BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING
Senator Jim Beall, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: AB 2170 Hearing Date: 6/21/2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Frazier |
|----------+------------------------------------------------------|
|Version: |6/9/2016 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant|Erin Riches |
|: | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Trade Corridors Improvement Fund: federal funds
DIGEST: This bill requires federal freight funds apportioned to
California under the federal Fixing America's Surface
Transportation (FAST) Act to be allocated to projects through
the state Trade Corridor Improvement Fund (TCIF) program.
ANALYSIS:
1)Proposition 1B and TCIF
Proposition 1B, the Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air
Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006, was approved by
California voters in November 2006. Proposition 1B authorized
the issuance of $19.9 billion in general obligation bonds to
fund a variety of transportation projects. Of this amount, $2
billion was allocated to the TCIF for infrastructure
improvements along federally designated "Trade Corridors of
National Significance" or other high-volume freight corridors.
In determining project eligibility under the TCIF, the
California Transportation Commission (CTC) must consult
various plans, including the California State Transportation
Agency's (CalSTA) state freight plan, the state Air Resources
Board's (ARB) Sustainable Freight Strategy, and the statewide
port master plan developed by the California Marine and
Intermodal Transportation System Advisory Council
(Cal-MITSAC), among others. Eligible projects include, but
AB 2170 (Frazier) Page 2 of ?
are not limited to, improvements to highway capacity and
operations, the freight rail system, ports, truck corridors,
and border access, as well as improvements to surface
transportation to facilitate goods movement to and from
airports. TCIF applicants must provide at least a 50% match
from local, federal, or private sources. TCIF funds have been
fully programmed, but SB 1228 of 2014 (see "Related
Legislation" below) authorized continuation of the program so
it could receive funds in the future.
2)California Freight Mobility Plan (CFMP)
The federal transportation funding authorization act of 2012,
the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 20th Century Act
(MAP-21), required the U.S. Department of Transportation to
develop a national freight strategic plan and encouraged
states to develop their own freight plans. AB 14 of 2013 (see
"Related Legislation" below) required CalSTA to develop a
state freight plan and to establish a freight advisory
committee made up of federal, state, local, and regional
representatives as well as private sector and other interest
groups, to guide the development of the plan. The CFMP was
adopted in December 2015.
3)FAST Act freight funding
The new federal transportation funding authorization, the FAST
Act, was signed into law in December 2015. The FAST Act
establishes a new Nationally Significant Freight and Highway
Projects Program - the first time a federal transportation
authorization has included a dedicated source of funding for
freight projects. This program will provide competitive
grants, known as FASTLANE grants, or credit assistance to
projects such as highway freight projects on the National
Highway Freight Network, highway or bridge projects on the
National Highway System, railway-highway grade crossings or
grade separation projects, and freight intermodal projects.
The FAST Act requires a state receiving FASTLANE funds to
develop a freight plan, and deems that in order to be eligible
for freight funds a project must be included in the freight
plan.
4)Sustainable Freight Action Plan
AB 2170 (Frazier) Page 3 of ?
Through an executive order in July 2015, Governor Brown
directed CalSTA, the California Environmental Protection
Agency, the Natural Resources Agency, ARB, the California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans), the Energy
Commission, and the Governor's Office of Business and Economic
Development to develop an integrated action plan by July 2016
that establishes targets to improve freight efficiency,
transition to zero-emission technologies, and increase the
competitiveness of California's freight system. This plan is
to be informed by existing state strategies such as the CFMP.
The Executive Order also directed departments to initiate work
on freight pilot projects within the state's primary freight
corridors that integrate advanced technologies, alternative
fuels, freight and fuel infrastructure, and local economic
development opportunities.
5)SHOPP and STIP
The State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP)
guides the expenditure of funds for capital improvements
necessary to manage, preserve, and protect the state highway
system. The SHOPP receives state and federal funding from
taxes and fees placed on vehicle fuels. In order to
anticipate and schedule future needs, Caltrans develops a
SHOPP plan that identifies goal-based needs over a 10-year
period, and updates the plan every two years. The SHOPP is
primarily limited to capital improvement projects related to
maintenance, safety, and rehabilitation of state highways and
bridges that do not add a new traffic lane to the system.
