DOCSLIB.ORG

2010 NEC Infrastructure Master Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2010 NEC Infrastructure Master Plan [THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] March 24, 2010 Thomas Carper Joseph H. Boardman Chairman of the Board President and Chief Executive Officer National Railroad Passenger Corporation National Railroad Passenger Corporation 60 Massachusetts Avenue, N.E. 60 Massachusetts Avenue, N.E. Washington, DC 20002 Washington, DC 20002 Dear Messrs. Carper and Boardman: As members of the Amtrak Northeast Corridor (NEC) Infrastructure Master Plan Policy Group, the twelve northeast states and the District of Columbia have worked cooperatively and collaboratively with Amtrak and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) to develop and review the Amtrak Northeast Corridor Railroad Infrastructure Master Plan (Master Plan). Started in 2007 and refined over three years, the Master Plan is a first. It is the first passenger rail infrastructure plan to incorporate a regional, corridor-wide perspective of the NEC Main Line and all its feeder lines. It is the first planning process to involve all the northeast states and the District of Columbia with Amtrak. It is the first to consider the plans and infrastructure needs of all the NEC users – intercity, commuter and freight. This foundational document identifies an initial baseline of infrastructure improve ments needed to maintain the current NEC system in a state of good repair; integrate intercity, commuter and freight service plans; and move the NEC forward to meet the expanded service, reliability, frequency, and trip time improvements that are envisioned by the northeast states and the District. Therefore, we are pleased to endorse the collaborative planning process and Amtrak’s Infrastructure Master Plan Final Report. The Master Plan is the first in a series of planning activities that must be undertaken if an expanded NEC – as part of an integrated, intermodal regional transportation system – is to support future economic growth and environmental and energy goals. Many of the service and financial assumptions, data and analyses that underpin this report precede the recent actions by the Congress and the Administration to revitalize the nation’s intercity passenger rail program. For example, the Passenger Rail Infrastructure and Investment Act of 2008 (PRIIA) establishes a new paradigm of state-led planning of intercity passenger rail corridors and authorizes significant funding for the development of these corridors. It also creates a Northeast Corridor Infrastructure and Operations Advisory Commission that is charged with developing comprehensive goals for the future development of the NEC as a transportation and economic corridor. Thanks to the infusion of funds for rail grants to states and Amtrak from the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009 (ARRA) and continuing yearly appropriations , passenger rail projects that were once a vision are now a real possibility. [THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] Thomas Carper -2- 3/24/10 Joseph Boardman The Master Plan process and report are an ongoing resource for the states, Amtrak, the FRA, and the NEC Advisory Commission, and we look forward to a continuing dialogue with Amtrak on updating this Master Plan as needed in the future. The report should be viewed as a foundational document that represents the improvements in operating flexibility and track capacity needed to support future enhanced, reliable and safe passenger rail service on the existing NEC system. As a longer term vision for the expansion of the NEC is developed, the collaborative process and this plan will serve as a prelude to the next phase of work. The Master Plan can be used now by the states, Amtrak, and the FRA to identify those specific projects which, covered by prior environmental analyses or other environmental assessments, can readily be determined as eligible for available High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail funding. Finally, the report can be used as the states continue to work collaboratively with Amtrak, the FRA and other key stakeholders to complete corridor-level service and related environmental planning required for the NEC to seek federal intercity passenger rail funding. Our states and the District thank the Master Plan Working Group for all of their efforts and look forward to continuing the collaborative efforts that resulted in this important plan, particularly as the NEC Advisory Commission is established and begins to develop more comprehensive policy goals and plans for the Northeast Corridor. Sincerely, Joseph F. Marie Carolann Wicks Gabe Klein Commissioner Secretary Director Connecticut DOT Delaware DOT District of Columbia DOT David A. Cole Beverley K. Swaim-Staley Jeffrey B. Mullan Commissioner Secretary Secretary Maine DOT Maryland DOT Massachusetts DOT George N. Campbell, Jr. James S. Simpson Stan Gee Commissioner Commissioner Acting Commissioner New Hampshire DOT New Jersey DOT New York State DOT Toby Fauver Michael P. Lewis David Dill Deputy Secretary for Local and Director Secretary Area Transportation Rhode Island DOT Vermont AOT Pennsylvania DOT Thelma D. Drake Director Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation [THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] The