Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
323153402
label
State Highway Officials 6/21/91 [OA 7564] [1]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323153402
contentType
document
title
State Highway Officials 6/21/91 [OA 7564] [1]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13761-008
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Speech Backup Chronological Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323153402
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
2f8c5c557b3acafd
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File Backup Files
Subseries:
Chron File, 1989-1993
OA/ID Number:
13761
Folder ID Number:
13761-008
Folder Title:
State Highway Officials 6/21/91 [OA 7564] [1]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
26
21
4
7
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 20, 1991
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
THROUGH:
TONY SNOW TS
FROM:
MARK LANGE
SUBJECT:
STATE HIGHWAY OFFICIALS
I. SUMMARY
On Friday, June 21, at 10:00 a.m. in Room 450, you will
address 100 members of the American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials. This includes most
of the state Secretaries of Transportation.
II. DISCUSSION
The remarks (8 minutes, on cards) point out the
differences between our transportation bill and the Senate
bill.
(Lange/Simon)
June 20, 1991
12:30 P.M.
[AASHTO.TS]
BRIEF REMARKS:
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF STATE HIGHWAY AND
TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS
ROOM 450, OEOB
FRIDAY, JUNE 21, 1991
10:00 A.M.
[[ Secretary Skinner ... fellow travellers: 11
Welcome to the private screening of Road Warrior II. 11
Sorry if I'm a little late. Not that my commute is all
that long
but I do get a little steamed by the gridlock in
Congress. 11 ]]
You all understand the importance of mobility in our
society. Our economic growth, our international competitiveness,
even our cultural vitality -- all depend on the transportation
lifelines that span this nation, that let people get to work,
home, to entertainment, to family and friends.
We are the most mobile society in history -- economically,
and, of course, literally. This century, we've developed the
world's most advanced transportation system. We've done it
through strong commitment and substantial investment. We have
tried to harness the power of market forces, and we'll continue
to do so. But we also believe in solid partnerships between the
private sector and government at all levels.
No transportation partnership has endured so long or
accomplished as much as the one between the Federal Government
and AASHTO. Our organizations have worked together for 75 years
now. We have helped turn a sprawling land knitted together by
2
dusty backroads into a nation linked by high-performance roads
and highways. Those corridors have reshaped our nation and made
it possible for all of us to take mobility for granted.
When President Eisenhower first proposed a major national
highway network back in 1956, he laid the groundwork for
unprecedented movement, unprecedented access, all across America:
to products, to services, to prosperity.
Now, as the world seems to shrink while the competitive pace
quickens, we must make certain American business has the mobility
to compete and get its goods to market.
That's why our Surface Transportation proposal calls for
significant investment in the future. We propose increasing
Federal highway spending by 39 percent over the next five years.
We're committed to building stronger partnerships at every
level. We favor giving new flexibility to the States. Let them
decide how to address local needs. Our bill provides innovative
features to encourage private investment in our transportation
infrastructure.
We seek legislation for greater investment at the Federal
level, for our overall highway system -- to meet an important
national need. We asked for a higher state matching share for
local roads outside the National Highway System because we
believe federal funds should stay focused on national needs.
We believe our nation is best served by providing greater
flexibility -- and greater accountability -- at the state and
local level. A higher state match on urban and rural roads that
3
are not critical to national interests will increase total
infrastructure investment. It will help us build better, more
efficient roads.
I'm very pleased the Senate included a National Highway
System in its version of the Surface Transportation
Reauthorization. The Senate's bill includes some good features -
- such as increased flexibility -- that we advanced originally.
We need to loosen the federal apron strings on the states'
highway programs.
But at times the stretch of Pennsylvania Avenue between
Congress and the White House seems like the longest street in
America. And that's certainly the case with the Senate version
of this bill. Its defects outweigh its virtues.
The Senate bill doesn't focus Federal funds sufficiently on
national needs. It allows for no differential match between the
National Highway System and other programs. It shortchanges the
National Highway System.
It calls for excessive Federal spending, putting at risk
other important federal programs -- including programs you care
about: aviation safety and modernization, for example, as well as
education and health care.
The Senate version doesn't lower matching ratios or
eliminate operating subsidies for local transit systems.
And finally, the Senate bill channels money directly to the
Metropolitan Planning Organizations, bypassing the states. I
believe that all highway funds should go through the state
4
transportation authorities. You people have the vision, the
experience, and the organizations to ensure that our highway
funds are spent wisely to meet local, state, and national needs.
As you all know, I challenged the Congress to pass a
comprehensive crime bill and a transportation bill in a hundred
days -- by June 14th. While the Senate has acted, the House
hasn't even begun.
Now it looks like sound transportation legislation is still
on the road to nowhere. Congress continues to take its time, and
unfortunately for all of us, the delays are taking their toll.
What the American people heard as a 100-day challenge, the
Congress used as an excuse to complain. A challenge of hundred
days became an occasion for a hundred delays -- and a hundred and
one excuses for inaction.
So I say to the Congress: Don't stop. Don't pass "go."
Don't collect any more dollars. Just pass our transportation
bill. //
The old approaches to surface transportation just won't do.
By any standard, the way in which we -- the Federal Government -
- and you -- the states -- do business must change in response to
new fiscal and technological challenges. We must take full
advantage of our present opportunity to create a surface
transportation program that will meet our present and future
needs -- not our past problems. We must develop a new generation
of transportation systems and solutions.
Our bill recognizes that we can't just preserve the well-
5
worn paths of the past. We must move ahead. I need your help -
- and the nation needs your service and expertise.
Let's review and reinvigorate the partnership between State
and Federal interests that's kept America on the move through the
20th century. Let's stop talking. Let's stop stalling. Let's
just get the job done. //
With the right tools, the right investment, and the right
incentives, we'll move this nation into the next American
century. And I look forward to working with you, every step of
the way. Thank you all very much. Godspeed to you, and God
bless the United States of America.
# # #
06/11/91
13:52
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
DRAFT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGHET
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20505
June 11, 1991
(Senate)
STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY
(THIS STATEMENT MAS MARK COORDINATED BY OMB WITH THE CONCERNED AUSHORIS.)
S. 1204 - Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991
(Burdick (D) North Dakota)
The Administration supports improvements and reforms to the
Federal-aid Highway system and the Federal transit program.
However, the Administration has serious concerns regarding
certain provisions of the Senate highway bill (8. 1204) and the
senate transit bill (8. 1194). (We understand that S. 1194 will
be added to 5. 1204 on the Senate floor as Title IV). Unless
these concerns are addressed, the President's senior advisors
would recommend that the President vato the bill.
The Administration's objections are delineated below and
improvements will be sought prior to passage. As reported out of
committee S. 1204 and 8 1194:
--
Fail to establish and fund a National Highway system that
includes the designation of priority highways or national
significance, to be improved and rehabilitated with targsted
Federal funds.
adequate increase
DO not require = higher state and local matching shares [DI
highway and transit programs. All levels of government -
Federal, state, and local -- must increase investment in the
Nation's transportation infrastructure.
Provide authorisation levels in excess or those proposed by
the Administration. S. 1204 currently would authorize $5.2
billion more for highways than the Administration's proposal
over a five year period. 5. 1194 would authorize $4,7
billion more for mass transit than the AdminIStration's
proposal over the same period. Theme increases in spending,
if enacted and made fully available by Congress, would
require adjustments in other categories of spending to stay
within budgetary limits.
Fail to reduce name transit operating subsidies. studies
show that these subsidies often undesirably inflate the
transit wage structure and extend inefficient transit
service to low-use suburban areas.
Do not derive a sufficiently high level of mass transit
funding from the mass transit account of the Highway Trust
Fund. As a result, uncommitted balances in this account
would remain high, and U.S. taxpayer subsidies of local
transit would continue.
--
Fail to bring financial discipline to the mass transit "now
starts" program. In particular, the State and local
05/11/91
13:52
matching share has not been increased from the existing as
percent ratio, and funds GEO authorised above the level
enacted DY congress in recent years, Furthermers, Language
has been added which would allow financing commitments for
major projects, such as new rail and bus fixed guideway
systems, in excess of the authorization levels of the bill.
Force states to allocate 75 percent of their surface
Transportation Program runds based on population in urban
and rural areas, thereby severely limiting state
flexibility.
Provide Federal financing ($750 million) to develop
prototypes and full-production systems for magnetic
levitation technology. The Administration has proposed a
research and development program to spur private sector
and/or State interest in magnetic levitation transportation.
Unconstitutionalljy limit the removal authority of the
President by appointing a Director of the newly created
Bureau of Transportation Statistics who can be dismissed
only for cause.
The Administration supports several features of S. 1204 and of s.
1194 which are similar to the Adninistration's proposal. These
include program consolidation, enhanced state and local automomy
over highway and transit projects, greater opportunities for
private sector involvement, emphasis on environmental concerns
and congestion relief, planning and management systems; and the
transit planning and research program to more effectively
establish investment priorities.
S. 1204 would establish a new National Recreational Trails Trust
Fund Program in the Interior Department for grants to states to
develop and maintain recreational trails. The program would be
funded by transfers from the Highway Trust Fund and by repealing
fuel tax refunds to commercial recreational off-highway
taxpayers. Initially, 0.3 percent of all Highway Trust rund
revenues would be diverted to this program regardless of source.
Up to $56 million would be transferred from the Highway Trust
Fund in subsequent years. The Administration does not support an
7
arbitrary diversion in the initial year of Highway Trust Fund
monies that may include non-raoreation tax receipts.
The bill provides for an automatic allocation of funds to States
which in the Administration's view is mandatory spending --
hence, an increase in direct spending subject to the pay-as-you-
go requirement or the Ownibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) of
1990. These direct spending increases are not fully offset by
the repeal or the ruel tax refunds or by other nears. A budget
point of order applies in both the House and senate against any
bill that 18 not rully offset under CBO scoring. If, contrary to
the Administration's recommendation, the senate waives any such
point of order that applies against 5. 1204, the effects of the
enactment of this legislation would be included in a look back
06/11/91
3
pay-as-you-go sequester report at the and of the Congressional
session.
OMB's preliminary scoring of this program is presented in the
table below. Final scoring of this legislation may devists from
these estimates. If S. 1204 were enacted, final ONE scoring
estimates would be published within five days of enactment, as
required by OBRA. The cumulative effects of all enacted
legislation on direct spending will be issued in monthly reports
transmitted to Congress.
retimates for Pay-As-Veu-Ge
In millions of dollars
1992
1993
1994
1995
Total
Outlays
+30
+50
+54
+56
+190
Receipts
-1
-1
-1
-1
T
(Not to be Distributed Outside Executivelorfies or the
This draft Statement of Administration Folicy was developed by
the Legislative Reference Division (Brown), in consultation with
the Departments of Defense (Xoster), Agriculture (Mogan),
Commerce (Van Hanswyck), Education (Heindel), Energy (Lavender),
HUD (Kamarck), Interior (Harris), Justice (Dorminey), State
(Davis), Transportation (Donelan), and Treasury (Dorsey), as well
as EPA (Meni), FEMA (Lavi), USTR (Weiss), OPD (Chess), OIRA
(Coffey), NR (Tuttle, Long, and Koskinen) and TCJ (Schwarts,
Pheto, Bertram, and sierra-Sorita).
Background
The current bill was originally introduced as 5. 965. an June 4,
Senator Burdick introduced the bill as reported by the Senate
Environment and Public Works Committee as an original bill, S.
1204. Department of Transportation staff anticipate that the
bill will be amended on the floor to incorporate the provisions
of 8. 1194, a bill to reauthorize the rederal mass transit
person.
Provisions of 8. 1204 and S. 1194
The principal provisions of B. 1204 would:
-- Authorise expanditures from the Highway Trust rund for
FYs 1992-1996 totaling $92 billion. By comparison, the
Administration's proposal would authorise spending
totaling $85.8 billion for these purposes in Fis 1992-
1996.
-- Establish a new program of grants to States Insoners as
the "Surface Transportation Program,' n under which
States could spend grants on any transportation
06/11/91
13:54
KKC
project, including highways, name transit, or rail
projects.
-- Establish a Congestion and Air Quality Imprevement
Program to provide grants to help cities comply with
the Clean Air Act.
-- Provide for a Federal-State match of 75/25 persont Does
the construction of new bridges and other TMW
transportation facilities, and a match of 80/20 persons
for other projects funded by the bill.
The principal provisions of #. 1194 would:
--
Authorise Federal mass transit expenditures for First
1992-1996 totaling $21 billion derived from both Has
Transit Account and General Fund revenues. By
comparison, the Administration's proposal would
authorise spending totaling $16.3 billion for these
purposes in FYs 1992-1996 derived molely from Name
Transit Account revenues.
I
Not change ekisting Federal shares for mass transit
construction projects (80 percent or 75 percent).
contrast, the Administration' proposal would lower
Federal share to 50 percent for new projects and 60
percent for other projects.
-- Continue Federal subsidies for mass transit operating
expenses. The Administration's proposal would
eliminate such subsidies.
Administration Position To Date
The Department of Transportation stated that it opposed envousi
provisions of the predecessor bill, S. 965, in testimony before
the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on May 14,
1991. In a latter to the Committee dated May 22, 1991, the
Secretary of Transportation stated that he would recommend that
the President veto a bill which did not include dedicated funding
for the National Highway System and an "adequate increase in
State and local matching shares." In a letter to the Senate
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee regarding S. 1194
dated June 6, 1991, the Secretary stated that he would "stacoment
to the President that he vato a bill unless a significant number
of our concerns [regarding 8. 1194] are addressed in a manner
that is consistent with the Administration's mass transit
reauthorization bill proposal."
Legislative Reference Division Draft
6/11/91 -- 1:00 P.M.
Transportation:
Key to a
Better Future
The Relationship of Transportation
Investments to Economic Growth
A Special Committee Report
THE TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS
American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials
1914
December, 1990
THING
Transportation:
Key to a
Better Future
The Relationship of Transportation
Investments to Economic Growth
A Special Committee Report
AND TRASPORTATION OFFICIALS
American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials
1914
December, 1990
Published by
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Inc.
444 N. Capitol St. N.W., Suite 225, Washington, D.C. 20001
Telephone 202-624-5800
Prepared Under Direction of the
AASHTO Special Committee on Economic Expansion and Development
A. Ray Chamberlain, Colorado, Chairman
Ronald Fiedler, Wisconsin, Vice Chairman
Dave Clawson, Secretary
Region I
Richard Trainor, Maryland
William A. Lazarek, Connecticut
Christine M. Johnson, New Jersey
John Mladinov, New York
Region II
Maurice Smith, Arkansas
Thomas J. Harrelson, North Carolina
Floyd Hardy, Georgia
Patrick McCue, Florida
Region III
Horace B. Edwards, Kansas
Leonard Levine, Minnesota
Roger Schrantz, Wisconsin
Gloria J. Jeff, Michigan
Region IV
Larry W. Larsen, Montana
Arnold Oliver, Texas
Jay Klagge, Arizona
David G. Williams, Oregon
Consultant:
Apogee Research, Inc.
Copyright © 1990 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Inc., Washington, D.C.
Permission to quote from or reproduce material in this publication is granted when the following acknowledgement is made:
Transportation: Key to a Better Tomorrow, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Inc.,
Washington, D.C., Copyright 1990.
Foreword
This report was prepared by
Committee on November 8,
are drawn from more than a
Apogee Research, Inc.,
1990.
hundred identified by a
under the direction of the
survey of the AASHTO
AASHTO Special Committee
The case studies in this
member departments, and
on Economic Expansion and
report which demonstrate
the Federal Highway
Development, and was
the relationship of
Administration.
approved for publication by
transportation investment
a mail ballot of the
and economic productivity
Table of Contents
THE U.S. AND THE NEW ECONOMY OF THE 1990s
2
TRANSPORTATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH
4
PRODUCTIVITY: THE KEY TO ECONOMIC GROWTH
7
THE NEED FOR PUBLIC INVESTMENT: THE EVIDENCE IS IN
10
TRANSPORTATION: A PARTNER IN BUSINESS PRODUCTIVITY
12
Reducing bottlenecks
14
Increasing flexibility
15
Improving access to labor
16
Permitting greater specialization
17
PRODUCTIVITY CASE STUDIES
19
Koley's Medical Supply, Inc.-Stockless Purchasing for Hospital Customers
19
Coca-Cola Midwest-Rolling Warehouse
20
Campbell Soup Company-Supply Chain
21
Dole Fresh Fruit-Highway Access to a Port
22
Aladdin Mills-Effective Transportation Network
22
R.D. Werner Company-Reduce Bottlenecks in Production
23
Xerox Corporation-Long Haul Trucking
24
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.-Quick Response
24
Federal Express, Ltd.-Ground Access to Airports
25
Bank of Boston-Relocation of Back Office Activities
26
SELECTED REFERENCES
27
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
28
Transportation: Key to a Better Future
The U.S. and
the New Economy
of the 1990s
As we rapidly approach the
technology. Growing
more effective use of our
21st Century, the U.S. faces
concern over quality of life
labor and capital
new economic challenges at
issues, such as the
resources-in other words,
home as well as abroad.
environment, divert atten-
improved economic
Our economy is no longer
tion and resources from
productivity-as the key to
self sufficient. Rather we
traditional economic answers.
future economic growth.
now depend on a global
Unlike the past when rapid
economy, where foreign
At the same time, the United
labor growth or access to
trade in goods and services
States has become a debtor
new raw materials were the
totals some one-fourth of
nation, dependent on a
economic forces that drove
our economic activity.
steady flow of cash from
growth, productivity gains
other countries to finance
now generate some 80
Too often we lag in the
government spending as
percent of the nation's
competitive battles with our
well as much of our
economic growth.
largest economic rivals.
domestic investment.
Our annual trade deficit
The key role played by
exceeds $100 billion a
Answers to these challenges
improved productivity in a
year-larger than the
are beginning to appear in
modern economy can be
economy of many countries.
the form of an economy that
seen through what may be
New rivals appear regularly,
emphasizes practical
called the "circle of
such as a united Germany
innovation, attention to
economic growth and
and the new economic
quality, renewed investment,
productivity". Very simply,
strength of the European
and recognition of the
new capital investment
Community when trade
global marketplace. Indeed,
serves as a catalyst for
barriers fall in 1992.
these same watchwords are
research and development
used by our most direct
and a series of
At home, growth in
competitors.
improvements in new
consumption continues to
technology and management
outpace savings, making it
Not surprisingly, many
techniques (Figure 1). As
difficult to increase invest-
business leaders and
described on page 3, new
ment in new capacity and
economists are calling for
evidence shows the vital role
2
AASHTO
Figure 1
CREATING ECONOMIC GROWTH
played by investment in
Growth in Productivity is Key to Economic Growth
transportation in stimulating
Capital Investment is Key to Productivity Growth
this "circle of growth".
Given the clear importance
of productivity, it is disturbing
RESEARCH AND
Acts as a Catalyst
to note that our rate of growth
DEVELOPMENT
For
in economic productivity has
Virtuous Circle
Application
fallen to half what it was just
of
20 years ago- only 1.4 per-
Research &
cent a year versus 2.8 per-
Development
cent annually in the 1960s.
Self-Generating
"Circle of Growth
A drop of 1.4 percent a year
CAPITAL
INVESTMENT
and Productivity"
sounds minuscule, but even
small changes have dramatic
effects on a five trillion
dollar economy.
Technology
Lower productivity affects
NEW TECHNOLOGY
everyone-workers,
Spurs Investment
AND PRODUCTIVITY
managers, and consumers
IMPROVEMENT
alike. For example, twenty
years of productivity gains at
Better Use
2.8 percent a year, rather
of Resources
than 1.4 percent, means a
more than 40 percent
increase in output per
ECONOMIC
worker. Such gains
GROWTH
translate directly into higher
wages, higher profits, and a
better standard of living.
3
Transportation: Key to a Better Future
Transportation
and
Economic Growth
Just as we search for new
disinvestment in public
"Less than one
answers to this broad array
works appears likely to help
percent of the
of challenges, there is
solve far broader economic
nation's economic
growing recognition that
problems.
traditional tools such as
resources (0.75
investment in transportation
Transportation affects our
percent) are invested
and other public works can
daily lives more than almost
in transportation
once again provide a
any other public service. It
powerful force for
determines how we get to
each year, about half
stimulating economic
work and where we live; it
that of just 25 years
growth and productivity.
affects the cost of what we
ago Recent
buy and the profitability of
Less than one percent of the
our local businesses; it
findings show that it
nation's economic
makes it possible to
is probably not a
resources (0.75 percent)
compete in world markets
coincidence that the
are invested in
just as it provides access to
transportation each year,
products from distant
nation's rate of
about half that of just 25
points; it is a major force in
growth in
years ago (Figure 2).
our quality of life, making it
Recent findings show that it
easier to visit friends and to
productivity has
is probably not a
enjoy leisure activities.
been cut in half at
coincidence that the nation's
about the same time
rate of growth in
Good transportation
that the level of
productivity has been cut in
obviously has more lasting
half at about the same time
importance as well. This
national resources
that the level of national
link between transportation
devoted to
resources devoted to
and future economic
investment in infrastructure
strength was most obvious
investment in
has dropped sharply.
in earlier times when
infrastructure has
Indeed, reversing the recent
shipping lanes, post roads,
dropped sharply."
national trend toward
and canals connected the
4
AASHTO
Figure 2
GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT IN TRANSPORTATION
HAS DECLINED AS A PERCENTAGE OF GNP
1.4%
1.2%
1.0%
0.8%
Percent
0.6%
0.4%
0.2%
0.0%
1960-63
1964-67
1968-71
1972-75
1976-79
1980-83
1984-87
Years
colonies. Later in the 19th
In the 20th Century, a
in partnership with the
Century, the transcontinental
national and regional
states, built a high quality
railroads became a
network of roads and
national road system
conscious national tool used
bridges became the leading
including the Interstate and
to speed the development of
force for economic growth.
Defense Highway System. Of
the West.
Starting more than 70 years
course, today's transport
ago, the federal government,
system is more than just
5
Transportation: Key to a Better Future
RIGGS
roads and bridges. It
distribute goods and
"Inadequate government infrastructure can
includes an inter-connected
services. With new
impede improvements in productivity
network of airports and
production methods such as
growth."
control towers, urban mass
"just-in-time" (JIT)
"Taking advantage of productive
transit, inter-city railroads,
manufacturing, however,
opportunities to maintain and improve the
and ports and harbors.
failure to deliver a part on
infrastructure is an important part of
time can shut down an
federal, state, and local government policies
But transportation is not just
entire factory. Because of
to raise economic growth."
a tool for opening up new
their geographic dispersion
regions for economic
and high-value shipments,
Michael Boskin, Chairman of the Council of
development. Indeed, an
the rapidly expanding
Economic Advisors
effective transport system
service and high-tech
Economic Report of the President, 1990
may play an even more
industries are surprisingly
critical economic role in a
dependent on transportation
modern, time-sensitive
as well.
economy than it did 100
years ago.
Transportation will always
play a leading role in
helping business to reduce
the costs to produce and
6
AASHTO
Productivity:
The Key to
Economic Growth
Economic productivity is
percent.
"Very simply, public
more than a watchword for
the U.S. Given the limited
This low growth in U.S.
investment improves
extent of new natural
productivity, coupled with
the effectiveness of
resources to be discovered
persistently high
and exploited and the
consumption growth, helped
the overall economy."
predictable growth in our
to change our position
available labor force,
during the 1980s from the
Even after recognizing the
productivity remains the one
world's largest creditor to
major differences in the
key determinant of
the world's largest debtor
economic and social
economic growth that we
nation.
structures of each country,
can influence. It also
the data imply a striking
provides a yardstick to
Figure 3 compares the
relationship between the
measure our success
recent trends in productivity
ability and willingness of
relative to that of our major
for each of the seven major
countries to invest in public
economic competitors.
industrialized nations with
capital and the
the rate at which they have
productiveness of their
Not only has the rate of U.S.
invested in public capital.
overall economy. Very
productivity growth fallen in
The estimates of public
simply, public investment
recent years, it remains low
capital spending exclude
improves the effectiveness
relative to our major
depreciation and are shown
of the overall economy.
competitors. For example,
as a percent of gross
between 1965 and 1985,
national product. Spending
Just as future economic
Japan achieved a labor
by other countries has been
growth depends on
productivity growth rate in
adjusted downward to
increased economic
excess of 3 percent per year
reflect the fact that some
productivity, so does our
and West Germany's labor
activities that are private in
domestic standard of living.
productivity grew at an
the U.S. (telecommuni-
Declining productivity
annual rate of more than 2
cations and airlines, for
means that our future
percent while the U.S. has
example) are public in
consumption opportunities
lagged at close to one
some countries.
will rise more slowly than
7
Transportation: Key to a Better Future
Figure 3
Higher Public Investment Implies Higher Productivity
3.5
Japan
3
2.5
West Germany
France
Productivity Growth
(Percent Per Year)
2
Italy
U.K.
1.5
Canada
1
U.S.
0.5
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Public Capital Investment
(As a Percentage of Gross Domestic Product)
Figure 4
Link Between Public Infrastructure Stock and Growth in Productivity
Scaled Values
Infrastructure
stock
Rate of growth
for U.S. productivity
1949
1953
1957
1961
1965
1969
1973
1977
1981
1985
Year
8
AASHTO
otherwise. This means that
time, even small percentage
and the trend in the
people must work harder
changes in productivity can
nonmilitary public capital
and longer to obtain the
add up to large sums.
stock (Figure 4). Increases
same basket of goods or
and decreases in public
must live at a lower standard
From 1950 to the
capital stock have changed
of living than they could
mid-1980s, there has been a
along with increases and
achieve if the economy were
close relationship between
decreases in productivity.
more productive. Over
the trend in U.S. productivity
9
Transportation: Key to a Better Future
The Need for Public
Investment:
The Evidence Is In
New research shows that
Dr. David Aschauer, while
in public works investment
public capital can be just as
with the Federal Reserve
over the past two decades
important as private capital
Bank of Chicago, and Dr.
may well be the most
investment in stimulating a
Alicia Munnell, Director of
significant single force
more productive economy.
Research for the Federal
behind the relative decline
Indeed, after two decades of
Reserve Bank of Boston,
in U.S. productivity. A later
reduced public investment,
have quantified the link
section provides real-world
it should not be surprising
between public
examples of how firms have
that many public
infrastructure investment
taken advantage of
investments may even
and long-term economic
transportation to improve
provide higher rates of
productivity. Their
their productivity.
return than some private
nation-wide findings provide
investments.
persuasive statistical
This research shows that:
evidence that the slowdown
There is a robust, positive linkage between public capital-particularly infrastructure
capital-and private sector productivity,
There exists a positive linkage between public capital and private sector profitability,
and
There is a long-run positive relationship between public, nonmilitary investment and
business investment.
Aschauer estimates that
the mid-1980s can be
in the streets would have
more than half of the total
attributed to insufficient
jarred many fewer motorists
fall-off in productivity
public infrastructure
had our nation invested
growth from the 1950s to
investment. Just as potholes
more in infrastructure, our
10
AASHTO
"New research shows that public capital can be just as important as
private capital investment in stimulating a more productive
economy."
productivity slump would
Even at the state and local
and efficient production and
have been much less
level, where economic gains
distribution of private sector
noticeable for the nation's
can be disbursed through
goods and services.
economy.
neighboring states, Munnell
finds that each additional
Without question, a limited,
While the statistical results
dollar of public capital
or inefficient transportation
vary depending on data used
stimulates private investment
network acts as a drag on
and specific assumptions,
by 45 cents. Her research
overall private economic
"An adequate and
the effect is strong, with
also shows that productivity
activity. Private business
each 1 percent increase in
is not an abstract concept,
relies heavily on public
well maintained
public capital stock
with an additional $1,000
infrastructure capital, such
public stock of
improving overall national
per capita in infrastructure
as roads, bridges, and air-
productivity by between 0.15
assets adding roughly 0.2
ports, to support productive
infrastructure
percent and 0.35 percent.
percent to the average
activity. Consider, for
capital is essential
annual rate of employment
example, how the Interstate
Aschauer finds that each 1
to the profitable and
growth-or about 230,000
Highway System provides
percent increase in the
new jobs per year.
truck access to virtually
efficient production
nation's capital stock should
every large- and medium-
and distribution of
raise the rate of return to
Such an increase in public
sized market and major port
private capital by about
investment raises the growth
in the United States.
private sector goods
one-tenth of 1 percent. At
rate of labor productivity
and services."
current rates, a one-tenth of
directly by allowing the
How does this link between
a percent increase in profit
available private capital
transportation investment
rates translates into more
stock to be utilized more
and economic productivity
than $4 billion a year in
efficiently-and indirectly
work in practice? The next
profits. This, in turn, means
by promoting private
section provides a sample of
higher private sector
investment, making more
real-world examples taken
investment in plant and
private capital available per
from more than a hundred
equipment-one of the
worker. The effect on
identified by state DOTs and
classic ways to improve
productivity is substantial.
the Federal Highway
productivity. Over time, this
Administration. This report
same increase in public
The basic idea linking
presents these examples for
investment will stimulate
infrastructure and private
the first time.
private investment in plant
economic activity is simple.
and equipment, having the
An adequate and well
net effect of raising the
maintained public stock of
national investment rate by a
infrastructure capital is
substantial amount.
essential to the profitable
11
Transportation: Key to a Better Future
Transportation:
A Partner in
Business
Productivity
As with our daily lives,
encouraging firms to change
are concerns with costs,
business decisions are
their internal operations to
production efficiency, labor
continually influenced by the
take advantage of new
productivity, and market
nature and quality of
production and marketing
demand. Transport changes
available transportation
opportunities. These
affect each of these factors,
services. Improved
changes have effects well
not just those associated
transportation facilities,
beyond the loading dock
with the obvious concerns
however, often act as a
and influence how firms
with reduced transport
catalyst in business
organize their production
costs. Thus, transportation
decisions, allowing and
activities.
has leverage throughout the
firm, creating a cascade of
Firms today operate in a
benefits to the firm, its
complex economy, with
customers, its employees,
suppliers and markets
and its suppliers.
disbursed throughout the
country and even the world.
The following table provides
Corporate decisions regarding
a summary of the case
location, capital investment,
studies presented here. A
production methods,
brief review of these
FEDERAL
relationships with suppliers
examples, reveals three
EXPRES
and customers, and overall
major findings:
organization must be based
on the constant need to
First, there is a clear
improve profitability.
interaction between high
technology and
Underlying these decisions
transportation. Electronic
12
AASHTO
Summary of Case Studies of the Link Between Transportation and Economic Productivity
Name of Case Study
Industry
Type of Productivity Effect
Koley's Medical Supply, Inc.,
Wholesale
Productivity improvements achieved by their hospital
Omaha, NE
Distribution
customers through stockless purchasing depend on
good transportation access
Coca-Cola Midwest
Soft Drink
High quality highways facilitate the use of rolling
Eagan, MN
warehouses, creating productivity gains by reducing
communication plays just as
product handling costs and allowing the elimination of
important a role in an
remote warehouses
effective supply chain as
James River Corporation
Paper
Improvements to Route 115 increased transportation
does the timely movement of
Berlin, NH
reliability and encouraged more carriers to come to the
goods. Indeed, the case
plant, allowing the plant to increase production and
studies show that private
operate more efficiently
firms have already taken the
Campbell Soup Company
Food
Higher productivity achieved through JIT deliveries by
lead in using technology to
Camden, NJ
suppliers depends on reliable transportation
maximize the gains from
Dole Fresh Fruit
Food
Improved access roads to the Port of Wilmington
improved transportation;
Wilmington, DE
improved truck traffic flow to port facilities, leading to
more effective operations at their banana importing
terminal
Second, the success stories
Aladdin Mills
Carpet
show a chain-reaction type
An effective highway network helps make the company
Dalton, GA
more competitive and facilitates labor access from
of effect that links transport
adjacent communities
improvements to a series of
R.D. Werner Company
Metal Parts
Relocation of State Route 4017 allowed more efficient
productivity gains that can
Mercer County, PA
organization of production and also will allow
even affect the structure of
expansion of plant
how firms do business. For
General Motors Corporation
Auto
Production system based on JIT shipping of components
example, in addition to cost
substantially increased dependence on effective highway
savings, "just-in-time"
transportation
inventory systems improve
Xerox Corporation
Copier
The Interstate highway network facilitates nationwide
quality and make it easier
Rochester, NY
shipping of its product by long haul trucking from a
for the firm to react to
single manufacturing site
market forces. These, in
Hewlett Packard
Computer
Because of high housing costs, employees must
Palo Alto, CA
turn, generate new sales and
commute longer distances making good highways
essential for labor access
make greater cost savings
possible.
Digital Equipment
Computer
An effective transportation network between their
Corporation,
headquarters in MA and NH, allowed cost-effective
MA and NH
expansion into NH
Third, the large number of
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Discount Retail
examples identified illustrate
Productivity gains and improved customer service
Bentonville, AR
achieved through its quick response program are
that the relationship
facilitated by the Interstate Highway network
between transportation and
Federal Express, Ltd.
Small Package
Good ground access to airports is essential to efficient
productivity is robust and
Memphis, TN
operation of its "hub and spoke" system
widespread and covers most
Bank of Boston
Financial
Construction of Route 128 and access to commuter rail
major industries, every
Canton, MA
allowed the bank to increase efficiency by locating its
region of the country, and
back office activities away from the bank headquarters
all modes of transportation.
in downtown Boston
13
Transportation: Key to a Better Future
Four general types of changes in firm operations, all of which improve productivity, can be
induced by improvements in transportation facilities:
Reducing bottlenecks in production and management,
Adding flexibility to what gets produced and how this is accomplished,
Improving access to labor, and
Permitting greater specialization of corporate functions.
Each category of productivity enhancements is discussed in more detail below with selected
case studies illustrating the effect that transportation improvements can have on firms'
productivity.
Reducing
Bottlenecks, usually limited
Either type of bottleneck
expensive-there are costs
production inputs or
reduces a firm's productivity
of purchasing inputs before
bottlenecks in
product flows, are a natural
by decreasing the efficiency
they are needed, costs to
production and
occurrence in every
or increasing the cost of a
plan and manage
production process. Firms
production process.
inventories, and costs of any
management
strive to avoid and overcome
Transportation
facilities or production
bottlenecks, with their
improvements can remove
processes resulting directly
decisions dependent on
some bottlenecks, creating
from having to hold large
whether the limitation is
productivity gains.
inventories (such as nearby
short-term or long-term in
warehouses). An increase
nature. Short-term
A typical short-term
in transportation reliability
problems require
bottleneck is a shortage of
along with a better
adjustments to the
certain inputs at the right
structured logistics system
production process, such as
time and place. To
may remove input shortages,
increasing inventories or
overcome such bottlenecks,
allowing firms to reduce
beginning over-time
firms maintain inventories
inventories. Reducing
production. Longer term
or require suppliers to
inventories frees up money,
bottlenecks often have to be
make more frequent and
manpower, and space,
solved with more dramatic
smaller deliveries (which
increasing the productivity
changes, including capital
simply shifts the burden of
of a firm's production
investments, a new location,
inventories elsewhere).
process.
or a new set of suppliers.
Maintaining inventories is
14
AASHTO
General Motors
General Motors-Just-in-Time (JIT) Production
Efficient
transportation
An efficient, effective transportation system is vital to the production and distribution of
system allows GM to
GM's vehicles and service parts. GM has 141 facilities in the U.S. that ship or receive
institute a
component parts, raw materials, and/or finished vehicles. Of GM's 141 facilities, 29
"just-in-time"
are car and truck assembly plants located throughout the U.S. Based on its estimates
delivery system:
for a typical assembly plant, described below, GM estimates approximately 7,000
Inventories are
trucks provide daily support to its 29 assembly plants. Also, GM estimates another
reduced and
7,000 trucks are involved daily for its manufacturing and stamping plants.
production
According to GM, approximately 240 trucks are required to support the daily activity of
efficiencies
a typical assembly plant (materials and supplies inbound and finished vehicles
increased.
outbound). A typical plant receives and unloads an average of 120 truckloads of
component parts and supplies daily. The plant then ships approximately 480 vehicles
(one-half of its daily production) directly to dealers using 60 trucks. The other 480
vehicles are shipped from the plant on railcars to rail unloading ramps located in
major market areas. Upon arrival, the railcars are unloaded and the 480 vehicles are
delivered to dealers using another 60 trucks.
GM's dependence on effective highway transportation has increased substantially in the
past decade. According to GM, much of its increased dependence upon highway
transportation is the result of efforts to remain competitive. Operational changes to
meet this goal revolve around GM's quality network production system that facilitates
just-in-time (JIT) shipping of components to meet very precise production schedules.
Smaller, more frequent shipments of components using JIT are also a method to
control and reduce in-plant inventory. Likewise, in-transit inventory can be minimized
by reducing the time that component shipments are in transit. Generally, truck
transportation is faster than rail and GM consequently transports more of its
component shipments over the highways.
To stay competitive, firms
more diverse consumers
network provides firms with
Increasing
today are increasingly
over a larger area. As a
better and more reliable
differentiating their product
result, both the amount of
access to both suppliers and
flexibility in
lines and shortening the life
inputs and products being
consumers. Productivity
what gets
cycle of individual products.
transported and the
gains often arise from more
In order to achieve this,
importance of speed and
efficient internal operations
produced and
firms require a wider variety
reliability of deliveries has
made possible, in part, by
how
of inputs from a wider
increased.
good access through an
variety of suppliers. In
effective transportation
addition, firms increasingly
The availability of an
network.
market their product to
effective transportation
15
Transportation: Key to a Better Future
To compete in today's
products, suppliers, and
markets. Transportation
rapidly changing business
markets. This flexibility
can play an important, but
environment, firms
increases productivity by
perhaps less obvious role in
increasingly depend on their
allowing firms to take
enhancing the flexibility of a
ability to make rapid
advantage in changes in
firm.
transformations among
both input and product
James River
Corporation
James River Corporation-Increased Manufacturing Productivity
Road improvements
allow year-round
James River Corporation in Berlin, New Hampshire, manufactures paper rolls, paper
shipments:
towel products, and wood flour. Eighty percent of its products are shipped by truck.
Efficient use of
Recent improvements to Route 115 encouraged more carriers to come to the plant.
equipment is
Widening the road allowed bigger trucks to use Route 115, which offers more direct
increased
access to the plant from the interstate than alternative routes. The road improvements
also allowed trucks to use Route 115 year-round, where previously it could not be
used for several months in the spring.
With improved transportation access and reliability, the company decided to increase
production at the plant by picking up the speed of existing machinery. Consequently,
the company began making more efficient use of its equipment leading to increased
productivity at the plant. With higher production, the company also increased sales.
In addition to productivity gains achieved at James River's plant, the improvements to
Route 115 allow James River's customers to achieve inventory savings. Their
customers generally do not want to keep large inventories of paper products.
Improved transportation access and reliability allows carriers to make more frequent,
smaller deliveries to James River's customers. As a result, their customers can reduce
inventories, lowering their inventory carrying costs.
