Attachment A

Amtrak On-Time Performance for FY 2009
Year-to-Date Totals through September

y Test 1: Test 2:
Indicates Higher Percent On Time Constant or
both | ¥TD- September 2069 vs. YTD - September | Better Effective
tests 2008 % Speed
were % Variance
met for Change | Proposed | from Change in MPH
oTP FY09 % from ‘Target for FY09 from October 2007
Progress _| On Time FY08 Fy09 Target Baseline
Northeast Corridor Service (Goal, ‘proposed for F¥ 2012: 95%)
Acela 87.2% 2.7% 90.7% (3.5%) (e5))
Regional Service 80.0% 4.3% 84.8% (4.7%) (1.3)
Other Corridor Services (Goal proposed for FY 2012: 9%. Minimum target proposed for FY 2009: 75%)
Adirondack v 57.4% 13.6% 75.0% __| (17.6%) 2.0
Blue Water v 50.9% 23.0% 75.0% _| (24.1%) L5
Capitols v 92.3% 6.3% 80.8% 11.6% LS
Carolinian v 57.2% 17.9% 75.0% (17.8%) 2.0
Cascades v 71.3% 6.6% 75.0% (3.7%) 0.6
Downeaster 74.9% 4.3% 82.8% (7.9%) (0.5)
Empire Service 82.6% 9.7% 79.0% 3.6% (1.6)
Ethan Allen Express 55.7% 18.9% 75.0% _| (19.3%) (2.0)
Heartland Flyer v 83.8% 32.2% 75.0% 8.8% 49
Hiawatha 87.1% (0.2%) 89.5% (2.4%) (0.7)
Hoosier State v 52.2% 10.7% 75.0% (22.8%) 0.9
Illini 46.2% (2.4%) TI 4% (31.2%) (1.8)
Illinois Zephyr v 88.3% 10.5% 75.1% 13.2% 1.0
Keystone v 90.0% 2.3% 87.2% 2.8% 0.4
Lincoln Service v 73.3% 30.2% 75.0% (1.7%) 18
Maple Leaf v 60.3% 15.9% 75.0% (14.7%) 12
Missouri Services v 73.6%. 55.0% 75.0% (1.4%) Si
Pacific Surfliner v 83.2% 71% 80.9% 2.3% 0.3
Pennsylvanian v 96.0% 9.3% 78.9% 17.1% 1.2
Pere Marquette v 38.3% 15.6% 75.0% (36.7%) 0.7
Piedmont 76.0%. 6.0% 80.6% (4.6%) (0.9)
San Joaquins v 89.6% 7.0% 76.8% 12.8% 0.3
Vermonter v 88.9% 48.2% 75.0% 13.9% 0.4
Wolverines x 44.0% 17.7% 75.0% | (31.0%) 0.7
Long Distance Trains (Goal proposed for FY 2012: 85%, Minimum target proposed for FY 2009: 66%)
Auto Train v 88.7% 6.7% 71.3% 17.4% LS
California Zephyr v 59.9% 29.8% 66.3% (6.4%) 41
Capitol Limited v 70.7% 38.1% 66.3% 44% 34
Cardinal 45.7% 14.4% 66.3% | (20.6%) (0.4)
City of New Orleans 83.0% 20.7% 85.0% (2.0%) (0.1)
Coast Starlight ~ 82.4% 21.7% 66.3% 16.2% 1.8
Crescent v 84.0% 17.0% 66.3% 17.7% LO
Empire Builder 75.7% 6.9% 78.0% (24%) (0.2)
Lake Shore Limited v 15.7% 17.6% 66.3% 9.4% 3.7
Palmetto v 66.9% 15.4% 66.3% 0.7% 3.7
Silver Meteor ¥ 72.6% 6.1% 66.3% 6.3% L7
Silver Star v 67.7% 22.6% 66.3% 1.4% LS
Southwest Chief ¥ 85.2% 19.8% 70.1% 15.1% 0.6
Sunset Limited v 79.2% 52.1% 66.3% 13.0% 2.9
Texas Eagle v 75.2% 57.3% 66.3% 9.0% 1.6



©

U.S. Department Administrator 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
of Transportation Washington, DC 20590

Federal Railroad
Administration

DEC 28 ox

The Honorable Daniel K. Inouye
Chairman

Committee on Appropriations
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Mr. Chairman:

Section 154 of the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2009 (Pub. L. 111-8) requires the Federal Railroad
Administrator to “submit a quarterly report on April 1, 2009, and quarterly reports
thereafter, to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations detailing the
Administrator's efforts at improving the on-time performance of Amtrak intercity rail
service operating on non-Amtrak owned property. Such reports shall compare the most
recent actual on-time performance data to pre-established on-time performance goals that
the Administrator shall set for each rail service, identified by route. Such reports shall
also include whatever other information and data regarding the on-time performance of

Amtrak trains the Administrator deems to be appropriate.”
’

Tam pleased to submit the report in accordance with this requirement. I hope that the +
information contained in the enclosed report will assist the Committee in its work.

