Rail Project Delivery Status Report - Vermont Legislature · Rail Project Delivery Status Report...
Transcript of Rail Project Delivery Status Report - Vermont Legislature · Rail Project Delivery Status Report...
Rail Project Delivery
Status Report
Presented to the House and Senate
Transportation Committees of The
Vermont Legislature
As required by 19 VSA § 10(e)c
January 15, 2011
- - - Contents - - -
1. FY11 Rail Budget
2. Project Report
3. Track 1 (ARRA-High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail) NECR
4. Track 3 (ARRA-NY/VT Bi-State Intercity Passenger Rail Study) Rutland to
Bennington – Western Corridor
5. Track 2 (ARRA – High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail – Ethan Allen Express
Improvements and Extension) Rutland to Burlington – Western Corridor
6. Western Corridor (Jeffords) Earmark
7. 3-Way Partnership – Economic Development
8. Topics of Particular Interest
9. Amtrak
10. Vermont State Auditor’s Oversight of Rail
11. Rail – Property Management
12. Regional Involvements
1. FY11 Rail Budget: All figures are as of December 31, 2010
a) Total FY11 rail budget = $54,917,359.57 (100%)
b) Expenditures to date = $12,371,795.82 (23%)
c) Balance remaining as 12/31/10 = $42,545,563.75 (77%)
d) Non-ARRA expended to date = $ 7,913,159.12 (64%)
e) ARRA expended to date + $ 4,458,636.70 (36%)
= $12,371,795.82
f) Exp. 11/30/10 to 12/31/10 = $5,505,767.59 (44.5%)
2. Project Report:
a) Projects bid prior and Construction Completed in 2010
Project Description
Proctor Install 1,600 ties on the VTR (Railroad Forces)
West Rutland Install 2 mi. continuously welded rail on the CLP Pittsford HPP ABRB(8)
Rehabilitation of Br. 215 on the VTR in Pittsford
b) Projects Bid in 2010 and Construction Completed in 2010
Project
Description
Middlebury STP WCRS(7) Installation of 12 miles of continuously welded rail on the VTR1
New Haven RAIL5307(16) Reconstruction of the US 7/VTR highway crossing
Ferrisburg RAIL 5306(1) Reconstruction of the Little Chicago Rd/VTR highway crossing
Barton
Rehabilitation of Rail Highway Surface by District Forces/WACR-CRL
Swanton - Lake St.
Rehabilitation of Rail Highway Surface by District Forces/NECR
Milton
Rehabilitation of Rail Highway Surface by District Forces/NECR
Clarendon
Rehabilitation of Rail Highway Surface by District Forces/GMRC
St. Albans - Aldus St. (2)
Rehabilitation of Rail Highway Surface by District Forces/NECR
S. Burlington (2)
Rehabilitation of Rail Highway Surface by District Forces/VTR
Williston - N. Williston Rd.
Rehabilitation of Rail Highway Surface by District Forces/NECR
Shelburne
Rehabilitation of Rail Highway Surface by District Forces/VTR
1 (18 of the 28 workers on this job were hired from hired locally {65%})
c) Projects Bid in 2010 with Construction to be completed in 2011
Project
Description
Rockingham STP GMRC(1) Reconstruction of Bridge 108 Parker Hill Road on GMRC
Rutland City RAIL5307(15) Reconstruction of the West ST/Forest ST/ VTR
Rockingham STPGMRC(16) Scour and slope stabilization for Br. 107 on the GMRC
Chester
STP GMRC(4) Rehabilitation of the bearings and bridge seats of Br. 114 on GMRC
Chester
STP GMRC(5) Rehabilitation of the bearings and bridge seats of Br. 121 on GMRC
d) Projects to be Bid in 2011 with Construction completed in 2011
Project
Description
Clarendon STP GMRC(7) Rehabilitation of the bearings and bridge seats of Br. 153 on GMRC
Wallingford STP GMRC(8) Rehabilitation of the bearings and bridge seats of Br. 145 on GMRC
Salisbury
WCRS(15) Reconstruction of the superstructure of Br. 232 on the VTR
Middlebury WCRS(16) Reconstruction of the superstructure of Br. 234 on the VTR
Leicester
WCRS(11) Rehabilitation of the bearings and bridge seats of Br. 229 on the VTR
Middlebury WCRS(12) Rehabilitation of the bearings and bridge seats of Br. 233 on the VTR
New Haven WCRS(13) Rehabilitation of the bearings and bridge seats of Br. 243 on the VTR
3. Track 1 (ARRA- High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail) NECR
Approximately 14 miles of continuously welded rail have been installed before winter conditions
halted the progress. Two companies, Atlas and Railworks, were awarded the welded rail
installation piece and have been working in tandem. Work will continue on signaling and
communications during the winter. Rail installation is expected to begin again sometime in
March, weather permitting. So far the project has gone very smoothly. As you may know,
USDOT awarded an additional $2.7M to this project in December. Discussions between FRA,
NECR and VTrans are ongoing to identify exactly what, within the scope of the project itself,
this additional money will support. This project has a 24 month window.
