Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points
Department Of Transportation/ New Jersey Turnpike Authority
1a. The FY 2016 Transportation Trust Fund Authority (TTFA) Financial Plan projected an outlay of $1.127 billion for transportation project costs, and a closing cash balance at the end of FY 2016 of $57.7 million. The Governor issued Executive Order No. 210 on June, 30 2016 which directed the immediate and orderly shutdown all non-emergency TTF projects, except for those federally funded, on the premise that the TTFA would exhaust all of its available funds in August 2016.
• Question: What was the actual cash balance of the TTFA on the date Executive Order No. 210 was issued? What amount of spending on transportation costs was likely to have occurred during July 2016 had Executive Order No. 210 not been issued? What amount did the TTFA expend for transportation project costs in FY 2016? If this amount fell short of the original projection, please explain the reasons for that shortfall.
Answer: As of June 30, 2016, the cash balance in the TTFA totaled $201 million. Prior to the shutdown, the TTFA’s monthly average cash expenses were approximately $90 million. In FY2016, the Authority’s gross transportation costs totaled $1,086.5 million, a figure which accounts for NJ Transit’s repayment of a TTF cash loan totaling $241.5 million.
1b. The TTFA FY 2016 Financial Plan also noted a FY 2015 closing net balance or “tail” of $1.94 billion, which represents authorized project costs that have not yet been realized as a cash expense. The TTFA’s FY 2017 Financial Plan updated that closing net balance or “tail” to $2.51 billion at the close of FY 2016.
• Question: Please provide an updated chart for appropriations through FY 2016 with the same information provided in response to OLS discussion point #7 on the FY 2017 Budget, as of April 1, 2017 (the chart was titled, “State Accounts with Unexpended and Uncommitted 480 Funds”).
Answer: Please see the attached chart.
2a. Subsequent to the issuance of Executive Order No. 210 the DOT commissioner issued a list of projects impacted by the shutdown, which included $775 million in DOT and local projects and $2.7 billion in NJ Transit projects. As part of the shutdown, the department informed localities that any refusal to adhere to the shutdown order could result in losing previously awarded local aid grants.
• Question: What is the estimated total cost to the DOT of the shutdown, including but not limited to affected project demobilization and reassembly costs? What is the total amount of claims filed by contractors on DOT projects for losses incurred due to the shutdown? Have any of these claims been resolved, and if so, with what result? When will the department resolve all remaining claims?
Answer: All contracts for both state and local aid projects were extended for up to 102 days (the length of the TTF shutdown). To date four claims have been submitted, 1 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
totaling $1.9 M. Three claims are in step 3 of NJDOT’s 4 step claims resolution process. The fourth claim was resolved through a change order.
• Question: Were any localities penalized as a result of their actions during the shutdown? If local projects were impacted by the shutdown, will the department provide any compensation to localities for their costs related to the shutdown? What is the total amount of claims filed by local governments, seeking compensation for losses incurred due to the shutdown? Please list each local government that has submitted a claim and the amount of the claim. Have any of these claims been resolved, and if so, with what result? When will the department resolve all remaining claims? If a claim is resolved to provide a local government additional funding, will those funds be in addition to or within the overall amount of local aid appropriated?
Answer: No localities were penalized as a result of their actions during the shutdown. No claims have been filed by local governments at this time. Two local governments have requested compensation for additional costs to shut down a project in an orderly manner in response to the shutdown order. NJDOT is also compensating local governments for costs necessary to accelerate project completion if the shutdown impacted the project completion date.
• Question: What is the internal process in place at the department when determining whether sufficient resources exist to advance a project? Are those decisions based on a level of State appropriation which may not necessarily correspond to the amount of funds actually available in the TTFA?
Answer: The TTF spending authorization included in the annual Appropriations Act, which is detailed by project or program, rationalizes the amount of work that may be advanced by NJDOT and NJ Transit. Funds are requisitioned as projects begin to develop and ultimately are obligated at the time of contract award. That programming function is separate and distinct from the Authority, however. Using primarily bond sales and pay-as-you-go appropriations, the TTFA generates the resources required to pay the cash need for these projects.
2b. On August 17, 2016 the Governor issued Executive Order No. 213, which directed the State Treasurer to transfer from any State department to the TTFA such amounts determined to be necessary by the OMB Director, in consultation with the Commissioner and the Executive Director, to support transportation projects determined to be absolutely essential for the protection of the health, safety, and welfare of the people of the State of New Jersey, or required to ensure the receipt of federal funding, according to the standards set forth in paragraph 4 of Executive Order No. 210.
• Question: Please identify any projects which received funding transfers under this directive, the amount transferred and the funding sources.
Answer: The Office of Management and Budget transferred a total of $71 million from the Emergency Services Fund (ESF) to enable the TTFA to pay cash expenses and support accrued expenses. The projects included a variety of emergent needs on the state highway system (e.g., repairs to ensure public safety), critical maintenance on NJ
2 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
Transit rolling stock, and capital program support. The ESF was subsequently repaid by the Authority after the program was reauthorized.
3. The TTFA issued $3.2 billion in 2016 Series A and Series B Federal Highway Reimbursement Revenue Notes, also known as Indirect GARVEEs, in October 2016. The notes mature in annual installments on June 15 in years 2019-2031; interest for the first two fiscal years will be paid from the proceeds of the notes (“capitalized interest account”). The proceeds of these notes can be used for State and federal construction projects. Federal aid the State receives in reimbursement for work completed on any federal projects is pledged to repayment of note principal and interest. Indirect GARVEEs do not under statute count against the limitation on TTFA program bonds, set by law at $12 billion for the period FY 2017-FY 2024. The Direct GARVEEs the TTFA issued in 2006 are linked to a specific project; federal aid will reimburse the State for both project and financing cost (i.e., interest on the notes). Indirect GARVEEs, while also providing cash for projects, are not project-specific, and federal aid will reimburse the State only for federal project expenditures, not for financing costs. Thus, when the State expends federal aid to repay both the principal and interest on Indirect GARVEEs, it will in effect be using State funds to pay for the construction of future federal projects. Or, seen another way, since federal aid is not adjusted upward to cover the interest on Indirect GARVEEs, State funds are the ultimate source to pay these costs, even though federal aid is the initial source of interest repayment.
• Question: What advantages did the TTFA and the State secure by choosing to issue Indirect GARVEEs rather than Transportation Program bonds or notes?
Answer: When the indirect GARVEE was issued in the fall of 2016, interest rate pricing was very attractive. In addition, since many of the larger investment funds had maximized their legal exposure to TTFA State Contract Debt, the indirect GARVEE presented a new opportunity that investors were eager to pursue. In total, the indirect GARVEE attracted over $13 billion in orders. It also broadened the investor pool, as evidenced by the fact that three of the top fifteen orders were from investors who did not previously hold TTFA bonds.
Both the average coupon (4.65%) and the true interest cost (3.96%) for the indirect GARVEE proved to be considerably lower than the comparable measures on recent TTFA debt (respectively, 5.02% and 4.87%, based on the Series 2015AA issuance.) In addition, the shorter term of the indirect GARVEES (i.e., 15 years) versus TTFA debt (i.e., 30 years) provided significant benefits in terms of interest rate spreads, as well as total debt service over the life of the bonds.
• Question: What is the total interest cost to maturity on the notes, excluding the amount of interest to be paid from the capitalized interest account? Can any of the notes be retired before maturity? If so, does the TTFA have any plans to retire any notes prior to maturity? What are the terms and conditions for doing so?
Answer: Aggregate debt service on the indirect GARVEE issuance, net of capitalized interest, is $4.4 billion. A total of $1.3 billion of the indirect GARVEEs were structured with a two-year par call and another $.8 billion were structured with a 10-year par call. Typically, the Department of Treasury takes the lead on determining whether to retire notes prior to maturity and advises the TTFA. If such action is taken in the future, the 3 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
primary conditions that would be considered are whether and when the bonds are callable and whether it is financially beneficial to do so.
• Question: What does the TTFA conclude is the impact of the Indirect GARVEEs on the closing net balance or “tail” of $2.51 billion at the close of FY 2016, noted in discussion point 1b. above?
Answer: The additional resources provided by the Indirect GARVEEs reduces the unfunded portion of TTF “tail”, defined as the difference between the inception-to-date spending authorization and the total resources provided to the Authority, to $1.26 billion as of the end of FY 2017.
• Question: Since Indirect GARVEEs do not count against the statutory limitation on TTFA program bonds, should it be concluded that the cost of interest on the notes reduces the amount of funds that otherwise would available from State appropriations for pay-as-you-go project funding for the eight years of the TTF reauthorization, and for debt service on TTFA program bonds issued pursuant to reauthorization? If not, please explain why this is not a sound conclusion.
Answer: That decision will presumably be incorporated into future Budget deliberations.
• Question: If it was advantageous to the TTFA and the State to issue GARVEEs in November of 2016, and in light of the facts that the issuance of GARVEEs is unrestrained by TTFA bonding limitations, and all interest costs in FY 2017 and FY 2018 would be funded from note proceeds, not State appropriations of either federal or State funds, why did the TTFA not elect to issue GARVEEs in July of 2016, which would have made a shutdown of TTFA projects unnecessary?
Answer: The issuance of indirect GARVEEs was a large, complicated transaction. The financing was not ready in July. Even if it had been possible to rush the transaction to market, the true interest cost likely would have suffered, as the TTFA reauthorization clarified the State’s long-term transportation funding strategy and thereby improved the market acceptance of the issuance.
4. Schedule 1 revenue from the New Jersey Turnpike Authority (turnpike authority or NJTA) and South Jersey Transportation Authority (Autonomous Transportation Authorities, Budget pg. C-6) is $24.5 million in FY 2018, the same as in FY 2017. Additional (Schedule 2) revenue from the NJTA is $204 million in FY 2018, the same as in FY 2017; this revenue is appropriated to NJ Transit for operating support. Information provided to the OLS on the FY 2018 Budget’s reliance on non-recurring resources includes $75 million of this revenue. In response to OLS discussion point 10 on the FY 2017 Budget, the department reported that the NJTA had one TTF-related funding agreement with the state in place for FY 2017 and beyond. That agreement obligates the NJTA to make annual payments of $22 million to the State for the development of State transportation projects, and expires when all obligations of the Transportation Trust Fund Authority are paid. Of this $22.0 million, $12.5 million supports the department’s Direct State Service appropriations. The department also noted the assumption that the NJTA would enter into a new State transportation project funding agreement in the total amount of $204.0 million, and further noted that over the five year 4 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
period FY 2017-2021, the New Jersey Turnpike Authority was expected to generate excess cash flow of $661.5 million.
• Question: What is the status of a new State transportation project funding agreement with the NJTP? If there is a more recent projection of excess NJTA cash flow, please provide that projection.
Answer: A new State Transportation Projects Funding Agreement was approved by NJTA’s Board in June 2016. It can be found by accessing page 7 of the June 2016 meeting minutes at the following link: http://www.state.nj.us/turnpike/commission- meetings.html.
When taking into account all required contractual payments to the State, the NJTA is projected to generate $391 million of excess cash flow for the period 2017 - 2021, of which $375 million is budgeted for the Authority’s General Reserve Fund spending, including funds for Emergency Weather Events and pay-go capital projects, leaving about $16 million in excess cash flow. The prior estimate of excess cash flow did not include payments under the current State Transportation Projects Funding Agreement as it was not in effect at that time.
5. The Delaware River Turnpike Bridge was closed from January 20 - March 9, 2017 as a result of a crack in a steel truss of the bridge that was noticed during an inspection. The bridge was described in the press as being co-owned by both Pennsylvania and New Jersey.
• Question: What caused the fracture in the bridge? Were there prior signs of deterioration or stress at the site of the fracture in previous inspections that would indicate the possibility that a fracture would occur?
Answer: The incident is still being investigated. The crack propagated from 2 misdrilled holes that were filled with weld material during fabrication of the steel member. This fracture was brittle, sudden and completely through the member. There were no signs of fatigue or any other indications that a fracture would occur.
• Question: How much did the repairs to the bridge cost? How are costs distributed between the two states’ turnpike authorities?
Answer: The costs to repair the bridge are still being finalized but currently are estimated at $15,000,000. The costs are distributed equally between the NJ Turnpike Authority and the Pennsylvania Turnpike Authority.
• Question: How much revenue was lost due to the bridge being closed for a roughly 50 day period, and by having traffic diverted off the turnpike?
Answer: The estimated revenue loss to the NJTA is $8,000,000.
• Question: Now that the bridge has been reopened, are there longer term construction projects that still need to be performed to completely restore the bridge, or has the work to this point been sufficient to fully repair the bridge? 5 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
Answer: The bridge has been restored to its original capacity. There are no load reductions, and there are no other long term projects that need to be undertaken. There was an ongoing painting project that was underway when the crack was discovered. That work was suspended during the shutdown but has resumed and will be completed in the first quarter of 2018.
6. P.L.2016, c.56 renewed the TTFA and the system of state transportation capital financing for FY 2017-2024. In the renewal, a new capital reserves account was created for appropriations of constitutionally dedicated revenues not needed for annual debt service on TTFA bonds. Under prior law, any amounts appropriated to the TTFA beyond what was necessary for the payment of debt service was to be used to pay directly for project costs (pay- as-you-go). Pursuant to language recommended in the FY 2018 Governor’s Budget, constitutionally dedicated revenues in excess of the amount required for debt service on TTFA bonds are first appropriated to the Transportation Trust Fund Subaccount for Capital Reserves (a General Fund account), and then appropriated along with the revenues and other funds of the TTFA to support the recommended FY 2018 $2 billion capital program.
• Question: Does the department and TTFA have a strategy and a multi-year plan for the expenditure of revenues appropriated to the Transportation Trust Fund Subaccount for Capital Reserves? Will funds appropriated to that subaccount in FY 2018 that are not reallocated for FY 2018 TTFA debt service costs or appropriated for FY 2018 capital program costs be retained in the General Fund subaccount or disbursed to the TTFA to be held in reserve?
Answer: As reflected on page C-14 of the FY 2018 Governor’s Budget Message, it is recommended that an appropriation totaling $1.3 billion, including $416.2 million in FY 2017 and $926.5 million in FY 2018, be deposited in the dedicated Subaccount for Capital Reserves. Funds appropriated to the Capital Reserve Fund will remain there pending implementation of a long-term strategy for the remaining years of the TTF reauthorization.
• Question: When amounts in the capital reserve account are used for pay-as-you- go support of TTF projects, how will that be reflected in the budget? Will there be a dedicated budget line and program class in the “other funds” section that specifically identify when amounts in the subaccount for capital reserves are expended directly on project costs?
Answer: It is premature to speculate on the technical budget structure that will be implemented to isolate future pay-as-you-go appropriations from the Subaccount for Capital Reserves.
7. In his budget address on February 28, 2017, the Governor urged the Legislature to approve a supplemental appropriation of $400 million for DOT and NJ Transit projects that could be fully expended within 100 days, to bring the FY 2017 capital program to $2 billion, consistent with the statutory provisions of P.L.2016, c.56. The Legislature approved this appropriation on March 23, 2017 and the Governor signed it into law on March 27, 2017 (Chapter 38, Laws of 2017). The law provides $260 million for DOT projects and $140 million for NJ Transit.
6 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
The TTFA FY 2017 Financial Plan adopted in October 2016 assumed a $2 billion capital program for FY 2017, and projected disbursements of $1.36 billion for State transportation costs. It is unclear whether, at the time the plan was adopted, the TTFA, the department, or NJ Transit were aware of the timing or the details of the supplemental appropriations law just enacted, or the Governor’s emphasis on 100-day projects.
• Question: Does the approval of Chapter 38, Laws of 2017 allow the TTFA FY 2017 Financial Plan target of disbursing $1.36 billion for State transportation costs to be exceeded, and if so by how much?
Answer: Based on the pattern of spending in FY2017 prior to the enactment of the $400 million TTF supplemental appropriation, the Authority was forecasted to expend a total of approximately $1 billion. It is anticipated that the final disbursement amount should approximate the $1.36b figure referenced in the FY2017 TTFA Financial Plan.
• Question: Please provide a list of the projects to be completed using the appropriation from the revenues of the TTFA of $260 million for the department. Please provide a breakdown of the locations where the $260 million is expected to be expended, by county and legislative district.
Answer: The requested project list is attached (“Supplemental Approp”).
8. The main portion of federal highway funding provided in the New Jersey Transportation Capital Plan comes from apportionment funding. Apportionment funding is provided to each state based on a formula that divides a fixed pool of federal funding among the states based on categories that include, but are not limited to, the number of miles of State roadway, traffic density, fuel sales, and population. Apportionment funding under the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act) is broken down into the following categories: National Highway Performance Program, Surface Transportation Block Grant Program, Highway Safety Improvement Program, Railway-Highway Crossings Program, Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ), Metropolitan Planning, and National Highway Freight Program. States are typically given the fiscal year in which the money is granted plus three additional fiscal years to obligate the money before it is subject to rescission by the federal government.
• Question: How much federal apportionment funding for NJ DOT projects from prior fiscal years has not yet been expended? For each federal fiscal year 2014-2017, please identify the amount of funds in each federal apportionment category that was appropriated in each year’s State capital program and the portion of that amount that has not yet been expended. Please provide a table similar to the one provided in response to OLS Discussion Point 2 on the FY 2017 Budget, and also identify the available apportionment balances by fiscal year.
Answer: NJDOT obligates all available funding to the limit allowed by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) annually.
To provide more context to this answer, it is important to explain how the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) program works as it does not operate in the same way as spending authority associated with the New Jersey Transportation Trust Fund funded programs and projects. 7 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
Definitions:
Apportionments: FHWA apportions contract authority (“apportionments”) under a number of federal programs each year to each state in its financial system. Unobligated apportionments may carry over from year to year and apportionment balances in the federal financial system may accrue. These balances are accounted for at the federal program level accounts and do not relate to specific New Jersey projects or programs. Under federal rules, States also have the ability to transfer apportionments from one federal program to another.
Obligation Limitation or Obligation Authority: FHWA annually sets an obligation ceiling for each state. This annual obligation limit is typically about 90% of the annual apportionment level. The obligation limit is set by FHWA based on projected federal revenues. When a project receives funding approval (authorization) from FHWA to begin incurring costs, the apportionment account is reduced as well as the annual obligation limit. New Jersey has always obligated federal funds to the obligation limit and in the last several years New Jersey has received additional obligation authority at the end of the year because of our ability to deliver additional work. Unused obligation authority from states that do not meet their obligation limit is redistributed by FHWA to states that are able to utilize the additional obligation authority. New Jersey has been able to take advantage of this opportunity.
Program Level or State Appropriation Level: NJDOT programs federal funds for NJDOT-related programs and projects annually in the Transportation Capital Program and Statewide Transportation Improvement Program using the annual federal apportionment level as a ceiling with the understanding that the obligation limit for the federal fiscal year will not permit obligation of funds for all projects in the program in the federal fiscal year. Programming funds to the annual apportionment level provides the state flexibility in delivering the program and obligating funds to the obligation limit. Spending authority for unobligated projects does not carry over as with New Jersey Transportation Trust Fund funded programs and projects. Under federal rules, unobligated programs and projects must be re-programmed in future years.
Having provided this context, below is a table that outlines the federal apportionment balances up to and including FFY2017. Again, as stated previously, NJDOT obligates federal funds to the limit allowed by FHWA annually. Apportioned funds always exceed the obligation limitation and apportionment balances will carry over from year to year. We expect the total below to be reduced to under $700 million by the end of Federal Fiscal Year 2017. New apportionments for Federal Fiscal Year 2018 are expected to add over another $1 billion to these accounts. This is typical for all states.
Sum of Available Major Federal Program Category Apportionments* ($ millions) STP - All Programs $541.16 National Highway Performance Program $522.33 Congestion Air Quality Program $217.56 Highway Safety Improvement Program $83.18 Transportation Alternative Program $63.48 Statewide Planning and Research $49.68
8 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
National Hwy Freight Program $26.97 Metropolitan Planning $15.24 Safe Routes To School Program $11.68 Railway-Highway Crossings $6.06 TOTAL APPORTIONED FUNDS** $1,558.56 * As of 10/1/16 **Total from FHWA FMIAW10A report and includes misc. apportionments not listed above.
• Question: For each federal fiscal year 2014-2017, please identify the amount of funds for NJ DOT projects in each federal apportionment category that was obligated in each State fiscal year and any amount that has not yet been obligated. Please provide the information in a table similar to the one provided in Appendix A in response to OLS Discussion Point 2 on the FY 2017 Budget.
Answer: The attached table provides the amount of funds appropriated and the amount of funds obligated for each fiscal year from FY 14 through FY 17 by federal program (“NJDOT Appendix A Appropriated and Obligated FY 14-17”).
• Question: Please identify the federal funds, if any, that are at risk of rescission if these funds are not obligated in the upcoming State fiscal year.
Answer: No funds are currently at risk of rescission in the upcoming State fiscal year.
9. On March 16, 2017, the President of the United States released the “America First” preliminary budget proposal for federal FY 2018. The proposal includes many substantial changes to funding levels of federal agencies and programs. If enacted, many of the changes could affect the finances of and programs operated by the State of New Jersey. The Governor’s FY 2018 Budget Recommendation includes a total federal funds appropriation of approximately $1.62 billion to the Department of Transportation and NJ Transit.
