Here's a short follow-up to my trip to the NARP/MHSRA joint meeting in Chicago on March 24. It's mostly the same thing I posted in the Transportation Forum on SSP in the Midwest Transit Thread:

 

I attended the meeting in Chicago, and thought it was well worth the time and effort to get there. I drove from Fort Wayne to South Bend and took the South Shore from there, and then walked the short distance from Van Buren Station to the meeting venue at the Union League Club. Travel-wise, it would have been more convenient to take Amtrak from Waterloo, but the unreliability of that service time-wise ruled it out for me.

 

After a near-steady diet of hearing people lament what we've lost, it was refreshing and encouraging to hear people there talking of possibilities and positive changes in the political environment and in public perception of passenger rail. Alfred Runte's address was inspiring; he has an almost-evangelical passion for progressive ideals, and he's an eloquent speaker. I bought his book, and I'm about halfway through it. I'm already familiar with much of what he wrote in it, but I hope more people with less familiarity read it; it should help open their eyes.

 

The comment by Milwaukee's Alderman Bauman caught my attention: Suffice it to say that guided buses are not a cheap form of light rail but a very expensive version of a bus service. I wish more people would wake up to that, although if BRT can be used to stake out future light rail ROW and build ridership toward eventual rail implementation, I'm not totally opposed to it. Sometimes baby steps are necessary.

 

Regarding long-distance trains, the perception that they're counterproductive to effective passenger rail service in the US, and not an important, integral, productive part of a national system is, to a large degree, the result of statistical and accounting manipulations that distort the facts. Runte covers that quite effectively in his book.

 

Critics of long-distance passenger trains tend to compare traveling from New York to Chicago or Chicago to Los Angeles by train with making the same trip by air, from the perspective of the business traveler. What they neglect is that unlike airplanes, passenger trains connect intermediate cities and towns that sometimes are not well-served by airlines, and they provide a valued service to non-business travelers who make up more than half the long- and intermediate-distance travelers in the United States.

 

Too bad we didn't get a chance to meet, Rob! I was at the meeting and tho there was a lot of hand-wringing over the past, I sensed a lot of energy in those meetings and a real discussion about moving ahead.

 

I made some notes and I'll share them with you:

 

Chicago conferences Mar 22-23-24, 2007

 

NARP President George Chilson Mar 23

 

Internal: Form national strategy for NARP, with long and short term goals. Work in concert with others toward long term goals. Strategy is to focus limited resources on what is important, eliminate distractions. Identify people with power to achieve these goals or identify possible problem people. Understand role as advocates, importance of unity and alliances.

 

External:

 

Oil-society is structured around it-but the party is over. Oil will threaten security.

Congestion-No market price on highways, can’t build enough to deal with congestion-at capacity-unless demand pricing is instituted, congestion will not go away. Choices are best, most adaptable solution to situation.

Global competition

Lack of awareness that rail is a solution

Rail is only mode that can run on any form of energy and can be electrified

One of three Americans do not own a car.

Quote for USDOT Secretary Peters: “Transportation is at the core of what makes Americans free.”

 

Need to break 35 years of gridlock-need capital-how do we do that?

Need a federal/state partnership

Tax credit bonds w/state control of funds, not Amtrak.

Spread wealth

Our own pie-does not compete with transit, highways, etc

Get program started and build critical mass-volume-and a sense of entitlement

Work with railroads on tax credit-get more credit if they run passenger trains and base on performance. The better they do, the more they can claim for tax credits. Passenger trains are the ticket to get federal funds into their infrastructure. Base credits on OT performance, added service, reduced trip times. Fig leaf of public benefit to sell to voters.

Quote: What is more Marxist than: To each automobile according to its needs?” In response to free market critics

 

Rick Harnish, Executive Director Midwest High Speed Rail Association

 

Spoke about success in getting more service in Illinois.

 

Realized that the full Midwest Regional Rail Initiative was too big to try to do in one bite. Decided to focus on one corridor. Asked others what corridor they felt was best candidate for service improvements. Chicago-St. Louis was the winner, since it was mostly within the state of Illinois and has service, much state travel between Chicago and Springfield.

 

Began a grass root effort, calling on officials from on-line community…and that soon spread as other communities began to support rail. Rick realized that is effort was to succeed, more routes would have to be added: Thus they ended up with added service proposed for:

 

Chicago-St. Louis: 2 new trips, for total of five daily round trips

 

Chicago-Carbondale: One new trip for three daily round trips

 

Chicago-Galesburg-Quincy: One new trip for two daily round trips (plus two long distance trains Chicago-Galesburg.

 

Service started last Fall…ridership up 91% Chicago-st. Louis in the first month of operation -will press for major rail program at $1.3 billion level.

 

Rick spoke also of another goal besides more corridor service in Illinois and the Midwest: The need for more long distance service between Chicago and the east coast. He suggested a goal of doubling service to the east.

 

Jim Coston

 

Delivered a speech called “Amtrak’s Dirty Little Secret”, in which he spoke of the inability of Amtrak to meet the market demand it had since its early days. He suggested that this was a deliberate attempt of to throttle rail service by the government, which was dominated by oil, auto and air. Those people viewed a healthy Amtrak as a threat.

 

There was a lot more---my notes are incomplete---and I have copies of speeches given by James Coston and AAO Pres. Bill Hutchison if anyone wants them.

Oh what the hell...I'm sitting at the computer...might as well forward this too..

 

Summation of remarks by Bill Hutchison, President All Aboard Ohio on March 24, 2007

 

Great to here from Columbus, Ohio, the largest city in America without passenger rail.

 

Also wish to than Rick for this meeting, the food and a terrific place to meet.

 

Before I talk about what we have been doing, I would like to especially thank Al Runte, who, in his understated way, asked a really important question: What happened to the “can-do” spirit this country used to have? Why do we see narrow interests pushing an agenda which is not in the national interest, but rather, serves the greedy, narrow self-interests of the few?

 

Where is that “can-do” spirit? It’s right here in this room and it’s alive and well. We are here for our cause, but I believe we have a higher calling as keepers of the torch. It’s up to us to decide what kind of country this will be.

 

Now on to what we have been doing, but first let me fill you in on what the Ohio Department of Transportation has been doing. This is an agency which could be a poster boy for bad policy and from what I hear this is not unique to Ohio.

 

Several years ago, the legislature pushed through a six cent gas tax increase and ODOT promptly leveraged itself to the hilt, issuing millions in bonds under the mistaken assumption there would be federal funds to make op whatever loss they might have. Well, as you know, the Federal highway trust fund is itself drying up, meaning there is no federal help.

 

So now ODOT is in a real bind, having committed itself to billions in new highway projects without a way to pay for them.

 

And what are these projects? A report done by the transition team for incoming Governor Strickland found that:

 

> Most projects were just a wish list with no real economic development angle.

> ODOT spent $70 million to replace every road sign in the state

> ODOT passed up $400 million if TEA-21 matches, even though they had a state 

   match. The reason? They were for things ODOT didn’t like, such as transit.

> ODOT spent 98% of its funds on roads

> ODOT interpreted TEA-21 rules for funding intended for historic rail preservation so

   narrowly that you can plant flowers but you can’t restore a rail car.

 

This flies in the face of the following:

 

> 500,000 Ohioans do not own a car

> Per capita public transportation spending in Ohio is $1.64 vs. $20.73 in Michigan and

   $63.29 in Pennsylvania

> 25% of the resident of the city of Cleveland do not drive

> Cars in Cleveland and other Ohio cities cost more than housing

> 70% of jobs are in suburbs but 58% of job seekers are in urban area

 

Fortunately, this story might have a happy ending. Incoming Governor Strickland promptly announced-the party is over. From this point on, projects will be judged on need, economic development and what mode can best address problems facing the state.

 

The Governor is still working with a conservative legislature, so look for unconventional solutions. We have had unprecedented input to the transition team and offered many ideas. I might add that our VP was a member of the transition team and is now working on transportation issues for Lt. Governor lee Fisher. This is a first for us.

 

Another thing: The Governor also said he is not in favor of any privatization scheme for the Ohio Turnpike. It will be a long time before that happens.

 

So what’s on the radar screen for All Aboard Ohio?

 

Right now it looks like the Lorain-Cleveland commuter line has legs. This is the outgrowth of a discussion between Ken Prendergast and myself, that believe it or not, has its origin in Chicago.

 

When I heard that METRA was about to “sell” old gallery cars for $1 dollar each (cost of scrapping the cars exceeded their value), I thought, “what the hell…I’ll fork out $5 and buy my own fleet!”

 

Of course it isn’t that simple, but in northern Ohio we have an ideal situation: A depressed community-Lorain-which sees the trains as an economic development tool, a little used former NS mainline through some of the most densely populated areas in Ohio and cars that were available for next to nothing.

 

So far we have gotten the support of nearly every on-line community, with the Cleveland City council being the latest to pass a resolution supporting n alternatives analysis. We are on our way and of this is a success, it will only lead to more.

 

Moving on, our third annual Legislative Summit was a big success. This is a unique venue for those interested in rail service and transportation reform to hear top notch speakers and then walk to the statehouse to speak to legislators. This is really important, since many of them saw trains as an abstract idea. The only time they heard about transportation issues was from highway lobbyist.

