application for high-speed rail funds

8/9/2019 Application for high-speed rail funds

1/28

FY10

For

Se

Hi

App

requ

appl

refer

info

appl

App

dropuplo

(1)Conn

Stree2800

Prov

and t

N/A

(2)

Service Deve

FRA F 6180

vice D

h-Speed

icants inter

ired to sub

ication. Lis

ence the FY

mation abo

ication, plea

icants must

-down menading it into

ame the sub

ecticut Depart

t Address:Berlin Turnpi

ide the submi

itle(if differe

ist the name

opment Progr

.133 (07-09)

evelop

Intercity

sted in app

it this appli

and descri

10 Service

t applicatio

se contact t

use this for

s. SubmitGrantSolut

A.Pitting agenc

ment of Trans

e

ting agency

nt from Auth

s) of addition

am

ent P

Passeng

ying for fun

cation form

e any supp

Developme

n requireme

e Federal R

m by enteri

his completions.gov by

int ofApplicant

match

:

ortation

City:Newin

oint of Conta

rized Repre

al State(s) ap

ogram

r Rail (

ding under

and other re

rting docu

t Programs

nts. If you

ailroad Ad

g the requir

ed form, alo5:00 p.m. E

ontactust ensure th

s the inform

ton

ct (POC) na

entative):

lying (if appl

Applic

SIPR) P

he FY10 S

quired docu

entation su

Notice of F

have questi

inistration

ed informat

ng with anyDT on Aug

nd Appat the inform

ation provide

Provid

name a

James R

State:CT

e Submit

Submit

icable):

ation F

ogram

rvice Devel

ments as ou

bmitted in S

nding Avai

ns about th

(FRA) at H

ion in the gr

supportingst 6, 2010.

licant Iation provid

d on the SF-

the submitti

nd title:

edeker, Burea

Zip Code:06410

ing agency P

ing agency P

rm

opment Pro

tlined in Se

ection G.

lability (N

HSIPR pr

[email protected]

ay narrative

documentat

formatid in this sect

24 forms.

g agency Au

u Chief, Publi

Authorize860-594-2

Authorizejames.rede

C telephone

C email:

OMB

grams solici

tion H of th

pplicants s

FA) for mo

gram or thi

ov.

fields, chec

ion, electron

nion

horized Rep

Transportati

d Representa02

d [email protected]

:

No. 2130-058

Page

tation are

is

ould

re specific

k boxes, or

ically by

esentative

n

ive telephon

ive email:

4

1


2/28

FY10 Service Development Program OMB No. 2130-0584

Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page 2

B.Eligibility InformationComplete the following section to satisfy requirements for applicant eligibility.

(1) Select the appropriate box from the list below to identify applicant type. Eligible applicants are listed in Section 3.1 of theNOFA.State

AmtrakGroup of StatesAmtrak in cooperation with a State or States

If selecting one of the applicant types below, additional documentation is required to establish applicant eligibility. Please select theappropriate box and submit supporting documentation to demonstrate applicant eligibility, as described in Section 3.2 of the NOFA toGrantSolutions.gov and list the supporting documentation under Additional Information in Section G.2 of this application.

Interstate CompactPublic Agency established by one or more States

(2) Verify the status of eligibility documentation including the dates of issue and how documentation can be verified by FRA.Verify any completed EA or Final EIS document that demonstrates satisfaction of Service NEPA for the proposed ServiceDevelopment Program by indicating if documents are submitted through GrantSolutions.gov or referenced through a public activeURL. See Section 4.2.5 and Appendices 2.1 and 2.2 of the NOFA as references. Second-tier project NEPA documents forprojects within the program may also be included. A NEPA decision document (Record of Decision or Finding of No SignificantImpact) is not required for an application but must be issued by FRA prior to award of a construction grant. Any eligibilitydocuments should be listed in Section G.2 of this application.

Service Development Planning

Documentation

Date(mm/yyyy)

Describe How Documentation Can Be Verified (choose one

Submitted in GrantSolutions Web Link

Service Development Plan 08/2010

Service NEPA Documents

Documentation

Date(mm/yyyy)



Final Environmental Assessment (EA) mm/yyyy

Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 07/2010

FRA Decision Documents for Service Development Programs

Documentation

Date(mm/yyyy)



Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) mm/yyyy

Record of Decision (ROD) mm/yyyy

Documentation (select from the list of choices)Date

(mm/yyyy)



Categorical Exclusion Documentation (worksheet) mm/yyyy




3/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page 3









4/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page 4

C.Corridor Service OverviewRespond to the following questions to help put this application into the context of

the long-term vision and related work for the HSIPR corridor service.

(1) Provide a brief narrative explaining how this Service Development Program relates to the long-term vision of the HSIPRcorridor.

CT-NHHS Corridor - Intercity HSR Program Narrative

This project proposes the reinstallation of double track and station improvements on the Springfield Line between New Haven, CT andSpringfield, MA. These proposed rail infrastructure improvements are one phase of a set of inter-related projects that will ultimatelyresult in the development of intercity high-speed passenger rail service throughout New England. The Vision for the New EnglandHigh-Speed and Intercity Rail Network collectively developed by the Departments of Transportation in the six New England Statesrecognizes the importance of double track on the Springfield Line in order to provide the foundation for the larger rail network.

Improvements to this corridor have been recognized as a key component in meeting the goals of improving and sustaining the regionaleconomic viability and improving regional livability.

This corridor is utilized for both passenger and freight service over a 62 mile route. Passenger station stops on the existing route are inNew Haven, Wallingford. Meriden, Berlin, Hartford, Windsor, Windsor Locks and Springfield MA. The potential for conflict betweenfreight and passenger services in the corridor impacts the ability of freight operators to provide delivery services to local industry. Thepurpose of this project is to relive congestion through an increase in track capacity allowing for growth in both passenger and freightvolumes, reduce travel times and improve on time performance. The States of Connecticut and Massachusetts are in the planning stageto establish a passenger service on the Springfield Line which will also benefit from the proposed improvements. Without increasedtrack capacity, expansion of HSR, growth of freight volumes and initiation of commuter service will not be possible. In addition, thiscorridor is part of the Strategic Rail Corridor Network (STACNET). Any capacity improvements will enhance the ability of thiscorridor to support the Railroads for National Defense Program.

Amtrak recently upgraded the entire existing track through a production tie (replacement) and surface maintenance program. Through Track 1a grant, 10.5 miles of double track will be reinstalled on the Springfield line between Meriden, CT and Newington, CT in thenext two years. This service development program application seeks to continue the program of reinstalling double track on theexisting Amtrak owned rail bed and make additional infrastructure improvements necessary to support the program.

The States of Connecticut proposes $480 million in total for capital funding for the following improvements:

Increase track capacity through the reinstallation of approximately 24.5 miles of double track on existing single track sections

Installation of approximately 5 miles of new sidings

Installation of 12 interlockings

Installation of signaling and control systems which meet the requirements of the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008

Rehabilitation of bridges and culverts

Improvements to 38 grade crossing warning devices

Improvements to the following stations: New Haven State Street, Wallingford, Meriden, Berlin, Windsor and Windsor Locks.Improvements will consist of 500 long high level platforms, up and over pedestrian structures, parking capacity improvements andstation amenities.

Layover and maintenance facility improvements at the Springfield, MA station.

These improvements will expand travel options between the some of the largest cities in Connecticut and Massachusetts; increase the


5/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page 5

operating efficiency for both passenger rail and freight in the area and further the goal of New England wide intercity HSR. The nearterm plan, which has independent utility, is to provide increased frequency of service and reduce travel time for rail travelers utilizingthe New Haven to Springfield corridor through the improvements proposed in this application. The long term plan is to connect thisgeographic section of the High Speed Rail corridor with the geographic sections running from New York City to New Haven, CT,Springfield, MA to Boston, MA and Springfield, MA to Montreal, Canada. The service will be operated by Amtrak and couldultimately consist of fully electrified service between New York City and Springfield, MA.

