DOCSLIB.ORG

Binghamton Regional Freight Study, 2008

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Binghamton Regional Freight Study, 2008 Binghamton Regional Freight Study final report prepared for Binghamton Metropolitan Transportation Study prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. with Eng Wong Taub & Associates RL Banks & Associates, Inc. Global Insight (USA), Inc. September 2008 www.camsys.com final report Binghamton Regional Freight Study prepared for Binghamton Metropolitan Transportation Study prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 33 East 33rd Street, Suite 804 New York, NY 10016 September 2008 Binghamton Metropolitan Transportation Study Table of Contents Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. ES-1 1.0 National and Global Trends: Setting the Stage..................................................... 1-1 1.1 Long-Term Trends................................................................................................ 1-2 1.2 Recent Trends........................................................................................................ 1-5 1.3 Long-Term Perspective........................................................................................ 1-12 2.0 Economic Profile........................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Demographic Profile............................................................................................. 2-2 2.2 Industry Analysis.................................................................................................. 2-8 2.3 Looking to the Future – Economic Prospects for the Binghamton Area....... 2-14 3.0 Freight Profile ............................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Overview of Regional Freight Network ............................................................ 3-1 3.2 Trade Patterns and Commodity Flows .............................................................. 3-39 3.3 Changing Freight Patterns................................................................................... 3-54 4.0 Carrier Profile and Stakeholder Feedback .............................................................. 4-1 4.1 Research and Field Observation ......................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Methodology.......................................................................................................... 4-1 4.3 Interviews Completed.......................................................................................... 4-2 5.0 Regional Freight Forecasts.......................................................................................... 5-1 5.1 Development of the Binghamton Regional Freight Forecasts ........................ 5-1 5.2 Freight Forecast Results ....................................................................................... 5-4 5.3 Opportunities and Implications of Forecast...................................................... 5-27 6.0 Freight Transportation Improvement Program ...................................................... 6-1 6.1 Transportation Project Identification ................................................................. 6-1 6.2 Recommended Projects and Strategies .............................................................. 6-7 6.3 Estimated Benefits and Benefit/Cost Ratios of Recommended Projects ...... 6-39 7.0 Conclusions and Recommendations......................................................................... 7-1 Appendix A Detailed Freight Forecast Methodology .................................................. A-1 Appendix B Benefit/Cost Methodology ......................................................................... B-1 Appendix C Stakeholder Outreach.................................................................................. C-1 Cambridge Systematics, Inc. i 7771.001 Binghamton Metropolitan Transportation Study List of Tables ES.1 Summary of Stakeholder Responses.......................................................................... ES-8 ES.2 Highway Project Cost Estimates................................................................................. ES-11 ES.3 Rail Project Cost Estimates .......................................................................................... ES-12 1.1 Long-Range Sector Shift in the U.S. Economy.......................................................... 1-3 3.1 Bridge Condition Data for BMTS Region .................................................................. 3-7 3.2 Bridges with Condition Ratings Below 4.000............................................................ 3-8 3.3 Low Overhead Bridge Clearances in BMTS Region ................................................ 3-9 3.4 Pavement Condition Rating Data for Interstate, Federal, and Major New York State Roadways within Broome and Tioga Counties .............................................. 3-10 3.5 Pavement Condition Rating Data for Nonstate Federal-Aid roads within the Greater Binghamton Metropolitan Area.................................................................... 3-12 3.6 Truck Percentage Summary for BMTS Region ......................................................... 3-18 3.7 Truck Volume Summary for BMTS Region .............................................................. 3-18 3.8 Freight Tonnage by Mode 2004 (in Millions of Tons) ................................................ 3-46 3.9 Value of Freight Moved by Truck and Rail 2004 (in Billions of Dollars) ................. 3-47 3.10 Binghamton Trading Patterns and Partners for Freight Shipped by Truck......... 3-48 3.11 Intraregional Truck Traffic .......................................................................................... 3-49 3.12 Binghamton Trading Patterns and Partners for Freight Shipped by Rail Rail Tons .......................................................................................................................... 3-52 4.1 Stakeholder Interview Count by Industry ................................................................ 4-2 5.1 Summary of Freight Forecasts for Binghamton Region .......................................... 5-4 5.2 Forecast of Freight Tonnage by Mode – 2004 versus 2030 in Millions of Tons ...... 5-6 5.3 Forecast of Value of Freight Moved by Mode – 2004 versus 2030 in Billions of 2004 Dollars .................................................................................................................... 