map-21 and beyond: a status report from aashto work groups november

MAP-21 and Beyond: A Status Report from AASHTO Work Groups November

MAP-21 and Beyond: A Status Report from AASHTO Work Groups

Overview

• AASHTO’s Implementation Work Groups: Status Reports

• FY 2013 Appropriations, CR and Sequestration

• Beyond MAP-21: Reauthorization Plans


MAP-21 Implementation Work Groups: Focal point for Implementation and Beyond

• Finance • Project Delivery• Freight• Performance

Measures

• Asset Management, Performance-Based Planning and Programming

• Safety• Highways• Transit


MAP-21 Implementation Work Groups

Charge: • Evaluate MAP 21• Identify and provide

recommendations on implementation issues

• Identify State DOT implementation support needs

• Provide internal technical support

Products: • Guidance Issues &

meetings with U.S. DOT• Work Group MAP 21

Assessments of Provisions, Questions & Issues

• AASHTO-wide webinar;• BOD briefing


Work Group Reports


Finance Work Group

Michael Bridges, LA DOTD

AASHTO

Jack Basso

Joung Lee

Finance Report Card AASHTO Policy vs. MAP-21

AASHTO MAP-21

Fund a $565 billion multimodal program

Distribute at least 90% of highway funds to the States by formula through core programs

Maintain Mass Transit Account and 80-20 funding split on fuel taxes

Limit or eliminate earmarks

Expand TIFIA

Provide greater flexibility for tolling

Ensure budgetary firewalls and funding guarantees for all modes

Give special consideration to projects of regional or national significance

Provide funding for testing of VMT-based funding approaches


FinanceImplementation Recommendations

TIFIA• Eligibility

Extend rural project eligibility to all projects where any portion falls in a rural area

• Application Process Collect the $100,000 fee on receipt of application, not letter of interest Provide clarity to ensure better understanding of the application

process Permit joint or separate TIFIA applications for multi-state projects with

shared/common pledge of revenues Consider projects from pre-MAP-21 application process without

requiring new application


FinanceImplementation Recommendations

TIFIA• Project Evaluation

Clarify the project evaluation criteria especially objective/measurable determination of public interest

Use 49% cost share as starting point for evaluation instead of 33%


Project Delivery Work Group

Tim Hill, Ohio DOT

AASHTO

Shannon Eggleston

Jim McDonnell


Project Delivery Report Card AASHTO Policy vs. MAP-21

AASHTO MAP-21

Full Environmental and CE Delegation Recommendations

Delegation-LiteProject Level Conformity

Use of Planning Documents in NEPA

Combined FEIS and ROD

Effect of Lead Agency Decisions

Timing of Permit Decisions

Programmatic Approaches to Compliance/Other Process Recommendations


Project Delivery Report Card AASHTO Policy vs. MAP-21

AASHTO MAP-21

One USDOT Lead Agency

Categorical Exclusion Recommendations

Special Experimental Integrated Planning Program

Funds for Early ROW Acquisition and Corridor Preservation

Contracting Recommendations


Project DeliveryKey Implementation Issues

• New/modified Categorical Exclusions• Planning and NEPA linkages • Environmental Review Process Schedule • Final Environmental Impact Statement

(FEIS) and Record of Decision (ROD)


Project DeliveryAASHTO Recommendations

• Categorical Exclusions Emergency projects: allow for safety and infrastructure

adaptation upgrades. Projects in existing “operational right-of-way” – use statutory

definition

• Planning/NEPA Linkages: Preserve flexibility existing prior to MAP-21

• Environmental review process schedule: Clarify that a coordination plan is not required to contain a schedule

• FEIS/ROD: Consult with State DOTs on definitions of “minor” and “substantial change”


Freight Work Group

Rich Biter, Florida DOT

AASHTO

Leo Penne

Chris Smith


Freight Report Card AASHTO Policy vs. MAP-21

AASHTO MAP-21

Establish National Freight Network

Create $60 billion dedicated Freight Program from new revenue sources

Authorize multi-state freight corridor organization program


FreightKey Implementation Issues

• State Freight Plans—Increased Fed Match• National Freight Network Designation• National Freight Performance Measures• National Freight Strategy• Critical Rural State Freight Corridors• State Freight Advisory Committees• Investment Data/Planning Tools• Freight Conditions/Performance Reports


FreightRecommendations

• Accept state plans for increased fed match /adopt rule consistent with law

• Provide process for state input to national freight network and national freight strategic plan

• Adopt AASHTO/FHWA freight performance measures/collaborative process for implementation


Performance Measures Work Group

Paul Degges, TDOT

AASHTO

Matt Hardy

Tony Kane


Performance Measures Report Card AASHTO Policy vs. MAP-21

AASHTO MAP-21

Performance measures should not be used to apportion or allocate funds

Focus on achieving progress toward a few national goals

Limited set of performance measures developed by cooperation

Targets established by States without approval of U.S. DOT

Require regular public reports but no sanctions or penalties to punish or reward States

&


Performance MeasuresKey Implementation Issues

• Defining a limited set of appropriate and credible performance measures

• Address six issues:1. Is the measure focused?

