Northeast Corridor
State of Good Repair Spend Plan
Prepared by Amtrak
Under Section 211 of the Passenger Rail
Investment and Improvement Act of 2008
(Public Law 110-432)
Submitted to the U.S. Secretary of Transportation
April 15, 2009
Northeast Corridor State of Good Repair Spend Plan
Contents
Summary ............................................................................................................................. 1
A Vital Transportation Asset .............................................................................................. 6
Operating and Maintenance Challenges ............................................................................. 8
State of Good Repair........................................................................................................... 9
Getting to a State of Good Repair..................................................................................... 10
Bringing the NEC to a State of Good Repair.................................................................... 11
NEC Main Line................................................................................................................. 12
Branch Lines ..................................................................................................................... 12
Major Engineering Needs ................................................................................................. 13
Benefits of Investment ...................................................................................................... 14
Equipment SOGR Needs .................................................................................................. 15
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 15
Appendix A: Tables / Charts ...………………………………………… ………A1-A15
Appendix B: State and Agency Comments ……………………………………..B1-B10
i
Summary
Under Section 211 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008
(Public Law 110-432) Amtrak is required to develop in consultation with the Secretary of
Transportation and the Northeast States, including the District of Columbia, a capital
spending plan to bring the Northeast Corridor main line to a state of good repair by 2018,
consistent with funding levels authorized under the act. Under the law, the plan is due to
be submitted to the Secretary within 180 days of passage, or by April 16, 2009.
This report has been prepared in draft form for comment by the Northeast states. At the
current time, this report includes only Amtrak-owned or operated portions of the
Northeast Corridor main line as well as branch lines, including the Springfield and
Harrisburg lines and Amtrak owned portions of the Albany Line1. Branch line costs are
included so a complete picture is presented to bring Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor (NEC)
infrastructure to a state of good repair. However, costs for the main line (Boston to
Washington) are identified separately to comply with the precise language of Section
211.
The “main line” of the Northeast Corridor, as cited under Section 211, is most commonly
used to refer to both Amtrak and non-Amtrak-owned portions of the line from Boston
South Station to Washington Union Station. Amtrak operates the Massachusetts portion
under agreement with the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) and has
included in its figures costs to bring this section of the railroad to a state of good repair.
The other major non-Amtrak owned portion of the main line is from New Haven, CT to
New Rochelle, NY. This section is owned by the state of Connecticut and Metro-North
Commuter Railroad and operated by Metro-North. Amtrak, in consultation with officials
of Federal Railroad Administration, has interpreted the language of Section 211 to
include Metro-North territory. Both ConnDOT and Metro-North have been invited to
include their SOGR requirements for New Haven to New Rochelle in this report.
However, primarily because of the additional time required to coordinate responses,
information on SOGR requirements for this segment is not included in this draft.
It is essential to recognize that state of good repair is just one component of a
comprehensive investment program. State of good repair includes the costs to maintain
assets within their useful lives or replace them if they exceed their useful life.2
1
Amtrak owns the Springfield and Harrisburg lines in their entirety but the Albany line is owned primarily
by Metro-North Commuter Railroad and CSX Corporation. Amtrak owned sections of the Albany Line
include the 11-mile “Empire Connection” between Penn Station and Spuyten Duyvil, New York, and a 35mile segment from CP 125 to Albany and Schenectady.
2
See definition of state of good repair provided by then-Secretary of Transportation Mary E. Peters in a
July 25, 2008 letter to House and Senate committees with transportation oversight responsibilities. This
definition states that state of good repair represents: “A condition in which the existing physical assets, both
individually and as a system, (a) are functioning as designed within their useful lives and (b) are sustained
through regular maintenance and replacement programs; state of good repair represents just one element of
a comprehensive capital investment program that also addresses system capacity and performance.”
1
Investment needs in addition to state of good repair include safety and mandated
programs, as well as capacity and speed improvements.
Comprehensive investment needs for the Northeast Corridor are being addressed by
Amtrak in partnership with the Northeast states and eight commuter and three freight
railroads operating on the NEC. The initial master plan report is due September 2009.
As discussed in prior reports3, state of good repair by itself does not specifically provide
for growth in services. Rather, it provides a solid foundation essential to ensure
continued reliable service as growth occurs.
The need to look comprehensively at state of good repair and growth requirements (as the
master plan is doing) is especially important as the corridor reaches its capacity limits.
Many segments of the corridor are at or near capacity, and there continues to be strong
demand for new and expanded services.4 Providing additional capacity to ensure all
users of the corridor – Amtrak, commuter and freight – are able to grow their services as
demand increases is a major challenge facing Amtrak and other users of the corridor.
Additionally, higher speed intercity passenger rail service provides greater regional
mobility and will help relieve the congestion of the northeastern airports, which routinely
post some of the worst delays in the nation. If this goal is to be realized, the NEC will
require upgraded infrastructure and additional capacity.
Preliminary master plan estimates contained in the draft interim report (see footnote 3.B)
suggest a price tag for SOGR, safety, mandates, capacity and trip time improvements of
roundly $38 billion through 2030 for all users regardless of ownership, or an average
investment level of $1.8 billion annually, including the main line, branch lines and
Washington to Richmond segment of the Northeast Corridor. The current phase of the
master planning process is engaged in refining this estimate for inclusion in the report
due in September 2009.
A comprehensive approach also provides opportunities to integrate SOGR, safety and
mandated programs and growth needs into a broad-based plan that meets the needs of
current and future users. By combining SOGR and improvement projects for speed and
capacity, engineering forces can minimize outages, which is an important consideration
given existing capacity constraints and the large amount of construction work anticipated
3
Three interim reports have been published as part of the ongoing master plan process. These reports are
available to representatives of states and railroads participating in the process on the project web site
www.necmasterplan.org, or on request. The interim reports include:
A. The Northeast Corridor Infrastructure Master Plan: Phase I Project Development Report, February
2008.
B. The Northeast Corridor Infrastructure Master Plan: Phase II Draft Interim Report, February 2009,
and
C. The Northeast Corridor Infrastructure Master Plan: Phase II 2008/2030 Northeast Corridor
Capacity Utilization Report, February 2009
4
Current capacity utilization exceeds 100% on 9 of 320 segments on the main line; 36 segments are
operating at more than 75% of capacity. The number of trains operating on the corridor, including branch
lines and Washington to Richmond is expected to increase by 44%, from 2,474 currently to 3,572 by 2030.
See draft interim report (footnote 3.B. above), pages 11 and 26.
2
in the future. It also minimizes costs by combining work that might otherwise be done as
separate projects, permitting more efficient use of design and construction resources.
Section 211 requires Amtrak to update the state of good repair plan annually. As
an alternative, Amtrak proposes that the master plan be updated annually once the
initial report is completed in September 2009.
This will provide a more comprehensive view of state of good repair needs along with
projects needed to meet safety and mandated requirements and provide for growth in
service levels. This approach is more consistent with the definition of state of good
repair provided by the Department of Transportation (see footnote 2).
In the interim, prior to publication of the master plan report in September 2009, the table
on the following page shows stand-alone state of good repair estimates for the Amtrak
owned / operated main line, branch lines and NEC equipment. In addition to totals at the
top of the table, costs for the two major components of state of good repair are shown
below the totals. The major components include “Normalized Replacement”, or the
estimated annual capital cost of sustaining assets in a state of good repair, as well as the
“Backlog of Deferred Investment” which represents the estimated cost of replacing assets
that are no longer functioning as designed within their useful lives.
3
State of Good Repair Spend Plan
Amtrak NEC Infrastructure and Equipment
(millions of 2010 dollars)
NEC Infrastructure
Main Line Branch Lines
FY 09
FY 10
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
FY 15
FY 16
FY 17
FY 18
FY 19
FY 20
FY 21
FY 22
FY 23
Total
Avg. Annual
Rolling Stock
Total
543
593
604
621
647
681
654
675
667
622
580
561
537
498
268
108
107
110
113
114
119
121
125
124
117
109
107
104
98
60
35
92
92
92
92
92
197
197
197
197
na
na
na
na
na
686
793
807
826
854
893
972
997
987
936
689
668
641
596
328
8,753
584
1,635
109
1,286
129
11,675
821
Normalized Replacement Component
NEC Infrastructure
FY 09
FY 10
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
FY 15
FY 16
FY 17
FY 18
FY 19
FY 20
FY 21
FY 22
FY 23
Total
Avg. Annual
Rolling Stock
Main Line
Branch Line
Overhauls
Total
312
293
285
278
263
255
244
244
244
252
255
263
278
282
268
70
65
64
62
59
57
54
54
54
56
57
59
62
63
60
35
56
56
56
56
56
24
24
24
24
na
na
na
na
na
416
414
405
396
377
368
323
323
323
332
312
322
340
345
328
4,018
268
897
60
408
41
5,322
368
Rolling Stock
Replacement
Total
Backlog of Deferred Investment
NEC Infrastructure
Main Line Branch Line
FY 09
FY 10
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
FY 15
FY 16
FY 17
FY 18
FY 19
FY 20
FY 21
FY 22
FY 23
Total
Avg. Annual
231
300
319
343
385
426
409
431
422
371
324
298
259
216
0
38
42
46
51
55
62
67
70
69
61
52
48
42
35
0
0
37
37
37
37
37
173
173
173
173
na
na
na
na
na
269
379
402
431
477
525
650
675
665
605
377
346
301
251
0
4,736
316
739
49
878
88
6,352
453
4
The definition of infrastructure used above includes components such as track, bridges,
tunnels, overhead catenary wire, power supply systems, cable, transformers and
converters, signals, communications and dispatching systems, as well as stations and
facilities.
Rolling stock represents equipment in the NEC equipment pool, including Acela and
Amfleet I passenger cars and AEM7 locomotives used in regional service. Not all of this
equipment operates exclusively within the boundaries of the main line and the branch
lines as defined for the purposes of this report. Regional equipment, for example,
operates south to Richmond and Newport News, VA; north to Buffalo and Niagara Falls,
NY, and is also used in selected corridor services including the Maine Downeaster
service and service to Raleigh and Charlotte, N.C.
The rolling stock estimates shown above through 2018 assume Amtrak will begin
replacement of Amfleet I equipment in the 2015 to 2018 timeframe at a cost of $350
million for 100 units (out of a fleet of 390). The remaining units potentially would be
replaced gradually over the next five to 10 years after 2018, although the figures shown
in the table on page 4 indicate “na” (or not available) for the period FY 19 to FY 23,
pending additional analysis on the useful life of Amfleet equipment used in NEC service.
The current replacement schedule assumes a 40-year useful life for Amfleet I passenger
cars when used in high-density, high-speed NEC service. Amtrak’s Mechanical
Department is evaluating the costs and benefits of replacing the Amfleet equipment used
in NEC service after 40 years or investing additional funds to extend the useful life
beyond 40 years. If it is determined that the Amfleet equipment can economically be
kept in operation, rolling stock replacement costs would decline by $350 million in FY
2015 to FY 2018, but overhaul costs would increase with the possibility of truck and
major system replacements needed to extend the useful life of the equipment.
