FRA Federal Update AASHTO Council on Rail Transportation February 17, 2021

FRA Federal Update

AASHTO Council on Rail Transportation
February 17, 2021

Agenda

• Grants: Upcoming NOFOs and Best Practices

• Metrics and Standards

• ADA Compliance and Research Panel Discussion

 2

RPD Focus Areas

 U.S. Department of Transportation Priorities

 Federal Railroad Administration's Mission
 "To enable the safe, reliable, and efficient movement of people and
 goods for a strong America, now and in the future."

 RPD Focus Areas

 SAFETY INFRASTRUCTURE AMTRAK
 INNOVATION INVESTMENT REFORM

 PROJECT DELIVERY WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT &
 STREAMLINING STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
 3

Grants: Upcoming NOFOs and Best Practices
Presented by:
Frances Bourne, Chief, Rail Planning and Program Development Division
Lynn Everett, Midwest Team Lead, Program Management and Oversight Division

FY 2021 Competitive Discretionary Grant Appropriations

 Grant Program FY 2021 Enacted

 INFRA $1B (~$145M available
 for rail)
 BUILD $1B

 CRISI $375M

 Fed-State Partnership $200M

 Restoration & $4.72M
 Enhancement

 Maglev $2M

 55

FY 2021 INFRA

 ~$145 Million out of $1 Billion
 What projects are eligible? Freight corridor improvements: Non-highway projects capped with
 approximately $145M remaining. Grade crossing improvements,
 including separations, not counted in this cap.
 Who's eligible to apply? States, cities, counties

 Notice of Funding Coming soon
 Opportunity (NOFO) Award announcements expected in June
 New Administration Racial equity and addressing barriers to opportunity; climate change
 priorities outlined and environmental justice impacts; and changes to innovation,
 economic vitality

 6

FY 2021 BUILD

 $1 Billion
 What projects are eligible? A wide range of transportation projects. For rail: capital improvements
 including grade crossings, track and bridges, station improvements.
 $30 million set-aside for project-level planning and up to $200 million
 can be used for RRIF credit risk premium
 Who's eligible to apply? States, cities, counties

 NOFO To be released before statutory deadline of April 26, 2021
 Applicants will have 90 days
 Award announcements by November 22, 2021
 What is new? More planning funds; portion designated for areas of persistent
 poverty; incorporating Administration priorities
 7

FY 2021 CRISI
 $75M
 $375 set aside for new Intercity Passenger Routes

 Million $25M
 set aside for new Trespasser Prevention Routes

 What projects are eligible? A wide range of intercity and freight rail projects – capital
 improvements including grade crossings, track and bridges,
 equipment, workforce development, research
 Who's eligible to apply? States, cities, counties, Amtrak and other intercity passenger rail
 providers, Class II and III railroads, labor unions, universities
 conducting rail-related research
 NOFO Likely in spring 2021
 Applicants will likely have 90 days
 What is new? Waiving more than 50% match preference; incorporating
 Administration priorities

 8

FY 2021 Federal-State Partnership

 $200 Million
 What projects are eligible? Intercity passenger rail projects on Amtrak-owned or publicly owned
 right-of-way
 Who's eligible to apply? States, cities, counties, Amtrak

 NOFO Likely in summer 2021
 Applicants will likely have 90 days
 What is new? Waiving more than 50% match preference; incorporating
 Administration priorities

 9

FY 2021 Restoration and Enhancement

 $4.72 Million
 What projects are eligible? Operating subsidy for up to three years to restore or enhance
 intercity passenger routes at decreasing Federal share (80-60-40)
 Who's eligible to apply? States, cities, counties

 NOFO Fall 2021
 Applicants will likely have 45 days

 10

FY 2021 Magnetic Levitation

 $2 Million
 What projects are eligible? Capital projects and preconstruction planning activities

 Who's eligible to apply? States, a group of states, or an authority designated by one or
 more states
 NOFO Likely in fall 2021
 Applicants will likely have 30 days

 11

Grant Application Life Cycle
 Pre-Award Award
 (NOFO Administration Monitoring/Oversight Closeout
 (Obligation Process)
 Development)

