1200 New Jersey Avenue S.E. Washington, D.C. 20590
Preliminary 

National Rail Plan

The Groundwork for Developing 

Policies to Improve the United 

States Transportation System

October 15, 2009
Page Intentionally Left Blank
Preliminary

Preliminary National Rail Plan

ExEcUTIvE SUmmaRy ............................................................................................................................ 1

BackGRoUND aND coNTExT of ThE PlaN .................................................................................. 3

oBjEcTIvES foR RaIl aS PaRT of a NaTIoNal TRaNSPoRTaTIoN SySTEm ................... 7

IncreasIng Passenger and FreIght raIl PerFormance WIll ImProve natIonal

transPortatIon system PerFormance ......................................................................................................... 7

IntegratIon oF all transPortatIon modes; a more comPlementary transPortatIon system ................ 8

IdentIFy Projects oF natIonal sIgnIFIcance ............................................................................................... 8

ProvIde Increased PublIc aWareness ......................................................................................................... 9

NEED foR a NaTIoNal RaIl PlaN ................................................................................................... 10

develoPment oF Passenger hIgh-sPeed raIl—a neW transPortatIon vIsIon ....................................... 10

to ImProve saFety: ................................................................................................................................... 11

to ImProve Fuel eFFIcIency: ..................................................................................................................... 13

to Foster lIvable communItIes: .............................................................................................................. 16

to Increase the economIc comPetItIveness oF the unIted states .......................................................... 17

to better understand and Integrate the unIque economIcs oF the raIl Industry ............................. 20

to helP bolster the domestIc Passenger raIl Industry and create jobs ............................................ 22

ImPoRTaNcE of STaTE RaIl PlaNS IN DEvEloPING ThE loNG-RaNGE NaTIoNal 

RaIl PlaN .................................................................................................................................................. 23

fRamEwoRk foR a NaTIoNal RaIl PlaN .................................................................................. 23

aPProPrIateness oF strategIes oF FundIng FreIght transPortatIon Investments ................................... 24

oPPortunItIes and greater eFFIcIencIes In multImodal transPortatIon ................................................ 25

IdentIFyIng areas to contInue to ImProve transPortatIon saFety ........................................................ 26

eFFectIvely meet deFense and emergency transPortatIon requIrements ............................................ 26

balancIng the beneFIts oF raIl corrIdor develoPment WIth local communItIes and 

commuter servIces ................................................................................................................................... 27

IdentIFy oPPortunItIes to ImProve energy use and the envIronment ................................................... 27

stakeholders and the develoPment oF the natIonal raIl Plan ............................................................ 28

oUTREach STRaTEGy To DEvEloP ThE NaTIoNal RaIl PlaN ......................................... 29

objectIves oF the natIonal raIl Plan outreach .................................................................................... 30

outreach actIvItIes .................................................................................................................................. 30

next steP .................................................................................................................................................. 30

aPPENDIx a ............................................................................................................................................... 31

aPPENDIx B ............................................................................................................................................... 32

aPPENDIx c ............................................................................................................................................... 33

i

2009 NATIONAL RAIL PLAN
Preliminary

Page Intentionally Left Blank

ii

NATIONAL RAIL PLAN 2009
Preliminary

iii

2009 NATIONAL RAIL PLAN
Preliminary

Page Intentionally Left Blank

iv

NATIONAL RAIL PLAN 2009
1

Preliminary

Executive Summary

The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA) directed the Administrator of 

the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) to develop a Preliminary National Rail Plan (PNRP or 

Preliminary Plan) to address the rail needs of the Nation. The PRIIA also directed FRA to provide 

assistance to States in developing their State rail plans in order to ensure that the Federal long-range 

National Rail Plan is consistent with approved State rail plans. Subsequent to PRIIA, the American 

Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) sets the framework for the development of true 

high-speed rail in the United States. This Preliminary Plan is, therefore, an important first step in an 

ongoing process. 

This Preliminary Plan lays the groundwork for developing policies to improve the U.S. transportation 

system. Its goals are consistent with the top goals of the U.S. Department of Transportation’s (DOT): 

to improve safety, to foster livable communities, to increase the economic competitiveness of the 

United States, and to promote sustainable transportation. The important attributes of rail—safety, fuel 

efficiency, and environmental benefits—can meaningfully assist in achieving these goals. 

cURRENT RaIlRoaD BENEfITS To ThE Today, rail is part of a complex national 

TRaNSPoRTaTIoN NETwoRk system for the movement of people 

fREIGhT PaSSENGER and goods. Passenger and freight 

SafETy Rail and intermodal Average fatalities transportation are closely interlinked 

rail can enhance per year from 2002- in that people and goods use the same 

safety in competitive 2008 = less than 9 infrastructure for transportation by corridors highway and rail. Therefore, a National ENERGy 1.9 to 5.5 times more Consumes 21% less 

fuel efficient than energy per passenger Rail Plan must be developed with an 

truck mile than awareness of the transportation needs 

automobiles and demands of both passengers and 

lIvaBlE Mitigates urban Encourages efficient freight, both of which increasingly move c congestion land use ommUNITIES “intermodally,” that is they use the most 

EcoNomIc Reduces logistics Improves regional suitable mode of transportation for each GRowTh costs interconnectivity segment of a particular journey. The ENvIRoNmENT Reduces greenhouse Reduces greenhouse long-range National Rail Plan will assist gases and pollutants gases and pollutants

in developing strategies that exploit the 

strengths that are inherent in each mode of transportation, and leverage those strengths to improve U.S. 

transportation as a whole. 

The traditional role of the FRA has long been to promote and oversee railroad safety, and safety 

remains a focus of FRA. Legislative directives in the last year, most notably PRIIA and the Rail Safety 

Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA), have given FRA additional broad responsibilities to administer and 

manage funds that will improve rail transportation. The new scope and direction provided by PRIIA and 

RSIA, in combination with the Recovery Act, has made FRA’s participatory role in rail transportation 

projects comparable to that of other modal administrations in the Department. 

2009 NATIONAL RAIL PLAN
2

Preliminary

This Preliminary Plan sets forth the FRA’s proposed approach to developing the long-range 

National Rail Plan, including our goals and objectives for the greater inclusion of rail in the 

national transportation system. Although this Preliminary Plan does not generally offer specific 

recommendations, it identifies a number of issues that this agency believes should be considered in 

formulating the National Rail Plan. In short, it is designed to create a springboard for further discussion. 

The FRA especially looks forward to input from the States, and freight railroads, who are expected to 

provide valuable information and perspectives. The end focus is on the shippers and riders who use 

the rail system. We welcome the participation of all transportation stakeholders on these issues as well 

as others that may be presented, as we develop the long-range National plan. Outreach efforts such 

as the Rail Safety Advisory Committee and the high-speed rail development efforts have been very 

successful. These and other activities have given FRA a reputation for strong and extensive outreach; 

the development of a National Rail Plan will be in line with this model. 

NATIONAL RAIL PLAN 2009
3

Preliminary

Background and context of the Plan

The RSIA reauthorized FRA and the current safety program through 2013, and it proposes initiatives to 

enhance rail safety by adding inspectors and new programs. The RSIA also advances high-speed rail 

by opening avenues for Federal investments in infrastructure improvements. Companion legislation, 

PRIIA, was enacted on October 16, 2008. Section 307(b)(j) of the Act directs the Administrator of FRA 

to: (1) provide assistance to States in developing State rail plans, (2) develop a long-range National Rail 

Plan consistent with both approved State rail plans and the rail needs of the Nation, and (3) develop a 

PNRP within a year of the date of enactment.

Additionally, PRIIA directed the Administrator to develop partnerships with the freight and passenger 

railroad industry concerning public rail development, support intermodal rail development and highspeed rail development, ensure that programs and initiatives developed under this section benefit the 

public, and support regional and national transportation goals. The Administrator was also directed to 

assist providers of rail service and owners of rail infrastructure in integrating passenger-freight service 

on shared rights-of-way in response to joint requests to help assess operations and capacity, capital 

requirements, and operating costs.

