DOCSLIB.ORG

SWUTC/10/169116-1 Measuring the Benefits of Intercity Passenger Rail: a Study of the Heartland Flyer Corridor April 2010 TTI

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
SWUTC/10/169116-1 Measuring the Benefits of Intercity Passenger Rail: a Study of the Heartland Flyer Corridor April 2010 TTI Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. SWUTC/10/169116-1 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Measuring the Benefits of Intercity Passenger Rail: April 2010 A Study of the Heartland Flyer Corridor 6. Performing Organization Code TTI 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Benjamin R. Sperry and Curtis A. Morgan Report 169116-1 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System 11. Contract or Grant No. College Station, Texas 77843-3135 10727 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Southwest Region University Transportation Center Research Report: Texas Transportation Institute September 2008-April 2010 Texas A&M University System 14. Sponsoring Agency Code College Station, TX 77843-3135 15. Supplementary Notes Supported by general revenues from the State of Texas. 16. Abstract In recent years, the policy and regulatory environment for intercity passenger rail in the United States has shifted dramatically, sparking a renewed interest in intercity passenger rail among policymakers, planners, and the general public. As the nation expands its passenger rail network, a better understanding of the mobility provided by short- to medium-distance corridors is desired. This study examined the Heartland Flyer, a 206-mile intercity passenger rail route between Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and Fort Worth, Texas. Researchers analyzed responses to an on-board survey, distributed to passengers in April and July of 2009, to identify who was using the service and how the service impacted regional mobility. The key measure used to identify the mobility impacts was the passengers’ self-reported alternatives for travel if the Heartland Flyer were discontinued. This study also identifies the economic impact of the rail service, measured through total spending on certain items (and the associated sales tax revenue). The findings of this study can be used in a variety of potential applications for all levels of passenger rail planning, including statewide rail planning, corridor-specific studies, and station-area planning, both in the southwestern United States and in other regions. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement Intercity Passenger Rail, High-Speed Passenger Rail, No restrictions. This document is available to Amtrak, Heartland Flyer, On-Board Surveys, the public through NTIS: Passenger Rail Planning, PRIIA, State-Supported National Technical Information Service Passenger Rail, Intercity Mobility Springfield, Virginia 22161 http://www.ntis.gov 19. Security Classif.(of this report) 20. Security Classif.(of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 180 Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized. Measuring the Benefits of Intercity Passenger Rail: A Study of the Heartland Flyer Corridor by: Benjamin R. Sperry Graduate Assistant Researcher Texas Transportation Institute and Curtis A. Morgan Program Manager Texas Transportation Institute Prepared for: Southwest Region University Transportation Center Multimodal Freight Transportation Programs Texas Transportation Institute Texas A&M University System College Station, TX 77843-3135 April 2010 ABSTRACT In recent years, the policy and regulatory environment for intercity passenger rail in the United States has shifted dramatically, sparking a renewed interest in intercity passenger rail among policymakers, planners, and the general public. As the nation expands its passenger rail network, a better understanding of the mobility provided by short- to medium-distance corridors is desired. This study examined the Heartland Flyer, a 206-mile intercity passenger rail route between Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and Fort Worth, Texas. Researchers analyzed responses to an on-board survey, distributed to passengers in April and July of 2009, to identify who was using the service and how the service impacted regional mobility. The key measure used to identify the mobility impacts was the passengers’ self-reported alternatives for travel if the Heartland Flyer were discontinued. This study also identifies the economic impact of the rail service, measured through total spending on certain items (and the associated sales tax revenue). The findings of this study can be used in a variety of potential applications for all levels of passenger rail planning, including statewide rail planning, corridor-specific studies, and station- area planning, both in the southwestern United States and in other regions. