Amtrak Official: Jacksonville-Miami rail going to happen

[Anderson]

Alan,

I think the Sunset plan may have another problem, this one legal: NOL-SAS is 573 miles. Last I checked, that's under the PRIIA 750-mile limit, which raises a big legal issue, especially since the plan doesn't indicate any through cars, and I can't see a locomotive exchange cutting it. I know NOL and SAS are both endpoint stations for PRIIA purposes (NOL for three trains, SAS for the Texas Eagle), but there's no provision for <750 mile connections (else we'd likely see serious talk of a LAX-EMY train on Amtrak's side of things, and the Cascades wouldn't necessarily need state support). That is a "bit" of a hurdle from what I can tell, and it's likely open to a challenge since the plan didn't mention through cars of any kind.

If that plan is going to fly, either there's something I'm missing or the NOL connection is in big trouble. Mind you, it could work if you ran the train SAS-ORL...and that would probably be a viable way of getting the Sunset East going without the train hanging out all the way to California (which is a logistical issue), but that's going to require some progress not found in that report.

 

[AlanB]

Alan,I think the Sunset plan may have another problem, this one legal: NOL-SAS is 573 miles. Last I checked, that's under the PRIIA 750-mile limit, which raises a big legal issue, especially since the plan doesn't indicate any through cars, and I can't see a locomotive exchange cutting it. I know NOL and SAS are both endpoint stations for PRIIA purposes (NOL for three trains, SAS for the Texas Eagle), but there's no provision for <750 mile connections (else we'd likely see serious talk of a LAX-EMY train on Amtrak's side of things, and the Cascades wouldn't necessarily need state support). That is a "bit" of a hurdle from what I can tell, and it's likely open to a challenge since the plan didn't mention through cars of any kind.

If that plan is going to fly, either there's something I'm missing or the NOL connection is in big trouble. Mind you, it could work if you ran the train SAS-ORL...and that would probably be a viable way of getting the Sunset East going without the train hanging out all the way to California (which is a logistical issue), but that's going to require some progress not found in that report.

Anderson,

While it's been a while, IIRC when the daily Sunset plan was first floated, PRIIA was not yet in existence; so I don't believe that was a concern of most people. However, I do recall posting way back then at that time that NOL-SAS was something that I was quite worried about and that Amtrak all on its own might just turn to Texas & Louisiana and say "if you want to keep this service, pay up." At the time my idea was scoffed on by some others; but PRIIA would have indeed made it reality.

And thanks for the vote of support!

 

[Anderson]

I recall the worries being posted in various forms. And actually, weren't the PIPs (along with the Gulf Coast plan, the NCH plan, and the Pioneer plan) a result of PRIIA?

 

[jis]

On the other hand, your description is compatible with the idea that top UP and Amtrak execs signed off on an *unworkable* agreement, and when the time came to dot the Is and cross the Ts, the people who actually did the work pointed out some things which were necessary to make it work, at which point UP said "A workable agreement? We can't have that!"

It's also compatible with UP being jerkish and refusing to negotiate.

In short, your version *actually makes UP sound like the bad guy*. So.

That's a nice theory, but far from correct. Sorry!

You can take my word for it or not, I don't much care, but again Amtrak blew the deal. And considering how long you've been around here, you should know by now that I don't tend to post rumors and hearsay.

I can certainly corroborate what Alan is saying, and as I have said before I cannot disclose the source. At the end of the day I suppose it also does not matter a heck of a lot whether someone believes me and Alan or not.

 

[George Harris]

On the other hand, your description is compatible with the idea that top UP and Amtrak execs signed off on an *unworkable* agreement, and when the time came to dot the Is and cross the Ts, the people who actually did the work pointed out some things which were necessary to make it work, at which point UP said "A workable agreement? We can't have that!"

It's also compatible with UP being jerkish and refusing to negotiate.

In short, your version *actually makes UP sound like the bad guy*. So.

That's a nice theory, but far from correct. Sorry!

You can take my word for it or not, I don't much care, but again Amtrak blew the deal. And considering how long you've been around here, you should know by now that I don't tend to post rumors and hearsay.

I can certainly corroborate what Alan is saying, and as I have said before I cannot disclose the source. At the end of the day I suppose it also does not matter a heck of a lot whether someone believes me and Alan or not.

There is this funny thing about reality. What I or anyone else believes about the situation has absolutely no effect on the reality of it. When it comes to believing something about a situation, however, I am inclined to believe Alan or JIS, and in particular when they are in agreement as is the case here.

