of traffic and commerce; or

(P) other kinds of undertakings jointly agreed to in writing by THC and TxDOT.

(2) TxDOT is committed to performing early identification efforts for cultural resources located within the area of potential effects of proposed transportation projects and initiating THC coordination during the early planning stages of these projects, when the widest range of alternatives is open for consideration.

(3) TxDOT is committed to implementing, in appropriate cases and as a part of early project planning and coordination, alternative methods, techniques, and other strategies that are reasonable and feasible and that will enhance efficiency in complying with cultural resource laws. These include, but are not limited to, programmatic approaches to coordination of selected types of cultural resources, evaluation of existing conditions affecting the integrity of cultural resources, geoarcheological research to assist in early planning and to reduce archeological liabilities, development of significance eligibility standards with THC, and development and implementation of alternative mitigation strategies. TxDOT may seek to utilize alternative strategies for procedures set forth in this MOU. Upon the written concurrence of THC, TxDOT may implement the alternative strategy in lieu of the procedures specified in this MOU.

(4) TxDOT is also committed to providing the public and interested parties with opportunities to provide input and express their views concerning potential project impacts to historic properties.

(A) TxDOT will ensure that cultural resource issues are incorporated into its regular public participation programs carried out under the National Environmental Policy Act (42 USC 4321-4347 et seq.), and §2.42 and §2.43 of this chapter (relating to Highway Construction Projects-Federal Aid, and Highway Construction Projects-State Funds), as far as practicable.

(B) TxDOT will also ensure that federally recognized Indian tribes (as specified in 36 CFR 800) are provided early project information and information on Native American sites that will be affected by TxDOT projects in order to provide comments.

(C) If concerns related to historic and archeological issues arise after the NEPA public involvement process is complete, or if new information about historic or archeological issues is found, TxDOT and THC shall independently re-evaluate their findings.

(5) Cultural resource investigations by consultants.

(A) TxDOT has the right to perform cultural resource investigations using staff or consultants who meet the professional standards of 13 TAC Chapter 26, and as required by 36 CFR Part 800.

(B) Cultural resource surveys, investigations, permit applications, and other work performed by consultants shall be coordinated with THC through TxDOT's Environmental Affairs Division or its successor as established by TxDOT administration.

(f) Procedures for coordination regarding archeological resources. Provided the work is completed in accordance with the provisions of this MOU, survey and eligibility testing of archeological resources performed by the archeological staff of TxDOT's Environmental Affairs Division is authorized under this MOU and will not be considered an operation that might require an antiquities permit under ACT, §191.054 or §191.131. All other archeological investigations shall require an antiquities permit.

(1) Identification.

(A) TxDOT will undertake sufficient background research to determine which proposed projects require archeological surveys. Background research may include a search of records and files at THC and/or the Texas Archeological Research Laboratory (TARL), gathering information on soils, a geomorphic history of the projects, Texas Historic Sites Atlas, and impact evaluations.

(B) Based on the results of background research, TxDOT will identify projects requiring archeological investigation for archeological resources.

(C) TxDOT will prepare a list of projects which do not require individual coordination for archeological sites, and will provide THC with a list of such projects, including those where impact evaluations were performed, on a quarterly basis or upon request by THC.

(D) Eligibility determinations that TxDOT performs under this MOU may not require field investigations if sufficient background information exists to demonstrate that the portion of the site to be affected does not have potential research value.

(E) Eligibility determinations that TxDOT performs under this MOU may be based on impact evaluation if it can be demonstrated that the portion of the site to be affected does not have sufficient integrity to be eligible.

(2) Archeological surveys.

(A) All projects, and portions of projects, recommended for survey by TxDOT during background research will be subjected to archeological survey using the methods in conformance with 36 CFR Part 800 and THC's Archeological Survey Standards, or with other appropriate methods. TxDOT reserves the right to depart from published survey standards in cases where it deems appropriate. THC reserves the right to review non-standard procedures for their adequacy.

(B) An archeological survey will be conducted by a TxDOT professional archeological staff member or other archeologist who meets the state and federal standards. Surveys may be limited to an evaluation of existing impacts or stratigraphic integrity when these are sufficient to determine that any sites present are unlikely to be eligible.

(C) When the archeological survey has been completed, TxDOT will submit the results of the survey to THC:

(i) as part of a quarterly list of investigations where no sites were found, where sites were found but were not recommended for further work, or upon request by THC;

(ii) as an individual report when sites are present and recommended for further work; or

(iii) as an individual report when no further work is recommended, but THC comment is a desirable element of TxDOT’s NEPA compliance.

(D) All TxDOT survey reports will include:

(i) details of the results of the survey, including project description, anticipated project impact, and existing disturbance in the project area;

(ii) environmental data on topography, soils, land use, survey methodology, survey results, and recommendations;

(iii) the project location plotted on 7.5' Series USGS quadrangle maps;

(iv) descriptions of any sites found;

(v) submission of electronic and paper copies of archeological site survey forms to TARL; and

(vi) recommendations regarding whether the site(s) merit archeological testing or archeological monitoring.

(E) THC will respond within 20 days of receipt of the TxDOT request for review of any survey results and recommendations. The response will include:

(i) a statement of concurrence or nonconcurrence with the results of the survey and its recommendations; and

(ii) any other comments relevant to the archeological resources which could be affected by the project.

