July 10, RE: Docket Number FRA Dear Administrator Szabo:

Similar documents
APTA s Legislative Proposal for a Federal High-Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail Program AMERICA S FUTURE IS RIDING ON PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

DEPARTMENT OF RAIL AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION REPORT ON AUDIT FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2005

Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations Fixing America s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act

Federal Public Transportation Program: In Brief

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation.

SUMMARY OF THE GROW AMERICA ACT As Submitted to Congress on April 29, 2014

9. Positioning Ports for Grant Funding and Government Loan Programs

To: Carolyn Peoples, Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, E. FROM: Roger E. Niesen, Regional Inspector General for Audit, 7AGA

TRANSPORTATION. The American County Platform and Resolutions

a GAO GAO TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH Actions Needed to Improve Coordination and Evaluation of Research

Open House Round 2. State Rail Plan. A Collaborative Vision for Transportation

Transit and Rail Efforts Impacting Northern Virginia

HOW DOES A PROJECT GET INTO THE STIP?

Program Management Plan FTA Section 5310

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. Transportation and the Federal Government

Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. POLICIES & PROCEDURES Design Build Procurement Procedures April 2016

APTA RAIL CONFERENCE. WORKSHOP The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

Capital District September 26, 2017 Transportation Committee. The Community and Transportation Linkage Planning Program for

2017 Grant Assurances - Comments Concerning LSC s Proposed Revisions to the 2017 Grant Assurances. (81 FR ) April 5, 2016

Appendix B. FAQ Brochure LOCHSTP Plan Outline Transportation Service Survey Project Prioritization Criteria

Appendix 5 Freight Funding Programs

Leverage Information and Technology, Now and in the Future

South Dakota Management Plan For the Section 5311 Program CFDA

Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO): Solicitation of Project Proposals for the Passenger Ferry Grant Program

FUNDING SOURCES. Appendix I. Funding Sources

Request for Developer Qualifications-John Deere Commons Development Opportunity

Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board Legislative Program

Table of Contents. Hudson Tunnel Project and Concrete Casing 2 Request for Information No Gateway Program Development Corporation

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS Grants for Adaptive Sports Programs for Disabled Veterans and Disabled Members of

OF VIRGINIA S FY2018-FY2021 STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

A. Amend the FY LACMTA Budget to add $3,000,000 from Measure R 3% Commuter Rail funds for the Rancho Vista Grade Separation Project

DRAFT. January 7, The Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld Secretary of Defense

CHAPTER House Bill No. 5013

Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program and Goals for LSCOG

Impact of Program Implementation on the Effectiveness of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Commodity Credit Corporation and Foreign Agricultural Service. Notice of Funding Availability: Inviting Applications for the Emerging Markets

USACE 2012: The Objective Organization Draft Report

GAO HIGHWAY SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. Further Efforts Needed to Address Data Limitations and Better Align Funding with States Top Safety Priorities

Guidelines for the Virginia Investment Partnership Grant Program

Economic Development Element of the Arroyo Grande General Plan. Prepared by the City of Arroyo Grande Community Development Department

Questions & Answers. Elderly Individuals & Individuals with Disabilities (Section 5310), JARC & New Freedom Programs Last Updated April 29, 2009

Summary of AV START Act (S.1885)

OHIO TURNPIKE AND INFRASTRUCTURE COMMISSION

SAFETEA-LU. Overview. Background

NASACT Benchmarking and Related Consulting Services RFP Questions and Answers

San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Legislative Priorities

Application Form Planning

Audit Report Grant Closure Processes Follow-up Review

Fiscal Year 2018 Competitive Funding Opportunity; Grants for Buses and Bus Facilities Infrastructure Investment Program

Update on Federal Rail Grants to NCDOT

NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Below are five basic procurement methods common to most CDBG projects:

SECTION 5310 APPLICATION GUIDELINES FOR 2018 PROJECTS:

ANNUAL TRANSIT PROVIDER MEETING FY 2017 GENERAL SESSION, SEPTEMBER 29, 2016

Comments on Proposed Rule The Women-Owned Small Business Federal Contract Assistance Program RIN: 3245-AE65

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS 11 th August, A Strategy for the Atlantic Canadian Aerospace and Defence Sector for a Long-term Development Plan

National Environmental Policy Act; Implementing Procedures; Addition of Categorical Exclusion for Real Property

