#1FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY Regional Working Group Meeting 3 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 1 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#2WELCOME & SAFETY BRIEFING U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 2 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#3FRA OPENING REMARKS U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 3 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#4INTRODUCTIONS U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 4 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#5Agenda ■ Welcome and Introductions Study Overview and What We've Heard ■Route Development and Evaluation Methodology ■ Identification of Routes Approach for Development of Route Service Development of Capital and Operations and Maintenance Cost Estimates Implementation Timeframe Feedback Ongoing Long-Distance Collaboration and Planning Closing and Next Steps U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 5 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#6Meeting Objectives ▪ Brief stakeholders on the study progress ▪ Inform stakeholders on the methodologies for developing routes, route schedules, and cost estimates ▪ Review the preferred routes and get feedback ▪ Receive input from stakeholders on: ○ Prioritization concepts for implementation timeframes ○ Ongoing collaboration and planning U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 6 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#7Long-Distance Service Study Regions: Stakeholder Group Meetings Seattle, WA 2/8 Northwest NORTHWEST Kansas City, MO 2/13 Central 2/14 Midwest Sacramento, CA 2/6 Southwest Southwest Northwest Central + Midwest Central Central + Southeast Midwest Midwest + Northwest Northeast Southeast Midwest + Southeast Northwest + Southwest U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration MIDWEST SOUTHWEST SOUTHEAST CENTRAL NORTHEAST Boston, MA 2/15 Northeast Charlotte, NC 2/7 Southeast 7 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#8Long-Distance Service Study Engagement Schedule 01 02 Meeting 1 January-February 2023 Universe of Routes & Evaluation Factors U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Meeting 2 Summer 2023 Enhanced Network Route Development Meeting 3 Winter 2024 Route Identification 03 Meeting 4 Spring 2024 Recommended Actions 04 8 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#9STUDY OVERVIEW U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 9 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#10About the FRA Long-Distance Service Study The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) of 2021 requires the FRA to conduct a study to evaluate the restoration of daily intercity rail passenger service along ― any Amtrak Long-Distance routes that were discontinued; and any Amtrak Long-Distance routes that occur on a nondaily basis. ▪ FRA may also evaluate potential new Amtrak Long-Distance routes, including with specific attention provided to routes in service as of April 1971 but not continued by Amtrak. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 10 SERVICE STUDY#11Legislative Considerations for Long-Distance Service Expansion U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Link and serve large and small communities as part of a regional rail network Advance the economic and social well-being of rural areas of the United States Provide enhanced connectivity for the national Long-Distance passenger rail system Reflect public engagement and local and regional support of restored passenger rail service 11 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#12FRA Long-Distance Service Study - Report to Congress Preferred options for restoring or enhancing Long-Distance service Prioritized inventory of capital projects to restore or enhance service Federal and non-Federal funding sources Estimated costs and public benefits of restoring or enhancing intercity rail passenger transportation in the region impacted for each relevant Amtrak route U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 12 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#13FRA Long-Distance Service Study - FRA's Preliminary Vision Common long-term vision for Long- Distance passenger rail service, and capital projects needed to implement that vision, based on existing conditions, future travel demand, and the role of Long-Distance services in the linking communities across the country. Potential institutional arrangements, financial requirements, and planning and development activities needed to implement the vision. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Strategies for Amtrak and other key stakeholders for implementation and coordination in development of Long- Distance routes, including potential opportunities and efficiencies in Amtrak's management and implementation of Long-Distance services. 13 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#14Overview of Long-Distance Service Study Scope ■ Plan and execute agency, stakeholder and public engagement ■ Review previous Long-Distance services ■ Assess current Long-Distance services and travel market Develop study methods and tools Develop restoration and expansion concepts ■Identify preferred options and prioritization Develop costs, benefits, and financing information Identify final recommendations and implementation strategies ■ Issue final report U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 14 SERVICE STUDY#15Long-Distance Service Study Approach Amtrak Non-Daily (Cardinal & Sunset Limited) Routes Evaluate existing conditions & requirements to restore to daily service Consider & recommend daily service restoration plan Former Long-Distance Routes Potential New Long-Distance Services Market Assessment & Evaluation Factors Long-Distance Service Restoration & Expansion Analysis for Refined Route Network . . Long-Distance Service - Proposed Preferred Routes Conceptual Route Service Measures of Effectiveness • Cost Estimate • Methodology Implementation Considerations U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 15 • • Report to Congress . Preferred Route Options & Phasing Funding Sources Capital Project Inventory Cost & Public Benefits FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#16Long-Distance Service Study Expectations What this Study IS Focused on Long-Distance Network Assessment of routes over 750 miles Focused on Amtrak as service provider Service frequencies to meet Long-Distance markets Utilization of existing rail corridors Conventional rail/technology What this Study IS NOT A "National Rail Plan" Assessment of State-Supported routes Identifying other service providers High frequency service Identifying new "greenfield” alignments High-speed or other emerging technologies U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 16 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#17Long-Distance Service Study Technical Outputs Develop robust market demand and operations and maintenance (O&M) costs that emphasize the benefits and costs of both the existing and an expanded long-distance network o Includes developing demand, revenue, and O&M cost estimates for specific routes under consideration Identify passenger-service specific projects ○ Examples: stations, rolling stock, track upgrades ○ Projects will be included as part of "prioritized inventory" mandated by the legislation ○ Decision to focus on identifying these types of projects was based on feedback from host railroads during initial LDSS outreach U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 17 SERVICE STUDY#18Long-Distance Service Study in the FRA Project Lifecycle Stages Development Stages Implementation Stages Systems Planning Project Planning Project Development Final Design Construction Operation Regional & State Rail Planning Corridor Identification & Development Program Fed State Partnership / Other Federal Funding Programs FRA Long-Distance Service Study U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Restoration & Enhancement Program 18 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#19Long-Distance Service Study in the FRA Project Lifecycle Stages Systems Project Planning Planning FRA Long-Distance Service Study Key Systems and Project Planning Tasks Undertaken Examines broad needs, challenges, and opportunities Considers links with other transportation modes for safe, seamless, integrated transportation to carry travelers from origin to destination within and between megaregions ■ Identify passenger-service specific projects, including their respective costs and benefits Key Project Planning Tasks Subject to Additional Analysis After This Study Route, service, and passenger-specific project recommendations are subject to further development and refinement under subsequent detailed project planning and project development efforts Identify potential capacity related improvements and operational issues associated with the proposed routes Develop conceptual engineering concepts with consideration of environmental factors U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 19 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#20Corridor Identification and Development Program Overview Build the foundation for a long-term rail program Corridor ID creates a foundational framework for identifying and developing new or improved intercity passenger rail (IPR) services. Under the program, FRA will: Bring world-class passenger rail service to regions across the country Solicit proposal for implementing new or improving existing IPR services SDP includes a "corridor project inventory" Select corridors for development Corridor project inventories populate a prioritized "pipeline" of projects Partner with corridor sponsor to prepare (or update) a Service Development Plan (SDP) Projects in the Corridor ID Pipeline are eligible for funding under FRA's financial assistance programs Grow a safer, cleaner, more equitable rail system U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 20 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#21Corridor Identification and Development Program Overview Eligibility includes both short-distance (less than 750 miles) services, along with increasing the frequency of long-distance service, and restoring service over any route formerly operated by Amtrak ■ The first selections of the Corridor ID Program were announced in December 2023. Long-distance service corridors selected into Step 1 of the program include: ○ Daily Cardinal Service (Amtrak) o Daily Sunset Limited Service (Amtrak) o North Coast Hiawatha (Big Sky Passenger Rail Authority) Step 1 of the program requires sponsors to develop a scope, schedule, and cost estimate for preparing, completing, or documenting its service development plan. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 21 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#22FY 22 Corridor ID Selections 90+ Corridor ID applications received 69 applications were selected U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration CID SELECTIONS -High-Speed Pal Conventional Rail (New) Conventional Rail (Exting Existing Intercity Passenger Rail Network FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#23WHAT WE HEARD U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 23 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#24Route Development Feedback Received at Meeting Series 2 During interactive sessions, attendees used a map of the Enhanced Network to identify potential routes, including termini and intermediate stations. Common themes included: Hubs at Kansas City, Denver, Dallas, Atlanta, St. Louis, Charlotte, Memphis, Nashville, Tulsa, Seattle, Los Angeles, Boise, Las Vegas, Salt Lake City, and Indianapolis ○ Support for greater accessibility to military bases and national parks Consideration for restoration of segments of discontinued routes Support for new segments connecting places in the network, like Rapid City, Baton Rouge, and Chattanooga and Roanoke via Knoxville. Legend Portland Sacramento, Baseline Network Antal Hous Chngen Boise Idaho Hero Salt Lake City Nevada Merced CE المالنا Wyoming South Dakota Sioux Falls Minnesota Duluth Des Moines lowa Nebraska Cheyenne Omaha Kansas City inois S LOLIS Green Bay Michigan ° Albany Boston New York Buffalo Detroit Cleveland Pennsylvania Pittsburgh Columbus Now Ha Combeesa New York City Phlacepha -Wang DC Aubur Seattle Washington Spokane Yakima Sandpoint Kennewick Helena Montana North Dakota Butte Billings Fargo Minneapolis St. Paul Wisconsin TCMC Milwaukee Chicago Indiana Ohio Indianapolis Cincinnati Ashland West Virginia Roanoke Louisville Virginia Pete Lynchburg- Mour Tulsa Nashville Tennessee Chattanooga Charlotte Oklahoma Amarillo City Odahoma Little Rock, Memphis Mississippi Ananta New Mexico Arkansas Birmingham South Carolina Tucson Meridian Savannah Fort Worth Jackson- Montgomery El Paso Marshal Georgia Alabama Louisiana Mobile Jacksonville GCPR Tallahassee Pensacola Sanford New Orleans Orlando Tampa Florida Miami Los Angulu Northant C Share Suppor Base Projects <-Bighe Denver Colorado Kansas Trinidad Bakersfield Las Vegas Barstow Flagstaff Abuquerque Arizona Phoenix Yuma Gut Count Passanger Rai Twin Cities-Mika-Chicago CAHBR MOS Enhanced Network Segments Segment Options Texas Newton Houston San Antonio Laredo 250 Kentucky North Carolina brightline Loron Conceptual Enhanced Network presented at Meeting Series 2, July 2023. Not an FRA proposal for service. Segments are conceptual building blocks for consideration in developing potential new long-distance routes. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA 24 LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#25Governance Feedback from Meeting Series 2 Participants were asked how FRA and Amtrak could coordinate with stakeholders about current and future long-distance services. ○ Themes for current and future service input included: ✓ Community and Rider Engagement: Increased awareness of services and related benefits; coordinated marketing with states and communities; local first/last mile connections; rider surveys; engagement with Tribal Nations, disability community, health care providers, higher education, and tourism/chambers of commerce Planning: Coordinated planning across states and corridor(s), including regional transportation plans and potential multimodal connections/hubs; schedules; station amenities ○ Potential models of governance bodies included: ✓ Congressionally-created bodies, such as SAIPRC and NECC; Interstate Rail Compacts, including SRC and MIPRC ✓ Others, including: SPRC, Associations (APTA, AASHTO, CTAA), and MPOS U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 25 SERVICE STUDY#26Feedback from the Website from Meeting Series 2 Received approximately 2,000 comments in the weeks after meeting series 2 ○ Project team reviewed and categorized all comments o Reviewed comments pertaining to termini and intermediate stations 9% Comment Type 8% o Continued to see comments in support 22% of the study and long-distance service U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 29% 32% Restore Former Service Potential New Service ■Modify Current Service ■ Other ■ Systemwide 26 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#27Seare Aubu Washing Sandpoint Spcka e Yakim Kennewick Helena Montana Bue Bings Oregon Boise Idaho Route Feedback after Meeting Series 2 Portino Conceptual Enhanced Network Conceptual segments for future route development consideration Not an FRA proposal for service North Dakota Minnesota Duluth Fargo Minneapolis/ St. Paul- Wisconsin Green Bay Michigan Wyoming South Dakota Sioux Falls TCMC lowa Milwaukee Chicago Sacramento Reno Salt Lake City San Francisco Nevada Merced California Bakersfield Barstow Las Vegas Flagstaff Los Angeles Albuquerque Arizona Phoenix Yuma Nebraska Cheyenne Omaha- Des Moines Indiana hio Utah Denver Colorado Kansas Newton 0 Kansas City Illinois Indianapolis Columbus Cincinnati West Virginia New Hampshire Albany Massachusetts Boston New York Buffalo Detroit Cleveland Pennsylvania Pittsburgh Rhode Island -New Haven -Connecticut New York City -Philadelphia -Delaware -New Jersey -Washington DC Maryland -Lorton Missour Trinidad Legend Baseline Network Amtrak Routes Long-Distance Northeast Corridor State-Supported Baseline Projects <--Brightline Gulf Coast Passenger Rail -Twin Cities-Milwaukee-Chicago -CAHSR MOS Enhanced Network -Segments Comments Submitted Ashland Louisville Kentucky Roanoke Lynchburg- Virginia Petersburg Tulsa Oklahoma Civ Amarillo Oklahoma New Mexico Tucson B Paso Nashville Tennessee Charlotte North Carolina Chattanooga Little Rock Memphis Mississippi Atlanta Arkansas Birmingham South Carolina Dallas Fort Worth Meridian Savannah Jackson Montgomery Marshal Georgia Louisiana Alabama Mobile Texas acksonville GCPR Tallahassee Pensacola New Orleans Sanford Houston San Antonio Orlando Tampa Brightine Laredo Florida Miami St Louis 250 500 Miles Atlanta Chicago Segment Options (52 Comments) (139 Comments) Conceptual Enhanced Network presented at Meeting Series 2, July 2023. Not an FRA proposal for service. Segments are conceptual building blocks for consideration in developing potential new long-distance routes. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 27 SERVICE STUDY#28ROUTE DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION METHODOLOGY U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA 28 LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#29Route Development and Evaluation Methodology Develop Potential New Long-Distance Routes U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Evaluate The Range of Route Options Identify Preferred Routes 29 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#30DEVELOP POTENTIAL NEW LONG-DISTANCE ROUTES U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 30 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#31Methods Align with the Legislative Considerations 1 Large and Small Communities Identify metropolitan area travel flows not served by the existing passenger rail network 2 Focus on Rural 3 Identify rural and disadvantaged communities not served by existing passenger rail network Enhance Connectivity Identify gaps in the passenger rail network, and reflect regional plans for passenger rail service 4 Reflect Public Engagement Check that Enhanced Network reflects stakeholder and public inputs Спсадо- Pitsburgh Philadelphia Indianapolis Columbus Cincinnat We Defamart Washington DC Virginli Lorton St Louis indiate Lynchburg- Vagina Petersburg Houll Nashville Memphis Tem Jackson Mobile Knoxville Charkite Birmingham Alabama North Caplica Ananta Soum Carsina Savannah Jacksonville 30% Link and serve large and small communities as part of a regional rail network Advance the economic and social well-being of rural areas of the United States Provide enhanced connectivity for the national long-distance passenger rail system Reflect public engagement and local and regional support for restored passenger rail service U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 31 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#32Portland Coast Starlight Washington Seattle Spokane Empire Builder Oregon Idaho Sacramento Reno Salt Lake City Emeryville Merced Nevada Los Angeles Legend Existing Network Amtrak Routes Long-Distance Northeast Corridor State-Supported California Bakersfield U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Existing Network Maine Montana North Dakota Minnesota Fargo Wisconsin Minneapolis/ St. Paul South Dakota Wyoming Michigan Milwaukee Detroit lowa Chicago- Cleveland Pennsylvania Pittsburgh Nebraska Omaha Indiana Ohio California Zephyr Indianapolis Utah Colorado 0 Denver Kansas City Illinois • Cincinnati West Virginia Buffalo Lake Shore Ltd Capitol Ltd Albany New York Vermont New Hampshire Massachusetts Boston Rhode Island New Haven Connecticut New York City New Jersey Delaware Washington DC Maryland -Lorton -Philadelphia St Louis Kansas Southwest Chief Missouri Flagstaff Albuquerque 10 Texas Eagle City of New Orleans Cardinal Kentucky Virginia -Petersburg Lynchburg- Charlotte Tennessee Arizona New Mexico Tucson El Paso Texas Sunset Ltd Houston San Antonio Jackson Louisiana Oklahoma City Oklahoma Little Rock Memphis Mississippi Atlanta Arkansas Birmingham Fort Worth Georgia Crescent Silver Star Palmetto Silver Meteor North Carolina South Carolina Savannah Alabama Auto Train Jacksonville Sanford New Orleans Orlando Tampa 0 250 500 Miles Florida Miami Data provided by Amtrak, 2022 32#33Portland Seattle Washington Spokane Oregon Idaho Sacramento Reno Salt Lake City Emeryville Nevada CAHSR MOS Merced California Bakersfield Los Angeles Legend Baseline Network Amtrak Routes Long-Distance Northeast Corridor State-Supported Baseline Projects --Brightline Gulf Coast Passenger Rail Twin Cities-Milwaukee-Chicago CAHSR MOS U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Montana North Dakota Minnesota Fargo South Dakota Wyoming Wisconsin Minneapolis/ St. Paul TCMC Baseline Network Michigan Milwaukee Detroit Albany New York Buffalo Vermont Maine New Hampshire Massachusetts Boston Rhode Island -New Haven -Connecticut New York City Philadelphia New Jersey Delaware Washington DC Maryland Lorton lowa Chicago- Cleveland Pennsylvania Pittsburgh Nebraska Omaha Indiana Ohio Indianapolis Kansas City Illinois St Louis Cincinnati West Virginia Virginia Kentucky -Petersburg Lynchburg Missouri Charlotte North Carolina Utah LOND Denver Colorado Kansas Flagstaff Albuquerque Arizona Tennessee Oklahoma City Oklahoma Little Rock Memphis Mississippi Atlanta Arkansas South Carolina Birmingham Savannah Georgia Alabama New Mexico Tucson Fort Worth, El Paso. Texas Houston San Antonio Jackson Louisiana GCPR Mobile New Orleans 0 250 500 Miles Jacksonville ⚫Sanford Orlando Tampa Brightline Florida Miami Existing Route and Station Data provided by Amtrak 2022; Baseline Projects Data provided by FRA 2023 33#34Seattle Auburn Washington Sandpoint Spokane Yakima Portland Kennewick Oregon Boise Idaho Sacramento Reno Salt Lake City- Emeryville Nevada Conceptual Enhanced Network Conceptual segments for future route development consideration Not an FRA proposal for service Vermont Helena Montana North Dakota Minnesota Duluth Butte Billings Fargo Minneapolis/ St. Paul- Wisconsin Green Bay Michigan TCMC Wyoming South Dakota Sioux Falls Milwaukee lowa Chicago- Nebraska Cheyenne Omaha- ⚫Des Moines Utah Denver Kansas City Illinois St Louis, Colorado Kansas Newton Merced CAHSR MOS California Bakersfield Las Vegas Barstow Flagstaff Los Angeles Albuquerque Yuma Arizona Phoenix Legend Baseline Network Amtrak Routes Long-Distance Northeast Corridor State-Supported Baseline Projects 11 Brightline Gulf Coast Passenger Rail Twin Cities-Milwaukee-Chicago CAHSR MOS Enhanced Network -Segments Segment Options U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Trinidad Missouri Tulsa Amarillo Oklahoma City Oklahoma New Mexico Tucson El Paso Fort Worth Marshall Louisiana Texas Houston San Antonio Laredo New Hampshire Albany Massachusetts Boston New York Buffalo Detroit Cleveland Pennsylvania Pittsburgh Indiana Ohio Indianapolis Columbus Rhode Island New Haven Connecticut New York City Philadelphia New Jersey Delaware Washington DC Maryland Lorton Cincinnati West Virginia Ashland Louisville Kentucky Roanoke Lynchburg Virginia -Petersburg Nashville Charlotte Tennessee Chattanooga Atlanta North Carolina Presented at Regional Working Group Meetings July 2023 Segments are conceptual building blocks for consideration in developing potential new long-distance routes Little Rock Memphis Mississippi Arkansas Birmingham South Carolina Meridian Jackson- Savannah Montgomery Alabama Georgia Mobile GCPR Jacksonville Ca Pensacola Tallahassee New Orleans Sanford Orlando Tampa Brightline Florida Miami 0 250 500 Miles Existing Route and Station Data provided by Amtrak 2022; Baseline Projects Data provided by FRA 2023 34#35Approach to Develop Potential New Long-Distance Routes Baseline Network Enhanced Network Development Route Development Service and Investment Identify Prioritized Analysis Routes Develop Potential New Long-Distance Routes ■ Followed principles for long-distance service developed for this study ○ Begin and end in major markets String together multiple intermediate markets Avoid circuitous routing o Are more than 750 miles but less than 2000 miles in length ■ Identified terminal markets for potential new long-distance routes ■ Connected terminal markets with a range of route options o Use new segments in the Enhanced Network ○ New segments in the Enhanced Network reflect the legislative considerations U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 35 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#36Approach to Develop Potential New Long-Distance Routes Enhanced Baseline Network Network Development Route Development Service and Investment Analysis Identify Prioritized Routes Develop Potential New Long-Distance Routes Routes and route options developed to address: ○ Metropolitan Area Travel Flows ○ Rural Accessibility ○ Geographic Coverage/Network Connectivity ○ Additional Considerations: Stakeholder Input and Discontinued Routes Evaluated the range of route options to select one route option for each potential new long-distance route U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 36 SERVICE STUDY#37Approach to Develop Potential New Long-Distance Routes Example: Two route options connecting major markets A and B A B Route Made up of segments in the Enhanced Network Start and end in major markets Represents an existing or potential new long-distance route A long-distance route is over 750 miles in length Route Options ☐ There are multiple ways to connect major markets using segments in the Enhanced Network Route options are the alternative means to connect the same or similar major markets using segments in the Enhanced Network U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 37 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#38Approach to Develop Potential New Long-Distance Routes Minimize duplication of potential new long-distance routes over the same segments. Minimize Duplication Expand Include each new segment in the Service Enhanced Network in at least one route option for evaluation. Connect Hubs Ensure potential new long- distance routes connect with each other and the Baseline Network to create hubs between services. Consider discontinued portions of discontinued routes. Restore Service Reflect Stakeholder Input Consider stakeholder input. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 38 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#39Metropolitan Area Travel Flows Considered travel demand between Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) Based on 2021 Next-Generation (NextGen) National Household Travel Survey (NHTS) National Passenger Origin-Destination Data ■ Identified terminal markets for potential new long-distance routes MSA pairs with 500,000 annual trips or more across all modes ○ Trip lengths of 750 to 2,000 miles MSA pairs not served directly by rail in the Baseline Network ■ Connected terminal markets with a range of route options Considered travel demand between intermediate markets MSA pairs with 500,000 annual trips or more across all modes In addition to metropolitan area travel flows, many routes and route options were developed to address needs related to rural accessibility. MSA: Urbanized areas with a minimum population of 50,000 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 39 SERVICE STUDY#40Rural Accessibility Considered those new segments in the Enhanced Network that provide rail service to: Rural Counties О Tribal Lands О USDOT Justice 40 Transportation and Health Disadvantaged Areas ■ Identified terminal markets for potential new long-distance routes: О Population greater than 500,000 О MSA pairs are 750 to 2000 miles apart ■ Connected terminal markets with a range of route options In addition to metropolitan area travel flows and rural accessibility, many routes and route options were developed to address needs related to geographic coverage and network connectivity. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 40 SERVICE STUDY#41Geographic Coverage/Network Connectivity Considered those new segments in the Enhanced Network that provide: o Rail service to unserved communities ○ Connectivity with other passenger rail services ■ Identified terminal markets for potential new long-distance routes: ○ MSA pairs are 750 to 2000 miles apart ○ Served by the Baseline Network or another Preferred Route ■ Connected terminal markets with a range of route options Routes and route options developed to address metropolitan area travel flows, rural accessibility, and geographic coverage and network connectivity. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA 41 LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#42Seate Washing Sandpoint Aubu'n Spokane Yakima Portland Kennewick Additional Considerations: Stakeholder Input Conceptual Enhanced Network: conceptual segments for future route development consideration Not an FRA proposal for service Helena Montana North Dakota Minnesota Duluth Stakeholder comments were reviewed in developing potential new long-distance routes for metropolitan area travel flows, rural accessibility, and geographic coverage/ network connectivity. Butte Billings Fargo Oregon Boise Idaho Minneapolis/ St. Paul- Wisconsin Green Bay New Hampshire Albany Massachusetts Boston B Michigan South Dakota Wyoming Sioux Falls TCMC New York Buffalo Iowa Milwaukee Chicago Detroit Sacramento Reno Salt Lake City San Francisco Nevada Nebraska Cheyenne Omaha- Des Moines Indiana Ohio Cleveland Pennsylvania Pittsburgh Indianapolis Columbus Merced CAHSR MOS California Bakersfield Barstow Las Vegas Flagstaff Los Angeles Albuquerque Yuma Arizona Phoenix Utah Denver Kansas City Illinois St Louis Kansas Colorado Newton Missouri Cincinnati West Virginia Rhode Island New Haven Connecticut New York City Philadelphia New Jersey Delaware Washington DC Maryland -Lorton Ashland Louisville Kentucky Roanoke Lynchburg- Virginia -Petersburg Trinidad Legend Baseline Network Amtrak Routes Long-Distance Northeast Corridor State-Supported Baseline Projects --Brightline -Gulf Coast Passenger Rail Twin Cities-Milwaukee-Chicago CAHSR MOS Enhanced Network Segments Segment Options Comments Submitted Atlanta Chicago (52 Comments) (139 Comments) U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Tulsa Amarillo Oklahoma Civ Oklahoma New Mexico Tucson E Paso Laredo Little Rock -Memphis Mississippi Arkansas Dallas/ Fort Worth Birmingham South Carolina Meridian Jackson- Savannah. Marshali Montgomery Louisiana Alabama Georgia Texas Mobile GCPR acksonville 1639 Pensacola Tallahassee Houston San Antonio New Orleans ⚫Sanford Orlando Tampa Brightline Nashville Tennessee Chattanooga Charlotte Atlanta North Carolina Presented at Regional Working Group Meetings July 2023 Segments are conceptual building blocks for consideration in developing potential new long-distance routes Florida Miami 250 0 L 500 Miles Existing Route and Station Data provided by Amtrak 2022; Baseline Projects Data provided by FRA 2023 42#43Additional Considerations: Discontinued Network ▪ Examination of Long-Distance routes occurred during the formation of Amtrak in 1970 ○ The passenger rail network was evaluated by US DOT and a system recommended to be continued by Amtrak Criteria considered included: national transportation need (available alternative modes), demand, cost competitiveness, population of endpoint cities, profitability, and required capital investment ■ The Amtrak Improvement Act of 1978 required US DOT to evaluate Amtrak's network based on financial performance, resulting in removal of several routes ○ Two primary metrics for evaluating route performance were ridership density (passenger-mile/train mile) and loss per passenger-mile ■ In 1996, Amtrak's Intercity Strategic Business Unit (ISBU) performed another review of its Long-Distance network, resulting in the removal of additional routes ○ Criteria considered included financial performance, costs saved by elimination, route interconnectivity, and long-term growth and profit opportunities U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 43 SERVICE STUDY#44Additional Considerations: Discontinued Network Pre-1971 Routes Route Endpoints Former Amtrak Routes City of Miami George Washington Pan American San Francisco Chief Chicago, IL and Miami/St. Petersburg, FL St. Louis, MO and Washington, D.C. New Orleans, LA and Cincinnati, IN Richmond, CA and Chicago, IL U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Disc. Route Endpoints Disc. 1971 James Whitcomb Riley Mountaineer Chicago, IL and Washington/Newport News Chicago, IL and Norfolk, VA 1977 1977 1971 Champion St. Petersburg, FL and New York, NY 1979 1971 Floridian Chicago, IL and St. Petersburg/Miami, FL 1979 1971 Hilltopper Catlettsburg, KY and Boston, MA 1979 Lone Star National Limited Dallas/Houston, TX and Chicago, IL 1979 Kansas City, MO and New York/Washington 1979 North Coast Hiawatha Seattle, WA and Chicago, IL 1979 Inter-American River Cities Gulf Breeze Laredo/Houston, TX and Chicago, IL 1981 New Orleans, LA and Kansas City, MO 1993 Mobile, AL, and New York, NY 1995 Texas Eagle - Houston Houston, TX and Chicago, IL 1995 Sunset Limited - West Desert Wind Pioneer Los Angeles, CA and New Orleans, LA 1996 Los Angeles, CA and Chicago, IL Seattle, WA and Chicago, IL 1997 1997 Silver Palm/Palmetto Sunset Limited - East Miami, FL and New York, NY 2004 New Orleans, LA and Miami, FL 1996 New Orleans, LA and Orlando, FL 2005 Broadway Limited/Three Rivers Chicago, IL and New York, NY 2005 FRA LONG-DISTANCE 44 SERVICE STUDY#45Discontinued routes were reviewed in developing potential new long-distance routes for metropolitan area travel flows, rural accessibility, and geographic cover/network connectivity. Seattle Washington Sandpoint Auburn Spokane Portland Sacramento . Emeryville CAHSR MOS Kennewick Oregan Idaho Reno Salt Lake City Nevada Merced California Bakersfield Barstow Additional Considerations: Discontinued Network Montana North Dakota Minnesota Fargo Wisconsin Maine Vermont New Hampshire Albany Massachusetts Boston Rhode Island - New Haven Connecticut New York City Philadelphia Delaware New Jersey -Washington DC Maryland -Lorton South Dakota Minneapolis/ St. Paul Wyoming TCMC New York Michigan Milwaukee Buffalo Detroit Chicago- Iowa Cleveland Pennsylvania Pittsburgh Nebraska Omaha Indiana Ohio Indianapolis Utah Denver Colorado Kansas Missouri Newton Cincinnati Kansas City Illinois St Louis West Virginia Flagstaff Albuquerque Louisville Virginia Kentucky Lynchburg Charlotte Tennessee Petersburg North Carolina Oklahoma City Oklahoma Little Rock Los Angeles Arizona Yuma Legend Baseline Network Amtrak Routes Long-Distance Northeast Corridor State-Supported Baseline Projects Brightline Gulf Coast Passenger Rail -Twin Cities-Milwaukee-Chicago CAHSR MOS Discontinued Network U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration New Mexico Tucson Fort Worth El Paso Texas Discontinued Segment of the Discontinued Route Memphis Mississippi Atlanta South Carolina Arkansas Birmingham Savannah Jackson Louisiana Alabama Montgomery Georgia Jacksonville Mobile GCPR New Orleans Orlando Tampa -Sanford Brightline 0 250 500 Miles Florida Miami Houston San Antonio Laredo Existing Route and Station Data as well as Discontinued Route Data provided by Amtrak 2022; Baseline Projects Data provided by FRA 2023 45#46EVALUATE THE RANGE OF ROUTE OPTIONS U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA 46 LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#47Route Options Evaluation Methodology Evaluated the range of route options to select one route option for each potential new long-distance route Compared route options based on evaluation criteria 。 Compare and rate quantitative data Evaluation criteria organized into four categories that align with the legislative considerations ✓ Metropolitan Area Travel Flows ✓ Rural Accessibility Geographic Coverage/Network Connectivity ✓ Stakeholder Input Results of the comparison summarized by category ○ Other factors: Considered when selecting a route option where the evaluation criteria alone is inconclusive ✓ Professional Judgement: leverage rail planning experience ✓ Discontinued Network: Portion of discontinued routes that no longer have service ■ Defined catchment areas for the route options to collect data ■ Excluded trips for route options serving local MSA pairs U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 47 SERVICE STUDY#48Evaluation Criteria 1 Large and Small Communities Metropolitan Area Travel Flows ■ Travel Demand: Number of annual trips per mile for all MSA trips pairs on the route option (2021 NextGen NHTS National Passenger Origin- Destination Data) U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 2 Focus on Rural 3 Enhance Rural Accessibility Transportation Disadvantaged Access: Population per mile (USDOT Justice 40 Disadvantaged areas) ■ Tribal Access: Population per mile (American Indian, American Indian Tribal Subdivisions, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and Oklahoma Tribal Statistical Areas) Higher Education Access: Number of higher education institutions (Public and private not-for-profit) ■ Medical Center Access: Number of medical centers (Level I or II trauma centers, cancer facilities, veteran facilities) ■ National Park Access: Number NPS lands (National Park Service national parks, recreation areas, and preserves) Connectivity Geographic Coverage/Network Connectivity ■ Access for MSAs Unserved by Existing Passenger Rail: Number and population of MSAs (Population of census tracts in MSAs) ■ Restored Portions of Discontinued Routes: Percent of route miles that include discontinued long-distance routes 4 Reflect Public Engagement Stakeholder Input ■ Feedback from Stakeholders: Top quartile by volume of comments received supporting markets and segments in route options FRA 48 LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#49Places Served by the Route Options Baseline Network New Segment consistent with the Discontinued Network Catchment area around existing stations . Catchment area around discontinued stations ● New Segment where long- distance passenger rail service has not operated Catchment area buffer around new segments Catchment Area: To support network-level analysis, catchment areas are defined as a 30-mile radius where the station or new segment is in an MSA, or a 50-mile radius where the station or new segment is in a non-MSA area. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 49 SERVICE STUDY#50Evaluation Criteria Analysis of travel demand data excluded major local trips ○ Some routes include local city pairs that may significantly bolster the overall travel flow. ○ Excluded these markets to accurately reflect demand for potential new long-distance routes. ○ Trips flows between MSA pairs were excluded if two conditions were met: MSA pairs were within 100 miles MSA pairs exceeded the 80th percentile of all demand for a given route option Examples: Excluded trips for route options serving MSA pairs San Antonio - Austin, TX Denver - Boulder, CO Dayton - Springfield, OH • 53 million annual trips • 80 miles • 70 million annual trips ⚫ 25 million annual trips • 25 miles ⚫ 25 miles U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 50 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#51IDENTIFICATION OF THE PROPOSED NETWORK OF PREFERRED ROUTES U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 51 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#52Inclusion of Cardinal and Sunset Limited ▪ This study is required to evaluate the restoration of daily passenger rail service along any long-distance routes that occur on a nondaily basis. ■ The restoration of daily Cardinal and Sunset Limited passenger rail service is assumed when identifying the proposed network of preferred routes. Cardinal: Chicago- New York Sunset Limited: Los E Angeles-New Orleans U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 62 52 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#53Seattle Washington Sandpoint Spokane Portland Yakima Proposed Network of Preferred Routes Maine Sacramento Reno Salt Lake City San Francisco D Nevada Merced Los Angeles California Bakersfield Barstow Las Vegas Flagstaff Albuquerque Kennewick Helena Montana North Dakota Bismarck Minnesota Billings Fargo Oregon Boise Idaho Pocatello Wyoming Casper Minneapolis/ St. Paul- Wisconsin Michigan South Dakota Pierre Sioux Falls lowa Milwaukee Chicago- Nebraska Omaha ●Des Moines Indiana Cheyenne Utah Denver Grand Junction Kansas Kansas City Illinois St Louis Colorado Newton Trinidad Cincinnati West Vermont New Hampshire Albany Massachusetts Boston New York Buffalo Detroit Cleveland Pennsylvania Pittsburgh Ohio Indianapolis Columbus Rhode Island New Haven Connecticut New York City Philadelphia New Jersey Delaware Washington DC Maryland Virginia -Lorton Ashland Lynchburg- Louisville Kentucky Roanoke Virginia -Petersburg Missouri Tulsa Oklahoma Oklahoma- Nashville Tennessee Charlotte North Carolina Chattanooga Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Phoenix City Little Rock Amarillo ●Memphis Mississippi Yuma Arizona New Mexico Arkansas Tucson Dallas/ Fort Worth Marshall Meridian Midland Jackson El Paso Preferred Routes Chicago - Miami Dallas/Fort Worth - Miami Denver - Houston Los Angeles - Denver Phoenix - Minneapolis/St. Paul Dallas/Fort Worth - New York Houston New York Seattle - Denver San Antonio - Minneapolis/St. Paul San Francisco - Dallas/Fort Worth Detroit New Orleans Denver - Minneapolis/St. Paul Seattle - Chicago Dallas/Fort Worth - Atlanta El Paso - Billings Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Texas South Carolina Savannah Georgia Montgomery Mobile Alabama Jacksonville Louisiana Baton Rouge Tallahassee Pensacola Houston New Orleans San Antonio Orlando Tampa Atlanta Birmingham Florida Miami 0 250 500 Miles U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 53#54Proposed Network of Preferred Routes Chicago - Miami ■ Dallas/Fort Worth - Miami ■ Denver - Houston Los Angeles - Denver Phoenix - Minneapolis/St. Paul ■ Dallas/Fort Worth - New York ■ Houston - New York Seattle Denver ■ San Antonio - Minneapolis/St. Paul ■ San Francisco - Dallas/Fort Worth ■ Detroit - New Orleans Denver - Minneapolis/St. Paul ■ Seattle - Chicago ■ Dallas/Fort Worth Atlanta ■ El Paso - Billings - Southwest Region • Denver - Houston. • Los Angeles - Denver • Phoenix - Minneapolis/St. Paul • Seattle - Denver • San Francisco - Dallas/Fort Worth • Denver - Minneapolis/St. Paul El Paso - Billings U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 54 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#55Proposed Network of Preferred Routes Chicago - Miami ■ Dallas/Fort Worth - Miami ■ Denver - Houston Los Angeles - Denver Phoenix - Minneapolis/St. Paul ■ Dallas/Fort Worth - New York ■ Houston - New York Seattle Denver ■ San Antonio - Minneapolis/St. Paul ■ San Francisco - Dallas/Fort Worth ■ Detroit - New Orleans Denver - Minneapolis/St. Paul ■ Seattle - Chicago ■ Dallas/Fort Worth Atlanta ■ El Paso - Billings - . • Southeast Region Chicago Miami Dallas/Fort Worth - Miami • Houston - New York • Detroit - New Orleans • Dallas/Fort Worth - Atlanta U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 55 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#56Proposed Network of Preferred Routes Chicago - Miami ■ Dallas/Fort Worth - Miami ■ Denver - Houston Los Angeles - Denver Phoenix - Minneapolis/St. Paul ■ Dallas/Fort Worth - New York ■ Houston - New York Seattle Denver ■ San Antonio - Minneapolis/St. Paul ■ San Francisco - Dallas/Fort Worth ■ Detroit - New Orleans Denver - Minneapolis/St. Paul ■ Seattle - Chicago ■ Dallas/Fort Worth Atlanta ■ El Paso - Billings - Northwest Region • Denver - Houston • Los Angeles - Denver Seattle - Denver Denver - Minneapolis/St. Paul Seattle Chicago • El Paso - Billings U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 56 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#57Proposed Network of Preferred Routes Chicago - Miami ■ Dallas/Fort Worth - Miami ■ Denver - Houston Los Angeles - Denver Phoenix - Minneapolis/St. Paul ■ Dallas/Fort Worth - New York ■ Houston - New York Seattle Denver ■ San Antonio - Minneapolis/St. Paul ■ San Francisco - Dallas/Fort Worth ■ Detroit - New Orleans Denver - Minneapolis/St. Paul ■ Seattle - Chicago ■ Dallas/Fort Worth Atlanta ■ El Paso - Billings - Central Region • Dallas/Fort Worth - Miami • Denver - Houston • Phoenix - Minneapolis/St. Paul • Dallas/Fort Worth - New York Houston - New York • San Antonio - Minneapolis/St. Paul • San Francisco - Dallas/Fort Worth • Detroit - New Orleans • Dallas/Fort Worth - Atlanta U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 57 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#58Proposed Network of Preferred Routes Chicago - Miami ■ Dallas/Fort Worth - Miami ■ Denver - Houston Los Angeles - Denver Phoenix - Minneapolis/St. Paul ■ Dallas/Fort Worth - New York ■ Houston - New York Seattle Denver ■ San Antonio - Minneapolis/St. Paul ■ San Francisco - Dallas/Fort Worth ■ Detroit - New Orleans Denver - Minneapolis/St. Paul ■ Seattle - Chicago ■ Dallas/Fort Worth Atlanta ■ El Paso - Billings - • Midwest Region Chicago Miami Phoenix - Minneapolis/St. Paul • Dallas/Fort Worth - New York • San Antonio - Minneapolis/St. Paul • Detroit - New Orleans . Denver - Minneapolis/St. Paul Seattle Chicago U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 58 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#59Proposed Network of Preferred Routes Chicago - Miami ■ Dallas/Fort Worth - Miami ■ Denver - Houston Los Angeles - Denver Phoenix - Minneapolis/St. Paul ■ Dallas/Fort Worth - New York ■ Houston - New York Seattle Denver ■ San Antonio - Minneapolis/St. Paul ■ San Francisco - Dallas/Fort Worth ■ Detroit - New Orleans Denver - Minneapolis/St. Paul ■ Seattle - Chicago ■ Dallas/Fort Worth Atlanta ■ El Paso - Billings - Northeast Region Dallas/Fort Worth - New York o Oklahoma City 。 St. Louis o Columbus 。 Pittsburgh 。 Harrisburg 。 Lancaster • Houston - New York o New Orleans o Montgomery o Atlanta 。 Chattanooga 。 Roanoke 。 Washington DC U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 59 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#60How do the Enhanced and Preferred Network Compare? Total Long-Distance Route Miles Baseline 21,900 Enhanced Preferred n/a 45,100 Total U.S. Population Served 247 million 290 million 292 million Disadvantaged Population Total Rural, Transportation- Served Total Rural Population Below the Poverty 13 million 18 million 19 million 18 million 27 million 27 million Threshold Served Total Population on Tribal Lands Served 2 million 4 million U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration n/a = not applicable 4 million 60 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#61Proposed Network of Preferred Routes 時雨 +61 Number of Additional MSAs Served ±Â 91% of all U.S. Higher Educational Institutions Served :: +45 million Additional U.S. Population Served 75 National Parks, Recreation Areas, and Preserves Served Å 23,200 Long-Distance Route Miles Added +74% of Previously Unserved Population on Tribal Lands Added + 86% of all U.S. Medical Centers Served 43% more Rural, Transportation- Disadvantaged Population Served U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 61 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#62Chicago - Miami Fargo Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Optional Alignments Considered Wyomin Minneapolis/- St. Paul Wisconsin New Hampshire Albany Green Bay Michigan Massachusetts Boston New York Buffalo Salt Lake City ada lowa Nebraska Omaha Milwaukee Chicago Detroit Cleveland Pennsylvania Pittsburgh Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Denver Kansas City Illinois Colorado Kansas St Louis Newton Indiana Ohio Indianapolis Cincinnati West Virginia -Rhode Island New Haven Connecticut New York City Philadelphia -New Jersey Delaware Washington DC Maryland Ashland Lynchburg- Louisville Roanoke Virginia -Petersburg Trinidad Missouri Bowling Green Kentucky NashvilleO Tennessee Charlotte North Carolina Albuquerque Oklahoma City Chattanooga Little Rock Oklahoma Memphis Mississippi Yuma Atlanta Augusta Arizona New Mexico Arkansas Birmingham South Carolina Tucson Dallas/ Fort Worth Macon Georgia Savannah Alabama Marshall El Paso Jackson Meridian Waycross Provides access to Orlando. Other routes may provide access to Daytona Beach. Jacksonville Texas Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Baseline Projects Potential New Route Segments Shared by All Route Options Segments for Optional Alignment Selected Route Option Terminal Markets Houston San Antonio Provides geographic coverage and network connectivity by expanding access to unserved markets in Georgia. Daytona Beach Orlando Corridor, State-Supported, Tampa Florida Miami U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 62 62#63New Chicago - Miami Fargo Wisconsin Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Evaluation Criteria Michigan St. Paul Access to MSAs Unserved by Passenger Rail Number of MSAs 16 Population of MSAs (millions) 6.96 Wyoming Discontinued Routes % of total 15% route track miles lowa Milwaukee Chicago, De Nebraska Stakeholder Input Top comments Yes supporting route Salt Lake City ada Omaha Indiana Ohio New Jersey Delaware Indianapolis -Washington DC Cincinnati West Virginia -Maryland Ashland Lynchburg- Louisville Roanoke Virginia -Petersburg Denver Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Kansas City Illinois Colorado Kansas St Louis Newton Trinidad Travel Demand Annual trips per mile Bowling Green Kentucky 151 Albuquerque (thousands) Transportation Disadvantaged Rural population 1,617 per mile Yuma Memphis Mississippi Nashville O Tennessee Chattanooga Charlotte Atlanta North Carolina Arizona Tucson New Mexic Population on Tribal Lands Population Birmingham South Carolina 22 per mile Macon Alabama Georgia Savannah El Paso Higher Number of 317 БОП Meridian Education institutions Waycross Mobile Jacksonville Medical Number of 69 Centers medical centers Number of New Orleans NPS Lands 16 Orlando parks Tampa Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route Selected Route Option Terminal Markets U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Florida Miami 63#64Cleveland Pennsylvania Pittsburgh Dallas/Fort Worth - Miami Nebraska Omaha Chicago- Indiana Ohio Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Optional Alignments Considered Denver Kansas City Illinois Colorado Kansas St Louis Newton Trinidad Missouri Indianapolis Cincinnati West Virginia Ashland Lynchburg- Roanoke Kentucky Charlotte Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Other routes identified in this study could provide access between Shreveport, Jackson, and Meridian. Tennessee Rock Memphis Mississippi Birmingham Arkansas Dallas/ Fort Worth Meridian Marshall Shreveport Alabama El Paso Jackson Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route Segments Shared by All Route Options Segments for Optional Alignment Selected Route Option Terminal Markets U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration -New York City Philadelphia New Jersey Delaware Washington DC Maryland Virginia Petersburg Optional alignments between Birmingham and Jacksonville are circuitous for a Dallas/Fort Worth-Miami route. Augusta South Carolina Atlanta Savannah Georgia Jacksonville Mobile Texas Bryan Louisiana Tallahassee Pensacola Baton Rouge New Orleans Orlando Houston San Antonio Tampa Includes the stakeholder preferred segment between Shreveport and New Orleans. Daytona Beach Florida Miami Provides geographic coverage by restoring the segment between Mobile and Jacksonville and expanding access to unserved markets in Florida. 64#65Dallas/Fort Worth - Miami Nebraska Omaha Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Evaluation Criteria Denver Colorado Kans Access to MSAs Unserved by Passenger Rail Chicago- Indiana Ohio Indianapolis Kansas Illinois Cincinnati West Number of MSAs 6 Ashland Population of MSAs Travel Demand 1.30 (millions) Trinidad Kentucky Discontinued % of total 41% Transportation Disadvantaged Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Routes Stakeholder Input route track miles Top comments essee Yes Cleveland Pennsylvania Pittsburgh Population on Tribal Lands -New York City Philadelphia New Jersey Delaware Washington DC - Maryland Annual trips per mile (thousands) 139 Rural population 1,501 per mile Population per mile 205 supporting route Little Rock Oklahoma Memphis Mississippi Higher Number of 229 Education institutions Arkansas Birmingham Atlanta Medical Centers Number of 52 medical centers Dallas/ Fort Worth Meridian Marshall Shreveport Ge NPS Lands Alabama El Paso Number of parks 9 Jackson Mobile Jacksonville Texas Louisiana Tallahassee Pensacola Daytona Beach Baton Rouge New Orleans Orlando Houston San Antonio Tampa Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route Selected Route Option Terminal Markets U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Florida Miami 65#66Denver - Houston Reno Nebraska Omaha Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Optional Alignments Considered ed alifornia Nevada akersfield Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Denver Utah Kansas City Illinois Colorado Colorado Springs Kansas St Louis Newton Flagstaff Albuquerque Arizona Yuma Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor,State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route Segments Shared by All Route Options Segments for Optional Alignment Selected Route Option Terminal Markets U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Tucson Trinidad Best addresses the evaluation criteria for rural accessibility and geographic coverage. El Paso Amarillo Iowa Chicago Indiana Ohio Indianapolis Cincinnati Ashland Kentucky Missouri Ch Tennessee Oklahoma City Okla Provides geographic coverage by restoring the segment between Dallas/Fort Worth and Houston. Ingham Atlanta Wichita Falls Alabama Dallas/- Fort Worth Marshall Geor Jackson Meridian Mobile Texas Bryan Other routes identified in this study could provide additional access between Dallas/Fort Worth and San Antonio. San Antonio Houston Provides rural accessibility by more directly connecting rural markets, providing education access, and medical center access. 