Sign Montana Profit Sharing Agreement Template Fast

Check out Sign for Profit Sharing Agreement Template Montana Fast function from signNow. Speed up business document signing process. Create, edit and send custom templates instantly. Mobile friendly. No downloading!

No credit card required

How it works

Upload & open your document in the editor
Fill it out and eSign it in minutes
Save the signed document or share it with others

Rate your experience

39 votes

Montana Sign Profit Sharing Agreement Template Fast

More and more people, as well as companies, are switching over to using digital documents. However, with the new opportunities that going paperless provides, there are also some challenges. Among these is being able to certify the authenticity and integrity of an electronic form.

In the United States, an electronically signed document with proven certification is as legal and legitimate as a usual paper with a handwritten signature. Another reason why online certifying solutions are becoming more popular is that now the majority of government institutions allow you to provide applications and tax reports by email. If you are looking for an easy-to-use and secure solution to prepare your forms electronically, the best choice is signNow. It provides everyone with the ability to create Sign Profit Sharing Agreement Template Montana Fast, without additional efforts. Now not a single document will be a problem to fill out. One of the main reasons for this is that our platform processes all kinds of different file formats for creating a neat, good-looking and easy-to-share template.

The initials tool is multi-purpose and combines several features. You can:

  1. Create a typed or finger-drawn autograph.
  2. Capture a handwritten full name with a camera.
  3. Save the initials you have already used.

As a result, your sample will be certified with a perfect-looking signature and easily shared with other individuals. You also have the option to send verifying requests to others.

Thousands of companies love signNow
Fall leader 2020. G2 Crowd award badge.

Quick-start guide — document type sign profit sharing agreement template montana fast

signNow makes complex signature workflows easy. Save time and follow the instructions below to sign documents online and close deals faster.

Wondering about Sign Profit Sharing Agreement Template Montana Fast? Nothing can be more comfortable with signNow. Its an award-winning platform for your company that is easy to embed to your existing business infrastructure. It plays perfectly with preferable modern software and requires a short set up time. You can check the powerful solution to create complex eSignature workflows with no coding.

Sign Profit Sharing Agreement Template Montana Fast - step-by-step guidance:

  • Sign up if you have no account yet. You can also log in with your social account - Google or Facebook.
  • Get started with a 30-day free trial for newcomers or check signNow pricing plans.
  • Create your customized forms or use ready-to-use templates. The feature-rich PDF editor is always at your fingertips.
  • Invite your teammates and create an unlimited number of teams. Collaborate in a single shared workspace.
  • Easily understand Sign Profit Sharing Agreement Template Montana Fast feature by self serve on our website or use the customer support.
  • Create document signing links and share them with your clients. Now you can collect signatures ten times faster.
  • Get instant email notifications about any user action.
  • Try out the free mobile application to be in touch on the go.

Improve your experience with signNow. Creating your account, you get everything needed to close deals faster, enhance business performance, make your teammates and partners happier. Try out the advanced feature - Sign Profit Sharing Agreement Template Montana Fast. Make sure it's the best solution for the company, customers, and each individual.


