1. The HCM and MAP-21 Performance Requirements: Opportunities
HCQS Summer Meeting 2016
Rich Margiotta
June 13, 2016

2. Background Rulemaking process Planning Final Rule has been published
Legislation directs an agency implement an action
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) issued
day comment period
Agency addresses comments and issues Final Rule
Code of Federal Regulation is updated
Agency is responsible for implementing the rule
Planning Final Rule has been published
Congestion, Reliability, and Freight is the last bundle of measures undergoing rulemaking from MAP-21
Safety was first, followed by Pavement & Bridges
We are in the comment period (closes August 19)

3. Background (cont.) Rule has two parts
Defines performance measures that must be reported by the states
Requires states to set targets for the measures
Full NPRM is 422 pages, only last 83 are the actual rule
FHWA is providing the travel time data needed to develop the measures (National Performance Management Research Data Set, NPMRDS)
See cheat sheet handout

4. Integration With Other Data Sources
Urban area boundaries needed for Peak Hour Travel Time Ratio and CMAQ/Traffic congestion measure
Which reporting segments are within the boundary
Speed limit needed for Level of Travel Time Reliability
Traffic volumes needed for CMAQ/Traffic congestion measure
Desired Peak Period Travel Time needed for Peak Hour Travel Time Ratio
Could be done manually, but automated means are more suitable
Conflation
GIS-enabled process of matching the travel time data configuration with agency roadway data files
Not a requirement of the rule, but many agencies will use it for efficiency

5. Conflation

6. Final Dataset Structure
Data elements
Reporting segment
Epoch (time interval, 5-minutes)
Reporting segment length
Travel time:
All vehicles
Trucks only
Desired peak period travel time
Posted speed limit
Highway type
Urbanized area designation
Traffic volume (matched to the level of the epoch)
Once the data is assembled to the above specs, the calculation of the measures is trivial

7. Four Big Questions (Among Many)
How will these measures perform over time, i.e., are they capable of showing trends?
Is there anything that states and MPOs can do that will actually “move the needle”?
Performance: Safety vs. Pavement vs. Bridges vs. Congestion – how does focusing/deemphasizing investment in one area affect others?
Will any of this make a difference – will agencies embrace performance management or just go through the motions of reporting to the Feds?

8. Where are the Opportunities for the HCM?

9. Where Are the Opportunities?
Issues for the HCM
Rule requires measures to be developed from empirical data
HCM is project (facility) oriented and MAP-21 measures are system measures
Performance reporting and target levels set at system level
Simplified methods could be used with state inventory data for target setting, but targets are short-term (2-4 years)
HCM and the Planning rule: TIP and LRTP
How do these plans affect the MAP-21 performance measures and progress toward targets
Freeway Facilities and Urban Streets for TIP projects
Planning level HCM for LRTP
HCM and project level planning
Microsimulation becoming very prevalent
HCM to screen improvement alternatives
HCM to develop reliability from basic microsimulation runs

10. What Needs to be Done?
Include MAP-21 measures in the Freeway Facilities and Urban Streets methods
Let users see how a project affects these measures, however, may be undetectable at the system level!
Data is already developed by these procedures (travel time distribution)
But MAP-21 measures only relevant for long analysis periods
E.g., PHTTR uses three A.M. and three P.M. hours