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Figures --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- viii List of Tables ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- viii Executive Summary ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- xi Disclaimer ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ xxvii Acknowledgements -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- xxix Chapter 1: Introduction ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 Research Overview --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Report Organization -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 Chapter 2: Literature Review ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7 Overview of Intercity Passenger Rail in the United States ----------------------------------------- 7 Focus on State-Supported Corridors ----------------------------------------------------------------- 12 Intercity Passenger Rail Planning -------------------------------------------------------------------- 24 Survey Design ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 33 Chapter 3: Description of Heartland Flyer Route--------------------------------------------------- 43 General Overview of Heartland Flyer Service ----------------------------------------------------- 43 Chronology of Passenger Rail Service in Corridor ------------------------------------------------ 49 Heartland Flyer Operating Details ------------------------------------------------------------------- 54 Heartland Flyer Service Data ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 63 Chapter 4: Data Collection ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 71 Survey Development ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 71 Data Collection ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 75 Quality Control ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 81 Discussion and Lessons Learned --------------------------------------------------------------------- 89 Chapter 5: Data Analysis -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 91 Statistical Considerations ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 91 Travel Characteristics ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 94 Passenger Characteristics ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 103 Mobility Impacts --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 115 Economic Impacts ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 122 Summary of Analysis Findings ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 126 Chapter 6: Conclusions ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 129 Summary of Findings --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 129 Potential Applications --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 131 Future Research ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 134 References -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 137 Appendix A: Project Photos ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 143 Appendix B: On-Board Survey Form ---------------------------------------------------------------- 147 Appendix C: IRB Documentation --------------------------------------------------------------------- 149 vii LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 3-1: Heartland Flyer Route ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 44 Figure 3-2: Heartland Flyer Timetable Schedule ------------------------------------------------------ 46 Figure 3-3: Typical Heartland Flyer Consist ----------------------------------------------------------- 56 Figure 3-4: Typical P42DC Locomotive Used on Heartland Flyer --------------------------------- 57 Figure 3-5: Typical NPCU Used on Heartland Flyer ------------------------------------------------- 57 Figure 3-6: Coach Cars Used on Heartland Flyer ----------------------------------------------------- 59 Figure 3-7: Heartland Flyer Monthly Ridership Variation against Average, FFY 2000-2009 -- 64 Figure 3-8: Heartland Flyer Daily Ridership Variation, CY 2008 ---------------------------------- 65 Figure 3-9:
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 0.2 Executive Summary
    2010 Montana State Rail Plan Executive Summary The 2010 Montana State Rail Plan describes historical and forecasted freight trends, provides operating and system characteristics of the State’s freight rail system, and summarizes ongoing efforts to expand and secure funding for addi- tional passenger rail service through the State. The Plan also describes the impact of grain facility consolidation; identifies potential rail funding programs to acquire, improve, establish, or rehabilitate intermodal rail equipment or facili- ties; and lists several other ongoing issues affecting rail service in Montana, such as rail competition and growing freight volumes. The following sections sum- marize the key topics in each chapter of the 2010 Montana State Rail Plan. FREIGHT TRENDS As consumer demand for goods has increased over the past several decades, freight service demand has grown along with it (Figure ES.1). In 2005, over 4.5 trillion ton-miles of freight were shipped in the United States – about 15,300 ton- miles per capita. Rail transportation, the fastest growing among the freight modes, represented the largest share (38 percent) of the freight ton-miles shipped in the United States. National increases in freight volume between 2002 and 2035 are generally balanced among modes, and increases in volume will be strongest in intermodal and truck movements. In Montana, growth in freight volume and value is concentrated in truck and intermodal movements, as rail shipments of coal and agricultural products are not expected to expand dramatically in vol- ume or value. This section of the report has extensive data on the modal shares of freight in Montana.