Northeast Corridor Infrastructure Master Plan May 2010 Prepared by the NEC Master Plan Working Group Including representatives of twelve states, the District of Columbia, Amtrak, the Federal Railroad Administration, eight commuter and three freight railroads operating on the Northeast Corridor [THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] Preface The Northeast Corridor (NEC) Infrastructure Master Plan is the result of a precedent‐setting region‐wide collaboration among 12 Northeast states and the District of Columbia, Amtrak, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), eight commuter and three freight railroads operating on the Northeast Corridor. This collaborative planning process is itself a significant achievement. It is the first time that the existing plans and infrastructure needs of all users of the NEC have been brought together in one document. Very few rail planning efforts have been as comprehensive or inclusive. The Master Plan identifies an initial baseline of infrastructure investment needed to maintain the current NEC system in a state of good repair, integrate intercity, commuter and freight service plans, and move the NEC forward to meet the expanded service, reliability, frequency, and trip‐time improvements that are envisioned by the Northeast states and the District. Initiated in 2007, before passage of the 2008 Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act (PRIIA), the Master Plan reflects existing goals and plans through 2030, including an expected 59% increase in rail ridership, a 41% increase in train movements, and the need for $52 billion in capital investment over 20 years. This will ensure reliable service, expand capacity on the Corridor for the benefit of all users, and reduce by up to one half‐hour intercity travel times between Boston and New York, and New York and Washington. All key stakeholders recognize that publication of this Plan is not the end of a process, but a beginning. The Master Plan is the first in a series of planning activities that must be undertaken if an expanded NEC – as part of an integrated, intermodal regional transportation system – is to support future economic growth and environmental and energy goals. The Master Plan process and this report will serve as an ongoing resource for the states, Amtrak, the FRA and the NEC Infrastructure and Operations Advisory Commission in the continuing dialogue that will define a longer term vision for the expansion of the NEC. As noted in the preceding letter of endorsement from the Northeast states, this report represents a “foundational” analysis upon which the future of the NEC will be defined and built. An enhanced NEC passenger rail system is essential to meet the region’s long‐ term mobility needs, stimulate economic growth and international competitiveness, enhance the livability of our communities, improve the environment and reduce dependence on foreign sources of energy. These are important goals that will help shape the future for residents of the Northeast – and the nation – for generations to come. [THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] Northeast Corridor Infrastructure Master Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary .................................................................................................................ES‐1 Part I 1. Regional Overview .............................................................................................................. 1 2. Existing Rail Services........................................................................................................... 5 3. State of Good Repair............................................................................................................ 8 4. Costs and Performance ..................................................................................................... 11 5. Goals for the Future........................................................................................................... 15 6. Future Service Plans .......................................................................................................... 17 7. Capacity Constraints to Reliability and Growth ........................................................... 28 8. Infrastructure Improvements – Costs and Benefits....................................................... 31 9. Moving Forward ................................................................................................................ 43
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Harrisburg Line Capacity Improvements Upgrade of Track 2 from Glen Interlocking to Thorn Interlocking
