(Source: Streetsblog)

The federal DOT has just released its guidance for states seeking a share of its $8 billion in high-speed rail funding — and tucked in the rules are standards that could prove crucial to the project’s success.

The definition of high-speed rail can vary depending on the source. The original White House outline cited a top speed of 150 mph, while European and Asian networks can go as high as 200 mph.  Today’s DOT guidance uses the same standard that was outlined in last year’s Amtrak reauthorization bill: high-speed trains are those “reasonably expected to reach speeds of at least 110 mph.”

That standard appears flexible enough to include most regional rail plans. California’s high-speed authority believes the state’s service can reach a top speed of 220pm. The states working on a midwestern rail network with Chicago at the center, however, envision their trains achieving an average of 67 mph for local service and 78 mph for express rides.

Secretary LaHood observed the following on his blog:

“And now, the time has finally come for the United States to get serious about building a national network of high-speed rail corridors we can all be proud of.  A robust 21st Century economy requires efficient transportation of people from urban center to urban center. And, the guidance we publish today will evaluate proposals for their ability to:

• Make trips quicker and more convenient;
• Reduce congestion on highways and at airports; and
• Meet other environmental, energy and safety goals.

So, today the guidance; in mid-September we’ll be back with the first round of grant awards. I am proud to say the DOT is meeting its ARRA commitments and meeting them responsibly.

High-speed rail can reduce traffic congestion on the roads and in the skies, and it links conveniently with light rail, subways and buses for competitive door-to-door travel times. It will encourage economic growth and create new domestic jobs even as it makes our communities more livable.

The guidelines require rigorous financial and environmental planning to make sure projects are worthy of investment and likely to be successful. Both planning and construction are eligible, so states can apply for funds no matter what stage of development their project is in. ”

Click here to read the entire Streetsblog post.

(Source: Streetsblog & Wall Street Journal)

The Obama administration is working on a plan to fill the shortfall in the nation’s highway trust fund by August without adding to the federal deficit, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood told Congress yesterday.

The highway trust fund, which relies mostly on gas-tax revenue, will need up to $7 billion in additional money by the end of summer to ensure states continue receiving payments, LaHood told the transportation subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee. The fund also will need up to $10 billion in the 12 months after September to ensure its solvency, LaHood said.

“We believe very strongly that any trust fund fix must be paid for,” LaHood told members of the House Appropriations Committee’s transportation panel. “We also believe that any trust fund fix must be tied to reform of the current highway program to make it more performance-based and accountable, such as improving safety or improving the livability of our communities — two priorities for me.”

The administration’s quest to offset its trust fund fix, which will cost as much as $7 billion, could prove fruitless.  Rep. John Olver (D-MA), chairman of the panel that greeted LaHood today, put it simply when asked if the necessary spending cuts could be found. “That’d be very tough,” he said, noting that his own annual transportation spending is unlikely to become law before the highway trust fund runs out of cash.  Replenishing the trust fund with a cost offset, as LaHood suggests, requires a serious conversation about finding new long-term revenue sources for not just highways but all modes of transportation.

But he said the President Barack Obama administration has ruled out raising the gas tax to provide additional funding, saying an economic recession isn’t the time to make such a move.  “We are not going to raise the gasoline tax. I’ll just say that emphatically,” LaHood said.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Government Accontability Office)

Ribbon Cutting Ceremony

The New Starts program is an important source of new capital investment in mass transportation. As required by the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) must prioritize transit projects for funding by evaluating, rating, and recommending projects on the basis of specific financial commitment and project justification criteria, such as cost-effectiveness, economic development effects, land use, and environmental benefits. To be eligible for federal funding, a project must advance through the different project development phases of the New Starts program, including alternatives analysis, preliminary engineering, and final design. Using the statutorily identified criteria, FTA evaluates projects as a condition for advancement into each project development phase of the program.

This testimony discusses the:

(1) key challenges associated with the New Starts program and

(2) options that could help expedite project development in the New Starts program.

This testimony is based on GAO’s extensive body of work on the New Starts program and ongoing work–as directed by Congress. For this work, GAO reviewed FTA documents and interviewed FTA officials, sponsors of New Starts projects, and representatives from industry associations. The FTA reviewed the information in this testimony and provided technical comments.

