Transcript Because of a market-based approach involving minimal

CSX’s I-95 Corridor
for the
Virginians for High Speed Rail
March 13, 2007
Today’s discussion:
 Provide an overview of CSX’s I-95 Corridor in Virginia
 Discuss Amtrak performance
 Review actions to improve performance
 Update construction projects
 In depth look at the Quantico Bridge cut-in
 The path to the Corridor of the Future and to the funding
2
On-time performance of Amtrak trains is largely dependent
on three factors.
 Physical characteristics of the operating territory
 Single/double track?
 Signal System?
 The operating mix of train traffic
 How many trains?
 What kinds of trains?
 The validity of schedules
 Can they be reliably maintained?
 Do they adjust for known activities?
3
CSX’s DC to Richmond corridor is our busiest multi-use,
double track corridor and one of the busiest in the US.
 ~110 miles of double track with
centralized traffic control (CTC)
 48 Daily passenger/commuter trains
 18 Amtrak trains
 30 VRE commuter trains
Washington
Richmond
Washington
 ~32 daily freight trains
Richmond
 Over half the train slots filled by
passenger trains
 And until recently, a single track bridge
4
Passenger operations outperform freight operations even
with increased traffic and few capacity enhancements.
Train Type
VRE
Amtrak
Intermodal
Merchandise
Unit
From
Washington
Washington
Washington
Washington
Washington
(CP
(CP
(CP
(CP
(CP
VA)
VA)
VA)
VA)
VA)
To
Fredericksburg
Richmond (Greendale)
Richmond (Greendale)
Richmond (Greendale)
Richmond (Greendale)
Distance
53.5
107.5
107.5
107.5
107.5
Avg Time
1:31
2:10
2:53
4:11
4:19
Deviation
0:12
0:19
0:40
1:31
1:26
MPH
35.1
49.3
37.1
25.7
24.9
 The high standard deviations for freight trains mean poor reliability for
freight customers
 Poor freight reliability means more highway congestion
5
CSX and BNSF have the lowest levels of freight train
interference.
Freight Interference by Road
1800
1600
1200
1000
800
BNSF
CSX
NS
600
UP
400
200
0
AP 5
R
05
M
AY
0
JU 5
N
0
JU 5
L
0
AU 5
G
0
SE 5
P
05
O
C
T
0
NO 5
V
0
DE 5
C
0
JA 5
N
0
FE 6
B
06
M
AR
0
AP 6
R
06
M
AY
0
JU 6
L
0
AU 6
G
0
SE 6
P
06
O
C
T
0
NO 6
V
0
DE 6
C
0
JA 6
N
07
05
B
AR
M
FE
N
05
0
JA
MIN. DELAY PER 10000 TRAIN MILES
1400
D A T A SOU R C E A M T R A K HOST
D ELA Y R EPOR T
( N o June 0 6
D at a)
6
In 2005 and 2006, CSXT delays to Amtrak trains have been
driven more by maintenance than by freight train delay.
Maintenance of Way, Signal and Slow Order Caused Amtrak Delays
Maintenance of Way, Signal, and Slow Order Caused Amtrak Delays
1600
1400
1000
BN
CSX
800
NS
UP
600
400
200
04
No
v-0
4
De
c-0
4
J an
-0 5
Fe
b- 0
5
Ma
r- 0
5
Ap
r- 0
5
Ma
y -0
5
J un
-0 5
J ul
-05
Au
g- 0
5
Se
p- 0
5
Oc
t- 0
5
No
v-0
5
De
c-0
5
J an
-0 6
Fe
b- 0
6
Ma
r- 0
6
Ap
r- 0
6
Ma
y -0
6
J un
-0 6
J ul
-06
Au
g- 0
6
Se
p- 0
6
Oc
t- 0
6
No
v-0
6
De
c-0
6
J an
-0 7
0
Oc
t-
Delay Per 10,000 Train Mile
1200
Da t a S ourc e
Amt ra k Host
De la y Re port
June 2 0 0 6 da t a not
a va ila ble
7
CSX is completing a robust RF&P maintenance program.
 Invested $19 million in RF&P track structure in 2005 and 2006
 Replaced 176,092 ties (138.2 track miles)
 97,165 feet of rail (9.2 track miles)
 Another $10.5 M planned in 2007
 Replacing 48,000 ties (43.68 track miles south of VRE service area)
 Replacing 78,000 feet of rail (14.74 miles)
 Investments benefit passenger service: Better ride and more reliable service
 However, tie replacement:




Requires the removal of the rail anchors
Breaks the surface friction between the ties and the ballast
Destabilizes track, and
Requires a conservative approach to heat.
8
Last summer’s passengers experienced significant
delays; the root cause was a lack of capacity.

The most severe delays resulted from a combination of causes





Lack of capacity identified as the root cause of delays years ago








June flooding set records
Severe electrical storm caused catastrophic damage at Possum Point
Traffic congestion due to booming economy
Lack of capacity
VRE agreement
1999 Federal Railroad Administration Report to Congress
2000 CANAC Line Capacity Study for Virginia, VRE and CSX
MAROPS (Mid Atlantic Rail Ops Study - VA, FRA, FHWA, state DOTs, and Ports)
Causes significant traffic congestion which inhibits reliability and growth
Prevents recovery, regardless of the cause of the initial delay
Few stations have platforms serving both tracks, resulting in a single track operation for VRE
Only a small portion of the delays were attributable to heat orders
 Affects trains between 1 PM and 7 PM only
 50 MPH, not 70 MPH, but multiple station stops limit the impact
 Maximum delay of 10 minutes for Fredericksburg riders; more for Richmond and Newport
9
News
As responsible partners, we’ve taken a number of actions
to improve performance as the capacity improvements are
underway.

