Maritime Administration

1. Maritime Administration October 15, 2014 Captain Bob Loken Director PNW, Alaska, Guam, Hawaii Gateway U.S. Maritime Administration

2. 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.

3. Challenges of Today’s Portsin a Global Economy • Large Investment • Panama Canal Expansion • Bigger Vessels • Competition • Aging Infrastructure • Expanding Population over next 40 years

5. Port Investment

6. StrongPorts PHASE I Implementation Category I Planning & Engagement Category II Financing Category III Project Support Very Few Ports High Federal Oversight Minimal Market Interference All Ports Low Federal Oversight No Market Interference Limited No. of Ports 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 • 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 • 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 • Direct support to individual ports (upon request) • Investment Plan Devel. Support (TIGER VI Planning Grants) • Delivery of Federal Services (Gateway Offices & HQ) • Dedicated Staff With MPO Experience • B. Assistance: Authority: 46 USC, Section 50302

7. Maritime Administration Projects Tiger/ARRA States 23 Ports 45 Grants 43 Funds $520M Neah Bay, WA M5 Corridor Seattle, WA Tacoma, WA Pasco, WA Portland, OR Eastport, ME Garibaldi, OR Duluth, MN Maine Ports, ME Lewiston, ID Benton, WA Coos Bay, OR M95 Corridor ProvPort, RI Quonset, RI Wellsville, OH Newark, NJ Toledo, OH Bayonne, NJ W. Sacramento, CA MH Projects Ports 6 Grants 3 Funds $7M South Jersey Port Corp, NJ Wilmington, DE Green Trade Corridor, CA Stockton, CA Oakland, CA Baltimore, MD Richmond, VA Tri-City, IL Virginia Ports, VA M55 Corridor Hueneme, CA Norfolk, VA Cates Landing, TN Catoosa, OK Port of L.A., CA Port of Long Beach, CA Fulton, MS Charleston, SC Pascagoula, MS Mobile, AL Pier 29, HI JaxPort, FL Lake Charles, LA Land Convey Ports 10 Land conveyed 3,000 Acres Value $54M to $1B New Orleans, LA Gulfport, MS Houston, TX Cross Gulf, FL Orange, TX Corpus Christi, TX Port Manatee, FL Port of Miami, FL LOOP Cross Gulf, TX Brownsville, TX Dillingham, AK Seward, AK Auke Bay, AK ARRA Grants TIGER FY 2010 TIGER FY 2012 Marine Highway Port Conveyance TIGER FY 2013 TIGER FY 2009 TIGER FY 2011 TIGER FY 2014 4

8. 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

9. 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.

10. 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

11. Financing Port Infrastructure Grant Authority TIGER VI Grants – 7 Grants $74.2Million Port Conveyance Program Marine Highway Projects Potential Full Time Port Finance Agent

12. 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

13. 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

14. Project Support Further Moves Away From “Management” Increasing Number of Support Requests Incremental Staff Increases Planned Retain “Project Management” Capability

15. Future Phase Implementation Category III Project Support Category II Financing Category I Planning & Engagement Very Few Ports High Federal Oversight Minimal Market Interference Limited No. of Ports Moderate Federal Oversight Minimal Market Interference All Ports Low Federal Oversight No Market Interference • Financing: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. • 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 • A. Guidelines & Data: • Sector advocate through analysis & showcasing opportunities/consequences regarding port role/investment • 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) • Direct support to individual ports (upon request) • Investment Plan Devel. Support (Additional Planning Grants) • Coordination Assistance with State, MPO, Local authorities • Delivery of Federal Services (Gateway Offices & HQ) • B. Assistance: Authority: 46 USC, Section 50302

16. Questions Photo Compliments of Port of New Orleans Captain Bob Loken robert.loken@dot.gov