signNow. It’s as  easy as 1-2-3

No credit card required

Document type sign profit sharing agreement template montana fast

okay welcome ladies and gentlemen thank you so much for joining us this morning or this afternoon depending on where you are in jeopardy wants to just thank you again for your participation we are proud to host these webinar series called connecting the dots we know that the industry globally has the opportunity to get together throughout the year to talk about technology in some of the initiatives that are happening when it comes to infrastructure and road building but at the agency level we know that these opportunities are less so we wanted to help sponsor and create a forum dedicated to agencies and helping generate awareness of technologies and what is needed to make those technologies succeed so today we have invited you to a presentation about the fast act specifically overview and implementation experience our speaker today is Lynn xanto she is an administrator with the Transportation Planning Division at the Montana Department of Transportation and I'm going to turn it over to Lynn to begin our presentation today I will also let you know before Lin begins that you are welcome to chat your questions you can do that in the left lower left side of your screen and I will help to moderate those questions Lynn has given us the permission to go ahead and entertain questions throughout the presentation so I will do my best to get to all the questions that we have while she's speaking or if we feel it's more appropriate to kind of wait till the end we can also do that but feel free to go ahead and chat your questions in the lower left of your screen okay Lynn go ahead okay thank you Amy and it is a pleasure to be here today and be presenting to all of you in the connecting the dots forum and on the fast act so as Amy mentioned i am the planning administrator for the montana do t I've been with state government for 25 years and the majority with the Montana Department of Transportation however I did take a couple years in the middle of my career and went and did physical analysis for legislative staff I've had the pleasure of working at both the technical the program and the policy levels and have been an administrator for the past eight years so what I hope to do with today's presentation is provide a bit of context about rural Montana first because I understand I'm talking to my fellow do tease across the state and we all are unique in our own ways so i'll provide a bit about our context and then working within the federal program as a rural state and with the fast act provisions i will focus primarily on the highway side because that is primarily what we deal with in Montana so for so we'll move into the basic outline I'll give the context I'll give a general overview of the fast act implementation status were not quite a year into the fast act but I'll highlight a few things from our perspective of what we've experienced and then talk a little bit about looking ahead and what's next at the federal level so first just here's a map of our country and probably most of you know where Montana is but if you if not we are in the northwest portion of the country and we border Canada and we are a large land area state you can see we've got a lot of land when you look at the rest of the space except for obviously Alaska Texas in California go ahead Amy so in terms of land area where the fourth largest land area state and our land area if you took the pen North Atlantic states we're larger than the combined area of those states yet we only have two percent of the combined population of those states who are very rural we have the third view of people per square mile of all states I believe our people per square mile is seven people per square mile yet we pay the fourth highest amount per capita to the Highway Trust Fund at 181 dollars per capita there's fifty six counties in our state and 52 of them are larger than Rhode Island's land area and 24 would not meet the US Census Bureau's definition of settled which is two persons per square mile so a lot of our population resides in the western part of the state and as you go east it gets really rural and that's where a lot of those counties that have less than two persons per square mile are in terms of travel in our highway system about seventy percent of our vehicle miles traveled is rural I think we're in the top seven of all states in terms of rural travel the and if you were to travel from our northwest corner the community of yak to our southeast corner which is a community of Valles ada it's it's longer than traveling between Chicago and Washington DC over if you went by Road at seven hundred and eighty seven miles but a fee when as the crow flies 744 we in terms of urban areas we only have three areas in the state that are over 50,000 population so have the status of a metropolitan planning organization and our biggest community is about 120,000 people so rural we do have seven reservations and given all that we are very dependent on the federal program our only funding source from a state side is fuel text we don't receive any general fund and so fuel tax and motor carrier vehicle fees are how our transportation system is funded rail we have no state operated rail in the state and in terms of transit programs we have 40 transit systems but most of them are rural and more on demand type transit so very dependent on the federal program and our state funds are just enough for us to match the federal funds and then take care of our highway maintenance needs so not a lot of extra we are we do function more as a pay-as-you-go state we're pretty risk-adverse so we don't do a lot of the innovative financing but is allowed to the federal program we view that more as a tool if needed but you still need revenue to back paying back a lot of that financing so without with our revenue sources pretty limited where we don't do a lot of innovative financing so I won't get into much of those provisions okay so now we'll move on to the fixing America Surface Transportation Act and you all know Congress passed that is fast act in December 2015 so as i mentioned we're not quite a year into implementation of the act but it was one of its the first long-term surface transportation bill in a decade and overall i think it's a pretty good bill it provides five years of federal funding certainty go ahead and move on thank you so five years of federal funding certainty so stable and predictable funding through September 30th of twenty20 it did include a slide overall program funding increase which amounted to a little more than inflation but the majority of the funding from the Highway Trust Fund is distributed to the states through formula I think it's at 92 or 93 percent and that's positive because it gives us all more flexibility and how we manage our program and meet our needs it continued the