Legislature(2009 - 2010)BUTROVICH 205
01/27/2009 01:00 PM Senate TRANSPORTATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Overview: Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan | |
| Overview: Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (stip) | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
JOINT MEETING
SENATE TRANSPORTATION STANDING COMMITTEE
HOUSE TRANSPORTATION STANDING COMMITTEE
January 27, 2009
1:05 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
SENATE TRANSPORTATION
Senator Albert Kookesh, Chair
Senator Linda Menard, Vice Chair
Senator Bettye Davis
Senator Joe Paskvan
HOUSE TRANSPORTATION
Representative Peggy Wilson, Chair
Representative Kyle Johansen
Representative Cathy Engstrom Munoz
Representative Mike Doogan
Representative Max Gruenberg
MEMBERS ABSENT
SENATE TRANSPORTATION
Senator Kevin Meyer
HOUSE TRANSPORTATION
Representative Craig Johnson, Vice Chair
Representative John Harris
OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT
Senator Gary Stevens
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
Overview: Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
(DOTPF)
HEARD
Overview: Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)
HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record.
WITNESS REGISTER
LEO VON SCHEBEN, Commissioner
Department of Transportation &
Public Facilities
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Delivered Department of Transportation
Overview.
FRANK RICHARDS, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Transportation &
Public Facilities
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information related to the
Department of Transportation Overview.
JEFF OTTESEN, Director
Division of Program Development
Department of Transportation &
Public Facilities
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Delivered Statewide Transportation
Improvement Plan (STIP) Overview.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:05:47 PM
CO-CHAIR PEGGY WILSON called the joint meeting of the Senate and
House Transportation Standing Committees to order at 1:05 p.m.
She recognized that Representatives Doogan, Muñoz, Gruenberg and
Wilson were present at the call to order and Co-Chair Kookesh
recognized that Senators Paskvan, Menard, Davis and Kookesh were
present. Co-Chair Wilson advised that the first three meetings
would be overviews that are designed to help members track where
the money is going so they can pass the information along to
their constituents.
^Overview: Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan
CO-CHAIR WILSON announced that Commissioner Leo von Scheben
would deliver an overview of the Alaska Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities (DOTPF). She asked him to
provide introductions.
1:08:42 PM
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN introduced himself; Jim Beedle, Deputy
Commissioner of Marine Operations; Frank Richards, Deputy
Commissioner of Highways & Public Facilities; Nancy Slagle,
Director of Administrative Services; Jeff Ottesen, Director of
Program Development; Ron King, Capital Programs; and Mary
Siroky, Special Assistant to the Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN said that the DOTPF mission statement
is to provide for the safe movement of people and goods and the
delivery of state services. He described the department's
structure as a matrix and said he works closely with Steve Titus
in the Northern Region, Gary Davis in the Southeast Region,
Gordon Keith in the Central Region and Christine Klein in
aviation.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN displayed a map of the regional
boundaries showing that the Northern Region encompasses by far
the most area. The Juneau headquarters has 346 employees, the
Northern Region has 719 employees, and the Central Region has
967 employees, and Southeast has 1,063 employees-836 of which
are with the marine highway. In total DOTPF employs 3,100
people.
A subsequent map indicated that the National Highway System
(NHS) generally runs north and south through the center of the
state passing through both Fairbanks and Anchorage. DOTPF
receives federal funds for 2,113 centerline miles in the NHS.
The Alaska Marine Highway System (AMHS) is included in the NHS
and it covers 3,500 miles. A map of the Alaska Highway System,
which is comprised of state highways and rural roads, has 1,508
centerline miles throughout the state.
1:13:15 PM
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN explained that DOTPF has 84 maintenance
stations throughout the state, 30 of which are located at
airports in rural communities. The department also manages 25 of
the 99 public harbor facilities in the state. Local governments
have agreed to operate 12 of those facilities, but they do not
provide operating revenue. With the exception of bond funds and
state match, the Corps of Engineers Program is largely
responsible for the capital program. Corps funds are used for
breakwaters, state and local mooring basins and inner-harbor
facilities.
1:14:41 PM
The Division of Measurement Standards and Commercial Vehicle
Enforcement ensures safe highways by enforcing all federal and
state commercial vehicle laws. It certifies the accuracy of all
commercial weighing and measuring devices and issues permits
using a web-based system. Working closely with the trucking
industry and the Legislature, the penalties for overweight
vehicles recently were increased for the first time in 30 years.
