House Passes 2015 THUD ... $1.4 billion for Amtrak

[Anderson]

My understanding on the UP-Amtrak negotiations is that things were running smoothly, there was an effective deal in place...and then someone at Amtrak got too clever by half at the end of the process, UP got furious, and we saw the after-effects of it. Even allowing for some misbehavior on both sides, my understanding is that Amtrak at least was not blameless in the failure of the negotiations.

As to equipment, IIRC the extra equipment in the plan came from ditching the sleeper east of SAS. That freed up enough sleepers to balance things out, while coaches are at least a slightly less desperate situation. I think the sets freed up in the schedule adjustment were also supposed to help there. As noted, you can throw a lot of equipment into the western LD trains (or indeed the eastern ones) and watch as demand rises to meet the new supply.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

I like Nathaneal's calculations. But by the following back-of-the-envelop method,

we can see why Paulus and the PRIIA study have concerns.

Keeping simple figures, the Red Bird Ltd. running 3 times a week, has been losing

$100 per day X 3 days = $300 a week.

By going daily, crew (and equipment) is more efficiently utilized, ridership doubles,

and now it is losing only $50 per day X 7 days = $350 a week.

Weekly or yearly losses on the Red Bird Ltd. would increase by about 16%.

Of course, there could be any number of ways to cut the Red Bird's daily loss

by more than half. So let's cut it by two-thirds. In my simplistic formula, cut

the loss to only $35 per day X 7 days = $245 a week.

In that case, total losses could be markedly reduced.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So I agree that simply going daily is probably not enuff by itself to get positive

operating results for the Cardinal, much less the Sunset Ltd. (It would move

the Cardinal's dreadful loss per passenger, and share of costs covered by

the fare box in the same range as other long distance trains.)

But the 3-days-a-week trains going daily will need bag/dorms, sleepers, diners,

coaches, and good-looking equipment, not hand-me-downs. And with Wi-Fi

capability NYC-D.C.-Charlottesville and then Charleston-Huntington-Ashland and

then again Indianapolis-Chicago. Damn, the Cardinal really needs its own dome car

for when it passes thru the National Park System's New River Gorge. (The desert

mountain scenery in the Southwest is worth looking at, as well.)

Importantly, the Cardinal needs two daily Hoosier State corridor trains running

Indianapolis-Lafayette-Chicago to allow easy same day go-and-return trips,

not to mention benefits to the Cardinal the $250 million of track improvements

that would entail.

When looking for the trains where truly substantial improvement would be possible

with better frequencies, more equipment, real investment, and some tender love

and care, the daily Cardinal ranks #1 as the most likely to see a major turn-around.

 

[William]

I like Nathaneal's calculations. But by the following back-of-the-envelop method,

we can see why Paulus and the PRIIA study have concerns.

Keeping simple figures, the Red Bird Ltd. running 3 times a week, has been losing

$100 per day X 3 days = $300 a week.

By going daily, crew (and equipment) is more efficiently utilized, ridership doubles,

and now it is losing only $50 per day X 7 days = $350 a week.

Weekly or yearly losses on the Red Bird Ltd. would increase by about 16%.

Of course, there could be any number of ways to cut the Red Bird's daily loss

by more than half. So let's cut it by two-thirds. In my simplistic formula, cut

the loss to only $35 per day X 7 days = $245 a week.

In that case, total losses could be markedly reduced.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So I agree that simply going daily is probably not enuff by itself to get positive

operating results for the Cardinal, much less the Sunset Ltd. (It would move

the Cardinal's dreadful loss per passenger, and share of costs covered by

the fare box in the same range as other long distance trains.)

But the 3-days-a-week trains going daily will need bag/dorms, sleepers, diners,

coaches, and good-looking equipment, not hand-me-downs. And with Wi-Fi

capability NYC-D.C.-Charlottesville and then Charleston-Huntington-Ashland and

then again Indianapolis-Chicago. Damn, the Cardinal really needs its own dome car

for when it passes thru the National Park System's New River Gorge. (The desert

mountain scenery in the Southwest is worth looking at, as well.)

