Federal Highway Administration, USDOT

1
Federal Highway Administration, USDOT Work Zone
Mobility and Safety Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) proposed changes to 23 CFR
630 Subpart J
2
Agenda

• Why update this regulation?
• Background and Context Trends and facts
• Current process and schedule - where are we in
  the process and where do we expect to go from
  here
• Discussion on ANPRM -- broad overview of comments
  received on the ANPRM
• Discussion on NPRM content proposed regulation
  outline and changes
• What role does the field have What you can do
  to get the word out

3
Why Update this Regulation?

• Section 1051 of ISTEA required the Secretary of
  Transportation to develop and implement a highway
  safety program
• FHWA, through non-regulatory action, established
  the National Highway Work Zone Safety Program
  (NHWSP)
• The NHWZSP language indicated that the FHWA would
  review current work zone problems and update the
  regulation to better reflect the current needs
  for improved safety and to minimize disruptions
  to traffic during the construction of highway
  projects

4
Background

• FHWA Strategic Goals
• Safety
• Mobility and Productivity
• Environment
• National Security
• Organizational Excellence

• FHWA Vital Few
• Safety
• Environmental Streamlining
• Congestion
• Work Zones

• Congestion reduction
• Congestion reduction leads to safer work zones

5
Construction Spending is Increasing

• 160,000 miles of National Highway System and
  300,000 miles of arterials reaching middle age
• Over the life of TEA-21, highway construction
  funding will increase nearly 40
• We can expect MORE WORK ZONES

• We estimate that 20.9 of the National Highway
  System is under construction at any time during
  the peak summer roadwork season, leading to 6,472
  work zones

6
Traffic is Growing

• Were traveling more miles without increasing
  highway capacity significantly
• 1980-2000 Vehicle Travel up 80, Lane Miles up
  2.4

7
Congestion is Growing

• Extremely or Severely congested highway miles
  more than doubled from 1982 to 1997
• Uncongested miles dropped by almost half

Recent analysis shows that work zones on freeways
cause an estimated 24 of nonrecurring delay
Temporary Losses of Capacity Study Prepared by
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Nov 2001
8
WZ Fatalities Have Increased

• Average 778 fatalities per year, with a high of
  1079 in 2001
• Approximately 40,000 people were injured in work
  zones crashes in 2001
• 1997 to 2001
• - 4000 fatalities
• - 220,000 injuries
• - 300 worker deaths

9
Working Conditions Are Changing

• More work is done under traffic
• In 2000, 54 of highway capital outlay was spent
  on system preservation
• Contractors are experiencing
• Reduced work hours / interrupted shifts
• Increased night work
• Compressed schedules
• These conditions contribute to concerns about
  worker safety, reduced productivity, and
  compromised quality

10
Work Zones Impact the System

• Snapshot of work zone activity from State DOT
  websites

11
Work Zones Contribute to Congestion

• Work zones on freeways cause 24 of non-recurring
  congestion
• Lost capacity of 60 million vehicles per day
  (VPD) (summer)
• Lost capacity of 64 million VPD (winter)

12
Work Zone Information is Limited

• Work zone data on State DOT web sites (summer
  2001)

Customer focused items
13
Our Customers are Concerned

• 1995 NQI survey
• Only 29 of respondents were satisfied with
  traffic flow through work zones
• Delays caused by construction received the lowest
  overall satisfaction rating.
• In a 2000 traveler survey
• The top reason cited for delays was heavy
  traffic, followed by roadwork

14
Work Zones Second lowest level of Satisfaction
79
Visual Appeal
60
77
Bridge Conditions
58
77
Travel Amenities
55
74
Safety
Percentage of Responses Satisfied and Very
Satisfied
58
65
Maintenance
Response Time
53
59
Pavement Conditions
48
59
Work Zones
Data not collected in 1995
47
Traffic Flow
1995
2000
47
Source Moving Ahead  The American Public
Speaks on Roadways and Transportation in
Communities (which can be found on the FHWA web
page at http//www.fhwa.dot.gov/reports/movingahea
d.htm)
15
Were Not Meeting our Customers Needs for Safety
and Mobility During Construction and Maintenance
Operations

• The public is telling us they are concerned.
  Travel survey shows
• Travelers rated highway improvements that would
  most help overcome delays.
• Of more than 20, the top 3 relate to work zones
  and how we build roads

16
Major Trends

• More construction spending
• Growing traffic volumes
• More work is done under traffic
• Increasing congestion
• Compressed contractor schedules
• Public dissatisfaction and frustration with work
  zones

17
Considering Policy and Regulation Change

• Led us to look at the entire project development
  process for work zone safety and mobility
• Objective is to think differently (with customer
  in mind) about how we plan, design and build
  projects
• Proposing changes to 23 CFR 630 Subpart J
• NPRM seeks input from the public on the proposed
  changes

