DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

2

DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK

VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program 

Step 2 Service Development Plan

FRA published the first Draft Statement of Work Framework in August 2023. This 

updated version – published in March 2024 – is intended to supersede the August 2023 

draft document. The new version reflects changes in the program’s terms and conditions

(Attachment 2) as well as for minor changes and clarifications based on industry 

feedback FRA received on the August 2023 draft document.

A. INTRODUCTION

The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Corridor Identification and Development 

Program (CIDP) is a comprehensive intercity passenger rail planning and development 

program that will help guide intercity passenger rail development throughout the country 

and create a pipeline of intercity passenger rail products ready for implementation.

Under the CIDP, corridor development will occur in three sequenced steps: Step 1 –

Corridor Development Initiation and Scope, Schedule, and Cost Estimate for Preparing a 

Service Development Plan (SDP); Step 2 – Service Development Plan; and Step 3 –

Project Development.

The purpose of this document is to provide a scope of work (SOW) framework for 

conducting a service development plan (SDP) under Step 2 of the CIDP. This document 

is based on previous service development planning efforts funded by FRA and is 

intended to provide interested corridor sponsors early expectations about the types and 

levels of analysis expected to conduct a SDP under 49 U.S.C. § 25101(d) for a new 

passenger rail corridor. The tasks in an SOW for improvements to or an extension of an 

existing service under the CIDP may be similar to the tasks identified in this document, 

although some tasks may be scaled back or unnecessary.

FRA will evaluate any prior SDP efforts, including previously completed SDPs or SDP 

elements, during Step 1 to assess whether those efforts may fulfill some of the subtasks 

and tasks identified below or whether updates or modifications to existing analyses is 

necessary as part of Step 2. Updates or modifications may be necessary due to differences 

between the previous efforts and what the corridor sponsor proposed under CIDP, as well 

as the lifespan/timing of the previous work.

Completing a SDP under CIDP occurs during the Project Planning stage of the Project 

Lifecycle as outlined in FRA’s Guidance on Development and Implementation of 

Railroad Capital Projects (January 11, 2023).1 FRA will consider completion of the SDP 

1 The Guidance on Development and Implementation of Railroad Capital Projects (January 11, 2023) is 
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

3

under Step 2, other applicable documentation, and corridor readiness when assessing 

whether a project is ready to advance to the Project Development stage, which includes 

both environmental review (i.e., NEPA) and preliminary engineering, under Step 3 of the 

CIDP.

The intended audience of this framework includes interested corridor sponsors, partners, 

stakeholders, and professionals who contribute to completing the tasks outlined herein. 

Throughout the document, FRA has provided instructions to help potential corridor 

sponsors understand the intent of the tasks and subtasks related to preparing a service

development plan and how the tasks might be tailored for the specific and unique 

circumstances of individual corridors.

For the purposes of this framework, “work products” are generally required for FRA to 

ensure methodologies and outputs are developed succinctly and appropriately for specific 

technical analyses, while “deliverables” represent the substantial completion of an overall 

task, including the culmination of work products under each task.

available at https://railroads.dot.gov/elibrary/fra-guidance-development-and-implementation-railroadcapital-project
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

4

B. SOW FRAMEWORK

I. BACKGROUND

Instructions: In this section, the Recipient will provide a high-level background of the 

corridor history/status to inform the SDP preparation (approximately 1⁄2 page).

Information may include, but is not limited to:

• Identifying existing corridor service characteristics (if applicable) or identifying 

high-level characteristics of proposed corridor

• If an existing corridor, provide a high-level statement of intent for service 

development planning effort, such as “to improve reliability” or “extend current 

corridor from X to Y” or “to increase frequencies from X to Y”

• Identifying relevant stakeholders in the development of the proposed corridor

• Identifying relevant preceding efforts which may have been completed to date 

(which would be validated by FRA under Step 1)

II. OBJECTIVE

This grant will fund the completion of a SDP for “Insert Corridor Name” Corridor in 

partnership with FRA. The main objectives of a SDP are to identify the draft Purpose and 

Need Statement for intercity passenger rail development; incorporate an analysis of 

alternatives supported by technical transportation planning and conceptual engineering; 

incorporate a high-level analysis and consideration of environmental factors associated 

with the alternatives; include input provided through public involvement and relevant 

public agencies; and identify the governance structure for the implementation and 

operation of the “Insert Corridor Name” Corridor.

The SDP results in a corridor project inventory identify the capital projects necessary to 

achieve the proposed service. The SDP serves as the foundation for Step 3 Project 

Development activities under the CIDP.

III.PROJECT LOCATION

Instructions: In this section, the Recipient will describe and identify the “Insert

Corridor Name” project’s2 study area (Study Area) and provide a map identifying at a 

minimum the major markets the corridor is intending to serve. The description may 

include identifying existing rail corridors that are relevant to the SDP.

IV.DESCRIPTION OF WORK

The Recipient will complete the Project through the following tasks:

2 For purposes of this Statement of Work, the term “Project” refers to the scope of this grant. The term 

“Insert Corridor Name Project” refers to the proposed passenger rail system and subject of this planning 

effort.
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

5

TASK 1: PROJECT ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT

Subtask 1.1: Project Management

Instructions: Identify all Project partners and other entities responsible for implementing 

the Project. Identify all actions the Recipient will perform to ensure the effective 

management and oversight of the Project.

The Recipient will perform all tasks required for the Project through a coordinated 

process, which will involve affected railroad owners, operators, and funding partners, 

including:

• [list parties other than the Recipient and identify role]

• FRA

The Recipient will facilitate the coordination of all activities necessary for 

implementation of the Project. Upon award of the Project, the Recipient will:

• Participate in a project kickoff meeting with FRA [if not already held prior to 

award]

• Complete necessary steps to hire a qualified consultant/contractor to perform 

required Project work, as necessary

• Hold regularly scheduled Project meetings with FRA

• inspect and approve work as it is completed; and

• participate in other coordination, as needed.

The Recipient will prepare a project management plan (PMP), budget, and schedule for 

completing Step 2. The PMP will include information about the project management 

approach, including team organization, team decision-making, roles and responsibilities, 

and address quality assurance and quality control procedures. The PMP, budget, and 

schedule will be reviewed and approved by FRA.

