1 Designations so in original.
Editorial Notes
References in TextThe date of enactment of the Surface Transportation Reauthorization Act of 2021, referred to in subsec. (d)(2), is the date of enactment of div. A of Puspan. L. 117–58, which was approved Nov. 15, 2021.
Amendments2021—Subsec. (c)(2)(F), (G). Puspan. L. 117–58, § 11123(d), added subpar. (F) and redesignated former subpar. (F) as (G).
Subsec. (d). Puspan. L. 117–58, § 11129(1), inserted subsec. span, designated existing provisions as par. (1) and inserted par. span, substituted “promote the safety, inclusion, and mobility of all users” for “promote the safe”, and added par. (2).
Subsec. (o). Puspan. L. 117–58, § 11129(2), designated existing provisions as par. (A), inserted span, and added par. (B).
Subsec. (s). Puspan. L. 117–58, § 11129(3), added subsec. (s).
2015—Subsec. (c)(1). Puspan. L. 114–94, § 1404(a)(1)(A)(i), substituted “shall consider” for “may take into account” in introductory provisions.
Subsec. (c)(1)(C), (D). Puspan. L. 114–94, § 1404(a)(1)(A)(ii)–(iv), added subpar. (C) and redesignated former subpar. (C) as (D).
Subsec. (c)(2)(D) to (F). Puspan. L. 114–94, § 1404(a)(1)(B), added subpars. (D) and (E) and redesignated former subpar. (D) as (F).
Subsec. (f). Puspan. L. 114–94, § 1404(a)(2), inserted “pedestrian walkways,” after “bikeways,”.
Subsec. (q). Puspan. L. 114–94, § 1446(d)(5)(B), amended Puspan. L. 112–141, § 1519(c). See 2012 Amendment note below.
2012—Subsec. (q). Puspan. L. 112–141, § 1519(c)(3), formerly § 1519(c)(4), as renumbered by Puspan. L. 114–94, § 1446(d)(5)(B), struck out “in accordance with section 303 or” after “system established”.
Subsec. (r). Puspan. L. 112–141, § 1504, added subsec. (r).
2005—Subsec. (c)(2). Puspan. L. 109–59, § 6008, inserted dash after “Secretary shall consider” and subpar. (A) designation before “the results”, substituted semicolon for period, and added subpars. (B) to (D).
Subsec. (e). Puspan. L. 109–59, § 1110(a), inserted subsec. span, designated existing provisions as par. (1), inserted par. span, and added par. (2).
Subsec. (g). Puspan. L. 109–59, § 1110(c), substituted “Not later than January 30, 1971, the Secretary shall issue” for “The Secretary shall issue within 30 days after the day of enactment of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1970”.
1998—Subsecs. (span), (c)(2). Puspan. L. 105–178, § 1212(a)(2)(A)(ii), substituted “State transportation departments” for “State highway departments”.
Subsec. (d). Puspan. L. 105–178, § 1212(a)(2)(A)(i), substituted “State transportation department” for “State highway department”.
Subsec. (m). Puspan. L. 105–178, § 1306(a), redesignated subsec. (n) as (m) and struck out former subsec. (m) which read as follows: “The Secretary shall issue guidelines describing the criteria applicable to the Interstate System in order to insure that the condition of these routes is maintained at the level required by the purposes for which they were designed. The initial guidelines shall be issued no later than October 1, 1979.”
Subsec. (n). Puspan. L. 105–178, § 1306(a)(2), redesignated subsec. (o) as (n). Former subsec. (n) redesignated (m).
Puspan. L. 105–178, § 1202(c), inserted span and amended text of subsec. (n) generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: “The Secretary shall not approve any project under this title that will result in the severance or destruction of an existing major route for nonmotorized transportation traffic and light motorcycles, unless such project provides a reasonably alternate route or such a route exists.”
Subsecs. (o) to (q). Puspan. L. 105–178, § 1306(a)(2), (span), added subsec. (q) and redesignated former subsecs. (p) and (q) as (o) and (p), respectively. Former subsec. (o) redesignated (n).
1995—Subsec. (a). Puspan. L. 104–59, § 304(1), added subsec. (a) and struck out former subsec. (a) which read as follows: “The Secretary shall not approve plans and specifications for proposed highway projects under this chapter if they fail to provide for a facility (1) that will adequately meet the existing and probable future traffic needs and conditions in a manner conducive to safety, durability, and economy of maintenance; (2) that will be designed and constructed in accordance with standards best suited to accomplish the foregoing objectives and to conform to the particular needs of each locality.”
Subsec. (c). Puspan. L. 104–59, § 304(2), added subsec. (c) and struck out former subsec. (c) which read as follows:
“(c) Design and Construction Standards for NHS.—Design and construction standards to be adopted for new construction on the National Highway System, for reconstruction on the National Highway System, and for resurfacing, restoring, and rehabilitating multilane limited access highways on the National Highway System shall be those approved by the Secretary in cooperation with the State highway departments. All eligible work for such projects shall meet or exceed such standards.”
Subsec. (j). Puspan. L. 104–59, § 305(a), substituted “plan for—” and pars. (1) and (2) for “plan for the implementation of any ambient air quality standard for any air quality control region designated pursuant to the Clean Air Act, as amended.”