• Question: Please identify each source of federal funding included in the Governor’s FY 2018 Budget Recommendation for the department that the department concludes would be reduced or increased by ten percent or more if the President of the United States’ preliminary budget proposal for federal FY 2018 were to be enacted, and the estimated amount of each increase or decrease.
Answer: The impact of federal funding changes cannot be calculated until a federal budget is enacted.
• Question: Please evaluate the impacts the changes identified in the above question would have on programs operated by the department absent funding adjustments from other sources. How would the citizens served by these programs be affected? To what extent would the department’s monitoring, regulatory, and administrative activities, including as measured by performance metrics, be affected? What would be the impact on the department’s workforce?
9 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
Answer: The impact of federal funding changes cannot be calculated until a federal budget is enacted.
10. The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016 established a repurposing provision for federally earmarked transportation funds. The FHWA provided guidance in March 2016 which allows States to utilize earmark funds for new projects if the federal earmark funds are from 2005 or earlier, where less than 10% of the earmark funds had been obligated, or where a project had been completed and closed out but unexpended funds remained. This is a notable departure from prior federal law concerning earmark funds, which previously never expired, but were limited specifically to the earmark purpose. Documents on the FHWA website indicated that New Jersey had approximately $250 million in unobligated balances, some of which would be eligible for repurposing based on the above conditions.
• Question: Please identify each earmark project that was repurposed through this program. For each project, note the original earmark amount, the unobligated remaining amount, the location of the original project, and whether or not the project was completed. If the project was not completed, please provide an explanation of why the project was not able to be completed. Please also provide a list of the new projects that received repurposed funds. For those projects please note the location, cost, portion of the cost to be funded through repurposed funds, and expected completion date.
Answer: See attached Earmark Repurposing Report for a listing of earmarks that were repurposed and the projects that are making use of repurposed funds (“RP Transfer Log- Earmark Repurposing Report”). As projects move forward they will be added to the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program with total cost information and the portion of funding attributed to repurposed earmark funds.
Where earmark funds were removed monies may not have been drawn down for numerous reasons such as full project funding was not secured, local support may have been lost, changing leadership may have impacted priorities, or significant environmental, right-of-way, or other hurdles may have hampered project delivery.
• Question: If any projects involved in the repurposing were local projects, please note those projects and their location, whether they were earmark projects or new projects to be completed with the repurposed funds.
Answer: The majority of projects on the list are on the local system. NJDOT worked with the three metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) on the reallocation of these earmarks. The three MPOs took the lead on this effort working with their respective counties and municipalities.
11. N.J.S.A.27:1B-21 set a limit of 13% for fiscal years 2007 through 2016 on TTFA funds used for salary and overhead, and sets that limit at $208 million per year for FY 2017 and beyond. However, language in both the FY 2017 appropriations law and the FY 2018 Governor’s Budget provides that “limitations on salary and overhead costs shall not be subject to any percentage limitation.” 10 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
• Question: What justifies the removal of any ceiling on use of capital program appropriations for salary and overhead?
Answer: Beginning with the FY 2010 Appropriations Act, budget language exempted force account construction work at NJDOT and NJ Transit from the 13% statutory cap on salaries and overhead. Force account work refers to capital-eligible tasks performed by in-house staff. Some examples include the replacement of major components of highway traffic signals, rehabilitation of drainage culverts, and reconstruction of track on the State’s rail system. The original intent of the salary and overhead cap was to limit charges for program support (i.e., “soft costs”), not to constrain capital-eligible functions.
Does the absence of a ceiling risk excessive spending of borrowed funds for current expenses?
Answer: No. As noted above, force account work is capital in nature and should not be characterized as “current expenses”. The new TTF statute replaced the former 13% statutory cap with a fixed dollar amount of $208M (based on a TTF program size of $1.6B). Nonetheless, NJDOT and NJ Transit have consistently restrained spending far below the salary and overhead cap in recent years. This approach is expected to continue in FY 2018.
Please provide the amount expended in FY 2016 and an estimate of FY 2017 and FY 2018 expenditures from capital program appropriations for DOT salary and overhead.
Answer: TTF Capital Program amounts for the Program Implementation line item are $95M for FY 16, $98 M for FY 17, and $102 M planned for FY 18. The amount programmed is based on projected salary charges for the fiscal year for the TTF portion of the capital program. The amount expended is determined by actual timesheet charges and non-salary expenditures. In FY 2016, NJDOT expended $ 88.3 M for salary and overhead. NJDOT’s estimated FY 2017 expenditure for salary and overhead will be less than the $88.3 M expended in FY 2016 due to the impact of the TTF shutdown. In any year in which such charges are less than the amount programmed, those funds are redirected to other critical TTF projects.
Please identify all line items which include funding for salary and overhead and the portion of the line item attributable to salary and overhead.
Answer: All salary and overhead costs associated with the $208 M cap are shown in a single TTF line item labeled “Program Implementation Costs”. For FY 2017, of the $98M programmed, $91.3M is budgeted for salaries and $6.7M is budgeted for overhead (i.e., non-salary) costs. For FY 2018, of the $102M programmed, $95.3M is budged for salaries and $6.7M is budgeted for overhead/non-salary. The drawdown of funds for salary is based on employee timesheet charges to TTF capital projects and programs.
11 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
Employee salary for Force Account work is drawn from four TTF Capital Program line items based on timesheet charges for eligible work. These line items and the maximum amounts allocated for salary for FY 2016 and FY 2017 are as follow: Drainage Rehabilitation and Maintenance $1.8 M Electrical Facilities (repair, replacement, installation) $3.2 M Traffic Signal Replacement $2.8 M Betterments, Roadway Preservation $.2 M
• Question: How does the DOT define salary and overhead? Is overhead calculated in a manner that covers indirect as well as direct costs?
Answer: Salary represents direct charges to capital projects by engineers and capital support staff, each of whom maintains a detailed log of time spent on various projects. Overhead represents non-salary costs required to implement the Department’s Capital Program. Some examples include computer equipment and network charges, lab equipment, and system development work, including creation of a new project management system (PMRS) that will provide detailed information on project status. The Department’s indirect cost rate, approved annually by the Federal Highway Administration, is applied to salary charges to capital projects.
How frequently in the past has the DOT charged salary and overhead to a capital program appropriation for a project that never advanced?
Answer: This last occurred in 2006-2007. While some projects are temporarily shelved after completion of a preliminary phase of work, these projects are eventually added to the project pipeline and completed at a later date.
12. A number of new programs and policies were established pursuant to P.L.2016, c.56. These programs include but are not limited to: an expansion of the local aid program; a local freight impact fund; the creation of a website to track TTF projects; the conversion of the financial policy review board into a transportation policy review board with new policy research and reporting requirements; the establishment of a transportation capital program approval committee; the adoption of federal DBE standards for state projects; the creation of a $25 million set aside for freight rail in the capital program; the provision of a means of capitalizing a new State transportation infrastructure bank; the enactment of a new state transportation infrastructure bank upon capitalization; and the requirement that bond premiums be counted against the TTF statutory bond limit.
• Question: Please provide an update on the Transportation Policy Review Board. Have the current members of the former Financial Policy Review Board met since the adoption of P.L.2016, c.56? Has the department determined a budget amount that this board will require to execute the tasks established in legislation?
Answer: The Board does not presently have sufficient members to form a quorum and has not formally met since the adoption of P.L. 2016, c.56.
• Question: What steps has the department taken to implement the required website to track TTF projects? What is the expected fixed cost to launch such a website, and what are the expected ongoing annual costs of maintaining the website? 12 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
Answer: NJDOT is presently developing a new project management system (PMRS) which is expected to produce much of the financial and project status information envisioned in the TTF reauthorization bill. The first elements of the PMRS system are expected to be operational midway through calendar 2017. Once the basic system is in place, the Department will arrange to develop the reports required by the TTF legislation. In the interim, the same project status information is available upon request.
NJDOT previously created another central website in response to P.L. 2013, c. 252. (See http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/capital/tcplaw/). That site lists comprehensive information regarding the State’s annual transportation capital program, including federal reimbursements, TTF and General Fund resources, long range planning documents (e.g., Five Year Capital Plan), and financial information on various transportation authorities such as NJ Transit, the NJ Turnpike Authority, and the South Jersey Transportation Authority.
13. The FY 2018 Governor’s Budget projects a $40 million supplemental appropriation for snow removal in the FY 2017 adjusted appropriation. Since the release of the budget proposal, there was a major snow event on March 14, 2017.
• Question: Is $40 million in FY 2017 supplemental appropriation still an adequate amount to cover FY 2017 snow removal costs?
Answer: The $40 million supplemental appropriation amount was estimated as of February 2017, prior to the March 14th-15th storm. An updated amount will be available at the end of the snow season.
• Question: Please provide updated information about the average snow removal costs per lane mile for the DOT, NJTA, and SJTA in the same manner as the response to OLS discussion point 12 on the FY 2017 Budget.
Average Snow Removal Cost Per Lane Mile Lane Miles 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 Average NJDOT 13,341 $4,517 $4,417 $9,233 $9,739 $4,653 $1,524 $5,681 NJTA 3,636 $6,447 $6,961 $11,718 $12,081 $6,796 $2,346 $7,725 SJTA 551 $2,175 $2,899 $4,367 $5,111 $3,139 $1,355 $3,174 # of Winter Events as Tracked by DOT 3227435036 13 13 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
NJDOT & SJTA 2017 ‐ as of 3/30/17 NJTA 2017 ‐ as of 3/31/17
• Question: Please provide for FY 2012-2017, the annual cost per contract hour, annual snowfall total, and a summary of how many contract hours were paid to operators that were on the road and hours paid to contractors to be on call but who did not actually plow highways for NJ DOT, NJTA, or SJTA.
NJDOT Winter Storm Contractor Costs Contractor Contractor Avg. Hourly Number of Year Cost Rate Hours 2017 $28,261,779 $191.00 147,967 2016 $27,754,647 $191.00 145,312 2015 $68,599,530 $172.15 398,487 2014 $73,750,355 $172.15 428,408 2013 $28,151,000 $172.15 163,526 2012 n/a n/a n/a
Answer: The NJDOT does not maintain reports that differentiate between contractor payments made for time on standby versus time plowing. The NJDOT’s protocol for deploying contractors is weather based. Spreading contractors are mobilized to augment crews as needed, or when a snow event is forecast to be 2” or less. Spreading contractors are paid by the hours they are utilized. Plowing contractors are called when an event is forecast to be over 2”. Plowing contractors are paid a standby rate of $70 per hour for up to 2 hours when called out for an event.
NJTA Winter Storm Contract Costs
Contractor Contractor Number of Year Cost Hourly Rate Hours
33,849 CY 2017 $11,001,000 $325.00 CY 2016 $10,812,400 $325.00 33,269 CY 2015 $20,463,400 $313.00 65,378 CY 2014 $20,727,800 $313.00 66,223
CY 2013 $7,172,600 $313.00 22,916
CY 2012 $488,000 $313.00 1,559
For the NJTA the activation level is determined by the weather forecast. Contractors are placed on standby when the rate of precipitation, amount already on the ground, ability of NJTA assets 14 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
to manage current conditions, or the predicted snowfall is yet to come or has ended. Spreaders are active sooner in the event as salt is applied in the earliest accumulations of snowfall, icing, etc. and at reduced levels behind plow teams. Depending on the type of precipitation forecast, the activation may be limited to spreaders only to supplement NJTA resources and maintain safe travel conditions. Plow teams and loaders are activated when an accumulating snow is forecast. The average standby rate is $230 per hour.
SJTA Winter Storm Contractor Costs Contractor Contractor Hourly Number of Year Cost Rate* Hours CY 2017 $253,633 $225.00 1,127 CY 2016 $201,120 $225.00 894 CY 2015 $248,145 $225.00 1,103 CY 2014 $365,512 $217.00 1,684 2017 – as of 3/30/17 *Rates paid to contractors vary depending on equipment required. Above rates are average rates.
SJTA calls out snow contractor services when a snow storm event is predicted. Billing is based on actual hours worked and equipment used.
14. Among its total capital assets, the State has considerable land holdings, valued by the FY 2016 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report at about $5.22 billion (Land and Easements, pg. 26). Land and easements may be held for future use, restricted as to future uses, or not needed for public purposes and available for sale, lease or other disposition. Knowledge about the extent, location, condition and intended use of these properties and property rights does not appear to be readily available. There could be potentially beneficial uses of some properties, other than those intended by the state agency in control of the properties, depending on the size, location and condition of those properties.
• Question: Please list each property under ownership or control of the department comprising unimproved or vacant land 1 acre or more in size, excluding land comprising all or part of a State park, recreation or wildlife management area, identifying each property by county and municipal location, street address, tax map block and lot number and, if available, Global Positioning System coordinates. Please provide the size of the property, its current use, intended future use within the next five years, and any known or suspected environmental contamination that would impede its future use. Please also describe any deed restrictions affecting current and future use. What are the department’s policies and procedures for determining future uses of its land holdings that further the department’s mission, and for allowing beneficial uses of its land in ways that are outside the department’s traditional mission?
Answer: Excess land held by the Department typically consists of odd shaped strips, landlocked parcels and uneconomic remnants. These parcels are usually non buildable and usually of value only to an adjoining property owner when 15 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
they are redeveloping their site. Excess land transactions must comply with Federal and State regulations, including review for internal use, obtaining fair market value unless other value is permitted and the need to obtain State House Commission approval whenever applicable.
When the Department receives a request to purchase excess land from the public, the Department reviews the parcel for future project needs, including storm water management requirements, open space mitigation, riparian mitigation, future road surfaces etc. If the Department has no anticipated use for the requested land, the local municipality and county are then offered the opportunity to purchase the land for public use, with a reverter clause if the use changes. If they decline their right of first refusal, then NJDEP or NJ Transit are offered an opportunity to purchase larger parcels near a park, or passenger rail. After these reviews, the property can be offered for outright sale, or lease in accordance with statute. When the NJ Turnpike Authority or NJ Transit request land, the Department has agreements with them to convey land at no charge for road/railroad use.
Funds received for the sale of parcels that were originally purchased with federal funds must be used in compliance with Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations for Highways, §710.409 which discusses the disposal of excess real property. Funds received for the sale of parcels originally purchased with NJ Transportation Trust (NJTTF) funds must be returned to the NJTTF.
Transactions are submitted to the State House Commission, except for transfers to a local government with a reverter clause for a public use other than redevelopment, public transportation use and lands which are exchanged to offset damages caused on a current project.
The report titled “An Inventory of Properties Owned by the New Jersey Department of Transportation for Transportation Projects Not Under Construction” can be found at http://www.nj.gov/transportation/publicat/lmreports.
15. The department is required by statute to provide a variety of reports to the Legislature, but not all are received by the deadline. The required reports include but are not limited to: 1) Bi-annual report on capital projects (N.J.S.A.27:1B-17) 2) Annual pavement report (N.J.S.A.27:1B-21.24) 3) Disadvantaged business enterprise contracting report (N.J.S.A.27:1B-24) 4) Annual report on TTF salary and overhead (N.J.S.A.27:1B-21(h)) 5) Transportation Master Plan (N.J.S.A.27:1B-22) 6) Statewide Capital Investment Strategy (N.J.S.A.27:1B-22) The OLS Library, which maintains a record of all reports received by the Legislature and forwarded to OLS, does not include the following reports as received: Bi-annual report on capital projects, disadvantaged business enterprise contracting report, annual report on TTF salary and overhead, and transportation master plan. The most recent annual pavement report
16 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
received is for FY 2014, and the most recent Statewide Capital Investment Strategy was received in 2012 and was for FY2013-2022.
• Question: Please provide a copy of the six reports referenced above. If the report has been completed and published on the NJ DOT website, please identify where on the website each report is located.
Answers: 1) Bi-annual report on capital projects (N.J.S.A.27:1B-17). There are numerous capital projects, including local projects funded by the Transportation Trust Fund. The ability to produce a reliable report on a frequent basis is something that NJDOT is working toward as part of the development of a new Project Management Reporting System. This system is expected to encompass the bulk of NJDOT and local projects. In the meantime, NJDOT will provide information on projects as requested.
2) Annual pavement report (N.J.S.A.27:1B-21.24). The most recent report can be found at http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/publicat/lmreports/.
3) Disadvantaged business enterprise contracting report (N.J.S.A.27:1B-24). This report is newly required in the 2016 TTFA Reauthorization. Attached are two reports that address compliance with 27:1B-24 (“Biannual Report Dec 1 2016,” and “SBE Monthly Report FY 16 June”). The first attachment is the most recent Biannual Report submitted to the USDOT which shows 13.09% attainment for DBE subcontract commitments (Federally funded projects only). The second attachment is the most recent report showing the % of SBE commitments attained by the end of 2016 state fiscal year (the last full fiscal year). This report shows an SBE commitment attainment of 25.77%. The current federally established triennial goal (established on 10/1/16 for 3 years) is 12.44%. The attached reports show that both our federal (DBE commitments =13.09%) and state (SBE commitments = 25.77%) commitments attained exceed the federally established triennial goal of 12.44%.
Federal regulations prohibit NJDOT from collecting data on the location (addresses) of applicants or employees on federally funded projects (See Davis-Bacon Privacy and Reporting.pdf ) Therefore there are no reports required by USDOT that indicate where women or minority applicants or employees reside. NJDOT Civil Rights does not currently receive information regarding where women or minority applicants or employees on state funded contracts reside. According to the state regulation, this information is kept by the Division of Public Contracts Equal Employment Opportunity Compliance in the Department of the Treasury and should be located on their website.
4) Annual report on TTF salary and overhead (N.J.S.A.27:1B-21(h)). See attached letters issued in 2016 reporting on FY 2015 (“FY 15 Cap Ltr Sweeney/Prieto”).
5) Transportation Master Plan (N.J.S.A.27:1B-22). Long Range Plan 2030 is the Transportation Master Plan. It can be found at http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/works/njchoices/.
6) Statewide Capital Investment Strategy (N.J.S.A.27:1B-22). The latest version of the Statewide Capital Investment Strategy is the FY2013-2022 Statewide Capital 17 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
Investment Strategy. It can be found at http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/capital/cpd/ . A new FY2018-2027 Statewide Capital Investment Strategy is being completed.
New Jersey Transit
16. In his budget address on February 28, 2017, the Governor urged the Legislature to approve a supplemental appropriation of $400 million for DOT and NJ TRANSIT projects that could be fully expended within 100 days, to bring the FY 2017 capital program to $2 billion, consistent with the statutory provisions of P.L.2016, c.56. The Legislature approved this appropriation on March 23, 2017 and the Governor signed it into law on March 27, 2017 (Chapter 38, Laws of 2017). The law provides $140 million for NJ TRANSIT.
• Question: Please provide a list of the projects to be completed using the appropriation from the revenues of the TTFA of $140 million for NJ TRANSIT. Please provide a breakdown of the locations where the $140 million is expected to be expended, by county and legislative district.
Answer: This information is provided in the attached chart titled “FY17 Supplemental Appropriation Project List.”
17. Information provided to the OLS on the FY 2018 Budget’s reliance on non-recurring resources includes $45 million for “NJ TRANSIT-Federal Preventive Maintenance”. The OLS is uncertain of the current source of this funding, but its inclusion on the list of non-recurring resources in the FY 2018 Budget signifies that some future action, such as a General Fund appropriation, will be required to maintain this funding in FY 2019.
• Question: Please identify the specific source of this non-recurring resource and explain the reason that the amount specified will not be available after FY 2018.
Answer: This represents non-recurring grant funding from the Federal Transit Administration for preventive maintenance.
18. Subsequent to the issuance of Executive Order No. 210 the DOT commissioner issued a list of projects impacted by the shutdown, which included $775 million in DOT and local projects and $2.7 billion in NJ TRANSIT projects.
• Question: What is the estimated total cost to NJ TRANSIT of the shutdown, including but not limited to affected project demobilization and reassembly costs? What is the total amount of claims filed by contractors on NJ TRANSIT projects for losses incurred due to the shutdown? Have any of these claims been resolved, and if so, with what result? When will NJ TRANSIT resolve all remaining claims?
Answer: To date, NJ TRANSIT has received notice of ten claims, the value of which totaled approximately $3.8 million. Two claims were rejected. One was resolved through a change order modifying the delivery schedule and payment terms. One was settled for a 18 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
payment of $124,810.92, representing documented shutdown and re-mobilization costs. The rest of the claims were abandoned or remain unresolved.
19. Other Reimbursements, one of NJ TRANSIT’s income sources (Budget pg. D-363) are projected to increase from $831.8 million in FY 2017 to $947.8 million in FY 2018, down from a FY 2017 adjusted amount of $831.8 million. The footnote to this line item states that “Other reimbursements include federal and Transportation Trust Fund reimbursement for transportation system improvements, preventive maintenance, and administrative costs in support of the Department’s capital program.”
• Question: Please itemize by source and amount the components of NJ TRANSIT’s income from Other Reimbursements for FY 2017 and FY 2018, specifically including revenue from the Clean Energy Fund, the NJTA, State and federal capital program sources, as well as other sources. Please identify the specific capital program line items that contribute to the State and federal capital program portions of Other Reimbursements. Are the sources that contribute to the increase capable of sustaining that increase beyond FY 2018?
Answer: The non-recurring $45 million resource is in Other State and Federal Reimbursements (from question 17) and represents prior year federal grant amounts.
The increase in the Federal Preventive Maintenance line of $47.3 million is recurring.