(F) TxDOT will summarize the results of the archeological survey and recommendations in the environmental document for the project, to the extent completed to date.

(3) Archeological eligibility testing phase.

(A) All sites and portions of sites recommended for eligibility testing by THC will be subject to archeological testing, using the methods agreed upon in writing by TxDOT and THC.

(B) THC may send a representative to observe any or all of the testing procedures.

(C) At the completion of testing, TxDOT will prepare a formal report of the results of testing.

(i) For sites affected by federal undertakings, the report will include recommendations regarding eligibility for the NRHP, as described in 36 CFR Part 60 and 36 CFR Part 800.

(ii) For sites affected by non-federal undertakings, the report will include recommendations regarding the eligibility of the site for designation as a State Archeological Landmark, in accordance with ACT, §191.091 and §191.092, and 13 TAC Chapter 26.

(iii) TxDOT may submit interim reports on testing to expedite project review, provided such reports contain sufficient information on which to base recommendations of eligibility and, if relevant, additional work. Interim reports shall not be substituted for final reports.

(D) TxDOT will send the testing report to THC with a request for review.

(E) THC will respond to the report within 20 days of receipt of TxDOT's request for review and in accordance with 36 CFR Part 800. The response will include:

(i) a statement of concurrence or nonconcurrence with the results of the archeological testing and recommendations contained in the TxDOT request for review; and

(ii) a determination of the site's eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, or for designation as a State Archeological Landmark, and

(iii) if THC does not respond within 20 days, TxDOT may assume that THC concurs with TxDOT’s determination regarding a site’s eligibility and may proceed with the project in accordance with the procedures required in this MOU.

(F) When appropriate, TxDOT will work with THC to develop public educational outreach projects associated with significant test level investigations.

(4) Archeological excavation/data recovery.

(A) All sites and portions of sites determined to be eligible for the NRHP (for federal undertakings) or eligible for designation as a State Archeological Landmark (for non-federal undertakings) based on consultation with THC, will be subjected to data recovery in conformance with a data recovery plan that has the concurrence of THC when avoidance is not feasible and provided that they are not eligible for preservation in place.

(B) TxDOT, in consultation with THC, will develop a data recovery plan for each eligible site on a case-by-case basis, in accordance with 36 CFR Part 800 for federal undertakings and ACT for non-federal undertakings. Final data recovery plans must be approved by THC prior to their implementation.

(C) Results of data recovery will be published as required by 36 CFR Part 800 and/or ACT. To expedite transportation project planning, design, and construction, interim reports on data recovery may be used for consultation to determine whether field work commitments have been fulfilled. Interim reports shall not be substituted for final reports.

(D) All data recovery will be performed under an antiquities permit.

(E) When appropriate, TxDOT and THC may agree to substitute alternative mitigation in lieu of data recovery.

(F) When appropriate, TxDOT will work with THC to develop public educational outreach projects associated with significant data recovery investigations.

(G) THC will respond to the report within 20 days of receipt of TxDOT’s request for review and will comment on whether field work commitments have been fulfilled. TxDOT shall take THC comments into account prior to proceeding with the project. If THC does not respond within 20 days, TxDOT may assume that THC concurs that the field work commitments have been fulfilled.

(5) Archeological sites found after award of contract.

(A) When previously unknown archeological remains are encountered after award of contract, TxDOT will immediately suspend construction or any other activities that would affect the site.

(B) TxDOT will inform THC, and, if appropriate, federally recognized tribes, of discovery of previously unknown archeological remains and invite them to accompany TxDOT staff (or consultants) to the location within 48 hours of the discovery.

(C) TxDOT will evaluate the need, if any, for further investigations upon visiting the location of the discovery.

(D) If TxDOT determines that the discovery is an unrecorded archeological site, then TxDOT shall complete a State of Texas Archeological Site Data Form.

(E) If TxDOT determines that the site does not warrant further investigations, TxDOT will write to THC and, if appropriate, federally recognized tribes outlining its reasons and requesting concurrence within one business day of the visit to the discovery location. THC and, if appropriate, federally recognized tribes, will have two business days to respond. No response will be deemed to represent concurrence and construction will resume.

(F) If TxDOT determines that the site warrants further investigation, a scope of work for investigations will be developed within 24 hours of the visit to the site. The scope of work will be submitted to THC and appropriate federally recognized tribes who will have one business day to review and comment on the scope of work. No response will be deemed to represent concurrence and the scope shall be implemented. If comments are received, TxDOT and, if appropriate, FHWA shall take into account those comments and carry out the final scope of work. Upon completion of the approved work, construction may proceed as planned. A report of the investigations will be completed within the timeframe established by the scope of work and copies provided to all consulting parties.

(G) The procedures in this subsection shall be used to satisfy the permitting requirements of 13 TAC Chapter 26 for emergency permitting under 13 TAC §26.20(13) when conditions of natural or man-made disasters necessitate immediate action.

(6) Artifact recovery and curation.

(A) Artifact recovery.

(i) The type and quantity of artifacts to be recovered during testing and data recovery will be detailed in the scope of work and will be selected to address the research questions.

(ii) Artifacts or analysis samples (such as soil samples) that are recovered from survey, testing, or data recovery investigations by TxDOT or their contracted agents that address the research questions, must be cleaned, labeled, and processed in preparation for long-term curation unless the artifacts or samples are approved by THC for discard under 13 TAC Chapter 26.

