FY25 CIG Funding Recommenations

Annual Report
on Funding
Recommendations
Fiscal Year 2025

Capital Investment Grants Program and
Expedited Project Delivery Pilot Program
Report of the Secretary of Transportation
to the United States Congress
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 5309(o)(1),
Section 3005(b)(11) of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act,
and Division J of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
March 2024
Prepared by:
Federal Transit Administration
Available from:
Federal Transit Administration
Office of Planning and Environment
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
http://www.fta.dot.gov

ii

Annual Report on Funding Recommendations

Table of Contents
Introduction................................................................................................................................ 1
General Commitment Guidelines for Capital Investment Grants Program Projects ..................... 2
FY 2025 Funding Allocations and Recommendations................................................................. 5

Tables
Table 1 FY 2025 Funding Proposed for Capital Investment Grants Program and Expedited
Project Delivery Pilot Program ................................................................................................... 4
Table 2A Summary of Capital Investment Grants Program and Expedited Project Delivery Pilot
Program Projects ........................................................................................................................ 8
Table 2B Detailed Summary of FY 2025 Local Financial Commitment Ratings ....................... 11
Table 2C Detailed Summary of FY 2025 Project Justification Ratings...................................... 13

i

Introduction
This Annual Report on Funding Recommendations is issued by the United States Secretary of
Transportation (Secretary) to help inform the appropriations process for the upcoming fiscal year
(FY) by providing information on projects that have been submitted to the Federal Transit
Administration’s (FTA) discretionary Capital Investment Grants (CIG) Program and Expedited
Project Delivery (EPD) Pilot Program.
The Capital Investment Grants Program
The CIG Program, set forth in 49 U.S.C. § 5309 (Section 5309), was most recently authorized by
the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, enacted as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA).
In addition to funding Congress may appropriate annually, the IIJA also provided $1.6 billion per
year in advance appropriations for the CIG Program from FY 2022 through 2026.
The CIG Program is the Federal Government’s primary financial resource for supporting transit
capital projects that are locally planned, implemented, and operated. It provides funding for
fixed guideway investments such as new and expanded heavy rail, commuter rail, light rail
(LRT), streetcars, bus rapid transit (BRT), and ferries, as well as corridor-based bus rapid transit
investments that emulate the features of rail. Over the years, the program has helped to make
possible dozens of new or extended transit systems across the country. These public
transportation investments, in turn, have improved the mobility and quality of life of millions of
Americans, provided alternatives to congested roadways, and fostered the development of more
economically vibrant communities.
There are three categories of eligible projects under the CIG Program: New Starts, Small Starts,
and Core Capacity. New Starts and Core Capacity projects are required by law to go through a
three-phase process – Project Development, Engineering, and Construction. Small Starts
projects are required by law to go through a two-phase process – Project Development and
Construction. As defined in Section 5309, as amended by the IIJA, New Starts projects are those
for which the sponsors request $150 million or more in CIG Program funds or have an
anticipated total capital cost of $400 million or more. Core Capacity projects are substantial
investments in existing fixed-guideway corridors that are at capacity today or will be in 10 years,
where the proposed project will increase capacity by not less than 10 percent. Small Starts
projects are those for which sponsors request less than $150 million in CIG Program funds and
have an anticipated total capital cost of less than $400 million.
FTA awards Section 5309 CIG Program funding for a portion of the total project cost, including
planning, design, and construction. Federal public transportation law limits New Starts projects
to a maximum Section 5309 CIG Program share of 60 percent of the total project cost, while
Core Capacity and Small Starts projects are limited to a maximum Section 5309 CIG Program
share of 80 percent of the total project cost.
The law requires FTA to evaluate and rate all CIG projects on a set of statutorily defined project
justification and local financial commitment criteria. Projects must receive and maintain a
“Medium” or better overall rating to advance through the various phases of the CIG process and
be eligible for CIG funding. Ratings are point-in-time evaluations by FTA and may change as
1

proposed projects proceed through planning and design, when information concerning costs,
benefits, financial plans, and impacts is refined. The law does not require FTA to evaluate and
rate projects once a construction grant agreement is awarded.
The Expedited Project Delivery Pilot Program
Section 3005(b) of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act established the
EPD Pilot Program, which allows FTA to select up to eight projects for participation in the pilot.
Eligible projects include New Starts, Small Starts, and Core Capacity projects that are seeking no
more than 25 percent in Federal grant funding, are supported in part through a public-private
partnership, and will be operated and maintained by an existing public transportation provider.
Similar to the requirements for the CIG Program, Section 3005(b)(11) of the FAST Act requires
FTA to submit to Congress an annual report on the proposed amount of funding for this pilot
program.
This Report provides general information about the CIG and EPD Program, including the
guidelines that the United States Department of Transportation (DOT) uses to make funding
recommendations. Table 1 identifies the FY 2025 funding amount recommended for individual
CIG and EPD projects, with information on each project’s cost and funding history. Tables 2A,
2B, and 2C provide information on the CIG and EPD projects as well as the results of FTA’s
evaluation and rating of the CIG projects at this juncture.
Information Available on the FTA Website
More information on the CIG Program can be found on FTA’s website at
https://www.transit.dot.gov/CIG. Also available on the website in the section labeled “Current
Projects” are profiles of each of the projects currently in the CIG Program pipeline.
More information on the EPD Pilot Program can be found on FTA’s website at
https://www.transit.dot.gov/funding/grants/grant-programs/expedited-project-delivery-pilotprogram-section-3005b.