    HARRISBURG LINE CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTS UPGRADE OF TRACK 2 FROM GLEN INTERLOCKING TO THORN INTERLOCKING FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION FEDERAL-STATE PARTNERSHIP FOR STATE OF GOOD REPAIR PROGRAM GRANT APPLICATION Lead Applicant: Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) Joint Applicant: Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) FEDERAL FUNDING REQUESTED: $8,337,500 (50%) PROPOSED NON-FEDERAL MATCH: $8,337,500 (50%) TOTAL PROJECT COST: $16,675,000 PROJECT LOCATION: Caln Township, Downingtown Borough, East Caln Township, West Whiteland Township, & East Whiteland Township in Chester County, Pennsylvania - 6th Congressional District No Federal Grant Application Previously Submitted for this Project Table of Contents I. Project Summary .................................................................................................................................. 1 II. Project Funding ..................................................................................................................................... 2 III. Applicant Eligibility ............................................................................................................................... 3 IV. NEC Project Eligibility ........................................................................................................................... 3 V. Detailed Project Description ................................................................................................................ 5 VI. Project Location .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Atlantic City Line Master File
    Purchasing Tickets Ticket Prices know before you go Station location and parking information can be found at njtransit.com tickets your way how much depends on how frequently & how far Accessible Station Bus Route Community Shuttle Travel Information Before starting your trip, Ticket Vending Machines are available at all stations. visit njtransit.com for updated service information LINE Weekend, Holiday and access to DepartureVision which provides your train on-board trains track and status. You can also sign up for free My Transit Train personnel can accept cash avoid Atlantic City Philadelphia and Special Service alerts to receive up-to-the-moment delay information only (no bills over $20). All tickets the $5 on your cell phone or web-enabled mobile device, or purchased on-board trains (except one-way one-way weekly monthly one-way one-way weekly monthly those purchased by senior citizens surcharge STATIONS reduced reduced Philadelphia Information via email. To learn about other methods we use to International PHILADELPHIA communicate with you, visit njtransit.com/InTheKnow. and passengers with disabilities) are buy before Atlantic City … … … … $10.75 4.90 94.50 310.00 30TH STREET STATION subject to an additional $5 charge. Airport you board Absecon $1.50 $0.75 $13.50 $44.00 10.25 4.65 86.00 282.00 414, 417, 555 Please note the following: Personal Items Keep aisleways clear of Please buy your ticket(s) before tic City ANTIC CITY obstructions at all times. Store larger items in boarding the train to save $5. There is Egg Harbor City 3.50 1.60 30.00 97.00 10.25 4.65 86.00 282.00 L the overhead racks or under the seats.
    [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]
  • Geospatial Analysis: Commuters Access to Transportation Options
    Advocacy Sustainability Partnerships Fort Washington Office Park Transportation Demand Management Plan Geospatial Analysis: Commuters Access to Transportation Options Prepared by GVF GVF July 2017 Contents Executive Summary and Key Findings ........................................................................................................... 2 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................. 6 Sources ...................................................................................................................................................... 6 ArcMap Geocoding and Data Analysis .................................................................................................. 6 Travel Times Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 7 Data Collection .......................................................................................................................................... 7 1. Employee Commuter Survey Results ................................................................................................ 7 2. Office Park Companies Outreach Results ......................................................................................... 7 3. Office Park
    [Show full text]
  • Project Title Project Sponsor FFY 2009 Costs Fed. FFY 2009 DVRPC
    01/26/2010 14:50 FFY 2009 DVRPC TIP Page 1 of 5 Rpt# TIP206 Public Transit FFY 2009 Costs FFY 2010 Costs FFY 2011 Costs FFY 2012 Costs Total Project Project Title Sponsor Fed. St. Federal State Local Total Fed. St. Federal State Local Total Fed. St. Federal State Local Total Fed. St Federal State Local Total 86712 Bucks County Transport Bucks 5310 435,200 108,800 544,000 544,000 County 86708 Child&Adult Disability Child&Adult 5310 96,000 24,000 120,000 120,000 disability and 86701 Comm Transit of Del Co Community 5310 144,000 36,000 180,000 180,000 Transit of 86713 County of Chester County of 5310 422,400 105,600 528,000 528,000 Chester 80951 Cruise Terminal Parking DRPA 5309 2,280,000 570,000 2,850,000 2,850,000 84470 Penn's Landing Ferry Syst DRPA 5309 5,600,000 1,400,000 7,000,000 7,000,000 88087 PATCO Station Improvement DRPA 5309 760,000 190,000 950,000 950,000 82860 Section 5310 Line Item DVRPC 5310 2,290,880 572,720 2,863,600 2,863,600 MPO Section 86702 Elwyn Elwyn 5310 72,000 18,000 90,000 90,000 86707 Human Services Inc. Human 5310 209,600 52,400 262,000 262,000 Services Inc. 86704 Paul Run Paul Run 5310 53,600 13,400 67,000 67,000 84473 Phila Zoo Intermodal Impr PHILA 5309 1,003,200 250,800 1,254,000 1,254,000 84665 Phila. Unemployment Proj PHILA 5309 CB 1,487,000 250,000 36,000 1,773,000 1,773,000 84665 Phila.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Transportation Highlights