5-6 ii Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Binghamton Metropolitan Transportation Study List of Tables (continued) 5.4 Binghamton Trading Patterns and Partners for Freight Shipped by Truck – 2004 versus 2030............................................................................................................ 5-8 5.5 Intraregional Truck Traffic in 2004 and 2030 ............................................................ 5-9 5.6 Binghamton Trading Patterns and Partners for Freight Shipped by Rail – 2004 versus 2030 in Tons ........................................................................................................ 5-22 5.7 Warehouse and Distribution Center Outbound Truck Tonnage (millions) Growth in BMTS and Regional Counties .................................................................. 5-27 6.1 Highway Project Cost Estimates................................................................................. 6-9 6.2 Rail Project Cost Estimates .......................................................................................... 6-17 6.3 Estimated Daily VHT/VMT Reduction in 2030 for Proposed Highway Projects 6-41 6.4 Estimated Private User Benefits in 2030 – Highway Project 1 in 2008 Dollars ..... 6-43 6.5 Estimated Public Economic Benefits in 2030 – Highway Project 1 in 2008 Dollars ............................................................................................................................. 6-44 6.6 Summary of Benefits and Estimated Benefit-Cost Ratio – Highway Project 1 in 2008 Dollars .................................................................................................................... 6-44 6.7 Estimated Private User Benefits in 2030 – Highway Project 2 in 2008 Dollars ..... 6-45 6.8 Estimated Public Economic Benefits in 2030 – Highway Project 2 in 2008 Dollars ............................................................................................................................. 6-46 6.9 Summary of Benefits and Estimated Benefit-Cost Ratio – Highway Project 2 in 2008 Dollars .................................................................................................................... 6-46 6.10 Estimated Private User Benefits in 2030 – Highway Project 3 in 2008 Dollars ..... 6-47 6.11 Estimated Public Economic Benefits in 2030 – Highway Project 3 in 2008 Dollars ............................................................................................................................. 6-48 6.12 Summary of Benefits and Estimated Benefit-Cost Ratio – Highway Project 3 in 2008 Dollars .................................................................................................................... 6-48 6.13 Travel Time Savings ..................................................................................................... 6-51 6.14 Rail Investments – Estimated Private Benefits in 2008 Dollars ............................... 6-51 6.15 Rail Investments – Estimated Public Benefits in 2008 Dollars ................................. 6-52 Cambridge Systematics, Inc. iii 7771.001 Binghamton Metropolitan Transportation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Regional Farmers' Market Feasiblity Study
    www.marketventuresinc.com 118 William Street 207.321.2016 Portland, Maine 04103 Broome County Regional Farmers’ Market Feasibility Study Prepared for: Broome County Department of Planning & Economic Development Broome County, New York August 11, 2009 Table of Cont ents Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 3 Study methodology ..................................................................................................................... 3 Feasibility considerations............................................................................................................ 4 Goals ........................................................................................................................................... 4 Comparable Farmers’ Markets ....................................................................................................... 5 Success factors............................................................................................................................ 9 Key Informant Interviews............................................................................................................. 11 Site Analysis ................................................................................................................................. 13 Otsiningo Park .......................................................................................................................... 14 Brandywine DOT Site..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Taco Bell Restaurant
    TACO BELL RESTAURANT NNN Investment 429 Court Street DAVE DELATORRE T 619 247 8585 F 828 459 3066 Binghamton, NY 13904 [email protected] EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Taco Bell NNN Investment PROPERTY Taco Bell Restaurant LOCATION 429 Court Street, Binghamton, NY 13904 SALES PRICE $4,100,000 CAPITALIZATION RATE 5.0% RENT Years 1-5 Years 6-10 Year 11-15 Years 16-20 Monthly $17,083.33 $18,791.67 $20,670.83 $22,737.92 Annual $205,000 $225,500 $248,050 $272,855 BUILDING SIZE Large 2,212 Square Feet Contemporary Building Built in 1998 LAND PARCEL SIZE 33,546 Square Feet Corner Parcel with Taco Bell using approximately 20,000 Square Feet & 13,000 Square Feet of Vacant Land. PRIMARY LEASE TERM & OPTION PERIODS New Twenty (20) Year Primary Lease Term Commencing Upon Close of Escrow with Four Additional Five (5) Year Options to Extend at the Same Terms and Conditions RENTAL INCREASES Fixed Ten (10%) Percent Increases Every Five (5) Years Including Options DAVE DELATORRE T 619 247 8585 2 [email protected] EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Taco Bell NNN Investment TENANT INFORMATION MUY Brands, LLC is a Texas Limited Liability Company who owns and operates 81 Taco Bell restaurants in Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Virginia. The company was founded in 2007 and acquired the existing Taco Bell restaurants in 2012 from another Taco Bell franchisee called El Rancho Foods who operated the restaurants for many years prior to MUY Brands, LLC acquiring the former El Rancho company. MUY Brands, LLC is also part of the MUY Companies which operate another 369 Pizza Hut Restaurants in Texas, 6 southeast states, and Minnesota and who are one of the largest Pizza Hut franchisees in America.
