DOCSLIB.ORG

Dallas/Fort Worth to Meridian Passenger Rail Study Txdot Rail Division I-20 Corridor Council

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Dallas/Fort Worth to Meridian Passenger Rail Study Txdot Rail Division I-20 Corridor Council Dallas/Fort Worth to Meridian Passenger Rail Study TxDOT Rail Division I-20 Corridor Council OCTOBER 2017 Table of Contents Section 1: Executive Summary ........................................................................................... 3 Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................................ 3 Methodology ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Improvements ................................................................................................................................... 4 Results .............................................................................................................................................. 6 Benefit-Cost Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 7 Section 2: Introduction ........................................................................................................ 9 Background ....................................................................................................................................... 9 Overview of Previous Studies ........................................................................................................ 10 Section 3: Methodology .................................................................................................... 14 Design Standards and Assumptions ............................................................................................. 14 Evaluation of Existing Infrastructure ............................................................................................. 16 Section 4: Existing Rail System ........................................................................................ 19 Existing Rail Infrastructure ............................................................................................................. 19 Section 5: Data Collection ................................................................................................ 29 Section Overview ............................................................................................................................ 29 Identification of Existing Amtrak Corridors ................................................................................... 30 Section 6: Improvements .................................................................................................. 40 Section Overview ............................................................................................................................ 40 Analysis - Indicators ........................................................................................................................ 43 Analysis – Correlation Evaluation .................................................................................................. 47 Analysis – Prediction of Necessary Miles of Passing Sidings ...................................................... 51 Results ............................................................................................................................................ 53 Order of Magnitude Construction Costs ....................................................................................... 54 Section 7: Benefit-Cost Analysis ...................................................................................... 58 Costs ................................................................................................................................................ 59 Benefits ........................................................................................................................................... 59 Appendix A: Rail Inventory ................................................................................................ 70 Appendix B: TRE Schedules .............................................................................................. 73 Appendix C: Amtrak Schedules ........................................................................................ 85 Appendix D: On-Time Performance Analysis ................................................................. 100 Appendix E: Order of Magnitude Construction Cost Estimates .................................. 270 Appendix F: Data by Grade Crossing .............................................................................. 274 Appendix G: Benefit-Cost Analysis Results ................................................................... 283 Appendix H: Planning and Economic Impact Study...................................................... 285 2 Section 1: Executive Summary Purpose of the Study The purpose of the Dallas/Fort Worth to Meridian Passenger Rail Study is to identify additional infrastructure needs and perform a benefit-cost analysis to implement a reliable passenger rail service from Fort Worth, Texas (TX) to Meridian, Mississippi (MS). The conceptual engineering, which is summarized in this report, is based on existing track and train count characteristics and the National Railroad Passenger Corporation’s (Amtrak) anticipated station stops and schedule. The feasibility of providing passenger rail service on the Meridian – Fort Worth corridor (see Figure 1-1) or along a portion of it has been previously studied. Several prior reports and state rail plans, summarized in this report, have identified the need to evaluate this feasibility. Figure 1-1: Project Corridor between Fort Worth, Texas and Meridian, Mississippi Methodology For the purposes of this study, potential infrastructure improvements are limited to siding installations and extensions within the corridor. The methodology for identifying infrastructure improvements is dependent on the available data for each segment of existing track. The following methodology represents two separate approaches for identifying possible infrastructure improvements within the project corridor. 