2009 West Virginia State High-Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail Plan

Transcription

1 (Final Report) By Dr. Junwook Chi Ms. Rebecca Dingus Dr. Pamela Hamilton Nick J. Rahall, II Appalachian Transportation Institute (RTI) Marshall University Huntington, West Virginia The report has been prepared with funds provided by the West Virginia Department of Transportation. The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and accuracy of the information presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the West Virginia Department of Transportation. December 2009

2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to thank the West Virginia Department of Transportation s State Rail Authority, West Virginia Public Port Authority, and Economic Development office for supporting this report. In particular, we are grateful for the direction and assistance given by Secretary Paul A. Mattox, Mr. David Cramer, Ms. Cindy Butler, Mr. Patrick Donovan, Mr. Charles Hill, and Mr. Ray Lewis. Additionally, we would like to thank Director Robert Plymale and Dr. Richard Begley of the Nick J. Rahall, II Appalachian Transportation Institute for their guidance and support. Dr. Wael Zatar from the Marshall University College of Information Technology and Engineering provided substantial efforts on the engineering assessment. We are also grateful to a number of students for their support and acknowledge valuable editorial comments from Mr. Andrew Gooding.

3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY With West Virginia s mountainous terrain and widespread population, a coordinated multimodal network is necessary for residents to conveniently travel throughout the state and into neighboring states. Currently bus systems, airports, and highway systems accompany the passenger rail presence in the state. However, these existing modes can be significantly improved upon by expanding the state s current passenger rail offerings. As interest in passenger rail has increased nationally, states have evaluated their passenger rail services both currently and potentially. This report, which serves as an update to the 1994 West Virginia State Rail Plan, evaluates passenger rail service across the state and provides recommendations for improvement and further offerings. Statewide, Amtrak boardings and alightings suffered a drop in 2006 but have increased significantly since, demonstrating a rising demand for passenger rail (Figure 1). Figure 1 Statewide Boarding and Alighting along Amtrak Routes ,000 52,000 50,000 48,000 46,000 44,000 42,000 40,000 Statewide Boarding and Alighting FY 03 FY '04 FY '05 FY '06 FY '07 FY '08 Although ridership has been increasing along West Virginia s railroads, service offerings have room for improvement. The top three challenges to West Virginia s Intercity Passenger Rail (IPR) that have been identified include the following: limited infrastructure capacity poor service poor profitability West Virginia s passenger rail services share track with freight rail, which results in decreased capacity and increased congestion and delays. Infrastructural improvements are needed to minimize chokepoints and allow faster rail travel. Such improvements are expected to be costly, but benefits to passenger and freight rail are expected to have positive net effects. Scheduled offerings are limited to two longdistance Amtrak routes and a MARCoperated commuter line in the eastern panhandle. Schedules of these routes are not consistent or frequent enough for sufficient passenger service. Beyond frequency, passenger rail has a very high rate of delays (experiencing on-time performance of 28% and 70% for the two Amtrak routes in June, 2009). Service can be improved by increasing reliability of on-time arrivals. As such services are more dependable, scheduled offerings should be made more frequent and ridership would be expected to increase. December 2009 Page i

4 The third challenge identified was poor profitability. Revenues should be carefully managed, and costs should be controlled. Current cost levels should be identified and evaluated. Cost reductions in areas such as IT, overtime, or ticketing may be possible. By improving service, as mentioned above, ridership and thus ticket revenue will increase. Financial transparency, regular monitoring of revenues, and realistic budgets should be attainable goals. Means of additional funding should be identified, and the feasibility of applicable grants or publicprivate partnerships should be explored. As challenges are lessened for West Virginia s rail system, new opportunities will arise for passenger and freight rail alike. To recognize such advantages, this report has identified the presence of high-speed rail (HSR) in other countries and noted details that may be directly applicable to West Virginia. China s high speeds and Spain s tilt technologies along mountainous terrain are noteworthy. Japan and Germany s sources of funding through public-private partnerships may be an idea for West Virginia to implement for financing of improved passenger rail. Additionally, Italy s national accessibility is noted as a goal for the U.S. West Virginia offers unique characteristics that afford advantageous circumstances for residents, businesses, and their communities. Such incentives provide an encouraging climate for new businesses. The state had the nation s sixth highest growth rate in GDP during 2008, as the economy grew at 2.5%, compared to the national growth rate of 0.7%. Recent tax reforms have reduced business December 2009 taxes, and additional reductions will continue into 2015, minimizing corporate net income tax rates and eventually eliminating business franchise taxes. Low electricity costs are another incentive for West Virginia residents and businesses. In 2008, the state s industrial electricity cost was the second lowest in the nation, and commercial and residential electricity costs were the third lowest. 1 West Virginia s location is significant when considering intermodal transportation. A new intermodal facility will be constructed in Prichard by December 2010, and the Heartland Corridor Clearance Improvement Project is currently upgrading freight rail lines to accommodate double-stack container freight. West Virginia s Heartland Corridor provides linkages to Norfolk, Virginia, and Columbus, Ohio. As such lines are improved, capacity will increase significantly. West Virginia is located entirely within Appalachia, and over half of the state s counties are considered to be distressed or at-risk of becoming distressed. In addition to being disadvantaged, these counties have widespread populations and are somewhat isolated from the nation. Improving passenger rail throughout West Virginia will provide residents with a means of economical, safe, and environmentally conscious travel. Increased mobility in the state will improve business opportunities and transportation for the state s workforce. The state s population of year olds is decreasing, and the age group of years is expected to decline 1 West Virginia: Open for Business, Business Climate Update. WV Development Office, Page ii

5 through As the state s unemployment rate has risen, reaching 9.2% in June 2009, this population has experienced fewer incentives to remain in West Virginia. Transportation improvements through conventional passenger rail would provide people who do remain in the state easier access to more employment options throughout the state and in neighboring areas. In order to better accommodate the dispersed population s transportation needs, seven rail corridors throughout the state have been identified as having potential to provide intercity passenger rail service. The suggested passenger rail routes will directly connect 37 of the state s 55 counties. new track may be constructed and designated solely for passenger rail travel. Routes for the first option are shown in Figure 1. Second, existing track may be used. This option includes sharing passenger rail with freight rail. Using this option, significant infrastructural improvements would be necessary. The third option is to lay new track parallel to existing freight rail lines. This alternative would provide close access to existing utilities and some existing rights of way. Existing routes, which would be used for the second and third alternatives, are shown in Figure 3. Figure 3 IPR Routes Using Existing Track As shown in Figure 2, the seven proposed corridors are the Appalachian Central Corridor, Shenandoah Corridor, Carnegie Corridor, Ohio River Corridor, Heartland Corridor, Blue and Gold Corridor, and the Potomac Highlands Corridor. Figure 2 IPR Routes Using New Track The first option, laying new track along new routes, would enable track with fewer curves. As a result, higher speeds would be more feasible, but costs of construction and rightof-way acquisition are expected to be highest with this method. Costs of the second and third alternatives are expected to be less, but partnerships with freight rail companies would be necessary. This plan provides three means of constructing the proposed corridors. First, December 2009 Currently, West Virginia ranks 43 rd for overall education and 39 th in America s Page iii

6 Health Rankings. 2 No matter the chosen option, the increased connectivity provided to West Virginia residents as a result of these corridors would increase access to more healthcare and educational opportunities. Pairing the proposed corridors for intercity passenger rail transportation with the existing transportation systems such as bus systems, door-to-door transportation is a possibility. In addition to increased accessibility within the Mountain State, the proposed corridors provide significant links for residents to the rest of the nation. The Appalachian Central Corridor, Shenandoah Corridor, and Carnegie Corridors all have the potential to extend into neighboring states for regional access. West Virginia s Appalachian location is a strength, as improved regional access would actually spread into greater access by rail throughout both the Midwest and East Coast. Ohio Hub Network in Columbus, Ohio. Traveling the eastern panhandle along the Shenandoah Corridor could connect Pittsburgh s Keystone Corridor to the Northeast Corridor in Washington, DC. Such increased connectivity would provide efficient transportation to major population hubs. Passenger rail travel should be designed in such a way, with appropriate speed and efficiency, that this option would be competitive with both air and auto travel. In order for such a large transportation change to occur, more research must still be completed. Corridors and their means of creation should not be chosen without estimating ridership, revenue, environmental impacts, and the availability of utilities and rail. Additional research issues include the following: Ten corridors across the United States have been federally designated for HSR service. Although West Virginia is not directly included in any of the 10 corridors, the state can potentially play a very prominent role in linking designated corridors together. The Appalachian Corridor would provide direct travel through West Virginia, from Cincinnati, Ohio, to Richmond, Virginia, linking the Chicago Hub Network to the Southeast Corridor leading to Washington, DC. Travel through Weirton via the Carnegie Corridor has potential to link the Keystone Corridor in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, to the 2 West Virginia: Open for Business, Business Climate Update. WV Development Office, December 2009 public-private partnership potential upgrading existing infrastructure evaluation of chokepoint reduction assessment of existing facilities estimation of cost to improve infrastructure for optimal performance evaluation of new proposed corridors grade separation and track relocation identification of financing strategies for public-private rail partnerships ridership revenue modeling and demand forecasting customer satisfaction survey fiber optic cable availability and cost operations and maintenance cost estimation economic impact model neighboring connectivity Page iv

7 Table of Contents Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS... i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... ii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION... 1 New Vision for HSR in America... 1 Overview of Passenger Transportation in West Virginia... 2 Study Overview... 3 Purpose and Scope of Study... 4 CHAPTER 2: INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL IN WEST VIRGINIA... 5 General Overview... 5 Amtrak Network and Service in West Virginia... 7 Rail Passenger Traffic in West Virginia Challenges with IPR in West Virginia Limited Infrastructure Capacity Poor Service Poor Profitability Recommendations for a More Efficient IPR System Infrastructure Investment and Partnership Service Improvement CHAPTER 3: HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER RAIL Direct and Indirect Benefits of HSR Lessons from Other Countries for a Successful HSR System High-Speed Rail System National and Regional HSR Plans CHAPTER 4: NEW HSIPR NETWORK IN WEST VIRGINIA Justifications for Building HSR in West Virginia Need for an Efficient Transportation System Locations of Potential HSR Corridors Appalachian Central Corridor Shenandoah Corridor Carnegie Corridor Ohio River Corridor Heartland Corridor Blue and Gold Corridor Potomac Highlands Corridor Current Modes of Transportation in West Virginia Demand for Economic Stimulants in WV Quality of Life Gini Coefficient December 2009 Page v

8 Equality of Wealth Economical Electricity in WV Location Engineering Assessment of High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail HSR Infrastructure Track Structure Types of Rail: Maglev vs. HSR Subgrade Bridges and Grade Crossings Barriers Installation of Appropriate Utilities Electrification Signal and Communication Systems Passenger Stations and Maintenance Facility Infrastructure Capital Cost Capital Cost Estimating Procedure and Assumptions for Rail Option Capital Cost Estimating Procedure and Assumptions for the Maglev Option Additional Costs to Consider CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND NEXT STEPS Introduction Key Findings Steps for Further Research Step One: Ridership Revenue Modeling Step Two: Environmental Impact Study Step Three: Utilities and Rail Other Research Needs APPENDICES Appendix I: Inter-Passenger Rail Stations in West Virginia Appendix II: Western Migration Evacuation Map Appendix III: Amtrak Delay Tables for West Virginia Appendix IV: May 2003-July 2009 MARC Delays, Identified by Cause Appendix V: Railroad Crossing Incidents in West Virginia, Appendix VI: Average Retail Electricity Price for Transportation Sector by State Appendix VII: 2008 State Highway Traffic Fatalities BIBLIOGRAPHY December 2009 Page vi

9 List of Figures Page Figure 2-1 Amtrak Route Map... 6 Figure 2-2 Current Amtrak Routes in West Virginia and the Surrounding Areas Figure 2-3 Current Amtrak Routes and Stations in West Virginia Figure 2-4 MARC Train Service Figure 2-5 Amtrak On-Time Performance Figure 2-6 Revenue less Total Costs (Loss) Figure 3-1 Direct and Indirect Effects of HSR Investment Figure 3-2 Proposed HSR Corridors Figure 3-3 Proposed Ohio Hub Network Figure 4-1 Potential High-Speed Rail Lines and Stations in West Virginia Figure 4-2 Existing Corridor Routes and Stations in West Virginia Figure 4-3 Appalachian Central Corridor, Existing Route Figure 4-4 Shenandoah Corridor, Existing Route Figure 4-5 Carnegie Corridor, Existing Route Figure 4-6 Ohio River Corridor, Existing Route Figure 4-7 Heartland Corridor, Existing Routes Figure 4-8 Blue and Gold Corridor, Existing Routes Figure 4-9 Potomac Highlands Corridor, Existing Routes Figure 4-10 Transportation Modes Currently Available in West Virginia Figure 4-11 America 2050 Recommendations for a Trans-American Passenger Network Figure 4-12 Emerging Megaregions in the United States December 2009 Page vii

10 List of Tables Page Table 2-1 Amtrak Boarding and Alighting in WV... 7 Table 2-2 Distances between West Virginia Stations on the Cardinal Line... 9 Table 2-3 Distances between West Virginia Area Stations on the Capitol Limited Line... 9 Table 2-4 Amtrak Stations in West Virginia Table 2-5 Approved Amtrak Projects in West Virginia Table 2-6 Intercity Passenger and Commuter Rail Schedule for West Virginia Stations Table 2-7 Amtrak Delays and On-Time Performance for June Table 2-8 Amtrak Summary Metrics for the Month Ended June 30, Table 2-9 Revenue and Costs, June 2009 ($ millions) Table 3-1 International Examples of HSR Table 3-2 Distinguishing Characteristics of HSIPR Table 4-1 Location Characteristics of Potential HSIPR Stations in West Virginia Table 4-2 Length of West Virginia HSIPR Corridors Table 4-3 West Virginia Projected Population and Percentage Change Table 4-4 Educational Attainment for West Virginians and Residents of Neighboring States Table 4-5 Gini Coefficient by State Table 4-6 West Virginia County Economic Status and Distressed Areas, FY Table 4-7 Track Classifications Table 4-8 Comparison of Maglev and HSR Technologies in Critical System Characteristics Table 4-9 Template of Infrastructure Capital Cost Analysis Table 4-10 Factors Affecting Rail Capacity and Cost Table 5-1 Identification of Additional Research December 2009 Page viii

11 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION This is America. There's no reason why the future of travel should lie somewhere else beyond our borders. Building a new system of high-speed rail in America will be faster, cheaper and easier than building more freeways or adding to an already overburdened aviation system and everybody stands to benefit (Obama 2009). With high-speed rail system, we're going to be able to pull people off the road, lowering our dependence on foreign oil, lowering the bill for our gas in our gas tanks. We're going to loosen the congestion that also has great impact on productivity (Biden 2009). New Vision for HSR in America As President Obama introduces an efficient high-speed rail (HSR) and intercity passenger rail (IPR) network and initiates grant funding to assist states in such implementation, the nation faces new transportation challenges. Together, led by the federal government, this new transportation vision will be shared across the nation. Coinciding with the mission of the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT), this vision will ensure a fast, safe, efficient, accessible, and convenient transportation system that meets vital national interests and enhances the quality of life of the American people (USDOT 2009). This HSR initiative transforms the U.S. transportation system. According to the 2009 High- Speed Rail Strategic Plan, new express high-speed corridor services will progress in corridors of miles on primarily dedicated track. Regional and emerging high-speed corridors of miles on shared and dedicated track will expand, and conventional intercity rail infrastructure will be made more dependable (USHSR 2009). Such an endeavor calls for states to collaborate with continuing dedication to improve rail transportation offerings. Efficient use and conservation of resources is a primary goal of the USDOT, and HSR furthers this mission. The presence of HSR as a means of transportation will reduce highway congestion. Accordingly, the U.S. will experience a significant reduction in gas emissions and air pollution. With the efficient use of electric power and renewable energy resources, dependence on foreign oil will be decreased. HSR can use clean electricity created by wind, solar, geothermal, and tidal resources (USHSR 2009). The availability of HSR corridors connecting across the U.S. will further open opportunities for national trade and travel. The current U.S. IPR network includes hubs at many large and popular cities, providing great opportunity for national accessibility. As HSR becomes a commonly preferred method of travel, additional corridors can be created to extend travel opportunities. In addition, efficient HSR benefits economic expansion. The manufacturing and maintenance of December 2009 Page 1

