Legislature(2023 - 2024)BARNES 124
04/02/2024 01:00 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 Update on the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program | |
| 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
April 2, 2024
1:01 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Kevin McCabe, Chair
Representative Sarah Vance, Vice Chair
Representative Louise Stutes
Representative Tom McKay
Representative Genevieve Mina
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Craig Johnson
Representative Jesse Sumner
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION(S): DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC
FACILITIES UPDATE ON THE STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
RYAN ANDERSON, Commissioner
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-presented a PowerPoint, titled
"Statewide Transportation Improvement Program Update for House
Transportation Committee."
KATHERINE KEITH, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-presented a PowerPoint, titled
"Statewide Transportation Improvement Program Update for House
Transportation Committee."
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:01:37 PM
CHAIR KEVIN MCCABE called the House Transportation Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:01 p.m. Representatives McKay,
Vance, Stutes, and McCabe were present at the call to order.
Representative Mina arrived as the meeting was in progress.
^PRESENTATION(S): Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities Update on the Statewide Transportation Improvement
Program
PRESENTATION(S): Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities Update on the Statewide Transportation Improvement
Program
1:02:17 PM
CHAIR MCCABE announced that the only order of business would be
the presentation titled "Alaska Department of Transportation &
Public Facilities Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
Update for House Transportation Committee.
1:02:49 PM
RYAN ANDERSON, Commissioner, Department of Transportation and
Public Facilities, co-presented a PowerPoint, titled "Statewide
Transportation Improvement Program Update for House
Transportation Committee" [hard copy included in the committee
packet]. He acknowledged that the Statewide Transportation
Improvement Program (STIP) has been a high-interest topic, and
he stressed the importance of understanding the program. He
highlighted how the Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities (DOT&PF) has been moving forward and said it
continues with obligating the federal program this fiscal year.
He spoke to awards for construction projects and that the
department has not slowed down. With the partial approval of
STIP, he said, the department is confident that the projects
will happen. He moved to slide 2, titled "2024-2027 STIP
Review," which showed a list of DOT&PF's STIP submission dates,
legislative briefings, and a summary of the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) correspondence. He described the contents
on the slide as a summary of important milestones.
1:06:09 PM
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON moved to slide 3, titled "2024-2027 STIP
FHWA Tiered Approach." He explained that DOT&PF received many
questions regarding the three different tiers of a federal
planning overview that STIP receives from FHWA and the Federal
Transit Administration (FTA), and he briefly described the
differences between each tier as shown on the slide.
Additionally, corrective actions under tier 1 included five
findings that would be touched on during following slides, he
said.
1:08:11 PM
CHAIR MCCABE asked whether DOT&PF was interested in pursuing
different states' methods of submitting STIPs on a rolling basis
rather than an annual one.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON answered, "Absolutely" and said that is
something that DOT&PF is working toward.
1:09:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA asked how often a given state may receive
partial or full approval of its STIP.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON said he would follow up with information
at a later date. He noted that on the last STIP, DOT&PF
received a planning findings recommendation, but he clarified
that it was not corrective actions.
1:10:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked whether including tribal consultation
and improving tribal transportation were new requirements.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON replied that the inquiries would most
likely be covered in coming slides.
1:11:14 PM
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON resumed the presentation on slide 4,
titled "2024-2027 STIP Narrative Changes," which further
detailed the previously mentioned system of tiers as they relate
to the state and federal regulations. The two areas of focus on
the slide were the STIP revision process, and the maintenance
and operations of the transportation system.
1:13:52 PM
CHAIR MCCABE asked about the process of amending the STIP in the
case of emergency funding.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON clarified that the amendment process would
include a 30-day public notice and said that they often take
months to be confirmed.
CHAIR MCCABE asked whether an amendment would cause a delay in
construction while waiting for approval from the federal
government.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON concurred that was his understanding as
well and said that if it came down to a critical situation,
DOT&PF would look for projects to cut and move in order to make
way for critical situations.