Importantly, the Cardinal needs two daily Hoosier State corridor trains running

Indianapolis-Lafayette-Chicago to allow easy same day go-and-return trips,

not to mention benefits to the Cardinal the $250 million of track improvements

that would entail.

When looking for the trains where truly substantial improvement would be possible

with better frequencies, more equipment, real investment, and some tender love

and care, the daily Cardinal ranks #1 as the most likely to see a major turn-around.

The Cardinal is the LD train that I use most often (to go between CIN and ALX). At the very least, it needs to be brought up to daily status, and needs to be equipped with bag-dorms. The next priority for it would be the replacement of the diner-lites with actual dining cars. In terms of the dining cars, I wonder what the priority for assigning the new VL2s is. If the Cardinal is going to be among the last to get them, Amtrak could potentially use freed up heritage diners from other routes to fill the gap, especially because the Cardinal isn't exactly a hard route on equipment (due to its lower speeds). For me, the lower quality of the food, the expensive sleepers, and the tri-weekly schedule are the biggest obstacles to wanting to ride it. I'm willing to tolerate a late train (in fact, especially for 51, the later it is the better because I get to sleep longer ) but if it's a late train that quite frankly sucks, I really have to think twice about it, especially since I can fly from DCA to CVG for the same cost, or sometimes even less.

It definitely has the potential to be a good route; the sleeping car almost always sells out, and I've even seen coach be completely sold out before. In terms of on-time performance, its biggest hurdle is between Chicago and Cincinnati. The max authorized speed through much of that segment is 60 MPH, and the train often runs at speeds lower than that. If that track can be improved, it would go a long way (it's somewhat hard to justify taking the Cardinal/Hoosier State if you're just going between the two mentioned points, or intermediate stations, when driving takes 2/3s, or even half the time).

 

[Crescent ATN & TCL]

So we've pretty much summed up that less than daily is horrible business sense...... if I were running Amtrak it would be daily or dead. With equipment shortages as they are and cost to restore daily service being astronomical I would shift equipment to a train that can pull in more revenue unless someone is willing to foot the bill to go daily.

 

[Crescent ATN & TCL]

I hate to say it but Raton is dead. The sunset is dead on 3x a week service. If the Sunset dies the southwest chief could use the cars for more CHI to LAX service. The cardinal can be saved with evasive action, daily service and more equipment. The east coast the Midwest and the NEC do great along with state contracts. Running 3,000 miles through sparsely populated desert and plains won't work.

 

[Crescent ATN & TCL]

Amtrak can find money for capital but not subsidizing money losing operations. I've ridden almost every train in the system and frankly some can be sacrificed for the health of the company. Hate to say it but its the truth.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Amtrak can find money for capital but not subsidizing money losing operations. I've ridden almost every train in the system and frankly some can be sacrificed for the health of the company. Hate to say it but its the truth.

Be careful what you ask for.you might get it! Death by a thousands cuts is an old saying but it is true!

The folks who lived along the Sunset East, Broadway Ltd, Pioneer, Desert Wind,Lone Star, InernationalNational Ltd and North Coast Hiawatha Routes

Wouldn't agree with you just like most of us don't!

 

[neroden]

When looking for the trains where truly substantial improvement would be possible

with better frequencies, more equipment, real investment, and some tender love

and care, the daily Cardinal ranks #1 as the most likely to see a major turn-around.

If

(1) Indiana ran the Hoosier State as a separate daily train (allowing the Cardinal to find its own schedule and providing more frequencies per day from Chicago to Indianapolis)

(2) Indiana and Illinois improved the trackage from Indianapolis to Chicago to allow for (at least!) steady 60 mph running,

(3) Indiana and Ohio improved the trackage from Cincinnati to Indianapolis to allow for (at least!) steady 60 mph running,

(4) The Cardinal operated daily,

(5) with more sleeper space and perhaps another coach,

its financial numbers would probably look similar to those of the Capitol Limited.

