Rebuild Highways to Restore the American Dream - continued...
Reforming the Highway Program Structure
National Programs
Ten percent of the program should be dedicated to national programs directly administered by the Federal Highway Administration or delivered through other national programs. FHWA would deliver or oversee programs of national highway research, and the Federal Lands Highway Program. The programs distributed by FHWA at the national level would include programs such as National Scenic Byways, Highway Rail Crossings, and Projects of National and Regional Significance. It is also vital that the safety programs of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration be continued.
Core Programs Apportioned to the States
AASHTO recommends that the Federal Highway Program be restructured to address six key objectives.
- 1. Preservation and Renewal Program. Create a program which has three subcomponents: Interstate Preservation, National Highway System Preservation, and Bridge Preservation. The largest share, approximately 42 percent of core program funding, would be allocated to this program. To make this program work as effectively as possible, AASHTO recommends that maximum flexibility in the use of federal funds be retained as well as all eligibility and transferability provisions that exist under current law.
- 2. Freight Program. Create a program to fund improvements in the national freight network. Freight system investments eligible for funding would include: freight bottlenecks, access to ports, airports, distribution centers, and border crossings, and improvements to routes that provide for interregional, interstate or international freight movement. Approximately 4.5 percent of core program funding would be apportioned to states for the freight program. The remainder of the program would be funded at approximately $7 billion per year from resources from outside the Highway Trust Fund. One half of these funds would be apportioned to the states. The other half would be distributed from a freight fund administered by U.S. DOT.
- 3. Highway Safety Improvement Program. The current Highway Safety Improvement Program administered by FHWA would continue the existing structure. Approximately 4 percent of core program funding would be apportioned to the states through the safety program. Additional funding for safety would be provided under the NHTSA grant program and the FMCSA grant program. Both should continue at expanded levels.
- 4. Operations and Management. Create a new program to fund improvements in system performance: real-time system management, traveler information, emergency response, and incident management. Approximately 4.5 percent of core program funding would be apportioned to the states for this program.
- 5. Transportation System Improvement/Congestion Reduction Program. Create a new program for system preservation, expansion, and congestion reduction which retains many of the features of the current Surface Transportation Program, including a 10 percent set aside for transportation enhancements. Just over 16 percent of core program funding would be apportioned to the states for this program, which is expected to be the primary source of federal highway funding for city and county governments.
In urban states with metropolitan areas of 200,000 population and above, 62.5 percent of funds would be suballocated to metropolitan areas, as in the current program. The remaining 37.5 percent of the funds would be distributed to any area of the state based on consultation between the state and its local governments.
In non-urban states, funds would be distributed to any area of the state based on consultation between the state and its local governments.
- 6. Environment Program: Air Quality and Climate Change. Approximately 5 percent of core program funding would be apportioned to the states for this program. Not less than 50 percent of these funds would be programmed to air quality solutions which address ozone and particulate matter requirements. The remaining funds would be used by states for climate change initiatives.
Studies on the Future of the Interstate Highway System
Congress should fund a comprehensive study of future interstate preservation needs to be jointly conducted by the U.S. DOT and state DOTs. This study should address the costs of rebuilding or replacing the 55,000 bridges on the system, the 15,000 interchanges, and pavement foundations for the system’s 210,000 lane-miles. These costs are not adequately taken into effect in today’s bi-annual U.S. DOT conditions and performance reports.
A second study should address the long-term, system-wide expansion needs of the National Highway System network, taking into account the global economy, population and economic growth, safety, and national defense needs. This study should also address whether the distinction between the Interstate Highway System and the National Highway System needs to be redefined.
Congress should craft a highway program that does the following:
- Encourages innovative financing mechanisms and public–private partnerships. Expand the flexibility allowed in current law for tolling the existing interstate system. Revenues from tolling must be reinvested for transportation purposes in the corridor.
- Increases the interstate system’s and the National Highway System’s share of the total program. Allow a 90 percent federal share on projects on the Interstate System and an 85 percent federal share on projects on the National Highway System.
- Allows commercialization of rest areas on the Interstate System to enhance safety and customer service.
- Provides additional flexibility in the Bridge Program and remove unnecessary restrictions on bridge maintenance and replacement activities.
- Provides maximum flexibility to use Federal funds for any capital or physical maintenance expenditure that are part of a state’s asset management plan. Permit expanded transferability of federal funds when tied to performance management and measures that demonstrate where the greatest needs are.
