Transportation Asset Management Webinar Series Webinar 15: Lessons Learned from Developing Transportation Asset Management Plans Sponsored by FHWA and AASHTO With support from the FHWA TAM ETG Please do not put your phone on hold. Please mute your phone. If you do not have a mute button on your phone, press *6 on your phone keypad. Press F5 to go to full screen mode, press Esc to go out of it Webinar 15 – April 8, 2015

FHWA-AASHTO Asset Management Webinar Series Sharing knowledge is a critical component of advancing asset management practice This is the fifteenth in a webinar series that has been running since 2012 Webinars are held every two months, on topics such as off- system assets, asset management financial plans, and more We welcome ideas for future webinar topics and presentations Submit your questions using the webinar’s Q&A feature Next webinar: TRANSPORTATION ASSET MANAGEMENT FINANCIAL PLANS: PART II– June 10, 2015 2:00 EST

Welcome FHWA is pleased to sponsor this webinar on lessons learned from developing transportation asset management plans, in cooperation with the AASHTO Sub-Committee on Asset Management and with support from the FHWA TAM Expert Task Group Today’s presentations address a topic that all state DOTs are following closely Under MAP-21, state DOTs will be required to develop and implement a risk-based transportation asset management plan FHWA is working to help support agencies in this process Three of our presenters today will discuss some of FHWA’s important work in this area: helping LADOTD, MnDOT, and NYSDOT to pilot the TAMP development process

Pilot TAMP Projects MAP-21 requires States to develop asset management plans that consider risks Includes requirements pertaining to the development process FHWA Office of Asset Management has supported three State DOTs in developing their first TAMPs Louisiana DOTD Minnesota DOT New York DOT Along with other states’ TAMPs, these serve as examples for agencies responsible for managing highway infrastructure assets at the state or local level All three TAMPs developed through the Pilot Project are posted to the the FHWA Asset Management website: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/asset/plans.cfm Colorado DOT’s TAMP is also available at this address

Webinar Overview Today’s presentation includes four perspectives on developing transportation asset management plans Together, we will explore the experiences of State DOTs that have been at the forefront in taking on these challenges Presentations will highlight important lessons learned Each presentation will focus on specific outcomes of an agency’s TAMP development journey We will also address some key success factors that may be applicable for those who are just beginning the process of TAMP development

Learning Objectives Building working knowledge of key concepts and definitions relevant to developing transportation asset management plans Understanding specific approaches that the Pilot agencies are taking to address these issues today Beginning to apply this knowledge in order to answer: How can TAMP development help agencies to improve coordination between the maintenance, preservation and the capital programs? What benefits can states expect from developing a TAMP that formalizes the process of managing physical assets for the long term? What are the key lessons-learned for agencies that are in the early stages of TAMP development? SHARE LESSONS LEARNED, IDEAS, KNOWLEDGE!!!

Webinar Agenda 2:00 Webinar introduction and overview Matt Hardy (AASHTO), Steve Gaj (FHWA), and Hyun-A Park (Spy Pond Partners, LLC) 2:15 Louisiana DOTD TAMP Mark Suarez (Louisiana DOTD) 2:30 Colorado DOT TAMP William Johnson (Colorado DOT) 2:45 Minnesota DOT TAMP Mark Nelson (Minnesota DOT) 3:00 New York State DOT TAMP Steve Wilcox (New York State DOT) 3:15 Q&A and wrap up

Louisiana DOTD Our Experiences Developing the MAP-21 TAMP FHWA / AASHTO TAM Webinar #15 Lessons Learned from Developing a Transportation Asset Management Plan April 8, 2015 Mark Suarez P.E.

