[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 231 (Friday, November 29, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60738-60740]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-30513]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Federal Highway Administration
[Docket No. 96-047-NO2]
Study of State Costs and Benefits Associated With Repeal of the
National Maximum Speed Limit (NMSL)
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Department of Transportation
(DOT).
ACTION: Final notice announcing NHTSA/FHWA plan to conduct a study of
State costs and benefits associated with the NMSL repeal, as required
by Section 347 of the National Highway System (NHS) Designation Act
(Pub. L. 104-59).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice is being issued to announce NHTSA's and FHWA's
plan to conduct the study (hereinafter referred to as the ``NHS Act
study'') of the State costs and benefits associated with repeal of the
National Maximum Speed Limit (NMSL), as required by the National
Highway System (NHS) Designation Act (Pub. L. 104-59). NHTSA and FHWA
(hereinafter referred to as ``the agencies'') published a notice in the
Federal Register (61 FR 31212) on June 19, 1996, inviting comments,
suggestions, and recommendations from State highway and traffic safety
officials, highway safety organizations, researchers, and others on the
agencies' proposed strategy for conducting the NHS Act study. The
proposed strategy, as described in the initial notice, included a draft
study outline, the minimum requirements for specific data from the
States that have raised their speed limits, and a proposed schedule for
completing the NHS Act study in order to meet the September 30, 1997,
deadline established by Section 347 of the Act. This notice summarizes
comments from the States and others on the proposed NHS Act Study and
outlines the agencies' plan to meet the legislative requirement, in
view of the concerns noted by the States.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: In NHTSA, Delmas Johnson, National
Center for Statistics and Analysis, Telephone 202/366-5382, Fax 202/
366-7078, Internet address is djohnson@nhtsa.dot.gov. In FHWA, Suzanne
Stack, Office of Highway Safety, Telephone 202/366-2620, Fax 202/366-
2249, Internet address is sjstack@intergate.dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The National Maximum Speed Limit (NMSL),
enacted by the Congress during the Arab oil embargo of 1973 to conserve
fuel, was initially set at 55 miles per hour (MPH). By March 1974, all
States were in compliance with the NMSL. The Congress later passed
legislation to make the NMSL permanent and to require the States to
certify that the NMSL was being enforced. Congress also passed
legislation requiring that a study of the benefits of the NMSL be
undertaken. The National Academy of Sciences' Transportation Research
Board (TRB) conducted this study and in 1984, published its special
report, 55: A Decade of Experience.1 The TRB study, while one of
the most thorough and extensive examinations of this important safety
issue, recognized the inherent difficulties associated with attempts to
accurately estimate the safety, economic, and energy benefits of the
NMSL. Even with these difficulties, the TRB study concluded that many
lives and taxpayer dollars were saved each year with the NMSL. The TRB
study also recognized several unresolved issues, including whether the
control of the speed limit is a state or Federal responsibility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 55: A Decade of Experience, TRB Special Report 204, National
Research Council, Washington DC, 1984.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1987, Congress passed legislation granting the states the
authority to raise the speed limit to no more than 65 MPH on the rural
Interstate system and certain rural freeways. By 1988, forty states had
raised limits on rural Interstates to 65 MPH, bringing approximately 90
percent of the 34,000 rural Interstate mileage to 65 MPH. In 1995, the
National Highway System Designation Act (hereinafter referred to as
``the NHS Act'', Pub. L. 104-59) was passed, establishing the National
Highway System and eliminating the Federal mandate for the NMSL.
Section 347 of the NHS Act required the Secretary of Transportation to
study the impact of actions to raise speed limits above 55/65 MPH, ``in
cooperation with any State which raises any speed limit in such State
to a level above the level permitted under section 154 of title 23,
United States Code * * * '', due September 30, 1997.
The agencies proposed a strategy for meeting the study
requirements, as stated in Section 347 of the Act, in the initial
Federal Register (61 FR 31212) notice, published on June 19, 1996. The
proposed strategy emphasized cooperation between the agencies and the
States that have increased their speed limits, as stated in the
legislation, for preparation of the study, along with a proposed
schedule for completing the NHS Act study. The agencies recognized in
the initial notice that the proposed NHS Act study outline, while
comprehensive in addressing the costs and benefits of increased speed
limits, posed difficulties based on the proposed schedule, particularly
in terms of data availability. The initial notice requested comments on
the reasonableness of the proposed draft study outline, the feasibility
of the proposed schedule, and the availability of state specific data.
