Notice2026-03648
Guidance on Multimodal State Freight Plans and State Freight Advisory Committees
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
February 24, 2026
Effective
February 24, 2026
Issuing agencies
Transportation Department
Abstract
The Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act included a provision requiring each State that receives funding under the National Highway Freight Program (NHFP) to develop a State Freight Plan (the Plan) that provides a comprehensive approach for the immediate and long-range planning activities and investments of the State with respect to freight, and meets all the required plan contents listed in the Act. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) added several new required elements and updated procedures for State Freight Plans. This guidance document updates and replaces the prior guidance on State Freight Plans and State Freight Advisory Committees issued on January 12, 2023. It also updates the guidance to be consistent with recent Executive Orders issued by President Trump and DOT Orders issued by Secretary Duffy. Except for any requirements specified in the statutes cited in the guidance document, the contents of this guidance document do not have the force and effect of law and do not bind the public in any way. The contents will not be relied upon by the Department as a separate basis for affirmative enforcement action or other administrative penalty. Conformity with any recommendations in this guidance document, as distinct from statutory requirements, is voluntary only, and nonconformity will not affect rights and obligations under existing statutes.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 36 (Tuesday, February 24, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 36 (Tuesday, February 24, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8950-8965]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-03648]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary of Transportation
[Docket No. DOT-OST-2026-0760]
Guidance on Multimodal State Freight Plans and State Freight
Advisory Committees
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of Transportation (OST), Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA),
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), Maritime Administration (MARAD), Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Great Lakes St.
Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation (GLS); U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT or Department).
ACTION: Notice of Guidance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act
included a provision requiring each State that receives funding under
the National Highway Freight Program (NHFP) to develop a State Freight
Plan (the Plan) that provides a comprehensive approach for the
immediate and long-range planning activities and investments of the
State with respect to freight, and meets all the required plan contents
listed in the Act. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)
added several new required elements and updated procedures for State
Freight Plans. This guidance document updates and replaces the prior
guidance on State Freight Plans and State Freight Advisory Committees
issued on January 12, 2023. It also updates the guidance to be
consistent with recent Executive Orders issued by President Trump and
DOT Orders issued by Secretary Duffy. Except for any requirements
specified in the statutes cited in the guidance document, the contents
of this guidance document do not have the force and effect of law and
do not bind the public in any way. The contents will not be relied upon
by the Department as a separate basis for affirmative enforcement
action or other administrative penalty. Conformity with any
recommendations in this guidance document, as distinct from statutory
requirements, is voluntary only, and nonconformity will not affect
rights and obligations under existing statutes.
DATES: Unless otherwise stated in this Notice, this guidance is
effective February 24, 2026.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Baumer, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: 202-366-1092. Email:
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#440236212d232c3004202b306a232b32"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f4b286919d939c80b4909b80da939b82">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 167, States receiving
funding under the NHFP are required to have a State Freight Plan
developed in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 70202 in order to obligate those
funds. Section 21104 of IIJA, Public Law 117-8, 135 Stat. 429 (2021),
added new required contents and updated procedures for State Freight
Plans, including reducing the update cycle for State Freight Plans from
five years to four. Following the passage of IIJA, the Department
issued revised guidance on State Freight Plans and State Freight
Advisory Committees to address changes made by IIJA. This document
replaces the prior guidance on State Freight Plans and State Freight
Advisory Committees issued on January 12, 2023. The updated guidance
document describes the required contents of State Freight Plans under
49 U.S.C. 70202 and continues to encourage States strongly to establish
State Freight Advisory Committees, as directed by 49 U.S.C. 70201. The
updates to the guidance document ensure consistency with recent
Executive Orders issued by the President and DOT Orders issued by
Secretary Duffy, as well as an attempt to make the guidance easier to
follow.
The following list of required elements that all State Freight
Plans must address for each of the transportation modes is provided in
49 U.S.C. 70202:
1. An identification of significant freight system trends, needs,
and issues with respect to the State;
2. A description of the freight policies, strategies, and
performance measures that will guide the freight-related transportation
investment decisions of the State;
3. When applicable, a listing of--
A. Multimodal critical rural freight facilities and corridors
designated within the State under 49 U.S.C. 70103 (National Multimodal
Freight Network);
B. Critical rural and urban freight corridors designated within the
State under 23 U.S.C. 167 (NHFP);
4. A description of how the Plan will improve the ability of the
State to meet the national multimodal freight policy goals described in
49 U.S.C. 70101(b) and the NHFP goals described in 23 U.S.C. 167;
5. A description of how innovative technologies and operational
strategies, including freight intelligent transportation systems, that
improve the safety and efficiency of the freight movement, were
considered;
6. In the case of roadways on which travel by heavy vehicles
(including mining, agricultural, energy cargo or equipment, and timber
vehicles) is projected to deteriorate the condition of the roadways
substantially, a description of improvements that may be required to
reduce or to impede the deterioration;
7. An inventory of facilities with freight mobility issues, such as
bottlenecks, within the State, and for those facilities that are State
owned or operated, a description of the strategies the State is
employing to address those freight mobility issues;
8. Consideration of any significant congestion or delay caused by
freight movements and any strategies to mitigate that congestion or
delay;
9. A Freight Investment Plan that, subject to 49 U.S.C.
70202(c)(2), includes a list of priority projects and describes how
funds made available to carry out 23 U.S.C. 167 would be invested and
matched;
10. The most recent commercial motor vehicle parking facilities
assessment conducted by the State under 49 U.S.C. 70202(f);
11. The most recent supply chain cargo flows in the State,
expressed by mode of transportation;
12. An inventory of commercial ports in the State;
13. If applicable, consideration of the findings or recommendations
made by any multi-State freight compact to
[[Page 8951]]
which the State is a party under 49 U.S.C. 70204;
14. The impacts of e-commerce on freight infrastructure in the
State;
15. Considerations of military freight;
16. Strategies and goals to decrease--
A. The severity of impacts of extreme weather and natural disasters
on freight mobility,
B. The impacts of freight movement on local air pollution,
C. The impacts of freight movement on flooding and stormwater
runoff, and
D. The impacts of freight movement on wildlife habitat loss; and
17. Consultation with the State Freight Advisory Committee, if
applicable.
Each of these required elements is discussed more fully in Section
V of the guidance below.
Guidance on State Freight Plans and State Freight Advisory Committees
Table of Contents
I. Background and Program Purpose
II. Policy
III. Funding
IV. State Freight Advisory Committees
V. State Freight Plans--Required Elements
VI. Other Encouragements
VII. Data and Analytical Resources for State Freight Planning
I. Background and Program Purpose
The purpose of this document is to provide guidance on the
implementation of 49 U.S.C. 70201 (State Freight Advisory Committees)
and 70202 (State Freight Plans), as established under the Fixing
America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act; Pub. L. 114-94) and
subsequently modified by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
(IIJA; Pub. L. 117-58). This document updates and replaces the prior
guidance on State Freight Plans and State Freight Advisory Committees,
issued on January 12, 2023. Except for any requirements specified in
the statutes cited in the guidance document, the contents of this
guidance document do not have the force and effect of law and do not
bind the public in any way. The contents will not be relied upon by the
Department as a separate basis for affirmative enforcement action or
other administrative penalty. Conformity with any recommendations in
this guidance document, as distinct from statutory requirements, is
voluntary only, and nonconformity will not affect rights and
obligations under existing statutes.
State Freight Plans can help States contribute to the goals of the
National Multimodal Freight Policy in 49 U.S.C. 70101(b) and the goals
of the NHFP in 23 U.S.C. 167(b). See 49 U.S.C. 70202(b)(4). DOT
believes strongly that these goals provide essential direction and
support for the improvement of freight transportation across all modes.
Sections 1117 and 1118, respectively, of the Moving Ahead for
Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21; Pub. L. 112-141) required the
Secretary to encourage States to establish Freight Advisory Committees
and to develop State Freight Plans. Stakeholder representation
requirements and qualifications were added by 49 U.S.C. 70201 and 49
U.S.C. 70202 further requires each State receiving funding under 23
U.S.C. 167 (NHFP) to develop a comprehensive State Freight Plan that
includes both immediate and long-term freight planning activities and
investments. Section 70202 specifies certain minimum contents for State
Freight Plans and provides that such plans may be developed separate
from or be incorporated into the Long-Range Statewide Transportation
Plans required by 23 U.S.C. 135.
Each State that receives NHFP funds is required by 23 U.S.C. 167 to
develop a freight plan, consistent with the requirements under 49
U.S.C. 70202, that provides a comprehensive plan for the immediate and
long-range planning activities and investments of the State with
respect to freight. State Freight Plans developed pursuant to 49 U.S.C.
70202 are multimodal in scope. State Freight Plans are meant to be
comprehensive, and as such, they should assist State planning that
involves all relevant freight infrastructure (highway, rail, waterway,
air, and pipeline, as appropriate to that State).
Each State Freight Plan must include, among other items, a Freight
Investment Plan that contains projects or phases of projects only if
funding for completion reasonably can be anticipated to be available
within the time period identified in the Freight Investment Plan (49
U.S.C. 70202(b)(9), (c)(2)). The State Freight Plan must, when
applicable, also include a list of the multimodal critical rural
freight facilities and corridors the State designates under 49 U.S.C.
70103 and the critical rural freight corridors and critical urban
freight corridors (if these have been identified at the time of
submission of the Plan) designated by the State and Metropolitan
Planning Organizations (MPOs) under 23 U.S.C. 167 (49 U.S.C.
70202(b)(3)). FHWA issued separate guidance on the implementation of 23
U.S.C. 167, which describes the NHFP program purpose, its governing
authorities, funding amount, the National Highway Freight Network,
program eligibility, State performance management and other program
details. FHWA is updating this guidance to comply with Executive
Orders.
II. Policy
DOT strongly encourages all States to establish State Freight
Advisory Committees. See 49 U.S.C. 70201(a). Advisory Committees can be
a valuable part of the process needed to develop a thorough State
Freight Plan by ensuring adequate stakeholder engagement in the
formulation of those Plans. If a State establishes a State Freight
Advisory Committee, the State must consult with its respective advisory
committee while developing or updating its State Freight Plan. See 49
U.S.C. 70202(b)(17). Bringing together the perspectives and knowledge
of public and private partners, including shippers, carriers, and
infrastructure owners and operators, can be important for developing a
comprehensive and relevant State Freight Plan.
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 70202, each State that receives funding for
the NHFP shall develop a comprehensive freight plan that provides for
the immediate and long-range planning activities and investments of the
State with respect to freight. Further, 23 U.S.C. 167(h)(4) specifies,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, beginning on December 4,
2017, a State may not obligate funds apportioned to the State under 23
U.S.C. 104(b)(5) (i.e., the NHFP) unless the State has developed a
freight plan in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 70202 (except that the
multimodal component of the Plan may be incomplete before an NHFP fund
obligation may be made). All States have met these requirements.
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 70202, as amended by IIJA, State Freight Plans
are required to be updated no less frequently than every four years.
There is no statutory allowance for an extension on the period of
eligibility of the Plan. If a State's four-year update cycle has
expired, then unless the State has developed its State Freight Plan
consistent with the existing requirements, the State may not obligate
NHFP funds (23 U.S.C. 167(h)(4)).