    [Show full text]
  • Just One Month of Amtrak Actions
    Volume 1 Issue 5 May 2018 JUST ONE MONTH OF AMTRAK ACTIONS • March 20- Effective March 20, Amtrak cancellation fees increased dramatically. Amtrak also cut back year-round discounts, eliminated the former 10 percent discounts for AAA and AARP members, and cut the senior discount from 15 percent to 10 percent. • March 26 – Amtrak discontinued discounts for military Veterans. The "Veterans Advantage" discount on Amtrak tickets for travel and on weekend Acela service was ended after 17 years. The decision to eliminate the program was part of Amtrak's decision to end its involvement with private company membership clubs. • March 28 - Amtrak issued a notice to employees: “Generally, Amtrak will no longer operate charter services or special trains.” • March 29 - Amtrak personnel began denying moves by private cars located on route midpoints with less than 30 minutes dwell time. This limits the locations where private cars can be added or removed from trains. • April 18 – Amtrak issued formal restrictions on private cars which contains a list of Amtrak- served locations eligible for adding or removing Private Cars from designated Amtrak trains, subject to operating conditions at the time of the requested movement. The policy also limits maintenance performed by Amtrak on Private Cars to FRA-required repairs of safety appliances, • April 18 - Rates were increased 12.4% on all services to private cars despite a long standing rate addendum agreement “The rates in this Addendum will be adjusted annually based on the AAR Quarterly Index of Charge-Out Prices and Wage Rates (Table No. C), using the 4th Quarter United States, “Materials prices, wage rates and supplements combined (excl.
    [Show full text]
  • Project Planning Documentation
    Project Planning Documentation Overview of Project Project funding will be used to complete necessary preliminary engineering and NEPA for a new 250 mile high-speed core express service between Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston. Based on the preliminary planning summarized in this document, the Dallas-Fort Worth to Houston route could utilize one of three routes analyzed, consisting of a BNSF route through Teague, a UPRR route through College Station, or a new green field route that parallels I-45. Additionally, all three of the routes include segments of the UPRR Terminal and West Belt Subdivisions in order to connect to the existing passenger rail station in downtown Houston and a small portion of the UPRR Dallas Subdivision to connect to the existing passenger rail station (Union Station) in Dallas. Purpose and Need The purpose of the Dallas/Fort Worth to Houston core express service preliminary engineering and NEPA documentation is to prepare the project for the next stage of final design and construction. The Dallas/Fort Worth to Houston corridor has been included in the Texas Rail Plan as well as a research study performed by the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI), and the America 2050 report as a key corridor with need for high speed rail service. Texas Rail Plan TxDOT completed and published the Texas Rail Plan in November 2010, which included a short term and long term program for passenger rail. The Dallas to Houston corridor was included in the short term program for preliminary planning and in the long term program for further development of the project.
    [Show full text]
  • North Coast Limited BRASS CAR SIDES
    R O U T E O F T H E Vista-Dome North Coast Limited ek BRASS CAR SIDES Passenger Car Parts for the Streamliners HO North Coast Limited Budd Dining Cars (NP 459-463, CB&Q 458) #173-29 for Con-Cor Conversion, #173-89 for Walthers Conversion Six full dining cars were delivered by Budd in 1957-58 for the Vista-Dome North Coast Limited. They were the last full diners built before the advent of Amtrak. They displaced the Pullman-Standard dining cars NP 450-455 to service on the Mainstreeter. The Budd diners operated between Chicago and Seattle until the end of BN service in 1971. Dining cars were cycled in and out of eastbound No. 26 at St. Paul Union Depot and were serviced at the nearby NP Commissary. Five of the six cars were purchased by Amtrak in 1971 and operated in the North Coast Hiawatha, and later in the "Heritage Fleet", particularly on the trains between Chicago and New York and