Improving
Labor is an essential input to
costs may increase or firms
considerations into play. In
virtually every product or
may have to relocate.
terms of transportation,
access to labor
service, and SO access to
these considerations include
cost-effective labor is a
Many types of businesses,
ground transportation
major consideration for
such as research and
quality (comfort, length of
private businesses. Good
development firms, require
commute), as well as
ground transportation is
access to highly skilled
proximity or access to
essential for access to a
labor. Attracting these
high-frequency air services,
workforce. If transportation
employees may bring
good schools, and attractive
access is poor, the labor
"quality of life"
communities. Inadequate or
16
AASHTO
congested transportation
workers, thus reducing the
systems may serve to raise
productivity of the firms that
the cost of highly skilled
rely on them.
Hewlett Packard
Hewlett Packard-Labor Access
Road access is
important to firm's
Labor access is an important concern at some Hewlett Packard (HP) facilities. In the
siting decisions
San Francisco Bay area, high housing costs cause many HP employees to commute
because employees
long distances to work. The long-distance commuters, as well as many short-distance
commute long
commuters, depend on good highways to get to work. Forty-eight percent of HP
distances
employees in the San Francisco Bay area commute over 10 miles one way, with 6
percent travelling over 30 miles one way to get to work.
"Quality of life" considerations are important to HP's employees. HP's highly skilled
employees often place great importance on their residential environment. While some
employees prefer an urban environment, other employees prefer a rural environment.
Some employees are willing to commute long distances to be able to live in their
preferred residential environment. To attract and retain highly skilled labor, HP
locates its facilities where a highway network allows good access from both urban and
rural environments. At HP's facility in Roseville, California, for example, employees
can commute on Interstate 80 from Sacramento, California or from smaller, rural
communities in the Sierra Nevada Mountains.
Transportation
competitive in a national or
and marketing activities.
Permitting
improvements, along with
international market.
Even when the major
improvements in
transportation mode
greater
telecommunications, may
Specializing functions in
affected by this increase in
allow firms to become more
specialization
different locations may
travel is aviation, there are
specialized in the location of
require inputs to be moved
significant inputs of highway
of corporate
different corporate activities.
over greater distances
facilities in order to provide
functions
Firms can locate certain
during the production
ground access to airports.
activities, such as corporate
process, leading to an
headquarters, away from
overall increase in traffic.
production centers to
In many cases, it also causes
reduce costs. Specializing
an increase in individual
the location of different firm
travel because of
functions also allows firms
management needs to travel
more flexibility to remain
more to monitor production
17
Transportation: Key to a Better Future
Digital Equipment
Easy transportation
Digital Equipment Corporation-Corporate Expansion
access allows firm
to expand
Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) has its headquarters in Massachusetts. Further
manufacturing
expansion in Massachusetts was not possible because of high real estate costs and
away from
traffic congestion. DEC looked for an area with lower property values but easy access
beadquarters:
to its headquarters, both in terms of employee travel and ease of installing fibre optic
cables between that location and its headquarters.
Production costs are
reduced
DEC purchased a large parcel of land in southern New Hampshire along the F.E.
Everett Turnpike. An interchange was constructed on the turnpike for easy access to
the site. DEC installed underground fibre optic cables from the new site to its
headquarters. Both good highway access and telecommunications allowed DEC to
expand its operations into New Hampshire.
18
AASHTO
Productivity
Case
Studies
Koley's Medical Supply, Inc.
is the wholesale distributor
Koley's Medical
for a coalition of six
Figure 5
Supply, Inc.
hospitals in Omaha,
Productivity Gains for Hospitals Using Stockless Purchasing
Nebraska and southwest
Stockless
Iowa that have converted to
TRANSPORTATION
IS CRITICAL
Purchasing for
a stockless purchasing
system. In the hospital
Hospital
industry, stockless
Distributor makes more
Distributor makes
Distributor delivers
Customers
frequent deliveries to
time-based
purchasing goes further
hospitals
products using pick
deliveries (JIT)
and pack operations
than just-in-time by offering
pick-and-pack operations in
Inventory for
addition to frequent
6 hospitals
Central supply
shifts to
operations for
deliveries of medical
distributor
Economies of Scale
6 hospitals
permits distributor to
shifts to distributor
negotiate lower prices
products to hospitals. The
distributor packages
Reduced total
inventory
Reduced product
medical products for
handling costs
Assets Redeployed
delivery directly to hospital
carts or supply closets in
hospital departments. In the
Fewer employees
Fewer employees
Reduced Labor Costs
Omaha area, Koley's packs
items in their proper units
Hospitals eliminate
of issue and delivers them in
Hospitals eliminate
storerooms, creating
central supply operations,
labor savings and
allowing conversion of
creating labor savings
bins several times a day to
and allowing conversion
storeroom space to more
of space to more
productive uses
productive uses
user departments in the
Other Uses for
Room and Equipment
hospitals. Koley's makes
Key:
daily deliveries to the
Actions
smaller hospitals in Iowa.
Productivity
Management Focuses
Effects
on Hospital Business
Transportation access is
critical to meeting the
19
Transportation: Key to a Better Future
frequent order cycles of a
individual hospital.
among various departments
stockless purchasing system.
Stockless also lowers the
within a hospital. Koley's
Generally, the distributor
costs of product flow by
negotiates for all six
must be no more than three
reducing the number of
hospitals collectively to get
hours by truck from the
times the product is handled.
lower prices from
hospital. Adequate access
manufacturers.
makes such frequent
Labor savings can be
deliveries efficient and
significant as fewer
At Bishop Clarkson
reduces costs over the
employees can achieve
Memorial in Omaha,
whole hospital materials
faster, more efficient
stockless purchasing
supply chain from
distribution of hospital
allowed the hospital to
manufacturer to patient.
supplies. Hospitals can
reduce inventories, reduce
Completion of the Storz
eliminate labor involved in
its receiving and distribution
Freeway improved Koley's
warehouse and central
staff by 12 full-time
access to its more distant
supply functions and the
employees, eliminate trucks
customers in Iowa.
distributor can leverage
and drivers associated with
labor for those functions
their off-site warehouse, and
Through streamlining
over many hospitals. In
streamline payment
operations, stockless
addition, hospitals often can
schedules. Bergan Mercy
reduces inventory storage
convert space previously
Hospital in Omaha
and handling costs for the
used for inventory storage to
eliminated its storeroom,
hospitals (Figure 5). With
more productive use.
converting it and other
very frequent deliveries,
space formerly used for
hospitals can eliminate
Other savings are achieved
receiving and warehousing
inventory storerooms and
through standardization of
to more productive uses.
central supply operations.
high-volume items among
Mercy Hospital in Council
Although these costs shift to
participating hospitals.
Bluffs, Iowa, reduced
the distributor, a distributor
Inter-hospital
inventory and purchasing
often can manage those
standardization of materials
costs through its stockless
operations at a lower overall
can achieve cost savings
system.
cost through economies of
beyond the already common
scale not possible in an
standardization of materials
Coca-Cola
The Coca-Cola Midwest
achieve higher efficiencies,
bottling plant in Eagan,
bottling plant, part of
Coca-Cola Midwest ships
Minnesota.
Midwest
Johnston Coca-Cola Bottling
their product using a
Group, serves a market area
transportation system the
Double-bottoming involves
Rolling
covering Minnesota,
company developed called
using two route trailers that
Warebouse
Wisconsin, eastern North
"double-bottoming."
are hooked together to
Dakota, and the upper
Midwest Coca-Cola also
transport the product from
peninsula of Michigan.
consolidated its production
the bottling plant to
Among its strategies to
at a larger, more efficient
distribution points within its
20
AASHTO
Figure 6
Productivity Gains for Bottling Companies
Using the Rolling Warehouse Concept
HIGH QUALITY HIGHWAYS
Two route trailers
Route trailers
hooked together in
equipped to function
double-bottoming system
as rolling warehouses
Makes it Possible to
Open a Larger, More
Efficient Bottling Plant
Lower Client Costs
due to
double-bottoming derive
Economics of Scale
from reduced product
Elimination of
remote warehouses
handling costs, reduced
overall mileage, and
Assets Redeployed
increased route driver
productivity (Figure 6). The
Reduced overall
Reduced product
mileage to deliver
handling costs
product
(product handled
product is handled only
only once)
Reduced Operating Costs
once, instead of loading the
product onto trucks at the
bottling plant, unloading it
Fewer employees
Fewer employees
at a warehouse or
Key:
Actions
Reduced Labor Costs
distribution center, and
Productivity
Effects
reloading it onto route
trucks for delivery to retail
outlets. Using tandem
trailers on deliveries to
market area. Such tandem
At the distribution point, the
distribution points creates
trailers require high quality
route drivers pick up a
savings on total mileage the
highways to operate
trailer and drive their routes
product is transported.
efficiently and safely. In
with their own tractors.
Route drivers can
fact, current regulations
Because the trailers are
immediately begin deliveries
restrict tandem trailers to
insulated and have a
and no longer incur the
Interstate highways,
self-contained heating
waiting time previously
specified distances from
system, they also serve as
necessary for loading route
Interstate highways, and to
rolling warehouses. The
trucks at warehouses. Other
certain state highways.
route trailers are picked up
savings arise from the ability
after retail deliveries are
to eliminate remote
Orders for route drivers
completed and brought
warehouses and their
already are loaded onto
back to the bottling plant.
associated costs, including
route trailers when they
inventory and labor costs as
leave the production plant.
The efficiencies from
well as property taxes.
21
Transportation: Key to a Better Future
Campbell Soup
Company
Supply Chain
HISP
Chunky
ROM FREEZING
CLEAR
413
mplings
REEZING
Over the last four-five years,
transportation. Because rail
reduced travel time achieved
Campbell has embarked on
transportation did not
with truck transportation
a just-in-time (JIT) delivery
provide the needed
allowed Campbell plants to
program for its food
reliability, Campbell
achieve faster turnover of
production operations. Part
gradually switched from rail
inventory and as a result,
of a wider corporate
to truck. Much of the
carry less inventory.
program to improve quality
incoming supplies to
Previously, Campbell's
and productivity, the goal of
Campbell's production
quality control program
JIT is to receive incoming
plants are now delivered by
involved repetitive
materials just prior to
truck and some plants
inspections of supplies after
production in appropriate
actually have eliminated rail
delivery, with rejections that
quantities and meeting
deliveries. Because most of
could disrupt production
quality standards.
Campbell's production
and necessitate large
Accompanying the JIT
plants are not located in
inventories. Now JIT
program is Campbell's
urban areas, highway
delivery of quality assured
Select Supplier program,
congestion has not been a
supplies contributes to
whereby Campbell works
serious problem for its JIT
overall productivity gains in
with vendors to achieve
delivery program.
the production process.
quality assurance from its
Campbell also believes that
ingredient and packaging
Together, Campbell's JIT
using fresher raw materials
suppliers.
and Select Supplier
results in the highest quality
programs have reduced
product and increases
Optimizing productivity
costly inventories, waste,
customer satisfaction.
gains from JIT deliveries
and handling costs. The
requires reliable
greater reliability and
22
AASHTO
Because the Port of
now the largest banana port
resurfaced. Smoother traffic
Dole Fresh Fruit
Wilmington, Delaware, has
in the world.
flow because of these
excellent highway access,
improvements leading to
Highway Access
the majority of all general
There are two access roads to
more efficient operations for
to a Port
cargo moves in and out of
the port. Terminal Avenue
all companies using the
the port by truck. Improve-
connects to Interstate 495
port. Dole Fresh Fruit is the
ments to secondary roads
within 1/4 mile of the port
major commercial
serving the port have
and Christina Avenue provides
enterprise at the port.
complemented the growth
truck access via local roads.
Improved truck traffic flow
of banana importing
These access roads have been
led to more effective
operations at Wilmington.
widened to accommodate
operations at their banana
As a result, Wilmington is
truck traffic, regraded, and
importing terminal.
Aladdin Mills is a carpet
infrastructure and high
tribution centers) in New
Aladdin Mills
manufacturer in Dalton,
manufacturing base, Dalton
Jersey, Ohio, Illinois, and
Georgia. Dalton has
also has a very competitive
Florida. Most of the carpet
Effective
excellent access to a major
trucking market with
produced by the company is
Transportation
Interstate (I-75), nearby
unrivaled freight rates.
shipped long distance by
railyards in Chattanooga,
truck to these warehouses.
Network
Tennessee, air services in
Aladdin takes full advantage
The Interstate highway
Atlanta, Georgia, and ports
of the dependable
network is very important to
in Savannah, Georgia, and
transportation system
making Aladdin's carpet
Charleston, South Carolina.
available to the company.
competitive in its U.S.
Because of its highly
Aladdin owns its own
market. Aladdin recently
developed transportation
warehouses (mini-dis-
increased its exports of
23
Transportation: Key to a Better Future
carpet. Excellent highway
(Norfolk-Southern and CSX)
system allows labor access
access to the ports of
and air services in Atlanta is
from adjacent communities.
Savannah and Charleston via
also excellent, when needed
This gives the company,
the Interstate highway
by the company.
which employs roughly
network also helps make the
1,700 at the Dalton mill,
company competitive in its
Although not as obvious as
access to a wide labor pool.
overseas market. Highway
these other transportation
access to railyards
advantages, the good highway
R.D. Werner
R.D. Werner Company is
from the southern end.
fork lifts to the other end of
located in Mercer County in
Until one year ago, State
Company
the plant to get them out of
northwest Pennsylvania.
Route 4017 ran through the
the way, while other parts
Reduce
The company manufactures
middle of the quarter mile
scheduled for the same
metal extrusions for ladders,
long, two building plant. As
shipment had to be
Bottlenecks in
radios, and car alternators,
Werner's production
transported later when they
Production
among other products. With
increased, the limited space
were finished. With State
the relocation of State Route
restricted options for
Route 4017 now rerouted
4017 (Werner Road),
efficiently organizing
around the side of the plant,
Werner will be able to
production and caused
Werner will be able to
increase efficiency in
bottlenecks in production.
increase its plant size by 30
production and expand its
percent-a 140,000 square
operations to producing
Bottlenecks in production
foot increase. This will
finished products (ladders).
occurred when an extrusion
enable them to organize
Previously, orders for
was completed at one end of
production in a more
finished products had to be
the plant and had to be
efficient manner. Expansion
contracted to other
transported the long
of the plant also will add
companies.
distance of the plant to the
flexibility to what gets
southern end to be shipped.
produced by allowing
Werner receives raw
This wasted labor and
Werner to begin production
materials at the north end of
machinery hours as large
of finished products.
the plant and ships products
extrusions were moved with
Xerox
Xerox manufactures
manufacturing plant to the
Because customer
photocopiers in Rochester,
two outlying distribution
satisfaction is a high priority
Corporation
New York. To serve a
centers by long haul
for Xerox, the efficiency and
Long Haul
nationwide market, Xerox
trucking. The Interstate
reliability of long haul
has three distribution
highway network makes it
trucking over the Interstate
Trucking
centers in Rochester, New
possible for Xerox to ship its
highway network
York, Dallas, Texas, and
copiers by truck over long
contributes to more
Sante Fe, California. Xerox
distances on time and in
productive operations for
ships copiers from its
undamaged condition.
the company.
24
AASHTO
TeamXerox
XEROX
Wal-Mart currently operates
deliver merchandise to the
to manage inventory levels
Wal-Mart
its discount retail stores
stores. The Interstate
in the distribution centers
(Wal-Mart stores, and its
highway network is a
and stores. The goal is to
Stores, Inc.
newer Hypermarts and
strategic part of Wal-Mart's
electronically exchange
Supercenters) in 29 states.
Quick Response
distribution system. Most of
forecasting and sales
The company is aggressively
Wal-Mart's merchandise
information to keep a model
expanding its discount store
moves through its regional
stock inventory in the store
business into new markets,
distribution centers.
by using automatic
with plans to be in 36 states
Wal-Mart sites its
merchandise replenishment.
at the end of 1990.
distribution centers based
Quick response also allows
Wal-Mart's legendary
on the availability of good
the supplier to better
success derives from
north-south and east-west
schedule production and
delivering better quality
access in the nation's
reduce its inventory.
merchandise at lower prices
Interstate highway network.
Although quick response
and providing customers
Merchandise is shipped
can hold down inventory
better in-stock conditions
from the distribution centers
costs, it increases
than competitors.
to the stores by truck, using
distribution costs because it
the company's private fleet.
requires making more
Wal-Mart's superior
frequent deliveries. Overall,
merchandise in-stock
Wal-Mart's quick response
the most important benefit is
conditions depend on its
program involves
higher sales from better
distribution system to
partnerships with suppliers
customer service.
25
Transportation: Key to a Better Future
Federal
Federal Express operates on
Federal Express offers two
have a major effect on
a "hub and spoke" system,
types of deliveries: the P1 or
efficient operation of the
Express, Ltd.
which the company
overnight service, and the
"hub and spoke" system.
Ground Access
developed. Express mail is
P2 service that promises
Where traffic congestion is a
carried-usually by
delivery by the day after.
problem, Federal Express
to Airports
truck-from its local
Delivery times at hub
has trucks make fewer stops
stations to a local or
airports are staggered or
in order to arrive at stations
regional airport, and flown
"pulsed" to make unloading
or hub airports on time.
to a "hub," where the mail
and sorting at the hub more
This adds costs in terms of
is sorted. When sorted mail
efficient. Therefore, closing
using more trucks and
leaves the hub, it is carried
times for drop-off points are
drivers as well as increasing
in the same fashion along
also staggered, first
fuel and truck maintenance
the "spokes" to its
regionally and then at
costs. Where ground access
destination. The major hub
stations within a given
to airports is inadequate,
for Federal Express is
region. With so many
Federal Express must close
Memphis, Tennessee, where
stations throughout the
its stations early to make
the company originated. In
nation, precise planning and
timely truck deliveries to the
addition, there are three
arrival times are of utmost
airport from those stations.
"sub-hubs" in Newark, New
importance to the company.
As such, the delivery of a
Jersey; Indianapolis,
Federal Express package
Indiana; and Los Angeles,
Because timing is crucial,
depends on good highway
California.
traffic congestion and
access to airports.
ground access to airports
Bank of Boston
With construction of Route
Boston because it was not
easier for employees to
128 around Boston, the
possible to find affordable
communicate with each
Relocation of
Bank of Boston was able to
office space of the size
other. In addition, office
Back Office
increase productivity by
required.
space at the new location is
relocating its back office
much less expensive than
Activities
activities away from its
Construction of Route 128
the previous downtown
headquarters in downtown
and access to a commuter
locations. Lower costs also
Boston. Because of the size
rail station allowed the bank
result from office supplies
and nature of its financial
to relocate its back office
being delivered to one
operations, the Bank of
activities (and a few
location, rather than all over
Boston has a large number
hundred employees) to
the city. Finally, the new
of back office employees
Canton, a suburb of Boston.
location allows employees
doing paperwork. Before
A new building is able to
easy access by auto along
construction of Route 128,
accommodate the entire
Route 128 or by commuter
the bank's back office
back office operations in
rail.
operations were scattered
one location, increasing
throughout the City of
productivity by making it
26
AASHTO
Selected References
Measuring the effect of transportation on economic productivity is a dynamic field of research
with few analytic studies older than two or three years. As a result, there are a limited number
of published papers on the subject and the number grows at a rapid pace. Reports used as a
source for this report are listed below.
Apogee Research, "Case Studies of the Link Between Transportation and Economic
Productivity," draft report prepared for the Federal Highway Administration, (September 1990).
Apogee Research, "Enhancing U.S. Competitiveness Through Highway Investment: A Strategy for
Economic Growth," prepared for The American Road and Transportation Builders Association,
(June 1990).
David A. Aschauer, "Does Public Capital Crowd Out Private Capital," Journal of Monetary
Economics, (October 1989), pp. 171-188.
David A. Aschauer, "Is Public Expenditure Productive?" Journal of Monetary Economics,
(March 1989), pp. 177-200.
Alicia H. Munnell, "How Does Public Infrastructure Affect Regional Economic Performance?"
New England Economic Review, (September/October 1990), pp. 11-32.
Alicia H. Munnell, "Why Has Productivity Growth Declined? Productivity and Public Investment,"
New England Economic Review, (January/February 1990), pp. 3-22.
27
Transportation: Key to a Better Future
Policy
Implications
The link between
importance of focusing
Americans should be
transportation and
America's transportation
concerned about
economic productivity
infrastructure policy on the
infrastructure investment.
examined in this report has
long-term economic impact
two important policy
of an adequate national
More importantly, the report
implications. First, it shows
transportation
highlights the need to
the potential gains that can
infrastructure. The
understand the importance
be obtained by redressing
short-term effects of
of public capital for the
the two decades of
infrastructure investment
profitability of private firms.
underinvestment in the
already are well known.
Good highways serve
nation's highways and
Spending on infrastructure
multiple functions, allowing
bridges. Secondly, it shows
leads to new jobs or new
for access to labor and
that an effective
business locations,
other key inputs,
transportation network has
spreading ripple effects
just-in-time inventory
economic importance well
throughout the economy.
management, as well as
beyond the immediate
However, because much of
reliable shipment to local,
benefits of improved
the nation's future economic
national, and international
transportation services. As a
growth will depend on using
customers. Without good
result, significant increases
its existing resources more
public infrastructure, private
in the overall level of
efficiently, providing an
business would be a difficult
investment (federal, state,
adequate transportation
-in some cases, impossible
local, and private) in the
system to support gains in
-task. The case studies
nation's transportation
productivity will become
presented in this report
infrastructure is likely to
increasingly important.
illustrate how an effective
produce high economic
Indeed, the effect on
highway network plays and
returns.
productivity, and in turn,
important role in private
long-term economic growth
economic activity.
The report shows the
are the real reasons
28
G
NEW TRANSPURTATION
AMERICAN AHSHD ASSOCIATION FR UNY BIRRWAY
CONCEPTS FOR
1914
A NEW CENTURY
AASHTO Recommendations on the Direction of the
Future Federal Surface Transportation Program and for a
National Transportation Policy
Prepared by the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials
TRANSPORTATION
America's Future Depends on it 2020
Keeping America Moving
October, 1989 Final Edition
Published by
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF STATE HIGHWAY
AND TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS, INC.
444 N. Capitol St. N.W. - Suite 225, Washington, D.C. 20001
Telephone 202-624-5800
Prepared Under Direction of the
AASHTO Task Force on a Consensus Transportation Program
Charles L. Miller, Arizona, Chairman
Ronald W. Fiedler, Wisconsin, Vice-Chairman
Members
William J. Burns, Connecticut
Hal Rives, Georgia
Kermit H. Justice, Delaware
R.E. Stotzer, Texas
Ben Watts Florida
Ray D. Pethtel, Virginia
John Tabb, Mississippi
Horace B. Edwards, Kansas
Leonard W. Levine, Minnesota
Franklin E. White, New York
Robert K. Best, California
Frederick Salvucci, Massachusetts
Duane Berentson, Washington
James P. Pitz, Michigan
Task Force Subcommittees and Officers
Policy Review Committee:
Harry A. Reed, Arizona, Chairman
Clyde E. Pyers, Maryland, Vice-Chairman
Highway Technical Advisory Committee:
Roger Schrantz, Wisconsin, Chairman
Harry A. Reed, Arizona, Vice-Chairman
Modal Technical Advisory Committee:
Henry Peyrebrune, New York, Chairman
G. Robert Adams, Michigan, Vice-Chairman
Subcommittee on Economic Expansion and Development:
Ronald W. Fiedler, Wisconsin, Chairman
Standing Committee on Planning Task Force on a Consensus Transportation Program:
Robert Royer, Oregon, Chairman
New Transportation Concepts for a New Century is available from the AASHTO office at no cost for single
copies. Multiple copies are $2.00 each. The Execuitve Summary of New Transportation Concepts for a New Century is
available at no cost for single copies. Multiple copies are $1.00 each.
NEW TRANSPORTATION
OF STATE AASHI MIQUWAY AMB AFFICIAL
CONCEPTS FOR
1914
A NEW CENTURY
AASHTO Recommendations on the Direction of the
Future Federal Surface Transportation Program and for a
National Transportation Policy
Prepared by the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials
TRANSPORTATION
American Association of State Highway
America's Future Depends on it 2020
and Transportation Officials
EXECUTIVE OFFICE:
444 N. Capitol Street, N.W.
Keeping America Moving
Suite 225
Washington, D.C. 20001
October, 1989 Final Edition
Telephone: (202) 624-5800
Preamble to Final Edition
This AASHTO Report was prepared under the guidance of the AASHTO Task Force on a Consensus
Transportation Program. Three earlier editions were published, the first in December, 1988, the second in
February, 1989, and the third in July 1989, all of which are replaced by this Final Edition.
As is required under the Association's procedure for publication of an AASHTO Report with recom-
mendations, through actions taken in 1988 and 1989 the content of the Final Edition was considered and
approved by more than the necessary two-thirds majority of the Board of Directors/Policy Committee of the
Association.
While this AASHTO Report contains recommendations, it is to be understood that such do not constitute
official policy for the Association. AASHTO official policy can only be adopted by separate action, which
has not yet occurred.
One purpose of this AASHTO Report is to make recommendations on national transportation programs
for consideration by other participants in the AASHTO-initiated Transportation 2020 program, including the
Transportation Alternatives Group, and for the use of Congress and the states in developing new transporta-
tion legislation. In addtion, the goals and recommendations contained herein have been provided to the U.S.
Department of Transportation, for consideration in the Department's development of a National Transpor-
tation Policy.
Underlying the findings and recommendations made in this AASHTO Report are several background
documents published or in final preparation by the Association. A list of those documents will be found in
the Appendix, and they can be obtained from the Association's office in Washington. The Appendix also
includes a description of the process by which this Final Edition and the supporting background documents
were developed and approved.
The Task Force and the Association's member departments want to acknowledge the cooperation of the
Federal Highway Administration and other agencies of the U.S. Department of Transportation who provided
assistance with preparation of this AASHTO Report, and also the many other organizations and people outside
government who provided counsel and information.
Francis B. Francois
Executive Director
October, 1989
Table of Contents
Page
Executive Summary
E-1
Chapter 1 - Transportation and a More Competitive
United States Economy
1-1
The New Challenge
1-1
Efficiency In All of Transportation
1-2
A Bigger Investment in Transportation
1-3
Without More Money for Transportation, The Economy Will Suffer
1-4
Chapter 2 - Aviation
2-1
Part I
Introduction
2-1
Historical Background
2-1
Future Outlook
2-2
Air Transportation Issues
2-3
Part II
Aviation Goals and Policy Recommendations
2-4
Chapter 3 - Highways and Public Transportation
3-1
Part I
Introduction
3-1
Historical Background
3-1
AASHTO's Transportation 2020 Policy Process
3-2
Part II-Findings from the Transportation 2020 Information
Development, Collection and Analysis Effort
3-3
Summary of The Bottom Line Report
3-4
Summary from the Public Forums
3-5
Summary of the Futures Conference
3-6
Conclusions
3-7
Part III
National Surface Transportation Goals and Objectives
Highways and Public Transportation
3-7
National Surface Transportation Goals - Highways and Public Transportation
3-8
National Modal Objectives - Highways and Public Transportation
3-9
Part IV
Federal Role and Program Recommendations -
Highways and Public Transportation
.3-10
Recommended Federal Role Principles - Highways and Public Transportation
.3-10
Recommended Federal Role - Highways and Public Transportation
3-12
Recommended Federal Programs - Highways and Public Transportation
3-14
Recommended Federal Procedures - Highways and Public Transportation
3-19
CHAPTER 4 - Railroads
4-1
Part I
Introduction
4-1
Historical Background
4-1
Future Outlook
4-2
Public Role
4-2
Part II-Findings of National Conference of State Railway Officials Information Development, Collection,
and Analysis Effort
Introduction
4-3
Summary and Conclusions of the NCSRO Rail Report
4-3
Part III-Total Systems Approach to Surface Transportation Investment
Goals
4-5
Goal Achievement Strategy
4-6
Part IV-Policy Recommendations - Rail
Provide for Access, Efficient Freight Movement, and Congestion Relief
4-6
Review Federal Railroad Laws
4-7
Provide for Traditional and High Speed Rail Passenger Service Needs
.4-7
Assess the Competitive Environment
.4-8
Provide for Railroad Safety Improvement and Enforcement
4-8
CHAPTER 5 - Water Transportation
5-1
Part I - Water Transportation
Introduction
5-1
Historical Background
5-1
Water Transportation Activity
5-2
Financing
5-2
Issues
5-4
Public Role
5-4
Part II - Findings of the Standing Committee on Water Transportation Information Development,
Collection and Analysis Effort
Introduction
5-5
Summary and Conclusions Modal Technical Advisory Committee
5-5
Standing Committee on Water Transportation Findings
5-6
Part III - Total Systems Approach to Water Transportation Investment
Introduction
5-8
Goals
5-8
Part IV - Policy Recommendations
Coordinated Water Transportation Plans
5-9
National Ports and Waterways System
.5-10
Intermodal Connections
.5-10
Water Resource Development Act
5-11
User Fees
.5-11
Disposal of Dredged Material
5-12
Research and Development
.5-12
Waterfront Development Pressures
.5-13
CHAPTER 6 - Research, Development and Technology Transfer
6-1
Part I
Introduction
6-1
Historical Background
6-1
Issues
6-2
Transportation 2020--RD&TT
6-3
Conclusion
6-4
Part II
Policy Goals and Recommendations
6-4
Highway Research and Development Programs
6-4
Intelligent Vehicle-Highway Systems
6-5
RD&TT - All Modes
6-6
RD&TT - Intermodal Issues
6-7
Application of Technology
6-8
Coordination of RD&TT
6-8
Funding for RD&TT
6-9
Commentary
C-1
Appendix
A-1
Executive Summary: Part I
"The true history
of the United States
is the history
of transportation.
"
Philip Guedalla
Today the citizens of America enjoy the convenience and economic benefits of a transportation system
second to none. This system was made possible largely through a long standing cooperative federal,
state, and local government partnership.
Unfortunately, we are currently disinvesting in our future transportation needs just by maintaining
current spending levels. Because of the aging of the system, inflation, and continued national growth,
the policy and spending decisions made--or not made--in this century will determine the America of
tomorrow.
Metaphorically, American transportation now stands at the crossroads. With some effort and
planning, we can establish the needed road signs to guide us successfully into the future. But we must
prepare today to meet the new challenge of tomorrow.
The New Challenge
The world today is still shrinking. Telecommunications and transportation are advancing rapidly
toward the creation of Marshall McLuhan's "global village."
America is now part of a global economy. What happens overnight on Japan's Nikkei affects Wall
Street at the opening bell. Economically, America is adjusting to compete in this rapidly changing
world economy.
The new economic world is, in a word, vastly more competitive than it has ever been before. And
among the things that are needed for a highly competitive America is a high quality, highly efficient
transportation network to give the American people their mobility and on which to ship American
materials and products. Good transportation alone is not the only answer; but there can be a
competitive America only with good transportation.
Efficiency in All of Transportation
Efficient transportation helps America compete. The intermodal approach to transportation promotes
efficiency and will help America meet its transportation challenge. It is AASHTO's belief that each
transportation system, each mode, must become more and more efficient for the nation to reach its
competitiveness goals.
A Bigger Investment in Transportation
It will cost money to give America the transportation network needed to meet the challenges of the
21st Century. It will cost money, it will require increased research, and it will take planning. Among
the myriad ideas about what ought to be the nation's transportation future, there is one constant: the
nation invests much less in transportation than it did a decade or two ago; the nation continues to
invest less than is needed even to maintain current services, let alone improve the quality of
transportation; but the nation must invest more in transportation, much more, if it is to keep pace with
a growing America and if it is to help America regain its competitive edge in a dynamic world
economy.
Without More Money for Transportation, the Economy Will Suffer
It should be patently clear that, if America is to regain its leadership in the world economy, the nation
must commit financially to preserve and improve its transportation infrastructure.
The Need is Now
The nation's transportation system is a
complex, dynamic network of physical
facilities, operations, and management
practices. This system for moving peo-
ple and goods is essential to domestic
productivity, international competi-
tiveness, and quality of life. Transpor-
tation accounts for 15 percent of
national employment and a substantial
portion of the cost of consumer goods.
Investments in the transportation sys-
tem are enormous; it consumes in all its
aspects more than $800 billion annu-
ally--nearly 20 percent of the gross na-
tional product. This system must be
maintained.
The individual chapters of this report
detail AASHTO's transportation pro-
gram recommendations for aviation;
highways and public transportation;
railroads; water; and research, develop-
ment, and technology transfer. Imple-
mentation of these programs is vital if
we are to give America the multimodal
transportation network needed to
match the challenge of the 21st Cen-
tury. The need is for new transporta-
tion concepts for a new century. The
need is now.
Photo by the California Department of Transportation
Executive Summary - E2
AVIATION (Chapter 2)
The long range future of the national air transportation system as we know it today is in doubt.
Projected aviation growth is outpaced only by projected aviation shortfalls.
FAA Projections Aircraft and
Passengers 1970-2000
Growth
10
Number of Aircraft
In 1987, air carriers enplaned 448,913,726 passengers.
9
(thousands)
This total is almost twice the number of enplaned passen-
8
Number of Passengers
gers prior to deregulation.
(hundreds of millions)
7
The FAA forecasts an annual growth rate of 4.5 percent in
passengers over the coming decade. From the current
6
(1987) nearly 449 million enplanements, the air transpor-
tation system is expected to enplane over 789 million in
5
the year 2000.
4
If traffic forecast levels are realized and if airport capacity
is not increased, it is projected that 58 of the nation's
3
primary airports will become severely congested by the
2
year 2000.
1
Air cargo has grown from a low of slightly less than three
million tons of enplaned cargo in 1982 to slightly over five
0
million tons in 1987, a 70 percent increase in five years.
1970
1978
1987
1992
2000
Technology's advances in miniaturization and business's
YEAR
insistence on speedy delivery assure a continued increase
in air cargo into the next century.
TABLE A-1
Dollars
Investment Needs By Category
(Uninflated-$ Millions)
Future needs exceed reasonable revenue expectations by
Air Traffic
a factor exceeding two.
Control and
Year
Facilities
Airports
Administration
Total
Projections indicate that the cumulative backlog of
1990
$2750.0
$3834.2
$3100.0
$ 9,684.2
spending needs will approach $150 billion by the year
2010.
1995
4520.0
5078.0
3100.0
12,698.0
2000
4520.0
6070.1
3100.0
13,690.1
Providing a stable and reliable funding source for avia-
2005
5520.0
6802.1
3100.0
15,422.1
tion development is vital to the future of the nation's air
2010
5520.0
7794.2
3100.0
16,414.2
transportation system and the economic well-being of
the country.
2015
7950.0
8901.2
3100.0
19,951.2
2020
7950.0
9893.2
3100.0
20,943.2
Source: AASHTO Aviation Needs Task Force, from federal agency reports
Executive Summary - E3
Other Concerns
Intermodal Transportation Links: improved highway, rail, mass transit, and water access will
become increasingly necessary as the level of air travel increases at the nation's airports.
Aviation Safety: The United States' air transportation system is one of the safest and most efficient
in the world. But the federal government's central role in aviation safety must be maintained and an
improved system of inspection, regulation, and certification is needed. The air traffic control system
must also be equipped, staffed, and trained to perform the added requirements of tomorrow's air
transportation system.
Aviation Security: The issue of security is of such compelling magnitude that it has become a national
public safety concern. The FAA should assume responsibility for ensuring compliance with federal
laws and regulations.
Surface Access: Air travel saves time. That is why it is the nation's first travel mode choice. But
with recent studies identifying twenty-three of forty-one major airports as experiencing landside
congestion and sixteen airports operating at or near airside capacity, the future invokes visions of
intolerable delays unless extensive improvements are made. If aviation's future is critical to this
nation's economic growth and international vitality, priority must be given to access improvements.
Environment: Attention to airport and aircraft noise is needed. The need to clean up toxic conditions
on or near airport properties and to replace leaking fuel tanks is still another concern for the health
and safety of the public.
New Technology: Research, both government sponsored and private industry sustained, must
continue to be pursued as an important national aviation goal.
Conclusions
At no time in the past has aviation appeared to face a future with so much success and yet so much
challenge.
Government and private sector cooperation must occur if our air transportation system is to receive
the investments that will assure that aviation demand through the year 2020 will be met.
This report discusses the federal, state, and local roles as system providers. The past federal/state/local
relationship in the air transportation system needs strengthening. A more focused federal role and a
greater state role appear necessary, and are recommended.
AASHTO's goals and recommendations for aviation are detailed in Part II of this Executive Summary.
Executive Summary - E4
HIGHWAYS AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION (Chapter 3)
From a citizen's perspective, the nation's
highways and public transportation sys-
tems are the most important links in the
intermodal chain. They certainly play the
largest part in the public's daily existence.
Most Americans use highways and public
transportation in one form or another every
day to work or to play--or just to get away
since highways and public transit provide
the main access to the other transportation
modes.
In 1988, Americans traveled two trillion
vehicle miles by auto, truck, bus, and pub-
lic transit, more than triple the travel mile-
age of 1956, when the Interstate and
Defense Highway System was begun. By
the year 2020, total travel in the United
States is expected to double again.
America's business is dependent on total
mobility. This country's vast size, the
broad distribution of people and resources,
have always placed a premium on the abil-
ity to move people and goods long dis-
tances with speed, safety, and low cost.
Retail items purchased every day probably
traveled to the store by truck over the high-
ways from a factory or a port. Mobility is
crucial to the nation's economic strength.
Photo by the West Virginia Department of Transportation
The Problem
Although construction of the Interstate and Defense Highway System is almost complete, tremendous
needs still exist to preserve and improve the system. Urban and suburban congestion is increasing,
demanding new highway and transit service. Highway fatality rates need to be reduced. The nation's
national transportation focus, once strong, has now begun to wander. It is necessary to develop a new
focus, a new "National Surface Transportation Policy."
The Solution
State transportation officials have proposed a broad program of recommendations on the direction of
the future federal surface transportation program for highways, public transit, and modal interlinks to
these modes. These recommendations are to help build a new consensus program. The new consensus
surface transportation program for highways and public transportation as envisioned by AASHTO
will involve all levels of government.
Executive Summary - E5
AASHTO Proposal for
TABLE H-1
Federal Highway Funding
AASHTO Proposal for
Federal Highway Funding
FY1989
(Billions of Dollars)
Funding Level
FY 1992
17.6
1992
Proposed Level
FY 1993
19.6
FY 1994
22.7
FY 1995
25.9
1993
FISCAL YEAR
The Consequences
1994
Without a renewed focus on a "National Surface Trans-
portation Policy," the disinvestment in the country's high-
ways and public transportation will continue. The
highway and transit systems will further deteriorate, cost-
1995
ing users time and money and diminishing safety.
The Facts
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
America's surface transportation expenditures, at all lev-
$ BILLIONS
els of government, in 1987 equaled about $81 billion. Of
this total, about $66 billion was for highways and $14.5
billion for public transportation systems.
