Center for Environmental Excellence by AASHTO CENTER HOME  
skip navigation
 New on the Website
 Web Watch
 Get Website Updates
 Get Broadcast E-mail
 Share Info with AASHTO
 Site Directory
 AASHTO Home
Print This Page
Section 4(f)

Overview | Recent Developments New| Research, Documents & Reports
Case Studies | Organizations & Training


Recent Developments Archive  
2008
 
«Return to Recent Developments
 
TRB Panel Issues Report on DOT's Draft Section 4(f) Study Plan

A committee formed to review the U.S. Department of Transportation’s study on implementation of changes to the Section 4(f) process has delivered a letter report to transportation secretary Mary E. Peters. The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) required DOT to streamline the Section 4(f) evaluation process and to conduct a study of the implementation of the associated regulatory changes.  In its first letter report, the TRB committee found that given the lack of baseline data and the qualitative nature of the issues under study, an experimental study design is not possible. Nonetheless, the committee made several suggestions for how the proposed study design can be revised. For more information, link to the Letter Report. (7-1-08)

[back to top]

 
Agencies Issue Technical Correction to Section 4(f) Regulation

The Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration have issued a technical correction to the final rule on Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act issued on March 12, 2008 (73 FR 13368). The correction clarifies a provision in the Section 4(f) regulations that could be misinterpreted to require an unintended step in the Section 4(f) approval process. The correction clarifies paragraph 774.3(c), which governs the steps that must be taken to choose an alternative when all alternatives use Section 4(f) property and it has already been determined that there are no feasible and prudent avoidance alternatives. The technical correction adds the phrase "from among the remaining alternatives that use Section 4(f) property" so that paragraph 774.3(c) now reads "If the analysis in paragraph (a)(1) of this section concludes that there is no feasible and prudent avoidance alternative, then the Administration may approve, from among the remaining alternatives that use Section 4(f) property, only the alternative that: …". For more information, link to the Federal Register notice. (6-3-08)

[back to top]

 
FHWA, FTA Issue Final Rule on Section 4(f), Clarify 'Prudent and Feasible' Standard

A final regulation to amend Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act in accordance with the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) was issued by the Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration. The rule defines "feasible and prudent avoidance alternative"outlines criteria for selecting the alternative that causes the "least overall harm"; defines and implements the procedures for determining a de minimis impact; and updates exceptions to Section 4(f) requirements. To access the final rule, link here. FHWA also summarized the regulation in its March Successes in Stewardship newsletter. (03/12/08)

[back to top]

 

Overview | Recent Developments New| Research, Documents & Reports
Case Studies | Organizations & Training

skip navigation