66 99#67Denver Houston Reno - Nebraska Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Evaluation Criteria ed Nevada alifornia akersfield Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Denver Utah Colorado Colorado Springs Kansas Newton Trinidad Flagstaff Albuquerque Arizona Yuma Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route Selected Route Option Terminal Markets Amarillo New Mexico Iowa Chicago Omaha Indiana Ohio lis Annual trips Travel Demand Transportation Disadvantaged Population on Tribal Lands per mile (thousands) 39 Cincinnati Rural population Ashland 611 per mile Population cky 170 per mile Higher Number of Ch 127 Education institutions Oklahoma City Medical Centers Number of 38 medical centers Oklahor Number of NPS Lands 6 parks Atlanta Wichita Falls Tucson Alabama Number of MSAs Access to MSAS Dallas/- Fort Worth Marshall Geor Jackson Meridian Unserved by Passenger Rail Population of MSAs (millions) 0.27 Mobile xas Bryan Discontinued Routes % of total 24% route track miles Louisiana Stakeholder Input Top comments New Orleans Yes supporting route San Antonio Houston U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 67#68Los Angeles - Denver Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Optional Alignments Considered Wyoming Ogden Rock Springs Sacramento Reno Salt Lake City- Provides geographic coverage by restoring the segments between Las Vegs and Cheyenne, and expanding access to unserved markets in Wyoming, Utah, and Nevada. Nebraska Omaha Cheyenne San Francisco Nevada Merced California Utah Denver Colorado Colorado Springs Kansas Newton Best addresses the Bakersfield evaluation criteria for travel Las Vegas Trinidad demand, geographic Barstow coverage, stakeholder input. Flagstaff Los Angeles Albuquerque Phoenix Oklahoma City Oklah Yuma Arizona New Mexico Legend Baseline Network Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Long-Distance, Northeast Tucson Potential New Route Segments Shared by All Route Options Segments for Optional Alignment Selected Route Option Terminal Markets El Paso Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Texas U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 68#69Los Angeles – Denver - Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Evaluation Criteria Wyoming Ogden Rock Springs Number of MSAs 4 Access to MSAs Unserved by Passenger Rail Discontinued Routes Salt Lake City Nebraska Omaha Population of MSAs (millions) Cheyenne 0.51 evada % of total 85% route track miles Stakeholder Top comments Yes Input supporting route Utah Denver Colorado Kansas Newton Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route Selected Route Option Terminal Markets Bakersfield Barstow Las Vegas Los Angeles Yuma U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Trinidad Annual trips Travel Demand Transportation Disadvantaged Population on Tribal Lands per mile (thousands) 64 Rural population 222 per mile Population 0 per mile Higher Number of 213 Education institutions Medical Number of 38 Centers medical centers Number of NPS Lands 12 parks Oklahoma City Oklah Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Texas 69 N#70Montana North Dakota Phoenix - Minneapolis/St. Paul Oregon Selected Proposed Preferred Route Idaho Fargo Minnesota Minneapolis/ St. Paul- South Dakota Provides geographic coverage and network connectivity by expanding access to unserved markets in South Dakota. Wisconsin Michigan Sioux Falls Milwaukee Detroit Chicago Iowa Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities rced prior to implementation. Nebraska Reno Salt Lake City Nevada Omaha- Indiana Ohio Denver Indianapolis California Bakersfield Barstow Utah Colorado Trinidad Kansas City Illinois Kansas St Louis Newton Wichita Missouri Cincinnati Ashland Kentucky Los Angeles Flagstaff Albuquerque Ch Tennessee Oklahoma City Phoenix Amarillo Little Rock Oklahoma Yuma Memphis Mississippi Arizona New Mexico Birmingham Atlanta Tucson Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route Selected Route Option Terminal Markets El Paso Midland Other routes identified in this study could provide access between Phoenix and provide network connectivity. Texas Provides geographic coverage by restoring the segments between Albuquerque and Newton. Alabama Georg ckson Meridian Mobile Louisiana New Orleans San Antonio Houston U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 70#71Montana North Dakota Fargo Minnesota Minneapolis/ St. Paul- Phoenix - Minneapolis/St. Paul Oregon Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Evaluation Criteria Idaho South Dakota Wisconsin Michigan Wyoming Number of MSAs Sioux Falls Milwaukee Detroit 6 Access to MSAs Chicago Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities rced prior to implementation. Reno Unserved by Passenger Rail Population of MSAs (millions) Iowa 0.98 braska Omaha- Indiana Ohio Nevada Discontinued Routes % of total 33% Indianapolis route track miles California Bakersfield Barstow Stakeholder Input Top comments supporting route Yes Kansas City Illinois Cincinnati Kansas St Louis Ashland Newton Kentucky Trinidad Wichita Annual trips Los Angeles Flagstaff Albuquerque Travel Demand per mile 28 Ch (thousands) Oklahoma City Phoenix Amarillo Oklahoma Yuma Arizona New Mexico Transportation Disadvantaged Population on Tribal Lands Population per mile Rural population 157 per mile nta 64 Tucson Dallas/ Fort Worth El Paso Ma Higher Education Number of 187 Georg institutions Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route Selected Route Option Terminal Markets Midland Medical Number of 48 Centers medical centers Texas Number of NPS Lands 13 parks THOW Oricans San Antonio Houston U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 71#72Fargo Dallas/Fort Worth - New York Minneapolis/- Selected Proposed Preferred Route. and Optional Alignments Considered New Hampshire Massachusetts Wisconsin Michigan Albany New York Buffalo Wyoming Iowa Milwaukee Chicago- Detroit Cleveland Pennsylvania Pittsburgh Nebraska Omaha Indiana Ohio Columbus Indianapolis Denver Colorado Other routes identified in this study could provide access between Dallas/Fort Worth, Tulsa and Kansas City. Kansas City Illinois Dayton Cincinnati Virginia West Boston -Rhode Island New Haven Connecticut New York City Philadelphia -New Jersey Delaware Washington DC Maryland Terre Haute St Louis Ashland Lynchburg- Newton Roanoke Virginia -Petersburg Kentucky Trinidad Springfield Wichita Missouri Oklahoma Tulsa Best addresses the evaluation criteria for travel demand and rural accessibility. Charlotte North Carolina Albuquerque Oklahoma Provides access to City Little Rock Memphis populations on Tribal New Land in Oklahoma. Birmingham Atlanta Arkansas Dallas/ Fort Worth Mississippi Alabama Savannah Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Marshall Georgia Jackson Meridian Mobile Potential New Route Texas Segments Shared by All Route Options Louisiana Segments for Optional Alignment New Orleans Selected Route Option Terminal Markets Orlando Houston San Antonio Tampa South Carolina Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes Jacksonville through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 22 72#73Wisconsin Michigan Dallas/Fort Worth - New York Selected Proposed Preferred Route. and Evaluation Criteria Wyoming Minneapolis/- St. Paul Albany New York New Hampshire Massachusetts Boston Buffalo Albuquerque Little Rock New Mexico Arkansas Milwaukee Number of MSAs 8 Access to MSAs Unserved by Passenger Rail Population of MSAs (millions) Chicago- 4.70 Detroit Pennsylvania -Cleveland Pittsburgh Indiana Discontinued Routes % of total Ohio Columbus 23% route track miles Indianapolis Stakeholder Input Top comments supporting route Illinois -Dayton Cincinnati Yes West Virginia Terre Haute Colorado St Louis Ashland Lynchburg Newton Trinidad Springfield Missouri Oklahoma Tulsa Travel Demand Oklahoma City Transportation Disadvantaged Population on Tribal Lands -Rhode Island New Haven -Connecticut New York City -Philadelphia -New Jersey Delaware Washington DC Maryland Roanoke Virginia -Petersburg Kentucky Annual trips per mile 85 North Carolina (thousands) Rural population 1,168 per mile Population 1,094 per mile South Carolina Dallas/ Fort Worth Higher Number of nah Marshall 725 El Paso Education Jacks institutions Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Texas Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Medical Number of 128 Centers medical centers Invill Number of Potential New Route Selected Route Option Terminal Markets NPS Lands Louisiana Houston San Antonio Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. parks New Orleans Orlando Tampa U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 73#74Houston - New York South Dakota Minneapolis/- Selected Proposed Preferred Route St. Paul and Optional Alignments Considered Wisconsin Albany Michigan Milwaukee Iowa Chicago- New York Buffalo ●Detroit -Cleveland Pittsburgh Pennsylvania Nebraska Omaha Indiana Ohio Indianapolis Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Albuquerque Kansas Newton Ka Other routes identified in this study could provide access between Birmingham and Cincinnati West Virginia Massachusetts Boston Rhode Island New Haven Connecticut New York City -Philadelphia New Jersey -Delaware Washington DC Maryland Ashland Cincinnati. Lynchburg- Louisville Virginia Roanoke -Petersburg Missouri Bowling Green Kentucky Knoxville Nashville Charlotte Oklahoma City Tennessee Chattanooga Little Rock Memphis Oklahoma Alabama Atlanta a New Mexico Arkansas Dallas/ Fort Worth Birmingham Mississippi Meridian Georgia Marshall El Paso Jackson Montgomery Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Texas Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route All Route Options Segments Shared by Segments for Optional Alignment San Antonio Houston Mobile Louisiana New Orleans Orlando Tampa North Carolina Includes the stakeholder preferred segment connecting Knoxville and Roanoke. Savannah South Carolina Provides rural accessibility by more directly connecting rural markets, providing medical center access, and national park access. Selected Route Option Terminal Markets U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 74#75Houston - New York South Dakota Minneapolis/- Selected Proposed Preferred Route St. Paul and Evaluation Criteria Wisconsin Michigan Albany Annual trips Travel per mile 125 Demand Ne (thousands) New York Buffalo ●Detroit -Cleveland Pittsburgh Pennsylvania Transportation Disadvantaged Rural population Indiana 1,474 Ohio per mile Indianapolis Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Albuquerque Population on Tribal Lands Higher Population Cincinnati 100 per mile West Virginia Massachusetts Boston Rhode Island New Haven Connecticut New York City -Philadelphia -Delaware New Jersey Washington DC Maryland Number of Ashland 595 Lynchburg- Education institutions Roanoke Virginia -Petersburg Medical Number of Kentucky 97 Centers medical centers Knoxville Number of Charlotte North Carolina NPS Lands 30 Tennessee parks Chattanooga Little Rock Memphis Oklahoma Alabama a New Mexico Birmingham Atlanta Arkansas Dallas/ Fort Worth Mississippi Meridian Marshall El Paso Jackson Montgomery Unserved by Passenger Rail Mobile Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route Selected Route Option Terminal Markets Texas San Antonio Houston South Carolina Number of MSAs 14 Access to MSAs Population of MSAs (millions) 4.03 Discontinued Routes % of total 19% route track miles Louisiana Stakeholder Top comments New Orleans Yes Input supporting route Tampa U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 75#76Other routes identified in this study could provide access between Kennewick, Yakima and Seattle. Seattle Washington Sandpoint Spokane Yakima Portland Kennewick Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Oregon Provides geographic coverage by restoring the stakeholder preferred segment between Ogden and Boise. Seattle - Denver Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Optional Alignments Considered Helena Montana Butte Billings Boise Idaho Pocatello North Dakota Minnesota Fargo South Dakota Minneapolis/- St. Paul Gillette Other routes identified in this study could provide Casper Wyoming access between Sandpoint, Billings, and Denver. Ogden Sacramento Nebraska Reno Salt Lake City Cheyenne, Iowa Omaha San Francisco ● Nevada Merced Utah Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route Segments Shared by California Bakersfield Best addresses the evaluation criteria for travel demand, rural accessibility, geographic coverage, and stakeholder input. Denver Junction Kansas City Colorado Kansas S Newton All Route Options Segments for Optional Alignment Selected Route Option Terminal Markets Trinidad Missou Barstow Flagstaff U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 76#77Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Legend Portland Sacramento San Francisco > Baseline Network Corridor, State-Supported, Long-Distance, Northeast Baseline Projects Potential New Route Selected Route Option Terminal Markets U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Seattle Washington Sandpoint Spokane Seattle - Denver Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Evaluation Criteria Kennewick Oregon Boise Idaho Pocatello Wyoming Access to MSAs Unserved by Passenger Rail Number of MSAs 5 Population of MSAs (millions) 1.28 Minnesota Discontinued Routes % of total 46% route track miles Fargo Stakeholder Input Top comments supporting route Yes South Dakota Ogden Reno Salt Lake City Nevada Merced California Bakersfield Barstow Flagstaff Travel Demand Transportation Disadvantaged Population on Tribal Lands Higher Education Annual trips per mile Minneapolis/- St. Paul 59 (thousands) Rural population 251 per mile Population per mile 59 Number of 126 institutions Utah Grand Junction Denver Medical Number of 33 Centers medical centers S Colorado Number of NPS Lands 14 parks Trinidad Missou 77#78Trinidad Kennewick Montana ota Duluth San Antonio - Minneapolis/St. Paul D Oregon Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Optional Alignments Considered outh Dakota Further analysis after completion It Lake City of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Bakersfield Barstow Other routes identified in this study could provide access between Kansas City, Omaha, and Minneapolis/St. Paul. Utah Colorado Denver Kansas Newton Minneapolis/ Wisconsin St. Paul Michigan Vermont New Hampshire Albany Massach Milwaukee Iowa Chicago- New York Buffalo Detroit Pennsylvania -Cleveland Pittsburgh Des Moines Omaha Indiana Ohio Indianapolis Kansas City Illinois Cincinnati St Louis, Ashland West Virginia Lynchburg- Roanoke Virginia Boston Rhode New Ha -Connecticut -New York City -Philadelphia -New Jerse Delaware Washington DC Maryland -Petersburg les Yuma Arizona Flagstaff Albuquerque Best addresses the evaluation criteria for travel demand and rural accessibility. Charlotte North Carolina Oklahoma Tulsa Oklahoma City Little Rock Memphis New Mexico Tucson El Paso Texas Birmingham Atlanta Arkansas South Carolina Dallas/ Fort Worth Marshall Mississippi Alabama Savannah Georgia Jackson Meridian Mobile ●Jacksonville Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route Segments Shared by All Route Options Segments for Optional Alignment Selected Route Option Terminal Markets U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Louisiana New Orleans Orlando Houston San Antonio Tampa Laredo Florida Miami 78#79Kennewick Montana San Antonio - Minneapolis/St. Paul Oregon Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Evaluation Criteria Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Salt Lake City Wyoming Denver Wisconsin South Dakota Minneapolis/ St. Paul Michigan ota Vermont New Hampshire Massach Albany Utah California Colorado Bakersfield Number of MSAs 6 Access to MSAs Barstow les Unserved by Passenger Rail Discontinued Routes Population of MSAs (millions) 1.73 Tulsa % of total Oklahoma City 13% route track miles Little Rock Oklahoma Stakeholder Input Top comments Yes Arkansas supporting route Dallas/ Fort Worth Milwaukee Iowa Chicago- New York Buffalo Detroit Pennsylvania -Cleveland Pittsburgh Nebraska Des Moines Omaha Indiana Ohio Indianapolis Kansas City Illinois Kansas St Louis Newton Cincinnati Ashland West Virginia Lynchburg Roanoke Virginia -Petersburg Kentucky Annual trips Missouri Travel Demand per mile (thousands) 52 Transportation Disadvantaged Population on Tribal Lands per mile Population Rural population 544 Boston Rhode New Ha -Connecticut -New York City - Philadelphia New Jerse Delaware Washington DC Maryland 498 per mile Marshall Higher Number of El Paso Jackso 238 Education institutions Texas Medical Centers Number of 58 medical centers Louisiana Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route Selected Route Option Terminal Markets Number of NPS Lands 6 Houston parks San Antonio Tampa Florida Miami U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 79#80San Francisco - Dallas/Fort Worth Wyoming Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Optional Alignments Considered Sacramento Reno Salt Lake City San Francisco Nevada Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Merced Iowa Nebraska Omaha Utah Denver Kansas City California Bakersfield Other routes identified in this study could provide access between Phoenix and Flagstaff, between El Paso and Albuquerque, or to Amarillo. Colorado Kansas St Lo Newton Trinidad Barstow Missouri Flagstaff Los Angeles Albuquerque Amarillo Oklahoma City Little Rock Phoenix Oklahoma Provides a direct connection between Barstow and Phoenix. Yuma Arizona New Mexico Arkansa Wichita Falls Las Cruces Tucson Marshall El Paso Ja Best addresses the evaluation criteria for travel demand. Midland Dallas/ Fort Worth Texas Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route Segments Shared by All Route Options Segments for Optional Alignment Selected Route Option Terminal Markets U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Provides a direct connection between El Paso and Dallas/Fort Worth. San Antonio Houston Louisiana 80#81San Francisco - Dallas/Fort Worth Wyoming Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Evaluation Criteria Nebraska Sacramento Reno Salt Lake City San Francisco Nevada Number of MSAs 5 Merced Access to MSAs Unserved by Passenger Rail Population of MSAs (millions) Travel Demand 0.96 California Discontinued % of total 11% Routes route track miles Bakersfield Stakeholder Top comments No Barstow Input supporting route Flagstaff Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route Selected Route Option Terminal Markets Iowa Omaha Annual trips 52 Transportation Disadvantaged Population on Tribal Lands per mile (thousands) Rural population 509 St Lo per mile Population per mile Number of institutions 20 20 Higher 189 Education Los Angeles Albuquerque Medical Number of 41 Centers medical centers Phoenix Number of NPS Lands 19 Yuma parks Arizona New Mexico Arkansa Tucson Marshall El Paso Ja Midland Dallas/ Fort Worth Texas U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Louisiana Houston San Antonio 81#82Rhode Island New Haven -Connecticut New York City - Philadelphia Delaware New Jersey -Washington DC -Maryland St. Paul Detroit - New Orleans Selected Proposed Preferred Route Milwaukee Iowa Detroit -Cleveland New York Buffalo Pennsylvania Chicago Toledo Pittsburgh Nebraska Omaha Indiana Ohio Columbus Indianapolis Denver Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Kansas Kansas City Illinois Dayton Cincinnati West Virginia St Louis Ashland Lynchburg Newton Louisville Roanoke Virginia -Petersburg Bowling Green Kentucky Missouri Nashville Provides geographic coverage by Tenn restoring access to markets between Louisville and Mobile. Legend Texas Oklahoma City Little Rock Memphis Oklahoma Atlanta Arkansas Dallas/ Fort Worth Marshall Birmingham Mississippi South Carolina Georgia Savannah Montgomery Jackson Meridian Alabama Mobile Jacksonville Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Houston Potential New Route Selected Route Option Terminal Markets San Antonio U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Louisiana New Orleans