OnTrackNorthAmerica - User contributions [en]

Industrial Land Value Optimization

2024-10-22T16:45:26Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>Industrial Land Value Optimization</b><b> </b><b>(ILVO) </b>establishes a new set of principles for industrial property development through site design, tenant attraction, and logistics. As part of a modern Silk Road*, ILVO pinpoints a property's highest and best value.</br></br>

*The Silk Road was an ancient trade route linking China with the West, carrying goods and ideas between the two great civilizations of Rome and China.</br></br>

<b>In the 21</b><SUP><b>st</b></SUP><b> century, land use choices must reflect the </b><b>full</b><b> impacts of</b><b>:</b></br></br>

1) the industrial activities at each property
2) the broader industrial systems in which these activities occur
3) transporting material, goods, and workers to and from each site.</br></br>

This redefines the concept of “highest and best use.” Currently, the guiding principle in real estate development rivets attention to the site’s maximum coverage, density, height, and income, with little regard to the impacts on logistics and supply chain systems, quality of community life, and the environment. In many cases, the implications of moving material and people to and from a property are greater than what occurs at the property. </br></br>

OTNA teaches how to use multiple commercially available freight databases to illuminate the supply chains that originate, terminate, and pass through a property’s region. This understanding enables land developers and realtors to target buyers or tenants who would most appreciate the property's logistics value. </br></br>

Knowing the supply chains that a property can serve using rail when sensible boosts the volume of on-site services that can be provided and enables shippers to access a larger marketplace for material supply and product distribution. </br></br>

Land use planning is widely practiced in transit-oriented development but rarely applied to logistics-oriented development. Optimizing a property’s use of highways and rail lines advances many public-sector objectives. </br></br>

North America's development pace calls for carefully preserving land along rail rights-of-way. To optimize the productivity of the existing rail network, it is essential to limit non-rail shippers’ development of rail-adjacent property. Rail service requires access to rail lines. In the same way that communities preserve land along scenic lakefronts for low-impact, non-industrial uses, land adjacent to rail lines should be used as much as possible for rail-served industrial activities. Land is no longer so plentiful in North America that we can afford to use it unwisely. </br></br>

<i><b>What sensible approaches should </b></i><i><b>North America</b></i><i><b> </b></i><i><b>embrace</b></i><i><b>? </b></i></br></br>

Support developers in designing sustainable logistics plans</br></br>

Preserve land along rail ROWs for rail-served development</br></br>

Create a continental rail-served property database</br></br>

Co-locate utility and transportation corridors</br></br>

Co-locate passenger and freight rail lines</br></br>

Offer property tax incentives to shippers using the rail system</br></br>

Develop corridor rail development and operating plans</br></br>

<h3>As the continent embarks on facilitating the rail service expansion envisioned in CAPSI, it must recognize that Industrial Land Value Optimization is critical to attracting private-sector investment capital in sustainable industrial systems. </h3></br></br>

Industrial Land Value Optimization

2024-10-22T16:45:16Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>Industrial Land Value Optimization</b><b> </b><b>(ILVO) </b>establishes a new set of principles for industrial property development through site design, tenant attraction, and logistics. As part of a modern Silk Road*, ILVO pinpoints a property's highest and best value.</br>

*The Silk Road was an ancient trade route linking China with the West, carrying goods and ideas between the two great civilizations of Rome and China.</br>

<b>In the 21</b><SUP><b>st</b></SUP><b> century, land use choices must reflect the </b><b>full</b><b> impacts of</b><b>:</b></br>

1) the industrial activities at each property
2) the broader industrial systems in which these activities occur
3) transporting material, goods, and workers to and from each site.</br>

This redefines the concept of “highest and best use.” Currently, the guiding principle in real estate development rivets attention to the site’s maximum coverage, density, height, and income, with little regard to the impacts on logistics and supply chain systems, quality of community life, and the environment. In many cases, the implications of moving material and people to and from a property are greater than what occurs at the property. </br>

OTNA teaches how to use multiple commercially available freight databases to illuminate the supply chains that originate, terminate, and pass through a property’s region. This understanding enables land developers and realtors to target buyers or tenants who would most appreciate the property's logistics value. </br>

Knowing the supply chains that a property can serve using rail when sensible boosts the volume of on-site services that can be provided and enables shippers to access a larger marketplace for material supply and product distribution. </br>

Land use planning is widely practiced in transit-oriented development but rarely applied to logistics-oriented development. Optimizing a property’s use of highways and rail lines advances many public-sector objectives. </br>

North America's development pace calls for carefully preserving land along rail rights-of-way. To optimize the productivity of the existing rail network, it is essential to limit non-rail shippers’ development of rail-adjacent property. Rail service requires access to rail lines. In the same way that communities preserve land along scenic lakefronts for low-impact, non-industrial uses, land adjacent to rail lines should be used as much as possible for rail-served industrial activities. Land is no longer so plentiful in North America that we can afford to use it unwisely. </br>

<i><b>What sensible approaches should </b></i><i><b>North America</b></i><i><b> </b></i><i><b>embrace</b></i><i><b>? </b></i></br>

Support developers in designing sustainable logistics plans</br>

Preserve land along rail ROWs for rail-served development</br>

Create a continental rail-served property database</br>

Co-locate utility and transportation corridors</br>

Co-locate passenger and freight rail lines</br>

Offer property tax incentives to shippers using the rail system</br>

Develop corridor rail development and operating plans</br>

<h3>As the continent embarks on facilitating the rail service expansion envisioned in CAPSI, it must recognize that Industrial Land Value Optimization is critical to attracting private-sector investment capital in sustainable industrial systems. </h3></br>

Collaborative Industrial Optimization

2024-10-22T16:39:00Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

What is now commonly called “supply chain optimization” is crippled by its narrow focus, limited to individual company logistics. Consequently, neither the marketplace nor the public sector have been able to design infrastructure for efficient industrial systems. </br></br>

OTNA’s <b>Collaborative Industrial Optimization</b> reconceives planning and investment to serve entire industries and regions. For example, minerals, forest products, glass, and aggregates can be redesigned as “industrial systems” from mines and farms to factories and customers. The Collaborative Industrial Optimization (CIO) approach facilitates collaboration between shippers, transportation providers, and other stakeholders in a larger design frame than afforded by traditional marketplace interactions. It leads stakeholders to integrate knowledge about natural resources, business plans, freight data, land use, logistics, and economic development into productive systems. We need to think and plan whole industrial systems so that commercial and public investments solve problems and create new efficiencies, not just move more stuff faster. </br></br>

Early rail lines in 19<SUP>th</SUP> century North America were envisioned as part of expansive supply chains, <b>from</b><b> interior </b><b>r</b><b>esources </b><b>to</b><b> coastal cities, from mine to factory, and from farm to table.</b> Before individual local projects were conceived and built, an entire corridor or region as an industrial system was envisioned. Contrast that with 2008 at the height of North America’s ethanol-production boom. Hundreds of billions in investment capital poured into the ethanol industry to fund individual “competing” projects. Unit train loading facilities, for example, were consequently built without matching unit train receiving facilities. Ethanol production skyrocketed while the ad hoc transportation and distribution system remained inadequate. </br></br>

When closely observing infrastructure development across the continent, it is shocking how often a project's full promise is squandered because one party limits the conception to serve only their business interests. This is not usually from a nefarious intention. Fundamentally, no entity or business is at the helm guiding industry or infrastructure to serve multiple opportunities for shippers and society. </br></br>

Today, Southern Nevada biofuel producers receive feedstock by truck from the San Pedro Bay area. They then truck the product back to the consumers in Southern California through populated areas in both states rather than use energy-efficient railroads available for these movements at origin and destination. Meanwhile, this inefficient commerce is rewarded with California Low Carbon Fuel Standard Credits. </br></br>

Of the 138 warehouses built in recent years in Western Nevada, only one uses rail, even though they are all on or near a rail line. These distribution centers are essentially there to serve California’s market. This results in high-volume back-and-forth truck traffic on the same roads as commuters and tourists. A similar dynamic is found between each coastal state and its inland counterparts, as well as within metropolitan areas throughout the continent. In these densely populated regions, where collaboration among stakeholders could yield the greatest benefits, we often see the least coordination.</br></br>

During OTNA’s work creating the 2021 Nevada State Rail Plan, we were struck by the opportunity of a Mining Materials Logistics Strategy to bring commercial benefits to the state’s mining companies, suppliers, and customers. This collaborative approach to mining’s inputs and outputs would justify new and enhanced rail infrastructure and services that could benefit other industries, the community, and the mining industry. </br></br>

Some will claim that <b>Collaborative Industrial Optimization</b> demands trust and cooperation that our competitive economic system cannot sustain. In our experience offering this level of collaboration to people across North America, almost everyone welcomes it. We are confident that this is precisely how we must relate to industry, transportation, and each other to ensure our economic and environmental sustainability. </br></br>

<i><b>Key Distinctions of Collaborative Industrial Optimization</b></i><i><b> (CIO)</b></i></br></br>

<b>1. </b><b>INDUSTRIAL SYSTEMS DO NOT BEGIN OR END AT POLITICAL BOUNDARIES</b><b>
</b>Supply chains extend across county, state, regional, and national borders. Needed improvements flow from planning in collaboration with entities throughout the supply chain.</br></br>

<b>2. PLAN WHOLE SUPPLY CHAINS, NOT JUST PROJECTS</b><b>
</b>Infrastructure investments supporting whole systems rather than just one-off projects deliver meaningful advantages to a region, its businesses, and investors.</br></br>

<b>3. PROJECTS OF LOCAL SIGNIFICANCE</b><b>
</b>There aren’t “Projects of National Significance” without many “Projects of Local Significance.” </br></br>

<b>4. INCLUDING ALL PERSPECTIVES MAKES </b><b>PROGRESS</b><b> EASIER, NOT HARDER</b><b>
</b>Contrary to the prevailing belief that including all concerns and views is too complex, 360° inclusion of businesses, communities, and projects boosts the productivity of infrastructure plans and investments. </br></br>

<b>5. PLANS ARE FOR ACTION</b>
We can no longer invest in the type of “plans” that sit ignored on government shelves and hard drives. Plans must be designed for implementation from the outset.</br></br>

<b>6. STAKEHOLDERS ARE PARTNERS, NOT SURVEY RESPONDENTS</b>
Stakeholder engagement is often conducted superficially to fulfill a bureaucratic requirement. Effective investments require collaborative dialogue and co-creation with all stakeholder groups.</br></br>

<b>7. RAIL AND ROADS ARE ONE SYSTEM</b>
It is unproductive to pit highway, air, pipeline, and railway transport modes against each other in public policy or the marketplace. </br></br>

<b>8. FREIGHT ANALYSIS MUST INCLUDE TRUCK DATA, EVEN IN RAIL PLANS</b>
Truck shipment data provides critical visibility into the bulk of a region’s industrial activity, illuminating the path toward an ideal truck-rail balance.</br></br>

<b>9. THE RIGHT TOOLS MAKE THE RIGHT DATA ACTIONABLE</b>
Raw data is one level of usefulness; data made accessible and applicable is another. CIO’s tools enable stakeholders to use freight data for plan implementation and business development.</br></br>

<b>10. INTEGRATE </b><b>FREIGHT </b><b>PLANNING WITH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMEN</b>T
Transportation departments and economic development agencies work in silos on matters that co-influence industrial system productivity. CIO integrates these efforts into regional strategies. </br></br>

<b>11. FREIGHT TRANSPORTATION IS INSEPARABLE FROM LAND USE PLANNING</b>
Effective land-use planning can optimize economic development and minimize the impact of goods movement. Smart land use is as much about how goods move to and from a property as what happens on the property.</br></br>

<b>12. CAPITAL IS AVAILABLE FOR ALL WELL-CONCEIVED PROJECTS</b>
Now holding hundreds of billions of dollars, infrastructure investors and lenders worldwide are poised to deploy capital for industrial and freight projects in North America. They need this plan. </br></br>

<b>Moving Forward</b><b>:</b>
Consider how investment in communities and industries is commonly structured. Investments are conceived so that the investor withdraws the benefits that capital makes available as narrowly and quickly as possible, with limited sharing, even with the people whose labor made the profits possible. We must restructure investments to ensure the benefits percolate and synergize among all stakeholders. Then, out of the enrichment of the system and the community, one makes one’s return on investment—just a few more words, but all the difference in creating the profound, long-lasting change our challenges urgently require. </br></br>

END_________</br></br>

</br></br>

</br></br>

</br></br>

A society that orients its capital deployment around competition for narrow gain can’t help funding further inefficiencies. </br></br>

However, for the Collaborative Industrial Optimization process to meaningfully integrate the diverse interests of stakeholders, it is imperative to develop performance measures, tangible outcomes, and deliverables to implement rail-enabled economic development successfully. </br></br>

<b>Competition</b> for individual gain straightjackets otherwise intelligent individuals to rivet their intelligence and attention on their narrow-vested interests. Collaboration and coordination expand our personal and collective intelligence into productive plans and investments. When we first came to Washington, DC, with our thinking about the value of railroads to the country and the opportunity of increasing attention and investment, we were received with open arms by Congress and the Executive Branch. Why that progress was shunned and stymied by the rail industry’s lobbyists demonstrates how otherwise good people will stand in the way of industry progress. We are almost all compensated now to maintain the status quo, usually gained toward inefficiency. As soon as an idea for improvement and efficiency comes along, it appears as a threat to our family. </br></br>

The shortcomings of competition for narrow gain are not just evident in corporations; they are present in almost all quarters of commercial activity, academia, science, law, public policy, and planning. Nearly all interactions, from one-on-one to large group discussions, meetings, summits, and conferences, utilize an inadequate design and can be transformed.</br></br>

This model integrates supply chain redesign, clear metrics, actionable data, and a process for inclusive dialogue. It’s an enabler of action, results, and whole systems transformation. It empowers people to recognize and embrace their leadership in meeting objectives, and then they can apply the tools effectively.</br></br>

Collaborative Industrial Optimization is the integrated planning of industrial systems, land use, transportation, and economic development for a sustainable world. </br></br>

Our precious national infrastructure investment can be optimally conceived to supercharge efforts to improve the nation’s supply chains, economy, and environment. OnTrackNorthAmerica’s Collaborative Industrial Development approach, borne out of this 30 years of fieldwork, can enhance the quality of life in rural and urban America.

Collaborative Industrial Optimization is an investment strategy that integrates public-sector planning and investment with private-sector commerce and capital to simultaneously address supply chain, community, and environmental issues. </br></br>

We have chosen to model collaboration and trust within supply chains. We work on private-sector commerce and finance and public-sector policy and planning. Most importantly, we stand for the community and the environment. Around what else would we orient supply chains? We determined early on that the world could best see and then transform the illogic of the past by coming face to face with our collective misuse of the wheel for moving heavy weight over land. The freight rail industry in North America earns 10% of the freight trucking industry's revenue despite its energy, capital, and space efficiencies. We continue to explore “Why would a society direct its precious resources toward inefficiencies?” Answering this question wisely tells us everything we need to know to transform the underlying causes.</br></br>

Beyond freight logistics, the last fifty years have taught the U.S. and the world that clean air, clean water, natural resources, and land must all be considered integral to sustainable industrial supply chain systems. Climate change is teaching us—more urgently with every passing year—that energy, the most fundamental resource, must be produced more cleanly and used more efficiently if we are to survive.</br></br>

Look at how transportation has typically been planned – or, more accurately, not planned. Supply chains are “legacies” reflecting the location of individual land transactions for each shipper and receiver, regardless of the inefficiencies those choices will impose for many years. </br></br>

<h4>A Message from Strategic Rail Finance’s Founder: “North America is severely underutilizing freight railroads at a time when highway congestion, air pollution, and oil dependence threaten our economy and quality of life. While governments are increasingly looking to support rail development, they are challenged to coordinate with businesses that operate on privately owned infrastructure. Planners and policymakers need this new framework for effective engagement with the private sector. We can only produce the much-needed expansion of long-haul and local freight rail service through thoughtful, collaborative planning. </h4></br></br>

</br></br>

<h4>However, as logistics and transportation exhaust scarce resources, we need a new alignment of commercial activity and related public policies. </h4></br></br>

<h4>OnTrackNorthAmerica is leading businesses and governments to generate results together that neither can produce on its own.</h4></br></br>

<h4>Increasing rail transportation with its inherent energy, capital, and space efficiencies will provide cascading economic and environmental benefits. </h4></br></br>

Many individuals, entities, and commissions produce studies, reports, and recommendations. However, they have lacked a forum and method for effective interaction. </br></br>

Case studies and pilot projects are fine when you are out to repeat the past. When you want to create a new future, there are no case studies, only current dynamics and new possibilities. The Wright Brothers weren’t operating from case studies. </br></br>

Solving problems begins with imagining a new future and then clarifying the gaps and the issues. </br></br>

Imagine a world where all the resources and effort applied to solving problems were instead used to create new possibilities. The path to a world that works for everyone is quickly transitioning commerce and governance from competition for narrow gain to coordination and collaboration for the greatest good. On that path, we can solve all of our challenges. </br></br>

The world has only one way out of the mess we are in. That path requires us to let go of competition in business and governance and embrace coordination and collaboration for the greatest good. And supply chains are the perfect arena for examining and improving our conduct as individuals and organizations in business and governance. We have been doing frontline field research for years and can report back that competition as a path has run its course. We have investigated, conceived, discovered, and invented a complete set of tools for this large-scale multistakeholder thinking, planning, and acting. Our survival depends on our ability to use these tools to create a new future together. It includes everyone at every level. Relationships and dialogues are tools, too. It’s all about energy; energy is the exchange. We can think together. People are generally bright, but our systems for gathering that intelligence into innovative business activity and public policies are woefully inadequate.</br></br>

Truth-telling is paramount</br></br>

Past and current realities, gaps, agendas, biases</br></br>

Future possibilities, challenges, and opportunities</br></br>

The Nevada State Rail Plan is different because the extensive knowledge of all stakeholder groups in the state informs our recommendations. </br></br>

This plan is informed by people and their perspectives, not just information and data. Most plans rely on limited survey responses and superficial public gatherings. In contrast, we have had 500+ in-depth conversations with Nevada stakeholders. We have also convened stakeholders in small and large group meetings that consistently lead to productive, creative dialogue.</br></br>

Would an entire state’s relevant stakeholders respond positively to an invitation to gather around rail development? Would they want to contribute to a whole system, whole state game plan for growing rail service? A strategy that supports their businesses, community, and environment? The resounding answer in Nevada has been YES. </br></br>

People worldwide are thirsting to have their efforts join the efforts of others in dispatching the critical challenges of this moment. </br></br>

The Nevada State Rail Plan is based on a new framework for capital investment, informed by the transformative understanding that ample private-sector capital is available for rail-enabled economic development.</br></br>

The key to unlocking this infrastructure investment is to focus transportation plans and economic development strategies first on supporting existing businesses. Help them expand their markets and their material sourcing through logistics efficiencies. Existing business management will empower economic development by recommending new companies that they would value as local customers, processors, service providers, or suppliers. Rail development should be designed to connect these new businesses with existing businesses. This is how rail infrastructure enables a state’s economy to move up the value chain. Attracting new companies will be easier as the capital for new rail infrastructure will enjoy a lower risk profile. </br></br>

The Nevada State Rail Plan is built on four principles: most notably, truth, followed by collaboration, inclusion, and commitment. Let me repeat that: truth, collaboration, inclusion, and commitment.</br></br>

Truth matters to a successful rail plan because we cannot improve a system without starting with the truth of the current dynamics. Creating a new future requires tremendous positivity that must also be informed by a clear-eyed understanding of what is not currently working. </br></br>

Let us direct that truthful analysis toward America's ultimate value—competition. I often reflect on my years as a high school and collegiate wrestler when I was naturally competitive. But in my career off the mat, I am committed to shining a light on the inadequacy of competition as an operating principle for commerce and governance.</br></br>

Think about a county with an idea it would do well by developing a rail-served industrial park. It often wants to develop that park before an adjacent county to win the competition game. Is winning a competition to invest in a less-than-optimal industrial development a win, or is it likely to be a short-lived investment that will lose its luster in subsequent years when infrastructure is built in another county when the marketplace finally responds to a more advantageous siting for the region?</br></br>

In response to our message of collaborative corridor and regional planning, the people of Nevada have embraced a fundamental perspective that collaboration is a more productive framework for advancing rail-enabled economic development. We have created an attractive model for other states and the world, demonstrating how stakeholders can cooperate with their neighbors across counties, regions, states, industries, and agencies.</br></br>

The Nevada State Treasurer asked me an astute question when he asked what I observed was most at play in project development around the state. My answer was immediate. In case after case, projects had been hampered because the level of collaboration needed for rail development was missing. </br></br>

What we call Radical Inclusion lights the path forward because all regions, communities, businesses, projects, and, indeed, every track mile in a state matter. We purposefully did not rank projects because the entire state and its rail network are part of a system best advanced by radical inclusion. Too often, ranking results in some regions getting supported while others are continually sidelined. Contrary to the accepted wisdom that too many perspectives and projects complicate matters, the inverse is the case. Infrastructure designed from all perspectives with diverse projects has a much greater likelihood of remaining relevant to the entire community and its industrial system. </br></br>

The fourth fundamental principle of rail-enabled sustainable economic development is Commitment. Commitment is what separates a plan from a report. And that Commitment does not automatically appear when an agency contracts with a consulting firm. Commitment shows up when one or more individuals in or out of that agency and consultancy assume a personal promise to turn the studies into plans by engaging everyone to act, not just report. For that, I appreciate my partners on the panel, Kris and Sheldon, and their economic development compatriots around the state and the Nevada Department of Transportation management for embracing that personal commitment with me that this is a transportation plan that creates a new future for Nevada. The implementation began from our engagement and remains in high gear.</br></br>

Nevada stakeholders have embraced these four principles—truth, collaboration, inclusion, and commitment—as critical underpinnings of effective rail-enabled economic development.</br></br>

Like almost all publicly funded transportation plans, rail plans are usually written as perfunctory, bureaucratic exercises that create two-inch-thick, 100MB reports that are then sent to the USDOT and never read or referenced again.</br></br>

Why would a society relate so inappropriately to its precious taxpayer dollars when there are vital infrastructure matters to address? Our society is numb to this dreadful squandering of human intellect and natural resources. </br></br>

You may be reflecting on your own experience of plans and reports that, once written, barely see the light of day. But we can forge a new future. I am asking us to embark on that new path, modeled by the Nevada State Rail Plan, where truth, collaboration, inclusion, and commitment will lead us to a world that works for everyone. I invite all within earshot to take on transforming the business of infrastructure consulting.</br></br>

Regarding transportation plans, the truth about railroad service—both the good and the bad—must be told. </br></br>

Rail service can make all the difference to the viability of a large swath of industrial activity and the minimization of that activity’s environmental impact on a community. Yet rail service in Nevada and most states has evolved to move traffic through the state, not serve businesses and communities. Our civilization’s underutilization of railroads is not an indictment of the rail industry. It is a societal dynamic that must be addressed for our future economic sustainability. We can turn these undervalued corridors into Silk Roads worldwide, served equally by trucks, waterways, and railroads. </br></br>

Nevada’s proximity to the 5th largest economy in the world has rendered it attractive to be served by the trucking industry and unattractive to be served by the Class I railroads, which dislike shorter movements. Therefore, 70% of all trucks moving within Nevada are going to or coming from California, exacerbating traffic issues in both states.</br></br>

Only 4% of all the freight moving in Nevada is moving by rail to or from a Nevada business. Less than 0.25% of the cargo in Nevada is moving by rail between Nevada businesses. </br></br>

Major commodity groups exist in most states that could better serve the state and the country if the reality of inefficient freight movement were examined and addressed. </br></br>

Since Nevada’s significant industrial development is occurring just east of Las Vegas and east of Reno-Sparks, Nevada’s economic expansion is inevitably accompanied by an increasing volume of trucks moving through the two spots in the state where that traffic is most problematic: I15 through Las Vegas and I80 through Reno and Sparks. That exemplifies what is happening all around the country as we speak.</br></br>

The Nevada State Rail Plan establishes eight distinct regions in the state, each with its rail-enabled economic development strategy that fits that region’s existing rail network, governing jurisdictions, industrial activity, and opportunities. (Show map with eight regions)</br></br>

Rail-enabled economic development requires infrastructure siting after analyzing the commodities currently moving in, out, and through a region. Because supply chains extend for hundreds or thousands of miles from origination to destination, planning or investing without a grasp of those chains is self-defeating. With that understanding, you can identify the logistics-based marketplace advantages that providers of those commodities would gain by locating in your location. Now that you know what commodities would enjoy the most benefits, you have a straight path to the participants in those commodity supply chains. </br></br>

Many of us have encountered communities that consider neighboring towns, counties, or states as targets of ridicule. When we arrived in Nevada in [month and year] to begin this project, I was struck by how many meetings included someone repeating a harmful meme about California. We were asked why we intend to include California in our scope when doing a Nevada rail plan. I explained that progress in Nevada cannot happen without collaborating with the stakeholders of its primary logistics partner, California. Supply chains do not stop at a state line. Nevada’s stakeholders made the point within a few months of these conversations. We are about to approach California and Utah to form the Southwest Supply Chain Coalition so that each state’s infrastructure investments can have the best chance of contributing to collaborations leading to healthy communities. </br></br>

Where else can we break through the barriers erected by an overly confining allegiance to competition? Neighboring states are best engaged as partners, not competitors. Counties and regions within each state are connected and can support each other and assist communities and supply chains in other states with their issues and challenges. </br></br>

In an increasingly interconnected world, antitrust fears and limitations have brought us close to the precipice. Isn’t it time to reorient around truth and trust? </br></br>

When we asked businesses throughout Nevada how they feel about sharing their rail infrastructure with other companies, even in their industry, I can tell you of their overwhelming response… They said they hadn’t thought of that, but it sounds intriguing—tell us more. Rail-enabled economic development requires pooling resources and opportunities. While it can be challenging to justify infrastructure to serve individual businesses, even projects with large freight volumes are rendered more stable when the expense of construction and operation is shared among multiple users.</br></br>

We must move beyond industrial development as a series of uncoordinated land transactions—neither the business community nor the community at large benefits from this chaotic approach to supply chain development. When supply chain analysis is not applied to land use planning, land is transacted at a fraction of its actual value—landowners, land developers, and the regional economy lose out in the process. Undeveloped land across the globe is more valuable than ever and must be used for its highest and best purpose. The impacts of the goods and people that have to move to and from a property must be choreographed as much as the activity planned at the property. This is important not only for the development of [the infrastructure] but also for ensuring the stability and sustainability of the lifestyles of the communities impacted by the development, for ensuring the environmental impact is appropriately addressed and mitigated, and that land opportunities are not wasted or haphazardly or unnecessarily developed.</br></br>

Here is how this commitment to truth, collaboration, radical inclusion, and action is represented in pragmatic, unique maps of the Nevada rail system and land development. With the understanding and hands-on access these maps accommodate, all stakeholders can gather around a comprehensive approach to rail-enabled economic and community development. </br></br>

Agencies can advance their mission in collaboration with other agencies, and rail-enabled economic development can be advanced as regional and corridor plans, not simply individual projects. </br></br>

In closing out these introductory remarks, let me tell you about the Mining Materials Supply Chain Strategy. It was birthed within the Nevada State Rail Plan and, like so much of the plan, has global implications as a model for industrywide and cross-industry collaboration. We must get the word out as the world is about to invest trillions of precious capital, land, and natural resources in transportation infrastructure. After our initial trip across northern Nevada, hearing in town after town how active mining is, I sat down in my hotel and wrote an inquiry-based strategy for mapping the entire mining industry in Nevada and its chains of incoming supplies and outgoing materials. The state had previously determined that accommodating more instate processing would grow the economy. We can establish many supply chain efficiencies by mapping the supply chains, including existing mines, transportation infrastructure, and storage facilities. We can also identify precisely where to locate these new processing facilities so that they can be best served by existing or new rail lines to render the whole system more efficient, sustainable, and profitable while supporting the surrounding communities and being environmentally responsible.</br></br>

Focusing our thinking on the common good is amazingly productive for our individual and collective intelligence. We are all smarter, and our plans are more likely to succeed when we align our economic development investments with what serves others, the community, and the environment. If one goal makes competition worthwhile, it is to compete to serve. </br></br>

</br></br>

</br></br>

</br></br>

</br></br>

</br></br>

</br></br>

Collaborative Industrial Optimization

2024-10-22T16:38:50Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

What is now commonly called “supply chain optimization” is crippled by its narrow focus, limited to individual company logistics. Consequently, neither the marketplace nor the public sector have been able to design infrastructure for efficient industrial systems. </br>

OTNA’s <b>Collaborative Industrial Optimization</b> reconceives planning and investment to serve entire industries and regions. For example, minerals, forest products, glass, and aggregates can be redesigned as “industrial systems” from mines and farms to factories and customers. The Collaborative Industrial Optimization (CIO) approach facilitates collaboration between shippers, transportation providers, and other stakeholders in a larger design frame than afforded by traditional marketplace interactions. It leads stakeholders to integrate knowledge about natural resources, business plans, freight data, land use, logistics, and economic development into productive systems. We need to think and plan whole industrial systems so that commercial and public investments solve problems and create new efficiencies, not just move more stuff faster. </br>

Early rail lines in 19<SUP>th</SUP> century North America were envisioned as part of expansive supply chains, <b>from</b><b> interior </b><b>r</b><b>esources </b><b>to</b><b> coastal cities, from mine to factory, and from farm to table.</b> Before individual local projects were conceived and built, an entire corridor or region as an industrial system was envisioned. Contrast that with 2008 at the height of North America’s ethanol-production boom. Hundreds of billions in investment capital poured into the ethanol industry to fund individual “competing” projects. Unit train loading facilities, for example, were consequently built without matching unit train receiving facilities. Ethanol production skyrocketed while the ad hoc transportation and distribution system remained inadequate. </br>

When closely observing infrastructure development across the continent, it is shocking how often a project's full promise is squandered because one party limits the conception to serve only their business interests. This is not usually from a nefarious intention. Fundamentally, no entity or business is at the helm guiding industry or infrastructure to serve multiple opportunities for shippers and society. </br>

Today, Southern Nevada biofuel producers receive feedstock by truck from the San Pedro Bay area. They then truck the product back to the consumers in Southern California through populated areas in both states rather than use energy-efficient railroads available for these movements at origin and destination. Meanwhile, this inefficient commerce is rewarded with California Low Carbon Fuel Standard Credits. </br>

Of the 138 warehouses built in recent years in Western Nevada, only one uses rail, even though they are all on or near a rail line. These distribution centers are essentially there to serve California’s market. This results in high-volume back-and-forth truck traffic on the same roads as commuters and tourists. A similar dynamic is found between each coastal state and its inland counterparts, as well as within metropolitan areas throughout the continent. In these densely populated regions, where collaboration among stakeholders could yield the greatest benefits, we often see the least coordination.</br>

During OTNA’s work creating the 2021 Nevada State Rail Plan, we were struck by the opportunity of a Mining Materials Logistics Strategy to bring commercial benefits to the state’s mining companies, suppliers, and customers. This collaborative approach to mining’s inputs and outputs would justify new and enhanced rail infrastructure and services that could benefit other industries, the community, and the mining industry. </br>

Some will claim that <b>Collaborative Industrial Optimization</b> demands trust and cooperation that our competitive economic system cannot sustain. In our experience offering this level of collaboration to people across North America, almost everyone welcomes it. We are confident that this is precisely how we must relate to industry, transportation, and each other to ensure our economic and environmental sustainability. </br>

<i><b>Key Distinctions of Collaborative Industrial Optimization</b></i><i><b> (CIO)</b></i></br>

<b>1. </b><b>INDUSTRIAL SYSTEMS DO NOT BEGIN OR END AT POLITICAL BOUNDARIES</b><b>
</b>Supply chains extend across county, state, regional, and national borders. Needed improvements flow from planning in collaboration with entities throughout the supply chain.</br>

<b>2. PLAN WHOLE SUPPLY CHAINS, NOT JUST PROJECTS</b><b>
</b>Infrastructure investments supporting whole systems rather than just one-off projects deliver meaningful advantages to a region, its businesses, and investors.</br>

<b>3. PROJECTS OF LOCAL SIGNIFICANCE</b><b>
</b>There aren’t “Projects of National Significance” without many “Projects of Local Significance.” </br>

<b>4. INCLUDING ALL PERSPECTIVES MAKES </b><b>PROGRESS</b><b> EASIER, NOT HARDER</b><b>
</b>Contrary to the prevailing belief that including all concerns and views is too complex, 360° inclusion of businesses, communities, and projects boosts the productivity of infrastructure plans and investments. </br>

<b>5. PLANS ARE FOR ACTION</b>
We can no longer invest in the type of “plans” that sit ignored on government shelves and hard drives. Plans must be designed for implementation from the outset.</br>

<b>6. STAKEHOLDERS ARE PARTNERS, NOT SURVEY RESPONDENTS</b>
Stakeholder engagement is often conducted superficially to fulfill a bureaucratic requirement. Effective investments require collaborative dialogue and co-creation with all stakeholder groups.</br>

<b>7. RAIL AND ROADS ARE ONE SYSTEM</b>
It is unproductive to pit highway, air, pipeline, and railway transport modes against each other in public policy or the marketplace. </br>

<b>8. FREIGHT ANALYSIS MUST INCLUDE TRUCK DATA, EVEN IN RAIL PLANS</b>
Truck shipment data provides critical visibility into the bulk of a region’s industrial activity, illuminating the path toward an ideal truck-rail balance.</br>

<b>9. THE RIGHT TOOLS MAKE THE RIGHT DATA ACTIONABLE</b>
Raw data is one level of usefulness; data made accessible and applicable is another. CIO’s tools enable stakeholders to use freight data for plan implementation and business development.</br>

<b>10. INTEGRATE </b><b>FREIGHT </b><b>PLANNING WITH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMEN</b>T
Transportation departments and economic development agencies work in silos on matters that co-influence industrial system productivity. CIO integrates these efforts into regional strategies. </br>

<b>11. FREIGHT TRANSPORTATION IS INSEPARABLE FROM LAND USE PLANNING</b>
Effective land-use planning can optimize economic development and minimize the impact of goods movement. Smart land use is as much about how goods move to and from a property as what happens on the property.</br>

<b>12. CAPITAL IS AVAILABLE FOR ALL WELL-CONCEIVED PROJECTS</b>
Now holding hundreds of billions of dollars, infrastructure investors and lenders worldwide are poised to deploy capital for industrial and freight projects in North America. They need this plan. </br>

<b>Moving Forward</b><b>:</b>
Consider how investment in communities and industries is commonly structured. Investments are conceived so that the investor withdraws the benefits that capital makes available as narrowly and quickly as possible, with limited sharing, even with the people whose labor made the profits possible. We must restructure investments to ensure the benefits percolate and synergize among all stakeholders. Then, out of the enrichment of the system and the community, one makes one’s return on investment—just a few more words, but all the difference in creating the profound, long-lasting change our challenges urgently require. </br>

END_________</br>

</br>

</br>

</br>

A society that orients its capital deployment around competition for narrow gain can’t help funding further inefficiencies. </br>

However, for the Collaborative Industrial Optimization process to meaningfully integrate the diverse interests of stakeholders, it is imperative to develop performance measures, tangible outcomes, and deliverables to implement rail-enabled economic development successfully. </br>

<b>Competition</b> for individual gain straightjackets otherwise intelligent individuals to rivet their intelligence and attention on their narrow-vested interests. Collaboration and coordination expand our personal and collective intelligence into productive plans and investments. When we first came to Washington, DC, with our thinking about the value of railroads to the country and the opportunity of increasing attention and investment, we were received with open arms by Congress and the Executive Branch. Why that progress was shunned and stymied by the rail industry’s lobbyists demonstrates how otherwise good people will stand in the way of industry progress. We are almost all compensated now to maintain the status quo, usually gained toward inefficiency. As soon as an idea for improvement and efficiency comes along, it appears as a threat to our family. </br>

The shortcomings of competition for narrow gain are not just evident in corporations; they are present in almost all quarters of commercial activity, academia, science, law, public policy, and planning. Nearly all interactions, from one-on-one to large group discussions, meetings, summits, and conferences, utilize an inadequate design and can be transformed.</br>

This model integrates supply chain redesign, clear metrics, actionable data, and a process for inclusive dialogue. It’s an enabler of action, results, and whole systems transformation. It empowers people to recognize and embrace their leadership in meeting objectives, and then they can apply the tools effectively.</br>

Collaborative Industrial Optimization is the integrated planning of industrial systems, land use, transportation, and economic development for a sustainable world. </br>

Our precious national infrastructure investment can be optimally conceived to supercharge efforts to improve the nation’s supply chains, economy, and environment. OnTrackNorthAmerica’s Collaborative Industrial Development approach, borne out of this 30 years of fieldwork, can enhance the quality of life in rural and urban America.

Collaborative Industrial Optimization is an investment strategy that integrates public-sector planning and investment with private-sector commerce and capital to simultaneously address supply chain, community, and environmental issues. </br>

We have chosen to model collaboration and trust within supply chains. We work on private-sector commerce and finance and public-sector policy and planning. Most importantly, we stand for the community and the environment. Around what else would we orient supply chains? We determined early on that the world could best see and then transform the illogic of the past by coming face to face with our collective misuse of the wheel for moving heavy weight over land. The freight rail industry in North America earns 10% of the freight trucking industry's revenue despite its energy, capital, and space efficiencies. We continue to explore “Why would a society direct its precious resources toward inefficiencies?” Answering this question wisely tells us everything we need to know to transform the underlying causes.</br>

Beyond freight logistics, the last fifty years have taught the U.S. and the world that clean air, clean water, natural resources, and land must all be considered integral to sustainable industrial supply chain systems. Climate change is teaching us—more urgently with every passing year—that energy, the most fundamental resource, must be produced more cleanly and used more efficiently if we are to survive.</br>

Look at how transportation has typically been planned – or, more accurately, not planned. Supply chains are “legacies” reflecting the location of individual land transactions for each shipper and receiver, regardless of the inefficiencies those choices will impose for many years. </br>

<h4>A Message from Strategic Rail Finance’s Founder: “North America is severely underutilizing freight railroads at a time when highway congestion, air pollution, and oil dependence threaten our economy and quality of life. While governments are increasingly looking to support rail development, they are challenged to coordinate with businesses that operate on privately owned infrastructure. Planners and policymakers need this new framework for effective engagement with the private sector. We can only produce the much-needed expansion of long-haul and local freight rail service through thoughtful, collaborative planning. </h4></br>

</br>

<h4>However, as logistics and transportation exhaust scarce resources, we need a new alignment of commercial activity and related public policies. </h4></br>

<h4>OnTrackNorthAmerica is leading businesses and governments to generate results together that neither can produce on its own.</h4></br>

<h4>Increasing rail transportation with its inherent energy, capital, and space efficiencies will provide cascading economic and environmental benefits. </h4></br>

Many individuals, entities, and commissions produce studies, reports, and recommendations. However, they have lacked a forum and method for effective interaction. </br>

Case studies and pilot projects are fine when you are out to repeat the past. When you want to create a new future, there are no case studies, only current dynamics and new possibilities. The Wright Brothers weren’t operating from case studies. </br>

Solving problems begins with imagining a new future and then clarifying the gaps and the issues. </br>

Imagine a world where all the resources and effort applied to solving problems were instead used to create new possibilities. The path to a world that works for everyone is quickly transitioning commerce and governance from competition for narrow gain to coordination and collaboration for the greatest good. On that path, we can solve all of our challenges. </br>

The world has only one way out of the mess we are in. That path requires us to let go of competition in business and governance and embrace coordination and collaboration for the greatest good. And supply chains are the perfect arena for examining and improving our conduct as individuals and organizations in business and governance. We have been doing frontline field research for years and can report back that competition as a path has run its course. We have investigated, conceived, discovered, and invented a complete set of tools for this large-scale multistakeholder thinking, planning, and acting. Our survival depends on our ability to use these tools to create a new future together. It includes everyone at every level. Relationships and dialogues are tools, too. It’s all about energy; energy is the exchange. We can think together. People are generally bright, but our systems for gathering that intelligence into innovative business activity and public policies are woefully inadequate.</br>

Truth-telling is paramount</br>

Past and current realities, gaps, agendas, biases</br>

Future possibilities, challenges, and opportunities</br>

The Nevada State Rail Plan is different because the extensive knowledge of all stakeholder groups in the state informs our recommendations. </br>

This plan is informed by people and their perspectives, not just information and data. Most plans rely on limited survey responses and superficial public gatherings. In contrast, we have had 500+ in-depth conversations with Nevada stakeholders. We have also convened stakeholders in small and large group meetings that consistently lead to productive, creative dialogue.</br>

Would an entire state’s relevant stakeholders respond positively to an invitation to gather around rail development? Would they want to contribute to a whole system, whole state game plan for growing rail service? A strategy that supports their businesses, community, and environment? The resounding answer in Nevada has been YES. </br>

People worldwide are thirsting to have their efforts join the efforts of others in dispatching the critical challenges of this moment. </br>

The Nevada State Rail Plan is based on a new framework for capital investment, informed by the transformative understanding that ample private-sector capital is available for rail-enabled economic development.</br>

The key to unlocking this infrastructure investment is to focus transportation plans and economic development strategies first on supporting existing businesses. Help them expand their markets and their material sourcing through logistics efficiencies. Existing business management will empower economic development by recommending new companies that they would value as local customers, processors, service providers, or suppliers. Rail development should be designed to connect these new businesses with existing businesses. This is how rail infrastructure enables a state’s economy to move up the value chain. Attracting new companies will be easier as the capital for new rail infrastructure will enjoy a lower risk profile. </br>

The Nevada State Rail Plan is built on four principles: most notably, truth, followed by collaboration, inclusion, and commitment. Let me repeat that: truth, collaboration, inclusion, and commitment.</br>

Truth matters to a successful rail plan because we cannot improve a system without starting with the truth of the current dynamics. Creating a new future requires tremendous positivity that must also be informed by a clear-eyed understanding of what is not currently working. </br>

Let us direct that truthful analysis toward America's ultimate value—competition. I often reflect on my years as a high school and collegiate wrestler when I was naturally competitive. But in my career off the mat, I am committed to shining a light on the inadequacy of competition as an operating principle for commerce and governance.</br>

Think about a county with an idea it would do well by developing a rail-served industrial park. It often wants to develop that park before an adjacent county to win the competition game. Is winning a competition to invest in a less-than-optimal industrial development a win, or is it likely to be a short-lived investment that will lose its luster in subsequent years when infrastructure is built in another county when the marketplace finally responds to a more advantageous siting for the region?</br>

In response to our message of collaborative corridor and regional planning, the people of Nevada have embraced a fundamental perspective that collaboration is a more productive framework for advancing rail-enabled economic development. We have created an attractive model for other states and the world, demonstrating how stakeholders can cooperate with their neighbors across counties, regions, states, industries, and agencies.</br>

The Nevada State Treasurer asked me an astute question when he asked what I observed was most at play in project development around the state. My answer was immediate. In case after case, projects had been hampered because the level of collaboration needed for rail development was missing. </br>

What we call Radical Inclusion lights the path forward because all regions, communities, businesses, projects, and, indeed, every track mile in a state matter. We purposefully did not rank projects because the entire state and its rail network are part of a system best advanced by radical inclusion. Too often, ranking results in some regions getting supported while others are continually sidelined. Contrary to the accepted wisdom that too many perspectives and projects complicate matters, the inverse is the case. Infrastructure designed from all perspectives with diverse projects has a much greater likelihood of remaining relevant to the entire community and its industrial system. </br>

The fourth fundamental principle of rail-enabled sustainable economic development is Commitment. Commitment is what separates a plan from a report. And that Commitment does not automatically appear when an agency contracts with a consulting firm. Commitment shows up when one or more individuals in or out of that agency and consultancy assume a personal promise to turn the studies into plans by engaging everyone to act, not just report. For that, I appreciate my partners on the panel, Kris and Sheldon, and their economic development compatriots around the state and the Nevada Department of Transportation management for embracing that personal commitment with me that this is a transportation plan that creates a new future for Nevada. The implementation began from our engagement and remains in high gear.</br>

Nevada stakeholders have embraced these four principles—truth, collaboration, inclusion, and commitment—as critical underpinnings of effective rail-enabled economic development.</br>

Like almost all publicly funded transportation plans, rail plans are usually written as perfunctory, bureaucratic exercises that create two-inch-thick, 100MB reports that are then sent to the USDOT and never read or referenced again.</br>

Why would a society relate so inappropriately to its precious taxpayer dollars when there are vital infrastructure matters to address? Our society is numb to this dreadful squandering of human intellect and natural resources. </br>

You may be reflecting on your own experience of plans and reports that, once written, barely see the light of day. But we can forge a new future. I am asking us to embark on that new path, modeled by the Nevada State Rail Plan, where truth, collaboration, inclusion, and commitment will lead us to a world that works for everyone. I invite all within earshot to take on transforming the business of infrastructure consulting.</br>

Regarding transportation plans, the truth about railroad service—both the good and the bad—must be told. </br>

Rail service can make all the difference to the viability of a large swath of industrial activity and the minimization of that activity’s environmental impact on a community. Yet rail service in Nevada and most states has evolved to move traffic through the state, not serve businesses and communities. Our civilization’s underutilization of railroads is not an indictment of the rail industry. It is a societal dynamic that must be addressed for our future economic sustainability. We can turn these undervalued corridors into Silk Roads worldwide, served equally by trucks, waterways, and railroads. </br>

Nevada’s proximity to the 5th largest economy in the world has rendered it attractive to be served by the trucking industry and unattractive to be served by the Class I railroads, which dislike shorter movements. Therefore, 70% of all trucks moving within Nevada are going to or coming from California, exacerbating traffic issues in both states.</br>

Only 4% of all the freight moving in Nevada is moving by rail to or from a Nevada business. Less than 0.25% of the cargo in Nevada is moving by rail between Nevada businesses. </br>

Major commodity groups exist in most states that could better serve the state and the country if the reality of inefficient freight movement were examined and addressed. </br>

Since Nevada’s significant industrial development is occurring just east of Las Vegas and east of Reno-Sparks, Nevada’s economic expansion is inevitably accompanied by an increasing volume of trucks moving through the two spots in the state where that traffic is most problematic: I15 through Las Vegas and I80 through Reno and Sparks. That exemplifies what is happening all around the country as we speak.</br>

The Nevada State Rail Plan establishes eight distinct regions in the state, each with its rail-enabled economic development strategy that fits that region’s existing rail network, governing jurisdictions, industrial activity, and opportunities. (Show map with eight regions)</br>

Rail-enabled economic development requires infrastructure siting after analyzing the commodities currently moving in, out, and through a region. Because supply chains extend for hundreds or thousands of miles from origination to destination, planning or investing without a grasp of those chains is self-defeating. With that understanding, you can identify the logistics-based marketplace advantages that providers of those commodities would gain by locating in your location. Now that you know what commodities would enjoy the most benefits, you have a straight path to the participants in those commodity supply chains. </br>

Many of us have encountered communities that consider neighboring towns, counties, or states as targets of ridicule. When we arrived in Nevada in [month and year] to begin this project, I was struck by how many meetings included someone repeating a harmful meme about California. We were asked why we intend to include California in our scope when doing a Nevada rail plan. I explained that progress in Nevada cannot happen without collaborating with the stakeholders of its primary logistics partner, California. Supply chains do not stop at a state line. Nevada’s stakeholders made the point within a few months of these conversations. We are about to approach California and Utah to form the Southwest Supply Chain Coalition so that each state’s infrastructure investments can have the best chance of contributing to collaborations leading to healthy communities. </br>

Where else can we break through the barriers erected by an overly confining allegiance to competition? Neighboring states are best engaged as partners, not competitors. Counties and regions within each state are connected and can support each other and assist communities and supply chains in other states with their issues and challenges. </br>

In an increasingly interconnected world, antitrust fears and limitations have brought us close to the precipice. Isn’t it time to reorient around truth and trust? </br>

When we asked businesses throughout Nevada how they feel about sharing their rail infrastructure with other companies, even in their industry, I can tell you of their overwhelming response… They said they hadn’t thought of that, but it sounds intriguing—tell us more. Rail-enabled economic development requires pooling resources and opportunities. While it can be challenging to justify infrastructure to serve individual businesses, even projects with large freight volumes are rendered more stable when the expense of construction and operation is shared among multiple users.</br>

We must move beyond industrial development as a series of uncoordinated land transactions—neither the business community nor the community at large benefits from this chaotic approach to supply chain development. When supply chain analysis is not applied to land use planning, land is transacted at a fraction of its actual value—landowners, land developers, and the regional economy lose out in the process. Undeveloped land across the globe is more valuable than ever and must be used for its highest and best purpose. The impacts of the goods and people that have to move to and from a property must be choreographed as much as the activity planned at the property. This is important not only for the development of [the infrastructure] but also for ensuring the stability and sustainability of the lifestyles of the communities impacted by the development, for ensuring the environmental impact is appropriately addressed and mitigated, and that land opportunities are not wasted or haphazardly or unnecessarily developed.</br>

Here is how this commitment to truth, collaboration, radical inclusion, and action is represented in pragmatic, unique maps of the Nevada rail system and land development. With the understanding and hands-on access these maps accommodate, all stakeholders can gather around a comprehensive approach to rail-enabled economic and community development. </br>

Agencies can advance their mission in collaboration with other agencies, and rail-enabled economic development can be advanced as regional and corridor plans, not simply individual projects. </br>

In closing out these introductory remarks, let me tell you about the Mining Materials Supply Chain Strategy. It was birthed within the Nevada State Rail Plan and, like so much of the plan, has global implications as a model for industrywide and cross-industry collaboration. We must get the word out as the world is about to invest trillions of precious capital, land, and natural resources in transportation infrastructure. After our initial trip across northern Nevada, hearing in town after town how active mining is, I sat down in my hotel and wrote an inquiry-based strategy for mapping the entire mining industry in Nevada and its chains of incoming supplies and outgoing materials. The state had previously determined that accommodating more instate processing would grow the economy. We can establish many supply chain efficiencies by mapping the supply chains, including existing mines, transportation infrastructure, and storage facilities. We can also identify precisely where to locate these new processing facilities so that they can be best served by existing or new rail lines to render the whole system more efficient, sustainable, and profitable while supporting the surrounding communities and being environmentally responsible.</br>

Focusing our thinking on the common good is amazingly productive for our individual and collective intelligence. We are all smarter, and our plans are more likely to succeed when we align our economic development investments with what serves others, the community, and the environment. If one goal makes competition worthwhile, it is to compete to serve. </br>

</br>

</br>

</br>

</br>

</br>

</br>

Solution-Driven Research Guided by IntelliSynthesis

2024-10-18T18:59:59Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

1700 Sansom Street | Suite 701

Philadelphia, PA 19103
215-564-3004

::<b>Applied </b><b>Action </b><b>Research</b><b> for Universities and Academics</b><b> </b></br></br>

<b>Imagination</b><b>/</b><b>Purpose- </b>What issues in the field are we inspired to research, given our areas of interest, concern, and expertise?<b> </b></br></br>

What is the problem in the field that we want to contribute to solving?</br></br>

Why is this problem significant?</br></br>

<b>Conception-</b><b> </b>What conception of our project would lead us to generate the optimal research approach?</br></br>

Who would benefit from this solution?</br></br>

What needs to be understood?</br></br>

Who must we relate with to inform our understanding of the problem?</br></br>

How do we measure the implications of the problem and the solution?</br></br>

What dynamics do stakeholders indicate are problematic?</br></br>

What needs to be changed, transformed, or advanced?</br></br>

Who do we want to educate (stakeholder groups) about our observations, discoveries, and inventions?</br></br>

How do we execute the education?</br></br>

<b>Design-</b><b> </b>How do we want to design our work?</br></br>

What can we do to make or assist with these contributions?</br></br>

What tools and methods are available to develop the solution? </br></br>

What new tools and methods should we develop?</br></br>

How will we know we have accomplished our purpose?</br></br>

What factors should we consider when determining the time for completion?</br></br>

What resources can we gather for this project?</br></br>

What partners can we establish for this project? </br></br>

<b>Implementation- </b>How will we execute our plan?<b> </b></br></br>

What is our game plan?</br></br>

Who is on our team, encompassing academic, government, industry, non-profit, and community partners?</br></br>

What are each team member's responsibilities? </br></br>

<b>Completion</b><b>/</b><b>Dissemination- </b>How can we best present our work for maximum uptake?</br></br>

Which audiences do we want our work product to reach?</br></br>

What documents, content, spreadsheets, and models would be most helpful?</br></br>

How do we prepare and present this information to partners and stakeholders so that it is accessible to the broadest audience?</br></br>

<b>Principles:</b><b> </b><b> </b></br></br>

Project conception and design require more input and guidance from industry-experienced individuals. </br></br>

Project execution then needs more direct dialogue with stakeholders in the field.</br></br>

Academic rigor does not preclude tailoring material to be understood by relevant industry and government stakeholders. </br></br>

Language and writing need more quality editing to communicate effectively with stakeholders.</br></br>

Data, formulas, and methods must be presented with explanations that render them understandable and usable by primary users in the field.</br></br>

