DOCSLIB.ORG

Monthly Performance Report a U G U S T 2008

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Monthly Performance Report a U G U S T 2008 300 Lakeside Drive, 14th Floor E. • Oakland, CA 94612 • 877.9.RIDECC • www.capitolcorridor.org MONTHLY PERFORMANCE REPORT AUGUST 2008 California Intercity Passenger Rail ridership and revenue records continue to grow, as demonstrated by the August statistics. Ridership on board Capitol Corridor set a new August record with 158,309 passengers, putting ridership growth at 21.2%*. August 2008 proved to be the second-highest month ever, maintaining Capitol Corridor’s position as the third busiest route in the country, by a wide margin. Major ridership growth continued all across California as well, with the Pacific Surfliners growing at +9.5%* and the San Joaquin at +27.5%*. All three California intercity rail services carried 568,132 passengers in August, and the Pacific Surfliner (313,570) route has carried more passengers than Amtrak’s premier Northeast Corridor Acela Express (250,440) for the fourth consecutive month. Riders again rated Capitol Corridor as Amtrak’s #1 route for customer satisfaction for the seventh consecutive month. Additionally, Capitol Corridor sustained its best on-time performance; at 91.6% this is the third best in the Amtrak system. *compared to August 2007 CAPITOL CORRIDOR STATS AT -A-GLANCE AUGUST 2008 FYTD * (*Fiscal year to date) Ridership: Ridership: 158,309 passengers 1,548,783 passengers +21.2% vs. AUG 07 +16.1% vs. FY07 Ticket Revenue: Revenue: $2,272,935 $21,563,275 +27.9% vs. AUG 07 +21.6% vs. FY07 On-time Performance: On-time Performance: 91.6% 85.3% vs. 75.5% in AUG 07 +12.2% vs. FY07 Operating Ratio 54.3% +6.5% vs. FY07 Page 1 of 2 300 Lakeside Drive, 14th Floor E. • Oakland, CA 94612 • 877.9.RIDECC • www.capitolcorridor.org THREE MOST CURRENT MONTHS ON-TIME PERFORMANCE BY TRAIN* Three Most Current Months On-Time Performance by Train* 90% or greater OTP Month 80%-090% OTP Jun-08 Jul-08 Aug-08 Train # 80% or less OTP WEEKDAY TRAINS 3 Month Average % 518 100.0% 100.0% 76.2% 92.1% 520 95.2% 95.5% 100.0% 96.9% 521 90.5% 95.5% 100.0% 95.3% 522 66.7% 95.5% 95.2% 85.8% 523 85.7% 100.0% 100.0% 95.2% 524 71.4% 90.9% 95.2% 85.9% 525 81.0% 90.9% 100.0% 90.6% 526 85.7% 90.9% 90.5% 89.0% 527 66.7% 90.9% 85.7% 81.1% 528 57.1% 68.2% 90.5% 71.9% 529 76.2% 81.8% 85.7% 81.2% 530 52.4% 86.4% 90.5% 76.4% 531 23.8% 81.8% 85.7% 63.8% 532 33.3% 68.2% 85.7% 62.4% 533 100.0% 63.6% 85.7% 83.1% 534 100.0% 95.5% 90.5% 95.3% 535 38.1% 77.3% 90.5% 68.6% 536 61.9% 95.5% 90.5% 82.6% 537 76.2% 68.2% 90.5% 78.3% 538 47.6% 90.9% 100.0% 79.5% 540 71.4% 86.4% 90.5% 82.8% 541 95.2% 81.8% 95.2% 90.8% 542 76.2% 95.5% 90.5% 87.4% 543 28.6% 90.9% 81.0% 66.8% 544 61.9% 90.9% 85.7% 79.5% 545 38.1% 90.9% 95.2% 74.7% 546 90.5% 86.4% 90.5% 89.1% 547 57.1% 77.3% 85.7% 73.4% 548 81.0% 95.5% 90.5% 89.0% 549 90.5% 100.0% 100.0% 96.8% 551 85.7% 100.0% 100.0% 95.2% 553 81.0% 100.0% 85.7% 88.9% WEEKEND/HOLIDAY TRAINS 3 Month Average % 720 77.8% 88.9% 100.0% 88.9% 723 100.0% 100.0% 90.0% 96.7% 724 77.8% 100.0% 100.0% 92.6% 727 88.9% 100.0% 100.0% 96.3% 728 77.8% 100.0% 90.0% 89.3% 729 88.9% 88.9% 90.0% 89.3% 732 77.8% 88.9% 100.0% 88.9% 733 66.7% 100.0% 90.0% 85.6% 734 88.9% 88.9% 