    [Show full text]
  • Northeast Energy Direct Project Docket No. Pf14-22-000
    NORTHEAST ENERGY DIRECT PROJECT DOCKET NO. PF14-22-000 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT RESOURCE REPORT 10 ALTERNATIVES PUBLIC Submitted by: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C. 1001 Louisiana Street Houston, Texas 77002 November 2014 Environmental Report NED Project Resource Report 10 Alternatives 10-i RESOURCE REPORT 10 – ALTERNATIVES SUMMARY OF FILING INFORMATION INFORMATION FOUND IN Address the “no action” alternative (§ 380.12 (l)(1)). Section 10.1 For large Projects, address the effect of energy conservation or Section 10.1.1 energy alternatives to the Project Section 10.1.2 (§ 380.12 (l)(1)). Identify system alternatives considered during the identification of the Project and provide the rationale for rejecting each Section 10.2 alternative (§ 380.12 (l)(1)). Identify major and minor route alternatives considered to avoid impact on sensitive environmental areas (e.g., wetlands, parks, Section 10.3 or residences) and provide sufficient comparative data to justify the selection of the proposed route (§ 380.12 (l)(2)(ii)). Identify alternative sites considered for the location of major new aboveground facilities and provide sufficient comparative Sections 10.4, 10.5, and 10.6 data to justify the selection of the proposed site (§ 380.12 (l)(2)(ii)). November 2014 Environmental Report NED Project Resource Report 10 Alternatives 10-ii TABLE OF CONTENTS 10.0 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................... 10-1 10.1 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE ...................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • BRIDGE POINT MELROSE PARK Bridgepmp.Com | Melrose Park, IL
    BRIDGE POINT MELROSE PARK bridgepmp.com | Melrose Park, IL AVAILABLE SPACE Up to 1,539,780 SF # OF BUILDINGS 1 - 3 CLEAR HEIGHT 36' - 40' NEW INFILL DEVELOPMENT O'HARE / WEST COOK SUBMARKET LAND SIZE HIGHLIGHTS 86.63 Acres • High profile location for labor and last mile distribution • Class A buildings with state-of-the-art • Unmatched connectivity to local expressways, specifications DELIVERY DATE intermodal centers, and O'Hare International Airport • Only site in O'Hare / West Cook submarket which • Direct access to Interstate 290 and Interstate 294 can accommodate over 500,000 SF building Q2 2023 • Potential for built-to-suit development with flexibility in • Site offers flexibility to accommodate heavy trailer design and layout parking CHARLIE KENNING BRIAN CARROLL Executive Vice President Senior Vice President [email protected] [email protected] +1 773 304 4117 +1 773 632 1102 CONCEPT PLAN #1 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY 3 Clear Height: 40' 56'-6" Exterior Docks: 130 (expandable to 148) (89) 5 5 70'-0" TRAILER POSITIONS 1 3 1 5 13 15 Drive-In Doors: 4 (65) EXTERIOR DOCKS (9) FUTURE EXTERIOR DOCKS 2 2 22 707,953 SF 60'-0" D.I.D. D.I.D. 1180'-0" Car Parking: 610 stalls 60'-0" 121'-0" 121'-0" 50'-0" 2 0 2 0 50'-0" 1080'-0" 4 0 20 20 40 (20)BAYS @ 54'-0" 10'-0" Trailer Parking: 178 stalls 16'-4" 10'-0" Truck Court: 130' (10) B A Y S @ 48'-0" PROPOSED 2 0 20 40 20 20 Spec Office: To suit 40 480'-0" 600'-0" FACILITY #3 ±707,953 SQ.FT.