Solution-Driven Research Guided by IntelliSynthesis

2024-10-18T18:59:49Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

1700 Sansom Street | Suite 701

Philadelphia, PA 19103
215-564-3004

:<b>Applied </b><b>Action </b><b>Research</b><b> for Universities and Academics</b><b> </b></br>

<b>Imagination</b><b>/</b><b>Purpose- </b>What issues in the field are we inspired to research, given our areas of interest, concern, and expertise?<b> </b></br>

What is the problem in the field that we want to contribute to solving?</br>

Why is this problem significant?</br>

<b>Conception-</b><b> </b>What conception of our project would lead us to generate the optimal research approach?</br>

Who would benefit from this solution?</br>

What needs to be understood?</br>

Who must we relate with to inform our understanding of the problem?</br>

How do we measure the implications of the problem and the solution?</br>

What dynamics do stakeholders indicate are problematic?</br>

What needs to be changed, transformed, or advanced?</br>

Who do we want to educate (stakeholder groups) about our observations, discoveries, and inventions?</br>

How do we execute the education?</br>

<b>Design-</b><b> </b>How do we want to design our work?</br>

What can we do to make or assist with these contributions?</br>

What tools and methods are available to develop the solution? </br>

What new tools and methods should we develop?</br>

How will we know we have accomplished our purpose?</br>

What factors should we consider when determining the time for completion?</br>

What resources can we gather for this project?</br>

What partners can we establish for this project? </br>

<b>Implementation- </b>How will we execute our plan?<b> </b></br>

What is our game plan?</br>

Who is on our team, encompassing academic, government, industry, non-profit, and community partners?</br>

What are each team member's responsibilities? </br>

<b>Completion</b><b>/</b><b>Dissemination- </b>How can we best present our work for maximum uptake?</br>

Which audiences do we want our work product to reach?</br>

What documents, content, spreadsheets, and models would be most helpful?</br>

How do we prepare and present this information to partners and stakeholders so that it is accessible to the broadest audience?</br>

<b>Principles:</b><b> </b><b> </b></br>

Project conception and design require more input and guidance from industry-experienced individuals. </br>

Project execution then needs more direct dialogue with stakeholders in the field.</br>

Academic rigor does not preclude tailoring material to be understood by relevant industry and government stakeholders. </br>

Language and writing need more quality editing to communicate effectively with stakeholders.</br>

Data, formulas, and methods must be presented with explanations that render them understandable and usable by primary users in the field.</br>

FreightImpact Calculator

2024-10-18T14:08:11Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>The Land Freight Life</b><b>c</b><b>ycle Impact Calculator</b><b>-</b>don’t copy on the page</br></br>

</br></br>

OnTrackNorthAmerica, in partnership with the University of Tennessee’s Institute for a Secure and Sustainable Environment, has gathered data on seventeen lifecycle costs and impacts of building, using, and maintaining highways for truck freight transportation versus railroads and trains. The dataset powers an online tool, the <b>Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator</b>, which now allows stakeholders to apply the information to individual projects, systems, and regions. This is the world’s first side-by-side comparison of each land freight mode's lifecycle return on investment. </br></br>

The transportation sector significantly influences our environment and quality of life. Yet legislators, planners, project developers, and citizens have lacked a comprehensive assessment tool for investment decisions in rail versus highway projects, even while transport infrastructure receives significant public and private-sector capital. Investment in highways to accommodate an overreliance on trucks for moving freight continues unabated, with little grasp of that investment's actual return and costs. </br></br>

</br></br>

Traditional cost-benefit analysis narrowly focuses on only a few factors, excluding most financial, environmental, and social concerns. OnTrackNorthAmerica’s Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator is crucial for redesigning infrastructure and industrial systems for the 21st century and beyond. Given our urgent need to spur economic development while reducing the impacts of industrial systems on our challenged environments and communities, including all lifecycle costs when making investment decisions is critical. </br></br>

</br></br>

Highway-centric freight transportation has many more impacts than the understandable focus on CO<SUB>2 </SUB>emissions. For instance, it takes a 27-mile convoy of trucks on the highway to move the same goods as a one-mile train on its own right-of-way. This truck congestion increases travel time for everyone and affects the entire system's reliability. Consider the difference in light pollution, an increasing problem for wildlife and humans. The goods carried by a mile train require 300 tractor-trailers, each with headlights, taillights, and side lights. The train, meanwhile, has two lights on the front of the lead locomotive and a red end-of-train device on the last railcar with reflective tape on the railcar sides. Light pollution is one of the impacts of this large number of trucks, along with their impact on air pollution, congestion, and road wear. Tire wear is now the largest source of microplastics in our oceans. </br></br>

</br></br>

Trucks must continue their vital role in our industrial systems; however, wise multimodal investments are needed at this critical time. Unfortunately, the complete costs of transportation infrastructure are seldom estimated or paid. While the direct costs are paid via construction and shipping fees, the indirect, externalized costs are absorbed by society and the natural environment. Although some legislators and planners are attuned to rail transport’s general efficiencies and benefits, the previous lack of an analytical tool has stifled wise decision-making and sound, sustainable investments. </br></br>

The Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator<b> </b>includes data from prior research conducted in the United States. When impact factors have not been researched in the U.S., overseas research was used. Future primary research needs to address these gaps. The data shows that the total lifecycle cost of a highway project is approximately five times the lifecycle cost of a railroad project. </br></br>

</br></br>

The data behind the Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator will be regularly updated and disseminated, providing the infrastructure planning sector with accurate quantitative data to inform intelligent long-term investments that best utilize each land transport mode. Adopting a complete lifecycle analysis will significantly enhance progress toward critical environmental, economic, and quality-of-life goals.</br></br>

</br></br>

FreightImpact Calculator

2024-10-18T14:08:01Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>The Land Freight Life</b><b>c</b><b>ycle Impact Calculator</b><b>-</b>don’t copy on the page</br>

</br>

OnTrackNorthAmerica, in partnership with the University of Tennessee’s Institute for a Secure and Sustainable Environment, has gathered data on seventeen lifecycle costs and impacts of building, using, and maintaining highways for truck freight transportation versus railroads and trains. The dataset powers an online tool, the <b>Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator</b>, which now allows stakeholders to apply the information to individual projects, systems, and regions. This is the world’s first side-by-side comparison of each land freight mode's lifecycle return on investment. </br>

The transportation sector significantly influences our environment and quality of life. Yet legislators, planners, project developers, and citizens have lacked a comprehensive assessment tool for investment decisions in rail versus highway projects, even while transport infrastructure receives significant public and private-sector capital. Investment in highways to accommodate an overreliance on trucks for moving freight continues unabated, with little grasp of that investment's actual return and costs. </br>

</br>

Traditional cost-benefit analysis narrowly focuses on only a few factors, excluding most financial, environmental, and social concerns. OnTrackNorthAmerica’s Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator is crucial for redesigning infrastructure and industrial systems for the 21st century and beyond. Given our urgent need to spur economic development while reducing the impacts of industrial systems on our challenged environments and communities, including all lifecycle costs when making investment decisions is critical. </br>

</br>

Highway-centric freight transportation has many more impacts than the understandable focus on CO<SUB>2 </SUB>emissions. For instance, it takes a 27-mile convoy of trucks on the highway to move the same goods as a one-mile train on its own right-of-way. This truck congestion increases travel time for everyone and affects the entire system's reliability. Consider the difference in light pollution, an increasing problem for wildlife and humans. The goods carried by a mile train require 300 tractor-trailers, each with headlights, taillights, and side lights. The train, meanwhile, has two lights on the front of the lead locomotive and a red end-of-train device on the last railcar with reflective tape on the railcar sides. Light pollution is one of the impacts of this large number of trucks, along with their impact on air pollution, congestion, and road wear. Tire wear is now the largest source of microplastics in our oceans. </br>

</br>

Trucks must continue their vital role in our industrial systems; however, wise multimodal investments are needed at this critical time. Unfortunately, the complete costs of transportation infrastructure are seldom estimated or paid. While the direct costs are paid via construction and shipping fees, the indirect, externalized costs are absorbed by society and the natural environment. Although some legislators and planners are attuned to rail transport’s general efficiencies and benefits, the previous lack of an analytical tool has stifled wise decision-making and sound, sustainable investments. </br>

The Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator<b> </b>includes data from prior research conducted in the United States. When impact factors have not been researched in the U.S., overseas research was used. Future primary research needs to address these gaps. The data shows that the total lifecycle cost of a highway project is approximately five times the lifecycle cost of a railroad project. </br>

</br>

The data behind the Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator will be regularly updated and disseminated, providing the infrastructure planning sector with accurate quantitative data to inform intelligent long-term investments that best utilize each land transport mode. Adopting a complete lifecycle analysis will significantly enhance progress toward critical environmental, economic, and quality-of-life goals.</br>

</br>

FreightImpact Calculator

2024-10-16T17:55:59Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>The Land Freight Life</b><b>c</b><b>ycle Impact Calculator</b></br></br>

</br></br>

OnTrackNorthAmerica, in partnership with the University of Tennessee’s Institute for a Secure and Sustainable Environment has gathered data on seventeen lifecycle costs and impacts of building, using, and maintaining highways for truck freight transportation versus railroads and trains. The dataset powers an online tool, the <b>Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator</b>, now providing stakeholders with a ready-at-hand ability to apply the information to individual projects, systems, and regions. This is the world’s first side-by-side comparison of the lifecycle return on investment of each land freight mode. </br></br>

The transportation sector significantly influences our environment and quality of life. Yet, legislators, planners, project developers, and citizens have lacked a comprehensive assessment tool for investment decisions in rail versus a highway project, even while transport infrastructure receives significant public and private-sector capital. Investment in highways to accommodate an over-reliance on trucks for moving freight continues unabated, with little grasp of that investment's actual return and costs. </br></br>

</br></br>

Traditional cost-benefit analysis narrowly focuses on only a few factors, excluding most financial, environmental, and social concerns. OnTrackNorthAmerica’s Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator is crucial for redesigning infrastructure and industrial systems for the 21st century and beyond. Given our urgent need to spur economic development while reducing the impacts of industrial systems on our challenged environments and communities, including all lifecycle costs when making investment decisions is critical. </br></br>

</br></br>

Highway-centric freight transportation has many more impacts than the understandable focus on CO<SUB>2 </SUB>emissions. For instance, it takes a 27-mile convoy of trucks on the highway to move the same goods as a one-mile train on its own right-of-way. This truck congestion increases travel time for everyone and affects the entire system's reliability. Consider the difference in light pollution, an increasing problem for wildlife and humans. The goods carried by a mile train require 300 tractor-trailers, each with headlights, taillights, and side lights. The train, meanwhile, has two lights on the front of the lead locomotive and a red end-of-train device on the last railcar with reflective tape on the railcar sides. Light pollution is one of the impacts of this large number of trucks, along with their impact on air pollution, congestion, and road wear. Tire wear is now the largest source of microplastics in our oceans. </br></br>

</br></br>

Trucks must continue their vital role in our industrial systems; however, wise multimodal investments are needed at this critical time. Unfortunately, the complete costs of transportation infrastructure are seldom estimated or paid. While the direct costs are paid via construction and shipping fees, the indirect, externalized costs are absorbed by society and the natural environment. Although some legislators and planners are attuned to rail transport’s general efficiencies and benefits, the previous lack of an analytical tool has stifled wise decision-making and sound, sustainable investments. The following chart reflects the comparative costs per ton-mile of highway and railroad shipments as identified in the Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator.</br></br>

</br></br>

<b>Cost Per Ton-Mile of Highway and Railroad Projects </b></br></br>

</br></br>

</br></br>

</br></br>

</br></br>

The Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator<b> </b>includes data from prior research conducted in the United States. When impact factors have not been researched in the U.S., overseas research was used. These gaps need to be addressed with future primary research. The data shows that the total lifecycle cost of a highway project is approximately five times the lifecycle cost of a railroad project. </br></br>

</br></br>

The data behind the Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator will be regularly updated and disseminated, providing the infrastructure planning sector with the accurate quantitative data to inform intelligent long-term investments that best utilize each land transport mode. Adopting a complete lifecycle analysis will significantly enhance progress toward critical environmental, economic, and quality-of-life goals.</br></br>

</br></br>

FreightImpact Calculator

2024-10-16T17:55:49Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>The Land Freight Life</b><b>c</b><b>ycle Impact Calculator</b></br>

</br>

OnTrackNorthAmerica, in partnership with the University of Tennessee’s Institute for a Secure and Sustainable Environment has gathered data on seventeen lifecycle costs and impacts of building, using, and maintaining highways for truck freight transportation versus railroads and trains. The dataset powers an online tool, the <b>Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator</b>, now providing stakeholders with a ready-at-hand ability to apply the information to individual projects, systems, and regions. This is the world’s first side-by-side comparison of the lifecycle return on investment of each land freight mode. </br>

The transportation sector significantly influences our environment and quality of life. Yet, legislators, planners, project developers, and citizens have lacked a comprehensive assessment tool for investment decisions in rail versus a highway project, even while transport infrastructure receives significant public and private-sector capital. Investment in highways to accommodate an over-reliance on trucks for moving freight continues unabated, with little grasp of that investment's actual return and costs. </br>

</br>

Traditional cost-benefit analysis narrowly focuses on only a few factors, excluding most financial, environmental, and social concerns. OnTrackNorthAmerica’s Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator is crucial for redesigning infrastructure and industrial systems for the 21st century and beyond. Given our urgent need to spur economic development while reducing the impacts of industrial systems on our challenged environments and communities, including all lifecycle costs when making investment decisions is critical. </br>

</br>

Highway-centric freight transportation has many more impacts than the understandable focus on CO<SUB>2 </SUB>emissions. For instance, it takes a 27-mile convoy of trucks on the highway to move the same goods as a one-mile train on its own right-of-way. This truck congestion increases travel time for everyone and affects the entire system's reliability. Consider the difference in light pollution, an increasing problem for wildlife and humans. The goods carried by a mile train require 300 tractor-trailers, each with headlights, taillights, and side lights. The train, meanwhile, has two lights on the front of the lead locomotive and a red end-of-train device on the last railcar with reflective tape on the railcar sides. Light pollution is one of the impacts of this large number of trucks, along with their impact on air pollution, congestion, and road wear. Tire wear is now the largest source of microplastics in our oceans. </br>

</br>

Trucks must continue their vital role in our industrial systems; however, wise multimodal investments are needed at this critical time. Unfortunately, the complete costs of transportation infrastructure are seldom estimated or paid. While the direct costs are paid via construction and shipping fees, the indirect, externalized costs are absorbed by society and the natural environment. Although some legislators and planners are attuned to rail transport’s general efficiencies and benefits, the previous lack of an analytical tool has stifled wise decision-making and sound, sustainable investments. The following chart reflects the comparative costs per ton-mile of highway and railroad shipments as identified in the Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator.</br>

</br>

<b>Cost Per Ton-Mile of Highway and Railroad Projects </b></br>

</br>

</br>

</br>

</br>

The Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator<b> </b>includes data from prior research conducted in the United States. When impact factors have not been researched in the U.S., overseas research was used. These gaps need to be addressed with future primary research. The data shows that the total lifecycle cost of a highway project is approximately five times the lifecycle cost of a railroad project. </br>

</br>

The data behind the Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator will be regularly updated and disseminated, providing the infrastructure planning sector with the accurate quantitative data to inform intelligent long-term investments that best utilize each land transport mode. Adopting a complete lifecycle analysis will significantly enhance progress toward critical environmental, economic, and quality-of-life goals.</br>

</br>

RE-FOREST

2024-10-15T17:38:03Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<h1>North American Sustainable Forestry Business Plan</h1></br></br>

<h2>Decades of ill-conceived forest treatment, inconsistent wood product demand, numerous mill closures, and a shrinking rail network have left North America with overburdened forests and a dislocated wood products industry short of adequate material supply. These dynamics strain the economies and quality of life in forest-based communities. Meanwhile, dense forests fuel massive, fast-spreading fires, further decimating the wood baskets of remaining mills.

Forests hold the key to sustainable life on Earth. When untouched by humans, they self-manage. However, given our ongoing influence and past forest treatment approaches, we must redesign our relationship with forests to satisfy the vital need for forest products, forest enjoyment, CO2 reduction, and sustainability.

This opportunity can be realized by implementing a continental forest-to-market approach to harvesting, logistics, processing, and manufacturing that supports local community revitalization. Income from multiple value streams within a holistic forest treatment plan can fund forest and watershed restoration and support local forestry services and forest products companies.
The viability of the continent’s remaining mills and new facilities will be bolstered through an optimal combination of trucking to local mills and rail movement of excess material to out-of-area mills and buyers. The NASFBP integrates the work of agencies and businesses across the continent with local community knowledge to create sustainable forests and wood products industries.</h2></br></br>

<h1>What questions will this initiative answer? </h1></br></br>

<h2>What elements of a continental forest-to-market strategy applied locally and regionally to individual forests provide a long-lasting approach to forest, watershed, and community renewal?</h2></br></br>

<h2>How can collaborating and coordinating across political jurisdictions, including national borders, deliver enhanced returns to all involved? </h2></br></br>

<h1>What are the components of these Continental, National, and Local Action Plans?</h1></br></br>

<h2>Integrated continental mapping of forests, logistics infrastructure, woods products companies, and political jurisdictions</h2></br></br>

<h2>Forest recovery and treatment plan</h2></br></br>

<h2>Optimal harvesting-to-processing plan for multiple value streams</h2></br></br>

<h2>Stakeholder roles and participation plan (who is doing what)</h2></br></br>

<h2>Transportation and logistics plan</h2></br></br>

<h2>Equipment plan</h2></br></br>

<h2>Month-by-month expense and revenue plan </h2></br></br>

<h2>Sustaining organization and governance design

Phase One: Illuminating the situation
</h2></br></br>

<h1>What overarching dynamics in forest management and the wood products industries inform the general improvements needed to establish sustainable forests, vital local communities, and viable wood products companies and industries? </h1></br></br>

<h2>What are the current conditions of our forests?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are the challenges to sustainable forest management?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What approaches can stakeholders agree on for sustainable forest management?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are the issues and challenges in the wood products industries?</h2></br></br>

<h3>The current cycle sees timber exported and then finished products imported back into the U.S.</h3></br></br>

<h3>Thirty sawmill closures nationally in 2023</h3></br></br>

<h4>Net sawmill capacity decreased by 2% in 2023 (NIP Impressions)</h4></br></br>

<h4>Closures are concentrated in the northwest U.S. and southern states, although there is some geographic diversity in closures</h4></br></br>

<h4>Northwestern U.S. and Montana (Montana Free Press) seem to be hotspots for mill closures.</h4></br></br>

<h4>Closures affect (Workingforest.com)</h4></br></br>

<h5>Local economies</h5></br></br>

<h5>Supply chains</h5></br></br>

<h5>Communities (Loss of tax revenue, decrease in services)</h5></br></br>

<h5>New openings do not ensure net zero exchange of capacity/impacts (location matters)</h5></br></br>

<h4>Factors influencing include:</h4></br></br>

<h5>Worker shortages (industry salaries not keeping up with increasing home prices)</h5></br></br>

<h5>Fluctuation in lumber pricing – lower prices in 2024?</h5></br></br>

<h5>Restrictions on cutting on federally owned lands</h5></br></br>

<h3>Attempts to close the national housing supply gap might lead to future demand for lumber (Realtor.com estimates the supply gap at 7.2 million housing units)</h3></br></br>

<h2>Who are the stakeholders in forest management?</h2></br></br>

<h3>Landowners</h3></br></br>

<h3>Watershed associations</h3></br></br>

<h3>Local and Indigenous Peoples</h3></br></br>

<h3>Individual citizens</h3></br></br>

<h3>Land Grants</h3></br></br>

<h3>Public agencies</h3></br></br>

<h3>Landscape conservation collaboratives</h3></br></br>

<h3>Environmental entities</h3></br></br>

<h3>Elected leaders</h3></br></br>

<h3>Consultants/experts</h3></br></br>

<h3>Foundations</h3></br></br>

<h3>Investors/lenders</h3></br></br>

<h3>Scientific and research organizations</h3></br></br>

<h3>Loggers, mill management, and other forest workers</h3></br></br>

<h2>Who are the stakeholders in forest harvesting and processing? </h2></br></br>

<h3>Forestry Industry</h3></br></br>

<h4>Loggers</h4></br></br>

<h4>Mills/processors</h4></br></br>

<h4>Other forest workers</h4></br></br>

<h3>Trucking and transportation companies</h3></br></br>

<h3>Local and state economic development agencies</h3></br></br>

<h3>Elected leaders</h3></br></br>

<h2>How many acres of forest are there, and where?</h2></br></br>

<h3>Private lands</h3></br></br>

<h3>State lands</h3></br></br>

<h3>Federal lands</h3></br></br>

<h2>What mills are in operation?</h2></br></br>

<h3>What value streams does each mill handle?</h3></br></br>

<h4>What wood material does each mill handle?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What wood products does each mill produce?</h4></br></br>

<h3>Which mills are short on supply to satisfy their current capacity?</h3></br></br>

<h3>Which mill management wants to expand capacity for value streams they already handle?</h3></br></br>

<h3>Which mill management wants to expand to handle other value streams? </h3></br></br>

<h2>Which mills have closed in the last ten years?</h2></br></br>

<h3>What is the physical condition of each closed mill and its potential for repurposing?</h3></br></br>

<h2>What is each state’s Forest Action Plan?</h2></br></br>

<h3>What does it say about the acreage?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What does it say about the challenges?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What solutions does it recommend?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What logistics solutions does the plan lay out?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What harvesting solutions does the plan specify?</h3></br></br>

<h3>Is there an action plan for the Forest Action Plan?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How is the plan commercially informed and commercially relevant?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What progress has been made since the last Action Plan was completed?</h3></br></br>

<h2>Who wants to participate in these efforts to revive our forested landscapes and wood products companies?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What do forest fires mean to the temporal concerns of forestry? </h2></br></br>

<h3>How long do we have before burned wood has to be removed and used as timber?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How long do we have before burned wood has to be removed and used as biomass?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How does the urgency of ecological restoration demand our focused attention on optimizing existing service providers rather than bringing in resources from across the nation?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What does the surge in harvesting mean for future supply and, therefore, commercial concerns now?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How can work on the urgent priority areas be done to serve the next set of priorities?</h3></br></br>

<h3>Is there a basis for installing “mobile” facilities, including new technology-focused ones, that can be moved to other forest regions?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the “Consequences of Delay”?</h3></br></br>

<h4>See Journal of Forestry, April/May 2004, by Dr. John Sessions et al. </h4></br></br>

<h3>What is the best treatment of ground cover in the aftermath of fires for the long-term vitality of forests, and how is this integrated into forestry operations?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How do we address high oak densities post-fire to accelerate recovery to later serial stages?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What changes in genetic or ecological composition are needed to anticipate climate change?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the best approaches to stump treatment?</h3></br></br>

<h3>Given shifting climates, what are the desired future conditions for our landscapes, watersheds, and communities?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What is the most appropriate balance between post-fire recovery and future fire mitigation?</h3></br></br>

<h2>What are the non-timber industry benefits of improved thinning and holistic forest management?</h2></br></br>

<h3>Reduces future fire risk and improves ecological function</h3></br></br>

<h3>Accommodates human access and enables ecological and watershed restoration</h3></br></br>

<h3>Improves balance between juniper and pinon pine for healthier ecosystems</h3></br></br>

<h3>Stabilizes the soil and restores the landscape</h3></br></br>

<h3>Increased downstream stream flow from forest thinning and fire recovery treatment mitigates drought and climate change and improves water access for agricultural producers</h3></br></br>

<h3>Improves wildlife habitat and diversity</h3></br></br>

<h3>Facilitates grazing and other traditional lifeways</h3></br></br>

<h3>Advances livelihoods consistent with local and Indigenous values</h3></br></br>

<h2>What community factors should be identified and weighed in decision-making?</h2></br></br>

<h3>What demographic and economic dynamics of nearby communities should inform the project, e.g., population demographics, primary industries, unemployment, and economic conditions?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What other related industries in the region should be considered in tandem with the forest products logistics strategy, e.g., mines, mills, oil, gas, renewables, agriculture, and manufacturing?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the economic development goals of the local communities?</h3></br></br>

<h3>Which communities and residents should be included in evaluating and siting new facilities and infrastructure?</h3></br></br>

<h2>What are the economic impacts of the forest products industry?</h2></br></br>

<h3>What are the employment implications?</h3></br></br>

<h4>How many people are employed?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How many people are unemployed?</h4></br></br>

<h5>What is that unemployment cost burden on the state?</h5></br></br>

<h4>How much do employees earn in each forest product-related industry?</h4></br></br>

<h4>Where in the county or state are these people employed?</h4></br></br>

<h4>Which areas have the talent/skills for expansion, and which areas need to import new sources of labor?</h4></br></br>

<h4>If employment talent is lacking, how will it affect the cost of this labor pool?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How much impact would it have on state average wage levels?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What is the seasonal impact of these jobs?</h4></br></br>

<h3>What are the public benefits?</h3></br></br>

<h4>What is the gross revenue?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What are the tax revenues?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What other industries are stimulated by wood/forest industries?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How can downstream industries like furniture manufacturing, wood pellets, paper, cardboard, and general milling help keep jobs in the US?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How will this spur the trucking, rail, and shipping industries?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What additional regulatory requirements, such as OSHA and EPA, are necessary?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How would growth in these industries improve our national balance of payments?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What are the environmental concerns and sustainability trends that will impact the industry?</h4></br></br>

<h4>Would our public policies encourage wood use and development?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How are tree planting subsidies impacting the expansion of forestry?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How do technological changes impact the expansion and price of wood?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How could the diversification of products in subsectors, such as paper mills, offset declines in traditional markets?</h4></br></br>

<h3>What is the current economic impact of the industry?</h3></br></br>

<h4>How big is the industry?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How much of manufacturing GDP does it comprise?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How many people are directly employed, and how many are indirectly employed?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How has the industry performed over the last year, five years, and ten years?</h4></br></br>

<h4>Which subsectors have grown, and which ones have declined?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How do the questions above vary by state and county?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How much is the industry forecast to change?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How will the housing construction sector in 2025 impact the lumber industry?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How are the interest and mortgage rates going to impact lumber demand?</h4></br></br>

<h3>What are the regional impacts?</h3></br></br>

<h4>In which states and counties is the wood industry in the top 10 manufacturing employment?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How many employees and how much is earned by employees by occupation in each wood-related industry by state and county?</h4></br></br>

<h4>Where in the county or state are these people employed?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How do we determine if there’s sufficient employment talent in the regions for growth?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How do the state and county average wage levels vary by region?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How much has employment by sector changed over the past five years by state and county?</h4></br></br>

<h2>What are the economic implications of the non-harvesting forest activities?</h2></br></br>

<h3>Tourism</h3></br></br>

<h4>Camping and hiking</h4></br></br>

<h4>Skiing</h4></br></br>

<h3>Hunting</h3></br></br>

<h3>Agriculture

Phase Two: Determining the Local and Regional Material Supply</h3></br></br>

<h1>What GIS map layers are needed to inform this opportunity?</h1></br></br>

<h2>All forests</h2></br></br>

<h2>Each forest harvesting volume by tree type and size, and ancillary material type and volume</h2></br></br>

<h2>Local logging companies</h2></br></br>

<h2>Timber product sorting facilities </h2></br></br>

<h2>Wood product processors and mills</h2></br></br>

<h2>Wood products manufacturers</h2></br></br>

<h2>Roads, highways, rail sidings, lines, and yards</h2></br></br>

<h3>Operating or potential for reactivation</h3></br></br>

<h2>Container terminals and ports and their wood products capabilities</h2></br></br>

<h2>Export fumigation facilities</h2></br></br>

<h2>Transportation service providers</h2></br></br>

<h1>What are the value streams to evaluate?</h1></br></br>

<h2>Cants</h2></br></br>

<h2>Lumber</h2></br></br>

<h2>Wood Pellets</h2></br></br>

<h2>Wood Chips</h2></br></br>

<h2>Mulch</h2></br></br>

<h2>Animal bedding/shavings</h2></br></br>

<h2>Compost</h2></br></br>

<h2>Firewood</h2></br></br>

<h2>Vigas</h2></br></br>

<h2>Specialty Wood Products</h2></br></br>

<h3>Flooring</h3></br></br>

<h3>Furniture</h3></br></br>

<h3>Fence posts</h3></br></br>

<h2>Treated Posts</h2></br></br>

<h2>Latillas (Wood stays)</h2></br></br>

<h2>OSB and other stranded material</h2></br></br>

<h3>Oriented strand board</h3></br></br>

<h3>Wood wool cement</h3></br></br>

<h3>Carbon fiber-reinforced plastics</h3></br></br>

<h2>Wood mass to biochar</h2></br></br>

<h2>Wood mass to energy</h2></br></br>

<h2>Secondary processing</h2></br></br>

<h2>Recreation</h2></br></br>

<h2>Ecosystem services</h2></br></br>

<h2>Agriculture</h2></br></br>

<h3>Grazing</h3></br></br>

<h3>Water supply</h3></br></br>

<h2>Fire mitigation</h2></br></br>

<h2>Carbon credits</h2></br></br>

<h2>Federal and state funding</h2></br></br>

<h1>What are the silvicultural prescriptions and feedstock volumes?</h1></br></br>

<h2>What is the current status of the state’s stand-based inventory?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What entity owns and manages each forest stand, i.e., federal, state, county, tribal, or private?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What types of trees and sizes, including species, age, health, stand structure, and photosynthetic activity?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are the slopes and aspects (direction)?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What percentage of the forest is burned or likely to burn soon?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What is the stand's current condition and its anticipated condition/deterioration over the coming months while harvesting activity can be scaled up?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What cultural, ecological, and hydrological values need to be addressed?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What is the current forest management plan for the entire forest, and is it current?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What is the current forest management plan for the stand, and is it up to date?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What activity is going on in each forest? What species are harvested? Who is currently harvesting each forest? How does each entity type approach its forestry management activities? </h2></br></br>

<h2>Which stands are not being managed to meet the forest restoration goals, particularly overstocking?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Where is the forest composition relative to historic baseline conditions?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What was the historic range of variation, and how do we move closer to those conditions?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What is the silvicultural prescription?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are the species, tree sizes, log volumes, and logging residues to be removed based on the silvicultural prescription?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What quantity and type of byproducts (e.g., forest slash) are generated at each forest? Are they shipped, and if so, where and how?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What quantity and type of waste products are generated at each forest, and how and where are they disposed of?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are the most significant unmet opportunities?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What material and volumes from each stand need new market solutions?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Which entities are best positioned to conduct the harvesting activities in each forest?</h2></br></br>

<h1>How do the feedstock volumes add up at the regional level?</h1></br></br>

<h2>How does each stand relate to other stands in the region so that the aggregate regional volume of common material is identified?</h2></br></br>

<h1>How do in-forest logistics assets determine accessibility for harvesting?</h1></br></br>

<h2>What are the roads in each forest stand, and what entity owns and maintains those roads?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are the legal guidelines for road use, construction, and maintenance?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are these roads’ conditions, how has fire damaged them, and how are they vulnerable?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What work is needed on which roads for accessibility to treat forests? </h2></br></br>

<h2>What are the seasonal characteristics of these roads?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are the characteristics of the critical infrastructure elements in the forest? What do we have? What’s missing?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Where are new roads and cleared land needed to render forest material removal viable? </h2></br></br>

<h2>Given the characteristics and regulations of the in-forest logistics, what percentage of the forest stands are physically accessible?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Which entities are best positioned to conduct the transportation activities from each forest? </h2></br></br>

<h1>What is the composition of the regional infrastructure for forest materials’ logistics? </h1></br></br>

<h2>What is the region’s publicly accessible road network?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What is the general condition of forest road access?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are these area roads' weight, clearance, and safety restrictions? </h2></br></br>

<h2>Where are the existing railroad main lines, branch lines, spur lines, sidings, and loading infrastructure?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Where are the existing rail- and truck-served infrastructure assets for transload, distribution, and storage?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Who owns each facility and network section, and what services and capacities do they have?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Where can new rail loading facilities enhance forestry operations and minimize transportation costs and impacts?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Are these new developments commercially viable, or do they need public subsidization?</h2></br></br>

<h1>What existing and new capacity is needed for short- and long-term harvesting?</h1></br></br>

<h2>Which entities are best positioned to conduct harvesting activities in each forest?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What new resources or support does each entity need? </h2></br></br>

<h1>What are the performance characteristics and costs of available equipment types for harvesting, in-forest logistics, and regional transportation?</h1></br></br>

<h2>What are the harvesting equipment choices?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are the transportation equipment choices?</h2></br></br>

<h3>What are the specifications of the trucks that can be utilized in each stand in support of each material-removal activity?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What transportation range can each vehicle type be viable?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the equipment costs for each vehicle type?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What is the status of diesel-alternative energy technology for each vehicle type?</h3></br></br>

<h2>What new collaborative pooling of harvesting and transportation equipment improves the financial viability of scaled-up harvesting and logistics?

Phase 3: Conceiving the forest-to-market system for logistics and processing of forest materials
</h2></br></br>

<h1>What is the optimal conception of existing and potential new processing facilities, including mills?</h1></br></br>

<h2>Where are the in-state and out-of-state timber (lumber, pellets, paper, paperboard, energy, biomass) processing facilities?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are the significant barriers to and opportunities for developing supply chains related to conventional forestry products (e.g., firewood, posts, flooring, timber, vigas, etc.)?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What does each existing facility need to reach its capacity expansion goals?</h2></br></br>

<h2>How do existing mills fit into a regional strategy?</h2></br></br>

<h2>How do we coordinate processing capacity for optimal benefit?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What is the optimal size and location of new processing capacity for conventional products?</h2></br></br>

<h3>What are the implications/limitations of weather on the location choice?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the implications of elevation and grade direction to the location choice?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the implications of the road network on the location choice?</h3></br></br>

<h2>What other value streams can be nurtured to encompass a complete forest treatment-to-market approach, including new uses of biomass for energy and construction materials?</h2></br></br>

<h3>What are the significant barriers and opportunities associated with developing supply chains related to biomass energy, biochar, building materials, carbon markets, electricity, and other non-traditional uses of forest products?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How can biomass and other income streams improve the viability of mill operations?</h3></br></br>

<h2>What inbound freight exists for forestry and connected and parallel industries, such as papermaking chemicals and animal feeds?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What new associated product manufacturing facilities are made viable by this coordinated forestry planning?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What new investments in existing or new technologies can be deployed in the region in the short- and long term? </h2></br></br>

<h2>Where should new processing facilities with the latest technologies and products be optimally located? </h2></br></br>

<h1>What forest materials need additional capacity to be met outside the region?</h1></br></br>

<h2>Where are the nearest out-of-area wood processing facilities?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Which facilities have supply needs or growth potential?</h2></br></br>

<h1>What new logistics solutions and capital are needed for this long-distance transportation?</h1></br></br>

<h2>What logistics services enable viable transportation of each forest’s harvested materials to the optimal destination?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What new infrastructure elements are needed for each transportation solution? </h2></br></br>

<h2>What truck types and numbers are needed for local transportation?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What rail car types and fleet management strategies are needed for instate and out-of-state transportation?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Which transportation providers, including rail, trucking, port, and transload operators, can be engaged to assess the commercial feasibility of gathering and delivering forest products to domestic and foreign markets?</h2></br></br>

<h1>How do the financial elements of this forest-to-market solution add up to an economically viable, culturally informed, and environmentally sound approach for everyone involved?</h1></br></br>

<h2>What are the needs and opportunities for investors in this North American Sustainable Forestry Business Plan?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Who are the investors that want to make these investments?</h2></br></br>

<h1>What governance and commercial innovations are needed to sustain this collaboration?</h1></br></br>

<h2>How do we best integrate local and Indigenous values into our process?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What laws and protocols must be addressed to accommodate this coordination among Canada, the United States, and Mexico? </h2></br></br>

<h2>How can relations with and between local, state, and federal governments be improved?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What new governance arrangements need to be undertaken to create these improvements?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What corporate or coop structures are needed to reflect holistic, collaborative frameworks?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Who should be seated at the table, and how is it organized?</h2></br></br>

<h2>How do we fund whole communities, not just individuals, businesses, homes, and landowners?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What financial and logistical support should be funded by the federal governments of Mexico, the U.S., and Canada?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Through what public-private partnerships can the completion and implementation of the Business Plan be supported?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What do agencies need to enable them to share or devolve power or authority to non-governmental or collaborative entities?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are state or federal entities' major fiduciary and statutory requirements? </h2></br></br>

<h2>What governance arrangements are needed to meet these state and federal requirements? </h2></br></br>

<h2>How do we address inurement prohibitions in organizational structures?</h2></br></br>

<h1>How do we interface with, support, and augment existing landscape and watershed conservation efforts? </h1></br></br>

<h2>How do we build upon and augment the legacy and current collaborative landscape-scale forestry already underway? </h2></br></br>

<h2>Specifically, which programs do we build on, and what models do we emulate regarding local and national initiatives?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What pitfalls should be avoided - what has worked and what has not?</h2></br></br>

<h2>How are private lands best integrated into state and federal planning efforts?</h2></br></br>

<h2>How can progress on private lands assist the overall forest management and stewardship goals?</h2></br></br>

<h2>How can the USFS and state forestry departments assist in the stewardship of private lands? </h2></br></br>

<h2>How can we better synthesize public and private land stewardship? </h2></br></br>

<h1>How can collaboration succeed in the region?</h1></br></br>

<h2>What barriers to progress in forests and the forest industry must be addressed?</h2></br></br>

<h2>How do we ensure industry involvement is consistent with landscape conservation and community development goals?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What assessments of existing industry and barriers and needs have already been completed? And when were they completed? </h2></br></br>

<h2>Are local forestry-related businesses changing their business models due to recent fires? </h2></br></br>

<h2>What assistance do businesses need toward contracting with the State, Fed, or private customers? </h2></br></br>

<h2>How can we better inform contractors of emergency harvesting activities to retain commercial value and maximize ecological and social benefits?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What can we learn from the experience of the recent fire mitigation and recovery efforts going forward?</h2></br></br>

<h2>How can state forestry departments and the national forestry agency (e.g., U.S. Forest Service) improve their collaboration toward shared goals? </h2></br></br>

<h2>Are the new U.S. Forest Plans completed in 2022 the best framing, or should we follow other legal guidelines? In essence, how do we best integrate with the existing frameworks?</h2></br></br>

<h2>How does the NASFBP collaborate with other large landscape and community forest conservation efforts?</h2></br></br>

<h2>How do we define the regional boundaries, and with whom must we align or partner in each region?

Throughout: Informing the conception with local knowledge
</h2></br></br>

<h1>What questions do we ask specific stakeholder groups, and what have they contributed to the collective thinking so far?</h1></br></br>

<h2>Local and Indigenous peoples</h2></br></br>

<h3>How does forest and watershed renewal align with your values and lifeways?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How can newer, more efficient, diversified approaches to forestry further your values or interests?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What threats to your values and lifeways are occurring from the existing dynamics?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How do threats from previous or potential wildfires impact your culture and lifeways?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What opportunities, threats, or disadvantages do you see from a regional forestry strategy?</h3></br></br>

<h2>Landowners</h2></br></br>

<h3>Forest management</h3></br></br>

<h4>What are the primary land stewardship issues landowners face?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What quality of life goals do we want front and center in a regional forest-to-market approach?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What environmental concerns do we want to address in a regional forest-to-market approach? </h4></br></br>

<h4>What assistance is needed to relate to the state and federal government effectively?</h4></br></br>

<h5>What are the issues in accessing state and federal funds?</h5></br></br>

<h5>What are the management plan challenges?</h5></br></br>

<h5>What are the issues in assessing loss?</h5></br></br>

<h5>What are the issues in implementing fire recovery approaches?</h5></br></br>

<h5>How can we relate most productively with other landscape cooperatives?</h5></br></br>

<h4>What is the status of each landowner’s forest management plan?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What is the total forestry harvesting volume needed to be done annually?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How much new labor is needed?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What are the opportunities to establish shared equipment pools?</h4></br></br>

<h5>Burn wagons</h5></br></br>

<h5>Firewood processing gear </h5></br></br>

<h5>Trucks</h5></br></br>

<h4>What are the opportunities to establish collective forest treatment contracts?</h4></br></br>

<h4>Which log roads need maintenance?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How do we better integrate stewardship of public and private lands?</h4></br></br>

<h5>Connect with the State Lands Office</h5></br></br>

<h4>How can smaller landowners participate in this Action Plan?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How do we integrate federal recovery funding granted to individual landowners into a coherent strategy?</h4></br></br>

<h3>Market development</h3></br></br>

<h4>What challenges identifying contractors need to be addressed?</h4></br></br>

<h5>Bonding and legitimacy of payroll protocols render many small contractors ineligible for government funding.</h5></br></br>

<h4>What challenges in identifying markets for materials need to be addressed? </h4></br></br>

<h4>For which forest materials have it proven easier to find contractors?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What issues with contractors need to be addressed?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What issues with processors need to be addressed?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What types and volumes of material need new local processing capacity?</h4></br></br>

<h4>Which forest material needs a costs-for-service agreement?</h4></br></br>

<h4>Where should new milling capacity be established?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What entity and organizational structure best supports this overall forest-to-market system?</h4></br></br>

<h5>What involvement of the large landowners should be considered?</h5></br></br>

<h6>Volume guarantees</h6></br></br>

<h6>Investment in facilities and infrastructure</h6></br></br>

<h6>Short-term advances against costs, then reimbursed by product supply</h6></br></br>

<h4>What concerns for privacy, confidentiality, and appropriate treatment of information need to be addressed within a collaborative planning process?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What education for landowners is needed?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How can we establish a fair and impartial process for timber valuation?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What elements comprise a productive and fair regional forest material “exchange”?</h4></br></br>

<h3>Fire prevention and mitigation</h3></br></br>

<h4>How can prescribed fire be used productively and safely as a management strategy?</h4></br></br>

<h5>How is fear of fire handicapping overall effectiveness?</h5></br></br>

<h5>How can we improve the process for obtaining burn and smoke permits?</h5></br></br>

<h5>How can we coordinate a regional fire management strategy?</h5></br></br>

<h6>How do each landowner’s priorities fit into the larger landscape approach?</h6></br></br>

<h4>How do we use geospatial information to guide fuel break locations and related strategies?</h4></br></br>

<h5>What are the optimal uses of fuel breaks within the overall forest management strategy?</h5></br></br>

<h5>What factors need to be incorporated into a fuel breaks strategy?</h5></br></br>

<h6>Where are the prevailing winds?</h6></br></br>

<h6>What is the optimal scale of prescribed burns?</h6></br></br>

<h6>What are the associated costs at various scales?</h6></br></br>

<h4>Where are the optimal locations to focus forest thinning activities?</h4></br></br>

<h3>Burnt forest issues</h3></br></br>

<h4>What has to happen for soil and erosion control?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What can be done with the forest slash safely and viably?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What are the uses of burnt forest material?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What is needed to restore the roads?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What is needed to restore the acequias?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What is needed to restore the fences?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What is needed to restore the water system?</h4></br></br>

<h3>What are the trespass issues that need to be addressed?</h3></br></br>

<h4>ATVs</h4></br></br>

<h4>Poaching for game</h4></br></br>

<h4>Taking firewood</h4></br></br>

<h4>Partying</h4></br></br>

<h4>Vandalism</h4></br></br>

<h3>Questions for individual landowners</h3></br></br>

<h4>Is the high density of burned or unburned trees a severe challenge on your lands?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What concerns about how adjacent forests to your lands are being managed?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What harvesting activity are you doing now, and how? </h4></br></br>

<h4>What is your on-staff and available contracting capacity for forest harvesting?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How many acres would you treat if a viable approach were developed within this comprehensive forest-to-market strategy? </h4></br></br>

<h4>In what timeframe do you want to have this acreage treated?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How do you want to participate in the development of the Action Plan?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How do you want to participate in the implementation of the Action Plan?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What is your political influence, and how can we activate that influence as a group?</h4></br></br>

<h4>Will you engage with OTNA to make a case for this Action Plan with decision-makers? </h4></br></br>

<h4>Will you contribute financially to this effort?</h4></br></br>

<h4>Will you agree to this participation agreement?</h4></br></br>

<h5>I promise to respond to the OTNA emails or phone messages within 48 hours or sooner when time is crucial.</h5></br></br>

<h5>I promise to invest up to 1-2 hours a week in reading and writing when asked so that my input effectively contributes to this effort.</h5></br></br>

<h3>What else needs to be investigated?</h3></br></br>

<h4>What is the condition and use of area wood-fired boiler systems?</h4></br></br>

<h2>State and federal forestry staff</h2></br></br>

<h3>Administrative</h3></br></br>

<h4>How does the U.S. Forest Service Planning Rule 2012 inform the local work? </h4></br></br>

<h4>What Forest Plans have been completed? </h4></br></br>

<h4>What other legal guidelines have to be recognized?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What is the best way to coordinate with these plans and guidelines?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What funding or other support opportunities can we tie into, and how can state and federal agencies assist?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How do we assist states and agencies in attaining funding and logistical support?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What misinformation challenges you? </h4></br></br>

<h5>What information do you need to spread? </h5></br></br>

<h5>How can we use our networks to inform and educate the public and decision-makers?</h5></br></br>

<h3> Current Efforts Assessment </h3></br></br>

<h4>How do we build upon and augment the legacy and ongoing collaborative landscape-scale forestry efforts already underway? </h4></br></br>

<h4>Specifically, which programs do you suggest building on, and what models do you suggest we emulate among local initiatives and national programs? </h4></br></br>

<h4>What pitfalls should be avoided - what has worked and what has not?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What can we learn from the experience of the recent fire mitigation and recovery efforts going forward?</h4></br></br>

<h5>How can State Forestry Divisions and the U.S. Forest Service improve their collaboration toward shared goals? </h5></br></br>

<h4>What is the most appropriate balance between post-fire recovery and future fire mitigation?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What assessments of existing industry barriers and needs have been completed, and when? </h4></br></br>

<h4>What other large landscape and ecosystem planning efforts are underway?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How do you suggest the NASFBP collaborate with these other forest conservation efforts?</h4></br></br>

<h3>Private Land Coordination</h3></br></br>

<h4>How are private lands best integrated into these state and federal planning efforts?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How can progress on private lands assist the overall forest management and stewardship goals?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How can the USFS and State Forestry Divisions assist in the stewardship of private lands? </h4></br></br>

<h4>How can we better synthesize public and private land stewardship?</h4></br></br>

<h2>Forestry and forest products business leaders</h2></br></br>

<h3>How can we improve how federal agencies handle forest material?</h3></br></br>

<h4>Bid before harvesting so it can be cut to suitable lengths</h4></br></br>

<h4>FEMA, in post-fire situations, has little connection to forest companies and landowners and is chopping material into 4’-6’ pieces with limited utility</h4></br></br>

<h3>How do we level the playing field between large national and local contractors? </h3></br></br>

<h3>How can we improve communications between the local forest industry and state and federal agencies?</h3></br></br>

<h4>Close the timber sales promptly on state and private lands</h4></br></br>

<h4>How do we establish communications between the USFS and the timber industry?</h4></br></br>

<h3>What federal policies concerning forest management need to be re-evaluated?</h3></br></br>

<h4>NEPA needs to be streamlined</h4></br></br>

<h4>NEPA exception in devasted landscapes and Federal Disaster Zones</h4></br></br>

<h4>Archaeological sites are already known and have typically already been damaged</h4></br></br>

<h4>1990 Roadless Act, passed during the Clinton administration, requires using main roads only</h4></br></br>

<h5>Carson National Forest and the Bridge Road area had 100,000+ latillas that could have been harvested in the aftermath of the 2022 Hermits Peak/Calf’s Canyon Fire, but for the closure of the roads</h5></br></br>

<h4>They need to take a whole forest management approach</h4></br></br>

<h4>The prohibition against salvage alongside forest treatment has to be removed</h4></br></br>

<h4>The federal agencies that are involved in forest management, recreation, fire recovery, environmental issues, wildlife, and transportation aren’t coordinating</h4></br></br>

<h4>Need equipment loans to cover operating capital, FSA loans are capped, stringent requirements, 150% collateral</h4></br></br>

<h3>How can we improve communications and understanding with the environmental community?</h3></br></br>

<h4>Recognize loggers as environmentalists.</h4></br></br>

<h3>How can we improve how landowners relate to forest treatment and local logging and mill management?</h3></br></br>

<h4>Need to address small landowners’ burned trees near their homes</h4></br></br>

<h4>Communication and Education</h4></br></br>

<h4>Forest treatment for material contracts</h4></br></br>

<h4>Utilize the logging and mill owners to educate the landowners and others</h4></br></br>

<h4>Establish a local marketplace hub for pricing, supply, and offers on forest treatment services and material disposition </h4></br></br>

<h3>What other challenges in doing your work do we want to address?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What capacity increases would you like to be capitalized for?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What shortcomings do you find in how banks relate to you?</h3></br></br>

<h4>There are no local banks that offer standard equipment financing </h4></br></br>

<h4>Need new low-interest/reasonable-interest equipment loan fund</h4></br></br>

<h4>Banks don’t understand the non-equipment capital needs</h4></br></br>

<h4>Need a new source of collateral and guarantee</h4></br></br>

<h4>Need a method for valuing wood inventory</h4></br></br>

<h4>Need to be considered an ag industry</h4></br></br>

<h3>In addition to capital, what else do you need to grow?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the opportunities to share and coordinate equipment across your businesses? </h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the opportunities to share and coordinate wood supply contacts and relationships across your businesses? </h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the opportunities to coordinate forest activity across your businesses?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What concerns about this cooperation do you want to make sure are addressed?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What are your other concerns about the current system, and how can it be improved to better assist you in expanding your work?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How can we address the need for more skilled labor, operators, and managers?</h3></br></br>

<h4>Environmentalists have to stop stigmatizing logging</h4></br></br>

<h4>Invite equipment providers like Ponsee to participate in training</h4></br></br>

<h3>How can we address the need for additional employee housing in emergencies? </h3></br></br>

<h3>How can state and federal financial and logistical support better serve your needs?</h3></br></br>

<h2>Local public sector and community leaders</h2></br></br>

<h3>How have the recent fires impacted your community and your work?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What goals would your community want to see advanced from this forestry action plan?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What concerns do you want to ensure are addressed in this Action Plan?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What resource limits need to be addressed for this initiative to be successful? Potential issues include, but are not limited to:</h3></br></br>

<h4>Housing</h4></br></br>

<h4>Labor force</h4></br></br>

<h4>Road capacity</h4></br></br>

<h4>Transportation networks</h4></br></br>

<h4>More effective and relevant state and federal support</h4></br></br>

<h3>What adjustments to your current role or mission would enable you to focus more on long-term collective benefit?</h3></br></br>

<h2>Environmental groups</h2></br></br>

<h3>How do you define and conceive forest and watershed health?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How does forest and watershed health impact your work and programmatic mission?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How have recent fires impacted your mission and operations?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the significant barriers to improving forest and watershed health?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the significant opportunities for improving forest and watershed health?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What concerns for the vitality of the environment, watersheds, and wildlife do you want to have a role in addressing within this forest-to-market strategy?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How can your organization support a positive view of forest workers as environmental stewards?</h3></br></br>

<h2>Foundations and philanthropists</h2></br></br>

<h3>What forest and watershed issues are the most significant challenges?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How have the recent fires impacted your actions and role?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What needs are not being addressed under the current system?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What would help you make your work more effective?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What resources can you provide to this Initiative, and what questions and guidance do you have toward applying those resources?</h3></br></br>

<h2>New technology developers</h2></br></br>

<h3>What technology could be productively included in this initiative?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What is the current status of your technology and its deployment?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What capital or support is needed to advance your technology?</h3></br></br>

<h2>Foundational questions for all stakeholders</h2></br></br>

<h3>What resources do you have in your control that may be helpful to this Initiative?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What resources do you know outside your control that you want to ensure we are aware of?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What resources do you want assistance accessing? </h3></br></br>

<h3>What is your vision for how the federal government, the state, and the region should relate to this Initiative?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How do you want to participate in this Initiative?</h3></br></br>

<h3>Based on your understanding of this initiative, do you want the state and federal governments to embrace and support the project?</h3></br></br>

RE-FOREST

2024-10-15T17:37:53Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<h1>North American Sustainable Forestry Business Plan</h1></br>

<h2>Decades of ill-conceived forest treatment, inconsistent wood product demand, numerous mill closures, and a shrinking rail network have left North America with overburdened forests and a dislocated wood products industry short of adequate material supply. These dynamics strain the economies and quality of life in forest-based communities. Meanwhile, dense forests fuel massive, fast-spreading fires, further decimating the wood baskets of remaining mills.

Forests hold the key to sustainable life on Earth. When untouched by humans, they self-manage. However, given our ongoing influence and past forest treatment approaches, we must redesign our relationship with forests to satisfy the vital need for forest products, forest enjoyment, CO2 reduction, and sustainability.

