Skip to content

Concept Design for an Online Information Source for Major Surface Transportation Projects: A Discussion Paper

June 2017
Table of Contents

« PreviousNext »

3 Organizational Structure of the Online Information Source

The Online Information Source could be organized into different tables that together could comprise a relational database. Users would be able to search the relational database and assemble tailored reports to suit their research needs. The relational database would also provide the flexibility to accommodate the addition of new projects and data over time. It is envisioned that the information source would be able to accommodate a variety of file formats and that it could provide users with access to images, video, and project documents.

As demonstrated in Figure 2, the contents of the online information source could be organized into seven data tables. Three of these would provide descriptive information on the P3 and non-P3 projects, as well as information on the legislative contexts in which they have been implemented and information on the sponsoring agencies' policies and capacity. Given that legislative contexts are fluid, the legislative information included in the online information source should be date-stamped and updated on a regular basis. This will enable researchers to gain access to accurate information about legislative context at the time decisions were made. Many of the data elements would need clear instructions on how to interpret and synthesize data from disparate sources into the information source. The intent is that the information would enable users to make "apples to apples" comparisons among project cohorts of their own choice. The remaining four data tables would contain information on the performance outcomes of the projects.

Using the approach described above, the data tables would provide the following types of information:

  • Project Information - descriptive information on the project location, cost, procurement model, length, interchanges, project type, setting, toll status and utilization levels
  • Legislative Information - descriptive information on statutory authorities under which the project was implemented
  • Agency Policy and Capacity - descriptive information of local policies under which the project was implemented and the technical capabilities and size of its sponsoring agency
  • Project Development Phase - data on the environmental approval process, technical feasibility, economic feasibility, financial feasibility and initial value for money (VfM) assessment, and retained public liabilities (financial risk analysis).
  • Procurement Phase - data on the request for information (RFI), request for qualifications (RFQ), draft request for proposals (RFP), final RFP, proposers, alternative technical concepts (ATCs), award details, selected team, VfM assessment, project finance, P3 agreement, commercial close, and financial close.
  • Project Implementation Phase - data regarding design and construction elements and costs.
  • Operations and Maintenance Phase - data on performance standards, technical performance over time, service quality over time, facility condition, hand back quality at end of service life, maintenance costs.

Tier 1 of the information source would include all the information in the above categories that is needed for project oversight. Tier 2 would add the more detailed information for further analysis. Appendix B of this report contains a detailed discussion and a list of suggested performance metrics that could be included in each of the data tables, including the purpose of the data tables, their information requirements, and potential data sources.

Figure 2. Relational Database Structure

Figure 2

Source: WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff, 2017

View larger version of Figure 2

The remainder of this chapter identifies the information recommended for inclusion in Tier 1 of the online information source. Industry experts reviewing the discussion paper also suggested that rather than collecting all the Tier 1 information initially, it might be beneficial to collect the subset of Tier 1 metrics that are available in the FHWA Major Projects database. That information could be shared with state DOTs to provide FHWA and the Bureau with sense of its usefulness to State DOTs and, if warranted, modifications could be made to the data collection approach.

3.1 Project Information

The proposed data elements to describe the project information are presented in Table 3.

Table 3. Recommended Data Elements for Project Information Table
Data Element Potential Data Source(s)
Project name
  • Project profiles on the FHWA Center for Innovative Finance Support website
  • Major Projects Database
  • Project websites maintained by the project sponsor or P3 concessionaire
  • Public Works Financing database
  • FHWA Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS)
  • State DOT geographic information system (GIS) websites
  • Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB) Electronic Municipal Market Access (EMMA) - Official Statements for debt issuance
Project location (city/county/region, state), project limits (latitude and longitude, and mileposts) and setting (urban, suburban, rural)
Project topography (flat, rolling or mountainous)
Total capital cost, including construction, financing, right-of-way, and utility relocations (some of which may be done under separate contracts) necessary for facility development
Procurement model, including design-bid-build, design-build, and DBFOM real toll and availability payment concessions
Concession period
Project type, including greenfield highway, priced managed lane, bridge, tunnel, brownfield/asset monetization (long-term lease concession)
Project length, number of lanes and lane-miles or span length and vertical clearance (for water crossings)
Number of interchanges
Toll status, i.e., tolled or non-tolled, and fixed vs. variable tolls
Utilization, including annual average daily traffic (AADT) by year
Roadway segments by type: on surface, elevated section, in trench, below ground in tunnel
For highways, number of bridges and length of elevated structures or flyovers

3.2 Legislative Information

The proposed data elements that capture the key legislative provisions are summarized in Table 4. Note that the information should reflect the status of legislation at the time the decision was made with regard to project delivery method. Amendments and changes to legislative authorities should also be captured, together with date stamps. This approach would provide researchers with a comprehensive understanding of the evolution of the state legal environments affecting the use of alternative project delivery strategies throughout the data collection period. Date-stamped information could also be included about past legislative changes and amendments.