John Spain, Executive Vice President Baton Rouge Area Foundation Karen Parsons AICP, Principal Planner - New Orleans Regional Planning Commission

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) Posey County Long Range Transportation Plan

SUBJECT: REGIONAL RAlL PLANNING AND ENGINEERING BENCH AND REGIONAL RAlL UPDATE. INITIATE PROCESS TO ESTABLISH A REGIONAL RAlL BENCH

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION SAVE OUR CEMETERIES, INC. STRATEGIC PLAN FOR CEMETERY RESTORATION YEARS RE-AFFIRMATION OF CORE MISSION The board of

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS. Transportation Systems Plan (TSP)

Summary of. Overview. existing law. to coal ash. billion in FY. funding in FY 2013 FY 2014

OahuMPO Transportation Alternatives Program

September 1, Comments on Draft Reportable Food Registry (RFR) Guidance; Docket No. FDA-2009-D-0260

UBER: DRIVING UPSTATE JOBS New York State Economic Impact Report

REGIONAL AND INTERCITY PROGRAM

FEDERAL TRANSIT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT GRANTS CAPITAL PROGRAM. U. S. Department of Transportation

Stimulus Funding and Transportation

Program Management Plan

CITY OF GREENVILLE, SC REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS RFP NO

New York Main Street Program & New York Main Street Technical Assistance RESOURCE GUIDE

Partnership Financing: Improving Transportation Through Public Private Partnerships

Transportation Improvement Program for Lake, Porter, and LaPorte Counties, Indiana for

REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATION FOR PREPARATION OF FACILITIES MASTER PLAN AND FUTURE ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES

Nevada Smart Transportation: Save Money and Grow the Economy

Candidate Info MTAP Steering Committee 2017 Elections

South Dakota Smart Transportation: Save Money and Grow the Economy

All Aboard! Safety and Safety Culture Impacts of the Clear Signal for Action (CSA) Program

Re: Feedback on Interim Guidance Document on Physician-Assisted Death. Re: Response to Request for Stakeholder Feedback on Physician-Assisted Dying

Texas Department of Transportation Page 1 of 39 Environmental Review of Transportation Projects

Iowa DOT Update 2016 APWA Fall Conference JOHN E. DOSTART, P.E.

Using Railroad-DOT Mitigation Strategies SHRP2 Case Study

Module 2 Planning and Programming

Alteration of Bridges

November 4, 2013 Office of Transportation Public Private Partnerships

JOINT PROCESS REVIEW OF THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION S LOCAL GOVERNMENT ADMINISTERED FEDERAL-AID PROGRAM

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS REGIONAL AGING AND DISABILITY SERVICE AND ADVOCACY COALITIONS

Alternative Funding and Financing Mechanisms for Rail Projects: Summary and Relevance for Intercity Passenger Rail (NCRRP 07-01)

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION. Notice of Availability of the Draft Programmatic Environmental Assessment for the

Public Transportation Innovation Funding Opportunity; Mobility on. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number:

INDEPENDENT AUDITING SERVICES

Executive Summary. Purpose

Project Selection Advisory Council

RE: NLADA Comments to Draft 2015 Compliance Supplement (80 Fed. Reg ) (December 4, 2015)

HIGH COUNTRY RURAL PLANNING ORGANIZATION (RPO) 2015 STIP PROJECT SOLICITATION AND RANKING PROCESS

Traffic-Calming & Pedestrian Safety Project

FY2018. NDAA Reform. Recommendations

Intellectual Disability Waiver Transition Plan Regarding Compliance with the HCBS Final Rule Elements July 30, 2014

Transcription:

Chair Beverly A. Scott First Vice Chair Mattie P. Carter Secretary-Treasurer Michael J. Scanlon The Honorable Joseph Szabo Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration U.S. Department of Transportation Docket Management Facility 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE West Building Ground Floor Room W12-140 Washington, DC 20590-0001 RE: Docket Number FRA 2009-0045 Dear Administrator Szabo: On behalf of the 1,500 member organizations of the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), I write to provide comments on the Federal Railroad Administration s (FRA) Notice of Funding Availability and Interim Program Guidance concerning the High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program (HSIPR), published June 23, 2009 at 74 FR 29900. About APTA APTA is a non-profit international trade association of 1,500 public and private member organizations, including transit systems; planning, design, construction and finance firms; product and service providers; academic institutions; and state associations and departments of transportation. More than ninety percent of Americans who use public transportation are served by APTA member transit systems. Immediate Past Chair Michael S. Townes Vice Chairs Richard J. Bacigalupo Management and Finance J. Barry Barker Government Affairs Doran Barnes Human Resources Linda J. Bohlinger Research and Technology Flora M. Castillo Transit Board Members Thomas J. Costello Marketing and Communications Joyce Eleanor Bus and Paratransit Operations Sharon Greene Business Members Delon Hampton Business Member-at-Large Loren Ben Herr State Affairs Angela Iannuzziello Canadian Members Hugh A. Mose Small Operations David Solow Commuter and Intercity Rail Gary C. Thomas Rail Transit President William W. Millar Among our members, we count the legacy members of the former High Speed Ground Transportation Association (HSGTA). Prior to its integration into APTA, HSGTA served as the premier advocate of high speed rail in America with more than 500 active members and a mature national advocacy program. HSGTA s efforts established the foundation for the current high speed rail initiatives now supported at both the state and national levels. 1666 K Street, N.W., 11th Floor Washington, DC 20006 Phone (202) 496-4800 FAX (202) 496-4324 www.apta.com

Page 2 APTA is now the focal-point for high speed rail advocacy for the nation with a perspective based on the legacy of HSGTA, matured by the multi-modal and informed perspective of APTA s broad membership. The HSGTA s more than two decades of expertise is now resident in APTA s High Speed and Intercity Rail Committee and APTA stands ready to partner with FRA as it fashions a comprehensive high speed and intercity rail network fully integrated with the nation s mass transportation programs. General Comment APTA commends FRA on the tremendous strides made in this program, particularly given the substantial time constraints, scope, and complexity inherent in creating a nationwide high speed rail program. The fact that our comments are few and quite specific demonstrates the high quality of the FRA work. Competition Throughout this program, we encourage FRA to maximize competition, not only in the grant process but in recipient driven selections of contractors and service operators. Open selection processes are vital to establishing viable, efficient services. Eligibility for Track 2 Paragraph 1.6.2 preconditions entry into Track 2 on completion of a programmatic or Tier I environmental impact statement (PEIS) and a service development plan (SDP), presumably under Track 3. The limitation of Track 3 funding to states in section 3.1.3 forecloses groups of states or interstate compacts from applying for Track 3 funding. This combination of factors effectively forces groups of states or interstate compacts to seek funding on either the state or federal level for these activities on an inefficient, piecemeal basis. As a result, some project sponsors have been stymied by state practices that withhold funding for activities, particularly environmental work, that crosses state lines in preparation for Track 2 activities. Allowing states, groups of states, or interstate compacts to apply for entry into Track 2 upon completion of either the PEIS or SDP, would facilitate state funding and allow for federal assistance in multi-state corridors. Moreover, some programs can more efficiently be developed as a single, unified project. This approach allows project sponsors to proceed without the time and expense of completing a PEIS when, in fact, moving directly to an EIS is appropriate. Allowing sponsors of these unified projects to apply for Track 2 funding would avoid duplicative, expensive, and unnecessary work and ensure optimum use of both federal and non-federal funds. We believe FRA should change paragraph 1.6.2 to allow entry into Track 2 upon completion of either the PEIS or SDP.

Page 3 Eligibility for Track 3 Paragraph 3.1.3 limits eligibility under Track 3 to states. APTA believes this eligibility should extend to groups of states or interstate compacts. Groups of states and interstate compacts created by those states are specifically tasked with the planning activities inherent in Track 3 and are authorized to act on behalf of their parent states. Project Funding We note the inconsistency between the authorized 100 percent federal share and the evaluation criteria that prioritize projects that incorporate non-federal funds, as eveidenced in paragraphs 3.3.1.1 and 3.3.1.2. Use of these criteria effectively eliminates any opportunity for a 100 percent federal share in a deserving project. We believe FRA should preserve the opportunity for such a deserving project to win funding by not overemphasizing the weighting of non-federal funding. To the extent FRA does consider non-federal resources in project selection, we believe it imperative that potential grantees be encouraged to enlist private sector participation through publicprivate partnerships or innovative project delivery methods. Project Inclusion in State Transportation Plans Paragraph 3.5.4 states: "To be eligible for funding under Track 4, a proposed project must be specifically included in the applicant State's Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP) at the time of application." This requirement is inconsistent with Sec. 301 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act (PRIIA), which requires that eligible projects must be on a State rail plan. Similarly, PRIIA Sec. 501 establishes as part of the grant criteria for selecting recipients of highspeed rail development grants "that the project be part of a State rail plan" or the North East Corridor state-of-good repair plan. Based on the congressional guidance in PRIIA, FRA should revise paragraph Sec. 3.5.4 to require inclusion on a State rail plan or a STIP, as the baseline eligibility criteria for Track 4 project applications. Prerequisites for Equipment Procurement or Design Grants Paragraph 3.6.3 states: If the applicant is seeking a grant for the procurement or design of railroad equipment, the proposed equipment should be consistent with Section 305 of PRIIA, which calls for the establishment of a standardized next-generation rail corridor equipment pool. Compliance with Section 305 of PRIIA will assist in creating the economies of scale necessary to achieve the Administration's goal, as outlined in FRA's Strategic Plan, of developing a sustainable railroad equipment manufacturing base in the United States.