Previous GAO work has identified three key challenges associated with the New Starts program. First, frequent changes to the New Starts program have sometimes led to confusion and delays. Numerous changes have been made to the New Starts Program over the last decade, such as revising and adding new evaluation criteria and requiring project sponsors to collect new data and complete new analyses. Although FTA officials told GAO that changes were generally intended to make the process more rigorous, systematic, and transparent, project sponsors said the frequent changes sometimes caused confusion and rework, resulting in delays in advancing projects.

Second, the current New Starts evaluation process measures do not capture all project benefits. For example, FTA’s cost-effectiveness measure does not account for highway travel time savings and may not capture all economic development benefits. FTA officials have acknowledged these limitations, but noted that improvements in local travel models are needed to resolve some of these issues. FTA is also conducting research on ways to improve certain evaluation measures.

Third, striking the appropriate balance between maintaining a robust evaluation and minimizing a complex process is challenging. Experts and some project sponsors GAO spoke with generally support FTA’s quantitatively rigorous process for evaluating proposed transit projects but are concerned that the process has become too burdensome and complex.

In response to such concerns, FTA has tried to simplify the evaluation process in several ways, including hiring a consulting firm to identify opportunities to streamline or simplify the process. As part of ongoing work, GAO has preliminarily identified options to help expedite project development within the New Starts program. These options include tailoring the New Starts evaluation process to risks posed by the projects, using letters of intent more frequently, and applying regulatory and administrative changes only to future projects.

While each option could help expedite project development in the New Starts process, each option has advantages and disadvantages to consider. For example, by signaling early federal support of projects, letters of intent and early systems work agreements could help project sponsors use potentially less costly and time-consuming alternative project delivery methods, such as design-build. However, such early support poses some risk, as projects may stumble in later project development phases. Furthermore, some options, like combining one or more statutorily required project development phases, would require legislative action.

Click here to download the entire report.

(Source: ENR.com & Wall Street Journal)

The Obama administration said as much as $17 billion in additional federal money is needed to maintain roads and bridges over the next two years, underscoring the challenges policy makers face as driving habits change.

Image Courtesy; Stateline.org via Gmanet.com

The recession and gas-price increases over the past two years have caused many consumers to drive less and switch to more fuel-efficient cars. The result has been a fall in revenue from taxes on gasoline and vehicle purchases, which are used to fund state and local transportation projects.

Officials from the  Obama administration and U.S. Dept. of Transportation have said that the trust fund will not have enough cash to cover commitments to states for highway projects, according to Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and the panel’s top Republican, James Inhofe of Oklahoma.

According to administration and DOT officials, $5 billion to $7 billion will be needed by August to avert having to slow down Federal Highway Administration reimbursements to state DOTs, Boxer and Inhofe said on June 2. The lawmakers added that a further $8 billion to to $10 billion will be needed in fiscal year 2010 to maintain the highway program at its current level. Congress has set the 2009 federal highway program obligation limit at $40.7 billion.

Boxer and Inhofe discussed the trust fund’s problem at a June 2 committee hearing on the nomination of former Arizona DOT Director Victor Mendez to be the new head of the Federal Highway Administration.

Inhofe raised the possibility of tapping the interest on the Highway Trust Fund balance as one solution. That interest goes to the general Treasury, not the trust fund.

The administration has resisted calls to increase the 18.4-cent federal tax on a gallon of gas; the tax hasn’t been raised since 1993.

Last year, Congress transferred $8 billion from the government’s general fund to the highway trust fund in response to a similar shortfall, allowing states to move ahead with hundreds of job-creating transportation projects. Congress may do that again this year.

Lawmakers could also consider tweaking the economic-stimulus law so states could use some of their stimulus money to compensate for other budget shortfalls. In most cases, states can’t use stimulus funds to compensate for budget deficits in their transportation-spending plans.

Congress and the administration are crafting legislation that would determine how the federal government funds transportation projects over the next several years. With the White House opposed to a gas-tax increase, lawmakers are trying to identify new money sources to maintain the nation’s infrastructure.

One hint of their approach could come later this month when Rep. James Oberstar (D., Minn.), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, is slated to unveil his blueprint for transportation spending.

(Source: Associated Press) 

WASHINGTON — The nation’s air traffic control systems are vulnerable to cyber attacks, and support systems have been breached in recent months allowing hackers access to personnel records and network servers, according to a new report.