Congressional philosophy of nowhere mark so unlike what we saw in safetea-lu in 2005 it did not have earmarks and the revenue from the Highway Trust Fund is over 280 1 billion nationwide for the five year period in order to get to that revenue level there it did require transfers from the general fund about 70 billion and these were more offset by a number of pay force and I won't get into all those specifics but I think the point there is is that the Highway Trust Fund is not sustainable over time and even prior to the fast act there have been several general fund transfers to keep funding for highways and transit moving through the trust fund one other aspect on the revenue side that is worries them from our perspective and probably for most do tease is that it includes seven point six billion rescission in 2020 and in terms of the rescission this is is to encourage life first a 2020 and it's called out section 14 38 at the fast act and what what we see that as is a lost flexibility and can potentially impact program delivery across our programs so we'll watch that closely and hope that Congress gives States flexibility and how we apply that rescission and that they don't dictate more what categories we take it from other notable program aspects is that the fast act really was minor adjustments where map-21 that was passed two years prior was more major program reform so the fast act extends the program structure through 2020 that was established in that 21 probably one minor caveat to that is that it did include a new Freight program and freight discretionary program and I'll talk a little bit more about those later in the presentation one of the features of map-21 was the establishment and national performance measures and the national performance goals for transportation and the fast act didn't change much there a lot of it is because we are still deep into the rulemaking and seeing what that will entail and haven't quite we're just an infancy of implementation on certain parts of the performance side so I'll talk a little bit more about that later on and I think to really good things about the fast act is the stability that it's provided in terms of the five years of funding that allows us as do tease the better plan develop and deliver our improvement projects for the decade prior as we were juggling short-term extensions it really is disruptive to projects and hard for any of us to plan an advance our program and again it's the first long-term bill and safety low expired in 2009 from the flexibility side it allows it retained a lot of the state flexibilities that have been in federal law for quite a while in terms of providing funds through formula so that we can look at our system identify our needs and best invest where it's going to make a difference in our state there's transferability fifty percent transferability that was retained between the core highway programs again that helps us put money where the needs are and the flexibilities help avoid that sort of one-size-fits-all approach that each of us is very unique in terms of what we deal with so we've appreciated that part of the bill so although overall we view the fast fact is a very good fill the it does it's not perfect and we do have some anticipated challenges that we see as we move forward and just to highlight a few of those challenges one of them is that Highway Safety funding from the fast act is more restrictive it's not eligible for behavioral programs and I know in our state as we try to work toward what we call vision zero and eliminating fatal and serious injuries on our highways as we look at the main causal factors it really is more behavioral related than infrastructure so in Montana are three major contributors to crashes on our system and fatal and serious injuries are run off the road crashes so that's the aspect we can address with this Highway Safety funding and try to improve our infrastructure but I would say over two-thirds of our crashes are attributed to impaired driving or lack of seatbelts and prior to the fact we could use funding to help address some of those behavioral aspects but with the fact we can't we still have the National Highway Safety traffic administration funding which is the nitsa funding to address behavioral but that we have found has been less money there for us in both map-21 in the fast act performance reporting again the national performance framework has continued through the fast act and one change is that under map 21 we would have to reporting cycles for the feds to assess if we were achieving progress toward are the targets that will establish under the fast act they put that evaluation of achieving progress to one year and if within one year of reporting we don't they don't determine that we're achieving progress then it kicks us into some penalties or those penalties range from having to do extra reporting or having to direct certain funds to certain types of projects there are some things like there the fast act changed the name of the surface transportation program to the surface transportation block grant program and not too much changed in terms of how that funding program works or sell it abilities but some of the challenge that we are seeing is block grants implies that some people interpret that to mean that we distribute funds out to say our local governments and then they manage and administer and do do with them as the law provides but in reality we still administer the funds again keep in mind that we don't have any urban areas that hit the 200,000 threshold and so part of our concern with the name changes it could cause confusion amongst our stakeholders when in reality and how the program functions it hasn't changed too much another requirement is Tim you can we stop you for just once I get working in a question and asking if you can explain the rescission process again what is it and where is the funding taken from and even is it the same for all states do you mind walking us through that sure I will explain it to the best that I can but so within the federal program the fast act on the authorization bill provide us the level of expenditure of expenditure so let's say for simplicity what was it 280 billion is our apportionment level and then each year the annual appropriators give us our obligation Authority which normally has been less than the amount of apportionment so then you have this this gap between the spendable dollars and the dollars you can't touch so the intent of the rescission is that come 2020 any of the money sitting in the various funding categories in our highway program they'll rescind a certain level Congress will basically take that away and I had mentioned those flexibilities where we can transfer between categories how they apply it I I don't know the exact mechanics but but we have seen rescissions where they apply a percentage across the board to each funding category and so