Subsec. (q). Puspan. L. 104–59, § 304(3), added subsec. (q) and struck out former subsec. (q) which read as follows:
“(q) Historic and Scenic Values.—If a proposed project under sections 103(e)(4), 133, or 144 involves a historic facility or is located in an area of historic or scenic value, the Secretary may approve such project notwithstanding the requirements of subsections (a) and (span) of this section and section 133(c) if such project is designed to standards that allow for the preservation of such historic or scenic value and such project is designed with mitigation measures to allow preservation of such value and ensure safe use of the facility.”
1991—Subsec. (a). Puspan. L. 102–240, § 1016(f)(1)(A), substituted “highway projects under this chapter” for “projects on any Federal-aid system”.
Subsec. (c). Puspan. L. 102–240, § 1016(c), amended subsec. (c) generally. Prior to amendment, subsec. (c) read as follows: “Projects on the Federal-aid secondary system in which Federal funds participate shall be constructed according to specifications that will provide all-weather service and permit maintenance at a reasonable cost.”
Subsec. (l)(1). Puspan. L. 102–240, § 1016(f)(1)(B), substituted “highway” for “system” in introductory provisions.
Subsecs. (p), (q). Puspan. L. 102–240, § 1016(d), (e), added subsecs. (p) and (q).
1983—Subsec. (o). Puspan. L. 97–424 added subsec. (o).
1979—Subsec. (l)(1)(A). Puspan. L. 96–106 struck out “any aspect of” after “adversely affect”.
1978—Subsec. (f). Puspan. L. 95–599, § 141(f), inserted “bikeways” after “surfaces, median strips,”.
Subsec. (l). Puspan. L. 95–599, § 113, added subsec. (l).
Subsec. (m). Puspan. L. 95–599, § 116(d), added subsec. (m).
Subsec. (n). Puspan. L. 95–599, § 141(g), added subsec. (n).
1973—Subsec. (g). Puspan. L. 93–87, § 152(2), substituted “Act” for “Rct”, thus correcting the popular name to read “Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1970”.
Subsec. (i). Puspan. L. 93–87, § 114, authorized promulgation of noise-level standards for highways on any Federal-aid system for which project approval has been secured prior to July 1, 1972, and approval of any project on a Federal-aid system to which noise-level standards are made applicable, described the range of the projects, made money available for financing Federal share of the project, and deemed such project a highway project for all purposes of this title.
Subsec. (k). Puspan. L. 93–87, § 156, added subsec. (k).
1970—Subsec. (g). Puspan. L. 91–605, § 136(a), substituted provisions ordering the Secretary to issue within 30 days after Dec. 31, 1970, guidelines, which will apply to all proposed projects approved by the Secretary after their issuance, for minimizing soil erosion from highway construction for provisions authorizing the Secretary to consult with the Secretary of Agriculture respecting guidelines for minimizing soil erosion from highway construction and report such guidelines to Congress not later than July 1, 1967.
Subsecs. (h) to (j). Puspan. L. 91–605, § 136(span), added subsecs. (h) to (j).
1966—Subsec. (span). Puspan. L. 89–574, § 5(a), required that in all cases the standards provide for at least four lanes of traffic.
Subsec. (g). Puspan. L. 89–574, § 14, added subsec. (g).
1963—Subsec. (span). Puspan. L. 88–157 substituted “Such standards, as applied to each actual construction project, shall be adequate to enable such project to accommodate the types and volumes of traffic anticipated for such project for the twenty-year period commencing on the date of approval by the Secretary, under section 106 of this title, of the plans, specifications, and estimates for actual construction of such project” for “Such standards shall be adequate to accommodate the types and volumes of traffic forecast for the year 1975”, struck out “up” before “to such standards” and inserted “all” in phrase “throughout all the States”.
Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries
Effective Date of 2021 AmendmentAmendment by Puspan. L. 117–58 effective Oct. 1, 2021, see section 10003 of Puspan. L. 117–58, set out as a note under section 101 of this title.
Effective Date of 2015 AmendmentExcept as otherwise provided, amendment by Puspan. L. 114–94 effective Oct. 1, 2015, see section 1003 of Puspan. L. 114–94, set out as a note under section 5313 of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.
Puspan. L. 114–94, div. A, title I, § 1446(d), Dec. 4, 2015, 129 Stat. 1438, provided that the amendment made by section 1446(d)(5)(B) is effective as of July 6, 2012, and as if included in Puspan. L. 112–141 as enacted.
Effective Date of 2012 AmendmentAmendment by Puspan. L. 112–141 effective Oct. 1, 2012, see section 3(a) of Puspan. L. 112–141, set out as an Effective and Termination Dates of 2012 Amendment note under section 101 of this title.
Effective Date of 1991 AmendmentAmendment by Puspan. L. 102–240 effective Dec. 18, 1991, and applicable to funds authorized to be appropriated or made available after Sept. 30, 1991, and, with certain exceptions, not applicable to funds appropriated or made available on or before Sept. 30, 1991, see section 1100 of Puspan. L. 102–240, set out as a note under section 104 of this title.
Updates to Manual on Uniform Traffic Control DevicesPuspan. L. 117–58, div. A, title I, § 11135, Nov. 15, 2021, 135 Stat. 516, provided that: “In carrying out the first update to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices under section 109(d)(2) of title 23, United States Code, to the greatest extent practicable, the Secretary [of Transportation] shall include updates necessary to provide for—“(1) the protection of vulnerable road users (as defined in section 148(a) of title 23, United States Code);
“(2) supporting the safe testing of automated vehicle technology and any preparation necessary for the safe integration of automated vehicles onto public streets;
“(3) appropriate use of variable message signs to enhance public safety;
“(4) the minimum retroreflectivity of traffic control devices and pavement markings; and
“(5) any additional recommendations made by the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices that have not been incorporated into the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.”