Asset Management in US (ISTEA) 1991 - Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act Establishes National Highway System (NHS) (TEA-21) 1998 - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century Establishes FHWA Office of Asset Management (SAFETEA-LU) 2005 - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (MAP-21) 2012 - Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act Transportation Reauthorization Bills Concept of Asset Management being developed Busy dragging Asset Management behind us doing our regular job MAP-21 puts Asset Management in front Seems to be Human Nature to Resist Change 3 Ways To Create Real Change 1. Great Leadership - AustRoads 2. Mandate 3. Mandate with Penalties = The Hammer 4. MAP-21 = The Hammer

MAP-21 Deliverables MAP-21 Requires each State DOT to Develop A Risk-Based Transportation Asset Management Plan (TAMP) for the National Highway System TAMP – “An essential management tool that brings together all related business processes and stakeholders, internal and external, to achieve a common understanding and commitment to improve performance.” With respect to todays Topic NHS At a Minimum Additional Asset Discussion Here

MAP-21 Deliverables TAMP Due 18 Months After Notice of Proposed Rules FHWA-2013-0052 – Asset Management Plan Extended to May 29, 2015 FHWA-2013-0053 - National Performance Management Measures Extended to May 8, 2015 Final Rules Scheduled for October 2015 TAMP Due 18 Months After Comment period Both affect your efforts

TAMP Major Focus Points NHS Pavements & Bridges – Management Systems Needed Asset Management Objectives & Measures Performance Gap Identification Life Cycle Cost Analysis Risk Management Analysis A Financial Plan Investment Strategies

TAMP Management Focus Establish Organizational Support for TAMP Define the individuals responsible for management of the TAMP How it will be used throughout the Agency How it relates to other Agency documents Policies Procedures Agreements Redefine Business Culture Preservation vs. Worst 1st My Personal Belief – Preservation Real mandate of MAP-21

TAM Steering Committee Finance (Initial Executive Champion) Statewide Operations (Maintenance) Multimodal Planning Data Collection and Management Systems Multimodal Planning (Long-range) Districts IT Engineering Research Center Strategic Planning/QCIP Executive Level Committee Secretary of Transportation attended these meetings Deputy Under Secretary – Michael Bridges (retired) Deputy Secretary – Dr. Eric Kalivoda

Core Working Team Executive Champion Data Collection and Analysis (Co-Chair) Statewide Operations (Maintenance) (Co-Chair) Asset Management Engineer Outside Consultant (Dye Management) FHWA Pilot Consultant (Cambridge and AMEC) Deputy Under Secretary – Michael Bridges (retired) Deputy Secretary – Dr. Eric Kalivoda Full Time Person dedicated to Asset Management and TAMP

Support Structure

AM Objectives & Measures Identify all policies & procedures TAMP will affect TAMP is a New Policy Document Identify & Determine how existing plans (e.g., the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program, Statewide Transportation Plan, Strategic Plan, etc.) need to tie together in a comprehensive, coordinated asset management process TAMP Does Not Replace other Plans TAMP Must Influence Other Plans TAMP – Glue that ties it all together

TAMP Link to Other Plans Our diagram

AM Objectives & Measures Pavement Performance Measures IRI focus only (customer centric) Project Selection vs. Performance Measures Use All PMS Index Measures If 100% Based on Performance Measure would never select preservation treatments (i.e. chip seals) Implement Levels of Service (Maintenance) Executive Management - Customer only cares about feel of ride PMS vs Project Selection Disconnect Our Common Sense overcomes IRI focused Performance Measures Preservation vs Worst 1st

Asset Management Objectives & Measures Bridge Performance Measures Switched from % Deficient Bridges to % Structurally Deficient by Deck Area after Katrina/Rita 7887 Bridges on State System 118 Bridges w/ Deck Area > 175,000 sq. ft. 1.5% of the Total Number of Bridges 47% of the Total System Deck Area loss of the twin 5.5 mile long I-10 bridges over Lake Pontchartrain over 3.5 million square feet of deck area 2.3% of the total bridge deck area in the State “% Deficient Bridges” Only 2 bridges 0.03% or 3 hundredths of a percent of the total number of State bridges 188 brides - Did not know this prior to TAMP efforts Move to Performance Based Practical Design

Performance Gap Identification NCHRP 08-90A TAMP GAP Analysis Tool Maturity Level GAP Analysis 5 Level Maturity Range Initial, Awakening, Structured, Proficient & Best Practices Focus Areas Policy, Planning & Programming, Program Delivery, Information & Analysis, Life Cycle Management, Legislative Compliance Redefine to Maturity Level GAP Analysis to actually identify meaning Been running in this direction for a while Assumed “Proficient” in most area Dig deeper, understand new requirements better, Proved Not to be “Proficient”