80.0% 85.9% 736 55.6% 55.6% 100.0% 70.4% 737 55.6% 55.6% 70.0% 60.4% 738 66.7% 88.9% 100.0% 85.2% 741 66.7% 100.0% 100.0% 88.9% 742 55.6% 55.6% 80.0% 63.7% 743 55.6% 100.0% 100.0% 85.2% 744 66.7% 100.0% 100.0% 88.9% 745 50.0% 88.9% 90.0% 76.3% 746 100.0% 100.0% 90.0% 96.7% 747 77.8% 77.8% 90.0% 81.9% 748 88.9% 100.0% 80.0% 89.6% 749 88.9% 100.0% 100.0% 96.3% 751 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% AVERAGE 72.9% 88.9% 91.8% 84.6% * On-Time Performance (OTP) - a train is considered on-time if endpoint arrival is no later than 10 minutes to scheduled arrival Printed: September 3, 2008 Page 2 of 2.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Capitol Corridor Service Performance
    CAPITOL CORRIDOR SERVICE PERFORMANCE In July 2016, the Capitol Corridor had one of its best months in the history of the service. Ridership was the highest ever, with a total of 128,655 passengers, a 1.7% year‐over‐year (YOY) increase. Revenue was up 4.6% compared to July 2015. Compared to June 2016, On‐ Time Performance (OTP) slipped slightly from 96% to 95%, yet was still above the FY16 standard of 90%. The Year‐To‐Date (YTD) results continue to be in positive territory. Compared to FY15, FYTD16 ridership and revenue are up 5.5%, with the System Operating Ratio at 55%, five percentage points above the 50% standard. YTD OTP is 94%, which keeps the Capitol Corridor in the #1 spot for service reliability in the national Amtrak intercity passenger rail network. The FYTD16 customer satisfaction scores (through June 2016) are at 89% “Highly Satisfied”, one point above the FY16 standard of 88%. The following are ridership highlights for July 2016: Average weekend ridership for July was down 7% versus July 2015. To address these continued decreases in weekend ridership, the CCJPA is modifying the weekend/holiday train schedule effective August 22, 2016, to slot trains at times that align with typical weekend travel patterns. Average July weekday ridership yielded a 9% increase thanks to continued growth on the trains serving San Jose/Silicon Valley and Placer County stations. Amtrak has sent detailed performance results (see attached) for June 2016 and provided below is a summary of the attached tables: OTP: June 2016 system end‐point OTP was a stellar 96% compared to 93% for May 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • Pacific Surfliner-San Luis Obispo-San Diego-October282019
    PACIFIC SURFLINER® PACIFIC SURFLINER® SAN LUIS OBISPO - LOS ANGELES - SAN DIEGO SAN LUIS OBISPO - LOS ANGELES - SAN DIEGO Effective October 28, 2019 Effective October 28, 2019 ® ® SAN LUIS OBISPO - SANTA BARBARA SAN LUIS OBISPO - SANTA BARBARA VENTURA - LOS ANGELES VENTURA - LOS ANGELES ORANGE COUNTY - SAN DIEGO ORANGE COUNTY - SAN DIEGO and intermediate stations and intermediate stations Including Including CALIFORNIA COASTAL SERVICES CALIFORNIA COASTAL SERVICES connecting connecting NORTHERN AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA NORTHERN AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Visit: PacificSurfliner.com Visit: PacificSurfliner.com Amtrak.com Amtrak.com Amtrak is a registered service mark of the National Railroad Passenger Corporation. Amtrak is a registered service mark of the National Railroad Passenger