AASHTO PRACTITIONER’S HANDBOOK - … · AASHTO PRACTITIONER’S HANDBOOK MANAGING THE NEPA...

AASHTO

PRACTITIONER’S HANDBOOK

MANAGING THE NEPA PROCESS FOR TOLL LANES AND TOLL ROADS

This Handbook provides recommendations for conducting National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) studies for projects involving toll lanes and toll roads. Issues covered in this handbook include:

▪ Addressingtollinginthetransportationplanningprocess

▪ PreparingtoinitiatetheNEPAprocessforatolledproject

▪ Developingthepurposeandneedandrangeofalternatives

▪ Trafficforecastingfortolledalternatives

▪ Environmentaljusticeissuesrelatedtotolling

▪ Addressingotherdirectandindirectimpactsoftolling

▪ CoordinatingNEPAreviewswithaprojectfinancingandprocurement

▪ Consideringtolledalternativesinare-evaluationorsupplemental NEPA document

The Practitioner’s Handbooks are produced by the Center forEnvironmental Excellence by AASHTO. The Handbooks provide practical advice on a range of environmental issues that arise during the planning, development, and operation of transportation projects.

The Handbooks are primarily intended for use by project managers andotherswhoareresponsibleforcoordinatingcompliancewithawiderangeofregulatoryrequirements.Withtheirneedsinmind,each Handbook includes:

▪key issues to consider;▪abackgroundbriefing;▪practical tips for achieving compliance; and▪alistofreferencematerials.

In addition, key regulations, guidance materials, and sample documents foreachHandbookarepostedon theCenter’swebsite at http://environment.transportation.org AmericanAssociationofStateHighwayandTransportationOfficials

CenterforEnvironmentalExcellencebyAASHTO

03August 2016

http://environment.transportation.org/

http://www.transportation.org/


2 Managing the NEPA Process for Toll Lanes and Toll Roads

Copyright©2016,CenterforEnvironmentalExcellencebyAASHTO(AmericanAssociationofStateHighwayandTrans-portationOfficials).AllRightsReserved.Thisbook,orpartsthereof,maynotbereproducedinanyformwithoutwrittenpermission of the publisher. Printed in the United States of America.

ThismaterialisbaseduponworksupportedbytheFederalHighwayAdministrationunderCooperativeAgreementNo. DTFH61-07-H-00019.Anyopinions,findings,andconclusionsorrecommendationsexpressedinthispublicationarethoseoftheAuthor(s)anddonotnecessarilyreflecttheviewoftheFederalHighwayAdministration.

© 2016 by the Center for Environmental Excellence by AASHTO.All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law.

Managing the NEPA Process for Toll Lanes and Toll Roads 1

Overview

This Handbook provides recommendations for conducting National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) studies for projects involvingtolllanesandtollroads.ItcoversissuesassociatedwiththeNEPAprocessitselfaswellasarangeofrelatedissues,suchasdevelopingtollingpoliciesinthetransportationplanningprocessandcoordinatingaNEPAstudywithaprocurementfora public–private partnership (PPP).

Tolling has received increased attention in recent years as a method for addressing transportation needs. This trend has resulted frommanyfactors,includingtheexpandedavailabilityofelectronictollcollection;theinadequacyoftraditionalfundingsourcesfortransportationprojects;theremovalofcertainlegalrestrictionsontollingunderFederallaw;andthesuccessoftollprojectsbothintheUnitedStatesandaroundtheworld.RecentlegislationseemslikelytocontinuethetrendtowardtollingbyincreasingStates’authoritytoallowforthedevelopmentoftolllanesandtollroads.

The topics covered in this Handbook include:

• Addressing tolling in the transportation planning process

• Preparing to initiate the NEPA process for a tolled project

• Developingthepurposeandneedandrangeofalternatives

• Trafficforecastingfortolledalternatives

• Environmental justice issues related to tolling

• Addressing other direct and indirect impacts of tolling

• CoordinatingNEPAreviewswithprojectfinancingandprocurement

• Consideringtolledalternativesinare-evaluationorsupplementalNEPAdocument

Background Briefing

ThebasicrequirementsapplicabletotheNEPAprocessforatolledprojectarethesameasthoseforatypicalfederallyfundedhighwayproject.Butasdescribedinthissection,tollprojectsalsoinvolvesomedistinctlegalandregulatoryissues,whichcreateadditionalopportunitiesandconstraintsthatneedtobeconsideredwhencarryingouttheNEPAprocess.

Adoption of Transportation Planning Decisions in the NEPA Process. Transportation agencies can use the transportation planning process to produce decisions or analyses that can later be adopted for use in the NEPA process, including decisions regardingtheuseoftollsandPPPs.Forhighwayandtransitprojects,therearetwomainsourcesofauthorityforadoptingplanning decisions for use in the NEPA process:

• 23 CFR 450 Appendix A: ThestatewideandmetropolitantransportationplanningregulationsallowtransportationplanningproductstobeadoptedforuseintheNEPAprocess,basedoncriteriasetforthin23CFR450.212(b)and450.318(b)andinAppendixAtotheregulations.AppendixAstatesthat“Ifthefinancialplanforametropolitantransportationplanindicatesthatfundingforaspecificprojectwillrequirespecialfundingsources(e.g.,tollsorpublic–privatefinancing),suchinformationmaybeincludedinthepurposeandneedstatement.”1

• 23 USC 168:Thisstatuteprovidesadditionallegalauthoritytoadoptplanning-leveldecisionsforuseintheNEPAprocess;itisdistinctfromtheprocessdescribedinAppendixAto23CFRPart450.2 Like Appendix A, this statute authorizesadoptionofdecisionsregarding“whethertolling,privatefinancialassistance,orotherspecialfinancialmeasuresarenecessarytoimplementtheproject.”3

1 23CFRPart450,AppendixA,PartII,Paragraph8.2 See23CFR450.212(d)and450.318(e)(implementing23USC168).3 23USC168(c)(1)(A).



Consideration of Non-Tolled Alternatives.InguidanceonNEPAcompliancefortollroads,FHWAhasidentifiedthreecircum-stancesinwhichaNEPAstudycanfocussolelyontolledalternatives:

• whentollingisassumedinthetransportationplanningprocessasthebasisformeetingfiscalconstraint;

• whentollingisanelementofthepurposeandneed;and

• whennon-tolledalternativesareeliminatedfromconsiderationduringthealternativesscreeningprocess.4

Ina2015guidancedocument,FHWAreiteratedthat“thespecificgoalsandobjectivesofaproject,suchasurgency,conges-tionrelief,orfinancialinfeasibilityofnon-tolledalternatives,couldnarrowtherangeofreasonablealternativestoonlytolledalternatives.”5Theguidancealsocautions,however,thatevenifthereisavalidjustificationforeliminatingnon-tolledalterna-tives,itmaybeadvisabletocontinueexaminingnon-tolledalternativesifthereispublicoppositiontotolls.

Authority to Implement Tolling on Federal-Aid Highways.FederallawallowstollingontheInterstateSystemandotherFederal-aidhighwaysunderspecificcircumstances.InaNEPAcontext,theserestrictionsarerelevantbecausetheymayinflu-encethewayaprojectisdefinedandthetypesofalternativesthatcanbeconsidered.Currently,therearefourmainsourcesofauthoritytoallowtolledfacilitiesonneworexistingFederal-aidhighways:

• 23 USC 129:Section129listsseveraltypesoftollprojectsthatcanbeimplementedonFederal-aidhighways,includingcertainfacilitiesontheInterstateSystem.Itprovidesbroadauthorizationfortollingonexistingandnewnon-InterstateSystemhighways.ItalsoallowstollingforsometypesofprojectsontheInterstateSystem,including:addingnewtolledlanestoanexistingInterstate;convertinganon-tolledbridgeonanInterstatetoatolledbridge;andbuildingnewtolledInterstatehighways.

• 23 USC 166:Section166authorizestheconversionofexistinghigh-occupancyvehicle(HOV)lanestoHOV/toll(HOT)lanes.ThisauthorityappliestohighwaysonandofftheInterstateSystem.

• Interstate Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Pilot Program:ThisprogramallowsfortollingexistinghighwaysontheInterstateSystemaspartofaprojectinvolvingreconstructionorrehabilitationofthosehighways.Thisprogramislimitedtothreefacilities,whichmustbeindifferentstates.

• Value Pricing Pilot Program:Thisprogramallowsforawiderangeoftolledprojectstobeauthorizedonnewandexistinghighways,bothonandofftheInterstateSystem.Themainrequirementisthattheprojectmustinvolvesomeformof“valuepricing”(alsocalledcongestionpricing).Participationislimitedto15states,localgovernments,orotherpublic authorities. Multiple projects can be authorized under a single agreement.

