Program UpdateProgram Update

Gary Hoffman, P.E.

Topics

Partnering Efforts PennDOT’s Strategic Focus Areas PennDOT’s Infrastructure Needs PennDOT’s Program Federal Reauthorization

Partnering Efforts

• Quarterly Meetings• Pursuing Consistency• Expand Constructability Reviews• Improving ECMS• Managing Letting Schedule• Implementing Innovation

PennDot’s Strategic Focus Areas

System Preservation

Management and Productivity

Quality of Life

Mobility

Safety

System PreservationSystem Preservation

“Maintenance First”

Bridge Structural Adequacy Reduce number of structurally deficient bridges

• PA’s structurally deficient bridges = 22%• National average for structurally deficient = 10%• Goal = match the national average within 20 yrs

Increase bridge preservation• Target: $350 M/year for rehab/replacement

$100 M/year for preservation

• Current Bridge Expenditure $300M

Infrastructure Needs

MAKING THE CASE FOR SYSTEM PRESERVATION

Pennsylvania’s Highway & Bridge Needs

• Highway Pavement:

• 6 Year Needs $ 18.0 Billion

• 6 Year Available Funds $ 13.2 Billion

• Gap $ 4.8 Billion

• Bridges:

• 6 Year Needs $ 3.3 Billion

• 6 Year Available Funds $ 1.8 Billion

• Gap $ 1.5 Billion

6 Year Funding GAP $ 6.3 Billion

2003 System PreservationInternational Roughness Index (IRI)

Good Fair Poor

Interstate 64% 29% 7%

NHS (Non-interstate) 59% 30% 11%

Non-NHS > 2000 ADT 63% 25% 12%

Pavement DeteriorationCurve

Programming Preservation Treatments for roads at key times will extend the life of the road greatly

Pavement Preservation

New Capacity vs. Preservation

24.5% 22.8%15.2%

28.3%19.1%

19.6%

47.2%58.1%

65.1%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

01-04 TIP 03-06 TIP 05-08 TIP

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Preservation %

Operational %

New Capacity %

Statewide

Proposed Statewide Goal

• Improve all “POOR” NHS and Interstate miles

• Focus on Preservation instead of reconstruction to keep the good roads good

System Preservation Pennsylvania Bridge Facts

• Median Age > 50 yrs

• Average Life Span – 50 yrs

• Average Cost/Bridge - $1.25M

$1.25M X 9352 deficient bridges = $11.7 B

National Comparison(based on total deck area)

11.6%

8.0%6.0%

12.3%10.0%

21.9%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

NATIONAL PENNDOT NJ NY OH VA

Structurally Deficient Bridges

PENNDOT Bridges: Age and Eligibility

0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 >700

5

10

15

20

25

30

Dec

k A

rea

in M

sf

Age of Bridges

All PENNDOT Highway Bridges 8 ft and Over - Deck Area

Eligible for REPLACE

Eligible for REHAB

NOT Eligible

Trend in Structurally Deficient BridgesPENNDOT Bridges > 8 ft.

19.5% 19.5%

22.6% 22.4% 22.2%

21.7%21.6%

21.9% 21.9%

8%

11%

13%

16%

18%

21%

23%

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

% Structurally Deficient by Deck Area

National Average = 10%

Local Bridges > 20 ft = 26.9% in 2003

$150M/yr $300M/yr $450M/yr

Proposed Statewide Goal

• Reduce Structurally Deficient Bridges to the National Average of 10% by 2024

• Bridge preservation can reduce rehabilitation and replacement requirements

Bridge Modeling and Spending Needs

• Designate Bridge “Champion”

(Craig Beissel)

• Rebuild Legacy BMS System

• Participate in National Effort for

Robust Bridge Asset Management

System

• Bridge Bill Legislation

Improve Bridge ManagementImprove Bridge Management

Bridge NeedsAsset Management

• Preservation

- Fix leaky joints (expansion dams)

- Fix beam ends, bearings and supports

- Bridge Painting

- Deck patching/replacement

- Other

Annual Lettings

$1,550$1,550

$1,374.9$1,304.4

$1,349.7

$1,034.2

$1,331

$970

$0

$400

$800

$1,200

$1,600

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Actual To Date Projected

Millions

$1,300 $1,250

2004 Lettings

$400$350

$250 $273$200

$251

$400$425

$1,250$1,300

$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

$1,400

1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Total

Projected Actual

Millions

2004 Large Projects

SR / SEC County Est. Cost Ant. Let Date

0078 / 17M Berks $ 50 M December

0022 / B02 Westmoreland $ 40 M December

0090 / B07 Erie > $ 20 M December

2005 Lettings

$400

$250$200

$400

$1,250

$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

$1,400

1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Total

Projected

Millions

First Quarter 2005 Large Projects

SR / SEC County Est. Cost Ant. Let Date

0202 / 3IT Chester $ 15 M January

7301 / BRG Allegheny $ 30 M January

6006 / 272 Lackawanna < $ 10 M January

0291 / S11 Philadelphia < $ 10 M February

0208 / A00 Mercer $ 15 M March

0079 / A25 Allegheny $ 10 M March

0068 / 650 Clarion $ 15 M March

2122 / A03 Allegheny $ 20 M March

Second Quarter 2005 Large Projects

SR / SEC County Est. Cost Ant. Let Date

0309 / NW1 Lehigh < $ 10 M April

0309 / 101 Montgomery $ 65 M April

0022 / 491 Indiana $ 45 M April

0022 / B08 Westmoreland $ 25 M April

0209 / 021 Monroe $ 15 M May

0019 / A27 Allegheny $ 40 M May

1021 / 370 Luzerne $ 20 M June

0048 / A16 Allegheny $ 15 M June

Materials Usage

2003 2004 2005

Asphalt (Tons) 8.2 M 8.1 M 8.3 M

Concrete (CY) 740 k 660 k 670 k

Aggregate (Tons) 12.3 M 14.8 M 12.9 M

Number of Consultant Final Selections

75

113127

195224

140 143 138 140

0

50

100

150

200

250

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

ACT 3

TEA 21Projected

Actual

127

To Date

Payouts to Consultants

128 129163

200

232264

301 307 310

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Millions

Projected

Actual

To Date

254

Federal Reauthorization (?)

• 5 short term extensions

• 8 mos. through May 2005

• Current extend ($36.8 + $1.8 B)

• Funding guarantees and firewalls

• Nothing during “lame duck”

• Reintroduced late-winter/early spring

Federal Reauthorization (?)

• Size Of Appropriation

• “Growth” of Appropriation Over Time

• Distribution Mechanism

• Earmarks

• Categorization/Flexibility

• Speak With “One Voice”

SIX YEAR PROGRAM (Pennsylvania’s Estimated Funding)

9.449.92

8.33

0

5

10

TEA-21 S 1072 HR 3550

BILL

DO

LLA

RS

(B

illio

ns)

Federal Reauthorization

20% vs. 40%

Questions ???