guidance on new starts policies and procedures and fy 2008 new starts reporting
Post on 22-Dec-2015
217 views
TRANSCRIPT
Guidance on New Starts Guidance on New Starts Policies Policies
and Proceduresand Proceduresandand
FY 2008 New Starts FY 2008 New Starts ReportingReporting
May 22 Federal Register May 22 Federal Register Notice Notice
Notice of Availability - May 16 Policy Notice of Availability - May 16 Policy GuidanceGuidance
Response to Comments on Draft GuidanceResponse to Comments on Draft Guidance Notice of Availability - New Starts Notice of Availability - New Starts
Reporting Instructions and FY 2008 Reporting Instructions and FY 2008 Evaluation ProcessEvaluation Process
Schedule for FY 2008 New Starts Schedule for FY 2008 New Starts ReportingReporting
SAFETEA-LU Says……SAFETEA-LU Says…… Section 3011(d)(6) requires that FTA Section 3011(d)(6) requires that FTA
publish, for comment and response, Policy publish, for comment and response, Policy GuidanceGuidance
180 days after enactment of SAFETEA-LU180 days after enactment of SAFETEA-LU Each time significant changes are made to the Each time significant changes are made to the
process/criteriaprocess/criteria At least every two yearsAt least every two years
FTA’s Response……..FTA’s Response…….. January 19, 2005 Proposed GuidanceJanuary 19, 2005 Proposed Guidance 60 day (plus additional week) comment period 60 day (plus additional week) comment period 2-day working session w/ APTA Policy and 2-day working session w/ APTA Policy and
Planning CommitteePlanning Committee May 16 Final GuidanceMay 16 Final Guidance
Changes Proposed Changes Proposed in Draft Guidancein Draft Guidance
NEPA/New Starts InterfacesNEPA/New Starts Interfaces NEPA ScopingNEPA Scoping New Starts Information in NEPA DocumentsNew Starts Information in NEPA Documents Acceptable New Starts Rating for Issuance of NEPA Final Acceptable New Starts Rating for Issuance of NEPA Final
Doc/Decision Doc/Decision Before and After Study DocumentationBefore and After Study Documentation Expanded Certification of Methods and AssumptionsExpanded Certification of Methods and Assumptions Uncertainty in Costs and Ridership ForecastsUncertainty in Costs and Ridership Forecasts Project Development AgreementsProject Development Agreements FFGA New Starts Level Set at Final Design FFGA New Starts Level Set at Final Design
ApprovalApproval Consideration of Rules for Use of Mode-Specific Consideration of Rules for Use of Mode-Specific
Constants Constants
Changes Adopted Changes Adopted in Final Guidancein Final Guidance
NEPA/New Starts InterfacesNEPA/New Starts Interfaces NEPA ScopingNEPA Scoping New Starts Information in NEPA DocumentsNew Starts Information in NEPA Documents
Acceptable New Starts Rating for Issuance of NEPA Final Doc/Decision Acceptable New Starts Rating for Issuance of NEPA Final Doc/Decision ** Before and After Study DocumentationBefore and After Study Documentation
Expanded Certification of Methods and AssumptionsExpanded Certification of Methods and Assumptions** Uncertainty in Costs and Ridership ForecastsUncertainty in Costs and Ridership Forecasts Project Development AgreementsProject Development Agreements FFGA New Starts Level Set at Final Design FFGA New Starts Level Set at Final Design
ApprovalApproval Consideration of Rules for Use of Mode-Specific Constants Consideration of Rules for Use of Mode-Specific Constants
plusplus
Clarification of Cost Effectiveness BreakpointsClarification of Cost Effectiveness Breakpoints Contractor Performance ReportContractor Performance Report
NEPA Scoping Prior to NEPA Scoping Prior to PE PE
““Require a project to have progressed Require a project to have progressed beyond the NEPA scoping phase before beyond the NEPA scoping phase before entering preliminary engineering”entering preliminary engineering”
Rationale Rationale Confirmation of the LPA / “PE project” Confirmation of the LPA / “PE project” Mitigates against having to do “planning” Mitigates against having to do “planning”
during PEduring PE Strengthens linkage between NEPA and Strengthens linkage between NEPA and
New StartsNew Starts
NEPA Scoping Prior to NEPA Scoping Prior to PE PE
Comments - Fairly evenly distributed Comments - Fairly evenly distributed between supporters and opponentsbetween supporters and opponents Concern that requiring scoping will Concern that requiring scoping will
prolong project development, increase prolong project development, increase costscosts
Subjecting the LPA to scoping is Subjecting the LPA to scoping is confusing to the publicconfusing to the public
Policy Guidance Implements this Policy Guidance Implements this RequirementRequirement
New Starts Information New Starts Information in NEPA Documentsin NEPA Documents
““Require the EIS to present the New Require the EIS to present the New Starts evaluation of the preferred Starts evaluation of the preferred alternative, in addition to NEPA alternative, in addition to NEPA evaluation of the alternatives”evaluation of the alternatives”
RationaleRationale Supports CEQ regulations 40 CFR 1502.23Supports CEQ regulations 40 CFR 1502.23 Provides public and stakeholders with Provides public and stakeholders with
