.coNGREssIoNAL % E5 Universi of Missouri - Columbia IIIIIWIIII IIIIIMIIIHII lllllfllllllllllllilll CONGRESS o1 o-1033 ~ 0948 AHTBLK TRENDS: FINANCING THE DEFICIT ISSUE BRIEF NUHER IB78003 AUTHO: Tra n sportati <11 5 ecti on E con on ics Div i sion THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE HAJOR ISSUES SYSTEH DAIE ORIGINATED g_2_41§4_2§_ DATE UPDATED 9_§_Q_1_[_8_Q FOR ADDITIONAL IHFORHETION CALL 287-5700 0502 cxs- 1 1373003 UPDATE-0 5/01/so l§§L¥.1§_D;§§l2';l.'l2£Q.. Rail passenger revenues and patronage declined annually during most of the years following World Bar II. From 1950 to 1970, the railroad market share of intercity passenger traffic plummeted from 46.3% to 7.2%. By the time the Interstate Commerce Commission requested Congress to change existing legislation to keep rail passenger service alive, only about 000 trains were left in a system that in 1929 had some 20,000 passenger trains. The National Rail Passenger Corporation (Amtrak), was created by P.L. 91-518 in 1970 as a semi-public, fo profit, entity to halt the serious reduction in the number of passenger trains. The President signed the National Railroad Passenger Authorization Act on Oct. 5, 1978. The law authorized $600 million in operating expenses and $130 million in capital improvement grants for Amtrak in FY79. This legislation directed the Secretary of Transportation to make final recommendations for an optimal intercity route system for Amtrak. Released on Jan. 31, 1979, DOT‘s recommendations call for route cuts of 12,000 miles or a 03% reduction in the system, which allegedly would save $1.0 billion in suhidies through 1980. This route structure was not disapproved by either House of Congress within the designated 90 continuous session days. Without congressional action, the DOT plan automatically went into effect.on Oct. 1, 1979. I 1 The President signed the Amtrak Reorganization Act of 1979, P.L. 96-73, into law on Sept. 29, 1979. This Act establishes certain cost and ridership criteria to which all Amtrak trains are subject. Several trains were ratained under these criteria that would have been eliminated under the _;cretary's route restructuring plan. The» Act also provides a two-year authorization of $1,305,800,000 for operating expenses and an authorization of $701,000,000 to cover capital costs over the next three years. Under this Act, Amtrak is directed to develop and submit to the President and to Congress, a comprehensive plan for the improvement of all intercity rail passenger service in the basic system, by Jan. 1, 1981- BACKGROUND AND POLICY ANALYSIS DECLINE or RAIL passnncnn srnvrcz Rail passenger service in the United States had been suffering a steady decline for many years until in 1970 Congress began an attempt to revitalize this mode of transportation. In the first decade of the twentieth century, railroads were carrying 95% of all intercity travelers. The total number of passengers transported by railroads from 1900 to 1930 averaged about one billion a year, reaching a peak in 1922 of 1.3 billion. In the 1920s, railroads were running 20,000 passenger trains to handle this volume of passenger traffic. ’ The ensuing years marked a consistent decline in the volume of revenue passengers carried by the railroads, except during the years of World War II. By 1969, the railroads operated only slightly more than 000 passenger trains, ’ld more than 100 of those were the subject of discontinuance proceedings _efore the Interstate Cbnmerce Commission. Moreover, according to the ICC, the railroads had experienced a deficit of $220.9 million on passenger 6 service in that year. CBS‘ 2 IB78003 UPDATE*05/OI/80 Although low patronage was primarily responsible for the economic downturn of passenger operations, other factors contributed as well. In 1967 the Post Office initiated a large—scale conversion from enroute sorting of mail 5' railway post office cars to stationary sorting in sectional centers. Th, resulting loss of revenue served to accelerate the rate of discontinuation applications before the ICC. . Because of their worsening financial condition, the railroads lacked sufficient funds to perform necessary maintenance. Amid this rising level of deferred maintenance and delayed capital improvement, the quality of service deteriorated and safety became a matter of serious concern. The physical deterioration further eroded the competitive position of the railroads. Observers in some quarters persistently charged, and the ICC subsequently confirmed, that the railroads themselves were deliberately downgrading the quality of passenger service to further discourage patronage. By showing poor patronage, the ICC would be more inclined to grant permission to discontinue a route or service- The result would be a decrease in both the railroads‘ operating loss and the amount of railroad service available to the public. Competing passenger modes of transportation reached far into the railroads"marke "share of traffic. By 1970, railroads accounted for a mere 7.2% of intercity passenger traffic, down from 46.3% in 1950 and 77% in 1929. By contrast, in 1970, the airlines dcminated the public carrier market, carrying 73% of the traffic. Buses, meanwhile, held 16% of the market. These shifts in passenger volume, coupled with an unprecedented level of private automobile travel, left the railroads with very little passenge patronage. i AHTRAK ARRIVES Because of the high rate of train discontinuance, it was evident that passenger service would almost disappear shortly. In view of the aforementioned developments, the question arose; would it be prudent to allow the virtual complete demise of railroad passenger service from the naticn‘s travel picture, perhaps permanently? Congress decided that to do so»would not be in the public interest.