MEMORANDUM                Date: October 12, 2009_ 

TO:     Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer, Port of Seattle 
Tim Farrell, Executive Director, Port of Tacoma 
FROM:    Kurt Beckett, Clare Gallagher, Port of Seattle 
Stephanie Bowman, Sean Eagan, Port of Tacoma 
SUBJECT:  Transportation Planning and Funding Policy Update 

BACKGROUND 
Both federal and state budgets have seen a decline in gas tax revenues, since the high cost per
gallon and increasing fuel efficiency of autos has reduced the volume of sales over the past few
years. As the federal government takes up the reauthorization of the Surface Transportation Act,
policy initiatives include alternative funding methods and reviewing the priorities of the nation"s
transportation network. At the state level, funding levels are very constrained after the 2015
biennium and work is underway to evaluate options to increase transportation investment. 
TODAY'S BRIEFING: 
Below is an overview of current federal, state and regional activities related to transportation
planning and transportation funding. 
FEDERAL 
Safe, Accountable, Flexible and Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users
(SAFETEA-LU) Reauthorization: 
SAFETEA-LU provides the funding and policy framework for the nation"s surface transportation
programs. The law expired at the end of September but, along with all federal agencies, was just
granted a one-month extension through Congressional action. The Highway Trust Fund, which
accounts for the majority of the Federal investment in infrastructure projects across the country,
is projected to become insolvent later this fall. The issue of how to address the nation"s aging
infrastructure while finding new and sustainable revenue sources for the Highway Trust Fund
has been the subject of considerable debate in Congress and between it and the Administration. 
Going into the final months of the first session of the 111th Congress, key policymakers do not
appear any closer to reaching resolution than they did earlier this summer, increasing the
likelihood that Congress will pass a short term extension of the current law this fall and kick the
larger reauthorization debate to next year, at a minimum. 
There continues to be an ongoing discussion regarding the value of a lengthy, 18-month 
extension of the current program to provide sufficient time to substantially revise the Act, versus

the feeling of some members that a faster timeline will compel members to reach agreement on
new program elements and policy direction.
The chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee has proposed a bill
(described below) that would likely require a gas tax increase to help pay for its various
elements. Concern about a potential tax increase, in part, drives legislative concerns with rapid
reauthorization. No bill has been introduced in the Senate. Members are evaluating new
methods of revenue collection, including taxes based on vehicle-miles-traveled, to address the
declining revenues from gas tax receipts but these significant changes in methodology and
collection have not garnered sufficient support among a broad base of legislators. 
As indicated by the proposed changes to SAFETEA-LU listed below, Congress is finally
beginning to recognize the need to make strategic investments in freight infrastructure and
expand the focus of certain federal programs to include improving goods movement. The ports 
of Seattle and Tacoma, along with other freight stakeholders, have been instrumental in
educating policymakers in both Congress and the Administration why federal investment and
policy in this area is so critical. The ports will need to continue to engage stakeholders directly
and through relevant coalitions or third parties, particularly as the Administration and various
committees in the Senate begin developing their own reauthorization proposals. 
Regardless of the slim prospects of passing a comprehensive bill this year, in June House
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman James Oberstar (D-MN) released a
detailed summary of his six-year, $500 billion proposal to reauthorize SAFETEA-LU and
develop a high-speed rail network. A few highlights of the House proposal follow: 
(1) $25 billion to establish a new Freight Improvement Program to support interstate commerce
and goods movement. This dedicated Federal funding stream would be allocated to the states
for freight projects. In turn, states would be required to consider freight transportation in a
"strategic, statewide context." In addition, states would be required to create new
performance measures to focus and track state efforts on improving the speed and reliability
of freight movement on both primary and secondary freight routes. 
(2) The creation of a new Under Secretary for Intermodalism at U.S. DOT responsible for
overseeing a rejuvenated Office of Intermodalism and Council of Intermodalism, and
spearheading efforts to create a national transportation strategic plan. An Under Secretary
would be a significant change at DOT and underscores the desire by lawmakers for the
Federal government to be a stronger partner in improving freight mobility.
(3) $25 billion for a new "Projects of National Significance Program" intended to provide
Federal funding to those multi-modal projects  including highway, transit, freight rail, and
intermodal  that serve a broad national purpose. This new program replaces the Projects of
National and Regional Significance, National Corridor Infrastructure Improvement, and
Coordinated Border Infrastructure programs that were created in SAFETEA-LU. This would
be a competitive program administered by the new Under Secretary for Intermodalism. 
(4) $50 billion for a new Metropolitan Mobility and Access program to provide direct Federal
assistance to major metropolitan areas. Funding would be distributed based on population

