Planning and Environmental Linkages Study

​Overview

For decades, the funding gap between available revenue and Pennsylvania's transportation infrastructure needs has been increasing. Transportation funding, which is largely supported by fuel-based taxes, has been eroded by reduced fuel consumption (due to higher fuel efficiency and electric/hybrid vehicle use) and inflation, which has reduced the buying power of a dollar. State revenue from Pennsylvania’s Motor License Fund, which supports highway and bridge maintenance and improvement projects, has also been shifted to other priorities, further reducing funds available for highways and bridges.

Meanwhile, the need for funding is increasing as Pennsylvania’s population has grown and its transportation infrastructure ages. As the funding shortfall has continued, projects to improve the system have been deferred to fund essential maintenance, primarily on Interstate highways.

Insufficient funding for highways and bridges means that critical projects are delayed or foregone, and it is Pennsylvanians who feel the impacts. Poor highway and bridge conditions result in more time spent driving in congestion, delay, higher vehicle maintenance and fuel costs, and increased emissions. This transportation funding shortfall affects all regions of the state and requires a statewide solution.

What is in the PEL Study?

• Chapter 1 provides a summary of the study purpose and needs and its goals and objectives, and summarizes the outreach process.
• Chapter 2 provides background information on the current sources of PennDOT funding and the expenditure needs that are driving the funding gap.
• Chapter 3 compares the revenues and expenditures and identifies the funding gap.
• Chapter 4 summarizes previous studies that identified and evaluated alternative funding options and identifies the reasonable funding options and early actions that will fund immediate and priority projects.
• Chapter 5 provides greater details on the proposed near- to medium-term funding options—namely, bridge tolling, managed lanes, and congestion pricing.
• Chapter 6 presents near-, medium-, and long-term action plans for addressing the funding gaps.
• Chapter 7 presents a proposed methodology for analyzing impacts on low-income and minority populations from potential funding solutions.
• Chapter 8 presents a framework for considering potential mitigation strategies should a project proposed under the program be found to have adverse environmental impacts.

Key Study Findings:

Major sources of revenues are declining.

• A vast majority of Pennsylvania's transportation funding comes from State and Federal gas taxes. In particular, our highway and bridge program relies on gas taxes for 74 percent of its funding. Gas tax revenues are decreasing, driven in large part by improving vehicle fuel efficiency and increasing use of hybrid and electric vehicles. Such declines are expected to continue and worsen over time.
• The purchasing power of gas taxes has declined substantially because the taxes have not been adjusted for inflation over time. For example, the Federal gas tax has not been increased since 1993.
• The Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission (PTC), an entity separate from PennDOT, currently transfers $450 million per year to PennDOT; by law this amount will be reduced to $50 million per year starting in fiscal year 2022-23 and running through fiscal year 2056-57.
• As a result of declining fuel sales, a reduction of $4.9 billion in state-generated revenue is forecast between 2018 and 2030.
• The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the shortfall in gas tax collection; reductions in travel due to the pandemic have resulted in substantial reductions in collection of fuel taxes and vehicle registration fees. The COVID-19 pandemic presents additional funding uncertainty, as it may affect long-term travel patterns.
  

PennDOT needs are substantial and increasing, resulting in large funding gaps.

• PennDOT owns and maintains 40,000 miles of highways and 25,400 bridges and supports another 80,000 miles of local roads and 6,600 local bridges with funding and inspections.
• A lack of funding means that maintenance is often deferred, resulting in higher costs in the long run.
• The majority of Pennsylvania’s funding needs, and more than 86 percent of PennDOT’s overall funding gap, is related to Pennsylvania’s highway and bridge system.
• Available funding for highways and bridges is currently $6.9 billion per year, while the identified funding need is $15 billion, resulting in a funding shortfall of $8.1 billion. That funding gap is projected to increase another $4.5 billion to $12.6 billion by 2030.
• PennDOT has historically spent between $450 and $500 million per year on the Interstate Highway System, while funding of approximately $1.2 billion annually is required to meet operations and maintenance needs. At these levels, the Interstate Highway System in Pennsylvania is underfunded by approximately 60 percent.
• In addition to funding needs to preserve and maintain existing highways and bridges, projections also include an unmet need of $2.1 billion (as of fiscal year 2020-21) for highway and bridge improvements, including capacity expansion, modernization, and upgrades. This $2.1 billion unmet need for improvements applies primarily to the Interstate system rather than non-Interstate National Highway System routes, and is expected to increase to $3.3 billion over the next 10 years.
  