(iii) To ensure proper care and curation, recovery methods must conform to 36 CFR Part 800, and 13 TAC Chapter 26.

(B) Artifact curation.

(i) TxDOT or its permitted contractor may temporarily house artifacts and samples during laboratory analysis and research, but upon completion of the analysis, artifacts and accompanying documentation must be transferred to a permanent curatorial facility in accordance with the terms of the antiquities permit.

(ii) Artifacts and samples will be placed at an appropriate artifact curatorial repository which fulfills 36 CFR Part 79, or the ACT, as approved by THC. When appropriate, TxDOT will consult with THC to identify for disposal collections or portions of collections that do not have identifiable value for future research or public interpretation. Final approval regarding the disposition of collections will be made by THC.

(iii) TxDOT is responsible for the curatorial preparation of all artifacts to be submitted for curation so that they are acceptable to the receiving curatorial repository and fulfill 36 CFR Part 79 and 13 TAC Chapter 26, as approved by THC.

(g) Early project development procedures for coordination regarding non-archeological historic properties. For purposes of this subsection and subsections (h), (i) and (j) of this section, the term historic properties will refer only to non-archeological historic properties.

(1) TxDOT and THC agree (for federal and non-federal projects) that certain types of undertakings do not require individual coordination. These undertakings are projects where no historic properties are present, or where the undertakings will have a minimal potential to affect historic properties if such are present in the area of potential effects. TxDOT will document these undertakings and include them in a quarterly report to THC unless they are the subject of individual coordination with THC. Examples of such undertakings include:

(A) Construction of bicycle and pedestrian lanes, paths, and facilities if not located in a listed or eligible National Register historic district;

(B) road widening within existing or minimal new right of way if not located in a listed or eligible National Register historic district;

(C) correction of roadway geometric and intersections within existing or minimal new right of way;

(D) bridge deck rehabilitation and stabilization; and

(E) other classes of undertakings jointly agreed to in writing by THC and TxDOT.

(2) Early in the project development process, TxDOT will determine whether federally assisted, licensed, or permitted transportation projects (federal projects) constitute undertakings with the potential to affect historic properties. In consultation with THC, it has been determined that individual coordination with THC is not necessary for projects where background research indicates that no historic properties are present or where they are present but the project will not have the potential to affect them. TxDOT will maintain documentation of efforts taken to reach this conclusion, and will include these projects in the quarterly report, or provide documentation upon request by THC.

(3) Early in the project development process, TxDOT will review its non-federal transportation improvements occurring on any lands of the State of Texas (non-federal projects) to determine whether they have the potential to affect historic properties under the terms of the ACT, and 13 TAC Chapter 26. Effects include the removal, alteration, or renovation of one or more contributing elements to a historic property. TxDOT and THC agree that individual coordination with THC is not necessary when no historic properties are present or when the project does not have the potential to adversely affect historic properties, provided TxDOT has complied with the provisions of this MOU. TxDOT will maintain documentation of efforts taken to reach this conclusion, and will include these projects in the quarterly report, or provide documentation upon request by THC.

(4) If TxDOT determines that a project has the potential to affect a historic property, TxDOT will then individually coordinate the project with THC in accordance with the provisions provided in this MOU.

(h) Identification and evaluation of historic properties.

(1) For non-federal and federal projects requiring individual THC coordination, TxDOT will identify historic properties within the project’s area of potential effects. TxDOT will conduct a search of available records, including listings of the Texas Historic Sites Atlas, Recorded Texas Historic Landmarks, State Archeological Landmarks, and properties listed in the National Register. THC will render all reasonable assistance to TxDOT in performing record searches on historic properties.

(2) TxDOT will conduct field surveys for all projects that may have historic-age properties within their area of potential effects. These surveys will be conducted in order to determine if historic properties are present.

(3) If the identification efforts reveal historic-age properties, TxDOT will evaluate the eligibility of each property to determine if the property:

(A) qualifies as a SAL as defined by ACT, §191.092(f), for non-federal projects; or

(B) is eligible for inclusion or listed in the National Register, for federal projects.

(4) If a non-federal or federal project has the potential to affect a historic-age bridge-class structure, the following procedures apply unless the structure is of a categorically excluded type as defined by SHBI criteria. Categorically excluded structures are generally not eligible bridges that have been widened, non-depression era simple span concrete box culverts and timber stringer bridges. There are exceptions to these exclusions and other categorically excluded structures may be added by written agreement between TxDOT and THC in the future.

(A) If a non-federal or federal project has the potential to affect a historic-age bridge-class structure that has not been included in the SHBI, as formally accepted by THC, TxDOT will assess the eligibility of the structure in consultation with THC.

(B) If a historic-age bridge-class structure has been determined not eligible, either under the SHBI or in individual consultation with THC, TxDOT will coordinate with appropriate local entities to determine if the structure has local interest or significance.

(i) If no local interest or significance is identified, TxDOT will add the project to the quarterly report.

(ii) If TxDOT or THC identifies local interest or significance in a structure, TxDOT will reassess the eligibility with THC. If TxDOT and THC concur that the bridge-class structure is still not eligible, TxDOT will document the project in the quarterly report.

