Project Selection Advisory Council | Asset Management Advisory Council - Joint Meeting
Meeting Notes of April 30, 2015
Draft Memorandum for the Record
Project Selection Advisory Council | Asset Management Advisory Council - Joint Meeting
1:30 pm – 3:30 pm, MBTA Board Room, 10 Park Plaza, Boston
Secretary Stephanie Pollack, Chair (PSAC), Secretary of Transportation, Massachusetts Department of
Transportation (MassDOT)
Patricia Leavenworth, Chair (AMAC), Chief Engineer, Massachusetts Department of Transportation
(MassDOT)
Attendees: Jim Lovejoy, Steve Silvera, Sec. Pollack, John Pourbaix, Dennis DiZoglio, Pat Ciaramella, Chris
Hennessey, Dave Knowlton, Patty Leavenworth, Frank DePaola, Jeff Mullan, Linda Dunlavy
Opening Remarks
Sec. Pollack noted that the Legislature was very eager to know that the very processes that they set in motion are being implemented and taken seriously. She mentioned that the work of these two councils really does overlap in important ways because the project selection process is just one of many tools the agency will be using to manage its assets in a better way. The asset management piece she saw as a broader effort but, a piece of managing our assets is actually prioritizing investment in those assets.
Objective
Jennifer Slesinger, of MassDOT’s Office of Transportation Planning, explained that there are a lot of existing processes for Asset Management and Project Selection will touch on these. The objective is to try to come up with some concrete ideas for implementation that we can put in the report for the
Legislature but also to flush out the different things we need to be thinking about going forward as well.
Asset Management
Victoria Sheehan, of MassDOT’s Highway Division, presented an overview of the Highway Division’s current asset management initiatives and goals.

AMAC was established back in 2012 as part of the Transportation and Finance Bill.

The Council has two levels of responsibility; one is around performance reporting and the second is the Asset Management piece.

Highway has focused on Asset Management initially because we want to set goals around managing the assets, looking at the work that MassDOT does and then track the performance against those goals.

Highway is following FHWA materials on how to develop a TAMS

They’ve hired a consultant to help develop a strategic plan

Reporting to the Legislature has been incorporated into the Highway report

We are where we need to be for bridges

Working on improving maintenance process – Bridge and Pavement are ahead of the curve
1

Project Selection Advisory Council | Asset Management Advisory Council - Joint Meeting
Meeting Notes of April 30, 2015

MAP-21 has no requirements beyond these mentioned assets. The agency is starting to expand process (asset management) to other asset classes.
For asset management you need to set goals – suitable condition for asset classes. Assess what you own and look at inspection cycle. The Agency needs to do the same for other asset classes; to look at what we should be spending to get the outcome we want.
Highway is forming sub-committee working groups to start data collection and standardizing reporting and maintenance processes. These groups report to the Steering Committee and Highway leadership.
After questions from the Council members, Ms. Sheehan explained that many of the existing data systems in use by MassDOT are not only outdated, but can only be operated by a very few employees with the knowledge to run these legacy systems. The first step entails consolidating the old systems so that they can communicate with each other.
The Highway Division is now trying to transition from MMIS to Maximo. Maximo currently is tracking maintenance activities and work force.
Initial data inventories are conducted by the Highway Districts, and MassDOT is working to build a process for maintaining and updating the information so that it stays current.
The Council members agreed that there is a challenge in determining the right approach to maintenance and state of good repair (SGR) projects, as the public wants the most deteriorated assets to be addressed first, however, this not the most cost effective approach.
Scoring
The Councils next discussed the approach to creating effective scoring project buckets. The members agreed that MassDOT Highway is not initiating many capacity projects, and most of them fall into the
SGR bucket. The MBTA has some capacity projects, which serve to provide service in an area where it is needed.
The Secretary noted that SGR is not a very useful term, and that in fact, there is a spectrum between maintenance and SGR projects. She suggested that the PSA Council may decide to keep the maintenance programs (i.e. bridge program) out of the PSAC scoring system, and simply allocate a specific amount of funding for these programs. She stressed that the scoring and asset management processes are supposed to lead to good investment decisions.
The Secretary also noted that when we say SGR, we are generally referring to modernization projects.
These projects include repairs, but simultaneously identify how the asset can be modernized in order to improve congestion, efficiency, safety, etc. The scoring should reflect this in terms of what added value the project would provide.
2

Project Selection Advisory Council | Asset Management Advisory Council - Joint Meeting
Meeting Notes of April 30, 2015
Ms. Slesinger explained that staff had tested out the scoring criteria with a selection of illustrative projects, with the aim of seeing how past projects would compare. The focus for this exercise was on
Highway SGR and MBTA capacity projects. She noted that some adjustments will be needed, as most of the Highway projects ended up in the 40-50 score range. The Secretary suggested that the scoring system have more granularity and that it could help to be able to score on a scale of 1-30, rather than 1-
3, for example.
In discussing the Highway SGR projects, staff pointed out that in the current system for scoring, the issue of user impact relies on counts of automobiles, and thus projects aimed at improving bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure do not score well. The Secretary noted that the scoring system that MassDOT will use should reflect its policies relating to encouraging healthy modes and safety for all road users, not just motorists.
Ms. Slesinger explained that MassDOT does not yet have a standard way of gathering bike/pedestrian counts throughout the Commonwealth, but this is an area of great interest that is being researched.
The Council members reiterated that the aim of both Councils should be to invest wisely in the transportation system, such that the approach is cost effective.
Next meeting is on May 14 th
at 1:00-3:00. There, we will have plan for releasing for public review.
3