‘ The Senate Commerce Committee, in its report No. 91-765 on the Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970, phrased this position succinctly, as follows: The United States desperately needs, but does not have in operation the machinery required to‘ insure systematic development of coordinated transportation based on sound planning. Legislation designed to achieve that.end is currently under active consideration by this committee. But the committee strongly believes that it would be most unwise to delay action on rail passenger legislation pending the results of otherwefforts to improve transportation balance. Given the present transportation situation, the committee is of the opinion that a properly run intercity passenger train service can make an important contribution to achieving that balance. Certainly if the CRS— 3 IB78003 UPDATE*05/O1/80 / passenger train is allowed to disappear entirely, it would be an expensive, time consuming, and probably impossible task to recreate it at some future date. THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION The Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-518) contained two basic, elenents. First, it created a 15-member National Railroad Passenger Corporation, and a 15-member financial advisory panel. The Corporation was authorized to provide for intercity railroad passenger service. The advisory panel was to advise the Corporation directors on methods of increasing the dcapitalization of the organization. .The second basic element provided for the funding mechanism of the Corporation in the form of Federal grants, loans and loan guarantees. IHPLEHENTATION OF THE SYSTEH Intended to be a self-sustaining, for-profit, quasi—public coporation, Amtrak set out to consolidate and upgrade rail passenger service, with the help of a small amount of initial government funding ($00 million in direct financial assistance and $100 million in loan guarantees). After reviewing comments by Federal and State authorities, by railroad officials and by the general public, the Secretary of Transportation announced, on Mar. 22, 1971, the route selections to be included in the "basic system". Beginning May 1, 1971, Amtrak assumed responsibility for the operation of 23,000 route—miles of intercity rail passenger.service between 21 "city-pair end points" with 184 trains. The railroads that originally signed contracts to operate and maintain Kmtrak trains and perform track maintenance on the “basic system" are: Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe;' Burlington Northern; Baltimore and io—Chesapeake and Ohio; Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific; Gulf, Mobile and Ohio; Illinois Central; Louisville and Nashville; Missouri Pacific; Penn Central; Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac; Seaboard Coast nLine; Southern Pacific; and Union Pacific. (The Illinois Central has since merged with the Gulf, Mobile and Ohio to form the Illinois Central Gulf-) Additional railroads that subsequently joined the Amtrak system include: Boston and Maine; Canadian National; Delaware and Hudson; Grand Trunk Western; Missouri-Kansas-Texas; Norfolk.and Western; and Texas and Pacific. / ROUTE AND SERVICE EXPANSION The 1970 Act permits the corporation to experiment with intercity rail passenger service outside the basic system. To be operated on a provisional basis, these trains may be discontinued if, after a reasonable time, they are not sufficiently utilized by the public. I The Act also permits any State, regional or local agency to request service that is not included in the basic network. This provision is based on the assumption that the requesting agency will pay no less"than two-thirds of the losses attributable to the service. The Amtrak Financial Assistance Act of 1972 (P.L. 92-316) authorized the operation of international rail passenger service between points within the 0.5. and Montreal and Vancouver, Canada, and Nuevo Laredo, Mexico. (The ute to Mexico has been delayed due to:rail line connections.) The Amtrak Improvement Act of 1973 (P.L. 93-146) authorized the CR3. 1: IB7 80 03 UPDATE-O5/01/80 implementation of at least one experimental route each year. After two years, the Secretary of Transportation is to recommend inclusion of the route in the Amtrak system or discontinuance of the route because of poor ridership. These efforts to bolster the Amtrak network are intended to increase service to the public and facilitate an increase in rail passengr patronage in the United States. CURRENT APITRBK STATUS AND OPERATIONS The Amtrak system now operates over 26,000 route-miles. There has been an increase of 3,000 route-miles since may 1971 through the experimental route program. New stations have been built and old ones refurbished during this time to accommodate the increase. Ridership has increased, with approximately 21.0 million people riding Amtrak by 1979, compared to 16.6 million in 1972. Amtrak has made an effort to furthr improve the quality of service through incentive agreements with the railroads that operate its trains. Even though Amtrak data shows that on-time performance has improved steadily, this can be attributed to some degree to a more liberal definition of "on—time.“ EQUIPHENT Inheriting a fleet of less—than—desirable passenger cars has required purchasing new cars and refurbishing old ones. Over $580 million in capital funds have been spent cm committed since 1971 to purchase a variety of ne' eguipment,« including Amfleet cars, bilevel cars, diesel and electrir locomotives, and Turboliner cars. Amtrak's existing fleet of Hetroliner cars is due to be phased out.” Cars averaging 25 years in age have been replaced and many problem—plagued cars have been scrapped. At present, Amtrak owns or leases a fleet of nearly 2,000 cars. TRACK MAIN TENANCE Although Amtrak's fleet has been modernized considerably, new cars and locomotives that have a potential speed of more than 100 mph cannot be utilized to their fullest due to poor track conditions. Bad track, besides adding to operating costs, is reducing average speeds so that Amtrak cannot be competitive with highways. To provide a.more efficient system, much of the infrastructure should be rehabilitated. I Improvements have begun on the Northeast section of the country, since Congress voted $1.75 billion to provide a smoother, faster ride for passengers using the heavily-traveled Northeast Corridor. The Department of Transportation has requested additionalfunding which, if Mapproved, would bring the total to $2.0 billion. 