HomeMy WebLinkAbout06 09 2008_State of Public Transportation
State of Public Transportation
in Bozeman and the Gallatin
Valley
Presented to the Bozeman City
Commission
June 9, 2008
67
ii
System Information
Human Resource Development Council
of District IX, Inc.
Streamline and Galavan
807 North Tracy Avenue
Bozeman, Montana 59715
(406) 587-2434
www.streamlinebus.com
Contacts
Lee Hazelbaker
Director
(406) 587-2434
Galavan@hrdc9.org
Lisa Ballard, P.E.
Bozeman Area Public Transportation Coordinator
Current Transportation Solutions, Inc.
(406) 581-4601
lballard@currenttransportation.com
David Kack
Streamline / Galavan Advisory Board Chair
Western Transportation Institute at Montana State
University
P.O. Box 174250
Bozeman, MT 59717
(406) 994-7526
dkack@coe.montana.edu
Streamline partners
The new bus
Past and future
68
1
Background
Prior to 2006, Bozeman, a college town with 35,000
people, was the largest community in Montana without
public transportation. Eleven miles away Belgrade
(population 7,300) was the second largest community
without transit.
Bozeman, Montana: Gallatin County seat; home to
Montana State University (MSU); gateway to
Yellowstone National Park; nearby world-class skiing,
fishing, and hiking; medical and shopping center for all of
southwestern Montana. The region is attracting new
residents, making it the fastest growing county in the state
and among the fastest growing in the country.
Its first public transportation, a trolley system that ran
from 1892 to 1922, was built in a campaign to become the
new state’s capital. Until World War II nearby
Yellowstone had the second largest fleet of buses in the
country. More recently, Galavan began senior
transportation service in 1973, later adding service for
people with disabilities.
The Associated Students of Montana State University
(ASMSU) made three attempts between 1977 and 1992 to
provide bus service for the students. Its first attempt was
on a trial basis. The second attempt in 1982 failed because
of unreliable equipment. The 1992 attempt succeeded,
with Bobcat Transit running until 2006.
Streamline began operations in August 2006 by
combining the fixed route (but seasonal) Bobcat Transit
funded by ASMSU, with the demand responsive service
of Galavan, operated by the Human Resource
Development Council (HRDC). Streamline and Galavan
serve Bozeman, Belgrade, Four Corners, and Bridger
Bowl. These services include:
Fixed Route / Deviated Route
□ Daytime (Fixed Route) : FY 2008 projected 139,000 rides
Trolleys on Main Street
One of 380 Yellowstone buses, part of the
second largest fleet in the country in 1924
The first number on the Montana plate
represents the county rank in population
when the state was formed. Gallatin County
has been growing, recently becoming the 3rd
largest.
69
2
□ Latenight (Deviated Route) : 8,000 rides
□ Bridger Bowl (Deviated Route) : 2,008 rides
Demand Response – Galavan : 23,400 rides
Head Start : 4,500 rides
Reach transportation for adults with disabilities:
33,000 rides
Streamline put 6 new low-floor, bustle-back buses in fixed
route service in August 2007. Galavan operates 2
minivans, 4 cutaways, and 1 bus meeting Headstart safety
requirements. Reach’s 8 vehicles are used for sheltered
workshop transportation, day time supportive employment
transportation, and residential-based transportation.
Streamline daytime service runs four routes. In FY 2008
Streamline added Latenight service and a weekend route
to the Bridger Bowl ski area. Latenight runs on Thursdays,
Fridays, and Saturdays, while the Bridger Bowl service
runs during ski season. In FY 2009, the Montana
Independent Living Project will start a pilot voucher
project to support transportation needs outside of
Streamline/Galavan’s operating hours and areas for people
with disabilities.
A large cross section of community rides the bus. A
survey conducted in October 2007 by the students in MSU
Civil Engineering (Course 480) found that the largest representation (55%) of riders consist of
Montana State University students and faculty. Recent observations in December and January
show a continued trend from the first year of service that Big Sky seasonal international
employees are heavily dependent on Streamline and our sister service, Skyline. Other major
users include seniors, people with low incomes, one-car households (by choice or necessity),
visitors, and other choice riders.
As the lead public transportation agency in the Gallatin Valley, HRDC coordinates with other
organizations that need or provide transportation through the Transportation Advisory
Committee. The committee works with charter services, the taxi company, local governments,
the Montana Independent Living Project, Reach, Inc., and other human service agencies. We also
coordinate with Skyline which connects Bozeman with Big Sky 45 miles to the south.
70
3
Accomplishments
The community’s biggest accomplishment has been getting different groups of people to work
together. We needed initial motivation from Montana Department of Transportation to get us
going with our planning; we needed the new federal funding from SAFETEA-LU for
implementation. We started Streamline with the money that was already being spent on
transportation in the community. By pooling funds, each of our partners has increased the
services available to its customers.
As an example, ASMSU’s investment in daytime service results in three times the amount of
service than was offered with Bobcat Transit. Before Streamline, when ASMSU paid for Bobcat
Transit, the service that ran on hand-me-down 1970’s-era buses from Butte was theoretically
open to the general public. Unfortunately, no one knew because the service had almost no
funding for anything other than the direct bus operations. Today, for the same investment in
daytime Streamline operations, ASMSU is spending 1/10th the contribution per student ride.
Similar benefits exist for all other partners and services.
Old and New Fixed-Route Daytime Weekday Service
Old Bobcat Streamline
FTA General Public No; non-accessible Yes; accessible with
complimentary paratransit
ASMSU annual investment $87,000 $87,000
Other funding (operating) $0 $453,000
Vehicles 2 old prison buses 6 new low-floor, attractive
buses
Amount of service 18 vehicle-hours per day, 9
months per year (3,400
hours/year)
42 vehicle-hours per day, year
round (10,500 hours per year)
Ridership 40/day, 7,800 per year 550/day, 139,000 per year
Cost per ride $11.15 $3.90
ASMSU contribution per ride $11.15 $0.63
ASMSU contribution per
MSU student rider
$13.95 (assuming 80% of
riders are students)
$1.56 (40% student ridership
from survey results)
Ridership has far exceeded expectations. In our second year, the biggest portion of our service,
our daytime service, is more than twice the projected ridership and 63% higher than our first year
of service. The trends show more people ride in poor weather, and fewer people ride when
school is out of session. Overall, in Fiscal Year 2008, the Streamline/ GALAVAN/ Headstart/
Reach partnership is projected to provide 220,800 rides, 77% higher than last year’s ridership.
We estimate this will result in 388,850 pounds of net carbon savings and $113,750 of personal
savings on fuel.
71
4
Streamline Fixed Route Daytime Ridership
FY 07 and FY 08
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
7/27/167/308/138/279/109/2410/810/2211/511/1912/312/1712/311/141/282/112/253/103/244/74/215/55/196/26/16Week NumberAverage Daily RidershipFY 07 FY 08 Streamline Projected
By introducing Latenight, the city
and university law enforcement
agencies have seen a reduction in
DUI related incidents. This provides
a huge impact on the safety of the
other passengers on the streets of
Bozeman during late hours of
Thursdays, Fridays and Saturdays.
An average DUI processing time is
estimated to be 5 hours, and the
total cost estimated for one such
incident is around $5,000. By
removing a single DUI related
incident, this amount of public
taxpayer’s money is saved and
police officers are available for
ensuring community safety.
Needs
During our annual planning process, the Transportation Advisory Committee identifies
community needs. They are assessed by:
Comparing existing services to residential and employment locations
0
200
400
600
800
Pre-Streamline Dec-06 Feb-08
Average Daily Ridership (Daytime Fixed
Route)
72
5
Obtaining feedback from Streamline and GALAVAN users, including from email comments
to Streamline web page
Assessing ridership characteristics
Obtaining driver feedback
Obtaining feedback from the TAC, Streamline, and Public Transportation Advisory Boards
This approach has identified the following gaps. At this time, adequate resources are not
available to meet all needs.