 

[Aaron]

Alan,I think the Sunset plan may have another problem, this one legal: NOL-SAS is 573 miles. Last I checked, that's under the PRIIA 750-mile limit, which raises a big legal issue, especially since the plan doesn't indicate any through cars, and I can't see a locomotive exchange cutting it. I know NOL and SAS are both endpoint stations for PRIIA purposes (NOL for three trains, SAS for the Texas Eagle), but there's no provision for <750 mile connections (else we'd likely see serious talk of a LAX-EMY train on Amtrak's side of things, and the Cascades wouldn't necessarily need state support). That is a "bit" of a hurdle from what I can tell, and it's likely open to a challenge since the plan didn't mention through cars of any kind.

If that plan is going to fly, either there's something I'm missing or the NOL connection is in big trouble. Mind you, it could work if you ran the train SAS-ORL...and that would probably be a viable way of getting the Sunset East going without the train hanging out all the way to California (which is a logistical issue), but that's going to require some progress not found in that report.

I'm seeing three possible scenarios here:

1. Amtrak just plain didn't catch that possibility. The right hand that was writing the PRIIA mandated plan didn't know about the left hand dealing with the PRIIA mandated state support on short routes. The daily Sunset Plan may have been created and bouncing around long before PRIIA, and just hadn't yet been formulated into this PIP until after PRIIA mandated it. So, when PRIIA asked for a plan for fixing the Sunset, they just pulled this one out of the file cabinet and dusted it off without looking too closely at the reality of short trains post-PRIIA.

2. Amtrak knows that it's a short route, but already has some loophole in mind (not disclosed in the plan) to get past the PRIIA requirements. I don't have any idea about what sort of loophole could possibly be employed here, but maybe someone else does.

3. Amtrak knows (and knew) full well that the SAS-NOL train would be covered by the state support requirement, and that's an integral part of the plan. Remember that the PIP suggested that with agreement from the host railroads, the plan could be implemented early 2011. That would give them a couple of years of running SAS-NOL under the old rules before having to ask for money from the states, giving them a better bargaining position (i.e. pay up or your train goes away). In the worst case scenario, they drop the (surely money losing) SAS-NOL segment. In the best case scenario, they're getting states to pay for part of a route that they're currently running but fully funding themselves at this point. Also, remember that in the PIP there are a couple of places where it lists "Potential stakeholder and community support" under "State or other non-Federal financial contributions" as one of the great benefits of the plan. I think that might be code for "We're gonna arrange it so that states have to pay for the SAS-NOL portion"

So, if you asked me to bet on the most likely scenario, I think "3". Of course, I know next to nothing about anything and this is just idle internet speculation on my part. Still, that's where my money would be.

 

[Nathanael]

Alan,I think the Sunset plan may have another problem, this one legal: NOL-SAS is 573 miles. Last I checked, that's under the PRIIA 750-mile limit

Which doesn't exist.

Do you remember me pointing out what PRIIA *actually says*? San Antonio to Houston is not a designated high-speed rail corridor and is part of the national rail system, and so Amtrak can operate it however it likes.

Houston to Baton Rouge to New Orleans appears to be a designated high-speed rail corridor... but the Sunset doesn't go to Baton Rouge. I haven't found the original designation statement for the corridor, so I'm not sure if this would apply.

Of course, Amtrak could always claim that the train ran from San Antonio to *Jacksonville* and was temporarily suspended between New Orleans and Jacksonville. I think some of these legal requirements have less effect than others.

 

[Nathanael]

There is this funny thing about reality. What I or anyone else believes about the situation has absolutely no effect on the reality of it. When it comes to believing something about a situation, however, I am inclined to believe Alan or JIS, and in particular when they are in agreement as is the case here.

Well, we have two people who believe, thanks to undisclosed sources, that Amtrak somehow messed up a negotiation with UP. The explanation features UP being obnoxious and making up large numbers to chase Amtrak away as *part* of the claim that Amtrak somehow messed up the negotiation.

Sure, it's possible, but it *still* doesn't make UP look good, which is particularly odd. Alternatively, both people could be getting their inside information from a bad source.

 

[Anderson]

Alan,I think the Sunset plan may have another problem, this one legal: NOL-SAS is 573 miles. Last I checked, that's under the PRIIA 750-mile limit

Which doesn't exist.

Do you remember me pointing out what PRIIA *actually says*? San Antonio to Houston is not a designated high-speed rail corridor and is part of the national rail system, and so Amtrak can operate it however it likes.

Houston to Baton Rouge to New Orleans appears to be a designated high-speed rail corridor... but the Sunset doesn't go to Baton Rouge. I haven't found the original designation statement for the corridor, so I'm not sure if this would apply.

Of course, Amtrak could always claim that the train ran from San Antonio to *Jacksonville* and was temporarily suspended between New Orleans and Jacksonville. I think some of these legal requirements have less effect than others.

