Legislature(2023 - 2024)BARNES 124
02/29/2024 01:30 PM House TRANSPORTATION
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation(s): Department of Transportation and Public Facilities Statewide Transportation Improvement Program Update | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE TRANSPORTATION STANDING COMMITTEE
February 29, 2024
1:33 p.m.
DRAFT
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Kevin McCabe, Chair
Representative Sarah Vance, Vice Chair
Representative Tom McKay
Representative Craig Johnson
Representative Jesse Sumner
Representative Louise Stutes
Representative Genevieve Mina
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION(S): DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC
FACILITIES STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM UPDATE
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
RYAN ANDERSON, Commissioner
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Gave the Statewide Transportation
Improvement Program (STIP) Update presentation.
ANDY MILLS, Legislative Liaison
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the Statewide
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Update presentation.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:33:52 PM
CHAIR KEVIN MCCABE called the House Transportation Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:33 p.m. Representatives C.
Johnson, McKay, Vance, Stutes, Mina, Sumner, and McCabe were
present at the call to order.
^PRESENTATION(S): Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities Statewide Transportation Improvement Program Update
PRESENTATION(S): Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities Statewide Transportation Improvement program Update
1:34:49 PM
CHAIR MCCABE announced that the only order of business would be
the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities Statewide
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Update presentation.
CHAIR MCCABE noted that the major municipality planning
organizations (MPOs) throughout the state were invited to attend
today's meeting for discussion on how they collaborate with the
department, and all offers had been declined. After sending
follow-ups, he confirmed there had been no responses and said
there would be "more to follow on that."
1:36:37 PM
RYAN ANDERSON, Commissioner, Department of Transportation &
Public Facilities (DOT&PF), provided an introduction before
moving into the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
(STIP) Update PowerPoint presentation [hard copy included in the
committee packet]. He stated he would be going through DOT&PF's
timeline through the STIP as well as challenges and ideas for
the future. He moved to slide 2, titled "What is the Statewide
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)?" He noted the slide
provided a brief rundown, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
• Required under 23 USC 135 and 23 CFR 450.218 and 17
AAC 05.155
• Four-year planning document
• Includes all federally funded surface transportation
projects
• Fiscally constrained
• Contains other projects of regional/statewide
significance
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON noted that the Alaska Marine Highway
System (AMHS) is included in "highways."
1:39:07 PM
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON moved to slide 3, titled "How does the
STIP Impact Projects on the Street?," which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
Project Delivery Continues:
• Operating under a 2020-2023 STIP Extension until
March 31, 2024
• Projects continue to be obligated under the
extension close to $200M obligated this year
• Carry over projects continue Estimated at over
$350M
• Over $100M in projects currently advertising for
construction this summer
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON continued to slide 4, titled "2024-2027
STIP Timeline Overview," which featured the DOT&PF STIP
Timeline from December 2021 to February 2024. He said the slide
provided an overall big picture timeline and showed the pieces
of work DOT&PF focused on during these time periods.
1:43:06 PM
CHAIR MCCABE asked Commissioner Anderson to solidify for the
public how the dialogue works between DOT&PF and the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA). He further referenced the
significance of October.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON replied that after resolving the public
comment period outreach, DOT&PF started discussions with FHWA
and worked through what the draft STIP had in it. He said that
after realizing DOT&PF was not going to make October 1[deadline]
due to the volume of comments, the department received an
extension to March 31 granted by FHWA.
CHAIR MCCABE noted DOT&PF having to deal with many comments and
having to meet a deadline shortly thereafter. He asked
Commissioner Anderson what was done as for answering and
considering the comments.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON confirmed that he read all the comments as
he said he felt it was important, and DOT&PF responded to all
the letters which he noted were mostly submitted electronically.
He added that many comments were for issues that would be
resolved in the future, and he reminded the committee that the
STIP is a planning document.
CHAIR MCCABE offered his appreciation to DOT&PF for making a
visit to Point Mackenzie and that the constituents there were
pleased that the department came out to respond.
1:48:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA asked where fiscal constraint and the
[electronic] STIP fits into the timeline with public commentary.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON said that the discussions with FHWA were
on how fiscal constraint was being looked at, and that happened
after the public comment period.