AASHTO Proposal for
Federal Transit Capital Funding
TABLE H-2
AASHTO Proposal for
FY1989
Federal Transit Capital Funding
Funding Level
1992
(Billions of Dollars)
Proposed Level
FY 1992
3.5
FY1993
4.0
FY1994
4.5
1993
FISCAL YEAR
FY 1995
5.0
In constant dollars, in order to just maintain the physical
1994
characteristics of the nation's public sector surface trans-
portation infrastructure and sustain "most" of the level of
service provided today through the year 2020, an an-
nualized investment of nearly $95 billion is required. Of
1995
this total, approximately $80 billion is needed for high-
ways and $15 billion for financing public transportation.
And further, without increased funds for highway safety,
fatality rates cannot be reduced.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
$ BILLIONS
Surface travel demand is expected to at least double by
2020. If this nation is to attempt to keep up with this
Executive Summary - E6
Photo by Michigan Department of Transportation
anticipated growth then an investment of approximately $117 billion per year in constant dollars would
be required. Of this total, about $100 billion would be for highways and the remainder for transit.
An additional $1 billion per year in constant dollars in highways and public transportation through
2020 would be required to adequately link surface transportation with airports, ports and waterways,
and rail terminals.
TABLE H-3
Surface Transportation
Conclusions
Annual Expenditure Requirements
1988-2020
If America is to maintain its economic leadership in
(Billions of Dollars)
the world economy and avoid the negative and costly
Surface
effects of inaction, the nation must commit the re-
Transportation
1988-2020
Investment Range
quired funds to improve its surface transportation
Area
Current
Low
High
system.
Highways,
Roads and
AASHTO recommends a two-pronged approach for
Bridges
66.0*
80.0
100.5
both highways and transit: (1) a Categorical Program
Transit
14.5**
focused on systems of national importance; and (2) a
15.1
15.8
Flexible Program designed to solve state and local
Linkage to
transportation problems within a set of national issues
Other Modes
NA
1.0
1.0
of concern established by Congress.
Total
NA
96.1
117.3
The Categorical Programs would include a new Na-
tional Highway System consisting of the Interstate
Estimated total expenditure for 1987
Highway System and a portion of the redefined Prin-
**
Estimated total expenditure for 1988
cipal Arterial System, and major transit systems.
AASHTO Report: The Bottom Line
The Flexible State and Local Program addresses such
national issues as urban mobility, suburban conges-
tion, rural access, and links between transportation
Executive Summary - E7
TABLE H-4
Linkage To Other Modes
TURN
Annualized Investment
LANE
Requirements 1987-2020
(Billions of Dollars)
Modal Linkage
Annual Costs
Air
.7
Rail
.2
Water
.1
Total
1.0
AASHTO Report: The Bottom Line
Photo by the Delaware Department of Transportation
modes. It is designed to grant funds to the
states for rural and urban highway needs
beyond the National Highway System and
Effects of Inaction
to states and transit agencies to meet public
On Highway Conditions
transportation needs.
AASHTO's goals and recommendations
for highways and public transportation are
detailed in Part II of this Executive Sum-
mary.
Spending
Backlog
Highway
Performance
Current Spending Levels
1985
2020
If current spending levels are continued, highway perfor-
mance will decline while the backlog of needs will escalate.
AASHTO Report: The Bottom Line
Executive Summary - E8
RAILROADS (Chapter 4)
America's railroads must have a renaissance because they are essential to the nation's economic
growth and well-being.
Railroads helped make America what it is today. If the United States is to move strongly into the 21st
Century, rail service must be given adequate consideration in transportation planning.
The Problem
Railroads are grossly under utilized in part because they are hampered by federally mandated policies.
The railroad industry is also severely burdened by railroad specific federal legislation which places
considerable unnecessary costs on the industry, hindering its competitiveness with other modes.
The Solution
Changes in government policies to eliminate inequities and repeal restrictive legislation would allow
the railroad industry to utilize more adequately its transportation capacity.
The Consequences
Failure to make these changes and to promote railroad profitability is to court disaster.
The Facts
Unless these changes are made the railroads will undergo severe line reductions. Operations will be
limited to a core system designed to carry bulk commodities long distances. Ultimately this will hinder
Photo Courtesy the American Association of Railroads
SEABOARD
SYSTEM
SEASOAND
4803
4803
Executive Summary - E9
the Strategic Rail Corridor Network for National Defense, cause additional public exposure risk and
added expense for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel, and very likely necessitate the cancellation of a
number of Amtrak's principal routes. While Amtrak has increased revenues 59 percent in the last
seven years, it will still need an annual operating subsidy of about $580 million for the foreseeable
future.
Line reductions will also require additional funding for highways due to increased truck traffic and
ensuing maintenance.
America's freight rail service must be preserved. Railroads are the principal mode of transportation
for most bulk commodities and the primary mode for many manufactured products. Railroads are
essential to the defense, health, and wealth of the country. Government interferences should be
eliminated thereby permitting all transportation modes to be controlled equally by economic forces.
America's passenger rail service must be preserved in order to prevent rural isolation and reduce
growing highway traffic congestion. Amtrak operations must be improved and the service encouraged
to become self sufficient.
Conclusions
If Congress takes the necessary corrective actions to allow railroads to maintain a fair and equitable
market share, the railroad industry will be able to provide competitive profitable service for the
enhancement of the nation's economy.
To repeat: rail service must be given adequate consideration in transportation planning for the 21st
Century. There is no acceptable alternative.
AASHTO's goals and recommendations for railroads are detailed in Part II of this Executive
Summary.
Executive Summary - E10
Photo by the New Hampshire Department of Transportation
WATER TRANSPORTATION (Chapter 5)
Water transportation impacts many aspects of the nation's economic well-being. Waterways have
served as major transportation facilities since the first settlement of this country. Most of our cities
are located on navigable waterways, and industrial expansion has traditionally followed the waterways
of the nation. But today, the physical condition of our ports and water transit is deteriorating, truck
and rail access to waterways is poor, and funding for improvements is uncertain at best.
The Problem
There are several areas of critical concern for the water transportation industry:
*Productivity and use of the existing water transportation system must be improved.
*The nation's existing water transportation infrastructure must be maintained and new facilities must
be built where needed. Public investments must be found and targeted to meet these needs.
*Public safety must be improved.
*The environment must be protected.
*Water transportation must be painted back into the intermodal transportation picture.
Executive Summary - E11
The Solution
All levels of government, including the Federal Government and the states, need to reevaluate their
roles in the light of enactment of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986. Adequate sources
of funding for maintenance and improvement must be found and agreed upon.
The Consequences
If reevaluation and coordination of government roles do not take place, the nation's water transpor-
tation system will continue its precipitous decline.
The Facts
About 1.8 billion tons of cargo are handled annually by the nation's port facilities. Two-thirds of the
total U.S. waterborne commerce is handled by deep-draft ports. The remaining one-third is handled
by the inland waterway system. By moving large volumes of commodities at a low unit cost per ton,
the nation's waterway system helps make our exports price competitive. It also contributes to the
economies of many individual states and to the nation as a whole by providing jobs, income, and
production.
Conclusions
The far reaching effect of the transportation benefits of our nation's waterway system cannot be
overemphasized. The nation's waterways are not only vital to trade, economic development, and
national defense, but also provide flood control, irrigation, fire protection, fishing, and other recrea-
tional activities. The Federal Government must continue its partnership with local and state govern-
ments to maintain water as a viable means of transportation.
AASHTO's goals and recommendations for water transportation are detailed in Part II of this
Executive Summary.
Executive Summary - E12
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER (Chapter 6)
It is increasingly clear that many of the challenges presented by our transportation system can only
be met by innovation based on research. In the years ahead, it may be technology that exerts the
greatest influence on the health of our transportation systems.
Highway Indicators
The Problem
1967-1987
Technology currently used in many parts
of the transportation system does not rep-
mileage;
roads & streets
resent the state of the art. Significant con-
tributions to transportation innovations are
licensed
often available yet barriers often deter their
drivers
immediate implementation.
motor
vehicle
The Solution
registrations
Transportation research and development
vehicle miles
of travel
needs to be more adequately funded. This
total
will insure that the necessary organiza-
disbursements
tional framework and coordination exist
(constant
dollars)
for each transportation research program to
Federal Aid
function efficiently. Adequate funding
Planning and
Research funds
will further insure that the total research,
(constant
development, and technology transfer ef-
dollars)
fort is fully effective for all modes of trans-
portation.
-50
-30
-10
10
30
50
70
90
110
PERCENT CHANGE
Photo by the Connecticut Department of Transportation
SHARP
1
000.00
Executive Summary - E13
The Consequences
Without adequate funding and coordination, the research, development, and technology transfer
needed to rescue the transportation system from its increasing problems will not happen.
The Facts
There is need for a vigorous transportation RD&TT program to lead the nation into the 21st Century.
Funding for research has not kept pace with the growing needs and opportunities for technological
innovation in the transportation industry. Highway research spending, for example, as a share of total
highway program expenditures is currently about 0.20 percent--far less than adequate. Furthermore,
in comparison to highways, research spending in the other modes (aviation, railroad, transit, and water)
is extremely low.
Conclusions
Given today's crowded, deteriorating fa-
cilities, transportation professionals must
reverse the decline in the nation's mobility
using research, development, and technol-
ogy transfer to find innovative ways to
provide safe and efficient movement of
people and goods under more difficult
conditions in the years to come.
AASHTO's goals and recommendations
for research, development, and technology
are detailed in Part II of this Executive
Summary.
Photo by the Arizona Department of Transportation
Executive Summary - E14
Photo by the California Department of Transportation
A Foundation for the Future
America has one of the finest transportation systems in the world. When it is working smoothly, as
it is most of the time, it is taken for granted. But the nation can not afford to take it for granted much
longer.
Many national challenges lie ahead. Over the next two years, many people will put forth many ideas
as to the direction national transportation policy should take. This report, prepared by state transpor-
tation officials, is a foundation on which to build the strong national programs necessary to preserve
and improve America's transportation system. New transportation concepts are needed and must be
found to keep America moving in a new century.
Executive Summary - E15
Executive Summary: Part II
Aviation
Goals and Policy Recommendations
The following goals and policy recommendations reflect the major recommendations of AASHTO for
any future transportation program for aviation and related surface access developed under the Transportation
2020 consensus process. They are presented in priority order from AASHTO's perspective, beginning with
national goals for aviation.
Aviation Goals
Safety
Through new and improved equipment, procedures, and aircraft maintenance practices, ensure the safety
of airline passengers and crews and enhance consumer confidence in the nation's air transportation
system.
Security
At the national and international level, establish adequate security procedures and enforce the surveillance
and monitoring of airport terminals, appurtenances and baggage areas to ensure passenger safety.
Airport Capacity
Provide adequate capacity to meet current and projected air travel demands through the expansion or
conversion of existing airport facilities, where feasible, or the construction of new airport facilities.
Airport/Airway Systems
Define national and state airport/airway systems which will meet forecasted demand and provide
continued support for the nation's economic health and international vitality.
Airport Ground Access
Through coordinated, multi-modal planning, determine current and future modal access needs and
implement improvements in a timely manner consistent with and in recognition of planned airport
capacity improvements.
Executive Summary - E-16
Environment
Develop and promulgate adequate and uniform standards for environmental quality at airports and airport
environs.
Federal/State Roles
Clearly establish the federal role in the definition and funding of a national airport system with appropriate
input at the state level as to airport location and compatibility with state goals.
Revenue and Funding
Maximize utilization of existing funding reserves, and develop additional funding at all levels of
government, through user and other appropriate fees, to properly ensure the efficient and safe operation
of existing airports and the nation's airspace system and the development of an airport system of national
and state significance.
Economic Development
Direct and indirect economic benefits from aviation are quite significant, thus, greater flexibility should
be given to state and local governments to consider economic development as a factor in the administra-
tion of air transportation improvement programs.
New Technology
Give major emphasis to new technology, research and development, and the expedient application of
innovations that improve security and safety, increase efficiency, and ameliorate environmental impacts.
Air Cargo
Movement of freight by air is an important and growing part of our national economy, and as such, its
needs must be considered in the planning, design and operation of airports with special emphasis on
ground access requirements.
Aviation Policy Recommendations
Safety
AASHTO believes that safety should be the prime consideration of all aviation programs. The following
areas of concern should be closely monitored by the federal government and under standards established
at the federal level, to ensure the safety of crews, passengers and people on the ground: aging aircraft
fleet; aircraft maintenance; increased air operations; constrained airspace; military/civilian airspace
conflicts; severe weather information; communications and navigation aids; and pilot training.
Executive Summary - E17
Security
AASHTO believes that aviation security is an issue of compelling national significance, and that it is a
proper federal role to ensure that airport and in-flight operations are as secure as possible from terrorist
threats. This would entail the following:
a) Security personnel are qualified and well trained.
b) Adequate and reasonable security procedures are established and properly monitored for
the nation's commercial airport system.
c) All cargo and baggage are adequately monitored.
d) New technology is brought to bear on security problems as soon as possible.
e) Security features are incorporated into airport design.
Airport Capacity
AASHTO believes that Congress should establish a national aviation policy which would ensure that
needed capacity improvements at airports of national significance will be made irrespective of airport
ownership. These improvements should be made in a timely manner and at a level which will satisfy
forecasted demand.
Airport/Airway Systems
AASHTO believes that a redefinition of the system of airports of national and state significance should
be completed by the federal and state governments. This system should receive funding from a federal
aviation trust fund supported by federal users' taxes.
AASHTO further believes that each state should identify a system of airports of state significance and
unless otherwise limited by state law, establish, collect and distribute state aviation fees along with
eligible federal aviation funding, to assist in development and maintenance of this system.
Airport Ground Access
AASHTO believes a major constraint on meeting of future air travel demand will be ground access, both
on and off airport.
AASHTO also believes that land side access should be a component of all airport master plans and all
comprehensive transportation plans.
AASHTO further believes that airport ground access should be eligible for funding as appropriate from
the Highway, Mass Transit and Airport and Airway Trust Fund Programs, with assistance from the
General Fund as needed. The funding should be flexible and should contain local and state participation
features.
Executive Summary - E-18
Environment
AASHTO believes that public concerns over airport noise, air quality and potentially toxic or hazardous
materials present at airport sites reflect a serious problem that could adversely affect the future
development of the nation's air transportation system.
AASHTO further believes that Congress, and other levels of government if they so desire, should address
this most serious problem and provide guidelines for federal, state and local governments for ensuring
environmental quality as an integral component of airport development.
Federal/State Roles
AASHTO believes that states should play a strong role in locating, developing and expanding airports
within their jurisdictions; that states should assume a more direct role in administering federal aviation
funds allocations unless otherwise limited by state law; and that states should have greater responsibilities
for funding and operating airports within their boundaries.
Airspace System
AASHTO believes that it is a proper federal role to operate and maintain the nation's airspace system.
The FAA should develop and implement the National Airspace System Plan as quickly as possible.
Revenue and Funding
AASHTO believes that a dedicated trust fund supported by equitable user fees should support the national
air transportation system, including airports of both national and state significance. Reasonable consid-
eration for public use and benefit also justify continued general fund support of this system.
AASHTO also believes that user funded trust funds for transportation should not be included in the federal
unified budget.
AASHTO further believes that a federal-state partnership that also provides an appropriate role for local
and private participation, if properly coordinated to establish responsibility, will produce adequate
funding resources to ensure needed system capacity.
Economic Development
AASHTO believes that economic development should be an element for consideration in all state and
federal comprehensive transportation planning and development for airports.
New Technology
AASHTO believes that the many positive gains from research and new development will continue to be
of enormous benefit to air transportation. National air transportation system providers, both public and
private, should ensure that programs and services they provide are managed such that immediate and
maximum benefits of new technology will occur.
Executive Summary - E19
Air Cargo
AASHTO believes air cargo is an emerging major component of aviation economics and should be taken
into consideration in all planning and operational studies of airports and airspace.
Highways and Public Transportation
Goals and Policy Recommendations
The following are the major goals and policy recommendations of AASHTO for a new surface
transportation program for highways and public transportation, to serve America as it moves toward the year
2020. The goals and policy recommendation statements are presented in hierarchical order from AASHTO's
perspective, beginning with national surface transportation goals, and progressing through federal role and
program policy recommendations to achieve the goals.
National Surface Transportation Goals - Highways and Public Transportation
Preservation
Preservation of America's existing surface transportation system should be the primary goal of any future
national transportation program since it is this system which provides the basic network upon which this
nation's economic health and international vitality depend.
Congestion
A balanced approach to increasing capacity and reducing congestion on this nation's surface transporta-
tion system should be employed, including an appropriate mix of highways and transit, and a thoughtful
application of systems management technologies and demand management techniques.
Funding
User and benefitter fees, set at an appropriate level to cover the economic cost of the surface transportation
facilities and services provided, should be dedicated solely to the funding of transportation improvements.
General fund commitments to public transportation should continue.
Safety
The safety of Americans, using the surface transportation facilities and services, should be preserved and
enhanced through the continued national commitment to safety research, safety applications and safety
projects.
Executive Summary - E-20
Access and Balance
The national surface transportation system should be comprised of a balanced, integrated and coordinated
network of multimodal facilities and services which provide an adequate level of access to all of the
various regions of this nation.
Planning and Research
This nation should continue to commit sufficient funding to transportation planning and research to ensure
that established goals are met, that future options do not get precluded, and that new technologies are
developed and applied to transportation infrastructure in a timely manner.
Economic Vitality
The national surface transportation program should preserve and enhance the economic vitality of this
nation by providing employment, reducing transport costs, improving freight movement productivity,
revitalizing rural America, rejuvenating blighted urban areas, supporting existing land uses, attracting
economic development, providing transportation for rapidly growing regions, and improving interna-
tional competitiveness.
Federal Role and Program Policy Recommendations- Highways and Public Transportation
System of National Significance
The federal role in surface transportation should focus on a system of facilities and services which are
significant to the economic health and international vitality of this nation.
AASHTO believes that such a system would be comprised of all of the existing Interstate Highway
System and an appropriate portion of the principal arterial system as redefined and the associated bridges,
as well as the public transportation facilities and services which keep this nation's major cities moving.
Issues of National Significance
Beyond the focus on the Highway System of National Significance and on the major transit projects, the
federal role should be to allow the states and local governments flexibility in identifying and implement-
ing specific surface transportation solutions appropriate to the regional/local need. These solutions
should also serve to address transportation issues of national significance.
AASHTO believes the dominant issues of national significance to be urban mobility, suburban conges-
tion, rural access, and modal interlinks. Tradeoffs among issues like transportation safety, air quality,
preservation, balance, public transportation, and rural and urban economic vitality should be determined
at the state and local levels.
Other Programs of National Interest
The federal role in surface transportation should include transportation planning, research, safety,
emergency relief, and federal lands access.
Executive Summary - E21
AASHTO believes that the basic goal of each federal program should be to assist the nation's surface
transportation system to function as safely and efficiently as possible and thereby to preserve and enhance
the economic health and international vitality of America.
Federal/State Partnership
The existing federal/state partnership has worked well over the several decades of its existence in
producing one of the best national surface transportation systems in the world.
Therefore, AASHTO believes that the existing federal/state partnership should be retained for the
programs addressing national surface transportation needs and only slightly modified for programs
addressing state and local surface transportation needs.
Fewer Categorical Restrictions
Existing lower-level federal program categories are unduly restrictive and do not permit the states and
local governments adequate flexibility to meet their unique transportation needs in the most appropriate
and cost-effective manner. Furthermore, existing federal requirements for lower-level programs are
unduly restrictive on the states and local governments, which merely serves to increase "red tape" and
decrease efficiency without delivering corresponding improvements in levels of safety or service to the
users.
Therefore, AASHTO believes that fewer categories, less rigid requirements and more flexible funding
should be employed for the lower-level surface transportation needs in order to facilitate the development
of regionally appropriate and economically efficient transportation systems.
Federal Role - Highways and Public Transportation
AASHTO believes that the new federal role in transportation should include two levels of program
specificity and commitment.
One level would address the concern for "focusing" the federal commitment on a System of National
Significance through categorical programs.
The other level would address the concerns of the states and local governments for program "flexibility"
in dealing with Issues of National Significance through flexible programs.
Highway Safety
The safety of Americans, using the surface transportation facilities and services, should be preserved and
enhanced through the continued national commitment to safety research, safety applications and safety
projects.
Federal Procedure Recommendations
Overall Recommendation
Simplicity and straightforwardness should be the hallmark of all federal administrative requirements
associated with federal transportation programs.
Executive Summary - E-22
Allocation of Funds
Fair, straightforward and simple formulas and equitable discretionary guidelines should be used to
allocate revenues collected at the federal level to state and local units of government.
AASHTO believes that minimum allocations should be developed for any program addressing needs on
the national highway system, but that prorata shares based on percentage of total highway user
contributions attributable to each state should be used for programs addressing state and local highway
needs.
AASHTO believes that allocations for the major transit projects and for those projects whose costs cannot
be accommodated from regular transit formula funds should remain discretionary in nature, and that
transit formulas should be used for other transit programs.
Highway Trust Fund
The Federal Highway Trust Fund should be made permanent, removed from the unified budget process
and released from obligation limitations. All interest earned, along with existing balances beyond those
providing an adequate cash flow cushion, should be released to the states and local governments to fund
needed surface transportation improvements. Increased federal revenues are necessary to carry out the
needs of the future Federal Surface Transportation Program.
Certification of Projects
The states and/or transit funding recipients should continue to be responsible for the certification of all
surface transportation projects receiving federal assistance.
Matching Ratios
For highways, AASHTO believes that an 85 percent federal share is appropriate for the programs that
address national needs. AASHTO believes that matching ratios for highway programs addressing state
and local highway needs should be determined at the state level.
For transit, AASHTO believes that the current federal matching shares should remain unchanged.
However, for new starts and system extensions, funding priority should be given to projects providing a
non-federal share higher than the minimum 25 percent. For the new Mass Transit Account formula funds,
the federal share should be 80 percent, the same as it is for other capital formula funds.
Summary Comments
These recommendations, having been approved by at least two-thirds of the member departments,
comprise the major policy recommendations of AASHTO for the direction of the future national surface
transportation program. Four major themes are represented therein:
Preservation - Preservation of the existing system should be the primary goal as this is key to the
economic health and vitality of this nation.
Congestion- An appropriate mix of modes and technologies should be used to increase capacity and
reduce congestion on this nation's surface transportation system.
Executive Summary - E23
Funding - User and benefitter fees should be dedicated solely to transportation improvements.
Safety - Commitment should be continued to improve the safety of this nation's surface transportation
system.
These major recommendations are to be read and considered with others made in this document for the
highway and public transportation programs. The recommendations made herein do not include all program-
matic details, either of the federal program itself or the intergovernmental processes at the state and local
government level that would be needed to support the new concepts included in the recommendations.
Further effort to develop these details will be necessary.
The following matrices (Figures A and B) show the major surface transportation programs for highways
and public transportation recommended by AASHTO. Shown for each program are the corresponding
administrative recommendations of AASHTO.
Executive Summary - E-24
AASHTO'S PROPOSED
HIGHWAY PROGRAMS
FEDERAL PROGRAMS AND
$18 B (FY-92) - $26 B (FY-95)
Executive Summary E-25 (Figure A)
RECOMMENDED POLICIES
CATEGORICAL
FLEXIBLE
FOR HIGHWAYS AND TRANSIT
HIGHWAY PROGRAM
HIGHWAY PROGRAM
EXISTING INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS AND
OTHER PRIMARY, RURAL SECONDARY,
ELIGIBLE FACILITIES AND
SERVICES
A PORTION OF A REDEFINED
URBAN ROUTES, OTHER FUNCTIONALLY
CLASSIFIED ROADWAYS
PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL SYSTEM
AND PUBLIC TRANSIT
0
Urban Mobility
0
Reconstruction & Rehabilitation
0
Suburban Congestion
0
Additional Urban Capacity
ELIGIBLE PROJECT TYPES
0
Rural Access
0
Pavement Preservation
0
Modal Interlinks
0
Additional Mileage Needs
0
Construction/Reconstruction
0
Bridge Needs
0
Rehabilitation/Preservation
0
Bridge Needs
0
Highway Planning & Research
0
ASSOCIATED PROGRAMS
0
2% Discretionary Bridge Program
Highway Safety Programs
0
Urban Element Hold Harmless
0
Highway Emergency Relief
ALLOCATIONS
0
Rural Element Hold Harmless
0
Highways to and on Federal Lands
0
0
Bridge Element Hold Harmless
2% Discretionary Bridge Program
FUNDING SOURCE
0
Highway Trust Fund Revenues
0
Highway Trust Fund Revenues
0
Factors: Statewide Lane Miles, VMT, Etc.
0
FY 91 Hold Harmless & Equitable Growth
FUNDING ALLOCATION
0
Prorata Share Of User Funds
0
Formula Allocation With 85% Minimum
0
PROCEDURE(S)
0
Set Donor/Donee Relationship
No Donor/Donee Relationship
0
0
1/2% Minimums
Some Transferability
0
Some Transferability
MATCHING RATIO
0
Around 85 Percent Federal
0
PROVISIONS
Determined By Individual States
PROJECT CERTIFICATION
0
PROCESS
Simplified Process
0
Annual Statewide Project List
BASIC INTERGOVERNMENTAL
o
Federal/State
0
State/Local
RELATIONS
AASHTO'S PROPOSED
TRANSIT PROGRAMS
FEDERAL PROGRAMS AND
Executive Summary E-26 (Figure B)
$3.5B (FY 92) - $5.0B (FY 95)
RECOMMENDED POLICIES
FOR HIGHWAYS AND TRANSIT
CATEGORICAL
FLEXIBLE
TRANSIT PROGRAM
TRANSIT PROGRAMS
ELIGIBLE FACILITIES AND
MAJOR PROJECTS ON EXISTING
PROJECTS ON EXISTING
AND
AND
SERVICES
FUTURE TRANSIT SYSTEMS
FUTURE TRANSIT SYSTEMS
On-going Operating Assistance
Rehabilitation Needs
Major Rehabilitation Needs
New Bus Service Needs
ELIGIBLE PROJECT TYPES
New Transit Systems
Small Urban & Rural Transit
New Transit Services
Broadened Type of Public
Transportation Projects
ASSOCIATED PROGRAM
Transit Planning & Research
No Associated Program Allocations
ALLOCATIONS
Elderly & Handicapped
Current Federal Fuel Tax
General Funds For Transit
FUNDING SOURCE (S)
Proportions Up to Current
Additional Amounts of The Federal
Funding Levels
Fuel Tax Over Current Funding Levels
Current Transit Formulas
FUNDING ALLOCATION
For General Funds
Discretionary Allocations
PROCEDURES (S)
New Transit Formula For Additional
Amounts of Federal Fuel Taxes For Transit
Same as Current Section 3
MATCHING RATIO
For New Starts and Extensions:
Same as Current Section 9 and
PROVISIONS
Priority to Project with
Section 18
Higher Local Share
PROJECT CERTIFICATION
Simplified Process
Annual Project List
PROCESS
BASIC INTERGOVERNMENTAL
Federal State
Federal\State
RELATIONS
Federal) Local
Federal\Local
Railroads
Goals and Policy Recommendations
The following are AASHTO's proposed goals to guide for the development of a healthy rail industry and
integrated surface transportation program to the year 2020, and its rail-related policy recommendations for
any future comprehensive federal surface transportation program.
The policy recommendations are not presented in any order of significance; rather, each recommendation
addresses a unique area of need within the rail industry. All are essential to the health and viability of the
railroad industry to the year 2020.
Railroad Goals
Preservation
To preserve rail service where it is in the public interest.
Impact and Benefit Assessment
To develop the ability to anticipate the economic, social and national defense impacts of railroad
abandonments on shippers, communities and highways. Also, to assess the relative benefits of rail and
highway system improvements.
Cost-Effective Investments
To implement programs that invest in railroad projects which are justified on their own merit and/or as
cost-effective alternatives to other improvements.
Rail Policy Recommendations
Provide for Access, Efficient Freight Movement and Congestion Relief
AASHTO believes that there is an appropriate federal role in funding rail related projects. Any
comprehensive national surface transportation program should include federal and state funding for track
rehabilitation and acquisition, construction of rail/truck transfer facilities, new rail connections and
industry relocation. This proposal meets the objectives of the Transportation 2020 process to preserve
rural access, provide modal interlinks and reduce urban and suburban congestion.
Review Federal Railroad Laws
AASHTO believes that Congress should review the body of law governing the rail industry in the same
manner it addressed economic deregulation through the Staggers Act. Laws which should be reviewed
include the Railway Labor Act, the Railroad Retirement Act, the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act,
Executive Summary - E27
and the Federal Employers' Liability Act. A redrafting of these laws is essential to allow the rail industry
to remain a viable part of the transportation system through the year 2020.
Provide for Traditional and High Speed Rail Passenger Service Needs
AASHTO believes that the continuation and further development of Amtrak is an appropriate federal
responsibility and in the national interest. In addition, AASHTO believes that the federal government
should support and participate in a public-privarte partnership to develop high-speed rail in those selected
corridors in which it will demonstrably relieve highway and airport congestion, and improve inner city
travel efficiency. Any comprehensive national transportation program must address rail passenger
service needs.
Assess the Competitive Environment
AASHTO believes that Congress should compare the laws, government policies and user fees impacting
the various transportation modes. Where a disparity is found, Congress should strive to create an
equitable balance.
Provide for Railroad Safety Improvement and Enforcement
Any future comprehensive national transportation program must continue to provide funds for separating
or otherwise protecting railroad - highway crossings. In addition, a federally funded state/federal
partnership of railroad safety inspections is required to assure that the rail industry complies with federal
safety standards. Also, federal research and development funding is essential in the areas of improved
warning systems (such as radar and sonar systems) and hazardous and nuclear materials transportation.
Water Transportation
Goals and Policy Recommendations
States, local government and the private sector generally bear the cost of port landside facilities. The
federal government maintains deep and shallow draft shipping channels and aids to navigation. An effective
water transportation network depends upon adequate landside connections to rail and highway facilities to
deliver or receive goods to or from areas far removed from the water. To ensure that all parties act to maintain
a viable water transportation network for the nation, there must be a comprehensive federal surface
transportation program which defines a water transportation network of national significance. The following
are AASHTO's goals and policy recommendations for the nation's water transportation system.
Executive Summary - E-28
Water Transportation Goals
Preservation
Preservation of a water transportation system should be a primary goal of a national transportation
program since the water mode is part of the intermodal freight movement of goods which supports the
nation's economic strength.
Funding
Established cost sharing programs should be continued. Funds generated by water transportation-related
activities from user fees, customs duties, etc. should be returned to the water transportation industry.
Federal funding for channel maintenance and for construction of water transportation facilities should
be secured to maintain an adequate water transportation system.
Safety
Aids to navigation, vessel inspections, environmental protection, drug interdiction, national defense, and
other Coast Guard activities are services to the entire nation. The safety of the public and water
transportation industry should be preserved.
Access
Intermodal connections between the water mode and other surface transportation modes should be
preserved and enhanced where there is a clear public benefit.
Water Transportation Policy Recommendations
Coordinated Water Transportation Plans
AASHTO encourages the Federal Government to establish clear priorities for federal investments in
ports and waterways. A national maritime policy is needed to guide federal, state, regional and local
efforts in a manner that will encourage the development of projects that best serve the interest of the
nation based on careful examination of the economic and environmental impacts of alternative actions,
while preserving the autonomy of non-federal entities.
National Ports and Waterways System
AASHTO believes that there is an appropriate federal role in the oversight of the operation, maintenance
and development of the nation's water transportation related projects. AASHTO urges the Federal
Government to develop a National Port and Waterways System which integrates water transportation
with its necessary intermodal connections into a surface transportation program.
Intermodal Connections
AASHTO urges the Federal Government to recognize the need for landside access improvements to our
nation's ports. Existing funding sources are inadequate to meet current and projected highway-port and
rail-port connector needs. An integrated surface transportation program must consider port landside
access improvements as part of federal funding programmed for highway and rail transportation modes.
Executive Summary - E29
Water Resource Development Act
AASHTO urges the Federal Government to fund 100 percent of the costs of feasibility studies for
deep-draft and inland harbor improvement projects. Improvements to the nation's deep-draft and inland
harbors generate benefits far beyond the local area, including reduced transportation costs, increased
competitiveness of U.S. goods in world markets and increased opportunities for national and regional
economic development.
User Fees
AASHTO believes that Congress should amend Section 208 of WRDA of 1986 which permits the
recovery of the non-federal share of the cost of an authorized project. The Act should be amended to
provide the ports greater flexibility in determining the method of assessing and allocating the non-federal
share of a project among port users.
Disposal of Dredged Material
AASHTO urges the Army Corps of Engineers, in close cooperation with ports and states, to establish
regional scientific criteria for disposal of dredged material, The criteria used must include a reasonable
margin of safety and should give consideration to the economics of dredged material disposal. Testing
procedures for dredged material disposal permit compliance must be standardized throughout the nation.
AASHTO also urges that the Federal Government develop a program to educate the public about the
economic necessity of dredging. The public's lack of hard information about dredged material increases
the likelihood that all dredged material will be lumped with sludge or toxic materials.
Research and Development
AASHTO believes that Congress should establish and fund an integrated Research and Development
Program for water transportation. The Navy, Coast Guard, Corps of Engineers and the Maritime
Administration should coordinate their research efforts within this National R&D Program to ensure the
most cost effective use of their individual R&D resources.
Waterfront Development Pressures
AASHTO encourages the Federal Government to investigate methods to increase the efficiency and
capacity of existing port terminals and their inland connections. AASHTO also encourages the devel-
opment of a national recreational boater education/safety program specifically aimed at operations near
ports and commercial vessels.
Executive Summary - E-30
Research, Development, and Technology Transfer
(RD&TT)
Goals and Policy Recommendations
The following goals and major policy recommendations reflect AASHTO's strategy for research,
development, and technology transfer.
There is no significance to the order in which these goals and policy recommendations are presented.
Each addresses a particular portion of AASHTO's strategy for RD&TT, and all are essential to the overall
goal - transportation innovation through RD&TT.
RD&TT Goals
Highway Research and Development Programs
Preserve and enhance the current system of highway research and development programs.
Intelligent Vehicle-Highway Systems
Develop and demonstrate intelligent-vehicle highway technology as an effective means of addressing
many of the problems on the highway network.
RD&TT - All Modes
Ensure that AASHTO's member departments are able to use RD&TT to develop innovative solutions to
problems in all modes of transportation.
RD&TT - Intermodal Issues
Ensure that intermodal issues that need to be researched are not overlooked because they do not fall
clearly under the scope of a single mode.
Application of Technology
Accelerate the application of new technology to solve transportation problems.
Coordination of RD&TT
Ensure that the necessary organizational framework and coordination exist for each research program to
carry out its role efficiently and for the total transportation RD&TT system to be fully effective.
Executive Summary - E31
Funding for RD&TT
Provide an appropriate level and a stable source of funding for transportation research, development, and
technology transfer programs, and ensure that resources are distributed for maximum effectiveness.
RD&TT Policy Recommendations
Highway Research and Development Programs
AASHTO believes that member-department research activities should be expanded to provide for more
effective problem solving at the state level.
AASHTO also believes that the National Cooperative Highway Research Program should be continued
and expanded for applied research on problems shared in common by state highway agencies and on
other problems of national significance.
AASHTO also believes that, to derive full benefit from the member departments' investment in the
Strategic Highway Research Program's Long Term Pavement Performance program, this component of
the SHRP program should be sustained for 15 years beyond 1991.
AASHTO further believes that the Federal Highway Administration's program of RD&TT should be
expanded to enable this program to more fully execute its role in fundamental research and technology
transfer.
Intelligent Vehicle-Highway Systems
AASHTO believes that Congress and the Administration should establish and support an adequately
funded national program to develop and demonstrate intelligent vehicle-highway systems.
RD&TT - All Modes
AASHTO believes that the Federal Highway Administration's research program should be considered
as a model for other transportation modes in conducting research requiring longer term, larger funding,
and special expertise.
AASHTO also believes that appropriate federal modal administrations within the U.S. DOT should
consider AASHTO's interests in the development of federally funded research programs.
AASHTO believes that consideration should be given to creation of a cooperatively funded research
program in each transportation mode modeled after the NCHRP. In particular, AASHTO should work
with the Urban Mass Transportation Administration, the American Public Transit Association, the
Transportation Research Board, and others to advance the prospects for a research program that would
have federally mandated set-aside funding and that would address AASHTO's research needs as
recommended in TRB's Special Report 213, Research for Public Transit.
AASHTO further believes that the Federal Aviation Administration should consider the initiative
currently being discussed within the aviation community to establish a National Cooperative Aviation
Research Program.
Executive Summary - E-32
RD&TT - Intermodal Issues
AASHTO and other transportation organizations and agencies should identify intermodal problems that
might benefit from research. AASHTO believes that if an intermodal problem includes a substantial
highway component, it should be considered for submittal as a candidate for NCHRP funding.
AASHTO believes that when interest in an intermodal research need is shared by several member
departments, it should be evaluated as a candidate for pooled funding using a system modeled after the
relevant parts of AASHTO's Joint Development process and other pooled fund efforts.
Application of Technology
AASHTO believes that the FHWA and other modal administrations of the U.S. Department of Trans-
portation should increase their implementation activities for the purpose of moving thoroughly evaluated
technology into practice. Technology assistance programs, training, demonstration and experimental
projects, and related activities should be continued and expanded.
AASHTO further believes that obstacles to the private sector's introduction of innovations into the
highway market place should be eliminated, and that recent initiatives by Regional Associations of State
Highway and Transportation Officials and the FHWA need to be extended to explore more effective
mechanisms for testing, evaluating, and reporting on newhighway products and materials for the purpose
of reducing the time and cost of technology introduction and to encourage industry to invest in R&D for
highway markets.
Coordination of RD&TT
AASHTO should expand its activities aimed at identifying new research opportunities and ensuring that
member departments' interests are reflected in research priorities for national-level programs.
AASHTO believes that the member departments should have a strong voice in setting the nation's
transportation research agenda. The states through AASHTO should continue to provide the vision and
guidance that will permit transportation research programs to address future needs and opportunities as
well as current problems. The states should be responsible for setting research goals and priorities.
AASHTO believes that improvements in computerized information systems will continue to be needed
to minimize the possibility of undesirable duplication of research. AASHTO should take a lead role in
working with the Federal Highway Administration, the Transportation Research Board, and other
appropriate organizations to develop a database of domestic publicly funded research project informa-
tion--for proposed, in-progress, and completed studies.
AASHTO further believes that activities of the newly formed Highway Research Coordinating Council
should be continued to ensure that major sponsors of highway research are aware of each other's programs
and will work together for a more coordinated system.
Executive Summary - E33
Funding for RD&TT
AASHTO believes that the recent decline in transportation RD&TT spending should be reversed to reflect
current needs and opportunities, and to bring the scale into line with research spending in other industries,
with transportation RD&TT spending in other developed countries, and with past levels of transportation
RD&TT spending in the U.S.
