new york state rail preservation annual report 1983

8/4/2019 New York State Rail Preservation Annual Report 1983

1/60

. State of New YorkMARIO M . CUOMOGovernorDepartment of TransportationJAMES LLAROCCACommissioner

N E W Y O R K S T A T ER A I L P R E S E R V A T IO N P R O G R A MA N N U A L R E P O R T

NO VEM BER , 1983

" ,,:..:. , .-.'"'".-.,- - .., .

6 6 0 6.. '.; " :"," ":' .'. ,-c." -,o .. '-. "S 8

o

N E W Y O R K S T A T E D E P A R T M E N T O F T R A N S P O R T A T I O N R A I L D IV IS I O N


2/60

.'


3/60

N E \ o l YORK STATE

R AIL P RE SE RV AT IO N P RO GRA M

A NN UA L R EPO RT

NOVEMBER, 1983

PREPARED IN CONFORMANCE WITH CHAPTER 257,SECt~ON 8, OF THE LAws OF 1975, AS AMENDEDANDCliApTER 369, SECTION 2, OF THE LAWS OF 1979

New York State. D ep ar tm en t o f T ra ns po rt at io n

R ai l P la nn in g & M ar ket in g Bu re au

Henry L. Pey r eb rune'.__A ss is ta nt C om mi ss io ne rf or P ub lic T ra ns po rt at io n

Louis RossiDirector, Rail Division


4/60

THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK


5/60

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I T E N PAGELIST OF FIGURES IV.INTRODUCTION V.

1.CHAPTER 1: PROGRAN OVERVIEWThe Impact and Effectiveness of the State's Program 1.Guidelines and Standards for Evaluating and Receiving

R ai l S er vi ce A ss is ta nce2.

The Potential for Private Enterprise Solutions forR ai l S er vi ces

2.

Program Administration 6 .CHAPTER 2: PROGRAN ELEHENTS AND FUNDING LEVELS 9.CHAPTER 3: RAIL FREIGHT SERVICE 13.

New York City-Long Island Full-Freight Access Program 14.U ps ta te F rei ght P ro gra m 17.Program of Upstate Freight Projects Undertaken WithBond Issue Funds 21.

Program of New York City-Long Island Freight ProjectsUndertaken With Bond Issue Funds 30.

CHAPTER 4: INTERCITY PASSENGER SERVICE 33.High Speed Rail Program 34.Very High Speed Service Feasibility Planning 38.Program of Upstate Intercity Passenger Projects

Undertaken With Bond Issue Funds 39.

CHAPTER 5: RAIL SAFETY PROGRAM 43.S af et y I ns pe ct io ri R es ul ts 44.A t-G rad e Cr oss ing I mp rov em en t Pr ogr am 46.Grade Crossing Elimination Program 48.G ra de S ep ar at ion St ruc tu re R ec ons tr uc tio n Pr ogr am 49.


6/60

FIGURE12.3.4.

5.

6.

7.

8.9.

LIST OF FIGURES

TITLE P A G E13.ew York's Rail Volume by Carrier

Rail Traffic Trends '74 - '82 14.NYSDOT Full Freight Access Program 15.Traffic Trends for "Road Railer"Freight Service

16.

Ridership Comparison New YorkServices vs. Amtrak System

33.

Intercity Passenger ScheduleTiines

34.

'Croton to Hoffmans Track Conditions1975 vs . 1983

35.

Ridership Generated at New Stations 36.Sta:t-e- Spon sor ed Int erc ity Pas sen gerSe-rvices 1977 - 1982 37.


7/60

INTRODUCTION

Under the Laws of 1~76 and the Laws of 1979, the New York State Legislaturedirected the Commissioner of Transportation to prepare and submit to theGovernor, as part of his annual budget request, a report which makes findingsand recommendations with respect to the State's intercity rail passengerservice, rail service preservation and rail service energy conservationprograms. In addition to any other information the Commissioner determinesappropriate, this report is to include the following: (a) the impact andeffectiveness of the State's programs to continue and preserve rail passengerand rail freight services, including federal and state operating subsidypayments actually made and projected to be made; (b) the development ofoperating, pricing and fare guidelines, standards of service and equipment,and facility mainten~nce standards that may be applied in evaluating the costand quality of service on those rail lines receiving state and/or federaloperating and/or capital assistance; and, (c) an analysis which evaluates thepotential for a permanent, long-range, privately financed solution to thedeterioration of r.ailservices for all rail lines receiving state and/orfederal operating andlor capital assistance.this mandate is contained in legislation which initiated both the "RailPreservation Bond Act of 1974" and the "1979 Energy Conservation ThroughImproved Transportation Bond Act". In compliance with this requirement, thisNew York,State Rail Preservation Program Annual Report is duly submitted tothe New York State Legislature and to the citizens of New York State.In November, 1983, New York voters approved the "Rebuild New York" BondProgram. This bond program ~s expected to have a large, positive impact onthe State's rail system. Over $238 million has been directly appropriatedthrough this program for specific rail project~, and, as a result of poten-tial federal matching funds and more detailed project identification, it ispossible that up to $890 million over the next five years may be made avail-able for rail related improvements.Initiation of the "Rebuild New York" program starts the State's Rail Programin a new direction. Funds made available from the 1974 and 1979 bond issuesserved their purposes well in stabilizing rail service and improving theState's physical rail network. The one component of the State's railroadsystem which could not be addressed in the past, however, was to decrease theinherent dangers which exist at interfaces between the railroads and thegeneral public. .These interfaces, grade crossings, highway bridges overrailroad rights of way, etc. are the focal point of the "Rebuild New York"bond program with regard to the Rail Program.Given this shift i~ direction, together with the fact that funds from boththe 1974 and 1979 bond programs have or will be totally obligated within thenext year, the Department intends to modify the structure of this report toaddress these matters. Future reports, will emphasize the status of the railprogram in general and reflect the issues that most impact the State's railservice. It is felt that this change will enhance the usefullness of thereport while still fulfilling its legislative mandate.

- v -


8/60

This report> therefore> wi 11 complete the past practice of emphasizingspeci fic pro jects f unded thr ough pre vious bond programs.

\

vi


9/60

CHAPTER 1PROG RM I OV ERV IE \v

This chapter fulfills the Legislature's mandate to report on: 1) the impactand effectiveness of the program; 2) guidelines used for evaluating andreceiving assistance through the program; and, 3) a status report on thepresent potential for solving rail service problems through privateenterprise.A. The Impact and Effectiveness of the State's Program

The objective of the State's Rail Program continues to be the developmentand maintenance of a safe, economical, and energy-efficient rail trans-portation system to serve its people, businesses and industry. In recentyears, work has focused primarily on the physical preservation andimprovement of the existing rail system. A significant portion of theavailable funds has been invested in the preservation or improvement ofcompetitive mainline freight service. Mainline facilities form thebackbone of the State's rail system and are critical to maintaining trulycompetitive freight service. Preserving competitive service translatesdirectly into economic savings for rail users and, ultimately, theconsumer.This program ~f mainline/competitive service investments has resulted ina number of different types of economic benefits. For example, over30,000 permanent industrial jobs have been - or will be - protected overthe life of the program; the potential for the cleation of nearly 3,000new jobs has. been developed; 33.7 person-years of direct and indirectconstruction employment are being generated for each million dollars ofinvestment; a tOtal program well in excess of $1 billion has been puttogether, when funds from all sources are considered; and collateraleconomic activity of some $5 billion will be generated over the life ofthe program. Such results have made a significant contribution to theState's on-goi~g economic development activities, and will continue to doso for the fores~eable future.The physical comfort and safety aspects of the rail program are equallyimportant. Rail-highway crossing projects are being implemented inpriority order, in accordance with their accident history and/or poten-tial. Similarly, projects which entail equipment acquisition, trackrehabilitation and signal improvements have been undertaken to improvepassenger comfort, reduce travel time and increase safety, in order tomake rail intercity passenger and commuter travel more efficient andattractive. By improving rail service, we are also encouraging a shiftfrom personal auto travel and truck transportation to rail, a mode whichhas been proven to contribute significantly less air and noise pollutionto the environment.Finally, the issue of making available alternative, energy efficientmodes of transportation remains important. The energy problems encoun-tered by our nation during the past several years are harbingers of along-term trend, a trend with major implications for the future of our


10/60

transportation system. One implication is the Lnc reas Ing iwg.9;r,tance atconservation. Rail intercity passenger and commuter service are amongthe foremost energy conservation measures available to the travelingpublic. The Rail Preservation Bond Issue of 1974 and Energy Conservat Ior;r~rough Improved Transportation Bond Issue of 1979, as w e 1 7 ~ ~ legisl,-tive appropriations, have allowed New York State to.gy1:; , p : importa,ntheadstart in revitalizing the rail mode and in ipcreq.sing both thecapacity and efficiency of our rail passenger and freight syslems. Thiswill result in significant energy savings.

- 2 -

Though many of these comfort, safety and conservation benefits areconsidered subjective, in that a "price tag" cannot b e pli3.c~4 anthem,they enhance the physical well-being of NewYork's citizyns aIl4 c~rtq.iIlJythiS is an aelded plus amid the more obvious and mor~ ti3.ngibl ~~qnRmiGbenefits.B. Guidelines and Standards for Evaluatin~ anel Receiving Rail Servic~.Assistancec,

SeIection of a proposed improvement to be added to the Rap- Progr am isci~d~ only after carefully e~aluating the specific problem ~nd altyinatiyemeans to address that problem. The selection of theqltHnqtiyg, if any,I's made only after an analysis of associated benefits and c?J?ts. Tlt~concept of economic evaluation of proposed capital expendLtur es i? IlRtnew to New York State's Rail Program. The experience ga,ineqt1ms fen:.i'ndicates that quantitative Berie fit Cost techniques may be applied tomost ~roject proposals. The usefulness of this technique, however,depel1ds' 'upon the amount and quality of information available; these varyc6ri~iderably from projLct to project. The technique i~ used, therefore,within tbeframework of the overall program objectives and priorities setby the Legis lature. It is a method to aid in selecting solutions toindividual problems; it is not the ~ole basis for programming decisions.At the time a proposal is selected for implementation, its final parame-ters (size, scope and purpose) are documented in a grant agreementbetween the State and the Grantee. This agreement is a binding, con-tractural guarantee protecting the public investment. In all instances,the Department requires the improvements to be maintained, that theuseable life of the improvements conform with the requirements attendingbonded indebtedness, and that State funds are not substituted for privateinvestment.