Service Gaps
Buses do not go into Belgrade. More frequent commuter transportation from Bozeman to
Belgrade is desired.
There are unserved portions of Bozeman including:
□ The northeast neighborhood north of the Interstate
□ South of campus
□ The business park southwest of campus hosting RightNow Technologies, one of the
largest employers
□ Durston and Peach
□ The new growth areas in northwest
□ The Reach, Inc. work center.
Several high priority areas which do have service are underserved.
□ The hospital is on a one-way loop, making one direction of the trip longer than he
other.
□ Northwest Bozeman north of Babcock
□ East Main and the library are poorly connected to west side
Higher service frequency
More service to Bridger Bowl
Livingston-Bozeman commuter service
Longer hours
More evening service
Weekend service
Information gaps
Lack of coordinated communication between the service providers. Streamline and Skyline
drivers communicate well. Schedules and web pages have been updated to provide adequate
information regarding the other service. Coordination with Angel Line, Madison County, and
West Yellowstone has been minimal in the last year.
Lack of knowledge in the community regarding Streamline.
73
6
Difficulty among some potential users in understanding time tables and planning trips.
Resource gaps
There exists no central place of storage and maintenance for vehicles
Lack of benches and bus shelters
Goals
Based on the needs assessment, the Bozeman Area Transportation Advisory Committee, the
Streamline/GALAVAN Advisory Board, and the City/County Public Transportation
Stakeholders Board established the following goals for FY 2009.
Goal: Develop a customer service plan, resulting in improved customer satisfaction
Our customers are our riders, our boards, the coordinating organizations, and the general public.
Members of the Transportation Advisory Committee want all transportation services to be
customer-centered and to have a high level of customer satisfaction.
“A customer-centered organization is one that makes every effort to sense, serve, and satisfy the
needs and wants of its clients and public within the constraints of its budget. One result of a
customer-centered orientation is that the people who come in contact with such an organization
report high personal satisfaction. They make such comments as, ‘This is the best church I ever
belonged to.’ ‘My college was terrific – the professors really taught well and cared about the
students.’ ‘I thing this hospital is fine – the nurses are cheerful, the food was good, and the room
clean.’ These customers become the best advertisement for these institutions. Their goodwill and
favorable word of mouth reach other ears and make it easy for the organization to attract and
serve more people. These organizations are effective because they are customer oriented.”1
As identified by Peter Schauer in the 2007 Montana Transit Management Training course, a
transportation service must have the following characteristics to have excellent customer service:
Safe
Easy to use
Predictable
Priced right
Clean
Sometimes fun
1 Kotler, Phillip and Alan Andreasen. Strategic Marketing for Nonprofit Organizations, Fifth Edition. Prentice Hall. Upper Saddle River, New
Jersey. 1996. p. 43.
74
7
In FY 2009 we will develop a customer service plan around these core areas that addresses
service design, interactions between staff and the public, and public perception.
All other goals also are related to improved customer satisfaction.
Goal: Institutionalize Streamline operations
In FY 2009 we will continue to solidify the base and institutionalize systems for Streamline
Transit. We expect Streamline ridership when combined with GALAVAN to be in the top 3 in
ridership among Montana’s rural systems. More normalized operations and communications
with government and community organizations should lead to more ridership.
Goal: Integrate transportation of Reach clients
HRDC and Reach have coordinated with each other since the mid to late 80’s when HRDC was
under contract to provide Reach transportation services. We will focus on coordination in two
areas. First, we would like able Reach clients to use Streamline. We have checked routes and
schedules to better accommodate Reach home and employment centers, and we will implement
travel training program. Second, we will incorporate more Reach transportation services into
Streamline/ GALAVAN operations.
We have identified barriers to fully integrating Reach and Streamline/Galavan operations and
have identified a framework that would be required to address all of these barriers. In FY 2009
we will work through this framework to determine if any additional consolidation can be
accommodated.
Goal: Improve marketing of Streamline, including development of a self-sustaining bus
shelter program
Marketing will include enhancements to the web site, public service announcements to increase
awareness of the new service, and discussions with community organizations.
Street furniture improves comfort for passengers and gives more presence to the system in the
community. In Calendar Year 2007 Streamline worked with the City of Bozeman, Dowling
Sandholm Architects, and the MSU College of Architecture to investigate the constraints and
costs of installing bus shelters. In CY 2008 we will develop a bus shelter program that is funded
by community contributions and sponsorships and meets the aesthetic requirements of the City
of Bozeman. We will install our first bus shelters.
We will make sure all stops are properly marked and post bus schedules at stops.
Goal: Continue existing services
In FY 2008 we worked with ASMSU, All Valley Cab, and the DUI Task Force to start Latenight
bus service Thursday – Saturday. We worked with Bridger Bowl Board of Directors to
incorporate wintertime Bridger Bowl transportation under the Streamline/GALAVAN umbrella.
75
8
We also continued our weekday daytime services and GALAVAN services. We will continue
these services in FY 2009.
Goal: Expand service within available budget
[Note: current budget does not allow for expansions in FY 2009]
The Transportation Advisory Committee has identified the following needed service
improvements, ranked in the order of priority. Services will be implemented based on
availability of funding.
Weekend service
Additional in-town route
Longer weekday service
More frequent service during peak hours
Airport service
A voucher program has also been recommended to be included as a request for New Freedom
funds.
Goal: Identify and implement appropriate technologies
Low-cost technologies can help make Streamline and Galavan easier to use and more
predictable. Before the end of FY 2009, Streamline services will be on Google Transit. This
service will provide potential customers with a trip itinerary when the customer enters an origin,
destination, and desired time to travel. We also will implement programs for tracking ridership,
scheduling rides on Galavan, and coordination. We will investigate other technologies for
traveler information, system management, coordination, and planning.
Goal: Build travel training program
In FY 2008 the Montana Independent Living Project (MILP) began a travel training program for
people with disabilities. In FY 2009 MILP will build this program.
Goal: Put Urban Transportation District on the ballot by 2009
As described in the original agreement to establish Streamline, HRDC intends to hand over
operations of Streamline to an Urban Transportation District when it is established. We will
begin working towards this goal this year. We will conduct community outreach and improve
customer service in part to improve the probability of the ballot measure passing.
Goal: Establish funding for a bus barn
Streamline and GALAVAN have more than $1,000,000 of rolling stock. In FY 2007,
GALAVAN was unable to work through the requirements of the FTA, the Bozeman School
76
9
District on whose land the bus barn is planned to be built, and the City of Bozeman building
requirements to build a small bus barn. Streamline and GALAVAN need to establish funding for
a larger facility to accommodate the needs of the larger fixed route system. We need to procure
additional funding to meet these needs.
Goal: Work with school districts to identify areas of coordination
The City/County Public Transportation Stakeholders’ Board has asked Streamline to work with
the school districts to identify any areas of coordination. Streamline should offer more
independence to middle school and high school students, and there may be areas where the
schools can save on transportation. Over the next year, we will work with the school districts to
develop coordination opportunities.
Federal Financing
Appendix C includes a SAFETA-LU guide from the American Public Transportation
Association (APTA) that describes the transit provisions of the current 5-year transportation bill
from a national perspective. This bill resulted in a major increase in funding for rural transit in
Montana and across the country. Legislation is scheduled to expire in 2009 but will be extended
until congress and the president pass the next transportation bill. While the nation faces an
upcoming funding gap between the highway trust fund and needed expenditures, we expect
continued federal funding for transit at the same or increased levels.