Table 4. Recommended Data Elements Capturing Key Legislative Provisions
Data Element (reflecting status at the time project delivery method was selected) Potential Data Source(s)
Whether design-build procurement is allowed
  • NCSL's Private Partnerships for Transportation: A Toolkit for Legislatures
  • NCSL's Transportation Funding and Finance Legislation Database
  • FHWA's Alternative Contracting Methods Library
  • InfraAmericas US Legislation database
  • State DOT and legislative policy agency P3 enabling statute primers
Whether DBFOM concessions are allowed
Year of enactment and sunset provisions
Whether the legislation explicitly allows the conversion of existing free roads to toll roads
Term limits on concession agreements
Limitations on utilizing availability payment structures
Whether non-compete clauses are restricted or prohibited
Limitations on utilizing progress, milestone and completion payments
Whether high occupancy toll operations or congestion pricing are allowed
Whether legislative approvals are required to finance revenue bonds, levy user fees, implement innovative finance partnerships, or complete the project procurement process
Whether creation of a P3 advisory body is required (this is different from a dedicated alternative delivery or P3 unit)
  • NCSL's Private Partnerships for Transportation: A Toolkit for Legislatures
  • NCSL's Transportation Funding and Finance Legislation Database
  • FHWA's Alternative Contracting Methods Library
  • InfraAmericas US Legislation database
  • State DOT and legislative policy agency P3 enabling statute primers
Whether both solicited and unsolicited proposals are allowed, and under what conditions
Whether proposal evaluation criteria are specified
How the confidentiality of ATCs is addressed and whether the payment of stipends to unsuccessful proposers allows the agency to use the innovations in their proposals
Whether the public agency is required to charge application fees for review of unsolicited proposals
Whether authority is limited to specific projects or certain types of projects
Information addressing the authority to set toll rates
Whether the legislation allows the highway agency to issue toll revenue bonds
Whether revenue sharing is explicitly allowed

3.3 Agency Policy and Capacity

The proposed agency policy and capacity data elements that could be gathered are summarized in Table 5. Note that the information should reflect the status of agency policy and capacity at the time the decision was made with regard to project delivery method.

Table 5. Recommended Data Elements Describing Agency Policy and Capacity
Data Element (reflecting status at the time project delivery decision was made) Potential Data Source(s)
Presence of a dedicated P3 or alternative project delivery team, including the number of full-time employees on the team
  • Project profiles on the FHWA Center for Innovative Finance Support website
  • Project sponsor's websites
  • Local revenue measure websites
  • P3 Concession Agreement
Number and status of past, current and future P3 procurements
Overall size of the project sponsor's 5-10- year capital program and the percentage of the program dedicated to the project
Whether financial feasibility and risk assessment studies were conducted using in-house personnel, with the help of private consultants, or solely using private consultants
Availability of a P3 advisory committee
Local revenue measures and policies on the use of the money they generate
Whether public funding in the form of up-front subsidies or revenue guarantees may be used to support the development of toll facilities
Financial self-sufficiency requirements for toll projects
Whether revenue sharing or cross subsidies are allowed
Local policies on tolling new highway capacity
Local policies on tolling existing highway capacity
Formal procedures for assessing new highway capacity for P3 feasibility
Toll rate setting authority
Toll rate setting flexibility
Agency policies on the use of external advisers

These data elements should be date stamped so that users can track changes over time. The data elements will be available at the same level of detail for both Tier 1 and Tier 2.

3.4 Project Development

The project development data elements for the Tier 1 level are summarized in Table 6.

