Good afternoon, thank you for standing by. At this time all participants are in a listen-only mode. I will now introduce Miss Laura FEIST.
Thank you. Welcome to the seminar. I'm Laura, I'm the moderator today. Today's topic is freight corridor programs. Today we'll have three presentations given by James Clarkin, Tony Furst, and Juan Jose Erazo Garcia Cano .
Dave is the manager for [ Speaker/Audio Faint or Unclear ] manages federal funding programs in the four western provinces and the northern territories. [ Speaker/Audio Faint or Unclear ]. A good deal of the efforts are now on 40 projects.
James is a professional engineer and a certified manager accountant and has found a niche in the two worlds. Tony Furst direct as multilevel staff for the FHWA.
Provides the truck size and weight interpretation. Prior to joining FHWA he held a range of positions with [ Interference ] as a program coordinator.
And the transportation security administration as the branch chief in the maritime [ Indiscernible ].
Juan Jose Erazo Garcia Cano has 16 years of experience. Juan worked in the general planning coordination in charge of different positions, direct of regional planning, coordinator of special projects.
Since 2004 he's been in charge of intermodal and border projects.
He is managing and developing the northeast infrastructure package, $3 billion, that includes the new construction of highways, rails and international bridges.
He is planning projects along the entire border region between the U.S.
and Mexico. He's in charge of other different studies to identify and study bottle necks and the analysis of connectivity of the corridor. I would like to now go over some logistics. 60 minutes is for the speakers,
the final 30 minutes is for question and answers. You may type questions into the chat box. Please make sure you type it into the text box, and not the large white area, send it to everyone and indicate which presenter the question is for.
Once we get through all of the questions the operator will give instructions on how to ask a question over the phone. If you think of a question after the seminar you can send it to the presenters directly
or you can send it to the LISTSERV. If you are not already joined the LISTSERV the web address is on the slide on your screen.
I would like to remind you this session is being recorded.
A file will be posted to the Talking Freight website within the next week. We encourage you to direct others in your office that are not able to attend today to access the recorded seminar.
The PowerPoints are available for download in the lower right-hand side. Presentations will also be available online within the next week.
Now we will get started. Today's topic is freight corridor programs. Our first presentation is from James Clarkin. If you have questions please type them into the chat box, they will be answered in the last 30 minutes.
Thank you. Most appreciated.
Thank you for giving transport Canada the opportunity to come and speak. Gateways are a big initiative right now.
What we've titled the discussion is Canada's Gateways. We'll need to give you background on the Canadian system and programs, then we will jump into how we're dealing with our Gateway programs.
I guess I can't ask you folks, I hope my tone is okay and you can hear. I would like to talk about the mandate of transport Canada and why we're involved in the Gateway initiative. Then the national highway system, how we deliver funding.
And discuss the Gateways we're considering.
The main focus is on the corridor initiative that transport Canada is pushing .
Canada's highways. Transport Canada's mission is posted on the screen. Similar to the United States, we do not own the highways. Though we have a mandate to support the system, we are not the owners and are not the proponents.
There's been extensive history of federal funding of highway projects. A number of different agreements, different mechanisms. There is that history there. It's continuing. The question is how do we deliver that?
One of the initiatives that has come to our forefront is we have the national highway system. It was developed by Canada. Because we do not have control over what we call the transCanada highway.
The designating of the transCanada highway is done by the providences. What is developed is the national highway system. That is a network of highways across the country that basically are the key connectors for major centers,
border points, key connections with ports and other areas for trade and mobility. I'm showing a brief map here. The main focus are highway 16 and along highway 1 into the heartland and the central area.
The national highway system is designated by the provinces.
We have our core routes, which are the major connectors. We have feeder routes which are smaller more regional roads. And the northern and remote routes, they do not service the volume of trade or travel.
Of the national highway system routes the make up is about 38,000-kilometers, that's about 3% of our total highways, but it carries about 30% of the traffic volume.
That gives a good idea of how important the national highway system is to the country. It's given us a good direct avenue to provide funding, we can direct our funding towards national highway projects when necessary.
That's background on our setup.