Washington. A typical summer consist for the North Coast Limited of the late 1950's and 1960's is listed below. [Side sets in brackets available from BRASS CAR SIDES or other manufacturers.] NP 400-411 Water-baggage (Chicago-Seattle) [173-56] NP 425-430 Mail-dorm (Chicago-Seattle) [173-50] NP 325-336 24-8 Budd Slumbercoach (Chicago-Seattle) [Walthers or Con-Cor] SP&S 559 46-Seat Vista-Dome coach (Chicago-Portland) [173-20] NP 588-599 56-Seat leg-rest coach (Chicago-Portland) [173-4] NP 549-556 46-Seat Vista-Dome coach (Chicago-Seattle) [173-20] NP 588-599 56-Seat leg-rest coach (Chicago-Seattle) [173-4] NP 500-517 56-Seat coach (extra cars as needed from
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Eagle® Heartland Flyer®
    2009 ® 26, TEXAS EAGLE OCTOBER And HEARTLAND FLYER® Effective SM journey. the Enjoy TEXAS EAGLE® serving CHICAGO - ST. LOUIS - LITTLE ROCK DALLAS - FORT WORTH - SAN ANTONIO 1-800-USA-RAIL LOS ANGELES Call And intermediate stations HEARTLAND FLYER® serving OKLAHOMA CITY - FORT WORTH And intermediate stations AMTRAK.COM Visit NRPC Form P21–200M–10/26/09 Stock #02-3670 TEXAS EAGLE HEARTLAND FLYER Chicago • St. Louis • Little Rock • Dallas • Oklahoma City • Fort Worth Fort Worth • San Antonio • Los Angeles 821 ᮤ Train Number ᮣ 822 21/421 ᮤ Train Number ᮣ 22/422 Daily ᮤ Days of Operation ᮣ Daily ᮤ ᮣ As indicated ᮤ ᮣ As indicated ® y On Board Service ® y in column Days of Operation in column ReadDown Mile ᮢ Symbol ᮡ Read Up ᮤ ᮣ ® s r On Board Service ® s r 8 25A 0 Dp Oklahoma City, OK (CT) 0h Ar 9 39P Read Down Mile ᮢ Symbol ᮡ Read Up b Tulsa, Kansas City—see back 0h 1 45P Daily 0 Dp Chicago, IL–Union (CT) 8s Ar 1 52P Daily 8 49A 20 Norman, OK 8 55P Hq 9 06A 35 Purcell, OK 0h 8 38P R 2 40P Daily 37 Joliet, IL 8H D12 56P Daily 9 31A 57 Pauls Valley, OK 0h 8 12P 3 27P Daily 92 Pontiac, IL 0H 11 39A Daily 10 23A 102 Ardmore, OK 0h 7 23P 4 04P Daily 124 Bloomington-Normal, IL 8s 11 08A Daily 11 05A 141 Gainesville, TX 0h 6 42P b Davenport, Hq 12 39P 206 Ar Fort Worth, TX (CT) 8hq Dp 5 25P Indianapolis—see back 4 37P Daily 156 Lincoln, IL 0H 10 25A Daily 5 14P Daily 185 Springfield, IL &¶8s 9 55A Daily Service on the Heartland Flyer® hq ® Coaches: Reservations required.
    [Show full text]
  • From Heimburger House America'shh Greatest Circus Train Garratt Locomotives by Bruce C
    Heimburger House Publishing Company 2014 A Message from the Publisher Contents New Books ......................................................3 Favorite Heimburger House Titles .....................4 Dear Friends, “With a book in my hand, I feel as though I am Cookbooks .....................................................7 holding something special,” I heard someone say the other day. Construction Equipment..............................7, 31 At Heimburger House we feel the same way: books are great and have a special feel to them, they’re easy to hold in your Model Railroading .....................................7, 31 hand, you can quickly turn back to a page for reference, and the size of a book makes it spectacular for viewing photography and illustrations. Let’s face it, books have a lot going for them Railfan Titles ...................................................8 that Kindles do not. - You can count on Heimburger House to provide the finest Children’s Railroad Books ..............................28 books available on your favorite railroad transportation sub jects. And we’ve just released America’s Greatest Circus Regional History ...........................................31 Train and Garratt Locomotives, a 1925 reprint of the Garratt catalog. Bruce Nelson has gathered detailed information and photographs for years for his new circus book, and the Garratt Model Magazines ............................................32 catalog depicts what this United Kingdom firm once offered in their line-up of “stretch-limo” locomotives. Also, our children’s railroad book line continues to grow, and has become very, very popular: it’s a way to get young children involved with trains! Sincerely, Don Heimburger Publisher HH Heimburger House Publishing Company • Phone: (708) 366-1973 • Fax: (708) 366-1973 • E-mail: [email protected] • Mail: 7236 W. Madison St., Forest Park, Illinois 60130 USA See our entire book selection at www.heimburgerhouse.com New Books From Heimburger House America'sHH Greatest Circus Train Garratt Locomotives By Bruce C.