 

Another issue is the Ohio Rail Development Commission, which is pushing its Ohio Hub Plan and may develop the 3-C Corridor first since it may be too much to do the entire plan in one bite. They have to do the 3-C first by statute anyway.

 

One last comment about issues is about Amtrak. I am encouraged by what I am hearing today about the new Amtrak, but I think it important for them to understand that for all intents and purposes, Ohio has no real service, and no base to build on. Amtrak is viewed as being irrelevant by some state leaders. One problem we have is the reluctance of either Amtrak of Ohio to take the first step to developing rail service. They each seem to think the other should take the first step. I just want to see them meet in the middle and get something going.

 

Internal concerns

 

I am pleased to announce that we have just been awarded a $40,000 grant from the George Gund foundation, part of a two year, $80,000 grant which will let us go back on offense.

 

Second, I am also pleased to say that we intend to host the next rail passenger leadership meeting this Fall in Cleveland. I want us to take Rick’s thoughts about doubling Amtrak’s Chicago-east coast service and develop a real plan of action and break the gridlock of the past 35 years.

 

Going back to the Gund grant, I want to tell you that this will make it possible for us to do much more than we would be able to otherwise. Let’s face it: volunteers are very good, but there is simply no substitute for full-time staff. Having that help has made it possible to stay on top of unfolding events or to take the initiative on issues. The Legislative Summit would not have happened without full time help.

 

I would encourage all of you to take a good look at applying for grants to build your organizations. We started off small with two grants of only $2500 each for a public opinion survey by Ohio State which showed that 80% of state resident wanted trains. This was really useful, since it was used to counter claims by libertarian “think tanks” that no one wanted trains.

 

More importantly, these small grants got our foot in the door and gave us a track record that served us well when we applied for larger grants. We just got a the Gund grant for $80,000, but that isn’t all. We are going to build AAO through grants from other foundations including the Cleveland Foundation and at some point, I hope we will have at least four staffers and a much bigger budget. This is what it will take to win.

 

Another idea was the phonebank system which was used for political campaigns as an outreach tool. We adapted it for our own needs and we can target by congressional district and the members there. This has really made a big difference. In one case, it was used to stop an attempt to kill ORDC and another attempt to cut funding for an environmental impact study for the Ohio Hub plan. It works.

 

I’ll probably get my butt kicked by Andrew, our staffer in Columbus, but I want you to call him at 614-228-6005 if you are interested in this. We’ll work out the details, but keep in mind this saves you the cost of contracting for a phone banking system on your own. We’ve already made the investment.

 

In closing, I’d like to say I think it is important that we share each others best practices and work hard to strengthen our organizations. If you’re strong, we’re strong.

 

 

Thanks for posting those.

 

This first daylight Lakeshore Limited at Cleveland arrived from Chicago 19 minutes EARLY (6:03 a.m.). It departed right on time at 7 a.m. All the other Amtrak trains last night at Cleveland were 1-2 hours late.

 

There was no media at the Amtrak station, however. I took a photo of the LSL just east of downtown, with the morning sun lighting the skyline behind it. I don't know how well it will come out, since the sun hadn't risen high enough yet to illuminate the train.

 

After I stopped at Starbucks in the Warehouse District to get an OJ and a muffin, Channel 19 called me to ask if the train had departed Cleveland yet. I guess they were counting on it being late (can't blame them)!

 

BTW, it was fun driving out from downtown at the posted speed limit (OK, slightly above) while the inbound rush-hour traffic was inching its way toward the Inner Belt. But the fact that I just saw an Amtrak train depart Cleveland on-time and in daylight while all this activity was going on was a new experience. I hope Amtrak markets this train locally so it doesn't stay a "secret service."

Let's hope they do some marketing, but we should do what we can to help promote the rescheduled service. I'd bet Amtrak won't spend much until the westbound counterpart is also rescheduled, tho...look for that this Fall.

 

Maybe there should be a press conference at the lakefront station on the day the WB train is rescheduled.

Oh what the hell...I'm sitting at the computer...might as well forward this too..

Summation of remarks by Bill Hutchison,

Are Bill Hutchinson's remarks "ok" for distribution?  There are some pretty critical remarks in there(not that I disagree).  I could not find that on www.allaboardohio.org :)

Critical of what? ODOT?

Critical of what? ODOT?

ODOT and a lot of the incumbent government (the legislature).

Most of that data used by Bill Hutchison were from the governor's Transition Team report. And whose name appears on the cover of that report? Then-ODOT Transition Team chief, now ODOT Director James Beasley!

Oh, by the way, got another call from Channel 19 today. They wanted to ride the Lakeshore Limited up to Erie tomorrow (I assume they would only go as far as Erie!) to do a segment about the new train schedule and asked me for permission. I should've told them "Yeah, sure, go right ahead!" Instead, my conscience got the better of me. So I referred them to Amtrak media relations in Chicago.

 

Turns out they wanted to ride this morning, but some breaking news got in the way. That's what that call was about, which I noted in my earlier message.

A good article on Maine's success :clap:.... but once again, the press (the Boston Globe) sets up this impossible standard of "profitability" that they never apply to other, far more heavily "subsidized" modes like highways and aviation.  Rail is every bit an essential transportation investment as any other part of our infrastructure!

:x

Amtrak CEO views Downeaster as a model for other states

By Associated Press  |  April 11, 2007

 

PORTLAND, Maine --The Downeaster is a model for other states looking to expand passenger rail service, according to Amtrak's chief.

 

http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2007/04/11/amtrak_ceo_views_downeaster_as_a_model_for_other_states/?p1=email_to_a_friend

Official: Amtrak riders climb 68-percent in five months

By HERB MEEKER, Staff Writer

[email protected]

 

MATTOON — Riders totaled 73,000 on the Illini and Saluki Amtrak trains passing through Mattoon over the past five months, which amounts to a 68-percent increase, an Amtrak official stated this week.

 

 

http://www.jg-tc.com/articles/2007/04/07/news/doc4616fc8d23fe4856448698.txt

Possible good news for The Cardinal?

 

Amtrak Testing New Diner/Lounge on Single Level Long Distance Trains

By Rafi Guroian | Friday, April 13, 2007, 11:44 AM

 

 

The times are a-changin’. Gone are the days of Cary Grant and Eva Marie Saint stealing romantic glances on the 20th Century Limited in North by Northwest while ordering a multiple course, exquisite dinner on their way to Chicago. Today, trains still have the dining cars, but things have changed somewhat. In an effort to economize some operations and to try new ideas, Amtrak is currently testing a new kind of Food Service car on its Cardinal, which runs from New York to Chicago by way of Virginia and southern Ohio. The “Diner-Lounge,” which is a rebuilt, remodeled, single level car, is Amtrak’s response to customers who have been asking for better food service without the high prices of a full service dining car, while at the same time having a dining experience that is comfortable and attractive.

 

 

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-blogs/washington/washington/entries/2007/04/13/amtrak_testing.html

National Association of Railroad Passengers; 900 Second St., N.E., Suite

308; Washington, DC 20002-3557 www.narprail.org 

 

NARP URGES CONGRESS TO SUPPORT PASSENGER RAIL GROWTH, NOT DOWNSIZING

 

For Immediate Release (#07-05)

 

April 17, 2007 (Washington, D.C.) -- Citing increased demand for

passenger rail service and rising gas prices, the National Association

of Railroad Passengers (NARP) urged Congress to invest $1.68 billion in

Amtrak next year and to steer clear of route-cutting discussions.  This

amount is what Amtrak requested, and includes $100 million for matching

grants for a state corridor development program.

 

In a statement submitted to the House Appropriations Subcommittee on

Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies,

NARP Executive Director Ross Capon noted that expanding Amtrak's network

would drive economies of scale.  "The most effective strategy to improve

the economic efficiency of all of its routes is to focus on actions that

increase volume and revenue, not reduce or eliminate service," Capon

said. 

 

Capon noted that Amtrak ridership has been strong, and that overnight

trains saw a three percent increase in passenger-miles traveled during

the first half of fiscal year 2007 from a year ago.

 

The Bush Administration requested just $800 million for Amtrak plus an

additional $100 million for the corridor development matching grant

program, an amount Amtrak has testified would make it difficult to keep

the system running. 

 

Capon noted the importance of keeping all existing routes.

* Millions of Americans, in travel markets  large  and small, do not

want to or cannot fly or drive;

* Many communities lack alternative public transportation;

* Overnight trains often facilitate start-up of shorter-distance

intercity services and commuter rail operations by allowing shared use

of tracks or facilities; and

* Rail is one of the safest and most energy-efficient forms of travel,

highways are the least safe, and rail is more energy efficient than both

highways and aviation.

 

Capon questioned the relevancy of proposals to identify and excise the

routes with the worst performance records.  He said,  "No matter how

many routes get cut, there always will be another set of 'worst

performing routes,'" and also noted that, measured in loss per

seat-mile, no route stands out as significantly worse than other routes.

 

The full statement is at www.narprail.org

 

About NARP

 

NARP is the only national organization speaking for the users of

passenger trains and rail transit. We have worked since 1967 to expand

the quality and quantity of passenger rail in the U.S. Our mission is to

work towards a modern, customer-focused national passenger train network

that provides a travel choice Americans want. Our work is supported by

over 22,000 individual members. www.narprail.org.

