1. Maritime Administration Maritime Administration Captain Bob Loken Director PNW, Alaska, Guam, Hawaii Gateway U.S. Maritime Administration October 15, 2014

2. U.S. Ports Today 2 American companies ship cargo worth more than $5.5 billion through U.S. ports every day. 75 % of our nation’s exports travel through U.S. seaports. Port activity supports more than 13 million jobs and accounts for more than $3 trillion in business activity nationwide. Studies show that, by 2050, America’s freight network will need to haul 4 billion more tons of international freight above the 9 billion it currently moves. Key to this plan will involve how our ports can most efficiently work with our rail lines and highway system on land and water.

3. Challenges of Today’s Ports in a Global Economy 3 Large Investment Panama Canal Expansion Bigger Vessels Competition Aging Infrastructure Expanding Population over next 40 years

4. 4

5. Port Investment

6. Category I Planning & Engagement Category III Project Support Category II Financing All Ports Low Federal Oversight No Market Interference StrongPorts PHASE I Implementation Authority: 46 USC, Section 50302 Limited No. of Ports Moderate Federal Oversight Minimal Market Interference Very Few Ports High Federal Oversight Minimal Market Interference B. Assistance: A. Guidelines & Data: Sector advocate through analysis & showcasing opportunities/consequences regarding port role/investment Activities Include: Port Investment Plan Guidelines (With Stakeholders) National/Regional Studies and Maritime Impact Analysis Direct support to individual ports (upon request) Investment Plan Devel. Support (TIGER VI Planning Grants) Delivery of Federal Services (Gateway Offices & HQ) Dedicated Staff With MPO Experience Financing: Direct funding support via existing/future programs TIGER I-VI Grants ($420M) Marine Highway Grants Eligible for Port Infra Devel. Fund Possible Project Support: Increased Federal project assistance where unique Federal interest exists MARAD Co-Manages Project w/Port Design Development Eligible For PID Fund Eligible for Lead Fed. Agency Supp. Strict Sel. Criteria Investment Plan Req’d Project Clearly Defined 6

7. Maritime Administration Projects Auke Bay, AK Pier 29, HI Green Trade Corridor, CA Coos Bay, OR Port of L.A., CA Tri-City, IL Gulfport, MS Port Manatee, FL Port of Miami, FL ProvPort, RI Quonset, RI Port of Long Beach, CA South Jersey Port Corp, NJ JaxPort, FL Lewiston, ID Oakland, CA Mobile, AL Corpus Christi, TX Brownsville, TX Catoosa, OK Bayonne, NJ Cates Landing, TN Garibaldi, OR Maine Ports, ME Eastport, ME Duluth, MN Wilmington, DE Baltimore, MD Pascagoula, MS New Orleans, LA Houston, TX Fulton, MS Virginia Ports, VA Cross Gulf, FL Cross Gulf, TX Stockton, CA W. Sacramento, CA Richmond, VA Tacoma, WA Benton, WA Pasco, WA Hueneme, CA Orange, TX Dillingham, AK LOOP TIGER FY 2009 TIGER FY 2010 TIGER FY 2011 TIGER FY 2012 TIGER FY 2013 Marine Highway Port Conveyance ARRA Grants M5 Corridor M55 Corridor M95 Corridor Portland, OR Toledo, OH Wellsville, OH Land Convey Ports 10 Land conveyed 3,000 Acres Value $54M to $1B 4 Tiger/ARRA States 23 Ports 45 Grants 43 Funds $520M MH Projects Ports 6 Grants 3 Funds $7M TIGER FY 2014 Seward, AK Neah Bay, WA Seattle, WA Lake Charles, LA Newark, NJ Charleston, SC Norfolk, VA

8. Planning and Engagement Port Planning & Investment Toolkit Port Planning Grants Port Talk Initiative Full Time Community Planner (Started 4/14) Gateways/HQ - Delivery of Federal Services 8

9. 9 A joint venture between AAPA, a working group of 57 industry expert volunteers, and the Maritime Administration. Toolkit will help ports obtain funding by developing investment grade plans that: Clearly identify future port needs; Determine the most cost-effective, sustainable and efficient solutions to port problems; and Get port infrastructure projects into MPO and state transportation programs in order to receive formula funding; Position port projects for federal funding such as TIGER grants; and Assist ports in obtaining private sector investment funds.

10. 10 A facilitated day-long session to foster dialogue and develop regional maritime transportation plans Target participants include State Departments of Transportation, MPOs, Economic Development Corporations, Ports, and Port Authorities PortTalk Outcomes: Identify resources and programs to help build, modernize and expand maritime transportation assets Spotlight maritime transportation's role in regional transportation system planning Shipper and shipping-company outreach and needs assessment Gain understanding of freight system plans to 2025 Generate innovative solutions to environmental and logistics challenges

11. Financing Port Infrastructure Grant Authority TIGER VI Grants – 7 Grants $74.2Million Port Conveyance Program Marine Highway Projects Potential Full Time Port Finance Agent 11

12. Federal Financing Programs (Selected) Surface Transportation Program (STP) Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Projects of National and Regional Significance (PNRS) Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) Private Activity Bonds (PABs) Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) Small Shipyard Grant Program Port Security Grant Program (PSGP) Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA) Brownfield Grants Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Program (CMAQ) Ferry-related Grants 12

13. Infrastructure Facility Charge A concept under discussion by the Marine Transportation National Advisory Council (MTSNAC) based on the Airport Passenger Facility Charge – Will require authorizing legislation. Fees are applied to cargo (bulk and containerized) or passengers shipped to or from a port authority authorized to collect the infrastructure charge – Funds remain under the port’s control. Fee is project specific and may be used for “state of good repair” maintenance or to support the issuance of construction bonds. Eligible projects must be included in a port master plan and include a detailed financing plan. Stakeholder working group is established to fully develop the proposal for consideration by the MTSNAC in the Spring of 2015 13

14. Project Support Further Moves Away From “Management” Increasing Number of Support Requests Incremental Staff Increases Planned Retain “Project Management” Capability 14

15. Category I Planning & Engagement Category III Project Support Category II Financing All Ports Low Federal Oversight No Market Interference Future Phase Implementation Authority: 46 USC, Section 50302 Limited No. of Ports Moderate Federal Oversight Minimal Market Interference Very Few Ports High Federal Oversight Minimal Market Interference B. Assistance: A. Guidelines & Data: Sector advocate through analysis & showcasing opportunities/consequences regarding port role/investment Possibilities Include: Port Investment Plan Guidelines (With Stakeholders) National/Regional Studies and Maritime Impact Analysis Strategic Asset Management Guidelines (With Stakeholders) Port/Terminal Ops Guidelines for AMH (With Stakeholders) Direct support to individual ports (upon request) Investment Plan Devel. Support (Additional Planning Grants) Coordination Assistance with State, MPO, Local authorities Delivery of Federal Services (Gateway Offices & HQ) Financing: Direct funding support via existing/future programs TIGER I-V Grants Marine Highway Grants Other Future Grant Programs Assistance with Loans/Loan Guarantees Eligible for Port Infra Devel. Fund (Through Planning) Support from States/MPOs and private sources. Project Support: Increased Federal project assistance where unique Federal interest exists MARAD Co-Manages Project w/Port Design Development Eligible For PID Fund Eligible for Lead Fed. Agency Supp. Strict Sel. Criteria Investment Plan Req’d Project Clearly Defined 15

16. Questions Captain Bob Loken robert.loken@dot.gov Photo Compliments of Port of New Orleans 16