Improving track west of Cincinnati to provide even better speeds such as 79 mph would be an even greater improvement, but even a steady 60 mph would provide tremendous improvement.

 

[William]

When looking for the trains where truly substantial improvement would be possible

with better frequencies, more equipment, real investment, and some tender love

and care, the daily Cardinal ranks #1 as the most likely to see a major turn-around.

If

(1) Indiana ran the Hoosier State as a separate daily train (allowing the Cardinal to find its own schedule and providing more frequencies per day from Chicago to Indianapolis)

(2) Indiana and Illinois improved the trackage from Indianapolis to Chicago to allow for (at least!) steady 60 mph running,

(3) Indiana and Ohio improved the trackage from Cincinnati to Indianapolis to allow for (at least!) steady 60 mph running,

(4) The Cardinal operated daily,

(5) with more sleeper space and perhaps another coach,

its financial numbers would probably look similar to those of the Capitol Limited.

Improving track west of Cincinnati to provide even better speeds such as 79 mph would be an even greater improvement, but even a steady 60 mph would provide tremendous improvement.

Separating the Cardinal and Hoosier state would be a good idea. If you look at the timetable for 51, you'll notice that it gets into Indy at 0457 and leaves at 0600. It has to wait in order to keep the same departure time as the Hoosier State. It seems to me that this would be pretty easy to do (they'd need a few extra locomotives and crews). The only obstacle would be whether CSX and NS have the capacity to add extra trains (I'm not sure how congested that particular line is). It would also be great if the Hoosier State could get a cafe car (five hour train w/o a cafe? Really?), but that's assuming the cost of the required labor is worth it, and whether extra cafe cars are available.

All of this seems moot though if the trackage can't be improved. I'm not even sure if the Indiana portion is CWR throughout. I believe that they've completed the upgrades of VA's Buckingham Branch, or are at least very close, so the Indiana portion of the route is what needs to be focused on. Indiana and Ohio have to be willing to provide funds. I could see Indiana cooperating, but not Ohio (the Governor of Ohio HATES passenger rail). Then again, since Ohio has a comparatively small amount of the route, this may not be a big issue.

Overall, the Cardinal's needs can be boiled down to this: Daily service, track improvements, an additional sleeper (or bag-dorm), and a proper diner. Once these things are done, I think that the Cardinal will cease to be the black sheep of the LD trains, and will be a lot more attractive to riders (me included ).

 

[neroden]

I hate to say it but Raton is dead. The sunset is dead on 3x a week service. If the Sunset dies the southwest chief could use the cars for more CHI to LAX service.

If I were involved with Amtrak or Kansas, in the eventuality that the SW Chief switches to Amarillo/Wichita, I would do whatever I could to get the Heartland Flyer extended to Wichita to connect to the SW Chief (in both directions). According to the 2011 Heartland Flyer extension study, the SW Chief would pick up roughly $2.8 million in connecting revenue (with basically no extra costs). (This is apart from the costs which would be calculated for the Heartland Flyer extension and paid by the states.)
If the SW Chief were already stopping at Wichita, the extension would actually be cheaper than the previous estimates for proposed Heartland Flyer extension; further capital improvements near Newton would be unnecessary, saving $15 million in capital costs off previous estimates. The necessary operating subsidy for the states to pay would also be less than previously predicted, because it's a shorter trip and Wichita is a better place to change trains than Newton.

Anyway, the Heartland Flyer - SW Chief connection would provide DFW-LAX service, and it would actually be slightly faster than the Texas Eagle - Sunset Limited route is now. So if the Sunset Limited remains triweekly or is cancelled... well, I'm liking the idea of a through sleeper from LA to Fort Worth on the SW Chief. There's enough room for switching at Wichita. (Okay, maybe not for THAT MUCH switching.)

Actually, the Heartland Flyer - SW Chief connection would be faster than the Texas Eagle from Ft. Worth to Chicago, too (the Texas Eagle is sloooow), so a through sleeper in that direction might make sense as well. (A through car LA-Ft Worth requires 5 cars, a through car Chicago-Ft Worth requires 3, a car from Chicago-LA requires 5.)

