Pull to refresh
Logo
Daily Brief
Following Why
FHWA quietly deletes the “rulebook” for tribal and forest road asset management

FHWA quietly deletes the “rulebook” for tribal and forest road asset management

Rule Changes
By Newzino Staff |

A 21-year-old safety-and-asset-management framework is stripped from the CFR—replaced by guidance and agency discretion.

December 17th, 2025: The rescissions take effect

Overview

On December 17, 2025, two FHWA rollbacks took effect that sound boring—and matter anyway. The agency removed the formal, on-the-books requirements that told the Forest Service and the Bureau of Indian Affairs how to run safety, bridge, pavement, and congestion management systems for certain federally funded roads.

This is the tension at the heart of the story: supporters see dead, outdated rules finally swept away; critics see guardrails quietly disappearing. The underlying work doesn’t necessarily stop, but the accountability mechanism shifts—from regulations you can point to, to guidance you can argue about.

Key Indicators

2
CFR parts rescinded in this action
23 CFR Part 971 (Forest Highways) and Part 973 (Indian Reservation Roads).
21 years
Age of the rescinded rules
Both management-system rules were issued February 27, 2004.
0
Public comments on the BIA rule
FHWA reported receiving no public comments before finalizing Part 973 rescission.
201 days
Time from proposal to effective date
From the May 30, 2025 NPRMs to the December 17, 2025 effective date.

Interactive

Exploring all sides of a story is often best achieved with Play.

Ever wondered what historical figures would say about today's headlines?

Sign up to generate historical perspectives on this story.

Sign Up

Debate Arena

Two rounds, two personas, one winner. You set the crossfire.

People Involved

Sean McMaster
Sean McMaster
Administrator, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) (Signed the final rescissions; confirmed by the Senate in September 2025)
Sean P. Duffy
Sean P. Duffy
U.S. Secretary of Transportation (Leading a DOT-wide push to reduce regulatory burdens)
Gloria M. Shepherd
Gloria M. Shepherd
Executive Director, Federal Highway Administration (at time of NPRMs) (Led FHWA operations and signed key deregulatory proposals in 2025)
Corey Bobba
Corey Bobba
Office Director, Federal Lands Programs, FHWA Office of Federal Lands Highway (Point of contact for the rescission rulemakings)

Organizations Involved

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
Federal agency
Status: Rulemaker rescinding federal-lands and tribal-road management-system regulations

FHWA funds and oversees highways and federal-lands transportation and sets key national transportation rules.

U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT)
U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT)
Federal Department
Status: Umbrella department driving deregulation priorities affecting FHWA programs

DOT sets national transportation policy and houses FHWA and other modal administrations.

U.S. Forest Service
U.S. Forest Service
Federal Agency
Status: Affected agency; Forest Highway management-system rules removed from CFR

The Forest Service manages national forests and relies on transportation assets for access and operations.

Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)
Federal Agency
Status: Affected agency; Indian Reservation Roads management-system rules removed from CFR

BIA supports tribal governments and administers programs including transportation coordination with FHWA.

Timeline

  1. The rescissions take effect

    Effective Date

    Parts 971 and 973 are removed and reserved in the CFR.

  2. FHWA finalizes rescissions for Forest Highways and Indian Reservation Roads

    Rule

    Final rules publish; FHWA says guidance and statute are sufficient.

  3. FHWA launches the cleanup: proposes rescinding Parts 971 and 973

    Rulemaking

    NPRMs argue the CFR parts are outdated after MAP-21 and unnecessary.

  4. MAP-21 rewires federal-lands and tribal road programs

    Legal

    Congress replaces “develop by rule” with “implement,” and reorganizes the programs.

  5. FHWA writes the playbook: Parts 971 and 973 created

    Rule

    FHWA issues final rules establishing Forest Highway and IRR management-system requirements.

  6. Congress orders federal-lands agencies to build management systems “by rule”

    Legal

    TEA-21 sets a rule-based mandate for safety, bridge, pavement, congestion systems.

Scenarios

1

Nothing Breaks: Agencies Keep the Same Practices, Just Not in the CFR

Discussed by: FHWA’s final-rule rationale; federal-lands transportation program practitioners

The most likely outcome is boring continuity: the Forest Service, BIA, and FHWA keep using similar asset-management tools because they’re operationally necessary. The difference is legal posture: fewer “musts” in regulations, more implementation through manuals, templates, and program agreements—and more room for variation by region and agency.

2

Accountability Fight: Tribes or Oversight Bodies Push for Harder Standards

Discussed by: Tribal transportation administrators; congressional staff; administrative-law attorneys

If project outcomes worsen—or if stakeholders suspect data quality and prioritization are slipping—pressure builds for audits, hearings, or statutory language that restores more explicit requirements. The trigger would be a visible safety failure, a funding dispute, or evidence that guidance alone isn’t producing consistent planning and reporting.

3

The Rollback Spreads: FHWA Removes More Legacy Program Rules Across the Board

Discussed by: DOT deregulation agenda watchers; Federal Register trendlines across 2025

These rescissions are part of a broader pattern in 2025: pruning older rules where statutory foundations shifted years ago. If the strategy continues, expect more targeted deletions, more “removed and reserved” CFR parts, and more reliance on guidance—especially ahead of surface transportation reauthorization deadlines.

Historical Context

ISTEA’s Management-Systems Era (States Required to Build Formal Systems)

1991–1998

What Happened

Congress required states to build multiple transportation management systems, and FHWA/FTA codified them in regulation. The idea was consistent, data-driven planning for pavements, bridges, safety, and congestion—before today’s performance-management vocabulary took over.

Outcome

Short Term

States built processes and reporting structures to comply with the new federal framework.

Long Term

The model later shifted toward performance measures and asset management, with old rules eventually treated as obsolete.

Why It's Relevant Today

It shows a repeating pattern: federal mandates create systems, then politics and statutes loosen the rule-based grip.

MAP-21 Rebuilds Federal-Lands and Tribal Transportation Programs

2012–2015

What Happened

MAP-21 replaced the old Federal Lands Highway Program structure and pushed agencies from “develop by rule” toward “implement” language. It also reframed how tribal transportation was administered under the Tribal Transportation Program.

Outcome

Short Term

Programs and terminology changed, but many operational practices continued under new authorities.

Long Term

A gap grew between what the CFR still said (2004-era) and what the statute and practice had become.

Why It's Relevant Today

FHWA is now closing that gap by deleting regulations instead of rewriting them.

FHWA Removes Obsolete National “Management and Monitoring Systems” Rules

1996–2025

What Happened

FHWA finalized removal of long-standing regulations governing transportation management and monitoring systems, arguing they were obsolete after later statutory changes. The move reinforced a governance style: fewer prescriptive systems in regulation, more reliance on updated statutory frameworks and guidance.

Outcome

Short Term

Old CFR scaffolding disappears, reducing compliance paperwork tied to outdated requirements.

Long Term

Debate shifts to whether guidance can maintain consistency, comparability, and transparency.

Why It's Relevant Today

It’s the closest modern analogue: retiring a federal “systems” rulebook rather than modernizing it.

8 Sources:
+5
Federal Register (GPO / GovInfo) Regulations.gov (Docket materials) FHWA Federal Register (GPO / GovInfo) Federal Register (PDF via GovInfo) FHWA Newsroom FHWA Federal Register (PDF via GovInfo)