REPRESENTATIVE MINA asked whether it was standard that assessing
fiscal constraint happened after the public comment period.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON replied that there were different ways
FHWA looked at fiscal constraint than in the previous STIP,
which is why DOT&PF had more consultations, and it is a process
that continues.
1:51:30 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES asked how long DOT&PF used the eSTIP
before the department discovered it was not working well.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON explained that staff worked with eSTIP, a
platform provided by a vendor, starting in December 2021, and in
May [2023], he said, it was brought to his attention the numbers
weren't adding up.
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES observed that would mean it took almost
two years to figure out it wasn't working.
1:52:16 PM
ANDY MILLS, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities, explained that
December 2021 marked the development stage of the eSTIP and
DOT&PF was not utilizing it. When it was apparent in May [2023]
it was not producing results that could be relied upon, the
decision point became clear.
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES reiterated her observation that it was
approximately an 18-month time period.
MR. MILLS confirmed that was the timeframe that the eSTIP was
under development. He added that that timeframe is not uncommon
for a large and complex platform.
1:54:05 PM
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON moved to slide 5, titled "The ESTIP
Problem (Dec. 2021-April 2023)," which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Why a New Platform?
• Previous STIPs were built from individual
spreadsheets
• Cloud Based
• Modern Tool for DOT&PF & MPOs (Metropolitan Planning
Organization)
• Improved planning functionality
• Dec. 2021: RFP signed - work begins
• April 2022: Certification test shows financial
information not accurate
• May 2023: Team stops work on E-STIP given flaws are
deemed beyond correction with remaining time in
federal fiscal year
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON added that the new platform was due to
looking for better functionality and efficiency.
1:55:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES sought clarity whether it took 13 months
to figure out that the eSTIP wasn't working.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON pointed out a misstatement on slide 5
where April 2022 should read April 2023.
CHAIR MCCABE asked whether there was an original STIP program.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON confirmed there was and it could be found
online.
1:56:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES asked for clarity that the requirements
for the STIP have not changed.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON confirmed that is correct. He further
explained that what DOT&PF wanted was a "database" where the
public could access it and provide their comments and could also
tie in with the MPO side.
CHAIR MCCABE presumed it was a big platform so people could
access the requirements that have not changed, see what the
projects are, and could then go and make a comment tying in with
the MPOs also. He offered his understanding "that all fell
apart" when the platform development failed.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON said that is correct, when numbers were
not adding up, DOT&PF pivoted to another platform with the same
functionality.
2:00:06 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA asked whether there were other states that
pursued eSTIP.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON said there were one or two using the
specific product, and one had success.
REPRESENTATIVE MINA asked whether there were specific staff at
DOT&PF who worked on the eSTIP versus the actual STIP.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON replied that in terms of the eSTIP, there
was a group focused on entering the data and managing the
systems, but the information is spread amongst many groups in
the department.
2:01:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE C. JOHNSON asked how long after the program went
live did it take to figure out if any comments were lost.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON confirmed that the eSTIP never went live
due to the numbers not adding up. The public comment period was
under a different platform and no comments were lost, he said.
2:02:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE expressed her thanks towards the creation
of the platform and wished to offer clarity that the previous
failed platform had nothing to do with public interface. She
said she was of the understanding that the program is an
internal document the department can work with, and an added
feature is that the public can add input.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON confirmed that was the goal and added that
department employees would be able to interface with the program
as well.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE opined that it seemed like a linear
document going to a multidimensional document resulting in
people gaining a better understanding of where projects are
going.
2:05:46 PM
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON proceeded to slide 6, titled "May 2023
Decision Point," which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
May July 2023: New STIP Development
• Commissioner's office involvement
• 30 person DOT&PF Multidisciplinary Team
• Focus on
square4 Technology
square4 Engagement
square4 Fiscal Constraint
square4 Project Delivery
square4 Programming & Planning
2:07:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA asked what positions make up the "30 person
DOT&PF Multidisciplinary Team" as shown on the slide.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON provided examples of the multitude of
teams relating to different areas of DOT&PF.