The directives of this section of PRIIA are numerous, and while certain provisions will require 

additional time due to new requirements, they nonetheless need to be considered in this Preliminary 

Plan. This PNRP sets forth the issues, methodology, and framework that must be taken into account 

in the future development of the first long-range National Rail Plan, which, as noted above, must be 

consistent with the approved State rail plans. This PNRP also presents background material on various 

aspects of our current system of rail transportation, and addresses the key issues that must be resolved 

in order to develop a modern and efficient passenger and freight rail system that works in harmony with 

other modes of transportation. Such a system will enable DOT to meet future national needs as well as 

achieve current departmental goals.

The railroad industry today is a major component of a mature transportation network that also includes 

highway, waterway, transit, pipeline, and air (see Figure 1 for rail, highway and waterway tonnage). 

Together these systems provide, singularly or intermodally, the transportation that is required for 

freight and passengers. Over the past decades, the network has improved in response to shippers and 

travelers who have demanded more efficiencies from both the transportation modes and the intermodal 

connections. As a result, freight shippers and their customers have been able to extract logistic costs 

from the supply chain, and commuter and intercity rail passengers can sensibly choose the type of 

transportation that best meets their expectations in terms of time and cost. As this trend continues, 

higher quality rail service will attract an increasing share of business from shippers and from traveling 

passengers. 

2009 NATIONAL RAIL PLAN
4

Preliminary

In the United States today, two distinctly different rail systems exist: freight railroads and passenger 

railroads. Freight railroads are privately owned and operated; they are in business to make a profit for 

their stockholders. Passenger railroads are publicly subsidized by taxpayers; they provide a public 

service by offering a safe and environmentally friendly travel option. These two different types of rail 

transportation usually occur in the same corridor and on the same infrastructure. 

By many measures, the U.S. freight rail system is the safest, most efficient and cost effective in the 

world. Generally speaking, and in relative comparison to other modes, freight railroads perform their 

functions and maintain the freight rail infrastructure without the need for government funds. Freight rail 

infrastructure maintenance and capacity enhancements, however, can only occur with Federal legislation 

and policies that allow rail carriers to earn revenues that are sufficient to encourage their continued 

investment in the system. Their investment meets National needs by enhancing safety, reliability, and 

capacity. Before 1980, when railroads were partially deregulated, they focused on survival. In recent 

years, they have been thriving and privately funded freight railroads have focused on enhancing the 

reliability of their service and their intermodal capacity. The recent economic downturn has slowed but 

not eliminated targeted projects that will enhance freight railroads capacity and competitiveness, thereby 

positioning them to better handle traffic as the economy recovers.

NATIONAL RAIL PLAN 2009
5

Preliminary

These investments are important to meet future growth. The Department estimates that tonnage on the 

railroad system will increase by 88 percent through 2035. Taking this growth into consideration, Figure 

2 shows future rail volumes based upon current corridor capacity. Levels of service “A, B, and C” are 

corridors operating below capacity. Levels of service “D and E” are operating near capacity and level of 

service “F” is operating above capacity with congestion affecting the network.

figure 2. - future corridor volumes compared to current corridor capacity - 2035 without Improvements

Our Nation’s intercity passenger rail service is provided by the National Railroad Passenger Corporation 

(Amtrak), which was created in 1971 to relieve the freight railroads from their common carriage 

obligation to provide passenger service. The current passenger services, (see Figure 3), which serve 

as an important component of a national transportation system, must be improved and intermodal 

connections enhanced. The PRIIA reauthorized Amtrak for 5 years and provided funding to improve the 

U.S. rail passenger network. To better develop high-speed rail service, whether operated by Amtrak or 

another entity, the Recovery Act, signed into law by President Obama on February 17, 2009, contains 

funding and sets forth requirements for the development of high-speed intercity rail. This investment 

will serve as an important economic stimulus, while improving intercity passenger rail service in urban 

areas and paving the way for high-speed rail. 

2009 NATIONAL RAIL PLAN
6

Preliminary

Currently, there are more than 20 commuter rail systems that serve 25 major metropolitan areas. During 

the 10 years between 1997 and 2007, annual commuter rail ridership increased by 28 percent–by 

almost 100 million riders–and in 2007, these commuter rail systems operated 7,000 route-miles and 

carried approximately 1.7 million daily riders. These systems are supported by State, local, and Federal 

funding, and they operate over rights-of-way that may be publicly owned, or owned and maintained by 

freight railroads. As commuter services grow, and as high-speed intercity rail brings more passengers 

directly into city centers, the importance of easy access to local transit services will increase. The 

number of rail corridors that reach through metropolitan areas and into the heart of cities, however, is 

limited. 

Long-term trends demonstrate that the growth in intercity and commuter passenger rail services will 

continue. Most passenger service, however, occurs on rail infrastructure that is owned and operated by 

freight railroads; only a small amount of rail infrastructure is owned by passenger carriers. Although 

some rail infrastructure is passenger-only, the vast majority of rail route-miles are traversed by freight. 

Passenger and freight rail needs are vastly different. Yet because they are inescapably linked and 

amenable to economies of scale and joint benefits, the development of a National Rail Plan cannot 

consider one method in isolation from the other. Both passenger and freight rail operations can interfere 

with one another, and the delay of either passengers or freight seriously diminishes productivity and 

customer satisfaction. 

NATIONAL RAIL PLAN 2009
7

Preliminary

Moreover, the rail plan must be developed in consideration of all other modes of transportation 

within the entire network. With proper policies and positioning, rail can better serve its role as a 

complementary component of that network. Shippers and passengers benefit from options that include 

intermodal freight and passenger transportation. Therefore, any plan must consider how to improve 

efficiencies not only within that particular mode, but also on how the system can collectively work 

together to provide service enhancements for all users of transportation services. 

The National Rail Plan must be vigilant of the dynamic transportation needs of the Nation and remain 

flexible to accommodate changes in trade patterns and market conditions. For example, the completion 

of the Panama Canal expansion project in 2014 could significantly alter U.S. and international trade 

patterns and shift current freight flows to or from different port facilities with subsequent increases in 

traffic on corridors which are not accustomed to such intensive use.

By recognizing that the individual modes of transportation form an integrated transportation system, the 

Nation can utilize the strengths that are inherent in each mode, thereby optimizing the entire system. 

objectives for Rail as part of a National Transportation System 

Increasing Passenger and freight Rail Performance will Improve National Transportation System 

Performance

The demand for rail passenger transportation depends on the performance of the system. Late passenger 

trains and inadequate amenities drive away customers, while on-time, frequent and comfortable trains 

draw increased patronage. Passengers switch to rail when the combination of the positive attributes 

(safety, speed, reliability, comfort, and convenience) outweighs the cost of transportation alternatives, 

that is, when the “total package” is viewed as preferable. For this reason, improving rail’s performance 

will enhance the performance of the national transportation system as a whole. Experience around 

the world has shown that high-speed and intercity passenger rail systems will require a sustained 

investment. 

Freight shippers, for example, consider not just the cost of rail, but its reliability and convenience. 

Shippers of freight, and particularly high-value freight, cannot afford slow or undependable 

transportation services, and when these difficulties result in lost market share, arguments about the 

superior safety and fuel efficiency of rail fall on deaf ears. If freight rail is to play a larger role in the 

national transportation system, its performance must improve. This will require expanding capacity, 

improving connections, reducing chokepoints, and providing new and expanded services. And where 

rail does not provide direct service to the originator or end-user, seamless service for the “last mile” is 

also key. At the same time, regulatory and institutional factors that increase costs and impose unequal 

burdens on performance may have to be revised to better serve the transportation industry and the 

Department’s goals. Finally, industry and government, working together, must develop and harness new 

technologies to further improve rail safety, productivity, and performance.

2009 NATIONAL RAIL PLAN
8

Preliminary

Integration of all Transportation modes: a more complementary Transportation System

The inclusion of new transportation options will allow people and companies to make smarter choices 

regarding costs and services. Greater integration of rail into the transportation network, where it makes 

sense to do so, will help the Nation to achieve its ambitious goals. When relative costs and services lead 

to the increased use of rail, society will experience improved safety, reduced congestion, and a reduction 

in the need for petroleum with subsequent reductions in pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. In 

many cases, measures to improve rail performance beyond current levels will further increase rail’s 

capacity to expeditiously move additional freight and passengers. 