12 improved rail systems will create new jobs. Highly-skilled construction jobs will be generated, and railroad expertise will be attained by a new age of workers as rail becomes a widespread mode of passenger transportation nationwide. As many current railroad employees are approaching retirement, opportunities abound for young workers to learn skills of the trade. The existence of HSR promotes the general welfare of the U.S. and its residents. Rail travel times will be established in a manner competitive with those of air and auto travel, and ridership will increase due to the convenience and low stress travel of HSR. As found with HSR systems in other countries, HSR is safe with very few derailments or accidents. HSR will increase safety for travelers by reducing current highway congestion, which should correlate to a reduction in the number of automobile accidents, injuries, and fatalities. Because millions of people will trade their dependence on driving for rail transit, thousands of lives that are lost each year in auto accidents may be saved (Lytton 2008). Through implementation of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 and budgeted five-year investment, selection of funding will be based on merit and benefits of investment. Three selection phases will include grants for projects that are near completion, cooperative agreements for projects to offer HSR along entire corridors, and cooperative agreements that will initiate planning activities for corridors not yet ready for construction. For consideration of funding by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), applications will include planning and project development, stakeholder agreements, financial plans, and project/risk management plans. Transparent selection will evaluate public benefits, mitigation of risk, timeliness of achieving benefits, and whether the reporting and management approach, along with the quality of the application, are sufficient. Overview of Passenger Transportation in West Virginia As the nation expands transportation offerings, West Virginia will take on an integral role by linking essential corridors. Currently, West Virginia boasts Amtrak IPR systems and has a sincere interest and commitment to develop HSR in the Mountain State. In accordance with the USDOT s mission, the West Virginia Department of Transportation (WVDOT) serves to create and maintain a multi-modal transportation system to support safe, effective, and efficient movement of people to enhance opportunity for both people and communities through environmentally sensitive and economically sound development (WVDOT 2009). West Virginia s existing passenger rail system includes commuter rail and Amtrak services. West Virginia maintains three train stations for participation in a commuter rail service (administered by the Maryland Transit Administration) to Washington, DC. Beyond commuter rail, West Virginia has an intercity passenger rail system, housing 10 Amtrak stations across the December 2009 Page 2

13 state. The West Virginia State Rail Authority (WVSRA) owns and operates the 52.4 mile South Branch Valley Railroad and the mile West Virginia Central Railroad, which are freight railways (WVDOT 2009). The presence of a HSR system running alongside existing infrastructure in West Virginia would provide an excellent additional mode of transportation. Congestion on highways and in airports will be reduced as more people switch to rail travel. Increased efficiency in travel time will be apparent for riders taking advantage of HSR. With safety as a prime concern, West Virginia is sure to benefit as residents switch from auto to rail. West Virginia s mountainous terrain can result in challenging vertical and horizontal roadway alignments. The implementation of HSR would be expected to reduce both highway traffic volumes and the number of highway accidents. Consequently, lives will be saved, injuries will be avoided, and resulting healthcare costs will be reduced (BTS 2008). While HSR in West Virginia will provide essential rail linkages which will benefit the entire country, numerous opportunities will also be enhanced within the state. Air pollution would be expected to decrease and general welfare increase. Economic growth related with the creation of HSR will bring economic opportunity to a suffering state. During both years 2007 and 2008, West Virginia s average unemployment rate was 4.3%, while the state s unemployment rate increased to 9.2% in June 2009 (BLS 2009). West Virginia, the only state entirely situated in Appalachia, has long experienced isolation from the rest of the nation, and HSR will increase connections. Jobs will be created within the state, but also accessibility will be enhanced for easier access to travel, if necessary for employment, and increased access to expanded labor markets. This HSR corridor will link an abundant labor supply to urban areas. West Virginia s proposed Appalachian Central HSR corridor will run across the southern part of the state and serve as a vital linkage for U.S. transportation by connecting the Southeast Corridor to the Chicago Hub Network. This location correlates with the designated primary evacuation routes of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, as seen in Appendix II. In case of emergency, this HSR could serve as an important method of evacuation from Washington, DC, or the east coast area. With the difficulty that arises in preparing for possible evacuations, the reliability of HSR as a means of additional transportation is valuable. Study Overview The Nick J. Rahall, II Appalachian Transportation Institute (RTI) provides this 2009 West Virginia State High-Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail Plan for the WVDOT. While this report is independent of West Virginia s request for FRA funding, the same corridors for passenger rail are identified. December 2009 Page 3

14 Purpose and Scope of Study The purpose of this report is to support the WVDOT in its investment planning and to improve understanding of the value of an efficient passenger rail system in West Virginia. The report presents an overview of the IPR system, identifies challenges of existing passenger rail services, and provides suggestions and recommendations for a more efficient IPR system. In addition, this research identifies potential HSIPR corridors in West Virginia with a discussion of their benefits. Specifically, the report highlights both direct and indirect benefits of high-speed intercity passenger rail (HSIPR) that contribute to economic recovery efforts, achieve strategic transportation goals, and advance other passenger rail objectives. Key factors for a successful HSIPR network in West Virginia are discussed by addressing efficient HSR systems in other countries. Specific objectives will include the following: overview of intercity passenger rail transportation in West Virginia description of HSR and national and regional HSR plans discussion of potential direct and indirect benefits of the HSR corridors lessons from foreign countries for a successful HSR system identification of potential HSIPR corridors in West Virginia documentation of potential construction, operation, and maintenance issues for West Virginia HSIPR corridors discussion of steps for further research for a more efficient HSIPR system in West Virginia Therefore, information provided by this research can be used to evaluate the feasibility of building a new passenger rail system and improving the existing rail network in West Virginia. Due to limited preparation time, detailed engineering assessments, economic impact study, and environmental assessments have not been included in this report. However, future research needs are identified and discussed. To accomplish the aforementioned objectives, this report contains four chapters in addition to the introduction. Chapter 2 provides an overview of IPR in West Virginia, including a discussion of challenges with existing passenger rail service and suggestions for improvement. Chapter 3 presents a description of the HSR system. In this chapter, both direct and indirect benefits of efficient HSR and lessons learned from other countries are discussed. In Chapter 4, potential HSIPR corridors in West Virginia are addressed. The chapter provides three construction options (construction on existing, parallel to existing, or on new track) in West Virginia. Finally, Chapter 5 serves as a concluding chapter, summarizing major findings from previous chapters. With this conclusion, areas of future research are identified. December 2009 Page 4

15 CHAPTER 2: INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL IN WEST VIRGINIA General Overview While passenger rail once had a prominent place in the United States, passenger rail began experiencing a decline as automobiles became popular and the U.S. highway system grew. Rather than allow passenger rail to disappear, Congress created Amtrak as a public-private entity to continue offering IPR with the assistance of government subsidies. Amtrak, also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corporation, was created in 1971 to provide passenger rail service nationwide, allowing many of the major railroads to cease passenger service themselves (Kelly 2001). Amtrak experienced difficulties at first, but ridership has consistently been on the rise over the past six years. In 2008, Amtrak had 28.7 million passengers the most since the corporation was created (Amtrak 2009). Amtrak produces $0.30 per passenger mile in revenue, which is $0.12 more than commuter rail and $0.17 more than domestic airlines (BTS 2007). Amtrak is also comparatively safer than traveling by car or intercity bus with only three deaths per million passenger miles, while cars and intercity buses average 80 deaths and five deaths per million passenger miles respectively (National Safety Council 2002). Amtrak s vision is to reintroduce the glory days of rail travel to the 21 st century. As can be seen in Figure 2-1, Amtrak offers service in 46 states, spanning all of the contiguous U.S. except Wyoming and South Dakota. Some routes also extend into Canada, serving cities such as Vancouver, Montreal, and Toronto. Amtrak operates on 21,000 miles of track owned primarily by freight rail corporations that have contracted use of their tracks to Amtrak. On an average day, 78,000 people use Amtrak s services. The Northeast Corridor connecting Washington, DC, and Boston is Amtrak s most heavily traveled line; Washington, DC, New York, and Boston stations on the Northeast Corridor make up three of the nation s six busiest Amtrak stations. Amtrak will continue to provide passenger rail service under the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, which re-authorized the corporation through This legislation, along with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, provides funding to allow Amtrak to expand and improve its current services. Amtrak intends to replace dated equipment and cars using the new funding, and additional funding will allow states to expand rail services. Through these acts, Congress approved $3 billion for operational funding, $5.3 billion for capital funding beyond debt service, and $1.3 billion for Amtrak s capital program. To assist in the development of high speed corridors, Amtrak has been given $8 billion for competitive grants. Amtrak created a report updating its goals and strategy in October The report mentions working with governors and state departments of transportation with less than 750 miles of service to develop a standardized system for allocating funding. Amtrak plans to work closely with states and share HSR experience to build a more complete HSR network (Amtrak 2009). December 2009 Page 5

16 Figure 2-1 Amtrak Route Map Source (Amtrak 2008) December 2009 Page 6

17 Amtrak Network and Service in West Virginia West Virginia s passenger rail stations are detailed in Appendix I. Of these 11 stations, Amtrak operates 10 of them along two lines through West Virginia. The Capitol Limited line (Washington-Martinsburg-Pittsburgh-Chicago) operates daily. The Cardinal line (New York- Washington-Charleston-Cincinnati-Chicago) operates tri-weekly. These routes connect the two busiest stations (New York and Washington, DC) to the fourth busiest station (Chicago) in the nation. As such, the Capitol Limited line runs 90 miles through West Virginia, and Amtrak s Cardinal line covers 206 miles of the state s soil. These lines are important because they are the only direct routes that connect Chicago and Washington, DC. Table 2-1 shows boarding and alighting activity for the past six years at West Virginia s 10 Amtrak stations. In fiscal year 2008, these stations had activity of 53,217 boardings and alightings. The Alderson station was closed from 2001 to 2004 for station renovations, causing no data to be available for the station for 2003 and Huntington, Hinton, and Charleston stations have respectively experienced the most traffic during this period. The Hinton station experienced a sharp drop in 2006, which held for one year and then returned to normal in Table 2-1 Amtrak Boarding and Alighting in WV Station FY 03 FY '04 FY '05 FY '06 FY '07 FY '08 Alderson NA NA Charleston 8,921 8,659 7,928 8,508 8,608 9,178 Harpers Ferry 2,983 3,097 2,985 3,315 3,315 3,967 Hinton 10,717 10,776 11,102 3,105 8,705 10,162 Huntington 13,209 13,854 13,575 13,067 11,080 12,610 Martinsburg 4,976 5,423 5,712 6,377 5,910 7,068 Montgomery Prince 3,257 3,538 3,431 3,035 3,247 3,495 Thurmond White Sulphur Springs 5,833 4,259 4,749 4,075 3,762 4,896 Total 50,838 50,699 50,939 42,984 46,207 53,217 Source (Amtrak ) December 2009 Page 7

18 Amtrak operates in West Virginia exclusively on track owned by CSX Transportation (CSXT). On the same track, CSXT operates freight trains which sometimes lead to delays for Amtrak trains. Tables 2-2 and 2-3 show where the West Virginia Amtrak stations are located along the Capitol Limited and Cardinal lines. The mile marker numbers show how far along the line each station is located, while the rest of the table shows distances between stations. Figure 2-2 provides a map of the route these two lines follow through West Virginia. The Cardinal line enters West Virginia at White Sulphur Springs and goes through the southern part of the state, connecting the state s two most populated cities Charleston and Huntington. The Cardinal line exits West Virginia 10 miles past Huntington on its way to Ashland, Kentucky. The Capitol Limited line enters West Virginia at Harpers Ferry and continues through Martinsburg, following the Maryland border for 71 miles before heading to Cumberland, Maryland. December 2009 Page 8

19 Table 2-2 Distances between West Virginia Stations on the Cardinal Line White Sulphur Springs Alderson Hinton Prince Thurmond Montgomery Charleston Huntington Mile Marker White Sulphur Springs Alderson Hinton Prince Thurmond Montgomery Charleston Huntington Source (Amtrak 2009) Table 2-3 Distances between West Virginia Area Stations on the Capitol Limited Line Rockville, MD Harpers Ferry, WV Martinsburg, WV Cumberland, MD Mile Marker Rockville, MD Harpers Ferry, WV Martinsburg, WV Cumberland, MD Source (Amtrak 2009) December 2009 Page 9

20 Rail Passenger Traffic in West Virginia The two passenger rail lines operating in West Virginia are primarily long-distance lines. The schedules do not easily allow for commuting, even between Huntington and Charleston. Due to the every other day nature of the schedule, the timing of the lines limits the commuting potential of these lines for West Virginians. The Capitol Limited line operates every day of the week with one train eastbound from Chicago and another westbound from Washington, DC. The Cardinal Limited line, which features eight of West Virginia s 10 Amtrak stations, only departs New York and Chicago on Sundays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. Table 2-4 lists the projected schedule times for train arrivals in the West Virginia stations as well as average use per line during the years 2003 through The projected time schedule available on Amtrak s website shows Huntington as the approximate halfway point, in terms of time, for a trip between Washington, DC, and Chicago. By mileage, the halfway point is between the Montgomery and Thurmond stations in West Virginia. The entire trip is 1,147 miles and takes an estimated 28 hours. Ticket offices are located at three stations in West Virginia Huntington, Charleston, and Prince (Amtrak 2009). Table 2-4 Amtrak Stations in West Virginia Station Name Average Annual Boarding & Alighting Amtrak Line Westward Times Eastward Times Harpers Ferry 3,277 Capitol Limited 5:16 p.m. 11:30 a.m. Martinsburg 5,911 Capitol Limited 5:45 p.m. 11:05 a.m. White Sulphur Springs 4,596 Cardinal 5:00 p.m. 11:25 a.m. Alderson 502 Cardinal 5:31 p.m. 10:53 a.m. Hinton 9,095 Cardinal 6:01 p.m. 10:23 a.m. Prince 3,334 Cardinal 6:31 p.m. 9:53 a.m. Thurmond 290 Cardinal 6:47 p.m. 9:36 a.m. Montgomery 779 Cardinal 7:38 p.m. 8:45 a.m. Charleston 8,634 Cardinal 8:10 p.m. 8:16 a.m. Huntington 12,899 Cardinal 9:35 p.m. 7:09 a.m. Source (Amtrak 2009) Figure 2-2 shows the map of national Amtrak lines, focusing on West Virginia and neighboring areas. This map illustrates the route that the Cardinal and Capitol Limited lines follow through the state and demonstrates the importance that West Virginia plays in linking the Midwest and East Coast areas. December 2009 Page 10

21 Figure 2-2 Current Amtrak Routes in West Virginia and the Surrounding Areas Source (Amtrak 2007) In 2008, Amtrak employed 41 West Virginia residents with total wages nearing $2.8 million (Amtrak 2009). Amtrak employees average annual salary was $68,000, which was $18,000 over the median household income for the U.S. Such a salary was also $31,000 over the 2007 median state household income, making Amtrak a valuable employer in West Virginia (Map Stats 2009). The eight Amtrak stations in the state have limited mobility access. Mobility access, which creates the ability for riders who require the use of wheelchairs to use train service, is available to platforms and trains at two stations (Martinsburg and Prince) and to platforms, trains, and station services with complete barrier-free access at the Charleston station. Additionally, these stations do not represent high levels of ADA compliance scores, as ranked by Amtrak. Four of West Virginia s stations meet minimal compliance standards (0-20%), and the other four meet partial compliance standards (21-79%). Full compliace, and complete accessibility to individuals December 2009 Page 11