    [Show full text]
  • City Council Agenda Packet
    NOTICE OF MEETING OF THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY OF BURNET Notice is hereby given that a Regular Meeting will be held by the governing body of the City of Burnet on the 13th day of April, 2021 at 6:00 p.m. in the Burnet Community Center, 401 E. Jackson Street, Burnet, Tx. In order to advance the public health goal of limiting face-to-face meetings (also called “social distancing”) and to slow the spread of the Coronavirus (COVID-19), a Declaration of a Public Health Emergency was executed by Mayor Bromley on March 19, 2020. The Burnet Community Center will be open for public attendance; however, masks will be required, hand sanitizer will be provided, temperatures will be taken upon entry and seating will adhere to social distancing guidelines. This notice is posted pursuant to the Texas Government Code, Chapter §551-Open Meetings. The following subjects will be discussed, to-wit: CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: INVOCATION: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: PLEDGE TO TEXAS FLAG: 1. REPORTS/SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS: 1.1) Addendum to the City Council Agenda: Department and Committee Reports/Briefings: The City Council may or may not receive a briefing dependent upon activity or change in status regarding the matter. The listing is provided to give notice to the public that a briefing to the Council on any or all subjects may occur. 1.2) Annual Audit Report: Jaynes, Reitmeier, Boyd & Therrell, P. C.: P. Langford a. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report b. Report on Internal Controls 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS: (All of the following items on the Consent Agenda are considered to be self-explanatory by the Council and will be enacted with one motion.
    [Show full text]
  • Union Depot Tower Interlocking Plant
    Union Depot Tower Union Depot Tower (U.D. Tower) was completed in 1914 as part of a municipal project to improve rail transportation through Joliet, which included track elevation of all four railroad lines that went through downtown Joliet and the construction of a new passenger station to consolidate the four existing passenger stations into one. A result of this overall project was the above-grade intersection of 4 north-south lines with 4 east-west lines. The crossing of these rail lines required sixteen track diamonds. A diamond is a fixed intersection between two tracks. The purpose of UD Tower was to ensure and coordinate the safe and timely movement of trains through this critical intersection of east-west and north-south rail travel. UD Tower housed the mechanisms for controlling the various rail switches at the intersection, also known as an interlocking plant. Interlocking Plant Interlocking plants consisted of the signaling appliances and tracks at the intersections of major rail lines that required a method of control to prevent collisions and provide for the efficient movement of trains. Most interlocking plants had elevated structures that housed mechanisms for controlling the various rail switches at the intersection. Union Depot Tower is such an elevated structure. Source: Museum of the American Railroad Frisco Texas CSX Train 1513 moves east through the interlocking. July 25, 1997. Photo courtesy of Tim Frey Ownership of Union Depot Tower Upon the completion of Union Depot Tower in 1914, U.D. Tower was owned and operated by the four rail companies with lines that came through downtown Joliet.
    [Show full text]
  • January 22, 2021 Board Meeting San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority
    January 22, 2021 Board Meeting San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority ITEM 1 Call to Order, Pledge of Allegiance, Roll Call San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority ITEM 2 Consent Calendar 2.1 Approve Minutes from November 20, 2020 Board Meeting 2.2 Appoint New Members to San Joaquin Valley Rail Committee 2.3 Next Board Meeting Location 2.4 SJJPA Operating Expense Report 2.5 Blue Ribbon Task Force Letter 2.6 Washington Update 2.7 Administrative Items San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority ITEM 3 Public Comments Please use the GoToMeeting chat function to alert staff if you wish to make a Public Comment. Alternatively, you may write in your public comment to [email protected] and staff will read the comment aloud. Public comments should be limited to approximately two minutes and no more than 240 words per comment. San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority ITEM 4 Approve a Resolution of the Board of the San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority Adopting the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (Final IS/MND) for the Madera Station Relocation Project (Project), Adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, Approving the Madera Station Relocation Project, Authorizing and Directing the Executive Director to Execute and File a Notice of Determination Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the Project, and Authorizing the Executive Director to Execute Any and All Documents Related to the Project (Dan Leavitt) Madera Station Relocation Project Background . Existing Madera San Joaquins Station located in vicinity of Madera Acres . Proposed Station located just north of Avenue 12 along the existing BNSF tracks CEQA Process Schedule .