2 | P a g e

and travel time delay through multi-year financing agreements to implement metropolitan
mobility plans. These plans would need to include strategies for relieving congestion. 
(5) Reform of Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), including increasing the population
threshold to 100,000 (but grandfathers in already established MPOs) and requires
proportional voting. Also includes new planning requirements for MPOs serving more than
one million people and expands the scope of the planning process to include projects that
reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve connectivity and livability. 
(6) Creation of a National Infrastructure Bank designed to attract private capital investment in
surface transportation projects. The bank would provide credit assistance, including secured
loans, loan guarantees, and standby lines of credit as well as full-faith-and-credit guarantees
by the Federal government to institutional investors. 
This fall, our advocacy of reauthorization will likely focus on the Senate, with the same goal of
seeing a dedicated, multimodal freight program included in the Senate's draft language. 
As potential policy elements and funding proposals are worked at the federal level, the State
Legislature is engaged in its own study of transportation funding and meeting the state"s future
needs in infrastructure investment. Port staff continues to monitor activity at the state and
federal level to assess opportunities for coordination and possible conflicts in policy
development for freight mobility. 
National Infrastructure Investments provision in the Senate FY2010 Transportation, Housing and
Urban Development (THUD) Appropriations bill. 
The US Senate recently voted on the 2010 THUD Appropriations bill. Included in that bill is
language creating the National Infrastructure Investment (NII) program. The language creates
a $1.1 billion discretionary grant program provided to the Secretary, to fund surface
transportation infrastructure. Like TIGER, project eligibility is broadened beyond Title 23, and
the language actually calls for investment in 'a variety of modes'. 
This new program will offer an important source of monies for goods movement infrastructure
and will build upon the investments made through the Transportation Investment Generating
Economic Recovery (TIGER) program included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act of 2009. 
The discretionary nature of the proposed program is especially attractive. Programs which
distribute funds on a formula basis are not well suited to allocating monies to freight
infrastructure projects, which often involve multiple modes, cross various jurisdictional borders
and are frequently constructed in phases. 
At this time, the House is holding the THUD Appropriations bill for possible use as a vehicle for
the 2010 Omnibus bill. As such, the fate of the NII program is on hold for now. Members of the
goods movement caucus and other freight mobility interests are lobbying in support of the Senate
language during the ongoing conference committee work on the appropriation bill. The ports are
sending letters of support for this program. 