This opportunity can be realized by implementing a continental forest-to-market approach to harvesting, logistics, processing, and manufacturing that supports local community revitalization. Income from multiple value streams within a holistic forest treatment plan can fund forest and watershed restoration and support local forestry services and forest products companies.
The viability of the continent’s remaining mills and new facilities will be bolstered through an optimal combination of trucking to local mills and rail movement of excess material to out-of-area mills and buyers. The NASFBP integrates the work of agencies and businesses across the continent with local community knowledge to create sustainable forests and wood products industries.</h2></br>

<h1>What questions will this initiative answer? </h1></br>

<h2>What elements of a continental forest-to-market strategy applied locally and regionally to individual forests provide a long-lasting approach to forest, watershed, and community renewal?</h2></br>

<h2>How can collaborating and coordinating across political jurisdictions, including national borders, deliver enhanced returns to all involved? </h2></br>

<h1>What are the components of these Continental, National, and Local Action Plans?</h1></br>

<h2>Integrated continental mapping of forests, logistics infrastructure, woods products companies, and political jurisdictions</h2></br>

<h2>Forest recovery and treatment plan</h2></br>

<h2>Optimal harvesting-to-processing plan for multiple value streams</h2></br>

<h2>Stakeholder roles and participation plan (who is doing what)</h2></br>

<h2>Transportation and logistics plan</h2></br>

<h2>Equipment plan</h2></br>

<h2>Month-by-month expense and revenue plan </h2></br>

<h2>Sustaining organization and governance design

Phase One: Illuminating the situation
</h2></br>

<h1>What overarching dynamics in forest management and the wood products industries inform the general improvements needed to establish sustainable forests, vital local communities, and viable wood products companies and industries? </h1></br>

<h2>What are the current conditions of our forests?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the challenges to sustainable forest management?</h2></br>

<h2>What approaches can stakeholders agree on for sustainable forest management?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the issues and challenges in the wood products industries?</h2></br>

<h3>The current cycle sees timber exported and then finished products imported back into the U.S.</h3></br>

<h3>Thirty sawmill closures nationally in 2023</h3></br>

<h4>Net sawmill capacity decreased by 2% in 2023 (NIP Impressions)</h4></br>

<h4>Closures are concentrated in the northwest U.S. and southern states, although there is some geographic diversity in closures</h4></br>

<h4>Northwestern U.S. and Montana (Montana Free Press) seem to be hotspots for mill closures.</h4></br>

<h4>Closures affect (Workingforest.com)</h4></br>

<h5>Local economies</h5></br>

<h5>Supply chains</h5></br>

<h5>Communities (Loss of tax revenue, decrease in services)</h5></br>

<h5>New openings do not ensure net zero exchange of capacity/impacts (location matters)</h5></br>

<h4>Factors influencing include:</h4></br>

<h5>Worker shortages (industry salaries not keeping up with increasing home prices)</h5></br>

<h5>Fluctuation in lumber pricing – lower prices in 2024?</h5></br>

<h5>Restrictions on cutting on federally owned lands</h5></br>

<h3>Attempts to close the national housing supply gap might lead to future demand for lumber (Realtor.com estimates the supply gap at 7.2 million housing units)</h3></br>

<h2>Who are the stakeholders in forest management?</h2></br>

<h3>Landowners</h3></br>

<h3>Watershed associations</h3></br>

<h3>Local and Indigenous Peoples</h3></br>

<h3>Individual citizens</h3></br>

<h3>Land Grants</h3></br>

<h3>Public agencies</h3></br>

<h3>Landscape conservation collaboratives</h3></br>

<h3>Environmental entities</h3></br>

<h3>Elected leaders</h3></br>

<h3>Consultants/experts</h3></br>

<h3>Foundations</h3></br>

<h3>Investors/lenders</h3></br>

<h3>Scientific and research organizations</h3></br>

<h3>Loggers, mill management, and other forest workers</h3></br>

<h2>Who are the stakeholders in forest harvesting and processing? </h2></br>

<h3>Forestry Industry</h3></br>

<h4>Loggers</h4></br>

<h4>Mills/processors</h4></br>

<h4>Other forest workers</h4></br>

<h3>Trucking and transportation companies</h3></br>

<h3>Local and state economic development agencies</h3></br>

<h3>Elected leaders</h3></br>

<h2>How many acres of forest are there, and where?</h2></br>

<h3>Private lands</h3></br>

<h3>State lands</h3></br>

<h3>Federal lands</h3></br>

<h2>What mills are in operation?</h2></br>

<h3>What value streams does each mill handle?</h3></br>

<h4>What wood material does each mill handle?</h4></br>

<h4>What wood products does each mill produce?</h4></br>

<h3>Which mills are short on supply to satisfy their current capacity?</h3></br>

<h3>Which mill management wants to expand capacity for value streams they already handle?</h3></br>

<h3>Which mill management wants to expand to handle other value streams? </h3></br>

<h2>Which mills have closed in the last ten years?</h2></br>

<h3>What is the physical condition of each closed mill and its potential for repurposing?</h3></br>

<h2>What is each state’s Forest Action Plan?</h2></br>

<h3>What does it say about the acreage?</h3></br>

<h3>What does it say about the challenges?</h3></br>

<h3>What solutions does it recommend?</h3></br>

<h3>What logistics solutions does the plan lay out?</h3></br>

<h3>What harvesting solutions does the plan specify?</h3></br>

<h3>Is there an action plan for the Forest Action Plan?</h3></br>

<h3>How is the plan commercially informed and commercially relevant?</h3></br>

<h3>What progress has been made since the last Action Plan was completed?</h3></br>

<h2>Who wants to participate in these efforts to revive our forested landscapes and wood products companies?</h2></br>

<h2>What do forest fires mean to the temporal concerns of forestry? </h2></br>

<h3>How long do we have before burned wood has to be removed and used as timber?</h3></br>

<h3>How long do we have before burned wood has to be removed and used as biomass?</h3></br>

<h3>How does the urgency of ecological restoration demand our focused attention on optimizing existing service providers rather than bringing in resources from across the nation?</h3></br>

<h3>What does the surge in harvesting mean for future supply and, therefore, commercial concerns now?</h3></br>

<h3>How can work on the urgent priority areas be done to serve the next set of priorities?</h3></br>

<h3>Is there a basis for installing “mobile” facilities, including new technology-focused ones, that can be moved to other forest regions?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the “Consequences of Delay”?</h3></br>

<h4>See Journal of Forestry, April/May 2004, by Dr. John Sessions et al. </h4></br>

<h3>What is the best treatment of ground cover in the aftermath of fires for the long-term vitality of forests, and how is this integrated into forestry operations?</h3></br>

<h3>How do we address high oak densities post-fire to accelerate recovery to later serial stages?</h3></br>

<h3>What changes in genetic or ecological composition are needed to anticipate climate change?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the best approaches to stump treatment?</h3></br>

<h3>Given shifting climates, what are the desired future conditions for our landscapes, watersheds, and communities?</h3></br>

<h3>What is the most appropriate balance between post-fire recovery and future fire mitigation?</h3></br>

<h2>What are the non-timber industry benefits of improved thinning and holistic forest management?</h2></br>

<h3>Reduces future fire risk and improves ecological function</h3></br>

<h3>Accommodates human access and enables ecological and watershed restoration</h3></br>

<h3>Improves balance between juniper and pinon pine for healthier ecosystems</h3></br>

<h3>Stabilizes the soil and restores the landscape</h3></br>

<h3>Increased downstream stream flow from forest thinning and fire recovery treatment mitigates drought and climate change and improves water access for agricultural producers</h3></br>

<h3>Improves wildlife habitat and diversity</h3></br>

<h3>Facilitates grazing and other traditional lifeways</h3></br>

<h3>Advances livelihoods consistent with local and Indigenous values</h3></br>

<h2>What community factors should be identified and weighed in decision-making?</h2></br>

<h3>What demographic and economic dynamics of nearby communities should inform the project, e.g., population demographics, primary industries, unemployment, and economic conditions?</h3></br>

<h3>What other related industries in the region should be considered in tandem with the forest products logistics strategy, e.g., mines, mills, oil, gas, renewables, agriculture, and manufacturing?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the economic development goals of the local communities?</h3></br>

<h3>Which communities and residents should be included in evaluating and siting new facilities and infrastructure?</h3></br>

<h2>What are the economic impacts of the forest products industry?</h2></br>

<h3>What are the employment implications?</h3></br>

<h4>How many people are employed?</h4></br>

<h4>How many people are unemployed?</h4></br>

<h5>What is that unemployment cost burden on the state?</h5></br>

<h4>How much do employees earn in each forest product-related industry?</h4></br>

<h4>Where in the county or state are these people employed?</h4></br>

<h4>Which areas have the talent/skills for expansion, and which areas need to import new sources of labor?</h4></br>

<h4>If employment talent is lacking, how will it affect the cost of this labor pool?</h4></br>

<h4>How much impact would it have on state average wage levels?</h4></br>

<h4>What is the seasonal impact of these jobs?</h4></br>

<h3>What are the public benefits?</h3></br>

<h4>What is the gross revenue?</h4></br>

<h4>What are the tax revenues?</h4></br>

<h4>What other industries are stimulated by wood/forest industries?</h4></br>

<h4>How can downstream industries like furniture manufacturing, wood pellets, paper, cardboard, and general milling help keep jobs in the US?</h4></br>

<h4>How will this spur the trucking, rail, and shipping industries?</h4></br>

<h4>What additional regulatory requirements, such as OSHA and EPA, are necessary?</h4></br>

<h4>How would growth in these industries improve our national balance of payments?</h4></br>

<h4>What are the environmental concerns and sustainability trends that will impact the industry?</h4></br>

<h4>Would our public policies encourage wood use and development?</h4></br>

<h4>How are tree planting subsidies impacting the expansion of forestry?</h4></br>

<h4>How do technological changes impact the expansion and price of wood?</h4></br>

<h4>How could the diversification of products in subsectors, such as paper mills, offset declines in traditional markets?</h4></br>

<h3>What is the current economic impact of the industry?</h3></br>

<h4>How big is the industry?</h4></br>

<h4>How much of manufacturing GDP does it comprise?</h4></br>

<h4>How many people are directly employed, and how many are indirectly employed?</h4></br>

<h4>How has the industry performed over the last year, five years, and ten years?</h4></br>

<h4>Which subsectors have grown, and which ones have declined?</h4></br>

<h4>How do the questions above vary by state and county?</h4></br>

<h4>How much is the industry forecast to change?</h4></br>

<h4>How will the housing construction sector in 2025 impact the lumber industry?</h4></br>

<h4>How are the interest and mortgage rates going to impact lumber demand?</h4></br>

<h3>What are the regional impacts?</h3></br>

<h4>In which states and counties is the wood industry in the top 10 manufacturing employment?</h4></br>

<h4>How many employees and how much is earned by employees by occupation in each wood-related industry by state and county?</h4></br>

<h4>Where in the county or state are these people employed?</h4></br>

<h4>How do we determine if there’s sufficient employment talent in the regions for growth?</h4></br>

<h4>How do the state and county average wage levels vary by region?</h4></br>

<h4>How much has employment by sector changed over the past five years by state and county?</h4></br>

<h2>What are the economic implications of the non-harvesting forest activities?</h2></br>

<h3>Tourism</h3></br>

<h4>Camping and hiking</h4></br>

<h4>Skiing</h4></br>

<h3>Hunting</h3></br>

<h3>Agriculture

Phase Two: Determining the Local and Regional Material Supply</h3></br>

<h1>What GIS map layers are needed to inform this opportunity?</h1></br>

<h2>All forests</h2></br>

<h2>Each forest harvesting volume by tree type and size, and ancillary material type and volume</h2></br>

<h2>Local logging companies</h2></br>

<h2>Timber product sorting facilities </h2></br>

<h2>Wood product processors and mills</h2></br>

<h2>Wood products manufacturers</h2></br>

<h2>Roads, highways, rail sidings, lines, and yards</h2></br>

<h3>Operating or potential for reactivation</h3></br>

<h2>Container terminals and ports and their wood products capabilities</h2></br>

<h2>Export fumigation facilities</h2></br>

<h2>Transportation service providers</h2></br>

<h1>What are the value streams to evaluate?</h1></br>

<h2>Cants</h2></br>

<h2>Lumber</h2></br>

<h2>Wood Pellets</h2></br>

<h2>Wood Chips</h2></br>

<h2>Mulch</h2></br>

<h2>Animal bedding/shavings</h2></br>

<h2>Compost</h2></br>

<h2>Firewood</h2></br>

<h2>Vigas</h2></br>

<h2>Specialty Wood Products</h2></br>

<h3>Flooring</h3></br>

<h3>Furniture</h3></br>

<h3>Fence posts</h3></br>

<h2>Treated Posts</h2></br>

<h2>Latillas (Wood stays)</h2></br>

<h2>OSB and other stranded material</h2></br>

<h3>Oriented strand board</h3></br>

<h3>Wood wool cement</h3></br>

<h3>Carbon fiber-reinforced plastics</h3></br>

<h2>Wood mass to biochar</h2></br>

<h2>Wood mass to energy</h2></br>

<h2>Secondary processing</h2></br>

<h2>Recreation</h2></br>

<h2>Ecosystem services</h2></br>

<h2>Agriculture</h2></br>

<h3>Grazing</h3></br>

<h3>Water supply</h3></br>

<h2>Fire mitigation</h2></br>

<h2>Carbon credits</h2></br>

<h2>Federal and state funding</h2></br>

<h1>What are the silvicultural prescriptions and feedstock volumes?</h1></br>

<h2>What is the current status of the state’s stand-based inventory?</h2></br>

<h2>What entity owns and manages each forest stand, i.e., federal, state, county, tribal, or private?</h2></br>

<h2>What types of trees and sizes, including species, age, health, stand structure, and photosynthetic activity?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the slopes and aspects (direction)?</h2></br>

<h2>What percentage of the forest is burned or likely to burn soon?</h2></br>

<h2>What is the stand's current condition and its anticipated condition/deterioration over the coming months while harvesting activity can be scaled up?</h2></br>

<h2>What cultural, ecological, and hydrological values need to be addressed?</h2></br>

<h2>What is the current forest management plan for the entire forest, and is it current?</h2></br>

<h2>What is the current forest management plan for the stand, and is it up to date?</h2></br>

<h2>What activity is going on in each forest? What species are harvested? Who is currently harvesting each forest? How does each entity type approach its forestry management activities? </h2></br>

<h2>Which stands are not being managed to meet the forest restoration goals, particularly overstocking?</h2></br>

<h2>Where is the forest composition relative to historic baseline conditions?</h2></br>

<h2>What was the historic range of variation, and how do we move closer to those conditions?</h2></br>

<h2>What is the silvicultural prescription?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the species, tree sizes, log volumes, and logging residues to be removed based on the silvicultural prescription?</h2></br>

<h2>What quantity and type of byproducts (e.g., forest slash) are generated at each forest? Are they shipped, and if so, where and how?</h2></br>

<h2>What quantity and type of waste products are generated at each forest, and how and where are they disposed of?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the most significant unmet opportunities?</h2></br>

<h2>What material and volumes from each stand need new market solutions?</h2></br>

<h2>Which entities are best positioned to conduct the harvesting activities in each forest?</h2></br>

<h1>How do the feedstock volumes add up at the regional level?</h1></br>

<h2>How does each stand relate to other stands in the region so that the aggregate regional volume of common material is identified?</h2></br>

<h1>How do in-forest logistics assets determine accessibility for harvesting?</h1></br>

<h2>What are the roads in each forest stand, and what entity owns and maintains those roads?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the legal guidelines for road use, construction, and maintenance?</h2></br>

<h2>What are these roads’ conditions, how has fire damaged them, and how are they vulnerable?</h2></br>

<h2>What work is needed on which roads for accessibility to treat forests? </h2></br>

<h2>What are the seasonal characteristics of these roads?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the characteristics of the critical infrastructure elements in the forest? What do we have? What’s missing?</h2></br>

<h2>Where are new roads and cleared land needed to render forest material removal viable? </h2></br>

<h2>Given the characteristics and regulations of the in-forest logistics, what percentage of the forest stands are physically accessible?</h2></br>

<h2>Which entities are best positioned to conduct the transportation activities from each forest? </h2></br>

<h1>What is the composition of the regional infrastructure for forest materials’ logistics? </h1></br>

<h2>What is the region’s publicly accessible road network?</h2></br>

<h2>What is the general condition of forest road access?</h2></br>

<h2>What are these area roads' weight, clearance, and safety restrictions? </h2></br>

<h2>Where are the existing railroad main lines, branch lines, spur lines, sidings, and loading infrastructure?</h2></br>

<h2>Where are the existing rail- and truck-served infrastructure assets for transload, distribution, and storage?</h2></br>

<h2>Who owns each facility and network section, and what services and capacities do they have?</h2></br>

<h2>Where can new rail loading facilities enhance forestry operations and minimize transportation costs and impacts?</h2></br>

<h2>Are these new developments commercially viable, or do they need public subsidization?</h2></br>

<h1>What existing and new capacity is needed for short- and long-term harvesting?</h1></br>

<h2>Which entities are best positioned to conduct harvesting activities in each forest?</h2></br>

<h2>What new resources or support does each entity need? </h2></br>

<h1>What are the performance characteristics and costs of available equipment types for harvesting, in-forest logistics, and regional transportation?</h1></br>

<h2>What are the harvesting equipment choices?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the transportation equipment choices?</h2></br>

<h3>What are the specifications of the trucks that can be utilized in each stand in support of each material-removal activity?</h3></br>

<h3>What transportation range can each vehicle type be viable?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the equipment costs for each vehicle type?</h3></br>

<h3>What is the status of diesel-alternative energy technology for each vehicle type?</h3></br>

<h2>What new collaborative pooling of harvesting and transportation equipment improves the financial viability of scaled-up harvesting and logistics?

Phase 3: Conceiving the forest-to-market system for logistics and processing of forest materials
</h2></br>

<h1>What is the optimal conception of existing and potential new processing facilities, including mills?</h1></br>

<h2>Where are the in-state and out-of-state timber (lumber, pellets, paper, paperboard, energy, biomass) processing facilities?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the significant barriers to and opportunities for developing supply chains related to conventional forestry products (e.g., firewood, posts, flooring, timber, vigas, etc.)?</h2></br>

<h2>What does each existing facility need to reach its capacity expansion goals?</h2></br>

<h2>How do existing mills fit into a regional strategy?</h2></br>

<h2>How do we coordinate processing capacity for optimal benefit?</h2></br>

<h2>What is the optimal size and location of new processing capacity for conventional products?</h2></br>

<h3>What are the implications/limitations of weather on the location choice?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the implications of elevation and grade direction to the location choice?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the implications of the road network on the location choice?</h3></br>

<h2>What other value streams can be nurtured to encompass a complete forest treatment-to-market approach, including new uses of biomass for energy and construction materials?</h2></br>

<h3>What are the significant barriers and opportunities associated with developing supply chains related to biomass energy, biochar, building materials, carbon markets, electricity, and other non-traditional uses of forest products?</h3></br>

<h3>How can biomass and other income streams improve the viability of mill operations?</h3></br>

<h2>What inbound freight exists for forestry and connected and parallel industries, such as papermaking chemicals and animal feeds?</h2></br>

<h2>What new associated product manufacturing facilities are made viable by this coordinated forestry planning?</h2></br>

<h2>What new investments in existing or new technologies can be deployed in the region in the short- and long term? </h2></br>

<h2>Where should new processing facilities with the latest technologies and products be optimally located? </h2></br>

<h1>What forest materials need additional capacity to be met outside the region?</h1></br>

<h2>Where are the nearest out-of-area wood processing facilities?</h2></br>

<h2>Which facilities have supply needs or growth potential?</h2></br>

<h1>What new logistics solutions and capital are needed for this long-distance transportation?</h1></br>

<h2>What logistics services enable viable transportation of each forest’s harvested materials to the optimal destination?</h2></br>

<h2>What new infrastructure elements are needed for each transportation solution? </h2></br>

<h2>What truck types and numbers are needed for local transportation?</h2></br>

<h2>What rail car types and fleet management strategies are needed for instate and out-of-state transportation?</h2></br>

<h2>Which transportation providers, including rail, trucking, port, and transload operators, can be engaged to assess the commercial feasibility of gathering and delivering forest products to domestic and foreign markets?</h2></br>

<h1>How do the financial elements of this forest-to-market solution add up to an economically viable, culturally informed, and environmentally sound approach for everyone involved?</h1></br>

<h2>What are the needs and opportunities for investors in this North American Sustainable Forestry Business Plan?</h2></br>

<h2>Who are the investors that want to make these investments?</h2></br>

<h1>What governance and commercial innovations are needed to sustain this collaboration?</h1></br>

<h2>How do we best integrate local and Indigenous values into our process?</h2></br>

<h2>What laws and protocols must be addressed to accommodate this coordination among Canada, the United States, and Mexico? </h2></br>

<h2>How can relations with and between local, state, and federal governments be improved?</h2></br>

<h2>What new governance arrangements need to be undertaken to create these improvements?</h2></br>

<h2>What corporate or coop structures are needed to reflect holistic, collaborative frameworks?</h2></br>

<h2>Who should be seated at the table, and how is it organized?</h2></br>

<h2>How do we fund whole communities, not just individuals, businesses, homes, and landowners?</h2></br>

<h2>What financial and logistical support should be funded by the federal governments of Mexico, the U.S., and Canada?</h2></br>

<h2>Through what public-private partnerships can the completion and implementation of the Business Plan be supported?</h2></br>

<h2>What do agencies need to enable them to share or devolve power or authority to non-governmental or collaborative entities?</h2></br>

<h2>What are state or federal entities' major fiduciary and statutory requirements? </h2></br>

<h2>What governance arrangements are needed to meet these state and federal requirements? </h2></br>

<h2>How do we address inurement prohibitions in organizational structures?</h2></br>

<h1>How do we interface with, support, and augment existing landscape and watershed conservation efforts? </h1></br>

<h2>How do we build upon and augment the legacy and current collaborative landscape-scale forestry already underway? </h2></br>

<h2>Specifically, which programs do we build on, and what models do we emulate regarding local and national initiatives?</h2></br>

<h2>What pitfalls should be avoided - what has worked and what has not?</h2></br>

<h2>How are private lands best integrated into state and federal planning efforts?</h2></br>

<h2>How can progress on private lands assist the overall forest management and stewardship goals?</h2></br>

<h2>How can the USFS and state forestry departments assist in the stewardship of private lands? </h2></br>

<h2>How can we better synthesize public and private land stewardship? </h2></br>

<h1>How can collaboration succeed in the region?</h1></br>

<h2>What barriers to progress in forests and the forest industry must be addressed?</h2></br>

<h2>How do we ensure industry involvement is consistent with landscape conservation and community development goals?</h2></br>

<h2>What assessments of existing industry and barriers and needs have already been completed? And when were they completed? </h2></br>

<h2>Are local forestry-related businesses changing their business models due to recent fires? </h2></br>

<h2>What assistance do businesses need toward contracting with the State, Fed, or private customers? </h2></br>

<h2>How can we better inform contractors of emergency harvesting activities to retain commercial value and maximize ecological and social benefits?</h2></br>

<h2>What can we learn from the experience of the recent fire mitigation and recovery efforts going forward?</h2></br>

<h2>How can state forestry departments and the national forestry agency (e.g., U.S. Forest Service) improve their collaboration toward shared goals? </h2></br>

<h2>Are the new U.S. Forest Plans completed in 2022 the best framing, or should we follow other legal guidelines? In essence, how do we best integrate with the existing frameworks?</h2></br>

<h2>How does the NASFBP collaborate with other large landscape and community forest conservation efforts?</h2></br>

<h2>How do we define the regional boundaries, and with whom must we align or partner in each region?

Throughout: Informing the conception with local knowledge
</h2></br>

<h1>What questions do we ask specific stakeholder groups, and what have they contributed to the collective thinking so far?</h1></br>

<h2>Local and Indigenous peoples</h2></br>

<h3>How does forest and watershed renewal align with your values and lifeways?</h3></br>

<h3>How can newer, more efficient, diversified approaches to forestry further your values or interests?</h3></br>

<h3>What threats to your values and lifeways are occurring from the existing dynamics?</h3></br>

<h3>How do threats from previous or potential wildfires impact your culture and lifeways?</h3></br>

<h3>What opportunities, threats, or disadvantages do you see from a regional forestry strategy?</h3></br>

<h2>Landowners</h2></br>

<h3>Forest management</h3></br>

<h4>What are the primary land stewardship issues landowners face?</h4></br>

<h4>What quality of life goals do we want front and center in a regional forest-to-market approach?</h4></br>

<h4>What environmental concerns do we want to address in a regional forest-to-market approach? </h4></br>

<h4>What assistance is needed to relate to the state and federal government effectively?</h4></br>

<h5>What are the issues in accessing state and federal funds?</h5></br>

<h5>What are the management plan challenges?</h5></br>

<h5>What are the issues in assessing loss?</h5></br>

<h5>What are the issues in implementing fire recovery approaches?</h5></br>

<h5>How can we relate most productively with other landscape cooperatives?</h5></br>

<h4>What is the status of each landowner’s forest management plan?</h4></br>

<h4>What is the total forestry harvesting volume needed to be done annually?</h4></br>

<h4>How much new labor is needed?</h4></br>

<h4>What are the opportunities to establish shared equipment pools?</h4></br>

<h5>Burn wagons</h5></br>

<h5>Firewood processing gear </h5></br>

<h5>Trucks</h5></br>

<h4>What are the opportunities to establish collective forest treatment contracts?</h4></br>

<h4>Which log roads need maintenance?</h4></br>

<h4>How do we better integrate stewardship of public and private lands?</h4></br>

<h5>Connect with the State Lands Office</h5></br>

<h4>How can smaller landowners participate in this Action Plan?</h4></br>

<h4>How do we integrate federal recovery funding granted to individual landowners into a coherent strategy?</h4></br>

<h3>Market development</h3></br>

<h4>What challenges identifying contractors need to be addressed?</h4></br>

<h5>Bonding and legitimacy of payroll protocols render many small contractors ineligible for government funding.</h5></br>

<h4>What challenges in identifying markets for materials need to be addressed? </h4></br>

<h4>For which forest materials have it proven easier to find contractors?</h4></br>

<h4>What issues with contractors need to be addressed?</h4></br>

<h4>What issues with processors need to be addressed?</h4></br>

<h4>What types and volumes of material need new local processing capacity?</h4></br>

<h4>Which forest material needs a costs-for-service agreement?</h4></br>

<h4>Where should new milling capacity be established?</h4></br>

<h4>What entity and organizational structure best supports this overall forest-to-market system?</h4></br>

<h5>What involvement of the large landowners should be considered?</h5></br>

<h6>Volume guarantees</h6></br>

<h6>Investment in facilities and infrastructure</h6></br>

<h6>Short-term advances against costs, then reimbursed by product supply</h6></br>

<h4>What concerns for privacy, confidentiality, and appropriate treatment of information need to be addressed within a collaborative planning process?</h4></br>

<h4>What education for landowners is needed?</h4></br>

<h4>How can we establish a fair and impartial process for timber valuation?</h4></br>

<h4>What elements comprise a productive and fair regional forest material “exchange”?</h4></br>

<h3>Fire prevention and mitigation</h3></br>

<h4>How can prescribed fire be used productively and safely as a management strategy?</h4></br>

<h5>How is fear of fire handicapping overall effectiveness?</h5></br>

<h5>How can we improve the process for obtaining burn and smoke permits?</h5></br>

<h5>How can we coordinate a regional fire management strategy?</h5></br>

<h6>How do each landowner’s priorities fit into the larger landscape approach?</h6></br>

<h4>How do we use geospatial information to guide fuel break locations and related strategies?</h4></br>

<h5>What are the optimal uses of fuel breaks within the overall forest management strategy?</h5></br>

<h5>What factors need to be incorporated into a fuel breaks strategy?</h5></br>

<h6>Where are the prevailing winds?</h6></br>

<h6>What is the optimal scale of prescribed burns?</h6></br>

<h6>What are the associated costs at various scales?</h6></br>

<h4>Where are the optimal locations to focus forest thinning activities?</h4></br>

<h3>Burnt forest issues</h3></br>

<h4>What has to happen for soil and erosion control?</h4></br>

<h4>What can be done with the forest slash safely and viably?</h4></br>

<h4>What are the uses of burnt forest material?</h4></br>

<h4>What is needed to restore the roads?</h4></br>

<h4>What is needed to restore the acequias?</h4></br>

<h4>What is needed to restore the fences?</h4></br>

<h4>What is needed to restore the water system?</h4></br>

<h3>What are the trespass issues that need to be addressed?</h3></br>

<h4>ATVs</h4></br>

<h4>Poaching for game</h4></br>

<h4>Taking firewood</h4></br>

<h4>Partying</h4></br>

<h4>Vandalism</h4></br>

<h3>Questions for individual landowners</h3></br>

<h4>Is the high density of burned or unburned trees a severe challenge on your lands?</h4></br>

<h4>What concerns about how adjacent forests to your lands are being managed?</h4></br>

<h4>What harvesting activity are you doing now, and how? </h4></br>

<h4>What is your on-staff and available contracting capacity for forest harvesting?</h4></br>

<h4>How many acres would you treat if a viable approach were developed within this comprehensive forest-to-market strategy? </h4></br>

<h4>In what timeframe do you want to have this acreage treated?</h4></br>

<h4>How do you want to participate in the development of the Action Plan?</h4></br>

<h4>How do you want to participate in the implementation of the Action Plan?</h4></br>

<h4>What is your political influence, and how can we activate that influence as a group?</h4></br>

<h4>Will you engage with OTNA to make a case for this Action Plan with decision-makers? </h4></br>

<h4>Will you contribute financially to this effort?</h4></br>

<h4>Will you agree to this participation agreement?</h4></br>

<h5>I promise to respond to the OTNA emails or phone messages within 48 hours or sooner when time is crucial.</h5></br>

<h5>I promise to invest up to 1-2 hours a week in reading and writing when asked so that my input effectively contributes to this effort.</h5></br>

<h3>What else needs to be investigated?</h3></br>

<h4>What is the condition and use of area wood-fired boiler systems?</h4></br>

<h2>State and federal forestry staff</h2></br>

<h3>Administrative</h3></br>

<h4>How does the U.S. Forest Service Planning Rule 2012 inform the local work? </h4></br>

<h4>What Forest Plans have been completed? </h4></br>

<h4>What other legal guidelines have to be recognized?</h4></br>

<h4>What is the best way to coordinate with these plans and guidelines?</h4></br>

<h4>What funding or other support opportunities can we tie into, and how can state and federal agencies assist?</h4></br>

<h4>How do we assist states and agencies in attaining funding and logistical support?</h4></br>

<h4>What misinformation challenges you? </h4></br>

<h5>What information do you need to spread? </h5></br>

<h5>How can we use our networks to inform and educate the public and decision-makers?</h5></br>

<h3> Current Efforts Assessment </h3></br>

<h4>How do we build upon and augment the legacy and ongoing collaborative landscape-scale forestry efforts already underway? </h4></br>

<h4>Specifically, which programs do you suggest building on, and what models do you suggest we emulate among local initiatives and national programs? </h4></br>

<h4>What pitfalls should be avoided - what has worked and what has not?</h4></br>

<h4>What can we learn from the experience of the recent fire mitigation and recovery efforts going forward?</h4></br>

<h5>How can State Forestry Divisions and the U.S. Forest Service improve their collaboration toward shared goals? </h5></br>

<h4>What is the most appropriate balance between post-fire recovery and future fire mitigation?</h4></br>

<h4>What assessments of existing industry barriers and needs have been completed, and when? </h4></br>

<h4>What other large landscape and ecosystem planning efforts are underway?</h4></br>

<h4>How do you suggest the NASFBP collaborate with these other forest conservation efforts?</h4></br>

<h3>Private Land Coordination</h3></br>

<h4>How are private lands best integrated into these state and federal planning efforts?</h4></br>

<h4>How can progress on private lands assist the overall forest management and stewardship goals?</h4></br>

<h4>How can the USFS and State Forestry Divisions assist in the stewardship of private lands? </h4></br>

<h4>How can we better synthesize public and private land stewardship?</h4></br>

<h2>Forestry and forest products business leaders</h2></br>

<h3>How can we improve how federal agencies handle forest material?</h3></br>

<h4>Bid before harvesting so it can be cut to suitable lengths</h4></br>

<h4>FEMA, in post-fire situations, has little connection to forest companies and landowners and is chopping material into 4’-6’ pieces with limited utility</h4></br>

<h3>How do we level the playing field between large national and local contractors? </h3></br>

<h3>How can we improve communications between the local forest industry and state and federal agencies?</h3></br>

<h4>Close the timber sales promptly on state and private lands</h4></br>

<h4>How do we establish communications between the USFS and the timber industry?</h4></br>

<h3>What federal policies concerning forest management need to be re-evaluated?</h3></br>

<h4>NEPA needs to be streamlined</h4></br>

<h4>NEPA exception in devasted landscapes and Federal Disaster Zones</h4></br>

<h4>Archaeological sites are already known and have typically already been damaged</h4></br>

<h4>1990 Roadless Act, passed during the Clinton administration, requires using main roads only</h4></br>

<h5>Carson National Forest and the Bridge Road area had 100,000+ latillas that could have been harvested in the aftermath of the 2022 Hermits Peak/Calf’s Canyon Fire, but for the closure of the roads</h5></br>

<h4>They need to take a whole forest management approach</h4></br>

<h4>The prohibition against salvage alongside forest treatment has to be removed</h4></br>

<h4>The federal agencies that are involved in forest management, recreation, fire recovery, environmental issues, wildlife, and transportation aren’t coordinating</h4></br>

<h4>Need equipment loans to cover operating capital, FSA loans are capped, stringent requirements, 150% collateral</h4></br>

<h3>How can we improve communications and understanding with the environmental community?</h3></br>

<h4>Recognize loggers as environmentalists.</h4></br>

<h3>How can we improve how landowners relate to forest treatment and local logging and mill management?</h3></br>

<h4>Need to address small landowners’ burned trees near their homes</h4></br>

<h4>Communication and Education</h4></br>

<h4>Forest treatment for material contracts</h4></br>

<h4>Utilize the logging and mill owners to educate the landowners and others</h4></br>

<h4>Establish a local marketplace hub for pricing, supply, and offers on forest treatment services and material disposition </h4></br>

<h3>What other challenges in doing your work do we want to address?</h3></br>

<h3>What capacity increases would you like to be capitalized for?</h3></br>

<h3>What shortcomings do you find in how banks relate to you?</h3></br>

<h4>There are no local banks that offer standard equipment financing </h4></br>

<h4>Need new low-interest/reasonable-interest equipment loan fund</h4></br>

<h4>Banks don’t understand the non-equipment capital needs</h4></br>

<h4>Need a new source of collateral and guarantee</h4></br>

<h4>Need a method for valuing wood inventory</h4></br>

<h4>Need to be considered an ag industry</h4></br>

<h3>In addition to capital, what else do you need to grow?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the opportunities to share and coordinate equipment across your businesses? </h3></br>

<h3>What are the opportunities to share and coordinate wood supply contacts and relationships across your businesses? </h3></br>

<h3>What are the opportunities to coordinate forest activity across your businesses?</h3></br>

<h3>What concerns about this cooperation do you want to make sure are addressed?</h3></br>

<h3>What are your other concerns about the current system, and how can it be improved to better assist you in expanding your work?</h3></br>

<h3>How can we address the need for more skilled labor, operators, and managers?</h3></br>

<h4>Environmentalists have to stop stigmatizing logging</h4></br>

<h4>Invite equipment providers like Ponsee to participate in training</h4></br>

<h3>How can we address the need for additional employee housing in emergencies? </h3></br>

<h3>How can state and federal financial and logistical support better serve your needs?</h3></br>

<h2>Local public sector and community leaders</h2></br>

<h3>How have the recent fires impacted your community and your work?</h3></br>

<h3>What goals would your community want to see advanced from this forestry action plan?</h3></br>

<h3>What concerns do you want to ensure are addressed in this Action Plan?</h3></br>

<h3>What resource limits need to be addressed for this initiative to be successful? Potential issues include, but are not limited to:</h3></br>

<h4>Housing</h4></br>

<h4>Labor force</h4></br>

<h4>Road capacity</h4></br>

<h4>Transportation networks</h4></br>

<h4>More effective and relevant state and federal support</h4></br>

<h3>What adjustments to your current role or mission would enable you to focus more on long-term collective benefit?</h3></br>

<h2>Environmental groups</h2></br>

<h3>How do you define and conceive forest and watershed health?</h3></br>

<h3>How does forest and watershed health impact your work and programmatic mission?</h3></br>

<h3>How have recent fires impacted your mission and operations?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the significant barriers to improving forest and watershed health?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the significant opportunities for improving forest and watershed health?</h3></br>

<h3>What concerns for the vitality of the environment, watersheds, and wildlife do you want to have a role in addressing within this forest-to-market strategy?</h3></br>

<h3>How can your organization support a positive view of forest workers as environmental stewards?</h3></br>

<h2>Foundations and philanthropists</h2></br>

<h3>What forest and watershed issues are the most significant challenges?</h3></br>

<h3>How have the recent fires impacted your actions and role?</h3></br>

<h3>What needs are not being addressed under the current system?</h3></br>

<h3>What would help you make your work more effective?</h3></br>

<h3>What resources can you provide to this Initiative, and what questions and guidance do you have toward applying those resources?</h3></br>

<h2>New technology developers</h2></br>

<h3>What technology could be productively included in this initiative?</h3></br>

<h3>What is the current status of your technology and its deployment?</h3></br>

<h3>What capital or support is needed to advance your technology?</h3></br>

<h2>Foundational questions for all stakeholders</h2></br>

<h3>What resources do you have in your control that may be helpful to this Initiative?</h3></br>

<h3>What resources do you know outside your control that you want to ensure we are aware of?</h3></br>

<h3>What resources do you want assistance accessing? </h3></br>

<h3>What is your vision for how the federal government, the state, and the region should relate to this Initiative?</h3></br>

<h3>How do you want to participate in this Initiative?</h3></br>

<h3>Based on your understanding of this initiative, do you want the state and federal governments to embrace and support the project?</h3></br>

How Collaboration, Trust, and Railroads Will Save the World

2024-10-03T15:16:00Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

Date: December 5th, 2023</br></br>

Place: Temple University, Science, Education, and Research Center, Hazel M. Tomlinson Lecture Hall, 1925 N. 12th St., Philadelphia, PA</br></br>

<i><b>YOUR INVITATION FROM OUR FOUNDER, MICHAEL SUSSMAN</b></i></br></br>

Thank you for engaging with me in this conversation. I am honored to be hosted by Temple University’s Industrial & Systems Engineering Program to present the essence of my thirty-year exploration of how to solve the world’s challenges. Early in my work in industrial systems, I learned that moving goods on a train saves 50-80% of the diesel fuel and emissions compared to trucks. This misuse of the wheel was the catalyst that revealed everything that needs to be reoriented in society. We must embrace capital sustainability: not just financial capital but natural resources, land, environmental, and human capital. </br></br>

In 1914, we had a 240,000-mile robust rail network in the U.S. However, instead of intelligently integrating the new trucking industry with railroads, the nation committed to building roads as a public investment. What was the result? An imbalanced freight system that pitted trucks and railroads against each other—as if this kind of competition is a productive orientation for society. We have been paying the price for that missed opportunity ever since, as the rail network has shrunk to 139,000 route miles. We can fix this. It is time to shift from the fearful rhetoric against “picking winners and losers” to a new era where we consciously and collectively design industrial policies that benefit all.</br></br>

Working with and learning from over 11,000 individuals on infrastructure projects in 43 U.S. states and Canadian provinces led to our invention of a set of practical and productive methods and tools for communities and stakeholders to work together in solving problems. </br></br>

We call this process IntelliSynthesis®, and it is eminently accessible and applicable to all issues. </br></br>

That is why I am inviting you to this important evening on December 5th. Experience IntelliSynthesis® for yourself and see how powerful it can be for charting a brighter future. </br></br>

Focusing initially on growing freight rail service will deliver cascading benefits to the economy, environment, and our future quality of life. We don’t have to stick with sub-optimal use of railroads or highways. Together, we can redesign governance, commerce, industry, and supply chains. We all want to improve our quality of life, combat the climate crisis, and find better ways to co-exist. When we think and plan together with IntelliSynthesis®, we have a way forward that vastly improves matters for all of us.</br></br>

Come to the talk to learn how you can play a role in the Continental Action Plan for Sustainable Industry (CAPSI), where stakeholders in Canada, the United States, and Mexico redesign our industrial systems. I look forward to your participation.</br></br>

</br></br>

</br></br>

In service to CAPSI, OnTrackNorthAmerica is introducing its new institutional model for citizens, businesses, and government to think and plan together for breakthrough results. </br></br>

Invariably, when we face our most difficult yet critical issues, we hear someone say, “We need to have a national conversation.” Where exactly would we have those conversations: on social media, news outlets, courts, the town square? </br></br>

The Continental Action Plan for Sustainable Industry and IntelliSynthesis® provide practical answers to the urgent need for large-scale, multi-stakeholder dialogue that is transparent, inclusive, and efficient.</br></br>

<b>Participation Agreement</b><b>:</b></br></br>

IntelliSynthesis thoughtfully utilizes everyone’s time and intellect. We begin with a fundamental participation agreement. Attendance is free, but requires: </br></br>

1. Commitment to attend, excluding personal or professional emergencies. </br></br>

2. Arrive prepared to begin at the scheduled start time of 5:30 PM Eastern</br></br>

3. Participate for the entire duration, which is scheduled to end at 8:00 PM Eastern </br></br>

::4. Be physically and mentally present by avoiding cell phones and emails. We ask that you remain on video if you are participating via Zoom. </br></br>

<i><b>Thank you, Professor Julie Drzymalski and the Temple University Industrial & Systems Engineering Program, for sponsoring our IntelliConference.</b></i></br></br>

How Collaboration, Trust, and Railroads Will Save the World

2024-10-03T15:15:50Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

Date: December 5th, 2023</br>

Place: Temple University, Science, Education, and Research Center, Hazel M. Tomlinson Lecture Hall, 1925 N. 12th St., Philadelphia, PA</br>

<i><b>YOUR INVITATION FROM OUR FOUNDER, MICHAEL SUSSMAN</b></i></br>

Thank you for engaging with me in this conversation. I am honored to be hosted by Temple University’s Industrial & Systems Engineering Program to present the essence of my thirty-year exploration of how to solve the world’s challenges. Early in my work in industrial systems, I learned that moving goods on a train saves 50-80% of the diesel fuel and emissions compared to trucks. This misuse of the wheel was the catalyst that revealed everything that needs to be reoriented in society. We must embrace capital sustainability: not just financial capital but natural resources, land, environmental, and human capital. </br>

In 1914, we had a 240,000-mile robust rail network in the U.S. However, instead of intelligently integrating the new trucking industry with railroads, the nation committed to building roads as a public investment. What was the result? An imbalanced freight system that pitted trucks and railroads against each other—as if this kind of competition is a productive orientation for society. We have been paying the price for that missed opportunity ever since, as the rail network has shrunk to 139,000 route miles. We can fix this. It is time to shift from the fearful rhetoric against “picking winners and losers” to a new era where we consciously and collectively design industrial policies that benefit all.</br>

Working with and learning from over 11,000 individuals on infrastructure projects in 43 U.S. states and Canadian provinces led to our invention of a set of practical and productive methods and tools for communities and stakeholders to work together in solving problems. </br>

We call this process IntelliSynthesis®, and it is eminently accessible and applicable to all issues. </br>

That is why I am inviting you to this important evening on December 5th. Experience IntelliSynthesis® for yourself and see how powerful it can be for charting a brighter future. </br>

Focusing initially on growing freight rail service will deliver cascading benefits to the economy, environment, and our future quality of life. We don’t have to stick with sub-optimal use of railroads or highways. Together, we can redesign governance, commerce, industry, and supply chains. We all want to improve our quality of life, combat the climate crisis, and find better ways to co-exist. When we think and plan together with IntelliSynthesis®, we have a way forward that vastly improves matters for all of us.</br>

Come to the talk to learn how you can play a role in the Continental Action Plan for Sustainable Industry (CAPSI), where stakeholders in Canada, the United States, and Mexico redesign our industrial systems. I look forward to your participation.</br>

</br>

</br>

In service to CAPSI, OnTrackNorthAmerica is introducing its new institutional model for citizens, businesses, and government to think and plan together for breakthrough results. </br>

Invariably, when we face our most difficult yet critical issues, we hear someone say, “We need to have a national conversation.” Where exactly would we have those conversations: on social media, news outlets, courts, the town square? </br>

The Continental Action Plan for Sustainable Industry and IntelliSynthesis® provide practical answers to the urgent need for large-scale, multi-stakeholder dialogue that is transparent, inclusive, and efficient.</br>

<b>Participation Agreement</b><b>:</b></br>

IntelliSynthesis thoughtfully utilizes everyone’s time and intellect. We begin with a fundamental participation agreement. Attendance is free, but requires: </br>

1. Commitment to attend, excluding personal or professional emergencies. </br>

2. Arrive prepared to begin at the scheduled start time of 5:30 PM Eastern</br>

3. Participate for the entire duration, which is scheduled to end at 8:00 PM Eastern </br>

:4. Be physically and mentally present by avoiding cell phones and emails. We ask that you remain on video if you are participating via Zoom. </br>

<i><b>Thank you, Professor Julie Drzymalski and the Temple University Industrial & Systems Engineering Program, for sponsoring our IntelliConference.</b></i></br>

Founder's Statement

2024-10-03T14:03:38Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<i> </i><i> “Whenever I hear that we need a national dialogue, as in, we need a national dialogue on gun control, police reform, or voter rights, I wonder, where exactly would we have that dialogue? In the newspapers, on social media, in our courts? These venues are ill-suited for </i><i>substantive </i><i>national</i><i> </i><i>dialogues.”</i> </br></br>

-Michael Sussman</br></br>

Too often, industrial sectors operate in fragmented silos striving to reach arbitrary and, at times, conflicting goals. Industrial development occurs as a series of individual projects instead of whole systems. We must redesign our supply chains to be as efficient and sustainable as possible to survive the threats of climate change. Addressing these challenges requires unprecedented collaboration between all stakeholders within a forum that allows us to build trust and create real action plans. CAPSI convenes stakeholders across all industrial sectors to facilitate whole systems planning for profitable and sustainable industrial systems. We do this through our IntelliSynthesis® dialogue process within topic-focused IntelliConferences®. </br></br>

As a society, we aren’t lacking intelligence. What we lack is a communication framework that builds solutions without being derailed by excessive competition, mistrust, or vested interests focused on short-term profits and maintaining power. Over thirty years as trusted advisors working with thousands of partners from industry, government, academia, and community organizations, OnTrackNorthAmerica has developed a powerful tool for mobilizing the knowledge, intelligence, and goodwill all around us. CAPSI utilizes IntelliSynthesis, our breakthrough question-and-response dialogue method, where profitable and sustainable industrial systems are created. Despite preconceptions, addressing all elements of a system makes it easier to build consensus and develop action plans. The more elements of a system we identify, measure, and consider, the more we turn its interactions into positive synergies. New solutions appear that would have otherwise been concealed. </br></br>

Supply chain shortcomings became public during COVID-19 when goods were stalled at ports and intermodal transfer points for months. The Biden administration responded with a massive public investment in infrastructure. Unfortunately, this precious capital is allotted for individual competing projects while overall system inefficiencies remain. Consequently, we continue to stimulate more highway-centric supply chain activity and underutilize railroads’ energy, space, and capital efficiencies for moving heavy weight over land. </br></br>

Consider how transportation has typically been planned, or more accurately, not planned. Supply chains have evolved as a chaotic response to shippers’ and developers' indiscriminate land transactions, regardless of the transportation inefficiencies those choices impose. Railroads, ocean carriers, freight forwarders, ports, trucking companies, distributors, and shippers operate in a competitive, and in some cases monopolistic, mode, neither of which allows for the collaboration needed for supply chain efficiency. Creating sustainable, multimodal industrial systems compels us to transition to comprehensive supply chain, land use, and transportation planning. </br></br>

Yes, a profound shift is needed. If not transformed, this mistrust will cost us and our children the chance of a sustainable, prosperous future. Fortunately, when we approach conversations openly and acceptingly, we inspire trust and cooperation in others. In co-creating CAPSI, stakeholders envision, articulate, and commit to shared principles, protocols, and desired outcomes. When people shift from a competitive to a collaborative mindset, they create policies, programs, and commercial opportunities that serve the collective good. As individuals, we can only go so far; together, we will reach our highest potential by tapping into our collective intelligence.</br></br>

<i> “These are powerful ambitions. Thankfully, we now have the tools to produce action plans for success. Time is of the essence. We live in a critical moment of </i><i>potential </i><i>environmental </i><i>collapse </i><i>alongside the need to expand economic vitality to more people. </i><i>R</i><i>edesigning industrial systems will deliver both environmental and economic sustainability. Join us in CAPSI for a brighter</i><i> </i><i>future!”</i> </br></br>

::-Michael Sussman</br></br>

</br></br>

Founder's Statement

2024-10-03T14:03:28Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<i> </i><i> “Whenever I hear that we need a national dialogue, as in, we need a national dialogue on gun control, police reform, or voter rights, I wonder, where exactly would we have that dialogue? In the newspapers, on social media, in our courts? These venues are ill-suited for </i><i>substantive </i><i>national</i><i> </i><i>dialogues.”</i> </br>

-Michael Sussman</br>

Too often, industrial sectors operate in fragmented silos striving to reach arbitrary and, at times, conflicting goals. Industrial development occurs as a series of individual projects instead of whole systems. We must redesign our supply chains to be as efficient and sustainable as possible to survive the threats of climate change. Addressing these challenges requires unprecedented collaboration between all stakeholders within a forum that allows us to build trust and create real action plans. CAPSI convenes stakeholders across all industrial sectors to facilitate whole systems planning for profitable and sustainable industrial systems. We do this through our IntelliSynthesis® dialogue process within topic-focused IntelliConferences®. </br>

As a society, we aren’t lacking intelligence. What we lack is a communication framework that builds solutions without being derailed by excessive competition, mistrust, or vested interests focused on short-term profits and maintaining power. Over thirty years as trusted advisors working with thousands of partners from industry, government, academia, and community organizations, OnTrackNorthAmerica has developed a powerful tool for mobilizing the knowledge, intelligence, and goodwill all around us. CAPSI utilizes IntelliSynthesis, our breakthrough question-and-response dialogue method, where profitable and sustainable industrial systems are created. Despite preconceptions, addressing all elements of a system makes it easier to build consensus and develop action plans. The more elements of a system we identify, measure, and consider, the more we turn its interactions into positive synergies. New solutions appear that would have otherwise been concealed. </br>

Supply chain shortcomings became public during COVID-19 when goods were stalled at ports and intermodal transfer points for months. The Biden administration responded with a massive public investment in infrastructure. Unfortunately, this precious capital is allotted for individual competing projects while overall system inefficiencies remain. Consequently, we continue to stimulate more highway-centric supply chain activity and underutilize railroads’ energy, space, and capital efficiencies for moving heavy weight over land. </br>

Consider how transportation has typically been planned, or more accurately, not planned. Supply chains have evolved as a chaotic response to shippers’ and developers' indiscriminate land transactions, regardless of the transportation inefficiencies those choices impose. Railroads, ocean carriers, freight forwarders, ports, trucking companies, distributors, and shippers operate in a competitive, and in some cases monopolistic, mode, neither of which allows for the collaboration needed for supply chain efficiency. Creating sustainable, multimodal industrial systems compels us to transition to comprehensive supply chain, land use, and transportation planning. </br>

Yes, a profound shift is needed. If not transformed, this mistrust will cost us and our children the chance of a sustainable, prosperous future. Fortunately, when we approach conversations openly and acceptingly, we inspire trust and cooperation in others. In co-creating CAPSI, stakeholders envision, articulate, and commit to shared principles, protocols, and desired outcomes. When people shift from a competitive to a collaborative mindset, they create policies, programs, and commercial opportunities that serve the collective good. As individuals, we can only go so far; together, we will reach our highest potential by tapping into our collective intelligence.</br>

<i> “These are powerful ambitions. Thankfully, we now have the tools to produce action plans for success. Time is of the essence. We live in a critical moment of </i><i>potential </i><i>environmental </i><i>collapse </i><i>alongside the need to expand economic vitality to more people. </i><i>R</i><i>edesigning industrial systems will deliver both environmental and economic sustainability. Join us in CAPSI for a brighter</i><i> </i><i>future!”</i> </br>

:-Michael Sussman</br>

</br>

Formatter Testing

2024-09-26T15:33:33Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>
</b><b>
</b><b>The OnTrackNorthAmerica </b><b>
</b><b>Promise, </b><b>Principles</b><b>, </b><b>Ethics, </b><b>and </b><b>Sustainability </b><b>Commitment</b></br></br>

OnTrackNorthAmerica is a 501c3 non-profit that advises governments, businesses, and communities on sustainable industry, transportation, land use, and economic development.</br></br>

<i><b>Promise Statement</b></i><i><b> and You</b></i><i><b>r </b></i><i><b>Invi</b></i><i><b>tation </b></i><i><b>to the Team</b></i><i><b>
</b></i>OnTrackNorthAmerica promises to co-lead society in redesigning its industrial systems to support sustainable life. You are invited to the team. </br></br>

<b>
</b><i><b>Principles for Collaboration</b></i></br></br>

<b>Lead from Community</b><b>
</b>When co-leadership with the community is working, leaders do what it takes to be trusted to advance the greatest good. Initiatives succeed when strong leadership stands for results and represents the community’s best interests.</br></br>

<b>Assume Responsibility </b></br></br>

We are called to be responsible for the quality of our relationships. We focus on sharing the best in ourselves while recognizing the perspectives and strengths of others.<b> </b>In each conversation, we relate in ways that advance mutual learning and progress.</br></br>

<b>Thrive at Our Learning Edge</b><b>
</b>Producing the results we stand for requires us to work at our learning edge. Change outside requires some change inside. What we are doing is unprecedented, and we’re constantly being trained. Bring it on! </br></br>

<b>Engage in Integrative </b><b>Dialogue</b><b> </b><b>
</b>Integrative dialogue transcends conventional debate, where either/or and right/wrong interactions marginalize many valuable perspectives. Especially when seemingly opposing points of view are expressed, we work together to synergize new understandings. </br></br>

<b>Articulate Questions</b><b>
</b>Writing and speaking in questions spark new thinking and ideas, while statements tend to express concerns as if they are intractable. Asking questions has the power to lead to results.</br></br>

<b>Gather all</b><b> </b><b>Perspective</b><b>s</b><b>
</b>It’s commonly believed that including all stakeholders makes progress more challenging. In fact, inviting all experiences, concerns, and ideas leads to imaginative, intelligent, elegant results. When it comes to collective intelligence, more is truly the merrier.</br></br>

<b>
</b><b>
</b><b>Celebrate and Energize</b><b>
</b>Leaning into positivity is vitally important to any concerted effort. We value each other’s participation and communicate our appreciation. </br></br>

<b>Be Accountable</b><b>
</b>There is power in clarity. When we make a promise, include a completion time. Then, complete it on time or give a heads-up to the team and commit to a new time. When we first make an agreement, we may face barriers to accomplishing the new task. These challenges are a function of our commitment, not our lack of commitment. Stay in the game.</br></br>

<b>Embrace Knowledge Sharing </b><b>
</b>Share rather than withhold information, ideas, and wisdom to create a world that works for all. Sharing accelerates productivity. It is time to scale up our collective intelligence.</br></br>

<b>S</b><b>tep into IntelliSynthesis</b><SUP><b>®</b></SUP><b>
</b>IntelliSynthesis® is the logic and intelligence all around us but so often hidden from view by posturing, positioning, and politicizing. When we engage with others in the community’s best interest, collective intelligence naturally moves us toward solutions that work for everyone.
<i><b>
</b></i><i><b>Code of Ethics</b></i></br></br>

<b>Objectivity</b>
OnTrackNorthAmerica does not accept financial sponsorships that require prioritization of individual business agendas over shared interests.</br></br>

<b>Inclusivity</b>
OnTrackNorthAmerica invites representation from all involved stakeholder groups and facilitates “level playing field” dialogues wherein all participants’ perspectives are appreciated. Inclusivity is fundamental to our planning approach, and we welcome all regions and projects of any size.</br></br>

<b>Nonpartisanship</b>
OnTrackNorthAmerica maintains the autonomy of a politically non-partisan entity.</br></br>

<b>Coordination and Collaboration</b>
OnTrackNorthAmerica advances the thoughtful integration of collaboration with helpful competition.</br></br>

<b>Whole System Attention</b>
OnTrackNorthAmerica embraces programs, policies, and planning that advance system-wide benefits.</br></br>

<b>Multimodalism</b>
OnTrackNorthAmerica supports the utilization of all transport modes within a sound multimodal system.</br></br>

<b>
</b><i><b>Sustainability Commitment</b></i></br></br>

<b>Return-on-</b><b>I</b><b>nvestment</b></br></br>

We believe that the return-on-investment analysis of economic development should account for all environmental and community impacts.</br></br>

</br></br>

<b>Acknowledging Unavoidable Elements</b><b>
</b>We acknowledge that some projects generate a degree of negative impact, which may be unavoidable in realizing a net positive contribution.</br></br>

<b>Transition from </b><b>F</b><b>ossil </b><b>F</b><b>uels</b><b>
</b>We support investments in projects that enable the transition from fossil fuels, petrochemicals, and overuse of water while acknowledging the pragmatic challenges on the journey to a cleaner economy. We guide our clients and communities to align their planning and investment horizons with the rapid evolution of these markets.</br></br>

<b>Connecting with </b><b>C</b><b>ommunity </b><b>S</b><b>tewards</b></br></br>

We advise project developers to interact proactively with community stewards, whose influence on advancing or blocking projects makes them valuable partners.</br></br>

<b>Including </b><b>E</b><b>veryone</b></br></br>

Including everyone benefiting from or impacted by a project is critical to successful design and implementation. </br></br>

<b>Best Interest of </b><b>the </b><b>Community and Environment</b></br></br>

As we level with everyone if a project is not economically viable, we also illuminate when the community's best interests or the environment are not being served.</br></br>

</br></br>

<b>There are four steps to evaluating every project for alignment with these values</b><b> and goals</b><b>.</b></br></br>

Each project’s commodities, activities, and impacts are cataloged.</br></br>

For nuanced and complex projects, we conduct research to complete our understanding of environmental and community impacts.</br></br>

We share our findings with the team and stakeholders to invite all perspectives.</br></br>

Together, we decide how to properly influence the project’s sustainability.</br></br>

<b>
</b><b>We </b><b>hold </b><b>ourselves accountable to </b><b>future </b><b>generations </b><b>by </b><b>working </b><b>only </b><b>on </b><b>projects </b><b>that </b><b>align with </b><b>a </b><b>sustainable </b><b>environment </b><b>and </b><b>healthy communities</b><b>.</b></br></br>

<b>Your Opportunity to Promise</b></br></br>

<b>Indicate</b><b> </b><b>each </b><b>promise</b><b> </b><b>that </b><b>fits for you</b><b>:</b></br></br>

</br></br>

☐I promise to uphold OnTrackNorthAmerica’s principles and ethics and contribute to its goals </br></br>

while on the OTNA Team. </br></br>

☐I promise to evolve my economic activities to align with the redesign of industrial systems to ensure sustainable life on Earth.</br></br>

☐I promise to <b>support</b> society in redesigning its industrial systems to ensure sustainable life on </br></br>

Earth. </br></br>

☐I promise to <b>co-lead</b> society in redesigning its industrial systems to ensure sustainable life on </br></br>

Earth.