Intensified tactical focus produces results
 Assigned experienced dispatchers to territory
 Added operations superintendent to network dispatch center to monitor daily operations
 Established new train manager for area
 Increased signal, track and mechanical maintenance presence on corridor
 Changed freight schedules for trains departing Richmond, Baltimore and Cumberland

Partnering with Amtrak & VRE on major maintenance work
 Working nights to minimize disruptions when possible
— Minimizes train cancellations
— Less productive, more costly and more challenging for workers
— But produces additional concerns during summer heat

Establishing an experienced based, realistic schedule
10
The capacity enhancements will make a real difference,
especially the opening of the Quantico Bridge.

Phase One – Complete
 AF Interlocking
 Dispatcher Consolidation

Phase Two – Complete
 Arkendale crossovers
 Elmont crossovers

Phase Three – Underway
 L’Enfant 3rd main

Phase Four – 2007/2008
 Quantico Bridge (Feb. 2007)
 Slater’s Lane to RO (Design)
 Franconia 3rd main (Design)

Phase Five – 2008
 Fredericksburg to HA 3rd main
(Design)
11
The new 2-track Quantico Bridge opened February 17.
12
P098 was the first train over the new Quantico Bridge.
13
The $30M Quantico cut-in involves far more than just the
construction of a new bridge.
P09816
0508
(Arkendale)
0608 (Featherstone)
Segment 3
17-Feb
SA thru 18-Feb
SU (0700-0700 ??? hours)
Single track Featherstone (87.0) to Arkendale (72.1) - 14.9 miles (Signals Suspended)
Absolute Curfew February 17, 2007 1200 hours until 1400 hours -- after P079/89 Combo
Saturday, February 17, 2007
Amtrak/VRE will have 2 T&E employees in the Locomotive Cab to copy DTC Blocks
P05216
P06717
P08217
P08817
P09216
P08917
P07917
P19417
P19517
P09117
P05317
P08017
P09917
P09017
P06617
P09717
0723
(Arkendale)
0823 (Featherstone)
Cancelled
0843
(Arkendale)
0943 (Featherstone)
Cancelled
1036
(Arkendale)
1136 (Featherstone)
Combine w P07917
1129
(Featherstone)
1229 (Arkendale)
Cancelled
Cancelled
1543
(Featherstone)
1643 (Arkendale)
1620
(Featherstone)
1720 (Arkendale)
Combined w/P090 at Richmond on PO 90'S Schedule
Cancelled
1846
(Arkendale)
1946 (Featherstone)
P090 will depart Rich 1 hour later than scheduled due to switching P080 into consist
Cancelled
2006
(Featherstone)
2106 (Arkendale)
14
In addition, the Rail Advisory Board is funding the preliminary
engineering for 11 miles of 3rd main between Arkendale and
Powells Creek.
 Increases capacity significantly
 Eliminates congestion at Quantico
Creek
 Capitalizes on new Quantico Creek
Bridge; from 1 to 3 tracks
 Complements on-going, publiclyfunded capacity improvements
 Includes a new Cherry Hill VRE
station stop
 Uses match from a private developer
15
But the consensus finding is that major investments are
needed to finish the project in three phases.
 Phase 1
 Build the third main track from DC to Richmond now
— Exclude the high cost projects
— Seek the preliminary engineering needed for firm estimates
 Phase 2
 Attack the challenging, high cost projects next
— Major bridges
• Potomac
• Aquia
— Ashland constraints
— Fredericksburg viaduct
 Phase 3
 Develop the Corridor of the Future
— Sealed high-speed freight passenger separation
— Expanded freight capacity
16
The DC to Richmond Third Track Feasibility Study provides
the path for completion.
 Complete the VTA 2000 program of projects.
 Complete a comprehensive alternatives analysis
 Conduct operational modeling
 Review alternate right-of-ways
 Analyze public and private benefits
 Conduct an environmental review and the preliminary engineering
 Determine the specific design
 Develop accurate estimate of costs
 Establish agreements
 Identify a dedicated source of funding for capital and operating costs
17
Federal support is the key.
Funding


Federal appropriations (primary source of
funding)
 2008/9 Transportation Reauthorization Bill
 Corridors of the Future
State Appropriations
 ~$100m spent by Commonwealth of VA
 ~$20m in VA transportation bill

Local governments and other agencies
 (1995 VRE agreement to fund 3rd main)

Amtrak

CSX - right of way & existing improvements
Benefits

Intercity passenger capacity / reliability

Commuter capacity / reliability

Trucks off the highway

Reduced highway congestion on I-95

Environmental benefits
18
CSX’s Corridor of the Future application may surprise you.
 Corridor stretches 1,200 miles from Washington to Miami.
 Corridor must be modified to address three major challenges
 Both passenger and freight trains need to travel faster
 Both passenger and freight trains need greater reliability and recoverability
 Both passenger and freight train volume will increase
 CSX’s vision for the future is:
 Passenger trains must be able to travel unimpeded at 110 MPH
 Freight trains must be able to operate at speeds of 50 MPH to 70 MPH
 Passenger service must be physically separated from freight operations
— Higher density industrial areas may require freight tracks on both sides of
passenger tracks
 The corridor must be sealed to prevent motor vehicle intrusion
— 1700 at-grade highway rail crossings must be addressed
19
We must finish the project; the next steps are…
 Set realistic expectations during current construction
 Align stakeholders around a common plan
 Seek consensus and action on “Quick Hits”
 Perform preliminary engineering – refine cost estimates
 Organize and energize all stakeholders to advocate for these changes
 Gain federal support
20
Thanks for your attention.
Questions?
21