C. The Potential for Private Enterprise Solutions for Rail ServicesThe objectives of the State's Rail Program cannot be attained in theabsence of a "private enterprise solution". The State has long recog-nized this fact and, in recent years, this fact has also been recognizedby the Federal Government and the Congress. During the last two years anumber of actions have had a s i.gni ficant impact on the State's railsystem. The continuing movement {oward deregulation, increased rate-setting freedoms, expedited abanqpnment procedures, the transfer ofConrail into the private sector~b.d similar actions will inevitablyresult in a restructuring of the'State's rail system and changes in theservices provided to businesses and localities.


11/60

The following sections discuss a number of the more important issuesregarding rail service in this State. wh ich the Department feels be ardirectly on funding solutions through private initiative.1. Conrail

Conrail -the dominant carrier in New York State - was created as afor-profit corporation to operate the restructured rail systems ofthe former Penn Central, Erie+La ck awanna , Lehigh Valley and otherbankrupt railroads in the Northeast. The new system was created as aresult of the United States Railway Association's Final System Plan,and began operations in early 1976. The USRA's expectations ofprofitability for Conrail, expectations upon which the Final SystemPlan and Conrail were based, were not met.After considering several studies and debating the Conrail problem,Congress ~assed legislation - the Northeast Rail Service Act of 1981(NERSA) - that is designed either to assist Conrail in reachingfinancial self-sufficiency or lead to the dissolution of Conrail asan entity. NERSA makes one thing certain: Conrail will - in whol~ orin part - be transferred into the private sector in the foreseeablefuture. This will have a profound impact upon railroading in theNortheast.New York -State is not concerned that Conrail is required to demon-strate financial self -sufficiency. Economic viability for Conrailhas always been our goal. Our concern is how this will be accom-plished and the implications it has for the public investments in theState's rail freight and passenger systems.

The Department is concerned with the potential impact of NERSA onboth t.he Water Level and Southern Tier mainlines. New York Stateconsiders the preservation of mainline services on the routes, and onthe D&H's link to the Albany area, essential to the State's economy.Preliminary studies into the potential impacts of the sale of Conrailshow that the Water Level route would be attractive to any potentialpur chaser . -The Southern Tier route, however, has historicallyattracted less attention as a strategic mainline route. To demon-strate the importance the State attaches to this route, it has fundeda major rehabilitation program on the Southern Tier line. This hasbeen complemented by a significant Conrail investment in the route.This investment program was intended to prevent the line from beingdowngraded-and to guarantee competitive mainline service across theentire Southern Tier, from New York to Buffalo and to the Pennsylva-nia border. Combined with an additional State investment in the D&Hfor mainline and feeder line rehabilitation, this strengthening offreight service was to assure customers of quality service on boththe D&H's and Conrail's mainlines, and to customers on connectingbranchlines.Finally, - there is the issue of the impending Conrail "transfer"itself. -How the transfer process will be implemented, the criteriathat will be imposed upon it, the timing and the system and servicesinvolved are all issues of great importance to the State. The

, 0. .


12/60

Department has participated with the New Jersey Depa~tment of Trans-portation and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey todevelop a report on "Contingency ~1arketing Strategies For Sale ofConrail II which addresses these issues and ensures that the publicinterests represented by these agencies are recognized and accommo-dated by the federal agencies charged with effecting Conrail'stransfer to private ownership.The Statewide Task Force on the Transfer of Conr ail , comprised ofrepresentatives of the State's rail-dependent shippers and communi-ties, was formed in early 1983 to assist the New York State Depart-ment of Transportation in its efforts to evaluate the progress andpotential impacts of the transfer of Conrail into the private sector.The purpose of this Task Force is to formulate a unified Stateposition on issues raised by such a transfer.The Task Force's objectives are summarized as follows: to preservecompetition within the rail industry in this State; to strengthen theexisting rail system; and, to protect the public interest. Theseobjectives have been expanded upon in a detailed Statement of Objec-tives adopted by the Task Force in September, 1983.Pzes errt Ly , the Conrail transfer is still subject to unc ar ta.irrt y ,NEB,SArequires that Conrail be sold by the Federal Governmer,lt eithel;as an entity or in parts. NERSArequired the USRABoard of Directorsto determine whether or not, as of June 1, 1983, Conrail was profit-ab l e. \JSRA did find CR to be profitable. A second determinationmust be 'made after November 1 as to whether or not Conrail is profit-ab l e during the period June t.hro igh October,1983. If Conrail'sprofitability is confirmed, USDOTis mandated to sell Conrail as anentity until June 1, 1984. Following this date, Conra iI may be soldeither as an entity or in segments.

2. Delaware and HudsonThe D&Hfinished 1982 with a net loss of $20 million, a considerableworsening of its poor financial performance in 1981, when it posted anet loss of $15 million. This pattern has carried over into 1983 (asof the end of June, the net loss was nearly $10 million) and islikely to continue into the near future.On July 23, 1982, the Interstate Commerce Commission approved theacquisition of the D&Hby Guilford Transportation, Industries (GTl),which already owns the Maine Central Railroad Company and the Boston& Naine Railroad. This action cleared the way for GTI to acquire theD&Hpending conclusion of negotiations between GTI and the NorfolkSouthern Corp., the D&H's parent company. When an agreement isreached, GTI will be in a position to coordinate the operations of anew Northeast rail system extending from Delson, Canada and Maine onthe north, to Buffalo in the w~st and Washington, DC, to the south.This system will entail a total of nearly 4,000 route miles.

- 4 -


13/60

This consolidation will enhance the D&H's viability allowing it andthe other GTI system carriers to compete more effectively for railfreight traffit in the Northeast.The Department has worked v ig or o u s ly to help the D&H solve itsproblems. NYSDOT also intends to work closely with GTI followingconsolidation, to preserve and enhance the essential rail servicesnecessary to New York's btisinesscs and localities. It is understoodby all parties involved that GTI is assuming control of the D&H underadverse circumstances but that the only other alternative is to seethe D&H declare bankruptcy. Bankruptcy is not desirable because ofthe immediate severe economic dislocations it would cause in theregion served by the D&H. It would also serve to open the way forConrail to become the sole mainline operator in all but the western-most portion of the State. This would destroy any hope of fosteringcompetitive rate-making in the State and jeopardize essential servic-es in certain regions; especially on the Southern Tier.The Department must be realistic, however, because even though theD&H will be saved from bankruptcy through GTI's takeover, not everycurrent job will be preserved nor will every trade-off work to theState Is benefit. Within this framework, however, .NYSDOT will doeverything in its power to alleviate these hardships.A $20 million capital program of projects is being developed for theD&H System. This fully commits all funds appropriated in the UpstateFreight component of the 1979 Bond Program.

3. Long Is13nd Rail Road (LIRR) Freight ServiceThe Goverrtor's message accJmpanying the SFY 1980-81 Executive Budgetincluded a call for the measured withdrawal of State subsidies forL1RR freight services. Since 1970, these subsidies have totalledover $250 million. The objective was to find a private enterprisesolution t'othe LIRR IS freight problem, not only to preserve thisessential service, but to strengthen it. A private enterprisesolution !would also eliminate the uncertainties surrounding theprovision of annual subsidies.Since early 1981, the New York State Department of Transportation hasworked closely with the LIRR to establish a basis for a profitableoperation. This mutual effort has resulted in a number of changes inLIRR freight accounting procedures, service patterns, use of humanresources, .and management practices. As a result, the financialperformance of L1RR's freight service has improved significantly. In1980, LIRR freight service registered a net operating loss of $18.5million. Losses have been steadily reduced and are expected to bebetween $5.0 and $6.0 million for 1983.Eliminating this remaining annual loss poses a more difficult problemand r equ ires a major re-evaluation of how the L1RR provides railfreight service. But, one thing is clear: the cost of providingfreight service 01'\ Long Island must be reduced to a level morecharacteristic of a' rail-terminal or shortline operation. In

- 5 -


14/60

response to this challenge, LIRR has undertaken technical studies todetermine what specific steps it can take to further reduce theoperating losses. If, at the conclusion of this effort, the LIRR isunable to establish a viable operation on its own, the Departmentintends to solicit proposals from private operators to provide overLIRR's freight service on a contract basis.

4. Intercity Passenger ServiceThe Department has sought to initiate the constructio:a effortsnecessary to provide high speed intercity passenger service west ofHoffmans to Buffalo. A maj or institutional obstacle h aa emerged,however. Conrail, the owner of the line, is unwilling to pursueupgrading of its existing track system to higher speeds claimingincreased interference and reduced capacity for its reigh,t trains.Thus, extending high speed passenger service to the west ffililY requireconstructing a new third track which would be dedicated to passengerservice. The Department has initiated a special track capaqity studywhich would examine existing conditions and track capacity andidentify the operating implications associated with the establishmentof high speed rail service.

- 6 -

D. Program AdministrationIt is frequent ly, but incorrect Ly , thought that the Rail Division sresponsibility is limited to development of intercity passenger andfreight capital projects under the 1974 and 1979 Bond Acts and thevarious direct legislative appropriations. While these are the mostvisible element of the rail program, they account for approximately onlyone-fifth of the rail prograffiworkload. Other work responsibilities ofthe Rail Division include:

Nanagement of the State's rail/highway grade crossing eliminationprogram.Planning, management, design, and construction monitoring responsi-bility for the grade crossing protection program which now averages80 projects annually C$8N).Safety inspection of all rail trackage and rolling stock in the Statewith the exception of the ~!TA/LIRR system.Hon.ito ri.ng and enforcement of the rail bond contracts to safeguardthe maintenance and service conditions of State agreements under mostelements of the bond programs.

