DOCSLIB.ORG

Review and Analysis of Railroad Passenger Car Waste Retention

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Review and Analysis of Railroad Passenger Car Waste Retention Review and Analysis of Railroad Passenger Car Waste Retention U 5 Deportment of Tronsportot~on Systems Federal Railroad Administration Volume 1: Report and Appendices A and B Office of Research and Development Washington DC 20590 Arthur D. Little, Inc. Acorn Park Cambridge MA 02140 DOTIFRAIORD-91-02 I January 1991 This document is available to the Final Report Public through the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161 NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. NOTICE The United States Government does not endorse products of manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report. Technical Keport Documentotion Page I. Report No. 2. Corcrnmcn? Acccs=fonNo. 3. Rcclplen!'r Cotalog No. DOT/FRA/OKD 91-02 I & 11 4. Tlvla and Subtl!le 5 Report 00,. Review and Analysis of Railroad Passenger Car Waste July 1990 Retention Systems 6. Pcrlormlng Orgonllo~lon Code Volume I Report and Appendices A and B 8 P.~I~~~,~~~~~ucport NO. .~~~~t~~~ 7. ~"thor(,l Alan J. Bing, Todd 0. Burger, Thomas J. Rasmussen ec al. 9. Perlormcng Orgqnlzo?lonName ond Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAlS) Arthur 3. Little, Inc. Acorn Park 11. con,roc,or clon(NO. Cambridge, MA 02140 DTFR-53-87-C-00035 - 13. Type 01 Rcpor~and Per,od covered 12. U.S.Sponrortng Department Aqoncy Nome ofond AddressTransportation Final Report January 1991 Federal Railroad Administration Office of Research and Development 14. Sponlorlng Agency Code 400 7th Street, S.W., Washington, UC 20590 t-- IS. Supplemenfory Notel The traditional practice of dumping railroad toilet and other waste directly onto the tracks is still used on most passenger cars operated by Amtrak. However, this practice is being questioned and legislation to require full waste retention systems is under consideration. This report has been prepared in response to a Congressional directive to identify, describe and evaluate waste-retention systems able to eliminate the need for direct dumping on the track. I This report provides the following information: I A description of waste retention systems currently used by intercity and local passenger railroads in the United States and elsewhere, including service experience. A discussion of waste disposal and environmental issues. An evaluation of the performance of the different waste retention technologies and systems. Review and estimate of capital, operating and maintenance costs. Recommendations regarding test programs for waste retention systems. 17 y Wmds 18. Dlrtrlbutlon Stolemen* o l'o~yet and other waste-retention Document is available to the public throug technologies the National Technical Information Service, o Intercity passenger train cars and Springfield, Virginia 22161 services o Test programs fl Cnst pvalllatlon 19 Spcunvy CIass~l.Iol vhqs report1 20. Sscurlty CIa.stI. 101 fh~spogcl 21. No. 01 Poges 22. Prlco Unclassified Unclassified Form DOT F 1700.7 18-72) Reproductnon of completed page outhortzed METRICIENGLISH CONVERSION FACTORS ENGLISH TO METRIC METRIC TO ENGLISH LENGTH lrrrnoxlurrrl LENGTH cL*tnoarrrn, 1 inch (in) = 2.5centimeters (cm) 1millimeter (mm) r 0.04 inch (in) 1 foot (k) - 30 centimeters (cm) 1 centimeter (cm) - 0.4 inch (in) 1 yard (yd) = 0.9 meter (m) 1 meter (m) = 3.3 feet (tr) 1 mile (mi) - 1.6 kilometers (km) 1 meter (m) s 1.1 yards (yd) 1 kilometer (km) i 0.6 mile (mi) AREA IAPPROXIW~J AREA mrrnoxtumr 1 sqvarr inch (sq in. in>) - 6.5 square centimeters (<my) 1 square centimeter (cml) 0.16 square inch(sq in, in') 1 square foot (sq h.hl) = 0.09 square meter (my) 1 square meter,(mt) r 1.2 square yards (sq yd. yd?) 1 square yard (sq yd, yd') = 0.8 square meter (my) 1 squaw kilometer (km') = 0.4 square mile (sq mi, m7) 1 square mile (sq mi, m?) r 2.6 square kilometers (kma) 1 hectare (he) - 10,000 square meters (mr) = 2.5 acres 1 acre = 0.4 hectares (he) = 4,000 square meters (ma) MASS- WEIGHT IASP~OIIYLT~I MASS - WEIGHT i~rr~o:~u*ro 1 ounce (oz) = 28 grams (gr) 1 gram (gr) i 0.036 ounce loz) 1 pound (lb) r .4S kilogram (kg) 1kilogram (kg) = 2.2 pounds (lb) 1 shoe ton - 2.000 pounds (lb) - 0.9tonne (1) 1 tonne (t) = 1.000 kilograms (kg) = 1.1 shorl tons VOLUME IAPPROllMArE) VOLUME IrP.noxlwm, 1 teaspoon (tsp) = 5 milliliters (ml) 1 milliliter (ml) = 0.03 fluid ounce (11 02) 1 tablespoon (tbsp) = 15 milliliters (ml) 1 liter (I) r 2.1 pints (pt) 1fluid ounce (fl oz) = 30 milliliters (ml) 1 liter (I) 1.06 quarts (qt) f cup (c) = 020 liter (I) 1 literrl) - 0.26 gallon (gall 1 pint (pt) r 0.47 liter (I) 1 cubic meter (mf) r 36 cubic feet (cu k, ft3) 1 quart(qt1 = 0.96 liner (I) 1 cubic meter (m') r 1.3 cubic yards (cu yd, ydf) 1 gallon (gal) = 3.8 liters (I) 1 cubic foot (cu ft, kf) - 0.03 cubic meter (ma) 1 cubic yard (cu yd. ydf) r 0.76 Nbic meter (mf) TEMPERATURE lrxrcn TEMPERATURE 1rx.m [(x-32)(511))IeF - y'C [(96)y*32l'C - 17 QUICK INCH-CENTIMETER LENGTH CONVERSION INCHES 0 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 0 9 10 t I CENTIMETERS 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 20 25 25.40 QUICK FAHRENHEIT-CELCIUS TEMPERATURE CONVERSION For more exact and'o~other conversion fanors, see NBS Mis~ellaneousPublication 286. Units of Weights and I Measures. Price S2.SO.SDCa:alog No.Cl3 10266. Prolect Team The following Arthur D. Little individuals and offices contributed to this study: Alan J. Bing Ashok B. Boghani Todd 0. Burger Bany Glauberrnan Thomas J. Rasrnussen Christopher C. Scholl and Arthur D. Little, overseas offices in Copenhagen Munich Paris Tokyo ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Numerous individuals and organizations have helped us in the preparation of this report. We would like to thank all of them, and would particularly like to mention the following: Amtrak James N. Michael, Senior Director, Engineering Marty Singer, Manager of Amaak's Waste Handling Department Program John Hutchinson, General Mechanical Superintendent, Cars, and his staff . C.E. Fernald, Senior Director Material Control, and his staff Greg Boardman from Beech Grove shops Toilet Svstems Suppliers EVAC D. Uzar, Director of Marketing, Land & Train Systems . Chamberlain GARD Philip A. Saigh, Director, Marketing and Sales Monogram Industries William I. Mercer, Product Sales Manager Railtech Ltd. Tim Secord, Manager, Engineering and Product Development Microphor Vern Haselswerdt, Vice President Sales Other Rail Svstems Several rail systems responded to our inquiries or entertained visits by ADL staff. These included: North America Long Island Railroad Metro-North Commuter Railroad Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority GO Transit (Toronto) METRA (Chicago) Via-Rail Canada International Japan Railways British Rail Danish State Railways German Federal Railwi~ys French National Railways TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION 1-1 1.1 Background ........................................ 1-1 1.2 Objective and Scope of Work ........................... 1-3 1.3 Guide to This Report ................................. 1-4 RECENT TOILET PRACTICE AND EXPERIENCE 2- 1 2.1 Introduction ........................................ 2-1 2.2 Recent Amaak Practice and Experience .................... 2-1 2.2.1 Heritage ........................................ 2-1 2.2.2 Amfleet I ....................................... 2-5 2.2.3 Amfleet II ...................................... 2-9 2.2.4 Superliner ...................................... 