The SW Chief reroute should be treated as an opportunity.

 

[Railroad Bill]

When looking for the trains where truly substantial improvement would be possible

with better frequencies, more equipment, real investment, and some tender love

and care, the daily Cardinal ranks #1 as the most likely to see a major turn-around.

If

(1) Indiana ran the Hoosier State as a separate daily train (allowing the Cardinal to find its own schedule and providing more frequencies per day from Chicago to Indianapolis)

(2) Indiana and Illinois improved the trackage from Indianapolis to Chicago to allow for (at least!) steady 60 mph running,

(3) Indiana and Ohio improved the trackage from Cincinnati to Indianapolis to allow for (at least!) steady 60 mph running,

(4) The Cardinal operated daily,

(5) with more sleeper space and perhaps another coach,

its financial numbers would probably look similar to those of the Capitol Limited.

Improving track west of Cincinnati to provide even better speeds such as 79 mph would be an even greater improvement, but even a steady 60 mph would provide tremendous improvement.

Separating the Cardinal and Hoosier state would be a good idea. If you look at the timetable for 51, you'll notice that it gets into Indy at 0457 and leaves at 0600. It has to wait in order to keep the same departure time as the Hoosier State. It seems to me that this would be pretty easy to do (they'd need a few extra locomotives and crews). The only obstacle would be whether CSX and NS have the capacity to add extra trains (I'm not sure how congested that particular line is). It would also be great if the Hoosier State could get a cafe car (five hour train w/o a cafe? Really?), but that's assuming the cost of the required labor is worth it, and whether extra cafe cars are available.

All of this seems moot though if the trackage can't be improved. I'm not even sure if the Indiana portion is CWR throughout. I believe that they've completed the upgrades of VA's Buckingham Branch, or are at least very close, so the Indiana portion of the route is what needs to be focused on. Indiana and Ohio have to be willing to provide funds. I could see Indiana cooperating, but not Ohio (the Governor of Ohio HATES passenger rail). Then again, since Ohio has a comparatively small amount of the route, this may not be a big issue.

Overall, the Cardinal's needs can be boiled down to this: Daily service, track improvements, an additional sleeper (or bag-dorm), and a proper diner. Once these things are done, I think that the Cardinal will cease to be the black sheep of the LD trains, and will be a lot more attractive to riders (me included ).

I, too, would like to see a daily scheduled Cardinal with the improvements you mention. Very little of this route is in Ohio. Most of the slow section seems to be north of Indianapolis, where the train seems to crawl to Chicago and back. If there could be additional roomette space and a regular diner service, I also agree this train could make more money for Amtrak.

 

[William]

I'm taking the Cardinal from Cincinnati to Chicago today. I'm interested to see just how slow it goes between here and there. I'm also interested to see whether the rails are jointed or CWR. It's already 1.5 hours late. I wonder how much later it will become as it goes through Indiana. If anything interesting happens, or it has an unusual consist, I'll post it here.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

I'm taking the Cardinal from Cincinnati to Chicago today.

Keep this Indiana Dept of Highways study in mind as you look out the window:

http://www.in.gov/indot/files/Amtrak_CostBenefitAnalysis_2013.pdf

It lays out the options from do-nothing to adding two runs of the Hoosier State.

Nobody in the Indiana Dept of Highways gave a damn about the Cardinal,

so the positive contributions to the Cardinal from better trip times, more

frequencies, better arrival and departure times, benefits from cost sharing,

efficiencies in advertising and marketing, etc were assigned a value of zero (0).

​Thus making another excellent example of how applying post-Confederacy

"States Rights" policies to passenger rail will not help Amtrak at all.

But a lot of interesting detail in that flawed study.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

I hate to say it but Raton is dead. The sunset is dead on 3x a week service. If the Sunset dies the southwest chief could use the cars for more CHI to LAX service.