Participation in several Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) mergercases and other requests by railroads for actions which could impactrail service in New York State. Current cases being reviewed by theDepartment include: Conrail's proposed sale of the Canada SouthernRailroad; the Pittsburg & Lake Erie t s petition for trackage rightsover the Norfolk & Western Railway to Buffalo; and establishment o!the Somerset Railroad.


15/60

Affirmative action programs focusing on the development of minorityenterprise in the rail program.Participation in federal rule-making proceedings defining the regula-tions under which rail carriers in the State operate, and under whichpublic l l s s i s t l l n c e programs I 1 r e funded llnd managed.S up er vi si ng c on st ru ct io nfinanced rail projects;agreements and billings.

of Department-let or railroad-let publiclythis also entai Is the process ing of all

Implementing the State-supported branchline assistance program, whichwas initiated in 1982.

All of these responsibilities, most of which pre-date the State's firstinvolvement in an actual rail capital assistance program, extend beyondthe rail program's unique and nationally significant program to modernizethe intercity rail passenger and freight facilities in the State.R es po ns ib il i t y for the Rail Program activities was consolidated in theRail Division in March, 1978. At that time, we emphasized the need forclearer delineation between the State and federal programs. The federalprogram is narrow in scope and fixed in time; the State program iscontinuous and broader in scope. It is essential to recognize the limitsof the non-federal program areas (such as passenger service, review ofrate structures, improvement or retention of mainlines, etc.) and theircontinuing importance to New York.The current climate at the federal level bears this out. Both deregula-tion and the proposed breakup and sale of Conrail will place severeburdens on the Rail Divison staff. This comes at a time when no federalfunds for staff will be available. Since the factors leading to thecreation of the State and federal programs were interrelated, and theprograms emerged at roughly the same time, there is the impression thatthe goals, methodology, activities, etc. of the two programs are moreclosely related than actually is the case.As a result of a fortunate ballooning in federal aid to New York State,between 1976 arid 1978, the State was able to shift many positions thathad been created for State Purposes to temporary service, federal certif-icate positions. This permitted dramatic savings in the State operatingbudget during those years. But, as was expected, the ability to chargeState Purposes expenses to a federal budget is ending and it is essentialthat the 23 existing temporary service positions in the Rail Division bemade a part of the regular state operating budget. In the 1982-83 StateFiscal Year,ten of the Rail Division temporary positions were convertedinto regular State Purposes items. Funds to complete this process in1983-84 fiscal year were requested but denied. Funds are again requestedin the 1984-85 budget. .

- 7 -


16/60

THIS PAGE LEFT INT ENT IO NA LL Y B LAN K

- 8 -


17/60

CHAPTER 2PROGRAN ELHIENTS AND FUNDING LEVELS

This chapter presents a summary of the six major funding elements thatsupport the Department's Rail Preservation Program and the program areas thateach of these elements is intended to address. While certain aspects of therail program have been a part of the Department Is capital program for anumber of years (e.g., the reconstruction of rail-highway grade separationstructures), the rail program, in fact, began with the passage of the RailPreservation Bond Act of 1974, which provided a State appropriation of $250million for rail program purposes. Since that time, the program has grownsubstantially and now totals nearly $1.7 billion from all sources.Following is a brief description of the six major elements that make up theRail Preservation Program:A. $250 Million Rail Preservation Bond Issue

The Rail Preservation Bond Act of 1974 established a rail program toensure the preservation of essential rail services and the eligibility ofthe State for federal financial assistance. It authorized creation of aState debt of $250 million to preserve, restore, and improve rail trans-portation capital facilities and equipment.The authorizing act (Chapter 118) was passed by the Legis lature andsigned by the Governor on April 1, 1974. On November 5, 1974, the votersof New York State approved the proposed $250 million bond program. OnJune 24, 1975, the Governor signed Chapter 257 into law. This act. whichmade the appropriations available, specified the four major programcategories shown below:

1974 RAIL BOND FUND APPROPRIATIONS BY CATEGORYCATEGORY APPROPRIATION

$ 49,500,00093,000,00045,000,00062,500,000

STATUSFully ObligatedFully ObligatedFully ObligatedFully Obligated

Intercity Rail Passenger ServiceCommuter Rail ServiceNew York City-Long Island Freight ServiceUpstate Freight Service

$250,000,000

All bond funds thus made available have been committed to specificprojects.

B. $30 Million Essential Rail Services AppropriationAs part of the Rail Preservation Bond Act of 1974, the Legis latureappropriated a sum of $30 million to be immediately available to furtherthe most urgent. aspects of the Rail Preservation Program) such as thereinstitution of discontinued passenger services and the rehabilitationof track and equipment on high priority lines. All funds made availablethrough this appropriation have been committed to specific projects.

- 9 -


18/60

C. ~soo ~1illion Energy Conservation Through Improved Transportation BondIssueThe Energy Conservation Through Improved TransportatiOh Bond Act of 1979authorized the creation of a State debt of $500 million for the purpos eof ensuring a program of energy conservation b y preserving and improvingrapid transit, commuter, intercity rail passenger and tail freightcapital facilities and equipment, as well as local streets and highways.This program was endorsed by the voters of New York State on November 6,1979.From this program, a total of $400 million was appropriated to assist inthe improvement of urban, commuter, intercity rail pass.n8~tl r~~idtransit system, and rail freight capital facilities, as shown be1Bw:

1979 RAIL RELATED BOND FUND APPROPRIATIONS BY CATEGORYCATEGORY APPROPRIATION$ 26,000,000

270,000,00034,000,00070,000,000

STATUSObligatiBn Pending

Fully ObligatedFully dbligatedFully dbligated

Intercity Rail Passenger ServiceCommuter Rail ServiceNew York City-Long Island Freight ServiceUpstate Freight Service

$400,000,000

D. $10 Million Early Implementation AppropriationAs part of the 1979 Energy Conservation Through Improved Transportati6rtBond Act, the Legislature app=opriated $10 million from the capitalconstruction fund for commencement of rail and rapid transit projectsprior to enactment of the Bond Act itself; of this amount, $5 million wasprovided to this Department and $5 million to the Metropolitan Transpor-tation Authority. All funds made available through this appropriationhave been committed to specific projects.

E. Local Rail Service Assistance ProgramThis federally sponsored branch line assistance program was established byCongress as part of the Regional Rail Reorganization Act of 1973 (3RAct). It was designed to ease the impact of large sca l.e abandonmentsresulting from the reogranization of bankrupt railroads and the formationof Conrail in the 17 state northeast/midwest reg i.on. The RailroadRevitalization and Regulatory Reform Act of 1976 (4R Act) created anational branchline assistance program. As an amendement to the 4R Act,the Local Rail Service Assistance Act of 1978 served to liberalize th~criteria required for branchlines to become eligible for assistance underthis program.Sinc.e 1976, New York State has been allocated nearly $41 million inbranchline assistance funding. The program's size and the amountallocated to this state - has diminished markedly over the last severalyears and is now a minor share of the overall program. It is expected

- 10 -


19/60

that this fed~~al program will be discontinued when current authorizationexpires next year -- indeed funding has already been reduced to trans!"tional levels.

F. State Funded Local Rail Service Assistance Program

Because the Federal Local Rail Service Assistance Program is coming to anend, and also because Conrail is likely to continue abandoning variousbranch lines the Legislature appropriated $19.4 million for fiscal years1981 - 83 to initiate New York's own Local Rail Service Assistanceprogram. The State's "self-help" program was the primary reason NYSDOThas been successful in preserving rail service on 75% of those linesConrail targeted for abandonment. The Local Assistance Program willrequire a permanent appropriation of $S million annually.

G. Rail Safety ProgramThis program consists of three separate project areas: at-grade crossingelimination projects; grade crossing separation reconstruction projects;and, at-grade crossing improvement projects.Grade Crossing Elimination ProgramThe purpose of this program is to eliminate specific rail-highway at-grade crossings. This program is subject to regulatory action by NYSDOT,upon petition by the muncipality having jurisdiction over the involvedhighway. The program is financed with State funds (less any federalfunds received), and is subject to annual legislative appropriations.Through the "Rebuild New York" Bond Program alone, seven grade separationprojects will be initiated. The largest of these, in the Village ofMineola on Long Island will eliminate six at-grade crossings alone.Other proj ects will eliminate all public) at-grade crossings in Amtrak Ishigh-speed territory and at many locations with high volumes of train andauto traffic along the Empire Corridor.Railroad Law Bridge Reconst~uctionThis program provides for the rehabilitation, alteration or replacementof existing rail/highway grade separation structures on non-state high-ways. This program is also subject to regulatory action by NYSDOT, uponpetition by the muncipality having jurisdiction over the highway. Thisprogram is financed with State funds (less any federal funds received)and is also the subject of annual legislative appropriations.Funds for these programs tend to fluctuate from year to year and reflectthe general fiscal status of the State as a whole. While the federalfunds available are significant, the bulk of the funds in the past yearshave been provided by the State.Rail-Highway Crossing ImprovementThe purpose of this program is to eliminate hazards at grade crossingseither on or off the federal-aid highway system. At least fifty percent

- 11 -


20/60

of the apportioned funds must be used to Lnstal l qr impro,y~ o/amip,~devices at rail/highway crossings. Remaining funds may p~ l1r:;~.qfqr avariety of other improvements, ~uch as surface treatment, ~rld~ !ep4fa-tion, relocation, and so on. Ninety percent of thi.s pr9~Hm ~~ fl!!1q~4from federal sources.

In additIon to the major fund sources discussed above, t.he PePirn:qJent hasbeen active in exploring the use of funds from otper ~Ql!rces. F q + exa~ple,advantage pas peen taken of the expanded Highwqy Bridge Repl,+s:'~ment\andRehabiLitatLon progrCim authorized under the (federal) Sur face TfeH;;;PQftationAssistance Act of 1978 to advance several rail-highway. ?r4d~ ~~R~rationreconstr~c~ion projects. Th~ Depa~tment.will continue ~o 1~lt~~stvil~~f~~esuch additi.ona I funds for r ail projects an the future, III 9:r4H tq ffi8 1l ,nt th~most comprehensive program of improvements possible. .'