Roadside Highway Safety HardwarePuspan. L. 117–58, div. A, title I, § 11517, Nov. 15, 2021, 135 Stat. 601, provided that:“(a)In General.—To the maximum extent practicable, the Secretary [of Transportation] shall develop a process for third party verification of full-scale crash testing results from crash test labs, including a method for formally verifying the testing outcomes and providing for an independent pass/fail determination. In establishing such a process, the Secretary shall seek to ensure the independence of crash test labs by ensuring that those labs have a clear separation between device development and testing in cases in which laspan employees test devices that were developed within the parent organization of the employee.
“(span)Continued Issuance of Eligibility Letters.—Until the implementation of the process described in subsection (a) is complete, the Secretary may, and is encouraged to, ensure that the Administrator of the Federal Highway Administration continues to issue Federal-aid reimbursement eligibility letters for roadside safety hardware as a service to States.
“(c)Report to Congress.—“(1)In general.—If the Secretary seeks to discontinue issuing the letters described in subsection (span), the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives a report at least 1 year before discontinuing the letters.
“(2)Inclusions.—The report described in paragraph (1) shall include a summary of the third-party verification process described in subsection (a) that will replace the Federal Highway Administration issuance of eligibility letters and any other relevant information that the Secretary deems necessary.”
Stormwater Best Management Practices ReportsPuspan. L. 117–58, div. A, title I, § 11521, Nov. 15, 2021, 135 Stat. 603, provided that:“(a)Definitions.—In this section:“(1)Administrator.—The term ‘Administrator’ means the Administrator of the Federal Highway Administration.
“(2)Best management practices report.—The term ‘best management practices report’ means—“(A) the 2014 report sponsored by the Administrator entitled ‘Determining the State of the Practice in Data Collection and Performance Measurement of Stormwater Best Management Practices’; and
“(B) the 1997 report sponsored by the Administrator entitled ‘Stormwater Best Management Practices in an Ultra-Urban Setting: Selection and Monitoring’.
“(span)Reissuance.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act [Nov. 15, 2021], the Administrator shall update and reissue each best management practices report to reflect new information and advancements in stormwater management.
“(c)Updates.—Not less frequently than once every 5 years after the date on which the Administrator reissues a best management practices report described in subsection (span), the Administrator shall update and reissue the best management practices report until the earlier of the date on which—“(1) the best management practices report is withdrawn; or
“(2) the contents of the best management practices report are incorporated (including by reference) into applicable regulations of the Administrator.”
Retroactive Application of Adjustment to Criteria for Categorical Exclusion for Projects of Limited Federal AssistancePuspan. L. 114–94, div. A, title I, § 1314(span), Dec. 4, 2015, 129 Stat. 1403, provided that: “The first adjustment made pursuant to the amendments made by subsection (a) [amending section 1317 of Puspan. L. 112–141, set out under this section] shall—“(1) be carried out not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act [Dec. 4, 2015]; and
“(2) reflect the increase in the Consumer Price Index since July 1, 2012.”
Categorical Exclusion DeterminationsPuspan. L. 114–94, div. A, title I, § 1315(span), Dec. 4, 2015, 129 Stat. 1403, provided that: “Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act [Dec. 4, 2015], the Secretary [of Transportation] shall revise section 771.117(g) of title 23, Code of Federal Regulations, to allow a programmatic agreement under this section [see section 1318(e) of Puspan. L. 112–141, set out under this section] to include responsibility for making categorical exclusion determinations—“(1) for actions described in subsections (c) and (d) of section 771.117 of title 23, Code of Federal Regulations; and
“(2) that meet the criteria for a categorical exclusion under section 1508.4 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this Act), and are identified in the programmatic agreement.”
Roadway Design Standard FlexibilityPuspan. L. 114–94, div. A, title I, § 1404(span), Dec. 4, 2015, 129 Stat. 1409, provided that: “Notwithstanding section 109(o) of title 23, United States Code, a State may allow a local jurisdiction to use a roadway design publication that is different from the roadway design publication used by the State in which the local jurisdiction is located for the design of a project on a roadway under the ownership of the local jurisdiction (other than a highway on the Interstate System) if—“(1) the local jurisdiction is a direct recipient of Federal funds for the project;
“(2) the roadway design publication—“(A) is recognized by the Federal Highway Administration; and
“(B) is adopted by the local jurisdiction; and
“(3) the design complies with all other applicable Federal laws.”
Emergency ExemptionsPuspan. L. 114–94, div. A, title I, § 1432, Dec. 4, 2015, 129 Stat. 1429, provided that:“(a)In General.—Any road, highway, railway, bridge, or transit facility that is damaged by an emergency that is declared by the Governor of the State, with the concurrence of the Secretary of Homeland Security, or declared as an emergency by the President pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), and that is in operation or under construction on the date on which the emergency occurs may be reconstructed in the same location with the same capacity, dimensions, and design as before the emergency subject to the exemptions and expedited procedures under subsection (span). “(span)Exemptions and Expedited Procedures.—“(1)Alternative arrangements.—Alternative arrangements for an emergency under section 1506.11 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this Act [Dec. 4, 2015]) shall apply to reconstruction under subsection (a), and the reconstruction shall be considered necessary to control the immediate impacts of the emergency.
