C REQUIREMENTS SYSTEM

gon Experience
1

Note From the Director

The Federal Highway Administration’s Office of AssetManagement is promoting a different way for transportation agencies to distribute their resources amongalternative investment options. This new way of doingbusiness, “Asset Management,” is a strategic approachfor getting the best return on dollars spent for transportation improvements.

Each State transportation agency will likely have different methods for implementing an Asset Management

strategy. For example, some agencies will pursue a dataintegration strategy in order to ensure comparable datafor the evaluation of investment alternatives across assetclasses. Others will move to deploy economic analysistools to generate fact-based information for decisionmakers. Still others will want to integrate new inventory assessment methods into their decision-makingprocesses. 

Much can be learned from those who are readying

their organizations for Asset Management. To spark theexchange of information, we are initiating a series ofcase studies focused on agencies that are leading theway. In this, the inaugural year of the series, we established four tracks: data integration, economics in AssetManagement, the Highway Economic Requirements System–State Version, and life-cycle cost analysis. In upcoming years we will add new State reports to each of thetracks and will create new tracks addressing additionalfacets of Asset Management such as change management and performance measurement.

On behalf of the Office of Asset Management, I am

pleased to introduce this new series. We believe the casestudies will help agencies meet the challenges of implementing Asset Management programs.David R. GeigerDirector, Office of Asset Management
3

on Asset Management Case Study Series is

partnership between State departments of

and the Federal Highway Administration’s

of Asset Management. FHWA provides the

ch to share information, and the individual

he details of their experiences. For each case

ate transportation staff were interviewed by

resulting material was approved by the State.

se study reports rely on the agencies’ own

heir experience. Readers should note that the

 may or may not be reproducible in other

■

Executive Summary 

Since 1991, the Oregon Department of Transportation(ODOT) has used computer models to support its investmentdecision-making processes. Initially, Oregon relied on theHighway Performance Monitoring System Analytical Process(HPMS AP). The HPMS AP is an investment/performance simulation model designed to predict the investment required tocorrect current and future highway system deficiencies. Thisapproach relies primarily on engineering considerations andonly marginally considers the highway user. While developingits 1999 Oregon Highway Plan, ODOT decided to changetheir methodology to one that incorporated economics andthe impact of investment decisions on highway users.

At about this time, ODOT became aware of the Highway

Economic Requirements System (HERS), a new investment/performance model that had just been introduced by the U.S.Department of Transportation (USDOT) for use at the Federallevel. The HERS differs from the HPMS AP in that it incorporates economics into its investment selection simulation procedures. Initially, the national version of HERS was not availablefor State use, but ODOT obtained a copy through a contractorworking on the update of its Highway Plan. ODOT workedclosely with the contractor in modifying the software to makeit useful as a State-level planning tool. The revised program,which came to be known as HERS-OR, was successfully usedin producing the 1999 Oregon Highway Plan. ODOT continuesto use the HERS model for selected planning and policy analyses, and envisions significant new applications in the future.

ODOT is one of the first States to use the HERS model for

planning and policy analysis at the State level. Recently, Oregonhas begun to upgrade from HERS-OR to HERS-ST, the Statelevel HERS model supported by USDOT. HERS-ST has most ofthe features of HERS-OR, but also has updated formulas andcalculations and is considerably more user friendly. ■
Scenic Byway signage

nsportation (ODOT) is headquartered in

the State Highway Department by the

OT was re-established by legislative

her State modal agencies, such as motor

mass transit. ODOT has 5 regional

ntenance facilities. ODOT maintains

more than 5,000 bridges. The agency

ersons statewide.

e a safe, efficient transportation system

nity and livable communities for all Ore

es the State’s highway and bridge systems,

motor carrier laws, and oversees public

grams throughout Oregon. The State’s

ll-maintained transportation systems. Ore

nd I-84, are vital to commerce throughout

e that the Portland and Upper Willamette

west part of the State, account for 75 per

duction—and much of this productivity

. Transportation systems are also essential

ng 25 percent of the State’s production

 the movement of timber, agriculture, and

other products.

