Passenger Trains > FRA issues proposed rules on bidding out long-distance trains

UPDATE: FRA issues proposed rules on bidding out long-distance Amtrak routes
TRAINS Newsline
by Kevin P. Keefe
June 22, 2016

> WASHINGTON — Amtrak’s 45-year near monopoly on overnight passenger
> trains could end based on a proposal announced today by the Federal
> Railroad Administration to introduce a pilot program allowing
> independent entities to run long-distance trains on as many as three
> routes.
>
> Citing its rule-making authority, the FRA says its proposal is a
> response to the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act, or FAST
> Act, of 2015, in which the Department of Transportation is directed
> to implement a program “for selection of eligible petitioners in
> lieu of Amtrak to operate not more than three long-distance routes.”

LINK:

FRA issues proposed rules on bidding out long-distance Amtrak routes

Summary:

Winning bidder would assume the "right and obligation" to operate for
four years with extension by USDOT approval, and would receive a
subsidy of no more than 90% or what Amtrak got for the prior year.

Amtrak must provide access to reservations systems, stations and
facilities.

Employees would be subject to (the same conditions) as current Amtrak
employees in similar positions, and displaced, qualified Amtrak
employees would get hiring preference.

An operator failing to provide service would be subject to "necessary
action" by the USDOT and STB to ensure continuation of service.

So...if eee had the incentive and sustainability plan in place, he could end up recreating the Panama Limited right down to the old equipment and timetable?

Sorry guys, I had to. ^^;

Oh boy this is gonna be interesting, especially if someone does jump on it and know the econopmics on running passenger trains! Any host railroad ready to give this a shot on thier tracks?

I wonder if the Freight Companies would be required to give anyone slots on their Rail Lines?
And what would happen if the Freight Companies refuse? 

The Freights barely put up with Amtrak and Commuter Agencies.

Jerry Martin
Los Angeles, CA
Central Coast Railroad Festival

Sad state of uncertainty for the dedicated men and women at Amtrak.

Two things come to mind.  First, who wouldn't want to ride a more complete version of the Hoosier State with a few sleepers and full diner with actual food cooked on board  from say Chicago to LA? And a true first class section separated from coach as is the case on the airlines, the Starlight, and Canadian.   But the railroads wanted out of the passenger business for a reason. They were money losers. The reason Amtrak was started in the first place.The only way to make this work would be for a private operator to provide the equipment and crews, while receiving a subsidy from the government. No doubt this service would have more "dedicated" employees than many current on board Amtrak staff. And if the service replaced the current Amtrak service on that route, it wouldn't be an issue for the host railroads.

The Hoosier state train crews are Amtrak's. I don't see that model being duplicated anywhere else, and the host railroads won't give anyone else trackage rights at incremental cost, which is only done for several commuter outfits. It would also get only 90% of the subsidy. So It will amount to nothing.

I wonder why they specified "90% of what Amtrak received the prior year" as one of the elements?

Even public charter schools get 100% of the state aid that regular public schools receive.

i wonder IF current conditions for employees includes current amtrak pay rates or can the new operator lower wages?

66

< I wonder why they specified "90% of what Amtrak received the prior year" as one of the elements? >

• Walmart mentality - race to the bottom, union busting, etc..
• Show that anyone else is cheaper and better than Amtrak
• Dangle a carrot to force the issue.

None of that will work.
Anything but deep dive into Amtrak's arbitrary fixed cost allocation models.

Quote: "It would also get only 90% of the subsidy."

Remember, the books are cooked! Cooked to show what Amtrak wants it to show.

If a new operator REALLY got 90% of the the complete cost of a LD train, they might make a go of it!

I believe Amtrak was going to nail Indiana for $3M for their Penn Central-ized Horizon coach hop of a train.
But Indiana and several municipalities fork over just $2.7M .

There's your 90%.
 

The original Amtrak quote to keep the Pennsylvanian operational came down quite a bit (half?) when PA asked for details on how the cost was derived.  It's amazing how a few questions will produce a dramatically different result.

Same thing happened in Michigan.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The original Amtrak quote to keep the
> Pennsylvanian operational came down quite a bit
> (half?) when PA asked for details on how the cost
> was derived.  It's amazing how a few questions
> will produce a dramatically different result.

This whole Amtrak situation is just another reminder that our government really doesnt give a crap about the citizens of the U.S.  Amtrak currently gets a pittance of a subsidy while we spend money on a plethora of programs domestically and internationally that do not help the American people as we wish our government would.   
Amtrak is the NATIONAL Railroad passenger corporation.  Tasked with providing a national network while at the same time fighting for funding on a regular basis, being forced to skeletonize its network, cut services to existing trains and foisting upon a handful of states the cost of running interstate trains.  Amtrak is supposed to be a NATIONAL railroad and keeps getting targeted to remove themselves from running a NATIONAL integrated passenger railroad. 

Who on earth is going to bid on running the SW Chief?   And if someone did, would that be a good thing or a bad thing? 



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 06/23/16 09:01 by P.

P Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>What could
> we have done with the $150 BILLION we gave to Iran
> - a country who held dozens of Americans hostage
> for months a mere 30 years ago??   How could we
> have helped our own veterans better with $150
> billion?  

That's already Iran's money to which they simply gain access if they meet certain terms.  It was never U.S. money that could have been spent on something else.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/16/donald-trump/donald-trump-iran-gets-keep-150-billion-even-if-us/

SDGreg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> That's already Iran's money to which they simply
> gain access if they meet certain terms.  It was
> never U.S. money that could have been spent on
> something else.
>
> http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements
> /2015/aug/16/donald-trump/donald-trump-iran-gets-k
> eep-150-billion-even-if-us/

Thanks for this.  I learned something from your post.  My post has been amended to delete this reference.   

It should be noted though that a significnt part of the US Aid comes with restrictions that essentially target the use of that money mostly to US produced things, and ultimately comes back to the US irrespective of any purpose it might serve for the aid recipient. This is somewhat like the Build America requirement that is placed on federal grants for transportation projects. So a significant part of the aid money just does not disappear from the US economy. It is jsut that it does not get spent on other things that we might rather see them spent on. But US provides foreign aid in support of its global political positioning in support of its sof global power, which is considered to be sueful by many even in the US.

That also circles around to the discussions of the Export-Import Bank.  GE moved its Waukesha Engine plant to Canada.  The plant makes huge industrial pumps, etc. Often for export. Many importing countries require that a manufacturer have a government guarantee on the funding arrangement.  It's often in the bid spec.  If you don't have it, your bid is incomplete.

So, the export import bank can be described as "welfare for big corporations" or "a necessary feature to get American made industrial products into many export markets".  But, failing to authorize it severely wounded US exporters and their employees.

There are lots of unintended consequences (and victims) when politicians of both parties grand stand for uninformed voters.

Preface: I haven't read the proposed regulation, only press reports. So take it for what it's worth.

I'd like more details on just how this watered-down "labor protection" giving "preference" to displaced Amtrak employees is going to work. During the handover from Amtrak to Keolis at VRE, not a single Amtrak employee elected to make the move.

Also, 90% of what? Supposedly it is Amtrak's requests from last year. That would represent a grant request that may or may not have any relationshop to the "real world" standalone costs and revenues of the service, plus a reasonable allocation of system costs.

As one well placed source told me, if the winning bidder gets 90% of Amtrak's claimed fully allocated loss on a route, if could be quite a bonanza--in the right hands. If it's some other (much lower) number, it might be in effect a poison pill.

Paul Wilson
Arlington, VA



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/23/16 09:50 by Dcmcrider.