Orlando Tampa 82#83Kansas St. Paul Detroit - New Orleans Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Evaluation Criteria Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Nebraska Omaha Iowa Milwaukee Chicago Detroit -Cleveland New York Buffalo Pennsylvania Toledo Pittsburgh Indiana Ohio Indianapolis Columbus Kansas City Illinois Dayton Cincinnati West Virginia Rhode Island New Haven -Connecticut New York City -Philadelphia New Jersey Delaware -Washington DC -Maryland St Louis Ashland Lynchburg- Newton Louisville Roanoke Virginia -Petersburg dad Travel Annual trips per mile Bowling Green Kentucky Number of MSAs 9 81 Access to MSAs Demand Transportation Disadvantaged Population on Missouri (thousands) Nashville Tennessee Charlo Unserved by Passenger Rail Rural population Population of MSAs (millions) 6.68 1,195 per mile Discontinued Routes % of total 80% route track miles Population 47 Rock Memphis Tribal Lands per mile Stakeholder Top comments Yes Higher Number of Atlanta Input supporting route 195 Arkansas Education institutions Birmingham Mississippi CalVillia Medical Number of Georgia Savannah 44 Centers medical centers Montgomery Jackson Meridian Number of NPS Lands 8 Alabama parks Mobile Jacksonville Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Baseline Projects Corridor, State-Supported, Potential New Route Houston Selected Route Option Terminal Markets San Antonio U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Louisiana New Orleans Orlando Tampa 83#84Denver - Minneapolis/St. Paul Selected Proposed Preferred Route Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Salt Lake City Utah Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route Selected Route Option Terminal Markets Addresses some stakeholder input for a connection North Dakota Minnesota Fargo Minneapolis/ St. Paul Wisconsin Michiga South Dakota between Rapid City and Sioux Falls. Rapid City Pierre U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Wyoming Cheyenne Nebraska Sioux Falls Provides geographic coverage by expanding access to unserved markets in Wyoming and South Dakota. Denver Kansas Colorado Newton Trinidad, Milwaukee Chicago- Indiana Indian Kansas City Illinois St Louis Missouri Tanne 84 Ke#85Denver - Minneapolis/St. Paul Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Evaluation Criteria North Dakota Number of MSAs 5 Access to MSAs Unserved by Passenger Rail Population of MSAs (millions) 0.77 Discontinued % of total South Dakota 9% Routes Stakeholder Input route track miles Top comments supporting route Rapid City Pierre Yes Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Legend Baseline Network Utah Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route Selected Route Option Terminal Markets U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Wyoming Cheyenne Nebraska Denver Kansa Colorado Trinidad, Fargo Minnesota Minneapolis/ St. Paul Sioux Falls Wisconsin Michiga Milwaukee Iowa Chicago- Travel Demand Transportation Disadvantaged Population on Tribal Lands Higher Annual trips per mile 41 Indiana (thousands) Rural population 108 per mile Indian Population bis 36 per mile Number of 103 Education institutions Medical Number of 24 Centers medical centers Ke Number of NPS Lands parks Tanne 85#86Seattle - Chicago Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Optional Alignments Considered Seattle Washington Sandpoint Spokane Yakima Missoula Portland Kennewick Helena Montana North Dakota Bismarck Butte Billings Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Sacramento Francisco D Oregon Provides geographic coverage and responds to stakeholder input by restoring the stakeholder preferred segment connecting Yakima. Reno Salt Lake City Nevada Minnesota Fargo Wisconsin South Dakota Minneapolis/ St. Paul Michigan Wyoming Iowa Milwaukee Chicago Nebraska Omaha Indiana Utah Denver Kansas City Illinois Colorado Kansas St Louis Newton Indianapolis Cinc A Kentucky Merced California Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, rsfield Barstow Baseline Projects Potential New Route Flagstaff Segments Shared by Albuquerque All Route Options Segments for Optional Alignment Selected Route Option Terminal Markets U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Yuma Trinidad Missouri Oklahoma Tennessee Oklahoma City Little Rock •Memphis 86#87Seattle Washington Sandpoint Spokane Seattle - Chicago Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Evaluation Criteria Yakima Missoula Portland Kennewick Helena Montana North Dakota Bismarck Billings Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Oregon Idaho Fargo Minnesota Wisconsin South Dakota Minneapolis/ St. Paul Michigan Annual trips Travel Demand per mile 10 (thousands) lowa Milwaukee Chicago Sacramento Reno Transportation Disadvantaged Rural population 216 per mile Francisco OD N Population on Population 82 Tribal Lands Merced per mile Access to MSAs Unserved by Passenger Rail Number of MSAs 3 Indiana Population of MSAs (millions) 0.40 Illinois Indianapolis Cinc Higher Number of 246 Education institutions Den Discontinued Routes % of total 61% route track miles California uis A Medical Number of 55 Bakersfield Centers medical centers Stakeholder Input Top comments supporting route Yes Kentucky Legend Barstow Number of Missouri Baseline Network NPS Lands 11 parks Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Albuquerque Potential New Route Selected Route Option Terminal Markets Oklahoma Tennessee Oklahoma City Little Rock •Memphis U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Yuma 87#88Dallas/Fort Worth - Atlanta plorado Kansas Kansas Illinois St Louis Selected Proposed Preferred Route Newton Trinidad Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Paso Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route Segments Shared by All Route Options Selected Route Option Terminal Markets Missouri Cincinnati West Maryla Virginia Ashland Lynchburg- Roanoke Virginia -Petersburg Kentucky Dallas/ Fort Worth Oklahoma City Little Rock Provides rural accessibility and expands geographic coverage by directly connecting rural markets in Louisiana and Mississippi. ●Memphis Oklahoma Birmingham Arkansas Mississippi Charlotte North Carolina Atlanta South Carolina Marshall Savannah Alabama Shreveport Georgia Meridian Jackson Includes the stakeholder preferred segment Mobile Jacksonville connecting Shreveport, Jackson, and Meridian. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Louisiana New Orleans Orlando Houston San Antonio Tampa⚫ Florida Miami 88#89Kansas Dallas/Fort Worth - Atlanta plorado Kansas Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Evaluation Criteria Trinidad, Newton Illinois St Louis Missouri Cincinnati Access to MSAs Unserved by Passenger Rail West Maryla Number of MSAs 2 Population of MSAs (millions) 0.36 sburg Discontinued Routes % of total 0% route track miles Stakeholder Input Tennessee Top comments Yes supporting route Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Oklahoma City Little Rock ●Memphis Oklahoma Atlanta Arkansas Birmingham Paso Dallas/ Fort Worth Marshall Alabama Shreveport Meridian Jackson Mobile Mississippi Texas Louisiana New Orleans Houston San Antonio Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route Segments Shared by All Route Options Selected Route Option Terminal Markets 10 Higher Education Number of 131 institutions Medical Centers Number of 25 medical centers Number of NPS Lands 6 parks Travel Demand Transportation Disadvantaged Population on Tribal Lands per mile (thousands) Rural population 1,377 per mile Population per mile South Carolina Savannah Georgia Annual trips 59 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 89#90Portland El Paso - Billings Kennewick Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Optional Alignments Considered Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Reno Idaho Montana North Dakota Billings Fargo Minnesota Wisconsin South Dakota Minneapolis/- St. Paul Michigan Gillette Wyoming Casper Best addresses the evaluation criteria for travel demand, rural accessibility, Nevada and geographic coverage. Milwaukee Iowa Chicago Nebraska Omaha Cheyenne -Denver Kansas City Illinois Colorado Kansas St Louis Newton Merced Utah California Bakersfield Barstow Flagstaff Los Angeles Albuquerque Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route Segments Shared by All Route Options Segments for Optional Alignment Selected Route Option Terminal Markets U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Trinidad Missouri Indiana Indianapolis Cin As Kentucky Phoenix Yuma Arizona New Mexico Tucson Dallas/ Fort Worth Tennessee Oklahoma City Little Rock Memphis Oklahoma Arkansas Birmingham Mississippi Marshall Alabama Shreveport El Paso Meridian Jackson Mobile Texas Louisiana 90#91Portland El Paso - Billings Kennewick Selected Proposed Preferred Route and Evaluation Criteria Idaho Montana Billings Wyoming Casper North Dakota Minnesota Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities prior to implementation. Wisconsin Michigan Milwaukee Iowa Chicago Nebraska Omaha Cheyenne Indiana Indianapolis Annual trips Cin Travel Demand Transportation Disadvantaged Population on Tribal Lands Higher Population per mile per mile (thousands) 46 As Rural population 151 per mile Kentucky Sa Number of MSAs 3 Access to MSAs San Frand Unserved by Passenger Rail Population of MSAs (millions) 0.36 -Denver Discontinued % of total 2% Routes route track miles Colorado Kans Stakeholder Input Top comments Yes supporting route Trinidad Barstow Flagstaff Los Angeles Albuquerque Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Potential New Route Selected Route Option Terminal Markets U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Number of Education institutions 44 ennessee 55 65 Phoenix Yuma Arizona New Mexico Medical Centers Number of 25 medical centers am Tucson Dal Fort NPS Lands Number of 11 parks Alabama El Paso Jackson Texas Meridian Mobile Louisiana 91#92COMPARISON OF PREFERRED AND BASELINE NETWORKS U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 92 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#93Analyze the Preferred Network Compare the Preferred Network to the Baseline Network Develop evaluation factors or "measures of effectiveness" Calculate the measures of effectiveness of the Baseline Network Calculate the measures of effectiveness of the Preferred Network Compare the Preferred Network to the Baseline Network Quantify how the Preferred Network meets the goals and objectives U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 93 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#94Measures of Effectiveness ■ Feedback on the evaluation factors from stakeholders informed the development of goals and objectives ■ Goals and Objectives: ○ Connectivity ✓ Increase Passenger Access to the National Passenger Rail Network ✓ Improve passenger rail geographic coverage ○ Link and Serve Large and Small Communities ✓ Increase long-distance passenger rail connections to small communities ○ Economic and Social Well-Being of Rural Areas Enhance access for historically disadvantaged populations ✓ Enhance access for tribal areas. ✓ Enhance rural access to services. ■ The Project Team developed measures of effectiveness for the goals and objectives to evaluate the Preferred Network U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 94 SERVICE STUDY#95Measures of Effectiveness Population with access to passenger rail • 100 most populated Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) Rural areas Rural population with access to passenger rail Transportation and health disadvantaged ⚫ Below the poverty threshold • Areas of persistent poverty MSAs served by passenger rail (number and population) • Discontinued routes • New segments Number of passenger rail stations in small communities Population on tribal lands with access to passenger rail U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Number of services connected to passenger rail • • Public/private higher education institutions Medical centers • National parks, recreation areas, & preserves 95 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#96GOAL: CONNECTIVITY INCREASE PASSENGER ACCESS TO THE NATIONAL PASSENGER RAIL NETWORK IMPROVE PASSENGER RAIL GEOGRAPHIC COVERAGE U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 96 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#97Goal: Connectivity Objective: Increase Passenger Access to the National Passenger Rail Network ○ Scope: Total U.S. Population ○ 45 million more people could have access to passenger rail services ○ an 18% increase → capturing 54% of the previously unserved population Population in Millions 300M Total Population (2020), All U.S.: 330M 225M +45M 150M 247M ΣΣ 247M 75M OM Baseline Network Preferred Network Population of census tracts served by the Baseline Network or Preferred Network. Values exclude Alaska and Hawaii. Source: U.S. Census Bureau. 2020 Decennial Census (census tracts) U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 97 SERVICE STUDY#98Goal: Connectivity Objective: Increase Passenger Access to the National Passenger Rail Network ○ Scope: Population of the 100 Most Populous MSAs ○ 19 million more people could have access to passenger rail services ○ a 10% increase → capturing 71% of the previously unserved population Population in Millions 250M Total Population (2020), 100 Most Populous MSAs: 222M +19M 200M 150M 100M 195M 195M 50M OM Baseline Network Preferred Network Population of census tracts served by the Baseline Network or Preferred Network. Values exclude Alaska and Hawaii. Source: U.S. Census Bureau. 2020 Decennial Census (census tracts and MSAs) MSA: Metropolitan Statistical Areas - population greater than 50,000 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 98 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#99Goal: Connectivity Objective: Increase Passenger Access to the National Passenger Rail Network ○ Scope: U.S Population Outside Urbanized Areas (i.e., Rural) ○ 9 million more people could have access to passenger rail services ○ a 51% increase → capturing 46% of the previously unserved population Population in Millions 38M 30M 23M 15M Total Population (2020), Rural: 38M +9M 18M 18M 8M OM Baseline Network Preferred Network Population of census tracts served by the Baseline Network or Preferred Network. Values exclude Alaska and Hawaii. Source: U.S. Census Bureau. 2020 Decennial Census (census tracts and Urbanized Area boundaries) Rural: population outside of urbanized areas, located within neither Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) nor Micropolitan Statistical Areas (MMSAs) U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 99 SERVICE STUDY#100Goal: Connectivity Objective: Improve Passenger Rail Geographic Coverage О ○ 2 additional states → 48 states, as well the District of Columbia, could have access to passenger rail services ○ 24 additional congressional districts → 431 congressional districts could have access to passenger rail services E 46 States +2 New States = 48 will have access to passenger rail 407 Congressional Districts +24 Additional Districts (6%) = 431 I will have access to passenger rail Baseline Network >>> Preferred Network States boundaries and congressional districts containing a segment in the Preferred or Baseline Network; values do not include District of Columbia counted separately Source: U.S. Census Bureau. State and congressional district boundary shapefiles (2022) U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 100 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#101Goal: Connectivity Objective: Improve Passenger Rail Geographic Coverage 61 more MSAS a 21% increase ○ 19 million more people an 8% increase ○ 23,200 more route miles a 106% increase ...could have access to passenger rail service U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Baseline Network Preferred Network +61 Total MSAs 284 +36 Discontinued +25 New 345 Population 229 million +19 million Total +13 million Discontinued +6 million New 248 million Long- Distance 21,900 Route Miles +23,200 Total +5,900 Discontinued +11,100 New Segments +6,200 Baseline 45,100 101 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#102Seattle Washington Sandpoint Restored Portions of Discontinued Routes Spokane Yakima Goal: Connectivity Improve Passenger Rail Geographic Coverage • Additional 36 MSAs served Portland Maine • Population: +13 million. Kennewick Helena Montana North Dakota Bismarck Minnesota • Route Miles: +5,900 Billings Fargo • New Segments • Additional 25 MSAs served Population: +6 million • Route Miles: +11,100 Oregon Boise Idaho Pocatello Wyoming Casper Minneapolis/ St. Paul Wisconsin Vermont New Hampshire Albany Massachusetts Boston Michigan Sacramento Reno Salt Lake City- San Francisco D Nevada -Merced California -Bakersfield Las Vegas Utah Grand Junction Colorado Trinidad Barstow Flagstaff Albuquerque Rhode Island New Haven Connecticut New York City Philadelphia New Jersey Delaware Washington DC Maryland -Lorton South Dakota Pierre New York Buffalo Sioux Falls Milwaukee- ●Detroit Cleveland Pennsylvania Iowa Chicago Pittsburgh Nebraska Omaha- ●Des Moines Cheyenne Indiana Indianapolis Ohio -Denver Kansas Kansas City Illinois St Louis Columbus Cincinnati West Virginia Ashland Lynchburg- Newton Louisville Roanoke Virginia -Petersburg Kentucky Missouri Tennessee Nashville Charlotte North Carolina Chattanooga Atlanta Tulsa Los Angeles Phoenix Oklahoma- City Oklahoma Little Rock Amarillo ●Memphis Mississippi Yuma Arizona New Mexico Arkansas Birmingham South Carolina Tucson Dallas/ Fort Worth- Marshall Meridian Savannah Midland Jackson Georgia El Paso Montgomery Mobile Alabama Jacksonville Texas Louisiana Baton Rouge Tallahassee Pensacola Houston New Orleans Sanford- Orlando- San Antonio Tampa Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Preferred Routes Discontinued Network Baseline Network New Segment on the NARN U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 0 250 500 Miles Florida Miami 102#103GOAL: LINK AND SERVE LARGE AND SMALL COMMUNITIES INCREASE LONG-DISTANCE PASSENGER RAIL CONNECTIONS TO SMALL COMMUNITIES U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 103 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#104Goal: Link and Serve Large and Small Communities Small Communities 110 stations Number of Long- Distance Stations +102 stations 212 stations (+93%) Large Communities 215 stations Number of Long- Distance Stations +114 stations 329 stations (+53%) Baseline Network Source: U.S. Census Bureau. 