TITLE 43. TRANSPORTATION

PART 1. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

CHAPTER 2. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS

The Texas Department of Transportation (department) proposes the repeal of §§2.201 - 2.214 and new §§2.201 - 2.207, concerning Memorandum of Understanding with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department.

EXPLANATION OF PROPOSED REPEAL AND NEW SECTIONS

Transportation Code, §201.607 requires the department to adopt a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with each state agency that has responsibilities for the protection of the natural environment or for the preservation of historic or archeological resources. Transportation Code, §201.607 also requires the department to adopt the MOU and all revisions to it by rule and to periodically evaluate and revise the MOU. The department has evaluated its MOU with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) adopted in 2013, and finds it necessary to repeal existing §§2.201 - 2.214 and simultaneously adopt new §§2.201 - 2.207.

New §§2.201 - 2.207 have been agreed upon by department staff and TPWD staff. The intent of the MOU is to foster communication, collaboration, and cooperation between TPWD and TxDOT on the review of transportation projects and protection of State natural resources.

The proposed MOU is more streamlined and straightforward compared to the existing MOU. It removes the various analyses that are required to determine whether coordination with TPWD is required on a given transportation project under the existing MOU, which are overly complicated and unnecessary. A simpler threshold is needed because the number of projects that require environmental review, including potential analyses to determine whether coordination with TPWD is triggered, has increased dramatically in recent years, from 1,669 projects in 2013 to 4,302 projects in 2019. Therefore, the proposed MOU requires coordination on projects that require an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement, which is a substantially more straightforward threshold compared to the existing MOU.

In addition to simplifying the threshold for coordination with TPWD, the proposed MOU will reduce the number of projects coordinated by eliminating the requirement to coordinate with TPWD on projects that are categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement. Under the proposed MOU, this will reduce the number of projects requiring coordination to fewer than 100 per year. This will allow department and TPWD staff to focus their coordination efforts on larger scale transportation projects. Projects that do not require an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement can still be coordinated with TPWD at TxDOT's discretion.

The proposed MOU also streamlines the actual coordination process. Under the existing MOU, there are two types of coordination, "early coordination" and "administrated coordination." The existing MOU is not specific about the type of information that must be provided by the department to TPWD for early coordination, but rather states that TPWD will notify the department when documentation is sufficient to conduct early project coordination. For administrated coordination, the existing MOU requires submittal of a coordination packet to TPWD, including a "Tier II site assessment." The proposed MOU streamlines this procedure by requiring the department to contact TPWD when it has completed its analysis of potential impacts to fish, wildlife, and other natural resources, at which point TPWD may review the information in the department's on-line Environmental Compliance Oversight System (ECOS). Then, when the department releases the draft environmental assessment or draft environmental impact statement for the project, the department will provide TPWD with the notice of availability of the document, at which point TPWD will have 45 days to provide comments back to the department. In other words, instead of preparing special analyses and documents specifically for coordination with TPWD, the proposed MOU relies on documentation that the department already prepares as part of its overall environmental review of the project. The MOU also provides that the department will respond to TPWD comments as outlined in Section 12.0011(c) of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code.

The proposed MOU also provides that TPWD will provide a set of non-project-specific recommended best management practices (BMPs), which the department will post on its external website. The department will indicate in the environmental assessment or environmental impact statement which of the recommended BMPs will be applied to the project.

The proposed MOU also reduces the number of department-funded staff positions at TPWD. Under the existing MOU, the department funds two TPWD staff positions to facilitate TPWD's review of department projects. Because of the simpler coordination threshold and procedures, and fewer number of projects coordinated under the proposed MOU, the proposed MOU reduces the number of TPWD staff positions funded by the department to one.

The proposed MOU also provides that the department and TPWD will identify and collaborate on mutually agreeable conservation actions, and will appoint members to an interagency team that will meet on at least a bi-annual basis to discuss and make recommendations for opportunities for the agencies to partner on conservation actions.

The proposed MOU also contains updated provisions governing the department's use of TPWD's Texas Natural Diversity Database (TXNDD).

