Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21 st Century An Overview of MAP-21

1. Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st CenturyAn Overview of MAP-21

2. What Happened in MAP-21? • Funding Continuity • Consolidation/Simplification • More Localized Decision-Making • Emphasis on Safety • Performance Management • Accelerating Projects and Programs • Focus on Freight

3. Topics and Format

4. MAP-21 Program Changes and Funding Joe Werning

5. Stable Funding • Program authorized through FY14 • Current law through end of FY12 • Most new provisions go into effect on October 1st • Avg. annual funding at FY12 levels (plus minor inflation) • Extends Highway Trust Fund taxes and ensures 2 years of solvency for Highway Trust Fund (HTF) • Substantial programmatic consolidation • No earmarks • Most discretionary programs eliminated

6. $37.7 billion/yearin formula funding Surface TransportationProgram ($10.0) HSIP ($2.2) Railway-Highway Crossing ($0.2) CMAQ ($2.2) Transportation Alternatives ($0.8) Metro Planning ($0.3) National Highway Performance Program ($21.8) Note: Amounts in $ billions; individual program amounts do not add exactly to total due to rounding

7. MAP- 21 Core Programs CMAQ Nationwide TAP STP NHPP PL HSIP

8. National Highway Performance Program (NHPP) Program Purpose: • Provide support for condition and performance of NHS • Provide support for construction of new NHS facilities • Ensure Federal-aid investments are directed toward achievement of performance targets established in State asset management plan

9. NHPP • New Federal-aid program. Funded at $21.8 B per year • Funds an enhanced National Highway System, combining functions of the existing NHS, IM and Bridge Programs • Enhanced NHS includes existing NHS, all principle arterials, STRAHNET, and intermodal connectors • Requires an asset management plan • States set targets for conditions and performance • Min. standards for Interstate & bridge conditions in a State • DOT to set minimum standard for Interstate pavement condition • Law sets standard for NHS bridges -- no more than 10% of deck area may be structurally deficient

10. Surface Transportation Program (STP) Program Purpose: • Provide flexible funding for States and localities • Fund projects to preserve and improve conditions and performance on: - any Federal-aid highway - bridge and tunnel projects on any public road - pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure - transit capital projects

11. STP • Continued flexible funding for Federal-aid highways,plus safety and bridges on any public road ($10 B/year) • Eligibility for transportation enhancements, rec trails, ferry boats, consolidated border infrastructure program, truck parking facilities, and safe routes to schools (no set-aside) • 50% of funds subject to suballocation based on population • Rural provisions enhanced • Rural planning organizations, if any, must be consulted • Up to 15% of rural suballocation may be spent on minor collectors

12. Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Program Purpose: • Aimed at significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads, including non-state owned public roads and roads on tribal lands • Requires data-driven, strategic approach to improving highway safety on all public roads

13. HSIP • Dramatically increases size of existing program ($2.4 B) • Maintains current structure; adds requirement for regular update of the strategic highway safety plan • Keeps setaside($220M/year) for rail-highway grade crossings • No high risk rural roads setaside unless safety statistics worsen • Secretary to establish measures and States to set targets for number of injuries and fatalities (and number per VMT) • Strengthens link between HSIP and NHTSA programs

14. Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) Program Purpose: • Provide a flexible funding source to State and locals for transportation projects and programs to help meet CAA requirements • Aimed at reducing congestion and improving AQ for areas that fail to meet NAAQS

15. CMAQ • Program continued from previous law • Dramatically increases size of existing program ($2.21 B) • State without nonattainment or maintenance area may use CMAQ funds any CMAQ or STP eligible project • MAP-21 requires new performance based features - rulemaking within 18 months - establish State measures to assess traffic congestion & mobile emissions - States required to establish targets 1-year from final rule - Extra reporting required for nonattainment TMAs (> 1 million)

16. Metropolitan Planning (PL) Program Purpose: • Provide funding for administering 3C transportation planning and programming processes in metropolitan areas • Provides framework for making transportation investment decisions

17. Metropolitan Planning (PL) • Program continued from previous law ($332 M) • MAP-21 modifies metro planning process - MPOs required to establish performance based approach - MPOs must establish performance targets - Performance targets must be coordinated with stakeholders - Targets required 180 days after State/transit operator establish targets - By 7/6/2014, MPOs must include officials of public transit operators • MPO Plan and TIP required to address performance measures & targets • By 7/6/2017 Report to Congress on performance based planning