Not being able to meet our transportation needs has real costs and impacts on Pennsylvanians.

• With insufficient funds, PennDOT often must delay routine maintenance work. Delaying repairs leads to additional costs in the future, with the compounding effects of aging bridges, increasing demand, and increasing construction costs. This means that Pennsylvanians will pay more money for these repairs in the long run.
• Roadways require regular repair and resurfacing work. If PennDOT is unable to effectively complete repairs, it impacts the traveling public. For example, a commuter driving an average of 30 miles per day could spend up to $548 extra each year in vehicle maintenance costs driving on poor-quality pavement.
• Lack of adequate funding may require delaying or foregoing capacity improvement projects that could ease congestion. Not resolving congestion can cause 62 hours of delay per year for commuters in urban areas or approximately 325 million hours of delay per year for all 22 of Pennsylvania’s urban areas.
• Assuming an average fuel price of $2.51 per gallon, congestion translates to an annual cost of up to $65 per commuter in urban areas due to wasted fuel. Statewide, fuel wasted in all urban areas due to congestion costs Pennsylvanians around $348 million per year.
  

Funding Options Considered

PennDOT evaluated a number of potential funding options, including:

• Sales taxes
  
• Personal income tax
• Real estate and property taxes
• Fuel/gas tax increases
  
• Other taxes and fees
• Mileage-based user fee
• Various forms of tolling

Each potential option comes with its own opportunities and challenges in terms of the degree to which it can fill the funding gap, the time needed for implementation, the approvals needed for implementation, and the effects on various stakeholder groups, including the traveling public. PennDOT evaluated these various factors and identified the options that could be advanced in the near term, versus those that would require longer-term coordination and legislative or other authority.

A solution in the near term (2 to 4 years) is essential because we have bridges in critical need of repairs today. Bridges in poor condition require frequent inspections and unexpected repairs that take limited funds away from other maintenance activities. When those repairs cannot be completed in a timely manner due to lack of funds, it can ultimately lead to weight restrictions, lane closures, and capacity restrictions. When lanes of traffic are removed from crucial bridges, traffic congestion can form and travel times can be greatly impacted. Longer travel times cause more than just headaches for drivers; they also lead to additional spending on gas and vehicle maintenance. For truck drivers, these additional costs can have major impacts on state and regional supply chains.

Results of the Analysis

A key part of the PEL Study was to determine funding solutions that could be feasible in the near term (2 to 4 years) to provide needed revenue relief quickly, and to prioritize other potential solutions that could take longer to implement but still may be feasible to help meet the transportation needs over the longer term.

Near-Term/Medium-Term Plan

Based on the analysis, each of the potential funding options has some merit and could be considered as part of PennDOT’s long-term strategy in securing sustainable and dedicated revenue for highways and bridges. However, without action by the legislature and/or others, only (1) bridge tolling and (2) managed lanes could be advanced in the near-term. Federal tolling legislation is in place to allow State DOTs to toll bridges for the purpose of reconstruction or replacement, and Act 88 provides the enabling legislation that permits charging user fees, or tolling, to implement managed lanes. In Pennsylvania, tolling authority requires authorization through the Pennsylvania Public-Private Partnership Board (P3 Board).

Of the potential funding options studied, congestion pricing was identified as a possible medium-term solution. Congestion pricing would require acceptance into a national pilot program for implementation, and it would take time to work through the application process for the pilot program.

Why Tolling?

