MAP-21 Overview and Programmatic Impacts February 4, 2013 Serge Phillips MnDOT Federal Relations Koryn Zewers MnDOT Capital Programs & Performance Measures

Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21 st Century (MAP-21) – Surface Transportation Reauthorization Bill

Federal Funding Terminology Authorization Acts – upper limit on program funding Apportionment – statutory formula funding terms Appropriations Acts – annual funding with specific funding amounts Obligation Authority – annual funding amount released by federal aid highway program

SAFETEA-LU & MAP-21– Highway Themes SAFETEA-LU ( ): Earmarks, Equity Bonus, separate highway safety program, State received program by program apportionment -MN highway obligation authority - $525 M/yr MAP-21 ( ):Performance-based Investment, National Highway System focus, formula program consolidation and changes -(Est.) MN highway obligation authority - $575 M/yr

MAP-21 ProgramsSAFETEA-LU Programs FY 2012FY 2013 National Highway Performance Program (NHPP) Interstate Maintenance, Bridge, National Highway System$308$365 Surface Transportation Program (STP) STP (less Enhancements), Off-System Bridges, Coordinated Border$180$168 Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)HSIP, Rail$35$40 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)CMAQ$32$31 Metropolitan Planning $4 Transportation Alternatives (TA) Safe Routes to Schools, Recreational Trails, Enhancements, Other TA$24$17 N/AEquity Bonus$42$0 Total Apportionment$625

National Highway Performance Program (NHPP) 63.7% of Minnesota’s total Federal Aid Apportionment Approximately $57 million in additional annual apportionment compared to previous programs Performance Driven Investment: US DOT will establish national measures and Interstate performance targets, NHS performance targets established by each state Matching requirements remain Ability to transfer up to 50% of NHPP MAP-21 Highway Formula Program Consolidation

Surface Transportation Program (STP) - primary federal funding source for projects not on NHS Transit Capital included 29.3% of Minnesota’s total Federal Aid Apportionment Minnesota’s STP apportionment is $12 million/yr less compared to FY2012 Funding formula has changed: –MAP-21: 50% to any area of the state; 50% based on population –SAFETEA-LU: 37.5% to any area of the state; 62.5% based on population MAP-21 Highway Formula Program Consolidation

Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP): Increased funding levels ($ 5M/yr) and continued focus on ALL public roads CMAQ and Metropolitan Planning: similar apportionment Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) –Funding for Enhancements, Safe Routes to Schools, Recreational Trails, and other similar transportation projects –$16.5 million in apportionment for FY $7 million less than SAFETEA-LU –One set-aside: $2.2 million for Recreational Trails –Competitive grant process MAP-21 Highway Formula Program Consolidation

Performance Management Provisions MAP-21 connects transportation investments to performance-based outcomes ◦ New national goals establish outcomes ◦ National performance measures establish criteria for measuring progress ◦ State targets will measure progress toward goals

The Indian Reservation Roads (IRR) Program changed to Tribal Transportation Program (TTP) MAP-21 replaces previous formula funding, resulting in funding reductions to Minnesota tribes –27% based on a tribe’s relative share of road miles –39% based on a tribe’s relative share of HUD Indian housing population (self-identified) –34% based on a tribe’s share of RNDF and population adjustment factor funding from FY2005 to FY2012 MAP-21 Tribal Transportation

MAP-21 Freight Provisions Increased freight policy and planning focus –Freight Performance Requirements: truck travel time and reliability on Interstate highways –Designation of National Freight Network will drive future freight funding and priorities –US DOT required to develop a National Freight Strategic Plan

MAP-21 Alternative Finance Provisions TIFIA : $1.7 billion in funding for credit assistance to projects of national or regional significance Tolling: MAP-21 expands state ability to use tolling: –to expand Interstate capacity –Federal Value Pricing Pilot Program (MN one of 15 states involved) –all electronic toll facilities must be interoperable by Oct. 1, 2016

Accelerated Project Delivery Emphasis Accelerated Project Delivery: –Authority for activities prior to completion of NEPA, including acquisition of real property –Authority to enter into CM/GC contract Environmental Streamlining : permits programmatic approaches for environmental reviews and mitigation plans –Additional Categorical Exclusions Agency Coordination: accelerated decision-making (combined FEIS and ROD), emphasis on early interagency coordination and a new issue resolution process

MAP-21– Transit Themes Highway/ Transit - 80/20 funding split retained Consolidation of major formula programs New Freedom program replaced by Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities New asset management requirements Performance-based planning requirements aligning federal funding with national goals and progress towards these goals

MAP-21 Urban Transit Highlights Urbanized area transit formula funding – gets $54.5 M/yr for new uses such as transit capital and preventive maintenance Fixed Guideway Capital Investment Grants replaces New Starts/Small Starts Programs with new eligibility for core capacity projects New State of Good Repair Program. Two categories of funding ($11.3 M/yr) –High Intensity Fixed Guideway formula for rail and BRT on exclusive guideways –High Intensity Motorbus formula for buses that run in HOV lanes or shoulders

MAP-21 Rural Transit Highlights ∙ Non-urbanized formula funding. Job Access/Reverse Commute now eligible ∙ Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities apportions funding to both states and large urbanized areas (>200,000) ∙ Although federal formula funding to Greater Minnesota transit increased, other program changes reduced key greater MN transit bus funding streams

∙ Same amount of highway funding, but apportioned differently ∙ MAP-21 emphasis on Performance-based Investment and NHS focus: ∙ Interstate pavements at 2% poor (national standard) ∙ NHS pavements at 3% poor (proposed state target) ∙ Bridges with less than 10% structural deficiency (MAP-21) ∙ MAP-21 flexibility to transfer funds between six core formula highway programs ∙ Alignment of four year highway plan (STIP) with MAP-21 provisions MAP-21 Highway Investment Programming Challenges

Four-year plan published in the late fall/early winter each year Includes all projects using federal funds provided through FHWA as well as other regionally significant highway projects Organized by region of the state and by year Must be fiscally constrained Area Transportation Partnerships (ATPs) involved throughout the STIP development process

Sub-state, multi-county partnerships Include traditional and non-traditional transportation partners Role is to integrate regional transportation priorities into the programming process Solicit and review projects that are eligible for federal funding within their region

Over Under Programmed ___

Goal: Move toward all MAP-21 performance goals, additional funding for Transportation Alternatives, and maintain the current program: Most projects in years FY will be funded $186 million for new interstate and national highway system pavements $60 million for new metro reliability projects $27 million for new highway safety projects $20 million for new transportation alternative projects Funding Sources for Additional Projects: $188 million in federal funds above forecast $105 million in project shifts

Federal fiscal year- forecast

∙ Statewide Performance Program ($400M) ∙ Interstate pavements and NHS bridges ∙ NHS system performance ∙ District Flexible Program for managing the Districts’ highest priorities ($320M) ∙ Funding directed by Area Transportation Partnerships ($134M)

∙ Transition to MAP-21 programs and funding in FY ∙ New target formula beginning in FY 2017 ∙ Minnesota GO ∙ Minnesota State Highway Investment Plan (MnSHIP) ∙ Increased emphasis on aligning spending with specific performance measures ∙ Increased emphasis on statewide programs ∙ Continued involvement of Area Transportation Partnerships (ATPs)