General Funding Recommendation and Funding Commitment
Guidelines for CIG Projects
•

Any project recommended for CIG funding by FTA in the Annual Report must meet the
project justification, local financial commitment, and process criteria established in Section
5309, and should be consistent with Executive Order 12893, Principles for Federal
Infrastructure Investments, issued January 26, 1994.

•

Funding recommendations are based on the results of the project evaluation process and
resulting project justification, local financial commitment, and overall project ratings, as well
as considerations such as project readiness and the availability of CIG funds.

The decision whether to enter into a construction grant agreement is discretionary. Even if FTA
decides to proceed with such an agreement, FTA does not sign a construction grant agreement
committing CIG funding until after the project sponsor has demonstrated that its project is ready
for such an agreement. This includes assurance that the project’s development and design have
progressed to the point where its scope, costs, schedule, benefits, and impacts are considered
2

firm and final, the project sponsor has obtained all non-CIG funding commitments, and the
project sponsor has completed all critical third-party agreements. Under the longstanding CIG
Program framework, FTA establishes a maximum fixed CIG dollar amount upon entry into the
Engineering phase for New Starts and Core Capacity projects, or at award of the construction
grant agreement for Small Starts projects. Thereafter, the project sponsor assumes the risk for
any cost overruns or funding shortfalls that may occur on a project.
The construction grant agreement, called either a Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) for
New Starts and Core Capacity projects or a Small Starts Grant Agreement (SSGA) for Small
Starts projects, defines the project, including its cost, scope, schedule, and level of service;
commits to a maximum level of annual and total CIG financial assistance (subject to
Congressional appropriation); establishes the terms and conditions of Federal financial
participation; defines the period of time for completion of the project; and helps FTA oversee,
and the project sponsor manage, the project in accordance with Federal law. Upon completion of
the payment schedule outlined in an FFGA or SSGA, the CIG funding commitment has been
fulfilled. Any additional costs are the responsibility of the project sponsor. FTA works closely
with project sponsors to identify and implement strategies for containing capital costs at the level
indicated in the FFGA or SSGA at the time it was signed.
When preparing funding recommendations for the upcoming fiscal year, FTA’s priority is to
honor the commitments made in existing construction grant agreements. FTA recommends new
projects not yet under construction grant agreements for funding only if proposed CIG Program
funding levels are sufficient.
Initial planning efforts conducted prior to entry into the first phase of the CIG process are not
eligible for CIG funding, but funding may be provided for that work through grants under the
Section 5303 Metropolitan Planning Program, the Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula
Program, or Title 23 “flexible funding.”
FTA encourages project sponsors to provide an overmatch as a means of funding more projects
and leveraging State, local, and private financial resources.
FTA emphasizes that the process of CIG project evaluation and rating is ongoing. As a proposed
CIG project proceeds through planning and design, information concerning costs, benefits,
financial plans, and impacts is refined and the project rating may be reassessed to reflect new
information.

3

FY 2025 Funding Allocations and Recommendations
FTA is requesting in the FY 2025 President’s Budget an appropriation of $2.366 billion for the
Section 5309 CIG and EPD Programs, that when combined with the $1.600 billion in advance
appropriations totals $3.966 billion. 1 The proposed distribution of this funding is as follows:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

$1.030 billion for four existing New Starts FFGAs;
$2.123 billion for six New Starts projects not yet under construction grants;
$60.0 million for New Starts projects that may become ready for construction funding
during FY 2025;
$60.0 million for Core Capacity projects that may become ready for construction funding
during FY 2025;
$533.0 million for four Small Starts projects not yet under construction grants;
$59.2 million for Small Starts projects that may become ready for construction funding
during FY 2025;
$60.0 million for projects under the Section 3005(b) EPD Pilot Program that may become
ready for construction funding during FY 2025; and
$39.7 million for management and oversight (1.0% of the FY 2025 funding level).

FTA is proposing funding for New Starts, Core Capacity, Small Starts, and EPD Pilot Program
projects that are not yet currently ready for a funding recommendation but might successfully
advance and become ready for construction funding in FY 2025. By providing projects in the
pipeline the potential to advance to construction grant agreements when they are ready, rather
than making them wait for the next federal budget cycle to be completed, an opportunity exists to
advance the projects more quickly and thereby minimize cost escalation and possible financing
costs.
Because a full-year FY 2024 appropriation has not yet been enacted by Congress, FTA is
assuming a full-year continuing resolution for FY 2024, but without specified funding levels for
the various categories of projects (New Starts, Small Starts, Core Capacity, and EPD Pilot
Program) for either the annual appropriations or the advance appropriations. The FY 2024
program funding level and assumed allocations for each project shown in Table 1 of this report
have an effect on the FY 2025 budget proposal. If appropriations amounts and allocations in FY
2024 differ from the assumptions shown in Table 1, then FY 2025 funding needs for various
projects may change.