“(2)Stormwater discharge permits.—A general permit for stormwater discharges from construction activities, if available, issued by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency or the director of a State program under section 402(p) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1342(p)), as applicable, shall apply to reconstruction under subsection (a), on submission of a notice of intent to be subject to the permit. “(3)Emergency procedures.—The emergency procedures for issuing permits in accordance with section 325.2(e)(4) of title 33, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this Act) shall apply to reconstruction under subsection (a), and the reconstruction shall be considered an emergency under that regulation.
“(4)National historic preservation act exemption.—Reconstruction under subsection (a) is eligible for an exemption from the requirements of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 [Puspan. L. 89–665, see Tables for classification] pursuant to part 78 of title 36, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this Act).
“(5)Endangered species act exemption.—An exemption from the requirements of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) pursuant to section 7(p) of that Act (16 U.S.C. 1536(p)) shall apply to reconstruction under subsection (a) and, if the President makes the determination required under section 7(p) of that Act, the determinations required under subsections (g) and (h) of that section shall be deemed to be made. “(6)Expedited consultation under endangered species act.—Expedited consultation pursuant to section 402.05 of title 50, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this Act) shall apply to reconstruction under subsection (a).
“(7)Other exemptions.—Any reconstruction that is exempt under paragraph (5) shall also be exempt from requirements under—“(C) the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.).”
Safety for UsersPuspan. L. 114–94, div. A, title I, § 1442, Dec. 4, 2015, 129 Stat. 1436, provided that:“(a)In General.—The Secretary [of Transportation] shall encourage each State and metropolitan planning organization to adopt standards for the design of Federal surface transportation projects that provide for the safe and adequate accommodation (as determined by the State) of all users of the surface transportation network, including motorized and nonmotorized users, in all phases of project planning, development, and operation.
“(span)Report.—Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act [Dec. 4, 2015], the Secretary shall make available to the public a report cataloging examples of State law or State transportation policy that provide for the safe and adequate accommodation of all users of the surface transportation network, in all phases of project planning, development, and operation.
“(c)Best Practices.—Based on the report under subsection (span), the Secretary shall identify and disseminate examples of best practices where States have adopted measures that have successfully provided for the safe and adequate accommodation of all users of the surface transportation network in all phases of project planning, development, and operation.”
Categorical Exclusions in EmergenciesPuspan. L. 112–141, div. A, title I, § 1315, July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 549, provided that:“(a)In General.—Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act [see section 3(a), (span) of Puspan. L. 112–141, set out as Effective and Termination Dates of 2012 Amendment notes under section 101 of this title], for the repair or reconstruction of any road, highway, or bridge that is in operation or under construction when damaged by an emergency declared by the Governor of the State and concurred in by the Secretary [of Transportation], or for a disaster or emergency declared by the President pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), the Secretary shall publish a notice of proposed rulemaking to treat any such repair or reconstruction activity as a class of action categorically excluded from the requirements relating to environmental assessments or environmental impact statements under section 1508.4 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, and section 771.117 of title 23, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this Act) if such repair or reconstruction activity is—“(1) in the same location with the same capacity, dimensions, and design as the original road, highway, or bridge as before the declaration described in this section; and
“(2) commenced within a 2-year period beginning on the date of a declaration described in this section.
“(span)Rulemaking.—“(1)In general.—The Secretary [of Transportation] shall ensure that the rulemaking helps to conserve Federal resources and protects public safety and health by providing for periodic evaluations to determine if reasonable alternatives exist to roads, highways, or bridges that repeatedly require repair and reconstruction activities.
“(2)Reasonable alternatives.—The reasonable alternatives described in paragraph (1) include actions that could reduce the need for Federal funds to be expended on such repair and reconstruction activities, better protect public safety and health and the environment, and meet transportation needs as described in relevant and applicable Federal, State, local and tribal plans.”
Categorical Exclusions for Projects Within the Right-of-wayPuspan. L. 112–141, div. A, title I, § 1316, July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 549, provided that:“(a)In General.—The Secretary [of Transportation] shall—“(1) not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act [see section 3(a), (span) of Puspan. L. 112–141, set out as Effective and Termination Dates of 2012 Amendment notes under section 101 of this title], designate any project (as defined in section 101(a) of title 23, United States Code) within an existing operational right-of-way as an action categorically excluded from the requirements relating to environmental assessments or environmental impact statements under section 1508.4 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, and section 771.117(c) of title 23, Code of Federal Regulations; and
“(2) not later than 150 days after the date of enactment of this Act, promulgate regulations to carry out paragraph (1).
“(span)Definition of an Operational Right-of-way.—In this section, the term ‘operational right-of-way’ means all real property interests acquired for the construction, operation, or mitigation of a project (as defined in section 101(a) of title 23, United States Code), including the locations of the roadway, bridges, interchanges, culverts, drainage, clear zone, traffic control signage, landscaping, and any rest areas with direct access to a controlled access highway.”
