California State Rail Plan 2007-08 to 2017-18

Chapter XIV – Policy Statement/Recommendationsincreased emissions, and interfere with the logical planning and delivery oftransportation infrastructure. Implementing a long-range, comprehensive planningprogram will be a critical element in developing the most effective solutions.POLICY STATEMENT NO. 3: RAIL PRESERVATIONTo maintain the State’s economic health, at a minimum the State’s railnetwork, and the system’s freight market share, must be preserved to themaximum extent feasible.In order for the State to continue in its preeminent economic position, thepreservation and maintenance of the current freight rail system is extremelyimportant. As well, corridors not in use but that one-day may return to activityshould also be preserved. The following information illustrates current andprojected trends that will impact this system.A recent report by the American Association of State Highway TransportationOfficials “Freight Rail-Bottom Line Report” focused on the freight rail system inthe United States and analyzed a number of factors, which affect it. The reportnoted that freight rail carries 16 percent of the nation’s freight by tonnage,28 percent of ton-miles, and six percent of freight values. If all freight rail wereshifted to truck tomorrow, it would add 92 billion truck vehicle miles to thehighway system and cost federal, state and local transportation agencies anadditional $64 billion for highway improvements over the next 20 years.Economic growth and the concomitant movement of goods will place a huge strainon the transportation framework of the country. Maintenance of the freight railsystem at its current level, or even with minor improvements will see more freightcarried by truck. Projections anticipate a national economic growth of threepercent a year, with domestic tonnage growing by 57 percent by 2020 and importexportgrowth 100 percent during the same period Even a one percent increase intruck vehicle miles would add approximately $1.6 billion to highway costsbetween 2000 and 2020.The impacts of the freight movement scenarios would be felt especially inCalifornia, and potential problems with constricted flows should be understood.As already noted California ports have become increasingly important in thenational economic fabric. For example a 10-day lockout and 23-day backlog ofWest Coast ports in 2002 disrupted trade valued at $6.28 billion just in the Ports ofLong Beach and Los Angeles. While this disruption was not caused by anovertaxed freight rail system the potential for negative economic impacts with a.overburdened rail system should not be underestimated. Failure to invest in goodsmovement infrastructure could also lead to significant losses in future taxrevenues. The Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation hasestimated that the state could lose over $17 billion in state income and sales taxesthrough 2035. “Growth of California Ports: Opportunities and Challenges”209