Add Comment

Aggressive preventative maintenance of the transportation system is a safety and cost saving issue.

28)    Develop a comprehensive asset management/ life-cycle cost system
In order to minimize the need for long term maintenance investments, improve user satisfaction, and maximize system performance, the Commonwealth should create a comprehensive asset management system for its current transportation inventory.  This plan would be a data driven monitoring system that would evaluate current conditions and performance and identify capital investment needed to maintain a satisfactory performance level.  Management systems have already been partially implemented for some of the Commonwealth’s building (CAMIS by DCAM and FAMIS by DCR) and bridge (PONTIS) assets.  The next step needs to be taken to guarantee the degree of annual maintenance funding needed to address issues raised by the management systems and prevent higher long term expenses.  In addition to CAMIS, FAMIS, and PONTIS, priority funding should be allocated to install management systems for roads, bridges, rail lines, rolling stock, and supportive assets.  Integral to any transportation asset management plan is the commitment to invest in systematic preventative maintenance. The agencies and secretariats of the Commonwealth should also consider developing centralized coordinated systems on similar assets.  The Department of Capital Management uses the CAMIS system to manage its assets, while the Department of Conservation and Recreation manages its buildings with the FAMIS system. CAMIS AND FAMIS are run on the same base software.   These systems and their date should be linked centralized to maximize their effectiveness and efficiency.  The PONTIS system should be extended to all state agency controlled bridges in the Commonwealth.  It currently manages MassHighway and MBTA bridges but does not include all DCR bridges.

28.a    EOTPW and the transportation agencies should develop and implement a comprehensive transportation asset management/life-cycle cost system

28.b    MAPC should work with stakeholders to develop legislation that mandates allocation of maintenance funding to cover costs over the life of each project.

28.c    EOTPW should incorporate asset management reporting into the comprehensive quarterly performance report

Add Comment

29)    Reduce the backlog of structurally deficient bridges
The emergency bridge plan proposed by the Governor and approved by the legislature in July of 2008 represents strong action on a crisis felt around the country.  The program will repair or replace between 250-300 bridges over the next 8 years at an expense of $3 billon. The program is funded, for the most part, by new bonding. These bonds are backed by future gas tax earnings and anticipated federal revenues.  The program will cause the Commonwealth to take on a sizeable amount of new debt in an environment where Massachusetts already ranks highest in the nation in percentage of highway funds spent on debt service.  Consistent funding sources should be identified or new funding sources should be developed to ensure that this and other maintenance programs become routine.

Provisions of the bridge bond bill containing detailed transparency and oversight were removed from the plan.  The need for this emergency capital funding stems from a lack of ongoing maintenance and oversight.  This program is an opportunity to turn the page on an era of decaying and neglected infrastructure.  A comprehensive monitoring and reporting system would set the proper tone going forward.  EOTPW and MassHighway should employ the originally identified transparency and oversight provisions in the implementation the accelerated bridge repair program.

Add Comment

30)    EOTPW should address the inherent disincentive in the current agency budget process
Currently, system maintenance is a function of a transportation agency’s operating budget.  In this era of limited resources and increased costs, agency leaders are often forced to decide between funding programs and personnel or routine maintenance.  Programs and personnel are much higher in the eye of the public and elected officials, deferring maintenance offers much less resistance.  This practice is further encouraged by the fact that if maintenance is deferred to the point that an asset requires a complete overhaul (the Longfellow Bridge for example) or fails its rehabilitation is funded through capital funds.  These emergency capital funds are under the control of DCAM or the Commonwealth, and would not affect the agency operating budget.  In effect Agencies are disincentives to maintain their assets.

A system of incentives should be developed to reward agencies and managers that prioritize needed maintenance and reduce long term costs.  The newly deployed asset management systems should be used to implement this reward system.

Add Comment