THE SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590

July 25.2008

The Honorable Robert C. Byrd

Chairman

C0I11111ilICC on AppropriilliollS

United SlalCs Senate

Washington, DC 20510

Dear Mr. Chninnan:

The Transponation. I-lousing and Urban Dcvclopmcll!. and Related Agencies

Appropriations Act. 2008 (Division K of Pub. L. 110-161) stipulates lhal .' ... the

Secretary Iof Trlll1Sp0rlat ion I. ill consultation Will1 the Corporal ion [Amtrak I and tile

States on the Northeast Corridor. shall establish a common definition of what is

dCICrlllincd 10 be a 'sln[c or good repair' o111hc Northeast Corridor and report its findings.

including definitional arC:lS of disagrcclllclli. [0 the I-louse and Scnntc COlllmillccs 011

Appropriations. the House Commincc on Transportalion nnd Infrastructure nnd the

Senate Comlllillcc on Commerce. Science. and Trnnsp0rlation:'

I am pleased to submit the requcsted definition and findings, which incorporme the

results of the congressionally mnnclated consultations, I hope thaI the informnlioll

contained inlhese enclosures will assist the Commillees in their work.

Identical lellers have becn sent to Ihe Ranking Member of the Scnate Commillee 011

Appropriations. and to the Chairmcn and Ranking Mcmbers of thc Housc Committee all

Approprialiolls. the House Comrnillec on Transportation and InfrastruclLlrc. and the

Scnate Commillee on Commercc. Science. and Transportalion.

Sincerely yours.

rvlary E. Pelers

Enclosures
Division K of Public Law 110-161, Title I 

Definition of a “State of Good Repair” 

on the Northeast Corridor: 

A condition in which the existing physical assets, both 

individually and as a system, (a) are functioning as 

designed within their “useful lives,”1 and (b) are sustained 

through regular maintenance and replacement programs2; 

state of good repair represents just one element of a 

comprehensive capital investment program that also 

addresses system capacity and performance.3

 

NOTES 

1

 Test (a): An asset is considered to be “functioning as designed” when it is performing 

at a level at least equal to that called for in its as-built or -modified design specification; it 

is considered to be within its “useful life” when the life cycle cost of maintaining the 

asset, so that it continues to function as designed, is lower than the cost of replacing it. 

2 Test (b): In addition, assets must be maintained and replaced on a regular schedule 

designed to mitigate cyclical imbalances in renewal needs. Moreover, if an asset or 

group of assets has received inadequate maintenance over a long period of time, it may 

still be functioning as designed but face imminent heavy repair or replacement to 

overcome a “backlog” of regular maintenance which was not performed on schedule; a 

railroad system is in a state of good repair only when there is no such backlog of 

deferred maintenance. 

3 Comprehensive capital investment program: Achieving a state of good repair is one 

goal of a capital investment program; it is not sufficient in and of itself to define a 

comprehensive investment program. A comprehensive capital investment program 

would consider the full set of system needs – including state of good repair – but also 

capacity and performance requirements driven by the business and service plans of all 

users. Such a plan would therefore also consider whether current physical assets are 

sufficient to meet projected service requirements or whether any such assets are 

excess; defining state of good repair itself is independent of such an assessment. 

Finally, capital investment plans, along with the business/service plans that underpin 

them, should be updated on a regular basis for changes in user needs, market demand, 

asset condition, technology and other considerations.
Findings: State of Good Repair on the Northeast Corridor

Background 

The Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations 

Act, 2008 (Division K of Public Law 110-161) stipulates that “... not later than 180 days after 

the enactment of this Act, the Secretary [of Transportation], in consultation with the Corporation 

[Amtrak] and the States on the Northeast Corridor, shall establish a common definition of what is 

determined to be a ‘state of good repair’ on the Northeast Corridor and report its findings, 

including definitional areas of disagreement, to the House and Senate Committees on 

Appropriations, the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Senate 

Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.” By delegation of the Secretary’s 

responsibilities under this section of the Act, the Federal Railroad Administrator (the 

Administrator) is issuing this report which includes a common definition and findings including 

areas of definitional disagreement. 

Consultation 

As required by the statute, the Administrator consulted with all the States on the Northeast 

Corridor (NEC) and the District of Columbia via a letter sent to their Secretaries of 

Transportation (or equivalent officials), the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak), 

and the Coalition of Northeastern Governors (CONEG) on April 2, 2008. The affected States, the 

District of Columbia, Amtrak, and CONEG were invited to submit their comments via an 

electronic docket (FRA-2008-0038) on regulations.gov created for the sole purpose of receiving 

those comments. Six States (Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, 

and Pennsylvania), the District of Columbia, Amtrak and CONEG all submitted comments on 

this proposed rule via the docket. The Administrator considered all of the comments received in 

the docket in drafting the definition. The following sections synthesize the areas of definitional 

agreement and disagreement that are contained in the docket. The entire docket may be viewed 

at: http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=FRA-2008-

0038 

Areas of Definitional Agreement 

The FRA’s definition reflects most of the comments submitted by the States, CONEG, and 

Amtrak as outlined below: 

Neutral on ownership – Several respondents indicated that any definition should apply to 

any Northeast Corridor infrastructure regardless of ownership. The FRA definition is a 

generic one that could be used on any segment of the Northeast Corridor – or other 

infrastructure for that matter – regardless of whether the ownership is by Amtrak or another 

party. 