Subtask 1.2: Step 2 Project Management Plan

The Recipient will prepare a Project Management Plan (PMP) for Step 2 that describes how 

the Project will be implemented and monitored to ensure effective, efficient, and safe 

delivery of the Project on time and within budget. The PMP will describe the activities and 

steps necessary to complete the tasks outlined in this Statement of Work.

The PMP will include a Project Schedule and Project Budget for the work to be performed 

under this Agreement. The Project Schedule will be consistent with the Approved Project 

Schedule from CID Step 1, but provide a greater level of detail. Similarly, the Project 

Budget should be consistent with the Approved Project Budget from CID Step 1, but 
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

6

provide a greater level of detail.

The Recipient will submit the PMP to FRA for review and approval. The Recipient will 

implement the Project as described in the approved PMP. The Recipient will not begin work 

on subsequent tasks until FRA has provided written approval of the PMP.

FRA may require the Recipient to update the PMP. The Recipient will submit any such 

updates to FRA for review and approval, and FRA will determine if updates to the PMP 

require an amendment to this Agreement.

Subtask 1.3: Project Closeout

The Recipient will submit a Final Performance Report to FRA within 120 days of the end 

of the grant’s period of performance. The Final Performance Report should describe the 

cumulative activities of the Project, including a complete description of the Recipient’s 

achievements with respect to the Project objectives, milestones, and deliverables.

Task 1 Deliverables:

● Project Management Plan, Budget, and Schedule

● Final Performance Report
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

7

TASK 2: DRAFT PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT & STAKEHOLDER 

COORDINATION

Instructions: If applicable, a corridor sponsor may be able to use existing data, 

analyses, and approaches required to fulfill many of the subtasks associated with Task

2. In Step 1 of the CIDP, FRA will evaluate previous materials developed by the 

Recipient and determine whether previous methodologies and outputs fulfill the 

objectives of the subtasks; whether previous methodologies and outputs require an 

update or refresh; or whether the corridor sponsor needs to develop new components to 

fulfill the task. Based on the Step 1 intake process, the language under each sub-task is 

subject to modification.

The objectives of Task 2 are to develop a draft Purpose and Need Statement and identify 

the key stakeholders and coordination approaches to inform the technical analyses of the 

SDP. The Recipient will not begin work on Tasks 3, 4, and 5 until the draft Purpose and 

Need Statement, Railroad Stakeholder Coordination Plan, Agency Coordination Plan, and 

Public Coordination Plan have been completed, submitted to FRA, and the Recipient has 

received approval in writing from FRA.

Subtask 2.1: Draft Purpose and Need Statement

The Recipient will develop a draft Purpose and Need Statement that will serve as the 

foundation for the analysis of the SDP and the evaluation of infrastructure improvements 

to be identified through Tasks 3 and 4.

In developing a draft Purpose and Need Statement, the Recipient will consider the broad 

market conditions that inform the corridor, which may include work undertaken as part of 

Subtask 2.2, some of the provisions identified under 49 U.S.C. 25101(c), and a 

description of how the corridor would contribute to the development of a multi-State

regional network of intercity passenger rail (consistent with 49 U.S.C. 25101(d)(9)). The 

Recipient will review previously prepared studies to help identify Purpose and Need 

information as appropriate (e.g., local planning studies, engineering feasibility studies, 

etc.). If applicable, the Recipient may rely on a vision statement or information that was 

developed to support a previous phase of the Insert Corridor Name Project to inform the 

draft Purpose and Need Statement. The Recipient will submit the draft Purpose and Need 

Statement to FRA for review and approval.

The Recipient will develop and refine the draft Purpose and Need Statement, as 

necessary, to address information collected on the Insert Corridor Name Project during 

data collection, transportation analysis, and public and agency scoping and involvement. 

The draft Purpose and Need Statement will be subject to agency and public review and 

comment as part of the subsequent National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process 

in Step 3 of the CIDP.
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

8

Subtask 2.2: Market Analysis

The objective of this subtask is to identify factors, conditions, and characteristics of 

intercity passenger rail transportation for the Insert Corridor Name Project. Market 

analysis considers the existing and projected characteristics of the transportation market 

to be served. Market analysis typically focuses on broader corridor wide data trends, 

such as passenger travel volumes in the corridor by mode, current and future quality of 

transportation service, and demographic trends.

The goal of market analysis is to identify gaps between current rail service and rail 

service desired by users and potential users, and to analyze quantitative data for the draft 

Purpose and Need Statement. Market analysis establishes the context for the role that the 

proposed rail service will play in that intercity travel market and helps determine the 

factors to be considered in travel demand forecasting (Subtask 4.3). Information from 

earlier and relevant planning efforts associated with the corridor, such as regional rail 

planning efforts, may be utilized to inform market analysis. Market analysis outputs 

should include travel volumes by mode, service characteristics between major cities, and 

demographic and macroeconomic trends.

The Receipt will also consider other potential intercity passenger rail efforts which may 

share the same stations, corridor segments, or geographic markets in the market analysis. 

The Recipient will submit a Market Analysis Report to FRA for review and approval.

Subtask 2.3: Railroad Stakeholder Engagement Plan

Instructions: The FRA Outreach Team is available to provide support and direction to 

the corridor sponsor in developing the appropriate level of outreach with host and 

operating railroad.

The Recipient will prepare and submit to FRA for approval a Railroad Stakeholder 

Engagement Plan that will outline the role of the host railroad(s), applicable operating 

railroads, and the potential corridor service operator(s) in the Insert Corridor Name

Project’s Study Area.