CHAIR MCCABE commented that the STIP's new requirements might
cause serious delay in critical projects.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON agreed that is a possibility of the STIP
amendment process.
1:17:17 PM
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON continued the presentation on slide 5,
also titled "2024-2027 STIP Narrative Changes," which further
detailed the previously mentioned system of tiers as they relate
to state and federal regulations. The slide highlighted the
areas of funding and fiscal constraint, FHWA discretionary
grants, and public involvement process. He moved on to slide 6,
titled "2024-2027 STIP Appendices Changes," which explained the
changes made to the appendices of the STIP plan. Featured were
appendixes C through D, summarizing transportation performance
management analysis, air quality conformance analysis, and
fiscal constraint demonstrations by fund type.
1:20:03 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA asked if Appendix D of STIP was related to
tier 1, item 5 on the STIP's air quality conformity.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON confirmed that is correct.
1:20:43 PM
KATHERINE KEITH, Deputy Commissioner, Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities, noted that metropolitan
planning organizations (MPOs) had been a topic of interest in
recent months and noteworthy benefits were increased
partnerships and how to modernize the way in which documents
inform each other. She focused on tier 1, finding 1: MPO and
other transportation improvement programs, which was featured on
slide 7, titled "2024-2027 STIP Volume 1: Project Details." The
slide displayed a table of various projects around the state in
need of funding from the federal government and their resolution
status in the regulatory approval process.
1:25:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA asked whether there was a way to determine
which project is approved and which is not by using Appendix K
of STIP.
MS. KEITH said she could provide a list to the committee, but
most projects have been removed because they were included in
the MPO lists.
REPRESENTATIVE MINA expressed her understanding that the three
projects that were excluded from the MPO list were because they
were not on STIP.
MS. KEITH replied that the two recently awarded discretionary
grants were not currently on the MPO list because they were so
recently rewarded.
1:29:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked for clarification on what the federal
government requires from the state when it is granting STIP
approval.
MS. KEITH replied that all parties must be in agreement, and the
short- and long-range planning documents all flow into each
other to ensure that federal and state governments are in good
standing. There must be alignment, and it must not slow down
for projects that are critical for moving forward, she stated.
1:31:51 PM
MS. KEITH continued on slide 8, titled "2024-2027 STIP Volume 1:
Project Details," which referred to Appendix B of STIP and its
projects that were denied by the federal government. She
expounded on some of the ways DOT&PF resolved those cases.
1:33:29 PM
MS. KEITH moved on to slide 9, also titled "STIP Volume 1:
Project Details," which went through tier 1, finding 3: fiscal
constraint, and referenced Appendix D. The contents included
pending approvals and resolved cases of the Alaska Marine
Highway System (AMHS) federal funding of its improvement
projects. She added that the majority of the projects have been
resolved, and that any projects included in tier 3 were not
slowed down. She further touched on the leveraging of ferry
toll credits so that the project moved forward at 100 percent
federal funding.
1:36:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES asked what DOT&PF's backup plan is if it
is not allowed to use toll credits for AMHS.
MS. KEITH answered that the money split would be 90 percent
federal funds and 10 percent state funds for AMHS. In response
to a follow-up question, she noted that DOT&PF has been working
on the toll credits for about a year and a half.
1:38:17 PM
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON addressed Representative Stutes and said
that the first formal submittal to FHWA was on February 1, 2024,
and the second submittal was on March 18, 2024. He added that
DOT&PF was anticipating a response from FHWA as early as the
current week.
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES clarified her understanding that if the
toll credits are not approved, then the legislature would have
to approve state-level match funds.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON confirmed that was correct.
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES asked why DOT&PF is taking the lead on the
Cascade Point project when Goldbelt, Inc. would be the one to
execute the project.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON explained that is Goldbelt land, so it
must act as a liaison for the state-run AMHS.
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES asked whether a feasibility study had been
done at Cascade Point.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON answered that that is what DOT&PF is doing
right now.