The audit done by the Department of Transportation’s inspector general concluded that although most of the attacks disrupted only support systems, they could spread to the operational systems that control communications, surveillance and flight information used to separate aircraft.

 The report noted several recent cyber attacks, including a February incident when hackers gained access to personal information on about 48,000 current and former FAA employees, and an attack in 2008 when hackers took control of some FAA network servers.

Auditors said the Federal Aviation Administration is not able to adequately detect potential cyber security attacks, and it must better secure its systems against hackers and other intruders.

“In our opinion, unless effective action is taken quickly, it is likely to be a matter of when, not if, ATC (air traffic control) systems encounter attacks that do serious harm to ATC operations,” the auditors said.

In response to the findings, FAA officials stressed that the support systems and traffic control networks are separated. But they agreed that more aggressive action should be taken to secure the networks and fix high-risk vulnerabilities.

According to the report, the FAA received 800 cyber incident alerts during the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, 2008, and more than 150 were not resolved before the year finished. Fifty of those, the auditors said, had been open for more than three months, “including critical incidents in which hackers may have taken over control” of some computers.

Officials tested Internet-based systems that are used to provide information to the public such as communications frequencies for pilots, as well as internal FAA computer systems. The tests found nearly 4,000 “vulnerabilities,” including 763 viewed as “high risk.” The vulnerabilities including weak passwords, unprotected file folders, and other software problems.

The weaknesses could allow hackers or internal FAA workers to gain access to air traffic systems, and possibly compromise computers there or infect them with malicious codes or viruses, the audit warned.

(Source: NY Times)

WASHINGTON — Ray LaHood, the secretary of transportation, is not one to toot his own horn over how much he knows about planes, trains and automobile bailouts. On the contrary.

“I don’t think they picked me because they thought I’d be that great a transportation person,” Mr. LaHood says with refreshing indifference as to how this admission might play if, say, he were ever to bungle a bridge collapse.

Yes, transportation is Mr. LaHood’s day job, a post that a few days ago required him to attend a groundbreaking ceremony for a highway in New Hampshire, speak to a group about the dangers of tailgating trucks and discuss “bird strikes” on CNN.

But one of the astonishing things about Mr. LaHood, 63, is how limited his transportation résumé is, how little excitement he exudes on the subject (other than abouthigh-speed rail) and how little he seems to care who knows it. So why exactly did President Obama pick this former seven-term Republican congressman from Illinois to oversee everything that moves?

Mr. LaHood posits a theory. “They picked me because of the bipartisan thing,” he explained, “and the Congressional thing, and the friendship thing.”

The “bipartisan thing” and the “Congressional thing” are self-evident: Mr. LaHood is a Republican with close ties to Capitol Hill. One White House insider described Mr. LaHood as “a master of odd jobs,” whose knowledge of Washington allows him to take on assignments as varied as lobbying lawmakers on the budget and helping political novices in the cabinet navigate Beltway social rituals (“cocktail situations,” as Energy Secretary Steven Chu calls them).

In the White House, Mr. Chu describes Mr. LaHood, a former junior high school social studies teacher, as a source of “fatherly advice” for Washington newcomers like himself.

One “cocktail situation” occurred recently at the annual Gridiron Club dinner. Mr. LaHood was seated at the head table near Mr. Chu, and between Arne Duncan andTimothy F. Geithner, the education and Treasury secretaries. The men asked Mr. LaHood if they could flee the dinner before the interminable speechifying ended. No, Mr. LaHood counseled.

“I said, ‘Look, you’re window dressing,’ ” Mr. LaHood said. “ ‘You’re more of a prop. But it’s part of what we have to do.’ ” Mr. Chu and Mr. Duncan heeded the advice; Mr. Geithner did not.

(Source: Washington Post & AASHTO)

Maryland Secretary of Transportation John D. Porcari has been tapped to join the Obama administration. (Photo by Post)

John Porcari, Secretary of the Maryland Department of Transportation, is President Barack Obama’s choice to become the next Deputy Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation.

Maryland’s secretary of transportation John D. Porcari will serve as Ray LaHood‘s deputy if confirmed by the Senate. He first served as Maryland’s transportation chief from 1999 to 2002, leading the development and construction of two high-profile transportation projects in the greater Washington region. He led the planning and start of the Intercounty Connectorbetween Montgomery and Prince Georges County, Md., and the development and funding to reconstruct the Woodrow Wilson Bridge, a critical piece of Washington’s infamous Beltway that connects Maryland with Virginia. In between two tours of duty at Maryland DOT, he served as the chief administrative and financial officer at the University of Maryland.