This notice summarizes the comments received addressing the issues
raised in the initial notice and describes the agencies' plan to meet
the legislative requirement in view of the concerns identified in the
comments.
Summary of Comments
A total of 39 official comments to the docket were received from
State agencies, private citizens, National Motorists Association (NMA)
members, and others. Nineteen (19) States were represented in the
official docket comments. Eighteen (18) of the 19 States commenting to
the docket have increased limits since the NMSL was repealed or are
planning to do so. Many of the comments from the States included
concerns regarding the complexity and/or comprehensiveness of the
agencies' proposed study outline, often in terms of the burden that
would be placed upon the States. Many of the
[[Page 60739]]
States commented regarding the unavailability of data and the apparent
difficulty in meeting the proposed schedule. Comments from private
citizens generally supported the repeal of the NMSL, with one
exception. Several NMA members and officials commented, expressing
views supporting the NMSL repeal and criticizing the proposed study
outline. Comments were also received from the National Association of
Governor's Highway Safety Representatives (NAGHSR), the Advocates for
Highway and Auto Safety (AHAS), the American Trucking Association
(ATA), and a consulting firm, JCW Consulting.
Cooperation and participation from the States with increased speed
limits is critical to conducting the NHS Act study, as described in
Section 347 of the Act. The States commenting to the docket recognized
this critical issue and generally commented in three specific areas:
Study Methodology, Data Availability, and Scheduling.
1. Study Methodology
While some of the States submitting comments to the docket
indicated that the proposed approach was ``* * * solid'' or ``* * *
reasonable'', most commented that the approach was too ambitious. The
States also expressed concerns, however, that the approach was too
broad, posed an additional burden, and would be difficult to accomplish
due to the unavailability of data. NAGHSR commented that the proposed
approach is reasonable ``* * * only if all states' data were available
* * *'' AHAS commented that while the proposed approach was
appropriate, ``. . . reliance on state analyses and failure to consider
other . . . issues'' were important concerns.
2. Data Availability
The issue of data availability was addressed to some extent in all
of the comments received from the States, along with some of the
comments from private citizens and JCW Consulting. All of the States
submitting comments to the docket expressed concerns related to the
unavailability of data to meet the proposed NHS Act study outline.
Among the reasons cited for lack of available data were: specific data
not presently collected by the states, e.g., speed monitoring, medical
costs related to crash injuries; not possible to provide data in time
to meet the proposed schedule; lack of resources; data currently
collected inadequate for determining benefits and costs specifically
related to increased speeds. Some States suggested that the agencies
develop standards for estimating benefits and costs, particularly in
the absence of specific state data collection efforts.
3. Scheduling
The States commenting to the docket consistently voiced the concern
that the proposed schedule was ambitious, unreasonable, impossible, or
unrealistic. One State suggested extending the proposed schedule one
year past the September 30, 1997, deadline to avoid creating a
``second-rate report.'' Three of the 18 States commenting to the docket
indicated that plans existed to study the impact of increased speed
limits in their respective State. However, all three States indicated
that results from such studies would not be available in time to submit
to the agencies for inclusion in the NHS Act Study. A concern regarding
the before and after time frame of one year, as specified in Section
347 of the Act, was also expressed by several States and the ATA. ATA
suggested that the agencies use a ten year baseline for conducting the
study. Many of the States commented that one year of data after the
increased limits became effective may not be adequate for analysis to
determine impact. This issue is further complicated in that only nine
States (Arizona, California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Montana, Nevada,
Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and Wyoming) may have had increased speed
limits in place for at least nine months of calendar year 1996. This
would mean, at best, that only one calendar year of data for the time
frame after the increased speed limit was in place would be available
for these nine States. States with increased speed limits becoming
effective later in 1996, therefore, would not have one full year of
final data to forward to the agencies prior to the report due date of
September 30, 1997.