    [Show full text]
  • Initial Release · Version 1.02 · December 2, 2016 ™
    Overpass Mono™ Initial Release · Version 1.02 · December 2, 2016 Overpass Mono Refactoring The Cathedral and the Bazaar Musings on Linux and Open Source by an Accidental Revolutionary import java.util.StringTokenizer; import java.util.StringTokenizer; public class StringTokenizerReturnTokensAsOb- public class StringTokenizerReturnTokensAsOb- jectsExample { jectsExample { public static void main(String[] args) { public static void main(String[] args) { //create StringTokenizer object //create StringTokenizer object StringTokenizer st = new StringTokenizer st = new StringTokenizer("Java StringTokenizer Exam- StringTokenizer("Java StringTokenizer Exam- ple"); ple"); //iterate through tokens using has- //iterate through tokens using has- MoreElements() method MoreElements() method while(st.hasMoreElements()){ while(st.hasMoreElements()){ System.out.println(st.nextElement()); System.out.println(st.nextElement()); } } } } } } 2 Overpass Mono About the Typeface Overpass is a bespoke typeface designed by Delve Fonts Red Hat has generously made the Overpass family freely between 2011–2016 on commission from Red Hat, Inc. with available to the public under the SIL Open Font License direction provided by Andy Fitzsimon, Jakub Steiner, and The GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL). and Ben Dubrovsky. Designers: Delve Withrington and Dave Bailey The design of Overpass is an interpretation of the rather well-known “Highway Gothic” letterforms from Year Created: 2016 the Standard Alphabets for Traffic Control Devices published by the U.S. Federal
    [Show full text]
  • Section 4: County Profile
    SECTION 4: COUNTY PROFILE SECTION 4: COUNTY PROFILE Broome County profile information is presented in the plan and analyzed to develop an understanding of a study area, including the economic, structural, and population assets at risk and the particular concerns that may be present related to hazards analyzed later in this plan (e.g., low lying areas prone to flooding or a high percentage of vulnerable persons in an area). This profile provides general information for Broome County (physical setting, population and demographics, general building stock, and land use and population trends) and critical facilities located within the County. GENERAL INFORMATION Broome County is a rural community located within the south-central part or “Southern Tier” of New York State. The Southern Tier is a geographical term that refers to the counties of New York State that lie west of the Catskill Mountains, along the northern border of Pennsylvania. Broome County lies directly west of Delaware County, 137 miles southwest of Albany and approximately 177 miles northwest of New York City. Broome County occupies approximately 715 square miles and has a population of approximately 199,031 (U.S. Census, 2011). Broome County is one of the 62 counties in New York State and is comprised of one city, sixteen towns, seven villages and many hamlets. The City of Binghamton is the County seat and is located at the confluence of the Susquehanna and Chenango Rivers. The City of Binghamton is part of the “Triple Cities,” which also includes the Villages of Endicott and Johnson City. With two Interstates and a major state route intersecting in the City of Binghamton, the area is the crossroads of the Southern Tier.
    [Show full text]
  • Construction Suspended Where Possible for July 4
    State of Illinois JB Pritzker, Governor Illinois Department of Transportation Omer Osman, Acting Secretary FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: CONTACT: July 1, 2020 Paul Wappel 217.685.0082 Maria Castaneda 312.447.1919 Construction suspended where possible for July 4 Non-emergency closures called off, but motorists should still expect work zones SPRINGFIELD – The Illinois Department of Transportation announced today that lanes that have been closed for construction will reopen, where possible, for the Fourth of July holiday to minimize travel disruption. Non-emergency closures will be suspended from 3 p.m. July 2 to 11:59 p.m. July 5. The following lane closures will remain in place during the holiday weekend. Work zone speed limits will remain in effect where posted. Please buckle up, put your phone down and drive sober. District 1 City of Chicago: • The following ramps in the Jane Byrne Interchange work zone will remain closed: • o Inbound Kennedy (Interstate 90/94) Expressway exit to inbound Ida B. Wells Drive. o Outbound Dan Ryan Expressway exit to Taylor Street and Roosevelt Road. o Outbound Ida B. Wells Drive entrance from Canal Street. o Outbound Ida B. Wells Drive exit to outbound Dan Ryan. o Outbound Ida B. Wells Drive exit to outbound Kennedy. o Inbound Eisenhower Expressway (Interstate -290) to outbound Kennedy; detour with U-turn posted. o Inbound Eisenhower; lane reductions continue. o Inbound Ida B. Wells Drive; lane reductions continue. • Outbound Kennedy exit at Canfield Road; closed. • Westbound Bryn Mawr Avenue between Harlem and Oriole avenues; lane reductions continue. • Westbound Higgins Avenue between Oriole and Canfield avenues; lane reductions continue.