0 FINBNC IAL ASPECTS Although Amtrak has been able to improve service, the corporation originally chartered as a "for—profit" entity, has incurred ever-mounting losses. This poor financial performance can be attributed mainly to high fixed and operating costs and to lower than expected revenue. In other words, the demand is not sufficient to support present levels of service. cns- 5 IB78003 UPDATE—O5/O1/80 According to a June 1977 GAO report, passenger revenues cover oly about 45% of operating expenses. Operating deficits increase every year, and the total operating loss for the first six and a half years ran close to $1.9 billion. The largest expense, accounting for over 60% of total expenses, 3 as for salaries and benefits. Required by law to operate under existing labor regulations, Amtrak probably is forced to pay for some unnecessary services. For example, union rules require a five-man crew on all trains, while Amtrak officials claim that with new equipment a three-man crew probably would be sufficient. Ownership of the Northeast Corridor, Amtrak estimates, has increased operating expenses by $75 million. Inflation also has greatly reduced the purchasing power of the Amtrak budget, and revenue gains through fare increases have not been able to offset cost growth. In an effort to stem the rising costs, management is continuing a cost—reduction program that was initiated in 1975. Cost~cutting measures include reducing station service personnel in the Northeast Corridor, reducing train frequency on some routes, and even planning the restructuring of whole routes. A ‘PROBLEMS AND Pnosrrcrs Consistent with the congressional intent of the Railroad Passenger Service Act to develop and maintain a safe, modern, and efficient national rail passenger system, Amtrak has continually sought to implement experimental routes. Continuation of this process however, becomes more difficult when running a deficit, and probably is not desirable, since management attention ,cently has been directed to pruning undesirable routes. Under current law, Amtrak is no longer required to start one new experimental route a year, but may do so if money permits- SUHHABY OF ROUTE AND SERVICE CRITERIA The Amtrak Improvement Act of 1975 (P.L. 9%-25) contained a mandate to Amtrak to publicly describe the criteria and procedures it would use in making changes in routes and services. Congress took no action to recommend changes in these procedures and the criteria subsequently became effective on narch 19, 1976. To arrive at a comprehensive set of guidelines, Amtrak drew from a number of sources in arriving at three general categories of route and service xcriteria: economic, social and environmental. The economic criteria seek to measure the impact of a route or service on Amtrak's current and projected financial status. The economic criteria include an evaluation of the financial contribution per revenue passenger mile, total financial contribution, financial.impact on connecting parts of the system, incremental capital investment required, and return on incremental investment of a route or service. These economicrcriteria are thought by some observers to provide as sound an economic judgment as can bernade. The social criteria seek to measure the impact that a route or service has on the population that is offered Amtrak service and the impact on actual ridership- Factors taken into account include the population served, cRs- 5 IB78003 UPDATE-OS/O1/80 individuals currently using the route, population deprived of or provided with rail service, availability of alternate methods of transportation and impact on personal safety. The environmental criteria seek to measure the impact of a route t- service on energy consumption, air quality and land use. Three guidelines within the environmental criteria are the change in energy consumed, the change in pollutants generated and the amount of land freed for, or removed from, alternative uses. A A AHTRAK BUDGET STATUS AND ITS EFFECT ON ROUTE STRUCTURE At the present time Congress is considering DOT's recommendation for reductions in the Amtrak system. Recurring losses have forced Amtrak to ask Congress for increases in operating subsidies every year. These were granted, for the most part, until 1976, when the Ford Administration, through Secretary of Transportation Coleman, proposed that Amtrak retain service only in the urban corridors (those with enough passengers to be selfrsupportingy. The question raised at that point and asked since is whether the United States actually needs nationwide rail passenger service. ‘~ 4 Amtrak and Congress have engaged in money disputes since 1976. In 1977 Amtrak asked for $53u.1 million for fiscal 1978 operating expenses. Congress appropriated $088.5 million. In its report.on the fiscal 1978 appropriations bill.the House Appropriations Committee said that this amount would be enough, if Amtrak used route analysis (using its route and service criteria) to drop its most uneconomical routes. Amtrak, however, decided that the corporation could not live within its budget and requested supplemental appropriations of $56.5 million in September 1977. The corporation stated that if the money was not forthcoming it would be necessary to cut the frequencies of service on various routes in the Northeast and nidwest. Consequently, Congress voted an additional $18 million operating subsidy, ordered Amtrak to halt its frequency reductions, and ordered the Department of Transportation and Amtrak to do a preliminary "zero-base" study of the entire route system. The study, which recommended a significant reduction in Amtrak service, was completed in May 1978. The final report was released on Jan. 31, 1979 after the Secretary considered input gathered at nationwide public hearings held by the Interstate- Commerce Commission. The DOT recommends a 12,000 mile (43%) cut in Amtrak's route structure from the existing 27,700 milelsystem. some of the routes slated for discontinuance include ones between Chicago and Houston, New York and Kansas City, and several trains linking New York or Chicago with Florida. monrnrnsr BAIL connxnon Amtrak has entered into an agreement with Conrail, the corpoation operating freight lines in the Northeast, under which Amtrak will buy the Northeast rail corridor. This property'from Washington to Boston consists of a total of 621 route-miles, and 128 railroad stations plus maintenance shops and yards at key points along the route. To be spread over eight years, tb $187 million purchase price will be paid with fees charged by Amtrak for Contrail's use of the right-of-way. Not only will passenger trains have priority over freight traffic, but CRS- 7 IB78003 UPDATE-05/01/80 Amtrak officials also feel a cash savings will be realized through outright ownership. The corporation claims it would cost approximately $173 million, over 10 years to lease the rail line. Early in 1977, Secretary of Transportation