4. Track 3 (ARRA - NY/VT Bi-State Intercity Passenger Rail Study) Rutland
to Bennington – Western Corridor
This grant engages the State of New York and Vermont to conduct a planning study to develop a
corridor analysis, service development plan and associated Preliminary Engineering and NEPA
documents for an intercity passenger route that would serve the communities between Albany,
NY and Rutland, VT including Mechanicville, NY, Bennington, VT and Manchester, VT. The
FRA award is $500,000 with $250,000 coming from both New York and Vermont, for a project
total $1,000,000.
The Track 3 Planning Grant award is shepherded by a working group comprised of
representatives from Bennington (Rex Burke), Rutland (Mark Blucher), NYSDOT (Charlie
Poltenson and Tim Conway), VTrans (Costa Pappas and Joe Flynn) and is chaired by VTrans
(designee). The official agreement was signed with FRA in early September. RFP’s were
solicited and 6 formal responses were reviewed by the working group on November 30th
. From
that meeting a front runner was identified, and Contract Administration at VTrans is vetting the
front runner’s proposal further. The project has a 24 month window.
5. Track 2 (High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail – Ethan Allen Express
Improvements and Extension) Rutland to Burlington – Western Corridor
Application
Twice, 2009 and 2010, VTrans has submitted applications to fund improvements on the Western
Corridor, from the Vermont State-Line to Rutland (CLP) and Rutland to Burlington (VTR), for
the purpose of extending Amtrak’s Ethan Allen Express to Burlington. Both times the FRA has
not selected this application. Upon the first non-selection, Vermont worked closely with the
FRA to better understand it’s suggestions for improvement and the second application was
tailored to the guidance received.
Upon release of information of the second round awards, which did not include Vermont, we
were extremely perplexed. Over 90% of the awards went to state’s whose projects are years
away from implementation. Working with our Joint Delegation in Washington, Vermont pressed
to understand the decision of FRA and USDOT. After detailed efforts FRA has agreed to meet
in Vermont with VTrans and NYSDOT to better understand the plan. We view this as an
optimistic sign. This meeting is expected to be this winter, in advance of yet another funding
opportunity.
6. Western Corridor (Jeffords) Earmark:
Currently $19.80M remain available in this earmark intended for use on Vermont’s Western
Corridor. The Jeffords Earmark has frustrated many people for years as it sat largely unspent,
referred to as “Glacial”, at times. VTrans had a placeholder of $16M attached to the Middlebury
Spur, until the Record Of Decision (ROD) became known. With the release of the ROD in
January 2010 VTrans has met many times with OMYA and the railroad. From these meetings
and through Conceptual Design efforts, we have identified the State’s cost to construct the bridge
at US Rt. 7 to be $6.15M. We are comfortable enough, although further design is necessary,
with this estimate that the remaining $13.65M is being programmed for projects. With the
support of the Vermont Rail Council, VTrans believes that bridge # 219 in Florence, VT near
Kendall Hill Road should be the recipient of the bulk of the earmark. This bridge relocation is
estimated at $11.95M. The major reasons we feel this should be done are 1) future federal
funding will likely be scarce, resulting in the need to appropriate state funds if we don’t use the
earmark and 2) with one minor exception (project programmed now) all the bridges south of
Kendall Hill Road, to Rutland, are at the 286,000 lb. load capacity. By rebuilding bridge # 219,
we realize the investments already made south of Florence and we allow one of the largest
freight rail customers in Vermont to maximize commodity movement.