Signature _____________________________________ Date________________________

Name ____________________________________ </br></br>

2

Formatter Testing

2024-09-26T15:33:23Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>
</b><b>
</b><b>The OnTrackNorthAmerica </b><b>
</b><b>Promise, </b><b>Principles</b><b>, </b><b>Ethics, </b><b>and </b><b>Sustainability </b><b>Commitment</b></br>

OnTrackNorthAmerica is a 501c3 non-profit that advises governments, businesses, and communities on sustainable industry, transportation, land use, and economic development.</br>

<i><b>Promise Statement</b></i><i><b> and You</b></i><i><b>r </b></i><i><b>Invi</b></i><i><b>tation </b></i><i><b>to the Team</b></i><i><b>
</b></i>OnTrackNorthAmerica promises to co-lead society in redesigning its industrial systems to support sustainable life. You are invited to the team. </br>

<b>
</b><i><b>Principles for Collaboration</b></i></br>

<b>Lead from Community</b><b>
</b>When co-leadership with the community is working, leaders do what it takes to be trusted to advance the greatest good. Initiatives succeed when strong leadership stands for results and represents the community’s best interests.</br>

<b>Assume Responsibility </b></br>

We are called to be responsible for the quality of our relationships. We focus on sharing the best in ourselves while recognizing the perspectives and strengths of others.<b> </b>In each conversation, we relate in ways that advance mutual learning and progress.</br>

<b>Thrive at Our Learning Edge</b><b>
</b>Producing the results we stand for requires us to work at our learning edge. Change outside requires some change inside. What we are doing is unprecedented, and we’re constantly being trained. Bring it on! </br>

<b>Engage in Integrative </b><b>Dialogue</b><b> </b><b>
</b>Integrative dialogue transcends conventional debate, where either/or and right/wrong interactions marginalize many valuable perspectives. Especially when seemingly opposing points of view are expressed, we work together to synergize new understandings. </br>

<b>Articulate Questions</b><b>
</b>Writing and speaking in questions spark new thinking and ideas, while statements tend to express concerns as if they are intractable. Asking questions has the power to lead to results.</br>

<b>Gather all</b><b> </b><b>Perspective</b><b>s</b><b>
</b>It’s commonly believed that including all stakeholders makes progress more challenging. In fact, inviting all experiences, concerns, and ideas leads to imaginative, intelligent, elegant results. When it comes to collective intelligence, more is truly the merrier.</br>

<b>
</b><b>
</b><b>Celebrate and Energize</b><b>
</b>Leaning into positivity is vitally important to any concerted effort. We value each other’s participation and communicate our appreciation. </br>

<b>Be Accountable</b><b>
</b>There is power in clarity. When we make a promise, include a completion time. Then, complete it on time or give a heads-up to the team and commit to a new time. When we first make an agreement, we may face barriers to accomplishing the new task. These challenges are a function of our commitment, not our lack of commitment. Stay in the game.</br>

<b>Embrace Knowledge Sharing </b><b>
</b>Share rather than withhold information, ideas, and wisdom to create a world that works for all. Sharing accelerates productivity. It is time to scale up our collective intelligence.</br>

<b>S</b><b>tep into IntelliSynthesis</b><SUP><b>®</b></SUP><b>
</b>IntelliSynthesis® is the logic and intelligence all around us but so often hidden from view by posturing, positioning, and politicizing. When we engage with others in the community’s best interest, collective intelligence naturally moves us toward solutions that work for everyone.
<i><b>
</b></i><i><b>Code of Ethics</b></i></br>

<b>Objectivity</b>
OnTrackNorthAmerica does not accept financial sponsorships that require prioritization of individual business agendas over shared interests.</br>

<b>Inclusivity</b>
OnTrackNorthAmerica invites representation from all involved stakeholder groups and facilitates “level playing field” dialogues wherein all participants’ perspectives are appreciated. Inclusivity is fundamental to our planning approach, and we welcome all regions and projects of any size.</br>

<b>Nonpartisanship</b>
OnTrackNorthAmerica maintains the autonomy of a politically non-partisan entity.</br>

<b>Coordination and Collaboration</b>
OnTrackNorthAmerica advances the thoughtful integration of collaboration with helpful competition.</br>

<b>Whole System Attention</b>
OnTrackNorthAmerica embraces programs, policies, and planning that advance system-wide benefits.</br>

<b>Multimodalism</b>
OnTrackNorthAmerica supports the utilization of all transport modes within a sound multimodal system.</br>

<b>
</b><i><b>Sustainability Commitment</b></i></br>

<b>Return-on-</b><b>I</b><b>nvestment</b></br>

We believe that the return-on-investment analysis of economic development should account for all environmental and community impacts.</br>

</br>

<b>Acknowledging Unavoidable Elements</b><b>
</b>We acknowledge that some projects generate a degree of negative impact, which may be unavoidable in realizing a net positive contribution.</br>

<b>Transition from </b><b>F</b><b>ossil </b><b>F</b><b>uels</b><b>
</b>We support investments in projects that enable the transition from fossil fuels, petrochemicals, and overuse of water while acknowledging the pragmatic challenges on the journey to a cleaner economy. We guide our clients and communities to align their planning and investment horizons with the rapid evolution of these markets.</br>

<b>Connecting with </b><b>C</b><b>ommunity </b><b>S</b><b>tewards</b></br>

We advise project developers to interact proactively with community stewards, whose influence on advancing or blocking projects makes them valuable partners.</br>

<b>Including </b><b>E</b><b>veryone</b></br>

Including everyone benefiting from or impacted by a project is critical to successful design and implementation. </br>

<b>Best Interest of </b><b>the </b><b>Community and Environment</b></br>

As we level with everyone if a project is not economically viable, we also illuminate when the community's best interests or the environment are not being served.</br>

</br>

<b>There are four steps to evaluating every project for alignment with these values</b><b> and goals</b><b>.</b></br>

Each project’s commodities, activities, and impacts are cataloged.</br>

For nuanced and complex projects, we conduct research to complete our understanding of environmental and community impacts.</br>

We share our findings with the team and stakeholders to invite all perspectives.</br>

Together, we decide how to properly influence the project’s sustainability.</br>

<b>
</b><b>We </b><b>hold </b><b>ourselves accountable to </b><b>future </b><b>generations </b><b>by </b><b>working </b><b>only </b><b>on </b><b>projects </b><b>that </b><b>align with </b><b>a </b><b>sustainable </b><b>environment </b><b>and </b><b>healthy communities</b><b>.</b></br>

<b>Your Opportunity to Promise</b></br>

<b>Indicate</b><b> </b><b>each </b><b>promise</b><b> </b><b>that </b><b>fits for you</b><b>:</b></br>

</br>

☐I promise to uphold OnTrackNorthAmerica’s principles and ethics and contribute to its goals </br>

while on the OTNA Team. </br>

☐I promise to evolve my economic activities to align with the redesign of industrial systems to ensure sustainable life on Earth.</br>

☐I promise to <b>support</b> society in redesigning its industrial systems to ensure sustainable life on </br>

Earth. </br>

☐I promise to <b>co-lead</b> society in redesigning its industrial systems to ensure sustainable life on </br>

Earth.

Signature _____________________________________ Date________________________

Name ____________________________________ </br>

2

Formatter Testing

2024-09-26T15:24:11Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

Formatter Testing

2024-09-26T15:24:01Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>
</b><b>
</b><b>The OnTrackNorthAmerica </b><b>
</b><b>Promise, </b><b>Principles</b><b>, </b><b>Ethics, </b><b>and </b><b>Sustainability </b><b>Commitment</b></br>

OnTrackNorthAmerica is a 501c3 non-profit that advises governments, businesses, and communities on sustainable industry, transportation, land use, and economic development.</br>

<i><b>Promise Statement</b></i><i><b> and You</b></i><i><b>r </b></i><i><b>Invi</b></i><i><b>tation </b></i><i><b>to the Team</b></i><i><b>
</b></i>OnTrackNorthAmerica promises to co-lead society in redesigning its industrial systems to support sustainable life. You are invited to the team. </br>

<b>
</b><i><b>Principles for Collaboration</b></i></br>

<b>Lead from Community</b><b>
</b>When co-leadership with the community is working, leaders do what it takes to be trusted to advance the greatest good. Initiatives succeed when strong leadership stands for results and represents the community’s best interests.</br>

<b>Assume Responsibility </b></br>

We are called to be responsible for the quality of our relationships. We focus on sharing the best in ourselves while recognizing the perspectives and strengths of others.<b> </b>In each conversation, we relate in ways that advance mutual learning and progress.</br>

<b>Thrive at Our Learning Edge</b><b>
</b>Producing the results we stand for requires us to work at our learning edge. Change outside requires some change inside. What we are doing is unprecedented, and we’re constantly being trained. Bring it on! </br>

<b>Engage in Integrative </b><b>Dialogue</b><b> </b><b>
</b>Integrative dialogue transcends conventional debate, where either/or and right/wrong interactions marginalize many valuable perspectives. Especially when seemingly opposing points of view are expressed, we work together to synergize new understandings. </br>

<b>Articulate Questions</b><b>
</b>Writing and speaking in questions spark new thinking and ideas, while statements tend to express concerns as if they are intractable. Asking questions has the power to lead to results.</br>

<b>Gather all</b><b> </b><b>Perspective</b><b>s</b><b>
</b>It’s commonly believed that including all stakeholders makes progress more challenging. In fact, inviting all experiences, concerns, and ideas leads to imaginative, intelligent, elegant results. When it comes to collective intelligence, more is truly the merrier.</br>

<b>
</b><b>
</b><b>Celebrate and Energize</b><b>
</b>Leaning into positivity is vitally important to any concerted effort. We value each other’s participation and communicate our appreciation. </br>

<b>Be Accountable</b><b>
</b>There is power in clarity. When we make a promise, include a completion time. Then, complete it on time or give a heads-up to the team and commit to a new time. When we first make an agreement, we may face barriers to accomplishing the new task. These challenges are a function of our commitment, not our lack of commitment. Stay in the game.</br>

<b>Embrace Knowledge Sharing </b><b>
</b>Share rather than withhold information, ideas, and wisdom to create a world that works for all. Sharing accelerates productivity. It is time to scale up our collective intelligence.</br>

<b>S</b><b>tep into IntelliSynthesis</b><SUP><b>®</b></SUP><b>
</b>IntelliSynthesis® is the logic and intelligence all around us but so often hidden from view by posturing, positioning, and politicizing. When we engage with others in the community’s best interest, collective intelligence naturally moves us toward solutions that work for everyone.
<i><b>
</b></i><i><b>Code of Ethics</b></i></br>

<b>Objectivity</b>
OnTrackNorthAmerica does not accept financial sponsorships that require prioritization of individual business agendas over shared interests.</br>

<b>Inclusivity</b>
OnTrackNorthAmerica invites representation from all involved stakeholder groups and facilitates “level playing field” dialogues wherein all participants’ perspectives are appreciated. Inclusivity is fundamental to our planning approach, and we welcome all regions and projects of any size.</br>

<b>Nonpartisanship</b>
OnTrackNorthAmerica maintains the autonomy of a politically non-partisan entity.</br>

<b>Coordination and Collaboration</b>
OnTrackNorthAmerica advances the thoughtful integration of collaboration with helpful competition.</br>

<b>Whole System Attention</b>
OnTrackNorthAmerica embraces programs, policies, and planning that advance system-wide benefits.</br>

<b>Multimodalism</b>
OnTrackNorthAmerica supports the utilization of all transport modes within a sound multimodal system.</br>

<b>
</b><i><b>Sustainability Commitment</b></i></br>

<b>Return-on-</b><b>I</b><b>nvestment</b></br>

We believe that the return-on-investment analysis of economic development should account for all environmental and community impacts.</br>

</br>

<b>Acknowledging Unavoidable Elements</b><b>
</b>We acknowledge that some projects generate a degree of negative impact, which may be unavoidable in realizing a net positive contribution.</br>

<b>Transition from </b><b>F</b><b>ossil </b><b>F</b><b>uels</b><b>
</b>We support investments in projects that enable the transition from fossil fuels, petrochemicals, and overuse of water while acknowledging the pragmatic challenges on the journey to a cleaner economy. We guide our clients and communities to align their planning and investment horizons with the rapid evolution of these markets.</br>

<b>Connecting with </b><b>C</b><b>ommunity </b><b>S</b><b>tewards</b></br>

We advise project developers to interact proactively with community stewards, whose influence on advancing or blocking projects makes them valuable partners.</br>

<b>Including </b><b>E</b><b>veryone</b></br>

Including everyone benefiting from or impacted by a project is critical to successful design and implementation. </br>

<b>Best Interest of </b><b>the </b><b>Community and Environment</b></br>

As we level with everyone if a project is not economically viable, we also illuminate when the community's best interests or the environment are not being served.</br>

</br>

<b>There are four steps to evaluating every project for alignment with these values</b><b> and goals</b><b>.</b></br>

Each project’s commodities, activities, and impacts are cataloged.</br>

For nuanced and complex projects, we conduct research to complete our understanding of environmental and community impacts.</br>

We share our findings with the team and stakeholders to invite all perspectives.</br>

Together, we decide how to properly influence the project’s sustainability.</br>

<b>
</b><b>We </b><b>hold </b><b>ourselves accountable to </b><b>future </b><b>generations </b><b>by </b><b>working </b><b>only </b><b>on </b><b>projects </b><b>that </b><b>align with </b><b>a </b><b>sustainable </b><b>environment </b><b>and </b><b>healthy communities</b><b>.</b></br>

<b>Your Opportunity to Promise</b></br>

<b>Indicate</b><b> </b><b>each </b><b>promise</b><b> </b><b>that </b><b>fits for you</b><b>:</b></br>

</br>

☐I promise to uphold OnTrackNorthAmerica’s principles and ethics and contribute to its goals </br>

while on the OTNA Team. </br>

☐I promise to evolve my economic activities to align with the redesign of industrial systems to ensure sustainable life on Earth.</br>

☐I promise to <b>support</b> society in redesigning its industrial systems to ensure sustainable life on </br>

Earth. </br>

☐I promise to <b>co-lead</b> society in redesigning its industrial systems to ensure sustainable life on </br>

Earth.

Signature _____________________________________ Date________________________

Name ____________________________________ </br>

2

Formatter Testing

2024-09-23T17:26:45Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<h1>NOTE… View and use this Document in Outline format by clicking on View in the Menu bar above and then on Outline to the left in the Views section. Then use green arrows in the upper left to indent and outdent lines. Additions and comments are welcome to be returned to msussman@ontracknorthamerica.org
</h1></br></br>

<h1>New Mexico Sustainable Forestry Business Plan</h1></br></br>

<h2>This initiative, an OnTrackNorthAmerica project in conjunction with the U.S. Forest Service, powerfully aligns the work of agencies and businesses with local communities' needs, opportunities, and knowledge in addressing the impacts and causes of the massive 2022 Hermits Peak and Calf Canyon wildfires.</h2></br></br>

<h2>The following is the framework for an action plan—a living document of the community’s collective thinking for advancing the critical conversations and action required to succeed. </h2></br></br>

<h1>What is the initial objective of the business plan?</h1></br></br>

<h2>To integrate the ideas and needs of landowners, loggers, mill owners, transportation providers, and the public sector into a commercially viable plan for rapidly scaling up forest restoration, treatment, and processing. </h2></br></br>

<h1>What is the opportunity?</h1></br></br>

<h2>The income from multiple value streams can pay for clearing dead timber and thinning green wood, which, in turn, helps pay for forest and watershed restoration. </h2></br></br>

<h1>What is the next step?</h1></br></br>

<h2>Completing a “Community Forest-to-Market Action Plan” by April 30, 2023. </h2></br></br>

<h1>What will this Plan clarify? </h1></br></br>

<h2>What elements of a complete forest-to-market strategy add up to a viable short-term surge and a long-lasting approach to forest, watershed, and community recovery and renewal? </h2></br></br>

<h2>What governance and public engagement strategies are most effective for sustaining forest thinning and landscape and watershed recovery?</h2></br></br>

<h2>How can these strategies be integrated into a durable, holistic solution that positively influences the vitality of rural communities?</h2></br></br>

<h1>What are the components of the Action Plan?</h1></br></br>

<h2>Forest recovery and treatment plan</h2></br></br>

<h2>Optimal harvesting-to-processing plan for multiple value streams</h2></br></br>

<h2>Stakeholder roles and participation plan (who is doing what)</h2></br></br>

<h2>Transportation and logistics plan</h2></br></br>

<h2>Equipment plan</h2></br></br>

<h2>Month-by-month expense and revenue plan </h2></br></br>

<h2>Sustaining organization and governance design</h2></br></br>

<h1>What are the value streams to evaluate?</h1></br></br>

<h2>Cants</h2></br></br>

<h2>Lumber</h2></br></br>

<h2>Wood Pellets</h2></br></br>

<h2>Wood Chips</h2></br></br>

<h2>Mulch</h2></br></br>

<h2>Animal bedding/shavings</h2></br></br>

<h2>Compost</h2></br></br>

<h2>Firewood</h2></br></br>

<h2>Vigas</h2></br></br>

<h2>Specialty Wood Products</h2></br></br>

<h3>Flooring</h3></br></br>

<h3>Furniture</h3></br></br>

<h3>Fence posts</h3></br></br>

<h2>Treated Posts</h2></br></br>

<h2>Latillas (Wood stays)</h2></br></br>

<h2>OSB and other stranded material</h2></br></br>

<h3>Oriented strand board</h3></br></br>

<h3>Wood wool cement</h3></br></br>

<h3>Carbon fiber-reinforced plastics</h3></br></br>

<h2>Wood mass to biochar</h2></br></br>

<h2>Wood mass to energy</h2></br></br>

<h2>Secondary processing</h2></br></br>

<h2>Recreation</h2></br></br>

<h2>Ecosystem services</h2></br></br>

<h2>Agriculture</h2></br></br>

<h3>Grazing</h3></br></br>

<h3>Water supply</h3></br></br>

<h2>Fire mitigation</h2></br></br>

<h2>Carbon credits</h2></br></br>

<h2>Federal and state funding</h2></br></br>

<h1>Who currently provides forest products and services in the region, and what are their needs and capacities?</h1></br></br>

<h2>Landowners</h2></br></br>

<h2>Watershed associations</h2></br></br>

<h2>Forestry Industry</h2></br></br>

<h3>Loggers</h3></br></br>

<h3>Mills/processors</h3></br></br>

<h2>Trucking and transportation companies</h2></br></br>

<h2>Land Grants</h2></br></br>

<h2>Local and Indigenous Peoples</h2></br></br>

<h2>Local, state, and federal agencies</h2></br></br>

<h2>Landscape conservation collaboratives</h2></br></br>

<h2>Environmental entities</h2></br></br>

<h2>Consultants/experts</h2></br></br>

<h2>Foundations</h2></br></br>

<h2>Investors/lenders</h2></br></br>

<h2>Scientific and research organizations</h2></br></br>

<h1>Who wants to participate in these efforts to revive our forested landscapes?</h1></br></br>

<h1>What are the silvicultural prescriptions and feedstock volumes?</h1></br></br>

<h2>What is the current status of the state’s stand-based inventory?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What entity owns and manages each forest stand, i.e., federal, state, county, tribal, or private?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What types of trees and sizes, including species, age, health, stand structure, and photosynthetic activity?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are the slopes and aspects (direction)?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What percentage of the forest is burned or likely to burn soon?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What is the current condition of the stand and its anticipated condition/deterioration over the coming months while harvesting activity can be scaled up?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What cultural, ecological, and hydrological values need to be addressed?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What is the current forest management plan for the entire forest, and is it up to date?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What is the current forest management plan for the stand, and is it up to date?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What activity is going on in each forest? What species are harvested? Who is currently harvesting each forest? How does each entity type approach its forestry management activities? Community or Indigenous values or resources?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Which stands are not being managed to meet the forest restoration goals, particularly overstocking?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Where is the forest composition relative to historic baseline conditions?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What was the historic range of variation, and how do we move closer to those conditions?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What is the silvicultural prescription?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are the species, tree sizes, log volumes, and logging residues to be removed based on the silvicultural prescription?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What quantity and type of byproducts (e.g., forest slash) are generated at each forest? Are they shipped, and if so, where and how?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What quantity and type of waste products are generated at each forest, and how and where are they disposed of?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are the most significant unmet opportunities?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What material and volumes from each stand need new market solutions?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Which entities are in the best position for conducting the harvesting activities in each forest, based on multiple factors, including:</h2></br></br>

<h3>Accessibility, as outlined below</h3></br></br>

<h1>How do the feedstock volumes add up at the regional level?</h1></br></br>

<h2>How does each stand relate to other stands in the region such that the aggregate regional volume of common material is identified?</h2></br></br>

<h1>What do recent forest fires mean to the temporal concerns of forestry? </h1></br></br>

<h2>How long do we have before burned wood has to be removed and used as timber?</h2></br></br>

<h2>How long do we have before burned wood has to be removed and used as biomass?</h2></br></br>

<h2>How does the urgency of ecological restoration demand our focused attention on optimizing existing service providers versus pulling in resources from across the nation?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What does the surge in harvesting mean for future supply and, therefore, commercial concerns now?</h2></br></br>

<h2>How can work on the urgent priority areas be done to serve the next set of priorities?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Is there a basis for installing “mobile” facilities, including new technology-focused ones, that can be moved to other forest regions?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are the “Consequences of Delay”?</h2></br></br>

<h3>See Journal of Forestry, April/May 2004, by Dr. John Sessions et al. </h3></br></br>

<h2>What is the best treatment of ground cover in the aftermath of fires for the long-term vitality of forests, and how is this integrated into forestry operations?</h2></br></br>

<h2>How do we address high oak densities post-fire to accelerate recovery to later serial stages?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What changes in genetic or ecological composition are needed to anticipate climate change?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are the best approaches to stump treatment?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Given shifting climates, what are the desired future conditions for our landscapes, watersheds, and communities?</h2></br></br>

<h1>How do in-forest logistics assets determine accessibility for harvesting?</h1></br></br>

<h2>What are the roads in each forest stand, and what entity owns and maintains those roads?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are the legal guidelines for road use, construction, and maintenance?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are these roads’ conditions, how has fire damaged them, and how are they vulnerable?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What work is needed on which roads for accessibility to treat forests? </h2></br></br>

<h2>What are the seasonal characteristics of these roads?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are the characteristics of the critical infrastructure elements in the forest? What do we have? What’s missing?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Where are new roads and cleared land needed to render forest material removal viable? </h2></br></br>

<h2>Given the characteristics and regulations of the in-forest logistics, what percentage of the forest stands are physically accessible?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Which entities are in the best position to conduct the transportation activities from each forest? </h2></br></br>

<h1>What is the composition of the regional infrastructure for forest materials’ logistics? </h1></br></br>

<h2>What is the region’s publicly accessible road network?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What is the general condition of forest road access?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are these area roads' weight, clearance, and safety restrictions? </h2></br></br>

<h2>Where are the existing railroad main lines, branch lines, spur lines, sidings, and loading infrastructure?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Where are the existing rail- and truck-served infrastructure assets for transload, distribution, and storage?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Who owns each facility and network section, and what services and capacities do they have?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What is the status of the rail line from Albuquerque to Raton?</h2></br></br>

<h3>Owned by BNSF</h3></br></br>

<h3>What level of sub-contract operator might BNSF agree to?</h3></br></br>

<h4>Anacostia & Pacific, Watco, Genesee &Wyoming, for example</h4></br></br>

<h3>Where does freight service currently begin down the line and up the line?</h3></br></br>

<h2>Where can new rail loading facilities enhance forestry operations and minimize transportation costs and impacts?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Are these new developments commercially viable, or do they need public subsidization?</h2></br></br>

<h1>What are the performance characteristics and costs of available equipment types for harvesting, in-forest logistics, and regional transportation?</h1></br></br>

<h2>What are the harvesting equipment choices?</h2></br></br>

<h3>See Miller Timber memo. </h3></br></br>

<h2>What are the transportation equipment choices?</h2></br></br>

<h3>What are the specifications of the trucks that can be utilized in each stand in support of each material-removal activity?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What transportation range can each vehicle type be viable?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the equipment costs for each vehicle type?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What is the status of diesel-alternative energy technology for each vehicle type?</h3></br></br>

<h1>What existing and new capacity is needed for short- and long-term harvesting?</h1></br></br>

<h2>Which entities are in the best position to conduct harvesting activities in each forest? </h2></br></br>

<h1>What is the optimal conception of existing and potential new processing facilities, including mills?</h1></br></br>

<h2>Where are the in-state and out-of-state timber (lumber, pellets, paper, paperboard, energy, biomass) processing facilities?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are the significant barriers to and opportunities for developing supply chains related to conventional forestry products (e.g., firewood, posts, flooring, timber, vigas, etc.)?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What does each existing facility need to reach its capacity expansion goals?</h2></br></br>

<h2>How do existing mills fit into a regional strategy?</h2></br></br>

<h2>How do we coordinate processing capacity for optimal benefit?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What is the optimal size and location of new processing capacity for conventional products?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What other value streams can be nurtured to encompass a complete forest treatment-to-market approach, including new uses of biomass for energy and construction materials?</h2></br></br>

<h3>What are the significant barriers and opportunities associated with developing supply chains related to biomass energy, biochar, building materials, carbon markets, electricity, and other non-traditional uses of forest products?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How can biomass and other income streams improve the viability of mill operations?</h3></br></br>

<h2>What inbound freight, such as papermaking chemicals and animal feeds, exists for forestry and connected and parallel industries?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What new associated product manufacturing facilities are made viable by this coordinated forestry planning?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What new investments in existing or new technologies can be deployed in the region in the short- and long term? </h2></br></br>

<h2>Where should new processing facilities with new technologies and products be optimally located? </h2></br></br>

<h1>What forest materials need additional capacity to be met outside the region?</h1></br></br>

<h2>Where are the out-of-area wood processing facilities in the west?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are their capacities?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What new logistics solutions and capital are needed for this long-distance transportation?</h2></br></br>

<h1>What are the non-timber industry benefits of improved thinning and holistic forest management?</h1></br></br>

<h2>Reduces future fire risk and improves ecological function</h2></br></br>

<h2>Accommodates human access and enables ecological and watershed restoration</h2></br></br>

<h2>Improves balance between juniper and pinon pine for healthier ecosystems</h2></br></br>

<h2>Stabilizes the soil and restores the landscape</h2></br></br>

<h2>Increased downstream stream flow from forest thinning and fire recovery treatment mitigates drought and climate change and improves water access for agricultural producers</h2></br></br>

<h2>Improves wildlife habitat and diversity</h2></br></br>

<h2>Facilitates grazing and other traditional lifeways</h2></br></br>

<h2>Advances livelihoods consistent with local and Indigenous values</h2></br></br>

<h1>What community factors should be identified and weighed in decision-making?</h1></br></br>

<h2>What demographic and economic dynamics of nearby communities should inform the project, e.g., population demographics, primary industries, unemployment, and economic conditions?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What other related industries in the region should be considered in tandem with the forest products logistics strategy, e.g., mines, mills, oil, gas, renewables, agriculture, and manufacturing?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are the economic development goals of the local communities?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Which communities and residents should be included in evaluating and siting new facilities and infrastructure?</h2></br></br>

<h1>What governance and commercial innovations are needed to sustain this collaboration?</h1></br></br>

<h2>How do we best integrate local and Indigenous values into our process?</h2></br></br>

<h2>How can relations with and between local, state, and federal governments be improved?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What new governance arrangements need to be undertaken to create these improvements?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What corporate or coop structures are needed to reflect holistic, collaborative frameworks?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Who should be seated at the table, and how is it organized?</h2></br></br>

<h2>How do we fund whole communities and not just individuals, businesses, homes, and landowners?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What financial and logistical support is sensible to be funded by the state of New Mexico and the federal government?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Through what public-private partnership can the completion and implementation of the Action Plan be supported?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What do agencies need to enable them to share or devolve power or authority to non-governmental or collaborative entities?</h2></br></br>

<h2>What are state or federal entities' major fiduciary and statutory requirements? </h2></br></br>

<h2>What governance arrangements are needed to meet these state and federal requirements? </h2></br></br>

<h2>How do we address inurement prohibitions in organizational structures?</h2></br></br>

<h1>How do the financial elements of this forest-to-market solution add up to an economically viable, culturally informed, and environmentally-sound approach for everyone involved?</h1></br></br>

<h1>What are the needs and opportunities for investors in this Forest-to-Market Community Action Plan?</h1></br></br>

<h1>Who are the investors that want to make these investments?
</h1></br></br>

<h1>What questions are we asking specific stakeholder groups, and what have they contributed so far to the collective thinking?</h1></br></br>

<h2>Local and Indigenous peoples</h2></br></br>

<h3>How does forest and watershed renewal align with your values and lifeways?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What opportunities or threats do you see to your values and lifeways from our approach or the status quo?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How can newer, more efficient, diversified approaches to forestry further your values or interests?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How do threats from previous or potential wildfires impact your culture and lifeways?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What opportunities, threats, or disadvantages do you see from a regional forestry strategy</h3></br></br>

<h2>Landowners</h2></br></br>

<h3>Forest management</h3></br></br>

<h4>What are the primary land stewardship issues landowners face?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What quality of life goals do we want front and center in a regional forest-to-market approach?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What environmental concerns do we want to address in a regional forest-to-market approach? </h4></br></br>

<h4>What assistance is needed for relating to the state and federal government more effectively?</h4></br></br>

<h5>What are the issues in accessing state and federal funds?</h5></br></br>

<h5>What are the management plan challenges?</h5></br></br>

<h5>What are the issues in assessing loss?</h5></br></br>

<h5>What are the issues in implementing fire recovery approaches?</h5></br></br>

<h5>How can we relate most productively with The Enchanted Circle and other landscape cooperatives?</h5></br></br>

<h4>What is the status of each landowner’s forest management plan?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What is the total forestry harvesting volume needed to be done annually?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How much new labor is needed?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What are the opportunities to manage shared equipment?</h4></br></br>

<h5>Burn wagons</h5></br></br>

<h5>Firewood processing gear, Los Alamos</h5></br></br>

<h5>Trucks</h5></br></br>

<h4>What are the opportunities to establish collective forest treatment contracts?</h4></br></br>

<h4>Which log roads need maintenance?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How do we better integrate stewardship of public and private lands?</h4></br></br>

<h5>Let’s connect with the New Mexico State Lands Office</h5></br></br>

<h4>How can smaller landowners participate in this Action Plan?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How do we integrate federal recovery funding granted to individual landowners into a coherent strategy?</h4></br></br>

<h3>Market development</h3></br></br>

<h4>What challenges identifying contractors need to be addressed?</h4></br></br>

<h5>Bonding and legitimacy of payroll protocols render many small contractors ineligible for government funding</h5></br></br>

<h4>What challenges identifying markets for what materials need to be addressed? </h4></br></br>

<h4>Which forest material has proven to be easier to find contractors?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What issues with contractors need to be addressed?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What issues with processors need to be addressed?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What types and volumes of material need new local processing capacity?</h4></br></br>

<h4>Which forest material needs a costs-for-services agreement?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What innovations in wood-to-energy, wood-to-biochar, and wood-to-new products should be further evaluated?</h4></br></br>

<h4>Where should new milling capacity be established?</h4></br></br>

<h5>What are the implications/limitations of weather on the location choice?</h5></br></br>

<h6>Jonathan Grassmick suggested the benefit of a new mill in Eagles Nest but agreed that the Cimarron location is excellent, or Wagon Mound. </h6></br></br>

<h5>What are the implications of elevation and grade direction to the location choice?</h5></br></br>

<h5>What are the implications of the road network on the location choice?</h5></br></br>

<h4>What entity and organizational structure best supports this overall forest-to-market system?</h4></br></br>

<h5>What involvement of the large landowners should be considered?</h5></br></br>

<h6>Volume guarantees</h6></br></br>

<h6>Investment in facilities and infrastructure</h6></br></br>

<h6>Short-term advances against costs reimbursed by product supply</h6></br></br>

<h4>What concerns for privacy, confidentiality, and appropriate treatment of information need to be addressed within a collaborative planning process?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What education for landowners is needed?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How can we establish a fair and impartial process for timber valuation?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What elements would comprise a productive and fair regional forest material “exchange”?</h4></br></br>

<h3>Fire prevention and mitigation</h3></br></br>

<h4>How can prescribed fire be used productively and safely as a management strategy?</h4></br></br>

<h5>How is fear of fire handicapping our effectiveness?</h5></br></br>

<h5>How can we improve the process for obtaining burn and smoke permits?</h5></br></br>

<h5>How can we coordinate a regional fire management strategy?</h5></br></br>

<h6>How do each landowner’s priorities fit into the larger landscape approach?</h6></br></br>

<h4>How do we use geospatial information to guide fuel break locations and related strategies?</h4></br></br>

<h5>What are the optimal uses of fuel breaks within the overall forest management strategy?</h5></br></br>

<h5>What factors need to be incorporated into a fuel breaks strategy?</h5></br></br>

<h6>Where are the prevailing winds?</h6></br></br>

<h6>What is the optimal scale of prescribed burns?</h6></br></br>

What are the associated costs at various scales?</br></br>

<h4>Where are the optimal locations to focus forest thinning activities?</h4></br></br>

<h3>Burnt forest issues</h3></br></br>

<h4>What has to happen for soil and erosion control?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What can be done with the forest slash safely and viably?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What are the uses of burnt forest material?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What is needed to restore the roads?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What is needed to restore the acequias?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What is needed to restore the fences?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What is needed to restore the water system?</h4></br></br>

<h3>What are the trespass issues that need to be addressed?</h3></br></br>

<h4>ATV</h4></br></br>

<h4>Poaching for game</h4></br></br>

<h4>Taking firewood</h4></br></br>

<h4>Partying</h4></br></br>

<h4>Vandalism</h4></br></br>

<h3>What are the infrastructure elements of a forest-to-market system?</h3></br></br>

<h4>Harvesting services</h4></br></br>

<h4>Harvesting equipment</h4></br></br>

<h4>Trucking</h4></br></br>

<h4>Wood sorting yards</h4></br></br>

<h4>Mill and processing capacity</h4></br></br>

<h4>Capitalization</h4></br></br>

<h3>Questions for individual landowners</h3></br></br>

<h4>Is the high density of burned or unburned trees a severe challenge on your lands?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What concerns about how adjacent forests to your lands are being managed?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What harvesting activity are you doing now, and how? </h4></br></br>

<h4>What are your on-staff and available contracting capacity for forest harvesting?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How many acres would you treat if a viable approach were developed within this comprehensive forest-to-market strategy? </h4></br></br>

<h4>In what timeframe do you want to have this acreage treated?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How do you want to participate in the Action Plan development?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How do you want to participate in the Action Plan implementation?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What is your political influence, and what can we activate as a group?</h4></br></br>

<h4>Will you engage with OTNA to make a case for this Action Plan with decision-makers? </h4></br></br>

<h4>Will you contribute financially to this effort?</h4></br></br>

<h4>Will you agree to this participation agreement?</h4></br></br>

<h5>I promise to respond to the OTNA emails or phone messages within 48 hours or sooner when time is of the essence.</h5></br></br>

<h5>I promise to invest up to 1-2 hours a week when asked to read and write so that my input effectively contributes to this effort.</h5></br></br>

<h3>What else needs to be investigated?</h3></br></br>

<h4>Wood-fired boiler systems unused in:</h4></br></br>

<h5>Ft. Baird, outside of Silver City</h5></br></br>

<h5>Santa Fe Community College</h5></br></br>

<h5>The Jamez Schools </h5></br></br>

<h2>State and federal forestry staff</h2></br></br>

<h3>Administrative</h3></br></br>

<h4>What role do we want the OTNA to have in the “Timber Industry Task Force" or “Line of Effort”?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How does the wood products industry line tie into the Forest Service Planning Rule 2012? We just completed Forest Plans under this rule for Carson, Santa Fe, and Cibola NF. Please review those since that’s the basis for all site-specific project planning under NEPA and decisions. Or other collaborative or ecosystem planning efforts?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How do we most productively synch with other lines of effort?</h4></br></br>

<h4>Are the new Forest Plans completed in 2022 the best framing, or are there other legal guidelines we should be following? In essence - how do we best tie into your existing frameworks?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How do you suggest OTNA collaborate with other large landscape and community forest conservation efforts?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How does OTNA tie in with the 2020 New Mexico Forest Action Plan?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What funding or other support opportunities can we tie into, and how can state and federal agencies assist?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How do we assist state and federal agencies to attain funding and logistical support?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What misinformation is a challenge, what information do you need to spread, and how can we use our networks to inform and educate the public and decision-makers?</h4></br></br>

<h3> Current Efforts Assessment </h3></br></br>

<h4>How do we build upon and augment the legacy and ongoing collaborative landscape-scale forestry efforts already underway? </h4></br></br>

<h5>There needs to be a mapping of this, which already exists with the New Mexico Highland Institute. </h5></br></br>

<h4>Specifically, which programs do you suggest building on, and what models do you suggest we emulate among local initiatives and national programs? </h4></br></br>

<h5>This is addressed by the NM State Forest Action Plan, which was based on Shared Stewardship agreements with New Mexico. Much effort was expended in defining risks and priority areas/lands. The question is, how does this proposal build off the priorities and landscapes already defined?</h5></br></br>

<h4>What pitfalls should be avoided - what has worked and what has not?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What can we learn from the experience of the recent fire mitigation and recovery efforts going forward?</h4></br></br>

<h5>How can the NM Forestry Division and the U.S. Forest Service improve their collaboration toward shared goals? </h5></br></br>

<h4>What is the most appropriate balance between post-fire recovery and future fire mitigation?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What assessments of existing industry barriers and needs have already been completed, and when? </h4></br></br>

<h5>What was identified as needs at the recent NMFIA industry roundtable? </h5></br></br>

<h3>Private Land Coordination</h3></br></br>

<h4>How are private lands best integrated into these state and federal planning efforts?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How can progress on private lands assist the overall forest management and stewardship goals?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How can the USFS and NMFD assist in the stewardship of private lands? </h4></br></br>

<h4>How can we better synthesize public and private land stewardship?</h4></br></br>

<h2>Forestry industry leaders</h2></br></br>

<h3>How can we improve how federal agencies handle forest material?</h3></br></br>

<h4>Bid before harvesting so it can be cut to the right lengths</h4></br></br>

<h4>FEMA has no connection to forest companies and landowners, chopping material into 4-6’ pieces</h4></br></br>

<h3>How do we level the playing field between large national and local contractors? </h3></br></br>

<h3>How can we improve communications between the local forest industry and state and federal agencies?</h3></br></br>

<h4>New Mexico Forestry doesn’t go out and close the sales promptly on state and private lands</h4></br></br>

<h4>How do we establish communications between the USFS and the timber industry?</h4></br></br>

<h3>What federal policies concerning forest management need to be re-evaluated?</h3></br></br>

<h4>NEPA exception in devasted landscapes and Federal Disaster Zones</h4></br></br>

<h4>Archaeological sites are already known, and have typically already been damaged, Ralph</h4></br></br>

<h4>NEPA needs to be streamlined</h4></br></br>

<h4>1990 Roadless Act, Bill Clinton admin, requires using main roads only</h4></br></br>

<h5>Carson National Forest and the Bridge Road area had 100,000+ Latillas that could have been harvested, but for the closure of the roads</h5></br></br>

<h4>They need to take a whole forest management approach</h4></br></br>

<h4>The prohibition against salvage alongside forest treatment has to be removed</h4></br></br>

<h4>The federal agencies are involved in recreation, FEMA, fire recovery, environmental, and wildlife and aren’t coordinating</h4></br></br>

<h4>Take firefighting out of a measure for forest treatment, </h4></br></br>

<h4>Need equipment loans to cover operating capital, FSA loans are capped, stringent requirements, 150% collateral</h4></br></br>

<h3>How can we improve communications and understanding with the environmental community?</h3></br></br>

<h4>Recognize loggers as environmentalists.</h4></br></br>

<h3>How can we improve how landowners relate to forest treatment and your businesses?</h3></br></br>

<h4>Need to address small landowners’ burned trees near their homes</h4></br></br>

<h4>Communication and Education</h4></br></br>

<h4>Forest treatment for material contracts</h4></br></br>

<h4>Utilize the logging and mill owners to educate the landowners and others</h4></br></br>

<h4>Establish a pricing and material volume shared marketplace hub </h4></br></br>

<h3>What other challenges in doing your work do we want to address?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What capacity increases would you like to be capitalized for?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What shortcomings do you find in how banks relate to you?</h3></br></br>

<h4>There are no local banks that offer standard equipment financing </h4></br></br>

<h4>Need new low-interest/reasonable-interest equipment loan fund</h4></br></br>

<h4>Banks don’t understand the non-equipment capital needs</h4></br></br>

<h4>Need a new source of collateral and guarantee</h4></br></br>

<h4>Need a method for valuing wood inventory</h4></br></br>

<h4>Need to be considered an ag industry</h4></br></br>

<h3>In addition to capital, what else do you need to grow?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the opportunities to share and coordinate equipment across your businesses? </h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the opportunities to share and coordinate wood supply contacts and relationships across your businesses? </h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the opportunities to coordinate forest activity across your businesses?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What concerns about this cooperation do you want to make sure are addressed?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What are your other concerns about the current system, and how can it be improved to better assist you in expanding your work?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How can we address the need for more skilled labor, operators, and managers?</h3></br></br>

<h4>Environmentalists have to stop stigmatizing logging</h4></br></br>

<h4>Ponsse has a simulator in Northern Colorado</h4></br></br>

<h3>How can we address the need for additional employee housing? </h3></br></br>

<h3>How can state and federal financial and logistical support better serve your needs?</h3></br></br>

<h3>Based on what you understand about t, do you want to participate actively? That means 1-2 hours a week of reading Action Plan sections and writing your responses. </h3></br></br>

<h3>Based on what you understand about this initiative, do you want the state and federal governments to embrace and support the project?</h3></br></br>

<h2>For local public sector and community leaders</h2></br></br>

<h3>How have the recent fires impacted your community and your work?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What goals would your community want to see advanced from this forestry action plan?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What concerns do you want to ensure are addressed in this Action Plan?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What resource limits need to be addressed for this initiative to be successful? Potential issues include, but are not limited to:</h3></br></br>

<h4>Housing</h4></br></br>

<h4>Labor force</h4></br></br>

<h4>Road capacity</h4></br></br>

<h4>Transportation networks</h4></br></br>

<h4>More effective and relevant state and federal support</h4></br></br>

<h3>What adjustments to your current role or mission would enable you to focus more on long-term collective benefit?</h3></br></br>

<h2>For environmental groups</h2></br></br>

<h3>How do you define and conceive forest and watershed health?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How does forest and watershed health impact your work and programmatic mission?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How have the recent fires impacted your mission and operations?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the significant barriers to improving forest and watershed health?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the significant opportunities for improving forest and watershed health?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What concerns for the vitality of the environment, watersheds, and wildlife do you want to have a role in addressing within this forest-to-market strategy?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How can your organization support a positive view of forest workers as environmental stewards?</h3></br></br>

<h2>For foundations and philanthropists</h2></br></br>

<h3>What forest and watershed issues are the region’s most significant challenges?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How have the recent fires impacted your actions and role?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What needs are not being addressed under the current system?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What would help you make your work more effective?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What resources can you provide to this Initiative, and what questions and guidance do you have toward applying those resources?</h3></br></br>

<h2>For new technology developers</h2></br></br>

<h3>What is the technology that could be productively included in this Initiative?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the current status of your technology and its deployment?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What capital or support is needed to advance your technology?</h3></br></br>

<h2>These are general questions all stakeholders should answer.</h2></br></br>

<h3>What resources do you have in your control that may be helpful to this Initiative?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What resources do you know outside your control that you want to ensure we are aware of?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What resources do you want assistance accessing? </h3></br></br>

<h3>What is your vision for how the federal government, the state, and the region should relate to this Initiative?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How do you want to participate in this Initiative?</h3></br></br>

Formatter Testing

2024-09-23T17:26:35Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<h1>NOTE… View and use this Document in Outline format by clicking on View in the Menu bar above and then on Outline to the left in the Views section. Then use green arrows in the upper left to indent and outdent lines. Additions and comments are welcome to be returned to msussman@ontracknorthamerica.org
</h1></br>

<h1>New Mexico Sustainable Forestry Business Plan</h1></br>

<h2>This initiative, an OnTrackNorthAmerica project in conjunction with the U.S. Forest Service, powerfully aligns the work of agencies and businesses with local communities' needs, opportunities, and knowledge in addressing the impacts and causes of the massive 2022 Hermits Peak and Calf Canyon wildfires.</h2></br>

<h2>The following is the framework for an action plan—a living document of the community’s collective thinking for advancing the critical conversations and action required to succeed. </h2></br>

<h1>What is the initial objective of the business plan?</h1></br>

<h2>To integrate the ideas and needs of landowners, loggers, mill owners, transportation providers, and the public sector into a commercially viable plan for rapidly scaling up forest restoration, treatment, and processing. </h2></br>

<h1>What is the opportunity?</h1></br>

<h2>The income from multiple value streams can pay for clearing dead timber and thinning green wood, which, in turn, helps pay for forest and watershed restoration. </h2></br>

<h1>What is the next step?</h1></br>

<h2>Completing a “Community Forest-to-Market Action Plan” by April 30, 2023. </h2></br>

<h1>What will this Plan clarify? </h1></br>

<h2>What elements of a complete forest-to-market strategy add up to a viable short-term surge and a long-lasting approach to forest, watershed, and community recovery and renewal? </h2></br>

<h2>What governance and public engagement strategies are most effective for sustaining forest thinning and landscape and watershed recovery?</h2></br>

<h2>How can these strategies be integrated into a durable, holistic solution that positively influences the vitality of rural communities?</h2></br>

<h1>What are the components of the Action Plan?</h1></br>

<h2>Forest recovery and treatment plan</h2></br>

<h2>Optimal harvesting-to-processing plan for multiple value streams</h2></br>

<h2>Stakeholder roles and participation plan (who is doing what)</h2></br>

<h2>Transportation and logistics plan</h2></br>

<h2>Equipment plan</h2></br>

<h2>Month-by-month expense and revenue plan </h2></br>

<h2>Sustaining organization and governance design</h2></br>

<h1>What are the value streams to evaluate?</h1></br>

<h2>Cants</h2></br>

<h2>Lumber</h2></br>

<h2>Wood Pellets</h2></br>

<h2>Wood Chips</h2></br>

<h2>Mulch</h2></br>

<h2>Animal bedding/shavings</h2></br>

<h2>Compost</h2></br>

<h2>Firewood</h2></br>

<h2>Vigas</h2></br>

<h2>Specialty Wood Products</h2></br>

<h3>Flooring</h3></br>

<h3>Furniture</h3></br>

<h3>Fence posts</h3></br>

<h2>Treated Posts</h2></br>

<h2>Latillas (Wood stays)</h2></br>

<h2>OSB and other stranded material</h2></br>

<h3>Oriented strand board</h3></br>

<h3>Wood wool cement</h3></br>

<h3>Carbon fiber-reinforced plastics</h3></br>

<h2>Wood mass to biochar</h2></br>

<h2>Wood mass to energy</h2></br>

<h2>Secondary processing</h2></br>

<h2>Recreation</h2></br>

<h2>Ecosystem services</h2></br>

<h2>Agriculture</h2></br>

<h3>Grazing</h3></br>

<h3>Water supply</h3></br>

<h2>Fire mitigation</h2></br>

<h2>Carbon credits</h2></br>

<h2>Federal and state funding</h2></br>

<h1>Who currently provides forest products and services in the region, and what are their needs and capacities?</h1></br>

