TRB/AASHTO Environment & Energy ConferenceJune 6-9, 2010 Raleigh, NC

Session 10: Public-Private Partnerships, Tolling, and the NEPA Process

Jill Gurak, PE, AICPProject Director – PBS&J

Raleigh, NC

Presentation focuses on issues in NEPA that differ for:

Toll Projects vs Traditional ProjectsPPPs and Design-Build Teams

Using toll project examples from North Carolina

Gaston East-West Connector (Garden Parkway)Monroe Connector/BypassMid-Currituck Bridge

NCTA Projects

Monroe Connector/Bypass – Design-Build

Gaston East-West Connector – Design-Build

Mid-Currituck Bridge –PPP with Pre-Development Agreement

What’s always common in the NEPA process for Toll and PPP Projects?

NEPA applies through FHWA involvement, regardless of financing/procurement methodsProcess must be transparentMust provide full disclosure of issues and decisions

Where do differences occur?

Purpose and NeedAlternatives DevelopmentDesign ElementsImpact EvaluationPublic/Stakeholder Involvement

Purpose and Need

FHWA / FTA Guidance

www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/section6002/1.htmThe Environmental Review Process – Question 33

“If the financial plan for an MPO’s LRTP indicates funding for a specific project will require special funding sources (tolls, private financing, etc.), such information may be included in the purpose and need statement.”

Purpose and Need

An MPO uses tolls as a specific goal or objective in an LRTPAn agency proposes to complete a network of tolled facilities (e.g. HOT Lanes)An agency/MPO can prove a project has insufficient funding

When could this guidance apply?

Purpose and Need

None include tolling or private financing as an element of purpose and needAll 3 had insufficient programmed funding without tolls

How does this apply to the 3 examples?

Alternatives Development

FHWA GuidanceThree situations where a NEPA study can narrow alternatives to just tolled alternatives:

1. When tolling is assumed as part of the financial forecasts in the planning process as the basis for meeting fiscal constraints

2. When tolling is part of the purpose and need statement

3. When non-tolled alternatives are eliminated from consideration during the screening process

AASHTO Practitioner’s Handbook 03Managing the NEPA Process for Toll Lanes and Toll Roads

Alternatives Development

Gaston Connector and Monroe ConnectorAll Detailed Study Alternatives tolled

Mid-Currituck BridgeA non-toll improve existing

roadways alternatives retained at request of resource agencies

How does this apply to the three examples?

Alternatives Development

Narrowing range of alternatives reduces study time, accelerates project delivery

Risk to PPP partner reduced if less chance a non-toll alternative will be selected

What benefits could be realized?

Design Elements

InterchangesRoadwayBridgesToll-related facilitiesConstruction methods

How does this apply to the three examples?

What design elements could be different between a toll project and a non-toll project?

Design Elements

Gaston Connector and Monroe ConnectorAll electronic tolling – only slight design differences

from traditional design

Design ElementsMid-Currituck Bridge

PPP partner suggested cost / time saving features

Allow dredging in Currituck SoundFill Maple Swamp, add wildlife passages

Interchange location inlandToll plaza location

Design Elements

Accounted for PPP suggestions in NEPA process, with full-disclosure of trade-offs

Encouraged innovation

Will reduce “re-do” loops of reevaluation/supplemental documents

Benefits of early PPP involvement in Mid-Currituck Bridge

Impact Evaluation

Traffic Forecasts

Air Quality Conformity

Environmental Justice (previous presenter)

Impact EvaluationTraffic Forecasts

NEPA forecasts and investment grade forecasts or pre-investment feasibility studies likely will use different methods and have different results

MonroeConnector Segment

2030 NEPA

Forecast

2030 Prelim T&R

Forecast

Difference

US 601 to NC 200

35,200 31,800 10%

NC 200 to Austin Chaney Rd

24,800 22,000 11%

Austin Chaney to Forest Hills School Rd

19,600 17,000 13%

Impact Evaluation

Timely input on financial feasibility and toll rates

More opportunity for public education through NEPA process

Traffic Forecasts – early PPP involvement

Draft EIS Citizens Summary

Impact EvaluationAir Quality Conformity

Major projects must be in LRTP, consistent in design concept and scope with the selected alternative, including toll designation

Conclusions

The NEPA process must be followed if federal involvement in a toll/PPP project, and the process must be transparent.

Toll projects can differ from traditional projects in purpose and need, alternatives, design, impacts, and public involvement.

Early PPP involvement can have some benefits in innovation and cost and time savings.

Helpful References

FHWA Innovative Program Delivery Websitewww.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/index.htm

AASHTO Practitioners Guide 03 – Managing the NEPA Process for Toll Lanes and Toll Roads

FHWA Memorandum – NEPA Analysis of Toll Roads, October 15, 2004

TRB Strategic Highway Research Program Project C12 – Status Pending

The Effect of PPP and Non-Traditional Procurement Processes on Highway Planning, Environmental Review, and Collaborative Decision Making