Now, the current initiatives. The building Canada plan. It's our largest investment we've ever launched here, $33 billion over the next 7 years. Funding programs vary from directed to flexible.
Over the past years from the provinces we've been hearing they need a more sustainable base funding amount they can keep up with the regular infrastructure needs.
There's been a number of funds established that provide that flexibility every year broken down per jurisdiction.
They can then use that money for their priorities. The building Canada fund focuses on major infrastructure that is strategic to Canada, it covers waste water and transportation, transit, broadband.
We move on to where we have very directed funding, this is where the Gateway funds are coming in. Now we've added the Gateway and border crossing fund, which will go to support the Atlantic Gateway.
I will move on here. I just have a quick slide showing the Gateways and the Gateway concept. We don't take full credit for everything here. There's been a lot of work done around the globe looking at the Gateway concept.
The main way to think of the Gateway is the supply chain.
It's not about thinking about how to fix the highway -- it's how to you fix the highway and the rail and port so that holistically everything is functioning. On the left-hand side you see the Asia Pacific Gateway,
that is what we're going to focus on later. The newer initiatives, of course, which will be a good deal is improving the Windsor/ Windsor/Detroit crossing .
I would like to speak about the Asia Pacific Gateway. That's where we will get into more of the presentation. It's a $1 billion initiative to strengthen the Gateway. The lion's share is going into [ Indiscernible ],
I believe it's above 95% going into the hard core infrastructure.
That is located along our two main corridors that lead to the two western ports. Sorry, I should back you up a little bit. You can see here Prince Rupert.
From the port of Vancouver highway 1. The highway 1 and highway 16 corridor both road and rail are the focuses of the Asia Pacific. The other part is the noninfrastructure side. It's designed to gauge stakeholders to talk to shippers
and ports to get the word out overseas on what the Asia Pacific Gateway is, how we're improving it, how we're making things better for shippers. It's also to develop and foster cooperation with different partners along the route.
We're trying to get everyone involved . One of the biggest things is to identify issues and solutions to current problems. We are glad to elaborate on the noninfrastructure side.
I think we could do a presentation on that subject ten times over.
A number of my colleagues have been touring the globe giving discussions on Asia Pacific. You may have had a speech from the two of them. We would be willing to provide more information on that initiative if you wish.
I would like to talk about the infrastructure side. We have $1 billion for infrastructure. It's one of our bigger program. We went out to see ba we could do to make the two key networks better.
Through a number of studies we identified who the likely proponents were. We went out for a call for proposals. We established eligibility criteria that were investigated by the federal treasury board.
Those became the rules of the program.
We asked that proposals be submitted to [ Indiscernible ], we had an initial screening to make sure there wasn't anything that did not fit, that way we could screen out proposals and not waste time if it did not fit.
We had a full proposal submission, that was reviewed by a mixed team of experts here, both technical and policy folks. We had a good group that brought different things to the understanding of the Gateway.
The projects were evaluated on a number of criteria, including how the project supported the Gateway, benefit/cost argument, the project had to remove a bottle neck along that Gateway of the supply chain,
also looking to leverage projects. We wanted to see -- Canada provides 50% funding contribution.
When proponents were looking for less than 50% than that we saw that as favorable. From the evaluation of these proposals, I believe we had 20 to 25 submitted, we submitted a recommendation to the minister.
The first announcements came in May of 2007, I will flip you ahead to show you where we're at. Might be a little tough to read, but it gives an indication that we have awarded about 40 projects.
The reason it's written that way is because we count some of the programs as individual projects. We have a number of projects that are on the highway 16 corridor. And we have a number of projects, as well in the lower mainland of BC .
We've got -- we were able to get a good mix of projects. Some are big, some are small. We have projects in the hundreds of millions. We have only one million dollar project right now. We also have a number of small projects,
rail projects, port work, a number of highway projects. One things we're excited about is short sea shipping initiatives. We have a number of inland water ways.
When the container ships come to the dock we're looking to see instead of taking the containers off and driving them into the rail yards to instead ship them on barges. It gets it off of the roads, it's a little more green.
We're funding a few of those projects, as well.
I know I'm running tight on time.