Categorical Exclusion for Projects of Limited Federal AssistancePuspan. L. 112–141, div. A, title I, § 1317, July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 550, as amended by Puspan. L. 114–94, div. A, title I, § 1314(a), Dec. 4, 2015, 129 Stat. 1402; Puspan. L. 117–58, div. A, title I, § 11317, Nov. 15, 2021, 135 Stat. 543, provided that: “Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act [see section 3(a), (span) of Puspan. L. 112–141, set out as Effective and Termination Dates of 2012 Amendment notes under section 101 of this title], the Secretary [of Transportation] shall—“(1) designate as an action categorically excluded from the requirements relating to environmental assessments or environmental impact statements under section 1508.4 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, and section 771.117(c) of title 23, Code of Federal Regulations, any project—“(A) that receives less than $6,000,000 (as adjusted annually by the Secretary [of Transportation] to reflect any increases in the Consumer Price Index prepared by the Department of Labor) of Federal funds; or
“(B) with a total estimated cost of not more than $35,000,000 (as adjusted annually by the Secretary to reflect any increases in the Consumer Price Index prepared by the Department of Labor) and Federal funds comprising less than 15 percent of the total estimated project cost; and
“(2) not later than 150 days after the date of enactment of this Act, promulgate regulations to carry out paragraph (1).”
Programmatic Agreements and Additional Categorical ExclusionsPuspan. L. 112–141, div. A, title I, § 1318, July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 550, as amended by Puspan. L. 114–94, div. A, title I, § 1315(a), Dec. 4, 2015, 129 Stat. 1403, provided that:“(a)In General.—Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act [see section 3(a), (span) of Puspan. L. 112–141, set out as Effective and Termination Dates of 2012 Amendment notes under section 101 of this title], the Secretary [of Transportation] shall—“(1) survey the use by the Department [of Transportation] of categorical exclusions in transportation projects since 2005;
“(2) publish a review of the survey that includes a description of—“(A) the types of actions categorically excluded; and
“(B) any requests previously received by the Secretary for new categorical exclusions; and
“(3) solicit requests from State departments of transportation, transit authorities, metropolitan planning organizations, or other government agencies for new categorical exclusions.
“(span)New Categorical Exclusions.—Not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall publish a notice of proposed rulemaking to propose new categorical exclusions received by the Secretary under subsection (a), to the extent that the categorical exclusions meet the criteria for a categorical exclusion under section 1508.4 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, and section 771.117(a) of title 23, Code of Federal Regulations (as those regulations are in effect on the date of the notice).
“(c)Additional Actions.—The Secretary shall issue a proposed rulemaking to move the following types of actions from subsection (d) of section 771.117 of title 23, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this Act), to subsection (c) of that section, to the extent that such movement complies with the criteria for a categorical exclusion under section 1508.4 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this Act):“(1) Modernization of a highway by resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation, reconstruction, adding shoulders, or adding auxiliary lanes (including parking, weaving, turning, and climbing).
“(2) Highway safety or traffic operations improvement projects, including the installation of ramp metering control devices and lighting.
“(3) Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the construction of grade separation to replace existing at-grade railroad crossings.
“(d)Programmatic Agreements.—“(1)In general.—The Secretary shall seek opportunities to enter into programmatic agreements with the States that establish efficient administrative procedures for carrying out environmental and other required project reviews.
“(2)Inclusions.—Programmatic agreements authorized under paragraph (1) may include agreements that allow a State to determine on behalf of the Federal Highway Administration whether a project is categorically excluded from the preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). “(3)Determinations.—An agreement described in paragraph (2) may include determinations by the Secretary [of Transportation] of the types of projects categorically excluded (consistent with section 1508.4 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations) in the State in addition to the types listed in subsections (c) and (d) of section 771.117 of title 23, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this Act).
“(e)Programmatic Agreement Template.—“(1)In general.—The Secretary [of Transportation] shall develop a template programmatic agreement described in subsection (d) that provides for efficient and adequate procedures for evaluating Federal actions described in section 771.117(c) of title 23, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this subsection [Dec. 4, 2015]).
“(2)Use of template.—The Secretary—“(A) on receipt of a request from a State, shall use the template programmatic agreement developed under paragraph (1) in carrying out this section; and
“(B) on consent of the applicable State, may modify the template as necessary to address the unique needs and characteristics of the State.
“(3)Outcome measurements.—The Secretary shall establish a method to verify that actions described in section 771.117(c) of title 23, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this subsection), are evaluated and documented in a consistent manner by the State that uses the template programmatic agreement under this subsection.”
Engineering JudgmentPuspan. L. 112–141, div. A, title I, § 1529, July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 583, provided that: “Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act [see section 3(a), (span) of Puspan. L. 112–141, set out as Effective and Termination Dates of 2012 Amendment notes under section 101 of this title], the Secretary [of Transportation] shall issue guidance to State transportation departments clarifying that the standards, guidance, and options for design and application of traffic control devices provided in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices should not be considered a substitute for engineering judgment.”
Highway Signs Relating to Veterans CemeteriesPuspan. L. 108–29, § 3, May 29, 2003, 117 Stat. 772, provided that:“(a)In General.—Notwithstanding the terms of any agreement entered into by the Secretary of Transportation and a State under section 109(d) or 402(a) of title 23, United States Code, a veterans cemetery shall be treated as a site for which a supplemental guide sign may be placed on any Federal-aid highway.
“(span)Applicability.—Subsection (a) shall apply to an agreement entered into before, on, or after the date of the enactment of this Act [May 29, 2003].”