As shown in the table on page 4, more than $11 billion will be needed to maintain NEC
infrastructure and equipment in a state of good repair and eliminate the infrastructure
backlog of deferred investment from 2009 to 2023. These figures are subject to change
depending on the results of the Mechanical Department’s analysis of the useful life of
Amfleet equipment. If it is determined that Amfleet equipment should be replaced after
40 years in service, costs above would increase by an order of magnitude of $1 billion to
replace most of the remaining 290 units of Amfleet equipment in the FY 19 to FY 23
period.
This spend plan differs from the language of Section 211 which suggests Amtrak should
fully eliminate the backlog of deferred investment by 2018. However, in the judgment of
Amtrak Engineering, it is not possible to fully eliminate the backlog by 2018 while
sustaining reliable operations for all users. Because of limited track capacity, combined
with very long lead times for design and construction, Amtrak assumptions on timing are
based on engineering experience that some major bridge and / or tunnel replacements will
5
continue to be ongoing beyond 2018. To fully eliminate the backlog by 2018 would, in
Amtrak’s judgment, require a shutdown of major portions of the railroad.
Moreover, Amtrak believes that, as a result of the master planning process and other
planning efforts, some non-SOGR projects for safety, mandates, capacity or speed
improvements may take priority over state of good repair backlog projects, constraining
Amtrak’s ability to devote the entirety of its resources to state of good repair. Examples
of projects that will or may take precedence include mandated projects, such as Positive
Train Control, and projects that are not classified as SOGR, but are nonetheless needed to
maintain reliable service, such as the elimination of an existing chokepoint in a
particularly congested part of the railroad that potentially has a “cascading” effect on
operations up and down the line.
The backlog includes many major projects, including bridge and tunnel replacements,
which require multi-year commitments of funds.
In Amtrak’s view, continued reliance on annual appropriations to fund the Amtrak
capital program will continue to frustrate efforts to achieve a state of good repair.
This, in turn, will likely cause constraints on growth for all users of the corridor.
This is because, as noted previously, state of good repair is needed to provide a reliable
foundation for future growth and because a stable source of multi-year funding is
essential if Amtrak is to enter into multi-year commitments to design and construct
bridges, tunnels and other major projects.
The Appendix tables (Appendix A) are an integral part of this report and contain
additional detail on sources of information and assumptions used in the development of
this spending plan.
A Vital Transportation Asset
The NEC is a centerpiece of the Northeast Corridor transportation system, serving most
of the major cities in the region and providing connectivity to the national rail network.
The NEC hosts 153 of Amtrak’s 310 daily trains and more than 2,400 commuter trains
operated by eight railroads. More than 250 million riders use the corridor annually and
that figure is expected to grow to more than 400 million by 2030.
In addition to passenger operations, the NEC hosts more than sixty daily freight trains,
with virtually all rail freight for Brooklyn, Queens, Long Island, and the Delmarva
Peninsula arriving over Amtrak rails. Southern New England and the ports of Baltimore
and Wilmington also depend heavily on the NEC for freight movements.
The 764 route miles of the NEC, including the Springfield, Albany and Harrisburg
branch lines, are the most densely trafficked railroad in the United States. In addition to
Amtrak and commuter operators, four class I and regional freight carriers operate over
6
the NEC. All of the “Main Line’ (DC to New York to Boston) is electrified, and
conventional intercity trains operate at 125 mph, with Acela service providing 150 mph
north of New York, and 135 mph service south of it. Commuter trains typically operate
at 80 mph to 110 mph, while freights operate at 50 mph or under, albeit with car weights
of up to 286,000 pounds on selected sections.
This variability in speeds presents a challenging operating environment that requires
precise scheduling and dispatching and, conversely, can result in significant delays to
large numbers of trains if the infrastructure is not maintained in a state of good repair
which is a key to minimizing failures and maintaining reliable operations.
The NEC receives traffic from a large number of “feeder” lines, including 14 commuter
lines that converge on Amtrak owned or operated portions of main line plus the three
branch lines noted above. An additional three commuter lines intersect the main line on
Metro-North territory with New Rochelle serving as a major junction between Amtrak
and Metro-North trains. Numerous freight lines also intersect the corridor with a major
junction with the Norfolk Southern line entering the corridor at Perryville, MD, north of
Baltimore.
The Harrisburg Line is electrified, and provides up to110 mph service. The Albany Line
operates largely, although not entirely, on trackage owned by CSX Corporation. and the
Metro-North Commuter Railroad. Amtrak service on the Albany Line requires special
“dual mode” locomotives equipped for diesel operation north of Croton-Harmon and
750V DC electric operation on a third rail south of Croton-Harmon into Manhattan5.
The NEC is the nation’s only high speed passenger rail corridor. It began as a
partnership project between the U.S. Department of Transportation and the Pennsylvania
Railroad in 1965. After a decade of experimentation with the successful Metroliner
service, the NEC was conveyed to Amtrak in 1976. In partnership with the FRA, the
Northeast states and commuter and freight rail operators, Amtrak undertook two major
efforts to modernize the NEC, and improve trip times. The first, the Northeast Corridor
Improvement Program (NECIP) brought regularly scheduled 125 mph service to the
“South End” of the NEC (New York to Washington). The second, the Northeast High
Speed Rail Improvement Program (NHRIP) electrified the line between New Haven and
Boston, introduced the highly successful 150 mph Acela service, and cut trip times
significantly on the “North End” (New York to Boston) for conventional trains.
Each round of investment made significant improvements in the physical condition of the
NEC that has benefited all users. Signaling and control have been centralized, allowing
the replacement of aging mechanically operated interlocking plants with modern
facilities. All of the modern equipment needed for higher speed service, such as cab
signals and automatic train stop, is in service. Positive train control is installed on the
segments of the Amtrak-owned routes where trains exceed 125 mph, and Amtrak intends
to install it on Amtrak owned and operated portions of the main line and branch lines by
the end of 2012. Continuous welded rail and concrete ties have replaced jointed rail and
5
New York State law does not permit non-electric locomotives on Manhattan.
7
wooden ties, allowing for improved ride quality, higher speeds and lower maintenance
costs.
Amtrak service accounts for close to half (2 billion) of the total of 4.4 billion annual
passenger miles. Between New York and DC, Amtrak’s endpoint market share is
approximately twice that of the airlines, and approximately half of the Boston to New
York air / rail market.
A major disruption of service because of a failure such as a power outage would
materially affect the economic life of the region; under these circumstances, the ability to
shut down traffic for long periods of time is virtually nonexistent.
Operating and Maintenance Challenges
The operating environment is challenging for a densely trafficked system like the NEC.
Sustained growth has brought enormous quantities of traffic to the line, and major
chokepoints are heavily trafficked even at off-peak hours. Already, traffic on 36 of 320
segments exceeds 75% of line capacity; 9 of those segments are operating at over 100%
capacity. By 2030, 39 segments are expected to be operating over capacity.6
Much of the Northeast Corridor infrastructure is over a century old. North of New
York’s Penn Station, there is a need to replace the Niantic, Connecticut River and Pelham
Bay bridges, all built in 1907, predating the Model T Ford. South of New York, the scale
of need is even greater, for the broad and deep river estuaries that drain into the
Chesapeake are spanned by bridges of great length – the longest one, at the Susquehanna
River, measuring more than three quarters of a mile. With aging infrastructure and heavy
traffic, the challenge of ensuring that the system is kept in a state of good repair is a
major one.
Despite aging components, the NEC is still the most modern and up-to-date railroad in
the United States. Much of the track structure has been upgraded over the past decade;
undergrade bridges have been re-decked and curves have been elevated, among other
improvements, that permit higher speeds and improved ride quality while contributing to
lower operating costs.
Nonetheless, it is important to note that the route was assembled piecemeal through the
gradual consolidation of smaller companies. Consequently, the route retains some
problematic alignments with undesirable curvature, particularly in and around Baltimore,
Philadelphia, New York City and on the Connecticut “Shore Line” north of New Haven.
These alignments often restrict operating speeds, and in many places, reduce capacity.
As cities grew up around the railroad, relocation became increasingly problematic for
predecessor companies, limiting the range of solutions to alignment problems.
6
See footnote 6. Figures cited are from the NEC Capacity Utilization Report as summarized in the NEC
Master Plan, Draft Interim Report, pages 11 and 26.
8
Amtrak routinely operates thirty year old coaches and locomotives under electrical
catenary that dates from the 1930s. Under these circumstances, the combination of aging
equipment and infrastructure, high traffic levels, variable speed operations and capacity
constraints present a difficult and challenging operating environment. Despite being one
of the most complex operators in the world, on-time performance for all Amtrak NEC
services averaged 82% for the first six months of FY 10, with Acela Express service
operating at 85% OTP.
State of Good Repair
As noted previously, the Department of Transportation has defined “state of good repair”
as “a condition in which the existing physical assets, both individually and as a system,
(a) are functioning within their ‘useful lives’, and (b) are sustained through regular
maintenance and replacement programs.” Under ideal circumstances, a certain number
of infrastructure items would reach the end of their useful lives in any given year. These
projects would then be replaced; annualized funding needed to accomplish such structural
or component renewal is referred to as “normalized replacement cost.” Because many
such projects have been deferred in the past, a “backlog” has accumulated; the total cost
of this slate of unfunded projects comprises the “backlog of deferred investment”, also
known as the “SOGR backlog.”
The SOGR backlog on Amtrak-owned / operated NEC infrastructure is currently
estimated to be about $5.5 billion in FY 2010 dollars7.
The backlog includes:
• More than 200 bridges, most dating to the turn of the last century
• Baltimore’s B&P Tunnels dating to the post-Civil War period
• Many interlockings (junctions and crossovers) that are past their normal component
life and functionally obsolete
• Electric traction systems strained by increased traffic levels while relying on 1930’sera components.
Maintenance of the infrastructure in a state of good repair has been, and continues to be,
the principal focus of Amtrak’s capital investment program.
This goal has become increasingly difficult as the backlog of deferred investment has
increased while traffic levels have grown. In the past several years, however, since FY
2004, funding levels have been sufficient to begin addressing major components of the
backlog, including replacement of the Thames River Bridge. Much of the recent progress
has been enabled by increasing coordination and cooperation among Amtrak, the
Northeast states and commuter and freight users of the corridor. Contributions from
7
Infrastructure backlog figures include NY tunnels structural improvements and station backlog costs as
reported in the February 2009 ADA Accessibility Report (see table on page 4 and Appendix A, table 1 for
detail of tunnels structural and stations work).
9
states and railroads now account for about one-third of Amtrak’s NEC capital program,
up significantly from just a few years ago.
Amtrak has long been concerned about these issues, and has sought to build a partnership
with the states and commuter authorities that would allow us to address SOGR and
capacity needs. To ensure that these issues are addressed, and that the various NEC users
all have a voice in the decision making process, Amtrak inaugurated the NEC Master
Planning Process in 2007. This collaborative process includes participation by Amtrak,
12 Northeast states, the District of Columbia, the Federal Railroad Administration, eight
commuter and three freight railroads operating on the NEC.
Products of the NEC master planning effort have informed the preparation of this report.