<h2>Landowners</h2></br>

<h2>Watershed associations</h2></br>

<h2>Forestry Industry</h2></br>

<h3>Loggers</h3></br>

<h3>Mills/processors</h3></br>

<h2>Trucking and transportation companies</h2></br>

<h2>Land Grants</h2></br>

<h2>Local and Indigenous Peoples</h2></br>

<h2>Local, state, and federal agencies</h2></br>

<h2>Landscape conservation collaboratives</h2></br>

<h2>Environmental entities</h2></br>

<h2>Consultants/experts</h2></br>

<h2>Foundations</h2></br>

<h2>Investors/lenders</h2></br>

<h2>Scientific and research organizations</h2></br>

<h1>Who wants to participate in these efforts to revive our forested landscapes?</h1></br>

<h1>What are the silvicultural prescriptions and feedstock volumes?</h1></br>

<h2>What is the current status of the state’s stand-based inventory?</h2></br>

<h2>What entity owns and manages each forest stand, i.e., federal, state, county, tribal, or private?</h2></br>

<h2>What types of trees and sizes, including species, age, health, stand structure, and photosynthetic activity?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the slopes and aspects (direction)?</h2></br>

<h2>What percentage of the forest is burned or likely to burn soon?</h2></br>

<h2>What is the current condition of the stand and its anticipated condition/deterioration over the coming months while harvesting activity can be scaled up?</h2></br>

<h2>What cultural, ecological, and hydrological values need to be addressed?</h2></br>

<h2>What is the current forest management plan for the entire forest, and is it up to date?</h2></br>

<h2>What is the current forest management plan for the stand, and is it up to date?</h2></br>

<h2>What activity is going on in each forest? What species are harvested? Who is currently harvesting each forest? How does each entity type approach its forestry management activities? Community or Indigenous values or resources?</h2></br>

<h2>Which stands are not being managed to meet the forest restoration goals, particularly overstocking?</h2></br>

<h2>Where is the forest composition relative to historic baseline conditions?</h2></br>

<h2>What was the historic range of variation, and how do we move closer to those conditions?</h2></br>

<h2>What is the silvicultural prescription?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the species, tree sizes, log volumes, and logging residues to be removed based on the silvicultural prescription?</h2></br>

<h2>What quantity and type of byproducts (e.g., forest slash) are generated at each forest? Are they shipped, and if so, where and how?</h2></br>

<h2>What quantity and type of waste products are generated at each forest, and how and where are they disposed of?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the most significant unmet opportunities?</h2></br>

<h2>What material and volumes from each stand need new market solutions?</h2></br>

<h2>Which entities are in the best position for conducting the harvesting activities in each forest, based on multiple factors, including:</h2></br>

<h3>Accessibility, as outlined below</h3></br>

<h1>How do the feedstock volumes add up at the regional level?</h1></br>

<h2>How does each stand relate to other stands in the region such that the aggregate regional volume of common material is identified?</h2></br>

<h1>What do recent forest fires mean to the temporal concerns of forestry? </h1></br>

<h2>How long do we have before burned wood has to be removed and used as timber?</h2></br>

<h2>How long do we have before burned wood has to be removed and used as biomass?</h2></br>

<h2>How does the urgency of ecological restoration demand our focused attention on optimizing existing service providers versus pulling in resources from across the nation?</h2></br>

<h2>What does the surge in harvesting mean for future supply and, therefore, commercial concerns now?</h2></br>

<h2>How can work on the urgent priority areas be done to serve the next set of priorities?</h2></br>

<h2>Is there a basis for installing “mobile” facilities, including new technology-focused ones, that can be moved to other forest regions?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the “Consequences of Delay”?</h2></br>

<h3>See Journal of Forestry, April/May 2004, by Dr. John Sessions et al. </h3></br>

<h2>What is the best treatment of ground cover in the aftermath of fires for the long-term vitality of forests, and how is this integrated into forestry operations?</h2></br>

<h2>How do we address high oak densities post-fire to accelerate recovery to later serial stages?</h2></br>

<h2>What changes in genetic or ecological composition are needed to anticipate climate change?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the best approaches to stump treatment?</h2></br>

<h2>Given shifting climates, what are the desired future conditions for our landscapes, watersheds, and communities?</h2></br>

<h1>How do in-forest logistics assets determine accessibility for harvesting?</h1></br>

<h2>What are the roads in each forest stand, and what entity owns and maintains those roads?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the legal guidelines for road use, construction, and maintenance?</h2></br>

<h2>What are these roads’ conditions, how has fire damaged them, and how are they vulnerable?</h2></br>

<h2>What work is needed on which roads for accessibility to treat forests? </h2></br>

<h2>What are the seasonal characteristics of these roads?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the characteristics of the critical infrastructure elements in the forest? What do we have? What’s missing?</h2></br>

<h2>Where are new roads and cleared land needed to render forest material removal viable? </h2></br>

<h2>Given the characteristics and regulations of the in-forest logistics, what percentage of the forest stands are physically accessible?</h2></br>

<h2>Which entities are in the best position to conduct the transportation activities from each forest? </h2></br>

<h1>What is the composition of the regional infrastructure for forest materials’ logistics? </h1></br>

<h2>What is the region’s publicly accessible road network?</h2></br>

<h2>What is the general condition of forest road access?</h2></br>

<h2>What are these area roads' weight, clearance, and safety restrictions? </h2></br>

<h2>Where are the existing railroad main lines, branch lines, spur lines, sidings, and loading infrastructure?</h2></br>

<h2>Where are the existing rail- and truck-served infrastructure assets for transload, distribution, and storage?</h2></br>

<h2>Who owns each facility and network section, and what services and capacities do they have?</h2></br>

<h2>What is the status of the rail line from Albuquerque to Raton?</h2></br>

<h3>Owned by BNSF</h3></br>

<h3>What level of sub-contract operator might BNSF agree to?</h3></br>

<h4>Anacostia & Pacific, Watco, Genesee &Wyoming, for example</h4></br>

<h3>Where does freight service currently begin down the line and up the line?</h3></br>

<h2>Where can new rail loading facilities enhance forestry operations and minimize transportation costs and impacts?</h2></br>

<h2>Are these new developments commercially viable, or do they need public subsidization?</h2></br>

<h1>What are the performance characteristics and costs of available equipment types for harvesting, in-forest logistics, and regional transportation?</h1></br>

<h2>What are the harvesting equipment choices?</h2></br>

<h3>See Miller Timber memo. </h3></br>

<h2>What are the transportation equipment choices?</h2></br>

<h3>What are the specifications of the trucks that can be utilized in each stand in support of each material-removal activity?</h3></br>

<h3>What transportation range can each vehicle type be viable?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the equipment costs for each vehicle type?</h3></br>

<h3>What is the status of diesel-alternative energy technology for each vehicle type?</h3></br>

<h1>What existing and new capacity is needed for short- and long-term harvesting?</h1></br>

<h2>Which entities are in the best position to conduct harvesting activities in each forest? </h2></br>

<h1>What is the optimal conception of existing and potential new processing facilities, including mills?</h1></br>

<h2>Where are the in-state and out-of-state timber (lumber, pellets, paper, paperboard, energy, biomass) processing facilities?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the significant barriers to and opportunities for developing supply chains related to conventional forestry products (e.g., firewood, posts, flooring, timber, vigas, etc.)?</h2></br>

<h2>What does each existing facility need to reach its capacity expansion goals?</h2></br>

<h2>How do existing mills fit into a regional strategy?</h2></br>

<h2>How do we coordinate processing capacity for optimal benefit?</h2></br>

<h2>What is the optimal size and location of new processing capacity for conventional products?</h2></br>

<h2>What other value streams can be nurtured to encompass a complete forest treatment-to-market approach, including new uses of biomass for energy and construction materials?</h2></br>

<h3>What are the significant barriers and opportunities associated with developing supply chains related to biomass energy, biochar, building materials, carbon markets, electricity, and other non-traditional uses of forest products?</h3></br>

<h3>How can biomass and other income streams improve the viability of mill operations?</h3></br>

<h2>What inbound freight, such as papermaking chemicals and animal feeds, exists for forestry and connected and parallel industries?</h2></br>

<h2>What new associated product manufacturing facilities are made viable by this coordinated forestry planning?</h2></br>

<h2>What new investments in existing or new technologies can be deployed in the region in the short- and long term? </h2></br>

<h2>Where should new processing facilities with new technologies and products be optimally located? </h2></br>

<h1>What forest materials need additional capacity to be met outside the region?</h1></br>

<h2>Where are the out-of-area wood processing facilities in the west?</h2></br>

<h2>What are their capacities?</h2></br>

<h2>What new logistics solutions and capital are needed for this long-distance transportation?</h2></br>

<h1>What are the non-timber industry benefits of improved thinning and holistic forest management?</h1></br>

<h2>Reduces future fire risk and improves ecological function</h2></br>

<h2>Accommodates human access and enables ecological and watershed restoration</h2></br>

<h2>Improves balance between juniper and pinon pine for healthier ecosystems</h2></br>

<h2>Stabilizes the soil and restores the landscape</h2></br>

<h2>Increased downstream stream flow from forest thinning and fire recovery treatment mitigates drought and climate change and improves water access for agricultural producers</h2></br>

<h2>Improves wildlife habitat and diversity</h2></br>

<h2>Facilitates grazing and other traditional lifeways</h2></br>

<h2>Advances livelihoods consistent with local and Indigenous values</h2></br>

<h1>What community factors should be identified and weighed in decision-making?</h1></br>

<h2>What demographic and economic dynamics of nearby communities should inform the project, e.g., population demographics, primary industries, unemployment, and economic conditions?</h2></br>

<h2>What other related industries in the region should be considered in tandem with the forest products logistics strategy, e.g., mines, mills, oil, gas, renewables, agriculture, and manufacturing?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the economic development goals of the local communities?</h2></br>

<h2>Which communities and residents should be included in evaluating and siting new facilities and infrastructure?</h2></br>

<h1>What governance and commercial innovations are needed to sustain this collaboration?</h1></br>

<h2>How do we best integrate local and Indigenous values into our process?</h2></br>

<h2>How can relations with and between local, state, and federal governments be improved?</h2></br>

<h2>What new governance arrangements need to be undertaken to create these improvements?</h2></br>

<h2>What corporate or coop structures are needed to reflect holistic, collaborative frameworks?</h2></br>

<h2>Who should be seated at the table, and how is it organized?</h2></br>

<h2>How do we fund whole communities and not just individuals, businesses, homes, and landowners?</h2></br>

<h2>What financial and logistical support is sensible to be funded by the state of New Mexico and the federal government?</h2></br>

<h2>Through what public-private partnership can the completion and implementation of the Action Plan be supported?</h2></br>

<h2>What do agencies need to enable them to share or devolve power or authority to non-governmental or collaborative entities?</h2></br>

<h2>What are state or federal entities' major fiduciary and statutory requirements? </h2></br>

<h2>What governance arrangements are needed to meet these state and federal requirements? </h2></br>

<h2>How do we address inurement prohibitions in organizational structures?</h2></br>

<h1>How do the financial elements of this forest-to-market solution add up to an economically viable, culturally informed, and environmentally-sound approach for everyone involved?</h1></br>

<h1>What are the needs and opportunities for investors in this Forest-to-Market Community Action Plan?</h1></br>

<h1>Who are the investors that want to make these investments?
</h1></br>

<h1>What questions are we asking specific stakeholder groups, and what have they contributed so far to the collective thinking?</h1></br>

<h2>Local and Indigenous peoples</h2></br>

<h3>How does forest and watershed renewal align with your values and lifeways?</h3></br>

<h3>What opportunities or threats do you see to your values and lifeways from our approach or the status quo?</h3></br>

<h3>How can newer, more efficient, diversified approaches to forestry further your values or interests?</h3></br>

<h3>How do threats from previous or potential wildfires impact your culture and lifeways?</h3></br>

<h3>What opportunities, threats, or disadvantages do you see from a regional forestry strategy</h3></br>

<h2>Landowners</h2></br>

<h3>Forest management</h3></br>

<h4>What are the primary land stewardship issues landowners face?</h4></br>

<h4>What quality of life goals do we want front and center in a regional forest-to-market approach?</h4></br>

<h4>What environmental concerns do we want to address in a regional forest-to-market approach? </h4></br>

<h4>What assistance is needed for relating to the state and federal government more effectively?</h4></br>

<h5>What are the issues in accessing state and federal funds?</h5></br>

<h5>What are the management plan challenges?</h5></br>

<h5>What are the issues in assessing loss?</h5></br>

<h5>What are the issues in implementing fire recovery approaches?</h5></br>

<h5>How can we relate most productively with The Enchanted Circle and other landscape cooperatives?</h5></br>

<h4>What is the status of each landowner’s forest management plan?</h4></br>

<h4>What is the total forestry harvesting volume needed to be done annually?</h4></br>

<h4>How much new labor is needed?</h4></br>

<h4>What are the opportunities to manage shared equipment?</h4></br>

<h5>Burn wagons</h5></br>

<h5>Firewood processing gear, Los Alamos</h5></br>

<h5>Trucks</h5></br>

<h4>What are the opportunities to establish collective forest treatment contracts?</h4></br>

<h4>Which log roads need maintenance?</h4></br>

<h4>How do we better integrate stewardship of public and private lands?</h4></br>

<h5>Let’s connect with the New Mexico State Lands Office</h5></br>

<h4>How can smaller landowners participate in this Action Plan?</h4></br>

<h4>How do we integrate federal recovery funding granted to individual landowners into a coherent strategy?</h4></br>

<h3>Market development</h3></br>

<h4>What challenges identifying contractors need to be addressed?</h4></br>

<h5>Bonding and legitimacy of payroll protocols render many small contractors ineligible for government funding</h5></br>

<h4>What challenges identifying markets for what materials need to be addressed? </h4></br>

<h4>Which forest material has proven to be easier to find contractors?</h4></br>

<h4>What issues with contractors need to be addressed?</h4></br>

<h4>What issues with processors need to be addressed?</h4></br>

<h4>What types and volumes of material need new local processing capacity?</h4></br>

<h4>Which forest material needs a costs-for-services agreement?</h4></br>

<h4>What innovations in wood-to-energy, wood-to-biochar, and wood-to-new products should be further evaluated?</h4></br>

<h4>Where should new milling capacity be established?</h4></br>

<h5>What are the implications/limitations of weather on the location choice?</h5></br>

<h6>Jonathan Grassmick suggested the benefit of a new mill in Eagles Nest but agreed that the Cimarron location is excellent, or Wagon Mound. </h6></br>

<h5>What are the implications of elevation and grade direction to the location choice?</h5></br>

<h5>What are the implications of the road network on the location choice?</h5></br>

<h4>What entity and organizational structure best supports this overall forest-to-market system?</h4></br>

<h5>What involvement of the large landowners should be considered?</h5></br>

<h6>Volume guarantees</h6></br>

<h6>Investment in facilities and infrastructure</h6></br>

<h6>Short-term advances against costs reimbursed by product supply</h6></br>

<h4>What concerns for privacy, confidentiality, and appropriate treatment of information need to be addressed within a collaborative planning process?</h4></br>

<h4>What education for landowners is needed?</h4></br>

<h4>How can we establish a fair and impartial process for timber valuation?</h4></br>

<h4>What elements would comprise a productive and fair regional forest material “exchange”?</h4></br>

<h3>Fire prevention and mitigation</h3></br>

<h4>How can prescribed fire be used productively and safely as a management strategy?</h4></br>

<h5>How is fear of fire handicapping our effectiveness?</h5></br>

<h5>How can we improve the process for obtaining burn and smoke permits?</h5></br>

<h5>How can we coordinate a regional fire management strategy?</h5></br>

<h6>How do each landowner’s priorities fit into the larger landscape approach?</h6></br>

<h4>How do we use geospatial information to guide fuel break locations and related strategies?</h4></br>

<h5>What are the optimal uses of fuel breaks within the overall forest management strategy?</h5></br>

<h5>What factors need to be incorporated into a fuel breaks strategy?</h5></br>

<h6>Where are the prevailing winds?</h6></br>

<h6>What is the optimal scale of prescribed burns?</h6></br>

What are the associated costs at various scales?</br>

<h4>Where are the optimal locations to focus forest thinning activities?</h4></br>

<h3>Burnt forest issues</h3></br>

<h4>What has to happen for soil and erosion control?</h4></br>

<h4>What can be done with the forest slash safely and viably?</h4></br>

<h4>What are the uses of burnt forest material?</h4></br>

<h4>What is needed to restore the roads?</h4></br>

<h4>What is needed to restore the acequias?</h4></br>

<h4>What is needed to restore the fences?</h4></br>

<h4>What is needed to restore the water system?</h4></br>

<h3>What are the trespass issues that need to be addressed?</h3></br>

<h4>ATV</h4></br>

<h4>Poaching for game</h4></br>

<h4>Taking firewood</h4></br>

<h4>Partying</h4></br>

<h4>Vandalism</h4></br>

<h3>What are the infrastructure elements of a forest-to-market system?</h3></br>

<h4>Harvesting services</h4></br>

<h4>Harvesting equipment</h4></br>

<h4>Trucking</h4></br>

<h4>Wood sorting yards</h4></br>

<h4>Mill and processing capacity</h4></br>

<h4>Capitalization</h4></br>

<h3>Questions for individual landowners</h3></br>

<h4>Is the high density of burned or unburned trees a severe challenge on your lands?</h4></br>

<h4>What concerns about how adjacent forests to your lands are being managed?</h4></br>

<h4>What harvesting activity are you doing now, and how? </h4></br>

<h4>What are your on-staff and available contracting capacity for forest harvesting?</h4></br>

<h4>How many acres would you treat if a viable approach were developed within this comprehensive forest-to-market strategy? </h4></br>

<h4>In what timeframe do you want to have this acreage treated?</h4></br>

<h4>How do you want to participate in the Action Plan development?</h4></br>

<h4>How do you want to participate in the Action Plan implementation?</h4></br>

<h4>What is your political influence, and what can we activate as a group?</h4></br>

<h4>Will you engage with OTNA to make a case for this Action Plan with decision-makers? </h4></br>

<h4>Will you contribute financially to this effort?</h4></br>

<h4>Will you agree to this participation agreement?</h4></br>

<h5>I promise to respond to the OTNA emails or phone messages within 48 hours or sooner when time is of the essence.</h5></br>

<h5>I promise to invest up to 1-2 hours a week when asked to read and write so that my input effectively contributes to this effort.</h5></br>

<h3>What else needs to be investigated?</h3></br>

<h4>Wood-fired boiler systems unused in:</h4></br>

<h5>Ft. Baird, outside of Silver City</h5></br>

<h5>Santa Fe Community College</h5></br>

<h5>The Jamez Schools </h5></br>

<h2>State and federal forestry staff</h2></br>

<h3>Administrative</h3></br>

<h4>What role do we want the OTNA to have in the “Timber Industry Task Force" or “Line of Effort”?</h4></br>

<h4>How does the wood products industry line tie into the Forest Service Planning Rule 2012? We just completed Forest Plans under this rule for Carson, Santa Fe, and Cibola NF. Please review those since that’s the basis for all site-specific project planning under NEPA and decisions. Or other collaborative or ecosystem planning efforts?</h4></br>

<h4>How do we most productively synch with other lines of effort?</h4></br>

<h4>Are the new Forest Plans completed in 2022 the best framing, or are there other legal guidelines we should be following? In essence - how do we best tie into your existing frameworks?</h4></br>

<h4>How do you suggest OTNA collaborate with other large landscape and community forest conservation efforts?</h4></br>

<h4>How does OTNA tie in with the 2020 New Mexico Forest Action Plan?</h4></br>

<h4>What funding or other support opportunities can we tie into, and how can state and federal agencies assist?</h4></br>

<h4>How do we assist state and federal agencies to attain funding and logistical support?</h4></br>

<h4>What misinformation is a challenge, what information do you need to spread, and how can we use our networks to inform and educate the public and decision-makers?</h4></br>

<h3> Current Efforts Assessment </h3></br>

<h4>How do we build upon and augment the legacy and ongoing collaborative landscape-scale forestry efforts already underway? </h4></br>

<h5>There needs to be a mapping of this, which already exists with the New Mexico Highland Institute. </h5></br>

<h4>Specifically, which programs do you suggest building on, and what models do you suggest we emulate among local initiatives and national programs? </h4></br>

<h5>This is addressed by the NM State Forest Action Plan, which was based on Shared Stewardship agreements with New Mexico. Much effort was expended in defining risks and priority areas/lands. The question is, how does this proposal build off the priorities and landscapes already defined?</h5></br>

<h4>What pitfalls should be avoided - what has worked and what has not?</h4></br>

<h4>What can we learn from the experience of the recent fire mitigation and recovery efforts going forward?</h4></br>

<h5>How can the NM Forestry Division and the U.S. Forest Service improve their collaboration toward shared goals? </h5></br>

<h4>What is the most appropriate balance between post-fire recovery and future fire mitigation?</h4></br>

<h4>What assessments of existing industry barriers and needs have already been completed, and when? </h4></br>

<h5>What was identified as needs at the recent NMFIA industry roundtable? </h5></br>

<h3>Private Land Coordination</h3></br>

<h4>How are private lands best integrated into these state and federal planning efforts?</h4></br>

<h4>How can progress on private lands assist the overall forest management and stewardship goals?</h4></br>

<h4>How can the USFS and NMFD assist in the stewardship of private lands? </h4></br>

<h4>How can we better synthesize public and private land stewardship?</h4></br>

<h2>Forestry industry leaders</h2></br>

<h3>How can we improve how federal agencies handle forest material?</h3></br>

<h4>Bid before harvesting so it can be cut to the right lengths</h4></br>

<h4>FEMA has no connection to forest companies and landowners, chopping material into 4-6’ pieces</h4></br>

<h3>How do we level the playing field between large national and local contractors? </h3></br>

<h3>How can we improve communications between the local forest industry and state and federal agencies?</h3></br>

<h4>New Mexico Forestry doesn’t go out and close the sales promptly on state and private lands</h4></br>

<h4>How do we establish communications between the USFS and the timber industry?</h4></br>

<h3>What federal policies concerning forest management need to be re-evaluated?</h3></br>

<h4>NEPA exception in devasted landscapes and Federal Disaster Zones</h4></br>

<h4>Archaeological sites are already known, and have typically already been damaged, Ralph</h4></br>

<h4>NEPA needs to be streamlined</h4></br>

<h4>1990 Roadless Act, Bill Clinton admin, requires using main roads only</h4></br>

<h5>Carson National Forest and the Bridge Road area had 100,000+ Latillas that could have been harvested, but for the closure of the roads</h5></br>

<h4>They need to take a whole forest management approach</h4></br>

<h4>The prohibition against salvage alongside forest treatment has to be removed</h4></br>

<h4>The federal agencies are involved in recreation, FEMA, fire recovery, environmental, and wildlife and aren’t coordinating</h4></br>

<h4>Take firefighting out of a measure for forest treatment, </h4></br>

<h4>Need equipment loans to cover operating capital, FSA loans are capped, stringent requirements, 150% collateral</h4></br>

<h3>How can we improve communications and understanding with the environmental community?</h3></br>

<h4>Recognize loggers as environmentalists.</h4></br>

<h3>How can we improve how landowners relate to forest treatment and your businesses?</h3></br>

<h4>Need to address small landowners’ burned trees near their homes</h4></br>

<h4>Communication and Education</h4></br>

<h4>Forest treatment for material contracts</h4></br>

<h4>Utilize the logging and mill owners to educate the landowners and others</h4></br>

<h4>Establish a pricing and material volume shared marketplace hub </h4></br>

<h3>What other challenges in doing your work do we want to address?</h3></br>

<h3>What capacity increases would you like to be capitalized for?</h3></br>

<h3>What shortcomings do you find in how banks relate to you?</h3></br>

<h4>There are no local banks that offer standard equipment financing </h4></br>

<h4>Need new low-interest/reasonable-interest equipment loan fund</h4></br>

<h4>Banks don’t understand the non-equipment capital needs</h4></br>

<h4>Need a new source of collateral and guarantee</h4></br>

<h4>Need a method for valuing wood inventory</h4></br>

<h4>Need to be considered an ag industry</h4></br>

<h3>In addition to capital, what else do you need to grow?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the opportunities to share and coordinate equipment across your businesses? </h3></br>

<h3>What are the opportunities to share and coordinate wood supply contacts and relationships across your businesses? </h3></br>

<h3>What are the opportunities to coordinate forest activity across your businesses?</h3></br>

<h3>What concerns about this cooperation do you want to make sure are addressed?</h3></br>

<h3>What are your other concerns about the current system, and how can it be improved to better assist you in expanding your work?</h3></br>

<h3>How can we address the need for more skilled labor, operators, and managers?</h3></br>

<h4>Environmentalists have to stop stigmatizing logging</h4></br>

<h4>Ponsse has a simulator in Northern Colorado</h4></br>

<h3>How can we address the need for additional employee housing? </h3></br>

<h3>How can state and federal financial and logistical support better serve your needs?</h3></br>

<h3>Based on what you understand about t, do you want to participate actively? That means 1-2 hours a week of reading Action Plan sections and writing your responses. </h3></br>

<h3>Based on what you understand about this initiative, do you want the state and federal governments to embrace and support the project?</h3></br>

<h2>For local public sector and community leaders</h2></br>

<h3>How have the recent fires impacted your community and your work?</h3></br>

<h3>What goals would your community want to see advanced from this forestry action plan?</h3></br>

<h3>What concerns do you want to ensure are addressed in this Action Plan?</h3></br>

<h3>What resource limits need to be addressed for this initiative to be successful? Potential issues include, but are not limited to:</h3></br>

<h4>Housing</h4></br>

<h4>Labor force</h4></br>

<h4>Road capacity</h4></br>

<h4>Transportation networks</h4></br>

<h4>More effective and relevant state and federal support</h4></br>

<h3>What adjustments to your current role or mission would enable you to focus more on long-term collective benefit?</h3></br>

<h2>For environmental groups</h2></br>

<h3>How do you define and conceive forest and watershed health?</h3></br>

<h3>How does forest and watershed health impact your work and programmatic mission?</h3></br>

<h3>How have the recent fires impacted your mission and operations?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the significant barriers to improving forest and watershed health?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the significant opportunities for improving forest and watershed health?</h3></br>

<h3>What concerns for the vitality of the environment, watersheds, and wildlife do you want to have a role in addressing within this forest-to-market strategy?</h3></br>

<h3>How can your organization support a positive view of forest workers as environmental stewards?</h3></br>

<h2>For foundations and philanthropists</h2></br>

<h3>What forest and watershed issues are the region’s most significant challenges?</h3></br>

<h3>How have the recent fires impacted your actions and role?</h3></br>

<h3>What needs are not being addressed under the current system?</h3></br>

<h3>What would help you make your work more effective?</h3></br>

<h3>What resources can you provide to this Initiative, and what questions and guidance do you have toward applying those resources?</h3></br>

<h2>For new technology developers</h2></br>

<h3>What is the technology that could be productively included in this Initiative?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the current status of your technology and its deployment?</h3></br>

<h3>What capital or support is needed to advance your technology?</h3></br>

<h2>These are general questions all stakeholders should answer.</h2></br>

<h3>What resources do you have in your control that may be helpful to this Initiative?</h3></br>

<h3>What resources do you know outside your control that you want to ensure we are aware of?</h3></br>

<h3>What resources do you want assistance accessing? </h3></br>

<h3>What is your vision for how the federal government, the state, and the region should relate to this Initiative?</h3></br>

<h3>How do you want to participate in this Initiative?</h3></br>

Formatter Testing

2024-09-23T17:25:11Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

Formatter Testing

2024-09-23T17:25:01Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<h1>NOTE… View and use this Document in Outline format by clicking on View in the Menu bar above and then on Outline to the left in the Views section. Then use green arrows in the upper left to indent and outdent lines. Additions and comments are welcome to be returned to msussman@ontracknorthamerica.org
</h1></br>

<h1>New Mexico Sustainable Forestry Business Plan</h1></br>

<h2>This initiative, an OnTrackNorthAmerica project in conjunction with the U.S. Forest Service, powerfully aligns the work of agencies and businesses with local communities' needs, opportunities, and knowledge in addressing the impacts and causes of the massive 2022 Hermits Peak and Calf Canyon wildfires.</h2></br>

<h2>The following is the framework for an action plan—a living document of the community’s collective thinking for advancing the critical conversations and action required to succeed. </h2></br>

<h1>What is the initial objective of the business plan?</h1></br>

<h2>To integrate the ideas and needs of landowners, loggers, mill owners, transportation providers, and the public sector into a commercially viable plan for rapidly scaling up forest restoration, treatment, and processing. </h2></br>

<h1>What is the opportunity?</h1></br>

<h2>The income from multiple value streams can pay for clearing dead timber and thinning green wood, which, in turn, helps pay for forest and watershed restoration. </h2></br>

<h1>What is the next step?</h1></br>

<h2>Completing a “Community Forest-to-Market Action Plan” by April 30, 2023. </h2></br>

<h1>What will this Plan clarify? </h1></br>

<h2>What elements of a complete forest-to-market strategy add up to a viable short-term surge and a long-lasting approach to forest, watershed, and community recovery and renewal? </h2></br>

<h2>What governance and public engagement strategies are most effective for sustaining forest thinning and landscape and watershed recovery?</h2></br>

<h2>How can these strategies be integrated into a durable, holistic solution that positively influences the vitality of rural communities?</h2></br>

<h1>What are the components of the Action Plan?</h1></br>

<h2>Forest recovery and treatment plan</h2></br>

<h2>Optimal harvesting-to-processing plan for multiple value streams</h2></br>

<h2>Stakeholder roles and participation plan (who is doing what)</h2></br>

<h2>Transportation and logistics plan</h2></br>

<h2>Equipment plan</h2></br>

<h2>Month-by-month expense and revenue plan </h2></br>

<h2>Sustaining organization and governance design</h2></br>

<h1>What are the value streams to evaluate?</h1></br>

<h2>Cants</h2></br>

<h2>Lumber</h2></br>

<h2>Wood Pellets</h2></br>

<h2>Wood Chips</h2></br>

<h2>Mulch</h2></br>

<h2>Animal bedding/shavings</h2></br>

<h2>Compost</h2></br>

<h2>Firewood</h2></br>

<h2>Vigas</h2></br>

<h2>Specialty Wood Products</h2></br>

<h3>Flooring</h3></br>

<h3>Furniture</h3></br>

<h3>Fence posts</h3></br>

<h2>Treated Posts</h2></br>

<h2>Latillas (Wood stays)</h2></br>

<h2>OSB and other stranded material</h2></br>

<h3>Oriented strand board</h3></br>

<h3>Wood wool cement</h3></br>

<h3>Carbon fiber-reinforced plastics</h3></br>

<h2>Wood mass to biochar</h2></br>

<h2>Wood mass to energy</h2></br>

<h2>Secondary processing</h2></br>

<h2>Recreation</h2></br>

<h2>Ecosystem services</h2></br>

<h2>Agriculture</h2></br>

<h3>Grazing</h3></br>

<h3>Water supply</h3></br>

<h2>Fire mitigation</h2></br>

<h2>Carbon credits</h2></br>

<h2>Federal and state funding</h2></br>

<h1>Who currently provides forest products and services in the region, and what are their needs and capacities?</h1></br>

<h2>Landowners</h2></br>

<h2>Watershed associations</h2></br>

<h2>Forestry Industry</h2></br>

<h3>Loggers</h3></br>

<h3>Mills/processors</h3></br>

<h2>Trucking and transportation companies</h2></br>

<h2>Land Grants</h2></br>

<h2>Local and Indigenous Peoples</h2></br>

<h2>Local, state, and federal agencies</h2></br>

<h2>Landscape conservation collaboratives</h2></br>

<h2>Environmental entities</h2></br>

<h2>Consultants/experts</h2></br>

<h2>Foundations</h2></br>

<h2>Investors/lenders</h2></br>

<h2>Scientific and research organizations</h2></br>

<h1>Who wants to participate in these efforts to revive our forested landscapes?</h1></br>

<h1>What are the silvicultural prescriptions and feedstock volumes?</h1></br>

<h2>What is the current status of the state’s stand-based inventory?</h2></br>

<h2>What entity owns and manages each forest stand, i.e., federal, state, county, tribal, or private?</h2></br>

<h2>What types of trees and sizes, including species, age, health, stand structure, and photosynthetic activity?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the slopes and aspects (direction)?</h2></br>

<h2>What percentage of the forest is burned or likely to burn soon?</h2></br>

<h2>What is the current condition of the stand and its anticipated condition/deterioration over the coming months while harvesting activity can be scaled up?</h2></br>

<h2>What cultural, ecological, and hydrological values need to be addressed?</h2></br>

<h2>What is the current forest management plan for the entire forest, and is it up to date?</h2></br>

<h2>What is the current forest management plan for the stand, and is it up to date?</h2></br>

<h2>What activity is going on in each forest? What species are harvested? Who is currently harvesting each forest? How does each entity type approach its forestry management activities? Community or Indigenous values or resources?</h2></br>

<h2>Which stands are not being managed to meet the forest restoration goals, particularly overstocking?</h2></br>

<h2>Where is the forest composition relative to historic baseline conditions?</h2></br>

<h2>What was the historic range of variation, and how do we move closer to those conditions?</h2></br>

<h2>What is the silvicultural prescription?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the species, tree sizes, log volumes, and logging residues to be removed based on the silvicultural prescription?</h2></br>

<h2>What quantity and type of byproducts (e.g., forest slash) are generated at each forest? Are they shipped, and if so, where and how?</h2></br>

<h2>What quantity and type of waste products are generated at each forest, and how and where are they disposed of?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the most significant unmet opportunities?</h2></br>

<h2>What material and volumes from each stand need new market solutions?</h2></br>

<h2>Which entities are in the best position for conducting the harvesting activities in each forest, based on multiple factors, including:</h2></br>

<h3>Accessibility, as outlined below</h3></br>

<h1>How do the feedstock volumes add up at the regional level?</h1></br>

<h2>How does each stand relate to other stands in the region such that the aggregate regional volume of common material is identified?</h2></br>

<h1>What do recent forest fires mean to the temporal concerns of forestry? </h1></br>

<h2>How long do we have before burned wood has to be removed and used as timber?</h2></br>

<h2>How long do we have before burned wood has to be removed and used as biomass?</h2></br>

<h2>How does the urgency of ecological restoration demand our focused attention on optimizing existing service providers versus pulling in resources from across the nation?</h2></br>

<h2>What does the surge in harvesting mean for future supply and, therefore, commercial concerns now?</h2></br>

<h2>How can work on the urgent priority areas be done to serve the next set of priorities?</h2></br>

<h2>Is there a basis for installing “mobile” facilities, including new technology-focused ones, that can be moved to other forest regions?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the “Consequences of Delay”?</h2></br>

<h3>See Journal of Forestry, April/May 2004, by Dr. John Sessions et al. </h3></br>

<h2>What is the best treatment of ground cover in the aftermath of fires for the long-term vitality of forests, and how is this integrated into forestry operations?</h2></br>

<h2>How do we address high oak densities post-fire to accelerate recovery to later serial stages?</h2></br>

<h2>What changes in genetic or ecological composition are needed to anticipate climate change?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the best approaches to stump treatment?</h2></br>

<h2>Given shifting climates, what are the desired future conditions for our landscapes, watersheds, and communities?</h2></br>

<h1>How do in-forest logistics assets determine accessibility for harvesting?</h1></br>

<h2>What are the roads in each forest stand, and what entity owns and maintains those roads?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the legal guidelines for road use, construction, and maintenance?</h2></br>

<h2>What are these roads’ conditions, how has fire damaged them, and how are they vulnerable?</h2></br>

<h2>What work is needed on which roads for accessibility to treat forests? </h2></br>

<h2>What are the seasonal characteristics of these roads?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the characteristics of the critical infrastructure elements in the forest? What do we have? What’s missing?</h2></br>

<h2>Where are new roads and cleared land needed to render forest material removal viable? </h2></br>

<h2>Given the characteristics and regulations of the in-forest logistics, what percentage of the forest stands are physically accessible?</h2></br>

<h2>Which entities are in the best position to conduct the transportation activities from each forest? </h2></br>

<h1>What is the composition of the regional infrastructure for forest materials’ logistics? </h1></br>

<h2>What is the region’s publicly accessible road network?</h2></br>

<h2>What is the general condition of forest road access?</h2></br>

<h2>What are these area roads' weight, clearance, and safety restrictions? </h2></br>

<h2>Where are the existing railroad main lines, branch lines, spur lines, sidings, and loading infrastructure?</h2></br>

<h2>Where are the existing rail- and truck-served infrastructure assets for transload, distribution, and storage?</h2></br>

<h2>Who owns each facility and network section, and what services and capacities do they have?</h2></br>

<h2>What is the status of the rail line from Albuquerque to Raton?</h2></br>

<h3>Owned by BNSF</h3></br>

<h3>What level of sub-contract operator might BNSF agree to?</h3></br>

<h4>Anacostia & Pacific, Watco, Genesee &Wyoming, for example</h4></br>

<h3>Where does freight service currently begin down the line and up the line?</h3></br>

<h2>Where can new rail loading facilities enhance forestry operations and minimize transportation costs and impacts?</h2></br>

<h2>Are these new developments commercially viable, or do they need public subsidization?</h2></br>

<h1>What are the performance characteristics and costs of available equipment types for harvesting, in-forest logistics, and regional transportation?</h1></br>

<h2>What are the harvesting equipment choices?</h2></br>

<h3>See Miller Timber memo. </h3></br>

<h2>What are the transportation equipment choices?</h2></br>

<h3>What are the specifications of the trucks that can be utilized in each stand in support of each material-removal activity?</h3></br>

<h3>What transportation range can each vehicle type be viable?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the equipment costs for each vehicle type?</h3></br>

<h3>What is the status of diesel-alternative energy technology for each vehicle type?</h3></br>

<h1>What existing and new capacity is needed for short- and long-term harvesting?</h1></br>

<h2>Which entities are in the best position to conduct harvesting activities in each forest? </h2></br>

<h1>What is the optimal conception of existing and potential new processing facilities, including mills?</h1></br>

<h2>Where are the in-state and out-of-state timber (lumber, pellets, paper, paperboard, energy, biomass) processing facilities?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the significant barriers to and opportunities for developing supply chains related to conventional forestry products (e.g., firewood, posts, flooring, timber, vigas, etc.)?</h2></br>

<h2>What does each existing facility need to reach its capacity expansion goals?</h2></br>

<h2>How do existing mills fit into a regional strategy?</h2></br>

<h2>How do we coordinate processing capacity for optimal benefit?</h2></br>

<h2>What is the optimal size and location of new processing capacity for conventional products?</h2></br>

<h2>What other value streams can be nurtured to encompass a complete forest treatment-to-market approach, including new uses of biomass for energy and construction materials?</h2></br>

<h3>What are the significant barriers and opportunities associated with developing supply chains related to biomass energy, biochar, building materials, carbon markets, electricity, and other non-traditional uses of forest products?</h3></br>

<h3>How can biomass and other income streams improve the viability of mill operations?</h3></br>

<h2>What inbound freight, such as papermaking chemicals and animal feeds, exists for forestry and connected and parallel industries?</h2></br>

<h2>What new associated product manufacturing facilities are made viable by this coordinated forestry planning?</h2></br>

<h2>What new investments in existing or new technologies can be deployed in the region in the short- and long term? </h2></br>

<h2>Where should new processing facilities with new technologies and products be optimally located? </h2></br>

<h1>What forest materials need additional capacity to be met outside the region?</h1></br>

<h2>Where are the out-of-area wood processing facilities in the west?</h2></br>

<h2>What are their capacities?</h2></br>

<h2>What new logistics solutions and capital are needed for this long-distance transportation?</h2></br>

<h1>What are the non-timber industry benefits of improved thinning and holistic forest management?</h1></br>

<h2>Reduces future fire risk and improves ecological function</h2></br>

<h2>Accommodates human access and enables ecological and watershed restoration</h2></br>

<h2>Improves balance between juniper and pinon pine for healthier ecosystems</h2></br>

<h2>Stabilizes the soil and restores the landscape</h2></br>

<h2>Increased downstream stream flow from forest thinning and fire recovery treatment mitigates drought and climate change and improves water access for agricultural producers</h2></br>

<h2>Improves wildlife habitat and diversity</h2></br>

<h2>Facilitates grazing and other traditional lifeways</h2></br>

<h2>Advances livelihoods consistent with local and Indigenous values</h2></br>

<h1>What community factors should be identified and weighed in decision-making?</h1></br>

<h2>What demographic and economic dynamics of nearby communities should inform the project, e.g., population demographics, primary industries, unemployment, and economic conditions?</h2></br>

<h2>What other related industries in the region should be considered in tandem with the forest products logistics strategy, e.g., mines, mills, oil, gas, renewables, agriculture, and manufacturing?</h2></br>

<h2>What are the economic development goals of the local communities?</h2></br>

<h2>Which communities and residents should be included in evaluating and siting new facilities and infrastructure?</h2></br>

<h1>What governance and commercial innovations are needed to sustain this collaboration?</h1></br>

<h2>How do we best integrate local and Indigenous values into our process?</h2></br>

<h2>How can relations with and between local, state, and federal governments be improved?</h2></br>

<h2>What new governance arrangements need to be undertaken to create these improvements?</h2></br>

<h2>What corporate or coop structures are needed to reflect holistic, collaborative frameworks?</h2></br>

<h2>Who should be seated at the table, and how is it organized?</h2></br>

<h2>How do we fund whole communities and not just individuals, businesses, homes, and landowners?</h2></br>

<h2>What financial and logistical support is sensible to be funded by the state of New Mexico and the federal government?</h2></br>

<h2>Through what public-private partnership can the completion and implementation of the Action Plan be supported?</h2></br>

<h2>What do agencies need to enable them to share or devolve power or authority to non-governmental or collaborative entities?</h2></br>

<h2>What are state or federal entities' major fiduciary and statutory requirements? </h2></br>

<h2>What governance arrangements are needed to meet these state and federal requirements? </h2></br>

<h2>How do we address inurement prohibitions in organizational structures?</h2></br>

<h1>How do the financial elements of this forest-to-market solution add up to an economically viable, culturally informed, and environmentally-sound approach for everyone involved?</h1></br>

<h1>What are the needs and opportunities for investors in this Forest-to-Market Community Action Plan?</h1></br>

<h1>Who are the investors that want to make these investments?
</h1></br>

<h1>What questions are we asking specific stakeholder groups, and what have they contributed so far to the collective thinking?</h1></br>

<h2>Local and Indigenous peoples</h2></br>

<h3>How does forest and watershed renewal align with your values and lifeways?</h3></br>

<h3>What opportunities or threats do you see to your values and lifeways from our approach or the status quo?</h3></br>

<h3>How can newer, more efficient, diversified approaches to forestry further your values or interests?</h3></br>

<h3>How do threats from previous or potential wildfires impact your culture and lifeways?</h3></br>

<h3>What opportunities, threats, or disadvantages do you see from a regional forestry strategy</h3></br>

<h2>Landowners</h2></br>

<h3>Forest management</h3></br>

<h4>What are the primary land stewardship issues landowners face?</h4></br>

<h4>What quality of life goals do we want front and center in a regional forest-to-market approach?</h4></br>

<h4>What environmental concerns do we want to address in a regional forest-to-market approach? </h4></br>

<h4>What assistance is needed for relating to the state and federal government more effectively?</h4></br>

<h5>What are the issues in accessing state and federal funds?</h5></br>

<h5>What are the management plan challenges?</h5></br>

<h5>What are the issues in assessing loss?</h5></br>

<h5>What are the issues in implementing fire recovery approaches?</h5></br>

<h5>How can we relate most productively with The Enchanted Circle and other landscape cooperatives?</h5></br>

<h4>What is the status of each landowner’s forest management plan?</h4></br>

<h4>What is the total forestry harvesting volume needed to be done annually?</h4></br>

<h4>How much new labor is needed?</h4></br>

<h4>What are the opportunities to manage shared equipment?</h4></br>

<h5>Burn wagons</h5></br>

<h5>Firewood processing gear, Los Alamos</h5></br>

<h5>Trucks</h5></br>

<h4>What are the opportunities to establish collective forest treatment contracts?</h4></br>

<h4>Which log roads need maintenance?</h4></br>

<h4>How do we better integrate stewardship of public and private lands?</h4></br>

<h5>Let’s connect with the New Mexico State Lands Office</h5></br>

<h4>How can smaller landowners participate in this Action Plan?</h4></br>

<h4>How do we integrate federal recovery funding granted to individual landowners into a coherent strategy?</h4></br>

<h3>Market development</h3></br>

<h4>What challenges identifying contractors need to be addressed?</h4></br>

<h5>Bonding and legitimacy of payroll protocols render many small contractors ineligible for government funding</h5></br>

<h4>What challenges identifying markets for what materials need to be addressed? </h4></br>

<h4>Which forest material has proven to be easier to find contractors?</h4></br>

<h4>What issues with contractors need to be addressed?</h4></br>

<h4>What issues with processors need to be addressed?</h4></br>

<h4>What types and volumes of material need new local processing capacity?</h4></br>

<h4>Which forest material needs a costs-for-services agreement?</h4></br>

<h4>What innovations in wood-to-energy, wood-to-biochar, and wood-to-new products should be further evaluated?</h4></br>

<h4>Where should new milling capacity be established?</h4></br>

<h5>What are the implications/limitations of weather on the location choice?</h5></br>

<h6>Jonathan Grassmick suggested the benefit of a new mill in Eagles Nest but agreed that the Cimarron location is excellent, or Wagon Mound. </h6></br>

<h5>What are the implications of elevation and grade direction to the location choice?</h5></br>

<h5>What are the implications of the road network on the location choice?</h5></br>

<h4>What entity and organizational structure best supports this overall forest-to-market system?</h4></br>

<h5>What involvement of the large landowners should be considered?</h5></br>

<h6>Volume guarantees</h6></br>

<h6>Investment in facilities and infrastructure</h6></br>

<h6>Short-term advances against costs reimbursed by product supply</h6></br>

<h4>What concerns for privacy, confidentiality, and appropriate treatment of information need to be addressed within a collaborative planning process?</h4></br>

<h4>What education for landowners is needed?</h4></br>

<h4>How can we establish a fair and impartial process for timber valuation?</h4></br>

<h4>What elements would comprise a productive and fair regional forest material “exchange”?</h4></br>

<h3>Fire prevention and mitigation</h3></br>

<h4>How can prescribed fire be used productively and safely as a management strategy?</h4></br>

<h5>How is fear of fire handicapping our effectiveness?</h5></br>

<h5>How can we improve the process for obtaining burn and smoke permits?</h5></br>

<h5>How can we coordinate a regional fire management strategy?</h5></br>

<h6>How do each landowner’s priorities fit into the larger landscape approach?</h6></br>

<h4>How do we use geospatial information to guide fuel break locations and related strategies?</h4></br>

<h5>What are the optimal uses of fuel breaks within the overall forest management strategy?</h5></br>

<h5>What factors need to be incorporated into a fuel breaks strategy?</h5></br>

<h6>Where are the prevailing winds?</h6></br>

<h6>What is the optimal scale of prescribed burns?</h6></br>

What are the associated costs at various scales?</br>

<h4>Where are the optimal locations to focus forest thinning activities?</h4></br>

<h3>Burnt forest issues</h3></br>

<h4>What has to happen for soil and erosion control?</h4></br>

<h4>What can be done with the forest slash safely and viably?</h4></br>

<h4>What are the uses of burnt forest material?</h4></br>

<h4>What is needed to restore the roads?</h4></br>

<h4>What is needed to restore the acequias?</h4></br>

<h4>What is needed to restore the fences?</h4></br>

<h4>What is needed to restore the water system?</h4></br>

<h3>What are the trespass issues that need to be addressed?</h3></br>

<h4>ATV</h4></br>

<h4>Poaching for game</h4></br>

<h4>Taking firewood</h4></br>

<h4>Partying</h4></br>

<h4>Vandalism</h4></br>

<h3>What are the infrastructure elements of a forest-to-market system?</h3></br>

<h4>Harvesting services</h4></br>

<h4>Harvesting equipment</h4></br>

<h4>Trucking</h4></br>

<h4>Wood sorting yards</h4></br>

<h4>Mill and processing capacity</h4></br>

<h4>Capitalization</h4></br>

<h3>Questions for individual landowners</h3></br>

<h4>Is the high density of burned or unburned trees a severe challenge on your lands?</h4></br>

<h4>What concerns about how adjacent forests to your lands are being managed?</h4></br>

<h4>What harvesting activity are you doing now, and how? </h4></br>

<h4>What are your on-staff and available contracting capacity for forest harvesting?</h4></br>

<h4>How many acres would you treat if a viable approach were developed within this comprehensive forest-to-market strategy? </h4></br>

<h4>In what timeframe do you want to have this acreage treated?</h4></br>

<h4>How do you want to participate in the Action Plan development?</h4></br>

<h4>How do you want to participate in the Action Plan implementation?</h4></br>

<h4>What is your political influence, and what can we activate as a group?</h4></br>

<h4>Will you engage with OTNA to make a case for this Action Plan with decision-makers? </h4></br>

<h4>Will you contribute financially to this effort?</h4></br>

<h4>Will you agree to this participation agreement?</h4></br>

<h5>I promise to respond to the OTNA emails or phone messages within 48 hours or sooner when time is of the essence.</h5></br>

<h5>I promise to invest up to 1-2 hours a week when asked to read and write so that my input effectively contributes to this effort.</h5></br>

<h3>What else needs to be investigated?</h3></br>

<h4>Wood-fired boiler systems unused in:</h4></br>

<h5>Ft. Baird, outside of Silver City</h5></br>

<h5>Santa Fe Community College</h5></br>

<h5>The Jamez Schools </h5></br>

<h2>State and federal forestry staff</h2></br>

<h3>Administrative</h3></br>

<h4>What role do we want the OTNA to have in the “Timber Industry Task Force" or “Line of Effort”?</h4></br>

<h4>How does the wood products industry line tie into the Forest Service Planning Rule 2012? We just completed Forest Plans under this rule for Carson, Santa Fe, and Cibola NF. Please review those since that’s the basis for all site-specific project planning under NEPA and decisions. Or other collaborative or ecosystem planning efforts?</h4></br>

<h4>How do we most productively synch with other lines of effort?</h4></br>

<h4>Are the new Forest Plans completed in 2022 the best framing, or are there other legal guidelines we should be following? In essence - how do we best tie into your existing frameworks?</h4></br>

<h4>How do you suggest OTNA collaborate with other large landscape and community forest conservation efforts?</h4></br>

<h4>How does OTNA tie in with the 2020 New Mexico Forest Action Plan?</h4></br>

<h4>What funding or other support opportunities can we tie into, and how can state and federal agencies assist?</h4></br>

<h4>How do we assist state and federal agencies to attain funding and logistical support?</h4></br>

<h4>What misinformation is a challenge, what information do you need to spread, and how can we use our networks to inform and educate the public and decision-makers?</h4></br>

<h3> Current Efforts Assessment </h3></br>

<h4>How do we build upon and augment the legacy and ongoing collaborative landscape-scale forestry efforts already underway? </h4></br>

<h5>There needs to be a mapping of this, which already exists with the New Mexico Highland Institute. </h5></br>

<h4>Specifically, which programs do you suggest building on, and what models do you suggest we emulate among local initiatives and national programs? </h4></br>

<h5>This is addressed by the NM State Forest Action Plan, which was based on Shared Stewardship agreements with New Mexico. Much effort was expended in defining risks and priority areas/lands. The question is, how does this proposal build off the priorities and landscapes already defined?</h5></br>

<h4>What pitfalls should be avoided - what has worked and what has not?</h4></br>

<h4>What can we learn from the experience of the recent fire mitigation and recovery efforts going forward?</h4></br>

<h5>How can the NM Forestry Division and the U.S. Forest Service improve their collaboration toward shared goals? </h5></br>

<h4>What is the most appropriate balance between post-fire recovery and future fire mitigation?</h4></br>

<h4>What assessments of existing industry barriers and needs have already been completed, and when? </h4></br>

<h5>What was identified as needs at the recent NMFIA industry roundtable? </h5></br>

<h3>Private Land Coordination</h3></br>

<h4>How are private lands best integrated into these state and federal planning efforts?</h4></br>

<h4>How can progress on private lands assist the overall forest management and stewardship goals?</h4></br>

<h4>How can the USFS and NMFD assist in the stewardship of private lands? </h4></br>

<h4>How can we better synthesize public and private land stewardship?</h4></br>

<h2>Forestry industry leaders</h2></br>

<h3>How can we improve how federal agencies handle forest material?</h3></br>

<h4>Bid before harvesting so it can be cut to the right lengths</h4></br>

<h4>FEMA has no connection to forest companies and landowners, chopping material into 4-6’ pieces</h4></br>

<h3>How do we level the playing field between large national and local contractors? </h3></br>

<h3>How can we improve communications between the local forest industry and state and federal agencies?</h3></br>

