Cover Image

Not for Sale



View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( R2


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
NATIONAL NCHRP REPORT 657 COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Guidebook for Implementing Passenger Rail Service on Shared Passenger and Freight Corridors

OCR for page R1
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2010 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE* OFFICERS CHAIR: Michael R. Morris, Director of Transportation, North Central Texas Council of Governments, Arlington VICE CHAIR: Neil J. Pedersen, Administrator, Maryland State Highway Administration, Baltimore EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board MEMBERS J. Barry Barker, Executive Director, Transit Authority of River City, Louisville, KY Allen D. Biehler, Secretary, Pennsylvania DOT, Harrisburg Larry L. Brown, Sr., Executive Director, Mississippi DOT, Jackson Deborah H. Butler, Executive Vice President, Planning, and CIO, Norfolk Southern Corporation, Norfolk, VA William A.V. Clark, Professor, Department of Geography, University of California, Los Angeles Nicholas J. Garber, Henry L. Kinnier Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, and Director, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Virginia, Charlottesville Jeffrey W. Hamiel, Executive Director, Metropolitan Airports Commission, Minneapolis, MN Edward A. (Ned) Helme, President, Center for Clean Air Policy, Washington, DC Randell H. Iwasaki, Director, California DOT, Sacramento Adib K. Kanafani, Cahill Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley Susan Martinovich, Director, Nevada DOT, Carson City Debra L. Miller, Secretary, Kansas DOT, Topeka Pete K. Rahn, Director, Missouri DOT, Jefferson City Sandra Rosenbloom, Professor of Planning, University of Arizona, Tucson Tracy L. Rosser, Vice President, Corporate Traffic, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Mandeville, LA Steven T. Scalzo, Chief Operating Officer, Marine Resources Group, Seattle, WA Henry G. (Gerry) Schwartz, Jr., Chairman (retired), Jacobs/Sverdrup Civil, Inc., St. Louis, MO Beverly A. Scott, General Manager and Chief Executive Officer, Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, Atlanta, GA David Seltzer, Principal, Mercator Advisors LLC, Philadelphia, PA Daniel Sperling, Professor of Civil Engineering and Environmental Science and Policy; Director, Institute of Transportation Studies; and Interim Director, Energy Efficiency Center, University of California, Davis Douglas W. Stotlar, President and CEO, Con-Way, Inc., Ann Arbor, MI C. Michael Walton, Ernest H. Cockrell Centennial Chair in Engineering, University of Texas, Austin EX OFFICIO MEMBERS Thad Allen (Adm., U.S. Coast Guard), Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC Peter H. Appel, Administrator, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, U.S.DOT J. Randolph Babbitt, Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration, U.S.DOT Rebecca M. Brewster, President and COO, American Transportation Research Institute, Smyrna, GA George Bugliarello, President Emeritus and University Professor, Polytechnic Institute of New York University, Brooklyn; Foreign Secretary, National Academy of Engineering, Washington, DC Anne S. Ferro, Administrator, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, U.S.DOT LeRoy Gishi, Chief, Division of Transportation, Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC Edward R. Hamberger, President and CEO, Association of American Railroads, Washington, DC John C. Horsley, Executive Director, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC David T. Matsuda, Deputy Administrator, Maritime Administration, U.S.DOT Victor M. Mendez, Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, U.S.DOT William W. Millar, President, American Public Transportation Association, Washington, DC Cynthia L. Quarterman, Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S.DOT Peter M. Rogoff, Administrator, Federal Transit Administration, U.S.DOT David L. Strickland, Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S.DOT Joseph C. Szabo, Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration, U.S.DOT Polly Trottenberg, Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy, U.S.DOT Robert L. Van Antwerp (Lt. Gen., U.S. Army), Chief of Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC *Membership as of February 2010.