18. MAP- 21 Core Programs CMAQ Nationwide TAP STP NHPP PL HSIP $332 M $2.4 B $2.21 B $809 M $21.8 B $10.0 B TAP Nebraska PL CMAQ STP NHPP HSIP $6.7 M $1.6 M $18.5 M $9.95 M $168.2 M $77.4 M MAPA LCLC MAPA LCLC LCLC MAPA $5.3 M $13.5 M $981K $386K < 200 K State Flex State Flex < 200 K SIMPCO GI State & Local $7.4 M $31.7 M < 5 K $539 K $2.7 M < 5 K $11.3 M Rec Trails $823K STP Off System Bridge $1.2 M $3.8 M

19. MAP-21 Transportation Alternatives Justin Luther

20. TAP Funding Levels $809 M Similar funding levels to the Transportation Enhancement Activities under SAFETEA-LU: FY 2013: $808,760,000 FY 2014: $819,900,000 Total TAP funding is 2% of MAP-21 highway funding. Funded via set-aside from each State’s formula programs. TAP $6.7 M MAPA LCLC $981K $386K < 200 K State Flex $539 K $2.7 M Rec Trails < 5 K $823K $1.2M

21. Funding structure Steps in the TAP sub-allocation process: • States receive an apportionment of TAP funds. • Funds are set aside for the Recreational Trails Program at FY 2009 levels ($84.16 m) (unless the State opts out). • Of the remaining funds: • 50% are suballocated by population (large urbanized areas, other urban areas, rural areas). • 50% are available for any area of the State.

22. TAP Eligible activities Transportation Alternatives (TA) as defined: • Construction, planning, and design of …facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists, ... compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act. • …safe routes for non-drivers… to access daily needs. • Conversion and use of abandoned railroad corridors for trails… • Construction of turnouts, overlooks, and viewing areas.

23. TAP Eligible Activities (continued) TA as defined (continued) • Community improvement activities, including— • inventory, control, or removal of outdoor advertising; • historic preservation and rehabilitation of historic transportation facilities; • vegetation management practices… • archaeological activities relating to impacts from implementation of a transportation project eligible under this title.

24. TAP Eligible Activities (continued) TA as defined (continued) • Any environmental mitigation activity… • address stormwater management, control, and water pollution prevention or abatement related to highway construction or due to highway runoff…; or • reduce vehicle-caused wildlife mortality or to restore and maintain connectivity among terrestrial or aquatic habitats.

25. TAP Eligible Activities (continued) The Recreational Trails Program under section 206. Safe Routes to School under section 1404 of the SAFETEA–LU. Planning, designing, or constructing boulevards and other roadways largely in the right-of-way of former Interstate System routes or other divided highways.

26. TE Activities No Longer Eligible • Safety and educational activities for pedestrians and bicycles. • Acquisition of scenic easements and scenic or historic sites. • Scenic or historic highway programs (including visitor and welcome centers). • Historic preservation as an independent activity unrelated to historic transportation facilities. • Operation of historic transportation facilities. • Archaeological planning and research undertaken for proactive planning. This category now must be used only as mitigation for highway projects. • Transportation museums.

27. Safe Routes to School Eligibility • No set-aside funding for SRTS. • All eligibilities remain. • Allocation of funds for Infrastructure and Non-infrastructure activities do not apply (because there is no apportionment). • Option to have a State SRTS coordinator, not required. • No National Clearinghouse requirement or funds.

28. Recreational Trails Program Eligibility • RTP usually administered by a State resource agency. • Funds set aside from TAP (prior to sub-allocation), unless the State opts out. • 1% returned to FHWA for administration. • All other RTP provisions and requirements remain the same. • States can opt out of the RTP. If so: • Funds remain as TAP funds (prior to sub-allocation). • The State does not return 1 percent to FHWA administration. • The State cannot use funds for State RTP administrative costs. • The State may use TAP funds for trails projects, but using TAP requirements (must treat projects as highway projects). • Recreational trails projects also are eligible under STP.

29. Competitive Processes • States and MPOs • “Shall develop a competitive process to allow eligible entities to submit projects for funding…” • States and MPOs develop their own competitive processes.

30. Eligible Project Sponsors • Local governments; • Regional transportation authorities; • Transit agencies; • Natural resource or public land agencies; • School districts, local education agencies, or schools; • Tribal governments; and • Any other local or regional governmental entity with responsibility for or oversight of transportation or recreational trails (other than a metropolitan planning organization or a State agency) that the State determines to be eligible, consistent with the goals of this subsection. • RTP setaside keeps its list of eligible project sponsors.

31. Transferability of Funds States may transfer the “any area” TAP funds to other apportioned programs. Funds from other apportioned programs may be transferred into TAP… …but TAP projects are broadly eligible under STP, so a transfer is not necessary to use STP funds. In the second fiscal year of MAP-21, unobligated balances of over 100% can be used for any TAP-eligible activity or any CMAQ activity.