I will get into some of the projects. The first is the rail corridor. On the far left-hand side is Robert's Bank. The red line is the rail line that cuts through the communities in the lower mainland
and connects into the [ Indiscernible ] rail network. There's a number of communities here that are choked by this rail line.
We can't add rail traffic because we have a number of crossings that really do [ Indiscernible ] the citizens off. This initiative brought together a number of groups to see how to improve this line.
They looked at how to do separations along the line to make it more workable for the cross traffic and also to then allow for longer train traffic. There's 12 partners involved.
A good example of how going out there with this focused initiative was able to bring a real big group together to attack one major bottle neck of the whole system.
This initiative is a new road. It will provide a connection to the highway system and also to a bridge being built in Vancouver. This is our biggest project. It's over a billion dollars, this project.
There's a number of challenges going through this challenge, there's a number of sensitive lands. It should provide a much needed road connection between the ports and the highway system. Right now you are traveling on arterial streets.
[ Audio Cutting In and Out ]
The delivery model. How do we deliver these things? We are not the owners, recipients or proponents.
Our partners build the projects and are responsible for the projects. Up front Canada commits to funding. We have to stay capped at that. We enter into a contribution agreement. We work with the recipients to manage the agreement.
We also work with guiding the recipients through the process.
At the end we do an evaluation for the projects.
When we do the evaluation what we look at is a retrospective evaluation to see if the outcomes were achieved. We look at accident stats and as much as possible trade values. Trade values are difficult to look at on a smaller scale.
We thing we'll have much better luck at looking at trade benefits when we look at the larger level evaluation.
We try to do these evaluations a couple of years after the projects are completed. Ensuring enough time for the network to mature. Often it's difficult to do that because of contractual arrangements.
We'll go a long way to give the networks and the projects time to mature and take effect, then we'll get a better look at how things have behaved. We will have a program evaluation to see was it the right thing to do? Was it efficient?
We will talk with the stakeholders, we get out there and talk to people and find out what is working and what is not. Are we spending our money well? Is this a good initiative?
We will also look at a number of indicators that we have developed and attempt to make a number of measurements through surveys and such.
That brings me to the conclusion of my presentation. I hope I given you a good overview of what our initiatives are right now.
There's lots of excitement for Canada. We feel it's a great way to direct policy initiatives and outcomes. We also think we're tackling some real bottle necks.
I will open -- I believe we're having questions at the end. I will now turn it back to Laura.
Thank you, James. Thank you to those of you that have posted questions. I'm going to bring up -- please be patient with me, I'm a newby. I'm learning the ropes.
Just give me a second to pull up Tony's presentation. Then we will get started with Tony.
I will get started. Good afternoon.
Many thanks to you for signing on. What I will talk about is not a corridor program, it's the background we put into place to take a look at corridors.
I'm sure a lot of you are familiar with in 2000 a number of the key trunk lines were apparent. There's been an increased focus on freight. It's received a lot of attention.
In SAFETEA-LU it presented it sufficient in a number of programs . They were put in place, the PRNS final rule was published on the 22nd of October, 2008.
GAO went back through a lot of prior work and instilled these key principals. All of these need to be considered. It's the first I will focus on. You move towards the constitution.
That connection has played itself out in many of the proposals being offered out. Out of the gate was [ Indiscernible ] builder's association with their 3Cs. Since then ATA, AASHTO have all endorsed the freight program
and corridors in the national network.
As we thought about interstate commercial we broke it down into two pieces, connectivity and corridors. Both are key to this discussion.
This slide represents the connectivity piece of the puzzle. The red is the interstate. It is including the national network. Trucks that are 102 feet must be allowed to move. Green is the national network.
The states were left to their own discretion about how much they wanted to put on the national network. Many of the states decided they need to be part of it, many of the other states decided they had the other perspective.
Then the national highway system, the purpose of this is slide is to demonstrate there's a number of different ways of defining the system.
The point is we've gotten to the place where we need to harmonize with a number of these diverse systems to get them into focus as we move forward.
This slide, this map, is the freight flows by mode in 2002. It's been tonnage. That big red blob is the powder river coal. When you look at it you will see a number of parallel routes that are highway and rail.