information on the likelihood of receiving information on the likelihood of receiving New Starts fundingNew Starts funding
Enhances information available for Enhances information available for decisionmakingdecisionmaking
New Starts Information New Starts Information in NEPA Documentsin NEPA Documents
Comments – majority opposed Comments – majority opposed May compromise NEPA process and May compromise NEPA process and
expose FTA to litigation expose FTA to litigation New Starts information is too confusing New Starts information is too confusing
to the public to the public Should be subject to rulemakingShould be subject to rulemaking
Policy Guidance Implements this Policy Guidance Implements this Requirement, with ModificationRequirement, with Modification
New Starts Information New Starts Information in NEPA Documentsin NEPA Documents
Applies to both EAs and EIS’sApplies to both EAs and EIS’s For LPA; FTA strongly encourages for all For LPA; FTA strongly encourages for all
alternatives in AA/DEIS’salternatives in AA/DEIS’s FTA has standard language/format for FTA has standard language/format for
presenting information and explaining how presenting information and explaining how it is usedit is used
Most recent rating would be reported, so Most recent rating would be reported, so long as information in document is long as information in document is consistent w/rating (new rating not always consistent w/rating (new rating not always necessary)necessary)
Study/project sponsors should work w/FTA Study/project sponsors should work w/FTA to clarify New Starts criteria and evaluation to clarify New Starts criteria and evaluation process for public and decisionmakersprocess for public and decisionmakers
New Starts Project Achieve an New Starts Project Achieve an Acceptable Rating Before NEPA Acceptable Rating Before NEPA
Final Doc/DecisionFinal Doc/Decision ““Require a New Starts project to achieve an Require a New Starts project to achieve an
acceptable New Starts rating before the acceptable New Starts rating before the FEIS, ROD, or FONSI is signed”FEIS, ROD, or FONSI is signed”
RationaleRationale Low rating = no New Starts funding recommendation = Low rating = no New Starts funding recommendation =
no Federal actionno Federal action Scope changes should be addressed within the NEPA Scope changes should be addressed within the NEPA
processprocess Final NEPA document must present a project that FTA Final NEPA document must present a project that FTA
can fund. can fund. FTA cannot issue a final NEPA document knowing that FTA cannot issue a final NEPA document knowing that
its supplementation or reevaluation of scope change is its supplementation or reevaluation of scope change is mandatory mandatory
New Starts Project Achieve an New Starts Project Achieve an Acceptable Rating Before NEPA Acceptable Rating Before NEPA
Final Doc/DecisionFinal Doc/Decision Comments – significant oppositionComments – significant opposition
Could prejudice the NEPA processCould prejudice the NEPA process NEPA delays could: NEPA delays could:
Delay ROW acquisition, which could result in cost Delay ROW acquisition, which could result in cost escalationescalation
Prohibit project from securing, and/or advancing in Prohibit project from securing, and/or advancing in development with, other fundingdevelopment with, other funding
Should be subject to rulemakingShould be subject to rulemaking
Policy Guidance Does Not Implement this Policy Guidance Does Not Implement this Requirement, Except Where Supplemental Requirement, Except Where Supplemental NEPA Documentation is CertainNEPA Documentation is Certain For all other projects, RODS/FONSIs to include a “New Starts For all other projects, RODS/FONSIs to include a “New Starts
Finding” Finding”
Preservation of Information Preservation of Information for Before and After Studyfor Before and After Study
““Require project sponsors to provide Require project sponsors to provide documentation of the information produced documentation of the information produced during alternatives analysis that will be needed during alternatives analysis that will be needed for the required B and A study, when they apply for the required B and A study, when they apply to begin PE, as well as updated information and to begin PE, as well as updated information and analyses at the time of the request to enter into analyses at the time of the request to enter into final design and before executing an FFGA”final design and before executing an FFGA”
RationaleRationale Ensures the availability of data for subsequent B and Ensures the availability of data for subsequent B and
A studyA study Consistent with FTA objectives for review of AA Consistent with FTA objectives for review of AA
technical informationtechnical information ““Real time” rather than retrospective analysisReal time” rather than retrospective analysis Consistent with Congressional intent Consistent with Congressional intent
Preservation of Information Preservation of Information for Before and After Studyfor Before and After Study
Comments – generally supportiveComments – generally supportive More guidance and training is necessaryMore guidance and training is necessary Costs of conducting the BnA Study should be an Costs of conducting the BnA Study should be an