Corporation. National Railroad Passenger Corporation, Washington Union Station, National Railroad Passenger Corporation, Washington Union Station, One Massachusetts Ave. N.W., Washington, DC 20001. One Massachusetts Ave. N.W., Washington, DC 20001. NRPS Form W31–10/28/19. Schedules subject to change without notice. NRPS Form W31–10/28/19. Schedules subject to change without notice. page 2 PACIFIC SURFLINER - Southbound Train Number u 5804 5818 562 1564 564 1566 566 768 572 1572 774 Normal Days of Operation u Daily Daily Daily SaSuHo Mo-Fr SaSuHo Mo-Fr Daily Mo-Fr SaSuHo Daily 11/28,12/25, 11/28,12/25, 11/28,12/25, Will Also Operate u 1/1/20 1/1/20 1/1/20 11/28,12/25, 11/28,12/25, 11/28,12/25, Will Not Operate u 1/1/20 1/1/20 1/1/20 B y B y B y B y B y B y B y B y B y On Board Service u låO låO låO låO låO l å O l å O l å O l å O Mile Symbol q SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA –Cal Poly 0 >v Dp b3 45A –Amtrak Station mC ∑w- b4 00A l6 55A Grover Beach, CA 12 >w- b4 25A 7 15A Santa Maria, CA–IHOP® 24 >w b4 40A Guadalupe-Santa Maria, CA 25 >w- 7 31A Lompoc-Surf Station, CA 51 > 8 05A Lompoc, CA–Visitors Center 67 >w Solvang, CA 68 >w b5 15A Buellton, CA–Opp.
    [Show full text]
  • 20210419 Amtrak Metrics Reporting
    NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION 30th Street Station Philadelphia, PA 19104 April 12, 2021 Mr. Michael Lestingi Director, Office of Policy and Planning Federal Railroad Administrator U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 Dear Mr. Lestingi: In accordance with the Metrics and Minimum Standards for Intercity Passenger Rail Service final rule published on November 16, 2020 (the “Final Rule”), this letter serves as Amtrak’s report to the Federal Railroad Administration that, as of April 10, 2021, Amtrak has provided the 29 host railroads over which Amtrak currently operates (listed in Appendix A) with ridership data for the prior month consistent with the Final Rule. The following data was provided to each host railroad: . the total number of passengers, by train and by day; . the station-specific number of detraining passengers, reported by host railroad whose railroad right-of-way serves the station, by train, and by day; and . the station-specific number of on-time passengers reported by host railroad whose railroad right- of-way serves the station, by train, and by day. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jim Blair Sr. Director, Host Railroads Amtrak cc: Dennis Newman Amtrak Jason Maga Amtrak Christopher Zappi Amtrak Yoel Weiss Amtrak Kristin Ferriter Federal Railroad Administration Mr. Michael Lestingi April 12, 2021 Page 2 Appendix A Host Railroads Provided with Amtrak Ridership Data Host Railroad1 Belt Railway Company of Chicago BNSF Railway Buckingham Branch Railroad
    [Show full text]
  • Performance Report FY19 Rider Profile CAPITOL Corridorticket JOINT Type POWERS AUTHORITY WORK/ BUSINESS 67%