3 | P a g e

STATE 
Several initiatives relevant to freight mobility and overall transportation investment are
underway. 
State Transportation Budget: As the Legislature prepares to enter the 2010 legislative session, it
will face a transportation budget that is flat or somewhat down for the biennium. Tax revenue
dedicated for the transportation budget is down about $76 million, or 1.8 percent for the
biennium. Transportation budget writers, however, believe that much of that shortfall will be
made up by recent project costs coming under bid. There is no talk of a new transportation
revenue package for the 2010 session, before the election. Rather, budget writer are looking
forward to 2011 at which time the Joint Transportation Committee will have completed its
Implementing Alternative Transportation Funding Methods study. 
Legislative Joint Transportation Committtee (JTC): Implementing Alternative Transportation
Funding Methods. This interim study began early this year to conduct a comprehensive analysis
of mid-term and long-term transportation funding mechanisms and methods, including the
feasibility and practicality of implementing new methodologies. The goal is to develop a
package of funding tools that the legislature could consider to meet transportation funding
objectives, including a sufficient revenue stream; public benefits that reflect the use of the
system; equitable funding, both geographically and in allocating costs to those who benefit; and
allowing viable local transportation funding options. 
This study uses the 2007 study, which had initially proposed a container tax as one of many
options, as a starting point. JTC members, however, recently decided to remove this funding
mechanism from the list of options that it will consider. Costs to freight users are captured in
other proposed methodologies. 
To date, the study work has produced a lengthy matrix of possible funding methods the state
might implement as a slate of changes. The work has been thorough and clearly researched, and
at this time it seems likely that the committee members will entertain serious consideration of
one or more proposed methods.
Methods carried forward for further analysis include taxes related to fuel (barrel tax increase,
motor vehicle fuel tax, alternative fuel tax; use (highway facility tolls, highway congestion
pricing, highway system-wide pricing by vehicle miles traveled, and by truck weight); vehicles 
(rental vehicle sales tax, registration weight and title fees, combined license fee, motor vehicle
excise tax, tire tax); driver; transportation business (dealer/manufacturer business license,
state impact fee); electric generation from highways. 
As these are being evaluated, the goal is to measure the implications of the funding scenarios on
total revenues and individual taxpayers. The breakdown being used is by looking at
representative vehicle types at different levels of vehicle use. There are two types of freight
vehicles: medium, with a weight between 22,000-24,000 lbs, and heavy, with a weight between
40,000 and 42,000 lbs. The cost of collection, funding constraints (subject to 18th amendment or

4 | P a g e

legislative restrictions) and the ability to implement (Department of Licensing infrastructure) are
also components in evaluating feasibility. 
Eric Johnson, executive director of the Washington Public Ports Association (WPPA), is on the
stakeholder committee for the study. The draft report is due by the end of the year and further
product will be reviewed at meetings in November and early December. It is important to note
that report will only examine how the various funding mechanisms perform in meeting
transportation funding objectives. A funding package recommendation will not be produced
until 2010. 
Washington Transportation Commission: Washington Transportation Plan. The Washington
Transportation Plan (WTP) establishes a 20-year vision for the development of the statewide
transportation system, encompassing state highways and ferries to sidewalks and bike paths,
county roads, city streets, public transit, air and rail. The plan is intended to identify the total
unfunded statewide need over 20 years, identifies significant statewide transportation issues, and
recommends statewide transportation policies and strategies to the legislature and Governor. 
By law, the WTP is required to be consistent with state"s growth management goals, reflect the
priorities of government, and address regional needs, including multimodal transportation
planning. In addition, the WTP will be based on transportation policy goals established by the
Legislature: preservation, safety, mobility, environment and stewardship. 
The study work began this year and includes an advisory group of transportation users and
planners from public and private sector stakeholders. WPPA has asked Scott Keller, the
executive director of the Port of Benton County, to serve on the advisory group and Karen
Schmidt, executive director of the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board also serves on the
advisory group. 
Some of the current work highlights that a transportation system for 2030 has to accommodate
almost 1.7 million more people in the state; an older population, 20% over 65 years old; a
regulatory requirement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 25% below 1990 levels; the fact
of declining gas tax revenues to the state and federal governments; and the need to find
innovative ways to move people and goods. It has also noted that "affordable and predictable
movement of freight and goods is critical to our state"s economy," with a goal to coordinate
transportation investments with economic development, land use and environmental stewardship
priorities. 
After three advisory group meetings this summer focusing on the planning process and vision,
the Commission intends to hold outreach sessions the fourth quarter of this year on the work to
date. Continued outreach and work on draft policy recommendations will be the focus of next
year"s work. A draft report is scheduled to be reviewed by the Transportation Commission June
of next year, with the final 2011-2020 Washington Transportation Plan adopted in November
2010. 
WSDOT State Rail and Marine Office: Washington State Freight Rail Plan. The Washington
State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) State Rail and Marine Office is updating the
5 | P a g e

