1. STATE AND FEDERAL PASSENGER AND FREIGHT SURVEY NCRRP 07-03 Libby Ogard Jeannie Beckett

2. Survey  500 emails to AASHTO, TRB, passenger and freight stakeholders  1500 member distribution list from American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association  Selected Class 1 and regional/short line railroads  Investment community supplemental interviews

3. Percent Responses by Type

6. State Response Some States have no programs. Amounts range between $2-$40 million More states are moving toward multimodal funding

7. State Response  Grants are often preferred, easier to award then loans.  Few Dedicated Funding Programs limit grant program expansion.

8. Ranking of Rail Fund Objectives StateAgencyPerspective

9. Program Objectives in Order of Importance  No difference between Group and State response  Economic Development is a Common Theme  Rail investment not seen as mode conversion tool

10. State Investments  State investment is dependent upon funding and business objectives.  Limited funding for passenger rail.  Often Legislative barriers.

11. Are there Institutional Restrictions for State Rail Programs?  “Can’t own rolling stock or operate railroads”  “State owns railroad but there are restrictions on what rail can do”  “Can’t lend money to private business”  “State can not own rail”  “Gas tax revenues are restricted”

12. State’s Self Assessment of Success  “More funding needed for safety, surface and infrastructure”  “State expectations are low”  “Need funding for projects existing programs can’t meet”  “Need to establish measurements to understand progress”

13. Existing Program Improvements Needed  “More funding needed for Industrial Rail Service”  “Rail completes with five other modes for state funding”  “Grade crossing protection funding inadequate”  “Funding needed for PTC mandate – especially short lines”  “Without sufficient funding can’t support forgivable loan program”  “Performance measures needed”  “RRIF credit risk premium is a hurdle many can’t overcome”  “Need Federal formula funds for rail infrastructure”

14. Essential Elements of Innovative Projects  Maximum multimodal flexibility  Public-Private partnerships and better vision for the future  Responsive  Stakeholder and political support  Something the Railroads will use  Simple, streamlined, with efficient oversight  Quick access to funds  A value proposition that will incent private investment  Design Build Opportunities  Something that does not require State Transportation Funding

15. Website  A data base if over 200 State Programs  Searchable by program types  Publicly Available  Demonstrations available at TRB Annual Meeting 2015

16. Feedback?  Examples?  Attributes?  Recommendations?  Program Eligibility?  Funding objectives?  Measurements? InnovationProgram Funding

17. Questions?