1 / 28

Making the Most of MRSI

Making the Most of MRSI. 2006 Midwest Regional & Shortline Railroad Annual Conference July 17, 2006. Our perspective: Anacostia has five short line railroad affiliates operating in six states. Chicago S. Shore Louisville & Indiana New York & Atlantic Northern Lines Ry Pacific Harbor Line.

marci
Télécharger la présentation

Making the Most of MRSI

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Making the Most of MRSI 2006 Midwest Regional & Shortline Railroad Annual Conference July 17, 2006

  2. Our perspective: Anacostia has five short line railroad affiliates operating in six states • Chicago S. Shore • Louisville & Indiana • New York & Atlantic • Northern Lines Ry • Pacific Harbor Line

  3. Anacostia Railroads2005 Aggregate Operational Metrics • Route miles: 530 • Carload equivalents: 700,000+ • Average crew starts each day: 50 • Employees: 320 • Locomotives: 60

  4. Chicago South Shore & South Bend Railroad (CSS)

  5. CSS

  6. Louisville & Indiana Railroad (LIRC)

  7. LIRC

  8. New York & Atlantic Railway (NYA)

  9. NYA

  10. Northern Lines Railway, LLC (NLR)

  11. NLR

  12. Pacific Harbor Line, Inc. (PHL)

  13. PHL

  14. Anacostia 2006 Capital Projects • Acquisition of 16 new EPA “Tier 2” locomotives : $ 22 million (PHL) • Acquisition of 100 new freight cars for coil steel loading: $ 8. 5 million (CSS) • Acquire locomotive speed control devices: $400k (NYA) • Track upgrade programs: $8 million plus (various)

  15. Use of public assistance programs • PHL “tier 2” locomotives: cost sharing with POLA,POLB, AQMD • NYA track upgrades: one time grant from Port Authority of NYNJ to improve state-owned track • LIRC track: periodic $200k grants from INDOT

  16. Effective State Rail Assistance Programs? • Anacostia affiliates operate in 5 states: • California – no program • Illinois – rail freight loan program funded by repayment-program underfunded in recent years • Indiana – small grant program-$1.2 million per year • Minnesota – MRSI • New York – Class based using state dedicated funds. Shortlines received $15M in fiscal ‘05-’06

  17. Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Idaho Kentucky Louisiana Missouri Nevada South Carolina Wyoming No Funding for Rail Assistance Programs* *Draft Report of State Rail Agencies Throughout the United States - October 2005 Virginia Dept. of Rail and Public Transportation

  18. North Dakota State Freight Rail Improvement Program Low Interest Loans – approximately $6M available to Class II and others in revolving loan account South Dakota Rehabilitation “any projects that are proposed must be paid for by the railroad company operating on the line. The state does not have funding itself to participate in costs of rehabilitation” SDDOT website Industrial Track Expansion “State of South Dakota has participated in helping some elevators with track expansion through small loans from the Railroad Trust Fund.” SDDOT website Neighboring State Programs

  19. Michigan Michigan Rail Loan Assistance Program (MiRLAP) Non-interest bearing loans with repayment up to 10 years. Revolving fund with anticipated $1.8M available for 2006. Freight Preservation . Economic Development Grants / loans for business development or expansion and preservation of State owned rail (700 miles) $3M in 2006 Other State Program Highlights

  20. Connect Oregon • New program in Oregon replacing the Shortline Infrastructure Program ($2M – biennial) and Industrial Rail Spur Fund ($8M one time) designed to connect industry to rail • First major funding initiative targeted at multi-modal or non-highway transportation • $100M available to non-highway transportation only - air, rail, marine or transit • Grant / loan program – grant recipients must provide at least 20% matching funds, loan repayments treated on a case-by-case basis • Funded by Lottery backed bonds

  21. State divided into 5 regions – geographic grouping of counties 15% of funds must be allocated to each of the regions 75% of funds will be distributed regionally Projects eligible for highway funds are not eligible for Connect Oregon Eligibility Reduces transportation costs Benefits or connects two or more modes Critical link to statewide or regional system How much cost can be born by applicant Whether it creates permanent jobs Ready for construction Connect Oregon – cont.

  22. Connect Oregon – cont. • Project Awards for Connect Oregon will be announced Wednesday July 19th – here is a preview: • Central Oregon & Pacific - new yard, Coos Bay Drawbridge repair, Portland & Western - new yard and Hillsboro Subdivision 286 upgrade, Willamette Valley - 286 upgrade, Port of Portland - Ramsey Yard upgrade, City of Prineville Railroad - reload center, Union Pacific - Hinkle Yard upgrade, Palouse River and Coulee City Railroad - upgrade 20 miles • Total of $39.2M directly allocated to rail, with additional money for marine/rail projects • Partial source TEA-LU!!!

  23. Range of program fund uses • Acquisition • Basic maintenance • Catastrophic response (eg flood) • Upgrade (eg 286, track class change) • New customer links • Safety, environmental, community mitigation • Capacity enhancement • Customer relocation

  24. Public benefits of rail investment • Job creation/retention • Economic development • Passenger corridor preservation • Reduction of truck congestion • Reduction of transportation costs • Avoidance of other public transportation expenditures • Safety, environmental, community impact mitigation

  25. Ranking criteria • Cost per job created/saved • Private funds match • Local government unit funds match • Loan vs. grant • Terms of loan • In MPO plan or regional growth corridor • Ownership of recipient

  26. Key issues • Transparency • Multi-year planning • Tie to future land use • Future capacity vs. ad hoc response • Need vs. value

  27. Observations • Assistance programs strongly tilt toward public applicants • Objectives of programs vary substantially (e.g. prop up failing rr; attract new customers; air quality/passenger benefits; support 286 cars, etc) • Mid to long term capacity, congestion land use and industrial development issues largely unaddressed

  28. What can we do to Make the Most of the Minnesota Rail Service Improvement Program?

More Related