The proposed MOU also eliminates the need for additional programmatic agreements. The existing MOU calls for six programmatic agreements between the department and TPWD, in addition to the MOU itself. These additional agreements are not necessary under the new agreed-upon coordination procedures.

Department staff will consult with TPWD staff before responding to any comments received on this proposed rulemaking or making revisions to proposed §§2.201 - 2.207, with the goal that the final adopted §§2.201 - 2.207 will reflect the MOU agreed upon by staff from both agencies.

SECTION BY SECTION EXPLANATION OF PROPOSED MOU

Section 2.201, Purpose, sets out the purpose of the proposed MOU, explains that it supersedes the existing MOU and programmatic agreements, and explains that the effective date will be the date on which this rulemaking becomes effective.

Section 2.202, Definitions, contains definitions of terms used in the proposed MOU.

Section 2.203, Applicability, explains the applicability of the proposed MOU. It explains that the department will coordinate with TPWD on projects that require an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement, and that the department may coordinate other projects with TPWD at its discretion. It also explains that, under certain circumstances, the department will coordinate reevaluations of projects previously coordinated with TPWD under the existing MOU.

Section 2.204, Coordination and Communication, sets forth the coordination process for projects subject to coordination under the proposed MOU. It explains that the department will contact TPWD when it has completed its analysis of potential impacts to fish, wildlife, and other natural resources, and will provide TPWD with access to ECOS so that TPWD staff can review the information prepared by the department. It explains that TPWD will provide the department with its recommended non-project-specific BMPs, and the department will post them on its external website. It explains that the department will indicate in the environmental assessment or environmental impact statement which BMPs will be applied to the project. It explains that the department will provide TPWD with the notice of availability of the draft environmental assessment or environmental impact statement, that TPWD will provide comments within 45 days, and that the department will respond to TPWD's comments as outlined in Section 12.0011(c) of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code.

Section 2.205, Commitments, provides that the department will provide funding, through an interagency contract, for one TPWD employee to review transportation projects under the proposed MOU. It also provides that the department and TPWD will identify and collaborate on mutually agreeable conservation actions.

Section 2.206, Interagency Team, requires the department and TPWD to appoint members to an interagency team that will meet at least on a bi-annual basis to discuss and make recommendations for opportunities for the agencies to partner on conservation actions.

Section 2.207, Texas Natural Diversity Database, provides that TPWD will continue to provide information from its TXNDD to the department, that the department will conduct training on access and use of the TXNDD to its employees, and that the department will report to TPWD observations of species of greatest conservation need within TxDOT project areas.

FISCAL NOTE

Lanny Wadle, Interim Chief Financial Officer, has determined, in accordance with Government Code, §2001.024(a)(4), that as a result of enforcing or administering the rules for each of the first five years in which the proposed rules are in effect, there will be cost-saving fiscal implications for state or local governments. The department currently spends approximately $99,432 per year for each of two department-funded TPWD employees who review TxDOT transportation projects under the existing MOU. By reducing the number of department-funded TPWD employees from two to one, the department will realize a cost savings of approximately $99,432 per year in each of the first five years in which the proposed rules are in effect.

Additionally, both the department and TPWD will benefit from the streamlined coordination process set forth in the proposed MOU, as fewer projects will require coordination, and the proposed MOU does not require the preparation of Tier II analyses or any other special coordination materials or analyses, but rather relies on analyses and documentation that the department already prepares as part of its overall environmental review. Local governments will also benefit from this more efficient coordination process, as they will also not have to prepare Tier II analysis or other special coordination materials or analyses for local government-sponsored projects subject to the department's environmental review process. The amount of cost savings is indeterminable because the department does not track its staff time or other expenses in preparing and reviewing coordination materials under the existing MOU, and the number of projects that would require coordination under the proposed MOU will vary in future years depending on various factors. Additionally, it is expected that the more efficient coordination process will allow department staff to focus on other duties associated with delivery of transportation projects, which have greatly increased in recent years as explained above.

LOCAL EMPLOYMENT IMPACT STATEMENT

Carlos Swonke, Director, Environmental Affairs Division, has determined that there will be no significant impact on local economies or overall employment as a result of enforcing or administering the proposed rules and therefore, a local employment impact statement is not required under Government Code, §2001.022.