1:15:15 PM
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN said that DOTPF is the largest airport
operator in the United States with an annual AIP (aviation
improvement program) capital budget of $200 million. The 258
state-owned airports include 2 international airports in
Anchorage and Fairbanks, 21 rural certificated airports and 235
community airports. He displayed a map showing that essentially
every community has some sort of airport. In the next few months
DOTPF will issue an Alaska aviation systems analysis plan that
will identify needed airport improvements, set funding
priorities, propose aviation policies and document the existing
system with photos, maps and data. He noted that since July
passenger and freight revenue is down between 12 and 15 percent.
Maintenance contracts for each of the 134 rural airports average
$27,000 with a total cost of $3 million.
The FY08 state operating expenditures for maintenance total
$21.1 million for facilities and $122.6 million for highways and
airports. The FY09 federal maintenance program includes $11
million for preventive highway maintenance, $39 million for
highway pavement refurbishment and $4 million for preventative
maintenance for aviation.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN displayed a graph of general fund
authorizations for maintenance and operations (M&O) showing an
annual 2.75 percent linear increase since FY83. The general fund
(GF) authorization at that time [adjusted for Anchorage CPI] was
about $85 million and now it's in the $150 million range. The
bottom line reflects the M&O actual GF operating budget and is
[increasing] about 1.5 percent per year. Since FY05 the increase
is considerably higher-probably due to the cost of doing
business in maintenance.
1:18:58 PM
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN said that each of the three regions has
a construction branch that performs contract administration,
field inspection/oversight and quality assurance. The FY09
construction budget includes $698 million for highways, $40
million for AMHS ferries, $349 for aviation, $26.3 million for
facilities and $16.5 million for ports and harbors. Between 1997
and 2006 expenditures have increased about 17 percent.
DOTPF safety programs include: Traffic Safety Corridors, 511
Program, Road Weather Information System, Intelligent
Transportation System for Commercial Vehicles, Size and Weight
Enforcement, and Safe Routes to School. Currently there are
designated traffic safety corridors on the Seward and Parks
highways and they are underway on the Knik/Goose Bay Road,
Sterling Highway and Palmer-Wasilla Highway. They seem to work
and save lives as long as the road is patrolled, he said.
1:22:03 PM
DOTPF accomplishments include: 17 percent reduction in square
footage of structurally deficient bridges between 2007 and 2008;
2 percent increase in survey responders who are satisfied with
state road and highway maintenance between 2005 and 2008; 3
percent increase in the voluntary use of seatbelts for 2007 to
2008; and 22 percent reduction in fatal and major injury crashes
between 2005 and 2006. He added that 2007 data will be available
soon.
In 2008, M&O crews covered 1,563,794 linear feet of highway with
surface crack seal treatment or "banding," which is a way to
treat expansion and contraction. They paved 33 lane miles of
gravel road, repaved 213 lane miles of road, reconstructed 31
lane miles of road, and inspected 529 bridges according to
federal standards.
Efficiencies include using innovative techniques such as
rubberized crack seal to extend pavement life, banding to make
asphalt wear longer, more efficient operation of public
facilities, and more efficient ports and harbors grants and
transfers.
Recruitment and retention is a key department challenge. Two
years ago he learned that one third of his 3,100 workforce would
be eligible to retire within five years. The department also
faces challenges related to preservation and protection of
infrastructure, high inflation and the economic downturn, the
reauthorization bills for highways and aviation, and an aging
marine highway fleet. Four ferries are 45 years or older.
1:26:12 PM
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN concluded the PowerPoint presentation
and said he would comment on the Juneau Access, Gravina and
KABATA (Knik Arm Bridge and Toll Authority). For the Juneau
Access the department is working with the Western Federal Lands
Highway Division to get an independent estimate for the project.
That information should be available by March 6. Litigation
regarding the NEPA process is currently in federal district
court and Judge Sedwick should provide a response any day. With
respect to the Gravina Project he said that money is not
available and there wouldn't be further work until there is a
better plan. The Governor told him to look for other options
because the F-1 bridge was too expensive. That entailed
submitting a supplemental EIS and his staff is working on the
draft. The final EIS will be complete at the end of 2009 and a
record of decision will come out about mid 2010.
He disclosed that he has a conflict of interest with KABATA
because his former company is submitting a proposal. That
project also is under a third-party estimate and should be done
early in February; four years ago the estimate was $580 million.
1:28:43 PM
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN distributed several pictures to
highlight project success stories. The Yakutat harbor was at
risk of losing $555,000 because their paperwork was filled out
incorrectly. At best the program would have been delayed a year.
Open lines of communication and a sincere desire to see the
project go forward resulted in success. "If we didn't step in
that would have gone another year and that project wouldn't have
been done."
The $21 million Gustavus Dock is another success story. The
state and the National Park Service were going to share the
cost, but the park came up $2 million short putting the project
in jeopardy. "I worked with the staff, we worked with Gustavus
people and were able to put that project out through scope work
and some money and thought process," he said.