-12 -


21/60

CHAPTER 3R A I L F R E I G I I T SERVICE

Despite continuing dominance of motor carriers, railroading in New York Stateplays an important role in moving cqu tpmcn t and raw materials to industry,feed and fertilizer to farmers, and manufactured goods and produce to consum-er markets. Conrail is the dominant rail service supplier in the State, withthe Delaware and Hudson in the eastern portions and the Chessie System (B&O)in western counties ilso contributing significant shares to the total.

FIGURE 1NEW YORK IS RAIL VOLmlE BY CARRIER

Carrier Tonnage Share %(Thousands)

Conrail 27,334 70%Delaware & Hudson 3,696 9Baltimore & Ohio 2,723 7Long Island 1,660 4Norfolk & Western 991 3All Others 2,903 7--TOTAL 39,307 100%SOURCE: 1980 ICC 1% W ay bi ll S am pl e.

The figures shown above reflect only each carrier's local pickup and deliveryof traffic: traffic that the carrier either originates or terminates in NewYork State. Conrail', even as large as it is, still relies upon other carri-ers to move two-thirds of its carloads for some portion of every trip. Allshort line and terminal carriers rely on other railroads for every route theyoffer. Thus, the ability of the carriers in New York State to provide viableservices is largely reflective of the health and vitality of the rail systemas a whole.Nationwide, the volume of revenue freight originated on lines of Class Icarriers during 1982-- some 1,453 million tons -- was down about 2.6 percentfrom the 1981 total. The annual tonnage value has remained relativelyconstant for the last several years and, allowing for the temporary fluctua-tions caused by changing economic conditions, is likely to remain so for theforeseeable future. A more useful measure of rail traffic trends is the"revenue ton-mile". Figure 2 provides selected data for this statistic forClass I carriers for the United States as a whole and for the Eastern Dis-trict. The difference between the tonnage and ton-mile trends is primarily areflection of significantly longer hauls in recent years due, in part, to anincrease in coal and intermodal traffic and to a decline in shorter distanceg e ne r al m e rc h an d i~ e mo v em e nt s .

- l3 -


22/60

FIGURE 2RAIL TRAFFIC TRENDS 1974 - 1982(1)

YEAR R EV ENU E TO N -H IL ES

UnitedStates(Billions)

EasternDistrict(Billions)

Eastern Distri~t ~hareo f U ni t ed St at es(%)197419751976197719781979198019811982

851.0754.3794.1826.3858.1913.7918.6910.2797.8

248.4217.9216.6211. 3197.6214.1202.0196.3176.1

29.228.927.325.623.023.422.021.622 .1

(1) Yearbook of Railroad Facts: Association of American Railroads (AAR) ,Washington, bc, September, 1983

Recently, the recessionary economy has had a negative Impact; upon the railindustry. This impact began to be felt in late 1981 and continued through1982. National year-to-date ton-miles for 1983 are down 0.6% compared tothose for 1982. It is uncertain if the traffic decline has r e ache I bottombut it is encouraging that an economic growth trend has begun.Taking advantage of this upturn in the economy, however, will continue to bea difficult task. For more than a decade now, New York State has been in th~unfortunate position of having almost all its rail freight service operatedby financially unstable railroads. While Conrail's positive financialperformance during the last two years and the pending incorporation of theDelaware & Hudson into an expanded GTI system are hopeful signs, the negativeeffects of the earlier trend will remain for some time to come. Thus, weintend to continue working closely with affected shippers and communities,and with the carriers themselves, to satisfactorily address our commonproblems. Some 6f the efforts are described below.A. New York City - Long Island Full-Freight Access Program

Rail Freight service to lower Westchester County, New York City and LongIsland had become increasingly less economical due to restrictive clear-ances that have made it impossible for the newer, larger cars in the railfleet to reach shippers in the area. Similarly, it was impossible toexploit the rapidly growing intermodal (TOFC) markets. Prior to theState's program to improve clearances, the direct rail route to New YorkCity via the Hudson Line had a 15' 3" vertical clearance limit, prohibit .ing more than 17 percent of the Nation's rail car fleet at that time, andall TOFC traffic, from accessing New York City and Long Island shippers.As the fleet is upgraded, this percentage grows, aggravating the area's

- 14 -


23/60

~IGURE 3

o 17'-6" MINI~ CLEAHANCE PROGPA11 ~e lk ir k- H ig hb ri dg eModify 18 Bridges south of Irvington too bt ai n c le ar an ce - C om pl et e

Construct New Rail Link - UnderConstruction

H ig hb ri dg e -' Oa k. Point

( 2 ) Oak Point - Fresh PondM in or o bs tr uc ti on s~.resh Pond - HicksvilleModify structure o~ lower track for 7bridges between Fresh Pond andH ic ks vi ll e - Under Construction

~ Bay Ridge LineT ra ck l owe ri ng u nd er 2 4 s t .r uct ur esUn de r C on s t.ru ctLo n

~ West Side Line

Terminal Location Intermodal Terminal (j)* Interim Terminal - Final Terminallocations are being evaluated,** Extracted fl:'ODl Oak Point Link Study

N o o bs tr uc ti on s

3 AlII


24/60

econom.i c disadvantage. This is also one reason why' industries haverelocated outside the New York City/Long Island area.While this situation had been recognized for some t.Lme, w it o u t ; a d e q u a t . efiscal resources and a coordinated approach to the problem, no mean-in8ful improvement could be made. With the advent of the Department'sRail Program, however, these two obstacles were overcome . The FullFreight Access Program has now been developed to correct these freightsystem deficiencies in a coordinted manner. Part of the program is a $20million project under the 1974 Rail Bond Issue to eliminate overheadclearance restrictions between the Selkirk Yard and Highbridge in theBronx. All restrictions under 17'6" have been corrected to provide amin imum clearance of 18' 0" (Figure 3). Completion of this Ln itLaI partor the program allowed intermodal service to HighbridgeYard i~ the Bronxto b~gin in E82. Below Highbridge, car heights are still limited to 15'6"into Oak Point Yard by other clearance obstructions thi~ will bee'orrected by the South Bronx-Oak Point Link project ,which is now undercbnstruetion and will be open in 1985.Tiakingadvantage of the new accessibility to imtermodal se.rv i.ce , theDep ar tment.Ls negotiations with Conrail and the BiModal 'Corporation led,in the Fall of 1982, to the initiation of a new form of "TOFC" servicebe tween Buffalo, Rochester, 'and New York City (Highbridge)calledtne"tmpi're St at'e :Xpress" . This service is noteworthy because it us-es new,i'ftate-6'f -t'lre-ilrt equipment supplied by private investment. This newequ ipmerrt ves'serrt La l ly consists of truck trailers spe cia l Iy -equs.pped xci.t.hrail 'W'fleels so that the trailers can be made up as a train without having't6be'placed on flat can" as is typical in TOFe operations. It provides'N e w Yd'rkshippers with lower rate; and more fuel-efficiEmt shipping. Therat'e vof 'increase -for this service is shown in Figure 4 below.

November 1982 (Service Began)February 1983March 1983(NYC/Rochester Service Began)October 1983

41117133

9.623.532.1

FIGURE 4

TRAFFIC TRENDSFOR "ROADRAILER"FREIGlIT SERVICE

Average # Dar10adsNonth Per Week Per Day

269 54.0

- 1 6 -


25/60

Subsequent phases of the Full Freight Access Program are being advancedunder the 1979 Rail Bond Issue. Projects already wlderway will eliminateclearance restrictions on the Bay Ridge line to Bush Terminal, and on theLIRR by the time the Oak Point Link is ready for use. Completion ofthese phases of the program w iII result in full intermodal services to ~New York City and Long Island. Event.ually this will create a need forpermanent facilities in order to provide adequate access to the users ofthese services throughout the area. The present plan calls for buildinga major new TOFC/COFC facility in the Bronx at the site of the HarlemRiver Yard on property now owned by the State.Figure 3Program.of these

details theAll proj ects

projects are:project components of the Full Freight Accessare scheduled to be complete by 1985. The costs

A. Clearances to HighbridgeB. South Bronx Oak Point LinkC. & E. Oak Point-Bay RidgeD. LIRR Clearances

Harlem River Yard (Phase 1)

$20 million70 million6 million5 million10 million

B. Upstate Freight ProgramMain Line Imptovem~ntsAs noted in earlier reports in this series, New York State has continuedto make investments in its mainline rail freight system in order tosec He reliable cost-competitive services for ies rail dependent busi-nesses and localities. The joint, Conrail/NYSDOT $15 million project toimprove the Syracuse . Massena Line has been complet~d. The benefit ofthis improvement is already evident as Conrail now offers an efficient,reliable and timely service between Canada and Selkirk which benefits allrail customers along this route. The Southern Tier program of improve-ments is also complete. The State investment of approximately $27million in this $]0 million program has made possible improvements to theGraham Line Ln vOr ange County. Subsequently all rail service has beentransferred from the old Main Line to the Graham Line the new Main Lineof 'the Southern Tier. Improvements at Wellsville and Olean have beencompleted and placed in operation. These, and other investments in theSouthern Tier, have preserved mainline services which are vital toshippers across the region.As the inclusion of the Delaware and Hudson into the Guilford Transporta-tion System draws near, discussions have begun regarding the needs of thenew GTl system. Projects now planned include improving the Binghamton toRouses Point mainline and several yard programs. The yards will bediscussed under the Yards, Shops and Equipment section of the ProgramReport. These improvements are very important to GTl as the D&H systemwill be called on to carry a greater volume of traffic once the proposedsystem is complete. Although no specific improvements have been identi-fied it is expected the improvements to D&H system will cost about $20million.

- 17 -


26/60

BranchlinesThe State Is basic approach to the branchline problem is to retain thoserail services deemed essential to meet the transportation needs of theagricultural and industrial sectors and the consumers in general ataconomic a l rates. The branchline program or igi.na l Iy arose(i)ut of ther ail reorganization efforts that preceded Conrail. At that time, theState was faced with massive abandonments that threatened ,tite State'sindustrial base. The first phase of the program was successful and isclemonstrated by the fact that no firm has left New York State because ofloss of rail service despite the elimination of nearly 1,000 miles in itsbranchline system.In late 1981, another major restructuring of the rail system in NewYorkState began, this time in response to the Northeast Rail Service Act of1981 (NERSA). This Act set a single goal for Conrail: profitability.NERSA gave that carrier a number of new prerogatives to exercise inpur su ing profits. One of these prerogatives -- the l1expedited abandon-~entll process -- allows Conrail to abandon virtually any line it choosest.o, upon short notice, without having to demonstrate the "public conve-nience and necessity" of such actions. The "expedited abandonment"freedoms under NERSAremain available to Conrail until October 31, 1985.