Remaining funds ($1.7M) would be targeted at 9 other projects all on the WC between
Shaftsbury and New Haven:
Bridge 95 Clarendon
Bridge 79 Dorset
Bridge 239 Middlebury
Bridge 57.5 Shaftsbury
Bridge 63 Sunderland
Bridge 64 Sunderland
Bridge 242 New Haven
Bridge 91 Wallingford
Bridge 72 Manchester
7. 3-Way Partnership - Economic Development:
The 3-way investment program is intended to spawn economic opportunity by leveraging
projects between the State of Vermont, the railroads and freight shippers. Potential projects are
identified, costs are estimated and benefits, value and timelines are discussed. If approved, costs
are shared by the three parties. VTrans hopes to increase opportunities for Vermont businesses
to access this program. Often we are contacted either by the railroad, who have prospective
clients or by developers who also have prospective clients who seek rail siding locations. Recent
3-way projects are:
a) Late 2009 between NECR, Swanton Limestone and VTrans in Franklin County.
b) In 2010 Shelburne Limestone, Vermont Railway Inc. and VTrans joined to
construct the first truck-to-train transload facility at the Burlington Railyard in
Chittenden County.
c) Current projects involve Phoenix Feeds of New Haven in Addison County
d) Couture Trucking Co. of Lyndonville in Caledonia County.
8. Topics of Particular Interest:
a) 12 miles CWR - VAOT entered into a contract for 12 miles of continuously welded rail with
Railroad Construction Company of New Jersey. RCC’s total bid was $3,015,507, which was
$96,637.05 under the estimate prepared for VAOT by HDR Engineering. There were three
approved bidders who took out plans. No contractors questioned the completion date during
the bidding process. A one month delay was incurred due to attempts by FHWA to determine
how to account for salvaged rail removed and credited to the project. Due to this delay the
time between advertisement and the project completion date was compressed. There was one
bidder and the bid was opened on May 28, 2010. The bid was from Railroad Construction
Company, of New Jersey for $3,015,507.00. VTrans did not find anything in their bid which
justified not awarding the contract. As such we proceeded with the award to the apparent
low bidder. The contract was executed by VTrans on June 30th
, 2010. RCC began the project
on July 19, 2010. Actual rail installation began on August 17, 2010. VTrans has not
encountered any problems with the contractor to date. In fact, resident engineering staff has
been quite impressed with the contractor. Once the project began, an unusually high number
of field welds were discovered in the rail, which was not noted during the pre-purchase
inspection (note that the pre-purchase inspection was conducted by a VTrans rail employee
and two Vermont Rail Systems superintendents). There were 292 welds which required a
significant amount of grinding and prep work to the rail base to allow for the rail to be
properly installed. These grindings caused the project to be extended 28 days and added
$54,484.28 to the cost. There was also a discrepancy in the material spec’d by HDR
Engineering used to plug holes in the ties left from the removal of the old spikes. A new
product had to be agreed upon while the contractor was engaged in other aspects of the
project. This did not significantly affect timelines. Vermont Railway requested a change in
design for the location of one existing turnout at milepost 60.36. This did not create any
additional cost or time to the contractor. The project finished on November 24, 2010 one day
ahead of the revised completion date.
b) Middlebury Spur – As stated before the ROD came out in January 2010. Immediately
OMYA assembled a team of engineers to identify what would have to be built at the Verpol
plant in Florence to accept and off-load quarry rail cars. Monthly meetings have followed
between VTrans, FHWA, OMYA and the railroad. OMYA met with VTrans in October and
committed to the Spur project, contingent upon acceptable financing. Currently, OMYA and
the railroad are discussing financing options and contemplating a loan request through the
FRA, for what is known as a Railroad Infrastructure Loan (RRIF Loan). Preliminary Design
has led VTrans to estimate its share of costs, which is limited to building a bridge at US Rt.
7, at $6.15M. This bridge will be near Foster Motors and will allow the rail spur to cross in a
cut beneath Rt. 7. No further work of significance has occurred on the rest of the Spur, or is
likely to before financing is secured, however the Rt. 7 bridge design continues.
c) Middlebury Tunnel – There are two surface bridges that cross the Vermont Railway (VTR)
in downtown Middlebury, they are at Merchants Row and Main Street. These bridges were
slated for reconstruction, but continually ran into design challenges given the surface grade
and possible disruption to the cityscape of the local streets and sidewalks. All the while
VTrans and the railroad were facing decisions about the underpasses, created by these
bridges. The vertical height is limited and restricts the use of double-stack shipping
containers. Welded rail was slated to be laid through the area; however it was decided to
hold so as not to have to rip it out to perform the underpass and bridge work above. About a
year ago the concept of lowering the grade of the rail line, and utilizing a precast concrete
structure through the linear distance and then laying welded rail was hatched. Scoping of this
concept is currently underway. Imagine laying hollowed out children’s blocks, one after
another, in a long line and then passing a toy train through them? In essence, that is the
concept of the Middlebury Tunnel.