Getting to a State of Good Repair
While Amtrak has always maintained capital and SOGR planning processes, these
processes are annualized and subject to constant revision, to take unplanned changes in
component SOGR and changes in the capital budget into account. As a general rule,
Amtrak reprioritizes SOGR spending when necessary to allow it to address safety and
operability issues as they arise. A backlog of SOGR ought not, therefore, to be
understood as an accumulation of disintegrating or unsafe structures; rather, it is a list of
projects that have passed the end of their useful life but may continue to carry traffic
safely, albeit at times with the additional burden of increased maintenance (i.e.,
operating) expense.
While the backlog is a product of decisions made to defer normalized replacement (and
hence can grow or contract as a result of investment decisions), the annualized
replacement requirement is a product of the expiration of the life cycles of various
components. The life cycles of different systems can vary radically. An interlocking,
which contains many electronic components and moving parts such as switches and
signal relays, has a service life of about twenty years. Bridges and tunnels, on the other
hand, can easily last for over one hundred years. Every engineered component of the
railroad requires periodic inspection and maintenance, but at expected levels, these serve
the function of ensuring each component will reach the end of its expected life cycle.
Under these circumstances, the cost for normalized replacement is not a flat or a prorated
cost. It is instead a total of the known projects that will come due for replacement in each
year. This annual charge will continue to come due as long as the railroad remains in
operation, but once the backlog is addressed, the cost for normalized replacement on the
NEC will flatten out, and should probably remain in the vicinity of $330 million per year
10
for NEC infrastructure in FY 10 dollars8. That the company will continue to spend
capital sums on annualized replacement is an assumption of this plan, but it should be
noted that if this assumption proves incorrect, and capital funding to address normalized
replacement is not forthcoming, the backlog will again emerge as a problem at some
point in the future.
This underscores an important consideration. A state of good repair cannot be attained
by simply “working off” the backlog. If normalized replacement does not take place,
then the existing infrastructure will reach the end of its useful life and it will become a
part of the backlog of state of good repair – meaning, in essence, that even as Amtrak is
reducing the problems associated with over age infrastructure in one spot on the system,
similar problems will crop up elsewhere. If the railroad is to reach a state of good repair,
efforts to reduce backlog and continue the process of normalized replacement must
proceed concurrently. If they do not, the backlog will grow, ensuring larger capital costs
in the future, and higher operating costs in the meantime.
Bringing the NEC to a State of Good Repair
On the Northeast Corridor, including the main line and branch lines, Amtrak needs to
spend approximately $10.4 billion between FY 2009 and FY 2023 to return the
infrastructure to a state of good repair. This sum encompasses all necessary spending
(both normalized replacement and backlog) on track, structures, electric traction,
communications and signals, stations and facilities. Of this sum, slightly more than half
(nearly $5.5 billion) will be devoted to elimination of the backlog; the remainder ($4.9
billion) will allow for the accomplishment of normalized replacement during this period9.
Given adequate funding, Amtrak projects that the backlog in NEC state of good repair
projects could be reduced to zero by FY 2023 (or the end of FY 2022).
The vast majority of the SOGR projects that are currently in the backlog could be
addressed by 2018. Currently, over 70% of track and communications and signal
installations, and more than 40% of electric traction equipment are classified as “in a
state of good repair.” A focused investment and repair program could largely complete
the task of returning electric traction, track, and signaling equipment to a state of good
repair by 2018. Such a program would also bring more than 80% of the structures on the
NEC into a state of good repair. The remaining five years would be required to restore
the last fifteen to twenty percent of the NEC’s bridges and tunnels to a state of good
repair, as well as completing some other outstanding projects.
8
Figure includes Amtrak owned / operated NEC infrastructure for the main line and branch lines. An
additional amount of approximately $50 annually would be needed to fund normalized replacement for
Amtrak owned infrastructure outside the Northeast, including the Michigan Line and other yard facilities in
the Midwest and West. Rolling stock requirements are discussed separately (see page 15).
9
All of these (and following) should be understood as projections of need; these figures are estimates,
rather than precise statements of costs.
11
Why does it take so long to complete such a small percentage of the work? The answer
lies not in the work, but in the way it is divided up. That fifteen percent includes one of
the largest pieces of civil engineering on the NEC – the replacement of the 1873
Baltimore and Potomac Tunnel in West Baltimore. The current estimated replacement
cost of the B&P Tunnel exceeds a billion dollars. In this case, replacement of the
structure on an accelerated timeline is simply impossible if the flow of traffic on the NEC
is to be maintained.
NEC Main Line
The bulk of the necessary capital investment will be spent on the NEC Main Line.
Infrastructure on this vital stem will require about $8.7 billion in investment over the
period in question – by far the lion’s share of the total need for infrastructure. More than
half of this cost, approximately $4.7 billion, is needed to address backlog projects.
Normalized replacement accounts for about $4.0 billion.
The large scale of the backlog on the NEC Main Line is weighted heavily toward
structures, which comprise more than half of its total backlog cost. Of a total SOGR
backlog of $4.7 billion, structural needs comprise $2.2 billion. More than $1 billion of
the structures backlog total will be needed between FY 2019 and FY 2023, and of that,
most would be spent on the replacement of the B&P Tunnel in Baltimore, Maryland
(included in the backlog at an estimated replacement cost of $1.2 billion in FY 10
dollars). This one project will require approximately a quarter of the total of the SOGR
backlog cost on the NEC Main Line.
The NEC main line also has a significant backlog in track maintenance, estimated at over
$1 billion in FY 10 dollars. While the range of needs is broad and encompasses almost
every category of track work, much of the total is for replacement of interlockings. The
remaining expense covers the replacement of track components and the repair of
subgrade and ballast that have reached the end of their useful lives.
Branch Lines
Amtrak expects to spend approximately $1.6 billion from FY 2009 through FY 2023 on
NEC branch lines, including Springfield, Harrisburg and Amtrak owned portions of the
Empire Line. Of this amount, approximately $900 million is for normalized replacement;
the balance of approximately $740 million is for backlog reduction.
The total backlog on the Harrisburg Line is estimated at approximately $640 million.
Because Amtrak, in partnership with Pennsylvania and SEPTA, has made significant
investments in the track in 2005 and 2006, the backlog of track-related projects is
proportionally small, although a number of interlockings require rehabilitation or
replacement. In addition, overhead catenary and power supply systems, including
transformers, frequency converters and transmission lines will be replaced.
12
The total structures backlog on the Harrisburg line is also substantial. A significant
amount of work also needs to be done on bridge replacement, including replacing and
renewing undergrade bridges as well as undertaking significant work to bring Harrisburg
Line stations to a state of good repair.
Backlog requirements on the Springfield and Albany lines total about $140 million in
infrastructure-related work. Both lines require significant amounts of track rehabilitation
and structural work, including rehab and replacement of undergrade bridges. The Canton
Viaduct on the Springfield Line will be rehabbed under the backlog reduction program.
Major Engineering Needs
Viewed broadly, there is a significant skew in the total cost toward the replacement of
large and expensive engineering works. Of the more than $5 billion in NEC backlog
requirements, some $2.4 billion is needed for replacement or rehabilitation of major
structures, including the Baltimore Tunnel. Some six moveable bridges in Connecticut,
New York and Maryland requirement replacement, along with rehab or replacement of
more than 200 undergrade bridges. Additionally, more than $1 billion is slated for track
work, including rehab or replacement of approximately 100 interlockings.
This pronounced tilt toward heavy and expensive programs is in part a reflection of
progress that has been made in the last few years toward attainment of a state of good
repair. Those projects that were less expensive, and were most urgently needed, have
largely been addressed. Large and complex projects, particularly those that were
mandated by life cycle rather than maintenance needs, have been deferred, because they
are expensive, difficult, time-consuming, disruptive to service and full funding has not
been available for multi-year commitments necessary to move many of these projects
forward.
Nonetheless, the recent round of investment in the NEC has paid significant dividends.
Amtrak’s Engineering Department has been able to make significant progress in
upgrading signal and communications systems and trackwork, and those efforts have
produced results. Between 2004 and 2007, the number of speed limits imposed because
of track defects fell by eighty percent. Signal failures have fallen by forty percent, and
there have also been improvements in the overall reliability of the electrical system. One
result has been a major drop in the unscheduled minutes of delay attributable to
infrastructure issues. In November, 2003, there were more than 8,000 minutes of
unscheduled delay on the NEC. By July, 2007, this number had been trimmed to just
over 4,000.
The difficulties associated with engineering projects are significant on the NEC. Amtrak
shares the NEC with numerous commuter agencies and several freight companies, and
traffic has grown significantly over the years. Since Amtrak took over the NEC in 1976,
the number of annual passenger train-miles run on the Corridor has doubled. Passenger
services are notoriously sensitive to delay, and the areas on the system that are the most
13
densely trafficked often have significant SOGR needs. The most prominent examples of
this combination of congestion and capital need are the tunnels that connect Penn Station
on Manhattan with Long Island and New Jersey. These underwater structures were
completed in 1910, and were built of cast iron and concrete. To ensure that the tunnels
are provided with the most up-to-date lifesaving equipment, and to provide for
emergency assistance in the case of emergency, Amtrak is rebuilding the ventilation
systems and replacing outdated firefighting systems. One of the great difficulties
associated with these projects is the scheduling of tunnel outages for work. Because
weekday commuter service is particularly time-sensitive, much of this work cannot be
undertaken during normal working hours. Tunnel outages have to be scheduled for
nights and weekends, resulting in considerable increases in cost as a result of overtime
wages.
Benefits of Investment
Over the long term, projects such as these raise the important issue of the need for
gradual improvements in capacity on the NEC. As commuter and intercity services
grow, the demand for track capacity, particularly at peak periods, will likewise grow.
There is essentially no room for growth at Penn Station in New York, and the South End
of the NEC (between DC and New York) has little room for additional trains at peak
hours. Many of the projects advanced under the SOGR program have significant benefits
beyond state of good repair and will lay the foundation for future growth. The Baltimore
and Potomac tunnel, for example, is a significant bottleneck. The line currently narrows
from four tracks to two at West Baltimore, and northbound trains must negotiate the Sshaped curve that threads through the tunnels at a speed of thirty miles per hour. Speed
restrictions on the seven miles of track between West Baltimore and Bay Interlocking
keep trains in the 30-40 mph range for most of the way around Baltimore. The tunnel
itself dates from 1873, but the age of the structure is only a part of the problem; the
circuitous alignment must also be addressed. A replacement structure would eliminate
not only the water infiltration problems and the maintenance costs associated with this
aging tunnel, it would allow Amtrak to reduce trip times by between two to three minutes
and add capacity to the system at a critical point.
Most of the major bridges on the NEC are two-track structures. Going forward,
additional tracks may be added to a number of these bridges to accommodate projected
growth. This will utilize scarce track time, and design and construction resources, more
efficiently than if SOGR needs alone are taken into account.
An example is the Portal Bridge over the Hackensack River at the entrance to the New
York tunnels. This aging drawbridge handles all of the Amtrak and New Jersey Transit
traffic into and out of New York. In partnership with New Jersey Transit, Amtrak plans
to replace this bridge with two structures, one a low level drawbridge, the other a high
level fixed bridge. Between them, these two bridges will have six tracks, and they will
eliminate the 20 mph speed reduction trains are currently required to make when crossing
14
the Portal Bridge, helping to ease the congestion problems at the southern entrance to
New York.