2-10 2.2.5 Horizon ....................................... 2-13 2.2.6 Viewliner ...................................... 2-13 2.2.7 Passenger Acceptance Overview ...................... 2-13 2.3 Recent Practice and Experience of Other North American Passenger Service Operators ................................... 2-16 2.3.1 MBTA (Boston) ................................. 2-16 2.3.2 Go Transit (Toronto) .............................. 2-17 2.3.3 MeaoNorth (NY) ................................ 2-18 2.3.4 METRA (Chicago) ............................... 2-18 2.3.5 LIRR(NY) ..................................... 2-19 2.3.6 Via Rail (Canada) ................................ 2-20 2.4 European and Japanese practice and experience .............. 2-21 2.4.1 Japan Railways .................................. 2-21 2.4.2 British Rail ..................................... 2-22 2.4.3 French National Railways (SNCF') ..................... 2-25 2.4.4 German Federal Railways @B) ...................... 2-25 2.4.5 Danish State Railways @SB) ........................ 2-26 OVERVIEW OF RETENTION TOILET TECHNOLOGY 3-1 3.1 Introduction and Scope ................................ 3-1 3.2 Features Common to all Systems ......................... 3-1 3.3 Gravity and Air Pressure Systems ........................ 3-3 3.3.1 GARD Amfleet I1 Prototype ......................... 3-4 3.3.2 Microphor Redwood Fiber H-Series Commuter/Lmomotive ... 3-4 3.3.3 Microphor Gravity System .......................... 3-8 3.3.4 Microphor Prototype .............................. 3-12 3.3.5 Railtech WTS 8300 .............................. 3-12 3.4 Recirculating Systems ................................ 3-14 3.4.1 Monogram Self-contained Recirculating System .......... 3-17 3.4.2 Monogram "Modified" Recirculating System ............. 3-19 3.4.3 Monogram Remote Recirculating System ............... 3-19 3.5 Vacuum Systems ................................... 3-19 Evac 2000 Vacuum Toilet System .................... 3-23 Evac Ultimate Vacuum Toilet System .................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Federal Railroad Administration Office of Safety Headquarters Assigned Accident Investigation Report HQ-2006-88
    Federal Railroad Administration Office of Safety Headquarters Assigned Accident Investigation Report HQ-2006-88 Union Pacific Midas, CA November 9, 2006 Note that 49 U.S.C. §20903 provides that no part of an accident or incident report made by the Secretary of Transportation/Federal Railroad Administration under 49 U.S.C. §20902 may be used in a civil action for damages resulting from a matter mentioned in the report. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FRA FACTUAL RAILROAD ACCIDENT REPORT FRA File # HQ-2006-88 FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION 1.Name of Railroad Operating Train #1 1a. Alphabetic Code 1b. Railroad Accident/Incident No. Union Pacific RR Co. [UP ] UP 1106RS011 2.Name of Railroad Operating Train #2 2a. Alphabetic Code 2b. Railroad Accident/Incident N/A N/A N/A 3.Name of Railroad Responsible for Track Maintenance: 3a. Alphabetic Code 3b. Railroad Accident/Incident No. Union Pacific RR Co. [UP ] UP 1106RS011 4. U.S. DOT_AAR Grade Crossing Identification Number 5. Date of Accident/Incident 6. Time of Accident/Incident Month Day Year 11 09 2006 11:02: AM PM 7. Type of Accident/Indicent 1. Derailment 4. Side collision 7. Hwy-rail crossing 10. Explosion-detonation 13. Other (single entry in code box) 2. Head on collision 5. Raking collision 8. RR grade crossing 11. Fire/violent rupture (describe in narrative) 3. Rear end collision 6. Broken Train collision 9. Obstruction 12. Other impacts 01 8. Cars Carrying 9. HAZMAT Cars 10. Cars Releasing 11. People 12. Division HAZMAT Damaged/Derailed HAZMAT Evacuated 0 0 0 0 Roseville 13. Nearest City/Town 14.