OCR for page R1
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM NCHRP REPORT 657 Guidebook for Implementing Passenger Rail Service on Shared Passenger and Freight Corridors Alan J. Bing Eric W. Beshers Megan Chavez ICF INTERNATIONAL Fairfax, VA David P. Simpson DAVID SIMPSON CONSULTANTS, LLC St. Paul, MN Emmanuel S. "Bruce" Horowitz ESH CONSULT Alexandria, VA Walter E. Zullig, Jr. Ossining, NY Subscriber Categories Planning and Forecasting Public Transportation Railroads Research sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2010 www.TRB.org

OCR for page R1
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY NCHRP REPORT 657 RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed research provides the most effective Project 08-64 approach to the solution of many problems facing highway ISSN 0077-5614 administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local ISBN 978-0-309-15470-3 interest and can best be studied by highway departments individually Library of Congress Control Number 2010927496 or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the 2010 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. accelerating growth of highway transportation develops increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of COPYRIGHT INFORMATION cooperative research. Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining In recognition of these needs, the highway administrators of the written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials published or copyrighted material used herein. initiated in 1962 an objective national highway research program Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this employing modern scientific techniques. This program is supported on publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of the FMCSA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, Association and it receives the full cooperation and support of the method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission Transportation. from CRP. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies was requested by the Association to administer the research program because of the Board's recognized objectivity and understanding of NOTICE modern research practices. The Board is uniquely suited for this purpose as it maintains an extensive committee structure from which The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; it the Governing Board of the National Research Council. possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, The members of the technical panel selected to monitor this project and to review this state and local governmental agencies, universities, and industry; its report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. relationship to the National Research Council is an insurance of The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved objectivity; it maintains a full-time research correlation staff of by the Governing Board of the National Research Council. specialists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the research directly to those who are in a position to use them. researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. by chief administrators of the highway and transportation departments The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research and by committees of AASHTO. Each year, specific areas of research Council, and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not needs to be included in the program are proposed to the National endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report. Research Council and the Board by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Research projects to fulfill these needs are defined by the Board, and qualified research agencies are selected from those that have submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Research Council and the Transportation Research Board. The needs for highway research are many, and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program can make significant contributions to the solution of highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement rather than to substitute for or duplicate other highway research programs. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at: http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 657 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Crawford F. Jencks, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Lori L. Sundstrom, Senior Program Officer Megan A. Chamberlain, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Natalie Barnes, Editor NCHRP PROJECT 08-64 PANEL Field of Transportation Planning--Area of Forecasting Randall E. Wade, HNTB Corporation, Madison, WI (Chair) John D. Bell, New York State DOT, Albany, NY D. C. Agrawal, DC Agrawal Consulting, LLC, Princeton, NJ Clem Bomar, California DOT, Sacramento, CA H. Craig Lewis, Montgomery, McCracken, Walker & Rhoads, LLP, Philadelphia, PA Rodney P. Massman, Missouri DOT, Jefferson City, MO Thomas Mulligan, Union Pacific Railroad, Omaha, NE Anthony D. Perl, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC Paul E. Vilter, AMTRAK, Philadelphia, PA Karen McClure, FRA Liaison Venkat Pindiprolu, FTA Liaison Edward L. Strocko, FHWA Liaison Karen E. White, FHWA Liaison Elaine King, TRB Liaison AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The research reported herein was performed under NCHRP Project 8-64 by ICF International. ICF International is the contractor for this study, with assistance from TranSystems Corporation and Walter E. Zullig Jr., Esq. Dr. Alan J. Bing, Technical Specialist at ICF International, is the Project Director and co-Principal Inves- tigator. The other authors of this report are David P. Simpson, Senior Transportation Planner, independent consultant for TranSystems and co-Principal Investigator; Emmanuel S. "Bruce" Horowitz, independent consultant for TranSystems; Eric W. Beshers, Senior Transport Economist, independent consultant for ICF International; Walter E. Zullig Jr., an independent transportation attorney; and Megan Chavez, Analyst at ICF International. The work was done under the general supervision of Dr. Bing and Mr. Simpson.

