Proposed Rule2025-12174

Project Management Oversight

Primary source

Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.

Published
July 1, 2025

Issuing agencies

Transportation DepartmentFederal Transit Administration

Abstract

FTA is proposing to modify the applicability of project management oversight by raising the total cost and Federal investment thresholds to align with the statutory thresholds for Small Starts projects under FTA's Capital Investment Grant program.

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 124 (Tuesday, July 1, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 124 (Tuesday, July 1, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28690-28693]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-12174]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Transit Administration

49 CFR Part 633

[Docket No. FTA-2025-0010]
RIN 2132-AB59


Project Management Oversight

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: FTA is proposing to modify the applicability of project 
management oversight by raising the total cost and Federal investment 
thresholds to align with the statutory thresholds for Small Starts 
projects under FTA's Capital Investment Grant program.

DATES: Comments should be filed by September 2, 2025. FTA will consider 
comments received after that date to the extent practicable.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by docket number FTA-2025-
0010, by any of the following methods:
    <bullet> Federal Rulemaking Portal: <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. 
Follow the instructions for sending comments.
    <bullet> Fax: (202) 493-2251.
    <bullet> Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, 
Room W12-140, Washington, DC, 20590-0001.
    <bullet> Hand Delivery/Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room 
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 
5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name 
and docket number or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this 
rulemaking. All comments received will be posted without change to 
<a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, including any personal information 
provided.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or 
comments received, go to <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. Background 
documents and comments received may also be viewed at the U.S. 
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, Docket 
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, 
DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. EST, Monday through Friday, 
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For program matters, contact Corey 
Walker, Office of Program Management (TPM), (202) 366-0826 or 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#bdded2cfd8c493cadcd1d6d8cffdd9d2c993dad2cb"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e7848895829ec990868b8c8295a7838893c9808891">[email&#160;protected]</span></a>. For legal matters, contact Mark Montgomery, 
Office of Chief Counsel, (202) 366-1017 or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5835392a33763537362c3f37353d2a21183c372c763f372e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="dcb1bdaeb7f2b1b3b2a8bbb3b1b9aea59cb8b3a8f2bbb3aa">[email&#160;protected]</span></a>. 
Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents

I. Executive Summary
    A. Statutory Authority
    B. Background
    C. Summary of Provisions
II. Regulatory Analyses and Notices

I. Executive Summary

    This NPRM proposes to amend the PMO regulation at 49 CFR part 633. 
The proposed rule would modify the applicability of project management 
oversight by raising the total cost threshold from $300 million to $400 
million and the Federal investment threshold from $100 to $150 million, 
to align with the statutory thresholds for Small Starts projects under 
FTA's Capital Investment Grant (CIG) program. This amendment would 
reduce the number of projects subject to project management oversight 
requirements and therefore reduce regulatory burden.

A. Statutory Authority

    This rulemaking is issued under the authority of 49 U.S.C. 5327, 
which requires the Secretary to conduct oversight of major capital 
projects and to promulgate a rule for that purpose that includes a 
definition of major capital project to delineate the types of projects 
governed by the rule.

B. Background

    Recognizing a compelling need to strengthen the management and 
oversight of major capital projects, in the Surface Transportation and 
Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (STURAA) (Pub. L. 100-17) 
(April 2, 1987), Congress authorized FTA's predecessor agency, the 
Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA), to conduct oversight 
of major capital projects and to promulgate a rule for that purpose. 
The statute, now codified at 49 U.S.C. 5327, authorizes FTA to obtain 
the services of project management oversight contractors (PMOCs) to 
assist FTA in overseeing the expenditure of Federal financial 
assistance for major capital projects. Further, the statute requires 
FTA to promulgate a regulation that includes a definition of ``major 
capital project'' to identify the types of projects governed by the 
rule. Accordingly, UMTA promulgated a rule for oversight of major 
capital projects on September 1, 1989, at 49 CFR part 633 (54 FR 
36708). At that time, the average total cost of CIG projects was $266 
million (not adjusted for inflation). The UMTA regulation defined 
``major capital project'' as any project for the construction of a new 
fixed guideway or extension of an existing fixed guideway or a project 
involving the rehabilitation or modernization of an existing fixed 
guideway with a total project cost of $100 million or more. The rule 
limited covered projects to those receiving funds made available under 
sections 3, 9, or 18 of the Urban Mass

[[Page 28691]]

