Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs Renewing the National Commitment to the Interstate Highway System A Foundation for the Future Committee for a Study of the Future Interstate Highway System A Consensus Study Report of
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs Transportation Research Board Special Report xxx Subscriber Categories Highways; policy; planning and forecasting; finance, operations and traffic management; bridges and other structures; freight transportation; passenger transportation; transportation, general Transportation Research Board publications are available by ordering individual publications directly from the TRB Business Office, through the Internet at www.TRB.org or nationalacademies.org/trb, or by annual subscription through organizational or individual affiliation with TRB. Affiliates and library subscribers are eligible for substantial discounts. For further information, contact the Transportation Research Board Business Office, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001 (telephone 202-334-3213; fax 202-334-2519; or e-mail TRBsales@nas.edu). Copyright 2018 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America This publication was reviewed by a group other than the authors according to the procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the National Academy of Medicine. This study was sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation. International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-XXXXX-X International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-XXXXX-X Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/XXXXX Library of Congress Control Number: XXXXXXXXXX
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to increase the benefits that transportation contributes to society by providing leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Boardâs varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the studyâs statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committeeâs deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task. Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies. For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
v PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs COMMITTEE FOR A STUDY OF THE FUTURE INTERSTATE HIGHWAY STUDY Norman R. Augustine (NAS, NAE), Lockheed Martin Corporation (retired), Bethesda, Maryland, Chair Vicki A. Arroyo, Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, DC Moshe E, Ben-Akiva, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge Ann M. Drake, DSC Logistics, Des Plaines, Illinois Genevieve Giuliano, University of Southern California, Los Angeles Steve Heminger, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, San Francisco, California Chris T. Hendrickson (NAE), Carnegie Mellon Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Keith L. Killough, Arizona Department of Transportation, Phoenix Adrian K. Lund, HITCH42 LLC, Arlington, Virginia Joan M. McDonald, JMM Strategic Solutions, Mahopac, New York Norman Y. Mineta, Mineta & Associates, LLC, Edgewater, Maryland Kirk T. Steudle, Econolite, Lansing, Michigan Michael S. Townes, Michael S. Townes, LLC, Las Vegas, Nevada C. Michael Walton (NAE), University of Texas at Austin Transportation Research Board Staff Monica A. Starnes, Study Director Thomas R. Menzies, Jr., Program Director of Consensus and Advisory Studies Steve Godwin, Scholar Micah Himmel, Senior Program Officer Katherine Kortum, Senior Program Officer Anusha Jayasinghe, Associate Program Officer Consultants Susan J. Binder, Cambridge Systematics Jagannath Mallela, WSP USA Inc. Richard Margiotta, Cambridge Systematics
vii PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs Preface In Section 6021 of the Fixing Americaâs Surface Transportation Act of 2015, the U.S. Congress asked the Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to conduct a study of the actions needed to upgrade and restore the Interstate Highway System to fulfill its role as a crucial national asset, serving the needs of people, cities and towns, businesses, and the military while remaining the safest highway network in the country. To conduct this study, TRB formed the Committee on the Future Interstate Highway System. The committee members were selected for their expertise in the areas of civil engineering (highway construction, maintenance, operations, and safety); transportation; public transportation; highway safety; systems engineering; environmental and community impact mitigation; modeling; funding/finance; supply chain and freight; and economics (biographical information on the committee members is provided in Appendix A). Understanding the perspectives of providers, operators, and users of the Interstate System, as well as national experts and private-sector stakeholders, was vital to the study. To gain this understanding, the committee held eight public listening sessions across the nation, focused on learning from experts and gathering information on specific topics related to the Interstate System, as well as their views on needs and aspirations for the systemâs future. One additional national public session was held online via webcast. To help conduct its analyses and deliberations, the committee also commissioned white papers exploring in depth five key topics that will influence the Interstate Highway System of the future: demographics and population, economics, technology, climate change, and projected travel demand. In addition, a consulting team, led by Cambridge Systematics and WSP USA Inc., conducted
viii PREFACE PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs extensive computer modeling of a variety of scenarios relating to the future system. This report reflects the contributions from all of these sources, together with information gleaned from the committeeâs review of the salient literature and the collective expertise of its members. Thus informed, the committee formulated a series of recommendations, characterized as a blueprint for action, designed to guide the reinvestment needed to meet the challenges of today and those anticipated for the future, thereby renewing and restoring a system that is critical to nearly every aspect of American life. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The committee thanks the many individuals who contributed to its work on this study. During its information-gathering sessions, which were open to the public, the committee was briefed by officials, topical experts, and Interstate users on a diverse range of subjects. The committee thanks the more than 100 such individuals who shared information and their views on the issues addressed by the study. Among them were the following federal and state executives who presented to the committee: Gregory Nadeau, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Administrator (2015â2017); Bud Wright, Executive Director of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO); Walter âButchâ Waidelich, FHWA Executive Director (2016â2018); Michael Trentacoste, Associate Administrator for Research, Development and Technology (2009â2017); Kristin French, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense and Acting Assistant Secretary, Logistics and Materiel Readiness, U.S. Department of Defense (DoD); Bruce Busler, Director, Joint Process Analysis Center, and Executive Director for Transportation, U.S. Transportation Command, DoD; Carlos Braceras, Director, Utah Department of Transportation and AASHTO President; William Panos, Director and Chief Executive Officer, Wyoming Department of Transportation; Randall Blankenhorn, Secretary, Illinois Department of Transportation; and James Bass, Executive Director, Texas Department of Transportation. The committee also wishes to thank Thomas D. Everett, FHWA Executive Director, who served as the principal contact between FHWA and the committee and coordinated information requests from the committee to offices within the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT). In addition, the American Automobile Association (AAA) provided archived maps dating to 1955, and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) shared data regarding Interstate safety.
