United Rail Passenger Alliance

Volume 3 Number 36

1. By the calendar, it’s still summer, but for all practical purposes, the summer travel season has ended. However, with less than a month to go in Amtrak’s fiscal year, the Sunset Limited is still not running east of New Orleans. What’s taking so long?As noted last week in TWA, Amtrak was considering dropping one daily roundtrip between the Northeast and Williamsburg, Virginia, which in 2007 will be celebrating the 400th anniversary of the founding of the Virginia colony at nearby Jamestown (Or, as we native Virginians like to think, the beginning of Civilization.). Over one million visitors are expected for the celebration, and Amtrak was very close to dropping one of only two daily trains. This is a vivid demonstration of how Amtrak’s annihilative planning department operates in more of a vacuum than anything else. We see this same phenomenon regarding the Sunset Limited. Partial facts are given out about ridership east of New Orleans and nocturnal station stops. None of that hardly matters. What matters are total revenue passenger miles, the Sunset east of New Orleans as part of Amtrak’s national route matrix, and overhead or connecting business between the Amtrak hubs of New Orleans and Jacksonville and Orlando. As long as the Sunset Limited doesn’t run east of New Orleans, there is a huge gap in Amtrak’s national long distance system, one which a lot of public money on all levels went into in the early 1990s to plug. We must question how good of information is flowing to the ultimate decision makers at Amtrak about the Sunset Limited east of New Orleans. Is the full story being told? Is all of the high volume connecting business at Jacksonville and New Orleans being considered? Even if the Sunset Limited remains terminated at New Orleans, is a daily replacement train between New Orleans and Jacksonville and Orlando being considered, which would eliminate all of the nocturnal station stops? There are so many options available to Amtrak to continue to live up to its corporate name: National Railroad Passenger Corporation. Please, note the word “National.” It means everybody, including the residents of the Gulf Coast and Florida’s panhandle, currently without any train service, at all.
2. It is difficult to imagine what various and alleged stakeholders in the search for a new president and CEO of Amtrak were expecting from the Amtrak Board of Directors. Were they expecting another transit official who believes in the wrongly perceived glory of power of government over private enterprise? Where they expecting a resurrected, retired railroad executive who has always wanted to run passenger trains, but couldn’t at the freight railroads? Were they expecting a long lost child of the late Amtrak Chairman and President Graham Claytor who would carry on the family tradition?It’s no telling who was expected, but we know we have former Union Pacific Vice President Alexander Kummant. Mr. Kummant, 46, who has also worked for a number of other private industries outside of the railroad industry, is an enigma to almost all Amtrak watchers. Somehow, in the closed minds of some, this disqualifies him from being the next chief steward of Amtrak. Here is what one longtime Washington wag had to say:
   

   I’m not sure what to make of all this, but [Amtrak Chairman of the Board] David Laney strikes me as neither an ideologue nor an idiot, so I doubt he’d hire an ideologue or an idiot. That said, the last three presidents – career public sector bureaucrats all – were not the “rails” that NARP, etc., pretended they were, especially Mr. Gunn. Even with six years under his belt at UP, [Mr.] Kummant is more of a “rail” than Downs, Warrington and Gunn combined. A “rail” where it counts, in knowing and understanding the challenges, corporate psyches and business models of the modern-day investor-owned railroads. [Mr.] Gunn didn’t have a clue, aside from using the railroads as a punching bag when he found it convenient. Their property is the only place Amtrak can grow and expand. With Mr. Kummant we might finally get away from the “Perils of Pauline” saga of the hapless NEC, the part of Amtrak that will always manage to survive, one way or another.

   So, Amtrak is trying something new, a president with zero public-sector experience. Hoorah!

3. This Week at Amtrak has begun polling Class I Amtrak host railroads about their relationship with Amtrak, and passenger rail in general. As a coincidence, the Association of American Railroads issued a position paper last month regarding the same subject.Norfolk Southern responded to TWA’s query.
   

   This is a brief note to reply to your … letter … . [O]ur office coordinates passenger policy for the Norfolk Southern system.

   In general, Norfolk Southern understands its long-standing (35 years and counting) operating arrangements with Amtrak. We run Amtrak’s trains as best we can, given that the freight environment of 2006 is much different from that of 1971.