Project Evaluation and Ratings
The CIG project evaluation and ratings included in this report are based on a process specified in
statute. Section 5309 establishes various criteria on which proposed projects must be evaluated
and specifies a five-point rating scale: High, Medium-High, Medium, Medium-Low, and Low. To
Pursuant to Division J of the IIJA, the potential projects that may receive FY 2025 advance appropriations funding
are those that have entered the CIG or EPD programs. As new projects enter the CIG or EPD Programs, the
Department updates the relevant congressional committees.
1

5

advance in the CIG process toward a construction grant agreement, a project must be rated
Medium or better overall. FTA awards CIG construction grant agreements only once the project
sponsor can assure FTA that the proposed project scope, cost estimate, schedule, and budget are
firm and reliable, all non-CIG funding commitments are in place, and all critical third-party
agreements are completed. Once a project receives a construction grant agreement, FTA does
not have to continue to evaluate and rate the project.
FTA does not require CIG project sponsors to submit information annually for evaluation and
rating for the Annual Report. Rather, FTA only requires CIG project sponsors to submit
information for an updated evaluation and rating of the project for the Annual Report if: 1) the
project sponsor wants the project to be considered as a candidate for funding; 2) significant
issues have been raised in prior year evaluations that warrant a re-rating; or 3) there has been a
significant change to the project since the last evaluation.
Projects can be expected to continue to change as they progress through the CIG process. Hence,
the ratings included in this Annual Report should not be construed as statements about the
ultimate success or failure of those projects. Rather, the ratings provide assessments of the
projects’ strengths and weaknesses at the point in time when they were rated.
Tables 2A, 2B, and 2C present information on CIG and EPD projects, including the ratings for
projects currently in the Project Development or Engineering phase of the CIG Program. Table
2A is the Summary of FY 2025 CIG and EPD Projects; Table 2B is the Detailed Summary of FY
2025 Local Financial Commitment Ratings for CIG projects; and Table 2C is the Detailed
Summary of FY 2025 Project Justification Ratings for CIG projects.
The latest information on CIG projects in the Project Development and Engineering phases can
be found on the FTA website at https://www.transit.dot.gov/funding/grants/grantprograms/capital-investments/capital-investment-grant-cig-dashboard. In some cases, the cost
and CIG request for each project listed in Tables 2A, 2B, and 2C may not match the data
contained on the public dashboard. This is because the information contained in these tables is
based on FTA’s completed review of formal submittals from project sponsors. As projects
progress through planning and design, project costs can and often do change before project
sponsors formally submit updated information to FTA and such information is included on the
public dashboard.
Between publication of the FY 2024 Annual Report in March 2023, and publication of this report
in March 2024, FTA awarded eight construction grant agreements. At the time of publication of
this Annual Report, there is an additional grant award pending. In addition, FTA approved four
projects into the New Starts Engineering phase, with one project pending approval. Lastly, two
projects entered the New Starts Project Development phase, and ten projects entered the Small
Starts Project Development phase. These approvals are listed below:
New Starts Projects Awarded Construction Grant Agreements since March 2023
• MN St. Paul Gold Line Bus Rapid Transit
• NY New York City Second Avenue Subway Phase 2

6

Small Starts Projects Awarded Construction Grant Agreements since March 2023
• CA San Bernardino West Valley Connector
• PA Pittsburgh Downtown-Uptown-Oakland BRT
• TX Austin Expo Center Bus Rapid Transit
• TX Austin Pleasant Valley Bus Rapid Transit
• WA Seattle RapidRide J Line BRT
• WI Madison East West Bus Rapid Transit
Small Starts Project Construction Grant Agreement pending as of March 2024
• NV Las Vegas Maryland Parkway BRT
New Starts Projects Approved into Engineering since March 2023
• CA Inglewood Inglewood Transit Connector Project
• IL Chicago Red Line Extension
• NJ-NY Secaucus Hudson Tunnels
• TX San Antonio Advanced Rapid Transit North-South Corridor
New Starts Project Pending Entry into Engineering as of March 2024
• CA San Francisco Transbay Downtown Rail Extension
New Starts Projects that Entered Project Development since March 2023
• AZ Phoenix Capital Extension
• WA-OR Vancouver/Portland Interstate Bridge Replacement Program
Small Starts Projects that Entered Project Development since March 2023
• AL Huntsville University-Medical BRT
• AZ Tucson High-Capacity Transit Project
• CO Denver Federal Boulevard BRT
• LA New Orleans East West Bank BRT Corridor
• OH Cincinnati Hamilton Avenue Corridor BRT
• OH Cincinnati Reading Road Corridor BRT
• TX Houston METRORapid Gulfton Corridor
• UT Salt Lake City Davis-Salt Lake City Community Connector
• WA Spokane Division Street BRT
• WI Madison North South BRT

7

Table 2A -- Capital Investment Grants Program Summary of FY 2025 Project Ratings
The latest information on CIG projects can be found on the FTA public website dashboard. In some cases, the data in this table may not match the latest data on the dashboard.
This is because the information below is based on FTA’s completed reviews of formal submittals from project sponsors.
CORE CAPACITY PROJECTS
Phase
State, City, Project
Core Capacity Engineering
NY New York City, Canarsie Line Power and Station Improvements
Core Capacity Project Development *
^ MA Boston, Green Line Transformation Program
UT Salt Lake City, FrontRunner Strategic Double Track Project

Total CIG
CIG Share of
Funding Request
Capital Costs
(millions)

Capital Cost
(millions)

Financing
Costs
(millions)

Total Capital
Cost (millions)

