Attachment A

Amtrak On-Time Performance for FY 2010
Year-to-Date Totals through August

Test 2:
v Test 1: Constant or
" Higher Percent On Time Better Effective
Indicates yTD- August 2010 vs. YTD - August 2009 Speed
were met Change | Proposed from Change in MPH
for OTP | FY10% from Target for FY10 from October 2007
Progress | On Time Fy09 FY10 Target Baseline
Northeast Corridor Service (Goal proposed for FY 2012: 95%)
Acela 79.9% (7.1%) 92.1% (12.2%) (2.1)
Regional Service TAl% | (5.4%) 88.2% | (14.1%) (1.2)
Other Corridor Services (Goal proposed for FY 2012: 90% Minimum target proposed for FY 2010: 80%)
Adirondack v 61.2% 5.3% 80.0% | (18.8%) 2.0
Blue Water v 69.1% 18.4% 80.0% | (10.9%) 2.0
Capitols v 92.8% 0.6% 83.8% 8.9% 1.6
Carolinian 47.0% | (10.3%) | 80.0% | (33.0%) LI
Cascades v 72.0% 0.9% 80.0% | (8.0%) 0.8
Downeaster 70.4% (3.3%) 85.2% (14.8%) (0.9)
Empire Service 85.4% 3.0% 82.7% 2.7% (3.6)
Ethan Allen Express 74.6% 20.3% 80.0% (5.4%) (0.5)
Heartland Flyer v 83.3% 0.4% 80.0% 3.3% 4.9
Hiawatha 89.3% 1.9% 89.7% | (0.4%) (0.3)
Hoosier State v 75.9% 24.2% 80.0% | (4.1%) 2.0
; Mini 62.4% 13.9% 81.6% | (19.2%) (0.1)
Illinois Zephyr v 92.5% 4.8% 80.1% 12.4% 19
Keystone 86.6% | (3.1%) | 88.1% | (1.5%) (0.5)
Lincoln Service v BAM 0.8% 80.0% (6.9%) 2.0
Maple Leaf v 68.8% 9.3% 80.0% | (11.2%) 1.0
Missouri Services v 90.9% 19.1% 80.0% 10.9% 6.8
Pacific Surfliner 76.5% | (6.6%) 83.9% | (7.4%) 04
Pennsylvanian 90.0% (6.1%) 82.6% TAY ll
Pere Marquette v 54.5% 18.7% 80.0% | (25.5%) 2.0
Piedmont T1.1% 2.2% 83.7% | (6.1%) (0.5)
San Joaquins v 90.6% 0.6% 81.2% 9.4% 2.0
Vermonter 84.5% | (3.9%) | 80.0% 4.5% 0.4
Wolverines v 63.0% 20.0% 80.0% | (17.0%) 17
Long Distance Trains (Goat proposed for FY 2012: 85% Minimum target proposed for FY 2010: 72.5%)
Auto Train 87.0% (1.1%) 75.8% 11.2% 1d
California Zephyr 52.7% | (5.5%) | 72.5% | (19.8%) 45
Capitol Limited 69.4% (0.3%) 72.5% (3.1%) 3.0
Cardinal v 51.6% 6.0% 72.5% _| (20.9%) 01
City of New Orleans 83.2% 0.6% 85.0% (1.8%) (0.1)
Coast Starlight v 89.9% 8.4% 72.5% 17.4% 2.1
Crescent 72.8% _| (11.7%) 72.5% 0.3% 0.7
Empire Builder v 714% 2.9% 80.4% | (2.9%) 0.0
Lake Shore Limited v 76.6% 1.9% 72.5% 41% 44
Palmetto 63.5% | (3.4%) | 72.5% | (9.0%) 3.3
Silver Meteor v 73.0% 17% 72.5% 0.5% 1.6
Silver Star v 71.2% 11.2% 22.5% AT% 1.6
Southwest Chief 80.1% | (4.7%) | 75.1% 5.1% 0.7
Sunset Limited v 88.2% 9.8% 72.5% 15.7% 4.1
Texas Eagle WA% | (3.2%) | 72.5% | (2.4%) 19



@

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

7 4k ann :
Federal Railroad OCT iS ae

Administration

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, 2010 (Pub. L. 111-117) requires the Federal Railroad Administrator to
“submit a report on April 1, 2010, 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.”

Iam pleased to submit the quarterly 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,

a iA fxr
Joseph C. Szabo

Enclosures


October 1, 2010

October 2010 Report on Amtrak On-Time Performance
Submitted by the Federal Railroad Administrator
Under Section 154 of Pub. L. 111-117

This report includes two sections: (1) an update on recent Federal Railroad Administration
(FRA) efforts to catalyze and effect improvements in Amtrak’s on-time performance (OTP); and
(2) in keeping with the FRA’s July 1, 2010 OTP report, an update on Amtrak’s OTP results and
performance against FRA-established goals.