Equipment SOGR Needs
By the end of FY 2010, Amtrak’s Mechanical Department classifies all of the Amfleet I
coaches and electric locomotives that are used to provide service on the NEC as being “in
a state of good repair.” Also included in this classification are the fixed trainsets used to
provide the daily Acela service. Some of the equipment that is currently used to provide
NEC service, such as the former Metroliner coaches that have been converted to cab cars,
is expected to reach the end of their useful life by 2015. When they do so, these cars will
begin to be retired and replaced. The AEM-7 locomotive fleet is also approaching the
end of its service life, and all of the remaining DC locomotives should be phased out of
service and replaced by new equipment by 2015. The cost to replace the AEM-7 DC
fleet of 20 locomotives will be around $180 million. The conversion of the 29 AEM-7
AC locomotives to AC propulsion between 1999 and 2002 extended their service life, but
these engines will need replacement as well in order to maintain reliable operations on
the corridor, and are expected to leave the roster by 2018. The total cost to replace these
29 locomotives will be an additional $261 million.
Currently, Amtrak also expects that the Amfleet I coaches, which carries about 70% of
our passengers on the NEC, will begin to reach the end of their useful lives in 2015 after
40 years in service. Amtrak’s Mechanical Department is currently evaluating the costs
and benefits of keeping Amfleet I equipment in NEC service longer than 40 years. $350
million is currently in the spending plan to replace 100 cars between FY 15 and FY 18.
If the equipment is not replaced, investment to prolong the life of the equipment when
used in very high density, high speed service will also be significant, potentially
including replacement of mechanical, electrical systems and underbody components,
including trucks, wheels, stabilization and suspension systems.
Conclusion
Amtrak will require more than $11 billion in capital funding between 2009 and 2023 to
reach a state of good repair. Additional funding will be required to address safety and
mandated requirements as well as capacity and speed improvements. These additional
needs, in conjunction with state of good repair, are being addressed by Amtrak in
collaboration with the Northeast states and other railroads operating on the corridor as
part of the NEC master planning process.
If full funding for state of good repair is provided, the company will be able to overhaul
and renew its NEC fleet, eliminate the backlog of deferred projects, and replace those
components of the NEC’s infrastructure that will reach the end of their useful lives
between 2009 and 2023. If this investment program is taken in full, it will not alleviate
the need for annualized investment after 2023, but it will lower the annual investment bill
15
to the region of $370 million10 in 2010 dollars including both infrastructure and
equipment overhauls while facilitating improvements that enable growth on the corridor,
including capacity and trip-time improvements. Much of the backlog bill will go toward
the replacement of “once in a century” projects such as major bridges. The replacement
of infrastructure with a long lifespan is a significant benefit; these projects, once
accomplished, will not require another replacement in our lifetime.
Alternatively, if we fail to fund these projects, or greatly extend the timeline, the totality
of the expense will be significantly greater. Ordinary maintenance costs will rise, and
individual component renewals will become more frequent, and in some cases
(particularly where obsolescent subcomponents must be replaced) more difficult. The
system will not gain the capacity it needs to deal with growth, and the major metropolitan
areas will suffer progressive degradations of commuter and intercity service.
10
Figure cited includes NEC infrastructure and equipment, but does not include Amtrak owned
infrastructure outside the Northeast or long distance and other corridor equipment not in the NEC
equipment pool. See also discussion of rolling stock requirements on page 5 and infrastructure needs on
page 10.
16
Appendix A
Northeast Corridor State of Good Repair Spend Plan
Tables / Charts
Table No.
1
AMTRAK NEC STATE OF GOOD REPAIR SPEND PLAN
2
NEC INFRASTRUCTURE - MAIN LINE AND BRANCH LINES - ESTIMATED
SOGR SPENDING BY YEAR
3
NEC INFRASTRUCTURE - NEC MAIN LINE ONLY - ESTIMATED SOGR
SPENDING BY YEAR
4
NEC INFRASTRUCTURE - NEC MAIN LINE AND BRANCH LINES - BACKLOG
REDUCTION GOALS
5
NEC STATIONS - STATE OF GOOD REPAIR BACKLOG COSTS
6
SOGR STATUS OF NEC EQUIPMENT
7
REPLACEMENT COSTS FOR NEC EQUIPMENT
8
NEC EQUIPMENT OVERHAUL COSTS
9
NEC INFRASTRUCTURE - STATE OF GOOD REPAIR - SUMMARY BY LINE /
DISCIPLINE
10
NEC INFRASTRUCTURE - STATE OF GOOD REPAIR - SUMMARY OF COSTS
BY DISCIPLINE / ASSET CATEGORY
11
NEC INFRASTRUCTURE - STATE OF GOOD REPAIR - DETAIL OF ELECTRIC
TRACTION COSTS
12
NEC INFRASTRUCTURE - STATE OF GOOD REPAIR - DETAIL OF
COMMUNICATIONS AND SIGNALS COSTS
13
NEC INFRASTRUCTURE - STATE OF GOOD REPAIR - DETAIL OF
STRUCTURAL COSTS
14
NEC INFRASTRUCTURE - STATE OF GOOD REPAIR - DETAIL OF TRACK
COSTS
Appendix A
Page 1
Table 1
AMTRAK NEC STATE OF GOOD REPAIR SPEND PLAN
(millions of 2010 dollars)
Normalized Replacement
Column>
Main
Line
1
Branch
Lines
2
Equipment
Overhauls
3
FY 09
FY 10
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
FY 15
FY 16
FY 17
FY 18
FY 19
FY 20
FY 21
FY 22
FY 23
312
293
285
278
263
255
244
244
244
252
255
263
278
282
268
70
65
64
62
59
57
54
54
54
56
57
59
62
63
60
35
56
56
56
56
56
24
24
24
24
na
na
na
na
na
Backlog of Deferred Investment
Column>
FY 09
FY 10
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
FY 15
FY 16
FY 17
FY 18
FY 19
FY 20
FY 21
FY 22
FY 23
Eng 2007
Report
4
NEC Main Line
NY Tunnels
Structural Stations
5
6
211
234
259
290
316
359
389
411
402
350
324
298
259
216
0
0
47
39
33
49
47
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Branch Lines
Eng 2007
Report
Stations
7
8
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
0
0
0
0
0
34
38
42
47
51
58
63
66
65
56
52
48
42
35
0
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
0
0
0
0
Equipment
Replacement
9
0
37
37
37
37
37
173
173
173
173
na
na
na
na
na
Notes by column number:
Columns 1,2,4,6,7 & 8: Source of estimates is the Engineering FY 2007 State of Good
Repair Report, except Stations, which are from the February 2009 ADA Accessibility
Report (which updated SOGR requirements at Amtrak stations). Figures have been
inflated to FY 10 dollars. Engineering annual spend estimates factor in the need to
ramp-up internal and external resources to fully address the state of good repair
backlog.
Columns 3 & 9: Amtrak Mechancial Department estimates.
Column 5: NY Tunnels Life / Safety program (NY tunnels were not included in original
SOGR estimates because the tunnels program was classified and safety / mandatory.
However, this report recognizes structural rehabilitation requirements that are
appropriatly classified as backlog).
Appendix A
Page 2
Table 2
NEC INFRASTRUCTURE - MAIN LINE AND BRANCH LINES - ESTIMATED SOGR SPENDING BY YEAR
FY 07 Assessment by Year Group
FY09-13
1,203
1,861
Normalized
Backlog
FY14-18
1,523
1,292
FY19-22
1,593
1,566
Adjusted Annual Spending Estimate - FY 07 Dollars
FY09
FY10
FY11
Normalized
367
337
328
Backlog
236
255
283
Total
603
592
611
Total
4,319
4,720
Average
Annual
309
337
FY12
320
316
636
FY13
302
345
647
FY14
294
392
685
FY15
281
425
706
FY16
281
448
729
FY17
281
439
720
FY18
289
382
672
FY19
294
354
648
FY20
302
326
628
FY21
320
283
603
FY22
324
236
560
FY 23
309
0
309
Total
09-22
4,319
4,720
9,347
1.0638
FY12
340
336
676
1.0638
FY13
322
367
688
1.0638
FY14
312
417
729
1.0638
FY15
299
452
751
1.0638
FY16
299
477
776
1.0638
FY17
299
467
766
1.0638
FY18
308
407
715
1.0638
FY19
312
377
689
1.0638
FY20
322
346
668
1.0638
FY21
340
301
641
1.0638
FY22
345
251
596
1.0638
FY 23
328
0
328
Total
09-22
4,586
5,015
9,929
346
301
251
345
328
FY22
FY 23
Adjusted Annual Spending Estimate - FY 10 Dollars
GDP Inflator >>>
millions of FY 10 dollars
Normalized
Backlog
Total
1.0399
FY09
382
245
627
1.0638
FY10
358
271
630
1.0638
FY11
349
301
650
1,000
800
600
417
452
477
467
407
245
271
301
336
382
358
349
340
322
312
299
299
299
308
312
322
340
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY16
FY17
FY18
FY19
FY20
FY21
367
377
400
0
200
0
Normalized
Backlog
Note: Figures have been adjusted from orginal 2007 state of good repair survey to show estimates in 2010 dollars and incorporate assumptions with respect to the ramp-up of resource
requirements. In addition, backlog requirements at Amtrak stations have been updated and are not included in the above tables / chart. For estimated station backlog
costs, see tables 1 and 5.
Appendix A
Page 3
Table 3
NEC INFRASTRUCTURE - NEC MAIN LINE ONLY - ESTIMATED SOGR SPENDING BY YEAR
FY 07 Assessment by Year Group
FY09-13
990
1,530
Normalized
Backlog
FY14-18
1,242
1,067
FY19-22
1,299
1,469
Total
3,531
4,065
Average
Annual
252
290
FY12
261
272
534
FY13
247
297
544
FY14
240
337
578
FY15
230
366
595
FY16
230
386
616
FY17
230
378
608
FY18
237
329
566
FY19
240
305
545
FY20
247
280
528
FY21
261
244
505
FY22
265
203
468
FY 23
252
0
252
Total
09-22
3,531
4,065
7,848
1.0638
FY12
278
290
568
1.0638
FY13
263
316
579
1.0638
FY14
255
359
614
1.0638
FY15
244
389
633
1.0638
FY16
244
411
655
1.0638
FY17
244
402
646
1.0638
FY18
252
350
602
1.0638
FY19
255
324
580
1.0638
FY20
263
298
561
1.0638
FY21
278
259
537
1.0638
FY22
282
216
498
1.0638
FY 23
268
0
268
Total
09-22
3,749
4,320
8,337
298
259
216
282
268
FY22
FY 23
Adjusted Annual Spending Estimate - FY 07 Dollars
FY09
FY10
FY11
300
275
268
203
220
244
503
495
512
Normalized
Backlog
Total
Adjusted Annual Spending Estimate - FY 10 Dollars
GDP Inflator >>>
1.0399
FY09
312
211
523
millions of FY 10 dollars
Normalized
Backlog
Total
1.0638
FY10
293
234
527
1.0638
FY11
285
259
545
800
600
400
359
389
411
402
350
211
234
259
290
312
293
285
278
263
255
244
244
244
252
255
263
278
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY16
FY17
FY18
FY19
FY20
FY21
316
324
0
200
0
Normalized
Backlog
Note: Figures have been adjusted from orginal 2007 state of good repair survey to show estimates in 2010 dollars and incorporate assumptions with respect to the ramp-up of resource
requirements. In addition, backlog requirements at Amtrak stations have been updated and are not included in the above tables / chart. For estimated station backlog
costs, see tables 1 and 5.