$336.8

$36.2

$372.9

$100.0

$2,100.0
$966.2

-----

$2,100.0
$966.2

--$671.1

Local Financial
Commitment
Rating

Project
Justification
Rating

Overall Project
Rating

26.8%

Medium-High

Medium-High

Medium-High

--69.5%

--Medium

--Medium

--Medium

* The CIG amount for each New Starts and Core Capacity project is determined by FTA at the time the project enters the Engineering phase. For projects that are not yet in Engineering, the CIG request amount shown here may
change.
^ Project Development is the phase when a project sponsor completes the environmental review process, selects a locally preferred alternative, gets it adopted into the fiscally constrained long range plan, and develops the information
necessary for the project to be evaluated and rated by FTA. Thus, the project cost, including financing charges, may not yet be known.
--- The project sponsor has not yet requested a rating.
NEW STARTS PROJECTS
Phase
State, City, Project
New Starts Engineering
CA Inglewood, Inglewood Transit Connector
IL Chicago, Red Line Extension
# MN Minneapolis, METRO Blue Line Extension (Bottineau LRT)
NJ-NY Secaucus, Hudson Tunnel
SC Charleston, Lowcountry Rapid Transit
TX San Antonio, VIA Advanced Rapid Transit North/South Corridor Project
New Starts Project Development *
^ AZ Phoenix, Capitol Extension Project
^ CA Livermore, Valley Link Rail Project Phase 1
^ CA Los Angeles, Southeast Gateway Line
CA San Francisco, Transbay Downtown Rail Extension
CA San Jose, BART Silicon Valley Phase II Extension
FL Miami-Dade County, Northeast Corridor Rapid Transit Project
^ MN Twin Cities, METRO Purple Line BRT
TX Houston, University Corridor Bus Rapid Transit Project
^ VA Fairfax County, Richmond Highway BRT
^ WA-OR Vancouver/Portland, Interstate Bridge Replacement Program
^ WA Seattle, Ballard Link Extension
^ WA Seattle, West Seattle Link Extension

Total CIG
CIG Share of
Funding Request
Capital Costs
(millions)

Capital Cost
(millions)

Financing
Costs
(millions)

Total Capital
Cost (millions)

$1,890.0
$3,648.8
TBD
$13,144.5
$593.5
$446.3

$128.9
$299.1
TBD
$2,504.5
$31.6
---

$2,018.9
$3,948.0
TBD
$15,649.0
$625.1
$446.3

$1,211.0
$2,368.8
TBD
$7,409.0
$375.1
$267.8

$499.0
$1,800.0
$4,900 - $5,100
$7,879.4
$8,752.7
$538.1
$445.0
$1,559.6
$730.0
$1,800.0
$9,000.0
$3,200.0

------$375.4
$565.0
----$6.0
---------

$499.0
$1,800.0
$4,900 - $5,100
$8,254.8
$9,317.6
$538.1
$445.0
$1,565.6
$730.0
$1,800.0
$9,000.0
$3,200.0

--$450.0
--$4,077.9
$4,602.9
$263.7
$218.0
$939.4
$285.0
-------

Local Financial
Commitment
Rating

Project
Justification
Rating

Overall Project
Rating

60.0%
60.0%
TBD
47.3%
60.0%
60.0%

Medium
Medium
Under Review
Medium-High
Medium-High
Medium-High

Medium
Medium-High
Under Review
Medium-High
Medium
Medium

Medium
Medium-High
Under Review
Medium-High
Medium-High
Medium-High

--25.0%
--49.4%
49.4%
49.0%
49.0%
60.0%
39.0%
-------

------Medium-High
Medium-High
High
--Medium
---------

------Medium
Medium
Medium
--Medium
---------

------Medium-High
Medium-High
Medium-High
--Medium
---------

# In March 2021, the project sponsor began a process of public outreach on several revised alignments under consideration.
* The CIG amount for each New Starts and Core Capacity project is determined by FTA at the time the project enters the Engineering phase. The amount shown here may change.
^ Project Development is the phase when a project sponsor completes the environmental review process, selects a locally preferred alternative, gets it adopted into the fiscally constrained long range plan, and develops the information
necessary for the project to be evaluated and rated by FTA. Thus, the project cost, including financing charges, may not yet be known.
--- The project sponsor has not yet requested a rating.

8

Table 2A -- Capital Investment Grants Program Summary of FY 2025 Project Ratings
The latest information on CIG projects can be found on the FTA public website dashboard. In some cases, the data in this table may not match the latest data on the dashboard.
This is because the information below is based on FTA’s completed reviews of formal submittals from project sponsors.
SMALL STARTS PROJECTS
Phase
State, City, Project
Small Starts Project Development
^ AL Huntsville, University-Medical BRT
^ AZ Tucson, Tucson High-Capacity Transit Project
CA Monterey Bay, SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
+++ CA Sacramento, Downtown Riverfront Streetcar Project
CO Denver, East Colfax Avenue BRT
^ CO Denver, Federal Boulevard BRT
^ CO Fort Collins, West Elizabeth BRT Corridor Project
^ FL Broward County, Broward Commuter Rail South
^ FL Miami-Dade County, East-West Corridor Rapid Transit Phase 1 Project
^ FL Orlando, SunRail Connector to the Orlando International Airport
& FL Tampa, Tampa Streetcar Extension and Modernization
^ GA Atlanta, Campbellton CIC BRT
^ GA Atlanta, Clayton Southlake BRT
^ IN Indianapolis, IndyGo Blue Line Bus Rapid Transit
^ LA New Orleans, East-West Bank BRT Corridor
^ MD Montgomery County, Veirs Mill Road Flash BRT
MN Minneapolis, METRO F Line Bus Rapid Transit
MN Rochester, Link Rapid Transit Project
NC Chapel Hill, North-South Bus Rapid Transit (NSBRT)
NC Raleigh, Wake Bus Rapid Transit: Southern Corridor Project
^ NC Raleigh, Wake Bus Rapid Transit: Western Corridor
NV Las Vegas, Maryland Parkway Bus Rapid Transit Project
NY New York City, Woodhaven Boulevard Select Bus Service
^ OH Cincinnati, Hamilton Avenue Corridor BRT Project
^ OH Cincinnati, Reading Road Corridor BRT Project
^ OH Cleveland, MetroHealth Line BRT
^ OH Columbus, East Main Street BRT
^ OH Columbus, West Broad Street Bus Rapid Transit
TN Memphis, Memphis Innovation Corridor Project
^ TX Houston, METRORapid Gulfton Corridor Project
TX San Antonio, VIA Advanced Rapid Transit East/West Corridor Project
^ UT Salt Lake City, Davis-Salt Lake City Community Connector
UT Salt Lake County, Midvalley Connector
WA Seattle, RapidRide I Line
^ WA Seattle, RapidRide K Line BRT
WA Seattle, Culture Connector
^ WA Spokane, Division Street Bus Rapid Transit Project
WI Madison, Madison North-South Bus Rapid Transit Project
^ WI Milwaukee, North-South BRT