Transportation Act of 1964, as amended; 23 U.S.C. 103(e)(4); or section 
14(b) of the National Capital Transportation Amendments of 1979.
    By 2011, the annual dollar value of the Federal transit capital 
programs was nearly five times the level authorized under STURAA in 
1987, and the number of active PMOC task orders was more than double 
the number in 1987. Furthermore, FTA funded a larger number of projects 
with a total cost of more than one billion dollars that presented 
significant oversight challenges. On September 13, 2011, FTA published 
a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) (76 FR 56378) that proposed to: 
(1) enable FTA to identify the necessary management capacity and 
capability of a sponsor of a major capital project more clearly; (2) 
spell out the many facets of project management that must be addressed 
in a project management plan; (3) tailor the level of FTA oversight to 
the costs, complexities, and risks of a major capital project; (4) set 
forth the means and objectives of risk assessments for major capital 
projects and; (5) articulate the roles and responsibilities of FTA's 
PMOCs.
    After the NPRM was published, however, the Moving Ahead for 
Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) (Pub. L. 112-141) (July 6, 
2012) expanded the scope of the project management oversight 
requirements to cover major capital projects for public transportation 
under any provision of Federal law. Moreover, MAP-21 shifted the 
initiation of project management oversight to the project development 
phase and removed the statutory requirement that recipients of 
financial assistance for projects with a total cost of $1 billion 
submit an annual financial plan. Given the fundamental changes to the 
project management oversight requirements and scope, FTA withdrew the 
NPRM (78 FR 16460) to reexamine its proposed definition of major 
capital project and its policy and procedures for risk assessment. 
Subsequently, the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act 
(Pub. L. 114-94) (December 4, 2015) further amended 49 U.S.C. 5327 to 
limit project management oversight to quarterly reviews, absent a 
finding that more frequent oversight was necessary, and mandated that 
the Secretary prescribe regulations outlining a process for at-risk 
recipients to return to quarterly reviews.
    FTA has become much more knowledgeable about the risks common to 
major capital projects, having conducted its own risk assessments since 
2005, witnessed some project sponsors' lack of management capacity and 
capability and appropriate project controls for some projects, and 
studied the reasons for cost and schedule changes on many major capital 
projects. Consequently, on September 23, 2020, following a notice of 
proposed rulemaking (84 FR 44590) and an opportunity for comment, FTA 
published a final rule (85 FR 59672) that changed the applicability of 
the regulation by shifting the definition of a ``major capital 
project'' from one based on the type of project or total project cost 
to one based on both the amount of Federal financial assistance and the 
total project cost, which FTA views as a more appropriate benchmark 
than the type of project or total capital cost of a project alone.
    The rule applied a project cost threshold to all fixed guideway 
capital projects. As a default, the rule raised the total project cost 
threshold to $300 million or more and required that the project receive 
$100 million or more in Federal investment to be subject to project 
management oversight. A key consideration for selecting these 
thresholds was that they reflect the thresholds Congress chose to 
distinguish Small Starts projects from New Starts projects in the CIG 
program. New Starts projects have more steps to complete in the CIG 
process and tend to be more complex, potentially requiring more 
oversight. Reducing the number of lower-risk Small Starts projects 
undergoing project management oversight will allow FTA to focus on 
higher-risk New Starts projects while yielding annual cost savings to 
FTA and its recipients.
    Subsequently, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Pub. L. 
117-58; November 15, 2021) amended 49 U.S.C. 5309 to raise the 
thresholds for Small Starts projects in the CIG program to $400 million 
or more in total costs and $150 million or more in Federal investment. 
Accordingly, FTA proposes to amend the definition of ``major capital 
project'' under 49 CFR 633.5 to align with these statutory thresholds, 
consistent with the rationale in its 2020 final rule.

C. Summary of Provisions

    FTA proposes to amend the definition of ``major capital project'' 
in 49 CFR 633.5 by raising the total cost and Federal investment 
thresholds to match those established for Small Starts projects under 
49 U.S.C. 5309. The current regulation defines the term as a project to 
construct, expand, rehabilitate, or modernize a fixed guideway of $300 
million or more that receives $100 million or more in Federal financial 
assistance. This NPRM proposes to raise the thresholds to $400 million 
and $150 million, respectively.

II. Regulatory Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866 and 13563 (Regulatory Review)

    E.O. 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review''), as supplemented by 
E.O. 13563 (``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review''), directs 
Federal agencies to assess the benefits and costs of regulations and to 
select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits when possible. 
OMB has determined the proposed rule is not significant within the 
meaning of E.O. 12866 and has not reviewed the rule under that order.
    Project management oversight requirements apply to all major 
capital projects. The current definition of a ``major capital project'' 
includes all projects involving the construction, expansion, 
rehabilitation, or modernization of a fixed guideway with a total 
project cost of $300 million or more and $100 million or more in 
Federal investment. The proposed rule would increase the total project 
cost threshold to $400 million and the Federal investment threshold to 
$150 million.
    Removing project management oversight from projects with total 
costs between $300 and $400 million and Federal investment between $100 
million and $150 may increase the risk of materially exceeding budget 
or falling behind schedule for some projects; however, the potential 
negative impacts are not quantifiable. First, it is not the case that 
project management oversight eliminates the risk of cost or schedule 
overruns, nor that the lack of project management oversight necessarily 
implicates a high risk of such overruns.
    Second, falling under the total cost and Federal investment 
thresholds does not preclude a project from receiving project 
management oversight. Section 633.5(e)(2) allows the Administrator to 
determine on a case-by-case basis that certain projects should be 
subject to project management oversight based on an assessment of risk, 
which would include an analysis of the likelihood of budget and 
schedule overruns. Of the 33 CIG projects currently in construction, 
FTA utilized this provision to designate six as major capital projects 
based on this risk assessment to receive additional oversight.
    The proposed rule would result in cost savings for recipients and 
for FTA by reducing the number of capital projects subject to project 
management oversight. Removing the oversight requirements would reduce 
labor hours for oversight procedures, which include