<h4>New Mexico Forestry doesn’t go out and close the sales promptly on state and private lands</h4></br>

<h4>How do we establish communications between the USFS and the timber industry?</h4></br>

<h3>What federal policies concerning forest management need to be re-evaluated?</h3></br>

<h4>NEPA exception in devasted landscapes and Federal Disaster Zones</h4></br>

<h4>Archaeological sites are already known, and have typically already been damaged, Ralph</h4></br>

<h4>NEPA needs to be streamlined</h4></br>

<h4>1990 Roadless Act, Bill Clinton admin, requires using main roads only</h4></br>

<h5>Carson National Forest and the Bridge Road area had 100,000+ Latillas that could have been harvested, but for the closure of the roads</h5></br>

<h4>They need to take a whole forest management approach</h4></br>

<h4>The prohibition against salvage alongside forest treatment has to be removed</h4></br>

<h4>The federal agencies are involved in recreation, FEMA, fire recovery, environmental, and wildlife and aren’t coordinating</h4></br>

<h4>Take firefighting out of a measure for forest treatment, </h4></br>

<h4>Need equipment loans to cover operating capital, FSA loans are capped, stringent requirements, 150% collateral</h4></br>

<h3>How can we improve communications and understanding with the environmental community?</h3></br>

<h4>Recognize loggers as environmentalists.</h4></br>

<h3>How can we improve how landowners relate to forest treatment and your businesses?</h3></br>

<h4>Need to address small landowners’ burned trees near their homes</h4></br>

<h4>Communication and Education</h4></br>

<h4>Forest treatment for material contracts</h4></br>

<h4>Utilize the logging and mill owners to educate the landowners and others</h4></br>

<h4>Establish a pricing and material volume shared marketplace hub </h4></br>

<h3>What other challenges in doing your work do we want to address?</h3></br>

<h3>What capacity increases would you like to be capitalized for?</h3></br>

<h3>What shortcomings do you find in how banks relate to you?</h3></br>

<h4>There are no local banks that offer standard equipment financing </h4></br>

<h4>Need new low-interest/reasonable-interest equipment loan fund</h4></br>

<h4>Banks don’t understand the non-equipment capital needs</h4></br>

<h4>Need a new source of collateral and guarantee</h4></br>

<h4>Need a method for valuing wood inventory</h4></br>

<h4>Need to be considered an ag industry</h4></br>

<h3>In addition to capital, what else do you need to grow?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the opportunities to share and coordinate equipment across your businesses? </h3></br>

<h3>What are the opportunities to share and coordinate wood supply contacts and relationships across your businesses? </h3></br>

<h3>What are the opportunities to coordinate forest activity across your businesses?</h3></br>

<h3>What concerns about this cooperation do you want to make sure are addressed?</h3></br>

<h3>What are your other concerns about the current system, and how can it be improved to better assist you in expanding your work?</h3></br>

<h3>How can we address the need for more skilled labor, operators, and managers?</h3></br>

<h4>Environmentalists have to stop stigmatizing logging</h4></br>

<h4>Ponsse has a simulator in Northern Colorado</h4></br>

<h3>How can we address the need for additional employee housing? </h3></br>

<h3>How can state and federal financial and logistical support better serve your needs?</h3></br>

<h3>Based on what you understand about t, do you want to participate actively? That means 1-2 hours a week of reading Action Plan sections and writing your responses. </h3></br>

<h3>Based on what you understand about this initiative, do you want the state and federal governments to embrace and support the project?</h3></br>

<h2>For local public sector and community leaders</h2></br>

<h3>How have the recent fires impacted your community and your work?</h3></br>

<h3>What goals would your community want to see advanced from this forestry action plan?</h3></br>

<h3>What concerns do you want to ensure are addressed in this Action Plan?</h3></br>

<h3>What resource limits need to be addressed for this initiative to be successful? Potential issues include, but are not limited to:</h3></br>

<h4>Housing</h4></br>

<h4>Labor force</h4></br>

<h4>Road capacity</h4></br>

<h4>Transportation networks</h4></br>

<h4>More effective and relevant state and federal support</h4></br>

<h3>What adjustments to your current role or mission would enable you to focus more on long-term collective benefit?</h3></br>

<h2>For environmental groups</h2></br>

<h3>How do you define and conceive forest and watershed health?</h3></br>

<h3>How does forest and watershed health impact your work and programmatic mission?</h3></br>

<h3>How have the recent fires impacted your mission and operations?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the significant barriers to improving forest and watershed health?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the significant opportunities for improving forest and watershed health?</h3></br>

<h3>What concerns for the vitality of the environment, watersheds, and wildlife do you want to have a role in addressing within this forest-to-market strategy?</h3></br>

<h3>How can your organization support a positive view of forest workers as environmental stewards?</h3></br>

<h2>For foundations and philanthropists</h2></br>

<h3>What forest and watershed issues are the region’s most significant challenges?</h3></br>

<h3>How have the recent fires impacted your actions and role?</h3></br>

<h3>What needs are not being addressed under the current system?</h3></br>

<h3>What would help you make your work more effective?</h3></br>

<h3>What resources can you provide to this Initiative, and what questions and guidance do you have toward applying those resources?</h3></br>

<h2>For new technology developers</h2></br>

<h3>What is the technology that could be productively included in this Initiative?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the current status of your technology and its deployment?</h3></br>

<h3>What capital or support is needed to advance your technology?</h3></br>

<h2>These are general questions all stakeholders should answer.</h2></br>

<h3>What resources do you have in your control that may be helpful to this Initiative?</h3></br>

<h3>What resources do you know outside your control that you want to ensure we are aware of?</h3></br>

<h3>What resources do you want assistance accessing? </h3></br>

<h3>What is your vision for how the federal government, the state, and the region should relate to this Initiative?</h3></br>

<h3>How do you want to participate in this Initiative?</h3></br>

IntelliConferences

2024-09-23T13:24:03Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

CAPSI convenes stakeholders in IntelliConference® forums that apply IntelliSynthesis®, our breakthrough question-and-response dialogue method, for efficient input from large groups of diverse stakeholders. IntelliSynthesis<i>®</i><SUB> </SUB>is our collective knowledge; it is everywhere and all around us when we are in our natural state of collaboration. IntelliConferences capture and track all perspectives and conversation details in an open-source dialogue agenda that becomes the long-term project plan informing future reports and presentations. This methodology employs guided inquiry by a facilitator to elicit and expand upon each participant’s thinking. Collective action is one of the biggest hurdles in designing collaborative action plans, and our IntelliSynthesis-based IntelliConferences overcome that obstacle. </br></br>

"What is missing from the policy analyst's tool kit -- and from the set of accepted, well-developed theories of human organization -- is an adequately specified theory of collective action whereby a group of principals can organize themselves voluntarily to retain the residuals of their efforts." -- Elinor Ostrom, 2009 Nobel Laureate in Economics</br></br>

IntelliSynthesis provides the theory of human organization that Professor Ostrom pointed toward in her seminal work Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. IntelliSynthesis® is, in fact, that theory in action. It is the living manifestation of approaches to coordinating human activity, aligning thought processes, and generating semantic and logical structures necessary for understanding. It is also a tool that provides ready-at-hand support and extension of human cognitive and expressive capacities.</br></br>

IntelliConferences<SUP>®</SUP> transcend the shortfalls of social media and online interaction by encouraging and focusing on the collective intelligence of a diverse team that has come together to solve a significant problem. It is a simple yet elegant approach to group dialogue that entirely reorients how the public and private sectors embrace next-level collaboration for the benefit of society.</br></br>

Academic leaders, business executives, government officials, and other stakeholders agree to collaborate fully and transparently, moving beyond the siloed thinking of their institutions, companies, and agencies to discuss and tackle the topic's nuances and intricacies. All perspectives and essential conversation details are captured and tracked in an open-source dialogue record that becomes the long-term project plan and informs future reports and presentations.</br></br>

Each IntelliConference<i>®</i> is facilitated by trained individuals who may also be subject matter experts. These individuals ensure that camaraderie is intact and forward progress is sustained. An IntelliConference<i>®</i><SUP> </SUP>is an empowering experience for participants, as they see that all contributions are respected and appreciated for their merit. In the mix of ideas, pragmatic solutions emerge that were previously inaccessible.</br></br>

</br></br>

<i><b>IntelliConf</b></i><i><b>eren</b></i><i><b>ce® Outline </b></i><i><b> </b></i></br></br>

PROPOSAL</br></br>

An IntelliConference is suggested to address a particular issue</br></br>

Member participation is unlimited</br></br>

Efforts are made to contact stakeholders </br></br>

</br></br>

PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT</br></br>

Commit to open and collaborative participation</br></br>

Make specific, timely promises </br></br>

</br></br>

ISSUE STATEMENT</br></br>

A carefully constructed document that describes the problem, condition, or improvement to be addressed. </br></br>

Must be considered satisfactory by all before proceeding. </br></br>

INQUIRY</br></br>

Create Context</br></br>

Historical Context</br></br>

Governmental/ Policy Context</br></br>

Existing Stakeholder Conflicts</br></br>

Previous Stakeholder Positioning</br></br>

Time Sensitivity</br></br>

</br></br>

::Formulate Questions </br></br>

Full participation</br></br>

Questions are comprehensive and extensive to cover all aspects of the issue</br></br>

</br></br>

::Answer Questions</br></br>

A researcher can be appointed from inside or outside the group if needed.</br></br>

</br></br>

EXPANSION</br></br>

::Review what has been learned from answering the questions.</br></br>

::Observations</br></br>

::Musings</br></br>

</br></br>

IDEALIZING</br></br>

Revisit the Issue Statement </br></br>

“Blue sky” an innovative solution.</br></br>

All input is welcomed without criticism. </br></br>

</br></br>

CREATE THE FUTURE</br></br>

Envision what could be achieved with a complete collaboration </br></br>

Set goals with milestones, measures, and timelines</br></br>

</br></br>

<i><b>IntelliConference </b></i><i><b>Amenities </b></i><i><b> </b></i></br></br>

Develop a common problem-solving language</br></br>

- Define common terms and adhere to the terms as posted in the system</br></br>

:: - Each engagement creates an applied ontology that can be expanded to fit future needs </br></br>

-Provides the essential shared reference terms and definitions</br></br>

-A Pattern of group behavior emerges and can be effectively applied</br></br>

Guided inquiry helps focus vague thinking to expand the solution horizon</br></br>

-Elicit and expand upon each participant’s thinking</br></br>

:: -Engages and challenges participants to think in ways that correlate with their desired outcomes </br></br>

Measurable Commitments keep the group on target</br></br>

:: -Assists participants in generating specific, measurable commitments and guides their activities through to completion</br></br>

:: -Diagnoses known barriers to continued participation and provides a set of immediate prescriptions </br></br>

:: -Conducts and displays real-time analysis of participatory patterns to provide visual feedback to participants about their progress</br></br>

Expanding the range of acceptable outcomes for all participants</br></br>

:: -Beginning with a custom-designed survey instrument that captures the participants’ desired outcomes, the methodology uses an inquiry-driven approach whereby participants are presented with potential individual and group outcomes </br></br>

:: -Participants incorporate feedback where alternatives can be developed, weighed, reviewed, and ultimately expressed as part of the deliberative process. </br></br>

Facilitators monitor progress and intervene to support the process</br></br>

:: -From our study of multi-party problem-solving groups, progress is likely to stall at some point. The system is designed to reflect the motivating characteristics of synchronous meetings among the participants and provides an impetus to push users toward committed action.</br></br>

</br></br>

IntelliConferences

2024-09-23T13:23:53Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

CAPSI convenes stakeholders in IntelliConference® forums that apply IntelliSynthesis®, our breakthrough question-and-response dialogue method, for efficient input from large groups of diverse stakeholders. IntelliSynthesis<i>®</i><SUB> </SUB>is our collective knowledge; it is everywhere and all around us when we are in our natural state of collaboration. IntelliConferences capture and track all perspectives and conversation details in an open-source dialogue agenda that becomes the long-term project plan informing future reports and presentations. This methodology employs guided inquiry by a facilitator to elicit and expand upon each participant’s thinking. Collective action is one of the biggest hurdles in designing collaborative action plans, and our IntelliSynthesis-based IntelliConferences overcome that obstacle. </br>

"What is missing from the policy analyst's tool kit -- and from the set of accepted, well-developed theories of human organization -- is an adequately specified theory of collective action whereby a group of principals can organize themselves voluntarily to retain the residuals of their efforts." -- Elinor Ostrom, 2009 Nobel Laureate in Economics</br>

IntelliSynthesis provides the theory of human organization that Professor Ostrom pointed toward in her seminal work Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. IntelliSynthesis® is, in fact, that theory in action. It is the living manifestation of approaches to coordinating human activity, aligning thought processes, and generating semantic and logical structures necessary for understanding. It is also a tool that provides ready-at-hand support and extension of human cognitive and expressive capacities.</br>

IntelliConferences<SUP>®</SUP> transcend the shortfalls of social media and online interaction by encouraging and focusing on the collective intelligence of a diverse team that has come together to solve a significant problem. It is a simple yet elegant approach to group dialogue that entirely reorients how the public and private sectors embrace next-level collaboration for the benefit of society.</br>

Academic leaders, business executives, government officials, and other stakeholders agree to collaborate fully and transparently, moving beyond the siloed thinking of their institutions, companies, and agencies to discuss and tackle the topic's nuances and intricacies. All perspectives and essential conversation details are captured and tracked in an open-source dialogue record that becomes the long-term project plan and informs future reports and presentations.</br>

Each IntelliConference<i>®</i> is facilitated by trained individuals who may also be subject matter experts. These individuals ensure that camaraderie is intact and forward progress is sustained. An IntelliConference<i>®</i><SUP> </SUP>is an empowering experience for participants, as they see that all contributions are respected and appreciated for their merit. In the mix of ideas, pragmatic solutions emerge that were previously inaccessible.</br>

</br>

<i><b>IntelliConf</b></i><i><b>eren</b></i><i><b>ce® Outline </b></i><i><b> </b></i></br>

PROPOSAL</br>

An IntelliConference is suggested to address a particular issue</br>

Member participation is unlimited</br>

Efforts are made to contact stakeholders </br>

</br>

PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT</br>

Commit to open and collaborative participation</br>

Make specific, timely promises </br>

</br>

ISSUE STATEMENT</br>

A carefully constructed document that describes the problem, condition, or improvement to be addressed. </br>

Must be considered satisfactory by all before proceeding. </br>

INQUIRY</br>

Create Context</br>

Historical Context</br>

Governmental/ Policy Context</br>

Existing Stakeholder Conflicts</br>

Previous Stakeholder Positioning</br>

Time Sensitivity</br>

</br>

:Formulate Questions </br>

Full participation</br>

Questions are comprehensive and extensive to cover all aspects of the issue</br>

</br>

:Answer Questions</br>

A researcher can be appointed from inside or outside the group if needed.</br>

</br>

EXPANSION</br>

:Review what has been learned from answering the questions.</br>

:Observations</br>

:Musings</br>

</br>

IDEALIZING</br>

Revisit the Issue Statement </br>

“Blue sky” an innovative solution.</br>

All input is welcomed without criticism. </br>

</br>

CREATE THE FUTURE</br>

Envision what could be achieved with a complete collaboration </br>

Set goals with milestones, measures, and timelines</br>

</br>

<i><b>IntelliConference </b></i><i><b>Amenities </b></i><i><b> </b></i></br>

Develop a common problem-solving language</br>

- Define common terms and adhere to the terms as posted in the system</br>

: - Each engagement creates an applied ontology that can be expanded to fit future needs </br>

-Provides the essential shared reference terms and definitions</br>

-A Pattern of group behavior emerges and can be effectively applied</br>

Guided inquiry helps focus vague thinking to expand the solution horizon</br>

-Elicit and expand upon each participant’s thinking</br>

: -Engages and challenges participants to think in ways that correlate with their desired outcomes </br>

Measurable Commitments keep the group on target</br>

: -Assists participants in generating specific, measurable commitments and guides their activities through to completion</br>

: -Diagnoses known barriers to continued participation and provides a set of immediate prescriptions </br>

: -Conducts and displays real-time analysis of participatory patterns to provide visual feedback to participants about their progress</br>

Expanding the range of acceptable outcomes for all participants</br>

: -Beginning with a custom-designed survey instrument that captures the participants’ desired outcomes, the methodology uses an inquiry-driven approach whereby participants are presented with potential individual and group outcomes </br>

: -Participants incorporate feedback where alternatives can be developed, weighed, reviewed, and ultimately expressed as part of the deliberative process. </br>

Facilitators monitor progress and intervene to support the process</br>

: -From our study of multi-party problem-solving groups, progress is likely to stall at some point. The system is designed to reflect the motivating characteristics of synchronous meetings among the participants and provides an impetus to push users toward committed action.</br>

</br>

EMIP

2024-09-18T17:53:09Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<h1>RE-STEM, Rail Enabled Sustainable Transportation of Essential Minerals</h1></br></br>

<h2>The essential minerals industry in North America is at a crossroads. The efforts to re-shore and re-industrialize provide an opportunity to expand continental mineral mining and production. The industry can continue on the slow-growth path given by competition and mistrust or lead with innovative thinking that integrates environmental stewardship with industrial progress. </h2></br></br>

<h2>Embracing a holistic approach of collaboration, innovation, and ethical commitment must include full lifecycle accounting and whole systems planning, including multi-modal transportation. The essential minerals industry can set a new standard that meets market demands while preserving the planet for future generations.</h2></br></br>

<h2>The challenges of counterproductive regulations, well-meaning environmental groups, and community resistance persist. Embracing the principles of RE-STEM will facilitate the cooperation necessary to resolve these challenges. </h2></br></br>

<h2>RE-STEM participants will inform the re-design of the essential minerals industry by balancing economic growth, environmental stewardship, and stakeholder interests.</h2></br></br>

<h2>Foundational Principles</h2></br></br>

<h3>1. Collaborative Industrial Optimization</h3></br></br>

<h3>2. Environmental Responsibility</h3></br></br>

<h3>3. Community Engagement</h3></br></br>

<h3>4. Transparent Communication</h3></br></br>

<h3>5. Sustainable Systems Capitalization</h3></br></br>

<h1>Convene the Essential Minerals Sustainability IntelliConference, inviting the continent’s leading environmental and community advocacy organizations to participate.</h1></br></br>

<h2>Background Statement: Existing forums and methods for stakeholder engagement rely on competitive debate at best, creating barriers to honest communication and alignment. Rational, multidimensional idea generation and problem-solving for sustainable mineral production and use is almost impossible. A new way for stakeholders to engage is needed. CAPSI provides that forum and method. </h2></br></br>

<h2>Core Question: What optimal volumes, locations, and design elements of essential mineral mining and processing can industry and community stakeholders, including company management, association leaders, unions, environmental organizations, and community advocacy groups agree on for a profitable and sustainable mineral mining industry? </h2></br></br>

<h2>Round One Dialogue Questions:</h2></br></br>

<h3>Which stakeholder groups do we want to have a voice in this IntelliConference?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the continent’s “essential minerals?”</h3></br></br>

<h4>What factors do we apply to determining the “essential minerals?”</h4></br></br>

<h4>What factors do we apply to determine how much of each essential mineral we need and want?</h4></br></br>

<h3>What are the current volumes of each essential mineral supply?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the current locations of each essential mineral supply?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the supply chain components for production, processing, and consumption?</h3></br></br>

<h4>What are the optimal volumes and locations of mineral supply to support the clean energy transition? </h4></br></br>

<h2>Round Two Dialogue Questions:</h2></br></br>

<h3>How do we best assess the environmental impacts?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What are the opportunities for conserving the use of each essential mineral?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What has to happen to accommodate reducing the consumption of individual minerals when deemed beneficial to the environment?</h3></br></br>

<h3>When harmful environmental impacts are deemed unavoidable for any supply chain activities, how do we mitigate them? </h3></br></br>

<h3>What environmental concerns do we want to address in how minerals are mined?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What environmental concerns do we want to address in how minerals are processed?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What environmental concerns do we want to address in how minerals are used and recycled?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What steps must be taken to render anticipated environmental impacts transparent and trustworthy?</h3></br></br>

<h2>Round Three Dialogue Questions:</h2></br></br>

<h3>What community concerns have to be effectively addressed?</h3></br></br>

<h4>What are the environmental risks of mineral mining?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What are the degrees of risk between varying mineral mines?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How can potential health risks to communities be mitigated?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What steps must be taken to increase the community's trust in mining companies?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What steps can be taken to protect against esthetic degradation?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How can communities maintain a sense of place attachment?</h4></br></br>

<h4>What steps can be taken to mitigate citizens' concerns for their community when the mine is closed? </h4></br></br>

<h3>What steps need to be taken for mining companies to improve relationships with communities?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What strategies promote the acceptance of new mines?</h3></br></br>

<h3>Which issues must be addressed to align the interests of mining companies and communities? </h3></br></br>

<h4>How does NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) sentiment affect mining? </h4></br></br>

<h4>What are the challenges posed by uninformed citizens? </h4></br></br>

<h4>What steps can be taken to mitigate citizens' propensity to overestimate risk?</h4></br></br>

<h4>How can the media contribute to a more accurate and positive image of mining? </h4></br></br>

<h4>How can citizens orient their motivations to support the greater good instead of narrow self-interests? </h4></br></br>

<h4>How can citizens’ trust in governments and private enterprises be expanded? </h4></br></br>

<h2>Round Four Dialogue Questions:</h2></br></br>

<h3>What steps can be taken to ensure the final decision is “fair” for the community and mine developers?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How can mining companies commit to projects that use Best Available Technology throughout the life of the mine? </h3></br></br>

<h3>What environmental regulations on essential mineral supply chain activities must be improved or eliminated?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How can the community's initial awareness of mining activity be communicated?</h3></br></br>

<h4>Switch from DAD (decide, announce, defend) to ADD (announce, discuss, decide)</h4></br></br>

<h4>Community-oriented mining increases domestic participation in the global mining boom and ensures equitable and resilient supply chains. </h4></br></br>

<h4>Shifting from fossil fuel-based energy to materials-based energy will allow North America to progress toward sustainability. </h4></br></br>

<h4>Materials-based energy requires less drilling than fossil-fuel energy. </h4></br></br>

<h4>Resisting mineral mining in the U.S. extends our dependence on China. </h4></br></br>

<h3>What steps can be taken to ensure citizens are educated on mineral mining?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What is the most effective way to communicate this education? </h3></br></br>

<h4>We rely on minerals for almost every aspect of modern life</h4></br></br>

<h4>China currently holds a near-monopoly on mining and processing</h4></br></br>

<h4>Shipping minerals by sea negatively impacts the environment, negating the benefits of products made with minerals, such as electric car batteries and wind turbines. </h4></br></br>

<h4>Mining for coal occurs at the surface, leaving large scars on the land, while mining for minerals occurs at a further depth in the earth, leaving less visible effects. </h4></br></br>

<h4>Show pictures of past successful projects </h4></br></br>

<h4>Communicate safety records </h4></br></br>

<h3>How can socioeconomic gains be communicated to communities?</h3></br></br>

<h4>Mining is the first link in production chains</h4></br></br>

<h4>Mineral wealth could provide development prospects</h4></br></br>

<h4>Mining can be considered a cultural identity</h4></br></br>

<h3>How can mining companies involve community leaders in decision-making? </h3></br></br>

<h4>increase public trust</h4></br></br>

<h4>Participation and community involvement persuasion skills are more effective than economic compensation.</h4></br></br>

<h3>How can mining companies allow community participation?</h3></br></br>

<h4>Allow diverse stakeholders to recognize the legitimacy of different perspectives.</h4></br></br>

<h4>Promotes feelings of autonomy and self-determination</h4></br></br>

<h3>How can mining companies informally communicate with communities? </h3></br></br>

<h4>Informal processes take time but are more effective than formal consultations</h4></br></br>

<h3>How can mining companies increase openness and transparency?</h3></br></br>

<h3>How can risk be communicated effectively and efficiently? </h3></br></br>

<h4>Avoiding conversations about objective risks, no matter how small, may contribute to community members' overestimation of risk. </h4></br></br>

<h4>The average person is terrible at accurately assessing risk. Many logical fallacies and cognitive biases are behind these distortions and must be acknowledged and addressed. </h4></br></br>

<h5>Generalizing: Making a broad generalization based on insufficient evidence where a sweeping conclusion is drawn from a limited sample that is too small to support it. “All mining is dangerous,” and “All mining pollutes the air and water.”</h5></br></br>

<h5>Ambiguity Bias: The tendency to avoid options that lead to an unpredictable outcome, perhaps because of insufficient data. This bias causes people to prioritize a known option over an option with an unclear outcome. Risks should always be explained using real-life examples, plastic illustrations, and not just abstract terminology.</h5></br></br>

<h5>Conservatism Regressive Bias: A pronounced leaning towards overestimating high probabilities and underestimating lower probabilities. When assessing risks, bigger risks are overestimated at the potential cost of neglecting the smaller risks.</h5></br></br>

<h5>Framing Effect: People tend to draw different conclusions from the same base data, depending on how and by whom they were presented. This means that the presentation of information can influence the recipient's behavior. </h5></br></br>

<h5>Neglect of Probability: Tendency to completely disregard probabilities when a decision concerning an unknown situation has to be made. Neglect of probability usually appears in emotionally charged situations.</h5></br></br>

<h5>The proof-seeking fallacy: Asking for 100% proof is asking for the impossible. All we can do is weigh the full body of evidence. Safety can never be proven with absolute certainty.</h5></br></br>

<h5>Zero-risk bias: Tendency to prefer the complete elimination of risk in a sub-part over alternatives with greater overall risk reduction. It often manifests when decision-makers address health, safety, and environmental problems.</h5></br></br>

<h3>What steps can mine companies take to acknowledge citizen’s concerns as valid?</h3></br></br>

<h3>What community demographics should be considered? </h3></br></br>

<h4>Rural?</h4></br></br>

<h4>Community History?</h4></br></br>

<h4>Conservative/Liberal? </h4></br></br>

<h3>What moral values should be considered in communities?</h3></br></br>

<h4>The Moral Foundations Theory:</h4></br></br>

<h5>Moral Foundations are 5“Intuitive ethics.”</h5></br></br>

<h6>Care</h6></br></br>

<h6>Fairness</h6></br></br>

<h6>Loyalty</h6></br></br>

<h6>Authority</h6></br></br>

<h6>Purity</h6></br></br>

<h5>Opposition to mining and NIMBYism is an emotional response and thus must be addressed by considering how people relate to their moral ethics. </h5></br></br>

<h5>Liberals and Conservatives value morals with varying intensity. Liberals focus on the first two moral foundations, while conservatives value all five more equally. </h5></br></br>

<h3>What steps can mining companies take to engage with all moral foundations? </h3></br></br>

<h4>Care</h4></br></br>

<h5>Conservatives reserve care for those who have sacrificed for the group. It can be activated by portraying a mine as a sacrifice for the country's greater good.</h5></br></br>

<h5>Signal words: Generous, selfless, devoted</h5></br></br>

<h4>Fairness</h4></br></br>

<h5>Conservatives value rewards in proportion to contribution. It can be activated by providing economic or other incentives for the community's contribution to hosting the mine. </h5></br></br>

<h5>Signal words: Equitable, righteous, virtuous, honor</h5></br></br>

<h4>Loyalty</h4></br></br>

<h5>Group cohesion is used to achieve success in conflict between two groups and determine who is part of the team and who is a traitor. Can be activated by portraying mine developers and community members as part of the same team, collaborating on mutually beneficial goals. </h5></br></br>

<h5>Signal words: Trust, duty, tried and true, staunch, faithful, dedicated, dependable</h5></br></br>

<h4>Authority </h4></br></br>

<h5>Respect for hierarchical relationships can be activated by acknowledging the authority of community leaders and taking a submissive role in certain situations. </h5></br></br>

<h5>Signal words: Respect, lead, esteem, reverence</h5></br></br>

<h4>Purity</h4></br></br>

<h5>The idea that a person, place, or object can be sacred and, therefore, polluted or contaminated can be activated by recognizing the significance of local land and portraying respect and intent to keep the sacredness intact. </h5></br></br>

<h5>Signal words: Purified, clean, clarified, pure, unadulterated, uncorrupted, refined, rendered</h5></br></br>

<h3>How can mining companies and community leaders agree on early impact planning and mitigation?</h3></br></br>

<h4>Where the mining company is responsible for…</h4></br></br>

<h4>Infrastructure upgrades</h4></br></br>

<h4>Increase demand for public services</h4></br></br>

<h5>School enrollment</h5></br></br>

<h5>Hospitality </h5></br></br>

<h5>Medical Services</h5></br></br>

<h5>Recreation sites</h5></br></br>

<h5>Public Lands </h5></br></br>

<h4>Increased traffic puts pressure on transportation infrastructure </h4></br></br>

<h4>Increased population from construction</h4></br></br>

<h4>The strain on the housing market</h4></br></br>

<h3>How can mining companies and community leaders agree on a Community Benefits Agreement?</h3></br></br>

<h4>CBAs should stay with the project, not the developer</h4></br></br>

<h4>Companies should act as if consent to land is required, even if it isn’t by law. </h4></br></br>

<h4>Ability to negotiate for and secure lasting benefits from new mines</h4></br></br>

<h4>Ensure shared economic development</h4></br></br>

<h4>Consider what communities want when the mine closes</h4></br></br>

<h4>Place-based opportunities </h4></br></br>

<h5>Infrastructure improvements</h5></br></br>

<h5>Local procurement provisions</h5></br></br>

<h5>Minimum local hire thresholds</h5></br></br>

<h5>Workforce training </h5></br></br>

<h5>Programs that build community capacity/resilience long-term</h5></br></br>

<h1>Convene the Essential Minerals Sustainability IntelliConference, inviting the continent’s governmental agencies to participate.</h1></br></br>

<h2>Background Statement: Regulations and permitting processes evolve over time among public- and private-sector actors with low levels of trust, free-flowing engagement, and commercial sensibility. Consequently, both public interests and private sector progress are hindered. A new approach for updating the regulatory and planning framework for the essential minerals supply chain is needed. </h2></br></br>

<h2>Core Question: What regulations can stakeholders agree on that are either outdated, de minimis, redundant, counterproductive, or can be improved or replaced in support of the growth and safety of essential mineral production and delivery?</h2></br></br>

<h2>Round One Dialogue Questions:</h2></br></br>

<h3>Which federal agencies might be enrolled in participating and supporting RE-STEM?</h3></br></br>

<h4>Environmental Protection Agency</h4></br></br>

<h4>U.S. Department of Labor Mining Safety and Health Administration</h4></br></br>

<h4>U.S. Department of Interior Bureau of Land Management </h4></br></br>

<h4>U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service </h4></br></br>

<h4>U.S. Department of Interior Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement</h4></br></br>

<h4>Division of Mineral Resources </h4></br></br>

<h4>U.S. Department of Energy</h4></br></br>

<h3>What federal laws regulate mining? </h3></br></br>

<h4>National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)</h4></br></br>

<h4>Clean Air Act (CAA)</h4></br></br>

<h4>Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)</h4></br></br>

<h4>Clean Water Act (CWA)</h4></br></br>

<h4>Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)</h4></br></br>

<h4>Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA)</h4></br></br>

<h3>Which state and local agencies might be enrolled in participating and supporting this development? </h3></br></br>

<h4>State Surface Mining Commissions</h4></br></br>

<h4>State Bureau of Mines and Geology Departments </h4></br></br>

<h4>State Departments of Natural Resources</h4></br></br>

<h3>What is the nature of the relationships with the relevant government agencies?</h3></br></br>

<h4>It relates well with the Western States Congressional and Senate Coalition, Chris is on the advisory committee of the Western States Caucus Foundation </h4></br></br>

<h3>What are the concerns of the government agencies that encounter the mineral industry? </h3></br></br>

<h3>What is EMA’s standing/posture/relations with our federal government?</h3></br></br>

<h4>EMA team is solid and capable, relate well with Congress, </h4></br></br>

<h2>Round Two Dialogue Questions</h2></br></br>

<h3>What policy and regulatory issues are the Essential Minerals Association and its members concerned with?</h3></br></br>

<h4>Clean Energy Reform Act</h4></br></br>

<h4>The Mining Regulatory Clarity Act reaffirms decades of mining law and precedent and provides certainty for America's mineral producers. </h4></br></br>

<h3>What policy solutions will support the development of increased processing capacity?</h3></br></br>

<h4>https://fas.org/publication/critical-thinking-on-critical-minerals/</h4></br></br>

<h3>How can government agencies and the Essential Minerals Association agree on regulatory legislation? </h3></br></br>

<h3>How can government agencies improve mining permit inefficiencies? </h3></br></br>

<h4>NEPA</h4></br></br>

<h4>Improved Jurisdictional Coordination</h4></br></br>

<h4>Uniform Interagency Approach</h4></br></br>

<h4>Adequate Staffing and Specialized Talent</h4></br></br>

<h4>https://natlawreview.com/article/permitting-reform-united-states</h4></br></br>

</br></br>

EMIP

2024-09-18T17:52:59Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<h1>RE-STEM, Rail Enabled Sustainable Transportation of Essential Minerals</h1></br>

<h2>The essential minerals industry in North America is at a crossroads. The efforts to re-shore and re-industrialize provide an opportunity to expand continental mineral mining and production. The industry can continue on the slow-growth path given by competition and mistrust or lead with innovative thinking that integrates environmental stewardship with industrial progress. </h2></br>

<h2>Embracing a holistic approach of collaboration, innovation, and ethical commitment must include full lifecycle accounting and whole systems planning, including multi-modal transportation. The essential minerals industry can set a new standard that meets market demands while preserving the planet for future generations.</h2></br>

<h2>The challenges of counterproductive regulations, well-meaning environmental groups, and community resistance persist. Embracing the principles of RE-STEM will facilitate the cooperation necessary to resolve these challenges. </h2></br>

<h2>RE-STEM participants will inform the re-design of the essential minerals industry by balancing economic growth, environmental stewardship, and stakeholder interests.</h2></br>

<h2>Foundational Principles</h2></br>

<h3>1. Collaborative Industrial Optimization</h3></br>

<h3>2. Environmental Responsibility</h3></br>

<h3>3. Community Engagement</h3></br>

<h3>4. Transparent Communication</h3></br>

<h3>5. Sustainable Systems Capitalization</h3></br>

<h1>Convene the Essential Minerals Sustainability IntelliConference, inviting the continent’s leading environmental and community advocacy organizations to participate.</h1></br>

<h2>Background Statement: Existing forums and methods for stakeholder engagement rely on competitive debate at best, creating barriers to honest communication and alignment. Rational, multidimensional idea generation and problem-solving for sustainable mineral production and use is almost impossible. A new way for stakeholders to engage is needed. CAPSI provides that forum and method. </h2></br>

<h2>Core Question: What optimal volumes, locations, and design elements of essential mineral mining and processing can industry and community stakeholders, including company management, association leaders, unions, environmental organizations, and community advocacy groups agree on for a profitable and sustainable mineral mining industry? </h2></br>

<h2>Round One Dialogue Questions:</h2></br>

<h3>Which stakeholder groups do we want to have a voice in this IntelliConference?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the continent’s “essential minerals?”</h3></br>

<h4>What factors do we apply to determining the “essential minerals?”</h4></br>

<h4>What factors do we apply to determine how much of each essential mineral we need and want?</h4></br>

<h3>What are the current volumes of each essential mineral supply?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the current locations of each essential mineral supply?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the supply chain components for production, processing, and consumption?</h3></br>

<h4>What are the optimal volumes and locations of mineral supply to support the clean energy transition? </h4></br>

<h2>Round Two Dialogue Questions:</h2></br>

<h3>How do we best assess the environmental impacts?</h3></br>

<h3>What are the opportunities for conserving the use of each essential mineral?</h3></br>

<h3>What has to happen to accommodate reducing the consumption of individual minerals when deemed beneficial to the environment?</h3></br>

<h3>When harmful environmental impacts are deemed unavoidable for any supply chain activities, how do we mitigate them? </h3></br>

<h3>What environmental concerns do we want to address in how minerals are mined?</h3></br>

<h3>What environmental concerns do we want to address in how minerals are processed?</h3></br>

<h3>What environmental concerns do we want to address in how minerals are used and recycled?</h3></br>

<h3>What steps must be taken to render anticipated environmental impacts transparent and trustworthy?</h3></br>

<h2>Round Three Dialogue Questions:</h2></br>

<h3>What community concerns have to be effectively addressed?</h3></br>

<h4>What are the environmental risks of mineral mining?</h4></br>

<h4>What are the degrees of risk between varying mineral mines?</h4></br>

<h4>How can potential health risks to communities be mitigated?</h4></br>

<h4>What steps must be taken to increase the community's trust in mining companies?</h4></br>

<h4>What steps can be taken to protect against esthetic degradation?</h4></br>

<h4>How can communities maintain a sense of place attachment?</h4></br>

<h4>What steps can be taken to mitigate citizens' concerns for their community when the mine is closed? </h4></br>

<h3>What steps need to be taken for mining companies to improve relationships with communities?</h3></br>

<h3>What strategies promote the acceptance of new mines?</h3></br>

<h3>Which issues must be addressed to align the interests of mining companies and communities? </h3></br>

<h4>How does NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) sentiment affect mining? </h4></br>

<h4>What are the challenges posed by uninformed citizens? </h4></br>

<h4>What steps can be taken to mitigate citizens' propensity to overestimate risk?</h4></br>

<h4>How can the media contribute to a more accurate and positive image of mining? </h4></br>

<h4>How can citizens orient their motivations to support the greater good instead of narrow self-interests? </h4></br>

<h4>How can citizens’ trust in governments and private enterprises be expanded? </h4></br>

<h2>Round Four Dialogue Questions:</h2></br>

<h3>What steps can be taken to ensure the final decision is “fair” for the community and mine developers?</h3></br>

<h3>How can mining companies commit to projects that use Best Available Technology throughout the life of the mine? </h3></br>

<h3>What environmental regulations on essential mineral supply chain activities must be improved or eliminated?</h3></br>

<h3>How can the community's initial awareness of mining activity be communicated?</h3></br>

<h4>Switch from DAD (decide, announce, defend) to ADD (announce, discuss, decide)</h4></br>

<h4>Community-oriented mining increases domestic participation in the global mining boom and ensures equitable and resilient supply chains. </h4></br>

<h4>Shifting from fossil fuel-based energy to materials-based energy will allow North America to progress toward sustainability. </h4></br>

<h4>Materials-based energy requires less drilling than fossil-fuel energy. </h4></br>

<h4>Resisting mineral mining in the U.S. extends our dependence on China. </h4></br>

<h3>What steps can be taken to ensure citizens are educated on mineral mining?</h3></br>

<h3>What is the most effective way to communicate this education? </h3></br>

<h4>We rely on minerals for almost every aspect of modern life</h4></br>

<h4>China currently holds a near-monopoly on mining and processing</h4></br>

<h4>Shipping minerals by sea negatively impacts the environment, negating the benefits of products made with minerals, such as electric car batteries and wind turbines. </h4></br>

<h4>Mining for coal occurs at the surface, leaving large scars on the land, while mining for minerals occurs at a further depth in the earth, leaving less visible effects. </h4></br>

<h4>Show pictures of past successful projects </h4></br>

<h4>Communicate safety records </h4></br>

<h3>How can socioeconomic gains be communicated to communities?</h3></br>

<h4>Mining is the first link in production chains</h4></br>

<h4>Mineral wealth could provide development prospects</h4></br>

<h4>Mining can be considered a cultural identity</h4></br>

<h3>How can mining companies involve community leaders in decision-making? </h3></br>

<h4>increase public trust</h4></br>

<h4>Participation and community involvement persuasion skills are more effective than economic compensation.</h4></br>

<h3>How can mining companies allow community participation?</h3></br>

<h4>Allow diverse stakeholders to recognize the legitimacy of different perspectives.</h4></br>

<h4>Promotes feelings of autonomy and self-determination</h4></br>

<h3>How can mining companies informally communicate with communities? </h3></br>

<h4>Informal processes take time but are more effective than formal consultations</h4></br>

<h3>How can mining companies increase openness and transparency?</h3></br>

<h3>How can risk be communicated effectively and efficiently? </h3></br>

<h4>Avoiding conversations about objective risks, no matter how small, may contribute to community members' overestimation of risk. </h4></br>

<h4>The average person is terrible at accurately assessing risk. Many logical fallacies and cognitive biases are behind these distortions and must be acknowledged and addressed. </h4></br>

<h5>Generalizing: Making a broad generalization based on insufficient evidence where a sweeping conclusion is drawn from a limited sample that is too small to support it. “All mining is dangerous,” and “All mining pollutes the air and water.”</h5></br>

<h5>Ambiguity Bias: The tendency to avoid options that lead to an unpredictable outcome, perhaps because of insufficient data. This bias causes people to prioritize a known option over an option with an unclear outcome. Risks should always be explained using real-life examples, plastic illustrations, and not just abstract terminology.</h5></br>

<h5>Conservatism Regressive Bias: A pronounced leaning towards overestimating high probabilities and underestimating lower probabilities. When assessing risks, bigger risks are overestimated at the potential cost of neglecting the smaller risks.</h5></br>

<h5>Framing Effect: People tend to draw different conclusions from the same base data, depending on how and by whom they were presented. This means that the presentation of information can influence the recipient's behavior. </h5></br>

<h5>Neglect of Probability: Tendency to completely disregard probabilities when a decision concerning an unknown situation has to be made. Neglect of probability usually appears in emotionally charged situations.</h5></br>

<h5>The proof-seeking fallacy: Asking for 100% proof is asking for the impossible. All we can do is weigh the full body of evidence. Safety can never be proven with absolute certainty.</h5></br>

<h5>Zero-risk bias: Tendency to prefer the complete elimination of risk in a sub-part over alternatives with greater overall risk reduction. It often manifests when decision-makers address health, safety, and environmental problems.</h5></br>

<h3>What steps can mine companies take to acknowledge citizen’s concerns as valid?</h3></br>

<h3>What community demographics should be considered? </h3></br>

<h4>Rural?</h4></br>

<h4>Community History?</h4></br>

<h4>Conservative/Liberal? </h4></br>

<h3>What moral values should be considered in communities?</h3></br>

<h4>The Moral Foundations Theory:</h4></br>

<h5>Moral Foundations are 5“Intuitive ethics.”</h5></br>

<h6>Care</h6></br>

<h6>Fairness</h6></br>

<h6>Loyalty</h6></br>

<h6>Authority</h6></br>

<h6>Purity</h6></br>

<h5>Opposition to mining and NIMBYism is an emotional response and thus must be addressed by considering how people relate to their moral ethics. </h5></br>

<h5>Liberals and Conservatives value morals with varying intensity. Liberals focus on the first two moral foundations, while conservatives value all five more equally. </h5></br>

<h3>What steps can mining companies take to engage with all moral foundations? </h3></br>

<h4>Care</h4></br>

<h5>Conservatives reserve care for those who have sacrificed for the group. It can be activated by portraying a mine as a sacrifice for the country's greater good.</h5></br>

<h5>Signal words: Generous, selfless, devoted</h5></br>

<h4>Fairness</h4></br>

<h5>Conservatives value rewards in proportion to contribution. It can be activated by providing economic or other incentives for the community's contribution to hosting the mine. </h5></br>

<h5>Signal words: Equitable, righteous, virtuous, honor</h5></br>

<h4>Loyalty</h4></br>

<h5>Group cohesion is used to achieve success in conflict between two groups and determine who is part of the team and who is a traitor. Can be activated by portraying mine developers and community members as part of the same team, collaborating on mutually beneficial goals. </h5></br>

<h5>Signal words: Trust, duty, tried and true, staunch, faithful, dedicated, dependable</h5></br>

<h4>Authority </h4></br>

<h5>Respect for hierarchical relationships can be activated by acknowledging the authority of community leaders and taking a submissive role in certain situations. </h5></br>

<h5>Signal words: Respect, lead, esteem, reverence</h5></br>

<h4>Purity</h4></br>

<h5>The idea that a person, place, or object can be sacred and, therefore, polluted or contaminated can be activated by recognizing the significance of local land and portraying respect and intent to keep the sacredness intact. </h5></br>

<h5>Signal words: Purified, clean, clarified, pure, unadulterated, uncorrupted, refined, rendered</h5></br>

<h3>How can mining companies and community leaders agree on early impact planning and mitigation?</h3></br>

<h4>Where the mining company is responsible for…</h4></br>

<h4>Infrastructure upgrades</h4></br>

<h4>Increase demand for public services</h4></br>

<h5>School enrollment</h5></br>

<h5>Hospitality </h5></br>

<h5>Medical Services</h5></br>

<h5>Recreation sites</h5></br>

<h5>Public Lands </h5></br>

<h4>Increased traffic puts pressure on transportation infrastructure </h4></br>

<h4>Increased population from construction</h4></br>

<h4>The strain on the housing market</h4></br>

<h3>How can mining companies and community leaders agree on a Community Benefits Agreement?</h3></br>

<h4>CBAs should stay with the project, not the developer</h4></br>

<h4>Companies should act as if consent to land is required, even if it isn’t by law. </h4></br>

<h4>Ability to negotiate for and secure lasting benefits from new mines</h4></br>

<h4>Ensure shared economic development</h4></br>

<h4>Consider what communities want when the mine closes</h4></br>

<h4>Place-based opportunities </h4></br>

<h5>Infrastructure improvements</h5></br>

<h5>Local procurement provisions</h5></br>

<h5>Minimum local hire thresholds</h5></br>

<h5>Workforce training </h5></br>

<h5>Programs that build community capacity/resilience long-term</h5></br>

<h1>Convene the Essential Minerals Sustainability IntelliConference, inviting the continent’s governmental agencies to participate.</h1></br>

<h2>Background Statement: Regulations and permitting processes evolve over time among public- and private-sector actors with low levels of trust, free-flowing engagement, and commercial sensibility. Consequently, both public interests and private sector progress are hindered. A new approach for updating the regulatory and planning framework for the essential minerals supply chain is needed. </h2></br>

<h2>Core Question: What regulations can stakeholders agree on that are either outdated, de minimis, redundant, counterproductive, or can be improved or replaced in support of the growth and safety of essential mineral production and delivery?</h2></br>

<h2>Round One Dialogue Questions:</h2></br>

<h3>Which federal agencies might be enrolled in participating and supporting RE-STEM?</h3></br>

<h4>Environmental Protection Agency</h4></br>

<h4>U.S. Department of Labor Mining Safety and Health Administration</h4></br>

<h4>U.S. Department of Interior Bureau of Land Management </h4></br>

<h4>U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service </h4></br>

<h4>U.S. Department of Interior Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement</h4></br>

<h4>Division of Mineral Resources </h4></br>

<h4>U.S. Department of Energy</h4></br>

<h3>What federal laws regulate mining? </h3></br>

<h4>National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)</h4></br>

<h4>Clean Air Act (CAA)</h4></br>

<h4>Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)</h4></br>

<h4>Clean Water Act (CWA)</h4></br>

<h4>Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)</h4></br>

<h4>Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA)</h4></br>

<h3>Which state and local agencies might be enrolled in participating and supporting this development? </h3></br>

<h4>State Surface Mining Commissions</h4></br>

<h4>State Bureau of Mines and Geology Departments </h4></br>

<h4>State Departments of Natural Resources</h4></br>

<h3>What is the nature of the relationships with the relevant government agencies?</h3></br>

<h4>It relates well with the Western States Congressional and Senate Coalition, Chris is on the advisory committee of the Western States Caucus Foundation </h4></br>

<h3>What are the concerns of the government agencies that encounter the mineral industry? </h3></br>

<h3>What is EMA’s standing/posture/relations with our federal government?</h3></br>

<h4>EMA team is solid and capable, relate well with Congress, </h4></br>

<h2>Round Two Dialogue Questions</h2></br>

<h3>What policy and regulatory issues are the Essential Minerals Association and its members concerned with?</h3></br>

<h4>Clean Energy Reform Act</h4></br>

<h4>The Mining Regulatory Clarity Act reaffirms decades of mining law and precedent and provides certainty for America's mineral producers. </h4></br>

<h3>What policy solutions will support the development of increased processing capacity?</h3></br>

<h4>https://fas.org/publication/critical-thinking-on-critical-minerals/</h4></br>

<h3>How can government agencies and the Essential Minerals Association agree on regulatory legislation? </h3></br>

<h3>How can government agencies improve mining permit inefficiencies? </h3></br>

<h4>NEPA</h4></br>

<h4>Improved Jurisdictional Coordination</h4></br>

<h4>Uniform Interagency Approach</h4></br>

<h4>Adequate Staffing and Specialized Talent</h4></br>

<h4>https://natlawreview.com/article/permitting-reform-united-states</h4></br>

</br>

Founder's Statement

2024-09-18T14:11:03Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

OnTrackNorthAmerica (OTNA) was founded by Michael Sussman in 2007 as a nonprofit 501c3 transportation think tank and consultancy co-leading society in redesigning industrial systems to support sustainable life. <b>Michael Sussman</b> began his career in transportation in 1994 by launching Strategic Rail Finance, a North American transportation-industry consulting firm, and has since advised on infrastructure-related projects, companies, and systems for private and public sector clients in 44 states and Canada.</br></br>

</br></br>

At OTNA, we uphold objectivity and nonpartisanship. Our autonomy from financial, political, or personal interests undergirds our ethics. Historically, industrial growth has prioritized economic advancement over community and environmental stewardship. We advance industrial systems that are financially profitable and sustainable. </br></br>

</br></br>

OTNA continually embraces the latest perspectives that inform progress toward these goals. We support investments in projects that enable the transition from fossil fuels, petrochemicals, and environmental stresses while acknowledging pragmatic challenges. OTNA values rationality and paths that provide the greatest benefit to the most people. </br></br>

</br></br>

<b>OTNA has developed state and regional plans, tools, </b><b>analyses</b><b>, and paradigms support</b><b>ing</b><b> these </b><b>values</b><b>. </b></br></br>

</br></br>

In 2023, OTNA led a four-county stakeholder process in New Mexico in the aftermath of a 350,000-acre forest fire resulting in the New Mexico Forestry Business Plan.</br></br>

In 2021, OTNA convened hundreds of transportation stakeholders to create Nevada’s 2021 State Rail Plan, a new whole-systems paradigm for statewide rail-enabled economic development.</br></br>

On December 11, 2008, OTNA gathered industry and government leaders in the U.S. Capitol Building to set a new collaborative framework for freight rail transportation efficiency.</br></br>

On December 8, 1998, OTNA convened a rail transportation educational event in the U.S. Capitol Building for 55 congressional staff. </br></br>

</br></br>

<b>OnTrackNorthAmerica Frequently Collaborates with Partners in Academia </b></br></br>

Dr. Barbara Gray, founder of Penn State University’s Center for Research in Conflict and Negotiation, has contributed significantly to OTNA’s work. </br></br>

The University of Tennessee’s Institute for a Secure and Sustainable Future provided research and development assistance for OTNA’s Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator.</br></br>

Philadelphia’s Temple University hosted Michael’s talk, “How Collaboration, Trust, and Railroads Will Save the World,” on December 5th, 2023.</br></br>

The Transportation Research Forum honored Michael with its 2024 annual President’s Award.</br></br>

Michael serves on the Industry Advisory Board of the six-university consortium, Center for Freight Transportation and Efficient & Resilient Supply Chains </br></br>

</br></br>

<b>He has contributed </b><b>to </b><b>improving public policy by meeting with s</b><b>taff or leaders of 68 U.S. Senate and 1</b><b>65</b><b> U.S. House offices</b><b>. </b></br></br>

</br></br>

In March of 2011, Michael was the only private sector invitee to a U.S. House Railroad Subcommittee Staff Workshop to explore ways to improve the FRA RRIF loan program.</br></br>

::On February 17, 2011, he testified before the U.S. House of Representatives Railroad Subcommittee on reforms to the Federal Railroad Administration’s Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) program.</br></br>

On October 19, 2005, he spoke before the Surface Transportation Board on the 25th anniversary of the Staggers Rail Act of 1980.</br></br>

<b>
</b><b>Representative acknowledgments of these efforts:</b><b> </b></br></br>

Thank you letters from Republican House Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Frank Wolf and Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller’s Chief of Staff.</br></br>

In 2003, he contributed to Washington State produce shippers by designing and writing important elements of the Washington State Produce Railcar Pool Act as passed by the 2003 state legislature.</br></br>

In 1999, he worked with the Federal Railroad Administration to eliminate audited financial statement requirements for Class II and III railroads from the Railroad Rehabilitation & Improvement Financing Act (RRIF loan program).</br></br>

In November of 1997 he was responsible for making freight rail projects eligible in H.R.115 – the National Infrastructure Development Act.</br></br>

</br></br>

<b>Michael ‘</b><b>s </b><b>writing</b><b> </b><b>has</b><b> </b><b>been </b><b>published in </b><b>many</b><b> transportation industry journals</b><b>:</b></br></br>

Railway Age, December 2014, “Revitalizing Direct Rail Service”</br></br>

Railway Age, April 2011, “A RRIF-Centered Capitalization Growth Strategy”</br></br>

Railway Age, September 2008, “Leveraging Capital for the Entire Industry”</br></br>

Transportation Quarterly, Fall 2002, “Regional and Short Line Railroads in the United States”</br></br>

Association of Transportation Law, Logistics & Policy, Fall 2000, “Assessing the Process of Creating the RRIF Program”</br></br>