(In Millions) FY 2017 FY 2018 Federal Preventive Maintenance $391.3 $438.6 TTF - Bus/Rail Capital Maintenance 5.8 22.2 TTF - Building Capital Leases 4.4 0.0 NJ Turnpike Authority 204.0 204.0 Other State & Federal Reimbursements 142.0 198.7 Clean Energy Fund 82.1 82.1 Homeland Security 2.2 2.2
Total $831.8 $947.8
20. N.J.S.A.27:1B-21 set a limit of 13% for fiscal years 2007 through 2016 on TTFA funds used for salary and overhead, and sets that limit at $208 million per year for FY 2017 and beyond. However, language in both the FY 2017 appropriations law and the FY 2018 Governor’s Budget provides that “limitations on salary and overhead costs shall not be subject to any percentage limitation.”
• Question: What justifies the removal of any ceiling on use of capital program appropriations for salary and overhead? Does the absence of a ceiling risk excessive spending of borrowed funds for current expenses? Please provide the amount expended in FY 2016 and an estimate of FY 2017 and FY 2018 expenditures from capital program appropriations for NJ TRANSIT salary and overhead. Please identify all line items which include funding for salary and overhead and the portion of the line item attributable to salary and overhead. 19 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
Answer: In FY 2016 NJ TRANSIT expended $18.2 million in total labor, fringe and overhead for capital program implementation. NJ TRANSIT did not expend any funds on TTF capital maintenance.
The new TTF statute replaced the former 13% statutory cap with a fixed dollar amount of $208M (based on a TTF program size of $1.6B). Nonetheless, NJ Transit has consistently restrained spending far below the salary and overhead cap in recent years. This approach is expected to continue in FY 2018.
Question: How does NJ TRANSIT define salary and overhead? Is overhead calculated in a manner that covers indirect as well as direct costs? How frequently in the past has NJ TRANSIT charged salary and overhead to a capital program appropriation for a project that never advanced?
Answer: NJ TRANSIT defines salary costs as all eligible salaries for regular and overtime. Overhead is the eligible cost incurred for a common or joint purpose benefiting more than one cost objective. NJ TRANSIT establishes an indirect cost pool to summarize the indirect or administrative costs. An overhead rate is determined by dividing the total allowable indirect expense by direct labor. This overhead rate is then used to allocate indirect costs to capital projects.
NJ TRANSIT does not charge inactive projects. Projects charged salary and overhead must be demonstrably active and have deliverables in one of the following stages of development: planning, environmental review; design; construction; commissioning; operations; closeout; or, other relevant project milestones.
21a. NJ TRANSIT is dependent upon annual State and federal capital program appropriations for its operating and capital project needs. When the flow of either State or federal funds is inadequate to meet NJ TRANSIT’s cash needs it must resort to other means to maintain adequate cash flow.
According to NJ TRANSIT’s FY 2016 Consolidated Financial Statements, its FY 2015 current liabilities increased by 9.2% mainly as a result of an increase in funds advanced from the State for preventive maintenance, for which expenditures had not been incurred and which would be subsequently reimbursed by federal grants. An increase in Federal grant receivables contributed to a 12.7% increase in FY 2015 net assets. In FY 2016 federal grant receivables declined.
• Question: Please explain the reasons why in FY 2015 there was a delay in expenditure for preventive maintenance and the related reimbursement from federal funds which required an advance in State funding to NJ TRANSIT. To what extent was this advance recorded by NJ TRANSIT as non-operating income?
Answer: In FY 2015, although the receipt of federal grant funding was delayed, expenditures for preventive maintenance were not delayed.
21b. Per the FY 2016 Consolidated Financial Statements, in June 2015 NJ TRANSIT entered into a revolving line of credit agreement in the amount of $300 million. The line of credit is 20 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
secured by a federally taxable Grant Anticipation Note Series 2015, which evidence the loans received from the line of credit and were issued to that lender in anticipation of the receipt of certain Federal Transit Administration grants. NJ TRANSIT drew down $300 million during FY 2016, repaid $100 million by the close of that year and has since repaid another $150 million. The line of credit expires September 30, 2018. • Question: What amount of fees and interest did NJ TRANSIT pay with respect to the revolving line of credit in FY 2015 and FY 2016, and FY 2017 to date? Why are the Grant Anticipation Note Series 2015 federally taxable? Does this tax status signify that NJ TRANSIT is paying a higher rate of interest on its line of credit than if the notes were tax-exempt?
Answer: The amounts of fees were: FY 2015 = $55k FY 2016 = $1.74m FY 2017 to-date = $1.27m
The 2015 line of credit was issued on a taxable basis due to US Treasury regulations which generally prohibit the use of tax-exempt financing for short-term working capital/liquidity needs due to arbitrage concerns.
• Question: To the extent that NJ TRANSIT’s cash flow problems are related to the underfunding of the TTFA capital program for the years FY 2012-FY 2016 - most State revenues originally anticipated as pay-as-you-go funding were shifted to non-capital purposes, specifically NJ TRANSIT operating subsidies - why did NJ TRANSIT, and not the TTFA undertake short-term borrowing for cash flow purposes? Could TTFA borrowing of the same nature, i.e., a revolving line of credit secured by federal aid reimbursements, have been undertaken on a tax-exempt basis and at a lower interest rate?
Answer: NJ TRANSIT utilizes a cash flow facility to bridge short-term borrowing needs. This is unrelated to the TTFA funded capital program.
• Question: Is it appropriate to conclude that NJ TRANSIT’s line of credit/grant anticipation note issuance has the same impact on State finances as the TTFA 2016 GARVEE issuance, i.e., that federal aid for NJ TRANSIT projects will not adjust upward to cover interest costs, and thus will be funded from State sources?
Answer: All costs associated with the credit facility are funded from NJ TRANSIT‘s operating budget.
• Question: Now that $12 billion in additional bonding authority has been made available to the TTF, will the TTF go back to being the source of cash advances or cash flow lending for NJ TRANSIT?
Answer: It is anticipated that NJ TRANSIT will continue to access the cash flow facility.
22. The NJ TRANSIT 2016 Consolidated Financial Statements note that operating expenditures increased by 19.4% ($382 million) in 2016. Notable drivers of this increase were a $75.9 million (11.6%) hike in labor costs and a $235.4 million (53.6%) rise in fringe benefit
21 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
costs. During FY 2016 NJ TRANSIT settled the Bus Workers Amalgamated Transit Union labor contract.
• Question: To what extent does the increase in labor costs and fringe benefit costs, respectively, reflect one-time expenses, and what was the nature of these expenses? To what extent does the increase in labor costs represent a workforce full-time equivalent increase and an overtime cost increase, respectively?
Answer: The $75.9 million increase in labor costs includes $47 million of one-time expenses for retroactive salary payments as a result of union contract settlements. This includes $22 million of regular salary increases and $7 million of overtime, with the remainder funding increased fringe benefits costs.
• Question: Please explain the increase in fringe benefit costs. What portion of the increase is attributable to employer retirement system contributions and health benefits, respectively? Concerning the latter, what would FY 2016 costs have been absent any contract settlement during FY 2016?
Answer: Similar to the prior year, as a result of governmental accounting standard (GASB 68), NJ TRANSIT recorded the actuarially calculated pension liability in the FY 2016 financial statements.
For FY 2016, the retirement system contribution was $105 million and FY 2016 health benefit costs were $250 million.
23. The NJ TRANSIT 2016 Consolidated Financial Statements indicated declines in the value of NJ TRANSIT capital assets (net of depreciation) of about 4% annually in both FY 2014 and FY 2015. Capital assets consist of capital projects in progress, infrastructure, vehicles, stations and other buildings. The annual report also notes total FY 2016 capital contributions of $332.8 million.
• Question: Please discuss the changes in the value of capital assets net of depreciation. What level of annual capital expenditure is necessary to offset annual depreciation of assets? Why did the value of capital projects in process decline so precipitously in 2015 (-29.1%)?
Answer: The changes in the value of capital assets net of depreciation are contingent on the value and timing of recordable activities for a given fiscal year. Once a project is completed and the assets are placed in service, related capitalizable costs are transferred from a capital project in process which is not depreciated, to an appropriate capital asset account which is depreciated from the date the asset is placed in service. In FY 2015 and FY 2016, a total of $755.7 million ($472.2 million and $283.5 million respectively) of capital projects were completed and recorded to capital asset accounts. This caused depreciation to outpace the overall increase in assets and in turn decrease the value of capital assets net of depreciation.
• Question: For any revenue vehicles removed from the fleet in each of the last three years due to either sale, retirement, or damage, how much value of those assets had yet to be
22 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
depreciated? For any revenue vehicles sold, was the sales price greater or the capital value net of depreciation?
Answer: Bus Rail Car Locomotive Net Sale Loss Book Value Proceeds FY 2014 3 0 0 $226,768 $5,451 $221,317 FY 2015 0 4 0 $581,061 $143,280 $437,781 FY 2016 3 2 * 4 $3,928,659 $3,498,593 $430,066 * Donated
• Question: Given that the net amount of State and federal capital appropriations for FY 2016 was nearly $1.4 billion (State and federal capital program budget appropriations to NJ TRANSIT of over $2 billion, less capital funds eligible for operating purposes of about $600 million, based on responses to an FY 2017 OLS discussion point), why is the capital contributions level reported in the annual report so low?
Answer: NJT TRANSIT’s FY 2016 $2.0 billion capital appropriation funds projects that generate assets such as purchasing rolling stock, as well as projects that do not generate an asset such as repairing facilities and equipment. All funds by the end of the fiscal year are recorded on NJ TRANSIT’s financials based on these project types. The mix of asset producing projects vs. non-asset producing projects will significantly impact annual capital contributions levels.
24. NJ TRANSIT projects a modest decrease in average daily system-wide ridership of 4,700 (-1.0%), and revised ridership estimates for FY 2017 are 3,625 lower than in FY 2016 (Budget pg. D-363). This has led to declining per-rider revenue/cost ratios, and declining revenue per mile of service despite the October 2015 fare increase of about 9%. Bus ridership in particular appears to have been significantly impacted with average daily bus ridership falling by 13,600 (-5%) between FY 2015 and FY 2018.
• Question: Please provide a list of ridership levels, farebox recovery ratios, and passenger growth rates for each bus route, rail line, and light rail line for FY 2013 through FY 2017 (projected full year).
Answer: See attached Excel file ‘System OLS Ridership FY13-17’
• Question: Please discuss the causes of declining ridership over the last two fiscal years, specifically with regard to bus ridership levels.
Answer: Recently the American Public Transit Association (APTA) issued their quarterly canvasing of ridership which found that of the ten largest US systems, nine of the top ten showed year-over-year declines of which only two had less declines (better results) than NJT.
While NJT ridership is off from last year, it mirrors trends seen industry-wide, in similarly sized systems, and in our geographic region. The common element affecting transit systems is cheap gasoline.
23 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
Regression analyses reveal a correspondence between the lagged timing of gasoline price changes and changes in NJ TRANSIT ridership. The analyses show a lag of up to 6 months between changes in gas prices and an impact on ridership, logical when considering consumer thought processes and the various steps necessary to shift from transit use to private auto.
25. The total level of State support for NJ TRANSIT is expected to remain flat in FY 2018 at $427 million. In addition, information provided by the Office of Management regarding non- recurring resources in the FY 2018 budget includes $75 million from the New Jersey Turnpike for maintenance and transit and $45.4 million in federal preventative maintenance funds, all or most of which are directed to NJ TRANSIT for operations.
Between recently renegotiated labor agreements and changes to the formula for NJ TRANSIT contributions for use of the Northeast Corridor, there are notable built-in fixed increases in NJ TRANSIT operating costs, unrelated to overall ridership levels. In FY 2018, NJ TRANSIT is projecting to increase budgeted positions by 599 positions, or 5.5%.
Over the last two years, NJ TRANSIT has realized consecutive years of decreased ridership. Projected FY 2018 farebox revenue of $1.014 billion (Budget pg. D-363) is less than 1% above FY 2016 levels, which reflect only three fiscal quarters of the October 2015 fare increase (in response to an OLS FY 2017 Budget discussion point, NJ TRANSIT estimated a revenue boost over the first fiscal quarter of the fare increase at about $17.8 million).
• Question: Since cost and farebox revenue trends indicate a negative impact on NJ TRANSIT as a business operation, please discuss how NJ TRANSIT expects to manage declining ridership, declining farebox revenue, and increasing fixed operating costs without an increased amount of State support. Given these trends in ridership how likely is it that NJ TRANSIT will meet its farebox revenue estimate for FY 2017 and FY 2018.
Answer: Regression analysis of ridership trends indicates FY 2017 will meet the revenue projected in the FY 2018 budget.
• Question: If bus and rail ridership are expected to decline in FY 2018, why is it necessary to increase the number of budgeted bus and rail operations staff?
Answer: The added headcount increase will allow NJT to comply with Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) audit recommendations, enhance safety and provide added oversight in areas such as:
Positive Train Control (PTC) which is a federal mandate, to monitor speed limits, traffic signals, switches and work zones. If any unsafe conditions are detected, the system will provide a warning and if corrective action is not taken, PTC will stop the train. Additional Senior Trainmasters to comply with FRA audit recommendations of increasing the level of supervision and to positively impact safety, reduce FRA violations and accidents and increase productivity at our larger and more complex rail yards. High Speed Track Gangs to comply with an FRA Safety Advisory for ballast defects and conditions. These positions will ensure that all NJT track ballast will be tamped on a three-year cycle to minimize defects. 24 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
Additional Infrastructure Engineering positions to audit vendors for scope of work compliance, standard operating procedures and rail operating procedures.
26. NJ TRANSIT ridership reports frequently cite the primary factors in ridership as gasoline prices and employment trends. Recent declines in ridership have occurred despite relatively consistent job growth. However, gasoline prices may be trending upward.
• Question: What is the estimated elasticity of ridership demand to gasoline prices, and employment respectively? How do these elasticities compare with ridership sensitivity to fare prices? What does that indicate about the usefulness of fare increases as a tool to increase revenue going forward?
Answer: NJ TRANSIT endeavors to update regression analyses and resulting elasticity figures as each month’s actual data becomes available. As such, elasticity is fluid and subject to frequent revision.
Over time we have found employment elasticities to exceed +1.000, which in practice would see percentage rider change exceeding percentage employment change. For example, +1.5% employment growth might correspond with +2.0% rider growth.
Gasoline price elasticities have been found to be extremely low, under +0.050, which in practice would see percentage rider change to be only a fraction of percentage gasoline price change. For example, a +$0.23 increase in $2.00 per gallon gas prices (or +11.5%) might correspond with only +0.4% rider growth. Ridership impacts have also been found to lag gasoline price changes by up to 6 months.
Fare level elasticities have been found to be less than -0.500, which in practice would see percentage rider change to be less than the percentage change in fares. For example, a +10% increase in fares might correspond with a -2% decline in riders. Ridership impacts have also been found to lag fare changes by up to 8 months.
Assuming a relevant range centered on the most recent fare change, NJ TRANSIT would expect to generate positive revenue from an increase in fares, even with an accompanying decline in the overall rider level. For example, a +10% increase in fares might yield a +7.8% net increase in fare revenue even with -2% fare elasticity diversion of riders.
It is critical to note that the various impacts to ridership are simultaneous and continuous. NJ TRANSIT has experienced fare increases where ridership continued to increase, as gains from other factors overwhelmed the rider declines generated by the fare change.
27. NJ TRANSIT origin and destination surveys provided to the Senate Legislative Oversight Committee and the Assembly Judiciary Committee estimated average household income at about $125,000 per year for riders on the Northeast Corridor, and about $100,000 per year for interstate bus riders to Manhattan. Median Household Income in New Jersey is $72,000 per year. While the relatively high income level of passengers to New York City relative to the State median largely reflects the availability of high-wage employment in New York City, that
25 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
destination, as well as others along the Northeast Corridor and other NJ TRANSIT routes, offer significant employment opportunities at lower wages.
Among the traditionally accepted public purposes of public transit is to provide affordable access to job centers that offer employment opportunities across a broad wage spectrum. Increasing the area in which a person can afford to travel for work can result in that person obtaining a higher paying job or allowing an unemployed person to obtain work. This supports economic growth, sustains tax revenues and decreases government costs for social safety net programs. However, NJ TRANSIT typically charges higher fares during peak commuting. Higher fares at peak commuting hours than at off-peak hours can serve both to boost fare income and ration limited capacity.
• Question: Are NJ TRANSIT’s fare policies consistent with the policies of other mass transit operators that serve large metropolitan areas? Has NJ TRANSIT considered or implemented any fare pricing programs that would provide fare discounts based on income specifically for work-based trips? Are there examples of such pricing policies among other mass transit operators?
Answer: To the extent a Statewide publicly operated mass transit system can be properly compared to smaller metropolitan systems, NJ TRANSIT believes its comparable pricing practices are in line with those of other large transit systems. These include a base urban fare which covers most travel in the system, with discounts offered for a monthly pass, child fare and senior fare.
There are very limited examples of income based fare pricing, and they are focused on small transit systems with extremely limited range and scope, such as Iowa City IA, Ann Arbor MI and Madison WI.
NJ TRANSIT does maintain a bulk ticket purchase program, through which organizations can purchase transit tickets at face value and distribute them to their populations at whatever resale price they deem appropriate, affordable and within their own budget constraints.
• Question: Has NJ TRANSIT performed any analysis that has estimated or tracked ridership that may have been priced out of NJ TRANSIT services, since the most recent fare increase?
Answer: As part of any fare increase NJ TRANSIT must perform a Title VI analysis to ensure that there is no disparate impact on customers.
Inflation adjusted fare levels are currently lower than they were at the time of the most recent October 2015 fare change, as well as the previous May 2010 fare change. To the extent that any riders were ‘priced out’ of transit service, they would be expected to be returning now as inflation has lessened the real fare level.
Regression analyses have consistently shown the primary measurable factor driving the recent moderation in rider levels has been the lagged impact of gasoline prices. Ridership drivers are dynamic, continuous and inter-related; a former rider may have left the system
26 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
because the alternative auto trip experienced a substantial drop in fuel prices, not necessarily because the fare level increased.
28. In addition to track miles and rights-of-way, NJ TRANSIT has a variety of buildings and structures, bus stops and parking areas from which it sometime must remove snow in order to facilitate the movement of passengers and employees.
• Question: What has NJ TRANSIT’s annual cost of snow removal been in each of the last four fiscal years?
Answer: Total snow storm costs are as follows:
FY 2017 (year to date March) - $9.3m FY 2016 - $8.4m FY 2015 - $14.7m FY 2014 - $16.8m FY 2013 - $8.7m
• Question: How much of the snow removal is performed in-house, and how much relies upon outside contractors? For the outside contractors, what is the average hourly rate paid?
Answer: NJ TRANSIT utilizes a mix of in-house and outside contractors for snow removal. As of fiscal year to date March 2017, NJ TRANSIT’s cost for snow removal by outside contractors totaled $1.4 million. In addition, in-house forces are utilized to remove snow from switches, interlockings, platforms, garages, yards and employee facilities owned and operated by NJ TRANSIT. Jet engine-powered snow blowers are used to remove snow from tracks and critical switching areas. In addition, all locomotives are equipped with snow plows to clear snow from the rails.
The average dollar per hour charged by outside contractor is based on the type of storm, snow accumulation, and size of the location, type of equipment used, and time worked to clear and remove the snow. As a result the average hourly rate varies for each storm and vendor.
• Question: In addition to rail stations and other property it wholly controls, what other areas does NJ TRANSIT clear of snow? What portion of sidewalks and road areas near bus stops, bus enclosures, bus stations, and parking lots are cleared of snow by NJ TRANSIT?
Answer: NJ TRANSIT contracts with a private vendor for snow removal at 9 locations: Vince Lombardi Park-Ride, Wayne Transit Center, Mother’s Park-Ride, North Bergen Park- Ride, Old Bridge Park-Ride, Howell Park-Ride, Lakewood Park-Ride, Wildwood Terminal, and the Weehawken bus parking lot.
All other bus stop locations are (and always have been) the responsibility of the local governing body or the adjacent private property owner.
27 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
• Question: Does NJ TRANSIT have any agreements with the State or local governments concerning snow removal along bus routes that provide preferential service to minimize delays?
Answer: NJ TRANSIT does not have any agreements with State or local governments for snow removal along bus routes.
29. The main portion of federal funding provided in the New Jersey Transportation Capital Plan comes from apportionment funding. Apportionment funding is provided to each state based on a formula that divides a fixed pool of federal funding among the states based on categories that include, but are not limited to, the number of miles of State roadway, traffic density, fuel sales, and population. Apportionment funding under the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act) is broken down into the following categories: National Highway Performance Program, Surface Transportation Block Grant Program, Highway Safety Improvement Program, Railway-Highway Crossings Program, Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ), Metropolitan Planning, and National Highway Freight Program. States are typically given the fiscal year in which the money is granted plus three additional fiscal years to obligate the money before it is subject to rescission by the federal government.
Typically NJ TRANSIT receives about $160 million in FHWA formula highway funds for preventative maintenance in addition to its own allocation of FTA funds identified within the FAST Act.
