# Breakdown of Redistributed $1.2 Billion?



## Daniel (Dec 13, 2010)

Does anybody have a link to a breakdown of the individual projects that will be funded with the redistributed $1.2 billion from WI and OH?


----------



## PRR 60 (Dec 13, 2010)

California: up to $624 million

Florida: up to $342.3 million

Washington State: up to $161.5 million

Illinois: up to $42.3 million

New York: up to $7.3 million

Maine: up to $3.3 million

Massachusetts: up to $2.8 million

Vermont: up to $2.7 million

Missouri up to $2.2 million

Wisconsin: up to $2 million for the Hiawatha line

Oregon: up to $1.6 million

North Carolina: up to $1.5 million

Iowa: up to $309,080

Indiana: up to $364,980


----------



## Ryan (Dec 13, 2010)

Link.


----------



## Daniel (Dec 13, 2010)

Thanks Ryan, but is there a further breakdown of each of the projects for each state?


----------



## Eric S (Dec 14, 2010)

Daniel said:


> Thanks Ryan, but is there a further breakdown of each of the projects for each state?


With the exception of the largest few (CA, FL, maybe WA), the awards essentially just fully funded previous applications that received a little bit less than full funding. For instance, IL received $1.1 billion (in Jan. 2010 I believe) for a $1.142 billion request. As far as I can tell, no "new" projects received funding, it was just a little more funding for already-funded plans.


----------



## DaveKCMO (Dec 24, 2010)

The additional money for Missouri will be used as such (from the Missouri River Runner Facebook page):



> The 2.2 million will not be used to directly fund the River Runner or for it's operation of our passenger rail service. The 2.2 million will be used on preliminary engineering and environmental compliance completion for various future railroad projects to build capacity and reliability on the St. Louis to Kansas City rail corridor. When these projects were awarded to Missouri in January, 2010, we were shorted by this amount on our application, so this additional amount will fully fund the preparation for those projects.


----------



## George Harris (Dec 24, 2010)

PRR 60 said:


> California: up to $624 million


This additional money, with the added state portion is supposed to be sufficient to get the initial segment to Bakersfield, or really close. Through Bakersfield, like through Fresno, the line is on a lengthy viaduct, which makes it more costly than the rather simple straightforward electrified double track railroad mostly on the ground adjacent to BNSF that it is for much of the line in between.

The independent utility requirement, or whatever the words are which I keep forgetting, means that whatever segment is built will be usable even if nothing else is built. This means that this initial segment will be capable of being tied into the BNSF line used by Amtrak on both ends so that the current San Joaquin service can use it if nothing else is ever built. For the length of whatever distance is built, the current equipment used on the San Joaquin can run 110 to 125 mph, which will save some time.


----------