Brock Adams and Amtrak I asident Paul Reistrup were on hand as work was begun on the $1.6 billion, fuur—year upgrading of the Washington—New York-Boston rail corridor. It is hoped that these improvements will increase the speed and comfort of the trains in the Northeast Corridor. These trains have the potential of 120 mph speeds. PUBLIC LAWS APPLICABLE TO AHTRAK P.L. 91-518' The Rail Passenger Act of 1970 created the fifteen member National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) and authorized it to provide for intercity railroad passenger service. The Act also established a 15-member financial advisory board to advise the Corporation directors on methods of increasing the capitalization of the coporation. The Act authorized Federal grants and loan guarantees in the form of $30 million for direct financial assistance and $100 million in loan guarantees to the Corporation and $200 million in direct loans or guarantees to the passenger railroads to enable them to enter into contracts with the Corporation. Signed into law Oct. 30, 1970. POLO The Amtrak Financial Assistance Act requires Amtrak to submit monthly erating data to Congress and to make its annual report to the President and the Congress on January 15 of each year. The Act requires Amtrak to directly control and operate all aspects of its rail passenger service. The Act also permits Amtrak to provide service in excess of that prescribed in the basic system if the Corporation determines the experimental or expanded service would be justified and consistent with prudent management. The Act authorized Federal grants of SQO million for FY71 and a total of $225 million in subsequent years, plus $2 million annually to develop international rail passenger service. The Act also provided for loan guarantees, not to exceed $150 million before July 1, 1973, and not to exceed $200 million after June 30, 1973. Signed into lam June 22, 1972. P.L. 93-146 The Amtrak Improvement Act of 1973 directed the Corporation to insure that no elderly or handicapped person is denied intercity rail transportation. The Act also directed the Corporation to initiate not less than one experimental route each year, to be operated for not less than two years; The Act increased both the Federal grant authorizations to $33u.3 million and the maximum loan guarantee amount to $500 million. Signed into law Nov. 3, 1973. The Amtrak Improvement Act of 197a provided that the Corporation shall Lrectly perform all maintenance, rehabilitation, repair and refurbishment of rail passenger equipment. The Act prohibited Amtrak from discontinuing» until July 1, 1975, service over any route which was operating on Jan. 1, cns- 8 IB78003 UPDATE-05/O1/80 1973.. The Act also required the secretary of Transportation to give priority to providing experimental rail service to major population areas which do not have intercity rail passenger service to any large population area. The Act increased the amount of Federal financial assistance from $334.3 million ’\ $534.3 million and the loan guarantees from $500 million to $900 million. Signed into law Oct. 28, 1974. POLO The Amtrak Improvement Act of 1975 provided that the Corporation must provide the service included within the basic system until Oct. 1, 1976, and that service undertaken by the Corporation on its own initiative beyond those services prescribed for the basic system, must be operated by the Corporation until Mar. 1, 1977. The Act required the Board of Directors to develop a set of criteria and procedures (within 120 dayssafter enactment) under which the Corporation would be authorized to add or delete rail passenger routes and services. The Act increased the amount of Federal grants from $534.3 million to $597.3 million and loan guarantees from $900 million to $1,055 million. Signed into law may 26, 1975.~ P.L. 94~387 The Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations for FY77 authorized $482.6 million for operating expenses of Amtrak. This sum includes $62.6 million necessary for the operation, maintenance and ownership or control of the Northeast Corridor pursuant to title VII of the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act of 1976 (P.L. 210)- Signed into law on Aug. 14, 1976. A P.L. 94-555 The Amtrak Improvement Act of 1976 provided that the President of Amtrak should automatically become an ex~officio member of the Board of Directors. This Act also amended the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act to permit Amtrak to purchase the Northeast Corridor. Signed into law Oct. 19, 1976. O P.L. 95-421 o The National Railroad Passenger Corporation Authorization Act amended the Rail Passenger Service Act to authorize appropriations for the National Railroad Passenger Corporation for fiscal year 1979. P.L. 95-421 provided for $600 million in operating subshdies and $130 million in capital improvement grants. This legislation also directed the Secretary of Transportation to develop preliminary recommendations for an optimal intercity route system for Amtrak. The<3ffice of Rail Public Counsel was directed to conduct hearings on these recommendations. The results of these hearings should be considered in developing a final route system. The DOT should then make final recommendations for an Amtrak route_ system. This system would go into effect within 90 continuous session days if not disapproved by either Hose of Congress. No route cuts would be allowed before Oct. 1, 1979. A o P.L. 95-421 also amended the Railroad Revitalization and Regulator Reform Act of 1976 to direct the Secretary of Transportation to establish rolling stock and related equipment, which would be compatible with the Northeast Corridor. Grants of over $1 million for the acguisition of certain materials, such as rolling stock, were restricted to U.S. goods. Signed into cns- 9 1373003 UPDATE~05/01/80 law Oct. 5, 1978. L§§l§LA2lQ! P.L. 96-73 A The Amtrak Reorganization Act of 1979 aaended the Rail Passenger Service Act by authorizing appropriations for Amtrak operating expenses of $1,305,800,000 for FY80 and FY81, and for capital expenses of $701,000,000 for FY80 to FY82. This Act also —-—- Directs the Corporation to continue to operate rail passenger service over any long distance route recommended for discontinuance by the Secretary, if the short-term avoidable loss per passenger is below 7 cents per passenger mile and the passenger mile per train mile on such route