Using information provided by the States and other stakeholders, including freight railroads and 

passenger rail operators, the National Rail Plan will set forth a methodology that can more accurately 

determine what capacity is needed and where intermodal connections need to be improved. This final 

Plan will recommend strategies to fund capacity enhancements, as well as identify public benefits and 

consequences. The plan will strive to identify and encourage choices in transportation that help achieve 

the Nation’s and the Department’s goals.

Identify Projects of National Significance

One purpose of this plan is to consider how to achieve those critical improvements in the rail system 

that cannot be realized solely through current public or private arrangements. Rail projects such as the 

Kansas City Flyover and the Alameda Corridor are examples of successful public-private partnerships 

NATIONAL RAIL PLAN 2009
9

Preliminary

that are funded by various means, including substantial funding from private sources. As in the case 

of the Alameda Corridor, user fees can be used to repay a portion of the initial outlays by government. 

Such projects mirror the manner in which early highway projects were financed by a variety of funding 

and recouped much of the cost of the project through user fees in the form of tolls. 

The privately owned freight rail system, however, must generally finance improvements through current 

cash flow based on expectations of future demand. Corporate railroads have a responsibility to generate 

income for their shareholders and look for ways to maximize their return on investment. However, 

activities that may provide a broad public benefit may not adequately contribute to (and may even harm) 

efforts to increase revenue or reduce expenses. By comparison, the national highway system, designed 

to be maintained by user fees in the form of fuel taxes, is not, and has never been, expected to “turn a 

profit” for its owners. Nonetheless, the national highway system provided speed and flexibility, and 

revolutionized travel and freight transportation during the 40 years of its development. 

There are critical rail projects that might be pursued if additional resources were available. This is 

particularly true for joint freight-passenger improvements, where the benefit for either mode (when 

viewed independently) may not be enough to justify a project, although the total benefit would warrant 

it. New high-speed intercity rail projects provide another example where coordination will be needed 

among a number of different local jurisdictions. The long range National Rail Plan will consider 

methods of identifying these “projects of national significance” and propose financing mechanisms. In 

addition, the Plan will evaluate alternative strategies for financing freight and passenger rail needs. 

Just as the formation of the interstate highway system took shape in concert with the development of 

corridors, rail service enhancements and additions to infrastructure must be coordinated within the 

context of traffic flows, corridors, and route structures that are in harmony with State and regional 

transportation plans. As an integral part of the national transportation system, improvements to rail 

service should be harmonized with existing and future highways, transit systems, airports, and ports. 

Provide Increased Public awareness

The achievement of these goals will require public support and awareness of all modes of transportation. 

It is therefore vital to stimulate public awareness of the issues and potential benefits from improvements 

in various modes of transportation, including rail. With this in mind, the long range National Rail Plan 

will include an extensive public outreach effort. Moreover, the Department will undertake efforts to 

develop and disseminate material to the public on the potential of rail transportation in partnership 

with other modes. This is consistent with the Department’s resolve to form a cohesive and efficient 

multimodal transportation network. Consequently, the long range National Rail Plan will include 

provisions for ongoing education and feedback on the numerous transportation issues involved.

2009 NATIONAL RAIL PLAN
10

Preliminary

Need for a National Rail Plan

As the Nation seeks to rebalance its transportation system, much attention has been focused on rail. 

In the last year, Congress has enacted several important pieces of legislation: RSIA, PRIIA, and the 

Recovery Act. Efforts are currently underway for legislation for surface transportation reauthorization. 

A National Rail Plan, developed in harmony with the states, can provide direction by developing a 

common understanding and aligning goals.

The Recovery Act contains more than $48 billion in vital transportation funding to help bring about 

economic recovery and make lasting investments in our Nation’s infrastructure. This Act provides an 

investment in our Nation’s transportation infrastructure and in jobs for Americans. The resources made 

available for transportation infrastructure in the Recovery Act will primarily be used for the modes of 

transportation that have been traditionally funded publicly. However, the Recovery Act specifies that 

certain investments, funded through the Federal Highway Administration or the Office of the Secretary 

of Transportation, can be used for meaningful transportation enhancements regardless of mode; these 

funds, therefore, are available for rail infrastructure improvements. In addition, for the first time, the 

Recovery Act designated $8 billion specifically for the development of high-speed intercity rail in the 

United States. 

Rail can deliver on the Department’s goals. For both passenger and freight, rail transportation is a safe, 

fuel efficient, and environmentally friendly mode of transportation. How rail transportation contributes 

to the Department’s goals is further explained below.

Development of Passenger high-Speed Intercity Rail: a New Transportation vision

To help address the Nation’s transportation challenges, the Federal Government is determining how 

and where to invest in an efficient, high-speed intercity passenger rail network, which would consist of 

100–600 mile intercity corridors that connect communities across America. (See Figure 4.) This vision 

builds on the successful highway and aviation development models by adding a 21st century solution 

that focuses on a clean, energy-efficient option (even today’s modest intercity passenger rail system 

consumes 21 percent less energy per passenger-mile than automobiles, for example). But developing a 

comprehensive high-speed and intercity passenger rail network would require a long-term commitment 

at both the Federal and State levels. In addition to the $8 billion in the Recovery Act, consideration is 

currently being given at all levels of government to increase funding for high-speed rail. 

Over the past two decades, the Federal Government has taken small steps to lay the groundwork for an 

expansion of high-speed intercity rail and intercity passenger rail. The funding provided in the Recovery 

Act represents a significantly greater Federal commitment to high-speed intercity rail development in the 

United States.

The first steps to advance passenger rail will emphasize strategic investments that will yield tangible 

benefits to intercity rail infrastructure, equipment, performance, and intermodal connections over the 

NATIONAL RAIL PLAN 2009
11

Preliminary

next several years, while also creating a “pipeline” of projects to promote future corridor development. 

Federal and State governments face a difficult fiscal environment in which to balance critical investment 

priorities, and many will have to ramp up their program management capabilities. 

The United States has a dwindling pool of expertise in the field of passenger rail and a lack of 

manufacturing capability. But future investment in passenger rail could lead to a resurgence of this 

industry and require new technologically advanced designs. Equipment could be constructed in 

manufacturing plants, requiring advanced subsystems along with primary materials such as high-quality 

steel. 

This presents a challenge, but also an opportunity. Along with the renewed Federal commitment 

proposed here, the country’s success in creating a balanced and sustainable transportation future will 

require that we work to overcome these challenges through strong new partnerships among State and 

local governments, railroads, manufacturers, and other stakeholders. 

figure 4. - high-Speed/Intercity Rail corridors under consideration by multiple Entities

To Improve Safety 

In numerous ways and on many levels, FRA has played a key role in the ongoing development and 

progression of safety in rail transportation. Although a strong safety culture already exists in the freight 

and passenger railroad environments, there is always room for improvement. Owing to the fact that rail 

transportation occurs on private rights-of-way and away from the public domain for most of its journey, 

2009 NATIONAL RAIL PLAN
12

Preliminary

it largely avoids interacting with the public. In fact, the preponderance of casualties, both injuries and 

fatalities, involve traffic at grade crossings and/or people trespassing on railroad property. Due to this 

separation between railroads and other traffic, shippers and passengers who use rail in lieu of public 

infrastructure accrue measurable safety benefits. Railroad passengers are significantly safer because 

of safety regulations, standards, and technology that are designed and built into passenger equipment 

and operations. On a per-mile basis, rail passengers are exponentially safer than automobile occupants. 

Whether hauling freight, taking commuters to work, or moving intercity passengers, rail is one of the 

safest modes available. The railroad environment, however, is not without its dangers; indeed, it can be 

unforgiving in certain situations. Because of this, FRA’s most critical mission is safety.