Alloftheselawsandprogramscontainspecificconditionsthatmustbemetinorderfortollingtobeauthorized.ForadditionalinformationonFHWA’stollingandpricingprograms,seetheReferenceMaterialssectionofthisHandbook.

Fiscal Constraint.FHWAwillnotissueaNEPAdecisiondocumentforaprojectinametropolitanareaunlessthatprojectisincludedinthefiscallyconstrainedmetropolitantransportationplan.6Fiscalconstraint,inessence,isafindingthatprojectedrevenuesaresufficienttocovertheprojectedcostsoftheprojectsintheplan.FHWA’sfiscalconstraintguidancerecognizesthattollrevenuescanbeconsideredasonesourceofrevenuetosatisfyfiscalconstraintrequirements.7 The need to make afiscalconstraintdeterminationmayrequireprojectionstobemaderegardinganticipatedtollrevenueswellbeforeanyfinaldecisions have been made regarding toll rates.

Major Project Financial Plans.Allfederallyfundedhighwayprojectswithanestimatedcostof$100millionormorearedefinedas“majorprojects”under23USC106.Foramajorproject,thesponsorisrequiredtodevelopafinancialplanthatdescribestheproject,theproposedconstructionschedule,theestimatedcost,andtherevenuesourcesandfinancingstrat-egiesthatwillbeusedtopayfortheproject.8Forprojectswithcostsover$500million,thefinancialplansmustbesubmittedtoFHWAforapproval.ThefinancialplantypicallyisdevelopedduringthelaterstagesoftheNEPAprocessandsubmittedforFHWAapprovalshortlyafterNEPAcompletion.

4 D.J.Gribbin,ChiefCounsel,FHWA,toD.Nicol,FHWADivisionAdministrator,Colorado,“NEPAAnalysisforTollRoads”(Oct.15,2004).5 Foradditionalinformation,seeFHWA,“Public–PrivatePartnershipOversight:HowFHWAReviewsP3s”(Jan.2015),p.19.6 FHWAalsorequiresatleastoneprojectphasetobeincludedinthemetropolitantransportationimprovementprogram(TIP),whichmustbeconsistentwiththestatewidetransportationimprovementprogram(STIP).

7 FHWA,“FinancialPlanningandFiscalConstraintforTransportationPlansandProgramsQuestions&Answers”(April15,2009;lastupdatedOct.29,2015),Section11.

8 Foradditionalinformation,seeFHWA,“MajorProjectFinancialPlanGuidance”(Dec.2014).



9 See23CFRPart636.Foradditionalinformation,seeFHWA,“Public–PrivatePartnershipOversight:HowFHWAReviewsP3s”(Jan.2015).10 23CFR636.109(b).11FHWAOrder6640.23A(June14,2012),Sec.8(e).12FHWAOrder6640.23A(June14,2012),Sec.8(f).13FHWAOrder6640.23A(June14,2012),Sec.8(g).14FHWA,“GuidanceonEnvironmentalJusticeandNEPA”(Dec.16,2011).1542USC2000d.

Procurement of PPPs during the NEPA Process. The procurement process for a PPP may be initiated, or even completed, inparallelwiththeNEPAprocess.9FHWA’sregulationsincludesafeguardstoensurethatearlyinitiationofthePPPprocure-mentdoesnotaffecttheobjectivityoftheNEPAprocess.Forexample,theprivatepartnerisprohibitedfrompreparingtheNEPAdocumentorhavinganydecision-makingresponsibilityintheNEPAprocess.Inaddition,anyPPPcontractmustensurethat no commitments are made to any alternative prior to completion of the NEPA process.10

Environmental Justice (EJ) and Tolling.UnderanExecutiveOrderonenvironmentaljustice(E.O.12898),allFederalagenciesarerequiredtotakeactiontoidentifyandaddressany“disproportionatelyhighandadverseeffects”oftheiractionsonminorityandlow-incomepopulations.FHWAhasimplementedthismandatethroughitsOrder6640.23A.ThisorderdirectsFHWAmanagersandstaffto“takeintoaccountmitigationandenhancementmeasuresandpotentialoffsettingbenefitstotheaffectedminorityand/orlow-incomepopulations”whendeterminingifeffectsaredisproportionatelyhighandadverse.11 In ad-dition,theorderstatestheconditionsunderwhichFHWAmayapproveaprojectthatwouldcausedisproportionatelyhighandadverseeffectsonalow-incomeand/orminoritypopulation:

• Iftheprojectwillhavedisproportionatelyhighandadverseeffectsonlow-incomepopulations(regardlessofminoritystatus),FHWAmustensurethattheprojectincludesall“practicable”measurestoavoidorreducethedisproportionatelyhighandadverseeffects.Theorderstatesthat“[i]ndeterminingwhetheramitigationmeasureoranalternativeis‘practicable,’thesocial,economic(includingcosts),andenvironmentaleffectsofavoidingormitigatingtheadverseeffectswillbetakenintoaccount.”12

• Iftheprojectwillhavedisproportionatelyhighandadverseeffectsonminoritypopulations,FHWAmustensurethat(1)thereisasubstantialneedfortheproject,basedontheoverallpublicinterest;and(2)alternativesthatwouldhavelessadverseeffectsonprotectedpopulationshaveeither“severe”environmentalorsocio-economicimpactsorwouldinvolve“increasedcostsofanextraordinarymagnitude.”13

FHWAalsohasissuedguidanceonhowtoaddresssEJissuesintheNEPAprocess.14Inaddition,FHWAhaspublishedsever-alreportswithadviceonmethodologiesforEJanalysesandexamplesofEJanalysesfortollprojects.(SeetheFHWApublica-tionslistedintheReferenceMaterialssectionofthisHandbook.)

Title VI.TitleVIoftheCivilRightsActisaFederallawthatprohibitsarecipientofFederalfunds,includingstateDOTsandpublic transit agencies, from engaging in discrimination against any person on grounds of race, color, or national origin.15 Any memberofaprotectedclassunderTitleVImayfileacomplaintwiththeU.S.DepartmentofTransportation(U.S.DOT),alleg-ingthatheorshewassubjectedtodiscrimination.AspartoftheNEPAprocess,itisprudenttodocumentthattheU.S.DOTagencyhasspecificallyconsideredcompliancewithTitleVI,especiallyiftheEJanalysishasconcludedthattheprojectwillhavedisproportionatelyhighandadverseeffectsonminoritypopulations.

Key Issues to Consider

Addressing Tolling in the Transportation Planning Process

• Doesthestatewideand/ormetropolitanlong-rangeplanestablishanypoliciesregardingfortolling?

• Hasatollfeasibilitystudybeenconductedforthisproject?Ifso,whatarethekeyconclusionsofthatstudy?

• Havetollrevenuesfromthisprojectbeenassumedinmakingafiscalconstraintdeterminationforatransportationplanortransportationimprovementprogram?Ifso,whatspecificassumptionsweremade?

Preparing to Initiate the NEPA Process for a Tolled Project

• HastheplanningprocessproducedanydecisionsoranalysesthatcanbeadoptedintheNEPAprocess?

• Areimprovementstothetrafficmodelneededinordertodevelopforecastsfortolledalternatives?



• WhatFederallegislationprovidesauthoritytoimplementtollingforthisproject?Doesthatlegislationincludeconstraintsthatmayberelevantwhendevelopingtolledalternatives?

• WhatexpertisewillbeneededontheconsultantteamtoensurethattolledalternativesareadequatelyanalyzedintheNEPAprocess?

• Isanychangeinstatelawneededtoenabletheprojectsponsortocarryoutatolledproject?

• Istollingcontroversial?Whatisthelikelihoodoflitigationchallengingtheproject?

Developing the Purpose and Need and the Range of Alternatives

• Hasthetransportationplanningprocessprovidedabasisforincorporatingtollingintothepurposeandneed?

• Eveniftollingisnotincludedinthepurposeandneed,arethereothergrounds—e.g.,lackoffinancialfeasibility—foreliminatingnon-tolledalternatives?Ifso,howwillthisbedocumented?

• Evenifabasisexistsforeliminatingnon-tollalternatives,arethereotherreasonstocontinueconsideringnon-tollalternativesintheNEPAprocess?

• Aretheredifferenttollingconcepts(e.g.,tollingonlynewlanesvs.tollingalllanes)thatneedtobeconsideredasalternativestooneanotherintheNEPAprocess?

• Whatcriteriawillbeusedforcomparingalternatives?Dothesecriteriafullycapturetherelevantdifferencesassociatedwithtolledandnon-tolledalternatives?

Traffic Forecasting for Tolled Alternatives

• AreimprovementstothemodelneededbeforetheNEPAforecastsaredeveloped?