    Performance Report FY19 Rider Profile CAPITOL CORRIDORTicket JOINT Type POWERS AUTHORITY WORK/ BUSINESS 67% Ticket WithWelcome FY2019, the Capitol Corridor Aboard! celebrated five straight years of Type record-breaking ridership and revenue, with a new all-time high of 10-RIDE 1,777,136 riders and $38.03 million in revenue. ThisWORK/ growth is reflected 18% FAMILY/ BUSINESS OTHER 1% 67% REC/in the FareboxFRIENDS Ratio, which reached a previously unattained 60%. SCHOOL 3% LEISURE 15% 12% ROUND-TRIP/ To build upon this success, and to ensure the Capitol Corridor’s place as ONE-WAY a premier travel choice, the CCJPA is making progress on infrastructure 50% improvements, safety upgrades, customer service enhancements, MONTHLY and service expansion projects. These efforts aim to maintain Capitol 32% Corridor as a quality, convenient,OTHER 1% cost-effective, and flexibleFAMILY/ option for REC/ FRIENDS years to come. SCHOOL 3% LEISURE 15% Rider Profile Ticket Type 12% SHOP/VACATION 2% WORK/ BUSINESS 21 Years of Improvement* 67% SERVICE REVENUE-TO- LEVEL RIDERSHIP REVENUE COST RATIO +275% +284% +508% +100% Rider Customer Satisfaction Profile 10-RIDE WORK/ 18% FAMILY/ BUSINESS OTHER 1% 67% FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 REC/ FYFRIENDS 2019 30 DAILY 1,777,136SCHOOL 3% $38.03MLEISURE 60%15% TRAINS 12% ROUND-TRIP/ ONE-WAY 50% MONTHLY 90% 87% 90% 91% 89% 89% 87% 89% 88% 85% 90% 32% OTHER 1% FAMILY/ FY 1998 REC/ FRIENDS 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 SCHOOL 3% 2018 2019 (PRE-CCJPA) FY 1998 FY 1998 FY 1998 LEISURE 15% 8 DAILY (PRE-CCJPA) (PRE-CCJPA) (PRE-CCJPA) SHOP/VACATION 2% 12% TRAINS 463,000 $6.25M 30% *CCJPA assumed management of the service in 1998.
    [Show full text]
  • Capitol Corridor Performance Report
    Capito l Co rr idor Performance Rep ort THE CAPITO L CORRIDO R JOIN T POWER S AUTHORITY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Fiscal Year 2009 was a year of mixed results for the Capitol Corridor. The challenging economic climate affected all sectors of the travel and transportation industry, including intercity passenger rail. Although our performance in FY 2009 was not as strong as FY 2008 – when high gas prices and a stronger economy drove record ridership – we continued the positive growth trend from FY 2007 and years past, and reinforced our record of prudently managing public funds to deliver a high- quality passenger rail service. In FY 2009: • Overall ridership fell 5.5%, revenue was flat, and our revenue-to-cost ratio fell to 47% primarily due to increased labor expenses and revenues that were below projections. • On-time performance reached an all-time high of 93% thanks to our capitalized maintenance program (now unfunded) and improved Union Pacific Railroad dispatching. This makes the Capitol Corridor the most reliable multi-frequency train service in the Amtrak national system. • Customer satisfaction scores continued to improve, despite poor economic conditions and extensive job losses. Over the past 11 years under CCJPA management, the Capitol Corridor’s service frequency has quadrupled, ridership and revenue have more than tripled, and our revenue-to-cost ratio improved by 56%. The CCJPA achieved these gains with very modest increases in State subsidy by constantly improving efficiency and reinvesting cost savings and revenues back into the service. Although ridership declined due to the slow economy we have continued to improve our service delivery, reliability, and customer satisfaction, which consistently tops the rankings of all Amtrak-operated services.