1:42:24 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES asked when public input comes into play
for proposed projects such as Cascade Point.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON said there is not a formal process for
public input, but who would enable a said comment period to move
forward is undetermined at this moment.
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES asked how construction on the Cascade
Point ferry terminal could start in 2025.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON said that the ferry terminal's
construction date was shifted to 2026 due to the mentioned
delays.
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES shared her presumption that there is an
agreement with Goldbelt, Inc. on the development of the ferry
terminal.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON replied yes, there is a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) with Goldbelt, Inc.
1:44:47 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA referred to appendix D on slide 9 and asked
what the word "resolved" means in its context.
MS. KEITH replied that "resolved" means that the original
comments that FHWA or FTA made to DOT&PF were acknowledged and
the changes were made.
REPRESENTATIVE MINA asked for a distinction between which
projects have been removed and which ones have been resolved.
MS. KEITH said right now, another step must happen for any
distinction to be made between the two.
1:46:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE clarified that if a project was removed
from STIP, it isn't necessarily dead and may be picked up in a
different long-term state improvement plan.
MS. KEITH said projects that are within the MPO boundary that
were previously removed from STIP could be re-added to STIP in
later years if adequate corrections were made.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked Ms. Keith to describe the difference
between a "project" and a "program."
MS. KEITH answered that "programs" are a group of projects, and
a "project" is an individual project.
1:49:54 PM
CHAIR MCCABE revisited the Cascade Point ferry terminal project
and asked for an encapsulation of public and private party
development.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON explained that there have been some
misconceptions as to what the goal is for Cascade Point, mainly
that it is not a replacement for the existing Auke Bay ferry
terminal and added that Cascade point was mainly looked at as a
resiliency for the system, both in redundancy and cost. He
noted the other piece is that the run from Juneau to Haines and
Skagway is a very popular route.
1:54:44 PM
CHAIR MCCABE asked whether the legislature would have to make up
for lost funding if a feasibility study determined that the
Cascade Point project was over budget.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON clarified that it would come before the
legislature. If funding moved forward with the project there
would be robust public discussion, he said.
1:55:30 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES asked whether electric ferries could run
from Cascade Point to Skagway or Haines.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON said that that is a stretch, but something
to keep in mind because of its future feasibility.
1:56:47 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked at what point tribal consultation
would be involved in the development of the Cascade Point ferry
terminal.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON answered that DOT&PF had many
opportunities to work with tribal governments and would make
every effort to keep an open line of communication between the
state and Tribal governments when possible.
1:59:10 PM
MS. KEITH touched on the prospect of electric ferries and
continued to slide 10, titled "2024-2027 STIP Volume 1: Project
Details," which displayed another list of projects awaiting STIP
approval and corrections. The outstanding items she pointed out
on the slide were in relation to bridge and tunnel work.
2:02:38 PM
MS. KEITH proceeded to slide 11, titled "2024-2027 STIP Volume
1: Project Details," which gave "modified deep dives" into
certain proposed and approved projects listed in STIP. It
detailed advance construction conversion (ACC), project
estimates, asset management metrics, previous obligations,
project scores, and STIP ID connections. She summarized how
they are used to explain a given project.
2:08:51 PM
CHAIR MCCABE expressed his excitement for the prospect of the
work that may be achieved under the proposed STIP.
2:08:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE shared her hope that life expectancy of the
roads would grow with an improvement in road and highway
infrastructure construction and management strategies.
MS. KEITH shared her agreement that the goal of DOT&PF is to
raise the life expectancy of the roads and infrastructure.
2:12:16 PM
MS. KEITH backtracked to slide 11 to reiterate the methods for
how projects are analyzed.
2:13:39 PM
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON continued the presentation on slide 12,
titled "2024-2027 STIP Volume 1: Project Details." He focused
on the Chena Bridges Replacement but noted the project was taken
out due to being within the "non-attainment" area. He further
explained how the projects were reviewed and studied for
conformity to various local requirements.