OCR for page R1
FOREWORD By Lori L. Sundstrom Staff Officer Transportation Research Board This Guidebook will aid states in developing publicprivate partnerships with private freight railroads to permit operation of passenger services over shared-use rail corridors. The Guidebook should encourage the broad acceptance of improved principles, processes, and methods to support agreements on access, allocation of operation and maintenance costs, capacity allocation, operational issues, future responsibilities for infrastructure improvements, and other fundamental issues that will affect the ultimate success of shared- use passenger and freight agreements between public and private railroad stakeholders. The United States is experiencing increasing congestion on the nation's highways, as well as capacity constraints on the national rail system. Higher gasoline prices and concerns about greenhouse gas emissions are increasing public demand for energy-efficient trans- portation alternatives. Faced with these challenges and increased emphasis on multi-modal planning under federal transportation statutes (i.e., ISTEA, TEA-21, and SAFETEA-LU), state interest in intercity passenger and commuter rail development has grown significantly in recent years. Thirteen states support Amtrak service and thirty-eight states have developed or partici- pated in developing plans for enhanced intercity passenger rail service. A growing number of commuter rail systems operate on lines of various ownership configurations (e.g., freight railroad, county, city, state, and transit authorities). AASHTO's report Intercity Passenger Rail Transportation (January 2003) documents $17 billion in state-defined infrastructure and equipment needs over 6 years and another $43 billion in needs over the next 2 decades. Eighty percent of these needs involve investments in privately owned freight corridors. Sev- eral states have well-established rail passenger programs through which capital and operat- ing funds are provided to ensure intercity, commuter, and transit services. Other states are beginning to implement rail passenger service plans and projects. Most of these rail services will operate on freight corridors. The concept of passenger and freight operations co-existing in shared-use corridors is central to further development of state-supported passenger rail service in the United States. All current Amtrak service is on shared-use corridors. Virtually all plans for enhanced passenger rail service, both intercity and commuter rail, developed by states are based on the shared-use corridor concept. Recent federal legislation--including the American Recovery and Investment Act of 2009, the Capital Assistance to StatesIntercity Passenger Rail Service provided for in the 2008 Department of Transportation Appropriations Act, and the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008--is providing significant new federal funding for passenger rail service, prompting a number of states to expand or initiate service. This new funding is coming at a time when there is no broadly accepted methodology for conducting the long,

OCR for page R1
costly, and often mutually frustrating negotiating process with freight railroads in an equi- table manner that ensures (1) that the public interest is served and (2) that private freight railroads have a reasonable incentive for entering into such agreements. The lack of such a methodology can increase the likelihood of significant delay or can even jeopardize project implementation. Under NCHRP Project 08-64, "A Guidebook on Improved Principles, Processes, and Methods for Shared-Use Passenger and Freight Rail Corridors," ICF International was asked to develop a guidebook that would assist states in understanding the variables, chal- lenges, and opportunities associated with starting or expanding passenger rail service on track owned by a freight railroad in a shared-use corridor. To meet the project objectives, the research team examined extant literature; reviewed current negotiation practices used by public and private rail entities; described factors that contribute to successful agreements; and prepared case studies that demonstrate the application of effective principles, processes, and methods. This Guidebook should be of immediate use to state rail programs as they determine how best to approach this highly complex situation.

OCR for page R1
CONTENTS 1 Chapter 1 Introduction, Background, and Purpose 1 1.1 Introduction 2 1.2 Background and Present Situation 2 1.2.1 Historical Background 4 1.2.2 The Present Situation 5 1.3 Scope, Purpose, and Content 5 1.3.1 Scope 6 1.3.2 Purpose 7 1.3.3 Content 9 Chapter 2 Getting Started and Negotiations 9 2.1 Introduction 9 2.1.1 Content of Section 10 2.1.2 Passenger Rail Development Timeline 11 2.2 Planning and Preparation 11 2.2.1 Introduction 11 2.2.2 Understanding the Railroad Industry 12 2.2.3 Vision for the Service and Long-Term Planning 12 2.2.4 Role of Long-Term Planning 13 2.2.5 Is the Proposed Service Amtrak Intercity or Commuter? 16 2.2.6 Educating Public Officials 18 2.3 Initial Discussions with the Host Railroad 18 2.3.1 Introduction 20 2.3.2 The Feasibility Study 22 2.4 Substantive Negotiations 23 2.4.1 Defining What the Passenger Agency Needs 25 2.4.2 The Access Agreement and Infrastructure Improvements 28 2.4.3 Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs 29 2.5 The Liability Issue 29 2.5.1 The National Liability Situation and Amtrak 30 2.5.2 Non-Amtrak Passenger Rail Service Operators and Agencies 33 Chapter 3 Analysis and Modeling 33 3.1 Introduction 33 3.2 Operations Simulation and Capacity Modeling 33 3.2.1 Simulation and Modeling Overview 36 3.2.2 Choice and Availability of Models 37 3.2.3 Using Simulation and Modeling in Rail Corridor Planning and Negotiations 40 3.3 Capital Investment Planning, Costing, and Cost Sharing 40 3.3.1 Right-of-Way Access or Acquisition 41 3.3.2 Estimating Capital Costs