Life Cycle Cost Analysis Maturity Level “Initial” Limited Implementation So Far Limited Expertise & Knowledge NCHRP 08-71 Guide for Estimating Life Expectancies of Highway Assets Six (6) “Life Expectancy Models” Four (4) “Deterioration Models” Other Research Confusing Very Slow to Adopt We are all Engineers Don’t deal well with “Fuzzy Variables” Customer cost Plenty of research that points out flaws in LCCA

Risk Management Analysis Maturity Level “Initial” Three (3) Risk Registers Agency Level Program Level Project Level NHI Course No. 134065 – Risk Management Thought we were “Proficient” Emergency Ops Section Staff Command Centers established long before Katrina Agency Level Procedures in Place for Emergency Ops Practice Operations every year Contra Flow in place before Katrina High Risk Bridges Identified With Respect to TAMP Requirements Risk Management completely redefined

Financial Plan & Investment Strategies Move to a Ten (10) Year Financial Plan Refresh Financial Plan Annually Implement Prediction Models (lifecycle cost) Focus on Preservation & Sustainability Modify Investment Strategies As Needed Provide Transparency to Stakeholders Budgetary GAP Analysis Targets Steady State Assumed Maturity Level “Proficient” Investment Strategies Developed over Time to Overcome Powerful Political Influence Ultimate Goal “Trade Off Analysis” Pavement, Bridge, Preservation, Maintenance & Safety project selection Local Feds required Steady State Analysis Very Enlightening 10 year plan appears to not be adequate for bridge funding analysis

Asset Management Data Necessary Data Inventory and Condition Risk Assessment Cost/Revenue Performance Measures (Targets) Management Systems (What-If Scenarios) Future Needs (Forecast Deterioration) Communication Tools (Dash Board) My Personal Expertise TAMP Requires Looking at the Data in New Ways i.e. No previous NHS budget partition or data Perfect Data – Paperless Office – World Peace

Asset Management Data Data Gathering Timeliness – data can’t be out of date Accuracy – is more critical than ever Quality Assurance / Quality Control – the quality of the data must be verifiable Location – most transportation data has a location component and it must be accurate Collection Cycles – must meet needs, too often is costly over collection Data Cost $$$ Collection, QA/QC, DB Storage, System to do Analysis, etc.

Asset Management Data Data Interoperability and Consistency Using Indexes for Disparate Data Comparison (i.e. roughness vs rutting indexes) Linking Data Systems – kill the data silos and eliminate inaccurate data redundancy GIS – ties data together and allows data viewing in a spatial way ESRI Roads & Highways – potential tool to tie all the data silos together and eliminate redundancy

Asset Management Data Needs Dealing with Data Deficiencies Missing Data – don’t always have all needed data, even when you plan to collect it Existing Data Errors – data that wasn’t critical may now be critical and must be accurate Duplicated Data in Various Silo Systems – need one data source to be truth, link from other systems to the primary data source Data Entry Errors – even with pick list IRI slow speeds on short section, traffic signals, stop signs, traffic volume Only maintain data of consequence i.e. road names in off system bridge database Enhanced NHS routes on Off System roads Different pavement lengths in different systems Very difficult to keep synchronized Mainframe Free form data entry Bad selection on pick list

Recommendations Start as Soon As Possible Borrow from Existing TAMPs Must Have Executive Leadership Support Recommend Full Time Person Develop a plan to implement the TAMP Start Working on Your Data Get Local Feds In the Mix Early & Often Gain Understanding of Risk Management NHI Course No. 134065 – Risk Management Don’t Dabble – Remember there are Penalties and Deadlines We thought we were in great position to do this, i.e. risk management Don’t get bogged down studying other TAMPs We tended to want to study each and rewrite our TAMP after Plan must have Assignments with Deadlines Local Feds had many valid comments More local knowledge details Responsible for Steady State Budget GAP Analysis

Questions? Mark Suarez, P.E. Asset Management Engineer Louisiana DOTD’s Pilot TAMP http://wwwsp.dotd.la.gov/Inside_LaDOTD/Divisions/Multimodal/Data_Collection/Pages/Asset-Management.aspx Mark Suarez, P.E. Asset Management Engineer Louisiana Department of Transportation & Development mark.suarez@la.gov (225) 379-1159

Risk-Based Asset Management Plan (RB-AMP) Lessons Learned from Developing a TAMP April 2015 William Johnson Asset Management Branch Manager

