Currently, each weekday, one of the refurbished turboliners is running between Albany and New York's Penn Station.  Amtrak is operating both Set # 1 and Set # 2, although at this point only one operates on any given day.  Recent observations have a turboliner often operating from Albany as Train 250, departing at 9:00am and returning as Train 251, which now departs Penn Station at 12:45pm.  Set # 3 appears to be nearly complete at SuperSteel and Set # 4 and # 5 are currently under refurbishment.  Set # 6 is just beginning to receive its refurbishments and Set # 7 has not yet been delivered to SuperSteel although it is no longer in operation and continues to sit in Rensselaer.  This trainset was partially refurbished in 1994 and operated from 1995 through 2002.

DOT Transformation

The New York State Department of Transportation is undergoing an internal reform process formally officially known as Tr! ansformation. The process is aimed at turning the NYSDOT into a transportation entity, which is able to meet the economic needs of the State with respect to all modes of transportation. This comes at a time when the department has many new people in key senior positions throughout the state. Early retirement incentives offered over the past several months have been taken by many NYSDOT employees.

All levels of the department and other State agencies are participating in the process. Commissioner Joseph H. Boardman has emphasized that thinking is to be non-mode specific and that it is to include all methods of conveyance. The project has been tasked to Acting First Deputy Commissioner Brian Rowback and Mike McCarthy- Director of Program Management at Albany headquarters. Mr. McCarthy has informed ESPA that aspects of the plan should be in place by year-end. He goes on to say that the policy areas to be considered are:

1) Trade- the northeast United States and Eastern Canada constitutes the world's third largest economy behind only the United States and Japan.

2) Technology- the complex flow of information now part of transportation systems.

3) Traffic- the flow and the means of transport for goods and the traveling public.

These developments come at a time when New York's Transportation Commissioner Joseph Boardman has risen to become a powerful proponent of railway investment through his outspoken Chairmanship of the AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials) Standing Committee on Rail Transportation. His public comments often reflect his belief that the rail system is worthy of additional public investment. Railroads themselves are beginning to acknowledge that their own capital spending plans may be inadequate to allow them to grow their businesses. Continuing freight traffic growth and the market demand for faster freight service is putting pressure on railroads to find new ways to finance capital projects. A public policy which invests in freight and passenger speed and capacity improvements could be a solution to this emerging problem.

Many of the new faces throughout the department consider New York's ongoing investment and consideration of New York's extraordinary railway infrastructure highly important to long range planning. Local development agencies throughout the state are aware of the significant value of using railway corridors to enhance their economic development plans already. The NYSDOT by undertaking the task of Transformation, will put the agency in a better position to serve the growing need for comprehensive transportation planning and implementation required by state, local and federal entities.

ESPA applauds the efforts of the Transportation Department in this reorganization effort. New thinking and fresh ideas will surely emerge during the process which will guide the State in the coming years ahead. If the NYSDOT were to apply their legendary highway infrastructure construction standards to railway improvements a great public benefit could be on the horizon. Stay tuned.

Ben Gottfried

Major Progress in Washington!

Strong support for Amtrak has emerged in Congress in recent weeks, despite continued opposition by critics who control key committees. On June 25th the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee passed two major bills that would authorize $2 billion annually for Amtrak during the next three years and $60 billion in bonds for high speed and other rail projects.

However neither bill would guarantee that any money actually gets spent, and the Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee chairmen who can do that--Ernest Istook (R., Okla.) in the House, and Senator Richard Shelby (R., Ala.) have been openly hostile to Amtrak. At an April 10th hearing Istook said "There is a grave question whether Amtrak can continue to operate without dragging down the transportation system for the rest of the country."

But in an almost unprecedented move, Jack Quinn (R., Buffalo) and other Amtrak supporters in the House garnered 219 signatures on a letter to the appropriators urging them to grant David Gunn's request of $1.812 billion for FY2004. This appears to be the first pro-Amtrak letter to be signed by more than half the House members and it puts Amtrak supporters in a strong position for negotiations with the Senate. Traditionally the Senate has been more willing to appropriate adequate funds for Amtrak than the House, which has often attempted to bargain the final amount downward. This time it will be clear to negotiators that a House majority supports full funding whatever subcommittee chairmen and other critics may say. Twenty-three of New York's 29 Congressmen and women signed the letter. Only California had more signers. For a list of New York signers, see Congressional scoreboard. At this writing it appears House Appropriators may act by mid July.

There were positive moves in the Senate as well--Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R., Tex.), who chairs the Senate Subcommittee on Surface Transportation, introduced an amendment to the Surface Transportation Safety Reauthorization Act authorizing $2 billion annually for Amtrak for 6 years. This was approved by the full Senate Commerce Committee over the objections of its chairman, John McCain. As one of Amtrak's harshest critics, McCain deserves at least some credit for not using his chairman's prerogative to block the vote. But he cut fellow Republican Hutchison off in mid-sentence so rudely that "the room gasped" according to Don Phillips in the August TRAINS magazine. RIDE 21 Provisions

In a show of bipartisan support, the Railroad Infrastructure Development and Expansion Act for the 21st Century (Ride21)was introduced by Don Young (R., Alaska), James Oberstar (D., Minn.), Jack Quinn and Corrine Brown, (D., Fla.). They are the chairs and ranking members of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and its Railroad Subcommittee. According to Quinn, "The roughly $60 billion...in this bill is the first serious money to be dedicated to a major, long-term rail infrastructure program of truly national scope." Quinn is a long time Amtrak supporter and received the National Association of Railroad Passengers Golden Spike Award for his efforts last year, as did Don Young this year.