    [Show full text]
  • Prices and Costs in the Railway Sector
    ÉCOLE POLYTECHNIQUE FÉDÉRALEDE LAUSANNE ENAC - INTER PRICESPRICES AND AND COSTS COSTS ININ THE THE RAILWAY RAILWAY SECTOR SECTOR J.P.J.P. Baumgartner Baumgartner ProfessorProfessor JanuaryJanuary2001 2001 EPFL - École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne LITEP - Laboratoire d'Intermodalité des Transports et de Planification Bâtiment de Génie civil CH - 1015 Lausanne Tél. : + 41 21 693 24 79 Fax : + 41 21 693 50 60 E-mail : [email protected] LIaboratoire d' ntermodalité des TEP ransports t de lanification URL : http://litep.epfl.ch TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. FOREWORD 1 2. PRELIMINARY REMARKS 1 2.1 The railway equipment market 1 2.2 Figures and scenarios 1 3. INFRASTRUCTURES AND FIXED EQUIPMENT 2 3.1 Linear infrastructures and equipment 2 3.1.1 Studies 2 3.1.2 Land and rights 2 3.1.2.1 Investments 2 3.1.3 Infrastructure 2 3.1.3.1 Investments 2 3.1.3.2 Economic life 3 3.1.3.3 Maintenance costs 3 3.1.4 Track 3 3.1.4.1 Investment 3 3.1.4.2 Economic life of a main track 4 3.1.4.3 Track maintenance costs 4 3.1.5 Fixed equipment for electric traction 4 3.1.5.1 Investments 4 3.1.5.2 Economic life 5 3.1.5.3 Maintenance costs 5 3.1.6 Signalling 5 3.1.6.1 Investments 5 3.1.6.2 Economic life 6 3.1.6.3 Maintenance costs 6 3.2 Spot fixed equipment 6 3.2.1 Investments 7 3.2.1.1 Points, switches, turnouts, crossings 7 3.2.1.2 Stations 7 3.2.1.3 Service and light repair facilities 7 3.2.1.4 Maintenance and heavy repair shops for rolling stock 7 3.2.1.5 Central shops for the maintenance of fixed equipment 7 3.2.2 Economic life 8 3.2.3 Maintenance costs 8 4.
    [Show full text]
  • The Signal Bridge
    THE SIGNAL BRIDGE Volume 18 NEWSLETTER OF THE MOUNTAIN EMPIRE MODEL RAILROADERS CLUB Number 5B MAY 2011 BONUS PAGES Published for the Education and Information of Its Membership NORFOLK & WESTERN/SOUTHERN RAILWAY DEPOT BRISTOL TENNESSEE/VIRGINIA CLUB OFFICERS LOCATION HOURS President: Secretary: Newsletter Editor: ETSU Campus, Business Meetings are held the Fred Alsop Donald Ramey Ted Bleck-Doran: George L. Carter 3rd Tuesday of each month. Railroad Museum Meetings start at 7:00 PM at Vice-President: Treasurer: Webmaster: ETSU Campus, Johnson City, TN. John Carter Duane Swank John Edwards Brown Hall Science Bldg, Room 312, Open House for viewing every Saturday from 10:00 am until 3:00 pm. Work Nights each Thursday from 5:00 pm until ?? APRIL 2011 THE SIGNAL BRIDGE Page 2 APRIL 2011 THE SIGNAL BRIDGE Page 3 APRIL 2011 THE SIGNAL BRIDGE II scheme. The "stripe" style paint schemes would be used on AMTRAK PAINT SCHEMES Amtrak for many more years. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Phase II Amtrak paint schemes or "Phases" (referred to by Amtrak), are a series of livery applied to the outside of their rolling stock in the United States. The livery phases appeared as different designs, with a majority using a red, white, and blue (the colors of the American flag) format, except for promotional trains, state partnership routes, and the Acela "splotches" phase. The first Amtrak Phases started to emerge around 1972, shortly after Amtrak's formation. Phase paint schemes Phase I F40PH in Phase II Livery Phase II was one of the first paint schemes of Amtrak to use entirely the "stripe" style.