3 Fort Worth, TX to Dallas, TX: 1. High-level review of passenger rail service within the Trinity Railway Express TRE corridor –Review the current TRE commuter train schedules, current Amtrak Texas Eagle passenger train schedules, and the potential Amtrak passenger rail schedule to identify possible train meets within the corridor. Dallas, TX to Meridian, MS: 2. Compare existing Amtrak corridors and their characteristics –A multi-stage approach to identify potential passing siding locations for this corridor segment includes: a. Determine project corridor characteristics between stations on the Amtrak route. b. Identify existing Amtrak corridors located within or near the project corridor. c. Review lengths and spacing of siding and double track locations, type of signalization and maximum allowable train speeds on the existing Amtrak corridors. d. Review existing freight and passenger train volumes on the existing Amtrak corridors. e. Review On-Time Performance (OTP) of selected existing Amtrak service. f. Identify and compare variables (indicators) on infrastructure, train volumes and OTP between the selected Amtrak corridors and the project corridor between station limits. g. Determine potential passing siding infrastructure improvements based on results from the comparison of indicators. Improvements To identify passing siding improvements within the corridor, the data was reviewed and compared between corridor segments and indicators. These indicators include the infrastructure, operations, and OTP data. A spreadsheet-based model was created and run for the potential Amtrak schedule for the corridor length from Fort Worth, TX to Meridian, MS to validate Amtrak’s schedule from the evaluation that Amtrak conducted (using Alternative 3). The Fort Worth, TX to Dallas, TX segment was evaluated separately from the other potential passenger rail corridors since it is the only segment from the project corridor that currently has commuter service. Given the elevated number of commuter trains running in this segment, a high-level schedule review was conducted to evaluate the impacts of the anticipated passenger rail schedule provided by Amtrak. 4 To complete the evaluation, the Dallas, TX to Meridian, MS segment was divided into the following sub-segments: . Dallas, TX to Marshall, TX; . Marshall, TX to Shreveport, LA; . Shreveport, LA to Vicksburg, MS; and . Vicksburg, MS to Meridian, MS. The indicators described within Section 5 of this report were compared between the selected existing Amtrak routes and the Dallas, TX to Meridian, MS study segments. These indicators included: . OTP, . existing passing sidings, . percentage of double track, . freight and passenger train counts, and; . corridor capacity. The comparisons were conducted using simple regression analysis, with graphs to visualize the association between indicators and the calculation of the R2 coefficient to understand the strength of the relationship between these indicators. The observed regression with the strongest association between indicators and the highest R2 value was between the total number of daily trains and percentage of double track for those corridors with an OTP equal or greater than 80%, as seen in Figure 1-2. Figure 1-2 Percentage of Double Track Compared with the Total Number of Trains by Corridor Segment with an OTP Equal or Higher than 80% 5 Figure 1-2 plots the correlation between the percentage of double track (vertical axis) versus the total number of trains (horizontal
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A-2 Capital Improvement Projects
    Buses staged at Pace’s East Dundee garage facility, managed by Pace River Division. Pace’s existing River Division garage will be expanded to allow more space for services operating along I-90 and locally in Elgin and the surrounding area. 56 | page A-2 Capital Improvement Projects Initiative: Implement all Pace capital projects funded through Rebuild Illinois, and produce a Facilities Plan to determine how Pace facilities will be used to support other service plans and initiatives. Supports Goals: Equity, Productivity, Responsiveness, Safety, Environmental Stewardship, and Fiscal Solvency ACTION ITEM 1 Rebuild Illinois State Capital Program Illinois’s nearly $45 billion capital construction program, Rebuild Illinois, earmarks $2.6 billion for public transit, of which $228 million has been allocated for Pace. Metra and CTA also received a combined $240 million in earmarks for capital projects through this funding source. As transit riders often make connections between CTA, Metra and Pace services, investments for all three service boards are expected to help improve the quality of public transportation regionally. Capital funding from the state is in addition to separate sources of funding all three agencies receive. Additionally, Rebuild Illinois will allow new sources of annual revenues to fund capital projects, primarily through the Transportation Renewal Fund, which will reserve 18 percent of receipts towards public transportation projects in Northeastern Illinois. Pace is working with IDOT, RTA, CTA and Metra to ensure program funding is expended quickly, effectively, and equitably across the region. Illinois Governor JB Pritzker speaking about the $45 billion Rebuild Illinois capital plan (Illinois Business Journal, 2020) page | 57 Pace Capital Projects funded through Rebuild Illinois 58 | page page | 59 I-55 Express Bus Garage and Infrastructure Pace Heritage Division has exceeded its garage capacity and cannot support further growth of Pace’s successful I-55 Bus on Shoulder service.