   In your letter you asked:

   How do today’s current Amtrak operations fit into Norfolk Southern’s business plan? How can future plans for expansion of Amtrak long distance trains fit into Norfolk Southern’s operating and capacity scenario? What changes would Norfolk Southern like to see in how Amtrak conducts business with its host railroads?

   The most concise source of answers to these questions is probably the position paper of the Association of American Railroads (“Passenger Service on Tracks Owned by Freight Railroads”), found at this link: http://www.aar.org/GetFile.asp?File_ID=290 [this document is not available for copying, so you must use the link to view the document].

   The best passenger operation is one that blends seamlessly. NS requires new or additional passenger service to be “transparent” to freight operations. We define transparency as “the provision of sufficient infrastructure for passenger trains and freight trains to operate without delay to either, and to allow for the growth of both.”

   Another document that may help with understanding NS’s concerns is a letter to planners of passenger service, attached. If the AAR position paper appears to contain concepts embodied in our letter, it’s not a coincidence.

   If you have any further questions, please don’t hesitate to e-mail or call me … .

   Best wishes.

   – Bill Schafer – Director, Corporate Affairs, Norfolk Southern

   Many misguided souls who believe governmental agencies are the only ones qualified to operate passenger trains will be greatly enlightened by the pragmatic document produced by the AAR. As the AAR speaks with a unified voice for all member railroads, the creation and dissemination of this document clearly demonstrates that passenger rail is not only on the radar screens of all major railroads in this country, but passenger rail has gone so far as to the creation of specific guidelines for planners of future passenger rail of all types to follow.

   Major excerpts of the Norfolk Southern planning document are below.

   June 15, 2005

   To Planners of Passenger Train Projects:

   Norfolk Southern welcomes the opportunity to work with state departments of transportation, high-speed rail advocates, and transit and commuter authorities to develop new or additional passenger rail services over our tracks. We look forward to moving your projects forward as long as they remain realistic and include our concerns.

   Because of the popularity of passenger train proposals, we believe that you should be aware of some of the principles that will underlie any discussions we hold with planners. These principles are intended to protect our “factory”, which is the track and right-of-way needed to produce our product – the present and future transport of freight – and to protect the interests of our owners and employees. We foresee major segments of our business – particularly the movement of truck trailers and containers – growing significantly in the coming years as highways become more congested.

   These principles refer only to conventional intercity or commuter passenger services and high-speed rail projects. Additional conditions will apply to light rail and other public transit ventures. …

   Conventional And High Speed Passenger

   We consider all passenger studies to be conceptual. Until serious money is available to construct infrastructure, we at Norfolk Southern will continue to regard passenger studies as hypothetical exercises. Their conclusions will be subject to revision if funding for a project’s implementation becomes available.

   We will coordinate infrastructure assessments. Studies intended to estimate how much additional capacity is needed for passenger trains (and how much it will cost) will be conducted by consultants approved by Norfolk Southern, and will be paid for by the sponsoring public agency.

   All studies and surveys must acknowledge that NS owns its corridors and is entitled to fair compensation for their use. We maintain them and we pay taxes on them. Please don’t assume that the use of our capacity and our asset is “free”. Instead, please acknowledge in your studies and reports that we are entitled to a fair return if the corridor is to be used for passenger trains.

   Passenger train operation must be “transparent” to our freight operations. We define transparency as the provision of sufficient infrastructure for passenger trains and freight trains to operate without delay to either, and to allow for the growth of both.

   Delay to freight trains by passenger trains, however minimal, is unacceptable. Sufficient infrastructure must be furnished so that each type of train can operate without getting in the other’s way. The common assumption that a proposed passenger train will impose “minimal interference with freight operations” is a non-starter.

   We will require new passenger train services to pay higher usage fees than Amtrak pays today. Please do not use “Amtrak incremental cost” factors in estimating the operating costs of new passenger services. Amtrak was entitled to special rights in return for relieving the freight railroads of intercity passenger train operation over thirty-four years ago. There is no relationship between the rates Amtrak pays and a fair, commercial return for use of private assets. We will require operators of new passenger train service to negotiate market-based operating agreements with us.