Capital Cost
(millions)

Financing
Costs
(millions)

Total Capital
Cost (millions)

$49.0
$117 - $137
$66.0
$117.0
$255.3
$300.0
$74.3
$297.0
$281.0
$175 - $225
$234.5
$274.7
$338.1
$360.5
$326.0
$102.0
$98.0
$143.4
$179.0
$173.9
$180.0
$305.0
$258.8
$143.6
$150.0
$50.0
$220 - $230
$180 - $190
$71.7
$220.0
$289.2
--$103.4
$141.1
$89.8
$285.5
$202.0
$146.9
$148.2

--------------------------$11.4
--------$4.0
------------------$1.7
----------------$3.8
---

$49.0
$117 - $137
$66.0
$117.0
$255.3
$300.0
$74.3
$297.0
$281.0
$175 - $225
$234.5
$274.7
$338.1
$371.9
$326.0
$102.0
$98.0
$143.4
$183.0
$173.9
$180.0
$305.0
$258.8
$143.6
$150.0
$50.0
$220 - $230
$180 - $190
$73.3
$220.0
$289.2
--$103.4
$141.1
$89.8
$285.5
$202.0
$150.7
$148.2

Total CIG
CIG Share of
Funding Request
Capital Costs
(millions)
----$22.2
$50.0
$126.9
------$92.7
--$99.9
--$150.0
$150.0
----$53.4
$84.9
$146.4
$85.9
--$150.0
$97.2
----$20.0
----$46.0
--$142.9
--$62.8
$66.7
--$75.0
--$118.1
---

----33.6%
42.7%
49.7%
------33.0%
--42.6%
--44.4%
40.3%
----54.5%
59.2%
80.0%
49.4%
--49.2%
37.5%
----40.0%
----62.8%
--49.4%
--60.7%
47.3%
--26.3%
--78.4%
---

Local Financial
Commitment
Rating

Project
Justification
Rating

Overall Project
Rating

----High
Under Review
High
----------Under Review
----High
----Medium
Medium-High
Medium
High
--High
High
----------Medium
--Medium-High
--Medium-High
High
--High
--Medium
---

----Medium
Under Review
Medium-High
----------Under Review
----Medium
----Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
--Medium
Medium
----------Medium
--Medium
--Medium
Medium
--Medium-High
--Medium
---

----Medium-High
Under Review
High
----------Under Review
----Medium-High
----Medium
Medium-High
Medium
Medium-High
--Medium-High
Medium-High
----------Medium
--Medium-High
--Medium-High
Medium-High
--High
--Medium
---

^ Project Development is the phase when a project sponsor completes the environmental review process, selects a locally preferred alternative, gets it adopted into the fiscally constrained long range plan, and develops the information
necessary for the project to be evaluated and rated by FTA. Thus, the project cost, including financing charges, may not yet be known.
--- The project sponsor has not yet requested a rating.
+++ In September 2020, the project sponsor adopted a shortened project alignment but has not yet provided FTA with the information needed to update the rating.
& In February 2021, the Florida Supreme Court ruled a key funding source is unconstitutional.

9

Table 2A-EPD -- Expedited Project Delivery Pilot Program Summary for FY 2025
EXPEDITED PROJECT DELIVERY (EPD) PROJECTS
State, City, Project

Capital Cost
(millions)

Financing
Costs
(millions)

Total Capital
Cost (millions)

$3,575.5

$60.0

$3,635.4

Total EPD
EPD Share of
Funding Request
Capital Costs
(millions)

Project Selection

New Starts EPD
CA Los Angeles, East San Fernando Valley (ESFV) Transit Corridor Phase 1 Project

$908.8

25.0%

Letter of Intent

10

Table 2B -- Detailed Summary of FY 2025 Local Financial Commitment Ratings
The latest information on CIG projects can be found on the FTA public website dashboard. In some cases, the data in this table may not match the latest data on the dashboard.
This is because the information below is based on FTA’s completed reviews of formal submittals from project sponsors.
CORE CAPACITY PROJECTS
Phase
State, City, Project

Core Capacity Engineering
NY New York City, Canarsie Line Power and Station Improvements
Core Capacity Project Development *
MA Boston, Green Line Transformation Program
UT Salt Lake City, FrontRunner Strategic Double Track Project

