Developing Multi-State Institutions to Implement Intercity Passenger Rail Programs (2016)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

N A T I O N A L C O O P E R A T I V E R A I L R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M NCRRP REPORT 5 Developing Multi-State Institutions to Implement Intercity Passenger Rail Programs Michael Meyer Crystal Cummings WSPParSonS Brinckerhoff Washington, DC Shelly Brown Shelly BroWn aSSociateS, llc Seattle, WA Subscriber Categories Administration and Management • Passenger Transportation • Railroads TRANSPORTAT ION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2016 www.TRB.org Research sponsored by the Federal Railroad Administration

NATIONAL COOPERATIVE RAIL RESEARCH PROGRAM The National Cooperative Rail Research Program (NCRRP) conducts applied research on problems important to freight, intercity, and commuter rail operators. Research is necessary to solve common operating problems, adapt appropriate new technologies from other industries, and introduce innovations into the rail industry. NCRRP carries out applied research on problems that are shared by freight, intercity, and commuter rail operating agencies and are not being adequately addressed by existing federal research programs. NCRRP undertakes research and other technical activities in various rail subject areas, including design, construction, maintenance, operations, safety, security, finance and economics, policy, planning, human resources, and administration. NCRRP was authorized in October 2008 as part of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PL 100-432, Division B). The Program is sponsored by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and managed by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medi- cine, acting through its Transportation Research Board (TRB), with pro- gram oversight provided by an independent governing board (the NCRRP Oversight Committee [ROC]) including representatives of rail operating agencies. NCRRP carries out applied research on problems that address, among other matters, (1) intercity rail passenger and freight rail services, includ- ing existing rail passenger and freight technologies and speeds, incremen- tally enhanced rail systems and infrastructure, and new high-speed wheel- on-rail systems; (2) ways to expand the transportation of international trade traffic by rail, enhance the efficiency of intermodal interchange at ports and other intermodal terminals, and increase capacity and avail- ability of rail service for seasonal freight needs; (3) the interconnectedness of commuter rail, passenger rail, freight rail, and other rail networks; and (4) regional concerns regarding rail passenger and freight transportation, including meeting research needs common to designated high-speed cor- ridors, long-distance rail services, and regional intercity rail corridors, projects, and entities. NCRRP considers research designed to (1) identify the unique aspects and attributes of rail passenger and freight service; (2) develop more accu- rate models for evaluating the impact of rail passenger and freight service, including the effects on highway, airport, and airway congestion, environ- mental quality, energy consumption, and local and regional economies; (3) develop a better understanding of modal choice as it affects rail passenger and freight transportation, including development of better models to pre- dict utilization; (4) recommend priorities for technology demonstration and development; (5) meet additional priorities as determined by the advisory board; (6) explore improvements in management, financing, and institu- tional structures; (7) address rail capacity constraints that affect passenger and freight rail service through a wide variety of options, ranging from oper- ating improvements to dedicated new infrastructure, taking into account the impact of such options on operations; (8) improve maintenance, operations, customer service, or other aspects of intercity rail passenger and freight service; (9) recommend objective methods for determining intercity pas- senger rail routes and services, including the establishment of new routes, the elimination of existing routes, and the contraction or expansion of ser- vices or frequencies over such routes; (10) review the impact of equipment and operational safety standards on the further development of high-speed passenger rail operations connected to or integrated with non-high-speed freight or passenger rail operations; (11) recommend any legislative or regu- latory changes necessary to foster further development and implementation of high-speed passenger rail operations while ensuring the safety of such operations that are connected to or integrated with non-high-speed freight or passenger rail operations; (12) review rail crossing safety improvements, including improvements using new safety technology; and (13) review and develop technology designed to reduce train horn noise and its effect on communities, including broadband horn technology. The primary participants in NCRRP are (1) an independent govern- ing board, the ROC, appointed by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation with representation from freight, intercity, and commuter rail operating agencies, other stakeholders, and relevant industry organiza- tions such as the Association of American Railroads (AAR), the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), and the National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP) as vital links to the rail commu- nity; (2) TRB as program manager and secretariat for the governing board; and (3) the FRA as program sponsor. NCRRP benefits from the coopera- tion and participation of rail professionals, equipment and service suppli- ers, other rail users, and research organizations. Each of these participants has different interests and responsibilities, and each is an integral part of this cooperative research effort. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE RAIL RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet by going to http://www.national-academies.org and then searching for TRB Printed in the United States of America NCRRP REPORT 5 Project 07-02 ISSN 2376-9165 ISBN 978-0-309-37538-2 Library of Congress Control Number 2016937529 © 2016 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this 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, FMCSA, FRA, FTA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, PHMSA, or TDC endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for 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 from CRP. NOTICE 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 by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Rail Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report.