if you have projects planned or upcoming to be led in that funding category and the rescission hits those funds may not be there to deliver that project so what we're doing in Montana what we will watch closely is will monitor our five-year program and our lettings and ensure that with that transfer ability ability that we will move money in the categories that we need it if if we can but ultimately given the level of the rescission we're worried it is going to impact our actual project delivery for what we have planned and we have a we have done a little white paper on that i can send that to you Amy it's super complicated and how they apply it could okay change when we get to 2020 the other thing I would mention is in the annual appropriations process so right now Congress has not given us our obligation Authority or our spendable funding for 2017 yet they haven't said how much we can spend of the funding provided in the fast act the Senate has its version of an appropriations bill and the house has there's the Senate version does have a additional revision of highway funds so the House version does not and Congress just got back in session and it's appearing that they probably will will not give us a full obligation Authority or a full appropriations bill before the end of the calendar year they'll probably just give us a continuing resolution through who knows a month or two months I'm hearing December so until they give us that full appropriations bill we won't know if they if they give us an additional recession in 2017 and that would be on top of what is in the act for 2020 okay so great awesome thanks for four given some attention to that we appreciate it sure okay so in terms of challenges so the freight plan I don't know if I'd necessarily call it a challenge but it does add additional requirements states in terms of we are required to have a safe right plan by December fourth of next year 2017 and so some states have had Frank plans some have not that is something that we're in the process right now of doing is initiating Freight plan and with that pre-planned came a funding category for specifically for freight and states that do not have a freight plan in place by December fourth of next year can't access those funds until such time that they do and then the other challenge is that at the Congressional levels we still haven't found figured out a way to we don't have a long-term sustainable revenue source we're still relying on the highway trust fund and as I mentioned earlier that's been kep afloat by transfers from the general fund for several years so now I'll talk about a little bit of some of the winds with the fast act all of us I believe our members to a shto and a shto had done extensive work on reauthorization policies that they are pushing forward to safety as yeah he was coming to an end and a lot of the policy positions that Ash dope had in place how were achieved and this is a summary of those so first is that the fast act to achieve a long-term surface transportation bill and it still acknowledges that that federally assisted but state implemented relationship which is important again for giving States the ability to implement our graham it it funded the program at a little bit higher level than what we had had so current levels plus a little higher than inflation it maintained state flexibility as I mentioned and maintained that percent of funding of over ninety percent coming to us by formula it resisted the creation of new programs for the most part except for the freight program but the freight program really was seen as having a federal purpose it allowed the do tease to assume some USDOT responsibilities for design and right away acquisition and both map-21 and the fast act had sections that were focused on simplifying and streamlining administrative approval and processes for routine activities so a big interest in both bills in terms of accelerating project delivery and streamlining and then from the performance measure standpoint again it continued the framework of map-21 indent expand on that however the rulemaking process that is being gone through we have seen additional measures added beyond what was in the act of self so we're watching that closely and are concerned about further burden through the rulemaking process the one the one policy area that was not achieved is the long-term solvency of the Highway Trust Fund so we'll move now into some specifics about our experience with the fast act and again keep in mind this is from a rural highway state perspective but there's three areas that I'll touch on innovation and streamlining I'll give you some examples of how we've taken advantage of those provisions I'll talk a little bit about the freight provisions and then some of the concerns we're seeing with national performance measures so on innovation and streamlining basically according to FHWA they have noted that there's 18 provisions in the highway title that are designed to increase innovation and improve efficiency and they sort of fall along for general seems there's flexibilities to increase efficiencies and so examples of this is that they there are some provisions where mid-century bridges or common mid-century bridges are exempt from some environmental review there's a provision that allows at-risk bridges to be replaced without delays to nesting swallows so there there's provisions along increasing efficiencies there's also provisions that are refining existing authorities that we're already in the law and some of these are related to basically how NEPA is applied and some flexibilities that are given to States in terms of NEPA one of those examples I'll talk a little bit about is the linking planning and NEPA and in our state we call it pre NEPA corridor planning so I'll mention a little bit about that another general theme of the streamlining provision is adding new tools to help accelerate project delivery and I'll talk a little bit about provision that was in map 21 and continued into the fast act that relates to innovative contracting and how that helps accelerate project delivery and also helps with more favorable federal share for certain projects and then lastly in in terms of innovation where they built on some of their existing activities that federal highways had implemented through the every day counts initiative so in terms of innovative contracting some of the items there that help that we have found useful that have helped us advance our project maybe quicker for certain types of projects we have taken advantage of design-build type contracts where we've used that contracting mechanism for certain types of projects like rest areas maybe retaining walls or slope stability projects or a DA improvements and what we found is that has helped us get a project into the design and the contracting process quicker so that we can we can move certain projects along and if I use the example