The plan will identify involvement activities linked to key milestones in the 

planning/engineering and alternatives analysis process and align with the schedule from 

Task 1. Involvement activities will include the corridor sponsor’s planned engagement 

activities with key railroad stakeholders. The Railroad Stakeholder Engagement Plan will 

include a proposed schedule for completing the Insert Corridor Name Project analysis 

that accounts for engagement activities and appropriate review periods with key rail 

stakeholders. Railroad stakeholder engagement activities identified in the plan will be 

completed as part of Subtask 265 primarily during the completion of Tasks 3, 4, and 5, 

and all efforts will be summarized and documented in a Stakeholder, Agency, and Public 

Engagement Summary Report after the completion of Task 5.
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

9

Subtask 2.4: SDP Agency Coordination Plan

The Recipient will prepare and submit to FRA for approval an SDP Agency Coordination 

Plan that will outline the role of public agencies and Federally recognized tribes in the 

Insert Corridor Name Project. The plan will identify key contacts within potential state, 

local, and federal agencies, and tribal governments that the Recipient will attempt to 

consult. The Recipient will engage stakeholders throughout the entirety of this planning 

phase of the Insert Corridor Name Project.

The plan will identify involvement activities linked to key milestones in the 

planning/engineering and alternatives analysis process and align with the schedule from 

Task 1. Involvement activities may include individual agency or tribal consultation 

meetings, existing agency or tribal coordination efforts, or developing topic specific 

technical working groups. The Agency Coordination Plan will include a project schedule 

for completing the Insert Corridor Name Project analysis that accounts for appropriate 

review and a schedule for corresponding engagement activities with agencies and tribal 

governments. Agency coordination activities identified in the plan will be completed as 

part of Subtask 2.6 primarily during the completion of Tasks 3, 4, and 5, and all efforts 

will be summarized and documented in a Stakeholder, Agency, and Public Engagement 

Summary Report after the completion of Task 5.

Subtask 2.5: Public Coordination Plan

The Recipient will prepare and submit to FRA for approval a Public Coordination Plan 

that will outline the role of the public in the Insert Corridor Name Project. The plan will

identify key contacts within civic and business groups, public officials, non-federally 

recognized tribes, relevant interest groups, present and potential riders/users, private 

service providers/shippers, communities with environmental justice concerns, and the 

public. If not already identified in the previous two subtasks, the Public Coordination 

Plan will identify all relevant entities required to be consulted in the preparation of the 

SDP as identified under 49 U.S.C. § 25101(e).

The plan will identify involvement activities linked to key milestones in the 

planning/engineering and alternatives analysis process and align with the schedule from 

Task 1. Involvement activities will include the corridor sponsor’s planned engagement 

activities with key public stakeholders. Activities may also include project specific public 

meetings, virtual engagement opportunities, consultation meetings, existing agency 

coordination efforts, or developing topic specific technical working groups. The Public 

Coordination Plan will include a project schedule for completing the Insert Corridor

Name Project analysis that accounts for appropriate review and a schedule for 

corresponding engagement activities with public stakeholders. Public engagement 

activities identified in the plan will be completed as part of Subtask 2.6 primarily during 

the completion of Tasks 3, 4, and 5, and all efforts will be summarized and documented 

in a Stakeholder, Agency, and Public Engagement Summary Report after the completion 

of Task 5.
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

10

Subtask 2.6: Engagement Activities

The Recipient will perform the public and agency engagement activities identified in the 

Railroad Stakeholder Engagement Plan, Public Coordination Plan and SDP Agency 

Coordination Plan as part of Subtasks 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5. These activities may include, but 

are not limited to, project specific public meetings, virtual engagement opportunities, 

consultation meetings, existing agency coordination efforts, or conducting topic specific 

technical working groups. Engagement activities will be completed primarily during the 

completion of Tasks 3, 4, and 5, and all efforts will be documented in a Stakeholder, 

Agency, and Public Engagement Summary Report after the completion of Task 5.

Task 2 Deliverables:

● Draft Purpose and Need Statement

● Draft and Final Market Analysis Report

● Railroad Stakeholder Engagement Plan

● Agency Coordination Plan

● Public Coordination Plan

● Stakeholder, Agency, and Public Engagement Summary Report
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

11

TASK 3: ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS

Instructions: If applicable, a corridor sponsor may be able to use existing data, 

analyses, and approaches required to fulfill many of the subtasks associated with Task

3. In Step 1 of the CIDP, FRA will evaluate previous materials developed by the 

Recipient and determine whether previous methodologies and outputs fulfill the 

objectives of the subtasks, whether previous methodologies and outputs require an 

update or refresh, or whether the corridor sponsor needs to develop new components to

fulfill the task. Additionally, if the proposed corridor program is for improvements 

and/or extension of an existing service, some steps of the alternative analysis may not 

be necessary and/or can be scaled back considerably. The corridor sponsor will engage 

FRA during the Step 1 process to determine the appropriate degree of analysis required 

under this task. Based on the Step 1 intake process, the language under each sub-task 

is subject to modification.

The objective of this task is to conduct an alternatives analysis to identify preliminary 

alternatives for the proposed infrastructure investments that satisfy the draft Purpose and 

Need statement developed under Task 2. The Recipient will complete Task 3 

concurrently with, and supported by, the analytical outputs of Tasks 4 and 5. After 

completion of the SDP, the preliminary alternatives will be evaluated further in a 

subsequent NEPA process in Step 3 of the CIDP.

Under each subtask of the Alternatives Analysis, the Recipient will develop or refine and 

evaluate options for satisfying the draft Purpose and Need Statement. These will include 

options for routes (“Route Options”), service configurations (“Service Options”), and 

physical infrastructure investments (“Investment Packages”), which will be comprised of 

multiple individual infrastructure projects (or “Component Investments”). The 

Alternatives Analysis may also include developing and evaluating “Design Options” for 

each Component Investment. The Recipient will develop or refine and evaluate each type 

of Option sequentially as separate subtasks, beginning with Subtask 3.1.

Taken together, the Route, Service, and Investment Package Options, and corresponding 

Design Options carried forward under the respective subtasks will define the preliminary 

alternatives for the proposed infrastructure investments that will ultimately comprise the 

corridor project inventory (consistent with 49 U.S.C. 25101(d)(2)(A)).

Under each subtask, the Recipient will first prepare a Methodology Work Product that 

describes the methodology for conducting the options analysis under that subtask, 

including:

• The methods to be used for developing or refining options;

• The criteria for evaluating the options to determine which will be carried forward 

for further screening in the next subtask, including:

o Metrics (quantitative and qualitative) to be used;

o Method of evaluating options against those metrics (i.e., measurement 

methods); and

o Standards, based on the assessment of options against the identified 

metrics, for determining which options will be carried forward for further 

screening in the next subtask;

• The means for incorporating the analytical outputs of Tasks 4 and 5; and
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

12

• The means for incorporating stakeholder input in accordance with the 

coordination plans developed under Task 2.