2. Has it been developed in partnership?

3. Is it maintainable to accommodate changes?

4. Can it be used to support investment decisions, policy making and target setting?

5. Can the measure be used to analyze performance trends?

6. Has the feasibility and practicality to collect, store and report data been considered?


Performance Measures Recommendations

• Safety (five-year moving average for all) Number of Fatalities Fatality Rate Number of Serious Injuries Serious Injury Rate

• Pavement Condition Interstate and Non-Interstate Pavement in Good, Fair and Poor

Condition based on the International Roughness Index Pavement Structural Heath Index (Future)

• Bridges Percent of Deck Area on Structurally Deficient Bridges NHS Bridges in Good, Fair and Poor Condition based on Deck Area

(Future)


Performance Measures Recommendations

• Freight Annual Hours of Truck Delay Truck Reliability Index

• System Performance Annual Hours of Delay Reliability Index

• Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Criteria Pollutant Emissions Annual Hours of Delay (AHD)


Statewide and Metropolitan Planning Work Group

Tim Henkel, MNDOT

AASHTO

Matt Hardy

Jennifer Brickett


Planning Report Card AASHTO Policy vs. MAP-21

AASHTO MAP-21

Strengthen recognition the federal-aid highway program is a federally assisted, state-administered program

Maintain existing balance of authority

Continue broad flexibility in planning procedures

Avoid new administrative burdens

Incorporate performance-based planning and programming aspects

Maintain separation between planning requirements and discretionary grant programs

Streamline fiscal constraint


Statewide andMetropolitan Planning• Work with individual States in developing a

plan update cycle that is least disruptive to the existing process

• Minimize duplication, eliminate conflicts, and streamline planning and reporting requirements for LRP, Asset Management Plan, SHSP, CMAQ and STIP


Performance-based Planning

• States will address national-level measures, but will use many other criteria in selecting projects, developing programs, etc.

• Work with the States in defining the criteria that will be used to evaluate “…the effectiveness of the performance-based planning processes of States.” Do not be prescriptive about what a performance-based

planning process is. Rather, define critical elements.

• Performance must be more than just making progress towards the national-level measures.


Asset Management

• Avoid forcing states into a worst-first approach Need to balance risk reduction, public involvement,

and customer expectations

• Develop guidance on the Transportation Asset Management Plan (TAMP) development process

• Provide States with maximum flexibility in defining risk within their State as part of a risk-based TAMP


Transportation Alternativesand CMAQ• Transportation Alternatives

Ensure flexibility in the competitive grant process at the state level is in order

Do not require a specific process or steps

• CMAQ Ability to use CMAQ for Highway and Transit

Operations Activities Discontinue the 3-year limitation. Enable states to use federal funds to support

highway and transit operations on an ongoing basis.


Safety Work Group

Tom Cole, ID DOT

AASHTO

Tony Kane

Kelly Hardy


Safety Report Card AASHTO Policy vs. MAP-21

AASHTO MAP-21

Increased safety funding

Streamlined, flexible programs

Strengthened Strategic Highway Safety Plans

Incentives instead of sanctions


SafetyKey Implementation Issues

• Strategic Highway Safety Plans (SHSPs) Update process and schedule

• Coordination with Highway Safety Offices and other safety partners SHSPs Performance measures and targets


SafetyRecommendations

• Flexibility States should define their own SHSP update process

and timeframe Update cycles should be no longer than 5 years “Effective” behavioral programs should account for

differences among states Guidance on use of HSIP funds for data

improvements should recognize differences in state laws related to use of federal funds off the state system


Highways Work Group

Carlos Braceras, Utah DOT

AASHTO

Tony Kane

Jim McDonnell

Keith Platte


Highways Report Card AASHTO Policy vs. MAP-21

AASHTO MAP-21

Expand Flexibility in Tolling on Interstate System (Topic II.1.4)

Transferability between Interstate Maintenance, NHS and Bridge Programs. (Topic II.1.5)

Study to re-examine definition of Interstate and NHS (Topic II.2.1)

Expand flexibility in Bridge Program (Topic II.2.4)


Highways Key Implementation Issues

• Expansion of NHS Expanded from 160,000 miles to 220,000 miles NHS requirements now apply to many more facilities

• National Highway Performance Program Penalties for “Interstate System and NHS Bridge