(C) If a historic-age bridge-class structure has been determined eligible, either under the SHBI or in individual consultation with THC, TxDOT shall follow the procedures outlined in subsection (i) of this section, regarding assessing and mitigating effects on historic properties.

(D) If TxDOT has reason to believe that a bridge-class structure is no longer eligible, TxDOT will consult with THC to reassess the eligibility.

(E) If TxDOT and THC concur that the bridge-class structure is no longer eligible, TxDOT will document the project in the quarterly report.

(i) Assessing and mitigating effects on historic properties. TxDOT will assess the effects of projects on properties that qualify as SALs for non-federal projects and on properties determined to be listed or eligible for inclusion in the National Register for federal projects. TxDOT will then consult with THC using the following procedures.

(1) For a non-federal project, TxDOT will consult with THC to determine if a historic structures permit is required for any proposed removals, alterations, or renovations to state archeological landmarks or to properties for which THC will initiate an SAL nomination in accordance with 13 TAC §26.12 and ACT, §191.098.

(2) For a federal project, TxDOT will apply the criteria of effect and in the case of a determination of adverse effect will consult with THC in accordance with the provisions set forth in 36 CFR Part 800.

(3) For a project involving a bridge-class structure that TxDOT and THC concur is eligible, TxDOT shall evaluate the preservation options in the following order of preference: full vehicular use; reduced level of vehicular use, non-vehicular use at original site; relocation for vehicular use; relocation for non-vehicular use; or demolition. TxDOT will document the evaluation of each preservation option including identification of the preferred option with supportive reasoning, and will submit the documentation to THC.

(A) When an eligible bridge-class structure will be retained for non-vehicular use at the original site or relocated, TxDOT will provide THC with an agreement signed by the bridge-class structure owner that includes language that ensures maintenance of the bridge-class structure, and provides THC the opportunity to review and concur that current and future proposed work on the bridge-class structure, beyond normal maintenance, complies with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation.

(B) Upon receipt of complete documentation, THC shall have 20 days to review and comment on the project. TxDOT shall take THC comments into account in making decisions on the project involving the bridge-class structure.

(4) TxDOT will, to the maximum extent practicable, provide an early opportunity for the public and interested parties to receive information and to express their views on projects when a historic property may be negatively affected by a transportation project.

(5) TxDOT will also consult with THC to seek ways to avoid, minimize, or mitigate any negative effects on historic properties caused by federal and non-federal projects in accordance with the following procedures.

(A) Non-federal projects. TxDOT shall take THC comments into account when projects will have an adverse effect on historic properties.

(B) Federal projects. TxDOT will follow the consultation procedures set out in 36 CFR Part 800.

(j) Project documentation by TxDOT.

(1) THC may audit TxDOT project files for specific undertakings submitted in the quarterly report. Projects involving non-archeological properties that are submitted individually to THC or included in the quarterly report, will be documented by TxDOT and will include:

(A) a project description and scope, including project drawings, photographs, reports and other information where needed to clearly describe the proposed project;

(B) a map showing the location of the project and all historic-age properties within the APE of the project;

(C) a statement of the efforts and methodology used to identify historic-age properties in the project area;

(D) documentation on each identified property, including at least one photograph of the property, the address, if known, an architectural description, date of construction (estimated or known), an integrity assessment, and any known local, state, or national historical designations;

(E) the results of any coordination with interested parties concerning the eligibility of identified historic-age properties;

(F) the results of TxDOT's determination of eligibility for each identified historic-age property; and

(G) TxDOT's assessment of potential project effects on historic properties, including evaluations, reports and other documentation relevant to the determination of effect.

(2) If the project is submitted to THC for review of non-archeological properties, THC will respond within 20 days of receipt of complete documentation and TxDOT's request for review as follows.

(A) For a non-federal project, THC’s response will indicate whether the project will require a historic structures permit for an SAL, whether THC intends to initiate SAL nomination of a property not previously designated as an SAL, or if THC has knowledge that another party intends to initiate SAL nomination in accordance with 13 TAC §26.11, §26.12 and §26.22, and ACT, §191.098. If THC does not respond within 20 days, TxDOT will assume that THC concurs with TxDOT's determination regarding historic-age property eligibility or project effects, and TxDOT will proceed with the project in accordance with the procedures required in this MOU.

(B) For a federal project, all coordination with THC will follow the provisions of 36 CFR Part 800 and the PA between TxDOT, FHWA, and THC.

(3) Projects involving archeological properties that are submitted individually to THC or included in the quarterly report will be documented by TxDOT in the manner described in this paragraph. THC may audit TxDOT project files for specific undertakings submitted in the quarterly report. For archeology, project documentation will consist of a statement for "no survey" or a report of an archeological impact evaluation or an archeological survey report. Each project at a minimum will include:

(A) a description of the project;

(B) a project location map;

(C) information about soils and geology in the project location, as appropriate;

(D) information on previously recorded archeological sites in the project location;

(E) level of effort for identification of archeological sites; and

(F) results and recommendations.

(k) Environmental document and public involvement. TxDOT will summarize information on its efforts to identify archeological sites and historic properties, to determine the effects of projects on archeological sites and historic properties, and to mitigate any negative effect on these sites or properties in the environmental document, if one is prepared, and will include this information in public involvement activities to the maximum extent practicable.