   Liability will be a major issue. Based on our experience with commuter authorities, the cost to the passenger carrier for indemnifying NS is substantial. We will accept no new or expanded passenger operations without adequate liability protection.

   Cab signals for freight locomotives will be required if the top speed for passenger trains is above 79 mph. Be prepared to equip the NS freight locomotive fleet with additional cab signal and other safety apparatus, and to pay for and maintain any additional signal infrastructure required by speeds in excess of 79 mph.

   Dispatching will remain with NS for all trains operating over NS tracks after inauguration of passenger service.

   High Speed Corridors

   High-speed corridors require careful planning. If the federal government designates a corridor as “high speed”, NS will automatically assume that mainline tracks dedicated solely to high speed trains will someday be built in the same corridor as our existing mainline tracks. Provisions must be made for separate high-speed tracks throughout the corridor, especially in urban areas. Highway or railroad overpasses/underpasses, when built with public funds, must allow space for the additional tracks.

   NS will require separate tracks for passenger trains operating in excess of 90 mph. No heavy-duty rail freight line has 110-mph passenger trains operating over it today. Where freight trains do operate over 110-mph track (Northeast and Empire Corridors, for example), the penalties imposed on freight trains are substantial. In a heavy-duty freight environment (Cleveland-Chicago is one example), high-speed passenger trains must operate over tracks dedicated to their use.

   Railroading is expensive. 110 mph railroading is very expensive. As most ridership analyses indicate, the greatest growth occurs with increases in frequency, not speed. This implies that four round trips a day at a top speed of 79 mph are much more cost-effective than four round trips a day at 110 mph.

   Our thanks to Mr. Schafer and Norfolk Southern for providing that document and access to the AAR document.

   There are several things which can be learned from this exercise, such as the willingness of host freight railroads to engage in the passenger business, as long as it doesn’t interfere with the freight railroad’s main reason for existence: the haulage of freight in a profitable environment. While private railroads have been treated and regulated in the past as public utilities (as the airlines once were, too), it is clear these are private businesses which are willing to share their assets, as long as the sharing is done on a fair basis to the railroads.

   This document, by the way, doesn’t preclude any internal planning which may or may not be done at the railroads regarding their own operation of passenger trains.

4. A book has been on the market for a year now that is a fascinating read for anyone interested in learning how railroads evolved into the worldwide industry of today. Frank Richter has written a magnificent book, “The Renaissance of the Railroad; A chronicle of the transformation of the century” that tells the story of American railroads from a technical, freight, passenger, and public perspective.This book is a “must read” for anyone who wishes to have a full comprehension and understanding of the railroad industry, and how all of the pieces fit together.

   Mr. Richter tells this story as only someone can who has been a well known and respected reporter, editor, and publisher in the railroad industry. Mr. Richter started in this field with his service during World War II, and went on to found the publication Modern Railroads, and later sell the company and move on to the publishing of Progressive Railroading magazine. Mr. Richter has been an intimate with railroaders on all levels, from the president’s office, down to the folks who operate the trains over the road. He has reported on technological advances in railroading all over the world, and currently serves as a Vice Presidente of Asociacion del Congreso Panamericano de Ferrocarriles when he spends six months out of the year in Buenos Aires, Argentina during the winter months, and the remainder of the year in the Chicago area.

   Mr. Richter notes on page 68 of his book when in 1969 he was tipped off the federal government was being inspired to take over the intercity rail passenger service. This is his place in the galaxy of the railroad world; if something important is going on, Frank Richter knows about it.

   For whatever reason you may choose to read The Renaissance of the Railroad, you won’t be disappointed by what you will learn, suddenly recall, or finally find that missing piece of the puzzle you have been wondering about. This is a book that could only have been written by a respected icon of the railroad publishing industry – one who reported with great intellectual curiosity for the professionals in the industry, not the watered down story telling for enthusiasts.

   “The Renaissance of the Railroad; A chronicle of the transformation of the century” by Frank Richter is published by authorhouse, and is available in both soft cover and hardback, at http://www.authorhouse.com or purchase the book at your local bookseller. The suggested retail price for the soft cover edition is $13.50, and the hardback edition is $23.95.