is not less than 150. The Corporation is to-continue tcaoperate over short distance routes if the short-term avoidable loss per passenger is below 9 cents a passenger mile and the passenger miles per train mile is not less than 80; Directs the Corporation to develop a comprehensive plan for the inprovenent of all intercity rail passenger service in the basic system; Directs the Corporation to establish a performance evaluation center to conduct an ongoing review of railroad operations, and to take recoazendations for improving such operations; Directs Amtrak to establish an "Employee Incentive Program;" Authorizes the Interstate Commerce Commission to establish through routes and joint fares with other modes of transportation; and Directs Amtrak to develop a job placement program for employees affected by the reduction in work force caused by the Secretary's recommendations for the restructuring of routes. §EA§l§§§ 0.5. Congress. House. Committee on Interstate and Foreign Coamerce. Subcommittee on Transportation and Aeronautics. Financial assistance to Amtrak. Hearings, 93d Congress, 1st session, on H.R. 8351. Washington, 0.3. Govt. Print. Off., 1973. 350 p. Hearings held June 12 and 13, 1973. ----- Rail Passenger Service. Hearings, 91st Congress, 2d session, on H.R. 17809. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1970. 187 p. Hearings held June 2-0, 1970. ----- Review and refunding of Rail Passenger Service Act, part 2. Hearings, 92d Congress, 1st session, on H.R. 709, H.R. 913, H.R. 0570, H.R. 5715, H.R. 6707, H.R. 6730, H.B. 6709, H.R. 7412, H.R. 7481, H.R. 7971, H.R. 9533 (and identical bills), H.R. 11417 and H.R. 9204. Washingtcn, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1972. 019-764 p. Hearings held April 21...Dec. 8, 1971. U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. Subcommittee on.Transportation and Commerce. Amtrak authorization. ~ Hearings, 94th Congress, 1st session, on H.R. 3282 and H.R. 4718. Washington, 0.5. Govt. Print. Off., 1975. 120 p. Hearings held March 11 and 13, 1975. -—--- Antrak's criteria and procedures for making route and service decisions. Hearings, 90th Congress, 2d session. Washington, cns-10 IB78003 UPDATE-05/01/80 0.5. Govt. Print. Off. 1976.. 299 p. Hearings held Feb. 0, 5, and 6, 1976. 0.5. Congress. House. Committee on Public Works and Transportation. Subcommittee on Surface Transportation. Energency rail passenger service operating assistance. Hearing, 90th Congress, 1st session, on H.R. 10631 and 10632. Washington, 0.5. Govt. Print. Off., 1976. 139 p. ‘ Hearing held Nov. 13, 1975. 0.5. Congress. Senate. Counitteeon Commerce. Surface Transportation Subcommittee. Adninistration's:reguest for additional funding for Amtrak. Hearing, 92d Congress, 1st session. Washington, 0.5. Govt. Print. Off., 1971. 860 p. Hearings held Oct. 26, 1971. —----*Antrak's criteria and procedure for making route and service decisions and present and future level of service. Hearings, 90th Congress, 2d session. Washington, 0.5. Govt. Print. Off., 1976. 269 p. Hearings held Bar. 2 and 3, 1976. ----- Amtrak oversight and authorization. Hearings, 93d Congress, 1st session, on S. 1763. Washington, 0.5. Govt. Print. off., 1973. 278 p. Hearings held Hay 16 and 18, 1973. ----- National Railroad Passenger Corporation. Hearings, 92d Congress, 1st session, on S.J.Res. 88, S. 1018, 5. 1380 and S. 1639. Washington, 0.5. Govt. Print. Off., 1971. 297 p. Hearings held Apr. 28, 1971. BE_QB2§-A§2-§Q!§§§§§lQ!AL-2Q§Q§§E2§ 0.5. Congress. «House. conference Committees, 1972. Anendments to the Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970; conference report to accompany H.R. 11017. Washington, 0.5. Govt. Print. Off., 1972. 20 p. (92d Congress, 2d sessio. House. Report no. 92-1111.) --—— Conference Committees, 1973. Antrak Improvement Act of 1973; conference report to accompany 5. 2016. Washington, 0.5. Govt. Print. Off., 1973. 23 p. (93d Congress, 1st session. House. Report no. 93-587.) ----- Conference Committees, 1970. Altrak Improvement Act of 1970; conference report to accompany H.R. 15027. Washington, 0.5. Govt. Print. Off. 1970. 21 p. (93d Congress, 2d session. House. Report no. 93-1001.) ---—- Conference Comnittees, 1978. Amtrak Inprovement Act of 1973; conference report to accompany ' 5. 3000. Washington, 0.5. Govt. Print. Of., 1978. 21 p. (95th Congress, 2d session. House- Report no. 95-1078.) -----= Conference Committees, 1979. Amtrak Reorganization Act of 1979; conference report to accompany H.R. 3996. Washington, 0.5. Govt. Print. Off., 1979. 03 p. (96th cns—11 1373003 UPDATE-05/01/80 Congress, 1st session. House. Report no. 96-M81. ----- Connittee on Interstate and Fcreign Commerce. Amtrak Reorganization Act of 1979: report to accompany H.R. 3996. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off. 1979. 91 p. (96th Congress, 1st Session.‘ House Report no. 96-189) ----- Connittee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. Amendments to Bail Passenger Service Act of 1970, to accompany H.R. 15027. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 197a. 16 p. (93d Congress, 2d session. House. Report no. 93-1145.) ----- Amendments to Bail Passenger Service Act of 1970. 93d Congress, 1st session. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off. 1973. 2a p. At head of title: Committee print. ----- Amendments to Bail Passenger Service Act of 1970. Report to accompany H.R. 8351. Washingtrn, 0.5. Govt. Print. Off., 1973. 36 p. (93d Congress, 1st session. House. Report no. 93-H15.) Amtrak Improvement Act of 1978. Report to accompany H.R. 11u93. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1978. 3Q p. (95th Congress, 2d session. House. Report no. 95-1182.). ‘ ----- Amtrak Improvement Act of 1975. Report to accompany H.R. 4975. Washington, U.$. Govt. Print. Off. 1975. 2Q p. (94th Congress, 1st session. House. Report no. 90-119) ----- Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970. Report to accompany H.R. 178fl9. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off. 1970. 19 p. (91st Congress, 2d session. Hcnse. Report no. 91-1580.) ---- Review and refunding of Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970. Report to accolpany H.R. 11417. washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off. 1972- 32 p. (92d Congress, 2d session. House. Report no . 92-905 .) ----- Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. Special Subcommittee on Investigations. Review of Amtrak operations: condition of Amtrak trains; report. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 197u. 121 p. At head of title: 93d Congress, 2d session. Subcommittee print. Review of Amtrak operations: maintenance and repair activities; report. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 197$. 20 p. At head of title: 93d Congress, 2d session. Subcommittee print. Review of Amtrak operations: "the national limited"; report. Washington, 0.5. Govt. Print. Oif., 197a. 38 p. At head of title: 93d Congress, 2d session. Subcommittee print. Review of Amtrak operations: "the Blue Ridge": report. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1974. 42 p. At head of title: 93d Congress, 2d session. Subcommittee CR5-12 IB78003 UPDATE-O5/O1/80 print. ----»-» Review of Amtrak train, "The Inter-American"; report. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1975. 105 p. At head of title: 9uth Congress, 1st session. Subcommittee print. - Failure to report deferral of budget authority. Communication from the comptroller General of the United States. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1976. 12 p. (9uth Congress, 2nd session. House. Document No. 94-571.) ----- Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the operation of certain rail passengerservice by the National Railroad Passenger Corporation. Washington, 10.5. Govt. Print. Off., 1978. n p. At head" of. title: (95th Congress, 2nd session. House. Report no. 95-983.) 0.5. Congress. Senate. vcommittee on Cbmmerce. Amendments to the Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970. Report on H.R. 11417. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off. 1972. 68 p. (92d Congress, 2d session. Senate. ‘Report no. 92-756.) ----- Amtrak Improvement Act of 1975. Reportto accompany S. 852. Washington, fl-S. Govt. Print..CEf., 1975. 5 p. (9nth Congress, 1st session. Senate. Report no. 94-65.) A----- Amtrak Improvement Act of 1973. Report on S. 2016. Washington, U-S. Govt. Print. Off. 1973. 19 p. (93d Congress, 1st session. Senate. Report no. 93-226.) --rt Amtrak Improvement Act of 197a. Report on S. 3569. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off. 1971!. 30 p. (93d Congress, 2d session. Senate. Report no. 93-1015.) -=-- Amtrak Improvement.Act of 1976. Report to accompany S. 3131. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1976. 30 p. (94th Congress, 2nd session. Senate. Report no. 94-851.) --—-- Amtrak Improvement.Act of 1979: report to accompany S. 712. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1979. 33 p. (96th Congress, 1st Session, Senate Report no. 96-183) ---- Laws relating to rail passenger service including the Rail Passenger Service Act (P.L. 9H-518) as amended. Washington, 0.5. Govt. Print. Off., 1977. 56 p. At head of title: 95th Congress, 1st session. 5 ~ icommittee print. - The Penn Central and other railroads; a report to the Senate Committee on Commerce. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off. 1973. 7H8 p. At head of title: 92d Congress, 2d session. Committee print. ----- Rail Passenger Act of 1970.» Report to accompany S. 3706. cns—13 1378003 UPDATE-O5/O1/80 Hashington, 8.5. Govt. Print. Ofif. 1970. 326 p. (92d Congress, 1st session. Senate. Report no. 91-765.) ----- Review of National Rail Passenger System. Report to accompany S.J.Res. 92. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1971. 47 p. (92d Congress, 1st session. Semate. Report no. 92-95.) ----- Committee on Finance. National Railroad Passenger Corporation Authorization Act of 1978. Report to accompany S. 3on0. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1978. 33 p. (95th Congress, 2d session. Senate. Report no. 95-782.) ----- Conference Committees, 1972. Amendments to the Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970; conference report to accompany H.R. 11417. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off. 1972. 20 p. (92d Congress, 2d session. Senate. Report no. 92-834.) - ~~~~- Conference Committees, 197a. Amtrak Improvement Act of 197M; conference report to Accompany H.R. 15u27. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Ofif., 1974. 21 p. (93d Congress, 2d session. Senate. Report no. 93-1288.) ‘£.f!BQHQLQ§.¥...9.§..§!EE'§§ 02/15/80 -- Amtrak, in its Annual Report, shows a net operating loss for 1979 of $619,823,000, and a cumulative loss since 1971 of over $3 billion. 10/28/79 -— Amtrak introduced a new fleet of 28a cars, called the Superliners, which include the first new sleeping cars built in the United States in more than two decades. 10/08/79 -- Supreme Court Justice Byron White permitted Amtrak to eliminate service on three routes: the North Coast Hiawatha, from Chicago to Seattle; the Lone Star, from Chicago to Houston; and the Floridian from Chicago to Miami. 09/30/79 —— The Supreme Court overturned a lower court order requiring Amtrak to continue running the National Liaited, from New York City to Kansas City, Mo. 09/29/79 -~ The Amtrak Reorganization Act of 1979, P.L. 96-73, was signed into law by President Carter. 09/27/79 - Amtrak announced that due to»rising fuel and other costs it will raise most of its fares 7% effective 0 0 - _ 09/26/79 -- Amtrak announced a personnel reorganization and pledged — to improve service on the Amtrak system. 08/29/79 -—-The Amtrak board of directors announced that five trains would be cut from the Amtrak route system; the Chicago—Florida "Floridian", the Chicago-Seattle "North Star Hiawatha, the Chicago-Houston 08/01/79 07/25/79 06/20/79 006/12/79 05/01/79 05/00/79 00/03/79 03/15/79 01/31/79 cns-1n IB78003 UPDATE-05/01/80 "Lone Star," the Boston-Catlettsburg, Ky. "Hilltopper", and the New York-Kansas City "National Limited.