    [Show full text]
  • Northeast Corridor Chase, Maryland January 4, 1987
    PB88-916301 NATIONAL TRANSPORT SAFETY BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 20594 RAILROAD ACCIDENT REPORT REAR-END COLLISION OF AMTRAK PASSENGER TRAIN 94, THE COLONIAL AND CONSOLIDATED RAIL CORPORATION FREIGHT TRAIN ENS-121, ON THE NORTHEAST CORRIDOR CHASE, MARYLAND JANUARY 4, 1987 NTSB/RAR-88/01 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 1. Report No. 2.Government Accession No. 3.Recipient's Catalog No. NTSB/RAR-88/01 . PB88-916301 Title and Subtitle Railroad Accident Report^ 5-Report Date Rear-end Collision of'*Amtrak Passenger Train 949 the January 25, 1988 Colonial and Consolidated Rail Corporation Freight -Performing Organization Train ENS-121, on the Northeast Corridor, Code Chase, Maryland, January 4, 1987 -Performing Organization 7. "Author(s) ~~ Report No. Performing Organization Name and Address 10.Work Unit No. National Transportation Safety Board Bureau of Accident Investigation .Contract or Grant No. Washington, D.C. 20594 k3-Type of Report and Period Covered 12.Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Iroad Accident Report lanuary 4, 1987 NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD Washington, D. C. 20594 1*+.Sponsoring Agency Code 15-Supplementary Notes 16 Abstract About 1:16 p.m., eastern standard time, on January 4, 1987, northbound Conrail train ENS -121 departed Bay View yard at Baltimore, Mary1 and, on track 1. The train consisted of three diesel-electric freight locomotive units, all under power and manned by an engineer and a brakeman. Almost simultaneously, northbound Amtrak train 94 departed Pennsylvania Station in Baltimore. Train 94 consisted of two electric locomotive units, nine coaches, and three food service cars. In addition to an engineer, conductor, and three assistant conductors, there were seven Amtrak service employees and about 660 passengers on the train.
    [Show full text]
  • Senate Hearings Before the Committee on Appropriations
    S. HRG. 111–983 Senate Hearings Before the Committee on Appropriations Departments of Transportation and Housing and Urban Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Fiscal Year 2011 111th CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION H.R. 5850/S. 3644 DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AMTRAK) NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY Departments of Transportation and Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations, 2011 (H.R. 5850/S. 3644) S. HRG. 111–983 TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES AP- PROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 HEARINGS BEFORE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION ON H.R. 5850/S. 3644 AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENTS OF TRANS- PORTATION AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RE- LATED AGENCIES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2011, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES Department of Housing and Urban Development Department of Transportation National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) Nondepartmental witnesses Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 54–989 PDF WASHINGTON : 2011 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Chairman ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri TOM HARKIN, Iowa MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky BARBARA A.
    [Show full text]
  • Bilevel Rail Car - Wikipedia
    Bilevel rail car - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilevel_rail_car Bilevel rail car The bilevel car (American English) or double-decker train (British English and Canadian English) is a type of rail car that has two levels of passenger accommodation, as opposed to one, increasing passenger capacity (in example cases of up to 57% per car).[1] In some countries such vehicles are commonly referred to as dostos, derived from the German Doppelstockwagen. The use of double-decker carriages, where feasible, can resolve capacity problems on a railway, avoiding other options which have an associated infrastructure cost such as longer trains (which require longer station Double-deck rail car operated by Agence métropolitaine de transport platforms), more trains per hour (which the signalling or safety in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. The requirements may not allow) or adding extra tracks besides the existing Lucien-L'Allier station is in the back line. ground. Bilevel trains are claimed to be more energy efficient,[2] and may have a lower operating cost per passenger.[3] A bilevel car may carry about twice as many as a normal car, without requiring double the weight to pull or material to build. However, a bilevel train may take longer to exchange passengers at each station, since more people will enter and exit from each car. The increased dwell time makes them most popular on long-distance routes which make fewer stops (and may be popular with passengers for offering a better view).[1] Bilevel cars may not be usable in countries or older railway systems with Bombardier double-deck rail cars in low loading gauges.
