Funding for Hoosier State: The Saga Continues

[Anderson]

The founding fathers would be proud of this discussion of a bicameral legislature,,,,

my concept derives from my childhood on the west side of chi,,,,, being somewhat devious

what if we were to create a multi state train like Columbus to Chi to Des Moines to say KC? The 750 mile rule would be satisfied,,, think of al the permutations,,,,

Can't add a new long distance train that isn't using existing end points if I'm not mistaken.

That's my understanding as well. The qualifying endpoints are, I believe, as follows:

East Coast:

Boston, MA (Lake Shore Limited)

New York, NY (Numerous)

Washington, DC (Capitol Limited)

Lorton, VA (Auto Train)

Savannah, GA (Palmetto)

Orlando, FL (Sunset Limited*)

Miami, FL (Silver Meteor, Silver Star)

Central

Chicago, IL (Numerous)

New Orleans, LA (Crescent, CONO)

San Antonio, TX (Texas Eagle)

West Coast

Seattle, WA (Empire Builder, Coast Starlight)

Portland, OR (Empire Builder)

Emeryville, CA (California Zephyr)

Los Angeles, CA (Coast Starlight, Southwest Chief, Sunset Limited)

Given the mention in a PIP of shifting the Cardinal to St. Louis and/or running a section there, it does seem that a train could theoretically have a section added going somewhere else. The second possibility is that St. Louis, MO and Minneapolis, MN might count by virtue of separately-numbered "trains" as part of the Builder and Eagle, respectively.

 

[jis]

Jacksonville FL is fine too. For a while Palmetto ran to JAX.

Also Tampa FL is fine. Amtrak trains have terminated there in the past, as well as at St. Pete.

Push comes to shove I think Laredo TX or Houston TX would be fine too since they'd all be "restoration of previously existing service.

Same goes for Salt Lake City/Ogden 25/26 originally originated in Ogden and 35/36 in SLC, with no car transfer from 5/6. Only cross platform transfer of connecting passengers.

St. Louis is grandfathered from the National Limited.

The Crescent Star was proposed to Dallas too, so somehow that is possibly OK from what I don't know.

 

[Anderson]

Jacksonville FL is fine too. For a while Palmetto ran to JAX.

Also Tampa FL is fine. Amtrak trains have terminated there in the past, as well as at St. Pete.

Push comes to shove I think Laredo TX or Houston TX would be fine too since they'd all be "restoration of previously existing service.

Same goes for Salt Lake City/Ogden 25/26 originally originated in Ogden and 35/36 in SLC, with no car transfer from 5/6. Only cross platform transfer of connecting passengers.

St. Louis is grandfathered from the National Limited.

The Crescent Star was proposed to Dallas too, so somehow that is possibly OK from what I don't know.

Eh, the issue is that PRIIA referred to a specific date (in 2008, I believe) that the system was restricted to, so there's a good chance that Laredo would be out. The other cities are at least on the existing system...and there is, of course, the question of terminating a train/section somewhere like Denver.

 

[andersone]

alas my attempt at subterfuge is born of ignorance,, good knowledge provided none the less,,,

thanks for adding to my graduate education experience

 

[jis]

Jacksonville FL is fine too. For a while Palmetto ran to JAX.

Also Tampa FL is fine. Amtrak trains have terminated there in the past, as well as at St. Pete.

Push comes to shove I think Laredo TX or Houston TX would be fine too since they'd all be "restoration of previously existing service.

Same goes for Salt Lake City/Ogden 25/26 originally originated in Ogden and 35/36 in SLC, with no car transfer from 5/6. Only cross platform transfer of connecting passengers.

St. Louis is grandfathered from the National Limited.

The Crescent Star was proposed to Dallas too, so somehow that is possibly OK from what I don't know.

Eh, the issue is that PRIIA referred to a specific date (in 2008, I believe) that the system was restricted to, so there's a good chance that Laredo would be out. The other cities are at least on the existing system...and there is, of course, the question of terminating a train/section somewhere like Denver.

You're right. I had forgotten, and indeed don;t quite know what exactly is said in PRIIA 2008, and what is proposed for PRRIA whenever. I have a vague recollection that it says in all cases that it would require Congressional approval to go beyond the permitted list, so in principle it is still possible, though admittedly unlikely.I was just trying to get a comprehensive list of all places where trains have terminated in the Amtrak era. And I am quite certain that no PRIIA 209 train requires any Congressional approval, which provides another workaround in train friendly corners of the country. Make sure it runs only 749 miles and avoid Congressional obduracy.
BTW, talk of terminating a section at Atlanta also keeps coming up, as does Mobile AL.