The railroad industry has experienced considerable improvement in safety over the past several decades, 

with significant annual declines in casualties and rail-related accidents and incidents, including train 

accidents, highway-rail grade-crossing incidents and employee accidents. These promising trends are 

all the more impressive because they occurred during an era of ever-increasing train-miles. Since 1980, 

train-miles, a measure of exposure, have increased by 27 percent while accidents per million train-miles 

have declined by 71 percent. (See Figure 5.) 

figure 5. - Train accident and Employee on Duty casualty Rates

NATIONAL RAIL PLAN 2009
13

Preliminary

Over the past decade, both the accident rate and the employee-on-duty casualty rate have flattened. 

To build upon these successes, FRA began the Risk Reduction Program (RRP), an initiative to reduce 

accidents and injuries beyond the current downward trend. The program capitalizes upon strong safety 

cultures already in place by helping the rail industry establish voluntary programs that identify and 

address risk, and which include measurable goals and corrective actions. Congress later mandated the 

use of the RRP in the Railroad Safety Improvement Act of 2008.

New technologies have the potential to increase safety even further; two notable examples are positive 

train control (PTC) and electronically controlled pneumatic (ECP) brakes. PTC systems integrate 

command, control, communications, and information systems in order to control train movements 

with safety, precision, and efficiency. These PTC systems will improve railroad safety by significantly 

reducing the probability of collisions between trains, “overspeed” accidents, and casualties to roadway 

workers. With FRA guidance and involvement, railroads have tested and demonstrated different types 

of PTC in signaled and non-signaled territory. The Rail Safety Improvement Act requires the installation 

of PTC by 2015 on all Class I1

 mainline track where certain hazardous materials are transported, and on 

mainline track over which intercity or commuter rail passenger transportation is regularly provided. The 

FRA has begun the rulemaking process for PTC implementation. 

Another proven technology, ECP brakes, can significantly enhance rail safety and efficiency. Under 

some conditions, trains operating with ECP brake systems can stop in approximately half the time 

and distance as compared to trains equipped with conventional brakes. With ECP brakes, locomotive 

engineers have better control of their trains because they can gradually apply or release the brakes. 

In addition, the use of ECP brakes may offer major benefits in fuel savings, train handling, car 

maintenance, and network capacity. Over the long term—and, in part, because of shorter stopping 

distances—ECP brakes will allow longer trains to safely operate closer together, permitting greater 

traffic flow and thereby increasing capacity on existing infrastructure.

To Improve Fuel Efficiency 

Railroads offer low rolling resistance, even at high speeds. This inherent feature of rail transportation 

saves fuel when transporting freight and passengers. Petroleum consumption is, of course, a growing 

national concern, not only as an economic drain, but also because increasing global competition for 

petroleum supplies raises national security concerns. Moreover, when petroleum is consumed in 

transportation, greenhouse gases (GHG) are released into the atmosphere; more efficient methods of 

transportation will reduce GHG and other harmful emissions. 

1

 As defined by the Surface Transportation Board, Class I railroads are rail carriers with operating revenues greater than 

$359.6 million per year. 

2009 NATIONAL RAIL PLAN
14

Preliminary

According to a U.S. Department of Energy study, depending on a number of factors including passenger 

load-factor, distance traveled and weight, passengers traveling by rail use 21 percent less BTUs2

 per 

mile on average than those traveling by automobile, and 17 percent less BTUs per mile than those 

traveling by air for short-haul flights on average. Importantly, passengers riding on intercity trains 

that are powered by electricity in the Northeast consume zero petroleum. Electricity for this region 

of the Nation is generated from a variety of energy sources. Examining information provided by the 

Energy Information Administration for the States in which electrically-powered intercity passenger 

trains operate (MA, CT, NY, PA, RI, DE, and MD) for the month of June 2009, indicates that in total, 

over 36 percent of the electrical power was generated by nuclear energy. Natural gas and hydroelectric 

power accounted for about 24 percent and 7 percent, respectively. About 30 percent of the energy 

was generated from coal. The balance is from other sources, such as wind. Technologies such as 

regenerative breaking, which captures the electrical energy that is generated by decelerating a train, can 

further increase energy efficiency.

The railroad industry is one of the most fuel-efficient freight transportation modes in the Nation. A 

2009 study comparing rail and truck fuel efficiency3

 demonstrated that, depending on the route and the 

commodity carried, railroads are 1.9 to 5.5 times more fuel-efficient than trucks. According to Oak 

Ridge National Laboratory, on a BTU per ton-mile basis, rail is 1.7 times more efficient4

 than domestic 

waterborne commerce. 

Railroads have worked to improve their fuel efficiency and have shown gains of over 23 percent from 

1990 through 2007, measured as average gallons of fuel consumed per revenue ton-mile. Most of 

these improvements were realized before the significant rise in fuel prices in 2008. These gains are the 

result of a mix of technical improvements in railroad infrastructure and improvements in equipment and 

operations. As new locomotive technologies are perfected, including hybrid systems and techniques to 

reduce aerodynamic drag, further gains are being realized.

Freight rail is much more fuel efficient than transportation by truck, although the level of rail fuel 

efficiency varies considerably by freight corridor and commodity when making a direct comparison. 

The 2009 fuel efficiency study found that the benefits of shipping by rail increase with route distance. 

As route distance increases, the advantage of rail’s fuel efficiency is compounded. Similarly, as 

commodity volume and weight increase, it takes more trucks to replace a single rail carload of freight. 

Figure 6 shows the average gallons of fuel consumed when shipping by rail compared to equivalent 

shipments moving by truck. 

2

 BTU is an abbreviation of “British thermal unit.”

3

 Comparative Evaluation of Rail and Truck Fuel Efficiency on Competitive Corridors, ICF International, published by the 

Federal Railroad Administration (2009) pp. 1-9.

4

 Table 2.16 Transportation Energy Data Book, 28th Edition (2009).

NATIONAL RAIL PLAN 2009
15

Preliminary

On average, for comparative moves within the mileage blocks and commodities studied, the fuel 

consumed for shipments traveling less than 300 miles is 58 gallons on rail, while truck consumes 173 

gallons. For shipments studied travelling 300–500 miles, rail consumption is 49 gallons and trucks 

use 180 gallons. Figure 6 illustrates that the results are similar for the 500–1,000 mile range with rail 

consuming 107 gallons to truck’s 333 gallons. When moving to the 1,000-2,000 mile range, the fuel 

consumption between the modes widens with rail using 241 gallons to truck’s 943 gallons. The largest 

fuel savings are realized for moves over 2,000 miles. Here, rail consumes 284 gallons but the equivalent 

move using trucks would consume 1,227 gallons.

Fuel savings for an entire long-distance freight train are particularly impressive. Depending on the type 

of the freight and the distance hauled, a single cross-country intermodal double-stack train5

 can replace 

280 trucks and save up to 80,000 gallons of fuel. 

 

 

5

 Intermodal freight is hauled in containers moved by truck, rail, barge, or container ship. On intermodal double-stack trains, 

the containers are stacked two containers high, doubling the amount of trucks this type of train can replace.

2009 NATIONAL RAIL PLAN
16

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005200620072008

Millions

Year

Passenger

Passengers

Linear Trend

Preliminary

To foster livable communities 

By providing enhanced intercity and commuter passenger rail transportation options, rail can increase a 

community’s vitality and livability. Rail corridors offer the use of private rights-of-way into city centers, 

putting intercity passengers within easy walking distance of their destinations or convenient transit 

connections to reach those destinations. From large cities to small towns, restaurants and shops often 

locate near center-city train stations that can serve as hubs of retail and business activity. 

Although Amtrak ridership has declined recently due to the economy, it has generally increased at a 

steady pace during the last 10 years. (See Figure 7.) As high-speed intercity rail services are expanded 

beyond the Northeast, the livability of cities will be enhanced. City centers are often the focus of transit 

systems and generally have the highest concentration of destinations, whether business or personal. By 

connecting city centers with convenient rail links, center city accessibility is leveraged exponentially, 

permitting residents of one city to easily enjoy the opportunities of neighboring cities without the 

need for automobile or air travel, which may be inconvenient for moderate distance trips between city 

centers. Moreover, the rail mode is often more environmentally friendly. Intercity rail can also work 

synergistically with transit by encouraging more people to use transit to get to rail stations. The result 

will be better use of transit services, which will stimulate growth of development more attuned with 

livable communities not relying on auto access.

figure 7. - amtrak Ridership

NATIONAL RAIL PLAN 2009
17

Preliminary

New stations, platforms and rail passenger cars are being constructed with ease of accessibility built into 

the design. Using rail passenger services, people with disabilities can travel between cities and connect 

to accessible transit services. 