Appendix A
Page 4
Table 4
NEC INFRASTRUCTURE - NEC MAIN LINE AND BRANCH LINES - BACKLOG REDUCTION GOALS
(millions of 2007 dollars)
2009
Discipline
Track
Structures
C&S
ET
2018
Component
Value
Backlog
5,251
8,307
1,071
1,907
16,537
1,109
2,278
295
1,038
4,720
% in Component
SGR
Value
79%
73%
72%
46%
71%
Backlog
% in
SGR
179
1,321
3
63
1,566
97%
84%
100%
97%
85%
5,251
8,307
1,071
1,907
16,537
2022 (Year End)
Component
Value
Backlog
5,251
8,307
1,071
1,907
16,537
0
0
0
0
0
% in
SGR
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Backlog Reduction - 2009 Revised
2009
Discipline
Track
Structures
C&S
ET
2018
Component
Value
Backlog
5,251
8,307
1,071
1,907
16,537
1,109
2,278
295
1,038
4,720
% in Component
SGR
Value
79%
73%
72%
46%
71%
Backlog
% in
SGR
0
1,233
0
0
1,233
100%
85%
100%
100%
85%
5,251
8,307
1,071
1,907
16,537
2022 (Year End)
Component
Value
Backlog
5,251
8,307
1,071
1,907
16,537
0
0
0
0
0
% in
SGR
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
2009
2018
2022 (Year End)
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Track
Structures
C&S
ET
Note: Does not include station backlog costs (see tables 1 and 5). Figures based on Engineering's 2007 state of good
repair survey and are stated in 2007 dollars. "Revised" figures shown are adjusted to take into account actual annual
spend-out estimates and ramp-up requirements (see table 2).
Appendix A
Page 5
Table 5
NEC STATIONS - STATE OF GOOD REPAIR BACKLOG COSTS
(thousands of 2009 dollars)
Station
Code
Station Name
State
Stations
Backlog
NEC MAIN LINE
BRP
Bridgeport
MYS
Mystic
NHV
New Haven
NLC
New London
OSB
Old Saybrook
STM
Stamford
NRK
Newark
WIL
Wilmington
WAS
Washington
ABE
Aberdeen
BAL
Baltimore - Penn Station
BWI
BWI Thurgood Marshall Airport Station
NCR
New Carrollton
BBY
Boston - Back Bay
BOS
Boston - South Station
RTE
Route 128
MET
Metropark
NBK
New Brunswick
NWK
Newark - Penn Station
EWR
Newark Liberty International Airport
PJC
Princeton Junction
TRE
Trenton
NRO
New Rochelle
NYP
New York - Penn Station
CWH
Cornwells Heights
PHL
Philadelphia - 30th Street Station
PHN
Philadelphia - North
KIN
Kingston
PVD
Providence
WLY
Westerly
Subtotal, NEC Main
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
DE
DE
DC
MD
MD
MD
MD
MA
MA
MA
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NY
NY
PA
PA
PA
RI
RI
RI
2,512
181
2
31
36
39,864
65
12,590
10
11
309
1,152
1
2
6
20
2
36,785
500
101,615
241
4
1,573
197,512
SPRINGFIELD LINE
BER
Berlin
HFD
Hartford
MDN
Meriden
WFD
Wallingford
WND
Windsor
WNL
Windsor Locks
Subtotal, Springfield
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
312
763
109
13
54
244
1,496
ALBANY LINE
ALB
Albany-Rensselaer
HUD
Hudson
POU
Poughkeepsie
RHI
Rhinecliff
SDY
Schenectady
Subtotal, Albany
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
170
369
521
218
1,278
HARRISBURG LINE
ARD
Ardmore
COT
Coatesville
DOW
Downingtown
ELT
Elizabethtown
HAR
Harrisburg
LNC
Lancaster
MID
Middletown
MJY
Mount Joy
PAO
Paoli
PAR
Parkesburg
Subtotal, Harrisburg
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
Note: Source of estimates is Amtrak's February 2009 ADA Accessibility Report.
Appendix A
Page 6
67
141
312
619
27,483
10,000
24
500
155
39,301
Table 6
SOGR STATUS OF NEC EQUIPMENT
Program
Current (2009)
Average
Own, Oper
Age
Maintain
FY 09
Active
Planned
Active
FY10 - FY 14
Capital
Overhauls
Planned
Active
FY15 - FY 18
Capital
Overhauls
# in
SGR
% Active
in SGR
100%
100%
100%
100%
345
0
160
505
374
-
612
445
17
120
582
49
49
49
15
40
45
149
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
0
15
40
45
100
-
# in
SGR
% Active
in SGR
277
0
160
437
80%
100%
87%
0
15
40
45
100
100%
100%
100%
100%
Passenger Cars
Amfleet 1
Former Metroliner/Cab Cars
Acela
Subtotal Passenger Cars
33
42
10
479
28
120
627
390
17
120
527
445
17
120
582
51
15
40
45
151
49
15
40
45
149
49
15
40
45
149
778
676
595
17
374
Locomotives
Electric Locomotoves
AEM7
HHP
Acela Power
Diesels (NEC assigned)
Subtotal Locomotives
Total
27
9
10
13
731
661
Note: Figures shown above (except average age and % Active in SOGR) represent units of equipment.
Appendix A
Page 7
731
100%
605
374
537
89%
Table 7
REPLACEMENT COSTS FOR NEC EQUIPMENT
(dollars in millions of 2009 dollars)
Equipment Type
Average
Age
Useful
Life
FY10
Active
Units to be replaced
FY 10-14 FY15-18
Replacement Cost ($M)
FY 10-14
FY15-18
33
42
40-50
50
390
17
407
-
100
19
119
-
350
67
417
27
27
9
10
13
30
25
30
30
25
29
20
15
40
45
149
20
20
29
29
180
180
261
261
556
20
148
180
678
Passenger Cars
Amfleet 1 - Regionals (a)
Former Metroliner/Cab Cars
Subtotal Passenger Cars
Locomotives
Electric Locomotoves
AEM7 AC
AEM7 DC
HHP
Acela Power
Road Diesels (Springfield, Empire)
Subtotal Locomotives
Total
Annual Spending Estimate - FY 10 dollars
Inflation Estimate (FY 09 - FY 10)
FY 09
FY 10
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
FY 15
FY 16
FY 17
FY 18
1.0239
Replacement
0
37
37
37
37
37
173
173
173
173
Appendix A
Page 8
Table 8
NEC EQUIPMENT OVERHAUL COSTS
(millions of 2009 dollars)
FY09
Total
Level 1
FY 10-14
Level 2
Level 3
Level 1
FY 15-18
Level 2
Level 3
Passenger Cars
Corridor Equipment
Amfleet 1 - Regionals (a)
Former Metroliner/Cab Cars
Acela Coaches*
Subtotal Passenger Cars
34.7
1.6
36.3
54.4
5.4
59.8
95.5
95.5
66.8
66.8
56.5
56.5
36.7
36.7
-
3.1
-
-
36.8
2.7
10.1
-
-
-
-
-
3.1
-
49.6
-
-
39.4
59.8
145.1
66.8
56.5
Locomotives
Electric Locomotoves
AEM7 AC
AEM7 DC
HHP
Acela Power*
Road Diesels (Springfield, Empire)
Subtotal Locomotives
Total
*Note: Acela component overhaul costs are under review.
Annual Spending Estimate - FY 10 dollars
Inflation Estimate (FY 09 - FY 10 )
FY 09
FY 10
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
FY 15
FY 16
FY 17
FY 18
1.0239
Overhaul
35
56
56
56
56
56
24
24
24
24
Appendix A
Page 9
-
36.7
-
Table 9
NEC INFRASTRUCTURE - STATE OF GOOD REPAIR - SUMMARY BY LINE / DISCIPLINE
(millions of 2007 dollars)
TOTAL
Discipline
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
TRACK
STRUCTURES
COMM. & SIGNALS
ELECTRIC TRACTION
690
250
120
143
573
481
185
623
1,263
731
304
766
855
283
149
236
357
477
107
351
1,212
760
256
587
855
304
160
274
179
1,321
3
63
1,035
1,624
163
337
2,401
837
428
653
1,109
2,278
295
1,038
3,510
3,116
723
1,690
ENGINEERING TOTAL
1,203
1,861
3,064
1,523
1,292
2,815
1,593
1,566
3,159
4,319
4,720
9,039
NEC MAINLINE
Discipline
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
TRACK
STRUCTURES
COMMUNICATION AND SIGNALS
ELECTRIC TRACTION
531
212
107
139
475
417
140
497
1,007
629
247
637
657
241
131
214
320
417
64
266
977
658
195
479
658
261
137
243
163
1,264
41
821
1,525
137
284
1,846
714
375
596
958
2,098
204
804
2,804
2,812
579
1,400
TOTAL
990
1,530
2,520
1,242
1,067
2,309
1,299
1,469
2,767
3,531
4,065
7,596
SPRINGFIELD LINE
Discipline
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
TRACK
STRUCTURES
COMMUNICATION AND SIGNALS
ELECTRIC TRACTION
30
9
5
-
23
14
1
-
53
23
6
-
36
9
5
-
9
11
1
-
45
20
6
-
36
9
5
-
2
11
-
38
20
5
-
102
28
16
-
34
36
2
-
136
64
18
-
TOTAL
44
38
82
51
21
72
51
13
64
146
72
218
ALBANY LINE
Discipline
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
TRACK
STRUCTURES
COMMUNICATION AND SIGNALS
ELECTRIC TRACTION
28
12
1
-
13
13
0
-
41
26
1
-
32
13
1
-
4
13
-
37
27
1
-
32
13
1
-
0
10
-
32
24
1
-
93
39
3
-
17
37
0
-
110
76
4
-
TOTAL
42
27
69
47
18
64
47
11
57
135
55
190
HARRISBURG LINE
Discipline
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
TRACK
STRUCTURES
COMMUNICATION AND SIGNALS
ELECTRIC TRACTION
100
17
6
3
62
36
43
126
162
53
49
129
130
20
12
22
24
36
42
85
153
55
54
108
130
20
16
31
14
35
3
22
143
55
20
53
360
57
34
57
99
107
89
233
459
164
123
290
TOTAL
127
267
394
183
187
370
197
74
271
507
528
1,035
Note: Structures figures exclude station backlog costs which were updated in the February 2009 ADA Accessibility Report (see tables 1 and 5). 2007
estimates shown above have been updated to 2010 dollars - see tables 2 and 3.