State Freight Rail Plan to meet both federal requirements (Public Law 110-432, Division B)
and the state requirements of RCW 47.76.220, so that the state is qualified for new federal grants
authorized through the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA). The
plan is scheduled to be completed by the end of 2009.
Many ports, as well as most other rail-connected entities, are participating in an advisory
committee, with the first meeting held in May. WSDOT is counting on members of the advisory
committee to assist the planning effort in a number of areas: everything from developing the
vision and goals of the plan, to updating information on the rail system, capacity and needs, port
access and rail abandonment issues, clarifying the beneficial aspects of rail infrastructure
investments and understanding concerns of local communities and organizations. Two surveys
have been distributed, on projects and on rail line abandonment. 
At the same time the work for this plan continues, the state and many entities are actively
engaged in preparing applications for federal stimulus money available for rail projects, both
passenger rail grants and discretionary projects under the TIGER program. 
With such a broad study goal, the timeline is tight to have a final report by the end of the year
and incorporate information relevant to freight mobility needs, especially from the container port
perspective. Staff from both Seattle and Tacoma are closely monitoring the work and have met
with WSDOT representatives and made substantial comments to much of the draft work
presented. We have also responded to the surveys and will continue to work closely with
WSDOT. The next meeting is an open house in October to review the material to date. 

REGIONAL 
PSRC Transportation 2040 Update: The PSRC is updating the region"s transportation plan which
will support the recently updated Vision 2040 Land Use Plan. Transportation 2040 is a multimodal
plan which will look at a combination of increased transit, improved efficiencies of the
existing system and new capacity to provide a balanced list of projects and programs to increase
mobility in the Puget Sound Region. 
The update, which is currently in the process of selecting a preferred alternative, will be
completed in the Spring of 2010. The plan has included a freight study to help advise the
preferred alternative. 
The Plan Update will propose new funding options, including tolling, for near- and long-term
transportation revenues. The plan includes projects within three categories of funding: Current
Law, Constrained, and Unprogrammed. Projects, such as the SR99 Bored Tunnel, Lincoln and
Spokane Streets, are included in Current Law funding. The preferred alternative's Constrained
funding plan includes both the SR509 extension and SR167 projects. It is currently about $70B
higher than current law revenue projections. The Unprogrammed list includes an additional $30B
in projects. 

6 | P a g e

COMMISSIONERS' PREVIOUS DIRECTION: 
April 1, 2008: Commissioners from the Ports of Seattle and Tacoma participated in a joint study
session focusing on current and future cooperative efforts, including infrastructure. The
commissioners called for creation of an "Infrastructure Issues Study Group." 
October 8, 2008: Infrastructure Issues Group presented the Transportation White Paper, plus
information on federal, state and regional policy initiatives, federal and state legislation and
Funding Principles to the commissioners. 
The commissioners requested a refined project list with a limited number of "top priority
projects" for consideration in the coming year. 
April 30, 2009: At the April 30, 2009 meeting, the Infrastructure Issues Group presented an
update on the funding status of High Priority Infrastructure road and rail Projects. The Joint
Commission directed staff to continue to look for ways to identify the most critical infrastructure
projects that would increase cargo movement productivity to be prepared when the Panama
Canal improvements are implemented in 2014. The Commission noted great progress in critical
roadway infrastructure thanks to ARRA grants and additional Port funding, but wanted to better
understand the I-5 Rail Projects and recommended a tour of the projects. 
The Commission also discussed meetings with the Valley Cities and a desire to assist them in
getting preservation and maintenance funding for key freight routes in these cities. 