• Those who use the facility pay for it.
• Provides dedicated funding that is used to construct and maintain the facility from which the toll was collected.
• It helps keep the local and regional transportation funding program from being diverted to the interstate program.
• Toll collection systems already exist in Pennsylvania, lowering the cost of collection.
• PennDOT has the mechanisms in place to implement and collect tolls.
  

Bridge Tolling (Near-Term)

Bridge tolling would collect a toll at select major bridges within the Commonwealth to fund their replacement or rehabilitation and to provide a dedicated source of revenue for their maintenance.

Which Bridges? Major bridges in need of replacement or rehabilitation would be considered for bridge tolling. Major bridges include substantial structures based on physical size, location, and cost to replace or rehabilitate. Structures that are in a condition that warrants timely attention for safety, and those that would experience disruptions and community impacts if weight restrictions or closure were imposed, would be prime candidates.

Managed Lanes (Near-Term)

A managed lane is a lane added to an existing highway where the traffic is regulated by charging a toll to use the new lane and/or by encouraging carpooling or transit use. A managed lane can take the form of either an Express Lane, where all users are charged a toll for use, or a high-occupancy toll lane, which allows high-occupancy vehicles free passage while single-occupancy vehicles are charged a toll.

Which Lanes? Managed lanes work best in corridors with recurring peak-period congestion. In selecting managed lane candidates, PennDOT would consider factors such as the connectivity of the network, congestion levels, travel time, potential for increasing capacity, traffic growth, and physical and geometric conditions of the roadway.

Congestion Pricing (Medium-Term)

Congestion pricing would toll all lanes where regular, recurring, and persistent congestion exists, with the goal of encouraging users to shift their travel patterns to off-peak periods, consolidate trips, carpool, or take alternative modes of transportation.

Which Corridors? Corridors where regular, recurring, and persistent congestion exists would be selected. Therefore, congestion pricing is typically implemented in urban areas. In selecting congestion pricing corridors, PennDOT would consider factors such as congestion levels, travel time, potential for transit or other mode shifts, traffic growth, and financial viability. Other considerations for identifying potential locations include the potential for diversion, the environmental effects of diversion, and the project’s ability to meet congestion reduction and revenue goals.

What about environmental impacts?

Tolling can potentially have two primary impacts on communities:

• Diversion Impacts: Various effects can occur on local communities from vehicles that use alternative routes to avoid the toll. Increased traffic congestion along toll diversion routes has the potential to affect neighborhood character, quality of life, and mobility.
• Financial Impacts: The requirement of paying a toll or managing a toll payment account can create financial burdens.

For specific projects identified as candidates for tolling, a more detailed and refined assessment of community effects would be performed as part of the NEPA process within each individual project’s development phase. In particular, impacts to low-income or minority populations within the communities affected by the toll must be considered. To address potential environmental justice impacts, PennDOT has laid out methodological guidance to be followed during the environmental approval process (see Chapter 7).

If the environmental review of a tolling project indicates the potential for adverse impacts, measures to mitigate those impacts will be evaluated. Chapter 8 presents a framework for evaluating potential mitigation measures that can be effective in avoiding, minimizing, or mitigating impacts from tolling.

Long-Term Plan

This PEL Study identifies a considerable number of potential funding solutions that could be implemented over the medium or long term. These other funding mechanisms would require legislative changes or implementation by third parties. PennDOT will work with elected officials and other transportation partners to examine these other potential solutions.

The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) has an $8.1 billion (and growing) funding gap between its current funding levels and what it needs to provide a system of highways and bridges in a state of good repair. ^1,2 To fill this funding gap, PennDOT has initiated an alternative funding program called PennDOT Pathways. To support PennDOT Pathways, an Alternative Funding Planning and Environmental Linkages (PEL) Study was undertaken to identify near- and long-term funding solutions for highway and bridge funding.

This PEL Study has been prepared in accordance with 23 United States Code (USC) Section 168 as well as with 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 450.212. Under these authorities, analyses conducted during planning may be incorporated directly or by reference into subsequent environmental documents prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), provided that the studies were adequately documented; interested Federal, State, local, and Tribal agencies were involved; a reasonable opportunity for public review and comment on the PEL Study was provided; and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) was engaged.