The Recipient will submit the Methodology Work Product for each subtask in Task 3 to 

FRA. The Recipient will not commence work on the options analysis for the subtask until 

FRA has provided written approval of the Methodology Work Product. Following receipt

of written approval from FRA, the Recipient will conduct the options analysis for the 

subtask in accordance with the approved Methodology Work Product.

Upon completing the options analysis for each subtask in Task 3, the Recipient will 

prepare and submit to FRA a Final Subtask Work Product. The Recipient will not 

commence work on the subsequent subtask until FRA has provided written approval of 

the Final Subtask Work Product.

Upon completion of Subtask 3.4, the Recipient will submit a Preliminary Alternatives 

Analysis Report that summarizes the work undertaken in each subtask and identifies the 

preliminary alternatives that will be carried forward for further evaluation as part of the 

NEPA process in Step 3 of the CIDP.

Subtask 3.1: Route Options Analysis

The Recipient will develop and assess potential routes for the proposed rail line through 

the Study Area. In conducting the Route Options Analysis, the Recipient will consider 

the market needs and anticipated operating requirements specified in the draft Purpose 

and Need statement.

Subtask 3.1 Work Products:

• Route Options Analysis Methodology Work Product

• Route Options Analysis Final Subtask Work Product

Subtask 3.2: Service Options Analysis

For those Route Options carried forward for further analysis, the Recipient will develop 

and assess potential viable service and operating options in the Service Options Analysis. 

In conducting the Service Options Analysis, the Recipient will consider the anticipated 

operating requirements specified in both the draft Purpose and Need Statement and 

Subtask 4.1, and identify which service options may be carried forward for further 

analysis and refinement at both the Investment and Design Options (Subtasks 3.3 and 

3.4). The effort will be completed in coordination with (note specific host and operating

railroads related to the project) and other stakeholders, and the Recipient will 

incorporate appropriate inputs associated with Stakeholder Engagement as part of Task

2. The Service Options Analysis should include, but is not limited to:

● A fleet analysis that identifies the type and quality of preferred train equipment to 

be used, with technical specifications such as maximum speed, passenger 

capacity, energy consumption profile, acceleration and deceleration rates 

(consistent with 49 U.S.C. 25101(d)(7));

● Signal systems required, including Positive Train Control (PTC);
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

13

● Service frequency, operating speeds, and trip times (consistent with 49 U.S.C. 

25101(d)(1));

● Fares and fare structure comparisons among proposed services;

● Description of potential service with existing and planned intermodal connections 

(consistent with 49 U.S.C. 25101(d)(10)); and

● Station locations and maintenance facility locations and, for each, whether it is 

existing or new and how it maximizes the use of existing infrastructure (consistent 

with 49 U.S.C. 25101(d)(6)).

Subtask 3.2 Work Products:

• Service Options Analysis Methodology Work Product

• Service Options Analysis Final Subtask Work Product

Subtask 3.3: Investment Package Options Analysis

For those Service Options carried forward for further analysis, the Recipient will develop 

and assess Investment Packages along those routes that could achieve the operational 

requirements specified in the draft Purpose and Need Statement and identify which 

Investment Packages will be carried forward for further analysis. The Investment 

Packages will include Component Investments, which are the individual physical 

investments that make up the Investment Package. The Investment Package Options 

Analysis will consider the potential phased implementation of physical investments.

Subtask 3.3 Work Products:

• Investment Options Analysis Methodology Work Product

• Investment Options Analysis Final Subtask Work Product

Subtask 3.4: Design Options Analysis

For each Component Investment included in the Investment Package Options carried 

forward for further analysis under Subtask 3.3, the Recipient may develop and assess the 

Design Options, if necessary, for that Component Investment. Conceptual level design is 

sufficient for Component Investments that are likely to fall within the scope of a NEPA 

Categorical Exclusion specified under 23 CFR part 771. Where there is more than one 

Design Option for the Component Investment, the Design Options will be evaluated in 

the subsequent NEPA process in Step 3 of the CIDP.

Subtask 3.4 Work Products:

• Design Options Analysis Methodology Work Product

• Design Options Analysis Final Subtask Work Product

Task 3 Deliverables:

• Preliminary Alternatives Analysis Report
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

14

TASK 4: TRANSPORTATION PLANNING

Instructions: If applicable, a corridor sponsor maybe able to utilize existing data, 

analyses, and approaches required to fulfill many of the subtasks associated with Task

4. In Step 1 of the CIDP, FRA will evaluate previous materials developed by the 

Recipient and determine whether previous methodologies and outputs fulfill the 

objectives of the subtasks, whether previous methodologies and outputs require an 

update or refresh, or whether the corridor sponsor needs to develop new components to 

fulfill the task. Additionally, if the proposed corridor program is for improvements 

and/or an extension of an existing service, some steps of the transportation planning 

task may not be necessary and/or can be scaled back considerably. The corridor 

sponsor will engage FRA during the Step 1 process to determine the appropriate degree 

of analysis required under this step. Based on the Step 1 intake process, the language 

under each sub-task is subject to modification.

The objective of this task is to conduct technical transportation planning analyses 

necessary to determine the characteristics of the proposed rail service. The Recipient is 

responsible for undertaking technical transportation planning activities, as applicable, to 

support the development and screening of preliminary alternatives, concurrently with 

Task 3. Task 4 is divided into subtasks, and the completion of each subtask will result in 

a Final Subtask Work Product summarizing the work undertaken in and results of that 

subtask. The Final Subtask Product for Subtask 4.1 will be submitted to and approved by 

FRA prior to the Recipient commencing work on any of the subsequent subtasks in Task 

4.

The Recipient will provide, prior to the initiation of work under each subtask in Task 4, a 

Work Product documenting the methodologies to be employed in the work comprising 

that subtask. The Recipient will submit the Methodology Work Product for each subtask 

in Task 4 to FRA and will not commence work on a subtask until the Recipient has 

received approval of the subject Methodology Work Product in writing from FRA.