2020 Decennial Census (MSAs) MSA: Urbanized areas with a minimum population of 50,000 Preferred Network The methodology to identify potential station locations is presented in the section on the approach for development of route service. Stations in small communities are stations located in non-MSA areas Stations in large communities are stations located in MSA areas Objective: Increase long-distance passenger rail connections to small communities ○ Additional potential station locations on preferred routes could increase the connections to small communities ○ 102 more stations in small communities (non-MSA areas) ○ a 93% increase U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 104 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#105GOAL: ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL WELL-BEING OF RURAL AREAS ENHANCE ACCESS FOR HISTORICALLY DISADVANTAGED POPULATIONS ENHANCE ACCESS FOR TRIBAL AREAS ENHANCE RURAL ACCESS TO SERVICES U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 105 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#106Goal: Economic and Social Well-Being of Rural Areas Objective: Enhance access for historically disadvantaged populations О Scope: Population in rural Transportation Disadvantaged Areas (Justice 40) ○ 6 million more people could have access to passenger rail services ○ a 43% increase → capturing 49% of the previously unserved population Population in Millions 30M 25M Total Rural Population (2019) Transportation Disadvantaged: 25M 20M 15M 10M +6M 13M 13M 5M OM Baseline Network Preferred Network Population of census tracts outside urbanized areas served by the Baseline or Preferred Network that are defined as Transportation Disadvantaged based on the U.S. DOT Justice 40 Initiative: ACS Data (2015-2019 5-year estimates, 2010 Census Tract Shapefiles). Values exclude Alaska and Hawaii. Source: U.S. Census Bureau. 2020 Decennial Census, U.S. Census Bureau. 2020 Urbanized Areas boundaries, U.S. Census Bureau. ACS 2015-2019 5-year estimates (using 2010 census tract boundaries) U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA 106 LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#107Goal: Economic and Social Well-Being of Rural Areas Population in Millions 20M 15M 10M 5M 7M Total Rural Population (2019) Health Disadvantaged: 17M OM Baseline Network +5M 7M Preferred Network Objective: Enhance access for historically disadvantaged populations О ○ Scope: Population in rural Health Disadvantaged Areas (Justice 40) ○ 5 million more people could have access to passenger services rail Population of census tracts outside urbanized areas served by the Baseline or Preferred Network that are defined as Health Disadvantaged based on the U.S. DOT Justice 40 Initiative: ACS Data (2015-2019 5-year estimates, 2010 Census Tract Shapefiles). Values exclude Alaska and Hawaii. Source: U.S. Census Bureau. 2020 Decennial Census, U.S. Census Bureau. 2020 Urbanized Areas boundaries, U.S. Census Bureau. ACS 2015-2019 5-year estimates (using 2010 census tract boundaries) a 66% increase → capturing 44% of the previously unserved population U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 107 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#108Goal: Economic and Social Well-Being of Rural Areas Objective: Enhance access for historically disadvantaged populations ○ Scope: Rural Population Living Below the Poverty Threshold (2020) ○ 1 million more people could have access to passenger rail services ○ a 59% increase → capturing 45% of the previously unserved population Population in Millions 6M 5M 4M 3M 2M 1M 2M Total Rural Population (2020) Below the Poverty Threshold: 5M OM Baseline Network +1M 2M Preferred Network Population of census tracts living below the poverty threshold outside of urbanized areas served by the Baseline Network or Preferred Network. Values exclude Alaska and Hawaii. Source: U.S. Census Bureau. 2020 Decennial Census, U.S. Census Bureau. 2020 Urbanized Areas boundaries, U.S. Census Bureau Rural: population outside of urbanized areas U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 108 SERVICE STUDY#109Goal: Economic and Social Well-Being of Rural Areas Objective: Enhance access for tribal areas ○ Scope: Population on U.S. Tribal Lands ○ 2 million more people could have access to passenger rail services Population in Millions Total Population (2020) on Tribal Lands: 5M 5M 4M 3M 2M 1M 2M +2M 2M OM Baseline Network Preferred Network ○ a 112% increase → capturing 74% of the previously unserved population Population in census tracts covered by American Indian Tribal area boundaries served by the Baseline Network or Preferred Network. Values exclude Alaska and Hawaii. Source: U.S. Census Bureau. 2020 Decennial Census (census tracts), U.S. Census Bureau. American Indian/Native Alaskan/Native Hawaiian Areas boundaries Tribal lands include American Indian and Alaska Native Land, American Indian Tribal Subdivisions, Bureau of Indian Affairs Regional Boundaries, Oklahoma Tribal Statistical Areas U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 109 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#110Goal: Economic and Social Well-Being of Rural Areas Objective: Enhance rural access to services О 82 more Medical Centers → 584 medical centers could have access to passenger rail services a 16% increase ○ 600 additional higher education institutions → 3,300 public and private not-for-profit higher education institutions could have access to passenger rail services a 22% increase ○ 12 more NPS lands → 75 National Parks, Recreation Areas, and Preserves could have access to passenger rail services a 19% increase +502 Medical Centers 2,700 Public/Private Higher Education 63 National Parks, Recreation Areas, and Preserves Baseline Network Values exclude Alaska and Hawaii. +82 Additional Medical Centers (16%) +600 Additional Institutions (22%) +12 Additional Parks (19%) = 584 will have access to passenger rail = 3300 will have access to passenger rail = 75 will have access to passenger rail Preferred Network Source: U.S. Census Bureau. 2020 census tract boundaries, U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security 2023 (Locations), Homeland Infrastructure Foundation-Level Data Geoplatform (HIFLD), National Parks Service data created by Land Resources Division 2023 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 110 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#111APPROACH FOR DEVELOPMENT OF CONCEPTUAL SERVICE ROUTE U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 111 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#112Approach for Development of Route Service Baseline Network Enhanced Network Development Route Development Service Analysis Investment Analysis Identify Prioritized Routes Purpose: Analyze and develop conceptual service concepts for each preferred route to support investment analysis ✓ Developed conceptual end-to-end run times for each preferred route to inform conceptual service schedules Future Next Step: Develop conceptual service schedules with approximate departure and arrival times for each preferred route to inform cost estimating, and public benefits analysis U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 112 SERVICE STUDY#113Approach for Development of Route Service Baseline Network Enhanced Network Development Route Service Analysis Development Investment Analysis Identify Prioritized Routes Develop Conceptual Run Times ○ Identified potential station locations ○ Calculated average speed and dwell times ○ Estimated travel times between stations ■ Future Next Step: Develop Conceptual Service Schedules o Schedule long-distance service (one train a day in each direction) Serve those MSA pairs that have the highest volume of trips during daytime hours (5 a.m. - 11 p.m.) ○ Support connections between existing routes and preferred routes for key markets U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 113 SERVICE STUDY#114Identification of Potential Station Locations This approach provides conceptual run times that will inform conceptual schedules. Schedules are not final and are not an FRA proposal for service. Segments in the Baseline Network •Use the current station locations New Segments Consistent with the Discontinued Network Considered the discontinued station locations •Station spacing approximately every 50 miles* •City population greater than 5,000 people New Segments where long-distance passenger rail service has not operated •Station spacing approximately every 50 miles* •City population greater than 5,000 people U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration *Based on the average station spacing for fiscal year 2022 Amtrak long- distance service: average of 42 miles east of the Mississippi River, average of 70 miles west of the Mississippi River. Initial Station Locations FRA LONG-DISTANCE 114 SERVICE STUDY#115Identification of Potential Station Locations Overlapping Multiple Existing Long-Distance Routes •Where a preferred route includes multiple overlapping existing long-distance routes, the service with more stations was adopted. •Supports conservative approach to identifying station locations Overlapping Existing State-Supported Routes •Where a preferred route includes a state-supported route and no overlapping existing long- distance route, not all stations served by the state-supported route were included •Consistent with existing long-distance operations that overlap state-supported service Intersecting Existing Long-Distance Routes •Where a preferred route intersects an existing route, a station was added to create a connection between the existing route and the preferred route Note: New stations locations for the preferred routes were not identified for existing long-distance routes or state-supported routes unless required to create a connection between the existing route and the new preferred route. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 115 SERVICE STUDY#116Estimate Conceptual Run Times This approach provides conceptual run times that will inform conceptual schedules Schedules are not final and are not an FRA proposal for service Segments with Current Passenger Rail Service Use the current schedule New Segments Estimate travel time based on: • Distance between stations • Average speed of 48 miles per hour between stations* Average 4 minutes of dwell time at stations* Average 20 minutes dwell time at stations with crew base and enroute servicing activities* *Based on the average for fiscal year distance service. 2022 Amtrak long- Conceptual Run Times for a Preferred Route Conceptual run times do not consider existing or future traffic conditions along the routes. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 116 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#117aho Chicago Miamis Wyom - Proposed Preferred Route and Select Station Locations ity- Michigan Iowa Chicago Nebraska maha Des Moines Indiana Preferred Route Operating Statistics Scheduled run time approx. 36 hours Utah Route length 1,529 miles Restored service Louisville, KY Bowling Green, KY on Nashville, TN gstaff Columbus, IN New service Chattanooga, TN Tulsa . Macon, GA UNationa enix City Amarillo Arizona New Mexico Tucson El Paso Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Preferred Routes Preferred Route: Chicago - Miami Preferred Routes Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k o Existing • Discontinued © New Kansas City Illinois St Louis Missouri Detroit Ohio New York Buffalo Cleveland Pennsylvania Pittsburgh Lafayette Indianapolis Columbus Boston -Rhode Island New Haven Connecticut New York City Philadelphia New Jersey Delaware Washington DC Maryland -Lorton Cincinnati West Virginia Columbus Ashland Lynchburg- Louisville Roanoke Virginia -Petersburg Bowling Green Kentucky North Carolina Tennessee Charlotte Nashville Chattanooga Little Rock Memphis Mississippi Atlanta Arkansas Birmingham So Ca Dallas/ Fort Worth- Marshall Meridian Jackson Macon Georgia Savannah Montgomery Mobile Alabama Jacksonville Texas Tallahassee Pensacola Louisiana Orlandoco Houston New Orleans San Antonio Tampa Florida Miami Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities, including detailed schedule development. This analysis would include extensive coordination with host and operating railroads, funding agencies and other key stakeholders. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Scheduled run time for northbound or eastbound service. 117#118Boston Rhode Island New Haven -Connecticut -New York City Philadelphia Delaware New Jersey Washington, DC Maryland Cheyenne -Denver olorado aho Chicago-Miamie ity- Wyom Proposed Preferred Route and Select Station Locations Conceptual run times are intended to support network analysis and do not consider existing or future traffic conditions along the route. Sioux Falls Iowa Nebraska Omaha- Des Moines Michigan New York Buffalo Milwaukee Chicago Indiana Lafayette Indianapolis Columbes Detroit Cleveland Pennsylvania Pittsburgh Capitol Limited Ohio Kansas City Cincinnati West Virginia Lorton Columbus St Louis Ashland Kansas Louisville Newton Lynchburg- Roanoke Virginia -Pete urg Bowling Green Kentucky Trinidad Missouri North Tennessee Charlotte staff Albuquerque Carolin Tulsa Nashville Oklahoma Oklahoma- City + Chattanooga Silver Star enix Amarillo Preferred Route phis Mis opi Atlanta Arizona ingham lina New Mexico Tucson Dallas/ Fort Worth- approx. 36 hours Meridia Macon Georgia Savannah 1 seat ride El Paso Mo Montgomery Alabama Jacksonville Texas Tallahassee acola Louisiana Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Preferred Routes Preferred Route: Chicago - Miami Preferred Routes Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k • Existing • Discontinued Chicago to Miami Time Savings: approx. 11 hours New Orleans Houston San Antonio Orlando co Tampa Florida Miami New U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Existing Route(s) 46 hours, 55 minutes 2 seat ride: Capitol Limited, Silver Star 118#119Kansas Dallas/Fort Worth - Miami Louisville Proposed Preferred Route and Select Station Locations Kentucky Lynchburg- Roanoke Virginia Missouri -Petersburg Preferred Route Operating Statistics Tulsa Oklahoma Oklahoma- City Amarillo Little Rock ●Memphis Mississippi Tennessee Charl Scheduled run time approx. 36 hours Nashville Route length 1,498 miles Chattanooga • Pensacola, FL Restored service . Tallahassee, FL • Arkansas Birmingham -Atlanta New service • • Shreveport, LA Baton Rouge, LA Daytona Beach, FL Palm Bay, FL Dallas/ Fort Worth Marshall Meridian Savannah Shreveport Georgia Montgomery Jackson Longview Mobile Alabama Jacksonville Texas Louisiana Tallahassee Pensacola Baton Rouge Gulfport Orlando co Houston New Orleans Daytona Beach Palm Bay San Antonio Tampa⚫ Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Preferred Routes Preferred Route: Dallas/Fort Worth - Miami Preferred Routes Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k o Existing Discontinued New Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities, including detailed schedule development. This analysis would include extensive coordination with host and operating railroads, funding agencies and other key stakeholders. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Florida Miami Scheduled run time for northbound or eastbound service. 119#120Iowa Nebraska Omaha- Des Moines no Denver - Houston Salt Lake City- Proposed Preferred Route and Select Station Locations Nevada Utah Denver nia Colorado Colorado Springs Kansas Pueblo kersfield Preferred Route Operating Statistics Barstow Trinidad Scheduled run time approx. 26 hours Route length 1,096 miles • Bryan, TX Restored service • Amarillo, TX New service Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Preferred Routes Preferred Route: Denver - Houston Preferred Routes Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k • Existing Discontinued Ⓒ New Newton Kansas City Illinois St Louis Tulsa Wichita Falls, TX Oklahoma Oklahoma- City Pueblo, CO Amarillo Colorado Springs, CO New Mexico Tucson Wichita Falls Dallas/ Fort Worth- Marshall U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration El Paso Missouri Little Roc Chicago Indiana Indianapolis Louisv Kentu Tenne Nashvill Memphis Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities, including detailed schedule development. This analysis would include extensive coordination with host and operating railroads, funding agencies and other key stakeholders. ht na Texas Bryan Louisiana Houston San Antonio Pensacola New Orleans Scheduled run time for northbound or eastbound service. 120#121Los Angeles - Denver Boise Idaho Proposed Preferred Route and Select Station Locations Wyoming Preferred Route Operating Statistics Scheduled run time approx. 33 hours Route length 1,440 miles Ogden Salt Lake City Provo . Restored service Las Vegas, NV Ogden, UT Nevada . Cheyenne, WY Utah New service Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Preferred Routes Preferred Route: Los Angeles - Denver Preferred Routes Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k o Existing Discontinued • New Fort Collins, CO U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Fort Collins Cheyenne Denver Colorado California Bakersfield Barstow Las Vegas Flagstaff Albuquerque Los Angeles Trinidad South Dakota Pierre Sioux Falls Nebraska Omah Kenese Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities, including detailed schedule development. This analysis would include extensive u coordination with host and operating railroads, funding agencies and other key stakeholders. Phoenix Amarillo Yuma Arizona New Mexico Tucson El Paso Dallas/ Fort Worth Scheduled run time for northbound or eastbound service. 121#122Phoenix - Minneapolis/St. Paul Oregon Proposed Preferred Route and Select Station Locations Boise Idaho North Dakota Fargo Minnesota Minneapolis/ St. Paul- South Dakota Pierre Wisconsin Michigan Wyoming Sioux Falls Milwaukee Detroit Preferred Route Operating Statistics Sioux City Iowa Scheduled run time approx. 48 hours Chicago Sacran Nebraska Route length 2,186 miles Omaha Des Moines Ohio Indiana Cheyenne San Francisco • Phoenix, AZ Indianapolis Columb Restored service . Amarillo, TX Wichita, KS -Denver Kansas City Illinois Sioux City, IA Colorado Kansas New service Lawrence Topeka o St Louis Sioux Falls, SD Cincinnati Ashland L Louisville Newton Bakersfield Barstow Las Vegas Trinidad Mi Flagstaff 8 Wichita Tulsa Los Angeles Albuquerque Oklahoma Phoenix Oklahoma City Little Roc Amarillo Yuma Arizona New Mexico Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Preferred Routes Preferred Route: Phoenix-Minneapolis/St. Paul Preferred Routes Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k • Existing Discontinued Ⓒ New Tucson Ar Dallas/ Fort Worth Marshall h ga Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities, including detailed schedule development. This analysis would include extensive coordination with host and operating ta railroads, funding agencies and other key stakeholders. El Paso Ge Montgomery Mobile Alabama Texas Tallahassee Pensacola Louisiana Houston New Orleans San Antonio Jacksuit U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Scheduled run time for northbound or eastbound service. 