In his current position, Mr. Porcari is responsible for motor vehicle registration and the highway, transit, aviation, and maritime modes of the state’s transportation system. Mr. Porcari also serves as chairman of the entity responsible for operating the state’s bridge and tunnel facilities. He’s in his second tour as Secretary, having previously served in this capacity from 1999 to 2002.

(Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) of the U.S. Department of Transportation)

This report is intended to provide timely, easily accessible information for the transportation community. It was developed by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), and is updated on a regular basis on the BTS website.

The indicators fall under two broad categories: those that provide context about the economy and society in which transportation functions, and those that convey information about an aspect of transportation. To the extent possible, these latter indicators are transportation-wide in scope; however, some apply to only part of the transportation system. Reference tables at the beginning of the document provide key statistics about U.S. social and economic characteristics, and about the extent of the transportation system.

For indicators that are highly seasonal, the current value of that indicator is compared to the same time period in the previous year (e.g., April 2001 compared to April 2000). Otherwise, the tables show a comparison of the current value to a comparable preceeding period of time (e.g., the data for the month of April 2001 compared to that of March 2001).

 Click here to read the report in HTML.

(Source: USDOT’s Bureau of Transportation Statistics)

Tuesday, March 31, 2009 – Surface transportation trade between the United States and its North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) partners Canada and Mexico was 27.2 percent lower in January 2009 than in January 2008, dropping to $47.5 billion, the biggest year-to-year percentage decline on record, according to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) of the U.S. Department of Transportation (Table 1).  The $47.5 billion in U.S.-NAFTA trade in January 2009 was the lowest monthly amount since January 2004. 

 The value of U.S. surface transportation trade with Canada and Mexico fell 10.3 percent in January from December (Table 2).  Month-to-month changes can be affected by seasonal variations and other factors.

Surface transportation consists largely of freight movements by truck, rail and pipeline.  About 88 percent of U.S. trade by value with Canada and Mexico moves on land.

The value of U.S. surface transportation trade with Canada and Mexico in January was up 3.9 percent in the five-year period compared to January 2004, and up 31.6 percent over the 10-year period compared to January 1999 (Table 3).  Imports in January were up 26.4 percent compared to January 1999, while exports were up 38.1 percent. 

U.S. Surface Transportation Trade with Canada

U.S.–Canada surface transportation trade totaled $29.0 billion in January, down 31.1 percent compared to January 2008 (Table 4).  The value of imports carried by truck was 31.3 percent lower in January 2009 compared to January 2008, while the value of exports carried by truck was 27.2 percent lower.

U.S. Surface Transportation Trade with Mexico

U.S.–Mexico surface transportation trade totaled $18.5 billion in January, down 20.0 percent compared to January 2008 (Table 6).  The value of imports carried by truck was 20.5 percent lower in January 2009 than January 2008 while the value of exports carried by truck was 10.7 percent lower.        

Click here to read the entire report in HTML or click here to download the report in PDF.  A read-only version of the PDF file is provided here:

(Source: Dr. Gridlock, Washington Post)

This time, it’s for real. The Washington region can now plan on construction of a new Metrorail line through Tysons Corner and out to Reston. U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood signed an agreement this morning that means all hurdles have been cleared for the crucial $900 million federal portion of the financing.

A quote that I could attribute to any number of Northern Virginia leaders who are at the U.S. Department of Transportation today: “This is a great day.” The grand signing ceremony in the DOT atrium is more than just a crowded photo op for state and federal officials. It’s a breakthrough for travelers in the Washington region. This will help organize Tysons Corner for the 21st Century. Four stations will be built there. And it will provide a transit line for at least a few more generations of Washington area commuters.

Virginia Gov. Timothy M Kaine said he had never worked on anything so complicated. In his remarks this morning, he noted that the project spanned federal administrations, and praised the work of former transportation secretary Mary Peters during the past year.

Shaking hands after the signing are, board chairman of the Metro Washington Airport Authority H.R. Crawford Honorable, left, and U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. Just behind them, left to right, are former Senator John Warner, Senator Mark Warner, Va. Gov. Timothy M. Kaine, and Rep. Frank Wolf. (Gerald Martineau/Post)