Transcript Slide 1
Reauthorization Update at the
AASHTO-FHWA Asset
Management Peer Exchange
July 26,2010
Tony Kane
Director of Engineering and Technical Services
Matthew Hardy
Program Director for Planning and Policy
Overview
• Reauthorization Update
• Summary of June 2010 Peer Exchange
Data Needs and Considerations Related to a National
Performance-based Planning Process
• Performance Measurement for Sustainability Strategies
and Outcomes
REAUTHORIZATION UPDATE
AASHTO Key Reauthorization Themes
•
•
•
•
Funding and Finance
Infrastructure Asset Programs
Performance Management
Institutional Process Reforms, Requirements and
Improvements
NOTE: the themes may be consistent across various
interest groups—it is the details that matter !!!!!
Outlook for Reauthorization
• Great Uncertainty Right Now
State DOTs and contractors depend on long-term investment
time horizons so a multi-year bill is critical
• Three General Areas:
House
Senate--??
Administration--??
• Only One Comprehensive (almost) Bill
Oberstar: Surface Transportation Authorization Act of 2009
(Other related Bills such as: Kerry –Lieberman Climate Change;
Safety bills; freight bill)
Reauthorization and Asset Management
• Oberstar: STAA of 2009:
Requires the planning and programming process to become
performance-based and outcome-driven—the bill does this in a
stovepipe fashion
Need to develop performance objectives, measures, and targets
• Key Program Areas in Oberstar’s Bill
Freight Improvement
Highway Safety
Critical Asset Investment
Metropolitan Mobility and Access
Projects of National Significance
Metropolitan Planning
Statewide Planning
Highway Safety (FHWA )House Bill (sample)
• Adopt strategic and performance-based goals that:
Focus resources on areas of greatest need or priority
Are coordinated with other State highway safety programs
Reflect and support the State's HSIP performance targets
The Secretary shall establish quantifiable HSIP performance
targets for each State in coordination with the state no later than 6
months after the date of enactment of the next Surface Transportation Act, and
every 6 years thereafter.
HSIP performance targets shall provide for a certain
reduction in the
percentage of highway fatalities and serious injuries that
occur on public roads.
Critical Asset Investment House Bill
(sample)
• The Secretary shall establish quantifiable CAI
performance targets for each State no later than 6
months after the enactment of this section, and
every 6 years after.
Targets for the State's total deck area of highway bridges that
are located on the Interstate System and NHS and rated as
structurally deficient
Targets for the State's lane miles that are located on the
Interstate System and NHS rated as being in either fair or
poor condition (based on IRI-- –the bill spells out IRI levels
for defining fair and good and poor-- until the Secretary
issues a rule on structural adequacy )
Moving Forward:
Highway Bridge Program
• Malcolm Kerley (VDOT) testified on July 21, 2010
• Summary of Comments
Focusing on the “worst first” does not work
Preservation is accomplished by better managing all assets in
the system
Asset management is most efficient and effective way to
improve health of all bridges with limited funding
Prioritization of bridge rehabilitation and replacement must
be accomplished by state transportation professionals
Moving Forward:
National Transportation Policy Project
• Focus: How the U.S. can move federal surface
transportation policy towards a performance-driven
workshop
• March 2010, Bellagio, Italy
• Four key action items:
1. Conduct Baseline Inventory and Assessment
2. Research and Development of Performance Measures
3. Apply Federal Performance Measures in Safety and Systemwide Asset Management
4. Consider Competitive Discretionary Programs as a Place to
Begin Applying Performance Measurements
Moving Forward:
AASHTO
• Refocus the Federal Program on National Objectives
• Secretary and the Congress to Establish Goals Through
Which the National Objectives Can Be Achieved
• Plan and Select Projects Based on a State-Driven
Performance Management Approach
• Develop State-Driven Performance Measures Process
• Two year effort to coordinate all this with the MPO’s
and transit properties and FHWA and FTA--the clock
is ticking!!!
