Performance Measurement of Transportation Systems: Summary of the Fourth International Conference (2013)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

44 PLENARY SESSION 4 Tools and Methods What Are We Doing and How Are We Doing It? Sue McNeil, University of Delaware (Moderator) Jeffrey F. Paniati, Federal Highway Administration Paula J. Hammond, Washington State Department of Transportation Jenne van der Velde, Rijkswaterstaat Centre for Transport and Navigation, Netherlands moving toWard a PerformanCe-based federal-aid highWay Program Jeffrey F. Paniati, Executive Director, Federal High- way Administration (FHWA), spoke on how FHWA is looking at performance management as part of moving toward a performance-based federal-aid highway pro- gram. FHWA’s FY 2012 budget proposal specifically establishes a performance-based highway program and reflects the administration’s four broad goals: building for the future; spurring innovation; ensuring safety; and reforming government and exercising responsibility. It is this fourth goal, reforming government and exer- cising responsibility, that relates directly to performance measurement. This goal also pertains to greater account- ability and transparency in using public funds. It builds on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which is generally characterized as being reporting heavy and performance light. Paniati stated that FHWA is trying to focus more on using data for performance and analysis rather than merely for reporting. The National Highway System (NHS) elements in the 2012 budget have received a more positive response from Capitol Hill. The Highway Infrastructure Perfor- mance Program (HIPP) provides for investments in the state of good repair, operational performance, and safety on an enhanced NHS, and the Flexible Investment Pro- gram (FIP) provides for investments in any part of the federal-aid highway system and in off-system bridges. Suballocations are recommended for both HIPP and FIP. The Highway Economic Requirements System model was used to estimate funding levels for maintaining a state of good repair. The enhanced NHS would be a 220,000-mile network that would carry 55 percent of all traffic and 97 percent of all truck freight. The current NHS extends for a comparatively low 165,000 miles. In addition, the enhanced NHS would provide a more comparable system in all 50 states. Considering that recent national commissions have rec- ommended increased transparency, accountability, and a performance-based system, the current fiscal situation of the United States also calls for more transparency and accountability. Paniati predicted that a performance-based federal-aid program will be part of the next authorization and remarked that FHWA is working with state and con- gressional partners to better define the salient elements and processes. FHWA has identified several principles that should inform the development of a performance-based federal-aid program: • Development of the program needs to be an evolu- tionary process. More than one step will be required to reach the desired program. • The program must be built from existing data and measures so that all states will be able to use it. FHWA should tailor the framework to support comprehensive and robust programs. • The responsibility for goals and target-setting is shared by FHWA and the states. FHWA realizes the need to provide accountability; in the first stage, however, accountability will probably not be tied to funding levels. The FY 2012 budget creates a framework that outlines the key elements of a performance-based program. The

45TOOLS AND METHODS budget recognizes the need to address performance in the national goal areas of safety, infrastructure condition, economic competitiveness, environmental sustainability, and livability. Initially, it focuses on performance in the areas of safety, and pavement and bridge conditions. The FY 2012 budget also outlines a performance management process. According to Paniati, FHWA would not look to legislation to establish the definition of the specific measures, goals, or targets, as that task should be performed by the U.S. Department of Trans- portation (DOT) in conjunction with state DOTs and local agencies. The process would begin with the Sec- retary of Transportation, who would establish quanti- fiable performance measures and national performance goals. The states would work in partnership with FHWA to set state targets, which would need to be tied to avail- able funding, so there would be some negotiations in this phase. FHWA envisions using the existing planning process, with some modifications, to implement perfor- mance management. The states would be called on to publish annual reports on their progress in meeting tar- gets. States would be allowed budgetary flexibility when targets are met but would be required to submit a perfor- mance improvement plan when performance falls short of targets. For the safety goal, the U.S. DOT would build on the states’ Strategic Highway Safety Plans. The U.S. DOT has called for an additional investment in safety data as part of the authorization. The Highway Safety Improvement Program provides improved information on highway characteristics to match existing crash data. This program provides the data needed to better under- stand the relationships between highway improvements, enforcement programs, and efforts targeting changing behavior as well as results. According to Paniati, the U.S. DOT envisions begin- ning with fatalities as a performance measure but tran- sitioning over time to the use of serious injuries as a measure. This approach