Task 4 will culminate in a Project Development Report that will document the Insert

Corridor Name Project development outputs for those alternatives included in the 

Preliminary Alternatives identified at the completion of Task 3.

Subtask 4.1: Operational Requirements and Existing Physical Conditions Data 

Collection

Instructions: FRA is still evaluating the appropriateness of the information drafted 

under this Subtask. The information below is consistent with recent SDP SOWs 

developed by FRA and corridor sponsors. Before initiating the SOW, FRA and the 

Recipient will discuss the application of the following provisions:

The objective of this task is to collect all relevant existing physical and operating 

conditions and other relevant data related to the corridor to appropriately inform the 

corridor sponsor, FRA, and other key stakeholders before commencing work on any of 

the other detailed transportation planning activities identified under the remaining 

subtasks in Task 4. The Recipient will translate the general operational requirement
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

15

consistent with the draft Purpose and Need Statement and described in the Service 

Options Analysis from Subtask 3.2 into a set of detailed operating requirements 

appropriate for supporting the development of Service Options. To the extent practicable, 

the Recipient will also collect and/or have access to other data on existing conditions 

relevant to the analysis to be undertaken in Task 4, including, but not limited to, the 

following:

• Existing train volumes (by operator/train type, and including all transfer, yard, 

local, and deadhead moves)

• Existing train characteristics (length, trailing tons, horsepower)

• Existing train routings through the Study Area (entry/exit and 

origination/destination points), including wye movements required of all 

passenger trains arriving at major passenger terminals

• Specific operating timetables for scheduled services or operating windows for 

unscheduled service

• Maintenance-of-way window requirements

• Abandoned rail lines and/or connections between rail lines, and/or 

abandoned/removed track(s) on existing lines

• Track charts, including yards, industrial leads, etc.

• Existing track conditions, including FRA track class

• Existing junctions, including turnout speeds and parallel diverging moves

• Existing and proposed locations of intercity and commuter platforms

• Location of highway grade crossings and number of lanes

• Aerial photography

• Public and employee timetables

• Existing signal system design and PTC implementation status

• Existing operating practices

• Existing documented survey information, which is readily available in either 

printed, archived or digital format.

• Route information including routes operating over-dimensional loads

• Railroad property records including existing right-of-way limits, including 

demarcation between owners/controllers of different sections of rail line and longterm operating leases

• Aboveground and underground rights lease to utility companies for 

communications or power facilities along rail lines

• Historical employee and public timetables for operations/services

• National Register of Historic Places-listed, eligible, and potential eligible rail 

facilities

• Design documentation for adjacent highway structures

• Navigable waterways operating through moveable railroad bridges, including 

frequency of moves

• Locations where local freight activity or freight yard operations may foul main 

line activities for extended periods of time

• Documentation for other projects under development within the Study Area

To the extent practicable, the Recipient will make available to FRA data on existing 

conditions relevant to the analysis. The Recipient agrees that it will take no action that 

could limit FRA’s access to such data without the express prior written approval of FRA. 
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

16

Work completed under conditions that limit FRA’s access to the data outlined above or 

any component of the operations modeling analysis such as, but not limited to, 

methodology for determining type and location of infrastructure improvements, freight 

and passenger service assumptions that impact existing and future rail operations 

scenarios, and passenger and freight performance outputs for draft and final networks 

will be ineligible for reimbursement if no prior approval from FRA was obtained.

Subtask 4.1 Work Products:

• Specification of Detailed Operational Requirements and Data Collection 

Methodology Work Product

• Specification of Detailed Operational Requirements and Data Collection Final 

Subtask Work Product

Subtask 4.2: Operations Analysis

The objective of this subtask is to assess the current physical conditions, proposed service 

characteristics, and other operating characteristics identified under Subtask 4.1 as inputs 

into an operations analysis that will identify the potential infrastructure and operational 

needs required to operate the proposed service. In support of the development and 

screening of alternatives undertaken in Task 3, the Recipient will undertake operations 

analysis of the various Route and Service Options under consideration to identify 

infrastructure investments for implementing the Insert Corridor Name Project. The 

Recipient will use appropriate tools, including train performance calculators and railroad 

operations simulation software, in performing the operations analysis. The operations 

analysis will allow for iterative development and stakeholder feedback. It will also

include randomization of modeling scenarios with statistically significant results to 

ensure reliable corridor operations. Software used for operations modeling will require 

integration of data from existing infrastructure, freight railroad operations, and other 

passenger operations identified in Subtask 4.1.

The Recipient will outline the methodology to be used for this task in the Operations 

Analysis Methodology Work Product. The Recipient will ensure FRA concurs with the 

operations analysis approach prior to commencing operations analysis through the 

approval of the Operations Analysis Methodology Work Product. Throughout the 

operations analysis, the Recipient will ensure that an appropriate degree of oversight and 

transparency is maintained. Since the results of operations analysis will be used to 

identify the corridor project inventory and capital and operating costs in subsequent tasks, 

the Recipient acknowledges that it is critical that FRA and the Recipient undertake this 

task with a high degree of confidence that the results of the operations analysis are 

appropriate and defensible relative to the level of public investment and benefit 

anticipated.

Subtask 4.2 Work Products:

• Operations Analysis Methodology Work Product

• Operations Analysis Final Subtask Work Product
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

17

Subtask 4.3: Travel Demand and Ridership Forecasting

The objective of this subtask is to generate reasonable and empirically supported 

ridership estimation for potential rail service plans so the corridor sponsor can evaluate 

tradeoffs between different service features in conjunction with the ridership estimation 

under Subtask 4.4. The outputs of the market analysis completed under Subtask 2.2 will 

also be used to inform this subtask. The Recipient will perform ridership forecasting 

based on passenger rail travel demand (consistent with 49 U.S.C.