Include design life – Several respondents were concerned that due to deferred maintenance, 

assets may be “functioning as designed” but still be overdue for replacement. FRA responded 

to these concerns by stating that to be in a state of good repair, assets must not only be 
functioning as designed but also be within their useful lives. Furthermore, the definition 

requires that the assets be continually protected against future maintenance deferrals by 

means of regular maintenance and replacement programs. 

Apply to a comprehensive set of assets – Several respondents to the docket recommended 

that the definition apply to a comprehensive set of assets including all the fixed infrastructure 

necessary for train operations on the Northeast Corridor. FRA agreed with these respondents; 

therefore, the definition states that the NEC railroad is only in a state of good repair when all 

of its existing assets individually and as a system meet the definition. 

Functioning as designed – Several respondents to the docket recommended that a state of 

good repair require not just that assets be within their useful lives, but also that they be 

functioning as designed as a failure would adversely impact reliability. The phrase 

“functioning as designed” was added to the definition. 

Maintain through regular maintenance and replacement programs – Several 

respondents to the docket recommended that FRA include in the definition that a state of 

good repair must be maintained through a normalized program to replace or renew assets 

before the end of their useful lives. Endorsing that concept, the FRA included wording that a 

state of good repair must be sustained through regular maintenance and replacement 

programs. If such regular programs are not in place and continually implemented, then a 

state of good repair cannot exist because deferred maintenance would be accumulating. 

Areas of Definitional Disagreement 

The FRA’s definition takes into account the views generally held by the docket respondents, 

with the exception of the following major points of definitional disagreement: 

Necessary to support the level of service established with respect to each user (included 

as part of one of the definitions provided by the FRA to stimulate discussion). While some 

respondents agreed that this clause should be part of a state of good repair definition, others 

indicated that the concept blurs the distinction between projects directed toward state of good 

repair and projects directed toward capacity improvement. FRA agreed with this latter 

position, and decided against including it in the final definition because portions and 

components of the Northeast Corridor, especially during peak hours, are undergoing use at a 

rate higher than their design capacities. As mentioned in Note 3 to the FRA definition, 

SOGR-related projects would be but one element of a capital plan which would include 

projects to improve capacity so as to meet the needs of all users. 

However, in FRA’s view, while projects that increase capacity or improve service quality 

may properly form part of a comprehensive capital plan, they do not fall within the definition 

of state of good repair. 
Inclusion of rolling stock – One submission to the docket recommended inclusion of 

Amtrak’s rolling stock as “infrastructure” in the definition. While not explicitly excluding 

rolling stock, FRA’s definition adopts as its focal point the fixed infrastructure. FRA believes 

that this focus properly responds to the intent of Congress and to the greater need for 

definitional precision with reference to the fixed infrastructure of the NEC, which is shared 

by multiple users, than to rolling stock, which generally appertains to individual users. In a 

larger conceptual sense, however, the principles encompassed in the FRA 

definition⎯functioning as designed within useful lives, regularly maintained and replaced, 

and addressed within a context of comprehensive business and capital planning⎯are 

applicable to all forms of NEC assets, moving as well as fixed. 

Current use and engineering standards – Several respondents to the docket recommended 

that the definition include the statement that, to be in a state of good repair, assets should be 

replaced with those that meet current use requirements, up-to-date engineering standards, and 

new regulatory requirements. FRA decided not to include such a statement because it could 

potentially broaden the definition of state of good repair to include investments which are 

actually “betterments” to the infrastructure.4

 While such betterments are certainly important, 

often desirable, and likely to be included in any comprehensive capital plan, they do not 

constitute state of good repair projects. For example, in a comprehensive capital plan, a 

project to rehabilitate a currently-used station might logically include both replacement of a 

hopelessly deteriorated roof and accessibility improvements for compliance with the 

Americans with Disabilities Act. Although both types of improvements may be absolutely 

necessary for system integrity and/or legal reasons, and although construction efficiency and 

cost factors might dictate that both projects be undertaken simultaneously, only the new roof 

would qualify as a “state of good repair” investment under the FRA definition. 

 

4

 In practice, there will be many cases in which outmoded infrastructure components would not be available for 

replacement in kind, and the most practical and/or least-cost option would be to replace such components with 

components that use new, improved technology; in such cases⎯depending, of course, on their specifics⎯the 

updated component might potentially be regarded as a state of good repair investment.