MidAtlantic Rail Operations

1
Financing Freight Transportation
Improvements Exploring Future Options
_________________________________________ U. S.
Department of Transportation Conference April 30,
2001 _____________________________ Randy
Evans Vice President Real Estate Industrial
Development CSX Transportation
2
I-95 Corridor CoalitionMid-Atlantic Rail
Operations Study An Integrated Strategy to
EliminateChoke Points
U.S. Department of Transportation Conference St.
Louis, MO April 30, 2001
3
Project Objective

• Develop a short-term rail investment program for
  the Mid-Atlantic transportation corridor
  (Virginia through New Jersey) that will
• Eliminate key rail choke points
• Increase rail-freight and rail-passenger service
  capacity
• Relieve congestion on the rail, highway, and air
  systems

4
Project Participants

• Amtrak, CSX, Norfolk Southern
• Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania, New
  Jersey
• I-95 Corridor Coalition

5
Mid-Atlantic Corridor Rail Service CSX
6
Mid-Atlantic Corridor Rail Service Norfolk
Southern
7
Mid-Atlantic Corridor Rail ServiceAmtrak
8
Mid-Atlantic CorridorCSX, NS, and Amtrak Rail
Service
9
Mid-Atlantic CorridorMajor Highways
10
Issue Do Rail and Truck Have the Capacity to
Handle the Growing Volume of Freight?
2020 Additional Rail Tons
2000 Rail Tons
2000 Truck Tons
2020 Additional Truck Tons
Truck and Rail Volume 2020
Truck and Rail Volume 2000
Source FHWA , MMFAF Project, based on Reebie
Associates data and WEFA forecasts
11
Freight Growth, 2000-2020Regional growth rates
(all modes, all commodities), andHighway links
with highest growth rates (truck freight density
in tons)
Northeast Region 79
Central Region 89
Mid-Atlantic Corridor
West Region 100
South Region 89
Source FHWA , MMFAF Project, based on Reebie
Associates data and WEFA forecasts
12
Rail Freight Flows, 2000All commodities rail
freight density in tons
Mid-Atlantic Corridor
Source FHWA , MMFAF Project, based on Reebie
Associates data
13
Mid-Atlantic Rail Corridor Issues

• Congested rail traffic because of increasing
  demand for freight, Amtrak, and commuter-rail
  services, resulting in inefficiencies for the
  railroad operators and unreliable services for
  shippers and the traveling public
• Lack of north-south doublestack service along
  Mid-Atlantic/I-95 corridor generally and at
  specific locations like Baltimore and Wilmington
  where low tunnels, bridges, or catenary wires
  block double-stack rail access to the ports
• Inability to accommodate modern, higher railcars
  introduced by domestic shippers and heavier
  marine intermodal containers being used by
  international shippers

14
Mid-Atlantic Rail Corridor Issues (continued)

• Differences in allowable speeds and weight limits
  between passenger and freight rail operations,
  resulting in inefficient use of shared rail
  rights-of-way
• Need for new or improved track to accommodate
  high-speed passenger rail service between
  Washington, DC and Richmond
• Limited ability to route around construction and
  accidents, particularly on segments of the
  corridor with only two tracks
• Limited capacity at intermodal freight and
  passenger rail terminals along the corridor, and
  congested landside access to many of the terminals

15
Mid-Atlantic Rail Corridor Issues (continued)

• Need for improved safety at highway-rail at-grade
  crossings
• Limited real-time information on freight and
  passenger rail operations in the corridor, and
• Limited information-system links for sharing
  operational and other data among the three
  railroads

16
Project Tasks

• Demand Estimates (2000, 2010, 2020)
• Choke Points Analysis and Actions
• Physical infrastructure, information systems,
  operations and scheduling practices, business
  agreements, and regulatory requirements
• System Strategies (packages of actions to address
  choke points)
• Benefit, Cost, and Impact Assessment
• Program Development

17
Mid-Atlantic Corridor Choke PointsLevels of
Analysis
Network Performance (System)
Segment Performance (Choke Point)
Segment Performance (Clusters of Choke Points)
Lane Performance (Trip, Shipment)
18
Products

• Program recommendations for action by the
  railroads, the states, the I-95 Corridor
  Coalition, the US DOT, and Congress
• Report documenting issues and opportunities
• Briefings and presentation materials

19
I-95 Corridor Coalition Opportunities

• Advance coordination among Amtrak, CSX, and
  Norfolk Southern
• Identify corridor-wide rail transportation needs
  and opportunities, including commuter rail issues
• Accelerate application of ITS and advanced rail
  technologies
• Identify costs, benefits, and related impacts
• Investigate innovative approaches to financing
  and constructing new capacity
• Provide new forum and develop public-private
  partnerships

20
Mid-Atlantic Rail Operations Project Contacts

• Coalition
• Gene Donaldson/I-95 Corridor Coalition
• GDonaldson_at_mail.dot. state.de.us
• Marygrace Parker/I-95 Corridor Coalition
• Marygrace_Parker _at_thruway.state.ny.us
• I-95 Coalition Web Site
• www.i95coalition.org/ projects/marop.html

• Railroads
• John Bennett/Amtrak
• BennettJ_at_amtrak.com
• Rick Crawford/NS
• Rick.Crawford_at_nscorp.com
• Randy Evans/CSX
• Randy_Evans_at_csx.com

21
Mid-Atlantic Rail Operations Project
Contacts(continued)

• New Jersey
• Ted Matthews/NJDOT
• TheodoreMatthews_at_ dot.state.nj.us
• John Powers/NJDOT
• JohnPowers_at_ dot.state.nj.us
• Pennsylvania
• Edwin (Ran) Marshall/PennDOT
• EMarsha_at_ dot.state.pa.us

• Delaware
• Mike Kirkpatrick/DelDOT
• MKirkpatrick_at_ mail.dot.state.de.us
• Maryland
• Dave Ganovski/MdDOT
• DGanovski_at_ mdot.state.md.us
• Virginia
• George Conner/VADRPT
• GConner_at_ drpt.state.va.us