• WhattollrateswillbeassumedinthetrafficforecastsintheNEPAstudy?Arethoseassumptionsconsistentwiththerevenueprojectionsusedinfiscalconstraintfindingsorotherfinancialforecasts?

• Arethereotherimportantassumptionsregardingtollingthatneedtobereflectedinthetrafficmodel—e.g.,differenttollratesbasedontimeofday?

• WhatassumptionswillbemadeabouttollingonotherfacilitiesundertheNoActionalternative?Forexample,isthereabasisforassumingthatsomeexistingnon-tolledfacilitieswillbecometolledintheforecastyear?

• Areseparatetrafficandrevenue(T&R)forecastsbeingpreparedforthesameprojectconcurrentlywiththeNEPAprocess?DothoseT&RforecastsdifferfromtheNEPAtrafficforecasts?

Environmental Justice Issues Related to Tolling

• Whatarethepotentialeffectsoftollingonminorityandlow-incomecommunities?

• Whatarethepotentialbenefitsoftollingtominorityandlow-incomecommunities?

• Whatmitigationmeasures,ifany,willbeconsideredforimpactsonminorityandlow-incomecommunities?

• HowwillcompliancewithFHWAOrder6640.23Abedocumented?

• HowwillcompliancewithTitleVIoftheCivilRightsActbedocumented?

Coordinating the NEPA Process with Project Financing and Procurement

• HowwilltheNEPAprocessbecoordinatedwithprojectfinancingandprocurement?

• WillaPPPbeused?Ifso: – Whenwilltheselectionofaprivate-sectorpartneroccurinrelationtotheNEPAprocess?Ifthereisoverlapwith

theNEPAprocess,howarethetwobeingcoordinated? – Whataretheobjectivesofprivatesectorinvestors(ifknown)andhowdotheyrelatetoprojectassumptionsand

features—forexample,projectscope,termini,purposeandneed,rangeofalternatives? – WhatgroundruleswillbeestablishedregardingcommunicationsbetweentheNEPAteamandanypotential

privateinvestors?



Considering Tolled Alternatives in a Re-Evaluation or Supplemental NEPA Document

• WeretolledalternativesconsideredatallinapreviousNEPAdocumentforthisproject?Ifso,whatanalysisdidthatdocumentinclude,andwhatconclusionsdiditreachabouttolling?

• Iftollingwasrejectedinapreviousstudy,whatarethereasonsforreconsideringitnow?

• Whatpublicoutreachisneededtoinformthepublicofthepossibilitythattollingwillbeconsidered?

• Whatprojectelementswillchangeiftheprojectismodifiedtoincludetolls?

• Howwilltollingaffecttheproject’stransportationperformanceand/orimpacts?

• Withtolling,willtheprojectstillmeetthepurposeandneed?

• IsasupplementalEISlikelytobeneeded?

Practical Tips

1 | Addressing Tolling in the Transportation Planning Process

Thissectionof theHandbook identifiesseveralspecificapproachesthatcanbeusedtoaddresstolling in thetransportationplanning process. The planning process provides an opportunity to resolve fundamental policy issues regarding the role of tolling inthestateorregion’stransportationsystem.Italsoprovidesanopportunitytodevelopthefinancialandtrafficanalysesthatdemonstratetheviabilityoftolledalternativesinaspecificcorridororregionalnetwork.Anditmayhelptodemonstratethattollrevenuesareneededtomeetfiscalconstraintrequirements.Bytakingadvantageoftheseopportunities,transportationagenciescanhelptolaythefoundationforafocusedandefficientNEPAprocess.

Developing a Region-Wide Toll Policy.Acomprehensiveregionalpolicyregardinghighwaytollscanprovidethefoundationforconsideringtollsintheenvironmentalreviewprocessforindividualprojects.Withinametropolitanarea,thedevelopmentofaregionaltollpolicycouldbeledbythemetropolitanplanningorganization(MPO)and/orthestateDOT,andwouldlikelyinvolvetoll road authorities, local governments, and many other stakeholders. A regional toll policy could address issues such as:

• Policy rationale for tolling (e.g., raising revenue, managing congestion, reducing emissions)

• Relianceontollstodemonstratefiscalconstraint

• Useofall-electronictollcollection

• Designationoftolledcorridors

• Assessmentofequityandenvironmentaljusticeconcernsrelatedtotolling

• Measurestominimizeoroffsettheimpactoftolls

Conducting Toll Feasibility Studies.Whenconductedaspartoftransportationplanning,atollfeasibilitystudycansavetimeintheNEPAprocessbyhelpingtoclarifythetypeoftolledalternativesthatwouldbeviableandthefinancialandoperationalbenefitsofthosealternatives.Specifically,atollingfeasibilitystudyprovidesastartingpointforassessing:

• Type of toll facility (e.g., HOT lanes)

• Potential toll rates on the facility

• Potential toll revenue generated by the toll facility

• Effectsoftollingontrafficdiversiontootherroutes

• Potential construction costs

• Potential use of a PPP

• Project phasing options



Developing Project-Specific Analyses for Adoption in NEPA. The planning process also can be used to prepare analyses for aspecifictollprojectwiththeintentionofadoptingthoseanalysesinafutureNEPAprocessforthatproject.Theseanalysescouldbuildonthevisionsetforthinaregion-widetollpolicy,andtheymayincorporatefinancialandotherdatafromatollingfeasibilitystudy. These analyses could include:

• Draftingapurposeandneedstatement

• Determiningthatnon-tolledalternativesarenotreasonable

• Determiningtheelementsofatolledalternative

• Evaluatingequity-relatedimpactsoftolling

• Developingmeasurestominimizeandmitigateeffectsoftolling

• Identifying other facilities that are expected to be tolled under the No Action condition.

• DevelopingassumptionstosupportinclusionofthetolledprojectinthefiscallyconstrainedplanandTIP.

ThedecisiontoadoptanyoftheseanalysesordecisionsforuseintheNEPAprocesswouldbemadebytheFederalleadagencyduring the NEPA process.16(SeeBackgroundBriefing.)

Incorporating Toll Revenues into a Fiscal Constraint Analysis. If theplanningprocesshas identified toll revenuesasafundingsource foraproject, theanticipated toll revenuecanbe incorporated intoapreliminaryanalysisshowinghowfiscalconstraintrequirementscanbemetfortheMPO’slong-rangeplan(and,ifapplicable,theTIPandSTIP).Asnotedearlier,itisnotnecessarytomeetthefiscalconstraintrequirementatthepre-NEPAstage;fiscalconstraintonlyneedstobeshownpriortocompletionoftheNEPAprocess.Nonetheless,anearlyanalysisoffiscalconstraintmayhelptoinformthedevelopmentandscreeningofalternativesintheNEPAprocessbyprovidingabasisforassessingfinancialfeasibilityofbothtolledandnon-tolledalternatives.Inaddition,earlyconsiderationoffiscalconstrainthelpstobuildrelationshipswithMPOstaff,whichcanreducetherisk of delays in obtaining MPO approvals during the NEPA process.

2 | Preparing to Initiate the NEPA Process for a Tolled Project

Onceapotentialtollprojectisidentified,theremaybeanexpectationthattheNEPAprocessshouldbeginrightaway.ButbeforestartingtheNEPAprocess,itisbeneficialtoassesswhetherthenecessarytechnicalresources,expertise,andlegalauthoritiesareinplace—especiallyiftheprojectisbeingimplementedinaregionthatdoesnothavesignificantpriorexperiencewilltolling.Thissectiondiscussessomeof the important topics tocoverwhenpreparing to initiate theNEPAprocess fora tollproject.ConsideringtheseissuesearlywillhelptoavoiddelaysaftertheNEPAprocessisunderway.

Adopting Planning Decisions for Use in the NEPA Process. If tolling has been considered in the transportation planning process,theprojectsponsorshouldmeetwiththeFederalleadagencytodiscusswhatdecisionsoranalysescanbeadoptedfromtheplanningprocessforuseintheNEPAprocess.Forexample,theplanningprocessmayprovideabasisfordefiningtheproposed project as a tolled project from the outset. The planning process also may provide information that can be adopted regardingtheregionalimpactsandbenefitsoftolling.Bythesametoken,theplanningprocessalsomayhaverevealedsignificantpublicconcernsabout tolling,whichmaysuggest theneed tocontinueconsiderationofnon-tolledalternatives in theNEPAprocess.

Modeling Capability.OneofthemostimportantissuestoconsiderbeforeinitiatingtheNEPAprocessistheadequacyoftheexistingtravelforecastingmodel.Amodelthatmaybesufficientfornon-tolledprojectsisnotnecessarilysufficienttocarryoutanalternativesanalysisforatolledproject.Developingthenecessarycapabilitiesoftentakessignificanttimeandresources,soitisbestdonebeforetheNEPAprocessbegins.Forexample,itmaybenecessarytodevelopatime-of-daymodel,withthecapability to predict variations in volumes throughout the day, rather than a model that predicts total daily volumes and simply makesassumptionsabouttheshareofthattrafficthatwilloccurduringpeakperiods.