The State of Vermont has been awarded $52 million in ARRA Track 1a funding to make track, roadbed and bridge improvementsalong the current route of the Amtrak Vermonter Service. The State of Massachusetts has been awarded $ 70 million in Track 2 ARRAfunding to make improvements to the Knowledge Corridor rail line along the Connecticut River between Springfield, MA andVermont. These improvements, when combined with the on-going and proposed improvements on the Springfield Line, will lay astrong foundation to complete the infrastructure necessary to establish northeast regional HSR intercity service.

A Service NEPA for Springfield Line corridor and the other geographic sections listed above has been completed and is submitted aspart of this application. The entire 62 mile NHHS corridor has been analyzed and a Draft Environmental Assessment for theSpringfield Line Service is under development. These documents will provide a solid underpinning to meet Project NEPArequirements for construction of this project along with other future projects in the corridor.

The proposed improvements will improve operational efficiency, increase on-time performance and attract new riders into the system.The result will be a reduction in highway traffic congestion, reduction in carbon emissions and an improvement in air quality.

This project is estimated to create over 8,000 total job-years in the study area and over 12,000 total jobs at the national level asdiscussed in Section E of this application. In addition, Transit Oriented Development opportunities will be enhanced at each stationstop along the line, creating additional jobs and economic development activity. A number of communities are activly working on TODimprovements near the train stations in this study area.

(2) List other HSIPR projects or activities related to this Service Development Program application. This includes any pendingor selected planning, PE/NEPA, FD/Construction, and other Service Development Program activities or projects. The purpose of

this list is to identify overlapping or complementary applications, programs, or projects. Click on the drop-down menu to selectthe FRA solicitation and to indicate if the project was previously selected.

Project, Activity, or ServiceDevelopment Program Name1

FRASolicitation

Federal FundingRequest

(in thousands of dollars) Status

Does This ProjectInclude Activities Tha

Overlap with AnyProjects Included in

This ServiceDevelopment Plan

Application?

1 CT-NHHS Corridor-1a Track 1a $ 41,105,500.00 Awarded Yes

2 Track 1a $ Announcement Pending Yes






1Please detail each activity for which HSIPR funding is being requested, or which is directly related to the Corridor Service. For example, if a related Track 1a Project application was alreadysubmitted, that application should be separately listed below. If the project covered by that same 1a application is also being submitted as an element of a Track 2 Program, indicate theprogram when listing the project.


6/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page 6





12 Track 1a $ Announcement Pending Yes13 Track 1a $ Announcement Pending Yes







7/28

FY 2010 Service Development Programs OMB No. 2130-0583

Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page7

D.Executive SummaryAnswer the following questions about the proposed program.

(1) Provide a Service Development Program name. The Service Development Program name must consist of the followingelements, each separated by a hyphen: (1) the State abbreviation; (2) the route or corridor name; and (3) a Service Development

Program descriptor that will concisely identify the programs focus (e.g., HI-Fast Corridor-Main Stem).

CT-NHHS Corridor-Intercity HSR

(2) Indicate the appropriate corridor name where the Service Development Program is located and identify the start and endpoints as well as major integral cities along the route.

NHHS Corridor. New Haven, CT to Springfield, MA are the termini (62 miles). Cities along the route include: Hartford, CT;Wallingford, CT, Meriden, CT; Berlin, CT; Windsor,CT; and Windsor Locks, CT (With connection to Bradley InternationalAirport).

(3) Indicate the anticipated duration, in months, for this Service Development Program (e.g., 36).Number of Months: 99

(4) Indicate the anticipated funding information for the Service Development Program below. This information must match theSF-424 documents, and dollar figures must be rounded to the nearest whole dollar. When the non-Federal match percentage iscalculated, it must meet or exceed 20 percent of the total project cost.

Federal Funding Request Non-Federal Match Amount Total Project Cost Non-Federal MatchPercentage of Total

$ 220,000,165 $ 259,177,751 $ 479,177,916 54 %

(5) Indicate the source, amount, and percentage of matching funds for the Service Development Program provided in SectionC.4. Identify supporting documentation that will allow FRA to verify the funding source. Click on the prepopulated fields toselect the appropriate response from the list of choices. Also, list the percentage of the total project cost represented by each non-Federal funding source.

Non-Federal Funding Sources

New orExistingFundingSource?

Status ofFunding2

Type ofFunds

DollarAmount

% of TotalProject

Cost

Describe Any SupportingDocumentation to Help FRA

Verify Funding Source

State of CT Bonding New Committed Cash $260,000,000

54 % Bond hearing for 08/11/10 tocommit funds for this specificproject.

New Committed Cash $ %



2Reference Notes: The following categories and definitions are applied to funding sources:Committed: Committed sources are programmed capital funds that have all the necessary approvals (e.g., statutory authority) to be used to fund the proposed project without any additionalaction. These capital funds have been formally programmed in the State Rail Plan and/or any related local, regional, or state capital investment program or appropriation guidance. Examplesinclude dedicated or approved tax revenues, state capital grants that have been approved by all required legislative bodies, cash reserves that have been dedicated to the proposed project, andadditional debt capacity that requires no further approvals and has been dedicated by the sponsoring agency to the proposed project.

Budgeted: This category is for funds that have been budgeted and/or programmed for use on the proposed project but remain uncommitted (i.e., the funds have not yet received statutoryapproval). Examples include debt financing in an agency-adopted capital investment program that has yet to be committed in the near future. Funds will be classified as budgeted whenavailable funding cannot be committed until the grant is executed or due to the local practices outside of the project sponsors control (e.g., the project development schedule extends beyond theState Rail Program period).

Planned: This category is for funds that are identified and have a reasonable chance of being committed, but are neither committed nor budgeted. Examples include proposed sources thatrequire a scheduled referendum, requests for state/local capital grants, and proposed debt financing that has not yet been adopted in the agency's capital investment program.


8/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page8


(6) Provide a project abstract outlining the Service Development Program. Briefly summarize the program in 4-6 sentences.Capture the milestones, outcomes, and anticipated benefits that will result from implementing the Service Development Program.

The Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT), in partnership with the Massachusetts Department of Transportation

(MassDOT) and Amtrak, is proposing to make improvements in the corridor which extends from New Haven, CT through Hartford,CT to Springfield, MA (NHHS Corridor) for the purpose of establishing High Speed Intercity Rail Service. These proposed railinfrastructure improvements are one phase of a set of inter-related projects that will ultimately result in the development of intercityhigh-speed passenger rail service throughout New England. CTDOT has been working closely with the Vermont and MassachusettsDepartments of Transportation to extend HSR service north to Montreal, Canada and from Springfield to Boston.

(7) Provide a Service Development Program narrative. Include the elements below when describing the main features andcharacteristics of the Service Development Program. Please limit the response to 12,000 characters.

How this Service Development Program is organized into phases or groups of component projects.3 Include a description ofthe activities and the measurable outcomes of each phase or group of activities;

The location(s) of the Service Development Programs component projects including name of rail line(s), State(s), andrelevant jurisdiction(s) (include a map in supporting documentation);

Substantive activities of the Service Development Program (e.g., specific improvements intended); Service(s) that would benefit from the Service Development Program, the stations that would be served, and the State(s)

where the service operates;

Anticipated service design of the corridor or route with specific attention to any important changes that the ServiceDevelopment Program would bring to the fleet plan, schedules, classes of service, fare policies, service quality standards, traiand station amenities, etc.;

How the Service Development Program was identified through a planning process and how the Service Development Programis consistent with an overall plan for developing high-speed or intercity passenger rail service, such as a State Rail Plan orplans of local/regional metrpolitan planning organizations;

How the Service Development Program will fulfill a specific purpose and need in a cost-effective manner; Any use of new or innovative technologies; Any use of railroad assets or rights-of-way, and potential use of public lands and property; Other rail services, such as commuter rail and freight rail that will make use of, or otherwise be affected by, the Service

Development Program; and Any PE/NEPAactivities to be undertaken as part of the Service Development Program, including but not limited to design

studies and resulting program documents, the approach to agency and public involvement, permitting actions, and other keyactivities and objectives of this PE/NEPA work.