    [Show full text]
  • Susquehanna Heritage Area Management Plan Amendment
    Susquehanna Heritage Area Management Plan Amendment APPENDICES Final Plan • December 2009 SUSQUEHANNA HERITAGE AREA MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT APPENDICES December 2009 Prepared By: Bergmann Associates x John Milner Associates, Inc. For The: Broome County Department of Planning and Economic Development Barbara J. Fiala, Broome County Executive Rita M. Petkash, Commissioner of Planning & Economic Development Gail L. Domin, Project Coordinator and Economic Development Planner And In Association With The: Susquehanna Heritage Area Commission This document was prepared for the New York Department of State with funds provided under Title 11 of the Environmental Protection Fund. Additional matching services were provided by the Broome County Department of Planning and Economic Development. APPENDICES TABLE OF CONTENTS Appendix 1: Heritage Area Terms and Definitions ........................................................................... 1 Appendix 2: Guidelines for Heritage Area Management Plan Amendments ................................. 3 Appendix 3: 1996 Urban Cultural Park Boundaries .......................................................................... 5 Appendix 4: Summary of Heritage Area Projects and Funding (1996 – 2009) .............................. 11 Appendix 5: Detailed Profiles of Primary Destinations .................................................................. 15 Appendix 6: Summary of National , State, and Local Historic Districts ........................................ 17 Appendix 7: Summary of National Register
    [Show full text]
  • Harrisburg Division
    HARRISBURG DIVISION NORTHERN REGION TIMETABLE NUMBER 1 EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 19, 2015 COMMITTED TO SAFETY DOUBLE ZEROS ZERO INJURIES ZERO INCIDENTS HARRISBURG DIVISION TIMETABLE TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Timetable General Information..................................................5 a. Train Dispatcher Contact Information…………………….4 b. Station Page........................................................................5 c. Explanation of Characters.................................................5 d. Diesel Unit Groups.............................................................6 e. Main Track Control.............................................................6 f. Division Special Instructions.............................................6 II. Harrisburg Division Station Pages.....................................7-263 III. Harrisburg Division Special Instructions......................265-269 NORFOLK SOUTHERN DIVISION HEADQUARTERS Train Dispatching Office 4600 Deer Path Road Harrisburg, PA 17110 Assistant Superintendent – Microwave 541-2146 Bell 717-541-2146 Dispatch Chief Dispatcher Microwave 541-2158 Bell 717-541-2158 Harrisburg East Dispatcher Microwave 541-2136 Bell 717-541-2136 Harrisburg Terminal Dispatcher Microwave 541-2138 Bell 717-541-2138 Lehigh Line Dispatcher Microwave 541-2139 Bell 717-541-2139 Southern Tier Dispatcher Microwave 541-2144 Bell 717-541-2144 Mainline Dispatcher Microwave 541-2142 Bell 717-541-2142 D&H Dispatcher Microwave 541-2143 Bell 717-541-2143 EMERGENCY 911 HARRISBURG DIVISION TIMETABLE GENERAL INFORMATION A.