22 with disabilities, is required by the ADA by July 26, The total cost of improvements for the eight West Virginia stations to meet ADA compliance and be in a state of good repair is estimated at $9.5 million (Amtrak 2009). In a recent report, Amtrak stated that it cannot reach 100% compliance for all its stations by the current deadline of July 26, As of October 1, 2008, 48 of the 481 stations for which Amtrak is responsible with making ADA compliant met the full requirements. Inconsistent and limited funding is cited as a major barrier to the necessary improvements. Amtrak does not exclusively own or operate many of its stations, which creates another barrier of shared responsibility for renovations. In response to these difficulties, Amtrak created the Accessible Stations Development Plan to coordinate projects designed to enhance handicap accessibility. The report states that practicable compliance could be achieved by September 30, 2015 at a cost of $1.38 billion. Amtrak is currently pursuing several short-term projects to improve its current accessibility level (Amtrak 2009). One major project called Mobility First involves the renovation of Amtrak stations to increase this handicap accessibility. An amount of nearly one million dollars has been approved for 2009 to make station improvements and renovations projects in West Virginia. Table 2-5 provides a brief description of these projects as well as their locations and cost estimates. As a result of this program, three stations in West Virginia are receiving wheelchair lifts, and the Harpers Ferry station is receiving significant additional renovations (Amtrak 2009). Table 2-5 Approved Amtrak Projects in West Virginia Cost Project Description Estimate Mobility First: Design for improved access from historic station platform to $615,000 outbound platform including ADA compliant access from tunnel, repairs to platform and new tactile edge, improved lighting on access path, and new signage in Harpers Ferry Mobility First: New wheelchair lift and enclosure in Montgomery $30,000 Mobility First: New wheelchair lift in Hinton $14,000 Mobility First: New wheelchair lift in White Sulphur Springs $14,000 Station Upgrades: Hinton Station to receive a new Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant tactile edge on existing concrete platforms Station Upgrades: White Sulphur Springs Station to receive a new ADA compliant tactile edge on existing concrete platforms $125,000 $100,000 Static Station Signage Program: Platform kiosk at six West Virginia stations $66,000 Total $964,000 Source (Amtrak 2009) December 2009 Page 12

23 Challenges with IPR in West Virginia West Virginia s passenger rail has been in service since 1873 (WVA-USA 1999). Since then, passenger rail options have changed, stations have been altered, and the prevalence of freight rail has grown. While adjustments and upgrades have been made, West Virginia s rail system still acknowledges several challenges today that hinder potential growth. The three largest hindrances confronting IPR in the Mountain State are limited infrastructure capacity, poor service, and low profitability. Limited Infrastructure Capacity West Virginia has a total of 2,659 miles of rail, and approximately 296 miles are used for IPR (NTAD 2008, WVDOT 2009). Much of the additional rail is used for freight, but not all is in use. Thus, existing passenger routes are limited by the accessible passenger rail in West Virginia. All rail used for IPR in the state is owned by CSXT and operated by Amtrak. Amtrak s Capitol Limited line also runs between Washington, DC, and Chicago daily, passing through the northern Harpers Ferry and Martinsburg stations. Amtrak services the state s eight other stations with its Cardinal line ultimately linking Chicago, Baltimore, and New York three times each week. The Cardinal line connects Ashland, Kentucky, to Charlottesville, Virginia, by passing through West Virginia s southern corridor via stations in Huntington, Charleston, Montgomery, Thurmond, Prince, Hinton, Alderson, and White Sulphur Springs. This route is shown in Figure 2-3 (Amtrak 2009). December 2009 Page 13

24 Figure 2-3 Current Amtrak Routes and Stations in West Virginia Source (NTAD 2009) In addition, the Maryland Transit Administration operates Maryland Area Regional Commuter (MARC) trains through the northeast Amtrak stations in Martinsburg and Harpers Ferry and a MARC station in Duffields. 3 While Amtrak operates West Virginia s IPR network across the southern corridor and through the northern panhandle, MARC provides access to West Virginia s two northern stations via its Brunswick line. The Brunswick Line ultimately connects West Virginia to Washington, DC, on weekdays (MARC 2009). Although designed as a commuter route, this line is also used by leisure travelers. Figure 2-4 displays the path traveled by the MARC trains. Sharing the rail with MARC trains restricts effective passenger and freight service, yet the MARC train s ridership in West Virginia demonstrates demand for such services. A HSIPR corridor connecting Martinsburg to Washington, DC, could serve as a hub to the connectors that run through Washington, DC. 3 This report focuses on High-Speed Rail (HSR) and Intercity Passenger Rail (IPR), which exclude commuter rail according to the FRA definition. However, due to the rail share, MARC service in West Virginia is briefly discussed in this report. December 2009 Page 14

25 Figure 2-4 MARC Train Service Source (Perryville, MD 2009) Beyond the limitations of available equipment, West Virginia s rails have the challenges of mixed rail use. Amtrak lines through the state run on CSXT rail. By sharing a track owned by a freight railroad, passenger rail is frequently slowed down. These tracks have become congested for both passenger and freight trains, and passenger trains often have to yield to freight trains ahead of them. Additionally, the signals on West Virginia s rail are not spaced adequately. On average, signals in West Virginia are approximately three miles apart, which is suitable for freight traffic but tends to slow passenger traffic. 4 Poor Service IPR is suffering due to the poor service offered. Rail offerings are inadequate because of the necessity to share tracks with freight trains and because of infrequent service and frequent delays. It is difficult to travel between towns or take day trips because of the schedule. Table 2-6 displays the IPR schedule for the state s stations. The restricted availability of passenger rail is apparent. Stations along the southern corridor have only one stop every day except Thursday, when there are two. With additional route offerings and an improved schedule, needs of more riders would be satisfied and revenue would increase. 4 Personal Reference with West Virginia State Rail Authority, July 22, December 2009 Page 15

26 Table 2-6 Intercity Passenger and Commuter Rail Schedule for West Virginia Stations Amtrak Cardinal Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday NYC to CHI CHI to NYC NYC to CHI CHI to NYC NYC to CHI NYC to CHI CHI to NYC NYC to CHI Huntington 9:35 a.m. 7:09 a.m. 9:35 a.m. 7:09 a.m. 9:35 p.m. 9:35 p.m. 7:09 a.m. 9:35 p.m. Charleston 8:10 a.m. 8:16 a.m. 8:10 a.m. 8:16 a.m. 8:10 p.m. 8:10 p.m. 8:16 a.m. 8:10 p.m. Montgomery 7:38 a.m. 8:45 a.m. 7:38 a.m. 8:45 a.m. 7:38 p.m. 7:38 p.m. 8:45 a.m. 7:38 p.m. Thurmond 6:47 a.m. 9:36 a.m. 6:47 a.m. 9:36 a.m. 6:47 p.m. 6:47 p.m. 9:36 a.m. 6:47 p.m. Prince 6:31 a.m. 9:53 a.m. 6:31 a.m. 9:53 a.m. 6:31 p.m. 6:31 p.m. 9:53 a.m. 6:31 p.m. Hinton 6:01 a.m. 10:23 a.m. 6:01 a.m. 10:23 a.m. 6:01 p.m. 6:01 p.m. 10:23 a.m. 6:01 p.m. Alderson 5:31 a.m. 10:53 a.m. 5:31 a.m. 10:53 a.m. 5:31 p.m. 5:31 p.m. 10:53 a.m. 5:31 p.m. White Sulphur Springs 5:00 a.m. 11:25 a.m. 5:00 a.m. 11:25 a.m. 5:00 p.m. 5:00 p.m. 11:25 a.m. 5:00 p.m. Amtrak Capitol Limited MARC Monday through Sunday Monday through Friday Pitt to DC DC to Pitt East East West West West Martinsburg 11:05 a.m. 5:45 p.m. Martinsburg 5:25 a.m. 6:30 a.m. 6:50 p.m. 7:41 p.m. 9:14 p.m. Harpers Ferry 11:30 a.m. 5:16 p.m. Duffields 5:41 a.m. 6:46 a.m. 6:29 p.m. 7:22 p.m. 8:55 p.m. Harpers Ferry 5:51 a.m. 6:56 a.m. 6:16 p.m. 7:09 p.m. 8:42 p.m. Source (Amtrak 2009; MARC 2009) December 2009 Page 16

27 Passengers traveling by rail in West Virginia must plan more carefully than they would if traveling by automobile. Geographically, rail access throughout the state is available. However, travelers must arrange their schedules around the limited schedule of departures and arrivals, and they also must accommodate for delays. Delays are a common occurrence for IPR riders, as trains may sometimes arrive as late as three hours. Even if a train arrives to the station on time, it may be late departing, as evidenced in the Amtrak Delay Tables in Appendix III. While a delay when traveling by rail is common, the root cause of delay can vary widely. One major reason for delays during summer months is CSXT s enforcement of heat restrictions. These heat orders require passenger trains traveling on CSXT track, which have a speed limit of 70 miles per hour (mph), to reduce their speed by 20 mph but not go under 40 mph. This precaution increases safety in hot weather due to welded rail s tendency to kink under pressure from heat expansion (VRE 2009). The top three reasons for delays caused by Amtrak in June 2009 were passenger holds, engine failures, and crew-related delays. The top three reasons for delays caused by host railroads were slow orders, communications and signal work due to defect, and passenger train interference (Amtrak 2009). The host railroads are responsible for keeping all trains moving at maximum efficiency through the rail network. Disagreement over dispatching practices and Amtrak s preference rights (49 C.F.R (c) (1973)) makes measuring violations difficult. Track maintenance practices can delay Amtrak trains, at times unavoidably. Hosts give priority to fixing the mainline tracks that handle the majority of train traffic. If a train is late departing due to a mechanical issue, the train will lose its scheduled spot and is likely to be stuck behind a freight train that will make it even later. Delays are tracked differently along different routes, but Amtrak considers these long-distance trains on time if they are within 30 minutes of their scheduled arrival times (Railway Age 2009). The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA) tasks Amtrak, the USDOT, the FRA, states, and other stakeholders to improve service, operations, and facilities. The On-Time Performance provision (OTP) of PRIIA requires the DOT and the Surface Transportation Board (STB) to investigate Amtrak delays and determine if they are the fault of the host railroad. If so, the host rail carrier may be ordered to pay Amtrak monetary damages. Addressing the root causes of Amtrak train delays will improve Amtrak s OTP and financial viability. Table 2-7 shows the amount of delay experienced by Amtrak in June 2009 on the Cardinal line, the Capitol Limited line, and nationally. Such large and unpredictable delays demonstrate how difficult it is for riders to confidently depend on Amtrak for timely travel. As they are shared with freight routes, the two Amtrak lines running through West Virginia experience delays that are significantly greater than the national total s percentage of delays. December 2009 Page 17

28 On-Time Performance % West Virginia Department of Transportation Table 2-7 Amtrak Delays and On-Time Performance for June 2009 Delays On-Time Minutes Hours Days Weeks % % Cardinal 5, % 28.0% Capitol Ltd. 8, % 70.0% National Total 396,591 6, % 80.7% Source (Amtrak 2009) 1 1 The most recent Amtrak report (July 2009) shows that on-time performance for Cardinal and Capitol limited is 40.7% and 75.8%, respectively (accessed on October 10, 2009). Figure 2-5 shows the percentage of on-time service provided by Amtrak from April 2008 to June The on-time performance percentage for the national Amtrak total appears to have increased slightly over the 15 months illustrated. The Capitol Limited line follows this trend in overall improved on-time performance as well. The Cardinal line shows some improvement in on-time performance, but it drops in June 2009, as it did in June Both the Capitol Limited and Cardinal lines show decreased ontime performance in the summer months, most likely due to the heat restrictions discussed previously. Low levels of on-time performance, especially on the Cardinal line, have made rail travel an unreliable means of transportation for travelers. Figure 2-5 Amtrak On-Time Performance 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Cardinal Capitol Ltd. National Total Source (Amtrak 2009) December 2009 Page 18

29 Although MARC is a commuter line, it is still confronted with delays caused by sharing the rail with freight trains. For the purpose of indicating the great delays caused by joint use track, a table has been created in Appendix IV that details passenger rail delays in West Virginia along the MARC-operated Brunswick railways from 2003 to The delays are grouped by cause, categorized as weather, signals, other trains, or other as reasons for such delays. Many comments include the time significance of each delay as well. To summarize the table, 33% of delays were due to extreme weather, 13% were due to signal problems, 23% were caused by other trains, and 38% encountered other difficulties. These percentages do not add up to 100% because several delays had multiple causes. Rail passengers bear the burden for the delays faced by MARC commuter trains and Amtrak IPR. Infrequent service restricts options for departure and arrival times. In order for IPR to grow in West Virginia, service must improve accessibility for riders that will increase positive customer experiences. Poor Profitability West Virginia s current IPR service is not profitable; revenue does not cover expenses due to low ridership, and limited funds exist for marketing and for maintenance of rail mileage and stations in West Virginia. Since IPR is provided by Amtrak and runs on track owned by freight rail companies, minimal payments are made to freight companies to share tracks. A poor level of service to customers results in fewer customers and, therefore, lowers ticket sales and revenues. Many expenses are incurred with IPR, and acquired revenues are not sufficient to break even. Amtrak has consistently been losing money across the nation. For the year ended June 30, 2009, ridership and ticket revenue were below budget. Amtrak credited this to the economic recession, high unemployment, and decreasing consumer gas prices. Areas where Amtrak performed better than budgeted included commissions from credit card and travel agent volume. Additionally, favorable savings resulted from the budgeted amount for fuel, power, and utilities because of diesel fuel costs per gallon being lower than expected (Amtrak 2009). Table 2-8 Amtrak Summary Metrics for the Month Ended June 30, 2009 Actual Budget/Goal Prior Year National Ridership 2,348,000 2,746,000 2,560,000 Average Load Factor 53.8% 63.5% 59.8% Source (Amtrak 2009) Ridership was lower in 2009 than in 2008, along with lower ticket revenue, as indicated in Table 2-8. Increasing costs would point toward higher ticket prices, but average ticket prices were actually lower. A likely explanation exists for such changes. Due to the current economic recession and high unemployment, fewer people are traveling far from their home. Less travel results in fewer sales of more expensive long-distance tickets and, thus, a lower average ticket price (Amtrak 2009). As ridership data December 2009 Page 19

30 specific to West Virginia is not available, the national load factor is used to evaluate rail capacity. With load factors (passenger miles / seat miles) barely over 50%, IPR is not close to full capacity. Further examination shows that the current levels of ridership and revenue do not create profits. For minimal additional cost, higher ridership could be accommodated, which would directly reduce losses. Revenues and costs for June 2009 are shown in Table 2-9 for the Cardinal line, Capitol Limited line, and total long-distance Amtrak trains. FRA defined cost 5 is the largest portion of total costs. Total remaining direct cost 6 is the second largest component of total costs. Total non-direct costs include Amtrak infrastructure maintenance and system costs. These three components of costs totaled are greater than revenue for both lines and long-distance trains as a whole in June 2009, resulting in losses for Amtrak (Amtrak 2009). Table 2-9 Revenue and Costs, June 2009 ($ millions) Cardinal Capitol Ltd. Total Longdistance Trains Revenue $4.9 $13.6 $318.9 Costs FRA Defined Costs $10.0 $17.7 $429.8 Total Remaining Direct Costs $5.3 $9.9 $198.9 Total Direct Costs $15.3 $27.6 $628.7 Total Non-Direct Costs $3.6 $5.4 $128.4 Total Costs (Excl. Dep. & Int.) $18.9 $33.0 $757.1 Revenue Less Total Costs (Loss) ($14.0) ($19.4) ($438.2) Source (Amtrak 2009) Amtrak has consistently suffered comprehensive losses. In 2008, Amtrak lost the least it had since The tragic effects of September 11, 2001, reduced business and leisurely travel. Additionally, the country has suffered an economic recession, causing losses across various industries. As oil prices for the U.S. increased, so did fuel charges, causing an increase in ridership and also an increase in fuel expense for Amtrak. Governmental subsidies for passenger rail are needed due to Amtrak s lack of profitability, as the benefits Amtrak provides for society and the environment are significant. Amtrak s ridership in fiscal year 2008 marked the sixth consecutive year of increasing ridership. With 28,716,407 riders, a record was set for the most passengers on Amtrak trains since operations started in 1971 (Barbaccia 2008). 5 The FRA defined costs include host railroad maintenance of way and performance incentives, fuel and power, transportation and exportation (T&E) crew, on-board service and commissary costs, car and locomotive maintenance and turnaround costs, commissions, reservations, call centers, passenger inconvenience, and route stations. 6 Direct costs are composed of shared stations, measures of effectiveness, supervision and training, maintenance of way, yard operations, marketing and distribution, insurance, terminal payments, procurement/purchasing, police/environmental and safety, and T&E overhead is the second largest component of total costs. December 2009 Page 20