of rest areas if we did the traditional design-bid-build process we were finding that by that time we got to letting a rest area project some of the building code standards were may be out of date so that design-build helps us move those projects more efficiently and helps us align better with building codes and those sorts of things that are more time sensitive let's see another thing that we've done we sometimes utilize alternative bidding in our contracting so if we're about to let a project and we might be a little uncertain about the funding package or costs a certain features we may utilize an alternate bidding feature and then we have been trying to pursue pursue through our legislature authority to do the construction the CMC g-type contracting and so far we haven't had success with that but our legislature will be meeting this next January and hope to achieve a bill authority to use that sort of contracting mechanism to to help accelerate our project delivery on the preemie but corridor planning efforts Montana we have done that sort of planning sense gosh we started piloting it in the early 2000s and have found that it has been extremely helpful and beneficial to us in terms of better scoping projects so traditionally it's like we would identify that okay we have this road it doesn't it's not up to standard we need to go reconstruct it so we jump right into design and pretty soon we find out that we're in the environmental process and elevated to an EIS type level which is millions of dollars and oh like it we've had the ISS that have taken a decade or more and so through the prenup a planning process we have been able to at a planning level have early conversations with our public and the resource agencies and and go into a project not knowing if there's truly a need but talking to those stakeholders and finding out what are the issues within me along a quarter a corridor and if we identify them then we use that premium a planning process to basically develop our purpose and need statement and also determine if we have a fundable and achievable project or if there's any any red flags and then once we identify a purpose and need and funding to fit an aspect of moving an improvement on the corridor then we move into NEPA and since we have been doing that process we have not initiated a new EIS gosh since probably two thousand three ish and we have no active EIS is right now and are able to move our projects more efficiently with less impacts because we're doing better scoping at the planning level before we initiate NEPA and the design and then the other aspect that I wanted to mention briefly is this provision on increased federal share and this is a 23 USC section 120 and essentially what this is is it was first established in map-21 I think in that bill at section 1304 and the purpose is to increase the use of innovations and that accelerate construction and improve efficiency of construction or that improve safety and quality of highway infrastructure reduce congestion and through your division office you can submit an application for something that is innovative in your state or exhilarates project construction and if it's accepted at your division office then you are able to get a more favorable federal share on your project so the typical federal share is eighty percent and they can increase the federal participation by up to five percent for a certain percentage of your overall program and examples of the type of type of things that they may view as innovative maybe like prefabricated bridge elements and systems innovative construction equipment materials or techniques including the use of in-place recycling technology or warm mix asphalt intelligent compaction innovative contracting methods so for instance design-build for us they wouldn't agree that that was innovative because we had been doing it for so long but for a state that's never used design build and wanted to try that mechanism for advancing a project quicker that would be something that the state could apply to their division office to get this more favorable federal match rate Lynn before we continue if you don't mind we have another question asking if Montana created the pre NEPA process or what was the inception of that okay so we what I can tell you is that through the 1990s we have so many I and the philosophy of both are I would say our federal highway division office and the head of our environmental bureau at the time was well you can never do enough analysis and it seemed like every project we initiated started to elevate to an EIS process and pretty soon we had these documents that would go on forever cost millions of dollars and if they actually got to a record of decision then we had commitments that we couldn't afford to deliver and still are trying to deliver a lot of those so the desire we had seen that Idaho had done a sort of corridor planning process and we got authority from our legislature to pilot a similar process and so we we really use the framework that Idaho has established and developed our own guidelines and that was in the early 2000s and started to have a lot of success so at the time that the federal planning statewide and metropolitan planning regulations were being updated for safety Lou they they did have an appendix that made it optional that states could do premi / planning but we were interviewed prior to those rules being put in place about our experience so I wouldn't say we created it but we definitely I think federal highways took note of how we were doing it and again we we we looked at what Idaho was doing and and a lot of the aspects of our process are in the pre NEPA planning requirements the linking planning and NEPA requirements great thanks for clarifying that for us sure okay so let me see where I was that so yeah so on the increased federal share a couple examples where we've used it as I mentioned we tried to advance an application for our design build process but our division office said no you design build as an innovative for you you've been doing it for several years and we the authority was established in our state statute several years ago so they wouldn't accept that as an innovation but some we have done like rapid replacements on critical bridges we've also in order to accelerate project delivery we typically use a 34 inch asphalt mix and in certain cases we've gone to a 3 eighth inch and they've allowed that for this innovation and higher federal share for those types of projects so on the federal on federal highways web site on innovation they have a lot of examples of what could count as innovative but they are sure to say that it's not limited to that so if there's something in your state that you feel is innovative and helping you move a project quicker and you have interest in a higher federal share then this is a good position to advance that vendor okay so now I'll move in to the freight