Progressive Railroading, June 1998, “Getting a Lender’s Attention”</br></br>

::</br></br>

::<i><b>Board of Directors</b></i></br></br>

<h3>Michael Sussman</h3></br></br>

<h4> Chairman, OnTrackNorthAmerica and Chairman & CEO, Strategic Rail Finance</h4></br></br>

<h3>Eugene N. (“Gene”) Cipriani</h3></br></br>

<h4>Attorney; former advisor to the United States Railway Association (U.S.R.A.); former in-house corporate counsel for Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA)</h4></br></br>

<h3>Daniel R. Elliott</h3></br></br>

<h4> Transportation Attorney, Former Chairman of U.S. Surface Transportation Board</h4></br></br>

<h3>R. Powell Felix</h3></br></br>

<h4> Founder, Indiana Boxcar Corporation</h4></br></br>

<h3>Jim Hoecker</h3></br></br>

<h4>Founder, Hoecker Energy Law & Policy PLLC, former Chair of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission</h4></br></br>

::</br></br>

::</br></br>

::<i><b>Advisory Board </b></i></br></br>

::</br></br>

<b>Daniel Burgess </b></br></br>

Local Chairman, Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen, Division 456</br></br>

</br></br>

<b>Dr. Beverly A. Cigler</b></br></br>

Professor of Public Policy & Administration, Penn State Harrisburg</br></br>

</br></br>

<b>Steve Gothreau</b></br></br>

Norfolk Southern Rail Train & Engine Service (Retired)</br></br>

</br></br>

<b>Philip Mortimer</b></br></br>

Director, TruckTrain Industries</br></br>

</br></br>

<b>Mingzhou Jin, Ph.D</b>.</br></br>

Associate Head Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Tennessee</br></br>

</br></br>

<b>Brian Rademacher</b></br></br>

CEcD Economic Development Director, City of Ormond Beach</br></br>

</br></br>

<b>Karen Risa Robbins</b></br></br>

Principal, Washington Progress Group</br></br>

</br></br>

<b>Peter Schwartzman</b></br></br>

Associate Professor & Chair, Knox College Environmental Studies Program</br></br>

</br></br>

<b>Dr. Joseph Schwieterman</b></br></br>

Director, DePaul University, Chaddick Institute for Metropolitan Development</br></br>

</br></br>

</br></br>

Founder's Statement

2024-09-18T14:10:53Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

OnTrackNorthAmerica (OTNA) was founded by Michael Sussman in 2007 as a nonprofit 501c3 transportation think tank and consultancy co-leading society in redesigning industrial systems to support sustainable life. <b>Michael Sussman</b> began his career in transportation in 1994 by launching Strategic Rail Finance, a North American transportation-industry consulting firm, and has since advised on infrastructure-related projects, companies, and systems for private and public sector clients in 44 states and Canada.</br>

</br>

At OTNA, we uphold objectivity and nonpartisanship. Our autonomy from financial, political, or personal interests undergirds our ethics. Historically, industrial growth has prioritized economic advancement over community and environmental stewardship. We advance industrial systems that are financially profitable and sustainable. </br>

</br>

OTNA continually embraces the latest perspectives that inform progress toward these goals. We support investments in projects that enable the transition from fossil fuels, petrochemicals, and environmental stresses while acknowledging pragmatic challenges. OTNA values rationality and paths that provide the greatest benefit to the most people. </br>

</br>

<b>OTNA has developed state and regional plans, tools, </b><b>analyses</b><b>, and paradigms support</b><b>ing</b><b> these </b><b>values</b><b>. </b></br>

</br>

In 2023, OTNA led a four-county stakeholder process in New Mexico in the aftermath of a 350,000-acre forest fire resulting in the New Mexico Forestry Business Plan.</br>

In 2021, OTNA convened hundreds of transportation stakeholders to create Nevada’s 2021 State Rail Plan, a new whole-systems paradigm for statewide rail-enabled economic development.</br>

On December 11, 2008, OTNA gathered industry and government leaders in the U.S. Capitol Building to set a new collaborative framework for freight rail transportation efficiency.</br>

On December 8, 1998, OTNA convened a rail transportation educational event in the U.S. Capitol Building for 55 congressional staff. </br>

</br>

<b>OnTrackNorthAmerica Frequently Collaborates with Partners in Academia </b></br>

Dr. Barbara Gray, founder of Penn State University’s Center for Research in Conflict and Negotiation, has contributed significantly to OTNA’s work. </br>

The University of Tennessee’s Institute for a Secure and Sustainable Future provided research and development assistance for OTNA’s Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator.</br>

Philadelphia’s Temple University hosted Michael’s talk, “How Collaboration, Trust, and Railroads Will Save the World,” on December 5th, 2023.</br>

The Transportation Research Forum honored Michael with its 2024 annual President’s Award.</br>

Michael serves on the Industry Advisory Board of the six-university consortium, Center for Freight Transportation and Efficient & Resilient Supply Chains </br>

</br>

<b>He has contributed </b><b>to </b><b>improving public policy by meeting with s</b><b>taff or leaders of 68 U.S. Senate and 1</b><b>65</b><b> U.S. House offices</b><b>. </b></br>

</br>

In March of 2011, Michael was the only private sector invitee to a U.S. House Railroad Subcommittee Staff Workshop to explore ways to improve the FRA RRIF loan program.</br>

:On February 17, 2011, he testified before the U.S. House of Representatives Railroad Subcommittee on reforms to the Federal Railroad Administration’s Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) program.</br>

On October 19, 2005, he spoke before the Surface Transportation Board on the 25th anniversary of the Staggers Rail Act of 1980.</br>

<b>
</b><b>Representative acknowledgments of these efforts:</b><b> </b></br>

Thank you letters from Republican House Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Frank Wolf and Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller’s Chief of Staff.</br>

In 2003, he contributed to Washington State produce shippers by designing and writing important elements of the Washington State Produce Railcar Pool Act as passed by the 2003 state legislature.</br>

In 1999, he worked with the Federal Railroad Administration to eliminate audited financial statement requirements for Class II and III railroads from the Railroad Rehabilitation & Improvement Financing Act (RRIF loan program).</br>

In November of 1997 he was responsible for making freight rail projects eligible in H.R.115 – the National Infrastructure Development Act.</br>

</br>

<b>Michael ‘</b><b>s </b><b>writing</b><b> </b><b>has</b><b> </b><b>been </b><b>published in </b><b>many</b><b> transportation industry journals</b><b>:</b></br>

Railway Age, December 2014, “Revitalizing Direct Rail Service”</br>

Railway Age, April 2011, “A RRIF-Centered Capitalization Growth Strategy”</br>

Railway Age, September 2008, “Leveraging Capital for the Entire Industry”</br>

Transportation Quarterly, Fall 2002, “Regional and Short Line Railroads in the United States”</br>

Association of Transportation Law, Logistics & Policy, Fall 2000, “Assessing the Process of Creating the RRIF Program”</br>

Progressive Railroading, June 1998, “Getting a Lender’s Attention”</br>

:</br>

:<i><b>Board of Directors</b></i></br>

<h3>Michael Sussman</h3></br>

<h4> Chairman, OnTrackNorthAmerica and Chairman & CEO, Strategic Rail Finance</h4></br>

<h3>Eugene N. (“Gene”) Cipriani</h3></br>

<h4>Attorney; former advisor to the United States Railway Association (U.S.R.A.); former in-house corporate counsel for Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA)</h4></br>

<h3>Daniel R. Elliott</h3></br>

<h4> Transportation Attorney, Former Chairman of U.S. Surface Transportation Board</h4></br>

<h3>R. Powell Felix</h3></br>

<h4> Founder, Indiana Boxcar Corporation</h4></br>

<h3>Jim Hoecker</h3></br>

<h4>Founder, Hoecker Energy Law & Policy PLLC, former Chair of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission</h4></br>

:</br>

:</br>

:<i><b>Advisory Board </b></i></br>

:</br>

<b>Daniel Burgess </b></br>

Local Chairman, Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen, Division 456</br>

</br>

<b>Dr. Beverly A. Cigler</b></br>

Professor of Public Policy & Administration, Penn State Harrisburg</br>

</br>

<b>Steve Gothreau</b></br>

Norfolk Southern Rail Train & Engine Service (Retired)</br>

</br>

<b>Philip Mortimer</b></br>

Director, TruckTrain Industries</br>

</br>

<b>Mingzhou Jin, Ph.D</b>.</br>

Associate Head Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Tennessee</br>

</br>

<b>Brian Rademacher</b></br>

CEcD Economic Development Director, City of Ormond Beach</br>

</br>

<b>Karen Risa Robbins</b></br>

Principal, Washington Progress Group</br>

</br>

<b>Peter Schwartzman</b></br>

Associate Professor & Chair, Knox College Environmental Studies Program</br>

</br>

<b>Dr. Joseph Schwieterman</b></br>

Director, DePaul University, Chaddick Institute for Metropolitan Development</br>

</br>

</br>

Founder's Statement

2024-09-12T18:22:16Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<h2>OnTrackNorthAmerica is a nonprofit transportation consultancy and think tank committed to co-leading society in redesigning our industrial systems to support sustainable life. Industrial systems are the complete set of commercial, policy, and planning activities that deliver materials and products for modern civilization’s survival and satisfaction. From the inputs of raw materials, labor, land, transportation, power, and infrastructure to the process and activities needed to convert those raw materials into finished products, we must conceive of industrial systems as a whole. Too often, industrial sectors operate in fragmented silos striving to reach arbitrary and, at times, conflicting goals. </h2></br></br>

</br></br>

Competition has limited the efficiency of our industrial systems. Supply chains have evolved as a chaotic response to individual shippers and developers' indiscriminate land transactions, regardless of the transportation inefficiencies those choices impose. How we move freight between industrial locations must be a central focus in industrial systems planning. North America currently underutilizes freight railroads despite the fact that rail is often economically, environmentally, and geographically superior to other modes of moving freight over land. Climate change, air pollution, congested highways, and dependence on oil diminish our quality of life. Railroads, ocean carriers, freight forwarders, ports, trucking companies, distributors, and shippers must cooperate and coordinate in transitioning to a comprehensive, multimodal supply chain. </br></br>

</br></br>

As a society, we don’t lack intelligence. We lack a communication framework that builds solutions without being derailed by excessive competition, mistrust, or vested interests focused on short-term profits. OnTrackNorthAmerica uses IntelliSynthesis®, our patented inquiry-based methodology for efficiently gathering collective intelligence into productive solutions. Using the most advanced communication technology, we convene stakeholders in IntelliConferences to collaboratively design the most efficient action plans for industrial transportation. </br></br>

</br></br>

<b>Michael Sussman</b> began his career in transportation in 1994 by launching Strategic Rail Finance, a North American transportation-industry consulting firm. He went on to found OnTrackNorthAmerica in 2007 advising private and public sector clients in 44 states and Canada.</br></br>

</br></br>

In 2023 OnTrackNorthAmerica led a four-county stakeholder process in New Mexico in the aftermath of a 450,000-acre forest fire. This work resulted in the New Mexico Forestry Business Plan.</br></br>

In 2021 OTNA convened hundreds of transportation stakeholders in the process of creating Nevada’s 2021 State Rail Plan, supporting the Nevada Department of Transportation in a new whole-systems paradigm for freight rail planning.</br></br>

On December 11, 2008, OTNA convened a five-hour summit of industry and government leaders in the U.S. Capitol Building to consider new collaborative approaches to freight transportation efficiency.</br></br>

On December 8, 1998, OTNA convened a rail transportation conference in the U.S. Capitol Building for 55 congressional staff, praised by many as the finest briefing they had ever attended.</br></br>

</br></br>

He has contributed considerable time to improving public policy by meeting with staff or leaders of 68 U.S. Senate offices and 135 U.S. House offices. </br></br>

</br></br>

In March of 2011 Michael was the only private sector invitee to a U.S. House Railroad Subcommittee Staff Workshop exploring ways to improve the FRA RRIF loan program.</br></br>

::On February 17, 2011, Michael testified before the U.S. House of Representatives Railroad Subcommittee on reforms to the Federal Railroad Administration’s Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) program.</br></br>

On October 19, 2005, Michael spoke before the Surface Transportation Board on the 25th anniversary of the Staggers Rail Act of 1980.</br></br>

</br></br>

Those efforts were acknowledged </br></br>

On April 5th, 2024, Michal received the President’s Award from the Transportation Research Forum.</br></br>

Thank you letters from Republican House Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Frank Wolf and Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller’s Chief of Staff.</br></br>

In 2003 he contributed to Washington State produce shippers by designing and writing important elements of the Washington State Produce Railcar Pool Act as passed by the 2003 state legislature.</br></br>

In 1999 he worked with the Federal Railroad Administration to eliminate audited financial statement requirements for Class II and III railroads from the Railroad Rehabilitation & Improvement Financing Act (RRIF loan program).</br></br>

In November of 1997 he was responsible for having freight rail projects made eligible in H.R.115 – the National Infrastructure Development Act.</br></br>

</br></br>

Michael has had several academic collaborators over the years to help bring focus to the pressing matters of our time:</br></br>

Penn State’s Center for Research in Conflict and Negotiation. Dr. Barbara Gray the former director of the Center, wrote me a letter of support.</br></br>

Partnering with the University of Tennessee to create the Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator.</br></br>

Michael hosted at Temple University to deliver on December 5th, 2023 the OnTrack2025 IntelliConference.</br></br>

</br></br>

Michael has had articles published in several transportation industry journals.</br></br>

Railway Age, December 2014, “Revitalizing Direct Rail Service”</br></br>

Railway Age, April 2011, “A RRIF-Centered Capitalization Growth Strategy”</br></br>

Railway Age, September 2008, “Leveraging Capital for the Entire Industry”</br></br>

Transportation Quarterly, Fall 2002, “Regional and Short Line Railroads in the United States”</br></br>

Association of Transportation Law, Logistics & Policy, Fall 2000, “Assessing the Process of Creating the RRIF Program”</br></br>

Progressive Railroading, June 1998, “Getting a Lender’s Attention”</br></br>

::</br></br>

Founder's Statement

2024-09-12T18:22:06Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<h2>OnTrackNorthAmerica is a nonprofit transportation consultancy and think tank committed to co-leading society in redesigning our industrial systems to support sustainable life. Industrial systems are the complete set of commercial, policy, and planning activities that deliver materials and products for modern civilization’s survival and satisfaction. From the inputs of raw materials, labor, land, transportation, power, and infrastructure to the process and activities needed to convert those raw materials into finished products, we must conceive of industrial systems as a whole. Too often, industrial sectors operate in fragmented silos striving to reach arbitrary and, at times, conflicting goals. </h2></br>

</br>

Competition has limited the efficiency of our industrial systems. Supply chains have evolved as a chaotic response to individual shippers and developers' indiscriminate land transactions, regardless of the transportation inefficiencies those choices impose. How we move freight between industrial locations must be a central focus in industrial systems planning. North America currently underutilizes freight railroads despite the fact that rail is often economically, environmentally, and geographically superior to other modes of moving freight over land. Climate change, air pollution, congested highways, and dependence on oil diminish our quality of life. Railroads, ocean carriers, freight forwarders, ports, trucking companies, distributors, and shippers must cooperate and coordinate in transitioning to a comprehensive, multimodal supply chain. </br>

</br>

As a society, we don’t lack intelligence. We lack a communication framework that builds solutions without being derailed by excessive competition, mistrust, or vested interests focused on short-term profits. OnTrackNorthAmerica uses IntelliSynthesis®, our patented inquiry-based methodology for efficiently gathering collective intelligence into productive solutions. Using the most advanced communication technology, we convene stakeholders in IntelliConferences to collaboratively design the most efficient action plans for industrial transportation. </br>

</br>

<b>Michael Sussman</b> began his career in transportation in 1994 by launching Strategic Rail Finance, a North American transportation-industry consulting firm. He went on to found OnTrackNorthAmerica in 2007 advising private and public sector clients in 44 states and Canada.</br>

</br>

In 2023 OnTrackNorthAmerica led a four-county stakeholder process in New Mexico in the aftermath of a 450,000-acre forest fire. This work resulted in the New Mexico Forestry Business Plan.</br>

In 2021 OTNA convened hundreds of transportation stakeholders in the process of creating Nevada’s 2021 State Rail Plan, supporting the Nevada Department of Transportation in a new whole-systems paradigm for freight rail planning.</br>

On December 11, 2008, OTNA convened a five-hour summit of industry and government leaders in the U.S. Capitol Building to consider new collaborative approaches to freight transportation efficiency.</br>

On December 8, 1998, OTNA convened a rail transportation conference in the U.S. Capitol Building for 55 congressional staff, praised by many as the finest briefing they had ever attended.</br>

</br>

He has contributed considerable time to improving public policy by meeting with staff or leaders of 68 U.S. Senate offices and 135 U.S. House offices. </br>

</br>

In March of 2011 Michael was the only private sector invitee to a U.S. House Railroad Subcommittee Staff Workshop exploring ways to improve the FRA RRIF loan program.</br>

:On February 17, 2011, Michael testified before the U.S. House of Representatives Railroad Subcommittee on reforms to the Federal Railroad Administration’s Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) program.</br>

On October 19, 2005, Michael spoke before the Surface Transportation Board on the 25th anniversary of the Staggers Rail Act of 1980.</br>

</br>

Those efforts were acknowledged </br>

On April 5th, 2024, Michal received the President’s Award from the Transportation Research Forum.</br>

Thank you letters from Republican House Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Frank Wolf and Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller’s Chief of Staff.</br>

In 2003 he contributed to Washington State produce shippers by designing and writing important elements of the Washington State Produce Railcar Pool Act as passed by the 2003 state legislature.</br>

In 1999 he worked with the Federal Railroad Administration to eliminate audited financial statement requirements for Class II and III railroads from the Railroad Rehabilitation & Improvement Financing Act (RRIF loan program).</br>

In November of 1997 he was responsible for having freight rail projects made eligible in H.R.115 – the National Infrastructure Development Act.</br>

</br>

Michael has had several academic collaborators over the years to help bring focus to the pressing matters of our time:</br>

Penn State’s Center for Research in Conflict and Negotiation. Dr. Barbara Gray the former director of the Center, wrote me a letter of support.</br>

Partnering with the University of Tennessee to create the Land Freight Lifecycle Impact Calculator.</br>

Michael hosted at Temple University to deliver on December 5th, 2023 the OnTrack2025 IntelliConference.</br>

</br>

Michael has had articles published in several transportation industry journals.</br>

Railway Age, December 2014, “Revitalizing Direct Rail Service”</br>

Railway Age, April 2011, “A RRIF-Centered Capitalization Growth Strategy”</br>

Railway Age, September 2008, “Leveraging Capital for the Entire Industry”</br>

Transportation Quarterly, Fall 2002, “Regional and Short Line Railroads in the United States”</br>

Association of Transportation Law, Logistics & Policy, Fall 2000, “Assessing the Process of Creating the RRIF Program”</br>

Progressive Railroading, June 1998, “Getting a Lender’s Attention”</br>

:</br>

VitalRail/IntelliConferences/Rail Technology Adoption

2024-09-11T15:10:48Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>Rail Technology Adoption</b></br></br>

Technology adoption by freight railroads has a long history, driven by internal business agendas, external regulation, and shipper requirements. Existing technologies can either be improved incrementally or replaced completely by new technological advances. This dynamic pace of change is challenging to manage, exacerbated by organizational silos and varying perspectives among vendors and in-house developers. Technology, especially software and communications, is increasingly relied on for safe and efficient operations and business processes. There is an inclination to replace human labor with technology because of technology’s superior ability to handle some types of complexity consistently. However, human intelligence is broader and more nuanced. The goal must be to optimize the interaction between technology and humans in complementary systems that empower situationally aware decisions.</br></br>

<b>Core Question:</b></br></br>

What level of cooperative interaction among stakeholders is required to implement technologies that effectively balance business drivers, increase safety, increase capacity for growth, and improve customer service while promoting a culture of empowerment and inclusion for railroad staff at all levels, from executive management to craft labor?</br></br>

<b>Stakeholders</b></br></br>

Railroad investors</br></br>

Railroad executive management, particularly the CFO, COO, and CTO</br></br>

Railroad subject matter experts</br></br>

Department Management:</br></br>

Operations</br></br>

Mechanical</br></br>

Dispatching</br></br>

Engineering (track, B&B, IT, Signaling and Communications)</br></br>

Marketing and Sales</br></br>

Field management</br></br>

Craft labor:</br></br>

Train, Yard, and Engine</br></br>

Dispatchers</br></br>

Mechanical</br></br>

Signaling/Communications</br></br>

Maintenance of Way</br></br>

In-house R&D and systems architecture staff</br></br>

In-house software and network developers</br></br>

Equipment and rolling stock vendors</br></br>

Information technology vendors</br></br>

Shippers and BCOs</br></br>

Logistics Businesses (3PLs, IMCs, other supply chain management)</br></br>

Other carriers (steamship, truck, barge)</br></br>

<i><i><b>Round 1</b></i></i></br></br>

<b>Current State of Technology</b></br></br>

</br></br>

How do the following aspects of the railroad business benefit from technological advances and improvements, and are there others that need to be identified?</br></br>

Managing the complexity of multiple thousands of origin-destination pairs in service design.</br></br>

Improvements to locomotive power, cost, flexibility, and maintainability.</br></br>

Improvements to rolling stock efficiency, capacity, load/unload cost, and safety.</br></br>

Safe train control and location awareness for:</br></br>

Train speeds beyond what a human locomotive engineer can manage alone.</br></br>

Operation of longer and heavier trains over demanding grade and curvature profiles.</br></br>

Expanding a dispatcher’s ability to control greater volumes with variable priorities effectively.</br></br>

Shipment tracking and schedule adherence.</br></br>

Improvements to track load bearing, longevity, rolling friction, safe operating speed, and maintainability.</br></br>

What are the most important aspects of technological capability and change that influence decisions to fund, deploy, and refine post-deployment?</br></br>

Timing relative to the technology’s maturity curve</br></br>

Expected effectiveness of the improvement</br></br>

Minimum effectiveness level to be deployed at scale</br></br>

Identification of unintended consequences and functionality gaps that lead to further refinements</br></br>

How are projects to correct intentional or accidental functionality gaps to already adopted technologies identified and funded?</br></br>

How does the technology adoption lifecycle from inception to obsolescence differ when:</br></br>

Mandated by regulation?</br></br>

Driven by cost reduction?</br></br>

Driven by train service improvements and revenue growth?</br></br>

How does the technology adoption lifecycle from inception to obsolescence differ for:</br></br>

Information and communications technologies applied to railroad operating and business processes such as (but are not limited to):</br></br>

Train service planning</br></br>

Train consists </br></br>

makeup and terminal automation</br></br>

Power assignment to train services</br></br>

Crew and yard personnel assignment</br></br>

Train dispatching location detection, conflict prevention, and operating authority communication</br></br>

Mechanical defect detection</br></br>

Locomotive operating health management and telematics</br></br>

Locomotive throttle and braking management</br></br>

Car and shipment location tracking</br></br>

Other railcar telematics such as location, health, load stability, and temperature</br></br>

Billing</br></br>

Locomotive energy cost efficiency, emissions management, maintainability, or operational flexibility?</br></br>

Railcar capacity, weight, aerodynamics, maintainability, or ease of loading/unloading?</br></br>

Locomotive and railcar air brake performance improvements?</br></br>

Trackage friction, stability, longevity improvements?</br></br>

How is technological obsolescence identified and corrected?</br></br>

<i><i><b>Round 2</b></i></i></br></br>

<b>Organizational Impact on Technology Adoption</b></br></br>

How do the following aspects of the railroad business benefit from technological advances and improvements, and are there others that need to be identified?</br></br>

What success measures and methods are used for a potential technological improvement to a railroad application to evaluate feasibility, funding, implementation, testing, and approval for in-service deployment at scale?</br></br>

Are all parts of the organization involved in the definition of the success measures and methods identified above when the adoption of new or improved technologies crosses organizational boundaries?</br></br>

How can any unforeseen costs and unintended consequences of a new or modified technology solution be identified as early as possible, and how are additional measures to correct these shortcomings funded, implemented, tested, and approved for deployment in railroad operations?</br></br>

In order for adopted technologies to achieve promised benefits, how can stakeholders more effectively evaluate the need for improvements?</br></br>

How are different technological solutions prioritized, given finite funding and implementation resources:</br></br>

Among solutions that address the same problem domain?</br></br>

Among solutions whose problem domains partially overlap?</br></br>

Among solutions where one solution is a subset of another? Is there a “minimum viable solution” that implies a more comprehensive one?</br></br>

Among solutions to completely different problems?</br></br>

How does the technology adoption lifecycle from inception to obsolescence differ when:</br></br>

Obtained from an outside vendor?</br></br>

Designed and implemented in-house?</br></br>

When considering the adoption of information and communication-based technologies, to what degree do components of those solutions satisfy multiple higher-level goals or functions (e.g., precise and timely train, locomotive, car location tracking, or train consist makeup)?</br></br>

Should these components be sharable and integrated into a common system architecture to:</br></br>

Guarantee consistent behavior across functions?</br></br>

Reduce testing, modification, or procurement costs?</br></br>

Provide a “single source of data truth” such that contradictory answers or system responses do not result from inconsistent behavior?</br></br>

When do varying quality-of-service requirements or the lifecycles of already adopted technologies drive separately implemented components that perform the same general function?</br></br>

<i><i><b>Round 3</b></i></i></br></br>

<b>Optimizing Human and Digital Technology Interaction</b></br></br>

What are the strengths of technological capabilities compared to human capabilities?</br></br>

What are the strengths of human capabilities compared to technology?</br></br>

When identifying, evaluating, and testing new technology solutions, how can human decision-making be incorporated to leverage the technological strengths?</br></br>

When identifying, designing, evaluating, and testing new technology solutions, how does the proposed solution keep human operators engaged and alert for situations the machine isn’t able to handle?</br></br>

How can intentional or accidental functionality gaps in already adopted technologies be efficiently mitigated with human intervention?</br></br>

VitalRail/IntelliConferences/Rail Technology Adoption

2024-09-11T15:10:38Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>Rail Technology Adoption</b></br>

Technology adoption by freight railroads has a long history, driven by internal business agendas, external regulation, and shipper requirements. Existing technologies can either be improved incrementally or replaced completely by new technological advances. This dynamic pace of change is challenging to manage, exacerbated by organizational silos and varying perspectives among vendors and in-house developers. Technology, especially software and communications, is increasingly relied on for safe and efficient operations and business processes. There is an inclination to replace human labor with technology because of technology’s superior ability to handle some types of complexity consistently. However, human intelligence is broader and more nuanced. The goal must be to optimize the interaction between technology and humans in complementary systems that empower situationally aware decisions.</br>

<b>Core Question:</b></br>

What level of cooperative interaction among stakeholders is required to implement technologies that effectively balance business drivers, increase safety, increase capacity for growth, and improve customer service while promoting a culture of empowerment and inclusion for railroad staff at all levels, from executive management to craft labor?</br>

<b>Stakeholders</b></br>

Railroad investors</br>

Railroad executive management, particularly the CFO, COO, and CTO</br>

Railroad subject matter experts</br>

Department Management:</br>

Operations</br>

Mechanical</br>

Dispatching</br>

Engineering (track, B&B, IT, Signaling and Communications)</br>

Marketing and Sales</br>

Field management</br>

Craft labor:</br>

Train, Yard, and Engine</br>

Dispatchers</br>

Mechanical</br>

Signaling/Communications</br>

Maintenance of Way</br>

In-house R&D and systems architecture staff</br>

In-house software and network developers</br>

Equipment and rolling stock vendors</br>

Information technology vendors</br>

Shippers and BCOs</br>

Logistics Businesses (3PLs, IMCs, other supply chain management)</br>

Other carriers (steamship, truck, barge)</br>

<i><i><b>Round 1</b></i></i></br>

<b>Current State of Technology</b></br>

</br>

How do the following aspects of the railroad business benefit from technological advances and improvements, and are there others that need to be identified?</br>

Managing the complexity of multiple thousands of origin-destination pairs in service design.</br>

Improvements to locomotive power, cost, flexibility, and maintainability.</br>

Improvements to rolling stock efficiency, capacity, load/unload cost, and safety.</br>

Safe train control and location awareness for:</br>

Train speeds beyond what a human locomotive engineer can manage alone.</br>

Operation of longer and heavier trains over demanding grade and curvature profiles.</br>

Expanding a dispatcher’s ability to control greater volumes with variable priorities effectively.</br>

Shipment tracking and schedule adherence.</br>

Improvements to track load bearing, longevity, rolling friction, safe operating speed, and maintainability.</br>

What are the most important aspects of technological capability and change that influence decisions to fund, deploy, and refine post-deployment?</br>

Timing relative to the technology’s maturity curve</br>

Expected effectiveness of the improvement</br>

Minimum effectiveness level to be deployed at scale</br>

Identification of unintended consequences and functionality gaps that lead to further refinements</br>

How are projects to correct intentional or accidental functionality gaps to already adopted technologies identified and funded?</br>

How does the technology adoption lifecycle from inception to obsolescence differ when:</br>

Mandated by regulation?</br>

Driven by cost reduction?</br>

Driven by train service improvements and revenue growth?</br>

How does the technology adoption lifecycle from inception to obsolescence differ for:</br>

Information and communications technologies applied to railroad operating and business processes such as (but are not limited to):</br>

Train service planning</br>

Train consists </br>

makeup and terminal automation</br>

Power assignment to train services</br>

Crew and yard personnel assignment</br>

Train dispatching location detection, conflict prevention, and operating authority communication</br>

Mechanical defect detection</br>

Locomotive operating health management and telematics</br>

Locomotive throttle and braking management</br>

Car and shipment location tracking</br>

Other railcar telematics such as location, health, load stability, and temperature</br>

Billing</br>

Locomotive energy cost efficiency, emissions management, maintainability, or operational flexibility?</br>

Railcar capacity, weight, aerodynamics, maintainability, or ease of loading/unloading?</br>

Locomotive and railcar air brake performance improvements?</br>

Trackage friction, stability, longevity improvements?</br>

How is technological obsolescence identified and corrected?</br>

<i><i><b>Round 2</b></i></i></br>

<b>Organizational Impact on Technology Adoption</b></br>

How do the following aspects of the railroad business benefit from technological advances and improvements, and are there others that need to be identified?</br>

What success measures and methods are used for a potential technological improvement to a railroad application to evaluate feasibility, funding, implementation, testing, and approval for in-service deployment at scale?</br>

Are all parts of the organization involved in the definition of the success measures and methods identified above when the adoption of new or improved technologies crosses organizational boundaries?</br>

How can any unforeseen costs and unintended consequences of a new or modified technology solution be identified as early as possible, and how are additional measures to correct these shortcomings funded, implemented, tested, and approved for deployment in railroad operations?</br>

In order for adopted technologies to achieve promised benefits, how can stakeholders more effectively evaluate the need for improvements?</br>

How are different technological solutions prioritized, given finite funding and implementation resources:</br>

Among solutions that address the same problem domain?</br>

Among solutions whose problem domains partially overlap?</br>

Among solutions where one solution is a subset of another? Is there a “minimum viable solution” that implies a more comprehensive one?</br>

Among solutions to completely different problems?</br>

How does the technology adoption lifecycle from inception to obsolescence differ when:</br>

Obtained from an outside vendor?</br>

Designed and implemented in-house?</br>

When considering the adoption of information and communication-based technologies, to what degree do components of those solutions satisfy multiple higher-level goals or functions (e.g., precise and timely train, locomotive, car location tracking, or train consist makeup)?</br>

Should these components be sharable and integrated into a common system architecture to:</br>

Guarantee consistent behavior across functions?</br>

Reduce testing, modification, or procurement costs?</br>

Provide a “single source of data truth” such that contradictory answers or system responses do not result from inconsistent behavior?</br>

When do varying quality-of-service requirements or the lifecycles of already adopted technologies drive separately implemented components that perform the same general function?</br>

<i><i><b>Round 3</b></i></i></br>

<b>Optimizing Human and Digital Technology Interaction</b></br>

What are the strengths of technological capabilities compared to human capabilities?</br>

What are the strengths of human capabilities compared to technology?</br>

When identifying, evaluating, and testing new technology solutions, how can human decision-making be incorporated to leverage the technological strengths?</br>

When identifying, designing, evaluating, and testing new technology solutions, how does the proposed solution keep human operators engaged and alert for situations the machine isn’t able to handle?</br>

How can intentional or accidental functionality gaps in already adopted technologies be efficiently mitigated with human intervention?</br>

VitalRail/IntelliConferences/Freight Transportation Land Use

2024-09-11T15:07:58Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>Freight Transportation Land Use</b></br></br>

The planning paradigm for industrial development has excluded the implications of site selection on the movement of freight to and from a property. This blind spot in land planning has had negative economic, environmental, and social consequences. Ensuring the quality of community life in municipalities, regions, and continents requires thoughtful coordination of land use decision-making with local and national supply chains, freight networks, and industrial systems.</br></br>

<b>Core Question:</b></br></br>

<b>How can we institutionalize integrated planning of land use, freight transportation, and industrial systems among public and private-sector stakeholders?</b></br></br>

<b>Stakeholders</b></br></br>

Citizen</br></br>

Non-industrial business owners and organizations</br></br>

Economic development agencies</br></br>

Public-sector planning agencies</br></br>

Elected officials</br></br>

Industrial facility sponsors</br></br>

Developers</br></br>

Freight transportation companies including:</br></br>

railroads</br></br>

trucking companies</br></br>

martimue users/operators</br></br>

air freight carriers</br></br>

terminal owners/operators, including ports and airports</br></br>

Academic institutions</br></br>

Non-academic professional organizations and associations</br></br>

Environmental groups</br></br>

<i><i><b>Round 1</b></i></i></br></br>

<b>Current State</b></br></br>

How do the stakeholder groups currently relate to freight transportation land use policies and plans</br></br>

Citizens</br></br>

How are the citizens and community groups aligned or misaligned in regard to planning of land use, freight transportation, and industrial systems?</br></br>

What are their conflicting benefits and concerns?</br></br>

Where is the balance between these potentially conflicting interests?</br></br>

Non-Industrial Business Owners and Organizations (Current)</br></br>

How are non-industrial business owners and organizations aligned or misaligned in regard to the planning of land use, freight transportation, and industrial systems?</br></br>

What are their conflicting benefits and concerns?</br></br>

Where is the balance between these potentially conflicting interests</br></br>

Economic Development Agencies</br></br>

Who are the local economic development agencies whose responsibility should concern comprehensive industrial planning?</br></br>

To which agendas are these organizations beholden?</br></br>

Public-Sector Planning Agencies</br></br>

What is the land use-related governing and planning system in each U.S. and Mexican state and Canadian province?</br></br>

Which are the governing agencies at each level (local, county, state/province, regional, national) with vested interests and/or authority in industrial development and freight transportation reviews and approvals?</br></br>

What are the systems in place for these reviews and approvals?</br></br>

Elected Officials</br></br>

Who are the constituencies dictating an elected official’s obligations and decision-making process</br></br>

What powers do elected officials possess relative to the governance of land planning and freight transportation?</br></br>

What are the elected official’s agendas, and how does effective change in freight transportation and land development policies further those agendas?</br></br>

What are the constituencies’ respective agendas, and how does effective change in freight transportation and land development policies further those agendas?</br></br>

How are the elected officials and their constituencies’ respective agendas aligned?</br></br>

If misaligned, what is the balance between the two in the context of land development and freight transportation?</br></br>

Industrial Facility Operators</br></br>

What is the current sentiment among operators about land planning, freight transportation and industrial systems?</br></br>

How does current land planning, freight transportation, and industrial systems benefit industrial facility operators?</br></br>

How does current land planning, freight transportation, and industrial systems hinder or hurt industrial facility operators?</br></br>

Developers</br></br>

What are the costs associated with incorporating rail service into industrial development?</br></br>

What are the calculable economic benefits of freight-conscious land development?</br></br>

What other areas of expertise need to be integrated into freight transportation land use planning?</br></br>

Freight Transportation Companies, including Railroads, Trucking Companies, Maritime Users/Operators, Air Freight Terminal Owners/Operators</br></br>

What is the current status of truck routes and rail lines?</br></br>

Do they need to be upgraded or expanded?</br></br>

How do existing transportation arteries meet the new capacity needs, and what new investments are called for?</br></br>

Academic Institutions</br></br>

What are the main topics and themes related to land planning, freight transportation, and industrial systems being taught in today’s academic institutions?</br></br>

Which academic institutions are leaders in the fields of land planning, freight transportation, and industrial systems?</br></br>

Under which disciplines are the study of land planning, freight transportation, and industrial systems covered?</br></br>

Environmental Groups</br></br>

What is the current impact of land planning, freight transportation, and industrial systems on the environment?</br></br>

Which activities related to the above topics pose the greatest threat to the environment?</br></br>

<i><i><b>Round 2</b></i></i></br></br>

<b>Future State</b></br></br>

What concerns do each stakeholder group have that should be addressed in comprehensive planning?</br></br>

Citizens</br></br>

How will we ensure that changes in freight transportation and land use policies in industrial land development do not negatively affect health, </br></br>

::quality of life, and fairness while maintaining respect for history and culture?</br></br>

What benefits are derived from new or expanded industrial facilities, including jobs and community tax revenues?</br></br>

Non-Industrial Business Owners and Organizations (Current)</br></br>

What are the ramifications of including freight logistics to and from properties in industrial land planning?</br></br>

Who will benefit?</br></br>

Who will be hurt?</br></br>

What are the ramifications of increased rail activity on the local economies through which rail passes?</br></br>

What is the calculable economic loss local businesses will face with fewer trucks and drivers passing through their region?</br></br>

How will local non-industrial businesses benefit from freight-conscious land planning and development?</br></br>

Economic Development Agencies</br></br>

How will the industries they are obligated to support be harmed by changes in land development and freight transportation?</br></br>

How can this be minimized or reconciled?</br></br>

How will changes in industrial land development and freight transportation further an economic development agency’s goals?</br></br>

Public-Sector Planning Agencies</br></br>

What would be needed to consolidate and streamline these reviews and approvals without sacrificing jurisdictional integrity and sustainability goals?</br></br>

What steps can be taken so that integrated land use and freight transportation planning can become a broadly accepted policy?</br></br>

How can the life-cycle cost impacts be integrated into assessing the income and revenue benefits?</br></br>

What steps can we take to have transportation land use plans become a fully integrated component for new freight-related development?</br></br>

What land use zoning practices do we want to initiate that preserve land adjacent to freight corridors and facilities for freight-related development?</br></br>

Who are the allies for developing a program of national preservation of property adjacent to rail rights-of-way for future rail development?</br></br>

Elected Officials</br></br>

Will there be opposition or backlash to an elected official leveraging their powers to address land development and freight transportation?</br></br>

If so, how can it be minimized or addressed?</br></br>

What vehicles must the elected official use to promote change? E.g., Legislation, formation of a committee, public speech?</br></br>

How can effective change in freight transportation and land development policies be measured so that officials can clearly share their results with their constituency?</br></br>

Industrial Facility Operators</br></br>

How will changes in freight movement benefit operators and shareholders?</br></br>

How will any and all changes affect the profit margin?</br></br>

How long will a change in facility operations take, and at what cost?</br></br>

How can existing operations be adjusted for more thoughtful freight transportation while limiting downtime and cost?</br></br>

Who is responsible for these costs, and is assistance available?</br></br>

How can organizations convey the value of freight-conscious land development policies and the subsequent effects to shareholders?</br></br>

What opposition might operators face if freight-conscious land development policies result in systemic changes to facility operations?</br></br>

If so, how can this be minimized or reframed?</br></br>

How will changes to freight plans support the economic driver of business?</br></br>

How will changes to freight plans alleviate a burden on business?</br></br>

How can comprehensive thinking in land development and freight transportation, including rail, alleviate an economic burden and enhance land values and business results?</br></br>

Developers</br></br>

How can we scale up consciousness and expertise in freight transportation land use planning throughout the development community?</br></br>

How can industrial developers, investors, and financial institutions be incentivized to collaborate with communities and all stakeholders to integrate freight transportation land use planning into master plans?</br></br>

How can we dispel the thinking that freight-conscious land planning policies will limit the amount and viability of developable land and, in turn, economic opportunity?</br></br>

How can partnerships be structured to satisfy the needs of all stakeholders and maintain core values and goals of sustainability?</br></br>

How will freight-conscious land development policies affect development timelines and costs?</br></br>

Freight Transportation Companies, including Railroads, Trucking Companies, Maritime Users/Operators, Air Freight Terminal Owners/Operators</br></br>

What new freight transportation arteries are needed?</br></br>

How long will it take for supply chains to adjust to the increased/decreased load</br></br>

What impacts will changes in freight transportation and land development policies have on the current infrastructure?</br></br>

What are the impacts of new industrial development freight traffic on existing operations for railroads?</br></br>

How can existing service levels be maintained or improved with added traffic?</br></br>

How can proximity conflicts between industrial and non-industrial development and uses be resolved?</br></br>

What improvements to the current rail line banking system would enable the lines to be reinitiated in the future?</br></br>

What steps can be taken to stimulate short line and switching railroads to partner with communities to create rail-served industrial developments?</br></br>

How could freight-conscious land development result in a loss of business for certain organizations?</br></br>

If so, which organizations?</br></br>

What organizations will benefit?</br></br>

How will these organizations benefit?</br></br>

Will there be an increase in the need for specialized labor?</br></br>

If so, how will the labor needs be met?</br></br>

What jobs are at risk?</br></br>

Academic Institutions</br></br>

Which academic institutions could be valuable partners in advancing “freight transportation land use” as a planning discipline?</br></br>

What needs to occur to integrate these two disciplines into one? Which public and private non-academic organizations and associations can become </br></br>

::valuable partners in creating “freight transportation land use” as a discipline in the field and academia?</br></br>

How can institutions adjust supply chain management, economics, finance/real estate curriculums to incorporate freight-conscious land development?</br></br>

How can institutions effectively teach this novel concept?</br></br>

How will students be better equipped to secure a job in their desired field with an understanding of freight-conscious land development?</br></br>

Where will institutions acquire new educational material, and who will author it?</br></br>

Environmental Groups</br></br>

How can freight transportation land use planning minimizes the impact of the movement of goods on the natural environment?</br></br>

How can our industrial supply chains be optimally localized and planned from production to consumption to be environmentally conscious?</br></br>

What are the environmental implications of this level of supply chain planning on land use and transportation planning?</br></br>

How can the integration of land use and freight transportation planning resolve the comparative pros and cons of each of the modal choices, i.e.,</br></br>

::marine (ocean and inland waterways), railroads, trucks, and air, and address their respective ecological drawbacks?</br></br>

</br></br>

VitalRail/IntelliConferences/Freight Transportation Land Use

2024-09-11T15:07:48Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>Freight Transportation Land Use</b></br>

The planning paradigm for industrial development has excluded the implications of site selection on the movement of freight to and from a property. This blind spot in land planning has had negative economic, environmental, and social consequences. Ensuring the quality of community life in municipalities, regions, and continents requires thoughtful coordination of land use decision-making with local and national supply chains, freight networks, and industrial systems.</br>

<b>Core Question:</b></br>

<b>How can we institutionalize integrated planning of land use, freight transportation, and industrial systems among public and private-sector stakeholders?</b></br>

<b>Stakeholders</b></br>

Citizen</br>

Non-industrial business owners and organizations</br>

Economic development agencies</br>

Public-sector planning agencies</br>

Elected officials</br>

Industrial facility sponsors</br>

Developers</br>

Freight transportation companies including:</br>

railroads</br>

trucking companies</br>

martimue users/operators</br>

air freight carriers</br>

terminal owners/operators, including ports and airports</br>

Academic institutions</br>

Non-academic professional organizations and associations</br>

Environmental groups</br>

<i><i><b>Round 1</b></i></i></br>

<b>Current State</b></br>

How do the stakeholder groups currently relate to freight transportation land use policies and plans</br>

Citizens</br>

How are the citizens and community groups aligned or misaligned in regard to planning of land use, freight transportation, and industrial systems?</br>

What are their conflicting benefits and concerns?</br>

Where is the balance between these potentially conflicting interests?</br>

Non-Industrial Business Owners and Organizations (Current)</br>

How are non-industrial business owners and organizations aligned or misaligned in regard to the planning of land use, freight transportation, and industrial systems?</br>

What are their conflicting benefits and concerns?</br>

Where is the balance between these potentially conflicting interests</br>

Economic Development Agencies</br>

Who are the local economic development agencies whose responsibility should concern comprehensive industrial planning?</br>

To which agendas are these organizations beholden?</br>

Public-Sector Planning Agencies</br>

What is the land use-related governing and planning system in each U.S. and Mexican state and Canadian province?</br>

Which are the governing agencies at each level (local, county, state/province, regional, national) with vested interests and/or authority in industrial development and freight transportation reviews and approvals?</br>

What are the systems in place for these reviews and approvals?</br>

Elected Officials</br>

Who are the constituencies dictating an elected official’s obligations and decision-making process</br>

What powers do elected officials possess relative to the governance of land planning and freight transportation?</br>

What are the elected official’s agendas, and how does effective change in freight transportation and land development policies further those agendas?</br>

What are the constituencies’ respective agendas, and how does effective change in freight transportation and land development policies further those agendas?</br>

How are the elected officials and their constituencies’ respective agendas aligned?</br>

If misaligned, what is the balance between the two in the context of land development and freight transportation?</br>

Industrial Facility Operators</br>

What is the current sentiment among operators about land planning, freight transportation and industrial systems?</br>

How does current land planning, freight transportation, and industrial systems benefit industrial facility operators?</br>

How does current land planning, freight transportation, and industrial systems hinder or hurt industrial facility operators?</br>

Developers</br>

What are the costs associated with incorporating rail service into industrial development?</br>

What are the calculable economic benefits of freight-conscious land development?</br>

What other areas of expertise need to be integrated into freight transportation land use planning?</br>

Freight Transportation Companies, including Railroads, Trucking Companies, Maritime Users/Operators, Air Freight Terminal Owners/Operators</br>

What is the current status of truck routes and rail lines?</br>

Do they need to be upgraded or expanded?</br>

How do existing transportation arteries meet the new capacity needs, and what new investments are called for?</br>

Academic Institutions</br>

What are the main topics and themes related to land planning, freight transportation, and industrial systems being taught in today’s academic institutions?</br>

Which academic institutions are leaders in the fields of land planning, freight transportation, and industrial systems?</br>

Under which disciplines are the study of land planning, freight transportation, and industrial systems covered?</br>

Environmental Groups</br>

What is the current impact of land planning, freight transportation, and industrial systems on the environment?</br>

Which activities related to the above topics pose the greatest threat to the environment?</br>

<i><i><b>Round 2</b></i></i></br>

<b>Future State</b></br>

What concerns do each stakeholder group have that should be addressed in comprehensive planning?</br>

Citizens</br>

How will we ensure that changes in freight transportation and land use policies in industrial land development do not negatively affect health, </br>

:quality of life, and fairness while maintaining respect for history and culture?</br>

What benefits are derived from new or expanded industrial facilities, including jobs and community tax revenues?</br>

Non-Industrial Business Owners and Organizations (Current)</br>

What are the ramifications of including freight logistics to and from properties in industrial land planning?</br>

Who will benefit?</br>

Who will be hurt?</br>

What are the ramifications of increased rail activity on the local economies through which rail passes?</br>

What is the calculable economic loss local businesses will face with fewer trucks and drivers passing through their region?</br>

How will local non-industrial businesses benefit from freight-conscious land planning and development?</br>

Economic Development Agencies</br>

How will the industries they are obligated to support be harmed by changes in land development and freight transportation?</br>

How can this be minimized or reconciled?</br>

How will changes in industrial land development and freight transportation further an economic development agency’s goals?</br>

Public-Sector Planning Agencies</br>

What would be needed to consolidate and streamline these reviews and approvals without sacrificing jurisdictional integrity and sustainability goals?</br>

What steps can be taken so that integrated land use and freight transportation planning can become a broadly accepted policy?</br>

How can the life-cycle cost impacts be integrated into assessing the income and revenue benefits?</br>

What steps can we take to have transportation land use plans become a fully integrated component for new freight-related development?</br>

What land use zoning practices do we want to initiate that preserve land adjacent to freight corridors and facilities for freight-related development?</br>

Who are the allies for developing a program of national preservation of property adjacent to rail rights-of-way for future rail development?</br>

Elected Officials</br>

Will there be opposition or backlash to an elected official leveraging their powers to address land development and freight transportation?</br>

If so, how can it be minimized or addressed?</br>

What vehicles must the elected official use to promote change? E.g., Legislation, formation of a committee, public speech?</br>

How can effective change in freight transportation and land development policies be measured so that officials can clearly share their results with their constituency?</br>

Industrial Facility Operators</br>

How will changes in freight movement benefit operators and shareholders?</br>

How will any and all changes affect the profit margin?</br>

How long will a change in facility operations take, and at what cost?</br>

How can existing operations be adjusted for more thoughtful freight transportation while limiting downtime and cost?</br>

Who is responsible for these costs, and is assistance available?</br>

How can organizations convey the value of freight-conscious land development policies and the subsequent effects to shareholders?</br>

What opposition might operators face if freight-conscious land development policies result in systemic changes to facility operations?</br>

If so, how can this be minimized or reframed?</br>

How will changes to freight plans support the economic driver of business?</br>

How will changes to freight plans alleviate a burden on business?</br>

How can comprehensive thinking in land development and freight transportation, including rail, alleviate an economic burden and enhance land values and business results?</br>

Developers</br>

How can we scale up consciousness and expertise in freight transportation land use planning throughout the development community?</br>

How can industrial developers, investors, and financial institutions be incentivized to collaborate with communities and all stakeholders to integrate freight transportation land use planning into master plans?</br>

How can we dispel the thinking that freight-conscious land planning policies will limit the amount and viability of developable land and, in turn, economic opportunity?</br>

How can partnerships be structured to satisfy the needs of all stakeholders and maintain core values and goals of sustainability?</br>

How will freight-conscious land development policies affect development timelines and costs?</br>

Freight Transportation Companies, including Railroads, Trucking Companies, Maritime Users/Operators, Air Freight Terminal Owners/Operators</br>

What new freight transportation arteries are needed?</br>

How long will it take for supply chains to adjust to the increased/decreased load</br>

What impacts will changes in freight transportation and land development policies have on the current infrastructure?</br>

What are the impacts of new industrial development freight traffic on existing operations for railroads?</br>

How can existing service levels be maintained or improved with added traffic?</br>

How can proximity conflicts between industrial and non-industrial development and uses be resolved?</br>

What improvements to the current rail line banking system would enable the lines to be reinitiated in the future?</br>

What steps can be taken to stimulate short line and switching railroads to partner with communities to create rail-served industrial developments?</br>

How could freight-conscious land development result in a loss of business for certain organizations?</br>

If so, which organizations?</br>

What organizations will benefit?</br>

How will these organizations benefit?</br>

Will there be an increase in the need for specialized labor?</br>

If so, how will the labor needs be met?</br>

What jobs are at risk?</br>

Academic Institutions</br>

Which academic institutions could be valuable partners in advancing “freight transportation land use” as a planning discipline?</br>

What needs to occur to integrate these two disciplines into one? Which public and private non-academic organizations and associations can become </br>

:valuable partners in creating “freight transportation land use” as a discipline in the field and academia?</br>

How can institutions adjust supply chain management, economics, finance/real estate curriculums to incorporate freight-conscious land development?</br>

How can institutions effectively teach this novel concept?</br>

How will students be better equipped to secure a job in their desired field with an understanding of freight-conscious land development?</br>

Where will institutions acquire new educational material, and who will author it?</br>

Environmental Groups</br>

How can freight transportation land use planning minimizes the impact of the movement of goods on the natural environment?</br>

How can our industrial supply chains be optimally localized and planned from production to consumption to be environmentally conscious?</br>

What are the environmental implications of this level of supply chain planning on land use and transportation planning?</br>

How can the integration of land use and freight transportation planning resolve the comparative pros and cons of each of the modal choices, i.e.,</br>

:marine (ocean and inland waterways), railroads, trucks, and air, and address their respective ecological drawbacks?</br>

</br>

VitalRail/IntelliConferences/Rail Energy Efficiency

2024-09-11T14:56:50Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>Rail Energy Efficiency</b></br></br>

There is an urgent need to improve the sustainability of how freight is moved. Technology choices for reducing the energy requirements of moving railcars are being advanced by many disparate commercial actors and policymakers. Progress on these developments can only be accomplished effectively through large-scale collaboration. It is time to transform how we collectively evaluate and commit resources to major new technology options.</br></br>

<b>Core Question:</b></br></br>

<b>How can technology developers, railroads, investors, and policymakers make the wisest energy-efficiency decisions so that North American railroads contribute to lowering the emissions and resource requirements of freight movement? This includes a 50% reduction in overall carbon emissions by 2030.</b></br></br>

<b>General Questions</b></br></br>

What does ‘sustainable’ mean in the context of rail motive power?</br></br>

What dynamics have to be considered when using multiple motive technologies across the system?</br></br>

Are they compatible technologies, and can they be sensibly integrated?</br></br>

What funding resources are currently available for each motive power choice?</br></br>

What funding resources might be made available for each motive power choice?</br></br>

What public incentives are currently available for the uptake of new power choices?</br></br>