. . . get the Heartland Flyer extended to Wichita to connect to the SW Chief (in both directions). According to the 2011 Heartland Flyer extension study, the SW Chief would pick up roughly $2.8 million in connecting revenue . . .)

. . .

As I recall that Heartland Flyer extension study, it forgot to calculate any added value of connecting the SW Chief passengers to the Texas Eagle at Ft Worth. Maybe it wouldn't be $2.8 million (helluva figure for connections in Kansas made at 3 a.m. LOL), but there'd surely be some more passengers on the Texas Eagle (and even the Sunset Ltd) from north of Oklahoma City if they could do it.

 

[Anderson]

Woody,

Part of the problem is that at least in terms of revenue on the trains, the state gets no benefit from filling up the Cardinal, at least directly. This is not unlike the situation in VA, where the state gets no benefit from filling seats on the Meteor, Star, Palmetto, Crescent, or Cardinal even though it is quite likely that the state's Regionals help enable some round trips which involve an LD train.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

I hate to say it but Raton is dead. The sunset is dead on 3x a week service. If the Sunset dies the southwest chief could use the cars for more CHI to LAX service.

. . . get the Heartland Flyer extended to Wichita to connect to the SW Chief (in both directions). According to the 2011 Heartland Flyer extension study, the SW Chief would pick up roughly $2.8 million in connecting revenue . . .)

. . .

As I recall that Heartland Flyer extension study, it forgot to calculate any added value of connecting the SW Chief passengers to the Texas Eagle at Ft Worth. Maybe it wouldn't be $2.8 million (helluva figure for connections in Kansas made at 3 a.m. LOL), but there'd surely be some more passengers on the Texas Eagle (and even the Sunset Ltd) from north of Oklahoma City if they could do it.

Woody,

Part of the problem is that at least in terms of revenue on the trains, the state gets no benefit from filling up the Cardinal, at least directly. This is not unlike the situation in VA, where the state gets no benefit from filling seats on the Meteor, Star, Palmetto, Crescent, or Cardinal even though it is quite likely that the state's Regionals help enable some round trips which involve an LD train.

We agree that's a problem. If Congress instructs each of the 50 states

to go its own way with corridor trains, and there's nobody supposed to be

looking out for the larger national interests, we could get short changed.

Well, thank goodness there's still some entities looking out for the larger

national interests. So in the real world, a state's short-sighted selfishness

will hurt them. As long as the FRA and the US Dept of Transportation

consider financial and operating benefits to Amtrak to be worthwhile,

applications for TIGER grants, for example, like Indiana would need to

upgrade the route of the Hoosier State, will be inferior because the study

commissioned by the Dept of Highways omits the potential benefits to

the Cardinal.

If Virginia works up an application for federal funds to upgrade the route

D.C.-Richmond-Petersburg, they'd be fools to omit the substantial benefit

to Amtrak's national system.

And if a number of passengers from north of Oklahoma City, from the

extended Heartland Flyer and from it's new SW Chief connection at Wichita,

would connect with the Texas Eagle, Oklahoma's application would be

much stronger if they include that fact.

 

[William]

Arrived into Chicago 1 hour late. The trackage seemed to be pretty mixed; I'd say 50/50 CWR vs. jointed (I'm going off how the ride felt, I didn't actually see the tracks we were on).

The train did a pretty good job maintaing 60MPH throughout, although there were points where it was going less than 20MPH.

Ideally, the entire line needs to be CWR, and needs to be upgraded to class four status. That will, of course, require state spending. I do believe that Indiana is willing to cooperate. It just depends on how it is sold, and whether the perceived benefits of faster service outweigh the costs to achieve a higher service level (I believe they do).

The other issue I see is that even if the track is upgraded, freight congestion can be very heavy in between IND and CHI. I'm not entirely sure about this, but I think that much of the line is only a single track. That would obviously need to change, but that would require even more spending.

 

[Big Iron]

I'm taking the Cardinal from Cincinnati to Chicago today. I'm interested to see just how slow it goes between here and there. I'm also interested to see whether the rails are jointed or CWR. It's already 1.5 hours late. I wonder how much later it will become as it goes through Indiana. If anything interesting happens, or it has an unusual consist, I'll post it here.