77
10
Highway Bill Allocations for Montana Transit
(excluding capital program)
$0
$2,000,000
$4,000,000
$6,000,000
$8,000,000
$10,000,000
$12,000,000
$14,000,000
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
YearEstimated AllocationRural (5311)
Total MT Transit
Of the SAFETEA-LU transit programs, the Bozeman area qualifies for the following formula
programs: Rural (Section 5311), Job Access and Reverse Commute (JARC) (Section 5316) and
New Freedoms (Section 5317). We also are eligible for funds from the discretionary Bus and
Bus Facilities Program (Section 5309).
We have seen our federal funding decrease slightly, but we expect federal funding to remain in
this range or increase in upcoming years. Because we don’t expect the upcoming highway bill to
reverse trends from current and previous federal legislation, we se no reason for federal funding
to disappear.
Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Summary
FTA’s allocation of funds to the state is increasing annually, but the Gallatin Valley’s allocation
of federal funding through the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) has decreased over
the last three years:
FY 2007: $547,000 ($547,000 Section 5311 rural transit)
FY 2008: $535,000 ($400,000 Section 5311 funds; $135,000 Section 5316 funds)
FY 2009: $513,000 ($513,151 Section 5311 funds; $13,444 Section 5317)
78
11
This decrease may be caused by MDT’s adjustment to the growth of transit in Montana (8 rural
public transit systems in 2005 to 30 today). Also, MDT is allocating some 5311 funds to capital
because of the decision by FTA to spend the entire national discretionary budget for FY 2007 in
five urban areas. Prior to FY 2007, these funds were earmarked by Congress and were spread
throughout the country. As expressed in the letter in Appendix C from the Community
Transportation Association of America (CTAA) Executive Director, much of the country was
upset over this decision and hope to see it change this year.
Because of the increase in gas prices and our cut in federal funding, we are facing a small
funding gap. For FY 2009, the expected combined costs for transportation in the region are
$948,000. Expected revenues are $933,000. HRDC was awarded $513,151 in Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) Section 5311 Rural Program funds. Montana Independent Living Project
was awarded $13,444 from the Section 5317 New Freedoms program. The FTA programs
provide approximately 54% of costs. Galavan and Reach have been awarding funding for one
minivan each, resulting in a total capital budget of $62,000. FTA grants will pay for 86% of
these costs.
The City of Bozeman is expected to contribute $72,430 based on the allocation from the senior
transportation mill levy. All of this funding goes towards Galavan. Currently Bozeman
contributes $0 towards Streamline operations.
Priority of Near-term Service Improvements
Streamline started operations with the existing community funds. ASMSU, the DUI Task Force,
and Bridger Bowl have contributed to expand service. The community is grateful for the service
it has, but the community needs to invest more to have an adequate level of service.
Based on the FY 2009 Coordination Plan, the following top funding priorities have been set. Our
initial goal for FY 2009 was to accomplish the top 4 items, but the MDT funding decision now
leaves us trying to find the small amount of funding to keep existing services.
1. Keep existing services running. Cover the shortfall caused by lost federal
funding and increased fuel costs.
$15,000
2. Saturday service – 2 buses running 8 hours. Flexible routes will accommodate
pre-arranged transportation for seniors and people with disabilities.
$49,000
3. Sunday service – 2 buses running 8 hours. Flexible routes will accommodate
pre-arranged transportation for seniors and people with disabilities.
$49,000
4. Fifth route $137,000
5. Longer hours $100,000
6. Higher frequency during peak hours $120,000
7. Airport service $103,000
79
12
Governance and the Future
Currently Streamline is governed by a non-profit organization, HRDC, the initial choice because
of its history running Galavan.
The City of Bozeman, City of Belgrade and Gallatin County each passed a resolution
recognizing HRDC as the recipient of FTA funds to operate as an “Interim System.” The City of
Bozeman’s resolution called for the “program” to be reviewed on or before October 1, 2008.
In moving forward the community must choose between three governance options.
Non-profit – HRDC can continue running Streamline and Galavan, thus making it the lead
transportation provider in the valley. HRDC brings the experience and excellent community
support. The biggest disadvantage of continued governance by HRDC is the inability for a non-
profit to levy taxes that are needed to expand Streamline.
Municipal - Montana law also allows for a municipal bus system such as Helena, Billings, and
Butte. Of the three local governments (Belgrade, Bozeman, and Gallatin County), the City of
Bozeman appears to be the best choice to operate Streamline. The advantage of this option is to
ease coordination with the streets department, the parks department, the planning department,
and the sustainability efforts. The biggest disadvantage of this option is the tendency to neglect
service outside of Bozeman. Taxing authority is also unclearly defined in state code and may be
limited.
Urban Transportation District (UTD) - The final governing option is an Urban Transportation
District (UTD). A district is formed by a vote of the people in the proposed area. Montana Code
Annotated section 7-14-201 et. seq. describes the process of placement on the ballot by petition
to the County Commission. Compared to the municipal bus company, the UTD has the
advantage of being able to encompass the entire service area. It also has the advantage of the
ability to levy taxes. Its biggest disadvantage is the effort and cost to get information to the
public that allows them to make an informed decision whether to form the district.
We need additional funding to expand service, which may lead to a change in governance. It is
the opinion of the Streamline team that a governance change at this time must be coupled with a
significant increase in funding.
80
Appendix A: Letters of Support
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
Appendix B: Marketing
90
Recent Recognitions
Swimming Upstream
Kezia Vernon of the ASMSU Community Outreach
Program was recognized with this 2008 award for
her “enthusiastic advocacy for Latenight Streamline,
and for ASMSU’s work in keeping late night ride
services available for MSU students and now,
community members.” Funded by the Gallatin County
DUI Task Force, the award is a result of a
collaboration between the Task Force, Alcohol
Services and Drug Services of Gallatin County, and
Gallatin Safe Kids Safe Communities.
National Excellence in Regional
Transportation Awards
The National Association of Development
Organizations (NADO) recognized Streamline with
its 2007 award for Excellence in Regional
Transportation.
Friend of Transit
The Montana Transit Association (MTA) recognized
Suzanne Winchester, a long-time Galavan and
Streamline volunteer, with its 2008 Friend of Transit
award. Suzanne was recognized for her long hours in
the office and on the street helping with dispatch,
talking with local businesses to sponsor Galavan,
working at the two farmer’s markets to share
information about Streamline, and organizing
volunteers to collect tickets at the County Fair to pay
for Galavan’s annual parking costs at the fairgrounds.
Montana EcoStar
The Montana Pollution Prevention Program and
Governor Brian Schweitzer recognized Streamline in
2007 for pollution prevention with their EcoStar
award.
91
Outreach
Representatives from Streamline and Galvan talk to as many people as possible. We also
participate in like-minded community events. Recent activities include:
First ever Bozeman Dump the Pump day on June 19, 2008.
Bozeman Mayor’s Climate Change Task Force participation, resulting in the
recommendation of increased funding.
Gallatin Earth Celebration participation, including providing extra weekend service (open
to the public and advertised) to take people who had never used Streamline to clean-up
trash and graffiti around town.
Expanding Your Horizons for middle-school girls from across the state to encourage
them to go into technical fields, including transportation.
Headstart discussion of Streamline at evening event for parents and children
Bozeman Business & Professional Women presentation. This group includes the mayor,
several state legislators, and women from a cross-section of Bozeman.
Chamber of Commerce presentation.
Visitor’s bureau presentation.
Catapooloza and other new student events at MSU.
Participation in the Sweet Pea and Homecoming parades.
Latenight bus service during the Cat-Griz game, the biggest sporting event in the state
(and the highest Latenight ridership date).
Special Latenight service for New Year’s Eve.
Coordination with the Bozeman Beer Festival organizers (among others) to encourage
use of Latenight.
Information tables at farmer’s market.