2:09:00 PM
CHAIR MCCABE brought up the engagement piece in reference to the
MPOs.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON replied that with the MPOs, one of the
mistakes made was a requirement meeting with MPOs before the
STIP but during the public comment period the department engaged
the MPOs.
CHAIR MCCABE referred to staff that advises the MPOs.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON explained the makeup of boards and said
three individuals at DOT&PF are MPO coordinators.
CHAIR MCCABE offered his opinion that it did not seem fair to
state that DOT&PF was not involved with the MPOs at all.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON affirmed that the department was involved
with MPOs on a daily basis.
2:12:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA inquired about the multidisciplinary team
during the 2020 to 2023 STIP.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON replied he could provide an answer at a
later date. He continued on slide 7, titled "New STIP Platform:
Shift of Modern Tools (timeline reference)," which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
Open-Source Platform
• Cloud based
• Multiple users
• Intuitive
• Glitches worked out
New tools for public and staff
• Tables
• Dashboards
• Spreadsheets
• Workflow
Public could select projects based on region,
investment area, legislative district or type of
project.
Staff tools to link to project delivery, track cost
increases, Legislative Authority.
2:13:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES asked whether people would be enabled to
see items that were previously on the STIP but did not make it
to the new one.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON replied absolutely.
2:14:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE pointed out the investment area and whether
it included a local government contribution breakdown.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON replied that DOT&PF can track third-party
match and get a total value.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE stated she did not understand what the ask
is from the Federal Government to be able to meet requirements
and asked for more clarity on how to overcome this hurdle.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON replied there are many discretionary grant
opportunities and there is more money available now than has
ever been in the past. He said DOT&PF could use the help of
local governments to "make this case." He said when the first
STIP amendment is in place, the issue could be addressed.
CHAIR MCCABE asked if it was a federal requirement on the last
STIP to show the revenue coming in for matching.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON stated that the rules changed a bit on
DOT&PF, and the department assumed it would always get a certain
amount of money; however, the government is much stricter about
it now.
2:19:26 PM
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON moved to slide 8, titled "45 Day Public
Notice (July 20 - Sept. 3)," which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
STIP Outreach:
• Publication in statewide newspapers
• Statewide STIP mailer
• Public meeting
Mass communication:
• Press releases/earned media
• Social media
• Radio PSAs to rural Alaska
Targeted outreach:
• Presentations to civic, trade groups
• Direct email to cities, boroughs, tribes
• Direct email to transportation related NGOs (Non-
Governmental Organizations)
• Direct contact with underserved communities
• MPOs (Metropolitan Planning Organizations)
• Joint House & Senate Transportation Committee
Presentation
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON proceeded to slide 9, titled
"Consultations After Public Notice (Sept. 4 Jan.)," which
showed a timeline of MPO and FHWA consultations between the end
of the public notice and going into January. He continued on
slide 10, titled "Resolution of Public Comments," which showed a
bigger picture about the public comments.
2:22:27 PM
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON moved to slide 11, titled "Fiscal
Constraint/Project Delivery Corrections," which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
Existing Challenges
• Over $3B programmed
• Project Estimates & Schedules
• Inflation and Large Projects
• Legacy Projects
New Challenges
• New Interpretations
• Fiscal Constraint - Overprogramming
• NHS routes/MPO TIPs
• Amendments and Administrative Modifications
2:26:17 PM
CHAIR MCCABE asked whether World War II bridges would be legacy
projects.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON referred to three old bridges on the
Alaska Highway and, as new activities occur, they were
identified as needing to be replaced.
CHAIR MCCABE also questioned who MPOs work for and report to.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON explained that an MPO is initiated through
an operating agreement that is signed by all local leaders.
2:28:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE opined that it seemed like a lack of
flexibility with the STIP, and she expressed concern that
contractors will over project to account for inflation.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON confirmed that DOT&PF had some big
challenges with rural Alaska projects, and some had to be
cancelled because the bids were higher than anticipated.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE pointed out that if a project goes over 20
percent, then there must be an amendment submitted that could
take three to six months. She asked what the current over
projection that DOT&PF is currently dealing with.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON explained that in urban areas, the
department was doing better seeing 5 to 10 percent, but in rural
Alaska, over 20 percent was often seen.