reflects the evolutionary devel- opment of appropriate measures and targets and also provides accountability. The approach for pavement and bridges is similar and builds upon previous work on asset management. A risk-based asset management plan would be required, and performance requirements would be limited to the enhanced NHS. The tentative plan is to move from using asset management for informational purposes to using it for decision making. The initial measures would focus on pavement smoothness, with the international rough- ness index (IRI) as the starting point, before moving on to structural adequacy and other related issues. In closing, Paniati highlighted FHWA’s ongoing efforts to advance all elements of performance manage- ment and the administration’s ongoing dialogue with the American Association of State Highway and Trans- portation Officials (AASHTO) Standing Committee on Performance Management, which has been a cen- tral part of developing a program for both federal and state agencies. FHWA is continuing to develop data and systematic measures for safety, pavement, and bridges; the work on the IRI will be instrumental in develop- ing national pavement measures. FHWA is also con- tinuing to invest in research in areas such as reliability, the environment, and livability, but additional research is needed to define measures in these areas. Finally, FHWA is brainstorming about how it can integrate per- formance management with planning, and pilot tests are being implemented within several states and metropoli- tan planning organizations. Under its Office of Infrastructure, FHWA has estab- lished an Office of Transportation Performance Man- agement whose director, Peter J. Stephanos, is working to define the role and agenda of the office to ensure alignment with the AASHTO Standing Committee on Performance Management. The Office of Transporta- tion Performance Management coordinates the cross- cutting aspects of performance management, as well as the efforts of individual offices. For example, the Office of Safety will still lead safety performance measures, but the Office of Transportation Performance Management will ensure internal coordination. One effort that is underway is building the internal capacity to support a performance-based program. Field staff who interact with state DOTs are being trained in this area. FHWA is also developing analysis tools and training to assist states and local governments in advanc- ing performance management and is working with the Federal Transit Administration to facilitate collabora- tion between the highway and the transit communities. Paniati indicated that he sees this process as a natural business evolution to improve decision making; resource allocation; and transparency and accountability for fed- eral, state, and local funds. He noted that FHWA is not waiting for authorization but is already working with its partners. measuring transPortation system PerformanCe: examPles of aPPlying PerformanCe management tools and strategies Paula J. Hammond described the use of performance measurement and performance management at the Washington State DOT. She stated that performance management is a key part of the Washington State DOT’s corporate culture and that the department was celebrating the Gray Notebook’s 10-year anniversary of reporting on transparency and accountability. (The Gray

46 performance measurement of transportation systems Notebook is the Washington State DOT’s quarterly per- formance report that measures programs and reports on their progress.) This publication is used internally to manage the agency and externally to communicate with policy makers and with the public. Hammond noted that a strong and reliable transpor- tation system is the backbone of a healthy economy and that performance measures play an important role in the Washington State DOT’s system management. The department’s plan to reduce congestion and improve mobility in the state is called Moving Washington. Hammond described the Washington State DOT’s broad and diverse transportation portfolio, which includes highways, ferries, passenger rail, freight rail, general aviation, and support for transit. The depart- ment owns, manages, and maintains 20,000 lane miles of state highway, 225 lane miles of a planned 320-mile- long high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) freeway system, and more than 3,600 bridges and structures. The ferry system includes 20 terminals and 22 ferry vessels that average 500 daily sailings and carry 23 million passen- gers annually. The Washington State DOT is a partner in the Amtrak Cascades state passenger rail, which car- ries more than 700,000 passengers per year, and it also owns, operates, and maintains the Grain Train, which includes 1,432 miles of short-line rail and 89 grain cars. There are 17 department-managed airports and 138 public-use airports in the state. The department’s com- mute programs support more than 810,000 commuters, and its vanpool fleet of more than 2,400 vans is the larg- est in the United States. Hammond discussed the three primary reasons that drive the use of performance measurement at the Washing- ton State DOT and the data collection needed to support the use of performance measures. First, performance-based investments best utilize the agency’s limited resources. Data are used to determine the highest-priority needs. Sec- ond, performance measures are used to demonstrate prog- ress toward completing projects and programs and are the basis for communicating this progress to the public. Third, measures and research are used to improve system perfor- mance