PUBLIC BENEFIT

Carlos Swonke, Director, Environmental Affairs Division has determined, as required by Government Code, §2001.024(a)(5), that for each year of the first five years in which the proposed rules are in effect, the public benefit anticipated as a result of enforcing or administering the rules will be continued exchange of information between the department and TPWD regarding transportation projects and their potential impact on natural resources, and better informed decision-making by the department regarding the potential impacts of transportation projects. Additionally, improvements made by the proposed MOU compared to the existing one will result in increased efficiency in the department's coordination of transportation projects with TPWD, which should result in more efficient delivery of transportation projects.

COSTS ON REGULATED PERSONS

Mr. Swonke has also determined, as required by Government Code, §2001.024(a)(5), that for each year of that period there are no anticipated economic costs for persons, including a state agency, special district, or local government, required to comply with the proposed rules and therefore, Government Code, §2001.0045, does not apply to this rulemaking.

ECONOMIC IMPACT STATEMENT AND REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS

There will be no adverse economic effect on small businesses, micro-businesses, or rural communities, as defined by Government Code, §2006.001, and therefore, an economic impact statement and regulatory flexibility analysis are not required under Government Code, §2006.002.

GOVERNMENT GROWTH IMPACT STATEMENT

Mr. Swonke has considered the requirements of Government Code, §2001.0221 and anticipates that the proposed rules will affect government growth. He expects that during the first five years that the rules would be in effect:

(1) they would not create or eliminate a government program;

(2) their implementation would not require the creation of new employee positions, but would eliminate an existing employee position by reducing the number of department-funded TPWD employees from two to one;

(3) their implementation would not require an increase or decrease in future legislative appropriations to the agency;

(4) they would not require an increase or decrease in fees paid to the agency;

(5) they would not create a new regulation;

(6) they would not expand an existing regulation, but rather would repeal the existing MOU between the department and TPWD, and replace it with a new one that is more streamlined and that would reduce the number of transportation projects that require coordination between the department and TPWD;

(7) they would not increase or decrease the number of individuals subject to their applicability as the rules do not apply to individuals but rather they apply to agencies, specifically the department and TPWD; and

(8) they would not positively or adversely affect this state's economy.

TAKINGS IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Mr. Swonke has determined that a written takings impact assessment is not required under Government Code, §2007.043.

COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM CONSISTENCY REVIEW

The proposed repeal of §§2.201 - 2.214 and new §§2.201 - 2.207 are subject to the Texas Coastal Management Program (CMP) and must be consistent with all applicable CMP policies. The department has concluded that the proposed rules are consistent with all applicable CMP policies.

The CMP policies applicable to transportation projects are set forth at 31 TAC §501.31. This rulemaking does not dictate the siting of transportation projects or contain any other requirements that would contradict any of the CMP policies listed in that rule. Rather, it establishes a mechanism by which the department and TPWD can efficiently and appropriately exchange information regarding transportation projects and their potential impacts on natural resources, as required by statute at Transportation Code, §201.607, that is acceptable to both department and TPWD staff. None of the CMP policies listed at §501.31 pertain to the mechanism by which the department and TPWD exchange information. Additionally, the intent of the MOU is to foster communication, collaboration, and cooperation between TPWD and the department on the review of transportation projects and protection of State natural resources, which is generally in alignment with the overall purpose of the CMP policies listed at 31 TAC §501.31. For these reasons, this rulemaking is consistent with the CMP policies listed at 31 TAC §501.31.

A copy of this rulemaking will be submitted to the General Land Office for its comments on the consistency of the proposed rulemaking with the CMP. The department requests that the public also give comment on whether the proposed rulemaking is consistent with the CMP.

SUBMITTAL OF COMMENTS

Written comments on the repeal of §§2.201 - 2.214 and proposed new §§2.201 - 2.207, may be submitted to Rule Comments, General Counsel Division, Texas Department of Transportation, 125 East 11th Street, Austin, Texas 78701-2483 or to RuleComments@txdot.gov with the subject line "TPWD MOU." The deadline for receipt of comments is 5:00 p.m. on May 10, 2021. In accordance with Transportation Code, §201.811(a)(5), a person who submits comments must disclose, in writing with the comments, whether the person does business with the department, may benefit monetarily from the proposed amendments, or is an employee of the department.

