Program UpdateProgram Update
Gary Hoffman, P.E.
Topics
Partnering Efforts PennDOT’s Strategic Focus Areas PennDOT’s Infrastructure Needs PennDOT’s Program Federal Reauthorization
Partnering Efforts
• Quarterly Meetings• Pursuing Consistency• Expand Constructability Reviews• Improving ECMS• Managing Letting Schedule• Implementing Innovation
PennDot’s Strategic Focus Areas
System Preservation
Management and Productivity
Quality of Life
Mobility
Safety
System PreservationSystem Preservation
“Maintenance First”
Bridge Structural Adequacy Reduce number of structurally deficient bridges
• PA’s structurally deficient bridges = 22%• National average for structurally deficient = 10%• Goal = match the national average within 20 yrs
Increase bridge preservation• Target: $350 M/year for rehab/replacement
$100 M/year for preservation
• Current Bridge Expenditure $300M
Infrastructure Needs
MAKING THE CASE FOR SYSTEM PRESERVATION
Pennsylvania’s Highway & Bridge Needs
• Highway Pavement:
• 6 Year Needs $ 18.0 Billion
• 6 Year Available Funds $ 13.2 Billion
• Gap $ 4.8 Billion
• Bridges:
• 6 Year Needs $ 3.3 Billion
• 6 Year Available Funds $ 1.8 Billion
• Gap $ 1.5 Billion
6 Year Funding GAP $ 6.3 Billion
2003 System PreservationInternational Roughness Index (IRI)
Good Fair Poor
Interstate 64% 29% 7%
NHS (Non-interstate) 59% 30% 11%
Non-NHS > 2000 ADT 63% 25% 12%
Pavement DeteriorationCurve
Programming Preservation Treatments for roads at key times will extend the life of the road greatly
Pavement Preservation
New Capacity vs. Preservation
24.5% 22.8%15.2%
28.3%19.1%
19.6%
47.2%58.1%
65.1%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
01-04 TIP 03-06 TIP 05-08 TIP
Pe
rce
nta
ge
Preservation %
Operational %
New Capacity %
Statewide
Proposed Statewide Goal
• Improve all “POOR” NHS and Interstate miles
• Focus on Preservation instead of reconstruction to keep the good roads good
System Preservation Pennsylvania Bridge Facts
• Median Age > 50 yrs
• Average Life Span – 50 yrs
• Average Cost/Bridge - $1.25M
$1.25M X 9352 deficient bridges = $11.7 B
National Comparison(based on total deck area)
11.6%
8.0%6.0%
12.3%10.0%
21.9%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
NATIONAL PENNDOT NJ NY OH VA
Structurally Deficient Bridges
PENNDOT Bridges: Age and Eligibility
0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 >700
5
10
15
20
25
30
Dec
k A
rea
in M
sf
Age of Bridges
All PENNDOT Highway Bridges 8 ft and Over - Deck Area
Eligible for REPLACE
Eligible for REHAB
NOT Eligible
Trend in Structurally Deficient BridgesPENNDOT Bridges > 8 ft.
19.5% 19.5%
22.6% 22.4% 22.2%
21.7%21.6%
21.9% 21.9%
8%
11%
13%
16%
18%
21%
23%
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
% Structurally Deficient by Deck Area
National Average = 10%
Local Bridges > 20 ft = 26.9% in 2003
$150M/yr $300M/yr $450M/yr
Proposed Statewide Goal
• Reduce Structurally Deficient Bridges to the National Average of 10% by 2024
• Bridge preservation can reduce rehabilitation and replacement requirements
Bridge Modeling and Spending Needs
• Designate Bridge “Champion”
(Craig Beissel)
• Rebuild Legacy BMS System
• Participate in National Effort for
Robust Bridge Asset Management
System
• Bridge Bill Legislation
Improve Bridge ManagementImprove Bridge Management
Bridge NeedsAsset Management
• Preservation
- Fix leaky joints (expansion dams)
- Fix beam ends, bearings and supports
- Bridge Painting
- Deck patching/replacement
- Other
Annual Lettings
$1,550$1,550
$1,374.9$1,304.4
$1,349.7
$1,034.2
$1,331
$970
$0
$400
$800
$1,200
$1,600
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Actual To Date Projected
Millions
$1,300 $1,250
2004 Lettings
$400$350
$250 $273$200
$251
$400$425
$1,250$1,300
$0
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Total
Projected Actual
Millions
2004 Large Projects
SR / SEC County Est. Cost Ant. Let Date
0078 / 17M Berks $ 50 M December
0022 / B02 Westmoreland $ 40 M December
0090 / B07 Erie > $ 20 M December
2005 Lettings
$400
$250$200
$400
$1,250
$0
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Total
Projected
Millions
First Quarter 2005 Large Projects
SR / SEC County Est. Cost Ant. Let Date
0202 / 3IT Chester $ 15 M January
7301 / BRG Allegheny $ 30 M January
6006 / 272 Lackawanna < $ 10 M January
0291 / S11 Philadelphia < $ 10 M February
0208 / A00 Mercer $ 15 M March
0079 / A25 Allegheny $ 10 M March
0068 / 650 Clarion $ 15 M March
2122 / A03 Allegheny $ 20 M March
Second Quarter 2005 Large Projects
SR / SEC County Est. Cost Ant. Let Date
0309 / NW1 Lehigh < $ 10 M April
0309 / 101 Montgomery $ 65 M April
0022 / 491 Indiana $ 45 M April
0022 / B08 Westmoreland $ 25 M April
0209 / 021 Monroe $ 15 M May
0019 / A27 Allegheny $ 40 M May
1021 / 370 Luzerne $ 20 M June
0048 / A16 Allegheny $ 15 M June
Materials Usage
2003 2004 2005
Asphalt (Tons) 8.2 M 8.1 M 8.3 M
Concrete (CY) 740 k 660 k 670 k
Aggregate (Tons) 12.3 M 14.8 M 12.9 M
Number of Consultant Final Selections
75
113127
195224
140 143 138 140
0
50
100
150
200
250
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
ACT 3
TEA 21Projected
Actual
127
To Date
Payouts to Consultants
128 129163
200
232264
301 307 310
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Millions
Projected
Actual
To Date
254
Federal Reauthorization (?)
• 5 short term extensions
• 8 mos. through May 2005
• Current extend ($36.8 + $1.8 B)
• Funding guarantees and firewalls
• Nothing during “lame duck”
• Reintroduced late-winter/early spring
Federal Reauthorization (?)
• Size Of Appropriation
• “Growth” of Appropriation Over Time
• Distribution Mechanism
• Earmarks
• Categorization/Flexibility
• Speak With “One Voice”
SIX YEAR PROGRAM (Pennsylvania’s Estimated Funding)
9.449.92
8.33
0
5
10
TEA-21 S 1072 HR 3550
BILL
DO
LLA
RS
(B
illio
ns)
Federal Reauthorization
20% vs. 40%
Questions ???