Freight rail also plays a role in livable communities. By using the long-haul efficiencies of rail, roadway 

congestion can be reduced, allowing commuters and shoppers to use their automobiles more efficiently. 

By tailoring their services to community and shipper needs, small freight railroads can preserve, and 

often improve, local rail service to communities that are not directly served by Class I railroads. And 

when freight rail service can provide businesses and factories in small communities with cost-effective 

transportation options, they, too, become more competitive. 

To Increase the Economic competitiveness of the United States

Safe and efficient passenger and freight transportation systems are essential to support our economy, 

and when properly maintained and strategically expanded, rail can be a catalyst not only for personal 

mobility but also for robust economic growth. Moving freight quickly and economically enables our 

Nation’s industries and markets to meet the demands of domestic consumers and helps U.S. products 

to compete in the global marketplace. Given that even the most successful commercial enterprise can 

be stifled by inefficient transportation, easy access to U.S. ports is an important factor in facilitating 

more cost-effective international trade. Economic forecasts continue to indicate a burgeoning demand 

for freight transportation in the future; industry and the Nation must aggressively plan ahead now if we 

hope to maintain the competitiveness of the United States in light of the future demands of a challenging 

global environment.

To that end, transportation providers and shippers have worked to lower total logistics costs. Over the 

years, more efficient use of the transportation network and targeted investments have lowered those 

costs, but recently they have begun to rise. This has led shippers to demand more improvements in 

transportation and better intermodal connections to reduce additional costs. Figure 8 shows logistics 

costs as a percent of gross domestic product (GDP). These costs fell after transportation industries were 

deregulated in the early 1980s; however, in 2003 they began to rise, a development that lasted until the 

recent economic downturn. While much of this increased cost can be attributed to a booming economy 

that placed capacity constraints on the transportation network, rising fuel prices also played a role. The 

result has been that logistics costs have formed a larger part of GDP, putting a drag on economic activity, 

making goods more costly, and diminishing the U.S. competitive position. In 2008, logistics costs ended 

their 4-year rise, falling to 9.4 percent of GDP. This was likely due to significant reductions in inventory 

cost from the slumping economy. Transportation costs as a percent of GDP, however, have continued to 

increase.

 

2009 NATIONAL RAIL PLAN
18

Preliminary

Congestion causes delays, diminishes productivity, and adds extra costs to virtually all goods and 

services produced in the economy. Investments in transportation infrastructure that expand capacity and 

relieve congestion points will facilitate the movement of goods over the network and reduce logistics 

costs. The freight railroad industry invested over $148 billion from 1980 through 2008. In recent years 

investment to expand capacity rose from $6.4 billion in 2005 to $10.2 billion in 2008. (See Figure 9.)

 

figure 9. - class I Railroad capital Expenditures

NATIONAL RAIL PLAN 2009
19

Preliminary

The financially healthy and viable rail system that was created after the partial deregulation in 1980 

allowed the railroads to regain market share, and helped ease the increasing burden that the economic 

boom imposed on the highway system. From 1980 through 2006, the railroad’s mode share measured in 

revenue ton-miles grew from 30 percent to 43 percent. (See Figure 10.) 

 

figure 10. - Trends in freight mode Share 

At the same time, rail intermodal shipments (shipping containers and truck trailers on rail flatcars) grew 

from 3 million trailers and containers to over 11.5 million. (See Figure 11.) Even though down from 

the 12.3 million trailers and containers in 2006, intermodal transportation is, nonetheless, the fastest 

growing segment of traffic on the rail system. (See Figure 12.)

figure 11. - Intermodal Growth

2009 NATIONAL RAIL PLAN
20

Preliminary

Modern rail systems require skilled employees. The rail industry has focused on workforce 

development, not only recruiting and retaining the needed skilled employees to add to and replace the 

large number of employees that will be required for an ever-increasing demand, but also ensuring that 

adequate educational institutions are in place to develop a constant pool of talent. This will provide for a 

highly technical work force at all levels that will be needed to build and operate those systems.

To Better Understand and Integrate the Unique Economics of the Rail Industry

The passage of the Staggers Act in 1980 partially deregulated railroads. Partial deregulation of the 

industry allowed the railroads to consolidate and gave them the flexibility to control costs and enter 

into contract pricing. As a consequence, the long-term decline of the U.S. freight rail industry prior 

to Staggers was reversed. Since the early 1980s, the total number of Class I railroads went from 26 to 

7. The number of miles of road owned by these railroads has declined from nearly 165,000 miles in 

1980 to nearly 94,000 miles in 2008. All told, railroad productivity has increased substantially, as more 

freight moves over a denser network. 

NATIONAL RAIL PLAN 2009
21

Preliminary

Duplicative routes and branch lines that were sold by the Class I’s are now being operated by smaller 

railroads. Class I railroads also spun off some routes that became viable Class II or “regional railroads” 

that offer mainline service and connections to multiple Class I’s and shortlines. The Class I’s also shed 

lightly used branch lines, allowing shortline operators to maintain rail service that might otherwise have 

been abandoned without the sale. This has created an important niche for the smaller railroads, which 

focus on local customer service. 

Historically, only two modes of freight transportation, rail and pipeline, are self-sustaining, meaning 

that they have the ability to finance, build, and maintain their infrastructure. Other modes of freight 

transportation rely on publicly financed infrastructure, though these modes have dedicated revenue 

sources that are paid, at least in part, by system users. When an investor buys stock in a non-rail 

transportation company, the investment is made in the vehicles, towboats, office buildings, and other 

capital costs. The investment does not cover the cost of the infrastructure, which is not owned and not 

maintained by the freight company. The economics of the U.S. rail industry are unique because private 

railroads own their locomotives and equipment as well as the track, yards, tunnels, and bridges of the 

total enterprise. Railroads, confident of the untapped capability of rail freight transportation, have 

been investing billions of dollars in double-tracking, signal improvements, and intermodal facilities. 

Railroads are in business to earn a profit and are willing to self-finance additions to their infrastructure 

to ensure long-term returns. A notable phenomenon is the construction of new main tracks in the same 

locations where main tracks were removed decades before. 

It is the inherent efficiency of rail transportation that enables freight railroads to do something that is 

expected of no other form of transportation: maintain their infrastructure, add capacity, host passenger 

operations, and pay local property taxes on their real estate6

. A review of the previous 29 years since the 

railroads were partially deregulated by the Staggers Act of 1980 reveals improvements in the railroad’s 

physical plant (infrastructure) as well as their performance metrics. Safety and fuel efficiency have 

remarkably improved. Rail rates are lower today than in 1980, when compared in constant dollars.7

 

(See Figure 13.) Nonetheless, captive shippers -- those without a viable alternative to a single rail 

carrier -- often complain that they are being charged more than shippers that have competitive options. 

 

6

 Railroads paid over $650 million in property taxes in 2007. 

7

 The period of declining rates ended in 2000. Through late 2007, due to increased demand and little excess capacity, freight 

rates began to move higher. Much of the increase in 2008 was due to the run-up in fuel prices. 

2009 NATIONAL RAIL PLAN
22

Preliminary

Figure 13. - Rail Rates Adjusted for Inflation—1970 to 2008

The combination of steel on steel, gentle grades and curves, and advances in motive power and rolling 

stock has enabled railroads to offer highly efficient and productive transportation services. Greater use 

of rail in the national transportation system can only increase the sustainability of this system. 

To help Bolster the Domestic Passenger Rail Industry and create jobs

Potential new developments in high-speed rail and intercity passenger rail could bring about a 

resurgence in railroad engineering and manufacturing that could help to bolster the U.S. industrial base. 