Identical letters have been sent to the Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on
Appropriations, and to the Chairman and Ranking Member of the House Committee on
Appropriations.

Sincerely,

Joseph C. Szabo

Enclosures


January 1, 2010

January 2010 Report on Amtrak On-Time Performance
Submitted by the Federal Railroad Administrator
Under Section 154 of Pub. L. 111-8

This report includes two sections: (1) an update on recent Federal Railroad Administration
(FRA) efforts to catalyze improvements in Amtrak’s on-time performance (OTP); and (2) in
keeping with the FRA’s October 1, 2009 OTP report, an update on Amtrak OTP results and
performance against FRA-established goals.

(1) Highlights of Fiscal Year 2009 OTP Improvement Outcomes

Southeast Corridor: Amtrak continues to benefit from reductions in slow orders and freight train
interference as a result of the Southeast (I-95) Corridor Performance Improvement Plan, which
the FRA required of Amtrak management as part of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 Grant Agreement
between the FRA and Amtrak. The delay reductions that Amtrak experienced in FY 2009
coincided with an increase in on-time arrivals among SEC trains during the fiscal year; however,
the overall OTP levels varied among the trains traversing this corridor. The Auto Train had the
highest endpoint OTP among Amtrak’s long-distance trains (88.7 percent) in FY 2009 and
achieved an on-time performance of 95 percent in the month of September. The Palmetto,
Carolinian, and Silver Star experienced notable year-over-year improvements to their endpoint
OTP in FY 2009 (increases of 15, 18, and 23 percentage points respectively), however, despite
these improvements, these three routes were in Amtrak’s bottom third for on-time arrivals for the
fiscal year.

California Zephyr: The Union Pacific (UP) Railroad and Amtrak continue to implement their
2007 agreement to reduce delays on UP’s portion of the California Zephyr, which extends from
Denver, Colorado to Emeryville, California. As part of the agreement, Amtrak had temporarily
added time to the Zephyr’s schedule to account for the UP’s track improvement work, however,
the track work has been completed and all the additional time has now been removed from the
timetable. In FY 2009, the California Zephyr’s OTP advanced to 60 percent, a 30 percentage-
point improvement over the preceding year.

Other Recent OTP Developments: Amtrak and UP continue to advance the performance
improvement plan for the UP’s portion of the Chicago — St. Louis corridor. The focus on the
corridor has contributed to significant OTP improvements for Amtrak trains. For example, the
endpoint OTP for the Chicago ~ St. Louis Lincoln Service was 73.3 percent in FY 2009, which
year-over-year, was a 30 percentage-point improvement.

While performance improvement plans between Amtrak and host freight railroads continue to
move forward, the implementation of identified action items across Amtrak’s network is
expected to accelerate upon completion of the Section 207 Metrics and Standards under the
Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIA). Amtrak and FRA developed
and published preliminary metrics and standards for Amtrak’s performance, which were released
for public comment. Amtrak and FRA have reviewed the submitted comments and are currently
finalizing these performance measures.


(2) Goals and Route Performance

Attachment A contains updated OTP statistics for all Amtrak routes for FY 2009. As the
attachment illustrates, three-fourths of the routes (30) have had improvements in OTP (in terms
of both improved percent on-time and no decrease in effective speed) through September 2009.
Of those routes experiencing OTP improvement, a total of 19 (eight corridor-type and eleven
long-distance trains) are meeting, or are surpassing, their FRA-defined OTP target for FY 2009.

The on-time performance across the entire Amtrak system for FY 2009 was 80.4 percent, an
increase of 9.3 percentage points over the previous year. Amtrak’s short distance routes outside
of the Northeast Corridor (i.e. “Other Corridor Services”) experienced a 9.5 percentage-point
increase year-over-year (for an average endpoint OTP of 80.5 percent) while the long-distance
trains experienced a 21 percentage-point increase over the previous year (for an average endpoint
OTP of 75.2 percent). Further highlighting these fiscal year improvements, compared to the
previous year, all but two of Amtrak’s routes experienced an increase in endpoint OTP and
almost two-thirds have had endpoint OTP increases of ten percentage points or greater.

In summary, while notable OTP improvements were made across the Amtrak system in FY
2009, considerable work remains to bring Amtrak’s OTP to satisfactory levels. The momentum
that was built in FY 2009 can only be helped by further cooperation between Amtrak and the
freight railroads, the implementation of the PRIIA Section 207 Metrics and Standards, the
completion of the initial investments announced in FY 2008 under the FRA’s Capital Assistance
to States—Intercity Passenger Rail Service program, and the prospect of noteworthy State-
sponsored investments under the FRA’s ongoing High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR)
program.