• Question: How much federal apportionment funding for NJ TRANSIT projects from prior fiscal years has not yet been expended? For each federal fiscal year from federal FY 2014 - 2017 please identify the amount of funds in each federal FTA and FHWA apportionment category that was appropriated in each year’s State capital program and any amount that has not yet been expended. Please provide a table similar to the one provided in response to OLS Discussion Point 2 on the FY 2017 Budget, and also identify the available apportionment balances by fiscal year.
The following table lists adjusted appropriations for FY 2014 - FY 2016 and the appropriation for FY 2017 as well as the amounts expended from FY 2014 through FY 2017:1
Funding FY 2014 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2017 Category Approp. Expended Approp. Expended Approp. Expended Approp. Expended Federal FHWA: $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $14.00 $50.00 $0.00 $75.00 $0.00 CMAQ FHWA: $176.50 $176.50 $168.40 $168.40 $176.50 $176.50 $89.50 $89.50 STP Statewide FTA: $282.30 $282.30 $279.20 $279.20 $283.90 $283.90 $165.60 $165.60 Section 5307
1 Section 5324 Emergency Relief funding is not a recurring source of funding and is not included in the table. 28 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
FTA: $7.20 $0.00 $7.20 $0.00 $7.20 $0.00 $7.20 $0.00 Section 5310 FTA: $4.20 $0.00 $4.20 $0.00 $4.20 $0.00 $4.20 $0.00 Section 5311 FTA: Section 5324 FTA: $157.40 $157.40 $157.30 $157.30 $156.40 $156.40 $104.90 $104.90 Section 5309/5337 FTA: $14.90 $14.90 $14.90 $0.00 $14.40 $0.00 $8.40 $0.00 Section 5339 Subtotal $692.50 $681.10 $681.20 $618.90 $692.60 $616.80 $454.80 $360.00 Federal Answer: The outstanding CMAQ funding is for the purchase of Multilevel Vehicles that are currently in design. The base bid for this project is $613.9 million. The section 5310 and 5311 funding is a competitive program NJ TRANSIT offers to the local municipalities and counties. The FFY 2014 funding year application package is currently being reviewed by FTA.
Lastly, the remaining FTA Section 5339 funding is for the replacements of the articulated buses which are also currently in design. This funding will be obligated once the procurement contracts are secured.
• Question: For each federal fiscal year from federal FY 2014-2017 please identify the amount of funds for NJ TRANSIT projects in each federal FTA and FHWA apportionment category that was obligated in each State fiscal year and any amount that has not yet been obligated. Please provide the information in a table similar to the one provided in Appendix A in response to OLS Discussion Point 2 on the FY 2017 Budget.
Answer: Please see answer above.
• Question: Please identify the federal funds, if any, that are at risk of rescission if these funds are not obligated in the upcoming State fiscal year.
Answer: NJ TRANSIT is not at risk of losing any federal funds at the end of FY 2017.
30. The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016 established a repurposing provision for federally earmarked transportation funds, which allows States to utilize earmark funds for new projects if the federal earmark funds are from 2005 or earlier, where less than 10% of the earmark funds had been obligated, or where a project had been completed and closed out but unexpended funds remained. This is a notable departure from prior federal law concerning earmark funds, which previously never expired, but were limited specifically to the earmark purpose. New Jersey may have approximately $250 million in unobligated balances, some of which would be eligible for repurposing based on the above conditions.
29 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
• Question: Please identify each earmark project that was repurposed by NJ TRANSIT through this program. For each project, note the original earmark amount, the unobligated remaining amount, the location of the original project, and whether or not the project was completed. If the project was not completed, please provide an explanation of why the project was not able to be completed. Please also provide a list of the new projects that received repurposed funds. For those projects please note the location, cost, portion of the cost to be funded through repurposed funds, and expected completion date.
Answer: NJ TRANSIT received two repurposed earmarks from NJDOT. The first repurposed funding from NJDOT in the amount of $8 million was for the Hudson Bergen Light Rail Route 440 Extension in Hudson County for design and preliminary engineering. Project is anticipated to be constructed by mid-2024.
Second repurposed funding from NJDOT in the amount of $7.391 million was for the Liberty Corridor New Brunswick Station Improvements. Project (elevator and escalator) is anticipated to be constructed by the end of 2019.
31. In the Governor’s FY 2017 budget, the FY 2016 adjusted appropriation for federally funded NJ TRANSIT public transportation projects (page H-7) was $1.6 billion. In the Governor’s FY 2018 budget, the FY 2016 amount expended for those projects (page H-7) was just $682.8 million, nearly $1 billion less than the adjusted appropriation. Further, while the adjusted appropriation for FY 2017 is $1.1 billion, the amount recommended for FY 2018 declines to $674 million.
• Question: What explains the difference between the FY 2016 adjusted appropriation federally funded NJ TRANSIT projects and the amount expended in FY 2016? What explains the decrease from the FY 2017 adjusted appropriation to the FY 2018 recommended amount? If the difference/decrease reflects a change in progress in expending federal funds awarded for Superstorm Sandy resiliency projects, please identify the amount for such projects included in the FY 2016 adjusted appropriation, FY 2016 expenditures, the FY 2017 adjusted appropriation and the FY 2018 recommendation.
Answer: The adjusted appropriation amount in FY 2016 and FY 2017 versus the expended amount difference is due to the award and appropriation of FTA Section 5324 Emergency Relief Funding that NJ TRANSIT identified for receipt in FY 2015. NJ TRANSIT is working to advance, quickly and responsibly, Emergency Relief projects – which include longer range, complex resilience projects requiring review under the National Environmental Policy Act.
The adjusted appropriation amount in FY 2016 and FY 2017 versus the expended amount difference is due to the award and appropriation of the Sandy Resilience Funding that NJ TRANSIT received in FY 2015.
30 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
Appropriated PROJECT NAME Unspent Spent SANDY - Long Slip Fill and Rail Enhancement $135M $5M SANDY - Raritan River Bridge Replacement $440M $8M SANDY - Delco Lead Storage and Inspection Facility $178M $8M SANDY - NJ TRANSITGRID $404M $7M SANDY - Signals and Communications Resilience $90M $1M
The appropriated “unspent” amount represents funding allocated by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to support the five listed resilience projects. As the projects develop and expenses are incurred, these appropriated unspent funds will be spent. Three of the five projects are currently moving through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review stage, which requires rigorous environmental impact documentation. Two of the five are currently in final engineering. The spent column represents costs incurred in connection with preliminary engineering and the NEPA review for all five projects, and final engineering costs to date for two of the projects.
32. On March 16, 2017, the President of the United States released the “America First” preliminary budget proposal for federal FY 2018. The proposal includes many substantial changes to funding levels of federal agencies and programs. If enacted, many of the changes could affect the finances of and programs operated by the State of New Jersey. The Governor’s FY 2018 Budget Recommendation includes a total federal funds appropriation of approximately $1.62 billion to the Department of Transportation and NJ TRANSIT.
• Question: Please identify each source of federal funding included in the Governor’s FY 2018 Budget Recommendation for NJ TRANSIT that the agency concludes would be reduced or increased by ten percent or more if the President of the United States’ preliminary budget proposal for federal FY 2018 were to be enacted, and the estimated amount of each increase or decrease.
Answer: The impact of federal funding changes cannot be calculated until a federal budget is enacted.
• Question: Please evaluate the impacts the changes identified in the above question would have on programs operated by the agency absent funding adjustments from other sources. How would the citizens served by these programs be affected? To what extent would the agency’s inspection, monitoring or administrative activities, including as measured by performance metrics, be affected? What would be the impact on the agency’s workforce?
Answer: The impact of federal funding changes cannot be calculated until a federal budget is enacted.
31 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
33. In November 2015, the Governors of New York and New Jersey came to an agreement with the federal government for funding of the Gateway program. Publicly released details of the agreement noted that the federal government and Amtrak will provide at least 50 percent of the funding for the project and in exchange for that minimum funding guarantee, New York and New Jersey will work to identify the remaining funding. The breakdown of funding responsibility between Amtrak and the federal government is not known, nor is the federal source of that funding, but it was expected that a notable portion of the federal share of the Gateway Program would be funded through the New Starts program. The breakdown of funding between New York and New Jersey is also unknown.
The Gateway program is actually a group of related projects. The biggest project is the Hudson Tunnel Project which involves the construction of a new tunnel with two new rail tracks under the Hudson River. Documents on the project website indicate an anticipated Record of Decision by spring 2018; construction could begin at that point, or about a year from now. It is not clear whether there is funding in place to begin that construction.
In addition, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey included $2.7 billion in funds in its 10 year capital program to support debt service payments on Gateway program-related borrowing through low-interest federal loans. The plan also assumed that the loans would be structured through the federal program so that debt service payments would commence post- completion. It is not clear whether the $2.7 billion is the total commitment from the port authority or whether it is the commitment through 2026, the term of the capital plan.
• Question: Since the Gateway program agreement with Amtrak and the federal government pre-dates the election of a new President and the appointment of a new Secretary of Transportation, does it represent a commitment that is binding on Amtrak and the current federal administration?
Answer: Consistent with a memorandum of understanding dated June 20, 2016, NJ TRANSIT continues to work collaboratively with the USDOT, Amtrak and the Port Authority of NY and NJ to advance the Gateway Program.
• Question: If the New Starts program is eliminated as proposed by the President in the “America First” preliminary budget proposal for federal FY 2018, then what source of federal funding could be relied upon to fulfill the federal share of the Gateway program?
Answer: The impact, if any, of potential federal funding changes cannot be evaluated until a federal budget is enacted.
• Question: Please provide additional details on the current financial commitment of the Port Authority for Gateway program debt service. What is the annual debt service funding commitment and the total commitment? How is that commitment distributed between the constituent projects of the Gateway program.
Answer: On February 16, 2017, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey unanimously approved a $32 billion Capital Plan at its Board meeting, which included $2.7 billion for debt service on the Gateway Program. The Capital Plan, which is publicly available, provides additional details on the current financial commitment of the Port Authority for Gateway program debt service. The Plan is available on the Port Authority’s 32 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
website at the following address: http://corpinfo.panynj.gov/documents/Capital-Plan-2017- 2026/
• Question: If the Hudson Tunnel project receives a favorable record of decision during the spring of 2018, what funding agreements, if any, need to be in place to begin construction? What is the current estimated cost for the Hudson Tunnel Project? How much funding specifically for the Hudson Tunnel Project has been identified and formally committed to the project at this point?
Answer: The requisite funding agreements for the Hudson Tunnel project cannot be determined until a federal budget is adopted and a source of federal funding is identified. A cost estimate is being developed for the Hudson Tunnel Project. Amtrak is funding the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) environmental process, which is being managed by NJ TRANSIT. Amtrak and the Port Authority have each agreed to each fund $35 million to develop the Preliminary Engineering in support of the NEPA program. The USDOT provided $235 million to AMTRAK for construction of a right of way preservation project in New York City that Amtrak is constructing. NJ TRANSIT and the Long Island Rail Road each contributed $5.5 million toward this project.
• Question: How much of the Hudson Tunnel project and the Gateway Program can be completed with the current funding arrangements already in place? At what point in time is the Hudson Tunnel project expected to reach the point where it has advanced as far as it can without either new funding sources or more formal contracts or agreements securing already identified funding commitments?
Answer: See the answer to the prior question. Funding is available for completion of the NEPA process for the Hudson Tunnel project and repairs of the existing tunnel. Another project within the Gateway Program is the replacement of the Portal Bridge. The USDOT awarded a $16 million Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (“TIGER”) Grant to NJ TRANSIT to commence early action construction activities. NJ TRANSIT is providing a local match of $4 million for the early action work.
Additional funding will be identified to undertake design work beyond the preliminary engineering and to construct the new tunnel. NJ TRANSIT, the PANYNJ and Amtrak are working together through the Gateway Program Development Corporation to identify and apply for additional funding to advance the program beyond the current activities.
Additional funding will be identified to undertake design work beyond the preliminary engineering and to construct the new tunnel. NJ TRANSIT, the PANYNJ and Amtrak are working together through the Gateway Program Development Corporation to identify and apply for additional funding to advance the program beyond the current activities.
34. In an April 7, 2017 article on NJ Spotlight, it was reported that Governor Christie plans to withhold the $2.5 million monthly fee paid to Amtrak for the use of Penn Station, as a result of a derailment at that station which caused damage to NJ TRANSIT trains and a week of significant delays for riders of train routes that terminate at Penn Station. The article noted that Amtrak knew that the derailments were caused by wooden railroad ties that broke apart and had been previously identified as in need of repair.
33 Department of Transportation and Motor Vehicle Commission FY 2017-2018
Discussion Points (Cont’d)
It was noted in prior responses to questions by the Joint Senate Legislative Oversight Committee and Assembly Judiciary Committee that NJ TRANSIT makes three primary payments to Amtrak: a payment for capital improvements to the entire Northeast Corridor of approximately $85 million per year, operating payments for electricity and other costs of approximately $92 million per year, and a lease payment for the use of Sunnyside yards of $7 million per year. These amounts increased significantly under new federal legislation that changed the formulas used to allocate Northeast Corridor costs between the states and Amtrak. The Joint Committee questions noted that there were incentive and penalty provisions in the agreements with Amtrak that were based on NJ TRANSIT on-time performance on the Northeast Corridor Line.
• Question: Which of the three payments to Amtrak does the Governor intend to withhold as result of the derailments? Under what conditions will payments resume?
Answer: NJ TRANSIT entered into an Amended and Restated Northeast Corridor Services Agreement Between New Jersey Transit Corporation and National Railroad Passenger Corporation, and an Agreement Between NJ TRANSIT and The National Railroad Passenger Corporation for Capital Obligations Under the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008. NJ TRANSIT has invoked its contractual right to withhold payments, and also to seek reimbursement for all previously paid amounts as appropriate, while the dispute over Amtrak’s compliance with its contractual obligations remains unresolved.
• Question: Since the incentive and penalty provisions were implemented, what was the monthly penalty or incentive payment between NJ TRANSIT and Amtrak in each month of the agreement?
Answer: The Amended and Restated Northeast Corridor Services Agreement Between New Jersey Transit Corporation and National Railroad Passenger Corporation, which includes incentive and penalty provisions, was executed on October 11, 2016. NJ TRANSIT has not yet made any claims under the incentive and penalty provisions.
• Question: Given the severity of the impact on commuters from these recent derailments and the Governor’s action to withhold payments, will NJ TRANSIT be seeking to amend any of its three funding agreements with Amtrak?
Answer: NJ TRANSIT is considering all of its legal options and remedies.
34
FY17 SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION PROJECT LIST BRIDGE County Municipality Route Description of work Legislative District Cumberland Vineland, Millville 55 Bridge deck repairs 1 Hudson North Bergen 495 Repair/Reconstruction of 9-span viaduct 32 Hudson E. Newark 280 Bridge Deck and approach repairs at Exit 16 32 Hunterdon, Mercer Complete concept development and advance preliminary design work Various D&R Canal various Middlesex, to accelerate construction schedule for 11 bridges over D&R Canal Somerset Complete Preliminary Engineering for So. Broad St. bridge over Mercer Trenton 206 15 Assunpink Creek Middlesex, Carteret, Linden Tremley Point Connector Road Complete Preliminary Engineering 19, 22 Union Monmouth Wall Twp. 35 Bridge deck repairs 30 Passaic Totowa, Woodland Park 80 Bridge repairs @ Passaic River crossing 40 Somerset Bernards Twp. I-287 Bridge deck joint and approach repairs south of Exit 30 21 Sussex Newton 206 Substructure and scour repairs north of CR 519 24 Warren Phillipsburg So. Main St. Deck and Parapet replacement 23
ROADWAY County Municipality Route Description of work Legislative District Atlantic Hamilton Twp. 40 Resurfacing 2 Bergen Kearny, No. Arlington 7 Resurfacing 32,36 Bergen/ Fair Lawn, Glen Rock/ Bedminster, Peapack- Somerset/ Gladstone/ Chester Twp./ White Twp., Liberty 46/206/208 Resurfacing 38,23,25,24 Morris/ Warren Twp./ Independence Twp. Burlington/ Mt. Laurel/ Haddon Hgts., Barrington, Lawnside, I-295 Resurfacing 7,5,6 Camden Haddonfield, Cherry Hill Burlington Mansfield Twp. 68 Resurfacing 8 Cinnaminson, Delran Evesham, Palmyra, Burlington 73, 70, 130, 90 Resurfacing 7,8,6 Voorhees, Pennsauken (Camden Co.) Concept Development & Design Advancement for Camden Gateway Camden Various 30, 130, 68 and I-676 various signage program Bellmawr, Berlin Boro, Berlin Twp., Brooklawn, Camden 130, 295, 73 Resurfacing 5,8,6 Westville (Gloucester Co.)
4/13/2017 Page 1 FY17 SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION PROJECT LIST
Cape May Dennis Twp., Upper Twp. 9 Resurfacing 1 Essex Livingston, Newark, W. Orange 280 Resurfacing 27,29 Gloucester Brooklawn, Deptford, Westville 130, 45 Resurfacing 5 Hudson Jersey City 185 Resurfacing 31,33 Raritan Twp., Readington, Branchburg Hunterdon 202 Resurfacing 16 (Somerset Co.) Mercer Ewing Twp., Hopewell Twp., Lawrence Twp. I-95/295 Resurfacing 15 Mercer Trenton, Robbinsville, E. Windsor 129, 130 Resurfacing 15,14 Middlesex Cranbury, So. Brunswick 130 Resurfacing 14,16 Congestion Relief pilot project - use of shoulders as travel lanes during Middlesex So. Brunswick 1 16 peak hours Monmouth Ocean Twp. 18 Resurfacing 9 Hanover Twp, Morris Plains, Parsippany-Troy Morris 10, 206 Resurfacing 27,26,25 Hills, Roxbury Ocean Lakewood 9 Concept Development for Widening of Rt. 9 30 Passaic Paterson 20 Resurfacing 35 Salem Upper Pittsgrove Twp., Quinton Twp. 40, 49 Resurfacing 3 Somerset Hillsborough, Montgomery 206 Resurfacing 16 Sussex Byram Twp, Andover Twp. 206 Resurfacing 24 Union Hillside Twp., Union Twp. I-78, 22 Resurfacing 20 Warren Knowlton Twp., Blairstown 94 Resurfacing 24 Hardwick Twp., Knowlton Twp., Blairstown, Warren I-80 Resurfacing 24 Hope Twp.
SAFETY Bicycle/Pedestrian County Municipalilty Route Description of work Legislative District Safety improvements through installation of bicycle and pedestrian Bergen Ridgefield, Palisades Park, Leonia 93 36,37 amenities
Rail Crossing County Route Municipality Railroad Description of Work Legislative District
4/13/2017 Page 2 FY17 SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION PROJECT LIST
JP Rail Suface and signal improvements (Supports Salem Rt. 49 Salem 3 (formerly Southern RR) economic development) Bergen S. Center Street Elmwood Park NYS&W Surface improvements 35 Bergen W. Fort Lee Road Bogota NYS&W Surface improvements 37 Passaic East 27th Street Paterson NYS&W Surface improvements 35 Passaic East 18th Street Paterson NYS&W Surface improvements 35 Monmouth Corlies Avenue Allenhurst NJ Transit Surface & signal improvements 11 Ocean Rt. 35 Point Pleasant NJ Transit Surface & signal improvements 30 Essex Doremus Avenue Newark Conrail Surface improvements 28,29 Gloucester Crown Point Road Westville Conrail Surface & signal improvements 5
PUBLIC TRANSIT County Municipality Project Description of Work Legislative District Capital Projects Camden/ Various Glassboro-Camden Light Rail Completion of Environmental Impact Statement various Gloucester Concept Development for redesign of regional South Jersey Camden Camden Walter Rand Transportation Center Improvements 5 Transportation hub Hudson Jersey City Hudson-Bergen Light Rail Rt. 440 Extension Preliminary Engineering and Final Design 31,33 Hudson/Bergen Various Hudson-Bergen Light Rail Northern Extension Completion of Environmental Impact Statement various
Hudson Hoboken Hoboken Train Washer Repair train washer facility and equipment 33
Middlesex No. Brunswick North Brunswick Rail Sta on Advance development of new station along Northeast Corridor 17 Safety Technology Projects Replacement of training simulators at the Ferry St., Newark, and Bus Training Simulators Walter Rand Transportation Center, Camden, facilities. Equip more than 2,500 (new and existing) buses with cameras to Bus Camera Safety Program provide operator with 360-degree view and eliminate blind spots.
Rail Car Cameras Security Improvements Camera system expansion to support safety and security needs at bus NiceVision Expansion garages and rail stations. Police Command Vehicle Mobile command and control center to support emergency response. Customer Service Technology Projects
4/13/2017 Page 3 FY17 SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION PROJECT LIST
Mobile Fare Validation Devices Hand held device to validate and inspect paper and electronic tickets. System wide enhanced technological capabilities on buses for service Bus Data Automation and Security Technology planning, GIS location and engine management systems. Enhancements to NJT's mobile ticketing application to increase MyTix functionality, including intermodal ticketing, service, schedules and fare structures.