Gap Analysis Top 10 Asset Management Gaps Identified: Develop and Document the Budget Distribution, Project Selection and Project Tracking Process Integrate Risk Analysis into Planning and Programming Processes Develop Strategies to Manage Project and Program Delivery Risks Establish a Risk Framework to Evaluate Alternative Strategies Analyze Budget Tradeoffs Across Programs Improve Project Scoping and Optimization Incorporate Life-Cycle Analysis into Decision-Making Clarify the Role of Target-Setting Implement a Strategic Management Framework to Reflect on Progress Communicate the Benefits of TAM       = significant progress

Project Selection Process Gap 1

Risk Register Gaps 2 & 3

Corridor Approach to Risk Gaps 2 & 3

Risk Framework Gap 4 Proposed Framework

Cross-Asset Optimization and Trade-Off Analysis Gap 5 Performance Curves Courtesy of Deighton Associates Limited

Cross-Asset Optimization and Trade-Off Analysis Gap 5 Slider Tool Courtesy of Deighton Associates Limited

Project Scope Optimization Gaps 6 & 7 Project Scope Optimization Courtesy of Redd Engineering

Target-Setting Gap 8

Strategic Management Framework Gap 9

Communication TAM workshop Internal website YouTube TAM pamphlet Gap 10 TAM workshop Internal website TAM pamphlet YouTube

Contact Information William Johnson Asset Management Branch Manager Colorado Department of Transportation 303-512-4808 will.johnson@state.co.us

Minnesota Department of Transportation Review of Minnesota’s Draft Transportation Asset Management Plan in Light of Proposed Rules Mark Nelson Minnesota Department of Transportation April 8, 2015

Process Draft Transportation Asset Management Plan (TAMP) Pilot state Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP- 21) TAMP rulemaking Minnesota, along with Louisiana and New York worked were part of an FHWA pilot project to develop TAMPs for the remaining 47 states to use a guides. MAP-21 requires every state to develop a 10-year risk-based asset management plan that at a minimum includes pavements and bridges on the National Highway System. MnDOT’s TAMP includes all pavements/bridges on state system, deep stormwater tunnels, highway culverts, overhead sign structures, and high mast light tower structures. TAMP includes inventory and conditions and performance gap assessments, risk and life-cycle costs analyses, performance measures and targets, financial plan and investment strategies, and future enhancements Today I will look at some proposed rules from the perspective of a state that has completed a draft plan prior to their release. As a state, we’ve gained a lot through our participation in the Pilot. we are much more focused on advancing our asset management efforts largely because of our work on the asset management plan. To the extent that these proposed rules remain unchanged, however, we will be challenged in revising the draft plan.

MnDOT TAMP Scope Highway Assets Pavement ITS Fencing Bridge Pedestrian Ramps Weigh Stations Drainage Structures Lighting ADA Infrastructure Centerline Culverts High-Mast Light Tower Structures Modal Infrastructure Deep Stormwater Tunnels Transit Vehicles Land Guardrails Rest Areas Traffic Signals Sidewalks Signs Retaining Walls Overhead Sign Structures Tunnels Noise Barrier Pavement Markings MAP-21 requires that, at a minimum, state Transportation Asset Management Plans address pavement and bridges on the National Highway System. MnDOT expanded the scope in this initial effort to include bridges and pavements on the entire trunk highway system, as well as several other asset types: hydraulic structures (centerline culverts, deep stormwater tunnels), overhead sign structures, and high mast light tower poles. Our agency, along with many other state DOT’s, have been managing pavements and bridges as enterprise assets for some time, using a data driven and/or performance based approach. The TAMP is a way to further document these processes, while looking for ways to improve. We also want to treat other asset types such as drainage, signing, and signals with as much rigor as we do pavement and bridge, and the TAMP is an opportunity to advance this objective. Last, we have not systematically planned for operations and maintenance activities and budgets, as they relate to capital investments. We know that these two areas are intrinsically linked. The asset management plan is an opportunity look at investments throughout the life cycle of our assets, define our desired level of service, and better inform investment tradeoffs.

Notice for Proposed Rule Making: Asset Management Plans Section 515.009 Asset Management Plan Content Requirements, page 9241 “….if a State DOT elects to include such other assets, all of the analysis and plan content requirements proposed in this rulemaking would apply.” Having selected assets for which we have less understanding, we do not meet the standard as proposed. If this rule stands, we will have to reconsider whether to include these other assets.