 Key • NOFO • Notification • Grant Administration • Grantee Notification
 Activities Publication
 • Terms and Conditions
 • Annual Monitoring • Final Invoice
 • Budget and SOW Development
 • Application • Project Management • Final Performance Report
 Intake & • Environmental Clearances*
 Evaluation • Review Project Deliverables • Tracking Project Benefit
 • Engineering Review* Agreements
 • Project Selection • Provide Technical Assistance
 • Performance Measures*

 • Stakeholder Agreements*

 • Creating Grant Award in Grant
 Solutions

 Duration Up to 5 months 6-15 months 3+ years 90 days

 12

From Grant Application to Award

 • Program requirements
 • Application requirements
 Understanding the • Environmental review process
 NOFO – Webinars

 • Pre-NEPA planning complete?
 • How complex is the project?
 How ready is the project?

 13

From Grant Application to Award

 • Pre-NEPA planning, NEPA clearance, permits and
 agreements
 • Railroad agreements are required to be in place
 Getting agreements and before obligation
 prerequisites in place

 • Make sure your matching sources of funds are
 committed in the right timeframe
 • Allow time when building your schedule of activities
 • The more you know in advance, the more realistic
 Budgeting for your project
 your budget should be
 14

From Award to Obligation

  Make sure the scope and budget are complete
  Responsible parties are on-board
  Leadership and project management teams are
 organized
  NEPA clearance is complete
  RR Agreements are complete
The Award is the beginning
  Execute Terms and Conditions, Obligate grant

 15

Metrics and Standards
Presented by:
Zeb Schorr, Assistant Chief Counsel-General Law, Office of Chief Counsel
Kristin Ferriter, Transportation Specialist, Passenger Rail Policy and Oversight Division

Background
• Section 207 of PRIIA requires FRA and Amtrak, in consultation with a variety of stakeholders, to
 jointly,
 “develop new or improve existing metrics and minimum standards for measuring the
 performance and service quality of intercity passenger train operations.”
• Metrics and standards published in 2010 were challenged on various Constitutional grounds.
 Litigation concluded in June 2019, and FRA and Amtrak are once again tasked with jointly developing
 metrics and standards.
• In July 2019, FRA and Amtrak began work on developing revised metrics and standards. The first
 phase of this process consisted of consulting with various stakeholders, including the Surface
 Transportation Board, rail carriers over whose lines Amtrak trains operate, States, Amtrak employees,
 nonprofit employee organizations representing Amtrak employees, and groups representing Amtrak
 passengers. FRA and Amtrak met with these stakeholders from August to September 2019.
• FRA published the Metrics and Minimum Standards for Intercity Passenger Rail Service Notice of
 Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) on March 31, 2020, with a 60-day comment period that ended on
 June 1, 2020. FRA held a public hearing on April 30, 2020. FRA published the Metrics and
 Minimum Standards for Intercity Passenger Rail Service Final Rule on November 16, 2020.
 17

Final Rule Summary
FRA published the Final Rule on November 16, 2020, with the following Metrics & Standards:

 OTP & Delays Customer Service Financial Public Benefits
 Customer On-Time Customer satisfaction Cost recovery Connectivity
 Performance (OTP)
 Standard: 80% for two
 consecutive quarters
 Ridership data Amtrak personnel Avoidable operating costs Missed connections
 covered by passenger revenue
 Certified schedules Information given Fully allocated costs covered Community access
 by passenger revenue
 Train delays On-board comfort Average ridership Service availability

 Train delays per 10K train On-board cleanliness Total ridership
 miles
 Station performance On-board food service

 Host running time

 18

OTP & Delays
Metric Description Reported by

Customer OTP Percentage of all customers on an Route and train
 Standard: 80% for intercity passenger train who arrive
 two consecutive at their detraining point no later
 quarters than 15 minutes after their
 published scheduled arrival time

Ridership data Number of host railroads to whom Host railroad
 Amtrak has provided host-specific
 ridership data

Certified schedules Number of certified schedules, Route, train, and
 uncertified schedules, and disputed host railroad
 schedules

 19

Customer OTP
Traditionally, OTP has been measured at the end point of Customer OTP better represents the customer
a route experience

 • What percentage of customers reach their
 detraining stations on time?
 • On time customers
 • Customers who arrive at their detraining point
 no later than 15 minutes after their published
 scheduled arrival time
 • Total customers
 • Number of customers traveling by Amtrak train