Rail passenger equipment industries have languished domestically in recent decades. Since the creation 

of Amtrak in 1971, uncertain budgets and ambiguities about the future of passenger rail service have 

contributed to the relative low volume of equipment purchases. States have taken up some of the slack, 

making important purchases of passenger rolling stock that have helped to meet the needs of the national 

passenger system. New equipment will need to be designed and built, however, if passenger rail 

services are to be strengthened and expanded. Given that locomotive production, like that of passenger 

cars, is a segment of heavy industry that relies on many suppliers to produce the required materials 

and components, this new production will exert a multiplier effect. For passenger equipment, more 

efficiencies and economies of larger-scale production could be realized. The development of passenger 

car standards that ensure interoperability of equipment and permit the same equipment to be used on 

various routes over the course of its designed lifetime could also result in lower unit costs and increased 

utilization. 

NATIONAL RAIL PLAN 2009
23

Preliminary

Importance of State Rail Plans in Developing the long-Range National Rail Plan

PRIIA contains a legislative mandate to develop a long-range National Rail Plan, and the Act directed 

FRA to develop the plan consistent with approved State plans. The PRIIA also tasks States with 

establishing or designating a State rail transportation authority that will develop statewide rail plans 

to set policies for freight and passenger rail transportation within their boundaries, establish priorities 

and implementation strategies to enhance rail service in the public interest, and serve as the basis for 

Federal and State rail investments within the State. The FRA is aware of the variety of rail needs and 

resources within State DOTs and that those individual State authorities can range from a division of the 

State DOT to the assignment of such activities to a particular office. The Department expects that these 

State rail plans will provide detailed insight into the concerns facing State transportation systems and 

set forth their vision of how rail transportation can address those issues. The Department’s challenge 

in preparing the National Rail Plan will be to examine passenger and freight corridors running through 

and between States, and to coordinate the States’ plans into a blueprint for an efficient national system, 

thereby meeting both regional and national goals. Because the majority of the infrastructure is owned 

and maintained by the freight railroads, the Department will continue to work with States to develop 

plans that contain proposals or initiatives for partnering with freight carriers in the development of plans 

and objectives.

In addition to the requirements of PRIIA, this preliminary plan will provide the States with a framework 

of elements that the Department views as necessary for creating a viable national rail plan. States are 

welcome to raise additional issues and provide other relevant information, and are encouraged to work 

with all stakeholders. State rail plans should also consider all other modes of transportation, especially 

ways in which they can be leveraged to serve transportation customers more effectively and efficiently. 

It is anticipated that the National Rail Plan may encourage rail development and growth much like the 

model of the interstate highways system, recognizing that the traffic flow of passengers and freight rely 

on the connectivity of regional corridors that pass through several States.

This Preliminary Plan recognizes the comments received from stakeholders over the last several months. 

On September 9, 2009, FRA held a meeting to exchange information with representatives from State 

DOTs, other U.S. DOT modal administrations, passenger rail advocates, transit groups, and the freight 

rail industry. This meeting served as an important step to reach out to all stakeholders and solicit their 

participation in the development of the National Rail Plan; these activities will be numerous as we go 

forward in the development of the Plan.

framework for a National Rail Plan

The development of a National Rail Plan will necessarily involve a discussion and resolution of certain 

issues common to almost every state. The following areas of discussion are not exhaustive, but are 

intended to raise key issues for States and transportation stakeholders to consider as they structure their 

State rail plans and provide input to the long-range National Rail Plan. The FRA believes an exploration 

2009 NATIONAL RAIL PLAN
24

Preliminary

of these issues by States and stakeholders will provide valuable information to the Department. This 

input will help shape policies and define the future programs that will be necessary to complete a 

strategic, long-range national plan. In addition, by bringing together the appropriate parties, and 

particularly by partnering with freight railroads—the owners of the rail infrastructure—the States will be 

able to better assess and resolve crucial transportation issues. 

On a more operational level, States can provide information on local rail bottlenecks and resultant 

traffic congestion, which can affect the movement of people and goods not only in that location but 

throughout the rest of the corridor as well, thereby negatively affecting the larger transportation network. 

Resolution of such issues can improve transportation flows and positively affect the movement of 

goods and people far beyond State borders. States can also provide information on projects that they 

are planning to develop, which may have repercussions beyond state borders, and hence should be 

considered in the National Plan.

The following are several issues that States and stakeholders should consider as they provide input to 

FRA in the development of the long-range National Rail Plan: 

appropriateness of Strategies of funding freight Transportation Investments 

Our Nation’s transportation infrastructure is one of its greatest assets. Properly maintained, it can move 

freight quickly and efficiently, which is essential to U.S. economic growth, industrial productivity, and 

global competitiveness. Inadequate investments in freight corridors that fail to keep pace with increased 

shipper demand and expected public benefits cause congestion, delays, unreliable service, and damage 

the environment. These freight corridors, once built, should be self-supporting. Cost-effective, fuel 

efficient, and environmentally friendly, improved rail transportation is essential to achieving national 

freight transportation goals. Failure to keep and grow rail market share will impose a further burden on 

highways. 

To address this issue, stakeholders need to evaluate the appropriateness of various strategies for 

investing in freight rail by the private sector, the public sector, or potentially both in conjunction. States 

can leverage Federal programs and funds by partnering with all freight transportation stakeholders, 

including the private sector. As States develop State transportation plans, it is expected that they will 

identify planning and organizational opportunities that will lead to the development of new and more 

creative ways to better allocate resources, which will result in a more integrated and efficient freight and 

passenger transportation network. 

Developing ways to assign costs and allocate Resources Equitably across all modes of freight 

Transportation

As explained above, freight transportation services are provided almost exclusively by the private sector, 

and all types of freight transportation place some cost on society. These external costs can include 

the costs of infrastructure damage, environmental damage, accidents, congestion, and other costs. 

NATIONAL RAIL PLAN 2009
25

Preliminary

While motor carriers operate on publicly provided highways and water carriers on publicly maintained 

waterways, the transportation services that the rail industry provides occur over its own rights-of-way, 

and through privately funded support services. Since railroads are privately owned, its customers must 

pay the full costs, both variable and fixed, for the transportation provided. These include the full costs of 

equipment operation and maintenance, as in the other modes; but unlike the other modes, rail must also 

maintain its own infrastructure. 

The Federal Highway Administration’s May 2000 Addendum to the 1997 Federal Highway Cost 

Allocation Study, indicates that heavy intercity trucks only pay 80 percent of the costs imposed on 

Federal highways. Many local roads are funded by real estate and sales taxes, rather than the highway 

users. A more recent study8

 indicates that user fees from transportation taxes and tolls cover only about 

60 percent of highway costs, when all roads, Federal, State, and local, are taken into consideration. 

The pricing of one mode of transportation can directly affect demand for and costs of other modes. 

When private freight companies provide transportation services without being held accountable for 

using the infrastructure, the resultant inefficiencies can impose higher costs on society. From a societal 

standpoint, inefficient pricing will manifest itself in the continued misallocation of resources for 

transportation services. 

Some States and universities have been studying the costs imposed on society by the different modes 

of freight transportation. In their rail plans, States can examine the opportunities that would exist if the 

various modes were priced properly, and calculate the expected benefits and cost savings that might 

result. The National Rail Plan will further examine this issue. 

Opportunities and Greater Efficiencies in Multimodal Transportation

One of the greatest accomplishments in improving efficiencies in the U.S. transportation network over 

the past 15 years has been the gains that have resulted from using multiple modes of transportation for 

completing an origination/destination trip. Significant investment by the public and private sectors 

has gone toward improving, for example, passenger connections at airports for ground transportation, 

which has included rail. Travelers and commuters look to minimize trip costs, and rely on the most 

efficient mode to meet their needs. The ubiquitous “park-n-ride” facilities that surround major cities 

are a testament to intermodal passenger travel. Intercity and commuter rail provides a great benefit to 

intermodal passenger traffic and can be designed for total accessibility.