Moving Forward (2009 International scan on
performance management
• Avoid nationally-set state targets, but provide strong
federal vision and national policy goals (eg safety
and greenhouse gases)
• Less is more: Focus on a few, key national policy
goals and metrics (eg preservation,
safety,congestion,environment,economy )
• Carrot versus stick: Use incentives rather than
disincentives(eg funding flexibility and performance
oversight rather than project oversight)
• Do it together: Apply collaborative performance
management processes (eg change the statewide
and metro planning processes to be goal oriented)
PEER EXCHANGE SUMMARY
Overview of Peer Exchange
• June 22, 2010 in San Antonio
Follow-on to October 2009 Executive Roundtable
Focus on data issues and needs
• Participation
60 SCOP, MPO, transit and research community members
Expert panel and consultant presentations
Facilitated small and full group discussions
Breakout groups focused on four key questions
• Draft report currently under review
Key Questions
1. How Can Agencies Ensure Their Data Approaches and
Systems Support Performance-based Planning and
Programming?
2. How Will Agencies Collect, Manage, Apply and Report
Data for Performance-based Planning and
Programming?
3. How Can We Ensure Decision-making is Closely Linked
to Performance Management Data?
4. What Research and Capacity-building Efforts should be
Initiated to Support Development and Use of Performancerelated Data?
Question 1: Ensuring Agency Data
Approaches Support PBPP
• Create a process for identifying and defining goals
• Assess existing data resources before launching new data collection
• View data as an asset to build institutional support for data collection
Question 2: Collecting & Using Data for
PBPP
•
•
•
•
•
Exploit/leverage existing data sources
Use appropriate private data sources
Expand and improve data sharing
Consider creating a National Data Warehouse
Identify data needs vis-à-vis short-term programming and longrange planning
• Improve economic impact assessment capabilities
• Consider both quantitative and qualitative performance measures
• Ensure federal funding accompanies new data collection
requirements
Question 3: Linking Decision-making to
Performance Data
•
•
•
•
•
Define clear roles for federal, state, metro & local policy-makers
Define clear and enduring national goals and measures
Define the scope of a national performance-based process
Keep performance measures simple
Consider a “certification process” for DOT/MPO performance
measurement (rather than legislatively-mandated measures)
• Maintain a user focus in performance reporting
• Make performance data part of accountability systems
Question 4: Research & Capacity-building
Needs
• Synthesize best practices across modes, agencies and
governmental levels
• Synthesize data needs and gaps across states and regions
• Establish data measurement and collection standards
• Investigate how to address both national and local/state
performance objectives
• Develop multi-modal performance measures
• Establish common definitions & terminology (e.g., “congested”)
• Research availability and usefulness of private data sources
• Guidance on turning “data” into “information”
• Develop accessible and robust economic analysis tools
PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT
FOR SUSTAINABILITY
STRATEGIES AND OUTCOMES
Transportation Sustainability
• Meeting access and development needs, in a manner
that is safe and consistent with human and ecosystem
health, while promoting equity amongst generations.
• Is of affordable; operates fairly and efficiently; offers a
choice of modes; supports a competitive economy , as
well as balanced regional development
• Limits emissions and waste within the planet’s ability to
absorb them; uses non-renewable resources at or
below the rates of development of renewable
resources
Source: European Union Council of Transport Ministers
Triple Bottom Line
Economy
Society
Environment
State DOT Performance Metrics
Economy
Society
Environment
Performance Metrics
(AASHTO SCOPM)
• Environment
Greenhouse gas reduction; storm water runoff protection; use of
recycled materials
• Economy
System preservation (pavements and structures; rail cars
and buses); freight movement (speed/travel-time and reliability
of travel on SFC’s); travel delay and reliability on the major
systems; incident clearance times
• Society
Reduction in fatalities and serious injuries; Access to
transportation; rural 4-lane roads and urban; alt. modes
Next Steps for SCOPM
• Aggressively move towards guides/standards for adoption by
appropriate AASHTO committees for ready to go measures such
as fatalities; pavement roughness; travel delay and structurally
deficient bridges
• Launch serious comparative study efforts on other measures—
such as the environment ;serious injuries; refined asset
measures for pavements and structures
• Develop methods for data storage and display ( national level)
• Develop long range research road map
• Get AMPO and APTA support in general and transit performance
metrics into the package: Planning conference in September
• Get CEO buy in and support for AM and PM and the measures
at a workshop in the fall a month or so prior to the annual
meeting in Biloxi
• QUESTIONS ????? DISCUSSION