Study Area.Thestudyareaforaprojectwithtolledalternativesmaybebroader,insomeways,thanthestudyareaforaprojectthatonlyincludesnon-tolledalternatives.Thereasonisthattollingcanhavewide-rangingeffectsontrafficpatterns,extendingwell beyond the immediate geographic area of the project.As initial traffic forecasts are received, the project team shouldexaminetheeffectsoftollingontheregionaltrafficnetworkasawholeandensurethatthestudyarea(atleastfortraffic-relatedimpacts)isbroadenoughtoincludeotherfacilitiesthatwillbemeaningfullyaffectedbytolling.

16 InthisHandbook,anyreferencestothe“FHWA”orthe“Federalleadagency”includeastateactingastheFederalleadagencypursuanttoaNEPAassignmentprogramunder23USC326or327.



Financial Expertise.WhileprojectfinancingisnotthemainfocusoftheNEPAprocess,issuesrelatedtoprojectfinancingandprocurementoftenplayakeyroleinthealternativesanalysisforatollroadproject.Forexample:

• Non-tolledalternativescanbeeliminatedintheNEPAprocessbasedonademonstrationoffinancialinfeasibility.Financialexpertisewouldbeneededtopreparedocumentationshowingthatnon-tolledalternativesarenotfinanciallyfeasible.

• TheanalysisoftolledalternativesintheNEPAprocessrequiresassumptionstobemadeabouttollratesandthetollratestructure.Financialexpertiseisneededtoensurethattheseassumptionsarereasonable.

• TheNEPAprocesscannotbeconcludeduntiltheprojectisincludedinafiscallyconstrainedlong-rangeplan.Foratolledproject,tollrevenuesgenerallyareassumedaspartofthefiscalconstraintdemonstration,oftenalongwithotherfundingsources.Financialexpertiseisneededtopreparedocumentationshowinghowtollrevenues,combinedwithothersources,canbeusedtopayfortheproject.

Giventheimportanceoftheseissuesinatolledproject,itishighlybeneficialtohaveagencystaffandconsultantswithprojectfinancingexpertiseavailabletoassisttheNEPAteamindevelopingtolledalternativesandindraftingdocumentsthatdiscussthefinancialfeasibilityoftolledandnon-tolledalternatives.Financialexpertiseisespeciallyimportantwhendocumentingfiscalconstraintdeterminationsfortolledprojectsthatwilluseinnovativefinancingmethods. PPP Expertise.Manytollroadsaredevelopedaspublic–privatepartnerships—forexample,concessioncontractsunderwhichaprivatepartywillberesponsiblefordesign,construction,financing,operating,andmaintainingtheproject.IfaPPPisbeingconsidered, it isbeneficial todevelopplansforthePPPprocurementandtheNEPAprocessinparallelwithoneanother,sothattheNEPAstrategycaninformtheapproachtothePPPprocurementandvice-versa.Forexample,itiscriticalforthePPPprocurement to be conducted in a manner that does not create bias or the appearance of bias in the NEPA process. Early coordinationbetweentheNEPAandPPPteamscanhelptoensurethatallcommunicationsanddocumentationinvolvedinthePPPprocurementarefullyconsistentwiththisprinciple.

Legislative Authority.Thepre-NEPAstageshouldalsobeusedtoidentifyanygapsintheprojectsponsor’slegislativeauthorityrelatedtoimplementationoftheproposedtollproject.Forexample,somestateslackauthoritytoimplementtollingoncertainfacilities, or lack authority to use a PPP. If these legal issues are not resolved prior to initiation of the NEPA process, they may create uncertainty about the viability of tolled alternatives and/or procurement methods that could be used for a toll project. If thenecessarylegislativeauthorityisinplacefromtheoutsetoftheNEPAprocess,itwillhelptoreduceuncertaintyandtherebyreduce the potential for delay in the NEPA process.

3 | Developing the Purpose and Need and the Range of Alternatives

Ifthetransportationplanningprocesshasbeenusedeffectively,itwillhelptodefinethepurposeandneedandtherangeofalternativesunderconsiderationintheNEPAprocess—possiblyjustifyingtheeliminationofnon-tolledalternatives.Ifthisworkhasnotbeendone,orhasnotledtoclearresults,additionalanalysiswillbeneededwithintheNEPAprocessbeforedecidingwhethertheNEPAprocesscanfocussolelyontolledalternatives.

Deciding Whether to Include Tolling in the Purpose and Need. The concept of tolling can be incorporated directly into the purposeandneedforaproject.Forexample,ifastateDOTorMPOhasestablishedaplanforcompletinganetworkoftolledlanes,aprojectthatisintendedtocompletealinkinthatnetworkcouldincludetollingasanelementofitspurposeandneed.Thedecisiontoincorporatetollingintothepurposeandneedwouldhavetobebasedonasolidunderlyingfoundationintheplanningprocess.Ifthisapproachisfollowed,thealternativesconsideredintheNEPAstudywouldconsistentirelyoftolledalternativesthatmeetthedefinedpurposeandneedfortheproject.Ofcourse,itisalsoappropriatetoadopta“tolling-neutral”purposeandneedstatement,whichallowsforconsiderationofbothtolledandnon-tolledalternatives.

Deciding Whether to Consider Only Tolled Alternatives. As noted earlier, the range of alternatives considered can in some casesbelimitedtotolledalternatives.Obviously,thiscanbedoneifthepurposeandneedspecificallycallsforatolledproject.Evenifthepurposeandneeddoesnotcallfortolling,non-tolledalternativesstillcouldbeeliminatediftheyaredeterminedtobefinanciallyinfeasibleandthatdeterminationissupportedwithdocumentation.Ontheotherhand,eveninsituationswhereitislegallyacceptabletofocussolelyontolledalternatives,adecisionstillcouldbemadetoconsiderbothtolledandnon-tolledalternatives.Reasonstoconsiderbothnon-tolledandtolledalternativescouldinclude:

• Preservingtheoptionofselectinganon-tolledalternativeattheendoftheNEPAprocessiftollingisfoundtobeunacceptable or infeasible

• Providingthepublicwithagreateropportunitytoconsidertheprosandconsoftollingandtooffertheirperspectivesbefore a decision is made on tolling

• Avoidingdisputesovertheadequacyofthelegaljustificationforfocusingsolelyontolledalternatives



Deciding Whether to Consider Various Types of Tolled Alternatives. In many cases, the tolled alternatives considered in a NEPA document all share certain common elements—for example, all tolled alternatives involve the same toll rate structure. Butinsomecases,itmaybeappropriatetoconsiderdifferentapproachestotollingasalternativestooneanotherintheNEPAprocess(e.g.,tollingonlynewlanesvs.tollingalllanes).Inanycase,theassumptionsmadeindefiningtolledalternativesshouldbedocumentedinthesamemannerasotherdecisionsaboutthedefinitionofalternativesconsideredintheNEPAprocess.

Considering Other Revenue Sources as Alternatives to Tolling. The transportation planning process can and should be used to establish transportation funding priorities and, as such, it can be used in some cases to identify tolling as the designated revenuesource foraspecificproject. If theplanningprocesshas identified tollingas the revenuesource foraproject, thatdecisionprovidesarationaleforeliminatingnon-tolledalternatives,includingthosethatrelyontaxincreasesorotherrevenueincreasestoavoidtheneedfortolls.Wheretheplanningprocessdidnotprovidecleardirectionregardingtheneedfortolls,itisstillpossibletoengagethestatewideand/ormetropolitanplanningprocessinparallelwithNEPAandusethatprocesstoresolveunderlyingpolicyissuesregardingwhichrevenueswillbeusedforwhichprojects.

Developing Alternatives Evaluation Criteria.Thecriteria typicallyused forevaluatingnon-tolledalternativesmaynot fullycapture the potential benefits and impacts of tolled alternatives.When tolled alternatives are being considered, it may beappropriate to develop additional evaluation criteria that help to distinguish among the alternatives. Examples include:

• Equity. Tollsfrequentlyraiseconcernsaboutissuesrelatedtothefairness(equity)ofthedistributionofthebenefitsandburdensoftollcosts.Theseconcernsmayrelatespecificallytotheimpactoftollsonminorityandlow-incomegroups,aswellasbroaderconcernsaboutequityamongdifferentareasorusergroupswithintheaffectedregion. Torespondtoequityconcerns,evaluationcriteriamayneedtobedevelopedregardingtheeffectoftolledandanynon-tolledalternativesonthedistributionsoftransportationbenefitsandcosts.