d) Rutland Railyard Improvement Project – The Environmental Assessment (EA) regarding this
project was released in November 2009. It identified what is called the Preferred Alternative,
which is the plan chosen to proceed with. In this case it was Preferred Alternative 5. A
public comment period was opened until January 29, 2010. During this period the public
could comment on the plan (5) chosen to be built. After much input, it became clear that
there was little to no public support for the Plan as chosen. VTrans position was and is that it
supports this project, but it will not force it upon the community that openly does not support
it. Meetings were held between the City of Rutland, the Town of Rutland and the Rutland
Redevelopment Authority. In the end a request was made by VTrans to the FHWA to allow
this project to circle back to the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) instead of forging
ahead with Preferred Alternative 5. The benefits of this request were many. However, it
serves two main points, the first being that if Alternative 5 as identified in the EA is not built
the State will have to repay about $1.3M to the FHWA. Also, going back to the EIS allows
new ideas and old sites to be reexamined and new sites to be explored. Granted, after an EIS
process there may still not be a favorable decision. Expenditures under an EIS may not
require repayment, if FHWA determines the best alternative is what is called No Build. We
await a response to return to the EIS from the FHWA.
e) Green Mountain Railroad Corporation (GMRC) – On December 30, 2010 VTrans and the
GMRC agreed on terms by which the Lease by the State to GMRC to operate their railroad
renewed for the preset length of ten-years.
f) Washington County Railroad (WACR) – The WACR runs from Montpelier Junction where it
meets the NECR to Websterville, which is its terminus. For many years there was sporadic
traffic on this line. This minimal activity spawned habits and encroachments by citizens that
are contrary to safe practices regarding rail lines. Then in November 2009 an announcement
that increased rail traffic may well occur resulted from plans to ship waste granite, stored in
Websterville, to points in the US where shore stabilization projects were being undertaken.
Clearly this news became of great interest to Montpelier, Berlin, Barre and Barre Town.
Subsequently there have been numerous meetings with stakeholders about aspects of this
activity with primary focus on safety. Candidly, there are concern about plans for bike paths
which have been designed, funded and intended to be located on part of the railroad right of
way, the potential length of trains, their frequency and the effects on the communities. In fall
2010 VTrans applied for FRA funding ($2.9M) to relocate 1.32 miles of the line in
Montpelier adjacent to what is known as Country Club Road, on an existing State-owned
railbed. If federal funding is unavailable VTrans would discuss State funds for this
realignment. This proposition has also caused concern on a few fronts. Factually, the State
is the steward of the property and the railroad has the right, under Federal Regulation, to
conduct rail operations on the line. Together the State and the railroad partake in
maintenance (railroad) and upgrades (State) on this line.
g) White River Junction Railroad Station – In November 2009 VTrans began discussing the
acquisition of the WRJ station with it’s current owner, Byron Hathorne. Mr. Hathorne
advised VTrans he was putting the station and land on the market for sale at the price of
$875,000. Of primary interest is 5.5 acres to the east of the station, owned by the State of
Vermont. This acreage is land-locked by the WRJ station and efforts to buy a slice to
“unlock the land”, were unsuccessful. WRJ also houses the Amtrak station, offices for the
GMRC, NECR, controls parking for Amtrak customers and some parking for the adjacent
Vermont Court House. In August 2010 we submitted a TIGER II application for funding to
purchase the station, which was not selected. Also, as mentioned before, we still have an
earmark request filed for funding as well.