Participation in lunch at the senior center.
City and County Commission presentations, which are broadcast on local cable and
reported in the local paper.
Presentations and participation at regional transportation meetings.
And more…
92
Advertising
Streamline uses mostly
free media coverage,
community word of
mouth, its brochures, its
web page, and its
recognizable buses to get
the word out about
Bozeman’s bus system.
Brochures are at all public,
medical, and social service
facilities. They are also
available at the Chamber
of Commerce, the airport,
the Visitor’s Center,
hotels, MSU, and any
other organization that
requests them. We have
posters throughout
downtown and MSU
showing the schedule.
On a quarterly basis we
place ads in the local and
MSU newspapers. This
year we plan to develop
radio and television Public
Service Announcements.
Joint newspaper advertisement for the Bozeman Daily Chronicle
and the MSU Exponent.
93
This advertisement, funded by the DUI Task Force, is placed in bathrooms at restaurants and
bars.
94
Appendix C: Federal Funding Information
95
Safe, Accountable,
Flexible, Efficient
Transportation
Equity Act -
A Legacy for Users
SAFETEA-LU
A GUIDE TO TRANSIT-RELATED PROVISIONS
96
This guide provides a brief summary of key transit and related provisions of the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act - A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-
LU), which authorizes federal transit and highway programs through Fiscal Year (FY)
2009. The bill was signed into law by President Bush on August 10, 2005 (Public Law
109-59).
SAFETEA-LU builds on the success of two previous surface transportation authorization
laws, the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA; P.L. 102-240) and
the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA 21; P.L. 105-178). Under it, the
federal transit program structure remains largely the same, retaining formula programs
that target federal investment to systems and communities based on need and capital
investment programs that address special needs and projects. Nonetheless, as
summarized in this guide, the new law makes a number of changes to existing
programs and adds new ones.
SAFETEA-LU represents a hard-fought victory for the public transportation industry and
is consistent with the key reauthorization goals adopted by APTA’s Board of Directors in
2002: grow the program; maintain funding guarantees; and expedite program delivery.
The new bill meets these goals. It:
• Provides a record level of federal transit investment, $52.6 billion over 6 years, an
increase of 46 percent over the amount guaranteed in TEA 21;
• Increases annual guaranteed transit funding from a level of $7.2 billion in FY 2003
(the last year of TEA 21) to $10.3 billion in FY 2009;
• Retains annual funding guarantees to ensure long-term funding stability; and
• Improves program delivery.
This outcome was possible because APTA member organizations worked together, and
with other transportation interest groups, to make it happen. With great leadership
provided by the APTA Executive Committee, Board of Directors and especially our
legislative leadership – the Big 5: Rick Bacigalupo (Orange County), Mike Townes
(Hampton Roads), Chris Boylan (New York), Dick Ruddell (Ft. Worth), and Alan
Wulkan (Parsons Brinkerhoff) – coupled with APTA’s Public Transportation Partnership
for Tomorrow (PT)2 resources we were able to carry that message forward more
effectively than ever before. The results are described in this guide.
William W. Millar
President
American Public Transportation Association
September 2005
APTA EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Richard A. White Chair
Ronald L. Barnes First Vice Chair
Paul P. Skoutelas Secretary-Treasurer
George F. Dixon III Immediate Past Chair
VICE CHAIRS
Richard J. Bacigalupo Government Affairs
Mattie P. Carter Transit Board Members
Michael P. DePallo Rail Transit
Nathaniel P. Ford, Sr.Management and Finance
Fred M. Gilliam Bus and Paratransit Operations
Kim R. Green Business Members
John M. Inglish Research and Technology
William D. Lochte Business Member-at-Large
Gary W. McNeil Canadian Members
Jeffrey A. Nelson Small Operations
Joshua W. Shaw State Affairs
David L. Turney Marketing
Kathryn D. Waters Commuter and Intercity Rail
Linda S. Watson Human Resources
INTRODUCTION
97
1SAFETEA-LU
Summary and Overview ..........................................................................................2
Transit Provisions of SAFETEA-LU........................................................................2
Planning.....................................................................................................................3
Planning Programs...................................................................................................3
Metropolitan Planning..............................................................................................3
Statewide Planning...................................................................................................3
Formula Programs...................................................................................................4
Urbanized Area Formula Program..........................................................................4
Small Transit Intensive Cities Tier...........................................................................4
Operating Assistance for Small UZAs.....................................................................4
Growing and High Density States Apportionment Factors ...................................5
Rural Formula Program...........................................................................................5
Transit on Indian Reservations................................................................................6
Elderly Individuals and Individuals with Disabilities Program..............................6
New Freedom Program............................................................................................6
Job Access and Reverse Commute Program.........................................................7
Capital Investment Programs.................................................................................7
New Starts Program.................................................................................................7
Small Starts Program.............................................................................................10
Alternatives Analysis...............................................................................................11
Fixed Guideway Modernization Program..............................................................11
Bus and Bus Facilities Program............................................................................11
Research..................................................................................................................12
Other Programs......................................................................................................12
Clean Fuels Program..............................................................................................12
Alternative Transportation in Parks and Public Lands Program.......................13
Project Management Oversight.............................................................................13
Other Transit-Related Provisions ........................................................................13
Non-Regulatory Notice and Comment Period.....................................................13
Charter Bus.............................................................................................................13
Employee Protective Arrangements.....................................................................14
Buy America............................................................................................................14
Bus Dealership Requirement ................................................................................14
Controlled Substances and Alcohol Misuse Testing............................................15
Eligible Capital Expenses.......................................................................................15
Use of Advertising and Social Service Contract Revenue Towards
Local Match.........................................................................................................15
Transit Pass Commute Benefit..............................................................................16
Volumetric Excise Tax Credit for Alternative Fuels..............................................16
Selected Highway Provisions................................................................................16
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement...........................................16
Bus Axle Weight Exemption...................................................................................17
Ferry Boats and Terminals.....................................................................................17
Tolling Provisions....................................................................................................17
Transportation, Community, and System Preservation Program......................18
National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission........18
National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission..........18
Funding Tables..................................................................................................1, 8, 9
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Over two reauthorization cycles,
federal public transportation
investment has more than doubled.Bi ions of Do ars
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
{$24.1 {$36
$52.6
{ISTEA TEA 21 SAFETEA-LU
98
PLANNING PROGRAMS, 49 U.S.C. 5305
A new section 5305 contains general provisions applicable to
planning programs and continues the current division of planning
authorization between Metropolitan Planning and Statewide
Planning. The law requires the Federal Transit Administration and
Federal Highway Administration to issue final planning regulations by
August 10, 2006.
METROPOLITAN PLANNING, 49 U.S.C. 5303
All provisions for Metropolitan Planning are consolidated in a new
section 5303. The requirement for separate transportation plans
and transportation improvement programs is maintained. The Long
Range Transportation Plan and the Transportation Improvement
Program are to be updated every four years. Provisions regarding
Transportation Management Areas (TMAs) are included in the
metropolitan transportation planning section. Metropolitan Planning
Organizations (MPOs) are encouraged to consult or coordinate with
planning officials responsible for other types of planning activities
affected by transportation. Safety and security are factors to be
included in metropolitan planning.
In developing a Long Range Transportation Plan, MPOs will be
required to include transit agencies in making funding estimates;
consult with state and local agencies responsible for land use
management, natural resources, environmental protection,
conservation, and historic preservation; and have a participation plan
that provides reasonable opportunities for all parties comments.
TMAs must be certified every four years. Program updates of state or
MPO plans shall reflect these changes by July 1, 2007.
