1. Railroad-DOT Mitigation Strategies (R16)
February 21, 2017
Kate introduces herself and the topic of the presentation 1

2. Purpose of Today’s Presentation
Goals
Update you on the SHRP2 program and Railroad-DOT Mitigation Strategies (R16)
Update you on the role of the Community of Interest and its goals
Learn how you and your organization can align with R16 and its activities

3. SHRP2 Implementation: INNOVATE.IMPLEMENT.IMPROVE.
As you can see on this slide, implementation efforts have already yielded significant results. More than $130 million in funding assistance has been distributed to 99 entities including DOTs, MPOs, local agencies, and universities, as well as Federal and tribal agencies. The research led to 63 implementable solutions, and there are now more than 430 transportation projects underway, utilizing SHRP2 products nationwide. 3

4. SHRP2 Implementation: INNOVATE.IMPLEMENT.IMPROVE.
As of November, we have launched approximately 8,900 outreach activities, and have engaged more than 224,000 participants in trainings, workshops, peer exchanges, demos, and showcases. In addition, more than 14,900 hours of technical assistance has been provided to ensure those who implement SHRP2 Solutions have the support they need to advance these innovations into our industry practice.
This information is highlighted in the FHWA End of Year report in you folders. 4

5. Railroad-DOT Mitigation Strategies (R16)
Challenge
Railroad-DOT interaction requires a thorough review of the safety, engineering, and the operational impacts of a roadway project during construction – since it will have lasting effects on the railroad for decades thereafter. Rapid construction goals require a new approach that eases the project agreement process for both industries.
Solution
Recommended practices, model agreements, and training materials to help resolve potential conflicts.
Railroad-DOT Mitigation Strategies or R16 was initiated because of project delays due to the lack of collaboration between DOTs and railroads
Consider the hundreds of highway construction projects that cross or abut railroad right-of-way each year
This will give y9ou an idea of the magnitude of the extended of coordination that is needed between both of these organizations
Railroads and DOTs feel most of these projects go smoothly, but delays during the project development and construction phase do occur
That being said, the solutions developed under R16 use a collaborative approach to address the challenges faced with expediting highway and rail projects in a time where railroads are upgrading and expanding their rail networks and DOTs are seeking ways to reduce the time it takes to complete highway construction projects.

6. Available Solutions Best practices and streamlined processes
Facilitates beneficial relationships between railroads and public transportation agencies
Institutional arrangements
Innovative partnering techniques
Approaches to ensure collaboration
Standardized (Master) agreements
Partnering Processes
The R16 Solutions take into account both railroad and public agency perspectives, processes, budgets and funding, and acknowledge best practices.
The products fall into three categories:
Best Practices and Streamlined Processes, focuses on the processes that provide institutional arrangements and innovative partnering methods that ensure collaboration between the DOTs and railroads occur.
Standardized Agreements, is a tool that helps reduce time and costs associated with the delays by providing programmatic templates for the interaction between both organizations.
Partnering techniques aid in both railroads and DOTs developing positive relationships.

7. Streamlined Processes and Agreements
Best Practices
Processes
Agreements
Streamlined internal and external coordination
Process manual
Standardized (Master) agreements
Standardized crossing improvement contract process
Partnering Memorandum of Understanding
Single point of first contact and coordination
Streamlined flagging process
Dedicated railroad project managers
Expediting right-of-way access
Streamlining agreement processing
Formal agreed upon points of concurrence
Escalation process to expedite issues
Formal project management
Partnering processes
Electronic workflow agreement process
Meetings
Here are a few examples of processes and agreements.
Streamlined internal and external coordination- Internally coordinate activities. (Some DOTs are consolidating operations under one rail office MDSOT, FDOT, NCDOT, Texas) – since consistency in who calls the railroads is important. These DOTs have also been very successful in streamlining processes with their railroad partners.
Meeting with your partners on an annual basis, semi-annual basis or pre- or post-construction. Don’t just meet to be meeting. Instead, these meetings should be to coordinate and collaborate current and future plans for railroads and DOTs.
Using standardized master agreements where each entity knows what is expected and can follow through.

8. Benefits of Using Railroad-DOT Mitigation Strategies
Expedited project delivery
Better management of limited resources
Improve communication, cooperation, collaboration
Streamlined processes
Transparency
Improved quality & safety
Win-win solution
Less risk!
One of the reasons R16 is being deployed under two FHWA initiatives – SHRP2 and Every Day Counts – is because of the benefits it offers in:
Expediting Project Delivery
Improving communication, cooperation and collaboration
Potential to identify processes that could be streamlined to effectively and efficiency improve the quality of both organizations
Transparency
Win-Win Solution

9. Implementation Assistance Program States
Round 2
Round 5
Round 7
Arkansas
Delaware
Oregon
Colorado
District of Columbia
Virginia
Idaho
Florida
Pennsylvania
Kentucky
South Dakota
Utah
Texas
New York
California
North Carolina
Currently, 16 states are engaged in the Implementation Assistance Program for R16.
They are all involved in slightly different efforts with a common theme to improve coordination, reduce delays, and, most importantly, proceed in a safe manner for all concerned.
A brief summary of the IAP activities will be available on the AASHTO SHRP2 R16 product page.
More information on these activities at:

10. Success Stories to Date
Washington State DOT
Streamlined Work Flow with clearly defined roles and responsibilities dramatically reduced the need for escalation of Issues – from 15% to less than 1% of projects
Florida DOT
Flagging Agreement saved $200K
Texas DOT
Reduced railroad agreement processing from 16+ weeks to as little as 4-6 weeks when using standard format agreements.
Simple maintenance agreements - 2/3 of State projects - reduced from 2-3 month turnaround to less than 1 month.
As a result, I’d like to share a few successful results from State DOTS in the use of R16. 
Washington State DOT streamlined its work flow processes and reduced the need for escalation – from 15% to less than 1% of projects.
In Florida, a comprehensive flagging agreement saved the agency $200,000.
In Texas, streamlined processes reduced overall railroad agreement processing from more than 16 weeks to as little as 4 to 6 weeks by using standard agreements.
Also in Texas, by using simple maintenance agreements, railroad-DOT interaction on two-thirds of state projects was reduced to less than one month.