SUBCHAPTER G. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT

43 TAC §§2.201 - 2.214

STATUTORY AUTHORITY

The repeals are proposed under Transportation Code, §201.101, which provides the Texas Transportation Commission (commission) with the authority to establish rules for the conduct of the work of the department, and more specifically, §201.607, requiring the department to have an MOU with TPWD and to adopt it by rulemaking.

CROSS REFERENCE TO STATUTES IMPLEMENTED BY THIS RULEMAKING

Transportation Code, §§201.604, 201.607, and 201.752.

§2.201.Purpose.

§2.202.Applicability.

§2.203.Definitions.

§2.204.Texas Natural Diversity Database (TXNDD).

§2.205.Determining Need for TPWD Coordination.

§2.206.Coordination Triggers.

§2.207.Early Project Coordination.

§2.208.Administrated Project Coordination.

§2.209.Tier II Site Assessment.

§2.210.Communication during Construction.

§2.211.Project Tracking.

§2.212.Site Access.

§2.213.Programmatic Agreements.

§2.214.Interagency MOU Implementation Team.

The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the proposal and found it to be within the state agency's legal authority to adopt.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on March 25, 2021.

TRD-202101317

Becky Blewett

Deputy General Counsel

Texas Department of Transportation

Earliest possible date of adoption: May 9, 2021

For further information, please call: (512) 463-8630


43 TAC §§2.201 - 2.207

STATUTORY AUTHORITY

The new sections are proposed under Transportation Code, §201.101, which provides the Texas Transportation Commission (commission) with the authority to establish rules for the conduct of the work of the department, and more specifically, §201.607, requiring the department to have an MOU with TPWD and to adopt it by rulemaking.

CROSS REFERENCE TO STATUTES IMPLEMENTED BY THIS RULEMAKING

Transportation Code, §§201.604, 201.607, and 201.752.

§2.201.Purpose.

(a) Transportation Code §201.607 requires the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) to adopt a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with each state agency that has responsibilities for the protection of the natural environment or for the preservation of historical or archeological resources, and requires TxDOT and each of the agencies to adopt the memoranda and all revisions by rule. This subchapter contains the MOU between TxDOT and the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) that implements that section.

(b) This subchapter furthers TxDOT's environmental policy, as found in §2.2 of this chapter (relating to Environmental Policy), to integrate environmental considerations into department activities to achieve compliance with applicable laws, regulations and standards. TxDOT will focus on delivering safe, efficient transportation projects and making sound decisions based on a balanced consideration of transportation needs and of social, economic, and environmental impacts of proposed transportation improvements.

(c) According to Parks and Wildlife Code §12.0011, TPWD is the state agency with primary responsibility for protecting the state's fish and wildlife resources; providing recommendations that will protect fish and wildlife resources to local, state, and federal agencies that approve, permit, license, or construct developmental projects; providing information on fish and wildlife resources to any local, state, and federal agencies or private organizations that make decisions affecting those resources.

(d) Except as specified in subsection (f) of this section, this MOU supersedes the MOU adopted on September 1, 2013 and associated programmatic agreements. Nothing in this subchapter supersedes, modifies, or nullifies any other agreement entered into by TxDOT and TPWD.

(e) TxDOT and TPWD shall examine and revise this MOU not later than the fifth anniversary of its effective date, as required by Transportation Code, §201.607. Notwithstanding the above, this MOU remains in effect until revised or terminated by written agreement of TxDOT and TPWD.

(f) The effective date of this MOU is the date on which this Subchapter G takes effect. Projects for which coordination with TPWD has been initiated prior to the effective date of this MOU will complete coordination under the procedures of the September 2013 MOU. Projects for which coordination with TPWD has not been initiated prior to the effective date of this MOU will be governed by this MOU. A project that requires reevaluation, and subsequently requires coordination as specified in §2.203 of this subchapter (relating to Applicability), will be governed by this MOU.

(g) The intent of the MOU is to foster communication, collaboration, and cooperation between TPWD and TxDOT on the review of transportation projects and protection of State natural resources.