Inventory, Condition & Replacement Value In developing our plan, we compiled an Asset Register, containing inventory, condition, and other information related to each of our TAMP which includes estimated replacement value. That is cost to reconstruct our system in current year dollars. This number gives an overall sense of system size and the relative size of different asset types. For example, although we haven’t assessed the replacement value of all ancillary assets, it appears that the value of the pavements and bridges together make up greater than 90% of the value of our system.

Notice for Proposed Rule Making: Asset Management Plans Section 515.007 Asset Management Plan Development Process, page 9240 “The FHWA proposes…including: an estimate of the value of the agency’s pavement and bridge assets and the needed investment to maintain the value of these assets.” Clearly as we’ve used the term value, it doesn’t work as a measure of needed investment. So we may have to make some changes. I’m not sure that performance based planning is really consistent with this approach either.

Performance Measures Performance Asset Type Measure Pavements Share of system with “Poor” ride quality in travel lane Bridges NHS bridges in Poor condition as a percent of total NHS bridge deck area Highway Culverts Share of culverts in Poor or Very Poor condition Deep Stormwater Tunnels Tunnels in Poor and Very Poor condition, measured as a percent of total tunnel length Overhead Sign Structures Share of Overhead Sign Structures in Poor or Very Poor condition High-Mast Light Tower Structures Share of High-Mast Light Tower Structures in Poor or Very Poor condition With performance based planning, we develop condition based measures.

Performance Targets Pavement System Current Condition 2023 Target (Desired) Interstate 2.4% Poor ≤ 2% Poor Non-Interstate NHS 4.3% Poor ≤ 4% Poor Non-NHS 7.5% Poor ≤ 10% Poor Then establish targets based on our policy objectives, assessment of risk, stakeholder input and other factors. Our 20 year State Highway Investment Plan includes performance targets for pavements and bridges, estimates investment needed to meet targets, and identify funding gap, if one exists. It seems that, if you have the data, investing to meet actual condition targets (an outcome measure) would be preferred to investing to offset depreciation (an output measure). Bridge System Current Condition 2023 Target (Desired) NHS 4.7% Poor ≤ 2% Poor Non-NHS 2.1% Poor ≤ 8% Poor 51

Notice for Proposed Rule Making: Asset Performance & Asset Management Plans Asset Performance (NPRM), Section 490.105, Page 327 “The State DOTs would establish 2- and 4- year targets for a 4-year performance period for the condition of infrastructure assets.” Section 515.007 Asset Management Plan Development Process, page 9240 “The FHWA proposes that the financial plan would be required to identify annual costs over a minimum period of 10 years.” It seems that the target periods should align with the financial plan. We maintain a four year STIP. Projects are pretty much set. What is referred to as Target in the rulemaking, we would call an “outcome”. For us, targets are set further out, and they are benchmarks from which MnDOT evaluates past present and future performance. We will be tracking and reporting conditions annually. This may be more an issue of semantics.

Notice for Proposed Rule Making: Asset Management Plans Section 515.009 Asset Management Plan Content Requirements, pages 9241, 3rd column & 9242, 1st column “In the proposed rule, the FHWA would require State DOTs to make their asset management plans available to the public, and encourages them to do so in a format that is easily accessible.” Make asset management plans availalable to the public.

Performance Gap, Financial Plan & Investment Strategies The table here summarizes planned 10-year capital investments to achieve pavement and bridge targets on the NHS, the amount MnDOT has committed to invest on non-NHS pavement, and investments needed to achieve highway culvert, deep stormwater tunnel, overhead sign structure, and high-mast light tower structure targets. The goal is to bring this information and incorporate results and direction into MnDOT’s State Highway Investment Plan.

Moving Forward TAMP Enhancements Future Capital Plan (MnSHIP) Enhance existing business processes Build on existing information, plan, & processes. TAMP Future Capital Plan (MnSHIP) Starting to incorporate lifecycle analysis Adding detailed information about “other roadside infrastructure” Moving forward MnDOT will continue to enhance current business processes, and will use TAMP information to influence the next State Highway Investment Plan and Highway System Operations Plan. Future Operations Plan (HSOP) Requirements for maintenance by asset type More strategic More data-driven 55

Thank You!