NR = Normalized Replacement; BL = Backlog
Appendix A
Page 10
Table 10
NEC INFRASTRUCTURE - STATE OF GOOD REPAIR - SUMMARY OF COSTS BY DISCIPLINE / ASSET CATEGORY
(millions of 2007 dollars)
TRACK
Asset Category
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
BALLAST
DIRECT FIXATION
DRAINAGE
ROLLING STOCK
FASTENERS
GEOMETRY
INTERLOCKING RENEWAL
RAIL
ROADBED
SPECIAL TRACK WORK
TRACK APPLIANCE
WOOD TIES
TOTAL TRACK RENEWAL
TLS
TURNOUTS
CROSSINGS-ROAD
67
2
6
20
39
52
174
23
31
11
152
29
82
2
72
2
7
12
18
111
69
22
26
12
124
30
64
2
140
4
13
32
57
163
243
45
57
23
276
59
146
5
78
2
8
21
68
70
228
25
36
15
169
32
100
3
63
2
6
0
111
18
0
10
95
29
22
1
140
4
14
22
68
181
228
43
37
26
264
61
121
4
78
2
8
21
68
70
228
25
36
15
169
32
100
3
37
2
1
106
4
0
0
3
25
1
0
115
4
9
21
68
176
228
29
36
15
172
57
100
3
223
6
21
63
175
193
629
73
104
42
491
92
281
8
172
6
14
12
18
328
69
44
26
22
222
85
87
3
394
12
36
75
193
521
698
117
130
64
712
177
368
12
TOTAL
690
573
1,263
855
357
1,212
855
179
1,035
2,401
1,109
3,510
STRUCTURES
Asset Category
MOVABLE BRIDGE-MOVABLE
SIGNAL BRIDGE
BRIDGE TIES
UNDERGRADE–FIXED BRIDGE
CULVERT
FENCE
M/E FACILITY
M/W BASE
STATION
TRANS DEPARTMENT FACILIT
TUNNEL
RETAINING WALL
TOTAL
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
14
1
5
87
6
2
21
6
78
2
26
1
177
1
173
21
7
16
3
*
2
71
9
191
2
5
260
27
9
37
9
78
4
98
10
23
1
5
93
8
3
25
7
87
3
29
1
177
1
173
21
7
16
3
*
2
71
6
200
2
5
266
28
10
40
10
87
5
100
7
32
1
5
93
8
3
28
7
94
3
29
1
173
21
7
1,114
6
32
1
5
266
28
10
28
7
94
3
1,143
7
69
3
16
274
21
8
74
20
258
8
84
2
354
2
518
63
22
31
7
4
1,257
22
423
4
16
792
84
30
105
26
258
12
1,341
24
250
481
731
283
477
760
304
1,321
1,624
837
2,278
3,116
COMMUNICATION AND SIGNALS
Asset Category
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
ABS LOCATIONS
ADV CIVIL SPD ENFORC SYS
MOVEABLE BRIDGES
CABLE COPPER
CABLE FIBER
CETC
HAZD
HAZH
INTERLOCKING - C&S
NETWORK
RADIO
SWHT
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
CROSSINGS
19
7
2
8
0
4
1
1
46
6
2
3
19
2
29
4
11
60
1
2
46
0
1
11
19
1
49
7
6
19
0
64
1
2
92
6
2
14
38
3
23
7
3
10
0
15
1
1
52
6
2
5
22
2
28
8
0
46
0
0
11
12
1
51
7
3
18
0
15
1
1
98
6
3
16
34
3
26
7
3
11
0
15
1
1
58
6
3
6
22
2
3
-
26
7
3
11
0
15
1
1
58
6
3
6
25
2
68
21
9
29
1
33
2
3
156
17
7
13
63
6
57
4
19
60
1
2
93
0
1
23
35
2
125
21
13
48
1
93
3
5
249
17
8
35
97
8
120
185
304
149
107
256
160
3
163
428
295
723
TOTAL
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
ELECTRIC TRACTION
Asset Category
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
CATENARY
CONSTANT TENSION CATENA
FREQUENCY CONVERTERS
CATENARY POLE
SIGNAL POWER
SUBSTATIONS
TRANSMISSION
3RD RAIL
32
38
32
15
0
21
5
1
66
91
63
33
173
190
7
98
38
122
78
33
194
195
8
44
38
51
20
7
46
29
2
52
91
63
33
91
15
7
95
38
142
83
40
137
44
9
48
38
62
20
14
59
31
3
63
-
48
38
62
83
14
59
31
3
123
113
145
55
21
126
66
5
118
182
190
66
264
205
14
241
113
326
245
87
390
270
19
143
623
766
236
351
587
274
63
337
653
1,038
1,690
TOTAL
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
Note: Structures figures exclude station backlog costs which were updated in the February 2009 ADA Accessibility Report (see tables 1 and 5). 2007
estimates shown above have been updated to 2010 dollars - see tables 2 and 3.
NR = Normalized Replacement; BL = Backlog
Appendix A
Page 11
Table 11
NEC INFRASTRUCTURE - STATE OF GOOD REPAIR - DETAIL OF ELECTRIC TRACTION COSTS
(millions of 2007 dollars)
ELECTRIC TRACTION TOTAL
Asset Category
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
CATENARY
CONSTANT TENSION CATENARY
FREQUENCY CONVERTERS
CATENARY POLE
SIGNAL POWER
SUBSTATIONS
TRANSMISSION
3RD RAIL
32
38
32
15
0
21
5
1
66
91
63
33
173
190
7
98
38
122
78
33
194
195
8
44
38
51
20
7
46
29
2
52
91
63
33
91
15
7
95
38
142
83
40
137
44
9
48
38
62
20
14
59
31
3
63
-
48
38
62
83
14
59
31
3
123
113
145
55
21
126
66
5
118
182
190
66
264
205
14
241
113
326
245
87
390
270
19
143
623
766
236
351
587
274
63
337
653
1,038
1,690
TOTAL
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
NEC MAIN LINE
Asset Category
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
CATENARY
CONSTANT TENSION CATENARY
FREQUENCY CONVERTERS
CATENARY POLE
SIGNAL POWER
SUBSTATIONS
TRANSMISSION
3RD RAIL
29
38
32
15
0
21
5
1
49
63
41
29
132
175
7
77
38
95
56
29
153
181
8
38
38
45
18
6
40
27
2
38
63
41
29
77
9
7
76
38
108
60
35
117
36
9
40
38
53
18
12
51
28
3
41
-
40
38
53
60
12
51
28
3
106
113
130
51
19
113
61
5
87
127
124
58
209
184
14
193
113
256
175
77
322
245
19
139
497
637
214
266
479
243
41
284
596
804
1,400
TOTAL
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
HARRISBURG LINE
Asset Category
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
CATENARY
CONSTANT TENSION CATENARY
FREQUENCY CONVERTERS
CATENARY POLE
SIGNAL POWER
SUBSTATIONS
TRANSMISSION
3RD RAIL
3
0
-
18
28
22
4
41
15
-
21
28
22
4
41
15
-
6
6
2
1
6
2
-
13
28
22
4
14
6
-
19
33
24
4
20
8
-
8
9
2
2
8
3
-
22
-
8
9
24
2
8
3
-
17
15
4
2
13
5
-
31
55
65
7
55
20
-
48
70
69
10
68
25
-
TOTAL
3
126
129
22
85
108
31
22
53
57
233
290
Note: 2007 estimates shown above have been updated to 2010 dollars - see tables 2 and 3.
NR = Normalized Replacement; BL = Backlog
Appendix A
Page 12
Table 12
NEC INFRASTRUCTURE - STATE OF GOOD REPAIR - DETAIL OF COMMUNICATIONS AND SIGNALS COSTS
(millions of 2007 dollars)
COMMUNICATION AND SIGNALS TOTAL
Asset Category
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
ABS LOCATIONS
ADV CIVIL SPD ENFORC SYS
MOVEABLE BRIDGES
CABLE COPPER
CABLE FIBER
CETC
HAZD
HAZH
INTERLOCKING - C&S
NETWORK
RADIO
SWHT
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
CROSSINGS
19
7
2
8
0
4
1
1
46
6
2
3
19
2
29
4
11
60
1
2
46
0
1
11
19
1
49
7
6
19
0
64
1
2
92
6
2
14
38
3
23
7
3
10
0
15
1
1
52
6
2
5
22
2
28
8
0
46
0
0
11
12
1
51
7
3
18
0
15
1
1
98
6
3
16
34
3
26
7
3
11
0
15
1
1
58
6
3
6
22
2
3
-
26
7
3
11
0
15
1
1
58
6
3
6
25
2
68
21
9
29
1
33
2
3
156
17
7
13
63
6
57
4
19
60
1
2
93
0
1
23
35
2
125
21
13
48
1
93
3
5
249
17
8
35
97
8
120
185
304
149
107
256
160
3
163
428
295
723
TOTAL
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
NEC MAIN LINE
Asset Category
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
ABS LOCATIONS
ADV CIVIL SPD ENFORC SYS
MOVEABLE BRIDGES
CABLE COPPER
CABLE FIBER
CETC
HAZD
HAZH
INTERLOCKING - C&S
NETWORK
RADIO
SWHT
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
CROSSINGS
16
7
2
8
0
4
1
1
42
4
2
2
18
0
13
4
4
60
0
1
33
0
9
16
-
29
7
6
12
0
64
1
2
75
5
2
11
34
0
18
7
3
8
0
15
1
1
46
5
2
4
21
0
12
2
0
33
0
9
9
-
29
7
3
10
0
15
1
1
79
5
2
13
30
0
19
7
3
8
0
15
1
1
50
5
2
5
21
0
-
19
7
3
8
0
15
1
1
50
5
2
5
21
0
52
21
9
24
1
33
2
2
139
14
6
11
60
1
25
4
6
60
0
1
66
0
17
25
-
77
21
12
29
1
93
2
4
205
14
6
29
85
1
107
140
247
131
64
195
137
-
137
375
204
579
TOTAL
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
SPRINGFIELD LINE
Asset Category
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
ABS LOCATIONS
ADV CIVIL SPD ENFORC SYS
MOVEABLE BRIDGES
CABLE COPPER
CABLE FIBER
CETC
HAZD
HAZH
INTERLOCKING - C&S
NETWORK
RADIO
SWHT
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
CROSSINGS
2
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
2
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
2
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
2
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
2
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
-
2
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
6
2
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
5
0
2
6
2
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
6
TOTAL
5
1
6
5
1
6
5
-
5
16
2
18
ALBANY LINE
Asset Category
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
ABS LOCATIONS
ADV CIVIL SPD ENFORC SYS
MOVEABLE BRIDGES
CABLE COPPER
CABLE FIBER
CETC
HAZD
HAZH
INTERLOCKING - C&S
NETWORK
RADIO
SWHT
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
CROSSINGS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-
0
0
-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
-
0
0
-
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
-
TOTAL
1
0
1
1
-
1
1
-
1
3
0
4
Note: 2007 estimates shown above have been updated to 2010 dollars - see tables 2 and 3.