The State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) is a
multi-year capital improvement program of transportation
projects on and off the State Highway System, funded from the
State Highway Account. The STIP is composed of two
categories: 75% of STIP funds go toward projects in the
Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) and 25% go
to the Interregional Transportation Improvement Program
(ITIP). Each STIP covers a five-year period and adds two new
years of programming capacity. Additionally, each new STIP
includes projects carried forward from the previous STIP, plus
new projects from among those proposed by regional
transportation planning agencies in their RTIPs and by
Caltrans in its ITIP.
This bill:
AB 2170 (Frazier) Page 4 of ?
1)Requires federal freight funds apportioned to California under
the FAST Act to be allocated to projects through the TCIF.
2)Deletes the requirement for the CTC to consult the ARB's
Sustainable Freight Strategy and requires the CTC to consult
the applicable port master plan (in place of the now-outdated
statewide port master plan prepared by Cal-MITSAC), in
determining project eligibility.
3)Adds rail landside access improvements (e.g., rail access to
ports), landside freight access improvements to airports, and
rail terminals to the list of projects eligible for TCIF
funding, as well as capital and operational improvements to
truck corridors and borders.
4)Adds improving trade corridor safety and making a significant
contribution to the state's economy to the criteria the CTC
must follow in allocating funds.
COMMENTS:
1)Purpose. The author states that the highly successful TCIF
program encouraged transportation stakeholders to collectively
identify important trade corridor improvement projects and
required funding recipients to provide at least 50% in
matching funds, resulting in the construction of scores of
significant trade corridor projects across California. The
CTC's management of TCIF resulted in on-time, on-budget
transportation improvements throughout the state, and $2
billion in TCIF funds resulted in the construction of $7.2
billion of transportation improvements along California's
trade corridors. Using this proven methodology for the
approximately $116 million per year that California is
expected to receive in FAST Act freight funds will help the
state develop critically needed freight projects and increase
leveraging of this funding so that more projects can be
completed.
2)Which freight plan? The state currently has a number of
freight plans, including the CFMP, ARB's Sustainable Freight
Strategy, and the upcoming Sustainable Freight Action Plan.
The author notes, however, that the FAST Act requires the
federal freight funds to be allocated to projects in the CFMP,
AB 2170 (Frazier) Page 5 of ?
which was created for that specific purpose pursuant to
MAP-21. The CFMP identifies a list of projects that was
developed by Caltrans with input from the freight advisory
committee. These projects came from regional planning
documents and are therefore fully vetted and meet all
environmental requirements. The author states that federal
freight funds could be used most efficiently and effectively
by placing them in the TCIF and directing them toward projects
identified in the CFMP.
3)Opposition concerns. The Department of Finance (DOF) states
that this bill is "premature." DOF states that it is working
with stakeholders to identify the best uses for any new
federal funding, and expresses concern that this bill could
potentially circumvent that process and prevent Caltrans from
directing new federal funds to important SHOPP and STIP
priorities. The author notes that the Administration has
indicated, through budget proposals, its intent to give 50% of
the federal funds to the state (Caltrans) and 50% to the
regions. The author states that this distribution would not
result in significant leveraging of the funds, achieve
geographic balance, or ensure that monies are put toward
priority freight projects, as would occur through the TCIF.
4)Double-referral. This bill has also been referred to the
Environmental Quality Committee.
Related Legislation:
SB 1228 (Hueso), Chapter 787, Statutes of 2014) - continues the
existence of TCIF in order to receive revenues from new funding
sources, and governs the expenditure of those funds.
AB 14 (Lowenthal, Chapter 223, Statutes of 2013) - required
CalSTA to develop a state freight plan and to establish a
freight advisory committee.
Assembly Votes:
Floor: 80-0
Appr: 20-0
Trans: 16-0
AB 2170 (Frazier) Page 6 of ?
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
POSITIONS: (Communicated to the committee before noon on
Wednesday,
June 15, 2016.)
SUPPORT:
Southern California Association of Governments (sponsor)
Alameda Corridor-East Construction Authority
Automobile Club of Southern California
California Asphalt Pavement Association
California Association of Port Authorities
California Trade Coalition
California Transportation Commission
Imperial County Transportation Commission
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Orange County Transportation Authority
Pacific Merchant Shipping Association
Port of Long Beach
Port of Los Angeles
Port of San Diego
Riverside County Transportation Commission
San Bernardino Associated Governments
San Diego Association of Governments
San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments
Ventura County Transportation Commission
OPPOSITION:
Department of Finance
-- END --