A PEL Study is a flexible tool that can be used to connect the planning process with the environmental process required by NEPA. By considering environmental effects during planning, the analyses conducted for a PEL Study can be readily incorporated in the subsequent NEPA process, promoting efficiency and potentially accelerating project delivery. A PEL study is a collaborative and integrated approach to transportation decision-making that considers benefits and impacts of proposed transportation improvements to the environment, community, and economy during the transportation planning process. Engaging stakeholders in planning also facilitates the incorporation of environmental and community values into transportation decisions.

1.1 Background

For decades, the gap between available funding and transportation infrastructure needs has been increasing. Transportation funding, which is supported largely by gas taxes, has been eroded by reduced fuel consumption (due to higher fuel efficiency and electric vehicle use) and inflation (the reduced buying power of a dollar). State-generated revenue from Pennsylvania's Motor License Fund (MLF) predominantly supports highway and bridge maintenance and improvement projects; however, shifting priorities, including funding the State Police, have further reduced MLF funds available for highways and bridges. Meanwhile, the need for funding is growing as Pennsylvania's transportation infrastructure continues to age, needs more repairs, and requires replacement.

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Commonwealth) has been working hard to make the most of its available revenue and to secure adequate and dedicated funding to continue maintaining roadways and bridges in a state of good repair. For example, PA Act 44 and PA Act 89 raised revenue from the Pennsylvania Turnpike and from gas taxes (respectively) for statewide transportation, and Act 89 increased transportation funding by $2.3 billion per year. This funding has been spent on high-priority programs such as those that reduce the number of poor-condition bridges in the state. Since its passage in 2013, Act 89 has allowed PennDOT to complete nearly 4,000 projects totaling more than $10 billion in value. ³ However, the Commonwealth's transportation funding shortfall persists, and projects to improve the system are being delayed to fund essential maintenance, primarily on Interstate highways. For example, some funds have been shifted away from regional and local modernization and operational improvement projects in order to maintain the aging infrastructure of interstate highways and bridges.

The transportation funding shortfall affects all regions of the state and requires a statewide solution. PennDOT continues to seek solutions to stabilize and raise revenues to address the growing need for investment in infrastructure. Over the past 2 years, many ideas have been proposed and studied by the PA Partnership for Mobility Advisory Council (May 2019 report); these options are discussed in Chapter 4, Potential Funding Options.

To solve this systemic funding gap, PennDOT has initiated PennDOT Pathways. This program will re-imagine transportation funding and identify solutions to secure funding for our future. This PEL Study is the first step in the PennDOT Pathways Program to identify potential funding sources, analyze them, and develop a plan for implementation. PennDOT has developed this PEL Study, with support from FHWA, to review previous funding solutions, evaluate potential near-term and long-term options, and identify a path to stable and dedicated infrastructure funding in the Commonwealth.

1.2 Study Purpose

This section discusses the reasons for preparing this PEL Study and summarizes the purpose and needs that have caused PennDOT to examine alternative means of funding. PennDOT's funding focus is twofold: (1) the overall program funding needs across all functions provided by PennDOT and (2) the largest and most urgent need to support the highway and bridge program. The latter is the focus of this document.

1.2.1 Purpose Statement

The purpose of this PEL Study is to identify the best near- and long-term options to fill the transportation funding gap, to provide adequate revenue for maintaining the Commonwealth's highways and bridges in a state of good repair, and to establish a path forward and a methodology for implementation.

1.2.2 The Need for Revenue

PennDOT Transportation-Wide Funding Need

At current funding levels, PennDOT is unable to meet its total needs across the transportation system. PennDOT's funding gap for transportation infrastructure for all modes (e.g., highway, bridge, transit, rail, air) is approximately $9.3 billion, and over the next 10 years this gap is forecast to grow to $14.5 billion. ⁴

Highway and Bridge Funding Need

Specifically, for the statewide highway and bridge system (the focus of this PEL Study), the funding gap is $8.1 billion (see Exhibit 2) and is forecast to grow by about $500 million per year to $12.6 billion in 2030. This highway and bridge funding gap includes maintenance projects to reach a state of good repair as well as modernization and operational improvement projects such as those that improve safety and operations.