122#123Billings NewYork Minneapolis/ Dallas/Fort Worth - New York Proposed Preferred Route and Select Station Locations Wisconsin Michigan Albany New Hampshire Massachusetts Boston Pierre New York Buffalo Wyoming Sioux Falls Milwaukee Detroit Pennsylvania Preferred Route Operating Statistics Iowa Chicago Cleveland Pittsburgh Scheduled run time approx. 45 hours Omaha ●Des Moines Indiana Ohio Harrisburg Route length 1,854 miles Springfield Indianapolis • Terre Haute, IN Dayton, OH Restored service Kansas City Terre Haute Illinois Cincinnati Columbus -Dayton West Virginia Lancaster - Rhode Island New Haven Connecticut New York City Philadelphia Delaware New Jersey Washington DC Maryland -Lorton Springfield, OH St Louis · Columbus, OH Ashland Lynchburg- Louisville [on Tulsa, OK Roanoke Virginia New service Springfield, MO Springfield Kentucky Missouri Tennessee Charlotte Tulsa -Nashville Albuquerque Oklahoma Oklahoma- City Chattanooga Little Rock Amarillo New Mexico Memphis Mississippi -Atlanta Arkansas Birmingham Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Dallas/ Fort Worth Marshall Meridian Sava -Petersburg Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities, including detailed schedule development. This analysis would include extensive coordination with host and operating railroads, funding agencies and other key stakeholders. Jackson Georgia Montgomery Preferred Routes Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Preferred Route: Dallas/Fort Worth - New York Preferred Routes Texas Mobile Alabama Jacksonville Tallahassee Pensacola Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k Louisiana o Existing Discontinued New Houston New Orleans Orlando San Antonio Tampa Scheduled run time for northbound or eastbound service. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 123#124Billings Dallas/Fort Worth - New York Minneapolis/ Wisconsin Proposed Preferred Route and Select Station Locations New Hampshire Albany Michigan Pierre Wyoming Milwaukee Dit Conceptual run times are intended to support network Existing Route(s) Chicago Capitol Limited Nebraska analysis and do not consider existing or future traffic conditions along the route. s Moines Indiana Ohio 17 hours, 55 minutes Cheyenne -Denver 2 seat ride: Bus, Capitol Limited Bus Illinois St Louis Colorado Kansas Newton Trinidad Springfield Indianapolis Columbus -Dayton We Cincinnati Vir Ashland Louisville Kentucky Missouri Tulsa Preferred Route Albuquerque Oklahoma Oklahoma- City Little Rock Amarillo New Mexico Buffalo New York Pernsylvania Pittsburgh Harrisburg - New Haven Connecticut New York City Philadelphia Delaware New Jersey Washington DC Maryland Massachusetts Boston Rhode Island -Lorton Surg Roanoke Virginia -Petersburg Memphis Mississippi approx. 11 hours Arkansas Birmingham North Indianapolis to Carolin Pittsburgh South Carolina Time Savings: approx. 7 hours 1 seat ride Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Dallas/ Fort Worth- Marshall Meridian Savannah Jackson- Georgia Montgomery Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Preferred Routes Preferred Route: Dallas/Fort Worth - New York Preferred Routes Texas Mobile Alabama Jacksonville Tallahassee Pensacola Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k Louisiana • Existing Discontinued New Houston New Orleans San Antonio Orlando Tampa Scheduled run time for northbound or eastbound service. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 124#125South Dakota Houston - New York Proposed Preferred Route and Select Station Locations Milwaukee Michigan Buffalo New York Iowa Chicago Preferred Route Operating Statistics Des Moines Indiana Scheduled run time approx. 44 hours Route length 1,840 miles Kansas City Illinois Restored service • Montgomery, AL St Louis New service Auburn, AL Chattanooga, TN Knoxville, TN Detroit Cleveland Pennsylvania Pittsburgh Ohio Indianapolis Columbus Cincinnati West Virginia Ashland Louisville Lynchburg Roanoke Kentucky Johnson City Johnson City, TN Missouri Knoxville Albuquerque Tulsa Oklahoma Nashville + Charlotte Tennessee Oklahoma- City Chattanooga Little Rock Memphis Amarillo New Mexico Mississippi Atlanta Arkansas Birmingham Dallas/ Fort Worth- Marshall Meridian Savanna Jackson- Legend El Paso Baseline Network Auburn Georgia Montgomery Mobile Alabama Jacksonvil Texas Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Tallahassee Preferred Routes Preferred Route: Houston - New York Preferred Routes Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k Houston San Antonio Beaumont Louisiana 8 Lafayette Pensacola Gulfport New Orleans Lake Charles Orlando Tampa o Existing Discontinued New U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Lorton Boston Rhode Island New Haven -Connecticut New York City -Philadelphia New Jersey -Delaware -Washington DC Maryland Virginia -Petersburg North Carolina Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities, including detailed schedule development. This analysis would include extensive coordination with host and operating railroads, funding agencies and other key stakeholders. Florida Scheduled run time for northbound or eastbound service. 125#126South Dakota Houston - New York Proposed Preferred Route and Select Station Locations Milwaukee Michigan Iowa Chicago Nebraska Omaha Des Moines Indiana Cheyenne Conceptual run times are intended to support network analysis and do not consider Denver existing or future traffic conditions along the route. Kansas Kansas City Illinois St Louis Newton New York Buffalo Detroit Cleveland Pennsylvania Pittsburgh Ohio Boston Rhode Island New Haven Connecticut -New York City -Philadelphia Delaware -New Jersey Indianapolis Columbus Cincinnati West Virginia -Washington DC Maryland Lorton Ashland Lynchburg- Louisville Roanoke Virginia -Petersburg Albuquerque TrinidAtlanta to Houston Time Savings: Oklahoma approx. 13 hours Amarino Kentucky Johnson City Missouri + Knoxville Tulsa Nashville Charlotte North Carolina Oklahoma Tennessee Chattanooga Existing Route(s) City Memphis Mississippi 34 hours, 10 minutes Atlanta New Mexico Birmingham Crescent South Carolina Dallas/ Fort Worth- 2 seat ride: Crescent, Sunset Limited Meridian Savannah El Paso Aub Georgia Montgory Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Preferred Routes Preferred Route: Houston - New York Preferred Routes Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k • Existing Discontinued New U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Texas Mobile Alabam Sunset Limited Talla Preferred Route sacola Gule San Anton Houston Beaumont Lafayette Lake Charles Approx 21 hours. New Orleans 1 seat ride Florida 126#127Seattle Washington Seattle - Denver Proposed Preferred Route and Select Station Locations Sandpoint Olympia-Laceyo Spokane Yakima Portland o Kennewick Helena Montana North Dakota Minnesota Preferred Route Operating Statistics Billings Fargo Scheduled run time approx. 40 hours on Route length 1,671 miles Boise • Boise, ID Restored service Idaho • Ogden, UT Pocatello New Service • n/a Wyoming Minneapolis/ St. Paul- Ogden- Sacramento Reno Salt Lake City Provo Legend San Francisco Nevada Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Merced Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects South Dakota Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities, including detailed schedule development. This analysis would include extensive coordination with host and operating Cheyenne railroads, funding agencies and other key stakeholders. Preferred Routes Preferred Route: Seattle - Denver Preferred Routes Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k o Existing Discontinued New California Bakersfield Las Vegas Barstow Utah Grand Junction Colorado Trinidad Denver Kansas City Kansas Newton U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Scheduled run time for northbound or eastbound service. 127#128Conceptual run times are intended to support network analysis and do not consider existing or future traffic conditions along the route. Seattle Washington Spokane Seattle - Denver Proposed Preferred Route and Select Station Locations Sandpoint Olympia-Laceyo ma Portland o Coast Starlight Existing Route(s) 55 hours, 48 minutes 2 seat ride: Coast Starlight, California Zephyr Preferred Route Kennick North Dakota Minnesota approx. 40 hours Fargo 1 seat ride Minneapolis/ St. Paul- Sacramento Reno San Francisco Nevada Merced Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Preferred Routes Preferred Route: Seattle - Denver Preferred Routes Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k • Existing Discontinued New U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Boise Idaho Pocatel Seattle to Denver Time Savings: Wyoming Ogden. Salt Lake City Provo California Zephyr California Bakersfield ●Las Vegas Barstow approx. 16 hoursx Falls Iowa Nebraska Omaha Cheyenne Utah Denver Kansas City Grand Junction Kansas Newton Trinidad 128#129Maine Kennewick Helena Montana San Antonio Minneapolis/St. Paul 1 Billings Proposed Preferred Route and Select Station Locations Fargo Minneapolis/ St. Paul- esota Wyoming South Dakota Pierre Sioux Falls Wisconsin Michigan Vermont New Hampshire Massachu Albany Milwaukee Preferred Route Operating Statistics Iowa Chicago Reno Scheduled run time approx. 32 hours Nebraska Omaha- Des Moines New York Buffalo Detroit Cleveland Pennsylvania Pittsburgh Ohio Indiana Nevada Merced Route length Restored service 1,572 miles Indianapolis Columbus • n/a California Tulsa, OK Kansas Kansas City Illinois St Louis New service • Des Moines, IA Newton Bakersfield Las Vegas Trinidad, Barstow Flagstaff Angeles Oklahoma- City Phoenix Amarillo Yuma Arizona New Mexico Tucson El Paso Albuquerque Oklahoma Tulsa Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Preferred Routes Preferred Route: San Antonio - Minneapolis/St. Pau Preferred Routes Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k Cincinnati West Virginia -Lorton Ashland Lynchburg- Louisville Roanoke Virginia -Petersburg Kentucky Missouri Nashville Tennessee Little Rock • Memphis Mississippi -Atl Arkansas Birmingham Dallas/ Fort Worth Marshall Meridian Jackson- Montgomery Mobile Alabama Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to Chattan advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities, including detailed schedule development. This analysis would include extensive coordination with host and operating railroads, funding agencies and other key stakeholders. Texas Temple o Tallahassee Pensacola Louisiana COAustin Orlando New Orleans Houston San Antonio Tampa Boston Rhode New Hav -Connecticut -New York City Philadelphia Delaware New Jerse -Washington DC Maryland • Existing ⚫ Discontinued ▸ New U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Florida Miami Scheduled run time for northbound or eastbound service. 129#130Kennewick Helena Montana San Antonio - Minneapolis/St. Paul Billings Proposed Preferred Route and Select Station Locations Fargo Minneapolis/St. Paul South Dakota esota Conceptual run times are intended to support network analysis and do not consider Salt Lake City existing or future traffic conditions along the route. Wyoming Preferred Route Falls Wi Thruway Bus Milwaukee Chicago Kansas City to Maine nt New Minneapolis/St. Paul Time Savings: approx. 12 hours. Boston Michigan Albany New York falo Existing Route(s) Pennsylvania 22 hours, 57 minutes India Southwest Chief India 2 seat ride: Southwest Chief, Thruway Bus Massachu Rhode New Hav Connecticut -New York City - Philadelphia Delaware -New Jerse -Washington DC Maryland -Lorton wa approx. 11 hours Omaha- Des Moines 1 seat ride -Denver Utah Illinois California Bakersfield Barstow Las Vegas Flagstaff Angeles Time Savings: approx. 11 hours Tulsa Oklahoma Oklahoma- City Phoenix Amarillo Yuma Arizona New Mexico Tucson San Antonio to Trinida Kansas City Kansas City Newton Missouri River Runner Virginia St. Louis Ashland Lynchburg- Louisville Roanoke Virginia -Petersburg Kentucky Missouri Nashville Tennessee Charlotte North Carolina Chattanooga Little Rock ●Memphis Mississippi anta Ark s South Carolina Dallas/ Fort Worth Existing Route(s) arshall Savannah Jackson- Georgia Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Baseline Projects Preferred Routes Preferred Route 30 hours, 50 minutes Jacksonville Temple o Corridor, State-Supported, approx. 20 hours Louisiana COA 2 seat ride: Texas Eagle, Missouri River Runner see Ο Preferred Route: San Antonio - Minneapolis/St. Paul Preferred Routes 1 seat ride Houston San Ant Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k San Antonio • Existing ⚫ Discontinued © New Orlando o Tampa Florida Miami U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 130#131San Francisco - Dallas/Fort Worth Wyoming Proposed Preferred Route and Select Station Locations Sacramento Reno Salt Lake City- Nebraska San Francisco OD Stockton Cheyenne Nevada Merced Utah Fresno Hanford California Preferred Route Operating Statistics Scheduled run time Route length Restored service approx. 43 hours 1,911 miles • Phoenix, AZ Bakersfield Las Vegas Barstow New service • • Odessa, TX Midland, TX Abilene, TX Flagstaff Los Angeles Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Preferred Routes Preferred Route: San Francisco - Dallas/Fort Worth Preferred Routes Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k • Existing Discontinued Ⓒ New U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Sioux Falls Iowa Des Moines Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities, including detailed schedule development. This analysis would include extensive coordination with host and operating railroads, funding agencies and other key stakeholders. UIT Tulsa Albuquerque Phoenix Oklahoma Oklahoma- City Little Rock Amarillo Yuma Arizona New Mexico Arkansa Tucson Dallas/ Fort Worth- Marshall Midland Ja El Paso Abilene Odessa Texas Louisiana Houston San Antonio Scheduled run time for northbound or eastbound service. 131#132Sacramento Reno Salt Lake City San Francisco OD Stockton Nevada San Francisco - Dallas/Fort Worth Wyoming Proposed Preferred Route and Select Station Locations Sioux Falls Bakersfield to Dallas/Fort Worth maha Cheyenne Time Savings: approx. 10 hours Merced Conceptual run times are intended to support network analysis and do not consider existing or future traffic conditions along the route. Utah Denver Fresno Hanford Kansas Colora Bakersfield California Newton Preferred Route BUS Las Vegas Barstow Tri Flagstaff approx. 36 hours Los Angeles Albuquerque 1 seat ride Legend Iowa Des Moines Kansas City St Lo Missour Tulsa Oklahoma Oklahoma- City Little Rock Phoenix Amarillo Yuma Arizona New Mexico Dallas/ Arkansa Tucson Fort Worth Marshall Ja El Paso Midland + Abilene Existing Route(s) Texas Eagle/Sunset Limited Odessa Texas Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Preferred Routes Preferred Route: San Francisco - Dallas/Fort Worth Preferred Routes Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k 45 hours, 15 minutes 2 seat ride: Bus, Texas Eagle/Sunset Limited • Existing ⚫ Discontinued New U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Louisiana Texas Eagle Houston San Antonio 132#133Detroit - New Orleans Proposed Preferred Route and Select Station Locations Milwaukee Michigan Detroit Iowa Chicago Toledo Pittsburgh Nebraska Omaha- Des Moines Indiana Ohio Cheyenne Springfield Indianapolis Columbus Preferred Route Operating Statistics Illinois Dayton West Cincinnati Virginia Buffalo New York Cleveland Pennsylvania Boston Rhode Is New Have - Connecticut -New York City - Philadelphia -Delaware New Jersey Washington DC Maryland Lorton Scheduled run time approx. 29 hours St Louis Route length 1,246 miles Ashland Lynchburg Louisville Roanoke Virginia -Petersburg • Montgomery, AL Bowling Green Kentucky • Decatur, AL • Nashville, TN Missouri • Bowling Green, KY Charlotte Restored service Nashville • Louisville, KY Albuquerqu Dayton, OH Tennessee Chattanooga Springfield, OH tle Rock • Columbus, OH Memphis Mississippi Decatur -Atlanta New service • n/a Arkansas Birmingham NOW IVICAICO Dallas/ Fort Worth- Marshall Meridian Jackson- Georgia Legend El Paso Baseline Network Mobile Montgomery Alabama North Caseline Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities, including detailed schedule development. This analysis would include extensive coordination with host and operating railroads, funding agencies and other key stakeholders. Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Jacksonvil Texas Tallahassee Preferred Routes Preferred Route: Detroit - New Orleans Preferred Routes Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k • Existing Discontinued Louisiana Pensacola Gulfport Orlando Houston New Orleans San Antonio Tampa New U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Scheduled run time for northbound or eastbound service. 133#134Denver - Minneapolis/St. Paul wproposed Preferred Route and Select Station Locations Billings North Dakota Minnesota Fargo Minneapolis/ St. Paul- Wisconsin Boise Preferred Route Operating Statistics Scheduled run time approx. 26 hours Route length Restored service • 1,136 miles Cheyenne, WY South Dakota Rapid City Pierre • Fort Collins, CO New service • Rapid City, SD • Sioux Falls, SD Sioux Falls Iowa Salt Lake City Nebraska Omaha- Fort Collins + Cheyenne Utah Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Preferred Routes Preferred Route: Denver - Minneapolis/St. Paul Preferred Routes Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k • Existing ⚫ Discontinued Ⓒ New Colorado Trinidad -Denver Kansas Newton U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Kansas City Milwaukee Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities, including detailed schedule development. This analysis would include extensive coordination with host and operating railroads, funding agencies and other key stakeholders. St Louis Missouri Scheduled run time for northbound or eastbound service. 134#135Seattle Washington Sandpoint Spokane Yakima Missoula Portland Kennewick Helena Montana North Dakota Bismarck Billings Oregon Bozeman Seattle - Chicago Proposed Preferred Route and Select Station Locations Boise Idaho South Dakota Minnesota Fargo Minneapolis/St. Cloud St. Paul Wisconsin La Crosse Michigan Preferred Route Operating Statistics Pierre Legend Scheduled run time approx. 