In November 2010, a Lease and Grant of Option to Purchase the WRJ station was entered
into by the owner and the State, giving the State until November 5, 2013 to purchase the
station. This Option cost $87,500. Also in November 2010, the Department of Buildings
and General Services (BGS) leased the building from the owner and operates the building
until December 2013. The State shall pay the owner $7,845 per month and the State collects
all rent from the tenants. During this Lease, the owner continues to pay property taxes, water
and sewer, insurance and all major interior and exterior maintenance, with the State
responsible for basic utilities. As such, we have 34 months remaining to come up with
funding to buy the WRJ station.
h) FRA Bridge Regulations – There are 210 bridges on the state-owned lines. VTrans used to
perform it’s own bridge inspections on a 24-month basis. New FRA regulations now call for
all rail bridges to be inspected on an annual basis. Due to this doubling of effort and
difficulty at times gaining access to the lines (due to securing proper agreement to provide
access and railroad flagging services) VTrans is now engaged in soliciting proposals to hire
the inspection work out. This is in the very preliminary stages. A scope of work has been
outlined, we have talked to other states and to local railroad partners about their experiences
with contracting bridge inspection work and we intend to let a formal RFP out soon. The
actual impact on costs to meet these new regulations, due to the accelerated inspection
frequency is not known at this time.
i) Essex to Burlington (Winooski Branch) – The Western Corridor travels all the way up the
western side of the state from Bennington to Burlington to Essex to St. Albans to Alburgh
and the border with Canada. The stretch from Essex to Burlington is on the NECR line.
There has been a desire to upgrade this line to increase freight capacities and some passenger
rail opportunity between the Village of Essex and outlying areas and Burlington. To date
VTrans has had the opinion that this concept has merit, however in the immediate future
there was a queue of projects and initiatives. This will continue to be a topic of interest and
VTrans will remain engaged with all parties regarding this initiative.
9. Amtrak:
Amtrak and the State of Vermont have a long history. Currently Amtrak provides two passenger
train services daily in Vermont. The “Ethan Allen Express” runs between Albany-Whitehall-
Rutland and the “Vermonter” runs between St. Albans and Washington D.C. Amtrak (National
Railroad Corporation) operates on the federal fiscal year. On October 1, 2010 VTrans renewed
it’s Service Agreement with Amtrak to maintain our present level of service.
Efforts to aggressively market Vermont’s Amtrak service began in earnest under Charlie Miller
and Commissioner Rob Ide. The marketing budget is comprised of $50,000 from the Rail
budget and $100,000 through Amtrak. Today, we have a very detailed marketing plan which
taps into radio; print (newspapers & VT. Life), television, venues (Burlington Airport, VT. Lake
Monsters, UVM Athletics, Vermont Symphony Orchestra) to mention a few.
Follow these links to our newest TV ads, produced, acted and shot locally:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1y_Gjkx0m9I http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdpqmdjXEKs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QAgujQwMnY
The importance of marketing is never clearer than the impact measured by ridership and revenue
numbers. The more revenue generated through selling tickets to riders results in fewer subsidy
dollars paid by taxpayers. The FFY11 subsidy is forecasted at nearly 14% less than the previous
forecast. Below are four charts, the first two shows the FFY10 in total and the second two shows
FFY11 YTD. In both cases you can see the encouraging movement in ridership and revenue. (One wild card of note is fuel. Like with any of us the unknown is difficult to predict. Current revenue projections
are based on industry assessments of fuel. Escalating fuel prices will have direct one-to-one impact on budgets):
Amtrak's Ethan Allen
State Contract Period: 10/1/09 - 9/30/10
Ridership Ticket Revenue
Month FY10 FY09
% Chg. FY10 FY09
% Chg.
Oct 3,999 3,870 +3.3 $186,368 $187,469 -0.6
Nov 3,711 3,817 -2.8 $181,442 $199,289 -9.0
Dec 4,652 4,682 -0.6 $238,743 $245,854 -2.9
Jan 3,758 3,668 +2.5 $191,841 $191,891 -0.0
Feb 3,244 3,234 +0.3 $166,722 $164,371 +1.4
Mar 3,831 3,501 +9.4 $196,558 $180,859 +8.7
Apr 3,606 3,466 +4.0 $176,529 $169,362 +4.2
May 2,971 3,100 -4.2 $142,409 $154,534 -7.8
Jun 3,880 3,512 +10.5 $194,117 $171,329 +13.3
Jul 5,720 4,891 +16.9 $289,714 $239,369 +21.0
Aug 5,484 5,646 -2.9 $274,371 $278,322 -1.4
Sep 3,175 3,361 -5.5 $160,182 $164,713 -2.8
Contract Period Total 48,031 46,748 $2,398,998 $2,347,362
Contract Period Cumulative Thru September FY10
Ridership Ticket Revenue
FY10 FY09
% Chg. FY10 FY09
% Chg.
