Title 17 . Transportation and Public Facilities

Chapter 5 . Miscellaneous Provisions

Section 175. Project needs list and evaluation

17 AAC 05.175. Project needs list and evaluation

(a) Projects nominated for a project needs list under 17 AAC 05.160 may, after public review and comment, be incorporated in the STIP. Except for projects classified in the National Highway System, classified under 17 AAC 05.170(c) in the Alaska Highway System, or exempt under 17 AAC 05.200, the department will evaluate and score projects regionally and statewide according to criteria applicable to each transportation program.

(b) For rural and urban streets projects classified under 17 AAC 05.170(d) (Community Transportation Program), the evaluation criteria are

(1) economic benefits resulting from the project;

(2) the project's effect upon health and quality of life;

(3) whether the project enhances the safety of the traveling public;

(4) whether the project improves intermodal transportation or lessens redundant facilities;

(5) whether a municipality, another state agency, or a federal agency has made a contribution to finance capital costs;

(6) whether a municipality, another state agency, or a federal agency has made a commitment to assume ownership or to finance maintenance and operations costs;

(7) whether the project will lower state maintenance and operation costs;

(8) environmental approval readiness;

(9) whether the project involves only surface rehabilitation;

(10) evaluation of cost, length, and the existing roadway's average annual daily traffic count;

(11) whether the project replaces deficient bridges;

(12) whether the project corrects deficient roadway width, grade, or alignment;

(13) the functional classification of the project;

(14) the degree to which the project exhibits innovation in the manner in which it addresses the project's challenges; and

(15) the degree of public support.

(c) For remote roads and trails projects classified under 17 AAC 05.170(d) (Community Transportation Program), in communities not connected to the continental road network by road or ferry, the evaluation criteria are

(1) economic benefits resulting from the project;

(2) the project's effect upon health and quality of life;

(3) whether the project enhances the safety of the traveling public;

(4) whether the project improves intermodal transportation or lessens redundant facilities;

(5) whether a municipality, another state agency, or a federal agency has made a contribution to finance capital costs;

(6) whether a municipality, another state agency, or a federal agency has made a commitment to assume ownership or to finance maintenance and operations costs;

(7) whether the project lowers state maintenance and operations costs;

(8) environmental approval readiness;

(9) whether the project improves access to water sources, landfills, sewage lagoons, sanitary waste disposal sites, health care, airports, subsistence harvest sites, or a river or ocean;

(10) whether the project preserves an existing facility;

(11) whether the project is a joint project with

(A) the Department of Environmental Conservation;

(B) the United States Department of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs;

(C) the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Indian Health Service;

(D) a tribal entity;

(E) a federal or state agency other than one identified in (A) - (C) of this paragraph;

(12) the degree to which the project exhibits innovation in the manner in which it addresses the project's challenges; and

(13) the degree of public support.

(d) For transit projects classified under 17 AAC 05.170(d) (Community Transportation Program), the evaluation criteria are

(1) economic benefits resulting from the project;

(2) the project's effect upon health and quality of life;

(3) whether the project enhances the safety of the traveling public;

(4) whether the project improves intermodal transportation or lessens redundant facilities;

(5) whether a municipality, another state agency, or a federal agency has made a contribution to finance capital costs;

(6) whether a municipality, another state agency, or a federal agency has made a commitment to assume ownership or to finance maintenance and operations costs;

(7) environmental approval readiness;

(8) whether the project is necessary for system continuity;

(9) whether the project increases the level of service or capacity;

(10) whether the project is listed in the state air quality control plan, as adopted by reference in 18 AAC 50.030;

(11) whether the local transit agency has exhausted financing sources from the United States Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration;

(12) whether the project supports coordinated service or brokerage, involving the cooperation of two or more transportation providers, including transit organizations and non-governmental agencies, to provide transportation for the elderly and disabled;

(13) whether the project increases mobility for the disadvantaged; and

(14) the degree to which the project exhibits innovation in the manner in which it addresses the project's challenges.

(e) For intelligent transportation systems (ITS) classified under 17 AAC 05.170(d) (Community Transportation Program), the evaluation criteria are

(1) the degree to which the project furthers the goals of efficiency with reliability, safety and security, improvement of the quality of life, and the facilitation of transitions between modes of transportation;

(2) whether the project furthers the department's operations and efficiency;

(3) whether the project furthers integration between activities within the department or other ITS activities;

(4) whether the project furthers integration with activities external to the department conducted by state and federal agencies, municipalities, or private sector organizations;

(5) whether a municipality, another state agency, a federal agency, or a private sector organization has made a contribution to finance project development;

(6) whether a municipality, another state agency, a federal agency, or a private sector organization has made a commitment to finance maintenance and operations costs;

(7) the total amount of the project's capital cost and operating costs for five years of operations;

(8) the degree to which the project is consistent with state and national standards for system architecture;

(9) the degree to which the project is consistent with national standards for ITS hardware;

(10) the degree to which the project uses technology that has proven in past projects to be sustainable in an environment comparable to the environment in the state;

(11) whether the project has a clear and complete implementation and operational plan;

(12) whether the project technology expands ITS potential beyond the project's parameters;

(13) whether benefits from the project accrue to more than one of the department's regions; and

(14) the degree to which the project is consistent with and furthers goals and objectives of the statewide transportation plan adopted under AS 19.10.140 and 17 AAC 05.120.