Of the four sections listed, my read of the Act (and I can't find the text now, go figure...) is that the NEC and 750+ mile trains are exempted, while Amtrak has to get an agreement for either sub-750 mile runs or non-NEC HSR trains. Knowing what was going through Congress's mind with this (part of the point was to try and get private-sector contract/franchise operators in the picture by removing the implicit federal subsidy that the previous frameworks had allowed.

This slots in with the fact that Amtrak is by no means a lock for operating the CAHSR operation, and that was the point that the folks designing PRIIA were gunning for.

 

[AlanB]

Well, we have two people who believe, thanks to undisclosed sources, that Amtrak somehow messed up a negotiation with UP. The explanation features UP being obnoxious and making up large numbers to chase Amtrak away as *part* of the claim that Amtrak somehow messed up the negotiation.

No, you have two people who posted. I'm quite certain that many others also believe.

Sure, it's possible, but it *still* doesn't make UP look good, which is particularly odd. Alternatively, both people could be getting their inside information from a bad source.

Well it's still better than the more commonly held belief by most that Amtrak approached UP and UP simply responded "We need big bucks because we're the anti-passenger RR." UP agreed to allow it. Then when confronted with last minute, unreasonable demands; UP came up with that ridiculous number to put an end to all negotiations for a while.

 

[cirdan]

Interestingly, Boardman settled for a schedule change and reconsideration of daily service in 2014. I'm wondering, therefore, if there was some particular double-tracking project or something which was scheduled to be done in 2014. Colton Flyover is supposed to be done in 2014...

Either that or maybe it isn't UPRR as a whole that is against the daily service but some individuals and maybe Boardman is biding his time, speculating they may retire or move on to other positions. In the business world surprisngly many decisons are taken on gut feeling rather than on the basis of hard factual analysis. If folks want to believe something they can always somehow twist the facts to back up what they want to believe.

 

[jis]

Cirdan, at this point in time you may very well be the closest to what is going on. Afterall some do remember these things after getting burned, and hold it against abstract concepts like Amtrak or UP even when the individuals involved have passed on. I have had to deal with such situations many times in business and it inevitably takes a while to resolve

(null)

 

[cuppb001]

Dont shoot me for ressurecting an old thread but after reading the article in NewsWire the other day about Amtrak long distance service, It sounds as if Boardman is not interesting in expanding the LD network. Kind of upsetting considering I was really looking forward to the FEC expansion of the Star and expected it to be a reality especially with that special inspection train being ran. Also I know that All Aboard Flordia is in the works but personally I am an Amtrak and Amtrak rolling stock fan.

Article Quote:
Responding to a question about whether Amtrak would consider increasing frequencies on sold-out one-train-a-day routes like the Lake Shore Limited or Empire Builder, he simply said, “no.” Earlier, he mentioned that it’s not possible to spend $700 million – or even $200 million – for increasing the Sunset Limited to daily from tri-weekly service, because “with long-distance trains, the revenue doesn’t come back the way we need it to make those kind of investments.”

 

[MikefromCrete]

I was at Boardman's speech and he said that Amtrak is not a funding organization, but an operating one. If someone wants to come up with the money, Amtrak will operate it. Same thing with Sunset East. He said Congress asked Amtrak what it would cost to resume New Orleans-Jacksonville service. Amtrak studied the issue, came up with a cost and sent it to Congress. Since, Congress has been silent on the issue. So, there will be no new services, long or short distance, without funding from somebody.

 

[afigg]

Dont shoot me for ressurecting an old thread but after reading the article in NewsWire the other day about Amtrak long distance service, It sounds as if Boardman is not interesting in expanding the LD network. Kind of upsetting considering I was really looking forward to the FEC expansion of the Star and expected it to be a reality especially with that special inspection train being ran. Also I know that All Aboard Flordia is in the works but personally I am an Amtrak and Amtrak rolling stock fan.
Article Quote:

Responding to a question about whether Amtrak would consider increasing frequencies on sold-out one-train-a-day routes like the Lake Shore Limited or Empire Builder, he simply said, “no.” Earlier, he mentioned that it’s not possible to spend $700 million – or even $200 million – for increasing the Sunset Limited to daily from tri-weekly service, because “with long-distance trains, the revenue doesn’t come back the way we need it to make those kind of investments.”

There is a good interview with Boardman, Amtrak's Boardman defends long-distance trains, available at the Trains Magazine website, but it is only available to subscribers. Don't over interpret what he said. He was asked about doubling frequencies on LD routes and he said that won't happen (no equipment, would lose more money, etc). That has nothing to do with splitting the Silver Star at Jacksonville and running it down the FEC. That is not a new LD train, it would just be a re-route. One that, according to the PIP report, would increase revenue more than operating costs, so it would be a net plus. So, if the FEC and Florida work out an agreement on service over the FEC, a Silver Star split could still happen.