    [Show full text]
  • The Railyard Dispatch
    THE RAILYARD DISPATCH Volume 17, Issue 1 The Newsletter of the Danbury Railway Museum January/February 2018 Shortlines NEWSLETTER EDITOR RESIGNS NEW HAVEN CLASS NE-5 CABOOSE Director Mike Madyda, Editor of the Rail Yard We received a generous donation from long-time Dispatch since May 2013, has resigned as Editor. member Tony White; coupled with a previous We would like to thank Mike for the many fine donation for paint, we have the funding for a total Newsletters he created while he was Editor. A re-paint and update of the historic (1944) caboose. search is on for his replacement; if you have an Bill Arm has accepted the job as Project Manager. interest in the position, please contact us. Please note that any correspondence sent to the Newsletter MUSEUM RECEIVES GRANT Editor should now go to [email protected] We received a $500 grant from the Mass Bay Railroad WEDNESDAY “NIGHTS AT THE MUSEUM” Enthusiasts for the purpose of Interesting slide and video presentations on various painting coach 1547. President railroad topics are periodically scheduled at the Stan Madyda was on hand at the Museum on Wednesday nights. To find out what Amherst Railway Society Train th presentations are currently planned, call or stop by Show on Jan. 27 to receive it. the Museum. We can schedule a presentation only This is the first year MBRRE has when someone volunteers to do one. If you are offered grants, and we are willing to give a presentation, e-mail the Museum appreciative of having been selected as a recipient.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 6-B: Chronology of Amtrak Service in Wisconsin
    Appendix 6-B: Chronology of Amtrak Service in Wisconsin May 1971: As part of its inaugural system, Amtrak operates five daily round trips in the Chicago- Milwaukee corridor over the Milwaukee Road main line. Four of these round trips are trains running exclusively between Chicago’s Union Station and Milwaukee’s Station, with an intermediate stop in Glenview, IL. The fifth round trip is the Chicago-Milwaukee segment of Amtrak’s long-distance train to the West Coast via St. Paul, northern North Dakota (e.g. Minot), northern Montana (e.g. Glacier National Park) and Spokane. Amtrak Route Train Name(s) Train Frequency Intermediate Station Stops Serving Wisconsin (Round Trips) Chicago-Milwaukee Unnamed 4 daily Glenview Chicago-Seattle Empire Builder 1 daily Glenview, Milwaukee, Columbus, Portage, Wisconsin Dells, Tomah, La Crosse, Winona, Red Wing, Minneapolis June 1971: Amtrak maintains five daily round trips in the Chicago-Milwaukee corridor and adds tri- weekly service from Chicago to Seattle via St. Paul, southern North Dakota (e.g. Bismark), southern Montana (e.g. Bozeman and Missoula) and Spokane. Amtrak Route Train Name(s) Train Frequency Intermediate Station Stops Serving Wisconsin (Round Trips) Chicago-Milwaukee Unnamed 4 daily Glenview Chicago-Seattle Empire Builder 1 daily Glenview, Milwaukee, Columbus, Portage, Wisconsin Dells, Tomah, La Crosse, Winona, Red Wing, Minneapolis Chicago-Seattle North Coast Tri-weekly Glenview, Milwaukee, Columbus, Portage, Wisconsin Hiawatha Dells, Tomah, La Crosse, Winona, Red Wing, Minneapolis 6B-1 November 1971: Daily round trip service in the Chicago-Milwaukee corridor is increased from five to seven as Amtrak adds service from Milwaukee to St.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation: Request for Passenger Rail Bonding -- Agenda Item II
    Legislative Fiscal Bureau One East Main, Suite 301 • Madison, WI 53703 • (608) 266-3847 • Fax: (608) 267-6873 Email: [email protected] • Website: http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lfb October 31, 2019 TO: Members Joint Committee on Finance FROM: Bob Lang, Director SUBJECT: Department of Transportation: Request for Passenger Rail Bonding -- Agenda Item II REQUEST On October 3, 2019, the Department of Transportation (DOT) submitted a request under s. 85.061 (3)(b) of the statutes for approval to use $13,248,100 BR in GPR-supported, general obligation bonding from DOT's passenger rail route development appropriation to fund the required state match for a recently awarded Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) grant for the purchase of six single-level coach cars and three cab-coach cars to be placed into service in the Milwaukee- Chicago Hiawatha corridor. BACKGROUND DOT is required to administer a rail passenger route development program funded from a transportation fund continuing appropriation (SEG) and a general fund-supported, general obligation bonding appropriation (BR). From these sources, DOT may fund capital costs related to Amtrak service extension routes (the Hiawatha service, for example) or other rail service routes between the cities of Milwaukee and Madison, Milwaukee and Green Bay, Milwaukee and Chicago, Madison and Eau Claire, and Madison and La Crosse. Under the program, DOT is not allowed to use any bond proceeds unless the Joint Finance Committee (JFC) approves the use of the proceeds and, with respect to any allowed passenger route development project, the Department submits evidence to JFC that Amtrak, or the applicable railroad, has agreed to provide rail passenger service on that route.