 

# # #

 

Media Contacts:

Ross Capon

(202) 408-8362

[email protected]

 

David Johnson

(202) 408-8362

[email protected]

 

 

Note the reference to major TOD near the Amtrak station in Philly.

 

New Amtrak Service Could Boost ‘the Sixth Borough'

BY ANNIE KARNI - Special to the Sun

April 20, 2007

URL: http://www.nysun.com/article/52916

 

Amtrak is planning to roll out new service on its much-maligned and often-delayed Acela route this July, providing nonstop service between New York and Philadelphia for the first time. The new route would also provide nonstop service to Washington from Philadelphia.

 

 

A link to a very interesting and interactive series of stories on Amtrak funding by the Christian Science Monitor. 

 

http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/amtrak/index.html

Amtrak ridership grows, but so do delays

By Kurt Erickson | Saturday, April 21, 2007

 

 

SPRINGFIELD — Expanded Amtrak service in Illinois has drawn record numbers of riders, but those same passengers have faced “unacceptable” delays, top Amtrak and state officials say.

 

Kurt Erickson can be contacted at [email protected] or (217) 789-0865.

http://www.qctimes.com/articles/2007/04/21/news/state/doc462adb288514b030912685.txt

 

The Amtrak Customer Advisory Committee (ACAC) is seeking a college student member.

 

 

 

The ACAC is a national group that works as passenger service advisors to Amtrak management.  The Committee consists of about 25 volunteers who ride Amtrak trains, observe conditions on the trains and produce a trip report for Amtrak management review.  The observations are discussed with Amtrak management at two meetings each year at various locations in the US.  The report consists of completing an electronic form and submitting it by email upon completion of the trip.  The report includes making written comments on subjects such as the hospitality of the train crew, food service and meal quality, the proper wearing of crew uniforms, and other matters related to providing good onboard services, as well as observations on whether the train was late or not and any obvious safety issues.

 

 

 

Since many passengers on Amtrak trains are college students, the ACAC has always sought to have at least one college student as a member.  Our most recent college student graduated and went on to a new job.  So we are looking for another student to be a member of the ACAC.

 

 

 

This is an excellent opportunity for a student to closely observe the inner workings a large national passenger transportation company and develop professional relationships with these managers.  Specific issues that Amtrak managers deal with include operation of the trains, relationships with host freight railroads, employee motivation and training, working with organized labor, leadership and team building, providing food and beverage services on dining cars and café cars, providing coach and sleeping car accommodations, handling reservations and ticketing, and numerous related issues. In addition to the rail industry, there are many close parallels in the management and operation of airlines, hotels, restaurants, tour companies, ocean cruise lines, recreation companies, bus lines, and transit companies.   

 

 

 

If you know of a student who might be interested, please have them send a brief resume of experience and interests, as well as a contact address and telephone number by email to Kate Warr at [email protected].  The requirements are that the student travel about 1,000 to 2,000 miles a year on Amtrak, complete the trip reports after each trip, and meet with the ACAC members and Amtrak managers twice a year in various locations in the US.  Amtrak will provide sleeping car travel, food, and hotel accommodations for the two annual meetings.  The ACAC membership term is for three years, although participation is voluntary and any member may leave at any time if necessary.  Kate Warr will be glad to provide further information if you contact her at the above email address.

 

 

 

John Guidinger

 

ACAC Member

 

Jackson, Michigan.

AMTRAK CELEBRATES NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION WEEK:

 

In recognition of National Transportation Week, Amtrak today announced that ridership across the country reached 14.3 million during the first seven months of the fiscal year, an increase of 5 percent over last year.

 

 

http://www.railpace.com/hotnews/

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

May 16, 2007 ATK-07-057

Amtrak Contact: Marc Magliari  880.5390

Ill. DOT Contact: Mike Claffey  312 814.3957

Sen. Durbin Contact:  Christina Mulka  202 228.5643

Cong. Manzullo Contact: Rich Carter  815 353.1991

 

Amtrak-ILLINOIS DOT feasibility study determines MOST DIRECT route BEST for SERVICE TO ROCKFORD, NORTHWESTERN ILLINOIS and DUBUQUE, IOWA

 

Public meetings drive route decision to restore service after 25 years;

Funding and other agreements still needed to advance the plan

 

CHICAGO – After a period of extensive public involvement, the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) has chosen the most direct route as the best choice of four options for restoring rail service to a section of the state which lost passenger rail service more than 25 years ago.  Following three community meetings and a web-based public comment period, IDOT has asked Amtrak to work with the CN railroad, which owns the tracks, to restore state-supported service when funding becomes available.

 

“It is clear from the series of public meetings we’ve held over the last few months and the extensive amount of input we have received from the community that there is strong public support for restoring passenger rail service between Chicago, Rockford and Dubuque,” said Milt Sees, Acting IDOT Secretary.  “A reliable rail connection would reduce highway congestion and help give travelers an option to avoid high fuel prices”

 

In July 2006, U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin hosted a town meeting in Rockford to gauge support for Amtrak service in the region.  Durbin was joined by Cong. Don Manzullo, Amtrak and IDOT representatives, labor officials and community leaders from Boone, Winnebago, Stephenson, Jo Daviess, DeKalb and Ogle Counties.

 

“Amtrak ridership has seen record increases over the past three years,” said Sen. Durbin (D-Ill.).  “One thing that was clear from the public meetings we held in the past few months -- Northern Illinois needs dependable passenger rail service.  Today's announcement brings us a step closer to that goal.  I am proud to have helped the communities in Northern Illinois in this effort.”

 

            “We are excited the State of Illinois has selected the route for Amtrak service and we can move forward to the next step," said Cong. Don Manzullo (R-Egan). "This quick decision was made possible because our local officials put their personal preferences aside and did what was best for the region. As a result, we are closer than ever to restoring daily passenger rail service to northern Illinois.”

 

After the report was delivered by Amtrak to IDOT in March 2007, IDOT held a meeting so Amtrak could present the report to area officials and an open house-style public meeting was also held by IDOT.  The report was posted for public comment on the IDOT website.

 

Since then, communities represented in the Rockford Area Transportation Study board endorsed IDOT’s process, preliminary meetings were held with railroad officials, further refinements have been made to the data and an additional route combination was considered beyond the original three options.  The route suggested by Winnebago County Board Chairman Scott Christiansen (“Route D”), would require an at-grade track connection between Metra and Iowa, Chicago and Eastern (ICE) railroad tracks in Kane County and a new connection where the ICE passes under the CN railroad at Genoa, in DeKalb County.

 

With the exception of the Union Pacific route though Belvidere (“Route A” in the original study), all the routes assume a stop at or near Genoa, 15 minutes south of Belvidere, to tap ridership potential in Boone and DeKalb Counties .

 

Annual ridership estimates range from 77,500 for the all-CN route chosen by IDOT (“Route C” in the original study) to 46,000 for the Rockford Airport route (“Route B” in the original study).  The annual operating cost to the state is estimated at up to $5 million, based upon a single daily round-trip frequency.

 

In the original feasibility report prepared by Amtrak at the direction of IDOT, the approximate cost of upgrading the railroad infrastructure was up to $62 million, dependant on the choice of routes.  The latest estimated capital funding needs range from a low of $32 million for the all-CN route chosen by the state (and used for state-supported Black Hawk service until 1981), to a high of $55 million for a route via the airport.  Not included in these capital figures are what are assumed to be the local costs of providing stations.

 

Chicago-Rockford travel times of nearly two hours and Chicago-Dubuque travel times of about five hours are possible and would be competitive with automobile driving.  Amtrak estimates two-to-three construction seasons would be needed to make the infrastructure improvements necessary to achieve these travel times, depending on the timing of the completion of negotiations with CN.

 

“The numbers in our report were further developed through consultations with local officials, the public and the host railroads,” said Michael Franke, Amtrak Senior Director, Corridor Development.  “The public nature of the process improved on our research and verified the original finding that the all-CN route is faster, less expensive to improve, less complicated to operate and therefore has the best ridership potential.”

 

Detailed negotiations with CN regarding schedules, staging construction projects and other issues remain.  There is no funding in Illinois’ 2007-2008 budget for capital or operating costs of the service, but Amtrak will continue to work with IDOT and CN to bring the project to as close as possible to a ready-to-act status.

 

“The process directed by IDOT’s Bureau of Railroads can serve as a model as Amtrak does other route feasibility studies in Illinois and elsewhere,” said Franke.

 

IDOT has asked Amtrak to deliver two other feasibility reports, to study state-supported service to the Quad Cities (including Rock Island and Moline, Ill.,) and to Peoria.  Both communities have never been served by Amtrak trains and both lost passenger rail service in 1978, when the Rock Island Railroad discontinued operations.

About Amtrak

 

Amtrak provides intercity passenger rail service to more than 500 destinations in 46 states on a 21,000-mile route system.  For schedules, fares and information, passengers may call 800-USA-RAIL or visit Amtrak.com.

 

 

National Association of Railroad Passengers: www.narprail.org

Passenger Rail Most Fuel Efficient vs. Highway & Air Modes

 

 

Oak Ridge Data on Fuel Efficiency

 

Edition 26, the latest edition of the Transportation Energy Data Book, was posted on May 29 on Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s website.  ORNL publishes this under contract to the U.S. Department of Energy.  The new edition contains data for both 2004 and 2005.