    [Show full text]
  • YOUR GUIDE to GREATER BINGHAMTON M&T Bank
    Life as you’ve imagined it: perfectly THRIVE balanced YOUR GUIDE TO GREATER BINGHAMTON M&T Bank. Understanding what’s important. At M&T Bank, understanding what’s important means realizing the role a bank plays in people’s lives. And then living up to those responsibilities, by helping families, businesses and communities thrive. It’s what we’ve been doing for more than 160 years. Learn more at mtb.com. Equal Housing Lender. ©2019 M&T Bank. Member FDIC. 2 THRIVE – YOUR GUIDE TO GREATER BINGHAMTON One Jane Lacey Drive • Endicott, NY 13760 “It’s a lifestyle ... Washer/dryer in your home Huge closets Cable hook-up in every Gourmet kitchen room, giving you Internet Garage available with access where you want it many homes Central air conditioning in all Patio and balcony Apartments and Townhomes Tennis courts nearby Built-in microwave oven Pet friendly 24-hour emergency maintenance service PGA championship golf course in your 24-hour Fitness Center neighborhood Seasonal heated pool ...when you’re here, you’re home.” To get a lease application, or for more information, simply: call: (607) 754-6769 email: [email protected] or go online: www.SummitChaseApts.com SummitChaseApts.com BROUGHT TO YOU BY THE GREATER BINGHAMTON CHAMBER 3 GROW SUCCEED ENJOY Guide design and layout by Idea Kraft — idea-kraft.com | Illustrations by Katie Vaz — katievaz.com 4 THRIVE – YOUR GUIDE TO GREATER BINGHAMTON Photo by Jonathan Cohen TO THRIVE IS TO DO MUCH MORE THAN SIMPLY GET BY. It means waking up every day ready to pursue your passions. It means recognizing that the path to success is just as important as life after achieving it.
    [Show full text]
  • The Greater Chicago Region: a Logistics Epicenter
    the greater chicago region By Mike Kirchhoff, CEcD, and Jody Peacock Fully one third of rail and truck traf- fic – and half the nation’s container traffic – pass through the Chicago region. While these statistics are impres- sive, Chicago’s infrastructure is being pushed to its limit. And projections point to more challenges ahead. In 2001 the Chicago Area Transportation Study (the Chicago region’s transporta- tion planning agency) projected 600 more daily trains in the region within 20 years (2,400 trains/year), and pro- jected an increase in Intermodal lifts of more than 250 percent in the same time period. Market impacts such as these are projected to demand more than 7,000 additional acres of land for Intermodal facilities. Choked by con- gestion already, these projections pre- A transload in progress from barge to truck. dict dire consequences for the region’s transportation system. rom the mid-1800’s to the 21st EMERGING CHALLENGES IN LOGISTICS century, Chicago has played a key Mike Kirchhoff, CEcD, Lean manufacturing, Six Sigma, just-in-time role at the heart of the American is Executive Director of commercial transportation sys- manufacturing, and other approaches to modern manufacturing each demand greater reliance on a the Jacksonville f tem. Today, with time-to-market timely, efficient and cost-effective transportation (Illinois) Regional EDC. demands ever more critical, the Chicago network. The increasingly elevated importance of Jody Peacock is region’s historic position as a freight transporta- distribution in the supply chain represents a signif- Communications and tion and distribution nexus is growing ever icant shift in emphasis – a paradigm shift of extraor- dinary proportions.
    [Show full text]
  • February 9, 1996
    PB97-916301 NTSB/RAR-97/01 NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD Washington, D.C. 20594 RAILROAD ACCIDENT REPORT NEAR HEAD-ON COLLISION AND DERAILMENT OF TWO NEW JERSEY TRANSIT COMMUTER TRAINS NEAR SECAUCUS, NEW JERSEY FEBRUARY 9, 1996 6674A Abstract: This report explains the collision of two New Jersey Transit trains near Secaucus, New Jersey, on February 9, 1996. Three people were killed and 69 people were treated at area hospitals for minor to serious injuries sustained in this accident. The total estimated damage exceeded $3.3 million. From its investigation of this accident, the Safety Board identified the following safety issues: the medical condition of the engineer of train 1254, the adequacy of medical standards for locomotive engineers, and the adequacy of the response to the accident by New Jersey Transit train crewmembers. Based on its findings, the Safety Board made recommendations to the Federal Railroad Administration, the New Jersey Transit, the Association of American Railroads, the American Public Transit Association, the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, and the United Transportation Union. The National Transportation Safety Board is an independent Federal agency dedicated to promoting avia- tion, railroad, highway, marine, pipeline, and hazardous materials safety. Established in 1967, the agency is mandated by Congress through the Independent Safety Board Act of 1974 to investigate transportation accidents, determine the probable cause of accidents, issue safety recommendations, study transportation safety issues, and evaluate the safety effectiveness of government agencies involved in transportation. The Safety Board makes public its actions and decisions through accident reports, safety studies, special investigation reports, safety recommendations, and statistical reviews.
    [Show full text]