RIDE-21, introduced as HR-2571, would authorize states or interstate compacts to issue $12 billion in federally tax-exempt bonds and $12 billion in federal tax credit bonds for high speed rail, each at a rate of $1.2 billion annually for ten years. High Speed would be defined as 125MPH. It would also extend the Swift Rail Development Act through 2011, authorizing $100 million annually for corridor development, subject to appropriation. The Swift Act had previously been authorized at $35 million annually for planning and technology development only.

Finally, the bill would expand the Railroad Rehabilitation and Infrastructure Financing Loan Program by increasing its funding authority from $3.5 to $35 billion in outstanding loans at any one time. And it would eliminate restrictive provisions, which have prevented use of this program in the past. Loans could be used for maglev as well as conventional rail projects including 110MPH corridors, and up to $7 billion could be used to upgrade freight railroads including shortlines.

This bill is almost identical to HR-2950--also called RIDE-21--that Quinn and Young introduced last year--but this year labor issues that dampened Democratic support have apparently been resolved and the top Democrats are now signed on. HR-2950 never made it beyond the committee last year. HR-2950 itself evolved from HR-2329, presented by New York's Amo Houghton (R, Corning) and Oberstar in 2001, which introduced the concept of tax credit bonds for rail. This approach has been advocated by Tim Gillespie, who represented ESPA in Washington last year and now represents the Railway Supply Institute.

Quinn, Young, Oberstar and Brown also introduced HR-2572 to provide Amtrak with direct operating grants at $2 billion annually for 3 years. This would not only allow Amtrak to continue operation but would also allow implementation of David Gunn's 5 year plan to restore the system to a state of good repair after 5 years of deferred maintenance under the previous management. Young stated that "Although serious disagreements still exist about Amtrak's long term management strategy and structure, there is a common understanding of the need for near-term funding." Gunn has argued persuasively that restoring the system to a state of good repair is necessary no matter what Congress decides to do with Amtrak in the long term.

This bill would require Amtrak to submit business plans to the Secretary of Transportation and to report bi-monthly on its progress. Hutchison's Amendment

In the Senate, Hutchison's amendment would create a "Rail Infrastructure Finance Corporation to support rail transportation capital projects through issuance of rail capital infrastructure bonds." The concept of a specific entity for this purpose has been strongly advocated by Tim Gillespie and is being promoted by the Railway Supply Institute. Gillespie feels the weak financial condition of many states will make them reluctant to incur more debt by issuing bonds, which RIDE-21 requires them to do. But "the Rail Infrastructure Finance Corporation would have no debt to start with and a built-in mechanism (non-federal contributions to the project) to repay the principal," Gillespie says.

The Hutchison amendment would also include intercity rail passenger service in Surface Transportation legislation for the first time although rail funding would not come from gasoline taxes. But this would at least acknowledge that the federal government has responsibility to find a means for funding rail along with other modes, according to the National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP). This amendment also authorizes $2 billion annually for Amtrak for five years. It will be offered as an amendment to the TEA-21 renewal bill when that legislation comes to the floor.

The Bush Administration remains a threat however. At an Istook hearing in April, Michael Jackson of the Federal Railroad Administration said simply "The Bush Administration does not believe there should be a subsidy for (Amtrak) operations." Bush spokesmen have said any operating subsidy would be up to the states. Such a policy would likely end most or all long distance routes and probably many corridors as well, since most states face severe cash shortages. NARP points out that Amtrak began as a federal initiative, not a state or local initiative and should remain a 100% federal responsibility.

Bush's proposed $900 million budget for Amtrak would likely generate another shutdown crisis or at best force Amtrak to defer Maintenance again. The Bush Administration insists on reforms as a condition of its support, including privatization of at least some routes, which could have very questionable results, based on experiences in Europe. And finally it has specifically opposed the tax credit idea suggested by key Republican supporters Hutchison, Houghton, Quinn and Young.

Yet public support for Amtrak continues to grow. The U.S. Conference of Mayors passed resolutions at its meeting in June, calling on Congress to "establish a dedicated federal rail infrastructure program to address needed improvements to our nation's railroad infrastructure," and to provide at least $1.8 billion for Amtrak next year. Even conservative columnist George Will wrote in a June 8 column that Amtrak should be counted "as a cost of democracy--it is here to stay." Will noted a recent nationwide opinion poll that showed 71% public support for subsidizing Amtrak at current or increased levels.