To enable access to funding under the NHFP and for other reasons,
DOT strongly encourages all States to be as comprehensive as possible
in the multimodal considerations in their State Freight Plan. DOT
understands the effects of freight transportation are often regional,
corridor-level, or national in scope. In addition, freight planning can
be more complex because it often involves many actors, including
privately owned and operated
[[Page 8952]]
infrastructure. DOT strongly encourages States to consider the
performance and modal interaction of the overall freight system when
updating their State Freight Plans. State Freight Plans that consider
all the relevant transportation modes; integrated transportation and
land use design; and aspects of freight performance, such as congestion
reduction, safety, infrastructure condition, economic vitality, system
reliability, dwell time, and externalities that impact communities
should lead to better policies, investments, and performance
outcomes.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For more information on performance measures, particularly
on highways, please see: FHWA, Transportation Performance
Management, <a href="http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/TPM">www.fhwa.dot.gov/TPM</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The State Freight Plans can also be used to communicate the freight
performance measurement targets established pursuant to MAP-21,
progress and strategies to goal achievement, any extenuating
circumstances, and other information relevant to this requirement.
DOT Order 2100.7, Ensuring Reliance Upon Sound Economic Analysis in
Department of Transportation Policies, Programs, and Activities
(effective January 29, 2025), directs the Department's policymaking
activities to be based on sound economic principles and analysis
supported by rigorous cost-benefit analyses and data-driven
decisions.\2\ State Freight Plans can assist the Department by
providing data and information necessary to integrate this principle
more fully into DOT program implementation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ DOT Order 2100.7, Ensuring Reliance Upon Sound Economic
Analysis in Department of Transportation Policies, Programs, and
Activities, available at: <a href="https://www.transportation.gov/mission/ensuring-reliance-upon-sound-economic-analysis-department-transportation-policies-programs">https://www.transportation.gov/mission/ensuring-reliance-upon-sound-economic-analysis-department-transportation-policies-programs</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The State Freight Plan may be developed as a document separate
from, or incorporated into, the Long-Range Statewide Transportation
Plan required by 23 U.S.C. 135. See 49 U.S.C. 70202(c). If the State
Freight Plan is separate from the Long-Range Statewide Transportation
Plan,\3\ both should explain how the projects and actions listed in the
State Freight Plan are compatible with and reflected in the Long-Range
Statewide Transportation Plan. If the two plans are combined, the Long-
Range Statewide Transportation Plan should include a separate section
focused on freight transportation and must include the elements
specified in 49 U.S.C. 70202.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 23 U.S.C. 135(f) (Long-Range Statewide Transportation Plan).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Due to the flexibility provided by statute, DOT will review State
Freight Plans separately from the process for approving Long-Range
Statewide Transportation and State Rail Plans, which are governed by
other statutes. For consideration of compliance with statutory
provisions of State Freight Plans, States should submit their State
Freight Plans to the FHWA Division Office in their State. DOT will
review the freight plans for compliance with 49 U.S.C. 70202 and will
notify the State whether its updated State Freight Plan complies with
the statutory requirements described below.
DOT released a multimodal, National Freight Strategic Plan on
September 3, 2020.\4\ DOT is required to update the National Freight
Strategic Plan every five years to comply with the requirements under
49 U.S.C. 70102, as enacted by the FAST Act and amended by IIJA.
Updates to the National Freight Strategic Plan will be based on the
national goals and priorities set forth in 49 U.S.C. 70101. The
National Freight Strategic Plan has and will continue to incorporate,
to the extent possible, issues and trends identified in State Freight
Plans to capture State and local priorities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ DOT, National Freight Strategic Plan, <a href="https://www.transportation.gov/freight/NFSP">https://www.transportation.gov/freight/NFSP</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Funding
There is no formula or discretionary funding specifically
designated for State Freight Plans or to establish or operate State
Freight Advisory Committees. Nevertheless, there are several Federal
funding resources with eligibility to support Plan development and
planning or Advisory Committee activities. The following is not an
exhaustive list, as other Federal funding may be eligible for data
collection, analysis, or planning related to discrete elements of the
State Freight Plan requirements.
In general, States may use funding apportioned under the Surface
Transportation Block Grant Program (23 U.S.C. 133) for developing State
Freight Plans, as well as funding set aside from apportioned programs
for the State Planning and Research Program (23 U.S.C. 505). Similarly,
States may use funds from the NHFP to support freight planning and
outreach, including efforts to develop or update State Freight Plans
and support State Freight Advisory Committees. They may also use
carryover balances from National Highway System (NHS) funds authorized
under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity
Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU; 23 U.S.C. 103(b)(6)(E) as in
effect on the day before enactment of MAP-21) that can be used for
transportation planning that benefits the NHS in accordance with 23
U.S.C. 134 and 135 (section 1104 of MAP-21 amended 23 U.S.C. 103,
eliminating the NHS Program under Sec. 103; however, the carryover
balances remain available for planning activities that benefit the
NHS).
IV. State Freight Advisory Committees
DOT strongly recommends that States use a collaborative process for
freight planning that involves relevant stakeholders. To help
accomplish this, and per the statutory language found in 49 U.S.C.
70201, DOT strongly encourages States to establish and continue State
Freight Advisory Committees. A forum of this type will also improve the
ability of public and private stakeholders, especially those with
experience or qualifications in the areas of general business,
transportation planning or freight transportation and logistics, to
identify and to engage the appropriate freight planning organization in
each State.
The establishment of State Freight Advisory Committees is not
required by statute or by DOT. In the event a Committee is established,
each committee member shall have sufficient qualifications, including,
as applicable, the items listed in 49 U.S.C. 70201(b). A State Freight
Advisory Committee is advisory in nature and is not subject to Federal
open meeting laws, though State open meeting laws may apply.
Nevertheless, DOT strongly encourages States to conduct Committee
business in an open manner so that interested persons may observe
meetings and may provide input. DOT further encourages States to hold
meetings on a regular basis.
As specified in 49 U.S.C. 70201(a), State Freight Advisory
Committees should include representatives of a cross-section of public
and private sector freight stakeholders. These include the following:
<bullet> Ports, if applicable;
<bullet> Freight railroads, if applicable;
<bullet> Shippers;
<bullet> Carriers;
<bullet> Freight-related associations;
<bullet> Third-party logistics providers;
<bullet> Freight industry workforce;
<bullet> The transportation department of the State;
<bullet> Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs);
<bullet> Local governments;
<bullet> The environmental protection department of the State, if
applicable;
<bullet> The air resources board of the State; if applicable;
<bullet> Economic development agencies of the State; and
<bullet> Not-for-profit organizations or community organizations.
[[Page 8953]]
In addition to these organizations identified in the statute, DOT
recommends considering the inclusion of the following:
<bullet> Federal agencies;
<bullet> Independent transportation authorities, such as maritime
port and airport authorities of varying sizes, toll highway
authorities, and bridge and tunnel authorities;
<bullet> Representatives of Tribal Nations;
<bullet> Representatives from bordering State or international
governments as applicable;
<bullet> Regional Transportation Planning Organizations;
<bullet> Safety partners and advocates;
<bullet> Other private infrastructure owners and investors, such as
pipelines;
<bullet> Hazardous material transportation providers; and
<bullet> University Transportation Centers and other institutions
of higher education with experience in freight.
The inclusion of freight carriers, freight associations, and
shipper and logistics companies in State Freight Advisory Committees is
essential, as much of the innovation in freight carriage, management,
and planning for future systems takes place among these organizations.
Planning for freight without consulting with these organizations could
constitute a significant gap in understanding the nature of freight
needs and concerns. Carriers should represent a range of sizes and
specialties, including full truck load, less than truckload, and small
package delivery services. Similarly, participation by shipper and
logistics companies of different sizes can provide critical information
about warehousing and distribution service needs.
Since MPOs are responsible for developing and programming projects
in their Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs), DOT strongly
encourages States to include representatives from MPOs in freight
planning processes because many freight projects are located within
metropolitan areas. Similarly, local governments, which often have land
use authority in locations of important freight activity, should be
included. MPOs, local governments, and community organizations are
affected by and may be concerned about the impacts of freight projects.
Early collaboration during the freight project planning process can
help to address concerns and opportunities. For example, input and
engagement with railroad representatives can help identify existing or
emerging impacts of rail activity that affect economic development,
mobility, throughput, and safety at railway-roadway grade crossings.
Engagement and consultation with a State Freight Advisory Committee can
help inform strategies to meet freight policy goals and identify areas
for investment in a State Freight Plan. Similarly, the inclusion of
independent transportation authorities, such as port and airport
authorities, toll highway authorities, and bridge and tunnel
authorities, helps minimize the fragmentation of planning that often
occurs due to different authorities acting independently.
The FAST Act made important changes to the Tribal Transportation
Program and established the Tribal Transportation Self-Governance
Program (section 1121 of the FAST Act; 23 U.S.C. 207) that extends many
of the self-governance provisions of Title V of the Indian Self-
Determination and Education Assistance Act to transportation.
Representation of Tribal Nations in State freight planning is important
to the development of a comprehensive State Freight Plan.
State DOTs already coordinate State involvement in both freight and
passenger rail operations, and, as required under section 303 of the
Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act (PRIIA; Pub. L. 110-432,
codified at 49 U.S.C. chapter 227), develop FRA-accepted State Rail
Plans. DOT strongly recommends that rail, highway, and other modal
divisions (pipeline safety, ports, and airports) within the State DOT
or in other agencies of the State government, be represented in State
Freight Advisory Committees. States should also consider the inclusion
of other State agencies, including those engaged in law enforcement,
housing, and emergency planning, which may have the authority to
regulate and enforce speed limits on roads and highways, to issue
permits for higher-weight truck movements and longer combination
vehicles (tractor-trailer combinations with two or more trailers) on
State roads, and to plan for emergency operations. Participation of
Federal and State environmental agencies may prove useful in helping
project sponsors anticipate and mitigate potential environmental issues
that could arise from freight projects.
States are encouraged to invite representatives from neighboring
States and Nations (Canada, Mexico, and their Provinces and States, as
appropriate) to participate in State Freight Advisory Committees, even
if only on a limited basis. They should also consider inviting councils
of government and regional councils (if not already represented through
the MPO), organizations representing multi-State transportation
corridors, and other local and regional planning organizations to
participate. Participation by Federal government representatives is
also encouraged. These participants can provide technical assistance on
Federal planning and funding programs. Similarly, participation by
regional economic development offices and State or regional Chambers of
Commerce is strongly encouraged.
Representatives from the freight transportation industry workforce
provide important input in identifying bottlenecks and other
inefficiencies; access, operations, and safety issues; methods to
respond to freight labor shortages; truck parking capacity and
information needs; applications of new technologies; and other factors.
Similarly, independent transportation experts, including academic
specialists and industry consultants, can be valuable additions to the
planning effort.
In all cases, DOT expects that State Freight Advisory Committee
participation will vary by State and acknowledges that available
funding, State DOT resources, and specific characteristics of a State's
freight infrastructure and supply chains will likely lead to
significant differences in the size and composition of such Committees.
IIJA established required qualifications for membership on a State
Freight Advisory Committee. Per 49 U.S.C. 70201(b), each member of a
freight advisory committee shall have qualifications, including the
following, as applicable:
<bullet> General business and financial experience;
<bullet> Experience or qualifications in the areas of freight
transportation and logistics;
<bullet> Experience in transportation planning;
<bullet> Experience representing employees of the freight industry;
<bullet> Experience representing a State, local government, or MPO;
or
<bullet> Experience representing the views of a community group or
not-for-profit organization.