    [Show full text]
  • Marshall's Mystique
    Preservation News TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION May/June 2011 THE MEDALLIONMEDALLION Marshall’s Mystique Railroad, African American Legacies Shape Northeast Texas City’s Heritage Sustainability Plays a Role in Historic Courthouse Preservation n Brownsville a Hotbed for Heritage Tourism PRESERVation NEWS THC Honors Book THC Announces Annual Award Winners Preservation Award Winners The T.R. Fehrenbach Book Award was presented to three Each year, the Texas Historical Commission (THC) presents prestigious awards to noteworthy authors at the THC’s notable individuals and organizations to emphasize outstanding contributions to annual conference. preserving Texas’ historic resources. The following people were recently honored at the 2011 Annual Historic Preservation Conference in Austin: William S. Clayson’s book ■ The Ruth Lester Lifetime has organized historical tours and Freedom is Not Achievement Award was presented helped to develop a heritage tourism Enough focuses to Jean Ann Ables-Flatt of Terrell. A project centered on the Butterfield on Texas in former THC commissioner, Ables- Overland Trail. the 1960s and Flatt also served for eight years as chair examines how of the Kaufman County Historical ■ The Award of Excellence President Lyndon Commission and is immediate past in Preserving History was presented Johnson’s War president of the Hiram Bennett to two recipients. Rudi Rodriguez on Poverty manifested itself in a Chapter of the Daughters of the of San Antonio has extensively state marked by racial division, Republic of Texas. researched Tejano history on diversity, and endemic poverty. www.TexasTejano.com, authored ■ The Curtis D. Tunnell Lifetime several books, and helped organize the Achievement Award in Archeology Hispanic Heritage Center of Texas.
    [Show full text]
  • Nexstar Media Group Stations(1)
    Nexstar Media Group Stations(1) Full Full Full Market Power Primary Market Power Primary Market Power Primary Rank Market Stations Affiliation Rank Market Stations Affiliation Rank Market Stations Affiliation 2 Los Angeles, CA KTLA The CW 57 Mobile, AL WKRG CBS 111 Springfield, MA WWLP NBC 3 Chicago, IL WGN Independent WFNA The CW 112 Lansing, MI WLAJ ABC 4 Philadelphia, PA WPHL MNTV 59 Albany, NY WTEN ABC WLNS CBS 5 Dallas, TX KDAF The CW WXXA FOX 113 Sioux Falls, SD KELO CBS 6 San Francisco, CA KRON MNTV 60 Wilkes Barre, PA WBRE NBC KDLO CBS 7 DC/Hagerstown, WDVM(2) Independent WYOU CBS KPLO CBS MD WDCW The CW 61 Knoxville, TN WATE ABC 114 Tyler-Longview, TX KETK NBC 8 Houston, TX KIAH The CW 62 Little Rock, AR KARK NBC KFXK FOX 12 Tampa, FL WFLA NBC KARZ MNTV 115 Youngstown, OH WYTV ABC WTTA MNTV KLRT FOX WKBN CBS 13 Seattle, WA KCPQ(3) FOX KASN The CW 120 Peoria, IL WMBD CBS KZJO MNTV 63 Dayton, OH WDTN NBC WYZZ FOX 17 Denver, CO KDVR FOX WBDT The CW 123 Lafayette, LA KLFY CBS KWGN The CW 66 Honolulu, HI KHON FOX 125 Bakersfield, CA KGET NBC KFCT FOX KHAW FOX 129 La Crosse, WI WLAX FOX 19 Cleveland, OH WJW FOX KAII FOX WEUX FOX 20 Sacramento, CA KTXL FOX KGMD MNTV 130 Columbus, GA WRBL CBS 22 Portland, OR KOIN CBS KGMV MNTV 132 Amarillo, TX KAMR NBC KRCW The CW KHII MNTV KCIT FOX 23 St. Louis, MO KPLR The CW 67 Green Bay, WI WFRV CBS 138 Rockford, IL WQRF FOX KTVI FOX 68 Des Moines, IA WHO NBC WTVO ABC 25 Indianapolis, IN WTTV CBS 69 Roanoke, VA WFXR FOX 140 Monroe, AR KARD FOX WTTK CBS WWCW The CW WXIN FOX KTVE NBC 72 Wichita, KS
    [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]
  • Steel Wheels 4Q20 Web.Pdf