“ The Senate passed S. 712, authorizing $1.8 billion for Amtrak for FY80-FY81. The bill would reduce Amtrak's route mileage by about 20%. The House passed H.B. 3996, authorizing $2.5 billion for Amtrak for FY80-FY82. The bill would reduce Amtrak's route mileage by about 18%. Reacting to sharply increased Amtrak ridership in the face of the fuel shcxtage, the Carter Administration announced that it would support House legislation that authorizes more fimncial aid for Amtrak than the Administration had originally requested. Secretary Adams restated that the Administration is still opposed to the retention of all of Amtrak 's operations "because it wastes energy and an enormous amount of money." The Washington Post reported that the Administration is reviewing Amtrak route restructure proposals in light of the significant increase in ridership over the past few months. Amtrak suspended all sales of its USA Rail Pass which allows unlimited travel for specified time periods. Many pass holders had been unable to to travel because. of sellouts of seating space on some trains. California, Texas, and eight other states filed suits in federal court to halt the Amtrak system route restructuring on grounds that the Administration has not made the required environmental impact studies. Secretary of Transportation Adams stated at a congressional hearing that the current Amtrak system is an energy waster. The Interstate Commerce Commission, in its annual report on Amtrak, stated that the corporation has lost $2.u billion in its seven years of operation. The Department of Transportation issued its final recommendation for a revision of Amtrak's route structure. DOT called for route cuts of 12,000 of the existing 27,000 miles, claiming that this would enable a $1.lI billion cut in subsidies over the next five years, while affecting only 9% of Amtrak passengers. The Southern Crescent, the last overnight passenger train operated by a private railroad began its last run. Amtrak took over the train on February 1st. The Crescent, however, is one of the Amtraktrains recommended to be discontinued. 12/13/78 -- 10/05/78 - 09/30/78 -- 08/11/78 06/21/78 05/08/78 on/25/73 on/oo/78 03/00/73 12/01/77 *- cns-15 1373003 upnu-3-05/01/so Amtrak, in its new policy Congress should determine Amtrak should provide and service through long-term statement, suggested that what size route network commit the funds for that contract authoity. President Carter signed S. 3000 (P.L. 95-421), the National Railroad Passenger Corporation Authorization Act. The ICC‘s Rail Services Planning Office published a report stating that the Department of Transportation should base its final proposals for restructuring of the Amtrak route system on social criteria such as public need for the passenger service, energy -conservation, the availability of alternate service and the contribution to tourism rather than on profit and loss.criteria. The recommendation came as a result of nationwide hearings held this summer by the RSPO. House and Senate conferees agreed on S. 3on0, authorizing $730 million in subsidy for Amtrak in FY79. Congress voted to shift budgetary control of Amtrak to the Office of Management and Budget from Congress. The Department of Transportation, in a report requested by Congress, proposed that Amtrak 's passenger routes be cut from 27,000 miles to 18,900 miles. Alan Boyd, the first U.S. Secretary of Transportation and former president of Illinois Central Gulf Railroad was elected to the offices of president and chief executive officer of Amtrak. Southern.Bailway asked the Interstate Commerce Commission for permission to discontinue the Southern Crescent, its only passenger train. was after Amtrak rejected Southern's plan for Amtrak to take over the service. This Paul Reistrup, the president of Amtrak announced his resignation because of "frustrations arising from the involvement of Congress, federal agencies, and other groups in the passenger rail services affairs." (Railway Age, I-I/10/78) According to a "Two-Year Report on the Northeast Corridor" prepared by DOT the N.E. Corridor Improvement Project is behind schedule. There is a new concept of the NECIP that the "project is designed to serve the needs of the people who used the corridor (Traffic World 3/13/78). House—Senate conferees voted Amtrak an additional $18 million supplemental appropriation rather than the 11/16/77 11/09/77 11/01%/77 10/31/77 09/23/77 09/19/77 ! 08/31/76 08/23/76 04/01/75 03/19/76 CRS-=16 IB780 O3 UPDATE-O5/01/80 $8 million agreed upon on November ll. Amtrak announced that it would freeze its route structure until after Congress has studied its route system report. Amtrak 's board of directors voted to suspend the Floridian (Chicago-Miami train) . Amtrak sent a letter to all members of Congress authorizing the corporation's financial position and listing ten routes being studied with an eye to discontinuance . -Congressional conferees voted Amtrak an $8 million supplemental appropriation and ordered the corporation to cancel service cuts that were to take effect on November 6. The conferees also ordered Amtrak and the Department of Transportation to produce a zero-base budget study of Amtrak's nationwide route system by Harch 1, 1978. Paul ReistruP, president of Amtrak, suggested to Congress that ‘it give Amtrak the money it needs or eliminate the service. According to the Journal of Commerce, senators Lowell Weicker and Clifford Case accused Amtrak President Paul Reistrup of planning service cutbacks to generate maximum political pressure for Amtrak 's new money request. Amtrak's board of directors decided today to ask Congress for a $56.5 million supplemental appropriation for fiscal year 1978 after being told that this is the amount needed to prevent reductions in trains or services during the year which begins October 1. Amendments were added to a bill which would implement an agreement just reached between the DOT and Amtrak over control of rehabilitation of the Northeast Corridor. secretary of Transportation Coleman agreed to release $1ll.3 million in operating funds and to approve $16 million in loan guarantees to Amtrak. The ICC ruled that track under its jurisiiction must be maintained by the railroads at a level at least equal to that existing cn hay 1, 1971 when Amtrak was formed. Amtrak, has agreed to purchase Conrail's Northeast rail corridor line between Boston and Washington. The $87 million net price is to be paid over eight years. A major effect of Amtrak ownership is to award passenger traffic priority over freight traffic. Amtrak 's criteria and procedures for making route and service decisions became effective. Congress expressed 10/29/75 03/01/75 04/03/71} o1/10/7a 02/‘H-I/73 11/10/72 O14/17/72 11/17/71 11/o1/71 10/18/71 0515- 17 11378003 UPDATE—05/01/80 its concurrence by taking no action on Antrak's proposed criteria and procedures before the deadline of march 19. In compliance with the Amtrak Improvement Act of 1975 (P.L. 94-25) ,. the Corporation submitted to Congress the criteria and procedures for making route and service decisions. Currently under scrutiny by Congress, the