STATEWIDE PLANNING, 49 U.S.C. 5304
SAFETEA-LU consolidates statewide planning requirements in a new
section 5304. States are allowed to enter into agreements for the
purpose of planning cooperation and coordination for projects with
multi-State implications. States must consider the economic vitality
for rural areas as well as urbanized areas in statewide transportation
planning. The Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
(STIP) is to be updated every four years. Safety and security are
factors to be included in statewide planning.
3SAFETEA-LU
On July 29, 2005, the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate
approved by huge margins the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act - A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). The
bill provides $286.4 billion, including $52.6 billion for transit,
through Fiscal Year (FY) 2009. The President signed the bill into
law (Public Law (P.L.) 109-59) on August 10, 2005. The President’s
signature completed a legislative process that began in 2003,
spanned two Congresses, and included two conferences and 12
extensions of TEA 21.
The provisions of SAFETEA-LU specifically fund the authorization
of transit and highway funds for FY 2005 through FY 2009; funding
for FY 2004 was authorized by the Surface Transportation Extension
Act of 2004, Part IV, (P.L. 108-280). All amounts in this document
refer to the entire SAFETEA-LU period and include FY 2004 funds
authorized by the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2004, Part
IV. Provisions of SAFETEA-LU generally take effect at the beginning
of FY 2006 (October 1, 2005), but the law incorporates FY 2005
funding provided in FY 2005 Appropriations law and extensions of
authorizing law.
Before FY 2006, federal transit programs were funded with a mix of
funds from both the Highway Trust Fund and the General Fund,
which under congressional budgeting rules resulted in a fast “spend
down” rate for Mass Transit Account funds. Beginning in FY 2006,
SAFETEA-LU funds the New Starts, Research and University Research
Centers programs and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA)
Administrative Expenses from the General Fund, and all other
programs from the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust Fund.
As a result, Trust Fund spending under the transit program for the
first time will be scored in the same way that spending is scored
under the highway program, which has a significant and positive
impact on the amount of funds that were able to be made available
for the transit program under SAFETEA-LU.
Finally, the legislation provides guaranteed annual increases in
investment for all transit programs through the use of discretionary
spending offsets and language similar to that included in TEA 21.
2
PlanningSummary and
Overview
Transit
Provisions of
SAFETEA-LU
99
200,000 in population under the 2000 Census may continue to use
formula funds for operating expenses in FY 2005 at 100 percent of
their FY 2002 apportionment, in FY 2006 at 50 percent of their FY
2002 apportionment, and in FY 2007 at 25 percent of their FY 2002
apportionment.
GROWING AND HIGH DENSITY STATES FORMULA FACTORS,
49 U.S.C 5340
New Growing States and High Density States Formula Factors
distribute funds to the urbanized area formula and rural formula
programs under new factors. One-half of the funds are made
available under the Growing States factors and are apportioned by a
formula based on state population forecasts for 15 years beyond the
most recent Census; amounts apportioned for each state are then
distributed between urbanized areas and rural areas based on the
ratio of urban/rural population within each state. The High Density
States factors distribute the other half of the funds to states with
population densities in excess of 370 persons per square mile. These
funds are apportioned only to urbanized areas within those states.
RURAL FORMULA PROGRAM, 49 U.S.C. 5311
SAFETEA-LU significantly increases funding for the rural program of
the transit formula program. A new formula tier based on land area
is established to address the needs of low-density states (20 percent
of section 5311 funds are distributed through this tier). Indian tribes
are added as eligible recipients, and a portion of funding is set aside
each year for Indian tribes - $8 million in FY 2006 and rising to $15
million by FY 2009. Rural transit systems receiving formula funds
will be required to report data to the National Transit Database. The
sliding scale federal match under the federal highway program for
states with a high percentage of federal lands is applicable under the
section 5311 program. The current practice of requiring the
Secretary of Labor to use a special warranty for section 5333
employee protective arrangements (formerly known as section
13(c)) is now codified in law. The Rural Transportation Assistance
Program (RTAP) is funded with a 2 percent set aside of the Rural
Formula program rather than from the Research program as under
current law. Up to 15 percent of such funds can be used by FTA to
carry out national projects. Rural Formula program
apportionments will include funds apportioned from the Growing
States program.
5SAFETEA-LU
Formula programs are those under which funds are apportioned
by a formula specified in authorizing law. SAFETEA-LU moves
several programs from other categories into a new “Formula and
Bus Capital” category for authorization beginning in FY 2006. The
new aggregation of programs is intended to allow all formula
programs and the Bus Capital program to be funded from a single
authorization from the Mass Transit Account.
URBANIZED AREA FORMULA PROGRAM, 49 U.S.C. 5307
SAFETEA-LU preserves the existing formula program and its
distribution factors, but creates several new programs or tiers to
distribute a portion of the funds to urbanized areas (UZAs). It
establishes a new tier for transit intensive urbanized areas with
fewer than 200,000 in population and extends the authority to use
formula funds for operating purposes in urbanized areas
reclassified as being larger than 200,000 in population under the
2000 Census. These changes are described in detail in the
following sections. Urbanized Area Formula Program
apportionments will include funds apportioned under a new
Growing States and High Density States program described below.
The transit enhancement program will be administered by
certification, and a grantee must submit an annual report of such
projects to the FTA.
SMALL TRANSIT INTENSIVE CITIES TIER, 49 U.S.C. 5336(j)
SAFETEA-LU includes APTA’s proposal to create a tier in the
Urbanized Area Formula program that would distribute funds to
small UZAs with fewer than 200,000 population that provide transit
service above a certain level. The new tier will be funded at 1
percent of all UZA formula funds annually beginning in FY 2006.
The criteria are passenger miles traveled per vehicle revenue mile;
passenger miles traveled per vehicle revenue hour; vehicle revenue
miles per capita; vehicle revenue hours per capita; passenger miles
traveled per capita; and passengers per capita.
OPERATING ASSISTANCE FOR SMALL UZAS, 49 U.S.C.
5307(b)(2)
Transit agencies in urbanized areas that grew from fewer than
200,000 in population under the 1990 Census to more than
4
Formula
Programs
100
JOB ACCESS AND REVERSE COMMUTE (JARC) PROGRAM,
49 U.S.C. 5316
The JARC program is changed to become a formula program rather
than the existing competitive discretionary grants program. The
formula is based on ratios involving the number of eligible low-
income and welfare recipients with 60 percent of funds going to
urban areas with more than 200,000 population, 20 percent for
urban areas with fewer than 200,000 population, and 20 percent to
rural areas. SAFETEA-LU contains report language directing the FTA
to continue its practice of providing maximum flexibility to job
access projects designed to meet the needs of individuals who are
not effectively served by public transportation. Coordination is
required between private, non-profit, and public transportation
providers and other federal programs in the JARC program, the New
Freedom Program, and the Elderly and Disabled program.
Capital Investment programs provide funds for transit capital
projects that meet specific criteria either by allocation where the
project is named or by apportionment under a formula. Capital
Investment Projects include the New Starts, Fixed Guideway
Modernization, and Bus and Bus Facilities programs. For
authorization of amounts for SAFETEA-LU, however, Fixed Guideway
Modernization and Bus and Bus Capital programs are included
under authorizations for Formula and Bus Capital Programs
beginning in FY 2006.
NEW STARTS PROGRAM, 49 U.S.C. 5309
SAFETEA-LU does not change the basic New Starts program or the
current federal share of 80 percent. A new Small Starts Program is
created for smaller projects with a federal share of less than $75
million (see below).
The current three-level rating system for New Starts is replaced by a
five-level system - High, Medium High, Medium, Medium-Low, Low.
Economic development/land use is explicitly added to the project
justification criteria. A grantee will be allowed to keep a portion of
the cost savings when projects are completed under budget. A higher
than requested federal share can be provided for projects which
keep cost and ridership estimates within 10 percent of the forecasts
7SAFETEA-LU
TRANSIT ON INDIAN RESERVATIONS, 49 U.S.C. 5311(c)
Indian tribes are added as eligible recipients for rural formula
funds, and a portion of rural formula funding is set aside each year
for Indian tribes - $8 million in FY 2006 and rising to $15 million
by FY 2009.