25101(d)(8)(B)). Two major components of travel demand forecasting include 

developing a travel demand model for the market area (or using a preexisting travel 

demand forecasting model if appropriate) and using the model to generate demand 

forecasts. Inputs to this effort include, but are not limited to, socioeconomic data and

growth rates, trip rates by mode, data regarding traveler’s mode choice, station locations, 

transit connections, equipment technology, operating speeds, land use, etc. Travel 

demand forecasting methodology, in addition to supporting decision-making between 

alternatives, should also be rigorous and thorough enough to support a funding decision.

The Recipient will also identify base and horizon service years that indicate the 

anticipated start date of the service and the implementation of the full-service vision. 

Additional ridership analysis will be performed as refinements are made to the route, 

station locations, train speed, and other aspects impacting the service plan.

Subtask 4.3 Work Products:

• Ridership Forecasting Methodology Work Product

• Ridership Forecasting Final Subtask Work Product

Subtask 4.4: Revenue Evaluation Analysis

The objective of this subtask is to generate a reasonable revenue evaluation for potential 

rail service plans in conjunction with the ridership estimation under Subtask 4.3. The 

Recipient will develop a Revenue Evaluation Analysis with potential operating partners 

to support the evaluation and screening of the alternatives undertaken in Task 3 

(consistent with 49 U.S.C. 25101(d)(8)(A)). A ticket pricing strategy will be proposed for 

this service based on comparable services around the country. This information will then 

be used to generate revenue forecasts from fares and ridership for the Service Options 

Analysis from Subtask 3.2. The Revenue Evaluation will also detail the boardings and 

alightings based on varying station locations and other key variables. If applicable, 

special events will also be analyzed to understand how service fares can impact ridership 

levels during events. Additional work will include identifying other revenue sources for 

the Insert Corridor Name Project (advertising, grants, local contributions, etc.).

Subtask 4.4 Work Products:

• Revenue Evaluation Analysis Methodology Work Product

• Revenue Evaluation Analysis Final Subtask Work Product
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

18

Subtask 4.5: Station Area and Access Analysis

The objective of this subtask is to identify the location of the stations to be served by the 

proposed infrastructure, examine how these stations will accommodate the trains and 

passengers associated with the proposed infrastructure, how passengers will access the 

stations, and how the stations will be integrated with or connected to other modes of

transportation (consistent with 49 U.S.C. 25101(d)(6)). The assessment of the operations 

for each alternative should be performed to a level sufficient to identify key 

characteristics, challenges, or impacts to existing and future passenger rail service. The 

Recipient will prepare a station area and access analysis to include but is not limited to:

● Determining the operational requirements of stations and station access for the 

new passenger rail service;

● Maximizing connectivity to existing transit services where available and to future 

planned services not yet providing service to these specific station locations;

● Accommodating pedestrian, bicycle, micromobility, and other ride-sharing 

services with efficient access;

● Connecting to major transportation roadway arterials and provision of parking 

areas;

● Discussing the economic development potential (commercial/residential) at each 

station area; and

● Developing a conceptual engineering layout for each station, including parking 

sufficient for Insert Corridor Name Project projected ridership and operations 

plans.

The Recipient will submit the Station Area and Access Analysis, as part of the Insert

Corridor Name Project Development report, to FRA for approval.

Subtask 4.5 Work Products:

● Station Area and Access Analysis Methodology Work Product

● Station Area and Access Analysis Final Subtask Work Product

Subtask 4.6: Conceptual and Early Preliminary Engineering

The objective of this task is to identify and classify the list of capital projects needed to 

construct and operate the proposed service. Conceptual engineering converts the required 

infrastructure identified in the other planning elements into discrete capital projects.

These capital projects will be accompanied by a set of conceptual engineering drawings 

that include basic visual depictions of the projects, including maps, track charts, 

conceptual stations, and proposed interlockings. In support of the development and 

screening of alternatives undertaken in Task 3, the Recipient will develop conceptual and 

early preliminary engineering for the various Investment and Design Options under 

consideration that is sufficient to support the analysis identified in the respective 

subtasks.

The Investment Options Analysis will be supported by conceptual-level engineering 

which will address, at a minimum and for each Component Investment:
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

19

• The specific operational objectives and functional requirements of the 

Component Investment; and

• The location of the Component Investment for track designs, a linear scale 

schematic showing track configuration, turnout sizes and type (powered, hand

thrown, etc.), proposed signal locations, distance between signals, limits of 

signalization, limits of curves with degree of curvature, and proposed speeds, 

including a comparison (through parallel drawings) of the existing and 

proposed designs.

The Design Option Analysis will be supported by early preliminary-level engineering 

which will address, at a minimum and for each Component Investment:

• The physical feasibility of the design;

• The ability of the proposed design to fulfill the operational objectives and 

functional requirements of the specific Component Investment (as established 

in the Investment Options Analysis);

• The general constructability of the design, including consideration of 

potential construction phasing to allow for the continuation of operations 

during the construction period; and

• The adequacy of the design to support a future detailed, site-specific 

environmental analysis of the Component Investment.

For new track infrastructure, scale drawings should include, as appropriate: turnout sizes 

and type (powered, hand thrown, etc.), proposed signal locations, distance between 

signals, limits of signalization, limits of curves and curve geometry, gradients, and 

proposed speeds, including a comparison (through parallel drawings) of the existing and 

proposed designs.

Subtask 4.6 Work Products:

• Conceptual and Early Preliminary Engineering Methodology Work Product

• Conceptual and Early Preliminary Engineering Final Subtask Work Product

Subtask 4.7: Capital Cost Estimation

The objective of this subtask is to identify the capital cost to design, construct, and 

implement the proposed service. This includes developing a cost-estimating methodology 

to document the assumptions for costing the projects as well as a phasing strategy to 

implement the project that identifies service targets and infrastructure needs by phase.

The Recipient will prepare capital cost estimates for each preliminary alternative 

including unit cost and quantities relating to core track structures and other components, 

fleet, management, design and construction management allowances, and contingencies 

(consistent with 49 U.S.C. 25101(d)(8)(C and D)). At a minimum, these will include an 

initial high-level cost estimate (based on the Conceptual Engineering developed under 

Subtask 4.6) to be used to support the Investment Options Analysis, and a more detailed 

cost estimate (based on the early preliminary-level engineering developed under Subtask 

4.6) to be used to support the Design Options Analysis. As the Insert Corridor Name

Project is currently in the planning phase, the capital cost estimation should be 
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

20

commensurate with other planning assumptions and analyses. As the program moves 

beyond project planning and towards project development (Step 3 of the CIDP) and

implementation (beyond the CIDP), capital cost estimation will be further refined. In 

developing the Capital Cost Estimation Methodology, the Recipient may refer to FRA’s 

Capital Cost Estimating Guidance.