As directed by 49 U.S.C. 70201(c), State Freight Advisory
Committees shall:
<bullet> Advise the State on freight-related priorities, issues,
projects, and funding needs;
<bullet> Serve as a forum for discussion of State transportation
decisions affecting freight mobility;
<bullet> Communicate and coordinate regional priorities with other
organizations (for example, among a
[[Page 8954]]
State's DOT, MPOs, Tribal and other local planning organizations);
<bullet> Promote the sharing of information between the private and
public sectors on freight issues; and
<bullet> Participate in the development of the State Freight Plan,
including by providing advice regarding the development of the Freight
Investment Plan.
The multimodal, multiagency mix of participants recommended above
should offer an excellent forum for the exchange of information needed
to develop the required components of the State Freight Plan (described
in more detail below). The Committee can also focus and facilitate
government efforts to incorporate freight into day-to-day planning
efforts and to raise the visibility of freight mobility issues more
broadly.
Per 23 U.S.C. 167(d)(2), the Federal Highway Administrator, in re-
designating the Primary Highway Freight System, shall provide an
opportunity for State Freight Advisory Committees, as applicable, to
submit additional route miles for consideration. Similarly, 49 U.S.C.
70103(c) authorizes the Assistant Secretary for Multimodal Freight to
consider facilities and transportation corridors recommendations by
State Freight Advisory Committees for facilities to be included on the
National Multimodal Freight Network. States are not constrained
statutorily from placing requirements in the charters of their State
Freight Advisory Committees to require State consensus with such
Committee recommendations for such facilities to the Assistant
Secretary or the Federal Highway Administrator.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The charter for the California Freight Advisory Committee is
one example of a State Freight Advisory Committee charter that
conforms to good practice, providing for committee membership,
responsibilities, frequency of meetings, decision processes,
reporting, etc. States can, of course, vary from this format, but
DOT strongly recommends the development of a charter document.
Caltrans, California Freight Advisory Committee, available at:
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/transportation-planning/division-of-
transportation-planning/strategic-freight-planning/california-
freight-advisory-
committee#:~:text=The%20CFAC%20is%20a%20charter,the%20State%2C%20and%
20local%20governments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. State Freight Plans
Each State that receives funding through the NHFP (23 U.S.C. 167)
is required to have a State Freight Plan that provides a comprehensive
plan for the immediate and long-range planning activities and
investments of the State with respect to freight (49 U.S.C. 70202). If
a State's 4-year update cycle has expired, then unless the State has
developed its State Freight Plan consistent with the existing
requirements, the State may not obligate NHFP funds (23 U.S.C.
167(h)(4)).
The required elements of State Freight Plans under 49 U.S.C.
70202(b), as amended by IIJA, are listed below:
1. An identification of significant freight system trends, needs,
and issues with respect to the State;
2. A description of the freight policies, strategies, and
performance measures that will guide the freight-related transportation
investment decisions of the State;
3. When applicable, a listing of--
A. Multimodal critical rural freight facilities and corridors
designated within the State under section 49 U.S.C. 70103 (National
Multimodal Freight Network);
B. Critical rural and urban freight corridors designated within the
State under 23 U.S.C. 167 (NHFP);
4. A description of how the Plan will improve the ability of the
State to meet the national multimodal freight policy goals described in
section 49 U.S.C. 70101(b) and the NHFP goals described in 23 U.S.C.
167 (NHFP);
5. A description of how innovative technologies and operational
strategies, including freight intelligent transportation systems, that
improve the safety and efficiency of the freight movement, were
considered;
6. In the case of roadways on which travel by heavy vehicles
(including mining, agricultural, energy cargo or equipment, and timber
vehicles) is projected to deteriorate the condition of the roadways
substantially, a description of improvements that may be required to
reduce or to impede the deterioration;
7. An inventory of facilities with freight mobility issues, such as
bottlenecks, within the State, and for those facilities that are State
owned or operated, a description of the strategies the State is
employing to address those freight mobility issues;
8. Consideration of any significant congestion or delay caused by
freight movements and any strategies to mitigate that congestion or
delay;
9. A Freight Investment Plan that, subject to 49 U.S.C.
70202(c)(2), includes a list of priority projects and describes how
funds made available to carry out 23 U.S.C. 167 would be invested and
matched;
10. The most recent commercial motor vehicle parking facilities
assessment conducted by the State under 49 U.S.C. 70202(f);
11. The most recent supply chain cargo flows in the State,
expressed by mode of transportation;
12. An inventory of commercial ports in the State;
13. If applicable, consideration of the findings or recommendations
made by any multi-State freight compact to which the State is a party
under 49 U.S.C. 70204;
14. The impacts of e-commerce on freight infrastructure in the
State;
15. Considerations of military freight;
16. Strategies and goals to decrease--
A. The severity of impacts of extreme weather and natural disasters
on freight mobility,
B. The impacts of freight movement on local air pollution,
C. The impacts of freight movement on flooding and stormwater
runoff, and
D. The impacts of freight movement on wildlife habitat loss; and
17. Consultation with the State Freight Advisory Committee, if
applicable.
The elements listed in 49 U.S.C. 70202 are the only required
elements of State Freight Plans. Each element must be addressed if a
State wishes to obligate NHFP funds available under 23 U.S.C. 167. As
long as State Freight Plans cover the required elements, they may be
organized in any structure that works best for individual States. Plans
must be updated at least once every four years. States may elect to
update more frequently, as appropriate. DOT approval of an updated Plan
prior to the expiration of the State's existing Plan would restart the
4-year clock for submitting an updated Plan. If a State wishes to
obligate NHFP funds for a project (other than those exempt from
inclusion in the Freight Investment Plan), including a freight
intermodal or freight rail project, that project must be included in
the fiscally constrained Freight Investment Plan as well. See 23 U.S.C.
167(h)(5).
The following paragraphs provide guidance on the minimum amount of
information necessary to satisfy each required element. For each
required element, DOT also identifies optional information/methods that
States may consider including in their State Freight Plans. These items
have been identified through a review of research papers, studies of
best industry practices, and State Freight Plans that were completed
immediately following the FAST Act. DOT is providing this information
to help inform each State's freight planning process; ultimately, it is
up to each State to determine which, if any, of these additional
elements to include.
A State Freight Plan must address an 8-year forecast period
(previously required by the FAST Act to be a 5-year horizon), though
DOT strongly encourages an outlook covering the next
[[Page 8955]]
20 years. While a ``State freight plan described in subsection (a)
shall address an 8-year forecast period'' (49 U.S.C. 70202(d)), the
Plan must also provide ``a comprehensive plan for the immediate and
long-range planning activities and investments of the State with
respect to freight'' (49 U.S.C. 70202(a)). In almost all transportation
planning exercises, long-range planning necessarily exceeds a period of
eight years. DOT notes that a freight plan horizon of only eight years
likely would not enable States to do more than list present problems
and projects already in the development pipeline, without respect to
longer-term trends and new technologies. In summary, whereas a planning
forecast of eight years is sufficient (and must be provided) to meet
the statutory requirement, longer outlooks supplementing the eight-year
forecast are strongly recommended for the overall State Freight Plan--
if possible, corresponding at least to the 20-year outlook of the Long-
Range Metropolitan and Long-Range Statewide Transportation Plans.
Carefully developed forecasts of freight movements will be
essential to the success of a freight plan, whether it covers an eight-
year period or longer. For example, it is important to have accurate
estimates of freight moving along a particular corridor and the numbers
of trucks, trains, etc., associated with moving that freight in an
efficient manner to select the most appropriate project or projects for
that corridor. Improved freight modeling is necessary to estimate
future freight movements accurately and to inform alternatives analysis
for freight projects, including multi-modal freight planning. For
States lacking a long-term freight modeling capability, Freight
Analysis Framework (FAF) forecasts are acceptable as a default.\6\ To
assist States in long term freight planning, Section VII of this
guidance contains several data and analysis sources that may prove
useful. DOT continues to support further improvements in freight
modeling through its freight model improvement program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ DOT, Freight Analysis Framework (Sept. 17, 2025), <a href="https://www.bts.gov/faf">https://www.bts.gov/faf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A special exception to this guidance on a 20-year outlook period
applies to the fiscally constrained Freight Investment Plan component
of the State Freight Plan (49 U.S.C. 70202(c)(2)), which addresses the
NHFP funding timeframe and can be updated more frequently than the
four-year requirement for the entire State Freight Plan. In the context
of State Freight Plans, the statute requires that ``[t]he freight
investment plan component of a freight plan shall include a project, or
an identified phase of a project, only if funding for completion of the
project can reasonably be anticipated to be available for the project
within the time period identified in the freight investment plan.'' The
statutes governing Long-Range Statewide Transportation Plans do not
require these plans to be constrained fiscally, however, and in some
cases, States may not be able to provide a fiscally constrained
statewide list of freight projects exceeding the planning period of the
Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), which is required
to be constrained fiscally. States offering the Long-Range Statewide
Transportation Plan as a State Freight Plan must include a Freight
Investment Plan to meet State Freight Plan requirements. DOT recommends
that all Freight Investment Plans, at a minimum, be aligned carefully
with the TIP and STIP documents for the respective MPO and State.
Aligning this investment plan with the above-referenced documents
enhances the State's ability to prioritize their freight projects and
ensures coordination between the State DOT and the MPOs. States may opt
to extend the period of their Freight Investment Plans to longer
intervals, including 20-year periods that correspond to the statewide
and metropolitan long-range plans, if this helps them for freight-
planning purposes.
DOT has organized this section around the statutory requirements of
49 U.S.C. 70202 and each element includes subsections describing
minimum requirements and suggestions (optional) that States may
consider including in their State Freight Plans.
1. An Identification of Significant Freight System Trends, Needs, and
Issues With Respect to the State.
Minimum Elements
States have broad flexibility in addressing the trends, needs, and
issues of their freight systems. To enhance the identification of these
issues, State Freight Plans should begin with a discussion of the role
that freight transportation plays in the State's overall economy, and
how the economy is projected to grow or to change. The discussion
should address the key issues confronting the freight system, both in
the present and anticipated in the future. Finally, this element should
include discussion of forecasted freight movements and how broader
economic trends within the State or region may affect them.
Additional Recommendations for State Consideration
This section could identify those industries which are most
important to the economy of the State and the specific freight
transportation modes and facilities most vital to the supply chains of
these industries. In particular, States should highlight the impacts of
the following areas of proper Federal interest on freight flows within
their respective States as appropriate: international trade shifts,
reshoring of manufacturing, industries of national interest (like
energy, steel and critical materials), and support for agricultural
exports. In most instances, the State will also have identified
critical freight issues in studies conducted through State agencies,
MPOs, and academic or research institutions. There are also many
national studies (such as through the Transportation Research Board of
the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine) and
local case studies that focus on emerging freight problems, such as
last-mile delivery issues, that will be relevant to many States.
The following are possible items to consider when identifying
economic trends and forecasts that will affect freight:
<bullet> Global, national, regional, and local economic conditions
and supply chain outlooks, particularly those of the State, neighboring
States or countries, and principal trading partners;
<bullet> Population growth and location;
<bullet> Income and employment by industry and service sector,
including the expected employment by each sector of the transportation
industry;
<bullet> Freight attributes of industry and service sectors
(including heavy freight, less than truckload freight, and small
package delivery);
<bullet> Type, value, and quantity of imports and exports;
<bullet> Industrial and agricultural production forecasts; and
<bullet> Forecasts of freight movements by commodity type and
location, including small package deliveries associated with e-
commerce, and projected port or rail freight activity.
DOT notes that when there is a high degree of uncertainty about
future economic, industrial, and technological conditions (e.g.,
changing energy markets, deployment of connectivity and automation in
freight vehicles), planning approaches, such as scenario planning, can
help to develop alternative outlooks that can accommodate more than one
future outcome.
