The Northern Virginia Transportation Authority Program and Project Committee directed staff to draft a petition policy that would fold submitted petitions into the Authority’s call‑for‑projects process, require all applicants to submit core‑value statements for the six‑year program, and prepare an RFP for on‑call consulting services, committee members and staff said. The transcript did not specify the meeting date.

Committee members and staff said the change is intended to ensure petitions receive the same analytical and financial review as other project submissions. "Any submitted petition would go through the process. And so if staff were to not recommend it, it would still go to the committees," said Mister Longhi, NVTA staff, describing the draft approach.

The change would make petitions part of the project rules used to evaluate modeling, congestion reduction and cost estimates, Longhi said, and would link petitions to the Authority’s two‑year revenue estimates that underpin the six‑year program. He said staff will draft the policy under what the committee described as "option 2," prepare an RFP for on‑call value‑engineering consultants and include a prohibition on transfers between projects going forward. "It's no transfers between projects moving forward," Longhi said.

Mister DeFerrantes, a committee member, said he supported the approach and the parallel timeline to prepare the RFP. "I think it seems wise to both do February and also do an RFP," DeFerrantes said during the discussion.

On the six‑year program evaluation, Mister Casper, NVTA staff, said the key procedural change will require every project sponsor to submit a core‑value statement rather than leaving that step voluntary. "What we want to do to put things onto a more level playing field is to require everyone to submit that core value statement," Casper said. He added staff does not intend to fold the core‑value analysis directly into staff recommendations at this stage, but will verify sponsors' submissions rather than creating the statements for sponsors.

Staff described next steps as drafting the petition policy and returning the proposal to committee rounds (PPC, PCAC, TAC) and then to the Authority for action. Longhi said the written policy will move toward a February deadline for petitions and that staff will prepare an RFP for on‑call consulting to assist with value‑engineering reviews.

The committee also heard a brief administrative update noting outgoing Authority members would be recognized at the Authority’s December meeting. The transcript did not include a formal committee vote to adopt the petition policy or the core‑value requirement; staff described the items as proposals to be drafted and returned for committee and Authority consideration.

Minutes from the June 25 meeting were approved at the start of the session; Mayor Olm moved to approve the meeting summary and the chair called the ayes. The transcript did not specify the name of the second or the exact vote tally.

What happened next: staff will draft the petition policy (incorporating the no‑transfer rule), prepare an RFP for on‑call value‑engineering consultants, require core‑value statements from six‑year program applicants, and return the draft policy to committee and Authority review in the coming months. The transcript did not specify firm dates beyond references to a February deadline and the Authority’s December meeting for member recognition.