    PENNSYLVANIA Public Transportation Public Transportation Highlights November 2013 Pennsylvania Public Transportation Ridership 500 10 434,248,701 440,208,599 422,618,782 8,144,628 8,162,647 8,047,117 400 8 300 6 200 4 passengers (in millions) passengers (in millions) 100 2 0 0 FY 2009-10 FY 2010-11 FY 2011-12 FY 2009-10 FY 2010-11 FY 2011-12 Number of Fixed Route Trips by Year Number of Shared-Ride Trips by Year 1,500 1,392,561 1,337,543 1,277,075 1,200 900 600 passengers (in thousands) 300 0 FY 2009-10 FY 2010-11 FY 2011-12 Number of Keystone Corridor Trips by Year 1 Public Transportation Highlights November 2013 Improving Public Transportation Performance Seven transit agency performance reviews completed between May 2012 and April 2013 VCTO DuFAST Mid County BCTA Performance reviews mandated by AMTRAN CamTran Act 44 of 2007 PART Performance reviews highlight issues and result in action plans with concrete goals and objectives to improve performance. Conduct Performance Review (every ve years) Transit System Identify DuFast performance Implements Opportunities Action Plan and for Improvement review completed in April Reports Quarterly ous Impro and 2013 (DuBois, Falls Creek, to Board and u ve Best Practices tin m PennDOT n e Sandy Township Joint o n 16 performance C t reviews completed Transportation Authority) PennDOT Oers since 2010 T e Technical r l a Establish c n Assistance to y 5-Year s C Implement Plan it Performance P w e ie Targets rfo ev rmance R Board and PennDOT Develop Reports are available Approve Action Plan at www.dot.state.pa.us Action Plan in the “Information and Reports” section of the Public Transportation 2 page.
    [Show full text]
  • Amtrak Station Development
    REAL ESTATE TRANSACTION ADVISORY SERVICES • Improving Performance and Value of Amtrak-owned Assets AMTRAK STATION DEVELOPMENT New York Penn Station| Moynihan Train Hall| Philadelphia 30th Street Station Baltimore Penn Station| Washington Union Station | Chicago Union Station • Pre-Proposal WebEx | August 5, 2016 Rina Cutler –1 Sr. Director, Major Station Planning and Development AASHTO Conference| September 11, 2018 SUSTAINABLE FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE 1 AMTRAK MAJOR STATIONS Amtrak is actively improving & redeveloping five stations: Chicago Union Station, NY Penn Station, Baltimore Penn Station, Washington Union Station and 30th Street Station in Philadelphia. NEW YORK PENN STATION WASHINGTON UNION STATION #1 busiest Amtrak Station #2 busiest Amtrak Station NEW YORK PENN STATION ● 10.3 million passengers ● 5.1 million passengers PHILADELPHIA 30TH ● $1 billion ticket revenue ● $576 million ticket revenue CHICAGO BALTIMORE PENN STATION STREET STATION UNION STATION ● 1,055,000 SF of building area ● 1,268,000 SF of building area WASHINGTON UNION STATION ● 31.0 acres of land PHILADELPHIA 30TH STREET STATION CHICAGO UNION STATION BALTIMORE PENN STATION #3 busiest Amtrak Station #4 busiest Amtrak Station #8 busiest Amtrak Station ● 4.3 million passengers ● 3.4 million passengers ● 1.0 million passengers ● $306 million revenue ● $205 million ticket revenue ● $95 million ticket revenue ● 1,140,200 SF of building area ● 1,329,000 SF of building area ● 91,000 SF of building area FY 2017 Ridership and Ridership Revenue 2 MAJOR STATION PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
    [Show full text]
  • History and Aesthetics in Suspension Bridges
    History and Aesthetics in Suspension Bridges 1 6-01 john a roebling_150dpi.jpg Today we trace the evolution of steel bridge design from its first American innovator, JA Roebling up through 1930’s New York In the 30’s in New York, despite hard economic times, many huge structures were erected 2 6-02 empire state building_150dpi.jpg The Empire State Building, tallest in the world About which more later 3 6-03 george washington bridge_150dpi.jpg The GW Bridge, longest suspension span by a factor of two, and 4 6-04 bayonne bridge_150dpi.jpg The Bayonne Bridge, longest arch span in the world, barely surpassing the Sydney Harbor Bridge 5 6-05 othmar ammann_150dpi.jpg These last two were both designed by Othmar H. Ammann, the greatest bridge artist to use steel as his material Ammann was born in Bern, graduated 1902 from ETH and 1904 to USA. Worked from 1912-23 for Lindenthal He would study under Karl Ritter protégé of Carl Cullmann The Swiss were uniquely able to mediate the scientific rigor of the germans with the design elegance of the French 6 6-06 hell gate and triborough bridges_150dpi.jpg The story of Ammann and the GWB begins with Gustav Lindenthal, the dean of American bridge engineers Ammann had cut his teeth as design assistant to Gustav Lindenthal at the Hellgate Bridge The last great bridge of the railroad bridges. From here on the great bridges would carry road traffic rather than trains Here we see two bridges, Hellgate and Triborough, on which Ammann would work, but not express his aesthetic vision 7 6-08 gustav lindenthal_150dpi.jpg Hellgate designer Lindnethal Born in Brunn in Austria, now Brno in the Czech Republic Designed a bridge at Pittsburgh, a lenticular truss to replace Roebling’s Smithfield St.