DOT strongly encourages States to include a discussion of supply
chain
[[Page 8956]]
resiliency, including the types of critical products moving through or
delivered in the State and the impacts of congestion or delays in the
movement of those products for people and businesses across the State.
In particular, DOT suggests a risk-informed consideration of critical
products related to health, safety, energy, and food that are
particularly vital to sustain human life, as well as the aforementioned
areas of proper Federal interest and corollary supply chains.
DOT recommends that the State Freight Plan describe the conditions
and performance of the State's freight transportation system, including
trends in conditions and performance. This analysis would help identify
needs for future investment within the State. If a State has already
conducted an analysis of the conditions and performance of its overall
public infrastructure, that analysis could be referenced or
incorporated into the State Freight Plan in so far as it pertains to
the freight system. Similarly, States may be able to develop such
measures from State asset management systems, Highway Performance
Monitoring System data, Level of Service data from Transportation
Management Centers, National Performance Management Research Data Sets
(NPMRDS), or other sources. It is recommended that the performance
measures used correspond to those required under Item 2 (``A
description of freight policies, strategies, and performance
measures'') below.
Information on the condition and performance of private
infrastructure is also encouraged, though it is acknowledged that this
information is more difficult to obtain. States can consult their State
Rail Plans, the Federal Railroad Administration, and other sources to
gather information on some aspects of freight rail and rail bridge data
(e.g., miles and locations of freight rail that can carry cars weighing
286,000 pounds or greater, tunnel heights adequate for double stack
rail cars, dual track sections). Similarly, States may have
commissioned reports on port and waterway conditions or may be able to
establish performance conditions. Metrics for States to assess truck
parking capacity are offered for consideration in the summary report on
the first Jason's Law survey.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ FHWA, Jason's Law Truck Parking Survey Results and
Comparative Analysis, available at: <a href="https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/infrastructure/truck_parking/jasons_law/truckparkingsurvey/index.htm">https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/infrastructure/truck_parking/jasons_law/truckparkingsurvey/index.htm</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Data on port and waterway conditions and performance may also be
available from port authorities, in Port Master Plans, or from
automatic identification systems (AIS) for vessels and Global
Positioning System (GPS) probe data for trucks in port areas and
operating on port access roads. More information about performance data
for measuring mobility for non-highway modes is provided in Item 7,
``An inventory of facilities with freight mobility issues,'' below.
Specific conditions and performance data are not required to be
included in State Freight Plans by 49 U.S.C. 70202. States are not
required or expected to undertake such an evaluation solely for the
purpose of informing the State Freight Plan.
Other topics States may consider addressing include the need to
improve safety and mitigate impacts of freight movement on communities,
as well as future transportation workforce challenges and supply chain
disruptions and resiliency. Discussion of these topics could include
assessing the following: impacts of longer and more frequent trains at
grade crossings; attracting and retaining a qualified workforce,
including strategies to crack down on fraudulent training providers and
enforce English language proficiency for commercial drivers;
information on capacity and availability of truck parking; hazardous
material transportation; and emergency response capability. Many of
these issues can be identified through the State Freight Advisory
Committee, if one has been established.
2. A description of freight policies, strategies, and performance
measures that will guide the freight-related transportation investment
decisions of the State.
Minimum Elements
This section of the State Freight Plan is important for providing
the overall approach the State will take to address the challenges
described in the preceding section. The policies and strategies in the
State Freight Plan are likely to reflect a mix of State legislative
direction, discretionary decisions by State DOTs and other State
agencies, decisions by other States, plans by MPOs, local and Tribal
governments, special transportation authorities (including port,
airport, and toll authorities), military planning, and the
accommodation of plans by private sector companies, such as railroads,
marine terminal operators, pipeline companies, trucking companies, and
others. States should identify any statutory and State constitutional
constraints on freight-related investments and policies, such as
prohibitions on spending State funds on certain kinds of
infrastructure.
Additional Recommendations for State Consideration
The State Freight Plan should describe the freight policies,
strategies, and performance measures that will guide freight-related
transportation investment decisions. These policies should outline the
State's goals for improving freight mobility, safety, infrastructure
condition, multimodal connectivity, and supply chain resilience. As
such, DOT recommends strategies to guide investment decisions include:
<bullet> Targeting freight bottlenecks and reliability issues on
high priority corridors, like the National Highway Freight Network or
the National Multimodal Freight Network.
<bullet> Improving first and last mile connections to ports, rail
facilities, airports and industrial centers.
<bullet> Strengthening supply chain resilience, especially for
critical single points of failure and routes supporting critical goods
or areas of proper Federal interest.
<bullet> Enhancing safety through design improvements, at-grade
crossing enhancement, and technology deployments.
<bullet> Supporting industry needs through workforce development
and adoption of advanced freight technologies.
<bullet> Using transparent, criteria-based processes to prioritize
freight investments that address both interstate and intrastate freight
volumes.
Performance measurements should explain how the State will track
the effectiveness of its policies, strategies, and investments.
Measures may be qualitative or quantitative but should preferably align
with the performance measures already identified in the National
Freight Strategic Plan or used in State transportation plans, or both,
grants applications, and condition-and-performance reports. These may
include pavement and bridge condition, traffic congestion, travel time
reliability, congestion and delay metrics, freight safety indicators,
and resilience considerations. Using consistent, quantitative metrics
will help each State determine whether it is achieving its freight
objectives and allow it to assess outputs and outcomes relative to
expectations.
States should avoid investments that limit freight mobility, worsen
congestion, or increase crash risks. In fast-growing metro areas,
adding additional interstate on- and off-ramps or closely spaced
interchanges can introduce short weaving segments that lower speeds and
increase points of conflict. National resources such as the
[[Page 8957]]
AASHTO Green Book suggest a minimum of one mile between interchanges in
urban settings (and about two miles in rural areas), with context-
specific design solutions when closer spacing is unavoidable. Planning
and access-management policies should evaluate interchange proposals at
the corridor scale to preserve limited-access performance as regions
grow, keeping the specific needs of commercial vehicles in mind where
freight volumes are high.
States should also consider freight policies and strategies that
increase supply chain resilience in the State, particularly for the
movement of critical products related to health, safety, energy, and
food as well as the aforementioned areas of proper Federal interest and
corollary supply chains.
3. When applicable, a listing of--
A. Multimodal critical rural freight facilities and corridors
designated within the State under 49 U.S.C. 70103, and
B. Critical rural and urban freight corridors designated within the
State under section 23 U.S.C. 167.
Minimum Elements
If corridors have been designated pursuant to the statutes given
above, the corridors should be included in the State Freight Plan.
Inclusion of corridors in the Plan does not constitute a designation
and certification of critical rural and urban freight corridors.
Critical urban and rural freight corridors are designated and certified
under 23 U.S.C. 167(g).
For inclusion in the Plan, corridors may be listed or displayed in
another format, such as a map. States should consider modifying their
Plan, specifically any maps or tables displaying this information, if
corridors are added or previous designations are changed or
redesignated. Any changes made to ensure maps/tables/figures are
accurate and up to date do not require DOT review and do not constitute
a formal update of the State Freight Plan that would reset the four-
year update cycle.
Additional Recommendations for State Consideration
DOT also suggests, but does not require, States provide an
inventory of the freight transportation assets, both publicly and
privately owned, that are deemed most significant for freight planning
purposes. This optional list could include elements either included or
not included in the National Highway Freight Network or the National
Multimodal Freight Network such as locally important freight roads and
bridges not on these networks, short line railroads, smaller border
crossings, water (including port) facilities, waterways, pipeline
terminals, smaller airports, etc. It also could include warehousing,
freight transfer facilities, and foreign trade zones located in the
State.
4. A description of how the Plan will improve the ability of the
State to meet the National Multimodal Freight Policy goals described in
section 49 U.S.C. 70101(b) and the NHFP goals described in 23 U.S.C.
167.
Minimum Elements
DOT notes that the goals of the National Multimodal Freight Policy
(49 U.S.C. 70101) are extensive and pertain to the National Multimodal
Freight Network (49 U.S.C. 70103). These goals are to:
(1) Identify infrastructure improvements, policies, and operational
innovations that strengthen the contribution of the National Multimodal
Freight Network to the economic competitiveness of the United States,
reduce congestion and eliminate bottlenecks on the National Multimodal
Freight Network, and increase productivity, particularly for domestic
industries and businesses that create high-value jobs;
(2) Improve the safety, security, efficiency, and resiliency of
multimodal freight transportation;
(3) Achieve and maintain a state of good repair on the National
Multimodal Freight Network;
(4) Use innovation and advanced technology to improve the safety,
efficiency, and reliability of the National Multimodal Freight Network;
(5) Improve the economic efficiency and productivity of the
National Multimodal Freight Network;
(6) Improve the reliability of freight transportation;
(7) Improve the short- and long-distance movement of goods that
travel across rural areas between population centers, travel between
rural areas and population centers, and travel from the Nation's ports,
airports, and gateways to the National Multimodal Freight Network;
(8) Improve the flexibility of States to support multi-State
corridor planning and the creation of multi-State organizations to
increase the ability of States to address multimodal freight
connectivity;
(9) Reduce the adverse environmental impacts of freight movement on
the National Multimodal Freight Network; and
(10) Pursue the goals described in this subsection in a manner that
is not burdensome to State and local governments.
The goals of the NHFP (23 U.S.C. 167(b)) are similar but focus on
investing in infrastructure improvements and implementing operational
improvements on the highways of the United States.
Additional Recommendations for State Consideration
It is noteworthy that the National Multimodal Freight Policy goals
are more comprehensive of freight transportation issues than are the
required elements of State Freight Plans. States should strongly
consider emphasizing aspects of their State goals and strategies
intended to improve safety, security, and resiliency of the freight
system, including through the use of enhanced designs, technologies,
and multimodal strategies. States should consider how their economy and
freight system interact with domestic and international supply chains.
Safety is of paramount concern to the public and policy makers. There
were more than 6,600 freight-related fatalities nationally in 2022.\8\
New technologies offer great potential to reduce or even eliminate
fatalities over the next several decades, but more conventional
investments in safety are also highly effective in reducing accident
risk.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See NHTSA, Large Trucks Traffic Safety Facts 2022 Data (July
2024), available at: <a href="https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/813588">https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/813588</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
States should also consider describing freight investments that are
intended to support economic opportunities as well to mitigate
potential negative impacts for communities. Though not cited as a
component of the National Multimodal Freight Policy or the NHFP goals,
States are invited to provide information on how they will seek to
develop and to maintain an adequate workforce for the freight
transportation industry.
DOT recommends these goals be addressed individually in the State
Freight Plan to facilitate DOT review, but this is not mandatory. Where
possible, DOT recommends that State goals and policies (addressed under
Item 2, ``A description of freight policies, strategies, and
performance measures,'' above) should be associated with comparable
components of the National Multimodal Freight Policy and the NHFP. DOT
also recommends that each State identify which goals it believes to be
most important and merit the largest focus. DOT acknowledges that a
State may not have specific goals or investments pertaining to all
elements of the National Multimodal
[[Page 8958]]
Freight Policy or the NHFP and notes that this is not required for a
compliant State Freight Plan.
5. A description of how innovative technologies and operational
strategies, including freight intelligent transportation systems, that
improve the safety and efficiency of freight movement, were considered.
Minimum Elements
States should describe any innovative technologies and operational
strategies that currently are planned for or being implemented across
the State to improve the safety and efficiency of the freight network.