eligible expenseeligible expense Economic development and land use should be Economic development and land use should be
required characteristics of the BnA Studyrequired characteristics of the BnA Study Policy Guidance Implements this Policy Guidance Implements this
RequirementRequirement Project sponsors should identify the contractor Project sponsors should identify the contractor
responsible for cost and ridership estimates and responsible for cost and ridership estimates and describe contractor’s role (in support of FTA describe contractor’s role (in support of FTA contractor assessment report)contractor assessment report)
Certification of Methods, Certification of Methods, Assumptions and Assumptions and
ProceduresProcedures ““Require that the individuals identified on Require that the individuals identified on
Template 1 as the person responsible for Template 1 as the person responsible for developing these tools and techniques, in developing these tools and techniques, in addition to the CEO, certify that they have been addition to the CEO, certify that they have been properly developed and applied according to properly developed and applied according to professional standards and conventions and FTA professional standards and conventions and FTA guidelines”guidelines”
RationaleRationale Improve the reliability of technical information used to Improve the reliability of technical information used to
support decisionmaking and justification for New Starts support decisionmaking and justification for New Starts projectsprojects
Better ensure “level playing field” for FTA’s evaluation Better ensure “level playing field” for FTA’s evaluation of candidate projectsof candidate projects
Consistent with Congressional intent Consistent with Congressional intent
Certification of Methods, Certification of Methods, Assumptions and Assumptions and
ProceduresProcedures Comment – Significant oppositionComment – Significant opposition
No one individual can be identified as No one individual can be identified as responsible for work.responsible for work.
Risk of professional liability and Federal Risk of professional liability and Federal prosecution.prosecution.
No industry-accepted standards.No industry-accepted standards. FTA reviews obviate the need for certificationFTA reviews obviate the need for certification..
Policy Guidance Does Not Implement Policy Guidance Does Not Implement this Requirement this Requirement Modest update to long-standing certification Modest update to long-standing certification
statementstatement
Identification of Identification of Uncertainties in Costs and Uncertainties in Costs and
Ridership ForecastsRidership Forecasts ““Require forecasts of costs and benefits Require forecasts of costs and benefits
to include an analysis of uncertainties”to include an analysis of uncertainties” RationaleRationale
Responds to SAFETEA-LU emphasis on Responds to SAFETEA-LU emphasis on reliability of estimates of costs and benefitsreliability of estimates of costs and benefits
Supports requirement for Contractor Supports requirement for Contractor Performance Assessment reportingPerformance Assessment reporting
Acknowledges elements of uncertainties for Acknowledges elements of uncertainties for strengthening decisionmaking and focusing strengthening decisionmaking and focusing project development activitiesproject development activities
Identification of Identification of Uncertainties in Costs and Uncertainties in Costs and
Ridership ForecastsRidership Forecasts Comments – Generally opposed, seeking more Comments – Generally opposed, seeking more
clarificationclarification All risk can never be eliminated and so too great a focus All risk can never be eliminated and so too great a focus
on it is not productiveon it is not productive FTA should delay implementation of this requirement FTA should delay implementation of this requirement
until guidance is issued that defines how uncertainties until guidance is issued that defines how uncertainties should be characterizedshould be characterized
Unclear how uncertainties would be presented for cost Unclear how uncertainties would be presented for cost effectivenesseffectiveness
Policy Guidance Does Not Implement this Policy Guidance Does Not Implement this RequirementRequirement FTA will issue guidance on reporting of risks and FTA will issue guidance on reporting of risks and
uncertainties at a later dateuncertainties at a later date In interim, sponsors strongly encouraged to report In interim, sponsors strongly encouraged to report
uncertainties uncertainties
Project Development Project Development AgreementsAgreements
““At FTA’s discretion, selectively require At FTA’s discretion, selectively require project development agreements (at project development agreements (at time of PE and/or FD approval)”time of PE and/or FD approval)”
RationaleRationale Provides mutually agreed upon yardstick Provides mutually agreed upon yardstick
for measuring progress in project for measuring progress in project developmentdevelopment
