State of Freight II Report Takes Wide-Ranging View of U.S. Infrastructure’s Needs

One could argue that the onus on, or the call for, an increased federal focus on transportation infrastructure has never been higher than it is now, especially in recent years.

One reason for that has been talk related to President-elect Donald Trump’s call for a $1 trillion investment into our nation’s infrastructure over the next ten years, a noble initiative to be sure.

But other reasons with far more supportive detail and information, at this time, comes from the “State of Freight II,” a joint report released today by the American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA) and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).  

This report comes a year after Congress made dedicated freight funding a priority, with almost $11 billion in funding for freight mobility in dedicated freight funds as part of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act.

What’s more, the report notes that under the FAST Act states will have a key role in how the U.S. plans for freight movement and what projects will be completed.

That is where this detail-rich report really proved its value by way of showing where states are, on a collective basis, in developing state freight plans, as well as a baseline on what future projected investments are needed to build out the 21st century freight network.

Whereas the report’s predecessor, “State of Freight,” published by AAPA last year, cited the need for $29 billion in seaport landside transportation infrastructure investments over the next decade in an effort to keep up with increasing freight volumes and rising population density in metropolitan areas, the successor report takes a wider view of the entire freight network in terms of how the FAST Act will leverage new planning provisions, funding and financing, and individual state freight plans, which the report said will be “key building blocks for the national freight network” while helping to gauge the needed baseline investments.

As for how states are faring, the report said that six months after the FAST Act became law, 71 percent of states had freight plans they are working on to become FAST Act compliant, with 57 percent of states identified 6,202 freight projects, with $259 billion in project costs already identified by just 35 percent of states.

This data echoed how state DOTs are making major progress and improvements in critical freight infrastructure, it is not keeping pace with current and future demands, said AASHTO Executive Director Bud Wright.

The AASHTO executive pointed various recommendations in the report to leverage private sector investment and move lawmakers to provide additional and ongoing funding resources outside of the Highway Trust Fund (which has been operating at a deficit for years).

And he stressed that more freight funding is needed on top of the almost $11 billion currently provided for freight-based projects through the FAST Act, with the stakes only going to increase as states submit their freight plans by the December 2017 deadline.

That leads to one of the report’s chief recommendation, which calls for Congress and the new Administration to continue to provide HTF apportionments to states for highway freight projects through the National Highway Freight program, while encouraging coordination with DOT’s Build America Bureau and Freight Advisory Committees to better leverage private sector investment.

Another key recommendation in the report, he mentioned, was for lawmakers to provide additional and ongoing funding resources outside of the HTF for the overall multimodal freight network that can supplement highway formula dollars and also fund discretionary grant programs.

Read the Article: AAPA Provides Trump Transition Team with Port Industry’s Policy Platform Recommendations

AAPA President and CEO Kurt Nagle stressed how increasingly state DOTs are vital partners with port authorities in focusing on freight movement, especially with respect to intermodal connectors and corridors that facilitate the transfer of cargo between ports and inland destinations. 

Among the 50 state DOTs and the District of Columbia, Nagle said that 12 have direct relationships with one or more port authorities, with 38 connected by navigable waterways or marine highway routes.

“This underscores the importance of strong relationships between state DOTs and port authorities in their states,” he said. “Because of increasing freight volumes and larger ships, coupled with antiquated and deteriorating freight infrastructure, there is heightened pressure on states and those port authorities to resolve the resultant traffic congestion and increase efficiencies. U.S. seaports comprise a vital economic engine for the economy and are responsible for over 23 million American jobs and $320 billion in local, state, and federal tax revenues, with port cargo activity generating over $4.6 trillion in economic value, more than one quarter of the U.S. economy.”

To accommodate increasing port volumes, Nagle said states are working closely with state port authorities, with states, including Virginia, North Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi, and Georgia, taking a system- or state-wide approach to moving freight and investing in multiple modes like marine highway, rail, and others, to move cargo from populated areas around seaports to distribution centers around other states.

And with the new requirements for state freight plans and freight advisory committees, ports are engaging more actively with their state DOTs for infrastructure planning and project development, he said.

Nagle said this serves as a driver for another report recommendation calling to reestablish a properly funded and staffed Office of Multimodal Freight within the DOT Office of the Secretary to address multimodal domestic and international freight planning needs across various DOT modal administrations. He also cited the report’s recommendation for moving the Harbor Maintenance Tax from discretionary to mandatory spending to enable full tax revenues to be used for the intended purpose of navigation channel maintenance.

This wide-ranging and detailed report is optimistic in its recommendations while signaling that there is a lot to be optimistic on the freight-related transportation infrastructure front. But at the same time, the optimism is met with a dose of reality as funding continues to top the list of concerns. Where things go from here is hard to tell, but there is at least a solid blueprint in place, replete with strong ideas and a solid forward looking vision.