18
Regulation Issues

• Beginning rehabilitation/
• reconstruction
• - Work zone safety issues emerging
• - Requires Traffic Control Plans - TCPs

• Current Regulation
• Reflected its time
• Broad purpose
• But narrow provisions
• Focusing on TCPs for projects
• Work zone operations on two-lane/two-way highways
• Doesn't address mobility explicitly
• Key Focus of Updates
• Reflects changing times
• Make regulation broader
• Cover more issues pertaining to work zone safety
  and mobility
• Facilitate customer-focused project development
• Comprehensive consideration of work zone impacts

To serve needs of all users during construction
and maintenance projects
More traffic, more congestion, greater safety
issues, and more work zones
19
Legislative Background

• ISTEA asked FHWA to establish a Work Zone Safety
  Program
• Done per Federal Register Notice in 1995 (60 FR
  54562)
• Part of that notice specified that 23 CFR 630
  Subpart J would be updated
• FHWA would review current work zone problems and
  update Subpart J to better reflect current needs

20
Current Schedule

• Issued ANPRM on Feb 6, 2002 to initiate dialogue
  with the transportation community
• Evaluated ANPRM comments and conducted outreach
• Published NPRM on April 15, 2003
• Comment period is 120 days
• Currently conducting outreach to inform and
  educate the public about the NPRM
• Final Rule expected in 2004

21
Overview of ANPRM

• Identified major considerations that affect
• Policy
• Planning
• Design
• Traffic control and operations
• Public information
• Performance reporting with respect to work zones
• Over-arching theme
• reduce need for recurrent roadwork, duration of
  work zones, and disruption due to work zones
• Issues posed as questions to elicit comments,
  guidance, and suggestions

22
ANPRM Comments

• ANPRM Comments may be viewed in the docket at
  http//dmses.dot.gov under docket no.
• FHWA-2001-11130

23
ANPRM Respondent Profile
Unclassified - 5
Private Individuals/Consultants - 6
Other Public Agencies - 6
Trade Associations Special Interest Groups -
16
DOTs - 65
Equipment/Technology Providers - 2
Total Respondents 84
24
ANPRM Areas Receiving Strong Support

• Need a National policy on work zone safety and
  mobility
• Preference for broad policy supported by
  guidance
• Provide flexibility in implementation of
  regulations
• Explicitly address both safety and mobility
• Imply stratification of regulations but let
  States use their own criteria
• Institutionalize work zone considerations
• Road user impacts of work zones are important and
  essential for decision making during project
  development and design

25
ANPRM Areas Receiving Strong Support (continued)

• Analysis of alternative project options and
  design strategies to minimize work zone impacts
• TCPs should be expanded to address sustained
  traffic operations and management
• Need to communicate better with the public need
  communications plans for projects
• Need comprehensive work zone traffic mitigation
  planning and implementation plans
• Consider programmatic initiatives in addition to
  project specific actions
• Flexibility in development and procurement of
  work zone impact mitigation strategies

26
Approach to Revisions

• Broad, address wide range of issues, and provide
  flexibility in implementation and adaptation
• Flexibility in implementation of regulations
  based on States respective performance
  objectives, needs, and operating environments
• Set the stage for performance-oriented
  regulations rather than method-oriented
  regulations
• Regulation provisions to be broad will be
  supplemented with detailed implementation
  guidelines when the rule goes into effect
• Retain the emphasis on safety but expand
  provisions to address mobility issues also
• Facilitate institutionalization of work zone
  considerations
• By requiring States to develop a work zone safety
  and mobility policy
• Flexibility in FHWAs review of States practices
  and procedures

27
Approach to Revisions (continued)

• Expand work zone mitigation measures to include
  operations and management and public
  information and outreach strategies, in addition
  to TCPs
• Require comprehensive analysis and understanding
  of work zone impacts of projects
• To choose project options and work zone design
  alternatives that minimize the work zone impacts
• Develop strategies to mitigate and manage the
  impacts
• Document the strategies under the umbrella of a
  Transportation Management Plan (TMP)
• Flexibility to States in allowing contractors to
  develop TMPs
• Retain existing requirement to collect and
  analyze work zone safety performance data.
  Encourage collection and analysis of work zone
  mobility performance data

28
Proposed Regulation

• Title
• Current title Traffic Safety in Highway and
  Street Work Zones
• Change title to Work Zone Safety and Mobility
• Safety is more comprehensive than just traffic
  safety
• Need to include mobility
• The phrase Highway and Street is sometimes
  misleading and confusing it was therefore
  removed

29
Proposed Regulation (continued)

• Overall Structure
• Current structure mixes general policy/process
  level provisions with individual project level
  requirements
• Current Section 630.1010 Contents of the
  Agencys Procedures
• TCPs project level
• Responsible Person project level
• Pay Items project level
• Training policy level
• Process Review and Evaluation policy level
• Change structure to include separate Policy
  Level and Project Level requirements, but
  establish a clear connection between the two