    Arizona News All Aboard Arizona Todd Liebman, President For well over a hundred and rail corridor between Los Angeles-Phoenix-Tucson and even thirty years, passenger trains further east to El Paso would be an economic driver for have been a daily fixture Arizona. Arizona’s congested transportation system diminishes of life in Northern Arizona, the quality of life for Arizonans increasing air pollution, literally building communities congestion related delays, and negatively impacting the state’s like Flagstaff and Winslow, economy. Conversely, for a relatively small investment, Amtrak bringing economic activity could return to Phoenix, the Sunset Limited/Texas Eagle to the cities served along Route 66. That came to an end in could operate daily, and the Southwest Chief could return October when Amtrak reduced the Southwest Chief route to to daily service across Northern Arizona. It is often in rural three day per week service, along with all long-distance train communities, like Yuma and Winslow, where passenger rail service in the United States. This cutback is expected to create has the biggest impact. These communities have fewer public economic losses of $239 million in the first nine months to transportation options, and the train serves as a vital lifeline for the communities served from Chicago to Los Angeles. These residents and visitors alike. cuts will not help Amtrak’s bottom line and may do permanent The outlook does not have to be bleak. We can achieve our damage to ridership and the financial health of passenger rail in goals related to daily Amtrak service on routes across Arizona America, and to the communities served by rail.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter Meeting Tues. April 5, 2016 – Interurban Railway Museum
    N ORTH T EXAS C H APTER , N ATIONAL R AILWAY H ISTORICAL S OCI ET Y N ORTH T EXAS Z EPHYR NEWSLETTER A P R I L 2016, VOLUME 2 1 , ISSUE 2 V ALLI H OSKI , NORTH TEXAS NEWS EDITOR O PINIONS EXPRESSED HEREIN MAY NOT REFLECT THE OFFICI AL POSITION OF THE N ORTH T EXAS C HAPTER OR THE N ATIONAL R AILWAY H I S T O R I C A L S OCI ET Y . A LL CONTENT RIGHTS RETAINED BY ORIGINAL AUTHOR . E VERY ATTEMPT HAS BEEN MADE TO COMPLY WITH FAIR USE AND COPYRIGHT LAW . CHAPTER MEETING ................................................................ 1 Chapter Meeting TUES . APRIL 5, 2016 – INTERURBAN RAILWAY MUSEUM ................................. 1 SPECIAL FEATURES & NEWS................................................ 1 Tues. April 5, 2016 – Interurban Railway Museum. FORTH WORTH RAILROAD SCENE – MARCH 3-4, 2016................................... 1 When 7 pm meet ’n’ greet. 7:30 pm meeting. TH 11 ANNUAL “24 HOURS @ SAGINAW ” – FRI . MAY 27-SAT . MAY 28, 2016..... 2 Where Plano Interurban Museum TRIP REPORT #3: TEXAS RAILROADING TIDBITS ............................................ 2 RAILROAD MUSEUM OF PA CELEBRATES 335 TH CHARTER ANNIVERSARY ......... 5 Program : Nikola Tesla. TRIP REPORT #4: TEXAS AT 14 MPH AND OTHER STORIES ............................. 5 Location: Interurban Railway Museum, 901 E 15th St, Plano, MTU SPONSORS RAIL EDUCATION ADVENTURE WAY UP NORTH ................... 7 TX 75074. (972) 941-2117. NRHS NEWS ................................................................................ 8 http://www.planoconservancy.org/interurban-railway- NRHS 2016 CONVENTION REGISTRATION NOW OPEN ................................... 8 museum.html NRHS PRESIDENT ’S CORNER – MARCH 2016............................................... 8 CHAPTER NEWS & VIEWS ..................................................... 9 TEXAS PASSENGER TRAINS – ALLEN PUBLIC LIBRARY , SAT . JUNE 11, 2016.... 9 JON ’S HISTORY CORNER – TER STATION , RICHARDSON TX..........................