PREFACE ix A number of other individuals also shared their expertise with the committee through five commissioned papers. Guangqing Chi, Pennsylvania State University, authored a paper on how a changing U.S. population and its evolving spatial patterns could affect demand for Interstate highways in various parts of the country. Mark Sieber and Glen Weisbrod, EDR Group, co-authored a second paper on how future highway demand will be affected by evolving shifts in the economy. Steven E. Polzin, University of South Florida, provided a paper on Interstate travel demand, its influence factors, and projections for the future. Steven E. Shladover, University of California-Berkeley, addressed how the development and deployment of connected and automated vehicle technology could affect the supply of and demand for transportation on the Interstates. And finally, Donald J. Wuebbles, University of Illinois, and Jennifer M. Jacobs, University of New Hampshire, examined climate change and how it could impact the condition and performance of the Interstate System. Monica A. Starnes managed the study under the guidance of the committee and the supervision of Thomas R. Menzies, Jr., Director, Consensus and Advisory Studies, TRB. Together with Steven R. Godwin, they also drafted the report under the guidance of the committee. Rona Briere edited the report, Alisa S. Decatur prepared the report for prepublication, and Rachel Marcus led the publication production. TRB staff Anusha Jayasinghe, Micah Himmel, and Katherine Kortum provided support for the study. Additionally, the staff and the committee thank Stephanie Seki, Fellow of the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicineâs Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Graduate Program, who contributed to the committeeâs research on the historical perspetive of the Interstate Highway System. The committeeâs work was also supported by a consulting team led by Susan Binder, Jag Mallela, and Richard Margiotta, who conducted case studies and modeling and collected information under the committeeâs guidance. Alan Pisarski and Gary Maring, additional members of the consulitng team, were instrumental in providing information to the committee. The staff and committee thank Tom Boast, JosÃ© Manuel Vassallo Magro, and Remy Cohen for input into and review of the international funding and financing material in Appendix J, as well as Adrian Moore for input into and review of material regarding mileage-based user fees. The committee also thanks Martin Wachs, Richard Arno d, and Omar Smadi for their interim review of the modeling approach. This report has been independently reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise in accordance with procedures specified by the National Research Councilâs (NRCâs) Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will help ensure that the report is balanced and evidence- based and satisfies institutional standards for objectivity and responsiveness to the PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs
x PREFACE PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs studyâs charge. The reviewersâ comments and the draft manuscript with which they were provided remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. The NRC thanks the following individuals for their review of this report: Tom Adler, RSG; Richard Arnold, Oregon Department of Transportation; John W. Fisher (NAE), Lehigh University (Emeritus); Emil H. Frankel, Eno Center for Transportation; James L. Kirtley (NAE), Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Susan Martinovich, CH2M Hill; Carl L. Monismith (NAE), University of California-Berkeley (Emeritus); Ariel Pakes (NAS), Harvard University; Ananth Prasad, Florida Transportation Builders Association; Joseph L Schofer, Northwestern University; Kumares C. Sinha (NAE), Purdue University; and Martin Wachs, University of California-Los Angeles. Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments, they were not asked to endorse the committeeâs conclusions and recommendations, nor did they see the final version of the report before its release. The review of the report was overseen by National Academy of Sciences members Charles F. Manski, Northwestern University, and Susan Hanson, Clark University. Appointed by the NRC, they were responsible for making certain that an independent review of the report was conducted in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered by the committee. Responsibility for the final content of the report rests solely with the authoring committee and the institution. Karen Febey, Senior Report Review Officer, TRB, managed the report review process.