I last rode the Cardinal in 2009. At that time there was a decent stretch of track around Dyer that was jointed rail. Music to my ears. Although you are not heading East, there is/was a good stretch of jointed rail on the Buckingham Branch in VA.

 

[William]

I'm taking the Cardinal from Cincinnati to Chicago today. I'm interested to see just how slow it goes between here and there. I'm also interested to see whether the rails are jointed or CWR. It's already 1.5 hours late. I wonder how much later it will become as it goes through Indiana. If anything interesting happens, or it has an unusual consist, I'll post it here.

I last rode the Cardinal in 2009. At that time there was a decent stretch of track around Dyer that was jointed rail. Music to my ears. Although you are not heading East, there is/was a good stretch of jointed rail on the Buckingham Branch in VA.

I've been that way several times on the Cardinal. I wouldn't exactly call it "good," haha. It was some of the roughest rail I've ever ridden on. I believe that BBR has almost completed their upgrades to CWR. I'll see whether this is true the next time I take a trip that way.

 

[cirdan]

Could minimize or just eliminate the stops in Arkansas is one possibility - or just charge a supplement to anyone going to/from those stations. Of course, that would cause additional problems and animosities. Amtrak needs to sell itself to state legislatures as they try to sell themselves to Congress.

In this hypothetiacl situation, cutting stops in Arkansas out of spite might hurt Amtrak as much as it hurts Arkansas.

I would say no, still stop in Arkansas, but let the states that chip in money sit around the table with Amtrak and be able to make demands to re-shape the service and timings to better suit their needs. Those who don't pay don't have a a voice.

 

[Anderson]

I hate to say it but Raton is dead. The sunset is dead on 3x a week service. If the Sunset dies the southwest chief could use the cars for more CHI to LAX service.

. . . get the Heartland Flyer extended to Wichita to connect to the SW Chief (in both directions). According to the 2011 Heartland Flyer extension study, the SW Chief would pick up roughly $2.8 million in connecting revenue . . .)

. . .

As I recall that Heartland Flyer extension study, it forgot to calculate any added value of connecting the SW Chief passengers to the Texas Eagle at Ft Worth. Maybe it wouldn't be $2.8 million (helluva figure for connections in Kansas made at 3 a.m. LOL), but there'd surely be some more passengers on the Texas Eagle (and even the Sunset Ltd) from north of Oklahoma City if they could do it.

Woody,

Part of the problem is that at least in terms of revenue on the trains, the state gets no benefit from filling up the Cardinal, at least directly. This is not unlike the situation in VA, where the state gets no benefit from filling seats on the Meteor, Star, Palmetto, Crescent, or Cardinal even though it is quite likely that the state's Regionals help enable some round trips which involve an LD train.

We agree that's a problem. If Congress instructs each of the 50 states

to go its own way with corridor trains, and there's nobody supposed to be

looking out for the larger national interests, we could get short changed.

Well, thank goodness there's still some entities looking out for the larger

national interests. So in the real world, a state's short-sighted selfishness

will hurt them. As long as the FRA and the US Dept of Transportation

consider financial and operating benefits to Amtrak to be worthwhile,

applications for TIGER grants, for example, like Indiana would need to

upgrade the route of the Hoosier State, will be inferior because the study

commissioned by the Dept of Highways omits the potential benefits to

the Cardinal.

If Virginia works up an application for federal funds to upgrade the route

D.C.-Richmond-Petersburg, they'd be fools to omit the substantial benefit

to Amtrak's national system.

And if a number of passengers from north of Oklahoma City, from the

extended Heartland Flyer and from it's new SW Chief connection at Wichita,

would connect with the Texas Eagle, Oklahoma's application would be

much stronger if they include that fact.

There's a difference between omitting benefits to the national system for internal considerations and doing so for an application for federal funding.

