United States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration FHWA HomeFeedback
Office of Highway Policy Information

FHWA > Policy > Office of Highway Policy Information > Motor Fuel

graphic vertical gray bar
graphic vertical gray bar

Current Issues in Motor Fuel

PowerPoint presentation: MFIssues.ppt


Current Issues in Motor Fuel - Slide 1

Barna Juhasz - Director, Office of Highway Policy Information, Federal Highway Administration - Presented on February 19, 2003


Why are we here? - Slide 2

  • Ensure that each State receives its share of Highway Trust Fund consistent with Title 23 U.S.C.
  • Ensure that each State is providing reliable, accurate motor-fuel data
  • Recognize efforts to date to ensure quality motor-fuel data
  • Get your input as to how we continue to make process improvements

Getting Acquainted - Slide 3

Title Slide


Getting Acquainted - Slide 4

  • How many State representatives? - State DOT's? - Other State agencies?
  • How many FHWA representatives? How many Division Office attendees? How many Resource Center attendees?
  • Anyone else?

Getting Acquainted - Continued - Slide 5

  • How many work as planners?
  • How many auditors?
  • How many financial managers?
  • How many analysts?
  • How many managers?
  • Anyone else?

Motor Fuel Related Statistics - Slide 6

  • 47
  • 27
  • 5
  • 1
  • 0

Motor Fuel Related Statistics - Explanation - Slide 7

  • 47 States Using "Smart" Tool
  • 27 Motor Fuel Reviews Initiated
  • 5 States with Gasohol Issues
  • 1 Error
  • 0 Still the Expectation

Key Areas - Slide 8

  • Discuss data quality concepts
  • TEA-21 Effects
  • Overview of the process as it existed in 1999 & as it exists today
  • Recognize FHWA Motor-Fuel Reassessment
  • GAO review of the motor-fuel attribution process and their recommendations

"Plain English on Data Quality: Seven Deadly Misconceptions" - Slide 9

Properties of Quality Information:

  • quality in all characteristics (completeness, accuracy, timeliness, clarity of presentation)
  • must consistently meet knowledge worker and end-customer expectations

"Plain English on Data Quality: Seven Deadly Misconceptions" - Continued - Slide 10

"...process of information quality improvement is one of continuous improvement of any and all processes to eliminate the causes of all defective data..."


Office of Highway Policy Information (OHPI) Interpretation - Slide 11

Quality Information Requires Quality in Each Step of the Information Process

  • From definition of data to be collected
  • Through collection, reporting, processing
  • Through assessment and analysis
  • Through presentation and dissemination

TEA-21 - Slide 12

  • Minimum Guarantee
  • No State's return is less than 90.5% of the estimated percentage of estimated tax payments attributable to highway users in each State
  • Motor Fuel consumption on highways is the significant variable in the calculation
  • More than $12 billion per year

Motor Fuel System Flow Chart.(pre-2002) - Slide 13

Flow Chart:

  • Revenue Departments of each State report State DOTs.
  • State DOT's provide and send copies of FHWA Form 551-M and Form 556 to FHWA headquarters, and copy to FHWA Division Office.
  • FHWA Division reviews forms.
  • FHWA headquarters revises Model Data into Excel Spreadsheets.
  • Data Table generation then takes place.
  • The table output goes into the yearly "Highway Statstics" sereis.

FHWA Motor-Fuel Reassessment - Slide 14

Purpose

  • Identify any changes needed to assure fair & equitable treatment of all States

Established outside working group

  • State DOT's, DOR's, FHWA DO's

Identified weaknesses

  • Methodology
  • Processing

FHWA Reassessment Findings - Slide 15

Existing process consistent with Congress's intent to return Highway Trust Fund receipts to highway users in the State where the fuel is consumed and the user pays the taxes

Improvements are needed:

  • Process is antiquated, staff intensive; relies heavily on Headquarters staff to correct State submitted data
  • Overall data collection & processing unchanged from mainframe technology

Motor Fuel "Smart System" Flow Chart - Slide 16

Flow Chart showing:

  • State agencies and State Revenue Departments work with State DOTs in submitting Form 551M and Form 556.
  • State DOT submits forms to website.
  • FHWA Division Office reviews forms and submits to FHWA headquarters.
  • Final table generation at headquarters for going into the Highway Statistics publication

Office of Highway Policy Information Quality Initiatives - Slide 17

  • Involve State as partners
  • Use State data to the maximum extent possible
  • 100% electronic data submission
  • Develop "smart" system including "smart" data submittal tool

GAO Review - Slide 18

  • Initiated at behest of Congress
  • Paralleled FHWA effort
  • Very cooperative effort

Screen Shot to cover of report: - Slide 19

GAO (U.S. General Accounting Office) - Report to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representation:

Tite of report: HIGHWAY FUND: Problems With Highway Trust Fund Information Can Affect State Highway Funds


GAO #1: Ensure independent verification of State data: - Slide 20

Replace existing triennial reviews

Motor Fuel Reporting Oversight Team

  • Developed process
  • Use continuous process improvement approach
  • DO's to conduct "baseline" review in FY02
  • Incorporate risk assessment
  • Future activities dependent on risk factors, including staff turnover, process errors found, etc.

GAO #2: Fully document attribution methodology - Slide 21

Multi-level documentation strategy

  • August 1998 - "TEA-21 and Estimates of Highway Trust Fund Receipts Attributable to States"
  • December 2000 - "Your State's Share: Attributing Federal Highway Revenues to Each State"
  • Spring 2001 - Draft "Abbreviated System Documentation"
  • July 2002 - "Attribution and Apportionment of Federal Highway Tax Revenues"
  • September 2001 - "FHWA Form 551-M Input Tool User's Guide"

GAO #3: Conduct Independent Comprehensive Review of Methodology - Slide 22

August 2001 - Contracted for review

Work plan addresses:

  • System performance
  • Data processing
  • Data quality
  • Risk
  • Institutional elements

GAO #4: Evaluate reliability of IRS's Ex-FIRS data to validate State data - Slide 23

  • July 2001 - Met with IRS
  • October 2001 - first data reports due to IRS
  • September 2002 - Met again with IRS Isufficient data for analysis
  • FHWA will continue to monitor and evaluate data

Conclusion - Slide 24

  • Efforts consistent with GAO recommendations
  • Support FHWA quality efforts
  • Together our efforts will ensure we have an enhanced process that ensures each State gets it fair share of funding
  • Meets the expectations of TEA-21 with up-to-data business processes and information technology.

Operating Philosophy - Slide 25

In the future, we want to use State submitted data, not data which we have to massage and rework to reflect what we believe is correct:

  • The best data is the data the States use in their own decision-making
  • We want that data, not something they put together to just satisfy the Feds .

Office of Highway Policy Informaiton (OHPI) Quality Initiatives - Slide 26

  • Have adopted this concept for all our data series
  • Moving forward in all data series
  • Addressing each in turn as resources permit

Workshop Charge - Slide 27

  • Need your input to improve existing process
  • Need to learn from you
  • Jointly improve the process



FHWA Home | Feedback

FHWA