NR = Normalized Replacement; BL = Backlog
Appendix A
Page 13
Table 13
NEC INFRASTRUCTURE - STATE OF GOOD REPAIR - DETAIL OF STRUCTURAL COSTS
(millions of 2007 dollars)
STRUCTURES TOTAL
Asset Category
MOVABLE BRIDGE-MOVABLE SPAN
SIGNAL BRIDGE
BRIDGE TIES
UNDERGRADE–FIXED BRIDGE
CULVERT
FENCE
M/E FACILITY
M/W BASE
STATION
TRANS DEPARTMENT FACILITY
TUNNEL
RETAINING WALL
TOTAL
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
14
1
5
87
6
2
21
6
78
2
26
1
177
1
173
21
7
16
3
*
2
71
9
191
2
5
260
27
9
37
9
78
4
98
10
23
1
5
93
8
3
25
7
87
3
29
1
177
1
173
21
7
16
3
*
2
71
6
200
2
5
266
28
10
40
10
87
5
100
7
32
1
5
93
8
3
28
7
94
3
29
1
173
21
7
1,114
6
32
1
5
266
28
10
28
7
94
3
1,143
7
69
3
16
274
21
8
74
20
258
8
84
2
354
2
518
63
22
31
7
4
1,257
22
423
4
16
792
84
30
105
26
258
12
1,341
24
250
481
731
283
477
760
304
1,321
1,624
837
2,278
3,116
NEC MAIN LINE
Asset Category
MOVABLE BRIDGE-MOVABLE SPAN
SIGNAL BRIDGE
BRIDGE TIES
UNDERGRADE–FIXED BRIDGE
CULVERT
FENCE
M/E FACILITY
M/W BASE
STATION
TRANS DEPARTMENT FACILITY
TUNNEL
RETAINING WALL
TOTAL
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
12
0
4
64
4
2
19
5
75
2
25
1
174
1
126
13
6
16
3
*
2
71
6
186
1
4
190
16
8
35
8
75
4
97
6
20
0
4
68
4
3
22
5
83
3
28
1
174
1
126
13
6
16
3
*
2
71
6
194
1
4
194
17
9
38
8
83
5
99
7
29
0
4
68
4
3
25
6
90
3
28
1
126
13
6
1,114
6
29
0
4
194
17
9
25
6
90
3
1,141
7
61
1
12
200
12
7
66
15
248
8
81
2
348
1
377
38
18
31
7
*
4
1,257
17
409
2
12
578
50
25
97
22
248
12
1,337
20
212
417
629
241
417
658
261
1,264
1,525
714
2,098
2,812
SPRINGFIELD LINE
Asset Category
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
MOVABLE BRIDGE-MOVABLE SPAN
SIGNAL BRIDGE
BRIDGE TIES
UNDERGRADE–FIXED BRIDGE
CULVERT
FENCE
M/E FACILITY
M/W BASE
STATION
TRANS DEPARTMENT FACILITY
TUNNEL
RETAINING WALL
0
1
6
1
0
0
1
0
TOTAL
9
8
3
0
-
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
3
0
1
13
4
0
0
1
3
0
1
6
1
0
0
1
0
8
3
0
-
0
1
14
4
0
0
1
0
0
1
6
1
0
0
1
0
8
3
0
-
0
1
14
4
0
0
1
0
0
2
17
3
0
1
4
0
23
8
1
3
0
2
41
12
1
1
4
3
14
23
9
11
20
9
11
20
28
36
64
*
ALBANY LINE
Asset Category
MOVABLE BRIDGE-MOVABLE SPAN
SIGNAL BRIDGE
BRIDGE TIES
UNDERGRADE–FIXED BRIDGE
CULVERT
FENCE
M/E FACILITY
M/W BASE
STATION
TRANS DEPARTMENT FACILITY
TUNNEL
RETAINING WALL
TOTAL
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
3
0
0
5
1
0
2
0
0
0
1
-
3
8
2
0
-
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
-
6
0
0
13
3
0
2
0
0
0
1
-
3
0
0
5
1
0
2
0
1
0
1
-
3
8
2
0
-
6
0
0
13
3
0
2
0
1
0
1
-
3
0
0
5
1
0
2
0
1
0
1
-
8
2
0
-
3
0
0
13
3
0
2
0
1
0
1
-
8
0
1
15
2
0
7
0
1
0
2
-
6
23
7
1
-
14
0
1
39
9
1
7
0
1
0
2
-
13
26
13
13
27
13
10
24
39
37
76
*
12
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
HARRISBURG LINE
Asset Category
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
MOVABLE BRIDGE-MOVABLE SPAN
SIGNAL BRIDGE
BRIDGE TIES
UNDERGRADE–FIXED BRIDGE
CULVERT
FENCE
M/E FACILITY
M/W BASE
STATION
TRANS DEPARTMENT FACILITY
TUNNEL
RETAINING WALL
0
0
13
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
TOTAL
17
0
31
3
0
-
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
0
1
0
44
5
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
14
1
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
31
3
0
0
1
0
45
5
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
14
1
0
1
2
0
0
0
31
3
0
0
0
0
45
5
1
1
2
0
0
0
1
0
41
4
1
3
6
0
1
0
1
94
10
1
1
2
0
135
14
2
3
6
0
1
1
36
53
20
36
55
20
35
55
57
107
164
*
Note: Structures figures exclude station backlog costs which were updated in the February 2009 ADA Accessibility Report (see tables 1 and 5). 2007
estimates shown above have been updated to 2010 dollars - see tables 2 and 3.
NR = Normalized Replacement; BL = Backlog
Appendix A
Page 14
Table 14
NEC INFRASTRUCTURE - STATE OF GOOD REPAIR - DETAIL OF TRACK COSTS
(millions of 2007 dollars)
TRACK TOTAL
Asset Category
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
BALLAST
DIRECT FIXATION
DRAINAGE
ROLLING STOCK
FASTENERS
GEOMETRY
INTERLOCKING RENEWAL
RAIL
ROADBED
SPECIAL TRACK WORK
TRACK APPLIANCE
WOOD TIES
TOTAL TRACK RENEWAL
TLS
TURNOUTS
CROSSINGS-ROAD
67
2
6
20
39
52
174
23
31
11
152
29
82
2
72
2
7
12
18
111
69
22
26
12
124
30
64
2
140
4
13
32
57
163
243
45
57
23
276
59
146
5
78
2
8
21
68
70
228
25
36
15
169
32
100
3
63
2
6
0
111
18
0
10
95
29
22
1
140
4
14
22
68
181
228
43
37
26
264
61
121
4
78
2
8
21
68
70
228
25
36
15
169
32
100
3
37
2
1
106
4
0
0
3
25
1
0
115
4
9
21
68
176
228
29
36
15
172
57
100
3
223
6
21
63
175
193
629
73
104
42
491
92
281
8
172
6
14
12
18
328
69
44
26
22
222
85
87
3
394
12
36
75
193
521
698
117
130
64
712
177
368
12
TOTAL
690
573
1,263
855
357
1,212
855
179
1,035
2,401
1,109
3,510
NEC MAIN LINE
Asset Category
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
BALLAST
DIRECT FIXATION
DRAINAGE
ROLLING STOCK
FASTENERS
GEOMETRY
INTERLOCKING RENEWAL
RAIL
ROADBED
SPECIAL TRACK WORK
TRACK APPLIANCE
WOOD TIES
TOTAL TRACK RENEWAL
TLS
TURNOUTS
CROSSINGS-ROAD
47
2
3
18
29
46
126
17
30
9
111
29
65
1
56
2
4
12
14
93
48
16
26
11
109
30
53
1
103
4
7
30
43
139
175
32
56
19
219
59
119
2
55
2
4
19
51
61
160
18
36
12
125
32
81
1
56
2
4
0
93
16
10
93
29
15
1
111
4
8
19
51
154
160
34
36
22
218
61
96
2
55
2
4
19
51
61
160
18
36
12
125
32
81
1
37
2
0
93
3
3
25
-
92
4
4
19
51
154
160
21
36
12
128
57
81
1
157
6
11
56
132
168
447
52
102
33
361
92
227
4
149
6
8
12
14
279
48
35
26
20
204
85
69
2
306
12
19
68
145
448
495
87
128
54
565
177
295
6
TOTAL
531
475
1,007
657
320
977
658
163
821
1,846
-
1,846
SPRINGFIELD LINE
Asset Category
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
BALLAST
DIRECT FIXATION
DRAINAGE
ROLLING STOCK
FASTENERS
GEOMETRY
INTERLOCKING RENEWAL
RAIL
ROADBED
SPECIAL TRACK WORK
TRACK APPLIANCE
WOOD TIES
TOTAL TRACK RENEWAL
TLS
TURNOUTS
CROSSINGS-ROAD
3
0
1
0
2
10
1
0
8
5
1
3
0
1
0
1
5
1
0
7
4
1
7
0
1
0
3
15
2
1
14
9
1
4
0
1
0
3
12
1
0
9
5
1
3
0
0
0
1
0
1
4
-
7
0
1
0
3
12
2
1
9
9
1
4
0
1
0
3
12
1
0
9
5
1
0
1
0
1
-
4
0
1
0
3
12
2
0
9
6
1
11
0
2
0
8
34
2
1
25
15
3
6
0
1
0
1
5
2
1
7
9
1
18
0
4
0
9
39
5
2
32
24
3
TOTAL
30
23
53
36
9
45
36
2
38
102
34
136
ALBANY LINE
Asset Category
BALLAST
DIRECT FIXATION
DRAINAGE
ROLLING STOCK
FASTENERS
GEOMETRY
INTERLOCKING RENEWAL
RAIL
ROADBED
SPECIAL TRACK WORK
TRACK APPLIANCE
WOOD TIES
TOTAL TRACK RENEWAL
TLS
TURNOUTS
CROSSINGS-ROAD
TOTAL
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
5
0
1
0
2
7
1
1
1
8
3
0
4
0
1
0
1
3
1
0
0
1
3
0
8
0
2
0
3
10
2
1
1
8
6
1
5
0
1
0
3
8
1
1
1
8
4
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
7
0
2
0
3
8
2
1
1
8
4
1
5
0
1
0
3
8
1
1
1
8
4
1
0
0
0
5
0
1
0
3
8
1
1
1
8
4
1
15
0
3
0
8
24
3
2
2
24
11
1
5
0
2
0
1
3
2
0
0
1
3
0
20
1
5
0
9
26
4
2
3
25
14
2
28
13
41
32
4
37
32
0
32
93
17
110
HARRISBURG LINE
Asset Category
BALLAST
DIRECT FIXATION
DRAINAGE
ROLLING STOCK
FASTENERS
GEOMETRY
INTERLOCKING RENEWAL
RAIL
ROADBED
SPECIAL TRACK WORK
TRACK APPLIANCE
WOOD TIES
TOTAL TRACK RENEWAL
TLS
TURNOUTS
CROSSINGS-ROAD
TOTAL
Total 2009-2013
NR
BL
Total
Total 2014-2018
NR
BL
Total
Total 2019-2023
NR
BL
Total
Total All Years
NR
BL
Total
12
0
2
2
6
7
30
5
0
2
26
9
0
9
0
2
0
3
18
13
4
0
1
8
4
0
21
0
3
2
9
24
43
9
0
2
34
12
0
14
0
2
2
11
9
47
5
0
2
27
10
0
2
1
0
18
1
0
1
2
-
15
0
3
2
11
27
47
6
0
2
28
12
0
14
0
2
2
11
9
47
5
0
2
27
10
0
1
13
0
-
14
0
3
2
11
22
47
5
0
2
27
10
0
40
0
6
7
27
25
125
16
0
5
81
29
0
11
0
3
0
3
49
13
5
0
1
9
5
0
50
0
9
7
30
73
138
21
1
6
90
34
0
100
62
162
130
24
153
130
14
143
360
99
459
Note: 2007 estimates shown above have been updated to 2010 dollars - see tables 2 and 3.