Current Financial
Condition Rating

Local Financial Commitment Factors
Commitment of
Reasonableness of the
Funds Rating
Financial Plan Rating

CIG Share of
Capital Costs

Local Financial
Commitment
Summary Rating

Medium

High

Medium-Low

26.8%

Medium-High

--Medium-High

--High

--Medium-Low

--69.5%

--Medium

If the summary local financial commitment rating is rated at least Medium and the CIG Program share is less than 50 percent of the project’s capital cost, then the summary local financial commitment
rating is raised one level.
“N/A” signifies that this subfactor does not apply because the project qualified for the financial rating “warrant” outlined in FTA's Final Interim Policy Guidance.
*
---

The CIG amount for each New Starts and Core Capacity project is determined by FTA at the time the project enters the Engineering phase. The amount shown here may change.
The project sponsor has not yet requested a rating.

NEW STARTS PROJECTS
Phase
State, City, Project

Current Financial
Condition Rating

Local Financial Commitment Factors
Commitment of
Reasonableness of the
Funds Rating
Financial Plan Rating

CIG Share of
Capital Costs

Local Financial
Commitment
Summary Rating

New Starts Engineering
CA Inglewood, Inglewood Transit Connector
IL Chicago, Red Line Extension
# MN Minneapolis, METRO Blue Line Extension (Bottineau LRT)
NJ-NY Secaucus, Hudson Tunnel
TX San Antonio, VIA Advanced Rapid Transit North/South Corridor Project
SC Charleston, Lowcountry Rapid Transit

Medium-High
Medium-Low
Under Review
Medium
High
High

Medium
High
Under Review
Medium
High
High

Medium-Low
Medium-Low
Under Review
Medium-Low
Medium-Low
Medium-Low

60.0%
60.0%
TBD
47.3%
60.0%
60.0%

Medium
Medium
Under Review
Medium-High
Medium-High
Medium-High

New Starts Project Development *
AZ Phoenix, Capitol Extension Project
CA Livermore, Valley Link Rail Project Phase 1
CA Los Angeles, Southeast Gateway Line
CA San Francisco, Transbay Downtown Rail Extension
CA San Jose, BART Silicon Valley Phase II Extension
FL Miami-Dade County, Northeast Corridor Rapid Transit Project
MN Twin Cities, METRO Purple Line BRT
TX Houston, University Corridor Bus Rapid Transit Project
VA Fairfax County, Richmond Highway BRT
WA-OR Vancouver/Portland, Interstate Bridge Replacement Program
WA Seattle, Ballard Link Extension
WA Seattle, West Seattle Link Extension

------Medium
Medium-High
Medium-High
--Medium-High
---------

------Medium-High
Medium-High
High
--High
---------

------Medium-Low
Low
Medium
--Medium-Low
---------

--25.0%
--49.4%
49.4%
49.0%
49.0%
60.0%
39.0%
-------

------Medium-High
Medium-High
High
--Medium
---------

If the summary local financial commitment rating is rated at least Medium and the CIG Program share is less than 50 percent of the project’s capital cost, then the summary local financial commitment
rating is raised one level.
# In March 2021, the project sponsor began a process of public outreach on several revised alignments under consideration.
* The CIG amount for each New Starts and Core Capacity project is determined by FTA at the time the project enters the Engineering phase. The amount shown here may change.
--- The project sponsor has not yet requested a rating.

11

Table 2B -- Detailed Summary of FY 2025 Local Financial Commitment Ratings
The latest information on CIG projects can be found on the FTA public website dashboard. In some cases, the data in this table may not match the latest data on the dashboard.
This is because the information below is based on FTA’s completed reviews of formal submittals from project sponsors.
SMALL STARTS PROJECTS
Phase
State, City, Project

Small Starts Project Development
AL Huntsville, University-Medical BRT
AZ Tucson, Tucson High-Capacity Transit Project
CA Monterey Bay, SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
+++ CA Sacramento, Downtown Riverfront Streetcar Project
CO Denver, East Colfax Avenue BRT
CO Denver, Federal Boulevard BRT
CO Fort Collins, West Elizabeth BRT Corridor Project
FL Broward County, Broward Commuter Rail South
FL Miami-Dade County, East-West Corridor Rapid Transit Phase 1 Project
FL Orlando, SunRail Connector to the Orlando International Airport
& FL Tampa, Tampa Streetcar Extension and Modernization
GA Atlanta, Campbellton CIC BRT
GA Atlanta, Clayton Southlake BRT
IN Indianapolis, IndyGo Blue Line Bus Rapid Transit
LA New Orleans, East-West Bank BRT Corridor
MD Montgomery County, Veirs Mill Road Flash BRT
MN Minneapolis, METRO F Line Bus Rapid Transit
MN Rochester, Link Rapid Transit Project
NC Chapel Hill, North-South Bus Rapid Transit (NSBRT)
NC Raleigh, Wake Bus Rapid Transit: Southern Corridor Project
NC Raleigh, Wake Bus Rapid Transit: Western Corridor
NV Las Vegas, Maryland Parkway Bus Rapid Transit Project
NY New York City, Woodhaven Boulevard Select Bus Service
OH Cincinnati, Hamilton Avenue Corridor BRT Project
OH Cincinnati, Reading Road Corridor BRT Project
OH Cleveland, MetroHealth Line BRT
OH Columbus, East Main Street BRT
OH Columbus, West Broad Street Bus Rapid Transit
TN Memphis, Memphis Innovation Corridor Project
TX Houston, METRORapid Gulfton Corridor Project
TX San Antonio, VIA Advanced Rapid Transit East/West Corridor Project
UT Salt Lake City, Davis-Salt Lake City Community Connector
UT Salt Lake County, Midvalley Connector
WA Seattle, RapidRide I Line
WA Seattle, RapidRide K Line BRT
WA Seattle, Culture Connector
WA Spokane, Division Street Bus Rapid Transit Project
WI Madison, Madison North-South Bus Rapid Transit Project
WI Milwaukee, North-South BRT