Subtask 4.7 Work Products:

• Capital Cost Estimation Methodology Work Product

• Capital Cost Estimation Final Subtask Work Product

Subtask 4.8: Operations and Maintenance Cost Estimation

The objective of this subtask is to convert the identified operating resources such as

labor, materials, and services needed to operate the proposed service into an annual cost 

projected for the planning horizon. The Recipient will prepare general estimates of 

operating, maintenance, and capital renewal costs for a 40-year period (consistent with 49

U.S.C. 25101(d)(8)(E)). Operating cost estimates will also include analysis of labor 

planning needs. Potential labor and staffing needs should include full-time equivalent

estimates for maintaining and operating assets, as well as administration functions, to 

include, but not limited to management, legal, and commercial/marketing needs of the 

corridor.

Subtask 4.8 Work Products:

• Operations and Maintenance Cost Estimation Methodology Work Product

• Operations and Maintenance Cost Estimation Final Subtask Work Product

Task 4 Deliverables:

• Draft Insert Corridor Name Project Development Report

• Final Insert Corridor Name Project Development Report
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

21

TASK 5: ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING

Instructions: If applicable, a corridor sponsor may be able to utilize existing data, 

analyses, and approaches required to fulfill some of the analysis associated with Task

5. In Step 1 of the CIDP, FRA will evaluate previous materials developed by the 

Recipient and determine whether previous methodologies and outputs fulfill the 

objectives of the Task, whether previous methodologies and outputs require an update 

or refresh, or whether the corridor sponsor needs to develop new components to fulfill 

the Task. Based on the Step 1 intake process, the language under this task is subject 

to modification.

The objective of this task to is to identify key environmental considerations in the 

development of the alternatives to support future lifecycle stages of the corridor’s 

development, including project-level environmental analysis. The Recipient will perform 

a high-level qualitative socioeconomic, cultural, human environment, and natural 

environmental resource inventory and preliminary effects analysis as part of the 

development and screening of options concurrently with Tasks 3 and 4. The Recipient 

will build upon the findings from environmental effect analysis to assess potential 

environmental effects of the preliminary route, service, investment, and design options, 

and employ the outputs of this environmental effect analysis to support the screening of

those options. Where environmental documentation is not available, the Recipient will 

perform additional desktop analysis to inventory existing conditions and identify key 

social, cultural, natural, and physical project concerns. The Recipient will review the 

environmental resources and determine, with input from agencies and the public, the 

extent of analysis needed for each resource for the subsequent NEPA process in Step 3 of 

the CIDP.

The Recipient will prepare an Environmental Concerns Analysis Report that will 

document the potential significant socioeconomic, cultural, human environment, and 

natural environmental effects of the Preliminary Alternatives identified at the completion 

of Task 3. The Report will document the anticipated benefits of the corridor’s impacts as 

it relates to other transportation modes, energy consumption, land use, and economic 

development (consistent with 49 U.S.C. 25101(d) (11 and 12). The Report will also 

address possible approaches to completing the environmental review of those 

alternatives, including the potential NEPA class(es) of action for subsequent 

environmental document(s) under Step 3 of the CIDP. This report will identify potential 

programmatic mitigation strategies and anticipated permits and agency clearance 

requirements that will be needed for the alternatives moving forward for additional 

consideration during NEPA.

Task 5 Work Products:

• Environmental Concerns Analysis Methodology

Task 5 Deliverable:

• Environmental Concerns Analysis Report
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

22

TASK 6: FINANCIAL PLANNING AND BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS

Instructions: If applicable, a corridor sponsor maybe able to utilize existing data, 

analyses, and approaches required to fulfill many of the subtasks associated with Task

6. In Step 1 of the CIDP, FRA will evaluate previous materials developed by the 

Recipient and determine whether previous methodologies and outputs fulfill the 

objectives of the subtasks, whether previous methodologies and outputs require an 

update or refresh, or whether the corridor sponsor needs to develop new components to 

fulfill the task. Based on the Step 1 intake process, the language under each sub-task 

is subject to modification.

The objective of this task is to clearly identify the financial resources required to 

implement and operate the proposed service and compare the anticipated benefits that 

accrue from a project to the anticipated costs of the project over a specified period of 

time. The Recipient is responsible for developing Insert Corridor Name Project financial 

analysis by completing a financial plan and a benefit cost analysis. The financial plan

will clearly identify potential financial resources required to implement and operate the 

proposed service consistent with 49 U.S.C. 25101(d)(8). Although financial planning

and benefit-cost analysis (BCA) use many of the same data inputs, the BCA should 

quantify all non-monetary benefits and combine them with the monetary costs and

benefits identified under the financial plan.

The Recipient will not commence work on Task 6 prior to FRA’s written concurrence or 

acceptance of Tasks 4 and 5. Task 6 is divided into subtasks and the completion of each 

subtask will result in a Final Subtask Work Product summarizing the work undertaken in 

and results of that subtask. Since the BCA is dependent upon the outputs of the financial 

plan, the Recipient will submit Final Subtask Product for Subtask 6.1 to FRA for 

approval prior to commencing work on Subtask 6.2.

The Recipient will provide, prior to the initiation of work under each subtask in Task 6, a 

work product documenting the methodologies to be employed in the work comprising 

that subtask. The Recipient will submit the Methodology Work Product for each subtask 

in Task 6 to FRA for approval prior to commencing work on a subtask.

Subtask 6.1: Financial Planning

The Recipient will compete a financial plan that will identify the potential financial 

resources required to implement and operate the proposed Insert Corridor Name Project 

components identified in the Insert Corridor Name Project Development Report (Task 4) 

(consistent with 49 U.S.C. 25101(d)(2)(A)(iii)). The financial plan will focus on the 

direct monetary factors of the Insert Corridor Name Project and will provide a single 

financial statement showing the proposed service’s financial projections over the course 

of the planning horizon. The financial analysis will describe the capital and operating 

dollars needed to implement and operate the Insert Corridor Name Project and identify 

sources of capital investment and operating financial support.