Table 6. Recommended Data Elements Relating to Project Development
Data Element Potential Data Source(s)
Environmental review milestone dates, specifically the following:
  • Notice of Intent
  • Draft Environmental Impact Assessment (DEIS)
  • Final Environmental Impact Assessment (FEIS)
  • Re-evaluation (if any)
  • Record of Decision
  • Project DEIS/FEIS reports
  • Record of Decision documents
FEIS cost estimate, broken down by the following elements (depending on the project delivery method):1
  • Capital costs
  • Financial costs
  • Other costs
  • Project DEIS/FEIS reports
  • FHWA Major Projects Initial Financial Plan
Baseline Public Sector Comparator cost for P3 project evaluations only (not available for all projects)
  • Toll facility: Estimated public upfront contribution (net of debt) if any (present value)
  • Non-toll project: Public cost (present value)
  • FHWA Major Projects Initial Financial Plan
  • Sponsor and project websites (on public upfront contribution for toll facility and public costs)
  • Procurement documents
  • Procurement options analysis studies
P3 Alternative cost (not available for all projects)
  • Toll facility (toll concession): Estimated public upfront contribution or concession fee expected from concessionaire (present value)
  • Non-toll project (or Availability Payment concession): Public milestone and completion payments and availability payments (present values)
  • FHWA Major Projects Initial Financial Plan
  • Procurement options analysis studies
Note: (1) There is a diversity of conventions on how owner agencies present the breakdown of project cost items in the FEIS. Recognizing that the breakdown of project costs might not be consistent across agencies, it is suggested that three broad categories be included to capture capital, financial and other costs. The other cost category may include right-of-way, utility, engineering, contract administration and contingencies.

3.5 Project Procurement

Project procurement data elements to be included in the Tier 1 level are summarized in Table 7.

Table 7. Recommended Data Elements Relating to Project Procurement
Data Element Potential Data Source(s)
RFI issue and response dates
  • Sponsor and Project websites
Number of submittals
  • Sponsor and Project websites
RFQ issue, response and shortlisting dates
  • Sponsor and Project websites
RFQ number of submittals and shortlisted proposers
  • Sponsor and Project websites
RFQ evaluation criteria and scoring
  • Sponsor and Project websites
Draft RFP issue, response and award dates
  • Sponsor and Project websites
Number of draft RFPs issued for comment
  • Sponsor and Project websites
Number of submittals in response to RFP
  • Sponsor and Project websites
RFP evaluation criteria and scoring
  • RFP documents available on Sponsor and Project websites
RFP requirements for local hiring
  • RFP documents available on Sponsor and Project websites
RFP requirements for disadvantaged, minority, women, disabled veteran, and small business enterprises
  • RFP documents available on Sponsor and Project websites
Amount and duration of coverage for all sureties and bonds
  • RFP documents available on Sponsor and Project websites
Commercial close date (for P3 projects) or bid opening date (for non-P3 projects)
  • Sponsor and Project websites
  • FHWA Project Profiles
  • Public Works Financing database
Engineer's cost estimate and date
  • FHWA Major Projects Financial Plan
Engineer's schedule estimate (substantial completion dates of key milestones) and dates
  • FHWA Major Projects Financial Plan
Commercial close award cost and date
  • Winning bidder's bid/proposal submittal
  • Annual updates to FHWA Major Projects Financial Plan
  • Public Works Financing database
Winning bidder's schedule estimate (substantial completion dates of key milestones) and dates
  • Winning bidder's bid/proposal submittal
  • Annual updates to FHWA Major Projects Financial Plan
Number of subcontractors
  • FHWA Project Profiles
  • Annual updates to FHWA Major Projects Financial Plan
  • Sponsor and Project websites
Total cost value of all implemented ATCs
  • Annual updates to FHWA Major Projects Financial Plan
Net schedule savings of all implemented ATCs
  • Annual updates to FHWA Major Projects Financial Plan
Project costs at financial close
  • Center for Innovative Finance Support Website
  • Public Works Finance
  • Project websites
Sources of finance, including public sector investments, debt, private equity, bond premiums, and interest income
  • FHWA Project Profiles
  • Annual updates to FHWA Major Projects Financial Plan
  • MSRB EMMA - Official Statements for debt issuance
Sources of revenue
  • FHWA Major Projects Financial Plan
  • MSRB EMMA - Official Statements for debt issuance

3.6 Project Implementation

Project implementation data elements to be included in the Tier 1 level are summarized in Table 8.