§2.202.Definitions.

The following words and terms, when used in this subchapter, or in documents prepared by TxDOT or TPWD pursuant to this subchapter, have the following meanings.

(1) Best or Beneficial Management Practices (BMPs)--Measures provided by TPWD that will result in avoidance and minimization of potential impacts to natural resources.

(2) Categorical Exclusion (CE)--A category of actions that have been found to have no significant effect on the environment, individually or cumulatively, and are excluded from the requirement to prepare an Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement as defined in §2.81 of this chapter (relating to Categorical Exclusions).

(3) Environmental Assessment (EA)--Environmental documentation required for a transportation project that TxDOT has not classified as a categorical exclusion and that does not clearly require the preparation of an EIS, or if TxDOT believes that an EA would assist in determining the need for an EIS, as defined in §2.83 of this chapter (relating to Environmental Assessments).

(4) Environmental decision--The official record created after coordination, analysis, and reviews are completed concluding that an action and its environmental impacts have been adequately identified and assessed. A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is the environmental decision document for an EA and a Record of Decision (ROD) is the environmental decision document for an EIS.

(5) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)--Environmental documentation required for a transportation project if there are likely to be significant environmental impacts, as defined in §2.84 of this chapter (relating to Environmental Impact Statements).

(6) Interagency Team (IAT)--As defined in §2.206 of this subchapter (relating to Interagency Team), TPWD and TxDOT staff identified to communicate on behalf of TPWD and TxDOT to carry out the MOU.

(7) Qualified biologist--A qualified biologist must have, at a minimum, a successful completion of a full 4-year course of study in an accredited college or university leading to a bachelor's or higher degree with a major in biological sciences, natural resource management, wildlife science or management, ecology, zoology, botany, conservation biology, or a closely related field and have experience relevant to the species, habitat, or ecosystems that are being studied or described.

(8) Reevaluation--The review and determination of the validity of the environmental decision under certain circumstances involving changes or delays subsequent to the environmental decision as defined in §2.85 of this chapter (relating to Reevaluations).

(9) Riparian habitat--The area of interface between land and a waterway (e.g., river or stream). River- or creek-dependent habitats which rely on periodic flooding or flushing, sub-irrigated substrates, and other influences of the ephemeral or perennial rivers or creeks to which they are adjacent, including floodplains, wet woodlands, gallery riverine forests, oxbows, swamps, and vegetated islands.

(10) Texas Natural Diversity Database (TXNDD)--A TPWD-owned and maintained database of natural resource records, including species of greatest conservation need (SGCN) and other tracked species, important remnant native vegetation, and other features of Texas natural history.

(11) TPWD--Texas Parks and Wildlife Department.

(12) TPWD Transportation Staff--The qualified biologist at TPWD that is assigned to work solely on transportation projects and related matters.

(13) TxDOT--Texas Department of Transportation.

§2.203.Applicability.

(a) TxDOT will coordinate with TPWD on federal and state transportation projects that require an EA or EIS.

(b) TxDOT may coordinate other projects that do not require an EA or EIS with TPWD at TxDOT's discretion.

(c) If TxDOT prepares a reevaluation for a transportation project that was previously coordinated with TPWD under the 2013 MOU, TxDOT will coordinate the reevaluation with TPWD when any of the following apply:

(1) New impacts not included in previous coordination or increase in impacts from previous coordination to terrestrial and aquatic state-listed species or their habitat as determined by a qualified biologist or rare plant communities with a record in the TXNDD or any state rank or rank range that includes a 1, 2, or 3.

(2) New or increased impacts to riparian habitat or water resources.

(3) Change to commitments made during previous coordination, including BMPs.

(4) Reevaluations of CE level projects with new or increased impacts may be re-coordinated at TxDOT's discretion.

(d) This subchapter does not apply to individual maintenance projects for which a programmatic environmental review is conducted under §2.133 of this chapter (relating to Maintenance Projects and Programs).

§2.204.Coordination and Communication.

(a) For projects requiring an EA or EIS, TxDOT will contact TPWD when TxDOT has completed its analysis of potential impacts to fish, wildlife, and other natural resources. To facilitate collaborative review, TxDOT will provide access to TxDOT's Environmental Compliance Oversight System (ECOS).