32. Treatment of Projects • TAP projects “shall be treated as projects on a Federal-aid highway…” • TAP projects must comply with applicable provisions in Title 23, such as project agreements, authorization to proceed prior to incurring costs, prevailing wage rates (Davis-Bacon), competitive bidding, and other contracting requirements, even for projects not located within the right-of-way of a Federal-aid highway. • Does not apply to projects conducted under the Recreational Trails Program set aside. • MAP-21 §1524 Youth Corps provision offers flexibility.

33. MAP-21 Performance Based FAHP Doug Atkin

34. What is Transportation Performance Management? a strategic approach that uses system information to make investment and policy decisions to achieve a desired set of national goals...

35. Performance Elements of MAP-21 Special Performance Rules apply Targets set by States and MPOs

36. Comment Period – 90 Days Enactment 2012 Seven National Transportation Goals are established in MAP-21. Safety Infrastructure Condition Congestion Reduction System Reliability Freight Movement and Economic Vitality Environmental Sustainability Reduced Project Delivery Delays

37. National Highway Performance Program Highway Safety Improvement Program Congestion Management and Air Quality Improvement Program Freight Movement

38. Performance Measures Not later than 18 months after date of enactment USDOT, in consultation with State DOTs, MPOs, and other stakeholders will promulgate a rulemaking that establishes measures. Provide not less than 90 days to comment on regulation. Take into consideration any comments. Limit performance measures to those described under 23USC150(c).

39. Performance Measures • For purposes of carrying out National Highway Performance Program USDOT will establish: • Measures for States to use to assess: • Condition of Pavements • Interstate System • National Highway System (excluding the Interstate) • Condition of Bridges • National Highway System • Performance of: • Interstate System • National Highway System (excluding the Interstate)

40. Performance Measures • For the purpose of carrying out the Highway Safety Improvement Program USDOT shall establish measures for States to use to assess: • Serious injuries per vehicle mile travelled • Fatalities per vehicle mile travelled • Number of serious injuries • Number of fatalities • Measures used to assess safety on all public roads

41. Performance Measures • For the purpose of carrying out the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program USDOT shall establish measures for States to use to assess: • Traffic congestion • On-road mobile source emissions • USDOT will establish measures for States to use to assess freight movement on the Interstate system.

42. Measure Consistency • Data elements necessary to collect and maintain standardized data • May be incorporated into requirements of each measure, as needed

43. Stakeholder Input National online dialogue to discuss options for measures and data elements. Dialogue open from September 13th through September 23rd. USDOT will consider input provided by stakeholders in the development of the proposed rule for performance measures.

44. States set targets for all national performance measures 1 Year State Targets Established Final Rule MPO Targets 180 Days • Coordinate with relevant MPOs to ensure consistency • Coordinate with public transportation providers • Targets established within 1 year of final rule - States • Targets established with 180 days of State target - MPOs

45. STIP and TIPs must include a discussion on the anticipated effect of the improvement program toward achieving the performance targets • NHPP- Asset Management Plan • HSIP - Strategic Highway Safety Plan • CMAQ – Performance Plan • MPO – System Performance Plan • Optional State Freight Plan

46. Highway Asset Management Plan • USDOT, in consultation with State DOTs, will establish the process to develop the plan through a rulemaking no later than 18 months after 10/1/2012 • States must have a plan developed consistent with the process by the 2nd fiscal year, otherwise federal share for NHPP will be reduced to 65% • Process certification • USDOT 90 days review period to determine certification • States have 90 days to cure deficiencies if not certified • Recertification required every 4 yrs

47. Management Systems • USDOT will establish minimum standards for States to use in developing and operating: • Bridge management systems • Pavement management systems • Minimum standards established through a rulemaking • Minimum 90 day comment period • USDOT will promulgate a rulemaking not later than 18 months after date of enactment

48. National Highway Performance Program • Achievement targets within two reporting periods • Min pavement and bridge standards Special Performance Rules apply • Highway Safety Improvement Program • Achievement within two years of establishment of targets • Special rules related to safety on rural roads and older drivers • MPO Certification • Applies to MPOs serving an area with a population over 200,000

49. State Reports on Performance Progress Address all targets Report every two years Highway Safety Improvement Program Report Report frequency to be set by USDOT CMAQ Performance Plan Report Required every two years MPO System Performance Report In LRP every four years

50. Performance Elements of MAP-21 Special Performance Rules apply Targets set by States and MPOs