Focuses project sponsors effort/FTA Focuses project sponsors effort/FTA oversight upon principal issuesoversight upon principal issues
Provides basis for FTA rescission of PE/FD Provides basis for FTA rescission of PE/FD approvalapproval
Project Development Project Development AgreementsAgreements
Comments – Some support, but majority Comments – Some support, but majority requested further informationrequested further information When required? What criteria would be used to When required? What criteria would be used to
determine if necessary?determine if necessary? Concern that PDA’s, at FTA’s discretion, could result Concern that PDA’s, at FTA’s discretion, could result
in inequitable treatment of projectsin inequitable treatment of projects PDAs will delay projectsPDAs will delay projects Could be partnering agreements, if not used Could be partnering agreements, if not used
punitivelypunitively Existing procedures are already in place to achieve Existing procedures are already in place to achieve
PDA objectivesPDA objectives Policy Guidance Does Not Implement Policy Guidance Does Not Implement
this Requirementthis Requirement PDAs will be developed and executed when mutually PDAs will be developed and executed when mutually
agreeableagreeable
New Starts Funding Level New Starts Funding Level Set at Final Design Set at Final Design
ApprovalApproval ““Place a cap on the FFGA New Place a cap on the FFGA New
Starts funding amount at the point of Starts funding amount at the point of approval to enter final design”approval to enter final design”
RationaleRationale Consistent with Congressional intentConsistent with Congressional intent Clarifies FTA participation in project Clarifies FTA participation in project
costscosts Supports decisionmakingSupports decisionmaking
New Starts Funding Level New Starts Funding Level Set at Final Design Set at Final Design
ApprovalApproval Comments – Slight majority opposition, but some Comments – Slight majority opposition, but some
support and some suggested alternativessupport and some suggested alternatives Concern that approach would inhibit innovative contractingConcern that approach would inhibit innovative contracting Concern that approach would inhibit traditional approachesConcern that approach would inhibit traditional approaches Cap costs at some percentage higher than PE cost estimateCap costs at some percentage higher than PE cost estimate Entry into Final Design should become the trigger for Entry into Final Design should become the trigger for
negotiating an FFGAnegotiating an FFGA Allow for some exceptions due to unavoidable cost Allow for some exceptions due to unavoidable cost
increasesincreases Policy Guidance Implements this Requirement, Policy Guidance Implements this Requirement,
with Modificationwith Modification
New Starts Funding Level New Starts Funding Level Set at Final Design Set at Final Design
ApprovalApproval Expanded definition and eligible activities for Expanded definition and eligible activities for
“New Starts Preliminary Engineering”“New Starts Preliminary Engineering” Once approved into final design, projects not Once approved into final design, projects not
subject to changes in New Starts programsubject to changes in New Starts program ““PE Exit Criteria” being developed to further PE Exit Criteria” being developed to further
clarify completion of PEclarify completion of PE FTA will consider unanticipated cost FTA will consider unanticipated cost
increases after final design approval (natural increases after final design approval (natural disasters, unforseen significant commodity disasters, unforseen significant commodity market fluctuations, etc.), market fluctuations, etc.), but not execution but not execution of FFGAof FFGA
Possible Rules for Possible Rules for Mode-Specific ConstantsMode-Specific Constants
““Require all project sponsors to use pre-Require all project sponsors to use pre-established mode-specific constants for each of established mode-specific constants for each of the included attributes (reliability, span of the included attributes (reliability, span of service, and passenger amenities) that appear service, and passenger amenities) that appear to be prominent in a specific fixed-guideway to be prominent in a specific fixed-guideway proposal”proposal”
RationaleRationale Acknowledges and captures heretofore ignored non-Acknowledges and captures heretofore ignored non-
transportation (time and cost) attributes of fixed transportation (time and cost) attributes of fixed guideway projects for areas considering new guideway projects for areas considering new guideway modesguideway modes
Enhances consistent treatment of projects nationallyEnhances consistent treatment of projects nationally Improves reliability of travel forecasts by mitigating Improves reliability of travel forecasts by mitigating
against poorly-estimated constants (“correction against poorly-estimated constants (“correction factors”)factors”)
Possible Rules for Possible Rules for Mode-Specific ConstantsMode-Specific Constants
Comment – Generally supportive, but Comment – Generally supportive, but more information neededmore information needed Option 2 (specific value for each guideway Option 2 (specific value for each guideway