    [Show full text]
  • San Francisco Bay Area Regional Rail Plan, Chapter 7
    7.0 ALTERNATIVES DEFINITION & Fig. 7 Resolution 3434 EVALUATION — STEP-BY-STEP Step One: Base Network Healdsburg Sonoma Recognizing that Resolution 3434 represents County 8 MTC’s regional rail investment over the next 25 Santa years as adopted first in the 2001 Regional Trans- Rosa Napa portation Plan and reaffirmed in the subsequent County Vacaville 9 plan update, Resolution 3434 is included as part Napa of the “base case” network. Therefore, the study Petaluma Solano effort focuses on defining options for rail improve- County ments and expansions beyond Resolution 3434. Vallejo Resolution 3434 rail projects include: Marin County 8 9 Pittsburg 1. BART/East Contra Costa Rail (eBART) San Antioch 1 Rafael Concord Richmond 2. ACE/Increased Services Walnut Berkeley Creek MTC Resolution 3434 Contra Costa 3. BART/I-580 Rail Right-of-Way Preservation County Rail Projects Oakland 4. Dumbarton Bridge Rail Service San 1 BART: East Contra Costa Extension Francisco 10 6 3 2 ACE: Increased Service 5. BART/Fremont-Warm Springs to San Jose Daly City 2 Pleasanton Livermore 3 South Extension BART: Rail Right-of-Way Preservation San Francisco Hayward Union City 4 Dumbarton Rail Alameda 6. Caltrain/Rapid Rail/Electrification & Extension San Mateo Fremont County 5 BART: Fremont/Warm Springs 4 to Downtown San Francisco/Transbay Transit to San Jose Extension 7 Redwood City 5 Center 6 & Extension to Downtown SF/ Mountain Milpitas Transbay Transit Center View Palo Alto 7. Caltrain/Express Service 7 Caltrain: Express Service Sunnyvale Santa Clara San San Santa Clara 8 Jose 8. SMART (Sonoma-Marin Rail) SMART (Sonoma-Marin Rail) Mateo Cupertino County 9 County 9.
    [Show full text]
  • Sb 1225 (Padilla) Pacific Surfliner Intercity Rail Corridor-Local Authority
    Attachment 2 SB 1225 (PADILLA) PACIFIC SURFLINER INTERCITY RAIL CORRIDOR‐LOCAL AUTHORITY Modeled after the success of the Capitol Corridor, SB 1225 will establish local authority for the Pacific Surfliner Service: Permissiveness: Authorizes that a local authority may be formed for the Purpose: LOSSAN member purposes of local control agencies have engaged in Cost Effectiveness: extensive discussions Requires the Secretary of Business, regarding the establishment Transportation and Housing to make a of a local authority to determination that a local authority oversee the state‐supported would result in administrative or intercity service. Using the operating cost reductions successful Capitol Corridor as Authorizes Caltrans to enter into an Interagency Transfer Agreement (ITA) a model, these agencies have to transfer those administrative reached a consensus on the functions importance of locally Requires the ITA between Caltrans governed management which and the local authority to detail the will enhance the success of terms and transfer the Pacific Surfliner service, improve the customer Timing: Requires that the ITA be experience, and create executed on or before June 30, 2014, for synergy among all the an initial period of five years transportation providers in the region. Continued State Operations Funding: Requires the state to continue to provide funding to operate intercity passenger rail service by the local authority on an annual basis Minimum Levels of Service: Requires that the level of service funded by the state shall in
    [Show full text]
  • Amtrak Capitol Corridor