• Traffic Diversion.Tollstypicallycausesometripstodivertfromthetolledroutetonon-tolledroutesortolledrouteswithlowertolls.Trafficdiversioncouldresultinincreasedcongestiononthesealternativeroutes,andtheincreasedtrafficalsocouldhaveothernegativeeffects,suchasincreasednoiseorairqualityimpacts.Therefore,itisimportanttoconsiderwheretrafficdiversionmayoccurandtodevelopappropriatecriteriaforevaluatingtrafficdiversioneffects.

• Timing of Construction. Fortollprojects,oneoftheprincipalbenefitsoftollingcouldbethepotentialfortollrevenuestoaccelerateconstructionoftheproject.Therefore,whenconsideringtolledalternativesintheNEPAprocess,itmaybeappropriatetodevelopevaluationcriteriathatspecificallyincorporatethetimingofconstructionandthepotentialforaccelerationofprojectbenefits.

• Financial Feasibility.Considerationoftollsalsomaybebasedonanassumptionthatnon-tolledalternativesarenotfinanciallyfeasible.Whenfinancialfeasibilityisconsidered,itisimportanttoexplainthecriteriausedtoassessfeasibilityanddocumenttherationalefordeterminingthatanalternativeisorisnotfinanciallyfeasible.

4 | Traffic Forecasting for Tolled Alternatives

Asdiscussedearlier,theevaluationoftolledalternativesintheNEPAprocessrequiresatraveldemandmodelwiththecapabilityto take into account theeffects of tollingon traffic volumesandpatterns.The following issues should be consideredwhenpreparingtrafficforecastsfortolledalternatives.

Defining the No-Action Alternative.Theassumptions regarding tollingunder theNo-Actionalternativewillhave importantimplications for theanalysisofboth thebenefitsand impactsofa tolledalternative. IndefiningtheNo-Actionalternative,animportant issue toconsider iswhetheranycurrentlynon-tolled facilitieswillbecome tolled in the future.Forexample, if theregion’slong-rangetransportationplanincludesacommitmenttoimplementaregion-widenetworkoftolledhighways,itmaybeappropriatetoassumeimplementationofthattollednetworkintheNo-Actionforecasts.

Defining the Tolled Alternatives.Themodelingresultsfortolledalternativeswilldependoncertainassumptionsthataremadeinthetrafficmodelregardingthephysicalandoperationalcharacteristicsoftolledalternatives.Forexample,trafficmodelingforatolledalternativenormallyrequiresassumptionstobemaderegardingsomeorallofthefollowingitems:

• Toll rates by vehicle class

• Type of tolling

• Toll rates by vehicle occupancy status

• Toll collection locations

• Tollcollectionmethods(e.g.,all-electronic)



IftollfeasibilitystudieswerecompletedpriortotheNEPAprocess,thosestudiesmayprovideabasisfordefiningtheseelementsofthetolledalternatives.Statewideorregionaltollpoliciesalsomayinformthedefinitionofthetolledalternatives.Inanycase,the NEPA process should document the assumptions used in analyzing tolled alternatives.

Sensitivity Analyses.Giventhemultiplicityofassumptionsmadeinmodelingtolledalternatives,aswellasthesensitivityoftheresultstothoseassumptions,itoftenisprudenttoperformsensitivityanalysestoassesshowdifferentassumptionscouldchangetheresultsoftheanalysis.Forexample,onepossibleapproachistoconductasensitivityanalysisthatincludesarangeofpotentialfuturetollrates.Asensitivityanalysisdoesnotnecessarilyreflecta“worstcase”scenario;rather,itprovidesageneralindicationoftheextenttowhichhigherorlowertollratescouldaffectthetrafficforecastsshownintheNEPAdocument.

Relationship to Traffic and Revenue Forecasts.TheNEPAtrafficforecastsareintendedtoprovidethebasisforaninformedFederaldecisionabouttheproject.ForprojectsinvolvingaPPPorbondfinancing,italsowillbenecessaryatsomepointtoprepare investment-grade trafficand revenue (T&R) forecasts.TheT&R forecastsserveadifferentpurpose from theNEPAforecasts: theyprovideassurancesto investorsthat trafficlevelswillbesufficienttosupport thetoll revenuesanticipatedfortheproject.Thesetwosetsoftrafficforecastsgenerallyareconductedseparatelyandinvolvedifferentmethodologies.Inmanycases investment-gradeT&Rforecastsarepreparedafter theNEPAprocess iscompleted.But if the investment-gradeT&Rforecasts are prepared during the NEPA process, it is prudent to include an explanation in the NEPA documentation of any notabledifferencesbetweentheNEPAforecastsandtheT&Rforecasts.

5 | Environmental Justice (EJ) Issues Related to Tolling

ItisessentialtogiveearlyconsiderationtoEJissueswhendevelopingthemethodologiesforenvironmentalimpactassessmentfor a tolled project. The tips in this section provide just a starting point for developing these methodologies.

Types of Effects on Minority and Low-Income Populations. AllFederalagenciesmustassessthepotentialfortheiractionstocause“disproportionatelyhighandadverse”effectsonminorityandlow-incomepopulations.Foratolledproject,thereareseveraltypesofimpactsthatmayneedtobeconsideredinanEJanalysis,suchas:

• Economic Impacts of Tolling—e.g., costs of toll payments, increased vehicle operating costs, increased delay costs (resultingfromuseofalternativeroutestoavoidtollsand/orgreatercongestiononnon-tolledroutes).

• Economic Benefits of Tolling—e.g.,reducedcongestion,improvedreliability,lowerusercostsforthosewhotakethe tolled route, increased access to job opportunities, overall increase in economic development.

• Community Impacts—e.g.,trafficdiversioncausingincreasedtrafficonneighborhoodstreets;lossofaccessifimportantroutesservingthecommunityareconvertedfromnon-tolledtotolled.

• Air Quality and Noise Impacts—e.g.,airqualityhot-spotsresultingfromincreasedcongestionatlocationswheretrafficcongestionhasincreasedasaresultoftrafficdiversion.

Inaddition,certaintollingpracticesmayhavedifferenteffectsonlow-incomegroups.Forexample,tollcollectionsystemsoftenprovidelowertollratesand/ordiscountstovehiclesequippedwithtransponders.Vehicleswithouttranspondersmayalsobechargedhigherfees.Becauselow-incomeusersmayhavegreaterdifficultyobtainingatransponder,theymaybelessabletotakeadvantageofthelowertollsanddiscountsavailabletotransponderusers.Bythesametoken,measurestopromotewideraccesstotransponderscanhelptominimizetheimpactsoftollsonlow-incomeusers.

Methodologies for Assessing Impacts on Minority and Low-Income Populations.MethodologiesforconductingEJanalysesareevolving,andthespecificEJ issuesassociatedwith tolledprojectsmayvaryconsiderably.17 Therefore, it is important to devotefocusedattention,early intheNEPAprocess,ondevelopingthemethodologiesthatwillbeusedtoassesseffectsoftollingonminorityandlow-incomepopulations.Keepthefollowingpointsinmindwhendevelopingthesemethodologies:

• Bothbeneficialandadverseeffectsshouldbeconsidered.Moreover,aprojectmayhavebothbeneficialandadverseeffectsonthesamecommunity.Forexample,aprojectcouldhavethebeneficialeffectofprovidingimprovedaccesstojobsandshortertraveltimeswhilealsohavingthenegativeeffectofincreasingthecostoftravelorincreasingcongestionontoll-freeroutes.

• AnEJanalysisisnotjustasingleanalysis,butasetofdistinctanalysesrelatingtovariousaspectsoftheproject’seffectsonlow-incomeandminoritypopulations.Forexample,anEJanalysisforatolledprojectmayinvolveanassessmentofbotheconomiceffectsandtrafficdiversioneffectsonminorityandlow-incomepopulations.Moreover,ananalysisofeconomiceffectsmayitselfinvolveseveralcomponents—forexample,tollcosts,vehicleusercosts,delay costs, etc.

17 FHWAhaspublishedseveralreportswithadviceonmethodologiesforEJanalysesandexamplesofEJanalysesfortollprojects.ThesepublicationsarelistedintheReferenceMaterialssectionofthisHandbook.



• AssumptionsabouttollratesplayakeyroleintheEJanalysis.Atabasiclevel,tollratesaffectthetrafficdiversionanalysis,whichisusedtodeterminecongestionimpactsonnon-tolledalternativeroutes.Inaddition,tollratesaffecttheout-of-pocketcoststousersofthetollfacility,andthusareakeypartofanyassessmentofeconomicimpactsonminorityandlow-incomepopulations.Tolldiscounts,ifany,alsocanplayanimportantroleinanassessmentofeconomicimpactsonminorityandlow-incomepopulations.