mode) was preferredmode) was preferred Defensible locally-derived and validated Defensible locally-derived and validated
constants should be permittedconstants should be permitted A panel of experts should be convened to A panel of experts should be convened to
establish constant valuesestablish constant values More information needed before “standard” More information needed before “standard”
constant values are implemented. constant values are implemented. Policy Guidance Does Not Implement Policy Guidance Does Not Implement
this Requirementthis Requirement
Cost Effectiveness Cost Effectiveness BreakpointsBreakpoints
Based on DOT Guidance on the Value of TimeBased on DOT Guidance on the Value of Time Original breakpoints reflected Year 2000 Original breakpoints reflected Year 2000
data:data:
(50% * Annual MHI ($42,148))/(50% * Annual MHI ($42,148))/
(hourly factor (2000)) = (hourly factor (2000)) =
$10.54 per hour$10.54 per hour
$10.54 * highway benefits (1.2) * indirect benefits (2.0) = $10.54 * highway benefits (1.2) * indirect benefits (2.0) =
$25.00 per hour$25.00 per hour
Adjusted Annually by GDP DeflatorAdjusted Annually by GDP Deflator
Cost Effectiveness Cost Effectiveness BreakpointsBreakpoints
Cost Effectiveness Rating Cost Effectiveness Value High less than or equal to$11.49
Medium-High between $11.50 and $14.99 Medium between $15.00 and $22.99
Medium-Low between $23.00 and $28.99 Low greater than or equal to $29.00
Contractor Performance Contractor Performance Assessment ReportAssessment Report
SAFETEA-LU ProvisionsSAFETEA-LU Provisions Secretary shall submit a report to Secretary shall submit a report to
Congressional committees analyzing the Congressional committees analyzing the consistency and accuracy of cost and consistency and accuracy of cost and ridership estimates made by each contractor ridership estimates made by each contractor to public transportation agencies developing to public transportation agencies developing new fixed guideway capital projectsnew fixed guideway capital projects
Report should compare the cost and ridership Report should compare the cost and ridership estimates at PE approval with estimates estimates at PE approval with estimates made at FD approval, commencement of made at FD approval, commencement of revenue operation and 2 years afterwardrevenue operation and 2 years afterward
Comparisons should take into consideration Comparisons should take into consideration factors not under control of the contractorfactors not under control of the contractor
Contractor Performance Contractor Performance Assessment ReportAssessment Report
ImplementationImplementation In effect for all PE requests subsequent to May 22In effect for all PE requests subsequent to May 22 Required information:Required information:
Ridership forecasts, service levels, underlying Ridership forecasts, service levels, underlying assumptions, uncertaintiesassumptions, uncertainties
Cost estimates, plans/profiles, design Cost estimates, plans/profiles, design standards, uncertaintiesstandards, uncertainties
Identification of responsible parties and rolesIdentification of responsible parties and roles Reporting format available from FTAReporting format available from FTA Information reported at subsequent milestones Information reported at subsequent milestones Report annually to Congressional committeesReport annually to Congressional committees Performance assessment will be project-specific, Performance assessment will be project-specific,
not overall assessment of firmnot overall assessment of firm
New Starts Reporting New Starts Reporting InstructionsInstructions
No significant changes to reportingNo significant changes to reporting New Starts Baseline Principles and New Starts Baseline Principles and
Cost ParametersCost Parameters Updated Standard Cost CategoriesUpdated Standard Cost Categories Updated CEO CertificationUpdated CEO Certification ““Linked” New Starts TemplatesLinked” New Starts Templates
Schedule for FY 2008 Schedule for FY 2008 New Starts ReportingNew Starts Reporting
July 14 (requested): Any changes to New July 14 (requested): Any changes to New Starts Project Justification Criteria Starts Project Justification Criteria “inputs” since last FTA evaluation“inputs” since last FTA evaluation Travel ForecastsTravel Forecasts Capital Costs (Build and Annualized Baseline)Capital Costs (Build and Annualized Baseline) O/M Cost MethodologyO/M Cost Methodology Annualization FactorAnnualization Factor
August 18: Formal New Starts submission August 18: Formal New Starts submission (templates, land use, financial info)(templates, land use, financial info)
September 30: Latest that FTA can September 30: Latest that FTA can consider new/updated/revised informationconsider new/updated/revised information
FY 2008 New Starts FY 2008 New Starts Evaluation ProcessEvaluation Process
Consistent with FY 2007 ProcessConsistent with FY 2007 Process Updated Cost Effectiveness Updated Cost Effectiveness
BreakpointsBreakpoints Consideration of Economic Consideration of Economic
Development as an “Other Factor”Development as an “Other Factor”