xi PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs Acronyms and Abbreviations AAA American Automobile Association AADT annual average daily traffic AASHO American Association of State Highway Officials AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials AET all-electronic tolling AMPO Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations ATA American Trucking Associations ATRI American Transportation Research Institute Auto-ISAC Automotive Information Sharing and Analysis Center BCR benefit-cost ratio BEV Battery-Electric Vehicle BPR Bureau of Public Roads BTS Bureau of Transportation Statistics C&P Conditions and Performance CAFE corporate average fuel economy CAV Connected Autonomous Vehicle CBD Central Business District CBO Congressional Budget Office CO carbon monoxide CO2 carbon dioxide CRCP continuously reinforced concrete pavement DDOT District Department of Transportation DoD Department of Defense DOT Department of Transportation EIA U.S. Energy Information Administration
xii ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EU European Union EVs Electric Vehicles FAST Act Fixing Americaâs Surface Transportation Act FDIC Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation FHWA Federal Highway Administration FRED Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis GAO Government Accountability Office GDP Gross Domestic Product GHG greenhouse gas GMSL global mean sea level GPS Global Positioning System GVW gross vehicle weight HERS Highway Economic Requirements System HLDI Highway Loss Data Institute HPMS Highway Performance Monitoring System HOT high-occupancy toll (lane) HOV high-occupancy vehicle HTF Highway Trust Fund HVUT heavy vehicle use tax IC Interstate Construction ICE Interstate Cost Estimate IRI International Roughness Index ITEP Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy MBUF mileage-based user fee MPO metropolitan planning organization NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASEM National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine NBI National Bridge Inventory NBIAS National Bridge Investment Analysis System NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program NHCCI National Highway Construction Cost Index NHS National Highway System NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology NMFN National Multimodal Freight Network NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOx nitrogen oxides NRC National Research Council NYCEDC New York City Economic Development Corporation PHT Pavement Health Track
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS xiii PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs PM10 particulate matter SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users SOX Sulphur oxides STRAHNET Strategic Highway Network TRB Transportation Research Board TTI Texas A&M Transportation Institute U.S. DOT U.S. Department of Transportation VMT vehicle-miles traveled vphpl vehicles per hour per lane VOC volatile organic compound ZEV zero emission vehicle
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs
xv PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs Contents Summary S-1 Looming Challenges, S-2 An Investment Imperative, S-3 Recommendations, S-6 Concluding Comments, S-7 1 Introduction 1-1 Study Charge, 1-4 Study Approach, 1-7 Report Organization, 1-16 References, 1-17 2 The Vision Takes Root and Pays Off 2-1 The Vision Takes Root, 2-2 Advent and Evolution of the Interstate System, 2-5 A Boon to Passenger and Freight Transportation, 2-10 Broader Economic and Social Consequences, 2-14 Role in National Defense, 2-17 Safety Benefits, 2-18 Summary, 2-19 References, 2-20 3 Emerging Challenges 3-1 Rebuilding the Systemâs Foundation, 3-3 Expanding and Managing Urban System Capacity, 3-12 Demand for Changing the Systemâs Length and Layout, 3-20
xvi CONTENTS PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs Ensuring Safety while Accommodating a Growing and Changing Vehicle Fleet, 3-26 Adding Resilience, 3-29 Summary, 3-33 References, 3-35 4 Confronting An Uncertain Future 4-1 Changing Centers of Population and Economic Activity, 4-4 Future Travel Demand and the Interstate System, 4-17 Future Impact of Connected and Automated Vehicles on the Interstate Highway System, 4-23 Climate Change and the Interstate Highway System, 4-31 Summary, 4-38 References, 4-41 5 System Investment Needs: A 20-Year Horizon 5-1 General Approach for Estimating Investment Needs, 5-2 Recent Interstate Capital Spending and the Investment Backlog, 5-4 Modeling Tools and Assumptions Used in Estimating Future Investment Needs, 5-9 Estimating 20-Year Pavement and Bridge Renewal Investment Needs, 5-18 Estimating 20-Year Capacity Investment Needs, 5-27 Summary of 20-Year Investment Needs, 5-35 Supplemental Investments in Resilience and Rightsizing, 5-38 Summary, 5-41 References, 5-44 6 Investment Funding Options 6-1 Background, 6-4 National Commission Recommendations, 6-5 Evaluation Criteria, 6-6 User Fee-Based Options, 6-7 Other Funding Options, 6-21 Summary, 6-24 References, 6-28
CONTENTS xvii PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs 7 A Blueprint for Action 7-1 Looming Challenges, 7-2 An Investment Imperative, 7-5 Recommendations, 7-9 Concluding Comments, 7-12 Appendixes A Study Committee Biographical Information A-1 B Panelists that Presented Testimony to the Study Committee B-1 C Vehicle Miles Traveled: Trends and Implications for the U.S. C-1 Interstate Highway System D Economic Outlook Factors Affecting Highway Demand D-1 E Demographic Forecasting and Future Interstate Highway System E-1 Demands F Connected and Automated Vehicle Technology Impacts on Future F-1 Interstate Highway System G Potential Impacts of Climate Change on the Interstate Highway G-1 System H Summary of HERS, NBIAS, and PHT Modeling Tools H-1 I Case Studies I-1 J Additional Detail on Funding and Financing Options J-1