AASHTO believes that funding of transportation research of national significance is a basic responsibility
of the federal government in its leadership role in advancing new technologies to serve the public and in
its fiduciary role in utilizing national resources efficiently. Federal funding, through federal user taxes,
should continue to be a principal source of funding for research to permit needed technological
advancements to occur.
AASHTO believes that allocation of federal-aid funds for support of transportation RD&TT should be
based on specified formulas applied to annual apportionments.
AASHTO also believes that specific amounts should be allocated annually, and matched equally by
private-sector and other participants, for a coordinated public/private program to develop and demon-
strate intelligent vehicle-highway systems.
AASHTO further believes that funding for the Highway Planning and Research program, FHWA's
RD&TT activities, and the IVHS program should be derived from federal-aid highway allocations before
the split into the categorical and flexible programs recommended by AASHTO.
Executive Summary - E-34
Chapter 1
Transportation and a More Competitive
United States Economy
Over 70 years ago, the United States Congress initiated federal involvement in this nation's surface
transportation systems by creating the Federal-aid Highway Program. From its inception, this federal
program has provided vital financial assistance for state-administered highway systems. The rationale
for this federal involvement in surface transportation was the national economic need for a network
of roadways to serve interstate commerce and travel.
In the 1960's, Congress expanded its support for surface transportation to include public transporta-
tion, and in 1982 it chose to support both highways and transit from highway user fees.
In the 1970's, Congress temporarily expanded federal support for surface transportation by providing
financial assistance to railroads both directly and through the states, for the purpose of helping
rehabilitate railroad equipment and trackage.
Today the citizens of this nation enjoy the convenience and economic benefits of a surface transpor-
tation system second to none. This system was made possible largely through the federal surface
transportation programs established by the U.S. Congress and implemented under the direction of the
enduring cooperative federal-state partnership.
There is obvious need to assure an adequate national transportation system for Americans. In making
transportation decisions the nation must take into account such factors as the different transportation
requirements of the states and their local governments, urban and suburban congestion, rural
development needs, changing demographics, and increasingly diverse economies and lifestyles across
the country. The need is for new transportation concepts for a new century.
The New Challenge
In recent years, particularly during the past decade or so, the post World War II era of an overwhelming
American domination of the world economy has diminished. What inevitably had to happen, did
happen. Other nations caught up to us, and some passed us. Workers in the Far East, Central Europe
and Latin America now supply a goodly amount of the world's material needs; needs that in earlier
times were produced in greater degree by American companies and American workeers. No one
expects this revolution in world economics to soon be reversed, if ever. Instead, America must respond
to this new economic age with the new skills, new resources and new energies that are imperative for
American prosperity and well-being in a new and ever-changing economic age.
The new economic world, in a word, is vastly more competitive than it ever before has been. American
business and industry, even the whole of the nation itself, in order to survive and prosper, must
constantly replenish its competitive toolbox--with ingenuity, with quality, with reliability, with
responsiveness, and with prices that are competitive with those of other nations.
Among the many things that are needed for a highly competitive America is a high
quality, highly efficient transportation network on which to ship American materials
1-1 Transportation and a More Competitive U.S. Economy
and products. Goods transportation alone is not the only answer; but there can be a competitive
America only with good transportation.
When transportation works well, and for the most part the American transportation network does work
reasonably well today, it is not easy to readily perceive the magnitude of transportation's influence
on the American economy. But consider this:
Inbound and outbound transportation costs constitute as much as 25 percent of product prices for
some industries, and many hover in the 8 to 12 percent bracket.
Over 21 percent of all average household expenses are to pay for personal transportation costs.
Surveys show that 11 percent of all labor force hours are spent in some form of highway travel.
Transportation is the parent of nearly one in every five dollars of U.S. gross national product.
Even marginal efficiencies in this massive transportation system can pay big dividends toward. a more
productive nation.
Efficiency in All of Transportation
When we speak of a more efficient transportation network, certainly a more productive movement of
people and goods on the nation's roads and highways is of the upmost importance. But efficient and
reliable rail service, and water transport as well, is also critical to national competitiveness. A rapidly
growing, very mobile services industries depends upon quality air service, and their competitive
position in a world of ideas and ingenuity may be threatened by our increasingly congested airways
and airports. Better public transportation to alleviate the longer and longer time required to go to and
from work in our urban areas is an urgent need.
In short, each transportation system, each mode must become more and more efficient for the nation
to reach its competitiveness goals.
However, even fully efficient single transportation systems, if operated and used in mono-modal
fashion, will not be adequate for the international competition that portends for the 1990's and the
21st century. Instead, we need to exploit the vast possibilities that are inherent in intermodalism--a
network of pipeline, rail, waterborne, air and motor vehicle transportation services, each doing what
it can do best to reduce transportation costs and thereby stimulate economic growth.
In the report America In Transition, The International Frontier: Report of the Task-Force on
Transportation Infrastructure, the National Governor's Association comments on the need for
intermodal coordination this way:
"Transportation issues increasingly cut across traditional boundaries of transportation modes
and governmental agency jurisdictions firms have responded with pricing, marketing,
technological, and operating changes that have altered domestic and international freight and
passenger flows dramatically Yet government programs have not kept pace with these
changes. Transportation policies, laws, and regulations are uncoordinated, inconsistent and
often incomplete when it comes to adequately meshing intermodal concerns In the future,
as the global economy requires more interconnections, the ability of people and products to
1-2 Transportation and a More Competitive U.S. Economy
transfer from one mode of transportation to another in moving across continents or oceans
will become even more essential."
A Bigger Investment in Transportation
Among the myriad of ideas and suggestions with respect to every aspect of what ought to be the
nation's transportation future, and in part the nation's economic future, there is one constant: the nation
invests much less in transportation than it did a decade or two ago; the nation continues to invest less
than is needed even to maintain current services, let along improve the quality of transportation; but
the nation must invest more in transportation, much more, if it is to keep pace with a growing America
and if it is to regain its competitive edge in a dynamic world economy.
The National Council on Public Works Improvement said in Fragile Foundation, its recent report to
the President and Congress:
"After two years of study, the National Council on Public Works Improvement has found
convincing evidence that the quality of America's infrastructure is barely adequate to fulfill
current requirements, and insufficient to meet the demands of future economic growth and
development.
A declining infrastructure inevitably will jeopardize the productivity of our economy and
our quality of life. Failure to reverse this decline will exact a high price for the nation in the
future, both in the cost of deferred investment and in reduced economic competitiveness.
Therefore, the Council recommends a commitment, shared by all levels of government, the
private sector, and the public to vastly improve America's infrastructure. Such a commitment
could require an increase of up to 100 percent in the amount of capital the nation invests each
year in new and exciting public works."
In its report card on the condition of the nation's public works, the Council found serious and
impending transportation infrastructure problems. Our nation's highways were given only a C+, with
the comments that "spending for system expansion has fallen short of need in high-growth urban and
suburban areas," and that, "many roadways and bridges are aging and require major work." Transit
fared worse, with only a C-, while aviation did a little better with a B- report card. Overall, the Council
found little to cheer in its appraisal of the nation's transportation infrastructure.
These challenging findings were corroborated in detail in the AASHTO report, Keeping America
Moving, The Bottom Line which summarized national surface transportation requirements for the next
three decades:
"Current levels of spending for the nation's surface transportation system have been inade-
quate. The publicly supported elements of the surface transportation system have declined in
total value since the 1970's, and the nation now is, in effect, disinvesting in surface
transportation infrastructure.
Continuing current levels of funding into the future, discounting any effect of inflation, will
result in a $1,000 increase in vehicle operating cost per household; public transportation
services will deteriorate, and the nation's mobility will suffer."
1-3 Transportation and a More Competitive U.S. Economy
The Bottom Line goes on to say that current investments must be increased by at least 20 percent (in
constant dollars) over the next three decades just to maintain the current service and physical condition
of the nation's highway and road system. "However, even at this funding level analyses show service
is likely to deteriorate in some areas of the nation and on some highway systems." A total 50 percent
increase is needed to maintain current service and physical conditions at today's level, expand capacity
enough to accommodate future travel growth, and to improve current service levels to tolerable
standards.
Without More Money for Transportation, The Economy Will Suffer
"Now we face tough competition from other countries for markets--domestic and foreign.
We need to produce and deliver goods and services with a high degree of efficiency at a
competitive price. Because the cost of doing business is influenced by how well we move
goods and people across town, across country, and around the world, our economic perfor-
mance is tied to the quality of our transportation services and facilities." NGA report, America
In Transition.
Recently, AASHTO, a community of transportation professionals, has come to more fully appreciate
the important role that more efficient, higher quality transportation services may play in making
America a more productive and competitive nation. But we still know far too little about the
interrelationships of transportation systems with efficient operations of the nation's economy.
In that vein, economists and transportation professionals across the nation were very intrigued by
reports in the fall of 1988 of the research of Dr. David A. Aschauer, Chicago Federal Reserve Bank,
into the correlations between the several decades long decline in American productivity and the
correlary decline in public infrastructure investment. Here is a summary of Dr. Aschauer's findings:
" what economists call 'total factor productivity' growth has slumped during the past decade
and a half in the United States the annual growth rate in the private business economy has
plummeted from 1.5 percent during the 1950's and 1.8 percent throughout the 1960's to .8
percent in the 1970's and a dismal .7 percent in the first half of the present decade Not
only has productivity growth fallen over time, but it has tumbled relative to the experience
of our major international competitors as well."
" there are deeper implications of the national neglect of our public facilities for the health
of the United States economy. Indeed, I have uncovered striking evidence that the recent
fall-off in public works spending is at the very core of the productivity slowdown."
"Productivity clipped long at a 2 percent annual rate during 1950 to 1970, while the net public
stock expanded by 4.1 percent per year. However, after 1970 the rate of increase in the public
capital stock fell to a mere 1.6 percent per year, bringing with it a slump in productivity growth
to a miserly .8 percent annual rate."
"This strong, positive correlation between productivity and non-military public sector invest-
ment is confirmed by looking across highly developed countries. Indeed, our ability to
compete with other nations in the Group of Seven has been eroded by the low level of public
investment in the United States. Japan, and to a lesser degree other members of the G-7,
have sustained higher levels of public investment and have reaped the harvest of higher
productivity growth."
1-4 Transportation and a More Competitive U.S. Economy
"Thus, a root cause of the decline in the competitiveness of the United States in the
international economy may be found in the low rate at which our country has chosen to add
to its stock of highways, port facilities, airports and other facilities which aid in the production
and distribution of goods and services we as a country should be vitally concerned with the
viability of our economic lifelines that enable us to meet the challenge of an increasingly
competitive world marketplace."
It should be patently clear that, if America is to maintain its economic leadership in the world economy
and avoid the negative and costly effects of inaction, the nation must commit the required, but
affordable, moneys that are needed to preserve and improve its transportation system. Anything less
will have dire consequences for our nation's economic vitality, and result in a diminished economic
legacy that we pass on to future generations.
The remaining chapters of this report outline the air, rail, highway, mass transit, water transport and
research policies and programs that will guide the development of the effective American transpor-
tation network that is needed for the kind of an America and its economy that we envision for the 21st
century.
1-5 Transportation and a More Competitive U.S. Economy
Chapter 2
Aviation
Part I
Introduction
The federal role in aviation began with early international conventions that focused on national
sovereignty, rights in airspace, and international uses and controls. From aviation's earliest begin-
nings through today, the need for unquestioned federal supremacy in aviation has marked Congress's
legislative efforts. The first federal interests in airports established that state governments would be
viewed the same as local governments. It is only recently that narrowly defined references to states
or state agencies have appeared in federal aviation legislation.
The national air transportation system in place today is the direct result of a federal/local government
partnership. The federal partner regulates aircraft and airmen, énsures safety, equips and operates the
air traffic control system, and administers an airport grant program. The local partner provides the
surface intermodal link - the airport.
Today our national air transportation system is troubled. The air traffic control system continues to
exhibit labor unrest. The federal National Air Space Plan to replace antiquated equipment is seriously
behind schedule and over budget. Our locally owned airports suffer critical capacity constraints at
key locations. Little or no effort by local airport sponsors address this urgent need. The consolidation
of the airlines and their continued move to hub and spoke type operations further aggravate the lack
of airport capacity.
Our nation faces an immediate need to restructure the aviation system for current and long- range
needs. This effort must clearly define federal, local and state roles within the system. Local authority
to constrain airport capacity or to choose to not build to meet demand cannot continue. An increased
and well defined state role similar to the surface modes can ensure future airport capacity.
Historical Background
On December 17, 1903 man first flew powered, heavier-than-air aircraft. Since that recent event the
aviation mode of travel has developed into the dominant means of national and international
commercial passenger travel. The Air Commerce Act enacted in 1926 established the initial federal
role in aviation. This act provided for federal regulation of pilots and aircraft and the establishment
and operation of the first air traffic control system. The act prohibited any federal role in the
establishment of airports.
The initial federal role in airports occurred in the 1928 Act Relating to Public Airports. Congress
authorized the leasing of public lands for use as public aviation fields. In the 1940 Washington
National Airport Act, Congress granted the Civil Aeronautics Administration, the forerunner of the
Federal Aviation Administration, authority to operate Washington National Airport.
2-1 AASHTO Aviation Recommendations
In 1946, the Federal Airport Act gave federal assistance to develop a comprehensive system of airports.
It was this program that recognized and reinforced the federal/local government partnership present
in our national air transportation system today. The passage of the Federal Aid Airport Act created
a program that by law could not differentiate state versus local government roles, and it ultimately led
to the dominant local government role in airports today.
The Federal Aviation Act of 1958 defines "State agency" only as it relates to air carrier economic
regulation as administered by the now sunset Civil Aeronautics Board. The Airline Deregulation Act
of 1978 did require that the Federal Government consult with the states in the administration of the
Essential Air Service Program.
The Airport and Airway Development Act of 1976 established a pilot project under which four states
administered the portion of the airport program for their general aviation airports in a one-year
demonstration program. The Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1987 included a similar state
block grant pilot program provision for up to three states for FY90 and FY91. This law included the
provision for state sponsorship for projects benefiting two or more airports. This represents the
federally defined state role in aviation.
Federal funding of the aviation programs reinforces the federal/local relationship. Formal federal
funding of a national airport program began in 1946. The 1970 Airport and Airway Development
and Revenue Acts created a trust fund for user fees, no longer providing general funds for airports.
In these programs, federal funds matched local contributions with little or no acknowledgement of
state participation.
The aviation needs we face today and tomorrow cannot be adequately addressed by old partnerships
or paid for from current dedicated funding sources. We must redefine the system, establish specific
federal/state/local roles, provide for the means to fund programs that will ensure that the capacity of
the system adequately serves the travel needs of the nation and thereby contributes to our economic
well-being.
In September, 1988, Leno Menghini, President of AASHTO, requested that the AASHTO Standing
Committee on Aviation undertake an effort that would result in an aviation mode component of the
Transportation 2020 effort. Major elements of the aviation effort were identified as an evaluation of
the requirements of the aviation mode through the year 2020, a review of all existing AASHTO policies
relating to the aviation mode, development of recommended AASHTO aviation policies, and
preparation of a document summarizing the above.
Future Outlook
The nation's air transportation system in the year 2020 probably will have undergone significant
changes from our system today. One possibility is that there will likely continue to be a diversity of
users but very possibly fewer and larger airlines providing service to the larger metropolitan areas.
Under such a scenario regional airlines could also be operating larger aircraft and serving fewer cities
as well. Smaller communities would continue to have problems accessing the national air transpor-
tation system. As a result, some form of commercial airline re-regulation could be considered in the
future. General aviation would continue to be the primary means of serving business and commercial
interests in smaller communities.
Aircraft to meet future aviation needs are expected to be safer, more fuel efficient and more
technologically complex, with newer engine types and airframes and more sophisticated navigation
2-2 AASHTO Aviation Recommendations
and communications systems. Age diversity could also characterize the aircraft fleet however, as
efforts are made to extend the lives of older aircraft. Experience levels of aircrew members could
show a gradual decline because of increased costs of training, greater use of simulation and reduced
availability of military trained airmen, a traditional source of airline pilots. At the same time,
forecasted growth in air travel will likely place increased demands on all the major components of
the air transportation system. The airspace system, one of the chief components, is finite and
competition for its use will almost certainly increase, and therefore increase the performance
requirements of both aircraft and aircrew.
One of the keys to the future of air transportation in this country, will be the ability of airports to keep
pace with growth. More passengers, more aircraft and more intensive use of the nation's airspace
will require a national aviation policy that ensures development of additional airport capacity, an
adequate means of funding airport expansion and a clearer definition of federal, state and local roles
in airport development.
Air Transportation Issues
The national air transportation system is the overwhelmingly dominant means of both domestic and
foreign commercial passenger travel today. The history of public/private cooperation in developing
this system is vital to its future. In order to ensure an air transportation system with a balanced capacity
for all users, the future national air transportation system must address these key issues:
1. Adequate airport and airspace system capacity with maximum
safety and guaranteed security.
2. A clearer definition of federal/state/local roles in aviation to
strengthen the public partnership.
3. A system of reasonable, equitable, and adequate federal user fees to fund a
well defined national airspace system.
4. The completion of the National Air Space Plan.
5. New and improved ground access systems for existing and new airports.
6. An adequate program of airport and aircraft inspection and maintenance.
7. Appropriate and uniform standards for environmental quality for airports.
8. The immediate application of new technology to every facet of aviation.
2-3 AASHTO Aviation Recommendations
Part II
Aviation Goals and Policy Recommendations
Safety
Goal: Through new and improved equipment, procedures, and aircraft maintenance practices, ensure the
safety of airline passengers and crews and enhance consumer confidence in the nation's air transportation
system.
Safety is one of the most critical issues in air transportation. It is the performance measure by which
the interaction of people, their machines and the other inanimate objects of human creation are judged.
Many parts of this complex system are subject to close regulation and oversight. The development
and design of all U.S. aircraft, for example, is subject to strict engineering and performance criteria.
Strict design criteria are employed in all federally funded airports. Aircraft operation, and use of the
nation's airspace is also strictly regulated, as are the operators of aircraft.
In an age of increasing aviation use it is vital that safety be of preeminent concern. Recent concerns
over aging aircraft, seemingly careless maintenance procedures, excessive traffic controller workloads
and lack of adequate training, apparent conflicts in military and civilian airspace use and inadequate
early warnings of severe weather conditions all point to the importance of this issue.
Implementation of the National Air Space Plan, along with the addition of collision avoidance systems
and advanced ground to air data links to provide weather information and position to pilots can create
more efficient utilization of the airspace. But, along with these innovations must go an adequate
system of repair and maintenance for facilities and equipment and a continuing program of training
and certification of personnel involved in critical operations.
Major Recommendation
AASHTO believes that safety should be the prime consideration of all aviation programs. The
following areas of concern should be closely monitored by the federal government and under
standards established at the federal level, to ensure the safety of crews, passengers, and people
on the ground: aging aircraft fleet; aircraft maintenance; increased air operations; constrained
airspace; military/civilian airspace conflicts; severe weather information; communications and
navigation aids; and pilot training.
Security
Goal: At the national and international level, establish adequate security procedures and enforce the
surveillance and monitoring of airport terminals, appurtenances and baggage areas to ensure passenger
safety.
Next to airline safety, probably no issue is so important to the air traveller as that of security. Reports
of terrorist attacks at major international airports and of weapons and explosives being clandestinely
smuggled aboard commercial airliners create public confusion and a pervasive apprehension that our
institutions are inadequately prepared to control such violence. Certainly airport users have every
2-4 AASHTO Aviation Recommendations
right to expect and even demand that adequate security measures be implemented to minimize such
dangers.
The current system is not completely effective, however. Financial constraints have prevented U.S.
airlines from keeping abreast with the development of newer technology that could be more effective
in screening weapons and plastic explosives. Owing to the lack of adequately trained security staff,
it has been difficult to identify and screen out dangerous objects, especially during peak travel periods
at major airports. In addition, U.S. airlines and some foreign flag carriers normally do not inspect
checked-in baggage.
A number of measures designed to combat terrorism have been implemented. Among them:
screening of flight line personnel; placing federal air marshals on flights; establishing in-flight and
ground security coordinators at airports; creating means for passenger separation; and providing
additional training for airline personnel. The International Federation of Airline Pilots Association
(IFALPA) has also approved procedures for immediate imposition of boycotts against unsecured
airports and countries that encourage terrorism.
It is apparent that most countries are willing to combat terrorism and are willing to implement laws
toward this end. One effective measure would be more uniform laws and legislation regarding terrorist
activities. Mandatory sentencing and rapid extradition would be appropriate complementary mea-
sures to add. Uniform standards for airport security, adequate funding for state-of-the-art security
systems, and adequate training for airport personnel are also needed. Check-in systems should be
redesigned to permit more thorough screening of passengers and baggage. Separation of departing,
arriving and transit passengers should be considered as a means to decrease the possibility of weapons
and drugs being transferred between passengers on different flights. Reliable and efficient baggage
inspection systems and electronic inspection of all air cargo are also measures that should be
implemented.
The issue of security is of such compelling magnitude that it has become a national public safety
concern and the Federal Government should assume primary responsibility in this area. The focus of
any security program should be on prevention, with emphasis on airport perimeter control, flight line
surveillance, and passenger and baggage screening. The rapidly changing methods and technologies
used by terrorists will require that investments continue to be made in the search for moreeffective
screening measures. Under federal guidance, the FAA, airports and airlines will need to work closely
together in implementing these measures without imposing unreasonable delays on airline passengers.
Major Recommendation
AASHTO believes that aviation security is an issue of compelling national significance, and that
it is a proper federal role to ensure that airport and in-flight operations are as secure as possible
from terrorist threats. This would entail the following:
(a) Security personnel are qualified and well trained.
(b) Adequate and reasonable security procedures are established and
properly monitored for the nation's commercial airport system.
(c) All cargo and baggage are adequately monitored.
2-5 AASHTO Aviation Recommendations
(d) New technology is brought to bear on security problems as soon as possible.
(e) Security features are incorporated into airport design.
Airport Capacity
Goal: Provide adequate capacity to meet current and projected air travel demands through the expansion
or conversion of existing airport facilities, where feasible, or the construction of new airport facilities.
According to current reports, at least 16 of the nation's primary commercial airports are congested.
By the year 2000, under present growth trends, over 40 large airports will have exceeded their practical
capacity. Also experiencing growth related problems are general aviation airports in major urban
centers. Here, in most cases, the problem is one of accommodating increasing numbers of based
aircraft at facilities that have only limited capabilities for expansion.
Several critical and interrelated factors affect the capacity of the nation's air transportation system.
Airport runways determine the number of aircraft that can physically take off and land in a given
period of time. Terminal facilities and gates control the number of passengers that can be accommo-
dated for passenger loading and unloading. The air traffic control system determines the number of
aircraft that can be safely guided in the terminal airspace around an airport. And the surface
transportation network serving the airport site affects the number of people that can access the terminal
facilities, either by highway or public transportation.
Commercial air service is a highly concentrated activity in the U.S. A relatively small number (72)
of the nation's 550 commercial airports account for roughly 90 percent of all passenger traffic. Airline
deregulation and evolving business strategies of the airline companies have accelerated the trend
toward hub and spoke operations since 1978. Increasing use of these radiating route patterns has
significantly contributed to the concentration of traffic at a relatively few airport nodes. Many of
these large hub airports are located within dense metropolitan areas, where they are becoming more
land locked by urban development that also imposes more stringent environmental standards on airline
operations. Noise curfews, aircraft and local flight pattern restrictions and limited aircraft operations
are prevalent at a number of the nation's primary airports today.
Despite advances in communications and rapid rail technologies that may lessen certain demands for
aviation in short-haul and certain communications dependent markets, the overall demand for aviation
is expected to continue its rapid growth, creating the need for major capacity expansions in the system.
Many present and already constrained hubs may become even more limited by airspace, land
acquisition, environmental, or surface transportation restrictions from expanding further at current
sites. New airport facilities will almost certainly be needed, and federal, state and local governments
will need to work closely together to identify and develop these new sites.
Completing implementation of the National Air Space System Plan offers great potential for more
efficient use of the airspace component of the air transportation system, and this should be a high
priority concern. Other recommendations for improving the efficiency of the airspace system such
as separation of landing approach traffic and improving procedures for instrument approaches should
also be developed. Some redistribution of traffic to alleviate peaking problems may also be possible.
Capacity allocation or peak hour pricing approaches could allow traffic flows to be spread more evenly
throughout the day, or among other airports serving the same area.
2-6 AASHTO Aviation Recommendations
For the long term, eventual automation of the terminal area air traffic control system is foreseen, along
with advanced weather detection systems and low altitude airport surveillance radar. Informal surveys
have also revealed a favorable potential for adding new capacity in many of the nation's major airport
cities, either through expansion of existing airports or development of new sites through conversion
of general aviation or military facilities. Another approach more conceptual in nature is the idea of
remote transfer airports or wayports. Shifting the transfer portion of intercontinental or transconti-
nental travel to another location would remove the constraints associated with new construction or
expansion in already developed metropolitan areas. Links with nearby cities could rely on short-haul
air service or high speed ground transportation.
Major Recommendation
AASHTO believes that Congress should establish a national aviation policy which would ensure
that needed capacity improvements at airports of national significance will be made irrespective
of airport ownership. These improvements should be made in a timely manner and at a level
which will satisfy forecasted demand.
Airport/Airway Systems
Goal: Define national and state airport/airway systems which will meet forecasted demand and provide
continued support for the nation's economic health and international vitality.
The National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) identifies some 3,243 existing airports and
466 new or replacement airports that meet established criteria for inclusion in the national plan for
development of public-use airports in the United States. This number represents only about 20 percent
of the total landing areas (airports, heliports, seaplane bases) in the U.S., but it includes the large
primary commercial service airports as well as a number of general aviation airports serving smaller
communities. Among the intended purposes of the NPIAS is to identify airport development projects
which may be eligible for federal aid. The federal financing of airports serves the primary purpose
of providing a national system of airports for interstate commerce. Definition of the NPIAS system
is such that over 97 percent of the U.S. population is within 20 miles of a NPIAS airport.
The ten-year needs (1986-1995) identified in the NPIAS have a budget requirement in excess of $24
billion, including federal, state, local and private costs. Approximately 72 percent of this cost will be
needed for development to increase airport capacity and expand the system of U.S. airports to handle
greater volumes of passengers and aircraft. The most significant portion of this amount will be needed
for development at the 278 primary commercial service airports that serve most of the nation's air
travellers. Reconstruction of airports to accept larger aircraft and longer non-stop flights, and
construction of new airports will be required as part of this development.
Under the NPIAS plan, major new airport construction will depend primarily on local initiative and
financing, as federal grant assistance may contribute no more than 20 percent of the total cost of new
airport development. Even with this, however, the NPIAS admits to possible physical or political
limitations to constructing new runways at all congested airports and cautions that other measures
"may be needed to limit delays at some locations." Measures recommended elsewhere include options
that range from traffic redistribution (capacity allocation or peak hour pricing); to airport conversion
(general aviation or military airports); to more conceptual approaches such as remote transfer airports
or wayports.
2-7 AASHTO Aviation Recommendations
Because of the enormous increases projected in air travel in the future and the already mounting
pressures to increase airport capacity at many of the nation's primary airports, some important
alternatives will be beyond the scope of local governments to address. State involvement may be
necessary in building new regional hub airports. Federal involvement will be needed in converting
military airports to civil use. And remote transfer airports will definitely require more direct federal
and state involvement. All of these concerns point to a need to reexamine the intent, purpose and
scope of the national plan for public use airports, with an aim toward focusing more strongly on truly
national, state and local interests in airport development and toward establishing more clearly defined
systems and funding approaches that reflect those interests.
Major Recommendation
AASHTO believes that a redefinition of the system of airports of national and state significance
should be completed by the federal and state governments. This system should receive funding
from a federal aviation trust fund supported by federal user's taxes.
AASHTO further believes that each state should identify a system of airports of state significance
and, unless otherwise limited by state law, establish, collect and distribute state aviation fees along
with eligible federal aviation funding, to assist in development and maintenance of this system.
Airport Ground Access
Goal: Through coordinated, multi-modal planning, determine current and future modal access needs and
implement improvements in a timely manner consistent with and in recognition of planned airport capacity
improvements.
Recent studies have identified 23 of 41 major airports as experiencing landside congestion. Simi-
larly, 16 airports are operating at or near airside capacity, four of which are under FAA operational
constraints due to the severe level of congestion. With passenger enplanements forecasted to double
current levels by the year 2000, and to double again by the year 2020, both landside and airside
congestion will significantly worsen without extensive improvements.
Currently, attention is being focused on the lack of airside capacity with little attention being given
to congestion on the landside. Airside demand obviously translates into landside demand and neither
can be addressed without the other. FAA considers airside congestion its number one problem, and
has been reluctant to fund major landside improvements because it considers them as a local
government responsibility. Due to this perception, landside access has not been adequately addressed
at the national level, nor in the comprehensive, continuing and cooperative planning processes carried
out by the states. The adequacy with which it has been addressed at the local level is also questionable,
since aviation planning is generally done independent of other modal planning.
A survey conducted by the AASHTO Modal Technical Advisory Committee provides the only
current, long-range, national-level estimate of off-airport access needs and this calculation was
intended only as an order-of-magnitude evaluation. The year 2020 needs estimate of $23.45 billion,
a very conservative estimate, clearly points to the severity of the landside access problem. Considering
that nearly 90 percent of all trips to and from airports are by private car and taxi, new and improved
highway facilities are crucial. Carefully planned rapid transit systems could accommodate a portion
of the airport access demand, but future needs estimates indicate only about 25 percent of the total
capital investment requirement for airport access would be applied to public transportation.
2-8 AASHTO Aviation Recommendations
It is clear that improvements to airside capacity must be accomplished by appropriate landside
improvements. However, under current practices, there are no assurances that such a coordinated
approach will be taken. One of the major issues to be faced for a successful aviation future is the
development of appropriate landside access plans and programs. If the future of aviation is critical
to this nation's economic growth and international vitality, priority must be given to landside access
improvements. In addition to requiring better coordination at all levels of government, increased
emphasis must be placed on landside access in the urban transportation planning process. Moreover,
landside access may require more funding emphasis from FAA, FHWA, and UMTA programs, and
increased funding from state, federal, and local general revenues. Additionally, the states must assume
greater responsibility for development of regional or major hub airports within their jurisdictions in
order to coordinate landside access needs and assure that a national airport/airway system, sufficient
to meet current and future demands, will be developed and maintained.
Major Recommendation
AASHTO believes a major constraint on meeting future air travel demand will be ground access,
both on and off airport.
AASHTO also believes that landside access should be a component of all airport master plans
and all comprehensive transportation plans.
AASHTO further believes that airport ground access should be eligible for funding as appropriate
from the Highway, Mass Transit and Airport and Airway Trust Fund Programs, with assistance
from the General Fund as needed. The funding should be flexible and should contain local and
state participation features.
Environment
Goal: Develop and promulgate adequate and uniform standards for environmental quality at airports and
airport environs.
Noise, air quality, toxic/hazardous wastes and the encroachment by incompatible land uses are all
airport-related environmental concerns. Although noise has been one of the most dominant environ-
mental concerns in airport operations, new emphasis is being placed on the airport's contributions to
air quality and hazardous wastes problems, as they become increasing sources of public concern.
Attempting to reduce airport-generated noise, vehicle emission, and hazardous materials and at the
same time provide a maximum level of service can often be conflicting goals. Actions to reduce
environmental concerns at an airport can impact groundside or airside service which could in turn
reduce the capacity of an airport.
Noise is one of the most dominant environmental concerns in airport operations. Some states presently
restrict land-uses near airports and some airport proprietors restrict aircraft operations because of
concerns for noise. Most of these operational restrictions occur in the form of capacity limiting
regulations that either establish passenger caps or bans on operations during certain hours, or impose
curfews on certain noisy aircraft. Aircraft manufacturers are required to meet federal noise standards
in the design of new aircraft. However, there are no uniform noise standards at the federal level
governing aircraft operations.
2-9 AASHTO Aviation Recommendations
Within the vicinities of urban air hubs, high levels of airport noise or the prospect of high levels of
noise act as a definite impediment to airport expansion as well as certain desirable forms of economic
development. Future airport expansions as well as development of new airport facilities must provide
for systematic consideration of the effects of noise. Uniform national standards on airport noise are
needed to establish a consistent national policy on airport funding for noise related improvements.
Air quality is becoming an increasing concern to the major urban areas in the United States. Airports
in these areas are becoming identified as a source of transportation related emissions. In addition to
the other environmental concerns, airport operators will have to deal with efforts to reduce emissions
from the aircraft, ground service vehicles and vehicles driving to the airport.
The need to clean up toxic conditions on or near airport properties and to replace leaking fuel tanks
is posing still another concern for the health and safety of the public. The responsibility for cleanup
of hazardous conditions on airport property lies with the airport owner. In many cases, the presence
of toxic substances in the soil and ground water is the result of past airport uses involving agricultural
operations or careless handling of fuels and solvents. The astronomical cost to clean up hazardous
wastes and the need to meet fuel storage and monitoring requirements could place a further financial
burden on many airport operators.
Many local governments are experiencing pressures to increase their tax base through land develop-
ment and from developers attempting to maximize their investment in properties. The resulting urban
growth around airports is bringing with it unsafe obstructions in flight paths, interference with
navigational and landing aids and potential for hazardous conditions for persons and property on the
ground. To respond to these conditions, local authorities are taking actions which constrain flight
activity and indicate movements toward eventual airport closures. At the local level, zoning and land
use ordinances that will provide for the orderly growth of each public use airport and the area
surrounding the airport must be implemented and strongly supported to be effective.
Major Recommendation
AASHTO believes that public concerns over airport noise, air quality and potentially toxic or
hazardous materials present at airport sites reflect a serious problem that could adversely affect
the future development of the nation's air transportation system.
AASHTO further believes that Congress, and other levels of government if they so desire, should
address this most serious problem and provide guidelines for federal, state and local governments
for ensuring environmental quality as an integral component of airport development.
Federal/State Roles
Goal: Clearly establish the federal role in the definition and funding of a national airport system with
appropriate input at the state level as to airport location and compatibility with state goals.
The separate and combined efforts of federal, state and local governments as well as the private sector
are required to achieve a balanced national air transportation system.
Public safety is and always has been the government's first concern in aviation. The current federal
role focuses on a system of facilities and services which are significant to the economic health and
vitality of the nation. The facilities include the landing areas of airports in the National Plan of
2-10 AASHTO Aviation Recommendations
Integrated Airport Systems. The services include standardization, operation, maintenance and regu-
lation of the nation's total airspace, aircraft and airmen.
Because of staggering projections of capacity problems at the nation's major airports during the study
period, the Federal Government, working in cooperation with state governments, should identify a
system of airports of national significance. This system should be funded from a federal aviation trust
fund supported by federal users taxes.
Security at major airports has become such a problem that the Federal Government should take a led
in the research and development of new aviation security technologies and measures, and make them
available to all airlines.
In summary, the primary role of the Federal Government should be:
1) To establish and maintain adequate standards that promote the safety and
security of aviation operations.
2) To operate and maintain the nation's airspace system.
3) To define, with the help of the states, a system of airports of national significance.
4) To collect and distribute federal aviation user taxes to help support an airport
system of national and state significance and the nation's airspace system.
The federal-state partnership so prevalent in highway development is absent or, at best, weak in
aviation development. State governments should and must play a larger role if the airport capacity
needed for the 21st century is to be achieved. Each state should identify and plan for a system of
airports of state significance and should establish, collect and distribute aviation taxes to develop and
maintain its system. States should also assume a more direct role in the administration of federal
aviation funds to better reflect state program priorities. State governments should also play a strong
role in locating and developing any new airports within their jurisdictions.
Local governments, including municipalities, counties and authorities currently own 85 percent of the
commercial airports and 61 percent of the nation's total public use airports. The primary role of local
governments should be to develop and maintain the airport facilities they own to serve the public as
part of the national and state airport system. Federal and state governments should provide financial
and technical assistance to help accomplish this role.
Major Recommendation
AASHTO believes that it is a proper federal role to operate and maintain the nation's airspace
system. The FAA should develop and implement the National Airspace System Plan as quickly
as possible.
Major Recommendation
AASHTO believes that states should play a strong role in locating, developing and expanding
airports within their jurisdictions; that states should assume a more direct role in
administering federal aviation funds allocations unless otherwise limited by state
2-11 AASHTO Aviation Recommendations
law; and that states should have greater responsibilities for funding and operating airports within
their boundaries.
Revenue and Funding
Goal: Maximize utilization of existing funding reserves, and develop additional funding at all levels of
government, through user and other appropriate fees, to properly ensure the efficient and safe operation of
existing airports and the nation's airspace system and the development of an airport system of national and
state significance.
The Airport and Airway Trust Fund was created in the Airport and Airway Development and Revenue
Acts of 1970. Funding for the Airport Development Aid Program and the air traffic control system
(airways) with dedicated user fees was intended. From the first appropriations process in 1971 the
trust fund has generated an operating surplus, and the federal aviation program has received a general
fund supplement. That both the aviation trust fund and the general fund are within the unified federal
budget has not well-served the user pay philosophy. Accounting procedures that carry forward 18
years of authorized but unobligated balances and prior year deferred obligation authority, estimated
at $5,285,000,000, and that report a trust fund end of year unexpended balance for FY 1988 estimated
at over $11,000,000,000, have little meaning when the same Congressional Budget Office report
includes:
"The accumulated surplus is only an accounting measure, and as such its meaning
must be carefully circumscribed.
"The current accumulated surplus in the aviation trust fund is illusory."
"If users had been required to cover the full, private-sector share of aviation
spending since 1971, aviation excise taxes would have had to be raised."
The Airport and Airway Trust Fund must be removed from the unified budget. The revenue side of
aviation funding is confusing. The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 removed all control of airline
fares, yet we maintain a budgetary dependence based upon 8 percent of these independent and varying
airline ticket prices. Frequent flyer coupons, free up-grades, and airline passes dilute the 8 percent
excise tax to a significant but unknown extent. Ticket tax revenue for FY 1988 is projected at
$2,815,000,000. This represents 88 percent of trust fund revenues and 97 percent of outlays for the
same period.
The outlay side of the program is somewhat clearer. Efforts to limit trust fund outlays to airport and
airway funding have, to a significant extent, been successful. However, demands for full funding of
the Federal Aviation Administration, the completion of the costly National Air Space Plan, greater
airport capital funding and a trigger provision to reduce by half the ticket, air cargo, and fuel taxes in
1990 greatly confuse future federal aviation funding.
The assumption of a trust fund surplus continues to deter needed federal action to reevaluate the user
pay concept. There is a need to limit system costs, provide adequate and safe service to the user, and
determine an equitable and adequate funding program which must not be included in the federal
unified budget.