provisions as I mentioned earlier this is probably the newest thing or the program that the provisions that were a little different than anything we've had before they came through the fast act and there's several aspects to the freight provisions first there's a National Highway Freight program and with that section essentially at the federal level they have identified a national highway freight network made up of what they call the primary highway freight system and then we as states have the ability to advance a certain number of miles of our highway network as critical role or critical urban freight corridors and then with that through the funding formulas there's a National Highway Freight program that then we are able to utilize those funds for improvements along anything that's on this national highway freight network and then in addition the fast act also established a discretionary grant program so program administered by USDOT that states can compete for along with local governments and reports of some other entities and those are called the fast lane grants USDOT has gone through that first round of solicitation and awards they recently announced the awards of those grants and those are seem to be aimed at very large projects i want to say over 100 million there is match requirement and i think that will be similar to the tiger grants that federal highways has done since the Recovery Act is it just another opportunity to potentially advance some really big projects and there's also a provision within the discretionary grants for smaller projects as we've also seen with the tiger grant process and then usdot there are several provisions within the fast act that fall primarily on usdot for a multimodal freight network so a freight policy a plan in a network and in august there just was a comment period that close that states could comment on what usdot has identified as their multimodal freight network and I what we had seen through that policy is it had quite a significant portion of the rail the freight rail in our state represented on that network the highway portion was very limited for instance for Montana was only our interstate system and yet if you saw our large land area and the resources we have from energy to agriculture to timber it's not all in the interstate region so there's other important components that we feel from afraid aspect and getting goods to market and so we're hopeful that that USDOT will allow a little bit of expansion of that network and part of the multimodal Freight policy is those state freight plans that I mentioned where states are to have a state for a plan and that Freight plan can either be standalone or it can be incorporated into each each state has to have a long-range transportation plan so it could be incorporated into that with it they had a provision about state freight advisory committees which you can States can establish as standing committees for managing Freight in their state but that's an optional provision it's not mandated that each they have a freight advisory committee so us for instance we're just kicking off initiating our state freight plan and initially we're not going to form a state freight advisory committee but we will have stakeholder involvement all through development of our plan and then once we get our plan in place by next December fourth we are December for that 2017 I should say will those plans have to be updated every five years so as we get experience with the freight program will then decide whether it would serve as well to have an actual advisory committee or just engage stakeholders as we're doing plan that updates and other afraid activities um when we have another question if you don't mind the grants that you're talking about are these in addition to the state's appropriation correct so let me here if i can find the amount yes so so the state's receive an amount distributed through formula of freight funds and that is under the national highway freight program so that first bullet yeah the fast lane grants are in addition there above and beyond and its funding that USDOT administers and solicits the applications if if folks are familiar with the tiger grants that have been being done every year they're very similar to those but with a freight focus and let me see if I have the provision has all the provisions here in front of me but I could I could probably add those to the pro I don't know if you post this stuff Amy but I could add the provisions or yeah I'd like to add the provisions I can post those in addition to posting a recast of the webinar as well if you'd like ok I'd a problem ok and I think I have a slide in here with the various links on the federal websites so much of this information is pretty easily found on a federal highway site I think they've done a pretty good job with their they're fast act and they're map-21 websites great that's have a lot of help sheets so we can go nowto to national performance measures and so as I mentioned it the national performance measure framework was established in map-21 under-23 USC section 150 and essentially laid out i think is it seven goal areas and that's what you see in front of you with safety infrastructure condition congestion reduction system reliability freight movement and economic vitality environmental sustainability and reduced project delivery delays and so it laid out the framework within the provisions the federal agencies are responsible for setting the measures themselves and have been working on rulemaking since map-21 was passed and then Congress gave States the authority and responsibility of setting targets that will fit those measures so go ahead and go to the next slide so this is a sort of recap of where FHWA is that in terms of their rule making processes and there have been several notices of proposed rule making sense I think they started in 2014 2013 2014 the highway provisions in 2014 you can see that we've had rules for safety performance measures for the highway safety improvement program itself for statewide and Metro planning for pavement and bridge performance measures along with highway outfit management plans and then the most recent was performance of the national highway system freight and tmac which is congestion mitigation and air quality measures so the rule makings been in full swing since early 2014 to date there's only a couple rules that have actually been been put to final rulemaking and that's the safety the highway safety improvement and the statewide and Metro planning but if you look at the far right column that shows which ones have been published and in red I had put that for safety performance for instance of this final there's five different measures that have came through that rulemaking process that now we estates are responsible for setting targets and those are the number of fatalities the number of fatal or serious injuries the rate of fatalities