 

It shows that, in 2005, domestic airlines on average consumed 20.5% more energy per passenger-mile than Amtrak, while cars consumed 27.2% more than Amtrak.  Looked at the other way round, Amtrak consumes 17.0% and 21.4% less energy per passenger-mile than airlines and cars, respectively.  [One passenger-mile is one passenger traveling one mile.]

 

Those percentages are derived from these Oak Ridge figures (British Thermal Units or BTUs per passenger-mile, 2005 data), organized here most to least efficient:

 

Amtrak: 2,709

Commuter rail: 2,743

Rail transit: 2,784

Certificated air carriers: 3,264 (excludes international services)

Cars: 3,445

 

As nationwide average figures, these figures do not reflect:

 

 

Externalities, which generally are positive for rail and negative for air. Rail tends to support pedestrian- and transit-friendly development;

 

The fact that short air flights are far more energy intensive than longer flights;and

 

The greater damage that aircraft emissions do because they occur at such high altitudes.  (Financial Times reported on May 18, “because the gases [from flying] are emitted at a high altitude, they are estimated to have at least twice as much warming effect on the climate than if they were at ground level.")

 

Other notes of interest:

 

Oak Ridge now recognizes one kilowatt-hour as equivalent to 10,339 BTUs (rather than the 11,765 used in previous years) and revised previous-year data to reflect this, so all passenger rail modes are shown as more efficient than in Edition 25);

 

Oak Ridge assumes 138,700 BTUs per gallon of diesel fuel, apparently a “timeless” figure as it was also used in a December 1977 report by Ram K. Mittal, Energy Intensity of Intercity Passenger Rail, prepared for U.S. DOT, Research and Special Programs Director, Office of University Research.

 

In 2005, Amtrak for the first time since 1995 was more energy efficient than both commuter rail and rail transit.

Amtrak consumed 14.6 trillion BTUs in 2005, which was 8.2% less than 15.9 trillion in 2003 and 19.3% below Amtrak’s peak year of energy use (2001, with 18.1 trillion BTUs).

 

Amtrak in 2005 consumed 65,477,000 gallons of diesel fuel and used 531,377,000 kilowatt hours. [both figures exclude consumption by commuter railroads for which Amtrak provides services.]

This indicates that 62.3% of Amtrak energy is diesel fuel vs. 37.7% electricity.

 

http://www.narprail.org/cms/index.php/resources/more/oak_ridge_fuel/

National Association of Railroad Passengers: www.narprail.org

Narp Hotline News

 

A new threat to Amtrak and intercity passenger rail has just emerged in the form of an amendment by Rep. John Boozman (R-AR) that would essentially eliminate Amtrak’s preferential access rights to freight lines unless the U.S. Secretary of Transportation first certifies that implementation of said access rights would not cause increased highway congestion, fossil fuel usage, air pollution or greenhouse gas emissions.  Boozman seemingly is fixated on the notion that Amtrak trains increase pollution by interfering with freight movements.  Please tell your own representative of your strong opposition to this amendment, which Boozman intends to attach to a climate change bill that the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure (T&I) expects to consider (“mark up”) next Wednesday or Thursday (June 20 or 21).  T&I at 75 members is the largest committee on Capitol Hill, so chances are good that your rep is either a committee member or good friends with one or more.  Go to our Action Alert Center for all the details and links to contact your Members of Congress.

 

The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development on June 11 approved legislation that will increase discretionary spending by $2.8 billion for community housing and transportation projects.  The legislation would provide $1.4 billion in direct payments to Amtrak, $106 million more than Amtrak got for this year and $600 million more than President Bush requested.  Appropriators also would provide $50 million to provide 50% federal matching grants for state investments for inter-city passenger rail projects.  The bill is “clean,” but that could change at future steps in the process.

 

Amtrak Testimony in Congress

 

On June 12, Amtrak President and CEO, Alex Kummant, along with Chairman David Laney testified before the House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines and Hazardous Materials.  The hearing focused on Amtrak’s strategic initiatives.  Amtrak President and CEO, Alex Kummant was optimistic that Amtrak could expand and improve its service as long as it received the necessary federal funding.  Amtrak Chairman, David Laney noted that the two most important issues surrounding the growth and vitality of Amtrak are the on-time performance of its long distance trains and the procurement of new equipment.  Since coming to Amtrak in the fall of 2006, Kummant has focused on expanding service through the enhancement and development of state corridors.  Kummant noted that this can be a challenging endeavor.  “While we have enough equipment to serve today’s needs, we lack the equipment it takes to foster corridor development.”

 

Kummant said the Northeast Corridor “is in the best condition it has been in decades,” and that Amtrak will continue to invest in it, even as more attention is afforded to growing state corridors.  Both Chairman James Oberstar of the full committee and Rep. John Mica, ranking full-committee member, expressed interest in the possibility of raising the top speed on the Northeast Corridor, and Mica asked whether the corridor should be privatized and leased to an outside entity to expedite its improvement.  Kummant said he did not expect to see an increase in the top speed, but there remained significant opportunities to improve running time by eliminating segments of slow running, such as 20-25 mph in the Baltimore tunnels.

 

The ongoing labor dispute between Amtrak and its employees was also a point of contention.  When asked about the current contract negotiation, Kummant said that he was optimistic that a deal would be reached soon, and that the issue of back pay is the only major hold-up.  He said one contract is out for ratification now, another he believes is near a “hand-shake,” and there is agreement with a third union to commence high-level discussions.

 

Subcommittee Chair Corinne Brown (D-FL) pressed Kummant on restoring service east of New Orleans.  She noted that “my office has been full of people who come and talk about it.” Kummant said that he “would like to eliminate the Sunset Ltd. as a lightning rod (for criticism of Amtrak) and focus on corridors along” the New Orleans-Jacksonville route.  He also said, “We also have different approaches to” the Sunset Limited west of New Orleans.

 

 

News Release

National Railroad Passenger Corporation

60 Massachusetts Avenue NE

Washington, DC 20002

www.amtrak.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Vernae Graham (510) 238-4360

June 13, 2007

 

Officials Announce Second Amtrak Cascades Train to Canada

 

SEATTLE, WA– On June 8, 2007, Governor Chris Gregoire and Premier Gordon Campbell announced an agreement between Washington State, British Columbia, BNSF Railway Company (BNSF) and Amtrak to make infrastructure improvements that will permit a second daily Amtrak Cascades train between Seattle and Vancouver, B.C. The announcement was made at the King Street Station in downtown Seattle.

 

The Province of British Columbia, Amtrak, and BNSF are funding this $7 million project, which includes construction of a new 11,000-foot siding track near Colebrook Road in Delta, B.C. The new siding track will allow for passenger and freight trains to pass one another at this location. The new passenger rail service could begin operating in summer 2008. Construction is scheduled to begin next month.

 

In 1995, Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and Amtrak began operating a single daily round trip train between Seattle and Vancouver, B.C. In 1999, WSDOT and Amtrak began operating another daily round-trip train between Seattle and Bellingham, Washington. This second train went into service with the expectation it would be extended to Vancouver, B.C. once rail line improvements were added in British Columbia.

 

When the new service begins operations, Amtrak Cascades will depart from Vancouver, B.C. in the morning, travel to Seattle, and then continue on to Portland, Ore. Each afternoon, another train will depart Portland, travel to Seattle, and then continue on to Vancouver, B.C. This service will supplement the existing train that makes a round trip between Seattle and Vancouver, B.C., departing Seattle in the morning.

 

Washington communities served by Amtrak Cascades include Bellingham, Mount Vernon, Everett, Edmonds, Seattle, Tukwila, Tacoma, Olympia/Lacey, Centralia, Kelso/Longview, and Vancouver, Washington.

 

"This is an important step toward improving passenger rail transportation in Washington," said Governor Chris Gregoire. "The additional service between Seattle and Vancouver will provide more options for Pacific Northwest travelers, as well as visitors coming to our region for the 2010 Winter Olympics."

 

"We are extremely pleased to continue our long-term partnership with the Washington State Department of Transportation, BNSF Railway, and the British Columbia Provincial Government," said Alexander J. Kummant, Amtrak President and CEO. "This project allows us to advance corridor development along an already highly successful Amtrak route. We look forward to enhancing our services to our passengers by extending a second frequency to Vancouver, British Columbia in the near future."

 

Amtrak Cascades service extends 466 miles from Eugene, Oregon to Vancouver, B.C. The corridor service is provided in partnership with the states of Washington and Oregon.

 

 

Damn. I had dream last night that Amtrak announced double-daily service service between Cleveland and the East Coast by extending a couple of Empire Corridor trains to Cleveland, with one of them going through Cleveland to Toledo and Detroit. Next thing I know, I'm on the train and it's going 186 mph. Can't shake what I saw overseas...

 

Guess the dream was the wrong side of the country, or the wrong side of the ocean.

May your dreams become reality... :-)

Good article, but;

 

An Editorial from the Grand Rapids (Michigan) newspaper:

 

On track, on time

The Grand Rapids Press

Sunday, June 24, 2007

 

[ ... ]

 

But even as the number of train enthusiasts has grown, so has their frustration. Delays and poor service continue to dog Amtrak, driven in large part by overcrowded tracks that accommodate both freight and passenger service.