TAMP Lessons Learned and Evolving Challenges Steve Wilcox, Director, NYSDOT Transportation Maintenance Planning Bureau TAMP Lessons Learned and Evolving Challenges

Lesson One: It Should Tell Your Story – It’s a Narrative Not a Data Dump Infrastructure Responsibilities Infrastructure Conditions Funding Available to the Agency Funding Deconstructed to Show What’s Available to Address Infrastructure Assets How You’re Organized to Manage these Assets Your Treatment Strategy The Risks You Face Your Likely End Conditions and Management of Risk What You’re Going to Improve Next Iteration

Lesson Two: Transparency Is Good Internally – Requires Working Across Stovepipes and Documents Asset Management Practices for All DOT Employees Documents a Common Vision for Asset and Program Management Defines Common Decision Time Frames and Periods of Analysis Explains Rationale Behind Treatment Strategies Begins a Dialogue for Cross Organizational and Cross Asset Decisions: i.e. “Backlog”, “What Counts as a Preservation Action?” Externally – Creates a Basis for Dialogue with FHWA MPOs Elected Officials Stakeholders

Lesson Three: TAMP Provides a Comprehensive Planning Structure Provides Self Assessment tool to determine strengths, weaknesses and gaps Provides requirements for Asset Management Planning Adds Management of Risks Provides a Basis for Continuous Improvement

Lesson Four: TAMP Project Management Information is coming from many sources and needs coordination Needs a Project Manager and detailed Management Plan Create a Team with all necessary Subject Matter Experts Establish an Author and one voice Establish deadlines Double the time to write the TAMP once all necessary data and analysis is done Double the time you think is necessary for high level review

Lesson Five: External Coordination Most Important – stay closely coordinated with FHWA Realize this is new to your Area FHWA office and they may not have the expertise or understanding of intent that Washington does Stay closely coordinated with other NHS owners, for us the NYS Thruway Authority Consider how to involve MPOs

Lesson Six: Stick to the Basics Pavements and Bridges The NHS TAMP development is a lot of work – each asset class requires full TAMP analysis and reporting Unknown impact of NPRM and how TAMP will be used by others Can expand asset classes in subsequent TAMPs

Do external outreach between reporting periods Evolving Challenge One: Integrating TAMP Methodology into Program Planning and Updating TAMP should define improvement areas of your asset management and program planning processes Develop policy, governance, treatment strategies between reporting periods Do external outreach between reporting periods This is where having a core Asset Management organization is more advantageous than our governance structure

Evolving Challenge Two: Institutionalizing Risk Management Risk Management as it relates to the TAMP is still not clearly defined Risk Management is akin to the previous slide in that the work needs to be done prior to the next TAMP and the next program update Again, an Asset Management organization would be a benefit here to manage the work

Evolving Challenge Three: Defining Levels of Service Transparency is good, but we need a better way to communicate with the public about infrastructure and it’s impact on them in ways they care about Need to define the capacity and condition of key stakeholder use corridors rather than by functional class or NHS/non-NHS: Commuters Commercial Transportation Mass Transit Emergency Responders Pedestrians and Bicyclists Tourists

Evolving Challenge Four: The Very Hungry NHS Federal funding for NHPP far exceeds STP NPRM can tip the balance further States are not picking up the growing funding gap for non-NHS highways An Asset Management Plan that concerns itself primarily with the NHS may not paint the entire picture or demonstrate the increasing impact on lower volume roads and bridges

Evolving Challenge Five: NPRM There is a fundamental disconnect between Asset Management Planning and the National Performance Measures NPRM does not consider current conditions or the resources required to meet legislated performance levels where TAMP targets are set by what models say is possible with available resources NPRM will likely drive poor (worst first) management decisions to “meet the measure” and avoid penalties NPRM will drive minimal asset reporting in the TAMP to avoid the reporting requirements and penalties NPRM imposes

Thanks and Questions Steve.wilcox@dot.ny.gov

Questions? Submit your questions using the webinar’s Q&A feature

All webinars available online: tam-portal.com Webinar 16 Transportation Asset Management Financial Plans: Part II Wednesday, June 10, 2015 – 2:00 PM EST