(l) Denial of access. In cases where access to private land for conducting archeological survey is denied prior to the approval of the environmental document, TxDOT will make a commitment to complete testing, evaluation of site eligibility, or data recovery prior to any construction related impacts.

(m) MOU to govern TxDOT procedures. TxDOT satisfies applicable THC requirements if it utilizes the procedures of this MOU in lieu of other THC procedures. In cases where TxDOT is utilizing this MOU in lieu of other THC procedures, TxDOT must follow the requirements of this MOU.

(n) THC audit. THC may audit TxDOT project files for specific undertakings carried out under this MOU.

(o) Annual meeting. TxDOT and THC staff will meet annually to discuss topics of mutual interest.

(p) Dispute resolution.

(1) If THC and TxDOT cannot reach agreement on any plans or actions carried out pursuant to this MOU, THC and TxDOT will consult to resolve the objection.

(2) If THC and TxDOT cannot reach a compromise solution or otherwise resolve the objection through consultation, either TxDOT or THC may choose to invoke the dispute resolution provisions which are set forth in paragraph (3) of this subsection.

(3) When these dispute resolution provisions are invoked, if TxDOT and THC cannot resolve their disagreement, the two agencies will resolve their dispute in accordance with the procedures established under state and federal rules.

(A) Federal undertakings will follow the dispute resolution procedures as stipulated in 36 CFR Part 800.

(B) Non-federal projects will follow the appeal procedures provided in 13 TAC Chapter 27.

(q) Review of MOU. This memorandum shall be reviewed and updated as provided by law or by agreement between the parties.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on April 30, 2004.

TRD-200402906

Richard D. Monroe

General Counsel

Texas Department of Transportation

Effective date: May 20, 2004

Proposal publication date: February 13, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 463-8630


43 TAC §2.24

STATUTORY AUTHORITY

The repeal is adopted under Transportation Code, §201.101, which provides the Texas Transportation Commission with the authority to establish rules for the conduct of the work of the department, and more specifically, Transportation Code, §201.607, which requires that the department adopt memoranda of understanding with each agency that has responsibility for the protection of the natural environment, the preservation of the natural environment, or for the preservation of historic or archeological resources, and that these memoranda and all revisions be adopted as rules.

CROSS REFERENCE TO STATUTE: Transportation Code, §201.607.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on April 30, 2004.

TRD-200402907

Richard D. Monroe

General Counsel

Texas Department of Transportation

Effective date: May 20, 2004

Proposal publication date: February 13, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 463-8630


Chapter 9. CONTRACT MANAGEMENT

Subchapter F. CONTRACTS FOR SCIENTIFIC, REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL, RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION, AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES

43 TAC §9.87

The Texas Department of Transportation (department) adopts amendments to §9.87, concerning selection of contracts for scientific, real estate appraisal, right of way acquisition, and landscape architectural services. The amendments to §9.87 are adopted without changes to the proposed text as published in the February 13, 2004, issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 1321) and will not be republished.

EXPLANATION OF ADOPTED AMENDMENTS

Transportation Code, Chapter 223, Subchapter D, provides for the procurement of scientific services. Government Code, Chapter 2254, Subchapter A, authorizes the procurement of real estate appraisal, right of way acquisition, and landscape architectural services.

The amendments to §9.87 increase the maximum amount payable under an indefinite delivery contract from $1 million to $2 million for scientific, real estate appraisal, right of way acquisition, and landscape architectural services in a single district and to a maximum of $5 million if the services are to be provided in two or more districts.

This increase will allow the department to be more flexible. The current cap of $1 million is not always enough to complete a minor and a major project. The purpose of indefinite delivery contracts is to facilitate the implementation of more than one project. To start with a new firm in the middle of a large-scale project causes a loss of continuity. This is especially disruptive in excavation work. More projects are expected with the increase in toll roads and design-build projects in new locations. Because the scope of impact is so large with these projects, and the timelines are short, a $1 million contract does not allow sufficient contract capacity. The department still has the option to advertise contracts for smaller amounts.

COMMENTS

No comments were received on the proposed amendments.

STATUTORY AUTHORITY

The amendments are adopted under Transportation Code, §201.101, which provides the Texas Transportation Commission with the authority to establish rules for the conduct of the work of the department, and more specifically, Transportation Code, Chapter 223, Subchapter D, which provides for the selection of technical experts, and Government Code, Chapter 2254, Subchapter A, which provides for the selection of real estate appraisers and landscape architects.

CROSS REFERENCE TO STATUTE: Transportation Code, Chapter 223, Subchapter D and Government Code, Chapter 2254, Subchapter A.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on April 30, 2004.

TRD-200402908

Richard D. Monroe

General Counsel

Texas Department of Transportation

Effective date: May 20, 2004

Proposal publication date: February 13, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 463-8630


Chapter 15. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING

Subchapter M. RAIL FACILITIES

43 TAC §§15.150, 15.151, 15.154, 15.155

The Texas Department of Transportation (department) adopts amendments to §15.150 and §15.151 and new §15.154 and §15.155, concerning the department’s acquisition, construction, maintenance, and operation of rail facilities. Sections 15.150, 15.151, 15.154, and 15.155 are adopted without changes to the proposed text as published in the March 5, 2004, issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 2286) and will not be republished.