DREDGING County Municipality Description of work Legislative District Maintenance dredging of five channels in the Forked Ocean Lacey Township 9 River
DRAINAGE County Municipality Route Description of work Legislative District Essex Newark, W. Orange, E. Orange 280 Inspect, Clean & Repair Drainage Structures 28,29,27,34 Essex/Union Newark, Hillside Twp. 22 Inspect, Clean & Repair Drainage Structures 28,29,20 Hudson North Bergen West Side Avenue Drainage Reconstruction and Paving 32 Monmouth Aberdeen Twp., Wall Twp., Belmar 35 Inspect, Clean & Repair Drainage Structures 13,30 Monmouth Wall Twp. 36 Inspect, Clean & Repair Drainage Structures 30 Ocean Point Pleasant Beach 35 Inspect, Clean & Repair Drainage Structures 10 Passaic Clifton 3 Inspect, Clean & Repair Drainage Structures 34 Passaic Little Falls, Wayne Twp. 23 Inspect, Clean & Repair Drainage Structures 40 Passaic Hawthorne 208 Inspect, Clean & Repair Drainage Structures 38 Passaic/Essex Clifton, Nutley 21 Inspect, Clean & Repair Drainage Structures 34,28
4/13/2017 Page 4 NJDOT Appendix A - Federal Funds Appropriated and Obligated in FY 2014 through FY 2017
FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2017 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 Federal Categories ($ in millions) Appropriated Appropriated Appropriated Appropriated* Obligated to Obligated Obligated Obligated (Programmed) (Programmed) (Programmed) (Programmed) date* as of 4/13/17
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality $ 51.000 $ 10.465 $ 51.000 $ 4.201 $ 51.000 $ 18.402 $ 23.320 $ 4.002 Improvement Program Construction of Ferry Boats and Ferry Terminal $ 2.000 $ - $ 2.000 $ - $ 2.000 $ 1.937 $ 2.000 Facilities High Priority (Earmarks) $ 141.400 $ 75.401 $ 31.000 $ 8.567 $ 44.500 $ 30.153 $ 40.160 Equity Bonus $ - $ 19.347 $ - $ 49.435 $ - $ 10.112 Emergency Relief Program $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - National Highway System Program $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Interstate Maintenance Program $ - $ 3.411 $ - $ 2.317 $ - $ - National Highway Performance Program $ 524.300 $ 535.536 $ 524.300 $ 502.854 $ 524.300 $ 435.970 $ 569.992 $ 241.720 Bridge $ 32.800 $ 17.617 $ 32.800 $ 12.937 $ - $ 6.949 $ 7.800 Rail-Highways Crossing Program $ 3.700 $ 11.522 $ 3.700 $ 8.297 $ 4.000 $ 7.064 $ 11.300 $ 6.911 Highway Safety Improvement Program $ 54.100 $ 34.276 $ 54.100 $ 46.956 $ 56.100 $ 37.317 $ 41.231 $ 5.603 National Highway Freight Program $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 28.374 $ 29.909 State Planning and Research/ Metropolitan $ 31.100 $ 34.066 $ 31.100 $ 43.787 $ 30.900 $ 21.101 $ 30.921 $ 22.764 Planning Safe Routes to School $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 4.425 Surface Transportation Program - DVRPC $ 3.900 $ 10.928 $ 3.900 $ 11.987 $ 11.900 $ 5.537 $ 13.320 $ 1.038 Surface Transportation Program - NJTPA $ 14.400 $ 16.917 $ 14.400 $ 30.085 $ 14.400 $ 14.425 $ 23.445 $ 1.119 Surface Transportation Program - SJTPO $ 2.600 $ 2.996 $ 2.600 $ 5.162 $ 2.600 $ 6.238 $ 3.022 $ 0.077 Surface Transportation Program - Statewide $ 5.300 $ 92.502 $ 5.300 $ 101.092 $ 38.100 $ 93.341 $ 103.680 $ 85.126
Surface Transportation Program - Transportation $ - $ 5.086 $ - $ 9.067 $ - $ - Enhancements Transportation Alternatives Program $ 15.500 $ - $ 15.500 $ 5.328 $ 15.500 $ 3.858 $ 19.322
Federal Transit Administration: State Planning $ 3.900 $ 6.348 $ 3.900 $ 0.847 $ 3.900 $ 1.069 $ 3.894 and Research/ Metropolitan Planning
Other $ 3.075 $ 1.040 TOTALS $ 886.000 $ 876.418 $ 775.600 $ 842.919 $ 799.200 $ 729.347 $ 924.356 $ 368.360 Notes: Overall obligations for a given FY may be larger than the appropriated amount as a result of additional obligation authority received by New Jersey. New Jersey has consistently received additional obligation authority over the past several years as a result of our ability to obligate additional federal funds. Obligations for a specific category in a given year may exceed the appropriation for that category for many reasons including changes in project mix, adjustments in project costs. Amounts appropriated (programmed) for projects in a given year do not carry over if not obligated in that year. Amounts programmed for each federal category do not equate to the apportionment balance for that program or annual apportionment levels for that year under that program. Earmark Repurposing Report
State Reference Repurpose Program Proposed Number Demo # Project Description: From Account Project Description: To Account Code Transfer Amount NJ-CPD-PRTWY-001 NJ241 Jersey City 6th Street Viaduct Pedestrian Portway, Fish House/Pennsylvania Avenue, HY10 320,000 and Bicycle Pathway Project (NJTPA) CR 659, Roadway Reconstruction-MP 0.5- LY10 1,282,360 1.4 (NJTPA) Total 1,602,360 NJ-CPD-Ridge-001 NJ128 Bergen County, NJ On Route 17, address Ridge Rd & Orient Way replace two bridges HY10 880,000 congestion, safety, drainage, over Rt 3, MP 5.67 and MP 5.93 on Rt 3 LY10 3,526,490 maintenance, signing, access, pedestrian (NJTPA) Total 4,406,490 NJ145 Construction Route 46 and Main Street Ridge Rd & Orient Way replace two bridges HY10 320,000 intersection in Lodi (NJTPA) over Rt 3, MP 5.67 and MP 5.93 on Rt 3 LY10 1,282,360 (NJTPA) Total 1,602,360 NJ-CPD-Ridge-002 NJ159 Route 17 Congestion Improvements and Ridge Rd & Orient Way replace two bridges HY10 1,920,000 Widening, from Williams Avenue to the over Rt 3, MP 5.67 and MP 5.93 on Rt 3 LY10 7,694,161 Garden State Parkway and Route 4 in (NJTPA) Total 9,614,161 NJ-CPD-Ridge-003 NJ108 Pompton Lakes Downtown Streetscape Ridge Rd & Orient Way replace two bridges H660 584,261 (NJTPA) over Rt 3, MP 5.67 and MP 5.93 on Rt 3 (NJTPA) NJ-CPD-Ridge-004 NJ153 Route 605 extension to U.S. 206 (NJTPA) Ridge Rd & Orient Way replace two bridges HY10 160,000 over Rt 3, MP 5.67 and MP 5.93 on Rt 3 LY10 641,180 (NJTPA) Total 801,180 NJ-CPD-RT001-001 NJ151 Widening of Route 1 and intersection Route 1, CR 533 (Quakerbridge Road) to HY10 LY10 606,809 Total NJ181 Bridge replacement on Section 6V of Route 1, CR 533 (Quakerbridge Road) to HY10 320,000 LY10 Total 320,000 NJ-CPD-RT001-002 NJ187 Construct I-195 Noise Barrier, Hamilton Route 1, CR 533 (Quakerbridge Road) to HY10 400,000 Township, Mercer County (DVRPC) Ridge Road-Design for Pavement LY10 1,602,950 Resurfacing-7.9-14.5 (NJTPA) Total 2,002,950 NJ266 Widening of Rt. 1 and intersection Route 1, CR 533 (Quakerbridge Road) to LY30 2,505,854 improvements in South Brunswick Ridge Road-Design for Pavement (NJTPA) Resurfacing-7.9-14.5 (NJTPA) NJ-CPD-RT015-001 NJ209 Sussex County, NJ, Vernon Township, Route 15, Bridge over Paulins Kill. Replace HY10 560,000 Mountain Creek Rt. 94 Traffic Calming, Superstructure, and Scour. MP 17.45-17.65 LY10 2,244,130 Ped. Safety and Traffic Congestion, (NJTPA) Total 2,804,130 NJ-CPD-RT020-001 NJ186 Passaic-Bergen intermodal Route 20 Paterson Safety, Drainage and HY10 1,218,900 transportaion deployment initiative Resurfacing-MP0.00-4.00 (NJTPA) LY10 (NJTPA) Total 1,218,900 NJ-CPD-RT027-001 NJ156 East Coast Greenway bicycle and Route 27 ADA Ramps Improvements, HY10 160,000 pedestrian path from New Brunswick to Evergreen St to Elizabeth River-MP23.8- LY10 641,180 Hudson River (NJTPA) 33.41 (NJTPA) Total 801,180 NJ-CPD-RT034-001 NJ118 Laurel Avenue Bridge replacement in Route 34, CR 537 to Washington Ave., Mill, HY10 160,000 Holmdel Township (NJTPA) Resurfacing & ADA Improvements-MP13.2- LY10 641,180 26.5 (NJTPA) Total 801,180 NJ-CPD-RT047-001 NJ115 Delsea Drive Rt 47 Timber Creek Route 47, Grove St. to Route 130, Mill, 5280 787,000 (DVRPC) Resurface Pavement & Sidewalk Replacement-MP62.3-75.2 (DVRPC) NJ183 Construction of Rowan Boulevard from Route 47, Grove St. to Route 130, Mill, HY10 96,000 US Route 322 to Main Street, Glassboro Resurface Pavement & Sidewalk LY10 384,708 (SJTPO) Replacement-MP62.3-75.2 (DVRPC) Total 480,708 NJ-CPD-RT070-001 NJ011 Route 70/38 Circle Elimination (DVRPC) Route 70, Route 38 to Cropwell Road 5280 1,500,000 Roadway Reconstruction, Culvert Replacement, MP0.0-7.7 (DVRPC) NJ-CPD-RT206-001 NJ219 Separation of the intersection of 13th Route 206 Bypass, Mountain View Rd to Old HY10 168,800 Street and the Lehigh Rail Line through Somerville Rd (Sections 14A & 15A) MP LY10 676,445 bridge or tunnel in Manville, NJ (NJTPA) 63.4-66.4 (NJTPA) Total 845,245 NJ-CPD-RT280-001 NJ059 Construct Rt 17 bridge over the Route 280, Route 21 Interchange Q920 98,393 Susquehana and Western rail line in Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- Rochelle Park (NJTPA) 15.2 (NJTPA) NJ152 Rehabilitate Route 139 in Jersey City Route 280, Route 21 Interchange HY10 320,000 Portway (NJTPA) Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- LY10 1,282,360 15.2 (NJTPA) Total 1,602,360 NJ-CPD-RT280-002 NJ195 Replace Route 7-Wittpem Bridge, Route 280, Route 21 Interchange HY10 160,000 Hudson County (NJTPA) Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- LY10 641,180 15.2 (NJTPA) Total 801,180 NJ210 Interstate 280 Interchange Route 280, Route 21 Interchange HY10 695,776 improvements, Harrison (NJTPA) Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- LY10 6,411,800 15.2 (NJTPA) Total 7,107,576 NJ-CPD-RT280-003 NJ195 Construct Hudson River Waterfront Route 280, Route 21 Interchange HY10 81,259 Walkway over Long Slip Canal--Hoboken Improvements & Bridge Rehab-MP13.8-15.2 LY10 and Jersey City (NJTPA) Total 81,259 NJ-CPD-RT295-001 NJ129 Safety and operation improvments on Route 295/42/I-76, Direct Connection, HY10 192,000 Route 73 in Berlin, Voorhees and Contract 3-Design-Reconstruction-MP26.42- LY10 769,416 Evesham (DVRPC) 27.8 (DVRPC) Total 961,416 NJ190 Construction of new access roads along Route 295/42/I-76, Direct Connection, HY10 160,000 Route 42/ Blackhorse Pike in Contract 3-Design-Reconstruction-MP26.42- LY10 641,180 Washington Township (NJTPA) 27.8 (DVRPC) Total 801,180 NJ-CPD-RT295-002 NJ203 Rehabilitation of Benigno Boulevard Route 295/42/I-76, Direct Connection, HY10 64,000 from I295 to Route 168 in Bellmawr Contract 3-Design-Reconstruction-26.42- LY10 256,472 (DVRPC) 27.8 (DVRPC) Total 320,472 NJ-CPD-RT440-001 NJ147 Intermodal Access Improvements to the Route 440, Access Rd/40th Street to Mina HY10 320,000 Peninsula at Bayonne Harbor (NJTPA) Drive-Aerial Photos for Base Mapping & LY10 1,282,360 Traffic Control-21.5-24.9 (NJTPA) Total 1,602,360 NJ220 Upgrade of Turnpike/Route 440 Route 440, Access Rd/40th Street to Mina HY10 640,000 Interchange in Bayonne (NJTPA) Drive-Aerial Photos for Base Mapping & LY10 2,564,720 Traffic Control-21.5-24.9 (NJTPA) Total 3,204,720 NJ-CPD-RIDGE-005 NJ255 Route 9W operational and safety Ridge Rd & Orient Way replace two bridges HY20 115,657 improvements, including Southbound over Rt 3, MP 5.67 and MP 5.93 on Rt 3 LY20 291,675 entrance alterations Total 407,332 NJ270 Route 9W operational and safety Ridge Rd & Orient Way replace two bridges LY30 85,881 improvements, including Southbound over Rt 3, MP 5.67 and MP 5.93 on Rt 3 entrance alterations. Total 85,881 NJ-CPD-RIDGE-006 NJ093 Route 17 congestion improvements Ridge Rd & Orient Way replace two bridges H170 60,268 from Route 3 to Linwood Avenue, over Rt 3, MP 5.67 and MP 5.93 on Rt 3 Bergen Co. NJ Total 60,268 NJ094 Route 17 congestion improvements Ridge Rd & Orient Way replace two bridges H170 638 from Route 3 to Linwood Avenue, over Rt 3, MP 5.67 and MP 5.93 on Rt 3 Bergen Co. NJ Total 638 NJ-CPD-RIDGE-007 NJ173 Route 9W operational and safety Ridge Rd & Orient Way replace two bridges LY10 206,057 improvements, including Southbound over Rt 3, MP 5.67 and MP 5.93 on Rt 3 HY10 23,124 entrance alterations Total 229,181 NJ-CPD-RIDGE-008 NJ255 Route 9W operational and safety Ridge Rd & Orient Way replace two bridges HY20 115,657 improvements, including I-95 over Rt 3, MP 5.67 and MP 5.93 on Rt 3 LY20 291,675 Southbound entrance alterations Total 407,332 NJ263 Route 46 Corridor upgrades Ridge Rd & Orient Way replace two bridges LY30 302,429 over Rt 3, MP 5.67 and MP 5.93 on Rt 3 Total 302,429 NJ-CPD-RIDGE-009 NJ270 Route 9W operational and safety Ridge Rd & Orient Way replace two bridges LY30 85,881 improvements, including I-95 over Rt 3, MP 5.67 and MP 5.93 on Rt 3 Southbound entrance alterations Total 85,881 NJ-CPD-RT001-003 NJ004 Corridor Safety Improvement; US Route Route 1, CR533 (Quakerbridge Road) to 3120 1,366,021 1 (NJ) Ridge Road-Design-MP7.9-14.5 Total 1,366,021 NJ018 Middlesex: Route 1 widening in Route 1, CR533 (Quakerbridge Road) to 3660 154,924 Middlesex Co. from Raritan River to Ridge Road-Design-MP7.9-14.5 Rahway River Total 154,924 NJ-CPD-RT001-004 NJ029 Widen Route 1 from Pierson Avenue to Route 1, CR533 (Quakerbridge Road) to Q920 1,816,414 Inman Avenue in Middlesex County Ridge Road-Design-MP7.9-14.5 Total 1,816,414 NJ041 Construct Route29/129 Bicycle, Route 1, CR533 (Quakerbridge Road) to Q920 53,432 Pedestrian and landscape improvement Ridge Road-Design-MP7.9-14.5 plan Total 53,432 NJ-CPD-RT001-005 NJ057 Construct, reconstruct and integrate Route 1, CR533 (Quakerbridge Road) to Q920 14,385 multi-transportation modes -- Ridge Road-Design-MP7.9-14.5 international airport and seaport, rail, Total 14,385 NJ073 Reconstruction of Institute Street, Route 1, CR533 (Quakerbridge Road) to 45A0 58,545 Lockwood Avenue, First Street, Second Ridge Road-Design-MP7.9-14.5 Street, Third Street, Ford Avenue, Total 58,545 NJ-CPD-RT001-006 NJ193 Replacement and Alignment of Amwell Route 1, CR533 (Quakerbridge Road) to LY10 315,475 Road Bridge over Neshanic River Ridge Road-Design-MP7.9-14.5 HY10 24,396 Total 339,871 NJ217 Improvements to implement the Route 1, CR533 (Quakerbridge Road) to LY10 177,950 Readington Tewksbury Transportation Ridge Road-Design-MP7.9-14.5 HY10 11,562 Improvement District Total 189,512 NJ-CPD-RT001-007 NJ218 Replacement of the Magnolia Avenue Route 1, CR533 (Quakerbridge Road) to LY10 355,900 Bridge over Routes 1 & 9 Ridge Road-Design-MP7.9-14.5 HY10 23,124 Total 379,024 NJ251 Widening of Route 1 and intersection Route 1, CR533 (Quakerbridge Road) to LY20 2,186,775 improvements in South Brunswick Ridge Road-Design-MP7.9-14.5 HY20 101,200 Total 2,287,975 NJ-CPD-RT003-001 NJ172 Quinn Road realignment, Clifton. Route 3, Route 46 Valley Road and HY10 69,373 Construct public access roadays and Notch/Rifle Camp Road Interchange, LY10 174,407 pedestrian safety improvements in and Contract B, Widening MP 59.1 - 60.6 Total 243,780 NJ-CPD-RT010-001 NJ125 Replace Rockaway Road bridge, Route 10, Hillside Ave (CR619 to Mt. LY10 425,240 Randolph Township, New Jersey Pleasant Tpk (CR665)-Resurfacing & Bridge HY10 23,124 Preservation-MP.93-7.2 Total 448,364 NJ-CPD-RT018-001 NJ248 Route 18 Reconstruction in downtown Route 18, East Brunswick, Drainage and HY20 216,857 New Brunswick Pavement Rehabilitation-MP35.4-39.5 LY20 547,416 Total 764,273 NJ264 Route 18 Reconstruction in downtown Route 18, East Brunswick, Drainage and LY30 240,506 New Brunswick Pavement Rehabilitation-MP35.4-39.5 Total 240,506 NJ-CPD-RT021-001 NJ002 Passaic Co - Complete constr of Rt 21 Route 21, Dayton Street to Route 46 W, 3070 335,556 MP12.68-14.35, Resurfacing 3090 176,733 Total 512,289 NJ-CPD-RT035-001 NJ038 Design, construct, and expand industrial Route 35, Perth Amboy Connector, Bridge Q920 1,065,112 roads connecting Carteret with Replacement-MP52.3-52.53 Woodbridge, Route 35 with Perth Total 1,065,112 NJ-CPD-RT040-001 NJ213 Construct Rt 40 Reconstruction from Rt Route 40, Elmer Lake to Elmwood Ave, LY10 335,556 77 to Elmer Lake, Elmer, Salem County Bridge replacement & drainage HY10 176,733 improvements - MP 16.5 - 20.38 Total 512,289 NJ-CPD-RT047-002 NJ117 Rt 47 Chapel Heights Ave Goucester Route 47, Grove St. to Route 130, Mill, 5280 96,547 Resurface & Sidewalk Repl.