Click for next page ( 7

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 6
6 ance on TIP amendment and modification procedures. As [e.g., National Association of Regional Councils (NARC) a result MPOs have developed diverse processes for TIP and the Association of Metropolitan Planning Organiza- revisions. Over the past 20 years, state DOTs and MPO(s) tions (AMPO)], and federal transportation agencies; and within each state have worked out the definitions of "modi- internal documentation developed by the MPOs and state fications" and "amendments" and established internal pro- DOTs about their own processes. The external information cedures for adopting them. Sometimes this diversity has is relatively sparse regarding specific language, guidance, or resulted in approaches that streamline the general process analysis on TIP revision processes; therefore, much of the so that projects can move forward in a timely fashion while literature review is derived from conference proceedings, still complying with all regional, state, and federal require- not from peer-reviewed sources. Also providing insight into ments. Cooperative relationships among state DOTs, MPOs, actual process elements and innovations are the state- and FHWA, and FTA have fostered numerous innovative prac- MPO-specific guidance documents prepared to assist MPOs tices that make the TIP management process more efficient. in achieving a level of consistency and uniformity in TIP revision procedures, and conference proceedings specific to professional meetings on this subject. These guidance docu- PURPOSE OF SYNTHESIS ments are summarized individually and linked to online (Internet-based) documentation, as available, in Appendix Although many MPOs have developed useful guidance or C. The literature review identified the themes and issues procedures on how to handle TIP amendments and modifica- confronting MPOs in programming matters, including major tions in a cooperative manner, there is not a one-size-fits-all influences on and motivating factors for TIP revisions. approach. This synthesis examines the different approaches and identifies efficiencies in the revision process that can be MPOs have encountered a range of procedural challenges transferred from one MPO to another. implementing federal provisions when those provisions directly impact TIP programming and revisions. Compli- The information gathered in this synthesis considers the cating TIP procedures has been the historical relationship following issues: between the state DOT and the congressionally mandated role of the MPO, which has been strengthening with each Strengths and weaknesses of existing procedures, as federal transportation reauthorization bill since the early perceived by MPOs, and how the former work and the 1970s (2). Even before ARRA (which set deadlines for latter are being addressed; programming and hence for TIP revisions) and before the How TIP revisions (administrative modifications and economic recessionary effects being felt at the time of this amendments) are initiated, reviewed, and approved, writing, some transportation agencies were not entirely sat- and the inclusion of traditional and nontraditional part- isfied with the amount of time required to handle the many ners in the process; programming issues associated with their capital improve- Average time from the initiation of a TIP revision to ment programs. Some state DOTs and MPOs were in a better approval; position to deal with fast-moving projects and project issues, Sources and magnitudes of delay to the TIP revision as they already had programs or experiences dealing with process generated from various administrative or pro- those types of projects. Some state DOTs have cited a special cess issues; and revenue fund to deal with emergencies, public-private part- Use of technology, paperwork reduction, procedural nerships, or other nontypical project categories as a need or streamlining, and other means to introduce increased as an existing opportunity (3). Also, some MPOs have noted efficiencies into the TIP revision process. the need for a different set of planning tools to address fis- cal constraint requirements for those projects comprising the The purpose of this report is to share the experience 20-year, fiscally constrained transportation plan, of which and practice of TIP revisions among MPOs, in the hopes of the projects in the transportation improvement program are making the TIP revision processes as efficient as possible a subset (4, p. 10). to avoid project delays; enhance opportunities for engag- ing required stakeholder agencies; and improve information An example of the role the state DOT can play in improv- flows and relationships among MPOs, local agencies, DOTs, ing consistency and quality of MPO products (and hence FHWA, and FTA. in reducing the potential for conflict within the TIP pro- gramming process) is when the state DOT takes an active role in determining programmable funds for fiscal con- LITERATURE REVIEW straint. California, for example, produces a Fund Estimate, a 5-year annual projection of available state and federal The literature review of TIP revision processes conducted for funds for transportation projects updated every two years. this synthesis included both external documentation devel- However, changing project cost estimates also trigger the oped by research institutions, regional planning associations need for many TIP administrative modifications or amend-