Historically, funds have had to be diverted from modernization and operational improvement projects in the Regional Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs) to maintain Pennsylvania's roadways and bridges. This is exemplified by Pennsylvania's bridge replacement needs. While Pennsylvania's bridges have different characteristics and varied expected durations of useful service life, the average service life of a bridge in Pennsylvania is approximately 75 to 80 years. Cost-effective repairs are essential to extend the time between bridge replacements. Under current funding, nearly 150 of Pennsylvania's 25,400 existing State-owned bridges are planned to be replaced every year. However, if adequate funding was available, the number of bridges replaced by PennDOT would increase to nearly 400 per year in order to achieve a better state of repair, resulting in lower maintenance costs over the long term. A substantial amount of Pennsylvania's highway and bridge infrastructure was built between the end of World War II and 1980, and as these bridges continue to age, the investment they require continues to grow. Pennsylvania's infrastructure funding gap substantially limits the Commonwealth's ability to meet this need, and the number of annual bridge replacements falls short of what would ideally be undertaken to adequately maintain the system by approximately 250 bridges per year. In addition to maintenance requirements, the remainder of Pennsylvania's funding gap is for operational improvement projects necessary to modernize the system, improve safety, and address congestion.

Without a maintained state of good repair on existing highways and bridges, and with delayed or unrealized improvement projects, it is Pennsylvanians who bear the burden. Poor asset conditions result in more time spent driving in congested conditions, higher vehicle maintenance and fuel costs, and increased emissions. Additionally, delays experienced by freight transportation translate to reduced economic competitiveness and higher prices for Pennsylvanians. These impacts and the costs to Pennsylvanians are discussed in Section 3.4.

Section 1.2.3 Study Goal and Objectives

The goal and objectives of this PEL Study began with PennDOT's vision: "An enhanced quality of life built on transportation excellence."

Building toward this vision requires the financial means to maintain a state of good repair of Pennsylvania's highway and bridges without diverting funds from modernization and operational improvements necessary to improve mobility. Unprecedented revenue shortfalls have created exceptional challenges to achieve this vision for the Commonwealth's 40,000 miles of State highways and the 25,000 State-owned bridges. The goal and objectives of this study include the following:

Goal:

• Provide essential infrastructure investment now and for the future.

Objectives:

• Identify and implement near-term funding solutions.
• Identify and prepare for long-term funding solutions.

To accomplish the goal and objectives, this study:

• Summarizes previous studies that identified and evaluated alternative funding options;
• Identifies reasonable funding options and early actions that will fund immediate, priority highway and bridge projects;
• Provides the foundation for near- and long-term solutions to provide funding and maintain the roadway system in a state of good repair;
• Facilitates incorporation of this PEL Study content into PennDOT's project development process and links to the Statewide Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), Metropolitan Long Range Transportation Plans, Comprehensive Freight Movement Plan, and State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP);
• Presents an environmental justice ⁶ evaluation methodology for tolling projects; and
• Provides an approach and action plan for identifying and implementing a near-term alternative funding program in the Commonwealth and identifies mid- and long-term funding options that may be feasible, but will require additional study.