31 Revenue less Total Costs (Loss) ($ millions) West Virginia Department of Transportation Figure 2-6 shows Amtrak s revenue less total cost for each month April 2008 through June Average long-distance train loss is calculated comparing the national average to the Cardinal and Capitol Limited lines. Total costs are consistently greater than revenue, resulting in a loss for the Cardinal line, Capitol Limited line, and average of long-distance trains for the 15 months graphed. The Cardinal and Capitol Limited lines, as well as the average of long-distance trains, had the largest losses in August and September. All three trains show the same downward trend in early 2009 as was present in early 2008; whether the sharp loss decreases experienced in October 2008 will be repeated in 2009 remains to be seen. The Cardinal and Capitol Limited lines show smaller losses than the average longdistance train throughout the 15 month period shown, with the Cardinal line experiencing the smallest losses. Passenger and commuter rail running through West Virginia is operated by Amtrak and MARC trains, respectively, along privately owned freight rail. Fares alone are not sufficient for passenger rail to produce profit nationally. This challenge is not unique to West Virginia, as it is also experienced nationally. Governmental assistance is needed to ease the feasibility of offering services. Passenger rail providers pay to use freight rail, but they do not pay a large sum. In fact, payment for one Amtrak train is equal to only 1% of the revenue that would be received by a freight train traveling along the same route (North Carolina Railroad Company 2009). Figure 2-6 Revenue less Total Costs (Loss) Cardinal $0.0 ($5.0) ($10.0) ($15.0) ($20.0) ($25.0) ($30.0) ($35.0) Capitol Ltd. Average Long Distance Train Source (Amtrak 2009) Recommendations for a More Efficient IPR System West Virginia shows potential for a top quality IPR system. The existing rail system is expansive but needs to be upgraded. Focus by the West Virginia Rail Authority to work with multiple rail groups to December 2009 Page 21

32 improve the infrastructure can make the state a leader in both freight rail and IPR. The unique location of West Virginia, rooted in the heart of Appalachia and linking large cities such as Chicago and Washington, DC, provides unlimited potential for ridership. By focusing on improving infrastructure, service, and profitability, these big ideas can become reality. Several suggestions for basic initiatives to achieve such measures are detailed in the upcoming sections. Infrastructure Investment and Partnership A strong partnership should be encouraged and formed between passenger and freight rail companies. Such collaboration will lead to better communication and a more harmonious environment of sharing the tracks. Necessary track maintenance must be reduced. If possible, upkeep should be regularly scheduled around train schedules so that the need for unplanned maintenance will be less frequent. As capacity is constrained, adequate compensation should be supplied. The rail available for passenger rail use could be improved, and passenger rail availability could be increased. Since inactive rail exists in parts of the state, it may be more cost efficient to restore old rail than to rebuild from scratch; this may be determined by an in-depth feasibility study. Developed rail that is currently being used solely for freight, including state-owned track, could jointly be used for passenger rail, greatly increasing intercity accessibility to small towns across the state. If rail previously designated as freight rail is made accessible to passenger trains, upgrades will be necessary. Appendix V contains a report of railroad crossing incidents in West Virginia from 2005 to Most incidents occurred at true at-grade rail crossings, striking trespassers or automobiles. For additional track to be used, safety must be improved as much as possible. Numerous chokepoints have been identified along West Virginia s rail, which directly increase the frequency of delays. Many of these chokepoints could be lessened with the installation of additional sidings. Sidings can serve multiple purposes of either holding maintenance equipment or of providing adequate space and track for trains to pass on single rail track. In the cases of joint use tracks, such implementation of team tracks would result in better performance. While options exist to either create new track accessible to HSR or to upgrade existing track for use as conventional rail with travel up to 79 mph, benefits of both do exist. If new track is created, trains could possibly travel up to 90 or 110 mph. However, upgrades for passenger trains to travel along freight rail at 79 mph are expected to be less costly and only take slightly more time than HSR. For example, the 93-mile stretch between Richmond and Norfolk in Virginia was estimated to cost $262 million to upgrade the existing Norfolk Southern Corporation corridor to HSR of mph. However, further research found that it would cost only $75 million to run 79 mph passenger rail along the same stretch. Over these 93 miles, the 79 mph train would only take about 11 minutes more than the mph train at an estimated cost savings of $187 million. Conventional rail should be investigated to determine if similar cost savings would be as effective in West Virginia. Investigation of the vast difference in estimates finds differing infrastructure requirements, per different speed capabilities, and December 2009 Page 22

33 that the larger estimate included costs for new stations. Full cost data has been submitted to the FRA and is estimated to be publicly available in late 2009 (Messina 2009). Additionally, time estimates will tell if 79 mph track, rather than 90 or 110 mph track, will still create service competitive with individuals driving passenger cars. Upgrading infrastructure for efficient use of conventional rail running at speeds of 79 mph on rail shared with freight trains will require use of a tilt system in passenger trains for efficient operation. For trains along the Acela Express, Bombardier s LRC (Light, Rapid, Comfortable) technology has recently been successful. The technology of this tilt system becomes active at speeds over 60 mph and compensates up to 75% of the lateral force experienced by passengers when traveling through curves. An under floor hydraulic power unit actuates the tilting, and each car tilts independently of the other cars (TrainWeb 2001). Currently, Missouri is targeting capacity in order to improve on-time performance of Amtrak trains through the implementation of sidings. Research at the University of Missouri ranked bottlenecks along a particular line, and siding is currently being constructed at the most congested area. This new siding, which should be in place by December 2009, is expected to reduce Amtrak delays in Missouri by nearly 17% (UNP 2009). West Virginia would likely experience comparable results with similar studies and implementation. Such upgrades to existing infrastructure would significantly improve passenger rail experiences. Additional support for such an implementation would also realize an increased use of freight rail through West Virginia, if rail access was dependable. Rail running through Harpers Ferry, West Virginia, is an alternate route to the Long Bridge rail crossing in the Washington, DC, area. The Long Bridge over the Potomac River is a major chokepoint for the East Coast rail system and, although Harpers Ferry is 70 miles out of the way, it is probable that freight customers would alter routes to avoid congestion at the Long Bridge (NCPC 2004). Service Improvement Amtrak strives to improve the quality of service received by all customers. In 1997, Amtrak established a Customer Advisory Committee that monitors customer views and complaints and shares them with management. In 2003, Amtrak created Julie, the voice of Amtrak, to aid customers in selecting tickets over the phone and paying for them with credit cards (BusinessWire 2003). For customer comfort and better accessibility, Amtrak has started the Great American Stations Project, which helps to rebuild and revitalize failing train stations. During the summer of 2008, customer satisfaction surveys were provided to California riders, and Amtrak has directed new goals accordingly. Compared to 2007 results, customers had decreasing satisfaction in awareness of delays and overall onboard experience. Satisfaction was increased for onboard cleanliness ratings and the availability of printed materials. To improve future customer satisfaction, Amtrak has provided Caltrain with a system to contact conductors onboard trains. Additionally, more cars will be put into service (JPB Citizens Advisory Committee December 2009 Page 23

34 2008). Satisfaction for passenger rail services outside of California would likewise benefit from similar initiatives. While some stations in West Virginia have recently experienced improvements, it is important for the state to ensure that all stations are easily accessible, safe, clean, and user-friendly. Adequate space and parking must be available, with enough overflow to handle delayed trains. While improvements have occurred and progress is visible, future development and improvements to West Virginia rail must not be neglected. Progress must be maintained, as intercity rail may serve as intermediary means of transportation for users of the proposed Appalachian Central HSR Corridor. Efforts to advance HSR in West Virginia will continuously improve current conditions. Passenger rail in West Virginia and across the country has many delays. Yet, perhaps huge infrastructure changes are not the only way to create better results. Amtrak s President and CEO, Joseph Boardman, points out that one way to go fast is to not go slow. With extreme weather and other unforeseen conditions, some trains have to slow down to 10 or 20 mph, which drastically delays the entire route. By finding ways to make small changes with significant results, Amtrak can begin to address larger issues (Bacque 2009). Delays in Amtrak service have been lessening. While Amtrak defines late as arriving over 30 minutes behind schedule, this figure must be improved. Such inconsistency of travel is not acceptable for efficient travel, and this is being addressed across West Virginia. In the last year, Amtrak s Cardinal ontime service has risen nearly 19% and that of the Capitol Limited has almost doubled. The cause for delays is incongruent. Delays in rail transport are measured differently by unrelated organizations, such as CSXT and Amtrak (US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 2009). To harmonize such inconsistencies, a clear and distinct definition of late must be defined and accepted across all rail organizations operating in West Virginia. Such an effort could be implemented and regulated by the WV Rail Authority. Furthermore, data should be recorded at all stations for each arrival and departure. Precise times should be available for the entrance and exit of every train from each station and, if the train is late, the reason for delay must be adequately noted. An organization perhaps the WV Rail Authority should compile all stations logs into a main database, report such numbers, and form a council focused on improvement of such figures. As travel by rail becomes more dependable and user-friendly, ridership will increase. Another way to increase ridership and service is to provide more frequent scheduled services. The current passenger rail offerings in West Virginia are very limited. IPR will attract mainly students, senior citizens, incidental travelers, and occasional tourists. For ultimate utilization, more trains must be available at peak times. The reliability of arriving to a traveler s destination and being able to depend on the train to return home in a timely manner is essential. With stations spread across West Virginia, multiple daily routes must be accessible. Further service improvement must address safety needs for employees and passengers. As West Virginia targets its citizens, including many senior citizens, as prospective riders, safety must be considered first. December 2009 Page 24

35 Of the 10 Amtrak stations in West Virginia, only two (Charleston and Huntington) are currently handicapped accessible. Renovations are being made for new wheelchair lifts at the Hinton, Montgomery, and White Sulphur Springs stations (Amtrak 2009). To ensure compliance with the Americans with Disability Act of 1990 (ADA), such a mobility first initiative is important to improve as much as possible in order to meet the current ADA deadline (USDOT 2009). Profit Enhancement It is apparent that IPR is not generating profit either in West Virginia or for Amtrak across the nation. Successful implementation of several initiatives will decrease losses and eventually create profit. At a minimum, Amtrak must work to increase ridership. In order to do this, routes must be made accessible to IPR, and schedules must be user-friendly. Customer satisfaction needs to be increased for riders to become repeat customers. Strengthening partnerships with freight rail companies to reduce delays will increase customer satisfaction. Increasing ridership will boost ticket sales and thus raise revenue. As revenue is increased and managed, it will be important to control costs while maintaining high levels of efficiency and productivity. Ticketing costs, IT costs, and overtime can all be reduced from their current levels. As the financial portrait of Amtrak and IPR is evaluated, it is important to maintain financial transparency. Returns received from IPR should be monitored regularly, and budgets should be realistic. The option of implementing HSR across West Virginia will improve connectivity for West Virginians. Travel will be available across the state with IPR, but HSR could provide a whole new experience for travelers and business people alike. The existence of the proposed Appalachian Central HSR Corridor will link West Virginians to locations from Chicago to Washington, DC. Coexistence of IPR and HSR would provide ultimate accessibility to the Mountain State. The profit enhancing initiatives mentioned previously will require significant funding. Such funding will enhance riders experiences, including the safety and aesthetic appearance of stations, along with the installation of regulatory programs to monitor and improve IPR throughout the state. Federal funding of Amtrak has been sporadic since its conception in 1971 through Beginning in 2003, federal expenditures to Amtrak have remained over $1 billion per year and are still increasing. Amtrak s Five Year Financial Plan, , shows that Congress has approved $3 billion of operational funding and $5.3 billion for capital funding beyond debt service through the end of fiscal year 2013 (FRA 2009). In addition to this funding through the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA), the Capital Assistance to States IPR Service Program was approved for 2008 through The program is designed to create a partnership between the federal and state governments to improve IPR investment. Thirty million dollars were spent through this program in 2008 and an additional $100 million have been approved for fiscal year Funding for HSIPR, however, has historically been inconsistent. Despite the proposed HSR plan of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, there are December 2009 Page 25

36 no long-term dedicated federal or state funding sources to support continued operation and maintenance of new HSR systems (Amtrak 2009). Several options for this funding exist. Station renovations and improvements can be made for most of the state s stations by using the Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives Program for a 20% tax credit for rehabilitating historic buildings. Union Station, a historic train station in Washington, DC, was recently rehabilitated for use as an attractive retail center and intermodal transportation facility (USNPS 2009). With West Virginia s intermodal capabilities, a restoration similar to that of Union Station could be established in conjunction with passenger rail. A near halfway point between Chicago and Washington, DC, on IPR is Huntington, a major rail hub served by Amtrak, CSXT, and Norfolk Southern Corporation (NS) freight rail. Huntington is located on the Ohio River and has the largest inland port in the nation. Additionally, the Huntington Tri-State Airport (HTS), which houses a regional hub of FedEx, and the Charleston Yeager Airport (CRW) are nearby. Interstate highway access is currently available via I-64 at Huntington, and the proposed I-73 upgrade will connect Huntington to Toledo, Ohio, and Charleston, South Carolina (HADCO 2009). An intermodal facility is scheduled to be constructed by December of 2010 in Prichard, West Virginia, approximately 20 miles south of Huntington. With close proximity to the Big Sandy River and NS freight rail, such a facility will attract large numbers of freight trains, as it will allow trains more direct routes to and from Chicago. In conjunction with this intermodal facility, railway tunnels and bridges across the state are being reconstructed by NS to accommodate double stacked railcars throughout the state (Johnson 2009). With such facilities, additional funding will be available through West Virginia s Special Railroad and Intermodal Enhancement Fund. Administered by the Port Authority, this fund will be used for the construction, reconstruction, maintenance, and repair of railways, as well as the construction of railway-related structures. Each year, at least $4.3 million will be paid to this fund (Senate Bill No ). The bill does not limit itself to freight rail, so this funding would be a viable option for improvements of IPR and the creation of HSR in West Virginia. Beyond in-state funding, national competitive grants will further assist West Virginia s rail development. Intercity Passenger Rail Service Corridor Capital Assistance (Section 301) could supply funding for the cooperative group of states directly involved in West Virginia s State Rail Plan. For the southern corridor where IPR is currently serviced by Amtrak, collaboration with Kentucky, Ohio, and Virginia would be necessary. For the state s northern stations, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Maryland would be directly involved. Contact has been made with Kentucky, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia West Virginia s neighbors regarding the feasibility of such rail plans. West Virginia s prime location serves as a powerful linking opportunity for the nation, which could further develop into HSR. The Appalachian Central HSR Corridor, linking Chicago to Washington, DC, would require additional collaboration and funding. As such rail plans develop, states involved in the Appalachian Central HSR December 2009 Page 26