 = (%)
 Source: Amtrak
 
 20

Certified Schedule Metric
 Certified schedules metric
 Amtrak to provide 24 months of
 updated and reported,
 ridership data, monthly thereafter
 annually thereafter
 Customer OTP Standard: Customer OTP Standard:
 Effective except disputed Effective for all schedules
 Certified schedules metric schedules
 Final Rule
 reported
 Published

 Certified Schedules
 Once a schedule is certified, it cannot later be designated as uncertified. Parties
 always have the option to revise schedules or to pursue third-party dispute resolution.
 Uncertified Schedules

 Disputed Schedules

 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov

 Reporting: Amtrak and host railroads submit joint
 status report on uncertified schedules

 21

OTP & Delays (continued)
Metric Description Reported by
Train delays Minutes of delay for all Amtrak- Route and host
 responsible delays, host-responsible railroad
 delays, and third-party delays, reported
 by delay code.
Train delays per 10K Minutes of delay per 10,000 train miles Route and host
train miles for all Amtrak-responsible and host- railroad
 responsible delays
Station performance Number of detraining passengers, the Route, train, and
 number of late passengers, and the station
 average minutes late that late customers
 arrive at their detraining stations
Host running time Average actual running time and the Route, train, and
 median actual running time compared host railroad
 with the scheduled running time between
 the first and final reporting points for a
 host railroad set forth in the Amtrak
 schedule skeleton

 22

Customer Service
Customer service metrics use data from the Amtrak customer satisfaction survey
 Metric Description Reported by
 Customer satisfaction Percent of respondents who provided a Route
 score of 70 percent or greater for their
 “overall satisfaction” on a 100 point scale for
 their most recent trip, shown both adjusted
 for performance and unadjusted
 Amtrak personnel Average score from respondents for their Route
 overall review of Amtrak personnel
 Information given Average score from respondents for their Route
 overall review of information provided by
 Amtrak
 On-board comfort Average score from respondents for their Route
 overall review of on-board comfort
 On-board cleanliness Average score from respondents for their Route
 overall review of on-board cleanliness
 On-board food service Average score from respondents for their Route
 overall review of on-board food service
 23

Financial
 Metric Description Reported by
 Cost recovery Amtrak’s adjusted operating revenue System-wide and
 divided by Amtrak’s adjusted operating route
 expense
 Avoidable operating Percent of avoidable operating costs Route
 costs covered by divided by passenger revenue for
 passenger revenue each route, shown with and without
 State operating payments
 Fully allocated core Percent of fully allocated core Route
 operating costs covered operating costs divided by passenger
 by passenger revenue revenue for each route, shown with
 and without State operating payments
 Average ridership Number of passenger-miles divided by Route
 train-mile for each route
 Total ridership Total number of passengers Route

 24

Public Benefits
Public benefits metrics will be updated on an annual basis

Metric Description Reported by
Connectivity Percent of passengers connecting System-wide
 to and from other Amtrak routes
Missed connections Percent of passengers connecting Route
 to/from other Amtrak routes who missed
 connections due to a late
 arrival from another Amtrak train
Community access Percent of Amtrak passenger-trips to and System-wide
 from not well-served communities
Service availability Total number of daily Amtrak trains per MSA
 100,000 residents in a metropolitan
 statistical area (MSA) for each of the top
 100 MSAs in the United States, shown in
 total and adjusted for time of
 day

 25

Implementation Timeline
FRA quarterly reporting will cover the first full quarter 3 months after publication of the Final Rule
• Customer OTP, station performance, and host running time metrics included in second quarterly report
• Customer OTP metric for disputed schedules included in third quarterly report

 Final Rule
 Published

 Certified schedules metric updated
 Certified schedules metric Amtrak and host railroads submit monthly and reported, annually thereafter
 reported monthly joint status report on uncertified schedules

 FRA 1st Quarterly FRA 2nd Quarterly
 Report FRA Quarterly Report
 Report
 (Except OTP) (Complete)
 (Except Disputed)

 Nov Jan Apr July Oct Dec

 2020 2021

 26

ADA Compliance and Research Panel Discussion
Moderated by: Michael Lestingi, Director, Office of Policy and Planning
Panelists:
Calvin Gibson, Director, FRA Office of Civil Rights
Alana Kuhn, Attorney-Adviser, FRA Office of Chief Counsel
Michael Murray, Transportation Specialist, Passenger Rail Policy and Oversight Division
Melissa Shurland, Research Program Manager/General Engineer, Rolling Stock Research Division