    [Show full text]
  • Railroad Operational Safety
    TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH Number E-C085 January 2006 Railroad Operational Safety Status and Research Needs TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2005 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OFFICERS Chair: John R. Njord, Executive Director, Utah Department of Transportation, Salt Lake City Vice Chair: Michael D. Meyer, Professor, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Division Chair for NRC Oversight: C. Michael Walton, Ernest H. Cockrell Centennial Chair in Engineering, University of Texas, Austin Executive Director: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2005 TECHNICAL ACTIVITIES COUNCIL Chair: Neil J. Pedersen, State Highway Administrator, Maryland State Highway Administration, Baltimore Technical Activities Director: Mark R. Norman, Transportation Research Board Christopher P. L. Barkan, Associate Professor and Director, Railroad Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, Rail Group Chair Christina S. Casgar, Office of the Secretary of Transportation, Office of Intermodalism, Washington, D.C., Freight Systems Group Chair Larry L. Daggett, Vice President/Engineer, Waterway Simulation Technology, Inc., Vicksburg, Mississippi, Marine Group Chair Brelend C. Gowan, Deputy Chief Counsel, California Department of Transportation, Sacramento, Legal Resources Group Chair Robert C. Johns, Director, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Policy and Organization Group Chair Patricia V. McLaughlin, Principal, Moore Iacofano Golstman, Inc., Pasadena, California, Public Transportation Group Chair Marcy S. Schwartz, Senior Vice President, CH2M HILL, Portland, Oregon, Planning and Environment Group Chair Agam N. Sinha, Vice President, MITRE Corporation, McLean, Virginia, Aviation Group Chair Leland D. Smithson, AASHTO SICOP Coordinator, Iowa Department of Transportation, Ames, Operations and Maintenance Group Chair L. David Suits, Albany, New York, Design and Construction Group Chair Barry M.
    [Show full text]
  • Amtrak Cascades Fleet Management Plan
    Amtrak Cascades Fleet Management Plan November 2017 Funding support from Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Information The material can be made available in an alternative format by emailing the Office of Equal Opportunity at [email protected] or by calling toll free, 855-362-4ADA (4232). Persons who are deaf or hard of hearing may make a request by calling the Washington State Relay at 711. Title VI Notice to Public It is the Washington State Department of Transportation’s (WSDOT) policy to assure that no person shall, on the grounds of race, color, national origin or sex, as provided by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise discriminated against under any of its federally funded programs and activities. Any person who believes his/her Title VI protection has been violated, may file a complaint with WSDOT’s Office of Equal Opportunity (OEO). For additional information regarding Title VI complaint procedures and/or information regarding our non-discrimination obligations, please contact OEO’s Title VI Coordinator at 360-705-7082. The Oregon Department of Transportation ensures compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; 49 CFR, Part 21; related statutes and regulations to the end that no person shall be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance from the U.S. Department of Transportation on the grounds of race, color, sex, disability or national origin.
    [Show full text]
  • Accessibility in Rail Facilities
    9/7/2017 Accessibility in Rail Facilities Kenneth Shiotani Senior Staff Attorney National Disability Rights Network 820 First Street Suite 740 Washington, DC 20002 (202) 408-9514 x 126 [email protected] September 2017 1 ADA Transportation Provisions Making Transportation Accessible was a major focus of the statutory provisions of the ADA PART B - Actions Applicable to Public Transportation Provided by Public Entities Considered Discriminatory [Subtitle B] SUBPART I - Public Transportation Other Than by Aircraft or Certain Rail Operations [Part I] 42 U.S.C. § 12141 – 12150 Definitions – fixed route and demand responsive, requirements for new, used and remanufactured vehicles, complementary paratransit, requirements in new facilities and alterations of existing facilities and key stations SUBPART II - Public Transportation by Intercity and Commuter Rail [Part II] 42 U.S.C. § 12161- 12165 Detailed requirements for new, used and remanufactured rail cars for commuter and intercity service and requirements for new and altered stations and key stations 2 1 9/7/2017 What Do the DOT ADA Regulations Require? Accessible railcars • Means for wheelchair users to board • Clear path for wheelchair user in railcar • Wheelchair space • Handrails and stanchions that do create barriers for wheelchair users • Public address systems • Between-Car Barriers • Accessible restrooms if restrooms are provided for passengers in commuter cars • Additional mode-specific requirements for thresholds, steps, floor surfaces and lighting 3 What are the different ‘modes’ of passenger rail under the ADA? • Rapid Rail (defined as “Subway-type,” full length, high level boarding) 49 C.F.R. Part 38 Subpart C - NYCTA, Boston T, Chicago “L,” D.C.
    [Show full text]