    [Show full text]
  • Revised Rule 227 - a Better Special Verdict System for Texas
    SMU Law Review Volume 27 Issue 4 Article 1 1973 Revised Rule 227 - A Better Special Verdict System for Texas Jack Pope William G. Lowerre Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.smu.edu/smulr Recommended Citation Jack Pope & William G. Lowerre, Revised Rule 227 - A Better Special Verdict System for Texas, 27 SW L.J. 577 (1973) https://scholar.smu.edu/smulr/vol27/iss4/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at SMU Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in SMU Law Review by an authorized administrator of SMU Scholar. For more information, please visit http://digitalrepository.smu.edu. REVISED RULE 277-A BETTER SPECIAL VERDICT SYSTEM FOR TEXAS by Jack Pope* and William G. Lowerre** THE Texas Supreme Court's revision of rule 2771 which became effective September 1, 1973, marks the first major change in the manner for the submission of jury issues since 1913.2 Hopefully the burdens on jurors, prac- titioners, and the courts will be lightened by the change. The effective date for the revised rule coincided with the effective date for the adoption of comparative negligence3 in Texas, and the two reforms should simplify tri- als in a great number of cases. This Article is written with two purposes in mind: (1) to explain the probable nature of the changes in the practice which will flow from the revision, and (2) to discourage the importation of former practices, especially in the area of negligence law, into the new system. The revised rule commences: In all jury cases the court may submit said cause upon special issues without request of either party, and, upon request of either party, shall submit the cause upon special issues controlling the disposition of the case that are raised by the written pleadings and the evidence in the case, except that, for good cause subject to review or on agree- ment of the parties, the court may submit the same on a general charge.4 The quoted portion of the rule means that the special verdict will be the dominant mode of jury submission in Texas.
    [Show full text]
  • Quarterly Report on the Performance and Service Quality of Intercity Passenger Train Operations
    Pursuant to Section 207 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-432, Division B): Quarterly Report on the Performance and Service Quality of Intercity Passenger Train Operations Covering the Quarter Ended June, 2019 (Third Quarter of Fiscal Year 2019) Federal Railroad Administration United States Department of Transportation Published August 2019 Table of Contents (Notes follow on the next page.) Financial Table 1 (A/B): Short-Term Avoidable Operating Costs (Note 1) Table 2 (A/B): Fully Allocated Operating Cost covered by Passenger-Related Revenue Table 3 (A/B): Long-Term Avoidable Operating Loss (Note 1) Table 4 (A/B): Adjusted Loss per Passenger- Mile Table 5: Passenger-Miles per Train-Mile On-Time Performance (Table 6) Test No. 1 Change in Effective Speed Test No. 2 Endpoint OTP Test No. 3 All-Stations OTP Train Delays Train Delays - Off NEC Table 7: Off-NEC Host Responsible Delays per 10,000 Train-Miles Table 8: Off-NEC Amtrak Responsible Delays per 10,000 Train-Miles Train Delays - On NEC Table 9: On-NEC Total Host and Amtrak Responsible Delays per 10,000 Train-Miles Other Service Quality Table 10: Customer Satisfaction Indicator (eCSI) Scores Table 11: Service Interruptions per 10,000 Train-Miles due to Equipment-related Problems Table 12: Complaints Received Table 13: Food-related Complaints Table 14: Personnel-related Complaints Table 15: Equipment-related Complaints Table 16: Station-related Complaints Public Benefits (Table 17) Connectivity Measure Availability of Other Modes Reference Materials Table 18: Route Descriptions Terminology & Definitions Table 19: Delay Code Definitions Table 20: Host Railroad Code Definitions Appendixes A.
    [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]