What public incentives might be made available for the uptake of new power choices?</br></br>

What other governmental resources can be deployed to support new motive power choices?</br></br>

How do railroad motive power choices need to be considered in relation to the various fuel pathways being evaluated within other transportation modes?</br></br>

How might the United States National Labs support the evaluation and uptake of new motive power choices?</br></br>

Is there internal railroad resistance to a move away from established (diesel) traction?</br></br>

<b>Biodiesel</b></br></br>

What are the potential biodiesel feedstocks and production methods that would significantly increase the percentage of fuel blends within Class I railroads?</br></br>

What has been the performance experience of the previous use of biodiesel for rail motive power?</br></br>

What are the production challenges of supplying biodiesel fuel to the rail industry?</br></br>

What are the logistical challenges of supplying biodiesel fuel to the rail industry?</br></br>

What performance evidence do railroad mechanical personnel need to utilize biodiesel at higher percentage blends, especially in cold climates?</br></br>

What grants and subsidies are available for railroad use of biodiesel?</br></br>

What success measures are proposed?</br></br>

<b>Internal Combustion with Compressed Natural Gas</b></br></br>

Given the costs of locomotive conversion, fuel tender acquisition, required infrastructure, revenue car space loss, and a limited carbon benefit, is it financially prudent to transition to natural gas power? What prior (limited) industry experience can be cited?</br></br>

How much gas leakage during transportation, storage, and fueling is acceptable? What rules and regulations govern the use of this fuel?</br></br>

What has been the prior experience of railroads using compressed natural gas?</br></br>

What federal subsidies (CMAQ, etc.) are available to pay for conversion costs?</br></br>

How does this compare with other fueling options in terms of energy efficiency and related capex/life costs/</br></br>

How can infrastructure costs (e.g. – condensing and fueling stations at intermodal transload facilities) be shared with other entities?</br></br>

<b>Fuel Cell</b></br></br>

Are fuel cells an overly complex technology for locomotives?</br></br>

What is the environmental impact of hydrogen derived from natural gas?</br></br>

How can hydrogen infrastructure developed for other freight modes be useful to rail?</br></br>

Who can build new fuel cell locomotives?</br></br>

What are the real capabilities of fuel cells in heavy long-haul applications?</br></br>

<b>Steam</b></br></br>

Where does steam locomotive power fit in modern railroading?</br></br>

How does a potential modern steam locomotive differ from historic models?</br></br>

<b>Electrification – General Questions</b></br></br>

What is the per gallon price of diesel that would make electrification an obvious economic choice? Is this the key metric or only part of a more complex analysis?</br></br>

How can the AAR’s Transportation Technology Center, Inc. facilitate the exploration, selection, and certification of technologies and manufacturers?</br></br>

What can we learn from the history of rail electrification?</br></br>

What can we learn from rail electrification in other countries?</br></br>

How do the operating costs (besides fuel) compare with diesel locomotives?</br></br>

How much faster are electric locomotives, and what difference does that make in track capacity?</br></br>

How much lifecycle emissions reduction is gained from the use of electric locomotives?</br></br>

How many fewer all-electric locos can be used compared to the same train using diesel-electric power?</br></br>

How much cheaper is electricity as a motive fuel?</br></br>

What effect will electrification have on ECP brake implementation?</br></br>

<b>Locomotives</b></br></br>

How can locomotives be designed to take advantage of regenerative braking, vibration harvesting, and other waste energy capture methods?</br></br>

What models of locomotives are candidates for conversion? Is this the most cost-effective option or an incremental approach?</br></br>

What companies can perform the conversions?</br></br>

What battery technologies are best attuned to railroad use on-board and trackside?</br></br>

<b>Power Delivery</b></br></br>

How can power suitable for locomotives be drawn from very high voltage transmission lines?</br></br>

What are each power delivery method’s costs and construction implications, i.e., overhead wire, third rail, induction from buried cable, etc.? Can a forensic and credible analysis demonstrate the variations, strengths, and weaknesses?</br></br>

What is the experience with overhead catenary suffering pole and wire damage from shifted loads and/or damaged railcars? How can this risk be minimized?</br></br>

How does the use of battery-powered locomotives impact the need for catenary? What are battery capabilities now and potentially in the future?</br></br>

What are the lifecycle economics of using composite catenary poles versus steel poles?</br></br>

What is the experience with catenary clearing double-stacked containers and other taller railcars?</br></br>

<b>Electric Grid Synergy</b></br></br>

What are the needs of the electric industry for new transmission corridors?</br></br>

What practical questions must be answered to evaluate the co-location of new transmission lines along rail rights-of-way? Are priorities compatible between rail and utilities?</br></br>

How will rail electrification expand the market for the construction of new remote renewable power generation?</br></br>

What is the value of grid-connected idle switching (and road) locomotives offering peak shaving, line conditioning, and backup electric power?</br></br>

What potential benefits to trackside communities could be available from access to higher voltage?</br></br>

What other elements could use grid electric power, such as reefer units and crossing signals?</br></br>

<b>Implementation</b></br></br>

What differences, if any, from the international state-of-the-art catenary installation will North America require?</br></br>

What portion of the North American rail network should be electrified?</br></br>

How are target sections determined?</br></br>

How should electrification be staged to secure maximum benefits?</br></br>

How will electrification coexist with residual diesel-powered segments?</br></br>

What companies can build the machines that build the catenary? Can the electrification process be “industrialized” to support rapid implementation?</br></br>

How is the Benefit-Cost Analysis of the catenary and battery/hybrid balance determined?</br></br>

<b>Financing</b></br></br>

How much of the power delivery infrastructure would electric transmission providers fund?</br></br>

How can the remaining infrastructure costs be funded? Have capex and leasing models been considered?</br></br>

How much and which electrification expenses should be borne by the government, and what are the implications of this?</br></br>

What current Federal sources might be utilized for funding this conversion?</br></br>

What new funding approaches can be established for new locomotives?</br></br>

What new funding approaches can be established for construction?</br></br>

<b>Hybrid and Pure Electric Vehicles and Maintenance Equipment</b></br></br>

How do hybrid or pure-electric drivetrains compare in TOC with ICE-only drivetrains? What is the evidence to support the findings?</br></br>

What battery technology is or will be sufficient for providing power during a full work shift?</br></br>

References: https://www.etransenergy.com/</br></br>

</br></br>

VitalRail/IntelliConferences/Rail Energy Efficiency

2024-09-11T14:56:40Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>Rail Energy Efficiency</b></br>

There is an urgent need to improve the sustainability of how freight is moved. Technology choices for reducing the energy requirements of moving railcars are being advanced by many disparate commercial actors and policymakers. Progress on these developments can only be accomplished effectively through large-scale collaboration. It is time to transform how we collectively evaluate and commit resources to major new technology options.</br>

<b>Core Question:</b></br>

<b>How can technology developers, railroads, investors, and policymakers make the wisest energy-efficiency decisions so that North American railroads contribute to lowering the emissions and resource requirements of freight movement? This includes a 50% reduction in overall carbon emissions by 2030.</b></br>

<b>General Questions</b></br>

What does ‘sustainable’ mean in the context of rail motive power?</br>

What dynamics have to be considered when using multiple motive technologies across the system?</br>

Are they compatible technologies, and can they be sensibly integrated?</br>

What funding resources are currently available for each motive power choice?</br>

What funding resources might be made available for each motive power choice?</br>

What public incentives are currently available for the uptake of new power choices?</br>

What public incentives might be made available for the uptake of new power choices?</br>

What other governmental resources can be deployed to support new motive power choices?</br>

How do railroad motive power choices need to be considered in relation to the various fuel pathways being evaluated within other transportation modes?</br>

How might the United States National Labs support the evaluation and uptake of new motive power choices?</br>

Is there internal railroad resistance to a move away from established (diesel) traction?</br>

<b>Biodiesel</b></br>

What are the potential biodiesel feedstocks and production methods that would significantly increase the percentage of fuel blends within Class I railroads?</br>

What has been the performance experience of the previous use of biodiesel for rail motive power?</br>

What are the production challenges of supplying biodiesel fuel to the rail industry?</br>

What are the logistical challenges of supplying biodiesel fuel to the rail industry?</br>

What performance evidence do railroad mechanical personnel need to utilize biodiesel at higher percentage blends, especially in cold climates?</br>

What grants and subsidies are available for railroad use of biodiesel?</br>

What success measures are proposed?</br>

<b>Internal Combustion with Compressed Natural Gas</b></br>

Given the costs of locomotive conversion, fuel tender acquisition, required infrastructure, revenue car space loss, and a limited carbon benefit, is it financially prudent to transition to natural gas power? What prior (limited) industry experience can be cited?</br>

How much gas leakage during transportation, storage, and fueling is acceptable? What rules and regulations govern the use of this fuel?</br>

What has been the prior experience of railroads using compressed natural gas?</br>

What federal subsidies (CMAQ, etc.) are available to pay for conversion costs?</br>

How does this compare with other fueling options in terms of energy efficiency and related capex/life costs/</br>

How can infrastructure costs (e.g. – condensing and fueling stations at intermodal transload facilities) be shared with other entities?</br>

<b>Fuel Cell</b></br>

Are fuel cells an overly complex technology for locomotives?</br>

What is the environmental impact of hydrogen derived from natural gas?</br>

How can hydrogen infrastructure developed for other freight modes be useful to rail?</br>

Who can build new fuel cell locomotives?</br>

What are the real capabilities of fuel cells in heavy long-haul applications?</br>

<b>Steam</b></br>

Where does steam locomotive power fit in modern railroading?</br>

How does a potential modern steam locomotive differ from historic models?</br>

<b>Electrification – General Questions</b></br>

What is the per gallon price of diesel that would make electrification an obvious economic choice? Is this the key metric or only part of a more complex analysis?</br>

How can the AAR’s Transportation Technology Center, Inc. facilitate the exploration, selection, and certification of technologies and manufacturers?</br>

What can we learn from the history of rail electrification?</br>

What can we learn from rail electrification in other countries?</br>

How do the operating costs (besides fuel) compare with diesel locomotives?</br>

How much faster are electric locomotives, and what difference does that make in track capacity?</br>

How much lifecycle emissions reduction is gained from the use of electric locomotives?</br>

How many fewer all-electric locos can be used compared to the same train using diesel-electric power?</br>

How much cheaper is electricity as a motive fuel?</br>

What effect will electrification have on ECP brake implementation?</br>

<b>Locomotives</b></br>

How can locomotives be designed to take advantage of regenerative braking, vibration harvesting, and other waste energy capture methods?</br>

What models of locomotives are candidates for conversion? Is this the most cost-effective option or an incremental approach?</br>

What companies can perform the conversions?</br>

What battery technologies are best attuned to railroad use on-board and trackside?</br>

<b>Power Delivery</b></br>

How can power suitable for locomotives be drawn from very high voltage transmission lines?</br>

What are each power delivery method’s costs and construction implications, i.e., overhead wire, third rail, induction from buried cable, etc.? Can a forensic and credible analysis demonstrate the variations, strengths, and weaknesses?</br>

What is the experience with overhead catenary suffering pole and wire damage from shifted loads and/or damaged railcars? How can this risk be minimized?</br>

How does the use of battery-powered locomotives impact the need for catenary? What are battery capabilities now and potentially in the future?</br>

What are the lifecycle economics of using composite catenary poles versus steel poles?</br>

What is the experience with catenary clearing double-stacked containers and other taller railcars?</br>

<b>Electric Grid Synergy</b></br>

What are the needs of the electric industry for new transmission corridors?</br>

What practical questions must be answered to evaluate the co-location of new transmission lines along rail rights-of-way? Are priorities compatible between rail and utilities?</br>

How will rail electrification expand the market for the construction of new remote renewable power generation?</br>

What is the value of grid-connected idle switching (and road) locomotives offering peak shaving, line conditioning, and backup electric power?</br>

What potential benefits to trackside communities could be available from access to higher voltage?</br>

What other elements could use grid electric power, such as reefer units and crossing signals?</br>

<b>Implementation</b></br>

What differences, if any, from the international state-of-the-art catenary installation will North America require?</br>

What portion of the North American rail network should be electrified?</br>

How are target sections determined?</br>

How should electrification be staged to secure maximum benefits?</br>

How will electrification coexist with residual diesel-powered segments?</br>

What companies can build the machines that build the catenary? Can the electrification process be “industrialized” to support rapid implementation?</br>

How is the Benefit-Cost Analysis of the catenary and battery/hybrid balance determined?</br>

<b>Financing</b></br>

How much of the power delivery infrastructure would electric transmission providers fund?</br>

How can the remaining infrastructure costs be funded? Have capex and leasing models been considered?</br>

How much and which electrification expenses should be borne by the government, and what are the implications of this?</br>

What current Federal sources might be utilized for funding this conversion?</br>

What new funding approaches can be established for new locomotives?</br>

What new funding approaches can be established for construction?</br>

<b>Hybrid and Pure Electric Vehicles and Maintenance Equipment</b></br>

How do hybrid or pure-electric drivetrains compare in TOC with ICE-only drivetrains? What is the evidence to support the findings?</br>

What battery technology is or will be sufficient for providing power during a full work shift?</br>

References: https://www.etransenergy.com/</br>

</br>

VitalRail/IntelliConferences/Revitalizing the Rail Carload System

2024-09-11T14:11:48Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>Revitalizing the Rail Carload System</b></br></br>

There is an urgent need to reflect on and reinvent our rail carload system in light of the decline of coal shipments, reshoring and reindustrialization, new natural resource development, increasing population and freight demand, and urgent environmental, congestion, and financial challenges.</br></br>

Core Question:</br></br>

How can stakeholders work together to build a rail carload system that best supports the nation’s sustainable prosperity?</br></br>

<i><i>Round 1</i></i></br></br>

How has the economic and transportation environment evolved since WWII, and how well has the rail carload system adapted to these changes?</br></br>

What have been the trends in supply chain management, and how have they impacted carload service and economics?</br></br>

What factors, e.g., volume, pricing, modal share, profitability, revenue/cost ratio, reliability, turn times, etc., need to be understood to define the current status of rail carload transportation?</br></br>

<i><i>Round 2</i></i></br></br>

What current and emerging technological, economic, social, environmental, and/or demographic trends could impact supply chain dynamics, and how might they influence how we think about an optimal rail carload system?</br></br>

How do we want the economic and supply chain environment to evolve over the next 5-10 years, and how well positioned is the rail carload system to meet these advances?</br></br>

What are the benefits of an expanded rail carload transportation system?</br></br>

When should alternatives to an expanded rail carload system be considered?</br></br>

Under what conditions does a bimodal truck and rail transload solution make the most sense?</br></br>

What are each stakeholder group’s desires, concerns, and needs for an expanded rail carload system?</br></br>

What commercial, technological, financial, organizational, procedural, and regulatory breakthroughs/adjustments are required for stakeholders to collaborate to create the ideal rail carload system?</br></br>

What specific innovations should be considered as potential elements of an optimized rail carload system?</br></br>

VitalRail/IntelliConferences/Revitalizing the Rail Carload System

2024-09-11T14:11:38Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>Revitalizing the Rail Carload System</b></br>

There is an urgent need to reflect on and reinvent our rail carload system in light of the decline of coal shipments, reshoring and reindustrialization, new natural resource development, increasing population and freight demand, and urgent environmental, congestion, and financial challenges.</br>

Core Question:</br>

How can stakeholders work together to build a rail carload system that best supports the nation’s sustainable prosperity?</br>

<i><i>Round 1</i></i></br>

How has the economic and transportation environment evolved since WWII, and how well has the rail carload system adapted to these changes?</br>

What have been the trends in supply chain management, and how have they impacted carload service and economics?</br>

What factors, e.g., volume, pricing, modal share, profitability, revenue/cost ratio, reliability, turn times, etc., need to be understood to define the current status of rail carload transportation?</br>

<i><i>Round 2</i></i></br>

What current and emerging technological, economic, social, environmental, and/or demographic trends could impact supply chain dynamics, and how might they influence how we think about an optimal rail carload system?</br>

How do we want the economic and supply chain environment to evolve over the next 5-10 years, and how well positioned is the rail carload system to meet these advances?</br>

What are the benefits of an expanded rail carload transportation system?</br>

When should alternatives to an expanded rail carload system be considered?</br>

Under what conditions does a bimodal truck and rail transload solution make the most sense?</br>

What are each stakeholder group’s desires, concerns, and needs for an expanded rail carload system?</br>

What commercial, technological, financial, organizational, procedural, and regulatory breakthroughs/adjustments are required for stakeholders to collaborate to create the ideal rail carload system?</br>

What specific innovations should be considered as potential elements of an optimized rail carload system?</br>

VitalRail/IntelliConferences/Containerized International Freight

2024-09-11T13:34:36Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>Containerized International Freight </b><b>IntelliConference</b></br></br>

Globalization of supply chains has exacerbated congestion and chaos in how containerized freight is moved through North America. Stakeholder groups involved in containerized international freight face significant inefficiencies in the current use of ISO containers, chassis, trucks, railroads, ships, and related infrastructure.</br></br>

</br></br>

<b>Core Question:</b></br></br>

<b>What improvements can stakeholders identify for moving containerized international freight through supply chains to improve efficiency, capacity, and commercial benefit with the least impact on the environment and community?</b></br></br>

</br></br>

What performance measures should guide planning of an optimal container logistics system for each of these stakeholder groups?</br></br>

Equipment providers</br></br>

Ocean carriers</br></br>

Port Authorities</br></br>

Land freight transportation providers</br></br>

Non-asset-based industry service provider</br></br>

Regulatory agencies</br></br>

Customs Border Protection/Department of Homeland Security</br></br>

U.S. Department of Agriculture</br></br>

U.S. Food and Drug Administration</br></br>

U.S. Department of Transportation</br></br>

Federal Motor Carriers Safety Association</br></br>

Federal Maritime Commission</br></br>

Beneficial cargo owners/shippers</br></br>

Communities</br></br>

Environmentalists</br></br>

Terminal Operators</br></br>

Land Developers</br></br>

Private Equity</br></br>

Debt Providers</br></br>

Municipal Bond Providers</br></br>

What performance measures should guide the planning of an optimal containerized freight system for each of these stakeholder groups?</br></br>

What equipment-related inefficiencies need to be addressed?</br></br>

Chassis positioning</br></br>

Chassis pairing</br></br>

Chassis availability and accessibility</br></br>

Chassis maintenance</br></br>

Container positioning</br></br>

Container storage</br></br>

Container availability and accessibility</br></br>

Demurrage and detention charges</br></br>

Relative to the ocean carrier segment, what dynamics in each area below impact the flow of containerized cargo?</br></br>

Ships slow steaming between ports</br></br>

IMO 2020 (International Maritime Organization’s sulfur in fuel reduction plan)</br></br>

Ocean carrier’s multi-company alliances resulting in vessel sharing</br></br>

Trend toward larger vessels (20,000+ TEUs)</br></br>

Empty container logistics</br></br>

Timeliness and accuracy of communications between parties</br></br>

Inhibited ability to match return loads for export</br></br>

Relative to the port segment, what dynamics in each area below impact the flow of containerized cargo?</br></br>

Land space limitations at ports</br></br>

Timeliness and accuracy of communications between parties</br></br>

Hours of operations</br></br>

Level of automation</br></br>

Labor productivity</br></br>

Relative to the rail segment, what dynamics in each area below impact the flow of containerized cargo?</br></br>

Turn times of trains at port terminals and container yards</br></br>

Transit times to and from ports</br></br>

Railyard capacity</br></br>

Railcar availability</br></br>

Timeliness and accuracy of communications between parties</br></br>

Level of automation</br></br>

Rail equipment requirements</br></br>

Cargo loading and weight requirements</br></br>

Switching requirements for placing containers on trains by destination</br></br>

Destination capacity</br></br>

Relative to the trucking segment, what dynamics in each area below impact the flow of containerized cargo?</br></br>

Highway and on-dock congestion</br></br>

Appointment systems</br></br>

Inefficient drayage of containers including empty returns to dock</br></br>

Turn times at port terminals and container yards</br></br>

Timeliness and accuracy of communications between parties</br></br>

Level of automation</br></br>

Trucking equipment requirements</br></br>

Cargo loading and weight restrictions</br></br>

Relative to non-asset-based industry service provider segment (ocean freight forwarders, freight brokers, customs brokers, etc.), what dynamics in each area below impact the flow of containerized cargo?</br></br>

Timeliness and accuracy of communications between parties</br></br>

Level of automation</br></br>

Commercial priorities</br></br>

How do the operations and regulations of various regulatory agencies impact the flow of containerized cargo?</br></br>

Customs & Border Protection/Department of Homeland Security</br></br>

Food & Drug Administration</br></br>

United States Department of Agriculture</br></br>

California Air Resources Board</br></br>

United States Census Bureau</br></br>

Federal Maritime Commission</br></br>

United States Department of Transportation</br></br>

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration</br></br>

Relative to the beneficial cargo owners, what dynamics in each area below impact the flow of containerized cargo?</br></br>

Container availability</br></br>

Truck availability</br></br>

Railcar availability</br></br>

Transload and intermodal site availability</br></br>

Door-to-door supply chain timeline</br></br>

Costs to move cargo</br></br>

Timeliness and accuracy of communications between parties</br></br>

Cargo or container damage and resolution</br></br>

Capacity issues along any part of the transport mov</br></br>

Relative to the location and configuration of cargo transfer facilities between domestic and international containers, what dynamics in each area below impact the flow of containerized cargo?</br></br>

VitalRail/IntelliConferences/Containerized International Freight

2024-09-11T13:34:26Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>Containerized International Freight </b><b>IntelliConference</b></br>

Globalization of supply chains has exacerbated congestion and chaos in how containerized freight is moved through North America. Stakeholder groups involved in containerized international freight face significant inefficiencies in the current use of ISO containers, chassis, trucks, railroads, ships, and related infrastructure.</br>

</br>

<b>Core Question:</b></br>

<b>What improvements can stakeholders identify for moving containerized international freight through supply chains to improve efficiency, capacity, and commercial benefit with the least impact on the environment and community?</b></br>

</br>

What performance measures should guide planning of an optimal container logistics system for each of these stakeholder groups?</br>

Equipment providers</br>

Ocean carriers</br>

Port Authorities</br>

Land freight transportation providers</br>

Non-asset-based industry service provider</br>

Regulatory agencies</br>

Customs Border Protection/Department of Homeland Security</br>

U.S. Department of Agriculture</br>

U.S. Food and Drug Administration</br>

U.S. Department of Transportation</br>

Federal Motor Carriers Safety Association</br>

Federal Maritime Commission</br>

Beneficial cargo owners/shippers</br>

Communities</br>

Environmentalists</br>

Terminal Operators</br>

Land Developers</br>

Private Equity</br>

Debt Providers</br>

Municipal Bond Providers</br>

What performance measures should guide the planning of an optimal containerized freight system for each of these stakeholder groups?</br>

What equipment-related inefficiencies need to be addressed?</br>

Chassis positioning</br>

Chassis pairing</br>

Chassis availability and accessibility</br>

Chassis maintenance</br>

Container positioning</br>

Container storage</br>

Container availability and accessibility</br>

Demurrage and detention charges</br>

Relative to the ocean carrier segment, what dynamics in each area below impact the flow of containerized cargo?</br>

Ships slow steaming between ports</br>

IMO 2020 (International Maritime Organization’s sulfur in fuel reduction plan)</br>

Ocean carrier’s multi-company alliances resulting in vessel sharing</br>

Trend toward larger vessels (20,000+ TEUs)</br>

Empty container logistics</br>

Timeliness and accuracy of communications between parties</br>

Inhibited ability to match return loads for export</br>

Relative to the port segment, what dynamics in each area below impact the flow of containerized cargo?</br>

Land space limitations at ports</br>

Timeliness and accuracy of communications between parties</br>

Hours of operations</br>

Level of automation</br>

Labor productivity</br>

Relative to the rail segment, what dynamics in each area below impact the flow of containerized cargo?</br>

Turn times of trains at port terminals and container yards</br>

Transit times to and from ports</br>

Railyard capacity</br>

Railcar availability</br>

Timeliness and accuracy of communications between parties</br>

Level of automation</br>

Rail equipment requirements</br>

Cargo loading and weight requirements</br>

Switching requirements for placing containers on trains by destination</br>

Destination capacity</br>

Relative to the trucking segment, what dynamics in each area below impact the flow of containerized cargo?</br>

Highway and on-dock congestion</br>

Appointment systems</br>

Inefficient drayage of containers including empty returns to dock</br>

Turn times at port terminals and container yards</br>

Timeliness and accuracy of communications between parties</br>

Level of automation</br>

Trucking equipment requirements</br>

Cargo loading and weight restrictions</br>

Relative to non-asset-based industry service provider segment (ocean freight forwarders, freight brokers, customs brokers, etc.), what dynamics in each area below impact the flow of containerized cargo?</br>

Timeliness and accuracy of communications between parties</br>

Level of automation</br>

Commercial priorities</br>

How do the operations and regulations of various regulatory agencies impact the flow of containerized cargo?</br>

Customs & Border Protection/Department of Homeland Security</br>

Food & Drug Administration</br>

United States Department of Agriculture</br>

California Air Resources Board</br>

United States Census Bureau</br>

Federal Maritime Commission</br>

United States Department of Transportation</br>

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration</br>

Relative to the beneficial cargo owners, what dynamics in each area below impact the flow of containerized cargo?</br>

Container availability</br>

Truck availability</br>

Railcar availability</br>

Transload and intermodal site availability</br>

Door-to-door supply chain timeline</br>

Costs to move cargo</br>

Timeliness and accuracy of communications between parties</br>

Cargo or container damage and resolution</br>

Capacity issues along any part of the transport mov</br>

Relative to the location and configuration of cargo transfer facilities between domestic and international containers, what dynamics in each area below impact the flow of containerized cargo?</br>

VitalRail/IntelliConferences/Rail Business Culture Transformation

2024-09-10T18:14:19Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>Rail Business Culture Transformation </b><b>IntelliConference</b></br></br>

The Class I rail industry’s historical and cultural dynamics and recently adopted business strategies have contributed to a post-2006 market share and volume decline. Focusing on short-term profitability, cost-cutting, and an outdated corporate culture has negatively impacted customer success and satisfaction, employee morale, expertise retention, and innovation. There is a compelling opportunity to transform the railroad business culture to support a more vital contribution to supply chain efficiency and satisfaction, success, and safety for all stakeholders.</br></br>

<b>Core Question:</b></br></br>

<b>What reorientation would transform the rail business culture to balance the interests of investors with the professional and personal interests of key stakeholders?</b></br></br>

<i><i><b>R</b></i></i><i><i><b>ound 1</b></i></i></br></br>

<b>Existing Railroad Culture</b></br></br>

</br></br>

What railroad management and investor dynamics create a risk-averse decision-making culture that stifles growth and modernization?</br></br>

What cultural drivers have led railroad boards and investors to focus on stock buybacks and shorter payback windows at the expense of long-term investments for market share growth?</br></br>

How has the rail business culture led to:</br></br>

Lower respect and adoption of staff ideas?</br></br>

Staff frustration and poor retention?</br></br>

How has the culture of hierarchical authority for decision-making impacted:</br></br>

Reliability of first-mile and last-mile services?</br></br>

Ability to advance customer-centric market opportunities?</br></br>

Safety of freight train operations?</br></br>

Quality of professional and personal life for train, yard, and engine staff?</br></br>

In-the-field operating authorities by experienced train, yard, and engine crews reacting to real-time local conditions?</br></br>

What skill sets are in short supply in railroad organizations that could be developed to meet the needs of customers, communities, and employees?</br></br>

<i><i><b>Round 2</b></i></i></br></br>

<b>A New Future for Railroad Cultur</b><b>e</b></br></br>

</br></br>

What do we want rail business culture to lead to?</br></br>

What cultural shifts need to occur such that employees, especially in-the-field operating employees, are viewed as collaborative partners with management in creating organizations that meet the needs of all stakeholders?</br></br>

What work and lifestyle experience among rail management do we want the business culture to support?</br></br>

How can senior management and the board of directors better collaborate with company staff to re-establish a meaningful and satisfying growth and improvement culture?</br></br>

What cultural shifts need to occur:</br></br>

To best retain railroad subject matter expertise?</br></br>

For customers and trucking partners to trust that rail operating decisions, services, and rates are respectful of their needs and investments?</br></br>

For communities and other public entities to view railroads as creating a safer, less congested, environmentally sustainable option for moving freight?</br></br>

VitalRail/IntelliConferences/Rail Business Culture Transformation

2024-09-10T18:14:09Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>Rail Business Culture Transformation </b><b>IntelliConference</b></br>

The Class I rail industry’s historical and cultural dynamics and recently adopted business strategies have contributed to a post-2006 market share and volume decline. Focusing on short-term profitability, cost-cutting, and an outdated corporate culture has negatively impacted customer success and satisfaction, employee morale, expertise retention, and innovation. There is a compelling opportunity to transform the railroad business culture to support a more vital contribution to supply chain efficiency and satisfaction, success, and safety for all stakeholders.</br>

<b>Core Question:</b></br>

<b>What reorientation would transform the rail business culture to balance the interests of investors with the professional and personal interests of key stakeholders?</b></br>

<i><i><b>R</b></i></i><i><i><b>ound 1</b></i></i></br>

<b>Existing Railroad Culture</b></br>

</br>

What railroad management and investor dynamics create a risk-averse decision-making culture that stifles growth and modernization?</br>

What cultural drivers have led railroad boards and investors to focus on stock buybacks and shorter payback windows at the expense of long-term investments for market share growth?</br>

How has the rail business culture led to:</br>

Lower respect and adoption of staff ideas?</br>

Staff frustration and poor retention?</br>

How has the culture of hierarchical authority for decision-making impacted:</br>

Reliability of first-mile and last-mile services?</br>

Ability to advance customer-centric market opportunities?</br>

Safety of freight train operations?</br>

Quality of professional and personal life for train, yard, and engine staff?</br>

In-the-field operating authorities by experienced train, yard, and engine crews reacting to real-time local conditions?</br>

What skill sets are in short supply in railroad organizations that could be developed to meet the needs of customers, communities, and employees?</br>

<i><i><b>Round 2</b></i></i></br>

<b>A New Future for Railroad Cultur</b><b>e</b></br>

</br>

What do we want rail business culture to lead to?</br>

What cultural shifts need to occur such that employees, especially in-the-field operating employees, are viewed as collaborative partners with management in creating organizations that meet the needs of all stakeholders?</br>

What work and lifestyle experience among rail management do we want the business culture to support?</br>

How can senior management and the board of directors better collaborate with company staff to re-establish a meaningful and satisfying growth and improvement culture?</br>

What cultural shifts need to occur:</br>

To best retain railroad subject matter expertise?</br>

For customers and trucking partners to trust that rail operating decisions, services, and rates are respectful of their needs and investments?</br>

For communities and other public entities to view railroads as creating a safer, less congested, environmentally sustainable option for moving freight?</br>

VitalRail/IntelliConferences/Rail-Truck Coordination

2024-09-10T16:53:45Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>Rail / Trucking Coordination </b><b>IntelliConference</b></br></br>

</br></br>

Rail and trucking each have their strengths and limitations. In an unplanned system, those limitations leave unwelcome performance gaps. In an integrated system, each mode’s strengths can be optimized. It is time to apply collaboration and coordination to create a freight system that best leverages and integrates modal strengths and enhances financial returns for each mode.</br></br>

<b>Core Question:</b></br></br>

<b>What new business interactions and public policy adjustments would improve the working relationship between trucking and rail systems to the benefit of shippers, providers, investors, labor and other staff, communities, and the environment?</b></br></br>

<i><i><b>Round 1</b></i></i></br></br>

<b>Current State</b></br></br>

</br></br>

What are the strengths of each mode?</br></br>

Trucking’s strengths are that they are nimble, flexible, andhas capacity and ease to access that capacity.</br></br>

Rail’s strengths are high volume capacity and efficiencies at high volumes in loading, unloading, and transport.</br></br>

What are the limitations of each mode?</br></br>

Who are the trucking and rail companies that collaborate and coordinate well with the other mode?</br></br>

What are the reasons these collaborative efforts are successful?</br></br>

What are the issues, challenges, and problems that reduce efficiency in the interactions between trucks and railroads?</br></br>

<i><i><b>Round 2</b></i></i></br></br>

<b>A New Future</b></br></br>

</br></br>

What concerns about modal collaboration and coordination can we productively identify?</br></br>

What vision of bi-modal communication, information sharing, and tracing is needed to satisfy shippers and beneficial cargo owners?</br></br>

What are the challenges to advancing that vision?</br></br>

What technologies in cargo tracing and data interchange are in research, development, or market entry and would benefit from closer cooperation and standardization?</br></br>

What commercial concerns for confidentiality need to be addressed in how this vision is executed?</br></br>

How can trucking and railroads collaborate to reduce lane imbalances and improve asset utilization for both modes?</br></br>

What service enhancements can trucking and railroads develop together to the benefit of shippers?</br></br>

What innovations in rolling stock (tractor-trailers, chassis, containers, railcars) and freight handling and transfer systems would improve bimodal productivity?</br></br>

Double-stacked containers in articulated well cars replacing trailers on spine cars (TOFC) is an example of past railroad rolling stock innovation around bi-modalism. What are the next revolutionary means of…</br></br>

Side-access containers or trailers</br></br>

Dedicated circus-loading railcars that cost-effectively support lower lane density movement of dry van or reefer trailers lacking “extra strengthening” against railroad buff and draft forces?</br></br>

What infrastructure and facility developments and innovations would contribute to bi-modal productivity?</br></br>

What previous or current North American or International approaches to bi-modal transportation might offer useful lessons for new improvements?</br></br>

What areas of local, state, and federal regulations need to be better aligned to improve bi-modal efficiency?Weight Limits</br></br>

Hazmat</br></br>

Crew sizes for railroads</br></br>

Taxes</br></br>

What dynamics call for dedicated roads or lanes that benefit bimodal collaboration?</br></br>

When is a single-mode approach appropriate based on:lane length</br></br>

commodity</br></br>

cargo time sensitivity</br></br>

modal capacity</br></br>

transload cost</br></br>

energy cost</br></br>

What government policies need to be adopted to encourage and support modal coordination in planning and infrastructure investment?</br></br>

How can we fast-track funding and decision-making on infrastructure projects that support modal coordination?</br></br>

</br></br>

VitalRail/IntelliConferences/Rail-Truck Coordination

2024-09-10T16:53:35Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>Rail / Trucking Coordination </b><b>IntelliConference</b></br>

</br>

Rail and trucking each have their strengths and limitations. In an unplanned system, those limitations leave unwelcome performance gaps. In an integrated system, each mode’s strengths can be optimized. It is time to apply collaboration and coordination to create a freight system that best leverages and integrates modal strengths and enhances financial returns for each mode.</br>

<b>Core Question:</b></br>

<b>What new business interactions and public policy adjustments would improve the working relationship between trucking and rail systems to the benefit of shippers, providers, investors, labor and other staff, communities, and the environment?</b></br>

<i><i><b>Round 1</b></i></i></br>

<b>Current State</b></br>

</br>

What are the strengths of each mode?</br>

Trucking’s strengths are that they are nimble, flexible, andhas capacity and ease to access that capacity.</br>

Rail’s strengths are high volume capacity and efficiencies at high volumes in loading, unloading, and transport.</br>

What are the limitations of each mode?</br>

Who are the trucking and rail companies that collaborate and coordinate well with the other mode?</br>

What are the reasons these collaborative efforts are successful?</br>

What are the issues, challenges, and problems that reduce efficiency in the interactions between trucks and railroads?</br>

<i><i><b>Round 2</b></i></i></br>

<b>A New Future</b></br>

</br>

What concerns about modal collaboration and coordination can we productively identify?</br>

What vision of bi-modal communication, information sharing, and tracing is needed to satisfy shippers and beneficial cargo owners?</br>

What are the challenges to advancing that vision?</br>

What technologies in cargo tracing and data interchange are in research, development, or market entry and would benefit from closer cooperation and standardization?</br>

What commercial concerns for confidentiality need to be addressed in how this vision is executed?</br>

How can trucking and railroads collaborate to reduce lane imbalances and improve asset utilization for both modes?</br>

What service enhancements can trucking and railroads develop together to the benefit of shippers?</br>

What innovations in rolling stock (tractor-trailers, chassis, containers, railcars) and freight handling and transfer systems would improve bimodal productivity?</br>

Double-stacked containers in articulated well cars replacing trailers on spine cars (TOFC) is an example of past railroad rolling stock innovation around bi-modalism. What are the next revolutionary means of…</br>

Side-access containers or trailers</br>

Dedicated circus-loading railcars that cost-effectively support lower lane density movement of dry van or reefer trailers lacking “extra strengthening” against railroad buff and draft forces?</br>

What infrastructure and facility developments and innovations would contribute to bi-modal productivity?</br>

What previous or current North American or International approaches to bi-modal transportation might offer useful lessons for new improvements?</br>

What areas of local, state, and federal regulations need to be better aligned to improve bi-modal efficiency?Weight Limits</br>

Hazmat</br>

Crew sizes for railroads</br>

Taxes</br>

What dynamics call for dedicated roads or lanes that benefit bimodal collaboration?</br>

When is a single-mode approach appropriate based on:lane length</br>

commodity</br>

cargo time sensitivity</br>

modal capacity</br>

transload cost</br>

energy cost</br>

What government policies need to be adopted to encourage and support modal coordination in planning and infrastructure investment?</br>

How can we fast-track funding and decision-making on infrastructure projects that support modal coordination?</br>

</br>

VitalRail/IntelliConferences/Rail Regulatory Excellence

2024-09-10T16:28:07Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>Rail Regulatory Excellence </b><b>IntelliConference</b></br></br>

Rules and regulations are promulgated in reaction to various events and experiences. Often, they develop a life of their own, untethered to the original intent and absent awareness of system consequences, frustrating stakeholders. Improvements are often challenging as individual industries and companies beseech government from a vested interest point of view. A robust set of recommendations informed objectively by all perspectives is critical to meet urgent safety, productivity, financial, and environmental goals.</br></br>

<b>Core question: What regulations can stakeholders agree on that are either outdated, de minimis, redundant, counterproductive, or can be improved or replaced in support of the growth and safety of railroads and their service?</b></br></br>

<i><i><b>Round One</b></i></i></br></br>

<b>Completing the framework</b></br></br>

</br></br>

In addition to the following, what other areas do regulations apply in owning and operating railroads?</br></br>

Financial reporting</br></br>

Service reporting</br></br>

Licenses and permits</br></br>

Employee Management</br></br>

Train Operations</br></br>

Maintenance of way</br></br>

Taxes</br></br>

Insurance and liability</br></br>

Locomotive emissions</br></br>

Rolling stock design/equipment requirements</br></br>

Inspection, track and rolling stock</br></br>

Equipment supplier country of origin</br></br>

Cybersecurity</br></br>

National security/DoD functions</br></br>

Common carrier responsibilities(e.g., must haul high-risk, high-liability hazmat commodities)</br></br>

Interchange rules (e.g., receiving RRs are responsible for safe railcar conditions)</br></br>

Pertaining to each regulatory area, what regulations: Are counter-productive?</br></br>

Are redundant, and where is another regulation or procedure handling the issue?</br></br>

Should be eliminated because the issue they target is inconsequential?</br></br>

Should be improved in some way? How?</br></br>

Have a positive impact that is outweighed by the costs?</br></br>

Impact customers’ shipping mode decisions in a way that is counter-productive to the overall policy goal?</br></br>

What activities or relationships need new regulations to be optimally deployed? Examples: Railcar defect detection</br></br>

Trackage defect detection</br></br>

Train control safety technology (e.g., ECP braking, PTC II)</br></br>

Directed service</br></br>

Degree of inter- and intra-modal competition</br></br>

Reciprocal switching</br></br>

<i><i><b>Round Two</b></i></i></br></br>

<b>Identifying Impacted Parties and Establishing Measures</b></br></br>

</br></br>

For each of the regulations identified in Round One: Who are the impacted parties?</br></br>

What data measures have been used to illuminate the need for that regulation?</br></br>

What data has been used to quantify the benefits of each regulation for each impacted party?</br></br>

How is the cost of implementing a regulation allocated and funded relative to each impacted party?</br></br>

<i><i><b>Round Three</b></i></i></br></br>

<b>Developing Regulations that Fit</b></br></br>

</br></br>

How do we need to think about regulations to best fit various characteristics of rail operations?</br></br>

What regulations that apply to larger railroads should be adjusted for smaller railroads?</br></br>

What regulations should be further distinguished for line haul routes of varying characteristics? Examples:</br></br>

Lines that host passenger trains</br></br>

Lines that host hazardous commodities</br></br>

FRA track classification level</br></br>

Traffic level by tonnage or train frequency</br></br>

Service Quality metrics (train velocity, re-crew rates, ETA failures)</br></br>

What regulations should be further distinguished for terminals and railyards of varying characteristics? Examples:</br></br>

Degree of automated operations</br></br>

Degree of automated inspection capability</br></br>

Provision of yard air</br></br>

Local service quality metrics (switching volume, terminal dwell, first-mile/last-mile failure rate)</br></br>

What regulations should be further distinguished by commodity hauled or railcar type?</br></br>

Hazmat and placarding</br></br>

Gross weight per car classification</br></br>

Excess length/height railcars</br></br>

Dimensional loads</br></br>

Community emergency response notification</br></br>

Train consist-oriented characteristics:</br></br>

Train length and weight</br></br>

Railcar placement in consist</br></br>

Locomotive placement in consist</br></br>

Container/trailer placement per railcar</br></br>

Buffer car requirements</br></br>

What performance metrics should be established for each regulatory objective?</br></br>

<i><i><b>Round Four</b></i></i></br></br>

<b>Prioritization and Process</b></br></br>

</br></br>

What regulatory issues are most urgent to address?</br></br>

Should the regulatory landscape and policy favor one mode over another?</br></br>

Why?</br></br>

What process should be established for reviewing and/or sunsetting rules and regulations at intervals or upon a change in circumstances?</br></br>

How frequently should a regulation undergo review to understand changes in benefits and costs?</br></br>

What monitoring or reporting improvements can be identified?</br></br>

How should hard and soft costs of regulations be calculated and recognized?
</br></br>

Who are the impacted parties?</br></br>

What data measures have been used to illuminate the need for that regulation?</br></br>

</br></br>

How is the cost of implementing a regulation apportioned and funded relative to each stakeholder group?</br></br>

What factors should be weighed in regulatory execution decisions and implementation timing?</br></br>

Technology maturity</br></br>

Pragmatic deployment timing</br></br>

Costs and benefits to impacted parties</br></br>

Effectiveness of the regulation toward achieving the objective</br></br>

What types of changes should be made to rulemaking and regulatory processes?</br></br>

Does the regulation account for all impacted parties?</br></br>

Does the regulation shift the modal balance in a way that negates the overall benefit?</br></br>

Examples for evaluation: Hours of service limitations to promote safe operation</br></br>

Total GHG/particulate/NOx emissions per shipment unit</br></br>

Toxic material emissions per accident</br></br>

Equipment inspection intervals</br></br>

How can the need for rules and regulations be mitigated with trust and cooperation?</br></br>

What transformation in principles and culture among impacted parties can lead to the presence of trust as expected and delivered?</br></br>

What transparent and comparable Key Performance Measures empower trust and cooperation, and how are they collected, registered, and interpreted?</br></br>

VitalRail/IntelliConferences/Rail Regulatory Excellence

2024-09-10T16:27:57Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>Rail Regulatory Excellence </b><b>IntelliConference</b></br>

Rules and regulations are promulgated in reaction to various events and experiences. Often, they develop a life of their own, untethered to the original intent and absent awareness of system consequences, frustrating stakeholders. Improvements are often challenging as individual industries and companies beseech government from a vested interest point of view. A robust set of recommendations informed objectively by all perspectives is critical to meet urgent safety, productivity, financial, and environmental goals.</br>

<b>Core question: What regulations can stakeholders agree on that are either outdated, de minimis, redundant, counterproductive, or can be improved or replaced in support of the growth and safety of railroads and their service?</b></br>

<i><i><b>Round One</b></i></i></br>

<b>Completing the framework</b></br>

</br>

In addition to the following, what other areas do regulations apply in owning and operating railroads?</br>

Financial reporting</br>

Service reporting</br>

Licenses and permits</br>

Employee Management</br>

Train Operations</br>

Maintenance of way</br>

Taxes</br>

Insurance and liability</br>

Locomotive emissions</br>

Rolling stock design/equipment requirements</br>

Inspection, track and rolling stock</br>

Equipment supplier country of origin</br>

Cybersecurity</br>

National security/DoD functions</br>

Common carrier responsibilities(e.g., must haul high-risk, high-liability hazmat commodities)</br>

Interchange rules (e.g., receiving RRs are responsible for safe railcar conditions)</br>

Pertaining to each regulatory area, what regulations: Are counter-productive?</br>

Are redundant, and where is another regulation or procedure handling the issue?</br>

Should be eliminated because the issue they target is inconsequential?</br>

Should be improved in some way? How?</br>

Have a positive impact that is outweighed by the costs?</br>

Impact customers’ shipping mode decisions in a way that is counter-productive to the overall policy goal?</br>

What activities or relationships need new regulations to be optimally deployed? Examples: Railcar defect detection</br>

Trackage defect detection</br>

Train control safety technology (e.g., ECP braking, PTC II)</br>

Directed service</br>

Degree of inter- and intra-modal competition</br>

Reciprocal switching</br>

<i><i><b>Round Two</b></i></i></br>

<b>Identifying Impacted Parties and Establishing Measures</b></br>

</br>

For each of the regulations identified in Round One: Who are the impacted parties?</br>

What data measures have been used to illuminate the need for that regulation?</br>

What data has been used to quantify the benefits of each regulation for each impacted party?</br>

How is the cost of implementing a regulation allocated and funded relative to each impacted party?</br>

<i><i><b>Round Three</b></i></i></br>

<b>Developing Regulations that Fit</b></br>

</br>

How do we need to think about regulations to best fit various characteristics of rail operations?</br>

What regulations that apply to larger railroads should be adjusted for smaller railroads?</br>

What regulations should be further distinguished for line haul routes of varying characteristics? Examples:</br>

Lines that host passenger trains</br>

Lines that host hazardous commodities</br>

FRA track classification level</br>

Traffic level by tonnage or train frequency</br>

Service Quality metrics (train velocity, re-crew rates, ETA failures)</br>

What regulations should be further distinguished for terminals and railyards of varying characteristics? Examples:</br>

Degree of automated operations</br>

Degree of automated inspection capability</br>

Provision of yard air</br>

Local service quality metrics (switching volume, terminal dwell, first-mile/last-mile failure rate)</br>

What regulations should be further distinguished by commodity hauled or railcar type?</br>

Hazmat and placarding</br>

Gross weight per car classification</br>

Excess length/height railcars</br>

Dimensional loads</br>

Community emergency response notification</br>

Train consist-oriented characteristics:</br>

Train length and weight</br>

Railcar placement in consist</br>

Locomotive placement in consist</br>

Container/trailer placement per railcar</br>

Buffer car requirements</br>

What performance metrics should be established for each regulatory objective?</br>

<i><i><b>Round Four</b></i></i></br>

<b>Prioritization and Process</b></br>

</br>

What regulatory issues are most urgent to address?</br>

Should the regulatory landscape and policy favor one mode over another?</br>

Why?</br>

What process should be established for reviewing and/or sunsetting rules and regulations at intervals or upon a change in circumstances?</br>

How frequently should a regulation undergo review to understand changes in benefits and costs?</br>

What monitoring or reporting improvements can be identified?</br>

How should hard and soft costs of regulations be calculated and recognized?
</br>

Who are the impacted parties?</br>

What data measures have been used to illuminate the need for that regulation?</br>

</br>

How is the cost of implementing a regulation apportioned and funded relative to each stakeholder group?</br>

What factors should be weighed in regulatory execution decisions and implementation timing?</br>

Technology maturity</br>

Pragmatic deployment timing</br>

Costs and benefits to impacted parties</br>

Effectiveness of the regulation toward achieving the objective</br>

What types of changes should be made to rulemaking and regulatory processes?</br>

Does the regulation account for all impacted parties?</br>

Does the regulation shift the modal balance in a way that negates the overall benefit?</br>

Examples for evaluation: Hours of service limitations to promote safe operation</br>

Total GHG/particulate/NOx emissions per shipment unit</br>

Toxic material emissions per accident</br>

Equipment inspection intervals</br>

How can the need for rules and regulations be mitigated with trust and cooperation?</br>

What transformation in principles and culture among impacted parties can lead to the presence of trust as expected and delivered?</br>

What transparent and comparable Key Performance Measures empower trust and cooperation, and how are they collected, registered, and interpreted?</br>

VitalRail/IntelliConferences/Rail Management – Rail Labor

2024-09-10T16:17:46Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>Rail Management - Rail Labor </b><b>IntelliConference</b></br></br>

</br></br>

Railroads and rail unions are filled with people dedicated to safety and organizational success. Their relations are often fraught with misunderstandings and missed opportunities. Creating a collaborative and trusting environment will leverage the strengths and contributions of all railroaders and is essential for the industry to grow and prosper.</br></br>

<b>Core Question</b><b>:</b></br></br>

<b>What aspects of the relationship between rail management and rail labor can be improved to boost productivity, safety, quality of working life, and service?</b></br></br>

</br></br>

<i><i><b>Round One</b></i></i></br></br>

<b>Current Conditions</b></br></br>

What communication approaches to employees are counter-productive?</br></br>

What working conditions for rail staff lead to diminished operating safety?</br></br>

What management approaches to staff performance need improvement?</br></br>

What working conditions for entry-level to mid-level management staff should be changed to improve the quality of professional and personal life?</br></br>

What relations between the different rail labor unions can be improved for everyone’s benefit?</br></br>

<i><i><b>Round Two</b></i></i></br></br>

<b>Charting a New Future</b></br></br>

What innovations in organizational communication and collaboration would advance better relations and productivity between management and staff?</br></br>

What innovations in communication between rail management and rail labor leaders can be instituted to improve collaboration?</br></br>

How can furloughing of employees through business cycles be minimized or eliminated while protecting financial performance?</br></br>

What improvements in management training should be made to better prepare staff for respectful relations with employees?</br></br>

What improvements in staff training should be made to prepare workers better to succeed in railroading?</br></br>

What experiences would enable labor leaders to better understand working conditions of their rank-and-file members?</br></br>

How can technology and automation be advanced in a way that includes consideration of employee work quality-of-life, performance, and security?</br></br>

What operational changes could improve the working quality of life for train labor?</br></br>

What accommodations can be made by rail labor to support rail industry growth, while gaining overall jobs, compensation, quality of life, and job security, especially in the fiercely competitive short-haul market?</br></br>

What union work rules should be reconceived to improve overall rail operations and productivity, without sacrificing safety, quality of life, compensation, or jobs?</br></br>

What improvements can be made in how rail staff performance is measured and acknowledged?</br></br>

How should company success and compensation be linked and shared among labor, management, and shareholders to fairly recognize and incentivize contribution?</br></br>

</br></br>

VitalRail/IntelliConferences/Rail Management – Rail Labor

2024-09-10T16:17:36Z

Docxbot: Automatic uplod by document formatter

<b>Rail Management - Rail Labor </b><b>IntelliConference</b></br>

</br>

Railroads and rail unions are filled with people dedicated to safety and organizational success. Their relations are often fraught with misunderstandings and missed opportunities. Creating a collaborative and trusting environment will leverage the strengths and contributions of all railroaders and is essential for the industry to grow and prosper.</br>

<b>Core Question</b><b>:</b></br>

<b>What aspects of the relationship between rail management and rail labor can be improved to boost productivity, safety, quality of working life, and service?</b></br>

</br>

<i><i><b>Round One</b></i></i></br>

<b>Current Conditions</b></br>

What communication approaches to employees are counter-productive?</br>

What working conditions for rail staff lead to diminished operating safety?</br>

What management approaches to staff performance need improvement?</br>

What working conditions for entry-level to mid-level management staff should be changed to improve the quality of professional and personal life?</br>

What relations between the different rail labor unions can be improved for everyone’s benefit?</br>

<i><i><b>Round Two</b></i></i></br>

<b>Charting a New Future</b></br>

What innovations in organizational communication and collaboration would advance better relations and productivity between management and staff?</br>

What innovations in communication between rail management and rail labor leaders can be instituted to improve collaboration?</br>

How can furloughing of employees through business cycles be minimized or eliminated while protecting financial performance?</br>

What improvements in management training should be made to better prepare staff for respectful relations with employees?</br>

What improvements in staff training should be made to prepare workers better to succeed in railroading?</br>

What experiences would enable labor leaders to better understand working conditions of their rank-and-file members?</br>

How can technology and automation be advanced in a way that includes consideration of employee work quality-of-life, performance, and security?</br>

What operational changes could improve the working quality of life for train labor?</br>

What accommodations can be made by rail labor to support rail industry growth, while gaining overall jobs, compensation, quality of life, and job security, especially in the fiercely competitive short-haul market?</br>

What union work rules should be reconceived to improve overall rail operations and productivity, without sacrificing safety, quality of life, compensation, or jobs?</br>

What improvements can be made in how rail staff performance is measured and acknowledged?</br>

How should company success and compensation be linked and shared among labor, management, and shareholders to fairly recognize and incentivize contribution?</br>

</br>