OCR for page R1
42 3.3.3 Sharing Infrastructure Capital Costs 43 3.3.4 Rolling Stock Capital Costs 44 3.3.5 Signaling and Train Control Capital Costs 45 3.4 Operations and Maintenance Costs and Cost Sharing 45 3.4.1 Overview 46 3.4.2 Railroad Operations and Maintenance Cost Categories 48 3.4.3 Cost-Sharing and Allocation Approaches 49 3.4.4 Operations and Maintenance Cost Analysis 50 3.4.5 Application to Intercity and Commuter Operations 52 Chapter 4 Content of Shared-Use Access and Operating Agreements 52 4.1 Introduction 53 4.2 Types of Agreements Needed to Implement Passenger Rail Service 56 4.2.1 Introduction to Amtrak Intercity Service 56 4.2.2 Introduction to Commuter Service 57 4.3 Amtrak Intercity Service 57 4.3.1 Introduction 58 4.3.2 Inputs to and Preparations for Finalizing the Agreements 60 4.3.3 Agreements between Amtrak and the Freight Railroad 61 4.3.4 An Agreement between the Passenger Rail Agency and Amtrak 62 4.3.5 Agreement between the Passenger Rail Agency and the Host Railroad(s) 64 4.4 Commuter Service (Non-Amtrak Intercity) 64 4.4.1 Basic Structure of a Commuter Rail Service on Shared Track 65 4.4.2 Inputs to and Preparations for Finalizing Commuter Rail Operating Agreements 67 4.4.3 Access Alternatives 69 4.4.4 Agreement with the Host Freight Railroad 70 4.4.5 Operations and Maintenance Services Agreements 72 4.5 Managing Change in Agreements 72 4.5.1 Major Revision to Provide for a Substantial Increment in Capacity and/or Service Performance 72 4.5.2 Minor Agreement Revisions to Provide a Limited Service Addition or Performance Improvement 73 4.5.3 Day-to-Day Service Variations 73 4.5.4 Managing Change with a Passenger Railroad Host and Freight Tenant 74 Chapter 5 Ongoing Management of Shared-Use Operations 74 5.1 Introduction 75 5.2 Setting the Framework and General Points for Ongoing Service Management 75 5.2.1 PRIIA Requirements and FRA, STB and Amtrak Actions on Intercity Passenger Service Quality 76 5.2.2 Performance Monitoring, and Service Quality 76 5.2.3 Agreement Revisions and Updates 77 5.3 Specific Approaches to Managing Amtrak Intercity Services 79 5.4 Specific Approaches to Managing Commuter Services 80 5.5 Case Studies in Service Management

OCR for page R1
83 Bibliography 83 Acts of Congress 84 Government Accountability Office (GAO) Reports 84 Federal Government Regulations and Industry Technical Standards 85 Capacity and Cost Analysis 86 Passenger Rail Projects and Project Planning 86 Other Shared-Use Issues, Including Liability and Safety 87 Miscellaneous 89 Acronyms A-1 Appendix A The U.S. Railroad Industry B-1 Appendix B U.S. Railroad Legal and Institutional Arrangements C-1 Appendix C Railroad Safety Regulations D-1 Appendix D Case Studies of Passenger Rail Service Developments and Processes