The Department anticipated this proposed abandonment. and requested theLong Island Rail Road (LIRR) to study the feasibility of assuming controlof operations on this line. The Study found that a LIRR operation wouldlikely be viable and the LIRR has initiated purchase negotiations withConrail. The Department w i11 work closely with LIRR to achieve anequitable solution for continuation of rail service.

Despite the short (90 days) prior notification requirement, NYSDOThasdealt successfully with virtually all the immediate problems caused bythese abandonments. The State-funded Local Rail Service AssistancePr ogr am has made it possible to deal in an orderly manner with thepptentially chaotic branchline situation created by Conrail's abandon-ments. Continuation of t.his program at a level of $5 million per year,is necessary so the State can be in a position to mitigate any adverseeconomic impacts anticipated as a result of branchlin~ rationalization,not only by Conrail, but also by other major carriers in the State.In May, 1983, Conrail filed a Notice of Insufficient Revenue, which is apreliminary abandonment notice, on Brooklyn's Bay Ridge Line, whichextends from Fresh Pond Jct. on the north, (the interchange point withthe Long Is land Rail Road), to Bay Ridge on the Brooklyn Waterfront.This filing raises the most serious economic issues, to date, in thesecond phase of Conrail's expedited abandonments. There are severalindustries on this line which are dependent on rail service and it iseconomically urgent that direct service be continued. The State has madesubstantial investments to improve rail facilities on the BrooklynWaterfront. A project now under construction will not only rehabilitatethe Bay Ridge Line but also extend, to the Waterfront area, clearanceimprovements made under the Full Freight Access Clearance Improvementproject.

- 18 -


27/60

Service to the Brooklyn Waterfront was further threatened when New YorkDock Raiwuy (NYD) and Brooklyn l.ns.c rn District Te nn inal Railroad(BEDT), which is controlled by NYD, applied to the Ice in May, 1983, forauthority to abandon operations at Bush, Atlantic and Kent Terminals inBrooklyn, and at the Conrail carf loat interchange in Greenville, N.J.NYSDOT also anticipated this abandonment and requested further studies byLIRR which found the LIRR capable of profitably operating Bush andAtlantic Terminals. The feasibility study thus provided a contingencyplan in the even~ othei proposals for private operation of these proper-ties were not successful.On June 3, 1983, the New York Cross Harbor Terminal Rail Road (NYCH), anew company formed when NYD and BEDT announced their intention to abandonoperations, applied to the ICC for authority to operate the car floatservice and NYD' s terminal operations at Bush and Atlantic Terminals. Inearly July, the ICC approved the abandonment of BEDT operations at KentTerminal. The ICC exempted the transaction between NYD and NYCH fromprovisions of the Interstate Commerce Act and dismissed NYD's abandonmentapplication. NYCH assumed control of the operation in mid-August, 1~83and the transition was accomplished without interrupting service to railcustomers. The Department will enter into an agreement with NYCH forservice and maintenance of the improvements already made on the BrooklynWaterfront facilities; improvements sponsored and owned by the State.NYD's residual liabilities are being explored.ShortlinesIndependently operated short lines have always been an importaLt elementin rail freight operations in the State, providing essential services 0:1lines considered marginal or unprofitable by Class I carriers. Theseoperations are generally lightly capitalized, producing profit levelsinadequate to generate funds for capital investments. Assistance isusually required to reverse years of physical and marketing neglect onthe part of the former opera~ors.The 1982 report described four new or expanded shortline operations inthe State which resulted from Conrail's first round of expedited abandon-ments. In late 1982, another new shortline, the Tonawanda Island Rail-road Corp. (TIRC) purchased the Tonawanda Is land Industrial Track inNorth Tonawanda. The Lndus tr ial track was abandoned by Con~ail throughthe expedited proceeding. TIRC offers rail users connections with boththe D&H and Conrail. The State is providing financial assistance to thisoperation in the form of start-up costs and emergency rehabilitation.TIRC has purchased the former EL Dock Line in North Tonawanda, (alsoabandoned by Conrail), and the State will assist in track rehabilitationand fund a connection to the Tonawnda Industrial Track to allow access toConrail's Niagara Branch; a connection essential to the success of theoperation.To the extent possible with available funds, the Department will continuethe assistance necessary to establish and support shortline operations;operations which are necessary for maintaining essential rail services.

- 19 -


28/60

Y.a rd s, S ho ps a nd E qu ip me nt1he 1'f79 Bond Issue made available some $12.9 million to coirt Lnue the"yards, shops and equipment" portion of the program. Thl:!se Funds lh-e~xpected to generate sufficient, additional money to en~bl~ th~ b!pstt~~ent to ~ount a major effort in this vital area. As m~htiohdd ~arl1~tlth~ Department has been discussing with GTI the antic!pat~d n~~d~ of thenew system. Under discussion for this program af~ majo r improvemente f forts at Hechanicville (consolidation of the B&M and D&H nkilities),East Binghamton (construction of a locomotive facility ) , and Buffalo(rehabiltatioh of Conrail's former JX Yard for the D&H).A program to make major improvements in the Buffalo Termihai laeiiitiesis hO~ in the agteement stage. Thi~ $4.7 millioh program ~ili ~atibhai~lze the re~iorits route structure, aliow the removal of cledt~h~@ t~sttic-tions and eiimihate redundant yard and terminal facilities in the. area.These improvements will result in th~ consolidation 6f lirt~ a n a terfuirial6 ~erdt iori sl ~ hd m ake loc al s ervi ce more effi cien t.Additiohal eielhents of the yard program will include itnproving Inte rmedaIt.emInals 1 ih d rail support facilities in the State. (e. g., at Albany,BUlfalo, E l m i r a , Syracus e, Utic a, and Bingh amton ).

- 20 -


29/60

PROJECTR eh ab il ita ti on of D &HMainline

Re hab il it at io n o f D&HLoc:omotivesD&H Market Study

Track Improvements on FJ&G

Re hab il it at io n o f B &MM ec ha ni cv il le Y ar d

R eh ab il it at io n o f A lb an yPort RR.

R eh ab il it at io n o f W es tS ho re S ec on da ry

T ra ck I mp ro ve me nt s o nG&J

P RO GRA M O F U PS TA TE F RE IG HT PR OJE CT SUNDERTAKEN WITH 1974 BOND ISSUE FUNDS

DESCRIPTIONTr ac k re ha bi li ta ti on to D&Hmainline including work on theCoolidge, Lake George. S. GlensF al ls B ra nc he s.

Rehabilitation of 28 D&Hlocomotives.

In -d ep th co ns ul ta nt st ud y t od et er mi ne m ar ke t i mp ac ts ,profitability and costs to the D&H.

Rehabilitation of the entire 19.6miles Fonda. Johnstown andG lo ve rs vi ll e R R.

Yard Work to improve efficienciesof freight movement and trackw or k o n F it ch bu rg Ma in lin e.Rehabilitation of 8.4 miles oft ra ck se rv in g p ort i nd us tr ie s.

Rehabilitation to FRA Class 3standards

R eha bi li ta ti on of t ra ck a lo ngthe Greenwich and Johnsonville RR.

S TA TE F UN DI NG$13.105.000

3.410.000

144.000

1.705.000

1,902.000

2.180.000

796,000

TO TA L CO ST$32.213.000

4.015.000

144.000

1,655.000

2.213 ,000

2,600.000

2.084.000

796.000

STATUSComplete

Complete

Complete

Complete

Complete

Complete

Complete

Complete


30/60

PROJECTRe hab il ita tio n of O BP ALocomotive

Yard Construction atLysander

Track Improvements onLyons,al1s Branch

Track Improvements onCNY

R eh ab il it at io n o f P ho en ixBranch

'.eh abi lit ati on o f A ubu rnBranch

PROGRAMOF'UP S''rATEFREIGI;lT,PJWJECTSUNDERTAl(ENMI'TH .1974 BOND ISSUE FUNDS

(Ieo;ntnue.d)

DESCRIPTION S TA TE F UN DI NGRe bu ild ing of loc omo tiv e s erv ingOgdensburg Bridge and PortAuthority.

$ 91,000

Co ns tru cti on o f Rad iss on Yar dto improve service in Syracusearea.

2,700,000

T ra ck r eh ab il it at io n b et we enUtica and Lyons Falls.

5,753,000

T rac k reh abi lit ati on o n Ce ntr alNew York RR from Richfield Jct.t o R ic hf ie ld S pr in gs .

766,000

R eh ab il it at io n o f 27 m il e P ho en ixBranch between Syracuse andOswego and five miles of MassenaBranch.

3,615.000

T ra ck r eb ab iLt.t .aton-be tweenS yr ac us e a nd G en ev a.

#,;1)00,.00 0

TOT AL CO ST$ 101.000

2,700,000

5,753,000

766,000

3,615,000

7,364.,000

.,

STATUSComplet

Complet

Complet

Complet

Complet


31/60

PROG RAM OF U PSTATE F REIGHT PRO JECTSU ND E RT AK EN W IT H 1974 BOND ISSU E FUNDS

(continued)

PROJECT DESCRIPTION STATE FUNDINGTrack Connecti on atBatavia ' C on st ru ct io n o f c on ne ct io nb et we en C al ed on ia B ra nc h

~nd Fo ;mer LV Mainli ne.Track Improvements on

Niagara Jct. RR. $ 578,000r ac k r eh ab il it at io n o f 44m il e t er mi na l r ai lr oa d.Tr ack Impr ovements onN ia ga ra B ra nc h

6,058,000nst allation of new weldedrail, ties. and ball aston old PC Mainline betweenBuffa lo and Niagara Falls.

C on st ru ct io n o f B oi le rFacility in Buffalo

Construct ion of Fl exi FloB oiler requi red to provideS team for goods transfe r.