    [Show full text]
  • Contract Summary
    I-95 NEW HAVEN HARBOR CROSSING CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM New Haven, East Haven, Branford, CT TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT PLAN November 2012 VERSION 3.0 Prepared For: Connecticut Department of Transportation 2800 Berlin Turnpike Newington, Connecticut 06131-7546 Submitted by: Parsons Brinckerhoff 148 Eastern Boulevard, Suite 200 Glastonbury, Connecticut 06033 I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing Corridor Transportation Management Plan Improvement Program Version 3.0 Branford, East Haven, New Haven November 2012 Table of Contents Section Page • Letter of Endorsement 3 • Preface 4 • TMP Distribution 6 • Revision History / Change Management Process 10 • List of Acronyms 13 • Executive Summary 14 • TMP Roles and Responsibilities 17 • Program Project Descriptions 21 • Existing and Future Conditions 27 • Work Zone Impact Assessment 30 • Work Zone Impacts Management Strategies 34 − Temporary Traffic Control 34 − Transportation Operations 38 − Public Information / Public Outreach 40 • Monitoring 45 • Implementation Costs 51 • Appendix 1 I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing Corridor Transportation Management Plan Improvement Program Version 3.0 Branford, East Haven, New Haven November 2012 Reference Documents Note: PDF files of the Reference Documents are included on the attached disk. • Accident Reports & Tables • Contract Plans and Special Provisions (See the Appendix for Lists) − Contract B − Contract E − Reconstruction of I-95 NB in the Long Wharf Area − Reconstruction of Waterfront Street − Route 34 East Downtown Crossing − Reconstruction of I-95 Over
    [Show full text]
  • January 20, 2020 Volume 40 Number 1
    JANUARY 20, 2020 ■■■■■■■■■■■ VOLUME 40 ■■■■■■■■■■ NUMBER 1 13 The Semaphore 17 David N. Clinton, Editor-in-Chief CONTRIBUTING EDITORS Southeastern Massachusetts…………………. Paul Cutler, Jr. “The Operator”………………………………… Paul Cutler III Boston Globe & Wall Street Journal Reporters Paul Bonanno, Jack Foley Western Massachusetts………………………. Ron Clough 24 Rhode Island News…………………………… Tony Donatelli “The Chief’s Corner”……………………… . Fred Lockhart Mid-Atlantic News……………………………. Doug Buchanan PRODUCTION STAFF Publication…………….………………… …. … Al Taylor Al Munn Jim Ferris Bryan Miller Web Page …………………..……………….… Savery Moore Club Photographer………………………….…. Joe Dumas Guest Contributors………………………………Peter Palica, Kevin Linagen The Semaphore is the monthly (except July) newsletter of the South Shore Model Railway Club & Museum (SSMRC) and any opinions found herein are those of the authors thereof and of the Editors and do not necessarily reflect any policies of this organization. The SSMRC, as a non-profit organization, does not endorse any position. Your comments are welcome! Please address all correspondence regarding this publication to: The Semaphore, 11 Hancock Rd., Hingham, MA 02043. ©2019 E-mail: [email protected] Club phone: 781-740-2000. Web page: www.ssmrc.org VOLUME 40 ■■■■■ NUMBER 1 ■■■■■ JANUARY 2020 CLUB OFFICERS President………………….Jack Foley Vice-President…….. …..Dan Peterson Treasurer………………....Will Baker BILL OF LADING Secretary……………….....Dave Clinton Chief’s Corner...... ……. .. .3 Chief Engineer……….. .Fred Lockhart Directors……………… ...Bill Garvey (’20) Contests ............... ……..….3 ……………………….. .Bryan Miller (‘20) Clinic……………….…...…3 ……………………… ….Roger St. Peter (’21) …………………………...Gary Mangelinkx (‘21) Editor’s Notes. …...........…..8 Form 19 Calendar………….3 Members .............. …….......8 Memories ............. ………...3 Potpourri .............. ..…..…...5 ON THE COVER: New Haven I-5 #1408 pulling the westbound “Yankee Clipper” passes the Running Extra ...... .….….…8 Sharon, MA station.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Transportation Fact Book
    PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FACT BOOK 54th Edition February 2003 published by American Public Transportation Association Celia G. Kupersmith, Chair George F. Dixon, III, First Vice Chair Richard A. White, Secretary-Treasurer Peter M. Cipolla, Immediate Past Chair Vice Chairs Karen Antion Nathaniel P. Ford, Sr. Howard Silver Richard J. Bacigalupo Carol L. Ketcherside William L. Volk Ronald L. Barnes William D. Lochte Linda S. Watson Peter A. Cannito Lawrence G. Reuter Alan C. Wulkan Gordon Diamond Michael J. Scanlon President William W. Millar Chief of Staff Karol J. Popkin Vice Presidents Pamela L. Boswell Anthony M. Kouneski Daniel Duff Rosemary Sheridan C. Samuel Kerns produced by Member Services Department Information Services Group Larry H. Pham, Ph.D. Chief Economist and Director - Information Services American Public Transportation Association 1666 K Street, N.W., Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20006 TELEPHONE: (202) 496-4800 FAX: (202) 496-4326 EMAIL: [email protected] WEB SITE: www.apta.com PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FACT BOOK February 2003 International Standard Serial Number: ISSN 0149-3132 About APTA APTA is a nonprofit international association of over 1,500 public and private member organizations including transit systems and commuter rail operators; planning, design, construction and finance firms; product and service providers; academic institutions, transit associations and state departments of transportation. APTA members serve the public interest by providing safe, efficient and economical transit services and products. Over ninety percent of persons using public transportation in the United States and Canada are served by APTA members. APTA Vision Statement Be the leading force in advancing public transportation. APTA Mission Statement APTA serves and leads its diverse membership through advocacy, innovation, and information sharing to strengthen and expand public transportation.
    [Show full text]
  • NEC One-Year Implementation Plan: FY17 Contents
    Northeast Corridor One-Year Implementation Plan Fiscal Year 2017 September 2016 Congress established the Northeast Corridor Commission to develop coordinated strategies for improving the Northeast’s core rail network in recognition of the inherent challenges of planning, financing, and implementing major infrastructure improvements that cross multiple jurisdictions. The expectation is that by coming together to take collective responsibility for the NEC, these disparate stakeholders will achieve a level of success that far exceeds the potential reach of any individual organization. The Commission is governed by a board comprised of one member from each of the NEC states (Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland) and the District of Columbia; four members from Amtrak; and five members from the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). The Commission also includes non-voting representatives from four freight railroads, states with connecting corridors and several commuter operators in the Region. 2| NEC One-Year Implementation Plan: FY17 Contents Introduction 6 Funding Summary 8 Baseline Capital Charge Program 10 1 - Boston South Station 12 16 - Shore to Girard 42 2 - Boston to Providence 14 17 - Girard to Philadelphia 30th Street 44 3 - Providence to Wickford Junction 16 18 - Philadelphia 30th Street - Arsenal 46 4 - Wickford Junction to New London 18 19 - Arsenal to Marcus Hook 48 5 - New London to New Haven 20 20 - Marcus Hook to Bacon 50 6 - New Haven to State Line 22 21 - Bacon to Perryville 52 7 - State Line to New Rochelle 24 22 - Perryville to WAS 54 8 - New Rochelle to Harold Interlocking 26 23 - Washington Union Terminal 56 9 - Harold Interlocking to F Interlocking 28 24 - WAS to CP Virginia 58 10 - F Interlocking to PSNY 30 25 - Springfield to New Haven 60 11 - Penn Terminal 32 27 - Spuyten Duyvil to PSNY* 62 12 - PSNY to Trenton 34 28 - 30th St.
    [Show full text]