1.2.4 Stakeholder Outreach

Stakeholders

This PEL Study has been prepared by the PennDOT Central office in conjunction with the PennDOT Districts and FHWA, and in coordination with stakeholders in the PEL Study area. Stakeholders include Pennsylvania residents and the traveling public, Metropolitan Planning Organizations, Rural Planning Organizations, and Federal, State, and Tribal Agencies as detailed below:

• Pennsylvania Residents and the Traveling Public: The traveling public are the users of the Pennsylvania roadway network and include residents, businesses, and out-of-state travelers.
• Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs): MPOs are Federally mandated transportation policy-making organizations with representatives from local government and transportation agencies. They are required in areas with an urban population of more than 50,000 residents.
• Rural Planning Organizations (RPOs): Pennsylvania's RPOs serve a function similar to that of MPOs for the rural areas of the state with fewer than 50,000 residents. Federal law requires States to consult and coordinate with local officials in rural areas; RPOs in Pennsylvania are supported by Federal and State planning funds.
• Federal, State, Local, and Tribal Agencies: Agencies and Federally recognized Tribes with a potential interest in the Pathways Program; 23 CFR 450.212 and 23 USC 168 require coordination with agencies and Tribes.
• PennDOT Central Office: The office that facilitates transportation across the Commonwealth, including the Secretary of Transportation and the Central Office team.
• PennDOT Districts: The offices that identify, program, and deliver projects through planning, design, and construction, as well as maintenance and operations in regions across the Commonwealth. The PennDOT Districts also coordinate with the MPOs/RPOs.
• FHWA: The operating administration of the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) responsible for stewardship and oversight of the Federally assisted, State-administered Federal highway and bridge program to ensure that Federal laws, regulations, policies, and guidelines are met.

Public Outreach Summary

This section presents a summary of the outreach activities undertaken to obtain input into the PEL Study and the Pathways Program in general. PennDOT reached out to the public via the web site, social media, and e-newsletters. PennDOT provided opportunities for public input on this PEL Study via a public engagement platform on the Pathways Program's website between November 17 and December 17, 2020. In addition, comments during a virtual public meeting held from February 19 to March 23, 2021, included information relevant to the alternative funding options in the PEL Study. The Draft PEL Study was available for formal public comment from April 29 to June 1, 2021.

These engagement opportunities included targeted outreach to low-income and minority populations (see Public Participation Plan). PennDOT convened two Equity in Transportation Working Group meetings (March 10, 2021, and March 31, 2021) and solicited input from low-income and minority populations as part of a statewide focus group panel survey (March 2021). These outreach measures and a summary of the comments received are described below. ⁷

Early Public Engagement

In November 2020, PennDOT launched a website for the Pathways Program to educate the public on the funding gap for highway and bridge transportation needs in the Commonwealth and the potential alternative funding solutions being studied. To obtain meaningful early input from the public regarding potential alternative funding solutions, an online engagement period was held between November 17 and December 17, 2020. The online engagement platform provided a comment form that allowed individuals to submit their comments directly within the platform website and noted other ways in which comments could be submitted, including the Pathways Program email address and hotline number. PennDOT issued a press release and conducted social media and stakeholder outreach to notify as many Pennsylvanians as possible to maximize public participation in the online engagement platform. During the early engagement period, there were:

• 375 Comments
• 5,845 Online Engagement Platform Visits
• 516 Stakeholder Emails
• 30,694 Website Visits
• 1,229 Aggregate Video Plays
• 241,695 Social Impressions

The top five comment topics heard from Pennsylvanians and stakeholders during the early engagement period included:

1. Suggestions to raise additional funds
2. Opposition to tax increases
3. Suggestions that fees should be short-term and committed to roads and bridges
4. Support of tolls
5. Opposition to tolls

Pathways Program Outreach: Major Bridge Public-Private Partnership Initiative

On February 19, 2021, PennDOT began engaging communities, stakeholders, and legislators in the Pathways Program's Major Bridge Public-Private Partnership (MBP3) Initiative and announced nine bridges across the state that were candidates for tolling. This outreach effort had three primary objectives: (1) to continue to educate the public on the funding gap for highway and bridge transportation needs in the Commonwealth and potential alternative funding solutions being studied; (2) to introduce the MBP3 Initiative, the purpose and need for the nine candidate bridges, and bridge tolling as a possible near-term solution in support of closing that funding gap; and (3) to receive meaningful input from the public regarding potential alternative funding solutions throughout the study as it progresses.