37 Corridor will be aided by federal funding for High-Speed Rail Corridor Development (Section 501) (FRA 2009). Congestion Grants are another option for funding. In cooperation with Amtrak, West Virginia can apply for 80% financing to decrease congestion of IPR. As this report describes the lengthy delays that West Virginians face when traveling by rail, such funding could improve service. West Virginia IPR delays are mainly caused by yielding to freight rail traveling on the CSXT-owned track. With financial assistance provided by a congestion grant, infrastructure and equipment improvements could be made that would improve customer service, which would then improve revenues. Such development would advance not only West Virginia s IPR, but also that of each state along Amtrak s Cardinal and Capitol Limited lines (FRA 2009). Private funding options should be carefully evaluated. If passenger rail will be sharing railways with freight railroads, namely CSX and NS in this plan, funding is not as probable but still worth investigating. Although these companies have billion dollar revenues, they are more likely to invest in initiatives that benefit their services, lessen their bottlenecks, and have high rates of return from which they will directly benefit. For this reason, freight railroad companies are not likely to invest their own funds into passenger rail-related improvements, but these companies could help carry them out as a contractor if they foresaw a positive rate of return for their railroads. Other private funding assistance may become available if a revenue stream could be identified, and a satisfactory partnership could be formed with the public sector to negotiate risk. Contributions that are sometimes brought to projects of this type include sharing and managing all or part of the risk and investing some of the capital in return for future cash flow. Using California as an example, states may do this through bonding, franchising, and contractual agreements. In order to acquire financing, states need to invest in or support the potential passenger service in exchange for private sector cooperation with funding. CHAPTER 3: HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER RAIL Direct and Indirect Benefits of HSR HSR has proven to be a cost-effective, environmentally friendly, and energy efficient service worldwide and, now, it is being introduced as a new innovative passenger transportation option in the U.S. HSR is anticipated to promote economic competitiveness through an efficient and reliable passenger transportation service. In addition to comparable advantages of other passenger transportation modes, HSR provides more choices for travelers long-, intermediate-, and short-distance trips (Kantor 2008). Considering long-distance travel, HSR is an excellent substitute for air travel in terms of cost effectiveness and accessibility. Consistent on-time performance and convenient service is attractive to December 2009 Page 27

38 travelers for relatively short-distance travel too. HSR service is faster than both auto and bus travel, and it is more convenient and safe than air, auto, and bus travel. Travelers and their communities, as well as regional and national economies, will reap significant benefits from HSR. An investment in HSR infrastructure creates direct and indirect benefits with shortterm and long-term effects. HSR provides direct benefits to all users, and these benefits further create indirect advantages. In this report, the indirect effects due to improvements in passenger transportation infrastructure are defined as economic, social, and other external impacts. For example, modal shifts in transportation can largely reduce passenger-miles on highways, which can in turn lower petroleum consumption and emissions. Figure 3-1 shows these direct and indirect benefits of HSR infrastructure investment. This report categorizes the benefits of HSR into five components: 1) HSR user benefits, 2) non-hsr user benefits, 3) positive economic impacts, 4) positive social impacts, and 5) other positive externalities. Figure 3-1 Direct and Indirect Effects of HSR Investment Direct Effects HSR User Benefits Efficiency Effects (Cost and Time Savings) Accessibility Effects Mobility Effects Non-HSR User Benefits Capacity Effects Congestion Reduction Competition Effects Indirect Effects Economic Impact Employment Industry Outputs Per Capita Income Gross State (Domestic) Product Social Effects Energy Savings Environmental Effects Safety Effects Other Externalities Real Property Value Effects Location Decisions First, travelers using HSR service directly benefit from reduced cost and travel time in comparison to auto or air travel. Accessibility is improved as service is provided to more destinations regionally and December 2009 Page 28

39 nationally. With each destination, mobility is enhanced. When passengers shift from auto or bus to HSR, primary benefits are derived from travel time savings. HSR can provide service approximately twice as fast as the average passenger vehicle. These benefits would be even greater for long-distance trips. Fares for HSR service that are lower than airfares can be a major advantage of HSR compared to air travel. Travel cost savings can be enough to compensate the longer travel time for some travelers. In addition, HSR can provide seamless and continuous door-to-door transportation to passengers by connecting with existing transportation modes such as bus systems. Thus, HSR s door-to-door accessibility and mobility are competitive with air travel. Second, travelers who remain in other passenger transportation modes also benefit from modal shifts to HSR. These positive externalities include increased capacity, reduced congestion, and competition effects. As travelers shift from existing ground transportation modes such as auto and bus to new HSR services, traffic congestion on roads is alleviated. This leads to an increase in capacity of existing highway systems. More transportation choices can also increase competition among transportation modes, and a high level of competitive market behaviors is likely to reduce fares or restrain a fare increase. Accordingly, a new HSR service option can increase competitive market forces in the transportation industry and influence fares for all passenger transportation modes (e.g., auto, bus, and air). Third, cost-effective HSR transportation service enhances economic activities. As a result of shifting to a HSR option, transportation costs can be substantially reduced for business, vacation, and commuting travelers. Because transportation is the backbone of the economy, lower transportation costs in a region can expand business activities by promoting existing businesses and creating new business opportunities. Therefore, HSR can effectively integrate domestic and international markets to the region and generate positive effects on employment, income, industry outputs, and gross regional product. Fourth, HSR generates positive social effects of energy savings, environmental advantages, and improved safety. HSR uses power from electrical generation facilities, which reduces the nation s dependence on foreign oil consumption. U.S. petroleum consumption has taken an upward trend over the last decade. According to the Energy Information Administration, total petroleum consumption has increased 11%, from 6.79 billion barrels in 1997 to 7.54 billion barrels in 2007 (EIA 2009). As HSR leads to a substantial reduction in petroleum, a decrease in emissions will result. For example, estimated national emissions of carbon monoxide were million short tons in 2007; highway vehicles produced the largest percentage (47%) of these emissions (NTS 2008). Another social effect is associated with safety. In 2006, 42,642 traffic fatalities and 5,973,000 crashes were reported in the U.S. (NTS 2008). According to estimates by the National Safety Council (NSC 2007), the average economic loss per death was $1.13 million; the average cost per property damage crash was $7,500. Therefore, the total economic loss in 2006 due to traffic accidents can be computed as $92.98 billion ($92,980,000,000 = $1,130,000*42,642 + $7,500*5,973,000). HSR can save such economic losses by reducing traffic volume on highways and other roads. December 2009 Page 29

40 Finally, additional external effects of HSR infrastructure investment include increases in real property value and government funding for a new transportation infrastructure. Transportation convenience and accessibility enhancement have a significant effect on real property values of commercial and residential properties. In economic research, a hedonic pricing model is often used to estimate the value of real estate by evaluating its bundled attributes (Kantor 2008). For example, the hedonic pricing method estimates economic values for local environmental attributes, such as environmental quality (e.g., air pollution) and environmental amenities (e.g., proximity to a transportation link). Using this logic, the benefits of HSR can provide further positive impacts in housing markets. Besides the impact on real property values, HSR investment can affect location decisions of people and firms (Knaap and Oosterhaven 2003). For example, people consider good accessible transportation hubs when making decisions about their residential, school, and/or job locations, which further generate social and economic impacts (e.g., population and gross regional product). As HSR is explored for implementation across the U.S., continual benefits will be observed. Although the initial costs will be high, they will be far outweighed by advantages. Business and travel in the nation are not bound by particular regions, yet efficient travel has not been convenient until now. Increased accessibility on an easily maneuverable system will benefit the population greatly, as well as the environment. America is ready for dependable and fast rail travel, as well as the economic and social benefits it will offer. Lessons from Other Countries for a Successful HSR System Much of the proposed HSR opportunities in the U.S. will vary from those in other countries because of speed. Within the UK, HSR means speeds of at least 155 mph (249 km/h) for new rail and speeds of 125 mph on existing lines. West Virginia s proposed sections are conventional rail traveling about 79 mph. By operating these fast, frequent, and dependable trains on heavy haul freight lines across variable terrain, the lessons learned in West Virginia will be applicable nationwide. To plan such a feat, HSR service internationally, and the lessons learned by those countries, is examined. The value placed on HSR s presence internationally is noteworthy. Culturally, the U.S. is not accustomed to using HSR for travel, as can be seen by the limited ridership and route-miles compared to other countries such as Japan, Korea, China, France, Italy, Germany, the UK, and Spain, which heavily rely on HSR offerings as a premier method of transportation. Japan, the first country to implement HSR into their transportation system, and these other countries have developed more advanced HSR infrastructure than the U.S. has developed since its first HSR train ran in With President Obama s current vision for a HSR system in the U.S., the country may need a way to quickly catch up. December 2009 Page 30

41 Table 3-1 International Examples of HSR Japan South Korea China France 1 Italy Germany United Kingdom Opening Year Miles of Track Enabled for HSR Travel 3 1, , over 155 mph in 2008 Test Run, Speed Record (mph) Scheduled Trains, Highest Speeds (mph) HSR Ridership (millions) N/A N/A Total Geographic Land Area (sq. miles) 4 140,728 37,421 3,694, , , ,623 93, ,657 3,537,455 Population, July 2009 (millions) , Miles of HSR Track to Land Area Miles of HSR to Million Residents Source (USDOT 2009) Notes: 1 For measures of geographic land area and population, metropolitan France was considered. 2 FRA and USDOT s Vision for High-Speed Rail in America: High-Speed Rail Strategic Plan. 3 This data was provided by the International Union of Railways, June CIA World Factbook, Ridership figures for France and the United States are from Ridership figures for Germany and the United Kingdom are from Spain United States December 2009 Page 31

42 Across the world, HSR is catching on in developed nations. HSR first came to the U.S. with Acela, which began connecting the Northeast Corridor in 2000, while Korea s high-speed rail system, the Korea Train express (KTX), service began in While the U.S. is currently in planning mode for passenger trains traveling over 79 mph, KTX limits its high-speed track to 186 mph (300 km/h) for safety during regular service (GAO 2009). China is a current leader in HSR construction and, in the next five years, China is investing more money into HSR than the rest of the world combined. In 2009 alone, Beijing will spend $50 billion on highspeed railways; in the next decade, the central government has planned additional spending of $250 billion. Within the U.S., $8 billion was allocated for 2009 for HSR development. According to Money Morning, the high-speed railroad initiative in China has already created over 110,000 jobs. A Canadian company won the contract to work on 40 high-speed trains, as well as signaling systems (Money Morning 2009). The implementation of HSR services is expensive, and the U.S. can learn much from financial endeavors of other countries. A significant possibility is the funding for states to form their respective HSR routes through the creation of a public-private partnership (PPP). Japanese rail has public subsidies (1/3 from local government and 2/3 from the national government) that fund the construction of HSR lines. The rail infrastructure is then leased to private entities, which pay track usage fees set at the breakeven level. Japan s unprofitable railroads, which are not lucrative enough for privatization, are owned by the Japanese government (GAO 2009). France has proposed a PPP between two public entities, governments, and a private sector. Responsibilities for the rail have been split between several entities. Tasks for public entities encompass duties such as passenger operations, contracting, allocating capacity, and managing traffic. Private sector participation must control financing, designing, building, maintaining, and constructing HSR projects. The partnering governments hold the responsibility of approving projects, setting policy, and enforcing all laws and regulations. Cooperation between all participants is important because rail projects are a lengthy process, with HSR projects in France taking years to finish (GAO 2009). As Japan and France have both benefited by forming a PPP, planners of U.S. HSR corridors should investigate doing likewise. In order to set up a PPP, costs must be identified and closely examined. Accurate estimates will be needed, yet such figures can vary greatly between corridors. Project cost data includes variables such as project type, site conditions, regional cost differences, condition of existing rail, freight traffic levels, operational factors, right-of-way costs, support structure costs, and rolling stock costs. Because of such variables, a detailed evaluation must be completed for each corridor. In addition to such variables, costs of actual projects must be estimated for grade crossings, communications, storage facilities, crossovers, and turnouts. Per mile, estimates will also be needed for siding, additional main line tracks, and bypass tracks. Each project can be grouped into one of four categories as defined by the FRA, which include recapitalization, trip-time improvements, capacity- December 2009 Page 32

43 related improvements, and other projects. Once total costs are estimated for a route, appropriate funding methods may be evaluated and implemented (Texas Transportation Institute 2005). Italy is credited with Europe s first high-speed route, which opened in 1978 to connect Rome and Florence. Since then, the network of Italy s rail has expanded to also include Naples, Turin, Milan, Padua, Venice, Treviglio, and Bologna. Trains of tilting and non-tilting types are used, regularly reaching speeds up to 190 mph. Italy is a leader in HSR offerings, and additional construction and plans currently exist for further growth in passenger rail transport. Trenitalia, the national railway, has been operating all HSR services. However, it will soon be getting competition from up-and-coming train company Nuovo Trasporto Viaggiatori. In 2011, this company will launch a fleet of 25 trains known collectively as Italo. Italo will link locations between Naples and Turin, estimating that the 350-mile trip from Rome to Milan will last only three hours. Such fast times, resulting from travel up to 225 mph, will be paired with ticket prices competitive to those of Trenitalia. Additional added value of the Italo trains is environmentally conscious the trains are to be constructed mostly of recyclable materials and use 15% less energy than existing high-speed trains (Howard 2009). The use of such energy efficient and environmentally conscious trains at such high speeds is illustrious to the U.S. as HSR becomes a reality. While West Virginia is likely to improve passenger rail offerings using conventional rail, the state should develop a vision to go beyond conventional, branching into emerging and eventually regional HSR systems. Just as Italy has continuously exerted efforts to improve rail services, West Virginia and the U.S. as a whole must do likewise. Across Europe, high-speed lines are an accepted reality; typical of European travel, this convenient transportation is available for travel between countries. The high-speed Thalys train offers journeys from Brussels and Paris to Cologne and Amsterdam. While already considered high-speed, these Thalys journeys are on schedule to become even faster and reduce travel times by one hour starting December 13, 2009 (Rail Europe 2009). Within the UK, the newest high-speed railway is the HS1, which runs from London to Channel Tunnel. A second high-speed rail link, HS2, is currently proposed for construction to offer services from London to Glasgow and Edinburg. Britain presently operates a fleet of diesel-powered 125 mph trains for intercity travel. Residents and business owners along the route have consulted with planners about the resulting feasibility for economic development and tourism (Wilson 2009). In Germany, high ridership due to convenience is noteworthy. Germany has a 21,000-mile rail network, of which 800 miles constitute high-speed track and average speeds of 150 mph. Pro Bahn, a train passengers association, estimates that for every 1% the journey time is decreased, passenger numbers increase by the same percentage. Convenience of a well-connected rail network, safety, and punctuality jointly demonstrate why rail travel has eliminated hundreds of daily flights between Berlin and Hamburg, Frankfurt and Cologne, Frankfurt and Stuttgart, and Bremen and Cologne (Connolly 2009). If the use of conventional rail through West Virginia can consistently maintain speeds of 79 mph and link December 2009 Page 33