by identifying problem areas and solutions. The public expects the Washington State DOT to build, maintain, and operate the transportation system in the most open and transparent manner possible. To this end, the department’s performance-based strate- gic plan outlines agency goals, and the Gray Notebook provides quarterly updates on agency performance and accountability. Under Daniela Bremmer’s leadership, the Washington State DOT has been using and expand- ing performance measurement over the past decade. As a result, the Gray Notebook is known nationally and internationally as a brand that stands for agency cred- ibility, transparency, and accountability. It is a vital and effective internal and external communication tool that has supported the passage of two critical increases in gas tax revenue. The Washington State DOT’s performance is tracked in several areas: • Safety. Fatalities on Washington roads are at their lowest levels since the 1950s. In 2007, there were 571 fatalities on Washington roads; in 2009, there were 491, a decrease of 14 percent. • Mobility. The movement of people and goods con- tributes to a strong economy and a better quality of life. Washingtonians experienced 22 percent less delay on state highways in 2009 than in 2007. • Asset management. The department focuses on preservation and maintenance. In 2009, 93 percent of the department’s roadways were in fair or better condition. Investments to improve the system are made on the basis of performance data. For example, collision and con- gestion data are used to direct the department’s roving incident response trucks to the areas of greatest need. Limited funds for bridge and pavement preservation are allocated to the facilities with the highest priority proj- ects. Collision data and before-and-after analyses are used to determine investments in safety measures such as rumble strips and cable median barriers in high-collision corridors. Preservation and maintenance are important for performance-based investments. The maintenance accountability process sets targets for 31 key activi- ties and responsibilities. In 2010 the Washington State DOT met 65 percent of its performance targets, includ- ing pavement repair and snow and ice removal. Aging vessels and terminals are issues for the Washington State ferry system, whose fleet is among the oldest of the major ferry systems in the country. A condition- rating system helps preserve and update vessels and iden- tifies when vessels and terminals need to be replaced. Hammond noted the importance of demonstrating and communicating performance. The 2003 and 2005 gas tax investments, in combination with lower levels of driving resulting from higher fuel prices and the economic recession, are making a difference in system mobility. Between 2007 and 2009, statewide travel delay declined by 21 percent on state highways, and the average peak travel time improved on 31 of 38 high-demand commute routes. A study of 15 completed projects funded by the 2003 and 2005 gas tax investments showed that morning and evening average speeds increased by 23 percent and that peak period travel times decreased by 15 percent. The Washington State DOT addresses congestion by managing the freeway system to maximum throughput speeds that help achieve maximum system efficiency. For example, the I-405–South Bellevue Widening Proj- ect, which was completed in 2009, added northbound

47tools and methods and southbound general-purpose lanes and a south- bound HOV lane near Bellevue. After the new lanes were opened in 2009, the typical commute time on I-405 between Tukwila and Bellevue, which had been 42 min- utes in 2008, was 26 minutes—a decrease of 16 minutes (Figure 7). The department’s technology systems help improve the efficiency, safety, and security of truck freight move- ment throughout the state. Weigh-in-motion scales and transponders electronically screen trucks. In 2009, the program saved the trucking industry an estimated 87,000 hours and $6.5 million dollars. Freight rail helps move goods to and from Washington’s ports and serves as a sustainable, efficient, and environmentally sound alternative to truck transportation for long-haul routes. In 2008, freight railroads in Washington carried 116 million tons of freight over 3,604 route miles. Active traffic management and variable tolling are examples of using data to make the freeway system work better. Active traffic management is being implemented on I-5 in Seattle and on other selected facilities to reduce collisions and improve traffic flow. In addition, vari- able tolling was implemented in the fall of 2011 on the SR-520 bridge across Lake Washington. Variable tolling is expected to encourage drivers to use the bridge at off- peak times, when the toll is lower. Legislatively directed tolling studies are considering other routes for future tolling options, including the Columbia River Crossing and the Alaskan Way Viaduct. The Washington State DOT uses data on travel time and speed to identify the least congested routes. Com- munication tools such as dynamic message signs are used to advise drivers of traffic conditions and thus improve system efficiency. Examples of new initiatives include focusing on sus- tainability, measuring the economic impacts of trans- portation investments, and preparing for the potential of a performance-based authorization at the federal level. Sustainability targets the triple bottom line of the econ- omy, the environment, and equity and provides perfor- mance management opportunities and challenges. The Washington State DOT continues to explore better ways to measure and report