The MBP3 outreach program continued use of a central online platform as an integral extension of the Pathways Program website. In addition, individual websites were launched for each of the candidate bridges where the community could express their thoughts and opinions. PennDOT also held virtual meetings with legislators, stakeholder organizations and individuals, and members of the public statewide; sent emails and published social media posts; and issued news releases and media alerts. While not specifically a comment period on the PEL Study, many of the comments received through this outreach were related to the funding gap and potential solutions, and contained relevant suggestions informing this PEL Study.

More than 7,000 comments were received in this engagement period. The most common comment themes were very similar to the comments received specific to the early public engagement described above. The following is a summary of the most common themes from the MBP3 outreach that were relevant to the PEL Study:

• Opposition to tolls
• Opposition to tax increases
• General dissatisfaction, including comments encouraging cutting PennDOT budget/being more efficient
• Financial concerns regarding being able to afford the tolls
• Other suggested means of raising revenue, such as selling bonds and legalizing marijuana and using those tax revenues
• Concerns related to impacts associated with travelers avoiding the bridges (like congestion on alternate routes and lost business from diverted traffic). Some indicated that they will avoid the tolls by diverting to other routes.

Environmental Justice Outreach

The FHWA and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Statewide Planning and Metropolitan Planning regulations, 23 CFR 450, call for actions to prevent discrimination early in the planning process, which affects long-range planning and project programming at the State and local levels. For this PEL Study, PennDOT solicited input from low-income and minority populations to identify concerns about potential near- and long-term solutions that are being studied to address Pennsylvania's transportation funding gap, including tolling initiatives. As near- and long-term solutions are selected for implementation and specific projects are initiated, environmental justice analyses will be performed at the project level in accordance with Federal and State guidance.

In preparing this PEL Study, PennDOT undertook the following additional outreach activities to specifically engage low-income and minority populations: (1) convened an Equity in Transportation Working Group and (2) conducted an online digital survey using a paid research panel comprised of minority and low-income Pennsylvanians over the age of 18. For more information on the specific environmental justice outreach activities and the results of that outreach, see Section 7.3.2, Project-Level Environmental Justice Analysis.

Agency Outreach

In addition to public outreach, PennDOT conducted outreach with Federal and State resource agencies. PennDOT participated in an Agency Coordination Meeting (ACM) on January 27, 2021. The purpose of the meeting was to present an overview of the Pathways Program and solicit feedback for the PEL Study. The meeting was attended by representatives from a number of Federal and State agencies, including resource agencies, transportation agencies, and regional and metropolitan planning organizations. Issues discussed included bridge tolling and procurement processes, maintenance, schedule, and environmental process. Environmental justice concerns and potential mitigation for low-income travelers were also discussed. In addition to the ACM, meetings were held with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to discuss the environmental justice methodology.

Tribal Outreach

Letters inviting participation in the PEL Study process were sent to the following tribal entities:

• Delaware Tribe of Indians
• Onondaga
• Cayuga Nation
• Oneida Nation
• Oneida Indian Nation
• Seneca Nation of Indians
• Tuscarora Nation
• Absentee-Shawnee Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma
• Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma
• Shawnee Tribe
• Tonawanda Band of Seneca
• Stockbridge-Munsee Community, Wisconsin
• Delaware Nation, Oklahoma
• Seneca-Cayuga Nation

The letters explained the funding gap issues and the funding options being considered, and explained what a PEL Study entails. No formal input on the PEL Study was received from the Tribes.

Draft PEL Study Outreach

PennDOT released the Draft PEL Study for public comment on April 29, 2021 and accepted comments through June 1, 2021. During the comment period, PennDOT held a Virtual Public Meeting in an online, on-demand platform accessed via the project website. The Virtual Public Information Meeting was accessible to the public online, 24 hours per day, during the comment period. In addition to the virtual public information meeting website, the public was also invited to participate in a Telephone Town Hall event, where they could call in to learn more about the project, ask questions, and provide comments. The Telephone Town Hall was held on May 25, 2021, from 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM and allowed individuals, even those without internet access, to participate in the public meeting and comment period. Comments during this period were requested to be focused on the Draft PEL Study.