The $45 million terminal connector at the Anchorage
International Airport is a success story. That project was
programmed to go forward in the spring of 2009, but the fuel
crisis came along. The airlines informed him they could not
afford to go forward and asked for help. "I was able to bring
that project under control, reduce the scope of work … and that
project is going forward. The point, he said, is that he feels
very strongly about building projects. "That's what I'm here for
and that's what I came for."
1:31:55 PM
Tuntutuliak is a great success story, he said. It now has a new
airport and boardwalk. The boardwalk was a better option than a
road because of drainage problems associated with road
construction.
1:33:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN referred to the Juneau Access, Gravina
and KABATA projects and asked if it's common practice for the
department to use a third-party analysis.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN replied it's not common practice, but
he believes that it adds confidence value on very high profile
projects.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN questioned why there was no third-party
analysis on the Gravina Project since it is probably the most
high profile.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN said they are putting out a
supplemental EIS and cost estimates will be redone "so we didn't
sense the same situation as the other two."
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN again questioned why there was a third-
party estimate on two projects and not on Gravina. "You're
confident with Gravina numbers, but not on the other two? Is
that what's happening?"
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN replied the SEIS will provide numbers
that are more current.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN observed that the same DOTPF employees
would be crunching new numbers.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN clarified that the SEIS is being done
by HDR.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked if the department would reprogram
the money for Gravina to another project or wait until the new
Gravina estimates are in and the SEIS is complete.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN said he does not intend to move money
around until those things are done.
SENATOR PASKVAN asked how much money will be taken off the shelf
in the 2009 construction season and what projects might be ready
to be part of a [federal] stimulus package.
1:37:07 PM
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN commented that he's hearing a lot about
stimulus money lately. He explained that stimulus projects have
to be put into the STIP process, which takes 90 days; DOTPF
started that process last week. They are preparing projects for
the Governor and have a number that are bid-ready; they range
from aviation to highways. He can't say too much more because he
doesn't know how much money there will be. "I think we're on
schedule to meet whatever they throw at us, but I don't know
what they're going to throw at us yet."
SENATOR DAVIS asked if the bid-ready projects he mentioned have
been prioritized for funding.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN replied the projects aren't prioritized
but they are working on the list.
1:40:30 PM
CO-CHAIR KOOKESH noted that the Governor asked for other options
on the Gravina Project and asked if he could list those.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN replied he has the draft supplemental
on his desk and they're looking at about a dozen options. They
run the gamut from "anything from ferries to other bridges to no
construction."
CO-CHAIR KOOKESH asked how many meetings he's had with locals to
discuss the various options.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN replied they are following the SEIS
process and he assumes there are public hearings in that
process. He offered to find out specifics.
CO-CHAIR WILSON asked him to bring information related to
options and timelines to the next meeting because some committee
members are very interested.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN recalled that DOTPF staff last session
identified some $250 million in projects that were ready to go.
"That was testimony when you were trying to get the billion
dollar highway trust fund put together," he added.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN agreed with the numbers.
1:42:30 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MUÑOZ asked how he sees the process unfolding on
the Juneau Access once there's a ruling on the NEPA [National
Environmental Protection Act] lawsuit.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN replied, "The problem I see with Juneau
Access is further lawsuits."
1:43:24 PM
CO-CHAIR KOOKESH asked him to elaborate on his plans for the
aging ferry fleet.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN said he's currently fine-tuning the
systems analysis and phase two will come out a year after that
is complete. The Malaspina, Matanuska, Taku, and the Tustumena
are 45-46 years-old and it takes 6 years to order and take
delivery on a new vessel. A shuttle ferry is under design and
the guestimated price is $80 million to $85 million. They'll
know more once the designs are complete, he said.
1:45:47 PM
CO-CHAIR KOOKESH said that he would like that information by the
next meeting.
REPRESENTATIVE DOOGAN noted that the Governor singled out the
road to Nome as a project she would like to go forward and asked
if DOTPF is involved or has information on that process.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN said several studies have been done and
DOWL Engineers have been retained to look at access going west
from the north/south highway. "We have nothing west … and we
should have something west." Phase one to compile information
will be complete in September 2009. He offered to provide a
debriefing paper from Steve Titus.
CO-CHAIR WILSON said her office would make sure all members
received a copy.
1:47:57 PM
SENATOR PASKVAN asked if some stimulus money might go directly
to municipalities rather than thru DOTPF and if the money does
go through the department what overhead might be assessed.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN said he understands that municipalities
will receive money independently; DOTPF will receive formula
funds. With respect to what DOTPF might add on, he said it
depends. A mill and pave project might have 10 percent to 15
percent added for engineering. Sometimes it goes as high as 20
percent. DOTPF adds nothing if the money goes directly to a
municipality.