Table 8. Recommended Data Elements Relating to Project Implementation
Data Element Potential Data Source(s)
Design Timeline: Design completion date, notice to proceed date, total design duration
  • FHWA Major Projects submittals - Project Management Plan and annual updates to Financial Plan
Construction start and completion dates, and total construction duration
  • FHWA Major Projects submittals - Project Management Plan and annual updates to Financial Plan
Design and construction costs (aggregation of cost items depending on the project delivery method and availability of reliable data)
  • FHWA Major Projects submittals - Financial Plan and annual updates to Financial Plan
  • MSRB EMMA - Official Statements for debt issuance and Monthly Construction Progress Reports
Final contract time, including extensions granted by the agency, value engineering savings, and the number of days involving liquidated damages
  • FHWA Major Projects submittals - Project Management Plan and annual updates to Financial Plan
Cost items, including final contract costs, award costs, cost growth due to claims and change orders, value engineering savings, construction engineering costs, quality assurance costs, and liquidated damages costs. Any changes from prior entries should be noted.
  • Annual updates to FHWA Major Projects Financial Plan
  • MSRB EMMA - Monthly Construction Progress Reports
Number of change orders, cost change due to change orders, schedule change due to change orders
  • Annual updates to FHWA Major Projects Financial Plan and Project Management Plan
  • MSRB EMMA - Monthly Construction Progress Reports
Number of claims, total cost value of all resolved claims
  • Annual updates to FHWA Major Projects Financial Plan and Project Management Plan
  • MSRB EMMA - Monthly Construction Progress Reports
Number of claims by the cause type (e.g., award related, right-of-way, third party, site-related, delay, schedule acceleration, quality, owner requested changes, plans and specifications, supply-chain, and others)
  • Annual updates to FHWA Major Projects Financial Plan and Project Management Plan
  • MSRB EMMA - Monthly Construction Progress Reports
Number of claims settled by resolution type (i.e., project team review, agency review, arbitration and mediations, claims review board, and litigation)
  • Annual updates to FHWA Major Projects Financial Plan and Project Management Plan
  • MSRB EMMA - Monthly Construction Progress Reports
Total cost value of all claims settled by resolution type and dates
  • Annual updates to FHWA Major Projects Financial Plan and Project Management Plan
  • MSRB EMMA - Monthly Construction Progress Reports
Change orders by type (e.g., scope change, differing conditions, errors and omissions, force majeure and weather, right-of-way, environmental concerns, and others) and dates
  • Annual updates to FHWA Major Projects Financial Plan and Project Management Plan
  • MSRB EMMA - Monthly Construction Progress Reports
Cost value of all approved value engineering proposals
  • Annual updates to FHWA Major Projects Financial Plan and Project Management Plan
  • MSRB EMMA - Monthly Construction Progress Reports
Schedule savings of all approved value engineering proposals
  • Annual updates to FHWA Major Projects Financial Plan and Project Management Plan
  • MSRB EMMA - Monthly Construction Progress Reports

3.7 Operations and Maintenance

Operations and maintenance data elements to be included in the Tier 1 level are summarized in Table 9.