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.national-academies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to increase the benefits that transportation contributes to society by providing leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Board’s varied committees, task forces, and panels annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.

C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Study Advisors WSP|Parsons Brinckerhoff: •  Peter J. “Jack” Basso •  David J. Carol •  Phillip G. Pasterak, PE WSP|Parsons Brinckerhoff Independent Consultants: •  Mortimer Downey •  Gil Mallery Research Support Team WSP|Parsons Brinckerhoff: •  Joel D. Anders, EIT •  Tiffany Batac •  Ella Claney •  Julian J. Gonsalves, LEED AP, ENV SP •  Jared Gulbranson, AICP •  Stephanie R. Jackson •  Anna Lynn M. Smith, AICP •  Peter J. Denitz, AICP, PP •  Benjamin G. Perez, AICP •  Jennifer Thompson WSP|Parsons Brinckerhoff Independent Consultant: •  James McQueen CRP STAFF FOR NCRRP REPORT 5 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Lawrence D. Goldstein, Senior Program Officer Anthony P. Avery, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Ellen M. Chafee, Editor NCRRP PROJECT 07-02 PANEL Field of Administration Anne P. Canby, OneRail Coalition, Wilmington, DE (Chair) Edward J. Bolden, Amtrak Mechanical Department, Wilmington, DE Rod Diridon, Sr., Mineta Transportation Institute, San Jose, CA Andrew J. Galloway, Amtrak, Philadelphia, PA Eric O. Glick, Nevada DOT, Carson City, NV Leslie A. McCarthy, Villanova University, Villanova, PA Petra T. Messick, Amtrak, New York, NY Allan Rutter, Texas A&M Transportation Institute, Dallas, TX Meredith Slesinger, NEC Commission, Washington, DC Beverley K. Swaim-Staley, Union Station Redevelopment Corporation, Washington, DC Scott Babcock, TRB Liaison Focus Group Joe Arbona, Union Pacific Railroad John Brennan, Union Pacific Railroad Johnson Bridgwater, Oklahoma Department of Transportation Tim Hoeffner, Michigan Department of Transportation Michael Kies, Arizona Department of Transportation D.J. Mitchell, BNSF Jennifer Moczygemba, Hatch Mott MacDonald (formerly Texas Department of Transportation) Kevin Page, Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation Ron Pate, Washington State Department of Transportation Jan Perschler, California Department of Transportation Patricia Quinn, Northern New England Passenger Rail Authority Bruce Roberts, California Department of Transportation Joe Shacter, Illinois Department of Transportation Mitch Warren, NEC Commission Paul Worley, North Carolina Department of Transportation