Service Development Plan Organization:

Service Development Plan is organized as a single phase that will provide infrastructure improvements to increase one-wayintercity trains from 12 to 24 per day, add 21 one-way commuter trains per day, increase the number of stations served by railfrom 8 to 13, and increase the freight volume by 1.75% compounded annually while maintaining passenger trip time andmeeting requirements for passenger on-time performance at 90%.

Project Location:

The location of the project is Amtraks Springfield Line, about 62 miles long between New Haven, CT and Springfield, MA.Maps of the New England Study Area and Springfield Line and the Proposed Track Configuration Map-Springfield Lineare included in the supporting documentation. The following railroads operate on the line:

Amtrak: Passenger service between New Haven and Springfield and NEC passenger service from New Haven to MillRiver

3The work to complete Service Development Programs can be organized into individual phases. Phases should produce meaningful and measurable service outcomes (e.g., trip time,frequency, or operational reliability) upon completion. Each phase is made up of one or more component projects that are necessary to deliver the outcome(s).


9/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page9

Metro-North: From New Haven to State Street on Shore Line East

Freight railroads under agreements with Amtrak: Connecticut Southern Railroad, CSX Transportation, Providenceand Worcester RR, and Pan Am serving industrial customers in Connecticut. Specific portions of the line served by eachfreight railroad are identified in the SDP.

Substantive activities:

Substantive activities of the Service Development Plan intended to improve the Springfield Line are those that are necessary toprovide the infrastructure to increase passenger service as described in the SDP while maintaining the on time performance ofthe freight operators. The improvements to support this service include:

Reinstall double track at all single track locations except the Hartford Viaduct and the Connecticut River Bridge.

Install new sidings at Berlin and north of Hartford.

Install layover and light maintenance tracks east of Springfield Station.

Improve/relocate stations at New Haven State Street, Wallingford, Meriden, Berlin, Windsor, and Windsor Locks.

Improve grade crossings including establishing quiet zones, as requested by local communities.

Signal Improvements including positive train control.

This Project does not include track and infrastructure improvement included in Project 1 CTDOTs Track 1A fundingand NEPA work which is currently under separate evaluation.

Additional necessary improvements that represent deferred maintenance and mandated signal improvements required tomaintain existing passenger and freight operations include:

Improve/repair all structures and culverts except the Hartford viaduct and the Connecticut River Bridge.

Positive train control.

Services That Would Benefit:

Services that would benefit from this plan includes existing passenger service between Washington, DC through New YorkCity, New Haven, CT, Hartford, CT, Springfield, MA and north as far as St. Albans, VT. Passengers using commuter servicesouth of New Haven would benefit by having convenient cross platform transfers in New Haven. Stations in the improvement

area (New Haven to Springfield) are at New Haven State Street, Wallingford, Meriden, Berlin, Windsor, and Windsor Locks.New Haven Union Station, Hartford Union Station, and Springfield Union Station are not included in this SDP and would beimproved under separate future projects.

Anticipated Service Design:

Anticipated service design will improve Amtraks current passenger service which is limited to 12 one- way trips per dayfrom New Haven to Springfield. After the improvements are made, regional/intercity class of service will increase to 24 one-way intercity trains per day, a new commuter class of service will add 21 one-way commuter trains per day, increase thenumber of stations served by rail from 8 to 13, and increase the freight volume by 1.75% compounded annually whilemaintaining passenger trip time and meeting requirements for passenger on-time performance at 90%. The service would addabout 9 train sets, the make-up of each train set is included in the SDP based on the class of train; the rolling stock will beprovided outside of this application. The proposed operating schedule provided in the SDP provides the following benefits toriders:

Cross-platform transfers from New York City to Springfield

Bi-directional, 30-minute peak hour service and robust mid-day service on the Springfield Line.

To operate the improved passenger service requires infrastructure improvements as follows:

o Construction of a waiting area at the Windsor Locks station with a coordinated shuttle bus transfer connection toBradley International Airport;

o Modifications to existing stations on the Springfield Line to provide high-level platforms and additional parking;

o Improving local bus routes to provide connecting service to the stations.

A unified reduced fare structure is proposed condidered in the ridership forecast. This fare structure will allow


10/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page10

passengers to use one fare instrument for various trips.

Program Identification:

The program was identified through a multi-state planning process. The Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT),in partnership with the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) and Amtrak, is proposing to makeimprovements in the corridor which extends from New Haven, CT through Hartford, CT to Springfield, MA (NHHS Corridor)

for the purpose of establishing High Speed Intercity Rail Service. These proposed rail infrastructure improvements are onephase of a set of inter-related projects that will ultimately result in the development of intercity high-speed passenger railservice throughout New England. CTDOT has been working closely with the Vermont and Massachusetts Departments ofTransportation to extend HSR service north to Montreal, Canada and from Springfield to Boston.

The NHHS Corridor, which has independent utility, will connect with Amtraks Boston, MA to Washington, DC NortheastCorridor in New Haven. In addition to Connecticut and Massachusetts, the project improvements discussed in this ServiceDevelopment Plan will benefit the New England Rail network system and ultimately promote the national goal of seamlesslylinking our communities nationwide with a fully integrated rail and transportation network.

Cost Effective Approach:

The project takes advantage of the robust NEC service at New Haven by providing cross-platform transfers with that service.

This program, therefore, for a small incremental amount, opens up the entire NEC service to riders north of New Haven. Thisprogram takes full advantage of the extraordinary amount of existing infrastructure, right of way, and station locations thatalready exist on the Springfield Line. Future opportunities are present to extend robust passenger service north and east ofSpringfield by continuing to take full advantage of existing rail infrastructure. And finally, the long term vision of potentialelectrification of the Springfield Line is fully adaptable to all of the improvements included in this program.

Right of Way and Public Land Usage:

The project uses existing railroad right of way and property owned by CTDOT as much as possible. All of the track and mostof the station work is projected to use property already owned by Amtrak. Some additional property will have to be purchasedfor new stations and some property will be required for additional parking space for reconstructed stations. All land use isbeing coordinated with the local community development plans.

Other Rail Services:

Connecticut Southern Railroad, CSX Transportation, Providence and Worcester RR, and Pan Am will continue servingindustrial customers in Connecticut. Their service is programmed to increase at 1.75% compounded annually. The freightrailroads service schedule is not expected to change significantly from their current operation which is necessary to meet theircustomers needs. New commuter service between New Haven, CT and Springfield, MA will be introduced as part of thisprogram. The new commuter service will have the benefit of connecting at New Haven with existing Metro North service outof New York City, thereby leveraging the cost effectiveness and desirability of this new service.

PE/NEPA Activities to be Undertaken

The implementation of this project will require Preliminary Engineering and a NEPA document. CTDOT has already preparedand distributed a Service NEPA Environmental Review Document for High Speed, Intercity, and Regional Rail Service inNew England. CTDOT has already completed significant environmental study for the Springfield Line with the expectation of

adding new stations and replacing the double track. It is anticipated that an Environmental Assessment will be completed alongwith Preliminary Engineering as the next steps in this project. A schedule for the follow on work is included in the SDP.

(8) Indicate the type of expected capital investments included in the Service Development Program. Check all that apply.New rail linesAdditional main-line tracksStructures (bridges, tunnels, etc.)Track rehabilitationMajor interlockings

Rolling stock refurbishmentsRolling stock acquisitionSupport facilities (yards, shops, administrative buildings)Grade crossing improvementsElectric traction


11/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page11

Station(s)Communication, signaling, and control

Other (please describe):


12/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page12

(9) Indicate the anticipated service objectives for the Service Development Program for which you are applying. Check all thaapply.