EXPLANATION OF ADOPTED AMENDMENTS AND NEW SECTIONS

Transportation Code, Chapter 91, authorizes the department to acquire, finance, construct, maintain, and operate a passenger or freight rail facility or system, including the acquisition of abandoned rail facilities.

Transportation Code, §91.051, provides that unless otherwise provided by Subchapter C of that chapter, a contract made by the department for the construction, maintenance, or operation of a rail facility must be let by a competitive bidding procedure in which the contract is awarded to the lowest responsible bidder that complies with the department’s requirements.

Transportation Code, §91.102, authorizes the department to lease all or part of a rail facility or system to a rail operator, and to contract with a rail operator for the use or operation of all or part of a rail facility or system. Transportation Code, §91.052, authorizes the department to enter into an agreement with a public entity, including a political subdivision of this state, to permit the entity, independently or jointly with the department, to acquire, construct, maintain, or operate a rail facility or system.

Section 15.150 is amended to reflect that the proposed amendments and new sections prescribe policies and procedures for the awarding of contracts for the construction or maintenance of rail facilities, and the leasing of rail facilities acquired or constructed by the department to public and private entities.

Section 15.151 is amended to define executive director and to define those public entities authorized to lease department rail facilities.

New §15.154 provides that the department will comply with the policies and procedures prescribed for highway improvement contracts in the qualification of bidders, issuance of proposals and receipt of bids, and award and execution of a contract for the construction or maintenance of a rail facility. These procedures have proven over time to be an effective means of awarding construction and maintenance contracts. Moreover, the use of existing procedures is anticipated to make the process more efficient, thereby resulting in cost savings to the state.

In order to ensure the award of a contract for a particular project is handled in the most efficient manner, §15.154 provides that the name and address of the individual to whom bids shall be submitted will be provided when a project is advertised. As authorized by law, §15.154 also provides that the department will prescribe bidder responsibility requirements.

New §15.155 provides that the department may lease a rail facility acquired or constructed by the department to a public entity. In accordance with Transportation Code, §91.102, which requires the department to encourage to the maximum extent practical the participation of private enterprise in the operation of rail facilities, §15.155 requires a public entity to contract for the operation of rail facilities leased by the public entity under an agreement with the department. As required by law, the lease agreement must provide for the department’s monitoring of the rail operator’s service and performance.

In order to obtain the contractual relationship that is in the best interest of the state, and to comply with the intent of Transportation Code, Chapter 91, §15.155 provides that the department will use a competitive process to obtain private rail operators for rail facilities acquired or constructed by the department. Section 15.155 also provides that in evaluating proposals submitted by private rail operators, the department will consider, among other criteria, the qualifications, experience, and capability of the proposer to operate the rail facility. In order to ensure that rail service is provided where needed and to provide for the development of transportation and commerce, §15.155 also provides that the department will consider, when evaluating proposals submitted by private rail operators, a proposer’s plans for servicing markets, improving service and adding additional markets, and maintaining and improving rail facilities that are the subject of a lease agreement.

COMMENTS

On March 16, 2004, a public hearing was held to receive comments, views, or testimony concerning the proposed amendments and new sections. No comments were received.

STATUTORY AUTHORITY: The amendments and new sections are adopted under Transportation Code, §201.101, which provides the Texas Transportation Commission (commission) with the authority to establish rules for the conduct of the work of the department, and more specifically, Transportation Code, §91.003, which authorizes the commission to adopt rules and the department to adopt procedures and prescribe forms necessary to implement Chapter 91.

CROSS REFERENCE TO STATUTE: Transportation Code, Chapter 91.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on April 30, 2004.

TRD-200402909

Richard D. Monroe

General Counsel

Texas Department of Transportation

Effective date: May 20, 2004

Proposal publication date: March 5, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 463-8630


Chapter 25. TRAFFIC OPERATIONS

Subchapter C. CONGESTION MITIGATION FACILITIES

43 TAC §§25.40 - 25.47

The Texas Department of Transportation (department) adopts amendments to §§25.40-25.43 and new §§25.44-25.47, concerning congestion mitigation facilities. Section 25.43 is adopted with changes to the proposed text as published in the February 13, 2004, issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 1322). Sections 25.40-25.42 and 25.44-25.47 are adopted without changes to the proposed text as published in the February 13, 2004, issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 1322) and will not be republished.

EXPLANATION OF ADOPTED AMENDMENTS AND NEW SECTIONS

House Bill 1208, 78th Legislature, Regular Session, 2003, expands the authority of the department to enter into agreements with various transportation entities for the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes and toll lanes established for the purpose of congestion mitigation.

House Bill 1208 also allows the Texas Transportation Commission (commission) to authorize the use of HOV lanes by low-emission vehicles (LEV) and motorcycles regardless of the minimum number of occupants of these vehicles as long as this does not jeopardize the receipt or use of federal funds by the department.

The legislation also gives the commission the authority to designate one or more lanes of a portion of the state highway as an exclusive lane for one or more classes of vehicles. The commission must follow specific criteria contained in the statute before it may designate an exclusive lane. The commission may also establish tolls on an exclusive lane under certain conditions.

House Bill 1208 also notes that restrictions contained in Transportation Code, Chapter 224, Subchapter F do not apply to police or emergency vehicles, that the department is responsible for installation and maintenance of traffic control devices installed under that subchapter, and that motorists are responsible for obeying these traffic control devices.

SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 25.40 is amended to reflect the expanded authority of the department established by House Bill 1208 to enter into agreements with transportation entities for HOV and toll lanes.

Section 25.41 is amended to incorporate new definitions for "exclusive lanes," "HOV authority," "level of service C," "low-emission vehicle," "seriously degraded," "toll entity," and "toll lane." The term "authority" is deleted and replaced with "HOV authority" to distinguish it from the definition of "toll entity." The definition of "low-emission vehicle" is designed to ensure that only very clean single occupancy vehicles have access to the HOV lanes.

Section 25.42 is amended to reflect the department’s authority to create toll lanes on any portion of the state highway system for congestion mitigation purposes and to create exclusive lanes.

Section 25.43 is amended to include toll lanes.

New §25.44 allows, but does not require, the department to authorize the use of HOV lanes by low-emission vehicles and motorcycles without meeting the minimum occupancy requirements of the facility. Before such authorization may occur, the department must find that the HOV lane or lanes will be able to adequately absorb the additional traffic volume without suffering adverse operational impacts. The new section also establishes the criteria the department will follow before suspending or rescinding the use of an HOV facility by these vehicles. The section notes that no such authorization may be given by the department if it would jeopardize the state’s ability to receive or use federal transportation funds.

New §25.45 allows the commission to designate and the department to finance, design, construct, operate, or maintain exclusive lanes on a portion of the state highway system. In order to designate an exclusive lane, the commission must find that the designation will improve transportation safety, mobility, or air quality. In accordance with House Bill 1208, the department may charge a toll for the use of an exclusive lane if the lanes or multi-lane facility adjacent to the exclusive lane are also tolled or a vehicle authorized to use the tolled exclusive lane is authorized to use non-tolled adjacent lanes or an adjacent non-tolled multi-lane facility. The new section also allows the department to enter into a third-party agreement with various entities for the design, construction, operation, or maintenance of a toll exclusive lane.

New §25.46 states that the department is responsible for the installation and maintenance of all official traffic control devices installed under this subchapter. The section does allow the department to authorize an entity with which it contracts to operate a toll lane under this subchapter to install and maintain the necessary traffic control devices.

New §25.47 provides that police and emergency vehicles may use any lane of the state highway system regardless of the restrictions imposed by this subchapter.

COMMENTS

On February 13, 2004, the proposed rules were published for comment in the Texas Register . Two written comments were received.

Comment: John Langmore Consulting (JLC) suggested that specific provision should be made to allow a private enterprise to submit unsolicited proposals regarding managed lanes, and that provision should be made for these proposals to be submitted and executed as a comprehensive development agreement (CDA).

Response: The department does not agree that a change to the rules is necessary. These rules are not intended to address contracting methods. The department currently has rules in Chapter 27, Subchapter A, governing the submittal of unsolicited proposals for CDAs. A proposal for a CDA under Chapter 27 may include or consist of a proposal for tolled lanes. The department does not have the authority to enter into a CDA for the development of non-tolled lanes except as part of the Trans-Texas Corridor.

Comment: JLC also commented that the minute order required in §25.43(b)(1) will significantly impair the viability of toll lanes. JLC further stated that the rules "should allow the operator of the toll lanes to freely set the toll rates."

Response: This comment is two-fold. The commenter is asking that a minute order not be required each time a rate is changed. The department agrees that the section should be revised to allow the commission the flexibility, as authorized by statute, to delegate setting the amount of toll charges to a department official if the department is the entity setting the charges. Section 25.43(b)(1) and (2) are revised to state: "(1) The commission by minute order, or its designee, will establish charges for the use of toll lanes or the commission will authorize an HOV authority or toll entity with which the department contracts to set the amount of toll charges. Variable toll charges may be established based on severity of congestion, time of day, classification of vehicle, type and location of facility, and vehicle occupancy. In establishing toll charges, the commission or its designee will . . . (2) A governmental entity that contributes substantial funding for a toll lane project may recommend a toll charge to be set by commission minute order or its designee. The commission or its designee will approve the recommended toll charge if the commission, or its designee, determines . . ." Criteria guiding the establishment of the tolls by the department are necessary to notify the public of the basis for the decision of the commission or its designee.

The comment also includes an objection to the requirement that a minute order be adopted to designate the toll authority as the entity that will set the rates. This provision is statutory. Once such a minute order is adopted, the toll authority will not need to come back to the commission for adoption of the actual rates.

Comment: The Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) noted that they supported various aspects of the proposed amendments and new sections including the increased use of various types of congestion mitigation facilities, the use of exclusive lanes by class of vehicle, the definitions of terms used in the rulemaking action, and the provision of flexibility in the types of congestion mitigation strategies that may be used.

Response: The department agrees that the rules provide a variety of tools to implement the operational and construction flexibility necessary to deal with congestion within specific regions.

Comment: CAMPO requested that all proposed mobility changes be submitted to local Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) for inclusion in the MPO's long range plan, and if necessary, the Transportation Improvement Program.

Response: Although not specifically addressed in these rules, the department agrees that major changes in the operational characteristics of the state highway system should be communicated with MPOs. The department anticipates that the creation of exclusive lanes, tolled exclusive lanes, or toll lanes proposed for congestion mitigation purposes will require extensive communication with MPOs and other local entities. During the development of any of the congestion mitigation techniques contained in these rules, it will be necessary for the department to work closely with local jurisdictions, including MPOs.