-MP62.3-75.2 Total 96,547 NJ-CPD-RT049-002 NJ158 Construct Rt. 49 Cohansey River Bridge Route 49, Sarah Run Drive to Garrison Lane, LY10 641,566 Replacement, Cumberland County. Resurfacing & Sidewalk Replacement- HY10 69,373 MP18.8-40.1 Total 710,939 NJ260 Construct Rt. 49 Cohansey River Bridge Route 49, Sarah Run Drive to Garrison Lane, LY20 404,025 Replacement, Cumberland County. Resurfacing & Sidewalk Replacement- HY20 105,920 MP18.8-40.1 Total 509,945 NJ-CPD-RT049B-001 NJ138 Construct Rt 56 Maurice River Bridge Route 49, Bridge over Maurice River, LY10 711,800 Replacement, Salem and Cumberland Replacement, MP 36.2 HY10 46,249 Counties Total 758,049 NJ-CPD-RT082-001 NJ155 Riverwalk in Millburn along the West Route 82, Rahway River Bridge, LY10 131,770 Branch of the Rahway River Replacement, MP 0.38 - 0.58 HY10 17,343 Total 149,113 NJ196 Roadway and intersection modifications Route 82, Rahway River Bridge, LY10 355,900 on New Jersey Route 82 Replacement, MP 0.38 - 0.58 HY10 23,124 Total 379,024 NJ-CPD-RT130-001 NJ034 Revitalize Route 130 from Cinnaminson Route 130, Charleston Road/Cooper Street Q920 947,417 to Willingboro (CR 630) to Crafts Creek, Resurface, MP 43.01 - 51.58 Total 947,417 NJ-CPD-RT406-002 NJ211 Rehabilitation exsisting structure at the Route 206 Bypass, Mountain View Rd to Old LY10 503,296 Bridge Street bridge over the CSX Somerville Rd (Sections 14A & 15A) MP HY10 23,124 Railroad Trenton Line in Manville, NJ 63.4-66.4 Total 526,420 NJ-CPD-RT280-004 NJ007 I-280 Downtown Connector Interim Route 280, Route 21 Interchange 5280 267,862 Imporvements bridges over Rt 4 Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- 5590 100,282 15.2 Total 368,145 NJ009 Newark: To construct ramps to provide Route 280, Route 21 Interchange 5280 22,745 access to I-78 Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- 3410 4,090 15.2 Total 26,835 NJ-CPD-RT280-005 NJ012 Paramus: RT.17/4 Interchange Project Route 280, Route 21 Interchange 5410 12,753 Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- 15.2 Total 12,753 NJ033 Relocate and complete construction of Route 280, Route 21 Interchange Q920 122,373 new multi-modal facility Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- 15.2 Total 122,373 NJ-CPD-RT280-006 NJ037 Construct road from the Military Ocean Route 280, Route 21 Interchange Q920 24,950 Terminal to the Port Jersey Pier, Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- Bayonne 15.2 Total 24,950 NJ045 Replace Maple Grange Road bridge over Route 280, Route 21 Interchange Q920 3,202 Pochuck Creek in Sussex County Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- 15.2 Total 3,202 NJ-CPD-RT280-007 NJ060 Upgrade urban University Heights Route 280, Route 21 Interchange Q920 21,453 Connector, Newark Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- 15.2 Total 21,453 NJ072 NJCDC Training Facility Project in Route 280, Route 21 Interchange 45A0 46,210 Paterson, New Jersey Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- 15.2 Total 46,210 NJ-CPD-RT280-008 NJ076 Improvements to Route 641 in Route 280, Route 21 Interchange 45A0 89,731 Hunterdon County, New Jersey Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- 15.2 Total 89,731 NJ121 Rahway River Corridor Greenway bicycle Route 280, Route 21 Interchange LY10 487,885 and pedestrian path, South Orange Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- HY10 34,687 15.2 Total 522,572 NJ-CPD-RT280-009 NJ137 University Heights Connector for Route 280, Route 21 Interchange LY10 226,707 improvements to First Street in Newark Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- HY10 14,730 from Sussex Street to West Market 15.2 Total 241,437 NJ141 Union Boulevard revitalization and Route 280, Route 21 Interchange LY10 62,606 streetscape enhancements, Totowa Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- HY10 11,562 15.2 Total 74,168 NJ-CPD-RT280-010 NJ148 Broad Street streetscape project in Route 280, Route 21 Interchange LY10 145,585 Elizabeth to provide physical Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- HY10 16,187 improvements and to enhance 15.2 Total 161,772 NJ160 Route 82 Union County streetscape and Route 280, Route 21 Interchange LY10 355,900 intersection improvements Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- HY10 23,124 15.2 Total 379,024 NJ-CPD-RT280-011 NJ168 Replacement of Signals at the Route 280, Route 21 Interchange LY10 101,909 intersections of Centennial Ave. at Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- HY10 11,331 Lincoln Ave. and Walnut Ave. at Lincoln 15.2 Total 113,240 NJ180 Construct waterfront walkway from Route 280, Route 21 Interchange LY10 711,800 North Sinatra Drive and 12th St. south to Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- HY10 46,249 Sinatra Drive in Hoboken. 15.2 Total 758,049 NJ-CPD-RT280-012 NJ233 Livingston pedestrian streetscape Route 280, Route 21 Interchange LY10 226,439 project along Mount Pleasant and Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- HY10 20,812 Livingston Avenues 15.2 Total 247,251 NJ239 Hudson County Fire and Rescue Route 280, Route 21 Interchange LY10 27,749 Department, North Bergen: Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- HY10 84,537 Transportation critical incident mobile 15.2 Total 112,286 NJ-CPD-RT280-013 NJ244 Weehawken Baldwin Avenue Route 280, Route 21 Interchange LY10 377,356 Improvements Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- HY10 46,249 15.2 Total 423,605 NJ250 Construct waterfront walkway from Route 280, Route 21 Interchange LY20 3,559,304 North Sinatra Drive and 12th St. south to Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- HY20 231,314 Sinatra Drive in Hoboken 15.2 Total 3,790,618 NJ-CPD-RT295-003 NJ058 Construct Collingswood Circle Route 295/42/I-76, Direct Connection, Q920 301,493 Eliminator, Camden Contract 3-Design-Reconstruction-MP26.42- 27.8 Total 301,493 NJ252 Route 29 conversion project to a full Route 295/42/I-76, Direct Connection, LY20 2,242,109 access freeway Contract 3-Design-Reconstruction-MP26.42- HY20 115,657 27.8 Total 2,357,766 NJ-CPD-RT295-004 NJ267 Route 29 conversion project to a full Route 295/42/I-76, Direct Connection, LY30 2,044,225 access freeway Contract 3-Design-Reconstruction-MP26.42- 27.8 Total 2,044,225 NJ-SJTPO-001 NJ226 Construct CR 521/Ocean Drive and Broadway/Seashore Road (CR626) - Cape HY10 1,100,088 Middle Thoroughfare Bridge May County, Resurfacing, MP .35 - 2.65 LY10 229,149 Replacement, Cape May County Total 1,329,237 NJ-DVRPC-01 NJ207 circle at the White Horse Pike to NJ Reconstruct CR 530 (South Pemberton LY10 210,969 Turnpike overpass in Barrington [ref P.L. Road) from Hanover Street (CR 616) to US HY10 11,562 110-244, Sec 105(a)(160)] Route 206, MP 0 to 2.68 Total 222,531 NJ216 Pedestrian facilities and street lighting Reconstruct CR 530 (South Pemberton LY10 67,120 on Haddon Avenue from Voorhees Road) from Hanover Street (CR 616) to US HY10 55,539 Township Line to Bate Avenue, Berlin Route 206, MP 0 to 2.68 Total 122,659 NJ-DVRPC-02 NJ212 Pedestrian facilities and street lighting Reconstruct CR 530 (South Pemberton LY10 256,472 on Route 551 from Route 130 to Road) from Hanover Street (CR 616) to US HY10 64,000 Chestnut Street, Brooklawn Route 206, MP 0 to 2.68 Total 320,472 NJ292 DELEWARE STREET BRIDGE Reconstruct CR 530 (South Pemberton 5280 1,500,000 REPLACEMENT PROJECT, (CR640) Road) from Hanover Street (CR 616) to US BRIDGE OVER MATTHEWS BRANCH IN Route 206, MP 0 to 2.68 Total 1,500,000 NJ-DVRPC-03 NJ061 CONSTRUCT BICYCLE TRAILS AND Reconstruct CR 530 (South Pemberton Q920 171,544 RIVERSIDE IMPROVEMENTS, WEST Road) from Hanover Street (CR 616) to US DEPTFORD Route 206, MP 0 to 2.68 Total 171,544 NJ293 Resurfacing and safety improvements to Reconstruct CR 530 (South Pemberton H170 36,067 Tanyard Road (CR 663) from Evergreen Road) from Hanover Street (CR 616) to US Avenue (CR 553) to Barlow Road in the Route 206, MP 0 to 2.68 Total 36,067 NJ-DVRPC-04 NJ154 Bicycle facilities in West Deptford Reconstruct CR 530 (South Pemberton LY10 73,736 Township Road) from Hanover Street (CR 616) to US HY10 18,400 Route 206, MP 0 to 2.68 Total 92,136 NJ132 Reconstruct Route 168 from Route 41 to Reconstruct CR 530 (South Pemberton LY10 331,169 6th Avenue in Runnemede Road) from Hanover Street (CR 616) to US HY10 15,216 Route 206, MP 0 to 2.68 Total 346,385 NJ-DVRPC-05 NJ131 Construct CR 538 Coles Mill Road Bridge Reconstruct CR 530 (South Pemberton LY10 177,950 over Scotland Run, Gloucester County Road) from Hanover Street (CR 616) to US HY10 11,562 Route 206, MP 0 to 2.68 Total 189,512 NJ068 Improvements at the Rosedal Road and Reconstruct CR 530 (South Pemberton 45A0 249,450 Provinceline Road intersection in the Road) from Hanover Street (CR 616) to US Township of Princeton, New Jersey Route 206, MP 0 to 2.68 Total 249,450 NJ-DVRPC-06 NJ182 Pedestrian facilities, street lighting and Reconstruct CR 530 (South Pemberton LY10 110,218 streetscaping improvements in Road) from Hanover Street (CR 616) to US HY10 13,790 downtown Laurel Springs Route 206, MP 0 to 2.68 Total 124,007 NJ143 Pedestrian facilities and street lighting Reconstruct CR 530 (South Pemberton LY10 90,054 on Haddon Avenue from Albertson Road) from Hanover Street (CR 616) to US HY10 10,013 Avenue to Glenwood Avenue, Haddon Route 206, MP 0 to 2.68 Total 100,067 NJ-DVRPC-07 NJ208 Maple Shade Township Streetscape Reconstruct CR 530 (South Pemberton LY10 58,135 Improvements of Mill Road, Rudderow Road) from Hanover Street (CR 616) to US HY10 23,124 Ave., North and South Coles Ave. and Route 206, MP 0 to 2.68 Total 81,259 NJ049 IMPROVE OLD YORK ROAD/RISING RUN Reconstruct CR 530 (South Pemberton Q920 76,473 ROAD INTERSECTION IN BURLINGTON. Road) from Hanover Street (CR 616) to US TOTAL TEA21 AUTHORIZATION Route 206, MP 0 to 2.68 Total 76,473 NJ-DVRPC-08 NJ126 Rowan Boulevard Parking adjacent to Reconstruct CR 530 (South Pemberton HY10 160,089 Highway 322 Corridor in Glassboro Road) from Hanover Street (CR 616) to US LY10 641,537 Township Route 206, MP 0 to 2.68 Total 801,626 NJ-CPD-RT049-001 NJ204 Construct Cape May and Supawana Route 49, Sarah Run Drive to Garrison Lane, LY10 155,984 Meadows National Wildlife Refuges Pavement Mill, Resurface & ADA Compliant HY10 17,343 roadway parking and improvements Curb Ramps-MP 18.8-40.1 Total 173,327 NJ-CPD-RT280-002 NJ195 Replace Route 7-Wittpen Bridge, Route 280, Route 21 interchange LY10 641,180 Hudson County improvements & bridge rehab. MP13.8-15.2 HY10 160,000 Total 801,180 NJ-CPD-RT280-003 NJ236 Construct Hudson River Waterfront Route 280, Route 21 interchange LY10 58,135 Walkway over Long Slip Canal--Hoboken improvements & bridge rehab. MP13.8-15.2 HY10 23,124 and Jersey City Total 81,259 NJ-NJTPA-HMETC-001 NJ205 Reconfiguration of Bay Avenue and Halls Mill Road, Realignment and Widening, LY10 5,129,440 Polaris Street in Newark, NJ Monmouth County, MP 0.00-1.31, AND, HY10 1,280,000 Livingston Avenue Traffic Calming, New Total 6,409,440 Brunswick, MP 0-06-1.08, MP 2.07-2.78 NJ-NJTPA-JOETC-001 NJ171 Improvements to Clove Road and Long Johnston Avenue Road Improvements, LY10 2,244,130 Hill Road in Little Falls and Upper Jersey City, MP 0.21-0.85 (Grand St), MP HY10 560,000 Mountain Ave. in Montclair 0.00-0.16 (Philip St), AND, Total 2,804,130 Passaic Main Avenue Bus Terminal, Upgrade and Relocation, Passaic County, AND, Schooleys Mountain Bridge Rehabilitation, Morris County, MP 13.83 (CR 517), AND, Main Street and Scotland Road, Intersection Improvements, MP 0.0 (Main St), MP 4.59 (Scotland Rd)
NJ-NJTPA-JOHNS-001 NJ237 Construct Parking Facility at McGinley Johnston Avenue Road Improvements, LY10 673,239 Square in Jersey City Jersey City, MP 0.21-0.85 (Grand St), MP 0.0- HY10 168,000 0.16 (Philip St) Total 841,239 NJ221 Design, plan and build a permanent Johnston Avenue Road Improvements, LY10 320,590 pedestrian/bicycle path along the banks Jersey City, MP 0.21-0.85 (Grand St), MP 0.0- HY10 80,000 of the Elizabeth River 0.16 (Philip St) Total 400,590 NJ-NJTPA-LIVIN-001 NJ074 Improvements to Route 35 at Clinton Livingston Avenue Traffic Calming, New 45A0 498,900 Avenue and other intersections in the Brunswick, MP 0-06-1.08, MP 2.07-2.78 Borough of Eatontown, New Jersey Total 498,900 NJ077 Spring Valley Road Project in Marlboro Livingston Avenue Traffic Calming, New 45A0 1,197,360 Township, New Jersey Brunswick, MP 0-06-1.08, MP 2.07-2.78 Total 1,197,360 NJ-NJTPA-LIVIN-002 NJ080 Monroe Township Intersection Livingston Avenue Traffic Calming, New 55B0 496,750 Signalization Project, New Jersey Brunswick, MP 0-06-1.08, MP 2.07-2.78 Total 496,750 NJ157 Replacement of Monmouth County Livingston Avenue Traffic Calming, New LY10 1,923,540 bridges W-7, W-8, and W-9 Brunswick, MP 0-06-1.08, MP 2.07-2.78 HY10 480,000 Total 2,403,540 NJ-NJTPA-MAINS-001 NJ144 South Essex Street Bridge Pedestrian Main Street and Scotland Road Intersection HY10 92,480 Access Improvements, Orange Improvements, Orange, MP 0.0 (Main St), LY10 370,602 MP 4.59 (Scotland Rd) Total 463,082 NJ-NJTPA-PBETC-001 NJ201 Construct Hackensack River Walkway in Passaic-Bergen Passenger Service HY10 320,000 Bergen County Restoration, Technical Update and LY10 1,282,360 Assessment, AND, Total 1,602,360 Livingston Avenue Traffic Calming, New Brunswick, MP 0-06-1.08, MP 2.07-2.78, AND, Schooleys Mountain Bridge Rehabilitation, Morris County, MP 13.83 (CR 517) NJ-NJTPA-SCHOO-001 NJ120 Construct Long Valley Bypass Schooleys Mountain Bridge Rehabilitation, HY10 160,000 Morris County, MP 13.83 (CR 517) LY10 641,180 Total 801,180 NJ142 Construct Great Swamp National Schooleys Mountain Bridge Rehabilitation, HY10 5,781 Wildlife Refuge Road Morris County, MP 13.83 (CR 517) LY10 51,995 Total 57,776 NJ-CPD-TRMLY-001 NJ027 Construct New Jersey Exit 13A Flyover Tremley Point Connector Road, New Q920 1,866 (extentsion of Kapowski Rd. to Trumbull Construction, Tremley Point Linden, NJ to St) Industrial Hwy Carteret, NJ Total 1,866 NJ164 Transportation improvements in Liberty Tremley Point Connector Road, New LY10 2,241,033 Corridor Construction, Tremley Point Linden, NJ to HY10 800,000 Industrial Hwy Carteret, NJ Total 3,041,033 NJ-CPD-TRMLY-002 NJ176 Planning for Liberty Corridor Tremley Point Connector Road, New HY10 11,562 Construction, Tremley Point Linden, NJ to LY10 71,537 Industrial Hwy Carteret, NJ Total 83,099 NJ216 Pedestrian facilities and street lighting Tremley Point Connector Road, New HY10 55,539 on Haddon Avenue from Vorhees Construction, Tremley Point Linden, NJ to LY10 67,120 Township line to Bater Avenue, Berlin Industrial Hwy Carteret, NJ Total 122,659 NJ-CPD-RT001-001 NJ151 Widening of Route 1 and intersection Route 1, CR 533 (Quakerbridge Road) to LY10 606,809 improvements in South Brunswick Ridge Road-Design for Pavement HY10 100,796 Resurfacing-MP7.9-14.5 Total 707,605 NJ181 Bridge replacement on Section 6V of Route 1, CR 533 (Quakerbridge Road) to LY10 894,549 Route 1 from Ryders Lane to Milltown Ridge Road-Design for Pavement HY10 320,000 Road, North Brunswick Resurfacing-MP7.9-14.5 Total 1,214,549 NJ-CPD-RT001-008 NJ165 Expand Route 440--State Street Route 1, CR 533 (Quakerbridge Road) to HY10 115,622 Interchange in Perth Amboy. Ridge Road-Design for Pavement LY10 1,301,276 Resurfacing-7.9-14.5 Total 1,416,898 NJ-CPD-RT010-002 NJ123 Construction of Route 206 Chester Route 10, Hillside Ave (CR619 to Mt. LY10 523,758 Township, NJ Pleasant Tpk (CR665)-Resurfacing & Bridge HY10 46,249 Preservation-MP.93-7.2 Total 570,007 NJ-CPD-RT030-001 NJ134 Construct Rt 30, Pomona Road Route 30, Elmwood Rd/Weymouth Rd (CR HY10 115,622 intersection improvements, Atlantic 623) to Haddon Ave., Pavement resurfacing, LY10 290,677 County MP 36.4 - 50.82 Total 406,299 NJ-CPD-RT280-014 NJ271 Expand TRANSCOM Regional ITS System Route 280, Route 21 Interchange LY30 260,427 in NJ, NY and CT Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- 15.2 Total 260,427 NJ163 Construct I-287, I-80, Route 202 Route 280, Route 21 Interchange LY10 207,978 Interchange Improvements & Bridge Rehab.-MP13.8- HY10 23,124 15.2 Total 231,102 NJ-CPD-RT295-005 NJ268 Improvements to River Road in Camden Route 295/42/I-76, Direct Connection, LY30 1,002,341 Contract 3-Design-Reconstruction-26.42- 27.8 Total 1,002,341 NJ-CPD-TRMLY-003 NJ242 Port Reading--Improvements to air Tremley Point Connector Road, New LY10 512,944 quality through reduction of engine Construction, Tremley Point Linden, NJ to HY10 128,000 idling behind Rosewood Lane Industrial Hwy Carteret, NJ Total 640,944 NJ-NJTPA-HMETC-002 NJ194 New Jersey Underground Railroad for Halls Mill Road, Realignment and Widening, HY10 51,200 preservation, enhancement and Monmouth County, MP 0.00-1.31 LY10 205,178 promotion of sites in New Jersey Total 256,378 NJ-CPD-RT280-015 NJ235 Construct parking facility at the Robert Route 280, Route 21 interchange LY10 1,282,360 Wood Johnson University Hospital and improvements & bridge rehab. MP13.8-15.2 HY10 320,000 UMDNJ with access to the intermodal Total 1,602,360
NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STATE CONTRACTS - SBE PARTICIPATION JUNE 2016
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS ACTUAL $ YEAR TO DATE $ %
ALL PRIME CONTRACTS $16,405,704 $171,615,247 PRIME CONTRACTS TO SBES $0 $34,317,281 20.00% SUBCONTRACT COMMITMENTS (SBE) RACE NEUTRAL $1,467,800 $9,635,320 5.61%
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES*
ALL PRIME CONTRACTS $1,039,350 $5,522,234 PRIME CONTRACTS TO SBES $29,000 $1,107,141 20.05% SUBCONTRACT COMMITMENTS (SBE) RACE NEUTRAL $0 $596,982 10.81%
SUMMARY (CONSTRUCTION & PROFESSIONAL SERVICES)
ALL PRIME CONTRACTS $17,445,054 $177,137,481 PRIME CONTRACTS (SBE) $29,000 $35,424,422 20.00% SUBCONTRACT COMMITMENTS (SBE) RACE NEUTRAL $1,467,800 $10,232,302 5.78%
TOTAL SBE PARTICIPATION $1,496,800 $45,656,724 25.77%
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Annual Passenger Trips Annual Passenger Trips %Change Revenue Recovery Ratio Mode Service Description FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16
Rail Northeast Corridor NY Penn-Trenton/Princeton 30,949,739 32,244,162 33,065,577 33,291,062 4.2% 2.5% 0.7% 97.9% 88.4% 94.1% 91.5% Rail Coast Line NY Penn/Hoboken-Bay Head 13,028,116 13,950,241 14,592,084 14,818,176 7.1% 4.6% 1.5% 51.7% 54.7% 57.3% 53.7% Rail Raritan Valley NY Penn/Hoboken-High Bridge 5,499,021 5,882,868 6,327,757 6,660,458 7.0% 7.6% 5.3% 38.5% 39.9% 45.9% 47.3% Rail Morris & Essex NY Penn/Hoboken - Dover/Gladstone 14,579,895 15,946,277 17,081,767 17,433,411 9.4% 7.1% 2.1% 48.5% 48.5% 53.3% 57.7% Rail Montclair-Boonton NY Penn/Hoboken-Hackettstown 4,695,603 5,153,915 5,197,924 5,456,443 9.8% 0.9% 5.0% 39.6% 42.0% 46.6% 50.8% Rail Main Line Bergen County Hoboken-Suffern 6,770,149 7,467,935 7,969,256 8,131,699 10.3% 6.7% 2.0% 41.5% 43.0% 48.7% 50.5% Rail Pascack Valley Hoboken-Montvale 2,129,115 2,426,847 2,512,362 2,538,191 14.0% 3.5% 1.0% 43.7% 47.8% 51.0% 49.9% Rail Atlantic City Atlantic City-Philadelphia 963,661 945,114 881,541 803,920 -1.9% -6.7% -8.8% 17.8% 19.6% 17.8% 14.0% Light Rail Hudson Bergen Light Rail North Bergen-Bayonne 12,865,393 13,821,851 14,201,074 15,450,736 7.4% 2.7% 8.8% 30.1% 33.2% 27.1% 29.6% Light Rail Newark Light Rail Newark-Bloomfield 5,303,871 5,356,687 5,500,164 5,724,544 1.0% 2.7% 4.1% 29.4% 29.5% 29.0% 30.4% Light Rail River LINE Trenton-Camden 2,859,074 2,869,707 2,830,339 2,746,696 0.4% -1.4% -3.0% 8.8% 10.0% 7.5% 8.6% Bus 121 North Bergen - NY 56,718 49,093 43,272 46,841 -13.4% -11.9% 8.2% 30.1% 24.1% 21.2% 19.0% Bus 122 Secaucus - NY 218,543 224,506 219,560 269,079 2.7% -2.2% 22.6% 47.7% 46.5% 50.9% 44.5% Bus 123 Union City - NY 936,101 999,541 1,056,849 1,138,276 6.8% 5.7% 7.7% 52.2% 45.1% 50.7% 50.4% Bus 124 Secaucus - NY 97,820 101,448 110,838 100,579 3.7% 9.3% -9.3% 25.0% 24.2% 27.4% 23.6% Bus 125 Journal Square - NY 261,213 262,925 274,900 301,400 0.7% 4.6% 9.6% 33.9% 30.6% 34.9% 35.8% Bus 126 Hoboken - NY 3,879,824 3,675,259 3,797,745 3,970,143 -5.3% 3.3% 4.5% 73.8% 58.8% 63.3% 61.5% Bus 127 Palisades Park - NY 484,155 509,793 537,846 540,846 5.3% 5.5% 0.6% 39.8% 40.9% 46.6% 44.1% Bus 128 Boulevard East - NY 1,312,393 1,392,983 1,492,109 1,687,989 6.1% 7.1% 13.1% 55.5% 56.7% 67.9% 70.6% Bus 129 Secaucus - NY 634,594 654,686 666,062 702,222 3.2% 1.7% 5.4% 36.9% 36.6% 39.0% 39.0% Bus 144 Elmwood Park - NY 207,104 224,706 236,877 242,620 8.5% 5.4% 2.4% 41.1% 38.7% 44.9% 41.9% Bus 145 Fair Lawn - NY 166,934 167,789 170,092 175,597 0.5% 1.4% 3.2% 59.3% 55.1% 56.1% 53.0% Bus 148 Midland Park - NY 68,262 67,940 66,575 69,771 -0.5% -2.0% 4.8% 69.0% 65.8% 64.6% 61.5% Bus 151 Paterson - NY Express 66,342 96,367 104,865 114,008 45.3% 8.8% 8.7% 41.1% 54.0% 64.1% 60.3% Bus 153 Fort Lee - NY 41,059 44,932 44,042 45,055 9.4% -2.0% 2.3% 52.0% 54.0% 54.7% 55.5% Bus 154 Fort Lee - NY 541,597 577,914 597,668 613,987 6.7% 3.4% 2.7% 47.0% 46.3% 50.2% 50.0% Bus 155 Teaneck - NY 112,388 134,011 142,553 135,762 19.2% 6.4% -4.8% 38.6% 41.8% 48.8% 49.5% Bus 156 Bergenline Avenue - NY 1,490,062 1,635,356 1,705,857 1,769,738 9.8% 4.3% 3.7% 44.1% 44.6% 48.0% 48.6% Bus 157 Hackensack - NY 64,787 74,978 78,151 79,824 15.7% 4.2% 2.1% 30.1% 35.0% 40.6% 37.0% Bus 158 Fort Lee - NY 1,705,746 1,861,406 2,024,501 2,172,938 9.1% 8.8% 7.3% 65.0% 59.2% 65.3% 67.3% Bus 159 Fort Lee - NY 2,881,537 2,930,709 3,084,227 3,144,034 1.7% 5.2% 1.9% 52.5% 49.4% 54.0% 53.0% Bus 160 Elmwood Park - NY 413,886 510,877 620,126 641,149 23.4% 21.4% 3.4% 54.8% 47.3% 49.5% 46.6% Bus 161 Paterson - NY 1,820,870 1,862,010 1,922,905 1,952,171 2.3% 3.3% 1.5% 55.5% 51.9% 54.4% 52.3% Bus 162 Maywood - NY 246,694 266,104 288,723 318,105 7.9% 8.5% 10.2% 41.1% 40.7% 51.8% 51.9% Bus 163 Ridgewood - NY 2,246,384 2,274,784 2,332,341 2,415,429 1.3% 2.5% 3.6% 51.8% 49.2% 53.9% 50.7% Bus 164 Midland Park - NY 1,045,052 1,006,364 925,065 900,757 -3.7% -8.1% -2.6% 57.7% 53.5% 50.8% 46.2% Bus 165 Westwood - NY 3,572,525 3,556,869 3,604,690 3,683,545 -0.4% 1.3% 2.2% 53.6% 50.1% 52.3% 49.4% Bus 166 Dumont - NY 4,177,856 4,234,605 4,317,643 4,441,958 1.4% 2.0% 2.9% 55.0% 52.2% 56.3% 53.2% Bus 167 Harrington Park - NY 2,110,246 2,027,833 2,031,131 2,089,439 -3.9% 0.2% 2.9% 64.5% 57.8% 61.0% 57.6% Bus 168 Paramus - NY 922,340 888,539 907,500 919,758 -3.7% 2.1% 1.4% 44.9% 39.2% 41.4% 36.8% Bus 177 Harrington Park - NY 462,602 568,494 638,546 692,751 22.9% 12.3% 8.5% 44.8% 49.7% 58.9% 58.9% Bus 190 Paterson - NY 3,054,409 3,023,398 3,016,180 3,006,678 -1.0% -0.2% -0.3% 47.7% 46.5% 51.1% 47.8% Bus 191 Wayne - NY 361,679 364,903 362,937 387,427 0.9% -0.5% 6.7% 61.0% 56.1% 55.0% 54.2% Bus 192 Clifton - NY 900,782 919,770 960,732 1,003,685 2.1% 4.5% 4.5% 60.6% 58.4% 63.8% 61.6% Bus 193 Clifton - NY 352,252 375,050 400,899 446,049 6.5% 6.9% 11.3% 94.4% 92.9% 103.1% 106.2% Bus 194 Newfoundland - NY 572,041 569,887 573,803 592,402 -0.4% 0.7% 3.2% 68.8% 63.6% 65.5% 62.0% Bus 195 Wayne - NY 302,655 300,416 301,103 301,003 -0.7% 0.2% 0.0% 57.5% 55.3% 55.6% 49.2% Bus 196 Warwick - NY Express 212,059 206,931 209,682 211,087 -2.4% 1.3% 0.7% 69.9% 66.0% 68.7% 66.4% Bus 197 Warwick - NY 739,693 734,568 750,497 744,869 -0.7% 2.2% -0.7% 61.4% 54.9% 57.3% 53.3% Bus 198 Wm Paterson Univ-NY 150,299 168,631 180,925 188,493 12.2% 7.3% 4.2% 65.8% 60.5% 63.9% 60.4% Bus 199 Clifton - NY 436,271 438,681 463,694 500,530 0.6% 5.7% 7.9% 58.2% 53.5% 57.5% 55.2% Bus 320 North Bergen Park-Ride - NY 1,523,373 1,513,409 1,567,588 1,681,099 -0.7% 3.6% 7.2% 77.8% 69.2% 74.9% 67.6% Bus 321 Vince Lombardi Park-Ride - NY 210,951 216,168 224,570 242,667 2.5% 3.9% 8.1% 44.1% 42.3% 44.3% 45.9% Bus 324 Wayne-NY 397,469 403,457 411,133 414,578 1.5% 1.9% 0.8% 79.9% 75.8% 81.0% 78.6% Bus 107 South Orange - NY 1,057,213 1,039,765 1,082,289 1,061,972 -1.7% 4.1% -1.9% 45.0% 43.2% 47.8% 44.8% Bus 108 Newark - NY 426,515 419,402 433,609 444,619 -1.7% 3.4% 2.5% 45.8% 43.2% 46.3% 40.7% Annual Passenger Trips Annual Passenger Trips %Change Revenue Recovery Ratio Mode Service Description FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 Bus 111 Elizabeth - NY 543,075 666,668 776,338 775,183 22.8% 16.5% -0.1% 119.7% 129.5% 105.7% 90.9% Bus 112 Clark - NY 670,620 670,953 691,478 698,584 0.0% 3.1% 1.0% 49.0% 43.8% 50.0% 45.1% Bus 113 Dunellen - NY 1,121,787 1,120,387 1,094,630 1,124,849 -0.1% -2.3% 2.8% 53.1% 49.1% 49.8% 46.9% Bus 114 Bridgewater - NY 1,723,592 1,740,943 1,738,143 1,720,950 1.0% -0.2% -1.0% 62.5% 58.1% 61.8% 54.9% Bus 115 Rahway - NY 348,696 360,709 353,154 339,117 3.4% -2.1% -4.0% 58.9% 58.5% 58.1% 49.9% Bus 116 Perth Amboy - NY 739,853 734,870 757,227 778,439 -0.7% 3.0% 2.8% 52.5% 50.1% 54.2% 51.9% Bus 117 Somerville - NY 75,589 83,732 81,471 79,380 10.8% -2.7% -2.6% 75.6% 67.1% 60.0% 53.9% Bus 171 Paterson -GWB 476,947 457,187 442,640 427,672 -4.1% -3.2% -3.4% 34.7% 35.6% 34.8% 30.8% Bus 175 Ridgewood- GWB 520,595 535,917 520,066 499,458 2.9% -3.0% -4.0% 28.6% 27.7% 26.4% 23.5% Bus 178 Hackensack - GWB via Englewood 575,314 598,966 549,593 514,402 4.1% -8.2% -6.4% 38.5% 42.4% 38.9% 32.7% Bus 181 Union City - GWB 157,753 144,108 145,642 145,501 -8.6% 1.1% -0.1% 23.4% 26.1% 26.5% 24.6% Bus 182 Hackensack - GWB via Leonia 393,660 341,528 337,222 338,209 -13.2% -1.3% 0.3% 35.6% 35.5% 35.8% 33.1% Bus 186 Dumont - GWB 718,641 735,903 723,469 714,678 2.4% -1.7% -1.2% 41.9% 45.6% 45.0% 40.2% Bus 188 River Road - GWB 218,822 211,600 204,514 195,396 -3.3% -3.3% -4.5% 27.2% 32.7% 31.5% 27.2% Bus 120 Bayonne - Downtown Manhattan 95,854 95,122 89,775 88,323 -0.8% -5.6% -1.6% 36.6% 33.8% 32.9% 29.5% Bus 130 Lakewood - Union Hill - NY Express 95,340 137,606 174,832 191,811 44.3% 27.1% 9.7% 38.9% 51.3% 67.2% 77.1% Bus 131 Sayreville - NY 223,514 252,486 243,210 237,997 13.0% -3.7% -2.1% 61.3% 65.1% 70.0% 66.4% Bus 132 Lakewood - Gordons Corner - NY Express 154,312 197,441 221,187 241,043 27.9% 12.0% 9.0% 53.7% 63.8% 80.1% 85.7% Bus 133 Old Bridge - NY 244,421 255,408 262,194 265,846 4.5% 2.7% 1.4% 64.8% 65.8% 68.6% 67.9% Bus 135 Freehold - NY 125,634 135,007 136,641 140,184 7.5% 1.2% 2.6% 77.1% 77.6% 85.2% 86.0% Bus 136 Lakewood - Freehold Mall - NY Express 73,118 83,240 101,789 107,198 13.8% 22.3% 5.3% 49.3% 52.5% 64.5% 65.9% Bus 137 Toms River - NY 474,881 474,612 490,175 479,925 -0.1% 3.3% -2.1% 78.6% 76.2% 87.7% 78.4% Bus 138 East Brunswick - NY 161,713 165,545 159,011 153,297 2.4% -3.9% -3.6% 67.3% 63.1% 65.8% 66.3% Bus 139 Lakewood - NY 3,152,917 3,180,533 3,143,586 3,136,953 0.9% -1.2% -0.2% 92.1% 85.4% 90.1% 89.2% Bus 319 Atlantic City - NY 340,112 342,596 333,848 339,108 0.7% -2.6% 1.6% 78.1% 76.6% 75.9% 72.1% Bus 74 Main Passaic 1,454,919 1,512,518 1,439,832 1,399,659 4.0% -4.8% -2.8% 42.9% 41.8% 40.5% 35.4% Bus 703 Haledon - East Rutherford 1,140,827 1,215,949 1,219,155 1,171,884 6.6% 0.3% -3.9% 36.1% 33.8% 33.3% 28.4% Bus 704 Paterson - Willowbrook 756,671 712,698 721,872 717,896 -5.8% 1.3% -0.6% 40.1% 38.3% 39.3% 34.3% Bus 712 Hackensack - Willowbrook 1,311,304 1,332,089 1,352,160 1,331,154 1.6% 1.5% -1.6% 41.5% 41.9% 43.7% 38.3% Bus 770 Paterson - Hackensack 577,939 576,387 541,026 446,959 -0.3% -6.1% -17.4% 31.9% 32.2% 31.2% 26.6% Bus 1 Newark - Jersey City 4,220,096 4,283,128 4,311,091 4,165,140 1.5% 0.7% -3.4% 43.2% 43.0% 44.2% 39.1% Bus 5 Newark - East Orange 386,558 384,077 375,588 367,050 -0.6% -2.2% -2.3% 19.9% 19.3% 20.9% 20.2% Bus 11 Newark - Willowbrook 976,292 935,722 915,629 865,172 -4.2% -2.1% -5.5% 37.5% 35.0% 35.7% 32.2% Bus 13 Newark - Irvington 4,448,677 4,329,368 4,340,673 4,163,659 -2.7% 0.3% -4.1% 44.8% 43.1% 44.3% 38.8% Bus 21 Main Street 3,076,985 3,048,174 3,005,359 2,891,908 -0.9% -1.4% -3.8% 50.5% 48.1% 50.1% 44.0% Bus 25 Springfield Ave 3,913,950 3,843,147 3,783,273 3,765,086 -1.8% -1.6% -0.5% 41.5% 44.8% 40.6% 37.3% Bus 26 Irvington - Elizabeth 392,108 397,775 377,615 330,785 1.4% -5.1% -12.4% 38.1% 38.9% 37.5% 28.8% Bus 27 Mount Prospect 3,697,588 3,546,232 3,596,018 3,458,662 -4.1% 1.4% -3.8% 35.9% 34.2% 36.3% 32.4% Bus 28 Newark - Montclair - Willowbrook 839,571 811,680 808,421 756,495 -3.3% -0.4% -6.4% 31.5% 29.7% 32.3% 27.6% Bus 29 Bloomfield Avenue 1,268,789 1,262,071 1,271,108 1,232,367 -0.5% 0.7% -3.0% 38.3% 36.7% 40.1% 34.6% Bus 30 North Arlington - Kearny - Newark 842,247 799,638 795,108 764,808 -5.1% -0.6% -3.8% 28.4% 26.3% 27.5% 24.0% Bus 34 Market Street 2,640,215 2,578,227 2,603,494 2,485,176 -2.3% 1.0% -4.5% 38.2% 36.9% 39.4% 33.9% Bus 37 Lyons Avenue 611,420 621,059 638,387 598,873 1.6% 2.8% -6.2% 33.1% 33.3% 35.3% 28.9% Bus 39 Chancellor Avenue / Kearny Avenue 2,240,498 2,231,920 2,264,707 2,157,986 -0.4% 1.5% -4.7% 42.2% 41.3% 43.0% 38.1% Bus 40 Jersey Gardens - Kearny 699,645 687,789 685,167 695,493 -1.7% -0.4% 1.5% 26.2% 25.3% 25.9% 24.0% Bus 41 Park Avenue 1,114,804 1,036,560 1,045,433 1,020,263 -7.0% 0.9% -2.4% 44.9% 39.6% 43.0% 37.9% Bus 42 18th Avenue 6,374 0 0 0 -100.0% ------13.3% ------Bus 48 Elizabeth - Woodbridge - Perth Amboy 610,615 813,623 838,135 799,732 33.2% 3.0% -4.6% 24.0% 25.8% 27.4% 23.6% Bus 52 Morris Avenue 366,587 358,023 351,669 334,330 -2.3% -1.8% -4.9% 23.3% 23.2% 23.8% 19.9% Bus 56 Elizabeth - Winfield 148,865 128,324 118,741 63,559 -13.8% -7.5% -46.5% 16.6% 14.2% 14.1% 12.0% Bus 57 Tremley 123,104 141,074 140,103 123,367 14.6% -0.7% -11.9% 26.5% 29.4% 30.4% 23.5% Bus 58 Elizabeth - Kenilworth 425,817 421,641 407,657 384,030 -1.0% -3.3% -5.8% 38.0% 35.4% 34.6% 29.3% Bus 59 Newark- Plainfield 1,621,568 1,607,970 1,628,825 1,573,698 -0.8% 1.3% -3.4% 39.7% 37.7% 39.9% 34.7% Bus 62 Newark - Perth Amboy 1,946,382 1,919,501 1,975,717 1,965,899 -1.4% 2.9% -0.5% 32.9% 30.3% 32.1% 28.7% Bus 65 Newark - Somerville 115,727 128,817 128,815 123,588 11.3% 0.0% -4.1% 17.4% 18.2% 18.6% 16.1% Bus 66 Newark - Somerville 636,020 622,475 616,434 595,929 -2.1% -1.0% -3.3% 23.3% 21.6% 21.8% 18.8% Bus 70 Newark - Livingston 1,896,304 1,874,088 1,903,051 1,827,298 -1.2% 1.5% -4.0% 35.3% 34.1% 35.1% 30.6% Bus 71 Newark - West Caldwell 716,993 732,280 737,995 683,667 2.1% 0.8% -7.4% 29.5% 28.5% 31.6% 26.6% Bus 72 Newark - Paterson 1,083,917 1,134,044 1,126,093 1,117,200 4.6% -0.7% -0.8% 50.1% 50.2% 50.2% 42.7% Annual Passenger Trips Annual Passenger Trips %Change Revenue Recovery Ratio Mode Service Description FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 Bus 73 Newark - Livingston 1,003,253 988,295 973,483 988,452 -1.5% -1.5% 1.5% 36.4% 35.0% 36.3% 34.1% Bus 75 Newark-Butler 5,655 0 0 0 -100.0% ------15.6% ------Bus 76 Newark - Hackensack 1,397,935 1,429,808 1,399,555 1,361,786 2.3% -2.1% -2.7% 36.3% 35.5% 36.6% 32.0% Bus 78 Newark - Secaucus 151,472 154,975 157,273 155,278 2.3% 1.5% -1.3% 24.5% 25.0% 27.0% 22.8% Bus 79 Newark - Parsippany Express 126,764 119,691 125,773 125,948 -5.6% 5.1% 0.1% 26.3% 24.2% 27.7% 27.9% Bus 90 Grove Street Crosstown 877,277 876,212 851,678 807,428 -0.1% -2.8% -5.2% 37.3% 36.0% 35.6% 31.0% Bus 92 Orange Crosstown 834,542 801,909 778,445 735,405 -3.9% -2.9% -5.5% 37.4% 34.0% 35.9% 31.8% Bus 93 Bloomfield-City Subway 10,751 0 0 0 -100.0% ------7.9% ------Bus 94 Stuyvesant Crosstown 3,933,508 3,828,301 3,759,987 3,642,362 -2.7% -1.8% -3.1% 46.0% 43.4% 46.2% 40.3% Bus 95 Wachtung - Newark 0 6,917 33,109 39,155 - - - 378.7% 18.3% - - - 3.3% 7.3% 8.4% Bus 96 18th Street Crosstown 176,142 171,654 163,943 174,477 -2.5% -4.5% 6.4% 18.3% 17.2% 18.9% 20.4% Bus 97 East Orange - Montclair 82,613 84,163 80,139 77,432 1.9% -4.8% -3.4% 13.1% 12.8% 14.3% 12.7% Bus 99 Clifton Avenue Crosstown 1,479,739 1,539,057 1,561,862 1,570,679 4.0% 1.5% 0.6% 26.9% 26.1% 27.2% 25.0% Bus 250 Springfield Ave "Go Bus" 185,554 186,507 183,170 179,314 0.5% -1.8% -2.1% 23.4% 22.6% 23.1% 20.8% Bus 258 Newark Airport - Newark - Bloomfield (28 GO) 893,824 802,458 858,758 794,346 -10.2% 7.0% -7.5% 23.8% 22.7% 26.4% 23.1% Bus 361 Newark Express 89,294 98,198 83,852 94,109 10.0% -14.6% 12.2% 29.2% 32.0% 28.6% 28.2% Bus 375 Springfield Ave Express 54,622 35,308 44,674 61,743 -35.4% 26.5% 38.2% 24.7% 17.3% 21.2% 23.8% Bus 378 Newark - Secaucus Express 10,801 7,561 18,448 7,679 -30.0% 144.0% -58.4% 28.1% 20.3% 54.0% 21.6% Bus 6 Ocean Ave-Journal Square 492,699 480,830 485,249 468,670 -2.4% 0.9% -3.4% 25.6% 24.1% 24.5% 21.3% Bus 43 Newark-Jersey City 