ELDERLY INDIVIDUALS AND INDIVIDUALS WITH
DISABILITIES PROGRAM, 49 U.S.C. 5310
SAFETEA-LU maintains the current program for special needs of
elderly individuals and individuals with disabilities. Because of strong
interest in extending the authority to use section 5310 grant funds for
operating assistance, a new seven-state pilot program is established for
fiscal years 2006 through 2009 to determine whether expanded
authority to use up to 33 percent of the funds apportioned under
section 5310 for operating costs improves services to elderly
individuals and individuals with disabilities. Four of the states in the
pilot program are specified in law – Wisconsin, Alaska, Minnesota,
and Oregon – along with three other states to be selected by the
Secretary.
NEW FREEDOM PROGRAM, 49 U.S.C. 5317
A new program called the New Freedom Program will provide
formula funding for new transportation services and public
transportation alternatives beyond those required by ADA to assist
persons with disabilities. The New Freedom Program will be
apportioned using a formula based on the disabled population in a
state, with 60 percent of the funds apportioned to urbanized areas
with populations larger than 200,000, 20 percent to states for use in
urbanized areas of fewer than 200,000, and 20 percent to states for
use in rural areas. Funds will be made available to transit systems
and the states. The program contains language mandating
coordination of transportation services with other federal human
service programs. The law’s legislative history specifies that
employee protective arrangements under section 5333 (formerly
known as section 13(c)) do not apply to this new program.
6
Capital
Investment
Programs
101
9SAFETEA-LU8
PROGRAM FY 2004
(Millions)
Total All Programs $7,309.0
Formula Programs Total 3,964.0
§ 5307 Urbanized Area 3,445.9
§ 5340 Growing States and High Density States —-
§ 5311 Rural Area 240.6
§ 5310 Elderly and Disabled 90.7
§ 5317 New Freedom —-
§ 5338(a)(2)(C) Alaska Railroad 4.8
§ 5308 Clean Fuels Formula 50.0
§ 3038 Over-the Road Bus 7.0
§ 5316 Job Access and Reverse Commute 125.0
§ 5320 Alternative Transportation in Parks —-
§ 5335 Reports and Audits —-
§ 5339 Alternatives Analysis —-
§ 5309 Capital Investment Programs Total 3,137.5
Fixed-Guideway Modernization 1,206.5
New Starts Total 1,323.8
New Starts Less Than $75 Million —-
New Starts $75 Million or More —-
Bus and Bus Facilities 607.2
Planning Total 73.0
§ 5305(d) Metropolitan Planning 60.4
§ 5305(e) State Planning 12.6
Research Total 59.0
§ 5311(b)(2) RTAP 5.3
§ 5313(a) TCRP 8.3
§ 5315 National Transit Inst. 4.0
§ 5314 National Research 35.5
§ 5506 University Centers 6.0
FTA Operations 75.5
FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 Six-Year
(Millions) (Millions) (Millions) (Millions) (Millions) Total
(Millions)
$7,646.3 $8,622.9 $8,974.8 $9,730.9 $10,338.1 $52,622.0
4,123.9 4,671.7 4,860.3 5,268.1 5,596.6 28,484.6
3,593.2 3,466.7 3,606.2 3,910.8 4,160.4 22,183.2
—- 388.0 404.0 438.0 465.0 1,695.0
250.9 388.0 404.0 438.0 465.0 2,186.5
94.5 112.0 117.0 127.0 133.5 674.7
—- 78.0 81.0 87.5 92.5 339.0
4.8 —- —- —- —- 10
49.6 43.0 45.0 49.0 51.5 288.1
6.9 7.5 7.6 8.3 8.8 46.0
124.0 138.0 144.0 156.0 164.5 851.5
—- 22.0 23.0 25.0 26.9 96.9
—- 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 14.0
—- 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 100.0
3,312.1 3,716.3 3,869.5 4,197.8 4,459.8 22,692.9
1,204.7 1,391.0 1,448.0 1,570.0 1,666.5 8,486.7
1,437.8 1,503.0 1,566.0 1,700.0 1,809.3 9,339.9
—- —- 200.0 200.0 200.0 600.0
—- —- 1,366.0 1,500.0 1,609.3 4,475.3
669.6 822.3 855.5 927.8 984.0 4,866.3
72.4 95.0 99.0 107.0 113.5 559.9
59.9 78.6 81.9 88.5 93.9 463.2
12.5 16.4 17.1 18.5 19.6 96.8
60.6 58.0 61.0 65.5 69.8 373.8
5.2 In § 5311 In § 5311 In § 5311 In § 5311 10.5
8.2 9.0 9.3 9.6 10.0 54.3
4.0 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 25.2
37.2 37.7 40.4 44.6 48.5 243.9
6.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 40.0
77.4 82.0 85.0 92.5 98.5 510.9
SAFETEA-LU FEDERAL TRANSIT PROGRAM AUTHORIZATION LEVELS
102
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS, 49 U.S.C. 5339
A new Alternatives Analysis programs provides $25 million annually
beginning in FY 2006 for new fixed guideway investment alternatives
analyses. Earmarks are included for FY 2006 and FY 2007.
FIXED GUIDEWAY MODERNIZATION PROGRAM,
49 U.S.C. 5309
The Fixed Guideway Modernization program is unchanged. It is
classified as a formula program for authorization in SAFETEA-LU but
remains in the section 5309 Capital Investment program and is
identified as section 5309(m)(1)(B) in FY 2005 and section
5309(m)(2)(B) beginning in FY 2006. In prior years it had been
identified as section 5309(m)(1)(A). Fixed Guideway
Modernization apportionment factors in section 5337 are not
changed.
BUS AND BUS FACILITIES PROGRAM, 49 U.S.C. 5309
Bus and Bus Facilities is classified as a formula program for
authorization in SAFETEA-LU but remains in the section 5309 Capital
Investment program and is identified as section 5309(m)(1)(C) in
FY 2005 and section 5309(m)(2)(C) beginning in FY 2006.
SAFETEA-LU makes few changes to the program, but provides
significant increases in funding. Some 600 earmarks are included in
this section; these earmarks cover about half of the Bus and Bus
Facilities program resources in each fiscal year through FY 2009. A
new intermodal facilities program is established with a $35 million
annual set aside from the discretionary bus program. The intercity
portion of intermodal terminals is eligible for funding under this
program if the facility serves as a connector to public transportation.
In addition, $10 million is now available annually under the Bus
Program for ferry boats or related terminals with the funds
earmarked for specific projects.
11SAFETEA-LU
used as basis for establishing locally preferred alternative. FTA is to
implement New Start Program changes by a rulemaking. There is a
pilot program to demonstrate the benefits of public/private
partnerships.
The FTA annually is to issue a contractor performance assessment
report to analyze the consistency and accuracy of cost and ridership
estimates made by contractors developing major capital investments.
The FTA may take into consideration extenuating factors outside the
control of a contractor in making its evaluations. The New Starts
program is identified as section 5309(m)(1)(A) in FY 2005 and
section 5309(m)(2)(A) beginning in FY 2006. In prior years it had
been identified as section 5309(m)(1)(B).
The law includes four categories of earmarks: specific annual
funding levels for projects that have Full Funding Grant Agreements;
a listing without any funding amounts for projects authorized for
final design and construction grants; a listing without any funding
amounts for projects authorized for preliminary engineering grants;
and a listing with maximum amounts during the SAFETEA-LU period
for additional projects not categorized by their status.
