Transcript StrongPorts Initiatives

Maritime Administration
October 15, 2014
Captain Bob Loken
Director PNW, Alaska, Guam, Hawaii Gateway
U.S. Maritime Administration
U.S. Ports Today
• American companies ship cargo worth more than $5.5
billion through U.S. ports every day.
• 75 % of our nation’s exports travel through U.S. seaports.
• Port activity supports more than 13 million jobs and
accounts for more than $3 trillion in business activity
nationwide.
• Studies show that, by 2050, America’s freight network will
need to haul 4 billion more tons of international freight
above the 9 billion it currently moves.
• Key to this plan will involve how our ports can most
efficiently work with our rail lines and highway system on
land and water.
2
Challenges of Today’s Ports
in a Global Economy
• Large Investment
• Panama Canal Expansion
• Bigger Vessels
• Competition
• Aging Infrastructure
• Expanding Population over next 40 years
3
4
Port Investment
StrongPorts PHASE I Implementation
Category I
Planning & Engagement
All Ports
Low Federal Oversight
No Market Interference
A. Guidelines & Data:
Sector advocate through analysis & showcasing
opportunities/consequences regarding port role/investment
Activities Include:
• Port Investment Plan Guidelines (With Stakeholders)
• National/Regional Studies and Maritime Impact Analysis
B. Assistance:
Direct support to individual ports (upon request)
Category II
Category III
Financing
Project Support
Limited No. of Ports
High Federal Oversight
Minimal Market
Interference
Moderate Federal Oversight
Minimal Market Interference
Financing:
Direct funding support via
existing/future programs
• TIGER I-VI Grants ($420M)
• Marine Highway Grants
• Eligible for Port Infra Devel.
Fund
• Possible
Very Few Ports
Project Support:
Increased Federal project
assistance where unique
Federal interest exists
MARAD Co-Manages
Project w/Port
• Design Development
• Eligible For PID Fund
• Eligible for Lead Fed.
Agency Supp.
• Strict Sel. Criteria
• Investment Plan Req’d
• Project Clearly Defined
• Investment Plan Devel. Support (TIGER VI Planning Grants)
• Delivery of Federal Services (Gateway Offices & HQ)
• Dedicated Staff With MPO Experience
Authority: 46 USC, Section 50302
6
Maritime Administration
Projects
Tiger/ARRA
States 23
Ports 45
Grants 43
Funds $520M
Neah Bay, WA
M5 Corridor
Seattle, WA
Tacoma, WA
Portland, ORPasco, WA
Garibaldi, OR
Benton, WA Lewiston, ID
Coos Bay, OR
Eastport, ME
Maine Ports, ME
Duluth, MN
M95 Corridor
ProvPort, RI
MH Projects
Ports 6
Grants 3
Funds $7M
Green Trade
Corridor, CA
W. Sacramento, CA
Stockton, CA
Oakland, CA
Hueneme, CA
Port of L.A., CA
Port of Long Beach, CA
Quonset, RI
NJ
Toledo, OH Wellsville, OH Newark,
Bayonne, NJ
South Jersey
Wilmington, DE
Port Corp, NJ
Baltimore, MD
Richmond, VA
Tri-City, IL
Virginia Ports, VA
M55 Corridor
Norfolk, VA
Cates Landing, TN
Catoosa, OK
Fulton, MS
Land Convey
Ports 10
Land conveyed
3,000 Acres
Value
$54M to $1B
Pascagoula, MS Mobile, AL
Lake Charles, LA
New Orleans, LA
Gulfport, MS
Houston, TX
Cross
Gulf, FL
Orange, TX
Corpus Christi, TX
Port Manatee, FL
LOOP
Cross Gulf, TX
Brownsville, TX
Pier 29, HI
Dillingham, AK
JaxPort, FL
Port of Miami, FL
Seward, AK
Auke Bay, AK
ARRA Grants
TIGER FY 2010
TIGER FY 2012
Marine Highway
TIGER FY 2009
TIGER FY 2011
TIGER FY 2013
Port Conveyance
TIGER FY 2014
4
Charleston, SC
Planning and Engagement
• Port Planning & Investment Toolkit
• Port Planning Grants
• Port Talk Initiative
• Full Time Community Planner (Started 4/14)
• Gateways/HQ - Delivery of Federal Services
8
A joint venture between AAPA, a working group of 57 industry expert
volunteers, and the Maritime Administration.