Analytical Challenges
Due to the concerns expressed by the States and others in the areas
of study methodology, data availability, and scheduling, the agencies
are faced with several major analytical challenges to conducting the
NHS Act study. Several of the States specifically indicated that
certain types of data, e.g., decreased travel time, increased fuel
consumption, and increased or decreased medical costs, would not be
available in time for inclusion in the report or was not presently
being collected. Without this type of information from the States, it
will be difficult for the agencies to address the entire range of
benefits due to increased speed limits in the NHS Act study. The issue
of data availability is further complicated in that many States are
selectively increasing speed limits on certain road segments and/or
roadway types, e.g., 4-lane roads, rather than systemwide, e.g., all
Interstates. While the selective application of increased speed limits
is indicative of the cautiousness on the part of many States in
adopting higher limits, it further complicates the issue of data
availability by necessitating the analysis of data by road segment. At
the national level, determining the impact of increased speed limits on
traffic fatalities will be limited to the latest available data from
the Fatal Accident Reporting System (FARS) for calendar 1996, focusing
on the nine States that have had increased speed limits in place for
most or all of 1996. Finally, determining the impact of increased speed
limits related to the amount of vehicle miles traveled and the
distribution of vehicle speeds on affected roadways will be limited at
best to the preliminary information available to the agencies in the
summer of 1997.
The agencies' final plan for conducting the NHS Act study, in view
of the States' concerns and the analytical challenges discussed above,
is described in the following section.
NHS Act Study Data
The initial Federal Register notice described several major
categories of data the agencies needed, as a minimum, for addressing
critical components of estimating the impacts of increasing speed
limits. Based on the comments from the States and others in the area of
data availability, the agencies plan to conduct the NHS Act study using
the data described in the following table. This table represents a
subset of the minimum data requirements included in the initial Federal
Register notice.
[[Page 60740]]
NHS Act Study Data and Outline
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Performing
Purpose Data description organization
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background.................. Effective Dates of NHTSA/FHWA and
Change in Limits, States.
Roadway Types, New
Limit(s), Types of
Vehicles Covered.
Determining the Impact of Fatalities--1996 NHTSA--national
Increased Speed Limits on Fatal Accident estimates and
Traffic Fatalities. Reporting System impact on limited
(FARS). number of States.
Estimating Costs............ Economic Cost of NHTSA--national
Crashes--Before vs. estimates.
After Speed Limit
Changes, Costs of
Fatalities.
Determining Exposure........ Vehicle Miles FHWA--VMT:
Traveled and Speed preliminary
Distribution. estimates, if
available; Speed
monitoring: from
those States making
voluntary
submissions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in Analytical Challenges, the agencies' ability to
address the impacts of increased speed limits on injury and other
crashes and estimating benefits in the NHS Act study will depend on
what the States are able to provide within the study schedule. The
agencies plan to use a methodology similar to that used in NHTSA's last
Report to Congress on the Effects of the 65 mph Speed Limit Through
1990 (DOT-HS-807-840, June 1992). This report illustrates the type of
analysis of crash data that can be performed for estimating the effect
of speed limit changes. In this report, a time series regression model
was used to estimate the data, using annual data from 1975 through 1986
as the baseline period, and 1987 through 1990 as the 65 mph period.
Fatalities on rural interstate highways in the 38 states that increased
their speed limits in 1987 were modeled as a function of fatalities on
all other roads in these 38 states, and a dummy (0,1) variable
representing the absence/presence of the 65 mph speed limit. This
approach resulted in a model that fit the data well (i.e., 88 percent
of the variation explained). In general, a longer time frame permits
more stable estimates than simply comparing the year before vs. the
year after, and thus, would be preferable for the current report.
Schedule for Conducting the NHS Act Study
The agencies plan to conduct the NHS Act study within the following
schedule in order to meet the deadline established by Section 347 of
the Act.
Schedule for Conducting NHS Study
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Milestone
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Insert date of publication Publish final notice on NHS Act study
in the Federal Register]. plan and summary of comments received in
response to initial notice.
April 1-May 30, 1997......... Informally canvas States on the
availability of any State-specific
studies on the impact of increased speed
limits.
June 30, 1997................ NHTSA/FHWA complete draft NHS Act study
report including consolidation of
individual State studies, as available.
July 1997.................... Draft NHS study circulated for review
within DOT (and specific States, as
appropriate).
August 1997.................. Final NHS study completed and reviewed/
approved by DOT.
September 30, 1997........... Final NHS study sent to Congress.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NHS Act study as outlined above will provide the agencies and
Congress with a preliminary assessment of the impact of increased speed
limits for a limited number of States. The agencies plan to continue
informally to communicate with the States regarding the impact of
increased speed limits, as more States have had the increased limits in
effect for longer time periods.
Issued: November 22, 1996.
Donald C. Bischoff,
Executive Director, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
Anthony R. Kane,
Executive Director, Federal Highway Administration.
[FR Doc. 96-30513 Filed 11-27-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