PEL Engagement Platform Study - Draft PEL Comment Period

• 275,359 Social Media Impressions (number of times the content was displayed, regardless of whether it was clicked on or not)
• 76 Social Media Posts
• 3,507 Social Media User Engagements (likes, reactions, comments, shares, retweets and link clicks)
• 3,004 Virtual Public Meeting Site Pageviews
• 309 Comments Received
• 6,167 Pathways Site Pageviews
• 174 Attendees at Legislator Meetings

Summary of PEL Study Comments

The following presents a summary of the predominant comments received during development of the PEL Study:

• Suggestions to raise additional funds. Many commenters had suggestions for alternative funding mechanisms to be explored. Many of these suggestions are addressed in this PEL Study (e.g., mileage-based fees, raising registration fees, raising sales taxes). A common theme was to make sure that all vehicles (e.g., electric vehicles, horse-drawn vehicles) are required to pay the fee, tax, or toll. Often this sentiment was based on fairness considerations—i.e., that all users should contribute; in other cases, it was a recognition that trends toward alternative-fueled vehicles should be accounted for.
• Opposition to tax increases. A large number of commenters recognize that Pennsylvania's gas tax is already among the highest in the country and feel the gas tax should not be raised. Others felt that no taxes or fees should be increased, but rather that increased efficiency of government and more efficient and less costly construction techniques should be explored first. Other commenters suggested significant agency-wide budget cuts in order to support highway and bridge rehabilitation and replacement projects.
• Fees should be short-term and committed to roads and bridges. Commenters suggested that increases enacted to make up for a budget shortfall should be temporary — i.e., just long enough to pay for the improvements they are funding; others had concerns that tolls would be used for items other than highways and bridges.
• Concerns about traffic congestion related to toll avoidance. Many commenters expressed concerns about the potential increase in traffic volumes on diversion routes as a result of drivers avoiding tolls.
• In favor of tolls. Some commenters were in favor of some form of tolling as means of having users of the facilities pay (in-state and out-of-state users) for improvements.
• Opposition to tolls. Many commenters wrote to express their opposition to more tolls in the Commonwealth.

Appendix D provides a detailed summary of the outreach efforts and comments received during the Draft PEL Study comment period from April 29 to June 1, 2021. Attachment 3 of the summary includes a numbered list of responses to the comments/questions received on the Draft PEL Study. A comment table lists each comment received and includes the response number(s) that correlate with the public response comment index.

Comments received after the Draft PEL Study public comment period deadline (June 1, 2021) are not included in the comment table in Appendix D; however, they were reviewed and it was determined that their themes are represented among the comments that were received during the official comment period and responded to in Appendix D.

NOTE: Appendix D is not available in the text-only version of the PEL study. Download the PDF version of the PEL study to view all appendices.

¹ A state of good repair means maintaining infrastructure assets to minimize asset life-cycle costs and potential safety risks while preventing adverse consequential impacts to service. With taxpayers' dollars in mind, one of PennDOT's goals is to make timely repairs to reduce the need for more extensive and expensive repairs later on. "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure," as the adage goes. See Section 4.1 for additional detail. Return to previous place in text.

² Data in the PEL is based on Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-2019 data, projections from Fiscal Year 2018-2019 data, and other published sources. Return to previous place in text.

³Projects as of February 2021.Return to previous place in text.

⁴ PennDOT, "Pennsylvania Transportation Funding." (PDF) The $9.9 billion annual budget is based off of PennDOT FY 2018-19 values. Return to previous place in text.

⁵ Annotation No. 5 does not appear in the text-only version of the PEL study as it references a graphic included only in the PDF.

⁶According to FHWA, Environmental Justice (EJ) means "identifying and addressing disproportionately high and adverse effects of the agency's programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations to achieve an equitable distribution of benefits and burdens." See more in Chapter 7. Return to previous place in text.

⁷Please see the PennDOT Accommodation Policy. Return to previous place in text.