As required under the Code of Federal Regulations and the Texas Administrative Code, specific projects resulting from changes in the operational characteristics of the state highway system may be included in both the area's long-range plan and the State Transportation Improvement Program for planning, funding, coordination, and public disclosure purposes. As this subject is addressed specifically in the Code of Federal Regulations and the Texas Administrative Code, it is not necessary to reiterate it in these rules. For this reason the department declines to modify the rules as proposed.

Comment: CAMPO suggests that the creation of toll lanes in areas where minority populations or low-income groups are present be carefully studied to determine how to mitigate any negative impacts on these people.

Response: The department agrees that when portions of the state highway system are proposed for tolling they should be carefully studied to ensure that they do not disproportionately impact any one segment of the population.

The rules as proposed allow for the creation of tolled lanes on the state highway system for congestion mitigation purposes. This may include a tolled high-occupancy vehicle lane, a tolled exclusive lane, a new toll lane or lanes, or conversion of a non-tolled section of the state highway system.

The department's existing rules for conversion of segments of the state highway system contained in §27.14 (relating to Conversion of Non-Toll State Highways) call for an extensive public hearing and involvement process. Conversion may only take place when the commissioner's court in the county in which the conversion will occur has approved the conversion. In addition, the commission may only issue final approval for conversion after the completion of the appropriate social, economic, and environmental studies.

The environmental review and public involvement procedures for new projects that involve toll lanes on the state highway system are contained in §2.42 and §2.43 (relating to Highway Construction Projects - Federal Aid and State Funds). The issues will be studied and considered as appropriate including the factors proposed by CAMPO.

The department believes that CAMPO's concerns are currently addressed through other applicable existing rules and processes, and as such, there is no need to modify the rules as proposed.

STATUTORY AUTHORITY:

The amendments and new sections are adopted under Transportation Code, §201.101, which provides the commission with the authority to establish rules for the conduct of the work of the department, and specifically Transportation Code, 224.151(8) which authorizes the commission to define a low-emissions vehicle, and Transportation Code, §224.159 which authorizes the commission to adopt rules for Transportation Code, Chapter 224, Subchapter F.

CROSS REFERENCE TO STATUTE: Transportation Code, Chapter 224, Subchapter F.

§25.43.Operation of HOV and Toll Lanes.

(a) Eligibility requirements. The executive director, in cooperation with an HOV authority with which the department contracts under this subchapter, will establish eligibility requirements for vehicles authorized to use HOV lanes on the state highway system, including eligible vehicle classes and occupancy requirements. These requirements may be established based on the type and location of the transportation facility and on the time of day. In establishing these requirements, the executive director will consider:

(1) the level of service on the HOV lanes;

(2) the level of service on general purpose lanes that are part of the highway facility on which HOV lanes are located or are proposed to be located;

(3) the consistency of the requirements with eligibility requirements established for any connecting facilities;

(4) the availability of alternative routes and the level of service on those routes;

(5) the effect of the requirements on transit operating efficiency; and

(6) the effect of the requirements on roadway safety and air quality.

(b) Toll charges.

(1) The commission by minute order, or its designee, will establish charges for the use of toll lanes or the commission will authorize an HOV authority or toll entity with which the department contracts to set the amount of toll charges. Variable toll charges may be established based on severity of congestion, time of day, classification of vehicle, type and location of facility, and vehicle occupancy. In establishing toll charges, the commission or its designee will consider the results of traffic and revenue studies and operational plans prepared by the department or an HOV authority or toll entity with which the department contracts under this subchapter, and the criteria prescribed in subsection (a) of this section.

(2) A governmental entity that contributes substantial funding for a toll lane project may recommend a toll charge to be set by commission minute order or its designee. The commission or its designee will approve the recommended toll charge if the commission, or its designee, determines that the charge:

(A) is consistent with the criteria described in paragraph (1) of this subsection; and

(B) complies with the requirements of any trust agreement, indenture, or other instrument securing debt financing for the project.

(c) Administrative fee. The commission by minute order, or an HOV authority or toll entity with which the department contracts by order of its governing body, will establish an administrative fee charged to owners of vehicles that use toll lanes established under this subchapter without paying the proper toll. In establishing an administrative fee, the commission will consider:

(1) the estimated cost to the department to collect unpaid tolls on tolled lanes on the state highway system; and

(2) the existing or estimated violation rate on tolled lanes on the state highway system.

(d) Operating agreements. The department may enter into an agreement with an HOV authority or toll entity to operate one or more HOV or toll lanes. The agreement will contain terms necessary for the safe and efficient operation of the HOV or toll lane, including, but not limited to:

(1) an operations plan that includes occupancy requirements, hours of operation, and provisions for law enforcement and incident management;

(2) responsibilities for maintenance of the facilities;

(3) insurance and audit requirements;

(4) responsibilities for setting toll charges and administrative fees;

(5) indemnification of the department; and

(6) distribution of revenue between the department and the HOV authority or toll entity.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on April 30, 2004.

TRD-200402910

Richard D. Monroe

General Counsel

Texas Department of Transportation

Effective date: May 20, 2004

Proposal publication date: February 13, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 463-8630