International Roughness IndexPuspan. L. 105–178, title I, § 1213(span), June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 200, provided that:“(1)Study.—The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a study on the international roughness index that is used as an indicator of pavement quality on the Federal-aid highway system.
“(2)Required elements.—The study shall specify the extent of usage of the index and the extent to which the international roughness index measurement is reliable across different manufacturers and types of pavement.
“(3)Report to congress.—Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act [June 9, 1998], the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a report on the results of the study.”
Environmental StreamliningPuspan. L. 105–178, title I, § 1309, June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 232, as amended by Puspan. L. 105–206, title IX, § 9004(c), July 22, 1998, 112 Stat. 843, which directed the Secretary of Transportation to develop and implement a coordinated environmental review process for highway construction and mass transit projects, was repealed by Puspan. L. 109–59, title VI, § 6002(d), Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1865.
Roadside Safety TechnologiesPuspan. L. 105–178, title I, § 1402, June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 236, as amended by Puspan. L. 105–206, title IX, § 9005(c), July 22, 1998, 112 Stat. 848, provided that:“(a)Crash Cushions.—“(1)Guidance.—Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act [June 9, 1998], the Secretary shall issue guidance regarding the benefits and safety performance of redirective and nonredirective crash cushions in different road applications, taking into consideration roadway conditions, operating speed limits, the location of the crash cushion in the right-of-way, and any other relevant factors. The guidance shall include recommendations on the most appropriate circumstances for utilization of redirective and nonredirective crash cushions.
“(2)Use of guidance.—States shall use the guidance issued under this subsection in evaluating the safety and cost-effectiveness of utilizing different crash cushion designs and determining whether redirective or nonredirective crash cushions or other safety appurtenances should be installed at specific highway locations.
“(span)Traffic Flow and Safety Applications of Road Barriers.—“(1)Study.—The Secretary shall conduct a study on the technologies and methods to enhance safety, streamline construction, and improve capacity by providing positive separation at all times between traffic, equipment, and workers on highway construction projects. The study shall also address how such technologies can be used to improve capacity and safety at those specific highway, bridge, and other appropriate locations where reversible lane, contraflow, and high occupancy vehicle lane operations are implemented during peak traffic periods.
“(2)Uses to consider.—In conducting the study, the Secretary shall consider, at a minimum, uses of positive separation technologies related to—“(A) separating workers from traffic flow when work is in progress;
“(B) providing additional safe work space by utilizing adjacent and available traffic lanes during off-peak hours;
“(C) rapid deployment to allow for daily or periodic restoration of lanes for use by traffic during peak hours as needed;
“(D) mitigating congestion caused by construction by—“(i) opening all adjacent and available lanes to traffic during peak traffic hours; or
“(ii) using reversible lanes to optimize capacity of the highway by adjusting to directional traffic flow; and
“(E) permanent use of positive separation technologies to create contraflow or reversible lanes to increase the capacity of congested highways, bridges, and tunnels.
“(3)Report.—Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act [June 9, 1998], the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on the results of the study. The report shall include findings and recommendations for the use of the technologies referred to in paragraph (2) to provide positive separation on appropriate projects.”
Metric RequirementsPuspan. L. 104–59, title II, § 205(c), Nov. 28, 1995, 109 Stat. 577, as amended by Puspan. L. 105–178, title I, § 1211(d), June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 188, provided that:“(1)Placement and modification of signs.—The Secretary shall not require the States to expend any Federal or State funds to construct, erect, or otherwise place or to modify any sign relating to a speed limit, distance, or other measurement on a highway for the purpose of having such sign establish such speed limit, distance, or other measurement using the metric system.
“(2)Other actions.—The Secretary shall not require that any State use or plan to use the metric system with respect to designing or advertising, or preparing plans, specifications, estimates, or other documents, for a Federal-aid highway project eligible for assistance under title 23, United States Code.
“(3)Definitions.—In this subsection, the following definitions apply:“(A)Highway.—The term ‘highway’ has the meaning such term has under section 101 of title 23, United States Code.
“(B)Metric system.—The term ‘metric system’ has the meaning the term ‘metric system of measurement’ has under section 4 of the Metric Conversion Act of 1975 (15 U.S.C. 205c).”
Type II Noise BarriersPuspan. L. 104–59, title III, § 339(span), Nov. 28, 1995, 109 Stat. 605, provided that:“(1)General rule.—No funds made available out of the Highway Trust Fund may be used to construct Type II noise barriers (as defined by section 772.5(i) of title 23, Code of Federal Regulations) pursuant to subsections (h) and (i) of section 109 of title 23, United States Code, if such barriers were not part of a project approved by the Secretary before the date of the enactment of this Act [Nov. 28, 1995].
“(2)Exceptions.—Paragraph (1) shall not apply to construction of Type II noise barriers along lands that were developed or were under substantial construction before approval of the acquisition of the rights-of-ways for, or construction of, the existing highway.”
Highway Signs for National Highway SystemPuspan. L. 104–59, title III, § 359(span), Nov. 28, 1995, 109 Stat. 626, provided that:“(1)Study.—The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the cost, need, and efficacy of establishing a highway sign for identifying routes on the National Highway System. In conducting the study, the Secretary shall make a determination concerning whether to identify National Highway System route numbers.
“(2)Report.—Not later than March 1, 1997, the Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report on the results of the study.”