7 | P a g e

MEMORANDUM                Date_October 12, 2009_ 

TO:      Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer, Port of Seattle 
Tim Farrell, Executive Director, Port of Tacoma 
FROM:    Kurt Beckett, Dan Burke, Clare Gallagher, Geri Poor, Port of Seattle 
Stephanie Bowman, Sean Eagan, Mike Reilly, Port of Tacoma 
SUBJECT:  Joint Ports Transportation Status Update High Priority Infrastructure Projects 

BACKGROUND 
Since Fall 2008, the Port Commissions of Seattle and Tacoma identified high priority rail and
roadway improvements that are critical for freight mobility in the Pacific Northwest and for
maintaining competiveness with other international gateways in the United States, Canada and
Mexico. Staff from both the ports of Tacoma and Seattle have worked with the commissions for
the past year to identify a list of needed projects, and from that list, determine which ones are the
most important to meet short and mid-range needs to keep pace with competing ports. Along
with near-term investments by competitor ports, the opening of the widened Panama Canal in
year 2014 will create new opportunities for southeast US ports. 
Fortunately, we have identified funding to close the gap for many of the roadway High Priority
Projects, given the influx of ARRA stimulus funds and Port funding, and we're now positioned
to provide opportunities to begin construction on these some of the projects. In partnership with
the State Freight Rail Office, the rail projects' progress is the application for ARRA High Speed
Passenger Rail funding which will be awarded as reviews are completed in February, 2010.
Obligation for Track 1 funds is September 30, 2010 and obligation for Track 2 funds is
September 30, 2011. 
We continue to seek funding for road and rail projects at all levels to help fund the needed
projects. In addition to the original list of High Priority Projects, other high cost, "megaprojects"
need funding, including the SR 99 Bored Tunnel corridor (Viaduct Replacement), SR
509 extension in King County, SR 167 extension in Pierce County, and I-90 projects at
Snoqualmie Pass and across Lake Washington. These will require billions of dollars to
construct. In our experience, freight projects -- and specifically those with port benefits -- risk
falling through the cracks in the federal funding competitions for reasons of project type and
funds distribution protocol. Since the projects have a high cost, are complex and located in less
visible sites (industrial areas), and may cross jurisdictional boundaries, they are less competitive 
in the funding process. In addition, broad allocation of federal funds (both by mode and
geography) means smaller quantities of funding are available. Renewed attention at the federal
and state levels for potential new funding sources may break this logjam. The ports are devoting
energy to identifying the benefits of freight investments to raise their visibility on the funding
competition. 
1 | P a g e

While many funding options are being considered, tolling has been authorized for the SR 520
Bridge project and the SR 167 HOT lanes pilot project. The legislature has also called for tolling
studies for the SR99 Bored Tunnel (Alaskan Way Viaduct), SR 509 and SR 167 extensions.
Another funding source could be a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) tax which would replace the
existing diminishing gas tax revenues. 

STATUS OF HIGH PRIORITY PROJECTS, AS OF OCTOBER 2009: 
Below is a matrix including the POT/POS High Priority Rail and Road projects, and additional
projects that will be needed to meet future freight mobility needs. 
Status of High
Priority     Funding    New
Status      Why It's Important 
Recommended   Gap   Funding 
Projects 
Ellensburg-Lind   $0              Passed 2009        Extension of Sunset
Sunset Clause                     Legislature; Signed   Clause will preserve the
by the Governor May  corridor for future rail for
5, 2009.            next 10 years 
Port/Railroad     $0               West Coast Port     West Coast Ports
Coordination                      Directors met in DC   speaking with one voice
with T&I Committee  on specific policy
Staff on May 8; Met   decisions will increase
again in Oakland on   our visibility and help to
June 3; Met with UP  direct funding to critical
and BNSF in separate  investments. 
meetings in Oakland
on August 28.       POS/POT viewed rail
projects first hand and
Port of Seattle and    coordinated with other
Port of Tacoma      port staffs 
Commission and staff
conducted a two-day  Rail stakeholders update
SW Rail Tour on July  State Rail Plan and set
8-9.                strategies and priorities
for future 
Washington State Rail
Office conducts State 
Rail Update (expected
completion 12/09) 