You can look at California up to Texas and up to St. Louis. We need to think about these from a holistic perspective.
These are the metro regions in the United States. These are the areas of large population centers that hold a lot of the population of the United States.
The red dots are the freight bottle necks. As you can see, they connect all of the major metropolitan hubs, and provide the conduit between them.
What we did is took a look at the framework and the data. We looked to connect all of the major areas that in 2000 had populations of a million or more. We looked at tonnage flows and set the break point at 50 million tons a year.
What you see is the rail, highway, water. Brown is rail and highway together. To take a look at the highway piece we converted it into truck trips, it's about 8500 truck trips a day on that portion of the system.
You can see all of the connections.
We took all of the analysis prior and connected it with one day's travel time. This represents about 25,000 miles on the internet system.
It's the minimum network necessary to connect all of the population centers with the freight generators. This is one way to look at corridors, it's not the official USDOT position.
Take a look how we could define corridors when the discussion gets to that point.
This is another way to look at it. We took the average annual daily truck traffic and then compared that to the annual daily traffic. What you see here is the break point between 10,000 and 25%. The thin lines are less than 10,000.
Where the trucks represent are less than 25% of the overall traffic stream. The orange are greater than 10,000 trucks, less than 25% of the overall stream.
You will see in most of the areas it's around the large metropolitan areas. The red lines are more than 10,000 trucks a day, more than 25% of the traffic stream. It gives you a way to think about where we can evaluate solution sets
and how to think about going forward and alleviating the congestion.
A look at a number of corridors. Not all corridors are created equally.
We took three that all have comparable tonnage and volume flows and dug down into the length of the truck trips. What you see is a very different dynamic.
If you look up in the upper midwest you see the vast majority of the trip lengths are less than a hundred miles. If you look down along the Mexican boarder you see the vast majority are more than 500 miles,
there's the potential to work a parallel rail line there. When you get up to I-40 it's a mixed bag, there's some solution sets there. There's a number of ways to look at the network,
you need to understand the dynamics on the ground before you start thinking about potential solution sets to solve the problem.
We took a look at commodity flows. We did this for the Department of agricultural.
We can do this for all of the different commodities we have. You can see how different economic sectors are using the transportation network, and where we could place changes
or improvements into the system to help move the goods across the system.
These are the corridors of the future. Once you start thinking about the corridors and the framework we have in the United States you need to start thinking about multi-jurisdictional coalitions
and ways to enable these capacities to take place so a number of states can think of corridors. On the I-70 corridor they have a dedicated truck lane. Those four states have signed an agreement
and an MOU about how they will work to think about putting into place a dedicated truck lane system if their research proposal determines that the truck lanes in that corridor are economically feasible.
And how they would go about allocating funds from a multi-jurisdictional way. This is the next step. Once we identify them and fund them then we need to think about the arrangements that enable them to go forward.
I-95 is the one that is working. There's a smaller one in the southeast states, that's more an ITS component.
The last slide is we thought about passenger movement, at least freight.
We overlaid the high speed passenger rail corridors that were developed. It looks like a tight fit. A number of the corridors are major freight, but they're also potentially major passenger corridors, as well.
You can think about it from a number of different perspectives. If you sync up passenger movement with rail movement you could see significantly improved freight flows, now you have pulled passenger rail off freight rail.
This is the result of a lot of analysis we've been doing thinking about corridors.
We will see what happens in the next reauthorization bill.
Special thanks to two guys for a lot of the analytic heavy lifting. With that I will conclude and turn it over.
Okay. We do have one small change -- we will have [ Indiscernible ] give the final presentation. Juan was not able to make the presentation. Just a bit about Manny,
in 2008 he was given the opportunity to work as the secretary of transportation in Mexico.
He participates in meetings such as the joint working group meeting . He promotes the programs through expositions and presentations in a diverse international presentation.
Prior to joining he served as the executive vice president as [ Indiscernible ]. We have your presentation up. Manny, are you on the line for us?
Give us just one second to track down Manny. He is dialing in from Mexico, there's sometimes a few technical issues, let's give him a second here.