• DifferentstudyareasmaybeappropriatefordifferentaspectsoftheEJanalysis.Forexample,themethodologyforevaluatingtrafficdiversion,noise,orairqualityeffectsonminorityandlow-incomepopulationsmayfocusprimarilyonthosepopulationsintheprojectarea,whilethemethodologyforassessingtheeconomiceffectsonroadusersmaytakeintoaccountminorityandlow-incomepopulationswithinabroadergeographicarea(the“travelshed”).

• Methodologiesthataresimpleandlow-costmayproducemisleadingresults.Forexample,aneconomiceffectsanalysis that focuses solely on toll costs may be misleading if it does not also take into account other components ofeconomicimpactsandbenefits—forexample,thereductioninoperatingcostsforusersofthetolledfacility,thebenefitsofincreasedreliability,ortheincreasedoperatingcostsresultingfromcongestiononotherfacilities.

• InformationimportantfortheEJanalysismaybedifficulttoobtain.Forexample,ananalysisofeconomicimpactsonminorityandlow-incomepopulationsmayrequiresomeunderstandingofthedemographiccompositionoftheusersofthetollfacilityaswellastheusersofalternativeroutes.Therearevariouswaystoobtainthistypeofdata,suchasusersurveys,polls,andlicense-platesurveys,butthesemethodsofteninvolvesignificantlimitationsordifficulties.Therefore,earlyattentionshouldbegiventoidentifyingthepopulationsthatcouldbeaffectedbytolling.

• TheNEPAdocumentwillfacilitatecompliancewithFHWAOrder6640.23AiftheNEPAdocumentdiscussesminoritypopulationsandlow-incomepopulationsdistinctlyratherthanlumpingthemtogetherinasingleanalysisof“EJimpacts.”Theorderincludesseparaterequirementsregardingapprovalofprojectswithdisproportionatelyhighandadverseeffectsonlow-incomepopulationsandprojectswithsucheffectsonminoritypopulations.18

• Keepinmindthatanagency’sobligationtoconsidereffectsinaNEPAdocumentisgovernedbya“ruleofreason.”WithanEJanalysis,aswithanyotheranalysis,anagencyhasdiscretiontodeterminethataparticulartypeofEJanalysisisnotfeasiblegiventhedifficultyorcostofobtainingthedata,orthepotentialforintrusionontheprivacyofindividualmembersoflow-incomeorminoritycommunities.Therationaleforanysuchdecisionsshouldbedocumentedintheprojectfile.

Determining If Effects Are “Disproportionately High and Adverse.”FHWAOrder6640.23Astatesthatanaction’seffectsonminorityand low-incomepopulationare“disproportionatelyhighandadverse” if theeffects(1)are“predominatelyborne”byaminoritypopulationand/oralow-incomepopulation;or(2)willbesufferedbytheminoritypopulationand/orlow-incomepopulationandthoseeffectsare“appreciablymoresevereorgreaterinmagnitudethantheadverseeffectthatwillbesufferedbythenonminoritypopulationand/ornon-low-incomepopulation.”19Whenconsideringwhetheraneffectis“disproportionatelyhighandadverse,”practitionersmaytakethefollowingfactorsintoaccount:plannedmitigationmeasures,offsettingbenefitstotheaffectedminorityandlow-incomepopulations,thedesign,thecomparativeimpacts,andtherelevantnumberofsimilarexistingsystemelementsinnon-minorityandnon-low-incomeareas.20

Outreach to Minority and Low-Income Populations.AnEJanalysisshouldbeaccompaniedbypublicoutreachefforts tominorityandlow-incomecommunitiesintheprojectarea,andtheresultsofthatpublicoutreachshouldinturninformtheEJanalysis.Fortolledprojects,thescopeofthepublicoutreacheffortshouldreflectthetypesofimpactsthattollingcouldcause.Typically,theseimpactswillincludebothlocalizedeffectsonminorityandlow-incomecommunitiesintheimmediatevicinityoftheprojectandeffectsoncommunitieslocatedwithinthebroaderareaservedbytheproject.

Mitigation for Impacts on Minority and Low-Income Populations.Dependingontheresultsoftheimpactsanalysis,itmayalsobeappropriate toconsideradoptingmeasures tomitigate theeffectsof tollingonminorityand low-incomepopulations.Examples include:

• Incorporatingprojectelementsthatbenefitpublictransitusers(e.g.,park-and-ridelots)

• Paying for improvements in public transit service (e.g., purchasing transportation vehicles)

• Dedicatingashareoftollrevenuestopublictransitservice(iftheprojectgeneratesexcesstollrevenue)

• Allowingpublictransitvehiclestousethetollfacilitywithoutpayingatoll

• Providingreducedtollsforvehicleswithtolltransponders

18 FHWAOrder6640.23A(June14,2012),Sec.8(f),(g).19 FHWAOrder6640.23A(June14,2012),Sec.5(g).20 SeeFHWA,“EnvironmentalJusticeReferenceGuide”(April1,2015),p.13.



• Taking steps to encourage transponder usage through actions such as: – Providing transponders at reduced or no cost – Settingalowminimumbalanceforloadingtransponders – Targetedoutreachtominorityandlow-incomecommunitiestoencouragetransponderusage

• Providingtolldiscountsforfrequentusersand/orspecificpopulations

• Implementingtraffic-controlmeasurestoreducetrafficdiversionthroughminorityandlow-incomecommunities

• Improvingtoll-freealternativeroutestooffsettraffic-diversioneffectsonthoseroutes

Theremaybefinancial,administrative,orevenlegalconstraintsthatmakecertaintypesofmeasuresinfeasibletoimplement.Forexample,theremaybenoexcesstollrevenuesthatcanbededicatedfortransitservice.Inaddition,somestatelawsrequiretollrevenuestobeusedsolelyfortheroadnetworkorevenforthefacilityonwhichthetollswerecollected.Thesetypesofconstraintsshouldbe taken intoaccountwhendecidingwhatmitigationmeasures, if any,will beadopted for tolling-relatedimpacts.

In addition to considering mitigation measures, the analysis also should consider aspects of the project itself that inherently benefitminorityand/orlow-incomepopulations.Forexample,atollprojectmayincreasethespeedandreliabilityofpublictransitservicesonroutesthatusethetollfacility.Iftheprojecthasnotablebenefitstominorityand/orlow-incomecommunities,thosebenefitsshouldbecapturedintheEJanalysis.

Compliance with FHWA Order 6640.23A.Asnotedearlier,FHWAOrder6640.23AestablishesconditionsunderwhichFHWAcanapproveanalternativethathaseffectsonminoritypopulationsand/orlow-incomepopulations.CompliancewiththisordershouldbedocumentedinthefinalEIS,ROD,orFONSI.Importantpointstokeepinmind:

• FHWAmayconsiderminimizationandmitigationmeasuresassupportforconcludingthattheprojectwillnothavedisproportionatelyhighandadverseeffectsonlow-incomeandminoritypopulations.Forthistobedone,themeasuresshouldbeidentifiedascommitmentsandincludedintheRODorotherNEPAdecisiondocument.

• Insomecases,evenwithsuchcommitments,FHWAmaystillconcludethattheprojectwillhavedisproportionatelyhighandadverseeffectsonlow-incomeand/orminoritypopulations.Ifthatconclusionisreached,FHWAwillapprovetheprojectonlyundercertainconditions,asdefinedinFHWAOrder6640.23A.(SeeBackgroundBriefing.)

6 | Addressing Other Direct and Indirect Impacts of Tolled Alternatives

Thissection identifiesbroadcategoriesof impacts inaddition toenvironmental justice thatshouldbeconsideredaspartofanimpactsanalysisforatollproject.Thelevelofdetailandmethodologyusedfortheseimpactanalyseswilldependonthecircumstances of each project.

Direct (Footprint) Impacts.Tollingissometimesviewedasanoperationalcharacteristicthatdoesnotaffectthefootprintofaroadway,butinfacttollingcanaffecttheprojectfootprintinanumberofways.Tollingmayrequireadditionalright-of-waytoaccommodatetoll-collectionfacilities.Tollingalsocouldreducethefootprint(bycomparisontoanon-tolledalternative)iftollingreducestrafficvolumestothepointthatafacilitywithfewerlanescanaccommodateprojecteddemand.Italsoispossible,ofcourse,thattollingwillhavenoeffectontheprojectfootprint.