States should also describe how these technologies and operational
strategies can be integrated into existing infrastructure as well as
any corresponding infrastructure needs to implement these technologies
and strategies. DOT especially encourages States to highlight such
initiatives being developed in conjunction with other States along key
multi-State corridors.
Additional Recommendations for State Consideration
States can use a range of innovative technologies and operational
strategies to improve the safety and efficiency of freight movement.
The deployment of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems is accelerating
rapidly. Vehicles equipped with automated driving systems, including
trucks, are already being piloted in some States. Advanced Air Mobility
technology is developing rapidly for both freight and passenger use
cases. These and other technologies, including intelligent
transportation systems, could improve greatly the safety and efficiency
of freight and passenger movements. Specific to freight, they may
enable all modes to make safer and more efficient use of existing
infrastructure capacity due to more efficient and coordinated vehicle
operations, while enhancing the ability of carriers not only to prevent
collisions but also to route around congested locations rapidly. As
such, DOT strongly encourages States, when updating their State Freight
Plans, to explore the potential of these new technologies and how they
may affect the need to modify or to expand existing infrastructure.
Other solutions include Transportation Systems Management and
Operations (TSMO) approaches that maximize the operational performance
of the existing transportation system and provide flexible solutions to
manage dynamic conditions. Information technology includes, but is not
limited to, freight traveler information systems, electronic
credentialing, automated permitting, smart roadside commercial motor
vehicle monitoring, truck queue management and appointment systems as
ports, truck parking information management systems, and border wait
time information. Digital Twin technology for simulating freight
infrastructure conditions and assessing project scenarios is growing in
use and a valuable tool.
Safety strategies include truck safety warning systems, work zone
management for trucks, road weather management, and traffic incident
management. Arterial management can include traffic signal timing for
trucks, access management at freight facilities, active traffic demand
management, off-peak deliveries, and managed truck lanes. DOT
recommends States consider strategies to separate freight traffic and
heavy vehicles from general purpose traffic at locations where the
potential safety and efficiency benefits are highest. Integrated
multimodal transportation can be used to improve efficiency through
interconnected freight flows utilizing highway, rail, air, and
waterborne transportation. Safety improvements are already being
realized through features such as automated braking and lane departure
warning systems, but impacts will become much more pronounced over the
next 10-20 years.
The private sector has been leading the way with many of these new
technology solutions, increasingly employing artificial intelligence
and machine learning to optimize routes, to predict demand, and to
automate decision-making processes, leading to increased efficiency,
reduced fuel consumption, and improved delivery times. As such, States
are encouraged to work with private terminal operators, freight
carriers, third party logistics providers, academic institutions, and
other participants in the freight transportation system to develop
credible forecasts of the use of innovative technologies and
operational strategies within a State or across its borders. Forums
such as State Freight Advisory Committees provide excellent
opportunities for States and other public entities to consult with
private interests to assess better how these technologies may impact
the freight system, and how the public sector can best support them
with infrastructure investments, intelligent transportation system
deployment investments, and regulatory support.
Familiarity with the technology plans of neighboring States,
including through participation in their State Freight Advisory
Committees or regional or corridor-based freight groups, will help to
promote the use of interoperable intelligent transportation systems.
States may benefit from collaborating with private-sector freight
operators, ports, railroads, academics, and technology partners to
understand how emerging technologies could influence system performance
and freight logistics. Engagement through regional coalitions or State
Freight Advisory Committees can help identify practical opportunities
to apply these tools., share lessons learned, and support consistent
deployments approaches across State and corridor boundaries.
6. In the case of roadways on which travel by heavy vehicles
(including mining, agricultural, energy cargo or equipment, and timber
vehicles) is projected to deteriorate the condition of the roadways
substantially, a description of improvements that may be required to
reduce or to impede the deterioration.
Minimum Elements
The State Freight Plan should address the strategies to manage
heavy freight vehicles on roadways. State Freight Plans should include
a description of any specific improvements necessary to reduce
deterioration along the State's roadways.
Additional Recommendations for State Consideration
In recent decades, growth across several freight-intensive sectors
has increased heavy truck volumes and axle loads. These shifts can
accelerate pavement and bridge deterioration, particularly on
facilities not designed for sustained heavy freight or mixed traffic
involving oversize or specialized vehicles. States may consider
mitigation approaches such as using more durable pavement materials or
designs on high-demand corridors, directing heavy vehicles to roadways
better suited for such loads, applying traffic management strategies to
smooth peak flows, and coordinate with industry to understand projected
freight growth. DOT recommends that State Freight Plans evaluate how
sector-driven freight activity affects roadway condition and identify
strategies, where feasible to manage these impacts and maintain
infrastructure performance.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ For example, Texas DOT made use of information developed by
its Energy Sector Impacts Task Force and other sources to inform its
State Freight Plan. See the following for more information: Texas
Department of Transportation, Task Force on Texas' Energy Sector
Roadway Needs, Report to the Texas Transportation Commission (Dec.
13, 2012) <a href="http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/energy/final_report.pdf">http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/energy/final_report.pdf</a>; Texas Department of Transportation, Texas Freight
Mobility Plan, Final, (Jan. 25, 2016) <a href="https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/move-texas-freight/studies/freight-mobility/2016/plan.pdf">https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/move-texas-freight/studies/freight-mobility/2016/plan.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 8959]]
7. An inventory of facilities with freight mobility issues, such as
bottlenecks, within the State, and for those facilities that are State
owned or operated, a description of strategies the State is employing
to address the freight mobility issues.
Minimum Elements
The statute does not provide an exhaustive definition as to what
qualifies as a freight mobility issue, leaving this determination to
the States provided that the issue pertains to freight transportation
specifically. States may determine which facilities most concern them
and should include an inventory of locations with freight mobility
issues based on their assessment. This section should include a
description of strategies being taken to address freight mobility
issues, either by the State or private sector.
Additional Recommendations for State Consideration
The State Freight Plan should include an inventory of facilities
with freight mobility issues across all modes, such as highway and rail
bottlenecks, first and last mile constraints, recurrent congestion
points, at-grade rail crossing, and areas with limited truck parking or
operational restrictions. For State-owned or State-operated facilities,
this section should briefly describe the strategies the State is using
to address issues and support freight related investment.
Recommended strategies to address freight mobility issues and guide
investment decisions include:
<bullet> Targeting capacity, operational, or geometric improvements
at known bottlenecks.
<bullet> Enhancing signal timing, ramp management, and freight
focused ITS deployments to improve reliability.
<bullet> Incorporating multimodal data, probe data, and source to
destination freight trip analysis to evaluate freight fluidity and
identify systemwide constraints that impact congestion, travel time
reliability, and bottleneck severity.
<bullet> Advancing grade separation or safety enhancements at high
delay or high-risk rail crossings.
<bullet> Improving first and last mile connections serving ports,
rail yards, distribution centers, and industrial corridors.
<bullet> Increasing truck parking availability and addressing
documented shortfalls identified through State or national assessments.
<bullet> Prioritizing resiliency improvements on freight corridors
vulnerable to disruptions, weather, or infrastructure failures.
<bullet> Using data-driven criteria to prioritize mobility projects
that deliver the greatest freight benefit.
States may supplement the inventory by referencing regional freight
planning activities and institutions.
FHWA resources, such as the Truck Freight Bottleneck Reporting
Guidebook, provides methods for identifying and measuring bottlenecks.
Additional data sources include the State Freight Advisory Committee,
State and regional mobility studies, truck probe data, and truck counts
that help illuminate facility and system level bottlenecks.
State Freight Plans may emphasize the identification of freight
facilities that likely will be on the National Highway Freight Network
and the National Multimodal Freight Network. States are encouraged to
identify any significant intermodal connector/first- and last-mile or
other mobility problems even if not on these networks. States are
strongly encouraged to describe mobility issues associated with non-
highway modes. States also are strongly encouraged to consider freight
mobility issues occurring in urban and rural settings.
Performance measurement is an important component of this section.
States should describe how they measure freight mobility issues and
determine where operational or capital investments are needed.
Performance measures, preferably consistent with those used in other
State planning documents, may include truck travel time reliability
pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 150(c)(6), and address congestion at freight
bottlenecks, including those identified in the national freight
strategic plan, within the State pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 150(e)(4),
congestion and delay metrics, pavement and bridge condition, safety
indications, and freight dependent economic measures. These metrics
help States determine whether strategies are effective in addressing
freight mobility challenges and improving overall system performance.
This section should clearly link each identified mobility issue
with the specific strategies or improvements the State is pursuing to
mitigate those challenges and support long-term freight system
reliability, safety, and economic competitiveness. In the discussion of
Item 2, ``A description of freight policies, strategies, and
performance measures that will guide the freight-related transportation
investment decisions of the State,'' DOT describes various forms of
performance metrics available to States. Regarding measuring freight
mobility, DOT also recommends consideration of methods that address the
fluidity of freight movement through the use of multimodal data and
analysis to understand source-to-destination freight trips.
There are numerous potential sources of information on facilities
with freight mobility issues. One particularly valuable resource is the
State Freight Advisory Committee, whose members often have first-hand,
specific data about freight mobility problems in and on public and
private facilities throughout the State. Several States, MPOs, and
regional or corridor coalitions have developed detailed studies of
mobility problems and solutions. States may also consult reports about
the locations of major highway freight bottlenecks issued periodically
by FHWA,\10\ in addition to third-party industry reports (e.g.,
American Transportation Research Institute).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ FHWA, Freight Mobility Trends and Highway Bottlenecks,
available at: <a href="https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/mobility_trends/">https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/mobility_trends/</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information about railroad bottlenecks may be available in State
Rail Plans, or through consultation with railroads serving the State.
Similarly, MPOs can provide information about locations where railroad-
highway crossings or railroad-railroad crossings create congestion for
vehicles, trains, pedestrians, and non-motorized vehicles. The FRA
Blocked Crossing data may serve as a resource to inform on recurring
incidences where a train is blocking a highway-rail grade crossing.
Railroad unions may be able to share important concerns about
bottlenecks. DOT notes that, because railroad freight and railroad-
highway grade crossing and separation projects are generally eligible
for funding under certain DOT's discretionary grant programs, railroads
have an incentive to participate in multimodal freight investment and
planning at a State, MPO, and local level.
Port authorities, either participating through State Freight
Advisory Committees, MPOs, or in direct consultation with the State,
can provide valuable information about mobility and other constraints
facing the port, including multimodal connections to highway and
railroad systems, as well as connections to inland waterway systems and
pipelines. Their Master Plans and similar documents can provide
forecasted volumes useful for predicting where future mobility and
other constraints may occur. The Port
[[Page 8960]]
Performance Freight Statistics Program (<a href="http://www.bts.gov/ports">www.bts.gov/ports</a>) is a source
of data on capacity and throughput for the largest ports. Some State
DOTs are responsible for port investments and will already have
mobility issues identified. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers may have
lock performance and outage information that could inform States about
potential inland waterway bottlenecks or disruptions. Port and maritime
labor organizations, marine terminal operators, barge and vessel
operators, and maritime and port industry associations can be accessed
directly to identify facilities with mobility constraints or
collectively through State Freight Advisory Committees.
All aspects of the energy transportation pipeline industry are
regulated to some extent by Federal and State agencies, which may be
able to provide information on congested segments and facilities.
Similarly, pipeline operators and their associations may contribute
useful information. Potential methods to present solutions to the
mobility problems are identified in the next section, immediately
below.