For the 2002 fiscal year,

ODOT reported that it hadspent more than $251 million on896 highway and bridge construction projects and nearly $27million on capital equipmentused to maintain highways andbridges. The department hadcommitted $321 million forfuture highway and bridge construction.

5

SETTING THE STAGEWhat Did Oregon Have?The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991set forth Federal transportation policy, funding levels, and guidelines forState and metropolitan transportation planning. Among other provisions,ISTEA required each State to prepare a long-range, statewide multimodaltransportation plan and to produce a short-term, statewide transportationimprovement program (STIP) consistent with the plan.

In response to ISTEA, ODOT adopted a new approach to transportation planning. The ODOT process begins with the Oregon Transportation

Plan (OTP). The OTP establishes the philosophy, vision, and broad policies that guide the overall planning process. The OTP calls for the “planning, development, and management of a statewide, integrated transportation network that is safe, provides efficient access, and enhances Oregon’seconomy and livability.” The OTP is intended to assist in making the difficult funding choices that Oregon will address in the future.

Consistent with the OTP, Oregon’s integrated planning process (see

sidebar on page 6) includes statewide modal plans, corridor plans, andvarious city/county transportation system plans (TSPs). The modal plansfocus on statewide needs and policies for each transportation mode; corridor plans address all modes for specific geographic corridor locations inOregon; and the TSPs concentrate on the State’s cities and their surrounding areas. Together, the modal, corridor, and transportation systemplans provide the basis for prioritizing improvements and selecting thosethat will be included in the STIP. 

The STIP provides a four-year capital improvement program, including project funding and scheduling information. Since 1991, ODOT 

has used sophisticated analytical models, including pavement and bridgemanagement systems, to support development of their STIP. From theonset, a critical component of this effort was the USDOT’s Highway Performance Monitoring System Analytical Process (HPMS AP), an investment/performance model designed to assess the physical condition, safety,service, and efficiency of highway system operations given alternativefunding levels, policies, or program structures.
ation Plan

Corridor Plans

Plans

• Rail Freight• Rail Passenger• Transportation Safety Action• Willamette Valley Strategy

n

Transportation

ent Program

Improvement Programs

Solution Delivery• Maintenance• Operation• System Management

7

What Did Oregon Want?In 1997, ODOT initiated work to revise its 1991 Oregon Highway Plan,which is one of a number of modal plans that provide direction and inputto the STIP. The Highway Plan provides long-range policies and investment strategies given current funding levels and explains how potentialfuture revenues could be productively invested.

With the guidance established in the OTP—that transportation investments should enhance Oregon’s economy and livability—ODOT recognized that the Highway Plan needed to reflect all of the benefits and costs

resulting from potential investments, not just agency costs and benefits. Inaddition, ODOT saw that as transportation needs grow and fundingbecomes more constrained, the ability to evaluate potential improvementsaccording to economic criteria will become more important. 

The engineering-oriented HPMS AP had a long history of successful

use by ODOT analysts. It was a robust analytical system that could systematically analyze the impact of planned investment levels and documentthe results of higher levels on system performance. There was, however, agrowing recognition that it lacked an important economic dimension necessary to address user costs and benefits more fully. Years earlier, FHWAhad come to the same conclusion and, in response to this concern, developed the Highway Economic Requirements System (HERS). In 1995,FHWA used HERS to produce the national investment requirement estimates included in the “Status of the Nation’s Surface Transportation System: Conditions and Performance Report to Congress.” 