48,031 46,748 +2.7 $2,398,998 $2,347,362 +2.2
Amtrak's Vermonter
State Contract Period: 10/1/09 - 9/30/10
Ridership Ticket Revenue
Month FY10 FY09
% Chg. FY10 FY09
% Chg.
Oct 7,179 7,042 +1.9 $370,165 $372,436 -0.6
Nov 6,872 5,998 +14.6 $378,787 $357,688 +5.9
Dec 7,941 7,449 +6.6 $456,032 $427,728 +6.6
Jan 6,563 6,029 +8.9 $367,071 $342,029 +7.3
Feb 6,238 5,126 +21.7 $338,817 $266,499 +27.1
Mar 6,638 5,946 +11.6 $377,268 $323,308 +16.7
Apr 6,412 5,613 +14.2 $355,077 $301,036 +18.0
May 5,923 5,182 +14.3 $326,747 $282,236 +15.8
Jun 7,780 5,759 +35.1 $427,913 $296,997 +44.1
Jul 9,928 7,014 +41.5 $573,474 $370,521 +54.8
Aug 8,596 7,764 +10.7 $482,654 $409,207 +17.9
Sep 6,175 5,094 +21.2 $324,741 $262,246 +23.8
Contract Period Total 86,245 74,016 $4,778,747 $4,011,930
Contract Period Cumulative Thru September FY10
Ridership Ticket Revenue
FY10 FY09
% Chg. FY10 FY09
% Chg.
86,245 74,016 +16.5 $4,778,747 $4,011,930 +19.1
Amtrak's Ethan Allen
State Contract Period: 10/1/10 - 9/30/11
Ridership Ticket Revenue
Month FY11 FY10
% Chg. FY11 FY10
% Chg.
Oct 3,333 3,999 -16.7 $168,477 $186,368 -9.6
Nov 3,670 3,711 -1.1 $188,522 $181,442 +3.9
Dec 4,652 $238,743
Jan 3,758 $191,841
Feb 3,244 $166,722
Mar 3,831 $196,558
Apr 3,606 $176,529
May 2,971 $142,409
Jun 3,880 $194,117
Jul 5,720 $289,714
Aug 5,484 $274,371
Sep 3,175 $160,182
Contract Period Total 48,031 $2,398,998
Contract Period Cumulative Thru November FY11
Ridership Ticket Revenue
FY11 FY10
% Chg. FY11 FY10
% Chg.
7,003 7,710 -9.2 $356,999 $367,810 -2.9
Amtrak's Vermonter
State Contract Period: 10/1/10 - 9/30/11
Ridership Ticket Revenue
Month FY11 FY10
% Chg. FY11 FY10
% Chg.
Oct 7,970 7,179 +11.0 $422,833 $370,165 +14.2
Nov 7,812 6,872 +13.7 $455,320 $378,787 +20.2
Dec 7,941 $456,032
Jan 6,563 $367,071
Feb 6,238 $338,817
Mar 6,638 $377,268
Apr 6,412 $355,077
May 5,923 $326,747
Jun 7,780 $427,913
Jul 9,928 $573,474
Aug 8,596 $482,654
Sep 6,175 $324,741
Contract Period Total 86,245 $4,778,747
Contract Period Cumulative Thru November FY11
Ridership Ticket Revenue
FY11 FY10
% Chg. FY11 FY10
% Chg.
15,782 14,051 +12.3 $878,154 $748,952 +17.3
PRIIA Section 209 – The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, passed by
Congress and known as PRIIA, charges Amtrak with developing new methodology for cost and
revenue allocation to be applied to State supported/sponsored Amtrak services. Per the
legislation, the new methodology must be applied beginning no later than 2013. VTrans has
been closely engaged with Amtrak and the States for Passenger Rail Coalition in attempts to
negotiate reasonable outcomes from this legislation. Early drafts given to VTrans by Amtrak
indicate the present level of service to Vermont would cost 90% more under the new funding
scheme. Clearly this is unacceptable and VTrans has strongly communicated that both to
Amtrak and the Delegation. Amtrak continues to work with the States for Passenger Rail
Coalition who represents our concern in PRIIA matters, especially Section 209. The
encouraging news is that an unofficial extension of six months has been agreed to by both parties
(Oct. 2010 – April 2011). During this time frequent meetings are taking place in Washington
with Amtrak. To date those meetings are bringing more favorable definitions of Direct Costs,
Shared Costs and Capital Costs, all earlier points of contention. Clearly, the cost to operate
Amtrak service will rise from its plane today to something higher, soon. However, the task at
hand is to identify reasonable and fair costs as well as revenue credits resulting in the least
negative outcome for Vermont. There will be more to report on this as time goes by.