1:49:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked how close DOTPF is to closing the
deal on the Ward Cove marine highway lay-up facility because the
money was appropriated between 4 and 6 years ago. "DOT has had
it who knows where for that long." Is it on your radar?
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN said it is on his radar. A consultant
agreement was put together and it's under study. He offered to
provide additional information.
1:51:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN said he would appreciate that. He's
spoken with Mr. Menzies, Mr. Beedle, the borough as landowner
and the Governor's office. Everyone has said that the agreement
is very close. "I hope you would engage yourself in that." A
decision is past due. "You're asking for money for a Prince
Rupert dock and I'd be hard to support another appropriation if
it takes you five years to finish a project like that."
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN said okay.
1:52:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DOOGAN asked him to elaborate on the recruitment
and retention challenges he mentioned previously.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN said that when he came on board two
years ago and read the statistic he knew there would be
problems. He believes that DOTPF will likely need to come up
with a different way of doing business because you can't count
on hiring any more people when they aren't out there. "The labor
force in engineering and surveyors and CAD people, those people
just aren't out there." In the current economy it's possible
that more people could come to the state from Outside. He
reiterated that he will lose about 1/3 of his workforce in the
next few years and believes that he'll need to look at a model
that has fewer technical people and more contracted and sub
positions. Recently he sent a team to Idaho, Oregon and
Washington to look at program management because he estimates
that it will take 500 people to produce the $2 billion in
infrastructure for the gas pipeline and that workforce isn't
available in the state. A lot more work is going to be
outsourced. "Not because I don't want to hire some people; I
just don't think we're going to be able to find the staff. We've
got to have more of our kids go to school in engineering and
architecture and surveying and business," he said.
1:54:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked if the recent hiring freeze will
put DOTPF in a "pickle" and if he'll request any waivers.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN replied he will ask for some waivers
but he doesn't believe the department will be in a "pickle."
Referencing the expected stimulus he said that outsourcing may
be necessary. "I think we can get our help from some of our
consulting help and not … hire permanent staff." Meeting
deadlines probably won't present a problem, especially if the
stimulus is 180 days out with a deadline. But because of the
people we're losing, there will be problems in the long run.
Again he said that "We want to fill some of those positions."
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN questioned whether outsourcing is okay
under a hiring freeze; he understood that the reason for the
freeze was to save money.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN replied he has to get certain work,
such as stimulus work, done and if he needs to get design
projects finished to get the job out to bid, he'll ask for that
kind of waiver. "I would be missing the boat if I couldn't get
my work done."
REPRESENTATIVE MUÑOZ referred to the request to put money into
the Prince Rupert dock and asked if he's aware of the Canadian
Pacific plan to expand the ore terminal and if that might
present conflicts with the dock construction. That question was
directed to the AMHS director, but she hasn't received an
answer, she said.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN replied he knows that the dock was
repaired and he would provide additional information after he
looks into it.
CO-CO-CHAIR WILSON asked him to bring the information to the
next meeting.
1:57:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN noted that 25 of 99 harbors are still
owned by the state and asked if additional transfers are
planned.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN said the state would like to transfer
more to cities, "but there's nothing coming across my desk for a
big push."
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked if there is a contingency for a
third state-owned international airport at Ketchikan. The state
owns the airport and Ketchikan operates it, he added. "We can
get out of that and give it back to you basically. … Along with
getting the airport back you would be responsible for providing
access to that airport I would assume," he said.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN replied it is something to think about,
but nothing about that has crossed his desk.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN highlighted the basic maintenance issues
related to roads around Ketchikan and remarked that the
Southeast Region indicated there wouldn't be any money until
July 1. Do you need more money in your maintenance operation or
do we just wait a few months to get potholes filled come April?
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN said he'd get back to him because he
doesn't know.
2:00:14 PM
CO-CHAIR WILSON asked him to elaborate on the 511 program.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN explained that it's as simple as
calling 511 and stating which road you want information about.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked what direction DOTPF is taking
regarding bridges that might be unsafe.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN replied there are three bridges on the
Seward Highway that have timbers that need to be replaced. All
three should be fixed by the end of the summer. Bridges are
getting older but none are unsafe. You need a program, federal
funds are available and "we're getting to it," he said.
2:02:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN recalled testimony last year that
indicated that the program had sufficient funds to meet the
challenges. "I'm not sure anything has changed, but we felt
comfortable with that," he said.
COMMISSIONER VON SCHEBEN clarified that the program hasn't
changed; bridges are inspected every two years.