(b) TxDOT will post on the Environmental Compliance Toolkit webpage the set of BMPs as recommended by TPWD. This set of BMPs is non-project specific. The application of specific BMPs to individual projects will be determined by TxDOT at its discretion.

(c) TxDOT will indicate in the draft EA or draft EIS the TPWD-recommended BMPs that will be applied to the project. TxDOT may also include information shared by TPWD during collaborative review.

(d) To ensure TxDOT will benefit from any recommendations or information provided by TPWD early in the environmental review process, TxDOT will follow the procedure indicated below.

(1) At or around the same time that a draft EA or draft EIS is made available for public review, but no less than 45 days before the issuance of an environmental decision, TxDOT will email the notice of availability of the document required by §2.108 of this chapter (relating to Notice of Availability) to TPWD at the following email address: WHAB_TxDOT@tpwd.texas.gov or the email account designated by TPWD.

(2) The email communication described in subsection (1) will serve as the "request for comments" in Parks and Wildlife Code §12.0011(b-1).

(3) To facilitate review of a draft EA or EIS, TxDOT will provide access to TxDOT's ECOS.

(e) If TPWD has any information or recommendations to conserve fish and wildlife species and other natural resources it wishes to provide to TxDOT in response to a request for comments, TPWD will provide them in writing to TxDOT within 45 days of the date on which TxDOT submitted the request for comments by email.

(f) If TPWD provides any recommendations or information regarding fish and wildlife to TxDOT after the 45-day deadline specified in subsection (e) of this section, then TxDOT will consider such recommendations or information to the extent practicable.

(g) TxDOT will respond as outlined in Parks and Wildlife Code §12.0011(c).

(h) Electronic communication will be used to the maximum extent practical.

§2.205.Commitments.

(a) TxDOT will provide funding, through an interagency contract, for one TPWD employee to review transportation projects under this agreement. TxDOT will actively and consistently engage this employee in project development, conservation actions, and other natural resource coordination needs as determined appropriate by TxDOT. The interagency contract to fund the review of transportation projects will be renewed biennially at TxDOT's discretion.

(b) Through that same interagency contract or other authority as appropriate, TxDOT and TPWD will identify and collaborate on mutually agreeable conservation actions. Conservation actions to be undertaken will be described in detail in an interagency contract document or associated workplan agreed upon by the IAT.

§2.206.Interagency Team.

(a) Each agency shall mutually appoint members to IAT which will meet at least on a bi-annual basis.

(b) An Interagency Team shall discuss and make recommendations for opportunities for the agencies to partner on conservation actions including but not limited to research, offsets, specification development, and restoration opportunities.

§2.207.Texas Natural Diversity Database (TXNDD).

(a) This MOU authorizes certain limited use and distribution of TXNDD information and specifies security requirements.

(b) TPWD will continue to provide TXNDD information to TxDOT on a schedule agreed upon by both parties.

(c) Except as provided in subsections (d), (e) and (f) of this section, TxDOT will not release the TXNDD or any portion of it to outside parties unless TxDOT receives a request under the Texas Public Information Act for the TXNDD or information contained therein, in which case TxDOT will notify TPWD of the request.

(d) Texas Public Information Act requests for copies of approved environmental review documents and environmental reports that contain information from the TXNDD do not require TPWD notification. Such documents and reports are not subject to the restrictions in subsection (c) of this section and may be disclosed to the public by TxDOT.

(e) TxDOT will conduct training on access and use of the TXNDD as it relates to transportation projects for TxDOT environmental staff and environmental contract employees. TPWD will assist in training development and implementation if requested.

(f) TxDOT will provide completed TXNDD reporting forms or any other format preferred by TPWD for observations of SGCN occurrences, which include federally and state protected species, within TxDOT project areas and collected by TxDOT staff and contract individuals.

The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the proposal and found it to be within the state agency's legal authority to adopt.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on March 25, 2021.

TRD-202101318

Becky Blewett

Deputy General Counsel

Texas Department of Transportation

Earliest possible date of adoption: May 9, 2021

For further information, please call: (512) 463-8630