Castleton Station – In November 2009 we moved the Amtrak Station from Fair Haven to
Castleton. Boarding numbers are running consistent and Amtrak is working with the railroad to
construct a permanent platform and additional parking on railroad property.
Montreal – Return of passenger rail service to Montreal is a high profile subject. The biggest
obstacle to reasonable and effective passenger rail service through Vermont to Montreal is
border security. Presently, the Amtrak Adirondack has to stop once it crosses from New York
into Quebec and clearing the train can take hours. Everyone and all baggage are off-loaded
while Canadian Customs (CBSA) performs their duties. VTrans, with other border states, has
been asking for designation of secured space in Montreal at Central Station from which all in-
bound and out-bound passengers are cleared, similar to airport operations. Fortunately this
concept is gaining traction. The State of New York is working with Amtrak and Central Station.
Space has been identified, renovation costs are being estimated and discussions have occurred
between the US and Canadian and Quebec Governments. VTrans has attended several meetings
on this subject and has made formal notice to Central Station of it too having the desire to utilize
the expected secure facility. There is a fair amount of work remaining as service plans, time
tables, union agreements, revenue and subsidy projections etc. all need to be dealt with.
However, from an infrastructure perspective the prospect of passenger rail service returning to
Montreal has advanced significantly within the last year. As you know, Governor Shumlin has
asked Brian Dubie to assist the Administration with his contacts in Quebec.
10. Vermont State Auditor’s Oversight of Rail:
The SAO conducted an audit of VTrans Rail in December 2008. It is fair to say that the finding
left VTrans and the Rail Section with plenty of homework. For the last two years we have
worked to address all items mentioned regarding oversight of railroad activities with the State
from, contracts, invoicing, rent, interest, procurement of materials used on jobs funded by the
State and other items. In the last year we have had several meeting with the Auditor’s office and
I believe have an excellent working relationship. As is practice, the SAO is now conducting a 24
month-out review of progress, testing policies and seeking to identify any challenges that remain.
The outcome of this review will be made known as soon as it is completed.
11. Rail Property Management:
The State of Vermont owns 305 miles of active rail line and 148 miles of rail trail (rail-banked).
VTrans manages and oversees this real estate. With this much land there are hundreds and
hundreds of abutters. Like any property line often there are issues of encroachment, violations,
agreements, leases and the like. Property Management staff addresses these and more on a daily
basis. Below is a chart of new projects and agreements undertaken in the last few years:
Type of Agreement Total Number of Agreements (Fiscal 2009-
2011)
License 6
Lease 23
Master License 21
Private Crossing 3
Temporary 7
Grand Total 60
Fiscal Year Total Number of Agreements
2009 13
2010 38
2011 9
Type of Agreements Total Number of Pending Agreements
License 1
Lease 5
Master License 11
Private Crossings 10
Grand Total 27
Along with getting these agreements finalized, we have been able to generate lease revenue. We
have set a goal of $375,000.00 to be reached by June 30, 2011. As of January 4, 2011, we are at
$242,359.34. On November 16th
our numbers were at $184,995.00. This is a $57,364.34 increase
in 7 weeks. Over the past several years we have been able to increase our revenue significantly
since 2004 when we started keeping track. In FY09 we generated $312,484.55 and FY10 we
generated $354,746.64. We had a $42,262.09 increase between the two years. With 5 months left
to reach our goal we are confident Property Management can reach and even exceed the goal.
12. Regional Involvements:
VTrans is actively involved with the New England States, New York and Quebec on regional rail
issues. The major rail projects requiring coordination and planning are (map included):
New England & New York Transportation Compact
Springfield (MA) to White River Junction High Speed Rail designation
Boston to Montreal
Knowledge Corridor (MA)
Inland Route – New Haven to Springfield to Boston
Capitol Corridor – Boston to Concord
Downeaster (ME)
Northeast Corridor (Coast)
Empire Corridor (NY)
Adirondack Corridor (NY)
We attend regular Transportation Leaders meetings and from a planning perspective all major
projects are discussed with emphasis on regional impacts.