While we're waiting you could start going through the questions. We will go ahead and get them knocked out.
Manny has joined.
There we go.
Hi, how are you?
Good, thank you so much for stepping in at the last second here. I just gave a quick bio. We introduced you a little bit. You are ready to go with the presentation. It's ready to go.
Great. Thanks. My apologies for Juan Jose Erazo Garcia Cano, he wanted to be here, but he got pulled out for another meeting. We have a new secretary in Mexico, things are moving fast. Thanks for the introduction.
I did not hear what you just said, I'm sure it went well.
Freight corridor programs in Mexico, I will give a quick introduction on where Mexico stands, then I will give you a three-step strategy for programs for Mexico.
The north American region has an important strategy at world level. It generates over $17 trillion. For the last 25 years the average percentage of growth is 6%.
74% of commerce [ Speaker/Audio Faint or Unclear ] of Mexico's international commerce is with the United States. It is important to make the border more security which providing programs to expedite the process.
In the CTP program nearly 300 exporters register, 41% of the exporters have done this job. For the 500 certified companies registered for the fast program, 40% of imports and 71% of exports. We have so far 165,000 users registered,
7% of transport is covered by this program.
We will do a three-step strategy. The first is the development of a strategic corridor. Then regional competitiveness, then border infrastructure.
We need to know the connectivity between the countries.
Of course, keeping in mind the secure and efficient operations at the border.
This slide you can see our main corridors that include seaports and road ports.
The projection for 2020 we were able to merge the data from FHWA and ours so you can have a better visual access of where the truck traffic is moving to and from.
This is an example on the quality of the infrastructure from 2006. Mexico is rated on 49. We are 3.8, the average is 3.7.
Exports between Mexico and China to the United States. We were competing with China up to 2001. China took off rapidly and left Mexico behind, as you can see.
Here's is the situation in 2006. We show our average daily traffic. We needed to make sure that Mexico takes on inventory on what we have in our corridors, this is our analysis of the traffic. These are our connections. Whoops, sorry guys.
This is what we wanted to connect to and from.
The second part is the strengthen regional competitiveness. We wanted to connect the corridors to our main corridors, these are projects we are working on to be able to complete and have a more easy for the traffic. Of course,
including our secondary. This slide includes secondary and interregional corridors.
For the development of boarder infrastructure. Here in Mexico our federal agency decided to view it in two different directions. The first one to the left is the modernization of existing ports.
We wanted to widen the infrastructure, add express lanes and modernize access. On the other hand, we need to build new ports with public and private investment.
We're in the process of working with [ Indiscernible ] which is in the state of California , and a rail project -- the last project that Mexico has done an international crossing was over a hundred years ago,
this will be our first project with public and private investment.
The daily average wait time, as you can see with the purple lines in year 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, Canada lowered their wait times. What happened to Mexico? Even worse.
After September 11 it was a major factor, we need to learn from the Canadian boarder on how to make it more easy for everybody to cross.
Here's an example of the daily average wait time at some of the ports in Mexico. As you can see all of them have gone up. Even passed beyond the wait time [ Speaker/Audio Faint or Unclear ].
The next slide gives you an idea of the rates between 2002-2006.
We would like to see on the green line it very constant. You can see the difference in the blue line, which is up to 80% of the inspection, that's a little bit too much. In regards to the region, why we decided to focus on the border,
this slide will give you a percentage on selected ports of entry on millions of tons that cross our border.
The next slide shows you why it was determined by our agency to constraint on the focus points.
It's not made up by politics, depending on the millions of tons crossed. We broke those areas into eight different areas. They are listed on the right-hand side of the slide.
The reason we chose to do it by region is we did not want to exclude any of the ports of entry in that area. For example, most of you know there's a set of bridges we analyze them as a system of bridges, not a single port of entry.
We wanted to make sure that the system works as the traffic flows smoothly and not individually as a port of entry.
This next slide gives you an average daily truck traffic at those eight principal regions. As you have seen, we have already gone over the maximum capacity for those ports.
This one shows the percentage of saturations at those ports.
This is the example I mentioned earlier in regards to the system of bridges.
