Methods for State DOTs to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the Transportation Sector (2022)

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.

NCHRP Web-Only Document 308: Methods for State DOTs to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the Transportation Sector Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Medford, MA Good Company Eugene, OR McVoy Associates, LLC Slingerlands, NY Zamurs and Associates, LLC Slingerlands, NY Conduct of Research Report for NCHRP Project 25-56 Submitted March 2021 NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed, and implementable research is the most effective way to solve many problems facing state departments of transportation (DOTs) administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local or regional interest and can best be studied by state DOTs individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation results in increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. Recognizing this need, the leadership of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) in 1962 initiated an objective national highway research program using modern scientific techniques—the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP). NCHRP is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of AASHTO and receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), United States Department of Transportation, under Agreement No. 693JJ31950003. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FTA, GHSA, NHTSA, or TDC endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. DISCLAIMER The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research. They are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; the FHWA; or the program sponsors. The information contained in this document was taken directly from the submission of the author(s). This material has not been edited by TRB.

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation improvements and innovation through trusted, timely, impartial, and evidence-based information exchange, research, and advice regarding all modes of transportation. The Board’s varied activities annually engage about 8,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.

C O O P E R A T I  V E  R E S E A R  C H  P R O G R A M S  CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP WEB-ONLY DOCUMENT 308 Christopher J. Hedges, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Lori L. Sundstrom, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Waseem Dekelbab, Associate Program Manager, National Cooperative Highway Research Program Ann M. Hartell, Senior Program Officer Jarrel McAfee, Senior Program Assistant Natalie Barnes, Director of Publications Heather DiAngelis, Associate Director of Publications Ellen M. Chafee, Senior Editor Kathleen Mion, Senior Editorial Assistant NCHRP PROJECT 25-56 PANEL Field of Transportation Planning—Area of Human and Natural Environment Thomas Doherty, DNV, Nashville, TN (Chair) Austina Casey, District Department of Transportation, Washington, DC Cindy S. Copeland, Boulder County (CO), Boulder, CO Faisal Hameed, EXP, Washington, DC Karin J. Landsberg, Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, WA E. Cris B. Liban, Los Angeles County (CA) Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Los Angeles, CA Matt K. Perlik, Ohio Department of Transportation, Columbus, OH Jonathan D. Rubin, University of Maine, Orono, ME John Davies, FHWA Liaison Matthew H. Hardy, AASHTO Liaison Melissa Anderson Savage, AASHTO Liaison Christine L. Gerencher, TRB Liaison AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The research reported herein was performed under National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Project 25-56 by Cambridge Systematics, Inc.; Good Company; McVoy Associates LLC; and Zamurs and Associates, LLC. Christopher Porter of Cambridge Systematics was the Principal Investigator. Joshua Proudfoot of Good Company, Gary McVoy of McVoy Associates, and John Zamurs of Zamurs and Associates were the principal subject matter contributors from the project team. Additional research support was provided by Whitney Faron and Leah Pickett of Cambridge Systematics and by Claudia Denton and Aaron Toneys of Good Company. Additional workshop support was provided by Lila Singer-Berk, Daniel Forbush, and Benjamin Lykins of Cambridge Systematics. The project team also acknowledges the assistance of other State DOT staff who served as lead points of contact for organizing workshops and technical assistance. These included Rose Waldman and Rebecca White (Colorado Department of Transportation), James Pappas (Delaware Department of Transportation), Pradip Pant (Hawaii Department of Transportation), Timothy Sexton (Minnesota Department of Transportation), Kandee Bahr Worley and Sondra Rosenberg (Nevada Department of Transportation), and Jackie Ploch (Texas Department of Transportation).