on the value of completed projects and new programs and is also preparing for possible new requirements and national performance goals as part of the federal authorization. There are many ways to effectively measure infra- structure to highlight key policy goals and agency pri- orities. Rebuilding Washington State’s economic vitality requires commitment to maintaining and preserving a strong and reliable transportation system. Transparency and accountability help develop stronger, more consis- tent partnerships between government and the public. asset management in the netherlands at riJksWaterstaat Jenne van der Velde focused on the use of asset man- agement in the Netherlands’ Rijkswaterstaat, which was founded in 1798. He noted that his organization employs approximately 9,000 staff members at 240 sites throughout the country. There are 10 regional depart- ments, five specialized departments, 35 districts, and three project departments. The agency’s annual budget is approximately e4 billion to e5 billion (US$6 billion to US$8 billion). Rijkswaterstaat manages three national infrastructure networks: the national highway network, the main waterway network, and the main water system. In the national highway network, the Rijkswaterstaat manages 3,102 kilometers of highways, including traffic signal systems; 1,259 kilometers of slip roads, exits, and 50 Before 2008 After 2009 40 30 M in ut es 20 10 0 12 am 3 am 6 am 9 am 12 pm 3 pm 6 pm 9 pm FIGURE 7 Travel time (minutes) before and after capacity additions to 10.2-mile corridor on I-405 northbound from SR-167 to Northeast 12th Street. Travel time was measured Tuesday through Thursday in October 2008 and October 2009. (Data Source: Washington State DOT Northwest Region Traffic Office.)

48 performance measurement of transportation systems connecting roads; 25 rush-hour lanes; 2,533 viaducts; 15 tunnels; 715 moveable and fixed bridges; and seven aqueducts. Van der Velde commented that traffic con- gestion on the Netherlands’ main highways is a policy conundrum. Maintaining the waterway network is paramount, as most of the Netherlands is located below sea level. Ports like Rotterdam, as well as the waterway network as a whole, are critical for commerce and economic vitality. Asset management is central to the work of Rijkswa- terstaat, which uses a life-cycle approach that focuses on strategic goals. This approach is a systematic and coordinated process that manages assets, performance, risks, and costs by focusing on understanding the extent and condition of infrastructural elements and identifying possible risks. The goal is to minimize and avoid costs by balancing acceptable risks with the budget level to meet performance targets. Staff members examine the various elements of the network and use a process called decomposition of the networks. This process begins with the network and the overall system and then examines the system and sub- systems to identify their basic objectives, maintenance objectives, and inspection objectives. For example, a specific highway represents one overall system. Various roadway segments are the subsystems. A basic objective might be to maintain the bridges in a subsystem section, with construction and pavement as the maintenance and inspection objectives. At the decision-making level, there may be choices between the networks, such as rail or highway. Funding, policies, and other factors may influence short- and long- term investments in the rail and highway infrastructure. At the sublevel, decisions may focus on maintenance or replacement needs. Asset management makes the con- nection between costs, targets, and risks over the long term and maintenance and projects in the short term. Rijkswaterstaat has roles, responsibilities, and tasks related to being the asset owner, the asset manager, and the service provider. As the asset owner, the agency focuses on the strategic future of the network within the framework of targets, risks, and costs. As the asset man- ager, the agency focuses on tactical plans associated with investment strategies, maintenance concepts, and tech- nology standards. Program management addresses risk management, network management, and performance management. As the service provider, the agency focuses on operations—renewal, expansions, and maintenance. The tasks are project management, process, and asset data management. Asset data management helps put the pieces of the jig- saw puzzle together. Ownership links to money, which links to knowledge and asset management. People and the service provider are the final two pieces. Connect- ing all of these pieces is critical to maintaining economic vitality and quality of life in the Netherlands. Van der Velde observed that Rijkswaterstaat faces many of the same issues and trends noted by other conference speakers. Funding for both new projects and maintenance and rehabilitation is limited, and the organization is challenged by being asked to do more with fewer employees. Responding to rapid changes in technology and new methods requires employees with new skills and technical knowledge. Key performance indicators for the future are based on reliability, avail- ability, maintainability, and safety (RAMS) and on secu- rity, health, the environment, economics, and politics (SHEEP). Service-level agreements with the minister are based on RAMS. Future research focuses on technical applications and other subjects. One joint project involves 13 countries and has a budget of e2.7 million (US$3.6 million). At the time of the conference, the results from this project and other studies were expected to be available in 2012.