 

[ ... ]

 

©2007 Grand Rapids Press

© 2007 Michigan Live. All Rights Reserved.

 

Journalists don't refer to car travelers as auto enthusiasts, or air travelers as plane enthusiasts.

 

There's an implication in this that only people who are slightly odd or obsessive would choose to travel by train instead of flying or driving.

Write the Grand Rapids paper a letter to the editor and make that very point. I share your dismay, but the only way to change this kind of mindset among the media is to say soimething about it directly to them.

 

And copy us on the letter too!

 

Go for it.

Most of the people on those trains couldn't give a rat's tail if it was a train or not. They just want a comfortable, affordable and reliable trip and don't care what kind of vehicle it is. Yet, still this crap continues -- even from a positive editorial!

Write the Grand Rapids paper a letter to the editor and make that very point. I share your dismay, but the only way to change this kind of mindset among the media is to say soimething about it directly to them.

 

And copy us on the letter too!

 

Go for it.

 

Done:

 

To the Editor;

 

Thank you for publishing the article, On Track, On Time, on Sunday, June 24.

 

As a long-time advocate for passenger trains as a viable and environmentally-responsible alternative to driving or flying, I'm pleased to see increasing media awareness of the importance of long-term commitment in funding Amtrak.

 

One comment in your article grabbed my attention, though:

 

"But even as the number of train enthusiasts has grown, so has their frustration."

 

Journalists never refer to car travelers as auto enthusiasts, or to air travelers as airplane buffs, but they often refer to rail travelers as train enthusiasts, railfans or rail buffs. Use of those terms implies that passenger rail is a niche service that caters to people who are a little odd or obsessive. Most riders are not railroad hobbyists and have little interest in the ephemera of railroad history or the arcana of railroading technology; they want comfortable, safe, reliable, affordable transportation. For them, passenger trains best meet those criteria.

 

Applying quirky labels to train travelers obscures passenger rail's value to the general public as a functional, vital element in the nation's transportation system.

 

Respectfully,

 

Robert E Pence

xxxx ******* Blvd.

Fort Wayne IN 46802

Outstanding!!!! :clap: :banger: :banger:

Good letter, Rob. But why block out your street address? DooN't you TruSt uUs??

 

SiGnED.,,,.

 

Wicked.

Good letter, Rob. But why block out your street address? DooN't you TruSt uUs??

 

SiGnED.,,,.

 

 

I trust all the forumers I know; even the crazy ones are mostly harmless, and I can hold my own when it comes to craziness. It's the unknown lurkers I fear.  :-o

The U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee today heard several hours of testimony advocating for both the long-term stabilized funding of Amtrak and the establishment of a first-ever federal-state matching funding program for regional passenger rail development (the very mechanism that would help fund the Ohio Hub.  The following is an op-ed by Wisconsin DOT Sec. Frank Busalacchi, but it is close to what he delivered today at the hearing as his opening statement:[/b]

 

   

Congress must respond to rising demand for rail

By Frank Busalacchi

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

May 21, 2007

 

 

As we approach another summer with gasoline prices rising above $3 a gallon, and witness a high-speed rocket train clocking a record 357.2 miles per hour in France, travelers across America are boarding passenger rail trains in record numbers. They are asking a logical question: Why does America continue to provide inadequate funding for passenger rail service?

 

 

http://www.s4prc.org/inthenews/news/atljourcons21may2007.html

And here is the actualy testimony delivered by States for Passenger Rail Chairman Busalacchi today, as well as a release from the Midwest Interstate Passenger Rail Commission, which had two of it's members testify.  Ohio is a member of both organizations.

 

 

 

Testimony on the Benefits of Intercity Passenger Rail

 

 

Before the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines and

Hazardous Materials of theHouse Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

 

by Frank J. Busalacchi

Secretary, Wisconsin Department of Transportation

Chair, States for Passenger Rail Coalition

 

Tuesday, June 26, 2007

 

Chairman Brown, Ranking Member Schuster and distinguished members of the Committee, my name is Frank Busalacchi.  I am secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Transportation and chair of the States for Passenger Rail Coalition. The Coalition is a group of 30 state transportation agencies dedicated to promoting intercity passenger rail development in the United States.

 

I am also a member of the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission. The National Commission is working to construct a new 50-year vision for the nation’s transportation system.  We are in the midst of our deliberations and my comments do not represent the views of the National Commission.  Each commissioner is working to keep an open mind on all issues.   

 

I appreciate this opportunity to share my perspective on the benefits of intercity passenger rail development to our communities, our states and the nation.   

 

The resurgence of passenger rail development activities in states across the nation reflects the increasing recognition by state and local officials and the public of the benefits of intercity passenger rail related to mobility, energy, economic development, emergency preparedness and the environment.     

 

Intercity passenger rail offers an efficient mobility option from one city-center to another for business travelers, recreational travelers, and those who are unable or unwilling to drive. Our nation needs a multimodal transportation policy that supports our highways, airways, railways and waterways.  Investment is needed in all the modes, but intercity passenger rail is quickly losing ground.  Congress must act now to establish a federal funding partner or intercity passenger rail may never expand beyond the existing rail corridors, and the nation may never experience the benefits we are discussing today.     

 

Congestion Relief Benefits of Modal Choice

 

Intercity passenger rail can provide a mobility alternative for travelers on our increasingly congested highway system.  The congruence that exists between the intercity passenger rail corridors proposed for improved service by state transportation agencies and US DOT’s forecast for congested routes on the National Highway System (NHS) in 2020 is more than coincidental.  The public demand for fast and efficient passenger rail service is strongest in congested intercity corridors connecting major urban areas where travelers face both highway and airport congestion. 

 

For short to medium distance trips of 100 to 400 miles, enhanced passenger rail service can offer travel time advantages over air transportation.  Air travelers are required to check in at the airport at least one hour before departure time, and major airports are often 30 to 45 minutes from downtown destinations.  Rail generally offers service from one city-center to another, with downtown stations in most cities and without security check-in delays. 

 

Air travelers must deal with late arrivals and departures.  In March 2007, only 72 percent of all U.S. flights had on-time arrivals.  The resulting travel delays can be significant.  For example, at New York LaGuardia, only 53 percent of arriving flights were on time.  At Chicago O’Hare, 61 percent were on time.  At Boston’s Logan International, 65 percent were on time; and at Detroit Metro, 70 percent were on time.   Intercity rail connections to airports such as those that already exist at Baltimore-Washington International Airport, Newark, Burbank and Milwaukee can free up commuter slots and reduce airport congestion at major hubs. 

 

A plan to modernize the U.S. Air Traffic Control System to help improve the safety and on-time performance of the airlines is under consideration in Congress.  Intercity passenger rail funding should be expanded at the same time in order to assure the reliability and flexibility of our transportation system and to promote intermodal connectivity and a variety of travel options for the public.   

 

Passenger rail feasibility studies have been conducted in states like North Carolina and Virginia, in Washington State and Oregon, and in the Midwestern states of Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio and Wisconsin.  These studies confirm that in 100- to 400-mile corridors with frequencies of 6-10 round trips per day and speeds of up to 110 miles per hour, enhanced passenger rail service is competitive with both the air and auto modes in terms of travel time, convenience and comfort.

 

These feasibility studies have involved extensive market research, ridership and revenue forecasts, and operating and capital cost estimates.  In specific corridors, ticket revenues from increased ridership were shown to be capable of covering or nearly covering operating costs.  To achieve these operating efficiencies, a significant public investment in new train equipment and improved track and signals is essential.  Infrastructure costs for corridors in the Midwest, for example, are estimated to be $2.7 million per mile.   

 

Congress must begin now to address our intercity passenger rail funding needs.  Projects to modernize our intercity passenger rail system through the procurement of new operating equipment and the construction of track and infrastructure improvements will take years to accomplish.  Federal funding is needed now to assure a balanced transportation system that fully utilizes the competitive advantages that enhanced intercity passenger rail service can offer when compared with our existing highway and airway modes.

 

Energy Benefits

 

The public’s demand for intercity passenger rail service is increasing with the price of gasoline.  National data show that passenger rail service offers substantial energy benefits when compared with other modes of travel. The Oak Ridge National Laboratory, which produces the annual Transportation Energy Data Book for the Department of Energy, concludes that intercity passenger rail consumes 17 percent less energy per passenger mile than airlines and 21 percent less energy per passenger mile than automobiles.  Intercity passenger rail energy efficiency will increase as new corridor services are inaugurated using the next generation of lightweight coaches and diesel locomotives with advanced fuel injection systems meeting the latest EPA standards.

 

These energy savings can be significant in some corridors.  For example, the intercity passenger rail service improvements planned for by the States of North Carolina and Virginia between Charlotte and Washington DC will provide a net reduction of 9.7 million gallons of fuel per year.   Nationally, a shift to alternative transportation modes can have a significant impact on energy usage.  To illustrate, a ten percent modal shift from surface transportation to transit would save the equivalent of all the oil we import from Saudi Arabia in a year – 550 million barrels.   It is clear that passenger rail development must be a key part of our national energy policy.  The time to add an intercity passenger rail component to the debate on energy policy has never been more critical.     