Rail       Funding    New         Status 
Gap    Funding 
2 | P a g e

Point Defiance    $95M    $0        Coordinate with State  Building a passenger rail
Bypass                Applied   Rail office on High   bypass track allows
for       Speed Passenger Rail  increased speed for both
$91.2M   grant           passenger trains on the
High                  bypass and freight trains
Speed Rail                  on the existing route. 
Kelso Martin Bluff         $0        Coordinating with    Project phases primarily
(Total of $222M                  State Rail Office on   build sidings or mainline
in six phases)              Applied    ARRA High speed    track to help separate
for:        Passenger Rail grants;  freight and passenger rail
Ph 1:Sidings     $35.6M   $35.6M    applied for $50.5M    to benefit speed and
Ph. 2:Sidings     $ 2.7M   $ 2.7M     for 4 different phases   reliability for both 
Ph 3:Mainline    $ 7.7M   $ 7.7M 
Ph 4:Mainline     $ 4.5M   $ 4.5M 
Vancouver Bypass  $68M    $0       Project provides new  This project provides a
Applied    middle lead and by-   siding track for freight
for       pass tracks          trains and a by-pass track
$39.3M                to help separate freight
High                  and passenger rail traffic
Speed Rail                  for the benefit of both.
Speeds will be improved 
and reliability increased. 
Port West       $7M     $2.5M    Construction of loop  Total project is $130M.
Vancouver Freight         stimulus   within Port to       This phase provides great
Access Project            (state)     eliminate delays of    mainline capacity
$700k    unit train crossing    benefits for through
Legislature  mainline. FMSIB     traffic and eliminates
$16M left $7M gap in  crossing of freight trains
this phase; Legislature  crossing mainline. 
provided $700k of
gap in 2009. 
Blakeslee Junction  $32M    $0        Freight Rail project   Phases 1A and 1B will
with 5-phases,       help reduce rail and
ineligible for High    roadway traffic
Speed Passenger Rail  congestion. Supports a
funds, has $12.8M for  connection for Tacoma
phases 1A & 1B      Rail at Blakeslee Junction
and improves rail speeds
through Centralia. 
Roadway    Funding   New       Status 
Gap    Funding 
Lincoln Ave.     $27.2M   $15.4M   Port of Tacoma funds  This project will help
Grade Separation          stimulus    remaining, ground    improve rail and road
$11.6M   breaking September  efficiencies, speeding
POT     18, 2009         freight and providing air
quality benefits. 
3 | P a g e

Spokane Street    $50M    $15.4M    State Transportation   This project will reduce
Viaduct                stimulus    budget funds final    traffic congestion and
$35.6M   $10 m, Bid openings  improve safety for the
Seattle     in Sept, 2009         "trips first and last mile". 
East Marginal     $17.3    $3.4M    Received $3.4M     This project will improve
Way Grade           ARRA    ARRA grant, Port of  speed and safety for
Separation               $13.9M    Seattle has funded     container trucks between
POS     remaining, bids     the marine terminals and
opened; award      rail yards 
expected in October. 
11th Street Viaduct  $5M     $0        No action           Project is currently not a
high priority 
Other Priority    Funding  New
Road Projects    Gap     Funding 
SR 509 (King Co)                  The project is ready to The SR 509 Project has a
(Total cost:$1.4B)                   go but is waiting on   strong freight component
funding. WSDOT is   and would: 
looking at ways to        Reduce I-5
phase the project.          Congestion 
Needs significant         Improve airport
$1.25B           funding               access 
Allow local
development 
Improve link to
Seaport/Warehou
se areas 
SR 99 Bored                   State, City and King  The Bored Tunnel
Tunnel (Viaduct)           $0        County have        provides the capacity
(Total                  Port of    identified funding    needed to keep traffic
Replacement cost         Seattle is   sources for funding   congestion off the critical
$4.2B)          $300     looking at  $3.9B for project     freight route arterials near
funding                  the marine terminals;
towards                  allows viaduct to remain
gap.                        during construction,
reducing traffic impacts. 
SR 167 (Pierce                   SR 167 Extension Ph  The four-lane limited
$63.4M
Co)                           1 and 2           access freeway will
for
improve safety and
$2.1B    property in
capacity and improve
2009 State
freight movement to and
budget 
from the Port of Tacoma 
SR 18                        Three phases from I-5  SR 18 provides a freight
(Total                           to I-90            route from Eastern
$500M 
cost:$500M)                                    Washington to the Green
River Valley. 
Sound Transit            $3.1B                    The implementation of
4 | P a g e