C on st ru ct io n o f T ra ns -loading Facilit y atClarence

C on st ru ct io n o f a R ai l/ Tr uc ki nt er fa ce f ac il it y n ea rBuffalo.

C on st ru ct io n o f T ra ns -loading Facilit y atFair Oaks

C on st ru ct io n o f r ai l/ tr uc kinter face faci lity at F airOaks.

TOT AL C OST$ 280,000

$ 1,156,000

6,058,000

220,000

23,000

15,000

STATUSComplete

Complete

Complete

Complete

Complete

Complete


32/60

PROJECTC on st ru ct io n o f I nd us tr ia lPark in Rochester

T ra ck I mp ro v em en tsOnta rio Second ary andSodus Bay B ranches

T ra ck C bn rr ectLon AtWallltfrg.teriL

Track Connection atNewark

Track Connections atV ic to r a nd S ho rt sv il le

Track Connection atPenn Yan

PROG RAM OF' UFSl'AtE:; F~EIGHT PROJE'C-rS.UNDERTAKEN..w i I r ' . tH < 1974 BOND ISSW FtmlJS'.' " -., ~ " ', ','" ." . '_ . ' ,-,- ' " ..,-,-,', '.'


33/60

PROJECTI mp ro ve me nt s o n S ou th er nT ie r M ai nl in e

R eh ab il it at io n o fF re ev il le S ec on da ryR eh ab il it at io n o f C &G V

R eh ab il it at io n o f O ne on taYard

T ra ck Im pr ove me nts onD &H A di ro nd ac k B ra nc hAccelerated MaintenanceProjects Statewide

P ROG RA M OF U PST AT E F REI GH T PR OJECT SUNDERTAKEN WITH 1974 BOND ISSUE FUNDS(continued)

DESCRIPTION S TA TE F UN DI NGTr ac k an d sig na l i mp rov em ent sb et we en S uf fe rn a nd Ja me st ow n,reconstruction ~f CR OleanYard and of Graham Line.

$26,900,000

T ra ck r eh ab il it at io n b et we enOwego and Harford Mills. 1,171 ,000

Rehabilitation of 16 mileC oo pe rs to wn a nd C ha rl ot teV all ey RR .

578,000

Reh ab ili ta ti on of D &H 's mai nclassification yard.

193,000

C or re ct io n o f i mm ed ia tetrack/roadbed deficiencies. 630,000A cc el er at ed M ai nt en an ce p ro je ct so n v ar io us b ra nc hl in essub si dized wit h Fe de ral fu nds . $78,277 ,00

TO TAL CO ST$ 70,700,000

1,875,000

578,000

193,000

870,0003,271,600

$155,542,600

STATUSUnderway

Complete

Complete

Complete

CompleteComplete


34/60

PROJECTI mp ro ve me nt s t o S ou th er nT ie r M ai nl in e

I mp ro ve W as hi ng to nand Salem Branch

Remsen - Lake Placid

Improv~p1eJil:tso D&HAdirm,nd a:ekBranch

GTI C ap it al I mp ro ve m en ts ;D &H M ai nl in e, S el ec te dYards and Shops

T er mi na l I mp ro ve me nt s i nB uf f al o- Ni ag ar a F al ls

l nt er mo da l I mp ro ve me nt s

PROGRAM OF UPSTATE FREIGHT PROJECTSU ND ER TA KE N W IT H 1979S0ND ISSUE FUNDS

DESCRIPTION S TA TE F UN DI NGContinued track, signal, andyard work includingM id dl et ow n T ra ck R el oc at io n.

$ 3.200 ,0,00

R eh ab il it at io n o f t ra ck b et we enEagle Bridge - Salem andGreenwich.

1,700.000

Settlement of acquisition fromP en n C en tr al . 5,000,000

Rehabilitation of entire Branchnver a three-year period (1980,1 98 1, 1 98 2) .

7,800,000

T ra ck i mp ro ve me nt s b et we enBinghamton-Albany-RousesP oi nt . E qu ip me nt r eh ab il it at io nand acquisition; and yardi mp ro ve me nt s a t M ec ha ni cv il leE. Binghamton, and JX (Buffalo).

20,000,000

Rehabilitation of Rail FreightTerminals in the Buffalo-Niagara Falls area.

4,700,000

Interm odal track. signal andyard improvements in Buffalo,R oc he st er , S yr ac us e , UtLe aa nd A lb an y.

9,000,000

TOTAL COST$11 ,'600,000

1,700,000

5,000,000

7,800,000

24,000,000

12,000,000

27,000,0-00

STATUSUnderway

Complete

Complete

Complete

UnderDevelopm

Underway

Uooe'rdevelopmRoche$;tproj.ecci n d e. s


35/60

PROJECTI mp ro ve me nt s o n M as se naBranch

I mp ro ve me nt s o n P ho en ixBranch

S ho rt -T er m A ct io nson Freight Lines

"I Love NY" Boxcars

C le a ra n ce I mp r ov e me ntStudy

-------.------.---~--------------------. ----------:.---"-------------------

PRO GRAM OF UPS TATE FRE IGHT PRO JEC TSUNDERTAKEN WITH 1979 BOND ISSUE FUNDS

(continued)

DESCRIPTION STATE FUNDINGTra ck im pro veme nts a long thi sSyracuse-Watertown-MassenaLine.

$ .7,500,000

Tra ck im pro veme nts and bri dgeel imi nati on on th is Syr acu se-F u lt o n- Os w eg o L i ne .

2,000,000

Necessary projects such asr eh ab il it at io n o f c on ne ct io ns ,s ho r tl i ne s, c r os s in g s,a cqu is it io ns , a nd f re ig htservice demonstrations.

3,447,000

Purchase from D&H andrebu ild ing o f 165 B oxca rs.

4,400,000

In depth consultant studyto analyze & propose methodsfor raising Water Level Routeclearance to 19'6" North ofTarrytown.

275,000

TOTA L COS T$ 15,000,000

7,000,000

3,447,000

6,000,000

550,000

STATUSComplete

Complete

Underdevelopmen

Complete

Complete


36/60

PROGRAM OF UPSTATE FREIGHT PROJECTSUNDERTAKEN WITH 1979 BOND ISSUE FUNDS (CONTINUED)

PROJECT DESCRIPTIONI mp ro ve me nt s t oA rc ad e 8 , At ti caRailroad

Rehabilitationof the Arcade& A tt ic a R ai lr oa d

I mp ro ve L iv on iaAvon & LakevilleRailroad

Rehabilitationof the Livonia Avon& L ak ev il le R ai lr oa d

InterchangeImprovements

Construction of anI nte rc ha nge t ra ck a tD ek al b Ju nc ti on

CadYI!.~ .llTrackImp ro;~gm~~1& C on st ru ct io n o f .arail spur for SaratogaIndustrial DevelopmentAgency

T ra ck I mp ro ve me nt si n L oc kp or t

R eh ab il it at io n o ftrack in the City ofLockport

A mst erd am S pur Co ns tr uc ti on o f r ai ls pur f or A ms te rd amIDA

O gd en sb ur g B ri dg ea nd Po rt A uth ori ty

I mp ro ve me nt s t oTrack .and LocomotiveE qu ip me nt f orA ut ho ri ty 's R ai lr oa d

L ake Pl ac idROW

A cqu is it io n o fR em se n- La ke P la ci dr ig h- of -w ay f ro mP en n C en tr al

S TA TE F UN DI NG TO TA L C OS T$ $ 745,40045,400

450,000 450,000

225,000 225,000

220,000 220,000

560,000 560,000

257,000 257,000

1,600,000 1 , n O D , o e o

5,000,000 5,000,000

STATUSComplete

Complete

Complete

Complete

UnderDevelopment

.eomplete

Und~rw~y

Comp1ete


37/60

PROGRAM OF UPSTATE FREIGHT PROJECTSUNDERTAKEN WITH 1979 BOND ISSUE FUNDS CONTINUED

PROJECT STATE/FUNDING TOTAL COSTESCRIPTIONU ti ca B ra nc h 3,000,000 3,000,000m pr ov em en ts t o

T ra ck b et we enB in gh am to n a ndU tic a o ver NYS&W

$81,079,000 $133,154,000

STATUSUnderway


38/60

PROJECTB roo kl yn Wa ter fro nt Rai lImprovements

R emo va l of Cle ara nceRestrictions

Replacement of LIRRLocomotives

Instal:hr t1i!cj -trf Sec uri tyFencing

C ons tru cti on of Sta tenI sl an d I nd us tr ia l S pu rs

Improvement to hump in.H ol ba n Y ar dC on st ru ct io n o f H ow la ndHoo k S pur .

P ROG RA M OF' N,EW'YORK CITY- - LONG ISLAND FREIGHTPROJ ECTS UNDERTAKEN; WITH 1974 BOOl,JjSSUE' FUNDS

DESCRIPTION S TA TE F UN DI NGR eh ab il it at io n a nd c on st ru ct io nof rail freight facilities on.t he B ro ok ly n W at er fr on t.

$12,400,000

R em ov al o f c le ar an ce r es tr ic ti on son the Hudson Division to permitTOFC and oversized rail equip-ment a& far south as Highbridge.

20,000,000

R ep la ce me nt o f 22 L IR R f re ig htlocomotives.

8,600,000

D emo nst rat io n p roj ect to t estfencing types at criticallocations.

350,000

Construction of a new rail spurto be constructed in the StatenI sl an d I nd us tr ia l P ar k.

600,000

Lowering of the hump at LIRR'sH ol ba n Y ar d ;i .n Qu ee nsConstruct1onof .anew rail sp.urto the Howland Hook Cont ameepoe t. --.. .------~-

*funded through the federally sponsored Local Rail Service ASlS:is:.tancero-grant .

TOT AL CO ST$16,90D,000

20,000,000

8,600,000

350,000

600,000

70.000*

2,,050,000

,.