CHAIR MCCABE asked whether there would be a 30-day public
comment period for the projects mentioned on slide 11.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON confirmed that was correct, and he added
that any change in a project would have to go through the STIP
amendment period. He proceeded to slide 13, titled "Project
Allocations to Replace Programs." The slide showed two programs
that were removed, titled the Community Transportation Program
(CTP) and the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP). He
said a scoring effort was completed and the projects were able
to be incorporated based on a combination of scores and sub
allocations in funding; therefore, projects could be added.
2:16:50 PM
MS. KEITH presented slide 14, titled "Project Allocations to
Replace Programs," which featured a sustainable transportation
program, frontier roads, trails and bridges, and the Promoting
Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient, and Cost-
Saving Transportation (PROTECT) project. She noted some
projects of interest and studies that pertained to
sustainability. She said the funding would allow DOT&PF to work
on mitigation strategies.
2:18:31 PM
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON briefly illustrated other programs in the
January submittal that were revised after the comments. He
noted the removal of the PROTECT program and referred to
Kachemak Bay Drive and the tsunami route.
2:20:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked Commissioner Anderson to expand
further on Kachemak Drive.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON explained that the PROTECT program had
specific things that enhance the resiliency of a tsunami
evacuation route and make sure it can accommodate multiple
users. It is called a "reconstruction," he confirmed.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked whether the funding is current or
"hopeful."
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON affirmed it was program funding in STIP.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked whether the $5.3 million was in
addition to the funding that was already there for the research
1 (R1) resurfacing.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON offered to get back to the committee with
an answer.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE commented that if she was making a capital
budget request it must be for the best use of the funds.
2:23:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA asked what "ledger" meant.
MS. KEITH replied that currently, it is used to indicate that
the department is transferring funds from PROTECT into the
surface transportation block grant. From an accounting
perspective, you would see a ledger transaction showing the
moving of funds, she explained.
2:27:10 PM
CHAIR MCCABE offered his observation that it seemed like FHWA
did not like the fact that DOT&PF had one grouping of projects
into a program called "sustainable transportation." He said
FHWA is willing to fund projects, but not as a group, he opined.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON responded that DOT&PF liked the program
flexibility for the state, being that projects could be
transferred "between the line" to keep things going. The FHWA
wanted to see more specifics, he said. He added that DOT&PF
was still allowed to do programs in certain areas, and he
referred to one of the bridge programs.
2:29:44 PM
MS. KEITH continued on slide 15, titled "2024-2027 STIP Volume
2: TIPs Incorporated by Reference." She said the slide
highlighted an example of when DOT&PF shares the updated and
final STIP with the submitted changes, and it would be clear to
the public. The ledger on the slide showed the transaction of
funds, she added. She further noted that the department had
work to do across some of the fund categories to make sure the
TIPs are fiscally constrained and that the programs are clearly
aligned.
2:33:46 PM
CHAIR MCCABE offered his understanding that DOT&PF would be
corralling all TIPs, amongst other programs, and questioned
whether they would need to be present each year to describe
projects to the legislature. He noted some groups have not been
forthcoming with attending hearings.
MS. KEITH clarified that all the projects are still under DOT&PF
and therefore the department still has the responsibility.
2:35:52 PM
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON reiterated that there is a lot of work to
do with MPOs. In order to meet the FHWA intent, STIPs and TIPs
must be tied together with MPOs and, in addition, there is a
requirement to develop stronger policy as to how DOT&PF and MPOs
work together. He briefly summarized agreements in process.
CHAIR MCCABE noted one of the agreements was signed by a
previous mayor from approximately one or two decades ago and he
proclaimed, "It should probably be updated."
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON affirmed that the agreement being referred
to was signed by a former governor.
2:37:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE referred to slides that covered the sharing
of processes for projects between MPOs, as well as a new
detailed, integrated platform that she said she strongly
supported. She shared that a concern was raised about data
security, and she asked whether there are system requirements to
protect and maintain security.