Additional service frequenciesImproved on-time performance of passenger trainsReroute existing serviceNew service on existing IPR route

Increases in ridership

Increases in operational reliabilityNew service on new routeService quality improvementsIncreased average speeds/shorter trip times

Other (please describe):

Briefly clarify your response(s) if needed:

(10)If appropriate, subdivide the Service Development Program into phases (groups of projects) and identify each phase onseparate rows of the table.4 Detail the service benefits to be realized after completion of each phase on the corresponding row.At the bottom of the table, provide the anticipated service benefits upon completion of the entire Service Development Program.Use as many rows as necessary; if the Service Development Program cannot be subdivided, summarize the information for theentire Service Development Program in the first row.

Phase Title5

Frequencies6Scheduled Trip

Time(in minutes)

AverageSpeed (mph)

Top Speed(mph)

Reliability Provide Either On-Time Performance

Percentage or DelayMinutes

Current Future Current Future Current Future Current Future Current Future

I. New Haven-Springfield IntercityHSR Service (Note: CurrentVermonter service stops at 5interim stations. Proposedintercity service will stop at 3interim stations.)

1 4 98 69 39 56 80 110 .75 1.5

II.

III.

IV.

V.

VI.VII.

IIX

Provide the Cumulative Service Outcome(Aggregate Benefits of all Phases)

1 4 98 69 38 54 80 110 .75 1.5

4The work to complete Service Development Programs can be organized into individual phases. Each phase should produce meaningful and measurable service outcomes (e.g., trip time,

frequency, and/or operational reliability) upon completion. Each phase is made up of one or more component projects that are necessary to deliver the outcome(s).

5Title should be a brief descriptive name for the phase.6Frequency is measured in daily one-way train operations. One daily round-trip operation should be counted as two daily one-way train operations.


13/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page13

(11)Provide information on the component projects within each phase of the Service Development Program identified inSection D.10 above. For each phase, please list all the projects in the sequence they will be completed. This section is unlocked-the applicant can add rows as needed for additional projects and phases.

PHASE I. New Haven-Springfield Intercity HSRService

Project Name Short Project Description

Project Cost

(in thousands ofdollars)

1 CT-NHHS Corridor Intercity HighSpeed Rail

Provide double-track, station and other infrastructureimprovements to previde more frequent reliable intercitypassenger service between New Haven, CT and Springfield,MA.

$ 479,178

2 $ 000

3 $ 000

4 $ 000

Phase I. Total Cost $ 479,178

PHASE II. [Insert Title from Section D.10]

1 $ 000

2 $ 000

3 $ 000

4 $ 000

5 $ 000

Phase II. Total Cost $ 000

PHASE III. [Insert Title from Section D.10]

1 $ 000

2 $ 000

3 $ 000

4 $ 000

Phase III. Total Cost $ 000

PHASE IV. [Insert Title from Section D.10]

1 $ 000

2 $ 000

3 $ 000

4 $ 000

Phase IV. Total Cost $ 000


14/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page14

E.Response to Evaluation CriteriaProvide a separate response to the following evaluation criteria to demonstratehow the proposed Service Development Program will achieve each criterion.

(1a) Potential Transportation Benefits

Demonstrate the potential of the proposed Service Development Program investment to achieve transportation benefits in acost-effective manner:

Supporting the development of intercity high-speed rail service; Generating improvements to existing high-speed and intercity passenger rail service, as reflected by estimated increases in

ridership (as measured in passenger miles), increases in operational reliability (as measured in reductions in delays),reductions in trip times, additional service frequencies to meet anticipated or existing demand, and other related factors;

Generating cross-modal benefits, including anticipated favorable impacts on air or highway traffic congestion, capacity, orsafety, and cost avoidance or deferral of planned investments in aviation and highway systems;

Creating an integrated intercity passenger rail network, including integration with existing intercity passenger rail services,allowance for and support of future network expansion, and promotion of technical interoperability and standardization(including standardizing operations, equipment, and signaling);

Encouragement of intermodal connectivity and integration through provision of direct, efficient transfers among intercitytransportation and local transit networks at train stations, including connections at airports, bus terminals, subway stations,ferry ports, and other modes of transportation;

Enhancing intercity travel options; Ensuring a state of good repair of key intercity passenger rail assets; Promoting standardized equipment (or rolling stock), signaling, communications, and power; Improved freight or commuter rail operations in relation to proportional cost-sharing (including donated property) by other

benefiting rail users;

Equitable financial participation in the project's financing, including, but not limited to, consideration of donated propertyinterests or services; financial contributions by freight and commuter rail carriers commensurate with the benefit expected totheir operations; and financial commitments from host railroads, non-Federal governmental entities, nongovernmental entitiesand others;

Encouragement of the implementation of positive train control (PTC) technologies (with the understanding that 49 U.S.C.20147 requires all Class I railroads and entities that provide regularly scheduled intercity or commuter rail passenger services

to fully institute interoperable PTC systems by December 31, 2015); and Incorporating private investment in the financing of capital projects or service operations.

Investment in improvements on the NHHS Corridor is anticipated to create substantial transportation,economic/job creation and environmental benefits in both Connecticut and Massachusetts.

One of the most important aspects of this corridor program is the highly cost effective, methodical, and incrementalincrease this project provides toward the creation of a nationally integrated High Speed and Intercity Passenger Railnetwork. The infrastructure and service improvements to the NHHS Corridor will increase operating speed limits to110 mph on segments of the project; increase the level of passenger service in one of the most densely populatedareas of the country, providing convenient connections to the largest cities in the region. Congestion on all interstatehighways in the region has been a problem for decades. These conditions will continue to deteriorate unless safe andconvenient alternatives, such as the NHHS Corridor rail service, are made available to travelers.

The service frequency, schedule, fare structure, and connectivity improvements are projected to increaseannual ridership from 52 million passenger miles to 133 million passenger miles.

The infrastructure improvements to accommodate this significant increase in train operations will maintain the currenthigh level of on-time performance while maintaining the on-time performance of the growing freight service.

Comparing the No-Build and Build Cases; the delays are about equal while the number of passenger train trips areincreased from 12 to 45, stations are increased from 8 to 13, and freight volume is increased 1-% compoundedannually .


15/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page15

The planned infrastructure improvements include an express bus connection between the rail station andBradley International Airport. Similarly, the rail stations are located for convenient access to/from highways. As such,the travel demand model projects a modal diversion of about 780,000 trips from auto and air to rail. This diversionbrings the attendant benefits of reductions in VMT and emissions. The diversion is not adequate to recommenddeferral of other planned transportation projects at this time.

The C-1 2020 Service Development Plan integrates the commuter service schedule with intercity rail andcommuter connections to New York City. All stations and infrastructure will be designed to handle all services (high-speed, intercity, regional, commuter, and freight). Because of these conditions it is expected that the service willattract new riders looking to avoid adverse driving conditions and reduce personal vehicle operating costs. The NHHSCorridor Service will provide intermodal connections at all station stops along the corridor. Dedicated bus service willconnect the Windsor Locks station with Bradley Airport. All stations will have connections with local bus service.

To further encourage intermodal connectivity, the fare structure for all passenger rail modes will becoordinated, schedule times are coordinated in New Haven for cross-platform transfers, and local transit scheduleswill be adjusted to meet train schedules.

Existing bridges, culverts, and track systems are being upgraded in the course of the project. All stations arebeing reconstructed for intercity as well as commuter service except for New Haven, Hartford, and Springfield; these

are being reconstructed under separate programs. Similarly, the Connecticut River Bridge will be upgraded under aseparate program.

The long term vision includes potential electrification of the NHHS Corridor to allow a seamless connectionto the electrified Northeast corridor. Infrastructure improvements to include rehabilitation or replacement of theConnecticut River Bridge and the Hartford Viaduct to allow for additional track capacity. Service improvements willinclude reduced travel times, improvements in on time performance and increase the attractiveness of rail travelproviding one-seat rides between Washington, DC, New York City, and Springfield with completely standardizedrolling stock and signal/communications/power systems.