the rate of serious injuries and then when I mentioned early on that it seems like the rulemaking is expanding what Congress intended for measures there was a fifth measure added to this final safety rule for non-motorized fatal and serious injuries then if you go down further the pavement and bridge performance measures in the proposed rulemaking there six there were six proposed measures there that rule is yet to be finalized and at the very bottom the performance of the national highway system freight and CMAC measures there's eight measures there so if you look just at those rules there's 19 proposed measures that states are going to have to be setting targets for and reporting on and showing progress that's is from the federal highway side in addition the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has 12 additional measures that space are having to report that targets for and then the Federal Transit Administration just published a final rule on transit performance and there's four measures there so collectively to date there's potential for 35 measures in this national performance rulemaking and so I guess why I've spent time knowning this is that the map 21 and the fast act called for a limited set of measures and I think as a to provide a means to the most efficient investment of federal transportation funds but as these this rulemaking is going on it's appearing to look pretty burdensome and it's going to be quite a big task for states to manage and comply with so ash still had a very organized approach to commenting on these rulemaking processes but but the concern is that it will be quite a burden on States and I guess in any future reauthorization efforts we really hope that they don't keep adding measures and expanding it until we've had time as states to basically see if we can implement what's intended by map-21 and the fast act get experience with that and see if it's really meeting the intent of what was envisioned at the Congressional level so those are those were sort of three areas that we've in this less than a year have really been dabbling in and has actually but have spent quite a bit of time in as I mentioned there are some very helpful links in terms of maneuvering the fast act and some of these provisions that I mentioned so ash still has a really good reauthorization web page and the link is there and you can find a lot about the Asheville policy positions and they are publishing a report each month I think in terms of implementation and some of the issues that were seen at the astral level and if any progress has been made in that regard there's also a performance web page that ash still has with all the rule makings or proposed rules all the state comments the ash no comments on that one in particular I think whoever in your do t is dealing with performance probably has access and there's a password that they would have established to get into it in terms of like the innovative financing provisions ashdod does have a finance center that has a lot of information for those states that take advantage of those provisions and then FHWA as I mentioned there's their fast act website has the legislation links to the rules any of their guidance that they've published presentations that they've done both for the fast act in the map 21 links they also have a performance page where you can find all the rulemaking processes and status of those and then the innovation so the innovation provisions that I talked about you can find a lot more information about those at FHWA slink and then I didn't talk a lot about transit but the Federal Transit Administration as well has a fast act page and map 21 that can highlight the provisions that are the changes that they have seen through those two pieces of legislation so if looking ahead at the federal level in terms of what's next so as I mentioned the fast act is a five-year bill and it will expire September 30 at the 20 20 which might seem a long way away but in terms of dealing with federal policy it probably really isn't and so I I think what's important for states in terms of the next authorization is to preserve the policy winds that have been achieved through map-21 in the fast fact that long-term fixed or the highway trust fund it's still a huge issue for all of us and how is transportation going to be funded into the future we hope that the next reauthorization will continue progress made toward innovation and streamlining I think that's expected by our customers that we deliver our programs efficiently and get projects out the door and also that there isn't further expansion of the national performance measures by the time this bill expires with the just the safety rule being finalized the first time that federal highways will evaluate our progress under safety will be in 2020 so it's quite a lengthy process in terms of developing the National performance program the rules and then States developing targets and then reporting those and then the federal agencies assessing progress so at least from Montana's perspective we really hope that there's no further expansion before states have had time to implement the requirements and see how it's working overall and so with that I'll turn it back to Amy I think she has a few quick flies yeah thanks Lynn actually we are coming up to about an hour so just wanted to go ahead and give anybody a chance to ask any last questions that they may have and you can feel free to speak your question you know unmute yourself and speak your question or you can chat it in if you'd like and we'll be sure to get to those so give you a second to chime in so we do have a question if our state's can't meet the performance measures will they lose funding in terms of the performance measures it it isn't losing funding and that was something as to push very hard is don't tie that don't tie it to funding but what does happen is for instance in safety or let me think on the NH performance measures it may direct us to spend a certain amount of our funding at a certain level on our national highway system or on bridges of some sort so the penalties are more putting constraints around how we're spending some of our funding or requiring us to report additional reporting that we have to do on how we're going to address not meeting our performance targets anyone else okay with that I just like to thank you again for participating for those participants on the call we will be following up with you to provide credit for professional development hours also just to note that if you'd like to listen and again or you wanted to share this webinar with colleagues that could not be with us today we'll be posting a recast of this link on our connecting the gov's com website so watch out for that and with that just have a wonderful afternoon and again thank you so much for your participation and we look forward to seeing you again in October have a great day