As for the rest of the interview, it is not that Boardman does not want to expand the LD system, it is that Amtrak can not do so without more funding from Congress. Right now, Boardman is fighting a defensive action to maintain the 15 current LD trains in the Amtrak re-authorization bill that is being worked on in Congress this year with a very hostile fraction to contend with in the House. But that is a discussion better left to a thread on the issue.

 

[NE933]

afigg is right.

Plus, in these hostile times, the best expansion will be longer consists, which will be possible for the Eastern trains with the new Viewliners coming up. Hopefully the Superliner western and midwestern trains can get some indirect capacity increase by the Nippo bilevels and the new Talgos, which sometimes use Superliners to cover up shortages.

 

[Nathanael]

Amtrak was pretty clear a few years ago that three-a-week was a problem, an inefficient use of resources, and needed to end. But it doesn't mean that it makes sense to spend $200 million to go daily. If it cost $20 million, Amtrak might well do it.

I have been wondering for a while what amount of money would be asked by CSX and the Buckingham Branch for the *Cardinal* to go daily. (I would hope there would be no complaints west of Indianapolis or east of Charlottesville!) The projections back in the PIP in 2010 were that it would impact Amtrak's bottom line for the worse by $2.1 million / year (vs. $3 million / year for the Sunset/Eagle daily plan). ($400 million of that is increased staffing costs at staffed stations.) The numbers are probably more favorable now, with revenue per passenger up substantially (up by more than 10% in the last two years). The PIP did say that nothing could be done until more rolling stock was available, so I wouldn't expect to see anything until the new Viewliners are delivered. But after that, I wonder: Virginia is already spending some money on the Buckingham Branch, how much more would it take?

 

[Nathanael]

Um, "$400 thousand of that"

 

[Anderson]

Well, the issue with a "new LD train" at the moment is that...for a new Eastern LD train, you'd need about $25m in cars per set (or about $75-100m for the requisite sets). Out west, it probably goes to $35m or so (or $210m for six sets). Then Amtrak would need to acquire the "slots", which would probably get expensive again. And then there's any operating deficit to deal with.

Now, let's turn things around: Assume that Amtrak is given the slots and the train can turn a substantial operating profit. Then, Amtrak might consider it, but nothing is quite there yet from what I can tell.

 

[afigg]

Amtrak was pretty clear a few years ago that three-a-week was a problem, an inefficient use of resources, and needed to end. But it doesn't mean that it makes sense to spend $200 million to go daily. If it cost $20 million, Amtrak might well do it.
I have been wondering for a while what amount of money would be asked by CSX and the Buckingham Branch for the *Cardinal* to go daily. (I would hope there would be no complaints west of Indianapolis or east of Charlottesville!) The projections back in the PIP in 2010 were that it would impact Amtrak's bottom line for the worse by $2.1 million / year (vs. $3 million / year for the Sunset/Eagle daily plan). ($400 million of that is increased staffing costs at staffed stations.) The numbers are probably more favorable now, with revenue per passenger up substantially (up by more than 10% in the last two years). The PIP did say that nothing could be done until more rolling stock was available, so I wouldn't expect to see anything until the new Viewliners are delivered. But after that, I wonder: Virginia is already spending some money on the Buckingham Branch, how much more would it take?

If Amtrak has $20 million available to spend in capital funds on LD route improvements. Much depends on what happens in the Re-authorization bill and the FY2014 appropriations. The administration asked for a lot of funding for passenger rail, including $800 million for the LD trains. Meanwhile Amtrak is asking for $2.65 billion in total. With the federal budget annual deficit falling even faster than forecast a few months ago, the politics of the deficit hawks/anti-spending crowd versus more investment in infrastructure crowd for the Fy14 budget are going to be interesting.

At the MWHSR meeting, according to the Trains Mag article, Boardman did have this to say about using NEC revenues to cover the losses on the LD trains: "But Boardman warned that paying back a $532 million loan used to purchase 70 new Siemens electric locomotives, formally unveiled last Monday in Sacramento, would mean that expanding Northeast Corridor revenues would not be available to help improve long-distance trains’ cost recovery." What Boardman had to say about VIA was also interesting....

As for the Buckingham Branch RR, the primary issue is the lack of sidings long enough over the 116 miles from Gordonsville to Clifton Forge for the 8000' long empty coal trains the CSX sends westbound on the BBRR. There was a new project line item added in the Virginia 6 year budget plan last year of $7 million for the North Mountain subdivision Siding Project split over FY13 & FY14. Now shifted to FY14 and FY15 in the FY14 draft 6 year budget plan that was just released. Have not found specifics on it, but it appears that VA is providing funds to build a new long siding on the BBRR. But it could be VA FY15 or later before it is built. However this is way off-topic for Jacksonville to Miami topic.