30
Proposed Regulation (continued)

• Introduced new section to define key terms and
  concepts
• Work Zone Impacts
• Transportation Management Plan (TMP)
• Traffic Control Plan (TCP)
• Transportation Operations Plan (TOP)
• Public Information and Outreach Plan (PIOP)
• Work Zone
• Work Zone Crash

31
Proposed Regulation (continued)

• Key concept
• Address Work Zone Impacts
• Have a policy driven focus
• Analyze safety and mobility impacts
• Address impacts on road users, workers and other
  affected parties
• Have a plan for safety and mobility

32
Proposed Regulation (continued)

• Policy Level Requirements (new)
• Work Zone Mobility and Safety Policy (new)
• States shall develop and implement policies and
  procedures that support the systematic
  consideration of work zone impacts across all
  project development stages and address the
  safety and mobility needs of all road users,
  construction workers, and other affected parties
  on all Federal-aid highway projects
• The content of such policies and their
  implications for different projects will vary
  based on the expected severity of work zone
  impacts due to projects
• States encouraged to use a team of personnel from
  appropriate departments and representing the
  different project development stages to develop
  and implement these policies and procedures

33
Proposed Regulation (continued)

• Policy Level Requirements (new)
• Training
• Existing requirement, with changes that encourage
  documentation and periodic updates
• All persons responsible for work zones (planning,
  design, development of mitigation strategies, and
  mitigation) shall be adequately trained
• Encouraged to keep records of training provided,
  and to provide periodic training updates
• Process Review and Evaluation
• Existing requirement with changes that address
  FHWA stewardship and the role of the Division
  Office in reviews and approvals
• Encouraged to perform periodic process review and
  evaluation, or review randomly selected projects
• Encouraged to include FHWA in these reviews and
  to address these reviews in their Stewardship
  Agreements

34
Proposed Regulation (continued)

• Policy Level Requirements (new)
• Work Zone Performance Data (new)
• Current provisions require analysis of crashes
  and crash data
• Changes encourage States to collect and analyze
  mobility data in addition to safety data
• Work zone crashes and crash data shall be
  analyzed and used to correct deficiencies which
  are found to exist on individual projects, and to
  continually improve work zone practices and
  policies. Other safety performance factors may
  be included in the analysis
• Encouraged to collect and analyze work zone
  mobility performance data to correct
  deficiencies, which are found to exist on
  individual projects, and to continually improve
  work zone practices and policies.

35
Proposed Regulation (continued)

• Project Impact Analysis and Management
  Requirements (new)
• Work Zone Impacts Analysis (new)
• Impacts analysis required, but scaleable
  according to agency policy and expected severity
  of impacts of projects
• Shall analyze work zone impacts of alternative
  project options and work zone design strategies,
  and develop appropriate measures to alleviate
  these impacts
• The scope and level of detail of this impacts
  analysis will vary based on the States policies,
  and their understanding of the anticipated
  severity of work zone impacts
• Encouraged to start analysis early in project
  development and, depending upon the anticipated
  severity of work zone impacts, continue the
  analysis through project design, and traffic
  control and operations planning
• Resultant project options and work zone design
  strategies and the mitigation measures shall be
  appropriately documented.

36
Proposed Regulation (continued)

• Project Impact Analysis and Management
  Requirements (new)
• Transportation Management Plan (TMP) (new)
• New requirement, with TCP rolled into it
• TMPs mandatory for all projects, but scaleable
  according to work zone impacts of individual
  projects
• TCP shall be developed removed reference to
  work zone operations on 2-lane / 2-way highways
• Transportation Operations Plan (TOP) shall be
  developed if recommended by impacts analysis
• Public Information and Outreach Plan (PIOP)
  shall be developed if recommended by impacts
  analysis

37
Proposed Regulation (continued)

• Project Impact Analysis and Management
  Requirements (continued)
• TCP Pay Items
• Existing requirement, with changes that focus on
  using unit pay items to cover traffic management
  devices. Restricting Lump Sum payment method to
  small and short duration projects
• Responsible Persons for Project Administration
  and Delivery
• Existing requirement, with changes that require a
  responsible person from the contractor side in
  addition to a responsible person from the agency

38
NPRM How to Comment?

• Submit comments electronically in the docket at
  http//dmses.dot.gov/submit
• under docket no. FHWA-2001-11130
• Accepted formats include document, pdf, text

39
What Can the Field Do?

• Let our transportation partners know about this
  NPRM
• Present the information provided at every
  opportunity
• Help them understand the reason for the update
• Be a champion of better project execution
• Help reduce congestion and crashes due to work
  zones