[[Page 28692]]

attending meetings, preparing quarterly reports and other requested 
documents, and accompanying contractors at project construction sites.
    Currently, there are 59 CIG and formula-funded major capital 
projects for public transportation subject to project management 
oversight. Seventeen of those projects have total costs between $300 
million and $400 million or Federal investments between $100 million 
and $150 million. Eight of the projects between the existing and 
proposed thresholds have received grant agreements and are in 
construction. Those projects would not be impacted by the new 
thresholds under this proposed rule if it becomes a final rule. 
However, the remaining nine projects still in project development would 
no longer meet the definition of major capital project and not be 
subject to project management oversight requirements if the new 
thresholds become final before the project receives a grant agreement.
    In 2020, FTA estimated that the oversight required approximately 1 
FTE (full-time equivalent) of recipient time (2,080 hours) and 0.5 FTE 
of FTA staff time (1,040 hours) per project per year. Removing 
oversight requirements for nine projects annually would result in 
annual savings of 18,720 hours for recipients and 9,360 hours for FTA 
staff.
    To estimate cost savings for project sponsors, FTA used May 2024 
occupational wage data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the latest 
available as of May 2025, in the ``Transit and Ground Passenger 
Transportation'' industry (North American Industry Classification 
System code 485000).\1\ To estimate the wages of agency staff 
completing the auditing requirements, FTA used the ``General and 
Operations Managers'' job category (code 11-1021). FTA used median 
hourly wages ($42.45) as a basis for the estimates, multiplying the 
wages by 1.62 ($42.45 x 1.62 = $68.69) to account for employer 
benefits.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2025. ``May 2024 National 
Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates: United States: NAICS 
485000--Transit and Ground Passenger Transportation.'' <a href="https://data.bls.gov/oes/#/industry/485000">https://data.bls.gov/oes/#/industry/485000</a>.
    \2\ Multiplier derived using Bureau of Labor Statistics data on 
employer costs for employee compensation in December 2024 (<a href="https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.htm">https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.htm</a>). Employer costs for state and 
local government workers averaged $63.46 an hour, with $39.22 for 
wages and $24.23 for benefit costs. To estimate full costs from 
wages, one would use a multiplier of $63.46/$39.22, or 1.62.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To estimate cost savings for FTA, FTA estimated an hourly wage of 
$64.06 for oversight staff, based on the hourly wage rate for federal 
GS (General Schedule) employees at step 5 of the GS-13 grade level in 
the Washington, DC locality pay area.\3\ The hourly rate was then 
multiplied by 1.62 to account for employer benefits ($64.06 x 1.62 = 
$103.65).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Office of Personnel Management. 2023. ``Salary Table 2024-
DCB.'' <a href="https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salary-tables/pdf/2024/DCB_h.pdf">https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salary-tables/pdf/2024/DCB_h.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule would result in annual cost savings of $2.3 
million (18,720 recipient hours x $68.69 + 9,360 FTA hours x $103.65) 
in undiscounted 2024 dollars, $1.9 million at a 3 percent discount rate 
(discounted to 2024), and $1.5 million at a 7 percent discount rate 
over the ten year period from 2025 to 2035. Additionally, there would 
be cost savings for future FTA projects between $300 million and $400 
million in total cost or $100 million and $150 million in Federal 
investment, that would have otherwise been subject to project 
management oversight under the current thresholds. However, because 
projects under the CIG and formula programs comprise a broad range of 
complexity, total costs, and amounts of Federal investment and vary 
from year to year, these cost savings are unquantifiable.