LRT         $0     funded in  Airport to Star Lake   the light rail system both
South: Airport    $0      Sound    (2 phases) Funded Ph  near the Sea-Tac Airport
East: Translake            Transit 2   2 Seattle to         and across I-90 to the
(Total Cost: $3.1B         Package    Redmond/Overlake    eastside will reduce SOV
and is funded in                                     traffic providing
SoundTransit 2)                                    additional capacity for
freight 
Sound Transit                    Adds four two-way   The Implementation of
Sounder                       Sounder Trips      four additional Sounder
(Total Cost is                       between Lakewood    Trains in the South End
$658 and is funded                 and Seattle (brings    has two distinct benefits
in Sound Transit                   total to 13) while     for freight: First, it
2)                                 providing track and    reduces SOV traffic,
$0      $658M 
station improvements   secondly, it provides
funding for rail and track
improvements to mitigate
additional passenger
trains on shared freight
rail tracks 
Green River                     Combined Tiger     Provides critical grade
Valley Grade                    Grant request of     separation and access
Separations                 TIGER $50.6M would       projects that improve
-----------------------              Request:  complete all five      safety and efficiency of
Strander Blvd.       $15M      $15M  projects.           both freight and auto
Willis St.            $15M      $15M                    traffic. 
M. Street           $10.6      $10.6 
70th Avenue E       $7.4M     $7.4M 
POT Rd/SB I-5     $2.0M    $2.0M 
Exit Ramp 
I-90/Snoqualmie                  Phase 1 improves five  Project improves critical
Pass                            miles of I-90,       freight corridor on I-90
(Total Cost:                       including snowshed   between eastern and
$595M Ph1; Ph 2                improvements, from  western Washington
unknown)       $0      $0       Hyak to Keechelus   which currently carries
Dam. Phase 2, I-90   35-million tons of
from Keechelus Dam  agricultural and industrial
to Easton, is currently  freight. 
unfunded. 
Mercer Corridor                   The City of Seattle    The Mercer Corridor
Applied
(Total Project                      applied for a $50M    provides a needed freight
for TIGER
Cost: $290M)                    Tiger Grant for      corridor between the
Grant: 
Mercer East and has   North Portal of the SR 99
$50M    $50M for
Mercer East                      established a strategy  Bored Tunnel, Interstate
$100M   Mercer
Mercer West                    to fully fund Mercer   5 (I-5) and the industrial
East 
West.             areas between the north
5 | P a g e

Seattle waterfront and
Ballard. This is especially
critical during
reconstruction of the
viaduct on the Seattle
waterfront. 

COMMISSIONERS' PREVIOUS DIRECTION: 
April 1, 2008: Commissioners from the Ports of Seattle and Tacoma participated in a joint study
session focusing on current and future cooperative efforts, including infrastructure. The
Commissioners called for creation of an "Infrastructure Issues Study Group." 
October 8, 2008: Infrastructure Issues Group presented Transportation White Paper, plus
information on Federal, State and Regional Policy Initiatives, Federal and State Legislation and
Funding Principles to the POS and POT Commissioners. 
The Commissioners requested a refined project list with a limited number of "top priority
projects" for consideration in the coming year. 
April 30, 2009: The Infrastructure Issues Group presented an update on the funding status of
High Priority Infrastructure road and rail Projects. The Joint Commission directed staff to
continue to look for ways to identify the most critical infrastructure projects that would increase
cargo movement productivity to be prepared when the Panama Canal improvements are
implemented in 2014. The Commission noted great progress in critical roadway infrastructure
thanks to ARRA grants and additional Port funding, but wanted to better understand the I-5 Rail
Projects and recommended a tour of the projects. 
The Commission also discussed meetings with the Valley Cities and a desire to assist them in
getting preservation and maintenance funding for key freight routes in these cities. 






6 | P a g e