Statutory Basis

 • Rehabilitation Act of 1973

 • Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990

 28

Regulations

 • 49 C.F.R. Part 27

 • 49 C.F.R. Part 37

 • 49 C.F.R. Part 38

 29

Stations Program

• Amtrak settlement with Department of Justice

• Planning and reviews

• Stations where Amtrak is not
 the responsible party

 30

ADA Stations Program
 Designs Completed / Planned Construction Completed / Planned
 through FY 2026 through FY 2026

 157 139
 163
 192

 66 56

 Total Total
 386 387*

 Comp In Prog Upcoming Comp In Prog Upcoming

 * Construction project for Tacoma, WA parking improvements was completed without a distinct design project.

 Slides Courtesy of Amtrak 31

Update on Number One Priority Stations
 Currently “Blocked” Design Construction Projected
 # Station
 (Yes/No) Status Status Completion Year
 1 Marshall, TX No Complete Complete CY18
 2 Clifton Forge, VA No Complete Complete CY19
 3 Glenwood Springs, CO No Complete Complete CY19
 4 Paoli, PA No Complete Complete CY19
 5 Mount Joy, PA No Complete Complete CY19
 6 Hazlehurst, MS No Complete Complete CY20
 7 Picayune, MS No Complete Complete CY20
 8 Buffalo - Exchange St., NY No Complete Complete CY20
 9 Gastonia, NC No Complete Complete CY20
 10 Toccoa, GA No Complete Complete CY20
 11 Sanderson, TX Yes Complete In Progress CY21
 12 Ashland, VA Yes Complete In Progress CY21
 13 Tyrone, PA Yes Complete In Progress CY21
 14 Alderson, WV Yes Complete In Progress CY21
 15 Westerly, RI Yes Complete In Progress CY21
 16 Middletown, PA Yes Complete In Progress CY22
 17 Newark, DE Yes Complete In Progress CY24
 18 Crawfordsville, IN Yes Complete Pending CY21
 19 McComb, MS Yes In Progress Pending CY21
 20 Latrobe, PA Yes In Progress Pending CY21
 21 Thurmond, WV Yes In Progress Pending CY22
 22 Philadelphia – North, PA Yes In Progress Pending CY22
 - Amtrak does not have ADA obligation
 23 Yuma, AZ No In Progress Pending CY23
 24 Aberdeen, MD No In Progress Pending CY24 - 3rd party sponsored project planned
 25 Elko, NV Yes In Progress Pending CY24
 26 Harpers Ferry, WV Yes In Progress Pending CY25 - Station no longer “blocked” on
 27 Parkesburg, PA Yes In Progress Pending CY25 amtrak.com
 28 Coatesville, PA Yes In Progress Pending CY25
 Red text - Change since last update
 29 Ardmore, PA Yes In Progress Pending TBD
 30 Downingtown, PA Yes Pending Pending TBD
 Slides Courtesy of Amtrak 32

Update on Number One Priority Stations
 Gastonia, NC Toccoa, GA

 Project Substantially Complete

 Ashland, VA Sanderson, TX

 Slides Courtesy of Amtrak 33

PIDS Program Progress (Overall FY14 – FY22)

 ADA Project Designs ADA Project Deployments

 16
 32
 50

 73 16
 Total
 Total 98
 89
 Completed In Progress Upcoming
 Completed In Progress Upcoming

 *Some deployments did not include a design in the ADA program and others are multiphase and count as multiple deployments