The private freight railroads have also undertaken and continue to make investments in facilities to 

develop rail intermodal services. Under a multimodal approach, the transportation mode that is the most 

efficient and cost effective for each leg of the trip is used for that particular segment. On the freight 

8

 Paying Our Way: A New Framework For Transportation Finance, Report to the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission, February 2009.

2009 NATIONAL RAIL PLAN
26

Preliminary

side, customer demands for lower logistics costs have led to a reliance on truck trailers or containers 

on freight trains for the long haul. At the origin, the trailer or container is driven to the rail intermodal 

facility or loaded onto rail at dockside. The long haul is provided by rail, keeping the shipment off 

congested highways, while creating a huge savings in fuel. For the final delivery of the freight—the 

“last mile” of the trip—a motor carrier provides the flexibility and reliability that is sought by the 

shipper. 

While transportation customers continue to demand improvements in multimodal travel, these 

efficiencies are also reducing the external and social costs of transportation. To continue these gains, 

States should look at opportunities to exploit the inherent efficiencies of each of the modes, and identify 

projects that will improve multimodal connections and travel. These strategic investments can repay the 

taxpayers many times over.

Identifying areas to continue to Improve Transportation Safety

Over the years, FRA has worked closely with State rail safety inspectors and railroads to reduce both 

the frequency and the severity of railroad accidents. As a result, Federal and State railroad safety efforts 

are now in harmony. In the wake of several major train accidents, DOT and FRA jointly launched, in 

2005, the National Rail Safety Action Plan, whose broad goals are to target the most frequent, highest 

risk causes of train accidents, to focus FRA oversight and inspection resources more precisely, and 

to accelerate research efforts that may mitigate the largest risks. New technologies will also enhance 

railroad safety, and FRA has sponsored research to bring technologies such as PTC and ECP to the point 

that they now are ready to be deployed. Congress has observed the value of several of FRA’s initiatives 

and has mandated their implementation in Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008. Going forward, PTC, 

in combination with other technologies and strategies, can offer levels of passenger protection that can 

be incorporated into new equipment design standards. 

The National Rail Plan will present DOT’s strategies for further improving rail safety based on data 

complied and the analysis developed by FRA’s Office of Railroad Safety. The FRA will continue to 

ensure that its inspection, enforcement, and regulatory programs uphold the safety of the rail industry. 

And FRA will continue to develop new programs to advance railroad safety for employees, passengers, 

and the general public.

States should also consider areas in which the greater use of rail, for both passenger and freight, can be 

used to improve safety. This should be an important consideration for transportation planning. 

Effectively meet Defense and Emergency Transportation Requirements

Rail transportation is important to the national defense strategy because the military’s heavy and 

oversized vehicles need to move by rail to seaports for deployment. The Department of Defense 

(DOD) has emphasized the need for rapid deployment of large numbers of people and huge amounts 

of materials on short notice. Similarly, following a natural disaster, rail transportation is critical to 

ensuring the safe evacuation of affected populations and to assisting local, State, and Federal officials in 

NATIONAL RAIL PLAN 2009
27

Preliminary

rebuilding devastated communities. Deployment of personnel, equipment, and supplies for defense and 

emergency relief operations requires a well planned and flexible rail network with the capacity to absorb 

additional traffic should the demand arise.

The DOD’s Railroads for National Defense Program, in conjunction with FRA, has established the 

Strategic Rail Corridor Network (STRACNET), which allows for the mobilization and deployment 

of personnel, equipment, and supplies in the event of a national emergency or natural disaster. The 

STRACNET is owned and operated by individual rail operators, principally the Class I railroads, 

and it comprises 38,000 miles of rail track serving 170 defense installations. The DOT and FRA will 

continue to work with the DOD, other Federal agencies, individual rail operators, and the transportation 

community to identify short- and long-term national defense and emergency transportation requirements 

and to ensure that the Nation’s railroad network can meet those requirements. To continue this high 

level of readiness, States should assess their plans and rail transportation options in the event a disaster 

strikes. States should also identify the need for improved access and egress in case of evacuations and 

the need for movement of humanitarian supplies.

Balancing the Benefits of Rail Corridor Development with Local Communities and Commuter 

Services

Greater use of passenger rail and freight rail holds the promise of improving our national transportation 

systems, reducing congestion, and diminishing petroleum use while improving the environment. These 

benefits enhance the livability of communities. Thus the benefits of expanded freight and passenger 

service to communities should be an important consideration when developing rail projects. In assessing 

total costs, States should consider both the community benefits and the potential community costs in 

developing their plans. Carefully planned economic development can also help to alleviate the recurring 

problem of benefits being enjoyed by one community while the costs are passed on to another, as well 

as “not-in-my-backyard” issues. Strategies and best-practice approaches must be developed to resolve 

these issues and to ensure that local concerns are addressed as regional and National needs are obtained.

Identify opportunities to Improve Energy Use and the Environment

While rail has proven that it is more energy efficient than comparable truck moves, the most significant 

gains occur over longer hauls. As advances in technology result in greater rail fuel and operating 

efficiencies, the relative length of haul required to obtain maximum efficiencies may be reduced. State 

and Federal efforts can work in harmony to leverage private freight rail investments and identify highvolume freight corridors that have the potential to increase their capacity through enhanced rail service. 

This can reduce the burden on highways while combining the benefits of lower highway capital and 

maintenance costs with improved safety and environmental quality. In order to assess the benefits 

of these projects, states can collect data to comply with the Clean Air Act administered by the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as well as make use of voluntary programs developed to 

estimate greenhouse gas emissions, such as the EPA’s Resources for Inventory Development and State 

Climate Change Action Plans at www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/state_ghginventories.html. 

2009 NATIONAL RAIL PLAN
28

Preliminary

Stakeholders and the Development of the National Rail Plan

We are all stakeholders in the Nation’s transportation system, and we all have a vested interest in the 

continuation and enhancement of performance and services that we have come to rely on. Each of 

us depends on the delivery of goods and the ability to travel unimpeded throughout the country. The 

providers of transportation services are constantly under pressure to provide greater value to their 

customers.

A long-range National Rail Plan cannot be constructed without the input of those that support and 

provide transportation services. These stakeholders include States, Class I railroads, Amtrak, regional 

and shortline railroads, rail labor, rail industry suppliers, trucking companies, logistics providers, 

domestic and international freight shippers, and the associations that represent these groups. Other 

stakeholders include the modal administrations of the DOT, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

and other State and Federal government entities.

Large carriers have the employees and maintenance capabilities to reliably operate a high-quality 

infrastructure that can simultaneously support passenger and freight operations through national 

corridors. But some rail projects designed to improve both rail and highway traffic flows lack sufficient 

return to the railroad to justify the investment. Nor could public bodies pursuing the project solely fund 

it. Railroads have pursued public participation in the development, financing, and construction of such 

projects. Such public-private partnerships offer the potential to achieve multiple goals that benefit both 

parties.

Smaller railroads also play a critical role in providing transportation services. These generally lowercost railroads preserve transportation options for local shippers, and thus play an important part in the 

harmonization of the national transportation system by providing the link to connect shippers with 

the larger carriers. In many instances, these small railroads have demonstrated the flexibility and 

resourcefulness to improve customer service at the local level, while connecting with the Class I carriers 

for the efficiencies of long-haul rail service. This combination has often improved service to shippers 

and communities that would otherwise have been without rail service. 

With the increase in rail intermodal traffic over the past few years, the trucking industry has become a 

significant partner with the railroads. These companies include large, national long-haul trucking firms, 

as well as local companies which provide drayage to and from port and rail intermodal facilities. The 

railroads have tailored their services to meet the demands of these customers and have continued to 

shorten transit times and strengthen reliability. This adds value and lowers total logistics costs. There 

are many aspects to these services, and because of the highway interfaces, obstacles to improving 

services could be local—that final mile on the highway—or regional. Stakeholders include trucking 

companies and trucking associations as well as ports and localities around intermodal terminals. 

