1. Developing State-Amtrak Agreements Stephen Gardner Vice President, Policy and Development March 8, 2010

2. 1 PRIIA/ARRA: The blueprint PRIIA (October 2008) –Reauthorized Amtrak ($2 billion annually) –Federal matching grant program for intercity/HSR capital investments –FRA, states and Amtrak work in partnership to establish new/improved passenger services -Amtrak operates national network; partners with states to design and operate services and improve NEC -States plan rail service role and provide operating/capital funding -FRA provides capital funding and integrates state planning into a national system –Collaboration among states, US DOT, Amtrak, transit agencies, host railroads, suppliers, and others key to success ARRA (February 2009) –$8 billion for intercity/HSR capital grants to states –No state match required

3. 2 Existing Amtrak-State Collaboration State-supported corridor services: Partnerships with 15 states NEC Master Plan process underway since 2006 9 commuter services on Amtrak infrastructure Numerous Shared capital investments (examples) –Infrastructure (Keystone Corridor) –Maintenance Facilities (Seattle) –NEC Joint Benefit Agreements –Stations (Wilmington) –Equipment (Pacific Surfliner)

4. 3 PRIIA/ARRA: Amtrak’s role to-date Amtrak partnered with more than 25 states to support over 100 projects and corridor applications in the first round of grant requests –Stakeholder agreements –Service development plans –Ridership/revenue estimates –Project scope –Planning assistance –Application assistance

5. 4 First Round Grant Announcements Announced projects will benefit at least 13 existing Amtrak routes –Higher speeds/reduced trip times –Increased frequencies –Improved stations –Increased reliability Funds new/extended services –Downeaster extension (Portland – Brunswick, ME) –Ohio “3C” Corridor (Cleveland – Columbus – Cincinnati) –Hiawatha extension (Milwaukee – Madison, WI) $3.5 billion for “Greenfield” HSR projects in California & Florida Planning grants, funded with 2009 appropriations, to help develop future applications Additionally, several “TIGER” grants will benefit Amtrak stations and services

6. 5 Amtrak Network and ARRA HSIPR Awards

7. 6 Amtrak’s role for grant implementation To complete grant agreements and fully fund projects, FRA will likely want -Concrete funding/spend plans -Fully developed of budgets/scope/schedules -Refined operating/investment plans and costs -Compliance with state and Federal requirements/laws -Completed agreements and contract negotiations Many different types of activities may require Amtrak-State collaboration and agreements -Investments on Amtrak-owned/operated infrastructure -Investments on host railroad infrastructure -New/extended services -Additional services on existing routes -Station investments -Schedule changes -Facilities improvements -Fleet acquisition/assignment/utilization -Identifying Amtrak manpower and resource requirements

8. 7 Amtrak Agreement Considerations Maintenance responsibility for equipment-related grants In general, existing agreements should satisfy Amtrak’s commitment to operate service until improvements are completed Use existing agreements when possible and use as model for new agreements Flow-downs Operating support Look for opportunities where other federal funds can supplement FRA grants

9. 8 Amtrak/State/Host Collaboration for New and Expanded Routes For service-related grants, state, Amtrak and host railroad should agree up-front on service outcomes, in particular –Amtrak train trips per day –Amtrak train trip time –Maximum delay minutes per Amtrak train trip Amtrak, state, and host then design an infrastructure to support these agreed-upon outcomes –Avoid unreasonably impairing freight operations –Practical improvements, not “gold plated” Public sector provides funding to “build it right” and host railroads make enforceable commitment to “run it right” –Hosts commit to provide service, not just build infrastructure Grant-funded projects need to be coordinated with existing/on-going Amtrak and Host services, projects, initiatives, and priorities (e.g., Amtrak’s station ADA plan) and recognize regional impacts of simultaneous projects

10. 9 Preparing for Future Funding Rounds States and Amtrak should again work together to identify/advance projects fundable under $2.5 billion FY2010 appropriation and in future funding rounds –Early Amtrak/state engagement –Clear identification of goals/needs –Service planning (Sec. 207), preliminary ridership/rev #’s –Amtrak participation in state discussions with host railroads –Environmental guidance –Equipment needs –Application development and review –Joint applications? –Recognition of Amtrak resource needs Adapt organizational structures/processes to new environment –Amtrak –FRA –State DOTs

11. 10 Amtrak-State Agreements: Equipment Whatever happens, we all need fleet! Average passenger car 24 years old, older than ever Comprehensive fleet plan for all Amtrak business lines –Total fleet procurement over a 30-year period will include 2,500 cars and 700 locomotives = 100 cars annually –Total anticipated cost (2009 dollars) -$11 billion through 2023, $23 billion through 2040 -Not including needs for projected state-supported corridor frequency increases and new services –Designed for baseline 2% ridership growth on existing services –Procurement model scalable for higher growth (options and retirement rate) –Fleet design to be coordinated with Sec. 305 process/specs as much as possible to create common designs/subsystems/parts/processes across entire system –Creates sustainable domestic manufacturing capacity

12. 11 Looking ahead: state activities Participation in PRIIA-initiated processes –PRIIA 209 (state corridor pricing) – joint responsibility –PRIIA 210 (long-distance trains) – work with Amtrak on opportunities to better integrate LD routes and corridor services –PRIIA 212 (NEC Infrastructure & Operations Advisory Committee) – joint undertaking among DOT, NEC states, and Amtrak –PRIIA 305 (equipment pool) - joint undertaking among DOT, NEC states, and Amtrak Future grant rounds will require –State capital match (at least 20%) beginning in FY10 –Operating funds –Completion of state rail plans Section 207 compliance –Working together to meet standards and raise train performance Building support to sustain and grow HSIPR program and Amtrak

13. 12 Looking ahead: Amtrak’s objectives Support the expansion, improvement and establishment of intercity and high-speed passenger rail service Rebuild planning and development capacity after years of neglect and turmoil Develop new business processes, resources and policies to support growth Improve service delivery Become a better, more nimble partner for state customers (customer surveys and interviews) Integrate new and improved services into a seamless national network with enhanced intermodal connectivity Provide leadership role in equipment acquisition/planning Facilitate partnerships among states, host/commuter railroads and Amtrak All this requires people and $$

14. 13 Policy considerations: implementation & next round Long-term dedicated funding for HSIPR and Amtrak Defining relationships –State-Amtrak, State-DOT, Amtrak-DOT PTC – costs and grant eligibility Pricing/cost allocation policies –State corridor service costs (PRIIA 209) –NEC shared infrastructure/services (PRIIA 212) –Commuter/host railroad benefits vs. contributions Equipment - roles and responsibilities for funding/financing, acquisition, ownership Standards –Application evaluations –Ridership, cost, benefit, projections –Sec. 207 Metrics and Standards Environmental process and requirements (Categorical Exclusion, etc) Flow-downs and tax implications – dealing with the hosts

15. 14 Amtrak-State Agreements: National rail plan issues What will the National Plan mean for future grant projects? Should projects have to be in the plan? Will there be a map? When should compliance with state rail plan requirement return for grants? Sec. 207 Metrics and Standards and National Plan integration? Should differences among state perspectives/levels of commitment affect National Plan? How does the Amtrak system fit into the National Plan? What funds the National Plan?