Use of Recycled Paving MaterialPuspan. L. 102–240, title I, § 1038, Dec. 18, 1991, 105 Stat. 1987, as amended by Puspan. L. 104–59, title II, § 205(span), title III, § 327, Nov. 28, 1995, 109 Stat. 577, 592, provided that:“(a)Asphalt Pavement Containing Recycled Rubber Demonstration Program.—Notwithstanding any other provision of title 23, United States Code, or regulation or policy of the Department of Transportation, the Secretary (or a State acting as the Department’s agent) may not disapprove a highway project under chapter 1 of title 23, United States Code, on the ground that the project includes the use of asphalt pavement containing recycled rubber. Under this subsection, a patented application process for recycled rubber shall be eligible for approval under the same conditions that an unpatented process is eligible for approval.
“(span)Studies.—“(1)In general.—The Secretary and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency shall coordinate and conduct, in cooperation with the States, a study to determine—“(A) the threat to human health and the environment associated with the production and use of asphalt pavement containing recycled rubber;
“(B) the degree to which asphalt pavement containing recycled rubber can be recycled; and
“(C) the performance of the asphalt pavement containing recycled rubber under various climate and use conditions.
“(2)Division of responsibilities.—The Administrator shall conduct the part of the study relating to paragraph (1)(A) and the Secretary shall conduct the part of the study relating to paragraph (1)(C). The Administrator and the Secretary shall jointly conduct the study relating to paragraph (1)(B).
“(3)Additional study.—The Secretary and the Administrator, in cooperation with the States, shall jointly conduct a study to determine the economic savings, technical performance qualities, threats to human health and the environment, and environmental benefits of using recycled materials in highway devices and appurtenances and highway projects, including asphalt containing over 80 percent reclaimed asphalt, asphalt containing recycled glass, and asphalt containing recycled plastic.
“(4)Additional elements.—In conducting the study under paragraph (3), the Secretary and the Administrator shall examine utilization of various technologies by States and shall examine the current practices of all States relating to the reuse and disposal of materials used in federally assisted highway projects.
“(5)Report.—Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 18, 1991], the Secretary and the Administrator shall transmit to Congress a report on the results of the studies conducted under this subsection, including a detailed analysis of the economic savings and technical performance qualities of using such recycled materials in federally assisted highway projects and the environmental benefits of using such recycled materials in such highway projects in terms of reducing air emissions, conserving natural resources, and reducing disposal of the materials in landfills.
“(c)DOT Guidance.—“(1)Information gathering and distribution.—The Secretary shall gather information and recommendations concerning the use of asphalt containing recycled rubber in highway projects from those States that have extensively evaluated and experimented with the use of such asphalt and implemented such projects and shall make available such information and recommendations on the use of such asphalt to those States which indicate an interest in the use of such asphalt.
“(2)Encouragement of use.—The Secretary should encourage the use of recycled materials determined to be appropriate by the studies pursuant to subsection (span) in federally assisted highway projects. Procuring agencies shall comply with all applicable guidelines or regulations issued by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
“(d)Asphalt Pavement Containing Recycled Rubber.—“(1)Crumspan rubber modifier research.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 [Nov. 28, 1995], the Secretary shall develop testing procedures and conduct research to develop performance grade classifications, in accordance with the strategic highway research program carried out under section 307(d) of title 23, United States Code, for crumspan rubber modifier binders. The testing procedures and performance grade classifications should be developed in consultation with representatives of the crumspan rubber modifier industry and other interested parties (including the asphalt paving industry) with experience in the development of the procedures and classifications.
“(2)Crumspan rubber modifier program development.—“(A)In general.—The Secretary may make grants to States to develop programs to use crumspan rubber from scrap tires to modify asphalt pavements.
“(B)Use of grant funds.—Grant funds made available to States under this paragraph shall be used—“(i) to develop mix designs for crumspan rubber modified asphalt pavements;
“(ii) for the placement and evaluation of crumspan rubber modified asphalt pavement field tests; and
“(iii) for the expansion of State crumspan rubber modifier programs in existence on the date the grant is made available.
“(e)Definitions.—For purpose of this section—“(1) the term ‘asphalt pavement containing recycled rubber’ means any mixture of asphalt and crumspan rubber derived from whole scrap tires, such that the physical properties of the asphalt are modified through the mixture, for use in pavement maintenance, rehabilitation, or construction applications; and
“(2) the term ‘recycled rubber’ is any crumspan rubber derived from processing whole scrap tires or shredded tire material taken from automobiles, trucks, or other equipment owned and operated in the United States.”
Survey and Report on Upgrading of Design StandardsPuspan. L. 102–240, title I, § 1049, Dec. 18, 1991, 105 Stat. 2000, directed Secretary to conduct a survey to identify current State standards relating to geometric design, traffic control devices, roadside safety, safety appurtenance design, uniform traffic control devices, and sign legibility and directional clarity for all Federal-aid highways and, not later than 2 years after Dec. 18, 1991, to transmit to Congress a report on the results of the survey and the crashworthiness of traffic lights, traffic signs, guardrails, impact attenuators, concrete barrier treatments, and breakaway utility poles for bridges and roadways currently used by States.
Erosion Control GuidelinesPuspan. L. 102–240, title I, § 1057, Dec. 18, 1991, 105 Stat. 2002, provided that:“(a)Development.—The Secretary shall develop erosion control guidelines for States to follow in carrying out construction projects funded in whole or in part under this title [see Tables for classification].