2:03:05 PM
FRANK RICHARDS, Deputy Commissioner, Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities, explained that after the
I-35 bridge collapse in Minnesota, DOTPF engineers inspected all
bridges with a similar gusset plate. The bridges were found
safe. Over the years DOTPF has used federal highway funds for
bridge rehabilitation and repair so they aren't structurally
deficient according to the federal categorization. The GEO bond
vote last year provided $20 million in emergency funds for use
on bridges around the state. Those funds are being used on the
three bridges on the Seward Highway mentioned previously.
"Otherwise we would be here asking for possibly $10 million for
needs for those three specific bridges in our system." Bridge
safety is a critical part of their mission and they take it
seriously. As needs are defined during biannual bridge
inspections funds are sought to accomplish the work.
CO-CHAIR WILSON asked how many bridges are under state auspice.
MR. RICHARDS offered to get the specific information. Some
bridges are "off-system" and he believes that borough mayors
will approach the Legislature asking for help to repair those
community-owned bridges.
CO-CHAIR WILSON asked him to specify which bridges belong to the
state and which to municipalities.
MR. RICHARDS agreed. The Legislature was helpful and last year
provided funds to inspect some of those off-system bridges, he
added.
^Overview: Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)
2:06:35 PM
CO-CHAIR WILSON announced the committees next would hear about
the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).
JEFF OTTESEN, Director of Program Development, Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities, said he is responsible for
programming federal funds that are used for highways, bridges,
ferries and some other things. He explained that federal law
requires each state to have a STIP so it can allocate the
federal highway money it receives. Spending must be prioritized
on a four-year horizon. Recently the fiscal constraint rules
were changed to require more frequent balancing between the STIP
and the projects. That is difficult because they deal with
estimates on revenue from the federal government and estimates
on the cost of construction. Firm information typically comes at
the last minute so the STIP has to be amended as things change.
2:09:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked if state law requires the STIP or
fleshes out the federal requirements.
MR. OTTESEN replied there is state law that amplifies federal
law. He offered to elaborate on the law and specific regulation
in a separate communication.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he'd appreciate that. "So we know
what our jurisdiction in the matter is too."
MR. OTTESEN continued with the PowerPoint. Both federal and
state rules require a substantial and specific public process.
Thus DOTPF must communicate with transportation providers,
metropolitan communities, non-metropolitan communities, and
tribes. The STIP must also conform to the long-range
transportation plan meaning that projects are put on a plan that
has a 20-year horizon and when the STIP is written it must
reflect which projects on the plan will be funded and executed.
Finally, the STIP has to be reviewed and approved by the Federal
Highway Administration and the Federal Transit Administration
before the state can use the money.
The STIP deals with the federal Surface Transportation Program
and historically those funds could only be used on top-level
roads, bridges and ferries. In 1991 an Alaska-specific amendment
passed to allow the use of STIP dollars on any public road,
which roughly tripled the roads that were eligible. Since that
time STIP dollars have been used on many local roads and even
boardwalks throughout the state. Public ferries and terminals,
public transit systems and public bike and walking trails that
serve a transportation purpose are also eligible for those
dollars.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked if STIP dollars could be used for
bike paths in urban areas.
MR. OTTESEN said yes and they're routinely used that way. "This
just gives you an example of the scale difference between the
classes of transportation facilities that we in Alaska can fund
with our STIP program," he said.
2:14:02 PM
But when there's more eligibility there is more competition for
limited funds. "The federal program today is simply not big
enough to meet all the original plus all the new categories of
need that are out there." People in the villages want basic
access, sanitation roads, dust control and more. Urban areas
deal with issues associated with congestion, growth and safety.
Other competition comes from the ferry system and the rural
highway system. The Parks, Glenn, and Richardson highways don't
have much traffic but they do serve the arteries of commerce.
2:15:00 PM
MR. OTTESEN displayed a multi-colored and banded pyramid chart
to explain different road classes. Each band represents the
percentage of miles of road that fall within each class. 18
percent of the roads are arterial and 62 percent are local. The
different colors reflect ownership; green represents state
ownership, yellow represents local government ownership and
brown represents federal ownership. The chart demonstrates that
DOTPF is the primary owner of the top three classes of roads.
Local roads are largely owned by local government. Most of the
federal roads are logging roads that are owned by the U.S.
Forest Service.
MR. OTTESEN said the pyramids indicate that the state owns and
maintains 92 percent of the high functions class routes in the
state. Those routes constitute just 30 percent of the system,
but that's where 75 percent of all travel and 86 percent of
accidents occur. He continued:
It really is three roads that are the most important
to the state's economy. And it's a very important
thing to understand because I think what's happened
with the distribution of money being eligible to
everything [is that] you could argue that we're not
spending enough money on the roads that make a
difference to the economy.