The infrastructure improvements to increase one-way intercity trains from 12 to 24 per day will alsoaccommodate 21 one-way commuter trains per day, and increase the freight volume by 1.75% compounded annuallywhile maintaining passenger trip time and meeting requirements for passenger on-time performance at 90%. The total

cost of the project is estimated to be $480 million. The State of Connecticut is committed improving rail service onthe NHHS Corridor and has agreed to provide funding in the amount of $260 million; over 50% of the total projectcost.

Amtrak is permitting the use of its right-of-way for the project.

Positive Train Control is included in the cost of the project.

Cities and towns in the region have already, through their own resources, developed plans that include rail.Improvements not necessary for the rail project would be financially supported through local resources. The communitiesrecognize that the addition of increased public transportation and the land used for it are generally consistent with communitydevelopment plans and would be beneficial to the economic environment of the cities and towns.

(1b) Other Public Benefits

Describe the potential and actual contributions the proposed Service Development Program would make toward achievingtransportation benefits in a cost-effective manner:

Environmental quality and energy efficiency and reduction in dependence on foreign oil, including use of renewable energysources, energy savings from traffic diversions from other modes, employment of green building and manufacturing methodsreductions in key emissions types, and the purchase and use of environmentally sensitive, fuel-efficient, and cost-effectivepassenger rail equipment;

Promoting interconnected livable communities, including complementing local or state efforts to concentrate higher-density,mixed-use, development in areas proximate to multi-modal transportation options (including intercity passenger rail stations)


16/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page16

Improving historic transportation facilities; and Creating jobs and stimulating the economy. Although this solicitation is not funded by the Recovery Act, these goals remain

top priority of this Administration. Therefore, Service Development Program applications will be evaluated on the extent towhich the project is expected to quickly create and preserve jobs and stimulate rapid increases in economic activity,particularly jobs and activity that benefit economically distressed areas, as defined by section 301 of the Public Works andEconomic Development Act of 1965, as amended (42 U.S.C. 3161) (Economically Distressed Areas).

Environmental Quality

The improvement in environmental quality is primarily a result of diversion of travelers from automobiles to rail. Thetravel demand model projects that this diversion will result in a 92.65 Million mile reduction in VMT with theattendant reduction in fuel and carbon emissions. The proposed service reduces fuel consumption and dependence onforeign oil. The project has a 32,000 metric ton net decrease in carbon emissions.

The long term vision for possible electrification of the corridor would further reduce fossil fuel consumption,dependence on foreign oil, and carbon emissions.

Promoting Interconnected Livable Communities

Introduction - The corridor is identified as a key component in meeting the goals of improving and sustaining regionaleconomic viability and improving regional livability in Connecticut and the project is recognized by the ConnecticutTransportation Strategy Board as an important step in implementing more robust Commuter, Intercity Passenger, andHigh Speed regional Rail service.

Economic Impacts on Land Usage - The NHHS Corridor program will provide economic recovery benefits to theStates of Connecticut and Massachusetts. The corridor passes through New Haven and Hartford, two of the mosteconomically distressed communities in the country. Development of new stations and increasing ridership at existingstations may provide communities with transit oriented development (TOD) opportunities. While ridership numbersalone may not generate sufficient demand to result in development, when combined with community initiatives theywill serve to foster economic growth. Mixed-use residential is a proven TOD mix that enhances public transportationridership and encourages urban living in a green setting by discouraging car use and creating dense livingenvironments. Many communities along the line have initiated their own development plans in proximity to thestations.

There are a significant number of positive economic impacts that the development of TODs at stations on the NHHSCorridor intercity service, including, but not limited to:

Increase the potential use of public transportation including use of trains and buses Reduction of overall environmental impacts due to the encouragement of less car usage and more publictransportation usage. Empty-nester housing, a popular TOD component, a has limited impact on the school systemlocally Construction of a development would cost in the millions of dollars which would create substantial sales inbuilding materials and local construction jobs. New development would increase the local property tax grand list. Reliable intercity passenger rail service will facilitate communities ability to retain and attract businesses.

The proposed corridor improvements will have the most potential for beneficial economic impact on the cities andtown where stations occur.

In general, the station locations are urban and suburban. Although the projected ridership volume is not anticipated tobe great enough to support a significant increase in development at any single station based on ridership alone, thereare several reasons why the new NHHS Corridor service can economically beneficial to the communities withoutcausing adverse impacts:

There is underutilized land a most station locations. The desire for more walkable communities is a growing trend, consistent with transit, and encourages mixed-


17/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page17

use development. The modest increase in traffic volume at the stations, as a result of the car-to-train modal split, does notdegrade Levels of Service or is easily mitigated. Cities and towns already have development plans that include transit. The addition of increased transit andthe land used for transit are generally consistent with community development plans and would be beneficial to theeconomic environment of the cities and towns.

The following table summarizes the economic environment and potential development for each station.

Summary of Economic Environment and Potential Development

REAL ESTATE MARKETPotential Potential Impacts on Constraints to

STATION Existing Changes Development Key Properties Development

New Haven Low income In accordance In accordance In accordance with Existing highway andUnion housing, with New with New Haven New Haven TOD rail transportation

commercial Haven TOD TOD initiative initiative facilities and limitedand retail initiative underutilized property

New Haven Multi family In accordance In accordance Development to Existing highway andState Street residential, with New with New Haven multi family rail transportation

commercial, Haven development residential in a facilities and limitedand retail development plans walkable underutilized property

plans neighborhood

Meriden Multi family Town Green In accordance In accordance with Existing Town Greenresidential, plan would with Meriden Meriden plan reservescommercial, increase development development plans significant portion forand retail commercial plans and, in time, green space. Ongoing

and residential redevelopment of businesses andsites to mixed use residences are notresidential distressed.

Berlin Residential Conversion of Conversion of Conversion of Housing incentive zoneand underutilized underutilized underutilized requires remediationcommercial industrial to industrial to industrial to which would add cost

commercial commercial and commercial and and the station is someand residential residential residential distance from the town

center.

Hartford Multi family In accordance In accordance In accordance with Existing highway and


18/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page18

residential, with Hartford with Hartford Hartford rail transportationcommercial, development development development plans facilities and the costand retail plans and COG plans and COG and COG bus transfer of developing

bus transfer bus transfer station underutilized propertystation station

Windsor Residential, Strengthen Increase in Increase in mixed use The high cost ofcivic, and retail existing usage mixed use residential as redeveloping well

residential as demand increases utilized property maydemand make redevelopmentincreases impractical in the near

term.

Windsor Locks Small amount The existing Mixed use Mixed use residential The existingof residential water residential farther away from wastewater treatmentexisting treatment farther away the station plant, transportationwastewater plant, from the station facilities, thetreatment transportation but it would not Connecticut River, veryplant, facilities, and be easily little underutilizedtransportation the walkable to the property, and the

facilities and Connecticut station. station is somethe River are not distance from the townConnecticut likely to center.River. change.

Improving Historic Transportation Facilities

One of the cross-cutting assumptions for this project is that all improvements would be made to existing rail corridorsand no new alignments are considered. The alternative follows an existing rail alignment that had, at times, been amulti-track facility providing both passenger and freight service. The existing stations are proposed to bereconstructed as close to their historical location as practical and repairs/improvements to all historic structures(bridges and stations) will be conducted in a manner consistent with environmental requirements.

Creating Jobs and Stimulating the Economy

Benefits to Environmental Justice Populations - There are a number of communities in the corridor with significantEnvironmental Justice populations. These communities include New Haven, Meriden, Hartford, and New Britain inConnecticut and Springfield in Massachusetts. Construction of the proposed improvements will have a positivebenefit on Environmental Justice populations in two ways:

1) There will be a significant number of construction jobs created that will likely be available to EnvironmentalJustice populations.2) The increased frequency of service will provide Environmental Justice populations dependent on transit for theirgeneral mobility or journey to work with improved transit services.