Air and Noise Impacts. Because tolling affects traffic volumes, it has the potential to affect any impacts that are directlydependent on traffic volumes—principally, air quality andnoise. Inmost cases, themethodologies for air quality andnoiseimpactsanalysesthemselvesdonotchangeforatolledproject;rather,theresultsofthoseanalysesmaybedifferentfortolledalternatives,becausethetrafficvolumesusedinthoseanalysesareaffectedbytolling.Forexample,trafficdiversionresultingfromtollingcouldresultinincreasedtrafficnoiseimpactsinlow-incomeandminoritycommunities.

Transportation System Impacts.Tollingonamajorfacilitycanhavearippleeffectontransportationchoicesmadebyusersthroughoutthetransportationsystem.Oneobviousexampleisthatsomeuserswillchoosetoavoidthetollbyshiftingtonon-tolledroutesorshiftingtheirtripstotimesofdaywhentollsarelower.Ontheotherhand,theavailabilityofacongestion-freerouteonthetollroadmayactuallyincreasethroughputonthatrouteduringthepeakhour.Andthecostofthetoll,combinedwithincreasedcongestionontoll-freeroutes,maycausesomeuserstoshiftfromautomobiletraveltopublictransit.Thetransportationimpactsanalysisshouldseektocapturethesewide-rangingeffectsoftollingonthetransportationsystem,totheextentthattheycanbemeaningfullyestimatedbythetrafficmodel.

Regional Equity Impacts.InadditiontoequityeffectsthatmaybeconsideredaspartoftheEJanalysis,atollroadmayalsoraisebroaderconcernsaboutregionalequity.Forexample,inalargemetropolitanarea,aproposaltotollonemajorrouteintothecentralbusinessdistrictwhileleavinganotherroutetoll-freemaybeperceivedasunfairlyfavoringonepartoftheregion



overanother.Concernsaboutthefairnessofthetollingproposalwilllikelybecloselyconnectedwithabroadersetofconcernsabout theoveralldistributionof transportation fundingaswellas transportation taxesand fees.These issues—which relatetotransportationfundingpolicies,notenvironmental impacts—canbedifficult toaddressinaNEPAdocument.Nonetheless,they are often central to the public debate regarding a proposed toll project. Therefore, some consideration should be given to addressingconcernsaboutregionalequitywhenconsideringtheimpactsoftolledalternatives.

Cumulative Impacts.Inadditiontotheissuesnormallyconsideredinacumulativeimpactsanalysisforahighwayproject,atollprojectmayinvolveadditionalissues,suchasthetransportationandsocio-economiceffectsassociatedwithimplementingmultipletollprojectswithinaregion.Thecumulativeimpactsanalysisshouldconsiderwhetherthepopulationaffectedbytheproposedprojectalsowouldbeaffectedbyotherrecentorreasonablyforeseeablefuturetollprojects.

7 | Coordinating the NEPA Process with Project Financing and Procurement

Formanytollprojects,theNEPAprocessmustbecoordinatedwithaseparateprocessinwhichthestateDOTorotherpublicagencyreviewscompetingproposalsforaPPP.AsdiscussedintheBackgroundBriefing,itispossibletoinitiatetheprocurementprocess,selecttheprivate-sectorpartner,andgivetheprivate-sectorpartnernoticetoproceedonpreliminaryengineeringwork,allbeforecompletionoftheNEPAprocess.Thisflexibilitymakesitpossibletoaccelerateprojectdevelopment,butalsoraisesissuesthatwillneedtobecarefullyconsideredinordertoprotecttheintegrityoftheNEPAreview.Examplesinclude:

Interdependence of NEPA and Procurement Decisions.TheNEPAprocessandtheprocurementprocessareinter-dependent.Ononehand,theprocurementprocessrequiressomedefinitionofthebasicprojectlocation,designconcept,andmitigationrequirements—andthesebasicproject featuresaredefinedthroughthedecision-makingprocess inNEPA.Butontheotherhand, the NEPA process for a toll project must be informed by some understanding of the project features that potential private investorsconsidertobeessential;otherwise,theNEPAprocessmayresultinapprovalofaprojectthatmeetsenvironmentalrequirements but is unworkable economically as a toll road.Thus, if a state anticipates using some form of public–privatepartnership,itisusefulfortheNEPAteamtobeginthinkingabouttheRFPasearlyaspossible.

Factors to Consider in Determining Timing of the RFP.ItisimportanttoconsidertheappropriatetimingoftheRFPinrelationtomajormilestonesintheNEPAprocess.Forexample,willtheRFPbeissuedbeforeoraftertheannouncementofapreferredalternative?IndecidingthetimingoftheRFP,somefactorstoconsiderinclude:

• Schedule for beginning project construction

• PotentialfortheRFPprocesstogeneratenewideasthatrequiremodificationofalternatives

• PotentialfortheRFPprocesstoaffectpublicconfidenceintheNEPAprocess

• PotentialtonegotiatemorefavorablepricesfordesignandconstructionbycommencingtheRFPprocessearlier

Role of Private Sponsor in NEPA Process.TheresponsibilityforNEPAcompliancerestswithFederalagencies.Forahighwayproject, a stateDOTmayplayasubstantial role inhelpingFHWAcarryout theseNEPAresponsibilities.Privatedeveloperscannot take over these NEPA responsibilities, but can contribute technical information, including proposed engineering plans, environmentaldata,andothermaterials.ItmaybehelpfultoestablishacommunicationsprotocolregardinginteractionsbetweentheNEPAteamandpotentialprivate-sectorpartners.ThisprotocolcouldidentifythetypesofinformationthatcanbeprovidedtothepotentialdevelopersbytheNEPAteam,aswellasthetypeofinformationthatcanbesubmittedbythepotentialdevelopersto the NEPA team.

8 | Considering Tolled Alternatives in a Re-Evaluation or Supplemental NEPA Document

Formanytollprojects, theconsiderationof tollingfirstarisesaftertheNEPAprocessisunderwayorevenafter ithasbeencompleted.Inthesesituations,theNEPAteamisfacedwithadecisionabouthowtoadaptanexistingorcompletedNEPAprocesstoincorporateconsiderationoftolledalternatives.Typically,are-evaluationisprepared,andinsomecasesasupplementalEISorsupplementalEAisrequired.

Assessment of Previous Analysis and Decisions.Theextentof thenewanalysisneededwilldependonwhathasbeendonepreviouslytoconsidertolledalternatives.IfthepreviousNEPAdocumentfocusedjustonnon-tolledalternatives,itwillbenecessarytodevelopandevaluatenewalternativesthatincludetolls.Inaddition,ifthepreviousNEPAdocumentspecificallyconsideredand rejected tolling, thatdocumentmay includefindings thatneed tobe revisitedandupdated to reflectcurrentconditions and policies. For practitioners, thismeans that a critical early step is to examine the previousNEPA documentthoroughlyandassesshowtollingwasaddressed.Theanalysisinthatdocumentthenbecomesthestartingpointfordeterminingwhatadditionalanalysisisneeded.



Assessment of Public Expectations and Outreach Needed.Whenaprojectisapprovedwithouttolls,andanagencylaterannounces that the project is being considered for tolling, there is a clear need for early and ongoing public outreach—not only tocomplywithNEPA,buttoaddressconcernsandobjectionsthatarisefromsuchanimportantchange.Theneedforpublicoutreachwillbeevengreater if theproject isbeingdevelopedinanareawheretollsarerelativelyuncommon,orwherethetollingproposalinvolvesfeaturesthatarenewtothearea,suchascongestionpricing.Thepublicinvolvementeffortshouldalsotakeintoaccountthedistinctiveeffectsassociatedwithtolling.Forexample,tollingmayexpandthenumberofminorityandlow-incomecommunitiesthatneedtobeengagedinthepublicoutreacheffort.

Developing Tolled Alternatives.Developingtolledalternativescanbeasubstantialeffortinitsownright;itisnotnecessarilyasimplematterofaddingtollstothepreviouslyapprovedalternative.Theoperationalcharacteristicsofthetollfacilitywillneedtobedefined,andtheremaybereasonstoconsiderdifferentapproachestotollingasalternativestooneanother.Inaddition,itispossiblethatphysicalelementsofthealternativeitselfwillchangewhentollsareincluded.Forexample,insomecases,tollsreducetrafficvolumestotheextentthatasmallerfacility(fewerlanes)isacceptable.Tollsalsoresultintrafficdiversion,whichinturnmayrequireimprovementstootherroadstobeincludedaspartoftheproject.Giventhecomplexityoftheseissues,theprocessofdefiningandrefiningthetolledalternativesoftentakesconsiderabletime,bothbeforeandduringpreparationofthere-evaluationorsupplementalNEPAdocument.