2:18:06 PM
MR. OTTESEN said that Alaska's STIP has four funding categories:
the National Highway System has 2,100 road miles of high
functional class highways; the Alaska Highway System has 1,500
miles of road that are largely city-to-city connections; the
Community Transportation Program covers most of the community
and some state roads; and the Trails & Recreational Access for
Alaska.
CO-CHAIR WILSON asked how many miles of road are in the CTP
category.
MR. OTTESEN replied it's about 10,000 miles less the mostly
logging roads, which won't see any STIP dollars. The focus is on
the minor collector roads. Those are more important than the
local, largely subdivision, roads. There isn't enough money for
everything and "whenever you have scarcity you do have to
prioritize."
2:20:48 PM
MR. OTTESEN displayed a pie chart to show how the money is
distributed. The CTP and TRAAK categories represent 41 percent
of the funds that are eligible for community nominations.
Federal law requires that a portion of the money is allocated
directly to Anchorage and Fairbanks leaving the non-metropolitan
communities in the state to compete for the remaining 65
percent. "We are clearly among all 50 states sharing more of our
STIP dollars with local government than any other state DOT."
CO-CHAIR WILSON asked how the department decides which roads to
fund.
MR. OTTESEN explained that they use a scoring system and they
treat it like a Bible. The problem is that several years ago the
price of individual projects started consuming more and more
money. Previously the STIP could deliver 10 to 12 projects a
year and this year there's a project that will go out for $40
million and there is just $65 million for the entire state.
Inflation is rising and the actual dollars going into the
program are falling. "We're down to 1 or 2 projects a year."
2:23:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN noted that NHS and AHS represent 56
percent of the pie and asked if marine highways are eligible for
those funds.
MR. OTTESEN replied AMHS draws largely from NHS but some marine
highway terminals draw from AHS. He continued to explain that
historically the ferries have been NHS eligible and the
terminals were eligible for either NHS or AHS depending on
whether they touch an NHS highway. The Skagway terminal ties
into an NHS highway so it is NHS eligible while the Angoon
terminal receives AHS funds because it does not touch an NHS
highway.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked how much leeway DOTPF has to
arbitrarily score a project higher or lower.
MR. OTTESEN replied the scoring is quite strict. The problem
isn't with the scoring system; the core problem is the amount of
money, he said.
2:25:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked if the strict scoring is coming
from DOTPF or from the federal government. He expressed the view
that it's one thing if it's internal and quite another if it's
coming from above.
MR. OTTESEN explained that six high-ranking members of the
department do the scoring-three from the regions and three from
headquarters. They carefully follow the published criteria and
the scores come out as they do. "There's a lot of deliberation
that goes into that process. We're reading the criteria, we're
reading the material about the project and we're assigning
scores against those criteria."
CO-CHAIR WILSON asked about fairness.
MR. OTTESEN said he's not sure there is fairness. They deal with
rules and laws and remain dedicated to the end result, which is
to build projects. It's a simple fact that all projects don't
proceed at the same pace once they're approved.
2:28:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked if there is anything the
Legislature can do to simplify the process.
MR. OTTESEN replied it's a good question. Each time the bill
comes up and they ask for streamlining they instead get more
complexity. The 2007 federal regulations are incredibly
difficult, he said. They've added time and process and that
often means expense and staff time.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG again said he'd like to see what can be
done to make the process simpler. He then questioned whether the
Legislature should look at bonding, which would entail removing
strictures in the constitution-"looking at GARVEE bonding and
that sort of thing." He solicited a comment.
MR. OTTESEN said his only comment is that there aren't as many
rules when state money is used and that's an advantage because
projects go faster.
2:31:10 PM
SENATOR MENARD observed that the pie chart was dated 2005 and
asked if the percentages had changed.
MR. OTTESEN replied they're still quite accurate.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN expressed frustration with the scoring
and deliberative process. "Depending on who's in that room
making decisions, some projects get funded and some projects
don't." He said he'd like a detailed response.
2:32:31 PM
MR. OTTESEN suggested that the next slide, which outlines how
projects are selected, might help. To get into the STIP a
project has to be on an approved state transportation plan. He
continued:
First we do a plan and then we write a more detailed
spending plan to execute that project. So that's the
dominant pathway; that's how most NHS projects AHS
projects get in. We use our state-developed state-
prepared transportation plans.
We also use the management systems that are prescribed
in federal law. And the management system is
essentially a tool that's developed. We collect a lot
of data about pieces of the system like bridges or
like safety conditions and then we rank and sift needs
using the data in those systems. They're very well
developed; they are prescribed in federal law and some
of the safety systems apply to both state and federal
roads-for example, safety for the bridge ranking
system. You heard today about bridge inspections. Well
it's the inspections then that get turned into
numbers, which get turned into a bridge ranking system
that tell us which bridges to go either correct or
replace. We have the same kind of system for pavement.