2-12 AASHTO Aviation Recommendations
Major Recommendation
AASHTO believes that a dedicated trust fund supported by equitable user fees should support the
national air transportation system, including airports of both national and state significance.
Reasonable consideration for public use and benefit also justify continued general fund support
of this system.
AASHTO also believes that user funded trust funds for transportation should not be included in
the federal unified budget.
AASHTO further believes that a federal-state partnership that also provides an appropriate role
for local and private participation, if properly coordinated to establish responsibility, will produce
adequate funding resources to ensure needed system capacity.
Economic Development
Goal: Direct and indirect economic benefits from aviation are quite significant, thus, greater flexibility
should be given to state and local governments to consider economic development as a factor in the
administration of air transportation improvement programs.
Major hub airports are powerful economic generators. They are often among the largest employers
in a region, and may contribute many billions of dollars annually to a state's economy. Important
industry location decisions are influenced by the presence of an airport hub. Geographic distributions
of businesses and industries dependent on air service are often confined to within a one-hour's drive
from a major airport. Companies for which transportation is one of the primary requisites of local
services provided, are particularly desirous of close-in locations. This would include central and
branch administrative offices of major companies, freight oriented distribution companies and certain
manufacturing industries that use relatively small or high value to weight components in their
manufacturing processes. Convention, trade and tourism industries that contribute significantly to
the economies of major cities also depend heavily on the presence of a major hub airport.
In smaller communities, the presence of a general aviation airport capable of accommodating business
aircraft often proves to be a deciding factor in locating a branch manufacturing plant. In such cases
where rail or truck transportation is available to readily access markets, local land costs and services
are favorable and work force quality is high; a relatively modest initial investment of capital to upgrade
a runway or install terminal navigation aids could translate into a significant percentage gain in local
wealth in the form of increased income and associated industry development.
Economic development is currently not a factor in federal funding for airports. Criteria for grants to
smaller airports, that require certain minimum levels of operation to justify expenditures, however,
effectively act as constraints to local economic development. States should assume a stronger role in
airport development, and should have greater flexibility in programming available federal airport
improvement funds to support state economic development priorities.
Major Recommendation
AASHTO believes that economic development should be an element for consideration in all state
and federal comprehensive transportation planning and development for airports.
2-13 AASHTO Aviation Recommendations
New Technology
Goal: Give major emphasis to new technology, research and development, and the expedient application
of innovations that improve security and safety, increase efficiency, and ameliorate environmental impacts.
The world we live in is changing rapidly. At the beginning of the 20th Century we could only dream
of powered flight. Today routine flights by orbiting space shuttles and supersonic aircraft (SST's)
are a reality. In fact, the combined advances in transportation and communications have led to the
coining of a phrase, "Global Village" that accurately reflects the ease with which even remote parts
of the world can be accessed.
Projections for the future are that world air travel, measured in revenue passenger miles, will double
by the year 2000. To accommodate this demand the world airline fleet must increase by 40 percent
over the same period. Two primary directions for change in aircraft serving this demand are expected
to be in the development of hypersonic aircraft and changes in conventional designs in the short to
medium range classes. The short to medium haul market is also expected to be impacted by tilt rotor
technology currently under development.
Technological advances and improved economic performance could provide a viable second gener-
ation SST by the year 2000. The short take off and landing (STOL) aircraft have found application
in the regional airline industry, where generally smaller airports are served. In addition, STOL aircraft
tend to have significantly less noise impacts on adjacent land uses, particularly in highly developed
areas. New tilt rotor technology (VTOL), being jointly developed for the military by Boeing and Bell
Textron could find commercial application in the future. Such an aircraft would have the vertical take
off and landing capability of a helicopter, and the cruise speed, range and fuel economy of fixed wing
aircraft. Their impact could be particularly felt in the city-center to city-center market and in feeding
large remote regional jetports from city centers.
Improvements in engine technology will center on fuel efficiency, nose reduction and improved
reliability. The high bypass ratio engines now coming on line and under development will be more
fuel efficient and less costly to maintain. Noise levels are also expected to be significantly lower than
present turbofan engines. Aircraft frames are expected to undergo an evolution as well. Long haul
aircraft will likely increase in size to nearly 600 passengers in capacity, to nearly Mach 0.9, in speed,
and in non-stop range to approximately 7000 nautical miles. Medium haul markets will likely see the
introduction of newer intermediate sized aircraft with improved engine technology and aerodynamics
and having seating capacities of 150 to 200 persons. Regional carriers are expected to stay with small
turboprop and turbofan aircraft until the mid 1990's when tiltrotor technology may begin to come into
service.
Advances in air traffic control technology are expected to significantly affect the use of airspace in
the future. By the year 2000 there is expected to be a substantial reduction in the number of enroute
and approach control facilities as newer computer systems integrate these functions. Most current air
navigation systems will no longer be in use by the year 2020. Newer satellite based systems such as
the Global Positioning System (GPS) will provide terminal, enroute and surveillance service to aircraft
worldwide. Key advances in weather technology are also expected to improve margins of aircraft
safety and provide better preflight and inflight use of weather information. Improved collection and
reporting of aviation weather will occur through increased use of computers and satellite communi-
cations technology. Along with this will be increased use of cockpit display, on board microcomputer
processing systems that provide continuous ground-to-air data links and electronic collision avoid-
2-14 AASHTO Aviation Recommendations
ance systems. In addition, low level windshear alert systems (LLWAS) will provide pilots and
controllers vital information on hazardous surface weather conditions.
Several new technologies are now available and others are emerging for detection of hazardous
substances and drugs. E-scan systems that differentiate between organic and inorganic materials,
thermal neutron activation that relies on gamma radiation, and back and forward scattered x-ray
systems that allow detection of plastics, drugs and agricultural products offer great potential for
screening passengers and baggage more efficiently and accurately.
The combined effects of advances in technology could have a profound effect on air transportation
in the future. Hypersonic speeds may become a reality in intercontinental markets. Safer, quieter and
more fuel efficient aircraft are possible with new airframe and engine technologies. Improved
navigation, weather and communications technologies could contribute significantly to safer and more
efficient use of airspace and detection of hazardous weather conditions. Advances in STOL and
VTOL technologies could extend service at land locked airports and provide better links to dense
urban centers. And better detection and surveillance technology could be employed to ensure airport
and airline security. The Federal Government along with state and local governments and the airline
industries will have to work closely together to bring these advances into practical use.
Major Recommendation
AASHTO believes that the many positive gains from research and new development will continue
to be of enormous benefit to air transportation. National air transportation system providers, both
public and private, should ensure that programs and services they provide are managed such that
immediate and maximum benefits of new technology will occur.
Air Cargo
Goal: Movement of freight by air is an important and growing part of our national economy, and as such,
its needs must be considered in the planning, design and operation of airports with special emphasis on
ground access requirements.
As far as passenger service is concerned, aviation has had little competition from other transportation
modes due to the speed with which an aircraft can cover long distances. However, cargo or freight
faces a different set of circumstances than the individual passenger. Railroads, shipping, and trucking
are vastly superior in their ability to move large quantities of material efficiently. As an alternative
to air shipping, they are unsurpassed, except in the amount of time utilized. If the commodity is a
high-value item that is particularly sensitive to time, air freight is the only possible choice. As
technology produces larger lifting bodies capable of carrying tremendous amounts of air freight, the
intermodal choice may begin to swing toward aviation. There are some commodities which will
probably always be transported by rail, water, or truck.
Notwithstanding the above, air cargo has been a success story for the 1980's with a growth of nearly
60 percent between 1983 and 1987. The industry should continue to grow because of a combination
of factors. Some of these are:
a) Products have become smaller especially in the electronics field, and in many
cases more expensive.
2-15 AASHTO Aviation Recommendations
b) Because of the time savings involved, companies can often save money on
other costs such as interest on debt.
c) There is a trend toward just-in-time inventory management which encourages
the use of air cargo.
d) Movement of perishable goods from other countries is now practical because
of international air cargo.
e) The availability of large, fuel-efficient jets has enhanced air cargo.
f) Overnight package delivery, necessitating the use of air freight, has become
commonplace in today's market.
This increase in air cargo does place further strain on currently overcrowded airports and airspace.
This is lessened somewhat, however, because air cargo travels considerably in off-peak periods,
particularly at night.
Major Recommendation
AASHTO believes air cargo is an emerging major component of aviation economics and should
be taken into consideration in all planning and operational studies of airports and airspace.
2-16 AASHTO Aviation Recommendations
Chapter 3
Highways and Public Transportation
Part I
Introduction
Over 70 years ago the United States Congress initiated federal involvement in this nation's surface
transportation systems by creating the Federal-aid Highway Program. From its inception, this federal
program has provided vital financial assistance for state-administered highway systems. The rationale
for this federal involvement in surface transportation was the national economic need for a network
of roadways to serve interstate commerce and travel.
In the 1960s Congress expanded its support for surface transportation to include public transportation,
and in 1982 it chose to support both highways and transit from highway user fees.
Historical Background
Since the establishment of the Federal-aid Highway Program in 1916, several significant steps have
been taken in arriving at today's level of federal involvement in surface transportation:
The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1921 initiated the intercity highway network which became the
foundation for today's Primary System;
Originally authorized in 1944, the nation's commitment to the Interstate and Defense Highway
System was reinforced in 1956 by the creation of the Federal Highway Trust Fund;
During the 1960s, the Federal Aid Highway Safety Act by Congress outlined safety standards for
vehicular and highway design;
The Federal Housing Act of 1961 along with the creation of the Urban Mass Transportation
Administration (UMTA) in 1964 established federal funding for transit;
In the federal Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA) of 1982, highway and transit needs
were both recognized as the first major federal highway user fee increase since 1959 was enacted
by Congress.
In framing the federal Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act (STURAA)
of 1987, Congress closely followed the major features they approved in the federal STAA of 1982.
The 1987 Act in part continued the consensus that has supported the highway program since the birth
of the Interstate and Defense Highway System in 1956, by providing funding for construction of that
System through 1991; but at the same time, Congressional intent was clear that this is the last such
funding to be provided. The time for a new consensus on the mission of the nation's highway system
has come.
3-1 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
That a new consensus on the nation's highway program is needed was highlighted by another action
of Congress in the 1987 Act. The major change in the 1987 Act over past highway legislation came
as Congress, for the first time in history, committed significant sums of Highway Trust Fund monies
to a large number of "demonstration projects." This action was against traditional practice in-the
federal-aid highway program, which historically has placed programming responsibility in the states.
Turning to public transportation, the 1980s saw a continual decline in the federal share of transit
support. At the same time, total state support for public transportation has been increasing, to where
combined state support nationally now exceeds federal support. The 1987 Act included support for
public transportation. But for both public transit and the federal-aid highway program, the funds
authorized and apportioned were less than available in the Highway Trust Fund and its Mass Transit
Account.
The nation faces the need to redefine and refocus America's surface transportation programs at the
federal, state and local levels, for the decade of the 90s and well into the 21st Century.
AASHTO'S Transportation 2020 Policy Process
In light of the wandering national transportation focus on the eve of the completion of the Interstate
and Defense Highway System as initiated in 1956, the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials initiated "Transportation 2020."
Transportation 2020 was envisioned by AASHTO as a multi-year, multi-organization, multi-modal
effort to achieve consensus and set comprehensive national surface transportation policy into the 21st
Century. Through the Transportation 2020 effort, AASHTO undertook to formulate a truly "National
Surface Transportation Policy," extending beyond the federal level to encompass federal, state, and
local roles and responsibilities.
Since the creation of a new "National Surface Transportation Policy" would require significant
consensus building, and since ultimate success would depend upon the effort and support of the many
national, federal, state, regional, and local interest groups from both the public and private sectors,
AASHTO created a Task Force on a Consensus Transportation Program and developed the following
purpose statement and, in general, the basic form of the broader Transportation 2020 process.
"It is the intended purpose of the AASHTO Task Force on a Consensus Transportation
Program, over the next few years, to:
Develop and implement a strategy for achieving consensus among federal, state, and local
governmental levels as to their respective roles and responsibilities under a new "National
Transportation Policy" designed to accommodate transportation needs well into the 21st
Century,
Develop and implement a means for establishing wide-spread support for the new policy
among elected and appointed government officials and governmental bodies, among
public and private sector interest groups, and among the various interests within the
general public."
The Transportation 2020 process includes four essential phases: 1) information development, collec-
tion and analysis; 2) alternatives development; 3) building a consensus program; and 4) implementa-
tion of the consensus program at all levels of government, and in the private sector. As a new, unique
3-2 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
tool to help reach a consensus program, AASHTO urged creation of the Transportation Alternatives
Group and took part in its establishment.
The phase 1) information development, collection and analysis effort is described in Part II of this
Chapter, and is essentially complete. It provides the basis for the Association's policy development
work.
This Chapter presents AASHTO's recommendations on the direction of the future federal surface
transportation program for highways, public transit and modal interlinks to these modes. The
recommendations herein are intended to be utilized for building a new consensus program. They do
not attempt to include all programmatic details, either of the federal program itself or the intergov-
ernmental processes at the state and local government level that would be needed to support the new
concepts included in the recommendations. Further effort to develop these details will be necessary,
and has been undertaken by the Association; the consensus building effort with other organizations
will also need to address these details.
A new consensus surface transportation program for highways and public transportation as envisioned
by AASHTO will involve all levels of government. AASHTO has chosen to concentrate first on the
federal role, since the federal role is inherently national in scope and tends to set the stage for actions
by the states, local governments and agencies, and the private sector.
In developing its recommendations the Association progressed logically to first consider the goals
and objectives for a national surface transportation program for highways and public transportation,
the results of this effort being presented in Part III of this Chapter. Then, it considered principles for
a federal role in meeting those goals and objectives, and finally it developed recommended federal
programs and procedures, these being the subject of Part IV of the Chapter.
Part II
Findings from the Transportation 2020 Information Development, Collection, and
Analysis Effort
Three separate but related activities were undertaken in the overall Transportation 2020 effort to
develop, collect and analyze information on the surface transportation needs of this nation through
the year 2020. They were as follows:
Transportation professionals from the AASHTO member departments undertook to develop,
collect and analyze information from a variety of sources, including the member departments, the
Federal Highway Administration, the Urban Mass Transportation Administration, organizations
representing local governments and transit agencies, and other sources. This resulted in publica-
tion of the AASHTO Report, Keeping America Moving: The Bottom Line.
To obtain the view of transportation users, AASHTO organized the Advisory Committee on
Highway Policy, and in cooperation with the member departments and with the help of the
Highway Users Federation, the Committee sponsored 65 forums nationwide that involved some
9,000 people. The results of this effort were summarized in the report Beyond Gridlock: The
Future Of Mobility As The Public Sees It.
3-3 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
To gain insights on what America will be facing as it moves into the next century toward 2020,
AASHTO, the Federal Highway Administration and the National Association of Regional
Councils provided funding to the Transportation Research Board to conduct a futures conference.
That conference was conducted in June, 1988 and the conference proceedings were published as
TRB Special Report 220, A Look Ahead: Year 2020.
The results of the document Keeping America Moving: The Bottom Line are presented first. These
results are followed by a listing of the major public perceptions about transportation uncovered in the
65 Transportation 2020 Public Forums held around the nation. Summary comments about the future
of transportation, as recorded at the TRB Futures Conference, complete the summary of the findings
from the Transportation 2020 effort.
Summary of The Bottom Line Report
While many conclusions could be drawn from the data and information presented in Keeping America
Moving: The Bottom Line, the following summary statements have been selected as those which most
forcefully direct and determine future fedéral, state and local roles and responsibilities in providing
this nation with the required surface transportation facilities and services to ensure economic vitality
between the 1990s and the year 2020. It should be noted that the dollar needs in The Bottom Line
document do not reflect inflation.
America's surface transportation expenditures, at all levels of government, in 1987 equaled about
$81 billion. Of this total, about $66 billion was for highways and $14.5 billion for public
transportation systems.
In order to just maintain the physical characteristics of the nation's public sector surface
transportation infrastructure and sustain "most" of the level of service provided today through the
year 2020, an annualized investment of nearly $95 billion is required. Of this total, approximately
$80 billion is needed for highways and $15 billion for financing public transportation, with transit
capital increasing to $2.7 billion from $2.13 billion in 1987.
To meet this annualized need, increased federal revenues are necessary. This issue will be
addressed by AASHTO in the Transportation 2020 process.
This 20 percent overall increase in funding over 1987 to merely try to maintain the most critical
current levels of service reflects the fact that this nation has been unintentionally "disinvesting"
in its surface transportation infrastructure since the 1960s. This disinvestment is the net result of
the relative reduction in user fee revenues, due to more fuel efficient vehicles, coupled with the
reduced purchasing power of those revenues because of inflation in construction costs.
Surface travel demand is expected to at least double by 2020. If this nation is to attempt to keep
up with this anticipated growth, then an investment of approximately $117 billion per year would
be required. Of this 43 percent increase in overall funding for surface transportation over 1987,
about $100 billion would be for highways and nearly $16 billion for transit, with transit capital
increasing to $3.4 billion, a 60 percent increase over the 1987 level.
The $16 billion for transit relates to currently operating transit systems. If the nation should decide
to significantly increase transit service, a corresponding further increase in transit funding would
be required.
3-4 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
An additional $1 billion per year investment in highways and public transportation through 2020
would be required to adequately link surface transportation with airports, ports and waterways
and rail terminals.
Future transportation investment requirements may be mitigated somewhat through improved
materials and techniques, and through the implementation of alternative responses to travel
demand, like demand management and operational improvements. Still, the impacts of doubling
travel demand and the uncertainties of future levels of inflation, not reflected in the figures
presented in The Bottom Line report, will undoubtedly quickly erode any efficiencies gained
through the implementation of improved construction, design and operational techniques.
If America is to maintain its economic leadership in the world economy and to avoid the negative
and costly effects of inaction, the nation must commit the required funds to improve its
transportation system.
In addition to these findings, many other facts are presented in The Bottom Line document. The reader
is urged to consult the publication Keeping America Moving - The Bottom Line which is available
from the office of AASHTO in Washington, D.C.
Summary from the Public Forums
The input from the 65 Public Forums co-hosted by AASHTO's Advisory Committee on Highway
Policy, state transportation agencies and the local highway users group is extremely valuable to the
Transportation 2020 process. The public forum input provides the perspectives of the users and as
such represents more of a "supply and demand orientation" than did The Bottom Line report, which
presented the costs of providing for the estimated future requirement for surface transportation
facilities and services.
Some of the major and recurrent themes raised in the public forums and presented in Beyond Gridlock:
The Future Of Mobility As The Public Sees It are categorized and summarized below:
Congestion is increasing in both our urban and suburban areas.
This increase in traffic volume and congestion has resulted in: 1) Physical deterioration of our
transportation facilities, 2) Deterioration of the level of service (more delays, higher delivery costs,
increased accidents, etc.), and 3) Deterioration of air quality in our major metropolitan areas.
Interstate Highways, rather than being "complete," are in need of additional work. The needed
work on the Interstate includes: 1) Major rehabilitation of older sections, 2) New capacity in urban
areas, and 3) Some new links in rural areas where traffic patterns have changed since the system
was laid out in the early 1950s.
Public transportation facilities and levels of service must not be allowed to undergo further
deterioration.
To address this concern: 1) Urban facilities should be refurbished, 2) Dilapidated rolling stock
should be replaced, and 3) New services should be provided for the special needs of rural areas
and for elderly and handicapped persons.
3-5 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
Funding, at all levels of government, must be increased to preserve and enhance our nation's
transportation systems.
To enact this increase: 1) Changes should be enacted in the handling of the Highway Trust Fund
(i.e. - it should be removed from the Unified Federal Budget, interest should be retained for
transportation purposes, the balance should be drawn down, it should be made permanent and
used for transportation purposes only), 2) User fees should be increased to fund the needed
maintenance, preservation and improvements, 3) User fee exemptions, especially on gasohol,
should be eliminated, and 4) Non-traditional funding sources should also be explored and
employed at the state and local levels (i.e. - developer impact fees, toll roads, private contributions,
"benefitter fees," and general revenue sources.)
In addition to these major themes, several other worthy suggestions were presented at the public
forums. For a more complete listing, the reader is urged to consult the publication Beyond Gridlock:
The Future Of Mobility As The Public Sees It is available from the Highway User Federation and from
AASHTO Headquarters in Washington, D.C.
Summary of the Futures Conference
The official summary and conference proceedings from the TRB Futures Conference were published
in TRB Special Report 220, A Look Ahead: Year 2020. The substance of the conclusions of the
proceedings are as follows, it being understood that these conclusions do not necessarily represent
the views of AASHTO or its member departments:
The mission of the nation's transportation system must respond to broad changes in context and
needs over time. As the nation looks ahead to the 21st Century, the transportation system must
meet new challenges introduced by an increasingly complex context for mobility. The Transpor-
tation 2020 Futures Conference suggested that the key challenges will include:
The increased relevance of productivity gains from infrastructure investment to the maintenance
of living standards and global competitiveness as the labor force grows more slowly than in the
past.
The new and more complex patterns of interaction associated with a post-industrial global
economy, dispersed service-based economic activity, extended urbanization and emerging centers
of growth and redevelopment.
Future travel demand increases beyond mere population growth caused by a proliferation of
households and lifestyles that generate a diversity of mobility needs and desires.
A blurring of traditional boundaries among transportation providers, modes, and institutions
fostered by deregulation and service innovation and enhanced by recent applications of computer
and communications technology.
Heightened awareness of the interdependence among increasing vehicle travel, community
quality, natural resources, and the environment.
Changing views of appropriate public and private sector responsibilities and of intergovernmental
roles as affected by evolving institutional traditions, relative technical and financial capabilities,
and competing priorities for available resources.
3-6 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
The conference featured commissioned papers on the following 10 topical areas:
Economic growth and vitality
Demographics
Lifestyles
Energy
Environment
Development patterns
Commercial freight movements
Personal mobility
New technology
Resource and institutional arrangements
The reader is urged to consult A Look Ahead: Year 2020 which is available from the Transportation
Research Board (TRB).
Conclusions
The "facts and figures" presented in the preceding documents were taken into account by AASHTO
in reaching its policy recommendations for the future federal surface transportation program.
These three documents describe many issues facing the nation, as it moves beyond completion of the
Interstate and Defense Highway System and into the 21st Century. The nation of today has more
complex transportation needs than were present in 1956, when the current surface transportation
consensus was brought together, and those needs will become even more complex over the next few
decades. Different states have changed in different ways, and will change again.
Part III
National Surface Transportation Goals and Objectives - Highways and
Public Transportation
The process used by AASHTO in making the policy recommendations of this Chapter involved the
identification of potential alternatives and a survey of the individual state highway and transportation
agencies to rank order these potential alternatives. Workshops of the Policy Committee members
were held to further define and delineate the preferred policy alternatives.
3-7 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
The AASHTO process began at the level of national surface transportation goals and worked its way
down through national modal objectives, before going on to develop principles for the federal role.
This summary presentation of AASHTO's recommendations will follow the same order.
National Surface Transportation Goals - Highways and Public Transportation
AASHTO makes the following major recommendation of seven national surface transportation goals,
to guide development of a consensus program under the Transportation 2020 process.
Major Recommendations
Preservation
Preservation of America's existing surface transportation system should be the primary goal of
any future national transportation program since it is this system which provides the basic network
upon which this nation's economic health and international vitality depend.
Congestion
A balanced approach to increasing capacity and reducing congestion on this nation's surface
transportation system should be employed, including an appropriate mix of highways and transit,
and a thoughtful application of systems management technologies and demand management
techniques.
Funding
User and benefitter fees, set at an appropriate level to cover the economic cost of the surface
transportation facilities and services provided, should be dedicated solely to the funding of
transportation improvements. General fund commitments to public transportation should con-
tinue.
Safety
The safety of Americans, using the surface transportation facilities and services, should be
preserved and enhanced through the continued national commitment to safety research, safety
applications and safety projects.
Access and Balance
The national surface transportation system should be comprised of a balanced, integrated and
coordinated multi-modal network of facilities and services which provide an adequate level of
access to all of the various regions of this nation.
Planning and Research
This nation should continue to commit sufficient funding to transportation planning and research
to ensure that established goals are met, that future options do not get precluded, and that new
technologies are developed and applied to transportation infrastructure in a timely manner.
3-8 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
Economic Vitality
The national surface transportation program should preserve and enhance the economic vitality
of this nation by providing employment, reducing transport costs, improving freight movement
productivity, revitalizing rural America, rejuvenating blighted urban areas, supporting existing
land uses, attracting economic development, providing transportation for rapidly growing regions,
and improving international competitiveness.
"Who pays," "how much," and "for what" are critical considerations to AASHTO member departments
in developing a transportation program for the future.
Preservation of existing systems, facilities and services is the number one national concern of
AASHTO. Closely following the preservation goal, however, is the recognized need to aggressively
address the issues of urban mobility, suburban congestion and rural access for economic vitality. The
provision of additional surface transportation facilities and services is in view, as well as the
implementation of system management approaches where such measures will significantly reduce
congestion and improve the operating level of service.
When it comes to who pays for these, and the other recommended improvements, AASHTO strongly
believes in "user" and "benefitter" fees. In the case of transit, AASHTO believes that general funds
should continue as an important source of revenues for transit facilities and services.
National Modal Objectives - Highways and Public Transportation
Three major categories of national modal objectives are presented. They are: highway objectives,
public transportation objectives and modal interlink objectives, including aviation, ports and water-
ways, and rail.
National Highway Objectives
1. SYSTEM MAINTENANCE, including pavement preservation, should be
provided.
2. BRIDGE NEEDS, including maintenance, repair and replacement, should be
provided.
3. INTERSTATE RECONSTRUCTION, including pavement rehabilitation and
preservation on the existing system, should be provided.
4. URBAN CONGESTION should be addressed with improved freeway/express-
way capacity where appropriate.
5. PRINCIPAL ARTERIALS serving interstate and intrastate needs should be
provided.
6. INTERSTATE CAPACITY should be increased by the addition of lanes in
congested sections.
3-9 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
National Public Transportation Objectives
1. URBAN CONGESTION should be addressed with improved public transpor-
tation services where appropriate.
2. RECONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE of facilities and vehicles should be
provided to preserve existing service.
3. MOBILITY should be provided for the non-driving public by public transportation
services.
National Modal Interlink Objectives
The following priority objectives are the same for each of the aviation, ports and waterways, and rail
modes:
1. ACCESS by highway and public transportation modes should be improved to
ports, terminals and other modal facilities.
2. PLANNING should ensure that decisions to locate ports, terminals and othermodal
facilities include adequate consideration of existing and future surface transportation
requirements.
AASHTO supports similar priorities under national modal objectives to the national transportation
goals set forth above. Preservation of existing surface transportation systems, facilities and services
is again ranked first, followed closely by the desire to address this nation's growing level of congestion.
It should be remembered that these national goals and objectives include roles to be performed at the
federal, state and local levels.
Part IV
Federal Role and Program Recommendations - Highways and Public Transportation
The Association makes the following recommendations with regard to the federal role in a Transpor-
tation 2020 consensus surface transportation program, and the federal programs for highways and
public transportation to be established thereunder.
Recommended Federal Role Principles - Highways and Public Transportation
The Policy Committee of AASHTO has set the following policy statements to guide the direction of
the future federal role in surface transportation:
1. ISSUES OF NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE should be included in the federal focus
on transportation.
2. SYSTEMS OF NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE should be included in the federal
focus on transportation.
3-10 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
3.
PRESERVATION NEEDS on the existing surface transportation systems should
be included in the federal focus.
4. NATIONAL ECONOMIC WELL-BEING and economic growth should be included
as part of the federal focus and role in transportation.
5. PLANNING should be emphasized in the federal role.
6.
SAFETY should be emphasized in the federal role.
7. MAJOR CAPITAL NEEDS requiring massive expenditures for new construction
or reconstruction should be part of the federal role.
8. RESEARCH should be emphasized in the federal role.
9. INTERSTATE OR INTERREGIONAL ISSUES should receive at least a minimum
response at the federal level.
10. EMERGENCY RELIEF should be provided for at the federal level.
11. DEFENSE should be included in the federal role in providing surface
transportation.
The Policy Committee, comprised of the Chief Administrative Officers of AASHTO member
departments, arrived at a remarkably high degree of consensus concerning its recommendations for
the future federal role in transportation. The top three of the 11 priorities just listed are more strongly
supported than the other eight. Priorities one and two indicate that AASHTO members desire the
federal role to focus on "ISSUES" and "SYSTEMS" of "NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE," while
priority three suggests that the preservation of existing systems may well be of national significance.
Major Recommendations
System of National Significance
The federal role in surface transportation should focus on a system of facilities and services which
are significant to the economic health and international vitality of this nation.
AASHTO believes that such a system would be comprised of all of the existing Interstate Highway
System and an appropriate portion of the principal arterial system as redefined and the associated
bridges, as well as the public transportation facilities and services which keep this nation's major
cities moving.
Issues of National Significance
Beyond the focus on the Highway System of National Significance and on the major transit
projects, the federal role should be to allow the states and local governments flexibility in
identifying and implementing specific surface transportation solutions appropriate to the re-
gional/local need. These solutions should also serve to address transportation issues of national
significance.
3-11 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
AASHTO believes the dominant issues of national significance to be urban mobility, suburban
congestion, rural access, and modal interlinks. Tradeoffs among issues like transportation safety,
air quality, preservation, balance, public transportation, and rural and urban economic vitality
should be determined at the state and local levels.
Other Programs of National Interest
The federal role in surface transportation should include transportation planning, research, safety,
emergency relief, and federal lands access.
AASHTO believes that the basic goal of each federal program should be to assist the nation's
surface transportation system to function as safely and efficiently as possible and thereby to
preserve and enhance the economic health and international vitality of America.
Recommended Federal Role - Highways and Public Transportation
AASHTO supports the following direction for federal involvement in the future surface transportation
program.
The Focused Aspect
Federal transportation programs would be focused on SYSTEMS OF NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE
- that is, transportation which provides for the major movements of goods, services and/or passengers,
including the Interstate and the major Public Transportation Systems of this nation.
The Flexible Aspect
The Federal Government would provide funding for and procedural guidance on ISSUES OF
NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE like mobility, economic development, urban congestion, etc. which
are considered to be of "national significance" in that they are common problems encountered around
the nation. Funds would be made available for use at state and local discretion for funding
transportation projects which addressed these national issues.
Basic to AASHTO's selection of a new federal role were the following beliefs:
1. The federal/state/local partnership has worked in facilitating the development of
this nation's existing surface transportation system.
2. Existing federal program categories for lower-level projects are unduly restrictive
and do not permit state and local governments an adequate degree of flexibility to meet their
own region's unique and specific transportation requirements in the most appropriate
and cost-effective manner.
The Highway Funding Aspect
The federal funding level for the combined categorical and flexible highway programs should be
increased over the life of the next highway authorization bill. AASHTO recommends that a gradual
increase be enacted which would begin in the first year (FY 1992) at approximately $18 billion and
rise to about $26 billion by the last year of the authorization (FY 1995).
3-12 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
AASHTO supports a 50 percent-50 percent split between the categorical and flexible highway
programs. AASHTO additionally recommends that up to 20 percent of a state's total highway
apportionment be eligible for transfer either way between that state's categorical highway program
and that state's flexible program without FHWA approval.
AASHTO recommends that total statewide urban and rural lane miles, total statewide urban and rural
vehicle miles of travel and other appropriate factors be used for the state-by-state formula distribution
of federal categorical highway funds, rather than using factors directly related to the highway system
of national significance. (See Commentary.)
The Transit Programs Funding Aspect
The federal funding level for the transit program should be increased over the life of the next surface
transportation authorization bill. AASHTO recommends that a gradual increase be enacted for public
transportation capital projects which would begin in the first year (FY 1992) at approximately $3.5
billion (including the current capital portion of the general fund commitment) and rise to about $5
billion by the last year of the authorization (FY 1995).
AAASHTO further recommends that Mass Transit Account funding in excess of current funding
levels for capital projects (approximately $1.1 billion per year) would be distributed on a 50 percent-50
percent basis using the existing Section 9 formula and percent of total population, after any reductions
in general fund appropriations have been held harmless.
AASHTO supports the direct allocation of federal transit funds to transit funding recipients in areas
over 200,000 population, and direct allocations to the states for fair and equitable distribution ot urban
areas under 200,000 population and to rural areas.
AASHTO believes that any additional Mass Transit Account formula funding for public transporta-
tion should be available for the broadened uses delineated under the Flexible Transit program
description. (See page 3-17 of this document.) (See Commentary.)
Major Recommendations
Federal/State Partnership
The existing federal/state partnership has worked well over the several decades of its existence
in producing one of the best national surface transportation systems in the world.
Therefore, AASHTO believes that the existing federal-state partnership should be retained for
the programs addressing national surface transportation needs and only slightly modified for
programs addressing state and local surface transportation needs.
3-13 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
Reduced Categorical Restrictions
Existing lower-level federal program categories are unduly restrictive and do not permit the states
and local governments adequate flexibility to meet their unique transportation needs in the most
appropriate and cost-effective manner. Furthermore, existing federal requirements for lower-
level programs are unduly restrictive on the states and local governments, which merely serves
to increase "red tape" and decrease efficiency without delivering corresponding improvements in
levels of safety or service to the users.
Therefore, AASHTO believes that fewer categories, less rigid requirements and more flexible
funding should be employed for the lower-level surface transportation needs in order to facilitate
the development of regionally appropriate and economically efficient transportation systems.
The approach espoused by AASHTO reflects modifications to the existing federal role in transporta-
tion, while evidencing the strongest preference for change in the categorical administration of existing
federal-aid programs.
Recommended Federal Programs - Highways and Public Transportation
AASHTO believes that the new federal role in transportation should include two levels of program
specificity and commitment.
One level would address the concern for "focusing" the federal commitment on Systems of
National Significance through categorical programs.
The other level would address the concerns of the states and local governments for program
"flexibility" in dealing with Issues of National Significance through flexible programs.
The AASHTO recommendations for the modified federal programs under the Modified Federal Role
are as follows.
Categorical Programs
At this level, the federal role would focus on systems and programs of national significance, to include
the following systems and programs:
CATEGORICAL HIGHWAY PROGRAM - Funding under this program would be spent on
addressing this nation's interstate commerce and defense needs through projects which:
Reconstruct and/or Rehabilitate
Provide Additional Urban Capacity
Provide for Pavement Preservation
Provide Additional Mileage Needs
Provide for Bridge Needs
3-14 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
Highway System of National Significance - The highway system of national significance should
include the existing Interstate system and an appropriate portion of the principal arterial system
as redefined. The redefinition necessary would be a cooperative and rigorous effort between
AASHTO and FHWA to develop consistent criteria to be used by states in designating principal
arterial routes.
The states would submit their potential routes through AASHTO to FHWA. In response, FHWA
would be given an appropriate amount of route mileage to assign in order to ensure system
rationalization and route connectivity. The new highway system of national significance should
result in a nationally consistent, state designated, federally approved system plan.
In further defining the highway system of national significance, at least the following criteria
should be considered:
Serve interstate and international commerce and travel
Provide for national defense needs
Enhance economic vitality and international competitiveness
Provide service to all portions of the nation
Respond to changing population and travel patterns over time through an objective review
process.
The newly redefined highway system of national significance should be established as a nationally
consistent, state designated plan. AASHTO has used the preceding process and criteria to develop
illustrative highway system of national significance (HSNS) alternatives. The formal establish-
ment of the highway system of national significance should be completed as a cooperative effort
between the states and the Federal Highway Administration after adoption of federal authorization
legislation. Consultation should occur with local governments and private sector users as the
formal HSNS is defined. (See Commentary.)
A percentage of funds from the federal Categorical Highway Program would be set aside for
meeting needs like:
Transportation Planning & Research
Transportation Safety
Transportation Emergency Relief
Transportation to Federal Lands
An appropriate amount of Highway Trust Fund monies would be appropriated and apportioned
to each state under the Categorical Highway Program.
3-15 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
Completion of the Interstate - The costs associated with completing the Interstate highway system
as reported in the 1989 ICE and funding the remaining Interstate substitution commitments which
are already approved may exceed the funding currently committed through 1991.
AASHTO strongly supports the prompt funding and completion of the remaining Interstate
highway and Interstate substitution commitments. (See Commentary.)
Discretionary Bridge Program - To address this nation's bridge needs, AASHTO supports a
separate amount of funding, not to exceed 2 percent of the total highway program, which should
be dedicated to finance a continued discretionary highway bridge replacement and rehabilitation
program.
Structural and/or capacity deficient bridges on any public highway would be eligible for funding
under this program if the cost of rehabilitating, replacing or supplementing the capacity of the
bridge exceeded $10 million or 10 percent of the state's total annual federal-aid highway
apportionments under the new highway program.
The selection of projects would be in accordance with priorities established by FHWA, with due
consideration given to balance among the states. (See Commentary.)
At the conclusion of fiscal year 1991, states will carry approximately $11 billion of unobligated
apportionment balances that they have been unable to use because of annual obligation lists imposed
on the federal highway program. These apportionments represent an unpaid commitment of the
Federal Government to highway users in the states.
Obligation authority equal to the apportionment balances should be released to the states at the earliest
possible opportunity. These unobligated apportionments should be provided to each state in addition
to and not as replacement for regular apportionments in the current or future program. (See Commen-
tary.)
CATEGORICAL TRANSIT PROGRAM - Funding under this program would be spent on
addressing this nation's major public transportation needs through projects and programs which:
Address Major Rehabilitation Needs
Address New Systems and Services
A percentage of funds from the federal Categorical Transit Program would be set aside for meeting
special needs like:
Transit Planning & Research
Elderly and Handicapped Transit
Mass Transit Account Equity - The one-ninth of the current federal gasoline tax, the one-fifteenth
of the current federal diesel fuel tax, and the one-third of the current alternative fuels tax would
continue to be committed to transit programs.
3-16 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
The fiscal year 1989 funding allocation levels for rail modernization, new starts and capital bus
expenditures from the federal fuel tax would be maintained and continued as discretionary grants
under the categorical transit program. (See Commentary.)
Flexible Programs
At this level, the federal role would be to provide a highly flexible source of funding to be used at the
discretion of state and local governments, as long as identified transportation issues of national
significance were being addressed. This level would replace all other existing federal-aid transpor-
tation categories and programs now existing at the federal level, and would include the following
issues:
FLEXIBLE HIGHWAY PROGRAM - Funding under this program could be spent by states or
local governments on projects which address issues of national significance like:
Urban Mobility
Suburban Congestion
Rural Access
Modal Interlinks
An appropriate amount of Highway Trust Fund monies would be appropriated and apportioned
to each state under the Flexible Highway Program to fund projects like:
Construction and Reconstruction
Rehabilitation and Preservation
Urban and Rural Highway Elements - AASHTO strongly supports the flexibility of decision-mak-
ing, prioritizing and programming at the state level through processes that include city and county
governments and ensure consideration of their surface transportation needs. Roadways and
bridges which are not on the highway system of national significance (HSNS), but are functionally
classified as arterials or collectors, and any other highways or bridges which are currently eligible
for use of federal aid are eligible for improvement under the flexible program. To ensure an
equitable distribution of flexible apportionment by each state, Congress should specify that each
state shall allocate in aggregate to non-state systems an amount of flexible apportionment equal
to not less than their FY 1991 apportionment of urban funds, secondary funds, and bridge funds
that was made available to non-state systems of the respective state.