44 sections of high-speed track together, similar transportation changes should occur between Chicago and Washington, DC. Spain s routes and methods will help the U.S. solve issues with mountainous terrain. With its first passenger trip occurring in 1992, Spain linked its most populated cities of Madrid and Barcelona with HSR in February In doing so, travel time was slashed from six hours to just two hours and 20 minutes. Lines were also added from Madrid to Valladolid, Segovia, and Malaga. As a result of such accessibility, ridership on domestic flights dropped 20% in the first 11 months of 2008 as consumers switched from cramped airplanes to more comfortable and convenient trains (Tremlett 2009). Rather than moving track around Spain s mountains, extensive technology was used to create tunnels for direct routes and quicker times. When considering tunnels, caution must be used due to pressure changes experienced in a train when passing through a tunnel. Several options exist to avoid high pressure pressure sealing trains, restricting speed, and complete avoidance of tunnel usage. Similar tactics need to be investigated for parts of the U.S., including West Virginia, to effectively run rail through and around the mountains (MIT 2008). Spain in particular has a unique infrastructure designed for its curvy and mountainous land. Track for high-speed rail in Spain has fewer solder points than regular track, meeting exact standards set for the country s HSR network. This track also has an intricate network of track sensors, signals, radio transmitters, and computer systems to precisely locate all trains at any moment, which is communicated to control operators in order to improve the safety and efficiency of operations. While Spain s rail improvements are noteworthy for the construction of HSR across the U.S., one infrastructural development can be directly applied to mountainous terrain such as West Virginia for incredible benefit (MIT 2008). If HSR runs on existing rail across the Mountain State, tilting technology will be beneficial. However, if new, dedicated track is constructed, it may potentially be constructed in such a way that new tilting mechanisms are not needed. When land for rail includes mountains, tracks are often made curvy. As trains travel around such curves, centrifugal force pushes the speeding trains to the outside of the curve. Such movement by the train is uncomfortable to passengers and increases the probability of derailment. In order to avoid derailments and discomfort, trains slow down for curvy track. However, Spain has constructed trains that diminish such problems. Spanish trains have a tilting technology that detects curvature in track and tilts the train by realigning suspensions to the center of the track in order to maintain high speeds through curves (MIT 2008). Some tilting technology has been implemented on the Acela Express along the Northeast Corridor, and such tilting technology may be extremely beneficial to trains traveling at high speeds around the mountains of West Virginia. Additionally, punctuality of trains in Spain should be noted. AVE, the high-speed train service in Spain, operates in a precise and timely manner. Renfe is a company that runs AVE s trains, and the company s December 2009 Page 34

45 annual on-time performance has never been below 99%. In fact, the company commits to refund passengers the full price of their tickets if the train arrives more than five minutes late for reasons attributable to the company. For regular (not high-speed) trains in Spain, riders get a 50% refund if their trains arrive one hour late. As the second chapter highlighted service issues with American passenger rail travel, the Spaniards can be viewed as leaders of time efficiencies on the rail especially with their high-speed travel (MIT 2008). Beyond solely increasing speed, rail planners can learn from other countries experiences with HSR. The extensive network of trains offered across Europe, pinpointing largely populated areas, has been carefully planned. The value of service provided by Spanish trains guaranteeing refunds for delays is also remarkable. While these initiatives are all admirable, they are also practical and learnable. The best practices, state-of-the-art technology, and innovative solutions from the international community, integrated with the goals for high-speed rail in Appalachia, have been transformed into attainable initiatives for the most feasible HSR implementation possible for West Virginia. High-Speed Rail System HSR in the U.S. has different requirements than HSR in other countries. In the U.S., HSR and IPR have been divided into four definitions by the FRA express HSR, regional HSR, emerging HSR, and conventional Rail. Express HSR goes the fastest, traveling on grade-separated, dedicated rights-of-way, and makes few intermediate stops. Regional HSR has more intermediate stops but does not travel as fast as express. Emerging HSR runs on track with potential for future regional or express services and pairs with conventional rail to develop the passenger rail market (FRA 2009). Table 3-2 shows the four designations of high-speed intercity passenger rail (HSIPR), providing their operating speeds and distances between populations served. Table 3-2 Distinguishing Characteristics of HSIPR Type of HSIPR Operating Speed (mph) Miles Between Populations Served Express HSR Regional HSR Emerging HSR Conventional Rail Source (FRA 2009) The FRA defines HSR as intercity passenger rail service that is reasonably expected to reach speeds of at least 110 miles per hour. The Northeast Corridor (NEC) runs HSR rail and reaches speeds up to 150 mph. The NEC connects Washington, DC, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York, and Boston. The NEC is operated and owned mostly by Amtrak, which runs the Acela Express. Current plans are being made to December 2009 Page 35

46 develop HSR, along with conventional rail operations that can lead to HSR, to connect the most densely populated parts of the nation. Collectively, HSIPR is used to portray presence of HSR and IPR or IPR with the possibility of future HSR capabilities (FRA 2009). Increasing the presence of HSIPR access throughout the U.S. has become an important focus of President Obama s, with over $8 billion designated specifically for the development of HSR corridors. States are encouraged to collaborate and plan the role they want to play in HSIPR through improving existing infrastructure and constructing new rail. National and Regional HSR Plans At the turn of the 20 th century, passenger rail played a growing role in transportation in the U.S. The first half of this century saw improving infrastructure as new tracks and trains were built. Railroads began experimenting with trains traveling at high-speeds. Hiawatha trains were able to break speeds of 100 mph when traveling between Chicago and Milwaukee as early as 1935 (Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company 1950). The FRA introduced new safety requirements in the 1940s for trains traveling over 79 mph that inhibited further high-speed innovation. These new requirements made HSR transportation uneconomical in the Midwest but still feasible in the Northeast. Some of the HSR safety requirements added by the FRA in the 1940s were only found in the U.S., such as cab signaling and automatic train stopping. After World War II, passenger rail service experienced a decline as the federal interstate system grew and aviation transportation became more popular. The second half of the 20 th century saw shrinking investment in HSR in the United States. Other countries built up extensive HSR systems, but the declining IPR market in the U.S. kept most railroads from experimenting. New antitrust restrictions were placed on the railroad industry at the same time that subsidies were granted to the automotive and aviation industries (Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation 2008). While these events inhibited HSR, there was some innovation. In the late 1960s, the federal government worked with the Pennsylvania railroad to develop the Metroliner Train which could travel at speeds of up to 125 mph. Shortly thereafter Amtrak was created to provide intercity passenger rail service, and Pennsylvania surrendered the Metroliner design to Amtrak. The Metroliner would go on to become the basis for many Amtrak train models, but these trains did not meet their potential speeds. It was not until the turn of the century that HSR expanded in the U.S. Amtrak, with governmental assistance, opened up the Acela Express Line in Acela trains operate on the Northeast Corridor connecting Washington, DC, to New York and Boston. Acela trains operate at speeds up to 150 mph, but their average speed is 79 mph. HSR is beginning to receive additional investment in the U.S., as President Obama has recently announced his intention to support the expansion of high-speed passenger rail service. Presently, 10 corridors have been proposed for upgrades to provide HSR service nationally. Figure 3-7 displays these 10 corridors in red and shows the existing Northeast Corridor in blue. The gray lines represent existing passenger rail lines that will continue to provide conventional passenger rail service. As the map shows, December 2009 Page 36

47 the corridors are not a complete network and are, in places, only connected by conventional rail. The California Corridor, Pacific Northwest Corridor, and South Central stand out as examples of this. Many of these routes are only in the initial or planning stages for upgrading to HSR service. Current legislation promotes further analysis of current rail systems nationwide for their potential to be upgraded to provide high-speed passenger rail service. The 10 corridors that have already been designated for HSR vary in their status. The California Corridor has undergone gradual improvements since the 1980s but still requires additional work to upgrade the routes that make this corridor able to handle speeds of up to 110 mph. California has also completed the environmental impact phase for a new HSR line. As for funding, Californians approved Proposition 1A in November of 2008 to guarantee $9.95 billion in state bond money to finance the state s share of the first phase of the statewide 800-mile HSR system. The Texas Department of Transportation is currently researching optimization of the South Central Corridor, so far improving the grade crossings. For the Gulf Coast Corridor, engineering studies are being conducted, and some rail improvement has been made. The Chicago Hub Network conducted an environmental impact study nearly 10 years ago and has been making gradual improvements to its rail network since then. The state of New York is currently updating its HSR study from 2005, which examined the cost of necessary improvements to allow speeds up to 125 mph for the planned Empire Corridor. The Northern New England Corridor has very mixed progress; while the Boston to Portland spoke has seen some improvements, other spokes remain in the planning stages. December 2009 Page 37

48 Figure 3-2 Proposed HSR Corridors Source (FRA 2009) December 2009 Page 38

49 Many of the states bordering West Virginia are improving their rail infrastructure for HSR. Ohio has two major plans in the works. The first one, titled the 3C Quick Start Passenger Rail Plan, proposes to use funds made available by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) to re-open a corridor connecting Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, and Cincinnati that has been closed since Ohio DOT examined the state s rail transportation needs in 2003, 2004, and 2006, resulting in the 3C corridor. The plan for this corridor is to provide passenger rail service at speeds reaching 79 mph by 2011 with the intention of upgrading further in the future to allow 110 mph travel (ODOT 2009). The 3C plan is a part of Ohio s larger plan to create a broader HSR hub in Ohio. The hub network would provide passenger rail service connecting the heavily populated areas of Ohio to major cities in the region. A series of feasibility studies have been performed to investigate the options for refining and expanding the passenger and freight rail system in Ohio. The result will be a 1,244 mile network connecting 46 stations. Various routes are being considered for speeds of 79 mph and 110 mph. The hub network would operate at 79 mph initially, but Ohio hopes to upgrade the network to allow 110 mph travel speeds by Figure 3-3 shows the routes that frame the proposed hub network. The route connecting Cleveland and Cincinnati through Columbus is the 3C route and is considered by Ohio to be the strongest corridor financially (Ohio Rail Development Commission 2007). Figure 3-3 Proposed Ohio Hub Network Source (Ohio Rail Development Commission 2007) December 2009 Page 39

50 Part of the Acela Express line runs through Maryland, and the state hopes to improve some of its other tracks to allow additional high-speed passenger rail service. To help fund such a project, Maryland has applied for $360 million of the $8 billion that President Obama allocated for HSR projects. Such funding would allow one tunnel and three bridges to be replaced, all of which are necessary infrastructure improvements for HSR. The Baltimore and Potomac Tunnel, used by Amtrak, MARC, and NS, was built in 1871 and prevents higher speeds in its current condition. Additionally, the Bush, Gunpowder, and Susquehanna bridges are barriers to HSR, and replacing them constitutes $260 million of the requested $360 million. Maryland also hopes to acquire funding for several smaller projects such as a new GPS-based tracking system, additional train storage at Union Station, and updated signaling along the Brunswick Line (Krouse 2009). Virginia has been slowly investing in its rail network, improving the on-time performance of its routes and preparing for HSR. Rail corridors along interstates 95 and 81 have been receiving special attention (Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation 2008). Virginia has also joined North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia to form a coalition to provide HSR in the Southeast Atlantic region. This corridor, called the Southeast Corridor, is one of the 10 designated for HSR, connecting Washington, DC, to Charlotte, Raleigh, and several other cities. A first round of environmental impact studies has been completed for the Washington, DC Charlotte portion of the route, but the second round, investigating the Richmond Raleigh portion of the corridor, is not expected to be completed until The corridor is estimated to be finished sometime between 2015 and 2020 and will provide top speeds of 110 mph with an average speed goal of 85 mph (Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor 2009). Pennsylvania has previously considered the option of connecting Philadelphia, Harrisburg, and Pittsburgh with HSR. When President Obama announced the 10 proposed HSR corridors, the Keystone Corridor was among them (The Patriot-News Editorial Board 2009). Pennsylvania, like many other states across the nation, is currently reviewing its rail network to decide how it might best serve its citizens needs. Pennsylvania also houses part of the Capitol Limited line, one of two available current passenger rail routes connecting Washington, DC, to Chicago. Such a line could be considered for upgrading to HSR. Pennsylvania, though, has shown only limited interest in HSR (O'Toole 2009). Kentucky has one station that will be a part of the 10 designated HSR corridors. The Louisville station will be an endpoint for a spoke of the Chicago Hub Network. If a high-speed corridor is created to connect Washington, DC, and Chicago, there is a possibility that it could run through Kentucky. The Cardinal Line is one of two existing passenger lines that connect these two major cities, running over 80 miles in Kentucky between Huntington, West Virginia, and Cincinnati, Ohio, stations. While Kentucky has three stations along this portion of the track, the state has not applied for any portion of ARRA funding for HSR investment. December 2009 Page 40

51 Many citizens are also weighing in on the HSR issue. The citizens advocacy group POW V was formed to support the creation of a HSR corridor connecting Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, to Columbus, Ohio. The acronym POW V stands for Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia, the three states that the corridor would pass through, and the group is building a base to generate ideas and maintain an open line of communication. POW V s corridor would run through the northern panhandle of West Virginia with a stop in Weirton. Ohio does include such a route connecting Columbus and Pittsburgh in its long-term plan to develop a hub network for HSR in the state. However, Ohio is not yet pursuing this route with studies or operations. Pennsylvania has not expressed any interest in a possible corridor along this route. At this time, there is support for such a route connecting Columbus and Pittsburgh, but little is being done to prepare this route for HSR (POW V 2009). CHAPTER 4: NEW HSIPR NETWORK IN WEST VIRGINIA Justifications for Building HSR in West Virginia Six of West Virginia s passenger train stations have been placed on the National Register of Historic Places. The Charleston station is a National Historic Landmark as the Chesapeake and Ohio Depot. Five other stations, Alderson, Harpers Ferry, Hinton, Martinsburg, and Thurmond, serve as contributing properties to landmarked historic districts. Such designation provides opportunity to participate in the Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives program, which offers a 20% tax credit for the rehabilitation of historic structures producing income (USNPS 2009). Such funding has enabled stations to be restored and to become safer. HSR would help these stations to further expand their legacy. Need for an Efficient Transportation System West Virginia has a significant need for HSIPR. During 2008, West Virginia had boarding and alighting activity of 53,217 people at its 10 Amtrak stations. Additional ridership of West Virginians occurred with the MARC commuter trains running through the northern part of the state. Both the Amtrak service and the MARC service are unreliable and consistently delayed, mostly due to the sharing of passenger rail with freight rail. If HSIPR operates on joint use track, appropriate arrangements must be made for efficient and speedy travel. Otherwise, the suggested HSR corridor could ideally operate on dedicated tracks along sealed corridors. Differences in infrastructure requirements for IPR, HSR, and freight rail must be evaluated. In Transportation for America s national transportation blueprint released in May 2009, it is noted that high-speed rail is a critical element in creating a dynamic, seamless national intercity passenger rail plan (T4 America 2009). Improvements to the state s IPR network are planned, and the improved IPR system will assist with providing access to HSR, and thus to additional opportunity, for the entire state. December 2009 Page 41

52 Amtrak trains are used mostly for short to intermediate-distance trips. With the added comfort in railcars on HSR corridors and increased efficiencies, long-distance trips via rail may become more popular. Either way, rail travel will become a preferred method of transport for short and intermediate-distance trips as long as additional transportation infrastructure exists to take passengers to the door of their final destinations. With such ridership, automobile usage will be lessened. With such a reduction, accidents will become fewer. This is a particularly appealing benefit to West Virginia, as Appendix VII demonstrates that West Virginia had the sixth highest rate of traffic fatalities for all states in The economic benefit from reducing these deaths is significant, as portrayed in Chapter 3. HSR will reduce West Virginia s oil consumption as fewer automobiles are used. As rail infrastructure is improved, freight rail usage will be increased, reducing the number of large trucks on highways. West Virginia s intermodal capabilities provide an excellent basis for such changes. As a result, pollution would shrink. The Center for Clean Air Policy estimated with 2005 U.S. travel figures that, in 2005, passengers would take 112 million trips via HSR, which would result in 29 million less automobile journeys and 500,000 fewer flights. Considering such figures, emissions savings would be 6 billion pounds of CO2 per year (Center for Clean Air Policy 2006). As HSR plans are being made in the U.S., West Virginia hopes to take a strong role by implementing HSIPR within the Mountain State. The creation of high-speed corridors through West Virginia will significantly increase accessibility between major midwestern and northeastern U.S. cities. This chapter focuses on the presence and feasibility of HSR network in West Virginia. Benefits to the state and also to the nation as a whole are included. This report carefully selects prospective routes and stations in West Virginia. Figure 4-1 shows the potential HSR stations in West Virginia. Locations of Potential HSR Corridors West Virginia HSR corridors can serve as the major economic, cultural, and transportation network of the nation. While it may not have the largest return on investment (ROI) compared to metropolitan areas in the nation, it is important to place an economic value on the HSR investment for equal growth and development between urban and rural areas. As West Virginia evaluates the feasibility of implementing additional rail services, speed, distance, and location will have a heavy emphasis on the final decision. Travel speed must be evaluated to ensure that HSR travel is competitive with other forms of transportation. HSR in the U.S. is expected to be most popular for mile journeys those that are almost too far to drive, yet almost too close to fly. Considering location, three options exist for bringing HSR into the state. December 2009 Page 42