MS. KEITH recognized that cyber security is something DOT&PF are
constantly keeping in mind, and one collaborated project is an
infrastructure portal where information is strongly protected.
2:40:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA acknowledged she was unsure about the
timeline for the first amendment for TIP and asked where the
Matanuska-Susitna ("Mat-Su") MPO would fit into the process.
MS. KEITH answered that the Mat-Su Planning Organization had
been off to a great start and is very engaged in how everything
is playing out. She said finding a balance over the next couple
of years is one of Mat-Su's goals, also looking to create its
own scoring system.
2:41:24 PM
CHAIR MCCABE commented that Mat-Su has surpassed Fairbanks in
terms of size of MPO and inquired how to find the balance
between Mat-Su, Fairbanks, and Anchorage.
MS. KEITH highlighted that the slide showed percentages that are
broken out, and she referred to how DOT&PF splits between the
areas based on the ratio of population, and then they are split.
There are agreements between all three MPOs as far as splitting
up funding, she confirmed.
2:42:46 PM
MS. KEITH moved to slide 16, titled "Volume 3: Engagement
Summary Volume 4: Project Selection." She noted that Volume 3
had not changed from the previous submission, but Volume 4 was
new and explained how the state selects projects along with the
backup information and measurable data. She noted that it
would be continually updated as DOT&PF moved forward.
CHAIR MCCABE commented that he would be more excited if the
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) were mentioned. He shared
that he asked Senator Sullivan several times about funding for
rail and notably Point MacKenzie, and the answer is always, "Can
you get it in the STIP?" He inquired whether rail would ever be
in STIP.
MS. KEITH said there is federal funding for rail with a
substantial amount that comes through for maintenance-related
operations that amount to approximately $50 million per year,
but it does not include expansion funds.
2:45:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA referenced Volume 3 and whether it included
all public comment submitted online.
MS. KEITH confirmed that was current.
REPRESENTATIVE MINA noted that a "find" feature was not
available for one to search for public comment and suggested
that it would be helpful for the public to be able to search for
other comments.
MS. KEITH replied that the department had worked hard to make
sure documents were accessible and would work to make that
happen.
2:47:36 PM
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON moved to slide 17, titled "2024-2027 STIP
- Tier 2 and Tier 3 Focus Moving Forward," which provided a
summary of tier 2 findings, many tied to MPOs. He stated there
would be more to come.
2:48:23 PM
MS. KEITH moved to slide 18, titled "Next Steps," which
highlighted projects moving forward. She noted quarterly
meetings with MPOs to ensure they are working together to
resolve outstanding findings and to make it seamless for the
public.
2:50:15 PM
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON concluded on slide 19, which showed
contact information. He noted that the changes in technology
and funding requirements were creating more demand for the
department and that they have much work to do.
2:51:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA referenced the STIP amendment for the tier 2
findings and whether it would happen within six months.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON affirmed that the goal is to get the
amendment as quickly as possible, but DOT&PF would have to work
with MPOs, and he reiterated that it was a requirement that they
work together.
REPRESENTATIVE MINA referred to fiscal constraint and the
inflation factor and asked whether it was still 1.5 percent for
federal funding.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON responded that there is a 3 percent
inflation rate. He stressed that inflation was a "tough thing"
right now.
REPRESENTATIVE MINA sought confirmation that the inflation rate
adjustment from 1.5 to 3 percent was only for the federal
funding estimates. She inquired how changing the inflation rate
would impact project costs.
MS. KEITH explained that it was 3 percent across the board on
the federal forecasts, and project costs that include federal
and state funding are also at the 3 percent rate. She added
that it affects the project costs but also helps DOT&PF keep
current.
2:54:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES thanked the presenters for their hard work
and acknowledged the overwhelming amount of effort it takes to
create the required document.
2:55:00 PM
CHAIR MCCABE thanked the presenters and discussed future
business.
2:56:09 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Transportation Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:56
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| STIP - House Transportation Presentation 04-02-2024.pdf |
HTRA 4/2/2024 1:00:00 PM |
Department of Transportation-STIP |