iv Contents CHAPTER 1 SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 1  Purpose of Project ............................................................................................................................ 1  Project Approach ............................................................................................................................. 1  Key Findings Regarding State DOTs and GHG Reduction ............................................................. 1  Key Findings Regarding Conduct of Similar NCHRP Research and Implementation Projects ...... 3  CHAPTER 2 PROJECT APPROACH ....................................................................................... 5  CHAPTER 3 REVIEW OF PRACTICE AND ASSESSMENT OF NEEDS, OPPORTUNITIES, AND BARRIERS ....................................................................................... 7  Literature Review............................................................................................................................. 7  State DOT Survey ............................................................................................................................ 8  State Document Review ................................................................................................................... 9  Interviews ......................................................................................................................................... 9  Background Research—Implications for Guide and Outreach Design ......................................... 11  CHAPTER 4 OUTREACH AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES .............................. 13  Initial Outreach—Workshops and Online Briefing ....................................................................... 13  Testing and Implementation—Workshops and Technical Assistance ........................................... 17  CHAPTER 5 ADDITIONAL IMPLEMENTATION STEPS................................................. 21  APPENDIX A STATE DOT SURVEY ................................................................................... A-1  Overview ...................................................................................................................................... A-1  Summary of Findings ................................................................................................................... A-1  Detailed Results ........................................................................................................................... A-2  Level of Engagement ................................................................................................................. A-15  APPENDIX B STATE DOT DOCUMENT REVIEW .......................................................... B-1  Overview ...................................................................................................................................... B-1  State Policies and Documents ...................................................................................................... B-2  Conclusions ................................................................................................................................ B-12 

v APPENDIX C INTERVIEWS ................................................................................................. C-1  Summary of Findings ................................................................................................................... C-2  Conclusions .................................................................................................................................. C-6  APPENDIX D TASK 7 WORKSHOP REPORT SUMMARIES......................................... D-1  Nevada ......................................................................................................................................... D-1  Colorado ....................................................................................................................................... D-6  Delaware .................................................................................................................................... D-10  Hawaii ........................................................................................................................................ D-12  Note: This conduct of research report is associated with NCHRP WebResource 1: Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions: A Guide for State DOTs which can be found on TRB’s website (http://www.trb.org) by searching for “NCHRP WebResource 1”.

vi List of Figures Figure 3-1. Percent of State DOTs by GHG level of engagement by functional area, as classified based on survey responses. ................................................................................................................. 9  Figure 4-1. Online briefing attendance by State. .............................................................................. 16  Figure 4-2. Participants’ views on agency needs with respect to GHG. ........................................... 17  List of Tables Table 1-1. GHG reduction strategies: observations and DOT roles. .................................................. 2  Table 2-1. Description of tasks. .......................................................................................................... 5  Table 4-1. Washington workshop agenda. ........................................................................................ 14  Table A-1. Question 2. .................................................................................................................... A-3  Table A-2. Question 3. .................................................................................................................... A-4  Table A-3. Question 4. .................................................................................................................... A-5  Table A-4. Question 5. .................................................................................................................... A-6  Table A-5. Question 6. .................................................................................................................... A-7  Table A-6. Question 7. .................................................................................................................... A-7  Table A-7. Question 8. .................................................................................................................... A-8  Table A-8. Question 9. .................................................................................................................... A-9  Table A-9. Question 11. ................................................................................................................ A-11  Table A-10. Question 12. .............................................................................................................. A-12  Table A-11. Question 14. .............................................................................................................. A-14  Table A-12. Question 15. .............................................................................................................. A-15  Table A-13. Rules used to assign levels. ...................................................................................... A-16  Table B-1. Summary of categories addressed in State DOT published documents. ....................... B-2  Table D-1. Nevada Workshop Agenda. .......................................................................................... D-1 

vii Table D-2. Colorado Workshop Agenda. ....................................................................................... D-6  Table D-3. Delaware Workshop Agenda. ..................................................................................... D-10  Table D-4. Potential next steps. .................................................................................................... D-11  Table D-5. Hawaii Workshop Agenda. ......................................................................................... D-13  Table D-6. Hawaii GHG total and transportation emissions. ....................................................... D-14