53 The first option for HSIPR connectivity in West Virginia is to create totally new rail and infrastructure along new corridors for passenger rail. This option provides ultimate flexibility for track location and routes between cities, allowing for direct routes and resulting in the shortest travel times. With new track in a unique location, utilities will need to be installed. If HSR is implemented along new routes, local support throughout the rail s region will be imperative. It is expected that communities will be willing to provide terminals for their own station stops. To evaluate this possibility, costs must be estimated for construction of new track, new stations, property, and utilities. Financing for the actual route must be determined, and several options exist for federal grants. The second option for HSIPR in West Virginia is to upgrade existing rail to accommodate higher speed passenger trains. Upgrades to rail that will service trains traveling up to 79 mph would be beneficial, but upgrades for higher speeds (79-90 mph, mph) should also be evaluated. Utilities are already accessible along these rails, as are stations for most stops. Some of this rail is owned by CSXT or NS, so a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) would need to be established between stakeholders and the WVDOT. A PPP should entail improvements that the WVDOT will make, such as sidings to reduce chokepoints, and responsibilities the private company will undertake, such as upkeep of the rail. With this option, most of the corridors will require passenger trains to share the rail with freight trains. As a PPP is made, passenger rail can run at peak times and freight rail can use the rail at other times and through the night; however, it must be established that the high-speed passenger rail will have priority. Additionally, the cost and feasibility of sharing utilities with rail owners, using existing stations, and performing necessary upgrades should be estimated. The final option is to build new track, exclusively for passenger rail, running along corridors parallel to existing track. This option would allow West Virginia to initially offer conventional passenger rail of 79 mph trains in the state; as demand builds, upgrades for higher speed trains could be made. If further evaluations and assessments find HSR to look promising for West Virginia, this exclusive track will likely make future improvements easier and less costly. By choosing this option existing train stations could be used, which would reduce the cost of constructing new stations for an exclusive passenger rail. Additionally, utilities for existing track would be located nearby. Some agreements to share tunnels and bridges will likely need to be made, or such new structures could be built. As costs for this rail option are evaluated, they should include necessary renovations or improvements for existing stations, in addition to costs of utilities and rail, and then should be compared to the cost of upgrading existing infrastructure. Within West Virginia, the following seven rail corridors have been proposed for HSIPR services: Appalachian Central, Shenandoah, Carnegie, Ohio River, Heartland, Blue and Gold, and Potomac Highlands. The Appalachian Central Corridor travels through the southern corridor of West Virginia to link Cincinnati, a part of the Chicago Hub Network, to Washington, DC. The December 2009 Page 43

54 Shenandoah Corridor connects Pittsburgh to Washington, DC, by crossing through West Virginia s eastern panhandle. The Carnegie Corridor has been proposed for travel between Columbus and Pittsburgh and cuts across West Virginia s northern panhandle through Weirton. The Ohio River Corridor parallels the Ohio River, traveling from the northern panhandle in Weirton to the southern corridor in Huntington. The Heartland Corridor follows a major freight rail, traveling from Norfolk, Virginia, to Columbus, Ohio. The Blue and Gold Corridor runs between the northern and southern parts of West Virginia, linking Morgantown to Bluefield. Traveling across the northern part of the state, the Potomac Highlands Corridor connects Parkersburg and Martinsburg. While three options for passenger rail were mentioned, the same option does not have to be chosen for all corridors. If brand new rail is used for HSR and a new rail map is devised, the track should connect major metropolitan areas across the state. Similar to when the highway system was formed, a comparable approach for locating highly populated areas and determining direct routes across the state will be helpful. Feeder systems must exist to create access points for as many residents of the state as possible. Additionally, rail lines in West Virginia should connect to populated and desirable locations in other states. Travel time from portal to portal must be evaluated. However, West Virginia s difficult mountainous terrain must be considered. If new track is laid, extensive costs will be faced to provide adequate infrastructure. Environmental and cost assessments, feasibility studies, partnerships with rail ownership, and funding availabilities will be strong deciding factors. Whether the first, second, or third option is chosen for each corridor, the route s main destination cities will remain the same. Several factors for the station location decisions along each route are mentioned in Table 4-1. Key factors include proximity for the designed HSR network by USDOT and other socioeconomic factors. Central locations that connect Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA) and diverse areas of the state are considered. Nine stations are located in MSAs, and eight stations are associated with non-msa areas. These characteristics of station locations can lead to the diverse development of regional economy through the anticipated benefits from HSR corridors. December 2009 Page 44

55 Table 4-1 Location Characteristics of Potential HSIPR Stations in West Virginia Station Name Proximity for Designed HSR Network by USDOT MSA 1 City Population 2 > 10,000 Existing Passenger Rail (AMTRAK and MARC) Connectivity CSX/NS Rail Connectivity Located on National Highway System 3 Appalachian Central Corridor (Cincinnati-Washington, DC) Huntington Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Charleston Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes White Sulphur Springs Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Shenandoah Corridor (Pittsburgh-Washington, DC) Berkeley Springs Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Martinsburg Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Harpers Ferry Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Carnegie Corridor (Columbus-Pittsburgh) Weirton No 4 Yes Yes No Yes Yes Ohio River (Huntington-Weirton) Huntington No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Parkersburg No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Wheeling No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Weirton No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Blue and Gold (Bluefield-Morgantown) Bluefield No No Yes No Yes Yes Beckley No No Yes No Yes Yes Charleston No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Weston No No No No No 5 Yes 6 Clarksburg No No Yes No Yes Yes Fairmont No No Yes No Yes Yes Morgantown No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Potomac Highlands (Parkersburg-Martinsburg) Parkersburg No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Weston No No No No No Yes Elkins No No No No No Yes Martinsburg No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Heartland Corridor (Huntington-Bluefield) Huntington No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Williamson No No No No Yes Yes Bluefield No No Yes No Yes Yes Notes: 1 The concept of a MSA is that of a core area containing a substantial population nucleus, together with adjacent communities having a high degree of economic and social integration with that core. Metropolitan statistical areas (MSA) contain at least one urbanized area of 50,000 or more population. Micropolitan statistical areas contain at least one urban cluster of at least 10,000 and less than 50,000 population (U.S. Census). 2 Top 10 cities in West Virginia are: Charleston (53,421), Huntington (51,475), Parkersburg (33,099), Wheeling (31,419), Morgantown (26,809), Weirton (20,411), Fairmont (19,097), Beckley (17,254), Clarksburg (16,743), Hancock (16,525), and Martinsburg (14,972) (U.S. Census 2000). 3 National Highway System (NHS) is defined as 160,000 miles of roadway important to the nation's economy, defense, and mobility. The NHS includes the following subsystems of roadways: Interstate, Other Principal Arterials, Strategic Highway Network, and Major Strategic Highway Network Connectors (USDOT). 4 Carnegie Corridor is based on Ohio State Rail Plan and POW V Corridor (Columbus-Pittsburgh line). 5 There is no existing right of way between Gilmer and Weston. 6 Weston is located within a reasonable distance (2 miles) from National Highway System (I-79). December 2009 Page 45

56 Figure 4-1 Potential High-Speed Rail Lines and Stations in West Virginia December 2009 Page 46

57 Figure 4-1 shows the proposed corridors for West Virginia s HSIPR system, as of October 9, The routes are approximate as several options exist, yet each corridor listed is mapped into its approximate location with corresponding connecting cities. The first option mentioned above involves development of new rail. This approach takes the designated cities and connects them with the straightest route possible. Straight track will lead to shorter travel times because of the shorter distance being traveled and less curvature, which is cause for trains to slow down. Upgrading existing track is the second option for creating HSIPR through West Virginia. The third option, laying track next to the existing rail, would have track lengths very similar to the existing. The mileage for each of the seven corridors, as it would apply to the three options, has been listed in Table 4-2. Table 4-2 Length of West Virginia HSIPR Corridors Corridor Option One New Track Distance (miles) Options Two & Three On or Along Existing Track Distance (miles) Appalachian Central Corridor Shenandoah Corridor Carnegie Corridor Ohio River Corridor Heartland Corridor / 207 Blue and Gold Corridor / 387 / 384 Potomac Highlands Corridor / 307 The corridors chosen to operate as conventional rail traveling up to 79 mph can do so assuming substantial upgrades. However, some of the corridors may be of a length that varies from the distance listed in Table 4-2 as multiple track options exist in some cases; yet estimated mileage is provided for all alternative routes. For such situations, it would be beneficial to choose tracks with better partnerships for rights of way, utilities, speed, and capacity. Figure 4-2 portrays the existing rail routes in West Virginia along the seven selected corridors. Several routes have multiple options for use of existing track, and some of the existing routes are missing sections of track, while others are operating as freight lines. Future study will aid in determining the best routes for traveling at the highest speeds. The map below displays the existing routes and demonstrates the connectivity provided to West Virginia with the presence of passenger rail. Following Figure 4-2, each corridor is individually identified with a route description and map of the particular corridor. 7 7 Information on the potential corridors was obtained from Charles Hill, West Virginia Rail Authority. December 2009 Page 47

58 Figure 4-2 Existing Corridor Routes and Stations in West Virginia December 2009 Page 48

59 Appalachian Central Corridor (Huntington Charleston White Sulphur Springs) The Appalachian Central HSIPR Corridor travels along a similar path as the current Amtrak route along the Cardinal line. This line originates in Huntington, passes through Charleston, and continues to White Sulphur Springs. Continuing beyond West Virginia s borders, this route can link to Cincinnati, Ohio, thus entering the proposed Chicago Hub Network, and also can continue through Virginia to Washington, DC. While this route follows CSXT-owned rail that is in current use, this corridor has the greatest potential for higher speeds as passenger rail popularity increases. For this reason, the option of building all new track and stations for this corridor should be investigated. If existing track is followed, this route would be approximately 200 miles. December 2009 Page 49

60 Figure 4-3 Appalachian Central Corridor, Existing Route December 2009 Page 50

61 Shenandoah Corridor (Berkeley Springs Martinsburg Harpers Ferry) The Shenandoah Corridor enters West Virginia from Maryland and travels the eastern panhandle through Berkeley Springs, Martinsburg, and Harpers Ferry. From Berkeley Springs traveling east, the line begins with 2.6 miles of abandoned CSXT track, with unknown track status, and then travels the CSXT Branch Line. At Hancock, the line would join the CSXT Main East West Route, which continues for the remainder of the state s Shenandoah Corridor to Harpers Ferry. From Martinsburg to Harpers Ferry, this is the same CSXT rail that the MARC train uses. The Shenandoah Corridor, traveling along existing routes, is a distance of about 45 miles. December 2009 Page 51

62 Figure 4-4 Shenandoah Corridor, Existing Route December 2009 Page 52

63 Carnegie Corridor (Weirton) Traveling east or west across the state s panhandle through Weirton is a short line just over seven miles that will further passenger rail efforts in Ohio and Pennsylvania. NS owns the line extending south out of Weirton and terminating in Wellsburg. The active railroad running through Weirton is owned by NS. The Panhandle Rail Trail, located southeast of Weirton, is rail banked. Leased to the City of Weirton for rail trail use, the title is held by the West Virginia State Rail Authority. In total, the Carnegie Corridor would span approximately 7.5 miles in West Virginia. December 2009 Page 53

64 Figure 4-5 Carnegie Corridor, Existing Route December 2009 Page 54

65 Ohio River Corridor (Huntington Parkersburg Wheeling Weirton) The Ohio River line is known as the Ohio Subdivision, and it runs parallel to the Ohio River in a north-south route along the western side of West Virginia. Spanning 216 miles, this corridor connects Huntington to Weirton through Parkersburg and Wheeling. The Ohio River IPR line is owned, from Huntington to Wheeling, by CSXT. The section of the line stretching from Wheeling north to Wellsburg belonged to Consolidated Rail prior to its abandonment in This section was not rail banked by the West Virginia Rail Authority. The City of Wheeling operates a rail trail over a portion of the line; this operation is maintained through either right of way owned in fee with no reversionary clauses or through agreements with landowners to whom the property would have reverted. It is believed that the remaining abandoned property along this line has reverted back to adjoining land owners. Continuing north from Wellsburg to Weirton, the line is owned by NS and active. December 2009 Page 55

66 Figure 4-6 Ohio River Corridor, Existing Route December 2009 Page 56

67 Heartland Corridor (Huntington Williamson Bluefield) The Heartland Corridor connects Mid-Atlantic regions of Virginia and North Carolina to the Midwest and West Virginia. West Virginia s portion of the Heartland Corridor is a major freight rail route running between Norfolk, Virginia, and Portsmouth, Ohio, and is owned by NS. West Virginia s section of this corridor moves 100 million tons of freight annually. The Heartland Corridor Clearance Improvement Project includes a Central Corridor Double-Stack Project that is currently upgrading this line to provide accessibility to double-stack container freight. Upon completion of this rail overhaul, transportation of double stack freight will be greatly aided through rail transport from Chicago, Illinois, to Norfolk, Virginia, and accessibility of intermodal terminal facilities in Prichard, West Virginia, and at Rickenbacker Airport in Columbus, Ohio. For the purpose of running passenger rail along existing track on the Heartland Corridor, two routes are available. The first option connects Bluefield and Huntington through Williamson along the state s border next to the Ohio River. This route is estimated to run about 200 miles. The second option connects Bluefield and Huntington via Elmore along a route traveling more inland than the first option. The length of passenger rail traveling through Elmore would run about 207 miles. December 2009 Page 57

68 Figure 4-7 Heartland Corridor, Existing Routes December 2009 Page 58

69 Blue and Gold Corridor (Bluefield Beckley Charleston Weston Clarksburg Fairmont Morgantown) Several options for traveling existing routes along the Blue and Gold Corridor are shown in the following map. The route has been broken into the following three sections for mapping purposes: Bluefield to Charleston, Charleston to Weston, and Weston to Morgantown. The first section, Bluefield to Charleston, has four route possibilities using existing railways. While the total corridor distance will vary among the three different options, the approximate lengths of these corridors are 350 miles, 387 miles, and 384 miles, respectively. The three options for traveling from Bluefield, around Deepwater, and to Charleston are shown in Figure 4-8. NS owns rights of way for much of the rail route to Deepwater when traveling west of Mt. Hope. At Deepwater, the corridor interchanges with the CSXT Main line, heading west to Charleston. To run along another route would require the purchase of property. While the variations will differ in distance, this section runs approximately 140 miles. The second section of the corridor continues from Charleston, traveling north to Falling Rock, where the right of way is owned by NS but currently out of service. Continuing from Falling Rock to Hartland, right of way is owned by Elk River Railroad and track structure has been removed. The Elk River Railroad also owns the continuing right of way from Hartland to Gilmer, a section where track structure remains in place. Between Gilmer and Weston, no right of way exists. This second section has a distance of approximately 105 miles. Approaching the third section of the Blue and Gold Corridor, abandoned CSXT track continues from Weston to just north of Jane Lew. In this section, CSXT has right of way, but the line s rail and ties have been removed. Continuing north along the Blue and Gold, the WVSRA owns right of way of track to Wolf Summit. Harrison County leases this section for the Harrison County Rail Trail. Further north from Clarksburg, the WVSRA ownership continues to Meadowbrook. The Harrison County Commission leases this portion for the Spelter Rail Trail. Continuing this line from Meadowbrook to just below Shinnston has an unknown right of way status. Starting in Shinnston, the line s title is again held by the WVSRA and leased to Marion County Parks and Recreation for the Ralph La Rue Rail Trail. Beyond this point, right of way status is unknown along the line until Fairmont. Extending from Fairmont to the Blue and Gold Corridor s ending at Morgantown, NS owns the track but CSXT has trackage rights. The third section of this corridor has an estimated distance of 77 miles. December 2009 Page 59