Finally, shippers and receivers who depend on rail, and other modes, have a significant interest in the 

performance of the entire transportation system as many shipments are multimodal. The convergence of 

NATIONAL RAIL PLAN 2009
29

Preliminary

each of these stakeholder concerns should be addressed in a National Rail Plan where stakeholders can 

identify the prospects for improved services and potential opportunities to achieve lower logistics costs.

Passenger rail service on the current freight rail network provides opportunities as well as significant 

challenges. Improvements in passenger rail service hold the promise of further mobilizing the Nation 

in an environmentally friendly way while reducing highway and airport congestion. The National Rail 

Plan will need to address many of these issues, a number of which are currently addressed/required 

in FRA’s High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program. Stakeholders, who include passengers and 

industry trade groups, will act as important resources in highlighting passenger rail issues.

Rail passenger intermodal facilities have also become important, as customers have benefited from 

improved connections between all forms of transportation. Significant investment on the part of the 

States, local governments, and the Federal Government has brought about these improvements. All 

stakeholders should identify additional opportunities for such connections and potential funding sources.

The role of public-private partnerships for these endeavors should also be explored. In this regard, FRA 

stands ready to work with all stakeholders who want to contribute to a comprehensive national rail plan 

that incorporates the needs of the States, the traveling public, the freight railroads and their customers, 

and promotes the National goal of a safe, efficient, and sustainable transportation system. Together, 

we can improve safety, foster livable communities, and improve the economic competitiveness of the 

United States.

outreach Strategy to Develop the National Rail Plan

The FRA’s National Rail Plan will involve a vigorous outreach strategy that will encompass all 

stakeholders and the achievement of the Administration’s goals will require nationwide involvement. 

Therefore, it is vital to promote nationwide awareness of the lasting benefits that high-speed intercity 

passenger rail, commuter rail and freight rail can provide, as well as the trade-offs including, but 

not limited to, costs to taxpayers and users of the Nation’s transportation system, impacts on local 

communities and businesses, and the effects on the environment. To encourage this, FRA will undertake 

efforts to develop and disseminate material to the interested public on the value of rail transportation in 

partnership with other modes. 

It is essential that the National Rail Plan be developed with an extensive outreach effort to stakeholders 

and the public, not only by FRA, but also by States and local organizations to their communities. As 

FRA developed this Preliminary National Rail Plan, stakeholders participated through FRA outreach 

efforts and provided valuable insight that played an important role in validating some issues and 

bringing others to the forefront. A list of stakeholders is shown in Appendix A. Appendix B illustrates 

the issues raised during outreach sessions for high-speed intercity rail. The FRA is committed to 

a proactive outreach effort to involve stakeholders in our development process that will result in a 

validated and consensus-built long-range National Rail Plan.

2009 NATIONAL RAIL PLAN
30

Preliminary

NATIONAL RAIL PLAN 2009
31

Preliminary

APPENDIX A 

ey to rail’s future success is partnerships.

FRA will be engaging in meetings and events with Federal, State, local and national organizations 

representing rail and transportation interests at large as well as special interest organizations and 

groups such as—but not limited to:

•	 American Association of State and Highway •	 Metropolitan Planning Organizations Leaders

Transportation Officials (AASHTO) •	 National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP)

•	 American Association of Port Authorities •	 States for Passenger Rail Coalition (SPRC)

•	 American Automobile Association (AAA) •	 National Association of Counties (NACo)

•	 American Association of Retried Persons (AARP) •	 National Association of County Engineers

•	 American General Contractors (AGC) •	 National Association of Rail Shippers

•	 American Planning Association •	 National Industrial Transportation League

•	 American Public Transportation Association (APTA) •	 National Private Truck Council (NPTC)

•	 American Shortline and Regional Rail Association •	 National Railroad Construction and Maintenance 

(ASLRRA) Association (NRC)

•	 American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE) •	 National Safety Council

•	 Amtrak •	 North American Rail Shippers Association (NARS)

•	 Association of American Railroads (AAR) •	 Railway Supply Institute (RSI)

•	 Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and •	 OneRail Coalition

•	 City Mayors •	 Regional Economic Development Agencies

•	 Coalition of Northeast Governors (CONEG) •	 Rail Division IBT

•	 Congressional Leaders and Staff •	 Transportation for America - Coalition Partners

•	 Council of University Transportation Centers (CUTC) •	 Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO

•	 Executives from State Departments of Transportations •	 U.S. Chambers of Commerce Leaders

•	 -Environmental Groups- •	 U.S. Department of Environmental Protection Agency 

•	 Governors and Staff (EPA)

•	 Institute of Transportation Engineers •	 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

•	 Intermodal Association of North America (HUD)

•	 National Governors Association •	 U.S. Department of Justice / ADA 

•	 National Mayors Conference •	 U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Modes and 

other Federal organizations

•	 Urban Land Institute

2009 NATIONAL RAIL PLAN
32

Preliminary

APPENDIX B: Issues Raised During High-speed Intercity Rail Outreach 

NATIONAL RAIL PLAN 2009
33

Preliminary

APPENDIX C 

References

Association of American Railroads. “Railroad Facts,” various years.

Association of American Railroads. “Analysis of Class I Railroads,” various years.

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. Implicit Price Deflator for Gross 

Domestic Product series, various years.

U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Transportation Energy Data Book, 28th 

edition.

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Producer Price Index for Line-Haul Railroads 

series, various years.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, Bureau of 

Transportation Statistics and U.S. Census Bureau. 2007 Commodity Flow Survey (Advance Report, 

released December 2008).”

U.S. Department of Transportation. “National Freight Transportation Policy Statement.” (1995)

ICF International. Comparative Evaluation of Rail and Truck Fuel Efficiency on Competitive Corridors. 

(March 2009); Report Prepared for the Federal Railroad Administration.

Transportation Research Board of the National Academies. Special Report 297; Funding Options for 

Freight Transportation Projects (August 2009).

Report of the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission. Transportation 

for Tomorrow (December 2007).

Cambridge Systematics: National Rail Freight Infrastructure Capacity and Investment Study (December 

2007). Report Prepared for the Association of American Railroads.

Federal Highway Administration. 1997 Federal Highway Cost Allocation Study. (September 1997)

Federal Highway Administration. Addendum to the 1997 Federal Highway Cost Allocation Study. 

(May 2000)

New York State Rail Plan: Strategies for a New Age (2009).

2009 NATIONAL RAIL PLAN
34

Preliminary

Virginia State Rail Plan: A Multimodal Strategy to Meet the Commonwealth’s Passenger and Freight 

Transportation Needs Through 2025 (2004).

Vision for the Future: U.S. Intercity Passenger Rail Network Through 2050. Prepared for 

Commissioner Frank Busalacchi, National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study 

Commission (December 2007).

National Railroad Passenger Corporation. High-Speed Rail: A National Perspective High-Speed Rail 

Experience in the United States (December 2008)

Federal Railroad Administration. Vision for High-Speed Rail in America: High-Speed Rail Strategic 

Plan (April 2009).

U.S. Department of Transportation. “Notice of Funding Availability for Supplemental Discretionary 

Grants for Capital Investments in Surface Transportation Infrastructure Under the American Recovery 

and Reinvestment Act.” Federal Register, June 2009.

Federal Railroad Administration. “High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program.” Federal Register, 

June 2009.

U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. The Surface 

Transportation Authorization Act of 2009: A Blueprint for Investment and Reform, (June 2009).

Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals. Annual State of Logistics Report, (June 2009).

Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (Pub. L. No. 110-432, Division A), 122 Stat. 4848 (2008).

Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 ((Pub. L. No. 110-432, Division B), 122 Stat. 

4907 (2008).

U.S. Department of Defense. Military Surface Deployment and Distribution Command, Strategic Rail 

Corridor Network and Defense Connector Lines (March 2008).

North Carolina Department of Transportation. 2009 Rail Plan (Executive Summary).

Washington State Transportation Commission. Statewide Rail Capacity and System Needs Study: Final 

Report, December 2006.

Paying Our Way: A New Framework for Transportation Finance; Report to the National Surface 

Transportation Infrastructure financing Commission (February 2009).

NATIONAL RAIL PLAN 2009