 

Environmental Benefits

 

Intercity passenger rail provides city-center to city-center service, encouraging downtown development rather than urban sprawl.  Rail stations are magnets for urban development in downtown areas.  On a per-capita basis, sprawling suburban development is considerably more costly to provide, with public services like sewers, water supply systems, electric power, streets and roads.  Sprawl generates travel patterns that consume more energy on a per-unit basis than compact, well planned urban development.

 

According to Sightline Institute (formerly Northwest Environment Watch), the average intercity passenger train produces two-thirds less CO2 greenhouse gas emissions per passenger-mile than a car or truck and half the greenhouse emissions of an airplane.  The intercity passenger rail mode also generates fewer emissions of other pollutants than other modes.  For example, intercity passenger rail service improvements planned for by North Carolina and Virginia between Charlotte and Washington DC will provide a net reduction of 531,000 pounds of nitrogen oxides per year as a result of auto diversion to rail.   

 

The investment of federal funding for intercity passenger rail in support of these environmental improvements is simply good public policy.  It will make our cities more livable and reduce the need to invest in unnecessary infrastructure improvements to support urban sprawl. 

 

Economic Development Benefits 

 

The improved mobility and access associated with enhanced passenger rail service can have significant economic development benefits for communities, states and the nation.  An economic impact analysis of the 3,000-mile Midwest Regional Rail System (MWRRS) proposed by nine Midwestern states identified 58,000 new permanent jobs, $1.1 billion in increased household income, and $4.9 billion in increased property values around 102 stations served by the system.   

 

These benefits can be significant for individual communities.  Enhanced passenger rail service in Milwaukee could generate up to 3,075 permanent jobs, $56 million in annual household income, and $227 million in increased property values around the downtown station. 

 

St. Louis could expect an increase of up to 2,800 jobs, $57 million in household income and $250 million in property value increases.  Similar benefits are shown for all 102 communities with stations served by the proposed Midwest Regional Rail System. 

 

This same economic impact analysis identified $23.1 billion in user benefits accruing to the nine-state region from passenger travel time savings, highway and airport congestion reduction, and emission reductions. The system would provide 15,200 construction-related jobs, on average, during its 10-year build-out period.

 

With factories and service jobs moving to other countries and imports from China at an all-time high, economic development is vitally important to our communities.  Our citizens need jobs.  Intercity passenger rail promotes job development around stations and moves people to the communities to support those jobs. 

 

Emergency Preparedness Benefits

 

Modal redundancy should be a basic tenet of the nation’s homeland security policy related to the uninterrupted movement of people and goods during times of natural and man-made disaster.  In fact, an effective intermodal transportation system, including intercity passenger rail, can help natural disasters from becoming human disasters.

 

Consider the problems with evacuating residents from New Orleans and other locations during Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.  Recall that Amtrak served as a mobility alternative for millions of stranded travelers when all commercial airline operations were grounded after 9-11.  Passenger rail is an underutilized resource in terms of disaster preparedness.  It can facilitate efficient evacuations and relieve highway and airway congestion during emergencies.  The nation must improve its ability to respond to transportation emergencies.  Federal funding to assist states with the implementation of their regional rail development plans would help prepare for many kinds of emergencies.

 

Wisconsin Passenger Rail Initiatives

 

As Secretary of Wisconsin DOT, I know firsthand that the American public endorses the expansion of passenger rail services.  Wisconsin and Illinois provide financial support to Amtrak’s Hiawatha Service, which offers seven round trips per day in the 90-mile Milwaukee to Chicago corridor.  The Hiawatha has the best on-time performance of any train on Amtrak’s national system – usually 90 percent or more.  This is a result of the close partnership we have developed with Canadian Pacific Railway, which owns the corridor and dispatches our trains.     

 

Since 1989, Wisconsin has committed almost $100 million in capital and operating support for existing and future Amtrak service in Wisconsin.  This includes annual operating support, new or renovated stations, rail corridor acquisition, crossing improvements, and planning studies.

 

Last year alone, Wisconsin provided approximately $6.5 million in annual operating support for the Hiawatha Service.  Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle has proposed another $500,000 in his 2007-09 biennial budget to add a car to each train, since many of the trains are so popular they now have standing room only for a 90-minute trip.

 

Wisconsin has undertaken three major station development projects for Hiawatha Service customers: a new passenger rail station at Milwaukee’s General Mitchell International Airport in 2005; replacement of a 100-year-old station in the village of Sturtevant with a brand new facility in 2006; and a $16 million renovation of the downtown Milwaukee station to be completed later this year. This public-private partnership will provide a new multimodal facility for Amtrak trains and Greyhound buses, along with commercial development opportunities.

 

Wisconsin has also conducted an environmental assessment of a major project to expand service from Milwaukee to Madison and has received a federal Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). We have invested state funds to purchase and preserve a 32-mile portion of the rail corridor for this future extension. 

 

The public has shown its support for these service improvement investments by voting with their feet.  Last year, Amtrak’s Hiawatha Service carried 588,000 passengers – an all time record and a 48 percent increase in just five years.

 

With Amtrak providing excellent service between Chicago and Milwaukee and with engineering plans on the shelf and ready to go, the demand is strong to expand service 90 miles to Madison.  Madison is the state capital, home to the University of Wisconsin, and its metropolitan population of 450,000 is highly supportive of alternative transportation options.  Better transportation and cultural linkages between Milwaukee, our traditional manufacturing center, and Madison, our center of government, higher education and technology, will provide important economic development synergies benefiting both communities.

 

Wisconsin has already committed $48 million in bonding authority towards this service.  Governor Doyle has proposed increasing this to $80 million in state bonding authority as a match toward future federal funds for the Madison extension.

 

The capital cost for the extension of the Hiawatha Service from Milwaukee to Madison is estimated to be at least $400 million for equipment and track improvements.  No program exists to provide federal funding, and Wisconsin cannot undertake a project of this magnitude on its own – nor could we undertake significant projects involving our highway, air or transit systems without the existing federal partnerships.

 

Other State Activities

 

The States for Passenger Rail Coalition represents 30 states that support intercity passenger rail service.  Many share Wisconsin’s experience and frustration with the lack of federal support.

 

Virtually all of Amtrak’s ridership gains over the past several years have come through state-sponsored services.  Fourteen states provide annual operating support for Amtrak intercity corridor services.   These state-supported services account for 35 percent of Amtrak’s daily ridership and about half of all passenger trains in the system.  State-supported services such as Pennsylvania’s Keystone Service, Illinois’ Chicago to St. Louis trains, the Downeaster in Maine, and Oklahoma’s Heartland Flyer joined Wisconsin’s Hiawatha Service in realizing double-digit percentage increases in ridership during fiscal year 2006.

 

A GAO  report from November 2006 notes that total ridership on the state-supported corridor routes increased by 18 percent from 2002 through 2005, while ridership growth on other parts of the system remained relatively flat.

 

From Washington to Florida, from New York to California and everywhere in between, states have committed hundreds of millions of dollars for short-term, incremental improvements that have fueled the growth in Amtrak ridership. States have completed environmental analyses, put plans on the shelf, and have passengers ready to board the trains. Around the nation, 35 states have developed intercity passenger rail plans for future service.

 

Based on the states’ plans, the 2002 Intercity Passenger Rail Transportation Report prepared by AASHTO  estimates $10.4 billion in state corridor needs and $6.5 billion in Amtrak Northeast Corridor needs over the next six years.  When adjusted for inflation to 2007, the estimated state corridor needs for infrastructure and equipment come to at least $12.7 billion over six years and $57 billion over twenty years. 

 

The need for capital investment in track and equipment is heightened by the increasing demand on Amtrak’s resources, prompting Amtrak to say it will not have sufficient equipment to meet the demand in the 2010-2012 timeframe if this growth continues.  Amtrak has also said that given the multi-year lead times required for equipment design and fabrication, it needs to begin the procurement process now.

 

Conclusion

 

The benefits of intercity passenger rail development, which I have outlined today, have motivated states to fund passenger rail service in many corridors and to plan for enhanced service in many additional corridors.  These benefits are also the driving force behind the formation of the States for Passenger Rail Coalition and our desire for a federal-state funding partnership to bring state rail plans to fruition.

 

Without a federal-state partnership, the state rail plans will never materialize.  According to Amtrak, if it takes steps now to expand or increase its network services, it could take up to four years before the desired outcome of those steps is realized.   The states have been working for a decade to achieve an effective federal/state funding partnership to expand intercity passenger rail service to meet the mobility needs of this country. 

 

In the United States Senate, S294, the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2007, introduced by Senator Frank Lautenberg, would lay the basic framework for Amtrak to work in partnership with the states on an 80/20 federal-state share basis to implement regional capital projects.  Both Wisconsin DOT and the States for Passenger Rail Coalition endorse S294 as an initial step to bring fast, reliable and energy-efficient passenger rail service to a public that is demanding mobility options. We also support the introduction of a companion bill in the United States House of Representatives. 

 

Without a federal-state partnership, the opportunity to address the climate change issues confronting Congress – through enhanced intercity passenger rail – will be lost.  Intercity passenger rail must be a component of the nation’s energy, environmental and homeland security policies.  It must be a cornerstone of US DOT’s intermodal transportation policy in the interest of improving mobility and relieving highway and airway congestion; and this policy must be reinvigorated to support modal connectivity and intercity passenger rail.   