70 Figure 4-8 Blue and Gold Corridor, Existing Routes December 2009 Page 60

71 Potomac Highlands Corridor The Potomac Highlands Corridor connects Parkersburg to Martinsburg. Two options for this corridor exist. Each of two route alternatives is detailed below, and each alternative has been split into two sections, according to probable station locations. Alternative One The first alternative follows existing track along CSXT s mainline and also constructs new track along a line where no track currently exists. (Parkersburg Weston Elkins Wilson Piedmont Cumberland, MD Martinsburg) The Potomac Highlands IPR Corridor begins in Parkersburg, following the CSXT mainline. The line then switches to the North Bend Trail, which is owned by the WVSRA and rail banked. The line follows the North Bend Trail through Walker before continuing straight, where there is no existing right of way, through Weston to Buckhannon. From Buckhannon, CSXT-owned rail, operated by the Appalachian and Ohio Railroad, is picked up and followed to Tygart Junction. From Tygart Junction, the corridor follows WVSRA s operating railroad to Elkins. In Elkins, the line picks up what is now a rail trail owned by the WVDOT, Division of Highways, and continues to Hendricks. From Hendricks to Thomas, the line continues along a rail trail where both private (Allegheny Wood Products) and public (Forest Service) ownership exist. As the line enters Thomas, the track has been removed of the CSXT-owned rail until reaching Henry. Right of way status for this section is unknown. Right of way from Henry to Thomas, Parsons, and on to Elkins is abandoned. Entering Henry, CSXT owns the line that continues to Wilson and track is in place, but the line is out of service. From Wilson, the line has track all the way to Martinsburg. The first section from Wilson to Piedmont follows the Stony River Subdivision line; then, the CSXT Mountain Subdivision line travels from Piedmont to Cumberland, Maryland. From Cumberland, the CSXT main line travels to Martinsburg. The total distance of this route from Parkersburg to Martinsburg is approximately 292 miles. Alternative Two The second alternative considers the construction of new track on an area where no track currently exists following CSXT s mainline. (Parkersburg Clarksburg Grafton Cumberland, MD Martinsburg) The second alternative for the Potomac Highlands IPR Corridor goes through Clarksburg and has a distance of approximately 307 miles. To do so, the line begins on the North Bend Rail Trail, a former CSXT line in Parkersburg. This trail is rail banked and is leased to the West Virginia Division of Natural Resources by its owner, the WVSRA. The North Bend Rail Trail continues to just four miles west of Clarksburg, where the Potomac Highlands corridor follows the CSXT Bridgeport Subdivision to Grafton. In Grafton, the line picks up the CSXT Mountain Subdivision, at this point joining the same route as the first alternative above. The Mountain Subdivision continues to Cumberland, Maryland, at which point the line switches to the CSXT main line for travel to the ultimate destination of Martinsburg. December 2009 Page 61

72 Figure 4-9 Potomac Highlands Corridor, Existing Routes December 2009 Page 62

73 Current Modes of Transportation in West Virginia Figure 4-10 portrays many of West Virginia s transportation assets. A legend depicts icons for airports, rail, truck terminals, public transit, ports, piers, rivers, and interstates. Each icon on the map represents the service available to that particular area. Even with challenging mountainous terrain, West Virginia remains accessible and well-connected throughout the state. Significant public transit is available, which pairs well with proposed IPR improvements and the possibility of HSR. As rail is improved through federal funding, local and state groups will improve the infrastructure of supporting services. Public transit services, such as buses, provide valuable services that coordinate well with passenger rail to improve door-to-door service. As shown in Figure 4-10, public transit services are provided throughout much of West Virginia. Bus services within the state have recently expanded with the opening of a daily Huntington-Charleston route in January Local bus services are provided for many cities such as Centra for the Clarksburg area, the Fairmont- Marion County Transit Authority for citizens of Marion county, the Kanawha Valley Regional Transit Authority for the Charleston area, the Mountain Line Transit Authority for the Morgantown area, the Eastern Panhandle Transit Authority for the Martinsburg area, and the Tri- State Transit Authority for the Huntington Area. Long-distance bus service provider Greyhound also operates six stations in West Virginia at Beckley, Bluefield, Charleston, Huntington, Parkersburg, and Wheeling. These services expand the effective radius of each rail station by providing an alternative method of traveling to and from the station. Pre-existing local and intercity public transit services would benefit from expanded rail services in West Virginia, as well as add value to such rail services. December 2009 Page 63

74 Figure 4-10 Transportation Modes Currently Available in West Virginia Source (WVDOT, 2009) Demand for Economic Stimulants in WV Investment in HSR would create a high public return on investment. Per capita income will increase, as will gross state product. From an environmental standpoint, energy consumption for transportation will be reduced. Fewer cars will be on roads so pollution will decrease, as well as congestion. Furthermore, the state s cultural diversity is likely to expand. Jobs will be preserved and created in an area where they are desperately needed. West Virginia s labor force has the capacity to fill new jobs, as the state unemployment rate was 9.4% in June and 8.6% in July December 2009 Page 64

75 2008, due to the economic crisis (WorkForce WV 2009). The improved integration of West Virginia s transportation network through the HSR initiative would allow residents dependable and efficient transportation. In 2007, West Virginia s per capita income was the second lowest of all 50 states. Additionally, the state s population is projected to decrease at a growing rate for residents aged years (U.S. Census Bureau 2008). The installation of HSR would improve this figure by offering residents access to an expanded job market. Considering the HSR itself, jobs will be created for the construction and maintenance of the railway. Engineers and technical experts will be sought after for employment here. Tourist attractions and additional retail opportunities will be recognized in West Virginia as heavy passenger rail traffic explores the Mountain State. Table 4-3 shows the projected populations for the state, separating the estimations by age group. The three age groups of greatest concern that will be discussed in this report are years, years, and ages 65 and up. Table 4-3 West Virginia Projected Population and Percentage Change July 2005 July 2010 July 2015 July 2020 July 2025 Total 1,818,887 1,829,141 1,822,758 1,801,112 1,766,435 < 17 years 391, % 382, % 372, % 357, % 338, years 157, % 146, % 138, % 132, % 132, years 481, % 471, % 456, % 435, % 401, years 507, % 536, % 525, % 503, % 485, years 279, % 292, % 329, % 372, % 408,533 Source (U.S. Census Bureau 2005) The population of year olds in West Virginia is continuously decreasing. As a state with a low college graduate rate, it is most likely that the students who choose to further their education beyond high school graduation would attend college within their home state. Because of HSR, college bound students are likely to make school choices from a larger selection because of the ease of transportation. West Virginia has 15 public and 13 private institutions of higher education, as well as four community colleges, within its 55 counties (UnivSource 2009). The presence of HSR, combined with improved IPR, would provide increased capabilities for transportation to students to attend such institutions. The next age group, years, is also expected to decline from 2005 to 2015 and again from 2015 to The age group of years, mainly working people, is expected to decrease by 2.7% from 2005 to 2015 and fall by nearly 8% between 2015 and As this group represents most workers in West Virginia, the state will suffer by losing its talent to other states. To avoid December 2009 Page 65

76 losing such a large percentage of its population, West Virginia must create jobs in the state, or else access to jobs, for these people to stay rooted in the Mountain State. Availability of a HSR network through West Virginia would link this working population to further opportunities. West Virginians would easily be able to work in neighboring states while maintaining residence in the low-cost state of West Virginia. The presence of HSR would also help to accommodate the ever-increasing population of West Virginia residents over 65 years of age. As these residents age, they will need better mobility. This age group also owns significantly fewer cars and thus generates a higher demand for other modes of transportation (Collaborative 2009). Accessibility to HSR will provide great opportunities for this age group, as these people can rely on such safe service for their transportation needs. West Virginia s HSR plan includes ease of access for multiple modes of transportation, so the aging population could get from the doorsteps of their homes to the HSR station. HSR will enable them to reach proper healthcare in larger cities and to travel to visit family. As West Virginia considers implementing HSR, impacts on residents young and old, as well as the state, are to be considered. Direct and indirect benefits will result. Quality of Life For 2008, the United Health Foundation ranked the state 39 th in America s Health Rankings. Challenges in West Virginia include high levels of air pollution, high frequency of obesity, and a high rate of cancer deaths. In 2008, the percentage of West Virginia s children living in poverty increased 13%, and the prevalence of smoking increased by 5% (United Health Foundation 2009). With West Virginia s health disparities, cost-efficient and convenient transportation provided by HSR would increase access to improved healthcare for West Virginians and residents of neighboring states. For 2008, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) ranked West Virginia 43 rd out of the 50 states for overall education in its Report Card on American Education. Table 4-4 shows the educational attainment for populations over the age of 25 for West Virginians and residents of neighboring states in 1990 and West Virginia ranks the lowest in every category except high school graduation, where the state ranks above Kentucky (ALEC 2009). December 2009 Page 66

77 Table 4-4 Educational Attainment for West Virginians and Residents of Neighboring States HS Grad or GED Some College BS/BA or More Advanced Degree HS Grad or GED Some College BS/BA or More Advanced Degree WV 66.00% 29.40% 12.30% 4.80% 75.20% 35.80% 14.80% 5.90% MD 78.40% 50.30% 26.50% 10.90% 83.80% 57.10% 31.40% 13.40% OH 75.70% 39.30% 17.00% 5.90% 83.00% 46.90% 21.10% 7.40% VA 75.20% 48.50% 24.50% 9.10% 81.50% 55.50% 29.50% 11.60% KY 64.60% 32.90% 13.60% 5.50% 74.10% 40.60% 17.10% 6.90% PA 74.70% 36.10% 17.90% 6.60% 81.90% 43.80% 22.40% 8.40% Source (Bauman and Graf 2003) West Virginia s educational weaknesses can be improved by the benefits HSR would bring to the state. Cultural diversity, access to other parts of the country, and new job opportunities can cultivate an environment conducive to attaining educational improvements. As mentioned previously, the presence of HSR would also provide suitable transportation for the degreeseeking population. Gini Coefficient The Gini Coefficient is a statistical measure of the difference between a given distribution of a variable. In this report, we have used the Gini Coefficient to demonstrate the spread of wealth across the nation and through West Virginia and neighboring states. Gini Coefficients range between 0, which indicates complete equality, and 1, which reflects complete inequality (meaning one person has 100% of the wealth and all others have none). The Gini Coefficient for the nation s tabulated income statistics is displayed in Table 4-5. Table 4-5 Gini Coefficient by State Gini Coefficient by State, Households West Virginia Maryland Ohio Virginia Kentucky Pennsylvania United States Source (U.S. Census Bureau 2008) December 2009 Page 67

78 West Virginia s 2007 Gini Coefficient ranks as the third lowest of the six states measured. It can also be observed that the increase in West Virginia s Gini Coefficient from 1979 to 2007 was smaller than those of neighboring states, with the exception of Kentucky, and smaller than the national change. This lower Gini Coefficient and minimal change indicate a more even and relatively constant distribution of wealth within West Virginia than within the United States. However, the fact that the Gini Coefficient for individual states and the nation is increasing indicates growing inequality. Considering the nation as a whole, if the Gini Coefficient continues to rise as it has historically, the presence of an American middle class will diminish. HSR offerings will provide economic benefits and opportunities, helping to balance the spread of income across the country and thus lower the nation s Gini Coefficient. Equality of Wealth West Virginia is the only state whose entirety is in Appalachia. The Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) uses an index-based county economic classification system to evaluate the economic status of counties. Such counties are then placed within five distinct categories distressed, at-risk, transitional, competitive, and attainment based on their positions relative to all counties in the nation. Distressed counties are the most economically depressed, ranking in the worst 10% of counties in the U.S. At-risk counties rank between the worst 11% and 25% of the nation s counties, and transitional rank between the worst 25% and the best 25% of counties in the U.S. Competitive counties rank between the best 11% and 25% of counties. Counties that reach the attainment level, none of which are located in West Virginia, are the strongest counties economically and rank in the best 10% of the country s counties. Of the 399 counties in Appalachia, 81 are considered to be distressed areas, which are in the worst 10% of counties in the nation. Within that list, 13 of West Virginia s 55 counties are designated distressed. Additionally, 17 counties are considered at-risk of becoming economically distressed. Counties not designated as distressed in entirety can still have areas of the county that are distressed, as evidenced in Table 4-6. It can be noted that 55% of West Virginia s counties are either distressed or at-risk of becoming distressed counties (ARC 2008). December 2009 Page 68

79 Table 4-6 West Virginia County Economic Status and Distressed Areas, FY 2009 County Economic Status Number of Distressed Areas County Economic Status Number of Distressed Areas Barbour Distressed Mineral Transitional 2 Berkeley Transitional Mingo Distressed Boone At-Risk 4 Monongalia Transitional 3 Braxton Distressed Monroe Transitional Brooke Transitional Morgan Transitional Cabell Transitional 13 Nicholas At-Risk 4 Calhoun Transitional Ohio Transitional 7 Clay Distressed Pendleton Transitional Doddridge At-Risk 1 Pleasants Transitional Fayette At-Risk 7 Pocahontas At-Risk 1 Gilmer At-Risk 1 Preston Transitional 3 Grant Transitional 1 Putnam Competitive Greenbrier At-Risk 3 Raleigh Transitional 5 Hampshire Transitional Randolph Transitional 3 Hancock Transitional Ritchie At-Risk 1 Hardy Transitional Roane Distressed Harrison Transitional 6 Summers Distressed Jackson Transitional Taylor At-Risk 3 Jefferson Competitive Tucker At-Risk 1 Kanawha Transitional 11 Tyler At-Risk 1 Lewis At-Risk 4 Upshur At-Risk 2 Lincoln Distressed Wayne At-Risk 4 Logan At-Risk 8 Webster Distressed Marion Transitional 5 Wetzel At-Risk 2 Marshall Transitional 3 Wirt Distressed Mason Distressed Wood Transitional 6 McDowell Distressed Wyoming Distressed Mercer At-Risk 6 Source (ARC 2008) Economical Electricity in WV Coal mining in West Virginia began in the mid-1800s and continues to date with 239 active mines in 2009 providing about 40,000 direct jobs. Coal is present in 53 of the state s 55 counties, and 99% of generated electricity in West Virginia comes from coal (Office of Miners' Health December 2009 Page 69

80 Safety & Training 2009). Such electricity can power high-speed trains and be more fuel efficient per passenger per mile traveled than the typical automobile, with substantial efficiencies of scale. For maximum efficiency, high-speed trains operate on electricity. As displayed in Appendix VI, West Virginia has retail electric prices for the transportation industry that rank among the lowest in the nation. Since 2004, the state s rates have been in the lowest six of all states electricity rates. Such a figure is very attractive when considering placement of HSR corridors. Location As a state, West Virginia s capability of connectivity with its neighbors Kentucky, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia is extensive. Viewing the map of President Obama s Vision for High-Speed Rail in America, the importance of West Virginia s route across the southern part of the state is evident. The Appalachian Central Corridor will run from Cincinnati, Ohio, through Ohio, Kentucky, West Virginia, and Virginia, to Richmond, Virginia, where it will link into the Southeast Corridor and thus Washington, DC, and the Northeast Corridor. Because Cincinnati and the Ohio Hub link into the Chicago Hub Network, the Appalachian Central Corridor will ultimately create a southern access path between Chicago and Washington, DC. On the northern end of the state, West Virginia s location again plays a prime role in connecting the nation. The northernmost station in Weirton will connect Columbus (Chicago Hub Network) to Pittsburgh (Keystone Corridor) via the Carnegie line. Eastern stations in Berkeley Springs, Martinsburg, and Harpers Ferry will encompass the Shenandoah line, linking Pittsburgh (Keystone Corridor) to Washington, DC. These shared visions are visible in Figure Figure 4-11 America 2050 Recommendations for a Trans-American Passenger Network Source (RPA 2009) December 2009 Page 70