Edit: On the numbers for the Chief/Flyer, that really isn't a lot. If I'm not mistaken, that figure included a through sleeper (if not a coach as well); assuming you took the average fare per passenger on the Chief, that comes out to about 22k passengers; for the average LD passenger in general, that's 25k passengers. For the average Texas Eagle passenger (since the route is mirroring the Eagle in some ways), 32k passengers. If a through sleeper and coach are involved, 30-45 passengers/train is not a huge number.

 

[afigg]

Resurrecting this thread because the FY2015 Omnibus appropriations bill is due to be released by the Senate and House committees today. The Continuing Resolution (CR) for FY2015 expires this Thursday, so the House and Senate have to pass the appropriations bill or another CR or the government shuts down on Friday.

With a massive omnibus bill, it will take days to figure out the basics of what is in it, if not months to turn up all the buried riders and special items stuffed into it. There is also a lot of last minute maneuvering on specifics and amendments, so nothing is set until the omnibus get passed by both houses. Poltico.com posted a story last night discussing some of what is expected to be in it: House-Senate negotiators near spending deal.

Amtrak gets mentioned: "Indeed, from Amtrak to Head Start and low-income fuel assistance, much of the domestic budget is flat." Which indicates that the Amtrak FY2015 total appropriations amount will be the same as FY2014, as expected. How the funding gets divided up between operating grant, capital grants, and the NEC, states, LD remains to be seen along with whether there are any poison pills for the LD trains left in.

The TIGER grant program will get $500 million for FY2015, down from $600 million for FY2014. This may be the last year of the TIGER grant program in its current form or funding level with the control of the Senate changing in January. The big issue for next spring is a new transportation reauthorization bill and the TIGER grant program could survive, but with the House Republicans changing it to favor road projects and restricting it from being used for passenger rail or things like bike and pedestrian trail projects. I hope the US DOT will select more passenger rail related grants with the FY15 awards than they did with the FY14 funds. Vermont, Maine for the Downeaster, MI could put TIGER grant money to good use for rail projects.

 

[afigg]

The omnibus appropriations bill was posted last night, but has not passed the House and Senate yet. There is more last minute posturing and drama ahead. But Amtrak's part of it is set.

Amtrak will get the same total amount as in FY14, $1.39 billion. Which is as expected given the budget deal in January which set the total discretionary funding levels for FY15. The breakdown is $250 million for operating subsidy, reduced from $340 million in FY14. The funds are shifted to the capital and debt service grants at a total of $1.14 billion with the following provisions: no more than $175 million for debt service obligations, no less than $50 million for ADA compliance, and up to $50 million may be used for operating subsidy with the approval of the DOT Secretary.

Has the same provisions as before on producing the 5 year financial plan, comprehensive fleet plan, micromanagement constraints on overtime & discounts of > 50% for subsidized routes except for State supported routes. I assume the House poison pill that would have killed the Sunset Limited is not in the final bill, although it could be buried in it. The Amtrak Office of Inspector General receives $23,999,000 which is an odd amount. Must be a reason it was not rounded off to $24 million.

So enough to keep the lights on, but no large boost in capital spending for FY15. FY2016 with a major effort on a new transportation funding bill and the proposed PRRIA reauthorization bill will be a critical FY for the funding of the LD trains and the NEC.

There is indeed $500 million for FY2015 TIGER grants, down from $600 million in FY14. Similar provisions as before: No less than 20% is for projects in rural areas (hello VT, Maine, Southwest Chief), grants shall be between $10 and $200 million except for rural grants which have a minimum of $1 million. Passenger and Freight rail transportation projects are eligible.

 

[wolfspirit]

(I haven't read the bill yet, so if it's really obvious, I apologize!)

So what happens if Amtrak has another banner year and posts a loss of $175 million. Does the rest of the $250 million operating subsidy get eaten by Congress, or does Amtrak get a fat stack of cash at the start of the fiscal year, which would leave the $75 million difference to get spent on stations/cars/hookers/whatever Amtrak wants?

 

[jis]

Hopefully Amtrak gets to pay for the Viewliners with the leftovers. But who knows?