comprehensive report covered a wide range of economic, social and environmental factors on which Amtrak feels route and service decisions should be based. Paul H. Reistrup, forner Senior Vice President of Illinois Central Gulf Railroad, assured the presidency of Amtrak. Amtrak and the Penn Central trustees signed an agreement providing for incentives for operating trains on time and in good repair. Under a sliding scale of payments, Penn Central could earn extra payments by improving its system-wide, average on-time performance. The Supreme Court ruled that a group of dissatisfied passengers had no right to sue Amtrak to prevent discontinuance of train service. In a 7-1 decision, the Court wrote that permitting such suits "would completely undercut the efficient apparataus that Congress sought to provide for Amtrak to use in the paring of uneconomic routes." The Court held that under the law, only the attorney general and labor organizations maintain the right to bring such suits. Citing a severe cash drain, trustees of the Penn Central asked a federal court: (1) to discontinue all passenger service it was providing to Amtrak, including the high-speed New York to Washington uetroliner; and, (2) to allow abandonment of 5,000 miles of track, approximately one-fourth of its total in operation. Southern Railway System, the only railroad other than Amtrak operating a significant amount of passenger service, decided to remain out of the Attrak system. Then Federal Railroad Administrator, John 5?. Ingram, testified before a House Appropriations Subcommittee that Amtrak would be a profit-making private corporation within the next 10 years. Amtrak secured a $5 nillion loan from the First National Bank of Chicago, the first such transaction under the $100 million authorized in federally-guaranteed loans. In a report on the effectiveness of Amtrak, the Interstate Commerce Commission ascertained that unless Amtrak were to receive sufficient funds to upgrade its eguipment, facilities and services, and to adopt a competitive fare structure, Amtrak would not succeed. /A Amtrak, through then Secretary of Transportation John A. Volpe, requested $170 million in additional funding cns—13 1373003 UPDATE-05/01/80 from Congress for equipment purchases and operating funds. Projecting a FY72 deficit of $152.3 million, Mr. Volpe defended the request by declaring the aid would bring the initial federal contribution more in line with the unique start-up costs being encountered by the Corporation - 05/01/71 —-— Amtrak assumed responsibility for the operation of approximately 23,000 route-ailes on intercity passenger service between twenty-one city-pair end-points. The system included five transcontinental routes and utilized 182 trains. 04/28/71 -- Roger Lewis was elected president of Amtrak by the Corporation's Board of Directors. 03/22/71 -- The incorporators issued the basic route, station stops and-train frequencies that would make up the original system. Principal criteria used in selecting the routes were market size, physical characteristics of route and track and train ridership. 01/01/71 *—- The eight Presidentially-appointed incorporators began organizing Amtrak. Their task. was to decide the routes, trains, frequencies and types of service to be operated by the Corporation. Contracts with up to 22 railroads had to be negotiated. In addition, problems of coordination of equipment, terminal services, marketing and the numerous and complex related issues needed to be solved. Under the law, these matters were to be resolved by Bay 1, 1971, the date of initial operation. 10/30/70 -- The Rail Passenger Service Act, creating Amtrak, became law. The National Railroad Passenger Corporation is to provide financial assistance for, and establishment of, a national rail system, to provide for the modernization of railroad passenger equipment and authorize the prescribing of minimum standards for railroad passenger service. The Act also amends Section 13 of the Interstate Commerce Act (section dealing with discontinuance of service). .12D1TlQ.11_L_..E.EF§B§E§.E. §.QF.'ES3.E5 Harbridge House Inc. The role of intercity rail passenger service; A study of Antrak's mission. Harbridge House Inc., 1973. 125 p. plus Appendice. Harris, Louis and Associates. A survey of the public mandate for the current passenger .market and the potential market for intercity rail passenger travel in the United States. - Louis Harris and Associates, 1972. 36 p. Harris, Louis and Associates. The continuing public mandate to improve inter-city rail passenger travel. Louis Harris and Associates, Harch 1978. 42 p. CRS-19 IB78003 UPDATE’05/O1/80 National Rail Passenger Corporation. Five year financial and operating plan, FY76-80. National Rail Passenger Corporation, 1975. 31 p. plus«exhibits. Southerland, Thomas C., and William Hccleery. The way to go; the coming revival of U.S. rail passenger service. Simon and Schuster, 1973. 256 p. U.S. Department of Transportation. Financial Analysis of the Northeast Corridor development project. Final Report. February, 1976. A ----- A reexamination of Amtrak route structure. may 1978. 0.5. Department of Transportation. Final Report on the Amtrak Route System. January, 1979. -'“- Recommendations for the Antrak.Route System -- Environmental Impact Assessment. January, 1979. U.S. General Accounting Office. Amtrak's incentive contracts with railroads —- considerable cost, few benefits. June 8, 1977 (B-175155) 63 p. ----- Amtrak's subsidy needs cannot be reduced without reducing service. May 11, 1978. ----- Should Amtrak develop high—speai corridor service outside the northeast? April 5, 1978 (CED-78-67) 38 p.7 0.5. Interstate Commerce Commission. Report to the President and the Congress, effectivenessvof the Act. Amtrak. March 15, 1978. 80 p. - Report to the President and the Congress, effectiveness of the Act. Amtrak. Mar. 15, 1979. 79 p. Rail Services Planning Office. Evaluation Report of the Secretary of Transportation's Preliminary Recommendations on Antrak's Route Structure. September 30, 1978. 0.5. Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service. The rail passenger service act of 1970, public law 91-518. Thonas E. Hccardell. [Washington] Dec. 1970. 9 p. Hultilith 70-299 E HE 1001 U.S.F. U.S. General Accounting Office. An analysis of Amtrak's five year plan. March 6, 1978 (PAD-78-51) 27 p. ,- LIBRARY OF WASHINGTON UNIVEP;-$3l'§'"‘." ST. LOU-ETE3 - MO.