STATUSUnderwa

Complet

Complet

Complet

UnderDevelop

CompLet


39/60

-- ----~-------- -----~ -- -""- - - ----------------~---.---- - - - - - - . -

PROJEOTConst:t!ucti:onof JL ]}RR Ca rRepair :Pa c:iU:it.y..Track Improvements atH un ts P od -n t'Market

I mp ro ve me nt s a t B ra ok ly nNavy Yard

LI RR Ya rd a nd Com mu ni.catianImpravements.

S o. . Bra nx T ea m T ra ck'Facility

,P'ROGRAMO F


40/60

PROJECTC l ea r an c e I m pr o ve m en t s(Sou th Br onx-Oak Poi nt L ink )

I mp ro ve me nt s f or I nt er mo de lYard Shops in NYC

Tr ack I mpr ovem ent s t oB us h T er mi na l

WNR eh ab il it at io n t o N YCP o rt T e rm i na lsImp rove men ts o n LI RR L ines

.U ns pe ci fi ed i mp ro ve me nt s t oy ar ds , s ho ps ,etc. on LIRR

S ho rt -T er m A ct io ns o nF re ig ht L in es .

PROGRAM OF NEW YORK CITY - LONG ISLAND FREIGHTPROJECTS UNDERTAKEN WITH 1979 BOND ISSUE FUNDS

DESCRIPTIONR em ov al o f c le ar an ce r es tr ic -tions from S. Highbridge toO ak P oint , Br onx.

H arle m R ive r Yard

C le ar an ce a nd t ra ck i mp ro ve me nt son Bay Ridge Line to Bush Terminal,Brooklyn.

R ehab ili tati on of F ulto n, RedH oo k a nd A tl an ti c T er mi na ls .

C le ar an ce a nd t ra ck i mp ro ve me nt so n L IRR.

I mpro vem ent s to y ard s, s hop s,tracks and TOrC termiuals tob e d et er mi ne d.

S up po rt o f I nt er mo da l O pe ra ti on sin NYC.

S TA TE F UN DI NG$ 7 , 000, 000* *

9,000,000**

6,000.000

3,000,000

5,000,000

4,000,000

1,200,000*

$35,200,000

* F un de d t hr ou gh s pe ci al l eg is la ti ve l Ii mm ed ia te a ct io nll appropriation.**Part vf the State funds used for Harlem River Yard Property is also

app Lf.cabLe to the Oak Point Link project as the Link passes throught he Y ar d p ro pe rt y.

T OTA L CO ST$70,000,000

10,000,000

6,000,000

8,000,000

5,000,000

16,000,000

5,500,000

$120,500,000

...-------(- --.------.----1-- -

STATUSUnderConstr

H ar le mY ard pe rty pc ha se dis inphase.UnderConstr

U nd ermentUnderConstrUnderDevelo

Ne w RRailerServicEstablB u ff aester-


41/60

CHAPTER 4INTERCITY PASSENGER SERVICE

Amtrak, the nation's sixth largest carrier of intercity passengers, continuedto make progress in 1982 achieving the goals and objectives set by Congress.Amtrak's overall financial performance, measured by the ratio of revenues tooperating costs, reached its highest level ever and surpassed the levelmandated by Congress three years earlier than required. Hore importantly,Amtrak required $88 million less in federal subsidies in 1982 than in thepreceding year.Key to this success were a number of productivity improvements includingfavorable 1abor sett lements and. increased management efficiency. Revenuegrowth through higher fares was also a factor. Rising fares, coupled withthe national recession and airline price wars, did take their toll on systemridership which dropped to 1978 levels. Ridership on Amtrak's New York Stateroutes posted only a slight decrease in 1982 in contrast to major declines onother routes. Projections based on ridership to-date in 1983, however showthat Amtrak's passenger levels in New York State will be the highest ever.Great progress in improving intercity passenger service continues to be madein New York State .. As Figure 5 demonstrates, rail ridership growth in NewYork is far outpacing national averages. The State's improvement efforts~esc~ibed below ha~e been instrumental in achieving this success.

FIGURE 5RIDERSHIP CONPARISO~:NEW YORK SERVICES VS. AHTRAK SY:;TEM

YEAR MfTRAK SYSTEM N.Y.S. SHARENEW YORK .SERVICES (NILLIONS) (PERCENT)788,044 17.4 4.5

1,011,966 18.6 5.4968,245 19.2 5.0981,016 19.3 5.1

1,133,719 2 1. 6 5.21,144,885 21.3 5.21,206,811 20.3 5.91,183,496 18.9 6.3

+50.2% +8.6% +40.0%

19751976197719781979198019811982Change


42/60

A. High Speed Rail Programtrack ImprovementsThrough the State Is high speed rail effort, New York' s train schedu Lesare now the shortest ever with speeds among the fas tes t ir the country(see Figure 6). Using a phased approach and fueled by rail bond funds,this effort has brought over 135 miles of the Empire. Corridor to speedsof up to 110 mph.

FIGURE 6

INTERCITY PASSENGERSCHEDULETIHES*(HRS: HINUTES)

Between 1948 1977 1983. _._.2:50 3:00 2:118:05 8:40 7:01~

Nyc and AlbanyNYCand Buffalo

* based on the shortest scheduled time for eachyear

The first section of track to be placed in high speed operation was thesegment between Hoffmans (west of Schenectady) and Albany-Rensselaer.The necessary upgrading efforts here were completed late in 1979 in aproj ect which also reopened passenger rail service to downtownSchenectady. Since then work has progressed southward from Albany withhigh speed operations on the Albany to Poughkeepsie po rtion of thecorridor authorized in the Fall of 1981. The rebuilding program south toCroton-Harmon was substantially completed in the Fall of 1982. As aresult, Amtrak schedules were shortened by up to 17 ~inutes. The pro-gress of this overall effort is readily apparent from Figure 7, whichshows the number of miles of track between Croton and Hoffrnans posted atvarious speeds today compared to cond~tions in 1975,. before the State'sconstruction projects were underway.

- J4. -


43/60

In the wostern half of the corridor, St.a te financed projects have beendovo t.cd to eliminating speed -restl'icled ilrens and to reopening theBuffalo to Niagara Falls line for puss enge r service, During 1982) theDepartment and Conrail made a joint commitment to undertake a multi-million dollar program to further improve rail service in the Buffaloarea, Once complete, these improvements will permit passenger trainschedules to be shorted by an additional 10 minutes,

FIGURE 7CROTONTO HOFH1ANSTRACKCONDITIONS

1975 vs, 1983Miles of Track

UponTrack Class 1975 1983 Completion

Class III (60 mph max) 39,2 4 1. 8 16,6Class IV (80 mph max) 190,3 6 1 . 3 78.3Class V (90 mph max) 0 74.1 78.0Class VI (110 mph max ) 0 65,6 70,6

At the eastern end of the corridor, con stru ct Lon of the direct railconnection between the Empire and Northeast Corridors is now underway.In response to federal legislation, passed in early 1983, and authorizingAmtrak to spend $30 million on this proj ect, the Department and Amtrakproduced a joint plan for the development of this project. Under thisplan, by 1986, Amtrak trains serving Upstate New York, would ieave theMetro North commuter railroad's Hudson Line at Spuyten Duyvil in theBronx, followCcnrail's former West Side freight line south into Manhat-tan, and terminate at Amtrak's Pennsylvania Station via a new trackconnection, This vital subterranean connection had been incorporatedinto the design of the Long Is land RR' s new car storage facility.Construction of this facility, located just west of Penn Station, beganin 1982.Consolidating Amtrak operations at Pennsylvania Station will not onlymake direct connections between Amtrak's New York State and NortheastCorridor routes possible, but also provides connections to the LongIsland Railroad's commuter rail services, thereby creating a direct raillink between Long Island and upstate New York. Access to the New YorkCity subway system, PATH trains, and trains operated by New JerseyTransit will also be improved. The new routing will provide importantfinancial benefits to Amtrak due both to the consolidation of services inNew York City and increased access to additional markets.Station ImprovementsStation and parking improvement efforts have been instrumental in elimi-nating the image of decay that once haunted rail passenger service in theState. Rail bond funds I combined with Amtrak and local contributions,have been used in constructing four new stations in the corridor, andsubstantially rehabilitating another four stations. Selected

- 35 -


44/60

improvements have been made to a number of other stations. Parkingprojects have been carried out at a total of 11 stations providing safe,expanded parking facilities for the thousands of new riders.These improvement efforts have attracted many new rail riders. Some ofthe most striking examples are shown in the figure below:

FIGURE 8RIDERSHIP GENERATED AT NEW STATIONS

SchenectadyRochesterBuffalo

Before Construction1977 Patronage

38,00061,00093,000

After Construction1980 Patronage

62,00095,000123,000

% Increase+ 63 %+ 56 %+ 32%

Most recently parking facilities were expanded at the Rhinecliff Station.Plans to tenovate this station are now being progressed. Other currentprojects include large scale station and parking improvement projects atSyracuse and Hudson, and station improvements at Rhiriecliff. Also, theparking facilities at the Albany-Rensselaer station have been expanded.Service ImprovementsThe level of rail service itself is another factoi affecting ridershiplevels. This is an area with which the State has been especially con-cern.ed in order to create and enhance the operatipn of a modern railp&,ss.ell,&e,ryste.m for its citizens. In the past,' New York State haspar tLcLp.ated in planning and, in some cases, financing reinstitutedservices to such major cities as Chicago, Boston; Montreal, and mostrecently 1:oronto.These new services have made New York more accessible to neighboringstates and two Canadian Provinces by train, and increased the availabili-ty and convenience of service within the State. F'igu re 9 presents theridership history for train services that are supported jointly by theState and Amtrak. Service has also been expanded by establishing directservice to downtown Schenectady, as well as to Niagara Falls where alltrains previous ly terminated at Buffalo. Service frequencies atSchenectady and in western New York have subsequently been increased.