2:31:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES inquired about how issues on the contract
would be dealt with in reference to requirements, and whether it
is a nationwide issue.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON replied that after DOT&PF did research, it
found that Washington was one of the states that had an
exception.
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES offered her understanding that only
certain states must abide.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON said it's a "negotiated thing," and STIPs
are different depending on the state.
2:32:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA asked whether recommendations mentioned in
the federal bindings document on fiscal constraint [included in
the committee packet] had been included in the update to the
STIP.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON responded that there was a fair amount of
work done over the past few weeks putting that piece together
and having multiple people review it. He said the new STIP
would have a summary of DOT&PF's overall state budgets.
REPRESENTATIVE MINA asked what the new interpretations were.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON replied that the big one was
overprogramming. He explained that in the past, the STIP
included more projects, and some could slip a year; therefore,
DOT&PF calls that "overprogramming."
REPRESENTATIVE MINA sought clarity of FHWA's planning memorandum
("memo") from 2017 and asked whether there are new
interpretations.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON stated that regulations and laws have not
changed, but how DOT&PF was asked to present things in the STIP
this time was different.
2:36:34 PM
CHAIR MCCABE offered his understanding that the rules of the
FHWA, on its website since the early 2000s, say one thing but do
not speak to how business is done in Alaska.
MR. MILLS replied that approval that was granted before by the
same FHWA office is not being granted this time without a
change.
CHAIR MCCABE noted the remoteness of Alaska and that it has
different challenges.
2:38:00 PM
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON proceeded to slide 12, titled "Formal STIP
Submittal and Federal Findings." He noted that he would not
spend much time on the slide, but he directed attention to the
chart showing STIP revision thresholds. He proceeded to slide
13, which he stated was an important slide, titled "Moving
Forward: Tier 2&3." The slide read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Action Areas:
• New DOT&PF Policy Addressing:
square4 DOT&PF/MPO Coordination
square4 TIP Management Consistency
square4 Performance Targets
• DOT&PF Dedicated Team focused on MPOs
• Tackle State of Alaska MPO Planning Authority
Conflict
• AMATS Transportation Management Area (TAM)
Certification Review
2:40:58 PM
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON concluded on slide 14, titled "Moving
Forward - Rolling STIP," which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Rolling STIP
Instead of every three years, it's an ongoing
iterative process, building the capacity inside the
department and allowing us to create greater layers of
understanding with the public.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON noted that the slide also featured states
with rolling (annual) STIPs, which were Washington, Montana,
California, Nebraska, Minnesota, and Texas.
2:41:56 PM
MR. MILLS added that some states had approvals in the January
timeframe, and therefore were not worried about the October
timeframe. He said rolling STIPs allow the luxury of time to
work through issues.
2:42:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA asked about the scoring process and if
anything would be updated in this STIP.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON confirmed there is a scoring section in
the STIP, and DOT&PF is working though every project sheet
having an indicator of the scoring method for that project.
2:43:33 PM
CHAIR MCCABE asked whether salt brines on the roads on the Kenai
Peninsula were better or worse than salt.
MR. MILLS replied that he became a brine expert due to extensive
work on the Kenai Peninsula. He gave examples of products that
are more corrosive, such as calcium chloride, and said that on
the Kenai Peninsula in particular, DOT&PF had worked on a
reduction plan and continues to work with legislators on what is
successful. He said from a brine-use perspective, there is a
literature review in progress.
2:50:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES referred to slide 6, which spoke to fiscal
constraints, and expressed her interest in any funds
appropriated for match funds for 2024 that had been expended in
2023 and are not currently available. She added that she was
particularly interested in the AMHS.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON replied absolutely, and that he would
provide the information to the committee at a later date.
2:51:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE noted that the issue of brine has been a
"hot topic," and there are many interested parties in the
reduction plan. She offered her understanding that it is not
safe to automatically stop the use of brine until there are
further alternatives. She thanked Mr. Mills and Commissioner
Anderson for being available and for working with local
governments.
2:54:08 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Transportation Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:54
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| DOT&PF.STIP Update.HTRA Presentation 2.29.24.pdf |
HTRA 2/29/2024 1:30:00 PM |