8. Consideration of any significant congestion or delay caused by
freight movements and any strategies to mitigate that congestion or
delay
Minimum Elements
States are already required to identify facilities with mobility
impediments (see Item 7 above), and this inventory can be used to
address this element. States should try to provide quantitative or
qualitative assessments of significant delays to freight movements on
those facilities previously identified. Strategies to address
significant congestion and delay can be drawn from pre-existing
evaluations and plans by the State or multi-state freight corridor
groups in which the State participates.
Additional Recommendations for State Consideration
States are encouraged to consider network effects of mitigation
actions, and where possible, to look to a broad mix of solutions,
including adding multimodal capacity, improved intelligent
transportation systems and technological solutions, changed operating
procedures (e.g., longer port gate hours), incentives to use off-peak
delivery times, regulatory changes to eliminate impediments to improved
efficiency (e.g., removing regulatory barriers to use of vehicle
connectivity or automation), and multimodal approaches to resolve
freight congestion problems.
States are encouraged to consider delays impacting both intrastate
and interstate flows and consider strategies that may cross State
boundaries to mitigate congestion and delay.
Consultation with the various parties participating in the
statewide assessment of mobility impediments can yield essential
information about alternatives not previously considered and, as noted
earlier, can inform States about rapidly emerging technology
deployments in the private sector. Private freight carriers may also
share their plans to address rail, port, waterway, pipeline, and air
cargo capacity problems, which may affect State plans for highway
capacity projects linked to these facilities or otherwise affected by
them.
9. A Freight Investment Plan that, subject to 49 U.S.C.
70202(c)(2), includes a list of priority projects and describes how
funds made available to carry out 23 U.S.C. 167 would be invested and
matched.
Minimum Elements
States must include all projects that will utilize NHFP funding
available under 23 U.S.C. 167 in their Freight Investment Plan, except
for those described in 23 U.S.C. 167(h)(6). As required in 49 U.S.C.
70202(c)(2), the Freight Investment Plan component shall include a
project, or an identified phase of a project, only if funding for
completion of the project can reasonably be anticipated to be available
for the project within the time period identified in the Freight
Investment Plan. This language pertains to ``Fiscal-Constraint'' and
has the same meaning as is applied to TIPs and STIPs (See 23 CFR
450.218(o)). Multi-State projects would require coordination of the
States involved such that the project is reflected accurately and
consistently in each State's Freight Plan. States may amend their
Freight Investment Plan at any time to add or delete projects. Per 23
U.S.C. 167(h)(5)(A)(ii), a State may not obligate NHFP funds on a
project unless it is identified in a Freight Investment Plan included
in a freight plan of the State that is in effect. A project may not
proceed under Advance Construction unless it meets this requirement (23
U.S.C. 115(a)(2)).
Amendments to the Freight Investment Plan require DOT review.
However, they do not constitute a formal update of the State Freight
Plan that would reset the four-year update cycle.
Additional Recommendations for State Consideration
DOT encourages States to include non-NHFP funded or unfunded
projects in their State Freight Plans if the project would address
freight-specific needs identified in their plans. This strategy helps
stakeholders see the universe of potentially beneficial freight
projects, especially those for which NHFP funding is not sufficient to
address project costs. Such projects could be considered for future
Federal discretionary grants or other State, local, or private funding.
If these additional projects are included in a State Freight Plan, it
should be indicated that these projects are not part of the prioritized
list of fiscally constrained NHFP projects. Other than projects
considered for future discretionary grant opportunities, DOT recommends
that all freight projects that are included in the State Freight Plan
and which involve the expenditure of public funds be included in TIPs,
STIPs, and be consistent with Long-Range Metropolitan and Statewide
Transportation Plans. To the extent that States have prepared economic
analysis for specific projects, DOT encourages States to consider the
results of those analyses when determining which projects are included
on their Freight Investment Plan, and also to refer to the results of
benefit-cost analyses, as appropriate, when and if the project is
mentioned in the State Freight Plan. Identifying projects by mode is
sometimes useful, but it is not required.
10. The most recent commercial motor vehicle parking facilities
assessment conducted by the State under 49 U.S.C. 70202(f)
Minimum Elements
Subsection (f) specifies that as part of the development or
updating, as applicable, of a State Freight Plan under this section,
each State that receives funding under 23 U.S.C. 167, in consultation
with relevant State motor carrier safety personnel, shall conduct an
assessment of--
(1) The capability of the State, together with the private sector
in the State, to provide adequate parking facilities and rest
facilities for commercial motor vehicles engaged in interstate
transportation;
(2) The volume of commercial motor vehicle traffic in the State;
and
(3) Whether there exist any areas within the State with a shortage
of adequate commercial motor vehicle parking facilities, including an
analysis (economic or otherwise, as the State determines to be
appropriate) of the underlying causes of such a shortage.
[[Page 8961]]
Parking facilities provide commercial motor vehicle operators,
including buses and commercial motor vehicles, a location where they
can take rest breaks in compliance with hours-of-service (HOS)
regulations. Basic data on parking capacity and utilization includes
locations, number of commercial motor vehicle parking spaces,
utilization information, and demand, based upon truck volumes and
freight origins and destinations. Stakeholder engagement through
outreach to the trucking industry can provide data on driver
perceptions on parking availability, but also provides an understanding
of driver behavior and decision-making to consider in addressing
parking needs. Commercial motor vehicle parking metrics include:
<bullet> An inventory of commercial motor vehicle parking supply
collected at a facility level for rest areas and other public
facilities that measure the capacity of a commercial motor vehicle
parking location.
<bullet> An identification of additional commercial motor vehicle
facilities that have been completed by the State since the prior State
Freight Plan and new facilities planned to be developed or expanded by
the State in the next four years.
<bullet> General information on private commercial motor vehicle
parking supply at truck stops and other similar facilities to allow for
assessment of private sector capability to provide parking facilities
for commercial motor vehicles.
<bullet> State level measures such as total number of public and
private parking spaces, number of spaces in relation to NHS mileage, or
number of spaces in relation to truck vehicle miles of travel.
<bullet> Safety and security issues, such as crashes with
commercial motor vehicles parked on the side of the road, fatigue-
related crashes, HOS violations, or crime at parking facilities.
<bullet> Operational demand for commercial motor vehicle parking,
such as truck vehicle miles of travel, truck traffic counts and
projections, and major origins and destinations, such as freight
generators and intermodal connectors.
States are strongly encouraged to develop a plan outlining existing
safety risks related to the shortage of truck parking and to identify
strategies to improve commercial driver safety through the expansion of
truck parking facilities in their State.
Understanding shortages of commercial motor vehicle parking and
underlying causes of such a shortage should highlight freight origins
and destinations and the importance of parking relative to major
freight generators. Parking near ports, intermodal facilities, and
distribution centers should be considered. Understanding the impact of
congestion on travel time and the related driving distance is important
to assessing parking needs along major freight corridors.
Additional Recommendations for State Consideration
Parking activity is tied to a set of factors associated with
highway safety; mandatory rest requirements for commercial vehicle
operators; and commercial motor vehicle operations in the context of
supply chains. Parking deficits and commercial motor vehicle parking in
unsafe locations are leading States to look at opportunities to expand
parking capacity. Expanding commercial motor vehicle parking capacity
should include an assessment of where parking capacity deficiencies
exist. Metrics for States to assess truck parking capacity are offered
for consideration in the summary reports on the Jason's Law Truck
Parking Survey and Assessment.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ FHWA, Truck Parking, available at: <a href="https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/Freight/infrastructure/truck_parking/index.htm">https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/Freight/infrastructure/truck_parking/index.htm</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional data can provide information on parking capacity,
utilization, demand, and driver needs. Additional commercial motor
vehicle parking metrics to consider include:
<bullet> Commercial motor vehicle parking demand and utilization
collected at a facility or corridor level that measure the demand for
commercial motor vehicle parking or the utilization of commercial motor
vehicle parking facilities by day of the week and time of day.
<bullet> Safety and security issues for drivers, such as crime and
security provisions at parking facilities.
<bullet> Driver needs measures for driver perception, issues, and
amenity needs at parking facilities.
<bullet> Environmental and local community impacts of commercial
motor vehicle parking, such as emissions, noise, or traffic.
Because of the strong linkage between freight transportation and
land use, engaging MPOs and local municipalities on commercial motor
vehicle parking may help with considering commercial motor vehicle
parking as part of freight-intensive land use development. MPO and
local municipality engagement allows the development of land use
ordinances to directly facilitate efficient freight movement and
address commercial motor vehicle parking shortages. Incorporation of
commercial motor vehicle parking requirements and zoning allowances
into local planning also enables MPOs and local municipalities to
manage freight industry demands.
The National Coalition on Truck Parking, which includes public and
private sector organizations with an interest in advancing safe truck
parking, has developed resources on truck parking capacity, technology
and data, funding, finance and regulation and state, regional and local
government coordination.\12\ Truck Parking Information and Management
Systems (TPIMS) that collect data on parking availability may also
provide the State with parking usage data and are a potential means of
providing drivers with real-time parking availability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ FHWA, National Coalition on Truck Parking, available at:
<a href="https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/Freight/infrastructure/truck_parking/coalition/index.htm">https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/Freight/infrastructure/truck_parking/coalition/index.htm</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
States are strongly encouraged to update their commercial motor
vehicle assessment periodically with consideration of the relevancy,
timeliness and accuracy of the latest assessment, as well as
consideration of shifting trends in commercial and industrial land
uses, intermodal generators, traffic patterns and congestion impacting
freight movements, safety considerations, truck parking capacity and
technology, and new data resources that would support a truck parking
assessment.
11. The most recent supply chain cargo flows in the State,
expressed by mode of transportation.
Supply chain cargo flows represent end-to-end movement of freight
and provide essential information for planning infrastructure
investments. Understanding supply chain cargo flows for a State
includes information about the State's economy; operation and logistics
of freight facilities such warehouses and distribution centers; and how
commodities are transported across the State on a multimodal
transportation network. While information about transportation network
system performance for a single mode, land use and locations of freight
facilities, and economy is tracked by public agencies, DOT acknowledges
that commodity level operations and logistic information is difficult
to access due to privacy concerns. In addition, this proprietary
business-sensitive freight operations and logistics information is
spread among multiple agents of the supply chain, including shippers,
carriers, receivers, and logistics agencies, and adds challenges to
sourcing consistently available information.
[[Page 8962]]
Minimum Elements
This analysis should include data aggregating total cargo flows by
mode, regardless of commodity type and geography. The FAF provides
estimated freight flow data by mode of transportation and can be a
starting point for this analysis. DOT recognizes that the definition of
``most recent'' will depend on the data sources chosen to support this
analysis. Ideally, the data sources will have been updated within the
previous three years, and they should not be older than five years.
Similarly, the level of granularity in the analysis will depend on the
data sources used.
Additional Recommendations for State Consideration
DOT encourages States to develop the State's economic profile by
identifying major industries, major trading partners and major
commodities that are transported into, outside and within the State by
various modes of transportation (see discussion of Item 1:
Identification of Significant Freight System Trends, Needs, and Issues
with Respect to the State). Identifying significant external (State or
country) trading partners can be useful in identifying gateways (both
within the State and outside of the State) that can inform where supply
chains flow and help prioritize corridor and gateway investments within
the State and nation. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) information (<a href="https://www.bea.gov/data/gdp">https://www.bea.gov/data/gdp</a>) published through Bureau of Economic Analysis is
a potential data source for developing a State's economic profile.