 Slides Courtesy of Amtrak 34

PIDS Program Progress

 Rhinecliff, NY Rhinecliff, NY Rhinecliff, NY

 Philadelphia - 30th Street Station, PA Philadelphia - 30th Street Station, PA

 Slides Courtesy of Amtrak 35

Accessible Boarding Technologies Program
 • Production of bridge plates and on-board ramps is complete
 • Bridge plate deployments are in progress. To date, 246 units have been
 deployed at 37 of 54 planned locations. Units have been deployed at the
 following locations:
 • New London, CT • New Carrollton, • Trenton, NJ • Cornwells
 • Old Saybrook, MD Albany- Heights, PA
 CT Ann Arbor, MI Rensselaer, NY • Elizabethtown,
 • Washington • Raleigh, NC Buffalo PA
 Union Station, • Metropark Exchange • Exton, PA
 DC (Iselin), NJ Street, NY • Harrisburg, PA Bridge Plates – Metropark, NJ
 • Wilmington, DE • New Brunswick, • New York Penn • Lancaster, PA
 • Tampa, FL NJ Station, NY (in • Mount Joy, PA
 • Boston Back • Newark Airport, progress) • Paoli, PA
 Bay, MA NJ • Niagara Falls, • Philadelphia, PA
 • Route 128 • Newark Penn NY • Kingston, RI
 (Westwood), MA Station, NJ • Rochester, NY • Providence, RI
 Secure
 • Springfield, MA • Princeton • Syracuse, NY • Roanoke, VA
 ment
 • Baltimore, MD Junction, NJ • Oklahoma City, Retract
 • BWI Airport, MD OK or

 • 30 new ramps deployed on Superliner I Sleeper cars

 Completed since last update Slides Courtesy of Amtrak On-board Ramp Installed
 36

RD&T Research – Background

• The Federal Railroad Administration’s (FRA) Office of Research,
 Development and Technology (RD&T) funds research to evaluate new
 technologies for improving occupant protection on passenger rail cars
 • Past research has identified new technologies that can reduce injuries
 to passengers on rail cars in accidents
 • Improved strategies for designing seat layouts

 • Working with the Next Generation Equipment Committee Accessibility
 Working Group (AWG), FRA developed recommendations for improved
 accessibility on passenger rail vehicles.

 37

Background – Research on Occupant Protection

Research on occupant protection showed that during collisions and derailments, secondary
impact velocity is a concern

 38

Background – Research on WhMD Spatial Study
Results from spatial study of recommendations for larger accessible space raised an issue of
containment of wheeled mobility devices (WhMD) and its occupant

 39

Background – Research on WhMD Spatial Study
Prior research has taught that the larger the space between the occupant and the nearest
surface, the higher the severity of injury from impact

There has been no research on what is the appropriate level of containment for occupied
WhMDs on passenger rail vehicles

 40

Objective of Experiments

 The purpose of the planned experiments is to test and evaluate
 protection provided by active and passive containment strategies
 for passengers seated in WhMDs on passenger trains.

 41

Planned Experiment

• FRA will be conducting a train-to-train test in 2021
 • The test is meant to assess crashworthiness features of passenger
 rail cars
 • One moving powered car/locomotive will pull 2 to 3 passenger rail
 cars and will impact a standing train consist
 • Trailing rail cars will be outfitted with WhMDs and anthropomorphic
 test devices (ATDs) to access different strategies of passenger
 containment during the accident scenario
 • The test will be conducted at the Transportation Technology Center in
 Pueblo, CO

 42

Planned Experiment – Setup

Three securement
methods will be
evaluated:
• Q’STRAINT Q’Pod®
 securement system
 in forward-facing
 orientation
• Q’STRAINT
 Quantum®
 securement system
 in rear-facing
 orientation
• ATD seated in
 WhMD in rear-facing
 orientation

 43

Securement of WhMD in Planned Experiment

• Q’STRAINT manufactures WhMD securement devices that are used on
 mass transit bus and rail (non-FRA regulated) systems in the United States
• Q’Pod® – Forward-facing containment system

 44

Securement of WhMD in Planned Experiment

Quantum® – Rear-facing securement system

 45

Planned Outreach

• Results from the planned experiment will be disseminated to various
 stakeholder groups
 • AASHTO
 • US Access Board
 • PRIIA Next Generation Equipment Committee
 • American Public Transportation Association
 • Federal Transit Administration

• The Technical Report will be made available detailing the experiment and
 results via the FRA website

 46

Available Research Report on Accessibility

Technical Report – available at link below
• Recommendations for accessibility
 improvements on board trains
 • Spatial Improvements
 • Communications
 • Boarding

https://railroads.dot.gov/elibrary/inclusive-and-universal-accessible-
design-considerations-next-generation-passenger

 47

QUESTIONS?
 48

CONTACT US
Federal Railroad Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590

For more information visit us at
www.fra.dot.gov

Connect with us USDOTFRA