AASHTO is willing to consider the merits of any proposed urban and rural elements which include
sufficient flexibility regarding the state and local transfer of funding and priorities among urban
and rural needs at state and local discretion. (See Commentary.)
FLEXIBLE TRANSIT PROGRAM - Funding under this program would be spent in addressing
state and local transit needs including:
On-going Operating Assistance
3-17 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
Rehabilitation Needs
New Bus Services
Small Urban and Rural Transit
The General Funds currently committed to transit would be appropriated and apportioned in
accord with current law to designated transit recipients and to the states under the Flexible Transit
Program.
All annual Mass Transit Account resources in excess of fiscal year 1989 transit funding allocation
levels would be distributed by a broad-based public transportation formula. These revenues should
be in addition to, rather than a substitute for, amounts currently appropriated out of the general
fund.
For these Mass Transit Account formula funds, eligible projects would be broadened to permit
funding for public transportation capital projects that serve to increase vehicle occupancy rates
and enhance basic mobility as follows:
traffic signal improvements which provide priority treatment for transit and ridesharing
vehicles;
exclusive high occupancy vehicle lanes;
transportation system management measures which provide priority treatment or improve
operations for high occupancy and shared ride vehicles; and
commuter rail service capital improvements which include service between multiple urban-
ized areas within a single state.
Mass Transit Account formula funds may be used for a share of the total project cost when the
projects listed above are a component of a highway project.
Highway Safety
The U.S. Department of Transportation estimates fatalities per hundred million vehicle mile in 1987
at 2.4, the lowest in history. The United States has by far the lowest fatality rate per vehicle mile of
travel in the world. The private and public sector safety communities at all levels deserve a large
share of the credit for this achievement.
All system failures produce a drain on our society and its economy. The degree to which vehicular
accidents contribute to this drain can best be appreciated by examining the current annual toll, which
are losses of more than 46,000 lives, over 3.5 million disabling injuries, and societal costs estimated
at $75 billion. Traffic accidents also require redirection of monies and human energies that could
expand our social and economic well-being.
However, current trends in population and travel growth present further challenges to the highway
safety community. Projecting the current rate of growth in vehicle miles of travel to the year 2020
results in an estimated 3.5 trillion miles of travel on the nation's highways annually. This growth in
travel coupled with the current death rate would result in 84,000 deaths per year on our nation's
3-18 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
highways in the year 2020. In addition to this intolerable loss of life, these accidents would also
interrupt the free flow of goods and services on our roadways, adding an incalculable cost to
transportation operations.
These projected scenarios indicate that to maintain the current highway fatalities at 46,000 we must
lower the death rate. To accomplish this goal, a major highway safety initiative is required.
Managing tomorrow's traffic will require increasing attention to safety. The measure of value for the
surface transportation system will continue to be mobility and safety. Improving the quality of
transportation requires the recognition of the interconnections of safety issues on each transportation
component; the facility, the operator, and the vehicle. The safety issues in particular cannot be dealt
with effectively in an isolated fashion.
Major Recommendation
Highway Safety
The safety of Americans, using the surface transportation facilities and services, should be
preserved and enhanced through the continued national commitment to safety research, safety
applications and safety projects.
Recommended Federal Procedures - Highways and Public Transportation
AASHTO makes the following recommendations for modifying the federal administrative proce-
dures. These recommendations for the future administration of federal transportation programs
revolve around and relate to the adopted definition and delineation of the "modified federal role" as
previously presented.
Major Recommendation
Overall Recommendation
Simplicity and straightforwardness should be the hallmark of all federal administrative require-
ments associated with federal transportation programs.
Administrative recommendations made in this chapter are organized around the topics of intergov-
ernmental coordination and relationships, allocating procedures for funding, certification of federally
assisted projects and the federal use of matching ratios as an incentive for the furtherance of systems
and issues of national significance.
The Intergovernmental Delivery System
The Federal Government should continue its primary relationship with the states in the delivery of
transportation facilities and services.
3-19 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
Categorical Programs
Under the focused federal role the Categorical Programs (Highways and Transit) should continue to
be administered in a manner similar to that employed presently. Coordination will be required in this
level of the modified federal role among the state transportation agencies, regional planning bodies
and local governments, particularly in the case of urban transit systems, transportation planning and
modal interlink projects.
Flexible Programs
For the Flexible Highway Program, funds should be administered and coordinated on a statewide
basis under the direction of state officials. Annual reports should be required from each state to assure
that the federally adopted "Issues of National Significance" are being addressed through expenditures
of these federal highway funds. For the Flexible Transit Program, funds should be administered in
the same manner as they are today under UMTA's corresponding transit formula programs.
The Allocation of Funds
Fair, straightforward and simple formulas and equitable discretionary guidelines should be used to
allocate revenues collected at the federal level to state and local units of government.
Categorical Highway Program
Under the Categorical Highway Program, some donor/donee relationship will need to continue. The
donor/donee relationship will provide large, sparsely populated states with the ability to fund projects
on the System of National Significance (Interstate and part of the existing Primary), emerging growth
regions with the ability to fund needed transportation improvements, while still providing densely
populated areas with the ability to fund urban highway projects.
Through a hold harmless provision, no state should receive less than the current highway program
would provide in 1991 as if all states had completed their Interstate Highway Systems. To ensure
some degree of equity of formula allocations, an 85 percent minimum allocation provision should be
established and the existing 1/2 percent minimum apportionment retained for the Categorical Highway
Program. In the event federal highway funding is increased above the 1991 levels, AASHTO
recommends that every state, including hold harmless states, should then receive an increase in its
allocation; the percentage growth in highway allocation amounts for hold harmless states should be
at an equitable percentage growth rate. In addition, the basic formula for distributing categorical
highway funds should be driven by factors, such as lane miles, travel (VMT), and other appropriate
factors. (See Commentary.)
Planning, research and safety should be allocated as a percentage of each state's apportionment for
the Categorical Highway Program. Emergency relief and federal lands allocations should continue
to be discretionary.
Categorical Transit Program
Transit funds should continue to be distributed using the discretionary grant approach.
3-20 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
Flexible Highway Program
Funding for the Flexible Highway Program, which will replace all other highway categories and
programs now existing at the federal level, should be allocated strictly on a pro rata share of federal
Highway Trust Fund collections attributable to each state as a proportion of federal Highway Trust
Fund revenues collected throughout the nation.
For the Flexible Highway Program, no donor/donee relationship should exist. Funds under the
Flexible Highway Program would be allocated to each state in proportion to the highway user
contributions attributable to the state.
Flexible Transit Program
The General Funds currently committed to transit should be appropriated and apportioned to the states
and local governments under the Flexible Transit Program in the same manner as funds are currently
distributed under UMTA's formula programs.
All annual Mass Transit Account revenues in excess of fiscal year 1989 transit funding allocation
levels should be distributed by the following formula: 50 percent by the Section 9 formula and 50
percent by total population. The formula should include a hold harmless provision so that if future
general fund appropriations for Section 9 are reduced below the 1989 level, Mass Transit Account
formula funds equal to the size of the Section 9 appropriation reduction would first be distributed 100
percent by the Section 9 formula. The actual recipients of the Mass Transit Account formula funds
would be the same as the recipients of the Section 9 and Section 18 funds.
Major Recommendations
Allocation of Funds
Fair, straightforward and simple formulas and equitable discretionary guidelines should be used
to allocate revenues collected at the federal level to state and local units of government.
AASHTO believes that minimum allocations should be developed for any program addressing
needs on the national highway system, but that prorata shares based on percentage of total highway
user contributions attributable to each state should be used for programs addressing state and local
highway needs.
AASHTO believes that allocations for the major transit projects and for those projects whose
costs cannot be accommodated from regular transit formula funds should remain discretionary in
nature, and that transit formulas should be used for other transit programs.
Highway Trust Fund
The Federal Highway Trust Fund should be made permanent, removed from the unified budget
process and released from obligation limitations. All interest earned, along with existing balances
beyond those providing an adequate cash flow cushion, should be released to the states and local
governments to fund needed surface transportation improvements. Increased federal revenues
are necessary to carry out the needs of the future Federal Surface Transportation Program.
3-21 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
The Certification of Projects
The states and/or transit funding recipients would be responsible for the certification of all transpor-
tation projects receiving federal assistance.
Categorical Programs
Streamlined certification processes would be used for projects developed under the Categorical
Highway and Transit Programs. Differences which exist between the certification of highway and
transit projects would be retained at the federal level.
Flexible Programs
Certification for projects developed under the Flexible Highway and Transit Programs would not
occur at the individual project level but at the statewide program level for highways and, in the case
of transit, at the statewide or local transit agency level, depending on who was the recipient of the
funding.
Each state or transit funding recipient would prepare an annual list of projects, using existing
documents like the state construction program, the regional Transportation Improvement Programs
and the local government project lists for prior approval at the federal level.
Annual progress reports covering the preceding year's achievements would be submitted at the same
time and as part of the same document. In this manner, the Administration, the Congress and the
Federal Government would be kept abreast of progress toward the national goals surrounding issues
of national significance.
Major Recommendation
Certification of Projects
The states and/or transit funding recipients should continue to be responsible for the certification
of all surface transportation projects receiving federal assistance.
The Federal Use of Matching Ratios
Matching ratios could be different for the various needs represented in the Categorical and Flexible
Programs.
The use of federal matching ratios to focus state and local program emphases, however, should be
carefully examined. And, under no circumstance should a federal matching ratio be set in order to
"force" state and local governments to enact revenue increases.
Categorical Programs
The matching ratio for roadway and bridge improvements under the Categorical Highway Transit
Program should range between 100 percent and 85 percent. For extremely important projects like
roadway preservation and bridge needs the federal portion could initially be 100 percent. For other
needs, like capacity increases or additions to the system, the initial federal matching ratio could come
3-22 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
closer to an 85 percent level. In this manner the incentive would be to preserve the existing system
before dealing with other system requirements.
Emergency Relief and Public Lands highway projects, due to their very nature, should be eligible for
100 percent federal funding.
Over the first five years of any new program, however, AASHTO believes that the federal matching
ratio for the Categorical Highway Program should be around 85 percent.
For the Categorical Transit Program, the federal share should remain at the current level. For new
starts, or system extensions, funding priority should be given to projects providing a non-federal share
higher than the minimum 25 percent.
Flexible Programs
The matching ratio for projects under the Flexible Highway Program should be set by the states. The
states, by varying the matching ratios, could provide strong incentives to meet state and local needs
while addressing national transportation goals and issues of national significance. Care should be
taken in this regard to ensure that rural needs are not overlooked or overshadowed by procedures or
matching ratios which preference urban transportation-related goals.
The matching ratio for capital projects under the Flexible Transit Program should remain at 80 percent.
Major Recommendation
Matching Ratios
For highways, AASHTO believes that an 85 percent federal share is appropriate for the programs
that address national needs. AASHTO believes that matching ratios for highway programs
addressing state and local highway needs should be determined at the state level.
For transit, AASHTO believes that current federal matching shares should remain unchanged.
However, for new starts and system extensions, funding priority should be given to projects
providing a non-federal share higher than the minimum 25 percent. For the new Mass Transit
Account formula funds, the federal share should be 80 percent, the same as it is for other capital
formula funds.
Summary Comments on AASHTO'S Administrative Recommendations
Simplicity and straightforwardness should be the hallmark of all federal administrative requirements
associated with federal transportation programs.
The changes from current practices recommended by AASHTO, reflected in the preceding sections
of this chapter, serve to underscore the state concerns for a Modified Federal Role which would focus
substantial federal resources on the Categorical Programs for addressing surface transportation
systems of national significance.
3-23 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
These recommended administrative changes also highlight the desire to see increased state and local
flexibility in solving specific surface transportation problems under the proposed Flexible Programs
which are aimed at addressing general surface transportation issues of national significance.
3-24 AASHTO Highways & Public Transportation
Recommendations
Chapter 4
Railroads
Part I
Introduction
A balanced multi-modal transportation network is essential for strong economic growth. Railroads
are an indispensable element of this network. Key issues for the rail industry and all modes of
transportation which must be addressed by any future comprehensive surface transportation program
are:
1. Efficient use of financial resources;
2. Providing access and mobility;
3. Relieving congestion; and
4. Protecting the environment.
Only through coordination among all modes, achieved with the help and support of the states and
Federal Government, can these issues be resolved.
Historical Background
During the Interstate highway construction era, motor carriers used the improving highway system to
greatly expand their services. During the same period, for a variety of reasons including excessive
regulation, railroads were unable to invest in equivalent improvements in productivity. Consequently,
railroads have become increasingly reliant on long distance and heavy haul markets, where their ability
to efficiently transport bulk commodities gives them an inherent competitive advantage. With the
railroads' loss of most service-sensitive markets, motor carriers became the primary providers of light
density, short and medium haul transportation services.
In response to these major market shifts, inadequate financial performance and changes in the
regulatory environment, the railroad industry is undergoing a significant restructuring. The industry's
goals are to improve its competitiveness and profitability. To accomplish these goals, railroads have
focused on:
1. Abandoning unproductive lines;
2. Selling marginally productive lines to more efficient operators such
as other railroads, shippers and/or public agencies;
3. Improving the utilization of capital assets;
4-1 AASHTO Railroad Recommendations
4. Increasing labor productivity;
5. Adopting new technologies; and
6. Marketing innovative services.
The future shape and role of the U.S. rail system depends on the results of these efforts. Success in
reducing costs will provide opportunities to preserve rail lines and increase rail traffic.
Future Outlook
When the restructuring process is completed, many observers of the railroad industry expect a scenario
consisting of large carriers operating high density main lines. These line haul carriers will continue
their current emphasis on long haul and multiple car service, and keep the system in private ownership.
Branch lines and secondary main lines will be retained only if they produce sufficient volumes of
traffic to be cost-effective.
Smaller rail carriers are expected to specialize in operating the remaining system of branch lines and
secondary main lines. They will gather traffic and interchange it with the line haul railroads. Many
of these carriers, known as short lines or regional railroads, already exist. It is anticipated that many
more will be formed in the future. Typically, short lines and regional railroads are able to operate
light density lines more efficiently. In addition, they can provide the more flexible, individualized
service required to satisfy many shippers' needs.
Another major initiative in the rail industry is an effort to regain a portion of the intercity freight traffic
presently served by the truck industry. Intermodal rail service uses highway trailers and containers,
gathered by trucks and unloaded from ocean vessels, to be transported to distribution terminals for
final delivery by truck. New developments in the technologies of intermodal services promise to
increase the railroad industries' ability to compete for time sensitive and high value freight.
Public Role
As the industry undergoes the current restructuring process, communities face the prospects of rail
abandonments or short line sales. Abandonments can bring forth loss of jobs, industry relocations,
loss of tax revenues, shipper dislocations and increased highway construction and maintenance
expenditures (needed to accommodate the increase in truck traffic).
Short line sales may not occur in some cases due to the difficulty of obtaining financing for acquiring
the line. Many of the lines operated by short line railroads are in need of rehabilitation. Financially,
these railroads are frequently operating with only marginal profits and the owners are unable to
rehabilitate lines without outside assistance.
The public role, in insuring the availability of essential rail freight transportation, may need to be
expressed through funding for track rehabilitation and/or acquisition. This financial assistance must
be provided as an alternative to highway investment for projects that serve the public interest and
promote economic development.
The public role for rail passenger service is presently expressed by Congress through financial support
for Amtrak. In addition, individual states have undertaken major efforts toward establishing high
4-2 AASHTO Railroad Recommendations
speed rail services in areas of dense population and congestion. Intercity passenger rail service is a
viable alternative to clogged highways and air traffic lanes.
Part II - Findings of the National Conference of State Railway Officials
Information Development, Collection, and Analysis Effort
Introduction
As stated earlier, Beyond Gridlock- The Future of Mobility as the Public Sees It was published by the
AASHTO Advisory Committee on Highway Policy. The information for the report was gathered
through 65 public forums held nationwide. The report summarizes major areas of concern for present
and future transportation needs. One area of concern pertained to railroads. The report states:
"A recurring theme in testimony throughout the forums was that rail service must be given
adequate consideration in transportation planning for the 21st century."
It was concluded:
"The Transportation 2020 forums showed that railroad abandonment in many parts of the
country has placed heavy demands on road systems not originally designated to carry loads
once shipped by rail. Particularly hard hit are roads serving the timber and agricultural
industries."
Summary and Conclusions of the NCSRO Rail Report
A balanced multi-modal transportation network is essential for strong economic growth. Railroads
are an indispensable element of this network. Railroads compete with other modes of transportation,
most notably trucks and barges. This competition assures shippers an efficient, reliable and econom-
ical transport system.
Concerning the essentiality of railroads, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) informed
Congress, in a report, Prospectus For Change in Freight Railroad Industry (October, 1978): "Without
rail service industries would suffer major dislocations and would be faced with the need for vast
new investments in transport and warehouse facilities, as well as with high operating costs. These
extra costs to the economy would exceed many times the investment needed to keep railroads
functioning efficiently."
The DOT report stated the following as the most important factors contributing to the relative decline
and poor financial health of the rail industry:
"Basic changes have occurred in traditional rail markets, as heavy industry gave way to a
service-oriented, high technology economy and as shifts have occurred in the location of industry.
Regulatory constraints have impinged upon management's ability to abandon
facilities and services, and improve productivity.
4-3 AASHTO Railroad Recommendations
Government provision of highways, waterways, airways, and other facilities, which - in areas
where user charges are inadequate - has subsidized the rail industry's principal competitors.
The railroad industry has been slow in adapting to new technology; rival modes have been more
successful in making use of new developments.
Labor unions and management have not been able to agree on methods for full implementation
of changes that would increase productivity, despite substantial increases in wages and benefits."
Corrective actions have been taken in some areas since the DOT report was issued. Most notable are
implementation of the Staggers Rail Act and various new technologies. Another portion of the DOT
report which is still applicable states:
"Since government actions have been very much a part of the environment of railroading,
there is an equally urgent demand for constructive changes in Government policy to be part
of the solution."
One Class I railroad, Delaware and Hudson Railway Company, is currently in bankruptcy. According
to the American Association of Railroads, all other railroads reported net incomes for the year ended
March 31, 1988. None, however, earned a rate of return greater than its cost of capital. One reported
a zero return on investment. This is an improvement over the previous year when two railroads
reported a net loss on operations and three reported a zero return on investment. It also stops, at least
temporarily, a rail industry trend of steadily declining profitability.
Railroads have little prospect of growth in their traditional traffic base. Traffic has eroded, due in part
to developments in technology and the transition from an industrial to a service economy. Changing
market demands, resulting in large increases in imports of manufactured products and decreases in
exports of coal and grain, have also adversely impacted railroads. In addition, railroad traffic has
been reduced by product substitution and down-sizing. The automobile industry is a good example
of where these changes have taken place.
Railroads are making strides in their attempt to overcome these traffic reductions. This is evidenced
by a 10.3 percent increase in freight revenue ton-miles last year. This increase was accompanied by
many cost reductions, as well as improved efficiency in operating procedures. These improvements,
however, have been relatively modest and their retention is not assured. In addition, the revenue
associated with them could quickly be eliminated through increased truck productivity. This is
particularly true if truck size and weight limits are expanded, without increased taxes to offset the
additional cost of damage these trucks would cause to the highways.
The new federal tax bill is not favorable to railroads due to changes in depreciation and minimum tax
calculations. The most devastating affect on railroad industry profitability, however, would be the
reimposition of regulatory restrictions. Amendments to the Staggers Rail Act, which would do just
that, have recently been considered by Congress.
In all likelihood, to break the trend of marginal profitability, Class I railroads will reduce their
operations to core systems. About one-third of the current trackage (45,000 miles), will be abandoned
or sold. Without either legislative relief, or a favorable legal environment on the labor-protection
issue, it can be assumed these lines will be abandoned rather than sold. If this happens, many
communities and shippers will experience severe negative impacts. In addition, as lines are aban-
4-4 AASHTO Railroad Recommendations
doned, an increase in highway funding will be required to cover the additional costs generated by the
diverted traffic.
At its peak, rail passenger service was provided by many railroads operating several thousand trains
each day. Demand for this service and the profitability of providing it declined significantly as
highway and air transportation systems improved. To salvage at least a minimal level of rail passenger
service, Congress created the National Railroad Passenger Corporation known as Amtrak. Amtrak
operates approximately 220 daily intercity passenger trains which serve 480 communities in 43 states.
Severe traffic congestion in many parts of the United States is helping re-establish rail passenger
service as a viable transportation alternative to airlines and automobiles. The revival of rail travel is
already evident in corridors, such as between Boston and Washington, D.C. In this and several other
areas, efforts are underway to relieve pressure on overburdened highway and air transportation
systems by establishing high speed rail passenger service. In some urban areas, a primary motivation
for using Amtrak and developing high speed rail corridors is that few opportunities remain to provide
additional capacity for highway and air travel.
If Congress takes the necessary actions to balance government involvement in the competitive
environment, the railroad can continue to provide freight and passenger services for the enhancement
of the nation's economy. Again, as concluded in Beyond Gridlock:
"
rail service must be given adequate consideration in transportation planning for the 21st
century."
Part III - Total Systems Approach to eTransportation Investment
Goals
Addressing the transportation funding and service crisis within budget constraints requires the
recognition that all elements of our transportation infrastructure (rail, highways, water and air) are
part of an integrated and interdependent system. Preserving rail service must be viewed as a
transportation and economic alternative for communities experiencing job losses, industries being
forced to relocate, and highways requiring additional improvements.
Not all rail lines can (or should) be saved. States have an important role, however, in insuring that
opportunities are available for maintaining rail service where it is the most cost-effective method for
meeting transportation needs. Any future comprehensive national surface transportation program
should be structured to meet the following goals:
1. To preserve rail service where it is in the public interest.
2. To develop the ability to anticipate the economic, social and national defense impacts
of railroad abandonments on shippers, communities, and highways. Also, to assess the
relative benefits of rail and highway system improvements.
(-)
4-5 AASHTO Railroad Recommendations
3. To implement programs that invest in railroad projects which are justified on
their own merit and/or as cost-effective alternatives to other improvements.
Goal Achievement Strategy
These goals can be achieved through a comprehensive national surface transportation program.
Railroads can and should play an important role in the U.S. transportation system. In addition,
transportation resources must be coordinated if they are to be used efficiently. The best response to
a proposed rail abandonment may be to build a rail/truck transfer facility, acquire and/or rehabilitate
the line, or proceed with the abandonment and improve the highway. Funds are not available to do
everything. Resources must be allocated to where they best serve the public.
When confronting a transportation issue involving railroads and highways, economic analysis will
indicate the most prudent, financial investment strategy. It will determine, for example, whether a
rail line should be rehabilitated or a highway should be improved. States should have discretion to
independently make the choice, and to accomplish transportation projects through direct investment,
loans to railroads or acquisition of the rail facilities. Federal funds should never be used, however,
for freight railroad operating subsidies.
Part IV
Policy Recommendations - Rail
Listed below are several policy recommendations which address the foregoing discussion as well as
other important rail issues.
Provide for Access, Efficient Freight Movement and Congestion Relief
The U.S. Class I railroad system will continue to shrink as the industry strives for economic
revitalization. This will be achieved through abandonment of uneconomic lines and the sale of
marginal lines to those who can operate them more profitably. This process will require public policy
choices on the preservation of lines. These lines may be important transportation corridors. As such,
they may be preserved as alternatives to highway improvements or as links providing access for
communities to the nation's core rail system. Preserving these lines will often require rehabilitation
and perhaps acquisition.
When rail lines are abandoned, highways must accommodate trucks as they provide replacement
collection and distribution services. To accomplish this, rail/truck transfer facilities supported by a
system of local feeder highways may need to be established. Rail/highway transfer facilities, such as
container and piggyback terminals, can also be used as a means of transferring to rail that traffic which
would otherwise travel on the highway system. In order to maintain access to markets, coordination
between the highway system and transfer facilities will be very important. It is imperative to locate
transfer facilities in a way which directs truck traffic away from congested urban/suburban areas.
Whenever possible, private investments should be used to help finance these facilities.
4-6 AASHTO Railroad Recommendations
Major Recommendation
Provide for Access, Efficient Freight Movement and Congestion Relief
AASHTO believes that there is an appropriate federal role in funding rail related projects. Any
comprehensive national surface transportation program should include federal and state funding
for track rehabilitation and acquisition, construction of rail/truck transfer facilities, new rail
connections and industry relocation. This proposal meets the objectives of the Transportation
2020 process to preserve rural access, provide modal interlinks and reduce urban and suburban
congestion.
Review Federal Railroad Laws
The rail industry has changed significantly since much of the body of railroad law was enacted. The
rail industry is no longer an all-purpose transportation provider.
It now specializes in long distance, heavy haul markets. Motor carriers have become the provider of
choice for most low density and short haul freight transportation.
The rail industry was the predominant employer in the early 1900s and most of the railroads were
extremely powerful. Many were abusing this power to the detriment of their employees and the
general public. Consequently, railroads became the legislative laboratory for dealing with many
economic, safety and labor issues. In recognition of changes in the industry and the nation, however,
public policy must now be modernized to bring railroad laws, regulations and programs into line with
the rest of the transportation industry and the industry in general.
In 1980, the Staggers Act modernized the economic regulation of the rail industry. However, several
laws remain to be updated. These include the Railway Labor Act, the Railroad Retirement Act, the
Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act, and the Federal Employers' Liability Act.
Major Recommendation
Review Federal Railroad Laws
AASHTO believes that Congress should review the body of law governing the rail industry in
the same manner it addressed economic deregulation through the Staggers Act. Laws which
should be reviewed include the Railway Labor Act, the Railroad Retirement Act, the Railroad
Unemployment Insurance Act, and the Federal Employers' Liability Act. A redrafting of these
laws is essential to allow the rail industry to remain a viable part of the transportation system
through the year 2020.
Provide for Traditional and High Speed Rail Passenger Service Needs
Rail passenger service is provided nationally by Amtrak. Amtrak was formed in 1971 to fulfill the
need for intercity rail passenger service that the rail industry could no longer afford to provide. Since
that time, Amtrak has been funded from operating revenues and federal appropriations. In the last
four years, it has been the desire of the Administration and Congress to reduce Amtrak's
dependence on federal support. Enhanced service has increased ridership and revenues,
but not enough to cover lost federal funding.
4-7 AASHTO Railroad Recommendations
In addition to the shortage of operating funds, Amtrak is experiencing a capital budget crisis as its
equipment wears out. Without replacement and repair of its equipment, Amtrak will become unable
to operate. Amtrak is an important passenger transportation service and its needs must be considered
in any comprehensive national surface transportation program.
While Amtrak is the provider of traditional rail passenger service, several regions are developing high
speed intercity passenger projects to connect high density traffic corridors. These projects will provide
essential passenger service in rapidly growing corridors and will significantly reduce highway and air
travel congestion.
Major Recommendation
Provide for Traditional and High Speed Rail Passenger Service Needs
AASHTO believes that the continuation and further development of Amtrak is an appropriate
federal responsibility and in the national interest. In addition, AASHTO believes that the Federal
Government should support and participate in a public-private partnership to develop high-speed
rail in those selected corridors in which it will demonstrably relieve highway and airport
congestion, and improve intercity travel efficiency. Any comprehensive national transportation
program must address rail passenger service needs.
Assess the Competitive Environment
In addition to competing among themselves for movement of freight, railroads also compete with the
barge and trucking industries. The rail industry is unique in owning the right-of-way on which it
operates. Through user fees and/or general appropriations, federal and state governments maintain
the infrastructure used by barges and trucks. Various federal and state cost allocation studies have
been completed which indicate that the barge and trucking industries fall short of paying their "fair
share."
Major Recommendation
Assess the Competitive Environment
AASHTO believes that Congress should compare the laws, government policies and user fees
impacting the various transportation modes. Where a disparity is found, Congress should strive
to create an equitable balance.
Provide for Railroad Safety Improvement and Enforcement
Transportation safety is a major public and governmental concern. This includes operational safety,
employee safety, railroad highway grade crossing safety, hazardous and nuclear materials transpor-
tation and acceptable accident response. It is essential that an ongoing governmental presence be
maintained. A strong federal - state - local partnership is necessary to assure an effective evenhanded
safety program for the railroad industry.
Research and development efforts are necessary in several safety areas. Areas of improved technol-
ogies, such as radar and sonar warning systems, must be publicly funded. This will assure that these
systems become operational and that their development is coordinated with other transportation
4-8 AASHTO Railroad Recommendations
modes. If strict procedures and proper equipment are developed to assure the public safety, railroads
are the best suited transportation mode to move hazardous and nuclear materials.
Major Recommendation
Provide for Railroad Safety Improvement and Enforcement
Any future comprehensive national transportation program must continue to provide funds for
separating or otherwise protecting railroad - highway crossings. In addition, a federally funded
state/federal partnership of railroad safety inspections is required to assure that the rail industry
complies with federal safety standards. Also, federal research and development funding is
essential in the areas of improved warning systems (such as radar and sonar systems) and
hazardous and nuclear materials transportation.
4-9 AASHTO Railroad Recommendations
Chapter 5
Water Transportation
Part I - Water Transportation
Introduction
A balanced multi-modal transportation network is essential for strong economic growth. Water
transportation is an indispensable element which supports this growth.
There are several areas of critical concern for the water transportation industry which also impact
other modes of transportation. These areas include:
Improvement in productivity and utilization of the existing water transportation system;
Improvement of the competitiveness of U.S. industries in world markets;
Efficient targeting of public investments to satisfy the nation's water transportation system's
infrastructure needs, and to provide new facilities where warranted;
Protection of the environment and public safety; and,
Effects of intermodalism on water transportation.
Water transportation impacts many aspects of the nation's economic well being. These areas of
concern can only be fully addressed through the coordinated efforts of Federal, state and local
Governments, along with private industry. It should be recognized that the nation's future transpor-
tation needs take place in an intermodal context. Impacts from deregulation in several modes,
increased freight containerization, technological improvements such as jumbo container ships and
double stack rail cars -- and even the rediscovery of ferries as a vital public transportation network
link -- are making water transportation businesses increasingly part of total intermodal service
packages. All levels of government, including the Federal Government and the states, need to take
this into account in setting policies and in managing water systems.
Historical Background
Waterways have served as major transportation facilities since the first settlement of this country.
Most of our large cities are located on navigable waterways, and industrial expansion has traditionally
followed the waterways of the nation. Waterways today are still a major element in the American
transportation network and the national defense system. They provide a long proven benefit in
transporting people and goods.
Water transportation is dynamic; continually improving its methods, equipment and capacity. Its
importance to the national welfare is emphasized by the fact that direct access to water transportation
is available to the majority of the nation's states. Technological advances in vessels
and material handling equipment permit direct international shipments between remote
inland ports and the ports of the world. Water also provides safe, energy-efficient
5-1 AASHTO Water Transportation Recommendations
transportation for the nation's mineral resources, agricultural products and other bulk commodities.
Water Transportation Activity
About 1.8 billion tons of cargo are handled annually by the nation's port facilities. Two-thirds of the
total U.S. waterborne commerce is handled by deep-draft ports. The deep water ports handle products
ranging from automobiles and computers to bulk products and sand, gravel and other nonmetallic
minerals. The remaining one-third is handled by the inland waterway system. The inland waterways
carry about half of the U.S. grain exports and one-fifth of the U.S. coal exports. By moving large
volumes of commodities at a low unit cost per ton, the nation's waterway system helps make our
exports price competitive. It also contributes to the economies of many individual states and to the
nation as a whole by providing jobs, income and production.
The nation's facilities are comprised of 188 deep-draft ports and 11,000 miles of segments on the
nation's shallow draft inland and intracoastal waterway system. Most of the channels in the
shallow-draft system have depths of 9 to 14 feet. These depths are maintained through a system of
dams and 216 lock chambers and 167 lock sites. In addition the Federal Government maintains an
extensive system of over 48,000 aids to navigation which mark the nation's waterways.
Financing
In order to maintain the nation's ability to trade in world markets, billions of dollars have been invested
by Federal, state and local Governments in the public port industry for marine terminals and harbor
and channel improvements. The investment in private port facilities has been greater. These
investments in public and private port facilities have helped maintain a healthy trade position for the
United States.
With the enactment of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (PL 99-662), the historic
division of responsibility for development of the water transportation system has been significantly
altered. The Federal Government is no longer assuming 100 percent of the cost for maintenance,
operation and new projects on the nation's waterway system. Payment of part of the cost of the
waterway system has been imposed on the shippers and vessels using the ports and waterways. The
states and other local interests have found it necessary to assume part of the cost if port and harbor
projects are to go forward.
The new law established the following cost-sharing provisions for harbor improvement projects:
5-2 AASHTO Water Transportation Recommendations
Construction Costs
Project Depth
Federal
Non-Federal
20 feet or less
90%
10%
20 feet to 45 feet
75%
25%
More than 45 feet
50%
50%
The non-federal entity is also required to pay an additional 10 percent of the project cost over a period
not to exceed 30 years. The non-federal entity is required to provide lands, easements, right of way,
relocations and dredged material disposal areas. These costs are credited against the 20 percent
non-federal share paid over the 30-year period.
The law imposed an ad valorem charge of .04 percent (.0004) per dollar value of cargo loaded or
unloaded, except on cargo moving between Hawaii, Alaska or a U.S. possession with receipts to be
placed in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund.
Operation and maintenance costs of federal navigation projects are fully paid by the Federal
Government for work associated with channels of 45 feet or less. However, non-federal sponsors
must pay 50 percent for the additional cost of maintaining new projects with channel depths in excess
of 45 feet.
The law also authorized non-federal interests to levy port or harbor fees on vessels and cargoes to
recover the costs of deepened or widened channels from those vessels and cargoes that make sure of
the improvements.
Operators of commercial vessels on fuel taxed segments of the inland waterway system are subject
to a federal inland waterways fuel tax. The fuel tax, authorized by Public Law 95-502 (Inland
Waterways Revenue Act of 1978) and Public Law 99-662 (Water Resources Development Act of
1986), is currently $0.10 per gallon of fuel used by commercial vessels on the 27 designated inland
waterways, but will increase to $0.20 per gallon by 1995. Fifty percent of the cost of new locks and
dam projects is to be paid by the Federal Government and 50 percent from the Trust Fund. The Federal
Government will continue to pay 100 percent of the operation and maintenance costs.
Current expenditures from the Trust Fund are helping to fund the construction of seven lock projects
authorized by the Water Resources Department Act of 1986. The balance in the Trust Fund is $300
million at the present time. The anticipated fund receipts will approximate the scheduled outlays for
the seven projects. Two additional projects are authorized to use the Trust Fund and there other
potential claims for funding from the Trust Fund. The Water Resource Development Act of 1986
specifically authorized 50-50 funding for both rehabilitation and construction of inland navigation
projects from the Trust Fund. At this time, there are 12 projects being rehabilitated and a potential
for several additional projects by the year 2000.
Under the Water Resource Development Act of 1986, an Inland Waterway Users Board was
established. The Board is composed of 11 members, representing various regions with a mix of
shippers and operators. The Board advises the Corps of Engineers on construction
priorities financed from the Trust Fund.
5-3 AASHTO Water Transportation Recommendations
The Trust Fund can provide for 50 percent funding of the projects now scheduled or authorized to use
the Fund. With the growth in revenue projected for the Fund, it could also finance several new projects.
Projects which require smaller scale investments with high immediate payoff will tend to attract future
funding priority.
Issues
Internal transportation policies, taxes, labor rates, etc. have all contributed to declining competitive-
ness by making U.S. exports more costly to deliver to world markets. Bulk commodities, relatively
low-valued exports such as coal and grain, are particularly sensitive to increases in transportation
costs. Actions that affect the transportation of these goods, particularly policies affecting waterways,
railroads, and maritime transportation can significantly influence the balance of trade.
The ability of the U.S. to equip its transportation industries is in question. At one time, U.S.
manufacturers completely dominated the transportation equipment industry. The U.S. automakers'
declining share of national and international markets is well known. The same trend has occurred
throughout heavy manufacturing. Other than the U.S. Navy, American ship yards have few customers.
Foreign competitors have captured much of the ship building/repair business.
The country is also facing a decline in its industrial base. The nation is changing from a manufacturing
to a service industry economy. This change will impact the type and amount of goods shipped by
water. The water transportation system must be able to serve this changing market.
Continued population growth and an increase in leisure time activities will continue to put pressure
on waterfront lands and on the use of the waterways system. Congestion in large urban areas will
generate renewed interest in water transportation for public conveyance. Recreational usage and
non-maritime commercial development will compete with water-borne transportation needs. The
shortage of developable commercial properties in heavily populated areas may force ports to increase
the efficiency of their cargo handling operations. The ports may also have to integrate their operations
to include non-maritime tenants within the port lands or to change their emphasis from transportation
to other commercial ventures.
Public Role
The quality of a nation's transportation network is one measure of its economic strength. A reliable
water transportation system is an important segment of the nation's transportation network. The
canals, rivers, dams and ports that make up the nation's water transportation system were constructed
by past generations. These waterways have served as major transportation facilities since the early
settlement of this country. Most of our major cities are located on navigable waterways and industrial
expansion has traditionally followed them.
Water transportation continues to be of national importance; providing benefits in the areas of regional
economic development, energy efficiency and national defense. It is also recognized that it provides
benefits to the commercial waterway transportation industry as well as recreational and wildlife
conservation interests. If the future generations are to enjoy these benefits, we will have to invest in
the maintenance and improvement of our water transportation infrastructure. The Federal, state and
local Governments, along with private industry, must be involved in the management of the inland
and coastal waterway systems.
5-4 AASHTO Water Transportation Recommendations
The impact of the waterway transportation system on the states extends beyond the rivers and the
facilities in the ports along them. Shippers or receivers of commodities through these ports often are
located as much as hundreds of miles away. As a result, the water mode with its landside connections
can offer cost-efficient transportation to a wide geographic segment of our Nation. The economic
development of an entire region is enhanced by the waterway system and the necessary port facilities.
Commodities moving through the deep water ports, in many cases, terminate in the vicinity of the
inland ports. In the reverse direction barges from inland ports bring commodities to ocean ports to
be transshipped throughout the world.
The far reaching effect of the transportation benefits provided by our nation's waterway system cannot
be overemphasized. The nation's waterways are not only vital to trade, economic development and
national defense, but also provide flood control, irrigation, fire protection, fishing and other recrea-
tional opportunities. The Federal Government must continue its partnership with local and state
governments to maintain water as a viable means of transportation. The Water Resource Act of 1986
must be viewed as a positive step toward a partnership for preserving water transportation. The
mandatory cost-sharing provisions will improve the project selection and will help stretch scarce
financial resources. Investments in speculative projects should be minimized by the Act, however,
there is still a real need to develop efficient funding criteria to insure that future water transportation
projects will represent worthwhile investments of public funds.