We want to make sure that every bridge is connected, it's our duty and job to make sure that the flow goes smoothly through those areas.
With that I think I am done with the slide presentation. I'm sure there's quite a few questions and answers, I'm glad to answer any of those that you might have. Thank you.
Thanks Manny for stepping in.
That was a very interesting presentation.
I would now like to start off the Q & A with the questions posted online. If time allows we will open up the phone lines.
Quickly, I will show a slide for Tony.
What I did -- while Laura is putting this up, we took a look at the slides that Canada and Mexico gave us and put together one slide that shows all of the corridors in the three nations.
That's what will be up on the slide as we go through the questions. There we go.
Hopefully this is showing for some of you. It's taking a few minutes to load.
There we go.
Start with the questions.
[ Speaker/Audio Faint or Unclear ]
We can't leave this up and have the questions at the same time.
Scrap this and go to the questions.
All right. We will start with questions for Manny. The first one I see here for Manny, the average daily wait times.
The border wait time study we found is just at the border, not traveling through the corridors.
Okay. Okay. We have a question here for you, James. What role has the greater Vancouver Gateway council played?
We see the council as a major stakeholder. There's been a number of roundtables, and working sessions with academics and experts on the matter. They've always been heavily involved.
We think dealing with a lot of the local groups is necessary to ensure that you're taking the right approach.
Okay, James. We'll stick with you while we have your attention. Let me go back up here to some more questions for you at the top. Okay. Do your route numbers go cross country like interstates? Or are they unique to provinces?
Unfortunately they don't. No, we wish it. But it's provincial jurisdiction.
Are the recipients much like [ Indiscernible ] contracts with the responsibilities of overruns?
When we have a contract we ask if the recipient ensure they complete the project, that is responsible for increases in cost. The reason is we don't get involved in the design. We also don't deal with the day-to-day construction issues
and project management. It would be a redundant function for us. To mitigate cost overruns for the government we don't feel we can open ourselves up to covering that. We pass that on the partners.
Thank you. Could you describe the primary corridors for rail and highways?
Sure. I don't know, to be Frank, if the rail is north -- the highway network, highway 97 it connects through Yukon and into Alaska. Canada receives funding from the United States for work on the highway through agreement.
That is the main road connection.
All right. Sometimes we work with the U.S. shippers that want to access the Asia Pacific corridor, does funding exist [ Speaker/Audio Faint or Unclear ] or is this mostly the role of provinces?
Where does the authority reside to change truck size and weight?
Sure. I wanted to give background on how we deliver programs. We have programs that are directed to nonnational highway system. We have a number of smaller local road improvements in industrial areas that are funded. We do fund them.
The second question about truck sizes, that is a provincial decision. We play a role to try and gather consensus on that issue.
I saw another one for you. How far into Canada does the high speed rail corridor along I-5 extend?
I don't know that. Tony?
Those are not existing. Those are areas where FRA said they should be most likely placed. We don't have any high speed rail corridors in the United States, along the lines of the bullet trains in Japan and Europe.
Questions for Tony. What year was the major truck route legend published?
Most of the maps we have came out of the 2002 survey. 2007 survey was conducted in 2007. We anticipate getting the data in the later part of the 2009. We'll have it available sometime in the spring or summer of 2010.
All of the maps are on our website. Most of them were generated in the '04-'05 timeframe.
Will an effort be made to formulate a list of projects with national significance prior to the next transportation reauthorization?
Very interesting question. We do not have any direction from Congress or the administration to publish a solicitation. There is the regulatory framework currently in place that is ready and go. We stand ready to do that.
corridors do we have goals?
A goal for mode split? No, where the conversation is going. AASHTO is talking about measures. If you look at what GAO has put out regarding performance measures I think there's a desire to establish performance measures for the system.
I would imagine we would let them drive the appropriate investment opportunities, depending on the targets.
On your corridors of the future slide what is the designation for the Indiana to Texas?
That is the I-69 corridor. A number of segments of that is built.
Most of the work is from Indianapolis down to Texas. Some of those have gone through the environment review process, some have not. The alignment is not completely defined for all of the segments. A lot of it is waiting on funding.
