Motor Fuel Accomplishments and Challenges 2003 Motor Fuel Workshops: Atlanta Sacramento

Introduction I Accomplishments: Re-Assessment Smart Input tool Motor Fuel (MF) Reviews Data verification Publications: Process Review Brochure Community of Practice (COP)

Introduction II Challenges: Motor fuel reviews and follow-up Quality of reviews Quality improvements Risk assessment Division Administrator emphasis Communication

Introduction III Changing environment Reauthorization Reporting changes Attribution analysis changes Modeling data (gasohol in particular) Communication

Accomplished: Re-Assessment Time line Began in late 1998 Shortly after TEA-21 passed Methodology Working group State experts AASHTO FTA (Federation of Tax Administrators) FHWA

Accomplished: Re-Assessment General Accounting Office (GAO) Concurrent assessment Cooperative effort Substantial agreement on conclusions GAO identified several actions Verification of State MF reporting Document FHWA attribution methodology Independent review of FHWA methodology Evaluate EXSTARS-EXFIRS for validation

Accomplished: Re-Assessment FHWA identified several areas for revision Federal Register Notice Comments received General support for the proposals Publication: Attribution and Apportionment of Federal Highway Tax Revenues: Process Refinements

Accomplished: Smart Input tool Developed and tested Smart Input Tool Version 1.03 available May, 2002 Installation and technical support Used by 48 States Must be used for data starting January 2002 Generally considered easy-to-use More detail later

Accomplished: MF Reviews Motor Fuels Review Working Group Continuous Process Improvement Model Discussed at last year’s workshop About 27 have been reported Quality varies Want your feedback on improving this process

Accomplished: Data verification Process review versus data verification Why verify? Old procedure - data hand-entered Data needs checking until new procedures Verification memo Just went out Due April 15 Probably two rounds

Accomplished: Publications Attribution and Apportionment of Federal Highway Tax Revenues: Process Refinements Your State’s Share: Attributing Federal Highway Revenues to Each State Community of Practice (COP)

Challenges: MF Reviews and Follow-up Quality of reviews Continuous Process Improvement model Left open to interpretation Wide range of quality Quality improvements Need to bring up the average Three core items: Procedures document Procedures assessment Oversight plan Risk assessment

Challenges: Communication Keep Division in loop Video conference options Community of Practice Promotional brochures

Changing Environment: Reauthorization TEA-21 ends September 30, 2003 Due for re-authorization Administration-proposed legislation What Congress will do is unknown No significant MF changes expected

Changing Environment: Reporting Changes Must use the Smart Input Tool Transfer date is January 2002 Any revision prior to 1 / 02, use old method Any submission or revision after 1 / 02, use Smart Input Tool Review some of the Input Tool features

Changing Environment: Attribution Analysis Changes FHWA will be treating some data differently On-highway public diesel use Alternative fuels reporting Loss allowance treatment Reporting changes For alternative fuels State responsibilities

Changing Environment: Modeling Data FHWA held a models workshop March 7-8, 2002 Stakeholder input Models generally acceptable Focus on the big picture Follow-up on State/Federal discrepancy Total gallons Reported versus modeled gallons

Changing Environment: Gasohol Model Hot topic in reauthorization Conversion from MTBE to ethanol Current model emphasized location That assumption will become invalid

In Summary Identified accomplishments Identified challenges Identified changes in the MF environment That’s the background – let’s move to details