Part II - Findings of the Standing Committee on Water Transportation
Information Development, Collection and Analysis Effort
Introduction
The nation's waterborne transportation network moves more than 1.8 billion tons of goods each year.
Over half of this shipping is between U.S. ports. The Transportation 2020 forums highlighted the fact
that waterborne trade is dependent on the intermodal exchange of goods with highway and rail for
delivering and receiving products from all of the U.S. to the ports.
Beyond Gridlock - The Future of Mobility as the Public Sees It identified areas of concern that pertain
to water transportation.
The physical condition of transportation facilities is deteriorating. Essential services must be
properly protected.
Access to waterports must be improved. Adequate truck and rail access must be able to bring
goods to and from marine terminals in a timely, cost-effective manner.
Stable funding sources for future revenues must be identified to provide needed transportation
improvements.
Summary and Conclusions Modal Technical Advisory Committee
The Modal Technical Advisory Committee (MTAC) was formed to provide information on the overall
future issues and needs concerning transit, aviation, rail, and waterways. One of the primary activities
of MTAC was to identify future landside access needs for the aviation, rail and water
transportation facilities.
5-5 AASHTO Water Transportation Recommendations
Through a survey of the states, highway and rail access needs to port facilities, which were not
presently included in long-range plans and programs, were identified. The survey was designed to
determine if specific highway improvements were needed on the interstate or non-interstate highway
facility for port facilities in metropolitan or rural areas.
The survey results indicate that waterborne commerce access needs for interstate and non-interstate
connections total about $2 billion. This amount is evenly divided between interstate and non-interstate
needs, although many more lane miles of improvements were identified on the non-interstate system.
The dollar amount of highway improvements in metropolitan areas was much greater than rural areas.
However, the lane miles of improvements were higher in the rural areas.
The dollar amounts are not as important as the identification of where the needs appear to be. The
greatest needs are within the metropolitan areas, on both interstate and non-interstate facilities. The
potential port access highway projects on the interstate and non-interstate system were primarily "new
facilities". New facilities were also identified as the highest dollar need category in both the
metropolitan and rural areas.
Standing Committee on Water Transportation Findings
The Standing Committee on Water Transportation through its discussions with water industry leaders
identified the following major issues which impact water transportation.
Rehabilitation and Modernization of Water Transportation Facilities
The replacement cost for the aids to navigation, locks, dams and channels on the nation's water
transportation system (deep and shallow draft) represents an 100 billion dollar investment for the
nation. The Federal Government maintains the locks, dams, shipping channels and aids to navigation
to protect its past investments. Based upon a report by the National Council on Public Works
Improvement, about $3.6 billion for port infrastructure needs includes about $1.9 billion per year in
federal expenditures and $1.7 billion per year in non-federal expenses. The majority of the non-federal
costs are borne by the private sector. Included in the federal expenses are $900 million for the Coast
Guard for administration, operation and maintenance expenses, and $600 million for annual funding
requirements of projects underway or authorized by WRDA by 1986. Only a portion of the $1.9
billion in federal funds for water transportation operation are covered by user fees. The two programs
which provide the majority of these funds are the Inland Waterways Trust Fund ($70 million) and the
Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund ($200 million). The remainder of the needed funds ($1.6 billion) is
provided through general taxes or borrowing. These funding sources need to be secured to maintain
an adequate water transportation system.
Federal Role
The federal role in operating, maintaining and/or modernizing the water transportation system is
changing federal legislation, redirected agency emphasis, and budget tightening have forced the Corps
of Engineers and the Coast Guard to modify their actions concerning water transportation. As a result
of greater cost-sharing responsibilities, the burden on local governments is greater now than in the
past. The non-federal entity will assume more responsibility in the planning, design and construction
of water transportation projects. This assumption of responsibility by a non-federal entity should not
relieve the Federal Government of its responsibilities to national defense and economic growth.
5-6 AASHTO Water Transportation Recommendations
User Fees
Construction costs of harbor navigation projects, e.g., channel deepening, are share by the Federal
Government and a non-federal interest (states and port authorities). The Water Resources Develop-
ment Act of 1986 authorized the non-federal interest to levy port or harbor dues to recover its portion
of the construction costs of a harbor navigation project. A workable method is needed for identifying
project beneficiaries and for levying user fees in order to recover the non-federal share of costs.
Development/Recreational Pressures
Real estate development pressures on waterfront ares have made it increasingly difficult for marine-
related industries to find suitable, affordable locations. This sector includes marine construction,
dredging, towing, ship repairs and ship servicing vital to the water industry. In some areas, port
operations are being affected by a lack of land needed to sustain growth. In other areas, port properties
are being proposed for waterfront recreation, residential or other commercial (non-water related)
development. Recreational boating activities are beginning to interfere with navigation on the nation's
waterways. The port operator is expected to balance marine, recreation and other commercial
development along the waterfront.
Dredged Material
Nationally, ports are facing increasing costs and tighter budgets. Dredged material disposal costs are
becoming a critical factor in port economics. The lack of environmentally acceptable and economi-
cally feasible dredged material disposal sites for the ports could delay or void most new harbor
deepening projects authorized by the WRDA of 1986. Dredging and the disposal of material is not
merely a local issue but a national concern as the ports provide benefits and services to all Americans,
whether they live on the seacoast or in middle America. Since the very beginning of the nation,
maintenance of navigable waterways has been a matter of national concern.
Research and Development
Research and development (R&D) are recognized as essential elements in the nation's efforts to
remain competitive in world markets. The R&D process for the maritime industry includes the
development and application in hardware, operations and information management systems. Im-
provements in ship building, in productivity, in state-of-the-art cargo handling systems and in terminal
advances. Government sponsored R&D activities have been adversely impacted by budget cutbacks.
Government sponsored R&D is necessary to support national security and public safety, to assist ports
and waterways planning and development, to ensuring that technical information supports existing
laws and to promote international competitiveness.
5-7 AASHTO Water Transportation Recommendations
Part III - Total Systems Approach to Water Transportation Investment
Introduction
Addressing the transportation funding and service needs within budget constraints requires the
recognition that all elements of our transportation infrastructure (rail, highways, water and air) are
part of an integrated and interdependent system. Budgetary constraints have forced federal, state and
local governments to reassess their needs and begin to strategically plan for future investments. The
Federal Government is also turning over traditional federal responsibilities to non-federal entities.
An increased state role in water transportation projects must be coordinated to ensure that our Nation's
water transportation network is preserved. The levels of service provided by portions of the water
transportation network must be compared with service provided by other modes to determine where
and under what circumstances the water transportation mode has a natural advantage and is most cost
effective. Under-utilized or inefficient water transportation related facilities should not continue to
enjoy future public subsidies. To ensure that all parties act to maintain a viable water transportation
network for the nation, there must be a comprehensive federal surface transportation program, which
in consultation with state and local governments and the private sector, guides future water-related
investments.
Goals
The goals for the nation's water transportation system are presented below.
Preservation
Preservation of a water transportation system should be a primary goal of a national transportation
program since the water mode is part of the intermodal freight movement of goods which supports the
nation's economic strength.
Funding
Established cost-sharing programs should be continued. Funds generated by water transportation-related
activities from user fees, customs duties, etc. should be returned to the water transportation industry. Federal
funding for channel maintenance and for construction of water transportation facilities should be secured to
maintain an adequate water transportation system.
Safety
Aids to navigation, vessel inspections, environmental protection, drug interdiction, national defense, and
other Coast Guard activities are services to the entire nation. The safety of the public and water transportation
industry should be preserved.
Access
Intermodal connections between the water mode and other surface transportation modes should be
preserved and enhanced where there is a clear public benefit.
5-8 AASHTO Water Transportation Recommendations
Goal Achievement Strategy
States, local government and the private sector generally bear the cost of port landside facilities. The
Federal Government maintains deep and shallow draft shipping channels and aids to navigation. An
effective water transportation network depends upon adequate landside connections to rail and
highway facilities to deliver or receive goods to or from areas far removed from the water. To ensure
that all parties act to maintain a viable water transportation network for the nation, there must be a
comprehensive federal surface transportation program which defines a water transportation network
of national significance. The surface transportation program will provide recommendations for future
water related investments as part of a total transportation system.
Part IV - Policy Recommendations
Listed below are policy recommendations to address the water transportation issues identified earlier
in this Chapter.
Coordinated Water Transportation Plans
The waterways system, including its landside supporting transportation infrastructure, is an integral
part of the nation's economy. The impacts of waterborne transportation extend well beyond the
localities and states in which water transportation facilities are located. Water transportation is truly
a national resource. In addition to its economic importance, the waterways are part of the nation's
defense transportation network.
The nation faces major structural navigation needs. The rehabilitation or replacement of a large
number of locks and dams on the Inland Waterway System and the modernization and deepening of
some deep-draft ports are needed to permit the nation to compete in world trade. Part of these needs
will be met through the ad valorem tax created by the Water Resource Development Act of 1986 and
the fuel tax from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund. The remainder of the federal share of water
projects must be provided through general taxes or borrowing. With growing competition for federal
funds, future levels of funding available for water transportation projects may not be sufficient to
finance all essential water transportation improvements. Strategic planning needs to be done at a
federal level to prioritize competing claims for federal resources in the preservation and modemization
of the nation's water transportation network. A clear statement of federal priorities and criteria for
federal funding eligibility will guide states, local government entities and private interests in
evaluating their investments in water transport projects. A federal review of the nation's water
transportation network and associated projects is needed to identify which ports and channels are vital
to the nation's economy. Distributing future federal funds based upon national needs, not local or
regional concerns, will provide for a better allocation of limited resources.
Major Recommendation
Coordinated Water Transportation Plans
AASHTO encourages the Federal Government to establish clear priorities for federal investments
in ports and waterways. A national maritime policy is needed to guide federal, state, regional and
local efforts in a manner that will encourage the development of projects that best
serve the interest of the nation based on careful examination of the economic and
5-9 AASHTO Water Transportation Recommendations
environmental impacts of alternative actions, while preserving the autonomy of non-federal
entities.
National Ports and Waterways System
To ensure that future water transportation improvement plans are coordinated, the Federal Govern-
ment should also be encouraged to develop a National Ports and Waterways System similar to the
system in existence for the nation's airports. This effort would classify ports and waterways by the
types and amounts of cargo handled and by their importance to the nation's economy and/or defense.
The inland waterways should be defined in terms of their national significance similar to the highway
classification system. This classification will also encourage rationalizing the nation's ports without
limiting the freedom of local entities to invest non-federal funds in water transportation. Those ports
and connecting channels and waterways which are deemed to be vital to the nation, as evaluated by
consistently applied criteria, would receive a higher priority for federal aid than those ports which
provide a lesser national service. Projects which provide strictly local service should be funded
locally. In addition, a clear definition of federal priorities as defined within a National Ports and
Waterways System will help focus the land access needs of the nation's ports. The intermodal links
serving the ports will be considered as part of a national policy for the surface transportation system.
Major Recommendation
National Ports and Waterways System
AASHTO believes that there is an appropriate federal role in the oversight of the operation,
maintenance and development of the nation's water transportation-related projects. AASHTO
urges the Federal Government to develop a National Port and Waterways System which integrates
water transportation with its necessary intermodal connections into a surface transportation
program.
Intermodal Connections
The nation's ports handle 1.8 billion tons of cargo annually. Their ability to sustain this activity
depends not only on channel depth, berth length or on the facilities available to handle the cargo but
also on the landside connections to the nation's highway and rail networks. Significant landside access
improvement needs have been identified for ports. These needs are concentrated in the urban areas
on non-interstate highways. Improvements to highways and rail are needed to alleviate traffic
congestion and to speed the flow of cargo through the ports to its final destination. Containerization
of goods for shipment has placed special demands on port facilities and supporting transportation
systems. Increased investments are required for landside facilities, such as dock rail lines, enlarged
storage areas, cranes, etc., to permit rapid movement from ship to intermodal connections. In the rural
areas, large volumes of bulk products rely on rail and highway access to the ports to permit timely
distribution to the product users and to allow for the efficient movement of export products.
Major Recommendation
Intermodal Connections
AASHTO urges the Federal Government to recognize the need for landside access improvements
to our nation's ports. Existing funding sources are inadequate to meet current and projected
highway-port and rail-port connector needs. An integrated surface transportation program must
5-10 AASHTO Water Transportation Recommendations
consider port landside transportation access improvements as part of federal funding programmed
for highway and rail transportation modes.
Water Resource Development Act
AASHTO supports the provisions of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 that established
partial cost recovery for improvements to deep-draft ports and the Inland Waterways System. The
nation's waterway system serves interstate commerce and it is essential that the Federal Government
maintain a pro-active role in project development. The Federal Government should promote programs
which replace or rehabilitate priority waterways, locks and dams and reduce or eliminate hazards and
unsafe conditions. It is in the interest of the nation to have a thorough evaluation of water projects
for which federal funding is proposed and carried out by the Federal Government. The federal interest
in an improved system of harbor facilities serving the needs of U.S. Waterborne Commerce warrants
an increased federal contribution to the cost of project feasibility studies. For this reason, the states
support a reduction in the non-federal share of project feasibility studies.
Major Recommendation
Water Resource Development Act
AASHTO urges the Federal Government to fund 100 percent of the costs of feasibility studies
for deep-draft and inland harbor improvement projects. Improvements to the nation's deep-draft
and inland harbors generate benefits far beyond the local area, including reduced transportation
costs, increased competitiveness of U.S. goods in world markets and increased opportunities for
national and regional economic development.
User Fees
With the enactment of the Water Resource Development Act of 1986, the construction costs of harbor
navigation projects are shared by the Federal Government and a non-federal entity. The WRDA of
1986 authorized the non-federal entity to levy port or harbor dues to recover its portion of the
construction costs of a harbor navigation project. Under the existing provisions of the WRDA, this
cost recovery method must avoid adversely impacting existing port users who do not desire or benefit
from the improvement. To date, no additional user charges have been assessed against port users to
finance authorized harbor deepening projects. It appears that no port will be able to utilize the limited
cost-recovery methods permitted within the WRDA.
Major Recommendation
User Fees
AASHTO believes that Congress should amend Section 208 of WRDA of 1986 which permits
the recovery of the non-federal share of the cost of an authorized project. The Act should be
amended to provide the ports greater flexibility in determining the method of assessing and
allocating the non-federal share of a project among port users.
5-11 AASHTO Water Transportation Recommendations
Disposal of Dredged Material
Nationally, ports are facing increasing costs and tighter budgets. In order to be competitive and serve
the vessels bringing goods and commodities, ports must maintain their channels. After enactment of
the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 1986, many ports took advantage of the project
authorizations and signed local cost sharing agreements with the Corps of Engineers to advance
channel maintenance and deepening projects. Dredged material disposal costs are the responsibility
of the non-federal entity, and are becoming a critical economic factor in port and waterway deepening
and maintenance projects. The lack of environmentally acceptable and economically feasible dredged
material disposal sites for ports could jeopardize projects authorized by the WRDA due to extremely
high disposal costs.
Ports serve national markets. The effort to manage dredged material must be a national effort and not
a local port issue. Ports need a national guide to follow in determining whether the dredged material
is clean or contaminated.
Major Recommendation
Disposal of Dredged Material
AASHTO urges the Army Corps of Engineers, in close cooperation with ports and states, to
establish regional scientific criteria for disposal of dredged material. The criteria used must
include a reasonable margin of safety and should give consideration to the economics of dredged
material disposal. Testing procedures for dredged material disposal permit compliance must be
standardized throughout the nation.
AASHTO also urges that the Federal Government develop a program to educate the public about
the economic necessity of dredging. The public's lack of hard information about dredged material
increases the likelihood that all dredged material will be lumped with sludge or toxic materials.
Research and Development
Research and development (R&D) in the water transportation industry is an essential element in the
nation's efforts to remain competitive in world markets. Improvements in ship building, in produc-
tivity, in state-of-the-art cargo handling systems and in terminal operations resulting from R&D
efforts, all contribute to U.S. maritime industry advances. The R&D process for the maritime industry
includes the development and application of hardware, operations and information management
systems. Research also includes an investigation of the laws and government policies impacting water
transportation to ensure that the U.S. maritime industry is not handicapped by needless rules and
regulations. High R&D costs are creating barriers to innovations in marine terminal equipment and
facilities, in dredging and disposal of dredged material techniques, in repair or renovation of locks
and dams, in ship design and operation, in the clean-up of hazardous materials like the oil spill near
Valdez, and in the prevention of spills through improvements in handling techniques of hazardous
materials.
5-12 AASHTO Water Transportation Recommendations
Major Recommendation
Research and Develoopment
AASHTO believes that Congress should establish and fund an integrated Research and Develop-
ment Program for water transportation. The Navy, Coast Guard, Corps of Engineers and the
Maritime Administration should coordinate their research efforts within this National R&D
Program to ensure the most cost effective use of their individual R&D resources.
Waterfront Development Pressures
Urban development pressures along waterfront properties have made it difficult for water-related
industries to find suitable, affordable locations. These industries include marine construction,
dredging, towing, ship repairs and ship servicing vital to the water industry. In some areas, port
operations were being affected by a lack of land needed to sustain growth. More efficient use of port
properties is an important area for future development. Through more efficient cargo handling and
storage methods, the ports would require less land area to accommodate future expansions.
Recreational boating is beginning to interfere with commercial navigation on the nation's waterways.
The maritime industry must work to ensure that redevelopment of waterfront areas and the increased
recreational usage of the nation's waterways does not impede commercial navigation or endanger
pleasure boaters.
Major Recommendation
Waterfront Development Pressures
AASHTO encourages the Federal Government to investigate methods to increase the efficiency
and capacity of existing port terminals and their inland connections. AASHTO also encourages
the development of a national recreational boater education/safety program specifically aimed at
operations near ports and commercial vessels.
5-13 AASHTO Water Transportation Recommendations
Chapter 6
Research, Development, and Technology Transfer (RD&TT)
Part I
Introduction
The nation's transportation system is a complex, dynamic network of physical facilities, operations,
and management practices. This system for moving people and goods is essential to domestic
productivity, international competitiveness, and quality of life. Today, faced with crowded, deterio-
rating facilities, transportation professionals struggle to reverse the decline in the nation's mobility
by finding innovative ways to provide safe and efficient movement of people and goods under
increasingly difficult conditions. Transportation research, development, and technology transfer
(RD&TT) are important weapons in this struggle.
There are strong linkages between transportation research and technological development; between
technology and innovative practice; and between innovation and the quality of our transportation
system. The nation's existing multi-billion dollar transportation system must be protected, and the
opportunities for a more effective system must be developed using new technologies only available
through research.
Historical Background
An early milestone in transportation research occurred almost 100 years ago, when, in 1893, the Office
of Road Inquiry was established by the U.S. Department of Agriculture to investigate road-building
methods and to disseminate information. Through the years, a strong federal-state partnership
developed in the highway research area in particular. A major portion of current highway research
activities is supported by the Highway Trust Fund through the Highway Planning and Research
(HP&R) program, which, since 1944, has provided that 1.5 percent of federal-aid- apportionments
may be used only for planning or research.
Those who have worked in the transportation industry during the last 30 years have been part of a
process that produced an unprecedented rate of change in the amount, variety, and complexity of
transportation services and facilities. Most would agree that there has been more progress in
transportation during this century than in the total prior history of mankind, and most of this progress
has resulted directly from technological innovation made possible by research.
In recent years, the nation has seen rapid innovation in many fields -- such as the space program,
national defense, health care, environmental protection, and communications; and of many kinds--
technological, managerial, and operational. In the years ahead, it may be technology that exerts the
greatest influence on the health of our transportation system. It is clear that the pace of technological
change is so rapid that no industry can be stagnant and remain effective. The rapidly changing
environment for both freight and passenger travel presents an array of challenges. Emerging
problems, more varied needs, regional differences, deregulation, the changing economy, and resource
constraints are making new demands on RD&TT. At the same time, evolving computing,
control, and communications technologies suggest opportunities for improved products,
service, safety, and mobility.
6-1 AASHTO RD&TT Transfer Recommendations
Issues
It is essential that the needs and opportunities for transportation innovation include consideration of
not just research (both fundamental and applied) but also development, education, technology transfer,
and other activities needed to bring about improvements in practice, both in administrative as well as
technical activities.
Starting early in 1989, AASHTO's Standing Committee on Research undertook an effort (1) to
evaluate the issues that will affect the future of highway and transportation research, (2) to recommend
positions for consideration by AASHTO, as part of the Association's Transportation 2020 program,
and (3) to consider current and prospective programs of research and provide AASHTO with the
information needed to determine priorities. This effort was particularly timely and important in the
light of changes expected in transportation research programs with the expiration of current federal-aid
highway and transit legislation in 1991. It is clear that, although the most pressing need is for
AASHTO to be prepared to discuss the role of federal legislation in the future of highway research,
it is important also to consider sources of funding other than federal and to evaluate research needs
in modes other than highways.
AASHTO must focus on two issues: First, is the nation investing adequately in transportation research
for the long term to sustain the enabling technology? Second, are priorities among transportation
RD&TT opportunities determined in a way that will best advance the transportation system? These
would be important issues even if the budget climate were better. In a period of limited resources,
there is an even greater premium on making well-informed budget allocations.
Funding of RD&TT
Many urgent researchable problems remain to be solved, and there is a general recognition that
research has provided useful, cost-effective solutions in the past. Nevertheless, transportation research
budgets continue to be inviting targets for those who must limit the expenditure of public funds.
Because research is usually seen as a discretionary expenditure, and because the products of research
are in the future and sometimes difficult to quantify, it is easy to reduce or eliminate research budgets
for short-term savings.
The rate of spending on research and development in the United States is not keeping pace with other
industrialized nations. The estimated ratio of civilian R&D expenditures to Gross National Product
in 1985 for Japan was 2.8; for West Germany--2.5 and for the United States--1.8. With these kinds
of statistics, it is not surprising that the National Council on Public: Works Improvement found that
the level of effort and resources applied to infrastructure research and development in the United
States falls far short of current as well as future requirements."
Spending on highway research currently constitutes only about 0.2, percent of the nation's highway
expenditures--a level of effort judged by most experts to be inadequate, This very low level of R&D
investment for highways is more clearly understood when it is compared even with low technology
industries, such as building materials, mining, and textiles, which, relative to their sizes, spend on the
average more than eight times as much as the highway industry does.
Furthermore, in comparison to highways, research spending on problems of concern to AASHTO in
the other modes (aviation, railroad, transit, and water) is extremely low.
6-2 AASHTO RD&TT Transfer Recommendations
Although the current level of transportation RD&TT funding is low, there is increasing interest and
support for research within AASHTO and its member departments. In response to a recent survey of
member departments, Chief Administrative Officers answered that the ideal level of funding to
support vigorous and effective research programs in their states would require an average increase of
61 percent.
AASHTO recognizes the high levels of uncertainty, risk, and opportunity associated with the outlook
for highway and transportation research following the expiration of the 1987 Surface Transportation
and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act (STURAA). More than 80 percent of the funds expended
on highway research are derived from the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) through federal-aid apportion-
ments. Given the likelihood that future federal-aid legislation will include provisions substantially
different from the current act, the consequences for transportation research programs must be
anticipated, and steps must be taken to ensure that the nation has the kind of transportation research
programs needed after 1991.
Coordination of RD&TT
If the nation is to have an effective transportation system for the 21st century, research is needed; and,
if research is to be effective, limited resources must be appropriately distributed and effectively
applied. There is a pressing need for a national agenda for comprehensive transportation research in
the U.S. This new agenda must accommodate and balance the needs of both the individual modes
and the system as a whole.
The nation's transportation research system is a complex array of interrelated programs. This
complexity, which flows from the decentralized nature of the nation's transportation system, threatens
the credibility and support for the system, and it creates a risk that inadequate coordination among
programs might lead to undesirable gaps or duplication in the total research effort.
Barriers to innovation must be overcome if research is to be effective. These barriers can stem from
such factors as organizational inertia, and fragmentation of funding and policy responsibilities, and
can block the pursuit and application of innovative solutions to transportation problems. The
decentralized nature of the transportation industry, with diverse geographic, economic, political, and
technical characteristics, results in a variety of problems in initiating and executing research programs.
Fragmentation makes it difficult for research to address problems that cut across the various modes
of infrastructure. Proper coordination enhances the capabilities of all involved.
Transportation 2020--RD&TT
As part of the Transportation 2020 process, the AASHTO member departments and AASHTO's
Advisory Committee on Highway Policy sponsored 65 public forums--at least one in every state--
seeking broad testimony on the nation's surface transportation needs looking toward the year 2020.
A report, titled Beyond Gridlock, was prepared summarizing the results of these forums. The nation's
need for research to enable surface transportation to meet the needs of the next century emerged as a
topic of substantial interest in the Transportation 2020 forums. Speakers from colleges, universities,
scientific organizations, and the public sector called for more emphasis on the nation's research effort.
Recognition of RD&TT as an important component of AASHTO's vision for transportation in the
next century is also reflected in the AASHTO report, Keeping America Moving, The Bottom Line, and
in TRB Special Report 220, A Look Ahead - Year 2020, which summarizes the 1988
Conference on "Long-Range Trends and Requirements for the Nation's Highway and
Public Transit Systems."
6-3 AASHTO RD&TT Transfer Recommendations
AASHTO's Standing Committee on Research has produced a comprehensive report, Innovation -
AASHTO Strategy for Research, Development, and Technology Transfer, which outlines the desirable
scope, scale, organization, and funding for future transportation RD&TT and recommends specific
actions by AASHTO. The Innovation report includes detailed discussions of subjects that will be
crucial to future transportation research.
Some 22 research areas are described in the report, and the priority assigned to each area is indicated
based on a survey of AASHTO member departments.
The report contains a thorough discussion of state-level and national-level RD&TT programs of
interest to AASHTO and its member departments. In addition to a detailed analysis of highway
programs, separate sections are included on RD&TT activities related to public transportation,
railroads, aviation, water transportation, and intermodal issues. The roles of the major highway
RD&TT programs are defined, and the means of coordinating highway research activities are
discussed.
The report includes a major section on RD&TT funding--its scale, distribution, and sources--and
contains recommendations to meet AASHTO's needs after 1991. The report concludes with a strategy
intended to bring about greater innovation through transportation RD&TT. The strategy is organized
by specific objectives and includes more than 70 individual action items.
Conclusion
An integral component of any strategy to address critical transportation issues over the long term will
be an aggressive RD&TT program. Such a program will be necessary if the United States is to remain
competitive in developing and applying new technology. The case to be made for elevating
transportation RD&TT as a high priority requiring adequate funding is based not on an assertion that
RD&TT is more important than other parts of the transportation agency's mission but rather on the
belief that RD&TT is essential to that mission.
Part II
Policy Goals and Recommendations
In developing and operating transportation facilities, AASHTO member departments need access to
accurate information, efficient equipment, and innovative procedures, which can only be provided
through an effective system of research, development, and technology transfer. The AASHTO
Standing Committee on Research has identified seven goals that must be accomplished in order to
reach the desired level of innovation.
Highway Research and Development Programs
Goal: Preserve and enhance the current system of highway research and development programs.
Highway Research is comprised of four major programs: State-level programs, the National Coop-
erative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), the Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP),
and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) program. These programs are distinguished by
the functions they carry out.
6-4 AASHTO RD&TT Transfer Recommendations
State-level programs, which collectively account for more than one-half of all highway research,
development and technology transfer (RD&TT) expenditures, are characterized by their dedication
to solving problems at the state level.
The National Cooperative Highway Research Program, since 1962, has enabled the states to leverage
their resources by cooperatively funding applied research on national-level highway problems
selected by AASHTO. The program places a strong emphasis on meeting the research needs of
AASHTO committees.
The Strategic Highway Research Program is an AASHTO-sponsored program focused on six specific
technical areas of major financial importance to highway agencies. Only the Long Term Pavement
Performance component of SHRP is designed to extend beyond 1992.
The Federal Highway Administration's program of RD&TT is defined by FHWA's responsibilities
and operating characteristics and includes: (1) applied research on national level problems related to
the agency's mission, (2) high risk, high payoff studies requiring a longer term effort, (3) fundamental
research to provide a solid technological base for highway innovation, and (4) leadership in transfer-
ring highway technology.
These four programs comprise a productive system of highway research activities that maintains an
effective balance of fundamental and applied research, short-term and long-term research, and various
problem areas of both local and national interest.
Major Recommendation
AASHTO believes that member-department research activities should be expanded to provide
for more effective problem solving at the state level.
AASHTO also believes that the National Cooperative Highway Research Program should be
continued and expanded for applied research on problems shared in common by state highway
agencies and on other problems of national significance.
AASHTO also believes that, to derive full benefit from the member departments' investment in
the Strategic Highway Research Program's Long Term Pavement Performance program, this
component of the SHRP program should be sustained for 15 years beyond 1991.
AASHTO further believes that the Federal Highway Administration's program of RD&TT should
be expanded to enable this program to more fully execute its role in fundamental research and
technology transfer.
Intelligent Vehicle-Highway Systems
Goal: Develop and demonstrate intelligent-vehicle highway technology as an effective means of addressing
many of the problems on the highway network.
The most prominent new initiative in highway research is emerging with growing interest in the
application of new and advanced technology for improvements in highway operations and safety.
Many transportation researchers and industry professionals believe that new vehicle-
highway applications of microelectronics and advanced communications systems hold
the promise of increasing the capacity, service level, and safety on the nation's highways.
6-5 AASHTO RD&TT Transfer Recommendations
Examples of intelligent vehicle-highway systems include: the use of "real-time" data in the operation
of large area traffic signal systems; advanced forms of in-vehicle displays of traffic information and
routing guidance; advanced systems for automatic traffic control, automatic vehicle identification,
weigh-in-motion, and satellite position finding; vehicle-mounted systems such as radar obstacle
detection and braking, automatic anti-lock braking, electronic failure detection, steerable headlights,
infrared imaging systems for low visibility, and driver impairment detection systems; and dual mode
véhicles, operating under fully automated control on dedicated highway lanes and under manual
control on conventional highways.
Major Recommendation
AASHTO believes that Congress and the Administration should establish and support an
adequately funded national program to develop and demonstrate intelligent vehicle-highway
systems.
RD&TT - All Modes
Goal: Ensure that AASHTO's member departments are able to use RD&TT to develop innovative solutions
to problems in all modes of transportation.
Very little research is conducted at the state level on problems related to aviation, public transportation,
railroads, and water transportation. Nevertheless, member departments face numerous problems in
these modes that could benefit from research.
Aviation research is needed by AASHTO and its member departments to improve security and safety,
increase efficiency, and ameliorate environmental impacts. Promising areas include: traffic control
technology, airports, weather technology, landside capacity, and access.
Public transportation issues that continue to require research include human resources management,
service configuration and marketing, service delivery models, internal efficiencies, maintenance,
equipment, and financing.
Railroad research areas of interest to the states include: line abandonments and the effect on essential
rail service for goods movement, support and technical assistance for short line railroads, and safety
for passenger and freight transportation.
About 80 percent of the states are affected by water transportation issues. This area encompasses
inland and intercoastal waterways as well as port facilities. Research in planning, finance, operations,
and management of water resources and facilities continues to be needed.
Major Recommendation
AASHTO believes that the Federal Highway Administration's research program should be
considered as a model for other transportation modes in conducting research requiring longer
term, larger funding, and special expertise.
AASHTO also believes that appropriate federal modal administrations within the U.S. DOT
should consider AASHTO's interests in the development of federally funded research programs.
6-6 AASHTO RD&TT Transfer Recommendations
AASHTO believes that consideration should be given to creation of a cooperatively funded
research program in each transportation mode modeled after the NCHRP. In particular, AASHTO
should work with the Urban Mass Transportation Administration, the American Public Transit
Association, the Transportation Research Board, and others to advance the prospects for a research
program that would have federally mandated set-aside funding and that would address
AASHTO's research needs as recommended in TRB Special Report 213, Research for Public
Transit, New Directions.
AASHTO further believes that the Federal Aviation Administration should consider the initiative
currently being discussed within the aviation community to establish a National Cooperative
Aviation Research Program.
RD&TT - Intermodal Issues
Goal: Ensure that intermodal issues that need to be researched are not overlooked because they do not fall
clearly under the scope of a single mode.
The concept of intermodal movements has revolutionized freight transportation. Likewise in passen-
ger transportation, where intermodal issues are considered, great benefits are realized by the public
in reduction of congestion and travel delay, in decreasing costs, and in increasing mobility. Intermodal
transportation brings with it critical research needs, but there is presently no stable home to locate
research projects. A number of research needs relate to intermodal issues. For example:
Eliminating railroad clearance obstructions and improving highway and rail access to ports.
Assessment of the transportation impacts of new technology and new container services, e.g.,
4,500-container-capacity ships, dedicated double-stack trains, land bridge services, and domestic
containerization.
Effects of computerization on the movement of freight and the operation of intermodal container
transfer terminals.
Integration of intercity rail terminals and urban transit systems.
Currently, intermodal research is performed by whichever mode perceives it has a dominant role in
the topic, and only if that mode has research funding. Unfortunately, however, intermodal research
too often is left undone because it is not perceived as central to the mission of the mode or because
funds for research are reserved only for use in one mode and cannot support other modes.
AASHTO is one of the few organizations which recognizes the needs in this emerging area and has
done something about it by creating the Special Committee on Intermodal Issues. The committee is
an appropriate body to identify research needs related to the intermodal challenges facing the member
departments.
Major Recommendation
AASHTO and other transportation organizations and agencies should identify intermodal prob-
lems that might benefit from research. AASHTO believes that if an intermodal
problem includes a substantial highway component, it should be considered for
submittal as a candidate for NCHRP funding.
6-7 AASHTO RD&TT Transfer Recommendations
AASHTO believes that when interest in an intermodal research need is shared by several member
departments, it should be evaluated as a candidate for pooled funding using a system modeled
after the relevant parts of AASHTO's Joint Development process and other pooled fund efforts.
Application of Technology
Goal: Accelerate the application of new technology to solve transportation problems.
No research-related activity is of more concern to research program administrators, budget and
financial planning officers, and highway program administrators than is technology transfer. The
process of successfully moving research results from the laboratory to practical technology employed
in the field as standards of practice is a vital part of the transportation research system.
Technology currently used in many parts of the transportation system does not represent the state of
the art. For many reasons, engineers and other transportation officials are careful in adopting new
solutions to recurring problems. It is important that AASHTO assist in accelerating the pace of
technological evolution, by helping to ensure that information is spread and shared systematically.
This objective will take on even greater importance with the arrival of SHRP research results.
Private sector investment in highway-related research is small and diminishing in recent years as a
result of numerous disincentives; it has been directed generally toward the development of new
construction equipment, materials, and scientific instrumentation. Any truly effective research
strategy for the future must include meaningful involvement by the private sector. Barriers such as
those related to procurement procedures and testing requirements must be eliminated where possible.
Major Recommendation
AASHTO believes that the FHWA and other modal administrations of the U.S. Department of
Transportation should increase their implementation activities for the purpose of moving thor-
oughly evaluated technology into practice. Technology assistance programs, training, demon-
stration and experimental projects, and related activities should be continued and expanded.
AASHTO further believes that obstacles to the private sector's introduction of innovations into
the highway market place should be eliminated, and that recent initiatives by regional Associations
of State Highway and Transportation Officials and the FHWA need to be extended to explore
more effective mechanisms for testing, evaluating, and reporting on new highway products and
materials for the purpose of reducing the time and cost of technology introduction and to
encourage industry to invest in R&D for highway markets.
Coordination of RD&TT
Goal: Ensure that the necessary organizational framework and coordination exist for each research
program to carry out its role efficiently and for the total transportation RD&TT system to be fully effective.
The transportation RD&TT system, having evolved to fit the decentralized nature of the industry it
serves, can give the appearance of being a fragmented, uncoordinated enterprise. This perception is
an obstacle to obtaining the support of transportation administrators who need to be convinced that
research is focused on high priority problems, is coordinated, and is free of unnecessary duplication.
One way of ensuring coordination is by defining clear roles for the major programs.
6-8 AASHTO RD&TT Transfer Recommendations
Each of the major research programs addresses most, if not all, technical areas in its research projects.
The determination as to which program provides a "home" for a project sometimes depends on where
a champion for that project is found and where the funding for that project is available. In the highway
mode, the role of the major research programs has evolved as a result of the responsibilities and
characteristics of the managing organizations. Although the same technical areas are often addressed
by each of the programs concurrently, multiple attacks emphasizing different aspects of a common
problem area can be effective. There are many research needs and opportunities that will be important
to AASHTO in both the short and long term. Member departments will determine priorities for their
own state-level programs, and AASHTO committees should have a strong voice in setting the agenda
for national programs (NCHRP, SHRP, and FHWA). The activities of AASHTO's Standing Com-
mittee on Research, its Research Advisory Committee, and the Research Liaison Representatives
recently appointed by AASHTO's committees, will all be important in determining priorities for the
transportation RD&T programs of AASHTO, TRB, FHWA, other federal agencies, and the private
sector. In particular, the Research Advisory Committee can play an important role in establishing
priorities for state-level research by ensuring that information on current federal-aid and state-funded
research is available through a more effective database.
Major Recommendation
AASHTO should expand its activities aimed at identifying new research opportunities and
ensuring that member departments' interests are reflected in research priorities for national-level
programs.
AASHTO believes that the member departments should have a strong voice in setting the nation's
transportation research agenda. The states through AASHTO should continue to provide the
vision and guidance that will permit transportation research programs to address future needs and
opportunities as well as current problems. The states should be responsible for setting research
goals and priorities.
AASHTO believes that improvements in computerized information systems will continue to be
needed to minimize the possibility of undesirable duplication of research. AASHTO should take
a lead role in working with the Federal Highway Administration, the Transportation Research
Board, and other appropriate organizations to develop a database of domestic publicly funded
research project information--for proposed, in-progress, and completed studies.
o
AASHTO further believes that activities of the newly formed Highway Research Coordinating
Council should be continued to ensure that major sponsors of highway research are aware of each
other's programs and will work together for a more coordinated system.
Funding For RD&TT
Goal: Provide an appropriate level and a stable source of funding for transportation research, development,
and technology transfer programs, and ensure that resources are distributed for maximum effectiveness.
Funding for RD&TT has not kept pace with the growing needs and opportunities for technological
innovation in the transportation industry. Highway research spending as a share of total highway
program expenditures is currently about 0.20 percent--far less than even "low-tech" industries devote
to developing new technology. Regrettably, the transit industry and other modes are
currently without significant research and development programs aimed at the problems
of operating agencies.
6-9 AASHTO RD&TT Transfer Recommendations
Funding levels for RD&TT have been trending downward at a critical time when the transportation
system is maturing and rehabilitation programs requiring new cost-effective technology are underway.