 

[bretton88]

On Facebook:

Per reports at Trainorders regarding the Chicago-Indianapolis Hoosier State - PRESENTLY* Amtrak 850/851:-Contract between Amtrak and Indiana DOT being extended for now

-Agreement being finalized for Iowa Pacific to take over service in future. IP has purchased Ex-NJT diesels for the job and at least one has made it to Chicago.

-IP will provide equipment and OBS. Amtrak will continue to provide crews - This information supplied by Ed Ellis himself.

This has been confirmed by Ed Ellis on another forum. He anticipates using IP equipment like the domes too. IP has excellent service quality, while they can't do anything about the crappy routing, they can make the train a lot more pleasant to take. This might finally provide some stability for the Hoosier State.

 

[neroden]

Subtle point: the "endpoint restriction" applies to "Congressionally funded" trains specifically. So Amtrak can run any train it likes if Amtrak can come up with an accounting profit on the train after including state or local funding.

Most of the reasonable endpoints for >750 mi. routes are already in the "authorized endpoint" list. However, if Texas decided to fund a >750 mi route, Texas could simply do so. Or if Amtrak could work out how to generate an accounting profit on a second Denver-Chicago frequency, Amtrak could run such a train.

 

[MikefromCrete]

Subtle point: the "endpoint restriction" applies to "Congressionally funded" trains specifically. So Amtrak can run any train it likes if Amtrak can come up with an accounting profit on the train after including state or local funding.

Most of the reasonable endpoints for >750 mi. routes are already in the "authorized endpoint" list. However, if Texas decided to fund a >750 mi route, Texas could simply do so. Or if Amtrak could work out how to generate an accounting profit on a second Denver-Chicago frequency, Amtrak could run such a train.

Texas, of course, could do this, and no one would stand in its way. Amtrak showing a profit on an LD train is highly unlikely.

 

[Ryan]

I'll bet they could pull something off with some creative accounting if they really wanted to.

 

[Paulus]

I'll bet they could pull something off with some creative accounting if they really wanted to.

Doubtful that they'd somehow pull wool over the eyes of the OIG, FRA, and Congress.

 

[loliwearhats]

So, could Amtrak create a second train to Denver, but treat all the already existing spending necessary to have the California Zephyr run over the route (stations, etc) as a fixed cost, rather than apportioning them to the new route, for the purposes of PRIIA?

 

[jis]

I'll bet they could pull something off with some creative accounting if they really wanted to.

Doubtful that they'd somehow pull wool over the eyes of the OIG, FRA, and Congress.

Specially considering some of the accounting goofiness is actually dreamed up by and enforced by the FRA.

 

[Just-Thinking-51]

So, could Amtrak create a second train to Denver, but treat all the already existing spending necessary to have the California Zephyr run over the route (stations, etc) as a fixed cost, rather than apportioning them to the new route, for the purposes of PRIIA?

If your adding a second trip over the same route?

If you call it a experiment, trial or test service, sure you could limited the chargeable cost to anything extra that would be need for the train to run. Fixed cost such as station do not need to be added, but if your adding staff (or staff hours) at a station to deal with new train that would be charge to the test service. Admin and shop forces can be limited also.

The issues would be how long is a new service a experiment, and when does the full share of cost need to be added. Open ended experiment train is going to be noticed and acted on. A time define experiment train may be allowed, by some, for a time. Now about the equipment needed and cost to hire and train people....

 

[afigg]

If the agreement with Iowa Pacific is a done deal, Amtrak is not wasting time cutting costs at the end of the current contract. Service alert on the HS:

Hoosier State Trains 850 and 851: AmtrakConnect Wi-Fi and Other Services Discontinued

Effective February 1, 2015

The AmtrakConnect® Wi-Fi, Business class seating and light refreshments will be discontinued on the Hoosier State, as scheduled, on February 1, 2015.

In October 2014, Amtrak announced its demonstration of Wi-Fi capabilities and other services aboard the Hoosier State through January 31, 2015. The State of Indiana has chosen not to fund the continuation of these services.

 

[Ryan]

How is Indiana choosing to to continue funding these "Amtrak cutting costs"? Try "Amtrak delivering what IN pays for".

