SB 263 - SECONDARY ROADS SENATOR JOHN TORGERSON, sponsor of SB 263, gave the following summary of the measure. SB 263 recognizes secondary roads as a separate category eligible for federal transportation funds for road maintenance. Funds would be placed directly into that category and then be disbursed according to a ranking system developed by the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOTPF). DOTPF's current ranking system is inadequate; secondary roads do not score high enough on the list of maintenance priorities to be paved. Examples of this problem can be seen in every district in the state. DOTPF's continual response to requests for maintenance of secondary roads is that when they score high enough, they will be repaired, however the ranking system prevents those roads from reaching the top of the list. Secondary roads are defined in SB 263 as dirt and gravel roads. Although the bill does not address any dollar amount, it reflects an appropriation of about $20 million. SB 263 contains a sunset provision after five years, therefore the five year cost will total $100 million. After SB 263 sunsets, gravel roads will be ranked amongst each other instead of against other highways and uses in the state. Number 053 SENATOR HALFORD asked how chip-sealed roads are categorized, since they are not actually paved. SENATOR TORGERSON said he considered writing standards into the bill, but current secondary road standards seem to evade everyone, are hypothetical at best, and can be changed at the discretion of DOTPF staff. To illustrate the problem, Senator Torgerson said a road in his district was slated to have a chip-seal covering, estimated to cost an additional $150,000 to a current project. Because of disputes and other factors, the cost escalated to $1.1 million. He felt everyone needs to know what a secondary road is and said that if he knew all of the technical terms for chip-seal or high-float, he would have included them in the bill. He maintained that his constituents want to drive on a hard surface, they do not care about the bells and whistles that go along with a fully fledged large federal highway project. He noted the definition of secondary road in the bill includes dirt and gravel roads only. CHAIRMAN WARD noted Senator Lincoln's presence. Number 091 SENATOR GREEN asked whether SB 263 will supersede any other projects and who will be sharing their pot of money to fund it. SENATOR TORGERSON stated if the amount of federal funds does not increase, he will advocate a reduction of an equal amount from three appropriations currently made by the Legislature (the National Highway System, the TRAC, and the Community Road Program). He has already devised a formula to raise the $20 million. Alaska might get an additional federal appropriation due to the reauthorization of ISTEA. He estimated that DOTPF exceeded last year's appropriation by about $280 million. He would like to see some of those projects reclassified to free up $20 million for gravel road paving. He stated he has not designed a ranking system at this time. SENATOR GREEN asked if most of these roads would be DOTPF construction projects, or whether the boroughs would receive funds from DOTPF and do the work. SENATOR TORGERSON replied SB 263 applies to state highways. He added that if projects such as the Juneau access road, the road to Whittier, the Dalton Highway, the Denali Highway, and the Kashwitna (ph) project are given a higher priority, the cost will be $700 million. He stated he does not oppose building new roads but believes it is more important to fix existing roads. Number 133 SENATOR LINCOLN commented that she receives repeated complaints about the dust control problem on gravel roads in her district, because of resulting health problems. It is especially problematic for smaller communities because gravel is removed from the riverbed and the sediment creates a very fine dust. She asked if that concern is addressed in SB 263. SENATOR TORGERSON replied the qualifications apply to any gravel road irregardless of community size which would then be ranked by DOTPF. SENATOR LINCOLN questioned whether villages could also participate in the municipal transfer provision under this legislation. SENATOR TORGERSON said any gravel road qualifies and DOTPF would be required to rank those roads higher if a local government wishes to take ownership of the road. SENATOR LINCOLN stated that as a member of the Deferred Maintenance Task Force, she was glad to see the transfer provision. SENATOR TORGERSON indicated that a substantial savings will occur "down the road" if some of the roads are upgraded and then transferred to local governments. He maintained he is taking a leap of faith by believing that DOTPF will devise a fair ranking system, but he believes it will, which is why he did not establish a ranking system in the legislation itself. Number 185 SENATOR GREEN asked what SB 263 accomplishes that cannot be accomplished right now without legislation. SENATOR TORGERSON stated the same thing could be done without legislation if the Administration was willing to recognize that there are gravel roads in the state that need paving. The Administration has recognized the problem just this year, but only to the tune of $800,000 in what is named the "Secondary Road Transfer Program." SENATOR GREEN asked if the unimproved secondary road definition in SB 263 is in statute elsewhere. SENATOR TORGERSON stated that he created that definition. SENATOR LINCOLN asked if, according to the definition in SB 263, Senator Torgerson's list of secondary roads needing improvement is compatible with DOTPF's list. SENATOR TORGERSON did not know whether DOTPF has a list, but repeated it would apply to any gravel road. He explained that there are paved roads in the state that are considered to be secondary roads, but SB 263 would set aside money to pave gravel roads. Number 214 MR. TOM BODECKER, City Manager of Soldotna, testified via teleconference. He said the City of Soldotna generally supports SB 263 because it addresses a problem with gravel roads that has resulted from the current system. Under the current standard, when a request is made of DOTPF to pave a gravel road, a cost estimate is completed and that number is plugged into the formula. In some rural areas, the cost estimates encompass a grand scheme plan to improve several roads. The high cost then lowers the project's ranking, and nothing gets done. [MR. BODECKER'S TESTIMONY WAS INTERRUPTED BY POOR TRANSMISSION.] MR. BOYD BROWNFIELD, Deputy Commissioner of DOTPF, stated DOTPF generally supports the concept of SB 263, but believes several areas need clarification. Section 1(a) begins by establishing the adoption of regulations formalizing secondary roads as a category within Alaska's highway system. The section also contains a subcategory that pertains to unimproved secondary roads, and instructs DOTPF to formulate a ranking system for those roads. Section 1(b) then relates to secondary roads again, and aims toward the ownership of a municipality