50 hours Route length 2,096 miles Yakima, WA Missoula, MT Salt Lake City Restored service Bozeman, MT • Billings, MT Bismarck, ND New service • Helena, MT California Bakersfield Las Vegas Baseline Network Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Preferred Routes Barstow Long-Distance, Northeast Flagstaff Angeles Albuquerque Wyoming Sioux Falls Milwaukee Iowa Chicago Nebraska Omaha- Des Moines Indiana Cheyenne Indianapolis Kansas Utah -Denver Colorado Kansas Newton Trinidad Preferred Route: Seattle - Chicago Preferred Routes Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k • Existing ⚫ Discontinued Ⓒ New Tulsa Phoenix Oklahoma Oklahoma- City Amarillo Yuma Arizona New Mexico Tucson Dallas/ Fort Worth Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to en advance the preferred routes through is project planning and project development activities, including detailed schedule development. nr This analysis would include extensive V coordination with host and operating railroads, funding agencies and other key stakeholders. Arkansas Marshall Birmingham, Meridian U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Scheduled run time for northbound or eastbound service. 135#136Kapsas Dallas/Fort Worth - Atlanta Illinois Proposed Preferred Routes and Select Station Locations Colorado Newton Cincinnati West Virginia Mary -Lorton Ashland Lynchburg- Louisville Roanoke Virginia -Petersburg Trinidad Kentucky Missouri Preferred Route Operating Statistics Scheduled run time approx. 22 hours que Nashville, Tennessee Charlotte North Carolina Route length 870 miles Chattanooga Little Rock Restored service • n/a ●Memphis Mississippi New service • New Mexico Shreveport, LA -Atlanta Arkansas Birmingham Tuscaloosa Dallas/ Fort Worth- Marshall Shreveport Meridian Ge El Paso Montgomery Jackson Longview Mobile Alabama Texas Tallahassee Pensacola Louisiana Legend Houston New Orleans South Carolina Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities, including detailed schedule development. This analysis would include extensive coordination with host and operating railroads, funding agencies and other key stakeholders. San Antonio Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Preferred Routes Preferred Route: Dallas/Fort Worth - Atlanta Preferred Routes Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k • Existing Discontinued ▸ New U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Tampa⚫ Florida Miami Scheduled run time for northbound or eastbound service. 136#137Portland Oregon Kennewick Helena Montana North Dakota El Paso - Billings Minnesota Proposed Preferred Route and Select Station Locations Fargo Boise Idaho Minneapolis! St. Paul- Wisconsin South Dakota Michigan Preferred Route Operating Statistics Pierre Scheduled run time approx. 31 hours Wyoming Casper Sioux Falls Route length 1,393 miles Milwaukee . Cheyenne, WY Iowa Chicago Restored service • Billings, MT ke City- Nebraska Omaha- Des Moines Indiana Las Cruces, NM Cheyenne Fort Collins Pueblo, CO Indianapolis New service • Colorado Springs, CO Utah -Denver Fort Collins, CO Kansas City Illinois Casper, WY Bakersfield Colorado Colorado Springs Pueblo Kansas Newton Los Angeles Las Vegas Barstow Flagstaff Albuquerque TrinidadO Legend Baseline Network Long-Distance, Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, Baseline Projects Preferred Routes Preferred Route: El Paso - Billings Preferred Routes Stations in Cities with Populations Over 50k • Existing ⚫ Discontinued ▸ New Tulsa Phoenix Oklahoma Oklahoma City Amarillo Yuma Arizona New Mexico Tucson Las Cruces Arkansas Dallas/ Fort Worth- Marshall El Paso Further analysis after completion of this study would be necessary to advance the preferred routes through project planning and project development activities, including detailed schedule development. This analysis would include extensive coordination with host and operating railroads, funding agencies and other key stakeholders. S C Birmingham Meridian Jackson- Montgo Mobile Alabama Texas U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Louisiana Pensacola Scheduled run time for northbound or eastbound service. 137#138Development of Route Service: Next Steps Develop conceptual service schedules ○ Schedule long-distance service (one train a day in each direction) ○ Serve those MSA pairs that have the highest volume of trips during daytime hours (5 a.m. - 11 p.m.) ○ Support connections between existing routes and preferred routes for key markets Conceptual service schedules will inform: o Cost estimating (capital and operating & maintenance costs) ○ Elements of the public benefits analysis (number of new origin-destination pairs, travel time savings on the network, jobs and earnings supported by operations/construction) ○ Travel demand estimating U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 138 SERVICE STUDY#139DEVELOPMENT OF CAPITAL AND OPERATING & MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATES U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 139 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#140CAPITAL COST ESTIMATING U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 140 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#141Capital Cost Estimating for Passenger Specific Projects Provides high-level cost estimating to support early planning activities Includes 35% allocated contingency to address project risks Estimates Passenger- service specific project costs • Track upgrades • Stations • Maintenance facilities • Signalization and Positive Train Control (PTC) U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration . Rolling stock 141 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#142Capital Cost Methodology ■ FRA Budgeting Tool: Standard Cost Categories (SCC) SCC 10: Track Structures and Track •Upgrade track class 1, 2, or 3 to track class 4 • New track connections SCC 20: Stations and Terminals •New stations •New platforms SCC 30: Support Facilities: Yards, Shops, Admin. Bldgs. •New yard leads to access storage tracks •New maintenance facilities •New enroute servicing facilities SCC 50: Communications and Signaling •Signals & PTC for new track connections (crossovers and turnouts) •Signals & PTC for upgraded track SCC 70: Vehicles •Diesel locomotives •Baggage cars • Sleeper cars • Diner cars •Lounge cars (café/sightseer) . Single- and bi-level passenger cars •Service Planning SCC 80: Professional Services •Project Environmental/Survey •Conceptual & Preliminary Engineering • Final Design •Project Management U.S. Department of Transportation ⚫Construction Administration, ⚫Engineering Inspection Startup, Certification, Commissioning •Contract Administration •Insurance Federal Railroad Administration 142 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#143Passenger Rail Route Infrastructure ■ Track Considerations o Identify new track connections where necessary to connect the end-to-end route o Improve existing rail infrastructure to FRA Track Class 4 ✓ Identify existing track speed based on track classification and available data ✓ Upgrade track classification 1, 2, or 3 to track class 4 Signalization and PTC Considerations o Add signaling and PTC where missing to support FRA Track Class 4 passenger rail operations o Add PTC where existing signalization is sufficient to support passenger rail operations as required Passenger rail maximum speed Track Class 1: 15 miles per hour Track Class 2: 30 miles per hour Track Class 3: 60 miles per hour Track Class 4: 80 miles per hour U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 143 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#144Stations and Terminals Amtrak Station Types Large Station Large station building, transit connections, offices, restrooms Medium Station Station building, offices, restrooms Caretaker Station Station building, restrooms Shelter Station Sheltered waiting room U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Use Case . • • • • • • New large terminal stations Located at route endpoints Staffed stations with ticket office Includes crew base and enroute servicing Unstaffed station with ticketing machine Supports variability in long- distance train operations Not considered for preferred routes Supports a conservative. approach to cost estimating ■ Costs included for new stations not currently served by passenger rail ■ Station types may be adjusted to reflect the needs within the station area 144 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#145Support Facilities ■ Costs included for new terminal facilities, additional yard track, and enroute servicing New maintenance facilities at terminals of preferred routes where there is not an existing terminal facility Additional yard tracks at existing facilities Enroute servicing costs. Full maintenance facility at terminals of preferred routes Size based on the number of preferred routes served U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Food vender refill Based on the number of routes that could be served Daily inspection (engine and car) Potable water refill Waste water servicing Garbage pick up 145 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#146Capital Cost Estimate Outputs Capital Cost estimates will be reported as a range by FRA SCC for each of the preferred routes ■ The high-cost estimate includes an additional 30% unallocated contingency over and above the low-cost estimate to account for unforeseen circumstances that impact project delivery. ■ The values will represent high-level cost estimates to support early planning. ■ Substantial additional planning and analysis would be required for further refinement and accuracy. FRA SCC SCC 10: Track Structures & Track SCC 20: Stations and Terminals SCC 30: Support Facilities: Yards, Shops, Admin. Bldgs. SCC 50: Communications & Signaling SCC 70: Vehicles SCC 80: Professional Services Total U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 146 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#147OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATING U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 147 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#148Operating and Maintenance Cost Estimating ■ Provides high-level cost estimating to support early project planning Operating and maintenance (O&M) costs for marginal and fixed costs . Marginal Costs Costs vary by the level of service provided ⚫ Boardings •Locomotive Miles •Locomotive Trips •Coach, Food Service, Sleeper Car Hours •Passenger Car Trips •Non-Shared Staffed Stations • Train Hours •Train Miles • Locomotive Days • Passenger Car Days Fixed costs Costs that are static regardless of the level of service provided • General & Administrative (Except Sales & Marketing) •Non-Operating U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 148 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#149Operating and Maintenance Cost Methodology Based on Amtrak Performance Tracking statistics for fiscal year 2019 ▪ Identified 135 operating statistics addressing marginal and fixed O&M cost categories ■ Identified marginal O&M unit costs for existing long-distance routes by operating statistic Weighted average unit costs for existing long-distance routes applied to preferred routes with the same number of nights and days operated/week o Not including existing non-daily Cardinal or Sunset Limited routes, or Auto Train Existing fixed costs would remain unchanged U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 149 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#150O&M Cost Estimate Outputs ■ O&M cost estimates will be reported as a range for each of the preferred routes. ■ The low- and high-range of cost estimates reflect the variation in marginal unit costs by operating statistic of existing long-distance routes. ■ The values will represent high-level cost estimates to support early planning. ■ Substantial additional planning and analysis would be required for further refinement and accuracy. Type Marginal Cost Fixed Cost Total O&M Cost U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 150 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#151PRIORITIZATION AND IMPLEMENTATION FEEDBACK U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 151 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#152Prioritization Considerations Category Public and Rider Benefits Capital Cost Estimates O&M Cost Estimates Complexity in Development and Implementation Consistency with Intercity Passenger Rail Projects Examples Access to new markets Passenger rail travel time savings Jobs and earnings supported by operations/construction Expanding geographic coverage of the long-distance network Increasing number of passenger rail connections Total capital costs Capital costs per mile Operating cost by route mile Operating cost by population served Number of host and operating railroads Corridor ID selections for long-distance routes Benefit to state supported services U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#153Interactive Session - Prioritization Feedback What parameters are the most important to consider for prioritization? ■ Place the sticky dot on each "Category" that should be prioritized as we develop an implementation phasing plan. Please limit to 3 sticky dots. ■ Provide input on sticky notes for any other examples you think should be considered. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 153 SERVICE STUDY#154Timeframes of Implementation of Operations Development and Implementation Timeline for a Preferred Route 15 Year Timeline • Year 0-4: Project Planning • Year 4-8: Project Development • Year 8-14: Final Design and Construction • Year 15: Start of Operations Conceptual Timeframes for Implementation • Near-term: 2040 to 2050 • Mid-term: 2050 to 2060 • Long-term: 2060 + U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 154 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#155ONGOING LONG-DISTANCE COLLABORATION AND PLANNING U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 155 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#156Governance Feedback from Meeting Series 2 Participants were asked how FRA and Amtrak could coordinate with stakeholders about current and future long-distance services. ○ Themes for current and future service input included: Community and Rider Engagement: Increased awareness of services and related benefits; coordinated marketing with states and communities; local first/last mile connections; rider surveys; engagement with Tribal Nations, disability community, health care providers, higher education, and tourism/chambers of commerce ✓ Planning: Coordinated planning across states and corridor(s), including regional transportation plans and potential multimodal connections/hubs; schedules; station amenities ○ Potential models of governance bodies included: ✓ Congressionally-created bodies, such as SAIPRC and NECC; Interstate Rail Compacts, including SRC and MIPRC ✓ Others, including: SPRC, Associations (APTA, AASHTO, CTAA), and MPOS U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 156 SERVICE STUDY#157Ideas for Ongoing Long-Distance Collaboration FRA is considering ideas for a new Long-Distance Public Committee, which would likely need to be established by Congress ■ This committee could focus on ongoing feedback for current Amtrak long- distance service. ▪ This Long-Distance Public Committee could serve several functions, including: ○ Coordinating with Amtrak on policies for engagement / marketing with station communities and states ○ Developing annual customer service reports or passenger surveys ○ Serving as a forum for long-distance service policy discussions related to current service ■ Committee membership could potentially include states with long-distance service, Amtrak, FRA, and other long-distance-focused associations or groups. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 157 SERVICE STUDY#158Ideas for Ongoing Long-Distance Planning FRA is considering ideas for a recurring, high-level long-distance planning process, potentially updated approximately every five years, documenting: Existing long-distance service, trends and forecasts, as well as needs and opportunities o Proposed long-distance passenger rail programs and investments, as well as the status of previously proposed long-distance passenger rail plans, projects, or other programs ■ This process, led by FRA, could be similar to State Rail Plans or other comparable transportation investment plans, focusing on the status and needs of future Amtrak long-distance service, as well as needs for current service. Any new planning process would involve significant stakeholder engagement U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration FRA LONG-DISTANCE 158 SERVICE STUDY#159NEXT STEPS U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 159 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#160Next Steps for Stakeholders Encourage your communities and constituencies to review the meeting materials on the website ○ All presentations and summaries will be posted online after the completion of the meeting series ■ Submit any feedback on the topics and materials from this meeting via the project website by March 8 for inclusion in our analysis and report ○ Due to the breadth of the study, it may not be possible to respond to all feedback, but all feedback will be reviewed by the team and captured in our report U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 160 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#161Study Next Steps ■ Based on feedback received from this meeting and the other regions: ○ Identify preferred routes for near, mid and long-term implementation ■ For stakeholder meeting 4: ○ Show costs and public benefits of the preferred routes ○ Identify implementation schedules for the preferred routes ○ Present long-distance study recommended actions and discuss next steps ■ Post all meeting materials on the project website U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 161 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#162Long-Distance Service Study Engagement Schedule 01 02 Meeting 1 January-February 2023 Universe of Routes & Evaluation Factors U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Meeting 2 Summer 2023 Enhanced Network Route Development Meeting 3 Winter 2024 Route Identification 03 Meeting 4 Spring 2024 Recommended Actions 04 162 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY#163Stay Informed FRA Long-Distance Service Study Website: www.fralongdistancerailstudy.org Email: [email protected] AMTRAK 175 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration 163 FRA LONG-DISTANCE SERVICE STUDY