HERS and HPMS AP are similar computer models. Both simulate

highway system deterioration and selectively choose investments forimplementation to correct current and projected deficiencies. Their simulations are based on analyst-specified constraints such as funding levels.Both models report system condition and performance levels resultingfrom the analysis of a given scenario. They both use engineering standardsto identify roadway deficiencies and consider capital improvement projectsintended to correct pavement and capacity deficiencies. The models differin that HPMS AP identifies needed improvements based primarily onengineering standards, while HERS uses not only engineering standards,but also economic criteria to select the optimal mix of improvements for
9

WHERE IS ODOT TODAY? In Oregon, HERS has proven its value as a transportation planning tool.The Oregon version of HERS was used to support the needs analysisrequirements in development of the modal, corridor, and MPO plansleading to the STIP. In each case, HERS-OR was used to analyze theimpact of different investment levels on the system and its users. HERSOR continues to be used to conduct various needs analyses and selectedfeatures of the model have been applied in producing special studies. The model has been integrated into the department’s day-to-day activities, as the following examples of HERS-OR applications show.

mary, the major difference between the

oks at the impact that highway users have

ce of the highway system, while HERS

ondition and performance of the highway

rs.

GET THERE?

-like approach to assist in developing

e consultant brought in to help with the

 HERS and agreed to tailor the national

gon’s Planning staff.

ired for the Highway Plan, Oregon direct

mber of enhancements to HERS. Two were

e: First, a feature was added to allow the

ted improvements. Because of this revi

R (Oregon’s version of the national HERS

utput so that improvements selected for

 world” conditions (i.e., anticipated

 on known land use changes). Therefore,

combination of model-identified

-identified improvements. ODOT can

ecommended improvement, without

d that output files be developed that

y section in the input database, the 

ovement or the analyst-specified improve

hose improvements, and the expected

mprovement. This feature was helpful 

w and understand the analysis recom

Rocky Creek Bridge, near Lincoln City
11

developed a spreadsheet to calculate the cost of delay based on the HERSOR methodology. This information was provided as reference points on aState map and is now available for quick and easy look-up. These information sources are routinely used by regional personnel in communicating with the public.

By using the value of travel time methodology from the HERS-OR

model, the Oregon DOT has been able to report, with the credibilitythat comes from consistency, the travel time costs accruing from incidents that cause unanticipated delay, such as mud slides, rock falls, andmajor crashes. These results are provided to the public and help to notonly generate interesting background information, but also demonstrate

o analyze three scenarios for the Oregon

he scenarios included a different mixture

on improvements, ranging from “Preser

dernization.” Modernization improve

addressing congestion issues. The scenar

highway system condition and

cts over a 20-year analysis period (see

ce was reported in terms of average effec

er mile.

ysis, ODOT was able to calculate the

itional increment of preservation invest

ment of investment in modernization.

s, a case was successfully made that addi

DOT’s current resources, could be invest

R analysis also helped frame the difficult

 and increases in spending when

te 1990s ODOT was publicly criticized

mates of the value of travel time. While

or different purposes, clearly there was a

nted, and readily accessible value of travel

his, the portion of HERS-OR responsible

was extracted and used to provide a

al ODOT estimates of the value of travel

ccident on I-5 closed a portion of the

ighted a remaining problem associated

ates: effectively disseminating the infor

aper article about the accident cited an

sociated with the incident that did not

ates produced using the HERS-OR

roblem, ODOT created two reference

the media: “Unexpected Delay Map” and

of Unexpected Delay.” Oregon analysts

Oregon’s Highway Economic Requirements System: ScenarioAnalysis• At the start of the analysis, evaluate the current condition

and performance of the highway system.

• Using traffic growth projections for each highway section in

the database, forecast future conditions and performance foreach 5-year period (of a 20-year overall analysis period).

• Identify section deficiencies based on analyst-defined triggers.• Analyze deficient sections to identify potential improvements.• For each section, list the possible improvements and apply

economic criteria to rank-order the possible improvementsaccording to relative economic merit. 

• Select improvements for systemwide implementation until

the system funding constraints or user cost objectives are satisfied.

• Consider analyst-determined substitutions for the improvements that the model selected for implementation. • Evaluate model-generated improvement costs and consider

appropriate revisions.