Frank Barry

Towards a Tri-State Regional Railroad

MTA's plan to merge its LIRR and Metro-North commuter rail operations, part of a proposal for a comprehensive restructuring of this agency, was to have been brought before the legislature this spring.  Following the controversy and lawsuit about misleading financial information underpinning MTA's fare hike and calls for reform after charges of wrongdoing and favoritism, MTA put its proposal on hold, but plans to introduce it this fall, in a special session.

MTA argues that merging its two commuter rail operations makes a lot of sense and will produce substantial savings in overhead and maintenance cost.  With tax sources earmarked for this agency shrinking, and with the city and the state anxious to reduce payments to the MTA to ease pressure on their own budgets, MTA is looking for ways to streamline its operations.  From the transit rider's perspective merging these operations also offers some attractive longer-term service and pricing gains.

Bringing some LIRR trains into Grand Central and some Metro-North Hudson and New Haven line trains into Penn Station offers the opportunity for convenient transfer between these two long-spirited carriers.

Unifying these lines will bring nearly 80% of the region's commuter rail operations under a single management.  Remaining will be NJ Transit's commuter rail service.  It would make good sense to consider merging the NJ Transit operation into the new MTA carrier as well.  Further economies of scale would result, benefiting New Jersey taxpayers. Perhaps more important from the passenger's perspective, the merger would greatly ease the implementation of new service opportunities.   The centerpiece of ESPA/CBT/NJ-ARP regional rail working group's  "Penn Station Metro-Hub" plan is to produce short term capacity and service gains, and fare simplification, achieved by operating trains through Penn Station.  A 50% gain in peak hour capacity could be attained by "through-running" trains between points in New Jersey and points in Long Island, Westchester and Connecticut.  This gain occurs by eliminating conflicts between inbound and outbound trains when trains are reversed in the station.  Capacity gains are desperately needed at this overstressed facility.

Integration of services can be attained by cooperative arrangements short of a full merger, but little progress has been achieved so far.  In fact, the opposite seems to be happening.  This spring NJ Transit selected its own bi-level car design rather than adding to an ongoing MTA purchase. NJ Transit is obtaining a costly fleet of 33 new diesel locomotives that are not compatible with operations to Penn Station, while Metro-North and the LIRR have opted for dual-mode locomotives that provide one-seat service from non-electrified lines to Manhattan terminals.  MTA has shown little interest in NJ Transit's Access to the Region's Core Plan "G" initiative.  This plan calls for a new rail tunnel under the Hudson to Penn Station and a link to Grand Central.  Rail passenger advocates on both sides of the Hudson have strongly supported this option, with its substantial benefits of regional connectivity.  Through-routing Metro-North and NJ Transit trains using this link would produce a world-class regional rail system.  Upstate New Yorkers have much to gain from this connection because it would permit Empire Service trains to serve both Grand Central and Penn Station and continue on to Philadelphia and Washington.

Achieving a tri-state operation is not without precedent, since several examples of bi-state rail operation are already in place in the region. Nearly a quarter of Metro-North's service is provided under contract with the state of Connecticut.  MTA bills Connecticut for its share of the cost, and systems of independent audits and an arbitration mechanism are in place to resolve disputes.  MTA contracts with NJ Transit for its service to Orange and Rockland Counties.  Both of these arrangements have served the traveling public well for many years, and could provide the basis for a more comprehensive agreement that would be needed to protect New Jersey's interest in a unified Tri-State operation.  With substantial tax savings and service benefits at stake, and with major interstate planning decisions in the making, now is the time to lay the groundwork for a Tri-State Regional Railroad.

George Haikalis, ESPA Manhattan Co-ordinator

Cut-Off Restoration

Restoration of the Lackawanna Cut-Off in New Jersey and resumption of passenger rail service between New York and Scranton has continued to move forward, though at a pace much slower than supporters would like to see.

According to Frank Reilly, Chairman, of the Bi-State (New Jersey & Pennsylvania) Advisory Committee and Executive Director, Morris County DOT, the project has been transferred from the five counties involved to New Jersey Transit as of November of 2002.

However, before it was transferred, the bi-state technical committee received assurances it would still play a significant role in advancing the project. New Jersey Transit has kept that promise and the committee is minutely involved.

Completion date is still targeted at late 2006, but considering the way funding has been coming down, 2007 appears more likely. Frank Reilly stated that if funding came through faster, the project could possibly be up and running by late 2005 or early 2006 -- but currently that doesn't seem to be happening.

Supporters of the project expect a rating from FTA around the middle of next year. They will then go after the larger funds from the Government for final engineering. Construction work on the Cut-Off could finally begin in 2005.

Reilly indicates that the project still needs the continued support from New Jersey and Pennsylvania residents  - as well as New York residents in urging the congressmen and state officials to fully support the project. Generally all have strongly supported the project, but keeping letters of support going to them is very helpful. Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter indicated that he planned to lobby to have the Cut-Off restoration included in the latest Federal Transit Authorization bill, which is vital to the completion of this long-needed project.

Letters of support for the restoration of the Lackawanna Cut-Off and rail service to Scranton and beyond to Binghamton are strongly recommended.

Letters should be sent to