Effect on Previous Alternatives Screening Decisions.Thepreparationofare-evaluationorsupplementalEISorEAdoesnotnecessarilyinvolverevisitingalternativesscreeningdecisionsmadeearlierintheNEPAprocess.Butitisprudenttoconsidertheeffectofanynewinformationonpriorscreeningdecisionstoensurethatthosedecisionsremainvalid.Forexample,it isimportant to considerwhether alternativeswere eliminated in the screening process based on performance characteristicssimilartothosethatareconsideredacceptablewhenanalyzingtolledalternatives.If inconsistenciesareidentified, itmaybenecessary to revisit those screening decisions. There may still be valid reasons to eliminate those alternatives, but the rationale for doing so may need to be updated or expanded.

Updates to Traffic Forecasting Model.Ifthepreviousstudyconsideredonlynon-tolledalternatives,theremaybeaneedforsignificanttechnicalworktodevelopthemodelingcapabilityneededtodevelopforecastsfortolledalternatives.Inaddition,eveniftollswereconsideredpreviously,theremaybeaneedforimprovementstothemodelnowthattolledalternativesarebeingconsideredindetail.Forexample,themodelmayneedtheabilitytoconsidertrafficdiversionissuesinspecificlocations,anddevelopingthatcapabilityatthenecessarylevelofdetailmayrequireimprovementstothemodel.

Assessing Changes in Benefits.Intermsoftheirtransportationbenefits,tolledalternativesoftenperformmorepoorlythannon-tolledalternatives.Thebasicreasonisthatthetolledalternativegenerallycarrieslesstrafficthananon-tolledalternativewhilecausinggreatercongestiononotherroutesduetotrafficdiversion.Thereductioninbenefitsisnotnecessarilyproblematicaslongasitisdisclosed.Itispossible,however,thattrafficvolumeswithtollscouldbesomuchlowerthattheyraisequestionsaboutwhethertheprojectstillmeetsthepurposeandneed.Inaddition,iftheperformanceoftolledalternativesisverylow,itmaycallintoquestionthebasisforeliminatingotherlow-performingalternativesinthescreeningprocess.Theover-archingissuetoconsideriswhethertheadditionoftollingwouldreduceprojectbenefitsinawaythatweakenstherationalefordecisionsmadeearlier in the study process.

Assessing Changes in Impacts.TheconsiderationoftolledalternativescanaffectmanyaspectsoftheimpactsanalysisinaNEPAdocument.Atthemostobviouslevel,tollscandramaticallyaffecttrafficforecasts,duetothetendencyoftraffictodivertawayfromthetolledfacilitytoothernon-tolled(orlower-tolled)routes.Thosechangesintrafficpatternscanaffectenvironmentalimpactsthatarelinkedtotraffic(suchasairandnoise),andcanalsochangetheproject’ssocio-economicimpacts,includingimpactson low-incomeandminoritypopulations.Thesechanges in impactsmay, in turn, requirereconsiderationoffindingsmadeunderotherlaws,ifthosefindingshingedonanalysesrelatedtotraffic.Forexample,theleadagencymayneedtore-assesscertainfindingsmadeunderSection106oftheNationalHistoricPreservationAct,Section4(f)oftheU.S.DepartmentofTransportationAct,orSection7oftheEndangeredSpeciesAct.

Deciding What Additional NEPA Review Is Needed.ConsideringtollingforthefirsttimeaftercompletionoftheNEPAprocesswillrequire,ataminimum,are-evaluationofthecompletedstudy.There-evaluationwillneedtoconsideralloftheimpactsofthetolledalternativesbycomparisontotheimpactsofthenon-tolledalternativeapprovedinthepreviousstudy.

• IftheoriginaldocumentwasanEAorcategoricalexclusion,FHWAmustdecidewhethertheimpactsassociatedwithtollingwouldbesignificant.Ifso,thenanEISwouldberequired.Ifnot,FHWAcouldprepareare-evaluationorsupplementalEAdocumentingtheimpactsassociatedwithtolling,andthenissuearevisedFONSI.

• IftheoriginaldocumentwasanEIS,FHWAmustdecidewhethertollingwouldresultinsignificantimpactsthatwerenotpreviouslyconsidered.Ifso,asupplementalEISwouldberequired.Ifnot,FHWAcouldprepareare-evaluationorEAdocumentingtheimpactsassociatedwithtolling,andthenissuearevisedROD(orequivalentdocument)approving the tolled project.



Reference Materials

Statutes,regulations,andguidancedocumentscitedinthisHandbookareavailableontheAASHTOCenterforEnvironmentalExcellencewebsite,http://environment.transportation.org.

Planning–Environmental Linkages

FHWA,“GuidanceonUsingCorridorandSub-AreaPlanningtoInformNEPA”(April2011)

23CFRPart450(transportationplanningregulations)

23USC168(planning–environmentallinkageauthority)

Tolling and Pricing

FHWA,“NEPAAnalysisforTollRoads”(Oct.15,2004)

FHWA,RoadPricing:TollingPrograms(website)

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/revenue/road_pricing/tolling_pricing

Fiscal Constraint

FHWA,“FinancialPlanningandFiscalConstraintforTransportationPlansandProgramsQuestions&Answers”(April15,2009)

FHWA,”TransportationPlanningRequirementsandTheirRelationshiptoNEPAProcessCompletion”(Jan.28,2008)

FHWA,“SupplementtoJanuary28,2008TransportationPlanningRequirementsandTheirRelationshiptoNEPAProcessCompletion”(Feb.9,2011)

FHWA,“FinancialPlanningandFiscalConstraintforTransportationPlansandProgramsQuestions&Answers”(updatedOct.19,2015)

Major Projects Financial Plans

FHWA,“MajorProjectFinancialPlanGuidance”(Dec.2014)

Environmental Justice

FHWA,Order6640.23A,“FHWAActionstoAddressEnvironmentalJusticeinMinorityPopulationsandLow-IncomePopulations”(June14,2012)

FHWA,“EnvironmentalJusticeReferenceGuide”(April2015)

FHWA,“EnvironmentalJusticeEmergingTrendsandBestPracticesGuidebook”(Nov.2011)

FHWA,“EnvironmentalJusticeandNEPAintheTransportationArena:ProjectHighlights”(Feb.2013)

FHWA,“GuidanceonEnvironmentalJusticeandNEPA”(Dec.16,2011)

Public–Private Partnerships and Design–Build Procurement

FHWA,“Public–PrivatePartnershipOversight:HowFHWAReviewsP3s”(Jan.2015)

FHWA,“Public–PrivatePartnershipConcessionsforHighwayProjects:APrimer”(Oct.2010)

23CFRPart636(design-buildregulations)



http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/revenue/road_pricing/tolling_pricing

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

PRACTITIONER’SHANDBOOKSAVAILABLEFROMAASHTOCENTERFORENVIRONMENTALEXCELLENCE:

Copyright © 2016, AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials) Center for Environmental Excellence.

1 MaintainingaProjectFileandPreparinganAdministrativeRecordforaNEPAStudy2 RespondingtoCommentsonanEnvironmentalImpactStatement3 ManagingtheNEPAProcessforTollLanesandTollRoads4 TrackingCompliancewithEnvironmentalCommitments/UseofEnvironmentalMonitors5 UtilizingCommunityAdvisoryCommitteesforNEPAStudies6 ConsultingunderSection106oftheNationalHistoricPreservationAct7 DefiningthePurposeandNeedandDeterminingtheRangeofAlternativesfor

Transportation Projects8 DevelopingandImplementinganEnvironmentalManagementSysteminaState

DepartmentofTransportation9 UsingtheSAFETEA-LUEnvironmentalReviewProcess(23U.S.C.§139)10 Using the Transportation Planning Process to Support the NEPA Process11 ComplyingwithSection4(f)oftheU.S.DOTAct12 AssessingIndirectEffectsandCumulativeImpactsunderNEPA13 DevelopingandImplementingaStormwaterManagementPrograminaTransportation

Agency14 ApplyingtheSection404(b)(1)GuidelinesinTransportationProjectDecision-Making15 ComplyingwithSection7oftheEndangeredSpeciesAct

ForadditionalPractitioner’sHandbooks,pleasevisittheCenterforEnvironmentalExcellencebyAASHTOwebsiteat:http://environment.transportation.org

CommentsonthePractitioner’sHandbooksmaybesubmittedto: CenterforEnvironmentalExcellencebyAASHTO444NorthCapitolStreet,NW,Suite249Washington,DC20001Telephone:202-624-5800E-mail:[email protected]:http://environment.transportation.org

(AASHTO

LOGO)


mailto:[email protected]



http://www.transportation.org/

AASHTO PRACTITIONER’S HANDBOOK - … · AASHTO PRACTITIONER’S HANDBOOK MANAGING THE NEPA...

Documents

Transcript of AASHTO PRACTITIONER’S HANDBOOK - … · AASHTO PRACTITIONER’S HANDBOOK MANAGING THE NEPA...