11. What is the Community of Interest?
What is it?
Neutral platform to discuss efforts to improve coordination and communications between transportation agencies and their respective railroads
Opportunity for face-to-face peer exchanges and collaboration
Opportunity to share best practices, lessons learned, challenges, new processes, agreements, and other information
Who is represented?
State DOTs
Class 1 Railroads
Short Lines
Transportation Associations
FHWA/AASHTO/FRA
How often will COI meet?
2 in-person meetings
6 webinars
(through 2018)
One important element of the Railroad-DOT Mitigation Strategies effort is the convening of this Community of Interest.
Basically, we see this as a neutral platform where all participants can discuss their efforts to improve coordination and communications between transportation agencies and their respective railroads.
Its’ an opportunity for face-to-face peer exchanges and collaboration and a place to share best practices, lessons learned, challenges, new processes, agreements, and other information.
Who is represented?
State DOTs
Class 1 Railroads
Short Lines
Transportation Associations
FHWA/AASHTO/FRA
How often will COI meet? -2 in-person meetings (we just completed one two weeks ago in Washington, D.C.)
-6 webinars through the duration of the SHRP2 program

12. Role of COI Members
Serve as advocates and subject matter experts
Advocate for best practices and get buy-in from railroads and other transportation agencies
Advice on outreach for national adoption
Identify and share innovations with peers
Test innovative practices and agreements

13. COI Meeting - Washington DC
Meeting Goals and Objectives
To share current practices, lessons learned and beneficial policy and processes
To identify future activities to benefit the community
To network within the community
Project updates on COI member implementation efforts
Executive leadership panel on importance of partnership and communications in advancing railroad-DOT relationships
Roundtable discussions of processes and existing/desired agreements
FRA/FHWA updates on Section 130 program, FAST Act state action plans
Lessons learned from working on alternative project delivery methods
Upcoming webinar topic discussions

14. COI Meeting Themes
All DOTs and railroads are different but they share a comment goal of safety
We have to know each others constraints, culture and environment
There are challenges to establishing robust relationships and partnerships
One point of contact can be a roadblock
There is education and training necessary at all levels
Communication is critical
All DOTs are different but they share a common goal of safety
Railroads can we say this is true of you as well?
We have to know each others constraints, culture and environments
For example we learned that BNSF only has two lawyers in house
There are challenges to establishing robust relationships and partnerships
These relationships need to be at multiple levels
Not just engineers but also supervisors and others
A few reoccurring topics have surfaces
Indemnification
An understanding the railroads have to coordinate with multiple states and therefore multiple regulations
One point of contact can be a roadblock
We need coordination at all levels
There is education and training necessary at all levels
We need to understand one anthers business needs
Communication is critical
A need to understand what communication and partnership means for each party
A need for:
Bimonthly service meetings
Regular reviewing of TIP

15. Possible COI Focus Areas
Major Areas of Interest
Concern with response time from some railroads
Difficulty in getting agreements in place (both internal and external roadblocks)
Decision makers at the top need to be aware and promote better responses within their agencies
Webinar or Case Study Topics
Section 130 – process, targeting, etc.
Electronic processes, transfer of information, record keeping
Training
General
Section 130

16. Upcoming R16 Activities
Next COI Webinar – May 16th 1 – 2:15 PM Eastern
Peer Exchange in conjunction with SCORT September 20th – 22nd in Oakland, California
New bi-fold or tri-fold brochure
Produce a promotional video
Participate in and present at industry meetings
SCORT
TRB
American Shortline and Regional Railroad Association
Association of American Railroads

17. Innovation Library – R16 Webpage
A library of agreements and other documents developed by state DOTs and rail agencies.
State and Railroad Agreements, Manuals, and Processes (R16)
Organized by State/Railroad
Organized by Topic

18. Discussion What would you like to see come out of the COI?
How do you see SCORT interacting with the COI?
What topic would be appropriate for the Peer Exchange?
How do we engage the railroads further?
How do we engage decision makers further at both the DOTs and the railroads?
Are there other meetings we should be attending or groups we should be engaging?
What should be the focus of a bi-fold or tri-fold brochure?
What should be the focus of a promotional video?

19. For More Information Product Leads: Additional Resources:
Kate Kurgan AASHTO Co-Product Lead Pam Hutton Joe Taylor FHWA Product Lead
GoSHRP2 Website:
fhwa.dot.gov/GoSHRP2
AASHTO SHRP2 Website:
R16 Product Page
/Pages/R16_RailroadDOTMiti gationStrategies.aspx
You may be asking yourself how can I get involved now that the IAP rounds are done?
For additional information, we encourage you to contact the product implementation leads from FHWA and AASHTO.
This product as well as others are available for use by anyone at any time and it can certainly be beneficial to your agency even without a financial or technical assistance incentive.
In addition to the implementation leads you may look to your peers who are working with the product for guidance.
The GoSHRP2 and AASHTO SHRP2 Websites are where you can find technical information about the products. GoSHRP2 product pages will provide a variety of helpful resources including fact sheets, videos, and links to product research.
We encourage you to sign up for GoSHRP2 alerts to get the latest information on SHRP2 delivered right to your inbox. 19