Also under the New Starts program, $20 million is made available
annually for ferry boats or related facilities for projects in Alaska
and Hawaii.
SMALL STARTS PROGRAM, 49 U.S.C. 5309(e)
A new “Small Starts” (Capital Investment Grants Less Than
$75,000,000) program would provide funding for smaller projects
with a federal New Starts share of less than $75 million, including
streetcar, trolley, bus rapid transit (if a substantial portion of the
project operates in a separate right of way in a defined corridor
dedicated for public transit use during peak hours or it has other
characteristics of a fixed guideway system), and commuter rail
projects. Small Starts projects may not total more than $250
million. Simplified procedures and criteria apply to the program.
The program will be funded with a $200 million takedown from the
New Starts apportionment annually beginning in FY 2007.
10
103
ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION IN PARKS AND PUBLIC
LANDS PROGRAM, 49 U.S.C. 5320
SAFETEA-LU establishes a new program to develop public
transportation in National Parks, with the goal of improving mobility
and reducing congestion and pollution. The Departments of
Transportation and Interior will work cooperatively to develop and
select capital or planning projects. Employee protective
arrangements under section 5333 (formerly known as section
13(c)) do not apply to this new program.
PROJECT MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT (PMO), 49 U.S.C. 5327
The takedown for Project Management Oversight is increased to 0.75
percent for section 5307 UZA Formula funds and to 1.0 percent for
section 5309 Capital Investment programs. New 0.5 percent PMO
takedowns will apply to section 5305 Planning, section 5310 Elderly
Persons and Persons with Disabilities, and section 5320 Alternative
Transportation in Parks and Public Lands programs. The 0.5 percent
PMO takedown for section 5311 Rural funds remains the same.
“Safety and security management” are added to project management
and oversight review requirements.
NON-REGULATORY NOTICE AND COMMENT PERIOD,
49 U.S.C. 5334 (l)
The law adds a new section that requires FTA to subject non-regulatory
substantive policy statements that impose a binding obligation on
recipients to a 60-day public review notice and comment period.
CHARTER BUS, 49 U.S.C. 5323(d)
SAFETEA-LU permits the partial withholding of federal funds by the
FTA in the case of a continuing pattern of violations of the charter or
school bus law and regulations. Report language accompanying the
bill calls for a negotiated rulemaking by the FTA to consider ways to
improve the charter bus complaint and appeals process; improve the
administration and enforcement of the charter bus regulation,
including use of the internet to help communications; and to
13SAFETEA-LU
The research programs are generally unchanged. The Transit
Cooperative Research Program grows from its current fixed amount
of $8.2 million a year to $10 million in FY 2009. A number of
studies and entities are funded from the national research program:
a National Academy of Sciences study of 38 transit systems ability to
accommodate evacuation in times of emergency; Center for Transit
Oriented Development at $1 million a year; transportation equity
research program to assess transportation impacts on transit
dependent at $1 million a year; transit career ladder training
program at $1 million a year; pilot program for remote infrared
audible signs $500,000 per year; hydrogen fuel cell shuttle
deployment demonstration project at $800,000 each year for two
years; human services transportation coordination at $1.6 million
per year; Portland streetcar prototype deployment at $1 million per
year; public transportation participation pilot program at $1 million
a year; transportation infrastructure and logistics research at
$500,000 a year for University of Alabama at Huntsville; National
Bus Rapid Transit Institute at $1.75 million a year for University of
South Florida; ITS application at $400,000 for Northern Kentucky
University; ITS pilot project at $465,000 for Ohio State; regional
public safety training center at $500,000 a year for Lehigh-Carbon
Community College; transit security training facility at $750,000 for
Chester Community College; Small Urban and Rural Transit Center
$800,000 per year at North Dakota State University; advanced
technology BRT at $500,000 per year for Connecticut project; New
Haven fuel cell-powered bus research at approximately $500,000 a
year; Center for Advanced Transportation Initiatives at approximately
$500,000 a year at Rutgers; New Jersey Institute of Technology
TELUS program at approximately $500,000 a year; Southern
California regional transit training consortium pilot program at
$540,000 a year.
CLEAN FUELS PROGRAM, 49 U.S.C. 5308
The Clean Fuels grant program is reauthorized with some
modifications. Grants would be provided for the purchase of clean
fuels buses, including clean diesel vehicles (up to 25 percent of
grants annually), in certain non-attainment areas and areas trying to
maintain compliance with clean air standards. Grants are
discretionary.
12
Research
Other
Programs
Other
Transit-
Related
Programs
104
CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES AND ALCOHOL MISUSE TESTING,
49 U.S.C. 5331
The law provides flexibility to permit a transit system to comply with
one DOT modal drug and alcohol testing program rather than having
to comply separately with different DOT modal drug and alcohol
testing programs.
ELIGIBLE CAPITAL EXPENSES, 49 U.S.C. 5302(a)(1)
The definition of an eligible capital project for mass transportation
improvement is expanded by adding construction, renovation, and
improvement of intercity bus and intercity rail stations and terminals.
New eligible capital project categories are added: crime prevention
and security including security and emergency response plans,
chemical and biological agent detection, emergency response drills,
and security training for employees; establishing a debt service
reserve; and mobility management. Mobility management is
described as “projects for improving coordination among public
transportation and other transportation service providers”, and
could include, among other things, the employment of personnel to
coordinate the full array of transportation options through a
clearinghouse function. Further, a transit system may allow the
incidental use of federally funded alternative fueling facilities and
equipment by nontransit public entities and private entities so long
as funds earned are used for transit purposes.
USE OF ADVERTISING AND SOCIAL SERVICE CONTRACT
REVENUE TOWARDS LOCAL MATCH
The legislation allows additional funds to be used for the local match.
Advertising and concession revenues can be used to match Urbanized
Area Formula funds. Amounts appropriated or otherwise made available to
a department or agency of the Government (other than the Department
of Transportation) that are eligible to be expended for transportation
can be used to match Elderly and Disabled, Rural, JARC, and New
Freedom grants. Funds from section 403(a)(5)(C)(vii) of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 603(a)(5)(C)(vii)) can be used to match
Urbanized Area Formula, Elderly and Disabled, Rural, JARC, and New
Freedom grants. Amounts received under a service agreement with a
state or local social service agency or private social service organization
can be used to match Elderly and Disabled, Rural, JARC, and New Freedom
grants. Proceeds from the issuance of revenue bonds can be used to match
Urbanized Area Formula and Capital Investment grants for capital projects.
15SAFETEA-LU
consider whether there are potential limited conditions under which
public transit agencies can provide community-based charter
services directly to local governments and private non-profit
agencies that would not otherwise be served in a cost-effective
manner by private operators. Under a negotiated rulemaking, a
balanced group representing public and private interests would
meet with a representative of the FTA as part of a federally chartered
advisory committee to negotiate the text of a proposed rule.
Meetings are to be announced in the Federal Register and are open
to the general public. If the group cannot agree on the text of a
proposed rule, FTA would draft it.
EMPLOYEE PROTECTIVE ARRANGEMENTS, 49 U.S.C 5333
(FORMERLY KNOWN AS SECTION 13(c))
Employee protective arrangements, formerly known as section
“13(c),” do not apply to two new programs created under the bill,
the New Freedom and Alternative Transportation in Parks and Public
Lands Programs. The bill codifies the Department of Labor (DOL)
“Las Vegas” decision relating to contractor-to-contractor issues in
cases involving buses as embodied in DOL letters dated September
21 and November 7, 1994. Further, the administrative special
warranty for section 5311 programs is now codified in law and
grants for purchase of like-kind equipment do not have to be
referred to DOL prior to certification.