    Departure Times Horas de salida 发车时间 Transit Information ® Fremont Centerville Station Fremont Schedule Information effective March 29,2021 ® Monday-Friday Saturday-Sunday/Holidays Altamont Corridor Express (ACE) provides weekday Depart To Train Depart To Train and Saturday rail commuter service along the Altamont 5:45a San Jose ACE 01 8:34a Sacramento Capitol Corridor 724 Corridor. For information visit acerail.com or call 6:37a San Jose Capitol Corridor 521 8:19a San Jose Capitol Corridor 723 1-800-411-RAIL. 6:47a Sacramento Capitol Corridor 524 11:22a San Jose Capitol Corridor 729 7:10a San Jose ACE 03 10:34a Sacramento Capitol Corridor 728 7:37a San Jose Capitol Corridor 523 1:21p San Jose Capitol Corridor 737 Amtrak Capitol Corridor 9:15a San Jose Capitol Corridor 527 3:34p Auburn Capitol Corridor 736 intercity rail serves 18 stations along a 170-mile 9:18a Sacramento Capitol Corridor 528 5:20p San Jose Capitol Corridor 743 rail corridor, and offers a convenient way to 11:36a Sacramento Capitol Corridor 532 5:34p Sacramento Capitol Corridor 742 travel between the Sierra Foothills, Sacramento, the 1:20p San Jose Capitol Corridor 537 San Francisco Bay Area Light face = AM times Bold face = PM times and Silicon Valley/San Jose. For information call 2:20p San Jose Capitol Corridor 541 1-877-9-RIDECC or visit 3:35p Auburn Capitol Corridor 538 capitolcorridor.org. 4:05p Stockton ACE 04 4:35p Sacramento Capitol Corridor 542 6:05p Stockton ACE 08 6:35p Sacramento Capitol Corridor 546 7:30p San Jose Capitol Corridor 547 Light face = AM times Bold face = PM times ACE Capitol Corridor San Joaquins Bus Connection Stop – Fremont Station Stops Station Stops N I L E S B L V D Getting to To San Jose San Joaquins To San Jose M I • Santa Clara/Great America S Bus Service • Santa Clara/Great America S I Map Not To Scale O • Santa Clara/University • Santa Clara/University N PERALTA BLVD B E L V 99 217 A V D To Stockton To Sacramento/Auburn FREMONT BLVD T U Take AC Transit bus Line 99 N • Pleasanton • Hayward L from Fremont Centerville A Station to Fremont BART.
    [Show full text]
  • Capitol Corridor South Bay Connect
    5.1 Capitol Corridor South Bay Connect ACTC Multi‐Modal Committee October 12, 2020 Agenda Project Overview • Station Planning Environmental Review Process Communications & Engagement • Concerns Heard Questions & Discussion Month Date, Year 1 10/11/2020 Project Overview Improving Rail Operations South Bay Connect – A key rail improvement project that will: . Enhance reliability, access, and travel time for Capitol Corridor riders . Reduce train congestion between Oakland and San Jose . Improve rail operations for passenger & freight service . Reduce GHG emissions and improve air quality Month Date, Year 2 10/11/2020 Project Description . Capitol Corridor route relocation (Oakland Coliseum to Newark) . Two discontinued Capitol Corridor stations (Hayward & Fremont‐Centerville) . New Ardenwood intermodal station (existing transbay bus & shuttle connections) . No frequency increase in Capitol Corridor service or change to freight operations . Potential improvements to UP rail lines (Industrial Parkway & Shinn Connection) . Pending UP modeling and discussions with UP Future Rail Mobility & Efficiency South Bay Connect – One of several transportation improvements identified within local, regional & state plans to provide efficient travel options & transport of goods in our growing region. 2014: Capitol Corridor Vision Plan Update 2016: Capitol Corridor Vision Implementation Plan 2017: Dumbarton Transportation Corridor Study 2018: Alameda CTC Rail Safety Enhancement Program California State Rail Plan Collective plans establish clear roadmap for implementation over time Month Date, Year 3 10/11/2020 7 Preliminary future market demand assessment results from the Southern Alameda County Integrated Rail Study: Trips through Southern Alameda County Serving Market Demand Month Date, Year 4 10/11/2020 Union Pacific (UP): Owner / Operator Shared use of rail lines: . Capitol Corridor .