Research funding should not be allowed to decrease at a time when the infrastructure crisis and the
need to rebuild our nation's highways and other transportation facilities cry out for technological
advancements.
The nation's transportation system is organized in a decentralized manner; operation is divided among
thousands of federal, state, county, city, and private organizations. Decentralized industries tend to
underspend on research, and the federal involvement is needed to provide a focus to encourage and
support innovation. For example, federally supported highway research activities have been an
important part of the federal-state highway partnership, for almost 100 years. Although less than 20
percent of the nation's highway expenditures are paid using federal aid through the highway Trust
Fund, more than 80 percent of the nation's highway RD&TT expenditures are supported by the Trust
Fund.
Because research is frequently seen as a discretionary expenditure, and because the returns on research
investments are in the future and are difficult to quantify, it is easy to reduce or eliminate spending
for short-term savings.
The essential elements of the current federal-state partnership in highway RD&TT should be retained
in future legislation for continuation of transportation programs. Federal agencies should continue to
play important roles in the planning and administration of RD&TT programs of national interest.
Formula-based allocations (e.g., Highway Planning and Research funding) controlled by operating
agencies have proven to be an effective method of earmarking a stable, dependable flow of funds,
maintaining RD&TT interest and support, and assisting the transfer of technology. Such an arrange-
ment ensures that the nation's transportation research investment is focused on emphasis areas that
closely correspond to the most pressing needs of the transportation community.
Major Recommendation
AASHTO believes that the recent decline in transportation RD&TT spending should be reversed
to reflect current needs and opportunities, and to bring the scale into line with research spending
in other industries, with transportation RD&TT spending in other developed countries, and with
past levels of transportation RD&TT spending in the U.S.
AASHTO believes that funding of transportation research of national significance is a basic
responsibility of the Federal Government in its leadership role in advancing new technologies to
serve the public and in its fiduciary role in utilizing national resources efficiently. Federal
funding, through federal user taxes, should continue to be a principal source of funding for
research to permit needed technological advancements to occur.
AASHTO believes that allocation of federal-aid funds for support of transportation RD&TT
should be based on specified formulas applied to annual apportionments.
AASHTO also believes that specific amounts should be allocated annually, and matched equally
by private-sector and other participants, for a coordinated public/private program to develop and
demonstrate intelligent vehicle-highway systems.
6-10 AASHTO RD&TT Transfer Recommendations
AASHTO further believes that funding for the Highway Planning and Research program,
FHWA's RD&TT activities, and the IVHS program should be derived from federal-aid highway
allocations before the split into the categorical and flexible programs recommended by AASHTO.
6-11 AASHTO RD&TT Transfer Recommendations
Commentary
The following discussions were considered by the Board of Directors/Policy Committee in approving
this AASHTO Report, and are regarded as guiding principles for their associated policy recommen-
dations.
FEDERAL HIGHWAY FUNDING LEVEL (page 3-14)
AASHTO should articulate the full The Bottom Line report needs as the real expression of what is
needed for the nation's highway system, and that the Federal Government should be a significant and
reliable partner in helping to meet those needs.
In recognition of the federal budget deficit problems, AASHTO recognizes that the necessary increase
in the dollar size of the federal highway program from the current inadequate levels may need to be
gradual and incremental.
Therefore, AASHTO has proposed that the federal highway program funding commitment start at a
modest level in fiscal year 1992, and then be gradually increased so that by fiscal year 1995 the federal
responsibility for The Bottom Line report needs on the nation's highways is maintained at the minimum
levels experienced in 1987--54% of the highway system of national significance and 32% of the
flexible highway program. Such a gradual expansion of federal funding could be:
FY 1992
$17.6 billion
FY 1993
19.6 billion
FY 1994
22.7 billion
FY 1995
25.9 billion
Current federal tax resources extended over the four years - annual revenues, interest earnings,
scheduled termination of the gasohol exemption, and accumulated balances--are sufficient to finance
the proposed 1992 and 1993 programs, including the opportunity for states to make use of their
apportionment balances. However, additional revenues will be required before the start of fiscal year
1994 in order to sustain the higher program levels.
FEDERAL TRANSIT FUNDING LEVEL (page 3-14)
Federal funding levels for public transportation capital projects would be increased to $3.5 billion in
FY 1992 and would rise annually, reaching $5.0 billion in FY 1995.
In recognition of federal budget problems, the recommended funding levels have been constrained,
particularly in the first year, with funding gradually rising to a more desireable level by FY 1995.
The $5.0 billion level is only a mid-range between the high and low capital investment requirements
identified in AASHTO's The Bottom Line report as adjusted for inflation. The $3.5 billion beginning
level is approximately mid-way between the current federal capital spending of $1.9 billion and the
FY 1995 target of $5.0 billion.
Commentary C - 1
Full use of the funds in the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust Fund should be made, and
the balance in the Account should be expended. This will delay the need for additional revenues.
Accomplishments possible under this recommended federal program include keeping pace with
rehabilitation/replacement needs on existing systems, upgrading the nation's vehicle fleeet to a more
desirable standard (primarily by decreasing average vehicle ages), and continuing funding for system
expansion (new starts) at the FY 1989 amount. This level does not fund transit growth to (1) maintain
market share; (2) expand service in new or poorly served urban and rural areas; (3) meet new national
goals, such as serving the disabled or achieved clean air mandates; or (4) undertake the projects
allowed under AASHTO's broadened definition of project eligibility.
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION DISTRIBUTION FORMULA (page 3-14)
Mass Transit Account (MTA) funding in excess of current funding levels would be distributed 50
percent by the Section 9 formula and 50 percent by total population. The formula would include a
hold-harmless provision so that if future general fund appropriations for Section 9 are reduced below
the FY 1989 level (as in the case of increased MTA funding merely substituting for general funds),
MTA formula funds equal to the size of the Section 9 appropriation reduction would first be distributed
100 percent by the Section 9 formula.
As with other federal transit funds, MTA formula funds would be allocated directly to transit funding
recipients in areas over 200,000 population and would be allocated to the states for fair and equitable
distribution to urban areas under 200,000 and to rural areas. MTA formula funds would lapse after
a given time be returned to UMTA for redistribution.
HIGHWAY SYSTEM OF NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE (page 3-15)
The highway system of national significance should include the existing Interstate and Defense
Highway System and some portion of the principal arterial system as redefined.
Redefinition of the national system needs beyond the Interstate is required because of the lack of
uniformity across the states in the identification of the existing principal arterial system, and will
require a cooperative and rigorous effort between AASHTO and the FHWA. In redefining the highway
system of national significance AASHTO and FHWA will, if possible, initially designate a system
within a range of between 150,000 and 180,000 centerline miles. AASHTO and the FHWA should
develop consistent criteria to be used by states in designating principal arterial routes.
Within the mileage limit, states are encouraged to identify existing routes and new corridors within
their boundaries, beyond their current portion of the existing Interstate System, which would comprise
a national system, considering at least the following criteria:
Serve interstate and international commerce and travel
Provide for national defense needs
Enhance economic vitality and international competitiveness
Provide service to all portions of the nation
Commentary C - 2
Respond to changing population and travel patterns over time through an objective review process.
The identification of the highway system of national significance would be a cooperative effort
between AASHTO and FHWA. The states would submit their potential routes through AASHTO to
FHWA. In response, FHWA would be given an appropriate amount of route mileage to assign in
order to ensure system rationalization and route connectivity. The new highway system of national
significance should result in a nationally consistent, state designated, federally approved system plan.
COMPLETION OF THE INTERSTATE (page 3-16)
AASHTO has historically supported the Interstate and Defense Highway System as the major focus
of the federal-aid highway program.
AASHTO has historically supported the rehabilitation and preservation of the Interstate and Defense
Highway System as an ongoing need of the nation's highway system.
AASHTO has historically supported the timely completion of the Interstate and Defense Highway
System by 1991.
AASHTO recognizes that there is an obligation to fully compensate the states which acted in good
faith in exchanging approved Interstate highway portions for substitute highway and transit projects.
AASHTO, in its Transportation 2020 effort, supports the continuing federal-aid highway program
focus on the rehabilitation and preservation of the Interstate and Defense Highway System.
AASHTO, in its Transportation 2020 effort, supports capacity improvements on the existing Interstate
and Defense Highway System.
AASHTO, realizing that the cost to complete the approved sections of the existing Interstate and
Defense Highway System as defined in the 1989 Interstate Cost Estimate (ICE) and to fund the
currently approved and committed Interstate Substitution projects may exceed the funding committed
through 1991, strongly supports the prompt funding and completion of the remaining Interstate and
Interstate Substitution commitments.
DISCRETIONARY BRIDGE PROGRAM (page 3-16)
Although a significant number of bridges have been improved in recent years under the bridge
replacement and rehabilitation program and the regular federal-aid programs, the nation's bridge
improvement needs remain extensive. As of June 1988, 8,195 bridges on Interstate highways, 35,022
bridges on other arterial highways, and 62,733 bridges on collector highways, were classified as
deficient or obsolete. Despite the authorization of over $10 billion in federal-aid since 1982 for
replacement and rehabilitation of bridges, the proportion of the Nation's bridges that are classified as
being deficient or obsolete increased over the 1982 to June, 1988 period.
AASHTO's report, The Bottom Line, estimates that at least $4 billion per year is needed to address
bridge needs.
Commentary C - 3
Recognizing this critical and growing need to provide for the maintenance, repair and/or replacement
of bridges on the nation's highway systems, the members of the AASHTO Policy Committee voting
in workshops during their July, 1988 meeting identified "Bridge Needs" as one of the highest ranked
objectives for the highway program. Based upon the voting process used in the workshops it was
voted second in importance only to System Maintenance among the seven highway objectives voted
upon.
While routine bridge needs can probably be addressed by each state using their formula apportion-
ments of categorical and flexible funds there is a need to ensure that the states can and will finance
the needed rehabilitation, replacement or capacity supplementation of major structures, which
because of their high costs, might not be fundable under an annual formula apportionment.
Since 1978, the states had identified 217 large deficient bridges (total cost almost $7 billion) which
are too costly to replace or rehabilitate from formula apportionments of Federal funds. These states
requested help in funding these projects from the existing Discretionary
Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program. Because of the limited funding available
through June 30, 1988, the FHW was only able to provide funding for 107 of these identified projects
in 45 states, leaving over 100 of these costly projects without an identified source of funding. The
list of large costly bridges which will age and deteriorate over the next few years and require
replacement, rehabilitation or capacity supplementation can be expected to grow.
In response to criticism that Discretionary Bridge grants were being dispensed as "pork barrel" and
not directed to the most urgent needs, the FHWA has developed a sophisticated formula which is
used to rank eligible candidate bridges and set priorities for funding. This formula can be modified to
ensure that the limited available funds will be used cost-effectively to address the most critical
structural and capacity needs on a priority basis.
To address these "lumpy" and difficult to finance critical needs the following is proposed:
(1) A separate funding source of up to 2 percent of the amounts made available from the Highway
Trust Fund to finance the proposed Total Highway Program to adequately finance a continued
Discretionary Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program; and
(2) The rehabilitation or replacement of structurally or capacity deficient bridges on any public
highway, including capacity supplementation through construction of a parallel structure, costing
more than $10 million or 10 percent of any state's annual apportionments for the proposed
Categorical and Flexible Highway Programs, whichever is less, shall be eligible for funding under
the program; and
(3) The selection of projects shall be in accordance with priorities established by FHWA using
a rating system for the Discretionary Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program which
takes into account both structural and capacity deficiencies, with consideration given to balance
among the states.
HIGHWAY PROGRAM TRANSITION CONSIDERATIONS (page 3-16)
While the AASHTO Policy Committee has acted on all significant policy proposals for the next federal
surface transportation act, there are still a number of important matters to consider in the transition
Commentary C - 4
from a still incomplete, many categorized old federal highway program to a new streamlined program.
Study and resolution methods are required to:
1. Implement the AASHTO policy for funding and completion of the remaining Interstate
highway and substitution commitments.
2. Allow states to readily make use of their accumulated apportionment balances in the event
that obligation limits were to be continued in the next federal act.
3. Smoothly move from the old federal program to the new program.
4. Assure that accumulated apportionment balances remain available to the states for
transportation purposes.
At the appropriate time, a cooperative effort of the states and Federal Highway Administration should
be organized to study and appropriately resolve these transition matters.
MASS TRANSIT ACCOUNT EQUITY (page 3-16)
1. A stable federal revenue source must continue to be available to all areas, urban and
rural, to fund extraordinary public transportation capital needs that cannot be accommo dated from
regular formula funds.
The need for extra funding to undertake non-routine capital projects occurs throughout the nation.
All areas should continue to have access to adequate discretionary funding to meet such needs.
2. The current MTA funding commitment to rail and bus modernization as well as
committed new start projects should be retained.
Current transit funding falls significantly short of meeting transit needs nationwide. A restruc-
turing of the MTA that does not protect current programs could have a serious impact on transit
systems that have major capital projects already underway or otherwise depend on continued
MTA funding.
3. Discretionary MTA revenues should be distributed on the basis of rational, objective
project selection criteria.
There will always be limited resources to meet all of the nation's public transportation needs. The
challenge is to meet those needs in the most effective manner, based on objective considerations.
4. All MTA revenues should be fully appropriated.
Since the MTA was established in 1983, appropriations from the account have been substantially
below levels that can be supported. As a result, the balance in the MTA has been growing while
badly needed transit capital needs have gone unmet. Revenue from this funding source should
be fully available for public transportation purposes.
5. Funding from the MTA above current amounts appropriated for bus and rail moderniza-
tion and committed new start projects should include a broad-based distribution plan.
Commentary C - 5
To achieve consensus on the MTA and to address public transportation needs in all areas of the
nation - from urban to rural areas - any additional revenues must be broadly and fairly distributed
with particular emphasis on rural public transportation which has been severely underfunded in
the past.
6. Funding from the MTA above current amounts appropriated for bus and rail modern-
ization and committed new start projects should emphasize a flexible, broadened defini-
tion of public transportation projects.
The nation's changing mobility needs can best be met through a variety of services and approaches
which include some forms of high occupancy and shared ride services.
URBAN AND RURAL HIGHWAY ELEMENTS (page 3-17)
AASHTO supports strong state and local decision-making in the prioritizing and programming of
surface transportation projects.
AASHTO finds that the split between urban and rural surface transportation needs varies greatly from
state to state.
AASHTO finds that solutions to surface transportation problems vary greatly from one urban area to
another, as well as from one rural region to another.
AASHTO believes that all urban and rural surface transportation needs can be addressed under one
of the following: a) urban mobility, b) suburban congestion, c) rural access, d) modal interlinks.
AASHTO believes that state and local flexibility will allow these varying surface transportation
needs, occurring within the various states, to be met in the most productive manner.
AASHTO understands that some states and local governments desire the development of urban and
rural surface transportation elements.
AASHTO will continue its strong support, evidenced in its policy recommendations, for the flexibility
of decision-making, prioritizing and programming at the state and local levels.
AASHTO is willing to consider the merits of any proposed urban and rural elements which include
sufficient flexibility regarding state and local transfer of funding and priorities among urban and rural
needs at state and local discretion.
HOLD HARMLESS PROVISION (page 3-20)
The AASHTO Board of Directors/Policy Committee adopted the following policy at its December 4,
1988 meeting in Wichita, Kansas:
"Through a hold harmless provision, no state should receive less than the current highway program
would provide in 1991, as if all states had completed their Interstate highway systems."
Commentary C-6
This policy statement is interpreted to mean that:
(1) In fiscal year 1992 (or in whatever year the new federal program is fully implemented) all
states are guaranteed to be apportioned and receive at least the same federal-aid highway dollar
amounts as they received in fiscal year 1991 from:
Interstate completion (each state receives one-half percent of the apportioned amount)
Interstate 4R
Primary
Secondary
Urban
Bridges
Metro Planning
Hazard Elimination
Rail-Highway Crossings
Minimum Allocation
(2) Unusual, disparate amounts would not be included in the hold harmless amount. Therefore,
dollar amounts for Interstate Construction above one-half percent, Interstate Substitution, and
discretionary and/or demonstration project funding would not be included.
Commentary C-7
Appendix
THE AASHTO TRANSPORTATION 2020 PROGRAM
The purpose of this Appendix is to describe the origins and overall activities of the AASHTO
Transportation 2020 Program through October, 1989, leading to the publishing of the Final Edition
of the AASHTO report New Transportation Concepts for a New Century. It needs to be recognized
that the Transportation 2020 Program is not completed, and that AASHTO's Transportation 2020
effort will continue into 1990 and possibly beyond.
Part I. Introduction
Founded in 1914, the Association has throughout its history been engaged in the development of
transportation policy to guide the development of America's transportation system, from the state
perspective. Initially concerned only with highways, in 1973 the Association expanded its activities
to all transportation modes. Following this expansion of its purview, the Association developed and
adopted its first comprehensive recommendations on National Transportation Policy in 1974, a
document that has been updated since. In addition to developing an overall National Transportation
Policy, the Association has adopted policy statements and resolutions addressed to each of the modes
and related transportation issues , which is an ongoing activity.
The effort leading to the New Transportation Concepts for a New Century report began in 1986,
when an AASHTO Task Force on Highway Finance was created. This Task Force proceeded to
organize a national conference on state highway financing considerations and methods that was held
in August, 1986, at Smuggler's Notch, Vermont, which resulted in publication of a January, 1987
AASHTO report titled "Understanding the Highway Finance Evolution/Revolution." With this
project completed, the Task Force then turned to the future of the nation's highways and the
Federal-aid highway program. This resulted in a proposal to the AASHTO Policy Committee in early
1987 to establish what has become the Transportation 2020 program.
The initial recommendation to the Policy Committee was to concentrate only on the future of the
highway program. The Policy Committee broadened the effort to also include public transportation,
and on February 20, 1987 adopted a resolution that committed the Association to:
" ...undertake to develop and implement a strategy for achieving public and private sector
consensus on, and commitment to, a redirected national highway and transportation program
that will address transportation needs and federal, state, and local roles well into the 21st
Century."
The February 20 resolution reconstituted the Task Force on Highway Finance as the Task Force on a
Consensus Transportation Program, and approved an overall work plan. The work plan included as
a goal developing and implementing a new consensus on the future of the nation's surface transpor-
tation program, working in conjunction with other major national organizations concerned about the
nation's transportation system and its future.
Under the adopted work plan, AASHTO proceeded to create an Advisory Committee on Highway
Policy (ACHP), appointing representatives from nearly 30 public and private sector organizations to
its Steering Committee, and Lester P. Lamm, President of the Highway Users Federation, as chairman.
Appendix A - 1
The Association also proceeded to initiate organization of the Transportation Alternatives Group
(TAG), as a mechanism to develop a consensus among 12 principle organizations concerned with the
nation's highway and public transportation policy. The President of AASHTO appointed Thomas W.
Bradshaw, Jr. of North Carolina as acting chairman of the TAG, and after organization of the TAG
was completed in November, 1987, the 12 TAG organizations named him chairman. During early
1987 AASHTO also developed and adopted a logo and named the effort the Transportation 2020
program, and extended use of the logo and name to the TAG and the ACHP, as well as AASHTO.
Within AASHTO, the Task Force on a Consensus Transportation Program proceeded to organize a
number of committees from the Association's member departments, and established cooperative
working relationships with the Federal Highway Administration and the Urban Mass Transportation
Administration, in addition to a large number of other organizations.
In 1988, AASHTO decided to expand its Transportation 2020 effort to include the other modes, and
undertook activities to examine aviation, rail and water transportation needs and policies. The work
on these additional three modes was assigned to the respective AASHTO Standing Committees on
Aviation and Water Transportation, and the AASHTO National Conference of State Railway Officials
(NCSRO). In 1989 a further expansion of AASHTO's Transportation 2020 program occurred, when
an analysis of research needs was undertaken by the AASHTO Standing Committee on Research and
preparation of a comprehensive report accomplished.
As envisioned by AASHTO, the Transportation 2020 Program is a multi-year initiative, organized
into a four-phase process. Phase I was to examine transportation needs and issues, which AASHTO
has nearly completed, and Phase II was to develop alternatives to meet transportation needs and
challenges, and to make recommendations. The publication of the Final Edition of the New Trans-
portation Concepts for a New Century report concludes Phase II for AASHTO. Phase III is to reach
consensus regarding the best transportation program for the nation, and through the TAG and related
efforts this Phase is well along. Phase IV is to work to implement new National Transportation Policy
and a new surface transportation program, and this Phase is now underway. The overall focus of this
effort is the year 2020, as the name for the Program implies, with a major interim target being the next
authorization of a Surface Transportation Assistance Act by the U.S. Congress. The surface trans-
portation program is currently authorized through fiscal year 1991.
A major factor leading to AASHTO's initiation of the Transportation 2020 Program was the pending
completion of the Interstate and Defense Highway System. Construction of this 44,000 mile system
was started in 1956 and has provided a major focus for the nation's surface transportation system for
the past 33 years. The 1987 Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act
(STURAA) was intended to provide the final federal construction funding for completion of the
Interstate system. With completion of construction on the Interstate system near, transportation
leaders in AASHTO and other organizations agreed upon the need to examine the nation's transpor-
tation system through the next thirty year horizon.
A second factor which led to the Transportation 2020 Program was the difficulty in obtaining passage
of the 1987 STURAA. This legislation passed only after the Congress was able to override a
Presidential veto by one vote. Transportation leaders realized that they needed to work together more
closely to develop a consensus-oriented transportation program for consideration by the members of
Congress and the Administration.
Part II of this Appendix details activities that have thus far been conducted under the Transportation
2020 Program. Part III provides a list of publications available from AASHTO that have been
Appendix A - 2
produced under the Program, which were utilized in the preparation of the Final Edition of the New
Transportation Concepts for a New Century Report.
Part II. Summary of Major Transportation 2020 Program Activities
1.
AASHTO Policy Committee
As described in Part I, the AASHTO Policy Committee, which consists of the Chief Administrative
Officers of the 52 AASHTO member departments of highways and transportation, approved a
resolution in February, 1987 that led to establishment of the Transportation 2020 Program. Since then
it has taken several actions and has been a strong participant in a number of Transportation 2020
activities. As indicated in item 5 below, AASHTO Policy Committee members provided leadership
for the 65 Transportation 2020 public forums held throughout the nation by the Advisory Committee
on Highway Policy, for example.
The principle work of the AASHTO Policy Committee concentrated on the development and approval
of the New Transportation Concepts for a New Century document. Through a survey distributed in
May, 1988 the Policy Committee members identified key transportation issues. Through workshop
sessions held in July, 1988 at Itasca, Illinois, the Chief Administrative Officers further defined the
key issues, and assigned them priority. The results of this activity were summarized and used as a
working document by the Task Force on a Consensus Transportation Program, along with the input
from a number of other Transportation 2020 activities, to develop the first edition of the New
Transportation Concepts for a New Century report, which was approved by a two-thirds vote of the
AASHTO Policy Committee in December, 1988 at the AASHTO Annual Meeting in Wichita, Kansas.
First and second sets of revisions and additions to the December, 1988 report were then developed
by the Task Force, and were approved by a two-thirds vote of the AASHTO Policy Committee at its
February, 1989 and July, 1989 meetings, respectively, and resulted in revised editions published under
those respective dates. The Task Force then developed a final set of revisions and additions to the
report, which were considered and adopted by the Policy Committee in October, 1989 during the
AASHTO Annual meeting in Atlanta, Georgia. The vote in Atlanta was nearly unanimous.
2.
Task Force on a Consensus Transportation Program/Related Committees
Following the passage of the February, 1987 resolution by the AASHTO Policy Committee, the
President of AASHTO proceeded to appoint members to the Task Force on a Consensus Transporta-
tion Program, with Charles L. Miller, Director of the Arizona Department of Transportation, as
chairman. The Task Force is composed of two representatives from each of the four AASHTO regions
as well as the chairmen of the AASHTO modal committees, including the Standing Committees on
Highways, Public Transportation, Aviation, and Water Transportation and the National Conference
of State Railway Officials. In addition, the chairman of the Standing Committee on Planning is a
member of the Task Force.
The Task Force and its related committees/subcommittees, in conjunction with the AASHTO Standing
Committees, have developed needs assessments and policy recommendations regarding the nation's
future transportation program.
Appendix A - 3
The major working committee of the Task Force on a Consensus Transportation Program is the Policy
Review Committee (PRC). This Committee is composed of a senior level staff person to each of the
AASHTO Chief Administrative Officers serving on the Task Force, and has held many meetings
around the country in the process of developing needs assessments and policy recommendations for
consideration by the Task Force.
The major subcommittees of the Policy Review Committee include the following:
1. Highway Technical Advisory Committee (HTAC)
2. Modal Technical Advisory Committee (MTAC)
3. SCOP Task Force on a Consensus Transportation Program
4. Subcommittee on Economic Expansion and Development
5. Task Force on a Highway System of National Significance
6. Task Force on Highway Finance and Funding Allocation
7. Task Force on Transit Equity/Task Transit Finance and Funding Allocation
Over 50 meetings of the Task Force, the PRC and its subcommittees and task forces have been held
since 1987, in addition to a number of telephone conference calls. These meetings have involved the
Chief Administrative Officers of the AASHTO member departments and/or senior level staff
representatives. A brief description of the activities of each of the above listed subcommittees and
task forces of the PRC follows:
Highway Technical Advisory Committee (HTAC) - This committee participated in the assess-
ment of highway needs through the year 2020 as reported in The Bottom Line report, including
drafting Appendix 1, "Highway Needs, Structural Issues and Highway Operations."
Modal Technical Advisory Committee (MTAC) - This committee developed needs assess-
ments for public transportation and modal interlinks through the year 2020 as reported in The
Bottom Line report, including drafting Appendix 2, "Public Transportation Needs" and Appendix
3, "Modal Interlink Needs for Air, Water and Rail."
SCOP Task Force on a Consensus Transportation Program - This group, selected from the
AASHTO Standing Committee on Planning (SCOP), assisted in the data collection efforts of the
Policy Review Committee, particularly with regard to new facilities and local road needs.
Subcommittee on Economic Expansion and Development - This subcommittee is examining
the linkages between transportation and economic productivity/development. Recommendations
from this subcommittee are included in Chapter 1 of the New Transportation Concepts for a New
Century report. Additional activities are underway through this subcommittee, including a
research project under the AASHTO-sponsored National Cooperative Highway Research Pro-
gram (NCHRP), a project with the National Chamber Foundation and the Eno Foundation, and
further activities to bring together the public and private interests in transportation and economic
productivity.
Appendix A - 4
Task Force on a Highway System of National Significance - This Task Force worked to further
define the AASHTO policy recommendation to establish a Highway System of National Signif-
icance (HSNS). As identified by the AASHTO Policy Committee in February, 1989, the HSNS
is proposed to include the Interstate system and a portion of the Principal Arterial System as
redefined.
The Task Force, working in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA),
held a series of meetings and regional workshops. A process was developed through which the
states submitted a proposed Principal Arterial system and proposed alternatives for an HSNS.
This information serves as a guide as to what such a system would look like. Further work with
FHWA and local governments would be needed if this concept is included in the next highway
authorization legislation.
Task Force on Highway Finance and Funding Allocation This Task Force, through a series
of conference calls and meetings, examined alternative factors for the distribution of highway
funds as well as funding levels for the FY 1992 to 1995 period and made recommendations to the
Policy Review Committee.
Task Force on Transit Equity/Task Force on Transit Finance and Funding Allocation - The
Task Force on Transit Equity examined the current distribution of the Mass Transit Account of
the Highway Trust Fund and alternatives to the current distribution. This work was then followed
by the work of the Task Force on Transit Finance and Funding Allocation, which did further
analysis and made recommendations to the Policy Review Committee regarding the distribution
of transit funds, transit funding levels for the FY 1992 to 1995 period, and a broadened definition
of public transportation for the use of Mass Transit Account funds allocated to the Flexible Transit
Program.
3.
AASHTO Standing Committees
In September, 1988, the chairmen of the AASHTO Standing Committee on Aviation, Standing
Committee on Water Transportation, and the National Conference of State Railway Officials were
requested by the President of AASHTO to begin work on needs assessment reports and policy
recommendations for their respective modes comparable to the Transportation 2020 activities being
completed for highways and public transportation. The policy recommendations developed for
aviation, rail and water transportation were forwarded to the AASHTO Policy Committee for
consideration, and the actions of the Policy Committee resulted in the recommendations included in
Chapters 2, 4 and 5 respectively of the final edition of the New Transportation Concepts for a New
Cenutry report.
In October, 1989 at the meeting of the AASHTO Policy Committee in Atlanta, needs reports for
aviation and rail transportation were presented by the Standing Committee on Aviation and the
National Conference of State Railway Officials to the Policy Committee, for consideration and
approval. The reports, respectively titled Beyond the Horizon: The Future of the Nation's Air
Transportation System, 1988-2020 and Railroad Perspectives: A Summary of Railroad Industry
Major Concerns and Trends for 1988-2020, were both approved for publication.
The Standing Committee on Water Transportation is developing its needs assessment as well, and is
completing its report for consideration by the AASHTO Policy Committee in the coming months.
Appendix A - 5
In early 1989, the AASHTO Standing Committee on Research initiated an effort to examine research
needs and to make recommendations in conjunction with the Transportation 2020 program. A report
was prepared entitled Innovation: A Strategy for Research, Development, and Technology Transfer,
and was approved for publication by the Policy Committee in a mail ballot. The Standing Committee
also made recommendations to the Policy Committee, for consideration with regard to inclusion in
the New Transportation Concepts for a New Century report. The Policy Committee adopted the
recommendations, with minor amendments, resulting in the recommendations included in Chapter 6
of this report.
4.
Advisory Committee on Highway Policy
In addition to the organizations represented on the Steering Committee of the Advisory Committee
on Highway Policy, the ACHP now includes a large number of cooperating organizations forming an
overall coalition of more than 100 public and private sector organizations. The major activity of the
ACHP was in helping sponsor the public forums and producing the Beyond Gridlock report described
in item 5, all done under the leadership of Lester P. Lamm and with strong staff support from the
Highway Users Federation.
The ACHP has been actively involved in a number of Transportation 2020 activities and has provided
input to AASHTO and other organizations throughout the Transportation 2020 process. It has also
functioned in the consensus building effort. During the summer of 1989, members of the ACHP
responded to a 38 question survey regarding key transportation issues, designed to identify areas of
consensus. Over 50 organizations responded to the survey and provided their positions regarding
present and future issues associated with surface transportation.
5.
Public Forums/Beyond Gridlock Report
As an initial Transportation 2020 activity under Phase I of the work program, 65 public forums were
held around the nation in 1987 and 1988 under the overall sponsorship of the Advisory Committee
on Highway Policy and the member departments of AASHTO. Chief Administrative Officers of the
AASHTO member departments and their staffs were actively involved in organizing the forums,
usually in conjunction with representatives of the Highways Users Federation. A large number of
individuals and organizations expressed their concerns regarding transportation needs and issues, with
over 2,300 persons making presentations at the forums. Attendance at the forums exceeded 9,000.
A report entitled Beyond Gridlock, which summarizes the highlights of these forums, was produced
by the ACHP with staff support from the Highway Users Federation, and was distributed by the
Federation and AASHTO, from whom copies may be obtained.
6.
Futures Conference
Another initial Transportation 2020 activity under Phase I was a Futures Conference held by the
Transportation Research Board (TRB) in June, 1988 to examine transportation-related issues to the
year 2020, including fuel availability, air quality, demographics, changes in vehicle related technology
and related subjects. The Conference was financed jointly by AASHTO, the Federal Highway
Administration and the National Association of Regional Councils, and the Transportation Alterna-
tives Group was a cooperating sponsor. A report entitled A Look Ahead: Year 2020 published by and
available from TRB presented the findings of that conference.
Appendix A - 6
7.
Transportation Alternatives Group (TAG)
As noted in Part I, AASHTO took the lead in organizing the Transportation Alternatives Group
(TAG), with eleven other major organizations. The TAG was established to provide a forum for the
development of consensus on major transportation issues, and was funded with contributions from
the sponsoring organizations and a large number of other persons and organizations in the private
sector. Stephen C. Lockwood was engaged to serve as TAG Executive Director, under the direction
of Chairman Thomas W. Bradshaw, Jr. and the members of the TAG Executive Committee. The 12-
member organizations of the TAG are:
AASHTO
American Automobile Association
American Public Transit Association
American Public Works Association
American Trucking Associations
Highway Users Federation
National Association of Counties
National Association of Regional Councils
National Conference of State Legislatures
National Governors' Association
National League of Cities
U.S. Conference of Mayors
Organization of the TAG was completed on November 11, 1987, and it has engaged in an extensive
series of meetings since then to discuss transportation issues and move toward consensus positions.
The TAG has produced two documents to date, and will be releasing a third document in the near
future. The first document is the "TAG Issue Statement", which discusses issues collectively
identified by TAG members for consideration in the development of future national surface transpor-
tation policy and programs.
The second document is entitled "Basic Directions for a New National Surface Transportation
Program," and represents an initial staff consensus of TAG member organizations on the major policy
themes to serve as a point of departure for subsequent detailed program development.
The third document, to be released in the near future, is the result of a staff level effort to reach
consensus on a number of issues, followed by a meeting of the leadership of the TAG member
organizations at Hunt Valley, Maryland on October 13-14, 1989. The senior officials attending the
Hunt Valley meeting examined the consensus positions reached by the staff and refined these
consensus positions.
Appendix A-7
Consensus was reached among the TAG member organizations regarding the following issues:
Program Orientation
Federal Program Focus/Priority
Federal-Aid Program Structure
Nature and Extent of "National Highway System"
Flexibility of Urban, Suburban and Rural Programs
Specific Program Issues
Safety
Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation
Systems Productivity (Operations and Management Emphasis)
Freight/Trucking Operations
Intermodal Access and Integration
Air Quality
Scenic Byways
Intercity Passenger Rail and Bus
Research, Development and Technology Transfer
Intergovernmental Roles and Responsibilities
Decision-making: Level, Style and Process
Funding Allocation and Recipients
Investment Level and Sources
Level of Federal Investment and State/Local Matching
This TAG consensus development, in addition to its long-range focus, provides positions for
consideration by the member organizations of the TAG, and also by others, including the U.S.
Department of Transportation in the development of its National Transportation Policy, and by the
Congress in the development of the next surface transportation authorization.
In addition to the TAG members, several other organizations concerned with transportation issues
serve on a Chairman's Advisory Committee (CAC), and provide additional information and raise
issues for consideration by the TAG.
8.
Transportation 2020 Implementation Team
At the AASHTO Annual Meeting held in Atlanta, Georgia in October, 1989, the AASHTO Policy
Committee endorsed the establishment of an AASHTO Transportation 2020 Implementation Team,
to help with the Phase IV implementation effort. The Transportation 2020 Implementation Team, in
conjunction with the AASHTO Task Force on a Consensus Transportation Program, is to engage in
a research and education program in support of the Transportation 2020 program.
Appendix A - 8
RELATED ACTIVITY
U.S. Department of Transportation National Transportation Policy
While formal separation has existed between the Transportation 2020 Program and efforts of the U.S.
Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) to develop federal transportation policy, a high degree of
cooperation has existed.
After Samuel Skinner became Secretary of Transportation, in 1989 he initiated a broad and intense
effort to develop a National Transportation Policy. AASHTO and those engaged in the Transportation
2020 Program have contributed to and assisted Sec. Skinner's effort.
AASHTO and its member departments have provided input to the U.S. DOT as that department works
toward the development of a National Transportation Policy scheduled for release in January, 1990.
Chief Administrative Officers of AASHTO member departments and their staffs have provided
testimony at the series of meetings sponsored by U.S. DOT around the nation, and AASHTO staff
has attended meetings held in Washington, D.C. to discuss the AASHTO Transportation 2020
program with U.S. DOT.
Copies of the Transportation 2020 reports developed by AASHTO were provided to each of the
members of the six market cluster groups organized for the U.S. DOT effort. These transportation
market cluster groups include:
Urban/Suburban Transportation
Rural Transportation
Intercity Freight Transportation
Intercity Passenger Transportation
International Transportation
Innovation and Human Factors in Transportation
AASHTO will continue to provide Transportation 2020 information to the U.S. Department 'of
Transportation for consideration as its National Transportation Policy is developed.
Part III. AASHTO Transportation 2020 Program Publications
The following reports and publications have been produced through 1989 by AASHTO under its
Transportation 2020 Program effort. Copies can be obtained from AASHTO, within limits of stock.
"Understanding the Highway Finance Evolution/Revolution", 1987, AASHTO.
(Single copies at no cost. Multiple copies at $5.00 each)
Beyond Gridlock, 1988, Advisory Committee on Highway Policy.
($4.95 each)
Appendix A - 9
The Bottom Line, 1988, AASHTO, Full Report.
(Single copies at no cost. Multiple copies: 2-50, at $5.00 each; 51-100 copies, at $2.50 each; and
101+ copies, at $2.00 each)
The Bottom Line, 1988, AASHTO, Executive Summary Only.
(Single copies at no cost. Multiple copies at $1.00 each)
Appendix 1: Report of the AASHTO Transportation 2020 Highway Technical Advisory Committee
(HTAC): Highway Needs, Structural Issues, and Highway Operations, 1988, AASHTO.
(Single copies at no cost. Multiple copies at $2.00 each)
Appendix 2: Report of the AASHTO Transportation 2020 Modal Technical Advisory Committee
(MTAC): Public Transportation Needs, 1988, AASHTO.
(Single copies at no cost. Multiple copies at $2.00 each)
Appendix 3: Report of the AASHTO Transportation 2020 Modal Technical Advisory Committee
(MTAC): Modal Interlink Needs (Air, Water and Rail), 1988, AASHTO.
(Single copies at no cost. Multiple copies at $2.00 each)
Transportation Safety in 2020, 1989, AASHTO.
(Single copies at no cost. Multiple copies at $2.00 each)
Railroad Industry Perspectives: A Summary of Railroad Industry Major Concerns and Trends for
1988-2020, 1989, AASHTO.
(Single copies at no cost. Multiple copies: 2-50, at $5.00 each; 51-100 copies, at $2.50 each; and
100+ copies, at $2.00 each)
Beyond the Horizon: The Future of the Nation's Air Transportation System, 1988-2020, 1989,
AASHTO (final edition under preparation).
(Single copies at no cost. Multiple copies: 2-50, at $5.00 each; 51-100 copies, at $2.50 each; and
100+ copies, at $2.00 each)
Innovation: A Strategy for Research, Development, and Technology Transfer, 1989, AASHTO.
(Single copies at no cost. Multiple copies: 2-50, at $5.00 each; 51-100 copies, at $2.50 each; and
100+ copies, at $2.00 each)
New Transportation Concepts for a New Century, 1989, AASHTO, Full Report.
(Single copies at no cost. Multiple copies at $2.00 each)
New Transportation Concepts for a New Century, 1989, AASHTO, Executive Summary Only.
(Single copies at no cost. Multiple copies at $1.00 each)
Appendix A - 10