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Eagle-Heartland Flyer-Chicago-Los Angeles-Oklahoma City-Fort Worth-May072012
    TEXAS EAGLE® MAY 7, 2012 and HEARTLAND FLYER® Effective SM Enjoy the journey. TEXAS EAGLE® serving CHICAGO - ST. LOUIS - LITTLE ROCK DALLAS - FORT WORTH - SAN ANTONIO 1-800-USA-RAIL LOS ANGELES And intermediate stations Call HEARTLAND FLYER® serving OKLAHOMA CITY - FORT WORTH and intermediate stations AMTRAK.COM Visit NRPC Form P21–175M–5/7/12 Stock #02-3675 Schedules subject to change without notice. Amtrak is a registered service mark of the National Railroad Passenger Corp. National Railroad Passenger Corporation Washington Union Station, 60 Massachusetts Ave. N.E., Washington, DC 20002. TEXAS EAGLE Service on the Texas Eagle® 21/421 Train Number 22/422 R Coaches: Reservations required. As indicated As indicated in column Normal Days of Operation in column s Sleeping cars: Superliner sleeping accommodations. R s R s - Amtrak Metropolitan Lounge available in Chicago, and On Board Service a private waiting area available in St. Louis for r y l r y l Sleeping car passengers. Read Down Mile Symbol Read Up - Sleeping car passengers arriving at Los Angeles are l1 45P Daily 0 Dp Chicago, IL–Union Station (CT) ∑w- Ar l1 52P Daily welcome to occupy their accommodations until 6:30 b Madison—see back a.m. R2 40P Daily 37 Joliet, IL ∑v D12 56P Daily r Dining-Cross Country Café: Casual service offering 3 27P Daily 92 Pontiac, IL >v 11 39A Daily complete meals. y l4 04P Daily 124 Bloomington-Normal, IL ∑v- l11 08A Daily Sightseer Lounge: Sandwiches, snacks and b Davenport, Indianapolis beverages. —see back l Checked baggage at select stations.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix B Technical Memorandum
    APPENDIX B TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM TEXAS TRANSPORTATION PLAN Texas Transportation Plan Tech Memo 1: Plan Assessment and Framework October 10, 2013 Acknowledgements PREPARED FOR: Michelle Conkle PREPARED BY: Michelle Maggiore, Alyson Welsh-Reaves QUALITY REVIEWERS: Steve Dilts Contents . 1.0 Introduction page 3 . 2.0 Plan Assessment page 3 – 2.1 Ongoing TxDOT Initiatives and Implications for the TTP page 3 – 2.2 TxDOT Plans for TTP Coordination page 4 – 2.3 Potential Challenges for the Texas Transportation System page 6 – 2.4 Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) Legislative Requirements page 7 . 3.0 Plan Framework page 9 – 3.1 Goals and Objectives page 9 – 3.2 Performance Measures page 12 – 3.3 Project Selection and Resource Allocation page 16 – 3.4 Performance Data Collection, Monitoring, and Reporting page 17 . 4.0 Plan Outreach page 19 – 4.1 Plan Outreach Requirements page 19 – 4.2 Texas Transportation Plan Outreach page 20 . 5.0 Plan Communication/Data Presentation page 20 – 5.1 Best Practices in Plan Communication/ Data Presentation page 20 – 5.2 Texas Transportation Plan Communication/ Data Presentation page 22 . 6.0 Recommended Plan Framework page 22 Exhibits . Exhibit 1: TxDOT Mission, Values, and Goals as defined in the 2013-2017 Strategic Plan . Exhibit 2: TxDOT Plans for Coordination with TTP (Source: 2035 SLRTP) . Exhibit 3: DRAFT TTP Goal and Objective “Building Blocks” . Exhibit 4: TTP Goal and Objective Development Process . Exhibit 5: U.S. DOT Guidance on MAP-21 Performance Rulemaking . Exhibit 6: TxDOT Performance Measures Recommended for National Use and AASHTO SCOPM Recommendations for National Performance Measures . Exhibit 7: Common State DOT Data Systems .
    [Show full text]
  • 2005 Annual Report
    Norfolk Southern Corporation Annual Report 2005 StrongStrong Legacy,Legacy, BrightBright FutureFuture System Map Norfolk Southern Railway and its Railroad Operating Subsidiaries NS Trackage/Haulage Rights Meridian Speedway Heartland Corridor Annual Report 2005 2 Norfolk Southern Corporation Description of Business Norfolk Southern Corporation is a Norfolk, Va.-based company that controls a major freight railroad, Norfolk Southern Railway Company. The railway operates ap- proximately 21,200 route miles in 22 east- ern states, the District of Columbia and On- tario, Canada, serves all major eastern ports and connects with rail partners in the West and Canada, linking customers to markets around the world. Norfolk Southern pro- vides comprehensive logistics services and offers the most extensive intermodal net- work in the East. Financial Highlights % INCREASE ($ in millions, except per share amounts) 2004 2005 (DECREASE) FINANCIAL RESULTS Railway operating revenues $ 7,312 $ 8,527 17 Income from railway operations $ 1,702 $ 2,117 24 Railway operating ratio 76.7% 75.2% (2) 1 2 Net Income $ 923 $ 1,281 39 Earnings per share 1 2 Basic $ 2.34 $ 3.17 35 1 2 Diluted $ 2.31 $ 3.11 35 FINANCIAL POSITION Total assets $ 24,750 $ 25,861 4 Total debt $ 7,525 $ 6,930 (8) Stockholders’ equity $ 7,990 $ 9,289 16 Debt to total capitalization ratio 48.5% 42.7% (12) Stockholders’ equity per share $ 19.95 $ 22.66 14 OTHER INFORMATION Year-end stock price $ 36.19 $ 44.83 24 Dividends per share $ 0.36 $ 0.48 33 Annual Report 2005 15.7 14.4 (8) Price/earnings ratio at year end 1 51,032 48,180 (6) Number of shareholders at year end Shares outstanding at year end 400,438,982 409,885,788 2 Number of employees at year end 28,986 30,433 5 1 Results in 2004 include a $53 million net gain from the Conrail corporate reorganization, which increased net income by $53 million, or 13 cents per diluted share.