The I-69 got money to take a look at a proposal to try to determine the appropriate funding mechanisms and whether they toll the entire or segments of the corridor. They're working through details right now .
Okay. Another one for you, talking about the national region corridor significance. Could you advocate funding?
Whether or not projects of significance are part of the next reauthorization bill remains to be seen. That's a function of the different types of bills that are working their way through Congress or to Congress.
The corridors of the future, keep in mind, it wasn't to define only the corridors that the department would be interested in going forward. We had 38 proposals come to us, the six that were selected were the six best.
Are those necessarily the ones that the department would have chosen? Some yes, some no. All of those were individual states and groups of states that came to us
and offered to come together in an agreement to think about a corridor in a multi-jurisdictional framework. A number of the corridor groups have aggressively pursued thinking, they take off their state hat and put on a different hat
and think beyond the boundaries of their state.
Okay. I think we do have another question for Manny. The border crossing freight [ Indiscernible ] has been increasing faster than the San Diego county POEs, is that from land use patterns on the Mexican side?
That's why we're proposing to have a Newport of entry in the California area, that will help to alleviate the truck traffic for that area.
In this point we're in the process of sending the solicitation to consultants to help us to develop it. The state of California is interested in that. We're working closely with Cal TRANS .
Okay. Great. Thank you. That were all of the questions we have now. If the operator could assist with the instructions of how to ask a question over the phone.
Thank you. At this time we will begin questions. To ask a question please press star 1, unmute your phone, record your first and last name. The name is required to ask the question. To withdraw press star 2.
Please press star 1 to ask a question over the phone. One moment.
To ask a question please press star 1. I currently have no questions on the phones.
Okay. Thank you. I do want to quickly mention I will upload Tony's map. A couple of you have asked. I will upload the file to the webinar once it's over.
I also just wanted to make a brief mention about the FHWA freight peer to peer program.
I do have one question now.
Okay. We will take that.
You may go ahead.
Yes, a question for Tony. There's a gap between Reno and Salt Lake City.
Just curious about that, why there's that gap there.
The volumes of cargo were not sufficient to wind upping about on the map. All of this is data driven. We looked at where the cargo was moving and the volumes and tonnages and used that to drive where the corridors were places.
These are notional corridors, again.
It's one way to use data to help define where the national interest may be.
Just a surprise to see that gap on the map. Thank you.
If you have any questions regarding the data you can get ahold of us. I'm sure there's contact information at Talking Freight.
We're happy to walk you through the data we have.
Hi. This is for all three of the presenters. The question is other than the border coordination are any plans at the north American level to coordinate planning for freight corridors?
I will take the first crack at that. I think what we can do after we've figured out what the major corridors are, I think that's the direction that the administration would like to go. Where they link up is areas to focus our attention.
I'm not aware of any initiative underway to coordinate planning efforts.
This is James, nor am I. Not aware of a major initiative like that.
Once again no questions.
This is Manny, I would like to make a question, if I may.
Mexico is committed to fulfill at least six projects for this administration, however we are very interested in providing most information in regards to trade corridors that connect to United States before it goes to Canada.
Right now the funding in Mexico is very limited, as you probably know. We would be glad to work together and increase it to the next level. We would like to see more ITS and share that data between the three countries.
Thank you, Manny.
Again, I wanted to briefly mention the freight peer to peer program, which puts the public sector freight transportation professionals in touch with the field.
Please visit the freight peer to peer website.
I encourage you to visit the Talking Freight website to sign up for the next seminar. I will bring back up the address for you so you know where to go.
I would say thank you to Manny and James for their presentations today. Appreciate you taking the time out of your day to join us. It's remarkable to have someone in Canada, Mexico and the United States to talk to you today.
Our thanks to you.
Thank you very much, Tony.
Thanks, Tony, glad to help.
With that we will close out for today. I will be uploading Tony's map for you, so you can log back in and download that, or stay online and I will get it up.
Keep in mind it's a notional map. We thought it showed where the different countries are in their corridors. Again, what I presented was a way to look at major U.S. corridors, it does not represent departmental
or administrational position.
Thank you everybody. Have a good day.