Economic Impact Analysis: Jobs and Economic Activity Generation - Injection of capital infrastructure spending,such as for the proposed Corridor, into the economy, whether regional or national, will lead to direct construction, andrelated professional services, jobs and economic activity, as well as indirect jobs supporting the suppliers of materialsand equipment. In turn, these direct and indirect jobs support additional jobs within the economy (induced impacts),all of which can generate a relatively quick boost to the regional economy, contributing to economic growth.Following the initial construction/capital investment activity, there will be ongoing operations and maintenanceexpenditures for the initially constructed facilities, equipment, and associated services. Operations and maintenancecontracts will include the hiring of employees and purchasing of supplies and services, which can be measured interms of economic impacts. Direct expenditures for operations and maintenance of the facilities and systems representdirect economic benefits, and give rise to multiplier effects for the estimation of the total impacts.


19/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page19

The following tables present the expenditure-based employment and economic activity (GDP/GRP), both direct andtotal, impacts pertaining to the construction (including professional services - engineering design) and operationsphases associated with this Application-related corridor improvements in the Corridor study area as well asnationwide. Overall, employment impacts are estimated to amount to 4,710 direct job-years in the study area or 5,500direct job- years nationwide over the 9-year analysis time horizon, or 8,090 total job-years in the study area and12,590 job-years for the nation as a whole over the 9-year time horizon. The operations-related job-years in 2019 willrecur in the same magnitude for each year thereafter (not presented within the tables), given the operations andmaintenance expenditures are assumed to remain constant into the future (in constant dollar terms).

Corridor Study Area (3-County)

Employment (Job-Years) Total HorizonExpenditure Category 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 TotalConstruction & EngineeringDirect Impact 70 200 330 520 580 530 520 250 110 3,110Total Impact 150 360 600 930 1,030 940 910 450 200 5,570Operations & MaintenanceDirect Impact 0 0 0 0 0 400 400 400 400 1,600Total Impact 0 0 0 0 0 630 630 630 630 2,520All Expenditure Categories

Direct Impact 70 200 330 520 580 930 920 650 510 4,710Total Impact 150 360 600 930 1,030 1,570 1,540 1,080 830 8,090

*notes: total = direct + indirect + induced; operations-related job-years continue past 2019 throughout theoperating time horizon; employment impacts are rounded to the nearest 10 job-years.

Economic Activity (GDP/GRP, in millions of 2010$) Time Horizon

Expenditure Category 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 TotalConstruction & EngineeringDirect Impact $5.27 $14.82 $ 25.01 $39.65 $44.64 $40.83 $39.77 $19.46 $ 8.68 $238.13Total Impact $11.26 $28.44 $ 46.77 $73.12 $81.22 $ 74.37 $72.11 $35.28 $15.81 $438.40Operations & MaintenanceDirect Impact $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25.68 $25.68 $25.68 $25.68 $102.70

Total Impact $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $44.81 $44.81 $44.81 $44.81 $179.24All Expenditure CategoriesDirect Impact $5.27 $14.82 $25.01 $39.65 $44.64 $66.50 $65.45 $ 45.13 $34.36 $340.83Total Impact $11.26 $28.44 $46.77 $73.12 $81.22 $119.17 $116.92 $80.09 $60.62 $617.63

*notes; total = direct + indirect + induced; operations-related impacts continue beyond 2019 throughout theoperating time horizon; the economic activty impact values are rounded to the nearest $1,000.

National-Level

Employment (Job-Years) Time Horizon

Expenditure Category 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 TotalConstruction & EngineeringDirect Impact 70 220 370 590 680 620 600 300 130 3,580Total Impact 220 560 930 1,460 1,620 1,490 1,440 710 320 8,750Operations & MaintenanceDirect Impact 0 0 0 0 0 480 480 480 480 1,920Total Impact 0 0 0 0 0 960 960 960 960 3,840All Expenditure CategoriesDirect Impact 70 220 370 590 680 1,100 1,080 780 610 5,500Total Impact 220 560 930 1,460 1,620 2,450 2,400 1,670 1,280 12,590

*notes: total = direct + indirect + induced; operations-related job-years continue beyond 2019 throughout the


20/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page20

operating time horizon; the employment impact are rounded to the nearest 10 job-years.

Economic Activity (GDP/GRP, in millions of 2010$0 Time Horizon

Expenditure Category 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 TotalConstruction & EngineeringDirect Impact $5.29 $14.25 $23.82 $37.56 $42.08 $38.50 $37.45 $18.32 $8.19 $225.46Total Impact $16.86 $42.42 $69.68 $108.86 $120.85 $110.65 $107.28 $52.49 $23.53 $652.62Operations & MaintenanceDirect Impact $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $24.27 $24.27 $24.27 $24.27 $97.10Total Impact $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $64.45 $64.45 $64.45 $64.45 $257.79All Expenditure CategoriesDirect Impact $5.29 $14.25 $23.82 $37.56 $42.08 $62.78 $61.72 $42.59 $32.46 $322.55Total Impact $16.86 $42.42 $69.68 $108.86 $120.85 $175.10 $171.73 $116.94 $87.98 $910.41

*notes: total = direct + indirect + induced; operations-related job-years continue beyond 2019 throughout theoperating time horizon; the economic activity impact values are rounded to the nearest $1,000.

These impact are expenditure (on design/engineering, construction, and operations) based only, and do not includeother impact types such as those related to travel efficiency savings or additional development in the Corridor thatwould also be expected to occur.

(2) Sustainability of BenefitsIdentify the likelihood of realizing the proposed Service Development Programs benefits, including:

The quality of a Financial Plan that analyzes the financial viability of the proposed rail service; The quality and reasonableness of revenue and operating and maintenance cost forecasts for the benefiting intercity passenger

rail service(s);

The availability of any required operating financial support, preferably from dedicated funding sources for the benefitingintercity passenger rail service(s);

The quality and adequacy of project identification and planning; The reasonableness of estimates for user and non-user benefits for the project; The reasonableness of the operating service plan, including its provisions for protecting the future quality of other services

sharing the facilities to be improved;

The comprehensiveness and sufficiency, at the time of application, of agreements with key partners (including the railroadoperating the intercity passenger rail service and infrastructure-owning railroads) that will be involved in the operation of thebenefiting intercity passenger rail service, including the commitment of any affected host-rail carrier to ensure the realizationof the anticipated benefits, preferably through a commitment by the affected host-rail carrier(s) to an enforceable on-timeperformance of passenger trains of 80 percent or greater;

The favorability of the comparison between the level of anticipated benefits and the amount of Federal funding requested; and The applicants contribution of a cost share greater than the required minimum of 20 percent.

Sustainability of Benefits

Projections of revenue and operating and maintenance cost forecasts for the benefiting intercity passenger railservices were prepared by financial managers of Amtrak. Amtrak also developed all the ridership projections aspresented in the Service development Plan by conservative standard methods as previously developed and proventhroughout the country. Amtrak as being the major provider of intercity passenger rail service throughout the US ismost qualified in developing these projections based on past proven experience. All projections involving ridership,revenue and operating and maintenance costs were sensitivity tested to determine the impact of a few key variables inthe analysis. These variables produced high and low ranges in the projected numbers to help establish medianprojections that were used in all forecasts in this application. All projections developed by Amtrak are consistent withthe Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA).The Connecticut Department of Transportation prepared a 2030 financial plan which fully demonstrates its capability