DOT encourages States to focus their attention on cargo flows
pertaining to the State's major industries or commodities and greatest
sources of freight volume growth rather than trying to describe every
commodity. DOT encourages States to pursue data with the lowest level
of granularity (i.e., county to county), but recognizes difficulties
relating to availability of that data and does not require it to meet
the minimum requirements. States are strongly encouraged to include
cargo flows for critical products related to health, safety, energy,
and food as well as for the aforementioned areas of proper Federal
interest.
DOT recommends States to engage the freight industry though State
Freight Advisory Committees to forge partnerships in sharing major
freight operations and logistics information identifying major cargo
flows, flow destinations, and supply chain bottlenecks to improve end-
to-end movement of freight that is critical to inform the State Freight
Plan.
12. An inventory of commercial ports in the State.
Minimum Elements
This section of the State Freight Plan should include a listing of
all commercial ports in the State that are active at the time the State
is updating their State Freight Plan. For purposes of this guidance, a
commercial port would be defined as any coastal seaport, inland
waterway or Great Lakes port, inland port, land port of entry, or
airport/spaceport, both privately owned/operated and publicly owned/
operated, within the State. For coastal seaports, inland waterway or
Great Lakes port, inland port, and land port of entry, any of those
commercial ports moving more than two million short tons of cargo
annually, as of the most recent data available for that commercial
port, should be included in the inventory. The Port Performance Freight
Statistics Program (<a href="http://www.bts.gov/ports">www.bts.gov/ports</a>) is a source of data on capacity
and throughput for the largest ports.
Additional Recommendations for State Consideration
DOT strongly encourages States to identify and address ports of
particular relevance to industries of national interest and corollary
supply chains.
DOT encourages States to consider including an inventory of cargo-
handling airports in their State, given the important role that
aviation plays in transporting high-value, time-sensitive goods.
DOT encourages States to consider providing additional information
about each port and airport, such as the total throughput, specific
commodities moved, and other defining characteristics of the facility
(i.e., number of terminals, multimodal connections, equipment, etc.).
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Waterborne Commerce
Statistics Center \13\ provides data on tonnage for maritime commercial
ports. DOT recommends use of the Bureau of Transportation Statistics
(BTS) T-100 Market (All Carriers) data set \14\ to measure total
freight landing/departing from airports and the BTS Transborder Freight
data set \15\ for land ports of entry. Securing access to freight data
at inland ports that primarily serve rail may require States to work
with the private sector to determine total cargo moved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water
Resources, <a href="https://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/About/Technical-Centers/WCSC-Waterborne-Commerce-Statistics-Center-2/">https://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/About/Technical-Centers/WCSC-Waterborne-Commerce-Statistics-Center-2/</a>.
\14\ DOT, T-100 Market, Statistical Products and Data, available
at: <a href="https://www.transtats.bts.gov/Fields.asp?gnoyr_VQ=FMF">https://www.transtats.bts.gov/Fields.asp?gnoyr_VQ=FMF</a>.
\15\ DOT, Data Dashboard, available at: <a href="https://data.bts.gov/stories/s/myhq-rm6q">https://data.bts.gov/stories/s/myhq-rm6q</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
States are not prohibited from including facilities in this
inventory that do not meet the minimum tonnage threshold, particularly
if those facilities had a down year due to factors outside their
control or are facilities the State expects will meet the threshold in
the future, for example, due to expected growth in cargo movements.
13. If applicable, consideration of the findings or recommendations
made by any multi-State freight compact to which the State is a party
under 49 U.S.C. 70204.
Minimum Elements
If a State belongs to a multi-State freight compact, as described
in 49 U.S.C. 70204, then the State Freight Plan must document how the
State considered any findings or recommendations made by that multi-
State freight compact (49 U.S.C. 70202(b)(13)). Per 49 U.S.C. 70204(d),
the Secretary of Transportation must establish a program to provide
grants to multi-State freight compacts or States seeking to form a
multi-State freight compact. The statute does not identify any existing
compacts, so it is up to the State to determine if they currently
belong to an existing multi-State freight compact.
Additional Recommendations for State Consideration
States may consider addressing the findings or recommendations made
by any multi-State organization in their State Freight Plans, even if
those organizations do not constitute a ``multi-State freight compact''
as defined in 49 U.S.C. 70204. Multi-State organizations could include
regional economic development partnerships such as the Appalachian
Regional Commission, or multi-State MPOs.
14. The impacts of e-commerce on freight infrastructure in the
State.
The use of e-commerce for purchasing goods has increased
significantly in recent years, particularly since the beginning of
2020. This e-commerce growth has impacted freight transportation
patterns and related transportation infrastructure, and these impacts
likely will continue to grow in the coming years due to projected,
continued e-commerce growth.
One of the most obvious ways e-commerce is impacting freight
transportation infrastructure is through increased, direct deliveries
to consumers, often to personal residences. While the impact of e-
commerce on the
[[Page 8963]]
overall volume of transportation is ambiguous, freight travel patterns
are changing due to the increased number of delivery locations. E-
commerce shipments to personal residences increases freight volumes on
roadways and streets not designed for freight vehicles. More frequent
deliveries, often with multiple attempts, and reverse logistics for
returns only increase the complexity of small freight shipments.
The growing number of curbside deliveries creates challenges in
many communities given the proximity to passenger and pedestrian
traffic, especially in urban environments. This requires a better
understanding of land use patterns in specific jurisdictions to
reconcile potential conflicts. Some communities are working with
freight carriers to address these issues by creating designated
delivery locker locations, which generally are located near residential
areas, close enough for many recipients to travel easily to the lockers
but with a small enough number of locations to reduce significantly the
number of stops freight carriers need to make for deliveries.
Minimum Elements
State Freight Plans should include a narrative describing how
shifts toward e-commerce are affecting freight infrastructure in the
State. To the extent that data is available, States should consider
supplementing their narratives with applicable data, such as changes in
warehousing space and capacity within the State. States should consider
identifying critical infrastructure for e-commerce, particularly any
airports that move large volumes of e-commerce deliveries and primary
routes to major distribution centers located across the State.
Additional Recommendations for State Consideration
States may also consider how emerging freight technologies, such as
Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) may influence freight and small-package
delivery in both urban and rural settings. These technologies have the
potential to supplement existing last-mile and middle mile freight
operations, reduce delivery times in remote areas, and create new
infrastructure or airspace management needs. Coordination with local
governments, MPOs, airports, State aviation authorities, and private
operations can help States monitor deployment trends, assess potential
impacts, and identify opportunities or constraints relevant to State
Freight Plan goals.
15. Considerations of military freight.
The expeditious movement of military cargoes and equipment in
support of the global deployment ability and sustainment of U.S. Armed
Forces is critical for national defense. These cargoes travel on the
same infrastructure that commercial freight moves on, and it is vital
that this infrastructure is maintained to always be in a state of
readiness. The military is a critical economic driver for many States,
and it is a driver of freight and cargo movements. This includes the
movement of military personnel, supplies, and equipment around the
United States, and throughout the world. The U.S. Transportation
Command (USTRANSCOM) of the Department of War (DOW) is the single point
of contact for completing deployment and global distribution for the
military in support of the National Military Strategy. The expeditious
movement of military equipment is central to DOW's mission of providing
military forces needed to deter war and to protect the security of the
Nation, while working to minimize disruption of civilian
transportation. Coordination between the military and Federal, State,
and local government agencies is essential for safe and successful
military convoy deployments.
Minimum Elements
At minimum, State Freight Plans must include a discussion, which
should be unclassified, of military freight within their State (49
U.S.C. 70202(b)(15)). Plans should identify specific military
installations as well as key transportation infrastructure within their
State identified by USTRANSCOM (e.g., Strategic Highway Network,
Strategic Railroad Corridor Network) that support military cargo
movement, including highways, railroads, seaports, and airports.
USTRANSCOM identifies these assets by type and State, as well as
specific corridor studies, on their website.\16\ Note that some of
these corridor studies are restricted access, so States are encouraged
to reach out to USTRANSCOM for more information. States should be
cognizant that military freight, like other types of freight cargo, may
only pass through their State on its infrastructure as it moves from
its origin to destination. States should make sure to consider these
impacts in their discussion as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ USTRANSCOM, available at: <a href="https://www.ustranscom.mil/">https://www.ustranscom.mil/</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information on military cargoes can be aggregated and does not need
to delineate between type of cargo/equipment. States should consider
vehicle size and weight-related impacts and needs related to military
freight movements.
FHWA has developed a publication on coordination procedures between
States and DOW to support military deployments: Coordinating Military
Deployments on Roads and Highways a Guide for State and Local
Agencies.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ FHWA, Coordinating Military Deployments on Roads and
Highways: A Guide for State and Local Agencies, available at:
<a href="https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop05029/">https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop05029/</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional Recommendations for State Consideration
States are encouraged to collaborate with USTRANSCOM and the
military installations located within their respective State on
addressing any additional information necessary, including deployment
needs, training, types of moves, and deficiencies that are being or
need to be addressed.
16. Strategies and goals to decrease--
A. The severity of impacts of extreme weather and natural disasters
on freight mobility,
B. The impacts of freight movement on local air pollution,
C. The impacts of freight movement on flooding and stormwater
runoff, and
D. The impacts of freight movement on wildlife habitat loss;
Events such as heavy precipitation periods, coastal flooding, heat,
wildfires, and other extreme weather threaten freight infrastructure.
Beyond the potential loss of access for localized populations to
critical goods and services, the range of impacts may include flooding
and damage to highways, limited waterway access, buckled runways, and
weakened structures such as bridges. Severe conditions may reduce the
life of capital assets, increase operational disruptions, and create
the need for new infrastructure. Some consequences may require changes
in the design, constructions, siting, operation, and maintenance of
infrastructure. Freight mobility also can impact wildlife habitat and
local air quality, particularly as freight movements and facilities
take on a greater footprint and carry more freight traffic.
Minimum Elements
Consideration of all four of these elements is required for a State
Freight Plan to meet minimum requirements (49 U.S.C. 70202(b)(16)).
State Freight Plans should set measurable goals to decrease the impacts
of each statutory element and should identify strategies to achieve
those goals while supporting freight mobility, like significantly
reducing freight bottlenecks to curb wasteful
[[Page 8964]]
emissions associated with idling. The State Freight Plan should include
a discussion of existing conditions (``the baseline''), including
reference to recent related events, such as extreme weather, natural
disaster, flooding, stormwater runoff, or changes in air quality;
impacts of freight infrastructure construction and operations on
communities and wildlife habitat; consideration of anticipated future
impacts to freight transportation as the result of extreme weather and
flooding events; and impacts of freight emissions and increasing
freight volumes on communities and wildlife habitat. EPA provides air
quality statuses and trends for cities and counties; \18\ this data
should be included as reference points in State Freight Plans. FHWA's
environmental toolkit \19\ provides a number of resources relating to
air quality, stormwater,\20\ floodplains, wildlife habitat, and
ecosystems that can be used to set goals and identify strategies for
addressing them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ EPA, Air Quality--Cities and Counties, available at:
<a href="https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-cities-and-counties">https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-cities-and-counties</a>.
\19\ FHWA, Environmental Review Toolkit, available at: <a href="https://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/">https://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/</a>.
\20\ For more information, see EPA's National Menu of Best
Management Practices (BMPs) for Stormwater <a href="https://www.epa.gov/npdes/national-menu-best-management-practices-bmps-stormwater">https://www.epa.gov/npdes/national-menu-best-management-practices-bmps-stormwater</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional Recommendations for State Consideration
State DOTs are strongly encouraged to work collaboratively with
other State agencies, local governments, and MPOs to develop goals and
identify strategies for inclusion in their State Freight Plan. Local
governments and MPOs may have more specific tools and data that can be
used to set goals. States are also encouraged to leverage existing
statewide resilience plans and strategies, as well as long-range
statewide and metropolitan transportation plans, and to apply those to
a freight-specific context.