Frequently asked questions

Learn everything you need to know to use signNow eSignature like a pro.

How do you make a document that has an electronic signature?

How do you make this information that was not in a digital format a computer-readable document for the user? ""So the question is not only how can you get to an individual from an individual, but how can you get to an individual with a group of individuals. How do you get from one location and say let's go to this location and say let's go to that location. How do you get from, you know, some of the more traditional forms of information that you are used to seeing in a document or other forms. The ability to do that in a digital medium has been a huge challenge. I think we've done it, but there's some work that we have to do on the security side of that. And of course, there's the question of how do you protect it from being read by people that you're not intending to be able to actually read it? "When asked to describe what he means by a "user-centric" approach to security, Bensley responds that "you're still in a situation where you are still talking about a lot of the security that is done by individuals, but we've done a very good job of making it a user-centric process. You're not going to be able to create a document or something on your own that you can give to an individual. You can't just open and copy over and then give it to somebody else. You still have to do the work of the document being created in the first place and the work of the document being delivered in a secure manner."

How do i insert an electronic signature into a word document?

How do I sign a text file with a text editor? How do I convert an .rtf, .otf, or .woff file to a proper .doc format? How do I edit an .doc file using an application like MS Word? How do I save an .doc or .rtf file in Adobe Illustrator format? Can I import a .doc, .rtf, or .otf file in Microsoft Publisher? How do I convert WordPerfect (.doc), MS Word (.doc), OpenOffice/LibreOffice/Adobe Acrobat (.odt).How do I import a file using MS Outlook? How do I import a Microsoft Office Document? I'm having trouble saving a document (how do I find a particular document in the archive? what does that mean? what does it mean to add something to a file or folder in Exchange? I'm having problems saving documents in Microsoft Office, is there any way I can export or save these documents? If so, what settings would make the file most helpful to me? I'm having problems saving a file in Microsoft Office (Exchange). Is it possible to find out how a file is saved? I'm trying to get a document to print but cannot find the printer I want to use. How do I set up the printer and find it on the network? Do you have a tool that shows me which Exchange servers can access the Exchange Online folder structure? What are the differences between the Exchange 2003, Exchange 2004, Exchange 2007, Exchange 2010 and Exchange 2013? Can you describe the differences between the three Exchange Server versions? If an Exchange user has multiple email addresses, how can I change their email...

How to sign the pdf digitally?

It's easy to sign, and you should be able to do it in most browsers. There are several ways to do it, though. You'll need to download the PDF version from the site, so check your download page for your browser's installation instructions or instructions for other operating systems.To sign a PDF file with the free Adobe Reader:Download and install the free Adobe Reader. Once installed, open the Adobe Reader.Go to the file you want to sign, then choose to save the document to a new location.Click "Save as." The file will be saved to the current folder. Save all the way to the end of the file name, or to the default name of a PDF file if you want a unique name.Click "Open" on the file that you just saved to the desktop or your computer's document folder.When you open the file in Adobe Reader, the PDF window will be full-screen, so you'll need to scroll the text around a bit in order to be able to read it. Then simply sign the page in the reader!The PDF file is signed, but not digitally signed! This is good.You'll get the digital signature that your web pages will now have.To digitally sign a PDF with the paid Adobe Acrobat:Download and install the paid Adobe Acrobat. Once installed, open the Adobe Acrobat.Go to the file you want to sign, then click "PDF."Click "Signature." The signature will be printed on the PDF.Click "Save as" to send the signed PDF file to the printer.You'll get the digital signature the digital PDF file will now have.How to si...

A smarter way to work: —document type sign profit sharing agreement template montana fast

Make your signing experience more convenient and hassle-free. Boost your workflow with a smart eSignature solution.

Related searches to Sign Montana Profit Sharing Agreement Template Fast

sample agreement between two parties pdf
agreement letter between two parties doc
agreement template word
sample agreement between two parties doc
agreement format between two parties
simple agreement template
sample agreement letter