The pavement management system focuses only on state
roads. It's not prescribed that we look at local
roads.
Those are the two dominant ways. Those are the two
that are set out in federal law. But go back to the
1991 change. We had this 1991 change that suddenly
opened up our universe of projects to everything in
this state-unlike any other state in the union. So how
do we get those projects selected? We're not doing
plans for local government. We don't do plans for
locally owned roads. We don't always have them in our
management systems. But we had a gap. We had a gap in
the system that said we have a universe of potential
eligible projects now but no way to identify what's
most important. We came up with the scoring system. …
It's been evaluated nationally; there was a report
that came out last year that gave us a gold star for
that scoring system. It said that we have one of the
best scoring systems in the country.
I'm personally convinced that our problem is not that
we don't want to build roads, not that we aren't
picking good projects, it's just that when the list is
this long and we can only do a little tiny bit of it
every year, there's going to be a lot of upset people
who feel like their project should be a little bit
higher than it was. No matter what we did, no matter
who we move to the top, there would be 98 percent of
that list that doesn't get funded that year and that's
a system that's never going to satisfy people
effectively.
2:35:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DOOGAN asked how a proposal like the road to Nome
gets into the matrix.
MR. OTTESEN replied it's a planning document that identifies the
potential costs and benefits for that corridor. If the
recommendations came out to proceed, it probably wouldn't be
scored because it's a state-owned project. It would end up in a
plan and DOTPF would have to figure out funding.
REPRESENTATIVE DOOGAN asked if he's saying that the state would
not seek federal funding for that project.
MR. OTTESEN replied they would consider federal funds but that
would be several years in the future. It would be an expensive
project.
2:36:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DOOGAN remarked that the problem is that the road
to Nome would consume all the STIP dollars for an unknown amount
of time.
MR. OTTESEN cited an example of a large project that was
ultimately broken into smaller pieces. "There has to be some
reality check; remember the STIP is fiscally constrained," he
said.
SENATOR PASKVAN asked if the scoring is reactionary depending on
roadway incidents.
MR. OTTESEN acknowledged that accident history is one of about a
dozen criteria, but they won't dominate the scoring.
SENATOR PASKVAN asked if discretion figures in if the accident
results in a death or serious injury.
MR. OTTESEN replied there is an existing safety system that does
that. DOTPF staff receives and stores the accident data that has
been scored on scene by law enforcement. The data can be
retrieved to look for accident hot spots. The existing highway
safety improvement system is very effective in finding hot spots
and making corrective action. Fatalities are lower now than
anytime in state history. "I feel real good about our safety
record and how we're achieving better safety results," he said.
CO-CHAIR WILSON asked him to provide the criteria at the next
meeting.
2:40:56 PM
MR. OTTESEN agreed; it's available on the web and out for public
comment right now, he added. He continued to explain that each
region has three or more area planners who really are the point
of contact. Area planners go to city council meetings and help
with forms so people and resources are available. It's a good
system; the core issue is the money we don't have to address
these needs, he said.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN recalled that the road to Nome was part
of the road to resource issue under the Murkowski
administration. He asked if that is simply a label or if there
is something under roads to resources that helps to get a
project done.
MR. OTTESEN explained that the large road to Nome wasn't in the
resource road program. The criteria for the resource road
program is new since the Murkowski administration. The problem
is that the program only has about $8 million left.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked if the designation makes it easier
to get things done.
MR. OTTESEN replied a project that's funded with state money can
go fairly quickly.
2:44:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MUÑOZ asked what the deadline is for submitting
STIP nominations and if projects in the current STIP are
automatically rolled into the update.
MR. OTTESEN replied the deadline was just extended until March,
2. Responding to the second question he said that once design
work has been done on a project it is grandfathered in the STIP.
"We're not going to rescore something that's already begun."
Continuing with the PowerPoint he said that in Alaska there are
two types of Metropolitan Planning Organizations in the state-
AMATS and FMATS. They receive an allocation of funds and are the
transportation authority within Anchorage and Fairbanks. State
roads are included in the two geographic areas.
2:46:20 PM
MR. OTTESEN described the rules associated with the federal
highway fund program as challenging. For example, there are 120
different funding types some of which are age classed and
require independent tracking each year. Also, most of the funds
have a use-or-lose rule. If some project is stalled, for
whatever reason, DOTPF must find another project to use the
money on or those dollars will go to another state. "The proper
decision for DOT is to ensure that these dollars don't leave the
state even if we have to slow down a project for some challenge
we're not responsible for." Furthermore, funding types and time
limits often drive project choices. For example, in 2008 a
considerable amount of money had to be spent on safety or
bridges so those were the projects that went forward.
