National/International Maglev Projects Overview
Prepared by the staff of the Maglev Task Force, Southern California Association
of Governments (SCAG), 4/20/05
Source: Clipped from a larger document which is available on-line
To: Maglev Task Force Members
From: Zahi Faranesh (x819) and Sarah Adams (x818)
Date: April 20, 2005
SUMMARY: The status of most national and international Maglev Projects is listed below:
California-Nevada has completed the programmatic DEIR/EIS Scoping processes and
has begun work on the study. On the initial segment from Las Vegas to Primm
(approximately 40 miles), they are working towards a project specific DEIS (Note no
EIR is required in the state of Nevada).
Baltimore-Washington has completed their DEIR/EIS, which has been signed by the
FRA Administrator. They are about to start FEIR/EIS and they currently have
approximately $1 million in Federal funding for this work.
Pittsburgh has completed their DEIR/EIS, but are going through revisions in cooperation
with the FRA. They still have some federal funding to finish the DEIR/EIS work.
San Diego has $1 million earmarked in TEA-LU (passed by the House only) for a
Maglev feasibility study from San Diego airport to a location in Imperial County. The
purpose of the feasibility study is to determine if Maglev can offer a viable option for
relieving their airport capacity issues.
Atlanta-Chattanooga is still in the beginning stages of planning for their proposed
Maglev project. There is significant local support for the project and they are currently
trying to harness local match from Georgia and Tennessee for a FRA grant. They may
extend the project propose to offer Maglev service to Nashville, TN and
Macon/Savannah, GA. The initial phase is expected to go to the Atlanta airport.
Shanghai continues to run successfully at 99.7% on-time performance. Ridership is
increasing, but they are still operating only nine hours per day. The potential extension to
Hangzhou (110 mi) is still under discussion. The goal for that extension is to be up and
running by 2010 for the World Expo.
Japan Slow-Speed (HSST) began operation in March and is running successfully so far.
They just completed the World Fair and had some issues with overcrowding on the trains.
London is under conceptual discussion on a potential line from London to Manchester.
Several high speed transit alternatives are being considered. Bahrain, Qatar, and the
United Arab Emirates are looking at a possible regional line throughout the three countries.
At this point, only conceptual discussions on feasibility studies are being undertaken.
National Maglev Program is subject to the TEA-21 Reauthorization process. A National
Maglev Program is contained in each bill and the goal of national Maglev interest groups
is to garner funding for construction of one or more projects with additional funding to
complete ongoing studies on other projects. Members of the Maglev Task Force will be
briefed on the national program and expectations for each project.
Federal SAFETEA and TEA-LU Update, April 20
SUMMARY TEA-LU (HR 3), the House version of the reauthorization bill, was
passed by the full House on March 10th. The Senates version, SAFETEA, was marked
up in the Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) on March 16th. Floor
action on the bill may be delayed. Currently, both bills contain overall funding levels
of $284 billion and retain the National Maglev Program.
The House bill authorizes $95 million from 2005-2009 for construction and/or planning
activities. No funding is given the status of non-contract authority and will come as a
take-down from NHS. Further, there is no discussion regarding participation and eligibility.
Any project that qualifies technologically and financially under the current program can
apply (projects must be revenue producing). The Senate bill authorizes $67 million in
contract authority and $1.9 billion in non-contract authority. Further, it allows additional
projects to be considered under the Federal program. (*Note Contract authority requires
the authorized amount to be obligated in the year it is assigned without going through
appropriations. Non-contract requires the authorized amounts to go through an
Last modified: May 19, 2005