Conditions” section are inconsistent with an asset management approach

• Highway Worker Safety Detailed statutory requirements regarding the use of

positive protection (i.e., barriers)


Highways Key Implementation Issues

• Project Approval and Oversight Life-cycle cost analysis requirement

• Tolling Inter-operability of toll systems across the country is

required within 4 years

• Buy America Provisions now apply to all contracts associated with

a given project, regardless of whether federal funds are involved


Highways Recommendations

• Expansion of NHS Streamline coordination and approval process for

determining appropriate NHS facilities• National Highway Performance Program

Focus on asset management approach, not “worst first”

• Highway Worker Safety Flexibility is vital


• Project Approval and Oversight LCCA is a VE analysis tool and should not be the sole

basis for a final decision

• Tolling Allow flexibility by allowing “planning for inter-

operability” to meet the requirement

• Buy America At a minimum, exclude subcontracted tasks Work to address in next reauthorization

HighwaysRecommendations


Transit Work Group

Ron Epstein, NY DOT

AASHTO

Shayne Gill

Jillian Linnell


Transit Report Card AASHTO Policy vs. MAP-21

AASHTO MAP-21

Recommendation: Provide operating assistance eligibility for small transit systems in large urbanized areas.

Recommendation: Preserve a strong federal partnership.

Recommendation: Maintain a separate transit account within the HTF; preserve the historical general fund contribution to transit.

Recommendation: Simplify and Streamline the current federal grant approval process.



AASHTO MAP-21

Recommendation: Preserve a “needs based” approach to the distribution of formula funds

Recommendation: Streamline the Fixed Guideway Modernization Program by replacing the current seven tier apportionment formula with a simpler two-tier approach.

Recommendation: Formularize discretionary bus/bus facilities program funding.

Recommendation: Consolidate the New Freedom Program and eligible program activities into Elderly Individuals/Individuals with Disabilities Program.

Recommendation: Consolidate the Job Access and Reverse Commute (JARC) Program and eligible program activities into the urbanized and rural formula programs.

Recommendation: Streamline and simplify the New Starts Program review and approval process.



AASHTO MAP-21

Recommendation: Preserve 80 percent federal matching share for formula and capital programs.

Recommendation: Amend Buy America to require that vehicle manufacturers self-certify compliance to FTA.

Recommendation: Restore parity for pre-tax transit pass benefit (e.g., TransitChek) with the current benefit level for parking.

Recommendation: Restore the gasoline gallon equivalent tax credit for alternative fuel public transportation vehicles.

Recommendation: Amend the FTA Charter Rule to allow greater flexibility for public transportation for special events/activities.


TransitKey Implementation Issues

• Mobility for Elderly Individuals/Individuals with Disabilities Provide maximum administrative program flexibility by

authorizing large urbanized areas to transfer Section 5310 funding to states for statewide administration/programmatic efficiency.

• State of Good-Repair (SGR) Simplify and streamline the current grant approval process for

routine and recurring SGR activities (e.g., bus replacement, preventive maintenance, track and signal rehabilitation/replacement) so that benefits to the system/system users accrue faster.


Transit Key Implementation Issues

Transit Safety & Asset Management Utilize existing safety and security programs, such as the CTAA

Certified Safety and Security Officer program as the framework for rural and specialized transportation systems.

New Starts/Core Capacity Grandfather projects currently in Final Design under SAFETEA-LU

New Start processes. Performance Measures/Target

Focus performance measures for rural and specialized systems at a statewide level and limit the frequency of reporting and level of detail for these extremely small systems.


LOOKING AHEAD


FY 2013 Appropriations, CR & Sequestration

• FY 2013 Continuing Resolution 6 months through March 27, 2013 Flat obligation limit for Highways 0.612% increase for transit Continued 6-month funding for USDOT, TIGER, Amtrak

• Outlook for FY 2013 Appropriations• Sequestration

Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Balanced Budget and Deficit Control Act of 1985 exempts contract authority programs

8.2% reduction in non-exempt, non-defense, discretionary funding


Beyond MAP-21: Reauthorization Plans

• AASHTO Work Groups Assess further policy needs and recommendations

• AASHTO Reauthorization Steering Committee February 27, 2013 - AASHTO Washington Briefing May, 2013 - AASHTO Spring Meeting October, 2013 – RSC Meeting

• AASHTO Board of Directors October, 2013 – Denver, Colorado


For More Information AASHTO MAP 21

Implementation Work Groups

http://map21.transportation.org

http://map21.transportation.org/

map-21 and beyond: a status report from aashto work groups november

Documents

aashto work groups map

dot work group map

new application slide

implementation issues

status reports fy

process recommendations

project evaluation criteria

rural project eligibility