- 36 -


45/60

FIGURE 9S T A T E S P O N S O R E D INTERCITY PASSENGER SERVICES

1977-1982r,

ServiceToeal Deficit

(000)NYS Subsidy

(000)Ridership

(000)Total DeficitPer Passenger

Albany-Nont r eal19771978197919801981ic1982

$1,7142,1542,1821,581668574

s 857 82.31,077 77 .11,091 87.1790 88.3334 76.7287 75.6

s 83 8.4258 23.0

$23.1831.3727.7617.918.717.60

Syracuse-Niagara Falls1981 $ 4131982 993 49.0343.20

=RevisedPublic transportation as a whole can serve many door-to-door travelneeds. However, the lack of widespread public information on specificlocal operation~is a real impediment to ridership growth, Therefore, aproject was begun to provide basic information on local transportationservices to intercity train travellers. The key product of this effortis a directory of public transportation services that exist in tte EmpireCorridor. The pamphlet, You Can Get There From Here, is available uponrequest from NYSDOT and at all Amtrak stations in New York.EquipmentAs a result of Amtrak modernizing its equipment, upstate New York trainsare now operated with the most advanced equipment in the country. Themajority of trains are operated with Turboliner sets.This progress and modernization not withstanding, additional equipment isneeded to alleviate existing "standee" problems on services operatedsouth of Albany. It would also permit further expansion of service inthe State, increase operating flexibility to permit improvements intime-of-day scheduling, and provide a better equipment maintenanceschedule.Amtrak has recognized the need to provide additional equipment for itsNew York State routes and took an important step in 1983 by pledgingadditional turboliner trains to the Empire Corridor. The units to beassigned to New York were formerly operated on several Midwestern routesand need to be overhauled before they can be used here. Amtrak has alsobegun a program to renovate the existing turboliner fleet. This is onlyan interim step and does not provide adequate equipment for New York'sneeds.

- 37 -


46/60

Announcements of possible very high speed train systems throughout thecountry l including New York State, made headlines during 1983. GovernorCuomo announced New York's commitment to study the ma.rket d~r.land for veryhigh speed train service between New York City and ~lontreal via AlbanyJ.nd Burlington, Vt. A technical, pre-feasibility study, commissioned bythe City of Nontreal, was completed in 1982 and found it was technicallypossible to establish rail service which could operate at speeds up to185 mph with a schedule time of less than three hours hetwe~n Hont.r ea land NewYork. City. The market study is a joint effort by the States ofNew York, Vermont and the Province of Quebec. It will he funded in partby a Federal Railroad Administration grant with aid from VermOl'I.'t, Quebecand France.

B. V . e r y High Speed Rail Service Feasibility Planning

- 111 -


47/60

P ROG RA M O F U PS TA TE I NT ER CI TY P AS SEN GE RPROJECTS UNDERTAKEN WITH 1974 BO~~ ISSUE FUNDS

(continued)

PROJECT DESCRIPTIONT r ac k R e ha b il i ta t io nAlbany to Buffalo

Installation of high speedinterlockingsP ar ki ng Im pr ov eme nt s a tHudson

Repaving and expansion of lot.

C ons tr uc ti on o f St ati ona t S ch en ec ta dyConstruction of new station andre in st itu ti on o f s erv ic e t oSchenectady.

I nt er ci ty R ai l P as se ng erS er vi ce - W as hi ng to nIrving

Additional round trip per daybetween NYC and Albany subsidizedby State through 403(b) program.

Niagara Branch RailRealignment

Re al ig nm ent of tr ac k b et we en Bu ffa loan d Ni ag ar a F al ls .

Ni ag ar a Bra nc h T ra ckImprovements

In sta ll at io n of w el de d r ai ls , t ie sa nd b al la st

S t at i on R e co n st ru c ti o nat Niagara Falls

C on ve rs io n o f e xi st in g f ac il it ie sto new pas se ng er s tat io n.

S TA TE F UN DI NG$ 5 .4 00 .0 00

33.000

240.000

2,231,000

2.253.000

1,058,000

330,001)

TO TA L C OS T$12,680,000

158,000

890,000

4,010,000

2,253,000

1,058,000

34 5',000

STATUSComplete

Complete

Complete

See Note

Complete

Complete

Complete

NOTE (1): Effective 7/1/80. Amtrak assumed complete responsibility for trains between Albany and New York Cityformerly supported jointly with the State.


48/60

P~~J;.EC'F'Track & S i gn a l I m rl r ov e me n ts- Croton t.O'oughkeepsie

Track & S'i.gna.L Improvements- Poughkeevsie to Sch'dy.

R h in e cl i ff - Ba r ry t ow n T r ac kRealignmentPa rk in g Im pr ov em en ts atRhinecliffTrack/Station/Equipment' Re ha bi li ta ti on - A lb an yto Rouses Point

PROGRAM< OF U PST ATE I NT ERC ITY PA SSE NGE RP RO JE Cr B U Nn ER T~ EN: WITH 1974 BOND ISSUE FUNDS

DESC.R iI PTTNRehabilitation of 42 miles oft ra ck a nd i ns ta ll at io n- of cabsignals

R eh ab il it at io n o f 94 miles oftrack and installation of cabsignals.

R ea li gn me nt o f t wo i nt er lo ck in gs

R es ur fa ci ng an d ad di ti on of 15spaces.T ra ck i mp ro ve me nt s, r eh ab il it at io no f al l st at io ns , a nd r eh ab il it at io nof four locomotives and twelvep as se ng er c ar s.

* Includes $1 4 m il li on i n di re ct a pp ro pri at io n u nd er 1979 CapitalCo ns tr uc ti on F un d an d $1 2 m il li on f ro m MTA.

S TA TE F UN DI NG$33,000,000*

47,380,000

215,000

21 ,000

5,450,000

T OTA L C OST$33,000,000*

89,420,000

215,000

156,000

5,450,000

STATUSUn de r C onstruction

Complete

Completed

Completed

Completed


49/60

PROJECTStatic.n Reconstructiona t B uf fa loC on str uc tio n of n ews ta ti on a t C he ek to wa ga

C on str uc tio n of ne ws ta ti on a t R oc he st er

Ac qu isi ti on of R OW R em sen -L ak e P la ci d

R eh ab il it at io n o f R em se n-Lake Placid Line

PROGRAM OF UPSTATE INTERCI TY P AS SE NG ERPROJECTS UNDERTAKEN WITH 1974 BOND ISSUE FUND S(continued)

DESCRIPTION STATE FUNDING TOTAL COST STATUS$ 184,000 $ 184,000 Completed

621,000 621,000 Completed

575,000 1,950,000 Completed

4,726, 000 4,726,000 Completed

1,081,850 2,700,600 I n L it ig at

$104,798,850 $159,816,600

R ec on st ru ct io n o f -.o rm er E xc ha ng eS tr ee t S ta ti on .Construction of new station tos er ve s ub ur ba n B uf fa lo .

C on str uc tio n of ne w i nt erc it yr ai l p as se ng er s ta ti on .

Purchase of 118 mile Remsen-lakeP la ci d L in e.

R eh ab il it at io n r equ ir ed f orr ei ns ti tu ti on o f U ti ca -L ak eP la ci d s er vi ce .


50/60

PROJECTS el ec te d T ra ck I mp ro ve me nt s

S oi l S ta bl il iz at io n P ro gr am

Albany-RensselaerS ta ti on I mp ro ve me nt sR hi ne cl if f S ta ti onImp r ove mer rtsS yr ac us e S ta ti onlmprovementsH ud so n S ta ti on I mp ro ve me nt s

H SR C ap ac it yS im ul at io n S tu dy

P RO GRA M O F IN TE RC IT Y P AS SE NG ER P ROJE CT SUNDERTAKEN WITH 1979 BOND ISSUE FUNDS

DESCRIPTION STATE FUNDINGInstallation of cab s'LgneLs ,between Albany and "Buffalo& r eh ab . o f e qu ip me nt .

19,000,000

I mp ro ve men t o f s oi l f ou nd at io nc on dit io ns a t va ri ou s l oc at io nss ou th o f S ch en ec ta dy .

6,000,000

E xp an si on o f E xi st in g P ark in gLot. 275,000

Improvement of Building andR el at ed F ac il it ie s

175,000

I mp ro ve me nt o f E xi st in gBuilding and Parking LotB ui ld in g R eh ab il it at io n a ndP ar ki ng L ot E xp an si on .

500,000

Analysis of Hoffmans to~ uf fa lo C orr id or t o de te rm in ei mp ac t o n ca pa ci ty r es ult in gf ro m h ig he r p as se ng er s pee ds:

200,000

$26,l.sO~OOO

TOTAL ~OST STATUS29,000,000 Not yetspecified

6,000,000 Completed

550,000 UnderDevelopme350,000 Under

Developmesn ,000 UnderDevelopme

1,000,000 UnderDevelopme

200,000 Underway

$'37,677,00:0


51/60

CHAPTER 5RAIL SAFETY PROGRMl

The State t s Rail Safety Program has three primary areas of responsibility.Tt.rof these components entail the interface between the railroad and highWAYsystems. These are: rail-highway at-grade crossings; and, rail-highwaybridges. The other function is safety inspections.The Rail Safety Inspection program involves the inspection of track androlling stock in th~ State. In cooperation with the Federal Railroad Admin-istration, 'inspectors insure that railroad track, equipment and facilitiesmeet required physical standards and that the trains are operated in accor-dance with the established safety standards. This cooperative program, thecost of which is shared equally by the State and FRA, has been successful andhas contributed iignificantly to the increased safety of rail operations inthis State.During Calendar Year 1982, the Rail Safety Inspection Unit inspected 6776miles, (or 84% of the track miles under J) epartment jurisdiction); performed20,751 equipment ins~ections and investigated 42 major derailments includingtwo involving passenger trains.Current funding for the Rail Safety Inspection program extends through FFY1984. The continuation of federal reimbursement for this program is expectedto be challenged in future budgets, howev~r.The crossing improvement program involves the elimination of potentialhazards at grade-crossings through the installation of automatic protectivewarning devices,improvement of crossing surfaces and related actions. Thisprogram is funded with a combination of Federal (90%) and State (10%) funds.Since the program began in 1973, a total of approximately $96 million hasbeen expended or committed to improve crossings in the State. Thus far, 371projects have been completed under this program area, and 346 others arecurrently in various stages of development or implementation. The 55-rail-highway crossing, improvement projects shown on the following pages areexpected to be complete by the end of the 1983 construction season.This program, too, is at risk. The Administration has proposed combining allhighway

new york state rail preservation annual report 1983

Documents