(f) For projects classified under 17 AAC 05.170(e) (Trails and Recreational Access for Alaska (TRAAK) Program), the evaluation criteria are

(1) the project's effect upon health and quality of life;

(2) whether the project enhances the safety of a user of a trail;

(3) whether a municipality, another state agency, or a federal agency has made a contribution to finance capital costs in the form of money or material contributions; for purposes of this paragraph, material contributions include land and building materials;

(4) whether a municipality, another state agency, or a federal agency has made a commitment to assume ownership or to finance maintenance and operations costs;

(5) departmental maintenance and operations costs and priority;

(6) whether the project bridges gaps or removes barriers between existing trail systems or provides interpretive or rest area continuity;

(7) whether the project is tied to a recreational, educational, or tourism event or activity, and the public's support of that event;

(8) whether the project has significance because of historical, cultural, natural, archaeological, or recreational considerations;

(9) whether the project stabilizes or renovates an historic transportation property;

(10) capital cost; and

(11) the degree to which the project exhibits innovation in the manner in which it addresses the project's challenges.

(g) Under the criteria set out in this section, and using the methodology set out in (j) of this section, members of each regional transportation planning staff shall evaluate and establish preliminary scores for projects nominated from that office's region for the project needs list. The department will establish minimum scores for each project category established under this section, that entitles the projects that score more than the applicable minimum score to be considered in the statewide evaluation of projects under this section.

(h) A project evaluation board (PEB), appointed by the commissioner, shall evaluate and score the projects, nominated and prioritized by each region, for the draft STIP using the methodology set out in (i) of this section. The PEB consists of

(1) a deputy commissioner from the department, or the deputy commissioner's designee;

(2) the director of the department's division of statewide design and engineering services, or the director's designee;

(3) the director of the department's division of program development, or the director's designee; and

(4) the directors of the department's regional offices, or their designees;

(5) repealed 5/7/2005.

(i) To arrive at the final statewide list of projects for inclusion in the STIP, the department will select the projects with the highest scores in each program for inclusion in the STIP, based upon fiscal constraints, score, project development considerations, and the state's best interests.

(j) During an evaluation under (g) and (h) of this section, and 17 AAC 05.180, each evaluator shall score each project using the evaluation criteria applicable to each category of project. Each evaluator shall then determine the total project score by multiplying the individual scores by the weight of each criterion, and then adding the total for all criteria. The final project scores for each evaluator will be averaged to provide a mathematical score for all scorers. The average score for each project will be used for the purposes of evaluating projects for each category. The relative weight assigned the evaluation criteria for each category of projects and the mathematical techniques used to differentiate the projects, will be included in the project criteria notice issued under 17 AAC 05.160, and may be discussed during any public meeting on the project needs list and draft STIP.

(k) A meeting of the PEB under (h) of this section is a public meeting under AS 44.62.310 . Notice satisfying the requirements of AS 44.62.310 will be given to interested persons not less than 14 days before the meeting. The department will make available at a meeting under (h) of this section, for inspection by the public and interested persons, one set of the briefing materials provided to the PEB members.

( l ) Before the department will consider a municipality's commitment to provide financing for construction or maintenance, or assumption of ownership, in the evaluation of a particular project under (g) and (h) of this section, or 17 AAC 05.180, the municipality shall authorize, by resolution or ordinance, the execution of an agreement with the state promising to perform the specified act. If the municipality breaches its obligation under that agreement before the advertisement of a project for construction, the department will reevaluate each project nominated by the municipality without consideration of the local contribution of money, or local ownership, with possible removal of the project from the STIP upon reevaluation. If the municipality breaches its obligation under that agreement after the advertisement of a project for bid, the department may proceed forward with construction to completion of the project. In the evaluation of other projects in the municipality in the succeeding six years after the breach, the department will not include any consideration of a local contribution toward the cost of construction, the cost of maintenance and operation of a facility, or ownership of a facility upon completion, until the municipality cures its earlier breach of an agreement executed under this subsection, to the department's satisfaction.

(m) In addition to the criteria listed in (b) - (f) of this section, when evaluating projects under (a) of this section, the department will use a simplified cost effectiveness methodology to consider the relative cost of projects. Cost effectiveness will be determined by subtracting the estimated transportation-related savings from the project's estimated cost and dividing the result by the latest population estimate available for the area served by the project.

History: Eff. 3/8/2002, Register 161; am 5/7/2005, Register 174

Authority: AS 19.05.020

AS 19.05.030

AS 19.10.140

AS 44.42.030

AS 44.42.050