Because DOTPF staff has had to become experts on all the new
rules, the retention issue addressed earlier has become
particularly problematic. As employees retire or move out of
state the department loses valuable assets. It takes about three
years to get up to speed on how to handle the various fund
classes.
2:48:18 PM
The ever more earmarks, which are preordained decisions about
how money will be spend, essentially short circuit preexisting
planning. Often earmark projects aren't fully funded leaving the
department with the conundrum of using more STIP funds to flesh
out the earmark funds or telling the community fund the rest of
the project itself. "No matter how you make that decision
somebody finds fault with it." Another thing that's happened, he
said, is that there is a new pattern of rescissions-ways that
Congress is taking money away. For example, if money is left
over from a 2005 project, DOTPF may only use those excess funds
on a project that is in the same age class. "We can't put it to
a project in 2009." Finally, the "time trap rule" is being
strictly enforced. As of last June all projects that were
started with federal funds are required to be completed in due
course or the state is obligated to give the money back. The
policy states that lack of funding, change of political
direction or lack of staff are not valid reasons for not
completing a project.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked if DOTPF is required to expend all
the money allocated for a project if the preferred plan costs
less. For example if $220 million is available for a bridge in
Ketchikan and an alternative only costs $100 million. "What
happens to the other $120 [million]?"
MR. OTTESEN explained that if the environmental document is
redone and the preferred alternative costs less and it serves
the purpose and need of the project, then that would meet the
intent of the federal law. "It's about achieving the
transportation solution."
2:51:38 PM
MR. OTTESEN next displayed a graph that clearly demonstrates a
dramatic drop in money allocated to the NHS and the CTP
beginning about 2005 as a result of SAFETEA-LU numbers and
earmarks, rescissions and set-asides." Highway fund rescissions
began as a trickle in 2004 and in 2009 almost $55,000 will be
rescinded. "These are dollars we have to give back," he
emphasized.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked about the possibility of
diverting those funds to other projects.
MR. OTTESEN replied it's in federal statute, but there is a move
for Congress to rescind the decision.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked if any states are considering
litigation in this area.
MR. OTTESEN replied not that he's aware of and added that the
rescissions were designed to balance the books. Continuing, he
displayed a map showing about 80 completed projects that would
have been ineligible prior to the Alaska-specific 1991 law that
opened other road classes. Eight or nine projects a year have
gone to the villages so it's been good, but they have taken
available money from big projects, he said.
2:54:29 PM
2009 projects are fully funded and stimulus funds are a
possibility so it looks like a healthy year. Beginning in 2010
there's a predicted deficit in the highway trust fund and
Congress has to pass a new authorizing bill within the next
eight months. Concerns about that new bill relate to formula and
allocation changes such that Alaska might no longer garner $6
for every $1 it puts in. He suggested that transportation will
be used as a way to drive policy related to greenhouse gases and
global warming. What that means to Alaska is unclear but
"there's a lot to worry about," he said.
The next graph provided a 50-year picture of the highway trust
fund between 1957 and 2007. For 30 years the balance was about
$10 billion; it jumped to more that $20 billion during the "dot
com" boom and has since fallen off. The highway trust fund began
FY08 with a net balance of $8 billion and late in the fiscal
year it became insolvent. People simply stopped driving which
resulted in less fuel taxes going to the fund.
CO-CHAIR WILSON asked if other states suspended their state fuel
tax as Alaska had done.
MR. OTTESEN replied not that he's aware of. He continued to say
that in September 2008 Congress put $8 billion general fund
dollars into the trust fund. "It was essentially the first drop
of the bailout money because it happened about two weeks before
the banking crisis hit." The projected FY09 ending balance is
zero meaning there will be no extra money in the fund starting
in 2010. Fixing the problem will require another bailout or a
tax increase. Our challenge going into the next year is what
Congress does to solve the problem.
The current 2006-2009 STIP calendar may be amended before it
expires in eight months, but it depends largely on the stimulus.
The 2010-2013 STIP must be prepared by the beginning of the
federal year on October 1. A call for nominations is out and the
draft STIP will be ready by the end of summer.
In summary: the STIP rules are more complex and demanding than
ever; federal funds are declining and becoming less flexible;
DOTPF shares more STIP funds than any other state DOT; and big
policy changes could be coming.
CO-CHAIR WILSON thanked Mr. Ottesen and announced that the next
meeting would be an update on the Alaska Marine Highway System
and proposed Alaska class ferry.
3:00:13 PM
CO-CHAIR WILSON adjourned the joint meeting of the Senate and
House Transportation Standing Committees.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|