“(span)More Stringent State Requirements.—Guidelines developed under subsection (a) shall not preempt any requirement made by or under State law if such requirement is more stringent than the guidelines.
“(c)Consistency With Other Programs.—Guidelines developed under subsection (a) shall be consistent with nonpoint source management programs under section 319 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act [33 U.S.C. 1329] and coastal nonpoint pollution control guidance under section 6217(g) of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 [16 U.S.C. 1455span(g)].”
Roadside Barrier TechnologyPuspan. L. 102–240, title I, § 1058, Dec. 18, 1991, 105 Stat. 2003, as amended by Puspan. L. 104–59, title III, § 328, Nov. 28, 1995, 109 Stat. 593, provided that:“(a)Requirement for Innovative Barriers.—Not less than 2½ percent of the mileage of new or replacement permanent or temporary crashworthy barriers included in awarded contracts along Federal-aid highways within the boundaries of a State in each calendar year shall be innovative crashworthy safety barriers.
“(span)Certification.—Each State shall annually certify to the Secretary its compliance with the requirements of this section.
“(c)Definition of Innovative Crashworthy Safety Barrier.—For purposes of this section, the term ‘innovative crashworthy safety barrier’ means a barrier, other than a guardrail or guiderail, classified by the Federal Highway Administration as ‘experimental’ or that was classified as ‘operational’ after January 1, 1985, and that meets or surpasses the requirements of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program 350 for longitudinal barriers.”
Roadside Barriers and Safety AppurtenancesPuspan. L. 102–240, title I, § 1073, Dec. 18, 1991, 105 Stat. 2012, provided that:“(a)Initiation of Rulemaking Proceeding.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 18, 1991], the Secretary shall initiate a rulemaking proceeding to revise the guidelines and establish standards for installation of roadside barriers and other safety appurtenances, including longitudinal barriers, end terminals, and crash cushions. Such rulemaking shall reflect state-of-the-art designs, testing, and evaluation criteria contained in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 230, relating to approval standards which provide an enhanced level of crashworthy performance to accommodate vans, mini-vans, pickup trucks, and 4-wheel drive vehicles.
“(span)Final Rule.—Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 18, 1991], the Secretary shall complete the rulemaking proceeding initiated under subsection (a), and issue a final rule regarding the implementation of revised guidelines and standards for acceptable roadside barriers and other safety appurtenances, including longitudinal barriers, end terminals, and crash cushions. Such revised guidelines and standards shall accommodate vans, mini-vans, pickup trucks, and 4-wheel drive vehicles and shall be applicable to the refurbishment and replacement of existing roadside barriers and safety appurtenances as well as to the installation of new roadside barriers and safety appurtenances.”
Studies Relating to Establishment of Standards for Resurfacing, Restoration, and Rehabilitation of Highways and to Establishment of Uniform Standards and Criteria for Testing and Inspecting Highways and BridgesPuspan. L. 97–424, title I, § 110(span), (c), Jan. 6, 1983, 96 Stat. 2105, provided that:“(span) The Secretary of Transportation shall enter into appropriate arrangements with the National Academy of Sciences (1) to conduct a study of the safety cost-effectiveness of geometric design criteria of standards currently in effect for construction and reconstruction of highways, other than highways access to which is fully controlled, to determine the most appropriate minimum standards to apply to resurfacing, restoration, and rehabilitation projects on such highways, which study shall include a study of the cost effectiveness of the hot dip galvanizing process for the installation, repair, or replacement of exposed structural and miscellaneous steel, and (2) to propose standards to preserve and extend the service life of such highways and enhance highway safety. The National Academy of Sciences shall conduct such study in cooperation with the National Transportation Safety Board, the Congressional Budget Office, and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Upon completion of such study, the National Academy of Sciences shall submit such study and its proposed standards to the Secretary of Transportation for review. Within ninety days after submission of such standards to the Secretary of Transportation, the Secretary shall submit such study and the proposed standards of the National Academy of Sciences, together with the recommendations of the Secretary, to Congress for approval.
“(c)(1) The Secretary of Transportation is directed to coordinate a study with the National Bureau of Standards, the American Society for Testing and Materials, and other organizations as deemed appropriate, (A) to determine the existing quality of design, construction, products, use, and systems for highways and bridges; (B) to determine the need for uniform standards and criteria for design, processing, products, and applications, including personnel training and implementation of enforcement techniques; and (C) to determine the manpower needs and costs of developing a national system for the evaluation and accreditation of testing and inspection agencies.
“(2) The Secretary shall submit such study to the Congress not later than one year after the date of enactment of this section [Jan. 6, 1983].”
Expenditure of Federal Funds for Highway Signs Using Metric SystemPuspan. L. 95–599, title I, § 144, Nov. 6, 1978, 92 Stat. 2713, as amended by Puspan. L. 96–106, § 14, Nov. 9, 1979, 93 Stat. 798, which prohibited use of Federal funds for signing solely in the metric system, was repealed by Puspan. L. 102–240, title I, § 1053, Dec. 18, 1991, 105 Stat. 2001.
Modification of Project Agreements To Effectuate Requirement of Four-Lanes of TrafficAuthorization to modify projects agreements entered into prior to September 13, 1966, to effectuate the amendment of this section by Puspan. L. 89–574 which added the requirement of four-lanes of traffic, see section 5(span) of Puspan. L. 89–574, set out as a note under section 106 of this title.