States are encouraged to establish State Freight Advisory
Committees (see Section IV of this guidance) that can spur discussion
on responding to supply change disruptions that may arise from extreme
weather and stormwater flooding events. States are strongly encouraged
to evaluate existing freight routes and consider whether investment in
alternative routes, including the use of alternative modes, is
necessary to maintain supply chain resilience. To the extent that
negative environmental and community impacts are attributed to
increased freight traffic, particularly in areas already characterized
by significant freight movements, States are also encouraged to
consider whether investing in infrastructure that supports alternative
freight routes will mitigate those impacts. Diversifying freight flows
can help reduce the impacts of major freight hubs on surrounding
communities, while mitigating the increased supply chain risks
associated with an over-concentration of freight in a localized
geography. Attracting freight activity to new locations can also create
economic opportunity for struggling communities. When appropriate, DOT
recommends States look beyond their borders and consider how freight
investments in their States may help alleviate concerns about negative
impacts reported along major freight routes in other States.
In addition, IIJA established the PROTECT program (23 U.S.C. 176),
which provides formula funds and competitive grants to States for
resilience improvements. Under this program, States have the option of
developing a Resilience Improvement Plan, which can reduce the amount
of non-Federal share of the costs of the project. DOT strongly
recommends that States consider including elements of that Resilience
Improvement Plan, or by reference, if applicable, in their State
Freight Plans.
17. Consultation with the State Freight Advisory Committee, if
applicable.
Minimum Elements
Each State should provide information summarizing its consultation
efforts with their State Freight Advisory Committee, if one has been
established. Possible approaches are to reference or summarize minutes
of the meetings of the Committee regarding discussions of the State
Freight Plan. Other methods are acceptable, including the incorporation
of a written position paper from the State Freight Advisory Committee.
As outlined in 49 U.S.C. 70201(c), the advisory role of the State
Freight Advisory Committee does not include approval of the State
Freight Plan.
Additional Recommendations for State Consideration
State DOTs are encouraged to identify membership of the State
Freight Advisory Committees by name and affiliation. They can also
describe their qualifications and areas of expertise in relation to
freight-specific issues.
VI. Other Encouragements
States are strongly encouraged to use the analysis conducted as
part of the State Freight Plan to prioritize the investments they make
with NHFP funding and other eligible Federal funding. This data-driven
and consultative approach to addressing freight needs can ameliorate
issues of safety, supply chain delays, local community impacts, impacts
on families, and other key issues facing the nation.
For DOT review and approval, States are to submit updated State
Freight Plans and Freight Investment Plan amendments to their FHWA
Division Office (49 U.S.C. 70202(h)(2)). This process ensures that DOT
will be able to provide feedback to the States on the Plans and help
States reach compliance for their continued use of NHFP funding.
In addition, State DOTs are encouraged to post agendas and minutes
of freight meetings, as well as the State Freight Plans, amended
Freight Investment Plans, corridor designations, studies, and other
supporting materials on publicly accessible websites to enable access
by neighboring State DOTs and other public and private entities.
DOT encourages each State to designate a freight transportation
coordinator to facilitate effective communication with the FHWA
Division Office in that State regarding the submission of State Freight
Plans and Freight Investment Plans. A point of contact can help
streamline information exchange with the operating administrations of
DOT and freight stakeholders, and help ensure that freight
transportation needs are given adequate consideration in the
transportation planning process. Within a State Freight Plan, States
may provide DOT with information as to how they are organized to plan
and implement freight programs across the network of highways, rail
lines, waterways, airports, maritime ports, inland ports, land ports of
entry, and distribution centers that constitute the multimodal freight
system in their State.
This point of contact would also be useful in managing the flow of
information between the State and DOT on other freight elements, such
as the designation of critical urban freight corridors, critical rural
freight corridors, changes to the Primary Highway Freight System, and
inputs to the National Freight Strategic Plan and National Multimodal
Freight Network. The DOT-designated Marine Highway Network is also an
area of emphasis, and the State points of contact can request edits or
amendments to that network by
[[Page 8965]]
contacting the Maritime Administration's Gateway Directors.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ MARAD, Gateway Office, available at <a href="http://www.marad.dot.gov/about-us/gateway-offices/">http://www.marad.dot.gov/about-us/gateway-offices/</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VII. Data and Analytical Resources for State Freight Planning
The operating administrations of DOT and other departments in the
U.S. Government provide a wide range of data and analysis resources to
assist States in the freight planning process. The following is a
series of links to internet websites that provide useful data and
analysis resources:
General Data and Analysis Sources on Freight
<bullet> DOT National Multimodal Freight Policy: https://
www.transportation.gov/freight
<bullet> DOT Supply Chains: <a href="https://www.transportation.gov/supplychains">https://www.transportation.gov/supplychains</a>
<bullet> BTS General Freight Data: <a href="https://www.bts.gov/topics/freight-transportation">https://www.bts.gov/topics/freight-transportation</a>
<bullet> Freight Analysis Framework, incorporating data from the
BTS Commodity Flow Survey and TransBorder Freight Data; Census Foreign
Trade Statistics; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterborne Commerce
Statistics; and other sources: <a href="https://www.bts.gov/faf">https://www.bts.gov/faf</a>
<bullet> Freight Indicators for Supply Chains: <a href="https://www.bts.gov/freight-indicators">https://www.bts.gov/freight-indicators</a>
<bullet> Commodity Flow Survey: <a href="https://www.bts.gov/cfs">https://www.bts.gov/cfs</a>
Data on Demographics and Economic Censuses
<bullet> Economic Census: <a href="https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/economic-census.html">https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/economic-census.html</a>
<bullet> National Transportation Atlas Database, GIS files across
all modes (including rail, ports, America's Marine Highways, locks,
etc.): <a href="https://www.bts.gov/ntad">https://www.bts.gov/ntad</a>
<bullet> State Statistics: <a href="https://www.bts.gov/product/state-transportation-statistics">https://www.bts.gov/product/state-transportation-statistics</a>
<bullet> North American Industry Classification System (NAICS):
<a href="https://www.census.gov/naics/">https://www.census.gov/naics/</a>
Freight Resources and Statistics by Transportation Mode
<bullet> General Highway Freight Data: <a href="https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/data_sources/index.htm">https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/data_sources/index.htm</a>
<bullet> National Level Maps Showing Freight Truck Commodity
Corridors: <a href="https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/nat_freight_stats/index.htm">https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/nat_freight_stats/index.htm</a>
<bullet> State Level Maps Showing Freight Truck Flow Patterns:
<a href="https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/state_info/index.htm">https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/state_info/index.htm</a>
<bullet> Freight Mobility Trends and Highway Bottlenecks: https://
ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/mobility_trends
<bullet> Freight Performance Measure Primer: <a href="https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop16089">https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop16089</a>
<bullet> Freight Performance Measures: <a href="https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/Freight/freight_analysis/travel_time.htm">https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/Freight/freight_analysis/travel_time.htm</a>
<bullet> The National Coalition on Truck Parking: <a href="https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/Freight/infrastructure/truck_parking/coalition/index.htm">https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/Freight/infrastructure/truck_parking/coalition/index.htm</a>
<bullet> National Performance Management Research Data Set: <a href="https://npmrds.ritis.org/analytics/">https://npmrds.ritis.org/analytics/</a>
<bullet> Performance Based Planning and Programing Guidebook:
<a href="https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/performance_based_planning/pbpp_guidebook/">https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/performance_based_planning/pbpp_guidebook/</a>
<bullet> Quick Response Freight Manual: <a href="https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop19057/fhwahop19057.pdf">https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop19057/fhwahop19057.pdf</a>
<bullet> Examples of existing State Freight Plans: <a href="https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/fpcb/toolkit/allplans.aspx">https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/fpcb/toolkit/allplans.aspx</a>
<bullet> Truck Freight Bottleneck Reporting Guidebook: <a href="https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/tpm/guidance/hop18070.pdf">https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/tpm/guidance/hop18070.pdf</a>
<bullet> Truck Parking Information and Metrics for Assessing Truck
Parking Capacity (Jason's Law): https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/
infrastructure/truck_parking/index.htm
International Statistics
<bullet> U.S. International Trade Data (Census Bureau): <a href="https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/data/index.html">https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/data/index.html</a>
<bullet> International Trade Data and Analysis (International Trade
Administration): <a href="https://www.trade.gov/trade-data-analysis">https://www.trade.gov/trade-data-analysis</a>
<bullet> North American Transborder Freight Data: <a href="https://www.bts.gov/transborder">https://www.bts.gov/transborder</a>
<bullet> Border Crossing/Entry Data: <a href="https://www.bts.gov/browse-statistical-products-and-data/border-crossing-data/border-crossingentry-data">https://www.bts.gov/browse-statistical-products-and-data/border-crossing-data/border-crossingentry-data</a>
Maritime Data and Statistics
<bullet> Navigation Data Center, Waterborne Commerce Statistics
Center, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: <a href="https://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/About/Technical-Centers/WCSC-Waterborne-Commerce-Statistics-Center-2/">https://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/About/Technical-Centers/WCSC-Waterborne-Commerce-Statistics-Center-2/</a>
<bullet> Maritime Data and Statistics, U.S. Maritime
Administration: <a href="https://www.maritime.dot.gov/data-reports/data-statistics/data-statistics">https://www.maritime.dot.gov/data-reports/data-statistics/data-statistics</a>
<bullet> Port Performance Freight Statistics Program: <a href="https://www.bts.gov/ports">https://www.bts.gov/ports</a>
<bullet> Great Lakes St. Lawrence Seaway System, Under Bilateral
American and Canadian management: <a href="https://greatlakes-seaway.com/en/about-us/slsmc-management/annual-corporate-summaries/#">https://greatlakes-seaway.com/en/about-us/slsmc-management/annual-corporate-summaries/#</a>
Rail Freight Resources and Statistics
<bullet> Final State Rail Plan Guidance: <a href="https://railroads.dot.gov/rail-network-development/planning/state-rail-plan-guidance">https://railroads.dot.gov/rail-network-development/planning/state-rail-plan-guidance</a>
<bullet> Surface Transportation Board Data:
[cir] Economic Data: <a href="https://www.stb.gov/reports-data/economic-data/">https://www.stb.gov/reports-data/economic-data/</a>
[cir] Rail Service Data: <a href="https://www.stb.gov/reports-data/rail-service-data/">https://www.stb.gov/reports-data/rail-service-data/</a>
<bullet> Online Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Investment Analysis
Tool: <a href="https://gradedec.fra.dot.gov/">https://gradedec.fra.dot.gov/</a>
Air Freight Statistics
<bullet> FAA Aerospace Forecasts: <a href="https://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation/">https://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation/</a>
<bullet> Office of Airline Information: <a href="https://www.bts.gov/airline-data-downloads">https://www.bts.gov/airline-data-downloads</a>
Other Resources
<bullet> National Transportation Library (research related to
freight transportation and a freight data dictionary): <a href="https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov">https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov</a>
Issued in Washington, DC, on February 19, 2026.
Michael Rutherford,
Assistant Secretary for Multimodal Freight Infrastructure and Policy.
[FR Doc. 2026-03648 Filed 2-23-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-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 February 24, 2026.
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.