Executive Order 14192 (Deregulatory Action)

    E.O. 14192 (``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation'') 
requires that for ``each new [E.O. 14192 regulatory action] issued, at 
least ten prior regulations be identified for elimination.'' 
Implementation Guidance for E.O. 14192, issued by OMB (Memorandum M-25-
20, March 25, 2025) defines an E.O. 14192 deregulatory action as ``an 
action that has been finalized and has total costs less than zero.'' 
This proposed rule, if finalized, is expected to have total costs less 
than zero, and therefore is expected to be an E.O. 14192 deregulatory 
action.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) 
requires Federal agencies to assess the impact of a regulation on small 
entities unless the agency determines that the regulation is not 
expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number 
of small entities.
    This proposed rule would not change any requirements for public 
transportation projects with a total cost of $400 million or more and 
Federal investment of $150 million or more, nor for projects with a 
total cost of less than $300 million and Federal investment of less 
than $100 million. The NPRM would narrow the applicability of project 
management oversight requirements, thereby reducing burden on capital 
projects with total costs between $300 million and $400 million and 
Federal investments between $100 million and $150 million. The only 
small entities impacted by the proposed rule would be project sponsors 
of projects with total costs and amounts of Federal investment between 
the existing and proposed thresholds, and that impact would be a burden 
reduction. FTA therefore certifies that the proposed rule would not 
have a significant effect on a substantial number of small entities.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    FTA has determined that this proposed rule does not impose unfunded 
mandates, as defined by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. 
L. 104-4, March 22, 1995). This rule does not include a Federal mandate 
that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more in any one 
year, adjusted for inflation, by State, local, and tribal governments 
in the aggregate or by the private sector.

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism Assessment)

    E.O. 13132 requires agencies to assure meaningful and timely input 
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies 
that may have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the 
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government. This action has been analyzed in accordance with the 
principles and criteria contained in E.O. 13132, dated August 4, 1999, 
and FTA determined this action will not have a substantial direct 
effect or sufficient federalism implications on the States. FTA also 
determined this action will not preempt any State law or regulation or 
affect the States' ability to discharge traditional State governmental 
functions.

Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)

    The regulations implementing E.O. 12372 regarding intergovernmental 
consultation on Federal programs and activities do not apply to this 
rulemaking.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 
3501 et seq.), and OMB implementing regulation at 5 CFR 1320.8(d), 
Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) for each collection of

[[Page 28693]]

information they conduct, sponsor, or require through regulations. The 
costs and burdens associated with the information collection 
requirements under 49 CFR part 633 are included in the individual 
information collections of FTA's major capital programs. FTA has 
analyzed this proposed rule under the Paperwork Reduction Act and 
determined that it does not impose additional information collection 
requirements for the purposes of the Act above and beyond the existing 
information collection clearances from OMB. If the final rule results 
in a measurable reduction in burden hours or costs associated with 
existing information collections, FTA will revise the relevant 
information collection requests accordingly in compliance with the 
Paperwork Reduction Act.

National Environmental Policy Act

    FTA has analyzed this rule for the purposes of the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). In accordance with 42 U.S.C. 
4336 and DOT NEPA Order 5610.1C, FTA has determined that this rule is 
categorically excluded pursuant to 23 CFR 771.118(c)(4), ``[p]lanning 
and administrative activities that do not involve or lead directly to 
construction, such as: [p]romulgation of rules, regulations, and 
directives.'' This rulemaking is not anticipated to result in any 
environmental impacts, and there are no unusual or extraordinary 
circumstances present in connection with this rulemaking.

Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation)

    FTA has analyzed this proposed rule under E.O. 13175, dated 
November 6, 2000, and it will not have substantial direct effects on 
one or more Indian Tribes; will not impose substantial direct 
compliance costs on Indian Tribal governments; and will not preempt 
tribal laws. Therefore, a Tribal summary impact statement is not 
required.

Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)

    FTA has analyzed this action under E.O. 13211, Actions Concerning 
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or 
Use. FTA has determined this action is not a significant energy action 
under that order and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect 
on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, a Statement 
of Energy Effects is not required.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into 
any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment 
(or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, 
business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act 
Statement in the Federal Register at 65 FR 19477 (April 11, 2000).

Regulation Identifier Number

    A Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) is assigned to each regulatory 
action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. The 
Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda in 
April and October of each year. The RIN contained in the heading of 
this document can be used to cross-reference this proposed rule with 
the Unified Agenda.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 633

    Government contracts, Grant programs-transportation, Mass 
transportation, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
    In consideration of the foregoing, and under the authority of 49 
U.S.C. 5327 and 5334, and the delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.91, 
the Federal Transit Administration proposes to amend title 49, Code of 
Federal Regulations, part 633, as set forth below:

PART 633--PROJECT MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT

0
1. The authority citation for part 633 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5327; 49 U.S.C. 5334; 49 CFR 1.91.

0
2. Revise Sec.  633.5 to read as follows:


Sec.  633.5  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Except as provided in Sec.  633.19, Major capital project means a 
project that:
    (1) * * *
    (i) Has a total project cost of $400 million or more and receives 
Federal funds of $150 million or more; and
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated in 49 CFR 
1.91.
Tariq Bokhari,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2025-12174 Filed 6-27-25; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-57-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Indexed from Federal Register on July 1, 2025.

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.