NCRRP Report 5: Developing Multi-State Institutions to Implement Intercity Passenger Rail Programs presents practical models of multi-state institutional arrangements for planning, developing, and operating intercity passenger rail networks and services. These models are designed to function in the context of rail passenger service currently provided by Amtrak and in response to the primary goal of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA) to provide more flexibility in developing and supporting intercity passenger rail operations in the United States. As a fundamental step in the process, NCRRP Report 5 constructs a conceptual framework of the intercity passenger rail visioning, planning, and project development and operations process using key characteristics and components to formulate alternative institutional models. Building on this framework approach, the report offers eight models of possible institutional relationships and a practitioners’ guide to help determine which model is more appropriate given the particular issues faced by those inter- ested in establishing an intercity passenger rail service. Case studies of intercity passenger rail initiatives and non-transportation, multi-agency programs are summarized in this report and detailed in a companion volume available as NCRRP Web-Only Document 3 on the TRB website. This document also includes background information on various regulations guiding formation of multi-jurisdictional institutions. In nearly every circumstance, planned intercity passenger rail service improvements, including construction of new infrastructure, enhancement of existing infrastructure, and purchase of new rolling stock, involves more than a single state jurisdiction. Out of necessity, implementing these plans requires multi-state agreements on infrastructure funding and rail service operations to address highly complex issues affecting a multitude of jurisdictions and operating agencies. Currently, there is no adequately tested institutional framework on which to structure these agreements and implement programs despite the fact that a majority of existing and proposed intercity travel markets suitable for rail transportation cross through multiple states. As presented in NCRRP Report 5, the challenges inherent in planning, designing, con- structing, and operating multi-state passenger rail corridors are broad and often complex. This report offers options on how to deal with issues such as the following: •  Overuse and underfunding conflicts associated with allocating available track capacity; •  Infrastructure investments on a corridor that are concentrated disproportionately in one state, while the benefits of those investments accrue to multiple states along the corridor; •  The limited resources, capacity, and leverage of individual states in negotiating service agreements with infrastructure owners, most of whom have regional- or national-level market perspectives; F O R E W O R D By Lawrence D. Goldstein Staff Officer Transportation Research Board

•  The need for rail corridors within multi-state regions to function as a cohesive, integrated network, while federal and state investments tend to be evaluated and prioritized on a state-by-state basis; and •  The limited incentive for a “pass through” state to plan for or invest in a rail corridor between major origin and destination cities with few or no intermediate stops. Creating institutional models responding to these challenges is critical to implementing improvements to both existing and expanded intercity rail passenger networks. The research team, led by WSP|Parsons Brinckerhoff, with Dr. Michael Meyer serving as Principal Inves- tigator, has built a series of institutional models to address these challenges, providing a systematic approach designed to help multiple jurisdictions work cooperatively to plan, develop, construct, and operate intercity passenger rail service.

1 Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Background 4 1.2 Research Objective 5 1.3 Research Approach 6 1.4 Case Study Methodology 7 1.5 Report Organization 8 Chapter 2 State of the Practice 8 2.1 Introduction 8 2.2 Theoretical Concepts and Frameworks 9 2.3 Examination of Existing Multi-State Arrangements 10 2.4 Agency Studies 11 2.5 International High-Speed Rail Efforts 12 2.6 The Amtrak Model 20 2.7 Overview of Relevant FRA Requirements for Rail Network Development 21 2.8 Summary 22 Chapter 3 Case Studies 22 3.1 Introduction 22 3.2 Conceptual Framework for Implementing Intercity Passenger Rail Service 23 3.3 Selection of Case Studies 28 3.4 Regional Studies 39 3.5 Corridor/Segment Studies 62 3.6 Case Studies from Outside of the Intercity Passenger Rail Sector 69 3.7 Key Findings 80 Chapter 4 Decision-Making Models for Intercity Passenger Rail 80 4.1 Introduction 80 4.2 Coordinated State Efforts 82 4.3 Coalition/Partnership 84 4.4 Single State Agency Contracting with or on Behalf of Other States 86 4.5 Public-Private Partnership 88 4.6 Multi-State Commission 89 4.7 Multi-State Special Authority 90 4.8 Federal-State Commission 92 4.9 Freight Railroads 93 4.10 Conclusion 94 Chapter 5 Practitioners’ Guidance 94 5.1 Introduction 94 5.2 Decision Trees 95 5.3 Question Template 99 5.4 Implementation Guidance C O N T E N T S

105 Chapter 6 Conclusions and Future Research 105 6.1 Conclusions 109 6.2 Future Research 111 References 112 Abbreviations, Acronyms, and Initialisms 114 Appendix A Compendium of Multi-State Institutional Models 123 Appendix B 2010 Iowa DOT and Illinois DOT Agreement in Principle