21/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page21

and capacity to support the funding for the ongoing operation and maintenance of the passenger rail service proposedfor this New Haven-Hartford-Springfield (NHHS) corridor. This analysis is based on the operating costs and revenueprovided by Amtrak. The details of this plan are contained in this application. The FRA should have a highconfidence level in the ability of CTDOT to deliver and maintain the NHHS rail investment along with the extensivearray of other services CTDOT delivers on a daily basis.In preparing this application the CTDOT and Amtrak invested a significant amount of time and effort in ensuring theoperational and financial success of this project. This project has been under study and development since 2003. Asignificant amount of preliminary engineering and environmental study has been undertaken by the project sponsorsand their consultants. The results of this study are contained in the environmental review documents and preliminaryengineering documents attached to this application. Some of the higher risk construction items, such as the new andmodified stations, were developed through preliminary engineering and environmental review to ensure adequateconstruction budgets were provided for in this application. Also a preliminary assessment of all the bridges wascompleted to determine the amount of rehabilitation needed to upgrade them for the proposed double tracking andnew service.The DOTs consultant on the project completed a detailed risk analysis on the project costs using a Monte Carlosimulation method. The results of this analysis help determine potential fluctuations in project budget to determinemedian range values for use in the financial analysis.The complete service plan for the corridor was modeled using the Rail Traffic Controller (RTC) software and iscontained in this application. This service plan includes all of the proposed freight, commuter and proposed intercityservice planned for this 62-mile stretch of rail. It also takes into account all train movements on both ends of the

corridor into the modeling and operations. Also a very conservative freight growth of 1.75% per year was assumedthrough the year 2020 to establish future performance values. This modeling established positive performance factorsfor all users of the rail corridor. Coordination with all rail operators was maintained throughout the development ofthe service operations plan. This service plan has received approval of all operators as evident by signature on theproposed track configuration contained in the application. Amtrak as the owner of the corridor and operator ofpassenger service will ensure that the expected levels of passenger service are maintained as the highest priority.Amtrak has also maintained a very close relationship with all the freight operators on the corridor and will continue tosupport their operations to the highest standards possible.

The CTDOT is supporting this project financially by putting up 54% of the funding for design and construction. This issignificantly more than the required 20% match. CTDOT is committed to funding all their share of the operating costs forcommuter services on this corridor. CTDOT supports this project very strongly based on the belief in the success of thiscorridor as a viable commuter and intercity passenger rail service that will have significant benefits to the State of Connecticutand all of New England.

(3) Project Delivery ApproachDescribe the risk associated with delivery of the Service Development Program within budget, on time, and as designed:

The applicants financial, legal, and technical capacity to implement the project, including whether the application dependsupon receipt of any waiver(s) of Federal railroad safety regulations that have not been obtained;

The applicants experience in administering similar grants and projects, including a demonstrated ability to deliver on priorFRA financial assistance programs;

The soundness and thoroughness of the cost methodologies, assumptions, and estimates for the proposed project; The reasonableness of the schedule for project implementation; The thoroughness and quality of the Project Management Plan; The timing and amount of the project's future noncommitted investments; The overall completeness and quality of the application, including the comprehensiveness of its supporting documentation; The adequacy of any completed engineering work to assess and manage/mitigate the proposed projects engineering andconstructability risks; The sufficiency of system safety and security planning; The project's progress, at the time of application, towards compliance with environmental protection requirements; The readiness of the project to be commenced; and The timeliness of project completion and the realization of the projects anticipated benefits.

Project Delivery Approach

The CTDOT and Amtrak are very qualified to deliver this project on time and on budget. Both agencies have undertaken projects of


22/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page22

similar nature and of higher complexity. Both have done significant work on all aspects of similar work projects involving new

stations, track work with complex interlocking, sidings, communications, power, bridge rehabilitation and replacement and drainage

modifications. These projects all involved significant Federal oversight, right-of-way acquisition, utility coordination and

environmental permitting with state and Federal agencies. No waivers of Federal railroad safety regulations are anticipated for this

project.

Both the CTDOT and Amtrak have administered successfully major Federal grant projects of similar nature and are experienced in the

financial requirements of such programs. They have successfully delivered on all projects undertaken. The construction cost estimates

were prepared with every attention to detail. All of the track work, communication and power estimates were prepared by comparison

to recent project construction costs on similar type work. All the new and modified train stations were advanced to preliminary design.

These plans are contained in the application package. We then completed quantity takeoffs on all aspects of construction. Unit costs

were established from recent bid and construction data from similar projects. The CTDOT had just completed the construction of

numerous shoreline east stations of similar nature. The bid data from these projects were used to establish the costs for the NHHS

stations. In a similar nature the costs for bridge construction was established to obtain unit cost and SF cost numbers. All the cost

estimating work was completed and compiled using FRA and FTA guidelines. Appropriate contingencies were applied to these costs

using these guidelines. All engineering and management costs were based on established percentages of the construction costs. This

cost estimating data is contained in this application.

A project design schedule has been developed for this project and is contained in the HSIPR Service Development Program Budget an

Schedule Form. All major milestones were established based on experience on similar projects that have been undertaken by CTDOTand Amtrak. These milestones were established through the planning and NEPA work required in the Preliminary Engineering phase,

the design, permitting, utility coordination and right-of-way acquisition required in the Final Design phase, the bidding, awarding,

completion of property takes, utility relocations and building of the project during the construction phase and the initiation of service

and project close out upon project completion. Upon initiation of the project a detailed project schedule will be developed, updated and

maintained throughout work as detailed in the Project Management Plan.

A Project Management Plan has been prepared for this project and is contained as part of this application. This plan was prepared base

on experience on similar projects by both Amtrak and CTDOT. This plan is a working plan in that it will continue to be developed

and updated throughout the project to meet the needs of all parties and project developments and ensure project success.

Connecticuts substantial share of the capitol costs of this project, approximately 54%, will be provided with bonding through the

States Transportation Fund. The States share of the yearly operating and maintenance costs will be provided for through the Special

Transportation Fund (STF). The details of this funding are contained in this application within the NHHS Financial Plan. This plandetails the STFs sources and uses of the funds necessary to assure long-term financial solvency and stability for the foreseeable

forecasting period.

The CTDOT and its partners in this project, Amtrak and Massachusetts, have spent considerable time and effort in putting forth this

application and supporting information. We have had this project under development in one form or another going back to 2003. There

has been considerable planning, engineering, and environmental work invested on this project which is presented in this application

and supporting documents. We have also consulted and maintained ongoing dialog with all users of the corridor, including all the

freight railroads that have approved of this project for its inherent robustness and support to their future growth. We have complied

with all project NEPA requirements and have maintained ongoing coordination with the FRA and public. We feel we are presenting a

very solid important transportation project for this entire region and have represented it as such in this application.

A system safety and security plan has been prepared and is contained as a part of this application. This plan along with other working

plans utilized by CTDOT and Amtrak as operator and owner of this corridor will be implemented for this project and utilized duringservice operations. Amtrak and CTDOT as operators of major passenger service in Connecticut are very familiar will all aspects of

implementation of this needed plan.

Connecticut in coordination with its partnering states of Massachusetts and Vermont have prepared a region wide Service NEPA

Document for all of the New England interior High Speed Intercity route going through New Haven, CT to Springfield, MA to Boston

to the east and north through MA and VT to Montreal Canada (approximately 500 mile corridor). This document has gone through

public presentation and review and has been submitted to the FRA for review. The CTDOT is also committed to completing an

Environmental Assessment (EA) for this specific project proposed in this application. CT is well advanced and is actively working on


23/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page23

completing this phase of the project. During the design phase of the project all environmental permits and approvals will be obtained

prior to construction.

CTDOT is actively working on the environmental, planning and preliminary engineering phase of this project. They are also actively

planning on going into the design phase upon project approval of the federal funding. This is considered one of the most important

transportation projects for Connecticut and the region. Connecticut and Amtrak are poised to undertake this project in an expeditious

manner to guarantee project success and completion.


24/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page24

F.Technical ComponentsAddress the sections below with information on the technical components of the Service Development Program.

(1) Indicate if you are requesting to be considered a Standard Capital Project as described in Section 1.3.1 of the NOFA.7Consider this application to be a Standard Capital Project.Consider this application to be a Major Capital Project.