As the Insert Corridor Name Project is currently in the planning phase, the financial 

planning analysis should be commensurate with other planning assumptions and 
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

23

analyses. As the program moves beyond project planning and towards project 

development (Step 3 of the CIDP) and implementation (beyond the CIDP), financial 

planning will be further refined to specify the precise levels of funding needed and 

explore additional sources of funding. This may include cost sharing agreements, 

government grants, loans, and other available funding opportunities.

Subtask 6.1 Work Products:

• Financial Planning Methodology

• Financial Planning Final Subtask Work Product

Subtask 6.2 Benefit Cost Analysis

The Recipient will complete a BCA that will document the overall economic impact of the

Insert Corridor Name Project. This will include both the financial results as described in 

Subtask 6.1 and the benefits and impacts for the Insert Corridor Name Project such as 

operational benefits, travel time savings, air quality impacts, community and economic 

development, and other user and non-user economic benefits. This is informed by earlier

tasks and will be used to assess the transportation-related merits of the service alternative. 

As the Insert Corridor Name Project is currently in the planning phase, the benefit cost 

analysis should be commensurate with other planning assumptions and analyses. As the 

program moves beyond project planning and towards project development (Step 3 of the 

CIDP) and implementation (beyond the CIDP), the benefit cost analysis maybe further 

refined.

The BCA should reference USDOT’s Benefit-Cost Analysis Guidance for Discretionary 

Grant Programs (January 2020) or latest edition, as appropriate.

Subtask 6.2 Work Products:

• Benefit Cost Analysis Methodology

• Benefit Cost Analysis Final Subtask Work Product

Task 6 Deliverable:

• Financial Planning and Benefit Cost Analysis Report
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

24

TASK 7: GOVERNANCE

Instructions: If applicable, a corridor sponsor maybe able to utilize existing data, 

analyses, and approaches required to fulfill some of the analysis associated with Task

7. In Step 1, FRA will evaluate previous materials developed by the Recipient and 

determine whether previous methodologies and outputs fulfill the objectives of the 

subtask, whether previous methodologies and outputs require an update or refresh, or 

whether the corridor sponsor needs to develop new components to fulfill the task.

Based on the Step 1 intake process, the language under this task is subject to 

modification.

The objective of this task is to determine how the corridor program will be administered 

throughout the project development lifecycle, to include responsibility for construction 

and ongoing operation of the service. The Recipient will assess potential governance and 

program administration options for the long-term management structure for design, 

construction, maintenance, and operations of a future Insert Corridor Name system.

Options may include private investment, public private partnerships, and/or publicly 

funded investment for program delivery and administration. The Recipient will provide 

organizational charts identifying the roles, responsibilities, and staffing requirements for 

each entity involved in advancing the corridor throughout each stage of the corridor’s 

project lifecycle. The Recipient will assess governance options allowable under state law

and other examples of potential governance structures for other state-supported Amtrak 

services that fall under Section 209 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement 

Act of 2008 if applicable/appropriate. The Recipient will facilitate meetings, in 

coordination with Amtrak (if applicable/appropriate), FRA, and other potential 

stakeholders, on the governing and operating organization for the future passenger rail 

service associated with the Insert Corridor Name Project (consistent with 49 U.S.C. 

25101(d)(4). The Recipient will identify all necessary agreements with potential 

stakeholders to advance the project into Step 3 of the CIDP and into subsequent stages of 

implementation.

The Recipient will identify key entities necessary to implement the SDP (consistent with 

49 U.S.C. 25101(d)(4)) and to progress the corridor including:

• The proposed entity who will manage the corridor’s development and operation;

• The proposed entities required to implement the corridor project inventory from Step 2 of 

the CIDP into Step 3 (consistent with 49 U.S.C. 25101(d)(2)(A)(ii));

• The proposed operator or type of operator for the service; and

• The entities who will comply with all safety and security laws, orders, and 

regulations (consistent with 49 U.S.C. 25101(d)(5)).

Task 7 Deliverable:

● Corridor Governance Report
DRAFT STATEMENT OF WORK FRAMEWORK - VERSION 2

Corridor Identification and Development Program Step 2 Service 

Development Plan

25

TASK 8: PHASED IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

The Recipient will develop a phased implementation plan that identifies the 

implementation sequencing of the capital project inventory (consistent with 49 U.S.C. 

25101(d)(2)) to support the Investments and Design Options identified in Tasks 3.3 and

3.4. The Phased Implementation Plan will identify implementation years and desired 

service levels for those years based on ridership demand for the Insert Corridor Name

service. The Phased Implementation Plan will identify a schedule of the capital projects 

required to support the service levels for each of the corresponding service years 

(consistent with 49 U.S.C. 25101(d)(3)). The Phased Implementation Plan will also 

include consideration of phasing the project lifecycle stages for each capital project –

project development (PE/NEPA), final design, and construction, and the appropriate time 

to initiate each lifecycle stage for a capital project. The Recipient will identify an initial 

prioritized list of projects based on service phasing considerations that can be advanced 

to environmental analysis and preliminary engineering studies to complete Project 

Development under Step 3 of the CIDP. Additional operations modeling may be required

to support the development of the Phased Implementation Plan.

Subtask 8 Work Products:

• Phased Implementation Plan Methodology

Task 8 Deliverables:

• Phased Implementation Plan

TASK 9: DRAFT AND FINAL REPORTS

The Recipient will prepare a draft report of the SDP including the culminating results of 

the Insert Corridor Name Project elements (Task 2 through Task 8) that includes an 

Executive Summary. Following appropriate reviews by the entities expected to 

participate in carrying out the plan, stakeholders, and the FRA, the Draft will be revised 

based on comments received and a final SDP document will be produced. The Recipient 

requires written approval by FRA for completion of the Final Report

Task 9 Deliverables:

● Draft Service Development Plan

● Final Service Development Plan