Local Financial Commitment Factors
Current Financial
Condition Rating

Commitment of
Funds Rating

Reasonableness of the
Financial Plan Rating

CIG Share of
Capital Costs

Local Financial
Commitment
Summary Rating

----N/A
Under Review
N/A
----------Under Review
----N/A
----N/A
Medium-High
N/A
Medium-High
--N/A
N/A
----------N/A
--High
--Medium-High
N/A
--N/A
--N/A
---

----N/A
Under Review
N/A
----------Under Review
----N/A
----N/A
Medium-High
N/A
Medium-High
--N/A
N/A
----------N/A
--Medium
--High
N/A
--N/A
--N/A
---

----N/A
Under Review
N/A
----------Under Review
----N/A
----N/A
Medium
N/A
Medium
--N/A
N/A
----------N/A
--Medium-Low
--Medium
N/A
--N/A
--N/A
---

----33.6%
42.7%
49.7%
------33.0%
--42.6%
--44.4%
40.3%
----54.5%
59.2%
80.0%
49.4%
--49.2%
37.5%
----40.0%
----62.8%
--49.4%
--60.7%
47.3%
--26.3%
--78.4%
---

----High
Under Review
High
----------Under Review
----High
----Medium
Medium-High
Medium
High
--High
High
----------Medium
--Medium-High
--Medium-High
High
--High
--Medium
---

If the summary local financial commitment rating is rated at least Medium and the CIG Program share is less than 50 percent of the project’s capital cost, then the summary local financial commitment
rating is raised one level.
--- The project sponsor has not yet requested a rating.
+++ In September 2020, the project sponsor adopted a shortened project alignment but has not yet provided FTA with the information needed to update the rating.
& In February 2021, the Florida Supreme Court ruled a key funding source is unconstitutional.
“N/A” signifies that this subfactor does not apply because the project qualified for the financial rating “warrant” outlined in FTA's Final Interim Policy Guidance.

12

Table 2C -- Detailed Summary of FY 2025 Project Justification Ratings
The latest information on CIG projects can be found on the FTA public website dashboard. In some cases, the data in this table may not match the latest data on the dashboard.
This is because the information below is based on FTA’s completed reviews of formal submittals from project sponsors.
CORE CAPACITY PROJECTS
Phase

Environmental
Benefits
Rating

Mobility
Improvements
Rating

Congestion
Relief
Rating

Cost
Effectiveness
Rating

Economic
Development
Rating

Capacity Needs
Rating

Project Justification
Summary Rating

Core Capacity Engineering
NY New York City, Canarsie Line Power and Station Improvements

Medium

High

Medium

High

Medium

Medium-High

Medium-High

Core Capacity Project Development
MA Boston, Green Line Transformation Program
UT Salt Lake City, FrontRunner Strategic Double Track Project

--Medium

--Medium-Low

--High

--Not Rated

--Medium

--Medium

--Medium

Environmental
Benefits
Rating

Mobility
Improvements
Rating

Congestion
Relief
Rating

Cost
Effectiveness
Rating

Economic
Development
Rating

Land Use
Rating

Project Justification
Summary Rating

New Starts Engineering
CA Inglewood, Inglewood Transit Connector
IL Chicago, Red Line Extension
# MN Minneapolis, METRO Blue Line Extension (Bottineau LRT)
NJ-NY Secaucus, Hudson Tunnel
TX San Antonio, VIA Advanced Rapid Transit North/South Corridor Project
SC Charleston, Lowcountry Rapid Transit

Medium
Medium-High
Under Review
Medium
Medium-High
Medium

Low
Medium-High
Under Review
High
Medium-Low
Medium-Low

Medium
Medium-High
Under Review
Low
Medium-Low
Medium-Low

Low
Medium
Under Review
High
Medium-High
Medium-Low

Medium-High
Medium
Under Review
Medium-High
Medium
Medium

Medium
Medium-High
Under Review
High
Medium
Medium

Medium
Medium-High
Under Review
Medium-High
Medium
Medium

New Starts Project Development
AZ Phoenix, Capitol Extension Project
CA Livermore, Valley Link Rail Project Phase 1
CA Los Angeles, Southeast Gateway Line
CA San Francisco, Transbay Downtown Rail Extension
CA San Jose, BART Silicon Valley Phase II Extension
FL Miami-Dade County, Northeast Corridor Rapid Transit Project
MN Twin Cities, METRO Purple Line BRT
TX Houston, University Corridor Bus Rapid Transit Project
VA Fairfax County, Richmond Highway BRT
WA-OR Vancouver/Portland, Interstate Bridge Replacement Program
WA Seattle, Ballard Link Extension
WA Seattle, West Seattle Link Extension

------Medium-High
Medium
Medium-High
--Medium-Low
---------

------Medium
Medium
Medium
--Medium
---------

------Medium
Medium
Medium
--Medium
---------

------Low
Low
Medium-Low
--Medium-Low
---------

------Medium-High
High
Medium
--Medium-Low
---------

------High
Medium-High
Medium
--Medium
---------

------Medium
Medium
Medium
--Medium
---------

State, City, Project

--- The project sponsor has not yet requested a rating.
NEW STARTS PROJECTS
Phase
State, City, Project

# In March 2021, the project sponsor began a process of public outreach on several revised alignments under consideration.
--- The project sponsor has not yet requested a rating.