 

If I can leave you with just one thought today, let it be this – Now is the time for Congress to enact a federal-state funding partnership for intercity passenger rail modeled after the successful highway and airway funding programs.  Once enacted, initial steps will be taken to expand capacity or increase network services.  But as Amtrak has said, it will take years before the outcome of these steps can be realized on the ground.  The nation can’t wait any longer.

 

Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. I appreciate your attention and look forward to answering your questions. 

 

************************************

 

News Release

MIPRC commissioners testify in Congress today on the benefits of intercity rail

June 26, 2007

Contact:  Laura Kliewer, Director

               Midwest Interstate Passenger Rail Commission

   (630) 925-1922

 

Washington, D.C. -- MIPRC Chair Indiana Sen. Robert Jackman and MIPRC Commissioner Illinois Rep. Elaine Nekritz testified today before the U.S. House Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials at a hearing on the benefits of intercity passenger rail.

 

Both Jackman and Nekritz outlined some of the benefits that passenger rail service has brought to the Midwest, and its potential for the future.

 

“In addressing our nation’s growing transportation needs, we must provide a vision for the 21st century – a vision that considers complementary methods of interstate and intrastate transportation, a vision that serves us well in a national emergency and a vision that is sensitive to our energy and environmental concerns.  The development of intercity passenger rail should serve as a vital component of that vision,” Jackman said. 

 

“Intercity passenger rail development will complement other modes of transportation by providing a necessary middle-distance way to travel.  Passenger rail is significantly more energy efficient than either commercial airlines or cars. Rail can prove a vital resource when disaster strikes, and is crucial to managing traffic from other modes of transportation that may be shut down,” he said.

 

The committee is seeking input on passenger rail needs and priorities prior to drafting its legislation.  “To be truly successful, the states need partners.  We already have a partner in Amtrak and the freight railroads.  We are hopeful that the federal government will also join us as a partner,” said Nekritz.

 

The MIPRC recommended that the committee consider the following when drafting their legislation:

 

First:  Provide passenger rail with a dedicated source of funding similar to other modes of transportation.  Passenger rail needs to be put on the same level as other modes of transportation.

 

Second:  Reauthorize Amtrak.  The MIPRC supports the provisions in the Passenger Rail Improvement Act (S. 294) to reauthorize Amtrak for six years, while requiring reforms and improvements.

 

Third:  Create (with state and local input) a comprehensive national plan for passenger rail development.  While states have been developing regional plans, a comprehensive plan for systematic, nationwide development of passenger rail as part of a larger, interconnected, multimodal plan would help ensure that all the states’ needs are considered and developed

 

Fourth:  Help ensure that passenger rail service can run on time.  Across the country, ridership on passenger rail has seen steady, and sometimes phenomenal, growth. But when trains can’t run on time due to freight hold-ups, states have a difficult time supporting service, and ridership can be affected.

 

Fifth: Provide incentives for biofuel usage in passenger trains.  The use of biofuels in intercity passenger trains in other countries, as well as on commuter trains in this country, show that blends up to 20 percent biodiesel can be used in passenger trains without any negative affect on the train’s engine.

 

The Midwest Interstate Passenger Rail Commission, created by an interstate compact in 2000, brings together the region’s leaders to advocate for expansion of and improvements to the Midwest’s passenger rail system. The commission seeks to provide a unified voice for the region in calling for federal support of passenger rail development as a key component of a strong, multimodal transportation system for the future.

 

 

Busalacchi's testimony was outstanding. I can't believe the House hasn't introduced a companion bill to S.294 yet. Hopefully the testimony by Busalacchi and the others will cause them to budge.

I watched the "live" feed today and Busalacchi was great not only in his opening statement (above), but in his comments and answers to questions.  His best moment came when he said that if Washington expects to deal with problems like energy conservation, air quality and traffic congestion (Quote) "It will not happen" unless Washington invests in the rail infrastructure in the same way it has done for highways and aviation.

 

Keep in mind, this is a guy who drove a truck for a living and rose up through the ranks of the Teamsters in Wisconsin to be appointed DOT Sec. for the state.  I have met him and seen him in action.  In my estimation, he and Gene Skoropowski (California Capital Corridors Managing Director) are the two sharpest minds in modern passenger railroading.  I have yet to come across two people who can and have done a better job of verbally shredding the sham transportation policies of the Bush Administration.  But what makes it even better is that both of these guys walk the walk as well when it comes to advancing passenger rail.

Yep. They have state-supported passenger trains running in their domains, and continue to make improvements to them (as best they can, absent the federal funding share). So when they speak, they speak with a track record behind them.

 

And, yes, that pun was most definitely intended (might make a good title for a rail news publication!).

^^thanks for the news as always, noozer... It's interesting to juxtapose nations, continents.  The addition of a train, the 2nd Cascades Train to Canada, is cause for a national press release exciting near celebration here in the car-crazy/air-crazy USA, in some quarters ... Adding such a new train in Europe?...  probably rates only a taped up notice on the stationmaster's window.

 

 

I doubt even that. Even in the UK (where they seem embarassed to lack a true high-speed rail service on their two principal rail corridors to the north), their train service is pretty extensive. When we looked at taking the train for York to London on the East Coast Mainline, I was astonished to see there was a train departing roughly every 10 minutes for London during the "rush hours" and every 30-45 minutes off-peak. We're talking essentially commuter rail-type frequencies that you see in Chicago and New York. But few commuter trains travel this fast... Most of the York-London trains took 2 hours to cover the 200 miles separating the two cities. The West Coast Mainline, from London to Manchester and Liverpool offered similar frequencies and running times.

 

The equivalent here in the Great Lakes region would be 30+ round trip trains a day between Cleveland and Chicago, taking 3 hours and 25 minutes between the two cities. And that's using a model from a country (the UK) that's trailing what continental Europe offers.

 

Oh, and by the way, York has 180,000 people. It's service level? 450 trains a day. And 5.6 million people got on/off trains at York last year.

 

Amtrak ridership at Chicago Union Station? 2.5 million. Philadelphia 30th Street Station? 3.5 million. Washington Union Station? 3.9 million.

 

Granted, York's ridership also includes commuter rail services. The above figures for major U.S. rail stations do not. The point is that little ol' York, with just 180,000 residents (granted its a popular tourist spot), ranks with the big boys of rail travel in the U.S.

More than a few Ohio communities that should be taking advantage of this, either to get ready for Ohio Hub service or commuter rail in several metro areas, such as the West Shoreway in the Cleveland-Lorain corridor.  Nice to see Amtrak being a bit more proactive and doing so (for a change) outside of the Northeast Corridor.

 

7/6/2007    Event

Amtrak to host station improvement workshop

 

As part of an effort to encourage communities to spruce up stations, Amtrak on July 24 will host a “civic conversation” in Denver as part of its Great American Stations Initiative. Amtrak President and Chief Executive Officer Alex Kummant recently invited mayors, civic leaders, and state officials along the 2,438-mile Chicago-to-Emeryville, Calif., California Zephyr route to attend.

 

 

 

http://www.progressiverailroading.com/prdailynews/news.asp?id=10998

Two statements today from the Amtrak Capital Needs hearing...

 

STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN JAMES OBERSTAR FROM TODAY’S HEARING ON “AMTRAK CAPITAL NEEDS”

From the Hearing of the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials

July 11, 2007

 

 

By Mary Kerr (202) 225-6260

 

Thank you, Chairwoman Brown and Ranking Member Shuster, for holding this hearing on Amtrak’s capital needs. This is an important subject to discuss as we begin deliberations on Amtrak reauthorization.

 

As we get into the specifics of Amtrak’s capital needs, I think it’s important we remind Members how we got to where we are today. When Amtrak was created in the Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970, Congress relieved the freight railroads of “all of their responsibilities as common carriers of passengers by rail.” The freight railroads begged Congress to let them get out of the passenger rail business because it was not profitable.

 

The Committee report accompanying H.R. 17849, the Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970, found that the railroads had been “downgrading service in a deliberate attempt to support elimination of passenger trains.”

 

In fact, there were some 20,000 passenger trains operating in the United States in 1929. Nine thousand of those had been eliminated by 1946. In 1970, when Congress began its work to create Amtrak, there were fewer than 500 trains and for over 100 of those the railroads were engaged in discontinuance proceedings before the Interstate Commerce Commission.

 

Years of railroad neglect of their passenger operations meant that stations and terminals were often old and run down, that passenger cars offered dated amenities, and that the equipment was prone to failure. The nation’s railroad infrastructure was in a serious state of disrepair. Trains, even some passenger trains, crept along at 10-15 miles per hour in some places and derailments were becoming distressingly commonplace. By the time Amtrak commenced operations on May 1, 1971, the rail share of the intercity travel market had shrunk to just 0.4 percent. The number of daily intercity passenger trains had been reduced to fewer than 300.

 

The Congress created Amtrak to revitalize intercity passenger rail service. The Congress stressed the public benefits of rail service. Unfortunately, Amtrak never received the support it needed to accomplish that goal. It barely received enough each year to keep it on life support. What this Administration and a few in Congress have had trouble understanding is that if you take an organization that is undercapitalized and has a backlog of deferred maintenance at the outset, and you invest only enough to barely preserve the status quo year after year, in 36 years you will have an organization that is undercapitalized with an even greater backlog of deferred maintenance, which is exactly what we are dealing with today. You get what you pay for.