 

[jis]

If the agreement with Iowa Pacific is a done deal, Amtrak is not wasting time cutting costs at the end of the current contract. Service alert on the HS:

That is a pretty odd way of saying that Amtrak is providing the service that the State of Indiana contracted with them to provide, no? If anyone is cutting cost it is the State of Indiana.

 

[TinCan782]

If the agreement with Iowa Pacific is a done deal, Amtrak is not wasting time cutting costs at the end of the current contract. Service alert on the HS:

That is a pretty odd way of saying that Amtrak is providing the service that the State of Indiana contracted with them to provide, no? If anyone is cutting cost it is the State of Indiana.

From the service alert, "The AmtrakConnect® Wi-Fi, Business class seating and light refreshments will be discontinued". "The State of Indiana has chosen not to fund the continuation of these services."

 

[zephyr17]

If the agreement with Iowa Pacific is a done deal, Amtrak is not wasting time cutting costs at the end of the current contract. Service alert on the HS:

That is a pretty odd way of saying that Amtrak is providing the service that the State of Indiana contracted with them to provide, no? If anyone is cutting cost it is the State of Indiana.

From the service alert, "The AmtrakConnect® Wi-Fi, Business class seating and light refreshments will be discontinued". "The State of Indiana has chosen not to fund the continuation of these services."

Despite strong competition, the Hoosier State again returns to the its accustomed position as Amtrak's Crappiest Train.

Thanks, INDOT.

 

[afigg]

If the agreement with Iowa Pacific is a done deal, Amtrak is not wasting time cutting costs at the end of the current contract. Service alert on the HS:

That is a pretty odd way of saying that Amtrak is providing the service that the State of Indiana contracted with them to provide, no? If anyone is cutting cost it is the State of Indiana.

Yea, I did overstate it a bit. INDOT was not willing to pay Amtrak to maintain BC, food services, and WiFi so they go bye-bye. We'll see what services Iowa Pacific will provide. BC does provide extra revenue; I wonder how many BC seats Amtrak sold during this short period of offering BC?

Amtrak issued a news release on a 60 day contract extension: Hoosier State Train Continues To Operate. Excerpt:

CHICAGO & INDIANAPOLIS -- Amtrak will continue to operate the Hoosier State train between Indianapolis and Chicago under an Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT) contract extension through April 1, 2015. A previous extension expires on Jan. 31.

The 60-day service agreement allows extra time to complete long-term contract negotiations for Amtrak to continue operating the Hoosier State with portions of the service being provided by INDOT contractors. INDOT is negotiating renewal of the service on behalf of the state, Beech Grove, Crawfordsville, Indianapolis, Lafayette, Rensselaer, Tippecanoe County and West Lafayette.

Will Iowa Pacific be able to provide equipment and support staff by April 1?

 

[Just-Thinking-51]

April fools day?

Yes Iowa Pacific will be able to roll by then.

The only lump of coal is getting Amtrak to agree to provide the Train and Engine personal at something less than two arms, and two legs.

That and "new" equipment training.

Back to the popcorn eating and watch this one unfold. I do wonder how long it going to take for Chicago to hard couple the equipment into the river?

 

[Anderson]

So, could Amtrak create a second train to Denver, but treat all the already existing spending necessary to have the California Zephyr run over the route (stations, etc) as a fixed cost, rather than apportioning them to the new route, for the purposes of PRIIA?

If your adding a second trip over the same route?

If you call it a experiment, trial or test service, sure you could limited the chargeable cost to anything extra that would be need for the train to run. Fixed cost such as station do not need to be added, but if your adding staff (or staff hours) at a station to deal with new train that would be charge to the test service. Admin and shop forces can be limited also.

The issues would be how long is a new service a experiment, and when does the full share of cost need to be added. Open ended experiment train is going to be noticed and acted on. A time define experiment train may be allowed, by some, for a time. Now about the equipment needed and cost to hire and train people....

How long can a service stay temporarily suspended? I'm actually kind of surprised that CSX hasn't sued Amtrak to run the train or give up the slot.

 

[jis]

What slot? You really believe there's a slot preserved?

 

[CHamilton]

What slot? You really believe there's a slot preserved?

Sure!

 

[jis]

Ah the Casinos in Mobile. I see!

 

[MikefromCrete]

I'm always amused by "slots" on freight railroads. It seems to me that most railroads just run freights when they're ready. I doubt that CSX between New Orleans and Jacksonville is so busy that another train couldn't be operated. Right now the "suspended" Sunset East isn't costing any money and if the need arrives to bring it back it will be easy to get back in operation rather than having to start negotiations with CSX from scratch.