    [Show full text]
  • 3.) MS State Rail Plan 2016
    THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................. ES-1 1 THE ROLE OF RAIL IN MISSISSIPPI ..................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE RAIL PLAN ......................................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 MISSISSIPPI’S GOALS FOR ITS MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ....................................................................... 1-1 1.3 THE ROLE OF RAIL IN MISSISSIPPI’S TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ................................................................................... 1-2 1.4 INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE OF MISSISSIPPI’S RAIL PROGRAM ...................................................................................... 1-3 1.4.1 Mississippi Department of Transportation .................................................................................................................................... 1-4 1.4.2 Mississippi Development Authority ............................................................................................................................................... 1-5 1.4.3 Southern Rail Commission ............................................................................................................................................................ 1-5 1.4.4 Public Authorities .........................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Travel Solution for Our Time 2006 Annual Report
    NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION The Travel Solution for Our Time 2006 Annual Report Community ~ Mobility ~ Environment THE TRAVEL SOLUTION FOR OUR TIME: COMMUNITY ~ MOBILITY ~ ENVIRONMENT Amtrak’s mission is to provide America with safe and reliable intercity rail passenger service in an economically sound manner that exceeds customer expectations. Amtrak Board of Directors (L. to R.): Donna McLean, FRA Administrator Joseph Boardman, Chairman David Laney, President and CEO Alex Kummant, R. Hunter Biden. Floyd Hall is not shown. Executive Committee: (top row, L. to R.) Vice President and Chief Risk Officer Jim McDon- nell, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary Eleanor Acheson, Vice President Govern- ment Affairs and Corporate Communications Joseph McHugh; (second row L. to R.) acting Chief Financial Officer Dale Stein, Vice President Procurement and Materials Man- agement Michael Rienzi, Vice President Labor Relations Joe Bress; (third row L. to R.) Vice President Strategic Partnerships and Business Development Anne Witt, Vice Presi- dent Human Resources Lorraine Green, Chief Information Officer Ed Trainor, acting Vice President Business Diversity Dawn Marcelle; (front row L. to R.) Chief Operating Officer William Crosbie, President and CEO Alex Kummant, Vice President Marketing and Prod- uct Development Emmett Fremaux. Vice President Planning and Analysis Roy Johanson is not shown. THE TRAVEL SOLUTION FOR OUR TIME: COMMUNITY ~ MOBILITY ~ ENVIRONMENT The Southwest Chief in Wagon Mound, N.M. Amtrak Annual Report 2006 3 THE TRAVEL SOLUTION FOR OUR TIME: COMMUNITY ~ MOBILITY ~ ENVIRONMENT A Letter from the President AS AMTRAK MARKED ITS 35TH YEAR of service in 2006, our performance contributed the most recent chapter of a story of an emerging and healthier Amtrak.
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland State Rail Plan
    Larry Hogan, Governor Boyd Rutherford, Lt. Governor Pete K. Rahn, Secretary of Transportation April 2015 www.camsys.com Maryland Statewide Rail Plan prepared for Maryland Department of Transportation prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 4800 Hampden Lane, Suite 800 Bethesda, MD 20814 date April 2015 Maryland Statewide Rail Plan Table of Contents 1.0 About the Plan ..................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Plan Development ...................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Plan Organization ....................................................................................... 1-3 1.3 Purpose of the Rail Plan ............................................................................. 1-3 1.4 Federal Compliance .................................................................................... 1-4 2.0 Maryland’s Rail History .................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Amtrak and Conrail ................................................................................... 2-3 2.2 MARC ........................................................................................................... 2-3 2.3 Short Lines ................................................................................................... 2-4 2.4 Summary ...................................................................................................... 2-5 3.0 Mission, Vision, and Goals ..............................................................................
    [Show full text]