(1) OTP Improvement Highlights through August Fiscal Year 2010

OTP Benefits of the High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) Program: On January 28,
2010, the Obama Administration announced the first round of selected programs and projects in
31 States under the FRA’s HSIPR Program. Through the States, this program is providing a total
of approximately $10.6 billion (appropriations through FY 2010) for incremental upgrades to
existing railroads as well as new high-speed rail systems, all for the purpose of endowing the
Nation with a transformative mode of intercity passenger transportation in heavily populated
corridors.

Most of the HSIPR awards will ultimately raise the effective speed of the benefiting services,
through a combination of better reliability (through capacity additions and other means) and/or
higher running speeds. Accordingly, the completion of the first round of FRA’s HSIPR
betterments will directly improve the OTP of the affected routes, as measured in this series of
OTP reports to Congress as well as the forthcoming reports under Section 207 of the Passenger
Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA).

For example, the FRA and State of Vermont have signed a $50 million HSIPR grant for
rehabilitating the rail line between Brattleboro and St. Albans, VT, which is traversed by the
Amtrak Vermonter service. The installation of new rail and roadbed work along this segment
will result in a 27 minute trip time reduction in the Vermonter’s schedule and an intrastate on-
time performance of 90 percent—S.5 points better than the route’s overall performance to date in
FY 2010, as reported in the table below. Not only will the effective speed and endpoint OTP
benefit in this illustrative route, but the operational and reliability improvements will also set the
stage for higher passenger rail frequencies along this corridor and for extending the Vermonter
service to Montreal, Quebec. Many more concrete examples of the HSIPR Program’s OTP
impact could be cited; a complete list of selected investments is available at:
http://www.whitehouse. gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/hsr_awards_summary_public.pdf.

Publication of Metrics and Standards: On May 12, 2010, the FRA published the final Metrics
and Standards for intercity passenger rail services, which it had developed jointly with Amtrak in
compliance with Section 207 of the PRIA. Available on FRA’s webpage at

http://www. fra.dot.gov/Pages/2165.shtml, these Metrics and Standards address OTP in detail,
along with financial and customer satisfaction data. PRIIA Section 207 also requires the FRA to



publish a quarterly report comparing the performance of all intercity passenger rail services with
the final Metrics and Standards; the first such report, covering the quarter ending September 30,
2010, will be published after all data for that quarter are available. The FRA believes that the
quarterly Metrics and Standards reports, with their augmented detail, coupled with related
provisions in other sections of the PRIIA (e.g., Sections 210 and 213), will provide additional
impetus for the host railroads and Amtrak to emphasize their collaborative efforts toward OTP
improvement.

Other Recent OTP Developments: Stemming from the increased Federal attention that has been
given to Amtrak’s OTP as well as the development of performance improvement plans between
Amtrak and host freight railroads, Amtrak has achieved improved levels of on-time performance
over the last year and a half, particularly among its long distance trains. These improvements in
reliability have allowed Amtrak to shorten the trip time of some its long distance trains.
Compared to the fall 2009 schedules, the current Amtrak published timetable, which went into
effect in May 2010, includes a 10 minute trip time reduction in the westbound Sunset Limited, a
20 minute trip time reduction in the westbound Cardinal service, a 20 minute trip time reduction
in the westbound Southwest Chief, and a 30 minute trip time reduction in the eastbound Lake
Shore Limited.

(2) Goals and Route Performance

Attachment A contains updated OTP statistics for all Amtrak routes for FY 2010 through
August. As the attachment illustrates, approximately half of the routes (20) have had
improvements in OTP (in terms of both improved percent on time and no decrease in effective
speed) through August 2010. Of those routes experiencing OTP improvement, a total of ten (five
corridor-type and five long-distance trains) are meeting, or are surpassing, their FRA-defined
OTP target for FY 2010.

The OTP across the entire Amtrak system through August FY 2010 was 79.4 percent, which is
less than a percentage-point decrease from the previous year. The slight decline in system-wide
performance primarily reflected the OTP experience in the Northeast Corridor (NEC), which was
the site of considerable infrastructure renewal activity during FY 2010. By contrast, Amtrak’s
short distance routes outside the NEC (i.e. “Other Corridor Services”) experienced a 1.3
percentage-point increase year-over-year (for an average endpoint OTP of 81.5 percent) while the
long-distance trains experienced a 0.6 percentage-point increase over the previous year (for an
average endpoint OTP of 74.8 percent). Further highlighting the extent of the route-by-route
fiscal year improvements, compared to the previous year, approximately one-quarter of Amtrak’s
routes have had endpoint OTP increases of ten percentage-points or greater.

Considerable momentum for improving Amtrak’s OTP was achieved in FY 2009 and notable
OTP improvements have been made across the Amtrak system in FY 2010. This momentum can
only gain strength from further cooperation between Amtrak and the freight railroads, the
implementation of the Metrics and Standards under Section 207 of PRIIA, and the ongoing
implementation of the selected State-sponsored investments under the FRA’s HSIPR program.