BUY AMERICA, 49 U.S.C. 5323(j)
Language is included in SAFETEA-LU requiring FTA to conduct a
rulemaking on the Buy America program to clarify that the
microprocessor waiver is limited to computers and similar devices;
to define end product to ensure that major systems procurements
are not used to circumvent Buy America and that such definition
include a list of representative items subject to the Buy America
requirements; provide for non-availability waivers after contract
award; and to clarify that it is the certification submitted with a final
offer that applies to a negotiated procurement.
BUS DEALERSHIP REQUIREMENT, 49 U.S.C. 5325(i)
The law provides that no state law requiring buses to be purchased
through in-State dealers shall apply to vehicles purchased with a
grant under the federal transit program.
14
105
impact of the projects on air quality and congestion levels; and
ensure the effective implementation of the program. The
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is to publish a list of
approved diesel retrofit technologies and the emission reduction
effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the technologies.
BUS AXLE WEIGHT EXEMPTION, SECTION 1023(h)(1) OF
THE INTERMODAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENCY
ACT OF 1991
The current exemption from axle-weight limitations for transit buses
and over-the-road buses is extended through September 30, 2009.
FERRY BOATS AND TERMINALS, 23 U.S.C. 149
A new program for the construction of ferry boats and terminals is
established, funded at $38 million in FY 2005 and increasing
annually to $67 million by FY 2009. Additional sums as may be
necessary are provided. A national ferry database will be
established. Included in program priorities are ferries that carry the
greatest number of passengers in passenger-only service.
TOLLING PROVISIONS, SECTION 1604 OF SAFETEA-LU AND
23 U.S.C. 166
An express lane demonstration program is established which permits
excess revenues to be used for transit purposes eligible under Title
49. SAFETEA-LU gives states more flexibility to use road pricing
strategies as a congestion management and transportation finance
tool. States are given latitude in the operation of High Occupancy
Toll (HOT) lanes, allowing priority consideration for use of toll
revenues for alternatives (such as transit) to single occupant
vehicles. In addition, the Federal Highway Administration’s Value
Pricing Pilot Program is continued and enhanced along with several
other pilot and demonstration programs to encourage congestion
strategies aimed at air quality, energy conservation and efficiency.
New provisions allow state/local governments expanded use of “toll
credits” for local match for federal highway and transit projects -
revenues from toll facilities may be counted as local matching funds
regardless of whether or not federal funds were or are used for the
toll facility.
17SAFETEA-LU
TRANSIT PASS COMMUTE BENEFIT, SECTION 3049 OF
SAFETEA-LU
The law preserves the current limitation for qualified transportation
fringe benefits for transit and vanpools at $105 per month (with
indexing for inflation). It also codifies Executive Order #13150
which requires federal agencies in the Washington, D.C. National
Capital Region to provide employees with tax-free transit benefits to
cover commuting costs up to the maximum allowed by law. It
extends benefits, beyond those provided in the Executive Order, to
federal employees in the National Capital Region who work for the
legislative and judicial branches or for independent agencies.
VOLUMETRIC EXCISE TAX CREDIT FOR ALTERNATIVE FUELS,
SECTION 11113 OF TITLE XI OF SAFETEA-LU
Two new excise tax credits are made available under SAFTEA-LU’s
tax title for alternative fuels and alternative fuel mixtures used in
highway-use vehicles. The law provides a 50 cent per gallon tax
credit for alternative fuel or gasoline gallon equivalents for non
liquid alternative fuels. While this tax credit would be provided to
the producer of such fuels, some of the benefit of the credit may
accrue to the users, including transit and other municipal agencies
that are not taxpaying entities.
The following selected sections of the highway provisions are
included because of their significance to the federal transit program
but represent only a small portion of the highway provisions in
SAFETEA-LU.
CONGESTION MITIGATION AND AIR QUALITY
IMPROVEMENT (CMAQ), 23 U.S.C. 149
A new requirement is established that states and MPOs give priority
consideration to projects and programs for diesel retrofits, other
cost-effective emission reduction activities, and cost-effective
congestion mitigation activities that provide air quality benefits. Also
established is a requirement to evaluate and assess a representative
sample of CMAQ projects to determine the direct and indirect
16
Selected
Highway
Provisions
106
TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNITY, AND SYSTEM
PRESERVATION PROGRAM, SECTION 1117 OF SAFETEA-LU
Funding for the Federal Highway Administration Transportation,
Community, and System Preservation Program (TCSP) is increased
from the current $25 million annual amount to a new annual level
of $61 million. Transit and highway projects that enhance transit-
oriented development are eligible, along with other broad
categories of projects that improve the efficiency of the
transportation system and reduce its impacts on the environment.
NATIONAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION POLICY AND
REVENUE STUDY COMMISSION, SECTION 1909 OF TITLE I
OF SAFETEA-LU
A new commission will be created to study and report on the
current condition and future needs of the surface transportation
system, and potential funding to meet such needs. It specifically
identifies public transportation infrastructure and facilities as part of
the surface transportation system to be considered, and directs the
commission to consider needs related to emergency preparedness
and evacuation using the system and alternatives to address
environmental concerns associated with the system.
NATIONAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE
FINANCING COMMISSION, SECTION 1142 OF TITLE XI OF
SAFETEA-LU
Another commission will be created to complete a study of the Highway
Trust Fund revenues and the impacts of these revenues for future
highway and transit needs. Among the considerations will be alternative
approaches to generating revenues for the Highway Trust Fund.
18
VISION
Be the leading force in advancing public transportation.
MISSION
To strengthen and improve public transportation, APTA
serves and leads its diverse membership through advocacy,
innovation, and information sharing.
107
August 17, 2007
Ms. Mary E. Peters
Secretary of Transportation
U.S. Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Ave, SE
Washington, DC 20590
Secretary Peters:
I write today with a decidedly mixed reaction to two recent actions by the United States
Department of Transportation. While the Community Transportation Association of America
and its more than 4,000 organizational and individual members is exceedingly gratified by
the decision to fully fund public and community transit recovery efforts along the Gulf Coast,
we are equally disturbed by the decision to spend so much in discretionary capital
investment in a mere five communities through the Urban Partnership program.
We certainly want to express our profound appreciation for the DOT and FTA effort relative
to Gulf Coast Transit Funding. This action provides important help and does justice to many
of the communities damaged by Katrina and the difficult situation caused by its aftermath.
The implementation of the waiver provisions we fought to create is also welcome news and
we know will be a tremendous help. I have spoken with our colleagues at Coast Transit in
Gulfport, Mississippi and I know how important this investment is to them. It will make a
real and positive difference. Thank you.
On the allocation of discretionary capital resources announced yesterday there will be
disappointment from many of our members who responded to the FTA notice of funds that
were available. This disappointment is exacerbated by the fact that FTA staff spent the
better part of the past six months advising many of our members on how to properly submit
for its competitive capital discretionary program, a program which now seems never to have
been part of DOT’s plans.
We understand the desire to make an impact on congestion — an issue we agree is vitally
important. But other needs are important, too. We had hopes that this discretionary effort
would be more balanced and address the needs of all parts of our national transit network,
and not five. Congestion is a national issue. More specifically, the lack of any allocation for
our rural and small urban areas is very troubling considering the large and continuing unmet
transit need in these areas. Despite the gains in transit since SAFETEA-LU there is still great
differences between areas that the discretionary program can balance.
In the last several years we have made significant progress in providing equity in our transit
programs by bring new services to all parts of our country. We are building a national
transit network. We regret DOT and FTA could not do that in this instance.
Moving forward, I know that we can work together to produce more results like the Gulf
Coast assistance package and we can look toward to continuing to work with DOT and FTA
to find other resources for the rest of the transit community. I still believe we are best
served by a system that recognizes the needs of all communities regardless of size. Thanks
again for your time and help.
Sincerely,
Dale J. Marsico, CCTM
Executive Director
CTAA
108