or local authorities, and then instructs that a priority shall be given to unimproved secondary roads if a local request for transfer is made. He requested a chance to work with the sponsor to clarify the language. MR. BROWNFIELD explained that Section 1(d) defines unimproved secondary roads as dirt and gravel roads. DOTPF feels a road does not have to be dirt or gravel to be unimproved and suggests the definition include roads that may have some asphaltic treatment on it. The asphaltic treatment is also referred to as chip sealed and high float. Those types of roads in disrepair should be qualified as unimproved roads. He noted DOTPF is already in the process of establishing a separate local roads category in its project evaluation board process which should address this same issue. MR. BROWNFIELD pointed out DOTPF has a regulation that defines secondary roads (17AAC.05.030). He concluded by saying in any event, DOTPF supports the concept of SB 263. SENATOR GREEN referred to language on page 1, line 7, which reads: "Standards adopted for secondary roads under this subsection need not conform to those adopted by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials" and asked if that language applies to improvements to secondary roads now. MR. BROWNFIELD answered DOTPF has the ability to create new standards now that would be accepted by the Federal Highway Administration (FHA). If federal funding is used, DOTPF has to touch base with the FHA somewhere along the line first. Number 294 MR. BODECKER continued his testimony via teleconference. One problem that prevents secondary road paving is that secondary roads tend to be designed for paving at a very high standard which results in a cost-benefit ratio that leaves those roads low on the list. He thought the idea of establishing a construction standard for secondary roads is important. He maintained that although the problem could be resolved through DOTPF's regulatory process, it has never occurred. Number 314 SENATOR GREEN informed committee members she prepared an amendment that includes gravel, chip sealed, or inadequately paved roads in SB 263. CHAIRMAN WARD asked SENATOR TORGERSON if he wished to respond to the comments made by Deputy Commissioner Brownfield. SENATOR TORGERSON felt Deputy Commissioner Brownfield raised three issues of substance. In response to any confusion about secondary roads versus unimproved secondary roads in Section 1(a), a definition of unimproved secondary roads is included in the bill. Senator Torgerson said this issue goes to the heart of the problem. DOTPF says it has defined secondary roads in regulation, but if the room were filled with city managers and people in the road construction business, no one could say what a secondary road is if asked to build one because the description is discretionary to DOTPF. The Legislature could adopt the standards used in the regulation, but the problem is the discretion DOTPF uses. Local governments cannot have an engineer visit their localities to review a project request, inform the local governments they are getting one thing, and then have the plan change completely. Regarding the asphalt and chip seal roads, SENATOR TORGERSON said he does not object to including both, but the object of SB 263 is to take care of roads that have never been paved. He pointed out his Borough has no paved secondary roads. He was not sure how many roads are chip sealed, but he assumed their inclusion will divide the pot up further. SENATOR TORGERSON stated DOTPF's Commissioner said DOTPF was looking at other ways to rank secondary roads several years ago. He felt if SB 263 spurs DOTPF along, that is fine, but he did not give that statement much credence. SENATOR TORGERSON said DOTPF's ability to create new regulations is what scares him about the process and is the reason he wants to put standards in statute. He said he talked this over with federal officials. Alaska would have to go through a process to amend the STIP, which requires a public hearing process and other things. Senator Torgerson pointed out that during previous DOTPF testimony he was told that federal money could not be used to upgrade gravel roads with more gravel, but federal officials said otherwise. Number 356 JIM SWING, Public Works Director of the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, testified on behalf of the Borough administration and the Department of Public Works. The Mat-Su Assembly has not had the opportunity to review either SB 263 or SB 264. The Road Advisory Board will be reviewing both bills tonight. The Borough administration is in favor of SB 263 but would like to see chip sealed or inadequately paved roads, that do not meet the standards established under this section, included in the definition. The Borough administration is interested in SB 263 from the standpoint of quality of life regarding paving state roads, and is also interested in taking ownership of some state roads, if improved to acceptable standards which SB 263 allows and encourages. He suggested soliciting local government participation when establishing standards because most local governments have standards of their own and could be of assistance. MR. OCIE ADAMS, Secretary of the Local Road Service Advisory Board for the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, stated he agreed with Mr. Swing regarding the definition of an unimproved road, and expressed concern that no standards are actually addressed in SB 263. He questioned whether state or local standards would be enforced. He stated the Advisory Board would be discussing the bill tonight and would provide the Legislature with written communication in the form of a resolution. CHAIRMAN WARD stated he would hold SB 263 in committee to allow Senators Green and Torgerson to work on a committee substitute, including Senator Green's proposed amendment. SENATOR GREEN maintained she is not trying to interfere with Senator Torgerson's purpose, however she believes it is important that attention be given to those roads that were sealed 20 or 25 years ago and are now essentially bare. Number 422 SENATOR LINCOLN referred to the definition of unimproved secondary road, and asked if roads that were asphalt or chipsealed but have been washed out would be classified as secondary roads rather than unimproved secondary roads. SENATOR TORGERSON replied that paved roads can be secondary roads. He said his definition only includes dirt or gravel roads because including asphalt roads will increase the pieces of the pie. He would oppose including chip-sealed roads if their inclusion means gravel roads will not get paved which was his primary purpose in introducing SB 263. CHAIRMAN WARD agreed with Senator Torgerson. SENATOR HALFORD pointed out the issue is further confused by the fact that primary roads can be gravel roads, such as the Haul Road. SENATOR TORGERSON added the word "unimproved" is in the eyes of the beholder also. CHAIRMAN WARD repeated his request that Senator Green work with the sponsor to prepare a committee substitute.