5,438 0 0 0 -100.0% ------14.4% ------Bus 80 Newark Avenue 2,011,532 2,034,698 2,022,572 2,020,727 1.2% -0.6% -0.1% 34.2% 33.6% 34.2% 30.4% Bus 81 Greenville - Bayonne 853,521 836,704 850,306 841,151 -2.0% 1.6% -1.1% 31.9% 30.6% 32.0% 28.9% Bus 82 Hudson 80,476 89,133 95,253 89,829 10.8% 6.9% -5.7% 31.0% 30.9% 29.8% 21.1% Bus 83 Jersey City - Hackensack 1,020,479 1,138,415 1,192,792 1,202,206 11.6% 4.8% 0.8% 32.6% 37.0% 33.3% 29.1% Bus 84 Bergenline - Park Avenue 1,520,050 1,532,897 1,577,253 1,509,233 0.8% 2.9% -4.3% 25.0% 24.2% 25.3% 21.8% Bus 85 Hoboken - Harmon Meadow - Mill Creek 575,618 608,443 631,939 624,688 5.7% 3.9% -1.1% 31.1% 32.8% 34.3% 28.8% Bus 86 Nungessers - Newport 283,085 287,177 269,848 247,923 1.4% -6.0% -8.1% 17.1% 16.4% 16.3% 15.5% Bus 87 King Drive 3,377,269 3,418,223 3,465,259 3,321,453 1.2% 1.4% -4.1% 43.4% 42.3% 43.2% 35.9% Bus 89 Hoboken - North Bergen 503,587 530,652 505,648 444,783 5.4% -4.7% -12.0% 29.7% 31.3% 30.7% 24.6% Bus 329 Harmon Cove - Secaucus 75,526 73,812 77,235 72,577 -2.3% 4.6% -6.0% 4.0% 4.1% 4.9% 6.3% Bus 63 Lakewood - Jersey City - Weehawken Exp 41,462 40,179 41,570 41,495 -3.1% 3.5% -0.2% 67.1% 59.4% 53.1% 54.4% Bus 64 Lakewood - Jersey City - Weehawken 344,946 349,537 343,671 357,766 1.3% -1.7% 4.1% 60.2% 55.4% 56.2% 52.7% Bus 67 Toms River Newark 329,301 326,603 309,895 300,420 -0.8% -5.1% -3.1% 22.8% 22.1% 20.5% 18.3% Bus 68 Old Bridge - Jersey City - Weehawken 215,830 217,477 223,815 239,123 0.8% 2.9% 6.8% 69.6% 62.9% 69.3% 71.0% Bus 871 Morristown - Boonton - Willowbrook 50,691 55,769 53,940 47,096 10.0% -3.3% -12.7% 13.8% 14.3% 14.3% 11.7% Bus 872 Morristown -Greystone - Dover 24,345 27,518 28,658 18,199 13.0% 4.1% -36.5% 6.9% 7.7% 8.2% 8.3% Bus 873 Greyston - Morristown - Livinston 60,776 57,750 53,861 56,068 -5.0% -6.7% 4.1% 11.5% 10.2% 9.9% 9.1% Bus 874 Morristown - Willowbrook 36,770 35,530 37,800 37,558 -3.4% 6.4% -0.6% 15.1% 13.7% 15.4% 14.2% Bus 875 Rockaway - Willowbrook 43,057 46,638 42,751 39,741 8.3% -8.3% -7.0% 15.6% 16.5% 16.2% 12.9% Bus 880 Morris - Dover - Rockaway 149,737 150,893 148,541 136,967 0.8% -1.6% -7.8% 22.3% 20.9% 22.4% 19.0% Bus 317 Asbury Park - Phila 298,328 300,758 296,948 267,366 0.8% -1.3% -10.0% 25.3% 25.1% 26.1% 20.7% Bus 406 Berlin - Phila 606,087 614,776 629,402 583,065 1.4% 2.4% -7.4% 23.5% 22.5% 24.8% 21.3% Bus 409 Trenton - Phila 773,975 769,301 790,194 723,179 -0.6% 2.7% -8.5% 20.6% 19.7% 20.6% 17.5% Bus 414 Philadelphia - Moorestown 17,995 21,142 21,506 20,779 17.5% 1.7% -3.4% 18.3% 21.1% 22.1% 17.7% Bus 417 Mt Holly - Phila 29,123 25,131 26,619 23,367 -13.7% 5.9% -12.2% 23.2% 18.9% 21.2% 16.6% Bus 400 Sicklerville - Phila 1,667,662 1,651,558 1,643,833 1,501,880 -1.0% -0.5% -8.6% 25.2% 24.5% 26.2% 22.4% Bus 404 Cherry Hill Mall - Phila via Pennsauken 600,250 585,748 553,228 511,858 -2.4% -5.6% -7.5% 28.0% 26.3% 26.5% 23.0% Bus 551 Atlantic City - Phila 704,041 683,771 623,929 572,542 -2.9% -8.8% -8.2% 49.2% 45.2% 42.6% 35.3% Bus 313 Philadelphia - Cape May via Millville 81,401 83,708 83,367 77,386 2.8% -0.4% -7.2% 15.8% 15.4% 16.0% 13.7% Bus 315 Philadelphia - Cape May via Tuckahoe 41,656 42,581 42,741 42,693 2.2% 0.4% -0.1% 23.9% 22.6% 22.7% 21.6% Bus 401 Salem - Phila 244,998 255,971 246,372 207,320 4.5% -3.8% -15.9% 21.0% 21.2% 21.2% 17.1% Bus 402 Pennsville - Phila 187,931 193,627 196,659 177,625 3.0% 1.6% -9.7% 22.2% 21.8% 23.5% 20.3% Bus 408 Millville - Phila 427,881 420,294 419,303 374,328 -1.8% -0.2% -10.7% 24.9% 23.6% 24.7% 19.9% Bus 410 Bridgeton - Phila 374,082 372,890 367,278 326,103 -0.3% -1.5% -11.2% 24.0% 23.5% 24.5% 20.6% Bus 412 Glassboro - Phila 336,192 336,006 330,102 286,052 -0.1% -1.8% -13.3% 21.9% 20.9% 21.9% 17.5% Bus 501 Atlantic City - Brigantine 313,526 305,659 289,291 271,143 -2.5% -5.4% -6.3% 13.4% 12.8% 12.5% 12.0% Bus 502 Atlantic City - AC Community College 893,956 839,440 783,863 760,431 -6.1% -6.6% -3.0% 34.0% 31.7% 32.1% 29.3% Bus 504 Bungalow Park 185,192 190,800 193,375 184,219 3.0% 1.3% -4.7% 10.9% 11.0% 11.7% 10.6% Bus 505 Atlantic City - Longport 1,514,846 1,468,482 1,413,815 1,318,249 -3.1% -3.7% -6.8% 18.8% 17.9% 18.3% 16.3% Annual Passenger Trips Annual Passenger Trips %Change Revenue Recovery Ratio Mode Service Description FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 Bus 507 Atlantic City - Ocean City 796,087 773,113 744,304 690,910 -2.9% -3.7% -7.2% 36.0% 34.2% 33.6% 29.8% Bus 508 Atlantic City - Hamilton Twp 614,137 615,226 576,779 541,915 0.2% -6.2% -6.0% 33.0% 31.0% 30.1% 27.1% Bus 509 Atlantic City - Somers Point 439,549 424,503 398,726 380,920 -3.4% -6.1% -4.5% 35.7% 33.6% 33.5% 30.5% Bus 510 Cape May - Wildwood Shuttle 7,145 7,675 9,184 9,106 7.4% 19.7% -0.8% 9.7% 10.6% 15.2% 10.4% Bus 552 Atlantic City - Cape May 653,693 644,601 622,435 603,103 -1.4% -3.4% -3.1% 20.2% 18.8% 18.9% 16.9% Bus 553 Atlantic City - Upper Deerfield 1,126,807 1,120,286 1,041,472 972,808 -0.6% -7.0% -6.6% 34.4% 32.6% 29.9% 24.8% Bus 554 Atlantic City - Lindenwold 797,928 784,185 754,823 728,505 -1.7% -3.7% -3.5% 29.4% 27.9% 28.4% 25.1% Bus 559 Atlantic City - Lakewood 809,721 778,442 753,599 723,183 -3.9% -3.2% -4.0% 30.9% 28.0% 27.9% 24.0% Bus 405 Cherry Hill Mall - Camden via Merchantville 270,197 260,836 245,830 233,643 -3.5% -5.8% -5.0% 24.9% 23.4% 23.3% 20.6% Bus 407 Moorestown Mall - Camden 368,550 361,049 355,043 334,796 -2.0% -1.7% -5.7% 19.5% 18.0% 18.9% 16.3% Bus 413 Burlington - Camden via Mt Holly 557,439 540,175 538,735 501,002 -3.1% -0.3% -7.0% 25.9% 24.0% 25.8% 22.3% Bus 418 Trenton - Camden Express 14,485 14,152 12,587 11,202 -2.3% -11.1% -11.0% 14.7% 13.0% 12.2% 8.8% Bus 419 Burlington - Camden 156,735 161,258 167,717 144,193 2.9% 4.0% -14.0% 6.9% 6.8% 8.4% 7.9% Bus 403 Turnersville - Camden 903,730 921,897 866,070 858,730 2.0% -6.1% -0.8% 23.7% 23.1% 23.4% 21.7% Bus 450 Cherry Hill Mall - Camden 389,114 386,969 395,737 349,276 -0.6% 2.3% -11.7% 20.4% 18.9% 20.7% 17.0% Bus 451 Lindenwold PATCO - Camden 71,749 72,362 73,430 61,451 0.9% 1.5% -16.3% 9.9% 10.2% 11.1% 9.0% Bus 452 Pennsauken - Camden 468,545 452,465 478,250 418,562 -3.4% 5.7% -12.5% 12.1% 12.3% 16.3% 13.4% Bus 453 Woodlynne - Camden 123,972 119,354 125,390 119,553 -3.7% 5.1% -4.7% 15.6% 14.4% 16.3% 13.1% Bus 455 Cherry Hill Mall - Paulsboro 257,862 254,048 249,629 234,546 -1.5% -1.7% -6.0% 14.3% 14.0% 15.0% 13.2% Bus 457 Camden - Moorestown Mall 212,779 215,235 212,739 194,387 1.2% -1.2% -8.6% 14.7% 13.9% 14.9% 12.2% Bus 459 Echelon Mall - Avandale Park-Ride 279,724 280,229 254,401 231,391 0.2% -9.2% -9.0% 15.8% 15.2% 14.8% 12.5% Bus 460 Camden Seasonal 32,084 38,794 51,047 35,458 20.9% 31.6% -30.5% 24.3% 28.1% 32.4% 21.4% Bus 463 Woodbury - Avandale Park-Ride 88,691 83,337 81,515 64,466 -6.0% -2.2% -20.9% 13.8% 11.8% 12.2% 9.2% Bus 600 Trenton - Princeton 276,597 274,208 263,474 264,229 -0.9% -3.9% 0.3% 16.0% 16.1% 16.7% 14.1% Bus 601 Ewing - Trenton - Hamilton 357,684 357,775 428,075 436,461 0.0% 19.6% 2.0% 17.8% 18.1% 21.3% 19.3% Bus 602 Trenton - Pennington 82,944 77,816 64,135 0 -6.2% -17.6% -100.0% 14.0% 12.9% 12.3% - - - Bus 603 Mercer Mall - Trenton - Hamilton 374,975 360,299 362,284 330,639 -3.9% 0.6% -8.7% 25.5% 24.7% 27.0% 22.6% Bus 604 Trenton - East Trenton 41,667 42,836 45,131 0 2.8% 5.4% -100.0% 8.9% 9.6% 11.3% - - - Bus 605 Montgomery - Princeton - Quaker Bridge Mall 158,330 159,827 156,771 140,987 0.9% -1.9% -10.1% 13.5% 13.8% 14.4% 11.6% Bus 606 Princeton - Trenton - Hamilton 658,755 658,239 667,175 649,329 -0.1% 1.4% -2.7% 24.5% 23.4% 24.0% 20.8% Bus 607 Trenton - Ewing 267,759 263,763 260,407 245,192 -1.5% -1.3% -5.8% 15.7% 15.6% 17.6% 14.8% Bus 608 Hamilton - Trenton - West Trenton 516,939 494,948 517,861 498,800 -4.3% 4.6% -3.7% 22.6% 21.8% 24.9% 21.7% Bus 609 Ewing - Trenton - Lawrence 740,380 725,115 698,888 646,403 -2.1% -3.6% -7.5% 25.0% 24.4% 25.7% 22.1% Bus 610 Trenton Seasonal 11,765 7,597 5,458 5,261 -35.4% -28.2% -3.6% 38.7% 20.0% 13.3% 12.1% Bus 611 Perry Street Shuttle 29,990 32,221 27,170 26,325 7.4% -15.7% -3.1% 80.5% 73.1% 78.0% 67.2% Bus 612 Lawrence - Princeton Jct Shuttle 22,833 20,456 18,509 17,484 -10.4% -9.5% -5.5% 2.7% 3.7% 5.3% 4.3% Bus 613 Mercer Mall - Trenton - Hamilton 479,155 472,553 480,320 462,454 -1.4% 1.6% -3.7% 25.6% 25.4% 25.9% 23.0% Bus 619 Ewing-Trenton-Mercer County College 248,026 239,174 242,426 217,326 -3.6% 1.4% -10.4% 21.8% 20.7% 22.4% 18.2% Bus 624 Pennington-East Trenton 0 0 2,114 96,483 ------4464.0% ------10.2% 10.7% Bus 655 Princeton - Plainsboro 40,421 38,483 40,785 9,146 -4.8% 6.0% -77.6% 17.5% 4.4% 5.0% 5.6% Bus 304 Mountain Creek - Crystal Springs - NY 2,444 4,727 2,652 0 93.4% -43.9% -100.0% 24.2% 28.0% 38.3% - - - Bus 307 Freehold - Great Adventure 20,966 21,142 13,881 9,750 0.8% -34.3% -29.8% 51.2% 30.5% 11.2% 16.2% Bus 308 Great Adventure - NY 121,982 127,047 119,813 108,156 4.2% -5.7% -9.7% 112.9% 107.6% 123.6% 101.3% Bus 316 Philadelphia - Cape May Express 26,063 24,849 23,474 25,653 -4.7% -5.5% 9.3% 46.7% 40.2% 48.2% 44.1% Bus 318 Philadelphia - Great Adventure 4,643 4,566 2,732 1,517 -1.7% -40.2% -44.5% 35.2% 28.2% 18.1% 71.7% Bus 353 Secaucus Jct - Meadowlands 40,981 21,187 14,840 2,460 -48.3% -30.0% -83.4% 16.9% 16.8% 12.9% 19.2% Bus ( c ) 2 JOURNAL SQUARE/SECAUCUS 829,366 934,053 956,530 908,082 12.6% 2.4% -5.1% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 10 Bayonne/Jersey City 1,690,844 1,501,972 1,516,260 1,347,177 -11.2% 1.0% -11.2% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 22 HILLSIDE 721,604 671,776 708,108 656,767 -6.9% 5.4% -7.3% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 23 HOBOKEN/NORTH BERGEN 51,680 51,878 45,341 47,993 0.4% -12.6% 5.8% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 88 JOURNAL SQUARE/NORTH BOULEVARD 1,047,618 865,998 947,539 934,567 -17.3% 9.4% -1.4% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 119 Bayonne-Jersey City-NY 353,162 485,629 776,507 918,984 37.5% 59.9% 18.3% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 751 Paramus/Fairview/Edgewater 123,371 140,061 135,756 129,144 13.5% -3.1% -4.9% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 752 OAKLAND/HACKENSACK 104,796 85,486 80,139 84,178 -18.4% -6.3% 5.0% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 753 NEW MILFORD/PARAMUS 96,686 56,130 49,565 66,574 -41.9% -11.7% 34.3% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 755 Paramus/Fort Lee/Edgewater 81,557 81,707 71,375 70,853 0.2% -12.6% -0.7% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 756 FORT LEE/PARAMUS 295,496 252,753 242,143 217,266 -14.5% -4.2% -10.3% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 762 HACKENSACK/PARAMUS 57,958 59,292 45,953 37,393 2.3% -22.5% -18.6% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 772 NEW MILFORD/SECAUCUS 72,224 77,135 74,128 78,739 6.8% -3.9% 6.2% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Annual Passenger Trips Annual Passenger Trips %Change Revenue Recovery Ratio Mode Service Description FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 Bus ( c ) 780 ENGLEWOOD/PASSAIC 400,877 322,056 311,215 303,381 -19.7% -3.4% -2.5% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 702 PATERSON/ELMWOOD PARK 195,993 182,293 167,614 176,402 -7.0% -8.1% 5.2% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 705 PASSAIC/WILLOWBROOK MALL 186,256 202,411 179,569 186,285 8.7% -11.3% 3.7% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 707 PATERSON-SADDLE BROOK 131,672 145,927 127,910 159,469 10.8% -12.3% 24.7% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 709 BLOOMFIELD/PARAMUS 505,543 492,238 482,070 434,520 -2.6% -2.1% -9.9% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 722 PATERSON/PARAMUS PARK 22,706 26,081 25,505 23,239 14.9% -2.2% -8.9% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 744 PATERSON/GREYSTONE PARK 447,973 441,379 461,103 433,939 -1.5% 4.5% -5.9% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 746 POMPTON LAKES/RIDGEWOOD 192,149 183,395 175,097 198,724 -4.6% -4.5% 13.5% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 748 PATERSON/WILLOWBROOK MALL 163,155 148,398 137,796 174,335 -9.0% -7.1% 26.5% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 758 PASSAIC/PARAMUS PARK 194,480 178,546 193,241 182,286 -8.2% 8.2% -5.7% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 801 Metropark Loop 51,674 61,762 63,775 58,816 19.5% 3.3% -7.8% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 802 Metropark Loop 91,959 101,860 101,462 104,128 10.8% -0.4% 2.6% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 803 Metropark Loop 132,746 133,231 132,687 150,533 0.4% -0.4% 13.4% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 804 Metropark Loop 61,628 65,501 64,003 73,953 6.3% -2.3% 15.5% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 805 Metropark Loop 113,544 109,991 100,486 95,007 -3.1% -8.6% -5.5% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 810 NEW BRUNSWICK/WOODBRIDGE CT 269,927 273,527 259,285 246,249 1.3% -5.2% -5.0% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 811 NEW BRUNSWICK/SOUTH RIVER 91,536 93,252 91,490 88,475 1.9% -1.9% -3.3% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 813 PERTH AMBOY/MIDDLESEX COLLEGE 263,902 278,461 266,656 267,671 5.5% -4.2% 0.4% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 814 NORTH BRUNSWICK/MIDDLESEX COLLEGE 297,472 309,679 297,348 276,747 4.1% -4.0% -6.9% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 815 WOODBRIDGE CENTER/NEW BRUNSWICK 393,735 404,357 400,519 373,524 2.7% -0.9% -6.7% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 817 Perth Amboy/Middletown 130,429 125,842 118,703 100,957 -3.5% -5.7% -14.9% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 818 New Brunswick/Old Bridge 144,884 148,283 141,429 128,038 2.3% -4.6% -9.5% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 819 PISCATAWAY/MIDDLESEX MALL 195,793 199,816 191,135 174,596 2.1% -4.3% -8.7% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 822 NORTH PLAINFIELD/PLAINFIELD 35,593 27,806 20,236 19,045 -21.9% -27.2% -5.9% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 830 ASBURY PARK/POINT PLEASANT BEACH 131,569 130,202 118,928 114,133 -1.0% -8.7% -4.0% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 831 RED BANK/LONG BRANCH 166,060 159,442 152,296 141,773 -4.0% -4.5% -6.9% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 832 RED BANK /ASBURY PARK 281,221 286,347 271,816 272,347 1.8% -5.1% 0.2% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 833 RED BANK /FREEHOLD RACEWAY MALL 72,669 68,418 64,564 59,229 -5.8% -5.6% -8.3% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 834 RED BANK /HIGHLANDS 104,815 102,413 96,894 95,150 -2.3% -5.4% -1.8% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 835 RED BANK /SEA BRIGHT 44,774 45,041 40,068 41,213 0.6% -11.0% 2.9% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 836 ASBURY PARK /CENTRA STATE 174,541 176,258 181,206 171,367 1.0% 2.8% -5.4% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 837 LONG BRANCH TO SEAVIEW SQUARE MALL 156,338 146,187 146,556 130,842 -6.5% 0.3% -10.7% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 468 PENNS GROVE-WOODSTOWN 139,116 134,554 127,160 113,524 -3.3% -5.5% -10.7% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 878 Liberty State Park 12,517 12,059 11,848 8,240 -3.7% -1.7% -30.5% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 879 Convent Station 8,364 5,261 5,749 3,370 -37.1% 9.3% -41.4% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 890 SOUTH MAIN 11,195 12,164 12,430 12,340 8.7% 2.2% -0.7% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 891 HECKMAN 10,407 9,514 9,870 9,440 -8.6% 3.7% -4.4% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Bus ( c ) 986 SUMMIT/MURRAY HILL/PLAINFIELD 51,507 51,907 58,469 49,702 0.8% 12.6% -15.0% (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) (contracted) Adjustments 3,047 1,300 -1,338 8,720
System Total 260,608,281 267,025,579 272,386,772 272,729,978 2.5% 2.0% 0.1%