Explain your response:Per FRA guidance and consistent with other USDOT agency policies, this project is considered a "Major Capital Project." Thefollowing parameters are used to deem the NHHS Corridor a "Major Capital Project":

-Project recipient has not previously implemented similar HSIPR project.-Estimated project cost is in excess of $100 million.-Anticipated maximun operating speed on intercity service will exceed 79 mph.

(2) Indicate the operational independence of the Service Development Program.8This program is operationally independent. This program is not operationally independent.

Briefly clarify your response:

The proposed project improvements are integrated with a portion of existing and future intercity service which continues beyondthe NHHS Corridor (i.e. South to New York and north to Vermont). Other existing and proposed intercity service will runexclusively within the NHHS Corridor.

(3) Provide Right-of-Way Owner(s) information in the program area. Where railroads currently share ownership, identifythe primary owner. Click on the prepopulated fields to select the appropriate response from the list of choices.

Type of RailroadRailroad Right-of-

Way OwnerRoute-Miles

Track-Miles Status of Agreements to Implement Projects

Amtrak Amtrak 62 62 Master Agreement in Place

Amtrak Master Agreement in Place





(4) Name the Intercity Passenger Rail Operator and provide the status of the agreement. If applicable, provide the statusof agreement with the partner that will operate the planned passenger rail service (e.g., Amtrak). Click on the prepopulatedfield to select the appropriate response from the list of choices.

Name of Operating Partner: Status of Agreement:

Amtrak Final executed agreement on project scope/outcomes

7Please note, that administratively, three primary distinctions exist between the Major and Standard Capital Project designation when applied to a Service Development Program: 1) theapproach to the environmental review process; 2) FRAs use of a Letter of Intent (LOI) to contingently commit funds to the Service Development Program (as described in Section 2 of theNOFA); and 3) the project delivery tools required and used by FRA in managing the Service Development Program.

8A Service Development Program is considered to have operational independence if, upon being implemented, it will result in a minimal operating segment of new or substantially improved

high-speed or intercity passenger rail service that demonstrates tangible and measurable benefits, even if no additional investments in the same service are made.


25/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page25

(5) Provide information about the existing rail services within the Service Development Program area (e.g., freight, commuterand intercity passenger). Click on the prepopulated field to select the appropriate response from the list of type of service.

Type of Service Name of Operator

Top Speed WithinProject Boundaries Number of

Route-Miles

Within ProjectBoundaries

Average Number of DailOne-Way Train

Operations9 WithinProject BoundariesPassenger Freight

Intercity Passenger Amtrak 80 62 12

Freight Connecticut Southern 62 12

Freight CSX 28 1

Freight Pan Am 20 2

Freight

Freight

Freight

Freight

Freight

Freight

(6) Estimate the share of benefits that will be realized by nonintercity rail services and provide the approximate costshare provided by the beneficiary.10 Click on the prepopulated fields to select the appropriate response from the lists oftype of beneficiary, anticipated share of benefits, and approximate cost share. If more than five types of nonintercitypassenger rail are beneficiaries, please provide additional information in a separate supporting document, and list it inSection G.2 of this application.

Type of Nonintercity Passenger Rail Expected Share of Benefits Approximate Cost Share

Freight Less than 50% 0-24%

Commuter Equal to 50% 50-74%




(7) Describe the rolling stock type. Describe the fleet of locomotives, cars, self-powered cars, and/or train sets that areintended to provide service upon completion of the Service Development Program. Note if the equipment is alreadyowned or needs to be acquired.

The proposed intercity service is anticipated to utilize existing standard Amtrak Northeast Corridor equipment.

9One daily round-trip operation should be counted as two daily one-way train operations. 10

Benefits include service improvements such as increased speed, on-time performance, improved reliability, and other service quality improvements.


26/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page26

G.Additional InformationProvide a response to the following, as necessary, for your Service Development Program.

(1) Please provide any additional information, comments, or clarifications and indicate the section and question number thatyou are addressing (e.g., Section A, Question 6). Completing this question is optional.

(2) Please provide a document title, filename, and description for all supporting documents. Ensure that these documents areuploaded to GrantSolutions.gov with your application and use a logical naming convention.

Document Title Filename Description and Purpose

Construction Budget Form 424C-ConstructionBudget.pdf

Standard Form developed by Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB)

SF424D Assurances-Construction Form 424D-Assurances-Construction.pdf

Standard Form developed by Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB)

Service Dev. Program Application Form SDP_Application Form.pdf Application for FRA funding to support HSRservice

Attachment for Section D7 ofApplication

SDP_Application-AttachmentSection D7.pdf

Mapping referenced in Application Form

Service Dev. Program Budget/Schedule SDP_Budget_Sched_updated_Final072810v2.pdf

Budget & Schedule terms provide estimate foryear of expenditure capital and operating costs

FRA Assurances & Cert. FRA Assurances & Cert.pdf Certification of grantee suspension anddebarment, drug-free workplace requirementsand Federal lobbying

Service Development Plan Service Development Plan.pdf Document provides scope of proposed serviceand demonstrates project feasibility

Appendix A thru Appendix M Appendix A.pdf thru AppendixM.pdf

Supporting materials for Service DevelopmentPlan

NEPA Documetation NEPA Documentation Master1 8-2-10.pdf

Environmental Review documentdemonstrating satisfaction of Service NEPApolicies

NEPA Doc. Appendix NEPA Documentation-Appendix 8-2-10.pdf

Supporting documents for NEPA document

Project Management Plan Project Mgt Plan Draft 8-3-10.pdf Overview and approach planning, monitoringand implementation of project

Financial Plan NHHS FINANCIAL PLAN.pdf Outlines financial obligation, necessary tosuccessfully deliver project

System Safety Plan System Safety Plan.pdf Supporting documentation as required byapplication

Agreement in Principle RAILROAD AND PROJECTSPONSOR AGREEMENTS-aip.pdf

Preliminary Agreement between projectsponsor, host railroad and other rail operators

Prel. Eng. Documentation Full PE Documentation Part 1.pdf Various preliminary engineering drawings,plans, maps and reports completed to date


27/28


Form FRA F 6180.133 (07-09)

Page27

Prel. Eng. Doc - Part 2 Full PE Documentation Part 2.pdf Various preliminary engineering drawings,plans, maps and reports completed to date

Construction Budget Detail Construction Budget Detail.pdf Detail of construction costs includingestimated unit costs

Letters of Support Letters of Support.pdf Letters from various agencies, municipalities,

and political representatives in support of theproject


28/28


H.Checklist of Application MaterialsUse this section to determine the thoroughness of your Service Development Program application prior to submission.

Documents Format

1. Application Form

HSIPR Service Development Program Application Form [This Form] Form

2. Budget and Schedule Form

HSIPR Service Development Program Budget and Schedule Form Form

3. OMB Standard Forms

SF 424: Application for Federal Assistance Form

SF 424C: Budget Information-Construction Form

SF 424D: Assurances-Construction Form

4. FRA Assurances Document

FRA Assurances Document (See Section 4.2.4 of the NOFA) Form

5. Service Development Supporting Documentation

Service Development Plan (See Section 3.5 of the NOFA) No Specified Format

NEPA Documentation (See Section 4.2.5 of the NOFA) No Specified Format

6. Service Delivery Supporting Documentation

Project Management Plan (See Section 4.2.6 of the NOFA) No Specified Format

Financial Plan (See Section 4.2.6 of the NOFA) No Specified Format

System Safety Plan (See Section 4.2.6 of the NOFA) No Specified Format

Railroad and Project Sponsor Agreements (See Section 4.2.6 of the NOFA) No Specified Format

7. Optional Supporting Documentation

Preliminary Engineering (PE) and/or Final Design (FD) Documentation(See Section 4.2.7 of the NOFA)

No Specified Format

Other Relevant and Available Documentation (See Section 4.2.7 of theNOFA) n/a

PRA Public Protection Statement: Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 32 hours per response, including the time forreviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person besubject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control numberfor this information collection is 2130-0583.