Table 9. Recommended Data Elements Relating to Operations and Maintenance
Data Element Potential Data Source(s)3
Traffic related elements (to be collected every year):
  • Annual average daily traffic (AADT) - HPMS Data Item 21
  • AADT of single-unit trucks and buses only - HPMS Data Item 22
  • AADT of combination trucks - HPMS Data Item 24
  • Peak hour single-unit truck and bus volume as a percentage of total AADT (sample sections only) - HPMS Data Item 23
  • Peak hour combination truck volume as a percentage of total AADT - HPMS Data Item 25
  • Design hour volume (30th largest hourly volume for a given calendar year) as a percentage of AADT - HPMS Data Item 26
  • Roadway capacity - HPMS Data Item 69
  • Number of through lanes - HPMS Data Item 7
  • Speed limit - HPMS Data Item 14
  • Bridge closure - detour length - NBI Data Item 19
  • Number of lanes on and under bridge - NBI Data Item 28
  • Year of reporting
  • Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) 1, 2
  • National Bridge Inventory (NBI) 1
Pavement condition related elements (to be collected every year):
  • International Roughness Index (IRI) - HPMS Data Item 47
  • Present Serviceability Rating (PSR) - HPMS Data Item 48
  • Rutting - HPMS Data Item 50
  • Faulting - HPMS Data Item 51
  • Cracking percent - HPMS Data Item 52
  • Cracking length - HPMS Data Item 53
  • Year of reporting
  • Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) or Agency Pavement Management System (through information requests)
Pavement structure related elements (available for sample sections only for pavement performance modeling purposes, and to be collected every year):
  • Pavement surface type - HPMS Data Item 49
  • Year of last improvement - HPMS Data Item 54
  • Year of last construction - HPMS Data Item 55
  • Last overlay thickness - HPMS Data Item 56
  • Thickness (rigid pavements) - HPMS Data Item 57 (as applicable)
  • Thickness (flexible pavements) - HPMS Data Item 58 (as applicable)
  • Pavement base type - HPMS Data Item 59
  • Pavement thickness type - HPMS Data Item 60
  • Climate zone - HPMS Data Item 61
  • Soil type - HPMS Data Item 62
  • Year of reporting
  • Highway Performance Monitoring System
  • Agency Pavement Management System (through information requests)
Pavement condition thresholds (e.g. IRI, rutting, faulting, cracking and others) and handback criteria 5
  • RFP documents available on Sponsor and Project websites
Annual pavement maintenance, preservation and rehabilitation cost elements:
  • Routine maintenance costs per mile
  • Pavement preventive maintenance costs per mile
  • Pavement minor rehabilitation costs per mile
  • Pavement major rehabilitation costs per mile
  • Pavement reconstruction costs per mile
  • Year of cost estimate
  • Agency Pavement Management Systems (through information requests and interviews)
  • O&M financial reports to debt holders (for P3 projects only) 4
Bridge condition related elements (to be collected every year):
  • Condition rating of deck - NBI Data Item 58
  • Condition rating of superstructure - NBI Data Item 59
  • Condition rating of substructure - NBI Data Item 60
  • Condition rating of channel and channel protection - NBI Data Item 61
  • Condition rating of culverts - NBI Data Item 62
  • Inventory rating - NBI Data Item 66
  • Structural evaluation rating - NBI Data Item 67
  • Deck geometry rating - NBI Data Item 68
  • Vertical and horizontal under-clearances - NBI Data Item 69
  • Bridge posting - NBI Data Item 70
  • Waterway adequacy rating - NBI Data Item 71
  • Approach roadway alignment rating - NBI Data Item 72
  • Critical feature inspection - NBI Data Item 92
  • Scour criticality - NBI Data Item 113
  • Year of reporting
  • National Bridge Inventory
  • Agency Bridge Management System (through information requests)
Bridge structure related elements:
  • Structure type - NBI Data Item 43
  • Structure type, approach spans - NBI Data Item 44
  • Deck structure type - NBI Data Item 107
  • National Bridge Inventory
  • Agency Bridge Management System
Bridge condition thresholds for decks, superstructure, substructure, channels and channel protections, culverts and other elements, and handback criteria 5
  • RFP documents available on Sponsor and Project websites
Annual bridge maintenance and improvement cost elements:
  • Bridge inspection and routine maintenance costs
  • Element repair, rehabilitation and replacement costs (by element type)
  • Structural replacement costs (by bridge type)
  • Year of cost estimate
  • Agency Bridge Management System (through information requests and interviews)
  • O&M financial reports to debt holders (for P3 projects only) 4
  • National Bridge Inventory
Annual financial performance metrics (for toll projects):
  • Annual revenue
  • Revenues by source
  • Toll collection costs
  • Operating and maintenance costs
  • Capital expenditures (rehabilitation and expansion)
  • Net income before depreciation
  • Profit or loss
  • Toll rate per mile by vehicle type
  • Debt service cover ratio
  • Credit ratings at end of year
  • Defaults
  • Bond covenant violations
  • Financial Statements
  • MSRB EMMA - Quarterly O&M Reports
Roadway maintenance costs per mile (aggregated at corridor level) by year
  • Agency Maintenance Management System (through information requests and interviews)
  • O&M financial reports to debt holders 4
  • MSRB EMMA - Quarterly O&M Reports

Notes:
1. Both HPMS and NBI databases are designed to support the assessment and reporting of highway and bridge performance at the system level. These databases are not designed to make asset management decisions at the asset level. Therefore, there may be some issues, such as data gaps, unavailability of recent data, or lack of precision, to facilitate a comprehensive life-cycle comparison of asset performance. The owner agency's pavement and bridge management systems typically maintain more recent and comprehensive data in readily-useable format. Therefore, information may be obtained directly from the agency's asset information systems through information requests.
2. Depending on the functional class and element type, the HPMS database may contain information for the full extent of the roadway segment or sample sections only. Similarly, depending on the element type, some element types may be reported as-is (with no further calculation) or using the most prevalent value, while others may be aggregated as weighted averages.
3. On most P3 projects, the P3 concessionaire is required to provide O&M reports on a monthly, quarterly or annual basis. The O&M reports are likely to include more recent and comprehensive data. Therefore, information may be obtained directly from the agency through information requests.
4. P3 concessionaires and toll road operators prepare and submit annual reports on financial performance to debt holders. These annual reports, which are available in the public domain, contain information about O&M expenditures for P3 projects only, with cost breakdowns or in aggregate.
5. Both the asset condition criteria and threshold values listed under performance requirements for P3 projects may differ among agencies. Similarly, the threshold values used for non-P3 projects may be different from those for P3 projects.

« PreviousNext »

back to top