    [Show full text]
  • Coast Corridor Improvements Final Program EIS/EIR
    Appendix C Coast Corridor Service Development Plan MAY 2013 Coast Corridor SERVICE DEVELOPMENT PLAN The contents of this report reflect the views of the author who is responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the State of California or the Federal Railroad Administration. This publication does not constitute a standard, specification or regulation. FINAL SUBMITTAL May 2013 SERVICE DEVELOPMENT PLAN Coast Corridor Prepared for Prepared by California Department of Transportation AECOM 1120 N Street 2101 Webster Street #1900 P.O. Box 942874 Oakland, CA 94612 Sacramento, CA 95814 with Cambridge Systematics & Arellano Associates [This page intentionally blank] Coast Corridor Service Development Plan May 2013 Contents 1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Background ................................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1.1 Organization of the Coast Corridor SDP ................................................................................ 1-3 1.2 Relationship of the Coast Corridor SDP to Other Documents ................................................... 1-4 1.2.1 SDP Support for State Rail Plan ............................................................................................ 1-4 1.2.2 Integration with other SDPs ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • California's Intercity Passenger Rail Program
    Connecting Cities, Connecting Regions, Connecting People CALIFORNIA’S INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL PROGRAM Pacific Surfliner | Capitol Corridor | San Joaquin 1 A NEW ERA FOR RAIL IN CALIFORNIA In 2014, California policymakers were urged to nationwide, and ridership continues to grow as more recognize the importance of developing a secure and Californians take advantage of a travel mode free of stable financing process to protect the $3.2 billion the stress and delays of driving on the state’s congest- investment in the California Intercity Passenger Rail ed highways. In the process, CIPR is helping the state (CIPR) Program. This awareness effort helped build meet its clean air and sustainable development goals. support to enact landmark legislation (Senate Bill 862) that establishes the Greenhouse Gas Reduction For over a decade, the three state-funded services Fund financed from California Cap and Trade auction have worked together to promote the benefits of revenues, of which a portion is available to support intercity rail service in both Washington, DC and the three California intercity rail services. Under a Sacramento. Recent efforts have resulted in a broad competitive grant program, rail agencies can apply coalition of support, with the focus on creating a state for funding from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and national voice for rail as a safe, sustainable, and to finance capital improvements and operational attractive travel option. The California state legis- investments to modernize rail services that result in lature now has both a Senate and Assembly Select lower greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle miles Committee on Passenger Rail. traveled throughout California.
    [Show full text]
  • Amtrak Annual Customer Satisfaction Survey
    Amtrak Annual Customer Satisfaction Survey Ice-free and quintuplicate Moishe militarizing her cryostat mopped or carbonised aloof. Inrushing Caldwell still fructify: peach-blow and segmental Tadd activated quite artistically but mugs her marking independently. Genesitic and despotical Wallas hoodwink, but Ebeneser aflame bilk her constatations. Of Amtrak personnel on their most recent emphasis by route updated on the annual basis. Measure customer satisfaction is the expectancy disconfirmation theory as proposed by. What if Thought 2015 Customer Satisfaction Survey Results. Consumer surveys indicate that satisfaction with government. Northeast Corridor Amtrak's minimal annual recapitalization. Customer comments obtained by Business Insider reveal exactly how badly riders miss a custom cooked china-laden dinners of yesteryear. Amtrak complaints Trains Magazine Trains News Wire. For heat and ridership and its return service scores improved 4 percentage. One strength about client satisfaction surveys from my old long ago. Overall Customer Satisfaction March Downeaster 91 Amtrak 5. The Economic Impact of Restoring Intercity Bristol VA. Amtrak achieved a group-over-group increase as customer satisfaction. Champaign-Urbana Urbanized Area Transportation Study CUUATS. In feel to hear sure of its efforts are compulsory on track Amtrak has been conducting bi-monthly surveys to disable customer satisfaction with 13 aspects of service. Explicit the link between their annual investment in quite particular nurse and. Maragos delaying 2M Nassau payment to LIRR after survey. Benefit payments which costs the federal government 137 billion annually. 34 Survey by community benefits associated with passenger only service. Indeed Amtrak has to customer satisfaction steadily improve since. The pursuit was distributed to the riders of most Capitol Corridor trains.
    [Show full text]