Toolkit will help ports obtain funding by developing investment grade
plans that:
• Clearly identify future port needs;
• Determine the most cost-effective, sustainable and efficient
solutions to port problems; and
• Get port infrastructure projects into MPO and state transportation
programs in order to receive formula funding;
• Position port projects for federal funding such as TIGER grants;
and
• Assist ports in obtaining private sector investment funds.
9
A facilitated day-long session to foster dialogue and develop regional
maritime transportation plans
Target participants include State Departments of Transportation, MPOs,
Economic Development Corporations, Ports, and Port Authorities
PortTalk Outcomes:
• Identify resources and programs to help build, modernize and expand
maritime transportation assets
• Spotlight maritime transportation's role in regional transportation
system planning
• Shipper and shipping-company outreach and needs assessment
• Gain understanding of freight system plans to 2025
• Generate innovative solutions to environmental and logistics
challenges
10
Financing
• Port Infrastructure Grant Authority
• TIGER VI Grants – 7 Grants $74.2Million
• Port Conveyance Program
• Marine Highway Projects
• Potential Full Time Port Finance Agent
11
Federal Financing Programs
(Selected)
• Surface Transportation Program (STP)
• Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery
(TIGER)
• Projects of National and Regional Significance (PNRS)
• Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA)
• Private Activity Bonds (PABs)
• Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF)
• Small Shipyard Grant Program
• Port Security Grant Program (PSGP)
• Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA)
• Brownfield Grants
• Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Program (CMAQ)
• Ferry-related Grants
12
Infrastructure Facility Charge
• A concept under discussion by the Marine Transportation National
Advisory Council (MTSNAC) based on the Airport Passenger Facility
Charge – Will require authorizing legislation.
• Fees are applied to cargo (bulk and containerized) or passengers
shipped to or from a port authority authorized to collect the
infrastructure charge – Funds remain under the port’s control.
• Fee is project specific and may be used for “state of good repair”
maintenance or to support the issuance of construction bonds.
• Eligible projects must be included in a port master plan and include
a detailed financing plan.
• Stakeholder working group is established to fully develop the
proposal for consideration by the MTSNAC in the Spring of 2015
13
Project Support
• Further Moves Away From “Management”
• Increasing Number of Support Requests
• Incremental Staff Increases Planned
• Retain “Project Management” Capability
14
Future Phase Implementation
Category II
Category I
Financing
Planning & Engagement
•
•
•
•
Possibilities Include:
Port Investment Plan Guidelines (With Stakeholders)
National/Regional Studies and Maritime Impact Analysis
Strategic Asset Management Guidelines (With Stakeholders)
Port/Terminal Ops Guidelines for AMH (With Stakeholders)
B. Assistance:
Direct support to individual ports (upon request)
High Federal Oversight
Minimal Market
Interference
Moderate Federal Oversight
Minimal Market Interference
Low Federal Oversight
No Market Interference
Sector advocate through analysis & showcasing
opportunities/consequences regarding port role/investment
Very Few Ports
Limited No. of Ports
All Ports
A. Guidelines & Data:
Category III
Project Support
Financing:
Project Support:
Increased Federal project
assistance where unique
Federal interest exists
Direct funding support via
existing/future programs
•
•
•
•
TIGER I-V Grants
Marine Highway Grants
Other Future Grant Programs
Assistance with Loans/Loan
Guarantees
• Eligible for Port Infra Devel.
Fund
• (Through Planning) Support from
States/MPOs and private sources.
MARAD Co-Manages
Project w/Port
• Design Development
• Eligible For PID Fund
• Eligible for Lead Fed.
Agency Supp.
• Strict Sel. Criteria
• Investment Plan Req’d
• Project Clearly Defined
• Investment Plan Devel. Support (Additional Planning Grants)
• Coordination Assistance with State, MPO, Local authorities
• Delivery of Federal Services (Gateway Offices & HQ)
Authority: 46 USC, Section 50302
15
Questions
Photo Compliments of Port of New Orleans
Captain Bob Loken
[email protected]
16