13

Table 2C -- Detailed Summary of FY 2025 Project Justification Ratings
The latest information on CIG projects can be found on the FTA public website dashboard. In some cases, the data in this table may not match the latest data on the dashboard.
This is because the information below is based on FTA’s completed reviews of formal submittals from project sponsors.
SMALL STARTS PROJECTS
Phase
State, City, Project

Small Starts Project Development
AL Huntsville, University-Medical BRT
AZ Tucson, Tucson High-Capacity Transit Project
CA Monterey Bay, SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
+++ CA Sacramento, Downtown Riverfront Streetcar Project
CO Denver, East Colfax Avenue BRT
CO Denver, Federal Boulevard BRT
CO Fort Collins, West Elizabeth BRT Corridor Project
FL Broward County, Broward Commuter Rail South
FL Miami-Dade County, East-West Corridor Rapid Transit Phase 1 Project
FL Orlando, SunRail Connector to the Orlando International Airport
& FL Tampa, Tampa Streetcar Extension and Modernization
GA Atlanta, Campbellton CIC BRT
GA Atlanta, Clayton Southlake BRT
IN Indianapolis, IndyGo Blue Line Bus Rapid Transit
LA New Orleans, East-West Bank BRT Corridor
MD Montgomery County, Veirs Mill Road Flash BRT
 MN Minneapolis, METRO F Line Bus Rapid Transit
MN Rochester, Link Rapid Transit Project
NC Chapel Hill, North-South Bus Rapid Transit (NSBRT)
NC Raleigh, Wake Bus Rapid Transit: Southern Corridor Project
NC Raleigh, Wake Bus Rapid Transit: Western Corridor
NV Las Vegas, Maryland Parkway Bus Rapid Transit Project
 NY New York City, Woodhaven Boulevard Select Bus Service
OH Cincinnati, Hamilton Avenue Corridor BRT Project
OH Cincinnati, Reading Road Corridor BRT Project
OH Cleveland, MetroHealth Line BRT
OH Columbus, East Main Street BRT
OH Columbus, West Broad Street Bus Rapid Transit
TN Memphis, Memphis Innovation Corridor Project
TX Houston, METRORapid Gulfton Corridor Project
TX San Antonio, VIA Advanced Rapid Transit East/West Corridor Project
UT Salt Lake City, Davis-Salt Lake City Community Connector
UT Salt Lake County, Midvalley Connector
WA Seattle, RapidRide I Line
WA Seattle, RapidRide K Line BRT
WA Seattle, Culture Connector
WA Spokane, Division Street Bus Rapid Transit Project
WI Madison, Madison North-South Bus Rapid Transit Project
WI Milwaukee, North-South BRT

Environmental
Benefits
Rating

Mobility
Improvements
Rating

Congestion
Relief
Rating

Cost
Effectiveness
Rating

Economic
Development
Rating

Land Use
Rating

Project Justification
Summary Rating

----Medium
Under Review
High
----------Under Review
----High
----Low
Medium-Low
Medium
High
--Medium
Medium
----------Medium
--Medium-High
--High
Medium
--High
--Medium-Low
---

----Low
Under Review
Medium
----------Under Review
----Medium-Low
----Medium
Medium-Low
Medium-Low
Low
--Medium
Medium
----------Medium-Low
--Medium-Low
--Low
Medium-Low
--Medium
--Low
---

----Medium-Low
Under Review
Medium
----------Under Review
----Medium-Low
----Medium
Medium
Medium-Low
Medium-Low
--Medium-Low
Medium
----------Low
--Medium-Low
--Medium-Low
Medium-Low
--Medium
--Medium-Low
---

----High
Under Review
High
----------Under Review
----Medium
----Medium
Medium-High
Medium
Medium
--Medium-High
Medium
----------High
--Medium-High
--Medium
High
--High
--Medium
---

----Medium-Low
Under Review
Medium
----------Under Review
----Medium
----Medium
Medium-High
Medium
Medium-High
--Medium
Medium-Low
----------Medium
--Medium
--Medium-Low
Medium
--High
--Medium-High
---

----Medium-Low
Under Review
Medium-High
----------Under Review
----Medium
----Medium-High
Medium
Medium-Low
Medium
--Medium
Medium
----------Medium-Low
--Medium
--Medium-Low
Medium-Low
--High
--Medium
---

----Medium
Under Review
Medium-High
----------Under Review
----Medium
----Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
--Medium
Medium
----------Medium
--Medium
--Medium
Medium
--Medium-High
--Medium
---

--- The project sponsor has not yet requested a rating.
+++ In September 2020, the project sponsor adopted a shortened project alignment but has not yet provided FTA with the information needed to update the rating.
& In February 2021, the Florida Supreme Court ruled a key funding source is unconstitutional.
 Project qualifies for Project Justification warrants outlined in FTA's Final Interim Policy Guidance.

14