Page 4 Section 305 of PRIIA requires Amtrak to establish a "Next Generation Corridor Equipment Pool Committee... including interested States... to design, develop specifications for, and procure standardized next-generation corridor equipment." As drafted, paragraph 3.6.3 of the interim guidance would require States or authorities proposing dedicated corridor systems or shared use applications to justify rolling stock procurement plans as an exception to any pool committee standard. PRIIA Section 305 is clearly intended to promote a single, cost-effective equipment platform when envisioned for use on the general system. FRA should revise paragraph 3.6.3 to clarify that compliance with PRIIA Section 305 applies only to intercity and higher-speed rail initiatives intended primarily on the general railroad system, and not dedicated corridors or shared use applications proposed for operation under approved FRA waivers and system safety rules of particular applicability. FRA should emphasize direct crash avoidance systems that take advantage of current and emerging technology demonstrated in high speed rail applications throughout the world. As an additional point, FRA should further make clear that while the Next Generation Corridor Equipment Pool Committee should proceed expeditiously, the initiative should not hold back any equipment procurement initiatives otherwise ready to proceed. Environmental Issues While we agree that environmental review of projects is mandatory, as detailed in paragraph 5.1, we believe FRA should affirmatively state that projects within the right of way of existing rail lines and infrastructure may be eligible for categorical exclusion, consistent with the guidance at 64 Fed.Reg. 28545, at 28547. Railroad Agreements Appendix 3.4.3 would precondition receipt of a grant on a written agreement with a host railroad that owns the applicable right of way. Given the complexity of these agreements, FRA should allow receipt of a grant in the absence of a signed agreement where it finds reasonable evidence of good faith negotiations and a likelihood that an acceptable agreement can be struck. This would allow projects to progress without unnecessary delay and unnecessary additional costs occasioned by that delay. Additionally, where not inconsistent with appropriations act limitations, federal assistance should be authorized to simply purchase right of way from railroads under fair and reasonable terms when such purchases are in the public interest. Finally, where no written agreement is forthcoming, railroad owners should not be given an effective veto of this national system. Dispute resolution mechanisms must be in place, whether under the auspices of FRA or the Surface Transportation Board.

Page 5 Time Limitations for Track 1 Projects The table embedded in section 4.3.6 requires project completetion [w]ithin 2 years of obligation. Even a small, completely shovel-ready project would be difficult to complete within 24 months. Any work undertaken in an active rail corridor must be accomplished safely and without unnecessary disruption of active traffic in the corridor. We suggest the time frame for completion be extended to at least 36 months. Administrative Dates In its December 16, 2008 Federal Register announcement related to PRIIA, FRA set a September 14, 2009 deadline for expressions of interest. In light of the dates in the interim guidance, FRA should clarify whether the September 14 deadline or those in the interim guidance are controlling. Interoperability An overarching goal of the FRA program should be interoperability. With a future vision of an interconnected, nationwide system of high speed rail, FRA should work with stakeholders to identify appropriate aspects of system parameters that will support long term interoperability without inhibiting innovation or unnecessarily adding costs to individual systems. APTA greatly appreciates the efforts and outreach of FRA and the opportunity to assist in crafting this important program. For additional information, please contact James LaRusch of APTA s executive office at (202) 496-4808 or email jlarusch@apta.com. Sincerely yours, William Millar President WM/rk