 

In 2005, Amtrak completed a comprehensive catalog of its capital needs entitled Engineering State of Good Repair. The analysis shows a $4.2 billion backlog of investment (in 2005 dollars) to bring the Amtrak engineering infrastructure system to a state of good repair, excluding some major bridge and tunnel work and equipment needs. With the backlog of major bridge and tunnel work, the backlog approaches an estimated $6 billion.

 

Even with adequate funding, resources, and additional equipment, Amtrak estimates the backlog of work will take a minimum of 10 years to complete in order to maintain a reliable level of rail service as the construction is completed. Based on a 10-year catch-up scenario, the Amtrak funding needed during this period would be approximately $715 million per year up thru 2011 and $600 million for the period 2012 to 2016 (using 2005 dollars). This is again exclusive of the major bridge or tunnel replacement programs and equipment needs.

 

This is drop in the bucket compared to what other countries are spending on passenger rail. A few months ago, in preparation for our upcoming work on Amtrak reauthorization, I asked the Congressional Research Service (CRS) to look at public spending for passenger rail in other countries. What CRS found put the United States to shame. We enter into an annual debate in Congress each time the transportation appropriations bill comes to the floor on whether it is wise to invest a billion dollars in our national passenger railroad, Amtrak. Meanwhile, other countries, most of which are much smaller than the United States, are spending five to ten times what we are spending for passenger rail on an annual basis. And they are expanding their systems, not paring them down, as we are doing.

 

According to an April 2005 study on public budget contributions to railways, which was commissioned by the European Union, in 2003 alone, France invested $10.6 billion (US converted from 2003 market Euro rates) in its rail system; Germany invested $12.4 billion; Italy invested $7.9 billion; the United Kingdom invested $7.8 billion; the Netherlands invested $2.5 billion; Austria invested $2.3 billion; Switzerland invested $1.9 billion; Sweden invested $1.7 billion; Spain invested $1.3 billion; and Denmark invested $1.2 billion. Japan invests about $2 billion annually in its Shinkansen and, according to the Ministry of Railways, China has launched a plan to spend a total of $162 billion from 2006 through 2010 to expand its railway system.

 

There is no reason why we cannot do the same here in the United States. The Federal Government just needs to step up and take charge with a strong program to support passenger rail service. We have a real opportunity with this Amtrak reauthorization bill to do just that.

 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE CORRINE BROWN FROM TODAY’S HEARING ON “AMTRAK CAPITAL NEEDS”

Comments from the meeting of the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials

July 11, 2007

 

 

By Mary Kerr (202) 225-6260

 

The Subcommittee is meeting today to hear testimony on “Amtrak’s Capital Needs.” This is our third hearing on Amtrak as we prepare to develop a long term reauthorization bill.

 

Amtrak serves nearly 25 million riders annually at more than 500 stations in 46 States on approximately 22,000 route miles. Amtrak directly owns or operates 730 route miles, primarily between Washington, D.C. and Massachusetts on the Northeast Corridor, and in the State of Michigan; several station facilities including Penn Station in New York, Chicago Union Station, and several major maintenance and repair facilities. The rest of Amtrak’s operations are on track owned by the freight railroads and some commuter railroads.

 

In 2005, Amtrak completed a comprehensive catalog of its capital needs, which showed a $4.2 billion backlog of investment to bring its infrastructure system to a state of good repair. With the backlog of major bridge and tunnel work, the backlog approaches an estimated $6 billion.

 

Even with adequate funding, resources, and additional equipment, Amtrak estimates the backlog of work will take a minimum of 10 years to complete in order to maintain a reliable level of rail service.

 

However, this estimate does not include service enhancements to improve on-time performance or increase train speeds. Addressing these concerns is important and necessary if Amtrak wants to improve service and grow its ridership for the future. But we can’t get to the future unless Amtrak is able to meet its current capital needs. I know for a fact that some of these major infrastructure projects are desperately needed to improve the safety and security of the system, such as the fire and life safety improvements to the tunnels in New York, Baltimore, and Washington, D.C. I can’t say it often enough that passenger rail is a prime target of terrorists and we haven’t prepared the way other countries have.

 

As I have said again and again, other countries continue to invest billions of dollars each year to their passenger rail systems while the United States continues to fall further and further behind. We enter into an annual debate in Congress each time the transportation appropriations bill comes to the floor on whether it is wise to invest a billion dollars in our national passenger railroad, while other countries that are much smaller than the United States are spending five to ten times what we are spending for passenger rail on an annual basis. We need to make a real commitment to Amtrak in this reauthorization bill.

 

 

 

Great write-up, especially the information on what other developed nations spend on rail. But this paragraph puts it all in a nutshell...

 

The Congress created Amtrak to revitalize intercity passenger rail service. The Congress stressed the public benefits of rail service. Unfortunately, Amtrak never received the support it needed to accomplish that goal. It barely received enough each year to keep it on life support. What this Administration and a few in Congress have had trouble understanding is that if you take an organization that is undercapitalized and has a backlog of deferred maintenance at the outset, and you invest only enough to barely preserve the status quo year after year, in 36 years you will have an organization that is undercapitalized with an even greater backlog of deferred maintenance, which is exactly what we are dealing with today. You get what you pay for.

Amtrak president: High-speed rail would cost billions

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — Even if it spent $7 billion on track upgrades, Amtrak couldn't reduce the travel time between Washington and New York to less than 2 hours and 20 minutes, which is only 25 minutes less than the trip now takes, the company's president told Congress on Wednesday.

 

 

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2007-07-11-amtrak-high-speed_N.htm#uslPageReturn

 

Or you could spend $32 billion on improving passenger rail nationwide and have 110-mph passenger trains serving people in California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, New York, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin.

 

If there is an effort to spend $32 billion on the Northeast Corridor and not at least an equal amount in the rest of the country, then I predict an outcry west of the Appalachians.

You ain't just woofin' KJP. Lock and load~!  :shoot:

Ride the rails in style

CNN.com

 

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Mahogany interiors, five-course meals and personal butler service will be available on several Amtrak routes starting this fall, as the national passenger railroad embarks on a new partnership with GrandLuxe Rail Journeys.

 

 

Find this article at:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TRAVEL/07/11/amtrak.luxury.ap/index.html 

 

http://www.narprail.org/cms/index.php/hotline/more/hotline_509/

NARP Hotline News

House and Senate Appropriations Committees acted on the Fiscal 2008 Transportation- HUD spending bill this week.

 

The House Appropriations Committee passed their version of the bill on Wednesday.  It has $1.4 billion for Amtrak and $50 million to match state intercity passenger rail investments.  Rep. Joe Knollenberg (R-MI), ranking member of the transportation/housing subcommittee, commended subcommittee chairman John Olver (D-MA) “for working with us in formulating a balanced bill that I can support…I thank him for keeping the Amtrak pro-reform language in the bill.”

 

Knollenberg said he expected colleagues to offer floor amendments cutting spending to last year’s level, by one per cent, and by one-half per cent.  He urged the potential authors of these amendments “to look at the rules.” Cuts below the highway and transit levels guaranteed in SAFETEA-LU are not permitted.  Similarly, two aviation capital investment programs can’t be cut.  “That leaves FAA safety, air traffic control and Community Development Block Grants” bearing the brunt of any across-the-board cuts.  (He could also have mentioned Amtra.k.)

 

The Senate Appropriations Committee approved their $104.6 billion bill on Thursday.  According to Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), chairwoman of the Senate Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Subcommittee, the bill is about $1.2 billion more than the President’s budget request because it restores funding that was cut from various transportation and housing programs.  Sen. Kit Bond (R-MO), though supporting the bill and complimentary of Murray’s work, said, “I’m afraid we are on a collision course with the executive branch because the cuts were restored.”

 

The bill has $1.375 billion for Amtrak, and $100 million to fund a state/federal matching program for to development of state corridors.  This means that the Senate bill has slightly more for intercity passenger rail and slightly less for Amtrak than the House bill.

 

This year’s level of funding is about $600 million more than what the White House requested.  The nation’s highways would receive $40.2 billion, also $600 million more than the President’s request.  The Federal Aviation Administration would receive $14.9 billion, which is $863 million more than President Bush required.  Commercial pilots scored a victory when lawmakers adopted by voice vote an amendment by Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, that would raise the current mandatory retirement age for airline pilots from 60 to 65, provided the copilot is younger than 60.  The panel also adopted by voice vote an amendment by Byron L. Dorgan, D-N.D., that would reduce Surface Transportation Board filing fees for certain challenges to freight rail shipping rates from $178,000.00 to $350.00.

 

The House Appropriations Committee passed their version of the bill on Wednesday. It has $1.4 billion for Amtrak and $50 million to match state intercity passenger rail investments.

 

Why in the world would the House offer a state matching grant program LESS than what even the Bush administration was offering?? What's up with the house? And they still have no companion bill to the Senate's passenger rail investment act (for the second session in a row). The House, whose membership is based on population, is supposed to represent the nation's urban constituency. Baffling.

Even the $100-Million in the Senate budget is a drop in the bucket, but at least it's a start.

I am hearing that Amtrak is putting in automated ticket machines at some stations and after promising not to cut staffing levels is proposing to exactly that in Toledo at least. More as it develops.