• Evaluate performance at the end of each funding period.
13

astructure to the citizens of Oregon. The

for other time-related estimates of delay

restrictions, construction work zones, and

em. Oregon’s statewide Congestion Man

s information on transportation system

s intended to help decision makers iden

ies and technologies that will alleviate

orts congestion trends on the State high

estion severity. The Oregon CMS uses the

R—ODOT literally imported the HERS

o be a powerful decision-support tool that

ment and needs analysis as well as for

ves. While the model has some limita

any strong points. ODOT has learned

a total solution to the challenge of plan

n the transportation decision-making

lly justified benchmarks. HERS-OR pro

getary and legislative program develop

tment sees this capability as being of

g constraints intensify and the public’s

ases.

lysis produced by HERS-OR helped leg

n makers by providing a clear picture of

ance of the highway system would change

s. Oregon officials also found that

ommunication tool for responding to

c about the transportation system, partic

. In addition, the model’s underlying rela

puts have provided input to other Oregon

Cyclists, Columbia River Gorge, near Interstate 84
15

Another reason that ODOT is moving to adopt HERS-ST is because ofFHWA’s commitment to ongoing HERS-ST technical support, periodicupdates, and user group forums. ODOT Planning staff view HERS-ST asa significant upgrade to the HERS-OR model. 

As one of the early users of HERS for State-level application, ODOT

has actively supported FHWA’s development of HERS-ST. ODOT is an original member of the HERS-ST Developer’s Group and, in that capacity, has provided insight and guidance in directing production ofHERS-ST. ODOT staff also participated in the national HERS-ST conference as well as other related forums. ODOT plans to continue theirinvolvement in HERS-ST, recognizing that not only do they gain valuable information and ideas regarding the experiences of other States inusing the HERS model, but they also have an enormous opportunity toshape the HERS-ST software.

Oregon continues to explore new ways in which to use the HERS

analysis and to integrate it with other applications within the agency.ODOT believes its use of HERS-ST will continue to grow as the pro

 DOT LEARNED? 

ons of HERS-OR, ODOT is exploring 

h other agency tools in order to enhance 

, ODOT is pursuing data integration 

egon Statewide Model. The strength of 

rovide an optimized list of improvements 

ria and budget parameters. The statewide 

generation and distribution assignments 

he network. This capability is particularly 

up because Oregon has unique land-use 

ollow stringent statewide planning goals 

ERS-OR is not sensitive to these land-use 

del is not sensitive to budget constraints. 

models offer tremendous potential when 

ty are essential to producing meaningful 

n 1997, while preparing the Oregon 

d a dataset that covered the entire State 

les. This comprehensively validated data- 

, has been used continually since that 

sure that the data are regularly updated, 

of HERS-OR analysis. ODOT uses the 

r analytical applications, such as databases, 

ormation systems (GIS) applications, 

ion of the FHWA-sponsored State version 

 is a direct extension of the national-level 

ytically similar to HERS-OR, but has 

r-friendly Windows interface, a GIS capa- 

al reporting tools not found in HERS-OR. 

 revised capacity calculations and updates 

ctions, and calculations found in HERS-ST. Bridge at Multnomah Falls, near Portland
Further Information

ODOT Transportation Planning Division Web Sitehttp://www.odot.state.or.us/tdb/planning/Transportation Planning AnalysisBrian Gregor503-986-4120brian.j.gregor@odot.state.or.usRich Arnold503-986-4218richard.arnold@odot.state.or.usPhotography CreditsPhotographs courtesy of the Oregon Department ofTransportationFront cover: Yaquina Bay Bridge, NewportInside front cover: MAXX, Portland’s light rail, alongsideInterstate 84 

within the State’s policy and planning

 additional applications for the model:

speed analysis 

nd calculating truck speeds on specific

decision-making tool for evaluating the

ments at the project level based on per

-cost ratios 

pact of bridge restrictions on trucks

alytical modules with ODOT’s manage

systems to take advantage of the model’s

s.

on
asstmgmt/hersindex.htm