NR = Normalized Replacement; BL = Backlog
Appendix A
Page 15
Appendix B
State and Agency Comments on
Northeast Corridor State of Good Repair Spend Plan (a)
Page No.
Connecticut Department of Transportation (b)
B-2
Maryland Mass Transit Administration
B-5
MTA Metro-North Railroad (b)
B-6
Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (c)
B-8
Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation
B-9
Notes:
a
Plan circulated for comment to the chief transportation executives of the following Northeast
states as required under the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act: Connecticut,
Delaware, the District of Columbia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York,
Pennsylvania and Rhode Island. Plan also circulated for comment to the following
additional states or agencies participating in the master plan process: Maine, New
Hampshire, Vermont, Virginia and the New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority
(MTA). Comments were requested by April 10, 2009; comments included in this appendix
are those received by April 13, 2009.
b
Responses by the Connecticut Department of Transportation and the MTA Metro-North
Railroad contain financial and other information related to state of good repair requirements
on the portion of the Northeast Corridor main line from New Haven, CT to New Rochelle, NY
(the New Haven Line), owned by ConnDOT and MTA Metro North Railroad and operated by
Metro-North. The information provided by these agencies specifically addresses NEC main
line state of good repair requirements and should be considered an integral part of this
report.
c
State of good repair station costs, which are referenced in the response of the Pennsylvania
Department of Transportation, are detailed in Appendix A, page 6; summarized in Appendix
A, page 2 (columns 6 and 8), and included in the table on page 4 under NEC Infrastructure.
Appendix B
Page 1
Appendix B
Page 2
Connecticut Department of Transportation
April 10, 2009
Northeast Corridor State of Good Repair Spend Plan
(Prepared by Amtrak – Required under Section 211 of the PRIIA)
Comments
The Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT) has been asked to comment on the
State Of Good Repair Spend Plan (SOGR Plan), and the following is offered with respect to both
the New Haven Line (NHL), owned by Connecticut and the New Haven, Hartford, Springfield
(NHHS) Line (owned by Amtrak) for which CTDOT is coordinating the Environmental Assessment
(EA) for adding commuter rail service.
NHL NEC Main Line
Amtrak had requested during the NEC Master Plan process that CTDOT and Metro-North (MNR)
include State of Good Repair (SOGR) evaluations of the sections of the NEC owned by
Connecticut and MNR. CTDOT and MNR have provided Normalized Replacement (NR) and
SOGR information to Amtrak in connection with the NEC Master Plan. The NHL SOGR
information should be included in the draft SOGR Plan. (See file excerpt below.)
Preliminary Draft Under Development (Not for Distribution)* - Metro-North Additions (02/12/09) - CTDOT Additions in blue (02/13/09)
NEC Master Plan
Order of Magnitude Infrastructure Investment Costs: 2010 - 2030
$ millions
Investment Category /
Major Programs
NEC MAIN LINE
MNR New Haven
Amtrak
MTA
OTHER SEGMENTS / BRANCH LINES
NY - Albany
CDOT
WAS-RVM PHL-HAR
Amtrak
MNR
TOTAL
NHV-SPG
Backup
Page
Number
Safety / Mandates
Positive Stop Train Control
Station Platforms / ADA
NY Life Safety
Protection of Freight Routes
63
496
535
60
1,154
10
20
50
tbd
35
35
24
112
40
176
5
5
30
50
45
-
8
28
36
110
671
535
100
1,416
4-5
6-7
-
238
59
66
9-10
204
271
364
4,658
1,798
2,000
6,532
1,955
17,306
845
1,406
5,496
-
774
1,012
187
16
262
604
83
687
300
600
900
-
-
-
-
-
300
600
900
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
8
State of Good Repair / Reliability
Backlog of Deferred Investment
Major bridges
Other
Baltimore Tunnel
Normalized Replacement
Other Reliability
1,413
1,798
2,000
5,367
450
11,028
3,245
170
170
SGR / Improvements
Mainline Signal Replacement
Mainline Catenary / Fixed Bride Replacement
18 (CDOT)
-
tbd
Trip Time Improvements
Boston -New Haven
11
12
-
Appendix B
Page 3
1
Connecticut Department of Transportation
April 10, 2009
NHHS Line
Table 9
NEC INFRASTRUCTURE - STATE OF GOOD REPAIR - SUMMARY BY LINE / DISCIPLINE
(millions of 2007 dollars)
SPRINGFIELD LINE
Discipline
Total 2009-2013
NR
TRACK
BL
Total 2014-2018
Total
NR
BL
Total 2019-2023
Total
NR
BL
Total All Years
Total
NR
BL
Total
30
23
53
36
9
45
36
2
38
102
34
136
STRUCTURES
9
14
23
9
11
20
9
11
20
28
36
64
COMMUNICATION
5
1
6
5
1
6
5
0
5
16
2
18
ELECTRIC TRACTION
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
44
38
82
50
21
72
50
13
64
146
72
218
TOTAL
Table 9 (above - excerpted from the SOGR Plan) outlines the Plan’s projected funding to achieve
SOGR on the NHHS at Line $218M (2009-2023). Based on recent discussions with Amtrak
regarding the NHHS Line, this funding level appears to be considerably lower than what was
estimated. For example, structures work in the SOGR Plan appears to be under funded for the
NHHS Line. Amtrak has $64M identified in structures work of which $36M is in the Backlog (BL)
category. Recently, Amtrak has indicated to CTDOT that two BL projects - the Hartford Viaduct
and the Connecticut River Bridge in Enfield - would require $58M-$65M in funding.
Deferred investment on the NHHS Line has also impacted Amtrak’s ability to improve Intercity
Passenger Rail service as well as to initiate a High Speed Rail service as mandated. As noted
above, significantly more work is required to restore the NHHS line to an SOGR than has been
presented. CTDOT, in conjunction with its EA process for re-establishing commuter service on
the NHHS Line, is prepared to work with Amtrak to identify and seek funding to reach an SOGR
for this important line that the US Congress has supported for service improvements under the
Sec. 403 of the PRIIA.
Appendix B
Page 4
2
Maryland Transit Administration
Comments on Northeast Corridor State of Good Repair Spend Plan
(Prepared by Amtrak under Section 211 of the Passenger Rail
Investment and Improvement Act of 2008)
From: Ira Silverman [[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 11:42 AM
To: Conlow, John; [email protected]; Walter Ernst; Ira Silverman; Charles Poltenson
Cc: Galloway, Drew; Simon Taylor
Subject: RE: Comments on SOGR / Section 211 Report
John,
We have reviewed the proposed State of Good Repair report. As best as we can tell it represents
a fair assessment of the needs of the NEC. We were glad to see the funds for stations, although
the $10,000 dollars for BWI seems somewhat low given the horrible condition of the canopies,
and the interior of the building. If we are able to build a new station that would take care of these
issues but that’s still unknown.
We are glad that the plan addresses the three major Maryland bridges which are crucial.
Expansion of these bridges to four tracks is an important part of the MARC growth and
investment plan and we will have to work with Amtrak to see how to dovetail our projects with
yours.
We were surprised to see the equipment included in the plan. There is no doubt that the electric
locomotive fleet needs replacement. It would seem that this is less an issue of State of Good
Repair rather than simply replacing an asset at the end of its useful life
Ira Silverman
410-454-7133
Please consider the environment before printing this email
LEGAL DISCLAIMER - The information contained in this communication (including
any attachments) may be confidential and legally privileged. This email may not serve as
a contractual agreement unless explicit written agreement for this purpose has been made.
If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution, or copying of this communication or any of its contents is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this communication in error, please re-send this communication to
the sender indicating that it was received in error and delete the original message and any
copy of it from your computer system.
Appendix B
Page 5
MTA METRO-NORTH RAILROAD COMMENTS
AMTRAK’S DRAFT NORTHEAST CORRIDOR STATE OF GOOD REPAIR
SECTION 211 REPORT
April 13, 2009
INTRODUCTION
The MTA Metro-North Railroad (Metro-North) submits the following comments on the draft
“Northeast Corridor State-of-Good-Repair Plan”, dated March 31, 2009 that is required
under Section 211 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act (PRIIA). The
statute directed Amtrak to “prepare a capital spending plan for capital projects required to
return the railroad right-of-way (including track, signals and auxiliary structures), facilities,
stations and equipment of the Northeast Corridor (NEC) main line to a state-of-good-repair
(SGR) by the end of fiscal year 2018.
As a major stakeholder along the Northeast Corridor (NEC) in New York State and
Connecticut, Metro-North continues to be supportive of the Year 2030 NEC Infrastructure
Master Plan process which is developing a comprehensive and collaborative infrastructure
investment plan for the entire NEC. The Section 211 report is a separate, but related effort
that builds upon the good work of the NEC Infrastructure Master Plan process.
We look forward in working with Amtrak as other capital improvement initiatives that will
benefit all users and stakeholders in the Northeast Corridor are developed, including capacity
and speed improvements.
DRAFT REPORT COMMENTS
The draft NEC State of Good Repair report clearly lays out a fair assessment and a
reasonable plan for bringing Amtrak owned segments of the NEC to an SGR level by 2018.
New Haven Line NEC Main Line (NYS)
Metro-North has operational control of commuter rail service along the NEC from CP 216
(New Rochelle, NY) and New Haven, CT (MP 72.8). The ten-mile segment in New York
State is under long term lease by the MTA from CP 216 (MP 16.3) and the New York
State/Connecticut state line (MP 26.1).
The ten-mile New York State segment is basically at a current SGR level or in the process of
attaining it. Some on-going SGR-type projects include overhead and undergrade bridge
repairs and replacement, station rehabilitation and catenary painting. The majority of Metronorth capital investment effort along this segment is under the Normal Replacement or
System Improvement capital investment categories.
Appendix B
Page 6
April 13, 2009
Draft Amtrak NEC SGR Report
MTA Metro-North Railroad Comments
Page 2 of 2
In February 2009, as part of the NEC Master Plan effort, Metro-North supplied preliminary
order of magnitude costs for Normal Replacement infrastructure costs. These costs will be
revised as our current 2010-2029 Twenty Year Needs Assessment effort becomes finalized.
Hudson Line (Amtrak Empire Service)
Similar to the above, Metro-North will update the Normal Replacement and System
Improvements projects associated with our Hudson Line that is within the NEC branch line
classification. In addition, most of the projects identified in the Joint Users Study of the
Hudson Line Corridor have been included in the Long Range Service and Improvement
Program recently released 2009 New York State Rail Plan.
Appendix B
Page 7
Appendix B
Page 8
Appendix B
Page 9
Appendix B
Page 10